This page has not been translated into 简体中文. Visit the 简体中文 page for resources in that language.
Waterfront Debris Deposit Removal
Appeal Brief
Appeal Letter
Appeal Analysis
Citation: FEMA-1044-DR-CA; City of Santa Barbara; DSR 26304 & 26305
Cross-Reference: Emergency debris removal, Immediate threat, Permanent repair
Summary: The DSRs address the removal of sediment and debris deposited by the 1995 Winter Storms in Santa Barbara Harbor. DSR 26304 submitted on March 3, 1995, is for $105,329 to remove 1,000 cubic yards of sediment from the seawall area. DSR 26305 submitted on March 9, 1995, is for $66,092 to dredge 33,046 cubic yards of sediment from the Stearns Wharf area. Both DSRs were determined to be ineligible by the FEMA reviewer on January 26, 1996, because there was no immediate threat, and no clear proof that the debris was the result of the declared incident. The grantee sent the first appeal of DSR 26304 to Region IX on July 30, 1996. The subgrantee argued that the debris was a direct result of the winter storms of 1995 and that fire boat access to Marinas 2, 3 and 4 became impossible except during extreme high tides. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 6, 1996, because no supporting documentation showed how the debris removal would alleviate any immediate threat to life and property. The grantee sent the first appeal of DSR 26305 to Region IX on August 6, 1996, arguing fireboat access is not possible in areas around Stearns Wharf. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 14, 1996, because land based fire equipment has access and no proof of an immediate threat was demonstrated. The subgrantee's second appeal for DSR 26304 was sent to Region IX on April 24, 1997. The subgrantee argues that lack of fireboat access is an immediate threat to improved property. The subgrantee's second appeal for DSR 26305 was sent to Region IX on April 16, 1997, with additional photographic information. The subgrantee argues that the debris removal is permanent repair of park facilities under Category "G".
Issues:
The damage survey reports (DSRs) address the removal of sediment and debris, deposited by the 1995 Winter Storms, along the Marina seawall (DSR 26304) and Stearns Wharf area (DSR 26305) in Santa Barbara Harbor. DSR 26304 was submitted on March 3, 1995, for $105,329 to remove 1,000 cubic yards of sediment from the seawall area with a 45-ton crane and clamshell bucket. DSR 26305 was submitted on March 9, 1995, for $66,092 to dredge 33,046 cubic yards of sediment from the Stearns Wharf area within the harbor. Both DSRs were determined to be ineligible by the FEMA reviewer on January 26, 1996, because of no immediate threat and no clear proof that the debris was the result of the declared incident.
First Appeal
The subgrantee submitted a first appeal of DSR 26304 on May 8, 1996, and the State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the first appeal to Region IX on July 30, 1996. The subgrantee argued that the debris was a direct result of the winter storms of 1995 and that fireboat access to Marinas 2, 3 and 4 became impossible except during extreme high tides and this constituted an immediate threat to life and property. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 6, 1996, because the subgrantee had not submitted supporting documentation showing how the debris removal would alleviate any immediate threat to life and property. Fireboat access was available at the southern end for each marina and the northern end was accessible by land based fire equipment.
The subgrantee submitted a first appeal of DSR 26305 on May 23, 1996, and the State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the appeal to Region IX on August 6, 1996. The subgrantee argued that fire-boat access is not possible in areas around Stearns Wharf. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 14, 1996, because fireboat access to protect improved property (i.e. a short section of the pier access road) would be a secondary measure to the land access fire department. In addition, no information has been provided with the appeal to demonstrate that the debris covered by DSR 26305 created any immediate threat to life, public health, safety or improved public or private property.
Second Appeal
The subgrantee submitted a second appeal for DSR 26304 on February 20, 1997. The State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the appeal to Region IX on April 24, 1997. This second appeal for DSR 26304 refers to information provided with the second appeal for DSR 26305 (i.e., photographs) to support their claim. The subgrantee argues that the debris removal done was consistent with category "A," Emergency Work, because the city's fireboat could not function in water less than 5 to 6 feet deep, without drawing sand into fire fighting equipment. The subgrantee contends the debris removal meets the requirements stipulated in Section 403 (a)(3)(A)(I) of the Stafford Act and 44 CFR 206.224(a).
The subgrantee submitted a second appeal for DSR 26305 on February 7, 1997. The State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the appeal to Region IX on April 16, 1997, with additional information. Photographs submitted with the appeal documented the pre-disaster condition of the harbor 50 days prior to the January 1995 storm and showed the soil, silt and debris resulting from the storm. The subgrantee argues that the debris removal was consistent with category "G" for recreational areas. The westernmost portion of the area described in DSR 23605 is considered "calm-water sailing waters." This area is a tranquil and safe location for the general public to sail small boats. Since category "G" includes the permanent repair of park facilities, the subgrantee contends that the restoration of this location through dredging conforms to FEMA guideline specifications. The subgrantee states that FEMA's contention that an immediate threat did not exist is not relevant as the work identified in DSR 26305 is for Category "G" work, contrary to what was asserted in the first appeal.
