Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 08-17-95 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE OF 3 BOARD MEETING OF August 1 7, 1 995 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR a. SUBJECT DATE ACCEPT THE CONTRACT WORK FOR THE KNOX DRIVE SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT (D.P. 4602) AND AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION August 11, 1995 TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT CONTRACT WORK SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.IDIV. Charles A. Canepa, Assistant Engineer Engineering Department/Infrastructure Division ISSUE: Construction has been completed on the Knox Drive Sewer Replacement Project (D.P. 4602) and the work is now ready for acceptance. BACKGROUND: The Knox Drive Sewer Replacement Project replaced a temporary sewer near Knox Drive, which was installed as a result of storm damage, by constructing a new sewer from Silverwood Drive to Revere Road in Lafayette. The project included the installation of approximately 330 feet of 8-inch pipe by directional drilling, construction of three manholes, rerouting four existing sewer laterals, removal of an existing manhole and a temporary sewer, and the abandonment of an existing rodding inlet and approximately 80 feet of existing 8-inch pipe. The location of the project is shown on Attachment 1. Additional information on the project is given on Page CS-68 of the 1995-96 Capital Improvement Budget. On March 16, 1995, the Board authorized the award of a contract to Underground Construction Company, Inc. to perform the work as a demonstration project to evaluate the installation of sewer pipelines using a directional drilling method. Notice to Proceed was issued on April 24, 1995. The contract completion date was July 24, 1995. The contract work was substantially completed on July 27, 1995, and the new sewer was under full operation as of that date. The remaining work consists of punch list items which do not affect the project acceptance. Certain problems arose during the progress of the work. The Contractor was unable to install the new 8-inch pipe for the full distance required under the Contract in the initial stages of the work. The cable which was used to pull the new pipe through the drilled hole became detached from the pipe. The Contractor contends that a hard material in the existing ground caused the detachment of the pulling cable from the front of the pipe. The Contractor theorized that the pipe hit this material which held the pipe in place; and, eventually, the force on the pulling cable separated the cable from the pipe. The Contractor contends that the hard material is a differing site condition; and, therefore, all costs to rectify the problem are the District's. The Contractor, to date, has not provided adequate documentation substantiating the existence of a differing site condition. District staff and the Contractor are negotiating a claim based on the alleged differing site condition. The claim is approximately $60,000. The Contractor was able to satisfactorily complete the installation of the pipeline. RE~EWEDANDRECOMMENDEDFORBOARDAcnON 11111 P{fj] INITIATING DEPT./DIV. CAC HT JSM RAB ACCEPT THE CONTRACT WORK FOR THE KNOX DRIVE SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT (D.P. 4602) AND AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION SUBJECT PAGE DATE 2 bF 3 August 11, 1 995 This project was undertaken to evaluate the directional drilling method for pipeline installations. The results from the project are mixed. Directional drilling appears to be appropriate for locations with difficult access constraints such as this project. However, there appear to be problems with the equipment which need to be resolved before directional drilling is adopted as an acceptable method for sewer installations. This method will continue to be evaluated and may be utilized on future projects. The total authorized budget for the project, including the cost of engineering design, District forces, etc., is $227,000. As mentioned above, a claim concerning an alleged differing site condition is being negotiated. Although the claim is unresolved, it is appropriate to accept the contract work at this time since said work has been substantially completed. A detailed accounting of the project cost will be provided to the Board at the time of project closeout. RECOMMENDATION: Accept the contract work performed by Underground Construction Company, Inc. for construction of the Knox Drive Sewer Replacement Project (D.P. 4602) and authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion. 13028-7/91 Overhill Rd ) / \\0,~ ,,-vS',\.\ ~ r- ';f./~ ' ~ ' ,,:.' I '/ ~~ !~i ,6/ ~.~\.es 0"-- ~J V . I I D\p..BlO \ Sf '- VD PROJECT AREA ORINDA I New Sewer \0(0 R(f LAFAYETTE l ~ N ~ 01/.<> ~r!-; . /// -- -- o 4 8 -- '--- -- FEET -- '-- BLVD .... Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ATTACHMENT KNOX DRIVE SEWER REPLACEMENT DP 4602 1 Cenlral Contra Costa Sanita, y District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE , OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 17, 1995 NO. 3. DATE CONSENT CALENDAR August 4, 1 995 b. SUBJECT AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC NOTICE TO INDICATE AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF THE DISTRICT'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE PUBLIC NOTICE SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Debbie Ratcliff, Controller Administrative/Finance and Accounting ISSUE: The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District is required to establish its appropriations limit in accordance with Article XIII B of the California Constitution. BACKGROUND: Proposition 4 was approved on November 6, 1979, and was incorporated in the California Constitution as Article XIII B. Article XIII B, as implemented by Senate Bill 1352, limits appropriations of state and local governments to the appropriations of the 1978-1979 base year adjusted in each subsequent year for changes in the Consumer Price Index or California per capita personal income, whichever is lower, and the change in population. SB 1352 requires government agencies to establish their appropriations limit by resolution each year at a regularly scheduled meeting. Notice to the public of the availability of documentation in support of the appropriations limit must be given fifteen days prior to adoption. The appropriations limit is open to challenge within 45 days of the effective date of the resolution. The following key considerations have been used in applying the provisions of Article XIII B: . The District accounts for its activities in four separate funds: Running Expense Fund (General Fund); Sewer Construction Fund (Capital Fund); Self-Insurance Fund; and Debt Service Fund. The Running Expense Fund and Self-Insurance Fund are considered to be enterprise funds and are not subject to limitation under Proposition 4. Enterprise funds are generally used to account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises where it is intended that costs of providing goods or services to the public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges. Bond proceeds used for debt service are not subject to the appropriations limit. The District's appropriations limit is required to be established for the Sewer Construction Fund. The appropriations limit is determined for yearly appropriations into the Sewer Construction Fund. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION DR PM INITIATING DEPT./DIV. SUBJECT ::lllliiill,imfJl,I:U:EII AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC NOTICE TO INDICATE AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF THE DISTRICT'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT PAGE DATE 2 OF 4 August 4, 1995 . Article XIII B defines "proceeds of taxes" as including, but not restricted to, all tax revenues, income from investment of tax proceeds, and the proceeds of regulatory licenses, user charges and fees to the extent that such proceeds exceed the reasonable cost of providing the regulation, product or service. "Proceeds of taxes" also include state subventions, other than those for mandated programs for which the state reimburses the local agency. SB 1352 further defines state subventions to include only money received by a local agency from the state, the use of which is unrestricted by the statute providing the subvention. Grant funds received from the state for capital projects are restricted to specific uses and are, therefore, not" proceeds of taxes." . Fund balances carried over into fiscal year 1980-1981 are generally subject to limitation unless they were appropriated into a reserve account prior to July 1, 1980; however, as the Sewer Construction Fund is a single purpose fund, the fund balance at June 30, 1981 has been construed as having been appropriated into reserves and, therefore, not subject to limitation. Article XIII B was amended in 1990 by Proposition 111, which resulted in the following changes: . Formerly, the appropriations limit was increased annually by a factor comprised of the change in population combined with either the change in California per capita personal income or the Consumer Price Index, whichever is lower. As amended, the Consumer Price Index is replaced by the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction. The Board is to select between the per capita personal income or the change In the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction by a recorded vote. The 1990-1991 appropriations limit shall be the 1986- 1987 appropriations limit adjusted from that year forward by the new growth factors stated in the proposition. The change in the local assessment roll, which is intended to be obtainable from the County Assessor was not available for use for the 1990-1991 fiscal year and, therefore, the per capita personal income factor was used. The County Assessor has since provided the change in the local assessment roll for the 1991-1992 through the 1994-1995 fiscal years, but advised that the change in assessment roll for the prior fiscal years 1987-1988 through 1990-1991 will not be available. The change in the local assessment roll for the 1995-1996 fiscal year has been reported by the County Assessor to be 34.3 percent. The California per capita personal income percentage change is 4.72. The change in the local assessment roll is being used in the calculation of the 1995-1996 appropriations limit, as shown on Attachment I. . Revenues received in a fiscal year and the fiscal year immediately following it in excess of the appropriations limit during that fiscal year and the fiscal year immediately following it, shall be returned by a revision of tax rates or fee schedules within the next two subsequent fiscal years. 