Pages

Monday, October 05, 2009

One Little "Opinion," Two Little "Opinions," Three Little "Opinions," . . .

Check out "Fradulent Concealment" over at http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com/ I suggested to Ron Crawford that he send all these documents to the County Counsel, who would call them "opinions," and then Supervisor Gibson could yell at him and tell him to stop calling Montgomery Watson Harza names, then everyone could wave the documents and go . . ." BOOOOOOO -- Hissss, these official documents are nothing but Opinion!" and then toss rotten tomatoes at Ron as he scampers out of the BOS chambers, after which the Shredder could call him another LON (Los Osos Nut) and make more poopy jokes and then we could all have a big laugh and nobody would ask so much as a single question about the matter. Case closed.

85 comments:

Ron said...

Ann, that's hilarious, and thanks for the link.

Ann wrote:

"... who would call them "opinions," and then Supervisor Gibson could yell at him and tell him to stop calling Montgomery Watson Harza names, then everyone could wave the documents and go . . ." BOOOOOOO -- Hissss, these official documents are nothing but Opinion!" and then toss rotten tomatoes at Ron as he scampers out of the BOS chambers"

Heck, I WISH they'd do that! At least it would be acknowledging that they received my information, and it'd give me SOME type of answer.

Instead, the County's usual MO regarding my ultra-tight arguments, is to just ignore me entirely. No return e-mail. No mention in meetings. No nuthin'... just like they did/are doing with my SRF challenge, and the funny thing about that, is I showed them how it would save Los Osos millions, and show that the CDOers are innocent, and they ALL -- Jensen, Ogren, the entire BOS -- just pretend that I never sent them anything. All I hear are crickets.

How 'bout that part in my latest post where I show that MWH estimated the dog park at $60,000 when a low-ball number benefited the Tri-W embarrassment, and then, just a few months later, they estimated it at $690,000!?

Nice!

4 years, and $7 million -- and it shows that if the LOCSD and MWH hadn't lied to the Coastal Commission about the numbers in the Tri-W "project" back in 2004, almost exactly what just happened a week ago at the BOS, would have happened five years ago at the LOCSD... before the recall... before the CDOs... before AB 2701... before the dissolution attempt... BEFORE the bankruptcy... before the...

GVD said...

Let us not forget the 2 million dollar wave wall that was planned for Tri-W. Why not put one at the new site to keep the sewer plant from view of the cemetary?

Watershed Mark said...

SLOCO BOS's Public Works has ignore anything "ultra tight" in their study/due diligence “process” like vacuum collection.
I hope that behavior won’t cost the citizens too damn much more than it already has.


As sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynette sez: “Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire the entire process”
Because that is correct it most certainly helps illuminate the MWH “issues” and it definitely bolsters Ron’s ultra tight “argument.”

Lawyers rarely get things; “so laid out in public, for so long” as the basis of a case.
Things are getting interesting to say the least.

Watershed Mark said...

Will the BOS vote to "take" the project in light of the current circumstances?
That IS the question...

Watershed Mark said...

GVD, a wall will do nothing to mitigate odor.


Technology will.

Mike said...

Gosh... if the wall is such a great idea AND that technology can mitigate odor...why not build the WWTF on the CSD/County owned property in Los Osos... Wow, what a concept...!!! and the County doesn't have to buy a large chunk of land...!!! Technology is GREAT...!!!! Too bad the CSD never thought about that...!!!

Watershed Mark said...

Where there is a fiduciary relationship and a corresponding fiduciary duty, a fiduciary can be liable for fraudulent misrepresentation by silence.

In one of if not the most studied wastewater projects in the State or Country for that matter there are a lot of trees who will be hewn once the trigger is pulled.

In one of if not the most studied wastewater project in the State or Country for that matter there are a lot of trees who will be hewn once the trigger is pulled.
I love sausage and LO, so I appreciate the linkage and the link Ron.

Watershed Mark said...

In one of if not the most studied wastewater projects in the State or Country for that matter there are a lot of trees which will be hewn once the trigger is pulled.

Sorry, but I must avert my eyes when I see vegetables being cruely yanked from the ground or vine. Just kidding.

Shark Inlet said...

Ron,

When you discuss the dog park (for example) and say that the costs changed dramatically $60k to $690k between two different versions of the plan it seems more likely to me that the change in cost is due to the CCC requiring the re-inclusion of the dog park as part of the development permit than it is due to someone trying to pull a fast one.

In short, the dog park component changed and the changing cost reflected the design change. Why the design change? That's the big question!

Alon Perlman said...

I kinda remember the Pre Recall CSD
(GH? SG-not me) noting that the Wave Wall was a CCC requirement. I kinda rmember Sea-Wall as a trm
This was Approx when it was Aknowlaged to go up to 165 per Mo. (Aftr actual bids?) Two mil is a roundup number?
My 180 second Comment back then was- Well you shulda coulda woulda known they (CaliCoastalComm) would be asking for it.(paraphrasing myself, but shades of things to come, oh let's say during a different project in '09)
Though-Even with fully melted ICE caps or just a miniscule 5 foot Sea rise. (not part of any public works plan anywhere/back then?). The Site elevation would not be in the inundated part.
Retention Wall for Spillage on site would be a mo-better term.
Add a (?) and this becomes a question for Ron.
Yeh Its somewhere on your Blog, fr shur, Elevation Maps on EIR website, Gotta run, Farmers Market ongoing.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,

Where is the reqirement and specification for a dog park?

