My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/24/1991
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1991
>
9/24/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:11 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:43:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/24/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
cost is the amount and time of inspection that is placed on this <br />project by the EPA. <br />Discussion continued regarding the advantages of going to an <br />industrial well in the beginning, and Commissioner Scurlock <br />wished to know, if additional observation was going to be <br />required, is it the intent that would not be done internally. <br />Director Pinto advised that if there is observation during <br />drilling that requires a specialty, that would be outside - if it <br />is just watchdogging to see nobody climbs on the rig or something <br />of that nature, that would be internal, and Commissioner Scurlock <br />noted, that in other words, nothing technically important would <br />be done internally. <br />This was confirmed by Director Pinto, who stressed how <br />important this was in order to limit our liability, and it was <br />his recommendation that we proceed with the contract with the <br />changes recommended based on the fee structure at the upset <br />limit. <br />Commissioner Scurlock commented that he had asked that this <br />item be delayed because he had some questions about the diameter <br />of the well, liability, percent, etc., and those questions now <br />have been answered. The other and most significant question he <br />had related to constructing a municipal or industrial well, and <br />he now feels there is no question that we should do the indus- <br />trial well at this time, especially when construction costs are <br />down. He noted --that he would like to propose at this time that <br />we proceed with staff's recommendation to approve the agreement <br />with the modifications suggested by the County Attorney and that <br />we proceed with an industrial well. but in addition to the <br />recommended contract, there is an attached Work Authorization, <br />and he had a question relating to -a couple of the items listed in <br />it - for instance the Hercules Meeting shown on Table 1 at <br />$5;886. If Hercules says they are not interested, he didn't <br />want our people to do an analysis and start the clock running on <br />that amount of money. <br />Director Pinto reported that he has discussed this with the <br />consultant. It is a coordinated effort, and we will take the <br />authority to stop at any point if we see we should not expend the <br />funds because it is not needed. <br />Commissioner Scurlock noted that the other element is the <br />study of leachate management, and he wanted to be sure if it is <br />going to be done that it is funded out of Solid Waste. <br />Director Pinto confirmed that one of the things that they <br />will come back to the Board with is the proportion of the cost of <br />this project that should be funded through the Solid Waste <br />District and through the Landfill. <br />69 <br />SEP 24 1991nu <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.