Resolution 252-1980
RESOLUTION NO.252 - 1980
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
TO EXECUTE A SUBGRANT APPLICATION BY AND BETWEEN
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,
FLORIDA AND THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS/
BUREAU OF HIGHWAY SAFETY, FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY FUNDS
FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE TASK FORCE OF THE
STEP PROGRAM - MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
That the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners
of Monroe County, Florida, is hereby authorized to execute
the Sub grant Application by and between the Board of County
Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, and the Department
of Community Affairs, Bureau of Highway Safety, for Highway
Safety Funds for Driving Under The Influence Task Force of the
STEP Program - Monroe County Sheriff's Department, copy of
same being attached hereto.
Passed and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 6th
day of October, 1980.
BOARD O,F CO~NTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONI).Oij:,/,cyjUNTY, FLORIDA
/,' / ~fa
/ / /-,
By C._ l/~' t9--z. ~
,- C lrman
-'....
(SEAL)
Attest: /,./) '.;
/, /);;;
/ / ~ ~
1/.' I :7
(--*z>~~ ~L~-,--r
, C1er '
APPROVfP AS 10 FQRI}f/(
AND~~f#t'
//"'~/"~:"'.;""""!:~" (.--' ';>' "
BY' J ,_
Attorn8Y'$ Office
2:J
~_"'- -.0'--..,
Allocation Approved
to
~
l~.})
'''~'''.'f.,.,,~
-
State of Florida
Department of Community Affairs
Division of Public Safety Planning and Assistance
Bureau of Highway Safety
FOR B
ONLY
Proje~t Number.
Program Module
PSP Title
SUBGRANT PERIOD:
Subgrant Application For Highway Safety Funds
-m-eTerlo Instructions ~or ~ubgrantAppllcatlon)
PART I: General Administrative Information (Refer to Instructions for Subgrant Application, Part I)
1. Project Title: Monroe Countv Sheriff's Deot.
2. Type.of Application: [] Initial [ ] Revision.
:pq Continuation of Subgrant No.
3. Requested Subgrant Period: October 1. 1980
Anticipated Project Period: October 1. 1980
4. ,Support Sought: $ 126.000. Matching Share: $
Drivin~ Under the Influence Task
Force
80-02-02-K-3l5-03
to Sentember 30. 1981
to Sentember 30 1981
- 0 - Total Budget: $ 126 .000.
5. Applicant:
Board of County Commissioners
Monroe County Courthouse
500 Whitehead St.
Key West, Florida 33040
6. Implementing Agency:
Monroe County Sheriff's Department
P.O. Box 1269
Key West, Florida 33040
Telephone: (305) 294-4641
Telephone: (305) 852-3211
7. Chief Financial Officer:
8. Project 0 irector:
Michael M. Somberg, Inspector
Monroe County Sheriff's Dept.
P.O. Box 151
Tavernier, Florida 33070
Michael M. Somberg, Inspector
Monroe County Sheriff's Department
P.O. Box 151
Tavernier, Florida 33070
Telephone: (305) 852-3211
Telephone: (305) 852- 3211
9. Project Summary n Summarize in approximately 200 words, the most important parts of the project presented
in Part II.
This project application requests continued funding support for the
Monroe County Sheriff's Department Driving Under the Influence Task Force.
The current task force, staffed by one Sergeant and five enforcement
Deputies has been operational only six months of the predicted 12 month
project year. This was due to an unusually high turnover of personnel
within the Sheriff's Department when the project was due to commence;and
several major crisis situations, including the so-called "Cuban Boatlift",
that required department resources to be allocated to those areas.
However, even with these obstacles, the project has enjoyed significan
community acceptance and positive enforcement results.
2't>
BHS/81
Proj ect S11T;nmary
continw
The project will continue with its primary emphasis
placed on the detection, apprehension and conviction of the
DUI offender; other high risk driver violations will also
continue to receive enforcement attention.
The project has been enhanced by the aquisition of two
motorcycles, which add a new and unique dimension to project
ooerations. Additionally, video-tape and play back equipment
:ha~been aquired. Though not yet operational, this program has
had significant impact in other areas and it is anticipated to
have the same effect here in Monroe Countv.
