Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0105.094,'-'" January 6. 1994 THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Palo Alto, California Attention: Policy and Services Committe~ La.ndfill Leachate Extraction System Eva] uat,i or.. .: Consult.ant Selection Approyal Membere of the Ccuncil: Report in Br.1ef This report summarizes ~he procedure used to select a consulting firm to conduct an evaluation of the leachate extraction system (LES) at the Palo ~to Landfill and recommends one firm with which staff should negotiate an agreement. This project was among those for which the Policy and Services Committee indicated it wished to participate in the consultant selection review during fiscal year 1993-94. Backgrgund Under State l..'egulations, infiltration of water decomposition processes) buildup and accum'.llat ion. leachate ithe fluid generated by the into a landfill and natural refuse must be TI1anaged t.c prevent excessive In 1988. t:he Regional Water Quality Control B':Jard (Board) issued updated waste discharge requirements for the Palo Alto Landfill~ which in~luded provisicns that. leachate conditions at ttle Pc.lo Alto Landfill be evaluated and a LES be developed and installed to mana.ge leachate at the facility. An investigation was conducted betweeL ]988 and 1990. which included the design and construction e,f a LES at ~he landfill. The LES consists of 1.9' extraction wells and associated piping. which pum9S fluid out of the landfill and transports it to a manhole where leachate is discharged to the sanitary sewer for treatment at the Regional Water O".lality Control Plant. Upon completion of the syatem r a pre~lminar/ evaluation was inconclusive as to the effects that the LES is having an leachate conditions at the la.."ldfil1. The City is required to submit a report to the Beard evaluating leachate conditions at the facility, the impacts that the LES is having on those conditions and the LES's ability to provide for effect-ive leachate management. The project has been divided into three primary tasks: -1- 1. Evaluation of current leachate conditions 2. Evaluation of LES operation 3. Development. of a]ternc:.tive-leachate management strategies The third task recognizes the fact that the operation of the LEE alone may not satisfy the Board' 51 requiremer:ts for :Leachate management, as the system's abilit~ to withdra~ leachate is restricted by a number of limitations that exist in landfills. This task 'ollill de~/elop alternate stratt;'giesl if needed, as pa::-t of an over-all approach to leach-Cite management. at. the Palo Al~o Landfill. Discussion St:aff began the select.ion process by soliciting interested firms that appeared capable of conducting the e .. ~al'..lation describ~d aoove. The firms were identified from the Environmental Cc~trol ?rogram's consultant f~les~ which contain backgrcund information and qualifications of consultants 'Who have expl.-cssed interest in providing services t.o the City. A reqi..lest for proposals waS sent to eleven firms. Five of the eleven firms responded by the closing date vf November 16. 1993. The firms that submitted proposals were: Wahler Associates Emcon Associat~B 3E Engineering PU Group Einarson Geosciences The Selection Advisory committee, ccnsisting of staff from the Public Works Depart:rrent. Operatiol'l.s Division, revie°ofied the proposals and invited BinarGon Geoscience Incorporated~ 3E Engineering. and PAA Group Consulting Engineers, to oral presentations/interviews_ The Committ.ee carefully revieo;",'ed each firm's ~Jalification6, with particular emphasis on their relevant experience and technical approach to the project. The Comlllittee recommends Einarson Geoscience Incorporated for the following reasons: • Depth of experie~ce in solid waste landfill designi operation and regulatory compliance i especially ,*,J..th regards to LEg design, operation and evaluation. • Familiarity with landfills and LBS's that are in a similar hydrogeologic sett.ing as the Palo "_ito Landfill. • OVerall quality and experience of the consultant team assigned to the project. .. Thoroughness in responding to the request for proposa:is. • Demonstrated understand~ng of the project and the technical approach to the scope of services. CMR"OS,94 -2- • Positive recommendations rece~Yed from previous clients_ If the Policy anc Services Committ~e approves the recommendation, 'Contract negotiations .... .i..11 begin with Einarson. Geoscience Incorporated. If staff is unable to reach an agreement with this firm, neqotiations ..... ill then COmlT'ence with the secor::.d firm, 3E Engi~eering. When the agreem~nt has been s~ccesEf~lly negctiated r it will be submitted to the City Council for approval. Recommendations Scaff reccmmends that the policy a::1d Services Committee direct staff to: 1. Commence negotiations with Einarson Geoscience Incorporated for consultant service?, for conducting the Palo Alto Landfill Leacha.te Extraction system Eva.luation. 2. Commence negotialior~9 with 3£ Engir::.eering if staff rails to reach an agreement with Einarson Geoscience Incorporated. 3. Upon s"o.ccessful completion of negotiations return to Council for approval. Respectfully submitted~ dp;;:k~ CHAD CENTOLA Manager -Environmental Control Programs iY4dU-J.... 7-1. J~VI<. • MICHAEL H. MILLER t;L17il:;::-:orkS GLENN S. ROBERTS Director of Public Works ~~OJNY As~istan~ City Manager Operations -3-