Churadogs said...

The questions Ron asks remains: Was the SRF loan illegal because it (wrongfully) included $ for "amenities" (i.e. dog park, tot lot, ampitheatre, etc.) which are specifically forbidden? Was the SOC truthful about overwelming community requirement for having a park in town next to the sewer plant or was it unsubstantiated (i.e. a lie) as well as there being "no other feasible site out of town" and etc.? What DID Chairman Potter mean by "bait and switchy?" Did MWH fail at due dilligence in their work on the CSD's project and if so, should they be on the short list now? And so forth.

As for getting a response from the County, Ron you'll have to put all those documents together and during public comment at the BOS meeting, formally and officially turn them in with a request for a ruling from County Council, and do it during an official meeting, make sure everyone knows you're formally and officially handing them "evidence" (oh, wait, excuse me, you're handing them "opinions") and do it in public, on tape, on the record, and state clearly that you expect a legal ruling on whether or not that SRF Loan was legal, whether MWH operated under best practices in their CSD work or were guilty of fraudlent concealment, thereby calling into question their position on the short list. & etc. Otherwise, you'll get shined on. Emails get lost, are ignored, aren't formal and official complaints & etc.And blogs, as you know, are derided by the BOS as mere bogs of rumor, not worth a look.

Watershed Mark said...

Blogs are information sharing devices which help protect First Amemndment Rights.
It would be a mistake to take Sewerwatch and Calhoun's Can(n)ons lightly.

If the BOS decide to "take on" the LOSTDEP they will address the issues they seem to want to ignore now.


Where is the "requirement" and specification for a dog park?

Watershed Mark said...

First Amendment Rights.

Ron said...

Ann wrote:

"Ron you'll have to put all those documents together and during public comment at the BOS meeting, formally and officially turn them in with a request for a ruling from County Council, and do it during an official meeting, make sure everyone knows you're formally and officially handing them "evidence" (oh, wait, excuse me, you're handing them "opinions") and do it in public, on tape, on the record..."

The interesting thing about that, is that my nails-tight SRF challenge, if argued today, would save Los Osos millions, AND show that the CDOers are completely innocent (you know... "LON" stuff like that), and I've already "formally and officially" made every relevant county official aware of that by e-mailing them all of my excellent, air-tight, official, admissible in court evidence (or as the local media and County Counsel calls it -- "opinion"), so, you'd think they'd be overjoyed with that development, and jump at the opportunity, and get that simple legal ruling: The $2-plus million dollars worth of park amenities in the Tri-W sewer plant? "Mandated mitigation," or "decorative items?"

Jensen should have got that ruling the moment I showed him (and ALL County Supervisors) that I'm SO right on that... and that was last June.

But he didn't do squat. Not even a reply to my e-mail.

I shouldn't NOW have to show up at public meetings and BEG them to save Los Osos millions, AND show that the CDOers are completely innocent.

And that's where it gets weird.

Why aren't they pursuing that?

And here's where it gets kinda "conflict of interest"-y.

If the County WERE to get a ruling on this: The $2-plus million dollars worth of park amenities in the Tri-W sewer plant? "Mandated mitigation," or "decorative items?"

... it would show that Bruce Gibson's Parks Commissioner -- a financial donor to, and public endorser of, his campaign -- did some VERRRRRY bad things, so it's REALLY starting to look like the County would rather protect its own, than save Los Osos a fortune and show that the CDOers were (and are being) wrongly prosecuted.

That's the weird part.

The County SHOULD be overjoyed to learn about the revelation of my official SRF challenge. I shouldn't have to lobby my ass off for them to get that simple ruling, yet, they're not doing ANYTHING about it.

And that "ANYTHING" involves one tiny, itsy-bitsy, little legal ruling:

The $2-plus million dollars worth of park amenities in the Tri-W sewer plant? "Mandated mitigation," or "decorative items?"

... and, for whatever reason, they refuse to ask that question.

Sad, actually... and terrible "representative" government.... UNLESS you consider "representative government" to mean representing the people that financial donated to, and public endorsed your campaign.

WSM wrote:

"It would be a mistake to take Sewerwatch and Calhoun's Can(n)ons lightly."

One of my favorite reporting thingees, is to be underestimated. It leads to primary sources saying, and doing, stupid things.

So, I LOVE to be underestimated! (which means I'm not about to let sources know about SewerWatch's hefty traffic stats... ooooopseee... did I just say that?)

Mike said...

Ron...and where IN Los Osos do you maintain a residence and hence PAID property taxes...???

Are you an attorney and/or engineer...????

If you are none of the above Mr.Crawford, you are not considered an expert on the, but just another outsider with minimal value "opinions" based on hearsay or madeup "facts"...

Not2010Yet said...

No, now, just a minute. This Crawford fellow says his arguments are "ultra tight" and nails-tight". I guess this makes him another out-of-the-area sewer and law expert, except dressed in tights?

...confused....

Maybe he could file in pro per, and seek a writ of mandamus and bring whatever progress is happening to a further halt? Get somebody jailed over an "illegal loan"?

Mike said...

