Consolidated Time Extension Request
Appeal Brief
Appeal Letter
Appeal Analysis
Appeal Brief
| Disaster | FEMA-4085 |
| Applicant | New York City Office of Management and Budget |
| Appeal Type | Second |
| PA ID# | 061-51000-41 |
| PW ID# | Multiple PW's |
| Date Signed | 2018-05-30T00:00:00 |
Conclusion: The New York City Office of Management and Budget’s (Applicant) second appeal claims have been resolved or otherwise addressed by the amendment to the New York City Direct Administrative Costs Addendum to Public Assistance Policy and Guidance (NYC DAC Addendum) executed on December 5, 2017, and FEMA’s revised time extension determination issued on March 7, 2018. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as moot.
Summary Paragraph
From October 27 to November 9, 2012, Hurricane Sandy caused extensive damage to the City of New York. The New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services (Grantee) granted a 30-month time extension for all entities within the New York City Government (NYC) for its ongoing permanent work projects on March 18, 2014. On June 27, 2014, the Applicant proposed a Section 428 Public Assistance Alternative Procedures pilot program for NYC’s direct administrative costs (DAC). FEMA, the Grantee, and the Applicant executed the NYC DAC Addendum on November 24, 2014, establishing the procedures to award NYC’s DAC at 4 percent of each project’s pre-award value. On June 21, 2016, the Applicant requested a 60-month blanket time extension for all NYC’s ongoing permanent work, and provided average construction durations from FEMA’s Cost Estimate Format (CEF) Guidance as support. On September 27, 2016, FEMA partially granted the request: (1) providing time extensions for large projects based on the average timeframes in the CEF Guidance plus 12 months for grant administration tasks starting at each PW’s initial obligation date; and (2) stating DAC would only be reimbursed if incurred prior to the project deadline. The Applicant appealed arguing: (1) project deadlines under 44 C.F.R. § 206.204 only pertain to eligible work, not DAC; (2) FEMA arbitrarily selected the initial obligation date to start each timeline and 12 months to complete grant administration tasks; and (3) the determination excluded 41 PWs in need of time extensions. It also requested: (1) a set of project deadlines that would be easier to track than 170 individual deadlines; and (2) clarification of whether FEMA intended to award DAC under the NYC DAC Addendum because FEMA implied otherwise by asserting DAC must be incurred before the project deadline. FEMA denied the appeal, and upheld the requirement to incur DAC within the approved time extensions without addressing the other issues raised. On second appeal, the Applicant: (1) challenges the assertion that DAC must be incurred prior to the project completion date; (2) argues that FEMA’s decision to begin each project timeline at the initial obligation may result in deobligation of its costs incurred prior to PW obligation; (3) asks FEMA to clarify whether it will reimburse costs incurred prior to the initial PW obligation dates; and (4) states FEMA did not address all first appeal claims.
Authorities
- Stafford Act § 428.
- 44 C.F.R. § 206.204.
- DAP 9525.9, at 6.
Headnotes
- In an amendment to the NYC DAC Addendum executed on December 5, 2017, all parties agreed on specific dates to calculate DAC independent of the project completion deadlines. FEMA issued a revised time extension determination on March 7, 2018: (1) excluding the assertion that eligible DAC must be incurred prior to the project completion dates; (2) confirming DAC will be awarded pursuant to the NYC DAC Addendum, and (3) approving time extensions for NYC’s open PWs with uniform deadlines independent of the initial obligation dates.
- The Applicant’s second appeal requests for: (1) a revised blanket time extension for all NYC’s open PWs with four sets of uniform deadlines, and (2) clarification on the eligibility of costs incurred prior to a project’s initial obligation date and the eligibility of grant management costs incurred after project deadlines, have been addressed or resolved by the amendment to the NYC DAC Addendum and FEMA’s revised time extension determination.
