This page has not been translated into Español. Visit the Español page for resources in that language.
Alternate Project Request
Appeal Brief
| Desastre | FEMA-1766-DR |
| Applicant | Clay County Highway Department |
| Appeal Type | Second |
| PA ID# | 231-U5F9L-00 |
| PW ID# | 1398 |
| Date Signed | 2010-06-03T04:00:00 |
Citation: FEMA-1766-DR-IN; Clay County Highway Department (Applicant)
Cross - Alternate Projects
Reference:
Summary: Heavy rainfall in June 2008 caused severe erosion in Clay County, Indiana and completely destroyed a bridge. The reinforced concrete structure was built in 1915 and measured 42.5 feet long x 20.1 feet wide x 3 feet deep. FEMA held a Kickoff Meeting with the Applicant in July 2008. FEMA prepared Project Worksheet (PW) 1398 in September 2008 for $331,654 to replace the bridge structure. The Applicant submitted a request for an Alternate Project to the State of Indiana and subsequently to FEMA on October 2, 2009. The Alternate Project request stated that Clay County decided that the interests of their citizens would be better served by purchasing highway equipment since their 2010 highway budget was recently cut by $500,000. The Applicant began purchasing said equipment in June and September 2009 and included receipts with the request for an Alternate Project. The Applicant claims that it misunderstood the deadline to request an Alternate Project and believed it was before the project completion date. FEMA denied the Applicant’s request because it did not comply with the policy that was in effect when the disaster was declared. FEMA updated Recovery Policy 9525.13 on August 22, 2008, two months after the disaster declaration to eliminate the requirement for applicants to request an Alternate Projects within 12 months of the Kickoff Meeting.
Issue: Did the Applicant submit the request for an Alternate Project within 12 months of the Kickoff Meeting?
Finding: No. However, FEMA waives Section 7E of the 2001 policy and approves the appeal.
Rationale: FEMA RR Policy 9525.13, Alternate Projects, dated July 31, 2001 and Recovery Policy 9525.13, Alternate Projects, dated August 22, 2008.
Appeal Letter
June 3, 2010
Arvin E. Copeland
Governor’s Authorized Representative
Indiana Department of Homeland Security
302 West Washington Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Re: Second Appeal–Clay County Highway Department,
Alternate Project Request, FEMA-1766-DR-IN, Project Worksheet (PW) 1398
Dear Mr. Copeland:
This is in response to your letter dated January 29, 2010, which transmitted the referenced second appeal for Clay County Highway Department (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) decision to deny its first appeal for an Alternate Project.
On July 17, 2008, FEMA held a Kickoff Meeting with the Applicant. On September 15, 2008, FEMA prepared PW 1398 to replace the Applicant’s bridge for $331,654. The Applicant submitted a request for an Alternate Project to the State of Indiana on October 2, 2009, to purchase highway equipment instead of replacing the bridge. The Applicant stated that its 2010 highway budget was cut by $500,000 and the Alternate Project would better serve its citizens. FEMA denied the Applicant’s request in a letter dated October 29, 2009, because the Applicant missed the deadline stated in FEMA 322, Public Assistance Guide to request an Alternate Project by two months. In its first appeal dated November 20, 2009, the Applicant claimed that it misunderstood the timeline for requesting Alternate Projects. The FEMA Regional Administrator denied the first appeal in a letter dated December 15, 2009, stating that the Applicant had 12 months after the Kickoff Meeting to submit a request for an Alternate Project. The one-year deadline was July 2009, and the Applicant did not submit the Alternate Project request until October 2009.
The Applicant submitted its second appeal dated January 29, 2010, requesting an Alternate Project for the bridge replacement on PW 1398. The Applicant stated that its highway budget was cut for 2010 and purchasing equipment for county infrastructure was a better option than replacing the damaged bridge. The Applicant also stated that it believed the deadline for requesting an Alternate Project was the project completion date listed on the PW.
Section 7E of Response and Recovery Directorate Policy 9525.13, Alternate Projects, dated July 31, 2001, which is the effective version of the policy for the disaster, states that an applicant must submit its proposal for an Alternate Project within 12 months of its Kickoff Meeting. FEMA updated and published Recovery Policy 9525.13 on August 22, 2008, two months after the DR-1766 disaster declaration. The updated policy eliminates the requirement for applicants to submit their requests for Alternate Projects within 12 months of the Kickoff Meeting. Based on review of all information submitted with the appeal, I waive Section 7E of Response and Recovery Directorate Policy 9525.13, dated July 31, 2001, for DR-1766 and approve the second appeal.
Please inform the Applicant of my decision. This determination constitutes the final decision on this matter as set forth in 44 CFR §206.206, Appeals.
Sincerely,
/s/
Elizabeth A. Zimmerman
Assistant Administrator
Recovery Directorate
cc: Janet M. Odeshoo Acting Regional Administrator FEMA Region V