....naw, the County knows he's just a harmless wanta-be/never-was paper hanger... he's been a squat'n on his eco-toilet and using too much straw wipes to actually make sense and bother the BOS... he's sort of become his own pain in his own arse...

His motto has always been "Never let Facts get in the way of a good Tale"...

franc4 said...

Mike sez;
"he's sort of become his own pain in his own arse..."
...people who live in glass houses.........

franc4 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
franc4 said...

notMMXyet;

What does it matter where
Ron lives??

Facts IS facts!!!! And excellent INVESTIGATIVE reporting uncovers much..... too bad Jensen is so busy covering Countys' behinds to act on some real facts....whoops....forgot.....everything that shows countys' incompetence and screw-ups, is "opinion". It would be great if the folks of your county would wake up and do something about the "PUBLIC SERVANTS" that are spending your tax dollars foolishly, mostly for their own benifit. Remember them on election day!

Mike said...

ah yes... spoken by another outsider with absolutely no ties to Los Osos...

"Public Servants"...??? I don't know any "Public Servants"... I do know some very hard working and dedicated Public Employees who most definitely are not servants...!!!! ...and they certainly don't need to be berated by those with a personal axe to grind....!!!!!!! Gail, Lisa, Ann, Ron, Julie, and of course Al come immediately to mind...!!!!

I don't believe franc4 even begins to understand what a government is, who put it into place, why it's there and how it's run...

How's the wife franc4....???

Aaron said...

A lot of people have a personal axe to grind, a lot of people have personal agendas -- but every public figure featured in the sewer saga has been far from perfect.

Watershed Mark said...

Sewertoons said...
Not2010Yet, there is little left to stop the process and the people who drank the STEP kool-aid know it. (Just look at who are promoting that Paavo is guilty - they are STEP people.) Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process, satisfying that they would get another shot at STEP, and the No-Sewers would be jubilant because we would be many more years away from getting one.

1:14 PM, October 03, 2009

Churadogs said...

Ron sez"The County SHOULD be overjoyed to learn about the revelation of my official SRF challenge. I shouldn't have to lobby my ass off for them to get that simple ruling, yet, they're not doing ANYTHING about it."

Which is exactly why you need to show up at public comment time before the full board, the cameras turning, the record being recorded, present hard copies of your tight-tight arguments, hand it into the Clerk of the Board and ask for a response right there in public where nobody can pretend they didn't see you and didn't get the documents. Until you do that, it will all be ignored.

Them's the rules.

Watershed Mark said...

The record is being made.

SLOCO will be an example.

Sewertoons said...

If he doesn't show - we'll all know that ron isn't so certain that his arguments are tight-tight like he claims that they are on BLOGS.

Watershed Mark said...

The record is being made.

"Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process"

Ron said...

Franc4 wrote:

"... everything that shows countys' incompetence and screw-ups, is "opinion"."

That may be true, but that's not what I'm arguing.

I'm not saying the County screwed up, I'm showing that the State screwed up.

Uh, guys, my SRF Challenge will BENEFIT you!

It will benefit the County.

It will benefit Mike.

It will benefit NY2010.

It will benefit 'toons.

And (much, MUCH) more importantly, it will benefit the 45 CDOers.

My SRF challenge is VERY good news for Mike, and 'toons, and NY2010, and the County of SLO... in fact, you guys should be helping me out by contacting your Supervisor and demanding that he get that ruling.

Ann wrote:

"Which is exactly why you need to show up at public comment time before the full board, the cameras turning, the record being recorded, present hard copies of your tight-tight arguments, hand it into the Clerk of the Board and ask for a response right there in public where nobody can pretend they didn't see you and didn't get the documents. Until you do that, it will all be ignored."

Fair enough.... Tell ya what I'll do, if I can't convince Supervisors to save Los Osos millions of dollars, and show that the 45 CDOers are innocent, the old fashion way (via e-mail ; - ), then I'll do what you just said, Ann, ONLY because I think it would be hilarious to show up, do what you just said, and then have everyone attack me for trying to save Los Osos millions, prove the CDOers innocent, and improve government.

"Ewwwww... what a whacky 'LON.' Coooo-coooo!"

Aaron wrote:

..."a lot of people have personal agendas..."

Full Disclosure: My personal agenda for saving Los Osos millions and showing that the CDOers are innocent, based on something I did four years ago? It'd make an EXCELLENT ending to my book.

THAT, and it's also the right thing to do... there's also that.

Aaron said...

I'm all for new ideas.

Looking forward to your book, Ron ;-)

Watershed Mark said...

Ron wrote: "I'm not saying the County screwed up,..."

I'm asking: Why Paavo never looked at vacuum collection during his $7MM study/review of ALTERNATIVES?

That is a mistake, which will be c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y looked at sooner or later, makes no difference to me "financially speaking.”
That mistake will make a huge difference for those who are being asked to pay for a very avoidable mistake…Truth hurts.

Alon Perlman said...

Ron. your-research-is-impeccable-at-the-document-research-stage,-but there-is-a-point-where-conclusions need-to-be-substantiated. And possibly your "opinions" should air at a venue other then hyper-inflation-virtual-space.
(Oooh that Alon, Sneaky, he tied up- [ “ Ron, Your research is impeccable” ] - so it couldn’t be quoted, (nah go ahead, if you wish, freely, just messin))
And though I don't necessarily agree with a high percentage of your final inferences, I know your "briefs" will be tight and concise, because as a writer, you have demonstrated the skills of the Art.

