HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.con.065.1996 ..1i�� .. .. . .. . . .. � .. . � . .._.. . �. . .. .,. .. . ...., . ... . . .
� �1
� ��f``�k .,
C�6'-G > €:.� .
. � �:
,�
:;� �.,
PITKIN COUNTY CON7RACT �,,,
,y. ;
ENGINEERING SERVECES FOR THE PITKIN COUN7Y SOLID WASTE CENTER '�
� j:`:
THIS CONTRACT, made as of the ��t�day of `i •��«�'`'�'1996, by "�
,:,`:.
and between the County of Pitkin, Colorado, a Colorado home-rule county, �
(hereinafter called the CQUNTY) and GOLDER ASSOCIATES ihereinafter called the �• -
�. `
CONTRACTOR). �.
1
WITNESSETH, that whereas the County intends to accomplish ° '
�°:
retaining an engineer for ENG{NEERING SERVICES FOR THE PiTKIN COUNTY SOUD �
� .
WASTE CENTER, Proposal #1995-4RR3, hereinafter called the PROJEC7, in +�
�',.
accordance with the terms and conditions outiined in the Request for Proposal ��
_ i
Documents.
NOW, THEREFORE, the County and the Contractor, for the considera-
tions hereinaiter set forth, agree as foNows: --- ---
1. THE Contractor AGREES to furnish all the necessary �abor,
i
materials, equipment, tools and professional services necessary to complete in a
i
professional manner a1i tasks required for the completion of the Project, in strict
compliance with the contract documents herein mentioned, which are made a part
of this contract. �
a. SUB-CONTRACTORS. The Contractor agrees to bind every �, .
•,
sub-contractor by the terms of the Contract Documents. The Contract Documents �
�'!`
shall not be construed as creating any contractual relationship between the sub-
;y
�
i :;y I
.a
, , ,,�
. �
�
,,.;
• F[LE No. 603 03i18 '97 11�08 ID�KELLER—LG�RY IN5 (NC 303756d218 PAGE 1
J i;
a�it♦����w . — h._ ..areau,mnn S �.
,�.......-,.:-_. ._. . . .. . � ' " m/19.97
vnooUCE�.. . . . ��.. .. . _. ..'_ . _.. .. .. ... THlS CERTIFICATE 16 IBS�ED A8 A FJATTER OF INWRIMTION `
ONLY AND COFiFEftB NO RI(iHTB UPON THE CEA7IFlCATE �-
Ka�er{mnY MtUnrMe Ine HOIDER.THIB CER'fIF1CATE OOE9 NOT A11END�EXiEND OR .
J90t E qa1d�Ave 1100 AL7EH THE COVERAOE AFFOROED BV THE PtllIC1ES BELOW.
COMPANIE6 AFFOIipING COVEAAL3E
o«w.r co aox�o-zva mMr�
A TAANBCOMi1NENTAL IN6 CQ
w � UNRANY
Tp}A gyaleme Ca�orrpyq� 8 TRANSPORTATION MS CO
3eoo E�alh AwnW ��P��,
po� � ��g C CREAT WE6T CASUALTY Co
cpuPWY
D
i TO �Tf1AT rTHE�POI{CfES�IFI��CE ! 6EC�11A4��8E �IF¢'7A�6Ufl�NAM��'D�A UVE FOR rw�ICY P�RiL`b:'�.� . .- . �
. WPfCAT�,NO7NTItlST.WdNU ANY qEOUIfiPJ4EHT,TFAA1 OR CONO{SION OF AN'f GONTAALT OR QTF#R OOCUTAENf SVRH HESPECT TO WNICH THI6 '
CEATIFlGnTE AUY BE 166UEA OR MAY PEHiNN,ihE WSURANCE AFFOrmEO BY THE FOiK'dE4 OESCRiOED}iFAE1N I&SufllELt 70 ALL TNE TEfNiS, •
IXCLUSIONS ANp CDIJpffIONS OF 6I1CH POLICIfS.4AflT5 9Fi0WN MAY N.�VE DEEN flEaUCED BY PAID CUINS
L� lYP6 OF pID17RA1KE POIJCT/N1�0EA ��r� W7E I�WL01M V� .
