Summary: The January-March 1995 winter storms caused damages to a sewer pipeline at the cul-de-sac on Tarapaca Road in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. FEMA prepared a Category B DSR for the installation of a temporary bypass at a cost of $7,285. The Los Angeles County, Department of Public Works (LADPW) stated that it applied to FEMA for a DSR for permanent repairs but was refused because of the question of legal responsibility. LADPW adopted a resolution giving the County of Los Angeles limited Power of Attorney to act on its behalf to secure FEMA assistance. The Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District was created to operate numerous sewer facilities with unincorporated County territory and unincorporated cities under the auspices of LADPW. FEMA prepared Category F DSR 44753 on July 11, 1996, for $15,800 to repair the pipeline but suspended the DSR pending the subgrantee's completion of stabilization efforts pursuant to the Landslide Policy. The hillside became unstable after 19 years of improper drainage into the head of an ancient landslide. A hazard mitigation proposal to relocate the pipeline at a cost of $572,000 that accompanied the DSR was also denied because it was not cost effective. The first appeal resulted in the DSR amount being increased to $28,465 but the DSR continued in suspension pending the hillside stabilization. The DSR was later voided when it was discovered that the applicant had proceeded with the improved project of relocating the pipeline without affording FEMA an opportunity to conduct the NEPA review. The second appeal was submitted by the subgrantee on September 14, 1998. In this appeal, the subgrantee accepted FEMA's determination of an improved project but insisted that FEMA's estimate of restoring the pipeline in situ was underestimated.
Issue: Is the improved project eligible for funding?
Findings: No. The subgrantee's failure to notify FEMA of the proposed relocation of the pipeline prevented FEMA from completing the necessary NEPA requirements for the project. FEMA cannot fund any portion of the work. Therefore, the appeal is denied.
Rationale: 44 CFR Part 10 and 44 CFR 206.203(d)(1).