Hume Road Repair - Emergency Protective Measures
Appeal Brief
Appeal Letter
Appeal Analysis
Citation:
FEMA-1585-DR-CA; Los Angeles County
Emergency Work; Reasonable Costs
As a result of heavy rainfall during the February 2005 Winter Storms, Project Worksheet (PW) 822 was prepared for Los Angeles County (Applicant) in November 2005 for $433,956 to fund emergency protective measures related to the failure of a 450-foot long section of Hume Road, from Briarbluff Drive to Castlewood Drive. The PW called for construction of a paved emergency access road reconnecting Hume Road and Briarbluff Drive, measures to redirect surface water away from the emergency road, and excavation of material from the landslide to prevent movement of the failure mass. The landslide that damaged Hume Road is located above Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicant contends that the landslide mass constitutes an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicant requests removal of 45,600 cubic yards of debris from the landslide mass and construction of a soldier pile and timber lagging wall above Las Flores Canyon Road to prevent damage to, and closure of the road resulting from a potential catastrophic mudslide. The estimated total project cost requested is $3,591,062.
1) Should the scope of work be revised to allow for additional measures to protect Las Flores Canyon Road from possible damage?
2) Should the total project cost be increased to a $3,591,062 to cover the additional work undertaken by the Applicant?
Findings:
1) No, the scope of work should not be revised to allow for the additional emergency protective measures requested by the Applicant.
2) No, the total project cost should not be increased.
44 CFR §206.225; OMB Circular A-87 §C.1.a.
As a result of heavy rainfall during the February 2005, Winter Storms, Project Worksheet (PW) 822 was prepared for Los Angeles County (Applicant) in November 2005 for the amount of $433,956. PW 822 was obligated to fund emergency protective measures related to the failure of a 450-foot long section of Hume Road, from Briarbluff Drive to Castlewood Drive, in the Santa Monica Mountains area of Los Angeles County. The Applicant disagrees with FEMAs scope of work and funding determinations in the PW.
The PWs scope of work included the construction of a paved emergency access road reconnecting Hume Road and Briarbluff Drive; construction of a new storm water catch basin; and installation of 200 feet of 24-inch diameter corrugated metal pipe to redirect surface water away from the emergency access road. In addition, since the landslide that damaged the section of Hume Road lies above a section of Las Flores Canyon Road, the PWs scope of work included the excavation of material at the top of the landslide in order to reduce the load on the failure mass in an effort to prevent, or at least reduce further movement of the landslide. The emergency work was 94% complete when the PW was prepared.
First Appeal
The Applicant submitted the first appeal on May 4, 2006, to the California Governors Office of Emergency Services (OES). OES forwarded it to FEMA on July 3, 2006. The Applicant disagreed with the quantities identified in the PW and contended that the scope of work should be revised to include an additional removal of an estimated 40,000 cubic yards of material from the landslide mass and the construction of a soldier pile wall with timber lagging above Las Flores Canyon Road to prevent damage to, and closure of the road resulting from a potential catastrophic mudslide. The Applicant states that a revision to the PW with the expanded scope of work was provided to FEMA in late November 2005, before the PW had been obligated, but the revisions were never made to the PW. The Applicant requested that FEMA fund the total project at a cost of $3,591,062.
The Applicant stated in the appeal that OES had granted its request for a time extension to complete the emergency work; consequently, emergency work performed beyond the 6-month period following the declaration should be eligible for funding. The Applicant includes in its appeal a copy of a resolution submitted to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (LADPW) requesting authorization for emergency work to remove an undefined quantity of material from below Hume Road in order to protect Las Flores Canyon Road. Also attached to the appeal was a line item estimate prepared by the LADPW for Project RDC0014722, Hume Road Phase I, and a 48-page report of force account labor, equipment, and materials for the period of April 2005 through April 2006.
Region IXs response to the first appeal acknowledged the Applicant had been granted a time extension by OES until April 22, 2006, for completion of additional emergency work. Region IX denied the appeal due to insufficient documentation to support the Applicants contention that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed.
Second Appeal
The Applicant submitted its second appeal to OES on December 28, 2006. OES forwarded the appeal to FEMA on February 26, 2007. The Applicant reiterated its position that the landslide posed an imminent threat to Las Flores Canyon Road, located down slope of the landslide, as well as another road, three bridges and an elementary school. The Applicant used force account labor in addition to awarding a contract in order to remove 45,600 cubic yards of material from the landslide mass and construct a soldier pile wall with timber lagging above Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicant reiterated that this fact was brought to the attention of FEMA before the PW had been obligated, along with a revision to the PW with the expanded scope of work, but the revisions were never made to the PW.
