HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 05-19-87
.
Centr~_ Contra Costa Sanitar) Oistriet
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 8
POSITION PAPER BOARDMEETING~: 19, 1987
SUBJECT
CONTINUE THE PROCESS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 56
(LID 56): HOLD PUBLIC HEARING, APPROVE ENGINEER'S
REPORT AND ASSESSMENTS, AND AWARD A CONTRACT TO
V AND M CONSTRUCTION AND AUTHORIZE $256,900.00
FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND
NO.
III. HEARINGS 1
DATE
Ma 12, 1987
TYPE OF ACTION
HOLD PUBLIC HEARING,
ADOPT RESOLUTIONS, AWARD
CONTRACT, AUTHORIZE FUNDS
SUBMI,tTED B.Y
uenn1S Hall, Associate Engineer
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Engineering Department
Construction Division
ISSUE: A public hearing must be held to consider testimony regarding the
Resolution of Intention and engineer's report for LID 56 and any other comments
from the public relating to LID 56. The Board may then approve, modify, or
disapprove the engineer's report and assessments and, if approved, award a
construction contract. Appropriate resolutions must be adopted for each action.
BACKGROUND: Property owners in the La Casa Via/Brodia Way area of Walnut Creek,
southeast of John Muir Hospital, petitioned this District in 1986 to form a LID for
the purpose of financing and constructing a public sewer system which will benefit
their properties. The sewer project consists of the installation of approximately
3,560 lineal feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer main which will provide service to 11
existing homes presently on septic systems. A total of 22 existing parcels and 7
future parcels, expected to be created from parcel splits, will also be provided
direct service. The sewers will be installed within the private roads known as
La Casa Via and Brodia Way and in paved private access easements. The project is
located within an unincorporated area adjacent to the city of Walnut Creek. The
attached map shows the assessment district boundary (Attachment 1).
On March 6, 1986 the Board of Directors initiated assessment district proceedings
by accepting property owner petitions within the proposed assessment district,
approving the assessment boundary map, and requesting jurisdiction from the County
Board of Supervisors. By Resol ution 86/246 dated April 29, 1986, the Board of
Supervisors of Contra Costa County consented to the formation of the LID and
assumption of jurisdiction by Central Contra Costa Sanitary District.
Environmental effects of the project were studied by staff and the Board of
Di rectors adopted a Negative Decl aration for the project on February 19, 1987.
All previous actions which have been completed by the Board are shown on
Attachment 2.
On April 2, 1987 the Board of Directors prel iminarily adopted the engineer's
report, called for construction bids and set a public hearing for May 19, 1987.
The project was advertised on April 10 and 17, 1987. Eleven bids ranging from
$166,760.00 to $495,172.80 were received on April 30, 1987. A tabulation of the
bids is shown in Attachment 3. The Construction Division staff conducted an
evaluation of the bids, met with the apparent low bidder, and concluded that the
lowest responsible bidder is V and M Construction of Pittsburg, Cal Hornia. The
Engineer's Estimate by D.K. Associates for construction is $239,000.00.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
1302A.9/85
DH
JSM
;{)dL<)
~RAB
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
.W
SUBJECT
CONTINUE THE PROCESS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 56
(LID 56): HOLD PUBLIC HEARING, APPROVE ENGINEER'S REPORT
AND ASSESSMENTS, AND AWARD A CONTRACT TO V AND M
CONSTRUCTION AND AUTHORIZE $256,900.00 FROM THE SEWER
CONSTRUCTION FUND
POSITION
PAPER
PAGE 2 OF
8
DATE
May 12, 1987
The Engineer of Work has filed an amended engineer's report to conform to the
lowest responsible bid received.
A Post-Bid Preconstruction Cost Estimate is presented in Attachment 4. A total of
$256,900.00 is required to complete the project, including construction,
construction management, and consultant services during construction. All costs
incurred by the District for LID 56 appear in this cost estimate and will be
reimbursed by assessment district funds.
In order to continue the process for LID 56, the following actions are necessary:
1. Conduct a Public Hearing to consider public testimony on
the Resolution of Intention and the engineer's report
2. If, at the close of the hearing, the Board finds that
protests are insufficient, the following resolutions
can be considered and passed:
Subject of this
Position Paper
Subject of this
Position Paper
a. Resolution overruling protests
b. Resolution approving amended engineer's report and
assessments
c. Resolution awarding contract to lowest responsible bidder
d. Resolution authorizing approval of change orders
3. Authorize $256,900.00 for the project.
Subject of this
Position Paper
Future Board
Action
7/2//87
4. Authorize sale and issuance of bonds
As part of the Board deliberations after the Public Hearing is closed, the Board
must decide the manner in which assessments of property owners opposed to the LID
are allocated. At the present time, only one of the 17 owners of the 22 parcels
within the LID boundary has filed a written protest against the formation of LID
56. The District has three options in establishing the allocation of the
assessments:
1. Owners of parcels opposed to the LID be included in the LID and all owners be
required to pay their assessment.
13026-9/85
SUBJECT
CONTINUE THE PROCESS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 56
(LID 56): HOLD PUBLIC HEARING, APPROVE ENGINEER'S REPORT
AND ASSESSMENTS, AND AWARD A CONTRACT TO V AND M CONSTRUCTION
AND AUTHORIZE $256,900.00 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND
POSITION
PAPER
PAGE
DATE
3
OF
8
May 12, 1987
2. The assessments of property owners opposed to the LID be spread over the
parcels owned by those in favor of the LID. The owners opposed would pay a
rebate at time of connection, with the proceeds distributed equally to all LID
proponents who paid assessments.
3. The District can pay the assessment for all owners opposed to the LID. The
District would collect an equalization fee at time of connection which would
be retained by the Sanitary District.
The most favorable option from the District's standpoint is option No. 1. All
costs are borne by property owners benefiting from the LID and the burdensome
procedures required to administer and distribute rebate monies would not be
required. Staff recommends option No.1 and that option has been used to allocate
the assessments which are shown in the engineer's report.
The LID 56 bonds will not be sold until after the Board approves the sale which is
scheduled for the July 2, 1987 Board meeting. This timing is required because of
the statutory 30 day "cash payment period" for property owners who wish to pay
their assessments in lump sum, rather than on a yearly basis over the life of the
bonds. The actual funds will be received approximately two weeks after the Board
approves the sale and issuance of the bonds.
The Board may choose to delay the award of the construction contract to a later
date. The contract documents dictate that the award must take place no later than
60 days after bid opening which was April 30, 1987. Therefore, if the Board
wishes to delay the award, award must take place no later than the June 18, 1987
Board meeting which will be prior to the sale of the bonds.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Directors take the following
action:
o Open Public Hearing, take public testimony, close Public Hearing.
o Adopt a resolution overruling protests.
o Adopt resolutions approving the amended engineer's report and
assessments.
o Adopt a resolution awarding Construction Contract in the amount of
$166,760.00 to V and M Construction.
o Adopt a resolution authorizing approval of change orders.
o Authorize $256,900.00 from the Sewer Construction Fund.
1302B-9/85
. .
. .
(
-'\
~~~v
f,tJ@ ~00~
t~~~~~
. - - - 1....
o -____ -..
/"R.O,POscO 1.-10 56
r---";--
~ ~,
\ .; :
\ ~ \
."---'..~
(0
- - - - NEW
O:A~SE55ME~T
SEWER
PARCEL NUM 8fR
PROPOSED
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 56
LA CASA VIA - BRODIA WAY
WALNUT CREEK AREA
COMPLElED BOARD ACTIONS
LID 56
1. Adopt a Resolution accepting petitions.
2. Adopt a Resolution approving a proposed boundary map.
3. Adopt a Resolution requesting jurisdiction from the
County Board of Supervisors.
4. Adopt a Resolution approvi~ a "Negative Declaration."
5. Adopt a Resolution directing filing of the boundary map
with County Recorder.
6. Adopt a Resolution approving agreement for legal services
with Sturgis, Ness, Brunsell and Sperry.
7. Adopt a Resolution approving agreement for engineering
services with D.K. Associates.
8. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to order improvements.
9. Adopt a Resolution accepting the engineer's report for
LID 56 and setting May 19, 1987 as the hearing date for
receiving public testimony on LID 56.
10. Adopt a Resolution calling for construction bids.
11. Direct staff to give Notice of Improvements for bidding
purposes.
ATTACHMENT 2
Completed
3/6/86
Completed
3/6/86
Completed
3/6/86
Completed
2/19/87
Completed
4/2/87
Completed
4/2/87
Completed
4/2/87
Completed
4/2/87
Completed
4/2/87
Completed
4/2/87
Completed
4/2/87
ATTACHMENT 3
CentraJ--<:ontra Costa Sani~~ry District
SUMMARV DF BIDS
PROJECT NO.
