alert - warning

This page has not been translated into Deutsch. Visit the Deutsch page for resources in that language.

Road Repair

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter Appeal Analysis

Appeal Brief

Disaster1930-DR-IA
ApplicantMonroe County Engineer
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#135-02B52-00
PW ID#1251 and 1314
Date Signed2012-03-22T04:00:00

Citation:         FEMA-1930-DR-IA, Monroe County Engineer (Applicant), Road Repair

Cross-

Reference:      Roads

Summary:      As a result of severe flooding, the Applicant sustained damage to numerous gravel roadways within its jurisdiction. FEMA worked with the Applicant to determine the eligible scope of work on Project Worksheets (PWs) 1251 and 1314. In developing the cost estimates, the Applicant calculated the quantities of aggregate with a 1.89 tons per cubic yard (tcy) conversion factor. The Applicant justified use of the 1.89 factor based on the 140 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) density for Class ‘A’ Crushed Stones found in the Iowa Department of Transportation’s Design Manual’s guidelines for estimating quantities of granular fill. FEMA’s final reviewers adjusted the PWs to authorize only a standard density of 104 pcf for uncompacted gravel which results in a 1.4 tcy conversion factor for aggregate material loosely deposited on the damaged roadways. In the first appeal, the Applicant stated that using 1.4 tcy would not return the roads to their pre-disaster design as gravel placed on the roads is compressed by traffic to a compacted density of 140 pcf. Therefore, the Applicant asserts that using the lower density conversion factor will result in reimbursement of a significantly smaller quantity of gravel than was washed away by the flood waters.  FEMA denied the first appeal on March 31, 2011,stating that pursuant to 44 CFR §206.201(j), permanent work to restore an eligible facility must be performed through repairs or replacement, to restore an eligible facility on the basis of its pre-disaster design and current applicable standards. The Regional Administrator cited the densities listed in the Pocket Reference - 1st edition, by Thomas Glover as the recognized reference throughout Iowa and FEMA Region VII. She concluded that the conversion factor of 1.4 tcy was appropriate. In a second appeal, the Applicant reiterates its arguments from the first appeal and asserts that the density listed in the Pocket Reference does not represent an industry standard.

Issue:              Is the use of a compacted aggregate density of 1.89 tcy reasonable and appropriate for calculating the amount of aggregate needed to return the Applicant’s gravel roads to pre-disaster design?

Finding:          No. The Applicant did not sufficiently establish that a 1.89 conversion factor was appropriate for the aggregate used in accomplishing the eligible work.

Rationale:       44 CFR §206.201(j), 44 CFR §206.226 (d), DAP 9527.4 Construction Codes and Standards

Appeal Letter

March 22, 2012

Mark Schouten

Administrator

Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division

7105 NW 70th Avenue

Camp Dodge, Bldg W-4

Johnston, Iowa 50131-1824

Re:  Second Appeal-Monroe County Engineer, PA ID 135-02B52-00, Road Repair, FEMA-1930-DR-IA, Project Worksheets (PWs) 1251 and 1314

Dear Mr. Schouten:

This letter is in response to a June 23, 2011, letter from your office which transmitted the second appeal of the two referenced PWs on behalf of the Monroe County Engineer (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) decision to reduce the quantity of aggregate approved for several gravel roadway repair projects and deny a total of $13,170.44 in associated costs requested under the referenced PWs.

As explained in the enclosed analysis, there is no basis for FEMA to reimburse the Applicant for the costs of compacted gravel when the approved scopes of work and the accepted method of gravel replacement throughout the State of Iowa entail spreading uncompacted aggregate loosely on top of the road bed through grading or tailgate delivery. I have reviewed all of the information submitted with the appeals and have determined that the Regional Administrator’s decision in the first appeal is consistent with Public Assistance regulations and policy. Accordingly, I am denying the second appeal.

Please inform the Applicant of my decision. This determination constitutes the final decision on this matter pursuant to 44 CFR §206.206, Appeals.

Sincerely,

/s/

Deborah Ingram
Assistant Administrator
Recovery Directorate
cc:  Beth Freeman

Regional Administrator

FEMA Region VII


Appeal Analysis

Background

As a result of severe flooding associated with FEMA-1930-DR-IA, Monroe County sustained damage to numerous gravel roadways within its jurisdiction. In developing the estimated quantities of aggregate and associated costs, the Monroe County Engineer (Applicant) used a 1.89 tons per cubic yard (tcy) conversion factor derived from the Iowa Department of Transportation’s (IDOT) Design Manual’s guidelines for estimating quantities of granular materials. The Design Manual identifies 140 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) as the density for Class ‘A’ Crushed Stone. The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) reviewers adjusted the PWs’ cost estimates using a 1.4 tcy conversion factor based on a standard gravel density of 104 pcf.

