Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 09-19-85 Coni Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS N~ IV. BIDS & AWARDS POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE September 11, 1985 TYPE OF ACTION AWARD BID SUBJECT AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR $9,360 FOR REPAIRING ll-IE 48-IN(}I CHECK Vft..VE AND VENlURI IN ll-IE AERATION AIR NO. 2 BLCMER PIPING SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. James Belcher, Associate En ineer Plant 0 erations De artment ISSUE: On September 6, 1985, sealed bids for Bid Request TP0096, to provide all materi al s, 1 abor and services to remove, repai r, and repl ace a 48-inch check val ve and venturi in the aeration blower discharge piping, were opened. The Board of Directors must award a contract or reject proposals within 30 days of the opening of bids. BACKGROUND: In December, 1984, Plant Maintenance inspected the aeration air piping prior to the installation of the Weco seals. During this inspection both the 48-inch check val ve and the 48-inch venturi in the No. 2 blower discharge piping were found to be damaged. The hinge on the right-hand door of the check valve had broken off, and the recovery section of the venturi had also broken off. The blower was secured fram further usage, and replacement and repair parts were ordered. These parts are now on site, and funds are provided in the 1985-86 o & M budget for this project. The project was advertised on August 19, 1985, inviting contractors to review the project and submit sealed bids within 15 days. Three bids were received ranging from $9,360 to $35,800. The lowest responsible bidder is Timec, and they are below the engineer's estimate of $15,000. RECO~ENDATION: Award the contract for "providing all materials, labor, and services to remove, repai r, and repl ace a 48-inch check val ve and venturi in the blower discharge piping" to Timec in the amount of $9,360. DAO CWR ..~__~_..._.."____________________.___._...__,_.m_~_..___.~._.~__._..__._._.__..,.._.___~~,_.~___,..._.,_._.. .._...___...,.----..._.._._ . _ _~~..._.~....__._""., Central Contra Costa sanitary District September 9, 1985 FROM: JAMES BELCHER, PLANT OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT ASSOCIATE ENGINEER PAT O'CONNOR - SENIOR BUYER P~q-, BID REQUEST TP0096P, PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, AND SERVICES TO REMOVE, REPAIR, AND REPLACE A 4811 CHECK VALVE AND VENTURI IN THE BLOWER DISCHARGE PIPING. TO: SUBJECT: Formal bidding commenced with publication of Notice to Contractors on August 19 and 25, 1985. Four contractors completed the site inspection, as required, and were given their package upon completion of the inspection. Bids were publically opened and read on Friday, September 6, 1985. Four bids were received as follows: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT EXCEPTI ONS Timec Company $ 9,360.00 NONE Pacific Mechanical 12,030.00 NONE Contractors Dalzell Corporation 35,800.00 NONE Mobile Mechanica) NO BID NO BID A technical and commercial evaluation was conducted by the Plant Operations Department Associate Engineer and Purchasing (see Attachment 1) which shows that Timec Company 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. Timec Company's bid is below the engineer's estimate of $15,000.00. Purchasing, therefore, recommends that you prepare the Position Paper to the Board of Directors recommending the award to Timec Company for providing all materials, labor, and services to remove, repair, and replace a 48" check valve and venturi in the blower discharge piping at the lump sum contract price of $9,360.00. POC:bbm cc : C. Ba tt s K. Laverty . o z I- z LlJ ~ ::I: U <C l- I- <C f" ~, ~ ~!i if .... IW ;:; 0- ~.. -..0 toW 0"\ ..... ef 0 0 0 - - . 0 co co 0- :;j I- ~ l.L 0 0 ~ .... z z ~~ I~ .. I ..... j. I 0 to c ~~ 0 i: . I .. u.1~ ef 0 i -..0 I-- e:: ~ l"'I LlJ 0 ~l~ 0 z 0"\ <C i~v I -I~ l- i" z 0 II-I.L u:1(;;l ~ W I-LlJ d > p.' :cl~ Vl ...J LlJ<C u> . :; ~,~ 0 .J'l 3 I~ ~i 0 a:u 0 . LlJ LlJ- iLlJ ~ 0 Vl' ::I: a. Iffi I;q: l"'I u- ~ 0 LlJ 0 > ~ ~ 0 z= I- I-- N <C ~~ J ...J <C ~ Ii ..... ;z I~ 0 a:~ <c ~ J ~ . 0 ;:; co LlJ <C u ~ c::t: ..J <C- u II 0 ....Je 0 ~O- 0 . . . en LlJ a L.LI a: 0 ~ a:~ :.. ..... ~ <C ~ .~ := w - oc: ~ ~ ~ 0 . a:z I.t'\ LlJ<C ~ :;j .... l"'I Z I- ~ .L.i Jl . <ca:~ 0 Z . ~- ~iJ. r~ ;:;, ~ ~.~ . . . . LlJ ~- Ii - o LlJ = ~ Z .. . 1- > I ! ! i I II q Vl >0 Z O~ = . .. ! ~ .1- 0 . o. J g:.~ .. g I g IS d .. c ~ 0- ... S = - I- :. .. o ..: Q a: 0- . = U LlJ o:a Vl u . a: uJ X . LlJ ~ 0 LlJ . 0 0 :: ...J .. - ex: <c .' . CO - a e: I a: - LlJ LlJ . . . . ...J I- .. co <c . 0 - ~ Z Vl "It" - z ~ 0 0 o I LlJ - 0- ::t- > ~ u Vl 0 LlJ ~ C ~ co ~ <c :I - ! l- t;; ~ Vl <c ~ 0 J1 I-- ..... 