4144
DATE 4/30/87
ENGR. EST. $ 239,000
LOCATION
La Casa Via/Brodia Way, Walnut Creek, CA
a::
~
BIDDER (Name, telephone & address)
BID PRICE
-
V & M Construction/Backhoe ( 415 ) 432-9624 $
1. 2121B Piedmont Way, Pittsburg, CA 94565 166,760.00
-
Pitts Plumbing & Mechanical Co.( 415) 837-2531 $
2. 560 South Hartz Avenue, Ste. 204, Danville 94526 174,740.25
-
Gallagher & Burk (415 ) 261-0466 $
3. 344 High Street (PO Box 7227), Oakl and 94601 204,455.00
-
Pfister Excavating ( 707 ) 643-7715 $
4. POBox 4312, Vallejo, CA 94590 214,844.40
-
Roto Rooter (415 ) 939-3100 $
5. 195 Mason Circle, Concord, CA 94520 239,365.00
~
Mountain Cascade (415 ) 837-1101 $
6. POBox 116, San Ramon CA 94583 299,000.00
MGM Construction (415 ) 685-8812 $
7 . 319,584.00
POBox 5757, Cnnr.nrn r.A 94524
J. Huizar & Sons ( 415 ) 682-3424 $
8. 112 Center Avenue, Pacheco CA 94553 320,961.60
Manual C. Jardim (415 ) 487-0444 $
9. 34201 Zwissy Way, Uni on City, CA 94587 326,488.00
Jardin Pipeline (415 ) 581-6946 $
10 2774 Jeffrey Court, Castro Vall ey 94546 390,825.00
Antioch Paving (415 ) 757-0123 $
11 POBox 1669, Antioch CA 94509 495,]72 80
-
( ) $
PREPARED BY
Dennis Hall
DATE
5/1/87
1
SHEET NO.
OF 1
2501-9.'84
ATTACHMENT 4
POST BID - PRECONSTRUCT ION ESTIMATE OF COSTS FOR LID 56
ITEM DESCRIPTION
1. Construction Contract (As Bid)
2. Estimated Construction Contingencies
3. Total Construction Cost
ITEM
AMOUNT
4. Est. Construction Incidentals to Project Completion
Survey
Inspection
Contract Administration
Outside Testing
Lega 1
Total Estimated Construction Incidentals
5. Total Estimate Required to Complete Project
6. Pre Bid Expenditures (District)
Survey, Plan Review, Printing
Pre Bid Expenditures (Engineer of Work -
D. K. Associates)
Engineering and Assessment
7. Total Preconstruction Expenditures
(as of 4/30/87>
8. Future Incidental Costs - Lid Proceedings
Bond Counsel, Fiscal Agency Fees, Bond
Printing, Misc. Cost of Proceedings,
Bond Reserve
Total Future Incidental Costs
9. Total Estimated Project Cost (Items 5, 7 & 8)
10. Funds Previously Authorized
11. Total Additional Funds Required to Complete
Project (Item 9 minus Item 10)
TOTAL
$166,760
25,24.0
$192,000
$ 3,800
8,000
4,000
2,000
. 200
$18,000 $.18,000
$210,000
$ 5,750
$ 5,000
$10,750 $ 10,750
$ 41,150
$261,900
$ 5,000
$256,900
% CONST
CONTRACT
100%
. 9.4%
109.4%
5.6%
21.4%
136.4%
I TO e \t\\ ~ - Aai,XaG~"~~8~"'~tbwl AJ f: I FA R-1<s:
f : ~~:J&::j,~. ~M ' J:~Jf~D~~c~~.q4Sq8
.~ ~~'t~y : - 0- 0 .;
SUBJECT . . ~ 8
~FaV1,. 4S 468 D NO EPl Y NECESSARY
POL Y PAK (50 SETS) 4P468
D REPLY REQUESTED - USE REVERSE SIDE
carbon'-_
.
Centrl. Contra Costa Sanitar.. District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 9
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
NO.
IV. BIDS AND AWARDS
1
Ma 19, 1987
SUBJECTAUlHORIZE J1i4ARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO WESTERN
UTILITY CONTRACTORS, INC., AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS
WITH PSC ASSOCIATES, INC., AND SHAPIRO OKINO HOM AND
ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, AND JAMES M. MONTGOMERY, AND AUTHORIZE
$9,630,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR PHASES 1A
AND 2 OF THE SAN RAMON V ALLEY TRUNK SEWER, PROJ ECT 4224A
DATE
Ma 15, 1987
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE JliJARD
AUTHORIZE FUNDS
AU TH OR IZ E AG REEMEN TS
SUBMITTED BY
Curtis W.
Princi al
ISSUE: On May 4,1987, sealed bids were opened for installing approximately
30,000 feet of 54 and 60-inch diameter sewer pipe for the San Ramon Valley Trunk
Sewer Proj ect. The Board of Di rectors must authorize award of the contract or
reject all bids within 60 days of bid opening. Board authorization is also
req ui red to expend sewer constructi on funds, execute amendments to engi neeri ng
agreements, and execute agreements for testing and preconstruction survey
serv ices.
BACKGROUND: The District is planning to construct a new 11.s-mile trunk sewer and
force main to serve the San Ramon Valley. Portions of the existing trunk sewer
through Danville and Alamo are at or near capacity. The Board of Directors
approved the trunk sewer project on October 28, 1986. Additional information
regarding the project is included in Attachment 1.
During 1987 approximately 7.5 m1les of trunk sewer out of the total 11.5 miles
will be constructed. Construction of the 7.5 miles of sewer will be accomplished
by the prepurchase of 6 mil es of sewer pi pe, a contract to install the 6 mil es of
prepurchased sewer pipe (Phases 1A and 2), and a conventional furnish-and-install
contract for the remai ni ng 1.5 mil es (Phase 1B). The pi pe prepurchase contract
was awarded by the Board on March 5, 1987, and sewer pipe is now being
manufactured. Award of the contract for Phase 1A and 2 is the subject of this
position paper. The Phase 1B contract is scheduled for award during June 1987.
The specifications and bid documents for the Phase 1A and 2 installation contract
were adverti sed April 2 and 8, 1987. Ten bi ds rangi ng f ran $7,541,086 to
$13,739,410 were received on May 4, 1987. A tabulation of the bids is shQlln in
Attachment 2. The engineers' estimate for the installation of the sewer pipe is
$15,205,682. Because of the size and complexity of this project, a second cost
estimate was prepared by an independent cost engi neer. The independent
construction cost estimate is $14,070,828. District staff, assisted by James M.
Montgomery Consulting Engineers, conducted a technical and commercial evaluation
of the bids received and have concluded that Western Utility Contractors, Inc. of
Pleasant Grove, Utah, is the lQllest responsible bidder with a bid of $7,541,000.
District Engineering staff will administer the construction contract. Engineering
services during construction, including shop drawing rev ie<<, will be provided by
James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers (JMM). As a subconsultant to Jt+1,
Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCe) will provide geotechnical engineering services
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
130211 .9/85
CWS
DRW
lJ;2uJ
?RAB
<<Jew
SUBJECTAUTHORIZE ~AAD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO WESTERN
UTIL ITY CONTRACTORS, INC., AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS
WITH PSC ASSOCIATES, INC., AND SHAPIRO OKINO HOM AND
ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, AND JAMES M. MONTGOfJfRY, AND AUTHORIZE
$9,630,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR PHASES 1A
AND 2 OF THE SAN RAMON V ALLEY TRUNK SEWER, PROJ ECT 4224A
POSITION
PAPER
PAGE 2 OF
DATE
May 15, 1987
9
during construction, including daily inspection during tunneling operations.
These services will be provided under Amendment No.3 to the agreement with JMM
for desi gn of the San Ramon Vall ey Trunk Sewer on a cost reimbursement basi s with
a cost ceiling of $189,000.
Testing Services will be required to verify soils compaction, concrete, pipe
bedding material, etc.. during construction. Four testing laboratories were
contacted for proposals and PSC Associates was selected by the District staff as
the most competitive in all aspects. The testing service will be provided under
an agreement with PSC on a cost reimbursement basi s with a cost ceil i ng of
$48,000.
A preconstruction survey will be required to investigate and record the conditions
of the existing facilities and structures within the immediate vicinity of the
construction work. Additional information on the need for and scope of the survey
is presented in Attachment 3. Three consultants were contacted for proposals and
Shapiro Okino Hom and Associates (SOHA) was selected by the District staff as the
most competitive in all aspects. The service will be provided under an agreement
with SOHA on a cost reimbursement basis with a cost ceiling of $100,000.
