fbpx

Christie Administration Addresses AshBrit Contract

The Christie Administration released the following statement regarding AshBrit’s contract with the State for the cleanup from Superstorm Sandy:

Taking  Emergency and Long-Term Action To Assist Debris Removal

Competitively  Bid Emergency Contract With AshBritt Allowed New Jersey Towns To Take  Immediate Action In Addressing Debris Removal In An Efficient And Responsible  Manner

________________________________________________

 

AshBritt  Had Extensive Experience And Unique Capabilities To Respond To Major  Disasters:

 

AshBritt  is a national, rapid-response natural disaster recovery company well tested  in marshaling extensive resources quickly to remove massive amounts of debris  from communities that have been impacted by natural disaster. AshBritt is  currently overseeing and coordinating 83 subcontractors in New Jersey for  cleanup work – 71 percent (59) of which are all New Jersey companies.

 

AshBritt’s  experience includes recovery efforts from 30 federally declared major  disasters across eleven states since Hurricane Andrew in 1992, including:

 

  • Removing over 21 million cubic yards of debris  along the Gulf Coast following Hurricane Katrina;
  • Responding to the 2011 Snowstorms in  Massachusetts & Connecticut which left up to 27 inches of snow, downing  trees and power lines;
  • Serving as a primary contractor in Texas  following Hurricanes Ike & Dolly; and
  • In Florida, AshBritt has worked on the recovery  efforts following Hurricanes Andrew, Ivan, Charley and Wilma.

 

Ashbritt’s  Contract Was Competitively Bid:

 

AshBritt  was retained by the State of New Jersey on October 31, 2013, via an existing  competitively bid contract in Connecticut.  It  was made available as one option among others for municipalities — many of  which chose other available contractors, chose to use municipal resources, or  both.

 

Having  AshBritt allowed New Jersey to make available as an option a previously  procured, competitively bid contract for disaster management and debris  removal services in the immediate aftermath  of the storm.

 

  • The underlying Connecticut contract was  competitively bid on February 25, 2008,  and AshBritt was awarded the primary contract on June 30, 2008.
  • AshBritt was selected from among 10 bidders,  which included 3 out of the 4 US Army Corp of Engineers contractors, by an  interagency evaluation committee consisting of representatives from the  departments of
    • Administrative  Services,
    • Environmental  Protection,
    • Transportation,
    • Public  Safety, and
    • Emergency  Management and Homeland Security.
  • The AshBritt contract in New Jersey was intended as and served as an intermediate  step, providing a short-term option until an RFP could be completed, which  was promptly done in the aftermath of the storm.

 

New  Jersey’s emergency debris removal contract with AshBritt was not a $100  million contract.  Rather, that was the theoretical ceiling on the  2011 Connecticut contract adopted by New Jersey.

 

The  Christie Administration has Moved to Follow Its Own Objective Bidding Process  to Provide Other Competitively Bid Debris Removal Contractors Now and Into  the Future:

 

  • A Request for Quotations was issued by Treasury  on November 30, 2012 for Disaster Debris Removal and Management  Services.
  • Of 10 Responding companies, 7 were deemed responsive  to the RFQ.
  • Four vendors ultimately  were awarded those contracts on January 25, 2013, following an impartial and  objective review by a panel in the Treasury Department’s Division of Purchase  and Property.
    • The four  firms are: AshBritt, Ceres Environmental Services, Crowder Gulf, and T.F.R.  Enterprises.

 

Throughout,  the Christie Administration has Provided Municipalities with Resources and  Options to Protect Taxpayers Through Auditing and Oversight:

 

New  Jersey also selected contractors available to municipalities to use for  debris removal contract monitoring – a requirement for FEMA  reimbursement.

 

 

As  a result, municipalities around the state can choose any one of these four  firms, or any other contract of their choosing, to provide them with the  monitoring services that FEMA requires.

