Debris Removal
Appeal Brief
Appeal Letter
Citation: FEMA-1379-DR-TX; City of Houston
Cross-reference: Debris Removal Operations, Eligibility Criteria, Time Frames
Summary: The City of Houston is seeking reimbursement of costs associated with the debris removal operations beyond September 30, 2001, which was the deadline established by FEMA to remove eligible debris. The City is claiming that FEMA imposed lesser deadlines than those allotted by Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §206.204 (c)(1) for the removal of eligible debris without the consent or agreement of the Grantee.While the grantee addresses the above referenced issue along with the magnitude of the event as defined in terms of displaced families and damaged properties, the greatest controversy arises from the outcome of three surveys taken during October 2001. These surveys, performed on October 4th, 5th, and 22nd by FEMA, State, City officials have generated different interpretations between FEMA and the City. The results of these surveys, specifically the one on October 22, have been interpreted by FEMA as presenting mixed debris, widely scattered and in quantities that did not constitute an immediate life, health and safety threat. The Regional Director denied the Citys first appeal for the same reason.
Issues: (1) Does 44 206.204 unconditionally grant applicants six months to complete debris clearance operations? (2) Is the city eligible for debris removal costs after September 30?
Findings: No. Yes. The City is eligible for debris removal costs for October 2001.
Rationale: 44 CFR 206.224 (a) (1)(2)(3).
Appeal Brief
| Disaster | FEMA-1379-DR |
| Applicant | City of Houston |
| Appeal Type | Second |
| PA ID# | 201-35000-00 |
| PW ID# | 20, 960 and 1151 |
| Date Signed | 2003-01-23T05:00:00 |
Appeal Letter
January 23, 2003
Mr. E. C. Smith
State Coordinating Officer
Division of Emergency Management
Texas Department of Public Safety
2575 W. Bellfort St.
Houston, TX 77054-5025
Re: Second Appeal, City of Houston, PA ID 201-35000-00, Debris Removal,
FEMA-1379-DR-TX, Project Worksheets (PWs) 20, 960 and 1151
Dear Mr. Smith:
This letter is in response to your correspondence of June 7, 2002, which transmitted the referenced appeal on behalf of the City of Houston (City). The City is requesting reimbursement of costs associated with the debris removal operations from October to December 2001. The City requests $950,450 for debris removal during October 2001. However, it does not include specific costs for November and December 2001. The City claims that it is entitled to reimbursement for debris removal for six months pursuant to Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §206.204 (c)(1).
Tropical Storm Allison struck the Houston area on June 6, 2001. The City hired debris contractors to remove disaster-related debris from June to August. The City informed FEMA in August that its debris removal operations had progressed so well that it terminated the debris removal contracts. The City stated that its three waste management contractors that perform regular trash pickup and disposal would remove any remaining disaster-related debris. Further, the City stated that it would no longer separate disaster-related debris from its regular trash. The City and FEMA agreed that disaster-related debris after mid-August would be computed by subtracting the amount of debris deposited at the landfill during the baseline month of May 2001 from the total amount of debris deposited during the subsequent months. At the time when the City terminated the debris contracts, FEMA observed that the nature of the debris deposited in the rights-of-way was changing from eligible flood-damaged household debris to construction debris and tree trimmings. Accordingly, FEMA set August 30 as the deadline for reimbursement for debris removal. FEMA extended the deadline to September 30, 2001, in response to the Citys request.
The City did not agree with FEMAs determination to limit reimbursement for debris removal to September 30, and requested an extension for an indefinite period of time. The State supported this request pursuant to 44 CFR 206.204, which allows applicants six months to complete debris removal and gives the Grantee the authority to extend the deadline another six months. In response to the Citys request, FEMA, State and City officials conducted field surveys on October 4, 5 and 22, to determine the volume of eligible disaster-related debris remaining on the ground. FEMA concluded that some of the debris observed during the surveys was disaster-related; however, it was not of sufficient quantity to pose a health and safety threat to the general public. Therefore, FEMA denied the Citys request to extend the deadline for debris reimbursement. The City appealed this decision to the Regional Director in a letter dated December 5, 2001, stating that many of the disaster victims did not receive FEMA assistance to repair their homes until October, November and December, 2001. Therefore, disaster-related debris associated with those homes was not deposited in the rights-of-way until that time. The City further stated that it incurred significant costs during October 2001 for the removal of disaster-related debris. The Regional Director denied the Citys appeal in a letter dated February 13, 2002, because the eligible debris was not of sufficient quantity and extent to pose an immediate health and safety threat to the general public.
