HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 05-02-85
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO. I V. B IDS AND AvJARDS
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
April 22, 1985
AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD BID FOR PAINTING OF INTERIOR OF
INFLUENT DIVERSION STRUCTURE
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZATION
TO AWARD BID
SUBJECT
SUBMITTlOa~'e Ohda
Plant Maintenance Su erintendent
INITIATING DEPT.!DIV.
Plant 0 erations De artment
ISSUE: The Infl uent Diversi on Structure at the Treatment Pl ant needs to be
pai nted. Bids have been submitted, and it is recommended that the contract be
awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.
BACKGROUND: The interior of the Influent Diversion Structure is in need of
repainting. The interior of this building has an extremely harsh environment due
to the presence of sewer gases, which requi res extensive surface preparation and
speci al pai nt. Staff fel t that thi s job coul d most economically be done by an
outside painting contractor. Specifications were written and the Notice to
Contractors was publicly advertised on March 26 and 31,1985.
Bids were publicly opened on Monday, April 22, 1985. Four bids were received as
follows:
CONTRACTOR
BID AMOUNT
$ 5,797.00
EXCEPTIONS
Bl ai r & Sons
None
H. T. Jones Painting and Coatings
8,350.00
None
Redwood Painting
11,179.00
None
w. L. Beardsworth
15,200.00
None
A techni cal and commerci al eval uati on was conducted by the Pl ant Operati ons
Department Mai ntenance Superi ntendent and Purchasi ng (see Attachment 1) whi ch
shows that Blair & Sons is the lowest responsible bidder.
Funds were budgeted in the 1984-85 Operati ons and Mai ntenance budget for thi s
work.
RECOt+ENDATION : Award the contract to B 1 ai r & Sons for i nteri or coati ng of
building and equipment in the Influent Diversion Structure at the lump sum
contract price of $5,797.00.
DAO
1jf
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
TI G DEPT.!DIV.
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
April 23, 1985
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CHARLES W. BATT~S
1/. ~ J
PAT O'CONNOR
INTERIOR COATING OF BUILDING AND EQUIPMENT IN THE INFLUENT
DIVERSION STRUCTURE WITH EPOXY PAINT
Formal bidding commenced with publication of Notice to Contractors on
March 26 and 31, 1985. Four contractors completed the site inspection,
as required, and were given their bid package upon completion of the
inspection.
Bids were publicly opened on Monday, April 22, 1985. Four bids were
received as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT EXCEPTIONS
Blair & Sons $ 5,797.00 None
H. T. Jones Painting $ 8,350.00 None
and Coatings
Redwood Painting $11,179.00 None
W. L. Beardsworth $15,200.00 None
A technical and commercial evaluation was conducted by the Plant Operations
Department Maintenance Supervisor and Purchasing (see Attachment 1) which
shows that Blair & Sons is the lowest responsible bidder. They have
previously performed contract work for the District and demonstrated that
they can fulfill all of the requirements of a contract. Blair & Sons' bid
is below the estimate of $6,200. Purchasing, therefore, recommends that
you prepare the Position Paper to the Board of Directors recommending
the award to Blair & Sons for Interior Coating of Building and Equipment
in the Influent Diversion Structure at the lump sum contract price of
$5,797.00.
PO/gv
Attachment
cc: Dale Ohda
K. Laverty
.......
I--
Z
w
:!::
:c
U
e::(
I--
I--
e::(
"
r~
~,
~
~
....... (
... u
... -
00:
......
... ...
- u
z -
:> 0:
...
S a
'r- '-::
I~ ....... R
,.,. e:;: ...u
... -
Ig ~ g 00: .......
... ... .
~ i~ .......
:: .;:.
~ -& I J!:.
0... :'\J '- t ......
L.{) J -u
en +~ ;2 z -
:::I a:
....... .;... .- ...
a C.
II: I-- a
...
lD '-:
::E Cl
:::I ....... ....w a
z co t; ,... ~ ~ a
~ ... I~ o a: N
x
OIl ... ... .
~ :i ~ L.{)
I~
Q) I l~
...c t "I IL-.l ......
~ I - U
.- Z -
:::I II:
s:: C'\. ...
'r- :!::
~ g
s::
Q) Vl ..w .
E Q) Cl ... u a
... -
0- s:: ~ 011: L.{)
.9 S I~ ... ... M
'r-
=' ~ co I
c- ~ ~ ~
w . 'r-
s:: p I- ......
o<:l .J ,..!, ~ z~
il~ M :::III:
enQ) ...
s::s...
'r- :z
-0 ~ 2S
r- U
'r- =' ..... ,....:
=,s... g c ~~ en
co ~ ~ . 011:
...... ........
(/) Xl 't Pr I~ L.{)
4-
o s::
0 s...Q~ >
en'r- ~ II- ......
s:: Vl ;p~.J !~ -u
'r- s... .. z-
:::III:
~Q) Xit: ~ ...
z tt:l >
f O'r-
U.Cl
ii! s...~
~ o s:: ~2
D 'r- Q) ... i z
.. s... =' a: ~ !( ci 0 ~~
s Q) r- D Z ~ ~ 0:::1
l5~4- 8 II: '" ... ai ... oil uS
b ... ::E
i s:: s:: z 0 g J oC
ci oC II: ~ -
............... ... 0 :::I w ...
> oC 0 0 .: 0 :> ..
w
..
...
" " Q
4ft
Q
ca ~
110 Ii: .
0 - ii!
.Z .. ~ I
..
0 ... Q !
0 Vl ,
- en ,
..
"4 s::
'r-
.... ~
::>> tt:l
ca 0
4 U
It- i
u I--
.. ~~
;) -l
~~
.. " 6t= .......
