HomeMy WebLinkAboutDepartment of CommerceNTANA
Department of Commerce
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
P.O. Box 200523 * Helena, Montana 59620-0523
Phone- 406-841-2770 * Fax- 406-841-2771
January 29, 2009
DEC 3 1 2009
CITY OF LAUREL
The Honorable Kenneth E_ Olson, Jr.
Mayor
City of Laurel
115 W. First Street
P.O. Box 10 -
Laurel MT 59044
Re: On Site Monitoring - Contract #MT-TSEP-CG-10-502, City of Laurel, Water
Improvement Project
Dear Mayor Olson:
On December 10, 2009, 1 visited the City of Laurel to review its efforts toward completion of the
awarded water system improvement project.. During.my monitoring visit, I appreciated the
courtesy and cooperation extended to me by Ms: Mary Embleton. (City Clerk/Treas.urer), Kurt
Markegaard (Public Works Director), Tim.Reiter (Utility Plants Superintendent).and Jackie Kuhl
(Great West Engineering). All gave generously of their time to help me review the records
related to the project.
The purpose of my visit was to evaluate the Town's compliance with state requirements of the
Montana TSEP program and to assess its progress towards completion of project activities. It is
the program's goal to assist and support the Town in its efforts to comply with applicable
requirements and to successfully implement your project. It is our intent, through the monitoring
process, to help TSEP recipients avoid potential problems when project records are audited and
to promptly resolve any concerns, which are identified. Within the scope of a monitoring review
there are three levels that may be assigned to-a-particular issue if the grant recipient's
performance is considered less than satisfactory:
1. Concern - When the TSEP liaison raises an issue that does not involve a statutory or
regulatory requirement but may involve recommending a management or program
improvement, it is considered a "concern". A modification of an administrative procedure
or policy is suggested but is not required. No response by local officials is required.
2. Question Of Performance - If the monitoring review raises a question regarding
whether aviolation of a statutory or regulatory.requirement has occurred, the TSEP
liaison will first informally discuss.the review results with. local ,officials to. determine if a
violation has occurred. If a determination cannot be made during the'exit.conference the
TSEP staff may conclude. that there is still a "question of. performance" and request. that
the grantee provide additional information within a 30 day time period in order'for the
Department of Commerce to determine whether a violation has, in fact, occurred. A final
-1-
_,5k.
determination regarding the issue under question will be made by the Department within
30 days of the grant recipient's response.
3. Finding - When a monitoring review of a grant recipient's performance reveals a
specific, identifiable violation of a statutory or regulatory requirement about which there
is no question, the TSEP liaison will make a "finding". A written response from the
grantee to the TSEP liaison regarding the grantee's proposed actions to correct the
situation is required within 30 days of the date of the TSEP liaison's monitoring letter.
Corrective actions should be designed to:
A) Prevent a continuance of the violation;
B) Mitigate adverse effects or consequences of the violation to the extent possible under the
circumstances; and
C) Prevent a recurrence of the same or similar violation.
Specifically, my review addressed the following areas of project administration:
- Project Start-up and Management,
- Procurement,
- Financial Management,
- Labor Standards, and
- Public Facility Construction Management.
Project Start Up and Management
Project start up and management activities appeared acceptable according to TSEP
requirements. The Town has kept complete and organized files for this project. As a reminder,
all TSEP related records should be kept on file at the Town's offices for three years from the
date of final closeout of your project.
Procurement
Documentation of the solicitation for the construction contractor appeared to be properly
accomplished in accordance with procurement requirements. TSEP funds were used to
reimburse for grant administration or engineering services.
.-Financial Management
The Town's financial management of TSEP funds for the project was deemed acceptable. The
Town utilizes the BARS chart of accounts. Claims and warrants sampled were in order and well
documented; at the time of my visit, $502,695.10 (80% of the grant award) had been
reimbursed with TSEP funds.
Labor Standards
All requirements involving federal labor standards appeared to have been met. Interviews have
been conducted to check payment of federal Davis-Bacon minimum wage rates, which the labor
compliance officer verified with the weekly company payroll forms.
Public Facility Project Administration
-2-
The construction contract documents, plans, and specifications were found to be in compliance
with TSEP requirements. TSEP funds were used to cover a portion of construction costs for the
water project. All other elements of project administration appeared acceptable.
Conclusion
Jackie Kuhl, Mary Embleton and all others involved with this project have been conscientious in
their efforts and have done a great job managing the TSEP grant and project. Both Mary and
Jackie have been very cooperative and easy to work with on this project.
If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 841-2597 or e-mail me at
kmiller(o),mt.gov
Sincerely,
Kat Miller, PE
TSEP Engineer
Montana Department of Commerce
CC: Chad Hanson, Project Manager - email
Mary Embleton, City of Laurel - email
-3-