J
The video-tape equipment is the first step in founding a
comprehensive treatment program for DUI offenders as the viol-
ator will be invited to review his video-tape prior to his court
date in hopes it will have a positive effect.
i<: ' f1
PART II: Project Plan and Supportin!:l Data
State clearly and in detail the aims of the project, precisely what will be done, who will be involved, and what
is expected to result. Use the following major headings:
1. Statement of the Problem
2. Proposed Solution
3. Objectives
4. Tasks and Timetable
5. Evaluation
Start below and use continuation pages as necessary
1. Statement of Problem:
Monroe County has many unique problems which affect the ability of the
Sheriff's Department to effectively enforce and/or deter the drinking
driver. In addition, calls for all facets .of services have increased
dramatically.
Law enforcement including traffic law enforcement is provided to the
unicorporated areas of Monroe County by the Sheriff's Department. The
Department also provides processing and custody of any person arrested
and incarcerated in'the county.
Monroe County has perhaps the most unique and unusual geography of any
county in the nation. The most unique aspect of the county is that all
traffic must use one road to traverse the county, one road utilized by
residential traffic and commercial use, coupled with the tourist influx,
creates a traffic situation that requires constant attention and enforce-
ment by the available and understaffed Sheriff's Department.
With no public transportation available in Monroe County, the population
increases and tourist influx has resulted in an increase in private
vehicle traffic. This, coupled with the fact that all consumable goods
must be trucked in, creates a funneling effect which leads to a .high
accident potential and the need for increased traffic law enforcement.
The Sheriff's Department has not increased in manpower over the last
three (3) years and no significant increases are expected. This circum-
stance has had the effect of reducing the resources available for traffic
enforcement to the point where it is almost nonexistent.
Over the last two years, the Department has increased use of its resour-
ces to handle the above problems by an agreement with the Florida High-
way Patrol where they have primary responsibility for the investigation
of all accidents within the unicorporated area of the county. The
Sheriff's Department assists with injuries and traffic control until the
Florida Highway Patrol arrives and assumes control of the scene.
18
2
Statement "~ Problem
continuec.
Unfortunately, there are many problems attendant with this
system. The Highway Patrol, due to manpower shortages, does
not have any Troopers in service after midnight. This
necessitates calling a Trooper out from his home to handle
any accidents occuring after midnight. This results in hav-
ing a Department car at the scene for at least l~ hours until
the Trooper arrives. As stated above, due to lack of man-
power, the Patrol is forced to give the Troopers larger areas
of responsibility which usually results in single-car coverage.
This results in longer distances that must be travelled and
unacceptable response time.
The DUI Task Force, vlhile only operational five months, has
made significant impact in terms of traffic enforcement by the
Sheriff's Department. The performance indicators for the pro-
ject revealed that the DUI enforcement officers a10ne:issued
1,587 citations and 242 warnings.
The comparison of figures between 1979 and 1978 indicates that:
1. Traffic related deaths
increased 16.5%.
2. Traffic accidents inc-
reased by .5%.
While the complete year 1980 is not over, 1,556 accidents
have occured to 31 August 1980. If this trend continues,
accidents will likely be reduced significantly.
However, while accidents are on the decline, the accidents
that are occuring are resulting in more deaths and injuries.
As of August 31, 1980,45 traffic deaths have occured in Monroe
County. This represents a 28.5% increase over 1979.
There is an on-going analysis of fatality accidents in order
to determine where task force resources should be allocated.
~~
2. Proposed Solution:
The Sheriff's Department realizes that there is no proven
method to totally stop people from driving under the infl-
uence of alcoholic beverages. To totally arrest the prob-
lem would require a dramatic change in our society's
attitude toward a completely socially acceptable practice.
However, there are means available to reduce the number of
persons who drive intoxicated.
The Sheriff's Department proposes to continue to use tech-
niques that will instill in the DUI driver's mind that the
likelihood of his being arrested and processed through the
courts is such that it is not worth the risk of driving
intoxicated.
Since the project implementation, the public is well aware
of the Sheriff Department's increased commitment to remove
the DUI problem driver from the road. By utilizing six (6)
Deputy Sheriffs, supplemented by the Uniform Pa~ro1 Division,
significant impact is being made in this area.
