The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 04-19-84 ((sD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IV. HEARINGS 1 4/19/84 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE Ap r ill 0, 1984 SUBJECT CONDUCT A PUBL I C HEAR I NG TO CONS I DER THE REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION BY ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. TYPE OF ACT ION PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY Walter N. Funasaki INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Finance Officer Administrative Department ISSUE: A Public Hearing has been set for April 19, 1984 to consider an application by Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. for refuse collection rate increases in Zones 1 (Orinda) and lA (Moraga). BACKGROUND: Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. submitted an appli- cation for a general rate increase which is requested to be effective Ap r ill, 1 984. The refuse collector's rate increase application and the District staff analysis thereon were submitted to the Board of Directors on April 5, 1984. Included in the staff analysis of the rate increase application were reviews of the following related matters which are being presented for consideration by the Board of Directors: o During the Public Hearing for the prior rate increase application in May 1983, the Orinda Association requested consideration of an increase In residential refuse collection service in Orinda to include one can of trimmings weekly and three seasonal cleanups annually. o In July 1983, a resident of Moraga requested that the refuse collector be required to provide self-addressed remittance envelopes with the quarterly billing statements. The Board determined that the request should be considered in conjuction with the present rate application review. Notices of the Public Hearing have been publ ished in the Contra Costa Times on two separate days and on a slngle day in the Contra Costa Sun. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a Public Hearing on April 19, 1984 to receive public comment on the application for increases in refuse collection rates by Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc., and establish such rates and service levels as are considered appropriate. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR SOARD ACTION PM ANALYSIS OF ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION Refuse Collector's Rate Application Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. (Orinda-Moraga) submitted its application for refuse collection rate increases on March 6, 1984. The rate application has been prepared using financial statement formats suggested by Price Waterhouse following its review of the District's refuse collection rate setting procedures. Orinda-Moraga has requested an 11.7% increase in rates effective April 1, 1984. The requested increase would raise the basic residential rates for existing service levels to $8.65 from $7.75 for Orinda customers, and to $9.20 from $8.25 for residents of Moraga. A copy of the refuse collector's rate application has been appended to this analysis. Rate increases granted to Orinda-Moraga during the last five years are summarized below: Effective Date % Increase Service Category May 15, 1983 1982 April 1,1981 Ap r ill, 1 980 January 1, 1979 July 1, 1978 8.6 Not Applied For 7.7 16. 11 6.42 9.28 All All All All All Staff Analysis District staff has performed an analysis of the refuse collection rate application. The overall objective of the analysis was to evaluate the reasonableness of forecasted operating expenses reported in the rate application and, after giving effect to rate setting adjustments, compute the percentage increase in revenue required to achieve a 95% operating ratio. The results of the staff analysis are shown in the following attachments: Attachment 1 - Rate Adjustment Analysis. The percentage increase in revenue required to produce a 95% operating ratio based on fore- casted expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 is presented. The effect of the percentage increase computed of 9.67% is shown in the revised representative rates on Attachment 2. Attachment 2 - Schedule of Present and Revised Monthly Rates. Current and revised monthly rates for representative services are presented. The revised rates are based on the percentage increase computed on Attachment 1. -1- Attachment 3 - Income Statement, Adjusted for Rate Setting, for the year ended December 31, 1983. The adjustments for rate setting are identified on this income statement. The cumulative adjustment for rate setting of $90,000 results in the restatement of a $57,000 loss per books to a $33,000 net income. Attachment 4 - Forecasted Income and Expenses. The forecasted income and expenses for the fiscal years ended March 31, 1984 and March 31, 1985 are presented. Forecasted expenses are shown net of rate setting adjustments. Variances in forecasted revenue and expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1984 prepared in the prior year rate application and the current rate application are shown. Variances between the forecasted expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 and March 31, 1984 are also presented. Attachment 5 - Explanation of Major Changes in Operating Expenses. Total expenses are forecasted to increase by 6.0% for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 compared to forecasted expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1984. Major increases or decreases are explained in this attachment. Attachment 6 - Schedule of Residential and Commercial Service Rates for Neighboring Communities. Attachment 7 - Officers' Compensation. Attachment 8 - Increased Residential Services for Orinda. The incremental expense of providing an increased level of service to Orinda residents is described. Attachment 9 - Incremental Expense of Providing Return Remittance Envelopes. Attachment 10 - Return on Equity Computation of Percentage Increase in Forecasted Revenue Required. Related Party Transactions Acme Landfill Corporation Dividends - The stockholders of Orinda- Moraga, and other refuse collectors operating in central Contra Costa County, own the Acme Landfill Corporation. As the stock ownership in Acme is held in the names of the stockholders of Orinda-Moraga, dividends of $9,000 in 1983 and $9,000 in 1982 were received by them directly and are not recorded in the refuse collector's financial statements. Dumping fees of $123,000 are forecasted to be paid to Acme by Orinda-Moraga during the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985. A review of dumping charges of other nearby dump sites disclosed that Acme's charges are among the lowest. -2- Notes Payable to Stockholders - Notes payable to Frances Navone, President, totaled $76,616 as of December 31, 1983. A five year note payable with a balance of $56,863 is secured by a truck and bears a 13% interest rate. The balance of the notes payable are noninterest bearing. Conclusion Operating results for the April 1, 1983 through March 31, 1984 fiscal year will not produce a 95% operating ratio because currently fore- casted operating expenses are $79,000 higher than the expenses fore- casted for this period in ~he prior year's rate application. As the 8.6% rate increase authorized effective April 1, 1983 was based on the lower forecasted expenses, revenues to be realized will be in- sufficient to produce a 95% operating ratio, in spite of a current revenue forecast which is $19,000 higher than the revenues forecasted last year. As shown on Attachment 4, the higher than forecasted expenses are primarily within the wages and payroll related expense accounts. Operating expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 are 6.0% higher than currently forecasted expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1984. The expense increases are primarily the result of wage and related benefits increases negotiated in a union contract and the addition of a maintenance employee. On the basis of its review of the forecasted expenses, District staff considers the expense forecasts to be reasonably stated. The assumptions underlying the forecasted incremental monthly expense of $1.62 per customer for an expanded level of service to Orinda residents described in Attachment 8 have been reviewed for reasonableness. However, because of the uncertainty in the level of usage, and the customer base over which the incremental expense is to be allocated it . ' IS recommended that the $1.50 per month charge indicated in the survey form be regarded as a reasonable surcharge to be assessed if the increased services are instituted. -3- ____.