: Nashville-Davidson County’s first appeal is untimely because the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency submitted it beyond the 60-day timeframe. Summary Paragraph Between April 30 and May 18, 2010, tornadoes and severe storms caused damage throughout Nashville-Davidson County, Tennessee (Applicant). The Applicant applied for public assistance funding for repairs to its K. R. Harrington water treatment plant. FEMA prepared Project Worksheet (PW) 5517 on November 13, 2010, and PW 5523 on February 23, 2011, to reimburse the Applicant for the repairs. The Applicant also submitted a hazard mitigation proposal (HMP) for construction of new switchgear and generator buildings, relocation of critical components in the original generator building and hot house, and repurposing the existing generator building. In the HMP, the Applicant outlined its benefit-cost analysis (BCA) and proposed that FEMA pay 50 percent of the estimated costs. FEMA denied this request for hazard mitigation funding, finding that the Applicant had not used the total project costs in conducting the BCA, but rather only used half of the estimated costs. Moreover, FEMA determined that the building was covered by insurance, and thus, the project did not appear cost-effective. FEMA notified the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency (Grantee) of this determination via e-mail on April 13, 2012. The Grantee then notified the Applicant of the denial via letter dated April 16, 2012, and the Applicant appealed the determination by a letter dated June 5, 2012. The Applicant argued that it had inadvertently left a sentence in the HMP that stated only half the estimated costs were used in the BCA, when in reality, the total costs of $11,037,918.44 were used in the analysis. Although the Grantee’s transmittal letter is dated June 12, 2012, FEMA Region IV did not receive the letter until February 8, 2017. FEMA issued a Final RFI on August 28, 2017, requesting information demonstrating that the Grantee’s transmittal was timely. The Grantee argued that the appeal was timely, as evidenced by the dates on the letters. In addition, the Grantee stated that it had made multiple inquiries of FEMA about the status of the appeal, and that when the Grantee learned FEMA did not have it, the Grantee submitted it again in February of 2017. FEMA denied the first appeal as untimely on February 26, 2018. The Applicant submitted its second appeal by letter dated April 26, 2018, arguing that the Grantee had submitted a timely appeal, but that it believed HMP-related appeals were treated differently than other appeals; that FEMA should have excused the late submittal via a waiver under section 301 of the Stafford Act; that FEMA has instituted a new policy of denying appeals based on grantees’ untimeliness in violation of section 325(a) of the Stafford Act; and that 44 C.F.R. § 206.206(c)(2) abrogates an Applicant’s statutory right of appeal. Authorities and Second Appeals Stafford Act §§ 301, 325(a), 423(a), (c). 44 C.F.R. §§ 206.32(d), 206.44, 206.201(e), 206.202, 206.206(c)(2). City of Atlanta, FEMA-1858-DR-GA, at 6; Town of Nichols, FEMA-4031-DR-NY, at 5; Dep’t of Transp., FEMA-4068-DR-FL, at 3-4; Village of Waterford, FEMA-4020-DR-NY, at 4. Headnotes Per 44 C.F.R. § 206.206(c)(2), a grantee must review and forward an applicant’s appeal to FEMA within 60-days of receipt. The Grantee submitted the Applicant’s second appeal approximately four years and eight months days after receipt, thus, the appeal is untimely. Under Stafford Act section 301, FEMA may modify or waive administrative conditions for assistance if an applicant or grantee was not able to satisfy those conditions as a result of the major disaster. The Applicant and Grantee have not demonstrated that any delay was caused by the disaster. FEMA applies the 60-day submission timeframe to both applicants and grantees, because grantees are legally responsible for any financial awards dispersed under the Stafford Act. The 60-day submission timeframe in 44 C.F.R. § 206.206(c)(2) does not abrogate an applicant’s statutory right of appeal. Under Stafford Act section 325(a), FEMA cannot apply certain new or modified policies without a notice and comment period and may not apply them retroactively. FEMA did provide a notice and comment period for 44 C.F.R. § 206.206(c)(2) and did not retroactively apply a new policy by enforcing the 60-day timeline for grantees.