Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD MINUTES 07-05-01 176 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF THE DISTRICT BOARD OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT HELD ON JULY 5, 2001 The District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District convened in a 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 July 5, 2001. President Hockett called the meeting to order and requested that the Secretary call roll. 1. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Members: Nejedly, Lucey, Boneysteele, Hockett ABSENT: Members: Menesini Member Menesini had advised that he would be unable to attend this meeting and had requested to be excused. a. INTRODUCTIONS . RECOGNIZE TIFTON GANTT ON HIS PROMOTION TO MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR . RECOGNIZE GLEN BRADLEY ON HIS PROMOTION TO MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN I Mr. Tifton Gantt, Maintenance Supervisor, and Mr. Glen Bradley, Maintenance Technician I, were introduced and congratulated on their recent promotions. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Christopher Alcantara addressed the Board, stating that he was working for the District as a temporary employee and applied for the Maintenance Technician I position. Mr. Alcantara reviewed the chronology and steps involved in the process to fill the position from the application through testing, interview, and physical examination and drug testing. Mr. Alcantara stated when he was asked to take a second drug test, he refused and was informed his refusal could jeopardize his hiring for the position. Mr. Alcantara returned to work for the remainder of the day after his refusal to take the drug test. Mr. Alcantara stated that when he came to work the next day he was told his services were no longer needed and he was escorted from the plant site. Mr. Alcantara expressed concern with the timing and procedures followed by the District in this matter. Members Boneysteele and Lucey advised Mr. Alcantara that the Brown Act prohibits the Board from discussing or taking action on any matter not listed on the agenda. President Hockett thanked Mr. Alcantara for his comments. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Nejedly, that the Consent Calendar, consisting of Items a. through f., be approved as recommended, resolutions adopted as appropriate, and recordings duly authorized. a. The contract work for the Orinda Trunk Sewer Urgent Repair, DP 5530, in Orinda, was accepted, and the filing of the Notice of Completion was authorized. Motion approved on the following vote: 07 05 01 177 AYES: Members: Lucey, Nejedly, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini b. Resolution No. 2001-091 was adopted, confirming and levying final assessments and authorizing a Notice of Assessment to be recorded in the office of the Contra Costa County Recorder for the Forest Lane Contractual Assessment District No. 99-1, DP 5405. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Lucey, Nejedly, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini c. Resolution No. 2001-092 was adopted, confirming and levying final assessments and authorizing a Notice of Assessment to be recorded in the office of the Contra Costa County Recorder for the Grothman Lane/Alhambra Way Contractual Assessment District No. 98-4, DP 5426. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Lucey, Nejedly, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini d. Resolution No. 2001-093 was adopted, confirming and levying final assessments and authorizing a Notice of Assessment to be recorded in the office of the Contra Costa County Recorder for the Muir Lane Contractual Assessment District No. 99-2, DP 5442. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Lucey, Nejedly, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini e. July 19, 2001 at 2:00 p.m. was established as the date and time for a public hearing to receive comments on the draft San Ramon Addendum to the 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 Capital Improvement Budget. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Lucey, Nejedly, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini f. Resolution No. 2001-094 was adopted, confirming the publication of District Ordinance No. 217, Retitling and Amending Chapter 6.12 of the District Code and Adopting a Schedule of Capacity Fees, Rates, and Charges. Motion approved on the following vote: 07 05 01 178 AYES: Members: Lucey, Nejedly, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini 4. HEARINGS a. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS: ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION. ARTICLE XIiID. SECTION 4: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT AND ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT: AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH ENTRADA VERDE PARCEL OWNERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENTRADA VERDE CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2001-1 Mr. Charles W. Batts, General Manager, introduced Mr. Curt Swanson, Environmental Services Division Manager, who stated that a group of 22 parcel owners on Entrada Verde in Alamo have requested that the District form a contractual assessment district for the purpose of financing and constructing a public sewer system that will benefit their properties. Twenty-three properties could potentially be served. The estimated cost is $ 231,445. Mr. Swanson stated that the public hearing on this matter was continued from June 21, 2001 because some of the property owners that will likely participate were out of town. The estimated cost per participant is $10,520 or $1,465 annually for ten years for 22 participants, or $11,234 or $1,564 annually for ten years for 19 participants. At 2:20 p.m., President Hockett opened the public hearing to announce the tabulation of ballots submitted by owners of each affected parcel and to receive comments on the Entrada Verde Contractual Assessment District (CAD) No. 2001-1. Twenty-three ballots were issued and 19 ballots were returned. Nineteen ballots were in favor of and none opposed to the proposed assessment. The four ballots that were not returned were counted as no votes. There being no further comments, President Hockett closed the public hearing. Following discussion, it was moved by Member Nejedly and seconded by Member Lucey, that Resolution No. 2001-095 be adopted, overruling protests for the Entrada Verde CAD No. 2001-1; that Resolution No. 2001-096 be adopted, confirming compliance with California Constitution Article XIIID, Section 4; that Resolution No. 2001-097 be adopted, approving Engineer's Report, assessments, and ordering improvement; and that the General Manager be authorized to execute an agreement with the Entrada Verde parcel owners. Motion approved on the following vote: AYES: Members: Nejedly, Lucey, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini 5. CALL FOR REQUESTS TO CONSIDER ITEMS OUT OF ORDER Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that Item 8.a., Engineering, should be taken out of order at this time, prior to the Board's consideration of award of construction contract for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project. President Hockett departed from the order of the agenda to consider Item 8.a., Engineering. 07 05 01 179 8. ENGINEERING a. AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH WINDEMERE BLC LAND COMPANY LLC FOR CONSTRUCTION FINANCING OF THE DOUGHERTY TUNNEL AND TRUNK SEWER (DP 5902) Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that the construction costs related to the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project will be paid for by Windemere BLC, one of the two principal developers of the Dougherty Valley. Staff has negotiated an agreement with Windemere BLC that deals with construction financing and reimbursement of construction related costs for this project. Under the agreement, Windemere will deposit approximately $17.2 million into an escrow account to cover the anticipated costs of the tunnel project. The District will be reimbursed for costs from this escrow account. Following discussion, it was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Nejedly, that the General Manager be authorized to execute the proposed agreement with Windemere BLC Land Company LLC for construction financing of the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project, DP 5902. