HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/4/2002 AGENDA BACKUPCentral Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002 No.: 3.a. CONSENT CALENDAR
Type of Action: ACCEPT ANNEXATION FOR PROCESSING
Subject: AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 02 -07 (ALAMO); 02 -08 (ALAMO); 02 -09
(LAFAYETTE); P.A. 02 -10 WALNUT CREEK); P.A. 02 -11 (LAFAYETTE) TO BE
INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT
Submitted By: Initiating Dept /Div.:
Molly Mullin, Engineering Assistant Engineering /Environmental Services
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTT .
r90, �� I"-- — 05K (
M. Mullin J. Miyamoto -Mills Swanson A. Farrell rtes
General
ISSUE: Board authorization is requested to initiate the annexation process on the following
listed properties.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize Proposed Annexations 02 -07, 02 -08, 02 -09, 02 -10,
02-11 to be included in future formal annexations.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None related to this action.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Not applicable.
BACKGROUND: PA 02 -07 is a petition for a single family home's septic tank conversion
to follow completion of a proposed mainline extension (Job No. 5568) which will begin
construction this month.
PA 02 -08 is a petition for a single family home's septic tank conversion to follow
completion for a proposed mainline extension (Job No. 5580) which will complete
construction this Spring.
The existing house at 3535 Springhill Road (property described as PA 02 -09), was
converted from septic tank to sewer service in January 2002. The owners also own the
adjacent parcel and wish to annex both parcels at the same time.
PA 02 -10 represents a recent lot split whereby an existing house has been connected to
sewer, and the owners of a new house under construction have applied for sewer
connection.
PA 02 -11 is a petition for connection of a house currently under construction.
Annexation of the parcel will eliminate an island in our District Boundary.
3/28/02 Page 1 of 8
U: \PPr \Annexations \Annex. PA02 -07 02- 11.wpd
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 10, 2002
Subject: AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 02 -07 (ALAMO); 02 -08 (ALAMO) 02 -09
(LAFAYETTE); P.A. 02 -10 (WALNUT CREEK); AND P.A. 02 -11 (LAFAYETTE) TO BE
INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize Proposed Annexations 02 -07, 02 -08, 02 -09,
02 -10, and 02-11 to be included in future formal annexations.
Parcel
Owners /Address
Lead
No.
Area
Parcel No. & Acreage
Remarks
Agency
02 -07
Alamo
Joseph J. and Nancy
Existing house will
CCCSD
(78A6)
Ronchetto, Jr.
be converted from
123 Wayne Avenue
septic when
Alamo, CA 94507
proposed sewer
201 - 022 -004
main project is
completed.
Project is exempt
from CEQA.
02 -08
Alamo
Andrea Applegate
Existing house will
CCCSD
(77D3)
7980 New Hope Rd.,
be converted when
Grants Pass OR 97527
proposed sewer
192 - 030 -042 (0.43)
main project is
completed. Septic
tank currently failing.
Project is exempt
from CEQA.
02 -09
Lafayette
Mahboud & Nichole
Existing house has
CCCSD
(46A6/B6)
Zabetian
been connected to
3535 Springhill Rd.
the public sewer
Lafayette, CA 94549
system.
231 - 080 -011 (27.12
Ac.)
Adjacent residential
lot having same
231- 080 -006 (16.14)
owner.
Project is exempt
from CEQA.
3/28/02 Page 2 of 8
U: \PPr \Annexations \Annex. PA02 -07 02- 11.wpd
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 10, 2002
subject: AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 02 -07 (ALAMO); 02 -08 (ALAMO) 02 -09
(LAFAYETTE); P.A. 02 -10 (WALNUT CREEK); AND P.A. 02 -11 (LAFAYETTE) TO BE
INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT.
Parcel
No.
Area
Owners /Address
Parcel No. & Acreage
Remarks
Lead
Agency
02 -10
Walnut
Deluca Trust
Existing house has
CCCSD
Creek
365 Donald Drive
been connected to
(5007)
Moraga CA 94556
the public sewer
138 - 100 -016 (1.081
system
Ac.)
Ron & Virginia Lukkes
New house under
2490 Arnold Industrial
construction on "B"
Way
portion has applied
Concord CA 94520
for sewer
138 - 100 -017 (.992 Ac.)
connection.
Project is exempt
from CEQA.
02-11
Lafayette
Douglas & Judith Nixon
Replacement house
CCCSD
(46136)
3540 Springhill Rd.
under construction
Lafayette, CA 94549
has applied for
231 - 070 -002 (0.88Ac.)
sewer connection.
Project is exempt
from CEQA.
3/28/02 Page 3 of 8
U: \PPr \Annexations \Annex. PA02 -07 02- 11.wpd
CP
OAP
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Prepared by Engineering Support Seatic
LOCATION MAP
N.T.S.
2-8
A -24 1958
1954
RONCHETO
201 - 022 -004
ANNEX
/�J�
J�
Q' 22 -33
1971
1 -17
1957
N LEGEND:
ANNEXATION
BOUNDARY
N0.
o so iso PREVIOUS
\ DATE ANNEXATION
FEET
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
P.A. 02 -07
Attachment
Page 4 of 8
CAMIL
I
M
OZ D
AVE
yy
2
2
m
rn
3
O r
O m
2
Z
r
ALAMO
r
En
�
O
m
O
�
z
�
o
WAYNE
AVE
O
2
EL PORT v
SITE
PN�o
LOCATION MAP
N.T.S.
2-8
A -24 1958
1954
RONCHETO
201 - 022 -004
ANNEX
/�J�
J�
Q' 22 -33
1971
1 -17
1957
N LEGEND:
ANNEXATION
BOUNDARY
N0.
o so iso PREVIOUS
\ DATE ANNEXATION
FEET
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
P.A. 02 -07
Attachment
Page 4 of 8
GPSP
r
N ALAMO STONE �A1
RO
Page 5 of 8
MAP
" " - -"
aha �- PR
B3—i
'
17 -2
1967
APPLEGATE
192 -030-042 '
23-18 -s, ANNFJS -''� �R
�00,0
A -24
-'"
uId
1954
Q
�Ota�
1958
a�
1115_i
1960
�r}
mill
v
� l�
N
�I
d
- -
- 1976
-
73-2
LEGEND:
1981
�m�m ANNEXATION
0 60 120
BOUNDARY
o FEET
N� PREVIOUS
DATE
a
N
ANNEXATION
x Central Contra Costa
Attachment
Sanitary District
'
v' I
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
P.A. 02 -08
-
Page 5 of 8
BOYD RD
SITE GEARY RD
0 (" 680 G
Hgpp�, Sv y�'jQ0
LAFA TTE
om
za 90 9�
J a
20 LOCATION MAP
N.T.S.
13
1 6 1 1
E
50-2
1976°
ZABETIAN � 1
E57-1)6 231 -080 -011
ANNEX
QQ �
ZABETIAN
231 -080 -006
ANNEX
CccS� 6
°..�NOg9r N
0 0 300
a
° FEET
LEGEND:
n
ANNEXATI N
a
BOUNDAR
°
NO. PREVIOUS
DATE ANNEXATIO
n
N
y Central Contra Costa Attachment
Sanitary District
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
g ' PA 02-09
0
Page 6 of 8
i
i
i
i
1 114 -3
t
1990
OAK
GROVE
RD WALNUT
YGNACIO
�q VALLEY RD
CREEK
�cn
1 ¢
NORTH G,y •�
AVE
I\
O Q
N
o
w¢
SITE
G� LOCATION MAP
CREEK N.T.S.
133-2 p NORTH GATE w00
1996 ��
CT
DEL UCA
Kl-
138-100-002
ANNEX
— - -- ----- - - - - -- _
---- ---- --
k
1 Q
2001
80-5 112-4
1982 1989 12;:5 a
I 115-3
1990
LEGEND:
° � N
���■ ANNEXATION
BOUNDARY �� .`\ — — — — I
E NO. PREVIOUS ��- - ----"
DATE ANNEXATION i ------ -' - - -- 0 FEET 200
Central Contra Costa Attachment
Q
Sanitary District PROPOSED ANNEXATION
v
P.A. 02 -10
Page 7 of 8
Y Central Contra Costa Attachment
p Sanitary District
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
' P.A. 02 -11
Page 8 of 8
Central Contra Costa S, Atary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002
POSITION PAPER
No.: 3.b. CONSENT CALENDAR
Type of Action: GRANT LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Subject: GRANT LEAVE OF ABSENCE TO COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIONS
DIVISION EMPLOYEE ROBERT WALKER, MAINTENANCE CREW MEMBER
II, FOR PERSONAL REASONS
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
William L. Echols, Field Operations Operations /Collection System Operations
Superintendent Division
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
W. Echols kf Pearl J. Kelly Ch
General Manager
ISSUE: Board approval is required for an employee Leave of Absence Without Pay for
longer than 30 days.
RECOMMENDATION: Grant a leave of absence without pay for up 11 months to
Collection System Operations Division (CSOD) Maintenance Crew Member II Robert
Walker for personal reasons.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Deny the leave of absence; grant a leave of absence
shorter than 11 months.
BACKGROUND: Robert Walker, Maintenance Crew Member II, has been a District
employee since February 21, 1992. Mr. Walker has requested a Leave of Absence
Without Pay from April 18, 2002, to March 17, 2003. Mr. Walker requests this Leave
of Absence Without Pay to explore life in ministry. He has requested a Leave of Absence
so that he could return to work at the District. During this Leave of Absence Without Pay,
the District will suspend payment of his benefits.
Mr. Walker is a fully trained, productive Maintenance Crew Member II. During his leave
of absence, he will maintain his Class A driver's license, cardiopulmonary resuscitation/
first -aid certification, and California Water Environment Association Technical Certification.
