upr000333 259

Sliest #3 * * \ ? In order to enter the intake at the le v e l o f the old l i n e , i t was ne­cessary to d ig the d itc h d eep er-fo r the la s t 1000 f t than the depth / f t c a lle d fo r on the p la n s. Your engineers gave me the grades on th is work,; As was c a lle d to your a tte n tio n at the tim e ,in s ta r tin g the extension j from Main St,we fo llo w ed the old lin e as the plans showed,hut a ft e r working fo r over a day,discovered that the old lin e was not in the p o s itio n i t was supposed to be,and the new lin e would in te rs e c t i t . your Engineer gave us a new lo c a tio n .T h is extra work,plus the moving o f the m a teria l from the f i r s t lin e to the lin e fo llo w ed in vo lved an extra expense o f$60*85,which I b e lie v e is a le g itim a te ex tra . $60.85 You to ld me v e r b a lly that you expected me to set the 3 va lves in the ) extension,bitt I did not fig u r e upon having to haul them,two from the Intake and one from the yards. As they weigh around 1000 lbs e a c h ,it and the excess depth averaged lO ifl fo r the 1000 f t , As the width o f the d itc h was 31w,th e extra excavation was 56 cu yds <§ . 3 0 ---- $16.80 As per your v e rb a l in stru ct ions, on the extension o f the p ip e lin e , through the yards-,I put the p ip e 2 '6 " under' the tie s ,in s te a d as f i r s t agreed up on.This was a l l in wet excavation. As we hi tracks to o r o s s ,it was not fe a s ib le to be con sta n tly dipping down,so i dug the whole lin e -9 4 0 ft- the extra 6" deep., - „ | Extra wet exca va tio n ,940 ft-6'!*-dqep|3® wide — -35 cu yd3 35 cu yds @ .70 - — ---------- *------ ----- $24.50 C uttin g o ld ooncrete at Intake aim0 in s t a llin g In in s t a llin g main p ip e lin e,th ro u gh the s ectio n where we encountered