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Menesini being absent. At this time, President Hockett reverted to the order of the agenda. 6. BIDS AND AWARDS a. CONSIDER RESPONSIVENESS OF MOUNTAIN CASCADE. INC.'S BID. AND CONSIDER AWARD OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. AND AUTHORIZE CONSULTING AGREEMENTS WITH BROWN AND CALDWELL. URS CORPORATION. EPC/UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS AND SOHA ENGINEERS FOR THE DOUGHERTY TUNNEL AND TRUNK SEWER PROJECT. DP ~ Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that following the settlement of the lawsuit with the City of San Ramon over issuance of an encroachment permit, the District advertised for bids for construction of the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project in mid-May and opened bids on June 20, 2001. Four bids were received with Mountain Cascade, Inc., the apparent low bidder. The second apparent low bidder, Affholder, Inc., has filed a protest with the District over award of the contract alleging that Mount Cascade's bid was neither responsive nor responsible. In this situation, it is appropriate for the Board to conduct a hearing to determine if Mountain Cascade's bid is responsive and responsible. After the hearing and the Board's determination, the Board will be asked to award the construction contract to the appropriate bidder and approve consulting agreements with URS Corporation, Brown and Caldwell, SOHA Engineers, and EPC/Underground Construction Managers for services related to construction of the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project. Mr. Batts introduced Mr. Curt Swanson, Environmental Services Division Manager, who reviewed the four bids received for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project as follows: Mountain Cascade, Inc. in the amount of $12,274,620; Affholder, Inc. in the amount of $13,274,000; Super Excavators, Inc. in the amount of $14,077,260; and Ranger Pipelines, Inc. in the amount of $14,104,439. The Engineer's Estimate for the project was $15,000,000. The bid proposal of Mountain Cascade, the apparent low bidder, lists Mountain Cascade as the prime contractor; and two subcontractors, Walter C. Smith Company as tunneling subcontractor and NADA Pacific as microtunneling subcontractor. Mountain Cascade and the two subcontractors have California "An licenses, adequate bonding capacity, and are established contractors with Mountain Cascade having 19 years, Walter C. Smith having 54 years, and NADA Pacific having 9 years experience. The second apparent low bidder, Affholder, Inc., has filed a protest stating that the Mountain Cascade bid is not responsive as the tunneling subcontractor does not meet experience requirements because Walter C. Smith Company has not completed a single tunnel 2,000 feet long or more, 6 feet or greater in diameter, in conditions similar to the Dougherty tunnel. Using overheads, Mr. Swanson described the proposed Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer alignment, a profile of the tunnel, and 07 05 01 180 alternative tunnel construction methods which were considered. Mr. Swanson described the soil conditions along the tunnel alignment as claystone, siltstone, and sandstone which are classified as extremely weak or very weak rock with squeezing ground and gassy conditions. Mr. Swanson stated that Mr. Dave Young, from Woodward Clyde now URS Corporation, is here to answer any questions on soil conditions. Mr. Swanson described tunnel construction methods including tunnel boring machine, road header, and steel rib and timber or precast concrete rings for temporary support. Mr. Swanson reviewed the project experience statement that was part of the bid proposal which stated that the bidder shall have completed one or more projects involving: . 1,000 feet of 24-inch or larger sewer using open cut construction; . 500 feet or more of 12-inch to 30-inch sewer using microtunneling pipeline construction in similar ground conditions; and . 2,000 feet or more of tunneling 6-foot diameter or larger tunnel in similar ground conditions. The project experience statement went on to say that it is the intent of the District to evaluate the responsiveness of the contractor's bid "in part" based on whether the bid and information set forth below reflects substantial experience in successful completion of work of the nature and magnitude of this project. Mr. Swanson stated that as with all bids, the bid review process was followed. Staff conducted a technical and commercial review of bids. The tunneling experience for the Mountain Cascade bid lists 6 projects totaling 4,100 feet with the longest project being 1,100 feet. All other aspects of the Mountain Cascade bid and all aspects of the Affholder bid are in order. Affholder filed a protest because the Mountain Cascade bid did not list a single tunnel project with length of 2,000 feet or more. In case of protest, it is appropriate for the Board to conduct a responsiveness hearing. The staff recommendation and Board decision will follow the hearing. While hearing the testimony presented, the Board should consider the following for basis of contract award: 1) the contract is to be awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, price and other factors considered, provided the bid is reasonable, and in the best interests of the District to accept it; and 2) the District reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive any non-material irregularities in the bids received. The decision alternatives available to the Board include: . Deny the protest by Affholder; declare the Mountain Cascade bid to be responsive; and award the contract to Mountain Cascade; . Uphold the protest by Affholder; declare the Mountain Cascade bid to be non-responsive; and award the contract to Affholder, Inc.; or . Reject all bids. President Hockett clarified the process, format, and rules for the public hearing. At 2:35 p.m., President Hockett opened the public hearing to determine the responsiveness and responsibility of the Mountain Cascade, Inc. bid on the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project, DP 5902. Mr. Jack Boatman, Vice President of Development for Insituform and Affholder, Inc., thanked the Board for this opportunity to speak. Mr. Boatmun introduced Mr. Richard Oliver, attorney for Affholder, Inc., and Mr. Robert Stier, of Affholder, Inc., who has been in the tunneling business for more than 25 years. Mr. Richard Oliver, Partner with the law firm, McKenna & Cuneo representing Affholder, Inc., distributed a written copy of his presentation which was received and is hereby incorporated by reference into the minutes. Mr. Oliver presented the position of Affholder, Inc. as set forth in that document, with regard to the non-responsiveness of the Mountain Cascade and Walter C. Smith Company, Inc. bid. 07 05 01 181 Mr. Robert Stier, of Affholder, Inc., reviewed the unique ground conditions of the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project as set forth in Attachment "A" to the document previously distributed by Mr. Oliver and incorporated by reference into the minutes. Following the presentation by Mr. Stier concerning ground conditions, Mr. Oliver concluded his presentation set forth in the document previously distributed, stating that Mountain Cascade and its tunneling subcontractor, Walter C. Smith Company., Inc. did not submit a responsive bid and the bid must be rejected and the contract for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project awarded to Affholder, Inc. Mr. Oliver thanked the Board for the opportunity to be heard. Mr. John Busby, attorney for Mountain Cascade, Inc., addressed the Board. Mr. Busby stated that Mountain Cascade is the lowest responsible, responsive bidder for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project. Mr. Busby introduced Mr. Roger Williamson, Vice President for Operations for Mountain Cascade, and Mr. Steven DeBenedetto, Vice President for Operations for Walter C. Smith Company. Mr. Busby stated that the low bidder, Mountain Cascade, submitted a bid of $12,274,000. In addition, the Mountain Cascade bid is also responsible and responsive. Mr. Busby