The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDistrict 01 Minutes 1951-07-18287 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO.1 OP ORANGE COUNTY,CALI~’ORNIA July 18,195].at 8:00 p.m. Board of ~upervisors~Róoc Court House Santa Ana,California ~he Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.]. met ir~regular session. The joint meeting of the district boards was called to order by Chairman Brad.en Finch ~t 8:10 p.m. Directors present:Courtney K.Chandler 3.L.McBrid.e C.H.Featherly Directors absent:None Others present:Nelson M.Launer,Administrative Officer Nat H.Neff,Engineer B.J.Marks,Attorney Harry Ashton,Attorney Fred ~Bowlus 1~.J.Harrison,Consulting Engineer J.A.‘itoolley.,Consulting Engineer John A,Qarollo,Consulting Engin~er Robert M,Brereton Mr.Erwin Or~Mae Merritt,Secretary 288 Chairman Pinch called,the joint meeting of the District Boards to Qrder at 8:10 p.m. The roll was called and.the Secretary rerorted a quorum vresent for all District Boards,except Cournty Sanitation District NO~8. A motion was made,duly seconded and. Sarried~,by the Boards of Directors of O.Qu.nty Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3, 5,6,7 and.11,approving the minutes of the meeting held,on July 11,1951,as mailed.out. Chairman Pinch called,upon the Administrative Officer for his report to the Directors. As instructed,by minute ord.er on July 11, 1951,he and.Mr.Bowlu.s had.secured.pro— _________ posals from various marine exploratiqn firms and had jnsDected their equiDment and.made a report to the Executive Committee on July 17, 1951:and as instructed by.the Execu.tlve Committee,had requested.the legal counsel to prepareresolutions for the consideration of the District Boards.Mr.Launer stated that inasmuch as the work should be done during the months of August and.September~he recommended that the Boards authorize the work at this meeting. Mr.Launer stated.that Mr.Bowlus would.give a report on the marine exploration work later in the evening, Chairman Finch called noon Director Boney for the Executive Committee’s report to the Directors. REPORT OF THE CHAIRMAN OP THE ExECUTIVE COMMITTEE Pro ‘o os a is Subrni tted Director.Robert H.Boney,Chairman of the Executive Cotnmittee~reported.: That Mr.Bowlu,s and.Mr~Launer submitted various pro~osa1s they had secured from marine exploration firms.These proposa: were reviewed at the meeting of the Executive Committee Tuesday evening,July 17th.At this meeting Mr.Bowlus led.a general discussion on the work to be done and made the following recommendations: MINUTES O~’ MEET IN.G HELD ON JULY 11,1951 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER’S R~PORT Marine Exploration Firms Mr.Nelson M.Launer,Administ~’ative Officer reported: -2— 289 1.Prom the following four proposals selected,as the best qualified firms,that the work be given to the lowest bidder,the B C &H Company: Newport Dredging Company quoting $L432.00 per day Smith—Rice Derrick Barges $LI.59.O0 “U B C &H Company “$376.85 tt U Srnale &Robinson,Inc.$825.00 U It 2.That Mr.Dan Boom be employed as the superintendent on the marine exploration job for the Districts at compensation of $1,000.00 per month. 3~That the work be performed by authority of a purchase order,specifically naming the number of men the marine exDloration firm will use,hoursper day, equipment to be used,insurance to be carried by vendor,time limitations and other pertinent detail. Mr.Bowlus stated that he believed use of a purchase order a much better method than by contract, In the general discussion of these recommendations,Mr. Bowlu,s stated that it cannot be determined now how many days the work will take,nor exactly what work will have to be done;and that he believed the most satisfactory supervision of the job would be for the Districts to em~1o~ their own man to check tha vendor’s eautnrnent,see that qualified men are doing the work and to compile permanent records to be used in the design.Mr.Bowlus stated.that h~recommei~ded Mr.Boom,who has had a great deal of experience in this type of work and would be able to check the equipment,progress of the work and would know what the divers were doing,as he goes down himself when there is any indication that the work is not being performed in the pro~er manner.Also,that Mr.Crane of the B C &H Company knows Mr.Boom’s work and knows the standard that would have to b~maintained under his supervision. Mr.Bowlus told,the Committee that if the District Boardb —3— 290 adopt his recommendatiOns at this meeting,the work can be started on July 30,1951 and would be completed in 25 or 30 working days,deoending upon the findings as the work progresses, In the general discussion that followed,the