The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 08-24-89 . CentrA Contra Costa Sanitar~ ..listrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 6 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF NO. I I 1. HEARINGS 1 SUBJECT CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF PLEASANT HILL BAY SHORE DISPOSAL FOR A RESETTING OF ITS COLLECTION RATES BASED ON A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN DISPOSAL FEE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 1989 DATE CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY INITIA TING DEPT.lDIV. Walter Funasaki, Finance Officer ~: The Board of Directors set a public hearing to be held on August 24, 1989 to receive publ ic comments on the request by Pl easant Hill Bay Shore Di sposal for a reconsideration of its refuse collection rates based on a significant increase in disposal fee implemented on August 1, 1989. BACKGROUND: Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal originally submitted an application for a 2.25 percent across-the-board rate increase effective July 1, 1989. The rate appl ication was subsequently revised to reflect a 16.07 percent increase. New refuse collection rates set effective July 1, 1989 at the July 20, 1989 Board Meeting resulted in a 4.10 percent increase being approved by the Board of Di rectors. The Board set the refuse collecti on rates based on reimbursement of disposal expenses at cost, and the use of a 93 percent operating ratio. Because of the significant uncertainty regarding future disposal fees, particularly upon the shutdown of the Acme landfill, the Board set the collection rates effective July 1, 1989, with the understanding that refuse collection rates may be reconsidered if disposal fees changed significantly during the July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990 period. In a letter dated July 27, 1989, Mr. Ken D. Little, representing Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal, requested a reconsideration of the July 1, 1989 collection rates set only a week prior. The request is based on the implementation by the GBF landfill <Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill) of a 26.67 percent increase in its disposal fee from $30 per ton to $38 per ton effective August 1, 1989. Notification by the GBF landfill to the refuse collector is dated July 19, 1989, one day prior to the July 20, 1989 Board Meeting at which the July 1, 1989 collection rates were set; however, the refuse collector professes not to have any knowledge of the disposal fee increase until receipt of the July 19, 1989 letter subsequent to the setting of the collection rates on July 20, 1989. The letters from the GBF landfill and Mr. Little are provided as Attachments I and II, respectively. Because the request for a reconsideration of collection rates is being submitted so soon after the setting of rates effective July 1, 1989, the Board requested a reading of the minutes to determine whether a minimum interval of time between the July 1, 1989 rate-setting and a reconsideration was intended. As recorded in the unadopted minutes of the July 20, 1989 Board Meeting, a motion was unanimously approved that a resolution "---be adopted establishing new refuse collection rates for Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal effective July 1, 1989, based on a 93 percent REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIA TING DEPT.lDIV. 4:?Ci;;..~- \ 1302A-9/85 WNF PM SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF PLEASANT HILL BAY SHORE DISPOSAL FOR A RESETTING OF ITS COLLECTION RATES BASED ON A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN DISPOSAL FEE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 1989 PAGE DATE 2 OF . 6 August 17, 1989 Operating Ratio excluding disposal fees from operating expenses for the purpose of profit calculation, .allowina mid-year reconsideration of disposal fees on a dollar .per dollar basis should they increase or decrease. approving implementation of a fulol-scale recyc"1 ing program with determination of the net incremental expense for the recycling program to be incorporated into the District's annual rate-setting schedule in future years, and directing the collector to maintain separate records of revenues and expenses for the recycl i ng program." A public hearing has been scheduled to be conducted on August 24, 1989 to consider resetting the July 1, 1989 collection rates effective August 1, 1989, based on a significant change in disposal expense. A staff analysis of the effect of the di sposaol expense increase on the percent increase in revenues requi red effective August 1, 1989 in a comparative format with the staff analysis for the July 1, 1989 rate increase is presented as Attachment III; additionally, the percent increase in revenues requi red to provide recovery of the di sposal expense increase effective August 1, 1989, if Board action on this matter were deferred until September 1989 and recovery were made during the September 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990 period, is also presented on Attachment III. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing to receive public comments on the request by Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal for a resetting of its July 1, 1989 collection rates based on a significant increase in disposal fee effective August 1, 1989. 13028-9/85 '. ATTACHMENT I LITTLE & SAPUTO ATTOIf.NEYSATLAW PETER T. SAPUTO GISeLLE A. JURKANIN KEN D. LITTLe 49 QUAIL COURT, SUITE 311 WALNUT CREEK, CA 94S96 (415) 944-5000 'ACSIItIILE (415) 944-1112 July 27, 1989 VIA FACSIMILE AND REGULAR MAIL Susan McNulty Rainey, President Board of Directors Contra Costa Central Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Rate Review Caused By Increase In Tipping Fees Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal Dear President Rainey: On behalf of Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal ("PHBD"), we regret to inform you that the midyear review has come sooner than any of us would have liked. That is to say, GBF Landfill has just increased its disposal rates. The increase in rates arrived without any warning and apparently was received just after the adoption of the new rates by the Board. The tipping fee at the GBF Landfill which was $22.50 in July, 1988 and was subsequently raised in November, 1988 to $25, and again in March, 1989 to $30, is now to be raised effective August 1, 1989, to $38 per ton. This represents a 26.6\ increase in tipping fees since the approval of the new rates. It represents an increase in tipping fees of 69\ in one year. A copy of the letter notifying PHBD of the increase is enclosed. Based on the foregoing circumstances, PHBD has no alternative but to seek to have the rates for collection and disposal adjusted to reflect the new cost. PHBD hereby applies for changes in rates based upon these circumstances. In its application, PHBD showed total tipping fees forecasted to be $142,428. Set forth below is a recalculation of forecasted tipping fees: Old Dump Fee Per Ton New Dump Fee Per Ton Percentage Increase $30 $38 26.6\ Total Dump Fees In Application Percentage Increase New Forecasted Dump Fees ($142,428 x 1.266\) $142,428 26.6\ $180,313 '. Susan McNulty Rainey, President Board of Oirectors Contra Costa Central Sanitary District July 27, 1989 Page 2 The increase in rate required should be calculated using the new forecasted dump fees of $180,313. Presumably this will simply be a percentage increase applied uniformly across all rates in accordance with the Board's latest announcement of policy. Please schedule this item on the next available Board agenda which we believe to be August 3. Please notify this firm and/or PHBD when it might expect this item to be heard. Thank you again for your cooperation and kind consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, LITTLE & SAPUTO KDL/mk enclosure cc: Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal Walter Funasaki (w/enc.) ~../ . . -' .. .. : 1 t~ ATTACHMENT 11 . Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill P.O OOX 5391 CO'~. CAlll=ORt~" 9'52:1 (415\ 682.9073 July 19, 1989 Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal P. O. Box 23164 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 ATTN: Boyd Olney, Jr. RE : Disposal Fees Deac Boyd, Due to a cignificant increase in our operational costs in the past fev months, we find i~ necessary to increase dUMping fees to ~38.00 per ton effective August I, 1989. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please <:ontact me. Sincerely, &U7~ Silvio Garaventa, Sr. President SCS:br CC: Band B Dump Concord Disposal Service Pittsburg Disposal Service Delta Debris Box Service Oakley Sanitation Service Brentwood Disposal Service 1-1 1-1 1-1 ~ C (I) E ~ 0 \0 r- IY"l ~ to 1.0 IY"l IY"l 1.0 0 0 ~ <XJ ~ <XJ r- r-4 N 10 ~ ~ .. .. .. .. . . . <C 0\ 1.0 r-I 0 ~ ~ 0 1.0 IY"l \0 N ex) IY"l r-4 r-I ~ IY"l IY"l r-4 1.0 ~ N Io"t Io"t Io"t "'C o (1)0\.... III CO I.. to 0\ (I) (l)r-4Cl.. I.. o .. 0> ..-1:r-41: to 1-1 .... III ~~ O~III~ 0.1::;,(1) III (I) 0> V) O~~~ CD ~ CDCl..CDtO I.. > a::: o r- .... ~\O~O V) .00\ 10 CD 0\ >0 N .... r-4 to .... ea .... UJ .. o 0 :::~mlY"l .... 01: CD :I: CD CD I: .... 0. :;, ~""X,.., CUJUJ to I 111......- 10 o to 0\ CD III CO ..-11100\ a. .... 0. r-I 111111 >. .... .. ..-0r-4 to CI:>o <CI-I..- :;, ,.., r-4 N r- CO ex) r- r-4 r-4 0 ex) N r-4 1.0 0 0 ex) 0 0 IY"l ~ 1.0 ex) r-4 1.0 0\ .. .. .. .. . . . IY"l N N 0\ ~ ~ 10 ~ 0 ~ r- 0 \0 10 IY"l IY"l r-I r-4 IY"l ~ r-4 1.0 1.0 Dl --. Io"t -------------------------------------- "'C 0 .... I.. CD ~ N 0 ex) 0 Cl.. ~ ~ 0 0\ ex) 1.0 N 0\ ~ .. .. .. .. ~ r- ex) N r- I: 0 IY"l r-I 0 ~ ~ r-4 10 :::E: N r-4 ---------------------------------------- ^ N ex) ~ N 0 0 1.0 0 0 0 r- N ~ ~ 0 r- r-4 IY"l 0\ 0 N ~ ex) 1.0 N r-4 . . . .. .. .. .. .. IY"l 0\ 0\ 0 N r- ex) N lB 0 ~ r-4 N 1.0 ~ 0 IY"l Dl ~ r-4 ~ ~ r-4 1.0 Io"t Io"t V ---~-------------__________._io______________ "'C III ~ 0 0 0 CD ~ CD C ex) 1.0 0 III I.. :;, :;, (I) . . . CD III "'C .... 0 I: I.. N 0\ 0 III III CD CD :;, ~ (I) s...r-4 N I: CD III s... III lir ~ "'C > :;, N <D III I: .,... 0 <D .,... "'C<D CD iri C'.) Io"t Io"t Io"t 0. I: CD :;,.,... III a::: ~ CD s... a::: CD X CD 0. lif~ I: ~.,... >CD UJ 0. X CD CD III III III :;, I: ....~ C I: X UJ a::: a::: CD 0. CD (I) tOlif H ~to to to 0> UJ U. X :;, :;, ~a::: to a::: C'.) C'.) C 0> 1110> UJ C C CD ~ ~ ~ ..... ..- I: CD C (I) CD CD s... Ul C C ~ to ..... ::J..... Ul ..- > > (I) 0 Ul to-c CD 0 ..- ..- to Ul ~ C~ ..... to CD CD Ul U. CD CD CD III.... 0> 0> X s... 0 to CD to ~ III a::: a::: to :;, 1..1.. <D~ I: I: 0 <D 0. s... >1.. 0 0 CD I: I: 0..... 1..0 ..... ..... CO 0. III (I) (1)(1) I: 0. "'C "'C s... H CD c:;' 0.(1) CI) V) 0 ..... 0. a::: 0. to III (I) CD 0 > l-llif (1)..- 0. 0 0 0 s... ..... ~ ~c CD CD a:::..- ..- (I) 0 "'C "'C U. 0 III IIIH ilia::: ~a::: 0 to f5 s... <D ~ CD~ to to 10 I: I:C'.) ..... 0 ~ CD ~1Y"l ~ 0 CD CD 0 ~ :I: III Ul Z UlO\ CD s... 0 C "'C 10 III to "'C I.. s... 0 s... ~..- CD CD I.. 0 CD ~ "'C 0 0 I: CD ~:S " ..