The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 03-16-89 . Centrl." Contra Costa Sanltar 7 District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF POSITION PAPER NO. v. HEARINGS 1 SUBJECT DATE CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING 10 RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT 1989 TEN-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) AND THE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FEE SYSTEM FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; APPROVE THE DRAFT CIP TYPE OF ACTION CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING. APPROVE CIP INITIA TING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Plannin Division SUBMITTED BY James R. Cae ISSUE: The Board of Directors has established the date of March 16, 1989 to conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the draft 1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan and the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Residential Development. BACKGROUND: The draft 1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Pl an and the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Residential Development were submitted to the Board of Di rectors' Capital Projects Committee for review on December 13, 1988, and January 3, 1989. These documents were submitted to the full Board on January 5, 1989, and a Board workshop on the draft Pl an and proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Residential Development was conducted on January 26, 1989. Over 700 informational brochures describing the CIP and the fee proposal for residential development were distributed by mail on February 24, 1989. Two public workshops were held on March 8 and 9, 1989, to provide an informal setting for discussion of the CIP and fee proposal. A summary of comments received during the public workshops and in telephone inquiries is presented in Attachment 1. It is appropriate to receive additional comments from the publ ic prior to approval of the Plan and adoption of the Fee System. March 16, 1989, was established as the date for this public hearing and appropriate notices have been published. Appropriate ordinances and resolutions establishing the Fee System and setting the fees are scheduled for Board consideration on April 20, 1989. The draft 1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan provides for approximately $196 million (1988 dollars) in capital improvement projects to be pursued over the next ten years. Goals and objectives have been established for the Treatment Plant, Collection System, and General Improvement Programs and are the basis for the proposed capital improvements. The goals and objectives are presented in Attachments 2, 3, and 4. The CIP provides the basis for project prioritizing and schedul ing, District staffing, and long-range financial planning. The Plan also serves as the framework for fee analysis and for the annual Capital Improvement Budget which will be produced in the Spring. The Capital Improvement Budget provides a deta il ed presentati on of the schedul es and cost estimates for proj ects proposed for the first year of the ten-year planning period. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION J!1K /IJf \ JMK RAB SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE CO~NTS ()! THE DRAFT 1989 TEN-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) AND THE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FEE SYSTEM FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; APPROVE THE DRAFT CIP PAGE DATE 2 OF 6 March 14, 1989 Approval of the CIP authorizes staff to use the Plan's project priorities and cash flow assumptions in the fee system analysis. The CIP has been evaluated by staff and determi ned to be exempt from the Cal iforni a Envi ronmental Qual ity Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 17.3 since it is a planning study. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing and receive comments on the draft 1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan and the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Residential Development. Approve the draft Capital Improvement Plan. Hold over adoption of the Fee System to the April 20, 1989, meeting of the Board of Directors. 13028-9/85 Page 3 of 6 ATTACH~NT 1 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC WORKSHOPS AND TELEPHONE INQUIRIES A total of nine people attended the March 8 and March 9, 1989, publ ic workshops on the proposed residenti al fee and five telephone inqui ries have been received. They represented the following groups: Public Workshop Attendance Building Industry Association Allied Investments Blackhawk City of Marti nez Presley of Northern California Prometheus Vermillion Group Warmington Homes TOTAL: 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 "9 Telephone Inquiries Developers City of Marti nez TOTAL: 4 1 5 The following is a summary of the questions that were asked. o Will annexation fees be affected? o Will Concord be affected? o Will a separate account be set up for expansion fees? o Will the proposed fee be affected by changes in wastewater discharge standards? o What major projects are planned in the next ten years? o When will the treatment plant need to be expanded? o What is a prudent reserve? o Is it equitable to charge the same fee for all single family homes? o Smaller residential users will bear more of the burden of cost if a differentiation in fees is not made among different types of residential users. o How much longer can new homeowners conti nue to afford the cost of new infrastructure before growth is stopped? o Will there be future fee increases? o When will the new fee become effective? o What is the difference between our current fee system and the proposed fee system? Page 4 of 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. CI') U'l 0 ~ CX) "It "It ~ ('oj ia "It N U'l CI') "It '" 0 N 1""'4 8 .. .. .. .. .. r-l ,... 0\ N r-l "It r-l ~ .... r .A. " r ..... """ CI') UJ t-l ~ l:; .. 0 CI') -I i ffi ~ ~ t-l ~ CI') ~ ~ ~ t-l LL. Z CI') ~ :z: 0 ~ 0 UJ UJ CI') t-l ~ H < :z: UJ i a:: !c 0 ~ CI') ! CI')CI') ~ t-l < ~ < UJ -I ~ F= ~ LL. ~ i~ t-l d :a ~ 0 ce ~ ~ ~ CI') L&J ~ I LL. ~ ~ t ~ ~~ ~ ~ Q. -I t-l -I en a:: ~~f3 l2 ..J -I ~ 0 Q.LL. ~ ~~ ~ en t-l UJ ~ LL.en ~ ~ > UJ ~ a:: oen ~ 8 0 ~~ ~~ ~5 ~~t; LL. t-l ~~ ! < i a:: N~ ~ ~~ -I < 8 ~ -I t:i !i!c.. :a ~t ~~~ ~~ ..Ii t-l UJ ~;i LL. ~ .. ~a:: i UJt-l en~ 0:: ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ UJ ~:a ~ ~~ t-l ~t-l ~ ~ < -I ~ ~o ~t; t-lZ ~ a:: ~~ ~.... t-l~CI') UJ L&J en UJ~ ~~~~ en~ . t-l ~ a:: UJ ~t; ~ ~~ t;j ~UJ ~ ~ .. !~ ~UJ ~ o:::<Cl ~~ UJ ~ a~ ~ > .. fi f=Q., <~o::: iB ~~ t-l L&J i UJ 0 ~ !c Z ::;)t-l C1')Z OQ., ~ ~ i ~~ t-len -I ;s < .. i ~~ O::i LL.Z ~ ~ 0:::0 t-l ~ ~~ 0 ~ ~~ ~<! t-l!i! a:: ~i t; ~ ~!z Q. :z: CI') UJ UJ~ UJ ~ 0\ UJ ~ L&J <en ~t-l i oen eX) > t-ll >-=> i~ t-lO ii ~ 0\ H :Eo ~~ ~~ ~ >t-l C1')d r-l t; t-lN !i ~.~ 8 ~ -I t-l t-l 8~ 8~ LU UJ< t-l LL.O UJ :I: ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ en !i! ~ ~ ~ S t-l ~ ~ Cl ~ en >- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z 8 I < ~ ~ -I 5 ~ I 0 UJ ~ ~ ~ ~ il t:i L&J ~ CI') !i! 8 i UJ --', ._-----_.'-_._.._-----~_._-_..,-,_..__....-.,..~,~--~_.,. .--...-.... Page 5 of 6 c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c 0 c .. .. .. .. .. .. en ~ (Y'l N co N .... I' ro 0\ N .... .... 0\ "'It \0 "'It co en .. .. .. .. .. 8 c III .... (Y'l .... 0\ .... .... .... .... .... r ........ "' UJ 0:: ~~ < ~ UJ ~ en > < % en 1-1 LI.. I 1-1 en UJ en en 0 UJ % i ! en 0::9 en ~~ > 1-1 en ~ ~ 1-1 ...I ~ ~~ u.. 0:: 0:: ~ 1= ~~ ~ ~ UJ < UJ c::c ~ ~ UJ ~ ~ z UJ .~ ~...I 1-1 ~~ 1-1 ~ 1-1 UJ ~Q S UJ~ 0:: Q ~ ~ :c ~ .~ ~ .0:: Q ~ ~ en .... 0 ~ ~ enLl.. en ~~ ~UJ > % ~ 1-1 g 1-1 oen >- UJ ~ Q ~~ 0:: S~ g ~CIO 1-1 ~~ 0.. ~ 1-1 .. 