ST9902-CS130820 (4)
Halie Hernandez
From:casey@franklinfoam.com
Sent:Tuesday, August 20, 2013 9:24 AM
To:Keith Marvin
Subject:Re: Q-0813-02 - Sandy Lake Pavement Repair
Keith,
I did receive your voicemail yesterday but wanted to wait until I was back in the office to get back with you.
Since you emailed me I will respond and we can talk if need be later today. I don't have a problem with any of
your calculations, and from reading below I do see how you are coming up with that lbs total. My concern is
that I know our foam vs. Uretek's foam. On paper the 2 are identical but performance ours is a far superior
product. Did the 4 lbs per cubic feet come from the 200 ft of test area? Our foam is normally calculated at 1.1
lbs per cubic foot. Did Uretek do the 200 ft stretch of test? On that note, did this test area go out for bid? Maybe
it did and we missed it, but I do find it hard to believe that a company that already has a streets contract with the
city didn't hear about a letting for their product?
I already discussed the 200 ft of test area with the guys here at the office and we all believe that even with 3 ft
of void we wouldn't have pumped 1,500 lbs let alone 7,000 lbs. Any chance we can do a test area to compare? It
can be smaller then 200 ft, I could have it done tomorrow and would be happy to offer you the same contract
price of $3.44/lb we charge the city. (It was $3.31 last year but there was a price increase due to material cost)
I also don't want you to think Im being rude about any of this either, its just frustration because I have this same
conversation with different agencies all over the nation all the time about the difference in materials. We do
jobs that engineers take Ureteks estimated quantities and don't come anywhere close to pumping what they
estimated. Just last month I had 2 crews in Houston working on a 120,000 lb project for TXDOT. Uretek's
estimates were used to calculate the locations for the bid. It was 14 approach slabs for 120,000 lbs. I told them
we could do all those locations with 65,000 lbs and they laughed at me. We did them all with 57,000 lbs and
were able to do another 16 approach slabs with the left over material. When I use the left over material that is
fine, but when I come in way under the estimated quantity and the agency says your done then I just lost a ton
of money because I had to lower my bid price for the high quantity of material but was not able to pump all the
material. Now Im not talking about throwing a fit over 10,000 or 20,000 lbs out of 260,000 but more like a
difference of 100,000 or 200,000 lbs. There needs to be something in the contract to protect the contractor from
this, its shouldn't be one sided either. If the material goes over by a certain percentage then there should be a
price decrease as well. TXDOT and other DOT's have this and it is standard in all their contracts.
Let me know your thoughts and I will bid the project accordingly but I do think it would be fair to have
something like that in the contract or at least let us do a test section as well and compare our numbers to theirs
before this thing goes out for bid.
Thanks,
Casey DeRosa
1
On 08-19-2013 6:34 pm, Keith Marvin wrote:
Casey,
I left you a message earlier today. I have reviewed the information submitted below, and the
information you sent in last week. I find it interesting that you have not done any calculations to
substantiate your estimate of the quantity of polyurethane, but are adamant that my numbers are too
high.
I calculated the void space under the road to be approximately 72,000 cubic feet. To establish the 5400
tons of mud jacking material, I multiply 72000*150 lbs/cf to establish 10,800,000 pounds, or 5400 tons
of mud. Using the same method, with 4 pounds per cubic foot for polyurethane, I calculate 72000*4 =
288,000 pounds of polyurethane.
I then checked from a cost standpoint, because I do not want to give either method an unfair
advantage. I estimated $150 per ton for the mudjacking, for a total of $810,000. Using Nortex's current
contract price of $3.31 per pound, 288,000 pounds would get you to $953,280. This seemed like I
might be giving the advantage to the mudjacking, so I reduced the volume by 28,000 pounds to make
the bid more equitable.
Uretek sent me numbers that are consistent with my calculations. We also did a test section of about
200 feet of this trench line where we used 7,000 pounds of material.
I think my numbers are a good estimate.
To answer your question though, this is a unit price contract, and we expect to pay the price bid for the
number of units installed.
Keith Marvin
City of Coppell
On Aug 19, 2013, at 1:57 PM, "Jennifer Cook" <Jenniferc@coppelltx.gov> wrote:
Keith,
His number is 817-845-5097.
