HomeMy WebLinkAbout080EA Engineering,
Science, and
Technology, lnc.
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 707
Seattle, WA 98121
Telephone: (206) 452-5350
Fax: (206) 443-7646
www.eaest.com
26 November 2Q14
M Garth Mann sent via e-mail
Statesman Group of Companies
U.S. Head Office
9300 E. Raintree Drive, Suite 100
Scottsdale, AZ 852690
Corporate Head Office
7370 Sierra Morena Blvd,. SW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T3H-4H9
Subject: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
EA Project Number 1501601
Request for Equitable Adjustment
Dear Mr. Mann
This letter follows up on our letter sent to you dated May 13,2014 regarding the schedule delays
and additional scope that have resulted in additional costs to complete the Pleasant Harbor
Supplemental EIS (SEIS). The scope of work and schedule for the SEIS has substantially
expanded since our contract with Jefferson County was signed and approved in February 2013.
For example, the following items were added to the scope of work:
. Washington State Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) road within the site boundary. Alteration of the Maritime Village areao Additional reports to be summarized in the SEISo Water Plano Sewer Plano Energy Memoo Economic Reports (August 2013 and April 2014)
Also, the secondary peer review of the final technical reports (reviewing final reports for
compliance with initial peer review comments) was more extensive than originally assumed
(initially budgeted for 8 hours of labor). EA was not provided the extensive initial peer review
comments until January 2014, and was not aware of the labor that would be required until that
time, which was approximately 11 months after we had prepared our cost estimate. The
summary memo and the thirteen sets of matrices detailing compliance with each peer review
comment was a significant task, requiring more labor than anticipated.
Lastly, the SEIS schedule included as Appendix A to the February 2013 Contract indicated Draft
SEIS issuance in Mgg2013, with Final SEIS issuance in September 2013. Due to the delays
resulting from the additional scope of work items and the additional technical reports
(Water/Sewer and Economic reports not finalized until October 2014), the Draft SEIS was
issued in November 2014, approximately 18 months beyond the date indicated in the February
2013 Contract. This extended schedule resulted in additional labor beyond that originally
assumed in the February 2013 Contract, including participation in approximately 50 additional
weekly conference calls with Jefferson County and the Applicant representative, and
coordination with the Applicant's technical team members.
You may be aware of the terms of the contract that we have with Jefferson County. Specifically,
Section X states that "neither pafiy shall be responsible for damages arising directly or
indirectly from any delays from causes beyond their reasonable control. ln addition, if the
delays resulting from any such causes increase the cost or time required by the
CONSULTANT to perform ifs servrces in an orderly and efficient manner( CONSULTANT
shall be entitled to an equitable adjustment in schedule andlor compensafion" (emphasis
added). ln addition, Section X of the February 2013 Contract indicates that "if, during the term
of this Agreement, circumstances or conditions that were not originally contemplated by or
known to, or should have reasonably been contemplated or known to the CONSULTANT are
revealed, to the extent that they affect the scope of services, compensation, schedule, allocation
of risk or other material terms of this agreement, CONSULTANT may call for renegotiation of
affected portions of this Agreement'.
Consistent with Section X of the February 2013 Contract, and due to the additional scope items
and the extension in schedule detailed above, we are requesting a budget revision not to
exceed $19.500 for costs already incurred in completion of the Draft SEIS ($4,500), and
anticipated costs to complete the Final SEIS ($15,000)1.
While our privity of contract is solely with Jefferson County,, Section V of our contract requires
"written approval from the Applicant" for cost overruns that have either occurred or are
anticipated to occur. EA is submitting this second request for written approval. According to
Jefferson County, signature of this letter will serve as "written approval from the Applicant"
.Following written approval, Jefferson County will amend the Contract with EA, and the original
contract terms signed by both parties would still apply.
Timely execution of this budget amendment will ensure that we can respond quickly to
comments received during the Draft SEIS comment period. Since our budget is now depleted,
we will await a contract amendment from Jefferson County to proceed.
To summarize, the original budget amount was $92,950. With this budget amendment of
$19,500, the total contract would equal $112,450.
Please do not hesitate to call me if you have questions.
Sincerely,
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, lnc.
)
Rich Schipanski, Program Manager
CC: David Johnson, Jefferson County
I Estimate of EA cosfs associated with preparation of the Frnal SE/S. Actual costs could be adjusted (up
or down) based on comments received during the Draft SE/S publlc comment period.
Contract Amendment
Pleasant Harbor SEIS
2
Authorization provided this _ day of
Statesman Group of Companies
2014
By Date:
Contract Amendment
Pleasant Harbor SEIS
3