Citation: FEMA-1941-DR-MN, Steele County, Building Repairs, Project Worksheets (PWs) 941, 947, 952, and 959
Cross-Reference: General Eligibility, Pre-disaster Condition, Codes and Standards
Summary: Four buildings located in the Steele County (Applicant) Highway Operations Complex (HOC) flooded during a severe storm and flooding event. FEMA prepared PWs 941, 947, 952, and 959 to fund repair of the disaster-related damage to each of the four buildings. The buildings are located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. After applying mandatory flood insurance reductions, FEMA approved $8,980; $1,925; $8,095; and $68,007 with the PWs, respectively. The Applicant submitted a Highway Operations Complex Restoration report to FEMA which presents a feasibility study for the restoration of the HOC and includes cost estimates for repair of all damage to the buildings. The Applicant requested FEMA use the cost estimates recommended in the report to determine the eligibility of the replacement of the HOC buildings. Subsequently, the Applicant informed FEMA that the local floodplain manager determined Buildings 1 and 4 are substantially damaged. If repaired, the Applicant is required to bring Buildings 1 and 4 into compliance with local floodplain ordinance by elevating or dry flood proofing the buildings. FEMA determined that replacing the buildings was not eligible for funding. The Applicant submitted first appeals of the approved scopes of work and cost estimates documented in the PWs. The Applicant stated that the scopes of work and cost estimates developed by the FEMA Project Specialist “were significantly lacking” based on the results of the feasibility study presented in the report. The FEMA Regional Administrator denied the Applicant’s first appeal of PW 941 and partially granted the first appeals of PWs 947, 952, and 959 by approving costs for disaster required work and denying the remaining requested costs. In the second appeal, the Applicant requests funding for repairs recommended by the feasibility study and the costs to comply with the local floodplain ordinance.
Issues: 1. Does the documentation submitted by the Applicant demonstrate that the damage detailed in the feasibility study was a result of the declared the disaster?
2. Is the Applicant required by code or standard to elevate or dry flood proof Buildings 1 and 4?
Findings: 1. No
2. Yes, but the work is eligible for Building 1 only as Building 4 was substantially damaged prior to by the event.
Rationale: 44 CFR §206.223 General Work Eligibility; 44 CFR §206.226(d) Restoration of Damaged Facilities, Standards