Because of the level of secretarial activities associated with construction
management and public relations on this large project, there is a need for one
secretarial position to supplement the current clerical staff. Authorization is
requested for one temporary secretari al positi on for a peri od of 14 months. An
authorization of $200,000 is being requested for recreational trail improvements.
The Board of Directors in approving this project last October determined that this
level of trail improvements was appropriate mitigation for construction impacts of
project on the communities in the San Ramon Valley. The funds for trail
improvements will be administered by the East Bay Regional Park District. These
funds are to be used for improvements to the recreational trail along the Southern
Pacific right-Of-way from Rudgear Road, Wal nut Creek, to Ensenada Drive, San
Ramon.
A total authorization of $9,630,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund is requested
for the construction contract, consultant services, administration of the
construction contract and facility. A contingency of 7.5 percent of the
construction contract price is requested as part of the authorization. This
contingency is intended to cover the cost of any change orders. A summary of the
funds being requested is included in Attachment 4.
To comply with the Cal iforni a Environmental Qual ity Act, the District prepared an
EIR for this project. The EIR was certified by the Board of Directors on
October 16, 1986.
---------
13028.9/85
~
SUBJECTAUTHORIZE JltlARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO WESTERN
UTIL ITY CONTRACTORS, INC., AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS
WITH PSC ASSOCIATES, INC., AND SHAPIRO OKINO HOM AND
ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, AND JAMES M. MONTGOMERY, AND AUTHORIZE
$9,630,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR FHASES 1A
AND 2 OF THE SAN RAMON VALLEY TRUNK SEWER, PROJ ECT 4224A
POSITION
PAPER
PAGE 3 OF
DATE
May 15, 1987
9
This project is included in the 10-year Capital Improvement Plan under the
Pri or1ty A category <Titl e: San Ramon Vall ey Proj ect-Phases 1, 2, and 3).
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of the construction contract for Phases 1A and 2
of the San Ramon Vall ey Trunk Sewer, Proj ect 4224A, to Western Uti lity
Contractors, Inc. as the lowest responsi bl e bi dder. Authorize the General
Manager-Chief Engi neer to execute Amendment No. 3 to the agreement with James M.
Montgomery Consul ti ng Engi neers, and agreements with PSC Associ ates and Shapi ro
Oki no Han and Associ ates Engi neers. Authorize a temporary secretari al positi on
for thi s proj ect for a peri od of 14 months. Authorize $9,630,000 fran the Sewer
Construction Fund for the construction and related costs.
---------
13028-9/85
ATTAa-ttlfNT 1
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA S~ITARY DISTRICT
S,6N ROON VAlLEY SEWER IMPROVEt-ENT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT reSCRIPTION
Introduction
The San Ramon Valley Sewer Improvement Project consists of the installation of
approximately nine and one-hal f miles of large diameter gravity trunk sewer and
two miles of force main. The trunk sewer and force main will be constructed from
Larwin Pump Station north to a point near the intersection of Danville Boulevard
and Rudgear Road in southern Wal nut Creek. At the northern poi nt, the proposed
trunk sewer will connect with both the existing 36-inch diameter trunk sewer that
now serves the San Ramon Valley and the proposed 66-inch diameter downtown Walnut
Creek bypass sewer. .
Sewer AliQnment
The sewer alignment is the Southern Pacific right-of-way for the enti re length of
the project. This alignment will cause the least disruption to traffic,
commercial, and other activities in the valley communities. The District entered
into an agreement in December 1985 with Contra Costa County to purchase a
20-foot-wide surface easement and a 12-foot-wide subsurface easement within the
railroad right-of-way. The cost for the San Ramon Valley portion of the sewer
easements was $2,959,000.
At the former rail road station site in Danville, the District does not have the
surface and subsurface easements that it has in the rest of the right-of-way. The
District does have the right to use an easement acqui red by Contra Costa County
for transit and underground utility purposes in this 1,500-foot-long section. The
County's easement is 30-feet wide. District's right would be second to the
County's rights in this section, and the sewer would be under County's planned
transit system whether that be a light rail system or a dedicated busway. Staff
evaluated three alignment options around the former station site. Two of the
options, Hartz Avenue and El Dorado Street, had significantly higher construction
costs and more impacts on the commun i ty than the County easement. The th i rd
ali gnment opti on, Rail road Avenue, has hi gher constructi on costs than the County
easement. Staff has deci ded to use the County easement as the al ignment around
the former railroad station based on lowest construction cost, fewer construction
constraints, and minimizing community impacts.
Sewer Size
The desi gn of the sewer is based on the ul timate buil dout popul ati on of the San
Ramon Valley and the infiltration/inflow criteria developed as part of the
Collection System Master Plan prepared for the District by Camp, Dresser & McKee.
The desi gn life of the sewer is 50 years.
The Board of Di rectors prev iously deci ded to use Growth Scenari 0 No. 4 as
presented in the project EIR for designing the sewer. Growth Scenario No.4
assumes an ultimate pipulation of 142,000 and development of the Dougherty Valley
subarea of the San Ramon Valley. Based on this population estimate, the gravity
sewer will have a nominal size of 42 inches in diameter from Norris Canyon Road to
Sycamore Valley Road. From Sycamore Valley Road to San Ramon Valley Boulevard,
the sewer has a diameter of 54 inches. From San Ramon Valley Boulevard north to
Danville and Rudgear Roads, the sewer will be 60 inches. The force main from
Larwin Pump Station to Norris Canyon Road will nominally be 16 inches in diameter.
Schedul e
Because of the size of the proj ect, the trunk sewer was i niti ally pl anned for
construction in three phases. The first phase is a four and one-half mile section
from La Serena Avenue in Alamo to St. James Court in Danville. The second phase
is approximately three miles long from La Serena Avenue north to a point near
Rudgear Road where the sewer will connect with the new Walnut Creek downtown trunk
sewer. The third phase will extend four miles from St. James Court south to the
Larwin Pump Station. The third phase includes two miles of force main.
Constructi on of the fi rst and second phases of the sewer w ill be duri ng 1987.
During prel iminary design, staff determined that the first and second phases had
to be constructed during 1987 to provide adequate sewage capacity. Because of the
amount of sewer bei ng install ed and to avoi d constructi on duri ng wet weather,
prepurchase of a major portion of the sewer pipe is underway. Prepurchase of the
pipe will allow installation to begin as soon as possible after award of the
constructi on contract. The th i rd phase of the sewer is currentl y schedul ed for
1989. The third phase is not needed as soon as the first and second phases.
Constructi on of Phase 3 may be deferred for two to three years if effort must be
devoted to other higher priority District projects.
Proj ect Cost Estimate
The design-level estimated project cost is $24.9 mill ion. This estimate consists
of:
Construction, including Contingency
Construction Management
Design
Total
$21,800,000
1,900,000
1,200.000
$24,900,000
The estimated cost of the three phases of the trunk sewer project are:
Phase 1 and 2
Phase 3
Total
$18,500,000
6,400,000
$24,900,000
ATTAa-tMENT 2
PROJ ECT 4224, SAN RAMON V N.LEY INTERCEPTOR
BID OPENING - 5/4/87 2 P.M.
Total Bid
Western Utility Contractors
$ 7,541,086
Mountain Cascade
8,464,641
MGM & Ebert J.V.
10,544,939
Pestana & Pestana J.V.
11,636,249
MJB Pipel ine
11 ,653,770
Haner J. 01 son
12,426,952
Steve P. Rados
12,509,980
Tri-State (Washington) Constr.
13 ,070,700
Constructors Pamco/Dorfman J.V.
13 ,530,558
C.R. Fedrick
13,739,410
ATTA(}f~NT 3
SAN RAMON VALLEY TRUNK SEWER PRoo ECT CDP 4224A)
PRECX>NSTRUCTION SURVEY PROORAM
Work Scope
BackQround:
Project 4224A consists of six miles of trunk sewer line at a depth of up
to 22 feet along the abandoned Southern Pacific Right-of-Way through
mostly residential and some commercial areas. In addition, the project
requi res sheet pil ing for about 2.S mil es of the sewer line and al so
includes a pipe tunnel of 380 feet in length under an existing building
and the San Ramon V all ey Boul ev ard.
For a project of this size and scope and at a relatively short
construction schedule, there is a high potential of damages to roads,
curbs, and properties. Although the contractor is required to indemnify
the District fran all cl aims, there might be cases when the Contractor
will dispute the cl aims and the District may bebl amed by the cities or
news media for the damages unless they can be resolved expeditiously.
