THE WELCH COMPANY
440 Davis Court #1602
San Francisco, CA 94111-2496
415 781 5700
rodwelch@pacbell.net
S U M M A R Y
DIARY: October 10, 1996 09:00 AM Thursday;
Rod Welch
Visit various people for edits on notes meeting 961009.
1...Summary/Objective
2...Received Instruction on Dutra's VEP Proposal
3...Received Correspondence Submitted by Dutra to COE
4...Navy Sewer Line Correspondence Conflicts with Official View Reality
5...Review of the Navy Sewer Line documents show.....
.....Dutra 960812 letter on "Sewer Line Crossing" adds 650' pipeline,
................"rift with unknowns and potential hazards."
.....Dutra's Shoring Design Omits Key Information
.....Dutra's Investigation of Slope Stability Reveals No Problems
.....Pipe Stability Severe, Complex, Becoming "Critical" oa 960812
.....Questions from Dutra's 960812 Letter and Attachments
.....Letter 960906 "Sewer Line Crossing Change Conditions," adds 700'
.....UPRR Requires Stability and Use of Tracks
.....Dutra Claims Contract Design is Impossible to Accomplish
.....Dutra Says Alternate of Adding 700' Pipeline May be Cheaper
.....Schedule Impact "Critical"
.....Lead Time on More Pipe is 100 Days
.....Second Sewer Line - Impact on Dutra's Work
.....Questions from Dutra 960906 Letter
6...Response to Contractor's Notice of Piling Problem
7...Sediment Testing at Galbraith - Contracting Problem
..............
Click here to comment!
CONTACTS
0201 - Corps of Engineers, SFD O-00000632 0403
020101 - Ms. Monti Jaggers; Contracting Officer
020102 - Contracting Division
0202 - Corps of Engineers, SFD O-00000632 0203
020201 - Mr. Marc McGovern; Civil Engineer, Construction Manager
020202 - Construction Operations Division
0203 - Corps of Engineers, SFD O-00000632 0401
020301 - Mr. Thomas Benero; Chief
0204 - Corps of Engineers, SFD O-00000632 0402
020401 - Ms. Ofelia R. Rosales; Contracting Officer
020402 - Contracting Division
0205 - Corps of Engineers, Sausalito O-00000645 0201
020501 - Mr. Leonard SooHoo, P.E.; Chief; Construction Service Branch
SUBJECTS
Corps of Engineers, SFD, Applications
Obtain Comments on Meeting Notes
0404 -
0404 - ..
0405 - Summary/Objective
0406 -
040601 - Follow up ref SDS 7 0000, ref SDS 6 0000.
040602 -
040603 - Tom Keesling was not in so I scheduled discussion of pending stuff for
040604 - tomorrow.
040606 - ..
040607 - Max was tied up in a meeting with Tom Benero, so I will review with
040608 - him the stuff Monti asked about later -- actually, it turned out that
040609 - Marc McGovern got Max's input on the VEP matter before I arrived, per
040610 - below.
040611 -
040613 - ..
0407 -
0408 -
0409 - Discussion
0410 -
041001 - I gave Tom Benero a copy of the meeting notes from yesterday.
041002 - ref SDS 4 0001
041003 - ..
041004 - Tom was in a meeting, but he let me in for a second to drop off
041005 - the draft and he indicated he would provide comments.
041007 - ..
041008 - I gave a copy to Monti, and she will have comments later today or in
041009 - the morning. Monti walked with me to Marc McGovern's office on the
041010 - 8th floor.
041012 - ..
041013 - I gave a copy of the draft meeting notes to Marc. He will have
041014 - comments by tomorrow morning. Actually since he is leaving on his
041015 - vacation tomorrow, I need to get them later today.
041017 - ..
041018 - I left an informational copy of the notes on Tom Keesling's desk so
041019 - he can edit if he wishes with respect to matters he may want to say
041020 - differently relative to COE's Claim Team work.
041021 -
041022 -
041023 -
041024 -
0411 -
SUBJECTS
Navy Sewer Line Re-design
Navy Sewer Line, RR Slope Stability
Changes and Changed Conditions, 52.243-5
Differing Site Condition, 52.236-2
Navy Sewer Line Installation
0907 -
090801 - ..
