PA ID# 083-91148; Cachuma Operation & Maintenance Board
DSR ID# 94719,39630; Maria Ignacio Creek @ Old San Marcos Pass
Citation: FEMA-1046-DR-CA; PA ID 083-91148; DSR 94719/39630.
Cross Reference: Winter storm and flooding; water pipeline damage; improved projects.
Summary: Flood waters from the January-March 1995 winter storms washed away support soil around a blow-off valve in the water pipeline belonging to the Cachuma Operation and Maintenance Board (COMB). The valve was located on the western side of Maria Ignacio Creek at Old San Marcos Pass Road. FEMA approved DSR 39630 on August 1, 1996, for $1,432 to install 38.7 cubic yards of backfill to support the valve. The applicant did not appeal the DSR but waited until it submitted a Project Completion and Certification Report on June 22, 1998, to claim that it had spent $29,885 on the project and that it was due an additional $28,453. The Disaster Recovery Manager (DRM) responded on July 24, 1998, stating that because a Net Small Project Overrun (NSPO) request had not been received by the statutory deadline, the application was closed and that the total funding for the project was $1,432. COMB submitted another first appeal stating that because another project (DSR 39631) had been granted an extension to August 31, 1998, it had 60 days following that date to submit an appeal for additional funding pursuant to 44 CFR 206.204(e). In his January 27, 1999, response, the DRM allowed that COMB provided sufficient documentation to justify that the project was not closed. However, the appeal was denied because it was determined that the eligible scope of work was exceeded thereby making the project an improved project. COMB submitted an April 5, 1999, second appeal in which it stated that the large amount of earthen embankment upstream and downstream protected the structure from erosive creek flows and that without them, it was necessary to place the additional amount of rip rap costing an additional $28,453.
Issue: Should the applicant receive additional funding for the large amount of rip rap that it found necessary to repair the exposure of the blow-off valve.
Findings: No. The work the applicant did to repair the exposure was excessive and rendered the project an improved project. Therefore, funding was capped at the approved eligible amount. Even though another small project had been extended, this did not give the applicant justification to delay reporting overruns on this project. It was determined that rip rap over the fill material was a reasonable way to repair the damage. Therefore, $1,638 is approved for 10.5 cubic yards of grouted rip rap to be placed over the fill material.