The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 11-06-86 . Centra.. Contra Costa Sanitar ~ District BOARD OF DIRECTORS I PAGE 1 OF 5 POSITION PAPER I BOARD MEETING OF NO. November 6. 1986 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 13 SUBJECT DATE AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 86-25 (ALAMO), P.A. 86-26, 86-27 OCTOBER 28, 1986 AND 86-28 (PLEASANT HILL), AND P.A. 86-29 (ALAMO) TO BE TYPE OF ACTION INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT ACCEPT ANNEXATION FOR PROCESSING SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.lDIV Dennis Ha 11 , Associate Engineer Engineering Dept./Construction Div. I Owner Parcel Address Lead No. Area Parcel No. & Acreage Remarks Agency 86-25 Alamo Aloha M. Tidd One single family house CCCSD (78A6 ) 30 Avalon Court being moved onto site. Walnut Creek CA 94595 District to prepare 201-010-002 (0.36 Ac.) "Notice of Exemption" 86-26 P.H. Bruce W. Betti s This parcel is part of a City of (47A6) 56 Bolero Court minor subdivision. Two Pleasant Hill Danville CA 94526 additional lots from this 152-029-011 (0.52 Ac.) parcel will be created on a future subdivision map. ThE City of Pleasant Hill has given tentative approval of the map and will prepare a "Negative Declaration". 86-27 P.H. K. Lee Martyn, Trustee Existing house with a CCCSD (47A6) 584 Little Road failing septic system. Pleasant Hill CA 94523 District to prepare a 152-070-004 (0.39 Ac.) "Notice of Exemption". 86-28 P.H. J. G. Farrant Property to be split into 3 City of (47A6) 391 Camino Las Juntas sites. One existing house Pleasant Hi 11 Pleasant Hill CA 94523 and 2 new houses will be 152-092-004 (1.31 Ac.) constructed. City of Pleasant Hill has prepared a "Notice of Exemption". REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. ()/if k() JJi}:IEF ENG. ()It . ROGItA J. DOLAN 'l ,. I 130." 9 85 DH JSM RAB . Centr8~.-:ontra Costa Sanitar;-~istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS I PAGE 2 OF 5 POSITION PAPER I BOARDMEETING~~vember 6, 1986 SUBJECT AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 86-25 (ALAMO), P.A. 86-26, 86-27 AND 86-28 (PLEASANT HILL), AND P.A. 86-29 (ALAMO) TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT DATE OCTOBER 28, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT ANNEXATION FOR PROCESSING SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPTJOIV. Engineering Dept./Construction Div. Pa rce 1 No. Area Owner Address Parcel No. & Acreage Remarks Lead Agency 86-29 ALAMO June E. Wilson PO Box 677 Alamo CA 94507 197-090-012 (0.55 Ac.) One single family home on CCCSD marginal septic system. Owner wants to connect to sewer. District to prepare "Notice of Exemption". RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 86-25 through P.A. 86-29 to be included in a future formal annexation. ~ sl PROPOSED ANNEXATION RA, 86-25 ( 16A6) ~p.(. - .{i "".~-.,. C~"~.. >~ ~~\ -\ '120 '2 I ~o)~:i.. ' V). s \27 J. 3 ~,.~ ,"i ,,,~ X' r ~~I\' ..\ ~ '5..1 .':. ,..~1 ~ s~ i l~ ~(:O 1 ITV ""Ii '<.' \,0 ---1 90 roo). Of · '10 '<J"/:":--- \1...-1 ---\ - i\.~ r \ I. >0 l~ . >. <T H'LL 5 <2,,,, '( yJ. ,.0 H ;)\.-1. 'U ~\ 41AC. ] 'OS ~ L -\ ':>,);;;;- I-i - I' 1/ ".~ 110 ,.J,., '.2 '., I~;r: .1" .. ",' ~ '25~ ~~ 5. ~a ..l'~1 · 5' .}t#~7~f-1q 175\ \ \ ~ " ,/;8e:.r-\ II! ....!,>cdcc 1 !lO ..-.. - l'> / COLL€GE PARK '0 - "- \ 53 ~ 54~ ~ 8i7 i2'~,.<A~ ~ 8(~ 1~~''33-(" .. !'I81. S4 if ., , 0(. ,.o~ ~. 86 89, 90 ~ ~ ;f" "A'" I.""'.~ lI".;~~' ~t9;~.8' 1.011.' "'''' ." -'1..IHff ''''1"' ~ .' .- :::--- ~, iA'fLOR -----"',~ 992--f'93> ~ ~~~ ~g-;\ - - .:.. )'MSBETERY ..' ~I ~ 0' S' I-- ~t :: 2. 51 AC I-- 1905'-< .. 6lfEGO/I Y '-- ,":........:....J /s-8941! ~ ~~= } _11111,0 /9' .9...... t/ l!..'". 'L'}"" W..l.. h.20 I- 1 ...1"' 11 ~' "l~" .'.... Ij:l' ~ 112' '00' I~ 1 ~. ] \'A_).. ,., -"" -. Z1 1115 .,_I,~ ~ 1002 ~I. 1- \.,Si-"'vL Sf:,' I- 1l~lvhiN ,.' '~DllI _cr 126' 1-- . _~~_' ,- " 'i /It.\! -Itl, ri~rr ~ ~ Ilfi~V'c< ':;;;.-.I'~ ~ l- . A JJ/'1&;'/\ ~ A... I~ \ROI" ...11 21'IDRI'~?iI<'( ~OO.:,' ~ ,I ..,..,. ;f I"l A F:: -J ,11'0, '~ &INn' lLTitC" tl.-" L ~yj I I-V &. 2Z rR~Z)~~ 'too ~ ilJ~, tJ V SI:':":::C u.'" ',- ~](I~':< ': t~~ It:~~ t1118'l...~&'~ ~.~~~.~o ~ Bz4~ \~ 80 ('2 4O~e:. 54.UC 'i......,::. -::;g. \ :! ,.. De;/. 0 I ~z.c ~ ~"<.'>J.. "6,~., j J N~' ~ ~ .............,:...,........~-.(:..::"..:... .7 ,-". ..'eX r" ~.~ 603 ~31' 8(2.': MO.J 1 r '.~ I ' ~ i~.,' ~:~At.Jf' .,,' 5 3 ''; ~~f.~(j. ~t 0~,t~ / lw..J:' '-., ?~ "..AC ~i'1: Ii ' 595 rtL~l~I'1~..' ~ 1-1 ~ Ai/AleX -if 42.... ...L~ ',,'_ : '" 50' 19 -...,1--...: :::t-:!.'traJ' i',.,. f- ~ Ift/vlll "L _< -tfl'l::fi t.o ,'3 , !... . - ii ~.30 ~'I' -L.~If6J,~-'- I TTT , ~ a I I:JI - e;c;/ (WJ.;t'i"?;.~. .... . . If! I ,.,." I II ... I"" .~ 51.": . .... . ,,' ';, .. ~ ~Ol31. ~:.O 119 71;" 1100. I ~ '!;1..dw f- ~ r'&' (;I'D ;~r .~~,....,:>i': ,'~.... '~ I ,II - GoRy G'N>~ =. HO:4;;1 \1;, .~ - \,,;;: ,-- '}25~l!IIl ~ ~ ,..ooooc ',/ i~!--i.'f</.: o{~ ,~.~... ~~;,r.; ': ~~~/.,l .,,1 ~IJ;"1 1 1\"~1A?~"2~ ~9{::1.'t1t- ~I~~d~~ I 10("'-' '" .:'.~ ~ 9 fI - 5.~.1~ hM P!GI. v.V 237 39~ ~~-.- +- + . ._ I," _I" " .". ~-~ .~. , ~~IIJ '5014 "." 15 "== ~ 0' \ 38, '6 ~ l''''' ..IIG'. ~, __... " ;0..-'-... 101 ~ ~ I- 11 ..14'..'1 ~ / 40~. r'lc' --; > " ., .~. -' f-JII' ~J I L \44d I i '" 2T - r"- ~- ,', ,. Ie" ,:::. .::. ~ 0 I . · 122. .~. - .!:;( J ~,-' .:\i.i2!~;J23 ..~ _ I I H ,,!' ~ ;; .... .,",' - eo _ L 72~ c.n 1. \ ~ u~ ~2 4' I!~ ~ ,. ~ \ 1 ~~ · ~'7'l K 'I : jae, - ... ~ - , - '0 05 J.. 3' 5 141 I. 7.8" rei .11. (133 4. (30'- C. 1\ \~ ~...~! ~ ~1!, ~ ~26~'52:; :: ~,~ ","0:: : -.. 021 - ", ~ .,' Q 90 "" >' t\.-.Ir ~ ~'iJ ~4' /' >- -~ ~ rla r O~ .!,. ~Y' ,I' -~I, II if~~~ -;-0 on ~~.,o-~-,r ~'O ~!",;'~ 141'~ 3~.~ -:T I..,:: 30 .. 9~ ''25~.U4.~ r.w~IW'= ~:; !P206 ~a~, 5 K'"'RY"'~J ~.. .,,7. \ I' ~ - __ I S7 ,..151 50 9~ 110 ~! !!S 7S 74.2 'IS III III 110, 'II 150 O~"'I0304 ~ .... ... '. \~'- )Iftai ~ ~ I-- I 140 - 23 lit .,.. ._ 110., &J: t05Q 1.&1\1 J02!t02ol . .... -" ... ?-J. II 20 21 31 SI,. ~.. ~W2' Z5 ~ 110 . ~ ;:ii , ~I~I _~ ~ lo:si'nO!! 1100 kM ~ 4/~ I ._1 70 (;;:T4I) .. I T'~ .' 1 - I g; ,:! -i !!! 115 _! ~ I' _., 'GREG R'r' ( ~~o.., '~~/ 1Ij '.'- j r i. J I I .. .. ;:- i~ _ 60 ~I '7 Ii, _ -5 ~ "~ III". ,," "'+ZiI , .~ '" S$ 14 155 1--, ~ - .. . t - 145 II 47 10 .. tOt r-- ~ ~o-r l6IJI ~!U"',.. .... 11Oa', I $'::::;'000 "~6~2 ~~3 ~: 51 ,. 46 ~; ~ ).. ' '04 .I~" ': 138 ~ I~ ro.;l -~T"ii ~~ I,' ,AY, 430 _T' CTJ...." '.t ~~~ , '7 rin -i24 10, I "'~17 ~ISUB I 35\'~ 0' --~/~. ~. , ., - . I L.J'! L'i I- .. ~ "... '5 · >Ert..IRD .' I _III~ [I Il" ~ Ir,TT Ii n'. !: _ ~ oil "'I~~~ '5 luIn --e:' ut"'Ui;.u~ _ II 137l" 10 ~~ ~ ~ \ ..\ 21\X~ 1'"1lC IV~,: 7"Wl- ~ ~ i2001lC""'l ~ ~~... . .. I_ ;J \'1 I I.IIAC j"1 m__.u .HI '~r.:rl ii148.':~ ~~- ill I '.. il'l · --IF'REGORY L1:-- -:r 5. .. ~ . M'. I .. :">1"" ROLL,M _IN _ " l" . III. '---" ..