First Appeal

The Applicant submitted a first appeal letter, dated February 1, 2011, to the Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division (Grantee). In the letter, the Applicant asserted that the material eroded from the damage roads’ surfaces was compacted gravel and maintained that the IDOT Design Manual value of 140 pcf is the applicable density for compacted gravel. The Grantee forwarded the appeal to FEMA on February 24, 2011, but did not support the claim that 1.89 tcy was an appropriate conversion factor. Instead, the Grantee concluded that 1.4 tcy was the applicable conversion factor as it is recommended by both the Pocket Reference - 1st edition, by Thomas Glover, which is the recognized reference throughout Iowa and FEMA Region VII, and by the manager of L&W Quarries Inc., a source of general aggregate in an adjacent county.

On March 31, 2011, FEMA denied the Applicant’s first appeal on the grounds that 1.4 tcy is an industry standard and is typically used for gravel throughout Iowa and FEMA Region VII. The Regional Administrator noted that the Applicant did not submit documentation demonstrating that the design of the damaged roadways required compaction to a 1.89 tcy specification. Therefore, the method of repairs were assumed to be consistent with the standard practice in Iowa of reclaiming or spreading new aggregate loosely on the top of the road-bed through grading or tailgate delivery. The reimbursement of loose gravel with the two PWs was consistent with 44 CFR §206.201(j), which defines permanent work as restorative work that must be performed through repairs or replacement, to restore an eligible facility on the basis of its pre-disaster design and current applicable standards. The Regional Administrator concluded that the Pocket Reference’s conversion factor of 1.4 tcy was appropriate for the restoration of the Applicant’s roads to pre-disaster design.

Second Appeal

In a second appeal, submitted on April 19, 2011, the Applicant explained that repairs to the damaged roads consisted of depositing and grading uncompacted gravel and allowing traffic to compact the gravel over time in stages. The Applicant disputed that 1.4 tcy is an industry standard, citing both the preface to the Pocket Reference, which states that it is only a “general guide” and the L&W Quarries Inc. manager who clarified that 1.4 tcy is an appropriate conversion factor for uncompacted gravel. The Applicant stressed that flooding had washed compacted stone, not loose stone, from the secondary roads. As compacted stone is of greater density, the Applicant requested reimbursement based on the IDOT Design Manual’s value of 140 pcf for compacted road stone. In support of the request, the Applicant cited the Public Assistance Guide, (FEMA 322) June 2007, page 104, which states that “[s]tate or local data from previously completed projects” is the most preferred source for unit costs.

The Grantee forwarded the Applicant’s second appeal to FEMA with a letter dated June 23, 2011. The Grantee again recognized 1.4 tcy as the appropriate and applicable conversion factor for loose gravel and stressed that the accepted method of gravel road repair in Iowa involves spreading loose aggregate on the surface of the road through grading or tailgate delivery.

Discussion

The introduction to the IDOT Design Manual explains, “The intent of this manual is to provide design guidance to designers to assist with projects involving the Primary highway and Interstate systems.” Given that the guidelines are intended for the design of paved road systems, the 140 pcf density refers to substantially compacted aggregates. For comparison, Table 5-17 of the Geotechnical Aspects of Pavements Reference Manual published by the United States Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration shows that a standard Proctor test of well graded gravel, USCS soil classification GW, yields a maximum dry density range of 125 to 134 pcf. Therefore, the cited densities in the IDOT Design Manual are expected of aggregates mechanically compressed by vibratory roller or other appropriate compacting equipment.

In developing eligible cost estimates, FEMA considers costs that are reasonable and necessary to accomplish the eligible scope of work. For types of work that are routinely accomplished by the Applicant, normal procedures followed in performing non-disaster work should not be altered because of the potential for reimbursement through Federal disaster assistance grants.

For the PWs addressed in the Applicant’s appeal, the eligible scopes of work entail spreading uncompacted aggregate loosely on the roads’ surfaces. This manner of repair is consistent with the Applicant’s usual method of gravel replacement on secondary roads and according to the Grantee is the standard approach in Iowa. It is important to note that the Applicant does not claim that the facilities were constructed in accordance with the IDOT Design Manual’s specifications. Nor has the Applicant provided documentation to show that compactors were required by the design or necessary for the repair of the secondary roads. Rather, the Applicant simply asserts that the gravel roadways were compacted to a density of 140 pcf over time by traffic. While traffic over uncompacted gravel can be expected to result in areas of increased density, it can also reduce gravel density by spreading loose gravel along and off of the road’s surface. Nevertheless, it is unlikely to result in an average density consistent with a uniformly compacted aggregate as could be accomplished through proper use of a vibratory compactor.

Conclusion

Throughout the State of Iowa, the accepted method of gravel replacement is reclaiming or spreading new aggregate loosely on top of the road bed which is done by grading or tailgate delivery. This is a practice that is followed by the Applicant and has not been refuted by the Applicant. As the scopes of eligible work to repair the damaged roads involve depositing uncompacted gravel loosely on the road bed through grading or tailgate delivery, the appropriate and applicable conversion factor is 1.4 tcy.