During the Leave of Absence Without Pay, Mr. Walker will gain valuable experience in
leadership and team - building that will benefit the District if he returns. Mr. Walker's
position would be filled by a temporary employee during his Leave of Absence so as to
reduce the impact of his absence on CSOD's productivity.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Grant a one -year leave of absence to CSOD employee
Robert Walker, Maintenance Crew Member II.
03/15/02
C: \PPAPER \walklv2.jmk Page 1 of 1
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002 No" 5.a. BIDS AND AWARDS
Type of Action: AUTHORIZE AWARD
Subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO VARIAN, INC. FOR AN
ATOMIC ABSORPTION SPECTROMETER FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Cheri Arstani, Principal Buyer Administrative /Purchasing
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
fflx.m doc--
(D V Lamica M graves J. Kelly
ISSUE: On March 6, 2002, sealed bids were received and publicly opened for the
purchase of one Atomic Absorption Spectrometer for the Treatment Plant's Environmental
Laboratory for the Laboratory Improvements Project, D.P. 7172. The Board must
authorize award of a purchase order or reject bids within 60 days of the bid opening date.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of the purchase order to Varian, Inc., the lowest
responsible bidder, in the amount of $58,167.06 to provide one Atomic Absorption
Spectrometer for the Treatment Plant's Environmental Laboratory.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The cost of this purchase is $58,167.06. Enough funds have been
budgeted for the purchase of this Atomic Absorption Spectrometer in the capital budget
of the Laboratory Improvement Project, D.P. 7172.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: If the Board of Directors decides not to purchase this
instrument, the samples can be sent to private laboratories for required analyses. The
cost of outside laboratory analyses will exceed the cost of this instrument in less than
three years. Additionally, there remains a good chance of not receiving data back from
the private laboratory in time to avoid permit violations by repeat sampling and analyses.
BACKGROUND: The current Atomic Absorption Spectrometer is approximately fifteen
years old and has undergone several repairs. It is now at the end of its useful life.
Additionally, the older 15- year -old technology is not meeting the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and Regional Water Quality Control Board's current stringent analytical
detection level requirements which are about ten times lower than when the current
Atomic Absorption Spectrometer was purchased. The Environmental Laboratory has
requested to replace this instrument in the Laboratory Improvements Project.
3/28/02
S: \ADMIN \POSPAPER\ Atomic .Absorption.Spectrometerwpd.wpd Page 1 of 3
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002
subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO VARIAN, INC. FOR AN
ATOMIC ABSORPTION SPECTROMETER FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
Environmental Laboratory and Purchasing staff developed the technical specifications and
the Formal Bid Request for the purchase of an Atomic Absorption Spectrometer. The Bid
Request was publicly advertised on February 11 and 17, 2002 and sent to three suppliers,
and an Addendum was issued on March 4, 2002. A summary of bids is presented in
Attachment No. 1. Three bids were received with evaluated bid prices, as follows:
Varian $58,167.06
Thermo Elemental 67,181 .03
Perkin -Elmer 60,372.11
Environmental Laboratory and Purchasing staff have conducted a technical and
commercial evaluation of the bids and concluded that the lowest responsible bidder is
Varian, Inc. with a bid price of $58,167.06.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize award of a purchase order to Varian, Inc.,
the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $58,167.06 to provide one Atomic
Absorption Spectrometer for the Treatment Plant's Environmental Laboratory.
3/28/02
S: \ADMIN \POSPAPER\ Atomic .Absorption.Spectrometerwpd.wpd Page 2 of 3
F-
U
/cc
vn
0
LV
Q
t
z
Q
U)
Q
U
z
0
V
J
MQM
6i.
z
W
U
ch
0
M�
W
LL
O
z
O
F-
Q
J
Q
M
O
M
CU
0)
^m
CL
E
0
a
c
0
.Q
`o
Q
jA^ti s
O
�'� .'.......,
(1)
CL
I-
CD
M
L6
LO
4
Cl
:• . \mil " /'
CD
E
CD
m v
Q>
CD
f0
U
O
O
O
N
O
O
'C
CD
N
00
CL
O
L
N
Ln
I�
CD
>
0
CD
�
3
z
CD
Q)
Y
f6
E
Q
N
Q)
CL
O
W
Q)
Q)
CS
a
O
E
.0
O Y
L
CL
Q)
}
)
CD
CQi
Q)
LL =
*�
m Cn
CL
F•-•
N LL
O
O
CD
O
O
O
Q
U
M
I�
'C
M
co
CD
CL
co
Cd
>_ Q
L
0
LO
LO
vs
CD
U
O_
Q)
E
Y
Q)
O
0)
U
C
) d
v
C
v)
C
U
N
U
O
z
U
C
CL
C
O
O
CL
cCC
>
N
C
Cl
� O.
L
N N
CO
O
<
0 O
`
~
a
a
-O
Q)
E
O
C1 C
Q
Q
cn U
Q
U
C
O
a
a
cn
o
0
N
�
�•
LO
N
O
N
N
Q
X
y
C
m
Q
m
N
O
O
N
U
_
N
>
o
a+
Q
f6
(n
X
W
Q
C
LL
N
N
N
C
>
>
a
=._
O o°
�+
U
p
y
O
W
t\
C
p o
7
d
Q)
>
Q
CL
E
Q
�,
i a
E
o
ti
o m
N
E
O
y
N i
O O
_ E
i
o
Z
N
Ci
OC
C] LLI
LL
0 f-
M
O
M
CU
0)
^m
CL
E
0
a
c
0
.Q
`o
Q
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
/in i BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002 No.: 5.b. BIDS AND AWARDS
Type of Action: AUTHORIZE AWARD
Sub /ect: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO LEEMAN LABS, INC. FOR
ONE (1) EACH AUTOMATED FLUORESCENCE MERCURY ANALYZER SYSTEM, EPA
METHOD 1631 FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Cheri Arstani, Principal Buyer Administrative /Purchasing
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
V. Lamica I�I graves 4J.K eE1 I D. Berge Charles . atts,
General Manager
ISSUE: On March 6, 2002, sealed bids were received and publicly opened for the
purchase of one Automated Fluorescence Mercury Analyzer System, EPA Method 1631
for the Treatment Plant's Environmental Laboratory for the Laboratory Improvements
Project, D.P. 7172. The Board must authorize award of a purchase order or reject bids
within 60 days of the bid opening date.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a purchase order to Leeman Labs, Inc., the
lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $26,737.75 to provide one (1) each
Automated Fluorescence Mercury Analyzer System, EPA Method 1631 for the Treatment
Plant's Environmental Laboratory.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The cost of this purchase is $26,737.75. Enough funds have
been budgeted for the purchase of the Mercury Analyzer System in the capital budget of
the Laboratory Improvement Project, D.P. 7172.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: If the Board of Directors decides not to purchase
this instrument, the samples can be sent to private laboratories for required analyses. The
cost of outside laboratory analyses will exceed the cost of this instrument in less than five
years. Additionally, there remains a good chance of not receiving data back from the
private laboratory in time to avoid permit violations by repeat sampling and analyses.
BACKGROUND: The current automated mercury analyzer is approximately nine years old.
It does not meet the current stringent analytical detection level of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency for Method 1631 as required by the District's 2001 National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System Permit. The District's previous Mercury limit was 210 parts
per trillion, and is expected to be less than 25 parts per trillion upon completion of the
4/1/02
S:\ ADMIN\ POSPAPER\ MercuryAnalyzerpositionpaper .wpd Page 1 of 3
POSITION PAPER"
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002
Subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO LEEMAN LABS, INC. FOR
ONE (1) EACH AUTOMATED FLUORESCENCE MERCURY ANALYZER SYSTEM, EPA
METHOD 1631 FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
total maximum daily analyses. The Environmental Laboratory requested to replace this
instrument in the Laboratory Improvements Project.
Environmental Laboratory and Purchasing staff developed the technical specifications and
the Formal Bid Request for the purchase of an Automated Fluorescence Mercury Analyzer
System, EPA Method 1631. The Bid Request was publicly advertised on February 11 and
17, 2002. A summary of bids is presented in Attachment No. 1. Three bids were received
with evaluated bid prices as follows:
Banian Technologies, Inc. $29,119.00
Tekran Inc. 28,762.03
Leeman Labs, Inc. 26,737.75
Environmental Laboratory and Purchasing staff have conducted a technical and
commercial evaluation of the bids and concluded that the lowest responsible bidder is
Leeman Labs, Inc. with a bid price of $26,737.75.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize award of a purchase order to Leeman Labs,
Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $26,737.75 to provide one (1) each
Automated Fluorescence Mercury Analyzer System, EPA Method 1631.
4/1/02
S:\ ADMIN\ POSPAPER\ MercuryAnalyzerpositionpaper .wpd Page 2 of 3
V
a
t
z
a
//F-
/�
V/
V
a
L�
r
Z
O
J
Z
W
V
0
Fa
LL
O
Z
O
F—
J
M�
W
a
W,
4•-
O
M
CU
(v
CL
a
3
m
O
n
N
U
U
O
I�
n
N
C
O
a.
r,
O
n
w
N
N
d
> E
+1
.0
N
vs
Co
C
L
y
L
CD
f°
J
O Z
CD
m
D N
U
C
O
Z
E
_
N
D
C
J
CD 2
M
O
Ch
M
O
O
O
N
U
O
N
N
O
'C
N
07
CO
CL
LO
—
n
i-
O
(fl
N
O
N
0
4
0
N
N
tis
E
Co O
:3
N
o•
Z
C)
CC co
+J
y O
c
co
U
(D C
O
cn
N
a)
U
c +1
a
}
N
ICD
L
Y
O
N L
+�
Ch
m (n
0_
�--'
F-
+�
o
O
LO
to
O
O
L
O
N
N
(u
>
U
O
rn
rn
N
>'
N c0
j D
CL
O
N
r
N
Q
•CD
O LL
0
N
N
•y
O
O
fl U
y co
�
C
— CU
m
O O
y
H
°
N
U
O
Z
U r
aci a
co
L
C
co
Ch N
y
C
U
r-
p N L
7
O
7 N
C
}, i
CL
m
r- U) o
O
j
U LL
O W
-p
O
F-
L
O
>
+J
L
y
y
C
a� o °3
°
a +
m
+� y
a
CL
a c
o
C7
Q Cn
Q
(n U
Q
c
0
a)
CL
O
L
U) �'>^
C
N
U
�
N
�
N
>
O
L
O
C
O
N
Q
y
C
U
O
>
O
c
m
�—
Q
<
a
y
L
O
y
U
(V
X
m
cL0
:3 ` c0
cXp
F-
W
O
ON
OR
O ON
(�
li
N E
(V
C:
0
CO
-0-0
"
'+.