Appeal Letter
Barbara Lee Steigerwald
Deputy Commissioner, Alternate Governor’s Authorized Representative
New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services
1220 Washington Avenue
Building 7A, Floor 4
Albany, NY 12242
Re: Second Appeal – New York City Office of Management and Budget, PA ID 061-51000-41, FEMA‑4085-DR-NY, Multiple Project Worksheets – Consolidated Time Extension Request
Dear Ms. Steigerwald:
This is in response to a letter from your office dated September 8, 2017, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of the New York City Office of Management and Budget (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) consolidated time extension determination dated September 27, 2016.
As explained in the enclosed analysis, I have determined that the Applicant’s second appeal claims have been resolved or otherwise addressed in the amendment to the New York City Direct Administrative Costs Addendum to Public Assistance Policy and Guidance executed on December 5, 2017, and in FEMA’s revised time extension determination issued on March 7, 2018. Accordingly, I am dismissing the appeal as moot.
Please inform the Applicant of my decision.
Sincerely,
/S/
Jonathan Hoyes
Director
Public Assistance Division
Enclosure
cc: Thomas Von Essen
Regional Administrator
FEMA Region II
Appeal Analysis
Background
From October 27 to November 9, 2012, Hurricane Sandy caused extensive damage to the City of New York. On March 18, 2014, the New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services (Grantee) used its authority under Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (44 C.F.R.) § 206.204(c)(2)(ii) to grant a 30-month time extension for all ongoing permanent work projects under FEMA-4085-DR-NY.[1] Accordingly, all New York City Government (NYC) entities received a time extension for ongoing permanent work projects to November 3, 2016.
In a letter to FEMA dated June 27, 2014, the New York City Office of Management and Budget (Applicant) proposed a Public Assistance Alternative Procedures (PAAP) pilot program under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988 (Stafford Act) § 428[2] for NYC’s direct administrative costs (DAC).[3] Under that proposal, DAC would be awarded to all NYC applicants based on fixed percentages of the Project Worksheet (PW) amounts, and the applicants would be allowed to use DAC underruns for otherwise eligible costs.
On November 24, 2014, FEMA, the Grantee, and the Applicant executed the New York City Direct Administrative Costs Addendum to Public Assistance Policy and Guidance (NYC DAC Addendum), which established the procedures to calculate and award DAC for all NYC’s fixed estimate projects under Stafford Act § 428 and all non-fixed estimate projects under Stafford Act §§ 403, 406, and 407[4] based on a 4 percent flat rate of each project’s pre-award value.[5] For Section 428 PAAP fixed estimate projects, each project’s 4 percent DAC award would be precalculated and included in the grant agreement at signing. For NYC’s non-fixed estimate projects, the 4 percent DAC award would be calculated based on each project’s pre-award value on the later date of either November 3, 2016, or the midpoint of project performance including time extensions. The NYC DAC Addendum also allowed DAC underruns to be used for otherwise eligible costs under Stafford Act § 406.
On June 21, 2016, the Applicant requested a 60-month blanket time extension for all NYC’s ongoing permanent work projects under FEMA-4085-DR-NY.[6] Due to the highly complex nature of NYC’s construction projects, the Applicant explained that NYC would need additional time to complete the eligible work. As support, the Applicant provided average construction durations derived from the historical data FEMA used to develop its Cost Estimate Format (CEF) Guidance dated April 10, 2014.[7] The Applicant also emphasized that several dozen initial PW versions had not been prepared yet, and many additional versions would be required for hazard mitigation proposals and scope of work changes. The Grantee transmitted the request to FEMA with a recommendation letter dated July 19, 2016.