Reasons for the ProQram:
1. Protection of District - The program serves to protect the District
in cases where the damage claims are disputed by the Contractor and
coul d be easily resol ved if records of the preconstructi on
conditions are available. The recorded information may also
el imi nate some frivolous cl aims to prevent them fran turni ng into
larger claims or creating a negative image for the District.
2. Protection of property owners - As evidence to the Contractor when
the proper owners have 1 egitimate cl aims.
3. Common practice - It is common for most construction projects to
record the preconstruction condition of the site or facilities prior
to the construction work. The District usually performs such
preconstructi on surveys with its own crew. However, due to the size
and complicity of the San Ramon Valley Trunk Sewer Project, it is
advisable that a consultant who has the manpower and is experienced
with preconstruction surveys be contracted to perform the work.
Experience of Other AQencies:
1. San Franci sco Cl ean Water Program - Uses consul tants to perform
surveys pri or to, and in some cases after, all maj or proj ects.
Discussions with several project managers of the Clean Water Program
indicated that the city of San Francisco values such survey programs
highly; however, historical records or information on the costs of
claims versus the survey programs are not readily available.
2. Sanitation District of Los Angeles County - Performs preconstruction
surveys by thei r own survey crews. The survey usually consi sts of
video, still photos, and notes; they usually do not go insi de of
houses. Upon questioning of claims, a 5-mlle sewer construction
proj ect (33-inch di ameter at 15 to 30 feet in depth) through a city
was referenced. There were approximatel y 15 cl aims i ncl udi ng four
on structural damages, and most of the cl aims were rej ected due to
the records.
3. East Bay Municipal Utility District - Performs preconstruction
surveys by their own survey crews.
4. Bay Area Rapi d Transit (BART> - Performed a survey by a consul tant
prior to the construction.
Scope of the Proposed Survey:
1. Danville Boulevard at M-l #3 to Sycamore Valley Road, inclusive,
survey the entire width of the abandoned Southern Pacific
Right-of-Way, including all creek crossings, cross roads, streets,
pavement, gutters, curbi ng, street si gns, li ght pol es, structures,
drainage ditches, and the fences along both sides of the
ri ght-of-way.
2. From Stone Valley Road south to Interstate 680 at Willow Drive,
survey the i nteri or and exteri or of all houses and structures,
including swimming pools, within 60 feet of the center line of the
trunk sewer. (Note: This is due to the possible impact from the
sheet piling activities).
Estimated Cost: $100,000
.illl1
(1)
( 2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
( 8)
(9)
ATTAOiMENT 4
SAN RAMON V ALLEY TRUNK SEWER PROJ ECT (D. P. - 4224A)
SUMMARY OF FUNDS
DESCRIPTION
Construction Contract
Contingency at 7.5 percent
Staging Area Leases (2 sites)
Water Main relocation by EBMUD
(4 locations)
Encroachment permit - related costs
Temporary construction easements/
relocations
Recreation trail improvement
Sub-total
Construction Management:
* Administration/Inspection
* Surveying
* Public Information Program
* Legal (including condemnation)
* Secretari al
* District Force account
Sub-total
Consultants/Contractors:
* Pre-construction Survey
* Engineering Services (JMM)
(including geotechnical services)
* Material Testing
* Secretarial/Clerical
Sub-total
(10) Miscellaneous
* Field office and expenses
* Furniture and Equipment
(11) TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED
Sub-total
TO TAL
$7,541,000
566,000
39,000
52,000
13 ,000
150,000
200,000
$8,561,000
426,000
65,000
55,000
50,000
9,000
35,000
$ 640,000
100,000
189,000
48,000
31,000
$ 368,000
35,000
26,000
$ 61,000
= $9,630,000
PERCEN T OF
CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT
COSTS
100.0
5.0
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.1
0.4
7.5
1.2
2.2
0.6
0.4
4.3
0.4
0.3
0.7
.
Centr~
Contra Costa Sanital District
-
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1
OF 16
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
NO.
IV.
BIDS AND AWARDS 2
SUBJECT
DATE
CONSIDER RESPONSIVENESS OF HU~QDT-WEDAG' S BID TO
SUPPL Y CENTRIFUGES FOR DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO. 3791,
DEWATERING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND CONSIDER AWARD
OF CON TRACT
RESPONSIVENESS
HEARING; BID AWARD
DETERMINATION
SUBMITTED BY
Bert L. Michalczyk
Senior En ineer
ISSUE: The Board must determine the responsiveness of Humboldt-Wedag's recent bid
for centri fuge procuranent on the Dew ateri ng System Improvements Proj ect and,
based on that fi ndi ng, award the contract to the lONest responsive bi dder or
reject all bids. This must be done within 40 days of the opening of bids.
BACKGROUND: The District is currently designing facilities for the Dewatering
System Improvanents Project. The project will provide facil ities capable of
dewateri ng the sl udge produced by 45 mill ion gallons per day average dry weather
flON. The heart of the systan will be four new horizontal sol id bowl dewatering
centrifuges which will be prepurchased by the District to expedite del ivery and
reduce cost. The District has completed a prequalification process to determine
which suppliers can meet the minimum requisite standards set for this project and
are, therefore, potenti al responsive bi dders. Humbol dt-Wedag and Sharpl es were
previously determined to be prequalified suppliers. Specifications for the
centrifuges were completed and sent to the prequal ified suppl iers. On April 21,
1987, bi ds were received from Humbol dt-Wedag in the amount of $1,504,374 and
Sharples in the amount of $1,515,700. The Engineer's Estimate for the prepurchase
contract is $1,850,000.
Following the bid opening, the Engineering Department conducted a technical and
commercial evaluation of the bids. Humboldt-Wedag's bid contained an unsolicited
1 etter dated April 21, 1987, addressi ng a purported ambi gui ty between General
Conditions 19 and 21 of the Specifications which are entitled Indemnity and
Insurance, respectivel y. The 1 etter was the onl y item in Humbol dt-Wedag' s bi d
which caused the Engineering Department to question the responsiveness of the bid.
Sharples bid contained only one minor clerical deficiency; the bid appears to be
responsive. On April 30, 1987, Di strict Counsel sent a letter to Humbol dt-Wedag
requesting written clarification of the intent of the April 21, 1987 letter.
Humboldt-Wedag then submitted a letter dated May 6, 1987, the intent of which was
to clarify their earlier letter. Subsequently, Sharples submitted a letter dated
May 7, 1987, stating Humboldt-Wedag's bid was nonresponsive. A final letter dated
May 12, 1987, was received from Humboldt-Wedag stating that they wish to rescind
their letters dated April 21, 1987, and May 6, 1987. Due to the importance and
complexity of the Humboldt-Wedag responsiveness issue, the matter is being
referred to the Board for consi deration. For reference, cop1 es of the various
documents are attached as indicated belON:
o Attachment A - Humboldt-Wedag's letter of April 21, 1987 - included in bid
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BARD ACT/ON
DRW
<J~
tpr RAB
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
1302,A.9/85
n1
BLM
fJ~
SUBJECT
CONSIDER RESPONSIVENESS OF HUMBOlDT-WEDAG'S BID TO
SUPPL Y CENTRIFUGES FOR DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO. 3791,
DEWATERING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND CONSIDER PilARD
OF CONTRACT
POSITION PAPER
PAGE 2 OF 16
DATE
May 15, 1987
o Attachment B - General Conditions 19 and 21
o Attachment C - District Counsel letter of April 30, 1987
o Attachment D - Humboldt-Wedag's letter of May 6, 1987
o Attachment E - Sharples' letter of May 7, 1987
o Attachment F - Humboldt-Wedag's letter of May 12, 1987
The issue before the Board is the responsiveness of Humboldt-Wedag's bid. Its
resol ution must center on the April 21, 1987 correspondence fran Humbol dt-Wedag
which was included in the bid. The Board must determine if the April 21, 1987
letter constitutes a clarification of an ambiguous section of the specification,
or whether it constitutes a variance fran the specifications. If it is determined
that the letter constitutes merely a clarification of the specifications, then it
would be appropriate for the Board to award the contract to Humboldt-Wedag. If it
is determined that the letter constitutes a variance, then the Board must
determine if that variance is material or nonmaterial. The determination on the
material vs nonmaterial nature of the variance is a question of fact and should be
made in light of the language of the specifications. If the letter does, indeed,
constitute a materi al vari ance, then the contract shoul d be awarded to Sharpl es.
If, on the other hand, it is determined that the letter constitutes only a
nonmateri al vari ance, then award shoul d be to Humbol dt-Wedag. The Boa rd, of
course, always has the authority to reject all bids. In the case where the Board
is unable to make a clear determination on the responsiveness of a bid, the
rej ecti on of all bi ds may be consi dered.