O
L.
U 'Cu
O O
C
U
co
0
0
J
y
CU
y N
L
co C
y
co
D
W
r
O
*'
`D r-
+,
N
E
O \
d
N
J
� '—
0
CL O
E
E
Q L
+a)
>`
Oai
"
co
0 m
to
E
U
m
E
+ -0
-a0
>
L
O
°) Z
r
N
cc
cr 0
LL
m LL
0 H
W,
4•-
O
M
CU
(v
CL
a
3
m
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002 No•: 5.c. BIDS AND AWARDS
Type of Action: AUTHORIZE AWARD /AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT
Subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO RANGER
PIPELINES, INCORPORATED, FOR THE LAFAYETTE SEWER RENOVATION
PROJECT, PHASE 3A, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5607
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Wesley Adams, Senior Engineering Engineering Department / Capital Projects
Assistant Division
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
W. Adams Pi cki W. Brennan A. arrell Charles W. atts
General Mana r
ISSUE: On March 22, 2002, sealed bids were received and opened for construction of
the Lafayette Sewer Renovation Project, Phase 3A, District Project No. 5607. The Board
of Directors must authorize award of the contract or reject bids within 60 days of bid
opening.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of a construction contract.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $237,600, including design, bid price, contingency,
and construction management.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Reject all bids, which is not recommended.
BACKGROUND: The District's 1,500 miles of collection sewers has pipe segments that
range in age from new to over 100 years old. Some of these pipe segments are at the
end of their useful life. This is evidenced by high maintenance costs and increases in call -
outs by Collection System Operations Department (CSOD). Over 300 miles of small
diameter sewers were constructed more than 40 years ago throughout the District, and
the majority of sewers within the City of Lafayette fall into this category.
The District implemented the sewer renovation program in 1991. Since that time an
annual allowance for this program has been included in the Capital Improvement Budget
and Plan. This program is an ongoing series of projects. Candidate sewer line segments
are identified, evaluated, and placed on a priority list for replacement and /or renovation.
The Lafayette Sewer Renovation Project will renovate or replace five (5) segments
identified in the City of Lafayette.
3/28/02
h \Design \Position Papers \2002 \5607award.wpd Page 1 of 6
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2000
Subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO RANGER
PIPELINES, INCORPORATED, FOR THE LAFAYETTE SEWER RENOVATION
PROJECT, PHASE 3A, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5607
The project was originally scheduled to bid in June of 2002. In January 2002, the City
of Lafayette indicated to the District its plans to repave /reconstruct in Calendar Year 2002
several of the roads (Ortega and Perales Streets, Sibert Court and Cerro Encantado) in
which some of these line segments are located. Once repaved, the City has a five year
moratorium on trenching. The District's Phase 3A project will reconstruct the sewers in
these areas ahead of the City's project. To reduce repeated future impacts on residents,
line segments in the same vicinity have been added to the District's Phase 3A project
bringing the total footage of sewer to be replaced /rehabilitated to approximately 1,100 LF
(see Attachment 1 for map).
The plans and specifications for the Phase 3A of the project were prepared by District
staff. The engineer's estimate for construction of Phase 3A is $182,000. This project
was advertised on March 8 and 13, 2002. Four sealed bids ranging from $168,350 to
$ 210,170 were received and publicly opened on March 22, 2002. A summary of bids
received is shown in Attachment 2. The Capital Projects Division staff conducted a
technical and commercial review of the bids and determined that the bid submitted by
Ranger Pipelines, Incorporated, is the lowest responsible bid.
The District will administer the construction contract and will provide contract
administration, inspection, survey, office engineering, and shop drawing review. The
funds required to complete this project, as shown in Attachment 3, are $237,600. The
total cost of the Lafayette Sewer Renovation Project, Phase 3A, is anticipated to be
$237,600.
Construction of the improvements to the Lafayette sewers is included in the fiscal year
2001 -2002 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) on pages CS -12 through CS -15. The
project manager has reviewed the expenditure requirements for this allocation and has
determined that they are consistent with the Capital Improvement Budget and Plan.
Staff has concluded that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines, Section 18.2, since it involves only
alterations of existing facilities with negligible or no expansion of capacity. Authorization
of the construction contract for this project will establish the Board of Directors'
independent finding that the project is exempt from CEQA.
3/28/02
is \Design \Position Papers \2002 \5607award.wpd Page 2 of 6
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2000
Subject: AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO RANGER
PIPELINES, INCORPORATED, FOR THE LAFAYETTE SEWER RENOVATION
PROJECT, PHASE 3A, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5607
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize award of a construction contract in the
amount of $ 168,350 for construction of the Lafayette Sewer Renovation Project,
Phase 3A, D.P. 5607, to Ranger Pipelines, Incorporated, the lowest responsible bidder.
3/28/02
I: \Design \Position Papers \2002 \5607award.wpd Page 3 of 6
Y
T
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
LAFAYETTE SEWER RENOVATION PHASE 3A
PERALES ST./ORTEGA ST.,
SIBERT CT., & TANGLEWOOD DR.
0
Attachment
Page 4 of 6
II
Attachment 2
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
SUMMARY OF BIDS
PROJECT NO. DISTRICT PROJECT 5607 DATE Marc!L��.
LOCATION
Martinez, California LNGINLLK L5 1. 5 "I bZ,000
Order
BIDDER
BID PRICE
Opened
(Name, telephone & address)
$
1
Darcy & Harty Construction Inc.
$209,800
Mike Darcy
1300 Carroll Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94124 -3611
2
Ranger Pipelines, Inc.
$168,350
1296 Armstrong Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94124
3
D. R. Lemmings
$210,170
Mike McDonald
P. O. Box 2173
Concord, CA 94521
4
Roto- Rooter
$194,750
Larry Fitch
195 Mason Circle
Concord, CA 94520
5
6
7
8
Page 5 of 6
ATTACHMENT 3
LAFAYETTE SEWER RENOVATION PROJECT, PHASE 3A
DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 5607
POST - BID /PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL
1. Construction Contract $ 168,350
2. Contingency at 15.0 percent $ 25,252
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL: $ 193,600
3. Construction Management
• District Forces
Construction Management $ 10,000
Contract Administration /Inspection $ 20,900
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT: $ 30,000
4. Consultant /Professional Services
• Arborist $ 1,000
• Geotech /Materials Testing $ 5,000
SUBTOTAL CONSULTANT /PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES: $ 6,000
5. Engineering and Other Services During Construction
• District Forces
Office Engineering Services $ 1,000
Record Drawings $ 1,000
Community Relations $ 2,000
Surveying $ 2,000
Collection System Operations $ 1,000
• Other Services
Legal $ 1.000
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING: $ 8,000
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND
ENGINEERING TOTAL (ITEMS 3, 4, & 5): $ 44,000
6. Prebid Expenditures (Design) $ 20,000
7. Total Project Cost $ 237,600
8. Funds Allocated to Date $ 0
9. Allocation Required to Complete Project $ 237,600
PERCENT OF
ESTIMATED
CONSTRUCTION
100.0
15.5
3.1
4.1
22.7
10.3
122.7
Page 6 of 6
0
I
W ^U^),
-J-'J V >_
� O '
L V
cn
U) fo
f 4-J t fu
fu
i -
fu 4-J
._ 0 CL 0
--J C: L � L.
m 4-J
.L - L .V U) 0 . '�
L-- 4-J 0 a-J
cn •
E w E p E
— ca mo
0 Qom' �`u
4-1 a�
4� �� L
(� O N 0 ra co Q O
C 0
4J 1�-4 m V U O
CL
cv it� �
E
fu
cn m
o
0
L
k � �
a
_ -v
fu
O � c
� cv
N
C
C!1
N
3
fo
cu
L
V
L
>,. 4-J
m a-J O
c E
"'
• V 4� �
4�
� V fo
4-J CL
— Cn
O p Jc
O 4-J O
U `�—
V fu fu
4-, 4-J —
V) c
•- > O
■
U
cl
cu
!cu
V
O
U
co
L
O
U
O
L
N
A
u
.E
J
c
O
N
O
E
CL
v
as
CL
°O
o
V
°O
0
o
°O
0
6
cn
aD
o
CL
-1-a
rn
m
U)
aD
0
a
..r
0)
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
�
QQ
D.
