Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD MINUTES 01-10-02 43 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF THE DISTRICT BOARD OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT HELD ON JANUARY 10, 2002 The District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District convened in an adjourned regular session at its regular place of meeting, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, County of Contra Costa, State of California, at 2:00 p.m. on January 10, 2002. President Hockett called the meeting to order and requested that the Secretary call roll. 1. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Members: Nejedly, Menesini, Lucey, Boneysteele, Hockett ABSENT: Members: None a. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Board and staff joined in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. b. ELECTION OF DISTRICT BOARD PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT PRO TEM FOR 2002 It was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Nejedly, that Member Mario M. Menesini be elected District Board President for 2002. Member Menesini was elected by unanimous acclamation. It was moved by Member Menesini and seconded by Member Lucey, that Member James A. Nejedly be elected President Pro Tem of the District Board of Directors for 2002. Member Nejedly was elected by unanimous acclamation. President Hockett congratulated Members Menesini and Nejedly on their election. It was the consensus of the Board that President Hockett preside over the remainder of the meeting. c. INTRODUCTIONS . INTRODUCE JEFFREY SKINNER. NEWLY HIRED SOURCE CONTROL INSPECTOR I . RECOGNIZE BRUCE DOBEY ON HIS PROMOTION TO SHIFT SUPERVISOR Mr. Jeffrey Skinner, Source Control Inspector I, was introduced and welcomed to the District by President Hockett and the Board of Directors. Mr. Bruce Dobey was congratulated on his recent promotion to Shift Supervisor. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS None 3. CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Member Menesini and seconded by Member Nejedly, that the Consent Calendar, consisting of Items a. through c., be approved as recommended, resolutions adopted as appropriate, and recordings duly authorized. 01 10 02 44 a. An easement was accepted from the San Ramon Valley Unified School District over the existing public sewer at Coyote Creek Elementary School, San Ramon, Job 5289, Parcel 2, and Job 5315, Parcel 1; the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District were authorized to accept said easement on behalf of the District, recording with the Contra Costa County Recorder was authorized; and Resolution No. 2002-001 was adopted to that effect. Motion unanimously approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: b. Menesini, Nejedly, Lucey, Boneysteele, Hockett None None Easements were accepted from Donald E. Reimers and Karen Reimers, (Parcel 1) and Terah R. and Leslie A. Larrick (Parcel 2) over the existing public sewer at Belle Avenue, Pleasant Hill, Job 5574; the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District were authorized to accept said easements on behalf of the District; recording was authorized with the Contra Costa County Recorder; and Resolution Nos. 2002-002 and 2002-003 were adopted to that effect. Motion unanimously approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: Menesini, Nejedly, Lucey, Boneysteele, Hockett None None Authorization was given for Proposed Annexations P.A. 02-01 (Orinda), P.A. 02-02 (Alamo), P.A. 02-03 (Danville), P.A. 02-04 (Danville), P.A. 02-05 (Walnut Creek), and P.A. 02-06 (Diablo) to be included in a future formal annexation to the District. c. Motion unanimously approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: Menesini, Nejedly, Lucey, Boneysteele, Hockett None None 4. HEARINGS CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND DISTRICT CODE SECTION 6.20.300 SCHEDULE OF REIMBURSEMENT FEES. TO ESTABLISH REIMBURSEMENT FEES APPLICABLE TO PROPERTY WHICH COULD CONNECT TO PROJECT 5183. 5357. 5377. 5409. 5432. AND 5485 FACILITIES a. Mr. Charles W. Batts, General Manager, stated that the District's reimbursement fee program was established by ordinance many years ago as a convenience for individuals and developers who are required to extend public main sewers to their property in order to have wastewater service. The reimbursement fee program provides the opportunity for the original installer of the sewer to recover a portion of the cost from others who subsequently connect to the pipe built by the installer. Once or twice a year, staff recommends that the Board establish reimbursement fees for those installers who have requested accounts for their projects. This public hearing is the last step in the process to establish reimbursement fees for the projects discussed in the position paper. 01 10 (.i..-"..