The DUI Task Force appears to be the only feasible method of
utilizing public and private resources for effective long
term community benefit. With the Task Force, a driver's
attitude change is expected due to the increased presence
and attention to traffic enforcement and education by the
Sheriff's Department. This hopefully will result in more
voluntary compliance by drivers and has the effect of re-
ducing traffic related deaths and removing the drinking
drivers and other high risk drivers, including speeders,
young problem drivers, and prior offenders from the roadway.
In order to meet project objectives, a dual approach will be
continue to be utilized: education and enforcement. A sig-
nificant impact has been seen due to increased presence and
attention paid to traffic enforcement.
The STEP project will utilize six (6) standard enforcement
vehicles. Each vehicle will be equipped with all standard
equipment utilized by the regulary Patrol Division, including
all emergency equipment and protective cages. Cages are re-
quired as Monroe County utilizes the one man/one car concept.
Three (3) new Smith and Wesson 900 A Breathalyzers will con-
tinue to be utilized to aid in the investigation of DUI
arrests. The new breatha1yzers were acquired through HRS at
no cost to the project.
In addition, the entire breathalyzer process will be video-
taped for presentation in court, training purposes and view-
ing by DUI offenders at some point between arrest and court.
30
Proposed :ion
continued
The DUI Task Force will continue to be staffed with adminis-
trative support provided by the Sheriff, the Inspector, the
Commander, Bureau of Field operations and the Task Force
Sergeant.
The DUI enforcement will be provided by the five (5) Deputy
Sheriff's and the supervising sergeant. Task Force personnel
will recieve training in DUI problem drivers, breathalyzer
operations, selective enforcement techniques and court tech-
niques.
The DUI Task Force, utilizing the above desc~ibed equipment,
will concentrate its enforcement efforts toward removing the
DUI problem driver from the road.
The Sheriff, as head of the Department, will be ultimately
responsible for the performance of the project. The Inspecor,
who has direct chain of command responsibility to the Sheriff,
is the appointed Project Director and Chief Financial Officer
of the project. The Inspector shall be responsible to the
Sheriff for management of the project, and shall continually
monitor the project to ensure it is meeting its goals and
objectives. The Inspector will have input into the project
in the areas of planning, staff management, personnel selec-
tion and public information and education.
The Commander, Bureau of Field Operations, is responsible for
all operational units of the Department. The Captain will .
monitor and evaluate the Project via reports submitted by the
Task Force Sergeant. The Captain will have input into the
project as to planning, staff management, personnel selection,
acquisition of equipment, monotoring of project budget and
tactical deployment.
The Task Force Sergeant will be responsible for the day to
day operations of the project. He will be responsible for all
administration and operational aspects of the project. He will
supply periodic reports required by the upper level chain of
command and the BHS. The Sergeant will evaluate the effective-
ness of the project via data co1letion and analysis. The
Sergeant will be responsible for assignment, mainteneance,
and repair of the project equipment. He will be responsible
for deployment of field units based on analysis of collected.
data. He will perform liaison duties with the district
commanders, the Community Relations Division and the public.
He will be responsible for supervision of the enforcement
officers, implementation of enforcement programs, review of
reports submitted by enforcement officers, inspection of pro-
ject personnel and equipment.
31
Proposed Snlvtion
continued
The Task Force Sergeant will devote 100% of his time to this
project.
The Task Force Enforcement Deputies, a total of five (5),
will apply enforcement activities at the direction of the
Task Force Sergeant.
The Department's existing Public Information/Community Re-
lations Division will solicit appearances before service
organizations, civic clubs, church groups, elementary and
secondary schools and other audiences to explain the pur-
poses and desirability of the project. This will include
traffic information data and programs to the community to
educate selected groups of the public as to the hazards of
traffic accidents and to the enforcement measures being util-
ized by the project. The P.I.O. will utilize a total media
approach to reach all concerned parties that will include
films, speeches, written communications and other media
techniques. The P.I.O. will disseminate articles on the
project to regional and national publications, in the field
of highway safety and law enforcement.
The above will be maintained for project related activities
and forwarded to the project sergeant for evaluation.
~~~
d~
3. Objectives
Due to the problems encountered with start-up for the project,
the projects first objectives will remain the same as fiscal
year 1979-1980:
(1) To increase DUI arrests by 50% over the 1978 total of
355 to 533 during the 12 month project period ending
September 30, 1981.