The Applicant states that OES had granted the request for a time extension to complete the emergency work; therefore, the emergency work performed beyond the 6-month period following the declaration should be eligible for funding. In addition to copies of the PW and response to the first appeal, the Applicant provided copies of similar information provided in the first appeal, and included photographs of the landslide, as well as a discussion of geotechnical investigations and the installation of two slope inclinometers within the landslide mass. Inclinometer data submitted with the second appeal confirmed that continued movement of the landslide was taking place. The Applicant requests that FEMA fund the total project cost of $3,591,062.
DISCUSSION:
The Applicant provided additional information in the second appeal to demonstrate that the landslide mass continued to move, but that was not the issue upon which Region IX based its decision to deny the first appeal. The issue stated in the response to the appeal was that the Applicant had not demonstrated that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed. The Applicant noted in both appeals that OES had granted its request for a time extension to complete the emergency work. The Applicants request for the time extension states, Unfortunately, DR-1585 did not signal the end of the winter rains in this area which continued for several more months and hampered the Countys ability to prosecute the necessary category A and B project work. Thus the very events (i.e., additional rainfall) that in the opinion of the Applicant would trigger a catastrophic landslide are what necessitated the time extension, essentially preventing the Applicant and contractor from executing the work to eliminate the perceived threat. This supports FEMAs position that the landslide did not constitute an immediate threat.
The Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR 206.225) require that eligible emergency protective measures must eliminate or lessen immediate threats to lives, public health or safety, or eliminate or lessen immediate threats of significant additional damage to improved public or private property through measures which are cost effective. In its request for a resolution authorizing the removal of material from the landslide mass submitted to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, LADPW states, Should this material not be removed, rainfall will likely trigger a catastrophic mudslide which could cause damage to persons and property on or near Las Flores Canyon Road.
The presumption made by the Applicant was not only that a catastrophic mudslide was a likely event with additional rainfall, but that damage would occur that would exceed the costs associated with preventing the occurrence. The fact that no mudslides were triggered by rainfall that continued to occur several months after the declared event, which did not even create the need for debris removal from Las Flores Canyon Road, does not support an argument that emergency protective measures in excess of $3.5 million dollars were necessary and cost effective. The Applicant has not provided any additional justification that these proposed measures are necessary and cost effective as emergency protection.
CONCLUSION:
The Applicant has not demonstrated that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed as a result of the damage to Hume Road. It was noted that rainfall continued to occur several months after the declared event, but this did not produce any additional failures or even create the need for debris removal from Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicants proposed measures are designed to address potential long-term problems rather than Thadditional justification that these proposed measures are necessary and cost effective as emergency protection. This supports FEMAs original determination that the landslide did not constitute an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road; therefore, the appeal is denied.
Appeal Brief
| Disaster | 1585 |
| Applicant | Los Angeles County |
| Appeal Type | Second |
| PA ID# | 037-99037-00 |
| PW ID# | 822 |
| Date Signed | 2007-12-21T05:00:00 |
FEMA-1585-DR-CA; Los Angeles County
Emergency Work; Reasonable Costs
As a result of heavy rainfall during the February 2005 Winter Storms, Project Worksheet (PW) 822 was prepared for Los Angeles County (Applicant) in November 2005 for $433,956 to fund emergency protective measures related to the failure of a 450-foot long section of Hume Road, from Briarbluff Drive to Castlewood Drive. The PW called for construction of a paved emergency access road reconnecting Hume Road and Briarbluff Drive, measures to redirect surface water away from the emergency road, and excavation of material from the landslide to prevent movement of the failure mass. The landslide that damaged Hume Road is located above Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicant contends that the landslide mass constitutes an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicant requests removal of 45,600 cubic yards of debris from the landslide mass and construction of a soldier pile and timber lagging wall above Las Flores Canyon Road to prevent damage to, and closure of the road resulting from a potential catastrophic mudslide. The estimated total project cost requested is $3,591,062.
1) Should the scope of work be revised to allow for additional measures to protect Las Flores Canyon Road from possible damage?
2) Should the total project cost be increased to a $3,591,062 to cover the additional work undertaken by the Applicant?