0 ::Eo.. ~ (I) ..... ~ ::EUJ 1-1 ~ t;~ ~~ a..c c 1-1 > ~~ 0.. 0 i 0 ...IUJ a (I) ~N 0 ... UJ ~ ~o.. ~~~ a~ < .. ~ ~~ <>- 0 0 ~~ m ~ (Y'l ....(.!' ~ ~~~ o~ 0..... I' ...I ~~ 1-1 0 .. 1-1 ~~< :c tc~ > UJ 1-1 ~~ 1-1 I' ~ . . (Y'l120..~ :c..... I .... SN ~~~ UJ '< ~~ :'UJ 'lilt .... 1-1 en % (1)...1 ~~:E ~> ~ ...I << UJ ::E~ UJ UJ ~ ~ ~~ 1-1 ~ r~~ (I)> (I) ~ 0:: > t:; ~~ !UJ !~ 1-1 ~~~ ~~ t;; % ...I ~ ~ ...I~ ...1% !i! 0 ZC:: 1-1 t:; en ~~ l2UJ 1-1 5en 5~ Si ~ % ~~~~ UJS x UJ :1.- I~ UJ > LI.. >(1) ~~ 12 t;Q 1-1 ~ ~~~ 0> 0::LI.. ~ ~ ~ t;o S ~ ~ ~~ 0::0 ~~ ~~ 1-1 UJz UJ~ ~ 1-1 zr ~s ~8~ ~UJ m~ Zt~ CJ 0:: > (l)S N Z Zt~ ~~~ :~ m~ 0::1-1 .. I 0 8~ ~ :J: ~~ 0 1-1 UJ:a ~ ~c:: .... tc > iUJ en en 12Q UJ!~ z en ~ en ~co t;; ~~ ~~ % ...18 ~ss ~ UJ ~~ z< Q...I ~~ > I-IUJ <~ ~LI.. ~~ I-I;UJ ~ 0\ 1-1 @~ ::E>- ~.... !I UJ ~ dffiUJ .... S ~6 0..1-1 ~8~ ~ ~~ Zt z>z ~i ~12 UJ UJN 1-101-1 ::J: ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1-1 ffi 0:: ~ ~ < -J ::;) fig 0:: (I) 0:: Z i g 0 1-1 tc ...I (.!' ~ ~ UJ 0:: :. E F= (I) ~ li; ~ z 8 0 ~ :. ~ ::E ~(I) ~ I 0 %UJ ~ ~ 1-1 1-1 ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ % UJ (I) ~ tu g !i! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" .. .. .. .. ..... N N C'f\ lD '" fQ 0'1 \0 8 N 0'1 "'It .. .. .. C'f\ 0'1 C'f\ ~ ... ...... ... r -r ......... ~ ~ ~ ~ 8% < < Q I.&J 0 .R: ~ ~S ~ < 8~ I.&J ~ "'~ ~ ~ ~~ M 6 ~ ~~~ ~ M ~~> e~ z ~ ~Q.~ 0 Q. ...I .-c ~ ~~~~ M~ t:; ~ ~I.&J CI) '" a:::: M 8 ~ '" ~ ~ ~;h Ou.. I.&J i u.. M < "'I.&J < '" t:; ~ ~ t:;~", M, '" ~~ ~ I.&J ...I I.&J ~~~~ % M '" ~ ~~ I.&J Si < <OM8 ~ > I.&J ~ ~..oJ M u.. ..... ~~~ !2 ~ 6 z i '" ..... 0- I.&J i ~ ..... ~ ~I.&J'" ::E u.. ..... '" 00 :iffi~ ~~ LU u.. ~ M '" ~ Z I.&J~ ~ ..... ~(!J 0 ::E ~ ~ N ~~ '" S~ e ~ ~ I.&J ~ <I.&J ~ > LLJ ~~ M '" ~ 0\ M ~~ I.L. ..... i ~ i ~ 6 I.l.. ~z u.. I.&J as .....~ ~ >- I.&J ...I :oJ: ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ '" % ~ 0 ..... ~ t< ..... ...I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" z g 8 I < ...I ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ "'I ~ ~ Gj ~ :z:: ~ % (!J I.&J .Q-ige 6 of 6 . Centre.. Contra Costa Sanitar) District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 11 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF March 16, 1989 NO. V. HEARINGS 2 SUBJECT DATE March 10, 1989 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM ADJUSTMENT OF REFUSE COLLECTION RATES BY VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT TYPE OF ACTION CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY INITIA TING DEPT./DIV. Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer Administrative/Finance & Accounting ISSUE: Valley Waste Management has submitted an unschedul ed application for an interim adjustment of its refuse collection rates. BACKGROUND: Valley Waste Management (Valley) has requested an interim adjustment of its refuse collection rates based on an unexpected 87 percent increase in landfill disposal fees instituted by Acme Fill Corporation on February 1, 1989. A 33.7 percent across-the-board increase in collection rates effective April 1, 1989 is requested by Valley. In its rate application, Valley asserts that the 33.7 percent increase is required to produce increased revenues during the balance of the current July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989 rate-setting period to cover the higher disposal fees. The Board of Di rectors received not1ficati on of the request for interim adj ustment of collection rates at the February 16, 1989 Board Meeting, and scheduled this matter for consideration at a public hearing on March 16, 1989. At the February 16, 1989 Board Meeting, District Counsel advised the Board that, under the provisions of Section 8 and 27 of the franchise agreement, requests for adjustment of collection rates may be made no more frequently than on an annual basis, and that the Board is not requi red to grant interim rate adj ustments. Staff Analysis Valley Waste Management was last granted a refuse collection rate increase of 21.74 percent effective July 1, 1988 to prov ide revenues requi red for the customary July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989 rate-setting period. The 21.74 percent increase was based on the existing landfill disposal fee of $25.13 per ton. The disposal fee had been increased by 118 percent to $25.13 per ton by Acme Fill Corporation as recently as JUly 1, 1987. Valley was notified by Acme Fill Corporation on January 12, 1989 that the disposal fee woul d be increased by 87 percent from $25.13 to $47.00 per ton effective February 1, 1989. As a result of this significant unanticipated increase in disposal fees, Valley seeks an across-the-board increase of 33.7 percent in collection rates during the three-month period, April 1, 1989 through June 30, 1989, to provide for the increased disposal fees during the five-month period, February 1, 1989 through June 30, 1989. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~ ~. '- INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1302A.9/85 WNF PM SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM ADJUSTMENT OF REFUSE COLLECTION RATES BY VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT PAGE 2 OF 11 DATE March 10, 1989 Before review ing al ternative courses for considerati on by the Board in addressi ng Valley's request for interim rate adjustments, it is appropriate to recount a number of maj or pendi ng issues. These issues, which woul d normally be addressed in the next rate-setting process to establish collection rates effective July 1, 1989, are desc ri bed below: Curbside Recycling Program On the basis of the results of a three-month pilot program initiated in March 1989 in the communities of Danville, Alamo and Lafayette, the Board will determine whether a full-scale curbside recycl ing program will be implemented throughout Valley's franchise zone. The projected revenues and expenses of the full-scale recycling program would be incorporated in the normal rate-setting process to establish collection rates effective July 1,1989. A restructuring of collection rates to encourage recycling by establishing lower rates for fewer refuse containers and successively higher rates for additional containers may be proposed for consideration. Automated Curbside Collection Automated curbside collection in the communities of Danville and Alamo will be initiated on a three-month pilot basis in March 1989. The Board will determine whether full-scale implementation of automated collection should occur, and the communities affected, after the results of the pilot program are reviewed. The projected revenues and expenses of automated collection would be incorporated in the normal rate-setting process to establish collection rates effective July 1, 1989. If automated collection is implemented in certain communities but excluded in another, the higher cost of service in the excluded community would require establishment of a separate rate schedule; additionally, it is anticipated that residences in participating communities, which cannot receive automated collection due to topography, would be assessed a higher collection rate. Interim Transfer Station Fee The interim transfer station sited at Acme landfill is anticipated to be placed in operation before July 1, 1989. The transfer station fee has not been establ ished at this time, and may not be known by Valley before submission of the rate application for the normal rate-setting process to establish collection rates effective July 1, 1989. In view of the need for financial information to be programs, it is likely that the normal schedule for application by March 31, 1989 by Valley will be delayed. result in straining staff resources during a particularly obtai ned from the pil ot submission of the rate Because such del ay will busy period, the District 