BNUMBER: B-271666
DATE: April 24, 1996
TITLE: [Letter]
**********************************************************************
B-271666
April 24, 1996
John P. Carey, Esq.
General Counsel
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, DC 20472
Dear Mr. Carey:
This is in response to your March 28, 1996, letter requesting our
opinion on whether it is appropriate for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) to reimburse, from the President's Disaster
Relief Fund, the hotel costs of 17 federal workers whose services were
essential to performing urgent disaster relief efforts pursuant to the
Stafford Act.[1]
The Director of FEMA, acting for the President, is authorized by
statute to coordinate the federal government's disaster relief
efforts. See 42 U.S.C. sec. 5170a (1994). The President has delegated
to the Director of FEMA the authority to coordinate emergency
management and assistance functions of the federal government. See sec.
4-203 of Executive Order 12148, July 20, 1979, as amended.[2] Section
5122 of the Stafford Act defines major disaster as
"any natural catastrophe (including . . . snowstorm . . .) . . .
which in the determination of the President causes damage of
sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster
assistance under this chapter to supplement the efforts and
available resources of States, local governments, and disaster
relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship,
or suffering caused thereby." 42 U.S.C. sec. 5122 (1994).
Your letter states that, pursuant to the Stafford Act, the President
declared major disasters in the District of Columbia and Maryland on
January 11 due to the winter storms. In addition, five more major
disaster declarations were imminent in other states as a result of the
winter storm which had occurred on January 6 and 7. Another severe
storm was predicted to begin later in the day on January 11.
Because of the ongoing and imminent disaster response activity, the
Director of FEMA determined that it was essential for FEMA's response
efforts to continue through the night of January 11 and into the next
day. Therefore, he directed the establishment of an emergency support
team (EST) at midday on January 11. The EST served as the federal
government's mechanism for coordinating the entire federal response to
the severe winter storm which had struck the eastern part of the
United States on January 6 and 7 and for the second winter storm which
was predicted to begin later on January 11. FEMA identified 30
employees who were available to form an EST.
Thirteen of the 30 EST team members either had four-wheel drive
vehicles or lived in the vicinity of underground subway stations and
were therefore able to work either the day or the night shift of the
EST and still commute to and from their homes. However, 17 of the 30
EST team members were not able to rely on four-wheel drive vehicles or
underground subway stations to commute to and from the EST, so they
were directed to remain at FEMA's headquarters through the night of
January 11 and into January 12 in order to be able to coordinate the
federal government's disaster response efforts during this critical
period. These 17 EST team members were provided rooms at a hotel in
the same building as FEMA headquarters.
You ask whether FEMA may reimburse these 17 federal workers for their
hotel costs from the President's Disaster Relief Fund.
As you point out, it is a well-established rule that the government
may not pay the subsistence expenses of or furnish free food to
civilian employees from appropriated funds without specific authority
of law. 53 Comp. Gen. 71 (1973). The rule has been upheld even where
unusual circumstances exist. William Perkette, 71 Comp. Gen. 517
(1992). However, reimbursement has been allowed under very limited
circumstances. In 53 Comp. Gen. 71, food was provided to federal
protective services officers of the General Services Administration
who were assembled in readiness to reoccupy a building of the Bureau
of Indian Affairs which had been occupied by force. We stated that we
would not object to a determination by the agency that the expenses in
question were necessary during an extreme emergency involving danger
to human life and the destruction of federal property.
Also, in B-193034, July 31, 1979, we permitted reimbursement for meals
and lodgings at headquarters by ACTION employees who train VISTA
volunteers because the Director, ACTION, had specific statutory
authority under the Domestic Volunteer Service Act to train volunteers
and to provide them with supervision and support as deemed necessary
by the Director. We allowed the subsistence expenses of the employee
trainers because, under his statutory authority, the Director had
determined that these employees must remain at the training facility
overnight to provide supervision and other necessary services incident
to the training.
Similarly, the facts of the present case warrant an exception to the
general prohibition on payment from appropriated funds of employee's
subsistence expenses at headquarters. The President declared a major
disaster in the District of Columbia and Maryland. The Director of
FEMA, in implementing his authority under the Stafford Act and
Executive Order 12148, activated an EST to coordinate the federal
government's response to the then-current blizzard conditions and the
impending disaster declaration generally along the East Coast. The
Director also determined it was essential that the EST operate through
the evening of January 11 and into January 12 in order for the EST to
function as required. The location of the FEMA headquarters within
the presidentially declared disaster area led to a determination that
it would be impossible to staff the EST unless those essential
disaster workers not having access to four-wheel drive vehicles nor
residing near an underground subway station, and therefore unable to
travel between work and home, were provided lodging near FEMA
headquarters for the night of January 11, 1996.
Under the particular circumstances of a major winter storm disaster
with immediate danger to life and property, FEMA could reasonably
determine that providing lodging for these 17 EST members was
necessary to fulfill disaster relief duties under the specific
statutory authority of the Stafford Act and the executive order.
Accordingly, FEMA may reimburse the lodging expenses of the 17
employees.
Sincerely yours,
Robert P. Murphy
General Counsel
B-271666
April 24, 1996
DIGEST
The Director, FEMA, established an emergency support team (EST) to
coordinate disaster relief efforts under the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. sec.
5121 et seq. (1994), during the blizzard of 1996 and some team members
were unable to travel to and from their homes because of the blizzard
conditions. The present case warrants an exception to the general
prohibition on payment of employee's subsistence expenses at
headquarters from appropriated funds. The presidentially declared
major disaster conditions presented immediate danger to human life and
to property; the Director, FEMA, was authorized to establish the EST
to coordinate relief efforts under the Stafford Act; and he determined
it was essential to provide hotel rooms to those team members who were
unable to travel to and from their homes. Under the particular
circumstances, the Director of FEMA may reimburse the lodging
expenses of these 17 EST members as necessary to fulfill his statutory
duties in a major disaster involving danger to life and property.
1. Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42
U.S.C. sec. 5121 et seq. (1994).
2. Exec. Order No. 12148, 3 C.F.R., 1979 Comp., p. 412.