Let me know if you need anything else.
2
From: Keith Marvin
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 1:56 PM
To: Jennifer Cook
Cc: casey@franklinfoam.com
Subject: RE: Q-0813-02 - Sandy Lake Pavement Repair
Jennifer,
This guy does not list a phone number. Do you have a number for him?
Keith Marvin, P.E.
City of Coppell
972-304-3681
From: Jennifer Cook
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 1:43 PM
To: Keith Marvin
Subject: FW: Q-0813-02 - Sandy Lake Pavement Repair
FYI …
Thanks.
From: casey@franklinfoam.com [mailto:casey@franklinfoam.com]
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 1:41 PM
To: Jennifer Cook
Subject: Re: Q-0813-02 - Sandy Lake Pavement Repair
Jennifer,
3
I was looking over the addendum attachment and I do not agree that the lbs totals to use
polyurethane foam will be anything close to what you are using for the bid doc total. We did a
job in Alabama last year. It was undersealing and void filling underneath a 2 lane highway for a
stretch of 2 miles (2 miles Northbound, 2 miles Southbound). Basically the same setup as you
have now minus some turning lanes. We worked every single concrete panel on that stretch on
that job and pumped a total of 281,000 lbs. The area you having being worked when you factor
in panels being replaced for full depth repair and the fact that you are only wanting to work a 6
ft area above the trench you are looking at probably 1/6 the amount of area the project in AL
had. There is no way your job would take 100,000 lbs let alone 260,000 lbs. Worse case
scenario (if there is a ton of void below the surface) I could see a company pumping 45,000 lbs.
Realistically I am thinking it will be 20,000-30,000 lbs. You have to keep in mind the
polyurethane material expands unlike the mudjacking material.
Did the URETEK representative give you a total amount in lbs of what we thought it would
take? If so can you tell me the amount he thought?
What were Kevin's thoughts about all this?
On the plans and addendum it calls to only work 6 ft area above the trench (3 ft each direction
from centerline of pipe), but it also says you are to match traverse and longitudinal joints where
panels are uneven. You will not be able to accomplish this if you are only allowing a contractor
to pump material above the trench. To joint match you will have to work the entire area of the
panel to accomplish this. If you try to lift a corner from below the center of the slab the
material will crack the panel and you will still have void present under the ends of the slab. The
material will only travel so far until it start to set up generally about 2 feet. I honestly think you
could void fill every concrete panel not being removed and replaced to stabilize the entire
roadway from Denton Tap to Kimbel and you still wouldn't pump but 100,000 lbs. Is this what
you are wanting to accomplish or is the work area of 6 ft (trench area) stayed the same?
If the bid number of 260,000 lbs is going to remain that high is there going to be anything in
the contract about a price increase for less material used? Ex: If we are awarded the job as a
sub to do the polyurethane material and we use a total of 25,000 lbs will I be able to increase
my price since I am having to reduce the price per lb. with such a high estimated quantity?
I would normally be $4.50-$4.75 per pound for 20,000-30,000 lbs for a job. For 260,000 lbs
my price would be $3.40-$3.65 per pound. That a huge difference, I would need some sort of
assurance that I would be able to recuperate the difference in price since I am having to lower
the price with such a highl estimated lb. total for bidding purposes. Does that make sense to
you and Kevin?
Please let me know both your thoughts and I will bid accordingly. Definitely not trying to be
difficult but want to make sure I am covered if the lbs totals are way, way under 260,000 lbs
like I expect them to be. Also I have not seen a bidders list, could you please send me one so I
will know which companies are bidding prime and I can get my numbers over to them.
Thanks,
Casey DeRosa
Nortex Concrete Lift & Stabilization
4
On 08-19-2013 10:14 am, Jennifer Cook wrote:
Good morning,
Attached is the Addendum #1 for Sandy Lake Pavement Repair.
Thank you.
Let me know if you need anything else.
Jennifer Cook I Purchasing Technician
City of Coppell Town Center I 255 Parkway Blvd. I Coppell, TX 75019
o.972.304.3644 I f.972.304.3635 I e. jenniferc@coppelltx.gov
Building Community through Public Service”
5