1302B-9/85 SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM ADJUSTMENT OF REFUSE COLLECTION RATES BY VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT PAGE 3 OF 11 DATE March 10, 1989 is in the process of engaging Price Waterhouse to perform the rate analysis for the rate-setting process which would normally occur to establish collection rates effective JUly 1, 1989. Alternative courses in addressing the request for interim adj ustment of collection rates by Valley are reviewed in the following section. Denv Valley's Reauest for a 33.67 Percent Increase Effective April 1, 1989 Under the terms of Section 8 of the franchise agreement, requests for rate increases may be made no more frequently than on an annual basis, except when the refuse collector is requi red to make changes in its operations. Such changes in operations relate to those caused by operational efficiencies required by the District, implementation of a recycling program or waste-to-energy program, or direction of refuse to a disposal site or transfer station of the District's choosing. As the increase in disposal fee is not related to a change in operations, the request for rate increase is not in compl iance with the provisions of the franchise agreement. Approve Valley's Request for a 33.67 Percent Increase Effective April 1, 1989 Valley has appl ied for a 33.67 percent increase for the three-month period April 1, 1989 through June 30, 1989 to recover the higher disposal fees during the five-month period February 1, 1989 through June 30, 1989. A 33.67 percent across-the-board increase would cause a single-can rate to increase from $12.95 to $17.30 per month, and increase other representative rates as shown in Attachment I. Collection rates established by the Board would prevail until the next discretionary submission of a rate application by the refuse collector. The rate increase of 33.67 percent is higher than it would otherwise be because of the shortened recovery period (three months vs. five months). In view of this, and the net expense reductions which are 1 ikely to be real ized from automated collection, the approval of Valley's request should be conditioned on a requirement for a subsequent rate review at a future date which is certain. Approve a 22.90 Percent Increase Effective April 1, 1989 Recovery of the higher disposal fees over a fifteen month period beginning April 1, 1989 and extending through the next fiscal year ending June 30, 1990 woul d requi re a 22.90 percent increase. A 22.90 percent across-the-board increase would cause a single-can rate to increase from $12.95 to $15.90 per month, and increase other representative rates as shown in Attachment I. 13028-9/85 SUBJECT POSITION PAPER CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM ADJUSTMENT OF REFUSE COLLECTION RATES BY VALLEY WASTE MANPGEMENT PAGE 4 OF 11 DATE March 10, 1989 Approve a 22.90 Percent Increase Effective April 1, 1989, with a Further Adjustment of Rates to Incorporate the Effects of Curbside RecyclinQ, Automated Curbside Collection and Transfer Fees Under th is al ternative, a 22.90 percent across-the-board increase woul d be implemented effective April 1, 1989, but would be further revised upon submission of a rate application giving effect to curbside recycling, automated collection and transfer station fees. Deny Valley's Request for a 33.67 Percent Increase Effective April 1, 1989, but Permit Inclusion of the Higher Disposal Fees in the Next Rate Application The higher di sposal fees incurred duri ng the February 1, 1989 th rough June 30, 1989 period would be allowed to be recovered in the normal rate-setting process to establish rates effective July 1, 1989. Other Courses That May be Identified During the Public Hearing Process Other alternative courses as may be determined as a result of the public hearing process should be reviewed. REC<Jl4Etl)ATION: Conduct a publ ic hearing to consider the request by Valley Waste Management for an interim increase in refuse coll ecti on rates effective April 1, 1989. 13026-9/85 .... .... C Gl E .<= V '" .... ~ I .... 101 ... ~! ~I~ ~QS I~I ~Ij ~ :5 ...111.. .. ~~! b- IOI! ... ~I ~- I o 0\ 0\ ..... 0 0\ .. ..... OUlO <'"l Gl <'"l "'..... GlC\O Call ::l>0\ ..,alCO 10::..... 0\ ..... :n~ ~ >..... o .. '" ..... al ......... UI- ::l ... l;: "'< ..... < 0 "'Gl<'"l alOal..... cn-"'\O "'... I CDCD_O\ l..o..lGCO V UI..... c.&:. 0..... I-t ~ a........ CUlN alO- al2:O. lI... ... U'l V .......... C '" .... UI o UI -0\ CCO 0\ 0\ 00 0\.....11I....... co alO ....... ...::Jl""') .-toe....... ..........al\O N > I alalO\ ...co::oo O::l ..... .., ..... ....1 ..... 1Il..... .,. ........ ...- w... liS < ..... alO ",al<'"l oll........ _ \0 ........1 al"'O\ c..~~ .<= 0...... ....UI..... c-N OC 2: .: <'"l g .... 00 00 0\ 0\ f'""'4CL~ ...:~:~ >.~>-~ .....<11..... .;~::lc -Ul_ ;~~-g c.. w 0\ co 0\ .. o ..... .... \0 \0 "'l N .... 00 0\ ..... .. N .... \0 0\ \0 ... ..... N "! ,... ... ~~g: ~~~ .....\Oco en al ::l C Gl > Gl 0:: '" al .... en '" 1Il ... o lI... UI Gl en C al 0. X 101 01 C en al en C .... al "'Ulo. :n31~..... o.lI... '" o ....... .....alO "''''.<=.... ~~t; en 0. "'en..... lilac: ... o lI... .... c al V ... al c.. al .,. al 0\ lI... al al V UI ::l - '" .<= o V ... C c.. '" ... o lI... .... '" en al al .... ::l 0 en c_ '" ~~&I alO::'" 0:: 0 OIlI... ",C al- ........ .. en"'", "'...'" VGl< alo. ...0 o lI... ,... ..... "l N o .,. ,... ~~ ,... .. co ..... 0\ ,... .. co '" al "Ii: '" 1Il ... o lI... ... o ... '" al .... en ::l .., '" < en al ::l C al al >al alll... 0:: al "OUI al- .....<= en v '" C 1Il ~ "'lI... o lI... o ,... "l ..... "0 al ... - ::l i 0:: en al ::l C al > ~ "0 al .... en '" l!l ... o lI... C al en '" Gl ... V C .... ~ ,... ..... N en al ::l C al > ~ "0 Gl .... en '" v al ... o lI... C - al UI '" al ... V c"o ....al ... ....- C ::l Gl lir eo:: al c.. ~II 0\ 00 ~ o ..... ... .. ,... ..... "l N ... ~Il II 00 0\ ..... N ... .. o .,. ,... ... "0 al ... - ::l i 0:: 31 '" al ... V C .... .... C Gl e Gl c.. Page 5 of 11 ; ~I~II ~ ~I~II ~ ~I~II ~ ~I~II 414 414 ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .... ~ ~~I ~ ~~II ~ ~~II ~ ~~II A !5 ~ .- 8 Q) > ~ ~ I al .... '" 0:: .... C al ... ... ::l U I C '" U Gl ..... 01 C ;:;; !5 .... ~ ... 101 al .... '" 0:: '" G) III "'al- _Ill> ~~~ G) ... "Ov _c Ill.... ~ al .... '" 0:: .... C al ... ... ::l U I C '" U al 0, C - <II al .... '" 0:: "0 G) en .....Gl- '" UI > _"'al ValO:: ... ... al V ~~ U al .... ~ .... C Gl ... ... ::l U I "0 G) en Cal- -Ill> CD:g~ ",... ... v '" C >-.... I N al .... '" 0:: al .... '" 0:: .... C Gl ... ... ::l U I .$ ~ ~ CD "0 Q. G) o en Ei31> '" al "'alO:: ... ... '" v >-c I.... o N al .... ~ ..... ..., '" < .... C .... ..... ..... ... G) 0. '" c.. C o :;; en o c.. ..... <II <II <II m (;' 0 '" 'I nn 1/IJ15t!!Ji5til/lElID FED 2 ':~ 1969 Fe b. 2 3, 1989 CC':JSD ADMINISThA;"'ON Honorable Tom A. Torlakson, Chairperson County of Contra Costa County Administration Building 651 Pine St., Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Chairperson Torlakson, Our family has lived in central Contra Costa County for 21 years, and we have watched helplessly as trash removal service (Valley Disposal, now Valley Waste Management) rates have climbed dramatically over that time period. At present we pay $38.85 every 3 months for the weekly pickup of one 32-gal container of household garbage and up to two contain- ers of garden clippings. And now we read that Valley Waste Management wants to raise rates again, to "cover increased . landf ill cost s" . Will there be no end to these frequent in- creases? We think $38.85 quarterly is already too high. Any rate increase we feel should be justified by a full report including costs and profits from Valley Waste Manage- ment, Acme Fill Corporation, and any other related companies. The automat ic grant ing of rate increases to companies that have a monopoly in a given area should not be permitted. Thank you for your attention to this matter. J:!:~)rL , (y'~~v J v' <::-- /1-, c-<J J ordarr S. Pr ice Lynn E. Price 1617 Springbrook Rd. Walnut Creek, CA 94596 LEP cc: ""-Iil tJ ~. ".7~- - ,., - I Supervi~ers Supervisor N. Fahden Supervisor S. McPeak Supervisor R. Schroeder Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Harvey Bragdon, Community Development Department Contra Costa Times Mayor and City Manager, Cities of Concord, Martinez, Walnut Creek, Pleasant Hill, and San Ramon C'r-n~ '1I.t8~~ll_1 Ir,1jgC~ijW5iD FEB 2 7 'Soa CCCSD ~~r-P.ETAAYOFTH;= -....,.