HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.0 Bond ReleaseSTATE OF COLORADO
Roy Romer, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION
FRED R. BANTA, Director
March 28, 1988
Garfield County Planning Commission
Courthouse
109 - 8th Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re: ?forth Thompson Creek Mine, 60% Bond Release, C-025-81
Dear Sirs:
The Division is proposing to approve a request by Snowmass Coal Company to
release 60% of the bonded amount for the North Thompson Creek Mine. This
release is for backfilling and grading work accomplished during 1986 and
1987. Enclosed are the Division's Decision Document detailing the reasons for
this release, and the inspection report covering the backfilling and grading
work. A public notice of this proposed decision will be published in the
Glenwood Post. Any person with a valid legal interest which might be affected
by the release of this bond, or any Federal, State, or local government agency
which has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any
environmental, social, or economic impact involved with the operation, or is
authorized to develop or enforce environmental standards with respect to such
operations, shall have the right to file written objections to or comments
upon the requested release from bond, and file a request for an informal
conference with the Division within thirty (30) days of issuance of the
proposed decision by the Division. Such issuance shall be dated from the time
this written notification is mailed. A request for an informal conference
shall be mailed to:
Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division
1313 Sherman Street, Room 423
Denver, CO 80203
Sincerely,
Candace M. Thompson
Hydrologist
CMT/hm
6200F
•
11988 H
t ri�....i LUUN [Y
423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203-2273 Tel. (303) 866-3567
Proposed Decision
Partial Bond Release Request
for
North Thompson Creek Mine
C-81-025
Prepared by
Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division
Fred R. Banta, Director
Candace Thompson, Hydrologist
March 9, 1988
In accordance with
C.R.S. 34-33-125
Rule 3.03
;•!C:t7S1q77
I+1 APR 011988 .11
LiAr L1ELD COUNTY
Proposed Decision for Partial Bond Release
North Thompson Creek Mine
C-81-025
Introduction
This document presents the results of the Division's review of Snowmass'
Coal Company request for a technical revision to the bond amount for the North
Thompson Creek Mine and a subsequent request for partial bond release at the
mine site. Both requests were received by the Division on November 12, 1987.
These requests are in accordance with Rule 3.03.2. This review is conducted
to fulfill the requirements of Rule 3.03.2(2) and 3.03.2(5)(a).
Rule 3.03.2(2) requires that the Division conduct an inspection and evaluation
of reclamation work involved after a request for bond release has been
received. The inspection to fulfill this requirement was conducted by the
Division on December 17, 1987. Surface and mineral owners within the boundary
were notified and offered the opportunity to participate in the inspection.
Mr. Larry Reschke of Snowmass Coal Company, Mr. Dennis Burns of the Office of
Surface Mining, Mr. Robert Perry of the Four Mile -North Thompson Creek Mineral
Land Company, and Mr. Duane Gilfrey, the local ranch manager and the
representative of the Anschutz Holdings, were present for the inspection.
The December 17, 1987 inspection and subsequent evaluation are the basis for
this proposed decision. The December 17, 1987 inspection report is available
for public inspection at the offices of the Division.
Rule 3.03.2(5)(a) requires that the Division propose a decision on the bond
release request and provide written notification of the decision to the
permittee and other interested parties within 30 days of the inspection. This
decision day was postponed due to outstanding issues which will be further
discussed in later sections of this document. This proposed decision is
subject to scrutiny by the permittee, other interested parties, and the United
States Department of The Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement. The Division's decision shall become final within 30 days of its
issuance unless a written request for adjudicatory hearing is received.
This document includes the proposed decision, the evaluation, and calculations
to determine the bond amount to be retained and released.
Proposed Decision
The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division proposes to approve a request for
partial bond release. This request was made by Snowmass Coal Company in
accordance with Rule 3.03.2 of the regulations of the Colorado Mined Land
Reclamation Board for Coal Mining and the Colorado Surface Coal Mining
Reclamation et C.R.S. 34-33-101 et seq section 125.
-2-
This proposed decision is to release from bond and liability all backfilling
and grading work which has occurred at the mine site and loadout to date
except that additional bond will be held to reclaim a portion of the truck
dump road located on prime farm land. An additional bond amount of $45,000.00
will be held to reclaim approximately 2 acres of prime farm land disturbed by
the truck dump road. Bond shall also be retained in an adequate amount to
cover reclamation of sediment ponds and ditches, and to ensure the successful
establishment of vegetation; including soil preparation, seeding, mulching
and netting and other methods as described in the approved reclamation plan.
This approval is based on an inspection of the site and evaluation of
reclamation results. The bond currently held by the Division is
$1,750,000.00. The bond liability recalculated by TR -7 is reduced by
$945,700.00. The remaining bond amount is $804,300.00. This approval
document approves the release of 60% of this amount or $482,580. The current
bond of $1,750,000.00 shall be reduced to $321,720.00 when all statuary notice
and public comment requirements have been met. This is more than enough bond
to cover any outstanding reclamation concerns.
Evaluation
All buildings, structures, and facilities at the mine site and loadout have
been dismantled and removed. Backfilling of the refuse area was done in
accordance with a technical revision approved July 2, 1986. Channels were
installed in accordance with a technical revision approved February 10, 1987.
The mine site and truck dump were reclaimed in accordance with a plan
submitted in a technical revision and approved September 7, 1987. The loadout
was reclaimed in accordance with the permit application reclamation plan.
The mine site reclaimed areas drain to three sediment ponds. The NPDES
permit, CO -0029599, requires monitoring of outfalls 002, 005, 006 and 007.
Outfall 004 was a sewage lagoon which has been reclaimed. A perpetual
discharge has been approved at the No. 3 Mine (Outfall 007). This discharge
is meeting water quality standards. Monitoring frequency for this site was
reduced from weekly to monthly for oil and grease, flow, and pH. The No. 3
mine regraded area drains down the county road to the upper most sediment
pond, or NPDES site 006. The main portion of the No. 1 mine drains into the
pre-existing sediment pond 8 (NPDES site 002) The refuse area and a small
portion of the mine site drain to the refuse sediment pond (NPDES site 005).
Soil sampling of the regraded areas at the loadout and the mine were submitted
by the operator to the Division. Division review found that the replaced
topsoil materials were valuable as plant rooting media and the proposed
fertilizer application adequate to alleviate defficiencies and enhance plant
growth. All areas of the mine site, refuse area, and loadout have been seeded
and mulched where required accept for an area at the loadout to be planted in
alfalfa during 1988. The refuse area was reclaimed in 1986. Good growth is
establishing on the refuse area.
-3-
The operator has submitted as -built topographic maps of the mine site and
refuse area. The site was flown after regrading of the total area was
accomplished in order to develop these topographic maps. As previously
stated, the site has been reclaimed in accordance with the plan submitted in
technical revision No. 6 and approved September 7, 1987. In many cases the
reclaimed slopes are of lesser slope than those approved in the plan and
should enhance vegetative establishment, stability, and post -mining land use
of the area. The approved post -mining land use for the mine site is
unimproved range land. The post -mining land use for the loadout is irrigated
pasture land and haylands, each matched to the specific site capability.
The site of the truck dump was located on an elevated upland terrace of the
'Roaring Fork river. A11 facilities have been removed at this area except for
the haul road and the truck dump pad which will be utilized by the ranch
manager as a hay storage area. The haulroad has remained in to allow access to
this hay storage site. The road was left in accordance with approval given in
technical revision No. 6 as requested by both the operator and the land
owner. The lower portion of this road cuts across approximately two acres of
prime farmland. The Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act has a
prime farmland restoration exemption in 30 CFR 823.12. However, the rule was
remanded by District Court Judge Flannery in 1984. In his decision he
states,"an across-the-board application of (prime farm land) requirements,
without an exemption for surface facilities that are actively used over
extended periods of time but affects minimal amount of land, was found to be
arbitrary and capricious". The Office of Surface Mining is required to
propose new rule making concerning prime farmland or else remove the
exemption. At this time, new rule making has not been proposed and therefore
the status of this road is in question. For this reason an additional bond
amount of $45,000.00 has been retained in order to assure that reclamation of
the prime farm land could be accomplished if new rule making excludes this
exemption.
The No. 1 mine portals have been sealed with hydraulic seals. The No. 3 mine
is drained by its pre-existing pipe to the river: The new NPDES permit for
this site (007) will be sampled monthly for pH, flow, and oil and grease. The
water has always been of good quality and no problems are expected from this
discharge.
