Environmental monitoring correspondence regarding remediation contractor, March 2003

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

fill THACHER associates were not licensed asbestos handlers. TA is of the opinion that delivery of materials is part of the Contractor’s overhead. This item resulted in over billing in the amount of $5,332.06. (Exhibit 14)

1. Certified payroll, initially certified on various dates by Mr. Wolfman, was modified and re-certified by Mr. Wolfman on October 8, 2002, and provided to TA as support documentation (Exhibit 16). This modification (of hours worked and labor rates) and re-certification of the payroll raises the issue of credibility of the certification.

Materials

TA reviewed back-up documentation pertaining to materials purchased and invoiced to the project. Due to the complexity of the project, tracking of the used materials retroactively is difficult, if at all possible. TA did, however, review the rates charged and compared them to the Safeway supplier’s invoices. Our analysis indicates that Safeway’s charges are fair and reasonable.

Safeway invoiced the project for laboratory analysis performed by ATC Associates, Inc. TA reviewed a representative portion of the submitted documentation relevant to OSHA compliance and industry standards and compared them to daily time sheets and certified payroll reports. The laboratory analysis represent samples collected by Safeway personnel, allegedly to comply with OSHA regulations related to worker exposure. The project administration coordinated and implemented an extensive worker protection and monitoring program for all personnel employed on the project. Due to this initiative, TA is of the opinion that the additional sampling performed by Safeway is redundant and should not be invoiced to the project. In addition, in response to TA’s inquiry, Safeway provided an extensive documentation of field data sheets and sample analysis. Our analysis of the provided documentation revealed that Safeway collected and had analyzed more samples than invoiced to the project. Furthermore, records indicate that samples were collected on personnel that, according to the daily time sheets and certified payroll reports, were not at the site at the time the samples were collected. This discovery further substantiates TA’s concern with regard to invoicing private work to the project. (Exhibit 17)

Equipment

a. During the course of the project, Safeway sub-contracted services from New York Breaking Company, Inc., to perform minor demolition. Rates charged for Other Tier Contractors were invoiced at 10% plus 5% as opposed to 5%, as dictated by the site policy implemented by the DDC (Exhibit 18). This resulted in over billing in the amount of $9,842.80. (Exhibit 19)

15

NYC-WTC_000174305