0"
z .. "
0 co Z
...~ '-
. ~
~ co '" 3 ~
c .. ~ !:
.......
cc<SD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO. IV. BIDS AND AWA DS
2 5 2/85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
April 29, 1985
TYPE OF ACTION
SUBJECT
REJECT JILL BIDS FOR A NEW QOSED CIROJIT TELEVISION
SYSTEM AND REVISE 1984/85 EQUIPMENT BUDGET
AU lHOR IZATION
REJ ECT BIDS
SUBMITTED BY
John Larson, Manager
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Collection System 0 erations De artment
ISSUE: The Board has until May 3, 1985, to award a contract or reject all
bids for the retrofitting of an existing van with a Closed Circuit
Television system.
BACKGROUND.: The District purchased a black and white Closed Circuit
Television (CCTV) system installed in a stepside van in 1974 for the
purpose of internally inspecting sewer pi pel ines. The CCTV unit has been
used to inspect over 500 mil es of sewer pi pel ine during the past 11
years. A great majority of the inspection effort has been directed
toward new pipel ines to el iminate poor qual ity work from being accepted
as a part of the District's collection system. As a result of its
ability to detect problems that can occur during the backfilling
operation, CCTV is now required prior to final acceptance by all but the
small est sewer agenci es and ci ti es.
The 1984/85 Equipment Budget included an authorization of $62,000 to
retrofit the exi sti ng CCTV van with a new sol i d state color CCTV system.
At the time that the Equipment Budget was prepared, the District had just
experienced two years of steadily decreasing reliability and increasing
repair costs due to deterioration of the electronic components of the
black and white CCTV system. Improved rel iabil ity was requi red to meet
the demand for inspecting new pipelines in a timely manner. Upgrading
the CCTV system to color would greatly enhance the operator's ability to
identify problems, such as sulfide corrosion, in the older portions of
the collection system. Although the District has periods during which
two CCTV units could be used, the decision simply to retrofit the
existing van was based on using a contract CCTV inspection service to
supplement the District's CCTV unit during periods of high demand.
Two bids to retrofit the existing van with a solid state color CCTV
system were received and were opened on February 27, 1985. The low bi d
of $51,940, including sales tax, was submitted by WECO of Benicia,
California. The second low bid of $55,438 was submitted by OJES, Inc. of
Sacramento, Cal iforni a. The budget amount of $62,000 was based on
earl ier quotes from the two bi dders.
During the bid evaluation period, the staff identified a new manufacturer
of pipeline CCTV systems. The equipment manufactured by this third party
JD
JAL
Rej ect Bi ds
Page 2
appears to meet the District's needs; however, the installed price of the
equipment (estimated at $34,000) would be much lower due to technical
innovation in its design. The District would save approximately $18,000
by rebidding this contract.
In the past year some additional information has come to light. Fi rst,
there has been a ten percent increase in the quantity of new pipeline
under constructi on over th i s same time 1 ast year. Second, a contract
CCTV serv ice was used to inspect a new pi peli ne proj ect; the quality and
quantity of detail was much lower than that provided by the District's
CCTV crew. Third, additional experience has been gained in using the
CCTV to inspect older portions of the collection system. It has proven
to be a valuable tool in identifying the source of problems as well as
providing feedback on the quality of CSO's maintenance activities.
By rejecting all bids and rebidding, the Board has the opportunity to
place two CCTV units into service within the original 1984/85 Equipment
Budget authorization of $62,000. A new solid state color CCTV system
coul d be purchased and install ed in a new utility van at a cost of
$49,000. The existing black and white CCTV unit could be refurbished to
improve its reliability at a cost of $13,000. A cost summary is attached
to this position paper. The benefits that would be associated with
owning and operating two CCTV units are:
o Continued high quality inspection of new pipelines by using
Di stri ct CCTV crew.
o Improved serv ice to contractors by usi ng the second CCTV unit
for new pipeline inspecting during the busy periods.
o Greatl y increased i nspecti on of 01 der porti ons of the
collection system resulting in the identification and
correction of problem areas. This will result in a reduction
in both stoppages and infiltration/inflow.
o More feedback on the quality of eso's maintenance activities
with attendant improvements in both quality and productivity.
No additional funds are being requested as a part of this action.
RECX>>IENDATION: Reject all bids received on February 27, 1985, for
retrofitting the existing van with a new CCTV system. Revise the 1984/85
Equipment Budget authorization to include the equipment necessary for one
new solid state color CCTV unit and one refurbished black and white CCTV
un i t.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
GEN. MGR./CHIEF ENG.
Attachment
ClOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION SYSTEM
1984/85 . EQUIPMENT BUDGET AUlHORlZATION
Retrofit Existing CCTV System with New Color
Camera, Transmission Cable and Reel Assembly,
Power and Light Control Unit, Monitor, and
VCR. Recondition Existing CCTV Van.
Total
$62,000
REVISED 1984185 EOUIPMENTBUDGETAlJ1HORIZATION
NEW SOLID STATE COLOR CCTV UNIT
Purchase Color CCTV Equipment
$25,000
Purchase Utility Van
12,000
Modify Van and Install Equipment
9,000
Contingency
3,000
Subtotal
$49,000
REFURBISH EXISTING BLACK AND WHITECCTV UNIT
Repair Body and Interior $ 5,000
Replace CCTV Components 5,500
Contingency 2,500
Subtotal $13 ,000
Total $62,000
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
GEN. MGR./CHIEF ENG.
c((5D
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
N~ V. CONSENT CALENDAR
2 5 2 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
SUBJECT
April 23, 1985
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 85-6 (DANVILLE) AND 85-7 (DANVILLE) ACCEPT FOR PROCESSING
TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT
SUBMITTED BY
Dennis Hall, Associate En ineer Construction Div.
Parcel
No.
Area
Owner
Address
Parcel No. & Acrea e
Remarks
85-6
Danville
Eugene A. Grillo
319 Diablo Road, #202
Danville, CA 94526
208-031-005 (0.34 acre)
Property to be City of
developed as a 10- Danville
unit senior citizens'
apartment complex.
