alert - warning

This page has not been translated into 日本語. Visit the 日本語 page for resources in that language.

Eligibility of Sod Replacement

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1603-DR
ApplicantJefferson Parish
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#051-99051-00
PW ID#Project Worksheet 8816
Date Signed2008-08-08T04:00:00
Citation: FEMA-1603-DR-LA; Segnette Field, Jefferson Parish (Applicant)

Cross-: Work Eligibility
Reference

Summary: As a result of Hurricane Katrina, a tidal surge, heavy winds, severe rain and flood water caused extensive damage to Segnette field in Jefferson Parish, LA. FEMA prepared Project Worksheet (PW) 8816 for $159,970, to provide reimbursement for the cost of restoring the baseball field to its pre-disaster condition. The PW funded several eligible repairs to this facility, but determined the replacement of sod was not eligible pursuant to Recovery Division Policy 9524.5, Trees, Shrubs, and Other Plantings Associated with Facilities, which makes sod replacement eligible only when necessary to stabilize a slope and minimize runoff. In the first appeal, the Applicant argued that sodding was necessary to restore the field to its pre-disaster condition. Therefore, the Applicant requested additional assistance for the cost of sod replacement and top dressing on the damaged portions of the athletic fields. On October 24, 2007, FEMA partially granted the Applicant’s first appeal stating that a number of the activities such as raising the level of the infield to proper elevation and installing top dressing were required to restore the field to its pre-disaster condition. Although the original estimate to perform all of the aforementioned activities was $67,000, the actual cost of performing these activities was $179,000. Of this total amount, $70,000 was for sod and $12,000 was for winter maintenance, the balance of the cost, $97,000 was for eligible preparatory work. The Applicant’s second appeal, dated January 14, 2008, argues that the Recovery Division considers sod to be non-essential in the functionality of a facility. The lack of sod would render facilities such as golf or athletic fields useless or obsolete. The Applicant also claims that the sod is a part of an engineered surface similar to artificial surfaces and is not a natural feature for landscaping or aesthetic purposes.

Issues: Is the grass sod line item eligible for reimbursement on facilities such as Segnette baseball field?
Findings: No.
Rationale: Response Recovery Division Policy Number 9524.5, Trees, Shrubs, and Other Plantings Associated with Facilities

Appeal Letter

August 8, 2008

Colonel Thomas Kirkpatrick (Retired)
State Coordinating Officer
Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness
415 North 15th Street
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70802

Re: Second Appeal–Jefferson Parish, PA ID 051-99051-00, Eligibility of Sod Replacement, FEMA-1603-DR-LA, Project Worksheet (PW) 8816Dear Colonel Kirkpatrick: This letter is in response to your letter dated March 6, 2008, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of the Jefferson Parish (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of funding for the replacement of sod on Segnette Field. FEMA prepared PW 8816 for $159,907, to fund repairs associated with restoring Segnette Field to its pre-disaster condition. The PW funded several eligible repairs to this facility, but determined the replacement of sod was not eligible pursuant to FEMA’s Response and Recovery Policy 9524.5, Trees, Shrubs, and Other Plantings Associated with Facilities, which makes sod replacement eligible only when necessary to stabilize a slope and minimize runoff.In the first appeal, the Applicant contended that sod was necessary to restore the field to its pre-disaster condition. Therefore, the Applicant requested additional assistance for the cost of sod replacement and top dressing on the damaged portions of the athletic field. On
October 24, 2007, FEMA partially granted the Applicant’s first appeal stating that a number of the activities such as raising the level of the infield to proper elevation and installing top dressing were required to restore the field to its pre-disaster condition.
The Applicant’s second appeal, dated January 14, 2008, argues that sod used on the surface of a baseball field is a precisely constructed and controlled playing surface essential to the functionality of the facility and that the intention of the FEMA policy is that sod would be less essential to the facility. The Applicant also maintained that the sod is a part of an engineered surface similar to artificial surfaces and is not a natural feature for landscaping or aesthetic purposes.

Based on my review of the information provided, I have determined that Response and Recovery Division Policy 9524.5, Trees, Shrubs, and Other Plantings Associated with Facilities, limits the eligibility of grass and sod to protecting slopes by reducing erosion, strengthening soil, and inhibiting landslides which increase general slope stability, and does not make exceptions for athletic field applications. The replacement of sod on Segnette Field, which is relatively level, does not meet the eligibility criteria envisioned in the subject policy. Therefore, the second appeal is denied.
Please inform the Applicant of my decision. This determination constitutes the final decision of this matter pursuant to 44 CFR §206.206.

Sincerely,
/s/
Carlos J. Castillo
Assistant Administrator
Disaster Assistance Directorate

cc: William Peterson
Regional Administrator
FEMA Region VI