The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.f. Payment Voucher 1 & 2 (Final) – Wells 4 & 5 Sealing and Chippendale Observation Well, Engineering Project 181I:\City Clerk\Agenda Items\Approved Items\6.f. Payment Voucher 1 & 2 (Final) – Wells 4 & 5 Sealing and Chippendale Observation Well, Engineering Project 181.docx EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Council Regular Meeting: November 1, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: Payment Voucher 1 & 2 (Final) – Wells 4 & 5 Sealing and Chippendale Observation Well, Engineering Project 181 AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Mitch Hatcher, Project Engineer John Morast, Interim City Engineer AGENDA NO. 6.f. ATTACHMENTS: Payment Vouchers APPROVED BY: ddj RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve Payment Voucher 1 & Payment Voucher 2(Final) to Keys Well Drilling Company for the Wells 4 and 5 Sealing and Chippendale Observation Well, Engineering Project 181 and Accepting it for Perpetual Maintenance BACKGROUND: This item is on the agenda to request Payment 1 & 2 (Final) to Keys Well Drilling Company for the Wells 4 and 5 Sealing and Chippendale Observation Well, Engineering Project 181. Well #4 At the November 17, 2015 City Council meeting, it was recommended only a portion of the original bid be awarded, which included the work for Well #4. Well #4 was initially cleaned, and in working with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) and Department of Natural Resources (DNR), it was determined that Well #4 could be converted to an observation well, instead of sealing Well #4 and constructing a new observation well. With that came a cost savings. Keys submitted a second quote for additional work necessary to convert Well #4, above and beyond the original abandonment work, for a total of $16,375. The amount of grout actually needed to complete the work was more than anticipated. The grout, along with the extra work hours, added an additional $3,570 for a final total of $19,945. Keys Well Drilling completed this work in September. Well #5 As recommended at the November 17, 2015 City Council meeting, the Well #5 portion of the project, was not awarded and further investigation would be completed. Keys performed additional work to extend the well casing to prepare for additional investigation. It was determined that Traut Companies was better suited to perform the actual investigation. Traut quoted $12,025 for the investigation work. At this time, Well #5 has been investigated, and as directed by MDH, the well has been drilled out, ready for proper sealing in the future when additional grant funding is available. The original bids for the project included: Well #4 Abandonment $39,250.00 Well #5 Abandonment $130,500.00 Observation Well $48,460.00 Total $218,210.00 2 Originally the project was awarded $64,000 in grant funding: • $50,000 from a MDH well sealing grant (50% reimbursement of eligible costs) • $4,000 from a Dakota County well sealing grant, and • $10,000 from a MDH source water protection grant. The actual work performed to both investigate well #4 as an observation well and investigate well #5 for abandonment include: 1. Keys a. Original contract to abandon well #4 $39,250.00 b. Quote for extra work to convert well #4 $16,375.00 c. Additional materials/labor for conversion $ 3,570.00 Keys Total $59,175.00 2. Traut Companies a. Investigate Well #5 for Abandonment $12,025.00 TOTAL Well #4 & #5 Abandonment and Conversation $71,220.00 Grant Funding Utilized 1. MDH well sealing (50% of Keys and Traut well #5 work) $ 8,468.75 2. MDH source water protection $10,000.00 TOTAL Grant Funds $18,468.75 The portion of the work not funded by grants, a total of $52,751.25, was funded out of the water utility fund. The original engineering project name and description did not change, so the voucher details are still listed as well #4 and #5 abandonment and Chippendale Monitor wells. SUMMARY: Staff recommends that Council approve both Payment Voucher 1 & Voucher 2 (Final) for the Wells 4 and 5 Sealing and Chippendale Observation Well, Engineering Project 181 and accept the project for perpetual maintenance subject to the following conditions. 1. Satisfactorily showing that the contractor has complied with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding state income tax. 2. Evidence in the form of an affidavit that all claims against the contractor by reasons of the contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured. 3. Consent of Surety to Final Payment certification from the contractor’s surety.