Given that this fur-ball of contradicting Government Agencies, and the "Lack of Science in Deliberations" of the CONTROL Agency, REGIONAL or OTHERWISE (The one that has more than occasionally demonstrated that they don't see the amazing QUALITY of the Dipolar – moment of WATER beyond the 3 Atoms that constitute it), is badly in need of some level of real reform.

So please do write your book, it would balance out the current tome, nicely. My own magnum opus will be written from a centrist viewpoint, not “neutral” not in the wishy washy “The truth is exactly, in the “Middle”” sense. More like an Iron spike driven through the center of mass.

Be sure however to, carry your timeline forward, for more interim events of the last 4 years (not skip ahead). At least till Walcott’s implied “Now that it’s at Tonini, Story over, we can all go home”.

And its currently 43 CDO’s (or CDO equivalents for Y’aal number crunchers. Though the undoable damage was done, The CDO’s have been let out of the cave in the woods, though they are not out of the woods yet.

Sewertoons said...

ron makes no sense again - as usual.

He wants to convince the SRF guys that the $134 million loan they issued us was supposedly illegal because they were supposedly hoodwinked by a small town CSD board about park amenities? That very same SRF source from which the County is about to request for us another huge loan, when the last, renegade CSD board tossed that loan back in their faces?

Great. That'll sure help us a lot. But we all know that the LON disease had moved to Pozo, right?

Mike said...

...it still amazes me that the pre-recall guys (certainly not Lisa and Julie) wielded such political might...!!!! My God, listening to Ron, you would think they controlled the State Water Board, the Coastal Commission and the SLO BOS.... It's a wonder one of them wasn't selected by President of the USA to run California...

I sure hope Ron gets Lisa and Julie's involvement in the Park issue correct this time...

Churadogs said...

Ron sez:"Fair enough.... Tell ya what I'll do, if I can't convince Supervisors to save Los Osos millions of dollars, and show that the 45 CDOers are innocent, the old fashion way (via e-mail ; - ), then I'll do what you just said, Ann, ONLY because I think it would be hilarious to show up, do what you just said, and then have everyone attack me for trying to save Los Osos millions, prove the CDOers innocent, and improve government."

Good. Bureaucrats, elected officials, appointed regulatory boards and state boards and staff operate on the principle of Magical Thinking: If I don't have to actually publicly acknowledge something, (especially a screw up) then it doesn't exist and can be denied and/or ignored. While silence means consent, silence also means legal, court-of-law safety. Plausable deniability. i.e. "If I can publicly state (admantly) , "This file folder is mere speculation," while leaving out the rest of the sentence, "of course, I haven't opened the file yet so I have no idea what's in there and so long as I DON'T open the file or am not FORCED to open the file, I can deny any "guilty knowledge" and truthfully maintain this happy ignorance (No, nope, I have no idea what's in there) and ignore the whole pile of worms that might be IN the file, and not have to do anything about it, whew."

Mark keeps asking why somebody, Paavo? TAC, Engineers? Mark Hutchinson? Somebody?? didn't look at vacuum? Did they? Didn't they? And if they did, why was it rejected? And if they didn't, why didn't they? The answers to that should be very, very simple. Did Mark ask that question in writing and did he ever get back an answer? If so, why not post it here. Was the question asked and answered in the DEIR? If not, why not? If so, what was the answer? & etc.

The time clock in all this is also critical. If the clock runs out, all this becomes moot and everyone stands around staring at the train wreck they helped create and say, Ooops, my bad, yeah, that SRF loan WAS illegal, but, hell, I had to cover my ass since my career was at risk, so if the community gets screwed so I can CMA, then that's what we'll do, plus I had to protect my bosses from embarassment and the whole system from Federal snoopers, so, oh, darn, well, it's too late now to do anything about that, sorry, pay up. Oh, o.k. vacuum would have worked at 1/2 the price but, oh, well, we didn't want that system because there's more money to be made for engineering firms going with traditional gravity, so we decided not to look at it, sorry, us bad, it's too late now, heh-heh, time to move on, pay up & etc.

That's the "Chinatown" game.

Sewertoons said...

Oh groan. How many times has the "why vacuum won't work" in Los Osos been explained here? It was studied. And rejected. wsm opining that it wasn't, no matter how many times he says it, does NOT make it true - that is another kind of magical thinking.

As much as some of you want to stop this sewer, it is coming and there is just nothing left for you to do to stop it.

Aaron said...

Vacuum wasn't studied as much as gravity and STEP/STEG. Compared to County staff analysis of those two collection systems, vacuum was a tiny blip on the radar screen.

In short, vacuum died prematurely on the operating table -- and I believe that happened because it really wasn't studied. Look at the weight of information here.

When I was a student at Cuesta College, I spoke to faculty who were well-versed in wastewater engineering. Before TAC was formed, we gathered to talk about state-of-the-art European ponding and composting systems that were surprisingly affordable and sustainable. We talked about "out of the box" project concepts that could work for Los Osos including vacuum.

When TAC started releasing their tech memos, we were shocked that it came down to gravity and STEP/STEG. No innovative, progressive technologies were studied. When I left CC last year, it dawned on me that Los Osos' unusual circumstances (the inflation costs, the project criteria) demands a sewer that is state-of-the-art and not "more of the same."

