HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 03-21-85
Sanitar)
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
No.IV. HEARrr~GS
1 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
March 18, 1985
SUBJECT
CONDUCT A PROTEST DETERMINATION HEARING REGARDING THE
STAGE 5B PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BIDS AND TAKE NECESSARY
ACTION TO RESOLVE THE PROTEST
TYPE OF ACTION
CONDUCT HEARING
CURTIS SWANSON
INITIATING DEPT.!DIV.
ENGINEERING DEPT./PLANNING DIVISION
SUBMITTED BY
ISSUE: A protest was filed with the District against award of the Stage 5B
project construction contract to the apparent low bidder. The protest must be
resolved before any construction contract can be awarded.
BACKGROUND: Bids for construction of the Stage 5B project were received and
opened on February 7, 1985. Bi ds were submitted by seven contractors. The
apparent lowest bidder was Pacific Mechanical Corporation (PMC) with a bid of
$5,000,000. The engineer's estimate was $5,897,850. A summary of the Stage 5B
bids is attached (Attachment 1). The appa rent second lowest bi dder, C. W. Roen
Construction Co. filed a protest with the District on February 15, 1985, against
the award of the constructi on contract to PMC (Attachment 2). C. W. Roen
contends that PMC did not "enlist any Minority Business Enterprise or Women's
Bus i ness Enterpri ses in thei r (b i d) P roposa 1. . . "
The District has received federal and state grant funding under the Clean Water
Grant Program for construction of the Stage 5B project. In accepting these
grants, the District must comply with federal and state grant conditions and
requirements including Minority Business Enterprise/Women's Business Enterprises
(MBE/WSE) partici pation requi rements. These requi rements are defi ned in Cl ean
Water Grant Bulletin 770 issued by the State Water Resources Control Board on
September 6, 1984.
The intent of the MBE/WBE requ i rements is to encourage increased MBE and WBE
partici pati on in constructi on contracts funded by Cl ean Water Grants. The
requirements set goals for MBE and WBE participation and describe the
responsibilities and minimum positive efforts of grantees and prime contractors
to meet the established goals. The MBE and WBE goals are targets--not minimum
standards; the grant regulations require positive efforts to achieve MBE and WBE
participation, but do not require specific participation levels.
Clean Water Grant Bulletin 770 containing the MBE/WBE goals and positive effort
requirements was included in the Stage 5B project plans and specifications. The
MBE utilization goal is 16.1 percent of the total bid amount. The WBE
utilization goal is 2 percent. The goals are considered achieved if the MBE and
WBE goal s are attai ned or if the prime contractor has compl ied with all the
minimum positive efforts to solicit MBE/WBE participation as subcontractors. A
summary of the positive effort requirements and actions taken by PMC with regard
to these requirements is listed in Attachment 3.
CWS
JSM
RAB
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
~~
;JML
POS IT ION PAPER
Page 2
The C. W. Roen Company bases its protest on PMC's failure to list any MBE or WBE
subcontractors in their bid. C. W. Roen states in its protest letter that PMC
was the only bidder on the Stage 5B project that is not using an MaE
subcontractor for paving and earthwork. All bidders are required to complete and
submit EPA Form 4700-5 with their bids. This form lists information about the
MBE/WBE subcontractors that will be participating in the construction project.
The form is to be submitted with the bid whether or not the prime contractor is
usi ng any MBE/WBE subcontractors. PMC di d submit the requi red EPA Form 4700-5
with their bid. The PMC form did not list any MaE/WBE subcontractors because at
the time of bid submittal, PMC, to its stated knowledge, was not using any
MaE/WBE subcontractors. During evaluation of the bids, District staff determined
that PMC's el ectrical subcontractor, Del Monte El ectric (whose subcontract was
16.0 percent of PMC's bid), is a certified WBE firm. PMC has stated that they
were not aware of this fact. In fact, five other bidders also proposed Del Monte
Electric as a subcontractor, but did not list them as a WBE firm.
A possible additional issue which should be considered in the context of this
protest is whether or not PMC has compl ied with the grant requi rements for
mi nimum positive efforts for MaE/WBE partici pati on. To achi eve the MBE/WBE
goals, a bidder must actually attain the MaE and WBE goals, or document that the
minimum positive efforts were made for MBE/WBE participation~ PMC surpassed the
2 percent WBE goal by proposing WBE firms to perform 16.7 percent of the total
contract work; however, PMC proposed 0.8 percent MBE participation compared to a
goal of 16.1 percent.
The positive effort requirements in the grant regulations are listed in
Attachment 3. PMC contends that they have compl ied with all of the positive
effort requirements (Attachment 4). PMC has documented their actions to comply
with the MBE/WBE positive effort requirements.
In support of its protest, C. W. Roen has stated that PMC is the only bidder who
is not using an MaE subcontractor for earthwork and paving. PMC is not
subcontracting this portion of the contract and will perform earthwork and paving
with its own forces. PMC di d receive a bi d from Ri os Gradi ng, an MBE fi rm, for
earthwork, but this bid was higher than the estimate for PMC to do the earthwork
portion of the contract.
Resolution of bid protests on the Stage 5B project are covered by Clean Water
Grant regulations (40 CFR 35.939). Under these regulations, the District has the
responsibil ity for initial resolution of a bid protest following its normal
practices. The District's practice has been for the Board to conduct a protest
determination hearing to receive information from the staff, the protester, the
low bidder, and any other bidders who desire to testify. Based on the
information received at the hearing, the Board then decides whether to uphold or
deny the bid protest. The District's determination may be appealed to the EPA
Regional Administrator. Until the protest is resolved, the District must delay
award of the Stage 5B construction contract.
POSITION PAPER
PAGE 3
In accordance with grant regulations, the District, by letter dated March 8,
1985, notified all bidders that a protest had been filed. The same notice
advised the bidders of the protest resolution procedures, the time and place of
the protest determination hearing, and how and when to submit written arguments
or documentation.
