CONTACTS 
0201 - COE, Oakland Harbor Project        510 532 4838 fax or 800...
020101 - Mr. Thomas W. White; Project Engineer =510 532 4838

SUBJECTS
Corps of Engineers, SFD, Oakland Project
Weekly Progress Meeting, 961126
Handwritten Notes Difficult to Read
Minutes Should be Liminted to What was
Conflicting Understandings Causes Anger,
Psychologically Demanding to Discover Error
Minutes of Meetings Improved by
Conflict Discover Before Mistakes are Made
Construction Communications Align People as

1411 -    ..
1412 - Summary/Objective
1413 -
141301 - Followed up work at ref SDS 13 line 32, ref SDS 9 line 101, 
141302 - line 103.
141303 -
141304 - Reviewed with COE management 1st draft of notes for 961126 meeting,
141305 - ref DIP 6 line 29.  Received a few edits from Tom White and extensive
141306 - comments from the Port of Oakland.  There was concern about the
141307 - methodology of Communication Metrics relative to conventional meeting
141308 - minutes.  The Port requested changes to their comments about meeting
141309 - management, but made no corrections or additions to their comments on
141310 - environmental management that affect production and administration of
141311 - the contract.
141312 -
141313 - Submitted the final version of the notes via ref DIT 1 line 30.
141314 -
141315 - Sent notes of what I was able to do with the Port's edits to Herb, via
141316 - ref DIT 2 line 30.
141317 -
141318 -      [The next morning got message that Frank Snitz did not get the
141319 -      final notes because his mail box is full with over 1,000
141320 -      messages, ref SDS 15 line 49.]
141321 -
141322 -
141323 -  ..
1414 -
1415 -
1416 - Discussion with Tom Keesling
1417 -
141701 - He had received the notes via internet and had begun to read them. I
141702 - gave him a standard printed set and asked for review of issues related
141703 - to the Port's concern about PM procedures.
141704 -
141705 - Also submitted copies to Tom Benero and to Herb Cheong.
141706 -
141707 - There were no edits or changes posed by 1200 as requested in the
141708 - letter transmitting the notes, ref DIP 6 line 29.
141709 -
141710 -
141711 -
1418 -
1419 -
1420 - 0920 discussion with Marc McGovern
1421 -   ..
142101 - Marc had already received a copy of the notes over the Internet.
142102 - He said his reading of the notes revealed a question about the meeting
142103 - Leonard set with Dutra in the afternoon following the Progress
142104 - Meeting.  Marc recalled that this meeting was supposed to be on
142105 - reviewing Action Items, rather than reviewing the schedule.
142106 -
142107 - We examined the notes and found that Leonard called for meetings on
142108 - both Action Items, ref SDS 9 line 515, and on reviewing scheduling
142109 - matters, ref SDS 9 line 431.  Marc then recalled that we met on both
142110 - matters last Tuesday, per ref SDS 10 line 77, and at ref SDS 11 line 77.
142111 -
142112 -
142113 -  ..
1422 -
1423 -
1424 - 1155 received call from Tom White
1425 -
142501 - Tom said it took an hour to read the notes and make the following
142502 - comments. (see his edits at ref SDS 0 3873.
142503 -
142504 -
142505 -  ..
142506 - Communication Metrics Differs from Traditional Meeting Minutes
142507 -
142508 - Tom said that Rob Andrews and Gail Staba were disappointed that the
142509 - notes are not a verbatim transcript of what was said at the meetings.
142510 -
142511 - He feels this causes some Port staff to criticize COE unfairly, per
142512 - his email to COE management, described at ref SDS 12 7754.  This
142513 - concern is set out in the notes at ref SDS 9 4988.  As a result Tom is
142514 - trying this afternoon with his edits to conform the notes to what he
142515 - recalled was actually said, although he finds it difficult to
142516 - remember, per our discussion last week, ref SDS 4 2886.  See also
142517 - below on inability to remember. ref SDS 0 3389
142518 -
142519 -      [On 981022 Tom White reported favorable review of Communication
142520 -      Metrics implemented on the Internet. ref SDS 22 4090]
142521 -
142522 -      [On 981027 COE District Counsel reported that Communication
142523 -      Metrics saved the government $200K ref SDS 21 7315]
142524 -
142525 -  ..