The main channel through the No. 1 mine site has been reestablished with a
filter fabric underliner and rip rap. The diversion channels of the refuse
pile have also been established with an underliner of filter fabric and rip
rap where required.
An Abandoned Mines Land project area exists at the mine site at the portal of
the abandoned Thompson No. 2 coal mine. This portal area was never utilized
by Snowmass Coal Company and is not within the permit area. The discharge
from this site has exhibited high iron content and a low pH. The Inactive
Mine Reclamation Program of this Division installed a passive mine drainage
treatment system in early 1985. Potential requirements of an NPDES permit was
waived by the Colorado Water Quality Control Division. Accordingly, the
-4-
Inactive Mine Reclamation Program assumed reclamation responsibility for the
disturbances created by the passive mine drainage treatment (PMDT) project.
The value of the PMDT system as an experimental system has been fully
realized. The Inactive Mine Reclamation Program plans to remove this system
when weather conditions permit in late spring or early summer in 1988. The
reclamation plan involves collecting the mine drainage within the portal in an
oversize PVC pipe designed to convey the mine drainage under the county road.
The pipe will discharge into an open channel currently employed by the PMPT
system. The channel will be designed with a large safety factor to provide
long tens stability and erosion resistance. The size of this channel will be
built in order to divert water from the surrounding permit area and prevent it
from comingling with mine drainage.
Except for the abandoned mine site no pollution of surface or subsurface water
is occurring at the site. The probability of any pollution occurring in the
future is very low. An ongoing monitoring program is required of the operator
and will remain in force until approval to delete the monitoring is given by
the Division. The monitoring plan required by the Division includes two wells
D -la and D -2a located near the toe of the refuse pile which will be monitored
quarterly for water level and field quality (pH, temperature, and
conductivity). Monitoring will continue on the North Thompson Creek above and
below the mine site and will include biannual monitoring of the following
parameters: TDS, pH, calcium, iron, magnesium sulfate, TSS, bicarbonate,
magnesium, sodium and zinc. The sediment ponds and discharge from the No. 3
mine will be monitored in accordance with the NPDES permit. Annual submittal
of a hydrologic report including the results of monitoring is required of the
operator by the Division.
Bonding Calculations
Currently, the Division is holding a reclamation bond in the amount of
$1,750,000.00. The final approval of technical revision No. 7 will reduce the
bond amount that would have been required to reclaim the site by $945,700.00
to an amount of $843,000.00. This reduction is appropriate due to the removal
of structures at the site and modifications to the reclamation plans. The
backfilling and grading reduction is not included within this technical
revision. With technical revision No. 7 it was estimated that $527,500.00 was
required to reclaim the mine site and $231, 800.00 was required to reclaim the
loadout area. In addition, the Division is requiring an additional $45,000.00
to be held for reclamation of the truck dump road or restoration of prime farm
land if required by further rule making. This amounts to a total bond of
$804,300.00. This document details the Division's findings for a request to
release 60% of this amount due to regrading and restoration of the approved
land. The resulting bond amount after a 60% reduction for regrading will be
$321,720.00. The Division has back calculated work remaining to be done at
the site in regards to reclamation of sediments ponds and final construction
of outlet channels and also accounting for possible failure of reseeding that
has already been accomplished. An estimate of $47,920.00 was derived by the
Division for reclamation of the drainage control and reestablishment of
vegetation based on a 50% failure rate. Other work that might be required is
-5-
reclamation of the prime farm land at the truck dump site for which a
$45,000.00 bond is being held. Bond is also required to be held for any
needed repairs to the Siever's ditch that might occur in the future. The
Siever's ditch is below the truck dump area and was reconstructed into a
concrete channel during the original construction phase of the mine. The
managers of the Siever ditch requested that this ditch be replaced back as a
dirt structure. This work was done during the reclamation phase of the
project. However, the mine is committed to repairing the earthen ditch for
five years from the installation and a bond needs to be held for this until
October, 1992. A conservative amount of bond of $5,000.00 for five years
would total $25,000.00. The total of all these reclamation totals '
$117,920.00. The Division is proposing to hold $321,720.00 during this phase
of the project, therefore more than sufficient bond is present to do all the
work required at the site.
vjr
5988F
-6-
STATE OF COLORADO
Roy Romer, Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION
FRED R. BANTA, Director
CA
DATE: December 21, 1987
TO: North Thompson Creek Mine File, Sixty Percent Bond Release
Inspection
FROM: Candy Thompson 14,—.r
RE: NORTH THOMPSON CREEK MINE, C-81-025, BOND RELEASE INSPECTION OF
DECEMBER 17, 1987
I was accompanied on this inspection by Dennis Burns of the OSM and Larry
Reschke of Snowmass. The BLM and Forest Service were contacted about the
inspection but were unable to participate. Mr. Robert Perry of the Founaile -
North Thompson Creek Mineral and Land Company met us at the mine site to
discuss reclamation. He stated that he was very pleased with the reclamation
that had been done at the mine site. There was same discussion about access
through Founnlle's property to the road leading up over into Middle Thompson
Creek on Anschutz's land. This matter will need to be resolved through
Snowmass and the interested parties. A11 areas of the mine disturbance have
been reclaimed. The final slopes at the mine are all of lesser slope than was
approved in the technical revisions of 1986 and 1987. All access roads have
been reclaimed at the mine site except for the road leading over into Middle
Thompson which the Anschutz Corporation requested remain in. The haul road
was the existing County Road and, of course, still remains. The Inactive Mine
Program's Peat Bog Project for the abandoned No. 2 portal remains on site also.
No topsoil was available at the mine site due to the pre -disturbance existing
there. Soil sampling and fertility testing was accomplished by the operator
prior to seeding. Some amendment was done to the top material. This
information will be supplied to the Division by Snowmass Corporation and will
be forwarded to OSM upon receipt. The Division did some sampling of the -four
feet of covering acquired at the refuse area. One hole was sampled down to
four feet and had the four feet of cover. Another hole extended to three -feet
prior to the auger breaking and had non-toxic cover to that depth.
Certifications also exist from the contractor of the four feet of cover. A11
the drainages at the mine site have been established.
Three sediment ponds remain in place at the No. 1 Mine area. The 3 Mine
regraded area drains down the County Road to the uppermost sediment pond.
This sediment pond discharges through a culvert under the road and into a rip
rap permanent channel. The main portion of the No. 1 Mine drains into the
preexisting sediment pond 8. This sediment pond has been regraded and seeded
423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203-2273 Tel. (303) 868-3567
and might be appropriate to remain in as a permanent stock pond if the land
owner so requests. The sediment pond below the refuse pile is also still in
and functioning properly. The western drainage of the refuse area was
established and rip rapped in 1986. A very low grade exists on the channel in
the upper portion, however, sightings along the channel assured that there is
a positive drainage on this channel. After sediment pond removal at the
refuse pile the permanent channel for the two drainage sections leading off
the refuse pile will need to be established down to the North Thompson Creek.
The bond has been calculated to assure that sufficient funds remain to reseed
and mulch if the vegetation were to fail and to regrade the existing sediment:
ponds, establish the final drainages down to the river, and repair the Seavers
Ditch for the five year liability term on that ditch. These calculations- az
include revegetation of the load out areas also. The Division calculated
approximately $38,000.00 required to accomplish all these tasks. The amount='
of bond that will remain after this reduction will be $300,000.00 so, the
Division believes the mine is well covered for any work that might be required
at the site.
Overall, both Dennis Burns and I felt that the reclamation work accomplished
at the mine and at the load out is exemplary. Even very small areas of
disturbance such as little access roads had special attention paid to
feathering in the edges of all the reclaimed section with the undisturbed
areas.
The No. 1 Mine portals have been sealed with hydraulic seals. The No. 3 Mine
is being allowed to drain through its pre-existing pipe to the river. A
concrete well exists just down the downslope of the old 3 Mine bench that
allows for sampling of the discharge water. The new NPDES permit for this
site will be monthly sampling for Ph, flow, and oil and grease. The water -has
always been a good quality and no problems are expected to occur from this
discharge. The land owner, Mr. Perry, expressed the interest in diverting
this mine flow to irrigate the No. 1 Mine reclaimed area in order to more
quickly establish the vegetation. He was cautioned that any diversion of such
water need to be approved by Snowmass Coal Company and must remain in
compliance with our regulations. Snowmass Corporation has an agreement with
Founnile Mineral and Land Corporation over controll of the mine site reclaimed
area for a 10 year period. Grazing will not be allowed until Snowmass
Corporation and the Division so approve it.