stated that he has represented Mountain Cascade for 15 years. Mountain Cascade is a licensed general contractor with a Class A license. Walter C. Smith Company, Inc. is also a Class A General Contractor, and Russell G. Clough also has a Class A General Contractor license. Mountain Cascade has successfully completed $25 million of public works projects for Central Contra Costa Sanitary District and an additional $54.7 million of sewer projects within the District service area which the District has taken ownership of, for a total of more than $80 million. Since 1986, Mountain Cascade has successfully completed $164 million of public works projects that contained substantial tunneling work using various types of construction methods. In 1986, Mountain Cascade successfully completed a $7.45 million project for East Bay Municipal Utility District called the Leland Pressure Zone Improvements Project built directly underneath California Boulevard in Walnut Creek and completed that project without incident. That project included three 108-inch rib and board tunnels totaling 4,400 feet in length. A complete list of projects had previously been presented to the Board and is hereby incorporated by reference. Mr. Busby stated that in addition to being capable of constructing this work, part of being responsible is being financially capable to do the work. Mountain Cascade is bonded by Safeco Insurance Company, the leading west coast bonding company for public works construction projects. The bond will fully guarantee the District of the financial success of this project. Mr. Busby stated that the project will be personally overseen by Mr. Michael Fuller, Mountain Cascade's Principal and Chairman, with over 40 years experience in the construction business. Mr. Duke Fuller, Mountain Cascade's President, with 20 years of experience in the construction business, and Mr. Roger Williamson, Mountain Cascade's Vice President of Operations, will be personally involved on a daily basis starting with the submittal phase and continuing to the end of the project. The submittal information on methods, materials to be used, and related information, is reviewed and approved by District staff. If they are not approved they are resubmitted. Mr. Busby stated that Walter C. Smith Company, Inc., Mountain Cascade's tunneling subcontractor, has been doing public tunneling projects in California longer than any other tunneling contractor that he is aware of. Walter C. Smith Company has been in the tunneling business since 1945 and is the premier tunneling contractor. Walter C. Smith Company has successfully completed 7,279 feet of tunnel ranging from 72 inches in diameter to 156 inches in diameter in the last five years. During the 1992 through 1995 period, Walter C. Smith Company successfully completed more than 30,000 feet of tunneling projects 6 feet in diameter or greater. In 1990 Walter C. Smith Company successfully completed a large diameter tunnel for Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts San Jose Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. A complete list of projects had previously been provided to the Board and is hereby incorporated by reference. 07 05 01 182 Mr. Busby stated that as far as the similar conditions issue, 90 percent of all of the tunneling work that Walter C. Smith Company does in California is in squeezing ground and gassy conditions. In 1996, Walter C. Smith Company successfully completed 1,256 feet of 48-inch diameter tunnel in another gassy environment for Delta Diablo Sanitation District, and was required to take all appropriate precautions. Walter C. Smith Company recently completed a 120-inch diameter pipe jack tunnel, the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District Bradshaw Interceptor, which required a tunnel under a lake. Mr. Busby stated that Walter C. Smith Company is responsible, they do have experience, and they are licensed. Company management responsible for this subcontract include Mr. Michael DeBenedetto, Vice President and Operations Manager, a Registered Civic Engineer with 20 years experience with this company, an OSHA certified gas tester, and an OSHA certified safety representative; and Mr. Steve DeBenedetto, Vice President, with 24 years experience with the company doing tunneling and boring, an OSHA certified gas tester, and an OSHA certified safety representative. Mr. Busby stated that Walter C. Smith Company submitted its prequalification submittal for conventional tunnel, microtunneling, and pipe jacking for this project to the District on November 15, 1999. Following submittal, Walter C. Smith Company was qualified and included in Volume 2 of the documents for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project. In later documents, all reference to prequalification was deleted but Walter C. Smith Company was never told it had not been prequalified for the tunneling aspects of the project. Mr. Busby stated that Walter C. Smith Company has hired a tunneling expert, Russell G. Clough, to act as its tunneling consultant for this project. Mr. Busby reviewed Mr. Clough's experience and qualifications which include Bachelors' and Masters' Degrees in Science and Civil Engineering, California Registered Civil Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, and Safety Engineer. Mr. Clough is a licensed contractor in California, Oregon, and Utah. Mr. Clough has been personally involved in over 281 tunnel projects as listed in a document previously provided to the Board and incorporated herein by reference. Mr. Clough is a Professor of Civil Engineering teaching at Stanford. Mr. Clough has agreed to act as retained project consultant to the Walter C. Smith Company. Not every day, but two to three days out of every week, Mr. Clough will personally be on site. Mr. Clough will be involved from the submittal process through construction and completion of the tunnel. Mr. Busby stated that the specifications do not say the contractor or subcontractor must complete one tunnel of 2,000 feet in length. It is subject to reasonable interpretation, one of which might be a number of tunnels totaling 2,000 feet in length. Walter C. Smith Company has completed thousands of feet of tunnels. It appears that Affholder wants the Board to be frightened of this work because there is squeezing ground, but the Board does not need to be frightened. The tunnel will be engineered. Additionally, the implication of their position is that Walter C. Smith Company is somehow going to be unsafe and they are not experienced. Mr. Busby stated that is not true. Their experience has been provided to the Board. In the material provided by Affholder, they have listed Office of the Comptroller General cases. Mr. Busby stated that he has read all those cases. Half of them deal with a particular material not meeting specifications. Many of them are not on point. Opinions of the Comptroller General are not California law. Citing them is inappropriate in this circumstance. They do not relate and should not be given any credence. In closing, Mr. Busby stated that all three of those who would be involved are all licensed contractors. In California, there is a strict Licensing Board. Mr. Busby stated that the bid of Mountain Cascade and Walter C. Smith Company is responsive and responsible. Mr. Busby thanked the Board for their consideration. Mr. Swanson stated that URS has done an analysis and evaluation of bidders' qualifications for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project. That document has been distributed to the Board and is hereby incorporated by reference. Mr. Swanson stated that the tunnel experience statement in the bid proposal required the bidder to have completed 2,000 feet of 6-foot or larger diameter tunnel in similar ground conditions. Mr. Swanson stated that it was the intent of the District that this be 2,000 continuous feet. Mountain Cascade interpreted this experience to be a cumulative 2,000 07 05 01 183 feet. In reviewing the language included in the bid, Mr. Swanson stated that it is felt that this was an interpretation that could be made by a bidder even though it was' not the District's intent. Because of this ambiguity, staff and District consultants reviewed the experience of Walter C. Smith Company. The technical consultants that assisted District