Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 08-25-88 . Centra. ;ontra Costa Sanitar\ .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 25, 1988 AUlHORIZE ~ARD OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO ETEX, INC. TO FURNISH lWO ELECTRIC MOTOR OPERATORS FOR DISTRICT PROl ECT NO. 20070, INFLUENT GATE OPERATORS NO. IV. BIDS AND AWARDS DATE August 17, 1988 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION AUlHORIZE AWARD SUBMITTED BY Cheri Arstani, Senior Buyer INITIATLNG DEPT/DIY. Admlnistratlve/Purchasing & Materials Control ISSUE: On August 2, 1988, sealed bids to furnish two electric motor operators for District Project No. 20070, Influent Gate Operators, were publ icly opened. The Board of Directors must authorize award of the purchase order or reject the bids within ninety (90) days of the bid opening. BACKGRaJN:>: The District is in the process of designing and constructing a new infl uent gate operator system to enhance the opening and closing speed of the existing influent gates. This project was approved by and is fully described in the Fiscal Year 1988-1989 Capital Improvement BUdget, page TP-82. The Notice to Bidders was advertised on July 22 and 28,1988. The bids were publicly opened and read aloud on August 2, 1988. Three bids were received as follows: Company ETEX, Inc. Val ve Serv ices R. J. Kaufman Price $11,537.96 12,646 .51 14,770.23 A commercial and technical evaluation was conducted by District staff (see Attachment 1), which determined that the lowest responsible bidder is ETEX, Inc. of Petaluma, California. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a purchase order to ETEX, Inc., the lowest responsibl e bidder, for $11,537.96 to furnish two el ectric motor operators for District Project No. 20070. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION DJC PM ()R.7;:G. ROGER J. DOLAN INITIATING DEPT./DIV. lJ.J~ 1302A-9/85 CCA ,-'.. ~ ... ... :!!l 011: ~.. ..... Z!l :oK .. "'0 ... ... s... ~!:l (\j 011: 3 .. .. .--l (\j U "- ~ E O'l tJ 0 0 s... ..... -u 0 +- z - :;)11: L.J..J .. .. VI :5 VI .." .--l ... 1-01 .. VII:: o::::t .--l . ~ t I~ s: LO LO 0 :;) ~ ...... z ~ ~ 1.0 . 0 ~ ~r? ~ 011: . N (Y") .... 0 O'l .. .--l s... ...... ... .--l 1.0 ,....., L.J..J LO s... ~ (1) . U 1::0 ""ex s...~ ICS 1.0 0,.... o+-> (\j - ,..... "- z: o::::t s... 0,.... (\j (1):3 ex 3 ~ ..... N 1.0 +->+->s...> , :; (\j~ ~ zY (Y") .. :;)11: N . -U (\j (1) ~ I:: C\ E ~ ~ C .. (1) r- 0.. (\j (\j .... LO .--l r-r-O 7 (1)(\j 1::3 +: +->(1) N (Y") . r- ......... VI +-' ...... o::::t N 0 (\j NI::(\j ~ ~~ "- . 0 ~ U ,-,.,.... C!) (\j .. 011: co N .,.... ~ ~~ ~> .. .. N N .. 'r- I:: (Y") os...+-> .--l co .--l V) <.. ..s:::: C N :;::-.... s::::: ~ ~ ex u-l't . +-'(1)(1) >- (1) +J 0 ..s:::: ::l V. :0 ~ IcY Q t: tj .--l +-> ~ I:: "- s...+-'r- (1)' "- "'C U ~ "- CJ 4- ~~~ t; ~ ~ It ~ ~ ~ c; .. ........ >s:::::c I:: . ~ (\j o::::t -.... -.... ~ ~~ex I'-s... 1.0 ( (t!' +-> .--l I- r- (\j z: (1)+-'0 fd L.J..J -0 VI "- I;: 1.0 1.0 ::E 0,.... 0 ...... 1.0 O'l ::r: <>;'1 VI 0 E( oCu c; . . ..- u VI N 0 011: .--l 0 c::( ..s:::: (\j U ~ s... ~.. 0 N LO L.J..J 1.0 I- VI +-' +- ::> .--l 1.0 Ll,) z: O'l I- 0,.... "'C U ~ llg ~ ~I~I~ . c::( 1::1::(1) z: "- s... (\j 0"'" (Y") ::l 0 x ~I';" V. ~!tl'" ~ ..... (Y") LO lL.Vls... ~~I~ -u co .. ~Ula. Q C z- s... c.. :;)11: .--l .--l .. 0 . .--l I +-' +-' :c LO (\j U s....,.... (1)s... 0.. +-' z~i OVl 5 Q .,.... e ~ ~ ... a: ~ s... Cl Q- 0 II: a Q z i :s B S ~ ... !i +-,s... 8 II: ~ .. . .. g oC 00 Z 0 ci J oC II: ~ ~ E4- -~ ~ 6 ..: ... s ... LO 0 0 0- w VI . .. s... 1.0 VI c 0 (1) 0 +-' . U s... (\j X .,.... ~ s... (\j > g ~ l- s... (1) '" U V) Q ::; 0 VI . L.J Z (1) iii U ~ s... ..- s... I:: (1) 0 (\j (l) Yo ...... ;; +-> V) (1) 0 c 0 I:: ...... 1-- H z x ,.... .. E (\j 'g VI (1) VI -.. .,.... I:: 0 +-> I:: c Q U I:: 0 ;:: L.J..J Q 0,.... s... L.J..J .,.... e( l-I s... 0 6- 0 III \ +-' 4- "'0 .... +-' (1) U .,.... r- (1) ::) s... (1) r- (1) U CD "'C +-l r- (\j .,.... X ,- , c( s... L.J..J U lL. L.J..J- I- (\j VI 3 (1) . c::( 3 K (\j \tJ 0 r$"'~~ (1) ii - - 3 ~. 0 N 11 I "0 2 . Z : "- 1",--~1 g i : i ~i .--l N IcY' . I ': 1~ . Centr..