#> ç.).... ' ~i /". ;f ""1 45 Mr. Batts introduced Mr. Jarred Miyamoto-Mills, Principal Engineer, who stated that when a public main sewer must be extended the property owner hires an engineer to design and a contractor to install the new publië main séwèr. The property owner pays fees, and receives permits, and the District inspects the work as installation proceeds. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills described typical costs associated with connection to a public sewer and reviewed public sewer financing methods including direct payment by property owner(s), reimbursements to installers, Local Improvement Districts (LID's), and Contractual Assessment Districts (CAD's). Discussion followed with regard to the information provided to the public on these costs and programs. Member Menesini requested copies of that information. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills reviewed an idealized case of how the reimbursement fee program would work. This is the model for the reimbursement fee program. As the Board can see from the position paper, this idealized case is rare and adjustments must be made based on the specific situation. Public notice is required as part of the reimbursement fee program. Individual letters are sent to the installers and the owners of affected properties, and legal notice is posted and published in the Contra Costa Times. Two installers and 12 property owners responded to the letters and legal notices that are the subject of this public hearing, and by reference are made a part of these proceedings. Mr. Miyamoto- Mills stated that the vast majority of the responses were to ask where the meeting was, how the calculations were made, and how and when payment would be required. Many times people are afraid they will have to pay before they connect and staff assures them that payment is made at the time of connection. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills described Project 5409, Springhill Road in Lafayette, and introduced Messrs. Gordon Winger and Kevin Marks from the Girl Scout Council, who were present in the audience. Discussion followed with regard to how the public uses of the property are determined and sized. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that all of the sewers being considered at this public hearing are the minimum size, 8-inch. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills described Project 5377, Smith Road in Alamo, and indicated that Mr. Peter Palmer, of 201 Smith Road, is the installer of this project. District staff had been working for some time with Mr. Palmer with his sewer project. A portion of the project was deemed special facility under the District Code. Mr. Palmer was concerned that the reimbursement fee program has a 20-year sunset and he asks that the District consider extending the period for his reimbursement account. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that he told Mr. Palmer that was not possible in this action today but that the District Code is reviewed periodically and that could be brought to the Board the next time this is considered. In response to questions from Member Boneysteele, Mr. Kenton L. Aim, Counsel for the District, stated that he does not believe that there is a legal prohibition for extending the reimbursement period because property owners would not pay until the hook up is made and the District would not be entering into a contract with them. The District Code states that it can be modified; and in fact, that has been done three or four times through the years. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated further that Mr. Palmer questioned inclusion of four lots within the boundary of the reimbursement area or whether they could be served to the south by another sewer. Mr. Palmer was advised that the District Code provisions allow for adjustments to be made in reimbursement fees for either the additional lots or deleted lots at a future date if they are served by a different sewer. The installer stands a risk of the uncertainty in the process. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills noted that Mr. Palmer waived the reimbursement fee for two parcels in return for the easements through those properties for the sewer. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills described Project 5485, North Gate Road in Walnut Creek. In a telephone call, Mr. Ronald Bueche expressed concern that the installer's parcel has more potential for development than was included in the reimbursement fee calculation. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that if additional connections occur, the reimbursement fees from the other potential participants would be recalculated and the amounts reduced. Also, 01 10 02 46 there is an additional parcel that is relatively near the manhole and Mr. Bueche Questioned why that was not included in the project. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that the reason it was not included was because a sewer main extension would be required and then these reimbursement fees would not be applicable. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills noted that the position paper lists six projects but only five are included in the recommendation. After receiving individual letter notices, the installer for Project 5183, Brodia Way in Walnut Creek, and all of the property owners of the potential connections reached agreement on cost sharing. At 2:35 p.m., President Hockett opened the public hearing to receive comments on adoption of the proposed ordinance to amend District Code Section 6.20.300 Schedule of Reimbursement Fees, to establish reimbursement fees applicable to property which could connect to Project 5183, 5357, 5377, 5409, 5432, and 5485 facilities. Mr. Roland O. Bueche, 676 North Gate Road, Walnut Creek, stated that his property is only 100 feet away from the sewer and his neighbor is 1,500 feet away. Mr. Bueche stated that he should not have to pay for his neighbor to connect. Mr. Bueche questioned the assumption that he owns two parcels when he actually owns one parcel of 2.5 acres. Mr. Bueche showed an aerial photograph and legal description, and described the facilities and structures currently on his property. In response to questions from Mr. Aim, Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that although two potential connections were attributable to Mr. Bueche's parcel, if the parcel were to remain in the current use and he connected only one house, Mr. Bueche would pay only one fee. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that staff looks at the adjoining density and that is how two potential connections were attributed to Mr. Bueche's property. If the District were to reduce the potential connections, it would increase the costs for all participants including Mr. Bueche. There being no further comments, President Hockett closed the public hearing at the hour of 2:50 p.m. Following discussion, it was moved by Member Nejedly and seconded by Member Menesini, that Ordinance No. 220 be adopted, amending District Code Section 6.20.300, Schedule of Reimbursement Fees, to establish reimbursement fees applicable to property which could connect to Project 5357, 5377, 5409, 5432, and 5485 facilities. Motion unanimously approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: Nejedly, Menesini, Lucey, Boneysteele, Hockett None None 5. CALL FOR REQUESTS TO CONSIDER ITEMS OUT OF ORDER At this time, President Hockett proceeded to Items 8.a., Engineering, and 9.a., Correspondence. 8. ENGINEERING a. CONSIDER REQUEST BY WALTER COSTA TO PAY FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR SEWER INSTALLATION. PROJECT 5288 9. CORRESPONDENCE a. LETTER RECEIVED FROM MR. WALTER H. COSTA. OF LAFAYETTE. REGARDING REIMBURSEMENT FEES Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that Mr. Walter Costa of 1264 Redwood Lane in Lafayette, has appealed a staff decision regarding collection of a sewer reimbursement 01 10 02~ 47 fee from his neighbor who recently connected to the public sewer. Staff determined that the neighbor did not have to pay the sewer reimbursement fee that had been set up for Mr. Costa because the point of conneètiôh Wäs'í1'ot to the sewer that was installed by Mr. Costa. Instead the sewer connection was made to an upstream sewer that was installed by another neighbor. Under the District Code, reimbursements are charged only when a property physically connects directly to a public sewer for which a sewer reimbursement has been established. Mr. Batts introduced Mr. Jarred Miyamoto-Mills, Principal Engineer, who stated that the Costa's main sewer extension, Job 5288, consisted of 92 feet of 8-inch pipe. The job was completed and the Costa's home at 1264 Redwood Lane was connected in October 1998. Reimbursement fees for the 1,300 feet of 8-inch sewer downstream of Job 5288 (Costa) were not applicable and were not paid by Mr. Costa. Reimbursement fee for the potential connection at 1265 Redwood Lane to Job 5288 (Costa) was established by the Board of Directors in October 1999. The McKee's main sewer extension, Job 5430, consisting of 424 feet of 8-inch pipe was completed in March 2000. The McKee's did not request a reimbursement account. The District made a number of notices to the McKee's to ask if they wanted a reimbursement account. They did not respond, and no reimbursement account was established. The Quinn home at 1265 Redwood Lane connected to the Job 5430 sewer extension (McKee) in December 2001. No reimbursement fee was collected because it was not a reimbursement project. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills showed an aerial photo of the properties and described the sewer extension. The Quinn's connected to the McKee Project 5430, not to the Costa Project 5288. The Quinn's had expected to pay a reimbursement fee because they had been noticed as the people here today were. Mr. Walter H. Costa, 1264 Redwood Lane, Lafayette, stated that he is good friends with the Quinn's and McKee's and the other residents in the area. Mr. Costa stated that he spoke with Mrs. Quinn yesterday to tell her he was going to appear at this Board Meeting. The Quinn's fully expected to pay a reimbursement fee of approximately $7,000. Mr. Costa stated that the cost to him for installation of the sewer was approximately $15,000 plus the cost of the lateral. Half of the cost was to be paid by the Quinn's. Mr. Costa stated that as he understands it, if you hook up to the end of a line you do not pay a reimbursement fee but if you hook up to the side of a line you pay a fee. Using a graphic, Mr. Costa described the Quinn and McKee installations. Mr. Costa stated that if he had known he would not receive a reimbursement fee, he could have had his septic tank pumped twice a year for 15 years for the same cost and not have had to install the line. Mr. Costa stated that since he was misinformed and expecting to get a reimbursement, he would request that the District reimburse him for half the cost of extending the sewer. In the discussion that followed, Member Lucey stated that he visited the site and found that staff was absolutely correct in what they did. Member Lucey stated that staff followed the District's rules and regulations but he does not think it was the right thing. Member Lucey stated that the District should reimburse Mr. Costa. As indicated in the letter attached to the position paper, Mr. Costa expected to be reimbursed when the Quinn's connected to the sewer. Member Lucey stated that the District should reimburse Mr. Costa for this special case and this case only. Member Nejedly stated that the District did tell Mr. Costa he would be reimbursed but the District does not know what will happen tomorrow. Member Nejedly agreed with Member Lucey that staff did the correct thing, but he does not personally feel it should be Mr. Costa's fault that the Quinn's hooked up to the McKee line. Member Menesini expressed concern that the District would be setting a precedent by reimbursing Mr. Costa. The District cannot see the future. In hindsight it is unfortunate that the Quinn's did not connect to Mr. Costa's sewer extension, but it is not the District's fault that they did not. Mr. Batts stated that by ordinance, the District is limited to direct connections to the sewer extension for which the reimbursement account is established. The reason is that if someone builds a house in San Ramon they would have to pay for all the sewer 01 10 02 48 extensions between the treatment plant and their house. When the reimbursement program was established, an effort was made to make it equitable. Member Boneysteele expressed concern when the installer installs the sewer up to the lot line and stops as Mr. Costa did, rather than extending the sewer past the line of the property. Member Boneysteele suggested that consideration be given to that. This is an extremely difficult decision. Everyone acted reasonably. If the McKee's had established a reimbursement account, then the Quinn's would have paid a reimbursement fee to the McKee's rather than Mr. Costa. But they did not. It is unfortunate it worked out this way. If the District pays Mr. Costa, that money must come from the Sewer Construction Fund or some other fund and it would have to be made up by the District ratepayers. President Hockett stated that the District Code and the decisions Mr. Costa made when he put in his sewer extension are clear. The District would not be serving the ratepayers of this District if we tried to pay for every misunderstanding upstream or downstream. It is likely that there are many people who anticipated a reimbursement but for one reason or another did not receive it. It would be a gift of public funds for the District to reimburse Mr. Costa. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that clearly a misunderstanding arose regarding the communication with Mr. Costa. After discussing this with Mr. Costa, staff took a close look at all communications on reimbursements. Even though a reimbursement account is established, there is no guarantee anyone will ever receive a reimbursement. It depends on the connection. If the Quinn's had not connected within the 20-year reimbursement period, there would have been no connection and no question of reimbursement. Staff will revise the communications in an effort to make them clearer. Following discussion, it was moved by Member Menesini and seconded by President Hockett, that the request of Mr. Walter Costa for the District to pay the reimbursement fee for sewer installation, Project 5288, be denied and that staff be directed to prepare a letter advising Mr. Costa of the District decision. Motion approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Menesini, Hockett, Boneysteele NOES: Members: Nejedly, Lucey ABSENT: Members: None At this time, President Hockett reverted to the order of the agenda. 