1/28/1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Geraghty & Miller, Inc. Indian River County - 2 - 20 Jan 81 Commissioners P225SC2 one-hour intervals and 1846 gpm for 20 minutes. These pumping rates are higher than those anticipated in our March 1979 report to the County. Preliminary analysis of the test data indicates that aquifer parameters are slightly more favorable than those assumed in the predictive model that we discussed in our March 1979 report. As a result, impacts of the proposed withdrawals will be slightly less than those predicted. We have not received results on water -quality analyses as yet. John Robbins of the Joint Venture will be better able to dis- cuss them with the County when they become available. Geraghty & Miller has completed three of the five tasks defined in its January 7, 1980, contract. The status of these tasks is as follows: Task 1:- Preparation of Specifications and Contractor's Proposal Form Under this task, we proposed and budgeted for the preparation of the Technical Specifications to be incorporated into the contract documents for bidding the drilling and testing program. At the request of the Joint Venture, the scope of this task was expanded to include the preparation of the contract documents. At the timQ of the request, a set of FmHA guidelines to be followed in the preparation of the contract documents was for- warded to Geraghty & Miller. On April 15, 1980, a draft copy of the specifications and contract documents was submitted to the Joint Venture. After the Joint Venture reviewed the docu- ments with its FmHA expert, it was discovered that the guide- lines were not the proper ones for a contract of this dollar amount and we were asked to rework the documents. The rework was extensive, as it required changes in both the form and sub- stance of the contract. In addition, Geraghty & Miller, Inc., administered the contract between the County and Alsay-Pippin Corporation during the course of the program.* Geraghty & Miller has completed 100 percent of the work in Task 1 at a cost of $13,703.82. This figure represents $8,703.82 over the amount budgeted in our proposal. 5 PAVE 70T, JAN 28 1981