The City submitted a second appeal in a letter dated April 29, 2002, wherein it requested $950,450 in debris removal costs for October 2001, based on a volume of debris above the May 2001 baseline. The City further stated that the inspections conducted on October 4, 5 and 22, observed debris that was on the ground on those days only, and did not consider the fact that the City continuously removed debris from those areas. The City stated that Tropical Storm Allison was the third largest flood event in the nation. It flooded approximately 40,000-50,000 homes, and nearly 120,000 people registered for assistance. Given the magnitude of this disaster, the City concluded that any jurisdiction would require more than six months to complete the debris removal process.
There are two primary issues in this appeal: (1) whether 44 CFR 206.204 unconditionally grants applicants six months to complete debris clearance operations, and (2) whether, given the facts of this case, the City is eligible for reimbursement for debris removal after September 30.
Title 44 CFR 206.204 states that debris clearance should be completed within six months, unless the Grantee grants an extension. This section contemplates that the eligible scope of work for a debris removal project is well defined. The precise scope of work for debris removal operations in large disasters is rarely known at the beginning of the recovery operations. The amount and extent of eligible debris and the time required to remove it are determined after the applicant, State and FEMA officials conduct field surveys of the impacted areas. This is an ongoing process during the recovery effort. The deadline for completing debris removal operations is established collaboratively by the FEMA, the State and the applicant, based on the amount and extent of eligible disaster-related debris. Therefore, the regulations do not unconditionally allow applicants six months to complete debris clearance operations.
During the field surveys conducted on October 4, 5 and 22, FEMA, State and City officials observed debris in the rights-of-way on those days only. The team agreed that some of the debris was eligible disaster-related debris, and some was reconstruction debris, which is not eligible. The Regional Director supported the original determination that the quantity of disaster-related debris observed during the field surveys did not pose an immediate health and safety threat to the general public. I believe that the field surveys were not sufficient to lead to that determination. Based on the results of the inspections, the size and impact of the storm and review of other information submitted with the appeal, I believe that there were sufficient amounts of eligible disaster-related-debris deposited in the rights-of-way during October 2001 to qualify for reimbursement. Therefore, I am approving the Citys request for reimbursement of costs for debris removal during October. The amount approved is $950,450. Although the City submitted information from its records about the volume of debris removed during November and December, there were no field surveys conducted during those months to determine if the debris was disaster related. Given this, and the fact that the amount of disaster-related debris had been steadily declining, I do not believe there is an adequate basis upon which to determine that reimbursement is justified for November and December. Therefore, the Citys request for reimbursement for debris removal costs for November and December is denied. By copy of this letter, I am asking the Regional Director to prepare a project worksheet to implement this determination.
Please inform the City of my determination. My decision constitutes the final decision on this matter, as set forth in 44 CFR §206.206.
Sincerely,
/S/
John R. DAraujo, Jr.
Assistant Director
Response and Recovery Directorate
cc: Ronald Castleman
Regional Director
FEMA Region VI
Mr. E. C. Smith
State Coordinating Officer
Division of Emergency Management
Texas Department of Public Safety
2575 W. Bellfort St.
Houston, TX 77054-5025
Re: Second Appeal, City of Houston, PA ID 201-35000-00, Debris Removal,
FEMA-1379-DR-TX, Project Worksheets (PWs) 20, 960 and 1151
Dear Mr. Smith:
This letter is in response to your correspondence of June 7, 2002, which transmitted the referenced appeal on behalf of the City of Houston (City). The City is requesting reimbursement of costs associated with the debris removal operations from October to December 2001. The City requests $950,450 for debris removal during October 2001. However, it does not include specific costs for November and December 2001. The City claims that it is entitled to reimbursement for debris removal for six months pursuant to Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §206.204 (c)(1).
Tropical Storm Allison struck the Houston area on June 6, 2001. The City hired debris contractors to remove disaster-related debris from June to August. The City informed FEMA in August that its debris removal operations had progressed so well that it terminated the debris removal contracts. The City stated that its three waste management contractors that perform regular trash pickup and disposal would remove any remaining disaster-related debris. Further, the City stated that it would no longer separate disaster-related debris from its regular trash. The City and FEMA agreed that disaster-related debris after mid-August would be computed by subtracting the amount of debris deposited at the landfill during the baseline month of May 2001 from the total amount of debris deposited during the subsequent months. At the time when the City terminated the debris contracts, FEMA observed that the nature of the debris deposited in the rights-of-way was changing from eligible flood-damaged household debris to construction debris and tree trimmings. Accordingly, FEMA set August 30 as the deadline for reimbursement for debris removal. FEMA extended the deadline to September 30, 2001, in response to the Citys request.