6. BIDS AND AWARDS a. AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO KAWEAH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE FILTER PLANT ROTARY WASH AND DRAIN- BACK CHANNEL PIPING UPGRADES PROJECT. DP 7183C Mr. Batts, General Manager, introduced Mr. James L. Belcher, Senior Engineer, who stated that this pipe renovation project is listed in the Capital Improvement Budget in the recurring project section, and accounts for nearly 20 percent of the annual Treatment Plant capital budget. Two smaller projects were combined in an effort to attract more competitive bids. Mr. Belcher stated that this project will replace or install new piping in two areas. The first part of the project will replace and relocate filter plant rotary wash piping that has failed. The second part of the project will install washdown piping and hydrants adjacent to the basin drain-back channel reducing the time and manpower required to clean the channel. It was moved by Member Nejedly and seconded by Member Menesini, that award of a construction contract in the amount of $181,400 for the Filter Plant Rotary Wash and Drain-Back Channel Piping Upgrades Project, DP 7183C, be authorized to Kaweah Construction Company, the lowest responsible bidder. There being no objection, the motion was unanimously approved. 01 10 If),..'),'.. (;) U~ 49 7. REPORTS a. GENERAL MANAGER 1 ) Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that there are several items relating to the Recycled Water Program which will require Board action over the next several months, including consideration of an increase in recycled water rates, and consideration of an agreement with East Bay Municipal Utility District to go forward with the Lamorinda Recycled Water Project. Member Lucey asked the status of the Lamorinda Recycled Water Project, indicating that he thought the project was on hold until there was a drought because of negative public comments received. Mr. Batts stated he did not recall that and would have staff review the minutes. Mr. Batts stated that he has asked staff to give the Board an update on the current status of the Recycled Water Program and to provide some thoughts on the priorities of the Recycled Water Program for the next several years. Staff is looking at possible cuts in the Recycled Water Program component of the existing Capital Improvement Plan. Mr. Batts introduced Ms. Ann E. Farrell, Director of Engineering, who recapped the history of District's Recycled Water Program beginning with planning in the late 1980's and early 1990's. During that time a series of projects was scoped including Pleasant Hill Zone, Lamorinda Zone, North Concord Zone, Martinez Zone, A- Line Zone, and industrial reuse. The Recycled Water Program really got underway when a general agreement with Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) was authorized by the Board on October 6, 1994. Using a map, Ms. Farrell provided a general overview of recycled water projects and indicated that the Board may wish to have particular projects come back at a future Board Meeting for a more detailed review. Ms. Farrell stated that the approach used by the District in selecting recycled water projects was to develop a benefit to cost ratio, selecting projects with a benefit greater than cost. However, not all costs were included. Cost was determined based on capital cost with 30-year payback at 6 percent interest; sunk capital costs were allocated out to all potential projects; and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs were based on estimated District costs. Revenue was determined based on potable users paying 50 percent of the cost of potable water, and non-potable users paying 75 percent of the cost of canal water. District recycled water rates are low because the District wanted to make recycled water attractive to potential users. Ms. Farrell noted that Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) and East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) are charging in the range of 80 to 90 percent of potable water. Ms. Farrell reviewed the projects passing the initial screening. The Pleasant Hill Zone was the most cost effective project. It was close and had high volume uses. CCWD was willing to allow the District to develop the project. The Lamorinda Project is a joint project with EBMUD and EBMUD will participate financially. EBMUD has approached the District on the Lamorinda Project again. District staff is looking at the Industrial Reuse Project again as discussed with the Board earlier this year. Industrial reuse is potentially attractive due to high volume use and use of existing facilities. There is limited interest from CCWD for industrial reuse. Pursuant to the General Agreement with CCWD, the CCCSD Board approved the Business Plan for the Pleasant Hill Zone in April 1995. In June 1995, the CCWD Board voted not to participate in a joint project but to allow CCCSD to go forward with the project. CCCSD negotiated a project specific agreement with CCWD. CCCSD is solely responsible for financing, planning, design, construction, and operation. The cost to get the pipeline to Boyd Road to serve current users 541 acre feet of recycled water per 01 10 02 50 01 year was $9.1 million. Ms. Farrell reviewed the proposed users for this fiscal year where benefits justify the costs. Those are Pleasant Hill Phase IV (48 acre feet per year), Pleasant Hill Fill In (15 acre