Loading...
BCRUA_R-11-02-23-7A RESOLUTION NO. R-11-02-23-7A WHEREAS, the Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority, Inc. (`BCRUA") has previously entered into a contract ("Contract') with S.J. Louis Construction of Texas LTD. for the 78-Inch Treated Water Transmission Line Segment One Project, and WHEREAS, the BCRUA has determined that it is necessary to make changes to the quantity of work to be performed or materials, equipment, or supplies to be provided, and WHEREAS, it has been determined that it is necessary to change said Contract in accordance with the attached Contract Change Order No. 1,Now Therefore BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BRUSHY CREEK REGIONAL UTILITY AUTHORITY, That the Board President is hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the BCRUA, Change Order No. 1 to the Contract with S.J. Louis Construction of Texas LTD. for the 78-Inch Treated Water Transmission Line Segment One Project, a copy of same being attached hereto as Exhibit "A"and incorporated herein for all purposes. The Board hereby finds and declares that written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted was posted and that such meeting was open to the public as required by law at all times during which this Resolution and the subject matter hereof were discussed, considered and formally acted upon, all as required by the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code, as amended. RESOLVED this 23rd day of February, 2011. MITC FULL R, President Brushy Regional Utility Authority TT ST: Join Cowman, Secretary Z. CRUA\Board Packets\Packet Documents\022311\Res.BCRUA Change Order_I w-Sl Louis Construction(00214972)[1].DOCtrmc SRM CREED REGIONAL UTILITY AUTHORITY w FI,%a a ralI 4t r*4 At F—u. La as qer.red MevAd Reek CHANGE ORDER No. 1 DATE OF ISSUANCE: 12/07/10 EFFECTIVE DATE: OWNER. BCRUA CONTRACTOR: S.J.Louis Construction PROJECT: 78-Inch Treated Water Transmission Line Segment One ENGINEER: Lockwood,Andrews,and Newnam,Inc. The Contractor is hereby directed to make the following changes in the Contract:Documents: 1. Extension of tunnel at New Hope Drive and New Flope Spur to facilitate water line tunnel installation. Under underground telephone and gas lines. ADD OR HE°I'UCT$ 58,664.00 TOTAL(Items t -2) ADD 0R-DkI3UC T$ 58.664.00 Page i Project:78-Inch Treated Water Transmission:Line Segment One Change Order No. 1 CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME: Original Contract Price: Original Contract Times: Substantial Completion(Days): 460 $ 8,134.941.13 Final Completion(Days): 550 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 Net Increase(Decrease)from previous Change Orders Net change from previous Change Orders No.Oto No._ No. to No. Substantial Completion(Days): N/A Final Completion(Days): N/A $ N/A Substantial Completion(Date): N/A Final Completion(Date): N/A Contract Price prior to this Change Order: Contract Times prior to this Change Order: Substantial Completion(Days): 460 $ 8.134.941.13 Final Completion(Days): 550 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 Net increase(decrease)of this Change Order: Net increase(decrease)this Change Order: Substantial Completion(Days): 0 $ 58.664.00 Final Completion(Days): 0 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 Contract Price with all approved Change Orders: Contract Times with all approved Change Orders: Substantial Completion(Days): 460 $ 8.193.605.13 Final Completion(Days): 550 