staff were Mr. Mike Kobler, of UCM, who has over 40 years experience; and Messrs. Dave Young and Sheldon Coudray, of URS Corporation. Mr. Kobler has over 20 years experience and Mr. Young has 13 years of experience. The resumes of these individuals were provided to the Board and are hereby incorporated by reference. In reviewing the Walter C. Smith Company experience, it was found that Walter C. Smith Company has: . Completed approximately 32,000 feet of tunnels with diameter 6-feet or larger during the last 20 years; . Completed approximately 7,300 feet of tunnels with diameter 6-feet or larger during the last five years; . Longest single tunnel was 1,115 feet during the last five years; and . Completed tunnel projects in ground conditions similar to the Dougherty Tunnel Project. Mr. Swanson stated that it was concluded that Walter C. Smith Company has sufficient experience to construct the Dougherty Tunnel Project. Mr. Dave Young, of URS, Project Manager responsible for Tunnel Design, stated that he was asked to put together qualifications from the Walter C. Smith Company bid and compare them to what was required in the bid specifications. That evaluation and analysis of bidders' qualifications for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project conducted by URS was provided to the Board and is hereby incorporated by reference. Mr. Young reviewed the analysis of these qualification requirements for similar in character to the work anticipated in the project, length and size of tunnel, and similar ground conditions. Mr. Young stated that it is the conclusion of URS that the bidding requirements do not include specific qualifications requirements for the tunnel contractor's personnel, nor for experience with temporary tunnel support systems. Nevertheless, Walter C. Smith Company has access to expertise in these areas through the use of consultants and new hires. Walter C. Smith Company proposes to use Russell G. Clough, who shows substantial tunnel experience on his resume. Mr. Young stated that it is URS's professional opinion that Walter C. Smith Company meets the qualifications requirements for bidding with respect to character of the work, cumulative length of tunnel constructed, and similar ground conditions. Further evaluations of personnel qualifications and construction methods will be addressed after award through the shop drawing review process. Mr. Swanson stated that the technical specifications of the contract documents specify construction methods, materials, equipment, and personnel for tunnel construction. This information was not required as part of the bid proposal. Consequently, this information is not an issue to be considered during Bid Award. The contractor is to provide that information within 30 days of Notice to Proceed. The District reviews, comments, and accepts this as part of the shop drawing submittal review process. With regard to the price advantage issue, Mr. Swanson stated that in reviewing the bids, District staff looked at items related to the tunnel construction for both Mountain Cascade and Affholder, Items 21 through 25. The total of those prices were $8,945,000 for Mountain Cascade and $9,038,000 for Affholder. The difference in tunneling cost is $94,000 on a $12.7 million project. Mr. Swanson presented the staff recommendation that the Board: . Deny the protest filed by Affholder, Inc.; . Award the construction contract to Mountain Cascade, Inc.; 07 05 01 184 . With award being contingent upon approval and signature of the Windemere financing agreement (Item 8.a. on this agenda); and . Authorize consulting agreements with Brown & Caldwell, URS Corporation, EPC/Underground Construction Managers, and SOHA Engineers. Mr. Kenton L. Aim, Counsel for the District, stated that in attempting to evaluate Affholder's protest, the overall responsiveness and responsibility, and appealed low bid, a second consultant, Mr. Michael Kobler, was contacted by the District. A copy of Mr. Kobler's resume was provided to the Board. Mr. Kobler is in Argentina on a tunneling project and could not be here, but his evaluation of the issues before the Board was requested in order to obtain a second independent analysis. Mr. Kobler indicated he did know Walter C. Smith Company as a small tunneling contractor. Walter C. Smith Company did a project in Sacramento. Mr. Aim stated that Mr. Kobler indicated that he would not consider them as having hard ground experience, but the Dougherty Tunnel Project is not hard ground in his experience so that would not be a problem. Mr. Aim stated that Mr. Kobler indicated that the difference between 1,100 feet and 2,000 feet or 4,000 feet is not of significance. If a contractor can do 1,100 feet, that contractor can do a longer tunnel. Longer tunnels may require more ventilation, special equipment, and safety training. The specifications called for squeezing ground conditions to be met and the contractor will have to comply with all OSHA requirements. Mr. Aim stated that Mr. Kobler indicated that he would not find Walter C. Smith Company to be non-responsive. Mr. Kobler stated that Affholder is good and may have superior experience, but that is not enough to disqualify Walter C. Smith Company. The Board must look at whether Walter C. Smith Company meets the District's requirements. Mr. Aim stated that Mr. Kobler indicated that he knows Mr. Clough and his background and it would be difficult to find another person on the West Coast with more tunneling construction experience. Mr. Aim stated that he conveyed this information from Mr. Kobler because it is a second independent opinion which suggests to staff that the bid should not be found non- responsive with significant deviation, and the award should be made to Mountain Cascade. Mr. Oliver, representing Affholder, Inc., stated that the Board just heard from staff what information is appropriate to consider and not to consider in making your decision. Responsiveness is determined from the four corners of the bid. The District said it was interested in experience in the last five years. The Board heard that Mountain Cascade was the prime contractor on a 4,400-foot tunnel project. Mountain Cascade did not dig the tunnel, a subcontractor did. It was indicated that Walter C. Smith Company was prequalified but that was only in microtunneling and not large diameter tunneling. Mr. Oliver stated that the District has objective experience requirements. No one here says Walter C. Smith Company meets them. Mr. Oliver stated that once those requirements are put in the solicitation, it is only fair to enforce the requirements. Mr. Oliver stated that legally for responsiveness purposes, you must go with what is in the bid. Walter C. Smith Company has nothing close to 2,000 feet of tunnel construction. Such a requirement can only legally be waived in two situations: 1) When it is a mere formality; or 2) When there is substantial conformance with the requirement. Mr. Busby, representing Mountain Cascade, stated that Walter C. Smith Company does meet the requirements as Mountain Cascade and Walter C. Smith Company understood them. Collectively, Walter C. Smith Company has over 2,000 feet of tunneling experience. Mr. Busby stated that he has told the Board this, so has District staff, and so has the District's expert. Mr. Busby stated that once again, he would suggest that it is the appropriate course of action for the Board is to award to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Mountain Cascade. Mr. Aim stated that two different terms, responsiveness and responsibility, have been used. The law reads that you must award to the lowest responsible bidder. A number of the issues Affholder dealt with here today concern responsiveness. If the Board reads the tunnel experience section in the bid proposal and concludes that it reasonably can be interpreted to be a cumulative length of more than 2,000 feet, Mountain Cascade would have met the minimum level of responsiveness. It is not a matter of picking what might be better or best. Mr. Aim stated that in looking at the issue of responsiveness there is 07 05 01 185 a reasonable interpretation that the 2,000 feet can be cumulative even though that was not the District's intent. It is staff and District Counsel's conclusion that the Mountain Cascade bid was responsive. Mr. Aim stated that the issue then is whether the "similar conditions" requirement has been met. The bid proposal does not specify that bidders must set forth in the bid all of the similar ground conditions they have encountered. The point is in looking at the bid, Mountain Cascade and Walter C. Smith Company have listed certain jobs and when those jobs were reviewed, they were found to be in similar ground conditions. Mr. Aim asked, "Is this contractor capable of doing the job?" It is opinion of staff that they are and it is the staff recommendation that the Board authorize award to Mountain Cascade. That is not in any way a denigration of Affholder, Inc., who also would be capable of doing the work. There being no further comments, President Hockett closed the public hearing at the hour of 3:42 p.m. Mr. Aim stated that if the Board feels they want a private attorney/client conference, a closed session has been scheduled for that purpose. The Board declined to go into closed session. Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that he believes that the District bid documents give the Board substantial discretion in evaluating the bid requirements. The law in California states that the Board must award to the lowest responsible bidder. The ultimate decision here is whether there have been facts provided to demonstrate that Mountain Cascade is not the lowest responsible bidder. One of the options available in protest situations is to reject all bids and rebid the project. Due to the time constraints in the settlement agreement with the City of San Ramon, there is not sufficient time to rebid the project and meet the compliance deadlines. The trunk line portion of the project must be completed by the end of the calendar year. The experiential requirements in the bid documents are by their nature somewhat subjective since no project is exactly the same as another. The specifications allow the District to consider the proposal as a whole in evaluating whether a contractor is qualified to do the job. Mr. Batts stated that with regard to the question of whether the bid is responsive, the standard to be applied is whether the bid proposal substantially conforms to the bid requirements. In this case, staff recommends that the Board find that the bid proposal does substantially conform to the bid requirements. Mr. Batts stated that on other occasions, the District has found deviations concerning past experience of the contractors to be non-material. One example of that was the award of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project to Ranger Pipelines in 1994. Ranger Pipelines successfully completed that project. Mr. Batts stated that a deviation, to be material, must provide benefit to the low bidder not afforded to other bidders. There must be demonstration or proof that the Affholder bid was adversely affected by alleged deviations from the bid specifications or that Mountain Cascade was afforded material advantage over other bidders. There has been no proof of that of favoritism or harm. Mr. Batts stated that the interest of the public to obtain the most competitively priced bid must be taken into consideration. There is a one million dollar difference between the bids and the bid specifications stated that in evaluating the bids, the price of the bids will be taken into consideration. Moreover, analysis of the bid items directly related to the conventional tunneling suggests that the majority of the price difference between the Affholder and Mountain Cascade bids is not related to the conventional tunneling portion of the work. Mr. Batts stated that it is the staff conclusion that it is in the best interest of the public to award the bid for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project to the apparent low bidder, Mountain Cascade. Mr. Aim asked that a copy of all the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project bid specifications and addenda be included as part of the record as well as the information provided by both bidders and all other written materials provided to the Board. In response to a question from Member Boneysteele, Mr. Aim stated that it is the conclusion of staff and District Counsel that Mountain Cascade met both the responsiveness and responsibility criteria. Member Lucey stated that about five years ago, Mountain Cascade began work on the South Orinda Sewer Improvements Project for the District. Member Lucey stated that 07 05 01 186 there were a number of problems on that project, and he was dissatisfied with the way Mountain Cascade handled them. Mountain Cascade redeemed itself on the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project. Member Lucey stated that the problem he has is that he clearly believes Affholder is the best contractor for this project but he is bound by California law as he interprets it. If Mountain Cascade is responsive and responsible and the low bidder, Member Lucey stated that he must award the contract to Mountain Cascade. Member Lucey stated that except for his pique over those few weeks in Orinda, he sees no reason why he should not award the contract to Mountain Cascade. If Mountain Cascade does get the contract, the Board will be looking very carefully at how the customers and nearby residents are treated during construction. Member Boneysteele stated that he has been attending Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Board meetings since 1964 and he has never seen a hearing before that was as competently presented on both sides as this one was. The legal and technical analyses were excellent. Member Boneysteele stated that he particularly wants to thank staff for the forthright recommendations and for bringing together expert advice on both the technical and legal aspects and coming with a very conclusive recommendation to the Board. Member Boneysteele stated that he must depend on staff for this as he is an engineer but not a civil engineer. Member Boneysteele stated that he is going to support the staff recommendation. It is a difficult decision but staff has made it easier by making a very definitive recommendation and supporting that recommendation. Member Nejedly stated that a lot of emphasis was placed on the 2,OOO-foot tunnel experience requirement. Member Nejedly stated that he found Walter C. Smith Company has been tunneling for many years. That along with the expertise of the tunneling expert consultant they have hired indicates that they have the necessary qualifications to do this job. Member Nejedly stated that from what he has read and been told he believes that Mountain Cascade is qualified to do this project. The District must do the best it can for the people in San Ramon. Member Nejedly agreed with Member Lucey, stating that he also had concerns with the South Orinda Sewer Improvements Project performed by Mountain Cascade, but Mountain Cascade has also done some good work for the District. Member Nejedly stated that the costs for the tunnel portion in the two bids are very close. Again both Mr. Oliver and Mr. Busby did an excellent job on their presentations. There is also the issue of time. Member Nejedly stated that he feels Mountain Cascade is qualified to do this work. The District has customers that need to be served and we must get the job done. Member Nejedly stated that he will vote to award the contract to Mountain Cascade and have construction begin as soon as possible since this project has already been held up for more than a year. Member Lucey stated that he neglected earlier to say that the help from District Counsel was outstanding and very helpful. President Hockett stated that she also finds Mountain Cascade's bid to be both responsive and responsible. President Hockett stated that their past experience, the global perspective of this bid award, and the need to serve the public must be taken into consideration. There is a one million dollar difference between the bids and that must be considered for the District's ratepayers. That is who the Board is here to serve. President Hockett stated that she appreciated the analysis and help provided by all the parties in this process. President Hockett asked for the parties consideration to allow the District to go through this process in a peaceful manner and complete this project in San Ramon. It was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Boneysteele, that