Alhambra Municipal Court Elevator Penthouse

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1008-DR
ApplicantLos Angeles County Courts
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#037-91032
PW ID#33432 (07421)
Date Signed1999-06-07T04:00:00
Citation: FEMA-1008-DR-CA; Los Angeles County Courts; DSR 33432 (07421)-Alhambra Municipal Court Elevator Penthouse

Cross Reference: Eligible Damages, Engineering Evaluation, Structural Damages, Eligible Engineering Costs

Summary: The Los Angeles County Courts (County) Alhambra Municipal Court Building was damaged as a result of the Northridge Earthquake. A post earthquake inspection documented damage throughout the building but the only significant structural damage evident was in the elevator penthouse. DSR 07421 was prepared for $2,240 to fund an Architectural and Engineering (A&E) study to determine the full extent of damages to the penthouse only and to recommend repair alternatives. The County did not concur with the scope of the DSR and requested that the DSR fund a study of the entire building, not just the penthouse. However, FEMA ruled that a study of the entire building was not warranted given minor apparent damage to the rest of the building. The County contracted a structural consulting firm to study the damaged penthouse, and recommend repair alternatives and determine costs. As a result of this A&E study, a separate DSR (63081) was obligated for $53,904 to fund the repairs to the elevator penthouse. The County submitted a request for a supplement to DSR 07421 in the amount of $27,585 to cover the actual costs of the A&E study of the elevator penthouse ($29,825). FEMA prepared DSR 33432 for $27,585 to fund the actual costs, however, during review the DSR was denied because FEMA believed that the study had been performed on the entire building and not just the penthouse. The County submitted a first appeal documenting that the A&E study had only been performed on the penthouse. In its response to the first appeal, FEMA agreed that the study had been of the penthouse only, but denied funding of the DSR because the A&E costs were deemed unreasonable (more than 50% of the repair costs). In its second appeal, the County has stated that the study costs were reasonable and actual, and has submitted documentation including the A&E report, and provides the hours billed per task by its consultant engineers and architects, as well as prevailing earthquake engineering rates for the Los Angeles area.

Issues:
  1. Was an A&E study of the elevator penthouse eligible for FEMA funding?
  2. Is the $29,825 cost for the A&E study, fully eligible, given the hourly breakdown provided by the County?
Findings:
  1. Yes. FEMA funded an A&E study of the elevator penthouse in order to determine the extent of damages and to recommend repairs options and estimate costs.
  2. No. The hourly breakdown of costs for the A&E study reflect an excessive amount of involvement of senior personnel, and disciplines that were not necessary at every phase of the study. The damage was relatively minor, readily apparent, and predominantly to exposed light steel framing members and wall facades that could have been assessed for less cost. FEMA has determined a reasonable A&E study cost to be $12,341.
Rationale: Pursuant to the FEMA Public Assistance Guide, FEMA will pay for reasonable and actual costs incurred for basic engineering services.

Appeal Letter

June 7, 1999

D.A. Christian
Governor's Authorized Representative
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
74 North Pasadena Avenue, West Annex, Second Floor
Pasadena, California 91103

RE: Second Appeal - Los Angeles County Courts, Alhambra Court Elevator Penthouse, DR-1008-CA, DSR 33432 (supplemental to DSR 07421)

Dear Mr. Christian:

This is in response to your October 21, 1998, submittal of the Los Angeles County Court's (County's) subject second appeal. The Disaster Survey Report (DSR) was initially approved for $2,240 to fund an Architectural and Engineering (A&E) study of the elevator penthouse of the Alhambra Municipal Court Building, which was damaged by the Northridge earthquake. The County did not concur with the scope of the DSR and requested that the DSR fund a study of the entire building, not just the penthouse. However, FEMA ruled that a study of the entire building was not warranted given minor apparent damage to the rest of the building. After the A&E study of the penthouse was completed, and funds were obligated for its repair (DSR 63081 - $53,904), the County submitted a request for a supplement to DSR 07421 in the amount of $27,585 to cover the actual cost of the penthouse A&E study ($29,825). FEMA prepared DSR 33432 to fund the actual costs, but during review, the DSR was ruled ineligible because FEMA believed that the study had been performed on the entire building and not just the penthouse. The County submitted a first appeal documenting that the study had only been performed on the penthouse. In its response to the first appeal, FEMA agreed that the study had been of the penthouse, but denied funding of the DSR because the A&E costs were deemed to be unreasonable (greater than 50% of the repair costs). In its second appeal the County has stated that the study costs were actual and reasonable, and has submitted documentation which provides a detailed breakdown of its A&E costs. The County's documentation includes the A&E Report, and provides a listing of the hours billed per task during the A&E study by its consultant, as well as prevailing earthquake engineering rates for the Los Angeles area.

After a thorough review of this appeal, it is evident that this project involved only repairs to a relatively minor portion of the courthouse building. For this type of repair, it generally would not be appropriate for a separate A&E study to be performed. Because an A&E study was approved for this project, the study will remain eligible. However, the costs of a number of the specific items comprising the study have been determined to be unreasonable considering the scope of the repair work involved, and have been reduced accordingly. For example, we do not believe that the five separate subcontractors/disciplines were needed for every project phase and meeting; there were excessive meetings with the principal employees of the various firms involved, when more junior staff would have been appropriate; the cost to research minimal code issues was too high for experienced firms; and finally, the cost for preparing a replacement cost estimate for the penthouse was not warranted given that the penthouse is a very small part of a larger facility (courthouse) that clearly was not 50% damaged. In addition to the above items, a number of other elements of the study (as provided by the County's consultant) were reduced in cost, given the nature of the project and the report that was produced. It is evident that the $2,240 originally authorized by FEMA could not have adequately funded a study of sufficient depth or detail to address the damaged court building penthouse. However, 364 billed hours are not a reasonable amount of labor to study a small elevator penthouse, considering the deliverable document produced by the study. Therefore, looking at each task and subtask, FEMA has determined a more reasonable number of billed hours (see enclosed table), which results in an eligible cost of $12,341 (151 hours) when calculated at the same average cost per hour of $81.73.

For the reasons stated above, I find partially in favor of the applicant. By copy of this letter, I request that the Federal Coordinating Officer prepare a supplemental DSR for $10,101 (total eligible cost of $12,341) to fund reasonable costs of the completed A&E study of the elevator penthouse of the Alhambra Municipal Court Building. Please inform the applicant of my determination. In accordance with the appeal procedure governing appeal decisions made on or after May 8, 1998, my decision constitutes the final decision on this matter. The current appeal procedure was published as a final rule in the Federal Register on April 8, 1998. It amends 44 CFR 206.206.

Sincerely,

/S/

Lacy E. Suiter
Executive Associate Director
Response and Recovery Directorate

Enclosure

cc: Christina Lopez
Federal Coordinating Officer
Northridge Long-Term Recovery Area Office
Last updated