alert - warning

This page has not been translated into 简体中文. Visit the 简体中文 page for resources in that language.

Damaged Ceiling Replacement

Appeal Brief Appeal Letter

Appeal Brief

DisasterFEMA-1008-DR
ApplicantUniversity of Southern California, Clinical Science Center
Appeal TypeSecond
PA ID#037-90007
PW ID#20071
Date Signed1997-12-16T05:00:00
Citation: Appeal Analysis; Second Appeal;University of Southern California (USC); Damaged Ceiling Replacement; FEMA-1008-DR-CA, PA 037-90007

Cross-Reference: DSR 20071; Northridge Earthquake; Ceiling Damage; Documented Justification

Facts: As a result of the Northridge Earthquake on January 17, 1994, the Clinical Science Center at the USC experienced minor ceiling damage. FEMA inspected the facility and prepared DSR 12114 on June 29, 1994, for $25,822 for miscellaneous repairs to ceiling tiles, light diffusers, shelving and wall cracks, and plaster repair for 1,000 square feet (SF) of ceiling damage. The DSR was based on the recommendations of an engineering report provided by a subgrantee's consultant. The State OES forwarded a subgrantee's request on May 17, 1995, for a supplement to DSR 12114, to include removal and replacement of the existing ceiling base and all light fixtures. The request was based on a second engineering report from another subgrantee's consultant. FEMA/OES jointly re-inspected the building on July 14, 1995, and prepared DSR 20071 for $152,955 to provide for 16,000 SF of ceiling plaster removal, replacement and painting, repair of ceiling frames and light fixtures, architectural services, and a 3% inspection fee. Upon review, FEMA reduced DSR 20071 to $0 because plaster removal, replacement and painting should be applied to the 1,000 SF identified under DSR 12114, replacement of light fixtures was not disaster-related, and architectural and inspection services were unnecessary for the type of work under DSR 20071. OES transmitted the subgrantee's first appeal on June 18, 1996. The applicant contended, based on the two engineering reports, that the plaster ceiling has detached and fallen and requested funding to remove and replace 12,600 SF of plaster ceiling. The Disaster Recovery Manager denied the appeal on March 6, 1997, because a joint FEMA/OES team re-inspected the facility on August 6, 1996, and reported no additional ceiling damage beyond the 1,000 SF of plaster ceiling already identified under DSR 12114. On July 18, 1997, OES transmitted the subgrantee's second appeal. The subgrantee continues to argue that the ceiling requires replacement rather than repair and claims that there is a critical need to address this life safety issue. The appeal includes a letter from a consultant stating that loose wood lath, not properly attached to the ceiling joists, were observed at many locations and present a life safety hazard.

Issue: Does the consultant's letter include documented justification of loose wood lath?

Findings: No. The consultant's letter only indicates that loose wood lath were observed and therefore present a life safety hazard. No documentation supporting the existence of additional earthquake damage to the ceiling beyond the original 1,000 SF of plaster damage identified under DSR 12114 was submitted.

Rationale: Pursuant to 44 CFR 206.206, the appeal shall contain documented justification supporting the subgrantee's position.

Appeal Letter

December 16, 1997

Mr. Gilbert Najera
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Disaster Assistance Program Branch
74 North Pasadena Avenue, West Annex, Second Floor
Pasadena, California 91103-3678

Dear Mr. Najera:

This is in response to your letter dated July 18, 1997, to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). With that letter, you forwarded a second appeal of damage survey report (DSR) 20071 under FEMA-1008-DR-CA on behalf of the University of Southern California (USC). The University argues that the ceiling at the Clinical Science Center requires replacement rather than repair and claims that there is a critical need to address this life safety issue.

As a result of the Northridge Earthquake on January 17, 1994, the Clinical Science Center at the USC experienced minor ceiling damage. The subgrantee contracted with Brandow & Johnson Associates (BJA) on February 1, 1994, to perform a structural engineering survey. The engineering report included several recommendations and noted "the ceiling damage can be repaired and the building can remain operational." The State Office of Emergency Services (OES) and FEMA jointly inspected the building on June 29, 1994, and prepared DSR 12114 for $25,822 based on the recommendations of the BJA report. The scope of work of DSR 12114 included repair/replacement of damaged ceiling tiles, shelving and light diffusers, patch and plaster wall cracks, painting, and plaster repair for 1,000 square feet (SF) of ceiling damage. On May 17, 1995, OES forwarded the subgrantee's request for a supplement to DSR 12114 to increase the scope of work based on a ceiling system seismic upgrade research performed by Terrell D. Nemnich, AIA (TN). The architectural firm, employed by the subgrantee, recommended the removal and replacement of the existing plaster ceiling base and the upgrade/replacement of all light fixtures.

