HomeMy WebLinkAboutDistrict 02 Minutes 1951-07-18284
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
COU1~TTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO.2
OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA
July 18,l9~].at 8:00 p.m,
Board.of Supervisors’Röo~
Court House
Santa Ana,California
T~ie Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.2
met in regular session.
The joint meeting of the distric~boards was called to order
by Chairman Braden Finch at 8:10 p.m.
Directors present:Robert H.Boney (Chairman)
Hugh V.Warden
Don 3.Kaiber
Willard.Smith
Charles L Stevens
Willis H.Warner
William H.Hirstein
.Lnton W.Wilson
Ralph J.McFadden
Directors absent:Prank J.Schweitzer,Jr.
Others present:Nelson M.Launer,Administrative
Off icer
1’TatH.Neff,Engineer
B.J.Marks,Attorney
Harry Ashton,Attorney
Free D,Bowlus
~.J.Harrison,Consulting Engineer
J.4.Woolley,Consulting Engineer
John A.Carollo,Consulting En~in~er
Robert M.Br~reton
Mr,Erwin
Ora Mae Merritt,Secretary
-~.1—
285
Chairman Pinch called,the Joint meeting of the District Boards
to order at 8:10 p.m.
The ro~.l was ~al1ed and the Secretary reDorted.a quorum ~resent
for all District Boards,except Cou.nty Sanitation District No.8.
MINUTES OP A motion was made,duly seconded and.
MEETING HELD carried,by the Boards of Directors of
ON JULY 11,1951 County 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.
Chairrnan Pinch called upon the Administrative Officer for hi~
report to the Directors,.
ADMINISTRATIVE Mr.Nelson M.Launer,Administrative
OFFICER’S RE?ORT Officer retorted.:
Marine As instructed,by minute order on July 11,
Exploration 1951,he and Mr.Bowlu.a had secured ~ro~
Pirms ‘posals from various marine exploration
firms and had ins~ec ted their squi~ment
and made a report to the Executive Committee on July 17,
1951;and as instructed by the Executive Committee,had
requested.the legal counsel to ‘prepare resolutions for
the consideration of the District Boards,Mr.Launer
stated.that inasmuch as the work shou1~i be done during
the months of August and.-September,he recommended that th~
Boards authorize the work at this meeting.
Mr.Launer stated that Mr.flowlus would give a report on
the marine exploration work later in the evening.
Chairman Finch called u’oon Director Boney for the Executive
Committee’s report to the Directors,
RE?ORT OF THE Director Robert H.Boney,Chairman of
CHAIRMAN OP the Executive Committee,retorted:
THE EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE
Proposals That Mr.Bowlus and Mr.Launer submitted
Submitted various proposals they had.secured from
marine exploration firms.These proposa:
were rev wed at the meeting of the Executive Committee
Tuesday evening,July 17th.At this meeting Mr.Bowlus
led a general discussion on the work to b3 done and.made
the following recommendations:
—2—
28G
1.Prom the following fou.r proposals selected as the
best qualified firms,that the work be given to the
lowest bidder,the B C &H Company:
Newport Dred.ging Company quoting $Ll~32.00 per day
Sraith—Rice Derrick Barges $L~59.O0 U If
B C &H Company ~376.85 “
Smale &Robinson1 Inc.$825.00 “
2.That Mr.Dan Boom be enrnloyed as the superintendent
on the marine exploration job for the Districts at
compensatio.n of $i,O0O~0O per month.
3.That the work be performed by authority of a pu.rchase
order,specifically naming the number of men the
marine exDloration firm will use,hours per day,
equipment to be used,insurance to be carried by.
vendor,time limitations and other pertinent detail.
Mr.Eowlu.s stated that he believed use of a purchase
order a much better method than by contract.
In the general discussion of these recommendations,Mr.
Bowlus 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 1TO1~ld be for the Districts to em-plo~
their own man to check the vendor1s eouioment,see that
qualified men are doing the work and.to comDile permanent
records to be used in the design.Mr.Bowlas stated that
he recommended 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 procer 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 Boards
—3—
287
adopt his recommendations at this meeting,the work can
be started on July 30,195].and would be completed in
25 or 30 working days,depending upon the.findings as the
work progresses,
In the general discussion that followed the questions were
raised as to whether Mr.Bowlus proposed to secure undisturbed
samples for the design;and why the proposals sabmitt~d were so,far
below the quotations previously received which ,we~e ix~the neighbor—
hood of $1300.00.Mr.Bowlus stated.that the metbb~.he própo~e~.
t~ôuld deviate from the specifications of the con~uiting engineers
ii~that biridistu.rbed.corings would not be bbtained but that an
aácarate profile ô~the inshore rock section would b~obtained by
~.t~ing the W~ttei jet method.This would be augmented b~r jack—hamrner.ee
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 and a diver
to walk along and make holes to see where the rock is located;that
the report 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.
prooosed by Mr.Bowlus was satisfactory to the consulting engineers.
Mr.Carollo stated.that he had not reviewed the method proposed
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 opportunity to go
over the information with Mr.Bowlu.s.
Mr.~owlus stated that he had contacted both Mr.Harrison and
Mr.Woolley on Monday afternoon,July 16th and.discussed.the method
he had proposed.
Mr.Carollo stated that they had.not Been the bids,and while
he did not question the process,he thought it rather an unusual
procedure that the consulting engineers had not been requested to
submit their recommendation;that they held the reeponsibility on
the project 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 a recommendation to the Directors.That he
believed that this matter should be discussed.with Mr.Ribal and the
consulting engineers to get it ironed out.
-
288
Director Langenbeck expressed the opinion that4the consulting
engineers ~been employed to do the work,and that the
men could go ahead with the samplings and reports which the
consulting en~<in~ers would want later.
Director Finch stated that he was under the impression that
the consulting engineers had been advised of the proceedings and
that they had been com~letely informed,on these matters.
A motion was made by Director Willis H.Warner,seconded by
Director Jack ~reer that the recommendations made by Mr.Bowlus be
referred to the dminitrative Officer,Mr.Bow].u.s and the en~ineers
to work out the details and a report submitted at the next meeting.
Chairman Finch stated that he had been informed by the legal
counsel that there was a matter of legality involved,in using the
purchase order instead of a contract with the marine exploration
firm;and thatMr.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 Piflch called u.pon Judge Marks for
an explanation of the opinion he had rendered.
Judge Marks stated that the work Mr.,Bowlus propo~es calls for
a completion bond and that hs 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 bone~,n~
company.However,in the instance of the Los Angeles County Sani
tation Dist~icts it may be that their purchase order amounts to a
contract.
A general discussion was held.upon the legality of a purchase
order.Director Langenbeck stated that it was the oractice of his
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
b~discontinued,while a contract would have to be broken.
Upon a motion made,duly seconded and carried,the Chairman
declared the meeting adjourned,at 8:3~p.m~
Chairman,Board of Directors
County Sanitat~on District No.2
Orange County:California
ATTEST:
Or~’Mae Meriitt,Sc retary
Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No.2
~rge County,California
-.5.—