Navigation
Search
Languages
Emergency Beach Berm
Appeal Brief | Appeal Letter | Back
Cross-reference: Emergency Protective Measures, Codes and Standards
Summary: Hurricane Isabel struck the coast of North Carolina on September 18, 2003, causing wave activity and a storm FEMA prepared Project Worksheet (PW) 10 for $674,586 to construct a 1.2 mile emergency berm to protect improved property along the beach. Following project closeout, the Town requested an additional $31,368 to stabilize the berms with vegetative sprigs. On March 12, 2007, FEMA denied the appeal stating that the beach was not an improved beach; therefore, it was not eligible for sprigging to stabilize the sand berm. The Town submitted a second appeal dated March 30, 2007, which was received by the Assistant Administrator on August 6, 2007. The second appeal reiterates the Towns claims from the first appeal: sprigging was required to stabilize the sand berm based on the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) and the Town Code. The Town also states that FEMA had verbally indicated that sprigging was an eligible expense.
Issues: Is sprigging of beach grass on an emergency sand berm an eligible cost?
Findings: Yes.
Rationale: 44 CFR § 206.225(a)(2)
Second Appeal Brief
1490
PA ID# 055-35720-00; Town of Kill Devil Hills
PW ID# 10; Emergency Beach Berm
01/14/2008
Citation: FEMA-1490-DR-NC, Town of Kill Devil Hills, NC, Project Worksheet 10 Sprigging of Vegetation on Emergency BermPA ID# 055-35720-00; Town of Kill Devil Hills
PW ID# 10; Emergency Beach Berm
01/14/2008
Cross-reference: Emergency Protective Measures, Codes and Standards
Summary: Hurricane Isabel struck the coast of North Carolina on September 18, 2003, causing wave activity and a storm FEMA prepared Project Worksheet (PW) 10 for $674,586 to construct a 1.2 mile emergency berm to protect improved property along the beach. Following project closeout, the Town requested an additional $31,368 to stabilize the berms with vegetative sprigs. On March 12, 2007, FEMA denied the appeal stating that the beach was not an improved beach; therefore, it was not eligible for sprigging to stabilize the sand berm. The Town submitted a second appeal dated March 30, 2007, which was received by the Assistant Administrator on August 6, 2007. The second appeal reiterates the Towns claims from the first appeal: sprigging was required to stabilize the sand berm based on the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) and the Town Code. The Town also states that FEMA had verbally indicated that sprigging was an eligible expense.
Issues: Is sprigging of beach grass on an emergency sand berm an eligible cost?
Findings: Yes.
Rationale: 44 CFR § 206.225(a)(2)