~ $2 . ~ IIIOLL, 5 - = ~ ~I d~ I~~.:ho.o .. '/ 4 c - ~ f ,'~_:_. ~ '- GRACE '='! =IE~ ~ 0;....... · ~ 21 50 ,..,ao.u.l ... ~l;il ~ 2 , ... 'H14 ~ ::~ ~';~..?'J 't 1 -1......1-1 d ~l!-[JtlJ,~o-';f.. '0 ~ ,If] I ./ ''''} ~1111. 0. ._mi'lJJ-I.......,r.... 1ft.. I C ..I li i:. H:l1 /c,rr ~ ~ I :oJ: PROPOSED ANNEXATION "', ;~. ";\ -B ," '----" I F "('t.:f I i 4 ~ 0 I r---~ I 23,79AC .1 ~ '" ~ .1 ~ NI -\0 ~ I.... ... ... "':1.... ~l ~ ~ ,'- II! ~'TY OF PLEASANT ILL II. 01 A C'VIC DR . , ~.. .. .. _I aT _.~ r.~ I.I.AC ~l ~M '-11114 t 35~ ~~____~ _-.::. ~0'41/1YLOR '?{~~~W?' A .~ f . , CONTRA COSTA CANAL SUB 5 7 I 3 . ~ l~ ~,. ,,-/rR e,LVD. RAZETO 653lAC \ \ \ 8.I"Jh7 ~'~ .. ' , liI.tUltNI 1!lM2AC 3i:~ 15 - I. 75 72 a2 10 DlI33 Ie! . ] 160"\ PLEASANT HI L L ,...:: . R[CREATION DllTlttCT I II 5f. At lANDIS _I'" 172 173 .... ;;;A\. "';;" ~ 121Af 2. Z1 28" If C .a- i 188 18. ~~- !~1\190 .J! '''''.ORY ; ~ I, ~ ,.1/'1 i..l. II ZD 1C " ,I ~ If~J ~ -r- - .f--~ ! :'. ~ J~~= '" - ~ r~ ~ ~, :. . .. ~: !I! 27 ~211 ~ . !~~ ~ JUNCTION .., " ~ . ... t -+ ~ '1....l.. ~ I i'/ rfL. k.....!.Ir r ""'",." DlI , PA. 86-26,,-27~ -28 ( 4746) ? A · 86 - 2~ . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ... ~ARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6. 1986 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 14 SUBJECT DATE AUTHORIZE THE SUBSTITUTION OF DARRELL'S DRYWALL, THE LISTED SUBCONTRACTOR, WITH NORTH BAY DRYWALL. A NEW SUBCONTRACTOR. FOR GYPSUM WORK ON THE MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE AND MATERIALS CONTROL BUILDING (D. P. 20027) October 28, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE SUBSTITUTION OF SUBCONTRACTOR SUBMITTED BY INfTIA TING DEPT.lDIV. Munawar Husain, Associate Engineer Engineering Div./Construction De t. ISSUE: The General Contractor (West Coast Contractors, Inc./W. A. Thomas Co.. Inc.) has requested substitution of a subcontractor 1 isted on the bid proposal because the listed subcontractor will not execute a subcontract agreement. Board authorization is required for the substitution. BACKGROUND: West Coast Contractors listed Darrell's Drywall as the subcontractor for gypsum work on its bid proposal to the District for the Mechanical Maintenance and Materials Control Building. This subcontractor will not execute a contract agreement with West Coast Contractors because of its work load. Under these circumstances West Coast Contractors now seeks approval to use North Bay Drywall for the performance of the same work. Under California Government Code Section 4107, substitution of a listed subcontractor is permitted only in certain situations; one of which is when the listed subcontractor fails to execute a written contract with the prime contractor. The awarding authority must consent to the substitution to effect the change. In the present instance. consent by the District is appropriate. The proposed substitution will not result in any additional cost to the District or result in a delay in the project completion. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the substitution of the listed subcontractor. Darrell's Drywall with a new subcontractor. North Bay Drywall for gypsum work on District Proj ect 20027. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITlA TIN~,j;jT.IOIV. ,jZt" lMfJ 1J:l:!" .9/65 MH RSK JSM RAB . Centr... Contra Costa Sanitar. District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6, 1986 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 15 SUBJECT DATE October 31, 1986 INFORM THE BOARD OF POSSIBLE OVERRUN OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT EDUCATION AND TRAINING BUDGET TYPE OF ACTION IN FORMA TI ON AL Sl,LBMITTED BY . ~ert L. Mlchalczyk Senior Engineer 1,lllITIA.TING DEPT./DI.IL. tm t ~nglneerlng uepar en Engineering Division ISSUE: The Engi neeri ng Department may overrun its Educati on and Trai ni ng Budget by approximately $2,800 because of the need for confined space training. BACKGROUND: Confined spaces are a significant safety concern in wastewater faci 1 iti es because of toxi c and explosive gases that can be produced in the treatment process. Engi neers need a good know 1 edge of safety concerns to desi gn safe facil iti es and to work in potenti ally hazardous env i ronments. It has recently become apparent that there is a significant need to provide confined space and gas detecti on trai ni ng for Engi neeri ng Department personnel. A cl ass was hel d two years ago, but si nce then a number of new peopl e have come into the Department without the necessary training. A total of 17 employees are schedul ed to attend a two-day hands-on trai ni ng session on November 12 and 13, 1986, to be. held in the District offices and facil ities. The sessions will be taught by Warren Riley of WARREN Industries who specializes in training of this nature. WARREN Industries was selected for the trai ni ng because of its superi or reputati on with other governmental agenci es and i ndustri es throughout the state for trai ni ng of th i s nature. WARREN Industri es has provided similar training to other District staff in the past. The need for confined space and gas detection training was not anticipated when the 1986-87 Fi scal Year trai ni ng budget was prepared. Consequently, the cost of this class may cause the Engineering Department training budget to be exceeded by the $2,800 cost of the confined space and gas detection training. Staff proposes to proceed with this training unless directed otherwise by the Board. RECOMMENDATION: This item is for information only. No action is required at the present time. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~;z/!fl fJiiU 130211.9/85 BLM DRW RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. . Centr... Contra Costa Sanitar # District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 November 6, 1986 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 16 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF AUlHORIZE $4,100 FROM SEWER roNSTRUCTION FUND FOR lHE REPlACEMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 91 FEET OF PIPELINE IN DOS POSOS ROAD IN ORINDA DATE November 4, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT AUlHORIZE FUNDS SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Jim Coe, Senior Engineer Collection System Operations ISSUE: Sewer Construction funds are needed to replace a section of public sewer in order to prevent sewage overflows. BAa<GROUND: The 6-inch di ameter publ ic sewer that serves the resi dences on Dos Posos Road in Ori nda is in very poor condi ti on between two manhol es. A recent television inspection showed low spots, misaligned joints, roots, and a 4-foot long section where the pipe is missing. In order to prevent stoppages and sewage overflows due to pipe fail ure, root intrusion, and grease deposition, it is recommended that this section of pipeline be replaced with new 8-inch diameter pipe. The cost of the project is higher than normal because it crosses under an existing storm drain. This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 18-3 of the Di stri ct Gui del i nes. RECOMENDATION: Authorize $4,100 from the Sewer Constructi on Fund for the replacement of approximately 91 feet of pipeline in Dos Posos Road in Orinda. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. v.z.., JL . Centre.. Contra Costa Sanitar ~ District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF November 6, 1986 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 17 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF AUTHORIZE $8,300 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR NEW MANHOLES IN THE DISTRICT'S COLLECTION SYSTEM DATE November 4, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT Authorize Funds SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Jim Coe, Senior Engineer Collection System Operations ISSUE: Sewer Construction funds are needed to construct four new manholes. BAa<GROUND: Four high maintenance sewer lines are currently maintained using hand-powered equipment because there are no manholes to allow the use of power operated equipment. The new manholes would allow the use of more efficient power operated maintenance equi pment whll e reduci ng the possi bllity of inj ury. The new manholes would be located: . PROPOSED NEW DISTRICT MANHOLES 1840 Glenhaven, Walnut Creek 1432 Murwood Dr., Walnut Creek 2130 Geary Rd., Walnut Creek 6 Monte Vista Rd., Orinda This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 18-2 of the District Guidelines. RECOtIENDATION: Authorize $8,300 from the Sewer Constructi on Fund for the construction of four new manholes. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON INITIATING DEPT./DIV. vL" JL . Centr~_ Contra Costa Sanita~ I District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6, 1986 NO. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR 18 SUBJECT ADOPT A RESOLUTION ELECTING TO RECEIVE AN ALLOCATION OF TAX REVENUES FROM THE SAN RAMON REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA DATE October 31, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION ADOPT RESOLUTION SUBMITTED BY Jay S. McCoy, Construction Div. Manager IN!JIA TlNG DEPJ.lDIV ~ng1neer1ng Dept./Construction Div. ISSUE: The Board of Directors must pass a resolution to receive future ad valorem tax revenues from the area included within the boundaries of the project area of the City of San Ramon's Redevelopment Project Plan. BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors adopted a similar resolution for the Danville Redevelopment project on May 1, 1986. The action proposed in this position paper is identical to the action taken in May. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) is authorized, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33676, to elect to receive an allocation of property tax revenues from redevelopment project pl an areas. The City of San Ramon has proposed a redevelopment project pursuant to the community redevelopment law. The Auditor-Controller of Contra Costa County has notified this District that the District can elect to receive its share of future tax revenues. It is in the best interests of CCCSD to elect. to receive its allocated share of tax revenues from the San Ramon redevelopment project by passing a resolution to that effect. By so doing, the District will receive its share of increased property tax revenues due to the annual 2 percent increase in assessed valuations provided by the Revenue and Taxation Code. The District will also continue to receive property tax revenues based on the assessed val ue of all taxable properties for fiscal year 1986-87 (base year). Increases in tax revenues due to other increases in assessed valuations will accrue to the redevelopment agency. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resol ution el ecti ng to receive an allocation of tax revenues from the San Ramon Redevelopment Project Area. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INI IATING DEPT/DIV ~/~ JSM 13~2A9'g5 RAB JH . 11?;)~~~t1GR/CHIEF ENG. I~, )I' R ER J. DOl.AN . Centra. Contra Costa Sanitar I District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6, 1986 NO. v. ENGINEERING 1 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE $50,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND TO INITIATE THE TREATMENT PLANT MASTER PLAN (DP 20045) DATE October 31, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE FUNDS SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Steve McDonald, Senior Engineer Engineering Dept./Planning Division ISSUE: Board authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to expend sewer construction funds. BACKGROUND: Since the original Central Contra Costa Sanitary District plant construction in 1948, the District has been involved in the continuous process of enlarging and upgrading the treatment facilities in response to growth and more stringent discharge requirements. There have been five major plant expansions since the original construction. The latest expansion is the Stage 5B Project, which when completed later this year will bring the current treatment plant capacity up to 45 million gallons of wastewater per day (mgd) of average dry weather flow (ADWF). Planning for the Stage 5B Project was completed in February 1982 with the Stage 5B "Facilities Pl an Amendment" by Metcal f and Eddy. Short-Term Treatment Plant Caoacitv Issues The current pl ant infl uent flow is approximately 35 mgd (ADWF>. peak wet weather flow capacity is approximately 150 mgd. However, 1985 caused a flow of 180 mgd and in February 1986 caused a approximately 220 mgd, exceeding the flow the plant can process. Current pl ant the storms of peak fl ow of In addition to peak wet weather flow constraints, the multiple hearth furnaces are reaching capacity. One of two existing multiple hearth furnaces has been in continuous operation since November 1984 and currently incinerates approximately 46 dry tons of solids per day. The seasonal solids loading is predicted to exceed the capacity of one- furnace operati on for part of the year begi nni ng in 1987; during those periods, two furnaces will have to be operated, allowing for no backup in the case of mechanical failure. Lona-Term Treatment Plant Caoacitv Issues The future plant influent flows and associated level of treatment will be affected by the current and projected rapid growth rate of Central Contra Costa County, as well as the pending regulatory actions affecting discharge requirements. Required improvements woul d incl ude expansion of the primary, secondary, and di scharge facilities, such as a new influent pump station, new primary clarifiers, new aeration basins, and secondary cl