O
N
Lo
m
m
6F}
6F}
6F}
N
O
f1
L.i�
Cl)
O
to
U
O
N
•V
(n
V
U)
�
O
O
°_�
C
cn
' L �
U
cn
♦ r
_
LP
5
tCy)
C
N
U
+ -+
to
to
in
Lp
C
.�
'�
L
p
co
O
U
c
w
v/
U
m
U
o
Q
c
0
C:
O
c:
to
U
�-
O
'CD
v
.N
N
O
`N
,�
`N
C
cn
'M
0
u
Q
L
L
At
�1
cu
L-
0
U
c
O
L
c
O
U
m
U
aD
U
W
_
V V
06 L
�
00
r-
!-
r-
0 4w
= O
OV
V
Im
_ .a N
O L 0)
.N .v
N —
N
00
N
� ' d
=
O Cj)
a W
U)
a)
Cl)
V
o •- a,
N
�
O
I`
LO
M
�-
O
O
v
a a
O
L=
O
LO
LO
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
N
LO
ti
N
M
�'
co
1`
0
O
O
C
0
0
0
0
0
N
L
N
co
Iq
V)
co
cvd
L
i
1-01
X
LJ
L
0
N
C
N
L
Qb�O
a
.3
L
0
-v
0
J
O
.� .v
o
N
I`
r-
Cv
O = Cl)
CL W
� = N
v
CV
=
d O 4)
= C C
O O
(L
L
4) N
N
O
U
L
I`
O
LO
r-
0
N
0
M
0
d'
0
LO
0
w
0
I`
o o
t
LO
N
O
'
~
O
O
O
N
O
M
O
O
LO
O
F-
�-
�
co
C
O
L
a
E
O
U
E
J
C
O
co
.N
L
E
N
N
V
N=
p
o
V
0
M
O
CD
0
T
0
CD 0
T
0
0
LO
O
0
0 CD
Q
LO
0
°o
°o
°0
00
°o
°o
.o
cn,v
o
0
0
0
0
0
LO
t
o
0
(5
Sri
M
N
N
LO
LO
N
p
{f}
6F}
t
6F}
Ef}
6F}
IL
U
U
�
V
U
Cl)
Q
�
U
Q
•L
N
.�
' Cl)
�
N
(D
_
Q
Q
�
U
C
+..
cn
U)
C/5
Q
•L
N
0
cc
O
Q
Q
U
ca
E
�-:
C/5
0 O
cc
CD
Q
c
U V
E
m
0
"J
C
c
�C
U
N
N
cu
L-
,C
Q
Q
w
0
U
V1
�J
-
E
C:
O
N
L
O
ca
O
.O
Cn --J
0) fo
.O
-0 O
Z
�.L. ■
fo
O
E
V)
.-
L
O
L
O
V)
.ro
O
O
c
0
■
�V11
W
V
O
L
L
L fo
O —
4-J V
V '0
4-' cu
O •-
V
O �
f
— c
� O �
V O
�
° O 4�
V z z
■ ■
wo
c
,O
fu
4�
E
V
O
O
O
L
E
O
wo
4J
4�
z
■
c
0
a
0
O
4-J
fo
N
i
O
O
V
-�
—
V
f
E
V
f
4�
E
ca
W
4)
fo
N
=3
V
L.
V
. =
4�
i
O
Jc
4�
�.
-J
=3
4
fu
fu
3:
>
O
fu
4�
E • -
ca
4)
4) E
V
4-J
(n
-
O
C
O
�
.61
Vi
N
O
�
ra
�
_
'0
c
c
E
C:L
0
�
a--i
V
�
a
oC
Z
5
a
W
} 0
Oa IX
W
CN
C
CO)
02
LL C1
IL
W
F-
W
J
CL
0
U
W
0
�NCOOCOMMM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d
N
nLO
n
H
O
O
O
LL
LL
LL
LL
H
H
H
.
-
C
C
C
C
C
.
C
C
C
`
6-
L-
N
:°:°:°��`�:°:°
E
E
E
aaaaaaa¢
°O°
UUUUUUUU
UUU
L
i
E
�a
Z
4)
ON
ON
N
c0
3
N
m
U CD
�
Z
�
v
v�
O
LL
U
.E
E
=
c°o�Cco
Q
E
o
8
CD
.c
M
c
t
c°
ca
N
�
N
to
c
M
N
O
Ua
L
N
U
..
E
�
c
=
Z
W
L-
ooyE2
c
o~
o
v
N
°
tm
o
(L I-)
°a
m
C
y
c
N
2
c
2
1
O
V
m
N
U
w°
O
C
W
c
ca.
E
��
E
Cc
c
a
p
8
y
��v
p
�
M
E�
�
N
o
C
C-6
c
O
N
o
i
o
�N
�E
O
W
LIS
�
o
E
E�
m'I
o0�
:
o
0
a
M0
°)
L
v
N
US�0
.
'o
°
>°
c
Q
c
O
o
V
E
E
-oo
g°L
,°N
•
``�cpai��N
cc
o
LLJ
�
-�j�
W
V
W
N
Cl
O.N
oo.9
o
0
O
CLINE•
oc4.�
N
°p�-ov
0'C
7
0'
�E
L
CL
0
p
u)
p
N
a
j
v
N
�c��amo
M
N
M
=
=
N
c�.`
o.�1
�,
+'
N
C
a
5
E.�,.,
}'
E
�--
2
-c
-v
3
°
0
o
N
o
.r
N
2
oan°.00N
a
cac�c��c�oco
W
°
N0
UA
'y
0
0
0
3.
W
U
O
c�
O o
N
>
O
>
N
>
y
Y
o�
N
a�
a�
a�
a�
a�
W
a�
a�
a�
a�
a�
m
O
c`a
o
V
L)
13
4
000
000
V
F—a
r
cd
.a
d
'6
O
s
1
1 N
ca
1.61
tU
1 -61
N
M
.6
U
U)
H
Z
W
2
W
Q
W
J
IL
H
D
ROO
H
U)
Z
Q
J
D
U)
Z
♦O
V
0
a�
rn
cc
a
N
O
Q
E
Q
E
O
2
V
o
m
CLWWU
wU
wU
WwwW
H
CL
a,a
CL
M
Ma.
Marla.
W
0000
c00co
�0�r
Un0ooLo
0000
00000
00tiLO
0000Lo
0
0
0�
r`r`"t
rnrnaD
0000000
ta
MVNO
CT06G
di
4"
oi
.;iu6ti
�MVtM
M
m
co
�
L
6F}
Ef}
Ef}
H9
64
f�}
6F}
61)-
61),
6cA
69
a
O
E
co
N
L
Q
CO)
.0
t/1
06
(D
=
0
�
c
o
�
U
0
3-0
O
N
2
ca
m
c�
m
0
U
o
0
a�
rn
cc
a
v
0
N
N
rn
m
a
O
0
a�
a
Q
E
Q
Q
o
m
V
cu
0
0
m
m
�WWWW
WW
UUUWW
UU
co0o
0
co
C)
000000
000
M00
qT
qtf`0
0co00U)
co
000
d�
�OI`CO�
cOcD�
LoGo�0)-l`u')-
OOO
�}
00�
r--
CO
N
Ncomco
000
Nf���
14t0)
ti
�
0
d'U')O
L
�
6F}
H9�
Eft
6H
6F}
6�9�
61)}
61%
d4
69
d4
60%
69
Q
o
E
N
Ul)
N
Q
C
Cl)
•�
(�
CO)
L
0
0
O
\
_
N
o
N
J
o
V
U
ci
0
0
C
C7
C)
C)
Y
v
0
N
N
rn
m
a
v
0
M
d)
rn
ca
CL
76
'FU
>
>
>
>
>
=
O
O
O
O
O
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
E
o
7E!
-OL
-2
-La-
V
co
ca
c�
ca
m
O
0
0
0
0
m
mm
mm
�-
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
U)
U)
(n
(1)
WW
Www
UU
w
w
w
w
I--
a-
IL
CL
CL
aaaCL
_
U)
0
f�0000r—
00000
f-00
N
o0U)
co
co
co
MOM
co0Oco00
U)
0Lo
U)
1`0N
000
�N0It00
{o!}
0
Vi
L
I,
N
O
V-
O
e—
f`
"
(0
0
00
00
NI`O_
`T00�t�
0)
U)
N�MT
-00
vq9
bF}
�
d!}
�
bF}
bg
69
6F}
64Y
6,).
Q
O
E
N
co
N
a
0
co
E
c
o
U
vi
0
V
U
p
N
O
M
ca
p
m
Q
>
>
co
v
0
M
d)
rn
ca
CL
v
0
v
a�
rn
m
CL
>
+�+
O
E
E
Q
-�
O
L
V
o
m
O'
co
U)
U)
U)
U)
U)
U)
(/)(/)(0
WWWW
WWUU
WWU
H
=
4)
0(0(0
MU')
00000
0000
�FOV,
M�
00000
0000
v-
OO"tf`N
NVttnO�
0000
�
Vt,gi`4
CflNNMV
vVL6
6
0
N
co
0
N
T-
to
L
69,
6F}
69
69
tq
69
69
6n�
v
6F}
60A
69
Q
O
co
E
M
L
Q
CO)
06
cc
.00
J
_
O
_O
�
Q
o
-C
F-
0
j
U)
0
F-
O
Q
o
2
V
>
Q
v
0
v
a�
rn
m
CL
Z
O
Q
V
06
9
W
J
Q
F--
N
O
O
N
r
°o
N
Cl)
O
00
00
r
i
f�
00
co
(N
U')
V
o2f
X
X
O
O
CD
CD
W
W
cm
W
c
ch
CD
a)
v
CU
-o
�
>
m
ca
�
Co
o
o6
a
a
p
E
cm
Q
—
•�
cu
0)
0
Q
0
cua�
o
O
O
U
U)
I-
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
/A" i ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: APRIL 4, 2002 No.: 7.a. ENGINEERING
Type of Action: SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING
Subject: ESTABLISH MAY 9, 2002, AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE
COMMENTS ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO DISTRICT CODE 6.38, RECYCLED
WATER CHARGES
Submitted By: Initiating DeptJDiv.:
Don Berger, Associate Engineer Engineering /Environmental Services Division
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
D. �B, R. Schmidt C. Swanson A. Fa ell Charles *ae
General
ISSUE: It is the District's practice to conduct a public hearing prior to revising District
Code provisions regarding fees, rates, and charges.
