The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0123.093January 14, 1993 THE HONORABLE CITY COUNC!L Palo Alto, California 6 .RW..2.~_",1 watet:' Quality Control Plant. waste Minimi~ation Studies - Amendment No, 3 to Agreement Members of the C~uncil: Report in Brief' This report requests that Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute ~~endment No. 3 to Agreement No. C0013897 with Kenne dy/Jenks/Chilton consulting Engineers, Inc, (KJC) in ~he amount of $130,000 for co~ducting ne~ pollution prevention reviews. F~ds were budgeted in the FY 1992-33 operating budget for the Regional water Quality Control Plant (RWOCP). Background In order to reduce metals and other pollutants being dischdrged into San Francisco Bay, the RWQCP has initiated a number of programs to reduce these pollutants at their source before they enter the City sewers. On September 10, 1930, Council approved an agreement with XJC, to conduct waste minimization study reviews for large industries and public participation activities for small businesses facing new pollution control requirements~ The agre~ment was for a one-year period, with the provision to continue the contract for two additional years~ Amendment No. 1 extended the waste minimization study reviews in the second and third years of the agreement. Ame~dment No. 2 added a storm drain pollution prevention component to the third year of the agreement. Disgussion The purpose of amendment No.3 for $130,000 is to conduct ne ... pollution pre ..... ention revielrt-s at manufacturing facilities in conformance with recently adopted regulatory requirements. The new requirements are anticipated in a Cease and Desist Ol:"der (COO) to be issued in February 1993 against the city of Palo Alto. In order to meet the tight time schedule proposed in tne COO, it is necessary to proceed with the agreement amendment: nO\ll". The amendment would increase the third year of the agreement to $326,450. -1- CMR:123:93 j .. The s~ope of ~ork consists o~ two Pollution Prevention Reviews of I:lanutacturinq facilities to determine cost effective ~dditional pollution control measures. The scope o~ w~rk also c3115 fer the KJC to determine whether further control measures should be mendateG for all similar facilities. If it appears that mandating control measures is appropriate; staff vould return to Council with a recommendation. Recommendation staff recommends tha't Council approve and a1Jthorize the Hayor to execute the attached Amendment No. J to Agreement No. C001J897 with Kennedy/Jenks/Chilton consulting Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $130,000, to conduct new pollution prevention revie'''''~. Respectfully submitted, PHILIP SOBEL Man~er, Environmental Complienca Dlvisi~n J-A . h G~GOON'-'"-' Acting Director of Public Works Attachl'llent: Amendment No. 3 -2- CHR:123:93 • _ 1 .':. AMENDMENT NO. 3 ~O CONTRACT NO. C00138970 BETWEEN CITY OP PALO ALTO AND ~ENNEDY/~S/CBtLTON CONSULTING ENG!~~ERING. INC. FOR PROPESSION~ ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES THIS »lENDMENT to Contract No. C00138,.7 is made and en~ered into this ________ day of • 1993. by and between the CITY OF PAl.O ALTO, a municipal corporation of California. hereina.fter referred to as "CITY." and KEh'"NEDY I JENKS/C"HIL'?ON CONSULTING ENGINEERING; INC~ (TaxpaYE'r Identificatic:l Nu."'nOer 94~21-47007). a California corporation; with offices at 30.3 Second Street, San Francisco. CA 94107 hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTAN'TI!. ; WHEREAS. Contract: No. C0013897 ".:a6 previously entered into bet~een CITY and CONSU~TANT for the provision of professional engineering consultant services related to Ci ty' s metals source reduction program for discharges ~o the sewer system; and WHERV.$. the parties may agree to amend said agreement from time to time; WHEREAS, the parties no~ desire to amend said agreement to allow for the furnishing of additional services related to pollution prevention plans; NOW. TH~REFORE, in consideration of their rnut~al covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: SECTION 1. The first. paragra.ph of Subsection 6.1 of Contract No. C0013897 is hereby amended in its entirety to read as [allows: 'In consideration for the full performance of the Basic Services and reimbl.lt'"sable expenses described in Section 4.1 of this Agreement, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTAJ.,;"T a fee r..ot to exceed One Hundred TwentY'Five Thousand Dol lars ($125, 000) for the first year of the terrr.. One Hundred Seventy-Five Thousand Dol lars ($175,000) for the second year of the tS:rrtl, and Three Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Dollars '$326/~50) for the third year of the term of this Agreement. Not~ithstanding the foregoing, CITY's obliga tion to pay CONSULTAN1 l s' fees under this Agreement is contingent on the City Council~s continued appropriation of sufficient mDnies to fund this Agreement durin3 each fiscal year of the term.' 1 SECTIQN 2. Exhibit. -All to Contract No. C001J837 is hereby amended to read in accordance ",ith the -Addendum to EXhibit -A·,· attached hereto and incorporated herein by this ref~rence. S:E:CTTON 3. Except as herein nlodified, .c:.ll other provisions "t and exhit·its and amendments to said agreerne::l.t shall remain in full force and effe~t. IN WITNESS wnEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this Am€rldment on the day and year first aoove ... 