In a determination letter dated September 27, 2016 (September 27, 2016 Determination), FEMA partially approved the Applicant’s time extension request for its ongoing permanent work projects.[8] FEMA provided time extensions for large projects based on the average construction timeframes used in its CEF Guidance plus an additional 12 months for scope of work changes and closeout. Accordingly, FEMA extended the deadlines for large projects 62, 65, 73.5, or 75.5 months from each project’s initial obligation date based on the project’s obligated amount.[9] For small projects and projects reported as 99 to 100 percent complete, FEMA extended the deadline to October 31, 2017. The September 27, 2016 Determination also stated DAC “will only be reimbursed if incurred within prescribed periods of performance.”[10]
In a letter to FEMA dated October 11, 2016, the Applicant raised several concerns in response to the September 27, 2016 Determination.[11] The Applicant explained that the determination excluded 41 permanent work PWs, which urgently needed time extensions before the November 3, 2016 deadline. It also pointed out that the determination created 170 individual project completion deadlines, and asked FEMA to provide a set of deadlines that would be easier to track. Lastly, the Applicant requested that FEMA clarify whether the determination’s assertion that DAC “will only be reimbursed if incurred within prescribed periods of performance” implied FEMA’s repudiation of the agreement to award DAC under the NYC DAC Addendum.[12]
First Appeal
In a letter dated November 26, 2016, the Applicant appealed FEMA’s September 27, 2016 Determination.[13] The Applicant contended that time extensions for project completion described under 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(d) only pertain to the performance of eligible work, and do not apply to grant administration activities.[14] As support, the Applicant quoted FEMA’s assertion in a letter dated March 21, 2014, that “[g]rant administrative activities are not bound by the regulatory work completion deadlines; therefore a time extension request is not required.”[15] It also quoted FEMA’s letter dated August 2, 2016, approving “a period of performance extension through the end of the [New York City Housing Authority’s] anticipated construction phase for the PWs’ approved, eligible scopes of work.”[16] Moreover, the Applicant argued that FEMA has already established the eligibility of DAC incurred after the completion of a project’s scope of work in FEMA Disaster Assistance Policy (DAP) 9525.9, Section 324 Management Costs and Direct Administrative Costs and related guidance issued on September 8, 2009.[17]
The Applicant asserted that FEMA arbitrarily chose the initial obligation date to start each project’s timeline because a PW’s initial obligation date has no relationship with its construction timeline. It also contended that FEMA’s selection of 12 months to complete each project’s grant administration tasks has no basis under FEMA regulations or policy, as 44 C.F.R. § 206.205(b)(1) only requires an applicant to request final inspection “as soon as practicable after [it] has completed the approved work and requested payment.” The Applicant claimed that FEMA’s reinterpretation of 44 C.F.R. § 206.204 constitutes a policy change triggering the public notice and comment requirements of Stafford Act § 325. It also emphasized this reinterpretation could result in the noncompliance of hundreds of PWs that were not closed out before the project completion deadline, premature award calculations under the NYC DAC Addendum, and increased risk of negative audit findings. In addition, the Applicant incorporated the issues and concerns raised in its October 11, 2016 letter. The Grantee submitted the appeal to FEMA, with a recommendation letter dated January 25, 2017.
FEMA issued the Final Request for Information (RFI) on January 31, 2017, to inform the Applicant the appeal would likely be denied due to a lack of documentation showing FEMA erred in asserting DAC must be incurred within the project completion deadlines to be eligible for reimbursement.[18] FEMA’s Final RFI also gave the Applicant and the Grantee a final opportunity to provide other information supportive of the appeal. The Applicant submitted its Final RFI response on March 3, 2017, arguing FEMA’s requirement to incur DAC prior to the project completion date deviates from past practice, and constitutes a new policy triggering the public notice and comment requirements of Stafford Act § 325. The Applicant also provided additional documentation such as: (1) letters from FEMA dated January 17 and February 23, 2017, approving time extensions without requiring closeout to be completed before the project completion deadline; (2) notes from a January 13, 2017 meeting with FEMA and the Grantee; and (3) a support memorandum from the Grantee’s Public Assistance Program Manager.
