U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.

Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.

The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Eligible Work

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1835-DR
ApplicantCity of Dothan
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#062-21184-00
PW ID#1291
Date Signed2011-08-11T04:00:00

Citation:         FEMA-1835-DR-AL, Storm Drain Systems Repair, Eligible Work

Cross-

Reference:       Eligible Work

Summary:       Following the heavy rain and severe storm declaration, City of Dothan  (Applicant) sustained damages to four storm drainage systems at four different sites.   FEMA prepared PW 1291 for $209,709. Following a review, FEMA denied the Applicant’s request due to a lack of maintenance of the drainage channels as defined at 44 CFR  §206.223(a), General work eligibility, General.  In the first appeal, the Applicant provided documentation supporting maintenance of the drainage facilities.  Following a review of the documentation, FEMA determined the work for one of the sites eligible and partially approved the amount of $82,030.  Subsequently, FEMA contracted a Professional Engineer (PE) to re-examine all of the damaged sites.  The PE reported that the lack of maintenance claim was unsubstantiated.  In the second Appeal dated March 4, 2010, the Applicant stated similar facts and provided additional documentation, which included a copy of the PE’s report and pictures to support the claim.

Issue:              Is the Applicant eligible for reimbursement for costs of repairing four storm drainage systems?

Finding:          Yes

Rationale:       44 CFR  §206.223(a)

Appeal Letter

August 11, 2011

 

Brock Long

Director

Alabama Emergency Management Agency

5898 County Road 41

P.O. Box Drawer 2160

Clanton, AL 35046

Re:  Second Appeal-City of Dothan-, PA ID 062-21184-00, Storm drain repair, FEMA-1835-DR-MD, Project Worksheet (PW) 1291

Dear Mr. Long:
This letter is in response to a letter from your office dated March 4, 2010, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of the City of Dothan (Applicant).  The Applicant is appealing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of $127,679 for the repair of four storm drain systems.

Background

Following the heavy rain and severe storm declaration, the Applicant sustained damages to four storm drain channels located at four separate sites.   FEMA prepared PW 1291 for $127,679 for the repair work.  Following a review of the PW and photo documentation, FEMA determined the work to be ineligible due to lack of maintenance over time as defined in  44 CFR  §206.223(a), General work eligibility, General which states that eligible work must be the result of a major disaster event.   

First Appeal 

In its first appeal dated February 24, 2010, the Applicant stated that the four storm drainage systems were damaged as a result of the declared disaster and presented a summary of costs, personnel and equipment that is budgeted annually for the maintenance of the drainage channels. On January 22, 2010, FEMA denied the first appeal stating that the damages to the drainage channels were not disaster related due to lack maintenance over time as defined at 44 CFR §206.223(a), General work eligibility, General.  After closer review of the four sites, FEMA deemed site number four eligible for funding and partially approved the estimated repair costs of $82,030.  However, damages for sites one, two, and three were determined ineligible for funding due to the extent of undergrowth and bushes at the three sites.

Second Appeal

In the Applicant’s second appeal dated March 4, 2010, the Applicant reiterated the arguments from its first appeal.  Subsequent to the first appeal determination, FEMA contracted a Professional Engineer (PE) to re-examine the damage sites and confirmed the claims of the Applicant.  The PE reported that the drainage channels have been constructed to minimize normal and continual maintenance and the severity of the disaster far exceeded the design capacity of the four storm drain channels.   Therefore, this appeal is granted.   

Conclusion

I have reviewed all of the information submitted with the appeal and determined that the second appeal decision was consistent with program statute and regulations.  Accordingly, I am granting this appeal. 

Please inform the Corporation of my decision.  This determination constitutes the final decision on this matter pursuant to 44 CFR §206.206, Appeals.
Sincerely,

/s/

Deborah Ingram
Assistant Administrator
Recovery Directorate
cc:  Major P. May
       Regional Administrator
       FEMA Region IV

Last updated February 4, 2020