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 RECOMMENDED BY: ACCEPTED BY: By: '" By: ENGINEER CONTRACTOR Date: Date: APPROVED BY: MANAGEMENT REVIEW: By: By: --- BCRUA Construction Manager BCRUA General Manager Date: l-,.I y - fl Date: K:AWAK020Mexecutionlchange orders\draft change order template.doc Page 2 Lockwood,Andrews &Newnan,Inc. A LEO A QALY COMPANY December 6,2010 'Org Mr.Michael Thuss,PE Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority 221 E.Main Street Round Rock, TX 78664 RE: Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority Treated Transmission Line Segment One Request for Deviation#6 Mr. Thuss: LAN has reviewed SJ Louis' Request for Deviation#6. The proposed tunnel extension is acceptable with the following exception. Ring beam and lagging outside of the existing ROW should be removed after the water line has been installed and the extended tunneled area should be back filled with Plowable fill to eliminate voids. LAN has also reviewed the cost submitted and finds that it is reasonable for the proposed change. LAN recommends the BCRUA accept the request for deviation with the exception noted in the previous paragraph. Sincerely, Alisa Gruber,PE Project Engineer Attach: RFD#6 dated 1.1/24/10 10101 Peunion Place,Suite 200 • San Antonio,Texas 78216-4165 • 210.499.5082 - Fax: 210-499.5157 • www.lan-inc.00m BRUSHY CREEK REGIONAL UTILITY AUTHORITY 78°TREATED WATER TRANSMISSION LINE —SEGMENT 1 DATE: November 24,2010 RFD No.: 6 T17: LAN ATTN• JULIE,D.HASTINGS,P.E. 10801 NORTH MOPAC EXPRESSWAY BUILDING 1,SUITE 120 AUSTIN,TX 78759 Please see the attached letter. 0 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ATTACHED November 24 2010 SIGNATURE DATE CURTIS A.OSTRANDER P.E. PROJECT MANAGER PRINTED NAME TITLE k a 3 RESPONSE ATTACHED A USE ONLY ❑LOGGED IN 13RESQ RECORDED LILOGGED OUT SIGN A RE DATE DISTRIBUTED TO: ) 0}I "7 7c_Yo I t RESPONSE DUE BY: PRINTED NAME TITLE RETURNED TO CONTRACTOR ON: 01800-FORMS.doc A 24-Nov-10 S.J.LOUIS CONSTRUCTION OF TEXAS LTD. 9862 Lorena St.,Suite 200 2101340-9998 office•2101340-9997 Fax San Antonio,TX 78216 Equal opportunity Employer 1 Contractor November 24, 20.10 L Mr.Michael Thuss, P.E. Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority 221 E.Main Street Round Rock,Texas 78664 Re: Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority(BCRUA) 78-Inch Treated Water Transmission Line Segment One RFD#6—Utility Conflict C Station 37+30 Mr.Thuss: Please consider this letter a Request for Deviation regarding the installation of the tunnel located at Station 37+34.75 on the reference project. SJ Louis conducted a utility investigation which revealed a gas main and an underground telephone line that are not shown on the plans at approximate Station 37+30 (see attached utility log). These utilities are in direct conflict with the bore pit that is required to tunnel across New Hope Road. Several options have been discussed with LAN and BCRUA representatives to resolve this conflict. It is believed that the solution that has the least impact to the project involves extending the tunnel back from New Hope to a point where the bore pit will not be in conflict with the existing utilities. Other options were presented but they involved damage and repair to City of Cedar park streets. Based on the response Cedar .Park representatives, these options were not pursued. The tunnel. extension process would include standard tunneling in accordance with the contract documents to a