Weather conditions prevented access to the Middle Thompson Creek area of the
mine. There is an old fan portal over on that side of the area which has not
been checked. The Division will fly this area in late December to check on;:
the status of reclamation for this site.
Mr. Dwayne Gilfrey the local Ranch Manager of the Anschutz holdings,
accompanied us on the inspection of all the load out areas. The macadem road
leading out to the old truck dump area has remained in place along with the
turn around pad for the truck dump. All the structures of the truck dump and
the conveyor have been removed and the entire area seeded and mulched. The,
truck dump turn around area will be utilized by the ranch for hay storage.
Mr. Gilfrey stated that he is very pleased with the status of reclamation at:
the area.
The Sievers Ditch has had the concrete removed and has been regraded with a
dirt base. This whole area has been seeded and mulched also. The trainload
out area has all been regraded with topsoil replaced. The operator sampled
this material prior to seeding and results of this sampling will be forwarded
to the Division. The Division also took eight samples at the load out area.
Documentation is being sent to the OSM. The analysis from the laboratory have
not been received to date. All areas at the load out have been seeded and
mulched except for the old rail road turn area which will be seeded next
spring in a hay alfalfa mix. Mr. Gilfree did have some problem with the
splitter boxes on the irrigation system. There are three of these structures
which he would like wing walls placed around the outlet. Mr. Reschke stated
that they would be happy to place the wing walls on these structures. We will
check at later inspections to see the status of these splitter boxes. At this
point the Division will allow this matter to be handled between the land owner
and the Snowmass Corporation.
vjr
4080F
APR 0 1 1988
GARFIELD COUNTY
STATE OF COLORADO
Roy Romer, Governor
!876
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION
FRED R. BANTA, Director
DATE: March 28, 1988
TO: N. Thompson Creek File, C-81-025
FROM: C. Thompson (LA
RE: Bond Calculation
The Division determination of bond requirement to complete reclamation at the
N. Thompson Creek mine site is as follows:
ML RD
Area Activity Estimate
All Revegetation aspect* $ 33,853
Minesite & Refuse Pile Remove drainage control structure 3,815
All Indirect costs 10,252
Kaiser -Sievers Ditch Repair as needed 25,000
Truck Dump Prime Farmland Reconstruction** 45,000
Total
$117,920
* Based on a worst-case 50% failure
** Due to uncertainties in the reclamation plan, the figure used was 2 X the
original estimate.
The attached calculation detail those costs.
Attachment
sa
6380F
rriPIThici71C11 C�
j!g APR 011988
GARFIELD COUNTY
423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203-2273 Tel. (303) 866-3567
Sheet / of Y Sheets
RECLAMATION COST SUMMARY FORM
MINE NAME Smowrv,ass Loo.c/oy/ PERMIT NUMBER
DATE .2 - f -se PREPARED BY La W PERMIT ACTION /recons/rve/,;ei
f /^/
I. DIRECT COSTS
TASK ITEMS
COST($)
A. Earthwork
1. Backfilling/Rough Grading
Task No.
Description
rL0. a� Stnisee
J J 1/ A,e4.
rno..7rrsAJe 1G tV//y
9iiirsw, a/
oV9 ll// n. n /erla l W ../
Y93.o7
delft — au//r ar
J 1
Subtotal
2. Highwall Reduction
Task No. Description
n /o
s-,tn. ;-s
Subtotal
3. Refuse Pile Cover Placement
Task No. Description
APR 011988
.o
. 43-ARFIELD COUNTY
Subtotal
RECLAt4ATION COST SUMMARY cont'd
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sheet a ofjSheets
TASK ITEMS
COST($)
Fill Compaction
Task No. Description
_
672./3
7 C.n,,,,,La it:// n,nI.r,a/ ,'n 5tiny
argue
Ripping
Task No. Description
Subtotal
67 P, /8
5/1.6(0
/ 1(•pp.n` c/' e' DAP/ 31.iriCe(0 1n
fear 0ve
%lar/t/nfl /jra ve/ hale
3 W.
R
RCOM Cod / ma ja_r
/i
4 7. l2
te,n� fac//ri/
II Zeneaih road sr.r`...ce
Road Reclamation
Task No. Description
Subtotal
4/of, 7 8
,n6) dj ." 6(I q /I,e/./wp
Finish Grading
Task No. Description
Subtotal
57,6/
d 1.\.J) grade 0_1/ °even.'
Subtotal
4 C7, 4/
RECLAMATION COST SUMMARY Lunt'd
8.
9.
10.
Sheet 3 ofl sheets
TASK ITEMS
COST ($)
Stream Channel Reconstruction
Task No. Description
AA
Subtotal
Sediment Pond/Diversion Ditch/Check Dam Removal
Task No. Description
n
Subtotal
Topsoil/Subsoil Replacement
Task No. Description
t a7 90.0o
?Hier/ ae_ern.t /J70 qdr n.a{er,'a/ lc
J
7.1/ area. RuJ,00/ey
jww//y
6 //avlIte•tai •/o`so.'/ rhader.a./lets. JIM h.
/ff.,.VO
C/ rah, 1 Slit' .11,1 r/5 et r•
117a
,
5 No u!/ <A res_I ire II/ Win'/rr,A./ 70e
I'
a 97. 34(
en sea Orf .-oc
"Ala-,
SubtotalVna'9s,
74,
RECLAMATION COST SUMMARY cont'd
B
C
II.
Sheet e/ of 4 Sheets
TASK ITEMS
COST ($)
. Portal/Shaft Sealing
Task No. Description -
n�0
Subtotal
. Drill Hole/Monitoring Well Sealing
Task No. Description
n/a
Subtotal
Task No. Description
. .,ia Structural Demolition/Removal (total from worksheet)
. 9 Revegetation (total from worksheet)
`f X3/9. 03
. Fencing (total from worksheet)
• /0 Mobilization/Demobilization (total from worksheet)
3, 060, 1 7
TOTAL DIRECT RECLAMATION COSTS (items A through 6)
INDIRECT COSTS
$ ,'7, 874.677
/'i4,5,
A. Overhead and Profit
1. Public Liability Insurance - 0.82% of direct costs
2. Contractor's Performance Bond - 0.80% of direct costs
/V3.00
3. Job Superintendant (total from worksheet) vide? /.i, .. AS
SS -0.0o
4. Contractor's Profit - 10% of direct costs
/ 7 87.4a
• Subtotal
B. Engineering/Bid Spec./Contract Document Preparation Fees
4.25% of Contract Amount (direct costs plus overhead & profit)
d, 63.7. 30
??1,1,0
C. CMLRD Project Management Expenses - $20/hr. x req. man hours
(manpower costs for contract issuance & construction oversite)
/60,00
TOTAL INDIRECT RECLAMATION COSTS (items A through C)
$ 3, 661,40
TOTAL PERFORMANCE BOND AMOUNT (direct plus indirect costs) $ a 1 5-14 .
ROUNDED TO $ 01 1, S.? S. 00
'EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - RIPPING ,,JRK
TASK NO. 1 DATE 2 - S • at PREPARED BY C 2 W PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION .4 ea OAS leoel'•oti •r p('1 — .SnoWn•0.rr 16C110 U1
TASK DESCRIPTION 8ty,,,b Conyatie .soi/ Mn/ev.G/r denra.14 road
evvraec Vo rho 0^A oiefee 01c }3JJ�13 w..d re Ve afano,.. (36 " deerh)
HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST
Machine make & model D P L. Attachments
S b/4.JJe 1 J s4`0,4 rlpe
No. shifts per day / Labor Zone i /Q
Ownership cost/hr =$ Operating cost/hr =$ Operator cost/hr =$
Total equipment cost/hr =$ /IS. 73
MATERIAL QUANTITIES
Circle appropriate method:
Volume method: LCY
CCY x load factor = BCY
Type of material , seizmic velocity = fps
Source of estimated load factor
Area Method:
.2(0, /36 sq. ft. total area. Required ripping depth = 3 ft.