Negative declaration
by the City of Danvill
85-7
Danville
Jay Weymouth
215 Marks Road
Danvi 11 e, CA
196-070-011 (1.10 acre)
Existing home;
failing septic
system. District to
prepare "Notice of
Exemption. II
CCCSD
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P. A. 85-6 and 85-7 to be included in a future formal
annexation.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
RAB
DH
~.
, 11
. //f/(
iJM
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
JD(
~~ "-
~~.:foVi""/.~\U:~"'~;~;~~ ~~~ID,r~IO JO~~r~0J '4~1'81 I~~~I -=f-.~;'6'2" ~
o ILYI) ," .~~';...... ~ ''- ",', r, ~~.., -! i- !!;
::I . .~ ~ ~ 04 ',,', ~''<''; 41 '" 2S ---4 ~ - ,~, ,6
..nAr. ~ ~"" ,'" L't .............. e /,,-
!( 173AC . ',', 1tf'4 4& ~... f........ 0" .~
~ ' ~ I 1-,,- ',', 5 20 130 - 46 '\0 57
, '45AC _ I l!i - ',', .... ~ '//1
..Ji.- \ 'T ' ---........ "'>' <l" .. ~l / 59 58
c. LA VI" __ .-+-~ ',', ~ UJ'/l../ t5 -
or-' \. U T.ll 5 "II' " ' ~'H' '.ly z '-- -
.0' 302 AC D A.-.A iI"'li: 10~ - . rrr-~ I ~""" "" 10 'f<ifP''''''' ..... c. ~ ~k .
__ '\ ~.:. . I 0" .ttlr.nl V 120 j'2T 4 -2
.<'~ 6 \ rl!~. 07L V "........ 8~' ";';5"" -.C b
;, ':: . .." . . j~I$'-;" 0 · -..' _."~ ,,' '~,,'- I
" I 108 ..., 5 U B .~ u r5( -
."iil" ~I
, 2.24Ar. ,Q f-'-" -..!!! I-- ...
,,,, l).... ~ 131! II: - :!i f-- -
'''ofl 109 n, 0 L . 'i---; -i
209AC"~~&.8t :~2: fNr>..~..~.. ~". CHARW~;\8_12IZ ~L -i ~ -i f 178 ~f. 18' ,~
<J. /)~il . 1>1/'" ---0 24~ ~ 143~47 iOi -li-!!-~'80' I
~ :'illJi ~8>:- .i< J I.,!. u" -J C'2[0!l4' '2.' '" "'" ,-' 'J ~ ~.,
\,;~~:< -4.. 103 ~03, J74~r~
".. ! 5 ~"'TO' b,-" ,'~
~)/""Ii'ii 8 ~~..5"STA Ec S08R
'25AC I ~ ~8~ 8-15'/6 0\ G F 1731 17~' BtfS;~
'l< i \" ~_L of- H'17- S UB- ;; I,,-CJ "t\ ~ -U' --rrrr
433AC .. 0"" ~~. \\~\~ .~ r;-l ~ \ () ~ ~~~.. ':~~f~ ~52AM'<i0
~ a" ~Pi:. J ~ 168 167 '1 6 ~
106"C ~ r- ~ V\. r .. ~ IllI ~ /. II ~ - , . 'I
~ :...~ 3 liil' Dlt.lIL .~ \" ~ .6E r
, f'!J so h.M..' ~ 164
:"\ ~ 2\. -Z4 ~ ~ -.95 RD' .O~ ID"~.JX
.,:.;~r.l:J~'.x, :'\..Ar~~ ' ~ :~~<iiYi;;' ~ \"';'-\'CT '~X(f'Jt'P[J ffi
"" .. ""< ~1:! ' ~ \r'%';1ili""j;t..... \\:, !i '
35AC <' ,,~... ,~ \ i9. L .",.,:;:; - :::::,:,: I ,II II I'
;J. "~ '" T~ r> ~ l~X;::::;:: ... :.~:.::;.~ I \\ I I ......
~' " ""'0 I S I:,~ .:.:::;;::- .... I,' I, " 6 I
<' .")' '0 <' ~~ _ _,^'", "" ~ ,i 9", <!1 ~ ~ "1:'/ l:':':'~:~""""-l;---~-' " ,\\~'.:.:-"::II? " 63
. .. ~o ~~).., " ~ :S:5i- ~ N" ,::,:;;', ,- I // D
'3 25 I 't "'01' ~'~ ~;s/..Iar~- : ~~. .~.~ <i',y~ .J 4 ,;' ~,"':V'-'-'\ .:. ...----.- ~D~ // ~ 64
I ....1< '- /.JII 1> ~ 8'9 l5' 'f,. I \' J::. '____.J I; /~
, "'1> / '>'v: ;s ~. oS <' /1 ~
, 0 ;> I~ '0 ~/' 65
:. . '. > ., '*' ' ,(' ......... ,i'
~<+",5 W7. A. /'Q' I CHARLOTTe "000 I it' ,9 ~
""" I ~1>O' Y" -II" Illel ~ SCHaOL \ {I i 10 ~
->," ~... "-- '.> /. ~. ~; $0'.. Q ;> S 9 ~ ~"<" ~ lIt 583 "C % / ' II ~
(lJ ""::::::';1) i l ....~.,:" ~:S4-~~ ;,' ~~~~~~;..~! 'c. \~
~ ~~4t~< . .\;;..,'~~'~(i..~~~;:<:j .. .: '
',~ ,....,,,..,,. ''''':~. " ;;~.\\~. ;k>' /'~,> < .~ ";":~-r:'4;j" :: ,~; ~, "'. .'
,QQ """ '" [.7' ~. ,-- t~1.t~ >.. '0 'to;. "I I
II ~ <<, ~ t"tt' 1<'$ :':: li~?~5;':>:, 73 ".P.::. '..,' W .i-----. 82
".. "1 . .... "" "0 l' ,.;;_'1 II ." .. ~-;:, \.~' ;..