More from my site

Posted: February 5th, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Chris Christie, Christie Administration, Hurricane Sandy | Tags: , , | 8 Comments »

8 Comments on “Christie Administration Addresses AshBrit Contract”

  1. Much Ado About Nothing said at 4:07 pm on February 5th, 2013:

    Just an attempt to trash the Governor who took the bull by the horns.

  2. Thank you said at 7:25 pm on February 5th, 2013:

    For affirming what was already discussed. Try and remember, it’s the “big kahuna”year in NJ. We are going to see some of the most ridiculous laws from legislators of both parties put forth, just to get their names on anything, all year long. Read the ridiculous and obvious press releases going out daily, that attempt or pretend this is a breaking, genius,and original thought, most of which pay the young staffers,but never even see a paper for unearned media blips.Assume when the Dems call for “investigations”, that it is likely the politics of personal, and inferred, destruction at work, because they know they are losing. Understand it is all about their keeping the majority in both houses. It’s called NJ “gutter politics”,and they fight to the death here, and it will simply not stop until Election Night!

  3. Christie Administration Addresses AshBrit Contract | Recent Disasters said at 7:27 pm on February 5th, 2013:

    […] Read the original here: Christie Administration Addresses AshBrit Contract […]

  4. Have a copy said at 7:52 pm on February 5th, 2013:

    Of the original A.G. Memo issued during the storm, which cites the Connecticut contract. It was done y the A.G. Over the regular process handled by NJ Purchase and Property in Treasury, which does the state contract bids that many, many entities use in NJ,to save them time from doing their own bids. Again, in that disaster, it was an option to get things done fast. For the Dems to have gone after it is an obvious political slam,and a very unseemly way to grab a headline and infer wrongdoing. I,for one ,am sick of it,and can see right through it!

  5. Bob English said at 9:24 pm on February 5th, 2013:

    First of all there is nothing wrong for anyone (newspapers, elected officials, bloggers including MMM etc.) to be asking questions about the way the AshBrit contract was handled. If they were not asking questions, they would not be doing their jobs. Note that AshBrit’s political connections are across the political spectrum so its not a one sided D or R issue.

    There are still unanswered questions as far as I am concerned. At the time the 4 1/2 year old Connecticut contract was adopted, did anyone realize that the rate AshBrit was charging was 75% (or more) higher than that of competition?? Did local officials in various towns and municipalities realize that the AshBrit rates where much higher than that of competition?? Did AshBrits political connections influence local municipalites in contracting with that company? Will FEMA still give 100% reimbursement if they find that AshBrits rates were way beyond what their competitors would have charged?

    All legit questions.

  6. Since it was discretionary, said at 5:20 pm on February 6th, 2013:

    Many entities did ask those same questions. I know of several who chose to either do work in-house if they had their own equipment, and others who sought their own quotes, if they had the time and staff to do so. No one was mandated to use that Ct. contract. As in any unusual situation, some officials panic, and act knee- jerk, while others are more measured and thoughtful. Guess each place’s voters will decide if they are happy with the executive decisions that were made. Feel sorry for any official up this year: where the losses equate into a bigger tax bite, whether done in good faith or not, I predict many will fall on the electoral sword and be thrown out,by angry and overburdened taxpayers.

  7. Ask away, said at 5:27 pm on February 6th, 2013:

    but do not assume the headline- grabber’s inferences are always with merit. The way those particular Dem’s went about their questioning, they fell into the pattern of smear first, get the facts out later, is all I’m saying. No one around here ever heard of AshBritt until controversy for political coverage and points was stirred up. I know of several companies from several different states who had done work after Katrina, and who call themselves

  8. ... Disaster-recovery consultants, said at 5:34 pm on February 6th, 2013:

    who would, for a fee, and preferably if you just went and hired them on an emergent and non-competitive basis, gather up all of your invoices incurred during your emergencies, and submit them to FEMA for you, promising a”faster” recoup of your reimbursements from the Feds. Here is where you thank them for stopping by, take their cards, talk to your fellow officials, and decide if we really want to spend that money/go that route. Many decided not to, relied on their own people, and put their own bills together,and are going after their own reimbursements. And, are thereby saving bucks,right there!