NYC Law Department release
Independent mirror · updated as the City releases more · v1.3.2
☕ Buy me a coffee
← Document results/Unboxed/No folder label
Document / 1 page

NYC-WTC_000231722

Label derived from the City's folder field. The City does not supply document titles.NYC-WTC_000231722
Page image
Scanned page image, NYC-WTC_000231722
OCR text

OCR status: ok · source: pdftotext

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

THACHER ASSOCIATES

Memorandum Privileged and Confidential

TO: Steve Pasichow Ron Calvosa

CC: William Rogers Thomas Thacher Joe Deluca

FROM; Terrence McDonald

DATE; April 17, 2002

RE: Report on Angel Aerial Invoicing

Introduction

Thacher Associates (TA), as part of our site-wide environmental monitoring role, has evaluated the invoices submitted by Angel Aerial Corporation, a dust suppression contractor working at the site. TA’s review included Angel Aerial invoices submitted through AMEC, Tully/EROC, and Bovis (as well as those submitted through Bovis subcontractors Grace and Gateway). The total amount of the invoices reviewed is approximately 2.5 million dollars. The period of time examined consists of October 15, 2001, through January 20,2002. The invoices reviewed were provided by Bovis (for work performed under their direction), Stier Anderson and Malone (for work performed under AMEC), and by Decision Strategies (for work performed under Tully or EROC’s direction).

In performing our evaluation, TA utilized the MEMO distributed by the City of New York, Department of Design and Construction (DDC) dated October 29, 2001 (Attachment 1), as the guideline for our analysis. TA performed a review of the invoices with particular focus on: (1) rates charged for equipment utilized at the site, (2) whether the same equipment/labor was billed in more than one quadrant simultaneously, (3)

.07.002971 1

CITY_21MC100_001129151 NYC-WTC_000231722

OCR can misread numbers and units. Confirm readings against the page image before using them.

NYC-WTC_000231722Source: NYC Law Department, mirrored locally

Related records

Browse subjects →

Ranked by indexed similarity. Reasons describe shared subjects and filing context; check the source records.

Same-box records

Filed elsewhere

More like this page

Similar subjects in other documents. Similarity does not establish the same event, measurement or conclusion.

Others also read

Readers open these alongside this record — through an Ask answer, the same folder, or indexed similarity. Not a claim they are about the same event.

Compare copies and versions →