point 53' further than the beginning point shown in the plans. Once the tunnel is complete, trenching for the installation of the pipe would break into the ring beam and lagging and the pipe would be installed per plan. The remaining length (approximately 40') of additional tunnel would then be filled with flowable fill. The costs associated with this deviation from the plan include additional tunneling, removal of additional spoils, installation of ring beam and lagging and installation of flowable fill. This cost is calculated as follows: bid price for 78-Inch Water Line in Tunnel (Gann Ranch) less the cost of pipe and associated items plus the cost of flowable fill for the abandoned additional tunnel. The bid price for 78-Inch Water Line in Tunnel (Gann Ranch) is $1.575.00/LF of which$575,00 is. associated with the pipe materials and installation. including welding, weld testing, rails/spacers and grouting the annular space. This puts the cost of the tunnel at $1,000.00/LF. Using a length of 53 LF gives a total cost of additional tunnel of$53,000.00. The volume of flowable fill needed to fill the abandoned additional tunnel can be calculated for the 9-foot diameter tunnel to be 2.36 CY/LF. Assuming 40 LF of tunnel will require flowable fill and a unit price of$60:00/CY, this gives a cost of flowable fill of $5664.00. If approved, the total cost of this Request for Deviation to resolve the existing utility conflict would be$58,664.00. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Regards, S.J.LOUIS CONSTRUCTION OF TEXAS LTD. Curtis A, Ostrander-P.E. Project Manager Station De pth Utility Notes Conflict Plan Field Plan Held (YeslNo 10+36 10+15 7.5' 6.0' WW No 18+4.1 18+42 4:5" 35' 8"W No 18+79 18+67 10.0' 11.0' 6"SS T Clearance Will Not Be Achieved Yes 19+00 3.5' 4"UE CONDUIT No 22+77 3.5' 4"UE CONDUIT N0 27+13 5.0' 24"SD No Apparent Utility At This Locati No 27+85 6"'G,LIT 14'LEFT(RUNS PARALLEL)Not Vertically Feld Located No 29+64 29+64 6.5 8.0' r W T Clearance Will Not Be Achieved Yes 30+20 5.0' 24"SD No 32+00 6"G,UT 9' 'T(RUNS PARALLEL) Not Vertically Field Located No 32+39 7.5' 8"W F13 Branch Not Meld Located No 34+00 WG.UT 25'LEFT(RUNS PARALLEL Not Verticals Field LiKated No 34+64 7.0' 8"W IN.,Marked,Not Fie►d.Located Unknown 37+30 4.0' 6"G,6'SS,4"UT In Bore Pit Yes 37+53 .3.0' UT Not Feld Located 37+83 4.0' 6"G Not Feld Located 37+90 3.0' UE Not Field Located 38+49 38+49 6.5' 8.0' 36"SD No 38+76 5.0' 16"W Not Field Located 39+08 3A' UE Not Field Located 39+1.4 ? 8"W Not Field Located 39+42 39+42 5.0' 6.0' 24"SD No 41+30 15.0' SD MH On Centerline Yes 41+47 3.0' UE Not Field Located 41+80 ? SD MH,UIS 50 UT No Inlets As Shown on Plans 41+92 12.0' SD BOX Does Not Exist 1n Feld 42+75 42+72 ? 4.5' 8"W(ABANDONED'?) No 42+81 (i.0' 81,W Not Field Located 42+83 10.0' 42"SS Does Not Exist In Field No 42+91 42+91 8.5' 8.0" 8"SS No 47+22 7.0' 8"W FH Branch Not Field Uxated No 48+12 3.(Y UE Not I field Located 53+17 7.0' 8"W FN Branch Not field Located No 53+30 53+40 12.0' I I A' 8"SS No 54+53 6.5' 12"W(ABANDONED") Not Field Located No 54+58 54+58 6.51 5.0' 12"W No i5+32 3.0' UE Not Field Located 59+32 7.0' 8"W FH Branch Not Feld Located No 00+76 6.0' UT,UF.CONDUITS No 61+01 61+02 9.0' 6.0' 24"SD BOX No 61+18 ? UE Not Field Located 61+56 61+55 4.5' 5.0' 8"W No 61+65 4.5' 8"W Not Field Located 61+73 61+73 6.5' 7.0' 8"SS No 64+93 ? MONITORING WELL'? Offset 2'Left Yes 65+20 2.5' 2.5' 18"SD No 67+72 4.5' 1.2"W Not Held Located 68+97 7.012"SS No 69+07 ? 