Travis County Commssioners Court
June 3, 2003
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 17
As to type 1 landfills, we do have an item that covers, number 17, discuss and take appropriate action on request to award contract for professional consulting services for the landfill order/gas emissions studies.
>> judge, should we clo the public hearing.
>> all infavor? That passes by unanimous vote. It's closed. 17. Discuss and take appropriate action on request to award contract for professional consulting services for the landfill odor/gas emission studies, rfs s030115-dm. (tnr) (judge
>> back on item no. 17 as it terrains to the odor study. Hopefully purchasing is making their way down. The general status as we left it last was that contracts were being signed and finalized and so forth with urs, which was the staff recommended consulting firm to handle the odor study. My understanding is that those -- I'm rather embarrassed to say those contracts are en route in the regular mail. But are signed by urs. One disclosure that we felt like we needed to come forward with that we learned of as recently as yesterday was that, you know, as you recall, one of the most important parts of the rfs submittal was what has been the corporation as well as the project team's experience or lack thereof with b.f.i. And waste management and iesi the city of Austin. All of the local landfills and it came to our attention that urs had done a contract in 1999 looking at title v of the air, clean air act, permitting on emissions. That -- that was conducted by a -- by a -- a group that was -- urs is a very large corporation that has acquired several branches, if you will. That one was done by the houston branch, woodward kline at the time. It was an oversight on the part of urs. I'm sorry I didn't bring copies for the court, but I have got the explanation for that oversight. In my mind, my recommendation stands and we knew that both sides of -- both contractors had some level of experience with the corporations. It's still not a whole lot and this was not -- this particular contract didn't change my mind because it didn't involve any of the folks that are even still working with urs right now. So I just wanted to make sure that we disclosed that new finding to the court. But it doesn't change our recommendation.
>> john, one thing that we heard last week, one issue of concern for us was how much work for b.f.i. And waste management, the two firms proposing in response to the rfs had done, the b.f.i. And waste management. And one reason that you selected this firm was that apparently they had done less work than the other one.
>> I did not, they did not present their information in a real comparable format. But the thing that struck me just to remind you, that was very different, was that a key member of the other team had been an employee of both waste management and b.f.i. For approximately 75% of their career. So that was -- [laughter] -- that was the thing that really kind of struck me as potentially being problematic.
>> if we just add to the selected firm additional work that was not disclosed, you still have the recommendation based on that fact.
>> right. I stand by the recommendation.
>> okay. Comments or -- from the court or audience?
>> if there are direct questions, bart ecland is here, the project manager.
>> I have a couple of questions with the -- for the urs folks if they don't mind coming to the table.
>> any chair would be fine. If you would give yours name, Commissioner Davis has some questions.
>> how are you doing.
>> good morning.
>> could you state your name.
>> my name is bart eckland the propose managed for the urs study.
>> I posed this question I think to john, but I would like to hear it come from the person that we are looking at as far as providing the contracting services. That's the preliminary things that you would do. What will you do basically for this amount of money that you are looking at per contract? What will actually take place?
>> the -- the contract is set up in phases. The first phase is the only part that's funded. Under that first phase is primarily information gathering and planning. So there's a couple of elements. One is to get all available relevant documents from the landfill operators and/or -- and the regulatory agencies to look at the design operation and maintenance issues with the landfill, what air emission measurements they have made in the past, what they have reported. I know the state has made some measurements. Downwind of each landfill. Get that information. Also to hold one or more public meetings with people who live or work in the area to get their information about -- about the types of odors that are encountered, the frequency of odors, intensity of odors to try to formulate a working hypothesis as to exact cause of the odors and what -- what are -- are they worse in the summer, winter, wet season, dry season, time of day, so on.
>> okay. Is there any way that you could also include when you are gathering data, I know you just mentioned the regulatory agents and also the landfill operators as far as proper documentation, there may be documentation as i've heard the residents speak that they have in their position that may be of use to you, also, as far as data collection. Would you object to them presenting you with any type of pertinent documents?
>> no, not at all. Again the intention is to have a public meeting, to have people speak and present as much information as they care to convey and I think we will also try to come up with -- with some -- some odor report forms or odor survey forms for those people who can attend the meeting so they can still have input as to -- as to their experience with odor issues, and how it relates to the -- to the again time of year, meterological conditions, so on.
>> and another question and then I'm going to be through, but the final question is that one of the concerns that the neighborhood did express was having a person that would be unbiased. And to the point where they think they could be fair, if they wanted to make sure that whoever was selected in this process, relationships wouldn't prejudice their getting the correct information, wouldn't offset that between the type and degree as far as being fair. And being unbiased, especially the relationship with -- with the landfill operator. That came up and I think was repeated several times and I was just wondering is that the position that you -- that you are approximating to take and I -- I hope that's an affirmative answer on that.
>> right. The answer is yes. For this project or any other, our role is to serve as the independent third party experts and make measurements and the numbers are what the numbers are. This case whether theter in project was funded by the county Commissioners, by the landfill operators or by the neighborhood. Our recommendations and our implementation of an approach would be the same regardless and that's why we have done lots of measurement studies in the past. So that -- so that regulatory agencies and industry can have a data set they can agree on and then try to make some decisions moving forward as to how to make use of that data and solve problems.
>> I guess according to the contract, when would this first phase be -- phase 1 [indiscernible]
>> the contract itself doesn't specify a schedule. We had a preliminary meeting last week and talked in terms of a 90-daytime frame.