While it is not the staff's intent to prejudge the outcome of the hearing,
District staff has made a preliminary conclusion based on the information
received to date from C. W. Roen and PMC that PMC has complied with the MBE/W8E
positive effort requirements. District staff will present a final conclusion and
recommendation at the conclusion of the hearing.
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a protest determination hearing regarding the protest of
award of the Stage 58 proj ect constructi on contract to the apparent lowest
bidder, Pacific Mechanical Corporation.
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
SUMMARY OF r )8 ATTACHMENT 1
PROJECT NO. X3816
STAGE 58
DATE 217185
ENGR. EST.~ 5,897,850
LOCATION CCCSD WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
c:
Z!7
q
3
s
2.
_.COER (Nome, telephone &. address)
DYN Construction Corp.
?111 ArihuLRoad M(1 rti '1ez
Kaweah Construction
P.O. Box 28057 Sacramento
Monterey Mrchanical
8275 San Leandro St Oakland
Homer J. Olsen. Inc.
35500 Olsen Way Union City
Carl W. Olson & Sons. Inc.
3750 Haven Ave Menlo Park
Pacific Mechanical Corp.
2501 Annalisa Drive Concord
C.W. Roen Construction
P.O. Box 4 Danville
Dalzell Corporation
P.O. Box 8284 Emeryviile
-.1Z~
( 415 ) 229-3400
94553
( 916 ) 739-6830
95828
( 415 ) 632-3173
94621
( 415 ) 489-1661
94587
( 415 ) 323-1851
94025
( 415 ) 827-4940
94520
( 415 ) 837-5501
94526
( 415 ) 8::l5-0732
94662
DATE
.10 PRICE
$ 5 c.i :; 0 cx:x;;>. Ol)
) J
$ 5" O~O cx:;C:;, aC)
) )
$ 5 l/ 66 c:x::>O . 00
) )
$ CO)?8G) )cc:o .00
$ l-JD 6lD
$ 5 cx::x::> cx:;c:;. 0-0
) )
$ ~ 0 Y'=' .:t-CD. aD
) )
$ & L1~ '1 OOD . 00
) )
$
$
$
$
z/.:; /~.s
/ /
SHEET NO. .I
OF /
G; W. ROEN CONSTRuCTION CO"
~
~
ATTACH~,1ENT 2'
P. O. BOX ~
DANVILLE. CA 94526 . 0004
GENERAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION
(415) 837-5501
C'.,.'..... ~,.'" ('_..."..... LiNn" H. "I/If'
JHhIJ ('."U'II,...... Ur...., "'., U/.MA.'
""""do ('-''''"..... """"01 H. 11/33'7
I,;..^ ('....,.."..,.. L."".. H. OIllIQJ~II:1'.f
February 15, "1985
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA
Attention: Mr. Jim Hill
Re: Construction Contract Award
15 MGD Hydraulic~apacity Expansion and Sludge Thickening Facilities
Stage 5B - District Sewering Project No. X3816
EPA Project No. C-06-1000-110
Subject: BID PROTEST
.'
Gentlemen:
In conformance with paragraph 35~939 Protests (page SCI-9 - Federal Register,
Vol. 43, No. 188 - Wednesday, September 27, 1978), we protest ,the consideration
of this contract to' Pacific Mechanical Corpor~tion., Concord, ~A (PMC).
This protest is based upon PMC's failure to list any Minority Business Enter-
prises (M.B.E.) or Women Business Enterprises (W.B.E.) in their proposal on
E.P.A. Hq Form 4700-5 (Page 00300-14 of the Proposal). Their proposal fails to
list any of the MBE/DBE earthwork/paving subcontractors that were listed by
the other bidders. We refer specifically to Rios Grading (listed by C.W. Roen
and Dalzell), Concord Trucking (listed by Keweah Construction & Monterey Mechani-
cal), Carone PaVing (listed by Keweah & DYN), or West Bay (listed by Homer J.
Olsen). You will note. that every bidder, except PMC listed at least one of
these grading/paving contractors jn their P!~posals..
We would point out that C.W. Roen listed two M.B.E.ls; Our total M.B.E. parti-
cipation would be $875,000 or 17.3% of our bid.
This protest has been prepared based on our inspection of photocopies of the ':,.:".. . _ .
bid documents which were -made-available to us for the first 'time on Februar,y ',~,'" :,::.'
14, 1985. _. " .'~.;.:;- ,"
Respectfully submitted,
e... ~"." __0.';.:: (,:~.~: ..." .
..... . .....
- ...,."
'"
. :..:' ~ ~ .'
: ,
BAR:rs
cc: State of California, Water Resources Control Board
Pacific Mechanical~
Keweah Construction
Dyn Construction
President " :,' _:':.~: -':!'>' . ,
"-. .".": : .~..:.~. ": . ;-;.- : ".~ ~... ..~'~'.; .
. .. ...:' .J... - :.. ."
. ." .
. '. -."
- . ~ .... .... ''". ."0: _e..
.. ."
0' _. _ __-,:-:"':~
I
o
----- -"-_.,^
_H_~_~__~____
ATTACHMENT 3
CENTRAl CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
STAGE 5B PROJECT
MINORITY BUSINESS/WOMEN'S BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS FOR ClEAN WATER GRANTS
AND COMPLIANCE BY PACIFIC MECHANICAL CORPORATION
GRANT REQUIREMENTS
l.a. Subcontracts for at least 16.1%
and 2% of the total construction
contract work have been awarded
to Minority Business Enterprises
(MBE) and Women's Business
Enterprises (WBE), respectively,
.2!:
l.b. If either the MBE or WBE goals
are not met, the low bidder
must document within 10 working
days after bid opening that the
following steps were taken to
try to attain the MBE/WBE goals:
(1) Identify the actual attained
MBE and WBE participation.
(2) The bidder requested assistance
from the EPA MBE/WBE assistance
center 5 working days before the
need for referrals.