8"W Not Field Located 70+48 ? ?W Not Field located 70+94 ?SS Seiner Service from 12"SS Line No 71+(A ?W Not Field Located 71+16 7.0' 7.0' 18"SD No 72+14 5.0' 12-W Not Held Located 72+15 72+14 10.0' 93' 10"SS No 72+50 72+50 ZO' 8.0' ?SD No 72+65 72+70 11.51 8.0' SD MH/36"SD No 72+91 ?W Not Field Located 73+44 ?W Not Field Located 74+73 74+75 18.0' IS"SD No 7?+50 3.0' U7 No 79+15 IIS' 1 I-W 15"SS No 94+50 4.5' 8'W No 95+(X) 4.5' GAS SERVICE No 95+01 3.O' I;K, No 98+00 2.0' CE No 10(1+01 0.0' TEST STATION On Centerline Yes Notes: All smirked utilities were field 1iroated. Fire hydrant leads were not'field located bceuuse they are to be removed and replaced. Depths shown are.to top of utility except for MHs and SD boxes-those depths are MH/box inverts. EXECUTED DOCUMENT FOLLOWS ' �• BRUSHY CREEJ�:�REGIONAL UTILITY AUTHOR A Par n e r a h p o t Cedar Park, L e a n E<r, and 0.o u n U 0. CHANGE ORDER No. 1 DATE OF ISSUANCE: 12/07/10 EFFECTIVE DATE: OWNER: BCRUA CONTRACTOR: S.J.Louis Construction PROJECT: 78-Inch Treated Water Transmission Line Segment One ENGINEER: Lockwood, Andrews,and Newnam, Inc. The Contractor is hereby directed to make the following changes in the Contract Documents: 1. Extension of tunnel at New Hope Drive and New Hope Spur to facilitate water line tunnel installation. Under underground telephone and gas lines. ADD OR-BEBtfff$ 58,664.00 TOTAL(Items 1 -2) ADD OWDEDUC T$ 58,664.00 Page 1 Project: 78-Inch Treated Water Transmission Line Segment One Change Order No.—I — CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME: Original Contract Price: Original Contract Times: Substantial Completion(Days): 460 $ 8,134,941.13 Final Completion(Days): 550 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 Net Increase(Decrease)from previous Change Orders Net change from previous Change Orders No._to No. No. to No. Substantial Completion(Days): N/A Final Completion(Days): N/A $ N/A Substantial Completion(Date): N/A Final Completion(Date): N/A Contract Price prior to this Change Order: Contract Times prior to this Change Order: Substantial Completion(Days): 460 $ 8,134,941.13 Final Completion(Days): 550 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 Net increase(decrease)of this Change Order: Net increase(decrease)this Change Order: Substantial Completion(Days): 0 $ 58,664.00 Final Completion(Days): 0 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 Contract Price with all approved Change Orders: Contract Times with all approved Change Orders: Substantial Completion(Days): 460 $ 8,193,605.13 Final Completion(Days): 550 Substantial Completion(Date): 7/16/11 Final Completion(Date): 8/14/11 RECOMMENDED BY: ACCEPTED BY: 2..v By: CXR By: ENGINEER CONTRACTOR Date: � Date: 42, 7 APPROVED BY: MANAGEMENT REVIEW: By: By: BCRUA Construction Manager BCRUA Giiteral Manager��� Date: fj Date: "1 "' "1 23 2 I le- !l•02.23 7� :\WJ�ecution\change orders\draft change order template.doc Page 2 Lockwood,Andrews &Newnam, Inc. A LEO A DALY COMPANY December 6, 2010 09 Mr. Michael Thuss, PE Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority 221 E. Main Street Round Rock, TX 78664 RE: Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority Treated Transmission Line Segment One Request for Deviation#6 Mr. Thuss: LAN has reviewed SJ Louis' Request for Deviation#6. The proposed tunnel extension is acceptable with the following exception. Ring beam and lagging outside of the existing ROW should be removed after the