alert - warning

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

Replacement of Traffic Signal Controllers

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-172-DR-
ApplicantCity of Mansfield
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#139-47138-00
PW ID#Project Worksheet 372
Date Signed2009-04-06T04:00:00
CitationFEMA-1720-DR-OH, City of Mansfield, Replacement of traffic signal controllers, Project Worksheet (PW) 372

Summary: Heavy rainfall and winds from Tropical Storm Erin severely damaged five traffic signal controllers on Federal Aid routes in the City of Mansfield (Applicant). FEMA prepared PW 372 for $56,022 for the permanent restoration work. Following a review of the PW, FEMA determined the work was ineligible because it was under the specific authority of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). As FHWA also could not fund the project, the Applicant submitted its first appeal to FEMA, requesting that FEMA provide funding on the basis that the intent of Section 312 of the Stafford Act and 44 CFR §206.226(a)(1) was to prevent a duplication of benefits. The Applicant claims that in this instance there was no duplication of benefits. On May 28, 2008, the Regional Administrator denied the Applicant’s first appeal reiterating the initial determination that the work was ineligible because it was under the specific authority of the FHWA. In the Applicant’s second appeal, dated August 7, 2008, the Applicant reiterated its arguments from the first appeal that there was no duplication of benefits. In addition, the Applicant added that FEMA has flexibility within its regulations to fund projects that are under the specific authority of another Federal Agency. The Applicant did not provide additional documentation to establish eligibility for funding under the Public Assistance Program.

Issues: 1. Can FEMA fund the restoration of a Federal-aid street or highway?

Findings: 1. No.

Rationale: Section 102 of the Stafford Act

Appeal Letter

April 6, 2009

Nancy Dragani Governor's Authorized Representative Ohio Emergency Management Agency 2855 West Dubin-Granville Road
Columbus, Ohio 43235
Re: Second Appeal–City of Mansfield, PA ID 139-47138-00, Replacement of Traffic Signal Controllers, FEMA-1720-DR-OH, Project Worksheet (PW) 372
Dear Ms. Dragani:
This letter is in response to your letter dated August 19, 2008, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of the City of Mansfield (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of $56,022 for the replacement of five traffic signal controllers located on Federal-aid routes.

BACKGROUND

Heavy rainfall and winds from Tropical Storm Erin in August 2007 severely damaged five traffic signal controllers on Federal-aid routes. The Applicant requested assistance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). FHWA denied the Applicant’s request because the disaster damage did not meet its $700,000 damage threshold to qualify for assistance under FHWA’s Emergency Relief Program (ER). In response to the Applicant’s request for assistance, FEMA prepared PW 372 for $56,022 to replace the five traffic signal controllers. However, following a review of the PW, FEMA determined that the work was ineligible because it was under the specific authority of FHWA.

By a letter dated March 24, 2008, the Applicant submitted its first appeal. The Applicant stated that the intent of Section 312 of the Stafford Act and 44 CFR §206.226(a)(1) is to prevent a duplication of benefits. The Applicant argued that since the amount of damage to the Federal-aid routes did not qualify for the FHWA ER program, there could not be any duplication of benefits. In a letter dated May 28, 2008, the Regional Administrator denied the Applicant’s first appeal, reiterating the initial determination that the work was ineligible because it was under the specific authority of the FHWA.

Second Appeal

In its second appeal, dated August 7, 2008, the Applicant reiterated its arguments from the first appeal, stating that the Congressional intent of Section 312 of the Stafford Act and 44 CFR §206.226(a)(1) was to prevent a duplication of benefits and that no duplication of benefits occurred. In addition, the Applicant added that FEMA has written flexibility into its regulation at 44 CFR §206.226(a)(1) to fund projects when projects are under the specific authority of another Federal Agency.

CONCLUSION

Section 102 of the Stafford Act defines a public facility in part as “…Any non-Federal-aid street, road, or highway….” We interpret this to mean that a Federal-aid street, road, or highway is not an eligible public facility under the Public Assistance Program and that FEMA does not have statutory authority to repair Federal-aid streets, roads, and highways. FHWA has statutory authority to repair Federal-aid streets, roads, and highways. Therefore, the replacement of five traffic signal controllers along Federal-aid routes is not eligible for funding by FEMA in accordance with Section 102 of the Stafford Act. As a result, I am denying the second appeal.

Please inform the Applicant of my decision. This determination is the final decision on this matter pursuant to 44 CFR §206.206.
Sincerely,
/s/

James A. Walke Acting Assistant Administrator Disaster Assistance Directorate
cc: Janet Odeshoo Acting Regional Administrator FEMA Region V