'f .. ,. ., " ,," ")" .. "\0','
,Q ,/ '" Q · D. 1,/'" 1 ...... '-'; ~!'~'#W1'\~" '",~" UB ..tI.. " F ':' ;:-:,'.. :"
.:.....:... " (~ IZ~ ~47 8 t~~tll'~..,':J61~ 1'~ ~ :~2~7', ~~. !~~:z21;:;~ Z:417_11~~'B~ ?? 2
........... ' ---.. r.: /~ ~f,,,, I,;~r:~ '-' \, · 6~~~'DZ ~ '~I r" ~.
" :-~';: 7- !.;.~ ktilfl ~ \ fAi' I i'?~{;'\" \.L
'Q_~7 ,,:J ~:~~.., =~~~ ~ ,--At: '1~ 'r~:\it:f;':
~i~" ..::'''~ I AR::tS5X:', ~ .~~
"" \' ~\\ \ .\",~\..\"~ ~ <VJ ~
________ _ \ , JJa./fJ\~ :!:i
,D )(
SAN RAMON UNION
HIGH SCHOOL
50.00 "c
\1f-
fltl,
..
.~'>/<'~
. /
I ~
~)o ,. I
3.0AC
,..", ,.
\....
"
<'/ <'oJf<~
" ~~.
~~
'b^~ ,~ ~
'0 y
~ \ .> ",
~\.9
'<,
i::)~ .t
4 .~
,Csu <:,
I
1>
.A .....
'<
...
II
HUMPHPEY
1:':-0.75 AC
III
BISCHOFF
12 90 AC
74
73
59 AC
HT Ollil
CSBCR~;
32 20 4C
JrA. 86-7
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO.
4
5/2/85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
April 23, 1985
SUBJECT ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO ADD C. MILLER, ACCOUNTING
TECHNICIAN, TO THE LIST OF EMPLOYEES AUTHORIZED TO HAVE ACCESS
TO THE DISTRICT1S SAFE DEPOSIT BOX
TYPE OF ACTION
ADOPT
RESOLUTION
SU~MITTED BY
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Administrative/Finance & Accounting
ISSUE: It is recommended that Colette S. Miller, Accounting Technician IIII, be
authorized access to the District's safe deposit box.
BACKGROUND: The District maintains a safe deposit box at the Wells Fargo Bank in
Pleasant Hill to safeguard contractor bonds which are in the form of certificates
of deposits. A designated Accounting staff member is given responsibility to
deposit and withdraw such bonds, and to maintain records and receipts which serve
as an inventory of the contents of the safe deposit box.
Employees currently authorized to have access to the safe deposit box are:
Joyce E. McMillan, Secretary of the District
Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer
Steven A. Elsberry, Accounting Supervisor
Deborah D. Barone, Accountant
D. Barone is the staff member assigned custodial responsibil ity for the safe
deposit box. She was recently promoted to the position of Accountant, and has
assumed new responsibil ities. It is considered desirable to assign C. Miller,
Accounting Technician, the custodial responsibilities, and to have D. Barone
provide coverage in C. Miller's absence.
A resolution to authorize Colette S. Miller access to the District's safe deposit
box is attached.
RECOtIENDATION: Adopt the attached resol ution to add Col ette S. Mill er to the
list of employees authorized access to the District's safe deposit box.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
~~.
WNF
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
RESOLUTION NO. 85-
A RESOLUTION REVISING RESOLUTION NO. 83-165 AND AUTHORIZING
THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT, FINANCE OFFICER, ACCOUNTING
SUPERVISOR, ACCOUNTANT, AND ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN AS SIGNATORIES
AND KEYHOLDERS FOR THE DISTRICT SAFE DEPOSIT BOX
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra
Costa Sanitary District, a public corporation (hereinafter referred to as
Corporation), as follows:
THAT, this Corporation has entered into a Rental Agreement (and
renewals thereof) for a Safe Deposit Box in the vaults of Wells Fargo Bank
(hereinafter called Bank); and
THAT, anyone of the following officers and employees of this
Corporation shall have the right of access to and control of the contents
thereof, and to surrender the said Box, releasing Bank from all liability
with respect thereto:
JOYCE E. McMILLAN, SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT
WALTER N. FUNASAKI, FINANCE OFFICER
STEVEN A. ELSBERRY, ACCOUNTING SUPERVISOR
DEBORAH D. BARONE, ACCOUNTANT
COLETTE S. MILLER, ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the certification of the Secretary
of this Corporation as to election or appointment of authorized officers
or employees shall be binding upon this Corporation, and the authority
hereby conferred shall remain in force until written notice of the
revocation or modification thereof shall be del ivered to an officer of
Bank at the office at which said Safe Deposit Box is located.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of May, 1985, by the following
vote:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Members:
President of the District Board of
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District, County of Contra Costa,
State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Secretary of the Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County of Contra
Costa, State of California
Approved as to Form:
John J. Carniato
District Counsel
(((sD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NO. VI. ENGINEERING
1 5 2 85
OS 10 n P VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
P IT. N .-JA ER General Manager-Chief Engineer
SUBJECT TRANSMIT CCSD S SOLI 0 WASTE MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATI ONS
TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
DATE
A ril 29 1985
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE LETTER
JAMES M. KELLY
SUBMITTED BY
ISSUE: Specific recommendations for the County Board of Supervisors concerning solid
waste issues have been prepared. Staff recommends that the recommendations be sent to
the Board of Supervisors.
BACKGROUND: The attached letter presents the District's recommendations for the
Board of Supervisors concerning solid waste issues. Specific recommendations are
made regarding Acme Fill closure, interim solid waste export, public landfill site
search, County-wide consensus required for solving the County-wide solid waste problem,
transfer stations, and funding.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the attached letter to be sent the County Board of
Supervisors.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
RAB
F ENG.
