The URL can be used to link to this page

Contract No. 1993-02T H E A M E R I C A N AIA Document B141 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect 1987 EDITION THIS DOCUMENT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES, CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO ITS COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION. AGREEMENT made as of the Fourteenth dayof April Nineteen Hundred and Ninety Three. BETWEEN the Owner: Kodiak Island Borough (Name and address) 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 and the Architect: GDM, Inc. (Name and address) 900 West Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2020 For the f6llowing Project: (Include detailed description of Project, location, address and scope.) Peterson Elementary School Rehabilitation PHS/OES Grant # AK -90-08A40 in the year of The Owner and Architect agree as set forth below. Copyright 1917, 1926, 1948, 1951, 1953, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1967, 1970, 1974, 1977, ©1987 by The American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006. Reproduction of the material herein or substantial quotation of its provisions without written permission of the AIA violates the copyright laws of the United States and will be subject to legal prosecution. AIA DOCUMENT 6141 • OWNER ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION • AIA® • ©1987 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 B141-1987 1 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to legal prosecution. I N S T I T U T E O F A R C H I T E C T S AIA Document B141 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect 1987 EDITION THIS DOCUMENT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES, CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO ITS COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION. AGREEMENT made as of the Fourteenth dayof April Nineteen Hundred and Ninety Three. BETWEEN the Owner: Kodiak Island Borough (Name and address) 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 and the Architect: GDM, Inc. (Name and address) 900 West Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2020 For the f6llowing Project: (Include detailed description of Project, location, address and scope.) Peterson Elementary School Rehabilitation PHS/OES Grant # AK -90-08A40 in the year of The Owner and Architect agree as set forth below. Copyright 1917, 1926, 1948, 1951, 1953, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1967, 1970, 1974, 1977, ©1987 by The American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006. Reproduction of the material herein or substantial quotation of its provisions without written permission of the AIA violates the copyright laws of the United States and will be subject to legal prosecution. AIA DOCUMENT 6141 • OWNER ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION • AIA® • ©1987 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 B141-1987 1 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to legal prosecution. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT ARTICLE 1 ARCHITECT'S RESPONSIBILITIES 1.1 ARCHITECT'S SERVICES 1.1.1 The Architect's services consist of those services per- formed by the Architect, Architect's employees and Architect's consultants as enumerated in Articles 2 and 3 of this Agreement and any other services included in Article 12. 1.1.2 The Architect's services shall be performed as expedi- tiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work. Upon request of the Owner, the Architect shall submit for the Owner's approval a schedule for the performance of the Architect's services which may be adjusted as the Project proceeds, and shall include allowances for periods of time required for the Owner's review and for approval of submissions by authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. Time limits established by this schedule approved by the Owner shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Architect or Owner. 1.1.3 The services covered by this Agreement are subject to the time limitations contained in Subparagraph 11.5.1. ARTICLE 2 SCOPE OF ARCHITECT'S BASIC SERVICES 2.1 DEFINITION 2.1.1 The Architect's Basic Services consist of those described in Paragraphs 2.2 through 2.6 and any other services identified in Article 12 as part of Basic Services, and include normal stmc- rural, mechanical and electrical engineering services. 2.2 SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE 2.2.1 The Architect shall review the program furnished by the Owner to ascertain the requirements of the Project and shall arrive at a mutual understanding of such requirements with the Owner. 2.2.2 The Architect shall provide a preliminary evaluation of the Owner's program, schedule and construction budget requirements, each in terms of the other, subject to the limita- tions set forth in Subparagraph 5.2.1. 2.2.3 The Architect shall review with the Owner alternative approaches to design and construction of the Project. 2.2.4 Based on the mutually agreed-upon program, schedule and construction budget requirements, the Architect shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Schematic Design Docu- ments consisting of drawings and other documents illustrating the scale and relationship of Project components. 2.2.5 The Architect shall submit to the Owner a preliminary estimate of Construction Cost based on current area, volume or other unit costs. 2.3 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE 2.3.1 Based on the approved Schematic Design Documents and any adjustments authorized by the Owner in the program, schedule or construction -budget,-the Architect-shair prepare, for approval by the Owner, Design Development Documents consisting of drawings and other documents to fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, struc- tural, mechanical and electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate. 2.3.2 The Architect shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to the preliminary estimate of Construction Cost. 2.4 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PHASE 2.4.1 Based on the approved Design Development Docu- ments and any further adjustments in the scope or quality of the Project or in the construction budget authorized by the Owner, the Architect shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Construction Documents consisting of Drawings and Specifica- tions setting forth in detail the requirements for the construc- tion of the Project. 2.4.2 The Architect shall assist the Owner in the preparation of the necessary bidding information, bidding forms, the Condi- tions of the Contract, and the form of Agreement between the Owner and Contractor. 2.4.3 The Architect shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to previous preliminary estimates of Construction Cost indi- cated by changes in requirements or general market conditions. 2.4.4 The Architect shall assist the Owner in connection with the Owner's responsibility for filing documents required for the approval of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 2.5 BIDDING OR NEGOTIATION PHASE 2.5.1 The Architect, following the Owner's approval of the Construction Documents and of the latest preliminary estimate of Construction Cost, shall assist the Owner in obtaining bids or negotiated proposals and assist in awarding and preparing contracts for construction. 2.6 CONSTRUCTION PHASE—ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 2.6.1 The Architect's responsibility to provide Basic Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with the award of the Contract for Construction and termi- nates at the earlier of the issuance to the Owner of the final Certificate for Payment or 60 days after the date of Substan- tial Completion of the Work. 2.6.2 The Architect shall provide administration of the Con- tract for Construction as set forth below and in the edition of AIA Document A201, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, current as of the date of this Agreement, unless otherwise provided in this Agreement. 2.6.3 Duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the Architect shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement of the Owner and Architect with consent of the Contractor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. AIA DOCUMENT B141 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION • AIA® • ©1987 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to legal prosecution. B141-1987 2 2.6.15 The Architect shall interpret and decide matters con- cerning performance of the Owner and Contractor under the requirements of the Contract Documents on written request of either the Owner or Contractor. The Architect's response to Ahali=be^^dP with reasonable --promptness and within any time limits agreed upon. 2.6.16 Interpretations and decisions of the Architect shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial deci- sions, the Architect shall endeavor to secure faithful perfor- mance by both Owner and Contractor, shall not show partiality to either, and shall not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith. 2.6.17 The Architect's decisions on matters relating to aesthe- tic effect shall be final if consistent with the intent expressed in the Contract Documents. 2.6.18 The Architect shall render written decisions within a reasonable time on all claims, disputes or other matters in ques- tion between the Owner and Contractor relating to the execu- tion or progress of the Work as provided in the Contract Documents. 2.6.19 The Architect's decisions on claims, disputes or other matters, including those in question between the Owner and Contractor, except for those relating to aesthetic effect as pro- vided in Subparagraph 2.6.17, shall be subject to arbitration as provided in this Agreement and in the Contract Documents. ARTICLE 3 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 3.1 GENERAL 3.1.1 The services described in this Article 3 are not included in Basic Services unless so identified in Article 12, and they shall be paid for by the Owner as provided in this Agreement, in addition to the compensation for Basic Services. The services described under Paragraphs 3.2 and 3.4 shall only be provided if authorized or confirmed in writing by the Owner. If services described under Contingent Additional Services in Paragraph 3.3 are required due to circumstances beyond the Architect's control, the Architect shall notify the Owner prior to com- mencing such services. If the Owner deems that such set%ices described under Paragraph 3.3 are not required, the Owner shall give prompt written notice to the Architect. If the OW net indicates in writing that all or part of such Contingent Addi- tional Services are not required, the Architect. shall have no obli- gation to provide those services. 3.2 PROJECT REPRESENTATION BEYOND BASIC SERVICES 3.2.1 If more extensive representation at the site than is described in Subparagraph 2.6.5 is required, the Architect shall provide one or more Project Representatives to assist in carry- ing out such additional on-site responsibilities. 3.2.2 Project Representatives shall be selected, employed and directed by the Architect, and the Architect shall be compen- sated therefor as agreed by the Owner and Architect. The duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of Project Representatives shall be as described in the edition of AIA Document B352 current as of the date of this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed. 3.2.3 Through the observations by such Project Represen- tatives, the Architect shall endeavor to provide further protec- tion for the Owner against defects and deficiencies in the Work, but the furnishing of such project representation shall not air®diiu Vis,the.Archa= as described elsewhere in this Agreement. 3.3 CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICES 3.3.1 Making revisions in Drawings, Specifications or other documents when such revisions are: .1 inconsistent with approvals or instructions previously given by the Owner, including revisions made neces- sary by adjustments in the Owner's program or Proj- ect budget; .2 required by the enactment or revision of codes, laws or regulations subsequent to the preparation of such documents; or .3 due to changes required as a result of the Owner's fail- ure to render decisions in a timely manner. 3.3.2 Providing services required because of significant changes in the Project including, but not limited to, size, qual- ity, complexity, the Owner's schedule, or the method of bid- ding or negotiating and contracting for construction, except for services required under Subparagraph 5.2.5. 