142526 - Tom explained his understanding that meeting "minutes" typically do
142527 - not contain context and linkages, and so he feels that COE's notes of
142528 - Progress Meetings should not set out context to show alignment of the
142529 - meaning the Engineer draws from what was said relative to contract
142530 - requirements.
142531 -
142532 -      [See follow up where Tom convey's this opinion to the Port of
142533 -      Oakland, ref SDS 18 4498, and discussion with Tom about his
142534 -      desire to have "meeting minutes," at ref SDS 19 2222.]
142535 -
142536 -      [See where DE terminates Welch contract, ref SDS 20 7768.]
142537 -
142538 - Tom noted that since summary headings were not expressly stated, they
142539 - should not be in the notes.  (Rob Andrews agrees, and in his edits -
142540 - see below - requests that all of the References be omitted.)  I
142541 - explained the headnotes make up the Executive Summary so the entire
142542 - meeting can be understood without reading the entire body of notes.
142543 - ..
142544 - Since the Welch contract is to provide Communication Metrics,
142545 - the notes include context and connections necessary to discover
142546 - alignment that exists, or is missing, with respect to understandings
142547 - among with parties that affect the success of the project.  On 960920,
142548 - Max Blodgett, Chief Con Ops, directed that "hiccups" be captured in
142549 - the record.  This requires context and alignment, ref SDS 2 8854, to
142550 - identify meaning, implications and correlations needed to manage the
142551 - work. The Engineer needs to know how what was said aligns with what
142552 - was said previously and with what is set out in the Contract and
142553 - various correspondence, so that action can be taken promptly to
142554 - maintain alignment.  Otherwise the project drifts off course and it
142555 - costs a lot of money to bring it back on course or to pay the damages
142556 - from failing to meet objectives.  Communication Metrics being used on
142557 - this job places a "search light" on daily details to discover these
142558 - small deviations, as discussed with Chief, Con Ops on 960105.
142559 - ref SDS 1 1551.
142560 -
142561 -      [See follow up where "search light' was turned off on the Port of
142562 -      Oakland's participation, ref SDS 17 5002.]
142563 - ..
142564 - Conveying the Engineer's understandings to the Contractor
142565 - enables the Contractor and/or others responsible to perform contract
142566 - tasks, in this case the Port of Oakland on Environmental management,
142567 - to be alerted of how what was said relates to project success, and to
142568 - thereon notify the Engineer of any misunderstanding so corrections can
142569 - be made.  This empowers people to think deeply and carefully about how
142570 - to perform the work correctly, rather than spend so much time
142571 - correcting mistakes.  It further reduces the time required to fix
142572 - mistakes by doing so when they are small, rather than wait for them to
142573 - get bigger, as discussed with Max Blodgett in our meeting on 960105,
142574 - ref SDS 1 8659.
142575 -
142576 -
1426 -

SUBJECTS
Corps of Engineers, SFD, Oakland Project
Weekly Progress Meeting, 961126
Handwritten Notes Difficult to Read

1806 -
180601 -  ..
180602 - Specific Edits
180603 -
180604 - 040603 the polygon is designated as IC1-B-2, 3,4,5.
180605 -
180606 -       I made this change, ref SDS 9 line 103.
180607 -
180608 - Tom says "Liberty Offloader" should be changed to "Liberty Unloader."
180609 -
180610 -       I made this a global change even though Dutra's serial letter
180611 -       #0198 dated 961127 describes the equipment as "Liberty
180612 -       Offloader," per ref DRP 2 line 27 received at ref SDS 14 line
180613 -       160.  This is a simple matter that gives Tom a greater sense of
180614 -       ownership of the notes.