~..- 3130 Sweetbrier Circle Lafayette, CA 94549 February 23, 1989 Ms. Susan McNulty Rainey, President Central Cnotra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place r1artinez, CA 94553 Dear Ms. Rainey: I am writing in regard to the garbagE rate increase requested by Valley Waste Management. The parent company, Waste Management Inc., is described by Forbes magazine as a darling of Wall Street for its ability to generate profit margins way above the industry norm. According to Forbes, they achieve these results by a comb- ination of relentless pressure on re~latory agencies and slick but deceptive advertising campaigns (such as that for the Marsh Canyon site). The current rate increase is another case in point. Valley Waste claims that increased dumping costs at the Acme Landfill (from ~25.13 to ~47.00 per ton) forces them to increase single can service rates (from $12.95 to $17.30 per month). Yet the typical household on this service generates approximately 200 pounds of garbage per month. This works out to an increased dumping cost of only ~2.20 per month, which is half of the increase requested by Valley\iaste. And this request comes on top of a substantial increase in 1988. I am unable to attend the public hearing scheduled for IJ~rch 16, but I request you to consider this letter as public testimony. Since you have given Valley Waste an exclusive franchise to my neighborhood, I implore you to protect the interests of your constituents. Please deny the current request and future outrageous requests that Valley Waste Management is sure to make. Sincerely, - (yLC ~~~ John C. Riordan Feb. 23, 1989 To: Central C.C.C. Sanitation District From: R.G. Petersen Subject: Proposed Garbage rate hikes. I have been reading in the paper about the increase in our rates. The proposed rates are unfair they work out to a very large increased revenue to the Company, as I will explain below. The average consumer gets 1 can picked up per week. This can contains usually 25 to 30 pounds of garbage. For the sake of the garbage company we will allow 50 pounds per can, This works out to 200 pounds of garbage per month. The increase to the garbage company went from $25.13 to $47 per ton, this is an increase of just under $22 per ton. It takes 10 customers to produce one ton of garbage per month. The garbage company should be allowed an increase to reflect their actual increase, this would be $2.20 per month based on my figures. My figures are not far off, however to be fair, I propose that a rider go along with a random garbage truck on pick-up day, the specific truck to be picked out by the C.C.C. rider on that morning to keep things honest. This person will then weigh 100 cans both before and after they are emptied to determine the actual weight of the garbage inside them. The total weight of the actual garbage will then be added together and then divided by 100 to get the average weight per can per customer. This can then be used to figure out exactly how much each customer should have to pay to make up the Garbage companies losses. It would be fair to all parties involved and would prove to be a most pracical aproach by your office, and neither parties could argue that it was not fair because it would be based on facts, not estimates, and would end up saving the County lots of time and money in the long run. proposed because Garbage Sincerely: R.G. Petersen ~A~ 1 William E. Kindley 49 Mott Drive Alamo, California 94507 (415) 820-2786 ~lEcg~U~IE[) MAR 1 3 ,gag CCCSO C'.....J:lFTIlRy OF THl" nl~"""'''''. /0 d~ /?t!J7' ~ ~ ~z s;;:,7.J~Q- ~:7' -01'~ ~ /-/~~Z &. / &~~~J / " ~,,// 6 tt/^'~ ~ /h~~~ ~ ~7~.J 'l~ /~ ~.' ~ A~~ ~,~ ;~ ~ ~ d:?7"~~- ~~....r- .e;..;;;-_:- ~~ 7= .~. 7 ~ ~ ds~~ aJ-4"'.+ .-::5/7;V~.;..j 4.Jh'c.4 ~....4 ~-,-'r- ~ 7'C> .h~ /. z. ~ ~% /~~ /,J ~ ~ ~ t2-u'&?1~. ~ /::;>~.:s ~A3€ :P'~F.-.q-- "$ ~ .~~~~ .\ ~eJa_~.J ~i4-I'€ ~~~~& -- A?J ~ 7;:r ,,~C,~ If" ~....;.. ~ S..."",-,,"7' ~,,~~ ~A:~ ~L /~~..V::S' a),,4 ~~ r -r--r-~....~ p~ u:;,~_A/'~ ~~ ~A;r- ~~;;- /~ -?;;r ~/~ ~~~~ ~...J~~ ~?'~;;- ~-"7 · -rJ/fryL"t: ~'^7' .e:. ~...,u7"f''7'' ~ Mf~~ -I ~ ~ c;;;.-=>-s ~ ~~ 7'~/ P . ----------- - - ~---~--- ------- Mrs. Barbara J. O'Connell 4053 Marianne Drive La~ayette, CA 94549 Centt-.:.d San 5019 Imhoff Place t1alP.t i nf:!z? Cf"~ Dear Central San: I have just been advised that Acme Fill has increased its rates by 87%. I would like to know how this has been justified, if it has. Are you protecting us taxpayers from being gauged by Acme Fill? I am opposed to such a gigantic rate increase and am taking this opportuni- ty to advise you that I expect you to protect us from this unbridled license on the part of Acme Fill. YOL\l'''s si ncerel y, . I! n to<. I ~/) /''/ . ,., ~t-t1eutft-l" L'~e{ (Mrs.) Barbara J. O'Connell RlEClEDVIm MAR 1 3 1989 CCCSD l''"'I'OOI;:TIlCi/Y OF""'. "~".,.... GORDON, DeFRAGA, WATROUS & PEZZAGLlA RlECIOVIED MAR 1 5 1969 A law Corporation Allan DeFraga Thomas A. Watrous James A. Pezzaglia Timothy J. Ryan March 14, 1989 CCCSO r~~F.rIl.RY Of n~c 1'I1ot'l'l'llill'l' Peter D. langley Scott W. Gordon Richard S. Bruno Bruce C. Paltenghi George R. Gordon Of Counsel Susan McNulty Rainey, President Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Acme-CCCSD Meeting of March 9, 1989 Dear Sue: Enclosed, please find a copy of Acme's independent engineers professional certification of initial closure and post-closure maintenance costs for the solid waste landfills on Acme's North, South and East parcels dated December 28, 1988 pursuant to your request of last Thursday. Also enclosed please find a copy of letter regarding the Solid Waste Disposal Site Reduction Act of 1987 requiring operators of solid waste landfills to pay an annual fee to the Board of Equalization pursuant to Roger Dolan's question of last Thursday. The 1989 solid waste disposal site clean-up and maintenance fee rate is estimated to be approximately ~.60 per ton. We had heard it was targeted for landfills, but its reach appears broader potential health and environmental problems site at solid waste landfills. closed public to respond to on site and off We appreciated meeting with you and John Clausen as well as members of your staff regarding an explanation of Acme's increased landfill tipping fee. V.~,ry tru~y~~ourS'D /?7n~J ~ft It.. / Ci (IJAMES A. P Z GLIA ,,/ cc. Boyd M. Olney, Jr. President, Acme Fill Corporation JAP/jaa Enclosure 611 Las Juntas Street. P. O. Box 630. Martinez. California 94553. (415) 228-1400 . (707) 642.6288 Telecopier (415) 228.3644 GORDON. DeFRAGA. WATROUS & PEZZAGLlA A law CorporaUon Allan D~Fra9a Thomas A. Walrous Jamn A. P~ualllla Tlmolhll ... Rllan P~l~r D. lan91~1I SCOll W. Gordon Richard S. Bruno Bruc~ C. Pa"~nllhl March 14, 1989 G~orll~ R. Gordon Of C_..wl Marshall Grodin General Manager Valley Waste Management 2658 North Main Street Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Re: Correspondence dated February 22, 1989 Dear Marshall: Acme Fill Corporation received your letter dated February 22, 1989 on March 1, 1989 relative to Acme Fill Corporation' s announcement of a landfill tipping fee increase effective February 1, 1989, On behalf of Acme Fill Corporation we provide a response to your questions regarding the recent landfill tipping fee increase. 