3.3.3 Preparing Drawings, Specifications and other documen- tation and supporting data, evaluating Contractor's proposals, and providing other services in connection with Change Orders and Construction Change Directives. 3.3.4 Providing services in connection with evaluating substi- tutions proposed by the Contractor and making subsequent revisions to Drawings, Specifications and other documentation resulting therefrom. 3.3.5 Providing consultation concerning replacement of Work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, and fur- nishing services required in connection with the replacement of such Work. 3.3.6 Providing services made necessary by the default of the Contractor, by major defects or deficiencies in the Work of the Contractor, or by failure of performance of either the Owner or Contractor under the Contract for Construction. 3.3.7 Providing services in evaluating an extensive number of claims submitted by the Contractor or others in connection with the Work. 3.3.8 Providing services in connection with a public hearing, arbitration proceeding or legal proceeding except where the Architect is party thereto. 3.3.9 Preparing documents for alternate, separate or sequential bids or providing services in connection with bidding, negotia- tion or construction prior to the completion of the Constmc- tion Documents Phase. 3.4 OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES 3.4.1 Providing analyses of the Owner's needs and program- ming the requirements of the Project. 3.4.2 Providing financial feasibility or other special studies. 3.4.3 Providing planning surveys, site evaluations or com- parative studies of prospective sites. AIA DOCUMENT B141 • OWNERARCHITECTAGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION • AIA® • ©1987 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 200n6 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and Is subject to legal prosecution. 8141-1987 4 ARTICLE 5 CONSTRUCTION COST 5.1- DEFINITION -- 5.1.1 The Construction Cost shall be the total cost or esti- mated cost to the Owner of all elements of the Project designed or specified by the Architect. 5.1.2 The Construction Cost shall include the cost at current market rates of labor and materials furnished by the Owner and equipment designed, specified, selected or specially provided for by the Architect, plus a reasonable allowance for the Con- tractor's overhead and profit. In addition, a reasonable allow- ance for contingencies shall be included for market conditions at the time of bidding and for changes in the Work during construction. 5.1.3 Construction Cost does not include the compensation of the Architect and Architect's consultants, the costs of the land, rights-of-way, financing or other costs which are the respon- sibility of the Owner as provided in Article 4. 5.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION COST 5.2.1 Evaluations of the Owner's Project budget, preliminary estimates of Construction Cost and detailed estimates of Con- struction Cost, if any, prepared by the Architect, represent the Architect's best judgment as a design professional familiar with the construction industry. It is recognized, however, that nei- ther the Architect nor the Owner has control over the cost of labor, materials or equipment, over the Contractor's methods of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding, market or negotiating conditions. Accordingly, the Architect cannot and does not warrant or represent that bids or negotiated prices will not vary from the Owner's Project budget or from any estimate of Construction Cost or evaluation prepared or agreed to by the Architect. 5.2.2 No fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be established as a condition of this Agreement by the furnishing, proposal or establishment of a Project budget, unless such fixed limit has been agreed upon in writing and signed by the parties hereto. If such a fixed limit has been established, the Architect shall be permitted to include contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation, to determine what materials, equipment, com- ponent systems and types of construction are to be included in the Contract Documents, to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include in the Contract Docu- ments alternate bids to adjust the Construction Cost to the fixed limit. Fixed limits, if any, shall be increased in the amount of an increase in the Contract Sum occurring after execution of the Contract for Construction. 5.2.3 If the Bidding or Negotiation Phase has not commenced within 90 days after the Architect submits the Construction Documents to the Owner, any Project budget or fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be adjusted to reflect changes in the general level of prices in the construction industry between the date of submission of the Construction Documents to the Owner and the date on which proposals are sought. 5.2.4 If a fixed limit of Construction Cost (adjusted as pro- vided in Subparagraph 5.2.3) is exceeded by the lowest bona fide bid or negotiated proposal, the Owner shall: .1 give written approval of an increase in such fixed limit; .2 authorize rebidding or renegotiating of the Project within a reasonable time; .3 if the Project is abandoned, terminate in accordance with Paragraph 8.3; or .4 cooperate in revising the Project scope and quality as required to reduce the Construction Cost, 5.2.5 If the Owner chooses to proceed under Clause 5.2.4.4, the Architect, without additional charge, shall modify the Con- tract Documents as necessary to comply with the fixed limit, if established as a condition of this Agreement. The modification of Contract Documents shall be the limit of the Architect's responsibility arising out of the establishment of a fixed limit. The Architect shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with this Agreement for all services performed whether or not the Construction Phase is commenced. ARTICLE 6 USE OF ARCHITECT'S DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS 6.1 The Drawings, Specifications and other documents pre- pared by the Architect for this Project are instruments of the Architect's service for use solely with respect to this Project and, unless otherwise provided, the Architect shall be deemed the author of these documents and shall retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including the copyright. The Owner shall be permitted to retain copies, including repro- ducible copies, of the Architect's Drawings, Specifications and other documents for information and reference in connection with the Owner's use and occupancy of the Project. The Archi- tect's Drawings, Specifications or other documents shall not be used by the Owner or others on other projects, for additions to this Project or for completion of this Project by others, unless the Architect is adjudged to be in default under this Agreement, except by agreement in writing and with appropriate compen- sation to the Architect. 6.2 Submission or distribution of documents to meet official regulatory requirements or for similar purposes in connection with the Project is not to be construed as publication in deroga- tion of the Architect's reserved rights. ARTICLE 7 ARBITRATION 7.1 Claims, disputes or other matters in question between the parties to this Agreement arising out of or relating to this Agree- ment or breach thereof shall be subject to and decided by arbi- tration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitra- tion Rules of the American Arbitration Association currently in effect unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. 7.2 Demand for arbitration shall be filed in writing with the other party to this Agreement and with the American Arbitra- tion Association. A demand for arbitration shall be made within a reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event shall the demand for arbitration be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. 7.3 No arbitration arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall include, by consolidation, joinder or in any other manner, an additional person or entity not a party to this Agreement, AIA DOCUMENT 8141 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION • AIA® • ©1987 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to legal prosecution. B141-1987 6 the specific information considered by the Owner to be confi- dential or proprietary. The Owner shall provide professional credit for the Architect on the construction sign and in the pro- motional materials for the Project. ARTICLE 10 PAYMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT 10.1 DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSE 10.1.1 Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the direct salaries of the Architect's personnel engaged on the Project and the portion of the cost of their mandatory and customary con- tributions and benefits related thereto, such as employment taxes and other statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pensions and similar contributions and benefits. 10.2 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 10.2.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to compensa- tion for Basic and Additional Services and include expenses incurred by the Architect and Architect's employees and con- sultants in the interest of the Project, as identified in the follow- ing Clauses. 10.2.1.1 Expense of transportation in connection with the Project; expenses in connection with authorized out-of-town travel; long-distance communications; and fees paid for secur- ing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 10.2.1.2 Expense of reproductions, postage and handling of Drawings, Specifications and other documents. 10.2.1.3 If authorized in advance by the Owner, expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates. 10.2.1.4 Expense of renderings, models and mock-ups requested by the Owner. 10.2.1.5 Expense of additional insurance coverage or limits, including professional liability insurance, requested by the Owner in excess of that normally carried by the Architect and Architect's consultants. 10.2.1.6 Expense of computer-aided design and drafting equipment time when used in connection with the Project. 10.3 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF BASIC SERVICES 10.3.1 An initial payment as set forth in Paragraph 11.1 is the minimum payment under this Agreement. 10.3.2 Subsequent payments for Basic Services shall be made Ittarlttlfy and, where applicable,-siralfbe In proptiTTion To SET vices performed within each phase of service, on the basis set forth in Subparagraph 11.2.2. 10.3.3 If and to the extent that the time initially established in Subparagraph 11.5.1 of this Agreement is exceeded or extended through no fault of the Architect, compensation for any set- Vices ervices rendered during the additional period of time shall be computed in the manner set forth in Subparagraph 1 t.3.2. 10.3.4 When compensation is based on a percentage of Con- struction Cost and any portions of the Project are deleted or otherwise not constructed, compensation for those portions of the Project shall be payable to the extent services are per- formed on those portions, in accordance with the schedule set forth in Subparagraph 11.2.2, based on (1) the lowest bona fide bid or negotiated proposal, or (2) if no such bid or proposal is received, the most recent preliminary estimate of Construction Cost or detailed estimate of Construction Cost for such por- tions of the Project. 10.4 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITIONAL SERVICES 10.4.1 Pavments on account of the Architect's Additional Services and for Reimbursable Expenses shall be made monthly upon presentation of the Architect's statement of services ren- dered or expenses incurred. 10.5 PAYMENTS WITHHELD 10.5.1 No deductions shall be made from the Architect's com- pensation on account of penalty, liquidated damages or other sums withheld from payments to contractors, or on account of the cost of changes in the Work other than those for which the Architect has been found to be liable. 10.6 ARCHITECT'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS 10.6.1 Records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses per- taining to Additional Services and services performed on the basis of a multiple of Direct Personnel Expense shall be avail- able to the Owner or the Owner's authorized representative at mutually convenient times. ARTICLE 11 BASIS OF COMPENSATION The Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows: 11.1 AN INITIAL PAYMENT of Zero Dollars ($ 0. 00 shall be made upon execution of this Agreement and credited to the Owner's account at final payment. 