This ideology isn't "no-sewer."

franc4 said...

Mike sez,

"ah yes... spoken by another outsider with absolutely no ties to Los Osos... "

Thing is, Mikey, I DO have ties, but the fact that you don't know how or why is buggin' you, right?
What's with the concern for my wife? You don't even know her. I don't think she is one of your ex's....but you never know. You've had so many. Your Corvette still running driven by one of them?
PS Do you notice your comments about Lisa and Julie draws no response from anyone....'ceptin me once in a while....like you still carrying the torch for Julie?...... Sigh

franc4 said...

Sorry Ron....I meant "state" scewups....like the ILLEGAL loan for one.

Sewertoons said...

Aaron, there was a reason it wasn't studied as much. Simply put, vacuum does not have the lift power needed to accommodate the hills here. One citizen in town was looking at it as viable when he found that the calculations provided by the salesman for our situation were incorrect and that the system as proposed - with those cost savings -- simply would not work. Just because it was eliminated early does not mean that it wasn't adequately studied. It had fatal flaws early on that eliminated wasting any more time on it.

For the limited needs around the bay (read "flat land") vacuum will work just fine, as a will a low pressure system with grinder pumps. I agree though, that in light of the controversy on this blog, there wasn't enough documentation on why vacuum wouldn't work for the whole town.

The only reason that STEP, also un-viable in terms of its supposed economic benefits, was given such attention was that there were many (but mostly LOUD) believers who thought it could work. They were perhaps leftover believers from the time of the original forming of the CSD who perhaps did not get to process WHY it had to change. Sure it could work, but not at the cost savings provided by salesmen. So this was clearly, very clearly, delineated by the County.

The many acres that would need to be dedicated to ponds - taking the most valuable resource this county has - ag land - OUT of production wasn't going to fly, even with the "green" Planning Commission.

When ideas that have given given rational proof as to their unviability are still pushed by people who keep insisting on pushing them, then it really does give one the impression of "no-sewer," don't you think?

Aaron said...

Simply put, vacuum does not have the lift power needed to accommodate the hills here.

That's your opinion. Got any sources?

Thank you for your opinion.

Sewertoons said...

I guess you missed Mark Hutchinson's comments at the Planning Commission, the BOS and the TAC. His credentials not good enough for you?

Watershed Mark said...

Perhaps while you attempt to explain: "Simply put, vacuum does not have the lift power needed to accommodate the hills here", you can explain how gravity causes wastewater to run uphill?

Vacuum was n-e-v-e-r studied, sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynentte.

I will agree with you that: “Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process”

Watershed Mark said...

Ann,

I have posted e-v-e-r-y response I have received from SLOCO.
Nobody has addressed why vacuum was not studied.

Watershed Mark said...

Sewertoons said...
Oh groan. How many times has the "why vacuum won't work" in Los Osos been explained here? It was studied. And rejected. wsm opining that it wasn't, no matter how many times he says it, does NOT make it true - that is another kind of magical thinking.

As much as some of you want to stop this sewer, it is coming and there is just nothing left for you to do to stop it.

10:33 AM, October 08, 2009

Sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynette,

You are again exhibiting your confusion.
Please show us where you or anyone addressed why vacuum was not studied on blog or where you claim it was in Paavo's flawed and incomplete study process.

After all it's as you say- “Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process”

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynette wrote:

"As much as some of you want to stop this sewer, it is coming and there is just nothing left for you to do to stop it."

The current AB2701 doesn't cover the prematurely issued RFQ design.

I "heard" that Supervisor Gibson stated during his golf course get together the cost would/could/should be about $168MM.

The cost of the partially studied project should fall on the financial burden alone.
Especially when more economical and energy efficient solutions exist, but were never studied.

“It’s the economy stupid”

Oh, what ever happened to that "shovel ready" lobbist from New Port Beach?

Sewertoons said...

Aaron, I sent you a couple of things. I hope that you will comment. Vacuum can work fine around the bay, it is appropriate for flat areas.

For someone so concerned with sole sourcing, I am puzzled by your seeming acceptance of sole sourcing from Orenco or AirVac. We are held captive by that technology if we go with it. There is no other way to replace parts that fail, but to buy them from that specific company. If they fail as a company, we are cooked. It's like Tom Murphy pushing Wrecklamators. Lots of $$$ to that system - in perpetuity. I can see why the salesmen descended - and are still trying to. Can you comment on that too?

Watershed Mark said...

No facts supporting that vacuum was studied to share?
“Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process”

Aaron said...

I have a new e-mail.

Orenco and AirVac aren't the only companies that do STEP/STEG and vacuum, but both of those companies are the most well-known.

I'm not advocating for any product. I'm no salesmen. It's just research. If a salesman is selling, I'm not going to tell him or her to stop. As for the Reclamator, the system clearly didn't work and that fact is universally recognized.

Sewertoons said...

OK - so which vacuum or step system is not proprietary?

But I'd like to hear what you thought about what I sent on vacuum.

Watershed Mark said...

Some folks are so stupid they would rather pay (at least) $168MM for a leaky, energy intensive system than get something that for less than half because they fear someone might make a few bucks.

NEWS FLASH: There isn't anywhere near $7MM worth of "commission" in a $60MM solution.