RECOMMENDATION: Establish May 9, 2002, as the date for a public hearing to receive
comments on a proposed Ordinance amending District Code Chapter 6.38, Recycled
Water Charges.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: If adopted, the proposed Ordinance will increase first year
revenues from recycled water. For the first year this would be approximately $20,000.
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Not raising rates would result in a loss of potential
revenue needed to cover the operating and capital costs of the program.
BACKGROUND: In 1998, the Board amended the District Code to include Chapter 6.38
on Recycled Water Charges. This chapter describes recycled water customer
classifications, volume charges, retrofit charges, and the billing cycle. Recycled water
rates have remained unchanged since 1998, and it is now appropriate to consider
increasing rates to comparable levels charged by other agencies.
The proposed Ordinance (draft attached) will set recycled water rates at 80% of the rates
for a customer's competing water source (i.e., potable or canal water). This is
comparable to recycled water rates charged by other agencies and keeps rates attractive
for marketing potential new customers, which is important for the development of
additional revenue sources. The financial viability of connecting individual new customers
will be evaluated, and additional fees or surcharges may be applied to customers with high
cost to benefit ratios when the costs of providing water exceeds anticipated revenue.
3/28/02
U: \PPr \Bertera \ratehearing.wpd Page 1 of 9
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002
Subject: ESTABLISH MAY 9, 2002, AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE
COMMENTS ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO DISTRICT CODE 6.38, RECYCLED
WATER CHARGES
A public hearing will allow current and future customers to comment on the proposed
charges. Staff recommends that the hearing be held on May 9, 2002, at the regularly
scheduled Board meeting.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Establish May 9, 2002, as the date for a public
hearing to receive comments on the proposed Ordinance to amend District Code 6.38,
Recycled Water Charges.
3/28/02
U: \PPr \Bertera \ratehearing.wpd Page 2 of Q
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE No. 209,
WHICH ESTABLISHED A STRUCTURE FOR
RECYCLED WATER RATES LISTED IN THE
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT CODE
WHEREAS, on December 3, 1998 the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
( "District ") passed and adopted Ordinance No. 209, which established a structure for
recycled water rates by adding Chapter 6.38 to the District Code; and
WHEREAS, the District has established the goal of "Recycling High Quality
Water;" and
WHEREAS, in response to this goal, the District has developed a substantial
recycled water program, which is primarily targeted for landscape irrigation; and
WHEREAS, the rate structure established by Ordinance No. 209 contains eight
separate rates that vary depending on volume usage and customer category; and
WHEREAS, the District has determined the rate structure established by
Ordinance No. 209 is unnecessarily complex and should be replaced by a simpler rate
structure; and
WHEREAS, the District is an authorized producer and purveyor of recycled
water pursuant to a "Project Specific Agreement for Zone One Recycled Water Project'
approved by the District and the Contra Costa Water District on November 22, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the District is permitted by the State of California, San Francisco
Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, to produce and supply treated effluent as
recycled water; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate for customers to pay their share of the costs to
produce and supply treated effluent as recycled water; and
WHEREAS, in order to encourage use of recycled water, thereby promoting the
conservation of the potable water supply, the District recognizes the need to price
recycled water so as to provide an economically competitive alternative to local potable
Doc #: 260707 v.1
1
Page 3 of 9
DRAFT
water sources while recovering the maximum amount of the cost of producing and
delivering recycled water, which is feasible dependant on the cost of the alternative water
sources available; and
WHEREAS, the costs associated with the production and supply of treated
effluent as recycled water are anticipated to be recovered over a period of years through
the application of a schedule of charges that reflect charges for service consistent with
long term capital recovery and competitive pricing while not exceeding the cost of
providing the service.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. — Title 6, Chapter 6.38 of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District Code shall be amended as follows:
(a) The title of Chapter 6.38 shall be amended to read: "Recycled Water
Charges — Landscape Irrigation."
(b) Section 6 38 010 Findings shall be amended as follows:
A. The District Board of Directors finds that pursuant to Title 11 of
the District Code, the District is authorized to produce recycled water for the
purpose of encouraging conservation of potable water supplies. Therefore, the
Board further finds that it is appropriate to adopt a rate structure based upon the
lowest possible cost consistent with sound economy and prudent management,
which includes a balancing of the District's own cost recovery concerns against
the requirements of providing recycled water at the lowest possible cost and rates.
In addition, the Board finds that the recycled water rate structure shall be based
upon the cost of service analysis which includes actual operating and maintenance
costs, debt service and capital costs based upon a maximum amortization period
of thirty years. The proposed rate structure is intended to recover such costs, and
is not intended to benerate unreasonable or excessive surplus revenues or profits
to the District. The Board further finds that the rate structure hereinafter set forth
is designed to conserve the public potable water supply for the greatest public
benefit, and does not exceed the reasonable cost to provide the service.
Doc #: 260707 v.1
2
Page 4 of 9
DRAFT
B. The rate structure for recycled water is established pursuant to
District Code, Chapter 11.50, Recycled Water Pricing. This rate structure shall
apply to each customer according to classification of that customer. A customer's
classification is based on their alternative water source.
C. This rate structure for recycled water is intended to help implement
the State constitutional mandate set forth in Article X, Section 2, which states that
water resources of the State are to be put to beneficial use, to the fullest extent of
which they are capable, and that waste of potable water (through an unreasonable
use or unreasonable method of use) should be prevented. In order for the
appropriate use of recycled water to be maximized, the rate structure for recycled
water must be competitive with, or favorable to, corresponding local costs for
alternative sources of potable water. This rate structure is designed to be
competitive with current potable water pricing structures. However, if drought or
other circumstances alter the demand for or pricing of recycled water, nothing
herein shall prevent the District from modifying these rates or adopting alternative
rate structures to facilitate accelerated cost recovery, including capital costs.
D The Board finds the rates set forth herein for the specified
categories do not exceed the cost of providing recycled water service to District
customers which costs include incremental costs of producing effluent that meet
California Code of Regulations Title 22 requirements for recycled water, delivery
costs maintenance cost administration and overhead costs and recovery of
capital costs.
E. The Board finds that the following recycled water rate structure is
based upon a just standard of reasonableness, given the complexity in determining
the actual incremental costs to provide the service.
(c) Section 6.38.020 — Customer Classification shall be amended to read
as follows:
The General Manager -Chief Engi n°°" shall classify each customer by
estimating the _ elt sae evaluating the water source alternative to of recycled water
that the customer
Doc #: 260707 v.l
3
Page 5 of 9
DRAFT
and other- appheable water- demand ehar-aeteristies speeifie to that eustemer-'s site
has available to it. The District may, from time to time, reclassify a customer
based on a new esfiffia4e that n A_ „a ,
e 1eiv,°a u ate M
change in the customer's alternative water source to recycled water. The General
Manger -Chief Engine°" shall classify each customer according to one of the
following defined classifications:
Class I: Potable
Class II: Canal/Well
(d) Section 6 38 030 — Declining Block Rate Structure — Volume Charge
shall be deleted in its entirety and amended to read as follows:
6 38 030 — Land Irrigation Rate Structure.
A A rate structure based on setting rates at or below the cost of
providing service and priced in a manner to compete with alternative water supply
costs encourages the use of recycled water, thus conserving the state potable
water supply for the erg atest public benefit Accordingly, a volume charge based
upon rates set for the user classification shall be applied to the volume of recycled
water measured and reported during each billing cycle for that customer based on
the customer's classification:
Alternative Water
Customer
Volume
Volume
Source
Classification
Charge Per
Charge Per
Acre Foot
Thousand Gallons
Potable
I
$750
$2.30
Canal/Well
II
$355
$1.09
B The rates set forth above will automatically be increased, in an
amount equal to three percent (3 %) of the then existing rates starting on July 1,
2003 and occurring each year thereafter, without further action of the Board. The
4
Doc #: 260707 v.I
Page 6 of 9
DRAFT
three percent (3 %) increase is required in order to provide for the increasing costs
associated with the regulation, inflation, and to maximize cost recovery of the
District for its recycled water program while obtaining competitive rates. This
annualized automatic increase shall remain in effect until further action of the
Board.
C. For existing customers as of the date of the amendment to this
Code Section the rate structure listed under this Section shall not result in the
rates charged to such customers to increase by more than 25% each year. Once
the existing customers' rates meet those established under this Section, then the
25% annual rate increase cap shall no longer apply.
D. Certain District customers are provided service pursuant to existing
contracts that provide for a limitation of maximum fees and charges to be
imposed for recycled water. In the event that the rates required by this Ordinance
provide for rates and charges to the contractual customer in an amount that is in
excess of the contractual terms the rates and charges shall be reduced to the
maximum allowable charges for recycled water provided for in the contract.
(e) Section 6.38.040 — System Isolation Charge shall be deleted in its entirety
and amended to read:
6.3 8.040 — Connection Fees.
Connection Fees shall be imposed on new customers to recoup District
costs, in providing a recycled water infra structure and isolating the customer's
existing system from the recycled water system. including capital costs, in
connecting a new customer to the recycled water stem. The Connection Fees
are intended to fully compensate the District for its reasonable costs incurred in
design and construction activities in extending its facilities to connect a new
customer, and for any design and construction or improvements required to isolate
the potable water supply from the recycled water supply. These Connection Fees
shall include both the costs of connecting new customers to the recycled water
system "Connection Costs ") and the costs of isolating the new customer's
recycled water facilities from their potable water facilities ( "System Isolation
Costs").
