Appeal Brief | Appeal Letter | Back
Second Appeal Letter
PA ID# 037-99037-00; Los Angeles County
PW ID# 3070; Latigo Canyon Road Repair
October 17, 2007
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 037-99037-00Latigo Canyon Road Repair
, FEMA-1577-DR-CA, PW #3070
Dear Mr. Jacks:
This is in response to your letter dated December 14, 2006, 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) decision not to revise the scope of work and increase funding for the repair of damage to a section of Latigo Canyon Road.
Heavy rainfall in January 2005 damaged five sections of Latigo Canyon Road in the Malibu area of Los Angeles County. FEMA prepared Project Worksheet 3070 for $196,941 to repair the road. The scope of work for Site 1 included a 95-foot soldier pile wall with timber lagging. The Applicant submitted a first appeal to the California Office of Emergency Services (OES) on March 30, 2006, requesting that FEMA revise the scope of work at Site 1 to include a 100-foot reinforced concrete crib wall instead of the soldier pile wall. It stated that lowhanging power lines precluded the construction of the soldier pile wall. The cost estimate for the revised scope of work was $412,382. The Acting Regional Director denied the appeal on August 14, 2006, because the Applicant did not submit adequate justification to support its request, including a demonstration that the proposed scope of work was cost effective.
The Applicant submitted a second appeal to OES on October 24, 2006, reiterating its request for a change to the scope of work at Site 1 and a corresponding increase in project cost to $412,382 due to physical constraints at the site. The Applicant submitted a geotechnical report dated April 20, 2006, a set of plans for the reinforced concrete crib wall, a line item estimate for the crib wall dated October 19, 2006, and a cost comparison of several types of soil retaining systems. In addition, the Applicant stated that the timber crib wall that FEMA proposed was not acceptable because the buried timber members are subject to rot and cannot be inspected for deterioration, the toxic chemicals used for preservatives treatment leech and contaminate environmentally sensitive areas, and the exposed faces of timber walls are subject to risks associated with wildfires.
We have reviewed all information submitted with the second appeal and determined that the Applicants request to construct a reinforced concrete crib wall at Site 1 is reasonable and cost-effective. Therefore, I am approving the appeal. The Regional Administrator will take appropriate action to implement this determination.
Please inform the Applicant of my decision. My determination constitutes the final decision on this matter as set forth in 44 CFR §206.206.
Carlos J. Castillo
Disaster Assistance Directorate
cc: Nancy Ward
FEMA Region IX