Most of the money will go towards parts and labor.
I believe AIR-VAC's Dean is a salaried employee. I doubt a commission on a $50MM project would be more that 1% or 50K.

Salesmen don't get a percentage of the labor.

***************************************

Lynette, are you saying you can prove vacuum collection was studied?

No?

That's because you can't...

alabamasue said...

Oh jeeze, mark, if you actually LIVED here, you would know that vacuum was discussed, and dismissed by the TAC and the BOS for the exact reasons 'toons tried to explain to you. And you want her to 'prove' it was studied? Not her problem, but it seems to be yours. Grow up, get a life- Hey, get a job!

Watershed Mark said...

So sue show me where vacuum collection was acually studied (you can't) and I'll be happy to stop asking:

Why wasn't vacuum collection part of a $7MM study of wastewater collection alternatives?

“Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process”

Watershed Mark said...

Sue,
How about we get back on topic?

"Fradulent Concealment"

Watershed Mark said...

Remember, "This" is one of my hobbies...

Watershed Mark said...

For Sue:

Late in the evening

Watershed Mark said...

For Lie-la-lie ... Lynette…

I'll be back on the job on LO soon.

Watershed Mark said...

I want one of these, don't you?

Aaron said...

Lynette,

I would give you my thoughts, but I haven't received anything. I posted my new e-mail address in my previous comment.

Watershed Mark said...

For a study-project in central Italy a complex and independent dynamic investment cost analysis has been prepared at the University of Rome “La Sapienza”. For this 1500 inhabitant-project investment costs, operation costs as well as reinvestment have been taken into consideration and compared for time “0”. The result was quite impressive: 600.000 Euro for the vacuum way versus 1.100.000 Euro for the gravity way!

Highly estimated operation costs and fear of malfunction have been the main prejudices and obstacles in the past against an expanded use of vacuum sewers. For an unprejudiced choice of a sewerage concept, it is necessary not to overestimate operational costs of alternative wastewater collection systems. Further, more difficult conditions during construction have to be considered for conventional gravity sewerage! When a vacuum sewerage system is well designed, operational reliability will be guaranteed.

Watershed Mark said...

An "independent" study did NOT occur during Paavo's process.

“Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process”

Watershed Mark said...

World’s Biggest Vacuum Station in Dubia, where money is no object…

Watershed Mark said...

Vacuum sewerage, compared to traditional gravity system, uses air instead of water to transport sewage.

Drought does not negatively affect the availabilty of air.

Why wasn't vacuum studied?

Sewertoons said...

wsm forgot this part from Wikipedia.

Limitations
vacuum systems are not capable of transporting sewage over long distances

vacuum sewerage systems are only reasonable for the collection of wastewater within a separated system and not for the collection of storm-water

the lines can reach up to 3 – 4 km laid in flat area

restrictions of the system as to static lifts (3-4 m)

systems should be designed with help of an experienced manufacturer

5-days- training of the technician, manpower necessary to survey the system

external energy is required for collecting sewage

odour problems close to the vacuum station can occur, because of exhaust air à biofiltre eventually

I might also add that in power outages - which we do experience yearly here, there is very little storage with a vacuum system, hence vacation homes are advised to have a special valve, to prevent the nasty occurrence of coming back to that vacation home filled with someone else's sewage.

PS It is spelled Dubai.

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynette:

I forgot nothing. I post the links/backup to my statements while you do not.


Regarding power outages for the 3-4 vacuum stations same solution as for the 22 lift stations: Backup generators, just fewer of them.

You still haven’t proven vacuum was studied. That’s because you can’t.

I have stated before I don’t use spell check when blogging.

You can see from what I posted cost and leakage issues are better mitigated with vacuum that was NEVER studied than the leaky gravity you love so much.

I know it and Paavo knows it even if you don’t/can’t/won’t.

Why wasn’t vacuum studied?
It’s as you say: “Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process”

I just don’t get tired of pasting your words as it is so revealing and so much fun! Revealing huh?

Watershed Mark said...

odour problems close to the vacuum station can occur, because of exhaust air à biofiltre eventually

These are dealt with where AS THE ODOR FROM 400 MANHOLES IS NOT...

Watershed Mark said...

can occur vs. will occur with gravity and future reduced flow of water.

Why not use air to move waste?

Alon Perlman said...

Using Air to move waste?
Youve been to our CSD Meetings WMark, spoke at them too.

We Los Ossans invented using air to move waste.
I was involved in blowing so much air (I also personally added Hard Science for leverage) under a WasteWater Project, that it floated up and Hovercrafted itself twice. (Mostly the scientifically untenable second one)
It is time to nail the Magic Carpet down, even though there are a lot of people who travelled along on the second ride and are just getting started. It would had been better if vacuum was promoted locally earlier, so that the issues could had been better ironed out even before FEIR.
You may not know where the money came from for Al "You gotta be kidding me" Barrow's Technology symposium, and why.

The Little Trash Can Icon? People who do care about spelling and do care about loosing any semblance of credibility by reposting, use it to correct and then repost. If you are back in town ever, send me an email, U typed u don't have it- It's open source and you posted it after I gave you some directions.
I prefer not to post it needlessly as there are plenty of Spambots prowling the internet (and some of the walking variety, Heck, Even LOCAC committee meetings get Spammed by "He who should only be mentioned once" and his female counterparts)
Good for 1 slice of Briggadoon Pizza, at the modest Baywood "Pier"

Watershed Mark said...