On May 11, 2017, the FEMA Region II Regional Administrator (RA) denied the appeal. The RA upheld the September 27, 2016 Determination’s requirement to incur eligible DAC within the approved time extensions because DAP 9525.9 classifies DAC as “project costs,” and 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(d)(2) only allows reimbursement for “project costs” incurred up to the latest project completion date. In addition, the RA found the determination did not constitute a new policy triggering the public notice and comment requirements of Stafford Act § 325 because DAP 9525.9 and 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(d)(2) were in effect at the time of the disaster.[19]
Second Appeal
The Applicant submitted its second appeal on July 11, 2017, contesting the RA’s first appeal determination.[20] On second appeal, the Applicant reiterates its previous arguments challenging FEMA’s assertion that eligible DAC must be incurred prior to the project completion date in accordance with 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(d). The Applicant also argues that FEMA’s decision to begin each project timeline at the initial obligation may result in the deobligation of millions of dollars in previously awarded costs incurred prior to initial PW obligation. Accordingly, the Applicant asks FEMA to clarify whether it will reimburse costs incurred prior to initial PW obligation dates. The Applicant also asserts that FEMA did not address all the issues raised on first appeal, nor did FEMA respond to a revised time extension request the Applicant submitted on January 23, 2017 (Revised Time Extension Request), proposing uniform project completion deadlines based on four groupings of all NYC’s open PWs.[21] The Grantee submitted the Applicant’s appeal to FEMA, with a recommendation letter dated September 8, 2017.
Subsequent Developments
The Applicant, the Grantee, and FEMA executed an amendment to the NYC DAC Addendum on December 5, 2017. The amendment removed the original version of Section 2.E[22] from the NYC DAC Addendum, and replaced it with a provision that categorized all NYC’s non-fixed estimate PWs into four groups and assigned specific dates to each group for calculating the DAC award.[23] It also added Section 4.F, which states the NYC DAC Addendum may be amended in a writing signed by all parties, and such an amendment will not invalidate the rest of the NYC DAC Addendum or relieve the parties of their respective obligations.
In a determination letter dated March 7, 2018 (Revised Time Extension Determination), FEMA approved the Applicant’s Revised Time Extension Request for simplified project completion deadlines based on four groupings of all NYC’s open PWs.[24] While the Applicant requested four specific deadlines ranging from December 31, 2018 to December 31, 2026, FEMA explained that the Applicant did not provide justification for time extensions beyond the current approved deadlines ranging from September 31, 2018 to March 30, 2023. The determination also stated FEMA would consider additional time extension requests on an individual basis, and any such request must include a timeline for project design, procurement, and construction with detailed justification in accordance with 44 C.F.R. 206.204(d). Lastly, the determination confirmed that FEMA would award DAC in accordance with the NYC DAC Addendum as amended.[25]
Discussion
DAC Incurred After Project Completion Deadlines
The time limitations for an applicant to complete debris clearance, emergency work, and permanent work are set forth under 44 C.F.R. § 206.204.[26] Project costs to complete such work may only be reimbursed if incurred before the latest approved project completion deadline and upon completion of the project.[27] Project costs to complete grant administration activities may be eligible for reimbursement as DAC based on actual costs incurred.[28]
FEMA executed the NYC DAC Addendum as a Section 428 PAAP pilot program on November 24, 2014, to award NYC’s DAC based on 4 percent of each project’s pre-award value. The NYC DAC Addendum was also amended on December 5, 2017, providing specific dates to calculate DAC. Thus, FEMA’s policy to reimburse DAC based on actual costs does not apply here, and the dates when NYC applicants incur DAC relative to the project completion deadlines are inconsequential to the calculation of DAC awarded pursuant to the NYC DAC Addendum. In addition, FEMA’s Revised Time Extension Determination confirmed DAC would be awarded in accordance with the NYC DAC Addendum,[29] and excluded the assertion from the September 27, 2016 Determination that eligible DAC must be incurred before the approved project completion dates.[30] Accordingly, the Applicant’s second appeal challenging FEMA’s assertion that eligible DAC must be incurred before the approved project completion dates is now moot.