__.__.___..'" ...J REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. Rate Adjustment Analysis Forecasted Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 1985 Actual revenue for the year ended December 31, 1993 Forecasted revenue for the fiscal year ended March 31, 198~ Forecasted operating expenses. as adjusted, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 Forecasted revenue required to produce 95% operating ratio Add: Forecasted franchise fee Forecasted revenue required, adjusted for franchise fee Increase in forecasted revenue required for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 Percentage increase in forecasted revenue required Percentage increase applied for -4- Attachment 1 $1,825,065 1,864,000 1,935,000 2,036,800 7,500 2,044,300 $ 180,300 9.67% 11.7% REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. Schedule of Present and Revised Monthly Rates for Representative Services Based on Results of Staff Analysis Or i nd a Present Residential Service: (1) 1 Can Weekly $7.75 4.25 Each Additional Can Weekly Multi-Apartment Service: Per Unit Per Week 6.45 Each Additional Pickup Per Week 1.05 Commercial Service: 1 Can Weekly 9.65 4.25 Each Additional Can Weekly Bulk Service: Cubic Yard - 1 Per Week 36.85 64.95 2 Cubic Yards - 1 Per Week Revised $8.50 4.65 7.05 1. 15 10.60 4.65 40.40 71 .25 Moraga Present $8.25 3.80 6.45 1.05 9.65 4.25 36.85 64.95 Attachment 2 Revised $9.05 4.15 7.05 1. 15 10.60 4.65 40.40 71.25 Note: (1) Moraga residential service includes one 32-gallon can of garden trimmings per week and three refuse cleanups per year; Orinda service does not include these additional services. -5- Attachment 3 Page 1 of 2 REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. Income Statement, Adjusted for Rate Setting Year Ended December 31, 1983 (000 Omitted) Actual December 31, 1983 Per Application Adjustments Dr (Cr) As Adiusted Revenue Residential Commercial and Drop Boxes $1 ,292 533 1 ,825 $1 ,292 533 1 , 825 Operating Expenses Disposal Expense: Dump i ng Truck & Equipment - Variable: Parts & Materials Tires & Tire Repair Fuel License & Other Expense 121 121 5 ( 5) 634 634 110 110 133 133 877 877 57 49 106 114 (114) 171 (65) 106 210 210 45 45 80 80 13 13 348 348 8 8 1 1 1 1 9 9 19 19 Franchise Fees Driver and Helper Expense: Wages Employee Benefits Payroll Taxes & Worker's Compo Truck & Equipment - Fixed: Depreciation - Truck & Equip. Truck Rent Vehicle Repair Expense: Wages Employee Benefits Payroll Taxes & Worker's Compo Parts & Suppl ies -6- Operating Expenses (Conttd) Other Direct Expense: Wages Employee Benefits Payroll Taxes & Worker's Compo Insurance Yard Rent & Maintenance Customer Claims General and Administrative: Salaries - Officers Salaries - Clerical Employee Benefits Payroll Taxes & Worker's Compo Ut i 1 it i e s Postage & Office Supplies Legal & Accounting Bad Debts Amortizations - Franchise Cost Advertising & Promotion Automotive Expense Dues & Subscriptions Off i ce Rent Taxes General Expense Total Operating Expenses Income (Loss) From Operations Other Income and Expense: Interest Income Other Income Gain or Loss on Disposal of Assets Interest Expense Insurance Ref. and Adjust. Amortization - Franchise Cost Total Other Income Income (Loss) Before Taxes Provision for Income Taxes Net Income (Loss) Attachment 3 Page 2 of 2 Actual December 31, 1983 Per App 1 i cat ion $ 34 5 3 51 12 4 109 111 30 17 11 5 1 3 10 4 5 8 5 7 1 6 233 $1,883 (58) 1 5 6 (12) 9 (8) 1 (57) $ (57) -7- Adj ustments Dr (Cr) 8 ill (70) $ 90 8 (8) 12 8 20 As Adj usted $ 34 5 3 51 12 4 109 111 30 17 11 5 13 10 4 5 8 5 7 1 6 233 $1 ,813 12 1 5 6 9 21 33 $ 33 r::: -- . CIO ...... U'\ N...... ~ .::t.::t 0_ "'" -0 U'\ U'\ U'\ U'\ -.0 ......... ~U CU ~ 0 U'\ III U CIO ~ C E 0'\ C III .r.- U CU x .... + ro .... t7l ro .... III - ......> <l:c.. ......-- 0'\ ..:I' -.0 r-. .r. ~- ...... U 0 .... U III ~ X "0 ~ ~ ~ 2~ c 0 CU ... -Ill .... III C ..:I' 0'\ 0 ...... L C::.., Q,) III CU 0 -.0 .::t -0 -0 CU--UI-X ...... > a;) L. UJ ~CU - c.. III U III ~ .... ~j III III ...... -0 -.0 -...... N -- U N r-._ ..:I' ...... N r-. CU -0 _ _ 0'1 ~ .... 0 ~ -- ...... -- U'\ CIO 0 r-. U'\ 0'1 -0 ...... 0'1 ~~ "'" ~.::t_ CIO ............ N U ~O z z u 0 III ell CU III U I- III ~ C <I: ... C C III U U CU 0. X .... ~r .... > X III c.. a:: ... -> ~U'\ c.. ... -- 0'1 CIO ...... 0'\ N <I: V> "0 "0 -- . ~N_ C CU U'\_ ... .... ro .... ~O I- <I: .... u <I: V> CU ~ a:: 0 E E c.. 0 0 Z V> U 0 C 0 0 0 ~ "l 2~ I- .e CIO .....~CU u <I: "0 0'\ OC:IIl ... C) CU _ CU c: .... <I: .... .... > ell CION 0 r-. NO r-. ..J a:: III -- c: ell 0 0 ro _..:I'eIla::X 00'10 -0 U'\ -0 U'\ U X U M-U LIJ r-.NO ...... I CU ....- ... <I: .... L QJ to L- V> 0 0 U c...... 0 ::l Z ~ .... 0 ~ III I- ... a:: X a:: 0 "0 CU l "0 .... O.::t N NO .::t -0 U'\ c: .... III N.::t N ..:1'- ...... CIO 0 ... c: III ...... U'\ -0- _ CIO -- ell U .......... .... ell Ill~ .... .... in- CU ~ 0 >- u~ III U III ~~l ~ o c: III CU c: .... > CU 0'\ _ 0 U'\ -.0 CIO r-._ ...... c: ell .0 . . .0"" CU a:: X _ CIO 0 -.0 U'\ U'\ N U ... r-.N 0 ...... .::t ....- ell III .... c......O 0 I- III 2~ "0 ~ i< i< or CU 0 .:r 0'1 _ CIO CIO ...... .... .- .... ......0 _ U'\ 0'1 III > ro -0 _ III ell ell - U....> eIlc.. .... o c: ~ .- III .... ... Ii. Ii. ..... I "0 ell :; ~ Ii. c: C c: ~ III I" e. CU xu o CT III X X lD ro ~ .- ... Ill- CU ... ... "0 X I- III CT ... .- III X c:... CU ... ro... .....- 0 - t7l ro CU- .... c: UlD .; ['; .... >- ell ... .. U~ ell CU .... ....eIllllOO~ "0 CU U ~"OeIlo. ell 0. ell - .... .... ~ CU .... ~ ~.;;; ~ e Ill. E >-t710.>0 uxo..... .... III ~ .-curoEro, ~.- CUI- >CUOO CU.- 0 L.%3wQ.. ....~ 0 cua::u 0 0 I- a:: 0 -8- ~-,--------- ...__. ---- ..:r ..:r ... c:.... Gl 0 ]M v I'D CIl ... tn ... I'D <0.. ,..... " ~ Gl OIl U ~ ~ 2: L. I'D M:> .... ~ o CIl -OIl ... CU c: L. c:...Gl CUOOGlO CIl VI-X >- L. W Gl 0.. ,..... M - ~ o u III OIl V ~ c: c: CU XL. CU -:> "'- o u ....... ..:r Gl 00 .....~Ill C1\ OC:OIl III c: ...> C III _..:r III a: X M 1.1 W ..- 1II CU L A.'" 0 ~ ~ V L I'D 2: 'Q III 'Q C W ... ...0Il C CU Gl V L. Gl L. L. ~ 0 U"- ,..... "M CU ....... III >- CU V OIl "- .... ~ III o c: OIl III c: ... > III NCGl ....... III a: X 1.1 W L- Gl CU L. 0....0 o I- OIl 'Q ~ III 0 ,.........- '- _OIl>CU CU Gl III UL>- III 0.. L. o C "- .- ..:r .;.. r-:- -.0 _0 C1\ 0 N -.0 N "0 "0 - MO ..:r0 _0 - '\0 'r __ .L 'i _ -.0 C1\ -.0 M ,,-.0 N -.0 N..:rN..:r--.oC1\ . . . . . . . N ... OIl CU V III L. o "- 00 NOO N-.o ..:r_..:r _ M_ - ~~~~N~f " 00 "": - - C1\ M o '" N ,..... _0 ,.....,..... ,..... ~ ~"":~~~~. 00_-.00"'0 N_-.o..:r"O .................. .........- C1\ 0 .......0 ,..... _N ....... ,.....,..... ,..... N_NNMM", .............. ....... C"i"'\.:t M..:t - C'f'\ 0"\ . . . . . . . _ -.0 0 -.0 M ,,-.0 N -.0 N N 000 _'" MO..:r _ f""\_ .- - '" 00 '" " - '<D '" M N C1\ .;.. '" - . . -Ie -Ie C't'\ """(1) _.::r' o N_ -.0 N 00 -.0 - ..:r"'NMNN N M_N "C1\M"'..:r MO N N OIl ~. III ... . ~ III ~ ,OIl ~.- > ~~S ~~ c:8~ ~t ... -XU ~u 0 tn OIl'" 'QCUI I....CU ~v .-IllC:CIll.oC ~~OIl~OIl~~I-~~~~<~~~~2~~: OIlGlIllIllVGl-L.-GlIll~.oN~-"'''' ~~~~~~=~J~g~_~~gt~~~801l~ L.-CU....CUIll .L.._.......CU LCUGlOOOll.-1ll1ll III e _.... _ _ ~ >- 0'- OIl.... tn'Q j L > L ... Ill..... X c: C'QI'DOCUUeI'D,...OOIllCU "-'Qo..~~""CUIll Ill<~ ~ WOO ~A. ~= < <QOI-~ ~ .-=lQ.:. III OIl c: 8- X W 0#" 0#" ... 1:'" <<10 14- U Illtl ...01 ...111 <A. r:::: o~ -0 ...... ... tI Lt\ III U Q) :JI: en I: III lit ... III .....> ..... ~cn~ u......o ... ... III ...... lit ~ L~~:~I: <<I......u~ x >- ... LLI tI A. III U III .... ,.... f;\ tI III U :J I: I: III lit ... III -> 0#" eo en "'~l o I: III tI I: ... > tI I: tI tI CIl: X U LLI ...- tI III ... A.'" 0 ~ _4- ..... .z: U ... III lit ~ tI ~ I: LLI ..."", III tI >- ... ... III I: III tI U ... tI ... ... :J 0 ....... III U III .... tll ...:JtI o I: III tI I: ... > I: tI N tI CIl: X U LLI ...- tI III ... A.'" 0 o ~ III ]5 ....._ L. III > III III tl tI U"'>- tlA. ... o I: ....- H o ..;. .". o o o o ... III III U tI ... o .... '" 0#" en H Lt\ ~ en ,.... o o o '" "" cO o o o ..... '^ ,.... 01 I: ... :! S~ tl ... 0 0. ....- o ... _ .S!:! III 0.0 tI ...xuo. OLLl 1:0 ~ '" o co~ ~f ... ..... en cor .....- ...... _ Lt\ -0 '" 0'\ 'Or -- ...... III III~ ~ gQ;!i", o "'......... UI!IIII11t1l:o. l:o~<CIl:I!~ U....I...tI... "'1: OUIII... cn-L. C::JU'I tI 0 lll.....tI .......... Q.L.~L. ... tltIl:lII:J<tI tI o.....z:.-- III ... .z: XI:"'IllCl 1:.01: "'LLI-Ot:l o .0 ft I: -11- tI ~e ~~ IIIU ...X o I: III ....1- I: ~ ...... 