the protest filed by Affholder, Inc. be denied; that the Board finds that any variations in the proposal of Mountain Cascade from the bid specifications are non-material and are waived; that award of a construction contract for the Dougherty Tunnel and Trunk Sewer Project (DP 5902) be authorized to Mountain Cascade the lowest responsive, responsible bidder in the amount of $12,274,620, contingent upon a fully-executed financing agreement with Windemere BLC and funding of the escrow account; that the General Manager be authorized to execute Professional Services Agreements with Brown and Caldwell in the amount of $850,000, with URS Corporation in the amount of $150,000, and with EPC/Underground Construction Managers in the amount of $430,000, contingent upon a fully-executed financing agreement with Windemere BLC and funding of the escrow 07 05 01 187 account; and that the General Manager be authorized to execute a cost reimbursement agreement with SOHA Engineers in the amount of $60,000, contingent upon a fully- executed financing agreement with Windel11ere BLC and funding of the escrow account. Motion approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Lucey, Boneysteele, Nejedly, Hockett NOES: Members: None ABSENT: Members: Menesini Member Boneysteele complimented President Hockett on the very professional manner in which she conducted this hearing. BREAK At 4:02 p.m., President Hockett declared a recess, reconvening the meeting at the hour of 4:21 p.m. with all parties present as previously designated. 7. REPORTS a. GENERAL MANAGER 1 ) Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that at this meeting he has asked Director of Plant Operations Jim Kelly and District Counsel Kent Aim to recommend to the Board that the District appeal the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and consider holding the appeal in abeyance until staff and the RWQCB have had time to sort out the appeal issues and process. It will also be recommended that the appeal be a petition for rehearing that would be filed jointly with the Bay Area Clean Water Agencies (BACWA). BACWA will provide the briefs for issues in common with other publicly owned treatment works (POTW's) and the District will provide the briefs for issues that pertain only to the District. Mr. Batts introduced Mr. James M. Kelly, Director of Plant Operations, who stated that the RWQCB approved all five permits on its June 20, 2001 agenda. The effective date of the District's NPDES permit is July 1, 2001. The District has 30 days to file an appeal, until July 20, 2001. Of the four other permitees, East Bay Municipal Utility District will recommend appeal to its Board next week; Sewerage Agency of Southern Marin and City of San Mateo are both considering joint appeal with BACWA; and Chevron is considering appeal to put its issues on the table. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District potential appeal issues include: . RWQCB failed to consider all evidence in the administrative record; . The District has chronic toxicity limits with violations issued for failure to meet the limits, but most other POTW's have triggers where more testing would be done; . The District disagrees with the fundamental approach for the interim mass limit for Dioxin (a different approach was taken for other POTW' s); . Ambient monitoring requirements and detection limits; . Some of the interim limits represent a new dilution credit policy for non 303(d) listed pollutants; and . DDE and Dieldrin, reasonable potential for these two legacy pesticides. 07 05 01 188 2) 3) 4) b. c. d. a. Mr. Kelly stated that it is recommended that the District appeal its NPDES permit, that the appeal be held in abeyance, and that the District file jointly with the Bay Area Clean Water Agencies (BACWA). Mr. Aim, Counsel for the District, stated that he and District staff will proceed to prepare a petition to protect the District's rights. BACWA is willing to file an appeal on most of the issues that are common to all POTW's but it may be necessary for the District to file its own appeal to preserve a couple of issues. This matter will be brought back to the Board for consideration at the next Board Meeting. The update on energy issues was deferred. Mr. Batts, General Manager, distributed a copy of the letter to South San Ramon residents announcing the San Ramon (Larwin) Pumping Station Open House from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 19, 2001. Mr. Batts, General Manager, announced that the District is advertising for bids for Television Inspection of Sanitary Sewers. This work will begin the complete television inspection of the collection system. The engineer's estimate is $450,000. Member Lucey requested that when a position paper on this project is brought to the Board, that an explanation be provided of the television inspection done by Collection System Operations (CSO) crews compared to the work to be done in this project. 5) Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that District staff had indicated to the Board that by this date there would be a report on the settlement of outstanding contractual issues with the City of Concord. While there has been progress, the City of Concord is still working on its proposal for capital program contributions based on future flows. The City has retained a consultant to aid in that effort. Staff will report back to the Board when the proposal is received. 6) Mr. Batts, General Manager, announced that he and Director of Engineering Ann Farrell met with Mr. Carlos Baltodano, Director of the County Building Inspection Department, to discuss interest in improving the overall permit process interaction between the District and the County to improve customer service in the building permit process. Those discussions are continuing. COUNSEL FOR THE DISTRICT None SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT None BOARD MEMBERS None 8. ENGINEERING AUTHORIZE THE. GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE.. AN AGREEMENT WITH WINOËMËRE BLC LAND COMPANY LLC FOR CONSTRUCTION FINANCING OF THE DOUGHERTY TUNNEL AND TRUNK SEWER (DP 5902) This item was taken out of order earlier in the agenda. 07 05 01 189 b. ADVISE THE BOARD OF THE CLOSE OUT OF THE MARTINEZ EAST SIDE TRUNK SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (DP 4950> c. ADVISE THE BOARD OF THE CLOSE OUT OF 16 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that Board Members have asked about the capital project close out procedure in recent months; particularly at the time the Board is asked to approve project acceptance. In response to the Board's questions, staff has developed a proposal for some changes to the close out procedure. Mr. Batts introduced Ms. Ann Farrell, Director of Engineering, who stated that there are two distinct kinds of projects: construction projects and all other projects. Construction projects come to the Board for consideration in the Capital Improvement Budget, approval of consultant agreements for design of greater than $50,000, award of construction contract, approval of construction changes orders greater than $50,000, contract acceptance, and project close out. All other projects come to the Board for consideration in the Capital Improvement Budget, approval of consultant agreements if greater than $50,000, and project close out. Prior to 1 996, individual position papers with project specific details were used to close out projects. Beginning in about 1996, a large position paper closing out projects was presented to the Board twice yearly. This position paper focused on total expenditures as opposed to budget information only. An example was shown. Ms. Farrell stated that this has been discussed at the staff level and it is proposed that the close out procedure be modified so that the large close out position paper would still be presented to the Board twice yearly for projects of less than $1 million. Detailed cost information on all construction projects would be presented. An example of this modified procedure is the Furnace Air Inlet Improvements Project on this agenda. A separate position paper will be presented for close out of projects greater than $1 million. An example is the Martinez East Side Trunk Sewer Improvements Project on this agenda. Ms. Farrell requested input