No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC80-044 Modification Agreemnt with Franklin Associates for Resource Recovery Feasibility StudyMODIFICATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF EAGLE (COLORADO) AND FRANKLIN ASSOCIATES, LTD. FOR RESOURCE RECOVERY FEASIBILITY STUDY THIS MODIFICATION AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _✓'day of May, 1980, by and between the COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, a body corporate and politic, by and through its Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as the "Board," and FRANKLIN ASSOCIATES, LTD., hereinafter referred to as "FAL." °g WHEREAS, on December 5, 1979, the respective parties herein entered into a contract for the purpose of conducting a resource recovery feasibility study for the County of Eagle Colorado; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18 of said contract, FAL shall submit to the Board for their approval any work scope changes not originally anticipated in the general scope of work as set forth in said contract; and WHEREAS, on or about January 17, 1980, FAL submitted a letter of which a copy is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference requesting two general changes in project activity as follows: (a) Expansion of the public information program which will require a number of additional trips to the County by FAL staff; travel to visit "y operating installations of modular solid waste and wood -fired boilers with County staff. (b) More extensive evaluation of the alternative scenarios in Task 6; and WHEREAS, due to the additional work referred to herein, the maximum compensation payable to FAL will increase from $37,487 to $52,944 (a difference of $15,457); and WHEREAS, FAL requests a modification to the original contract to reflect the work scope changes and increase in compensation referred to herein and the Board's approval thereto. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, and promises contained herein and in that certain contract entered into between the parties herein on December 5, 1979, the parties hereto agree to modify, alter and change said contract dated December 5, 1979, as follows: (1) That Section 2 of the contract dated December 5, 1979, reflect changes in the scope of work to be performed by FAL as set forth in Exhibit A herein. (2) That in consideration of the additional work to be performed by FAL referred to in Paragraph 1 herein, Section 5 of the contract dated December 5, 1979, shall be modified to read as follows: "The total fee to be charged by FAL for the performance of this contract shall not exceed $52,944, as outlined in FAL's proposal (Exhibit 2) and Exhibit A of this modification agreement." (3) It is expressly agreed by the parties herein that this modifi- cation agreement is supplemental to the contract of December 5, 1979, which is by reference made a part hereof, and all the terms, conditions, and provisions thereof, unless specifically modified herein, are to apply to this contract and are made a part of this modification agreement as though they were expressly rewritten, incorporated, and included herein. (4) In the event of any conflict, inconsistency, or incongruity between the provisions of this modification agreement and any of the provisions of the contract of December 5, 1979, as heretofore modified, the provisions of this modification agreement shall in all respects govern and control. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this modification agreement the day and year first above written. ATTEST: By i64� Clerk o e and of County Commissioners (") COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO By and Through its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By Dale F. Grant, C airma Address P.O. Box 850 Eagle, Colorado 81631 Telephone (303) 328-7311 FRANKLIN ASSOCIATES, LTD. Address 8340 Mission Road Suite 101 Prairie Village, Kansas 66206 Telephone (913) 649-2225 Franklin Associates, Ltd. RESEARCH CONSULTANTS IN RESOURCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY/PLANNING TELEPHONE 913/649-2225 SUITE 101, 8340 MISSION ROAD PRAIRIE VILLAGE, KANSAS 66206 Ms. Jo Ann Deighan Assistant Environmental Health Officer Eagle County P.O. Box 850 Eagle, Colorado 81631 a J 'wl 19 19180 January 17, 1980 Re: Proposed Work Scope Changes for Eagle County Resource Recovery Study Dear Jo Ann: This is in response to your request that we document work scope changes for the Eagle County resource recovery study. Based upon our meetings in Eagle during the week of December 10, 1979, and on January 15, 1980, we see two general changes in project activity not originally anticipated in the cur- rent scope of work. They are as follows: (1) Expansion of the public information program which will require a number of additional trips to the County by FAL staff; travel to visit operating installations of modular solid waste and wood -fired boilers with County staff. (2) More extensive evaluation of the alternative scenarios in Task 6. The additional travel and public participation meetings are documented below. We concur with the philosophy of informing local governments and citizens about the project by going to the towns directly rather than expecting persons to come to Eagle for scheduled public meetings. Trip 1 - Trip to Eagle County for W. E. Franklin to attend a Vail town meeting January 8 at 7:30 p.m. and an Upper Eagle County Sanitation District meeting January 9, at 2:00 p.m. Trip 2 - Trip to Eagle County for W. E. Franklin and N. S. Artz