(3) The bidder requested sub-bids
from MBE/WBE firms at least
7 working days prior to the need
for a bid response.
(4) Requests for sub-bids must ade-
quately specify the items on
which sub-bids are requested.
PACIFIC MECHANICAL CORP.(PMC) ACTION
1. Pacific Mechanical Corp. (PMC)
awarded 0.8% of the total work to
MBE firms and 16.7% to WBE firms.
PMC met the WBE goal but not the
MBE goal.
PMC provided all documentation by
February 22, 1985 (10 working days
after the February 7, 1985, bid
opening.
(1) PMC identified their actual MBE
and WBE participation (0.8% and
16.7% respectively).
(2) CCCSD sent the EPA list of MBE/
WBE subcontractors to all prime
contractors on January 11, 1985,
which was 11 working days before
the need for referrals.
(3) PMC requested sub-bids from all
MBE/WBE firms on the EPA list 9
working days before the need for
a bid response. Also, PMC adver-
tised for MBE sub-bids in the
Daily Pacific Builder on
January 30, 1985 (seven working
days before the need for bids).
(4) The letters for sub-bids did not
list specific items. However,
the EPA MBE/WBE list stated the
type of work performed by each
prospective MBE/WBE subcontractor.
The EPA MBE/WBE list was developed
specifically for the Stage 5B
proj ect. Prospective toI3E/WBE
subcontractors reviewed the Stage
5B plans and identified the type
of work in which they were
interested in bidding.
_.__u____^'___.______,~__,_.______.____.__~______,." _ .__.._. ......_...._..___._...____~_,..",._~._,_.._______.__'______._".._____.____..___.__n__
ATTAa-tMENT 3 (continued)
(5) The bidder must show positive
efforts to receive a response
from MBE/WBE fi rms to whom sub-
bid invitations were extended.
(6) The bidder provided a list of
all subcontractors who bid and
the dollar amount of the sub-
bids.
(7) The bidder has provided documen-
tation of the percentage of the
work offered to MBE/WBE firms.
(8) The bidder must provide an ex-
planation for rejecting any
low MBE or WBE subcontractor.
2.
The bidder must provide a list of
MBE/WBE subagreements on EPA Form
4700-5 (Attachment l-B) with the
bid.
3.
The low bidder must submit a MBE/
WBE self-certification form within
10 working days following bid
opening for each MBE/WBE firm.
4.
If subagreements are arranged or
changed after bid opening or award,
a revised EPA Form 4700-5 shall be
submitted along with any MBE/WBE
certification forms.
5.
Any deviation from the MBE/WBE
subagreement listing provided
with the bid shall not result in
a decrease in the MBE and WBE
participation without prior
approval of CCCSD and SWRCB.
(5) PMC followed up their letters to
MBE/WBE subcontractors with at
least one phone call. Reasons
for any MBE/WBE firm not bidding
were documented.
(6) PMC provided all MBE/WBE sub-bids
and non-MBE/WBE sub-bids in
instances where an MBE/WBE firm
was not low bidder.
(7) PMC has documented that at least
16.1% of the work was offered to
MBE/WBE firms. PMC actually
offered 26% of the total construc-
tion work to MBE/WBE firms.
(8) PMC did not reject any MBE or WBE
firms that were the low subcon-
tractors; hence no explanation is
is required.
2. PMC submitted EPA Form 4700-5 with
their bid. However, the form did not
list any MBE or WBE subagreements.
PMC states that it was not aware that
their electrical subcontractor was
actually a WBE firm. Five of the other
six bidders did not list the same
electrical subcontractor as a WBE firm
on the EPA Form 4700-5 either.
3. PMC submitted certification forms
for all MBE/WBE firms within 10
working days.
4. PMC has listed two suppliers since bid
opening; an MBE supplier and a WBE
supplier. A revised Form 4700-5 was
submitted along with MBE/WBE certifi-
cati on forms.
5. The two changes made by PMC to the
subagreement listing after bid
opening increased the MaE and WBE
participation.
---,--~-,._'-----
I
ATTACHMENT 4
PACIFIC MECHANICAL CORPORATION
~ne~1 ~'?e"n#!e}lin?, ~nbaot01t6
P.O. BOX 404 1 · CON COR D I C A 9 4 524
TELEPHONE (415) 827-4940
TWX 9104813020 PMC CONCORD
February 21, 1985
central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553
Attention: Jim Hill
Reference: Construction Contract Award
15MGD Hydraulic Capacity Expansion and
Sludge Thickening Facilities/Stage 5B
District Sewering Project No. X3816
EPA Project No. C-06-10pO-II0
Subject: C. W. Roen Construction Bid Protest
- .-
- .
,.'>..;
:,'" .
Gentlemen:
Pacific Mechanical Corporation contacted every firm by mail
that was shown on the Homitz, Allen and Associates MBE/WBE
list that was furnished to us by the District.
This mailing was made nine (9) working days prior to bid date
and all firms were subsequently contacted by telephone (see
back-up data attached) .
Pacific Mechanical Corporation advertised in the Daily Pacific
Builder requesting minority sub-bids (see copy attached) .
None of the subcontractors mentioned in the protest letter
were listed by Homitz, Allen and Associates.
We did receive a bid from Rios Grading prior to bid time, but
determined that they were not low and their price was not used.
None of the other subcontractors, Concord Trucking, Carone Paving,
or West Bay offered bids prior to bid time, and we received no
other bona-fide minority sub-bids.
STATE LICENSE No. 138920
...
.
.
PACIFIC MECHANICAL CORPORATION
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
February 21, 1985
Page two
Pacific Mechanical Corporation has complied with the MBE/WBE
requirements of the specifications and should be awarded a
contract.
