Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 12-17-81 Contra Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer NO. IV. Bi ds & Awards 1 12 17 81 BATE ecember 14, 1981 SUBJECT AWARD OF THE CARPETING CONTRACT FOR THE NEW DISTRICT OFFICE BUILDING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION OF $79,740 IN FUNDS TO DP 3633 TYPE OF ACTION AWARD CONTRACT; AUTHORIZE FUNDS SUBMITTED BY Ron Klimczak, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Division BACKGROUND The Board of Directors authorized advertising for bids for carpeting in the renovated Plant Operations Building and new District Office Building at the November 19, 1981 Board meeting. The bid opening occurred on December 9, 1981. The basic bid covers carpeting in all areas of the office building project (except Alternate #1 area and areas included in W. A. Thomas' contract), a quantity of carpeting (5%) to be placed in storage for future replacement of any damaged carpet tiles, and a manufacturer recommended carpet cleaning machine with cleaning supplies. Carpet for the unused portion of the second floor is included as additional cost under Alternative #1. Reduced plan sheets are attached showing the extent of carpeting covered by the contract and Alternative #1. BID ANALYSIS The bids are presented in Table A. A review of the bids shows that the three low bids (not including the Alternate #1 area) are within 4% of the low bid indicating consistent interpretation of the plans and specifications as well as confidence that the lowest cost to the District has been obtained. The fourth bidder has numerous errors in his bid summary. The apparent low bid is by Conklin Brothers in the amount of $69,339.30. The additive bid costs associated with doing the Alternate #1 area (balance of second floor) ranged between $17,500 and $19,729.52. The Conklin Brothers' bid for this additional work was $18,509.30. The Architect's estimate was approximately 6.9% ($4,475.30) low for the basic carpeting area and approximately 5.9% ($1,037) low for the Alternate #1 area. The Purchasing Division has reviewed the bid documents from the three lowest bidders and has determined that they are complete and accurate bids. The fourth bid is considered non-responsive due to errors that were made ln both the quantities used a s well as the interpretation of the bid form. The contract documents give the District until May 1, 1982 to exercise the Alternate #1 option. Consequently, no decision is required at this time. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION (\, JL JL e.:L.~ CL~J 'y( \ PM A recommendation will be made at a later date as to the desirability of installing the carpeting covered by the Alternate #1 additional cost, once recent changes in the District organization have been incorporated in the floor space layout. RECOMMENDATIONS (1) Award the carpeting contract for the new District Office Building Project to Conklin Brothers and authorize $79,740 from Sewer Construction Funds to DP 3633. (2) Direct staff to make a recommendation prior to May 1, 1982 as to the desirability of proceeding with the additional carpeting on the second floor (Alternate #1). Attachments REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR SOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT.(DIV. GEN. MGR./CHIEF ENG. TABLE A Bidder Bid (wi 0 A 1 t #1) Alt #1 Add'l Cost Total (1) Conklin Bros.(Oakland) $69,339.30 + $18,509.30 $87,848.60 (2) Design Performance 69,821.45 + 20,670.30 90,491 .75 (San Francisco) (3) Superior Linoleum 72 ,451.57 + 19,729.52 92,181 .09 & Carpet (San Leandro) (4) Professional Flooring 99,960.50 + 17,500.00 117,460.50 (Concord) Architect's Estimate 64,864.00 + 1 7 ,472 . 00 82,336.00 10. POST BID - PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE OF COSTS FOR DISTRICT PROJECT 3633 ITEM DESCRIPTION %CONST. CONTRACT ITEM AMOUNT TOTAL 1. . $ 69,339.30 100.0 Construction Contract (As Bid) . 2. 