Project Completion Timelines
On second appeal, the Applicant expresses concern that FEMA’s September 27, 2016 decision to start each project completion timeline at the initial obligation date could be used as a basis to deobligate previously awarded funding for costs it incurred prior to initial obligation, and asks FEMA to clarify whether costs incurred prior to initial PW obligation dates will be reimbursed. This issue is now moot because FEMA’s Revised Time Extension Determination did not use the initial PW obligation date to start each project completion timeline.[31]
The Applicant also points out that FEMA did not address all issues raised on first appeal, such as its time extension request for 41 PWs excluded from the original determination and its request for a simpler set of deadlines to reduce the burden of tracking 170 separate project deadlines. However, these issues are now moot because FEMA approved time extensions for all of NYC’s open PWs with uniform deadlines for all four PW groupings in its Revised Time Extension Determination. FEMA’s first appeal determination also did not address the Applicant’s concern that the project completion deadlines under the September 27, 2016 Determination would result in premature calculations of DAC under the NYC DAC Addendum. According to the amendment of the NYC DAC Addendum executed on December 5, 2017, all parties agreed on specific dates to calculate DAC for all four non-fixed estimate PW groupings independent of the project completion deadlines. Therefore, the issue raised on first appeal concerning premature DAC calculations due to the project completion deadlines is now moot.
Conclusion
The Applicant’s claims on second appeal have been resolved or otherwise addressed in FEMA’s Revised Time Extension Determination issued on March 7, 2018, and the amendment to the NYC DAC Addendum executed on December 5, 2017. Accordingly, the Applicant’s second appeal is dismissed as moot.
[1] Letter from Alternate Governor’s Authorized Rep., N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs., to Reg’l Adm’r, FEMA, Region II (Mar. 18, 2014).
[2] The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 93-288, § 428, 42 U.S.C. § 5189f (2013); see Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013, Pub. L. No 113-2, § 1102 (revising the Stafford Act by creating Section 428, which authorizes the FEMA Administrator to establish and adopt alternative procedures for administering federal assistance under the Public Assistance program).
[3] Letter from Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget, to Sandy Recovery Office Dir., FEMA, and Infrastructure Branch Chief (June 27, 2014).
[4] While Section 428 of the Stafford Act was created under the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013, this reference to Sections 403, 406, and 407 pertains to the version of the Stafford Act in effect on the declaration date of FEMA-4085-DR-NY. Stafford Act §§ 403, 406, and 407 (2006).
[5] NYC DAC Addendum defined the pre-award value as a project’s full dollar value before reduction of insurance proceeds, the applicant cost share, and other reductions.
[6] Letter from Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget, to Recovery Div. Dir., FEMA Region II (June 21, 2016). The Applicant explained that it submitted a consolidated time extension request with the intent to reduce the administrative burden that would have resulted from processing 470 individual time extension requests.
[7] See FEMA Public Assistance Cost Estimate Format (CEF) Guidance for FEMA-4085-DR-NY (Apr. 10, 2014) (providing guidance for NYC applicants in calculating construction midpoints for uncompleted work based on historical data the Applicant submitted to FEMA on March 18, 2014). The average construction durations ranged from 43 months for projects under $2 million to 52 months for projects above $20 million.
[8] Letter from Recovery Div. Dir., FEMA Region II, to Governor’s Authorized Rep., N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs. (Sept. 27, 2016) [hereinafter September 27, 2016 Determination].
[9] FEMA provided the following time extensions based on each project’s obligated amount: (1) 62 months for projects below $2 million, (2) 65 months for projects between $2 and $10 million, (3) 73.5 months for projects between $10 to $20 million, and (4) 75.5 months for projects over $20 million.
[10] Id. at 3.
[11] Letter from Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget, to Recovery Div. Dir., FEMA Region II (Oct. 11, 2016).
[12] Id. at 3 (quoting September 27, 2016 Determination, at 3).
[13] Letter from Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget, to Deputy Comm’r, N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs. (Nov. 26, 2016).
[14] Id. at 1 (citing 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(a), which states “[t]his section describes the policies and procedures applicable during the performance of eligible work.” ).
[15] Id. at 3 (citing Letter from Dir., FEMA N.Y. Sandy Recovery Office, to Governor’s Authorized Representative, N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs. at 1 (Mar. 21, 2014)).
[16] Id. (citing Letter from Recovery Div. Deputy Dir., FEMA Region II, to Governor’s Authorized Representative, N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs. at 2 (Aug. 2, 2016)).