feet per year) and Old Quarry (36 acre feet per year). The cost for these users was $600,000. Ms. Farrell stated that the District needs to bring on users to generate revenue now that the pipeline has been extended, but the District also needs to consider recycled water rates. Other future potential users could use as much as 471 acre feet per year with a benefit/cost ratio is less than 1.0. Ms. Farrell stated that staff will review the minutes with regard to the Lamorinda Project. EBMUD has applied for a grant and if they get the grant they are interested in pursuing the Lamorinda joint project again. The Principles of Agreement for the Lamorinda Project were approved by the CCCSD and EBMUD Boards in 1997. CCCSD committed to fund the pipeline and treatment plant improvements, at an estimated cost of between $500,000 and $1 million. CCCSD would recapture those costs through the wholesale rate to EBMUD. EBMUD committed to pay for CCCSD sunk costs of $1 million to $1.5 million. If the Board wishes to go forward, staff would recommend that there be zero up front costs and that payments equal CCCSD costs for doing the project. Negotiations with EBMUD are ongoing. It is anticipated that an agreement will be brought back to the Board for consideration this spring. Member Lucey stated that he has no problem revisiting the issue, but he wanted to be clear where the District left it. Ms. Farrell stated that the Industrial Reuse Project was brought to the Board because the District has facilities that are not being used. Early in 2001, CCWD declined to participate in the Business Plan for the Industrial Reuse Project. CCCSD completed an abbreviated Business Plan cost analysis in December 2001. The total cost to deliver recycled water in current dollars was $275 per acre foot. The problem is that the two users that would receive the recycled water would replace the two highest CCWD users so CCWD maintains that CCCSD should pay a duplication of services cost. CCWD would add on $352 per acre foot for duplication of services. CCWD's current canal water cost is $436 per acre foot. Capital costs for the project are in the range of $14 million of which about $8 million would go to CCWD to reimburse them for reservoirs. Ms. Farrell recommended that the cost analysis be sent to CCWD. CCWD is in the process of updating its Water Supply Master Plan. The burden should be on CCWD to come to CCCSD for a project. In response to questions from Member Menesini, Ms. Farrell stated that the environmental community should be made aware that CCCSD can provide recycled water at $275 per acre foot. Advocates are needed. Ms. Farrell reviewed the financial model used for the Pleasant Hill Zone. Total costs to date for recycled water are $9.7 million, but the model underestimated the Pleasant Hill Zone costs. Only $5.2 million of sunk costs were allocated to the Pleasant Hill Zone because it was assumed that the remaining costs would be allocated to other projects. The cost to connect customers and capital renewal and replacements costs were not included. The initial calculated payback was 30 years; however, the calculated payback with all costs included is 50 plus years. Ms. Farrell stated that the calculated payback with an aggressive rate increase (80 percent of potable cost) would be 40 years. Existing users are currently at a lower rate so it would be recommended that such a rate increase be implemented over time. Ms. Farrell stated that this matter will be coming back to the Board in the next few months. At that time, the Board will be asked to consider the following financial issues: . 30-year payback on the Pleasant Hill Zone is not possible; 10 O,"~ ') ~ 51 . There is a need to adopt more rigorous benefit/cost analysis when contemplating future recycled water projects; . The revenue stream is based on artificially low rates; and . There is a need to adopt an aggressive strategy for raising rates to improve the revenue stream and reduce the payback period. Ms. Farrell stated that existing users must be considered, but it is not appropriate to bring new users on at artificially low rates. Rate setting scenarios will be presented to the Board in the February time frame. A public hearing will be scheduled to consider setting new rates in April/May. The Recycled Water Supply Agreement with EBMUD will be brought to the Board in the Spring. The Industrial Reuse Project is on hold unless interest is expressed by CCWD. The benefit/cost ratio of recycled water projects will be evaluated more rigorously in the future. The Board thanked Ms. Farrell for her informative presentation. 