0 Sf en U'I ~ Otl-O ...x>u U tI III 0 I: I:lD~"'- A. Lt\ 0#" Lt\ '" eo Lt\ Lt\ '" Lt\ 0#" o ,.... Lt\ ~ U I: ... tI Z Lt\ Lt\ ';;< "'...... ......z < << ...... ............ z zz ..... Lt\ 0#" ,....eo '" '" 0'\ - < ...... z << ............ zz eo en ..... 00 Lt\ '" 0#" < ...... z << ............ zz eo 0'\ ..... oeo Lt\ '" '" '" III ... tI III III < ~ tI tI- x.o ....01 I: ... III tI~ Z < ...... z << ............ zz ... III III U tI ... o .... << ............ zz ... I: tI ... ... ::I U tI .z: ... I: eno 0'\ Lt\ 0'\ ... III E ... o .... ... I: :J o U U III ~ tI III > tI ... GI .z: ... << ............ zz .z: ... :l >- ... << ............ zz .0 III ... III 0. S U ... o ... III GI Lt\ ..... NcO en ... o 01 tI ... III U << ............ zz III ... I: ::I o U U III :l GI I: o ... ~ tl I: o .....0 ... ... o 0. 0. III I: GI III .J:l . . 0#" Lt\ _ 0'\ III ... 0 1Il- Ill'" III III <CIl: III > III .z: >- ... >-- ... :J -IT :JLLI IT ~ LLlI: I:tl III 01 OOX-I: en -..a- ...EE....g,~ III 1>::J:J....,c.... ~ 1:......tlIlIGI .z: :lllltlZ~o. ~ o a:: a:: O-tc III ... I: :J ~ III Attachment 5 Page 1 of 2 REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. Explanation of Major Changes in Operating Expenses Forecasted Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 1985 The following are explanations of major changes in forecasted expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 compared to the forecasted expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1984 which are presented on Attachment 4: Driver and Helper Wages - The forecasted increase of 5.3% is primarily the result of scheduled garbagemen's wage increases of 4.5% to 5.5% negotiated in a new multiyear Teamsters Union contract. Driver and Helper Employee Benefits - The forecasted increase of 5.5% is primarily the result of increased employer contributions to health and pension plans provided in the new Teamster Union contract. Driver and Helper Payroll Taxes and Worker1s Compensation - The forecasted increase of 5.2% is primarily the result of in- creases in wages. Truck & Equipment - Depreciation - The forecasted increase of 16.2% is based on the acquisition of two new trucks during the fiscal year. Truck and Equipment - Parts & Materials - The forecasted decrease of (5.4%) is primarily the result of anticipated expense reductions achieved through implementation of a maintenance program under a full-time maintenance employee. Vehicle Repair Expense - Wages Vehicle Repair Expense - Employee Benefits Vehicle Repair Expense - Payroll Taxes & Worker1s Compensation The forecasted increases of $18,000, $3,000 and $5,000 in these respective accounts are the result of the employment of an individual during the last half of the prior fiscal year into a newly established position for maintaining the refuse collector's trucks and equipment. The wages and related employee benefits and payroll expenses for a full year are provided in the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985. -12- Attachment 5 Page 2 of 2 Other Direct Expense - Wages - The forecasted increase of 5.9% provides for an increase on a portion of the salary of one of the officers of the refuse collector who is active in the field collection operation. General and Administrative Salaries - Officers - The forecasted increase of 5.4% is the result of projected salary and bonus payments to officers. General and Administrative Salaries - Clerical - The forecasted increase of 6.7% is the result of salary increases projected for clerical employees. -13- ~ N .. c'" 1~ u II .. w'" .. II CA. .. .. ~~I i ~ N I C : C ..... ... ... ~ ~ ~C o. 0.. ~ '" ~ ..... .. Ul o o. ... ... .. ... .. .: 'a .. 'a ~ U C Ul .. u .. > ... .. '" '" ... to- i u '" ~ a:: ~ :z: '" ... z a:: e '" ... i ::It .. .. ::a .. ~ '5 S U'I-c: ....... 'a -... C"'a NO~ ... ... :>> a:: ... '" - .. C .. ... l5 C ~ .0 - .. ii"'::lt ~ "'.... c.. CO NO::a .... .,. ~ Ii ... o '" ... a:: .. > .. .. ...... U..a:: .. .. ...",o. ... 0 ... ... .. Ul ... u Ii o. ... o. o u 1 .. ! c :;:, Oft Oft co co .... .... .,. ... co ..... Ci ..... ~ I......v-.J .... ~ Ci Co 1 .2 .. >- .1 __ :z: .. c .. .. : ~ ... H i .<:l o. ~ U i .<:I ... ~ u .. .. o ~ .;.. 8 ..; o ~ .;.. ... co ..... Ci ..... Ci .. ~ .. >- .1 ;: .. c .. .. : ~ s .. >- .. ... .<:I o. ~ U .. .. ...; >- N >C ~ ~ .<:I o. ~ U .. .. .. c .. u .. ! .. '" o .... I N . j !i I N 8 N 8 cD N ~ Ci ..... Ci ~ o u S ... J .<:I o. ~ U 'i o .... I N o co ..; .. Oft cD ... co ..... Ci ..... Ci .. .. &. .. Cl >- .. - " ~ .! -' .: > c ~ .<:I o. ~ U .. .. 'a >- N J o. >- ..... .... .. " .. c " u J .. Oft ..; Oft .. '^ .... ~ Ci ..... Ci :i ~ Cl J .. S z Oft N cD 8 cD .... co ..... Ci ..... .... .. :.l ... o. .. ... .<:I o. ~ u .. .. ! :i o. >- ..... N .. l!i z .. ..:. ~ ..:. N co ..... Ci Co :z: 'a >- N .. . j J .. '" .. .... I N .. ... .. Oft co ... ~ Ci ..... Ci .<:I o. ~ U .. .. o. >- ..... .... .<:I o. ~ U .. .. .. i u J J .. N ... Oft ..:. ~ ..... Ci ..... Ci J .. Oft ... .. .... ..:. .. co ..... Ci ..... Ci ! :i .. i ~ '^ .. .... co ... co ..... Ci ..... Ci E E 3 E .. .. &. .. Cl >- .. .. .. .. .. >- .. ... .. ~ l .. .., o. .. ~ -= N t:; ~ J ~ >- l .. .., o. .. ~ >- = l .. .., o. .. ~ .. j J J .. .... Oft .. Oft .;.. ... co ..... Ci ..... Ci >- - ~ l .. ~ .. ~ J .. .... .... .. .. ~ .... co ..... Ci ..... Ci l! ~ .. > ~ .<:I o. ~ u .. .. .. ! :i o. >- ..... .. .. j j .. N g ..:. N ~ Ci Co .. o .. C .. o ~ -14- .. j Oft .... .... Oft ~ cD N ~ Ci ..... .... .. .. :z: S .. C .. o ~ .<:I o. ~ u .. .. .. ! :i o. >- ..... o. >- ..... N - - .. " " it ~ ~ .:. .=. ~ j .. .<:I o. ~ U .. " ... .. ~ o. .<:I 1 .. ! c :;:, 8 Oft .. Oft cD N co ..... Ci ..... Ci i .. l .. ! :i .. co .... Oft N co .... co ..... Oft ::: Oft .. - - - - - - " .. &. .. .. .. i' i I " 'a C o. o. So e " r i .<:I o. ~ U .. .. 'a >- N .c ~ ~ '" .<:I o. ~ U .. " 0: .. U 'ii ell N .... I ! :i Oft N ... Oft .... ..:. .... co ..... Oft ::: Oft .. " .. &. .. Cl " ell " i I " 1 " 1 o. o 'a >- N .. . .. j J j .<:I o. ~ U .. " .. c " u .. ell o .... I N 8 N Cl Oft .... co ..... Ci ..... g .. ~ .. >- " . :z: .. c " .. : g :z: .. C .. .. " .. A. .<:I o. ~ U .. .. ~ N .. j N .... Oft en '^ .... co ..... Ci Co - .. .. ,.., 5 .=. .. u ] .. a:: ~ ell J ~ .. .. " a. 'i N .... .. ~ .... .. ~ ~ ... ~ Ci ..... Ci E E Ii .. ... " a:: C .. '" .. j ~ r .<:I u .. .. .. a. . .. '" N .... .. .... ... Oft ... ..:. ... co ..... Ci ..... Ci >: Ii " ... " a:: c .. '" .<:I .<:I o. o. ~ ~ u U .. .. .. .. 'a 'a >- >- N N j i j o. .: ~ ~ .... .... .<:l o. ~ U .. .. .. c .. u . '" .. .... I N g .... .. Oft cD ... co ..... Ci ..... Ci .. & .. .. >- .. ii ~ .. ~ o '" ... ... ... I .., .. .. o. ... .. ~ C ~ .<:I o. ~ U .. .. j ~ .. .. " a. N o. o .. c .. u .. '" N .... I N Oft co N Oft .... ~ .... co ..... Ci ..... .... .. - - Oft co ..... ::: .. > - .. .. &. .. .. u .. ... ... . .. o. 0" ...~ 1.... - .. - Ul ~.. ~.. .. ... u .. C Ul- .. ..- o.- u- 0: :a .. .. .. .. .. .. .. a:: a:: Cl >- .. >- .. ... I .., .. .. o. ... -- .::.~ .. ~ c .. ::a .. i '" N .. c... 1~ U .. " ..'" ..... c(L ~ 8 ~1 ~ ;~ ... 8 8 ~ .. v. '^ o :: 2 .. c . " .. " >- ! ~~ ~ ... 8 ~ ~ 0, f"\" ..... ..... '^ ~~ ~ ~ ... .. c . " .. .. >- I . C o ell ... !:: I o ... ... z "" 51 a .~ U.>It c . oJ " ~ .. o 8 8 Z ~ '^ '^ '^ '^ ... .r~~: ~:~ .. - 1-3 ... . U ... Z "" f ell ... 5 ~ . ell C .. ... ... ... > "" ... ell ~~ ... ~ :i a ~ ..; .. ..; ..; ~ ... "" i o ... j~-~ ~ :i a ;!: ..; .. ..; :03 ... .... .... - - - " .. '5 c .. .. ... .. o ~ ! ~ ~ 8 .i ... ~ ~ ... " :;; " ~ ~ '" '^ '^ o '" cO ~ N '^ '^ .. 0 .4i '^ .... '; .. &. .. o t" o GO o '^ '^ N N '^ o 0 en o '" 0:) '^ ~ i ... ..... '^ '^ '^ ..... o '^ '^ '^ '^ 0 ... ... '^ ..... '^ ,^,^N " :;; " " ~ 8 ... o o N i " :;; " .. ~ .. ~ '^ ..... 0:) N - '^ ..... o N . :;; " " ~ i '^ en .. '" ~ 8 :'i :'8 '^ ~ ~ . :=:: 8 ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ - ~ ~ 8 8 8 :;!. ~ v. ;;\ ~ o 0:) g a ,.; N '^ o '^ 8 ~ :: !i GO GO '" '" ~~::!i ca\O"';'~ " .. &. .. co >- " " ~ .. ~ " " .. .. ~ i >- .. " .>It .... .. " .. -' -' > c ~ ~ ... ::J '" = ... .. .. ... o 0 ..... GO ... N E g 8 '^ ..... o 0 '^ '^ ,.: ai .. : ~ .. > .... .. .. c c " · · i " " .. :. :;; :i >- >- I I I .. =: =: 1 e ~ " > -' .. o .. :c .. .3 .. J I- ... 8 0:) en 8 0:) '" o ... '^ en " :;; " .. > c( i 5'. 5l. .:. '^ '^ Ct 0 ... en '^ C'< ..... '^ '^ ... N ~::8!i~~ """,,^GDCD,,,, I'f'\ f""\ ~ N fII"\ ~ ~ 8 ,.; "'" '^ - :; ~ ~ en en ~ :; ~ .j == = ~ it ~ '^ . cO '^ '^ 0 U\ '^ '^ ~ .:r '^ CD <f'\ .... 'G-Gr-:. ",,,, \0 2 2 = 3 .... .... -; ... i i .. .. '" '" .. r .. :i I " " c .. .. :: s s c .. ! .. " r 1 i ~ -)5- .... - :: = .. " .. .. &. &. .. ~ Ci >- >- " " :: " .. > ~- '" >- ell .. ... u tt I .>It .