[17] Id. at 5 (citing FEMA Disaster Assistance Policy (DAP) 9525.9, Section 324 Management Costs and Direct Administrative Costs, (Mar. 12, 2008) and Memorandum from Assistant Administrator, Disaster Assistance Directorate, FEMA to Regional Administrators, FEMA, at Attachment (Sept. 8, 2009).
[18] Letter from Section Chief, Appeals and Audits, Recovery Div., FEMA Region II, to Deputy Comm’r, N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs., and to Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget (Jan. 31, 2017). The Final RFI did not provide any other basis for the anticipated denial of the appeal.
[19] The RA did not address the Applicant’s request for FEMA to grant a time extension for 41 of NYC’s ongoing permanent work PWs that were excluded in the PW list enclosed with the September 27, 2016 determination. It also did not clarify whether DAC would be awarded in accordance with the NYC DAC Addendum, nor did it address the Applicant’s request for a simpler set of deadlines to reduce the burden of tracking 170 separate project deadlines.
[20] Letter from Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget, to Deputy Comm’r, N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs. (Jul. 11, 2017). The July 11, 2017 appeal letter was revised in a subsequent letter dated September 8, 2017. Letter from Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget, to Deputy Comm’r, N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs. (Sept. 8, 2017).
[21] The Applicant’s revised time extension request dated January 23, 2017, was not included with administrative record or otherwise made available for FEMA HQ’s review on second appeal. However, the Applicant and FEMA both acknowledge that the letter proposed uniform project completion deadlines based on four groupings of all NYC’s open PWs. See Letter from Recovery Div. Acting Dir., FEMA Region II, to Deputy Comm’r, N.Y. State Div. of Homeland Sec. and Emergency Servs. and Deputy Dir., New York City Office of Mgmt. and Budget, at 3–4 (Mar. 7, 2018) [hereinafter Revised Time Extension Determination] (describing the Applicant’s January 23, 2017 request and related correspondence in June and July of 2017). Hereinafter, the Revised Time Extension Request collectively refers to the Applicant’s January 23, 2017 request and related correspondence in June and July of 2017.
[22] The original version of Section 2.E established that the DAC award for all non-fixed estimate projects would be calculated based on the pre-award value of each PW either at 48 months after the disaster’s declaration date or the midpoint of project performance including approved time extensions, whichever date is later.
[23] The original NYC DAC Addendum established that the DAC award for all non-fixed estimate projects would be calculated based on the pre-award value of each PW either at 48 months after the disaster’s declaration date or the midpoint of project performance including approved time extensions, whichever date is later.
[24] Revised Time Extension Determination, at 6–8. This determination applies to all NYC’s open PWs except for certain 428 PAAP fixed-estimate PWs and PWs for temporary facilities tied to ongoing permanent work.
[25] See id. at 5 (referencing NYC DAC Addendum and its amendment executed on December 5, 2017).
[26] See generally 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(a) (stating that 44 C.F.R. § 206.204 “describes the policies and procedures applicable during the performance of eligible work”). Pursuant to 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(c), applicants generally must complete debris clearance and emergency work within 6 months and permanent work within 18 months of a major disaster or emergency’s declaration, but a grantee may extend those deadlines by an additional 6 months for debris clearance and emergency work and 30 months for permanent work based on extenuating circumstances or unusual project requirements beyond the applicant’s control. Requests for time extensions beyond a grantee’s authority must be submitted to the RA in accordance with the requirements set forth under 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(d).
[27] 44 C.F.R. § 206.204(d).
[28] See DAP 9525.9, at 6 (limiting eligible DAC to “actual reasonable costs incurred for a specific project”).
[29] See Revised Time Extension Determination, at 5 n.1 (referring to the NYC DAC Addendum as amended).
[30] See id. 7–8 (excluding any reference to DAC in the assertion that “FEMA will only reimburse project costs incurred prior to the project completion deadline.”).
[31] FEMA’s Revised Time Extension Determination selected four sets of uniform project completion deadlines for all of NYC’s open PWs to replace the September 27, 2016 Determination’s methodology of setting individual deadlines 62–75.5 months after each project’s initial obligation date depending on the PW’s obligated amount.
Last updated