THE WELCH COMPANY
440 Davis Court #1602
San Francisco, CA 94111-2496
415 781 5700
S U M M A R Y
DIARY: October 4, 1996 10:30 AM Friday;
Visited Tom White re SDS, review notes of Oakland Progress Meeting.
2...Headlines, Summaries, Action Items
3...Orientation for Tom White Using SDS Records
4...Disposition of SDS Notes
5...Additions & Corrections
.....Notifying Dutra of Environmental Reporting Requirements
.....Written Procedures Can Confirm Verbal Explanations
6...Shoaling, Quantities, Payment
7...Partnering Meeting Adopted Intermediate "Final" Survey???
Click here to comment!
0201 - COE, Oakland Harbor Project O-00000646 0101
020101 - Mr. Thomas White; Project Engineer
0202 - Port of Oakland O-00000647 0301
020201 - Ms. Gail R. Staba; Environmental Planner
Corps of Engineers, SFD, Training
Claim Team Review Prepare Meeting with
Orientation Comm Metrics, SDS
SDS Notes for Weekly Progress Meetings
2207 - ..
2208 - Summary/Objective
220901 - Follow up ref SDS 18 0000, ref SDS 14 0000.
220903 - ..
220904 - Got Tom's edits to the meeting notes. Got input from Gail Staba on
220905 - her extended comments at the Progress Meeting on 961001.
220907 - ..
220908 - Tom discussed measuring quantities for payment under section 02480-13,
220909 - 14; Phil Torres said there was agreement at a project launch meeting
220910 - for there to be an intermediate post-dredge survey upon completion of
220911 - soft material in polygons of with soft and hard material. Phil
220912 - suggested another partnering meeting could be helpful on this matter.
220916 - ..
2212 - Discussion
221301 - Demonstrated SDS, per meeting with Tom Benero on 960926, ref SDS 8
221302 - 7793, and discussion with Tom on 961001. ref SDS 14 0001
221304 - There was only enough time to demonstrate the SDS linking feature.
221306 - ..
221307 - Tom seemed somewhat preoccupied with events on the job, the phone
221308 - and in developing an interpretation of the progress payment
221309 - clause, so we did not spend time on SDS today.
221311 - ..
221312 - There was actually a sense that Tom did not want to see the SDS
221313 - program, so I did not pursue this.
221315 - [On 961103 Tom reported to Max Blodgett that SDS is
221316 - improving project management. ref SDS 25 1220
221318 - ..
221319 - Reviewed notes of Progress Meeting on Tuesday, 961001, and got missing
221320 - information. ref SDS 12 0000
221322 - Gail Staba visited Tom during our discusson and so I asked her to
221323 - edit the points she made at the meeting on Tuesday because they
221324 - were too long and complex for me to capture fully during the
221325 - meeting. ref SDS 12 5488
221327 - [On 961126 Gail complained the SDS record misrepresent what
221328 - she has said at meetings. ref SDS 28 8845
221330 - ..
221331 - [On 981021 SDS saved government $190K by capturing accurate
221332 - record of Gail's comments. ref SDS 29 7315
221334 - ..
221335 - Gail said it is difficult for her to remember everything she said,
221336 - but she did write the detailed procedures she recalled giving at
221337 - the meeting. Her writing was difficult to read, so I asked her to
221338 - explain again the points she made on Tuesday.
221340 - [On 961030 Gail provided copy of her hand written notes she
221341 - used to guide her remarks during meetings, but they were too
221342 - cryptic and the handwriting is hard to follow, so we try to
221343 - obtain corrections from Gail and other attendees,
221344 - ref SDS 24 GM9O and example on 961125. ref SDS 27 0001
221346 - ..
221347 - It turned out that, at the Progress Meeting on 961001, Gail was
221348 - actually confirming understandings from an earlier meeting held on
221349 - 960919 (Tom White later thought the meeting was on 960912). There
221350 - was no record of when the meeting actually occurred. Gail said
221351 - there was an agenda but no notes were distributed of what was
221352 - agreed or determined, so she re-stated everything at the Progress
221353 - Meeting. Today, she sets out for publication in the notes of the
221354 - Progress Meeting on 961001 some of what she recalled hearing and
221355 - stating at the prior meeting, ref SDS 12 5488
221357 - ..
221358 - On 940901 example of difficulting people have remembering
221359 - what they say at meetings, and shock when seeing their
221360 - comments and the understandings others have drawn.
221361 - ref SDS 1 4920
Summary Linked to Details part of Intelligence
Headings Summary Links Details Multiple Views Controlled Visibility M
Headlines Summary Linked to Details Power of Microcosm Intelligence A
Orientation Training for Tom White at USACE
Project Engineer, Tom White
270801 - ..