1) No, the scope of work should not be revised to allow for the additional emergency protective measures requested by the Applicant.
2) No, the total project cost should not be increased.
44 CFR §206.225; OMB Circular A-87 §C.1.a.
Appeal Letter
December 21, 2008
Mr. Paul Jacks
Governors Authorized Representative
Governors Office of Emergency Services
Response and Recovery Division
3650 Schriever Avenue
Mather, CA 95655
Re: Second Appeal Los Angeles County, PA ID# 037-99037-00
Hume Road Repair Emergency Protective Measures, FEMA-1585-DR-CA, PW 822
Dear Mr. Jacks:
This is in response to your letter dated February 26, 2007, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of Los Angeles County (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Securitys Federal Emergency Management Agencys (FEMA) denial to increase funding for emergency protective measures associated with a slope failure involving a section of Hume Road, which is located above Las Flores Canyon Road.
As explained in the enclosed analysis, the information provided by the Applicant in the second appeal does not support the contention that emergency protective measures were needed to eliminate or lessen an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road . The Applicant did not document that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed, nor did it demonstrate that these proposed measures in excess of $3.5 million were cost-effective, as required by Federal regulations. Therefore, I am denying the Applicants appeal.
Please inform the Applicant of my decision. My determination constitutes the final decision on this matter as set forth in 44 CFR §206.206.
Sincerely,
/s/
Carlos J. Castillo
Assistant Administrator
Disaster Assistance Directorate
Enclosure
cc: Nancy Ward
Regional Administrator
FEMA Region IX
Mr. Paul Jacks
Governors Authorized Representative
Governors Office of Emergency Services
Response and Recovery Division
3650 Schriever Avenue
Mather, CA 95655
Re: Second Appeal Los Angeles County, PA ID# 037-99037-00
Hume Road Repair Emergency Protective Measures, FEMA-1585-DR-CA, PW 822
Dear Mr. Jacks:
This is in response to your letter dated February 26, 2007, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of Los Angeles County (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Securitys Federal Emergency Management Agencys (FEMA) denial to increase funding for emergency protective measures associated with a slope failure involving a section of Hume Road, which is located above Las Flores Canyon Road.
As explained in the enclosed analysis, the information provided by the Applicant in the second appeal does not support the contention that emergency protective measures were needed to eliminate or lessen an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road . The Applicant did not document that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed, nor did it demonstrate that these proposed measures in excess of $3.5 million were cost-effective, as required by Federal regulations. Therefore, I am denying the Applicants appeal.
Please inform the Applicant of my decision. My determination constitutes the final decision on this matter as set forth in 44 CFR §206.206.
Sincerely,
/s/
Carlos J. Castillo
Assistant Administrator
Disaster Assistance Directorate
Enclosure
cc: Nancy Ward
Regional Administrator
FEMA Region IX
Appeal Analysis
BACKGROUND:As a result of heavy rainfall during the February 2005, Winter Storms, Project Worksheet (PW) 822 was prepared for Los Angeles County (Applicant) in November 2005 for the amount of $433,956. PW 822 was obligated to fund emergency protective measures related to the failure of a 450-foot long section of Hume Road, from Briarbluff Drive to Castlewood Drive, in the Santa Monica Mountains area of Los Angeles County. The Applicant disagrees with FEMAs scope of work and funding determinations in the PW.
The PWs scope of work included the construction of a paved emergency access road reconnecting Hume Road and Briarbluff Drive; construction of a new storm water catch basin; and installation of 200 feet of 24-inch diameter corrugated metal pipe to redirect surface water away from the emergency access road. In addition, since the landslide that damaged the section of Hume Road lies above a section of Las Flores Canyon Road, the PWs scope of work included the excavation of material at the top of the landslide in order to reduce the load on the failure mass in an effort to prevent, or at least reduce further movement of the landslide. The emergency work was 94% complete when the PW was prepared.
First Appeal
The Applicant submitted the first appeal on May 4, 2006, to the California Governors Office of Emergency Services (OES). OES forwarded it to FEMA on July 3, 2006. The Applicant disagreed with the quantities identified in the PW and contended that the scope of work should be revised to include an additional removal of an estimated 40,000 cubic yards of material from the landslide mass and the construction of a soldier pile wall with timber lagging above Las Flores Canyon Road to prevent damage to, and closure of the road resulting from a potential catastrophic mudslide. The Applicant states that a revision to the PW with the expanded scope of work was provided to FEMA in late November 2005, before the PW had been obligated, but the revisions were never made to the PW. The Applicant requested that FEMA fund the total project at a cost of $3,591,062.
