man000204 98

1 8 1 Dear Mr. Renshaw: Last August Change Order No. 5 to the subject contract was issued which changed the method of stabilizing the exterior reser­voir slopes from a sodicement treatment to a rock and oil treatment. The subject Contractor now states that because of the winter weather it would be impracticable to apply the oil for this treatment until all cool weather is past. We have checked into the matter and find that this is true. After watching the embankment slopes for the past several months we feel that very little treatment is necessary to prevent any noticeable erosion. Therefore, it is recommended that the Contractor be authorized to apply only a penetrating tack coat of oil. This matter has been discussed with the Contractor and he has agreed to allow the District a further credit of $3,237.36 if this change is authorized. We feel that this credit is fair to all concerned, and it is recommended that the attached Change Order No. 7 embodying this change be approved and forwarded to the Contractor. ' Very truly yours, JAMES M. MONTGOMERY /s/ R. C. KENMIR R. C. Kenmir” Following a general discussion, a motion was duly made by Director DuBravac, seconded by Director Thorn, and unanimously approved by the seven Directors present, that the recommendations of the Engineer be accepted and Change Order No. 7 to Specification No. 4, Schedule I be approved. SERVICE INSTALLATION CHARGES The Board considered a memorandum from the Manager riatftH .Tanufl-ry 1ft, 1056 relative to charges for service installations. The memorandum pointed out that the current cost of service connections without meters, based on records for the past five months, were exceeding the service charges in the case of the two-inch size of the regular service connections (those other than on the northeast side of the Boulder Highway). With reference to those on the northeast side of the Boulder Highway, only a few have been installed, but the indications are that the cost of all sizes will far exceed the installation charges because of certain conditions not anticipated at the time the charges were established. Principal among the reasons for the higher cost is the fact that practically all of the services are being installed in the area where pressure reducing valves are necessary, and are having to be installed much deeper than originally anticipated because of a proposed storm drain down the center strip of the highway. It was also pointed out that a new factor had been introduced with the adoption of metering which required a policy decision as to whether the cost of the meter and box should be reflected in the charge made for installation of services. Two sets of recommendations for adjustment of service charges were given in the memorandum, depending on the policy decision relative to inclusion of the cost of meters and boxes.