3,466.96 5.0 Estimated Construction Contingencies . . . . . . $ 3. Estimated Construction Incidentals to Project Completion Survey. . . . . . . . . . . .. . $ Inspection & .Co.ntract .Administr.ation . $ 6.933.93 Engineering . . . . . . . . . . $ Total Estimated Construction Incidentals .$ 6,933.93 $ 6,933.93 10.0 4. Street Resurfacing or Seal Coat . $ N/A -0- 5. Total Estimate Required to Complete Project . $ 79,740.19 115.0 6. Pre Bid Expenditures Survey, Engineering, Printing, Advertising Specia I Services Right-ot-Way Acquisition. . .$ .$ .$ 7. o -0- 115.0 * Total Preconstruct ion Incidentals (as ot ). . $ $ 8. 79,740.19 .$ Total Estimated Project Cost (Items 5 & 7) 9. -0- Funds Previously Authorized . . . . . . . $ Total Additional Funds Required to Complete Project. (Item 8 minus Item 9) . $ 79.740.19 Say $79,740. * All prebid expenses have been charged to DP 3000. 2050-8-78 _ -Ii i' !,'I.=I! , ~ -, 'I ~ -:tJC 1 - 11--' , I . '-' ....-----.. ---- -- ~ i , I : --==n] i' , . . L___ ___ _ ____J ,. . ;;1[', iIIi Ii. II" n: it ; :11: ! 1 ;': -j~.~ :11: u --~ '-,' I" . I __!; ~ . ern , ,Pi 'j I ._~ +--~ _--1 ~ _:-~- 1--1 '~~[]II I I: ' .---! ' r--, Ii-I! I'd ~; rt--~ 'I i1 r; 1 - li:l:)! 1~1' ::== -. II I: I '= 1r , ~ Pi f J, I , , I ! r- i .' " , - d I l I I I ' . i I , i I I. I , I I !! I /.~~- ~ Ii' \ ,i " I'i 'I ~ ! . I : III i .:; Ii, I [j ! li,l! ~ .,&~~~==tI-:::.'_ L. . 1__ .,..=iC ~ I h , ~ " ., II :1 l " " ...-r___-~. I 1---; :J I I ---~ , . I I I I ! I I I I .. I- ::) o ~ ..J W ..J - l- I- W G- o: ct o (!) z ~ I- en w ~ I If-iffi I i I r~ U~ 1 liT Il- I -..-- >. ( li\-." ___.::::J' ;; I _ ~r= =,1 LT i ii + L LL ;;;~;: =F , II ,i - - - - - - - ii-~-J Ii ! l;~~ I ~ . '-1- Ii ~.-:J '1 ;1 I d t.J .,iii::::;lilllilm, .........::......... . ~i i::: ~:: ~:! ~;: 'I .. .,.",cJ'1 I . - , -- ---.-------------- - -1 t-1 +~I +l-+- +- Il- =r< ; 1 11- ~ I'll _ )>--.<1 J, ~ H' ~ 'H~r" ; :I:;~ ::l t~.. :::::.. - P-W-+- 1 I- H H ~-t -l -l.11 '1 .......... ,:::: .".: i HH ::::: j i i . I jI ,I i=ll i'l r I 1b\+liL T~ I Il- I \' -LLLJ~ + IJ.--I ti. - (.. - [ :.. '- ~ ;-1...1 "- "- ~ ------~~ -!- 1. l- +=+ l-..l "'t L++ ~=ft '-ri +- i ~ I T +=rt! i +-l-t-l f --l- 1 l- I 1 _-I L [Ctf , I dtt ...L f-t--l .L L f-f- I- -l t ~ H, .( Q +-" ~b ~ ~ - ~ ~ T .J T F F r I ~ T =+..; T "I I~, : +- I "I T ; r f: -r, :::! -I. . :i -: ...' I- :) o >- <( ...I W ...I t= I I- W C. a: <( o a: o o ...I LL I- en a: u: [ ~- ~ - ~ - _ 1- _-1- - ~ _.1. _ .L _L - - .- = - - - - --4 ,- - -!- ~ -I-- ~ _1--1- ,-_ --l ..1 - - = t- L - ... I _-1 i- --\- "- ,'-.J ....j-.l .. - I ,,; " ,'.. ill " ....J.--r:~~ ...;. _ -.:..":_1 I ,17 . ,- ..r~ ;'~ h <"" ..~.~..: i H ", ..lTi-t ~ ~ +-1 ,~; ~ -F 1:+= If','j ~ u + ~ . I t-1o-4- t: "" r-+ .... ;;;;;"': !;~;, II .LN ~ +-l. -I-- , f- +- ! -t ~ .1 tl:'=t- ++ -r- T ~ f- I -+- I 1:H= ! f- i l' I ..... +w .1. + 4=' .1 +-I -1 i' 1 l' 1=i +1 l' I I t- t t- T " .::::::::::: T +1= +- H -+-l -j; ~n ~l T l:::jC- J...+ ..l 1-1 -t -r , .1 -r T .1 .1 .L ~l ,J +8= t-~ 1- ..1 ...L .L i +- 1 ~l i '., .~ l- "'.J IT::;:: ,~ I l' ~ I ~I_'.,.;, , "h~:l ~ IJ:.. cH . ._~. =:'.J ' " I I . I I TTiT-ri ..1 ill I 1,1 I I I II I I 1.1 I . I i ~v ~..-f ~.. c"u I- .. .( ~ \.l ~ += t \\. ~ -r 'lU ~ f- J F F r \- i- ~ ~ T+ I ! +- i- * t l- t l' H '1 1 It I- ::) o > .<( ..J W ...J i= I I- W ~ a: <( (,) a: o o ..J u.. .0 Z o (,) w en - .m. .... ... -. . - .... 1:::......."........- -.. :''':.:'' :..: ::,;: t:;; .::" :~1 F t~ ~'k [i .. ~ l .-. _.. .... oL Jjc:::l .. .- -.. ::::::,.,. R l" 11 T T ~ -- - ._. ... ... .... .... .. ..... .. ... .... ... ..... .. - - - ..~ , ... .- .. . - m. .- I?' .... .... .. ~ A I Lil I UI n 0 r ,..." LlI n = = . I .. .