Source of quantity take-off(s) (map no., permit page no.) a s i a/e / (0.6 ae @ J'd/.i
Method(s) used to verify quantities
HOURLY PRODUCTION
Circle appropriate unit:
Beq.ft.fn unadjusted production x 0.,Sjob efficiency (avg. for all
BCY hr
shifts utilized) x 1.00 altitude adj. = t/y, 7S5 q. t./hr)adjusted production
JOB COST
BCY BCY/hr
d I q.ft. divided by Hyp 7(5' sq.ft/hr 0, S8 hours
Tota quantity adj. production Total job time
O.SB hours x $ //S. 7? /hr = $ 4'7, la Total job cost
Total job time Equip. cost
BCY/BC
Unit cost: $ (O7, 42 divided by sq.ft. _,se O.dSj
Total job cost Total quantity
Sheet 1 of 2 Sheets
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - TRUCK/LOADER TEAMS
TASK NO. o. DATE Q- s -pg PREPARED BY L R ki PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION /Recons/.oc/.o, of pill sols - Snawn+oss l-octdoon
TASK DESCRIPTION fie mowe rue_d sfir(cQ 'ha- ler AA./s (4/ac/of
1
e „Is lin 9 v //7
HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST:
No. shifts per day /
Equipment Labor Ownership Operating Operator Total Equip.
Make & Model Zone Cost/hr ($) Cost/hr ($) Cost/hr ($) Cost/hr ($)
Truck : /o CV 4)...11, T..ok
Loader: 953 = 60.2y
Dozer : D 9L i/o + + = 107,19
MATERIAL QUANTITIES:
BCY CCY x swell factor = /9J7 LCY
Source of quantity take-off(map no., permit page no.) es/%..+a./,.d (o,4 sc. @ a' deo1i )
" " estimated swell factor
Method(s) used to verify volume
HOURLY PRODUCTION:
Haul distance = la so ft., return distance = n230 ft., astitude = dodo ft.
Total Resistance (haul):+ d % rolling res. plus % grade res.(+/-)= a %
(return):+ a % " % 11 II 11
Truck capacity: /o LCY struck, /o LCY heaped. Avg. capacity = io LCY
Loader capacity: . LCY (heaped measure x o.9 bucket fill factor
= '.8 LCY per bucket load (adjusted capacity)
No. loader passes required to fill truck = S (average truck capacity divided by
adjusted loader bucket capacity and rounded to the nearest whole number)
Adjusted truck capacity = 9 LCY (no. of loader passes multiplied by adjusted
loader bucket capacity). Note: Adjusted truck capacity cannot exceed average truck
capacity. If loader overfills truck on last pass, assume excess material spills off.
Loader cycle time: Basic cycle (load, maneuver, & dump) = minutes. (average)
Loader cycle corrections:
Adjusted loader cycle time = minutes
1st pass = 0.1 min. (bulk of 1st pass completed during truck exchange time)
2nd o.s min.
3rd o.s min.
4th 0.s min.
5th o.s min.
6th min.
a.I minutes total load time per truck
Truck cycle time: Exchange time ---- 0.7 min. (0.6 - 0.8 min.)
Load a.I min.
Haul i.5 min.
Maneuver & dump 0.7 min. (1.0 - 1.2 min.)
Return i.a min.
= 4.a minutes total truck cycle time
TRUCK/LOADER TEAM EST 1TING cont'd Sheet 2 of 2 Sheets
LCY/hr:
Loader: 60 min./hr divided by ( &./ min. truck load time + 0,7 min. truck
exchange time) = &L.4' cycles/hr.
,2/.4/ cycles/hr x R LCY adj. truck capacity = /9a.4 LCY/hr (unadj.)
adjusted loader production:
/9a.6 LCY/hr x o.83 job efficiency* x /.o altitude adj.= /S9.¢ G LCY/hr
Truck : 60 min./hr divided by 64, min. truck cycle time = /S.9 cycles/hr
is, 9 cycles/hr x 9; LCY adj. truck capacity = 14 3.1 LCY/hr (unadj.)
adjusted truck production:
/43./ LCY/hr x o.?J job efficiency* x /.a altitude adj.= //8.8 LCY/hr
*average for all shifts utilized
Team Size Determination:
/(9 . g LCY/hr divided by ,i 8.y LCY/hr = /./S trucks req'd. for team**
adj.loader prod. adj.truck prod.
**round to nearest whole number = / actual trucks utilized. To figure net
hourly team production, use lower production figure between adjusted hourly
loader production and total hourly truck team production (no. of trucks on team
multiplied by adjusted hourly production per truck).
Net hourly truck/loader team production =
Multiple team production = LCY/hr x teams = LCY/hr/fleet
JOB COST:
Team cost/hr: Truck(s) $ ro.7a /hr/truck x 1 trucks =$ S0.? /hr
Loader =$ 60, 34/hr
Dozer =$/o7, /9 /hr
.4_12/1.41u/hr/team
Multiple team cost/hr = $ z6.8.97 /hr/team x 1 teams =$ .168,9 7 /hr/fleet
)937 LCY divided by /1 8.8 LCY/hr = /6.3 total job hours
total material vol. hourly fleet prod.
/C. 3 hours x $ &(O2, 9 7 /hr = $ I/ 2 2 y, a I Total Job Cost
total job hrs hourly fleet cost
Unit cost/LCY =$ /88S/•al divided by 193) LCY =$ ea..,L/LCY
total job cost total material vol.
NOTES ON JOB:
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - RIPPING WORK
TASK NO. 3 DATE 2 • 5 • 8 8 PREPARED BY 4 flk) PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION lieconrI-1.4:0A o/p(/ .sc,/ — SnoWfl'Aff Loadoo±
TASK DESCRIPTION Allop,;J road rue lace lb re move b /a.al. low ',oboe/
base ( artvrne a y" dei/2 ) — do/.. / road 'svr aee !o by re...ovacl
G . G a.c Cac, /26 scl
HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST
Machine make & model DU Attachments S b Lde
No. shifts per day / Labor Zone i//3
Ownership cost/hr =$ 61.94 Operating cost/hr =$ .3y.l. Operator cost/hr =$ 19.9.T
Total equipment cost/hr =$ //S. 73
.�shpt. A Yvier
MATERIAL QUANTITIES
Circle appropriate method: Volume (Area___
Volume method: LCY
CCY x load factor = BCY
Type of material , seizmic velocity = fps
Source of estimated load factor
Area Method:
oZ G
I34 sq. ft. total area. Required ripping depth = a ft.
Source of quantity take-off(s) (map no., permit page no.) ea/.n.e.iwJ (0.6 we Q aided,//,
Method(s) used to verify quantities
HOURLY PRODUCTION
Circle appropriate unit:
BCY/hr
,15,.? 7 tMrirThipunadjusted production x OW job efficiency (avg. for all
BCY/hr
shifts utilized) x 1•oo altitude adj. = 7 0, y 63 Lq r adjusted production
JOB COST
BCY BCY/hr
24 /34 t divided by 70, A63 sq.ft/hr = 0,37 hours
Total �q.fquantity adj. production Total job time
Total job cost
0. 3 6 hours x $ 1I5,74 /hr = $ J//. C 4
Total job time Equip. cost
Unit cost: $ .//, (,6 divided by AC /2
Total job cost Total quantity
BCY
/BCY
1 0.50 ,' q.
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - DOZER LIIRK
TASK NO. 4/ DATE ? -a 8 Y PREPARED BY L w PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION 'TNcoasrlrvcl.o,. of P. -.'tet
TASK DESCRIPTION aack f /l /.:j 4 j,...,c/,'n3 ( 6 6d i',..50,4 {: // ",,, /r - ;a / �
w or A. r(rip:ed It, Petah. / pi/ 1/47/
1/47//y
farm /an/ So; I — Snawn+atr Loadoo/
HOURLY EOUIPMENT COST:
Machine make & model ,D 8 L Attachments
1J
No. shifts per day / Labor Zone 1/8
Ownership cost/hr =$ Operating cost/hr =S Operator cost/hr =$
Total equipment cost/hr =5 107,19
MATERIAL QUANTITIES:
BCY x swell factor = CCYS, /G 6 LCY
Source of quantity take -off (map no., permit page no.) (a..8c.c 6=‘,/c07,#)
" estimated swell factor
Method(s) used to verify volume
HOURLY PRODUCTIOK:
Push distance = .cn ft., altitude = 4,000 ft., grade
Unadjusted hourly proauction from dozer curve tables =
Job condition correction factors (multiply all approp.