DISCUSSION
The subgrantee has submitted additional information in the form of color photographs to establish the deposition of debris in the area of the marina seawall for DSR 26304. The photographs provide no additional evidence that the debris, near the seawall, is a direct result of the January 1995, storm because that area does not appear in the photographs. In addition, no maintenance records are provided to establish a maintenance program for the marina which would be necessary to establish it as an actively maintained facility.
In DSR 26305 the claim is based on the restoration of a facility instead of the claim of "immediate threat" in the first appeal. No evidence is provided that indicates dredging initially created the harbor and it was not established that the wharf area meets the definition of a facility.
CONCLUSION
No information was provided to show that the debris in the marina near the seawall is a direct result of the January 1995 storm. The "calm-water sailing waters" in the vicinity of Stearns Wharf do not meet the definition of a facility. Therefore, the second appeal is denied.
Appeal Brief
| Disaster | FEMA-1044-DR |
| Applicant | City of Santa Barbara |
| Appeal Type | Second |
| PA ID# | 083-69070 |
| PW ID# | 26304,26305 |
| Date Signed | 1997-11-28T05:00:00 |
Citation: FEMA-1044-DR-CA; City of Santa Barbara; DSR 26304 & 26305
Cross-Reference: Emergency debris removal, Immediate threat, Permanent repair
Summary: The DSRs address the removal of sediment and debris deposited by the 1995 Winter Storms in Santa Barbara Harbor. DSR 26304 submitted on March 3, 1995, is for $105,329 to remove 1,000 cubic yards of sediment from the seawall area. DSR 26305 submitted on March 9, 1995, is for $66,092 to dredge 33,046 cubic yards of sediment from the Stearns Wharf area. Both DSRs were determined to be ineligible by the FEMA reviewer on January 26, 1996, because there was no immediate threat, and no clear proof that the debris was the result of the declared incident. The grantee sent the first appeal of DSR 26304 to Region IX on July 30, 1996. The subgrantee argued that the debris was a direct result of the winter storms of 1995 and that fire boat access to Marinas 2, 3 and 4 became impossible except during extreme high tides. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 6, 1996, because no supporting documentation showed how the debris removal would alleviate any immediate threat to life and property. The grantee sent the first appeal of DSR 26305 to Region IX on August 6, 1996, arguing fireboat access is not possible in areas around Stearns Wharf. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 14, 1996, because land based fire equipment has access and no proof of an immediate threat was demonstrated. The subgrantee's second appeal for DSR 26304 was sent to Region IX on April 24, 1997. The subgrantee argues that lack of fireboat access is an immediate threat to improved property. The subgrantee's second appeal for DSR 26305 was sent to Region IX on April 16, 1997, with additional photographic information. The subgrantee argues that the debris removal is permanent repair of park facilities under Category "G".
Issues:
- Does marina seawall debris removal constitute emergency work that eliminates the immediate threat of significant damage to improved property?
- Does debris removal from the area near Stearns Wharf qualify for funding because it was permanent repair of park facilities?
- No, documentation has not been provided that shows the debris near the seawall is a direct result of the declared incident.
- No, the area of water in the vicinity of Stearns Wharf is a natural feature and does not meet the definition of a facility.
Appeal Letter
November 28, 1997
Mr. Gilbert Najera
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Disaster Field Office
74 North Pasadena Avenue
West Annex, 3rd Floor
Pasadena, CA 91103
Dear Mr. Najera:
This letter is in response to your letters of April 16, 1997, and April 24, 1997, that transmitted the City of Santa Barbara's second appeal of damage survey reports (DSR) 26304 and 26305 under FEMA-1044-DR-CA. The DSRs address the removal of sediment and debris deposited by the 1995 Winter Storms in Santa Barbara Harbor.
I have reviewed all information submitted with the appeal and have determined that the removal of debris from the harbor is not eligible. No documentation is provided that indicates the debris in the area of the seawall is a direct result of the declared incident. The area of water in the vicinity of Stearns Wharf is a natural feature which has not been improved or maintained and does not meet the definition of a facility. I am denying the appeal for the reasons contained in the enclosed appeal analysis.
Please inform the applicant of my determination. The applicant may submit a third appeal to the Director of FEMA. The appeal must be submitted through your office and the Regional Director within 60 days of receipt of this determination.
Sincerely,
/S/
Lacy E. Suiter
Executive Associate Director
Response and Recovery Directorate
Enclosure
CC: Ray Williams
Acting Regional Director
Region IX
Mr. Gilbert Najera
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Disaster Field Office
74 North Pasadena Avenue
West Annex, 3rd Floor
Pasadena, CA 91103
Dear Mr. Najera:
This letter is in response to your letters of April 16, 1997, and April 24, 1997, that transmitted the City of Santa Barbara's second appeal of damage survey reports (DSR) 26304 and 26305 under FEMA-1044-DR-CA. The DSRs address the removal of sediment and debris deposited by the 1995 Winter Storms in Santa Barbara Harbor.
