alert - warning

This page has not been translated into Español. Visit the Español page for resources in that language.

Emergency Protective Measures

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter Appeal Analysis

Appeal Brief

DesastreFEMA-1044-DR
ApplicantCity of Escondido
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#073-22804
PW ID#26943,37836,39153
Date Signed1997-09-12T04:00:00
Citation: FEMA-1044-DR-CA; City of Escondido; DSRs 26943, 37836, and 39153

Cross-Reference: Emergency Protective Measures, Overtime Labor And Benefits

Summary: On January 10, 1995, the City of Escondido recorded high total colliform levels as a result of FEMA 1044-DR-CA. The County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health gave a "boil water" order. DSR 26943 was prepared on August 28, 1995, for $64,364 to cover the expenses incurred during this order. The DSR was determined ineligible because documentation did not indicate these costs were related to elimination or reduction of a threat. The subgrantee submitted their first appeal on December 12, 1995. They stated that all work was disaster related. The Regional Director denied most of the first appeal, but granted funding for the purchase of extra chemicals to treat contamination. DSR 37836 was approved for $2,599 to fund these expenses. The subgrantee provided new documentation with their December 13, 1996, second appeal, including a table of responsibilities for their employees during the incident. The regional staff determined that the documentation supported the claim that some employees were performing emergency protective measures and approved supplemental DSR 39153 for $9,122 to cover overtime labor and benefits. The work not funded included work to disseminate hazard information.

Issues:
  1. Should FEMA fund the overtime labor and benefits not included in DSR 39153?
  2. Should FEMA fund any other expenses requested in the second appeal?
Findings:
  1. Yes. The work performed to disseminate hazard information to the public is eligible for FEMA assistance. Therefore, a supplemental DSR should be prepared for $13,039 to cover these costs.
  2. Yes. Funding of some of the meals and beverages ($699) and office supplies ($1,302) are attributed to eligible overtime labor. The phone reprogramming ($266) is eligible.
Rationale: FEMA may provide assistance for issuance of warnings, risks, or hazards, including dissemination of public health and safety information.
Stafford Act, Section 403

Appeal Letter

September 12, 1997

Mr. Gilbert Najera
Governor's Authorized Representative
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
74 North Pasadena Avenue, West Annex, 3rd Floor
Pasadena, California 91103

Dear Mr. Najera:

This letter is in response to your January 28, 1997, submittal of the City of Escondido's second appeal of damage survey report (DSR) 26943 under FEMA-1044-DR-CA. This DSR was prepared to cover the costs associated with the emergency protective measures the subgrantee may have taken as a result of high total colliform levels in their water supply.

As explained in the enclosed analysis, I have determined that some of the work the applicant performed was to eliminate or reduce an immediate threat or to disseminate hazard information to the public. The regional staff has prepared two supplemental DSRs (39153 and 37836) to cover additional chemicals and overtime labor and benefits for employees at the filtration plant. Further, I have granted funding for additional overtime labor and benefits, phone reprogramming costs, and a percentage of the office supplies and overtime meal and beverage expenses related to the dissemination of hazard information. I have asked the Regional Director to take appropriate action to implement this determination.

Please inform the subgrantee of my determination. The subgrantee may submit a third appeal to the Director of FEMA. The appeal must be submitted through your office and the Regional Director within 60 days of receipt of this determination.

Sincerely,
/S/
Lacy E. Suiter
Executive Associate Director
Response and Recovery Directorate

Enclosure

Appeal Analysis

BACKGROUND
The City of Escondido's Public Works Department, Utility Division, provides water to 30,000 residences, housing 117,000 people. On Tuesday, January 10, 1995, the subgrantee recorded high Total Colliform (TC) levels at several monitoring locations. The subgrantee was required by the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health to issue a "boil water" order. In response to the order, the subgrantee's employees worked overtime to disseminate information and reduce contamination levels. There was no physical damage to the system to account for this condition and the subgrantee had not experienced this condition prior to the FEMA-1044-DR-CA disaster event.

Damage survey report (DSR) 26943 was prepared for $64,364 on April 28, 1995, to cover the expenses incurred during the "boil water" order. The costs identified on DSR 26943 included overtime labor-hours, consultation fees, meals and beverages, extra chemicals, office supplies, and utility expenses. Upon review, the entire DSR was determined ineligible because documentation did not indicate that the costs were directly related to elimination or reduction of an immediate threat to the public.