( ~ \1 \1 ~ ~ ~ ~ F f= \) t ~ ~ D 2 ~ \U --.l I- ::) o > <a: ..J W ..J i= I I- W 0. a: <a: o a: o o ..J LL Q a: - :J: I- - cc<SD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IV. Bids & Awards y POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE December 17, 1981 AWARD OF PURCHASE ORDERS FOR SUPPLY OF FIVE (5) VEHICLES TYPE OF ACTION Award of Purchase Order SUBJECT SUBMITTED BY K. F. Laverty INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Administration/purchasing Issue: Certain District vehicles needed replacement or new purchase, these vehicles were approved by the District Board in the 1981-1982 Fiscal Equipment Budget. Approval of award to Parker Robb Chevrolet and Sun Valley Ford is needed. Background: In accordance with the Safety and Health code, formal public bids were taken for the supply of two pick-ups, one 3/4 ton pick-up, one 1 ton cab, and one 4 Dr. compact station wagon. Six (6) bid requests were issued and six (6) bids received. Parker Robb was the lowest responsible bidder for all of the trucks. Their total delivered price is $31,093.47; which is $903.56 lower than the next low bidder. Sun Valley was the lowest responsible bidder for the compact station wagon. Their total delivered price is $6,546.50; which is $423.18 lower than the next low bidder. Please note that a clarification on the inclusion of power steering will be accomplished prior to purchase order issuance. This clarification would not effect the low bidders ranking. Recommendation: 1. Award a purchase order to Parker Robb Chevrolet for the supply of the trucks at $31,093.47. 2. Award a purchase order to Sun Valley Ford for the supply of the compact station wagon at $6,546.50 and allow for further clarification. K. F. Laverty RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. " MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ken laverty, Purchasing & Materials Officer . Don Gallagher, Senior Buyer cp-~ c:::::? ~~ AWARD OF VEHICLES - BID REQUEST CS-1-82 Purchasing hereby recommends award of items 1,2, and 3 totaling $31,093.47 to Parker Robb Chevrolet, the lowest responsive bidder. Recommend award of item 4 in the amount of $6,596.50 to Sun Valley Ford who is the lowest responsive bidder for that item. NOTE THE FOllOWING: 1 . Six (6) bids were publically advertized on Nov. 9,11, 1981 . 2. Six (6) bids were issure and received. 3. Don Young Ford, the lowest bidder on item 1, sma 11 pick-ups is non-responsive since his bid is for 1981 vehicles. Please proceed to obtain approval. r ~ ,\ '\-, ~ ~ ~, & ....., JJ <. ~ );) b n ~ .~ * ., ...... ~ ~ ~ .l> :AJ rr, Vi ~ ~ II) ~ ft, J tit - o ') ~ - .(\ ..lQ - ~ ...:. D t) Itr ,.... 11\ ~ ~ U 2':. , - \ 1~~ r~f:-<. S;~ ~~ IJ\~ '\ ~ , "'" ~ ~ ~ '-<I '< V' < I't, :--\ ~ ~ .~ 1;~ () ~9 '-ll ~ ~~ 'r'\ ~~ ~~ '< '-. .VI ...., ~ ::\ ~ ~ ~ 't "" t ..., , \JJ ~ ~ ~ i,t. I "- ~ t) ~.~ I ~ =e ~ o "a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '-I ~ \ ,\ :tl x ~ f\ f' 8 rr tJ ~ \!-\ ~ ~ "" ...'- ~,,-..;.""'~ ~~~~~ ~~'-~~ ~ ~\ ~ ~ ;b~ ~~::-!.l w~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ '\ ~ ~ K ~\l": ~ -:. ..< \n b\ ~ ~ .: ,,- ~ I ()'- I '\ ~~ '\ ,- ~ C'>. ~ ::-.. o--~ ~ ~~ ~~I ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ , ~ ~Ic - ~ ~ z ~" ~.... -{ }> \l, ~ Z d ~ a 0 I ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ R-i\ \~J ~ ~ I-{~ ~ - ""1-'- ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ ....~ f..~ ~ aV) Vl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~~w () ~ ~ ~ IAJ IT, ~ :ij" .... fl', ^~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . \ l', '\.~.I '6' .. ~ ~. ~ ~ ".t:\ ,~ ~ ~ Of ~ a ~ I~ .. ~ ~ I ~ ;~ I ~ . - -{ /T1 :J: !>=" .t" \.AJ N - )>. .. ,0 -i -< <: n1 :x: n r n1 )> OJ V) -{ ;;c }> n -i a " OJ o Vl n V) I I co ~ co N ... 'v Ut~ 1 1 REC'D December 10, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: KEN LAVERTY, PURCHASING & MATERIALS OFFICER FROM: RobertH. Hinkson, Manager, Collection System Operations SUBJECT: 1981-1982 VEHICLE PURCHASE C.S.O. has reviewed the vehicle bids for specification conformance and compatability with the District's fleet and find the following acceptable: Small Pickup - Parker-Robb Chevrolet - $13,089.40 The apparent low bidder Sun Valley Ford ($13,069) is quoting 1981 Ford Courier trucks which are not acceptable. 