alert - warning

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

Slope Failure

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1646-DR
ApplicantMarin County
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#041-99041-00
PW ID#Project Worksheet 828
Date Signed2008-06-02T04:00:00
Citation: FEMA-1646-DR-CA; Marin County; PW 828

Cross
Reference: Landslides, Pre-Disaster Condition

Summary: As a result of severe spring rainstorms, a slope failure occurred on an embankment in Marin County (Applicant). Storm water runoff resulted in a slope failure that damaged the road surfaces on Idlewood Road and Crown Road. FEMA prepared PW 828 for $417,707 to stabilize the slope and repair the damaged roads. Based on investigations by the Applicant’s geotechnical consultants, FEMA determined that Public Assistance funding was not eligible to stabilize the failed slope due to evidence of a pre-existing slip plane observed during the technical investigations and records of a landslide event that occurred at the site in 1982.

In its first appeal, the Applicant claimed that the slope had not failed during four previous disasters. Records of a landslide 24 years earlier did not prove that the site was unstable. The Deputy Regional Administrator denied the Applicant’s first appeal based on its determination that the geotechnical investigations demonstrated that the 2006 slope failure occurred on a pre-existing plane of weakness in the bedrock.

In its second appeal, the Applicant provided an email dated September 18, 2007, from its geotechnical consultant that stated that its borings and other site inspections were taken after the 2006 slide event had occurred and did not show evidence of active landslide topography. The Applicant reiterated its position that the reference to slide activity from 1982 demonstrated stability for two decades rather than instability at the site.

Issues: Was the slope failure a result of the disaster?

Findings: No.

Rationale: 44 CFR §206.223; FEMA Response and Recovery Directorate Policy 9524.2, Landslide Policy Relating to Public Facilities, dated November 17, 1999.

Second Appeal–Marin County, FEMA-1646-DR-CA

Appeal Letter

June 2, 2008

Paul Jacks
Governor’s Authorized Representative
Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
Response and Recovery Division
3650 Schriever Avenue
Mather, CA 95655

Re: Second Appeal–Marin County, PA ID 041-99041-00, Slope Failure
FEMA-1646-DR-CA, Project Worksheet (PW) 828

Dear Mr. Jacks:

This is in response to your letter dated November 26, 2007, forwarding and supporting the Marin County’s (Applicant) appeal of the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of $417,707 for slope stabilization at the intersection of Idlewood Road and Crown Road.

Severe rainstorms from March 29, 2006, through April 16, 2006, resulted in significant storm water runoff from the uphill side of a slope in Marin County. Storm water drained across Idlewood Road and down the adjacent earthen embankment resulting in a slope failure that damaged the road surfaces of Idlewood Road and Crown Road. FEMA prepared PW 828 for $417,707, to repair the roadways and stabilize the failed slope. However, FEMA denied funding because it determined that the slope failure was not the result of the disaster but was due to a pre-existing slide plane found below the site during the geotechnical investigations. If a site is unstable, the Applicant is responsible for stabilizing the site. After the site is stabilized, the cost to restore the facility is eligible.

In its first appeal dated December 1, 2006, the Applicant provided a Cal Engineering & Geology (CE&G) draft report dated August 4, 2006; a Miller Pacific Engineering Group (MPEG) report dated August 25, 2006; and a CE&G report dated November 30, 2006. The Applicant argued that there had been no evidence of instability at this site in the prior four major disasters declared for Marin County as a result of severe rainstorms and mudslides. In addition, a 1982 landslide referenced in the CE&G report does not demonstrate that the site was unstable. In a letter dated June 21, 2007, the Deputy Regional Administrator denied the Applicant’s first appeal based on its analysis of the CE&G and MPEG reports which demonstrated that the cause of the 2006 slope failure was a pre-existing plane of weakness within the highly sheared shale and mélange and sandstone bedrock.

In its second appeal dated September 18, 2007, the Applicant provided an email dated September 18, 2007, from MPEG that stated that its borings and other site inspections were taken after the 2006 slide event had occurred, and did not show evidence of active landslide topography. The Applicant reiterated its position that reference to slide activity from 1982 demonstrated stability for two decades rather than instability at the site.

The geotechnical investigations indicate the presence of colluvium, loose earth material that has accumulated at the base of the hill, which signifies marginally stable slopes that can become dynamic by disturbances such as road work or heavy storms. The MPEG field notes state that the conditions in borehole-5 are consistent with the inclinometer reading that showed that 28 feet below the surface a weak sliding plane existed within the rock. The presence of “very hard” rock at 26 feet below ground surface at borehole-1 suggests that the sliding plane coincided with the soil/rock interface at this location. The presence of colluvium and the weak sliding plane within the rock indicates that a deep-seated landslide had existed at the project site prior to the 2006 slide. The disaster re-triggered the movement of the already unstable slope resulting in the slope failure. The site was unstable prior to the 2006 disaster event.
I have reviewed all information submitted with the appeal, and have determined that the Deputy Regional Administrator’s decision in the first appeal is consistent with Public Assistance Program regulations and policies. Therefore, the Applicant’s second appeal is denied.

The Applicant may apply for Public Assistance funding for repairs to roads and other public facilities, once the slope has been stabilized by the Applicant. However, the Applicant did not submit documentation that demonstrates that the slope has been stabilized. If the Applicant can provide such documentation to the Region, a PW will be prepared to reimburse the Applicant for repair costs for non-Federal roads.

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

Sincerely,
/s/
Carlos J. Castillo
Assistant Administrator
Disaster Assistance Directorate

cc: Nancy Ward
Regional Administrator
FEMA Region IX