>It : I .. .. ... ... '"' .. c .. .. : L " " ... " "" c " ell .. .. ~ ~ J i '^ N '^ 2 ..... '^ .. " .. .. .. " I " > 1 g -8 >- .. ... ] I. '^ GO .... ::::: " c " " > .. U " ... ... " .. o .. ... 'l! " ... .! " a. i i .. U " C .. " " - g 'i .. ! ~ .. " "" "" .. '"' .. o .. C VI .3 ~ '" a .8 .. - = . j .... .... ~ Attachment 7 REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. OFFICERS' COMPENSATION FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1983 AND 1982 Salary, Bonus, & Director's Fees Off i cer Title 1983 1982 Frances Navone Pres i dent $ 48,520 $ 48,623 George Navone Vice-President 45,100 44,208 & Treasurer Donald Navone Secretary 46,250 46,308 Joseph Navone Director 5,496 5,496 $145,366 $144,635 The officers' compensation shown above represented 7.67% and 8.51% of 1983 and 1982 operating expenses, respectively. The salaries, bonuses and director's fees forecasted for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 of $154,000 represent 7.96% of forecasted operating expenses. Pension expenses for 1983 for the President, Vice-President and Treasurer, Secretary, and Director were $13,346, $1,877, $1,355, and $2,012, respectively. A comparison of the above officers' compensation to average compensation levels reported in the American Management Association's "Compensation Policies and Practices for Smaller Organizations" published in January 1984 indicates that the refuse collector's officers' compensation is reasonable. -16- Attachment 8 REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-t10RAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. Increased Residential Services For Orinda On May 5, 1983, the Orinda Association requested that consideration be given to an increase in refuse collection service to include one can of trimmings weekly and three seasonal pickups annually. As a result, a survey was conducted by the refuse collector of each of the 5,504 residential customers in Orinda during October, November and December 1983. The survey results, tabulated in March 1984, follow: Total Customers Surveyed Total Responses Received Percentage of Responses Received 5,504 3,711 67% Survey Results: Favor Additional Services No Preference Opposed to Additional Services 1 ,909 554 1,248 3,711 51% 15 ~ 100% The inclusion of the 15% of respondents with no preference to the 51% favoring an increased level of service produces a total of 66% of respondents who are not opposed to the additional services. The incremental expense to the refuse collector of providing the additional services is difficult to determine as it is largely dependent on the extent of usage by Orinda residents of the trimmings and cleanup services. Additionally, because of the topography of the area, certain Orinda residents are intended to be given the option of obtaining the additional services or being exempted. Based on usage and customer base assumptions, the refuse collector has estimated the following incremental expense per customer: Annual Incremental Expense for Garbagemen, Truck Expenses and Other Operating Expenses ~97 , 142 Customer Base Annual Expense Per Customer Monthly Expense Per Customer .5,000 $ 19. 48 $ 1. 62 The customer survey described above requested an indication of preference based on the increased service level being provided for an additional charge which was estimated to be $1.50 per month. Because of the uncertainty in the extent of usage, and the number of customers who will permissively be exempted, the $1.50 charge is regarded as a reasonable monthly assessment for the additional services. The refuse collector will be able to implement the new service levels in Orinda within two to three months following authorization by the Board of Directors. -17- Attachment 9 REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. Incremental Expense of Providing Return Remittance Envelopes On July 30, 1983, a resident of Moraga requested that the Board of Directors require the refuse collector to provide self-addressed remittance envelopes with the quarterly invoices. The Board determined that the request should be considered during the next application for rate increase. Orinda-Moraga Disposal has estimated the annual incremental expense of providing return envelopes with all quarterly invoices to be as follows: $1 ,704 1 ,000 Envelopes Labor $ 2, 704 The incremental expense of $2,704 would result in an increase in the percentage increase in forecasted revenue required, shown on Attachment 1, from 9.67% to 9.83%. Because service rates are rounded to the nearest 5 cents, the effect of the higher percentage increase required on the monthly rates for representative services, shown on Attachment 2, is as follows: Residential Service Multi-Apartment Service Commercial Service Bulk Service No Change 5 Cents Increase No Change 10 Cents Increase -18- REFUSE COLLECTION RATE APPLICATION ORINDA-MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. RETURN ON EQUITY COMPUTATION OF PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN FORECASTED REVENUE REQUIRED Attachment 10 The computation of Orinda-Moraga's percentage increase in forecasted revenue required under the Return on Equity method using a 20% rate of return is presented below. A 20% rate of return was used in consider- ation of Price Waterhouse's suggested 14% to 20% range and the following industry and general business rates of return: 1983 average 90-day Treasury Bill rate 8.5% Industry Return on Equity %: Browning-Ferris Waste Management 1982 31.2 16. 1 1981 19.4 22.5 *";~;";,, Stockholders' equity as of December 31, 1983: Capital Stock Capital contributed in excess of par value Retained earnings Stockholders' equity Restatement to give effect to lease capitalization for fiscal year ended March 31, 1984 Stockholders' equity, as restated Add: Notes payable to stockholders Owners' equ i ty Rate of return Net income, after income taxes Add back estimated income taxes Income before income taxes Forecasted operating expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1985 Add: I nterest expense $58,126 Less: Interest pa i d to stockholder (7,000) Add: Allowable profit Less: Other income Forecasted revenue required Forecasted revenue at current rates Increase in forecasted revenue required Percentage increase in forecasted revenue required -19- $ 6,000 11 ,987 86 , 1 81 104,168 47,531 151 ,699 75,000 226,699 20% 45,340 $ 45,340 $1,942,000 51 , 126 1 ,993 ,126 45,340 (1 ,000) 2,037,466 1 ,864,000 $ 173,466 9.31% ~ co en ~ I en ,.... 0) ~ UJ o - > a: UJ en z < o UJ -oJ Cl Z - en a: o u. en w I- < a: z o - I- o W -oJ -oJ o o UJ en ::) u. UJ a: -oJ < - I- Z UJ C - en UJ a: '" ... 0" ..... ,. J en ... 0 ,. . 0 J i II 0 ,'): I . . ..- ~ II 0>- c: III .JC ~ .. Ill'" S II Gl ..'- -g t Gl . ~o ~ .. .. '" C-. ,- . 0 0 Ill.. 'i ..% :IE 0.... 0 .. "tl i ~ ~ ." ~ ~ .5 :: .= ~\ )( .. :0 Gl III OU "tl , ~ ..... .= \...~~ \ ....... Gl ......... (J \. ~ '\......... .. Gl E ~ III c: N \ 0 Gl 0 C '~ .. III . :::E a: \. , 0 --"" o q o or-- o o . 0> o 0 q q CO ...... H~NOW/N"~/$ o o . <0 o o . LO ~ CO 0) or-- CW) CO 0> or-- C\I CO 0> or-- or-- CO 0> or-- o CO 0) or-- 0) ...... 0) or-- o q ~ 'Gown of OJoraga 350 RHEEM BOULEVARD, SUITE 3 P.O. BOX 188 MORAGA, CA 94556 (415) 376-5200 Gary C. Chase, Town Manager April 18, 1984 The President and Members of the Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA 94553 Gentlemen: The Moraga Town Council has reviewed the rate increase request of Orinda/ Moraga Disposal Service, Inc., now pending before you. This review in- cluded consideration of your staff report. The Town Council offers the following recommendations for your meeting of Thursday, April 19. As representatives of the citizens of Moraga, the Town Council is very pleased with the service that Orinda/Moraga Disposal provides. There are a minimum number of complaints and the relationship between the company and the Town is one of cooperation and accommodation. The Council believes that the company should receive a reasonable rate increase because it is important that they be healthy and solvent so they can continue to provide a high level of service. The Council reviewed the staff analysis and believes that the return on equity approach, as recommended by Price Waterhouse, to be the appropriate measure for profit. This range was recommended between 14 and 20%, and the Town would offer 16.1% as it was the average of the industry in 1982. In- flation this last year and a half has been slight and, therefore, the lower figure is appropriate; a 20% return on equity is inappropriate. This smaller increase would provide a comfortable margin of return on investment and, yet, would not place the