to attend an Eagle town meeting at 7:30 p.m. January 15. Trip 3 - Trip to Kaibab Industries headquarters in Phoenix, Arizona for W. E. Franklin and N. S. Artz (date as yet unknown) to obtain information and management participation at Kaibab's headquarters level. Jo Ann Deighan 2 January 17, 1980 Trip 4 - Trip to visit operating resource recovery facilities and a local wood boiler facility for two FAL staff who will accompany Eagle County officials --estimated to Little Rock and Osceola, Arkansas in February. (Also, we hope that someone from Auburn, Maine can visit Eagle on an EPA peer match grant to give information to local officials in Eagle County about a similar project.) Trip 5 - Trip for two FAL staff to accompany Eagle County officials on a visit to two wood waste burning facilities at Eugene, Oregon. Trip 6 - Trip to Eagle County for W. E. Franklin and N. S. Artz to attend a County board meeting at the end of the study. (This was not budgeted in the original scope of work.) Trip 7 - Trip to Eagle County for W. E. Franklin and N. S. Artz to attend a public hearing at the end of the study. This meeting would be in addition to .the public meeting for which we have budgeted funds. The estimated additional FAL costs for the above -listed extra trips are shown in the table. These costs are itemized by trip and additional FAL person -hours associated with the trips are also listed. We are now into project work far enough to be anticipating the way that Task 6 work will develop. This is the key task in the study. Our proposal (page 57) anticipates four alternative plans. It now appears that we should screen more alternatives than that for the potential Eagle site as follows: Customer(s) Technologies Energy Product(s) Kaibab Industries Wood Waste Only Steam Kaibab Industries Wood Waste and MSW Kaibab Industries Wood Waste and MSW and School District Kaibab Industries Wood Waste and MSW and School District Steam Steam and Hot Water Co -generation of Electricity and Steam Also, of course, an Upper Eagle Valley option should be investigated as well as conventional disposal only. Thus, we now see six alternatives. o.� Jo Ann Deighan 3 January 17, 1980 There are several types of wood waste boilers, MSW boilers and co -generation options. We would prefer to narrow the field of alternative technologies in the Task 6 work too. There are three plant ownership options to evaluate with respect to the "Kaibab" scenarios: Public Ownership; Public/Private Ownership, and Private Ownership. Finally, we became aware of the Colorado law relating to "Regional Service Authorities" which appears to be a special district approach to the project that would take the County out of direct ownership. We want to explore this option carefully in Task 6 too. Finally, we believe that the more in-depth analysis we can do in Task 6 the better we will be able to move into Phase II on a more confident basis and ' fewer alternatives to explore in-depth. We believe that 120 person -hours of additional FAL senior staff time will be required at an estimated cost of $4,328. With the travel time and cost of $11,129, the total additional costs in this request are $15,457. You should note that I have calculated all of these at 1980 salary, fringe, and overhead rates; also, we have used current air fares, but air fares are rising about 3% each 3 months now. Nonetheless, we feel this change of work scope and cost will add very substantively to the project quality. I do want to emphasize to you that the original work scope and budget are a matter of commitment on our part and we will perform that work originally " contracted with no requests for additional funding. The amounts shown here are over and above the existing work scope. We strongly urge you to request additional funds of your own from EPA for Phase I. In particular, we feel it is very important that County officials visit operating modular incinerator(s) and wood waste boiler(s) in order to gain first-hand knowledge of how these systems operate. Also, you are pro- viding very strong support to us in the conduct of the work and making a substantive contribution to the project we normally do not experience with our clients. Please call me if you have any questions. - Sincerely, William E. Franklin VIEF : sb Attachments cc: N. S. Artz, Project Leader I H W x w Pa U 0- E -A U � U O is PL4 O U � n o �? 00 r I O G I U v CD W w Ha H mE-4 rZ4 6 En O pW U w zH O O U 6 W 0, —1 ca � N.0 � 00� rn ri � O O r I II N H r1 w b b ca r-1 (. Cr) r -I ,t u'1 M O to Ln 00 � R) O l� O N r- n n � H O n ti Ln v'1 •rl m � N N m % M O M O � H •r -I U N �' r i r I O N r I d r- 1 Ul 10 r 1 r -I r t0 MLr) MLr) �o "0 N 00 r-4 M r- O I () O O m cd 0 H p H H n E13 t� 00 N O O O O O d -t ca N 00 r -I m CO r -I N r -I M p b Lr) Ltl I 1 r I N "i -t ul i4 N r -i rl r -i n m co O O RS N b O Cl) COI --I r M a b cn to 1 1 r I N 'T Lr) Cq r i rl H v n U) to N O N t, cn N t O d RS 00 r -I m ul r -I t\ � - � Cl) P� t1 1 ul I ul O W m r4 N H -It p N r -I r I N " n m cd co r -i d> 00 OI Lr) r, u1 N b N CO O O Ln 00 %10 to N I r� Ln ( M -t m r` O r- N -r4 N p - N H r 1 rNh N u n m N ri m N O N u1 d cd � m � m r -f � 00 o co p, 'd M N 1 I �D %O r -i r- M -4 H v {!}. cn I O I P4cn -ty N N I I N m co m � H r{ c0 m __ co -.m. -r...i. ..__tn _. h p T7 Ln I 1 I b t~ O }a C7 rcy p, m ca O (31 r4 -I�d m aJ 41 •O p ca 41 cocop w m G� txj p a1 p o (1) a1 �4 p � � w d w w w rd Ea 0. p o o 'a) H U H U W v] W r -4w r- G 14 H a7 p ,Q ca r1 r-4 CS) ca ca Cd ca U) a .00 ? z h M E-4 .0 4-1 w Cd H U0 '4 H H H w C7