Operator
Material Consistency
(-) favorable
p % (+) unfavorable
/t00 LCY/hr.
factors to obtain total):
o.7.f
Oozing method (normal, slot. side-by-side)
Visibility (average for all shifts)
Job efficiency (average for all shifts)
Oirect Drive Transmission
Grade adjustment
Altitude adjustment
Material weight correction
Blade type
1800 LCY/hr. x 0, 4.1
unaaj. prod. net correction
x ll A 0 LCY/hr
no. dozers adj. prod.
used per dozer
JOB COST:
3t /6 0
$ /o7. /9 /hr dozer cost x /
446 job hours
LCY divided by
o. 6'3
= 0,6a net correction factor
i/A 0 LCY/hraajusted prod. per dozer
//4k0 LCY/hr. adjusted fleet production
/la 0 LCY/hr/fleet = l/•/v total job hours
dozers used = $ /07. /D fleet cost/hr
x $ /07, /9 fleet cost/hr = $ L/93 07 total job cost
Unit cost =5 493 .07
total job cost
divided by S,/ 40 LCY =$0= LCY
total material vol.
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - SCRAPER WORK
TASK NO. ,S' DATE S - 8d' PREPARED BY 44 ,.J PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION Hee en.r/r..C1/,a„ n714 pt'/ so // - Jnawsare Loac/o,.,,
TASK DESCRIPTION 14.n rja e. /,..4 / Seread .3/ba4;/e d *ore; / ,s/rs.J./a1I
/op /o/acon,emi an /a_u/ road area (asson,e v8" re//acen.cni ch ih 1,
HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST:
Machine make & model 437 0 Attachments
No. shifts per day ) Labor Zone //a
Ownership cost/hr =$ Operating cost/hr =$ Operator cost/hr =$
Total equipment cost/hr =$ /KS. P9 (add push dozer cost if required for job)
MATFRIAL QUANTITIES:
BCY
CCY x
swell factor =
6VS LCY
Source of quantity take -off (map no., permit page no.) ac QS"SPpth)
" " estimated swell factor
Method(s) used to verify volume
HOURLY PRODUCTION:
Haul distance =aSoo ft., return distance =2.500 ft., altitude = 000 ft.
Total resistance (haul):+ 2. % rolling res. plus - % grade res.(+/-)= .2 %
(return):+ d % — % " " " = a %
Scraper capacity: LCY struck, 3/ LCY heaped. Avg. capacity = .1/ LCY
Cycle time: Load = 0,9 min., haul = /, / min., maneuver & spread = 0.7 min.,
return = 0.9 min. Total cycle time = 3.6 minutes
60 minutes/hr divided by 3,1 min./cycle = /6. 7 cycles/hour
/6,7 cycles/hr x 3/ LCY avg. scraper capacity = 517. 7 LCY/hr•(unadjusted)
5.r7.7 LCY/hr x U.By job efficiency* x 0,96 altitude adj. = '/17.5 LCY/hr(adjusted)
*average job efficiency for all shifts utilized
Fleet production = A no. scrapers used x H,7,5 LCY/hr/scraper = 835 LCY/hr/fleet
JOB COST:
LIS LCY divided by '35 LCY/hr/fleet = O,y total job hours
$ 11!. Yy /hr scraper cost x a scrapers used = $ 37/.62 fleet cost/hr
0.7 job hours x $ 371.68 fleet cost/hr = $ a97.34j total job cost
s
Unit cost =$ a 97.34/ divided by 6 L/ S LCY =$ 0.46 /LCY
total job cost total material vol.
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - SCRAPER '4ORK
TASK NO. 4 DATE : 'f - r k PREPARED BY L it .) PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION Recon+ir,.at,,,. o di ro.•/ — 'Sr" annalf
T oa'n,a,r [og4pfr
TASK DESCRIPTION'"
--Car. S®p i 11,..15v‘tSf., i mix de, la / {/6M 4r 444/01 -ie (..Z
rS.'net% S.'✓e 7/O yid&
HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST:
Machine make model 437 0 Attachments
No. shifts per day ) Labor Zone I / 8
Ownership cost/hr =$ Operating cost/hr =$ Operator cost/hr =$
Total equipment cost/hr =$ /96-,4,1/21 (add push dozer cost if required for job)
MATERIAL QUANTITIES:
BCY
CCY x
swell factor =
aa co LCY
Source of quantity take -off (map no., permit page no.) es/in-flat/
" " estimated swell factor
Method(s) used to verify volume
HOURLY PRODUCTIOK:
Haul distance = sato ft., return distance = SAB° ft., altitude = 6000 ft.
Total resistance (haul):+ A % rolling res. plus — % grade res.(+/-)= 74.9, %
" (return):+ a % " Hu % " " " = d°% %
n
Scraper capacity: LCY struck, .2/ LCY heaped. Avg. capacity = .?/ LCY
Cycle time: Load = 0,9 min., haul = 01.3 min., maneuver & spread = 0.7 min.,
return = 7.9 min. Total cycle time = S.,? minutes
60 minutes/hr divided by S . 8 min./cycle = 10.j cycles/hour
04 cycles/hr x 31 LCY avg. scraper capacity = 3 of 0.7 LCY/hr (unadjusted)
(3(.70.7 LCY/hr x 0.21/ job efficiency* x 0.9C. altitude adj. = arg.LCY/hr(adjusted)
*average job efficiency for all shifts utilized
Fleet production = a, no. scrapers used x .'t58,.6 LCY/hr/scraper ='S/7. A LCY/hr/fleet
JOB COST:
al. 00 LCY divided by Si7',.a. LCY/hr/fleet = S. 0 total job hours
$ /85,8V/hr scraper cost x a scrapers used = $ .27/.42 fleet cost/hr
S.0 job hours x $ 37/,bJ'fleet cost/hr = $ /? p,.t7d total job cost
Unit cost =$ f$$ ?, 110 divided by 49 6 00 LCY =$ 0. 7/, /LCY
total job cost total material vol.
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - COMPACTION WORK
TASK NO. 7 DATE ,. - 5 - kg PREPARED BY LR K/ PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION /SpcoAS/.orl,on or pil Soils- Snow mart Laacic.c..t
TASK DESCRIPTION Cone6cc/ // ena/er;0./ in
j‘,//y a .ea .
HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST:
Machine make & model 2/513 Attachments
No. shifts per day / Labor zone //!3
Ownership cost/hr $ Operating cost/hr $ Operator cost/hr $
Total equipment cost/hr $ 8G , 91/
MATERIAL QUANTITIES:
LCY x
BCY x
load factor = S / G 0 BCY
shrinkage factor = CCY
Source of quantity take -off (map no., permit page no.)
" " estimated load & shrinkage factors ps/.'.no./e (1 o. Lc. Q r/' de,o/A)
Method(s) used to verify volume
HOURLY PRODUCTION:
Elements: W = compacted width per pass, in feet
S = average speed, in miles per hour
L = compacted thickness of lift, in inches
16.3 = conversion constant (5,280 ft. divided by 12 in. divided by 27 cu.ft.)
P = number of machine passes needed to achieve compaction
Jro (W) x 4 (S) x 9- (L) x 16.3
- 800 CCY/hr (unadjusted)
4(P)
Adjusted Hourly Production:
A o0 CCY/hr x .83 job efficiency x /.o altitude adj. = 6 6V/ CCY/hr
JOB COST:
.0
/C. O CCY divided by 4 6 1/ CCY/hr = 7.7 hours
Total mat. vol. adj. prod. Tot. job time
7.6' hours x $ 86. 9V /hr = $ (078.13 Total Job Cost
Tot. job time Tot. equip. cost
Unit cost: $ G 18.13 divided by S, I G O CCY = $ 0. /L /CCY
Total job cost Total mat. vol.
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - MOTOR GRADER W(
TASK NO. 7 DATE . s 8 8 /� PREPARED BY L k_.. PERMIT N0.
PERMIT ACTION Reco,s/,.,.c/.o., G(,,( / so. /s — S. ow,p,a:s
Loa doc.f
TASK DESCRIPTION f%,.vA )rade a-// arear ( jLe//� 4 road .rear)
HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST:
Machine make & model /WC- Attachments
No. shifts per day / Labor Zone //B
Ownership cost/hr =$ Operating cost/hr =5 Operator cost/hr =$
Total equipment cost/hr =$ 73.33
MATERIAL QUANTITIES:
Total area to be graded in acres = /-1/ Acres
Source of quantity take -off (map no. , permit page no.) /))1,,,,,e/e.
too -do,.
