Appeal Summary | Appeal Letter | Appeal Analysis | Back
Second Appeal Summary
PA ID# 133-91011; Consolidated Drainage District #1
DSR ID# 27541,25998,05685,20466 ; Drainage Channel Repair
Citation: FEMA-1054-DR-MO; Consolidated Drainage District #1
Cross Reference: Debris removal; channel restoration; disaster-related debris
Summary: As a result of heavy rains and flooding in May/June of 1995, flood-waters from the Mississippi River flowed into the Wilkerson Ditch within Consolidated Drainage District #1. DSR 27541 was prepared by the inspection team ($204,000) for removal and disposal of 145,211 cubic yards (CY) of soil debris. In review, it was determined that much of the debris was in the ditch prior to the disaster. DSR 27541 was approved for removal and disposal of 16,662 CY of debris ($20,778). A re-inspection was conducted on October 1995 at the subgrantee's request, at which time it was noted that 1992 survey records show that the ditch was at design grade (no debris was present). A survey following DR-1054 indicates that the channel bottom had three feet of sediment over an 80-foot width. DSR 25998 was approved to increase total funding to $202,786 for removal of 117,333 CY of sediment, removal of 97,778 CY of damaged slopes, and reseeding damaged slopes. During project closeout (January 1997), DSR 05685 was approved to reduce the prior funding by $56,101 because slope repairs only occurred on one side of the ditch, the costs included mowing (maintenance work), and there were costs for excessive rock hauling and placement. Based on the findings of a May 1997 re-inspection, DSR 20466 made several adjustments. The costs to repair one slope were reinstated ($42,727) and a portion of the costs for rock and rock hauling were deducted ($16,231) for total approved funding of $173,182. In November 1997, the State transmitted the first appeal of the request to refund $23,005 and indicated that it saw "no valid reason to overturn FEMA's determination." In December 1997, FEMA denied the appeal, stating that rock placement and hauling and mowing are not eligible because they are improvements or maintenance. In March 1998, the State forwarded the second appeal based on the funds being spent within the approved scope, mowing should be eligible because it was recommended by a State inspector, and rock placement was needed to facilitate the repair as observed by a FEMA representative. The State indicates that it can find no reason to overturn the prior findings.
- Is the mowing work eligible?
- Is the placement of culverts and rock eligible?
- No. Mowing is maintenance work and is not eligible as restoration or emergency work.
- No. Neither the State nor FEMA were consulted with on use of a "cost saving method" and no documentation supports that costs were reduced by the placement.
- 44 CFR 206.226.
- 44 CFR 206.202 (d).