fepa annual meeting 2013
DESCRIPTION
Scott L. Nelson Emergency Management, Wakulla County Sheriff’s Office. FEPA Annual Meeting 2013. We received 30 plus inches of rain countywide Weak tropical storm force winds were recorded along the coast; inland wind fields were below TS force. Minor storm tides of 6’ were measured. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
FEPA ANNUAL MEETING 2013
Scott L. NelsonEmergency Management, Wakulla County Sheriff’s Office
EVENT CHARACTERISTICS We received 30 plus inches of rain
countywide Weak tropical storm force winds were
recorded along the coast; inland wind fields were below TS force.
Minor storm tides of 6’ were measured
IMPACTS Record Flooding along the Sopchoppy River Major road flooding to include the total isolation of
the City of Sopchoppy Major Flooding to homes Major road damage Major impacts to the wastewater treatment system Minor vegetative debris, household C&D Numerous sinkholes on public and private property Ponding Vector Control
FROM THE GOOD TO THE UGLY The GOOD
FDEM Smooth coordination
the willingness to support the locals
Private contractor DSI
Extremely knowledgeable staff and a willingness to go to battle
The Ugly FEMA
PWs not provided for review before submittal
Inconsistent guidance to FEMA and local staff
Decisions contrary to policy/guidance
Lack of urgency Staffing inconstancies Eligibility determinations
made in the field Lack of
communication/leadership More concerned with image
than outcome
THE UGLY CONTINUED FEMA stance that sites
with less than $1000.00 could not be grouped
FEMA stance that private contract labor was not eligible CAT C and F
FEMA stance that if you performed CAT B work the project would not be eligible for CAT C
Reservist program
THE GOOD FDEM
Supportive of the needs of the locals
They had to be nudged at times but were effective in nudging FEMA
Private Contractor They had the ability
to hire experienced staff
Many had worked for FEMA in the past
Had more knowledge of FEMA policies than the FEMA representation
Allowed for a successful outcome
THE UGLY FEMA PW REVIEW PROCESS PWs only available for
review after submission PWs were written in a
vacuum with no local verification/input
On August 17, Wakulla County requested to have the State Contractor write small projects. The FEMA FCO and State Director pleaded with the county to stay the course for continuity
Eventually the majority of the PWs were re-written by the State Contractor (all were approved)
THE UGLY : INCONSTANT GUIDANCE TO STAFF
FEMA project specialist and local staff complained about continuing changes in guidance and data needed
Two project specialists left the event before completing a PW
Staff would be given guidance to provide information and spend hours of sorting and preparation only to be told “they” changed their minds.
THE UGLY: DECISIONS WERE CONTRARY TO EXISTING GUIDANCE
On multiple occasions FEMA made decisions that were contrary to FEMA guidance (4 major problems)
CAT B and CAT C issue
Roads with damage less than $1,000.00 listed as non-eligible
Waste Treatment Plant/Private contractor issues
Private contractor labor not allowed while their equipment was (were ghosts operating the equipment or was it a Google tractor)
THE UGLY: LACK OF URGENCY PA Declaration July
9, 2012 Applicant Brief
August 2 September 14
meeting held to discuss county concern over lack of urgency (5 total PWs written) 5 new PWs promised by the 9-21
September 18; began developing daily recovery strep to track progress 5 PWs written (day 71 since declaration)
September 28 5pws written (day 81) This is 0 since the promise of 5 new PWs by the 21st!
THE UGLY: STAFFING INCONSTANCIES At least 8 project
specialists were assigned to Wakulla
This led to a learning curve for all involved each time a new specialist arrived
Damages were shown multiple times
Each new specialist wanted to perform a site visit, take pictures and measurements. This information was not passed down to new FEMA personnel
Recommendations and comments were not consistent among FEMA staff
ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS WERE MADE IN THE FIELD
We were promised by the FCO that determinations would be made in the JFO
The majority of PWs were submitted with an eligibility determination in the field.
The four major points of contention were zeroed out in the filed before ever being submitted to the JFO. They were submitted with an eligibility call that was contrary to guidance
THE UGLY: COMMUNICATION/LEADERSHIP
Multiple promises were made from the JFO; many of these were not followed in the field
The most comical of all: During a high level meeting (FCO, County
Administrator, County Chairman, Attorney, etc.) The FCO stated that her staff was clear that any site with damages of less than $1,000 would be grouped where reasonable. While in this meeting, her staff submitted PWs zeroing out any site less than $1,000.00 regardless of reasonableness
The following is quoted from FEMA 322 (Public Assistance Guide, pages 98 – 99:Combining Work and Creating ProjectsThe first paragraph states, “The Applicant, in coordination with the PAC Crew leader, may combine work items into projects. In this manner, the projects may be organized around the applicant’s needs. A project may consist of one item of work, such as repairs to a single structure, or work that occurs at multiple sites, such as repairs to several washouts along a road. Table 7: Combining Work Method ExplanationType of Facility an applicant could combine all sewer pump stations or gravel roads together. System an applicant could combine repair of several breaks in a water distribution system togetherBoundaries an applicant may have divided power lines into sections or a road department into divisions for ease of operations
The final paragraph on page 98 and continuing onto page 99 states, “FEMA regulations state that individual projects of less than $1,000 in estimated costs are not eligible. However, it is acceptable to combine sites less than $1,000 in estimated costs into one PW when the work meets the conditions shown above for combining sites.
THE UGLY: MORE CONCERNED WITH IMAGE THAN OUTCOME
On multiple occasions FEMA was more concerned about how they looked to the public and public officials than the outcome
Masters of telling you what you want to hear
Make a promise follow guidance and find some stick-to-itiveness
Say what you mean, mean what you say and develop a positive outcome
It matters
THE UGLY :SITES LESS THAN $1000.00 We won; enough said
THE UGLY: NO REIMBURSEMENT FOR CONTRACT LABOR
Wakulla County hires a private company to manage Public Works. The equipment is owned by the county. The contract pays for straight time. FEMA believed that the county was not eligible for contract labor but was eligible for equipment
WE won
THE UGLY: CAT B AND C CAN’T BE PERFORMED ON THE SAME DIRT RAD
FEMA stance that if you performed CAT B work the project would not be eligible for CAT C
The failed to realize the difference between making a road passible for emergency workers and repairing a road to pre-existing conditions
WE WON
THAT’S IT FOLKS!