(2) To decrease the average BAC level among drivers arr-
ested for DUI by 15% by September 30, 1981. (Compar-
ative data for the 12 months immediately preceeding
this project will be used.)
(3) To reduce accidents in Monroe County by 15% from the
1979 total of 2646 to 2249 by September 30, 1981.
4. Evaluation
Administrative evaluation will be used to measure the effec-
tiveness of project activities. Therefore, the degree of
accomplishment of the three objectives will be the determin-
ing factor, i.e.,
(1) DUI arrests are increased by 50% to 533 during the 12
month project.
(2) The average BAC level among drivers arrested is de-
creased by 15% during the 12 months project, and;
(3) Total accidents in Monroe County are reduced by 15%
to 2249 during the 12 month project.
Alcohol arrests, BAC levels, and alcohol involved accidents -
Average BAC level of arrests prior to commencement of the
enforcement program will be compared to the twelve months
following start-up. A ratio of arrests to accidents involving
alcohol for the twelve months prior to implementation will be
compared to the project year.
Data Source - Each subgrantee will provide BAC data, arrest
and accident data for the twelve months prior to implementa-
tion and for the twelve months during the program.
Frequency of collection - Data for the twelve months prior
to program implementation should be provided within one month
following award. Monthly BAC averages and arrests should be
provided quarterly during the project year.
33
Evaluation
continued
Responsibility - The BHS Program Development (P/D) Section is
responsible for obtaining repoelts from subgrantees. Deter-
mination of summary objective'~ttainment will be the respon-
sibility of the PIE Section.
H
TA~;K FORCE Fl,(;1o'J Clltd{T
,f '~
.,. Vio]atlon-
L--r--..
_____..4--
~~I
~rro I
Warned
~
Corrective
Action
Successful
.
Correct1ve
l\ction Not
Successful
~ser ]
.. ov,r9U.
G NO\'-~l
l\pprchcr.dc:U
1
l p~8~ecutd
c;~~~ 1
85
~
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
Public I
\
Sheriff I
-------- Inspector
Proiect Director
I
Police - Community
Relations Division
Bureau of Fietd Operations ,
Captain
I I
Uniform Patrol DUI
Division Task Force
I
Sergeant
Secretary I
Deputies I
J6
I
..J C"1 I"'- L1") UI a
I I I <t ...j" L1") N I"'- a
..-l I .. I I I- a 0'\ C"1 \.0 a
~
00 I I I 0 ~ ~
0'\ I I I l- I"'- I"'- \.0
..-l I I I a ..-l N
I I I ..-l ~
<f}-
I I I I
(/) I I I I
..... I I I I .....
Cll I Cll
+-' I I +-'
..... .....
ro <t I I ro C"1 a C"1
::J I I ::J \.0 0'\ L1")
0 I I 0 I"'- ...j" N
.s:: I I .s:: ~ ~ ~
+-' +-' \.0 ...j" ..-l
<<:t I I I <<:t
-, I I I N C"1
I I I <f}- <f}-
,
I I
-, I I
Cll ..... I I .....
"~ Cll I Cll a 0'\
+-' I +-'
I- ..... I I ..... \.0 00 0'\
ro Cll ro
>- ::J ~ I I E 0 ::J I"'- ...j" ...j"
~ 0 I I 00 0 ~ ~ N
r:o I . f= C> \.0 ...j" ~
+-' "0 "0
..... I I I I ~ ~ ..... N ..-l
c ..... M <t I I I I ..... M <f}- C"1
::> I I I I ro <f}-
.::t:. ..... .::t:. Cll
ro I I <II >-
<II Cll I I I ro
ro ~ I- .....
I- >- ..... I I I ro Cll
Q) ~
- +-' CJ +-'
: <II .....
ro ..... I I I ro a 0'\ 0'\
Q) CJro +-' u.. ::J \.0 00 ...j"
<II ::J u.. I I I
.0 0 I I I <II 0 I"'- ...j" N
ro u.. 0
+-' V I I I () "0 ~ ~ ~
Q) C I I C \.0 ...j" ..-l
E N .
N I I I N C"1
I- -, I ~ I <f}- <f}-
.
I I I I I
0 I I I I I
..... I I I I I .....