'ritten. City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM, 5r. Assistant City Attorney APPROVED: City V.ana,ger Director of Finance Risk ¥..anager AP PROVED AS TO CONTENT, Director of Public Works 2 CITY OF PALO AI,TC l'1a yo:r---- KENNEDY/J;;NKS/CHILTON CONSULT!NG ENGINEERING. INC. By,-9.ij4?- Its, dq /fuflU Taxpayer Identification No. 94-2147001 .' , -~"'.'.~" , ,,'. Addendum to Exhibit A Scope of Project The "Scope of Projec'l" tmder Ex.hibit ""A" to this Agreement i5 being expanded t'J inc1ude the foltowing task. 5. Pollution Prevention Revi~ The Consuitant shall conduct two (2) Pollution Prevention Reviews (PPRs) at ind'...lstriaJ facilities at the direction of the City as described below: 5.1 Two facilities shalt be selecled by the City for review by the Consultant. The Consu!t.1nt shall review the Waste Minimization Plans prepared oy the facilities and information ill City facility files before commencing the review 10 <l\'oid duplication of effort. 5.2 City shall arrange an initial meeting for Consultant with facili!y managers to secure the cooperation of f ... dlity employees. Subsequent meetings. and sire vis.its shall be a.i·TaIlged and conducted by Consultant to obtain information about ,he facility and explore pollution. preventior, oplion~. 5.3 The purpose of the PPRs shall be 10 identify ways of minimizing wastewaler now, copper loading and nickel loading to the sanitary sewer. Each process generating significant wa~ewaler volume, copper loading, or nicket loading shall be evaluated by the Consultant. Potentia! water, copper aIld nickel reductions, the capital and operating cost, cos:. savings, and economic payback period sball be ca1cl.!lated for each significant waste reduction measure. Payback periods shall be C<!lculated using 0%,9% and the current prime interest rate. The city's Waste Minimization Checklist Sohall be c0mpleted far each process documenting the measures currently employed and ptanned for each p;ocess. 5.4 Consultant shaJI evaluate the economic feasibility of complelt: {or virtually complete) recycle of process water at e:lCh facility. Implementation of cost effective wastewater flow reduction measures shall be assumed. Cost, cost savings and payback period shall be calculated. 5.5 Consultant shall discuss the resuits of the evaluations with facility representatives sharing all information with them prior to submission of a technical report to the City. 5.6 Consultant shall prepare a lechnic.al report for each facility which contains the results of the PPR. Those measures which have a payback: period of 7 years or less sIlaJl be identified. The report shall contain a summary of the mea5-lJre'i evaJuated, the checklist and previous Waste Minimization .. Studies and relevant correspondence. 6. ~C?lj9n rtf Ppllution Prevention ~tJr~.s. (or Po~en!ial __ Legislativc Artien 6. I Consultanl shall review waste minimization alld ~ilutant prevenrjon review data from Palo Alto, San Jose and Sunnyvale and' organize measures inlo categories; for potential legislation: a) Insigniricant cost b) Payb.ack period of less than 2 years c) Payback period of 2-5 years d) Payback period 5-7 year; e) In place at 75-100% of facilities f) In plac •• t 50%-75 % of facilities g) In place a.t 25 %-50% of facilities evaluated The measures shall be fully described. Cost, cost saYings and payback period sba.!l be ~dentified. Cest shaH include capital and operating cost. Legislative language shall be developed for incorporation in ordinances which are keyed 10 a technical report describing the mea~ures in fun delaiL , -- ;. a , . ..... ;.;: .. -: ': - QfALiV. AEN1CN & ~SSCC. '.0. au: 1a?S O*.l.~~, eA 1(544-26'5 t. Ti~: ~y j 0 fC1QrroI1Voj 510-4n-305 a Ktnntdy/Jt1lk. C'!';I.llcn!r ~'fllkon F/.~ •• IOt~ fJg~' 3~~ So~~"~ S!rttl S_n fnndHo. CA "'''' ~~NW'L OF AESO~C2~2 COo4rIU_~E""'srVE OE""" L1ASllITV FO~ 1IO(-.IOla5521 " ,e/: 1/S2 lCI01/$2 1/ C' 1 Ii 1 '~/~'/U laIc '/n . -;. :''1i00i"1 I"", .. , I.el UC[O I''''"", .,~ 'L>< I "CIUOfO l>c" , '~IJ"'~ '1000:1 I , 'OC or. 1 ... 1 . !'·'· .. '~~i· "",,,,",- , ~;~'~:~~ I"t;::~t~~ t.uo,,~ , I'·' """"-' , , , '"",," , '0. oe, :1. 'ROH:$SIO"'~~ lli5/92 1 5 '.L'lCC.H~ PER eUI~ ANC ANNUAL "",.,0,.,. l u.~ IlIlY ;;.n' I. • A",to Lill. "e'.c'1 1r.I'III'.: ell)' cd PJra "tto, its oflicilft. ,;,.,,11 1I'I1it: 0tarlo:r":s. C!;Our,s. ia ,rill"fl' i~S"ft"(O. CH,. of Palo Alto .... HI·. ~Dt 1:1:7\ 1C..11 '''''.r '.0. In lC2S() . '~"Alh.U 941::1~3 OF THE set:·.:': E~~,l.TION O,l.T£ lHi~OF. TI-£ IS!~ COMP .. ~.,. ..... u i/oCiE"'VO~ 10 M.I.:L ,0 c .. \"s .... ';~a T£NNOICE TO Ti-£C£RTII=lCA TE .... :H_~f:.,..»-EOT 01J-OE LE~T:eut-FAL~!:: '0 I..!/Iol. su..-::~ ~'ICC S ..... L'L l<QOSE "C OB'LC,l.11ON Oil. U~!kI"Y 0;' .. "'''(..::'-''<0 uPC"'""IE~"N¥.11 S .Cf. ... l$OI;,,~E.PRE5E.~! 1.1t.'t:S . 128S&OODt)