180615 -
180616 - 080524  He wants to add "results"
180617 -       ..
180618 -       I made this change, ref SDS 9 line 153.
180619 -
180620 - 080532  He wants to say Galbraith decant into the bay is stopped
180621 - instead of discharge, ref SDS 9 line 160.
180622 -
180623 -       I explained "discharge" is used because that is the term the
180624 -       abatement order uses, ref DRP 1 line 214, and so we want to
180625 -       align the project record with this official document.
180626 -
180627 -       I changed the thing by adding a description "of decant water."
180628 -
180629 - 080542 Tom does not recall discussion of Cure Notice.
180630 -
180631 -       I left this for context, since it is in a document issued to the
180632 -       Contractor during the preceeding week, and so is the background
180633 -       against which the entire discussion occurred.
180634 -
180635 - 211125 change "presentations" to "representations"
180636 -       ..
180637 -       I did not make this change, since these are Progress
180638 -       Meetings at which various people present their remarks for the
180639 -       record.
180640 -
180641 - 211136 Should we say this is a Contracting Division serial number?
180642 -
180643 -       Tom notes the record clarifies this point elsewhere, and there
180644 -       is no apparent benefit to repetition on this point.
180645 -
180646 - 211153 What does it mean?
180647 -
180648 -       I tried clarifying the meaing, ref SDS 9 line 257.
180649 -
180650 - 211158 Need "have" after "not"
180651 -
180652 -       Made this change.
180653 -
180654 - 211169 Tom does not recall discussion of stenographic records.
180655 - He feels I may have said something about it.
180656 -       ..
180657 -       I left this part of the notes for context, ref SDS 9 line
180658 -       273. Added the notation that there was no discussion of...
180659 -
180660 - 211178 Tom said this is true, noting that there was no evidence
180661 - offered today showing there is a material error in the notes, ref SDS
180662 - 9 line 281.
180663 -
180664 - 211180 Tom does not recall hearing discussion of the Contract
180665 - Management Plan, nor of staffing of the plan.
180666 -
180667 -     I did not change this text, since it is a headnote that merely
180668 -     summarizes the import of the passage, ref SDS 9 line 288.
180669 -
180670 - 211212 Tom agrees with Marc's observation that the Port should not be
180671 - speaking up at these meetings about how meetings are conducted or any
180672 - other aspect of COE contract admin.  He hopes Herb can contact help
180673 - the Port recognize the advantages to the project of working with the
180674 - Corps on this point, ref SDS 9 line 342.
180675 -
180676 - 211253 Tom does not recall Bob saying anything about serial letter
180677 - number sequencing.
180678 -     ..
180679 -     I left this in the notes.
180680 -
180681 - 220406 add acronym in parentheses after Dredging Plan of Operations.
180682 -
180683 -     I added the acronym.
180684 -
180685 - 220413 Wants the language made more clear on why a meeting that was
180686 - requested to be held by Dutra, now is not needed.
180687 -
180688 -     I tried to fix this so it reads better, ref SDS 9 line 395.
180689 -
180690 - 290222 Tom does not recall discussion of COE serial letter #107
180691 - citing Cure Notice.
180692 -
180693 -     I left this in the notes for context, ref SDS 9 line 444.
180694 -
180695 - 290922 Tom does not recall Cure Notice being discussed at the
180696 - meeting.
180697 -     ..
180698 -     I left this in the notes for context, ref SDS 9 line 444.
180699 - ..
180700 - 290961 Tom does not recall discussion of the Navy Sewer Line.
180701 - He does not seem to feel as strongly that this should be omitted
180702 - simply because it was not discussed.  Tom indicated it provides
180703 - context needed to understand what was said.
180704 -
180705 -     I left this in the notes for context, ref SDS 9 line 484.
180706 -
180707 - 360923 Need to add stuff to complete the description: "Pipeline
180708 - Installation Plan."
180709 -
180710 -     I added this stuff, ref SDS 9 line 568.
180711 -
180712 - 360927 Tom does not recall discussion of tests on this matter.
