Printable View
Looking for a written agreement / letter to have signed and notarized when we sell off our "replaced" apparatus. You know...stating that the unit cannot be used as a fire service vehicle because it was purchased with AFG funds.
Thanks, Wolf
firefighterwolf@hotmail.com
Not necessary since you can only sell it to a private owner or a broker; regardless of what a document says you can't sell it to another FD for any reason as a whole per AFG guidelines. If you sell off parts that's a different story since that means you scrap it by title first, then dismantle.
Besides, broker can turn around and sell it as a fire truck since they have DOT and other regulations on them to prepare it for service which is why that's the loophole to keep functioning but old trucks in service somewhere.
Are there situations where FEMA has actually approved the selling of apparatus directly to another fire department for front line service ? This direct sale of a ladder tower from fire department to fire department was recently published in the media and is contrary to what the AFG Program Guidance states.
http://www.kittanningpaper.com/PDF/KP-12-0905-01.pdf
http://www.kittanningpaper.com/PDF/KP-12-0905-04.pdf
http://www.pennlive.com/east-shore/i...ire_truck.html
If this sale was approved by FEMA then in all actuality the buyer could then recycle the exact same apparatus through the grant program a second time.
No exceptions. The only way a truck can end up back with an FD making calls again is if the grant-awarded department sells the truck to a dealer, and then the dealer sells it to an FD. That is allowed because when a dealer takes title and wants to resell they have to ensure the vehicle meets basic safety and DOT standards in order to sell it.
In a nutshell, they're about to get their hands smacked for doing this, anywhere from giving the money back and taking the truck, refunding the grant, or having FEMA take the new one themselves for a lucky DoD department somewhere. So if you know anyone over there, might want to drop a line that they can't do what they're doing to avoid a lot of heartburn.
Somebody gonna be in trouble, me thinks.
Yeah I see trouble ahead!
Better question...how did a "1990" aerial get funded for replacement?
Most of the aerials I have replaced have been 70s and early 80s vintage.
Says remanufactured 1990 in the PennLive story, but who knows if that's when the refurb was done, if it's a 1990 chassis and 70s vintage aerial, or what. Either way truck had to be reported in the app as whatevery it's titled at, so if it is a 1990 chassis and they put anything but that's a stretch there too.
My gosh. what a peyton place department. Do a google on Kittanning Borough Council hose #1 and read. Dysfunctional with a capital D. And after all this, they want to buy another NEW ladder with an AFG grant.
Seems like a bunch of people in a sand box, and none of them, council or fire department has a friggin clue.
Is Kittanning one of those PA towns with several private fire companies?
Been through a few towns where the three companies could stand on the apron and shoot bottle rockets at each other.
There was another one from PA in recent years where the ladder truck was for sale and it was bought by an individual who happened to be the chief of another dept. After a repaint it ended up back in service at that dept. They even put the story in the newspaper
That would be one of them there loopholes. As long as it's a private citizen taking title to the vehicle the FD has no say about what happens after that, not a grant issue since the awardee did dispose of it legally.
Now odds are it was wasted money since one of the scoring metrics in the computer is how long the vehicle has been owned, so anyone buying an old truck with newer ones of the same type already there isn't going to gain anything.
It appears that the sale and transfer of the ladder tower in question has already occurred with the department purchasing the apparatus placing it directly into frontline service. When a department is awarded a vehicle grant does FEMA actually confirm the disposition of the replaced apparatus at any point during the grant process other than on the final closeout documentation ? The department that purchsed the appartatus indicated in the newspaper article that this was an interim purchase and they hoped for a future AFG award. What mechanisms if any does FEMA have in place preventing this apparatus from being recycled through the grant program in the future by the department that purchased it ?
Yes, part of the closeout is verifying that the apparatus was disposed of properly in accordance with AFG Guidelines. Guess they can't check that box without lying.... :rolleyes: And since that didn't happen, there will be ramifications.
Whoever bought it is in for a nice surprise of no grant for a long time. Remember they added the "how long have you owned this vehicle" question several years ago to prevent this from happening again. Again meaning it was done a few times prior to that being put in place, basically to keep people from buying junk trucks just to get the fleet age older and be more competitive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejfeicht
The primary mechanism that they always have at their disposal, and which they use more frequently than many think, is to monitor and read what is being said or alleged right here online. It certainly would not surprise me to think that this issue is probably being examined and once the truth is separated from fiction, the appropriate action will be undertaken. It is also not unreasonably to assume that in what appears to be a "political cat fight" such as this, there was probably several phone calls made to AFG from the local press and governing officials. In the words of Paul Harvey.. I don't think we have seen the rest of the story yet.
If anyone is interested our department has an 2005 Engine for sale that is not Grant Replaced.
Truck is sold.