11.2 BASIC COMPENSATION 11.2.1 FOR BASIC SERVICES, as described in Article 2, and any other services included in Article 12 as part of Basic Services, Basic Compensation shall be computed as follows: (hiserl hast, of compensation, becladinR stipulated surra nudtyales or percerziages. and identJi phases to utitch parttotlar ,,hod, of mmpet+sattoa .ppli. J necessary) Lump Sum Fee of $355,198.00, as described in Attachment "A", dated April 19, 1993. AIA DOCUMENT 8141 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION • AIA® • ©1967 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to legal prosecution. B141-1987 8 11.5.3 The rates and multiples set forth for Additional Services shall be annually adjusted in accordance with normal salary review practices of the Architect. ARTICLE 12 OTHER CONDITIONS OR SERVICES (Insert desMptions of other services, identify Additional Services included witbin Banc Compensation and modifications to the payment and compensation terms included in this Agreement.) Optional Services, as described in Attachment "A", may be awarded upon written authorization of the Kodiak Island Borough for a period of up to twelve (12) months from the date of this Contract. Award of options must be made in a timely manner in order for the Work to proceed in accordance with the Basic Contract's time schedule in Article 11.2.2. This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above. OWNER S (Signature) Jerome M. Selby, Mayor (Printed name and title) Kodiak Island ough �J - GDM, Inc. ATTEST: (,,� 1 1 CAUTION: You should sign an original AIA document which has this caution printed in red. An original assures that changes will not be obscured as may occur when documents are reproduced. AIA DOCUMENT 6141 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • FOURTEENTH EDITION • AIA* • ©1987 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 B141-1987 10 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and Is subject to legal prosecution. ATTACHMENT "A" GDMMC. ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • ENGINEERING 900 West Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2020 _—_- Teleehone-90712761575 Facsimile 907/2763671 April 9, 1993 Steve Hobgood, Engineering & Facilities Director Kodiak Island Borough Engineering/Facilities Department, Room 223 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615-6398 RE: Revised Fee Proposal Dated April 8, 1993 Peterson Elementary School Rehabilitation GDM # 93-001 Dear Steve: Enclosed is GDM's revised Fee Proposal for Peterson Elementary School. This proposal is based upon our discussions with you on April 1, 1993. A/E BASIC SERVICES FEE PROPOSAL: $355,198.00 OPTIONAL SERVICES 1. Radon Mitigation 29,772.00 2. Asbestos Abatement Monitoring 29,154.00 3. UST Removal Monitoring 5,559.00 4. Mitigation of Lead & Copper in Domestic Water System: Testing and Reports 1,439.20 Design of Replacement Piping 13,090.00 5. Correction of USCG -Caused Drainage Problems 28,157.00 6. Energy Study & Engineering for Replacement of Interior Lighting 10,040.00 Attached is GDM's breakdown of the Basic Services and our Memorandum of Understanding on the scope of the basic and optional services. GDM understands we will not perform any of the Optional Services unless authorized by your Office. Sincerely, fl 7M (James $. Blair ProjeSVManager n rn in v_ OD N OD 1 N N co O C N ER 6c3 M OD CDi C 0 CO CO c 0 O 0) Co Cl) W N 0 �ca 0-' C O) 0 3 7 0 C_ O C -p O y •X N y C C 0 ... 0 .�. 0 O))O ad O a O Q -- " "O) «(C 'r O.0-0 � U) `y O C O 7.000 3mm ac�a�J3cs 3Cj CD � ca 0) `°mc�mo a) F» � - r : O c m 3 ai w a v c m y 3 c �-a p xrno >rn: Uca 0o)E�c0- xa Qoa�C7coc�0 W 0 0 :.. O C C U 7 N E C >. 7 C U O) 'O 4 O 0 E L 6 N Cl)-OOO O)= (n Ocn o E N � y.. O �O O O) O) -`O � O N R com• -O Nom... 60) W cmc 4) L��'OOL4)>>mm 0p cNi-(naci�'(noco pa ¢ �ac0i FD U) U)aocav�)vic0iv QZ, QUO � U U F- p LU (1) J j J m W Z cq o a o 0 _ CO N ODLU r O cc r JO +i O O �? O CL o v x O o Um Lq y� fA p � m > W 2 1110 O C y 0 0 U aLL > a= m� �X f' a) Q (n� W W In c iri iu a c 22 c c6 E > al - m W i lV r 0 fQ 0 L W W a tOn (D 'gi d zcr) mm m >�)� O UaEi a) � c o a) CD 0 CO WQ c �le (1)) o a�ciOo3 H m m U co ❑ x o m ag mo 0 ca WaciQ c iD • a E >"� c Z c a) Z a �) m 7 O = 0 N U 0 O) 0 Vj f0 lA 0 (DO 1 c «?� a) 0 E c y o Ni m E L 0 EO tz CL a �o c� pC=v O)U M O a En 0 r O) � 0 N 01 ` O .0 y r a c fC Q 7 N p_7 C.) MN.N O Co yW Na 0 yo NQIi o a a a a Q x x x x x CL . a a. a. a 0 0 0 o O co N O LOM M v t` Icm LO ea tC C C co Ni a C C _ N y N a) a) .00) a C«O E N 0_ 0= O co N a) L C U m O 0 N O 8,0 0c �ON OZ 0:� a a)Q0'0 co '> a a) al LL W U) Q)Z U30 co ca z irate a �LLm t m N O. O O p L 0 ca O O O N O In O L N L M U cq c6 C6 It to Q) (D � 6s N In OOOO 63 N sf' 00 0 �t C 6s fA a O O C O COfl. L) 3 V N w Id o a a COaw 3N a N 0 c a) U N aC� ma) U a)O o 0 r- -= �� U N O - N m a) C 3 ca (� coN C a) M m m C > co O U T C am O a) N L a �C• '0.1-- N a) CL C.L.+ " Q N .— N 1 a (6 C O « c 0 U c E mu) E m m O ZU 0 a) co co w N 0 N p :3 (D N N N V1 C o..« c-- co w c a o c o moa V rCo m `c c��v o ZQ w o �o> cYc« o LLI q) o« m c 0.Z, w U 0 a) 0 C Ca c0 3 K °? N a CO 'OU` NrC7m a) � N wa)cco J 0 0) a co aooacm co�F�- a) � WZ'o H o° Q m m$ a� 0 3 o� O «n V 'y N U Q N a CD m a cV F 0 2r m a i m c0 a) E E c U aoi Brno O a�? �cc3 'omN•3�yrvoi� io(D r> ONCc�a w W w0Om W No`mycoOa) w•o w� �.— CD a Qa a)CO)a¢LLamO�QU ya 0) Ma� _ d Z W ~ IL a a. a w. w APRIL 8, 1993 A/E SERVICES MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING HANDICAP COMPLIANCE: To the best of our understanding, the RFP does not state the A/E team is to bring the building into compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Page 4, para- graph 1, states the scope of the A/E work includes handicapped accommodations. Page 6 requirements of the Request for Proposals, asked for the Firm's experience with ADA requirements. It does not state which handicap codes were to apply to the Project. When we checked into the Deficiency Study, we found that the Impact Aid Grant was based upon bringing the building into compliance with the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS), not ADA. As stated in a previous GDM letter, there are other requirements in ADA which are not covered by UFAS, and that ADA is now being enforced in the State of Alaska for public schools. The building will not be acceptable to the Department of Education until the provisions of ADA are complied with. Because you have stated that the other A/E team fee proposals would cover ADA com- pliance, GDM will table our request for additional fees until KIB is successful in secur- ing additional funding from the Impact Aid program and proceed with documents to cor- rect ADA deficiencies. GDM will assist KIB in the additional back-up which will proba- bly be requested by Laurel Cornish, and will help to obtain the necessary additional funds. If KIB is successful, GDM understands we will be compensated for our addi- tional efforts for ADA compliance and assistance in obtaining additional funds. SITE SURVEY WORK: GDM's fee proposal included with our RFP Submittal included $3,000 for site survey work. We have separated out the additional site surveying work necessary to obtain site topographic and utility data to do the $100,000 playground re -grading and $120,000 parking lot paving from the site survey work necessary to solve the USCG - caused drainage problems identified in the Optional Services listing. If KIB is able to get USCG to correct the drainage problems their new work caused, GDM will sell the optional site survey work to them. If USCG gives KIB the money to solve the problem, GDM has included the additional survey work in our Optional Services fee proposal for inclusion in this Contract as an extra service cost as part of the additional engineering efforts. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING: Our April 8th Revised Fee Proposal returns to the initial fee proposal price of $2,500 for soils testing. The scope of work for this program would include a Shannon & Wilson or GDM Civil Engineer observing the soil conditions of test pits dug in the area of the pro- posed Gymnasium Addition to determine depth of bedrock and soil types. Selected soil samples would be taken for fine grain analysis for paving sub -base design. Memorandum of Understanding - Page 1 Based upon available data, bedrock is approximately 110 ft. deep. The soil testing program we proposed with our previous Revised Fee Proposal was going to also study methods for avoiding the cost of removing all material down to bedrock. After further feview, of Ahe,_ _ conWU=-- a ex-is-mg Peterson construction; GDM feels the 1.5 ft. silty layer and 1.5 ft. volcanic ash layer should be removed and foundations designed to bear totally on structural fill. The addi- tion is not big enough to achieve any appreciable cost savings to leave the silty layer in place. Because the Structural engineer will specify the type of structural fill and it's placement, no formal geotechnical study report will be prepared. Test pit log informa- tion will be included as part of the Civil design documents. CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR REMOVAL OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS: UST REMOVAL: The 5,000 gallon heating oil underground storage tank (UST) will be removed and replaced by a contractor hired by the General Contract via lump sum bid- ding. S&W will be responsible for preparing those sections of the bid package that specifically address the removal of the UST. the plans and specifications for the re- placement of the UST and the general bid package will be prepared by GDM. Specifications developed for the tank removal will be prepared using the CSI format, and will cover the following items: • Emptying, cleaning and disposal of tank contents • Tank purging, fire prevention measures • Pavement removal Excavation • Removal and disposal of tank and associated equipment Handling of potentially contaminated soils excavated as a result • Criteria for excavation limits Confirmation sampling by consultant with an ADEC-approved QAPP • Analytical testing by a certified testing laboratory UST sections of the bid package will be site specific, and will refer to documents such as API Recommended Practice 1604 and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation regulations for "boilerplate" requirements, where appropriate. Summary of Fee Estimate: • Coordinate with ADEC & Client/UST Removal Workplan Preparation and Technical Specification: Sr. Associate/Engineering Geologist (18 hrs @ $91) $1,638.00 Engineer/Geologist II (24 hrs @ $60) 1,440.00 Clerical (4 hrs @ $45) 180.00 Airfare 194.00 Per Diem and lodging 150.00 Auto Rental and Expenses 65.00 SUB -TOTAL $3,667.00 GDM's previous revised fee did not include GDM Specification Writer coordination and quality control time. This proposal includes 9 hrs @ $85 = $765.00, for a new total of $4,432.00. Memorandum of Understanding - Page 2 AUTOCAD SITE TOPOGRAPHIC, UTILITY AND IMPROVEMENT SURVEY FOR PLAYGROUND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, GYM ADDITION AND PARKING LOT PAVING: (1) Records search 1 man (2) hours $90.00 (2) Set Benchmarks and Horizontal control points 2 men (1) day 800.00 (3) Field -As -Built & Topography 3 men (1) day 910.00 (4) Office computations 1 man (.5) day 180.00 (5) Sketch plot at scale with 1 foot contours 20.00 (6) Check GDM drafting of data 1 man (2 hours) 90.00 FIELD WORK TOTAL $2090.00 GDM, Inc: (1) GDM Sub -consultant Markup $209.00 (2) Computer Drafter $55.00/hr x 10 = 550.00 (3) Computer Machine Time 10.00/hr x 10 = 100.00 (4) Mylar Plots 25.00 x 1 = 25.00 (5) Express Mail of Checksets 1 each @ $22 COORDINATION/OFFICE WORK TOTAL 906.00 TOTAL COST OF SITE SURVEY WORK $2996.00 Ecklund will furnish field notes and computer data to GDM. GDM will do conversion of data to AutoCAD, prepare final computer drafted work and return to Ecklund for check- ing. Because survey work is only a portion of the site, the data will be given to the Contractor as a portion of the site grading drawings, not as a separate survey sheet. ASBESTOS ABATEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES Proposed Asbestos Consultant Services are based upon the Borough's goal to render this building "asbestos free"; including all asbestos bearing floor tile/mastic, suspect roofing materials, pipes enclosed above ceiling and trenches, gypsum wallboard with positive joint compound, and cement asbestos wallboard. Asbestos Consulting Services proposal is based upon including asbestos abatement work under the General Contractor, and not as a separate Contract. Given the sched- ule constraints, phasing and coordination of work