Q) Q)
+-' +-'
..... I I I I ..... a 0'\ L1") L1") 0'\
ro ro
::J Z I I I I ::J \.0 00 N I"'- ...j"
0 I I I I 0 I"'- ...j" C"1 \.0 N
+-' ..... ~ ~ ~
<II I I I I <II \.0 ...j" N
..... 0 ~
I I I N C"1
I I I <f}- <f}-
"O? ~
Cll"- 0
c..... \.0 \.0 ..-l ~
c ~
ro ::J ~
a:O Q)
CJ
.,-l
~
.w ~
.,-l 0
Jj
'"d ~ Q)
.w Jj ~ Jj
..-l Jj cO .w ..-l : 0
Q) Q) cO I- Q) ~ .w
Jj S Jj CJ (f) Jj 00 cO ~
Jj Q) 0 Q) 0 Jj 0 CJ 0
0 CJ .,-l Cl () 0 ~ Q) ~
m ~ .w <.9 m 0... Cl S~
z ~ 0 ctI .w S Z ~ :
0 Q) ~. CJ Jj .,-l cO Q) .w Q).,-l
~ ~ Jj ;j .,-l ~ ~ > 0... ~ ..-l .,-l ~
I-
a.. Q) '"d ~ 00 ..J Q) ..-l '"d .,-l
Cll Q) Q) ~ 0 0 Q) S ctI ~ ctI
a::: CJ .w Q) ~ > CJ Q) .w
.0 () ~ Jj CJ CJ .w 0... Z ~ CJ m Q) ~
ro (f) 0 Q) .,-l .,-l cO 0 ~ ~ p..E-l
..... w -
Cll IZ-t m ..-l ~ CJ ~ ~ IZ-t 0 .,-l
E 0 Q) .g ~ Q) 0 (f) ~ "d.w
I- ~ ~ ~ 0 Cl <t ~ ~ '"d ~.,-l
"0 (f) m 0... 0... ~ I- m Q) Jj cO ~
c <t cO m Q) 0 cO cO ~
ro I- E-l Q) Q) m ~ Q) .,-l E-l Q) Q) m
.::t:. ;j S ;j Q) 0 .w .w ;j {/) Q):
<II ~ ~ ctI ~ ~ cO cO ~ Jj m.w
ro cO
I- 00 .,-l ~ .,-l Q) ~ .,-l ;j 00 .,-l .r.: ~ cO
.,-l .wOO .w~ .,-l .w .w ..-l .,-l .w CJ Q) CJ
" m ~ 0 ~ cO cO.,-l .,-l cO m ~ ~ 0...Q)
- m O~ o ;3 ~ ~ ~ :> m 0 ~Cl
- :J
I- < Uo... UcO E-l~ H, ~ < U ~ ~:
a::: 8'f
<t . . . . . . . . .
a.. ..-l N C"1 ...j" L1") \.0 ..-l N C"1 ...j"
3
PART III: project ueldll uudget (Attach detail narrative defining cost for each category) Refer to instructions.
3. Budget Category
A. Salaries and Benefits
1 Sergeant
Benefits * (20.50%)
5 Deputies @ 14,388 each
Benefits * (20.50%)
*benefits include
retirement
social security
13.95%
6.55/0
20.50%
Sub-total
B. Other Personal Services
Sub-total
C. Expenses
Automobile operations & maintenance
a. fuel for 6 cars @ 2859.50 each
b. oil, oil change, routine maintenance
(six cars at 133.33 each)
Purchase of Decat Unit
Installation of Decat Unit
One day per diem & travel expenses
for one officer for Decat training
Sub-total
D. Operating Capital Outlay
Sub-total
E. Data Processing Services
Sub-total
F. Indirect Cost
Sub-total
TOTAL
16,895
3,463
71,940
14, 745
FEDERAL
16,895
3,463
71,940
14, 745
107,043 107 043
,
17,157
800
250
75
675
18,957
17,157
800
250
75
675
18,957
Total Cost
Project Total 126,000' 126,000
5
Non-Federal
State Local
4l),lA
--
I-
0:
o
0..
W
0:
CI)
CI)
w
0:
Cl
o
0:
0..