180713 - Tom wants to say:
180714 -       ..
180715 -       Dutra's Test Results for Todd/Schnitzer Wings Receipt
180716 -       Pending
180717 -
180718 -       Instead, I added a citation to the notes of the 961119 meeting
180719 -       that deals with this matter, ref SDS 9 line 595.
180720 -
180721 - 360952 Add "when" after "of" and delete one of the "can"
180722 -
180723 -       I fixed this.
180724 -
180725 -
180726 -
1808 -
1809 -
1810 - 1319 received call from Herb
1811 -   ..
181101 - He advised of having received 16 pages of comments from Rob
181102 - Andrews via fax.
181103 -
181104 - Herb wants to meet this afternoon following the meeting on COE issuing
181105 - a Cure Notice, to review Rob's comments and determine what changes
181106 - might be needed in the notes.
181107 -
181108 -
181109 -
1812 -
1813 -
1814 - 1523 Met with Herb
1815 -
181501 - The meeting with Max, Tom Benero, etc., on the Cure Notice matter ran
181502 - longer than expected.  Herb gave me a copy of Rob's comments that
181503 - showed extensive handwritten notations that are hard to read.  Herb
181504 - said he had to leave in 10 minutes.  He asked me to let him know of
181505 - any questions I have on Rob's edits tomorrow, and he will discuss them
181506 - with Rob.
181507 -
181508 -
1816 -
1817 -
1818 - 1725 review Port's Edits received from Herb
1819 -
181901 -  ..
181902 - Communication Metrics is Different from Meeting Minutes
181903 - ..
181904 - Port's edits noting that headings, contacts and references
181905 - are...
181906 -
181907 -                   not part of meeting minutes
181908 -
181909 - ...conflict with Communication Metrics, which COE notes provide, as
181910 - discussed above with Tom White, and previously at ref SDS 4 line 116.
181911 - Differences between COE notes using Communication Metrics, their
181912 - objectives and utility for improving management, and traditional
181913 - "meeting minutes," have not yet been explained to Port management.  A
181914 - meeting set for 961121 was deferred and has not yet been rescheduled,
181915 - ref SDS 7 line 71.
181916 -
181917 -     [See follow up discussion with Len Cardoza reflecting the above
181918 -     views, ref SDS 16 line 72.]
181919 - ..
181920 - Line 040608, edits shown for the summary/objective are
181921 - unreadable, and so changes needed can be entered in the record of the
181922 - next week's meeting after clarification of the writing.
181923 -
181924 - Line 080524, edits shown for status item f, are unreadable.
181925 -
181926 - Line 080532, the edit to strike "pending further notice" was not
181927 - accepted, so the record is clear that the stoppage is temporary, which
181928 - is a contract administration issue between COE and Dutra.
181929 -
181930 -  ..
181931 -     Added the Port's clarification to cite the abatement order as
181932 -     authority for enhanced reporting procedures when discharge is
181933 -     permitted to resume.
181934 -
181935 - Line 080540 the edit seems to say "not...." but I cannot read the
181936 - thing that is underlined.
181937 -
181938 -     Decided to remove the explanation of the grounds COE charges that
181939 -     removal of the Liberty violates the contract, and simply leave the
181940 -     record to show that Dutra was notified of a violation, ref SDS 9
181941 -     line 172.
181942 -
181943 -     The original text said:
181944 -        ..
181945 -        COE serial letters #105 dated 961120 and #107 dated
181946 -        961122 ask Dutra to schedule completion of bid item #0006 and
181947 -        advise that removal of the Liberty Unloader violates Dutra's
181948 -        contract to submit a "Pipeline Installation Plan" since Dutra's
181949 -        plan stated Dutra would keep the Liberty Unloader on site until
181950 -        completion of Galbraith work.  COE advised a "Cure Notice" will
181951 -        be issued if Dutra fails to perform in accordance its "Pipeline
181952 -        Installation Plan." ref D P 10 line 54.
