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.

Traffic Signal Repair

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1785-DR
ApplicantCity of Fort Pierce
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#111-24300-00
PW ID#707
Date Signed2011-08-01T04:00:00

Citation:         FEMA-1785-DR-FL, City of Fort Pierce, Traffic signals repair, Project Worksheet (PW) 707

Cross-

Reference:      Other Federal Agency; Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Summary:      As a result of heavy rainfall and winds from Tropical Storm Fay in August 2008, the City of Fort Pierce (Applicant) requested Public Assistance funding to repair thirteen severely damaged traffic signals on Federal aid routes.  FEMA prepared PW 707 for $4,052 for the permanent restoration work.  Following a review of the PW, FEMA determined the work was ineligible because it was under the specific authority of the FHWA.  The Applicant’s request for funding by FHWA Emergency Relief (ER) Program was denied, due to not meeting its $5,000 damage threshold.  In its first appeal, the Applicant stated that the de-obligated costs were categorized inaccurately as permanent work, and should be considered eligible emergency protective measures.  FEMA denied the first appeal on May 12, 2010, stating that the work was ineligible because it was under the authority of another federal agency per 44 CFR §206.226(a)(1), Restoration of damaged facilities, Assistance under Other Federal Agency (OFA) programs.  In the second appeal, the Applicant stated similar arguments and did not provide additional documentation to establish eligibility for funding under the Public Assistance Program. 

Issue:              Under FEMA’s Public Assistance Grant Program, does FEMA fund the restoration of a facility that is under the authority of another Federal agency?

Finding:          No.

Rationale:       44 CFR §206.226 (a)(1).

 

Appeal Letter

 

 

August 1, 2011

 

Bryan Koon

Director

Florida Division of Emergency Management
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
Re:  Second Appeal–City of Fort Pierce, PA ID 111-24300-00, Traffic signals repair,
FEMA-1785-DR-FL, Project Worksheet (PW) 707
Dear Mr. Koon:
This letter is in response to your letter dated September 13, 2010, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of the City of Fort Pierce (Applicant).  The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) denial of $4,052 for the repair of thirteen traffic signals located on Federal-aid routes within its jurisdiction.

Background

Following Tropical Storm Fay in August 2008, the Applicant replaced thirteen damaged traffic signals on Federal-aid routes within the city.  FEMA prepared PW 707 for $4,052 for the permanent restoration work.  Following a review of the PW, FEMA determined the work to be ineligible because it was under the specific authority of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).  The Applicant was unable to qualify for funding from FHWA, Emergency Relief (ER) Program because the damage from the disaster failed to meet the $5,000 damage threshold for the ER Program. 

First Appeal

In its first appeal dated June 7, 2010, the Applicant asserted that the Federal-aid routes damage threshold did not qualify the Applicant for the FHWA ER program.  In addition, the Applicant stated that the denied costs were incorrectly categorized as permanent work and should be reclassified as emergency protective measures.  On May 12, 2010, FEMA denied the Applicant’s first appeal reiterating the initial determination that the work was ineligible because it was under the specific authority of the FHWA.

Second Appeal

In the Applicant’s second appeal, dated June 7, 2010, it reiterates the position stated in the first appeal. The Applicant argues that the work performed should be categorized as an emergency protective measure instead of permanent work. The Applicant did not provide any additional information to support its position.

Discussion

Replacement of damaged traffic signals is considered permanent work in the Public Assistance Program; thus, the work is categorized properly as permanent work.  Section 102 of the Stafford Act defines a public facility in part as “…Any non-Federal-aid street, road or highway...”  A Federal-aid street, road, or highway is therefore not an eligible public facility for repair assistance under the Public Assistance Program and FEMA does not have statutory authority to repair Federal-aid streets, roads and highways. Alternatively, the FHWA has statutory authority to repair Federal-aid streets, roads and highways. Therefore, the replacement of thirteen traffic signals along Federal-aid routes is not eligible for funding by FEMA in accordance with Section 102 of the Stafford Act.  

Conclusion

I have reviewed the information submitted with this appeal and have determined that the Regional Administrator’s decision on the first appeal is consistent with Public Assistance regulations and policy.  Accordingly, I am denying the second appeal. 

Please inform the Applicant of my decision. This determination is 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