alert - warning

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

Garbage Disposal

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1603-DR
ApplicantCity of Baton Rouge
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#033-05000-00
PW ID#Project Worksheets 4879
Date Signed2008-06-30T04:00:00
Citation: FEMA-1603-DR-LA, City of Baton Rouge Project Worksheet (PW) 4879

Cross-reference: Increased Operating Cost
Summary: The Applicant claims that an influx of evacuees from Hurricane Katrina caused a
spike in garbage collection that resulted in an increase of $105,892 in cost. The Applicant maintained its claim that the garbage posed an immediate threat to public health and safety. In addition, the Applicant contends that FEMA misunderstood the documentation submitted with the appeal. FEMA reviewed the documentation and found that the Applicant experienced a one month spike in garbage collection. Data submitted by the Applicant shows that it collected more garbage in May, June and July 2004 than it did in September 2005. After the spike, garbage collection levels returned to normal. If the increase in garbage collection was due to the evacuees, the effect would likely have continued for months following the initial influx. A one month spike is not enough to justify funding the collection when spikes in garbage collection are commonplace. FEMA does not reimburse municipalities for increased operating costs to provide a service after a disaster.
The Regional Director denied the first appeal on October 6, 2006, stating, “The Applicant did not experience any extraordinary expense in providing garbage collection, but rather ran under its budgeted collection estimate.”

Issues: Will FEMA reimburse an Applicant for increased operating costs?

Findings: No.

Rationale: Increased operating costs are not an eligible cost under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Public Assistance Guide,
FEMA-322, October 1999, page 58.

Appeal Letter

June 30, 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−City of Baton Rouge, PA ID 0033-050000-00,
Increased Operating Cost, FEMA-1603-DR-LA, Project Worksheet (PW) 4879
Dear Colonel Kirkpatrick:
This letter is in response to your letter transmitting the referenced second appeal of the City of Baton Rouge (Applicant) on January 4, 2007. The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of its first appeal for reimbursement of increased operating costs for garbage collection.

The Applicant requests that FEMA reconsider reimbursing $105,892 for the removal of 5,748.77 tons of additional garbage in September 2005 for a total of 40,392.19 tons which it attributes to the increase in Hurricane Katrina evacuees and asserts that it is not normally performed work. The Applicant stated that it did not budget for the additional garbage. Further, the Applicant asserts that the garbage within the City-Parish posed an immediate threat to life, public health and safety. The Applicant also contends that FEMA misunderstood the data submitted with the first appeal.
Increased costs of operating a facility or providing a service may increase due to or after a disaster. With very few exceptions, these costs are not eligible. Further, the applicant collected greater amounts of garbage in May, June, and July 2004 than it did in September 2005. After the 1-month tonnage spike in September 2005, garbage collection levels returned to normal in October. The garbage collection data from October through December 2005 shows no significant increase over the corresponding months in 2004. If the increase in garbage collection was due to the evacuees, the effect would likely have continued for months following the initial influx of evacuees.
The Regional Director denied the first appeal on October 6, 2006, stating that the Applicant did not demonstrate that the additional cost of garbage collection was the result of “mixed debris” caused by Hurricane Katrina.

Therefore, the Applicant supplied documentation however; the documentation submitted does not establish that the garbage collected in September 2005 posed an immediate threat to the public health and safety or improved property. FEMA does not reimburse municipalities for increased operating costs. Therefore, the appeal is denied.

Please inform the Applicant of my decision. This determination constitutes the final decision on 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