181953 -
181954 -     I changed it to read:
181955 -
181956 -        COE serial letters #105 dated 961120 and #107 dated 961122 ask
181957 -        Dutra to schedule completion of bid item #0006 and advise that
181958 -        removal of the Liberty Unloader violates Dutra's contract. COE
181959 -        advised a "Cure Notice" will be issued if Dutra fails to
181960 -        perform in accordance its "Pipeline Installation Plan." ref D P
181961 -        10 line 54.
181962 - ..
181963 - Line 211104 edit asks why "misrepresent" is in quotes?
181964 -
181965 -     This is because misrepresentation can imply mendacious intent to
181966 -     mislead and cause harm. That meaning has legal implications beyond
181967 -     merely being incorrect and reflecting misunderstanding.  Since
181968 -     Gail used the word misrepresent, it is important to afford the
181969 -     usage careful scrutiny given to quoted text.
181970 -
181971 - Line 210707 edit says the text for several lines is not correct and
181972 - has comments in the margin which are unreadable.  The text reported
181973 - to be in error is as follows:
181974 -
181975 -         The project has been underway for approximately 2 years.  Gail
181976 -         was asked what is incorrect?  She could not recall nor cite
181977 -         any specific errors in the notes.  No one else recalled
181978 -         specific errors in the notes.
181979 -     ..
181980 -     Cannot think of any way to change this that more clearly
181981 -     conveys COE's understandings.  This meaning comports with
181982 -     understanding of other COE attendees.  The Port offers no
181983 -     indication of what Gail might have cited as a specific instance of
181984 -     error in the notes, nor is there an explanation of anything anyone
181985 -     else said at the meeting which identified an error of a material
181986 -     understanding set out in the notes.
181987 -
181988 - Line 211112 cannot read most of this edit, and not enough to draw the
181989 - intent.  There is an arrow leading to the following sentence:
181990 -
181991 -          Typically notes are available for review on Thursday and
181992 -          issued to the Contractor on Friday.  This past week
181993 -
181994 -     ...the arrow has some unreadable stuff, then says "It is also
181995 -     incorrect."
181996 -     ..
181997 -     Not sure what to do with this edit.  Typically, notes are
181998 -     available for review on Thursday.
181999 -
182000 - Line 211117 there are a number of edits that indicate things were not
182001 - discussed and alternatively request specifics on where things are
182002 - entered in the record.
182003 -
182004 -     The Port's interest in original sources reflects COE's purpose in
182005 -     using Communication Metrics.  The demonstration on Communication
182006 -     Metrics will answer these questions by showing how the citations
182007 -     and the references are used to accomplish the Port's goal, as
182008 -     stated by Ralph Gin at the meeting on 961101, ref SDS 3 line 147.
182009 -
182010 - Line 211151 edit requests changing "Requests Stenographic..." to
182011 - "Suggests Stenographic..."
182012 -     ..
182013 -     This change was made, ref SDS 9 line 258.
182014 -
182015 -     Cannot make out the meaning of the rest of the notes.  There is
182016 -     something about "The issue was not that these ____ are so
182017 -     lengthy..."
182018 -
182019 - Line 211162 there is a question of why there is a note of an important
182020 - point that was not discussed.  The writing indicates strong feelings
182021 - about the conduct of business meetings in characterizing the COE
182022 - notes as "MINUTES."
182023 -
182024 -     This is a prevelant concern of people who have not worked with
182025 -     Communication Metrics, as discussed above.
182026 -
182027 -
182028 -
1821 -
1822 -
1823 - 1822 received call from Tom White
1824 -   ..
182401 - He says he needs the notes now to get them out for the meeting
182402 - tomorrow.
182403 -
182404 - Upon discussion, Tom said I can have another 45 minutes or so which is
182405 - what I think is needed to review and apply the rest of the Port's
182406 - edits.
182407 -
182408 - Tom will call me this evening from his home with his home email
182409 - address.  He wants me to send the notes to him and he will fax them to
182410 - Dutra this evening.  He wants me to send the notes to the main people
182411 - who will be attending the meeting tomorrow.