1 Ton Truck - Parker-Robb Chevrolet - $8,863.45 3/4 Ton Pickup - Parker-Robb Chevrolet - $9,140.62 The bidder has listed an exception in his bid for tires and wheels. We can accept this and recommend Parker-Robb be awarded th is un it. Small Wagon - Sun Valley Ford - $6,546.50 Sun Valley Ford indicates that they have made an error in their bid by not including the cost of power steering in the submittal to the District. I suggest they be awarded this unit irregardless. ~ Robert H. Hinkson Manager, Collection System Operations RHH :yb Costa it~ary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO.V. Consent Calendar POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE December 10, 1981 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 81-30 (DANVILLE AREA) TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT ANNEXATION Jay S. McCoy INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction and Services SUBMITTED BY Parcel No. Area Owner Address Parcel No. & Acreage Remarks Lead A ency A 81-30 Danv. Glenn R. Maynard 17 Sky Terrace Danvi11e, CA 94526 208-120-001 (1.5) ac.) One existing house with a failing septic tank. District to prepare "Notice of Exemption'l. CCCSD RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 81-30 to be included in a future formal annexation to the District. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION HIEF ENG. ~~LW <<I Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. VIr. Eng. POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE December 11, 1981 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE $80,000 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND TO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT FOR THE LANDFILL GAS PROJECT TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE FUNDS SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.!DIV. Steve McDonald, Associate Engineer Engineering Div. BACKGROUND On October 15, 1981 the Board authorized the execution of the Gas Sales Agreement between Getty Synthetic Fuels, Inc., and Central Contra Costa Sanitary District to purchase fuel gases processed from the Acme Landfill by Getty. John Carollo Engineers (JCE) was selected to do the required engineering design to utilize the landfill gas in the District's boilers. JCE developed three alternatives to utilize the landfill gas (LFG), and the recommendation to use the dedicated boiler/burner method has been selected for implementation. A rough piping and instrumentation diagram, and major equipment list has been developed. There are long-lead times associated with the purchase of much of the equipment and instrumentation. It is necessary to expedite equipment purchase at this time to assure meeting the May 1,1982 deadline in the Gas Sales Agreement with Getty. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the expenditure of $80,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund for the purchase of equipment and instrumentation for the Landfill Gas Project; DSP No. 3469. This expenditure was included in the Capital Expenditure Plan. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT.!DIV. ~MC JL ~~CLW cc(sD Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO'VIII. Col System POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE SUBJECT Dec. 11, 1981 TYPE OF ACTION REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO PAY $13,617.00 FOR ~ENDOR SERVICES IN THE DAVID HORNE CLAIM - 27 RHEEM BLVD., ORINDA Authorization SUBMITTED BY Robert H. Hinkson INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Collection System Operations ISSUE: A sewage overflow, the result of a stoppage in the main line sewer serving the Horne residence, took place on September 23, 1981 causing substantial property damage. BACKGROUND: The settlement of this claim is being negotiated by George Hills Company, representing the District, and Mr. Horne. A full and final settlement figure and agreement has not been achieved yet. In the interim, we have con- tracted for certain work to be done at the Horne residence that should be paid for now. 1. Aeor-Space Heating & Cooling Company 2. Design Center Interiors 3. Service Master, Inc. 4. Master Construction Company $ 2,000.00 3,374.17 2,310.50 5,932.33 $13,617.00 RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $13,617.00 in vendor payments in the David Horne claim, 27 Rheem Blvd., Orinda. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION RHH .) i.... " . \ Costa itary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS N~ IV. Consent Cal. 2 12 3 81 VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE November 25, 1981 SUBJECT POSITION PAPER AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 81-27 (DANVILLE AREA), P.A. 81 TYPEOFACTION 28 (SAN RAMON AREA) AND P.A. 81-29 (WALNUT CREEK AREA, TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE ANNEXATION D I STR I CT. SUBMITTED BY Parcel No Area 81 - 2 7 Da n v . 81-28 San Ramon 81-291 W.C. Ja INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction and Services Owner Address Parcel No. & Acreage Remarks Lead A enc Norman E. Holden 708 El Pintado Danvi lIe, CA 197-161-022 & 025 5.7 Acres Sub 6065 - Containing 5 lots Tentative plan and "Negative Declaration'l by County. County Ma r t h a Far i a 4685 Richmond Ave. Fremont, CA 208-260-035 14.6 Acres Minor Subdivision 67-81 - Three County lots are zoned Administrative Offi~e District. Tentative Map and plans approved by County. I'Negative Declaration" by County. James K. Wittkop, etux 766 Hutchinson Rd. Walnut Creek, CA 94598 139-090-006 0.61 Acres. Failing Septic Tank - District to prepare "Notice of Exemption". CCCSD RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 81-27, P.A. 81-28 and P.A. 81-29 to be included in a future formal annexation to the District. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION '- ex.W JSM CLW Sanitary BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IV. Consent Calendar POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE November 25, 1981 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION QUITCLAIM EASEMENTS TO STATE OF CALIFORNIA JOB 1616 - ORINDA AREA. RIGHT OF WAY Ja INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction and Services SUBMITTED BY ISSUE: The State of California has requested the District to quit claim the subject easements. BACKGROUND: The subject easements are located within State Highway 24. The sanitary sewer facilities which were in these easements were relocated outside the freeway area when the freeway was widened in conjunction with the B.A.R.T. construction. The subject easements are not needed for District use and should be quit claimed to clear the States title to the freeway area. RECOMMENDATION: Approval, execute Quit Claim Deed and forward same to the State of Cal ifornia for recording. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JSM e~CLH Sanitary BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IV. Consent Calendar POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE November 25, 1981 SUBJECT TYPE OF ACTION EXCUTE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY WITH REX E. RIGHT OF WAY DOHERTY, ET UX, JOB 1798 (LOT 44, SUB. 3833) ORINDA AREA. SUBMITTED BY Jay S. McCoy .JNITIATING Dj::PT./DIVd Lonstructlon an Services ISSUE: The property owner desires to construct a wooden deck and a portion of a concrete pool deck within an existing District sewer easement. BACKGROUND: The property owner and his architect have cooperated with District staff in altertng . their plans to minimize the impact upon the existing sewer easement. Staff has determined that the improvements do not interfere with the present use of our sewer, however, if they should become an interference, the agreement requires the property owner to remedy any harm within 30 days of notice to do so. RECOMMENDATION: Approval, execute "Agreement" (in triplicate) and authorize the recording. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ENG. INITIATING DEPT./DIV. .., L~JSM ~~ CLW itary BOARD OF DIRECTORS Nqv. Consent Calendar POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer SUBJECT ACCEPT AND AUTHORIZE FILING NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR JOB 3429,3430,3435, INSTALLATION OF CHEMICAL INJECT- ION FACILITIES AT VARIOUS DISTRICT PUMP STATIONS. DATE November 24, ]98] TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT JOB AS COMPLETE SUBMITTED BY Jay McCoy INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction and Services BACKGROUND: On 6-]8-8] a contract was awarded to Wilson Pacific Construction for installing Chemica] Injection Systems, for installing Odor and Corrosion Contro], at Moraga, Fairview and Ma]tby Pump Stations. AI] work has been satisfactorily completed and it is necessary to file a Notice of Completion. RECOMMENDATION: Accept project as complete and authorize filing of Notice of Completion. INIT T'~'JMC REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~CL\4 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V. Eng. POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE November 30, 1981 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE DISTRIBUTION OF THE DRAFT STAGE 5B FACILITIES PLAN AND EIR AMENDMENT TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE REPORT DISTRIBUTION SCHEDULE HEARING SUBMITTED BY Curtis Swanson, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT.!DIV. Engineering Div. POLICY ISSUE: Should the Draft Stage 5B Facilities Plan and EIR Amendment be distributed for review by interested local citizens and government agencies? When should the public hearing on the Draft Facilities Plan and EIR Amendment be scheduled? BACKGROUND: Earlier this year, the Board authorized Metcalf & Eddy (M&E) to prepare a Facilities Plan Amendment for the Stage 5B treatment plant expansion project. This Amendment includes a Project Report, EIR, and Revenue Program/Financial Plan. M&E has evaluated several project alternatives which comply with the District's Waste Discharge Permit and the Reclaimed Water Supply Contract including the project recommended in the 1977 Stage 5B Facilities Plan. These alternatives were discussed with the Board at the September 17 meeting. M&E is recommending a project which provides for conventional secondary treatment of wastewater flows up to 45 MGD (average dry weather flow), and sludge thickening and dewatering. The dewatered sludge will be incinerated in the existing multiple hearth furnaces. The treated effluent will be discharged to Suisun Bay via the existing outfall. The recommended project will not produce an effluent that satisfies consti- tuent limits of the Reclaimed Water Supply Contract with CCCWD. However, there are provisions for incorporating separate nitrification and phosphorus removal facilities for future water reclamation. The estimated cost to design and construct the recommended project is $13,300,000. The estimated annual operating cost for 1985 (first full year of operation) is $10,200,000. To comply with CEQA and Clean Water Grant Program Requirements, the District must distribute the Draft Facilities Plan and EIR Amendment for public review. A hearing must also be conducted to receive public comments on the proposed project. Because of hearing notice requirements, the earliest that this hearing can be held is January 21,1982. INlcY); REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION CWS V~ JL e~ CLW RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to distribute the Draft Stage 58 Facilities Plan and EIR Amendment for review by the public and government agencies. Authorize the District Secretary to schedule a-public hearing on the Draft Facilities Plan and EIR Amendment for January 21,1982. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR SOARD ACTION 1~f?SPT'/OIVCWS VL JL ~~ CLW CHIEF ENG. Central itary BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. v. POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE November 2 1 81 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT AUTHORIZE $15,000 FOR DESIGN OF DISTRICT PROJECT 3622 ROAD AND GROUND DRAINAGE REHABILITATION AT TREATMENT PLANT. AUTHORIZE FUNDS SUBMITTED BY Lloyd Smith INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Division BACKGROUND: Thi~ project consists of correcting a number of flooding and drainage problems throughout the main Treatment Plant area that remain from the Stage 5A Project. Originally this design work was in- cluded in the scope of work for Metcalf & Eddy; however, the project can be completed at a much lower cost using District staff. The preliminary construction cost estimate is $190,000.00. The State Water Resources Control Board has approved the design of this project for qrant fundinq. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $15,000 for design of Project 3622, Road and Ground Drainage Rehabilitation at Treatment Plant. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~'-"~LS e~ CLW INITIATING DEPT./DIV. District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V I. POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE November 24, 1981 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT + TRANSFER OF $6600- FROM CONSTRUCTION AND SERVICES DIVISION 0 & M BUDGET TO EQUIPMENT BUDGET. AND AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF ONE E.O.M. 6100 MICROFILM AUTHORIZE TRANSFER SUBMITTED BY Jay S. McCoy ICNITIATING DE;.PT.!DIV. onstructlon and Services BACKGROUND: The District has actively pursued a microfilm program for its Permanent Records. Updateable equipment previously proposed by staff costs approximately $30,000. Recently, with advancement in silver fi~m technology, equipment is now available at an initial cost of $6,600-. (See Attached Flyer). The system is compatable with existing microfiche systems in the Permit and Right of Way Sections, and could be used in the proposed District wide system. Attached is a cost analysis for use of this Ilinhouse" program versus a service bureau. As you will note, an initial cost savings of 2~ per frame is possible, including amortization of purchased equipment and the expense of one personto perform the filming. It is antici- pated that existing staff will perform the labor for the filming. With an estimated 550,000 frames to be filmed, an overall savings of $11 ,000 will be rea 1 i zed. The filming of paper records will coincide well with the move to the new office building. It is desirable to move as little paper as possible from the Springbrook site. The filming of over 3600 files in the Permit vault will eliminate the need to move the majority of papers in these files and conserve space in the new building. There is $13,800 in Construction and Services Div. 0 & M budget for out- side microfilming services. $6600~ could be transferred from this account to the equi~ment budget for the purchase of the E.O.M. 6100. The remaining $7200- should be appl ied towards the operation and maintenance of the microfilm/filing system. RECOMMENDATION: camera processor. Authorize $6600 for the purchase of a microfilm Attachment REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JSM t: ~ CLW .. "J Cost Comparison Based On Filming 400 Documents Per Hour Costs ustng microfilming s,ervi,ce Each frame Fi lming 18.90 1m equals $ .0189 EA Jackets .20/EA equals .0029 EA La bo r 15.50/HR equals .0326 EA Total $ .0544 EA I , Co~ts p~rchasing microfilm equipment Equipment Labor @ R45E including benefits = lO.30Hr ~r $ .0019 EA .0023 EA .0030 EA .0021 EA .0258 EA Total $ . 035 1 lEA Chemicals Fi 1m Jackets 550,000 documents @ $.0544 per document $29,920 550,000 documents @ $.0304 per document = '$19,305* Savings $10,615 * tncludes purchase of machine and salary of one clerk. "_'''I\Oo9;.",,'t,.','__ " ,.".~".. ..........;'...... Mol .._ ._",._.......,..,.........,._,'..._...-_._~,,_v._ "._.~~__.._.____~._.__...____~____,___.__~.___ _~..__~.__ _.'__'___,_~_ _~ ._.~_~_ ____,_ __._.______ ___ __.~__...