alert - warning

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

Debris Removal

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DesastreFEMA-1539-DR
ApplicantCity of Port Orange
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#127-58575-00
PW ID#Project Worksheets 234 and 438
Date Signed2008-03-10T04:00:00
Citation: FEMA-1539-DR-FL, City of Port Orange (Applicant), Project Worksheets (PWs) 234 and 438
Cross-reference: Debris Removal

Summary: FEMA prepared PWs 234 and 438 for debris removal following Hurricane Charley. FEMA subsequently de-obligated $97,468 from PW 234 and $14,101 from PW 438 because these costs were based on a 1 to 5 compaction ratio. In a letter dated October 5, 2005, the Applicant appealed FEMA’s determination that the contractor compaction 1 to 5 ratio was ineligible for reimbursement. The Applicant stated that FEMA had approved the compaction ratio and that the Applicant had paid the contractor based upon the 1 to 5 compaction ratio. The Regional Director denied the appeal in a letter dated November 14, 2006, stating that the supporting documentation identified rear-loading refuse trucks with a capacity of 25 cubic yards. Therefore, it would not be possible to fill such trucks to the requested 1 to 5 compacted ratio, which would amount to 125 cubic yards of debris.

In a letter dated January 9, 2007, the Applicant reiterated its position that FEMA approved the 1 to 5 compaction ratio and that if FEMA wanted to change the compaction ratio then it should do so prospectively rather than retroactively. The Applicant stated that its files are well documented and it has video of all loaded trucks.
Issues: Did the Applicant submit information to support its claim that debris removal costs
based upon a 1 to 5 compaction ratio are eligible for Public Assistance?

Findings: No. Debris removal costs based on a 1 to 2 compaction ratio are eligible for Public
Assistance.

Rationale: 44 CFR §206.224; 44 CFR §206.206(a).

Appeal Letter

March 10, 2008

W. Craig Fugate
Director
Division of Emergency Management
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100

Re: Second Appeal–City of Port Orange, PA ID 127-58575-00, Debris Removal
FEMA-1539-DR-FL, Project Worksheets (PW) 234 and 438

Dear Mr. Fugate:

This letter is in response to your letter dated June 21, 2007, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of the City of Port Orange (Applicant). The Applicant appealed the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of $111,569 for debris removal costs based upon 1 to 5 compaction ratio for debris hand-loaded and hauled with rear-loaded compactor trucks (the type usually used for residential garbage pick-up).

In a letter dated October 5, 2005, the Applicant appealed FEMA’s determination that the contractor 1 to 5 compaction ratio was ineligible for reimbursement. The Applicant stated that FEMA had approved the compaction ratio and that the Applicant had paid the contractor based upon the 1 to 5 compaction ratio. The Regional Director denied the appeal in a letter dated November 14, 2006, stating that the supporting documentation identified rear-loading refuse trucks with a capacity of 25 cubic yards. Therefore, it would not have been possible to fill such trucks to the 1 to 5 compaction ratio (which would amount to 125 cubic yards of debris).

The Applicant submitted its second appeal in a letter dated January 9, 2007. The Applicant reiterated its position that FEMA approved the 1 to 5 compaction ratio. In its second appeal, the Applicant stated that its files are well documented and it has video of all loaded trucks. There does not seem to be any question that the debris trucks were fully loaded. Even though these were hand-loaded trucks, the use of trucks usually used for residential garbage pick-up with the ability to compact the debris collected, effectively negates the inefficiencies associated with loading these vehicles by hand. The use of trucks usually used for residential garbage pick-up can achieve greater compaction than the use of mechanically-loaded open top debris trucks.
The costs related to debris removal compaction ratio of 1 to 5 are not eligible because the Applicant has not demonstrated that five times more debris than the full capacity of the truck was hauled. However, the Applicant has demonstrated that compactor type garbage trucks are not hand-loaded trucks and can achieve greater compaction than hand-loaded trucks. After reviewing the information submitted with this appeal, I have determined that the debris removal costs based upon 1 to 2 compaction ratio is reasonable. Therefore, the Applicant’s appeal is partially granted. Presuming that the amount previously found eligible was based on a 1 to 1 ratio, an approval of a 1 to 2 ratio should result in a doubling of the amount of eligible cubic yards of debris. By copy of this letter, I request that the Regional Administrator take appropriate action to implement this decision.

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: Major P. May
Regional Administrator
FEMA Region IV