Board Determination
Appropriate Action
1. April 21, 1987 letter constitutes a
clarification
2. April 21, 1987 letter constitutes a
nonmaterial variance
3. April 21, 1987 letter constitutes a
material variance
4. Determination cannot be made
Award to Humboldt-Wedag
Award to Humboldt-Wedag
Award to Sharples
Rej ect All Bids
If the Board decides to award the contract to either Humboldt-Wedag or Sharples,
staff will prepare a position paper for consideration at the May 28, 1987 meeting
to all C1ii the Board to authorize funds for the proj ect as well as to authorize an
amendment to John Carollo Engineer's contract. If the Board decides to reject all
bids, the specifications will be modified, and bids will again be solicited fran
Humboldt-Wedag and Sharples. It is anticipated that the Board would then be asked
to award a contract for centrifuge acquisition at the June 18, 1987 meeting.
1..-_______..
13028-9/85
..,
SUBJECT
CX>NSIDER RESPONSIVENESS OF HUM3CllDT-WEDAG' S BID TO
SUPPL Y CENTRIFUGES FOR DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO~ 3791,
DEWATERING SYSTEM IMPROVE~NTS AND CX>NSIDER P-i/ARD
OF CX>NTRACT
POSITION
PAPER
PAGE
3
OF
16
D~1y 15, 1987
RECX>MMENDATION: Detenmine if the letter included in Humboldt-Wedag's bid
constitutes a clarification, a material variance, a nonmaterial variance, or
conclude that a determination cannot be made. Based on the detenmination,
authorize the appropriate course of action.
---------
13028-9/85
11
KHD
HUMBOLDT
WEDAG
ATTACHMENT A
April 21,1987
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, California 94553
Reference: Dewatering System Improvements
Centrifuge Procurement
District Project No. 3791
Bid Request No. E0727K
Bid Opening Date and Time - April 21,1987 @ 2:00 PM
Humboldt Wedag Proposal No. 173-018
Gentlemen:
Humboldt Wedag Division of Deutz Corporation is pleased to submit its bid
covering the supply of four (4) Horizontal Solid-Bowl Sludge Dewatering
Centrifuges and appurtenances as specified.
As regards the General Conditions of the Project, specifically General
Condition 19 (Indemnity) on pages GCOO-7 and GCOO-8 of the Contract
documents, Humboldt Wedag's indemnity is given with the understanding
that the District will promptly notify Humboldt Wedag of any claim,
demand, suit, or proceedings involving the District in which such
performance by Humboldt Wedag is alleged, and the District will permit
Humboldt Wedag to control completely the defense or compromise of any
such allegation and the District will render such reasonable assistance
in the defense thereof as Humboldt Wedag may reasonably require.
Humboldt Wedag's total liability pursuant to General Conditions 19 of
this Purchase Order shall in no event be greater than the aggregate sum
of $ 5,000,000. The insurance requirements set forth in General Condition
21 of this Purchase Order are provided to satisfy the full extent of any
and all Humboldt Wedag's liability for the occurrences covered by such
insurance. The District hereby releases Humboldt Wedag from all liability
for any loss or damage of the type covered by such insurance in excess of
the applicable insurance deductible. Humboldt Wedag shall not be
obligated to indemnify the District for any claim or demand first
asserted more than two (2) years after the initial start-up of the
centrifuges. Humboldt Wedag shall not be obligated to indemnify the
District with respect to any litigation commenced by any third party more
than three (3) years after the initial start-up of the centrifuges.
HUMBOLDT WEDAG · DIVISION OF DEUTZ CORPORATION
3200 POINTE PARKWAY, ATLANTA (NORCROSS), GEORGIA 30092 - USA
TELEPHONE 404/448-4748 TWX 810-766-4531 HUMDAG NRCS
A
KHD
HUMBOLDT
WEDAO
- 2 -
We trust you will find the above, which is made a part of our proposal,
to be self-explanatory.
Should you have any questions as regards either the contents of this
letter or our proposal, please contact the undersigned as required.
Very truly yours,
HUMBOLDT WEDAG
sd~~i<<e1.~
Genera 1 Manager
Process Equipment Group
SHS/iw
Enclosure
ATTACHMENT B
CC.19 ImlEHNITY
Seller hereby indemnifies and shall defend and hold harmless the District and
its employees or authorized representatives from and against any and all
suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedinKs, claims, demands, damages,
liabilities, interest, attorney's fees, costs, and expenses of whatsoever kind
or nature whether arising before or after completion of the work hereunder and
in any matter directly or indirectly caused, occasioned, or contributed to in
whole or in part, by reason of any act, omission, fault, or negligence whether
active or passive of Seller or of anyone actinK under its direction or control
or on its behalf in connection with or incident to the performance of this
Purchase Order.
Seller's aforesaid indemnity and hold harmless obliKations, or portions or
applications thereof, shall apply to the fullest extent permitted by law but
will not exceed $5,000,000 and in no event shall they apply to liability
caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the party indemnified
or held harmless.
GC.21 INSURANCE
Seller shall, at its sole expense, maintain in effect at all times during the
performance of its obligations hereunder insurance coverages with limits not
less than those set forth below Ivi th Insurers and under forms of policies
satisfactory to the District.
COVERAGE
MINIt1UM AMOUNTS ANT> LIMITS
(I) Worker's Compensation
Statutory requirements at location of work,
but not less than $100,000
(2) Employer's Liability
To extent included under Workmen's Compen-
sation Insurance Policy
(3) Comprehensive General
Liability
( i) Bodily Injury
(ii) Property Damage
$5,000,000 each occurrence
$5,000,000 each occurrence
S5,OOO 000 81 & PD Combined
(4) Comprehensive Automobile
Liability (Owned, Hired,
and Non-owned)
( i) Bodily Injury
(ii) Property Damage
$1,000,000 each occurrence
SI,OOO,OOO each occurrence
$1,000,000 Bl & PD Combined
The coverage shall contain the following indorsements:
(a)
Liability coverage shall contain a standard cross-liability endorsement
and, in addition, name as additional insureds the District, its Board,
officers, employees, and agents.
(b)
All coverages shall cont "I in an endorsement prec luding cance llat ion or
reduction in coverage before the expiration of thirty (30) days after the
District shall have received written notification thereof from the
insur~nce carrier.
(c)
Statin~ that such insurance, subject to all of its other terms and condi-
tions, applies to the liability assumed by Seller as stated in
GC.19 INDEMNITY.
Seller shall deliver a copy of the Certificate of Insurance to the Oistrict
within fifteen (15) calendar days after Notice of Award.
A TT ACH~1ENT C
.' . . ... ... .. o. .
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
_ .._n . .5019..I~ff ~~~~._~_a~i~~.~ ~5~_3-4392 (4151689-3890
April 30, 1987
IIOGEIl J. CJC:XAN
Gcnorll ~
CNaf Engorwet
~l tWNO
Counsellor ltIr DlIrrlct
141519"")1)
JO\'CE E. McMIUNI
kaeul)' oIlt1r DisUla
Mr. steven H. silverman
General Manager
Process Equipment Group
KHD Humboldt Wedag
3200 point Parkway
Atlanta (Norcross), GA 30092-USA
Re: Dewatering System Improvements centrifuge Procurement
District Project No. 3791
Bid Request No. E0727K
Humboldt Wedig Proposal No. 173-018
Dear Mr. silverman:
This letter is to inform you in writing that bids were opened
on April 21, 1987, and that your company's submittal was the
apparent low bid. Further, it is to inform you that your
letter setting forth additional clarifications of your propos-
al has been reviewed and raises several questions given the
requirements of a public entity open bidding process.
The District Board of Directors is required by law to accept
the lowest "responsible" bid or in the alternative to rejedt
all bids. To the extent the low bid is determined by the
Board of Directors to be nonresponsive to the bid specifica-
tions, then the Board of Directors has the discretion to
reject the nonresponsive bid and may thereafter accept the
next lowest "responsible" bid. The District Board of Direc-
tors has the responsibility to determine whether any qualifi-
cation to the bid proposal results in the proposal being
nonresponsive. To the extent that a qualification amounts to
a material -variation, rather than a clarification or a
non-material variation, the Board may determine that bid to
be nonresponsive. To the extent a variance from the specifi-
cation exists, the Board may only waive the variance and
accept the low bid with the variance if the Board determines
the variance to be non-material.
Your letter accompanying the proposal refers to several items
which could,' in the discretion of the Board, be determined to
be mere clarifications, non-material variances, or material
variances. The contents of your letter appears to be intend-
ed to address purported ambiguity in the interrelationc;hip
between General Condition 19 and General Condition 21. Un for-
;tCJ.i::..'