involved, and the amount of demoli- tion work required' this will be to the Borough's advantage. A single source of con- struction responsibility will minimize claims and potential time delays. The General Contractor will be pushing their Asbestos Sub -Contractor to get the work done and ob- tain air clearances so the general construction can get underway. Enough General Contractors in Alaska have handled projects including asbestos, that their bid prices no longer contain unnecessary costs for unknown risks involving the abatement work. GDM's Team Sub -Consultant will be responsible for developing and coordinating the recommended abatement actions. They will prepare the plans and specifications nec- essary to implement the agreed-upon hazardous material abatement. These plans and specifications will incorporate all the design objectives, and will meet the regula- tory requirements in effect at the time of construction document completion. Memorandum of Understanding - Page 3 GDM is not a qualified Asbestos Abatement Consultant. We will include abatement documents prepared by the Asbestos Consultant with the General Construction Specifications and Drawings as a convenience to the School District, Borough and legal responsibility for the abatement work belongs to the abatement consultant. For purposes of this Contract, it is understood that all liability involved with the Hazardous Material Abatement Consulting Work belongs to Asbestos Consultant This is a man- dated provision of GDM's Professional Liability insurance, without which our insurance is null and void on all of the professional design liability provisions. SCOPE OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE WORK FOR ASBESTOS ABATEMENT: A. ASBESTOS SURVEY AND DOCUMENT REVIEW: Asbestos Consultant will review all asbestos-related data, meet with the Borough/Architect (one visit) and survey the building relative to renovation impacts planned for summer 1993. Bulk samples will be collected and analyzed as necessary. A report will be compiled summarizing the findings of the survey, and updating cost estimates for all friable and non -friable asbestos -containing materials. B. ASBESTOS ABATEMENT SPECIFICATION DEVELOPMENT: Asbestos Consultant will develop an asbestos abatement specification which describes work practices, abatement procedures, air monitoring and documenting proto- cols. This specification will also describe the Owner's, Contractor's and Consultant's overall responsibilities. The specification will be either a single asbestos design package or a specification section to be included under the General Construction Contract, at the Owner's request. Memorandum of Understanding - Page 4 D) N N C Q o Qco(D U ENCL__ E a) aY C t co S' 0L C Ea O aE a c U a) CL CZ f cz o a m m m 0))'� m ¢ o m a o �Yw -0 mccaoc«- Q N o CL _0 a) = o'Q cm U m i m U a) OCo N OCId UE Qcb Ua)a) T V a O i 2 O).. > O E C 1 C C y O a a) a) — N — C CO N —'� C O N O C a)'a C.) Mn ��i� U m C Q m 3 0� oCL � oa0 ro ro W O o�Eo —ca a)'0 Q a) a) o — W W ca (n :3 o E=oµ- N N O O— N 00 U N Z > O V fO L u7 C a) Tco > N W W 0) Z r a) a) O O` -00 O 'p Eoc K ¢ 49a)QN �d 1=00C> W W J m Q O O O O O O O IO O )O )O O )O O -O .. 00 IO N 00 O OD LO m M a c N O h Yi Hi .N d C C d) E 0 a 0 a) '3co � cca 01 d a) Eaa Co N a) « a3 a) C co O O y cE w o` >.`-oo ca 3ca m L a) y E= a ccE�co) o a) EYa)�(Doo O)QO y C C CU _0 a) CD WOO E o Q o a -M co o m is a) 02 ui m Ew00 y c(n _ c ` . a N o J 0 0 0 0 ca popm o li li m �0in�a)a) Na)ci�c Y �_ i av)a)a)Eccao O o °)�'ca'v�m rn a Q ca N co -0co CLI Co ca O C) IL co O L) CO `o c ca car c 0 ` m `0 CL CL .- �cmi ocLi-..c c o CO a)mm IL 444400 C;cm 0 IL Cil -0 0 W c0 co to lA ai , �; o cd cd fl• o 0 ?3 w ai :: t . - C'3 o a m C4 cQ aio "FcVa) H3U a) m N oU Y3 0 LL CL 0) N .y ._.O . F. 2� E N coo a� o s C D7L O — Q (n .0 N N .co a) to Q co (M-= Ca CLtoa „ U) a)O Z r- ON y Q a)�a)—a a) t5 IL aI— stn W a �:3 °' ca LL cc° 0 F- 0 000 OOOCIS it U V U U � a) a) Lo O Q O Qa x r M rr l� M �tt CO (MV t� i I� N M m OL O O C6 ER Z ami w O L c H N 'c U O m Z t p E X H m O ow O LL M ) a N V w 3O CL CL p c co o p > 0CD W J a O d aai : p (D r oC E a m cC rn O y o m m x 0 W U- a'ca>c CC md�cc O W O. >c �i ? da U c W N 3 U p W >\ a >, a> c m am c'o m x o a) O c_ o a> �� co c m> aM p 7D= C LL � p Q »� o c X U� eo ago ago d U) 'U- Wfn N N N W 0 Z W IL x W LL >+L LLCL LL co (OaON (00 fO0NN ON ALO 000Lf) r� o.^. oLc) oN r N T a7 O f!? a as cc 00 Y mm dm a oC O N N LLL O 00 _ T r 0) O M r T > 0 x x O U N N N (� •Q T r r L Ov Ov O O y L NNUV0Co 00 �0 CL O 0(n a) 00m UUa CLT w� 3 as m� x0 c•- a) L3 •O 2 O N S co (nfn OO -m000) 3 o 0vm SOC 0 U- a: C' U) cv) 0 .r-=== 0 0 C 0 o _ (a co (6 co Q Y 00L00�O T O T y6 O Y r N 0 L O O 0 O 0 N in'n = m x 0 xa T N x N x TT' M;o �chZo Y O O LL CO co N N T r E 7 C E 7 E •C E .. U) 0 L 0) _N E 3 E N a> _v E E LO J W Q cc N OaY >+O — ODM �O 6F� CL 0 N a_ in �oo-O N QY o0 O O O C p (n T (()cu rn o- ao } O N 3 0 0 0 0 O U w a) w `,V LL .O N U O_ H a C>1 o as COa i O C Cis cC C �D (D a r- Co 0 o O r N O 0 O N a' ¢¢ U)'- LU « 0 IL d00kkk33k ©�z�U)0.._..._._ cu C.) LF C� �f cLT�(� k§C,��k« �\ �°§§§G°2 k� @ 0 2 7 a) e •CL C k k A uk8 S § § � _ ....... ...�.�.....� . . � ? C E E r o 2 C $ ) c A � / E5 ƒ \ k } @ ?-%& • 2 # ' t CD $ A : F x x & co =�f co L 2 x OL 2�; § 2 w z ±CL 0 6 ....... ...�.�.....� . . � Z O H Jy mZ O wa m � J U) ONa Oap = O yNoJ Y �a FwN a za¢ W 1- 2w LU W J LL w2 z CO)00 2 W W IL Q: W 2 Lu F N z O cc a a W N W cc Lu W LL J a Z :7 REO z a W z z a J a m N c O U C 0 70 a) 0 U r N a) U y Q Q a) � m m c m m T J7TT C7 7 ai ai c c 00 as a) a) .5 .5 (1) m C C CL CL 'U 'U 0 a1 as 00 7 Z Z ai ai c c 00 as a) as a) a) a) c"C CL 0. 'U 'U a) of as 66 7ZZ m 75 N C O U C 0 a) m N O co a) L Y m m 777 0 z CD w 0 0 rn c Lu ate, U ` U C: a0i >, W c a to � CD a) r L. Uc a) C N N �. N N a) m co 0 0. r 0 a) C 0) a) C_ C r a a) C_ () C_ � a) N W co H C01 C0)� C0)�OCC�W la CWf=d��C�CW ca�CW aiCW NUL�W a) �W—c No a)W-0NW—.—OW—c�U U 0) N m o c m= 0)— car cm ca 0) of o = a) N — - - H c a) c a ca (D U�c c� cc�i�a)aca(j oocLi NN0L''•c 60 ca a) a) O'C'6 C-ro'C UU ca UNO as a) C� as N S U V N 7 m" orNtq''�O =�•— Q- Laa))oLw~W a CL d cU �ca).—Ma.,°N'•�'~L0oQodc o¢o ?� aL da)ic42 QoU>~_ cNN0aO 0%a' 0 a`O a) CiO N O0yo�>S cn tVmnm ��c `m E�aOFm m 2cma0 5m F'O_YU) `ao0QV Y02 Y0)N'C 9aiciE�EmE-20EVE2EOM(nmQm7C=5 m =7Qm clgQm� Tr M c OE m cm mcn rn y U L U o to U a` 2 PETERSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL REHABILITATION OPTIONAL SERVICES A/E AND CONSTRUCTION SCOPE CHANGES NOT COVERED BY PHS/OES ADMIN- ISTERED GRANT AK -90-08A40 OR KIB REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS DATED DEC. 1992: RADON MITIGATION: Radon Testing, Mitigation Recommendations, Contract Documents, and Construction Administration Services: During a 3/18/93 CNN news program, they stated radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the Unites States, and that 70,000 school classrooms have radon levels above the allowable limits established by EPA. According to a 3/19/93 KIMO TV news- cast, Peterson is one of only four schools in Alaska with radon levels above EPA ac- ceptable levels. Undated test results for Peterson Elementary School attached to a May 1, 1992 ADEC transmittal letter, show results ranging from 1.0 to 6.3 pCi/L at Peterson Elementary. Locations of the tests were not noted. In an undated attachment to the letter interpreting three-month screening measurement results, it states that Congress has set a National goal for radon at 0.2 to 0.7 pCi/L. As an optional service, GDM is proposing to have the project team's Radon Consultant perform additional radon testing, and prepare recommendations for reduction of radon levels to the Congressional recommended limits mentioned in the above paragraph. GDM's architectural and engineering team services would include the implementation of the recommendations in the Construction Documents. RADON MITIGATION SCOPE OF WORK: A. Radon Survey and Document Review: Radon Consultant will visit the site once, during the asbestos investigation, to set up 20 long term passive radon samples to collect data on radon entry points during the Project's design phase, review all current radon -related data, review architectural and mechanical plans, and survey the building for possible radon entry points. GDM staff will collect and ship samples for analysis as directed by Radon Consultant. B. Radon Mitigation Phase 1 Design: Radon Consultant will prepare a mitigation Phase 1 design report, based upon current data and observed building condi- tions, that recommends immediate actions that the Owner could employ which would be intended to reduce average radon concentrations to the recom- mended levels. Plans will be prepared that characterize foundation materials and conditions in crawlspaces/mechanical trenches. Radon Consultant will work with GDM team members on procedures to seal foundation/slab openings as much as is practical in an existing building. Ventilation patterns in these ar- eas will be summarized. Immediate remedial actions will be recommended with a cost estimate for each recommended action. Radon Consultant will work with GDM's team engineers for the new HVAC system and address opportunities to utilize the new system as part of the remedial action. C. Follow-up Action: One year after construction completion, Radon Consultant will evaluate 20 "alpha track" radon samples placed by GDM during Final Inspection. If test results remain above recommended levels Radon Consultant will provide instructions for adjustment of fresh air percentage of make-up air and additional mitigation measures, if necessary. OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 1 Based upon EPA Publication 520/1-89-020 "Radon Reduction Techniques in Schools", mitigation techniques include: 1. Sealing of radon entry routes, i.e., floor cracks, caulk joints at walls/floor 'ft 2. Pressurization of building by a positive pressure in the School from a forced air H&V system 3. Sub-slab de-pressurization; such as exhaust fans tied to openings under floor slab, drawing radon to outside. Radon Mitigation Consultant Services: • Investigator's on-site work, and existing document review $1,600.00 • Phase I design recommendations 2,200.00 • GDM Project Manager (16 hrs @ $105) 1,680.00 • GDM Project Architect (68 hrs @ $90) 6,120.00 • GDM Team Structural Engineer (16 hrs @ $95) 1,520.00 • GDM Team Mechanical Engineer (56 hrs @ $95) 5,320.00 • GDM Team CAD Drafter (42 hrs @ $55) 2,310.00 • Specification Writer (24 hrs @ $75) 1,800.00 • Cost Estimator (20 hrs @ $75) 1,500.00 • Construction Phase Observers (32 hrs @ $75) 2,400.00 • Processing of 1 -Year radon tests/Recommendation report (24 hrs @ $68) 1,632.00 • Reimbursables: The following reimbursable expenses will be billed at these rates (analysis rates are for regular turn -around): "Alpha Track" Radon Sampling & Testing (Est. 40 samples @ $25.00 each) 1,000.00 Packing & Shipping of Radon Samples 275.00 Air Fare (Included as part of Asbestos Consultant services) 0.00 Rental Car (Est. 2 days @ $65/day) 130.00 Per Diem(Est. 2 days @ $30/day) 60.00 Hotel(Est. 2 days @ $75/day) 150.00 Express Delivery, Postage, Photographs 75.00 TOTAL OPTIONAL SERVICES FEES FOR RADON MITIGATION: $29,772.00 CONSTRUCTION PHASE MONITORING OF ASBESTOS ABATEMENT GDM team's Environmental Consultant will do all Construction Phase Quality Control Testing in lieu of the Contractor hiring a consultant to do this. This cost is normally identified in a project budget as a construction cost and not a design cost. The advantage of this procedure in addition to satisfying EPA Requirements is that GDM Team's Consultant would be on site full time during the Asbestos Abatement and would be making the determination on any material uncovered during demolition as to its asbestos content in lieu of the Contractor. GDM Team Consultant would also perform the final air clearance monitoring after the Contractor says he is finished with the asbestos cleanup. This gives KIB an added level of assurance that the asbestos has been removed. OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 2 3. PRE-CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE: Consultant will attend an on-site Pre- Construction Conference with the Borough and selected Contractor. The Contractor's work plan, schedule and submittal package will be evaluated prior to this meeting, and • Pre -Construction Conference, including travel time and meeting minutes $1,800.00 • Air Monitoring, based upon 20 days @ $450/day (If Contractor takes longer, this will increase) 9,000.00 • Reimbursables: TEM Air Samples (Est. 30 @ $120/ea) 3,600.00 PCM Air Samples (Est. 200 @ $8/ea) 1,600.00 Rental Car (Est. 35 days @ $65) 2,275.00 Airfare (4 roundtrips @ $1376 from/to Portland, OR/Kodiak) 5,504.00 Per Diem (Est. 35 days @ $30) 1,050.00 Hotel (Est. 35 days @ $75) 2,625.00 Full-sized drawings/reproduction 1,000.00 Express Delivery, Postage, Photographs 200.00 Bulk Samples (25 @ $20) 500.00 TOTAL FOR ASBESTOS SUB -CONSULTANT CONSTRUCTION PHASE QUALITY CONTROL: $29,154.00 Please Note: This fee proposal is based on 20 days for asbestos abatement and air monitoring testing. If Contractor takes longer, on-site Asbestos Consultant cost will in- crease. CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION PHASE SITE ASSESSMENT PORTION OF THIS UST CLOSURE PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN ADEC QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN, AS REQUIRED BY 18 AAC 78: Tank Removal and Replacement Monitoring: An approved QAPP Principal Investigator will be on-site full-time while the existing tanks are removed and the new tanks in- stalled. A Registered Geological Engineer will serve as Project Hydrogeologist, and will prepare the final UST Site Assessment Report. Soil Screening: Portable photoionization analyzers will be used to screen soils for the presence of volatile organics. Field testing for POL contaminated soils will be con- ducted on an "as required" basis. Field screening will be conducted throughout the du- ration of the UST removal and site excavating to identify and separate POL contami- nated (clean) soils from non -contaminated soils. The walls of the UST excavations will be screened for the presence of volatile hydrocarbons prior to backfilling. Screening will be performed at numerous locations and various depths along the walls, in accor- dance with QAPP. Soil Sampling: Soil samples will be collected during the closure program of the fuel oil UST by a Principal Investigator approved by the QAPP. All of the soil samples will be collected using the guidance and requirements set forth in Section 78.090 of the ADEC's Storage Tanks Regulations (18 AAC 78) and procedures outlines in the ap- proved QAPP. Samples will be taken and shipped to an ADEC-approved laboratory for analysis. The new tanks cannot be installed until the results of the lab samples are finished. Additional excavation may be necessary if the lab results are positive. OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 3 a An ADEC approved laboratory will provide analytical testing for the UST closure pro- gram, if required, and will ensure the calibration, data reduction, validation, reporting procedures used, quality control checks, calculation of data quality indicators, labora- dits; as outlined in the Quality Assurance Project Plan. PROPOSED FEES: • Construction Phase UST Removal/Field Monitoring Fee Proposal: Engineer/Geologist II (36 hrs @ $60) $2,160.00 (Includes 2 days wait for closure tests) Travel time (4 hrs @ $60) 240.00 Airfare, auto, travel, lodging, per diem 800.00 PID rental, photos, sample bottles 75.00 Sample & equipment shipping 150.00 • Lab Testing: Collect & ship soil samples to Anchorage 200.00 Chemical & Geological Laboratories: Tank Excavation Sampling: Diesel Range Organics (EPA 3550/8100) - Soil (2 @ $142) 284.00 Aromatic Volatile Organics (EPA 8020) - Soil (1 @ $95) 95.00 Stockpiled Soils (preparing for disposal): Diesel Range Organics (EPA 3550/8100) - Soil (3 @ $142) 426.00 Aromatic Volatile Organics (EPA 8020) - Soil (2 @ $95) 190.00 S&W Mark-up (15%) 149.00 • Summary Site Assessment Report Preparation: Vice President (.5 hrs @ $115) 58.00 Sr. Associate/Engineering Geologist (2 hrs @ $91) 182.00 Engineer/Geologist II (8 hrs @ $60) 480.00 Clerical (2 hrs @ $35) 70.00 SUB -TOTAL: $5,559.00 Please Note: This fee proposal assumes Contractor will complete the UST removal in three 12 -hour days, plus two days for clearance tests. If Contractor takes longer, the cost for on-site UST Consultant will increase. LEAD AND COPPER IN DRINKING WATER PIPING: Evaluation of School for compliance with EPA promulgated National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (56 FR 26460), recommendations, construction documents for re- placement of lead -bearing water piping, and construction administration services. Following sampling criteria described in EPA Promulgated National Primary Water Regulations (56 FR 26460), Monitoring Protocols for Tap Water Samples, a GDM team member will take water samples from Peterson Elementary's domestic water system. Sampling will use laboratory containers obtained from Chemical and Geological Laboratories of Alaska; and will be hand -carried to Anchorage in sealed containers for testing. OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 4 Direct GDM Costs: Pickup of sample bottles and shipping container, prepare for air transport: .75 hr @ $45.00 = $33.75 eport of sampling: 3.5 hrs @ $95.00 = 332.50 Hand-delivery of samples to Chemical & Geological Laboratories: .75 hrs @ $45.00 = 33.75 Tests: Lead: 4 @ $27.00 (C&GLA 80-132) $108.00 Copper: 4 @ $16.00 (C&GLA 80-102) 64.00 10% GDM Administrative Mark-up on Reimbursable Expenses 17.20 Discussions with Test Lab, write report on test results, and recommendations for inclu- sion in Schematic Design Submittal: Civil Engineer: 8.0 hrs @ $95.00 = $760.00 Word Processor: 2.0 hrs @ $45.00 = 90.00 SUB -TOTAL FOR TESTS AND REPORT: $1,439.20 If results are within EPA Guidelines, no additional A/E work will be necessary. If test results are above acceptable limits, all domestic water piping inside of Building will have to be replaced. Available site utility drawings say the incom- ing water service is cast iron pipe, so scope of testing is limited to interior piping. GDM Project Manager 8 hrs @ $105.00 = $840.00 Mechanical Engineer: 18 hrs @ $105.00 = $1,890.00 Mechanical Designer: 60 hrs @ $75.00 = $4,500.00 Mechanical CAD Drafter: 48 hrs @ $55.00 = $2,640.00 Spec Writer: 20 hrs @ $75.00 = $1,500.00 Cost Estimator: 16 hrs @ $85.00 = $1,360.00 Word Processor: 8 hrs @ $45.00 = $360.00 SUB -TOTAL FOR DESIGN OF REPLACEMENT PIPING: $13,090.00 RESOLUTION OF DRAINAGE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY NEW ADJACENT USCG CONSTRUCTION: The 1990 PHS/OES School Facility Deficiency Study upon which the Impact Aid Grant was funded did not identify the following drainage problems caused by USCG facilities constructed since 1990 The first drainage problem is northeast of Peterson School along the fenced area separating the School and the new Fire Station. The second problem is in the ser- vice/parking area behind the School and bordering the outfield area of the ball field. Additional project cost to fix these problems is forecasted at $220,000. The $100,000 in the Impact Aid Grant will not cover the cost to solve these problems and the play- ground drainage problem for which it was intended. OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 5 The drainage problem to the northeast (Photos 3 & 4) is the result of the Fire Station construction, which changed the School's site drainage pattern, too flat of terrain in this area and possibly a clogged or collapsed drainage pipe connecting the catch basin lo- this side of the School, has created a dam-like area which cuts off drainage flow and adds to the extent of ponding water. To solve these problems, the catch basin inlet in this area should be lowered and the area re -graded to create drainage flow. It may also be necessary to dig up and replace the pipe connecting this manhole to the system if the pipe cannot be cleaned out and is crushed. Several recently constructed situations influence the second drainage problem. A broad drainage swale (Photo 1) brings run-off down from the new housing project and empties onto the paved area in the rear of the School. The only place for this water to go to is a catch basin next to the dumpster (Photo 2). This catch basin was not engi- neered to handle the additional water volume routed by the swale to this area. This water flow onto the School property also freezes in the winter, and causes a glacier- like condition over the entire service area. Also to the rear of the School, a new drainage culvert from the housing projects flows onto the hillside next to the stairway that connects the housing project with the School. This culvert appears to have an even greater flow than the swale. The nearby catch basin also does not appear to be able to adequately handle the additional water volume dumped onto the School site from the housing area. Also in this catch basin west of the School is a concrete pad that is slightly above grade. The Coast Guard has cut channels in the concrete to assist drainage, but this is at best a "band-aid" solution. The housing project's engineering has basically given you the problem of dealing with the storm water run-off from a large portion of their project. First -look recommendations to correct drainage problem #2, if the housing project's drainage cannot be modified to keep the additional drainage flow off the School site, would be to take the new culvert pipe flowing from the hillside underground and con- nect it to the existing catch basin. The pipe connecting this catch basin with the next should be replaced. The inlets of both catch basins should be lowered. At the same time, the rear service area paving should be reconstructed so the drainage swale at the rear coming downslope can be directed along the rear of the paved area to the nearest catch basin. FEE PROPOSAL FOR AUTOCAD SITE TOPOGRAPHIC, UTILITY AND IMPROVEMENT FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING TO CORRECT DRAINAGE PROBLEMS: Ecklund Surveying: (1) Records search (2) Set Benchmark's and Horizontal control points (3) Field -As -Built & Topography (4) Office computations (5) Sketch plot at scale with 1 foot contours (6) Check GDM drafting of data FIELD WORK TOTAL 1 man (6) hours $270.00 2 men (.5) day 400.00 3 men (3.5) days 2,835.00 1 man (3.5) days 1,260.00 40.00 1 man (6 hours) 270.00 OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 6 $5,075.00 GDM, Inc: (1) GDM Sub -consultant Markup $507.00 (2) Computer Drafter $55.00/hr x 50 = 2,750.00 Time k o = SW00 -- (4) Mylar Plots 25.00 x 2 = 50.00 (5) Air Courier of Checksets 1 each @ $35 = 35.00 COORDINATION/OFFICE WORK TOTAL 3.842.00 TOTAL COST OF SITE SURVEY WORK $8,917.00 Ecklund will furnish field notes and computer data to GDM. GDM will do conversion of data to AutoCAD, prepare final computer drafted work on mylar and return to Ecklund for checking, registration stamp, and signature. CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES TO CORRECT DRAINAGE PROBLEMS: GDM Project Manager: 8 hrs @ $105 $840.00 Civil Engineer: 88 hrs @ $85 7,480.00 CAD Drafters: 124 hrs @ $55 6,820.00 Spec Writer: 24 hrs @ $85 2,040.00 Cost Estimator: 20 hrs @ $85 1,700.00 Word Processor: 8 hrs @ $45 360.00 TOTAL COST OF CIVIL ENGINEERING $19,240.00 ENERGY STUDY STUDY FOR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING INTERIOR LIGHTING Replacement of existing interior lighting, with the exception of toilet room lights, is not included under the Grant funding. The Asbestos abatement cost forecast (upon which the Grant funding was based) has assumed that none of the lights or electrical devices have to be replaced as part of the abatement work. As part of the Asbestos Abatement work, we will have the Consultant check for PCBs in light ballasts and building trans- formers. Because of KodiaWs high electrical cost ($.18/KW), a Value Analysis on changing out existing fixtures to new, more energy-efficient units may be a desirable consideration. Simplified lighting energy efficiency analysis and recommendations study, not based on computer modeling: $820.00 If Study is accepted, the Electrical Engineering work to implement the recommendations and prepare the necessary Contract Documents and Estimates: GDM Project Manager: 8 hrs @ $105.00 = 840.00 Electrical Engineer: 16 hrs @ $95.00 = 1,520.00 Electrical Designer: 32 hrs @ $75.00 = 2,400.00 CAD Drafter: 28 hrs @ $55.00 = 1,540.00 Spec Writer: 12 hrs @ $85.00 = 1,020.00 Cost Estimator: 4 hrs @ $85.00 = 340.00 Word Processor: 8 hrs @ $45.00 = 360.00 Construction Phase Final Inspection 1.200.