090802 - Received Instruction on Dutra's VEP Proposal
090803 -
090804 - Marc gave Monti and I a copy of a memo he emailed on a discussion with
090805 - Max this morning. He indicated to us that Max has approved informing
090806 - the contracor to proceed with the Sewer Line according to plans and
090807 - specs.
090808 -
090809 - [On 961015 reviewed with Tom Keesling. ref SDS 11 7590]
090811 - ..
090812 - Marc's memo says...
090813 -
090814 - I spoke now with Max.
090815 -
090816 - We concluded that it is necessary for the Contracting Officer to
090817 - respond to Dutra letter, serial no. 0167, dated Sept 6, 1996...
090818 - ref DRT 2, that he is to immediately proceed with his work as
090819 - specified in his contract. That any requirements presented by the
090820 - RR are his responsibility to comply with, as his contract
090821 - specifies in Section 01005, paragraph 2. If these RR requirements
090822 - to obtain their permit constitute a change to his contract in his
090823 - opinion, then he can submit a claim (do not tell him he can submit
090824 - a claim).
090826 - ..
090827 - Our engineering staff maintains that slope stability is not at
090828 - issue (we do not need to tell him this). They have denied a
090829 - change to the design. We must direct Dutra to start work
090830 - immediately, according to their contract. Let them claim if they
090831 - so desire. This whole business has gone on for too long. It
090832 - appears as if Dutra is not and does not want to diligenty proceed
090833 - with the execution of their contract. In no case should we
090834 - authorize a change to the design. If we do, then the additional
090835 - costs, and they will be substantial, will be on us and this is not
090836 - responsible on our part. Dutra bid the project, and apparently
090837 - badly underbid this item. Now he must live with it.
090838 -
090839 - [On 961205 UPRR indicates location has history of problems...
090840 - ref SDS 16 9630]
090842 - ..
090843 - Received Correspondence Submitted by Dutra to COE
090844 - Navy Sewer Line Correspondence Conflicts with Official View Reality
090845 -
090846 - Marc said I should have copies of correspondence Dutra has submitted,
090847 - on the Navy Sewer Line VEP to use in helping Ofell draft a letter for
090848 - Tom Benero to tell the contractor to proceed with the work.
090849 -
090850 - There was no further discussion with Marc.
090852 - ..
090853 - Subsequent review, shows a lot of conflicts between the documents and
090854 - expressions in various meetings by contractor and agency staff of what
090855 - the documents say, similar to problem reported on 920120, ref SDS 1
090857 - ..
090858 - Review of the Navy Sewer Line documents show.....
090859 -
090860 - Dutra 960812 letter on "Sewer Line Crossing" adds 650' pipeline,
090861 - ref DRT 1 8338
090862 -
090863 - Contractor cites prior unspecified conversations at weekly
090864 - meetings, and correspondence with unidentified individuals that
090865 - indicates the Navy Sewer Line, as designed in the contract plans
090866 - and specs, is...
090868 - ..
090869 - "rift with unknowns and potential hazards."
090870 -
090871 - ...ref DRT 1 4822
090872 -
090873 - [On 961119 Progress Meeting cited Dutra's letter #0161 dated
090874 - 960812 to illustrate need for Communication Metrics to support
090875 - contract management, ref SDS 14 4822, as called out in COE
090876 - letter on unsatisfactory evaluation of Dutra.
090878 - ..
090879 - [On 961204 meeting with Dutra and conference call with
090880 - Engineer developed solution acceptable to all parties that
090881 - increases income for Dutra without adding expense to the
090882 - governement. ref SDS 15 0149
090884 - ..
090885 - [On 961205 UPRR indicates location has history of problems...
090886 - ref SDS 16 9630
090888 - ..
090889 - There is nothing apparent in this letter that offers a Value
090890 - Engineering submission. Section 00752 is not cited as authority
090891 - in Dutra's letter.
090893 - ..
090894 - Why is Dutra's position characterized as a VEP?