Method(s) used to verify acreage
HOURLY PRODUCTION:
*
Grading Production - Acres Per Hour
Model
Blade Width
Acres Per Hour
Light
grading
Medium Heavy
grading grading
12G
14G
16G
12 ft.
14 ft.
16 ft.
2.69
3.14
3.71
i
1.85
0.90
1.05
1.24
*Unadjusted rates
/.5-7 Acres/hr x 8 • x /. U = /.3 Acres/hr (adj.)
unadj. prod. job efficiency** altitude adj.
**average efficiency for all shifts utilized
Fleet prod. _ / no. graders used x 1. 3 Acres/hr/grader = /•3 Acres/hr/fleet
JOB COST:
1. y Acres divided by /•3 Acres /hr/fleet = /•I total job hours
$ 73.23 /hr grader cost x / graders- used = $ 73,23 fleet cost/hr
1./ job hours x $ 73,72 fleet cost/hr = $ SO. 66 total job cost
Unit cost =$ 80 . GC,
divided by /. V acres 'S5 -7Z1 Acre
total job cost total acreage
Sheet / of 2. Sheets
'VEGETATION & FENCING ESTIMATE r 1M
TASK NO. 9 DATE .2- 3--87; PREPARED BY L2 H/ PERMIT NO..
PERMIT ACTION Recons]rvc4c , of ,.(l . Io.ls — S..o&nlaCt LoaIo✓{
TASK/AREA DESCRIPTION (list all job elements for each task area):
Area # / @ 1.4 acres:
Area # @ acres:
COST/ACRE ($)
UNIT COSTS
Area# /
Area#
SEEDBED PREP.: d.'se Atree w •'n5
on
ALSO--.
.29.}S
SEEDING (specify tilling met1od for each area)
Seed Mix:
Area#
Species Name
Variety
Cost/LB.
PLS ($)
# LBS.
PLS/Acre
Cost/Ac.
($)
Grasses
Alf'.lfa
AviRo
/•95
/5
.29.-1s
Forbs
Shrubs
Totals
Area#
$a9..)s
Grasses
Forbs
Shrubs
Totals
SUBTOTALS
$
$ 5s as
$
REVEGETATION & FENCIN' -STIMATE FORM cont'd
I. UNIT COSTS cont'd
Sheet_Lof a Sheets'
COST/ACRE ($)
Area# / Area#
B. SEEDING cont'd
Planting: c)r,'// s e eo/,+SS
(specify platting method for each area)
Materials: Jd S 33 )A,a.c Co- lig-o) f So A i, ra
(no. lbs/acre multiplied / by cost/lb. for each area)
Application: leas w
r clrwh 6rco�/Cavi drew/es'(specify method of application for each area)
C. FERTILIZING
Totals from previous sheet
ss, aS
1/P•c.o
D. MULCHING
Materials:
71.00
15,00
(no. tons/acre multiplied by cost/ton for each area)
Application:
(specify method of application for each area)
Crimping:
Tackifier:
Netting- Materials:
(specify type used on each area- incl.staples)
- Installation:
E. SHRUB & TREE TRANSPLANTS OR TUBLINGS
Materials:
Planting:
II. JOB COST
(cost/plant mult. by no.. plants/acre for each area)
(cost/plant mutt. by no. plantsjacre for each area)
TOTAL COST/ACRE (items A thru E for each area) = $ ig9•aS $
Initial Seeding- Area# / : /.y acres x $ P.24 /acre = $ ? OP. IS
- Area# acres x $ /acre = $
.TOTAL INITIAL SEEDING COST = $ y oat'. /S
Reseeding (additional costs for anticipated seeding failures)
-Area# / : /. y acres x 0.safailure rate x $ 77.35 /ac. = $ Sy.OP
-Area# acres x failure rate x $ /ac. = $
TOTAL RESEEDING COST = $ S y, OP
III. FENCING
GRAND TOTAL REVEGETATION COST =
$ .319.03
$ /lin. ft. x lin. ft. = �$
(unit cost- mat.&inst.) (total req. length)
(specify type of fence to be installed)
EQUIPMENT MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION ESTIMATE FORM
TASK NO. /0 DATE a - S -88 PREPARED BY LR w
PERMIT ACTION neaonsIYuc1.a,! of en se;/— Snocontatf
HOURLY EQUIPMENT & HAUL
Equipment Transport R
UNIT COSTS
igs: Labor Zone /73
Light Equipment Rig
Ownership cost/hr
+ helper cost/hr
PERMIT NO.
(for equipment weighing up to 35 tons GVW):
$ 33, sf + operating cost/hr $ i9. 6L + driver cost/hr $
$ /4. 47 _ $ b'9. 3 7 /hr Total Rig Cost
Heavy Equipment Rig
Ownership cost/hr
+ helper cost/hr
Equipment Used on Job
Machine
Description
ply Q
(for equipment weighing over 35 tons GVW):
$ ss.ia + operating cost/hr $ 3/,9? + driver cost/hr $ ;a,S P
$ /4.SR = $ /ay.as /hr Total Ri� g t
/0 C y Dorrw 7.,e14
953
OIL
637 D
14G-
Equip. Ownership Equip. Haul Rig Fleet Size Mob./Demob.
Cost/hr Cost/hr (no. hauled) Cost/hr
$ AL.9Y + $ 29.37 x = $ /7G,)/
$ So , 7. + $ — x = $ So. 7S
$ G0 ,3y + $ 89.37 x = $ 149.71
$ 107./9 + $ I?q,.a: x = $ �31,4y
$ 185.8V + $ 12y.]S x d = $ (9a0. 4
$ 73.33+ $ 89.37 x = $ /4,70
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x
$ + $ x
$ + $ x
= $
=$
=$
Total Project Mob./Demob. Cost/hr = $ /3 91.04
EQUIPMENT HAUL DISTANCE & TIME
Major population center within project area region G./en wood St.S
Total distance = l5 miles, average speed in miles per hour = 1/0
Job time: O,a S hrs load + 0.3 hrs had + 0.25 hrs unload + 0.,3 hrs return
= 1.t total hrs x 2 trips = c?,?. hours total mob./demob. time
JOB COST
1. a hrs x $ /.% 9l . J G = $ 3,060.3? Total Job Cost
Total mob./demob. time Total project mob./
demob. cost/hr
NOTE: Depending on the job layout and reclamation requirements, it may be necessary to
mobilize/demobilize additional equipment at some future point in time after com-
pletion of initial reclamation work to perform sediment pond/diversion ditch final
reclamation and any necessary reseeding work due to initial seeding failures.
Costs for transporting appropriate equipment to and from the job site to perform
such follow-up work should be included in the mob./demob. estimate.
DATE a -s -pp
NET JOB HOURS ESTIMATING FORM
PREPARED BY L R NJ PERMIT NO.
PERMIT ACTION Recons/rueiler or
Task
No.
Description
Sheet of Sheets
J — Snoklmarr toadaaf
Quantity & Type Task
of Equip. Used Hours
Net Job
Hours
3
N-8
R,// 1:5 ro0.o/ (CJ r/ ee
rv,'/ .ta.1ace
day 9 /e ;p;:it/',S-C1I'yi�
/'/a o%,t jNu •n' Ana. /er.t
•
/ - 08L s204,4
j - 08 L rAan/c
/ — 08L /ser;/rr
I - by", /ruck//'ronl
end load to.
0.37
0.?7
0. SP
7.1
/6,3
Total Net Job Hours as
RECLAMATION COST SUMMARY FORM
Mine Name
I. DIRECT COSTS
TASK ITEMS
DRAF
Sheet L of LS". Sheets
Permit Number
Cost (S)
A. Earthwork:
1. Backfilling/Rough Grading
Area/Task Description
-1Q1PYARTIcl
APR 011988 l;ul
UARFIELD COUNTY
Jn.d
57. 2 9
lJ,ea .c vat- / e s r.., rl 4 ,:an rlrc:
a.
?045, A;e...
4 /o /,F) —
2. Fill Compaction
Area/Task Description
3. Ripping
Area/Task Description
♦1 n
DRAY
Reclamation Cost Summary Cont'd Sheet 2 of S Sheets
TASK ITEMS
Cost (S)
z rows worts he e-r(S))
4. Finish Grading (total - f
5. Roads (haul, access, Lt. duty) - backfilling and
Area/Task Description
A 0 I. C
grading
Highwall Reduction
Area/Task Description
h urs •
7. Stream Channel Reconstruction
Area/Task Description
n V A e'
Reclamation Cost Summary Cont'd
TASK ITEMS
DRAF1
Sheet L of Sheets
Cost (El
8. /-Sediment Pond/ Diversion Ditch/Check-e'
B.