� ' A CENEBFLUABILRY IAE 1a57043823 f0101/8fi 10/01/97 OEAEMIeaoREOATE 7 2,000,000
X m1A4E0.cNL pEAEpLL L49f.1fY PqOq1C71•[OYpqP Aa0 S 1,UpU,UUU
CiAWi w0E Q OcCUN PER901ut i A�V INLIPY T 1,U00,OOU -
� OYIIEP9�COMFNG'�OW7 MoT EAtli dfOJRflE6ME { �
F1HE DAMAOe Wn w M) i
uco cxr y,ny w� y 5, o
B .urrouoa�F u.Bwir BLL�1031650209 t6/ollg6 10101JB7
X ANY A11f0 COVBINi➢iWOGE LM1R i 1.OUO.Q�U
ALL OWAFD AUT09 ������.
. SCJfEWLEU hUT0.5 � t
NMfO AUf0.S 90011Y�NNNY
N01FOWiED�Ufa9 Rsf arderwl �
Pa0vFA1Y OANADE S
I
c
a�uoe wenm �nrto ornv•fa accrosNS ! I�_
ANy�I�{p OiHEfl i}UN AUTO O/RN, '�i
S
' f
B excESS u�ewTV �cn ocawacvice f f�aoo,aoo
X uu9aEiU rowA CUP 1091650213 10/01/9b 10/01197 aoonEWiE 7 1,000,060
� OTHEA�1Vip UAIPAEIU R7flM 7
1WRKfliS COR�PE114hT10N ANO 5
' F+1Pl0YEPS lU&lffY
ft FA�ACCIOEN[ i
. THE PlIOPHIEfOW INCl EL p5lA6:.POL'C/Wp i
� PMTNEWiFYEClif1YE
aFFI[EHS ANE E%CL EL OISEAbE�EA EYnWrPE 3
oTMEq
� A CAiUE CLVEFU(3E HE 1U57�99827 tOf01196 t�lat197 B.iPLOVEE DISFCNESTV 50,000
C GF00 COVFAeGE CLP 7U973A to118196 1671979) GR[D iN671RANLE �a.600
��X'�S� � 24 53N&. NSVEtuQ=SLYECNI !x5
11
�(� , _pc;,r.�x�,���A.:w._ ._'�'.�:'.`=:��"s�.; ..�:,a'�'1�.: � .�,"�__. '�-'- x.�,�"� .rr,:,�'nY .
� sMb�M aNY OF nl Aaovp CEStlt18EU PouCtES BE CANCLLLPO BEF�R°_THE^
P�Wn Gau�ry Roeowca Rawvery EXMMTiON OAi':TNEAEOF,ME ISSUNO COLPA,VY'NILL ENCEAWp 10�NN. .
htfi; Mltes gtntlz ?0 wvs wpm¢u wrY�:o tt�c�nFrca�no�cEq w�ueo to n���r, .
78 sarvka ceffer Reed 9UI iAllllRE IO IIAL SUCN UOT'CE�U.11 d1PO4f!J6 6All8ASf�61 On iu.en.m�
��SAA � atEt1 nf r.rn Kwo t�roN r�cowurt.rts anexrs aq neaaesE�nair,Es
� AlIn1011�0 RF9A£9H(TA7NE �
P4BESiT L SIBElJlf6,CIC
''�'�.���u�t.�aC'l�?'',.. .�_y+L�.`:.7:' ;��:;���r`!'-'.;�°' .i5`wy��:,�;2 � �`0�'-�nif�'i '�.i` 8�� : .
"':i:,Ci' :�.i'.�:�:::?�'.'d:i•.-F`_..Ial� `ei::�'k. "'i�'-�k,r.J:�"��.ry'
, ��i
w �
�
.-...
. .
..,, - .:. .: . , ,
. . , . , ,...-.., ...,..
� . . �. ... _.__. . . . � t..
,_ ,-..,;_
� November 30, 1995 -3- PRS-2800
�
� �y
2.0 SCOPE OF WOBK
':.�;..
� A thorough evaluation of the County's solid waste needs and resources, and careful fucure
plannin� will provide the Counry with a cost-effective means to achieve rheir current and
� projected goals. .z> <
� Therefore, Golder Associates Inc.,based on a site visit and file review,discussions with County _
personnel,and information contained in the RFP,proposes the foilowin,;scope of work.
�
� 2.1 Statement B-Review of Daily Onerations
As a consulting engineerin� firm, Golder is uniquely qualified to provide a review of the daily
� oQerations of the faciliry. Golder has been involved in solid waste consulting for over 30 yeacs
and can brin� a vazied background to this review. Golder has worked closely with the major
� waste firms(BFT,Waste Mana;ement, Laidlaw,etc.)in developing engineering designs for their
� facilities. As such, �ve have oained a�reat deal of experience in the operations of the facilities, �:�
because the operational practices often dictate ponions of the ensineering desi�n (i.e., liner
� design,surface water runon/runoff control,ecc.?.