13028-7/91 SUBJECT POSITION PAPER AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC NOTICE TO INDICATE AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF THE DISTRICT'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT PAGE DATE 3 OF 4 August 4, 1995 . In the event an emergency is declared by the Board, the appropriations limit may be exceeded provided that the appropriations limits in the following three years are reduced accordingly to prevent an aggregate increase in appropriations resulting from the emergency. . The annual calculation of the appropriations limit for each entity of local government shall be reviewed as part of an annual financial audit. The appropriations limit for 1994-1995 will be reviewed by the District's independent auditors, Maze and Associates, during the regularly scheduled annual audit. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize a public notice advising that documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit shall be available fifteen days prior to the Board Meeting to be held on September 7, 1995, at which the appropriations limit for the Sewer Construction Fund for the fiscal year 1995-1996 will be established. 1302B-7/9fo\U;:)/ t"'os J-'a per N :lWrop4. J-'J-' CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT Sewer Construction Fund (Capital Fund) Appropriations Limit 1979-1980 Appropriations Subject to Limitation $5.285.789 $6.062,800 $6,746,078 $7,266,875 $7,548,830 $8.010.818 $8.416.165 $8,823.507 $9.303,506 $9,964.055 1980-1981 Appropriations Limit 1981-1982 Appropriations Limit 1982-1983 Appropriations Limit 1983-1984 Appropriations Limit 1984-1985 Appropriations Limit 1985-1986 Appropriations Limit 1986-1987 Appropriations Limit 1987-1988 Appropriations Limit 1988-1989 Appropriations Limit 1989-1990 Appropriations Limit $10.768.154 $11.575.765 ~ 13.574.899 $14.559.079 $16.366.166 $19.225.777 1990-1991 Appropriations Limit 1991-1992 Appropriations Limit 1992-1993 Appropriations Limit 1993-1994 Appropriations Limit 1994-1995 Appropriations Limit 1995-1996 Appropriations Limit: Nonresidential New Construction Change in Assessment Roll Population Change Compound Effect: 1 .3430 1.0179 1.3430 x 1.0179 = 1.3670397 $19,225,777 x 1.3670397 = $26.282.400 ADS/PosPaper #2/Prop4.PP Attachment I Page 4 of 4 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 5 BOARD MEETING OF August 1 7, 1 995 NO. 4. HEARINGS a. SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 132, AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO); AUTHORIZE THE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH TWO PROPERTY OWNERS; AND CONSIDER ANNEXATION DATE August 11, 1 995 TYPE OF ACTION HOLD PUBLIC HEARING/ AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT / CONSIDER ANNEXATION SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Infrastructure Division ISSUE: LAFCO has amended the boundaries of District Annexation 132. The District must hold a public hearing and consider any testimony before acting on the proposed amended annexation. Additionally, Board of Directors' authorization is required for agreements with property owners regarding conditions for future sewer service. BACKGROUND: By resolution of application, a one-parcel annexation (consisting of ten separate contiguous properties) was sent by the District to LAFCO as required to initiate the formal annexation process. This potential annexation is the first to be processed under the Town of Danville's Lawrence/Leema Road Specific Plan. LAFCO amended the boundaries of the proposed annexation by adding three properties during its approval process. LAFCO reports that this amendment was made to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary and to include all parcels in proposed Subdivision 7876. The original District-proposed annexation and the added property to the west can be served from the District's existing gravity sewers in Camino Tassajara. Service to the two eastern added properties, where 12 homes are planned, can not be provided without a pumping station. The Town's conditions of approval for the subdivision effectively preclude building on the two eastern added properties until a pumping station has been constructed. However, prior to approving the annexation of the eastern added properties, agreements between the District and the owners of those properties are advised to clarify the District's conditions for providing future sewer service to the properties. Staff has negotiated agreements with the owners of the two eastern added properties regarding requirements for potential future sewer service. The agreements essentially provide that the District will not provide sanitary sewer service to the two eastern added properties until and unless: . the owners have submitted a satisfactory sewer facilities design document for the entire Lawrence/Leerna Road area, and RE~EWEDANDRECOMMENDEDFORBOARDAcnON JSM RAB ,()JY 1302A-7/91 DH t1 fJff3 INITIATING DEPT./DIV. SUBJECHOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 132, AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO); AUTHORIZE THE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH TWO PROPERTY OWNERS; AND CONSIDER ANNEXATION PAGE DATE 2 OF 5 August 2, 1995 . the District has approved the design of a properly sized pumping station and sewage collection system, and . the pumping station and sewage collection system have been constructed and accepted by the District, and . the District has approved a method for the payment of pumping station operations and maintenance costs by the developers and/or the tributary property owners. The exhibits mentioned in this position paper are included in a separately bound document. Amended District Annexation 132 is shown on the attached map. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) REQUIREMENTS: A Mitigated Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexation was prepared by the Town of Danville, as lead agency, and was reviewed and considered by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. In accordance with District CEOA Guidelines Section 7.17 (f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as discussed in the Negative Declaration, which is presented in Exhibit A, before approving the annexation. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS District Annexation 132, as submitted to LAFCO, was a single, inhabited annexation (12 or more registered voters). The addition of the three properties by LAFCO requires a public hearing. Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notified of the public hearing as required by law. Factors to be considered by the Board in deciding to approve or disapprove the proposed annexation are listed in Exhibit B. Following its review, the Board, not more than 30 days after the conclusion of the public hearing, shall adopt a resolution reflecting the appropriate action taken. Options that the Board may consider are: 1 . certifying that the Board has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration and concurs with the adoption of the Negative Declaration by LAFCO, 1302B-7/91 SUBJEffoLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 132, AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO); AUTHORIZE THE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH TWO PROPERTY OWNERS; AND CONSIDER ANNEXATION PAGE 3 OF DATE 5 August 2, 1995 2. ordering the annexation subject to confirmation by election by the registered voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by either of the following: a. At least 25 percent but less than 50 percent of the registered voters residing within the affected territory, or b. At least 25 percent of the number of owners of land who also own at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. If it is determined that an election is required, the Board may terminate the proceedings and avoid the cost of an election (special election mailing by County Election Department, approximate cost is $200). 3. ordering the annexation without an election if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory, 4. disapproving the annexation if the Board finds the annexation is improper based upon any of the factors set forth in Exhibit B, 5. . disapproving and abandoning the proposed annexation if the Board finds that written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the public hearing representing 50 percent or more of the voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed. Annexation 132 now includes 13 properties. Petitions for annexation were filed by owners of 10 of these 13 properties. Three properties were added by LAFCO. Because the potential for protests to be filed by the ten property owners who petitioned for annexation is small, Options Nos. 2 and 5 above are unlikely to be appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: After the conclusion of the public hearing on the annexation: 1. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute the agreements regarding potential future sewer service with the owners of the two eastern parcels added by LAFCO. 13026-7/91 SUBJE~OLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 132, AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO); AUTHORIZE THE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH TWO PROPERTY OWNERS; AND CONSIDER ANNEXATION PAGE 4 OF DATE 5 August 2, 1995 2. Adopt a Resolution: A. certifying that the Board has reviewed the Negative Declaration; and B. ordering the filing of an appropriate Notice of Determination; and C. taking one of the following actions: (1 ) ordering the annexations if no written protests are filed. (2) ordering the annexation without an election if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. (3) disapproving the proposed annexation if the Board determines that the annexation is not warranted. The Board may elect to hold over consideration of the annexation for up to 30 days. 1302B-7/91 Page 5 of 5 ~.-.; '.v~,f .t:.:/ ' f "~ ~~ /~~~~ c,~ ~~~~~~-"'\-"'<e o1L... ~ _!.... !!,~,~ It'L r(" ~J. i:~- ~~~ \'L "~ ~ tt ,\-::'_~\ % '; \~ '~. -/ oS-.".~ \ ~ '1- ;.i .' i..,. ~c ~~ ,1$ ~c; ".... ;~ ~ .'. ~,~ ~. i~ . t'e.. \ , I , . '~-q~/( I ",/z. ~~ '" . ~~ J~ .p~/ ~,...... -.L,~ -r ("'" E.-.GL.E J V\.v' ( 'T I I I I ~,~ " --1 ~ Z ~ ~ or..~<c :.;i~~Ja~Htr#~~~U!t~!!1!2!