arifiers. In addition, the tradeoffs between expanded hydraulic capacity and use of hol di ng basi ns w ill be eval uated. Thi s REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Ib1. S;A &L- JMI< 1302".9/85 HSM SUBJECT AUTHORIZE $50~OOO FROM THE SEWER roNsTRucnON FUND TO INITIATE THE lREATM:NT PLANT MASTER PLAN <DP 20045) POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 oF2 DATE October 31~ 1986 eval uation wil 1 impact the need and size of a potenti al new outfall. and the District's ultimate wet weather flow handling methods and capability. Fina"y~ the ultimate method of solids handling and disposal plan will be evaluated. MASTER PL AN The proposed Treatment Plant Master Plan will address the hydraulic~ solids handling~ and process capacity of the treatment facilities for a 20-year horizon, with the production of a five-year pl an of action for the construction of critical improvements needed in the near term. Improvements in wet weather flow processing and sol ids handl ing capacity will be addressed early in the master pl anni ng effort and will be spun off before compl eti on of the Master Pl an to expedite design and construction. Current and predicted wastewater flows as well as pending federal, state, and regional regulatory actions establishing discharge requirements to the air, land, and water, as well as the potential for water reclamation will all be assessed. Potential treatment strategies will be screened for the best apparent alternatives. The Treatment Plant Master Plan will develop detailed project cost scenarios which will be used for District rate setting determinations. The Master Plan will also provide the framework to evaluate and set priorities for near-term projects and to check for overall compatibility with the anticipated future facilities. In the initial phase of the Treatment Plant Master Plan which this Position Paper will authorize, staff will collect, collate~ and organize plant data and prepare a plan of study that will provide the basis for project approach and the development of consultant scopes of work. The District force account cost for the initial phase is estimated to be $50~000. This will be followed by a formal process for the selection of the best qualified engineering consultant. The overall schedule for completion of the Treatment Plant Master Plan is estimated to be two years. The rough pl anni ng- 1 evel cost est imate for the Treatment Pl ant Master Pl anni ng effort, including all District force account, consultant, and related costs, is estimated in the range of $1 to $1.2 million. This project is included as a Priority A project in the Capital Improvement Program. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $50,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund to initiate the Treatment Plant Master Plan CDP 20045). --------- 13026-9/85 . Centr~ Contra Costa Sanitar) District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 3 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6, 1986 NO. v. ENGINEERING 2 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, INC. AND AUTHORIZE $242,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR DISTRICT WATERSHED PLANNING DATE October 31, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT AUTHORIZE FUNDS SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Jack H. Case, Associate Engineer Engineering Dept./Planning Division ISSUE: Board approval is required for the annual watershed planning authorization and for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a consulting agreement with Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM). BACKGROUND: The District's sewer system is divided into 21 watershed areas; each watershed corresponds to a defined drainage basin. Staff performs ongoing watershed engineering studies as a part of the sewer capital improvement program. Each year staff presents the Board of Directors with an authorization request to fund watershed engineering studies for the upcoming planning period. The last annual watershed funding request was in December, 1985 for $126,000. This year, a significant increase in effort is pl anned to prioritize, define, and prepare projects for design to correct existing sewer main deficiencies identified by the manhole overflows that occurred during the storm of February, 1986. Consequently, $242,000 is requested to fund watershed engineering and environmental studies from October, 1986 through June, 1987. After July 1987, watershed planning activities will be funded as a part of the proposed capital budget process. A breakdown of this authorization request is presented in Attachment "A" to this Position Paper. The watershed engineering work covered under this authorization will provide the basi s for improvements to the sewer mai n system (sewers under 12 inches in diameter). The proposed staff watershed engineering work can be divided into three major categories. The first category is local sewer system capacity anal ysi s in response to proposed developments. Upon recei pt of a proposed development, staff checks the existing sewer system capacity. If additional sewer capacity is requi red to serve proposed developments, staff will take steps to insure that this capacity is provided. The second major category of work is sewer capacity analysis to identify and define existing deficiencies in the sewer main system. (A capacity analysis of of the trunk sewer system has just been completed as part of the Collection System Master Plan.) The District has approximately 1000 miles of sewer mains. The storm of February, 1986 resul ted in numerous overflows which indicated that major portions of the sewer main system are under capacity. Due to a high work load and a continued increase in the new development review activity, these additional sewer capacity studies must be performed by contract. Staff has negotiated an agreement with COM to perform hydraul ic analyses on portions of the sewer main system known to be deficient. CDM was selected for this work because of their REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ~ 5f/V~ HS SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, INC. AND AUTHORIZE $242,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR DISTRICT WATERSHED PlANNING POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 3 DATE October 31, 1986 experience in preparing the Collection System Master Plan and because .of their familiarity with the computer program developed for sewer capacity analysis. The CDM agreement will be of the "Direct Cost Times a Multipl ier with a Cost Ceil ing" contract type, not to exceed $45,000. An ongoi ng porti on of the sewer capacity analysis is sewer flow monitoring to support and validate the findings of engineering studies. A portion of this work will be performed by Collection System Operati ons Department crews whil e the remai nder wil 1 be done by outside contractors under technical service agreements. The third major category of proposed watershed engineering work is environmental studies to comply with the Cal Horni a Environmental Qual ity Act (CEQA). Each project identified through the sewer capacity analysis activity must be reviewed for compliance with CEQA and the appropriate environmental documentation prepared. An environmental consultant will be retained under a technical service agreement to prepare the required documentation. The funds requested for environmental work will only be used to prepare documents for projects which are determined to be categorically exempt or require a negative declaration. Additional funds may be requested in the future on a case-by-case basis, if it is determined that an environmental impact report is required for a project. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with Camp, Dresser and McKee, Inc.. Authorize $242,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund for District watershed planning. -' -------- 13028-9/85 ATT ACH~NT A ESTIMATED COSTS FOR DISTRICT WATERSHED ENGINEERING STUDIES FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER. 1986 THROUGH JUNE 30. 1987 OCTOBER 28, 1986 Local Sewer Caoacftv Ana1vsfs o Staff force account to maintain land use and collection system data base o Staff force account to perform local capacity analyses o Staff force account to perform sewer flow monitoring in support of local capacity analysis o Camp, Dresser & McKee consultant costs o Flow monitoring services in support of engineering studies o Survey work in support of engineering studies Subtotal Environmental Studies o Staff force account for environmental work o Environmental consultant costs Subtotal *Contingency (10%) Total Authorization Requested ~ $ 20,000 40,000 15,000 45,000 10,000 10,00Q $ 15,000 65.000 $140,000 $ 80.000 $220,000 22.000 $~2,000 *If necessary, District staff will use this contingency to fund additional force account or consultant costs associated with the performance of watershed engineering studies. . Centr-. Contra Costa Sanitar ~ District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6 ENGINEERING 3 1986 NO. V. DATE October 31, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION ADOPT REVISED CHARGES SUBJECT REVISE THE CHARGES FOR THE PURCHASING AND MAILING OF DISTRICT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED BY Jay S. McCoy, Construction Div. Manager INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Dept./Construction Div. ISSUE: The charge for standard specifications must be increased to cover the cost of producing and mailing the specifications. The Board of Directors must approve any change in District fees. BACKGROUND: The charge for the 1976 edition of the standard specifications was $5.00 per set. The revisions to the 1976 specifications have been issued as the 1986 edition. An increase of $5.00 in the price per set is needed to compensate for additional costs associated with the preparation of the specifications. Staff has determined that $10.00 per set is the appropri ate charge for the 1986 specifications. It is appropriate for the Board to authorize a revision in the charge from $5.00 to $10.00 because the $5.00 charge was established by the Board by previous action. In addition, the previous Board-established charge of $1.00 for mailing specifications must be increased to $2.50 to cover costs. The provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act do not apply to this action per Section 17.7 (a) (1) of this District's Guidelines for the Implementation of the Act. RECOMMENDATION: Approve $10.00 as the charge for one set of District standard specifications and $2.50 as the charge for mailing a set. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A.9/85 JSM RAB . Centra =ontra Costa Sanitar~ .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS I PAGE 1 OF 3 POSITION PAPER I BOARD MEETING OF November 6, 1986 NO. v. ENGINEERING 4 AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANIGER-CH IEF ENGINEER TO EXEQJTE ~ IGREEMENT WITH V ILLALOOOS & ASSOCIATES FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR CATHODIC PROTECTION, FHASE 2, DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO. 20029 DATE October 30, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT AUTHORIZE EXEQJTION OF AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Cheryl Creson Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Engineering Division ISSUE: Authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with Villalobos & Associates for the Phase 2 design of the Cathodic Protection System for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. BACKGROUND: A two-phased approach for prov isi on of cathodi c protecti on for the buried piping at the Wastewater Treatment Plant was adopted by the District. A proj ect descri pti on is presented in Attachment No. 1 and a cost summary is presented in Attachment No.2. Phase 1 construction was awarded to Harco Corporation on June S, 1986, and is scheduled for completion on November 20, 1986. Phase 2 design includes collection of data from the electrolysis testing stations installed during Phase 1 as well as design of needed facil ities. Phase 2 design must be started when Phase 1 construction is completed in order to meet the 18-month schedule established by the Stage SA-I and SA-II Termination Agreement and to 1 imit wet weather del ays. Since Phase 2 is a continuation of the Phase 1 work performed by Villalobos & Associ ates, staff recommends that V ill al obos & Associ ates be retai ned to perform the Phase 2 design under a direct labor times a multiplier-type contract with a cost ceiling of $79,000. A large part of the design funds are used for field testing which is required for proper design of cathodic protection facilities. Thus, by its very nature, this type of project tends to be design intensive. Under the Stage SA Completion Project $100,948 was authorized for Phase II design. Since current estimates show this amount to be adequate for providing consultant and District Force Account services, no authorization of additional sewer construction funds is required. Th i s proj ect is i ncl uded in the Capital Improvement Pl an under Treatment Pl ant Corrosion Protection Phase 1 and Phase 2 (see Capital Improvement Plan Section A and Schedules Section page 10). The Termination Agreement for the Stage S~I and SA-II grants included a $229,000 allocation to be applied towards the Cathodic Protecti on Proj ect. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chi ef Engi neer to execute an agreement with Villalobos & Associates for design of Cathodic Protection System Phase 2 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant, District Project No. 20029. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302,A.9/85 {Ie cc ~'t'P fJJecv ne CWS DRW RAB G?1JfJEN MGR./CHIEF ENG. PL" ~ jtYL ROG~R J. DOLAN INITIATING DEPT./DIV ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEM DP 20029 Proj ect Descr i pt ion Buried piping at both the Treatment Plant and Filter Plant sites is in corrosive soil. The ori gi nal desi gn engi neers were aware of the corrosive soil conditi ons and prov i ded for a cathodoi c protecti on system. The system was install ed duri ng the Stage SA constructi on; hOtlever, post-constructi on testi n9 i ndi cated significant design and construction deficiencies. As a result of the deficiencies, none of the buried piping at the two sites has a working cathodic protection system, with the exception of the fuel gas piping. Recognizing the importance of providing adequate corrosion protection, the District included a Scope of Work for correction of the cathodic protection system deficiencies as part of the Stage SA Completion Project. Metcal f & Eddy Consulting Engineers was selected as the design engineer for the Stage SA Completion Project. Villalobos & Associates was included in the Metcalf & Eddy team to perform the cathodic protection system evaluation and design. During the Stage SA Completion Project, Villalobos & Associates evaluated several alternatives in order to determine the most cost-effective approach for correcting the cathodi c protecti on system defici enci es. The recommended approach consi sted of a two- phased program. Phase 1 consi sted of desi gn and constructi on of electrolysis test stations eETS's). Phase 2 includes data collection from the ETS's, design of a cathodic protection system using the test data, and install ati on of the cathodi c protecti on system. The two-phased approach offered the advantage of having actual field test data available at the time the cathodic protection system is designed. This facil itates the design of the most cost- effective cathodic protection system for the Plant. After review by the District, the recommended two-phased approach was approved and design for the electrolysis test stations eETS) for the main Treatment Plant area was begun. Upon reaching the 90 percent completion level in late 1982, the Phase 1 desi gn was submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board e SWRCB) for grant funding approval. Since the correction of the cathodic system was part of the Stage sA-I and SA-II Termination Agreement, review and approval of the 90 percent desi gn was del ayed. As the Terminati on Agreement approached settl ement, work on the Phase 1 design was resumed. On December 15, 1985, the Termination Agreement was finalized and the complete Cathodic Protection Project was assigned an 18-month compl eti on schedul e. The current Di stri ct schedul e shOtl s that the mid-point of construction on Phase 2 will occur within the 18-month time frame. The SWRCB has been advised of this schedule and feels it is in compliance with the Termination Agreement. ATTAQ-fMENT NO. 2 WASTEWATER TREAT~NT PlANT CA TH ODr C PROTECT ION PROJ ECT A-iASES 1 AND 2 COST SUMMARY ITEM COST Phase 1 Design $227,154 (a) Constructi on 346,000 (b) Subtota 1 $573,154 Phase 2 (estimates) Design Villalobos & Associates $ 79,000 District 21,948 Construction 183,000 - 400,000 (c) Subtotal $283,948 - 500,948 TOTAL $857,102 - $1,074,102 (a) $147,154 authorized for preliminary design of Phase 1 under the Stage 5A Completion Project and $80,000 authorized for final design of Phase 1 on October 3, 1985. (b) Authorized on June 5, 1986. (c) The actual construction cost estimate is dependent on test results from equipment installed during Phase 1 and, thus, a range is provided. . Centr\. Contra Costa Sanitaa. District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF NO. VI. TREATMENT PLANT 1 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE $95,000 IN SEWER CX>NSlRUCTION FUNDS AND AUTHORIZE AWAAD OF PlJRQ-IASE ORDER TO AERNETICS ENGINEERING CX>MPANY FOR A SERV ICE AIR CX>MPRESSOR DATE JlLJTHORIZE FUNDS J1LI TH OR IZ E f<W AA D SUBMITTED BY Dav i d Rei ndl Assistant En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Maintenance Engineering Plant 0 erations De artment ISSUE: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District staff has solicited quotations fran the local representative for a second Atlas-Copco service air compressor. The Board of Di rectors is req uested to award a purchase order and authorize Sewer Constructi on funds. BACKGROUND: The service air system provides air for process controls throughout the Treatment Pl ant. The exi sti ng compressors consi st of one 200 HP Atl as-Copco uni t which was installed in 1983 and two 100 HP Worthington units which were installed in 1976. Over the past several years, the Worthington units have become unrel iable as backup eq ui pment with maj or component fail ures and di sconti nued producti on of the del icate compressor feather val ves. All repl acement parts are becoming very hard to obtain as these units are the last two of this type that are still in operation. The staff has determined that replacement of the two Worthington units is warranted at this time. The existing Atlas-Copco unit has run almost continuously since it was installed and has been extremely reliable. Standardizati on of compressor eq ui pment will improve the effici ency of mai ntenance and operations and reduce inventory of spare parts. In accordance with Section 3400 of the public contract code, the District is electing to sole source the purchase of the second Atlas-Copco unit. The need to standardize these units is stated herein, and only Aernetics Engineering Canpany can sell the Atlas-Copco unit in this area. The proposal fran Aerneti cs Engi neeri ng Company for $68,000 is the same purchase price that was paid for the existing unit competitively bid in 1983. The engineer's cost estimate for the entire project which consists of the removal of the existing Worthington units and installation of the new Atlas-Copco unit is $160,000. The installation contract will be bid prior to the delivery of the air compressor in February, 1987, and funds req uested fran the Board at that time. The Board of Directors is asked to authorize $95,000 for purchase of the new Atlas-Copco air compressor and related engineering work. RECX>MMENDATION: Authorize award of a purchase order for DP No. 10021, Service Air Compressor No. 4 to Aerneti cs Engi neeri ng Canpany, and authorize $95,000 fran the Sewer Construction Fund for purchase and engineering. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ,( - --, 1 j"[. ~,\../,. V 1302/1.9/85 0 R SERVICE AIR COMPRESSOR Prepurchase Items Atl as-Copco ZR3A <789 cfm 200 HP) Tax Cooling System Components Installation Design Plans and Speci ficati ons 5 Percent Contingency $68,000 4,420 6,050 $78,470 12,000 $90,470 4,530 $95,000 . Centra. Contra Costa Sanitar. District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6, 1986 NO. VI!. BUDGET AND FINANCE 1 SUBJECT DATE October 31, 1986 RECEIVE lHE 1985-1986 SINGLE AUDIT REPORT FREPARED BY THE DISTRICT'S INDEPENDENT JltJDITORS JlND AUTHORIZE ITS SUBMISSION TO lHE ENVIRCJ.JMENTAL FROTECTION JlGENCY TYPE OF ACTION RECEIVE SINGLE AUDIT REPORT SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer Administrative/Finance & Accounting ISSUE: The audit reports prepared in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984 by Hood and Strong, Certified Publ ic Accountants, for the fiscal year endi ng June 30,1986 are being submitted to the Board of Directors. B~ROUND: The Single Audit Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-502) is intended to reduce the nll1lber of grant-by-grant audi ts performed for federally funded programs and repl ace them with a si ng1 e, uni form audi t. The Act estab1 i shes uni form audi ti ng requirements for federal financial assistance to state and local governments. State and local governments that receive a total of $100,000 or more in federal funding in a fiscal year are required to obtain an annual, organization-wide audit. Governments receiving less than $100,000 but more than $25,000 in a fiscal year in federal assistance have the option of selecting a single audit or complying with the existing audit requirements for each federal assistance program. Government entities that receive less than $25,000 in federal aid are generally exempt from the Act's req ui rements. Under the Single Audit Act, an independent auditor must perform the audit for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 1984. The auditor is required to report whether the state or local government's financi al statements fai rly present its financi al position and the results of its financial operations. Internal control systems must be eva1 uated to test systems re1 i ance in prov i di ng reasonab1 e assurance that the entity is managing federal financial assistance programs in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The Single Audit Act specifies that the single audit will replace all financial or compl iance audits of individual federal assistance programs conducted pursuant to federal law. This provision does not preclude federal agencies from conducting additional audits of state or local governments, if necessary to fulfill other responsibilities. Hood and Strong expanded its customary examination of the District's financial statements to incorporate the requirements of the Single Audit Act. The single audi t reports subm itted herewith prov i de a summary of C1 ean Water Act grants, and the auditor's opinion regarding compliance with laws and regulations and its review of the system of internal accounting and administrative controls; these reports will be incorporated with the customary financial audit report submitted to the Board at the October 16, 1986 Board Meeting, and comprise pages 13 through 19 of the enclosed INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON G~--~ 1302,0-9/85 WN F ~-,--------,_...,._.__.,-....---_.__._.,--"--------_._,.,-.,,-- SUBJECT RECEIVE lHE 1985-1986 SINGLE AUDIT REPORT FREPARED BY lHE DISTRICT'S INDEPENDENT PUDITORS AND AlllHORIZE ITS SUBMISSION TO lHE ENVIR()JMENTAL PROTECTION JlGENCY POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 2 DATE October 31, 1986 single audit report. Hood and Strong reported no adverse findings based on its single audit review. The District's single audit report is required to be submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency, the grantor of the District's Clean Water Act grants. RECOMMENDATION: Receive the single audit report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1986 prepared by Hood and Strong, and authorize its submission to the Environmental Protection Agency. .....------. 13028-9/85 . Centr '- Contra Costa Sanita~ District .. BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 6 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 6, 1986 NO. IX. ITEMS LATE FOR AGENDA 1 SUBJECT . , FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AREA 1 - PHASE I OF DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO. 3622, TREATMENT PLANT DRAIN~E REHABIL ITATION, REJ ECT BID FROM GRADEX COMPANY AS NON-RESPONSIBLE, AND AUTHORIZE $83,916 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AREA I - PHASE I AND DESIGN OF SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS DATE November 6, 1986 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AWARD REJ ECT BID AUTHORIZE FUNDS SlJilMITTEp BY ~ert L. Micha1czyk Senior Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department Engineering Division ISSUE: On October 30, 1986, sealed bids for the construction of Area 1 - Phase I District Project No. 3622, Treatment Plant Drainage Rehabilitation, were received and opened. Gradex Company was the apparent low bi dder but upon eva1 uati on the bid was determined to be non-responsible. J. Huizar & Sons, Inc. is the lowest responsi b1 e bi dder. The Board must award the contract to a responsi b1 e bi dder or reject all bids within 60 days of the opening of bids; the Board must reject the bid from Gradex Company. BACKGROUND: A number of flooding and drainage problems exist throughout the Treatment Plant area. The problem areas were first identified in 1981 as part of the Stage 5B predesign work. Since that time the drainage problems in several areas were corrected by other proj ects. Four maj or areas remai n; these are: o Area 1 - South of the filter plant forebay o Area 2 - Around the north sedimentation tanks o Area 3 - Around the south sedimentation tanks o Area 4 - Roadway south of undercrossing to the filter plant Attachment A shows these locations. Alternative solutions to the drainage problems at each of the four areas have been identified and evaluated by District staff. The area, south of the forebay is the highest priority because of the need to maintain access to the filter plant influent diversion structure and surroundi ng forebay area. At times in the past, the water 1 eve1 has ri sen hi gh enough to flood an instrumentation manhole near the forebay damaging wiring and interrupting flow to the filter plant. To address the problem the Plant Operati ons Department annually sets up a portab1 e pump to dewater the area which results in the significant expenditure of manpower and fuel for operations and maintenance. The recommended sol uti on to the drai nage prob1 em south of the forebay will be implemented using a two-phased approach. In the first phase (Area 1 - Phase I), which is already designed, the subject area will be re-graded so that water drains to the northeast. A 12-inch corrugated metal pipe with control valve will be used to convey the drainage by gravity to the Martinez line during low flow periods. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION Bt D .k/.A) 130211.9/85 BLM DRW RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. SUBJECT AUTIiORIZE M'lARD OF CONTRACT TO J. HUIZAR & SONS, INC., FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AREA 1 - PHASE I OF DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO. 3622, TREATMENT PLANT DRAINPGE REHABILITATION, REJ ECT BID FROM GRADEX COMPANY AS NON-RESPONSIBLE, AND AUTIiORIZE $83,916 FROM TIiE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AREA I - PHASE I AND DESIGN OF SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 DATE November 6, 1986 OF 6 The second phase (Area 1 - Phase II) will be undertaken during the next construction season and involve the installation of a pumping station to allow the drainage to be pumped from the area at times of peak flow. Attachment B shows the system proposed for the first phase. The Engineering Division staff will require funds to complete the design of drai nage improvements for Area 1 - Phase II as well as desi gn of improvements in Areas 2, 3, and 4. It is anticipated that $41,100 will be needed to complete all the remaining design work in these areas. Design is scheduled to be completed during this fiscal year with construction anticipated during next year's construction season. Plans and specifications for Area 1 - Phase I were prepared by the Engineering Division staff and the project was advertised on October 17 and 23, 1986. Six bi ds, rangi ng from $24,537.63 to $54,995 were received on October 30, 1986. A tabulation of the bids is shown in Attachment C. The Engineering Division conducted a technical and commercial evaluation of the bids received and concluded that the lowest responsi bl e bi dder is J. Huizar & Sons, Inc. of Pacheco, California, whose bid was second lowest at $25,731. The proposal of the apparent low bidder, Gradex Company at $24,537.63, was determined to be non-responsible because they di d not possess the General or Speci al ty Contractor's 1 icenses necessary to perform work on sanitation systems. Gradex Company has acknowledged the deficiency and has indicated they will not contest the rejection of their bid. J. Huizar & Sons, Inc. has been contacted and is willing to accept the award. A Post Bid/Pre-Construction Cost Estimate for Area 1 - Phase I is presented in Attachment D. An amount of $83,916 from the Sewer Construction Fund is needed for the construction contract, District Force account, construction contingencies, and to continue design for Area 1 - Phase II, Area 2, Area 3, and Area 4. The total estimated project cost for the Treatment Plant Drainage Rehabilitation Project for all four areas is $400,000 to $450,000. The project is included in the Capital Improvement Plan as Treatment Plant Drainage Improvements. Following Board approval staff will file a Notice of Exemption to satisfy CEQA req ui rements. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a constructi on contract for the constructi on of Area 1 - Phase I of the Treatment Plant Drainage Rehabilitation, District Project No. 3622, to J. Huizar & Sons, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder, and reject the bid of Gradex Company as non-responsible. Authorize $83,916 from the Sewer Construct; on Fund for construct; on of Area 1 - Phase I and the des; gn of facilities for Area 1 - Phase II, Area 2, Area 3, and Area 4. --------. 13028- 9/85 Attachment A Treatment Plant Drainage Probl em Areas .., ..'-..... .. ........... .. .......... ... G I / I' / /' I' I I I / , WAY ~ AREA 2 NORTH SEDIMENTATION TANKS + LEGEND: PROBLEM DRAINAGE AREAS AERATION AND NITRIFICATION TANKS AREA 3 SOUTH SEDIMENTATION TANKS --_.,---~._-----_._.__.._._._"-"._..~.._._~,-,,._.-........._."--'-,.._---------,._---'------------~------~_._--_._-_.,_._._~-,_._--, 1 i 1 t I I l~ 1 I I t i i 1 ) ! 1... ! TO HEAOWORK~ -+-l~"""--~~-- !I\~ \\ ---- I ~ . - I() " ", I. I ~ t- i: '- I 1-- I t I I I ~~ I =~I I 'BI I I I I I I ! I I ! I , 1 ~. ... ~ I " \ '~'-',- ',.<l' , e~ \ ~.s')- "'--- .~~ OVJ'~ ~(.(. , Ii I Ii i' : \ - I \, ~ ~ n i '1J Id. , iJ \ ~ .~ <l , , ^u' \ . ~ . --------- ---=- ' .~ Cb \' , Attachment B . nase I - Area South of Forebay ~ '1J .~ .~~ .~ 0) ~ to .<l , .~ " .~ .~ (" III .~ , FILTER PLANT FORE BAY .~ '1J .Q ... .~ <l .~ 0) ~ , ~ " ~ Cb ~ ... Q , .~ o~ .~ III , <l ... 'f- .~ <l ~ 0 to ~i ~-l ~ ~ ",::0 .~ '" 0 ~' r 'f- .<l ... -- ----- Attachment C Central ~ontra Costa Sanitc.t"y District SUMMARY OF BIDS PROJECT NO. 3622 - TP DRAINAGE REHABILITATION - PHASE I DATE October 30. 1986 LOCATION South of Filter Forebay ENGR. EST. $ 39,600 a: ~ BIDDER (Name, telephone & address) BID PRICE Gradex Company ( ) 937-4760 $ P.O. Box 23117, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 24,537.63 J. Huizar & Sons, Inc. ( ) 682-3424 $ 112 Center Avenue, Pacheco, CA 94553 25,731. 00 Richard Sawdon ( ) 820-2746 $ Box 350, Diablo, CA 94528 35,888.00 - Gallagher & Burke. Inc. ( ) 261-0466 $ P.O. Box 7227, Oakland, CA 94601 43,225.00 I-- FANFA. Inc. ( ) 278-8410 $ 2401 Grant Avenue, San Lorenzo. CA 94580-1888 45,974.00 Pfister Excavatinq. Inc. ( 707 ) 643-7715 $ P.O. Box 4312, Vallejo, CA 54,995.00 .. ( ) $ ( ) $ - ( ) $ - ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) $ PREPARED BY DATE SHEET NO. OF -.----.....-..,----..... '---""-'-'-'~'''------'''''''---'._'-'-'''-- ~".,.,,----_.._._~_...._----_..._~_._,._"---_..__..--..-...'''-'-~'''----~'''''---_.__..,.__., .----.-.-----^-.--.-........-..---. --_._--- -,cn'1_0 'at! POST BID - PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE OF COSTS FOR DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO. 3622 PHASE I - TREATMENT PLANT DRAINPGE REHABIL HATION NOV EM3ER 6, 1986 ITEM DESCRIPTION 1. (a) Construction Contract (As Bid) (b) Construction Contingency (c) Subtotal Construction 2. Estimated Construction Incidentals Prior to Project Completion (Phase I onl y) ( a) S u rv ey (b) Inspection (c) Engineering (including Contract Admin., Submittal Review) (d) Total Estimated Construction Inci dental s 3. Total Estimate Required to Complete Construction (Phase I only) (Item l(c) Pl us 2 ( d ) ) 4. Pre-Bid Expenditures (a) Predesign all areas (b) Design, Survey, Printing, Advertising - Area 1, Phase I (c) Total Preconstruction Cost Area 1, Phase I (as of 11/1/86) 5. Total Estimated Proj ect Cost (Items 3 & 4(c)) 6. Less Funds Previously Authorized 7. Total Additional Funds Required to Complete Area 1, Phase I (Item 5 minus Item 6) 8. Engineering for Area 1, Phase II, and Areas 2/3/4 9. Total Authorization Request (a) Includes predesign work for all areas. ITEM AMOUNT TOTAL $25,731.00 $ 3,860.00 $29,591.00 $ 1,800 $ 3,600 $ 2,000 $ 7,400 $ 36,991 $ 10,500 $ 12,500 $ 23 ,000 $ 59,991 ($ 17,175) $ 42,816 $41,100 $83,916 Attachment 0 %CON ST. CONTRACT 100% 25 125