charges to Moraga residents at the top of the industry. There was considerable discussion concerning envelopes being sent with the bills. The Council recommends that this new service not be added as this would increase the cost to the consumer. There was also discussion on the landfill problem in Central Contra Costa County. The Moraga Council encourages the Board of Directors of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District to take the leadership in providing a public The President and Members of the Board of Directors April 18, 1984 landfill site. It is clearly recognized that this process will take a number of years and will cost considerable dollars. The Moraga Council believes that a public landfill is necessary and is in the best interest of the citizens of our community. Unfortunately, the cities of Contra Costa County are not in a financial position to take on this responsi- bility, but are led to believe that your Board is considering this project. We commend you for your leadership and support you in this endeavor. SinCerelY~ ~ ry . Chase Town Manager GCC:cjw xc: George Navone Orinda/Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. c<{5 Centra; Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. I V. HEARINGS 241 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE April 10,1984 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON DISTRICT ANNEXATION 86 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION HOLD HEARING: D.A. 86 SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction & Services Division ISSUE: The LAFC has amended the boundaries of several of the parcels included within the above-referenced District Annexation. The District must hold the subject hearing and consider testimony by affected property owners before acting on the proposed amended annexations. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation was sent to LAFC as required for the formal annexation process. LAFC amended the boundaries of several of the parcels during its approval process. These amendments were made to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary. The amended annexations are designated as D.A. 86-B, 86-C, 86-D, and 86-E. Maps are attached showing the amended annexations. Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notified of this hearing as required by law. A Negative Declaration has been prepared by LAFC for all of these amended annexations. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. There are three possible actions the District may take: 1. Overrule protests when owners of less than 50 percent of assessed land value protest the annexation, then order the annexation of the parcels as amended by LAFC. 2. If the owners of land having more than 50 percent of the assessed value (land only) of the total assessed value of land proposed for annexation protest the annexation, the District must disapprove the annexations as proposed. 3. Continue the hearing at a future date on any particular proposed annexation as the Board deems necessary. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. .~I:S DH 1V RAB Attachments RECOMMENDATION: (1) Open hearing, receive and review any testimony, close publ ic hearing. (2) Adopt Resolutions concuring with the Negative Declaration and ordering annexation of all parcels as amended which have insufficient protests. (3) Take appropriate action as outlined above for any protested annexation. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. GEN. MGR./CHIEF ENG. AVE. WALNUT @ /.15~OA CT. MO/?/?/60N @ . ~~ " 'P-::--:;"'; ':>!~i<-;~":''',.;''--'- ~ >If ~ c:.."<t';)~it:tJ'.""."..- tt.: .,..$: . "T"~'<"' .. . ~.,. ~ \f!!!} . ~:~'~~.irJ,~: @ ~ \!!!!:J TR.. 3600 @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION _____ = EXISTING CCCSO BOUNDARY "'~. '., . '- __ = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DA,86-8 ~ l 0/\." =f(~ 4.' I. '..... ~ ,,' " RAMONA , .... WAy o ,- '- .. @ . ~ /9~7 .' I O~, t\l} ~. \,; F,l'{YtJAR Ge,q ,; (5lJO/ o.lf. /"5") P'#;/. ,Wi:> .., ,""1 is /y P/?tJPEP-TlES O.,t;f. 253) '6(.. ONE @ /974 ........ .,' '" .......... , ......... :\ , " \ \~ \ f \ \ I ~ I I g , I /J :1 @ II~ ,.( ,~ ',. " HIJ.._ "27'25-"" " 7.J.8 _\ !.Z4'40"W ) I08.~ I / / / <, @ \. ',' '8-" \. . '\. /'164- \. 66S-37'W ~ \!!!:J ~IlISTE~ (,Sg6Z alf. ~!!J~) , -..... , MANNING (7'27 (ur. 4Z) .-.:il:.@/. _::~ '''77 >- ...,.....;..;;.:~~.~.r,if."'J;:.;:.4.;.!f/IIIItipt.... ,;. ":"",,,,:" , '. ~ Q ~ ";i'",,~;,:";""';;;'f' ".zo 1972 DA. f36-C ~ - D '.' /' ~~ J 'r D-'" r.:.) I" ~ ~, l l=' "1' '; " .1 . l - ~. ! A J 9 .R )/)" a ,1 ,""f ~ ~ CI\ ~ ~ ~ 5PEAI<S 757Z OR. 566 P<;/. One ~.-~,.:~;;, ~t~,~\~~~~~,: SFEAI6 757Z O.~, ~65 ". @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION .!\'....4;.. = EXISTING CCCSO BOUNDARY __ = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION OA.86-E Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS N~ V. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 4 1 84 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE Apr ill 0, 1984 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION ORDER COMPLETION OF DISTRICT ANNEXATION NO. 86-A COMPLETE ANNEXATION OF DA 86-A SUBMITTED BY Dennis R. Hall INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction and Services Division ISSUE: The District must pass a resolution to final ize District Annexation 86-A. BACKGROUND: The District previously made application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFC) for the annexation of ten parcels of land designated as District Annexation 86. LAFC has considered this request and has recommended that Parcels 1 and 2 be processed as submitted. LAFC has designated these parcels to be District Annexation No. 86-A. No public hearing is required and the annexation of these parcels can be completed. LAFC has adopted a Negative Declaration for District Annexation No. 86-A. District staff has reviewed this Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution concurring with the Negative Declaration and ordering the completion of District Annexation No. 86-A. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION .o~ DH INITIATING DEPL/DIV. RESOLUTION NO. 84- A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY CONTAINED IN DISTRICT ANNEXATION NO. 86-A TO THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT WHEREAS, the District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, on December 1, 1983, adopted Resolution No. 83-162, said Resolution being a Resolution of Appl ication to the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of Contra Costa for annexation of certain pro- perties to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District; and WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission on February 8, 1984, adopted Resolution No. 83-34-A, indicated that District Annexation No. 86, Parcels 1 and 2, amended by the Local Agency Formation Commission to be District Annexation No. 86-A may be annexed without notice or hearing by the District Board of Directors and without the necessity of call ing for an election; and WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission caused to be pre- pared a Negative Declaration covering said annexation and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District has reviewed and concurs with said Negative Declaration; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that territory encompassed in the description attached hereto and incorporated herein as District Annexation No. 86-A be and the same hereby is annexed to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District subject to all the terms and conditions specified in the Local Agency Formation Commission Resolution Making Determination and subject to the Code, ordinances, rules and regulations, bonded indebtedness and contractural obI igations of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District shall del iver six certified copies of this Resolution to the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of April, 1984, by the District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of Ca1 ifornia COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of Ca1 ifornia Approved as to form: John J. Carniato District Counsel ~ &'C JJ (fi;n 'V.!.!!J titl:i \!!!V ~ \!!!9 RD. lE'TER'.,'}60UNDAAY r{~' ,~~~~rE HUNre l; cell8. 3~~. 0;';:0 I't ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~~ @ ~.. ~ -...J~\C ft) "5-Z ). , ~ ~ lu ~ ~~zJi~~ ~u ~ . .., "~ * V) J -) .:;; J2 i414LJ.A/(Y 4859aR.455 Pcl. One ~@ If ,"Z Jy/UJR 0./-1}( S @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXA TIO _ = EXISTING CCCSD BOUt- __ = PROPOSED ANNEXA TIC * = SIGNED PETITION D,A,86-A o ~.... < .1""...... """r/ ~--<'.. .;' C- -J.