090895 -
090896 - [On 961015 Bob Johnston said Dutra has not submitted a Value
090897 - Engineering proposal; ref SDS 10 5739, and discussion with Tom
090898 - Keesling at ref SDS 11 8492
090900 - ..
090901 - Dutra cites Union Pacific's geotechnical firm, Shannon and Wilson
090902 - which is a document dated 960724, attached to ref DRT 1 3845.
090904 - ..
090905 - S&W's letter is a "shoring review" of a submission prepared by
090906 - Dutra Dredging, that is undated, and intended to obtain a permit,
090907 - ref DRT 1 8477.
090909 - ..
090910 - Dutra characterizes S&W's 960724 letter as raising concerns about
090911 - slope stability. ref DRT 1 7563
090912 -
090913 - This seems like an incorrect characterization, which, if
090914 - correct, would support Dutra's contention that a different
090915 - design is needed from that shown in the government's plans;
090916 - whereas, S&W's concern is that Dutra's proposed construction
090917 - method does not show an adequate plan to provide for slope
090918 - stability during construction. ref DRT 1 6726
090919 -
090921 - ..
090922 - Dutra's Shoring Design Omits Key Information
090923 -
090924 - S&W says Dutra's submisson omitted sections A-A and B-B located on
090925 - Figure 1, and omitted from the Operation Plan (OP) a construction
090926 - sequence of these casings and sleeve(s) particularly with regard
090927 - to the connection at the shoring wall. ref DRT 1 3748.
090929 - ..
090930 - S&W says this missing information is needed in order to evaluate
090931 - potential impacts of the excavation on jetty slope stabilty. see
090932 - ref DRT 1 3754
090934 - ..
090935 - S&W recommends that Dutra submit contingency plans for maintaining
090936 - slope stability, ref DRT 1 4628, and offers other suggestions to
090937 - assist the Contractor in preparing an adequate design for
090938 - obtaining a UPRR permit to construct the work.
090939 -
090940 - [On 961015 Dutra submitted more information. ref SDS 10 5739]
090941 - ..
090942 - There is nothing apparent in the S&W 960724 letter that
090943 - shows a defect in the underlying COE contract plans and
090944 - specifications, as impliedly set out in Dutra's 960812 letter,
090945 - ref DRT 1 4822 and ref DRT 1 7563
090946 -
090948 - ..
090949 - Dutra's Investigation of Slope Stability Reveals No Problems
090950 -
090951 - The Contractor says the S&W report and its own investigation of
090952 - slope stability, led the Contractor to hire GEI Consultants to
090953 - investigate slope stability. ref DRT 1 4728
090954 -
090955 - GEI Consultant's letter dated 960808 to Dutra Dredging is
090956 - attached to Dutra's 960812 letter to COE at ref DRT 1 0044.
090957 -
090958 - GEI's letter says it reviewed S&W's 960724 letter calling for
090959 - plans to maintain stability of railroad tracks and need for
090960 - shoring members, ref DRT 1 5499, both of which are elements
090961 - of shoring that Dutra is providing to perform its contract
090962 - with COE,
090964 - ..
090965 - GEI says conditions are not "risk free," and lists design
090966 - criteria Dutra's shoring must meet. ref DRT 1 5814
090968 - ..
090969 - Contractor offers a "solution" to a "slope stability" issue, of
090970 - moving alignment of pipeline 500 feet and adding 650' of pipe, see
090971 - ref DRT 1 5999.
090973 - ..
090974 - However, the only "slope stability" issue identified in Dutra's
090975 - submission dated 960812, is the lack of design details in the
090976 - Dutra shoring submission reviewed by S&W that meet the existing
090977 - conditions Dutra contracted to perform. ref DRT 1 3748
090978 -
090980 - ..
090981 - Pipe Stability Severe, Complex, Becoming "Critical" oa 960812
090982 -
090983 - Contractor describes shoring for slope stability, for which it is
090984 - responsible to submit an adequate shoring design, as a severe and
090985 - complex issue. ref DRT 1 5588
090986 -
090987 - Dutra requests a "group" to come up with solutions. ref DRT 1 5588
090989 - ..