- 10 CD ...J <C U. U. H a. ..... >- s... s... .... I: III .Q 0 0 ....0 CD 0 0 u.. U. UJ::E a::: ::E N ., Centra~ ;ontra Costa Sanitar) Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 24, 1989 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 4 SUBJECT ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM KENNETH W. McMILLAN, ET UX, AT A COST TO THE DISTRICT OF $3,300 - JOB 4652 PARCEL 2 - LAFAYETTE AREA DATE Au ust 15, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Denni sHall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: The subject easement is required for a six-inch sewer main extension which is being constructed to facilitate maintenance procedures. BACKGROUND: The easement is located along the western property line of the McMillan property. When completed, this pipeline will permit access to 1,500 feet of sewer line from Meek Place by truck-mounted cleaning equipment. This sewer is presently cleaned by hand-operated equipment. Plans call for the sewer to be installed by the "Flowmole Directional Drilling" process. This method requires excavation only at each end of the project for the boring and pipe insertion. If problems arise with this construction method, the subject easement permits the use of conventional surface trenching. Thi s project has been eval uated by staff and determi ned to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to accept the Grant of Easement from Kenneth W. McMillan, et ux, Job 4652, Parcel 2, at a cost to the District of $3,300, and authorize the Grant of Easement to be recorded. JSM RAB ROGER J. DOLAN REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. W%} PH 1302A-9/85 DH ;1w ~. 1/,' \'~'\ -..:,~-:...:::,""""~'-':~~~Z,,M.. / -J.I~,."O ~ ~ //...---...~\\\ "'----~""' ..... ' .J "..i1Q~ - ~ ~ /,// " \ P ,,'.... .......... Of': I ~ 1 ~ ) , ..., '" ' . '41 ~l~ ~ II' \.\ . II " 'l"/.;o, 8 s1/IIZ- . II ,I \ \, \ If.....,. ~ ..J. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ / \ \,\ /' .'............ ___ ,1l11l. ----.-- ----- ----- /1 \, I", /' ,-----.=-=-=------==.-----f,1;.1 - ~ ______________ __-- -', ,--..../~--;.~----~~~=-==-~====-~::..-----=~-----=-=-=.;:~--- - - -- --sr--- --_~'----_-----'~ .-- =_ --::-=N- - ~'-..-...r~~- ::-'- ~~ -.- - ...~_:: -~::=::~_.~- -: .~----~---------- -------.: ------.-,-::-:!: -::-:- -----~--.- ~ /. ~.__ -'11 ;-==-=-:iX..=----<'::---:=-:-~~\--.-..: ~ "",.;- / (I)' ~~ l'V.. irtij-/ - \ ~\"/~i"J:1'11l~' \ :,,~~._,. .~\?: -- "I: I' \ ..... 7i...~ : i I N,,')4t "'.. ~ ....9' 63 ... ~'.- _~\ I I I' \ , ~ i-.' \ . -- '-"------'i. "\,, fl' '<'... ,. -r-=:..-- '<', " I: 1\"-. ~X ' . I LlNDA72Z'STA LNG ZL - I". 't.'.. - <".:: - \,- - , /1, ' I - - -...,..... , r 'l I '" '.. _ -q -' .. .. --.. -.-.... I 'J ~.41' -G r:;?~ a.:.. I ., ft~ / " .:: -. ::;:-- -- - ~ "-,:,-:'~ \ I'" . ~,-~ f-!L ~ ""--"" 6 '" jJ' 5' :I"'1! J - - - - - - r ~ '- __~".. )4 __ .. ~ )~ " ,,~" 69 T C':.<~'~' ~~ :~"C U\ \ ~it~ ~ ',~~ i ~~ ~~.- r--' E.B."'.U,D. ~,~". . ~",''''. ~ .'~ t.~~ ,.......... ~\, . ~ " ~-!.. " le.OAC Z I ,,~- IA":" or.\ , \ ..~x,,'S. '0 ~. I ~ . ___, . ...; _~ r-- , + r' ': -.- :: :: ::~, , ':, I\':~ 'C ~~'f ~ ;.11"\'" ~ rcJ~A~ 1 ~ -l ~,:~". '. -'t;I. ~ ~- tln4- ~ '~~~ =: ~...,-: 1. K ' .--,---- I)- ,. _ AES ..-::::===:::: ~ ,><" I i f> 7! ~ __ ~\ . < ''\ . l\"1 .. JR Q 1 // 1 -!~ ... .~. ,J ~.~ ~".. ..., 1--::" ocr '0' ,,~ ....~~'t. ' .Af L>o~?'~I."'i.'l'~/ ~ ~,..~ '~o.' .0,' : " ..". ~ . --,-/. -.. \ '" v A'7 E .. \.. r J._ ~. oJ '-../" 9 ,!,'., ('- ~ \. "I #..~...., 1'" E~T'TEf5 I Q ",r' ... !. 10 " ~ -.- '._ .. '. ,. ->11' . )!'~.;oiil.\ ,'(' .A ,." ......, ~ 1 ",,1'.i:~!,r,l1l\\:'':. (51 '''-1):\' ~.. ~ :.." '. 1-,. ~,;.,- ,., ,'ir"~ rLO.fJ'-"~ . ?'/:jl V / ... ,I'. K I .~)o ..\ ..~ ,,"0,:-- ::.J" . ,"~:" )I lit tl 'wi ^ VJ 44 ....... Ijj 13 -- ------'~. . ..-' '~.-..' .. '" ~;. fa \"~.CL~\\: 50 ~401}1I. v~'Z '- t;~-' "E'~",! ~ E'~ " :~ .. ~ i, 50.. -1~,1;:~;~;; 2~~LN ~ J~~Q> i ':J'. ~~ ',' 1/-_ .:~ g~~;$'~ G.~ z; 21 i" -<50 ~.\ ~'" iUrhr~.J~'t= LAFmTU --=,,-"~1i:~~~ 001 f'~~~~ ~ s " : . ~ ,,:--' ,\ ' c II e..'''~ ~~ ,..... ~ -0 SCHOOL. DIST. ~_.' ---'Q- _~.' r' ~ ..' ~. U~ ~ \ \'.\ \~'l$ ~_~[s" 4t luctdlV1f : '..IAC J--- '.. ':~ ~"'1 0,t' W ' Q~VIO \ . ~\ . 1 2 6 ' " ~ C,9 'W~.\ ( ~~oGG'~: I cr~; -;;- /L {~~ ,- " \ f 1.11i ~ " / " ; ~ /. /1 D ~ ., ~ : :e6;.! u ~.. Ii , L~ ~,.. ,,' . , ~" ~ "', \.- C~I ~ .J:: ,"~Cl( '''' co. \ / ',.f7 ~ (~ ~ · ~~ ":' .. B(-{is~ fir I" $< 'c ft-D-----\(.: :,..-< ~:~ q .~:~ . ''''.". ~~ : ~, ~ W ~ ~ ~u r;( I .~ It Ie \ _ /.'~11... ~';~ ... ::':~jl,~; ." \-:":11 ~ ~ .\ I, NEW EASEMENT ...1 . '-$ I E . Accept Grant of Easement Job 4652 - Parcel 2 Lafayette Area . Centra. Contra Costa Sanitar~ Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 24, 1989 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 5 SUBJECT ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM FAYE SPICKELMIRE AT A COST TO THE DISTRICT OF $1,700- JOB 4652 PARCEL 1 - WALNUT CREEK AREA DATE August 15, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENT SUBMI)~~Dn~'S Hall Associate Engineer INITIApNG PEPT.lDLV. 0 tm t/ tng1neerlng epar en Construction Division ISSUE: The subject easement is required for a six-inch sewer main extension which is being constructed to facilitate maintenance procedures. BACKGROUND: The easement is located along the eastern property line of the Spickelmire property. When completed, this pipeline will permit access to 250 feet of sewer line from Kendall Road by truck-mounted cleaning equipment. This sewer is presently cleaned using hand-operated equipment. Plans call for the sewer to be installed by the "Flowmole Directional Drilling" process. This method requires excavation only at each end of the project for the boring and pipe insertion. If problems arise with this construction method, the subject easement permits the use of conventional surface trenching. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Presi dent of the District Board of Di rectors and the Secretary of the District to accept the Grant of Easement from Faye Spickelmire, Job 4652, Parcell, at a cost to the District of $1,700, and authorize the Grant of Easement to be recorded. INITIATING DEPT./DIV. W~ :D.H. jtJfJ ~ ROGER J. DOLAN REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB i i ::: : ~ C::) D +-~ -!-~ I I ~ -Cr.(;::;,SSZ) - -G- NEW SEWER PIPE 2~4 '" Accept Grant of Easement Job 4652 - Parcel 1 Walnut Creek Area . Centra. ~ontra Costa Sanitar~ .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 24, 1989 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 6 SUBJECT ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM DOUGLAS K. IVEY, ET UX, AT A COST TO THE DISTRICT OF $5,000 - JOB 4293 PARCEL 2 - ORINDA AREA DATE August 15, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENT SUBMlb~8nBi\ Hall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT/DIV Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: The subject easement is required for a six-inch sewer main relocation which is being constructed as part of a storm damage repair project. BACKGROUND: The existing six-inch sewer is located along a creek bank which was eroded by storm water during February, 1986. Approximately 40 feet of the existing sewer was displaced and a temporary sewer was installed. Alternative repai r projects were eval uated and a best apparent al ternative al ignment was chosen in September, 1987. This al ignment is away from the creek, further into the property owned by Mr. & Mrs. Dougl as Ivey. This al ignment requi red the granting of a new easement by Mr. & Mrs. Ivey. A series of campl icated negotiations took place over the next two years and has resulted in an agreement for Mr. & Mrs. Ivey to grant a new easement at a cost of $5,000. The proposed project is described in more detail in the 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget beginning at page CS-97 under the title of "Sewer Repairs at 731 Miner Road." The new sewer is proposed for installation by the "Flowmole Directional Drilling" process. This method requires excavation only at each end of the project for the boring and pipe insertion and minimizes disruption to existing surface features. If problems arise with this construction method, the subject easement permits the use of conventional surface trenching. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Presi dent of the Di stri ct Boa rd of Di rectors and the Secretary of the District to accept the Grant of Easement from Dougl as K. Ivey, et ux, Job 4293, Parcel 2, at a cost to the District of $5,000, and authorize the Grant of Easement to be recorded. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION :Jf;;NG DEPZ>H I/(j 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB ROGER J. DOLAN /0 "cS' 0> /t- /, <? ~)- 0eS> 0 O?> '0 <?o> O.t 0 o ~ U'(' "cS'/ 't9> 1-~(<' '0 O~ '<9 eS>0 ~~ , "'S?: 00 0 S' NEW SEWER PIPE o 111.3'1 N7S' 3rw Accept Grant of Easement Job 4293 - Parcel 2 Orinda Area . Centra. ~ontra Costa Sanitar~ ...listrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Au ust 24, 1989 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 7 SUBJECT ESTABLISH SEPTEMBER 21, 1989, AT 3:00 P.M. AS THE DATE AND TIME FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON ANNEXATION 112 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) DATE Au ust 7, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION SET PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: LAFCO has added properties to several of the parcels which are a part of the above-referenced District annexation. A public hearing must be held before this District can order the annexation of these amended parcels. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation was sent to LAFCO as required for the formal annexation process. LAFCO has amended the boundaries of several of the parcels as submitted by the District. The amended parcels are designated as D.A. 112, Parcels B, C, E, and F. As required by law, staff will notify all affected property owners 15 days prior to the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: the annexati on Set a public hearing date on September 21, 1989, at 3:00 p.m. for of the above-referenced territories as amended by LAFCO. IJt 1302A-9/85 D H JSM REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. IItf RAB . Centra. ~ontra Costa Sanitar) Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS SUBJECT NO. IV. PAGE 1 OF 1 CONSENT CALENDAR 8 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF DATE AUTHORIZE AN INCREASE IN THE DISTRICT'S 1989-1990 EQUIPMENT BUDGET BY $2,750 FROM THE GENERAL PROGRAM CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET Au ust 21 1989 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE INCREASE IN EQUIPMENT BUDGET SUBMITTED BY Barton L. Brandenburg Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT/DIV Engineering Department! Plannin Division ISSUE: Purchase of a Microtox Toxicity Analyzer was authorized in the 1989-1990 Equipment Budget. Due to a recent price increase, the cost for this equipment now exceeds the budgeted amount. Board authorization is needed to increase the Equipment Budget to cover this purchase. BACKG ROUND: The Mi crotox T oxi ci ty Anal yz er w 11 1 be used for fi e 1 d test i ng of trunk sewer samples and industrial wastewater. This analyzer is portable and will provide a fast indication of the relative toxicity of wastewater. If toxicity is encountered during trunk sewer sampling, this instrument will be used to trace the toxicity upstream to the source. The purchase price for the Microtox Toxicity Anal yzer, Model 2055, and Starter Pack was estimated to be $15,000, based on information received fran Mfcrobics Corporation in December 1988. In J anua ry 1989, Mi crobi cs Corporati on di sconti nued the Mi crotox Model 2055 Toxicity Analyzer and replaced it with an improved version, Model 500 Toxicity Analyzer. The purchase price for the Model 500 Toxicity Analyzer and Starter Pack, including sales tax and delivery, is now estimated to be $17,750 and results in a shortfall in the Equipment Budget of $2,750. Staff bel ieves that the intended purpose and need for the toxicity analyzer is still justified even with the higher cost. Recommendation: Increase the Equipment Budget by $2,750 fran the General Program Conti ngency Account of the Capital Improvement Budget to cover the additi onal cost of the Microtox Toxicity Analyzer. INITIATING DEPT./DIV. .5 tf,A. IL 1302A-9/85 f~ BLB JML REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JMK . Centra. Contra Costa Sanitar~ .