Debris Monitoring Costs

March 5, 2010

Albert Ashwood

Governor’s Authorized Representative

State of Oklahoma Department of Emergency Management

P.O. Box 53365

Oklahoma City, OK  73152-3365

Re:  Second Appeal–City of Chandler, PA ID 081-71000-00, Debris Monitoring Costs,

       FEMA-1735-DR-OK, Project Worksheet (PW) 846

Dear Mr. Ashwood:

This letter is in response to your letter dated July 31, 2009, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of the City of Chandler (Applicant).  The Applicant is appealing the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of an additional $54,100 for debris monitoring services under PW 846.
Background

An ice storm from December 8, 2007, to January 3, 2008, deposited large quantities of vegetative debris, including hanging limbs and leaning trees, in the Applicant’s maintained and owned properties.  The Applicant awarded a contract to Danos and Curole Staffing (Danos) on January 5, 2008, to monitor debris removal operations.  The contract was a time and materials contract with a ceiling of $45,900.  On January 7, 2008, a team of FEMA and Oklahoma Department of Emergency Management (ODEM) employees surveyed the city and estimated the quantity of disaster-related debris to be 21,490 cubic yards (CY).  FEMA later revised the estimate upward to 28,042 CY using an average of debris estimates and inspections from ten other applicants in the same vicinity.  On January 18, 2008, the Applicant issued an addendum to its contract with Danos, authorizing an increase in total costs from $45,900 to $100,000.  FEMA prepared PW 846 for $45,900 on March 27, 2008, as a reasonable cost for debris monitoring based on the original estimate of 28,042 in debris.  On April 23, 2008, ODEM reviewed the Applicant’s documentation at closeout of PW 846 and observed that the Applicant was invoiced for $104,955 on the contract.  ODEM requested that FEMA prepare a PW to obligate an additional $54,100 for a total project cost of $100,000, the ceiling for the contract.  FEMA denied the request for an additional $54,100 for debris monitoring services.

The Applicant submitted its first appeal in a letter dated May 22, 2008, requesting an additional $54,100 for debris monitoring costs.  In a letter dated April 3, 2009, the Acting Regional Administrator denied the first appeal because he determined that $45,900 was the maximum amount allowed under the contract, and that this amount was reasonable for the estimated debris quantity of 28,042 CY. 

The Applicant submitted its second appeal in a letter dated April 24, 2009, which as forwarded to FEMA by ODEM on July 31, 2009.  In its second appeal, the Applicant argued that the increase is justified because additional monitoring work was necessary due to an increase in debris quantity.  The Applicant stated that the original contract amount was modified by an addendum, dated January 18, 2008, which increased the amount, not to exceed $100,000. 

Discussion

The ODEM auditors reviewed the Applicant’s documentation and identified $104,955 in contractor fees.  ODEM did not submit any information to demonstrate that it evaluated the work that the contractor performed for eligibility under the Public Assistance Program.  The Applicant’s contract with Danos states in part, “Field monitors will perform roving on-site, street-level work area inspections of debris cleanup and collection.  Field Monitors will also inspect and control debris collection utilizing manifest load tickets.  Field monitor responsibilities include:

·         Field monitor personnel at designated areas to check and verify information on debris removal

·         Monitor collection activity of trucks

·         Issue manifest load tickets at loading site for each load (emphasis added)

·         Properly monitor and record performance and productivity of debris removal crew…

·         Ensure only eligible debris is collected for loading and hauling

·         Ensure only eligible debris from approved public areas is loaded and removed….”

The Applicant requested reimbursement for the removal of 50,724 CY of disaster-related debris.  Based on irregularities that FEMA observed in the field and shared with the Applicant and ODEM, FEMA determined that only 28,042 CY were eligible disaster-related debris.  These irregularities included monitors routinely writing load tickets at the dump site instead of at the collection points and there were frequently no load monitors observed with debris haulers. 

The irregularities indicate that Danos did not perform its debris monitoring responsibilities in accordance with the contract.  Danos certified that the debris contractor removed 50,724 CY of eligible disaster-related debris, while FEMA determined that only 28,042 CY were eligible, over forty percent less.  Federal regulations and Public Assistance Program policy require eligible costs to be reasonable.  FEMA has determined that the original funding for monitoring services of $45,900 is reasonable for the volume of eligible debris removed.

Conclusion

I have reviewed the information submitted with the second appeal and have determined that the Acting 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/

Elizabeth A. Zimmerman

Assistant Administrator

Disaster Assistance Directorate

cc:   Tony Russell

       Regional Administrator

       FEMA Region VI