182412 -
182413 -
182414 -
182415 -
1825 -
1826 -
1827 - 1833 continue Port's edits
1828 -   ..
182801 - Line 211172 there is an edit on stenographic records and why COE
182802 - is using Communication Metrics, that attributes the text to commercial
182803 - interests of Rod, on the grounds that it does not reflect dialog at
182804 - the meeting and so is not "minutes."
182805 -
182806 -      This text provides context which COE is relying on in managing
182807 -      the project, as supported by a citation to discussions at prior
182808 -      meetings.  The citation methodology has not yet been demonstrated
182809 -      to the Port, per ref SDS 7 line 70.
182810 -
182811 - Line 211200 the edit describes the request for summaries in place of
182812 - the full record, as a suggestion for something (???) without (???)
182813 - analysis.
182814 -
182815 - Line 211213 the edit changes "complained" to "stated" which gives the
182816 - text greater weight than may be warranted.  I have no strong
182817 - recollection of a specific statement about participating in Project
182818 - Management.  My sense is there was a strong complaint which from COE's
182819 - perspective was aimed at seeking participation in Contract
182820 - Administration.  This exercise of considering edits is an example of
182821 - accomplishing a key objective of Communication Metrics in drawing out
182822 - from the parties areas where better definition and clarification of
182823 - roles might be helpful.
182824 -            ..
182825 -            I made this change.
182826 -
182827 -    Port's edit changes "contract management" to "project management,"
182828 -    and this is a material change since it reflects deeply held
182829 -    differences, cited in meetings at COE today about roles and
182830 -    responsibilities.  COE feels Contract Administration is being
182831 -    impacted, the Port views the participation it seeks as Project
182832 -    Management.  Since this text relates the Port's perspective it
182833 -    should reflect the Port's terminology.
182834 -
182835 -            I made this change.
182836 -
182837 -    The same issue arises on changing "construction management" which
182838 -    the edit says something about "PCA."
182839 -
182840 -            Since it is unclear what edit is intended, I removed the
182841 -            phrase "construction management," and permit the parties to
182842 -            sort out over time the implications of the text that is not
182843 -            changed.
182844 - ..
182845 - Line 220413 edit wants to omit the word "seemed" on the grounds
182846 - it does not belong in "minutes."
182847 -
182848 -    Did not make this change because the text indicates COE's level of
182849 -    understanding and gives notice to the Contractor to clarify the
182850 -    matter if warranted.
182851 -
182852 -    The edit does not offer a stronger alternative description of what
182853 -    was conveyed, which presumably is within the knowledge of the Port,
182854 -    since this text relates their comments at the meeting.  A good use
182855 -    of the Port's time would be to clarify what they intend to convey
182856 -    that is different from what they read in the draft of the notes.
182857 -
182858 - Line 360943 edit shows Jim Galli's name is mispelled.
182859 -
182860 -    Made global change.
182861 - ..
182862 - Line 360960 edits ask "Why do we need minutes like these?"
182863 -
182864 -    This reflects the distinction between "minutes" and Communication
182865 -    Metrics.  This page has edit comments expressing disappointment
182866 -    about uncertainty reflected in the text with respect to details.
182867 -    There is no correction or clarification offered to remove such
182868 -    uncertainty, which is one of the goals of review.
182869 -
182870 -
182871 -
1829 -
1830 -
1831 - 1911 completed edits
1832 -
183201 - Prepared ref DIT 1 line 30 submitting the notes as edited to reflect
183202 - input from COE and Port of Oakland review.
183203 - ..
183204 - Will initially send to COE and Port staff, per Tom White's
183205 - direction, they when he calls, I will send them to him for faxing to
183206 - the Contractor.
183207 -
183208 -      [The next morning the whole thing bounced back because COE and
183209 -      Port mail boxes were said to be full with over 10,000 messages,
183210 -      ref SDS 15 line 49.]
183211 -
183212 -
183213 -