Doc #: 260707 v.1
Page 7 of 9
DRAFT
The new customer must pay Connections Fees including Connection
Costs and System Isolation Costs prior to the District undertaking the
construction activities required to provide service. Alternatively, the Customer
may enter into a contract with the District which shall provide adequate security
for payment of the connection fees prior to the District incurring those costs of
providing for a connection to the recycled water system.
The District may assist new customers by financing the Connection Fees
over a period not to exceed fifteen (15) years from the date of initiating recycled
water service No right to obtain a connection or to finance connection fees, is
created by these provisions All decisions concerning the extension of service to a
new customer and financing of the Connection Fees shall be made on a case by
case basis at the discretion of the District.
(f) Subsection 6.38.055 is to be added to the District Code as follows:
6.38.055 — Cost - Benefit Analysis.
Before committing to a new customer connection the District shall
perform a Cost - Benefit Analysis to determine whether it is cost effective to
connect the new customer to the recycled water system. If the Cost - Benefit
Analysis indicates that the new customer connection would not be financially
beneficial to the District the District may decline to design and construct the
improvements necessary to connect the new customer to the recycled water
system.
(g) Current District Code Subsections 6.38.050 and 6.38.060 will remain
unchanged.
SECTION 2.
All provisions of the District Code not specifically addressed in Section 1 shall
remain in force and unchanged.
Doc #: 260707 v.1
6
Page 8 of 9
DRAFT
SECTION 3.
This Ordinance shall be a general regulation of the District, and shall be published
once in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general circulation within the District,
and shall be effective on the seventh day following such publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2002 by the Board of
Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following votes:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Members:
Mario Menesini
President of the Board of Directors,
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District,
County of Contra Costa, State of California
COUNTERSIGNED:
Joyce E. Murphy
Secretary, Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa
State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
7
Kenton L. Alm,
District Counsel
Doc #: 260707 v.1
Page 9 of 9
ct
W
W
V
cit
V
z
0
a
W
W
a
N
0
0
N
q-5
v
aC
Q.
R
V
Q
N
�
=
a�
Q
Q
�
�
a
=
U
0
V
_
0
0
O
(
_
s
.�.�
N
.O
O
_
O
y-
+r
O
O
_
ca
m
O
4-4
10
cn
Q
L
N
O
i�
CL
o
•�
cn
C�
V
Q
O
=
=
•�
O
N
V
•0
a
N
i
Q
Q
•�,
a�
ai
a)
�,
+r
._
v1
0
Z
Z
0
N
E
7
O
C
R
0
CD
v
v
CD
c�
fl.
0
O
0
Ln
N
0
O
Ln
CD
ca
E
O
a..
a..
V
•
.-.
i
0)
3
AMM
O
(1)
B
m
O
Cl.
a�
LIM.
Q
0
N
Ln
00
x
LO
-U).
3
O
v
I.L.
Ln
�>
C
IMM
N
G�
E
O
C
O
i
*+
C
i
>
N
C
N
(.�
i
V%
++
�
._
LLI
O
V
Q
N
E
7
O
C
R
0
CD
v
v
CD
c�
fl.
0
O
0
Ln
N
0
O
Ln
CD
ca
E
O
a..
a..
V
•
C
O
O �
R =
D �
V ca
V U)
O N
O
Z 0
i
�. N N 'i-
E .� O Q N
v E y O
`#.' 3 N V CD
O
o O v 1, V
O � �
00 boo O
c� y
O V 3 O +O+
ca O O
N �
O
V N
N O O CD
O O v
M� �>
O.
.E O.
0
N boo L M
N. CD � y-
= LL I.I. _
C Q Q a
O
._ 0 O
N � r%% M O
O
5 3
O
z
N
c
.O
C
Cl. _
N O O
4) Z v
� � 3
� V =
V O
N
V O
R ate. ■i U
O O _
O ° C _
O O
X N 4
hoo
i V > V
O .= O
O +O+ O `0
v 3 N O
am
N 4 V
C
� O
O i .V C
O
y V � O
� 3
c�
oc z
LL
a
i
L1)
O
LA
LA
V
LA
Ln
O
LA
O
L!)
O
07
Il
M
M
n
M
LA
n
LA
M
LA
O
M
CO
M
M
o
o
Lt')
\
\
c
\
c
c
0
0
-C*
-C&
LA
IS')
LA
LA
LA
LA
a)
LA
C±
Lf)
a)
LA
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
N
M
N
M
N
0
U>
v*
�
V
v}
V).
4).
4).
4*
yr
i
-
C
E
H
O
C:
a
=
3
O
LL
a
L1)
O
LA
LA
O
LA
Ln
O
LA
O
L!)
O
07
Il
M
M
n
M
LA
n
LA
M
LA
O
M
CO
M
M
to
O
Lt')
LA
O
LA
LA
t?
J*
Ol
i/i
-C*
-C&
O
*�
LL
V
C
Q
i
lA
to
O
Lt')
LA
O
LA
LA
Lf)
Lf)
LA
O
C1
n
LA
a)
n
Lf)
N
M
N
00
N
00
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
LA
M
Lf)
M
Ct
U
U>
v*
�
V
v}
V).
4).
4).
4*
yr
O
*�
V
CA
a.
_
.O
�_
3
O
-
C
E
H
O
C:
=
3
O
U
V
c
V
°�.'
U
�j
H
d
CL
y
O
��+
O
*''
O
O
O
�
O
>
O
=
V
V
c
U
m
a
U
U
• •
r
4)
O
N
J
Q
..
•_
=
_
m
Q
�.
M
i
E
co
O
i
N
v
%
O
.�
ca
O
'a
v�
G
16-
(D
p
N
0
O
+r
N
■N
•-
a
_
'y
N
N
CD
O
C
a
♦O
0
cc
N
O
V
3
m
O
)
cn
=
a�
a�
_o
cn
i
Im
_
cc
4-1
•-
=
uj
• •
0
i
O
ca
'C
_(D
V
V
i
O
N
N
O
O
M
O
N
O
O
v
N
O
N
O
O
V
C
O
N
O
>•
�
•E
Cc
O
ca
m
_
>'
O
._
♦O
O
O
CL
CL
N
w
p
m
p
v
Q
z
oc
0
i
O
ca
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
12M i ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002 No.: 10.b. BUDGET AND FINANCE
Type of Action: BUDGET & FINANCE
Subject: ADOPT AMENDMENT TO THE DISTRICT'S CAFETERIA PLAN DOCUMENT TO
MEET NEW CHANGES IN INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Debbie Ratcliff, Controller Administrative /Finance & Accounting
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
A "e� -
D. Ratcliff R. MLAgraves
General
r
ISSUE: Board approval is required to adopt Amendment No. 1 to the District's Cafeteria
Plan document.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board adopt Amendment No. 1 to the
District's Cafeteria Plan document to meet new Internal Revenue Code (IRS) requirements.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None
ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: If the Amendment No. 1 is not approved by the
Board, the District's Cafeteria Plan would be in violation of the IRS code.
BACKGROUND: Per the existing Memorandum of Understandings the three employee
groups receive a fixed amount each month to spend on a variety of benefit options offered
in the Cafeteria Plan. This Cafeteria Plan is governed by Section 125 of the Internal
Revenue Code (IRS). The Plan allows employees the option of spending their monthly
benefit allowance on a variety of taxable and non - taxable benefits.
The law firm of Trucker • Huss, who specializes in benefit law, has been asked to review
the Cafeteria Plan documents annually to ensure compliance with any changes in IRS
Code. The Internal Revenue Service issued new regulations on January 10, 2001, which
become effective for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2002. The last revision
to the Cafeteria Plan document was effective January 1, 2001.
Amendment No. 1 amends Section 3.6 "Change or Revocation of Elections" to reflect
final regulations pertaining to the circumstances under which a plan participant may
change his or her election under a cafeteria plan. No amendments are needed to the
Component Plans which include the Premium Conversion Plan, the Health Flexible
3/27/02
S:\ ADMIN\ POSPAPER \Cafeteriaplanamended.02.wpd Page 1 of 2
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002
Subject: ADOPT AMENDMENT TO THE DISTRICT'S CAFETERIA PLAN DOCUMENT TO
MEET NEW CHANGES IN INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Spending Arrangement Plan and the Dependent Care Assistance Plan. These plans refer
to Section 3.6 "Change or Revocation of Elections" of the Cafeteria Plan for purposes of
changes in the elections.
The significant changes to the Cafeteria Plan surround changes in the area of cost and
coverage of health care plans. The new regulations now allow participants to make
changes to their elections if there is:
• A significant curtailment of health coverage without loss of coverage
• A significant curtailment of health coverage with loss of coverage
• A new health plan added
• A significantly improved coverage under an existing health plan
• A significant increase or decrease in the cost of health coverage or cost of
dependent care coverage
A copy of Amendment No. 1 to the District's Cafeteria Plan document and the latest
version of the Plan updated January 1, 2001, are being provided to the Board under
separate cover.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: It is recommended that the Board adopt Amendment
No. 1 to the District's Cafeteria Plan document to meet new Internal Revenue Code
requirements.
3/27/02
SA ADMIN\ POSPAPER \Cafeteriaplanamended.02.wpd Page 2 of 2
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: April 4, 2002
Type of Action: RECEIVE ANNUAL REPORT
No.: 10.c. BUDGET AND FINANCE
subject: RECEIVE THE 2001 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION
PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Submitted By:
Debbie Ratcliff, Controller
Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Administrative /Finance & Accounting
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION.
