This page has not been translated into 简体中文. Visit the 简体中文 page for resources in that language.
Midwest City, OK
Appeal Brief
Appeal Letter
Appeal Analysis
Attn: Matt Rollins, State Hazard Mitigation Officer
RE: DR-1803-0009-OK, Project #09, Midwest City Individual Safe Room Project Second Appeal
Dear Mr. Ashwood:
Appeal Brief
| Applicant | Oklahoma Department of Emergency Management |
| Appeal Type | 2nd |
| Project Number | 9 |
| Date Signed | 2018-04-12T00:00:00 |
1st Appeal
- Issue
- A property owner had requested $2,000 reimbursement for a previously HMA-awarded safe room that the owner removed and replaced.
- Reason for Denial
- FEMA Region VI determined the project to be ineligible based on duplication of benefits (DOB) and no documentation of a problem associated with the original saferoom.
- Reference(s)
- 44 CFR Section 206.191 - DOB
- Stafford Act Section 312 - DOB
2nd Appeal
- Issue
- ODEM appealed the Regional Office 1st appeal denial on behalf of the subrecipient on March 13, 2018.
- FEMA Findings
- FEMA Region VI determined the project is ineligible for HMGP funding due to duplication of
benefits in accordance with the 44 CFR Section 206.191 requirements and Section 312 of the
Stafford Act. The original safe room installation provided a functional safe room, and no documentation was submitted to indicate a problem with it. The project was closed out with no issues reported. - FEMA HQ upheld the 1st appeal denial.
- FEMA Region VI determined the project is ineligible for HMGP funding due to duplication of
- Rationale
- The Region's decision on the 1st appeal is consistent with program regulations, statutes and guidance.
- References
- 44 CFR Section 206.191 - DOB
- Stafford Act Section 312 - DOB
Appeal Letter
Mr. Albert Ashwood, Director
Oklahoma Department of Emergency Management
P.O. Box 53365
Oklahoma City, OK 73152-3365
Oklahoma Department of Emergency Management
P.O. Box 53365
Oklahoma City, OK 73152-3365
Attn: Matt Rollins, State Hazard Mitigation Officer
RE: DR-1803-0009-OK, Project #09, Midwest City Individual Safe Room Project Second Appeal
Dear Mr. Ashwood:
Thank you for your letter to the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regarding an Individual Safe Room Rebate issued to Mr. Garry Avery at 3402 Bella Vista Drive, Midwest City, OK. My office received the request to reconsider the denial for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) project DR-1803-0009, in accordance with Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 206.440, Appeals.
Background
On March 25, 2017, the State of Oklahoma requested special consideration for a property owner that received a $2,000 reimbursement in 2004 and in 2011 for a safe room. The homeowner was unsatisfied with the first installation as the contractor installed the unit to allow a portion to remain above the garage floor surface. The homeowner had the safe room removed and another safe room installed in the same location.
On March 25, 2017, the State of Oklahoma requested special consideration for a property owner that received a $2,000 reimbursement in 2004 and in 2011 for a safe room. The homeowner was unsatisfied with the first installation as the contractor installed the unit to allow a portion to remain above the garage floor surface. The homeowner had the safe room removed and another safe room installed in the same location.
Analysis
FEMA Region VI determined the project is ineligible for HMGP funding due to duplication of benefits in accordance with the 44 CFR Section 206.191 requirements and Section 312 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). Additionally, the original safe room installation provided a functional safe room, and no documentation was submitted to indicate a problem with it. As a result, the project was closed out with no issues reported.
FEMA Region VI determined the project is ineligible for HMGP funding due to duplication of benefits in accordance with the 44 CFR Section 206.191 requirements and Section 312 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). Additionally, the original safe room installation provided a functional safe room, and no documentation was submitted to indicate a problem with it. As a result, the project was closed out with no issues reported.
Conclusion
I have reviewed all documentation that the State provided with the appeal and have determined that the Region's decision on the first appeal is consistent with program regulations, statutes, and guidance. Therefore, this office is denying the second appeal for DR-1803-0009, Individual Safe Room Rebate. This determination is the final decision on this issue in accordance with 44 CPR Section 206.440, Appeals.
I have reviewed all documentation that the State provided with the appeal and have determined that the Region's decision on the first appeal is consistent with program regulations, statutes, and guidance. Therefore, this office is denying the second appeal for DR-1803-0009, Individual Safe Room Rebate. This determination is the final decision on this issue in accordance with 44 CPR Section 206.440, Appeals.
Sincerely,
Michael M. Grimm
Assistant Administrator for Mitigation
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
Assistant Administrator for Mitigation
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
cc: Tony Robinson, Regional Administrator, FEMA Region VI
Appeal Analysis
FEMA Region VI determined the project is ineligible for HMGP funding due to duplication of benefits in accordance with the 44 CFR Section 206.191 requirements and Section 312 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). Additionally, the original safe room installation provided a functional safe room, and no documentation was submitted to indicate a problem with it. As a result, the project was closed out with no issues reported.