~ Contra Costa Sanitar) District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE JOINT VENTURE OF JMM/CDM TO DEVELOP A WET WEATHER DISCHARGE PROGRAM FOR THE TREATMENT PLANT NO. VI. ENGINEERING 1 DATE Au us 19 1988 TYPE OF ACTION EXECUTE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Steve McDonald INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ P nnin Division ISSUE: Authorization by the Board of Directors is required for the General Manager-Chief Engi neer to execute professional service agreements greater than $50,000. BACKGROUND: Currently, peak wet weather flows exceed existing plant processing capacity. During wet weather, flows in excess of treatment plant capacity are diverted to holding ponds. During extreme wet weather events, the ponds fill up and excess flows are diverted to Walnut Creek. The ultimate bottleneck in processing wet weather flows and avoiding a creek discharge is the outfall capacity. The Treatment Plant Master Plan modeling work demonstrated that the ponds will not be big enough to prevent overflows to the creek in the future, even when the outfall is increased to its peak capacity of 145 mgd. An a1 ternative to a new outfall and new processi ng capacity for flows greater than 145 mgd, is to obtain approval by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for an infrequent wet weather discharge to Wa1 nut Creek of treated eff1 uent. Approval of an infrequent di scharge to the creek will e1imi nate the need for a second outfall. This would save approximately $35 million, plus the cost to expand treatment beyond 145 mgd. In February 1988, the Planning Division began to develop the background material and engineering studies required to obtain RWQCB approval. Work completed to date i nc1 udes a review and compari son of wet weather management programs of other agencies which have RWQCB approval and meetings with the RWQCB staff to discuss the feasibility of a discharge to the creek. The Planning Division found that EBMUD, Vallejo Sanitary District, and the city of Richmond have recently received approvals for similar discharge requests. The Planning Division also found that the RWQCB staff was receptive to the infrequent creek di scharge a1 ternative for CCCSD. Therefore, Di strict staff recommends proceedi ng now to prepare a formal di scharge request because the preliminary discussions with the RWQCB were favorable and because the District's NPDES permit is up for renewal in 1989. A scope of services and a cost reimbursement contract with a cost ceil in9 of $110,100 has been negotiated with the joint venture of James M. Montgomery Engi neers and Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (JMM/CDM), the consul tant for the REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302....9/85 HSM JMK RAB INITwJ0PT.lDIV. -pt1L- /JfJ SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEfJENT WITH THE J OINT VENTURE OF J MM/CDM TO DEVELOP A WET WEATHER DISCHARGE PROGRAM FOR THE TREATMENT PLANT POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 2 DATE August 19, 1988 Treatment Plant Master Plan. JMM/CDM was selected for this project because it is part of the overall Treatment Plant Master Plan effort. The objective of the proposed scope is to obtain RWQC8 approval of a creek discharge. The work consists of gathering and analyzing historical treatment plant overflow data and receiving stream water quality, stream flow, and biology. These data will be used in discussions with the RWQC8 and the California Department of Fish and Game to demonstrate the potential impacts of the proposed wet weather di scharge on the creek. Al so, a ''Wet Weather Management Pl an" will be prepared which will document the assessment of environmental impact, present the alternatives and costs required to justify the proposed wet weather discharge, and will serve as the formal discharge permit request. Staff has budgeted the project assuming that existing studies and raw data are suffi ci ent to develop a formal di scharge permit request. However, additi onal field and office studies may be requested by the regulatory agencies to supplement the available data. These studies are not included in this scope of work because staff believes currently available data should be adequate. Also, preparation of the required CEOA documentation is not included in this scope, but will be submitted to the Board for approval following the completion of the ''Wet Weather Management Plan," if needed. Authorization of funds is not required because this effort is budgeted in the FY 1988-89 Capital Improvement Budget on page TP 96 under the title "Treatment Plant Master Plan." RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement in the amount of $110,100 with the joint venture of JMM/CDM for development of the Wet Weather Discharge Program. 