Dam 2ewiovaL
Structure/Task Description
Ine. e., IC e /.., hf I
J
9. Topsoil Replacement
Area/Task Description
r</...l...r ,., Ai - .
Portal & Shaft Seals
Task Description
LORAF
Reclamation Cost Summary Cont'd Sheet `i of ,SLLIJ
TASK ITEMS
Cost ($)
C. Drill Hole/Monitoring Well Seals
Task Description
hong
D. Structural Demolition (total from worksheet)
051a45?521501)= a
E. Revegetation (total from worksheet)
F. Fencing (total from worksheet)
33)'53
G. Mab./Demob. (total from worksheet)
S , c.)
Total Direct Reclamation Costs
(Items A through G ) $ 371 tvlo$ .
II. INDIRECT COSTS
A. Overhead Expenses
1. Public Liability Insurance - 0.82% of
direct cost
15% I,cnG, 1.016.00/ ,
2. Workmens Compensation - 6.871of payroll
3001.
H03.
3. Contractor's performance bond - 0.8% of
direct cost
301
4. Job Superintendant $ 3 /hr x total
job hours /cc
8. Contractor's Profit - 10% of direct cost
3, Goo, o0
3,141
Total Overhead and Profit (Items A & 8) $ -7 4640
Contract Cost = Total direct cost $ 3 7,l4962
Total 0& P + 1 S y
=s 45,aot
C. Engineering Costs
1. Engineering & bid document prep -fees -
4.25% of contract
2. Engineering services contract issuance
cost - 1.75% of contract
791
Total Engineering Costs
$ ;01a
DRAFT
Reclamation Cost Summary Cont'd Sheet 5 of .S Sheets
Total Reclamation Bond Amount = Total Direct Costs S 371 c‘?"
Total 0 & P +$ 6 L
Total Engineering +S a'?I a
=S 9?,9 a O
/vj r
8929F
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - DOZER WORK ®A
F
TASK DESCRIPTION: ate-.- . / «! / , ,:n vy,4e tj i o n«=J Ced
/rs _ M,'_w Tea
'OURLY EQUIPMENT COST:
Machine make and model 84. -
attachments
U
shift
no.
hours
per
day
days
per
week
adjusted
base
rental
rate/hr.
operating
cost/hr
Operator Cost Per Hour
total
eauio.
cost/hr
base
wage
rate/hr
overtime
adjustment
shift
premium
adj.
1
I
S
Ss. Ga
3.x.,11-
/9,yS
N/A
/G 7. /9
2
.,
3
I1
I1
$ /c7,/$1 /hr. divided by / shifts/day = $ /07./9
MATERIAL QUANTITIES:
BCY x swell factor
Verification method(s) used
HOURLY PRODUCTION:
(-et),
ol = $ IC7.r9 /hr.
average equipment cost/hr.
c /
LCY
(-) favorable
Push distance = /u0 ft., altitude = "700 ft., grade = *wko a (+) unfavorable
Unadjusted houToduction from dozer curve tables = 9y° LCY/hr.
Job condition correction factors (multioly all aooroo. `actors to obtain total):
Operator
Material Consistency
Oozina method (normal, slot, side-by-side)
Visibility (average for all shifts)
Job efficiency (averaoe for all shifts)
Direct Drive Transmission
Grade adjustment ‘c
Altitude adjustment 0 93
Material weight correction
Blade tyoe =
O
2s-
0 • f 3
S
7.¢3
9'/o LCY/hr. x 0,?$ = .9S
unadj. prod. net correction
/ x I S 7 LCY/hr 3S 7
no.dozers adj. orod.
used oer dozer
0,� net correction factor
LCY/hr. adjusted prod. per dozer
LCY/hr. adjustad fleet Production
JOB COST:
i X f 0 LCY divided by d S 7 LCY/hr. _
total material vol. fleet orod.
C. .2. total job hours
$ /c7./9 /hr. avg. dozer cost x / dozers used = $ /07,19 hourly fleet cost
S. 7- hrs x $ / e 7, 1 9 /hr. = $ 5S 7, 3 9
total job time hourly fleet cost
unit cost/LCY = $ 57S77. 3 9 divided by
tOLdl jut) LUDL
Total Job Cost
I d SO = $ 0 .20 /LCY
Local maLerial vol.
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - DOZER WORK
TASK DESCRIPTION: Reroc,n dra...... e co
/Jon S Co 5/r✓c the. r) J — Rrfv. v n'/Na
'OURLY EQUIPMENT COST:
Machine make and model ,O 8L.
attachments
(J
shift
no.
hours
per
day
days
oer
week
adjusted
base
rental
rate/hr.
operating
cost/hr
Operator Cost Per Hour
total
eauio.
cost/hr
base
wage
rate/hr
overtime
adjustment
shift
oremium
adj.
1
?
5
$f,C.,.
3.7, 12
19.4/5
N/A
/07./9
2
"
II
3
.
I I
otai = D 1D7. /9 /hr.
$ /67./9 /hr. divided by / shifts/day = $ /o 7. /9 averaae eauioment cost/hr.
MATERIAL QUANTITIES:
BCY x
Verification method(s) used
HOURLY PRODUCTION:
swell factor = 3, 0 0
LCY
11'c.r Ur• ea, /0.4 O t 1 1 (I',
(_) favorable
Push distance = /O ft., altitude = 7700 ft., grade = 'o? 0 v, (+) unfavorable
Unadjusted hourly production from dozer curve tables = 94/6 LCY/hr.
Job condition correction factors (multiply all approo. `actors to obtain total):
Operator c,75
Material Consistency
Dozing method (normal, slot, side-by-side)
Visibility (average for all shifts)
Job efficiency (averaae for all shifts) 0,53
Direct Drive Transmission
Grade adjustment 6.c5
Altitude adjustment v•93
Material weight correction
31ade tyoe
0,3k net correction factor
946 LCY/hr. x .,3P = 33'7 LCY/hr. adjusted prod. per dozer
unadj. orod. net correction
/ x SS' LCY/hr = .3Y7 LCY/hr. adjustad fleet production
no. •ozers adj. orod.
used oer dozer
JOB COST:
moi, 000 LCY divided by J177 LCY/hr. _ 8, 4/ total job hours
total material vol. fleet prod.
$ /02/9 /hr. ava. dozer cost x / dozers used = $ /07.19 hourly fleet cost
8, y hrs x $ /07 /9 /hr. = $ 900, 4//p
Total Job Cost
total job time hourly fleet cost
unit cost/LCY = $ 900. 4/0 divided by 3 oop = $ O. J0 /LCY
wcal Job GUS'. local waLerial vol.
EARTHWORK ESTIMATING - EOUIPMENT MOBILIZATION/^EMOBILIZATION
TASK DESCRIPTION: rn.,/s ` .00-en,'3
DRAF]
HOURLY EQUIPMENT & HAUL UNIT COSTS:
Equipment Haul Units
Note: Shift & overtime adjustments do not apply to equipment haulino units due to the
short duration of use on most jobs. To calculate total haul unit cost/hr, se-
lect the appropriate haul unit (light or heavy equipment) from those listed in
Section III.4.0 of the estimating manual, determine the appropriate rate basis
(weekly, daily, hourly), and calculate total cost/hr as shown.
Model: Heavy equipment rig = $ /07,10 /hr
Light equipment rig = $ /hr
Earthmoving Equipment Used on Job
Avg. cost/hr + Equip. haul x Fleet size _
Model from worksheet unit cost/hr (no. hauled) Mob./demob. cost/hr
OR I. $ /o7 . + $ /07.3u x I = $ .2/4'.3u
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + $ x = $
$ + 5 x = $
$ + 5 x = $
Total Project Mob./Demob. Cost/hr =$ e2 / y. 36
EQUIPMENT HAUL DISTANCE & TIME: + �
Major population center nearest job site lr/en woad
Route traveled
Total distance = miles, average speed in miles per hour = aA S mph
Total haul, unload, & return time = a hrs x 2 trips = '/ hrs tot. mob./demob.
