LALONDE, GIROUARD & LETENDRE
Consulting Engineers
8790 Park Avenue, Montreal 11, PQ
October 16, 1959
SECRET
Chief of the Air Staff
Air Force Headquarter
Ottawa, Ontario
Attention: CCE - Victoria Island
Re: Gap Filler Stations
Engineering Services - Western Quebec
File 10-36-80/5 (JDPG)
DCL File 122-7-154
Dear Sir:
Pursuant to our letter of September 18th, to DCL, regarding increase in engineering services for the different sites in Western Quebec, we feel that more specific details are necessary in order to establish reasons for these increases. As mentioned in page 3 of our letter to DCL, these preliminary estimates for engineering services were prepared before any visit to the site were made possible. Even after the reconnaissance trip some difficulties inherent to the work could not be foreseen. As an example, even though in La Macaza we knew after the reconnaissance trip that the trail leading to the actual fire tower, which we had established then as having slopes up to 25%, could not be used as access road, we could not know then what would be the access road. We could only locate on aerial maps the approximate location of such a road, but these maps did not have sufficient precision to establish whether or not such a location chosen on the map would correspond to the access road desired in conformity with the requirements of the RCAF. To clearly indicate the various reasons which have necessitated an increase in engineering services it is necessary to review individually each site and enumerate the difficulties which were met.
In our preliminary estimate, the survey of the site at La Macaza was estimated at four days' work with the survey crew. The actual work was executed in eight days. In our preliminary estimate, we were under the impression that the trail leading to the fire tower could be used either with a jeep or some other equipment in order to reach the site rapidly. Instead our crews had to walk from the main road to the site, morning and night, a distance of approximately 2 1/2 miles. This resulted in a travel time much higher than the one foreseen. Setting up monuments was also costly in time. All materials, water, cement and sand, etc had to be carried from the main road to the site. Rock being on the surface, these monuments had to be drilled in rock, consequently increasing the amount of time necessary to perform the work.
When preparing our preliminary estimate, we believed that the access road would be the same road as the one actually used by the fire ranger. Upon the reconnaissance trip, we saw that this was impossible and we started a survey to locate an entirely new road. We had figured that this access road work would take four days of the survey crew, relying on the fact the actual road could be used. This new road location necessitated sixteen days of work for the complete survey. To perform this work, our crews which were estimated, at the beginning at seven men, had to be increase to nine men. With this increase in the number of men in the survey party, we had to use two cars instead of one, thereby increasing the travelling expenses. In the same regard, the board of such a crew had to be increased. The first location chosen for the new access road was around three miles in length and had greade up to 10% and 12% for over 4,000 feet long. Some changes had to be made to this original location and a new location worked out in order to obtain a better profile. In this number of days mentioned above, the gathering of information is included. This being done by our senior engineer while the crew was at work.
We has also to increase the office work over our preliminary estimate. This was due to the fact that these changes which occurred on this site, had to be looked over by the principal of this office together with the senior engineer in order that the least time possible be spent by the crew in establishing that location on the ground. The increase in length of that access road over the preliminary estimate involves also more hours in drafting and office work.
It is important also to note here that, in order to avoid repetition of trips, our crews had to gather more information than was actually required. This accounts also for an increase in the number of hours orginally estimated.
Lac des Loups in our original estimate was figured to take seven days. In our revised figures we have shown this survey to take ten days. Here again in our original figures the site was estimated to take four days. The complete survey of the site took seven days. The increase here is principally due to travelling time and the installation of the different monuments. The site in itself took one extra day to complete. The principal increase in the staff time can be seen as coming mainly from labourers. This increase in labourers also brought about an increase in travel expenses since no men were available in the area they had to be hired at Mount-Laurier and transportation and board paid for them. The location of the access road did not bring any increases in the number of hours. This access road was very easy to locate and, our original figure of two days for that job, holds.
In our revision of of office work some hours were added to permit principal and senior engineer a trip to the site, if necessary.
In our letter of September 18th to DCL, we have added extra hours to complete the work. We expect that the number of hours added in this category will be sufficient to cover a few extra days either of the crew or engineer collecting data, also it may cover supplementary stenographer and draftmen's time.
With the information we had on hand, Lac Ste Marie at the beginning was estimated as being an eight days work. The revised figures show a very high increase on this original figure and the work was estimated to take twenty-five days. For the same reasons as already mentioned above, Lac Ste Marie was still a harder job than the others. There was absolutely no communication between the main road and the site chosen. In the case of Lac Ste Marie, the original estimates were exactly the same as that of La Macaza. The site was situated at approximately two miles from the nearest highway. Even after the reconnaissance trip, we were not sure of the exact location of the access road and its complete length. The site was a little more difficult to do than at La Macaza and has taken one day over the other one, making it a nine days work for the site proper against an estimation of four days. Location of the access road took fourteen days against a foreseen four days. This access road over three miles in length was finally located after extensive research on the ground by our survey crew, in order to find a suitable road with a grade correspondingly.
We have tried to give you some good reasons why our original estimate had to be increased. As we had already mentioned, the principal reason resides in the fact that these estimates were prepared without having any idea of the conditions in which the work would be executed. It is not a current practice, in our office, to prepare estimates for work when the sites or the conditions have not been seen. It seems, that in all cases we have underestimated that work, probably with a wrong impression that these preliminary estimates were just prepared to obtain funds to start the work. We understood maybe wrongly that as the work progresses we were to send revised estimates in order to bring the figure to the actual or the real cost. It was the interest of this office that the work be carried out in the field in the shortest number of hours possible. From the reports we received from our engineer in charge, the whole work was organized to obtain a maximum work for the number of hours put in.
Trusting this information will enable you to secure approval for our demanded increase, we remain,
Yours truly,
J Antonio Lalonde, P Eng,
for LALONDE, GIROUARD & LETENDRE
Consulting Engineers.