270802 - Headlines, Summaries, Action Items
270803 - Orientation for Tom White Using SDS Records
270805 - When Tom finally was able to review the draft of the notes on the
270806 - Progress Meeting, I gave an orientation of the SDS format.
270808 - ..
270809 - Tom spent a good deal of time noting and deleting the duplication
270810 - in the Executive Summary of headlines, Action Items and text in
270811 - the notes.
270813 - ..
270814 - Initially, I did not interrupt so that his train of thought could
270815 - proceed. When he seemed to become a bit impatient and annoyed by
270816 - the duplication, I explained the headlines are intended to be a
270817 - single line summary of a "chunk" of related text, similar to
270818 - "Headlines" in a newspaper story or article in a magazine. The
270819 - computer can then summarize these headlines into an Executive
270820 - Summary that enables busy people to quickly grasp the import of a
270821 - long complicated meeting, by reading only the headlines. The line
270822 - numbers are pointers to the detail, if they choose or need to get
270823 - more information.
270825 - ..
270826 - The discipline of writing headlines forces consideration of the
270827 - implications of text by testing understanding, i.e., if the writer
270828 - cannot summarize a few related paragraphs of text, then there is
270829 - no "understanding" and so further effort is needed to attain it.
270830 - This discipline greatly improves the chances of meeting the goal
270831 - of Communication Metrics to build and maintain shared meaning over
270832 - time among team members.
270835 - ..
270836 - It took in the aggregate about 20 minutes for Tom to review and edit
270837 - the notes; however, this occurred over a period of 2 - 3 hours,
270838 - because he initially wanted to discuss contract requirements for
270839 - payment relative to shoaling, per below. Plus, there were a lot of
270840 - interruptions from daily routine dealing with the Contractor, Gail
270841 - Staba, and a personal medical matter re his family which obviously
270842 - required his attention.
270846 - ..
270847 - Disposition of SDS Notes
270849 - Tom asked about the disposition of the SDS notes?
270851 - I explained these notes are for Tom Keesling relative to his task
270852 - as head of the Claim Team. We considered Tom Keesling's idea that
270853 - I also give the notes to Tom (White), and, if he wishes, I can put
270854 - his letterhead on them for distribution to attendees, to save Tom
270855 - time in preparing a separate set of notes, ref SDS 16 line 121, as
270856 - we discussed last Tuesday, ref SDS 14 line 99.
270858 - ..
270859 - Tom noted the more detailed nature of the notes and the structure
270860 - of the format. He indicated his notes could be distributed as a
270861 - "subset" of the notes Welch prepares.
270862 - ..
270863 - I will bring the final version, that includes the edits we
270864 - make today, to Tom on Monday.
270866 - ..
270867 - We also need to strive for distribution within two days of the
270868 - meeting on Tuesday, so they go out on Thursday, rather the
270869 - following Monday or even Tuesday. I think this can generally be
270870 - accomplished.
270874 - ..
270875 - Additions & Corrections
270877 - Tom said the practice on this project has been that no one has offered
270878 - corrections or additions to the meeting notes, so I removed that entry
270879 - in the notes for the meeting on 961001. ref SDS 12 0001
270881 - (The body text can contain additions and corrections, and the
270882 - absence of same comprises the record, without making a specific
270883 - issue of the absence or occurrance of objections by attendees.)
270886 - ..
270887 - I need the RFP for the Navy Sewer Line issue discussed during the
270888 - meeting on 961001. ref SDS 12 5477
270889 - ..
270890 - Tom said there is no RFP. It is a value engineering
270891 - proposal Dutra has submitted.
270893 - ..
270894 - How is it identified. Is there a VEP number, or just the date of
270895 - the document?
270897 - [On 961015 Dutra maintained its submisson on the Navy Sewer
270898 - Line is not a VEP; it is a claim for additional payment due to
270899 - differing conditions. ref SDS 23 5739
270902 - ..
270903 - Tom corrected the assignment of subjects for the benches discussed by
270904 - Bob Johnston during the meeting on 961001. ref SDS 12 YX9G
270906 - ..
270907 - We made a new subject.
Galbraith Disposal Requirements
290501 - ..
290502 - Notifying Dutra of Environmental Reporting Requirements
290504 - After writing and explaining the notes for the Progess Meeting on
290505 - 961001, Gail had a separate discussion with Tom White about
290506 - reporting procedures which COE supports based on input from Dutra.
290507 - This was another long series of complex steps which Gail explained
290508 - were required by the Contractor.