13028- 9' 85 . Centra. Contra Costa Sanitar) District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER PAGE 1 OF 2 1988 NO. VIII. BUDGET & FINANCE 2 SUBJECT ESTABLISH LIMITATIONS ON SEWER SERVICE CHARGE REFUNDS DATE August 18, 1988 TYPE OF ACTION ESTABLISH REFUND LIMITATIONS SUBMITTED BY Barton L. Brandenburg Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Planning Division ISSUE: Staff requests that the Board of Directors establish a policy limiting sewer service charge refunds and providing for the payment of interest on certain refunds. BACKGROUND: On July 1, 1976, the District initiated the current practice of assessing sewer service charges to its customers and collecting them with property taxes. Prior to initiating the sewer service charge, property owners (identified through the County Assessor's property tax rolls) were sent a letter advising them of the implementation of a sewer service charge program. The property owners were instructed to compl ete and return a card if thei r home or busi ness was served by a septic tank and was not connected to the Di stri ct' s sewers. Property owners who returned cards were not assessed an annual sewer service charge on their property tax statement. However, some property owners di d not return a card even though thei r property was served by a septic tank. Subsequent owners of the property may have al so been unaware the property was served by a septic tank and therefore paid a sewer service charge. Since that time, property owners (21 in fiscal year 1987-88) have requested refunds of prior year sewer service charges when the owner or District staff discovered that their homes or businesses were not connected to the District's sewer. District Code Section 6.24.070 authorizes the General Manager- Chief Engineer to refund sewer service charges to customers when they were paid in error. However there is no provision establishing a time limit for the determination of the refunded amount nor whether interest should be paid. The current practice for determining the refunded amount is to use the entire length of time the property owner requesti ng the refund pai d the sewer service charge. For a typical single-family residence, a refund could be as much as $1,283.00 for 11 years of previous payments. Commerci al account refunds may be much higher. In the past, staff has not included any interest on the refunded amount. However, staff has, over the years, received requests for interest payment from property owners requesting refunds. Researching sewer service charge documents to affirm each overcharge is done manually. This is time consuming and requires that 11 years of records be kept access i b 1 e. 01 der records are becom i ng worn and i 11 egi b 1 e due to thei r age and use. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. ~rM K- ~~h 1302A.9/85 BlB JMK SUBJECT ESTABLISH LIMITATIONS ON SEWER SERVICE CHARGE REFUNDS POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 2 OF 2 August 18, 1988 To assist in establishing a reasonable policy of refunding overpayments, staff requested a determination from District Counsel as to the legal obligation the District has in issuing refunds. Counsel's opinion is summarized as follows: o Refunds of sewer service charges must be made by the same method as state tax refunds if these charges are collected on the property tax rolls. o Generally, when overpayment of taxes is disputed, a taxpayer (property owner) is required to make the payment under protest in order to obtain a refund at a later date. o Tax codes provide that no refund shall be made after four years from the last day prescribed for payment of tax. o Tax codes require payment of interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum only if the overpayment occurred without any error on the part of the taxpayer (property owner). o In instances where the error in overpayment is due to the property owner's failure to inform the District that the property is not connected to the sewer, no interest should be paid. Staff believes that Counsel's opinion supports establishing a limit on sewer service charge refunds. The maximum sewer service charge refund is recommended to be determined by summing overpayments made over the previous four years or for the years the taxpayer requesti ng the refund overpayed, whichever is 1 ess. Interest woul d onl y be pai d on refunds when there was an error made by the District rather than the property owner's failure to inform the District. RECOMMENDATION: Establish a limit of four years from the date a sewer service charge was due for the determination of a refund amount. Establish a policy that interest on the overpayment will only be paid when the overpayment is solely due to District error. 