:J~" ~~~ ~~~a~;~r~~
. April 30, 1987
Page 2
H. Silverman
System Improvements Centrifuge Procure~ent
tunately, your letter does not provide the District with a
clear understanding of what you are suggesting. Therefore I
must request that you provide written clarification of the
intent of your April 21, 1987 letter (hereinafter referred to
as "the Letter"; copy attached). We request that you make
specific reference to whether the Letter was offered as your
interpretation of the existing bid specifications, or whether
your proposal is offered as an alternative, condition or
amplification to the existing specifications. In your writ-
ten response to this inquiry, please. indicate whether the
language contained in the Letter was intended as clarifica-
tion, your interpretation, or a proposed alteration to or
variance from the Equipment Prepurchase Specifications with
regard to the following issues:
o The'reciprocal responsibilities and duties of Humboldt
Wedag and the District with regard to the indemnity
provisions in General Condition 19, as set forth in the
second paragraph of the Letter.
o Your statement that "{T}he insurance requirements set
forth in the General Condition 21 of this purchase
order are provided to satiSfy the full extent of any
and all Humboldt Wedag's liability for occurrences
covered by such insurance. The District hereby releas-
es Humboldt Wedag from all liability for loss or damage
of the type covered by such insurance in excess of the
applicable insurance deductible."
o Your statement that "{H}umboldt Wedag shall not be
obligated to indemnify the District for any claim or
de~and first asserted r.ore than two (2) years after the
ini tial start-up of the centrifuges. Humboldt Wedag
shall not be obligated to indemnify the District with
respect to any litigation commenced by any third party
more than three (3) years after the initial start up of
the centrifuges."
A number of possible interpretations exist with regard to the
above referenced statements in your proposal. The question
arises as to whether your intent is to limit Humboldt Wedag's
indemnity responsibility under Condition 19 to $1 million for
occurrences arising under the automobile policy? Are you
attempting to limit the responsibility of Humboldt Wedag
under Special Condition 19 to loss or damage covered under
insurance provided pursuant to' Special Condition No. 2l? Is
Humboldt Wedag attempting to set up a period of limitations
for claims which it shall be responsible for under General
"
To: Mr. steven H. Silverman
Re: Dewatering System Improvements Centrifuge Procurement
April 30, 1987
Page 3
Condition 19 other than the claims period set up by the appli-
cable California statutes of limitation?
These questions are not intended to be exhausti ve of the
issues potentially raised by the Letter. Rather the
above-noted questions are merely provided to point out thr
nature of the District's uncertainty as to the intent of your
April 21, 1987, letter.
It will be necessary to receive your written response by May
7, 1987. Upon receipt of your communications, District staff
will evaluate whether a hearing on the issue of responsi ve-
ness of your bid will be necessary. It is our intention to
schedule a responsiveness hearing, if needed, for the Dis-
trict Board of Directors meeting on May 19, 1987, and 10 days
notice to the effected parties is required. Due to te fact
that Ken F. Laverty, the District Purchasing and Materials
Officer, is unavailable due to medical leave, please address
your correspondence to the District Secretary, Joyce
McMillan, at the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District offic-
es.
The comments set forth above are without regard to adequacy
and/or responsiveness of the bid proposal submitted by
Sharples. Serious evaluation of the Sharples bid proposal
for responsiveness need only be undertaken at such time as
the matters outlined herein are resolved as to the low bid.
Very truly yours,
KENTON L. ALM
Assistant District Counsel
KIA: pr
cc: David Hammond,
Sharples-Stokes
A
ATTACHMENT D
nEClt'EU
MAY - 7 1987
cccso
llf.l"'~:~~T.~~
KHD
HUMBOLDT
WEDAG
r~ay 6, 1987
~ l! t:,~ ~ ':I..I? ~ fQI
MA':' 7 1987
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, California 94553-4392
COC;&,i
gf...."r: ...t'1y (\~ y..e: .-"'~''f.(I~'
Attn.: Ms. Joyce E. McMillan, Secretary of the District
Reference: Dew~tering System Improvements Centrifuge Procurement
Di strict Project No. 3791
Bid Request No. E0727 K
Humboldt Wedag Proposal No. 173-018
Humboldt Wedag letter dated April 21, 1987
District letter dated April 30, 1987
Dear Hs. r'1cMillan:
Humboldt Wedag Division of Deutz Corporation (hereinafter referred to as
~Humbo1dt") included with its bid for the referenced project a letter
dated April 21,1987 (hereinafter referred to as "the Letter") which was
made a part of that proposal. Under cover of its letter dated April 30,
1987 the District has requested that Humboldt provide written clarifi-
cation as to the intent of the letter including "specific reference to
whether the Letter was offered as your sole interpretation of the existing
bid specifications, or whether your proposal is offered as an alternative,
condition or amplification to the existing specifications."
The following information is provided to clarify this subject:
A. The letter - Paragraph Two (2)
In its review of General Condition 19 (Indemnity) of the contract
documents (pages GCOO-7 and GCOO-8) Humboldt found the general intent
of that clause to be reasonably clear but likewise found the clause to
be lacking in detail as to the course of actions to be followed by both
the District and Seller in the event of a suit, action or claim, etc.
of the type covered by the clause; such details being frequently found
in other municipal contract documents of a similar nature. In the
absence of such detail as summarized above, Hunboldt found the clause
to be ambiguous and requiring amplification for the benefit of all
concerned parties.
HUMBOLDT WEDAG . DIVISION OF DEUTZ CORPORATION
3200 POINTE PARKWAY, ATLANTA (NORCROSS), GEORGIA 30092 - USA
TELEPHONE 404/448-4748 TWX 810-766-4531 HUMDAG NRCS
11
KHD
HUMBOLDT
WEDAG
- 2 -
As a result of its review of General Condition 19 and the conclusions
drawn by Humboldt therefrom, paragraph two (2) of the letter was
submitted to provide Humboldt's understanding as it pertains to
reasonable reciprocal responsibilities and duties of Humboldt and the
District in connection with the indemnity provisions stipulated in
General Condition 19. To the extent that the clause as originally
written is vague specific to this subject, Humboldt's inclusion of
paragraph two was intended as an amplification of the specifications
based upon Humboldt's understanding of the subject from similar
projects elsewhere; not as a proposed alteration to or material
variance from the specifications.
In connection with this general subject please know that Humboldt as a
reputable supplier does not disavow its obligations to its customers
but does require a reasonable approach to such matters. In the absence
of clearly defined reciprocal responsibilities and duties of Humboldt
and the District. Humboldt, or any supplier for that matter. could
conceivably be required to indemnify or hold harmless the District
against claims for which it had neither any prior knowledge or the
opportunity to defend itself in advance of a judgement against the
Supplier. Any denial of the basic right of Humboldt to conduct its own
defense of such claims would be considered by Humboldt to represent an
unreasonable requirement.
B. The letter - Paragraph Three (3)
I. In advance of bidding. Humboldt's review of potential liability
exposure centered around five (5) clauses within the body of the
contract documents. as follows:
1. GC.04 - liquidated Damages (Delay in Delivery)
2. Ge.07 - Warranties - Guarantees
3. GC.19 - Indemnity
4. GC.21 - Insurance
5. Special Requirements 0.6. - Liquidated Damages for Failure
to Perform
Insofar as the subjects of Liquidated Oamages (Delay in Delivery).
\~arranties-Guarantees and Liquidated Oa;nages for Failure to Perfonn
are each covered indivi~ua1ly elsewhere in the contract. Humboldt
interpreted clause GC.19 (Inde~nity) as excluding the above-
summarized matters and therefore. as limited to the subjects of
personal injury. property damage and other matters which are covered
by Humboldt's regularly maintained insurance programs.
11
KHD
HUMBOLDT
WEDAO
- 3 -
Further to this subject, clause GC.19 (Indemnity) stipulates in
summary that the Seller's indemnity of the ~istrict will not exceed
$ 5,000,000, corresponding to the insurance requirement for
Comprehensive General Liability as stipulated in clause GC.2l
(Insurance). Since the limit of indemnification and comprehensive
general liability insurance coverage stipulated were identical,
Humboldt logically and reasonably interpreted and concluded that the
primary concern of the ~istrict was to limit its own potential
liability exposure for personal injury and property damage arising
out of the operation of equipment supplied under the contract;
moreover that it 1S quite common for suppliers to maintain insurance
coverage for this purpose, Humboldt included.
We wish to point out that Hu~boldt has never had either a claim or
judgement against our company for bodily injury or property damage
as regards the sale of its centrifuges. Nevertheless, Humboldt
maintains siginficant insurance coverage for this purpose; well in
excess of the minimum amounts stipulated in the contract documents.