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED FEES FOR LIGHTING VALUE ANALYSIS AND ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING FOR FIXTURE REPLACEMENT: $10,040.00 OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 7 This work may qualify for AHFC Energy Grant funding. Estimated cost offiew througlho-rt-the�g is 000 GDM would be happy to assist KIB with requests to PHS/OES for additional Grant funding to cover the additional A/E and construction costs. OPTIONAL SERVICES - Page 8 ATTACHMENT "B" GDM, INC. HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Principal Architect $100.00 Chief Structural Engineer $95.00 Registered Architect or Engineer $90.00 Technical Employee III $75.00 Technical Employee II $70.00 Interior Designer $65.00 Technical Employee 1 $60.00 CADD Drafter, or Data Processor $55.00 Clerical $35.00 SUBCONSULTANTS: PROJECT EXPENSES (By others): GDM Cost + 15% GDM Cost + 10% ODIA R ISLAND BOROUGH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AMENDMENT NO. 1 CONTRACT NO. 93-02 PROJECT NO. #70 K18 410-458 THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH, HEREAFTER THE CONTRACTING AGENCY, AND GDM INC. , HEREAFTER THE CONTRACTOR IS HERE AMENDED AND EFFECTIVE THE LAST DATE EXECUTED BY ITS PARTIES. BY CHANGES TO CONDITIONS OR SERVICES: 1. Radon mitigation $ 2 Monitoring of asbestos abatement 28,107.00 construction and performance of clearance testing (Specialized Environmental Consultants) and (J.D. Hill). $ 3. 40,880.00 Monitoring of underground tank removal and performance of ADEC required clearance testing. $ 5,559.00 4. Lead and copper in domestic water system testing $ 1,439.20 5. Engineering of corrections for USCG caused drainage problems. $ 6. Separate asbestos abatement bid 28,157.00 package, $ 18,184.90 THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS TO THIS AMENDMENT ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN: Attachment no A AMENDMENT Title Peterson Elementary School Rehabilitation Additional A/E Services Date No of Pages 9/10/93 10 PAGE I of 2 CHANGES TQ LQMPENSATWN: Method(s) of Payment Current Amount(s) Amount(s) for Revised Thru Amendment #A This Amendment Amount(s) Periodic Estimate for $355,198.00 Partial Payment $122,327.10 $477,525.10 TOTALS $355,198.00 $122,327.10 $477,525.10 MAXIMUM AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ALL SERVICES PERFORMED UNDER THE AGREEMENT, REVISED TO INCLUDE THIS AMENDMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED Four Hundred Seventy Seven Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Five Dollars & Ten Cents ($477,525.10) ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT REMAIN IN FORCE. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE PARTIES HAVE EXECUTED THIS AMENDMENT (SIGNATURES MUST BE AFFIXED IN�C7CORDANCE WITH CONTRACTING AGENCY PROCEDURES). CONTRACTOR /I —) '- SIGNATURE: SIGNATURE: NAME: J mes B TITLE: d /Treasure, SIGNATURE: NAME: 40t=M, SELBY TITLE: KODIAK ISLAND B T2--21CL3 SIGNATURE: 1Q - (`-ad NAME: STEVEHO G O DATE TITLE: DIRECTOR, ENGTNEERING/FACILITIES SIGNATURE: NAME: DONNA F. SMITH, CMC TITLE: KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH CLERK AMENDMENT CORPORATE SEAL PAGE 2 of 2 Steve Hobgood Engineering Facilities Director Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, AK 99615 Re: Peterson Elementary School Contract Our File No. 4701-405 Dear Steve: I had a chance to review the proposed contract between GDM, Inc. and Specialized Environmental Consulting • Generally, the idea of GDM subcontracting the asbestos abatement consul ' with another consulting firm in order to provide orough should not be required to release GDM from liability or to protect both GDM and the asbestoss not seem ot*donable. But the abatement consultant from any liability for the consulting which they are proposing to Provide. In fact, this is contrary to the spirit of the original comprehensive architectural agreement h we entered into with GDM In whic Particular, I recommend that you ask GDM to have Paragraph 8 is the agreement between GDM and Specialized deleted because that paragraph would make the Kodiak Island Borough liable for any design errors by the asbestos abatement consultant. In addition, I recommend that you ask GDM to have the following sentences deleted from paragraph 16: "We will require a release of claims from the owner and assurance that all legal responsibility for the abatement work belongs to the abatement consultant. For Purposes of this contract, it is understood that all liability involved with the hazardous material abatement consulting work belongs to asbestos consultant". Please let me know if there is more history involved with this provision which should be considered. It seems to me, however, that GDM asbestos abatement consulting services in its memorandum of understanding of rovide a subcapril n1993 t for the those hat services are included in the contract with GDM which was eventually executed without any on GDM's liability, limitation RECEIVED JUN 2 41993 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH CLERK'S OFFICE JAMIN, EBELL, BOLGER & GENTRY JOEL H. ROLLER* A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION C. WALTER EBELL• ATTORNEYS AT LAW DUNCAN S. FIELDS DIANNA R. GENTRY 323 C4 RO Lvry STREET ANCI-C=4GE OFFICE: MATTHEW D. JAMIN KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 401 1 s' -ECT. 104 ANC,�OR4GE. 4iAS.5rtA 99 gOI WALTER W. MASON' TELEP-3yE yap chs A E' SE-HwttTT - TELEPHONE: (901'186-6024 ".1 a1s-6.1 lAOM.TTED TQ ALAS— FACSIMILE: (9071466-6112 G ec SHIINGTRAPS ALL ERBADMITTEO TG AS ALKA A REPLY TO KODIAK OFFICE SEA'-_E CFFICE: 300 MI----- FE 9UPLOING 60 = SEATTLE. —S'.. NG -ON S' ON 9Bi0< 'E LEPirC+_'206. 6221634 =4Csi Mi_�_ 'OR 623162, June 23, 1993 VIAF-- FAX 48649376 Steve Hobgood Engineering Facilities Director Kodiak Island Borough 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, AK 99615 Re: Peterson Elementary School Contract Our File No. 4701-405 Dear Steve: I had a chance to review the proposed contract between GDM, Inc. and Specialized Environmental Consulting • Generally, the idea of GDM subcontracting the asbestos abatement consul ' with another consulting firm in order to provide orough should not be required to release GDM from liability or to protect both GDM and the asbestoss not seem ot*donable. But the abatement consultant from any liability for the consulting which they are proposing to Provide. In fact, this is contrary to the spirit of the original comprehensive architectural agreement h we entered into with GDM In whic Particular, I recommend that you ask GDM to have Paragraph 8 is the agreement between GDM and Specialized deleted because that paragraph would make the Kodiak Island Borough liable for any design errors by the asbestos abatement consultant. In addition, I recommend that you ask GDM to have the following sentences deleted from paragraph 16: "We will require a release of claims from the owner and assurance that all legal responsibility for the abatement work belongs to the abatement consultant. For Purposes of this contract, it is understood that all liability involved with the hazardous material abatement consulting work belongs to asbestos consultant". Please let me know if there is more history involved with this provision which should be considered. It seems to me, however, that GDM asbestos abatement consulting services in its memorandum of understanding of rovide a subcapril n1993 t for the those hat services are included in the contract with GDM which was eventually executed without any on GDM's liability, limitation RECEIVED JUN 2 41993 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH CLERK'S OFFICE June 23, 1993 Page 2 Feel free to let me know if you have any further questions. Sincerely yours, JAHN, EBELL, BOLGER & GENTRY Joel H. Bolger JHB:srp cc: Jerome Selby ,,J'a'ck McFarland 4702\405L.002 R EIVED JUN 2 41993 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH CLERK'S OFFICE ITEM NO. 12.A.1 Kodiak Island Borough AGENDASTATEMENT Meeting of: November 18, 1993 ITEM TITLE: Peterson Elementary School Rehabilitation Additional A/E Services SUMMARY STATEMENT: Attached is a request for an amendment to our existing agreement with GDM, Inc. for the architectural/engineering services for the renovation of Peterson Elementary School. This change is required due to several changes in the scope of work required to complete this project. The main items of concern are: 1. Radon Mitigation 2. Monitoring of asbestos abatement construction and testing 3. Monitoring of UST removal and ADEC clearance testing 4. Lead and copper testing in domestic water 5. Engineering of corrections for USCG caused drainage problems 6. Separate asbestos abatement bid package The requested change of scope and amendment requirements are detailed in the attached paperwork. FISCAL NOTES ACCOUNT NO. 410-458 [ ] N/A Expenditure $122,327.10 Amount $125,000 Required Budgeted APPROVAL FOR AGENDA: Kodiak Island Borough V November 8, 1993 TO: Kodiak Island Borough Assembly THRU: Jerome Selby, Mayor-KIB FROM: Steve Hobgood, Director-Engineering/Facilities 159�4 SUBJECT: Peterson Elementary School Rehabilitation Additional A/E Services Attached is a request for an amendment to our existing agreement with GDM, Inc. for the A/E services for the above stated project. In the process of design of this project, several items came to light which were not identified in the original grant in regards to the required scope of work required to complete this project. These items are listed on the attached amendments. I would like to review each by their number as listed: Item #1 Radon mitigation. Twenty five separate test areas were conducted on the Peterson site to determine if any Radon existed which could compromise the safety of the students. The site was first determined to contain a higher amount of Radon then is allowed by the ADEC when a test was conducted by the EPA. When this project began, the twenty five tests were done and the north wing of the site was identified as containing a high amount of Radon gas. GDM, Inc. is to design a system which will eliminate the presence of Radon gas by sealing the foundation, install piping from the ground to the attic area and then vent to the outside by means of a fan system. This will eliminate the presence of Radon over the acceptable amount o identified by the EPA and ADEC. Item #2 Monitoring of asbestos abatement construction and performance of clearance testing. Performed by Specialized Environmental Consultants and J.D. Hill Co. Asbestos removal and monitoring were first planned to be part of the General Construction portion of this project. It was later determined that money could be saved and a third party monitoring firm used if the asbestos portion of this project was made into a separate project. GDM, Inc. was instructed to do a cost estimate of the breakout of this work. At that time, an amount of $250,000 to $300,000 was estimated in savings if the project was controlled by the Borough rather than under a G.C. The asbestos abatement project was awarded to Restec, Inc. of Redmond, WA. and the monitoring was awarded (under the A/E contract with GDM, Inc.) to Specialized Environmental Consultants of Tacoma, WA. This amount is what equals the $40,880.00 bill from GDM, Inc. This would otherwise have shown as a line item under the G.C. Item #3 Monitoring of underground tank removal and performance of ADEC required clearance testing. Monitoring of the underground tank removal and testing required for certification can be done by the G.C. and/or the A/E firm. I have requested a third party inspection through GDM, Inc. This will allow more control and compliance by the Borough. This amount would normally be part of the G.C. under the scope of the Federal Grant. This change will benefit the Borough. Item #4 Lead and copper in domestic water system testing. The USCG began testing all facilities on the base to determine compliance with the required EPA and ADEC guidelines for lead/copper amounts in the domestic water system. Peterson Elementary has one drinking fountain which did not pass the required compliance guidelines. The USCG has made some changes which were thought at first would bring the water into compliance by the addition of additives into the base water system. These changes had little effect on the findings at Peterson Elementary which confirmed our beliefs that the school contained galvanized piping. This was also confirmed by the removal of wall by the asbestos abatement. This change will remove the existing piping and design a replacement system to eliminate the presence of lead/copper above the EPA/ADEC compliance limits. Item #5 Engineering of corrections for USCG caused drainage problems. When the USCG built additional housing on the hill above Peterson Elementary and removed soil and fill, it caused excessive drainage down to the school site. Since the USCG owned the complete site, including the school, no impacts were anticipated. In meetings earlier this summer with the USCG and Borough staff, it was agreed that if the Borough would design the present drainage problem and incorporate the changes required into their design, the USCG would repair the drainage problem on the backside of the facility at their