This document is a summary of a printed document. The printed document may contain charts and photographs which are not reproduced in this electronic version. If you require the printed version of this document, contact the Freedom of Information Act Officer, Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC 20210, or call (202) 693-5116.

This report reflects the findings of the Office of Inspector General at the time that the audit report was issued. More current information may be available as a result of the resolution of this audit by the Department of Labor program agency and the auditee. For further information concerning the resolution of this report's findings, please contact the program agency.

OIG has started using Acrobat 4.0 to prepare it's latest Audit reports. If you are experiencing problems downloading some of the larger PDF files, you may want to download the latest version of the Adobe Acrobat Reader by clicking the link provided below.

ETA awarded Will H. Hall & Son, Inc. (WHH) a $17,230,000 firm fixed-price contract for the construction of seven buildings at the new Job Corps Center in Flint, Michigan. WHH encountered problems on the site (which it claimed were beyond its control). WHH submitted a Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA) to DOL in which it claimed additional costs totaling $2,365,622. The REA stated that WHH was never able to achieve a smooth flow of construction primarily because of:

• errors and omissions in contract drawings;

• differing site conditions;

• failure of DOL’s architect/engineer (A/E) to respond to submittals, shop drawings, and requests for information; and

• failure of DOL's A/E to address errors and omissions in plans in a timely and adequate manner.

At ETA’s request, we looked at whether the additional costs claimed by WHH were reasonable, allowable, and allocable under the Federal contract cost principles and the terms and conditions of the contract between DOL and WHH. We questioned $1,365,278 and set aside for further consideration by ETA an additional $981,462. Of the $2.3 million claimed by the contractor, we accepted only $18,882 as allowable costs. The primary reasons for the questioning of the costs were that:

• WHH failed to substantiate its claim that various events under the DOL contract constituted compensable construction delays caused by the owner (DOL); and

• certain amounts claimed were either "double counted" as both direct and indirect costs, already covered under the original firm fixed-price contract, or based on estimates instead of actual costs incurred.

-- DISCLAIMER

Send technical comments to: Webmaster@oig.dol.gov
Comments relating to policy, content or style should be directed to:
rpts-coordinator@oig.dol.gov .