I have reviewed all information submitted with the appeal and have determined that the removal of debris from the harbor is not eligible. No documentation is provided that indicates the debris in the area of the seawall is a direct result of the declared incident. The area of water in the vicinity of Stearns Wharf is a natural feature which has not been improved or maintained and does not meet the definition of a facility. I am denying the appeal for the reasons contained in the enclosed appeal analysis.
Please inform the applicant of my determination. The applicant may submit a third appeal to the Director of FEMA. The appeal must be submitted through your office and the Regional Director within 60 days of receipt of this determination.
Sincerely,
/S/
Lacy E. Suiter
Executive Associate Director
Response and Recovery Directorate
Enclosure
CC: Ray Williams
Acting Regional Director
Region IX
Appeal Analysis
BACKGROUNDThe damage survey reports (DSRs) address the removal of sediment and debris, deposited by the 1995 Winter Storms, along the Marina seawall (DSR 26304) and Stearns Wharf area (DSR 26305) in Santa Barbara Harbor. DSR 26304 was submitted on March 3, 1995, for $105,329 to remove 1,000 cubic yards of sediment from the seawall area with a 45-ton crane and clamshell bucket. DSR 26305 was submitted on March 9, 1995, for $66,092 to dredge 33,046 cubic yards of sediment from the Stearns Wharf area within the harbor. Both DSRs were determined to be ineligible by the FEMA reviewer on January 26, 1996, because of no immediate threat and no clear proof that the debris was the result of the declared incident.
First Appeal
The subgrantee submitted a first appeal of DSR 26304 on May 8, 1996, and the State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the first appeal to Region IX on July 30, 1996. The subgrantee argued that the debris was a direct result of the winter storms of 1995 and that fireboat access to Marinas 2, 3 and 4 became impossible except during extreme high tides and this constituted an immediate threat to life and property. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 6, 1996, because the subgrantee had not submitted supporting documentation showing how the debris removal would alleviate any immediate threat to life and property. Fireboat access was available at the southern end for each marina and the northern end was accessible by land based fire equipment.
The subgrantee submitted a first appeal of DSR 26305 on May 23, 1996, and the State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the appeal to Region IX on August 6, 1996. The subgrantee argued that fire-boat access is not possible in areas around Stearns Wharf. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on November 14, 1996, because fireboat access to protect improved property (i.e. a short section of the pier access road) would be a secondary measure to the land access fire department. In addition, no information has been provided with the appeal to demonstrate that the debris covered by DSR 26305 created any immediate threat to life, public health, safety or improved public or private property.
Second Appeal
The subgrantee submitted a second appeal for DSR 26304 on February 20, 1997. The State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the appeal to Region IX on April 24, 1997. This second appeal for DSR 26304 refers to information provided with the second appeal for DSR 26305 (i.e., photographs) to support their claim. The subgrantee argues that the debris removal done was consistent with category "A," Emergency Work, because the city's fireboat could not function in water less than 5 to 6 feet deep, without drawing sand into fire fighting equipment. The subgrantee contends the debris removal meets the requirements stipulated in Section 403 (a)(3)(A)(I) of the Stafford Act and 44 CFR 206.224(a).
The subgrantee submitted a second appeal for DSR 26305 on February 7, 1997. The State, supporting the subgrantee, sent the appeal to Region IX on April 16, 1997, with additional information. Photographs submitted with the appeal documented the pre-disaster condition of the harbor 50 days prior to the January 1995 storm and showed the soil, silt and debris resulting from the storm. The subgrantee argues that the debris removal was consistent with category "G" for recreational areas. The westernmost portion of the area described in DSR 23605 is considered "calm-water sailing waters." This area is a tranquil and safe location for the general public to sail small boats. Since category "G" includes the permanent repair of park facilities, the subgrantee contends that the restoration of this location through dredging conforms to FEMA guideline specifications. The subgrantee states that FEMA's contention that an immediate threat did not exist is not relevant as the work identified in DSR 26305 is for Category "G" work, contrary to what was asserted in the first appeal.
DISCUSSION
The subgrantee has submitted additional information in the form of color photographs to establish the deposition of debris in the area of the marina seawall for DSR 26304. The photographs provide no additional evidence that the debris, near the seawall, is a direct result of the January 1995, storm because that area does not appear in the photographs. In addition, no maintenance records are provided to establish a maintenance program for the marina which would be necessary to establish it as an actively maintained facility.
In DSR 26305 the claim is based on the restoration of a facility instead of the claim of "immediate threat" in the first appeal. No evidence is provided that indicates dredging initially created the harbor and it was not established that the wharf area meets the definition of a facility.
CONCLUSION
No information was provided to show that the debris in the marina near the seawall is a direct result of the January 1995 storm. The "calm-water sailing waters" in the vicinity of Stearns Wharf do not meet the definition of a facility. Therefore, the second appeal is denied.