1. Acme Fill Corporation does not know whether the $47.00 per ton tipping fee will continue when Acme operates its transfer station. 2. Relative to future additional increases of the tipping fee at Acme Fill, solid waste facilities are in a period where costs of solid waste management at landfills will continue to increase. Therefore Acme Fill Corporation believes it is likely that future additional rate increases will be prudent and necessary to cover costs, with ever changing regulations requiring greater environmental safeguards and/or funding to implement them, as well as other increased operating costs (eg. insurance). 3. The basis for the Acme landfill tipping fee increase effective February 1, 1989 is principally to meet regulatory guidelines for landfill closure costs, post-closure care costs, and contingencies. Harding Lawson Associates, Acme' s independent engineers, advised Acme that the estimates 611 Las Junlas Street. P. O. Box 630. Martinez. California 94553 . (415) 228.1400 . (707) 642-6288 Telecopler (415) 228-3644 '__'__"~__" .___,~_____._,___.,__"_________.____~_."_,,.>__...._.,,__,.,..,___~_~____,,__.____"__~___.___.____"__""'''_'''___h.._4_._._."._.,."..,_.._....".".",.,.~,."._"., ..._"_,_____~,_,,_._...__..__.~,,__"..,,_.~__________,_____._- Marshall Grodin March 14, 1989 Page 2 for these projections should be revised to $41,000,000.00 to conform to recently adopted California Waste Management Board Guidelines. Enclosed please find a copy of Acme's independent engineer's Professional Certification for initial closure and post-closure maintenance cost estimates for the solid waste landfills on the North, South and East parcels. Also enclosed is a copy of Acme's press release. 4. Relative to Valley Waste Management's request to review Acme's books and projections supporting the February 1, 1989 increase, it would be inappropriate to allow Valley Waste Management to review Acme's books. yours, JAP/jaa Enclosure cc: Roger Dolan Central Contra Costa Sanitary District [55llP] Harding Lawson Associates PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION FOR INITIAL CLOSURE AND POSTCLOSURE MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATES I, Philip B. Crispell, an employee of Harding Lawson Associates and a Civil Engineer, registration number 41971, registered in the State of California pursuant to Section 6762 of the Business and Professions Code, hereby certify that I have prepared initial cost estimates pursuant to Government Code Section 66796.22(b) pertaining to closure and postclosure maintenance, for the solid waste Acme Landfill-North, South & East Parcels located at 950 Waterbird Way in Martinez in the county of Contra Costa, facility number 07- AA-002, and have made visual inspection(s) and formulated initial cost estimates for the aforementioned facility. These initial cost estimates were prepared for Acme Fill Corporation. I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. f}~~ (~~ ~ CA: Date and Place ~~at&;~ RCE 41971 C.E.G. or C.E. Number 7655 Redwood Boulevard Business Address Novato. California 94948 (415) 899-8869 Telephone Number SlJ..J.-1ARY OF INITIAL COST ESTli"U....ES Harding Lawson Associates Facility Name ACME LANDFILL - NORTH PARCEL SWIS #07-AA-002N Closure Final Cover (Line 23) $ 7629000.00 IV. Sum of I & III x 20% contingency Costs $ 125000.00 $ 0.00 $ 15000.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 3486000.00 $ 11255000.00 $ 19000.00 $ 314000.00 $ 234000.00 $ 3000.00 $ 2000.00 $ 16000.00 $ 6000.00 $ 594000.00 $ 8910000.00 $ 4033000.00 $ 24198000.00 Revegetation (Line 29) Landfill Gas Monitoring and Control (Line 32) Groundwater Monitoring Installations (Line 34) Drainage Installation (Line 35c) security Installation (Line 36d) Other (Line 37) I. Subtotal Monitoring and postclosure Maintenance Revegetation (Line 40) Leachate Management (Line 46) Monitoring (Line 50) Drainage (Line 51) Security (Line 52) Inspection (Line 53b) Other (Line 54) II. Subtotal III. Subtotal II x 15 years Postclosure Care TOTAL COSTS (Item I + Item III + Item IV) ~~.__._._--_.__.,---,._,_.,~,_..._--_.._----~---~,-~----~,_...----_..__..__.~--------_._~.-.'--_.'--'--'----=----.-.,. .--:----..--.---------- ~l._.J.1ARY OF INITIAL COST ESTI1'u.4'ES Harding Lawson Associates Facility Name ACME LANDFILL - SOUTH PARCEL SWIS # 07-AA-002S Closure Final Cover (Line 23) $ 1066000.00 $ 22000.00 $ 0.00 $ 10000.00 $ 0.00 $ 3000.00 $ 37000.00 $ 1138000.00 $ 3000.00 $ 31000.00 $ 87000.00 $ 2000.00 $ 1000.00 $ 4000.00 $ 3000.00 $ 131000.00 $ 1965000.00 $ 621000.00 $ 3724000.00 Revegetation (Line 29) Landfill Gas Monitoring and Control (Line 32) Groundwater Monitoring Installations (Line 34) Drainage Installation (Line 35c) Security Installation (Line 36d) Other (Line 37) I. Subtotal Monitoring and Postclosure Maintenance Revegetation (Line 40') Leachate Management (Line 46) Monitoring (Line 50) Drainage (Line 51) Security (Line 52) Inspection (Line 53b) Other (Line 54) II. Subtotal III. Subtotal II x 15 years Postclosure Care IV. Sum of I & III x 20% contingency Costs TOTAL COSTS (Item I + Item III + Item IV) SUMMARY OF INITIAL COST ESTIMATES Harding Lawson Associates Facility Name ACME LANDFILL - EAST PARCEL SWIS # 07-AA-002E Closure Final Cover (Line 23) $ 4259000.00 Revegetation (Line 29) Landfill Gas Monitoring and Control (Line 32) $ 97000.00 $ 0.00 $ 15000.00 $ 0.00 $ 5000.00 $ 241000.00 $ 4617000.00 $ 15000.00 $ 116000.00 $ 291000.00 $ 2000.00 $ 2000.00 $ 9000.00 $ 10000.00 $ 445000.00 $ 6675000.00 $ 2258000.00 $ 13550000.00 Groundwater Monitoring Installations (Line 34) Drainage Installation (Line 35c) Security Installation (Line 36d) other (Line 37) I. Subtotal Monitoring and Postclosure Maintenance Revegetation (Line 40) Leachate Management (Line 46) Monitoring (Line 50) Drainage (Line 51) Security (Line 52) Inspection (Line 53b) other (Line 54) II. Subtotal III. Subtotal II x 15 years Postclosure Care IV. Sum of I & III x 20% Contingency Costs TOTAL COSTS (Item I + Item III + Item IV) / .. Jo I { I J I I f ( f r I - :;1.'.[ ()l ("lIft"",'" RECE\VEO t-t 0\1 \ 5 '988 Ails' d...... --...- WIt"AIA lA nf:NNl 'f .."Sf 'hSI.tel, Kp.n....~.... STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 10;>0 N SHIH I. SACIlAMENTO. CAlIFOIlNIA 11'0 BOX 942819. SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA !f4279.0001) Telephone (916) 139-2582 CONWAY H COlLl~ Second o.Shecl. Los Angeles November 4, 1988 EANES' J ORONEN8URG. JR T""d OoslrOCI. San Oteoo PAUL CARPENTER '- OoslrtCI. Los Ange... GRAY DAVIS C-_.511(:'_0 Hr. Boyd H. Olney Acme Landfill P. O. Box 1108 Harlinez, CA 94553 CINDY RAM80 E ,..,IIf..", 0....,10< Account No. WD HQ 39-000015 TO ALL OPERATORS OF SOLID WASTE FACILITIES: The Solid Waste Disposal site Reduction Act of 1981 requires every operator of a solid waste landfill required to have a solid waste facilities permit, pursuant to Section 66796.30 of the Gove~ent Code, to pay an annual fee to the Board of Equalization on all solid waste disposed of at each disposal site on and after January I, 1989. Your facility has been identified by the Waste Kanag8ment Board and registered with the Board of Equalization as an active solid waste facility. As such, you are SUbject to the fee and filing requirements under the Solid Waste Disposal Site Cleanup and Kaintenance Fee Law. A report Showing tonnage activity by facility for the preceding calendar year is due Karch 1st of each year. The Board of Equalization will calculate the fee rate based on the tonnage reported and will bill you accordingly. The amount billed is due and payable on or before July 1st of each year. The first report will be mailed early in 1990 and will be due Harch 1, 1990. In order to accurately report the disposal of solid waste, it is recommended