alert - warning

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

Eligibility of Sod Replacement

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DesastreFEMA-1556-DR
ApplicantBridgeport Exempted Village School District
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#013-UF8CL-00
PW ID#1136
Date Signed2006-05-18T04:00:00
Citation: FEMA-1556-DR-OH; Bridgeport Exempted Village School District;
Sod Replacement on Athletic Fields

Cross-reference: Sod Replacement; Athletic Fields

Summary: As a result of severe storms, high velocity water runoff washed away sections of sod and topsoil from Bridgeport Exempted Village School District’s (Applicant) athletic fields. FEMA obligated Project Worksheet (PW) 1136-0 for $37,605 to repair eroded sections of the athletic fields. However, the replacement of sod in damaged areas was deemed 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 its first appeal, the Applicant argued that re-sodding was necessary to restore the fields to their pre-disaster design and to prevent future erosion. Accordingly, the Applicant requested additional assistance for the cost of sod replacement and top dressing on the damaged portions of the athletic fields. On July 22, 2005, FEMA partially granted the Applicant’s first appeal and obligated PW 1136-1 for $23,970 for top dressing damaged areas repaired by the Applicant, but denied funding for replacement of the sod. The Applicant’s second appeal, dated September 15, 2005, argues that FEMA Recovery Division Policy
#9524.5 contradicts federal law and FEMA regulations that provide reimbursement for repair and restoration of an eligible facility to its pre-disaster design and function. The Applicant is requesting additional funding of $51,556 because replacement of sod is necessary to restore the facility to its pre-disaster design and function.

Issues: (1) Is replacement of the sod necessary to stabilize slopes or to minimize runoff?

Findings: (1) No.

Rationale: Recovery Division Policy Number 9524.5

Appeal Letter

May 18, 2006

Ms. Nancy J. Dragani
Ohio Emergency Management Agency
2855 West Dublin-Granville Road
Columbus, OH 43235-2206

Re: Second Appeal – Bridgeport Exempted Village School District;
PA ID #013-UF8CL.00; Eligibility of Sod Replacement;
FEMA-1556-DR-OH

Dear Ms. Dragani:

This letter is in response to the referenced second appeal submitted by the Bridgeport Exempted Village School District (Applicant) on September 15, 2005, transmitted by your letter dated October 11, 2005. The Applicant is appealing the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of funding for the replacement of sod on its athletic fields.

FEMA prepared Project Worksheet (PW) 1136-0 in the amount of $37,605 to fund repairs to the eroded portions of the Applicant’s athletic fields. The replacement of sod was not deemed eligible work pursuant to FEMA 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 sediment runoff.

In its first appeal, submitted to your office on April 6, 2005, and transmitted to FEMA by your letter dated May 10, 2005, the Applicant argued that the replacement and top dressing of sod was necessary to restore the fields to their pre-disaster condition and to prevent future erosion. On July 22, 2005, FEMA denied the Applicant’s request for reimbursement of sod replacement, pursuant to Recovery Division Policy #9524.5, but granted the Applicant’s request for $23,970 in funding for top dressing of damaged areas with a layer of sand and compost.
In its second appeal, dated September 15, 2005, the Applicant argues that Recovery Division Policy #9524.5 contradicts federal law and FEMA regulations that provide reimbursement for repair and restoration of an eligible facility to its pre-disaster design and function. The Applicant is requesting the approval of $51,556 of funding for sod replacement because sod is necessary to restore the facility to its pre-disaster function.

Recovery Division Policy #9524.5, Trees, Shrubs, and Other Plantings Associated with Facilities, limits the eligibility of grass and sod to circumstances where such measures are necessary to stabilize slopes and to minimize sediment runoff. The replacement of sod on the Applicant’s athletic fields, which are relatively level, does not meet the eligibility criteria envisioned in the subject policy. Accordingly, the Applicant’s appeal is denied.

Please inform the Applicant of my decision. This determination constitutes the final decision of this matter pursuant to 44 C.F.R. § 206.206

Sincerely,
/S/
David Garratt
Acting Director of Recovery
Federal Emergency Management Agency

cc: Edward G. Buikema
Regional Director
FEMA, Region V