D. Ratcliff R. Musgraves
General
ISSUE: The Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee (Committee) respectfully
submits its 2001 Annual Report.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the Annual Report of the Deferred Compensation Plan
Advisory Committee for 2001 and provide any comments to staff.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None
BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors approved the establishment of the Committee in
January 1982. The scope of activities of the Committee includes:
• Establishing internal administrative procedures
• Educating participants regarding the Plan
• Reviewing emergency withdrawal requests
• Reviewing investment performance of the Plan
• Submission of an annual report to the Board of Directors and Plan
participants
The Committee is made up of the following Departmental representatives:
Debbie Ratcliff, Controller - Chairperson
David Rolley, Accounting Technician III - Administrative
Jack Case, Associate Engineer - Engineering
Ron Freitas - Collection System Operations
Bill McEachen, Assistant Control Systems Engineer - Plant Operations
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Receive the Annual Report of the Deferred
Compensation Plan Advisory Committee for 2001 and provide any comments to staff.
SAADMIMPOSPAPEMDeferred Comp Rep. 2001.wpd Page 1 of 12
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT
JANUARY 2001 - DECEMBER 2001
The Deferred Compensation Plan Advisory Committee (the Committee) was established
by the Board of Directors to facilitate the internal administration of the District's Deferred
Compensation Plan. The scope of the Committee's activities encompass the following:
• Establish internal District administrative procedures within the provisions of the
Deferred Compensation Plan document.
• Educate participants regarding the plan provisions by issuing a handbook which
summarizes the Deferred Compensation Plan and responding to questions from
participants.
• Review accountability by the Program Administrators, Hartford Life Insurance
Company (Hartford), National Deferred, and ICMA Retirement Corporation (ICMA)
and respond to participants' queries regarding accuracy or propriety of account
balances.
• Review participants' requests for emergency withdrawal of funds and make
recommendations for acceptance or denial to Board of Directors.
• Review investment performance of the Deferred Compensation Plan on an annual
basis.
During the period January 2001 through December 2001, the Committee addressed all
of the activities included in its scope of responsibilities through the conscientious efforts
of all of the Committee members.
The performance of Hartford, National Deferred, and ICMA in administering the Deferred
Compensation Plan during the 2001 report is considered to be satisfactory. The
performance results of the Hartford, National Deferred, and ICMA stock and bond
investments for the calendar year 2001 follow.
SAADMINTOSPAPEMDeferred Comp Rep. 2001.wpd Page 2 of 12
Please note the following when reviewing Plan results:
• Market index benchmarks have been provided for comparative purposes only. These indexes
reflect broad based changes in the market conditions based on average performance. Indices
are unmanaged and reflect no fees or expenses and are not available for direct investment.
• Rate of returns quoted by providers and fund managers include reinvestment of capital
appreciation (depreciation), plus realized gain (losses), dividends and interest income.
• All rate of return performance results are net of annual asset -based fees, which include fund
manager fees and expenses, marketing fees and plan administrative fees.
• In general, plan administrative fees are charged by the carriers and differ between the
carriers. The basic plan administrative fees are as follows:
National Deferred An annual plan administrative fee of .29 percent is deducted from the
participants account and is based on the participant's account balance.
ICMA Effective April 2001, ICMA no longer charges a plan administrative
fee.
Hartford Depending on the fund, the plan administrative charge ranges from
.75 percent to .90 percent of account balance.
For additional information on fee charges consult with your plan provider. The above
information is general information. Additional fees may be incurred for other items such as
transfers and withdrawals. See Attachment 1 to this report.
Results shown represent past performance and are not a guarantee of future performance.
Ask your Plan Representative for a current prospectus for each fund in which you are
interested. The current prospectus presents more complete information about the fund
including fund charges and expenses. Read it carefully before investing in that option under
the Plan.
Page 3 of 12
Helpful Definitions
Blue Chip Company is used in the context of general stock market investments. Large and
creditworthy company. Company renowned for the quality and wide acceptance of its
products or services, and for its ability to make money and pay dividends.
Dow Jones Industrial Average or DJIA is the best known U.S. index of stocks. It is
comprised of 30 actively traded blue -chip stocks, primarily industrials including, stocks that
trade on the New York Stock Exchange. The Dow, as it is called, is an indicator of how the
largest U.S. companies are performing. Measuring the Dow Jones Industrial Average is used
to gauge the direction of the stock market.
• Indexing is a passive instrument strategy consisting of the construction of a portfolio of
stocks designed to track the total return performance of an index of stocks.
• Lehman Brothers Bond Index is an unmanaged list of U.S. Treasury /Agency and
investment grade corporate debt securities. It is used as a general measure of performance
of fixed income securities.
• MSCI Europe, Australia/Asia, and Far East or EAFE index is the European, Australian,
and Far East stock index, computed by Morgan Stanley. This index is used to measure the
general performance of the international market.
• Mutual Funds are pools of money that are managed by an investment company and
regulated by the Investment Company Act of 1940. The investment company purchases
securities which become jointly owned by its shareholders. The funds portfolio is managed
by a professional money manager. They offer investors a variety of goals depending on the
fund and can invest in equity, debt, cash, real estate, options and futures.
NASDAQ or National Association of Securities Dealers Automatic Quotation System is an
electronic quotation system that provides price quotations to market participants about the
more actively traded common stock issues in the over the counter market. This market
comprises of securities not listed on a stock or bond exchange. Large technology stocks have
a major effect on this index value. The NASDAQ market is an over the counter market for
U.S. stocks and includes approximately 4,000 common stocks in the system.
Standard & Poor's 500 or S &P 500 is an index of blue chip stocks, which measures
changes in stock market conditions based on the average performance of 500 widely held
common stocks. The S &P 500 is one of the most widely used benchmarks of U.S. equity
performance. This index tracks industrial, transportation, financial and utility stocks with
heavy emphasis on industrial companies.
Treasury Bill or T Bill is a discounted government security that matures in one year or less.
It is a negotiable debt obligation issued by the U.S. government.
Page 4 of 12
CCCSD Deferred Comp istribution
BY ADMINISTRATOR AND INVESTMENT TYPE
CCCSD Deferred Comp Distribution
BY ADMINISTRATOR
December 31, 2001
HARTFORD
$10,578,716
20.4%
NATIONAL
DEFERRED
$13,379,071
25.8%
NATIONAL DEFERRED ■ ICMA 457 O ICMA 401(a) O HARTFORD
CCCSD Deferred Comp Distribution
BY INVESTMENT TYPE
December 31, 2001
SAVINGS
$17,965,178
34.7%
STOCK
BONDS $32,249,049
$1,619,542 62.2%
3.1%
■STOCK ■BONDS ❑SAVINGS
Page 5 of 12
CALENDAR YEAR ENDEDDECEMBER'31, 2001'
NATIONAL
INVESTM
%
DEFERRED
ICMA 457
ICMA 401(a)
HARTFORD
TOTAL
STOCK
62.2%
$8,771,284
$13,746,709
$4,775,288
$4,955,768
$32,249,049
BONDS'
3.1%
835,285
289,635
50,142
444,480
1,619,542
SAVINGS
34.7%
3,772,502
7,975,552
1,038,656
5,178,468
17,965,178
TOTAL. INVESTMENTS,%
100.0%
$13,379,071
$22,011,896
$5,864,086
$10,578,716
$51,833,769
CCCSD Deferred Comp Distribution
BY ADMINISTRATOR
December 31, 2001
HARTFORD
$10,578,716
20.4%
NATIONAL
DEFERRED
$13,379,071
25.8%
NATIONAL DEFERRED ■ ICMA 457 O ICMA 401(a) O HARTFORD
CCCSD Deferred Comp Distribution
BY INVESTMENT TYPE
December 31, 2001
SAVINGS
$17,965,178
34.7%
STOCK
BONDS $32,249,049
$1,619,542 62.2%
3.1%
■STOCK ■BONDS ❑SAVINGS
Page 5 of 12
CCCSD Deferre 'omp Stocks and Mutual Ft is
Calendar Year Ended
December 31, 2001
Rate of Return ( %)
Dow Jones Industrial Average - 7.10%
Standard & Poor's 500 - 11.88%
MSCI Europe, Australia /Asia, and Far East (EAFE) - 21.45%
National Deferred - Source: Performance Results of "Core List" Mutual Funds (with Plan Charges) adjusted for
CCCSD'S plan fee as of 12/31/01.
DFA US 9 -10 Small Company Portfolio
21.78%
Federated Kaufmann Fund (Class K)
6.99%
Mutual Beacon Fund (Class A)
4.94%
Income Fund of America
4.57%
Vanguard Wellington Fund*
3.90%
Washington Mutual Investors
0.70%
Scudder Dreman High Return Equity A
0.42%
Fidelity Puritan Fund*
- 1.34%
Vanguard Windsor II*
-3.69%
Neuberger & Berman Partners Trust
-4.01%
Investment Company of America
-5.35%
Fidelity Equity Income Fund
-5.77%
Templeton Foreign Fund (Class A)
-8.65%
Fidelity Growth & Income Fund*
-9.64%
Fidelity Magellan Fund*
- 11.94%
Vanguard 500 Index Fund*
-12.31%
Vanguard Institutional Index
- 12.63%
Gartmore Total Return Fund (Class A)
- 12.72%
EuroPacific Growth Fund (Class A)
- 12.87%
Growth Fund of America
- 12.97%
Fidelity Contra Fund
- 13.26%
Vanguard Primecap*
- 13.59%
American Century Ultra Fund
- 15.29%
Invesco Small Company Growth Fund
- 21.53%
Janus Adviser Capital Appreciation Fund
- 22.44%
Janus Worldwide Fund
- 23.48%
Dreyfus Third Century Fund
-24.31%
Janus Fund
- 26.68%
Vanguard US Growth*
- 31.99%
Invesco Dynamics Fund
-33.41%
PBHG Growth Fund
- 35.04%
Invesco Technology II Fund
- 45.92%
* Rate of return was obtained from the fund manager, less .29% National Deferred plan administration fee.