that certified scales be used at each facility. If you do not have scales available, a plan must be submitted detailing the method by Which you will dete~ine the tonnage of waste required to be reported by you. The plan must be submitted to the above address prior to December 1, 1988, for approval by the Board of Equalization: During the 1989 calendar year, the Board will consider adopting a regulation to be effective January 1, 1990 that would establish requirements for the accurate weighing by certified scales of solid waste SUbject to the fee. It is anticipated that the rule will propose that scales be required in all cases for large facilities, but that for small facilities (i.e. less than 500 tons per day disposal rate) an approved alternate method of verifying disposal amounts subject to the fee will be allowed. Based on historic tonnage data reported to the Waste Hanagement Board, the 1989 Solid Waste Disposal Site Cleanup and Haintenance Fee Rate is estimated to be approximately $0.60 per ton. This estimate is being provided only for your convenience. Th~ual rate will be computed based on lhe Harch I, 1990 reported tonnage. If the legal entity or the facility mailin~ address used above is not accurate or YOUt' permit is inactive, notify us as soon as possible. Enclosed for your future reference is a law pamphlet. If there are questions, please contact the Board of Equalization at (916) 139-2582. .-:r'''~''''''~:....,",,,_......___ _ . Centrt. Contra Costa Sanitar District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER PAGE 1 OF 1 SUBJECT NO. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 DATE ACCEPT THE CONTRACT WORK FOR INSTJllLATION OF A DISTRICT-PROVIDED SUBMERSIBLE PUMP AND APPURTENANCES, CONTRACT NO. T0059P, A PORTION OF THE CHLORINE MIXING SYSTEM PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 10044, ,AND JlJJTHORIZE THE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION March 10 1989 TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT CONTRACT WORK SUBMITTED BY William E. Brennan Plant 0 erations Division Mana er INITIA TING DEPT./DIV. Plant 0 erations De artment ISSUE: Construction Submersi bl e Pump and Chlorine Mixing System ready for acceptance. has been completed on Installation of District-Provided Appurtenances, Contract No. T0059P, a porti on of the Project, District Project No. 10044, and the work is nON BfCKGROUND: The contract work was a major portion of the Chlorine Mixing System Project to better mix the chlorine solution and final effluent, as described in the fiscal year 1988 - 1989 Capital Improvement Budget, beginning on page TP-24. It involved the installation of a diffuser grid, prepurchased pump, and piping in one of the post aeration tanks. Monterey Mechanical Company was issued a Notice to Proceed on September 26, 1988. The work of the contract was substanti ally compl eted on December 13, 1988, with benefici al use begi nni ng on the same date. All of the remai ni ng contract work was completed on February 22, 1989. It is appropriate to accept the contract work at this time. A detailed accounting of the project costs will be provided to the Board of Directors at the time of proj ect closeout. RECOMMENDATION: Accept the contract work for Install ati on of a District-Provided Submersible Pump and Appurtenances, Contract No. T0059P, a portion of the Chlorine Mixing System Project, District Project No. 10044, and authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion. INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Vv~b REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A.9/85 WEB . Centrlo.. Contra Costa Sanitar) District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF POSITION P APE R BOARD MEETING OF 1 NO. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR 3 SUBJECT ESTABLISH APRIL 6, 1989, AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FEE SYSTEM FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DATE Ma rch 13 1989 TYPE OF ACTION ESTABLISH PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR CAPITAL FEES SUBMITTED BY Jarred Miyamoto-Mills Seni or En i neer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Plannin Division ISSUE: A date for a publ ic heari ng to receive comments on the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Non-Residential Uses needs to be established. BACKGROUND: A staff-proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Non-Residential Development was presented to the Board of Directors in a workshop on February 16, 1989. An ordinance to establish the Fee System is scheduled for Board consideration on April 20, 1989. Prior to adoption of the Fee System, it is appropriate to solicit and receive comments from the public. RECOMMENDATION: Establish April 6, 1989, as the date for a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Non-Residential Development. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JMM JMK RAB 2/ J7t1 ~ . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF March 16, 1989 PAGE OF 4 NO. VI1. ENGINEERING 1 DATE March 10, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE FUNDS SUBJECT AUTHORIZE $89,000 FROM THE COLLECTION SYSTEM PROGRAM CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT TO PERFORM A FACILITIES PLAN FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN WATERSHED 23 - NORTH WALNUT CREEK AREA, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4615 SUBMITTED BY Douglas J. Craig Associate Engineer INITJtJg~'b~EJ'tilf!~ Department Engineering Division ISSUE: Board approval is required for authorization of Collection System Program Contingency Account in excess of $25,000. BACKGROUND: During the February 1986 rainstorms, Watershed 23 experienced numerous manhole overflows. The District has subsequently completed preliminary sewer capacity studies and identifted extensive deficiencies throughout the watershed. To address the sewer deficiencies, the watershed has been divided into four subareas and prioritized for improvements. The Third Avenue subarea in north Walnut Creek has been ranked as the second highest priority behind the Country Gardens subarea which is nearing design completion. The sewers in the Third Avenue subarea are approximately 30 to 50 years old. A Facilities Plan is required to identify alternatives for improving the sewer deficiencies in the area. The plan will identify specific sewer improvement needs and provide a schedule for implementation. Since the project will consist of incorporating new pipelines in an existing sewer network, a large effort will be required to locate existing sewer laterals and utilities within the study area. The total estimated cost of the facilities planning effort is $114,000 as shown on Attachment I. The General Manager-Chief Engineer has authorized $25,000 from the Collection System Program Contingency Fund for staff to initiate the Facilities Plan. Additional funds in the amount of $89,000 are required for force account and consultant services to complete the Facilities Plan. A very preliminary estimate of the total project cost is $2,500,000. The estimate will be revised after the improvements are defined by the Facilities Plan. This project, although not included in the 1988-1989 Capital Improvement Budget, is listed in the 1989 Capital Improvement Plan on page CS-77 under the heading "Watershed Facilities (Trunk) Improvement Program." Recent hydraulic analysis performed by the local capacity study section has indicated that the sewer deficiencies in the north Walnut Creek area are worse than originally thought. Consequently, staff now recommends that the priority of improvements in this area be moved up. The proposed Facilities Plan schedule is to complete the plan in July 1989 and to begin design immediately after the Facilities Plan. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. j}~e 1302A-9/85 I SUBJECT I AUTHORIZE $89,000 FROM THE COLLECTION SYSTEM PROGRAM CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT TO PERFORM A FACILITIES PLAN FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN WATERSHED 23 - NORTH WALNUT CREEK AREA, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4615 POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 4 DATE March 10, 1989 After completing the Facilities Plan, the District will conduct an environmental evaluation of the project. Depending on the improvements selected, the project may be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or may require a Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report. The appropriate CEQA documentation will be prepared by the District or an outside consultant at that time. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $89,000 from the Collection System Program Contingency Fund to complete a Facility Plan for sewer improvements in the north Walnut Creek area, DP 4615. 1302B-9/85 TO SACRAMENTO ~ r 111 l> (/) l> Z -t \ ( \C"l \~ \~ Il> I \ OAK \ " \ \ " " 3: l> Z TO SAN FRANCISCO PARK ::r r r ~ C -t Z l> 3: ::u o TREAT BLVD CANAL _ __/ --- TO SAN JOSE Central Contra Costa Sanitary District . Watershed 23 District Project No. 4615 THIRD AVENUE AREA. WALNUT CREEK FIG. 1 2523-1/87 ~.".."..__ "_,_"~_,,,,,,___"__,~,__,~_",.___,,__,,_"',,"_e~__.'_~__'___'_'_"_"__'_"_"_ ,..~_~__.._...__.:..___.__,__._. ATTACHMENT I PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN District Force Account Planning Division Engineering Division $ 6,000 32,000 $38,000 Facilities Planning (Dodson & Young) TV Inspection and Lateral Location Survey Contingency Total Previous Authorization Additional Authorization Requested $ 38,000 34,000 24,000 8,000 10,000 114,000 <25,000> $ 89,000 . Centra. --':ontra Costa Sanitary Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF March 16, 1989 AUTHORIZE ALLOC'ATION OF $67,000 FROM THE OOLLECTION SYSTEM PROGRAM OONTINGENCY ACCOUNT FOR REPLACING A DAMAGED SEWER AT 3970 LOS ARABIS DRIVE, LAFAYETTE CDP 9507) NO. III. COLLECTION SYSTEM 1 DA"'March 10, 1989 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION Authorize Allocation SUBMITTED BY John Larson, CSO Department Manager INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Collection System Operations Department ISSUE: A sewer main was damaged beyond repair. The estimated cost of the replacement work is $67,000. The Board must authorize the allocation of Collection System Program Contingency Funds in excess of $25,000. BAa<GR<lJND: A public sewer mai n located in an easement at 3970 Los Arabi s Drive, Lafayette, was damaged beyond repair in early January. The sewer main, which serves over 120 homes, was parti ally coll apsed and fill ed with cement grout by a contractor worki ng to 1 evel the adj acent resi dence usi ng the grout j acki ng method. The Boa rd declared this an emergency at their January 26, 1989 meeting. To date approximatel y $25,000 has been expended i nstalli ng and mai ntai ni ng temporary sewer bypass pumpi ng faciliti es, cl eani ng up the affected areas, determi ni ng the cause, and pl anni ng the repl acement proj ect. Thi s work has been covered by a $25,000 contingency authorization approved by the General Manager-Chief Engineer. Al ternative methods for repl aci ng the sewer have been eval uated. The 1 east costl y alternative is to install a replacement sewer directly to the east of the existing resi dence. The 1 imi ted space avail abl e di ctates that the sewer must be i nsta 11 ed by j acki ng and bori ng. The total cost of the repl acement work is estimated to be $67,000. The cost of the next lowest alternative is $100,000. The replacement work will be undertaken on a time and materials basis with the possibility that the cost estimate may be exceeded. The work must proceed as quickly as possible because of the limited reliability of the temporary sewer, the ongoing operatlonal costs, and the i nconveni ence to the adj acent resi dents due to the presence of the temporary sewer (slow drains, sidesewer backups, and continuing minor spills). The total cost to the Di stri ct, i ncl udi ng the immedi ate response and the ongoi ng maintenance during construction, is anticipated to be approximately $92,000. Upon completion of the replacement work, the District will make a claim for reimbursement of all of its costs. Any recoveri es w ill be app1i ed to the cost of the repl acement work. Thi s project has been eval uated by staff and determi ned to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District GEQA Guidelines Section 18.3, since it involves replacement of an existing sewer facility involving no expansion of capacity. REOOMtENDATION: Authorize all ocati on of $67,000 from the Coll ecti on System Program Contingency Account for replacing a damaged sewer at 3970 Los Arabis Drive, Lafayette (Oi stri ct Proj ect 9507>. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION . CentrA Contra Costa Sanitar) .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF March 16, 1989 NO. IX. PERSONNEL 1 SUBJECT APPROVE REVISED CLASS DESCRIPTION FOR THE SAFETY AND LOSS CONTROL SPECIALIST DATE March 8, 1989 TYPE OF ACTION APPROV AL OF REVISED CLASS DESCRIPTION SUBMITTED BY Jack E. Campbell, Administrative Operations Manager INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Administrative/Risk Management ISSUE: Revisions of class descriptions require approval by the Board of Directors. BACKGROUNl: Bonnie Allen, who has been the District's Safety and Loss Control Special ist since July of 1984, has resigned to accept a position with the Contra Costa Water District. The class description for this position was written in early 1984 and has not been revised since then to include the additional tasks now being performed and also the up-dated terminology for positions of this type. This vacancy provides an opportunity for doing this and the revised class description is attached. The two major changes are the addition of the administration of the District's workers' compensation program, and the monitoring of hazardous material comp1 iance requirements now being imposed by agencies external to the District. Ms. Allen assumed these duties some time ago and they should be added to bring the class description into line with the work actually being performed. REC(JIENlATION: Approve the revised c1 ass description for the Safety and Loss Control Specialist position. REVIEWED ECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. ~L ~ 1302A-9/85 JEC CRF PM CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT Effective: Range: MSG-71 SAFETY AN) LOSS CONTROl. SPECIALIST DEFINITION Plan, organize, coordinate, and review the implementation and maintenance of a comprehensive and effective Di strict O<'rllpatin'l~l, Safety, Occupa"tfonal Health and Workers' eo.pensa"tfon Program; assist in the development and implementation of risk management programs. SUPERVISION RECEIVED AN) EXERCISED Receive general supervision from the Administrative Operations Manager. May exercise technical supervlslon ~ otheri .:LA safety-related ~roc~durei 4A.c!. traiRiRg fURctioRi. EXAMPLES <F DUTIES - Duties may include, but are not limited to, the following: Plan, organize, coordinate, and review continuous and comprehensive .gccupatioRal Heal th .aM Safety Progralll Safe"ty, Occupa"tfonal Heal"th and Workers' eo.pensa"tion Progrus. Assist departments to determine appropriate safety standards for "their s"taffs and assess po"ten"tial loss con"trol problems in order to develop a continuous and comprehensive iCcideRt loss prevention program; recommend plans for meeting legal requirements as well as for establishing and mai ntai ni ng iOURd priRcipl~i .o.t iilf~ty safe"ty principles for Di strict employees and the public. Provide information to