090990 - Dutra says the pipeline crossing is rapidly becoming a critical
090991 - item. ref DRT 1 8402. There is no reference to a CPM schedule and
090992 - there is no information offered on the amount of float in this
090993 - work activity, to show the degree of urgency needed for a
090994 - solution.
090996 - ..
090997 - Contractor requests assistance from the government, and asks to be
090998 - contacted if there are questions, ref DRT 1 8402
090999 -
091001 - ..
091002 - Questions from Dutra's 960812 Letter and Attachments
091003 -
091004 -
091005 - 1. What was said in weekly meetings, cited by Dutra, that show a
091006 - problem exists that justifies extra payment? ref DRT 1 4822
091007 -
091008 - 2. Where is prior correspondence cited by Dutra? ref DRT 1 4822
091010 - ..
091011 - 3. Has Dutra submitted the missing information requested by S&W?
091012 - ref DRT 1 3752
091014 - ..
091015 - Where is the transmittal?
091017 - ..
091018 - What if any response has been issued by S&W?
091020 - ..
091021 - 4. What authority does the Contractor rely upon for COE to assist
091022 - the contractor in submittng missing design information for its
091023 - shoring system, cited by S&W? ref DRT 1 3752
091025 - ..
091026 - Has COE responded to this request for assistance?
091028 - ..
091029 - 5. What document shows the pipeline is becoming "critical?" Has
091030 - the Contractor prepared a CPM showing this? ref DRT 1 8402
091032 - ..
091033 - Is there some other evidence that informs the Contractor the
091034 - pipeline is critical? If so, where has it been submitted to
091035 - COE?
091037 - ..
091038 - 6. What information causes this matter to be considered a Value
091039 - Engineering proposal, as characterized at Weekly Progress
091040 - Meeting for 960924? ref SDS 2 5477
091041 -
091042 -
091044 - ..
091045 - Letter 960906 "Sewer Line Crossing Change Conditions," adds 700'
091046 - pipeline, serial #0167. ref DRT 2 6499
091047 -
091048 - Dutra cites meetings and correspondence as having identified
091049 - changed conditions on the Navy Sewer Line Crossing. ref DRT 2 4882
091051 - ..
091052 - Dutra indicates its letter dated 960906, serial #0167, formally
091053 - advises COE that Dutra seeks relief from having encountered
091054 - changed conditions. ref DRT 2 4888
091056 - ..
091057 - Dutra claims the slope at the UPRR location has steepened from
091058 - conditions shown on the contract drawings, and says COE has been
091059 - given drawings showing this change. ref DRT 2 4894
091060 -
091062 - ..
091063 - UPRR Requires Stability and Use of Tracks
091064 -
091065 - Contractor says it did not know prior to bid that:
091066 -
091067 - 1. Railroad requires construction methods that maintain slope
091068 - stability and guarentee stability.
091070 - ..
091071 - 2. Railroad insists on using the track at all times.
091072 -
091073 - ...ref DRT 2 4898
091074 -
091076 - ..
091077 - Dutra Claims Contract Design is Impossible to Accomplish
091078 -
091079 - Dutra says it cannot drive H beams due to rock rip rap, and it
091080 - cannot excavate the rock and still assure slope stability. see at
091081 - ref DRT 2 6491
091082 -
091083 - Dutra says it is not possible to guarentee stability while jacking
091084 - a casing under the tracks as shown in the plans. ref DRT 2 6491
091085 - This contention appears to conflict with the next paragraph that
091086 - says it may be more expensive than another design. ref DRT 2 6499
091087 -
091089 - ..
091090 - Dutra Says Alternate of Adding 700' Pipeline May be Cheaper
091091 -
091092 - The Contractor's assertion that a design adding 700' of pipeline
091093 - (up from 650' in the letter of 960812, ref DRT 1 8338), may be
091094 - cheaper than a shoring design that assures stability of railroad
091095 - track, ref DRT 2 6499, impliedly rebuts the previous contention
091096 - that an adequate shoring design is "not possible."
091098 - ..
091099 - The Contractor's assertion that the cost of an alternative may be
091100 - cheaper, establishes that there is no clear and direct benefit to
091101 - the government in changing the design, since the cost could turn
091102 - out to be greater.