$?;; CAMINO TASSAJARA A . A c A c A Central Contra Costa Sanitary District . DISTRICT ANNEXATION 132 2523-1/87 ~ Central Contra Costa Sanitary District , BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Au ust 17 1995 PAGE 1 OF 1 NO. 7. ADMINISTRATIVE a. SUBJECT DATE AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO ALLOCATE $67,000 FROM THE GENERAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT TO COMPLETE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) AND AN ALTERNATE CENTER TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.IDIV. Bonnie Allen, Risk Mana er Administrative/Risk Mana ement & Safet ISSUE: The Board of Directors must authorize allocation of funds in amounts greater than $25,000 from the Capital Improvement Budget Contingency Programs. BACKGROUND: Both Cal-OSHA and Federal standards require the District to establish and maintain an emergency planning function. A recent state law requires compliance with the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). The District must establish plans, procedures and facilities for disaster response management within SEMS guidelines. Included in the 1994-1995 Capital Improvement Budget, the Board approved District Project No. 8160 to design and equip an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for a total project cost of $80,000. Planning and preliminary design of the facilities at costs of $13,000, were completed during fiscal year 1994-1995. Through an Engineering review, two sites were selected for the District Emergency Operations Center (EOC). It was recommended that the District Board Room be used as the EOC and the Training room at Walnut Creek be the alternate Center. These facilities were selected because of their proximity to District operations, accessibility to the public and the structural integrity of the buildings. Physical changes to the Board room and the training room will be limited to additional outlets for power sources and equipment connections. Emergency equipment and supplies will be stored and be brought into the Center during the event of a disaster. The rooms will remain unchanged for their normal use functions. Funding for the project was inadvertently omitted from the current Capital budget. The requested funds of $67,000 will complete the detailed design, construction and equipment purchases for the two Emergency Operations Centers. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the GM-CE to allocate $67,000 from the General Improvement Program Contingency Account to complete the Emergency Operations Centers originally included in the 1994-1995 Capital Improvement Budget. ~ REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1302A-7/91 BA PM Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 4 n POSI BOARD MEETING OF August 17, 1995 NO. 8. ENGINEERING a. SUBJECT DATE August 14, 1995 ESTABLISH SEPTEMBER 7, 1995, AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED ABANDONMENT OF THE BOLLINGER CANYON lEACH FIELD TYPE OF ACTION ESTABLISH HEARING DATE SUBMITTED BY James R. Coe, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering/Planning ISSUE: A date for a public hearing to receive comments regarding the proposed abandonment of the District's Bollinger Canyon leach Field should be established. BACKGROUND: At the Board meeting of June 1, 1995, the Bollinger Canyon leach Field (leach Field) and service to the Bollinger Canyon area was discussed. Subsequent to further study, staff has now concluded that the Bollinger Canyon leach Field has reached the end of its useful life after 28 years of service. More information on the background and current status is included in the Bollinger Canyon leach Field Staff Report (Attachment 1). All of the property owners with connections to the leach Field have been notified of the proposed abandonment. The East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD), which operates a staging area for the Little Hills Ranch Regional Recreation Area and the las Trampas Regional Wilderness near the leach Field, has also been notified of the proposed abandonment, although the EBRPD facilities are not connected. It is appropriate to receive comments in a formal public hearing prior to consideration of the staff recommendation for abandoning the leach Field. RECOMMENDATION: Establish September 7,1995, as the date for a public hearing to receive comments on abandoning the Bollinger Canyon leach Field. RE~EWEDANDRECOMMENDEDFORBOARDAcnON RAB P14fJ ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 of 4 BOLLINGER CANYON LEACH FIELD STAFF REPORT AUGUST 1995 ISSUE The Bollinger Canyon Leach Field (Leach Field) has reached the end of its useful life after 28 years of service. Properties that have had full use of the Leach Field can be disconnected. The potential for providing alternative service for a private residence that was connected in 1987 needs to be addressed. BACKGROUND . The Leach Field was established in 1967 under Local Improvement District (LID) 48 to dispose effluent discharged from privately owned septic tanks. The Leach Field has been used since that time resulting in the useful life of the facility nearing its end. . The Regional Water Quality Control Board has reduced the allowable capacity of the Leach Field in 1992 from 10,590 gallons per day (gpd) to 900 gpd due to the loss of soil permeability that resulted from extended use of the Leach Field. . California Division of Forestry (CDF) has two properties served by the Leach Field since 1967 that are now minimally utilized. (Refer to Figure