0 ...J ..... ~ i i I Ii ..... (c<SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IV. BIDS & AWARDS POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE SEPTEMBER 13, 1985 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZATION TO AWARE PURCHASE ORDER FOR THREE (3) PORTABLE TRENCH SHORING BOXES TO PLANK CO. FOR $9,297.45 AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. KEN LAVERTY, PURCHASING & MATERIALS OFFICER ADMINISTRATIVE/PURCHASING ISSUE: Three (3) portable trench shoring boxes were authorized for purchase in the 1985-1986 Equipment Budget. Staff work has been completed and we request Board authorization to award the purchase. BACKGROUND: The request for bids was publ icly advertised on August 16, 1985, and bids were publ icly opened on September 11, 1985. One bid was received. The Plank bidder. not meet not meet Co. is the only bidder and h~s been evaluated by staff to be a responsible Four other firms were furnished bids but did not respond. One firm could the maximum weight limit and the other three, who are fabricators, could the specifications. The Plank Co. bid of $9,297.45 (see Attachment) is under the approved budget amount of $9,300.00. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a purchase order to the Plank Co. for three (3) portable trench shoring boxes for a total sum of $9,297.45. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ./DIV. KFL PM I I i I I I I .. a . z is! ::::I ~ !i J CID ~ j ::::I I ~ .... ~J - ~ :!~ .... ~ J ~ CID en i! g I i !! . :E J " - . a:l . III ;i ~ a a W. - . en !I - i J " - 5 CID ~ A. i5 z !J" ~ to- , >- .~ lit ~ J ... e g i lit lit lit lit . ~ ~ ~ ~ ,... 01 N . W Cl 01 ~ A. ~ .... !I i:!: ~ ~ C? I C') lit lit i ~ 1 8 I pot - ... . ... " - pot E GI " pot I " .I:: c: GI lit 8 i s. t: - I I 0 E - u " -I ~ - 'i CID j:: ~ i lit - . .I:: Q C;; GI J It- ... en . - 'i \D pot S. " ... (:) ~ J ~ s - - ! " (:) .... ... GI U .... .. " lit - 0 - ~ z: c: GI lit j :c E (:) J u ... to- - - " lit . J tc s. - - J A. a:l ...J ::::I ~ . . . . . ~ pot N C') or lit .... J ceCSD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 6 9 19 5 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE SEPTEMBER 9, 1985 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 85-18 (LAFAYETTE) TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT ACCEPT FOR PROCESSING SUBMITTED BY DENNIS HALL, ASSOCIATE ENGINEER INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT/CONSTRUCTION DIVISION 85-18 Owner Address Area Parcel No. & Acrea e Lafayette Rose C. Burger 3498 Springhill Court Lafayette, CA 94549 230-110-013 (1.01 acres) Lead Remarks A enc Parcel No. Parcel has been split CCCSD into two 1/2 acre lots. There is an existing house with a failing septic system on one lot. The other lot is a future building site. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 85-18 to be included in a future formal annexation. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JMc RAB ~~ DH l1If3 INITIATING DEPT./DIV. I...... + .... .. '" "'.P'P'LI: Uk "'lEY MEA ur_ + + JENNINGS ....'" 17 ...st:~~ .r.. PROPOSED ANNEXATION /8 8S - RA. <C<SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS N~ V. CONSENT CALENDAR 7 9 19 85 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager Chief Engineer DATE SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH FLOOD CONTROL FOR SEWER MAIN RELOCATIONS AT NEWELL AVENUE AND CREEKSIDE DRIVE, TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ISSUE: Approval of a rel ocati on agreement with the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Flood Control) is required for the relocation of existing sewer mains prior to construction of a flood control channel in Walnut Creek. BACKGROUND: Flood Control, in conjunction with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), is constructi ng a flood control channel in the abandoned Southern Paci fi c Railroad right of way between Arroyo Way and Rudgear Road, Walnut Creek. Existing District sewer mains at Newell Avenue and Creekside Drive need to be relocated to accommodate constructi on of the flood control channel. Flood Control and the District have prepared a relocation agreement wherein Flood Control will reimburse the District for all costs to design and construct the above mentioned rel ocati ons. The rel ocati on desi gns are currentl y underway as part of the trunk sewer design effort for Watershed 35 North, and should be completed this winter for construction in the early spring of 1986. RECOtIENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute the proposed agreement with Flood Control for sewer main relocations along the Southern Pacific right of way at Newell Avenue and Creekside Drive, Walnut Creek. REVIEWED A RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 17fB J DRW RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. AJAu c((SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER SUBJECT AU EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH FLOOD CONTROL FOR A SEWER MAIN RELOCATION AT THE NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY, WALNUT CREEK, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 1997 VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer N~ V. CONSENT CALENDAR 8 9 19 5 DATE September 6, 1985 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT James L. Hill, Associate En ineer ineering Division SUBMITTED BY ISSUE: Approval of a rel ocati on agreement with the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Flood Control) is required for