� �Vith die advent of the Subtitle D reQulacions, all facilities have been required to impiement
operational standards. Additionally, proper operations can increase site life while limitins
� environmental exposure. T'hroueh our experience�ained at the major facilities, Golder has been
able to provide assistance to the smalier facilicies that typically do not have access to the
� experienced�ained by[he larger waste tirms. This allows us to readily evaluate the operational
practices at rhe smaller facilities and provide useful informa[ion to supplemen[daily oQerations. '
� The close working relationship�vi�h the lar;er waste firms ensures thac the�idance provided to
all facitities we serve is currenc, applicable to the size of the faciliry, and atlows for economical
� and environmentally safe operacions.
i _
� �
� �
Golder Associates
' _, �,, •
`
� � .
�
_,�' .
.,.�
� - . , `� t,
F, �;
1�,..'e;Ri
f�;.
� November 30, 1995 -4- PR�-?$00 -
�� .�
s�.�,
� If Golder is selected as the successful consu{tan[, che Frst action�voutd be to thorou�hly review ' ���
the pertinent facility plans(operations,contingency,CQA,etc.). The nexc step would be[o meet '� ��'
� at the site with the current operator and County personnel and obsecve and review the actual site ��.�
operations. Following the review and meeting, a detailed lisc of recommendations for ''
� {_ `_*.
improvements, revisions, further actions, or continued practices would be prepared for the �•-;::.p-�'
Counry and presented in a summary repoct. .k''. ,
� �� •
� In preparation of this proposal,Golder has made a cursory review of the operacions plan for the �':�
- Pl,...;..
faciliry as wetl as making a brief review of the site operations during the site visit. Based on " ;;_:
=i�
� these reviews and observations, Golder has the followin� preliminary commentsl 1�..
recommendations regardin;the operations of che facility: ��
,:•;,�
:: .;.
� ��,,.
i,
� Poteniial lack of on-site soil may dicrate changes in daily cover placement and height of o
i
-� refuse li8s;
► Increase use of signs,cones,etc.,shouid be considered to dicect the public usin�site;
� '$,
► Equipment usage could be optimized;
� ► Roadway construction and alignmen[ should be considered to minimize repairs and z- .�
� reali�nmenu of roads during future filtins; , _
,� `. p .
► A site CQA plan and construction specifications should be developed;
� �
► Improvements to site drainage and fu[ure leachate control systems could be made;and.
� ► Increased use of wind fences,etc.,should be considered to control blowin�Gtter. �+
�� .
� � :,:'
These are only cursory and are suhjeccto modification/chan�e based on a detailed review of the
,'i
facility plans and a detailed site visit if Golder is retained as the consuttan[. '�'�
� �
� f}�,�� �
:� .
� , i
Golder Associates
. ''�
i '
. r ,
. .
,,,
� • • - �fi;��,":
� t�r�42_:.'Y._...�
! .
� L'..,.`_.y:..,; .
[�iovember 30, 1995 -5- PRS-2800 z' "'�
`_ ...
� 2.2 Statement G-R�view of F.ngin ring DesiQn � `^�
�.
' '.-,'.
� In preparation of this proposal, Golder has made a cursory review oF the present engineering
design of the facility. The design appears to incorporate a combination of a (ateral expansio�
� onto the sideslopes of the faciliry in conjunction with a vertical expansion over the existing waste '-
(; •`
disposal areas. � :;.- '
� � - '
As a fusc step,Golder proposes to review the current engineering desi�n,alon�with information � .
� such as site property, topography, his[orical waste placement constraints, stare reguladons and
po�ential altemative desigtu, sequencine/airspace considerations, as well as hydrogeolo;ic �
� parameters to gain a complete understanding of possible engineerin�considerations for the site
(layouts, phasin„ liner and cover systems, leachate control, etc.). After[his review a meetins €�•
� (concurrent with the site visit discussed in Section 2.1)would be held with Counry personnel ro
,
� discuss our preliminary fmdin;s. Golder would then propose recommendations for revisions to �
the en�ineering design(i.e.,optimize the tocatioz�and the size of Uie proposed lateral expansion, �
� etc.) utilizing the inforcnation previously discussed as we{1 as any possible Further anaiysis of t_
geolo�ical, sequencin�, and airspace faccors. The conclusions of the review, along with � 4
� recommendations for additionat work activities, would then be presenred ro �he Counry in a
summary repon.