290510 - ..
290511 - It sounded as though these procedures related to implementing the
290512 - understandings from the 960919 meeting, as confirmed at the 961001
290513 - Progress Meeting, per above.
290515 - ..
290516 - Tom and Gail were concerned that Dutra did not know or simply was
290517 - not performing the reporting steps. The concern was whether to
290518 - call Dutra immediately and alert that a report is due on Mondays
290519 - by 1200.
290520 - ..
290521 - Gail asked Tom to call Dutra; Tom suggested it might be
290522 - better for Gail to make the call, or to remain while he talked to
290523 - Dutra, so she can provide support on technical issues that might
290524 - arise during the call. He also noted, jokingly, that the Dutra
290525 - rep might be more responsive to a woman than to a man. They
290526 - finally decided not to call Dutra because Gail indicated it is too
290527 - late for Dutra to complete whatever it is that needs to be done by
290528 - Monday.
290530 - [See follow up at ref SDS 19 line 67; and report from Gail
290531 - that matter was resolved by Dutra submitting the requried
290532 - reports on Monday, as needed, ref SDS 20 line 61.]
290534 - ..
290535 - Gail said she will raise the matter at the Tuesday Progress
290536 - meeting.
290539 - ..
290540 - Written Procedures Can Confirm Verbal Explanations
290542 - I asked if the detailed steps Gail wants conveyed to Dutra reflect
290543 - written procedures. We considered that the discussion this
290544 - morning indicates a fairly complex series of steps to carry out.
290546 - Gail indicated these procedures have not been written up. She
290547 - noted that she has no authority to submit procedures to the
290548 - Contractor. We considered whether she can prepare the procedures
290549 - that should be implemented, and Tom can review and work with her
290550 - to develop a submission to the Contractor by COE who has such
290551 - authority.
290553 - ..
290554 - Gail seemed to indicate she would prepare written implementation
290555 - procedures; however, the matter was left uncertain due to some
290556 - communication tension between Gail and Tom.
290558 - [See follow up where Gail is trying to get to writing up the
290559 - procedures, ref SDS 20 line 57.]
Surveys Predredge, Postdredge
Measurement and Payment, Dredging
Material Classification Polyons and
320601 - ..
320603 - ..
320604 - When I arrived, Tom had a phone call.
320606 - ..
320607 - Rick Olejniczak asked about the Engineering report at the Claim Team
320608 - meeting yesterday, on 961003, which he and Tom White missed.
320609 - ref SDS 17 R24I
320611 - ..
320612 - I reviewed generally the discussion on quantities which relates to
320613 - Rick's survey that is underway. ref SDS 17 8860.
320617 - ..
320618 - Shoaling, Quantities, Payment
320620 - When Tom completed his calls he came into the common area and began a
320621 - discussion (or possibly continued a prior discussion) with Rick
320622 - Oleniczak, and Phil Torres about computing progress payments relative
320623 - to polygons that contain both hard and soft material, such as OC5 and
320624 - OC6, 7, 8. This is part of the matter Tom Keesling asked me to
320625 - discuss with Tom White, ref SDS 18 4992.
320627 - [On 961008 Tom Keesling received copy of an email from Rob
320628 - Andrews to Tom White and others at COE, dated 961001, which
320629 - raises questions on shoaling, and may have led in part to this
320630 - discussion today, ref SDS 21 3927
320632 - ..
320633 - The discussion was primarily about accounting for shoaling, and
320634 - centered on applying the intent of:
320636 - PREDREDGE AND POSTDREDGE (FINAL) SURVEYS.
320637 - section 02480-13, ref OF 9 line 1178
320639 - MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
320640 - section 02480-14, ref OF 9 line 1202
320642 - ...including
320644 - Shoaling
320645 - section 02480-14.4, ref OF 9 line 1275
320647 - ..
320648 - Rick had to leave after a few minutes of my arrival.
320651 - ..
320652 - Partnering Meeting Adopted Intermediate "Final" Survey???
320654 - Phil Torres recalled a project launch partnering meeting that
320655 - determined an additional survey would be performed in polygons with
320656 - both hard and soft material, following removal of the soft material.
320657 - This intermediate survey would be the postdredge survey for the soft
320658 - material, and would be the pre-dredge survey for measuring the hard
320659 - material in a polygon with both soft and hard material, e.g., OC5.
320661 - ..
320662 - Evidently this is needed because while there are no pay items based on
320663 - hard and soft material, per se, the hard material shown on plan sheet
320664 - 14 of 20 (Amend 0001) shows only "Soft" material is suitable for
320665 - disposal at Sonoma Baylands and at Galbraith. All of the "Hard" and a
320666 - small portion of the "Soft" material is taken to the ocean for
320667 - disposal, at least for the Outer Harbor area, ref OF 11 line 55.