Page 6 of 12
CCCSD Deferre 3omp Stocks and Mutual FI Is
Calendar Year Ended
December 31, 2001
Rate of Return ( %)
Dow Jones Industrial Average -7.10%
Standard & Poor's 500 - 11.88%
MSCI Europe, Australia /Asia, and Far East (EAFE) - 21.45%
National Deferred (cont'd)- source: Performance Results of "Core List' Mutual Funds (With Plan Charges) adjusted
for CCCSD'S plan fee as of 12/31/01.
Conservative
1.32%
Moderately Conservative
-1.95%
Moderate
-5.50%
Moderately Aggressive
-9.51%
Aggressive
- 12.15%
Info only: (Existing balances will remain in the phased -out funds until moved by the participant.)
Vanguard Wellesley Fund*
7.10%
American Century Balance Fund*
-3.97%
American Century Select Fund*
- 18.36%
American Century Growth Fund*
- 18.87%
Fidelity Overseas Fund*
-20.51%
Fidelity Independence Fund*
-27.51%
* Rate of return was obtained from the fund manager, less .29% National Deferred plan administration fee.
** Funds became available to participants October 2001.
Page 7 of 12
CCCSD Deferre pomp Stocks and Mutual FL is
Calendar Year Ended
December 31, 2001
Rate of Return ( %)
Dow Jones Industrial Average - 7.10%
Standard & Poor's 500 - 11.88%
MSCI Europe, Australia/Asia, and Far East (EAFE) - 21.45%
MI0 - Source: ICMA Retirement Corporation Fund Performance Report as of 12/31/2001.
Vantagepoint Funds" **
12.82%
VP Equity Income
2.92%
VP Growth & Income
-4.77%
VP Asset Allocation
-5.42%
VP Mid /Small Company Index Class II
-9.65%
VP Broad Market Index Class II
- 11.73%
VP 500 Stock Index Class II
- 12.17%
VP Aggressive Opportunities
- 13.75%
VP Growth
-15.21%
VP International
- 20.16%
VP Overseas Index Class II
- 21.56%
Vantagepoint Model Portfolio Funds * **
12.82%
VP Conservative Growth
0.09%
VP Traditional Growth
- 3.62%
VP Long Term Growth
-7.15%
VP All Equity Growth
- 11.13%
Mutual Fund Series
American Century Value
12.82%
T. Rowe Price Small Cap Stock Adv CL
6.55%
Gabelli Value
5.39%
Vanguard Wellington
3.89%
Fidelity Puritan
- 1.08%
Neuberger & Berman Socially Responsive
-2.82%
Lord Abbett Affiliated Class A
- 7.94%
Fidelity Growth & Income Portfolio
- 9.34%
Fidelity Magellan
- 11.66%
Fidelity Contra
- 12.56%
American Century Ultra
-14.61%
Fidelity Blue Chip
- 16.58%
Putnam International Growth
-19.81%
Invesco Small Company Growth
- 20.90%
Putnam Voyager
- 22.47%
MFS Mass Investors Growth Stock
- 24.79%
* ** The Vantagepoint Funds were registered during 1999 and 2000. All of the Vantagepoint Funds are
patterned on, have the same investment objectives, and are operated in substantially the same
fashion, as certain funds that have been offered through the ICMA Retirement Trust prior to their
registration. The ICMA Retirement Trust is a series of unregistered commingled funds which hold
and invest the assets of public sector retirement plans. Substantially all of the portfolio securities of
each Vantagepoint Fund were transferred from the corresponding fund of the ICMA Retirement Trust.
Page 8 of 12
CCCSD Deferre pomp Stocks and Mutual FL Is
Calendar Year Ended
December 31, 2001
Rate of Return ( %)
Dow Jones Industrial Average -7.10%
Standard & Poor's 500 - 11.88%
MSCI Europe, Australia/Asia, and Far East (EAFE) - 21.45%
Hartford - Source: Separate Accounts Performance Plan Summary Statement as of 12/31/2001.
Skyline Special Equities
12.96%
American Century Value
11.90%
Fidelity Advisor Balanced
-2.64%
Hartford Dividend and Growth
-4.90%
Hartford Advisers
-5.50%
Calvert Social Balanced
-7.77%
Hartford Capital Appreciation
-7.77%
American Century Income & Growth
-9.15%
Fidelity Advisor Growth & Income
-9.53%
Scudder Growth & Income
- 12.79%
Hartford Stock
- 13.02%
Hartford Index
- 13.10%
American Century Ultra Fund
- 15.34%
Fidelity Advisor Growth Opportunities
- 15.77%
Hartford International Opportunities
- 19.46%
Janus Worldwide
- 23.53%
Putnam International New Opportunities
- 29.23%
Janus Twenty
- 29.80%
Putnam Vista
- 34.20%
Page 9 of 12
CCCSD Deferred Comp Bond Performance
Lehman Brothers Bond Index
Vanguard Total Bond Market Index
Bond Fund of America
Scudder High Yield Fund (Class A)
IcM
Vantagepoint Fund * **
VP Core Bond Fund
Hartford Bond
Hartford Mortgage Securities
Putnam High Yield Advantage
8.42%
7.49%
6.29%
2.54%
8.71%
7.71%
6.53%
2.21%
* ** The Vantagepoint Funds were registered during 1999 and 2000. All of the Vantagepoint Funds are
patterned on, have the same investment objectives, and are operated in substantially the same
fashion, as certain funds that have been offered through the ICMA Retirement Trust prior to their
registration. The ICMA Retirement Trust is a series of unregistered commingled funds which hold
and invest the assets of public sector retirement plans. Substantially all of the portfolio securities of
each Vantagepoint Fund were transferred from the corresponding fund of the ICMA Retirement Trust.
Page 10 of 12
CCCSD Deferred Comp Saving Performance
90 Day T -Bill
Stable Value Fund
5 YR CDs
3 YR CDs
Liquid Savings
., .. , , a 2 1 ,.
VP U.S. Government Securities
VP Money Market
VP Savings Oriented
Plus Fund (401a)
Plus Fund (457)
General Account
Money Market
4.09%
6.05%
4.52%
4.16%
3.62%
7.42%
3.70%
2.81%
5.35%
5.35%
5.45%
2.94%
*' * The Vantagepoint Funds were registered during 1999 and 2000. All of the Vantagepoint Funds are
patterned on, have the same investment objectives, and are operated in substantially the same
fashion, as certain funds that have been offered through the ICMA Retirement Trust prior to their
registration. The ICMA Retirement Trust is a series of unregistered commingled funds which hold
and invest the assets of public sector retirement plans. Substantially all of the portfolio securities of
each Vantagepoint Fund were transferred from the corresponding fund of the ICMA Retirement Trust.
Page 11 of 12
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
SUMMARY OF FEES - ATTACHMENT 1
AS OF APRIL 1, 2002
FEES CHARGED BY PROVIDERS
(Based on account balance)
Plan Fees
Annual Plan Administrative Fee
Fund Expenses
Stable Value Fund, 3 &5 YR CD's, and Liquid Savings Fee
Plus Fund Management Fee (Savings)
General Account (Savings)
Model Portfolio Fund Fee (Total Fee Charged)
Mutual Fund Services Fee (Partial Fee - See example below)
FEES CHARGED BY THE FUND MANAGERS
Fund Fee
PROVIDERS
NATIONAL
DEFERRED ICMA HARTFORD
0.29%
NONE
.75% -.90%*
0.49%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.50%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.00%
N/A
0.98-1.20%
N/A
N/A
0.25 % **
N/A
0.06-1.88%
0.27-1.46%
0.43-1.51%
These expenses are charged by the fund managers which include Advisory Fees, 12b -1 Fees, Operating Expenses and Other Fees
charged by the individual funds. These fees and expenses differ for each fund invested. As a general rule, the higher the potential
reward, the higher the risk, the higher the fee. The reverse is also generally true, the lower the potential reward, the lower the risk,
the lower the fee.
Example of fees on an annual basis:
Assume you are a plan participant and you invest in the American Century Ultra Fund, depending on the provider
you choose, you would pay the following annual asset -based charges:
Plan Fees
Plan Administration Fee
Fund Expenses
Mutual Fund Services Fee
American Century Credit
Total Participant Fees Paid to the Plan Provider
Fund Fee (% charged by American Century)
Total Annual Cost
N/A = Not applicable
* Administration fee differs for each fund invested.
NATIONAL
nFFFRRFn IrMA HARTFQRn
0.29% 0.00% 0.85%
N/A
0.25 % **
N/A
N/A
- 0.22 % * **
N/A
0.29%
0.03%
0.85%
.99%
.99%
.99%
1.28%
1.02%
1.84%
** The fee shown is the standard fee. Some of the underlying mutual funds in the Mutual Fund Series currently rebate ICMA for
accounting and other services. These reimbursements received from the mutual funds are applied to offset all or part of that fee.
Consequently, as of 12/31/01, the mutual fund services fee was fully offset by reimbursements for 13 of the 16 funds of the Mutual
Fund Series. The net mutual fund services fee after reimbursements was 0.03% for the American Century Ultra and Value Funds
and was 0.25% for the Vanguard Wellington Fund. Reimbursements may be discontinued at any time by mutual funds at their
discretion.
* ** Because American Century pays an annual fee to the Retirement Corporation or its broker /dealer affiliate for providing certain
services (which in turn is credited in full to the American Century Fund offered by ICMA), your actual Mutual Fund Services Fee
would be 0.03% (0.25% standard fee minus 0.22 %), for a total cost of 0.03% paid to ICMA. Therefore, a provider may charge
additional types of fees, but the total fees paid to the provider and in total may vary significantly.
Page 12 of 12
S: \ADMIN \FINANCES \Summary of Feesl.wpd