the relocation of an existing sewer main prior to construction of a flood control channel in Walnut Creek. BACKGROUND: Flood Control, in conjunction with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), is constructing a flood control channel in the abandoned Southern Pacific Rail road right of way between Arroyo Way and Rudgear Road, Wal nut Creek. An existing District sewer main at the National Guard Armory near Arroyo Way, Walnut Creek, needs to be relocated to accommodate construction of the flood control channel. Flood Control and the District have prepared the relocation agreement wherein Flood Control will reimburse the District for all costs to design the relocation, and Flood Control will pay for the cost of constructing the relocation as part of the flood control channel project. The relocation design is currently underway as part of the trunk sewer design effort for Watershed 35 North, and will be completed this winter for inclusion in Phase II of the COE flood control channel plans and specifications. RE CO tJMEN DATI ON : Authori ze the General Manager-Ch i ef Engi neer to execute the proposed agreement with Flood Control for the sewer main relocation along the Southern Pacific right of way near the National Guard Armory, Walnut Creek. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION fJ)lJ 1~13 DRW JLH RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ((sD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE September 13, 1985 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE TO REDUCE PREMIUM COSTS FOR DISTRICT PROPERTY AND LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICIES CONSIDER CHANGES IN DISTRICT INSURANCE PROGRAM SUBMITTED BY Jack E. Cam bell, Admin. 0 erations M r. INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Administrative/Risk M mt. & Safet ISSUE: The District premiums for property and liability insurance increased by more than 500 percent for the 1985-86 year. The Board requested that staff determine if changes in coverage could be made in order to reduce premium costs. BACKGROUND: After an initial analysis, two areas of coverage appear to offer the best opportunity for reducing premium costs at this time: one is the discontinuance of earthquake and flood coverage and the other is raising the self-insured retention (SIR) level for the liability insurance. Other alternatives to reduce premium costs may arise after a more comprehensive study of the District's insurance program is completed. With respect to earthquake and flood coverage, this had been added to the District's insurance program in prior years primarily because the premium cost was very reasonable. In the 1985 all-risk property insurance renewal, the premium was increased 530 percent and the deductible for the earthquake and flood coverage was increased tenfold on the Treatment Plant site. The District's broker has determined that between $125,000 and $150,000 of the current property insurance premium represents the earthquake and flood portion. This means the District is paying that amount per year for $20 million of insurance coverage with a $7.5 million deductible at the location which has 93 percent of the District's total insured values. Several brokers and risk managers have been contacted and the consensus is that the District should seriously consider discontinuing this coverage given the cost versus the potenti al benefit. However, the Ri sk Management Committee wants the Board to understand that considerable property damage can occur to the Treatment Plant in even a moderate earthquake. The risk is that the plant would incur repair costs greater than $7.5 million in an earthquake that might not trigger state and federal disaster funding. Rather than discontinuing this coverage now, an alternative is to continue the earthquake coverage until the Sei smic Strengtheni ng Project, which is about to start, can be completed sometime next fall. This project will improve the chances for avoiding an uncovered funding gap between what the District's retention would be under an insurance policy and the availability of government disaster relief through the Federal Emergency Management Agency after a disaster declaration by the President which may follow a severe earthquake in the area. IN! ATzG ~/DIV' REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON JEC P~1 If the earthquake and flood coverage is cancelled effective October: 1, 1985, the premium savings for 1985-86 is estimated to be $100,000. The next area is the liability insurance. The broker can obtain a $75,000 reduction in annual premiums if the SIR level is raised from the current $50,000 per occurrence to $100,000. This would reduce the annual premium to $263,849 for the $10 mill ion coverage. If this change is effectiye October 1, 1985, there would be a $56,250 savings this fiscal year. The Risk Management Committee is concerned about the adequacy of the $10 mill ion per loss occurrence maximum given the current "deep pocket" situation that public agencies face in California and suggests consideration of an alternative to use the savings to increase the level of coverage to