TJ:dh
Attachments
Yours truly,
" "... n - r-'---
Tom Jo~son
cc: State of California, Water Resources Control Board
C. W. Roen Construction
Kaweah Construction
'Dyn Construction
-..
c((SD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO. IV. HEARHlGS
2 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
MARCH 11, 1 985
SUBJECT
TYPE OF ACTION
HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON DISTRICT ANNEXATION 90 AS AMENDED
BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
HOLD HEARING: D.A. 90
SUBMITTED BY
DENNIS HALL, ASSOCIATE ENGINEER
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT/CONSTRUCTION DIVISION
ISSUE: The LAFC has amended the boundaries of several of the parcels included
within the above-referenced District Annexation. The District must hold the
subject hearing and consider testimony by affected property owners before acting
on the proposed amended annexations.
BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation was sent to LAFC as required for the
formal annexation process. LAFC amended the boundaries of several of the parcels
during its approval process. These amendments were made to improve the continuity
of the resulting District boundary. The amended annexations are designated as
D.A. 90-A thru 90-G. Maps are attached showing the amended annexations.
Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notified of this
hearing as required by law.
A Negative Declaration has been prepared by LAFC for all of these amended
annexations. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs
with its findings.
There are three possible actions the District may take:
1. Overrule protests when owners of 50 percent or less of assessed land value
protest the annexation, then order the annexation of the parcels as amended
by LAFC.
2. If the owners of land having more than 50 percent of the assessed value (land
only) of the total assessed value of land proposed for annexation protest the
annexation, the District must disapprove the annexation as proposed.
3. Continue the hearing at a future date on any particular proposed annexation
as the Board deems necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
(1) Open hearing, receive any testimony, close public hearing.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
DH
JM
RAB
J)(
/1J(J
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
(2) Adopt Resolutions concurring with the Negative Declaration and ordering
annexation of all parcels as amended which have insufficient protests.
(3) Take appropriate action as outlined above for any protested annexation.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
GEN. MGR./CHIEF ENG.
1!fJ.8.
r{)Jltf)
e -rflet, ytJ
ILl
~
a:
ffi-
f-
o
o
c(
<<
c( ---
>
-J
c(
-
-
ARREBA
@ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION
_ = EXISTING CCCSO BOUND
__ = PROPOSED ANNEXATIOt
* = SIGNED PETITION
(PA~~t- /)
l2A.90-A
~~A 5"" f '"
9507 O.Po.444
Nflf,o'e
\ 100
b.
, r-
:t:.
~
,~
1~
,~
" )::..
&XJ5TIf't/G,
~
(PAleCtL- ""2-)
....l!~~ 90-"
Gi\
~
~
~
/\
@o.
DATE = PREVIOUS A
NNEXA TION
.=.:...:. = EXISTING CCCSD
* = PROPOSED A BOUNDARY
= SIGNED PET NNEXA TlON
(PAr//> ITION
''L-€L 3)
~__________~___________?~. 90- c
fJ;t
t~
I
ItJ
C
j
.{J
. .c:-
,-v>
^~ ~
L,V v./~
cY v ./..9
~
t./
~"?
t:J~
~
~
(rAJeceL- if)
D.A.90-0
~
~
~
~
-.Iff., .EO}}
1AN~~
pre.et $S
(PAleCE:LS 516)
D.A. 90-EtlF
~
~=
--=
*=
.
~ C.U3" L}.955
~'""
.sUB- 5158
.03,15
~
l
'"
~~
,~
~
'U
i
~
'S-,,>.
~-
~
'co.>-
""-q..
'-
'- 'S-s."..
1< 'b.
~..... ..>~
0,... -:>>0:"
~ , '''I::>
~
..........
k~":"'.
B
69 P, r/}. 38
(JIIASe NAiJONAL
/
/
/ stl5-4Z
(0 V
~ \:)
l-.; ......
I ---1
4..i
I i:I:-""
~ ~\~
~
II ~~
. \ .
. ay / Apt; - ·
AfJOeo V ~, ~
11 ~
A\ ~
/,~ ~r--
/ ,::, 8 /.'i .s .9
,L.!"o ZL /J; ~
- --<[::'://0
7'/ ~.ge
.57 if -~
'*
I/'JC
95
r:;:
~
(PA/?.Cf.L '7)
DA.
90-(;
Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR
1 3 21 85
DATE MARCH 11, 1985
SUBJECT
TYPE OF ACTION
ORDER COMPLETION OF DISTRICT ANNEXATION NO. 90-H & 90-1
COMPLETE ANNEXATION OF
DA 90-H & I
SUBMITTED BY
DENNIS HALL, ASSOCIATE ENGINEER
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT/CONSTRUCTION DIVISION
ISSUE: The District must pass a resolution to finalize District Annexation 90-H& I.
BACKGROUND: The District previously made application to the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFC) for the annexation of ten parcels of land designated as District
Annexation 90. LAFC has considered this request and has recommended that Parcels
8 and 9 be processed as submitted. LAFC has designated these parcels to be District
Annexation No. 90-H & I. No public hearing is required and the annexation of
these parcels can be completed.
LAFC has adopted a Negative Declaration for District Annexation No. 90-H & I.
District staff has reviewed this Negative Declaration and concurs with its
findings.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution concurring with the Negative Declaration and
ordering the completion of District Annexation No. 90-H and 90-1.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
DH
JMc
RAB
INITIATI~PT'/DIV'
!4/l
ffS!
Jy/J'y}
~
~
~
.l(Sl ~
o~
Co ~ .c: 71 r;
-z. _.:::; 0
~.~
~~
..I....~
.~
,
347'
/
,.O.~.
(PAR-cec.... 8)
(~Ol-,
D.A.
9o-H
@
,,,,,
~~
~'
'1 ,'..,
~,f.
.."
,
JENSE.N
PARCEL ONE
(6524 alt. aoo)
@
.i,.;
228.36
IV 8S-39'E
A
A
~Ne
38)
~
A LBE R7 S.E1Y TF/A C7
B ill 3J
:;:
~
*
~\ '
~',
0'\
c
\
\
f) \
\
\
B
t
~\
... .~
~\
.