from the Board on this proposed modification to the close out procedure. The Board endorsed the proposed modification to the close out procedure, stating that it meets the needs of the Board and provides an adequate level of detail on the costs of construction projects. The position papers advising the Board of the close out of the Martinez East Side Trunk Sewer Improvements Project (DP 4950) and return of $1,128,000 or approximately 13 percent of the total project budget to the Collection System Program, and the close out of 16 capital improvements projects with a net underrun of $512,438 or 18 percent of the total authorized budgets, were presented for the Board's information. No action was taken. d. AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH MICHAEL WILLIS ARCHITECTS TO PROVIDE CONTINUATION OF DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY. DP 9181 e. AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE A $320.000 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER TO ARNTZ BUILDERS. ON THE LABORATORY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (DP 7172) AND AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MICHAEL WILLIS AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS FOR THE MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY. DP 8191 Mr. Batts, General Manager, stated that staff realizes that the additional costs of both the design and the proposed improvements for a large meeting room are controversial and not without cost. However, the District has been presented with a unique opportunity to create a multipurpose facility in the location of the existing laboratory space. As an organization, the District is in a major transition with large turnover in staff and the promotion of many employees to new responsibility. Staff focus continues to be on both training and communication with employees, customer service demands, for meetings with the public on projects, and cost is always a concern. This facility would meet those varied needs for a large meeting space. While staff recognizes that a need exists for such a facility, staff also recognizes the financial constraints the District is currently operating under. 07 05 01 190 Mr. Batts introduced Ms. Ann Farrell, Director of Engineering, who stated that the District has an opportunity to build a multipurpose facility. The existing laboratory facility will be vacated in July 2001. A plan exists for demolition and clean up work, basic carpet, and painting. In the needs assessment done for the Capital Improvement Budget, the need for a large multipurpose facility continually came up. The opportunity is now to do more extensive renovation and create a multipurpose facility. Unfortunately for the Board and staff, the timing is not good. The budget just approved by the Board included a significant multi-year rate increase, there are future O&M cost uncertainties, and future capital expenditure needs. Staff is conscious of the costs but felt that this matter should be brought to the Board for consideration. Ms. Farrell showed drawings and described the laboratory remodel per the existing contract with Arntz Builders and the proposed improvements being considered to make that a more usable space. By doing this work now it is estimated that approximately $100,000 would be saved in the areas of contractor mobilization, preparation of formal bid documents, bid and award of an additional project, and additional demolition. Ms. Farrell reviewed the multipurpose facility construction cost breakdown and indicated that the total construction cost would be $370,000 if the $50,000 credit for demolition is included. Ms. Farrell stated that we must ask ourselves if this change order is a good value. The cost is approximately $140 per square foot for 2,700 square feet at $370,000. The laboratory facility cost approximately $500 per square foot for 8,700 square feet at $4,300,000. Typical East Bay office building space costs from $150 to $180 per square foot. Similar space at Mills College in Oakland and UC Berkeley were also in the same range. Ms. Farrell stated that the District spends approximately $10,000 to $20,000 per year renting outside facilities for training and recruitment testing. High turnover has increased the need for District- wide training and recruitment. Numerous large meetings are held in the Board Room which is not conducive to informal meetings. Opportunities to host functions for California Water Environment Association, Special Districts Association, and other organizations are not available. The current laboratory contract includes some renovation in this area, with the work to be done in August. Ms. Farrell stated that the District has a number of choices. The Board could authorize a change order and build the multipurpose facility; postpone the project and do demolition and renovation currently included in the Laboratory Improvements Project; competitively bid the multipurpose facility; request additional information from staff and bring this back for Board decision on July 19 or August 9, 2001. Ms. Farrell stated that with regard to the position paper requesting continuation of the consultant contract for design services for the multipurpose facility, the District had an agreement of just under $50,000 with Michael Willis Architects. When Michael Willis Architects was asked to rework the project to decrease costs, additional funds were spent that were not authorized by the Board. Discussion followed with regard to the work done by Michael Willis Architects on the multipurpose facility project and the additional work in reviewing submittals for the Laboratory Improvements Project. Member Lucey questioned how the amount of the Michael Willis Architects contract could reach $76,000 without Board approval, since it is his understanding that violates a District policy. Ms. Farrell stated it is correct, that was a violation of District policy. Ms. Farrell stated that she sent out a memo chastising her staff and told them not to let that happen again. Member Lucey stated that he believes all contracts should go through Purchasing and Materials Manager Victoria Lamica. Member Lucey stated that he will not vote for this, and he sees no reason to spend any more money for construction of a multipurpose facility. The current contract includes carpeting, painting, and other improvements to make the space usable. In defense of Ms. Farrell's staff, Mr. Batts stated she is right, this should have been brought back to the Board. There was a District Space Committee reviewing the space needs of the District. They requested additional information and cost estimates for this project. Before additional work was done on this recommendation, it should have come 07 05 01 191 to the Board. This should not have happened. Staff apologizes and will see that it does not happen again in the future. Member Boneysteele stated that training at this crucial point in the District's history is very important. Earlier in the agenda the District got through a critical hearing that is the result of years and years of building staff. Member Boneysteele stated that it is regrettable that this happened. The Board can make its displeasure known and hopefully this will not happen again. Member Boneysteele stated that he supports both proposals before the Board. Member Nejedly stated that the District just raised rates. There is already a contract for to convert the existing laboratory space to a space that can be used as a meeting room. A kitchen facility may be nice to have at some point in the future, but Member Nejedly stated that he is not in favor of spending $500,000 on a multipurpose room after just raising rates. President Hockett stated that her career has been devoted to education. President Hockett stated that she has taught in classrooms that had very limited amenities, and she does not know why the Board would want to try to make do in today's world of technology where presentations are incredibly high level. President Hockett stated that she is in favor of this project; and while she does not want to spend the money, it is money well spent to educate District staff and serve the public. President Hockett stated that it would appear that the vote will be 2/2 so this will need to come back at the July 19, 2001 Board Meeting. Mr. Batts stated that