the 1984-85 maximum of $25 mill ion. It is not known at this time if another $15 million of coverage could be obtained and what it would cost. The District broker has indicated that obtaining additional liability coverage at this time could be very difficult and the cost would be high. He recommends that the District wait until the first of the calendar year when the market eases. The District has 70 vehicles operating on the public streets approximately 630,000 miles per year and this represents the highest area of continuing District liability exposures. The two largest District settlements to date have been for vehicular injuries and it is predictable that there will be others in the future. Unless the Board dfrects otherwise the staff will investigate increasing the liability insurance maximum limit and return with a recommendation. The Risk Management Committee recommends that a study be made of the District's insurance program and a property loss risk analysis performed in preparation for the 1986-87 budget year and will be outlining this with a request for funding in a future position paper. The study will utilize an insurance and loss analysis consultant to rev iew the Di strict's sc.ope of coverages, insurance maximums, deductib 1 e and SIR levels, claims payment financing, and the loss scenarios from fires and other catastrophes. RECOMMENDATION: The Board needs to consider the following options: 1. Cancel the District's. earthquake and flood insurance coverage effective October 1, 1985, for an estimated premium reduction of" $100,000 this fiscal year or continue this coverage through thi~ fiscal year; 2. Increase the District's retention level effective October 1, 1985, on liability insurance coverage from $50,000 to $100,000 for a premium reduction of $56,250 this fiscal year. .EVlnED AND ItECOUENDED ~Olt .OAItD ACTION 'NITIATING DlftT JDIV. GEN. MGR./t:HIE' ING. 1 c((SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V II 1. LEGAL/LITIGATIO 1 9 19 85 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE SUBJECT Se tember 12, 1985 TYPE OF ACTION DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION FROM ROBERT A. MACDONALD, JR. DENY CLAIM SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Jack E. Cam bell, Admin. 0 erat10ns Mana e Administrative/Risk M mt. & Safet ISSUE: One of the defendants in the previously filed Mellon Bank, et al vs. Shelter Development, et al, case has filed a claim for indemnity and contribution against CCCSD. BACKGROUND: Robert A. MacDonald was named as a defendant in Mellon Bank, et al v. Shelter Development Corporation, et al, wherein plaintiffs seek recovery for certain property damages and injuries concerning their property at 3881 Los Arab1s, Lafayette. Claimant was the owner of the house at above property prior to Mellon Bank's acquisition of it and the subsequent landslide. Claimant seeks equitable and comparative contribution and indemnity from the District for all damages which may be assessed to him. There is no 1nfonnat1on at this time which indicates that the District has any responsibility for the landslide. RECOMMENDATION: Deny Robert A. MacDonald, Jr.'s claim against the District and refer it to the Administrative Operations Manager for further action as necessary. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JEC IN TIATING DEPT./DIV. ?~ ((sD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IX. SOLID WASTE 1 9 19 85 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE September 17, 1985 SUBJECT RECEIVE REPORT OF A REVIEW OF PLEASANT HILL BAYSHORE DISPOS L SERVICE'S REFUSE COLLECTION RATES AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS WITHIN ZONE 3 TYPE OF ACTION RECEIVE REPORT SUBMITTED BY Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Administrative/Finance & Accountin ISSUE: A report by Price Waterhouse of its review of refuse collection rates and results of operations of Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service within Zone 3 is being submitted to the Board of Directors. BACKGROUND: A refuse collection franchise agreement was executed on November 24, 1961 by the District and Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service which granted a franchise to operate in Zone 3 within District boundaries. The agreement was amended on February 26, 1965 to extend the term of the agreement from November 30, 1966 through November 30, 1976, with an option to thereafter extend for an additional ten-year period. The ten-year option was exercised for a term beginning December 1, 1976 and ending November 30, 1986. The area within the District which was included in Zone 3 was described in the original franchise agreement as "Those portions of the Pleasant Hill and Pacheco areas lying within the boundaries of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District" and consisted of a comparatively small number of residential and commercial accounts in the unincorporated areas of Pleasant Hill and the community of Pacheco; currently, these accounts number 720 residential accounts and 123 commercial accounts, which produced approximately $100,000 in annual revenues. The