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 3 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 24, 1989 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 9 SUBJECT DIRECT STAFF TO SECURE THE SERVICES OF AN ARBITRATOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE III, SECTION 3.3.B & 3.4.B OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AND THE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' LOCAL NO. 1 DATE August 16, 1989 TYPE ~E~g8~~EL SUBMITTED BY Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manager INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Administrative/Personnel ISSUE: In accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding (M.O.U.) between the District and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Employees' Associ ation, Public Employees Union, Local No. One (Local #1), the Board shall employ an arbitrator to render a recommendation when disciplinary actions are appealed to the Board 1 evel . BACKGROUND: Mr. Derhyl Houck, Maintenance Technician III, Plant Operations Department, received a discipl inary action for violation of District rules. Mr. Houck appealed this action and received a hearing under the discipline provisions of the current Memorandum of Understanding between the parties. Mr. Houck was dissatisfied with the Hearing Officer's decision and has exercised his further appeal rights. Accordingly, he has appealed to the Board of Directors under Article III, Section 3.3.B and 3.4.B of the current M.O.U. which reads, in part, as follows: "B. Appeal to Board of Directors Permanent employees dissatisfied with the Hearing Officer's decision, only in matters relating to suspension, reduction in rank or payor dismissal, may appeal to the Board of Directors pursuant to the procedures set forth herein. 3.4 APPEAL A. Genera 1 An employee, except as provided in Sections 4-410, 4-411, 4-412, and 4-415 in Chapter 4 of the Di strict Ordi nance Code, may appeal the Hearing Officer's decision by appealing to the Board via filing a written request for hearing with the Secretary of the District within five (5) working days of receipt of the Hearing Officer's decision. The Secretary shall calendar the matter at the next regularly scheduled Board Meeting in keeping with established guidelines for calendaring an agenda item. B. Board Shall Designate Representative to Hear Appeal The Board shall employ a neutral third party to hear the appeal and to recommend action to the Board. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION PM SUBJECT DIRECT STAFF TO SECURE THE SERVICES OF AN ARBITRATOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE III, SECTION 3.3.B & 3.4.B OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AND THE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' LOCAL NO. 1 POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 3 DATE August 7, 1989 C. Adopt or Modify Recommendation The Board may adopt, rej ect, or modify the recommendati on of the Board-appointed neutral third party. The decision of the Board is the final action of the District." Th i s matter has been rev i ewed by the Board Personnel Committee at thei r meeti ng on August 10, 1989. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to secure the services of an arbitrator according to the M.O.U. process in the matter of the appeal of Mr. Derhyl Houck. 13026-9/85 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL ONE Mailing Address - P.O. Box 222, Martinez, CA 94553 Union Hall - 5034 Blum Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Phone (415) 228-1600 ~ OBO~eW~ffi August 3, 1989 l~U'~ 4 i9E9 <:,:-:r::--:--. /''::~.;i;:: . ..-c '--:C'r-t Mr. Paul Morsen Deputy General Manager Central Contra Costa Sanitary 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez. California 94553 District Dear Mr. Morsen: This is to notify you that Derhyl F. Houck wishes to appeal his one-day suspension to the District's Board. in accordance with Article 3.4A of the parties' MOU. Sincerely, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION. LOCAL #1 .~d-- p~ Bob da Roza Business Agent BD:omm BD0034 cc: Russell Leavitt Dennis Almond Dave Platt .Anne Mueller Derhyl F. Houck . Centraa ~ontra Costa Sanitar} ~istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 5 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 11 SUBJECT DATE CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING ASSEMBLY BILL 1312 PROVIDING STATE BOND FUNDS FOR WATER REQAMATION PROJECTS TYPE OF ACTION APPROV E RESOLUTION INITIATING DEPT/DIV. Engineering Department/ Plannin Division SUBMITTED BY Russell Leavitt ISSUE: District support for A8 1312 (Filante and Bradley) has been requested by the California Association of Reclamation Entities of Water (CAREW) (see attached letter). BACKGROUND: A8 1312 would enact the Water Reclamation Bond Law of 1990 which, if approved by the voters, woul d authorize the issuance of $200 mil 1 ion in state bonds to finance low-interest loans to public agencies for the design and construction of water reclamation and reuse projects. /JB 1312 woul d establ ish a rev 01 vi ng loan fund to be admi ni stered by the State Water Resources Control Board. The Board would be authorized to make loans for periods of up to 20 years for up to 100 percent of the eligible cost of design and construction. The interest rate would be 50 percent of the rate paid by the state on the most recent sale of state general obligation bonds. A statew i de survey of potenti al water recl amati on proj ects, conducted by CAREW, indicates that almost $2 bill ion worth of water recl amation projects total ing over 686,000 acre-feet in capacity are in the conceptual, planning, design, or construction stages at this time. These totals include the District's water recl amati on proj ects in conj uncti on with the Contra Costa Water Di stri ct. More than 90 percent of the $2 billion currently is unfunded. /JB 1312 is in competition with $12 billion worth of other proposed legislation seeki ng state bond fundi ng. The Governor and State Treasurer are expected to 1 imit bond funding on the 1990 ballot to about $5 bill ion. The proposed bond acts which receive the greatest support in the Legislature will have the best chance to be pl aced on the ball ot at or near thei r currentl y proposed 1 evel of funding authorization. /JB 1312 would create an additional, potential source of funding for the District's upcoming and long-term water reclamation projects. Contra Costa Water District currently is considering its support for this legislation. As part of a larger effort to promote /JB 1312, CAREW is requesting agencies to send endorsements of AS 1312 to the bill's authors, the Governor, and local state 1 egi sl ators. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution supporting A8 1312. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ~L, J)t~ fl[l ROGER J. DOLAN 1302A-9/85 RL JMK R/JB California Assoeiation of Reelamation Entities of Water Page 2 of 5 August 10, 1989 TO: CAREW Member/Survey Respondent 'CS.M.I<~ Legislative committeel FROM: James M. Kelly, Chairman, CAREW SUBJECT: support for AB 1312 This letter enlists your support for AB 1312, which will provide $200 million in low interest loans for water .reclamation projects. Approximately $14 billion worth of worthy public works programs must ~ompete for this year's allocated, allowable amount for state bond issues -- expected to be about $5 billion. Please help us keep AB 1312 as close to $200 million as possible. The Board of Directors of the California Association of Reclamation Entities of Water (CAREW) has authorized an ad hoc committee to undertake an AB 1312 support program. This letter is inspired by the remarks of Assemblyman Filante, author of AB 1312, who recently addressed our Annual Conference. Assemblyman Filante urged all AB 1312 proponents to: 1. Send him a letter outlining your specific water reclamation and reuse project(s) and indicating the provisions which should be retained in (or incorporated into) AB 1312 to facilitate your project(s). ADDRESS: Honorable William Filante, California State Assembly, State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814. 2. Write your local state legislators urging them to support AB 1312 and explaining the local benefits of successful implementation of your planned water reclamation and reuse project(s). 3. Contact the Governor's office in support of AB explaining the positive statewide impacts of increased reclamation and reuse. ADDRESS AND PHONE: Honorable Deukmejian, Governor, State Capitol, Sacramento, CA (916) 445-2841. 1312, water George 95814; 4. Make presentation to cities, chambers of commerce, public interest groups, and other local organizations to obtain endorsements for AB 1312. Send copies of endorsements to Assemblyman Filante, your local legislators, the Governor, and to me (James Kelly, Legislative Committee Chairman, CAREW, c/o CCCSD, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, CA 94553-4392). Page 3 of 5 5. Bring AB 1312 to the attention of the media by getting coverage of presentations, issuing press releases, and contacting editorial boards. Enclosed is an outline for a letter to local legislators per Item 2 above. Please send your letters as soon as possible and take whatever other actions you can to promote AB 1312 during the month of August. The Legislature will be finalizing its bond package in early September. If we can give you additional assistance, please contact me at (415) 689-3890 or FAX (415) 676-7211. ,..-.---- .._-_._--,.,----_.__....^._._~.__.~._,.__._-~._._---_.-_.__.~~-_.._---_.._--,--_.,"'"^-,._--_.-~_._,.._'--"~........~~"._.'"--" RESOLUTION NO. 89- RESOLUTION SUPPORTING ASSEMBLY BILL 1312 PROVIDING STATE BOND FUNDS FOR WATER RECLAMATION PROJECTS WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Board of Directors acknowledges the importance of water reclamation to meet present and future water demand in the State of California and to maximize the use of a vital and limited resource; and WHEREAS, benefits of a comprehensive water reclamation project include providing an additional source of water, extending existing water supplies, and improving availability and reliability of water during droughts; and WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District and the Contra Costa Water District have joined together in a demonstration project to test and evaluate the feasibility of a comprehensive reclamation program and to identify viable water reuse projects; and WHEREAS, Assembly Members William Filante and William Bradley have introduced legislation to enact the Water Reclamation Bond Law of 1990 which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of $200 million in state bonds to finance water reclamation projects; and WHEREAS, utilization of reclaimed water would provide a beneficial use of treated wastewater currently not fully utilized and would reduce requirements on existing water sources, allowing them to meet the increasing demands for water for municipal, agricultural, Bay/Delta flow enhancement, and other uses statewide. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District hereby strongly supports and endorses Assembly Bill 1312 (Filante and Bradley), which would enact the Water Reclamation Bond Law of 1990 as being in concert with the goals of the State of California for the best utilization of new and existing water sources, and as being in the best interest of the residents of this District. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Central Contra Costa Sani tary District Board of Directors this 24th day of August, 1989, by the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: President of the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, state of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California Approved as to form: District Counsel . Centra~ Contra Costa Sanitar~ ~istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 31 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 24, 1989 NO. VI. SOLID WASTE 1 SUBJECT RECE IV E A PROPOSAL BY V AL LEY WASTE MANAGEMENT FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN AUTOMATED CURBSIDE COLLECTION PROORAM DATE August 18, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION CONSIDER PROPOSED PROORAM SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manager Admi ni strative ISSUE: In response to a request by the Board of Directors, Valley Waste Management has submitted a proposal for an automated curbside collection program. BACKGROUND: An automated curbside collection program for residential refuse was initiated by Valley Disposal Service, Inc. in the City of San Ramon in 1987, shortly after the city assumed franchising jurisdiction for its refuse collection. This introduction of automated refuse collection was, and continues to be, the only automated collection program in the county, and has achieved the lowest residential collecti.on rates in the county tcrdate. The automated curbside collection program was continued in the City of San Ramon by Valley Waste Management, which acquired the net assets of Valley Disposal Service, Inc. in 1988. The Board of Di rectors expressed interest in consi deri ng the impl ementati on of an automated curbside collection program within Valley Waste Management's service area in the District. A number of residences, which were provided automated curbside collection service, was included in the recently completed three-month pilot program on curbside recycling and automated collection. As a part of the pilot program, Valley Waste Management was requested to submit a proposal for an automated curbside collection program for consideration by the District. Proposed Automated Curbside Collection Prooram The automated curbside collection program proposed by Valley Waste Management for residentia-I refuse is contained in the separate document dated August 16, 1989 accompanying this Position Paper. The major features of the proposed program are summarized below: o The automated co-Ilection system proposed differs from the system used in the City of San Ramon in that the proposed system uses an innovative, state-of-the-art technology developed in West Germany which provides for the direct field transfer of refuse containers from collection vehicles to a transfer vehicle for hauling to a distant landfill. A substantial portion of residential refuse would thereby avoid costly processing through a transfer station. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON LAN SUBJECT RECEIVE A PROPOSAL BY VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT FOR lHE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN AUTOMATED CURBSIDE COLLECTION PROORAM POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 2 OF 31 Auoust 18. 1989 o Three al ternative collecti on methods are proposed for the Di strict's consideration: All Refuse In One Container Residential customers would be provided with one 64 or 95 gallon container for both refuse and yard waste. The container is picked-up at the curb by a collection vehicle with automatic hoisting arm operated by a single driver. The capital cost requi red for new collecti on vehicl es, transfer vehicl es, transfer containers and refuse containers, and startup costs is $4.2 mill ion. A 16.3 percent reduction in the current revenue requirement is proposed as a result of lower operating expenses which would be achieved. Seoarated Refuse And Yard Waste Picked-Up In Same Truck Resi denti al customers woul d be prov ided with one, two or th ree 32 gallon container<s> for refuse, and one 64 gallon container for yard waste. The containers are rolled to the curb and placed side-by-side for automated pickup by the same truck. The capital cost required for new vehicles and equipment, and startup costs is $5.7 million. A 7.8 percent reduction in the current revenue requirement is proposed as a result of reduced operating expenses. Separated Refuse and Yard Waste Picked-Up In Separate Trucks Residential customers would be provided with one, two or three 32 gallon container<s> for refuse, and one 64 gallon container for yard waste. The containers are rolled to the curb and placed side-by-side for automated pick-up. The yard waste is picked-up by a separate truck for del ivery to an, as yet, undesignated composting facility. The capital cost required for new vehicles and equipment, and startup costs is $6.4 million. A 1.2 percent reduction in the current revenue requirement is proposed as a result of reduced operating expenses. Valley Waste Management submitted an i ni ti al proposal for an automated curbsi de collection program on August 1, 1989. District staff met with officials of Valley Waste Management to review the proposal on August 8, 1989. Certain additional 13028-9/85 SUBJECT RECEIVE A PROPOSAL BY V ALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT FOR TIiE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN AUTOMATED CURBSIDE COLLECTION PROORAM POSITION PAPER 3 OF 31 PAGE DATE Auous1: 1 R. 10RO information related to the segregated pickup of yard waste by a separate truck was requested by District staff. The additional information is submitted in the proposal dated August 16, 1989 which accompanies this Position Paper. Di strict staff bel ieves that the proposed automated curbsi de coll ecti on program offers the following significant potential benefits: Lowered Collection Rates The increased productivity, operational efficiencies and avoided transfer stati on expenses of the proposed automated curbsi de coll ecti on program, if realized, could result in the immediate reduction in refuse collection rates for residential customers who receive the service. A staff analysis of the financial projections made by the refuse cOllector, and development of new rate schedules for the proposed automated collection service will be completed for submission at the September 21, 1989 Board Meeting. Provides For The Seareaation Of Yard Waste The composting of yard waste would remove a measurable amount of residential refuse from the landfills, and be in keeping with the recycling goals of the County Solid Waste Management Plan. The proposed automated collection program provides for the collection of yard waste on a segregated basis at the outset, or the subsequent segregation of yard waste when a composting facH ity is put into operati on. In view of the current environment of escalating collection rates, which are driven by ever-increasing disposal fees, a decision on the implementation of the Valley Waste Management proposal for automated collection should be made with due haste. A schedule of actions which is proposed for concurrence by the Board follows: Initial Presentation of the Automated Curbside Collection Program to the Board of Directors Completion Date August 24, 1989 Submission of Additional Information Requested at the August 24, 1989 Board Meeting; Results of Staff Analysis of Financial Projections and New Alternative Rate Schedules Presented; Submission of Related Information to the Communities of Danville, Alamo and Lafayette September 21, 1989 Observation of an On-site Demonstration of the Automated Curbside Collection System by Members of the Board and District Staff September 29, 1989 13026-9/85 SUBJECT RECEIVE A PROPOSAL BY VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT FOR lHE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN AUTOMATED CURBSIDE COLLECTION PROGRAM POSITION PAPER 4 OF 31 PAGE DATE AunlJ~i: 1 A _ 1 CAC Conduct a Public Hearing to Receive Comments From the Affected Communities and the General Public on the Implementation of the Automated Curbside Collection Program October 19, 1989 Board Decision on Whether, and in Which Communities, the Implementation of the Automated Curbside Collection Program Should Occur November 2, 1989 RECOMMENDATION: Receive the proposal by Valley Waste Management for the implementation of an automated curbside collection program, and provide District staff with comments regarding the proposed program and schedule for decision-making. 13028-9/85 Valley Waste Management PO Box 4007 2658 N. Main Street Walnut Creek. California 94596 415.935-8900 IQ \eI A Waste Management Company August 16, 1989 Honorable Susan Rainey, President and Members of the Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Members, Provided in response to the staffs' request of August 8, please find for your review a second proposal which addresses the three Residential Automated Collection options discussed with CCCSD staff. We feel the options as presented on pages 1-1 and 1-2 address the concerns of staff, with one exception; because of the Sleeve/Arm/Container mechanism used, 32-gallon containers are not available with the proposed system. This can be remedied several ways and will be addressed during our presentation on August 24th. As shown in the attached proposal, this conversion is very capital intensive. However, the efficiencies gained range from approximately 16.3% for single can combined automated pick-up (V. 2-3) , to 1.2% for two-truck segregated pickup (VA-3). We plan to show a VHS VCR tape at the August 24 meeting, and then make ourselves available for any questions the members or staff may have. Sincerely, ~~l-K- Jerome M. Kruszka Acting General Manager Enclosure JK/sl A DI\/isi(H~ .~),:...\/\ INDEX Item Title Tab-Page 1. Explanation of Proposal 1-1 2. Residential Automated Collection with All Refuse In One Container - Operating Statement With Rate Adjustment 2-1 - Operating Statement Without Rate Adjustment 2-2 - Rate Adjustment Computation 2-3 - Operating Assumptions 2-4 - Capital Requirements 2-5 3. Residential Automated Collection with Separated Brush, Picked Up In The Same Truck - Operating Statement With Rate Adjustment 3-1 - Operating Statement Without Rate Adjustment 3-2 - Rate Adjustment Computation 3-3 - Operating Assumptions 3-4 - Capital Requirements 3-5 4. Residential Automated Collection with Automated Brush Collection and Composting - Operating Statement With Rate Adjustment 4-1 - Operating Statement Without Rate Adjustment 4-2 - Rate Adjustment Computation 4-3 - Operating Assumptions 4-4 - Capital Requirements 4-5 5. The WMI System - Description 5-1 V. 1-1 EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL Residential Automated Collection With All Refuse In One Container (Tab-2) This collection service provides the customer with one 64- or 95-gallon container for both garbage and brush collection. The container is rolled to the curb on collection day for automated pickup. The Waste Management System (WMS) will be introduced. This concept saves labor costs, through increased productivity, by eliminating costly trips to landfills and/or transfer stations. 01. 5-1) It is estimated that annually 35,997 tons will be transferred using WMS to the Altamont Landfill, and 6,433 tons direct-hauled to the Acme Landfill. Additional operational assumptions, manpower, and routes are also presented on page V.2-4. The automated collection, using a single container for garbage and brush, is less capital intensive than the two can automated collection. The initial outlay will be $4,367,500 requiring 9 automated collection vehicles, 2 transfer vehicles, 11 transfer containers, 2 side-loaders, 1 rear-loader, 24,500 containers, and $350,000 in start-up costs. 01. 