Appeal Brief | Appeal Letter | Back
Second Appeal Letter
PA ID# 099-99099-00; Palm Beach County
PW ID# 5010; Sod Replacement
September 16, 2010
Florida Division of Emergency Management
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-210
Re: Second Appeal–Palm Beach County, PA ID 099-99099-00,
Sod Replacement, FEMA-1561-DR-FL, Project Worksheet (PW) 5010
Dear Mr. Halstead:
This is in response to the letter from your office dated December 21, 2007, which transmitted the referenced second appeal for Palm Beach County (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) disallowance of $38,400 for sod replacement at the Roger Dean Stadium in PW 5010.
In its first appeal submitted by your office on March 8, 2006, the Applicant argues that “the sod replacement was installed to minimize runoff from clay playing surfaces.” The Regional Administrator denied the appeal on October 2, 2007, citing a lack of documentation substantiating the claim that the sod is required to stabilize slopes or minimize sediment runoff. The playing fields in question are relatively level and inside a stadium. Photographs submitted with the original PW showed that the sod was still in place after the storm with no signs of erosion or washouts.
In the second appeal dated December 21, 2007, the Applicant reiterated its original claim, stating that the “clay sediment eroded into the existing turf, compromising drainage, growth and stability of those areas.” The appeal included a site plan and several additional photographs of the damaged sites showing that as water drained or was moved by wind from the dirt base paths and infield playing areas into the grass areas, it carried with it loose soil that was deposited in the grass playing surface. The Applicant claimed that the erosion would continue and eventually destroy the fields if the sod was not replaced.
Disaster Assistance Policy 9524.5 clearly limits the eligibility of grass and sod to circumstances where such measures are necessary to stabilize slopes and to minimize sediment runoff. The grass areas do not serve in function or design as erosion control measures; they are playing surfaces. The replacement of sod on the Applicant’s ball fields, which are relatively level, does not meet the eligibility criteria in the policy.
I have reviewed the information submitted with the appeal and have determined that the Regional Administrator’s decision in the first appeal is consistent with Public Assistance regulations and policy. This determination is the final decision on this matter pursuant to
44 CFR §206.206, Appeals.
Elizabeth A. Zimmerman
cc: Major P. May
FEMA Region IV