water line has been installed and the extended tunneled area should be back filled with flowable fill to eliminate voids. LAN has also reviewed the cost submitted and finds that it is reasonable for the proposed change. LAN recommends the BCRUA accept the request for deviation with the exception noted in the previous paragraph. Sincerely, Alisa Gruber, PE Project Engineer Attach: RFD#6 dated 11/24/10 10101 Reunion Place, Suite 200 San Antonio, Texas 78216-4165 210.499.5082 Fax: 210.499.5157 www.lan-inc.com 'er i u kN 4 b 0 0 BRUSHY CREEK REGIONAL UTILITY AUTHORITY 78" TREATED WATER TRANSMISSION LINE — SEGMENT 1 DATE: November 24,2010 RFD NO.: 6 TO: LAN ATTN: JULIE D.HASTINGS,P.E. 10801 NORTH MOPAC EXPRESSWAY BUILDING 1,SUITE 120 AUSTIN,TX 78759 Please see the attached letter. Q ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ATTACHED % -" November 24, 2010 SIGNATURE DATE CURTIS A.OSTRANDER,P.E. PROJECT MANAGER PRINTED NAME TITLE Al RESPONSE ATTACHED A USE ONLY ❑LOGGED IN ❑RESP RECORDED ❑LOGGED OUT SIGNA RE DATE DISTRIBUTED TO: — ��/I 7 4�3t�r'+ ?tiE (.% _,) RESPONSE DUE BY: PRINTED NAME TITLE RETURNED TO CONTRACTOR ON: - - -- . -..__.... ....... ... _._.. 01800-FORMS.doc A 24-Nov-10 S.J. LOUIS CONSTRUCTION OF TEXAS LTD. 9862 Lorene St.,Suite 200 210/340-9998 Office•2101340-9997 Fax San Antonio,TX 78216 Equal Opportunity Employer 1 Contractor November 24, 2010 Mr. Michael Thuss, P.E. , Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority 221 E. Main Street Round Rock, Texas 78664 Re: Brushy Creek Regional Utility Authority (BCRUA) 78-Inch Treated Water Transmission Line Segment One RFD#6—Utility Conflict @ Station 37+30 Mr. Thuss: Please consider this letter a Request for Deviation regarding the installation of the tunnel located at Station 37+34.75 on the reference project. SJ Louis conducted a utility investigation which revealed a gas main and an underground telephone line that are not shown on the plans at approximate Station 37+30 (see attached utility log). These utilities are in direct conflict with the bore pit that is required to tunnel across New Hope Road. Several options have been discussed with LAN and BCRUA representatives to resolve this conflict. It is believed that the solution that has the least impact to the project involves extending the tunnel back from New Hope to a point where the bore pit will not be in conflict with the existing utilities. Other options were presented but they involved damage and repair to City of Cedar park streets. Based on the response Cedar Park representatives, these options were not pursued. The tunnel extension process would include standard tunneling in accordance with the contract documents to a point 53' further than the beginning point shown in the plans. Once the tunnel is complete, trenching for the installation of the pipe would break into the ring beam and lagging and the pipe would be installed per plan. The remaining length (approximately 40') of additional tunnel would then be filled with flowable fill. The costs associated with this deviation from the plan include additional tunneling, removal of additional spoils, installation of ring beam and lagging and installation of flowable fill. This cost is calculated as follows: bid price for 78-Inch Water Line in Tunnel (Gann Ranch) less the cost of pipe and associated items plus the cost of flowable fill for the abandoned additional tunnel. The bid price for 78-Inch Water Line in Tunnel (Gann Ranch) is $1575.00/LF of