Alon,

Which gravity sewer "outfit" attended the "Technology Symposium" you refered to?

How many technologies represented there were actually studied?
As STEP/STEG was studied but prematurely dismissed in favor of gravity, how credible is Paavo's review of alternatives/study process?

No worries about your email address, stay put. I do not have the inclination to look for you.
I just thought you would be interested in a real salt water intrusion study.

Watershed Mark said...

Hey Alon,

On second thought the study realloy is "right up your alley" so if you would like a copy, click on my handle and you'll find my email address.

Ah heck you can email me at mark@nowastewater.com

No worries.

Alon Perlman said...

I will tonight but not till after I finish a memory dump that may take a little more time to post so please dont wait (2 hrs time dif?)
I like you Mark, though the "I don't hate anyone in Los Osos", only operates to a 10 mile radius requirement in my prep. for the CSD)
You'l get it when I send(sent) the email(NCR 17).

Alon Perlman said...

Responding to the first WM
I will, I'd love to see the study, but…
Do unnerstan, it took me less than 2 seconds to see that Weimers Graphing is correct cause I had that image, and another 20 to validate by numbers (In a LOCAC committee mtng, That part of the revolution did not get televised.) because I already knew that anyway, and I had seen the raw data before, maybe at the original release of Cleath Et Al. Though I reviewed most of the DEIR, Cause I only had 3 nights to deadline. I had submitted to the EIR that the Intrusion is increasing based on memory. Somewhere in last year During an election, while waiting for my turn at public comment I figured that if Broderson is Implemented after too much of delay it would push The encroaching salt inland. (A distinguished Cal Poly Prof Told me when I sat down "Well , you got one vote" I don’t necessarily know if it was his) At the time County Staff were indicating that most all the Water would "Escalator" (my term) down into the Aquifer. You may had been there? I was of course Horrified that SECONDARY treated water would be shooting down into the Aquifer. TRI-W original plan called for too much Water but at least it was MBR treated. At the same time I had to ask myself if the Dirty water would by hydro dynamically beneficial. A tourniquet around the neck for something much more than a nose bleed?
Another 10 seconds to see that the Graphs of the “Hole in the Aquifer” in proximity to the intrusion would accelerate the intrusion even more. Actually my first observation is that the Hole has a “memory” Stop any pumping and it will still sit there, hungrily sucking.
I was standing next to Keith when I said it and we discussed it and the Accelerative pull, he thanked me but I don’t know if the Phrase “Shoot (Race?) through the aquifer” is originally mine or his. CSD mtg?
When I presented it to later BOS (Or was it PC Bos). I was Ad-Libing had to borrow Keith’s copies and scribble over them to show the Draw Vector.
But what are the implications?
Finger of diffuse intrusion, proximity to the moved new wells?
My interpretation; Broderson has to be brought into operation in real time (at reduced %, + monitoring As oer) And recharge into the “Hole” (Bayridge good first step but haven’t map confirmed)
The unknown –Hydrodynamic loading and actual % recharge past the aquitards.
What will Los Osos be subjected to next? More “Political Science”?
Still more LO Direct research etc.. needed
We Delay... The Aquifer's toast

Watershed Mark said...

The money wasted on Paavo's New Port Beach Lobbyist to see about "stimulus money from DC" would have gone a long way to testing, evaluating and generally figuring out how best to proceed as prescribed in AB 2701:


"(4) “Prohibition zone” means that territory within the Baywood
Park-Los Osos area of the county that is subject to the wastewater
discharge prohibition imposed by the Central Coast Regional Water
Quality Control Board pursuant to Resolution 83-13.
(c) The county may undertake any efforts necessary to construct and
operate a community wastewater collection and treatment system to meet
the wastewater collection and treatment needs within the district. These
efforts may include programs and projects for recharging aquifers,
preventing saltwater intrusion, and managing groundwater resources to the
extent that they are related to the construction and operation of the
community wastewater collection and treatment system. These efforts
shall include any services that the county deems necessary, including, but
not be limited to, any planning, design, engineering, financial analysis,
pursuit of grants to mitigate affordability issues, administrative support,
project management, and environmental review and compliance services.
The county shall not exercise any powers authorized by this section
outside the district."

Watershed Mark said...

One citizen in town was looking at it as viable when he found that the calculations provided by the salesman for our situation were incorrect and that the system as proposed - with those cost savings -- simply would not work. Just because it was eliminated early does not mean that it wasn't adequately studied. It had fatal flaws early on that eliminated wasting any more time on it.


"One citizen in town"

Sounds like another lie to me.
Of course you could provide his or her name and their calculations.

Sewertoons said...

youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtfJoI7168Q

point of interest 1 minute 40 seconds in to the video - Provincetowns vacuum sewer failure that closed 18 Cape Cod beaches over the July 4 weekend this year.

Quote out of the video by Mary Jo Avilar, Provincetown Selectman:

""…the fact remains that we have a system that's prone to disruption - and this the worst one of the 5 that have occurred since the sewer system was installed…""

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynette.

The engineering and construction companies did not follow the manufacturer's advice for installation.
The leaks were found and repaired which makes the system water tight.

