|
<![CDATA[
CCASE:
69TH STREET WASTEWATER & TREATMENT PLANT
DDATE:
19780607
TTEXT:
~1
[1] WAGE APPEALS BOARD
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WASHINGTON, D. C.
In the Matter of
69TH STREET WASTEWATER WAB Case No. 77-29
TREATMENT PLANT
Wage Rates Applicable to
Construction of 69th Street
Wastewater Treatment Plant,
EPA Proj. No. 0-48-1205,
Houston, Harris Co., TX Dated: June 7, 1978
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
The Wage Appeals Board is in receipt of a Motion for
Reconsideration of the Board's decision dated March 3, 1978,
in the above-captioned matter from the Houston Gulf Coast
Building Trades Council, AFL-CIO, (herein BTC). The BTC is
requesting the Board to reconsider its decision that applied
heavy construction wage rates to the construction of filter beds
and contact chambers, and building construction wage rates to
an administration building located directly above the heavy
structures. The BTC believes building construction wage rates
should apply to the entire project because they feel the filter
beds and contact chambers are actually a part of and serve as
foundations for the building.
The Board's decision relied on testimony by the City of
Houston's engineer who stated that the changes required to place [1]
~2
[2] the building as planned had been minimal, totalling only
about $69,000. The overall cost of the entire project was
estimated to be $14,000,000 and the changes made in the heavy
portion to accom[m]odate the building amounted to about one-half of
one percent of the cost. The Board did not consider these changes
sufficient to change the character of the filter beds and contact
chambers from what would normally be considered to be heavy
construction to building construction.
The BTC has forwarded additional information to the Board
relating to the actual changes which were required in the location
and design of the pillars and the addition of pillars necessary to
support the slab and administration building. The BTC also refers
to the increase in size of certain baffle walls to accom[m]odate
the enlarged columns. Finally, the claim is made that necessary
changes were designed into walls of the filter beds and contact
chambers from the beginning of the planning for the project in
order for these structures to accom[m]odate and support the
building above it. The BTC claims this is the only way the cost of
the support foundation for the building as designed could be kept
to the $69,000 claimed by the City engineer.
The Wage Appeals Board considered the arguments presented
by the BTC in the Motion for Reconsideration. It seems to the [2]
~3
[3] Board that though these statements offer more detail concerning
the specific changes made in the pillars, and filter beds and
contact chambers than was discussed at the hearing,, the BTC has
not demonstrated that the structures have been so altered or
changed that they should now be characterized as building
construction instead of heavy construction. The Board has noted in
several decisions that sewage treatment plant structures generally
involve elements of building and heavy construction and it appears
to the Board that the 69th Street Plant provides another example
of this rule rather than an exception to it.
In view of these comments the Board denies the Motion for
Reconsideration and affirms its decision.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD
Craig Bulger,
Executive Secretary
Wage Appeals Board [3]
]]>
|