091103 -
091105 - ..
091106 - Schedule Impact "Critical"
091107 -
091108 - Dutra says it is "critical" that it be advised on how to continue.
091109 - ref DRT 2 6996
091110 -
091112 - ..
091113 - Lead Time on More Pipe is 100 Days
091114 -
091115 - Contractor says procurement of pipe requires 100 days from notice
091116 - to proceed, ref DRT 2 6996.
091117 -
091118 - This addresses in part the question raised at the progress
091119 - meeting yesterday, ref SDS 4 5883, except it seems to conflict
091120 - with Bob Johnston's representation that procurement is not
091121 - recognized by Dutra as a long lead issue. ref SDS 4 4825
091122 -
091124 - ..
091125 - Second Sewer Line - Impact on Dutra's Work
091126 -
091127 - Dutra asks about a 2nd pipeline. ref DRT 2 5739, reflecting
091128 - speculations on this issue from its 960812 letter. ref DRT 1 4828
091129 -
091131 - ..
091132 - Questions from Dutra 960906 Letter
091133 -
091134 -
091135 - 1. Where are cross-sections Dutra has submitted showing changed
091136 - condition from original plans? ref DRT 2 4894
091137 - ..
091138 - 2. What does the contract say with respect to frequency of
091139 - using the railroad tracks? ref DRT 2 4898
091140 -
091141 - [On 961013 decided to investigate. ref SDS 9 4914]
091143 - ..
091144 - 3. Is COE aware of a 2nd pipeline, does it require investigation?
091145 - ref DRT 2 5739
091147 - ..
091148 - 4. Where is the COE Engineering review Marc cites from his
091149 - discussion with Max. ref SDS 0 2992
091150 -
091151 -
091152 -
091153 -
091154 -
0912 -
SUBJECTS
Piling encountered, Schnitzer
1003 -
100401 - ..
100402 - Response to Contractor's Notice of Piling Problem
100403 -
100404 - Monti took me to Ofell's office and explained to Ofell that I will be
100405 - available to help her draft the letters for Tom Benero to sign on the
100406 - VEP matter. We need the Technical Analysis report from Leonard in
100407 - order to issue a letter on the piling problem. Ofell will call
100408 - Leonard on this.
100409 -
100410 - [On 961017 meeting with Contractor and COE, ref SDS 12 0000; and
100411 - subsequent analysis at ref SDS 13 0000.]
100413 - ..
100414 - I saw Leonard later when I came in to install SDS update on Tom
100415 - Keesling's computer. He was engaged in continuous dialog with
100416 - colleagues outside Max's office, so I did not interrupt to ask about
100417 - the status of the Technical Analysis on the piling problem.
100419 - ..
100420 - I called for Glen Chafey later, but he is off today and tomorrow. see
100421 - ref SDS 8 0000
100422 -
100423 -
100424 -
1005 -
SUBJECTS
Disposal at Sonoma Baylands
Environmental Protection
Galbraith Disposal Requirements
1305 -
130601 - ..
130602 - Sediment Testing at Galbraith - Contracting Problem
130603 -
130604 - Monti advised that a problem has arisen today about the contract with
130605 - MEC who is doing sediment testing at Galbraith, discussed at the
130606 - Progress Meeting on 961001, ref SDS 2 5488, and which Gail Staba
130607 - reported yesterday at the Progress Meeting, is going "perfectly." see
130608 - ref SDS 4 6282
130610 - ..
130611 - Monti understands that the Engineering people have arranged to award
130612 - the work to MEC under exigent procedures.
130614 - ..
130615 - Tom Benero was not aware this was done.
130617 - ..
130618 - There is concern the procedure may have been non-standard, and that
130619 - another contractor may complain. There is also concern this could
130620 - delay work at Galbraith, which is otherwise going well, with respect
130621 - to environmental activities, per report yesterday. ref SDS 4 6282
130623 - ..
130624 - Tom Benero was meeting with Max on this when I left.
130625 -
130626 -
130627 -
1307 -
Distribution. . . . See "CONTACTS"