>
-l
0:
w
I-
0:
<t:
::>
a
.
l
.... .... Cl
u-
Q) co u C
'00 Q).-
'~"O
0:1- Oc
o:w
e; rn~1 Cl~1
(I)
~ .~ en CO)
0 "0 ..- :0..-
C ' " C -
t U) wO wO
C"') M
~ ~ .
....... ........
g ~ 00. ag-
Q) (J)
0 ...-I CI)
C,) (I)
ctI
(I) ,.d
0 CJ Cl~1 g'~1
H .,-l
~, .~ CO)
0 :0..- .-0)
~ "0..-
C ' C
"- wO WQ
0 M
'" ~ Q) .M
.... Q) "-
u C ....C ....Q)
Q) O::J ac
Q) "- 0
Q) .- .... -, ::J
.... 0 '" -,
C Q)
co .... .-
"- u ~
Cl Q)
.0 '0' '"
::J "- '" .c
(J) 0.. .c ....-
....- C co
C co 0....
0.... ~~
~~
(0 co
~I ~I
CO) .~ en
:0..- "0"-
C , C ,
w"- W"-
M M
~.c ~.c
.... u ....u
a,,- 0,,-
co co
~ ~
~ ~I
.- en
-~ '-0) "0..-
8 "0..- C
C w..-'
W..-' . C"')
t I ~C"') "-
LJ" .... .
.... . ofrl
afrl
~ 0 0
1 I
~ ' ,
',... I CJ)
4- 8' (I)
.,-l H
~ , H CJ) CJ)
N ctI .w .w >
(I) 0 CJ) ~ ~ '"
'" '" III Q)
.w ~ "- ...-I CJ) .w (I) (I) "0 Q) +:; .S2 "0
~ 0 0...-1 .w CJ) 'i:l 'i:l Q) in .S2 ::J Q) '"
H oc .... ,.d (I) CJ) (I) .,-l .,-l "0 .... c: 0 c: "0 E
III C C
.S2 :> :;: Q)
0 (I) H CJ CJ Q) III Q) Cii C/) Q) Q)
"- "0 CJ (I) H H ...-ICJ CJ a. C C/) .... a. .0
Q) C ...-I ...-I H ctI OC1:! ctI x Q) Cl X 0
Q) .0 - ctI ctI ,.d 'i:l W co Cii a. C '" W "-
+:; C co 'v; ....
E Q) C,) tlO O'i:l (I)'i:l '" '" '" 0-
,- u "0 0 U '" ---
I- ::J C (1)< ...-I ~ CJ(I) (1)(1) "0 C '" Q) 0 "0 '"
C "- Cl U U C ....
+-' Z co tlO~ 0 .,-l ...-I.w p...w ::J co Q) '" C 0 ::J C
C E Q) ....
ctI ,.d 'i:l <ctI U)ctI u. '" 0.. '" '';:; "- u. Q)
co ... "- Q) C 0- U E
"- u H (I) "- III Q)
Cl Q) 0 0 ...-I ...-I 'C Q) III "- co "- Cii E
.0 '0' - (I) CJ (I) (I) (I) co .c a. Q) .... ....
"- "0
:::J "- Q) :> ...-I p.. H H III .... X a. co C 0 0
C/) 0- 0- ctI < U) (J) 0 W 0 0 - I- U
4
':j,}
'-2. ,.J
SIGNATURES OF ACCEPTANCE
Project Director
1.
Authorizing Official of Governmental Unit
JOnly Com'1liswn Chairmow or Mayor for Local App,lici\"ts)
Hoard or ~ounty ~ommlSS1oners ot ~onroe
1. Name: Don Schl ser Chairman
County,
FL.
2. Signature:
2. Signature:
3. Date:
:~~::::: (6~~b..
\ t er
APPROVAL FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED (SEAL)
1. Effective Date:
4. Name:
2. Federal Funds Allocated:
5. Title:
3. Approval Date:
6. Signatu re:
8
40
. .
State of Florida
Department of Community Affairs
Division 'of Publ ic Safety Planning and Assistance
Bureau of Highway Safety
PART IV: Acceptance and Agreement
Conditions of Agreement. The applicant understands and agrees to the following
conditions:
1. Reports. The subgrantee shall submit, at such time and in such form as may be pre-
scribed, such reports as the Bureau of Highway Safety may reasonably require, in-
cluding periodic financial reports, quarterly progress reports, and final financial and
narrative reports.
