Board tables $7M‑scale Provost & Pritchard change‑order request after project managers detail schedule and technical risks
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Provost & Pritchard described design and coordination challenges for the imported‑water pipeline — late scour modeling, SCE and AVEC coordination and additional trenchless crossings — and requested change orders primarily to cover project management work; the board tabled the request to December for further review.
Provost & Pritchard asked the board for change‑order funds to cover extensive project management and coordination work after new geotechnical and scour modeling introduced major design risks to the imported‑water pipeline.
Jeff Davis of Provost & Pritchard described a timeline in which late geotechnical and scour data showed a risk that "this pipeline is likely to get washed away unless you do some very severe things with it like bury it 15 feet deep under the road," a finding that forced the team to consider alternative designs and additional coordination with agencies including the Bureau of Land Management, Southern California Edison (SCE) and AVEC. Davis said the firm absorbed some effort but that April–October project management and coordination work — much of it to resolve SCE and AVEC issues — exceeded the original schedule and scope.
Omar Dandashi, the recently hired project manager from Blue Mountain, said staff are preparing an integrated master schedule and that environmental and right‑of‑way work remain key drivers. During discussion, directors questioned whether previous change orders should have addressed some of the issues and asked for better cost control and clearer scopes before approving additional funds.
Given the unresolved questions about budget transfers, scope, and options for trenchless crossings and corrosion design for above‑ground tanks, the chair moved to continue (table) the Provost & Pritchard change‑order item to the December meeting. The motion was seconded and carried; the item will return with more detailed budget and scope documentation.
The board also received a Blue Mountain monthly update describing plans to finalize an integrated master schedule, coordinate environmental and technical deliverables, and pursue right‑of‑way acquisition work. Staff said they will return in January with detailed budget implications if further funds are required.
Jeff Davis’s presentation and the subsequent tabling motion are recorded in the transcript between SEG 911 and SEG 1383; the motion to continue was made at SEG 1368–1383.