cost. This is mutually beneficial for the Borough and USCG as it allows for more drainage to be done than approved under the Federal Grant and still keep the cost within the guidelines of the present budget. Item #6 Separate asbestos abatement bid package. This is the extra cost to GDM, Inc. involved with the creation of a separate project to design and put together the bid package and drawings for the asbestos abatement performed by Restec of Redmond, WA. This included extra visits and inspection other than those involved with the original contract. This price incorporated with the cost of Specialized Environmental Consultants and Restec saved the Borough an estimated $250,000 to $300,000 of the Federal Grant anticipated cost to do the asbestos abatement. The savings involved will allow the Borough to complete some of the items listed under the Federal Grant which could not be completed otherwise. Kodiak Island Borough KDDIAK 1SLAND BORoUGH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AMENDMENT NO. 1 CONTRACT NO. 93-02 PROJECT NO. #70 HIB 410458 THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH, HEREAFTER THE CONTRACTING AGENCY, AND GDM INC., HEREAFTER THE CONTRACTOR, IS HEREBY AMENDED AND EFFECTIVE THE LAST DATE EXECUTED BY ITS PARTIES. CHANGES TO CONDITIONS OR SERVICES: 1. Radon mitigation $ 28,107.00 2. Monitoring of asbestos abatement construction and performance of clearance testing (Specialized Environmental Consultants) and (J.D. Hill). $ 40,880.00 3. Monitoring of underground tank removal and performance of ADEC required clearance testing. $ 5,559.00 4. Lead and copper in domestic water system testing $ 1,439.20 5. Engineering of corrections for USCG caused drainage problems. $ 28,157.00 6. Separate asbestos abatement bid package. $ 18,184.90 THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS TO THIS AMENDMENT ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN: Attachment no. Title Date No. of pages A Peterson Elementary School 9/10/93 10 Rehabilitation Additional A/E Services AMENDMENT PAGE 1 of 2 r'rIANGES Ig-- - N&ATI@N. Method(s) of Payment Periodic Estimate for Partial Payment TOTALS Current Amount(s) Thru Amendment #A $355,198.00 $355,198.00 Amount(s) for This Amendment $122,327.10 $122,327.10 Revised Amount(s) $477,525.10 $477,525.10 MAXIMUM AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ALL SERVICES PERFORMED UNDER THE AGREEMENT, REVISED TO INCLUDE THIS AMENDMENT, SHALL NOT EXCEED Four Hundred Seventy Seven Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Five Dollars & Ten Cents ($477,525.10) ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ORIGINAL, AGREEMENT REMAIN IN FORCE. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE PARTIES HAVE EXECUTED THIS AMENDMENT. (SIGNATURES MUST BE AFFIXED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRACTING AGENCY PROCEDURES). CONTRACTOR CORPORATE SEAL SIGNATURE: NAME: DATE TITLE: CONTRACTING AGENCY: SIGNATURE: NAME: JEROME M. SELBY DATE TITLE: KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH MAYOR SIGNATURE: NAME: STEVE HOBGOOD DATE TITLE: DIRECTOR, ENGINEERING/FACILITIES SIGNATURE: NAME: DONNA F. SMITH, CMC DATE TITLE: KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH CLERK AMENDMENT PAGE 2 of 2 GDMMC. ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • ENGINEERING 900 West Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2020 Telephone 907/ 276-1613 September 10, 1993 Steve Hobgood, Engineering & Facilities Director Kodiak Island Borough Engineering/Facilities Department, Room 223 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615-6398 RE: Peterson Elementary School Rehabilitation Additional A/E Services Contract KIB-410-458 GDM # 93-001 Dear Steve: This letter will serve as the Kodiak Island Borough's authorization for GDM to perform the fol- lowing extra services. A majority of the work was previously listed under Article 12 of the Owner/Architect Agreement and the accompanying Attachment "A". As work on the Project progressed, some of the work has been modified and revised. The cur- rent fee proposals summarize as follows: 1. Radon mitigation $28,107.00 2. Monitoring of asbestos abatement construction and performance of clearance testing $40,880.00 3. Monitoring of underground tank removal and performance of ADEC-required clearance testing $5,559.00 4. Lead and copper in domestic water system testing $1,439.20 5. Engineering of corrections for USCG -caused drainage problems $28,157.00 6. Separate asbestos abatement bid package $18.184.90 Sub -Total of Additional Services $122,327.10 Explanation of the work is attached as Attachment A. Items 2 and 3 should be funded from the construction budget, not the A/E budget. If you are in agreement with the charges for extra work, please indicate your acceptance for the Borough and your authorization to proceed by signature below. Si ly, James S. Blair Pr 'ect Manager ACCEPTED BY: TITLE: Attachment A DATE: PETERSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL REHABILITATION ADDITIONAL SERVICES ATTACHMENT A A/E AND CONSTRUCTION SCOPE CHANGES NOT COVERED BY PHS/OES ADMIN- ISTERED GRANT AK -90-08A40 OR KIB REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS DATED DEC. 1992: RADON MITIGATION: A. Radon Survey and Document Review: Radon Consultant will direct the instal- lation and set up of 25 long term passive radon samples to collect data on radon entry points during the Project's design phase, review all current radon - related data, review architectural and mechanical plans, and survey the build- ing for possible radon entry points. B. Radon Mitigation Phase 1 Design: Radon Consultant will prepare a mitigation design recommendations, based upon current data and observed building conditions, that recommends immediate actions that the Owner could employ which would be intended to reduce average radon concentrations to the rec- ommended levels. Plans will be prepared that characterize foundation materi- als and conditions in crawlspaces/mechanical trenches. Radon Consultant will work with GDM team members on procedures to seal foundation/slab openings as much as is practical in an existing building. Ventilation patterns in these ar- eas will be summarized. Immediate remedial actions will be included as part of the general construction work. Radon Consultant will work with GDM's team engineers for the new HVAC system and address opportunities to utilize the new system as part of the remedial action. C. Follow-up Action: One year after construction completion, Radon Consultant will evaluate 15 "alpha track" radon samples placed by GDM during Final Inspection. If test results remain above recommended levels Radon Consultant will provide instructions for adjustment of fresh air percentage of make-up air and additional mitigation measures, if necessary. Radon Mitigation Consultant Services: • Investigator's review of existing documents $1,600.00 • Design recommendations 2,200.00 • GDM Project Manager (16 hrs @ $105) 1,680.00 • GDM Project Architect (68 hrs @ $90) 6,120.00 • GDM Team Structural Engineer (16 hrs @ $95) 1,520.00 • GDM Team Mechanical Engineer (56 hrs @ $95) 5,320.00 • GDM Team CAD Drafter (22 hrs @ $55) 1,210.00 • Specification Writer (6 hrs @ $75) 450.00 • Cost Estimator (20 hrs @ $75) 1,500.00 • Construction Phase Observers (32 hrs @ $75) 2,400.00 • Processing of 1 -Year radon tests/Recommendation report (24 hrs @ $68) 1,632.00 • Reimbursables: The following reimbursable expenses will be billed at these rates (analysis rates are for regular turn -around): "Alpha Track" Radon Sampling & Testing (Est. 40 samples @ $50.00 each) 2,000.00 Packing & Shipping of Radon Samples 475.00 TOTAL FEES FOR RADON MITIGATION: $28,107.00 ATTACHMENT A - Page 1 2. 3. CONSTRUCTION PHASE MONITORING OF ASBESTOS ABATEMENT - ranee }n�m'a En„ironrn Mal Goncnllo M.wili do all Constr„Minn Phase !1„nlNa _ Control Testing in lieu of the Contractor hiring a consultant to do this. This cost is normally identified in a project budget as a construction cost and not a design cost. The advantage of this procedure in addition to satisfying EPA Requirements is that GDM Team's Consultant would be on site full time during the Asbestos Abatement and would be making the determination on any material uncovered during demolition as to its asbestos content in lieu of the Contractor. GDM Team Consultant would also perform the final air clearance monitoring after the Contractor says he is finished with the asbestos cleanup. This gives KIB an added level of assurance that the asbestos has been removed. J.D. Hill Laboratory Proposal to GDM $35,100.00 GDM administrative mark-up 3,510.00 GDM Project Manager: 18 hrs @ $105 = 1,890.00 For final inspection trip & closeout report to PHS/OES Reimbursables: Airfare 220.00 Auto Rental 50.00 Meals 25.00 Hotel 85.00 TOTAL FOR ASBESTOS ABATEMENT: $40,880.00 Please Note: This fee proposal is based on 26 days for asbestos abatement and air monitoring testing. If Contractor takes longer, on-site Asbestos Consultant cost will in- crease proportionally. This is an increase over the previous fee proposal due to the longer contract period for asbestos construction. Again, these costs should come from the construction budget, and not the A/E fee budget since this monitoring and testing is mandated by ADEC. CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION PHASE SITE ASSESSMENT PORTION OF THE UST CLOSURE PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN ADEC QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN, AS REQUIRED BY 18 AAC 78: Tank Removal and Replacement Monitoring: An approved QAPP Principal Investigator will be on-site full-time while the existing tanks are removed and the new tanks in- stalled. A Registered Geological Engineer will serve as Project Hydrogeologist, and will prepare the final UST Site Assessment Report. Soil Screening: Portable photo -ionization analyzers will be used to screen soils for the presence of volatile organics. Field testing for POL contaminated soils will be con- ducted on an "as required" basis. Field screening will be conducted throughout the du- ration of the UST removal and site excavating to identify and separate POL contami- nated (clean) soils from non -contaminated soils. The walls of the UST excavations will be screened for the presence of volatile hydrocarbons prior to backfilling. Screening will be performed at numerous locations and various depths along the walls, in accor- dance with QAPP. ATTACHMENT A - Page 2 Soil Sam to ina: Soil samples will be collected during the closure program of the fuel oil UST by a Principal Investigator approved by the QAPP. All of the soil samples will be collected using the guidance and requirements set forth in Section 78.090 of the ADEC's Storage Tanks Regulations (18 AAC 78) and procedures outlines in the ap- for analysis. i ne new tanks cannot oe instauea until ine results or the iao samples are finished. Additional excavation may be necessary if the lab results are positive. An ADEC approved laboratory will provide analytical testing for the UST closure pro- gram, if required, and will ensure the calibration, data reduction, validation, reporting procedures used, quality control checks, calculation of data quality indicators, labora- tory preventive maintenance, corrective action, and performing laboratory system au- dits; as outlined in the Quality Assurance Project Plan. PROPOSED FEES: • Construction Phase UST Removal/Field Monitoring Fee Proposal: Engineer/Geologist II (36 hrs Co) $60) $2,160.00 (Includes 2 days wait for closure tests) Travel time (4 hrs @ $60) 240.00 Airfare, auto, travel, lodging, per diem 800.00 PID rental, photos, sample bottles 75.00 Sample & equipment shipping 150.00 • Lab Testing: Collect & ship soil samples to Anchorage 200.00 Chemical & Geological Laboratories: Tank Excavation Sampling: Diesel Range Organics (EPA 3550/8100) - Soil (2 Co) $142) 284.00 Aromatic Volatile Organics (EPA 8020) - Soil (1 @ $95) 95.00 Stockpiled Soils (preparing for disposal): Diesel Range Organics (EPA 3550/8100) - Soil (3 @ $142) 426.00 Aromatic Volatile Organics (EPA 8020) - Soil (2 @ $95) 190.00 S&W Mark-up (15%) 149.00 • Summary Site Assessment Report Preparation: Vice President (.5 hrs @ $115) 58.00 Sr. Associate/Engineering Geologist (2 hrs @ $91) 182.00 Engineer/Geologist II (8 hrs @ $60) 480.00 Clerical (2 hrs @ $35) ZQ Q4 SUB -TOTAL: $5,559.00 Please Note: This fee proposal assumes Contractor will complete the UST removal in three 12 -hour days, plus two days for clearance tests. If Contractor takes longer, the cost for on-site UST Consultant will increase. ATTACHMENT A - Page 3 4. LEAD AND COPPER IN DRINKING WATER PIPING: Evaluation of School for compliance