CCASE:
SOUTH COBB WASTE WATER TREATMENT
DDATE:
19761119
TTEXT:
~1
WAGE APPEALS BOARD
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WASHINGTON, D.C.
In the Matter of
SOUTH COBB WASTE WATER
TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
Prevailing Wage Rates Applicable WAB Case No. 76-19
to the Construction of South Cobb
Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion,
EPA Project No. C-130430-04-0, Cobb Dated: November 19, 1976
County Water and Sewer System Contract
No. 4, Cobb County, Georgia
APPEARANCES: Carl H. Trieshmann, Esquire for the Georgia Utility
Contractors Association
Thomas X. Dunn, Esquire for the Building and
Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO
Joseph Jacobs, Esquire, James T. Langford, Esquire
for the North Georgia Building and Construction
Trades Council
Donald S. Shire, Esquire, George E. Rivers, Esquire,
Gail V. Coleman, Esquire for the Wage and Hour
Division, U.S. Department of Labor
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Board upon a petition for review
filed by the Georgia Utility Contractors Association (hereinafter
Petitioners).
Petitioners seek review of Wage Determination No. 76-GA-446,
dated October 19, 1976, applicable to expansion and upgrading of
the South Cobb Waste Water Treatment Plan, EPA Project No.
C-130430-04-0, located in Cobb County, Georgia. Specifically,
Petitioners contend that the Wage and Hour Division (hereinafter
Wage and Hour) has erred in failing to issue a heavy construction
wage rate schedule, together [1]
~2
[2] with the building construction schedule which was issued for the
project. For reasons stated herein, the Board agrees that both building
and heavy construction wage rate schedules should be issued for this
project.
The primary basis for Petitioner's objection to the wage
determination is the fact that Wage and Hour historically has
issued both building and heavy schedules in its wage determinations
for Cobb County.
Until the MARTA decisions (WAB Case No. 75-05 and its
supplementary decision of October 16, 1975), Wage and Hour had a
general practice since shortly after passage of the Water Pollution
Control Act of issuing both heavy and building wage rate schedules
(and frequently a schedule for water and sewer lines) in its wage
determinations for water and sewer treatment plants, in recognition
of the fact that in most cases they involved a substantial amount
of building structures and non-building structures, piping, and
other appurtenance not directly a part of the building.
Wage and Hour now contends that the Board's decision in WAB
Case No. 75-05 compels the Assistant Administrator to issue only a
building schedule and not a heavy schedule for construction of
water and sewer treatment plants in the five-county Atlanta area
even though the projects included in the survey before the Board
in WAB Case No. 75-05 were located only in Fulton and DeKalb
Counties. Apparently, because of the Board's decision in WAB Case
No. 75-05, the Assistant Administrator now feels that a presumption
is created [2]
~3
[3] that water and sewer treatment plants should have only one schedule
of rates, and that schedule should be the building schedule. The Board
disagrees.
WAB Case No. 75-05 does not stand for the proposition that
water and sewer treatment plants should be regarded solely as
building construction for purposes of issuing wage determinations.
This is not factually correct as a matter of industry practice and
it has no basis in the law or regulations implementing the Water
Pollution Control Act. If Wage and Hour has taken this decision
as a mandate to issue only building schedules on water and sewer
treatment plants, it has misunderstood the Board. The substance
of WAB Case No. 75-05 was that wage data obtained from water and
sewer treatment plant construction projects was not to be used in
determining the prevailing wage rates for three particular projects
to be undertaken as part of the construction of the Metropolitan
Atlanta Rapid Transit System. The Board was careful in indicating
that it was making a determination only with respect to those three
projects it had before it. The Board did not, however, instruct
Wage and Hour to cease including heavy construction schedules in
wage determinations for water and sewer treatment plants.
Accordingly, Wage and Hour's reliance on the MARTA decisions as a
basis for changing a practice of including both building and heavy
wage schedules in such projects which has been in effect for almost
fifteen years is without foundation.
Moreover, it would appear that with few exceptions, Wage and [3]
~4
[4] Hour has not followed the mandate of the MARTA decisions
anywhere but the five-county area around Atlanta. /FN1/ It appears
that Wage and Hour continues to issue two wage schedules for water
and sewer treatment plant construction elsewhere in the United
States. Thus, there is no factual basis for issuing only a
building wage schedule for the water and sewer treatment plant to
be constructed in Cobb County, which was neither included in the
survey considered by the Board in WAB Case No. 75-05 nor the
subject of a Wage and Hour survey to determine the prevailing
practice in the county with regard to such projects.
Wage and Hour also offers the argument that enforcement of
dual wage schedules on water and sewer treatment projects is
difficult. It contends that the Envi[ro]nmental Protection Agency
(EPA) rarely gives instructions as to the proper application of the
respective schedules and violations are common. Wage and Hour also
argues that it does not have sufficient information about the
construction to be performed on the projects to instruct
contractors in the use of the dual schedules. This is no reason to
adopt the approach taken by Wage and Hour. Instead, Wage and Hour
should give immediate attention to impressing upon EPA the
importance of proper instructions to contractors concerning
implementation of the applicable prevailing wage rates. It is
suggested that a conference [4]
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
/FN1/ During the hearing, Wage and Hour indicated that a single
wage schedule was issued in Prince William County, Virginia and
Harris County, Texas, but in both cases as the result of a survey
of practices of the local contractors performing on similar
projects. [4]
~5
[5] with EPA be held at the highest appropriate level to resolve
this serious problem as soon as possible. EPA should be advised of
its responsibilities under the Davis-Bacon Act and the necessity
for proper enforcement.
Therefore, it is ordered that Wage and Hour immediately modify
Wage Determination 76-GA-446, October 14, 1976 to include a
schedule of wage rates for heavy construction.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD
Terry Yellig,
Acting Executive Secretary [5]
