My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009-01-AU Follow-up Review of the 2006 Audit of the Department of Environmental Management's Recycling and Diversion Grants Program
PublicDocuments
>
Legislative Auditor
>
Audit Reports
>
County Auditor Reports
>
2009-01-AU Follow-up Review of the 2006 Audit of the Department of Environmental Management's Recycling and Diversion Grants Program
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2011 2:33:45 PM
Creation date
7/19/2011 12:22:02 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
RECOMMENDATIONS - SCRAP METAL PROGRAM <br />RECOMMENDATIONS —SCRAP METAL PROGRAM <br />STATUS <br />REPORT <br />REFERENCE <br />1. We recommend that DEM ensure that the award entity is a "legal" entity prior to <br />contract award and that there is sufficient documentation in the program file to <br />IMPLEMENTED <br />p. 35 <br />explain inconsistencies between the names of original bidders and names of <br />vendors awarded contracts during the procurement process. <br />2. We recommend that DEM ensure that personnel with sufficient training and <br />IN <br />p. 35 <br />expertise are assigned to supervise the contract procurement process. <br />PROGRESS <br />3. We recommend that DEM ensure that personnel with sufficient training and <br />expertise are assigned to monitor each contract after issuance to ensure <br />IN <br />p.35 <br />departmental and contractor compliance with all contractual, regulatory, and <br />PROGRESS <br />operational requirements. <br />4. We recommend that DEM ensure that proper permits are obtained prior to any <br />IN <br />p. 36 <br />contractor commencing work on any contract on any County property. <br />PROGRESS <br />5. We recommend that DEM ensure that contractors obtain necessary permits and <br />IN <br />p. 36 <br />provide documentation of work performed before disbursing any County funds. <br />PROGRESS <br />6. We recommend that DEM develop and implement policies and procedures to <br />p. 36 <br />adequately verify the accuracy and integrity of the contractor's claims of scrap <br />PENDING <br />metal removed from County storage sites. <br />7. We recommend that DEM address any warning letter received from DOH - <br />SHWB or any other regulatory agency in a timely manner to avoid assessment <br />IMPLEMENTED <br />p. 36 <br />of fines and penalties and possible termination of permits. <br />8. We recommend that RFP and contract documents require contractors to <br />p.37 <br />respond within a given time to any communications pertaining to complaints or <br />IMPLEMENTED <br />deviations from program, permit, or other regulatory requirements. <br />9. We recommend that DEM document any operational problem with a contractor <br />IN <br />p. 37 <br />during the administration of a contract. <br />PROGRESS <br />10. We recommend that DEM document its own departmental responses and <br />IN <br />pp. 37 - 38 <br />corrective actions taken to resolve operational problems. <br />PROGRESS <br />11. We recommend that DEM adhere to contractual provisions particularly regarding <br />IN <br />p. 38 <br />vendor compensation. <br />PROGRESS <br />12. We recommend that DEM reconcile contractor invoices against supporting <br />IMPLEMENTED <br />p.38 <br />documentation before processing payment. <br />Vii <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.