13026-9/85 . Centr&~ Contra Costa Sanitar~ ~istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 7 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 25, 1988 NO. IX. SOLID WASTE 1 SUBJECT CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) DEALING WITH SOLID WASTE EXPORT ISSUES AND APPOINTMENT OF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AS A REPRESENTATIVE TO THE MOU POLICY BOARD DATE August 19, 1988 TYPE OF ACTION APPROV E MOO AND APPOINT REPRES ENTA TrV E SUBMITTJ;D BY E McM '11 Joyce. 1 an Secretary of the Di strict INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Administrative ISSUE: At the August 4, 1988 Board meeting, the Board of Directors expressed support of the Memorandum of Understandi ng deal ing with sol id waste export issues proposed by the Contra Costa Publ ic Managers Association and requested that the matter be brought back for formal Board action. BAa<GROON): The Acme Fill disposal site is expected to close in January 1989, and sites in west and east county will close shortly thereafter. A permanent replacement site will not be available within the county by the date of closure of Acme Fill. As a result, various parties are currently engaged in efforts to negotiate an export agreement. The Contra Costa Public Managers Association has drafted a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the current efforts to export solid waste. The purpose of the MOO is to establish an appointed board for policy support and guidance to the Mayors Conference export negoti ati ng committee, to establ ish an executive committee (the current export negotiating committee), to provide staff support for the policy board and executive committee, to expedite approval of any export agreement(s) arising out of the negotiations, and to establ ish a forum for cooperative di al ogue on solid waste export matters. The proposed MOU is not intended to interfere with any negotiations which may be conducted by private concerns regarding export, nor is it intended to address the siting of a permanent landfill in Contra Costa County. A memorandum of expl anation from the Contra Costa Publ ic Managers Association and the proposed MOU are attached for the Board's consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Consider participation in the MOU regarding current efforts to export solid waste. If appropriate, adopt a resolution authorizing the President of the District Board of Directors to execute the MOU and appoint an elected official to the MOU policy board. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ~ 26 orinda way . orinda . california 94563 . 415' 254-3900 MEMORANDUM ~ ~ C- c' i: "'1.; ~ i1J J U L. j" ::1 1988 TO: Mayors and Members of City Councils Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Contra Costa Sanitary and Service Districts f~' .,~,c~~q ;......' DATE: July 22, 1988 FROM: Torn Sinclair, Chair, Contra Costa Public Managers Association As you are certainly aware, the Acme Fill landfill site in central Contra Costa is expected to close in January 1989, and similar sites in west and east county will close in the next few years. A permanent replacement site will not be available within the county by the date of closure of Acme Fill. ( The Contra Costa Mayors Conference has appointed a committee to explore and negotiate an agreement for interim export of solid waste. This committee, consisting of Councilmernbers Rosemary Corbin (Richmond), Nancy Parent (pittsburg) and Avon Wilson (Lafayette), has been joined by Supervisor Nancy Fahden and Supervisor Torn Torlakson in discussions with representatives from other counties with landfill capacity. The Contra Costa Public Managers Association has drafted a Memorandum of understanding regarding the current efforts to export solid waste. The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is