Laserfiche WebLink
Metro Flood Diversion Authority—August 25, 2016 2 <br />MOTION, passed Mr. Campbell moved and Ms. Otto seconded to approve the appropriation of funds for the outlined Construction Change Orders with Industrial Builders, Inc. On roll call vote, the motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br /> Work Change Directive Mr. Smith discussed Work Change Directive No. 6 with ICS, Inc. to install two still wells in the <br />wet well and relocate ultrasonic transducers (level sensors). The work is necessary so the level <br />sensors are working correctly at the 4th Street pump station. He discussed the difference between a Work Change Directive (WCD) and a Change Order (CO). A WCD is a tool used to <br />authorize work to be done before the construction price is finalized and in many instances, the work is time sensitive. He estimates the cost will be $25,000 to $30,000 and will impact the project schedule by 7-10 days. The request is for the board to approve the WCD, which will <br />authorize the work to be done, but the contractor will not be paid until after the CO is brought <br />back to the board for approval. <br />Mr. Pawluk has some concerns and is trying to understand the basis of the request. Mr. Smith said some type of change needs to be implemented in order for the pumps to work. There was discussion on the responsibility of the engineer and associated cost for the repair. Mr. Mahoney <br />said the WCD could be approved with the stipulation that the engineer’s responsibility is reviewed. <br />MOTION, passed Mr. Piepkorn moved and Mr. Campbell seconded to proceed with the repair as outlined in the Work Change Directive with ICS, Inc. and <br />determine the cost liability before approval of the change order. Discussion: Mr. Campbell asked if this is a warranty issue. Mr. Smith said the problem was discovered when the pump was tested, so it wouldn’t <br />have been discovered until then and therefore is not a warranty issue. Mrs. Scherling said there does not appear to be a formal process in place on change orders. Mr. Mahoney suggested the technical committee give <br />a presentation on the subject at a future meeting. There was discussion on the financial impact to the budget due to change orders. Mr. Richardson said a presentation will be given at the September 8th board <br />meeting regarding basic budget reporting. Mr. Brodshaug said it is reasonable to expect a certain number of change orders, but agreed that the process on how they are handled may need some improvements. On <br />roll call vote, the motion carried unanimously. 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION <br />Attorney John Shockley said under North Dakota state law the board is allowed to meet in private session to consult with legal counsel. <br /> MOTION, passed Mr. Campbell moved and Mrs. Scherling seconded that the Metro Flood Diversion Authority meet in executive session pursuant to North Dakota <br />Century Code 44-04-19.1 for the purposes of attorney client communications and update regarding matters arising out of or related to the on-going litigation matters of: (i) the Richland County WRD vs. ND State Engineer; (ii) <br />The Richland Wilkin JPA vs. MN DNR; and (iii) Richland/Wilkin Joint Powers Auth. v. Army Corps of Eng’rs. and City of Oxbow as intervenors. Discussion: Mr. Strand asked about including more detailed statutory language regarding <br />the executive session on the agenda. Mr. Shockley said if the board wishes, that protocol can be used for future executive sessions. Motion carried.