Appeal Summary | Appeal Letter | Appeal Analysis | Back
Second Appeal Summary
PA ID# 063-00000; Wallowa County
DSR ID# 07835,07839,37068; Lower Imnaha Road
Citation: FEMA-1160-DR-OR; Wallowa County; DSRs 07835, 07839, 37068
Cross Reference: Erosion, embankment, road, cost overrun, actual costs, cost estimate
Summary: Following the flood disaster in late 1996 and early 1997, FEMA prepared twelve small project DSRs for the cost of restoring the subgrantee's damaged facilities. The Grantee submitted the subgrantee's first appeal to the Regional Director for a small project adjustment of $108,537 to cover a net cost overrun on all of the subgrantee's small projects. The Regional Director determined that the subgrantee incurred an eligible cost overrun of $19,298 and prepared a supplemental DSR in that amount. The Grantee submitted the subgrantee's second appeal to the Executive Director requesting additional funding of $84,026 to cover the claimed actual costs of small project DSRs 07835, 07839, and 37068. The basis of the second appeal is that FEMA inadvertently excluded a section of damaged road in DSRs 07839 and 37068 and also did not include all of the materials necessary to complete the road repair. The Grantee claims that a 700 linear foot section of the road surface and embankment was damaged by the disaster, but was excluded as a part of the scope of work for DSR 07839. Also, the Grantee contends that if FEMA had used the proper cost codes for the work, then the FEMA estimate would have more accurately represented the cost of the repair work. In addition, the Grantee claims that the subgrantee expended an additional $1,276 for the scope of work described in DSR 07835 that was not approved in the Regional Director's first appeal response.
- Has the subgrantee incurred an eligible cost overrun above the amount determined by the Regional Director?
- Is the use of riprap an eligible repair method for the eligible sites?
- No. It can not be verified that the additional damage identified by the Grantee was disaster-related. In addition, improvements over the pre-disaster condition were made to a damaged road section identified in DSR 07839. Therefore, the actual costs for the eligible repair work cannot be separated from the costs of the ineligible work and the improvements made to the road. In addition, the cost documentation for DSR 07835 does not support the additional cost of $1,276 identified by the Grantee.
- Yes. The use of riprap is a reasonable repair method and the subgrantee is eligible for additional funding for the higher cost of this repair.
Rationale: 44 CFR 206.226