2) Mr. Batts, General Manager, introduced Mr. Randy Schmidt, Senior Engineer, who provided an update on Basin A South closure. In 1965 the District received asphalt-like material from Shell Oil. The material was used to stabilize the District's levee system. It was also used by Contra Costa County for fill on nearby roads. At that time, the material was considered non-hazardous. In the 1980's, Federal hazardous waste regulations were promulgated. Shell Oil notified the District that the material may be hazardous. In 1987, the District voluntarily initiated an investigation. The results of the investigation indicated that some soils were considered hazardous waste. The groundwater directly under the affected soils showed some contamination, but the groundwater migrating offsite consistently meets drinking water standards. The soils are basically impervious and contaminants are relatively insoluble. There was some surface exposure of contaminated soils. California Environmental Protection Agency Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) requires remedial action to prevent human exposure and to prevent surface runoff. Mr. Schmidt stated that failure to conduct jointly developed remedial action could result in a Court Consent Order from DTSC, costs from such an action could increase by up to 1800 percent to the range of $18 million to $20 million, and the District could be required to obtain a hazardous waste treatment and storage and disposal facility permit. Mr. Schmidt stated that the best closure alternative both from minimizing public exposure and from a financial standpoint would be to cap the material in place and monitor the groundwater. The construction cost for this alternative would be less than $1 million. The alternative to remove and treat the contaminated soil would cost at least $18 million, would require approximately 50 trucks per day for three to six years, and would involve airborne exposure from dust. Mr. Schmidt stated that design of the project to cap the materials in Basin A south with 40,000 cubic yards of cover is 50 percent complete. Approximately 18,000 cubic yards of soil have from stockpiled mainly from the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project, and 20,000 to 50,000 more cubic yards have been confirmed from a Contra Costa Water District pipeline project. This could save approximately $400,000 of the $1 million construction cost. Mr. Schmidt reviewed the regulatory schedule calling for submission of the Drat Removal Action Workplan to DTSC January 14, 2002; approval of the Draft Removal Action Workplan by mid February 2002; a 30-day public comment period to be conducted by DTSC in March 2002; and finalization of the Removal Action Workplan by mid April 2002. The design/construct schedule calls for 80 percent design by April 2002; chemical analysis of fill material by April 2002; 100 percent design for bid by mid May 2002; start of construction in July 2002; and completion of construction by October 1, 2002. Ms. Schmidt stated that there will be ongoing costs for this project for perimeter well monitoring, and there will be a deed restriction on the 01 10 02 52 property. To date the District has received $200,000 from Shell Oil and will receive a total of approximately $450,000. The total cost of the project is estimated to be approximately $2.4 million. President Hockett thanked Mr. Schmidt for the update. BREAK President Hockett declared a recess at the hour of 4:32 p.m., reconvening at the hour of 4:45 p.m. with all parties present as previously designated. b. c. d. 01 3) Mr. Batts, General Manager, introduced Mr. John Pearl, Collection System Operations Division Manager, who reported on the St. Stephens Drive, Orinda, temporary sewer repair. A broken storm drain culvert has recently worsened a historic slide area in Orinda. Mr. Pearl showed slides and described the situation. The erosion is now threatening a District 6-inch main sewer. If the erosion continues another three feet, the District sewer line will be exposed and damaged, and sewage could flow into a nearby creek. In order to protect the sanitary sewer line from an imminent threat, District crews temporarily stabilized the area. Mr. Pearl stated that he is working with Safety and Risk Manager David Clovis and District Counsel Kent Aim on this matter. 4) Mr. Batts, General Manager, distributed a letter from Ms. Bette Boatmun, Chair of the Contra Costa Special Districts Association (CCSDA), urging special district board members to attend the next CCSDA meeting on January 28, 2002 at 10:00 a.m. The topic will be regulations governing grand juries and the grand jury process. 5) Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that the Board Financial Planning and Policy Workshop is scheduled to be held in the District's new multipurpose room at 2:00 p.m. on January 24, 2002. The supporting documents for the workshop will be distributed to the Board next week. 6) Mr. Batts, General Manager, reported that the first public meeting on the San Ramon Forcemain Project was held on the evening of January 9, 2002 at the San Ramon Community Center. Eleven people, including San Ramon Mayor Nancy Tatarka and Council Member Donna Dickey were present. Major concerns expressed were normal construction impacts such as dust, noise, contractor parking, and work hours; the condition of the trail and keeping the trail open during construction; and notification to adjacent homeowners. The District has just