ASCE 41-13 Tier 2 Quantitative Seismic Analysis

1 Scope and Deliverables

Evaluation of the xxx buildings listed in “Exhibit xxxx” per ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers) 41-
13: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings.
1. The consultant shall complete a “Tier 2 Deficiency-based” or “Tier 3 Systematic” evaluation per ASCE
41-13 as required.
a. The consultant shall select the appropriate “Tier” per ASCE 41-13 section 3.3.1.

b. The consultant may proceed directly to a Tier-3 where appropriate.

c. For the purposes of establishing this scope, it may be assumed that the evaluation can be
based on “linear” analyses results.
d. If “linear” analysis results mandate repeating the evaluation using “nonlinear” analyses per
ASCE 41-13 section 7.3.1.1, the cost of “nonlinear” analyses need not be included in the
scope of this proposal.

e. In order to determine whether or not liquefaction is risk to the branch, the consultant will
provide a due-diligence level evaluation of the site for geotechnical purposes focusing on
liquefaction and related effects. The evaluation will consist of researching geotechnical
reports provided either by Citi, readily available geological and geo-hazard mapping, and
conducting a visit to the local building department to pull geotechnical reports for nearby
properties, where available, and as necessary.

The consultant shall review these documents, perform calculations and provide screening-
level conclusions of the potential for liquefaction to adversely affect the site.

f. The consultant shall evaluate the non-structural components per ASCE 41-13 Chapter 13
that could be observed with a reasonably practicable effort and that were labeled as “non-
conforming” or “unknown” during the Tier-1 screening.
g. The engineer in responsible charge of the consultant team assessing each building shall be
qualified to practice in the state/country in which the property in question is located.

2. The ground shaking hazard information for each building will be determined from U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS – www.usgs.gov) and/or Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP –
www.seismo.ethz.ch/GSHAP)

3. Building Data Collection:

a. Citi will provide access to any archive of drawings and information that they maintain.

b. Citi will arrange for access to be provided to any drawings and building information kept by
the landlord. Costs of reproduction or fees paid to landlord, original design architect or
engineer shall be reimbursable by Citi.
c. If sufficient information is not found in the Citi archive or from the landlord, the consultant
shall check the records of the local authority having jurisdiction to obtain any relevant
 information they might have. Permission of Citi or the landlord and Citi may be required in
these cases to gain access to these records. Citi will provide the consultant with these
written authorizations that may be required by the local building departments in order to
get access to the drawings. Costs of reproduction or fees paid to the local jurisdiction shall
be reimbursable by Citi.

d. Any fees or costs beyond consultant’s time to search, request and obtain building
information pertaining the scope of this work shall be reimbursable to the consultant.

e. If information is not available and quantitative conclusions are required by Citi, Citi shall pay
for the costs for any further required testing and inspection including the consultant’s
additional service fee to coordinate the testing and inspection program. This cost need not
be included in the fees for basic scope.

4. Meetings
a. A kick-off meeting will be set up with Citi to review the seismic assessment process and
achieve alignment with Citi’s objectives.
b. Weekly progress update email to Citi Project Manager of each region.

c. Progress update video conferences for each region to share preliminary findings and
observations.

d. After the issue of final reports, (1) meeting to conclude evaluation studies and discuss next
steps.

5. Reports (each considered as a “Deliverable”)

a. Each building will have an individual report with the following key information:

i. Pertinent Building Data

ii. Screening-level conclusions of the potential for liquefaction to adversely affect the
site.
iii. Structural Material Properties

iv. Description of the Analysis and Evaluation Strategy.

v. Structural Element Evaluation Results.

vi. Determination whether the site structure will achieve sufficient life safety level or
not.
vii. If the site does not have sufficient seismic life safety level, a conceptual list of any
seismic mitigation enhancements it would take for the site to achieve a sufficient life
safety level.

2 Bid Structure

The consultant’s proposal shall include:

1. Cost / timeline to perform above services for the xxx buildings listed in “Exhibit xxx”.

2. Include hourly billing rates for the various team members / functional skills to complete the
work above.

3. Please provide an estimate proposed schedule to completion.

4. Please provide relevant sample Tier 2/3 Seismic Evaluation Report with your submission.

5. Quotation on indicative/estimate (not to exceed cost) of a nonlinear analysis cost (for one
site/per site)

6. Quotation on indicative/estimate (not to exceed cost) of the consultant’s additional service fee
to coordinate the testing and inspection program if information is not available and quantitative
conclusions are required by Citi
7. Indicative list and costs (not to exceed cost) of potentially further required testing and
inspections if quantitative conclusions are required

8. Please provide resume and experience of key personnel with relevant experience.