which $575.00 is associated with the pipe materials and installation including welding, weld testing, rails/spacers and grouting the annular space. This puts the cost of the tunnel at $1,000.00/LF. Using a length of 53 LF gives a total cost of additional tunnel of $53,000.00. The volume of flowable fill needed to fill the abandoned additional tunnel can be calculated for the 9-foot diameter tunnel to be 2.36 CY/LF. Assuming 40 LF of tunnel will require flowable fill and a unit price of$60.00/CY, this gives a cost of flowable fill of $5664.00. If approved, the total cost of this Request for Deviation to resolve the existing utility conflict would be $58,664.00. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Regards, S. J. LOUIS CONSTRUCTION OF TEXAS LTD. Curtis A. Ostrander, P.E. Project Manager Station De pth Utility Notes Conflict Plan Field Plan Field (Yes/No) 10+36 10+15 7.5' 6.0' 30"W No 18+41 18+42 4.5' 3.5' 8"W No 18+79 18+67 10.0' 11.0' 6"SS 2'Clearance Will Not Be Achieved Yes 19+00 3.5' 4"UE CONDUIT No 22+77 3.5' 4"UE CONDUIT No 27+13 5.0' 24"SD No Apparent Utility At This Locati No 27+85 6"G,UT 14'LEFT(RUNS PARALLEL)Not Vertically Field Located No 29+64 29+64 6.5' 8.0' 8"W 2'Clearance Will Not Be Achieved Yes 30+20 5.0' 24"SD No 32+00 6"G,UT 9'LEFT(RUNS PARALLEL) Not Vertical) Field L)ated No 32+39 7.5' 1 8"W FH Branch Not Field Located No 34+00 6"G,UT 25'LEFT(RUNS PARALLEL) Not Vertically Field Located No 34+64 7.0' 8"W Not Marked,Not Field Located Unknown 37+30 4.0' 6"G,6"SS.4"UT In Bore Pit Yes 37+53 3.0' UT Not Field Located 37+83 4.0' 6"G Not Field Located 37+90 3.0' UE Not Field Located 38+49 38+49 6.5' 1 8.0' 36"SD No 38+76 5.0' 16"W Not Field Located 39+08 3.0' UE Not Field Located 39+14 ? 8"W Not Field Located 39+42 39+42 5.0' 6.0' 24"SD No 41+30 15.0' SD MH On Centerline Yes 41+47 3.0' UE Not Feld Located 41+80 ? SD MH,O/S 50'LT No Inlets As Shown on Plans 41+92 12.0' SD BOX Does Not Exist In Field 42+75 42+72 ? 4.5' 8"W(ABANDONED?) No 42+81 6.0' 8"W Not Field Located 42+83 10.0' 42"SS Does Not Exist In Field No 42+91 42+91 8.5' 8.0' 8"SS No 47+22 7.0' 8"W FH Branch Not Field Located No 48+12 3.0' UE Not Field Located 53+17 7.0' 8"W FH Branch Not Field Located No 53+50 53+40 12.0' 11.0' 8"SS No 54+53 6.5' 12"W(ABANDONED?) Not Field Located No 54+58 54+58 6.5' 5.0' 12"W No 55+32 3.0' UE Not Field Located 59+32 7.0' 8"W FH Branch Not Field Located No 60+76 6.0' UT,UE CONDUITS No 61+01 61+02 9.0' 6.0' 24"SD BOX No 61+18 ? UE Not Feld Located 61+56 61+55 4.5' 5.0' 8"W No 61+65 4.5' 8"W Not Field Located 61+73 61+73 6.5' 7.0' 8"SS No 64+93 ? MONITORING WELL? Offset 2'Left Yes 65+20 2.5' 2.5' 18"SD No 67+72 4.5' 12"W Not Field Located 68+97 ? 7.0' 12"SS No 69+07 ? 8"W Not Field Located 70+48 ? ?W Not Field Located 70+94 ? ?SS Sewer Service from 12"SS Line No 71+04 ? ?W Not Field Located 71+16 7.0' 7.0' 18"SD No 72+14 5.0' 12"W Not Field Located 72+15 72+14 l0A' 9.3' 10"SS No 72+50 72+50 7.0' 8.0' ?SD No 72+65 72+70 11.5' 8.0' SD MH/36"SD No 72+91 ? ?W Not Field Located 73+44 ? ?W Not Field Located 74+73 74+75 ? 8.0' 18"SD No 77+50 3.0' UT No 79+15 11.5' 11.0' 15"SS No 94+50 4.5' 8"W No 95+00 4.5' GAS SERVICE No 95+01 3.0' UE No 98+00 2.0' UE No 100+01 0.0' TEST STATION jOn Centerline Yes Notes: All marked utilities were field located. Fire hydrant leads were not field located because they are to be removed and replaced. Depths shown are to top of utility except for MHs and SD boxes-those depths are MH/box inverts.