� �
Based on a very cursory review of the engineerin� design Golder has these preliminary
� comments: �
� ► A concise set of engineerin�plans, includin�details,plan views,etc., should be prepared
in a clean, easy to follow forma[. This will aid in re�ulatory review as well as facilicate
� construction; . '
► The phasin� of the development wouid need ro take into account the hisrorical was[e �
� placement,progression of fillin�,e[c.; '
� ► The potencial lack of on-site soils Tor cover/liner systems would need to be examined wi[h � -
possibie altemate liner/cover systems reviewed; �� i
� Goider Associates
� . -
� '�;
r
. _ ,
.a' ,
'�R
,. . , .
�r:. ;� ,, . ._.
.
. ... ,. , ,.
. , : . ; .
� . . " �'t`���r�i�1, .
�.�iL��.
�,.�
� November 30, 1995 -6- '� `'} �
PRS-2800
<
� �.
� Construction on the sideslopes, in relation to stabiliry, methods and sequence of ��"�.:' _
� construc[ion,aad potential perched�roundwater zones would need to be evatuated;
� The leachate collection system may be revised; +;�.'_:;,
� ► :.,,:r::..'
Surface water control at the site should be futther examined;and, ? � ..
� 1�� , .
► Deve(opment of a concise CQA p]an and standard construction specifications. •
� 23 Statemen[D-Gonstruction Oversi�{ � .
� As discussed in Section 6.0 below, Golder Associates Inc., along with our wholly owned '
;°i
subsidiary company, Golder Construction Services (GCS), offers one of che lar�est third-pam
� ��
construction qualiry assurance moni[orin; firntis in the country. The Principal-in-Charge �
�
proposed for this projec[(�Ir. David O'Sadnick)is the Rocky b[ountain Reaional Manaser t'or �
� GCS, and atong with Mr. Dean Rector, che proposed Project Nlana�er, offer aimo'st 30 years of ;
� combined geotechnical engineerin�construction experience.
� GCS is widely reco�nized as industry leaders in construction manaeernent/constcuction quality
assurance monitoring services. Our vast experience allows us to economically complete almost
� any level of construction oversight. 1
i.
4
� It is proposed that for this project an experienced GCS soils cechrucian would be assigned[o the `•
�
project. The technician will, depending on the needs of che Councy, not only provide �
� conscruction qualiiy assurance monitoring, bu[ could aIso oversee canstcuction manaozrneric
acuvities such as contractor pay,conflict resolucion, scheduling,etc. GC3, in conjunction wirh -
� Golder, has recent[y completed tfus rype of project for Chaffee Counry (refer to Section 4.0 for �
� details of this and many other so[id waste landfill related cons[ruction projects).
� `� I� �-
� Golder Associates
�
i . �, ,"'
� r -
� '
;..q.
:�
- .... .�.p. . • ••
��n �. -.
, .
��. �., . ,.�.: .. �.� :. � .
. .. .. �.�..,,-.. �. .,.....
i...,.�..�.;-.�....� ....c._. .....,._. �..
� � '. .J _ ����;�;;�.
cJ����;:'.
,� '�,'y� ..
Golder Assocloles Inc. '.'�. �;:`
� � 200 Union 8o�levord.5uite 500 �� Goid^'e,-r,.� �_'' ��
lakewood,CO USA 802�8 ��SD�.iLLLes
Telephone(303)980-0540 ;. _.
Faz(303)985•2080 .
� ti.
..J,
� t. •
� PROPOSAL �, .
;:;�� '
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERPi TG SERVICES - -
EXISTTNG PITKIN C�UNTY,LANDFII,L �
PITKPt COUNTY, COLORADO
�
�.
� Prepared For.• ��:
�
76 Service Cen[er Road
Aspen,Colorado 81611 .
���
Prepared By:
Go[der Associa[es Inc. �
200 Union Boulevard,Suite 500
Lakewood,Colorado 30228
� Distrihution� "
I
� 6 Copies-Ms.Chris Hali , �
1 Copy-Golder Associates Inc. �
� November 1995 P�-�sQO i
OFFICES tNAUSTG'.LIA.CANADA.GERWIANV.HUNGAfi!ITAIY.SNEDEN.UN17ED XING�OVI l��"TcD STATES E�
/ r, i.
`'..
v
� /
a
:i' .
-:.i