.--__._--.--....,_,.,._.._~,._,__.."_M__.~____~.__.__._^_,_____~__'~__._~___._.,_.__~.~.._..,.,__.___.._._,,__.,..___._~____+.._."..~.....___....._.,.~".,,~...'_'""m.~_+___._._._._..__.,_._...._M.__.~.__~.___._."....___._____".
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Martinez, California 94553
.
5019 Imhoff Place
(415) 689-3890
ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager
Chief Engineer
May 2, 1985
J. J. CARNIATO
Counsel for the District
(415) 283-1552
JOYCE E. McMILLAN
Secretary 01 the District
Honorable Board Members
Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
P. o. Box 911
Martinez, CA 94553
RE: CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT'S
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
TO THE CONTRA COST A COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS
Dear Board Members:
The Solid Waste Management Project Report conducted by Central Contra
Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) and Contra Costa County provides compara-
tive information to be used for solid waste management decision making. The
CCCSD Board of Directors has deliberated upon the information in the report,
in addition to feedback received from the public and other interested parties,
and has formulated specific recommendations for the Board of Supervisors
concerning solid waste issues. These recommendations are contained in the
balance of this letter and cover the following issues:
o Acme Fill Closure
o Interim Solid Waste Export
o Public Landfill Site Search
o County-Wide Consensus
o Transfer Stations
o Funding
ACME FILL CLOSURE
The current Army Corps of Engineers permit for the existing Acme Fill
expansion expires either in June 1987, or until the height of fill reaches 40 feet,
whichever comes first. It is very unlikely that any new landfill could be placed
into operation in the 1987 timeframe. Consequently, it is extremely important
that Acme be given permission to continue operation until at least June 1989 in
order to give the County time to develop and implement alternatives.
Permit authority to allow Acme Fill Corporation to raise its landfill to the 60
foot level would provide landfill capacity until at least June 1989. This
additional capacity would greatly alleviate the looming short term solid waste
crisis in the County while not harming or usurping any further wetland habitat.
CCCSD recommends that the Board of Supervisors continue to take an active
and aggressive role to assist the Acme Fill Corporation in its attempts to
extend its 97 acre expansion permit for two years past June 1987. The CCCSD
Board of Directors stands ready to assist the Board of Supervisors in this task.
In addition, CCCSD recommends the Board of Supervisors assist Acme Fill
Corporation overcome legal challenges that may arise from Acme's extension
request.
Public agency support for an extension of Acme Fill's permit should be based
upon Acme Fill Corporation's commitment to develop host community mitiga-
tion measures for the extension, such as importing cover material to preserve
the hill that acts as a buffer for the Vine Hill community, preparing a
comprehensive closure plan, keeping access roads and surrounding property free
of debris, and minimizing transportation impacts to the Arthur Road area.
INTERIM saUD WASTE EXPORT
The Solid Waste Management Project Report documents that the County could
be out of landfill capacity as early as 1989. It is probable that it will not be
possible to permit and place replacement landfills into service in time to avoid
the necessity for solid waste export, possibly even if Acme Fill Corporation
succeeds in extending its present permit. Consequently, it is essential for
Contra Costa County to secure a commitment from another county for interim
solid waste disposal.
CCCSD recommends that the Board of Supervisors initiate an intensive effort
to negotiate solid waste export agreements with one or more neighboring
counties. This effort should begin immediately as the experience of other
counties (e.g., San Francisco) shows that the process can take 18 months or
longer. The county negotiating team should address the following export issues:
o The negotiation of a contract with private landfill operators in
the "import county," as appropriate.
o Evaluate CEQA requirements, as required by the "import
county. "
o The need to negotiate a fair and reasonable tipping fee surcharge
that may be required by an "import county" to compensate that
county for the impacts of solid waste import.
o Determine what other actions might be required by the host
county, such as amending and complying with the host county's
Solid Waste Management Plan.
o The need to develop a plan and a schedule under which the
needed activities would be conducted.
-2-
CCCSD further recommends that the Board of Supervisors investigate the
staffing requirements for the successful negotiation of a solid waste export
agreement to assure that sufficient resources are allocated to this potentially
difficult and lengthy task. The County's negotiation effort should be closely
coordinated with the affected franchisors and franchisees.
PUBLIC LANDFILL SITE SEARCH
The Public Participation Program which was conducted as part of the Solid
Waste Management Project Report identified significant public opposition to
each of the three privately proposed landfill sites. Furthermore, while no fatal
technical flaws were uncovered in the Solid Waste Management Report, such
flaws could be uncovered by the further study currently underway by the private
landfill proponents. As a result, it is uncertain whether any of the three private
proposals will survive the permit process. It is still more uncertain whether two
or more of the private proposals will survive the permit process and thus provide
competition for disposal fees.
CCCSD recommends that the Board of Supervisors continue work to select
possible landfill sites; however, CCCSD believes that the publicly identified
landfill site option should be fully executed only in the case where private
industry fails to show adequate progress to permit two landfills in the county.
This approach will avoid the danger that a publicly identified landfill site
alternative will reduce the chances that privately proposed sites will survive the
permit process or reduce the commitment of private entrepreneurs to persevere
in their efforts. In the event only one private site is permitted, the option of
rate regulation should be considered along with the option of developing a
competing publicly identified site. Who would operate and own the publicly
identified site could be determined after the site was permitted (i.e., the
decision if the site is public or private).
CCCSD recommends that the public landfill site selection process proceed, using
a step-by-step methodical approach, similar to that used in the Solid Waste
Management Project. Actual procurement of a landfill site would be held in
abeyance pending a Board of Supervisors determination of the adequacy of the
progress the private sector is making in permitting a landfill. In order to
facilitate this determination, a series of realistic measurable milestone
accomplishments should be scheduled in the near future. If the private landfill
proponents fail to meet these milestones, the Board of Supervisors should embark
on an appropriate alternative plan. In order to insure the maximum cooperation
from regional interest groups, CCCSD recommends that the Board of Supervisors
assume responsibility for the management of a future publicly identified landfill
site selection effort. CCCSD would, of course, wish to participate in the
process, along with other franchisers, in a manner consistent with its role as a
major solid waste franchiser in the county.