current refuse collection rates were originally established for Zone 3 by the District in 1968. These rates have not been changed in the last seventeen years as the refuse collector has not applied for a rate increase. In October 1984, because of uncertainty regarding the refuse collection rate schedule being used by the refuse collector, the District's Board of Directors directed that a review of all refuse collection rates, and results of operations, within Zone 3, be performed. The firm of Price Waterhouse, Certified Public Accountants, was engaged to conduct the review. The objectives of the review were: o to determine the propriety of the refuse collection rate schedule used in Zone 3. o to review the refuse collector's statement of operations for Zone 3 to determine its reasonableness. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. d~~' WNF ~ PM Price Waterhouse is now submitting its report to the Board of Directors following completion of the review. A summary of the primary conclusions reported are presented in the following paragraphs: Refuse Collection Rate Schedule o The refuse collector has, for the most part, adhered to the refuse collection rates established in 1968 within the areas originally regarded as Zone 3. However, during the intervening seventeen year period, the following areas which became annexed to the District have continued to be regarded by the refuse collector as being excluded from the franchised area: Clyde Mallard Reservoir Contra Costa Country Club North Pacheco The rates charged in the Clyde and the Mall ard Reservoi r areas are based on the rates for West Pittsburg; the rates charged in the Contra Costa Country Club and North Pacheco areas are based on the rates charged in the City of Pleasant Hill and Mountain View Sanitary District, respectively. There are presently approximately 175 residential and commercial customers in the four areas; the refuse collector extimates the annual revenues and expenses for these areas to be $46,000 and $44,400 respectively. 1) income and expenses for customers in Clyde, Mallard Reservoir, Contra Costa Country Club and North Pacheco. 2) income and expenses for drop box service. In the case of the other refuse collectors franchised by the District, the rate review process has provided an almost annual opportunity for District consideration of the many operating factors that are involved in franchise refuse collection. The fact that Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service has not applied for a rate review under this franchise has permitted the condition to develop .fv,rwro ANO IfCOUfNOfO '01 .0AlO ACTION INITIATING DE"oIDIV. eEN. MGR./cHIEar ENG. where factors such as the actual scope of regulated customers and services differs greatly from the scope practiced by the franchisee~ The District is currently negotiating a new franchise agreement to succeed the present agreement, which expires on November 30, 1986, with the District's other two franchised refuse collectors. A process for notification between the District and the refuse collector of new areas to be served by the refuse collector, and timely submission of financial statements and other information annually, even if no rate increase is applied for, will be incorporated in these new franchise agreements. The negotiation of a new franchise agreement with Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service was held in abeyance until results of the present review by Price Waterhouse were obtained. . The following actions will be undertaken by District staff, in conjunction with Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service, for completion by the dates indicated: By December 1, 1985: 1) the present Zone 3 boundaries will be defined for all areas served by Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service which are within District boundaries. 2) the refuse collection services and rates regulated by the District will be defined for Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service. By March 31, 1986: 1) a rate application is to be submitted by Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service to the District's Board of Directors for refuse collection rates in Zone 3, defined in 1) above, which will be supported by separately maintained revenue and expense accounts for all regulated services. . RECOMMENDATION: 1) Receive and consider the report submitted by Price Waterhouse of its review of the refuse collection rates and statements of operations of Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service within Zone 3; 2) Following co~pletion of the actions enumerated in the last paragraph above with the submission of a rate application, authorize District staff to negoti ate a successor franch i se agreement with Pl easant Hill Bayshore Disposal Service. 3) Provide District staff with any specific direction the appropriate for consideration during the negotiation of franchise agreement with Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal ..vrrw.o MlO ..COMldNO.O 1'011 .OAIIO ACTION Board feel s a successor Service. INITIATING ""JDIV. .EN.IIG"./CHI&" ENG.