severalfold: to establish an appointed board for policy support and guidance to the export negotiating committee; to establish an executive committee (the current export negotiating committee); to provide staff support for the policy board and executive cornnlitteei to expedite approval of any export agreement(s) arising out,of the negotiations; and to establish a forum for cooperative dialogue on solid waste export matters. It is also important to note what is not intended by this Memorandum of Understanding. Its purpose is not to interfere with any negotiations which may be conducted by private concerns regarding export. It is also not intended to address the siting of a permanent landfill in Contra Costa County. The focus is on export, with emphasis on public agency involvement in the design process. This Memorandum of understanding is being distributed to the eighteen cities, the County and the eight sanitary and service districts involved in solid waste franchising. Agencies electing to participate should adopt a resolution authorizing that agency ( July 22, 2988 Page Two to be a signatory to the Memorandum of Understanding, and appoint an elected official as a representative to the board. When more than one-half of the agencies determine to participate, a meeting notice will be sent to the appointed representatives. The Public Managers Association has proposed this Memorandum of Understanding to provide a collective and cooperative effort to avoid a solid waste disposal crisis in January 1989. We ask that your agency give careful consideration to this matter. Thank you. ( Executed copies of the Memorandum of Understanding and the name of your agency's appointed representatives should be sent to: Torn Sinclair City Manager City of Orinda 26 Orinda Way Orinda, CA 94563 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING dated August 1988 for purposes of reference only is entered into by and between any agency listed below which as a consequence of a majority vote of its ruling body chooses to become a signatory to this MOU. A body shall be considered to be a signatory to this MOU and thus a party as that term is used hereinafter upon the signing of the Agreement by the Mayor or Board Chairman of such body and submitting a resolution from its ruling body approving such act to the Executive Secretary of the Mayors' Conference. The parties to this MOU shall be restricted to the following agencies: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CITY OF ANTIOCH, CITY OF BRENTWOOD, CITY OF CLAYTON, CITY OF CONCORD, TOWN OF DANVILLE, CITY OF EL CERRITO, CITY OF HERCULES, CITY OF LAFAYETTE, CITY OF MARTINEZ, CITY OF MORAGA, CITY OF ORINDA, CITY OF PINOLE, CITY OF PITTSBURG, CITY OF PLEASANT HILL, CITY OF RICHMOND, CITY OF SAN PABLO, CITY OF SAN RAMON, CITY OF WALNUT CREEK, BYRON SANITARY DISTRICT, CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT, CROCKETT-VALONA SANITARY DISTRICT, KENSINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, MOUNTAIN VIEW SANITARY DISTRICT, OAKLEY SANITARY DISTRICT, RODEO SANITARY DISTRICT, and WEST CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT 'BACKGROUND AND POINTS OF AGREEMENT: ( 1. Acme Fill landfill is expected to reach capacity in January of 1989. The Contra Costa Waste Sanitary Landfill is expected to reach capacity in 1991 (sooner if other wastes are diverted to the landfill). The West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill is expected to reach capacity in 1992 (sooner if other wastes are diverted to the landfill). It is unlikely that an additional in-county landfill site can be operational before 1991. As current landfill sites become unavailable to parties to this MOU, affected parties will be required to export their solid waste to landfills outside of Contra Costa County in order to prevent the diversion of additional waste to any of the above landfills. If no export solution is found, the entire County landfill capacity could be exhausted in 1990. In this MOU "export" refers to the disposal of solid waste generated and collected in Contra Co~ta County to a disposal site outside of Contra Costa County. 2. The solid waste export issue is complex and directly involves the County, cities, franchising sanitary districts, and the private solid waste collection and disposal companies. 