District personnel regarding changes in laws and regulations, including the Cal/OSHA program and federal and state regulations related to safety issues; act as a resource person regarding manda"ted state and federal lIlaRdat~d prograllli safe"ty requi~n"ts. Review engineering plans and specifications for safe"ty eleDen"ts; ilnalyze review work practices and make recommendations to ensure compliance with safety standards, laws, and ordinances, as well as safe work techniques. Conduc"t safe"ty orien"ta"tions for Dis"tric"t projec"t con"trac"tors. Investigate work-rel ated accidents/inj uries, analyze causes, obuin and review accideRt injury reports, recommend and implement measures to prevent their recurrences.o.t~. -Ac.t Function as staff pArc:otl to IIt:ld9rtake proj9Cts .t:a.I= the Central Safety Committee and o"ther Safe"ty CoIIInittees upon reques"t; compll e stati sties, prepare and presen"t reports, and disseminate safety-related lIlaterhli informa"tion. CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT Safety and Loss Control Specialist (Continued) Recom!flend and Draft District-wide safety and health safety di rectivesj prepare and present periodic proJ~t status reports. Develop, conduct and/or assist in the presentation of .osI:iA training programs for District Personnel on Safety and Loss Control topics. Secure and coordinate necessary instructors, equipment, training aids, and facilities ia m~vimi7~ tbe ~ff~tivene~~ 4f tbe tr~iQina prnor~m~. Administer and manage the Workers' eo.pensat1on progr_; perfor'll c1a111S management; act as District liaison with carrier, legal and medical personnel in resolution of Workers' CoIIpensat1on c1a1l1S; represent District at Workers' Compensation Appeals Board hearings. Develop safety and occupati onal heal th programs for loss control which can be integrated into the overall District risk management activities. Prepare and conduct special projects as assigned. Perform related duties as required. QlJALIFICATIONS KnowledQe of: Pri nci pl es, practices, and methods of safety, occupational heal th, and accide~t loss prevention programs. Applicable features of the California Occupational Safety and Health Act and the California Workers' Compensation Insurance Laws. Workers' Compensation claims manag~nt, applicable Workers' CoIIpensat1on ~ procedures, statutes and processes. Californi a traffic safety 1 aws, fi re preventi on and suppressi on techniques, and equipment/systems. Emergency response planning and associated drills. Principles and techniques of employee training. Safety hazards and appropri ate p r~cautioRli preventative measures applicable to ~ aliii9~lle~ti construction projects. Hazardous materials as may be found at sanitation agency facilities. Ability to: Pl an, promote, and impl ement effective safety, 4Ad, .ccide~t loss prevention and workers' compensation programs. CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT Safety and Loss Control Specialist (Continued) Maintain attention to detail and work under deadlines while coordinating several concurrent projects and activities. Analyze nrrllp"ltinna1 c::af~ty safety and occupational health programs, and their operation and procedures; develop sound conc1 usions and recommend appropriate rnllrC::AC:: .of <1ctior:l changes and illprovements. Communicate effectively, orally and in writing, with all units of the District organization. Organize, assemble, and interpret statistical data. Establish and maintain cooperative working relationships with 4U. le\le1s .o.t ..:t.h.e organi:ution District staff. the publ ic. and contractors. Learn and observe all appropriate safety precautions as required by the District, including, but not limited to, Cal/OSHA General Industry Safety Orders and the Di strict's Respi ratory Protecti on Program. Experience and Education Any combination equivalent to experience and education that could likely provide the required knowledge and abilities would be: Experience: Four years of professional experience in industrial safety, 4Ad occupational heal th and amployee loss prevention trai ni ng, of which two years should involve experience in developing and conducting implementing a comprehensive safety and accident loss prevention program, preferably in a water, ~ wastewater or industrial facil ity, and one year coordinating workers' compensation claims. Education: Equivalent to a bachelor's degree university with major study in i ndustri al hygi ene, physical engineering, or a related field. from an accredited college or occupational health, safety, or biological sciences, License or Certificate Possession of a valid California Driver's License. Possession of a certificate as a Certified Safety Professional. . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary ..,istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING 'March 16, 1989 NO. IX. PERSONNEL 2 Ma rch 13, 1989 SUBJECT APPROVE THE CREATION OF A TEMPORARY PERMIT TECHNICIAN POSITION FOR SIX MONTHS BEGINNING APRIL 1, 1989 DATE TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE TEMPORARY POSITION SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Robert A. Baker, Deputy Chief Engineer Engineering Department ISSUE: Permit Counter responsiveness to telephone inquiries has been unacceptable recently due to high counter activity. BACKGROUND: Construction activity at the District rose to a high level after the 1981-1983 recession and has remained high ever since. The Engineering Department has been reluctant to commit to an increase in staffing at the Permit Counter to accommodate this activity because of the variability of the possible future workload. Various approaches involving the use of co-op students and temporary employees have been tried in attempts to accommodate the workload with 1 imited success. The Constructi on Divisi on is about to impl ement a computerized permit writing system at the Permit Counter which should help to improve service to the public. In addition, the Engineering Department is considering requesting Board authorization for an automated telephone answering system as part of the 1989-1990 Equipment Budget. The installation of these labor saving devices will undoubtedly improve Permit Counter responsiveness to public inquiries. It is not known whether those improvements will be suffici ent to allow staff to meet a performance goal of answeri ng most telephone i nqui res on the same day of the call. In additi on, implementation of these systems will be labor intensive, and temporary reductions in service level will likely occur unless some action is taken. Accordingly, it is proposed to create a Permit Technician position at the Permit Counter for six months beginning April 1, 1989. This position will be filled via an internal provisional appointment. The internal position being temporarily vacated will likely be filled by a temporary services agency person. The creation of this six-month position will provide an immediate improvement in Permit Counter service and will allow for orderly implementation of the computer system and the automated telephone answering system. During the six-month period, staff will eval uate the effectiveness of the 1 abor saving equi pment and will determine the Permit Counter responsiveness that will be possible with the former, two-person staffing level. At the end of the six-month period, staff will recommend any permanent personnel changes which are desirable, if any. The use of a temporary agency employee as described is not budgeted and may cause an overrun of the Engineering Department's Technical Services expense account. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the creation of a temporary six-month Permit Technician position in the Construction Division, level G64 ($2,718/mo. - $3,290/mo.). REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV.