AgdaPkt 2009-08-24 clsd and reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

78 . Use of VRS workers. Section 5.11.N. includes language regarding the use of such Page 3 workers and the SBWMA endorsing the use of such workforce. Using workers from VRS is expected to cost about $330,000 a year more than using temporary workers. . Exceptions SBR took to the original draft agreement related to moisture content and material contamination. Attachment 11-C, Moisture Measurement, addresses excessive moisture issues. Material contamination (I.e., contamination levels in loads of franchised materials delivered by the collection contractor) is addressed in Section 7.06 and Attachments 2E and 2H. . Key items discussed during the short-list negotiation process, including a price assurance mechanism, liquidated damages and charges that can be imposed, self haul diversion guarantees, and critical implementation milestones. The price assurance mechanism can be found in Attachment 11-B. Liquidated damages are addressed in Section 11.07 and Attachment 10. The self haul diversion guarantees and details on self haul diversion are in Sections 5.18, and 7.08; and Attachments 3, 4 and 19. Critical implementation milestones are addressed in an implementation and operations plan found in Attachment 4. . Changes in compensation and cost forms. Sections 7 and 8 and Attachments 12A, 12B, 12C, 120, 13A, and 13B address how SBR is compensated. Notably, Attachment 12C was added to address compensation specific to interim operations, as opposed to full-scale operations as originally envisioned in the facility operations RFP, due to expected delays in the completion date of the MRF and transfer station improvements. Attachment 12D contains SBR's final cost forms. . SBR is no longer responsible for installation of the single stream processing equipment. The SBWMA is separately negotiating the purchase and installation of the equipment with an equipment vendor. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Agreement will provide for an increased level of services at the Shoreway facility. The Shoreway facility is being modified and improved to handle the increase in service, and a Use Permit was obtained from the City of San Carlos in July 2008 for the improvements to be made to the Transfer Station and MRF. As part of the Use Permit process, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and approved by the San Carlos Planning Commission. A legal opinion has been obtained from legal counsel to the SBWMA indicating that CEQA can be complied with as to action on the Operating Agreement by both the SBWMA Board, and by the Member Agencies by referring to the MND as an adequate environmental document pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines for the purposes of analysis and consideration of the Operating Agreement. A copy of the MND has been on file with the City Clerk for review. CEQA language has been included in the Resolution approving the Operating Agreement. ALTERNATIVES Council may elect to disregard staffs recommendation to approve the agreement with SBR to operate the Shoreway facility. Doing so would contradict the action the Council took on April 20th to direct the City's SBWMA's Board representative to vote in favor of the selection of SBR at the April 23, 2009 SBWMA Board meeting. If eight SBWMA member agencies do not approve the agreement with SBR the SBWMA will be forced to select another firm to operate the Shoreway Facility, the terms of which will likely be less favorable than those contained in the recommended agreement with SBR.