2-5) Residential Automated Collection With Separated Brush. Picked Up In The Same Truck (Tab-3) This collection service provides the current one-can customer with capacity for 32 gallons of refuse, and one 64-gallon container for yard waste. The containers are rolled to the curb on collection day, and placed side by side for automated pickup. In this proposal both yard waste and refuse is picked up by the same truck, deferring composting of yard waste to some future date. The Waste Management System (WMS) will be introduced. This concept saves labor costs, through increased productivity, by eliminating costly trips to landfills and/or transfer stations. 01. 5-1) It is estimated that annually 35,997 tons will be transferred using WMS to the Altamont landfill, 6,433 tons to be direct-hauled to the Acme Landfill. Additional operational assumptions, manpower, and routes are also presented on page V.3-4. The automation of both refuse and yard waste is capital intensive. The initial capital outlay will be $5,804,500 requiring 9 automated collection vehicles, 2 transfer vehicles, 11 transfer containers, 2 side loaders with cart tippers, 1 rear- end loader, 46,000 containers, and $350,000 in start-up costs. 01. 3-5) V. 1-2 Residential Automated Collection With Automated Brush Collection and Composting (Tab-4) This collection service provides the current one-can customer with capacity for 32 gallons of refuse, and one 64-gallon container for yard waste. The containers are rolled to the curb on collection day, and placed side by side for automated pickup. The yard waste is picked up by a separate truck and brought to a facility, not as yet determined, for composting. Composting has many variables as does any type of recycling. At the time of this proposal the best estimate for costs relating to composting, not including land and improvements, is $20.00 per ton. If the compost is marketed it would offset production costs. However, 50 tons of yard waste produces roughly 25 tons of compost after three to six months of the decomposition process. The Waste Management System (WMS) will be introduced. This concept saves labor costs, through increased productivity, by eliminating costly trips to landfills and/or transfer stations. 0/. 5-1) It is estimated that annually 24,000 tons will be transferred using WMS to the Altamont landfill, 5,590 tons to be direct-hauled to Acme, and 12,845 tons of yard waste to be diverted form the waste stream to a composting facility. 0/. 4-4) Additional operational assumptions, manpower, and routes are also presented on Page V. 4-4. The automation of both garbage and brush is capital intensive. The initial capital outlay will be $6,584,500 requiring 15 automated collection vehicles, 2 transfer vehicles, 11 transfer containers, 2 side loaders with cart tippers, 1 rear-end loader, 46,000 containers, and $350,000 in start-up costs. 0/. 4-5) CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION ALL REFUSE IN ONE CONTAINER OPERATING STATEMENT WITH RATE ADJUSTMENT (OOO'S OMITTED) V. 2-1 AMOUNT PERCENT ------- -------- REVENUE 4,528 100.0% COST OF OPERATIONS DRIVERS 855 18.9% TRUCK OPERATING 169 3.7% TRUCK MAINTENANCE 508 11.2% INSURANCE 287 6.3% BUILDING OCCUPANCY 100 2.2% CONTAINER MAINTENANCE 61 1.3% TRUCK DEPRECIATION 285 6.3% CONTAINER DEPRECIATION 263 5.8% DISPOSAL 1,310 28.9% INTEREST 376 8.3% FRANCHISE FEES 50 1.1% START-UP COSTS 70 1.5% -------- -------- TOTAL COST OF OPERATIONS 4,334 95.7% -------- -------- OPERATING INCOME 194 4.3% ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION ALL REFUSE IN ONE CONTAINER OPERATING STATEMENT WITHOUT RATE ADJUSTMENT (OOO'S OMITTED) V. 2-2 AMOUNT PERCENT ------- -------- REVENUE 5,410 100.0% COST OF OPERATIONS DRIVERS 855 15.8% TRUCK OPERATING 169 3.1% TRUCK MAINTENANCE 508 9.4% INSURANCE 287 5.3% BUILDING OCCUPANCY 100 1.8% CONTAINER MAINTENANCE 61 1.1% TRUCK DEPRECIATION 285 5.3% CONTAINER DEPRECIATION 263 4.9% DISPOSAL 1,310 24.2% INTEREST 376 7.0% FRANCHISE FEES 50 0.9% START-UP COSTS 70 1.3% -------- -------- TOTAL COST OF OPERATIONS 4,334 80.1% -------- -------- OPERATING INCOME 1,076 19.9% ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- v.2-3 RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION ALL REFUSE IN ONE CONTAINER RATE ADJUSTMENT COMPUTATION Residential Operating Income Fiscal Period Ending 6/30/89 Revenue Expense Operating Income @ 6-30-89 (000) 5,649 5.455 194 100.0% 96.6% 3.4% (A) Projected Operating Income Fiscal Period Ending 6-30-90 (Exhibit V.2-2) Revenue Expense Projected Operating Income @ 6-30-90 5,410 4.334 1.076 100.0% 80.1% 19.9% (B) Reduction in Revenue to Retain Current Profitability A-B (882) (16.3%) (C) EFFECT ON RESIDENTIAL RATES Toter Rate Weighted With Current Revenue: Customer Base Containers Current Monthly (000) Revenue Weiahted Averaae Annual Revenue Total 21,500 1.300 22,800 54-Gal Toter 95-Gal Toter 19.12 30.55 4,933 477 5.410 (D) Projected Toter Rate @ 16.3% Rate Reduction: Customer Base Container Proiected Monthlv Revenue Annual Revenue Total 21,500 1.300 22,800 54-Gal Toter 95-Gal Toter 16.00 25.50 4,128 400 4.528 (E) Total Reduction in Revenue (D-E) 882 V.2-4 OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS ALL REFUSE IN ONE CONTAINER RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION Residential Routes WMI System (Collection) 7 WMI System (fransfer) 2 Side Loader (Hilly Areas) 2 Rear-End Loader (Clean-Up) -1 Total Routes 12 Residential Manpower Drivers Helper (Clean-Up) Supervisors Mechanics Total Manpower Disposal Volume Residential Residential Clean-Ups Landfill Acme Altamont Acme Total Volume 12 1 2 ~ 18 Tons 2,533 35,997 3.900 42.430 CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION ALL REFUSE IN ONE CONTAINER Description of asset Quantity VEHICLES WMI SYSTEM COLLECTION FEL WMI SYSTEM TRANSFER VEHICLE TRANSFER CONTAINERS REAR-LOADERS (EXISTING;25YD) SIDE-LOADERS (EXISTING ;15YD) SEMI-AUTOMATED CART TIPPERS CONTAINERS 64/95-GAL AUTOMATED TOTERS START-UP COSTS PROJECT START-UP COSTS REORGANIZATION COSTS TOTAL CAPITAL REQUIRED 9 2 11 1 2 2 24,500 Unit Cost 175,000 140,000 15,000 50,000 50,000 5,000 100,000 250,000 V.2-5 Extended Cost $1,575,000 280,000 165,000 50,000 100,000 10,000 75 1,837,500 100,000 250,000 $4,367,500 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH SEPARATED BRUSH PICKED-UP IN THE SAME TRUCK OPERATING STATEMENT WITH RATE ADJUSTMENT (OOO'S OMITTED) V. 3-1 AMOUNT PERCENT ------- -------- REVENUE 4,990 100.0% COST OF OPERATIONS DRIVERS 855 17.1% TRUCK OPERATING 239 4.8% TRUCK MAINTENANCE 508 10.2% INSURANCE 287 5.8% BUILDING OCCUPANCY 100 2.0% CONTAINER MAINTENANCE 115 2.3% TRUCK DEPRECIATION 285 5.7% CONTAINER DEPRECIATION 468 9.4% DISPOSAL 1,310 26.3% INTEREST 509 10.2% FRANCHISE FEES 50 1.0% START-UP COSTS 70 1.4% -------- -------- TOTAL COST OF OPERATIONS 4,796 96.1% -------- -------- OPERATING INCOME 194 3.9% ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ._,,__~,.____,+____..,,+__.__...__._.~.,..~ ._____ .. .___....+_.._.._.._._...._....w..__._.,._._"__..... ...___.._0...__." _" _ ~.__,._......_._...__.__.._.._ CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH SEPARATED BRUSH PICKED-UP IN THE SAME TRUCK OPERATING STATEMENT WITHOUT RATE ADJUSTMENT (OOO'S OMITTED) V. 3-2 AMOUNT PERCENT ------- -------- REVENUE 5,410 100.0% COST OF OPERATIONS DRIVERS 855 15.8% TRUCK OPERATING 239 4.4% TRUCK MAINTENANCE 508 9.4% INSURANCE 287 5.3% BUILDING OCCUPANCY 100 1.8% CONTAINER MAINTENANCE 115 2.1% TRUCK DEPRECIATION 285 5.3% CONTAINER DEPRECIATION 468 8.7% DISPOSAL 1,310 24.2% INTEREST 509 9.4% FRANCHISE FEES 50 0.9% START-UP COSTS 70 1.3% -------- -------- TOTAL COST OF OPERATIONS 4,796 88.7% -------- -------- OPERATING INCOME 614 11.3% ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- v.3-3 RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH SEPARATED BRUSH, PICKED UP IN THE SAME TRUCK RATE ADJUSTMENT COMPUTATION Residential Operating Income Fiscal Period Ending 6/30/89 Revenue Expense Operating Income @ 6-30-89 (000) 5,649 5.455 194 100.0% 96.6% 3.4% (A) Projected Operating Income Fiscal Period Ending 6-30-90 (Exhibit V.3-2) Revenue Expense Projected Operating Income @ 6-30-90 5,410 4.796 614 100.0% 88.7% 11.3% (B) Reduction in Revenue to Retain Current Profitability A-B (420) ( 7.8%) (C) EFFECT ON RESIDENTIAL RATES Current Residential Rates: Customer Base Containers Current Monthly (000) Revenue Weiahted Averaae Annual Revenue 11 ,700 9,800 1.300 22,800 1 32-Gal 2 32-Gal 3 32-Gal 15.75 23.15 30.55 2,211 2,722 477 5.410 (0) Total Projected Toter Rate @ 7.8% Rate Reduction: Customer Base Container Proiected Monthlv Revenue Annual Revenue 11 ,700 9,800 1.300 22,800 32-Gal Toter 54-Gal Toter 95-Gal Toter 14.50 21.35 28.10 2,036 2,510 444 4.990 (E) Total Total Reduction in Revenue (O-E) 420 OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH SEPARATED BRUSH, PICKED UP IN THE SAME TRUCK Residential Routes WMI System (Collection) 7 WMI System (Transfer) 2 Side Loader (Hilly Areas) 2 Rear-End Loader (Clean-Up) -1 Total Routes 12 Residential Manpower Drivers Helper (Clean-Up) Supervisors Mechanics Total Manpower Disposal Volume Residential Residential Clean-Ups Total Volume Landfill Acme Altamont Acme 12 1 2 ~ -1a Tons 2,533 35,997 3.900 42.430 V.3-4 CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH SEPARATED BRUSH, PICKED UP IN THE SAME TRUCK Description of asset Quantity Unit Cost V.3-5 Extended Cost VEHICLES WMI SYSTEM COLLECTION FEL WMI SYSTEM TRANSFER VEHICLE TRANSFER CONTAINERS REAR-LOADERS (EXISTING ;25YD) SIDE-LOADERS (EXISTING;15YD) SEMI-AUTOMATED CART TIPPERS CONTAINERS 32-GAL AUTOMATED TOTERS 64/95-GAL AUTOMATED TOTERS 64-GAL AUTOMATED TOTERS (BRUSH) START-UP COSTS PROJECT START-UP COSTS REORGANIZATION COSTS TOTAL CAPITAL REQUIRED 9 2 11 1 2 2 11,700 11,300 23,000 175,000 140,000 15,000 50,000 50,000 5,000 100,000 250,000 $1,575,000 280,000 165,000 50,000 100,000 10,000 60 75 75 702,000 847,500 1,725,000 100,000 250,000 $5,804,500 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH AUTOMATED BRUSH COLLECTION AND COMPOSTING OPERATING STATEMENT WITH RATE ADJUSTMENT (OOO'S OMITTED) V. 4-1 AMOUNT PERCENT ------- -------- REVENUE 5,348 100.0% COST OF OPERATIONS DRIVERS 1,133 21.2% TRUCK OPERATING 239 4.5% TRUCK MAINTENANCE 580 10.8% INSURANCE 338 6.3% BUILDING OCCUPANCY 100 1.9% CONTAINER MAINTENANCE 119 2.2% TRUCK DEPRECIATION 382 7.1% CONTAINER DEPRECIATION 410 7.7% DISPOSAL 1,310 24.5% DISPOSAL DIVERSION (375) -7.0% COMPOSTING 257 4.8% INTEREST 541 10.1% FRANCHISE FEES 50 0.9% START-UP COSTS 70 1.3% -------- -------- TOTAL COST OF OPERATIONS 5,154 96.4% -------- -------- OPERATING INCOME 194 3.6% ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH AUTOMATED BRUSH COLLECTION AND COMPOSTING OPERATING STATEMENT WITHOUT RATE ADJUSTMENT (OOO'S OMITTED) V. 4-2 AMOUNT PERCENT ------- -------- REVENUE 5,410 100.0% COST OF OPERATIONS DRIVERS 1,133 20.9% TRUCK OPERATING 239 4.4% TRUCK MAINTENANCE 580 10.7% INSURANCE 338 6.2% BUILDING OCCUPANCY 100 1.8% CONTAINER MAINTENANCE 119 2.2% TRUCK DEPRECIATION 382 7.1% CONTAINER DEPRECIATION 410 7.6% DISPOSAL 1,310 24.2% DISPOSAL DIVERSION (375) -6.9% COMPOSTING 257 4.8% INTEREST 541 10.0% FRANCHISE FEES 50 0.9% START-UP COSTS 70 1.3% -------- -------- TOTAL COST OF OPERATIONS 5,154 95.3% -------- -------- OPERATING INCOME 256 4.7% ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- v.4-3 RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH AUTOMATED BRUSH COLLECTION AND COMPOSTING RATE ADJUSTMENT COMPUTATION Residential Operating Income Fiscal Period Ending 6/30/89 Revenue Expense Operating Income @ 6-30-89 (000) 5,649 5.455 194 100.0% 96.6% 3.4% (A) Projected Operating Income Fiscal Period Ending 6-30-90 (Exhibit V.4-2) Revenue Expense Projected Operating Income @ 6-30-90 5,410 5.154 256 100.0% 95.3% 4.7% (B) Reduction in Revenue to