A 1) . One private residence was connected to the Leach Field in January 1987. This property is currently owned by Mr. Saber Zell and is the only private residence septic tank connected to the Leach Field. Although this property was included in the original LID 48, it has only used the Leach Field for eight years. . Tracor disconnected in 1990 to avoid concerns about possible ground water contamination liabilities. Tracor routinely trucks their septic tank effluent offsite to an approved dumping location. . Continued use of the Leach Field may create substantial risks of liability claims against the District. These risks could involve possible allegations of ground water and surface water contamination should the Leach Field fail. . A sewer project replacing the Leach Field could cost up to $2.5 million. . The District currently spends $7,000 each year monitoring the Leach Field. CURRENT STATUS The normal life expectancy of a leach field, depending on flows and soil conditions, can be expected to range from 12 to 25 years. Technically, it can be concluded that the Leach Field has outlived its normal useful life and accordingly the benefit intended to be provided to the properties Page 3 of 4 within the LID has been fully provided. The District accordingly may take the facility out of service without incurring any liability for providing new service to the LID participants. The owner of the sole residence connected to the leach Field contends to the contrary. Without conceding the merit of any such contention, District staff presents the following discussion to outline possible options which may be tendered as offers to compromise this dispute. Zell Property Mr. Saber Zell lives in the five-bedroom house at 145 Paulanella Place off Bollinger Canyon Road with his family. Mr. Zell bought the home and 3.73 acres in late 1992 from Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller connected to the leach Field in January 1987 after paying the District $790 in connection fees and constructing a 720 lineal feet, 4-inch sewer lateral (at an estimated cost of $12,000) and septic tank. The District requested that Mr. Miller be permitted to connect to the leach Field in a letter to the RWQCB dated May 1, 1986. The RWQCB granted approval provided that the Miller septic tank would be included in the District's self-monitoring program. Mr. Zell paid $188 in Sewer Service Charge fees in FY 1994-95. Mr. Zell has been notified that the leach Field will be terminated in the near future. Mr. Zell has tentatively agreed to the concept of disconnecting from the leach Field and constructing a private leach field on his property. Based on the results of a recent soil profile analysis, Mr. ZeU's property would be adequate for a leach field to be constructed according to County Health Department standards. ALTERNATIVES FOR FUTURE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL The following alternatives for continued wastewater disposal are available to the property owners: . Apply to the Contra Costa County Health Services Department for a permit to construct a private leach field system on their own property. . Apply to this District for a private permit to routinely pump, haul, and discharge the septic tank effluent to a specified location. . Participate with other parcel owners in the formation of a new LID that would finance, design, and construct a sewer system extending to Crow Canyon Road. RECOMMENDATIONS 1 . Abandon the leach Field and disconnect the CDF and Zell properties beginning 120 days after the September 7, 1995, public hearing with the exception that a two-year extension would be granted in the event that the users apply to form a new LID to extend the sewer system to Crow Canyon Road. 2. Continue to negotiate a compromise settlement that provides alternative sewage disposal for the Zell property based on a depreciated value of ZeU's facilities constructed in 1987. ~L Page 4 of 4 , _.t MOTtS: L lOr~.l ~N01H1 \B161H = %M.' 1_ PflLCOlAl\OlJ N2ff\: ~CDC)91 ~_ ~-nOR 6.Vf11 W H1-1t TO t1lU M1C\1JOOUB>; lUJ.f PUlCMaJ tJ:( HilL o ~Y"Ou.~~~ MOt\,*()\"'"~'"'.9 W~\\ '- tF~* PE~COLA.-rIOU "REA. .-~< ~ \ FIGURE A 1 CCCSO BOLLINGER CANYON COLLECf{ON AND LEACHLlNE SYSTEM Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5(1]9 Imhoff I'lace.l\Iartinez. California 94553-4392 (5JO) 22i)-l)5(10 · F"L\: (5JO) b76-7:21] September 26, 1995 CERTIFIED MAIL ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager Chief Engineer KENTON L. ALM Counsel for the District (510) 938-1430 Mr. Boyd Olney Acme Fill Corporation P. O. Box 1108 Martinez, CA 94553 JOYCE E. MURPHY Secretary of the District Dear Mr. Olney: WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT CONTRACT EXTENSION This letter serves as the District's extension of the Wastewater Discharge Permit Contract with Acme Fill Corporation for the Leachate Treatment System (L TS). Pursuant to District Board action on August 17, 1995, the expiration date of the current permit contract is extended to October 31, 1995. The terms and conditions of the original permit contract and the extension letter dated May 31, 1995, will remain in effect with the additional requirements specified in this letter and any modifications that are agreed to in writing by both Acme and the District. TECHNICAL ISSUES The District considers this