_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (250)

Home Browse Search

Thursday,July 20,1995 09:21:48 PM Greg Lewicki and Asociates Page 1 of 5 (tl'l':: it,1,i .e 1) d .�, Ssovi.ltus July 20, 1995 Lou LaGiglia Trustee P.O. Box 500 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Dear Lou: I have been asked by Dianne Delaney to review the RFP's and the subsequent bids for this year's DMG work at the Mid-Continent Mines. Overall, the bids are generally 2 to 4 times higher than what we had calculated (and actually received bids on) for the work. It also seems that the RFP's generally follow the permit but a few deviations and contract wordings have raised the costs and the anxiety level of the bidders. The comments on the RFP's and the bids will be divided into two areas: Sutey Pile and Alines 3 and 4. Suter Pile 1) The requirement for silt fence under Task 2 is simply not necessary, especially for such a short term use. To my knowledge, its use is also not stipulated in the permit. The entire refuse pile is contained by existing ditches which lead to the sediment pond. While the contractor is loading topsoil from one of the stockpiles, a ditch/berm can be utilized around the outside edge of the pile to prevent runoff from entering the undisturbed area. Also, temporary culverts should be used to cross the Diversion and the collection ditch to gain access to the pile itself. Contractors that I have worked with in the past generally frown on silt fence for its cost, its appearance, its effectiveness and ongoing maintenance problems. 2) The vast portion of some existing ditches, particularly ditches, #5, #6, and #7 do not need to be re-worked, as stated in Task 4. The ditches are already in place with good vegetation establishment on both sides. These ditches are located at the inside edge of the refuse pile benches which are approximately 10' to 20' wide and are graded to the inside ditch. It is virtually impossible that these ditches could breach since the entire bench is available to act as a ditch in a large runoff event.