Public Interest, Immediate Threat

Appeal Brief

Summary Paragraph 

From February 15-20, 2023, severe storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides impacted areas throughout Kentucky. The University of Kentucky (Applicant) requested Public Assistance (PA) funding for debris removal operations at the Robinson Center for Appalachian Resource Sustainability. FEMA conducted a site inspection and prepared Grant Manager Project 729382 to document work and claimed costs. FEMA denied PA funding because the debris was removed from natural, unimproved land, which was not in the public interest since it did not eliminate an immediate threat. The Applicant submitted its first appeal, asserting that the property is an improved area that safeguards natural resources for the public interest, and that the vegetative debris posed a public safety hazard because it could wash back into the river, potentially obstructing the river’s flow and causing flooding. Finally, the Applicant stated removing the debris would eliminate a threat to lives, public health, and safety, as well as the immediate risk of significant damage to the surrounding infrastructure. FEMA Region 4 Regional Administrator denied the appeal. FEMA found that the Applicant had not substantiated that debris removal work was performed to eliminate an immediate threat of significant damage to improved property. The Applicant filed a second appeal reiterating first appeal arguments. 

Authorities

• Stafford Act § 407(a).
• 44 C.F.R. §§ 206.206(a), 206.221(c), 206.224(a).
• PAPPG, at 63-64, 97, 99, 100, 101.
• University of Kentucky, FEMA-4663-DR-KY, at 3; Montgomery Cnty., FEMA-4618-DR-PA, at 3; West Turin (Town of), FEMA-4472-DR-NY, at 4.

Headnotes

• FEMA is authorized to provide PA funding for debris removal as long as it is in the public interest, such as removal necessary to eliminate immediate threats to life, public health, and safety or to eliminate immediate threats of significant damage to improved property.
  • The Applicant has not demonstrated that the debris removal was in the public interest, as the removal does not eliminate an immediate threat.

Conclusion

FEMA finds that the claimed debris removal work was not in the public interest, as the removal did not eliminate an immediate threat.

Appeal Letter

Appeal Analysis

Background

From February 15 to 20, 2023, severe storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides caused damage in Kentucky.[1] The University of Kentucky (Applicant) requested $26,523.72 in Public Assistance (PA) for debris removal at its Robinson Center for Appalachian Resource Sustainability (Robinson Center).[2] FEMA prepared Grants Manager Project 729382 to document the work and claimed costs. On March 18, 2024, FEMA performed a site inspection, resulting in photographs and a site inspection report (SIR) recording the debris claimed by the Applicant. 

On September 19, 2024, FEMA issued a Determination Memorandum (DM) denying $26,523.72 for debris removal. FEMA stated the photographs in the SIR did not show debris impacting improved property or public-use areas, such as trails or sidewalks. FEMA concluded that the debris removal was from natural, unimproved land, and thus not in the public interest since it did not eliminate an immediate threat to lives, public health, and safety, or improved property; therefore, the work was ineligible for PA funding.

First Appeal

The Applicant submitted a first appeal on November 15, 2024, stating that the property is an improved area that protects natural resources for the public interest. Additionally, it noted that vegetative debris on an embankment might wash back into the river, potentially blocking flow and increasing flooding. Finally, the Applicant claimed that removing debris would reduce threats to lives, public health, and safety, as well as prevent significant damage to the nearby infrastructure. The Applicant provided photographs and a maintenance letter. On November 25, 2024, the Kentucky Emergency Management (Recipient) transmitted the Applicant’s appeal with a letter stating its support. 

On March 3, 2025, the FEMA Region 4 Regional Administrator denied the appeal. FEMA found that the Applicant had not substantiated that it had improved or maintained the area where the work was performed. Additionally, FEMA concluded that the debris removal work was not performed to eliminate an immediate threat of significant damage to improved property.

Second Appeal

The Applicant submitted its second appeal on May 1, 2025, reiterating several first appeal arguments and emphasizing that it is not requesting assistance for debris removal from agricultural or natural, unimproved land, such as heavily wooded or unused areas. The Applicant states that it seeks reimbursement for debris removal that hindered access to essential facilities, blocked culverts and drainage, and threatened riverbank stability. The Applicant notes this raises the risk of erosion and potential road washout, and increases risk to property. On May 9, 2025, the Recipient transmitted the second appeal with a letter stating its support. 

Discussion

FEMA may provide PA funding for debris removal activities that are in the public interest, such as removal that is necessary to eliminate immediate threats: (1) to lives, public health, and safety; or (2) of significant damage to improved public or private property.[3] “Immediate threat” is the threat of additional damage or destruction from an incident that can reasonably be expected to occur within five years of the declared incident.[4] Removal of debris from improved public property is eligible.[5] Debris removal from natural, unimproved land, such as heavily wooded areas, is ineligible.[6]Eligible vegetative debris may include tree limbs, branches, stumps, or trees that are still in place, but damaged to the extent they pose an immediate threat.[7] These items are not eligible if the debris is in a natural area and does not extend over improved property or public-use areas.[8] It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide documentation to substantiate its claim as eligible and to clearly explain how those records support the appeal.[9]

The Applicant requested reimbursement for debris removal work at the Robinson Center, asserting that the work was performed on improved and maintained property used to serve the public. However, a review of the record does not show that the debris was located on, or posed an immediate threat to, improved property. Although the Applicant provided aerial photographs and maps showing Robinson Center’s infrastructure and improvements, the photographs within the record do not show the presence of disaster-related debris on or near improved features, such as paved roads, buildings, constructed trails, or other public-use infrastructure. Instead, the photographs show vegetative debris along the riverbanks. Debris removal from these types of areas is not in the public interest as it does not address an immediate threat to lives, public health and safety, nor threats of significant damage to improved property.[10]

The Applicant also asserted that the debris created an immediate threat of additional flooding and damage that threatens the Robinson Center infrastructure. However, the photographs do not substantiate this assertion as they do not identify university infrastructure, nor do they demonstrate the threat of additional damage or destruction from an incident that can reasonably be expected to occur within five years of the declared incident. The Applicant does not provide any documentation, such as engineering reports or documented damages to improved property to substantiate any immediate threat to improved property from a five-year flood event.[11] Without specific information substantiating its assertion, the Applicant has not demonstrated an immediate threat to any improved property is reasonably expected to occur within five years of the disaster.

Conclusion

The claimed debris removal work was not in the public interest, as the removal did not eliminate an immediate threat. Therefore, this appeal is denied.