In order to resolve any remaining questions which may exist on the
part of the District relative to this matter, Humboldt offers, if
required by the District, to provide insurance coverage for bodily
injury and property damage in the su~ of Fifteen Million Dollars
($ 15,000,000) combined single limit and aggregate; such insurance
to name the District, its Board, officers, employees and agents as
additional insureds.
II.The Letter - Paragraph III - Last Two Sentences
In answer to a question raised in the District's letter of April 30,
1987, Humboldt's intention was not to set up a period of limitations
for claims relative to General Condition 19 other than the claims
period set up by the applicable California statutes of limitation.
The last two sentences of paragraph 3 of the Letter were inserted
because Humboldt inadvertently did not take proper note of GC.12
{Arplicable Law - Definitions). If California statutes are intended
as applicable to this contract, Humboldt has no objection and hereby
rescinds those sentences.
11
KHD
HUMBOLDT
WEDAG
- 4 -
We trust that information contained in this letter is sufficient to
satisfy your inquiry and provides ample clarification as to pertinent
subject matter. Please let us know at your earliest convenience should you
require additional information.
We look forward to your favorable reply.
Very truly yours,
HU!.\BOLOT WEOAG
~A~~
Stephen H. Silverman
Genera 1 ~'anage r
Process Equipment Group
SH S / i w
cc: J. Robbins
MCCUTCHEN, DOYLE, BROWN & ENERSEN
Attachment E
~.Cr! ,\ttffn
r- .;. .
"'H: 7 1987
FORMERL Y
~F/"b'" Cct:at I
'" '.' a"v,,~ .,.,,-= f1"~\lC'~.,
VAN VOORHIS & SKAGGS
COUNSELORS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO
SAN .JOSE
WASHINGTON. D.C.
SHANGHAI
1655 OLYMPIC BOULEVARD. THIRD FLOOR
WALNUT CREEK OFFICE
POST OFFICE BOX V
TELEX 34-0817
FACSIMILE GI. II AND III
(4IS) Q37-8004
CABLE ADDRESS MACPAG
WALNUT CREEK. CALIFORNIA 94596-1270
TELEPHONE (415) 937-6000
t1ay 7, 1987
HAND DELIVERED
central Contra Costa sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553-4392
Attn: Joyce McMillan, District Secretary
Dewatering System Improvements centrifuge Procurement
CCCSD Project No. 3791
Bid Request No. E0727K
Our Client Sharples-Stokes Division of
Pennwalt corporation
Our File No. 10305.03
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We represent the Sharples-Stokes Division of Pennwalt
Corporation which submitted a bid in response to the
above-referenced bid request issued by central Contra Costa
Sanitary District (nCCCSD").
We have reviewed a copy of the letter dated
April 30, 1987 from your counsel addressed to KHD Humboldt
Wedag, the apparent low bidder. We have also reviewed a copy
of the letter dated April 21, 1987 addressed to CCCSD from
Humboldt Wedag which expressly was made a part of its bid.
The procedure established by your counsel's letter
dated April 30, 1987 impermissibly gives to Humboldt Wedag an
opportunity to modify its bid. We object to this procedure.
The Humboldt Wedag letter does not seek clarification of the
specifications. Instead, it attempts to unilaterally modify
the general conditions and add certain provisions for the
benefit of Humboldt Wedag. Under the circumstances, Humboldt
Wedag's bid is clearly non-responsive and CCCSD should reject
it on that basis.
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
May 7, 1987
page 2
We note that all bidders were provided a formal
opportunity to review and comment on the bid documents before
bids were solicited. If Humboldt Wedag wished clarification of
the bid documents, it had ample opportunity to obtain such
during this preliminary review.
If CCCSD is considering any action other than
rejecting the Humboldt Wedag bid as nonresponsive, we request
that a hearing on the issue of the responsiveness of that bid
be set and that we be given notice and opportunity to appear
and comment on these issues.
Very truly yours,
~4d7~
~;for~M. Skaggs
cc: Kenton L. Alm, Asst. District Counsel (Hand delivered)
Andrea utecht, Esq.
SMS:ksclj18
Attach~ett ;,F
11
KHD
HUMBOLDT
WEDAG
~@e~ ~Y'rQ)
MAY 13 1987
eot."1l. .
Ii~DI'"' al'lV (\1'"" .~ '''t\~1
May 12, 1987
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553-4392
Attn.: Ms. Jocye E. McMillan, Secretary of the Discrict
Re.: Dewatering System Improvements Centrifuge Procurement
District Project No. 3791
Bid Request No. E0727 K
Humboldt Wedag Proposal No. 173-018
Humboldt Wedag Letter dated April 21, 1987
Humboldt Wedag Letter dated May 6, 1987
Dear Ms. McMillan:
This letter is to confirm our May 12, 1987 telephone conversation
in which Humboldt Wedag Division of Deutz Corporation formally
requested that Humboldt letters dated April 21, 1987 and May 6, 1987
be withdrawn from further consideration with respect to District
Project No. 3791, Bid Request No. EO 727 K. Humboldt Wedag further
requests that its bid be considered for contract award as if the
aforementioned letters, intended to amplify our understanding of
the contract documents, had not been submitted by us. Humboldt
Wedag's right of withdrawal of such letters was confirmed by
James L. Hazard, Counsel for the District.
We wish to confirm that Jon Robbins, Humboldt Wedag Regional Manager,
will be in attendance at the responsiveness hearing scheduled for
the District Board of Directors' meeting at 7:30 P.M. on May 10, 1987.
Very truly yours,
HUMBOLDT WEDAG
AfJpk.vid ./~
Stephen H. Silverman
General Manager
Process Equipment Group
SHS/iw
HUMBOLDT WEDAG · DIVISION OF DEUTZ CORPORATION
3200 POINTE PARKWAY, ATLANTA (NORCROSS), GEORGIA 30092 - USA
TELEPHONE 404/448-4748 TWX 810-766-4531 HUMDAG NRCS
.
Centre.. Contra Costa Sanltar) District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 1
POSITION PAPER
NO.
VII. BUDGET AND FINANCE 2
DATE
May 13, 1987
TYPE OF ACTION
SUBJECT
APPROVE ll-IE 1987-1988 EQUIPMENT BUDGET FOR INClUSION
IN ll-IE 1987-1988 DISTRICT BUDGET
APPROVE EQUIPMENT
BUDG ET
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Walter Funasaki, Finance Officer
Administrative/Finance & Accounting
ISSUE: Approval of the District's 1987-1988 Equipment Budget is requested.
BACKGROUND: The 1987-1988 Equipment Budget was submitted for review at the May 7,
1987 Board Meeting, and was calendared for approval by the Board on May 19, 1987.
The Board's Capital Projects Committee reviewed the 1987-1988 Equipment Budget with
District management prior to the submission of the budget on May 7.
The approved 1987-1988 Equi pment Budget will be schedul ed for adopti on with the
1987-1988 Personnel, Operations and Maintenance, and Capital Improvement Budgets on
June 18, 1987.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the 1987-1988 Equipment Budget for incl usion in the
1987-1988 District Budget to be adopted on June 18, 1987.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
~~.
1302A..9/85
WNF
PM
.
Centre.. Contra Costa Sanitar.. District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 1
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
May 19, 1987
NO.
VIr.
BUDGET AND FINANCE 3
SUBJECT
RECEIVE THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 1987-88 CAPITAL
IMPROVE~NT BUDGET AND THE DRAFT 1987 TEN-YEAR
CAPITAL IMPROVE~NT PLAN FOR REVIEW
DATE
May 1 1, 1987
TYPE OF ACTION
RECEIVE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT BUDGET
AND PLAN
SUBMITTED BY
Jarred Miyamoto-Mill s,
Associate Engineer
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
Engineering Department/
Planning Division
ISSUE: The Di strict's draft Fi sca1 Year 1987-88 Capital Improvement Budget and
1987 Capital Improvement P1 an have been prepared by staff and now requi re Board
rev i ew.
BACKGROUND: The draft Fi scal Year 1987-88 Capital Improvement Budget and the
1987 Ten-Year Capital Improvement P1 an are presented in two separate documents.
The Budget document is transmitted herewith, and the Plan will be submitted to
the Board at the May 19, 1987, meeti ng. The fi rst annual Capital Improvement
Budget is intended to present a broad, "bi g-pi cture" view of the costs and
impacts of the District's Capital Improvement Program and to establish near-term
project priorities. Detailed information for projects having activity and funding
authorizations requested in Fiscal Year 1987-88 is presented in the Capital
Improvement Budget document. This year's update of the Capital Improvement Plan
includes more discussion of population, interest rate and inflation projections,
the cash flow analysis, and the project planning process than last year's plan.
