Emergency procurement letter for rooftop work, May 2002

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document I :i J ■ \\ V ’'-a „ ...J ireS

!• ’J «'-• ‘fl Is May 7, 2002

'William H. Thompson, Jr Comptroller irivirQnmeri^l:^'"’' Municipal Building ^Protection One Centre Street (unction Boulevard^ tq, New York, New York 10007 BrF“shing,'New York jAi.-,' .4 > ’’ -« ATTN: Stanley Rosanoff i'H3 73-51'08 Sir V < as. t '93 r.’: f-j Michael A. Cardozo {y Y'., -VY-? Corporation Counsel I t,Chris§hdr O:'Wafd < 's 59 Maiden Lane Commissioner,' .> New York, New York 10038 A) ATTN: Steven Stein Cushman jj V-.-

Re: Declaration of Emergency FS / agency chief Contractino officer .. Written Determination ;7Tei'(718)596-3300 Contract ROF-REM2 y/Fax (718) 5954278 Is ; [email protected] PIN 82602WTCROF2

Gentlemen;

This letter shall serve as the Written Determination required by §3-06(c)(3) of the Procurement Policy Board Rules (“PPB Rules”) for the procurement conducted 1. £ > «■ , ■*; pursuant to §3-06 of the PPB Rules under a Declaration of Emergency for Rooftop and Facade Remediation in Sector Two in the Vicinity of . THE World Trade Center Site. (Contract “ROF-REM2"). On March 19, * 2002, oral approval was provided by the Comptroller and by the Corporation Counsel. The Declaration of EMERGENCY was signed by former DEP i:. Commissioner Joel A. Miele Sr., P.E. on March 20, 2002. On April 2, 2002, written approval was provided by the Comptroller and by the Corporation Counsel.

The following narrative is provided pursuant to §3-06(e)(3) of the PPB Rules.

Introduction: As a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, buildings J, in the area surrounding the World Trade Center site were damaged and destroyed. In the aftermath of the attacks, in order to minimize further destruction and implications of the attack, various remediation activities were immediately instituted. As a follow-up to such activities performed in October and November, 2001, DEP, in conjunction with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the New York State Department of Labor (“DOL”), performed site visits at buildings in the surrounding vicinity. Although many buildings were found to be fi-ee of debris, the assessments found some buildings containing debris with various dispersal patters, including isolated debris areas at ■

( www.nyc.gov/dep ) the perimeters of roofs, at the base of parapet walls and in gutters. Debris was ( 7 18 0 E P - H E LP:

NYC-WfC_00dl53600“