First Appeal
The subgrantee submitted their first appeal by letter dated December 12, 1995, to the Regional Director through the State of California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (OES). According to this letter, the subgrantee believed the work and costs associated with DSR 26943 were eligible for public assistance because all work was directly related to the disaster event. OES concurred with the subgrantee and forwarded the appeal to Region IX on March 8, 1996.

The Regional Director responded to the first appeal by letter dated October 11, 1996. The response stated that no information was provided to indicate what the subgrantee's employees were doing in response to the water contamination threat. Also, the subgrantee did not provide documentation linking the remaining costs to elimination or reduction of a threat. Accordingly, the appeal was denied. However, the regional staff approved supplemental DSR 37836 for $2,599 to grant funding for the extra chemicals required to treat the contamination.

Second Appeal
The subgrantee submitted a second appeal on December 13, 1996. The subgrantee stated that because the entire water emergency occurred during the Martin Luther King holiday weekend and on a "dark Friday" (i.e., non-work day), all labor during the 4-day weekend was overtime. Further, the subgrantee contended that all employees handled duties directly related to the water emergency. The subgrantee submitted labor records with the second appeal to document the hours and responsibilities of each employee during the incident. The subgrantee provided no information regarding the eligibility of other items in DSR 26943, but they withdrew their request for funding of meal and travel expenses for their consultants. OES concurred with the subgrantee's second appeal and forwarded the appeal to the Regional Director on January 28, 1997.

Upon receipt, the regional staff reviewed the second appeal and determined that a portion of the labor costs was eligible for public assistance. Subsequently, DSR 39153 was approved as a supplement to DSR 26943 for $9,122 to cover the overhead labor cost and benefits of employees directly involved with testing, monitoring, or treating the contaminated water supply. The remainder of the labor was determined ineligible. This ineligible work included dissemination of hazard information to the public, infrastructure inspection, custodial services, and updating information systems. The determination was based on the fact that the work was not performed to reduce the TC levels in the contaminated water supply.

DISCUSSION
FEMA may render public assistance for emergency protective measures if the work is necessary to eliminate or reduce an immediate threat to life, health, safety, or improved public or private property. Additionally, the Robert T. Stafford Act establishes that FEMA may provide assistance to State and local governments for issuance of warnings, risks, or hazards, including dissemination of public health and safety information. (Sec. 403)

Work performed by the subgrantee to reduce contamination in the water supply is eligible for FEMA funding and is covered by DSR 39153. Additionally, work performed by the subgrantee to inform the public of hazards related to the high TC levels is eligible. Specifically, the subgrantee supplied documentation that indicates some workers were performing eligible work to disseminate hazard information (e.g., answering phone calls and disseminating information to and from the public). This work accounts for an additional $12,806 of eligible overtime labor expenses. Similarly, phone reprogramming expenses of $226 is eligible.

To establish their responsibility for providing overtime meals and beverages, the subgrantee submitted their overtime meal reimbursement policy. Thus, expenses for overtime meals and beverages of employees performing eligible work are eligible. The subgrantee provided a lump-sum cost for meals and beverages, so it is not possible to determine exactly which costs correspond to eligible, disaster-related work. Therefore, a pro-rated meal and beverage allowance is eligible. The allowance is based on the percentage of eligible labor costs relative to the original labor costs ($22,154 / $51,032 = 43.4%) times the original, eligible meal and beverage costs ($1,594 * 0.434 = $692). Likewise, the request for the subgrantee's estimate of office supplies is granted according to the pro-rated portion of eligible labor ($3,000 * 0.434 = $1,302).

The subgrantee requested funding for utilities, however, FEMA policy (Public Assistance Guide, page 67) clearly states that "Another general requirement for all types of utilities is that increases in operating expenses, even if a result of the disaster, are not eligible."

CONCLUSION
The work associated with dissemination of hazard information meets criteria for public assistance. Therefore, a supplemental DSR will be prepared for $15,148 to cover overtime labor and benefits associated with dissemination of hazard information, phone reprogramming, office supplies, and meal and beverage costs. The request for funding of the remaining items in the second appeal is denied.