\(\
~,
715:1:
~
V!!!J
(p..q,ecu q )
~
QA.90-1
,
<e<SD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO.V. CONSENT CALENDAR
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
MARCH 11, 1985
SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE ATTENDANCE OF TOM TRICE AT A THREE-DAY TYPE OF ACTION
COURSE ENTITLED "ASPHALT PAVING MIXTURES: DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION,
AND PERFORMANCE", UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO-APRIL 17-19, 1985,
SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
J8Y McCe~ ENGINEERING/CONSTRUCTION
ISSUE: Authorization of attendance of a District employee at an out-of-state
course.
BACKGROUND: Attendance of a District employee at the "Asphalt Paving Mixtures:
Design, Construction, and Performance course was authorized by the Board in
the 1984-85 Construction Division employee education budget. When the budget
was being formalized, it was anticipated that the University of California
(U.C.) Extension would conduct the instruction in Richmond. The course will
be conducted by U.C. Extension in conjuction with the University of Nevada,
but the location of the seminar has been changed to Reno, Nevada. The seminar
contains some excellent material and is directly applicable to District
inspection work. The Engineering Department recommends that Mr. Tom Trice
be authorized to attend the course, even though it has been moved to Reno.
The cost of the course and transportation will be $360. There are sufficient
funds in the Construction Division employee education budget to cover this
expend iture.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the attendance of Tom Trice at a three-day
course entitled "Asphalt Paving Mixtures: Design, Construction and
Performance" to be held in Reno, Nevada, at a cost not to exceed $360.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATI~ PT./DIV.
. 4-1/1
/ VI'I
P!1t
JM
RAB
<c(sD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO.V. CONSENT CALENDAR
3 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
March 14, 1985
SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE ATTENDANCE OF ROBERT BAKER AT THE
W.P.C.F. GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS SEMINAR IN WASHINGTON, D.C. ON
MARCH 18-20, 1985.
TYPE OF ACTION
CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBMITTED BY
R. J. DOLAN
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
ADMINISTRATIVE
ISSUE: Authorization of attendance of a District employee at an out-of-state
conference.
BACKGROUND: The Federal Clean Water Act is up for reauthorization this year in
Congress. Robert Baker has been recently assigned the District responsibility for
working with the California Association of Sanitation Agencies' (CASA) Federal
Legislative Committee on the Clean Water Act amendments. An opportunity exists
this year to make San Francisco Bay Area and California needs known to members of
Congress.
It is requested that Mr. Baker be authorized to attend this seminar. Mr. Baker will
be meeting with congressional representatives during the seminar to present
CASA's views on the Clean Water Act.
The cost of this trip will be about $1,100.00. The funds for the trip are included
in the 1984-85 Travel and Conference budget for the General Manager-Chief Engineer.
Because of the recent assignment of Mr. Baker to handle federal legislative activi-
ties, this item was inadvertently left off the last Board agenda. Because the meeting
will have already taken place by the time of the Board meeting, the President of the
Board of Directors has been contacted for a provisional authorization for this trip.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the attendance of Robert Baker at a three-day W.P.C.F.
Government Affairs Seminar to be held in Washington, D.C. at an estimated cost of
$1 ,100.00.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
RJD
itary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO.V. CONSENT CALENDAR
4 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
March 4, 1985
SUBJECT
TYPE OF ACTION
JlUl1-IORIZE FU NOS
AUl1-IORIZE $1,000 FOR l1-IE ATTENDANCE OF LABORATORY SUPERINTEN-
DENT AT W.P.C.F. OONFERENCE ENTITLED, "ANALYTICAL TEOiNIQUES IN
WATER POLLUTION OONTROL," MAY 2-3, 1985, IN CINCINNATI, GilO
SUBMITTED BY
Batts
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Plant Operations Department Manager
ISSUE: Board approval for attendance at this Water Pollution Control
Federation conference is required since it is out of state and over $500.
BAO<GROUND: Thi s is the fi rst nati onal conference on anal ytical techniques
used by laboratory analysts in the water pollution control field; it is
co-sponsored by the Water Poll uti on Control Federati on and the United States
Environmental Protection Agency. The subjects covered are diverse and offer
the participants the most advanced concepts in effluent monitoring and
requi rements, state-of-the-art 1 aboratory equi pment and techniques, and water
poll uti on control pol icy and criteri a. The estimated cost for attendance at
this conference is $1,000; budgeted funds are available in the Plant Operations
Department Travel and Conferences Account No. 091 for this conference.
REOOMMENDATION: Authorize Bhupi nder Dhaliwal, P1 ant Operati ons Department
Laboratory Superintendent, to attend the Water Pollution Control Federation
Conference on "Anal ytica1 Techniques in Water Poll uti on Control" at a cost not
to exceed $1,000.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
CWB
RJD
c((SD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR
5 3/21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
February 8, 1985
SUBJECT ACCEPT THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF INCINERATOR
ASH SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT 3694.3) AND AUTHORIZE THE
FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION
TYPE OF ACTION
ACCEPT CONTRACT WORK
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Robert A. Simmons
Engineering Division
ISSUE: Work has been completed on the Incinerator Ash System Improvements project and
is now ready for acceptance.
BACKGROUND: On June 21, 1984, the Board awarded a contract to Altec, Inc., to
construct certain improvements designed to improve the MHF ash handling facility.
The construction work consisted of installing new equipment and modifying
existing equipment to reduce the frequency of plugged ash bins and conveying
lines, and to mitigate dusting during operation. Also included in the contract
were miscellaneous instrumentation and MHF control improvements not associated
with the ash handling system. The contractor has completed the work in
accordance with the terms of the contract. Total compensation amounted to
$308,108.54. It is appropriate to accept the work at this time.
Expenditures for the Furnace Project have been reviewed periodically with the
Board. The Board has asked for a review of C.C.C.S.D. contract acceptance
procedures. The Engineering Department will provide a report to the Board
on this matter within the next month.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the Contract for construction of the Incinerator Ash
System Improvements (Project 3694.3) and authorize the filing of the Notice of
Completion.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
ENG.