learned that the Dublin/San Ramon/East Bay Municipal Utility District Recycled Water Authority (DERWA) may be constructing a pipeline in the same alignment. Coordination of the projects may be possible if the timing can be arranged. COUNSEL FOR THE DISTRICT None SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT None BOARD MEMBERS 1 ) In response to questions from the Board, Mr. William E. Brennan, Capital Projects Division Manager, provided a brief update on the Dougherty Tunnel Project, stating that the tunneling machine should have started again today. It had been stopped for a time. Approximately 12 feet of tunnel had been completed when the machine stopped. There is sufficient time for the work to be completed by the time the contract completion is scheduled. 10 02 53 2) President Hockett distributed notes and reported on the January 8, 2002 Household Hazardous Waste Committee meeting at which historical information, participatiõlÎ' and i êòsts, and development of a Request for Proposals for a new hauling and disposal contract and temporary staffing services were discussed. President Hockett stated that elimination of one or more mobile collection events will be explored as a cost saving measure. 8. ENGINEERING a. CONSIDER REQUEST BY WALTER COSTA TO PAY FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR SEWER INSTALLATION. PROJECT 5288 This item was taken out of order earlier in the agenda. 9. CORRESPONDENCE a. LETTER RECEIVED FROM MR. WALTER H. COSTA. OF LAFAYETTE. REGARDING REIMBURSEMENT FEES This item was taken out of order earlier in the agenda. 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 6. 2001 b. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 20. 2001 It was moved by Member Boneysteele and seconded by Member Menesini, that the minutes of December 6, 2001 and the minutes of December 20, 2001, be approved as presented. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Nejedly abstaining because he was not present at the meeting of December 6, 2001. 11. APPROVAL OF EXPENDITURES a. EXPENDITURE LIST DATED JANUARY 10. 2002 Member Lucey, Chair of the Budget and Finance Committee, stated that he and Member Nejedly reviewed the expenditures and found them to be satisfactory. It was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Nejedly, that the Expenditure List dated January 10, 2002, including Self Insurance Check Nos. 101824-101832, Running Expense Check Nos. 136034-136248, and Sewer Construction Fund Check Nos. 24107-24162, be approved as recommended. There being no objection, the motion was unanimously approved. 12. BUDGET AND FINANCE a. RECEIVE NOVEMBER 2001 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Ms. Deborah Ratcliff, Controller, reviewed the results of operations and maintenance for the month of November 2001, noting that expenditures were $181,000 greater than budget, representing a 5.9 percent unfavorable variance. Year-to-date expenditures were $1,184,000 less than budget, representing a 7.5 percent favorable variance. Year-to-date revenues of $2,960,000 were essentially on budget. Ms. Ratcliff reported that year-to-date Sewer Construction Fund expenditures were $15,066,000, and year-to-date Sewer Construction Fund revenues were $5,555,000 pulling the Sewer Construction Fund balance down by $9.5 million. Ms. Ratcliff reported that the District's temporary investments were held in Treasury bills and Treasury notes and the District's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) account with interest rates ranging from 5.7 percent to 6.7 percent. The latest interest rate as of 01 10 02 54 December 2000 was 5.7 percent. The average yield of the District's LAIF account through November 2001 was 3.5 percent. President Hockett declared that the November 2001 Financial Statements were duly received. 13. EMERGENCY SITUATIONS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION None 14. ANNOUNCEMENTS/SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS President Hockett reported that Ms. Bette Boatmun, Contra Costa Water District Board Member, has been elected President of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA). President Hockett requested that a letter be drafted congratulating Ms. Boatmun on her election. President Hockett thanked fellow Board Members and staff for their support during the past year. 15. CLOSED SESSION a. SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION - ONE POTENTIAL MATTER This closed session was not held. 16. REPORT OF DISCUSSIONS IN CLOSED SESSION None 17. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, President Hockett adjourned the meeting at the hour of 5:02 p.m., to reconvene at 2:00 p.m. on January 24, 2002, for an Adjourned Regular Board Meeting for a Financial Planning and Policy Workshop. The workshop will be held in the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District multipurpose room, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, California. ~ak(l --tr. ~. President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: 01 10 02