The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDistrict 07 Minutes 1951-07-18MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING BOARD OP DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO.7. OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA July 18,1951 at 8:00 p.m. Board.of Supervisors’Rôo~n Court House Santa Ana,California The Board.of Directors of County Sanitation District No.7 met in regular session. The joint meeting of the district boards was called to oider ~ by Chairman Brad.en Finch at 8:10 p.m. Directors present:Vincent L.Huineston (Chairman) Willard.Smith J.L.Mc3rid.e Directors absent:Heinz Kaiser Others present:Nelson M.Launer,Administrative Off icer Nat H,Neff,~ngineer B.3.Marks,Attorney Harry Ashton,Attorney Fred.D.Bowlus 1~,3.Harrison,Consulting Zngineer 3.A.Woolley,Consulting Engineer John A.Caro].lo,Consulting En~in~er Robert M,Brereton Mr,Brwin Or~Mae Merritt,Secretary Chairman Pinch called,the joint meeting of the District Board.s to order at 8:10 fl.m. The roll was called and.the Secretary reported.a quorum Dresent for all District Boards,except County Sanitation District No.8. MINUTES OP A motion was made,duly seconded and MElTING 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,~s mailed out. Chairr~an Finch called upon the Administrative Officer for his report to the Directors. ADMINISTRATIVE Mr.Nelson M.Launer,Administrative OFFICER’S RETORT OUicer re~orted,~ Marine As inGtructed.by minute order on July li~ Exploration 1951,he and Mr.Bowlus had secured pro-’ Firms posals from various marine exploration firms and had inspected.their equipment 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 ~repare resolutions for the consideration of the District Boards.Mr.Launer stated that inasmuch as the work should.be done during the months of August e.nd September,he recommended that th~ 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 u.Don Director Bonsy for the Executive Committee’s report to the Directors. REPORT OF THE Director Robert H.Boney,Chairman of CHAIRMAN OP the Executive Committee,reported: fl1U~,1r~,,Tm T ~T~” J~£1 ~.dJ .t~~i ~J u j,j. COMMI TTEE Proposals That Mr.Bowlus and Mr.Launer su.bmitted Submitted,various proposals they had.secured.from marine exploration firms.These praposa were reviawed at the meeting of the Executive Committee Thesday evening,July 17th,At this meet~.ag Mr.Bowlus led.a general ~.iscussion on the work to be done and made the following recommendations: 28~4 1.From 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 Dredging Company quoting $L~32.00 Der day Smith—Rice Dcrrick Barges I’$L~59.0O I’ B C &H Company U $376.85 It II Srnale &Robinson,Inc.$825.00 ~t U 2.That Mr.Dan Boom be em~loyed 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 exploration firm will use,hours per 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. Bowlus stated that it cannot be determined now how many days th~work will take,nor exac tly what work will have to be done;and that he believed the most satisfactory supervision of the job would be for the Districts to eniplo~ their own man to check the vendor’s ecaiDment,see that qualified men are doing the work and to compile permanent records to be used in the design.Mr,Bowlus 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 5.n the pro-per manner.Also,that Mr.Crane ot’the B C &H Company knows Mr.Boom’s work and knows the standard that would have to be maintained under his supervision. Mr.Bowlus told,the Committee that if the District Boards —3— adopt his recommendations at this meeting,the wor1~..can be started on July 30,1951 and would be conipleted.in 25 or 30 working day’s,deDending u~on the findings as the work progresses,.~ In the general discussio~that -followed the questiäns ‘~.tere raised as to whether Mr.Bowlus proposed to secure undisturb~’d samples for the design;and why the:‘proposals submitted were so faz below the quotations previously receivêd~rhich were in the neighboi4-~ hood.of ~130O.00.Mr.Bowlus statá~.that the mCtbod he troposed would deviate from the specificatid.n~of.the consulting engineers in that undisturbed corings would ~be o.~taine~.but that an accurate profile of the inshore roäk 6,~ct~on.would be bbte.ined b~’ using the water jet method.T’hi~’wou]~d.be,a~grt~i~.ted b~jack—hammerec’ borings at in’terval~s which he b&1ie~ved would ~rov.i.de su~’ficient information for the design of the outfall sewer;that this method would considerably lower the cost of.the woi’k to be done.That the proposed method of doing this wbu1~dbe’to get a’~a’rge ttnd.a diver to walk ~tlong ahd.make holes to see where the rocic is l~catad~that the ~eport on ‘the speed the ja~—h~i~ñèr ~oe~&bwti ~ri11 d.etermix~e tbe hardne~oi~so~ttiess of the g~Ound’underr~eath.~.and that his th~ight on the foundati~ns is that t~ipre woul’d~not’~ave to be as rigid a structure as would be required for a bridge or.a dam where the concentration is two thousandör three thousa~i4’p~otinds per square foot. ‘ Director Warner raised the question as to whether the ñ~thod prnioosed by Mr.~owlus waS satisfactory to the consulting ~n~i.neers, Mr.Carollo stated that he had.not reviewed the method pro~’.sed by Mr.~owlus;and that he be1.ieved that the Districts had employed their firms to d.c the design of the treatment ~lant ansi the outfall sewer and,as they believed they were to be paid for •th~e supervisIon and gathering of information,they would like the opp,or~unity to go over the information wj.th Mr.Bowlus. Mr.Bowlus stated that he had.contacted both Mr.Harrison and Mr.Woolley on Monday afternoon,July 16th ard~aiscussed 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 con~ul:t-iAg eng1~eers had not been requested to submit their recommendation;that they held the responsibility on the ~roject 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 disciissed with Mr.Ribal and the consulting engineers to get it Ironed out, Director Langenbeck expressed the o~inion that4the consulting engineers ~been employed to do the work,tand that the m~n could.go ahead with th~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-oletely informed on these matters, P~motion was made by Director Willis H.Warn~~r,seconded by Director Jack Greer that the recommendations made by Mr.Bowlus be referred to the Administrative Officer,Mr,Bowlus and the engineers to work out the details and a report submitted at the next meetings Chairman Finch stated that he had been informed by the legal couns~l 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 th~-purchase order method is in use by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District’~ f or work of this kind.Chairman Finch called.u.-pon Judge Marks for an exlanation of the oinion he had rendered. Judge Marks stated.that the work Mr.,Bowlus propoii~calls for ~.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 co-oy of the contract to the bona&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 or4er.Director Langenbeck stated that it was the ~ractice 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 8:35 p.m~ ~~oard~~ctors County Sanitation District No.7 Orange County.~California ATTEST: Ora Mae Merritt,Secretary Bjard of Directors Oounty Sanitation District No.7 2~’~ge County,California —5--