Appeal Brief | Appeal Letter | Back
Second Appeal Brief
PA ID# 147-99147-00; Steele County
PW ID# 675; Temporary Relocation
Citation: FEMA-1941-DR-MN, Steele County, Temporary Relocation- Storage Building, Project Worksheet 675
Reference: Temporary Relocation
Summary: Flooding damaged a wood frame storage building at the Highway Operations Complex (HOC). To restore the facility to pre-disaster condition, repairs included cleaning the facility and replacing a door. The storage building is one of five buildings damaged at the HOC complex. Following the disaster, Steele County (Applicant) relocated all functions of the HOC to a temporary facility approximately two miles away. FEMA determined that temporary relocation of the storage building was not eligible because the building was not damaged to an extent requiring relocation. In the first appeal dated May 9, 2011, the Applicant asserted that effective and efficient operation of the HOC required all assets, including those stored in the wood frame storage building, to be in close proximity to administration functions. In the first appeal response dated December 12, 2011, FEMA’s Regional Administrator concurred that the building was not ancillary as it contained materials and equipment necessary for the County to continue providing essential/critical community services. However, the building was not damaged significantly enough to meet the requirements for temporary relocation funding in Recovery Policy 9523.3, Provision of Temporary Relocation Facilities. In its second appeal, the Applicant argues that all five buildings within the complex should be eligible for temporary relocation. Furthermore, the Applicant claimed that relocation for the storage building should be eligible because it lacked critical utilities, such as potable water. The State does not support the Applicant’s appeal. At the time of the disaster, the only utility at the storage building was electricity, and there was no disruption of service to the building as a result of the disaster.
Issues: 1. Was the facility damaged by the disaster to the extent that it could not be occupied safely, and restoration could not be completed without suspending operations of the facility for an unacceptable period of time?
2. Was a critical utility at the building disrupted as a result of the disaster causing suspension of operations?
Findings: 1. No.
Rationale: Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act Section 403(a)(3)(D); Policy Digest, page 112; and FEMA Policy 9523.3, Provision of Temporary Relocation Facilities, dated July 16, 1998.