Retain Current Profitability A-B L@ ( 1.2%) (C) EFFECT ON RESIDENTIAL RATES Current Residential Rates: Customer Base Containers Current Monthly (000) Revenue Weiahted Averaae Annual Revenue 11,700 9,800 1.300 22,800 1 32-Gal 2 32-Gal 3 32-Gal 15.75 23.15 30.55 2,211 2,722 477 5.410 (0) Total Projected Toter Rate @ 1.2% Rate Reduction: Customer Base Container Projected Monthlv Revenue Annual Revenue 11 ,700 9,800 1.300 22,800 32-Gal Toter 54-Gal Toter 95-Gal Toter 15.60 22.85 30.15 2,190 2,687 471 5.348 (E) Total Total Reduction in Revenue (O-E) ~ OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH AUTOMATED BRUSH COLLECTION AND COMPOSTING Residential Routes WMI System (Collection) 7 WMI System (Transfer) 2 Side Loader (Hilly Areas) 2 Rear-End Loader (Clean-Up) 1 Brush/Yard Waste ~ Total Routes -1Z Residential Manpower Drivers Helper (Clean-Up) Supervisors Mechanics Total Manpower Disposal Volume Residential Residential Clean-Ups Brush/Yard Waste Total Volume Composting Brush/Yard Waste Landfill Acme Altamont Acme Tons 12,841 17 1 2 ~ ~ Tons 1,690 23,999 3,900 12.841 42.430 Per Ton (000) Total Composting Cost 20.00 257 V.4-4 CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS RESIDENTIAL AUTOMATED COLLECTION WITH AUTOMATED BRUSH COLLECTION AND COMPOSTING Description of asset Quantity Unit Cost V.4-5 Extended Cost VEHICLES WMI SYSTEM COLLECTION FEL WMI SYSTEM TRANSFER VEHICLE TRANSFER CONTAINERS REAR-LOADERS (EXISTING;25YD) SIDE-LOADERS (EXISTING ;15YD) SEMI-AUTOMATED CART TIPPERS AUTOMATED SIDE-LOADERS CONTAINERS 64-GAL AUTOMATED TOTERS 64/95-GAL AUTOMATED TOTERS 64-GAL AUTOMATED TOTERS (BRUSH) START-UP COSTS PROJECT START-UP COSTS REORGANIZATION COSTS TOTAL CAPITAL REQUIRED 9 2 11 1 2 2 6 11,700 11,300 23,000 175,000 140,000 15,000 50,000 50,000 5,000 130,000 100,000 250,000 $1,575,000 280,000 165,000 50,000 100,000 10,000 780,000 60 75 75 702,000 847,500 1,725,000 100,000 250,000 $6,584,500 V.5-1 THE WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (WMS) This revolutionary new concept combines the proven efficiencies of the single rear axle with the improved balance and performance of a mid-engine chassis capable of quickly exchanging loaded compactor bodies for empties right in the heart of the service areas. Collection vehicles and drivers need never leave the assigned service area or route. And the need for costly transfer stations will be virtually eliminated. Filled containers are picked up and loaded onto hitched trailers by an equally revolutionary single rear axle transfer truck for efficient transfer to outlying process and disposal centers. Each transfer truck/trailer combination carries three 21-cubic yard exchangeable bodies. WMS is more than a new concept collection vehicle. It is an entire system designed to increase route time, reduce labor costs, and produce increased efficiency. ,< ", .~ ~" ..: '; , ) " .<.:. .~ ; :;:"{! -' " ,'" ."'" .' ~ '.~~1;;:" . 1......, :, '.~ ~~"' .,; .._~ . '<~.1J;'. .~.t-.~~ ". . . -l. ~ ". ~~ ilft.,~ I ~r..-: ~~,~. ." " .-~~ '.~ il: . . ) ) i' t -) ) , ~ 1~ '. ~ ":.. :!' . ". .!". . \ ~: .~. ~ ".. -~. :t. , ,(: '.'.... Jt~ . ',:\. ;\l~;) . '( 'i ....j.. "'.';, ;', , (, 'l ". ',~~':\ ' .,.' , " ) , \ V il~ ,,' I I ; ~ " ", ~ " .- )' ~., . " " c' - I' I ) .: :~ .\'j ..... " (ro'f:; H /'-' J/)' .' " . : " '/' ) ) ) ) ) -t ~. ~.... .;;;. '"~ . ~ -'\' ,:-_.:...,. /' ~:., " --..~- ..... " . "- ---"--"- ,: ~ I r , . ~ I I , I J , I . Centra~ ~ontra Costa Sanitary .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 3 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Au ust 24, 1989 NO. VIr. ENGINEERING 1 SUBJECT DATE AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE August 21, 1989 AGREEMENTS WI TH THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AN TYPE OF ACTION WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS AUTHORIZE AGREEMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND SERVICES RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE WALNUT CREEK DOWNTOWN BYPASS, PHASE 2, DP 4257 SUBMITTED BY Tad J. Pilecki Senior Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department Engineering Division ISSUE: Authorization by the Board of Directors is required for the General Manager-Chi ef Engi neer to execute a Joi nt Exerci se of Powers Agreement with another public agency. Authorization is also required to execute a consulting engineering agreement when it is greater than $50,000. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Flood Control District), in conjunction with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), is constructing a flood control channel in the abandoned Southern Pacifi c Rail road ri ght of way between Arroyo Way and Rudgear Road, Walnut Creek. The total Bypass Project consists of 9,580 linear feet of 60 and 66-inch diameter pipeline, two siphons totaling approximately 820 linear feet, and a major flow control/junction structure. The pipeline alignment is shown in Exhibit A. The Bypass Project was split into two phases to coincide with the construction phasing for the flood control channel. Approximately 5,800 linear feet of the interceptor and one siphon (Phase 1) has been installed. Construction on the remaining 4,600 linear feet of interceptor sewer, the second siphon, and the flow control/junction structure (Phase 2) is expected to start in October 1989. The Flood Control District and the Sanitary District have prepared a cost-sharing Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement wherein the Sanitary District will reimburse the Flood Control District for all construction and construction management costs associ ated with the Sanitary Di stri ct IS faci 1 iti es to be constructed under Phase 2. Payments will be made to the Flood Control District at the beginning of each quarter based on the estimated construction and construction management cost anticipated for the quarter. The total project cost is projected to be $7,100,000. The total Phase 2 cost is estimated to be $3,600,000. John Carollo Engineers (JCE) provided construction management services for Phase 1 and designed the siphon and flow control/junction structure for Phase 2. Based on their past performance during Phase 1 construction and Phase 2 design, staff recommends that JCE be retained to provide engineering support services during construction for Phase 2. JCE will review shop drawings, interpret plans and specifications, prepare change orders, and provide periodic inspections for their portion of the Phase 2 design. A cost reimbursement agreement has been negotiated with JCE with a cost ceiling of $86,000. District staff will administer the contract and provide construction monitoring as provided for in the JEPA. 1302A-9/85 TJP DRW KLA RAB ()~ lJIf] INITIATING DEPT./DIV. SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND SERVICES RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE WALNUT CREEK DOWNTOWN BYPASS, PHASE 2, DP 4257 POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 DATE OF 3 August 21, 1989 The Board approved a Negative Declaration for the installation of the Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass (Bypass) in conjunction with the Flood Control District Project on March 21, 1985. Connection of the Bypass Sewer to the existing A- Line sewer was addressed by the San Ramon Valley Interceptor EIR which was certified by the Board of Directors on October 16, 1986. The Bypass Project was included in the 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget (p. CS-15). . RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a Joint Exerci se of Powers Agreement with the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a cost reimbursement agreement with a cost ceiling of $86,000 with John Carollo Engineers for providing engineering support services during construction on the Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass Project, Phase 2, DP 4257. . 13028-9/85 ROAD YGNACIO " , I ~I t; CD I .( lffi z I~ ~ l~ :J 10 .( '" (.)1 .1 Z :Ii <'\I ltJ CI) ~ a... Q ~ la.J ~ ....... ~ <:: ....... - ~ ltJ CI) ~ .... ... ... Z a... ~ ~ .... % ... a.. (J II: Q fli! ... ... w ~ ;;; ... -I Iii en en ct 0 c c 0 X II: % % ... a.. a.. a.. U) I . * ~ * b I . . * z . * I . * . * * I . . * . * . . * - lJ... a ~(,;.~,," .,." ;...- &,'b ~ ";,;' " " ,," ::>.. ....... <:3 r" f" ) Exhibit Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass A DP 4257 . Centra~ ~ontra Costa Sanitary .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 7 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Au ust 24, 1989 NO. VI!. ENGINEERING 2 ACCEPT GRANTS OF EASEMENTS AND FEE PARCEL FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR DISTRICT PROJECT 4257 IN THE WALNUT CREEK AREA AT A COST TO THE DISTRICT OF $15,650 DATE August 21, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT ACCEPT GRANT OF EASEMENTS SUBMITTED BY Tad J. Pilecki Senior Engineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department Engineering Division ISSUE: The Board must pass five resolutions accepting four Grants of Easements and one fee parcel before the documents can be recorded. BACKGROUND: The subject easements and fee parcel are required for the construction of an access road and retaining walls for the Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass Sewer Project (Bypass). These easements and the fee parcel are required prior to the commencement of the construction by the Army Corps of Engineers' contractor. The Board approved a Negative Declaration for the installation of the'Bypass in conjunction with the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Project on March 21,1985. The Bypass Project is described in the 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget (p. CS-15) and in the previous position paper. Exhi bit A 1 i sts the vari ous pri vate property easements and the fee parcel. Exhibits B through F show the respective easement locations. Staff has negotiated the terms of acquisition and recommends them for Board approval. Sufficient funds are available in the budget for the Bypass Project to pay the cost of the easements. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to accept the Grants of Easements and one Grant Deed from five private property owners for District Project 4257 at a total cost to the District of $15,650, and authorize the Grants of Easements and Grant Deed to be recorded. nfi j 1(/,(,LJv DRW I~ RAB G REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 c EXHIBIT A PRIVATE EASEMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE WALNUT CREEK DOWNTOWN BYPASS, PHASE 2 DP 4257 Owner Cost McClun, David E. and Diana $ 2,700 - easement Mattioda, Marc P. 6,000 - fee parcel Smith, Abigail W. 700 - easement Hawthorn Apartments 650 - easement Schakat, Horst G., et al 5,600 - easement Subtotal $15,650 G ISI) I G '\ \. '\.,. -{.l', ,~. ~~'v ~. f'~ ~ (,Y> ~. ~ '/> ~ (,~~ \. A ~ .~" -.' ,,'" ~~. v~ 'v~ ~~ BRADLEY ET AL g13g OR .22g PAIlCH .... PADlEY TRACT (15 .. '45) ."'t~~\ \..... .,. \, ~. ~\~. '" \"!.. ~..... 'we ~\.;; \i ~~"". ~ ...>>> ~ \'i;... \~" f \"' .. . ~ ~ 0\ .^" 5' PM 44 Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass DP 4257 Exhibit B 2523-9/88 G r\fo~ (y.P- , 'f. ' (,~ -tI(,~~ ~ (, ~ foV e,e,f o~ -tI~ (, fJ\o\ I ~\ ~\ iJ SR;~ ET .AL ~I 9/39 OR.229 I .", ~ l EASEMENT ./ ~ .. ~ :'1 .. .. --177""ii' JIf'IY (".Hi:ii) Ii ,,' IJ' ,,' E ,'.JI -.e- Exhibit Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass C D P 4257 2523-9/88 e II - NORLYN SUBDIVISION (29 M 2) APRIL 5, 1946 NORLYN DJ2. LO! 10 ~ 5' EA5EMEJ..JT ~ \C\ ~ SMI!H ::-- "'I C'( - LO! II LO-r12 0 !:.! . - .... . ~ ~ ElIST,NG- 5' EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES ~ DRAINAGE ~6D.54'4b"W 170. sz "-> Q Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass DP 4257 Exhibit D 2523-9/88 ,,. a ~ L--- DR. NO{2.LYN " S5iO 170.'