The July Fourth incident you use happened after Paavo decided to eliminate STEP/STEG and certainly after he decided not to look at vacuum collection.

Your use of P-Town does not address the core is(-)sue:

Why wasn't vacuum collection included in a $7MM review/study of "alternatives?"

Sewer Backup Overflow Flood due to tree roots

12" Sewer sucks in 2 houses!

Roots in Sewer Line

Sewertoons said...

I wonder what the percentage is of traditional gravity systems in the US and what percentage is vacuum systems?

I wonder what percentage of gravity failures relate to old pipes (clay, metal, wood, brick) and/or poor maintenance. And what percentage relate to the new types of pipe materials failing.

I wonder what percentage of the newer vacuum systems fail due due to contractors not knowing how to install them or homeowners/renters unaware of how to use them?

I'd say a town that has a fairly large rental population of college students and young families are not the best candidates for vacuum. Common failures are due to flushing inappropriate objects - diapers and latex come to mind. Where there is trouble just maintaining septic tanks, there will be more trouble getting everyone in a transient population up to speed on the DONT'S of a vacuum sewer.

Best to leave the success of a system in the hands of professionals rather than the general population.

Sewertoons said...

wsm forgot to note that the Selectman said that the July 4 P-town incident was incident #5, so his Paavo comment is not relevant. (As if the P-town incident was the only time a vacuum system failed.) All that it took to foul up an entire system was ONE inappropriately flushed item.

Alon Perlman said...

Correction to previous post;
"Broderson has to be brought into operation in real time (at reduced %, + monitoring As oer) And recharge into the “Hole”

Monitoring as per Rob Miller LOCSD District Engineer.
P.S.
Do you know who was responsible for (c)... These
efforts may include programs and projects for recharging aquifers ,
preventing saltwater intrusion, and managing groundwater resources to the extent that they are related to the construction and operation of the community wastewater collection and treatment system. ..."


But really the reason for my posting; Word verification=
nesswrag

Watershed Mark said...

-The July Fourth incident you use happened after Paavo decided to eliminate STEP/STEG and certainly after he decided not to look at vacuum collection.

Sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynette

I wonder what percentage of medical health care plans are administered by private corporation as compared with those which are government administered?


“Getting rid of Paavo would unravel the entire process”

"Fradulent Concealment"

Sewertoons said...

There were 4 prior incidents in just that town with vacuum failure prior to July 4, 2009. Their system was installed in 2003. Paavo was not in charge of Public Works at that time.

Aaron said...

NOTE: For every one failure with vacuum, there are 30 failures/spills with gravity collection.

That statistic has been generated from Google and me having a lot of time on my hands late at night.

Watershed Mark said...

Why wasn't vacuum studied by Paavo during his $7MM review of alternatives?
How much of the $7MM was spent on STEP/STEG?

These are critical questions that Sorry, I lost his last name and got him confused with your outfit Lynette doesn't want to acknowledge and won't be going away like she and others think they will...

Watershed Mark said...

Aaron,

Every vacuum collection "failure" must me dealt with, while the sneaky leaky gravity failures are buried deep and may not appear for decades, if ever.
Gravity leaks must be looked for.
If you don't look you don't find any...

Vacuum collects every drop of waste while gravity does not.
There is no mechanism to measure how much waste leaves a point source of pollution and how much of that waste actually arrives at its destination.

Using a sealed vacuum system insures a transportation vehicle that does not exfiltrate or infiltrate.

Because no one has answered my question I shall continue to inquire:

Why wasn't vacuum collection studied by Paavo during his $7MM review of alternatives?
Where is the "memo?"

Aaron said...

Rough Screening Report (March 26, 2007), CHAPTER 6 – COLLECTION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES (6.2.3 Vacuum System Collection System) is where you'll find the study.

"Vacuum sewer systems rely on gravity only to move wastewater from homes to a vacuum valve pit package and then use a pressure differential, instead of gravity, to move wastewater to a vacuum station and on to the treatment plant. Differential air pressure is used as the motive force to transport sewage. The main lines are under a vacuum of 16 to 20-inches mercury (-0.5 to –0.7 bar) created by vacuum pumps located at the vacuum station.

The vacuum system requires a normally closed vacuum/gravity interface valve at each entry point to seal the lines so that vacuum is maintained. The interface valves, located in a valve pit, open when a predetermined amount of sewage accumulates in the collecting sump. When the valve is opened, the pressure differential between atmospheric pressure and the vacuum in the mains provides the energy required to open the vacuum interface valves, evacuate the sump contents, and propel the sewage toward the vacuum station. The NWRI panel identified this system as an alternative that may be desirable in high groundwater areas."

Interestingly enough, on Table 6.1 (pg. 103 in the PDF), it lists small pipes and minimal I&I as advantages. Documented vacuum failures have shown that both of these "advantages" have appeared as the sources of the problem.

Nowhere in the Rough Screening Report does it validate LT's claim that "Simply put, vacuum does not have the lift power needed to accommodate the hills here."

Also, AIRVAC isn't the only vacuum sewer provider. There is FLOVAC. If you want to look at European examples of vacuum, there are systems done by companies like Roavac and Quavac.

While the Rough Screening Report documented case studies of vacuum systems, they didn't exactly say why vacuum is completely disqualified for further evaluation in Los Osos.

It's clear. Vacuum was not studied to the same extent as the other collection systems.