RJD
Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR
6 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
SUBJECT
March 12, 1985
TYPE OF ACTION
QUITCLAIM SEWER EASEMENTS, JOB 3635, SUBDIVISION 6024,
MORAGA AREA
APPROVE QUITCLAIM OF
EASEMENTS
SUBMITTED BY
Dennis Hall
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Engineering/Construction
ISSUE: C.W.O.K., the owner of Subdivision 6024, has requested the District to
quitclaim two easements which were dedicated to the District when the subdivision
map was filed.
BACKGROUND: The public sewer pipes which were designed to be installed in the
subject easements have been realigned and new easements have been granted to the
District. The subject easements are no longer required. The property owner has
paid our fee for processing the subject quitclaim deed.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve Quitclaim Deed and authorize the president and secretary
to execute said document and authorize its recording.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
I)tt
DH
f)1JfJ
G.
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
JM
RAB
, .......
L-
~'t.
'4.
Sire
V/C/N/rY MAP
Quitc19im Easements
Job 3635
Moraga Area
~
~
"
\\~
~
<c<SD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
No.VI. ADMINISTRATIVE
1 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
March 13, 1985
SUBJECT
ADOPT POLICY ESTABLISHING STANDARD DISTRICT-WIDE CHARGES
FOR PHOTOCOPY AND SPECIAL DOCUMENT REPRODUCTION SERVICES
TYPE OF ACTION
ADOPT POLICY
SUBMITTED BY
Joyce McMillan, , Secretary of the District
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Administrative Department
ISSUE: The Board has requested staff to research the issue of establishing standard
District-wide charges for outside requests for photocopy and special document
reproduction service~
BACKGROUND: In the past such req uests were i nfreq uent and were handl ed on an
individual basis following established administrative procedura With the growth of
the District and its subsequent involvement in projects generating wider publ ic
interest" such as the Solid Waste Management Study" demands for photocopy and special
document reproduction services have increased in number and variet~ Board and staff
di scussions have concl uded that a formal pol icy shoul d be adopted by the Board of
Directors defining existing practices and establ ishing a standard District-wide
charge and procedure for complying with such request~
Section 6257 of the Cal iforni a Government Code establi shes charges for photocopy
services and states as follows:
"A req uest for a copy of an i dentifi abl e public record or i nformati on
produced therefrom" or a certified copy of such record,. shall be
accompanied by payment of a fee or deposit to the state or local agency"
provided such fee shall not exceed the actual cost of providing the copy,
or the prescri bed statutory fee, if any" whichever if 1 ess. "
A survey was made of other public agencies with regard to their policies for similar
request~ Research has indicated that fees levied by local agencies for photocopy
and document reproduction services range from 10~ per page to 25~ per paga It was
concluded that current District administrative practice and fees are in conformance
with State statutes and are consistent with the policies of other agencie~
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached policy establishing standard District-wide
charges for photocopy and special document reproduction services.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Pl8. Ie RECORDS INSPECTION AN> FEES
1. PURPOSE
To establish a policy in accordance with the Public Records Act
(Government Code Section 6250 et seq.) whereby persons may be
granted access to public information and records with the right to
procure copies upon payment of a fee or deposit
2 DEFINITION
21 Public Record: Includes any writing containing information
rel ati ng to the conduct of the public's busi ness prepared"
owned" used or retained by any state or local agency regardless
of physical form or characteristics. (Govt Code Section
6250(d))
22 "Writing" means handwriting" typewriting" printing,.
photostat i ng, . photograph i ng, . and every other means of record i ng
upon any form of communication or representation including
letters,. words,. pictures,. sounds or symbols or combination
thereof,. and all papers" maps,. magneti c and paper tapes"
photographic fll ms and pri nts,. magnetic or punched cards,
discs,. drums and other documents. (Govt Code Section 6253(e))
3. POL ICY
3.1 Disclosura Public records are open to inspection at all times
during office hours and every citizen has a right to inspect
any public record" except those records exempted from
disclosure by Section 6254 of the Government Coda
Determination as to whether a requested record is a public
record and open to inspection shall be made by the Department
Head or his/her appointed representativa Refusals to disclose
a public record shall be reviewed by the Counsel for the
Di stri ct
3.11 Records exempt from disclosure include the following:
3. 111 Prelimi nary drafts,. notes,. or interagency or
intra-agency memoranda w h i ch are not reta i ned by
the public agency in the ordinary course of
business,. provided that the public interest in
withholding such records clearly outweighs the
public interest in disclosure;
3.112 Records pertaining to pending litigation to which
the public agency is a party" or to cl aims made
pursuant to Division 8.6 (commencing with Section
810) of Titl e I of the Government Code, . until such
litigation or claim has been finally adjudicated
or otherwise settled;
3. 113 Personnel" medical" or simil ar fil es" the
disclosure of which would constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
3. 114 Geological and geophysical data" pl ant production
data and simil ar information rel ati ng to utility
systems development" or market or crop reports"
which are obtained in confidence from any person;
3.115 Records of complaints to or investigations
conducted by, . or records of i ntelli gence
information or security procedures of,. the office
of the Attorney General and the Department of
Justice, ' and any state or local police agency or
any such investigatory or security fl1es compiled
by any other state or local agency for
correctional, . 1 aw enforcement or licensing
purposes; (1976 statutes provided for certain
exceptions,. see Section 6254(f) of the Government
Code ).
3.116 Test questions" scoring keys" and other
examination data used to administer a licensing
examination" examination for employment., or
academic examination:
3. 117 The contents of real estate appraisal s, '
engineering or feasibility estimates and
evaluations made for or by the state or local
agency relative to the acquisition of property" or
to prospective public supply and construction
contracts" until such time as all of the property
has been acquired or all of the contract agreement
obtai ned" prov i ded, , however" the 1 aw of emi nent
domain shall not be affected by this provision;
3.118 Information required from any taxpayer in
connection with the collection of local taxes
which is received in confidence and the disclosure
of the information to other persons would result
in unfair competitive disadvantage to the person
supplying such information;
3.119 Records the disclosure of which is exempted or
prohibited pursuant to provisions of federal or
state 1 aw" i ncl udi ng" but not limited to, .
provisions of the Evidence Code relating to
priv 11 ege.
3. 2 RElQ uest for Informati on or Copy. A req uest for a copy of an
identifiable public record or a certification" shall be in
writing and shall be accompanied by a fee or deposit shown on
attached Schedul e. Req uested copi es shall be prov i ded upon
payment of appropriate fee. Monies received shall be deposited
in the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Running Expense
Fund
3.3 Request for Summary of Information or Cop~ The Public Records
Act does not req ui re the Di strict to make summaries or to
extract information from documents. Requests for summaries
shall be directed to the Board of Directors who shall set the
fee upon receiving advice from staff as to the estimated time
of staff work required to compile such summaries.
SCHEDULE OF FEES OR DEPOSITS TO BE COLLECTED WHEN
COpy OF PUBL Ie RECORD OR INFORMATION IS REIlUESTED
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Fee or Deposit
per Unit
Unit
1.
$ . 15
Copy of identifiable public
record or information
(Set by Administrative
action, currently at 15~
per page)
Each page
2
Copy of maps by di azo
$ 1.50
$ .50
$ 200
Each page
3.
Print from microfilm
Each page
4.
Extract of document
and certification
Page
5.
$ 1. 00
Certifying existing documents
Document
SPECIAL DOCUMENTS
1.
District Code in binder
Update Service Fee
$100. 00
$ 15. 00
Code with binder
Annual
2
Standard Specifications
Set of Specifications $ ~OO
Mail ed $ 6.00
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO. VII. ENGINEERING
1 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
March 12,.1985
SUBJECT
CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DEClARATION FOR WALNUT CREEK
DOWNTOWN PARALLEL PROJECT (DP 1997)
TYPE OF ACTION
ADOPTION OF
NEGATIV E
DEClARATION
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
JIM HILL
ENGINEERING/CONSTRUCTION
ISSUE: The local Cal ifornia Environmental Qual ity Act (CInA> guidel ines require
the District to prepare environmental documents for the Wal nut Creek Downtown
Parall el Proj ect -- DP 1997. Di strict staff have conducted an Initi al Study and
prepared a Negative Declaration for this project The Board must review and act
upon the Negative Declaration in accordance with CInA guidel ines before the
project can be constructe~
BACKGROUND: This project is proposed for construction now based on a unique, one
time opportunity for the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District to incorporate
project construction with construction of the already approved Walnut Creek
Project/San Ramon Creek Bypass Flood Control Channel. This flood control project
is the last phase of an overall plan to reduce flood damage in Walnut Creek and is
designed to control flooding and bank erosion in the San Ramon Creek are~
The proposed project consists of construction of an 8400 foot" isolated section of
54-inch diameter pipeline within the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way in the
City of Walnut Creek, California,. between Arroyo Way and Rudgear Road (see Exhibit
A attached).
The pipeline would begin approximately 60 feet north of the existing Walnut Creek
Channel at the southern edge of Arroyo Wa~ The pipeline would end approximately
160 feet south of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way crossing of San Ramon
Creek, ,which is 1300 feet north of the intersection of Rudgear Road with Danville
Boul evard and the Southern Pacific Rail road right- Of-way. Neither end of the
pipeline would be connected to the existing Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
sewage transport system in the proj ect are~
The proposed project will ultimately serve as a segment of a trunk sewer system
which is likely to be required further south of the project area to meet future
demands for Central Contra Costa Sanitary District sewer service~ The proposed
project would be connected to the existing Walnut Creek area sewer system to act
as a relief sewer to handle existing flows in case of a need for a sewer line
bypass in Walnut Cree~
The pipeline would be constructed immediately west of the flood control channel in
the same excavation are~ By merging construction of the proposed pipel ine
project with the flood control project,. additional construction related air
e~
J~tL-
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
cws
JMK
RJD
. '~-'-~'---"-'--'~-------'--'._'--""-~~--'--"""------_.__.~._,....,"- - _..-.".-._----'..~._._-,..--,.-.,,-----_..._,.._.<----.,_.
quality,. noise, . and biological impacts are avoided since potential construction
impacts of the proposed project would be mitigated with those of the flood control
proj ect.
The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District is the lead agency in the
mandated rev i ew process si nce it is the public agency proposi ng the proj ect
and has conducted an Initi al Study of the proposed proj ect to determi ne 1f
the project may have a sign1ficant effect on the environment. The Initial
Study was prepared - by Earth Metrics Incorporated,. an env i ronmental and
planning consulting fir~
The District staff finds that the Initial Study adequately,. accurately,. and
objectively evaluates the proposed project's effect on the environment,. that
the proposed project will not have a sign1ficant effect on the environment,.
that no mitigation measures are needed other than those incorporated in
accordance with the approved Walnut Creek Project/San Ramon Creek Bypass
Flood Control Project, and that a Negative Declaration would be the
appropriate document for the project.
In compliance with the CEnA requirements,. District staff have solicited
comments and arranged for legal notices. Once the Board has acted on this
Negative Decl aration,. a Notice of Determination will be fll ed with the County
Clerk's office.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the project Negative Declaratio~
REV'PED I.ND RECDMMENDED I'OR 80l.RD I.CT'ON
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
GEN. MGR.lCHIEF ENG.
.O"')e
~
~
~
Q;
\J
h ..
It
~ :;
..
J ..
~ III ..
It It ..
).... :; It
C 0
~ .. It ..
'"' .. u .
i: 0
~ 0 ..
'- . .. 0
It . It
\oJ ~ Q 0 ..
.. .. .
z . 0 .
1&.1 X It .
..