2. Responsibility of Subgrantee. The subgrantee must establish fiscal control and fund
accounting procedures which assure proper disbursement of and accounting for, sub-
grant funds and required non-federal expenditures. All monies spent on this project
will be disbursed in accordance with provisions of the project budget as said budget
was approved by the BHS. All funds not spent in accordance with this agreement
shall be subject to repayment by the subgrantee.
3. Compliance with Sec. 287.055, Florida Statutes. The subgrantee, when applicable,
agrees to satisfy all requirements provided in Section 287.055, Florida Statutes,
better known as the "Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act".
4. Approval of Consultant Agreements and Final Reports. The subgrantee must receive
approval of all consultant agreements from the BHS prior to the actual employment
of a consulting firm. Final reports must be approved by the BHS and, for traffic en-
gineering related projects, by FHWA prior to final project acceptance.
5. Allowable Costs. The allowability of costs incurred under any subgrant shall be de-
termined in accordance with the general principles of allowability and st:mdards for
selected cost items set forth in Federal Management Circular No. 74-4, "Cost Princi-
ples Applicable to Grants and Contracts with State and Local Governments", and in
accordance with the BHS Policies and Procedures Manual.
6. Travel. Travel is allowed by persons in the performance of activities related directly
to the subgrant. Request for out-of-state travel must be submitted to the BHS for
approval and acknowledgement prior to beginning of travel. Travel cost will be re-
imbursed at a rate not to exceed those allowed in Sec. 112.061, Florida Statutes.
7. Written Approval of Changes. Subgrantees must obtain prior written approval from
BHS for major changes. These include but are not limited to (a) changes of substance
in project activities, designs, or research plans set forth in the approved application;
(b) changes in the project director or key professional personnel identified in the ap-
proved application; and (c) changes in the approved project budget,
8. Commencement of Projects. If a project has not commenced within 60 days after
the acceptance (approval date) of the subgrant award, subgrantees will report by letter
the steps taken to initiate the project, the reasons for delay, and the expected starting
date, If after 90 days from the acceptance of the award, the project is not operational,
a further statement of implementation delay will be submitted by the subgrantee to
the BHS. Upon receipt of the 9()"day letter, the BHS may cancel the project and re-
obligate the funds to other project areas. The BHS, where warranted by extenuating
circumstances, may extend the implementation date of the project past the gO-day
period.
6
41
9. Obligation of Subgrant Funds. Subgrant funds may not under any circumstances
be obligated prior to the effective date or subsequent to the termination date of the
su bgrant period. Only project costs incu rred on or after the effective date of the
subgrant application are eligible for reimbursement.
10. Audit. BHS, NHTSA, FHWA, and the Auditor General of the State of Florida, or
any of their duly authorized representatives, shall have access for purpose of audit
and examination of any books, documents, papers, and records of the subgrantee,
and to relevant books and records of subgrantees and contractors, as provided by
the provisions of section 402(a) of the Highway Safety Act of 1966, Public Law
89-564, as amended.
11. Equal Employment Opportunity. No person shall, on the grounds of race, creed,
color or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be refused the benefits
of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under subgrants awarded pursuant
to P.L. 89-564, or any project, program, activity, or subgrant supported by such
requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and all applicable require-
ments pursuant to the regulations of the Department of Commerce (Title 15, Code
of Federal Regulations, Part 8, which have been adopted by the Department of
Transportation) .
12. Minority Business Enterprises.
(a) Policy. It is the policy of the Department of Transportation that minority
business enterprises as defined in 49 CF R Part 23 shall have the maximum
opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts financed in
whole or in part with Federal funds under this agreement. Consequently,
the MBE requirements of 49 CF R Part 23 apply to this agreement.
(b) MBE Obligation. The recipient or its contractor agrees to ensure that
minority business enterprises as defined in 49 CF R Part 23 have the max-
imum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts and sub-
contracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds provided under
this agreement. In this regard all recipients or contractors shall take all
necessary and reasonable steps in accon;fance with 49 CF R Part 23 to en-
sure that minority business enterprises have the maximum opportunity to
compete for and perform contracts. Recipients and their contractors shall
not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the
award and performance of DOT-assisted contracts.
13. Special Conditions:
7
-.