320668 - ..
320669 - Maybe we need a spreadsheet on this plan sheet 14,
320670 - correlated to original bid quantities, per analysis on 960919.
320671 - ref SDS 5 8058
320673 - [On 961007 discussed with Tom Keesling, ref SDS 19 0001 and
320674 - Action Review meeting on 961115. ref SDS 26 9502
320676 - ..
320677 - Presumably then this is not an issue where a polygon is either all
320678 - hard or all soft, since in that case there is no differentiation of
320679 - payment prices.
320681 - ..
320683 - ..
320684 - Phil suggested another partnering meeting may be helpful to clarify
320685 - the understandings on this issue.
320687 - [On 961007 discussion with Tom Keesling, ref SDS 19 0001, and
320688 - progress meeting on 961009. ref SDS 22 8831
320690 - ..
320691 - I asked if there was a published set of understandings from the
320692 - partnering meeting on the need for an additional intermediate survey,
320693 - as Phil recalls. Phil could not recall seeing a document on this.
320695 - ..
320696 - Tom noted that the partnering meeting does not change the language of
320697 - the contract, which he is charged to implement.
320698 - ..
320699 - Phil indicated a concern about accounting for intermediate
320700 - shoaling from the beginning a large polygon to completing it. There
320701 - is also a problem of shoaling from the date of the pre-dredge survey
320702 - to the date of performing the work. He said this could be an extended
320703 - period covering several months to a year, and result in requiring the
320704 - contractor to dredge a lot more material than the specification
320705 - methods in 02480-13 can capture. Depending upon the time of year, a
320706 - lot of shoaling can occur between the date of the pre-dredge survey
320707 - and the date of the post-dredge survey. Evidence of this is the
320708 - annual dredging performed to maintain a uniform harbor bottom.
320709 - ..
320710 - The contract seems to indicate final pay quantities will be
320711 - determined based on subsection 13 calling for a pre-dredge survey and
320712 - final post-dredge survey, ref OF 9 line 1183 and in subsection 14,
320713 - ref OF 9 line 1198, stating:
320715 - 14.1 Measurement for Payment. Measurement for payment of the
320716 - total amount of material dredged will be made based on the cubic
320717 - yards of material in-place, by computing the volume between the
320718 - bottom surface shown by soundings of the Contractor's survey
320719 - taken before dredging and the bottom surface shown by soundings
320720 - of the final survey compared with the neat line template, using
320721 - the average-end-area method. This quantity shall include
320722 - excavation performed within the allowable overdepth limits and
320723 - exclude excessive dredging as specified under paragraph
320724 - "OVERDEPTH AND EXCESSIVE DREDGING".
320726 - ..
320727 - The question then seems to center on whether the natural
320728 - dynamics of shoaling are adequately accomodated by the contract
320729 - language in sections 13 and 14.
320731 - How can the parties distinguish material found to be above grade
320732 - after a polygon is accepted under 02480-13 based on a post-dredge
320733 - survey of the polygon, per ref OF 1 line 1180, and a year or two
320734 - later (since the contract extends for 840 CD, para 11 SF 1442,
320735 - ref OF 4 line 53) when the final post-dredge survey is performed
320736 - for the purposes of finalizing payment quantities, ref OF 9 line
320737 - 1183, when shoaling may have occurred as contemplated under
320738 - 02480-14.4?
320740 - ..
320741 - Tom White at one point noted that the language of 02480-13 requires
320742 - the contractor to absorb the cost of additional dredging when the
320743 - final post-dredge survey shows above grade material.
320744 - ..
320745 - There was discussion about the need to give weight to all of the
320746 - language in the contract, including 02480-14.4, rather than select one
320747 - passage in preference to another. Where a conflict may exist, an
320748 - interpretation least harmful to the contractor is often applied since
320749 - the government prepared the language.
320751 - ..
320752 - Ordinarily, the burden is on the contractor to request clarification,
320753 - where it is felt the contract requires correction to ensure proper
320754 - payment. The Contractor can give notice of any conditions which
320755 - appear not to be covered by the contract, or explain the result the
320756 - contractor expected in bidding the work for such contingent
320757 - situations, as discussed today.
320759 - ..
320760 - Alterntively, the contractor can wait for COE to determine a pay
320761 - estimate that is seen as improperly accounting for shoaling and then
320762 - make an objection based on the interpretation the Contractor expected
320763 - in bidding the work.
Distribution. . . . See "CONTACTS"