- -,? \!' ~...... < c... -J,. .........., ....- ~ (; 11" t ~\ O.f.' Or! /' ./-P e,\.- ,.,/ ~,..~~ /. @ ./ r16jlO 1978 ...f 1'1 i Cp.. / ~f- ~~ .It ~, ,., ....... Q V!!V QA.86-A ((<SD CentraJ _ontra Costa Sanitar, District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V. CONSENT CALENDAR POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE March 30, 1984 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE FUNDS FROM SEWER CONSTRUCTION TO CONVERT THE EXISTING UNDERGROUND GAS TANK FOR DIESEL FUEL STORAGE FOR $3,750.00 Con sen t Ca 1 enda r SUBMITTED BY Robert H. Hinkson, Manager INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Collection System Operations ISSUE: One of the Vehicle and Equipment Section's goal and objective in 1983-84 is to install an underground gas tank for diesel fuel storage. BACKGROUND: Present usage of diesel fuel is near 5,000 gallons a year and we have no ability to receive bulk deliveries. The use of diesel fuel will increase as addi{ional diesel powered vehicles and equipment are purchased. We fuel our diesel powered trucks by card-lock service making many trips with these vehicles. Card-lock price per gallon is approximately $1.19 per gallon against bulk delivery of 3,000 gallons at about $.97 per gallon. Based on 5,000 gallons per year, $3,750 would be recovered with 10% annual interest in less than 5 years in fuel savings alone. Rather than installing a new tank which would cost almost $11),000, we propose to convert an existing underground 3,000 gallon gas tank to diesel fuel. This would require the purchase and installation of one new gas pump with dual hose delivery and the modification of one existing pump for diesel fuel delivery. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize funds from sewer construction in the amount of $3,750.00 to convert the existing underground gas tank for diesel fuel storage. This authorization has been placed on the consent calendar as it is less than $5,000. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION '.'JI:!'~~';;J':V' RHH RJD Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. ENGINEERING OS On VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN P ITI N .-'APER General Manager-Chief Engineer SUBJECT AUTHORIZE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH EMCON ASSOCIATES FOR PRELIMINARY PLANNING FOR THE DISTRICT LANDFILL PROJECTS; AUTHORIZE $38,900 IN SEWER DATE TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE FUNDS AUTHORIZE CONTRACT Curtis Swanson INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Planning Division SUBMITTED BY ISSUE: Funds are required to initiate planning studies for the District Landfill Project. Authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with EMCON Associates to provide professional engineering services related to the landfill project. BACKGROUND: On February 16, 1984, the Board directed staff to II. . pursue, with diligence, the potential of the District operating or contracting a solid waste 1 andfi 11 for the pub 1 i c benefi t . . . II Since receiving this direction, staff has approaced the other Central County cities which are garbage franchisers and County staff to assess the level of support for District involvement with a landfill. Staff has also made cursory inspections of two potential landfill sites in the Central County area and has selected an engineering consultant to assist with defining the necessary planning studies. Most importantly, staff has developed a phased approach for the District to undertake the landfill project. The phase of the project which is scheduled to begin in June, is a planning study to develop landfill site evaluation criteria, identify and evaluate potential landfill sites, and address institutional and financial issues. This phase would be six to eight months long and would begin in mid-June. Between now and June, staff will define the scope of the planning studies and prepare a summary of the project approach for presentation to the County Board of Supervisors. In addition, staff is preparing contingency plans for emergency sludge/ash disposal should Acme Fill cease acting as the Wastewater Treatment Plant's disposal site in the near term. EMCON Associates will assist staff in this effort. The purpose of the authorization is to fund the work required until June, 1984. The staff has selected EMCON Associates to assist with the preparatory work for the June to January phase of the landfill project and to assist with emergency sludge/ash disposal contingency planning. EMCON is a nationally recognized engineering firm that specializes in solid waste landfills. EMCON has provided services for the majority of landfills in the Bay Area including Altamont Landfill in Alameda County and the proposed Lynch Canyon Landfill in Solano County. The agreement with EMCON is based on their standard table of hourly charges with a total cost not to exceed $20,000. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIA~DEPT'/~I;' JMil-- JK I?ftri! RB District staff will perform project management, technical, and real property evaluation tasks. A total of $38,900 is being requested to continue planning for the landfill project through June. Following a favorable Board of Supervisors decision to consider a publ ically owned landfill site, staff will prepare a position paper to authorize Phase I of the landfill project. A cost breakdown of this request is attached to the position paper. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the expenditure of $38,900 in Sewer Construction Funds for preliminary planning fGr the District Landfill Project. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with EMCON Associates to provide professional engineering services related to the project on an hourly basis at a cost not to exceed $20,000. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR SOARD ACTION INITIATING OEPT./OIV. GEN. MGR.lCHIEF ENG. CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT DISTRICT LANDFILL PROJECT PROJECT NO. 20015 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY Item Cost District Staff $ 9,450 EMCON Associates 20,000 Legal/Technical 5,000 Initial Authorization by GM-CE 4,450 To ta 1 $38,900 4/11/84 CWS/lp Attachment c((SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V I. ~NGIN~7~1~~4 POSITION PAPEfl su*d'fHORIZE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BECHTEL CIVIL AND MINERAL, INC. FOR NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE A il12 1984 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY John Larson ISSLE: Board authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. BAO<GROl..J\ID: Ash from the Multiple Hearth Fumace (MHF) System is pneumatically conveyed to storage hoppers prior to being loaded into trucks for transport to the disposal site. Operation of the pneumatic conveyor system and the truck loading facility during the test in late 1983 uncovered several materials handling problems. In addition, the production of dust at the disposal site during offloading is a regulatory agency concern that must be addressed by the District in order to have the ash accepted by the potential disposal sites. Materials handling is a highly specialized field. The District staff interviewed several engineering consultants with expertise in materials handling that would be applicable to our situation. Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. has both technical strength and applicable experience gained through the design and operation of mineral-refining facilities. Accordingly, District staff recommends that Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. should be engaged to perform this work. Bechtel's initial scope of work will be to recommend the best solutions for the materials handling problems associated with the MHF Ash Handling System, to establish design criteria for necessary improvements, and to identi fy the schedule and cost for construction and testing. Future work will include pilot scale testing, final design, assistance during construction, and accept- ance testing. The initial scope of work will be billed on an hourly basis with a cost ceiling of $15,000. Funds for this work will come from the Multiple Hearth Furnace Project budget previously authorized by the Board. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. for professional engineering services in conjunction with the Multiple Hearth Furnace Project. No additional Sewer Construction Funds are requested as a part of this authorization. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. VI.- JAL E,~ RAB c((SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. ENGINEERING 1 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE April 12, 1984 SUA0rF-10RIZE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE MULTIPLE HEARTH FURNACE NST SUBMITTED BY John Larson TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT ISSLE: Board authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with John Carollo Engineers. BACKGRClt.J'.IO:" The District staff conducted a two-month test of the Multiple Hearth Furnace Sludge Incineration System in late 1983 in order to identify remaining system problems. Since completion of the test, the data has been analyzed and the problems that must be addressed prior to long term operation have been identi tied. Two of the areas requiring improvements are the landfill gas sub-system and the instrumentation and controls. The landfill gas sub-system, which allows the District to use less expensive landfill gas, needs to be improved to facilitate the transfer from landfill gas to natural gas and back again. The improvements would reduce operator labor and minimize air pollution problems. The instrumentation and controls need to be improved for the same reasons. The Engineering work on the Multiple Hearth Furnace Project to date has been accomplished by a team of District staff and personnel from Malcom Pimie, Inc. (MPI) from White Plains, New York. The nature of the work has changed and John Carollo Engineers (JCE) from Walnut Creek, as the result of their work on Stage 5B and the Landfill Gas Utilization Project, has the best background and knowledge to complete this segment of the work. Another reason is that JCE is considerably lower in cost than MPI, primarily because of their lower overhead and limited travel expense. Accordingly, District staff recommends that JCE should be engaged to perform this work. JCE's initial scope of work will be to recommend the most cost effective improvements and to identify the cost and schedule associated with implementing their recommendations. On many items in the instrumentation and controls area, the JCE work product will be design drawings which will be constructed by District and contract personnel. Future work will include final design, contruction assistance, and acceptance testing for the work appropriate for contract construction. The intitial scope of work will be billed on an hourly basis with a cost ceiling of $65,000. Funds for this work will come from the Multiple Hearth Furnace Project budget previously authorized by the Board. RECOMMEI'DA TICI'I: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with John Carollo Engineers for professional engineering services in conjunction with the Multiple Hearth Furnace Project. No additional funds are requested as a part of this authorization. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. elL L ?/iDS <(<SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. ENGINEERING POSITION PAPEI:t VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE April 12, 1984 TYPE OF ACTION su~ORIZE THE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONCORD CONTRACT EXECUTE AGREEMENT & AUTHORIZE FUNDS SUBMITTEO BY John Larson INITIATING OEPT./OIV. Engineering Division ISSLE: Staff requires the assistance of an impartial third party engineer for the resolution of Concord contract issues. BAO<GROll'D: The Engineering and Construction Department performed a study in the summer and fall of 1982 which disclosed deficiencies in the design of the City of Concord's sewage flow measurement devices and in their calibration practices. Subsequent studies by the City of Concord and Culp, Wesner and Culp Consulting Engineers have provided the following additional findings: o The past Concord sewage flow data is inaccurate and unusable. o The City of Concord's sewage flow meters have serious, unrepairable design deficien- cies which warrant their replacement., a Based on population share, per capita sewage flaws, and CCCSD wastewater treatment plant sewage flow, Concord has comprised 33% of the District's sewage flow since 1977. The implications of the findings of the above studies coupled with the possibility of a continuing shortfall of revenue from the City of Concord due to the unresolved metering issues has dictated that engineering work continue an three tasks. The three tasks comprise the John Carollo Engineers (JCE) scope of work and are briefly described as follows: a Task 1 - An engineering study to identify the mast cost effective sewage flow meter for the north Concord sewer line which is unquestionably accurate. o Task 2 - An engineering study to identify the most cost effective sewage flow meter far the Concord pump station which is unquestionably accurate. o Task 3 - A third party engineering study to verify and quantitate the accuracy of the CCCSD wastewater treatment plant sewage flow meters. The 1974 contract with the City of Concord makes the city totally responsible for the installation, operation, and maintenance of their sewage flow meters and all costs incurred thereof. Despite this, staff recommends that CCCSD proceed unilaterally to study alternatives for future Concord flow metering. This is necessitated by the large daily revenue stream which is currently being measured by the inaccurate sewage flow meters (calculated by CCCSD to be about $8,200 per day) and by Concord's slow response to the problem to date. Staff also recommends that the City of Concord be held responsible for the costs of tasks one and two. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR SOARD ACT/ON INITIATING OEPT./OIV. v~ [2~j; JL RB John Carollo Engineers was selected for this work because of the following reasons: o The firm has a significant reputation for integrity and reliability. o The firm has staff that are highly qualified and experienced in sewage flow metering design and operation. o The firm is local and has one of the lowest overhead rates in the industry. The costs and revenue sources of the work are as follows: o Task 1 - $13,150 from Sewer Construction Funds. o Task 2 - $10,800 from Sewer Construction Funds. o Task 3 - $9,100 from Engineering and Construction Department 0 & M Funds (this task is not capitalizable). The contract with John Carollo Engineers will be on an hourly basis with a not to exceed cost of $33,050. The authorization of Sewer Construction Funds includes Task 1, Task 2, District Force Account, and a 20% contingency. A cost breakdown is attached to the position paper. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a contract with John Carollo Engineers on an hourly basis with a not to exceed cost of $33,050; authorize $30,900 in Sewer Construction Funds. Staff to establish a receivable account for Concord covering the costs of tasks one and two and the associated District staff force account costs. REVIEWED AND RECDMMENDED FOR SOARD ACTION V0 ,/h7Y] ~/P'1"~ GEN. MGR.lCHIEF ENG. INITIATING OEPT./OIV. JAL RAB CONCORD CONTRACT DISPUTE ENGINEERING AUTHORIZA nON COST BREAKDOWN Sewer Construction Funds John Carollo Engineers - Task 1 John Carollo Engineers - Task 2 District Force Account SUBTOTAL Contingency (@ 20%) SUBTOTAL Enqineerinq & COllstruction Department's 0 & M Funds John Carollo Engineers - Task 3 TOTAL $13,150 10,800 1,800 $25,750 5,150 $30,900 $ 9,100 $40,000 t((SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. ENGINEERING 5 4/1 /84 VI/,-: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE POSITION PAPER A r i I 11 1 984 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT AUTHORIZE $55,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR PHASE I I OF THE MARTINEZ SEWER RENOVATION PROJECT SUBMITTED BY Ja AUTHORIZE FUNDS ISSUE: Certain portions of the Martinez Collection System are in poor repair and require rehabil itation. Other portions of the collection system will require expansions of capacity. BACKGROUND: The Engineering and Construction Department has developed an eight phase plan for the renovation of the Martinez Collection System. The phases of the plan are as follows: Phase I Phase II Phase I I I Phase IV Phase V Phase VI Phase VII Phase VIII Trunk Sewer Survey and Watershed Capacity Study Sewer Main Survey Easement Review and Correction Detailed Project Schedule and Financial Plan Sewer Main Capacity Study Collection System Condition Assessment Design of Improvements to Collection System Staged Construction of Collection System Improvements Phases I, I I, and I I I are in progress. Phase I, work on trunk sewers, was funded from watershed funds. It is appropriate to fund Phase I I from the Sewer Construction Fund as this work is a general obI igation of the District. Phase III is the responsibil ity of the City of Martinez. The surveying effort for Phase I I will include the location and measurement of approximately 160,000 feet of pipe and 600 structures. Elevations will be taken on the rIm and flow I ine of each structure. The size of existing pipel ines will be checked and the condition of each manhole will be noted. The Planning Division will prepare a detailed project schedule and financial plan (Phase IV) by September, 1984. Cost figures will be deve)oped during the design of the Project (Phase VI I). The actual construction of the improvements (Phase VI I I) will be phased over a minimum of five years. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $55,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund for Phase I I of the Martinez Sewer Renovation Project. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION J~ RAB RJD <CCSD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VI. ENGINEERING 1 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE A ri 1 11 1984 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE GM-CE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH TYPE OF ACTION H.J. DEGENKOLB ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN OF SEISMIC MODIFICATIONS Authorize Agreement/ TO TREATMENT PLANT BUILDINGS AND EQUIPMENT. AUTHORIZE $113,800 Authorize Funds FROM SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUNDS Associate En ineer SUBMITTED BY ISSUE: Board authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a contract with H.J. Degenkolb Associates. Board authorization of Sewer Construction Funds is also required for this work. BACKGROUND: Personnel from H.J. Degenkolb Associates (HJDA) conducted a field inspectionof treatment plant structures as part of the identification of the Stage 5A deficiencies. Their inspection revealed that two buildings had serious deficiencies in seismic design. Upon notification of this deficiency, Brown and Caldwell immediately initiated corrective action and paid for the completion of all work (estimated to have cost $120,000). Based on the findings of the preliminary field inspection, HJDA was hired to conduct a more extensive evaluation of the treatment plant structures and equipment. During the course of their work, HJDA identified deficiencies in the seismic design and construc- tion of several other buildings and associated equipment of the wastewater treatment plant. This information was used in the negotiation with Peterson-Simpson and Brown and Cal dwell. The District staff has reviewed the HJDA findings. The goal for the staff review was to identify a cost effective project that would enhance personnel safety and reduce the damage that could be expected during a major earthquake to reduce the potential cost liability and to minimize the time that the wastewater treatment plant would be out of operation. Following is a description of the major elements of the project. A. Solids Conditioning Building (SCB) The SCB is a four-story steel-frame structure. The design employs asymetrical concrete shear walls to resist lateral loads. Based on HJDA's evaluation, the building and equipment could sustain major damage in a severe earthquake. This damage could be difficult and possibly uneconomically feasible to repair. Corrective action would consist of installation of lateral.braci,ng to rroperly transfer the lateral loads and reinforcing major equipment foundations and supports. (The waste heat boilers have already been braced as part of the incinerator renovation project.) REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR SOARD ACTION JAL RAB INITIATING DEPT./DIV. qtL~' JLK vI- ~~ RJD B. Plant Operations Building (POB) The POB is a two-story building that consists of four separate sections. In two sections, the pump and blower area and the maintenance/chlorine area, large lateral displacements are expected during a severe earthquake. The building could be heavily damaged after a severe earthquake. Corrective action would include the addition of concrete shear walls and the strengthening of non-ductile concrete frames. C. Substation 82 Substation 82 is a small non-ductile concrete-frame electrical substation, ~hich is infrequently manned. All electrical power for the treatment plant is routed through this structure. In the event of a major earthquake, significant cracking and spalling of the frame members can be anticipated. The possibility of partial or total collapse of the substation exists. Corrective action would consist of the construction of concrete shear walls. D. Inlet Building The inlet building structure that encloses the barscreens is a steel frame with concrete block infill walls. The concrete block walls can be expected to sustain major damage. Corrective action would consist of including the possibility of strengthening the connections to the steel frame. The predesign study estimate for the cost of the Seismic Modifications Project is $1,400,000. This estimate will be improved during the design phase of the project. The scope of the project has been carefully reviewed and we believe that the project adequately addresses personnel safety and structure seismic protection while being as cost effective as possible. Reimbursement for the cost of seismic repair is an on-going subject of negotiation with Peterson-Simpson and Brown and Caldwell. Staff has selected HJDA for this project because of their prior knowledge of treat- ment plant seismic designs; because of their excellent performance on the waste heat boiler seismic retraint design; and because of their high standing in the seismic engineering field. Staff has negotiated a lump sum contract with HJDA to design the seismic restraints for the structures and equipment and to determine if seismic work is required for some additional items which may require action. The cost of the contract is $88,200 to design the estimated 1.4 million dollars in improvements. This cost is offset by $7,500 remaining from a previous Board authorization. This cost does not include design cost of additional study items. A 20% contingency is included in this It'VlnED /aND ItECOMMENDED I'01t .O/aItD /aCTION INITIATING OEPT./OIV. GEN. MGR./CHIEF ENG. authorization to cover this possibility. If it is determined that seismic bracing is reauired for structures not included in the current scope, staff will negotiate a coniract change order with HJDA. This project is included in the 5-Year Capital Expenditure Plan. District staff is seeking to obtain grant funds from the State Water Resources Control Board for the construction cost of this work. District force amount costs to coordinate and administer this contract are estimated to be $12,900. The total authorization that is requested is $113,800. A cost breakdown is attached to the Position Paper. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a lump sum contract with HJDA and authorize $113,800 in Sewer Construction Funds for design of treatment plant seismic modifications. Attachment It_VIREO AND ItECOMMENDED I'01t .0AItD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. GEN. MGR.lCHIEF ENG. SEISMIC MODIFICATION PROJECT DESIGN COST BREAKDOWN H.J. Degenkolb lump sum design cost District force account Contingency Previous Authorization Total Request For Sewer Construction Funds $88,200 12,900 20,200 (7,500) $113,800 <C<SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER VI'A: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer NO. V III . ITEMS LATE Consent Calendar DATE 4 84 /19/ SUBJECT ACCEPT THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FLUSHKLEEN PUMP STATION CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT, ORINDA, (PROJECT 2553), AND ACCEPT CONTRACT WORK AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION TYPE OF ACTION SUBMITTED BY Munawar Husain INITIATING DEPT.!DIV. Construction and Services Division ISSUE: Work has been completed on the F1ushk1een Pump Station Capacity Improvement project and is now ready for acceptance. BACKGROUND: W. R. Thomaso~, Inc., was issued a Notice to Proceed on September 21, 1983. By April 13, 1984, rlhe Contractor had substantially completed the contract work. It is appropriate to accept the work at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Accept the Contract for construction of the F1ushkleen Pump Station Capacity Improvement (Project 2553) and authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion. RaVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITJ~E~T'!DIV. MH 'lM RAB