% , fl'. ,+'~~"'" 1%1." +/1..0 HAWTHORN APARTMENTS '-.j ( 800a O.R. 3771 ~ I Q Exhibit Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass E o P 4257 2523-9(U ~ Q~ 1-, ! ~! Q JJAINTAIN All ~il5T. 'LDG4- IN PLAtE, (TYP" ALl APPRDt. LDCATIDJJ5 5HDWN. <:) '-' '-..,' ,vl1. OIA~L.O ~'" ~ "V 4?'1?VcQ \ ~ ,,~ . EASEMENT SHADED IS A TEMPORARY ACCESS AHD CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FOR OEI<<lL IT I ON AHD RE- PLACEMENT OF RETAINING WALL. Exhibit Walnut Creek Downtown Bypass F DP 4257 2523-9/88 . Centra. ~ontra Costa Sanitary .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 3 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Au ust 24 1989 NO. VIr. ENGINEERING 3 SUBJECT DA TE Au ust 18, 1989 AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE TYPE OF ACTION AN AGREEMENT WITH CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE FOR DESIGN OF THE OUTFALL PHASE 3 AND SECONDARY CLARIFIER AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT IMPROVEMENTS, DP 20089 SUBMITTED BY Curtis W. Swanson Princi al Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department Engineering Division ISSUE: Authori zati on of the Board of Di rectors is requi red for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a professional services agreement in an amount greater than $50,000. BACKGROUND: Final effluent from the District's wastewater treatment plant is discharged to Suisun Bay through a four-mile long 72-inch diameter outfall that was constructed in 1958. The present capacity of the outfall is 60 to 65 mgd under gravity condit ions and 90 mgd under pumped conditi ons. Si nce constructi on, the' outfall has been operated under gravity conditions; however, the recent Phase 2 Rehabilitation Project allows pumping up to 90 mgd. While the outfall has the capacity to convey pumped flows, several improvements need to be made to increase outfall capacity and improve reliability. The Phase 3 Outfall Project will provide improvements to allow the capability of pumping flows up to 140 mgd. The proposed improvements include two new 75- mgd final effluent pumps, pump control system improvements, and surge protection facilities including a surge tower approximately 60 feet tall. Installation of the new pumps and other improvements will allow for reliable, uninterrupted effluent disposal during future peak dry weather flow and wet weather flow conditions. The second element of this project will improve eight existing secondary clarifiers. The existing fiberglass weirs in the secondary clarifiers are structurally inadequate to utilize the full hydraulic capacity of the units. To withstand buoyant forces, the fiberglass weir troughs are currently operated in a partially flooded condition. Under this restricted operating mode, the capacity of each of the existing clarifiers is limited to 10 mgd. Additional secondary cl arifi er capacity wi 11 be needed to treat wet weather flows and increasing dry weather peak flows. District staff estimates that the capacity of each existing clarifier can be restored to a full capacity of more than 12 mgd by replacing and adjusting the elevation of the existing weirs. Overall, more than 16 mgd of secondary cl arifier capacity will be made avail abl e as a result of the weir modifications. The proposed secondary clarifier improvements include installation of new perimeter weirs, improvements to sludge collection, pumping and metering systems, and modifications to the scum baffle and removal systems on all eight existing secondary clarifiers. 1302A-9/85 CWS DRW RAB REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATIN~ !J6..J lf$ SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE FOR DESIGN OF THE OUTFALL PHASE 3 AND SECONDARY CLARIFIER IMPROVEMENTS, DP 20089 POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF DATE AUqust 18, 1989 3 The increased outfall and secondary cl arifi er capacity wi 11 improve the treatment plant's ability to handle wet weather flows. This project is an alternative to the earlier approach of lined holding basins. Camp Dresser and McKee (COM) is recommended to be the consulting firm for the preliminary design of the outfall and secondary clarifier improvements. COM was involved in the Treatment Plant Master Plan and the Outfall Phase 2 Rehabilitation Project. COM performed well on those projects and has applicable experience which will be useful for this current project. A cost reimbursement agreement has been negotiated with COM with a cost ceiling of $140,200. Under the proposed agreement, COM will perform prel iminary design of the outfall pumping and secondary clarifier improvements. A separate agreement for final design of the improvements will be negotiated at the completion of preliminary design. The concept of and facilities included in the Outfall Phase III Project were included in the Stage 5B Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which was prepared to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The secondary clarifier improvements has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from CEQA under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 18.3 because the project involves rehabilitation or replacement of existing utility systems. The proposed outfall pumping and secondary clarifier improvements are included in the 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget (pages TP-7 through TP-11 and TP-14 through TP-16). The estimated total project cost as listed in the budget is $11 ,240 ,000. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a Cost Reimbursement Agreement with a cost ceiling of $140,200 with Camp Dresser and McKee for the Outfall Phase 3 and Secondary Clarifier Improvements Project. 13028-9/85 '", \ '", , '"" ) '", I ''''-" i .~ i '''', I ". -J ~ Effluent Pumps Central Contra Costa Sanitary DIstrict ~ Project Location Outfall Phase III Secondary Clarifier Improvements Figure 1 2523-9/88 . Centra~ ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Augus t 24, 1989 NO. VI!. ENGINEERING 4 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH FLOWMOLE CORPORATION TO CONSTRUCT 830 FEET OF SEWER USING DIRECTIONAL DRILLING TECHNOLOGY WITH A COST CEILING OF $48,600 DATE August 22, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED B'C 1 LT' Ky e . onJes Assistant Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DI~ngineering Department Engineering Division ISSUE: Board authorization is required for the GM-CE to execute construction contracts over $10,000 and to exempt projects from public bidding. BACKGROUND: Engineering Division staff are currently involved in the design of three small but difficult sewer projects. The first project is located near Meek Place in Lafayette and consists of extending a sewer rodding inlet from a backyard easement sewer to the street. This project, requested by CSO, is required since the backyard easement sewer has very poor accessibility and thus requires routine maint~nance by hand equipment. By extending the rodding inlet to the street, a long section of the backyard sewer can be cleaned with truck-mounted equipment, thereby reducing maintenance efforts. The second project, known as the Miner Road Storm Damage Project, consists of constructing a sewer along a new alignment through private property, thereby eliminating a temporary sewer suspended along an unstable creek bank. The third project will be constructed along Foye Drive in Lafayette. This project will relocate a deteriorated sewer from the front yards of several homes to a new alignment in the street. Staff has analyzed these projects with respect to access restrictions, construction impacts, and cost and has determined that the use of a trenchless construction technology is the most appropriate method for construction of these sewers. Directional drilling is an emerging trenchless technology which staff believes is well suited for these projects due to 1) reduced costs compared to open cut methods, 2) the potential for minimizing construction impacts, and 3) the ability to install sewers in difficult access situations. FlowMole Corporation is a proprietary directional drilling company providing services throughout North America. The FlowMole technology consists of drilling a small pilot hole with a directionally controlled cutting head. Once the pilot hole is complete, polyethylene sewer pipe is pulled behind a reamer which expands the pilot hole to a size slightly larger than the outside diameter of the pipe. This technology is different from the pipe bursting technology (PIM) recently used at the District in that directional drilling results in a new pipe line constructed in virgin soil whereas PIM results in a new pipe line being pulled through an existing sewer which has been burst. FlowMole Corporation has substantial experience in installation of underground utility conduits but has minimal sewer installation experience in the United States. The District has had one experience with FlowMole to date. This was on an emergency basis and resulted in the successful installation of a new pipe line to replace a pipe line that had been damaged. In that project, staff xperienced REVIEWED AND RECOMMENotD FO B RD ACTlO~ 1302A-9/85 KL T DRW LAN INITIATING DEPT./DIV. j}~e- DJC J~ SUBJECT AUTHORIZE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH FLOWMOLE CORPORATION TO CONSTRUCT 830 FEET OF SEWER USING DIRECTIONAL DRILLING TECHNOLOGY WITH A COST CEILING OF $48,600 POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 DATE August 22, 1989 OF 4 some problems with the F10wMole technology. Since that time, however, staff has learned of improvements in the FlowMole equipment which staff believes will alleviate several of the problems experienced during the emergency project. Staff is now proposing to utilize the FlowMole technology for the installation of the three sewer. projects described above. Since new alignments are being used at these locations, there is no existing sewer available, thereby eliminating pipe bursting as an alternative. The total project cost for the three sites is $134,200 as shown in Attachment II. It is estimated that it would cost an additional $25,000 to complete these three projects using conventional open cut excavation methods. In addition to the cost savings, an added benefit of this technology is the reduction in construction impacts on local residents which lessens the difficulty of construction management and easement acquisition. Easements required for these projects have been presented to the Board on August 24, 1989, under the consent calendar. FlowMole Corporation has patented their directionally controlled boring process and is the sole contractor in North America using this innovative technology for the pipe sizes required. The Board may, therefore, elect to exempt this project from public bidding since it is only available from one source. Due to the innovative nature of this technology, staff feels this project could also be exempt from bidding on the basis of being a demonstration project since 1) 8-inch sewer has never been installed using FlowMole Technology, and 2) one of the objectives of the overall project is to demonstrate the applicability of using this technology on future sewer construction projects. Exemption from bidding for demonstration purposes is allowed under Public Contracts Code Section 3400. An agreement has been negotiated with FlowMole Corporation for the installation of 830 feet of 6 and 8-inch diameter. sewers on a unit price basis with a cost ceiling of $48,600. Sufficient funds have been authorized within the Miner Road Storm Damage Project (1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget, Page CS-97) to fund construction activities at all three project sites. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.2, since it involves a minor alteration of existing sewer facilities; no expansion of use would occur beyond that previously existing. RECOMMENDATION: Exempt this project from public bidding requirements, and authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with FlowMole Corporation for the installation of 830 feet of sewer at a cost not to exceed $48,600. Further, the Board should adopt a resolution making a finding that the FlowMole Technology is designated by trade name in the project proposal in order that a field test may be made to determine the FlowMole Technology's suitability for future District use. (Public Contracts Code Section 3400(b).) 13028-9/85 Attachment I Project Leg~nd: .0 - Meek Place @ - Miner Road Storm Damage Project ~ - Foye Drive G inda Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Location Map Flowmole Demonstration Projects DP 4652 ATTACHMENT II FLOWMOLE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY Construction Contingency (15%) $ 18,500. 8,300. 48,600. 30,000. 12,000. 6,800. District Forces (Design) (1) Right of Way Acquisition Directional Drilling (FlowMole) CSO Support Services During Construction (2) Construction Management Initial Authorization 10 , 000 . $134,200. (35,000. ) $ 99.200. Project Evaluation (3) TOTAL PROJECT COST FUTURE BUDGET ALLOCATION (From Miner Road Storm Damage Project 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget, pg. CS-97) (1) Design labor includes preparation specifications, utility coordination, cost negotiations. of permit construction drawings and acquisition and construction (2) eso crews will provide excavation of access pits, assembly of polyethylene sewer pipe, and construction of new manholes. (3) Project evaluation will include TV inspection of new sewer lines and potholing at various locations to verify alignment and grade of new sewer. . CentrL Contra Costa Sanitar ~ .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 7 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 24, 1989 NO. VIII. PERSONNEL 1 SUBJECT ADOPT NEW QASS DESCRIPTIONS FOR JUNIOR CONTROL SYSTEMS ENGINEER (RANGE G67, $3,070 - $3,716) AND ASSISTANT CONTROL SYSTEMS ENGINEER (RANGE G72, $3,461 - $4,189) DATE August 9, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION PERSONNEL SUW1rrr~ E. Brennan Plant Operations Division Manager INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Plant Operations Department ISSUE: The class descriptions for the positions of Junior Control Systems Engineer and Assi stant Control Systems Engi neer shoul d be adopted to estab 1 ish appropri ate job duties and levels of responsibilities. The Board of Directors must adopt the new class descriptions. BACKGROUND: On April 20, 1989, as part of the 1989 - 1990 Personnel Budget, the Board of Directors approved a junior engineer position within the Computer Section of the Plant Operations Department. This position is flexibly staffed, as are all junior engineer classes, to the level of assistant engineer to attract high quality individuals by providing a career advancement path. As stated in the Personnel Budget, this position is to provide assistance in the replacement of the field microprocessors and provide backup to the present staff. The emphasis of this position is on process engineering with an extensive background in computer programming. Due to the specialized needs of the Computer Section, a separate class description is necessary for the individual in this position. The class descriptions of Junior Control Systems Engineer and Assistant Control Systems Engineer are attached. After the Junior Control Systems Engineer has satisfactorily completed 24 months in the position, the individual will be pranoted to Assistant Control Systems Engineer. This practice is consistent with similar Junior Engineer positions throughout the District. These class descriptions detail the specific duties and responsibilities required in these posit.ions. This position paper has been reviewed by the Personnel Committee of the Board of Directors. RECOtIENDATION: Engineer, (G67, $3,461-$4,189). Adopt the new cl ass descri pti ons for J uni or Control Systems $3,070-$3,716) and Assistant Control Systems Engineer (G72, WEB REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIAv;r?5'V @/l;f 1302/1.9/85 ROGER J. DOLAN CRF CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITAAY DISTRICT Effective: Range: JUNIOR CONTROl SYSTEMS ENGINEER DEFINITION Use the Pl ant Operation Department's process computer system to incorporate changes to pl ant i nstrumentati on, make softw are changes to improve or expand computer system performance. Develop, design, and install new computer programs as required. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS This is an entry level class in the professional engineering series within the Operations Division of the P1 ant Operations Department. Incumbents perform 1 ess compl ex computer engi neeri ng work. KnOrll edge and experience is required with electro/mechanical devices and computer programmi ng. After successful compl eti on of 24 months of trai ni ng and testing, the Junior Engineer woul d advance to the Assistant Engineer 1 evel . The use of respiratory equipment Cincl uding S.C.B.A.) may be required for this position. Therefore, the Junior Control Systems Engineer will be required to be clean shaven for annual fit tests and for any occasion which requires the use of respiratory equipment. SUPERVISION. RECEIVED AND.EXERCISED Receives general supervi si on and specific trai ni ng from the Control Systems Engineer. E.XAMPLES OF .DUTIES - Duties may include, but are not limited to the foll 0rI i ng: o Use plant computer control system to make changes to data bases and operator schematics. Incorporate changes and additions to plant instrumentation. o Use computer system processors and di agnostics to backup and monitor software integrity and security. o Make changes to existing appl ication software to improve or expand control system of management i nformati on system performance. o Develop, des i gn, and install new computer programs when required for the addition of new control system or management information system capabilities. o Assist the Control Systems Engineer in the study of existing instrumentation performance for possible replacement recommendations. o Help in the diagnosis of harcWare and software problems by logical tracing at the failed function from its source to its final destination. o Performs mechanical or el ectrical projects under di recti on of the Control Systems Engineer. o May perform instrumentation testing, eval uation or install ation under direction. QUAl IFICATIONS KnOlll edge of: o Pri ncipl es and practices of el ectrical and/or mechanical engineering. o Computer programming in Fortran o Basic elements of systems theory and procedures analysis. o Safety hazards and appropri ate precauti ons appl icabl e to work ass i gnments. Abil ity to: o Learn new computer systems from documentation and training. o Appl y the pri nci pl es of softw are management to organize and maintain software integrity. Diagnose problem to isolate cause. o o Use personal computers. o Learn and observe all District safety precautions. o Work shift, on-call, weekends, and hol idays as assigned. EXPERIENCE AND EDUCATION Any combination equivalent to experience and education that coul d 1 ikely provide the required knOllledge and abilities would be qualifying. A typical way to obtai n the knOlll edge and abil ities woul d be: Experi ence: None req ui red. Education: Equivalent to possession of a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major work in electrical or mechanical engineering or closely related field. LICENSES AND CERTIFICATE Possession of an Engineer-In-Training Certificate is desirable prior to promotion to Assistant Engineer. CENTRAl CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT Effective: Range: ASSISTANT CCIfTR<l. I SYSTEMS ENGINEER DEFINITION Use the P1 ant Operati on Department's process computer system to incorporate changes to pl ant i nstrumentati on, make softw are changes to improve or expand computer system performance. Develop, design, and install new computer programs as required. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS Incumbents perform moderately difficult computer engineering work. Kno<<ledge and experience is required of electro/mechanical devices and computer programming. Performs more compl ex fiel d instrumentation and other engi neeri ng proj ects with mi nimal superv i s i on from the Control Systems Engineer. The use of respiratory equipment (including S.C.B.A.) may be required for this position. Therefore, the Assistant Control Systems Engineer will be requi red to be cl ean shaven for annual fit tests and for any occasi on which requires the use of respiratory equipment. SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED Receives general supervision and specific training from the Control Systems Engineer. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES - Duties may incl ude, but are not 1 imited to the foll 0<< ing: o Use plant computer control system to make changes to data bases and operator schematics. Incorporate changes and additions to pl ant i nstrumentati on. o Use computer system processors and di agnosti cs to backup and monitor software integrity and security. o Make changes to existing appl ication software to improve or expand control system of management i nformati on system performance. o Develop, des i gn, and install new computer programs when required for the addition of new control system or management information system capabilities. o Assist the Control Systems Engineer in the study of existing instrumentation performance for possibl e repl acement recommendations. o Hel pin the di agnos i s of hard<< are and softw are probl ems by logical tracing at the failed function fran its source to its final destination. o Performs mechanical or electrical projects under direction of the Control Systems Engi neer. o May perform instrumentation testing, evaluation or installation under direction. o Assist Operators to correct control problems encountered-retune control loops, etc. o Provide Operator training as required. QUALIFICATIONS KnOffl edge of: o Pri ncipl es and practices of el ectrical and/or mechanical engi neeri ng. o Computer programming in Fortran and Assembly language. o KnOt/lege of control systems theory and its practical appl ication to process control and field instrumentation. Safety hazards and appropri ate precauti ons appl icabl e to work assignments. o Abil ity to: o Learn new computer systems fran documentation and training. o Appl y the pri nci pl es of softw are management to organize and maintain software integrity. o Diagnose problem to isolate cause. o Use personal computers. o Learn and observe all District safety precautions. o Provide backup as required for Control Systems Engineer. o Work shift, on-call, weekends, and hol idays as assigned. EXPERIENCE AND EDUCATION Any combination equivalent to experience and education that could 1 ikely provide the required knOt/ledge and abilities would be qualifying. A typical way to obtain the knOt/ledge and abil ities woul d be: Experi ence: 18 months of professional engineering experience comparable to that of the Junior Control System Engineer in the District. Education: Equival ent to possession of a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major work in electrical or mechanical engineering or closely rel ated fiel d. LICENSES AND CERTIFICATE Possession of an Engineer-In-Training Certificate is desirable. Possession of a valid Cal ifornia Driver's License.