C!>> III
1&.1 I 0 0
..I
0 0
0 0
I 0 0
0 0
I 0 0
0 0
11"1
00
0\
-
..
o
tI)
u
u
u
~
:z:
E-<
0<
E-<~
f-<c:a:::
u<
fo,:
'JE-<
OU
~~
P-...,
o
oc:a:::
~p..
tI)~
o::t::
~E-<
~z
p-.....
~~
~~
E-<
fa..tI)
0>-
tI)
P-c:a:::
.....w
:z:~
tl)w
~tI)
.....0
~tI)
,.JU
~u
~u
..
~
~
6
tI)
<(
I-
.....
co
.....
::c
x
lLJ
ra:I
i41i\3
\W~
:Ii:
m
A .u
lilts
,;
RESOLUTION Nn 85-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE WALNUT CREEK DOWNTOWN PARALLEL PROJ ECT <DP 1997)
RESOLVED, .by the Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District, . County of Contra Costa, . State of California, . that
WHEREAS, .the project upon which this determination is made is
described as follows:
The proposed project consists of construction of an 8400 foot,.
isolated section of 54-inch diameter pipel ine within the Southern
Pacific Rail road right-of-way in the City of Wal nut Creek,.
Cal iforni a, . between Arroyo Way and Rudgear Road.
The pipeline would begin approximately 60 feet north of the existing
Wal nut Creek Channel at the southern edge of Arroyo Way. The
pi pel i ne woul d end approximatel y 160 feet south of the Southern
Pacific Railroad right-of-way crossing of San Ramon Creek,. which is
1300 feet north of the intersection of Rudgear Road with Danvil1e
Boulevard and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way.
WHEREAS,. District staff has conducted an Initial Study of the
proposed proj ect, . which was prepared by Earth Metrics Incorporated" an
environmental and planning consulting fi~
WHEREAS" District staff finds that the Initial Study adequately,.
accurately,. and objectively evaluates the proposed effect on the
environment.
WHEREAS, . the results of the Initial Study have been reviewed by the
Board.
NOW, ,THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY FOUND,. DECLARED, . and ORDERED that the
above named project will not have a significant effect upon the
environment; and
THAT,. the Secretary of the District is hereby authorized and
instructed to file a certified copy of this resolution and of the
aforesaid Initial Study at the District Office to be available for public
inspection and copyin~
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the District Board of the Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District this 21st day of March 1985 by the following vote:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Member:
President of the District Board of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District,.
County of Contra Costa. . State of Cal fforn1 a
COUNTERS IG NED:
Secretary of the District Board of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District"
County of Contra Costa,. State of California
John J. Carn1 ato, .01 strict Counsel
((sD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO.VIII. COLLECTION SYST M
1 3 21 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
March 18, .1985
SUBJECT
AUTHORlZE $146,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND TO
COMPlETE PHASE I OF THE OUTFALL INSPECTION AND REPAIR
ACTIV !TY
TYPE OF ACTION
Authorize Funds
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
John Larson, . Mana er, . CSO
Collection S
ISSUE: An additional authorization of Sewer Construction Funds is needed at this
time to cover the cost of completing Phase I of the Outfall Inspection and Repair
Activ ity.
BAa<GROUtlh In July 1984 the Board of Directors approved two authorizations
totaling $556,000 to begin work on Phase I of the Outfall Inspection and Repair
Activit~ These authorizations were based on rough cost estimates and they were
intended to cover the cost of dewatering and inspecting the entire Outfall and to
repair 140 leaking joints using three different repair technologies. The work
started in October 1984 and was completed in thirty-five days. The late timing of
the work was necessitated by continued leaking in the vicinity of the Industrial
Tank Corporation and Acme Fill disposal sites.
The total cost of Phase I to date is approximately $670,00~ The additional costs
are in three major areas: (1) sealing additional joi nts; (2) unknown fiel d
conditions; and (3) unanticipated labor related charges. Shortly after starting
the inspection and repair work in October,. it became apparent that the condition
of the Outfall vis-a-vis the number of leaking joints was worse than anticipate~
This was discussed with the Board during the Engineer's Report on October 18,.
1985. In additi on, . the progress bei ng made by the maj or j oi nt seali ng contractor
was better than expecte~ The decision was made to seal 40 additional joints to
minimize the problems of continued leakage in the vicinity of the Industrial Tank
Corporation and Acme Fill areas while taking advantage of a unit price break in
the installation contrac~ This work added $63,000 to the cost of Phase I. The
cost of dewatering the Outfall exceeded the original cost estimate by $37,000 due
to extreme and frequent fluctuations in elevation that severely limited the use of
the natural drainage. Finally, the project incurred $14,000 in labor related
costs due to a change in accounting procedures.
All of the constructi on work that was pl anned for Phase I is compl ete at th i s
time. A draft report has been compil ed that will be used as the basi s for
planning Phase IL An inspection using divers is being planned for this summer to
assess the performance of the three repair technologies installed last yea~ The
i nformati on prov i ded by the divers w ill be used to fi nalize our pl ans for Phase
IL The inspection is estimated to cost $33,000 including contract divers and CSO
forces for access and surface support. The inspection using divers was not
included in the previous authorizations. A summary of the Outfall Inspection and
Repair Activity costs is
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
included in the attachment to this position pape~ The total authorization being
requested is $146,000. This expenditure is included in the Five Year Capital
Expenditure Pla~
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $146,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund to complete
Phase I of the Outfall Inspection and Repair Activit~
R~Vln~D laND R~COMMENOED '0" .0IaRD IaCTION
INITIATING DEPT ./DIV.
GEN. MGR.lCHIEF ENG.
SU*ARY OF OUTFALL INSPECTION AND REPAIR COSTS
Total Cost of Phase I $ 668,698
(as of 2/28/85)
Less Total Funds Authorized 556,000
Overexpenditure $ ( 112, 698)
Inspection and Planning 33,000
This Authorization 146,000
Total Repair Cost (rough estimate)
$ 3,000,000
Total Replacement Cost (rough
estimate)
$13,000,000