COUNTY-WIDE CONSENSUS
Perhaps the most definitive conclusion relating to solid waste management
policy that the CCCSD Board of Directors has reached throughout the Solid
Waste Management Report preparation period is that the county solid waste
problem requires county-wide solutions. Because of the high vulnerability which
-3-
environmentally sensitive projects have in the permit process, it is probably
necessary to achieve a county-wide consensus to ensure a successful resolution
to the solid waste management problem. In addition, amendments to the Solid
Waste Management Plan require approval of fifty percent of the cities having
fifty percent of the incorporated population of the county.
CCCSD recommends that the Board of Supervisors create a decision making body
to represent cities and sanitary districts as well as the county in solid waste
matters. This body should be given sufficient authority and responsibility to
enable the county to reach a workable consensus of those aspects of solid waste
management which are controlled by franchisers, including control of the waste
stream and recycling efforts which are integrated into solid waste collection.
The existing Solid Waste Commission might evolve into this decision-making
body.
TRANSFER ST A nONS
The Solid Waste Management Project Report makes the following findings rela-
tive to transfer stations:
o A central county transfer station is cost effective or marginally
cost effective for most Acme Fill replacement options.
o A transfer station could reduce the truck traffic in-route to a
landfill by ten-fold.
o A transfer station is probably needed for export of solid waste
out of the county.
o The time requirement for a new transfer station from permit
application to operation is two to three years if there are no
major complications in site acquisition and permitting.
CCCSD recommends that the Board of Supervisors undertake efforts to facili-
tate construction of a transfer station in central county. Study areas needing
further investigation include site identification, more definitive cost estimates,
options for ownership and operation, financing, the need for an interim vs. a long
term solution, the need for waste stream control, integration of recycling
options, and possibilities for a sponsoring agency.
CCCSD recommends the Board of Supervisors adopt a policy which would require
that transfer stations be provided to mitigate truck traffic at any future landfills
which have access routes in residential areas. The adoption of such a policy
would expedite the permitting, financing, and construction of transfer stations.
FUNDING
CCCSD recommends that future solid waste management planning efforts that
will be conducted by the county or other authorized agencies be funded by an
increase in the existing landfill tonnage surcharge fees. These fees are a
uniform rate applied at all Contra Costa County landfills and would enable
revenue generation from all waste disposed of in the County, including imported
waste. The surcharge is fair, equitable, and is readily implementable by the
Board of Supervisors.
-4-
The CCCSD Board of Directors is happy to have been of service to the County in
contributing to the Solid Waste Management Project Report. CCCSD stands
ready to assist the Board of Supervisors in the future, consistent with its role as
a major franchiser of solid waste in the County.
tl:L/B
Parke Boneysteele, President
Board of Directors
RAB:bg
cc: Management Advisory Committee
Technical Advisory Committee
Solid Waste Commission
-5-
Contra Costa itary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
Apri 1 22, 1985
SUBJECT
TYPE OF ACTION
APPROVE 1985-1986 EQUIPMENT BUDGET
APPROVE E0UIPMENT
BUDGET
SUBMITTEQ BY .. Off.
Walter Funasakl, Flnanee leer
i,N\TIP.T~NG DEPT.!DIV . .
Aamlnlstratlve7Flnanee & Aeeountlng
ISSUE: Approval of the District's 1985-1986 Equipment Budget is requested.
BACKGROUND: The 1985-1986 Equipment Budget was submitted for review at
the April 18, 1985 Board Meeting, and was calendared for approval by the
Board on May 2, 1985. No changes or additional information were
requested as a result of the Board's review on April 18.
The approved 1985-1986 Equipment Budget will be schedul ed for adoption
with the 1985-1986 Personnel and Operations and Maintenance Budgets on
June 20, 1985.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the 1985-1986 Equipment Budget.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
~~;:::.. ~
vJF PM
CC(SD
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
No.VII. BUDGET & FINANCE
2 5 2 85
POSITION PAPER
VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN
General Manager-Chief Engineer
DATE
Apri 1 22, 1985
SUBJECT
TYPE OF ACTION
RECEIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN ADVISORY
COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT
RECEIVE ANNUAL REPORT
SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Walter N. Funasaki Finance Officer Administrative/Finance & Accounting
ISSUE: The District's Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee
(Committee) has prepared its annual report to District management and
the Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors approved the establishment of the
Committee in January 1982. The scope of activities of the Committee
includes the submission of an annual report to District management
and the Board of Directors. The annual report of the Committee for
the March 1984 to March 1985 period is submitted herewith.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and consider the annual report of the
Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
I2!O::~ .
WNF
PM
.. ._____.._.__.._"____,~___._.___".,..~..__..___."_.~~~'"._._...,^_"~.~______.,,~_.______...__~,,_~_~M._______."__....._...._.._.__._.__.__~_____....._____.___
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT
Report Period: March 1984 - March 1985
Introduction
The Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee (Committee) was established by
the Board of Directors to facilitate the internal administration of the
District's Deferred Compensation Plan (Plan). The scope of the Committee's
activities are to:
o Establish internal District administrative procedures within the provisions
of the Deferred Compensation Plan document.
o Educate participants regarding the Plan provisions by issuing a handbook
which summarizes the Deferred Compensation Plan, and responding to queries
from participants.
o Review accountability by the Plan Administrator, Hartford Variable
Annuities Life Insurance Company (Hartford), and respond to participants'
queries regarding accuracy or propriety of account balances.
o Review participants' requests for emergency withdrawal of funds.
o Review investment performance of the Deferred Compensation Plan on an
annual basis.
