Accomack County, VA - Elevation

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter Appeal Analysis

Appeal Brief

ApplicantVirginia Department of Emergency Management
Appeal Type2nd
Project Number44
Date Signed2013-03-04T00:00:00
1st Appeal
• Issue
o Accomack County submitted an appeal of the closeout action   taken by FEMA. Region III stated that the closeout was initiated for two reasons: the budget increase was an unauthorized scope of work (SOW) change; and the submitted documentation included unauthorized alterations in the federally required language. The Virginia Department of Emergency Management (VDEM) stated that the SOW was “sufficiently vague”, and that the changes did not constitute a scope change. Additionally, they requested that the absence of assurance documents should be considered ‘de minimus’ rather than a ‘material failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant’. 
• Reason for Denial
o Region III based the denial of the 1st appeal on the fact that neither the State nor FEMA received documentation or assurance that the property owner purchased and would maintain flood insurance.
• Reference(s)
o 44 CFR 206.434 Eligibility;   44 CFR 206.440 Appeals, 44 CFR 206.436(d) Application Procedures, 42 U.S.C. 4012(a)
2nd Appeal
• Issue
o The applicant filed a second appeal, stating that the modifications to the scope were consistent with the grant, other projects had been handled differently and the modifications to the required language were minimal.
• FEMA Findings
o FEMA HQ denied the 2nd appeal, supporting Region III’s decision to deny the 1st appeal.
o Rationale: Neither the State nor FEMA received documentation or assurance that the property owner purchased and would maintain flood insurance. Additionally, VDEM returned the funding associated with the subject property.
o Reference(s):  44 CFR 206.440 Appeals; 44 CFR 206.434 Eligibility; 44 CFR 206.436(d) Application Procedures, 42 U.S.C. 4012(a)

Appeal Letter

MAR 04 2013
 
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Eugene K. Gruber
Director
Mitigation Division
 
FROM:
James A. Walke, PE
Director
Risk Reduction Division
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration

SUBJECT:
HMGP Closeout 1491-DR-V A-044, Accomack County.
1 Acquisition and 60 Elevation Project
 
I support the Region's action to closeout this grant and concur with your memo dated January 24, 2013. I have reviewed the information submitted with your memo concerning this project. For the property in question (XXXXX Crystal Beach Dr.), the main issue is that both the State and FEMA never received adequate documentation or assurance that the property owner purchased and will continue to maintain flood insurance. This is required by statute (42 U.S.C. Sec. 4012 (a), guidance (HMA Guidance, Part III, Sec. D.7.1), policy (March 20, 2006, David Maurstad memo) and the terms and conditions of the original grant award. A review of the correspondence indicates that Regional and State staff contaced the property owner on numberous occasions. However, the property has not complied with the flood insurance purchase and maintenance requirment of the grant.
 
In addition, the Virginia Department of Emergency Management (VDEM), who has resonsibility for managing this grant, has returned all funding associated with the subject property. VDEM acknowledged in its January 9, 2013 correspondence to the Regional Office that the property is not in compliance with program requirements with respect to the flood insurance purchase and maintenance requirement.
 
If you have any questions regarding this determination, please contact me at (202) 646-2751 or Franki Coons, Acting Chief, Grants Implementation Branch, at (202) 646-3079.

 

Appeal Analysis

Both the State and FEMA never received adequate documentation or assurance that the property owner purchased and will continue to maintain flood insurance. This is required by statute (42 U.S.C. Sec. 4012 (a), guidance (HMA Guidance, Part III, Sec. D.7.1), policy (March 20, 2006, David Maurstad memo) and the terms and conditions of the original grant award. The property has not complied with the flood insurance purchase and maintenance requirment of the grant.
 
In addition, the Virginia Department of Emergency Management (VDEM), who has resonsibility for managing this grant, has returned all funding associated with the subject property. VDEM acknowledged in its January 9, 2013 correspondence to the Regional Office that the property is not in compliance with program requirements with respect to the flood insurance purchase and maintenance requirement.

 

Last updated August 19, 2014