questions were raised as tQ whether Mr.Bowlus proposed.to secure undisturbed samples for the design;and.why the proposals subm1tt~d were so far below the quotations previously received which were in th~neighbor--~ hood,of $1300.00.Mr.Bowlu.s stated that the method he Droposed would deviate from the specifications of the consulting engineers in that undisturbed corings would not be obtained but that an accurate profile of the inshore rock section would be obtained by using the water jet method.This would be augmented b~r jack—hamrnere~ borings at intervals which he believed would provide sufficient information for the design of the outfall sewer;that this method would considerably lower the cost of the work to be done,That the proposed method of doing this would be to get a barge ar~d a diver to walk along and make holes to see where the rock is located;that the re-port on the speed the jack—hammer goes down will determine •the hardness or softness of the ground underneath;and that his thought on the foundations is that there would not have to be as rigid a structure as would.be required for a bridge or a dam where the concentration is two thousand or three thousand.~pounds per square foot. Director Warner raised.the question as to whether the method prolosed by Mr.Bowlus was satisfactory to the consulting engineers. Mr.Carollo stated that he had not reviewed the .method pro~osed by Mr.Bowlus;and that he believed that the Districts had employed their firms to do the design of the treatment plant and the outfall sewer and,as they believed they were to be paid.for the supervision and gathering of information,they would like the op~ortunity to go over the information with Mr.Bowlus. Mr.Bowlus stated that h~had.contacted both Mr.Harrison and. Mr.Woolley on Monday afternoon,July 16th and diécussed the method. he had ~roposed.. Mr.Carollo stated that they had not been the bids,and while he did not question the process,he thought it rather an unusual ~rocedur~that the consulting engineers had not been reauested to submit their reoommei~dation;that they held the responsibility on the Drojact which involves a considerable amount of money and becaus~ of this responsibility would want to go over the details before they would want to make arecommendation to the Directors.That he believed that this matter should ‘be discussed with Mr.Ribal and the consulting engineers to get it ironed out, —4— 3l~~ Director Langenbeck expressed the o-oi.nion that4the consulting IT’ engineers ~been employed to do the work,and that the men could go ahead with the samDlings and reports which the consulting en~in~ers would want later. Director Pinch stated that he was under the impression that the consulting engineers had been advised of the proceedings and that they had.been comDletely informed on these matters, A motion was made by Director Willis H.Warner,seconded by Director Jack ~reer that the recommendations made by Mr.~owlue be referred to the Administrative Officer,Mr.Bowlus and.the engineers to work out the details and.a report submitted.at the next ni~eting, Chairman Pinch stated.that he had been informed by the legal counsel that there was a matter of lega~ity involved,in using the purchase order instead of a contract with the marine exploration firm;and that :Mr.Bowlus had informed,the Chair that the purchase order method is in use by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District~ for work of this kind.Chairman Finch oall~d upon Judge Marks for an exi,lanation of the ooi.nion he had.rendered.. Judge Marks stated that the work Mr~Bowlus propoces calls for a completion bond.and that he doubted if a bonding comPany would give bond on work that did not specify what they were bonding~that the usual procedure is to send.a copy of the contract to the bonei,ng company.However,in the instance of the Los Angeles County Sani tation Districts it may be that their purchase order amounts to a contract. A general discussion was held upon the legality of a purchase Q’.order.Director Langenbeck stated.that it was the oractice of hi~ e;/-~xr to use the purchase order,which carried the same respons— “ibilities and penalties as a contract.Mr.Bowlus stated that the advantage of the purchase order over a contract is that in the event the work is not satisfactory,by purchase order the work can be discontinued,while a contract would have to be broken. Upon a motion made,duly seconded and carried,the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Chairman,~~rd of Directors County Sanitation District No._j, Orange County~California ATT~ST: .4~2~A~7 Ora Mae Merritt,Secritary Board of Directors County Sanitation District No.1 :~~ge County,California —5—