FEMA/OES re-inspected the building on July 14, 1995, and prepared DSR 20071 for $152,955 to provide for 16,000 SF of ceiling plaster removal, replacement and painting; strengthening of ceiling frames; re-hanging and bracing of 20 light fixtures; architectural services; and a 3% construction inspection fee. DSR 20071 included the deletion of $9,600 for ceiling plaster repair already covered under DSR 12114. Upon review, FEMA reduced DSR 20071 to $0 for the following reasons: 1) plaster removal, replacement and painting should be applied to the actual 1,000 SF already covered under DSR 12114; 2) replacement of light fixture was not earthquake-related and not eligible; 3) architectural services were unnecessary for the type of work under DSR 20071; and 4) construction inspection was not normally required for the type of work described in DSR 20071.

On June 18, 1996, OES transmitted the subgrantee's first appeal to FEMA. The subgrantee contended, based on the reports from BJA and TN, that the plaster ceiling had simply detached and fallen, and requested funding to remove and replace 12,600 SF of plaster ceiling. OES recommended a re-inspection of the ceiling be conducted to determine a reasonable and satisfactory scope of work and reinstatement of the architect's fees. The Disaster Recovery Manager (DRM) denied the first appeal on March 6, 1997, because a joint FEMA/OES team re-inspected the facility on August 6, 1996, and reported no additional ceiling damage beyond the 1,000 SF of plaster already covered under DSR 12114. The team was unable to identify actual damage to the ceiling structure. Both of the subgrantee's engineering reports conclude that the ceiling suffered damage during the earthquake, however, the extent of the actual eligible earthquake-related damage is unclear. The TN report does not provide documentation of any actual structural ceiling damage. It only includes options to upgrade the current ceiling system to meet current codes and standards. It was also noted that the subgrantee removed most ceiling tiles prior to the Northridge Earthquake, suggesting possible repairs/replacement of the ceiling was being considered prior to the event. The DRM concluded that the ceiling does not meet the definition of a suspended ceiling system, and therefore the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding between FEMA and OES dated March 3, 1994, and titled "Expediting Infrastructure Grants (DR-1008-CA)," and those of the amendment dated July 26, 1994, are not triggered.

On July 18, 1997, OES transmitted, but did not support, the subgrantee's second appeal to the Executive Associate Director. The subgrantee continues to argue that the ceiling requires replacement rather than repair and claims that there is a critical need to address this life safety issue. The appeal includes a letter from BJA dated May 20, 1997, stating that loose wood lath, not properly attached to the ceiling joists, were observed at many locations and present a life safety hazard. The subgrantee also requests that the DSR includes necessary fees for the architectural/engineering team to develop a scope of work and construction documents for the project. The damaged ceiling has been inspected by a joint FEMA/OES team, and it was determined that no additional ceiling damage beyond the 1,000 SF identified in DSR 12114 was evident. The FEMA/OES team never observed the loose wood lath during the inspections. The BJA letter dated May 20, 1997, submitted with this appeal, does not include documented justification of loose wood lath not properly attached to the ceiling joists. Pursuant to Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 206.206, the appeal shall contain documented justification supporting the subgrantee's position. The subgrantee did not submit any documentation supporting the existence of additional earthquake damage to the ceiling beyond the original 1,000 SF of plaster damage identified in DSR 12114. Furthermore, the scope of work under DSR 12114 would restore the facility to its pre-disaster condition. Any work beyond that identified under DSR 12114 would constitute an improvement, which would not be eligible for FEMA assistance.

We have reviewed the information submitted with the second appeal and have determined that the Disaster Recovery Manager's decision is consistent with program statute and regulations. Therefore, I am denying the second appeal.

Please inform the applicant of my determination. The applicant may submit a third appeal to the Director of FEMA. The appeal must be submitted through your office and the Regional Director within 60 days of receipt of this determination.

Sincerely,
/S/
Lacy E. Suiter
Executive Associate Director
Response and Recovery Directorate

cc: Leland Wilson
Federal Coordinating Officer
FEMA-1008-DR-CA