Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />00123~ <br /> <br />Cultural Resources - The original estimate included $9 million for this item and the <br />original authorization for the project limited expenditures to 4 percent of the project costs. The' <br />information provided to the ALP Review Team indicates the estimate was updated to $18.3 <br />million prior,to the indexing that occurred in October of2002. <br /> <br />, Wetlands and Fish and Wildlife Mitigation - The original estimate included a <br />recreation component thai has now been re-designated as fishery mitigation enhancement. This <br />appears to include some land acquisition for fishing access as well as support for stocking the <br />reservoir. The indicated increase of $4.4 million is for water quality monitoring. <br /> <br />Non-coutract Costs. The listed increases above do not include non-contract costs that <br />have also increased as the cost of the project has increased. Concern has been expressed by the <br />project sponsors that the project has not actually changed, only the estimated costs have changed; <br />therefore, the original dollars allowed for non-contract costs should not significantly increase. <br />As shown in this appendix, the current estimate of non-contract costs as provided to the ALP <br />Review Team includes all those components listed on Page E-2l of Attachment E to the FSEIS. <br />The scope of the proj ect is such that the level of staff involvement, which are part of non- <br />contract costs, is directly related to several factors that will tend to drive the non-contract costs <br />over the original estimate. These factors include the high level of public involvement, changes <br />resulting from the proximity of the pumping plant to the town of Durango, the ISDEA <br />contracting process, the abundance of cultural resources in the area, and the migratory bird <br />requirements. <br /> <br />The current estimate of non-contract costs as a percentage of contract costs varies from 19 to <br />34.7 percent with an average for the project of 29 percent, which is still below the 30 percent <br />anticipated in the FSEIS and the funding agreements with non-Indian sponsors. <br /> <br /> <br />In addition, the percentages for design and construction management based on the construction <br />costs are in line with the percentages suggested in ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering <br />Practice No. 45. How to Work Effectively With Consulting Engineers - Getting the Best Proiect <br />for the Right Price. <br /> <br />4-4 <br />