Information for projects which are anticipated to commence or which will have
funding authorizations requested beyond the next budget year is included in the
Capital Improvement Plan.
On May 5 and May 18, 1987, the Capital Projects Committee met to review the draft
Capital Improvement Budget and Pl an with District staff. The two documents are
submitted for initial review by the full Board at this time and are scheduled for
approval at the May 28, 1987, Board meeting. To facilitate review, staff will
make a presentati on descri bi ng the organizati on and content of each document at
the May 19, 1987, meeting. Adoption of the Fiscal Year 1987-88 Capital
Improvement Budget will be considered by the Board on June 18, 1987.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the draft Fiscal Year 1987-88 Capital Improvement Budget
and draft 1987 Ten-Year Capit~1 Improvement Plan for review.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
AJRt<J
j
.
Centr~_ Contra Costa Sanitar) District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 4
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
Ma 19, 1987
NO.
VIII.
SOLI D WASTE
1
CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF ORINDA-MORJli1A DISPOSAL SERV ICE,
INC. TO IMPlEMENT A REDUCED SENIOR CITIZENS RATE FOR
REFUSE COLLECTION IN ZONE 1 (ORINDA SERVICE AREA)
DATE
May H, 1987
TYPE OF ACTION
REFUSE COLLECTION
RATE OiANGE
SUBJECT
SUBMITTED BY
INITIA TING DEPT.lDIV.
Walter Funasaki, Finance Officer
Administrative/Finance & Accounting
ISSUE: Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. has requested authorization by the
Board of Di rectors to impl ement a reduced seni or citizens rate for resi denti al
refuse collection services in Zone 1.
BAa<GR<lJND: The refuse coll ector developed a senior citizens di scount program at
the request of the City of Orinda and submitted it for consideration at the
April 16, 1987 Board Meeti ng. The qualifyi ng requi rements of the di scount program
and the amount of discount were as follows:
o Senior citizens of the City of Orinda must be the heads of the
household, .and be 65 years of age or older.
o Participants must be in need of the reduced rate.
o An application form must be submitted to the refuse collector in which
the applicant will attest to meeti ng the head of househol d and age
qualifications. A copy of the application form is shown as Attachment
I.
o The senior citizens discount will be $3.00 per month for the first can
for full service customers, and $1.50 per month for the first can for
customers receiving less than full service.
During the April 16, 1987 Board Meeting two alternative methods of producing reduced
rates for all customers which woul d benefit senior citizens were presented by
District staff. The first method would reduce the rate for the first can by $3.00
and raise the rates of additional cans, and the second method would establish a
lower uni form rate for all cans. Because the lower rates under these al ternative
methods woul d be avail abl e to all customers, concerns of the Board regardi ng
supportabil ity of reduced rates for a particul ar group of customers, which is not
based on ability to pay, may be satisfied.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
WNF
PM
JLH
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
~.
130:!A..9/85
SUBJECT
CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAl SERVICE,
-INC. TO IMPLEMENT A REDUCED SENIOR CITIZENS RATE FOR
REFUSE COLLECTION IN ZONE 1 (ORINDA SERVICE AREA)
POSITION PAPER
PAGE 2 OF 4
DATE
May 11, 1987
The Board directed that a meeting be held with officials of the City of Orinda and
the refuse collector to review the alternative methods for achieving lower rates for
all single can customers, and its concerns regarding sustainability of the refuse
collector proposed discount program if challenged on legal grounds. A meeting was
held on May 6, 1987 at the offices of the City of Orinda between Board Member Sue
McNulty, Paul Morsen, Walter Funasaki, Council Members Bobbie Landers and Aldo
Guidotti, City Manager Tom Sinclair, and George Navone. The following revisions to
the proposed program were determi ned, and are presented for consi derati on by the
Boa rd :
o The general requirement that the participant be in need of the reduced
rate is replaced by a requirement that participants attest in the
appl icati on form, under penal ty of perj ury, that thei r annual gross
income from all sources is less than $25,000.
o The discount program will be implemented on a test basis for one year
to determine the number of participants and administrative problems
which are identified. The refuse collector will report on the number
of participants by service type, and the administration of the program
to the Board at the end of the test year.
o The refuse collector is willing to absorb the revenue reduction
resulting from the senior citizen discount program for the initial
year.
District Counsel believes the inclusion of the maximum gross income qualification in
the application form provides sufficient legal support for the discount program.
A revised application form which incorporates the modifications described above is
shown as Attachment II, with changes highlighted in bold-face type.
The senior citizen discount program would require the balance of May and the month
of June to promote customer awareness and to administer enrollments. The discounted
rates would be effective July 1987, and be incorporated in the July 1,1987
comprehensive rate schedul es to be developed as a resul t of the current rev iew of
the refuse collector's rate application which is in progress.
REC(MENDATION: Consider the request of Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. to
implement a senior citizens discount program in Zone 1, effective July 1987, for a
test period of one year.
:......------.
13026-9/85
ATTACHMENT I
FILING DATE:
(
APPLICATION FOR
SENIOR CITIZENS REDUCTION ON GARBAGE RATES
(ORINDA SERVICE AREA)
Orinda/Moraga Disposal Service will allow a reduced rate for ga~bage
collection to qualified senior citizens who are in need of this program. The reduction is
$3.00 per month and applies oaly to basic residential services. Senior citizens already
receiving leAs tha~ basic residential services and rates will receive a $1.50 reduction per
mOLth. Senior citizens who wish to apply for ~he garbage rate reduction may complete this
application and mail it to:
Ori~da/Moraga Disposal Service
P. O. Box 659
Orinda. Ca. 94563
Telephone: (415) 254-2844
NAME:
LAST
FIRST
INITIAL
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
SERVICE ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
DATE OF BIRTH
TELEPHONE
(
QUALIFYING SENIOR CITIZENS
Applicant ~ust be:
(a) a customer in good standing of this company and the sole user of the
garbage service (other than legal dependents). and
(b) sixty-five years of age or older.
PROOF OF AGE
A copy of any of the following documents will generally be accepted as satisfactory
proof of age:
<a) A coVy of your Medicare Card;
(b) Hospital Birth Record;
(c) Church Baptismal Record. established during the first few years of life.
showing the date of birth;
(d) Document issued by the Social Security Administration clearly showing
eligibility for benefits as of age 65 or older:
(e) Any other document proving you to be over 65.
It is intended that this rate would be used by Seniors who are in need of the reduced
rate. Please remember the differential cost or the amount of discount will be borl:e by non-
seniors. Please do no~ use this service unless necessary.
I. the undersigned. do certify that! am the sole user of garbage service at the
above address (except for my legal depe~der.ts). that I am over the age of 65 aud that all the
above information is accurate and true to the best of my k~owledge.
DATE
SIGNATURE
ATTACHMENT II
FILING DATE:
APA..ICATION FOR
SENIOR CITIZENS REDUCTION ON GARBAGE RATES
(ORINDA SERVICE AREA)
Orinda/Moraga Disposal Service will allow a reduced rate for garbage collection to
qualified senior citizens who are in need of this program. The reduction is $3.00
per month and applies only to basic residential services. Senior citizens al ready
receiving less than basic residential services and rates will receive a $1.50
reduction per month. Senior citizens who wish to apply for the garbage rate
reduction may complete this application and mail it to:
Orinda/Moraga Disposal Service
P.O. Box 659
Orinda, CA 94563
Telephone: (415) 254-2844
NAME:
LAST
FIRST
INITIAL
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
G
I
I
SERVICE ADDRESS
CITY
L-I
I
STATE
ZIP
I
I
TEL EPHONE
DATE OF BIRTH
QUALIFYING SENIOR CITIZENS
Appl icant must:
(a) be a customer in good standing of this company and be the head of the
household receiving garbage service
(b) be 65 years of age or older.
(c) receive an annual gross i~e f~ all sources of less than $25,000.
PROOF OF AGE
A copy of any of the following documents will generally be accepted as satisfactory
proof of age and Ilust be subllitt8d with this fo...:
(a) A copy of your Medicare Card;
(b) Hospital Birth Record;
(c) Church Baptismal Record, established during the first few years of
life, showing the date of birth;
(d) Document issued by the Social Security Administration clearly showing
eligibility for benefits as of age 65 or older;
(e) Any other document proving you to be 65 years of age or older.
ATlEST
I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury, that I am the bead of the household
receiving garbage service at the above address, that I am 65 years of age or older
and meet the i~e limitation indicated above, and that all the above information
is accurate and true to the best of my knowledge.
DATE
SIGNAlURE
SSS/Pos Paper/o-M Sr Cit