3. Initial steps have been taken with the formation of the Mayors' Conference Subcommittee on Solid Waste Export. The purpose of this MOU is to compliment and further the efforts of that group by providing a policy foundation and support staff. 4. The need for transfer stations for waste export is acknowledged and the parties intend to work together to ensure that any needed transfer station is operational when export is required. 5. Now is the time to cooperatively act to obtain a waste export agreement. The initial waste disposal problem lies in central County, but East and West County will also likely need to export their wastes. IN FURTHERANCE OF THE GOAL OF SOLVING THE PROBLEM OUTLINED ABOVE, THE PARTIES AGREE TO COOPERATIVELY TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: 1. The parties agree to work actively and cooperatively to arrange for an export agreement to dispose of Contra Costa County's wastes until a new landfill in Contra Costa County is in operation. 2. Any agreement for export shall be brought back to the governing body of each party for approval. 3. Each party shall appoint one elected official to serve on a policy board to direct actions concerning waste export. ( 4. An executive committee of elected officials comprised of the Mayors' Conference Subcommittee on Solid Waste and such other representatives as are selected by the policy board shall be established. This executive committee shall be charged with the responsibility of developing policies and agreements to be acted upon by the policy board. Replacements for vacancies on the executive committee shall be chosen by the policy board. 5. A technical committee of agency staff shall be formed to manage waste export activities and to give advice to the executive and policy committees. 6. Contra Costa County staff, in connection with the technical committee, shall initially support the executive committee on its waste export activities until the parties decide otherwise. 7. The initial task of the policy board is to develop a work plan for approval by the governing bodies of the parties. 8. The formation of this body shall not delay, interfere or prohibit any activities now ongoing to obtain waste export agreements. DATED: (Signatures begin on Page 3) -2- CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT By: Its: l -23- . Centra. Contra Costa Sanitar) District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 25, 1988 NO. x. LEGAL/LITIGATION SUBJECT DENY CLAIM FROM PACIFIC BELL CONCERNING DAMAGE TO CONDUITS AT SAN RAMON VALLEY INTERCEPTOR PHASE "A" PROO ECT DATE August 19, 1988 TYPE OF ACTION DENY CLAIM SUBMITTED BY Jack E. Campbell Administrative Operations Manager INITIA TING DEPT.lDIV Administrative/Risk Management ISSUE: A cl aim has been received from Pacif ic Bell for the costs to repair telephone conduits allegedly damaged by Westcon during construction work on the San Ramon Valley Interceptor Phase "A" Project. A claim denial requires action by the Board of Directors. BAO<GROUNl: Pacific Bell is alleging that on June 13,1988, Westcon employees damaged six 4-inch transite telephone cable ducts while excavating for a CCCSD sewer line. The cost of repairs was $4,695. Pacific Bell sent an insurance claim form to Westcon on June 23, 1988, requesting that they accept responsibil ity for the costs of the repairs. Westcon replied to Pacific Bell that only three conduits and two a i rl ines were damaged. Furthermore, Westcon contends that Pacif ic Bell used the incident to replace undamaged conduits and encase them in concrete which represented an improvement to the original installation. Westcon believes that it should not be held responsible for this extra work over and above the actual damage repairs. Pacific Bell had not responded to Westcon as of this date because Pacific Bell has not completed their follow-up investigation of the incident. The staff position is that this is a matter between Westcon and Pacific Bell as to the repairs and the cost. Westcon, as contractor, has indemnified the District through the construction contract, and, therefore, this claim against the District should be denied and forwarded to Westcon for resolution. RECOMMENlATION: Deny claim from Pacific Bell for alleged damage resulting from the San Ramon Valley Interceptor Phase "A" Project and refer it to Westcon for resolution. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INIT AT~G ~DIV. 1302A-9! JEC PM