Committee Accomplishments
The following activities were completed by the Deferred Compensation Plan
Advisory Committee since March 1984:
o Education of participants - The employee handbook summarizing the Deferred
Compensation Plan provisions was updated to reflect changes in interest
rates, social security rates, and Committee membership.
General queries from participants regarding the Plan were responded to by
Committee members.
o Review accountability by the Plan Administrator - There were few queries
from participants regarding account accuracy and propriety. Instances of
inaccuracies which were reported to Hartford were corrected promptly.
o Review requests for emergency withdrawals - One emergency withdrawal
request was reviewed by the Committee and denied as non-qualifying, and the
applicant did not pursue his request further. A second emergency
withdrawal request was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Board
of Directors.
o Review investment performance of the Plan - A summary which presents the
investment performance of the Pl an is prov i ded on an attachment. The.
summary shows the investment performance for the calendar years 1981, 1982,
1983, and 1984. The performance measures for 1981, 1982, and 1983 were
based on a sample of 25 participants' accounts. As a result of the
availability of quarterly summary reports from Hartford for 1984, the
performance measures are based on the results of all District participants'
accounts, and the presentation format has been modified accordingly.
Current Committee Activities
The Committee is currently involved in the following major activities:
o The Committee has undertaken a review of other deferred compensation plans
in order to evaluate the competitive standing of the Hartford administered
deferred compensation plan.
Letters requesting information on various deferred compensation plans were
sent to 20 different insurance companies, brokerage fi rms, and Savings &
Loans. Twelve replies were received, and after a preliminary review of
these 12 plans, six plans were selected for a more thorough analysis. Of
these six plans, three have been chosen for an in-depth comparative
analysis with the current deferred compensation plan we have with Hartford,
as well as a new plan proposed by Hartford. This review and analysis will
be completed in July, 1985, and a Position Paper containing the Committee
recommendations will be submitted no later than the July 18, 1985 Board
Meeting.
o The Committee has reviewed the Pl an document and has compl eted a draft
revision which incorporates changes required by new Internal Revenue
Service regul ations as well as changes recommended by Hartford. A final
review by District Counsel is required before the Committee prepares a
report of its recommendation to District management and the Board of
Directors.
Conclusion
During the twelve month period March 1984 through March 1985, the Committee has
accomplished all of the responsibilities incl uded within its scope of
activities. This has been achieved through the conscientious efforts of the
Committee members.
The performance of Hartford in administering the Plan during this period is
considered to be satisfactory. Review of other deferred compensation plans
indicates that Hartford is one of the leading deferred compensation plan
administrators in their fee structure, administrative reporting methods, and
response to problems.
The Plan's investment performance during the calendar year ended December 31,
1984 for stocks and bonds exceeded the general market, as measured by the Dow
Jones indexes; however, as measured by the Standard and Poor's 500 stock index
and the Shearson Lehman bond index, the District's investments slightly
underperformed the general market. Interest earned on fixed interest accounts
reflected the prevailing short-term interest rates.
Committee Members:
& d~.J'
Wal tar Funasaki
~ ~ ~
I~ i9 )
Tony !'lZ ott
(through January 21, 1985)
-({All vtt <f -t. j -'" .I
en Harri son
~~~
Maria Izzo
(beginning March 14, 1985)
ifl~ ;/~
Doni ta Hoh enstei n
(th rough Ma rch 13, 1985)
n Netto
(beginning Janu ry 22,1985)
'/wffi- JrUL
arriette Stahl
~
u
.....
cr:
~ .
~:z: t'I"\
c< co
....J......,en
>~U-
~z~ .
~O::;:N
...........c::OO
%~OCT\
<<Ll--
V) c.n 0:: ..
~E5~a;
:;;~~en
ooz-
UU~O
<c~....
D::L.l.JV')O
~C::LU:Z
Zc::>L&J
O......,Zv>
Uu..-lX'
....J~ <
< ....
cr: >
~ a:
z <
......, 0
u :z
....
....J
<
U
-:r
CO
en
c
:z
<
0\
to
~
.......
......
1.0
'"
~
~
~
M
.......
N
.......
-
~
~I.O
III
1Il_
o 0
....J U
....... ..
+
~ to
c:
.-
1Il_
e.:! 0
U
IW~
VI _
CU 10
CU.....>
u;.o
VI ~ CIl
..... c: >
~.- ex:
~~
~<
U
:;
'-
10
'""
'"
N
.....
o
CU
~
10
Vl
IOCU
""'::J
0-
~IO
>
l!h>
10_
'- '-
~t::
<
CIl
CIl ::J
Ol_
1010
'->
CU
>.....
<U
U
<
CIl
"'VI
- .....
10 U
>U
<
0;:;;.....
""'0
o
~
CIl
a> CIl
10 ..... ::J
'-U_
CIl U 10
><>
<
.....
U
oL
.....
VI
CIl
::J
- VI
10"'"
>U
U
-<
10
..........
00
~
c
VI
..........
o c:
'- 2i
CIlo~
..cU
E'~
::J"'"
2:'-
10
'""
.....
CU
~
'-
10
:IE:
CIl
..... VI
10 "C
cr: c:
o
- 'a:l
_"C
._ CO
CO- N
I
~VIVI
CIl CIl
CIlC:C:
~~ .!5
'-
CIl~~
>00
<CC
~~~
COO 0
MO\_
- -
+ I I
-
10
'-
CU
c::
~
~ ~ :;I~II
++++
c:
LnN....-tCO
CO--CO""""
l:'\~~tO
[8
'"
-
~O
~
~
l!! _ tOl~11
o . . .
Z~....-t....-t
-
NtOgl
M~CO
~:I.O::
en 0""";
I.O~M~
en M 1.0 0\
Oft Oft Oft ..
......0l.O~
1.0 '" M ....,
-
-
~"'Ne
ONM~
NM~"d"
L()-=:tM.......
-
_M_~
to......N......
....-t 0'\ 0.......