The City did not agree with FEMAs determination to limit reimbursement for debris removal to September 30, and requested an extension for an indefinite period of time. The State supported this request pursuant to 44 CFR 206.204, which allows applicants six months to complete debris removal and gives the Grantee the authority to extend the deadline another six months. In response to the Citys request, FEMA, State and City officials conducted field surveys on October 4, 5 and 22, to determine the volume of eligible disaster-related debris remaining on the ground. FEMA concluded that some of the debris observed during the surveys was disaster-related; however, it was not of sufficient quantity to pose a health and safety threat to the general public. Therefore, FEMA denied the Citys request to extend the deadline for debris reimbursement. The City appealed this decision to the Regional Director in a letter dated December 5, 2001, stating that many of the disaster victims did not receive FEMA assistance to repair their homes until October, November and December, 2001. Therefore, disaster-related debris associated with those homes was not deposited in the rights-of-way until that time. The City further stated that it incurred significant costs during October 2001 for the removal of disaster-related debris. The Regional Director denied the Citys appeal in a letter dated February 13, 2002, because the eligible debris was not of sufficient quantity and extent to pose an immediate health and safety threat to the general public.
The City submitted a second appeal in a letter dated April 29, 2002, wherein it requested $950,450 in debris removal costs for October 2001, based on a volume of debris above the May 2001 baseline. The City further stated that the inspections conducted on October 4, 5 and 22, observed debris that was on the ground on those days only, and did not consider the fact that the City continuously removed debris from those areas. The City stated that Tropical Storm Allison was the third largest flood event in the nation. It flooded approximately 40,000-50,000 homes, and nearly 120,000 people registered for assistance. Given the magnitude of this disaster, the City concluded that any jurisdiction would require more than six months to complete the debris removal process.
There are two primary issues in this appeal: (1) whether 44 CFR 206.204 unconditionally grants applicants six months to complete debris clearance operations, and (2) whether, given the facts of this case, the City is eligible for reimbursement for debris removal after September 30.
Title 44 CFR 206.204 states that debris clearance should be completed within six months, unless the Grantee grants an extension. This section contemplates that the eligible scope of work for a debris removal project is well defined. The precise scope of work for debris removal operations in large disasters is rarely known at the beginning of the recovery operations. The amount and extent of eligible debris and the time required to remove it are determined after the applicant, State and FEMA officials conduct field surveys of the impacted areas. This is an ongoing process during the recovery effort. The deadline for completing debris removal operations is established collaboratively by the FEMA, the State and the applicant, based on the amount and extent of eligible disaster-related debris. Therefore, the regulations do not unconditionally allow applicants six months to complete debris clearance operations.
During the field surveys conducted on October 4, 5 and 22, FEMA, State and City officials observed debris in the rights-of-way on those days only. The team agreed that some of the debris was eligible disaster-related debris, and some was reconstruction debris, which is not eligible. The Regional Director supported the original determination that the quantity of disaster-related debris observed during the field surveys did not pose an immediate health and safety threat to the general public. I believe that the field surveys were not sufficient to lead to that determination. Based on the results of the inspections, the size and impact of the storm and review of other information submitted with the appeal, I believe that there were sufficient amounts of eligible disaster-related-debris deposited in the rights-of-way during October 2001 to qualify for reimbursement. Therefore, I am approving the Citys request for reimbursement of costs for debris removal during October. The amount approved is $950,450. Although the City submitted information from its records about the volume of debris removed during November and December, there were no field surveys conducted during those months to determine if the debris was disaster related. Given this, and the fact that the amount of disaster-related debris had been steadily declining, I do not believe there is an adequate basis upon which to determine that reimbursement is justified for November and December. Therefore, the Citys request for reimbursement for debris removal costs for November and December is denied. By copy of this letter, I am asking the Regional Director to prepare a project worksheet to implement this determination.
Please inform the City of my determination. My decision constitutes the final decision on this matter, as set forth in 44 CFR §206.206.
Sincerely,
/S/
John R. DAraujo, Jr.
Assistant Director
Response and Recovery Directorate
cc: Ronald Castleman
Regional Director
FEMA Region VI
Last updated