permit contract extension period to be critical for gathering appropriate data on the L TS operation. Based on the historical problems with the L TS operation, District staff are reluctantly proceeding with this extension. Subsequent extensions will require demonstrated reliability with the L TS performance and operator commitment to compliance with the permit contract conditions. The District will be reviewing the existing monitoring program to ensure appropriate parameters are being tested at the necessary frequency. The District intends to set standards for the Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) treatment system at the end of this extension period. Continued monitoring under the existing contract conditions and additional monitoring will be required in order to obtain adequate data to set PAC standards. The District will evaluate the L TS monitoring program at the end of the extension period and will consider modifications as performance of the L TS is documented. . The following modifications to the permit contract monitoring program are effective during the extension period: Continue submitting monthly PAC demonstration reports on or before September 15 and October 15; PED-SC/C :Source/Timl Acmeext.L @ Recycled Paper HOB Mr. Boyd Olney Page 2 September 26, 1995 Include weekly sampling and analysis for Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) on the influent and effluent; Include weekly UV Transmittance sampling and analysis on the effluent; Reduce frequency of reading leachate extraction well flow totalizers from daily to weekly provided that this alternative frequency does not contradict the requirements of other agencies (e.g. RWQCB); Modify the flow limitations of the discharge to 25 gpm average monthly flow with a 35 gpm instantaneous peak flow. LEGAL, REGULATORY, AND FINANCIAL ISSUES Notwithstanding that Acme has made some progress to resolve a number of the treatment plant operational issues, little, is any, effort or progress is apparent with resolving the litigation, regulatory risk, and financial assurance issues facing the District as a result of receipt of Acme leachate. The District has consistently alerted Acme that continued and/or long-term acceptance of leachate by the District is dependent upon satisfying the District's requirements regarding the future regulatory and financial risks, as well as providing for a satisfactory resolution of the CERCLA litigation which Acme is pursuing against the District. Acme has not to date even approached the District with any serious proposals to address these non-operational issues. As a result of Acme's failure to timely address these issues, the District may not be able to accept Acme leachate after this extension expires. Only prompt, dramatic, and substantive action by Acme to adequately address these non-operational issues will allow for further extensions of the current permission to discharge leachate to District facilities. Please call Bart Brandenburg at (510) 229-7361 if you have any questions about this extension. TP/tp/vh cc: Samuel Bandrapalli, RWQCB B. Brandenburg J. Kelly Michael Brown, BVA bee: P. Morsen J. Murphy PED-SC/C :Source/Timl Acmeext.L Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 BOARD MEETING OF August 17, 1995 NO. SUBJECT 8. ENGI EERING b. DATE August 14, 1 995 AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE A TWO-MONTH EXTENSION TO A WASTE- WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT CONTRACT WITH ACME FILL CORPORATION TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE CONTRACT EXECUTION SUBMITTED BY Lynne B. Putnam, Senior Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering/Planning ISSUE: The Board is requested to authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a two- month extension to the wastewater discharge permit with Acme Fill Corporation. BACKGROUND: Since May 1993, Acme Fill Corporation has been discharging up to 25 gallons per minute (gpm) of treated leachate to the District under two one-year permit contracts. The most recent permit contract was authorized in June 1994 and expired May 31, 1995. The Board authorized a three-month extension to the contract which will expire on August 31, 1995. Acme Fill Corporation will soon be requesting the District to consider a long-term permit contract for the discharge of treated leachate. District staff is not able to recommend approval of such a permit contract at this time due to inconsistent operation of the current Acme leachate treatmen plant, and the need for certain protections to be granted to the District by regulatory agencies. District staff believes that an additional two-month extension to the current permit contract is a reasonable way to approach resolution of whether a long-term permit contract is feasible. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was addressed in the original position paper authorizing the General Manager-Chief Engineer to enter into a one-year permit contract with Acme Fill Corporation. A Notice of Exemption was filed pursuant to the Board approval of that position paper. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a two-month extension to the current permit contract, with modifications, with Acme Fill Corporation. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1302A-7/91 }j}~ LBP DJC RAB