.. .. .. ..
M M C'\ \.0
to"'~tO
-
-
MO......el
N"".......""
COM Lt')......-t
. . .
I.O~~tO
....
N"'N~
eno:l~-
......lIli:!"Lt')C'\J
.. .. Oft ...
Lt')&.(')O"lO
LnONO"l
O\.q-M\O
-
-
OM N I""" I I
-=:to"l"""'O
_ N
~g
<~
"C .><
r-J U"'O
><oc:
-,.. +J 0
Ll-Vla:l
'-
10
CIl
>-
-
o:l
""
-
CU
..... III
10 "C
cr: c:
o
- 'a:l
_"C
-_ CO
CC-N
I
~VIVI
CIlCU
CIlc:c:
olOO
10"':)"':)
'-
CU~~
> 0 0
<CC
~~~
_I.OM
-0\0
---
+ + +
~~r;I~11
..........-4("'") M
-'NN .......
+ + + +
NL.l')O ,.....
o 1.0 N to
O....-4N M
. . .
Ooo",M
~ I~
CIl
...,
10
cr:
o
- 'a:l
_ "C
-_ CO
C<l-N
I
~VIVI
CIlCll
CIlC:C:
olOO
10"':)"':)
'-
CU~~
~gg
~~~
MM'"
0\0-
+c:;:'
~~~I~II
0"\00...... O"l
++++
I.O~NN
\C U"') M LJ")
D:)MLt')"
I.O~
N
-
l!! 0......\ 0\11 l!! M 01~11
o . .. 0'"
Z....... z: N......
M MI 1.0
0\ 1.0 '"
~M.-t Lt')
2:_ _
en L/').... an
,...... ex:>""'" M
1.0 ...., M 1.0
.. Oft Oft ...
cnooNO
.......MN'd"
- N
- -
M\OLn\O
('.JON LJ'")
~~~~
en \C M f"""t
-
- -
N-I.Oo\
OO~...... O'l
NM....... M
. . .
\0 c:> '-C ......
O~N 00
N N
..." -
(""')\01.00
O.q 0 Lt')
L(') 0'\ 1"""'4 N
~~,..:~
-
- -
~~~ N
MI.O~~
L'~. q- oc:t -=:t
. . .
MMM 0
LnCOM.......
\0 Lt') -=:t \0
.
- N
- -
~ ~ -10011
....... CO \0 .......
_ N
"C .><
CIlU"C
><OC:
.,.. +J 0
Ll-VlCO
N
o:l
""
-
1.0 '" -
"'...... M
CV......Ntid"
c:: .
.g~ ;;;:
I.OMI.O~
'd' 0"\ ...... U")
O-~I.O
.. .
N 0\ 00 O'l
......~N~
N M
-
"'NtO~
OOtON
OLt"JO"\"d"
.q- L,(') IIII:t Lt'>
- -
-
N_C"\~
C\J,...-4M,.....
...... L/') 0'\ I.t"J
.. .
NOO-=:tLt')
NMNCO
M M
-
MM......~
1.0 1.0 M 0
C'J IJ") O"l Lt')
.. Oft .. ..
MOO......'"
- -
-
~O'lO'li
C:OCOM......
an 0"1 r--.. M
Oft Oft .. ..
,....,.III:::tNLt')
III::t 0...... \0
r;.OOoc:tu:
N M
- .
......~NIOII
....... C"l Ln M
_ N
"C .><
CIlU"C
><Oc:
",.. +J 0
Ll-"'a:l
M
en
C"'>
-
-
a
.......
~-:r
III
1Il_
o 0
....JU
....... ..
+
~-o
c:
1Il-
e.:! 0
U
IW~
;:0-
~
I)
:l
......1Il
0>
III
I) IW .
I) I)
Ll- >
<
Lt\~
i'
E
"t:l
<
i<
oj<
.......
-:r
~
oj<
oj<
i'
.......
M
~
.......
N
.....
I)
.:,/.
'-
III
:E:
III
I) "t:l
..... c:
III
a:
"t:l III
lD"t:l
-0 c:
.- 0 c: 0
CD LI'\ . f'tI CD
~1Il~!0
>-- - I) N
Ill.... ....J
~ 8 ~ r:: ~
00.. c: 0 c:
en 01110
Lb""~""
III
~~~~~
<V>oV>o
IW IW IW IW IW
N..::r-,.......O~
O_C"'"\LI'\.:r'
+ + I + +
III
....
I)
c:
I)
e.:!
...........
o III
III
t: 0
.- ....J
1Il~
e.:!
~I
I)
:l
1Il-
..... III
0>
~
>-
1)-
01....
III I)
.... .....
I) ....,
> III
< :l
c:I
I)
:l
1)-
01 III
Ill>
....
I).....
> U
< U
<
III
.....
u.J:>
UO-
< L..
.....
......1Il
0'-
o
I)
:l1W
III
>
~~I
III
...... .....
o c:
III
.... ~
1).-
.J:>U
5 .;:;
:z ....
III
0..
~ 1)1
o ~
u >-
U~
<
~I
-0 M
ON
+ I
.......
enM
co en
en ......
......Lt'\
O-
M
I)......
c:
o
:z
I) CO
t:Lt'\
0......
:z .
-:r
CO M
...... -:r
ON
MN
_ en
en '"
N
-0 to
0Lt'\
Lt'\M
......0
OLt'\
'" Lt'\
......-
-0 en
N en
Men
-0 M
en en
M'"
M
~
-:r ......
en '"
"t:l~
Q) U
x 0
.- .....
Ll- V>
-:r
CO
en
Lt'\
ell
+
CO
M
co
o
-:r
~
~
I~II
-:r
Lt'\
BII
......
N
o
-:r
Lt'\
M
;
-0
co
-:r
o
~II
Lt'\
cO
I~II
CO
en
-:r
......
......
M
!
'"
M
~II
"t:l
c:
o
lD