staff has negotiated the construction costs down from $420,000 to $320,000. He would hesitate to bring this back until the full Board is present. That will not happen until late August, and some of the economic incentive to do this project by change order will have been lost by then. It was moved by Member Boneysteele and seconded by President Hockett, that the General Manager be authorized to execute Revision No.2 to Agreement No. 021087 A V with Michael Willis Architects for an additional $26,330 for continuation of design services for the Multipurpose Facility, DP 8191, which would result in a total cost for work under this agreement of $76,000. Motion failed to pass on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: Nejedly, Lucey ABSENT: Members: Menesini It was moved by Member Boneysteele and seconded by President Hockett, that the General Manager be authorized to execute a $320,000 construction contract change order to Arntz Builders on the Laboratory Improvements Project and a revision to the existing construction services agreement with Michael Willis Architects for the Laboratory Improvements Project for $20,000 to provide construction services during the construction of the change order for the Multipurpose Facility, DP 8191. Motion failed to pass on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: Nejedly, Lucey ABSENT: Members: Menesini Discussion followed with regard to bringing these items back at a future Board meeting. Mr. Batts stated that he would bring back the item requesting approval of payment for work already completed by Michael Willis Architects, but he would not bring back the proposed change order for construction of a multipurpose facility because the incentive would be gone. 07 05 01 192 Member Boneysteele asked that both items be brought back at the next Board Meeting. Mr. Aim, Counsel for the District, stated that if the Board wishes to have the two matters just voted on reconsidered at the next Board meeting, a motion to that effect would be required. Following discussion, it was moved by President Hockett and seconded by Member Boneysteele, that the position paper requesting authorization for the General Manager to execute agreement with Michael Willis Architects to provide continuation of design services for the Multipurpose Facility, DP 8191; and the position paper requesting authorization for the General Manager to execute a $320,000 construction contract change order to Arntz Buildings, on the Laboratory Improvements Project, DP 7172, and authorization of a construction services agreement with Michael Willis Architects for the Multipurpose Facility, DP 8191, be calendared for reconsideration at the August 9, 2001 Board Meeting. Motion failed to pass on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Hockett, Boneysteele NOES: Members: Nejedly, Lucey ABSENT: Members: Menesini Following further discussion, it was moved by Member Nejedly and seconded by Member Boneysteele, that the position paper requesting authorization for the General Manager to execute agreement with Michael Willis Architects to provide continuation of design services for the Multipurpose Facility, DP 8191, be calendared for reconsideration at the July 19, 2001 Board Meeting. Member Nejedly stated that he believes the District has some obligation to pay its bills, but it is unfortunate this happened. It has been a long-standing District policy that Board approval is required. Someone is not doing their job and exceeding authority limits. That is wrong. On the other hand, apparently Michael Willis Architects has done the work and the District has an obligation to pay its bills. President Hockett called for the vote on the above motion. Motion approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Members: Nejedly, Boneysteele, Hockett NOES: Members: Lucey ABSENT: Members: Menesini 9. TREATMENT PLANT a. DIRECT STAFF REGARDING THE EXEMPTION OF DISTRICT FACILITIES FROM INCLUSION IN ROTATING OUTAGE BLOCKS BY PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Mr. Batts, General Manager, introduced Mr. Jim Belcher, Senior Engineer, who stated that District facilities are not currently categorically exempt from the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) rotating outage block program. The District must petition the California Public Utilities Commission for exemption. The treatment plant and pumping stations must be able to operate without electrical power. To that end, many efforts have already been made. In the treatment plant, cogeneration, standby power, and load shedding are in place. Thirteen pumping stations have on-site power and nine other facilities are ready with mobile generator connections. Mr. Belcher stated that staff is concerned about having all these facilities placed in one rotating outage block and having to respond to all of them at the same time. There are currently two options available to the Board: 1) Withdraw part or all of the petitions, with the impact of needing to expedite the pumping station reliability projects; or 2) Await the decision of the California Public Utilities Commission, with no immediate impact. 07 05 01 193 Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Board with Member Menesini being absent, that staff be directed to pursue an exemption of District pumping stations, but not the treatment plant, from inclusion in PG&E's rotating outage block program. 10. HUMAN RESOURCES a. DIRECT STAFF TO SECURE THE SERVICES OF AN ARBITRATOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DISTRICT'S GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Following discussion, it was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Nejedly, that staff be authorized to secure the services of an arbitrator in the matter of the job classification descriptions grievance in accordance with the District's grievance appeal procedures. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Menesini being absent. 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. MINUTES OF MAY 24. 2001 b. MINUTES OF JUNE 7. 2001 It was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Nejedly, that the minutes of May 24, 2001 and the minutes of June 7, 2001 be approved as presented. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Menesini being absent. 12. APPROVAL OF EXPENDITURES a. EXPENDITURE LIST DATED JULY 5.2001 Member Lucey, Chair of the Budget and Finance Committee, stated that he and Member Nejedly reviewed the expenditures and found them to be in order. It was moved by Member Lucey and seconded by Member Nejedly, that the Expenditure List dated July 5, 2001, including Self Insurance Check Nos. 101754-101755, Running Expense Check Nos. 132636-132823, and Sewer Construction Check Nos. 23420- 23462, be approved as recommended. There being no objection, the motion was approved with Member Menesini being absent. 13. BUDGET AND FINANCE a. RECEIVE MAY 2001 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS In the absence of Controller Deborah Ratcliff, Ms. Colette Curtis-Brown, Accounting Supervisor, reviewed the results of operations and maintenance for the month of May 2001, noting that expenditures were $190,000 greater than budget, representing a 6.9 percent unfavorable variance. Year-to-date expenditures were $5,000 less than budget, or virtually on budget. Year-to-date revenues of $33.6 million were $421,000 greater than budget, representing a 1.3 percent favorable variance. Ms. Curtis-Brown 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 3.899 percent to 6.775 percent. The latest interest rate as of April 2001 was 3.981 percent. The average yield of the District's LAIF account through April 2001 was 5.760 percent. President Hockett declared that the May 2001 Financial Statements were duly received. 14. EMERGENCY SITUATIONS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION None 07 05 01 194 15. ANNOUNCEMENTS/SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS None 16. CLOSED SESSION a. INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(C) - ONE POTENTIAL MATTER This closed session was not held. 17. REPORT OF DISCUSSIONS IN CLOSED SESSION None 18. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, President Hockett adjourned the meeting at the hour of 5:44 p.m. ~)~#-::, President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: 07 05 01