The Applicant stated in the appeal that OES had granted its request for a time extension to complete the emergency work; consequently, emergency work performed beyond the 6-month period following the declaration should be eligible for funding. The Applicant includes in its appeal a copy of a resolution submitted to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (LADPW) requesting authorization for emergency work to remove an undefined quantity of material from below Hume Road in order to protect Las Flores Canyon Road. Also attached to the appeal was a line item estimate prepared by the LADPW for Project RDC0014722, Hume Road Phase I, and a 48-page report of force account labor, equipment, and materials for the period of April 2005 through April 2006.
Region IXs response to the first appeal acknowledged the Applicant had been granted a time extension by OES until April 22, 2006, for completion of additional emergency work. Region IX denied the appeal due to insufficient documentation to support the Applicants contention that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed.
Second Appeal
The Applicant submitted its second appeal to OES on December 28, 2006. OES forwarded the appeal to FEMA on February 26, 2007. The Applicant reiterated its position that the landslide posed an imminent threat to Las Flores Canyon Road, located down slope of the landslide, as well as another road, three bridges and an elementary school. The Applicant used force account labor in addition to awarding a contract in order to remove 45,600 cubic yards of material from the landslide mass and construct a soldier pile wall with timber lagging above Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicant reiterated that this fact was brought to the attention of FEMA before the PW had been obligated, along with a revision to the PW with the expanded scope of work, but the revisions were never made to the PW.
The Applicant states that OES had granted the request for a time extension to complete the emergency work; therefore, the emergency work performed beyond the 6-month period following the declaration should be eligible for funding. In addition to copies of the PW and response to the first appeal, the Applicant provided copies of similar information provided in the first appeal, and included photographs of the landslide, as well as a discussion of geotechnical investigations and the installation of two slope inclinometers within the landslide mass. Inclinometer data submitted with the second appeal confirmed that continued movement of the landslide was taking place. The Applicant requests that FEMA fund the total project cost of $3,591,062.
DISCUSSION:
The Applicant provided additional information in the second appeal to demonstrate that the landslide mass continued to move, but that was not the issue upon which Region IX based its decision to deny the first appeal. The issue stated in the response to the appeal was that the Applicant had not demonstrated that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed. The Applicant noted in both appeals that OES had granted its request for a time extension to complete the emergency work. The Applicants request for the time extension states, Unfortunately, DR-1585 did not signal the end of the winter rains in this area which continued for several more months and hampered the Countys ability to prosecute the necessary category A and B project work. Thus the very events (i.e., additional rainfall) that in the opinion of the Applicant would trigger a catastrophic landslide are what necessitated the time extension, essentially preventing the Applicant and contractor from executing the work to eliminate the perceived threat. This supports FEMAs position that the landslide did not constitute an immediate threat.
The Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR 206.225) require that eligible emergency protective measures must eliminate or lessen immediate threats to lives, public health or safety, or eliminate or lessen immediate threats of significant additional damage to improved public or private property through measures which are cost effective. In its request for a resolution authorizing the removal of material from the landslide mass submitted to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, LADPW states, Should this material not be removed, rainfall will likely trigger a catastrophic mudslide which could cause damage to persons and property on or near Las Flores Canyon Road.
The presumption made by the Applicant was not only that a catastrophic mudslide was a likely event with additional rainfall, but that damage would occur that would exceed the costs associated with preventing the occurrence. The fact that no mudslides were triggered by rainfall that continued to occur several months after the declared event, which did not even create the need for debris removal from Las Flores Canyon Road, does not support an argument that emergency protective measures in excess of $3.5 million dollars were necessary and cost effective. The Applicant has not provided any additional justification that these proposed measures are necessary and cost effective as emergency protection.
CONCLUSION:
The Applicant has not demonstrated that an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road existed as a result of the damage to Hume Road. It was noted that rainfall continued to occur several months after the declared event, but this did not produce any additional failures or even create the need for debris removal from Las Flores Canyon Road. The Applicants proposed measures are designed to address potential long-term problems rather than Thadditional justification that these proposed measures are necessary and cost effective as emergency protection. This supports FEMAs original determination that the landslide did not constitute an immediate threat to Las Flores Canyon Road; therefore, the appeal is denied.
Last updated