JOB COST:
) 9, 3 0 hrs x $ ii /hr = $ 857, a o Total Job Cost
Total mob./demob. time Total Project
mob./demob cost/hr
REVEGETATION & FENCING ESTIMATE 'RM
TASK NO. DATE /-1- // - a "7 PREPARED BY C/- PERMIT NO. 2
PERMIT ACTION .S+cr.,..c. r,r
Sheet / of 'Sheets
TASK/AREA DESCRIPTION (list all job elements for each task area):
Area # / @ g acres: it/ter. �� /c Se. ,//:„,/
Area # @ i,/ acres: /
J.
P., ;
COST/ACRE ($)
UNIT COSTS
Area# /
Area# Z
SEEDBED PREP.: /,0.,.,;,,,i
.2 �,00
0;Z .o
SEEDING (specify -tilling method for each area)
97. S'
97 ?'1
Seed Mix:
Area# /
S.ecies Name
Varlet
Cost/LB.
PLS $
# LBS.
PLS/Acre
Cost/Ac.
$
Grasses
1WWPINIPM-nrainniffnl
nffignii-
larrfinla
..:.
su
/.0
•
< ,e
MMES.
S
Forbs
�Rl�!�1l�1l�=
4�
y
=
Shrubs
i;e-lhr 4, -so,
/,.g
f.�a
Area# Totals
dI. ;
Grasses
Sc,”
e a t
a. h..ve
Forbs
Shrubs
Totals
SUBTOTALS
$
$ «,7, S 7
$J„j.,} 7
kEVEGETATION & FENCIN" ESTIMATE FORM cont'd
B.
C.
D.
E.
Sheet 2 of 2 Sheets
COST/ACRE ($)
Will Luau cont•a
Area# ,
Area# s
Totals from previous sheet
SEEDING cont'd
/.'3,P 7
/ 27.P7
.>'G, 06
7li • PG
Planting: d.ca,/� ,sf
(specify planting method for each area)
FERTILIZING ,
9. Go
q, G0
Materials: (../S.'/4 -p)— C;: /d,/acc .5,;ti//6
(no. lbs/acre multiplied by cost/lb. for each area)
Application: t,.,.,ur .,/.6N,,, 4,c..,0<,..,r/ tf•.-a der
IS, rc
iro6
(specify method of application for each area)
MULCHING
/-20,oc
139.o0
/4c,cc,
/3/ 60
Materials: a yens A.c fi 41IC0f/u„
Ino. tons/acre multiplied by cost/ton for each area)
Application: Plod e'. ,., V kit, r
(specify method of application for each area)
Crimping:
Tackifier: Stoy lls L✓ -ii37, s0 /'.c
Netting- Materials: S. -e.. ne//cd - P/..si.c C) Ja-3:)/; c
4 '. o c
2 J c>
3.3 Lig
(specify type used on each area- incl.stapl
- Installation: Lri le9gS/:.c .t SLc
SHRUB & TREE TRANSPLANTS OR TUBLINGS .. ,,,,a c'h,,,,,,
y,97$
4 60
e2 000
/,ne (a) roc/cc ( 1 "'c) "4
Materials: 1. /sf ./
(cost/plant mult. by no. plants/acre for each area)
Planting: -I ACC ii 4c -. CY.�
(cost/plant mult. by no. plants/acre for each area)
- .. c -raa) =
$J11,07
$; /7,(.1.
Rewe,, Ccs¢
II. JOB COST
Initial Seeding- Area# / : 8, G acres x $ 97.P ) /acre =
- Area# ,2 . 1,1 acres x $ 9,.;, /acre =
TOTAL INITIAL SEEDING COST =
Reseeding (additional costs for anticipated seeding failures)
- Area# ! : EI.C) acres x , co failure rate x $ ), C') /ac. =
- Area# 2 : /.l acres x .50 failure rate x $ % ,n /ac. _
TOTAL RESEEDING COST =
III. FENCING
GRAND TOTAL REVEGETATION COST = $ IJI, ‘60
C/Y697rsig+ 4/4'5
$ /lin. ft. x lin. ft. = I$ 1
(unit cost- mat.&inst.) (total req. length)
(specify type of fence to be installed)
REVEGETATION & FENCING ESTIMATE RM
TASK NO. DATE /Z -//- f ; PREPARED BY LRw PERMIT NO. C 4.t f - &/
PERMIT ACTION n,,, r r
Sheet / of 2 Sheets
TASK/AREA DESCRIPTION (list all job
Area # 3 @ 3a. acres: P1.,,.
elements for each task area):
y,/.
Area # - @ .7/ acres: Ct.d.1,„./
COST/ACRE ($)
UN!I OUSTS
Area# 3
Area# 4'
SEEDBED PREP.: AQ✓Ccw'..Q
7G 4i0
14„00
SEEDING (specify Milling method for each area)
9`.17
4 7.8 7
Seed Mix:
Area# 3
S'ecies Name
Variet
Cost/LB.
PLS $
# LBS.
PLS/Acre
Cost/Ac.
$
Grasses
-�--
C.
el Vlr
Forbs
Shrubs
----
Totals
Area,
77.d?
Grasses
-�--
•
m r d 3✓
O
Forbs
-�----
Shrubs
--_-
Totals
SUBTOTALS
$ 9'7,g;
$ /23,t'
$_/z,,_a7
KEVEGETATION & FENCINr 'ESTIMATE FORM cont'd
I.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Sheet Z of; Sheets
COST/ACRE ($)
""" `'""' LU"L °
Area # J
Area# Y
Totals from previous sheet
SEEDING cont'd
/a3, &7
/2, (97
Vf,co
V/f.co
Planting: c/ // fceq' ',.
specify plantg method for each area)
FERTILIZING A.ro-f3 6014/ac (/P-46.0)+.5"
9.4G
' 00
r y,uu'
Materials: A4 e. '4/ 1, 22f i4/aa (NU.NG,) : r6 r F.sc
1?t /a/ac (0•yf•O) : Sc •' II.SG}
(no. lbs/acre /multiplied by cost/lb. for each area)
Application: !..,c/.:. rife. Iva . roac/aq(/ t r✓as4,
's, 00
/S, 00
(specify method of application far each area)
MULCHING
izo,co
—
Materials: 2 /cNs 4, ,r/.w 4 /06/..:,,
(no. tons/acre multiplied by cost ton for each area)
Application: Poa,-ir ,,.,,,/i,r.k.
,21 ).0G
(specify method of application for each area)
Crimping:
Tackifier: ,y 1s;,1.4-
Netting- Materials: Q��� ;7C .:447 8.l i2.4. -et //ed)+sl;
`
7,431
,rs/cc
1/, 0yi
'
(specify type used on each area- incl.staple
- Installation: t,Z,A, ,;,•. •
SHRUB & TREE TRANSPLANTS OR TUBLINGS `kc "sa
.2, Yoo
—
Materials: ii -O. /$' /v/a.,4 A' r00 /ct c. ria»c of rt,-, ANe3
(cost/plant mult. by no. plants/acre for each area
Planting: t2S0/mac
3, coo
—
7 cost/plant mult. by no. plants/acre for each area
$9Y. 507_
$ 799Y
. ) _
7',14 C. 4.10S7' Alt ✓L C►,
II. JOB COST
Initial Seeding- Area# 1 : ,3.� acres x $ 97. p7 /acre =
- Area# y : 3/ acres x $ 9747 /acre =
TOTAL INITIAL SEEDING COST =
Reseeding (additional costs for anticipated seeding failures)
- Area# 3 : .301 acres x /50 failure rate x $ 97,g7/ac. =
- Area# / : .% I acres x . So failure rate x $ 97.47 /ac. =
TOTAL RESEEDING COST =
III. FENCING
$ 3, in7.
$ 3,039
6, /t6
$ /,56(s.
$
i15/7
$ 3,023
GRAND TOTAL REVEGETATION COST = $ 56) 8<
62,0a-3# yy,so7+ 2,599)
$ /lin. ft. x lin. ft. = I$
(unit cost- mat.&inst.) (total req. length)
(specify type of fence to be installed)
NET JOB HOURS ESTIMATING FORK
DATE lq — fa` PREPARED BY 5, }t\ �-
PERMIT ACTION `3p. ' 1,: lv'..l4_.y L; v,,.[; i ..;-l.t.:_ „t,(_,
Task
No.
PERMIT NO.
Sheet of Sheets
Description
Quantity & Type Task Net Job
of Equip. Used Hours Hours
iU
8,
x^4.`5 =104"d d.
Total Net Job Hours