with EPA promulgated National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (56 FR 26460), recommendations, construction documents for re- lead=bearing water piping, and ewztructien administration services_ Following sampling criteria described in EPA Promulgated National Primary Water Regulations (56 FR 26460), Monitoring Protocols for Tap Water Samples, a GDM team member will take water samples from Peterson Elementary's domestic water system. Sampling will use laboratory containers obtained from Chemical and Geological Laboratories of Alaska; and will be hand -carried to Anchorage in sealed containers for testing. Direct GDM Costs: Pickup of sample bottles and shipping container, prepare for air transport: .75 hr @ $45.00 = $33.75 Taking and packing of water samples, field observation report of sampling: 3.5 hrs @ $95.00 = 332.50 Hand -delivery of samples to Chemical & Geological Laboratories: .75 hrs @ $45.00 = 33.75 Tests: Lead: 4 @ $27.00 (C&GLA 80-132) $108.00 Copper: 4 @ $16.00 (C&GLA 80-102) 64.00 10016 GDM Administrative Mark-up on Reimbursable Expenses 17.20 Discussions with Test Lab, write report on test results, and recommendations for inclu- sion in Schematic Design Submittal: Civil Engineer: 8.0 hrs @ $95.00 = $760.00 Word Processor: 2.0 hrs @ $45.00 = 84.,00 SUB -TOTAL FOR TESTS AND REPORT: $1,439.20 5. RESOLUTION OF DRAINAGE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY NEW ADJACENT USCG CONSTRUCTION: The 1990 PHS/OES School Facility Deficiency Study upon which the Impact Aid Grant was funded did not identify the following drainage problems caused by USCG facilities constructed since 1990 The first drainage problem is northeast of Peterson School along the fenced area separating the School and the new Fire Station. The second problem is in the ser- vice/parking area behind the School and bordering the outfield area of the ball field. Additional project cost to fix these problems is forecasted at $220,000. The $100,000 in the Impact Aid Grant will not cover the cost to solve these problems and the play- ground drainage problem for which it was intended. The drainage problem to the northeast (Photos 3 & 4) is the result of the Fire Station construction, which changed the School's site drainage pattern, too flat of terrain in this area and possibly a clogged or collapsed drainage pipe connecting the catch basin lo- cated in this area with the main system. Recently added gravel to the roadway around this side of the School, has created a dam -like area which cuts off drainage flow and adds to the extent of ponding water. ATTACHMENT A - Page 4 To solve these problems, the catch basin inlet in this area should be lowered and the area re -graded to create drainage flow. It may also be necessary to dig up and replace the pipe connecting this manhole to the system if the pipe cannot be cleaned out and is crushed.— Several recently constructed situations influence the second drainage problem. A broad drainage swale (Photo 1) brings run-off down from the new housing project and empties onto the paved area in the rear of the School. The only place for this water to go to is a catch basin next to the dumpster (Photo 2). This catch basin was not engi- neered to handle the additional water volume routed by the swale to this area. This water flow onto the School property also freezes in the winter, and causes a glacier- like condition over the entire service area. Also to the rear of the School, a new drainage culvert from the housing projects flows onto the hillside next to the stairway that connects the housing project with the School. This culvert appears to have an even greater flow than the swale. The nearby catch basin also does not appear to be able to adequately handle the additional water volume dumped onto the School site from the housing area. Also in this catch basin west of the School is a concrete pad that is slightly above grade. The Coast Guard has cut channels in the concrete to assist drainage, but this is at best a "band-aid" solution. The housing project's engineering has basically given you the problem of dealing with the storm water run-off from a large portion of their project. First -look recommendations to correct drainage problem #2, if the housing project's drainage cannot be modified to keep the additional drainage flow off the School site, would be to take the new culvert pipe flowing from the hillside underground and con- nect it to the existing catch basin. The pipe connecting this catch basin with the next should be replaced. The inlets of both catch basins should be lowered. At the same time, the rear service area paving should be reconstructed so the drainage swale at the rear coming downslope can be directed along the rear of the paved area to the nearest catch basin. FEE PROPOSAL FOR AUTOCAD SITE TOPOGRAPHIC, UTILITY AND IMPROVEMENT FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING TO CORRECT DRAINAGE PROBLEMS: Ecklund Surveying: (1) Records search 1 man (6) hours $270.00 (2) Set Benchmark's and Horizontal control points 2 men (.5) day 400.00 (3) Field -As -Built & Topography 3 men (3.5) days 2,835.00 (4) Office computations 1 man (3.5) days 1,260.00 (5) Sketch plot at scale with 1 foot contours 40.00 (6) Check GDM drafting of data 1 man (6 hours) _ 270.20 FIELD WORK TOTAL GDM, Inc: (1) GDM Sub -consultant Markup $507.00 (2) Computer Drafter $55.00/hr x 50 = 2,750.00 (3) Computer Machine Time 10.00/hr x 50 = 500.00 (4) Mylar Plots 25.00 x 2 = 50.00 (5) Air Courier of Checksets 1 each @ $35 = 35.00 ATTACHMENT A - Page 5 $5,075.00 COORDINATION/OFFICE WORK TOTAL 3.842.00 TOTAL COST OF SITE I{T��E� SURVEY WORK � • /±�� / �� $8,917.00 -.-. C••L16klunclwitl-f�}rni.Sl-f TteldTNie �i�F��:data 53Li1YG.: Ll1Yk G.conversion _�. data to AutoCAD, prepare final computer drafted work on mylar and return to Ecklund for checking, registration stamp, and signature. CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES TO CORRECT DRAINAGE PROBLEMS: GDM Project Manager: 8 hrs @ $105 $840.00 Civil Engineer: 88 hrs @ $85 7,480.00 CAD Drafters: 124 hrs @ $55 6,820.00 Spec Writer: 24 hrs @ $85 2,040.00 Cost Estimator: 20 hrs @ $85 1,700.00 Word Processor: 8 hrs @ $45 360.00 TOTAL COST OF CIVIL ENGINEERING $19.240.00 TOTAL ITEM 5 FEES: $28,157.00 6. SEPARATE ASBESTOS ABATEMENT BID PACKAGE: STAFF CHARGES: GDM Principal Architect: 64 hrs @ $100 $6,400.00 Specifier: 48 hrs @ $90 4,320.00 Word Processor: 42 hrs @ $55 2,310.00 Clerical: 36 hrs @ $35 1.260.00 SUB -TOTAL STAFF CHARGES: 14,290.00 REIMBURSABLES: Airfare (Seattle to Kodiak R/T): Specialized Envir. 1,805.00 Additional asbestos samples from Gym floor JD Hill Labs: 4 @ $20 80.00 Shipping of Samples/Addenda/Meeting Minutes 459.46 Printing of Asbestos Bid Package (25 sets) 560.00 Facsimiles 200.00 GDM administrative mark-up 310.44 GDM Airfare 7/31/93 for Asbestos Pre -Con Mtg 480.00 SUB -TOTAL REIMBURSABLES: 3.894.90 TOTAL COST OF SEPARATE ASBESTOS BID PACKAGE: $18,184.90 ATTACHMENT A - Page 6 JD ._Uii i I Qa ROTnRIES, INC. ■ !N!' IMKI A ■ WBE NW2F3907771 Hygiene Services SP =7� _ Architects: GlM9 & Assoc., in PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT Anchorage, AWska ��// �� THIS AGREEMENT is made this /Iq day of , 1993, by and between J.D. Hill Labdratories, nc., a Washington professional services corporation (hereinafter "J.D. Hill") and GDM, Inc. WHEREAS, GDM, Inc. (hereinafter "Architect") is the agent of Kodiak Island Borough for building(s) or other structure(s) in which asbestos -containing materials (ACM) have been or may be identified, and which is\are described as follows: Peterson Elementary School, Kodiak Island, Alaska WHEREAS, J. D. Hill is a professional services corporation qualified to provide Laboratory and Industrial Hygiene services with regard to the assessment, removal, encapsulation and disposal of ACM; THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. Services. J. D. Hill agrees to provide the following services: o Monitor compliance with federal, state, local and municipal statutes, codes and regulations pertaining to ACM abatement projects o Air Monitoring before, during and after abatement procedures, including clearance samples in accordance to all applicable federal, state, local and municipal statutes, codes and regulations pertaining to ACM abatement projects 2. Fee. Charges for professional services rendered by J. D. Hill pursuant to this Agreement shall be made on a flat fee plus expenses basis for services described in Paragraph 1. The fee schedule for the services described in Paragraph 1 is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 3. Records and Information. J. D. Hill shall have access to all records which it deems relevant, including documents regarding building structures and layout, and relating to all suspected building ACM. Building Owner Kodiak Island Borought shall provide copies of any such documents upon request by J. D. Hill. P.O. Box 363 • Wauna, WA 98395 • (206) 857-3222 • FAX(206)857-2450 ATTACHMENT A - Page 7 4. insurance. Contractor agrees to maintain general premises liability insurance during the period of this Agreement. 5. Indemnification\Hold Harmless. J. D. Hill shall exercise the utmost professional effort to ensure that all contractors comply with applicable federal, state, municipal and loci statutes, regulations and codes throughout the courseo --t ACM abatement project. However, the parties recognize that J. D. Hill cannot guarantee the conduct of others, and that J. D. Hill's personnel cannot remain on the site 24 hours per day. Therefore, J. D. Hill shall not be liable to Contractor, and Contractor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless J. D. Hill, its agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, losses or liabilities arising from injury or death to persons, damage to property, or regulatory agency citations, charges or fines occasioned by any and all acts, omissions or failures of Owner or contractors and their officers, agents and employees. This paragraph shall not apply to any injury or damage resulting the sole negligence of J. D. Hill, its agents and employees. To the extent that any of the injuries or damages referenced above were caused by or resulted from the concurrent negligence of J. D. Hill, its agents or employees, this obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless is valid and enforceable only in relation to the extent of the negligence of J. D. Hill, its officers, agents and employees. 6. Amendment\Entire Agreement. This Agreement may be amended only upon the specific written consent of all parties hereto. No other express or implied representations have been made by any party hereto, and no benefits or obligations of this Agreement shall benefit any entity not a party to this Agreement. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed a waiver of any other provision or condition at such time or at any other time. 7. Assignment. No assignment of this Agreement or delegation of the rights and obligations hereunder shall be valid without the specific written consent of all parties hereto. 8. Arbitration. In the event of any dispute arising out of this Agreement which the parties hereto cannot mutually resolve, then the parties agree that the dispute will be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules and Regulations of the American Arbitration Association ("AAA"). An arbitrator shall be selected pursuant to the AAA Rules and Regulations and arbitration results will be binding on the parties and in any subsequent litigation or other dispute. 9. Attorney Fees. In the event of litigation arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. 10. Expert Witness Services. The parties agree that ATTACHMENT A - Page 8 J. D. Hill is not obligated to provide expert witness services before any federal, state, municipal or local agency, tribunal, board or court as a result of execution or performance of this Agreement. In the event that Owner desires J. D. Hill to provide any such service, J. D. Hill's fee for such services shall be $125.00 per hour plus expenses. 11. Client agrees to notify J. D. Hill twenty four (24) hours in advance of scheduled changes for on site personnel. If such schedule changes are not received by J. D. Hill, a minimum four (4) hours ($200.00) shall be charged to the client. IN WITNESS WHEREAS, the parties execute this Agreement as follows: Date: a 93 Date: ES, INC. Rdymond L. Donahue Its: Vice -President AGENT FOR BU DING OWNER GDM, INC. P _ By: Its: ATTACHMENT A - Page 9 EXHIBIT "A" FEE SCHEDULE On -Site Air Monitoring for 26 days $19,500.00 including all room, meals and travel. Transmission Electron Microscopy is estimated not to exceed $15,600.00. ATTACHMENT A - Page 10