>> I think it should specifically address time frame and because otherwise it may be dragged out and I think what we are looking for is quick results as far as trying to determine the source of those, I guess a collection of data is one end of it. I definitely did not want that -- I guess I'm asking, what are we looking at? I guess staff -- what are we looking at as far as the time frame.
>> the conversation that we had, the purpose of having that meeting was to address this very concern that y'all raised the last time we met. The agreement was a 90-daytime frame with hopes of perhaps hitting closer to 60 if possible.
>> is that embedded in the language?
>> there was, I believe, an agreement, the general agreement that it could be appended to the contract.
>> okay. Well, I would prefer that that is appended and if it's not, it need to be. We need to take action on that, I would appreciate that. From 60 to 90 days.
>> right.
>> okay. The other change in the contract is we negotiated not to exceed an amount and when they met and started looking at the hours that were going to be involved, we were concerned that we might go over based on the hourly fees. So they have agreed to a fixed fee contract for this phase at $15,000. $15,000. The dollar amount is the same, but it's a fixed fee as opposed to a not to exceed amount.
>> okay, cyd, thank you.
>> we can bring both of those changes back or I can incorporate them since, with your direction, without bringing it back if you would like for me to. Because it does not -- incorporate that and the -- include the time line that you would like.
>> we only have three landfills right there together, are we designing this study in such a way that we will be able to determine what odors are coming from what landfills?
>> yes.
>> yes, ma'am?
>> I wanted to ask one question. I was wondering what percent of your business is paid by industry, what is paid by government, and what is paid by environmental groups?
>> I can't give you exact answers, I can probably make some estimates based on generalities. Are you referring to urs as a whole as opposed to me personally? Urs as a whole, I believe the government revenues represent approximately 55 or 60%. The industry would represent the majority of the rest of that, though -- um ... Yeah, would probably be the best way to say it. We may do also work for ngo's in some cases.
>> environmental group, maybe one percent of your business? If that much?
>> probably less than that. We try not to do a lot of work that's -- we don't do advocacy work and -- the -- there's -- their funding is limited. They may be involved as stakeholders in projects, but I think ultimately the funding generally comes from industry, certainly for air measurement type of programs.
>> if I could ask one more question, of the 15,000 in industry -- is industry paying all of the 15,000.
>> zero.
>> the county is paying that.
>> the county?
>> the county pays 100% of the first 15,000. The big expenditures will come later on when we decide about doing the study and remediation. We thought that up front we would have the consultants work directly for Travis County. Any other questions, ms. Macafee.
>> I guess -- trek english again. I think that we have missed a golden opportunity. We had thousands of bikers on 290 for about four or five days. I think you should have used that opportunity to get input, if this is what they are going to pass out, these are people who are exposed on their motorcycles, probably 25 times a day, drove back and forth. And went to the heritage center. And I spoke to some of them. And they were quite adamant that it was just horrible. And they couldn't believe that -- that the city of Austin or Travis County would put up with such a thing. So -- and to add to this, which has nothing to do with the odor study, but since you cut me short before, I wanted to let you know --
>> I'm trying not to cut you short this time, but is it relevant to this item?
>> I wanted to let you know that if you drive on 290 as you passed reagan high school, and you look straight ahead of you, you will see a big blue plastic liner. From several miles away. In all its glory. You are going to see a 400-foot cell, which is wider than a football field, where waste management is going to be operating. I just think that you need to take that into consideration. That is not a site for public road or a major highway. Thank you.
>> okay.
>> anything further on this item?
>> let me ask, was the omission that urs had on their application, was that something that they came forward with and submitted or is that something that you all found?
>> it was brought to our attention by b.f.i. Actually who had been -- representatives of b.f.i. Who had been the recipient of those services.
>> was the question specifically asked on the application have you done work or I mean --
>> uh-huh.
>> and so it looks like that the omission might have been done because of -- they might not have gotten the contract without it?
>> I don't believe that. I looked at that this morning. I went back and looked at their proposal they did disclose in their proposal that they had done work for the city, b.f.i. And waste management. That was done out of the local office out of houston with different folks. They -- their explanation was that they -- it was in 1999 and the data base that they used, they had like 12 different data bases and it was an oversight on their part. And in looking at the proposal, I do not believe that that left it out intentionally. They did disclose that they had done work for those companies. So -- so I feel like that they were honest about that they had done work in the past and I think it's unrealistic to think that any of the companies could have submitted had in the done it, worked for any of these, because that's the industry that they are in. So I'm satisfied that it was not done to -- to be --
>> underhanded.
>> right.
>> well, I think that is unfortunate. But this is what we're dealing with. It's just another thing that you have there that makes it so difficult for everybody to get happy with what's going on. And it is so unfortunate, but I do agree with you, cyd. I was amazed that -- that, you know, I'm always amazed when people are asking for a -- for juries on high profile cases and the first question anyone asks you is do you know to go about this? Well, I guess if you don't live in the milky way, you don't know anything about it. But if you do, you do. So it's -- but I would hope, you know, that this thing comes in -- since I voted against the motion, that's probably about all I need to say. Thank you. [laughter]
>> anything on this item mr. Macafee.
>> yes. I guess to continue with melanie's line of question, waste management and b.f.i., Are they -- would you consider them to be top clients of your company?
>> no. They are relatively small.
>> relatively small clients.
>> the -- yes.
>> of the overall company?
>> (nodded head). As opposed to -- usepa, u.s. Department of energy, oil companies, chemical companies. They represent a much larger fraction of the business.
>> okay, that's all that I had.
>> I have some more. [indiscernible] contract, phase 1, 2, 3, this is the first phase of those two phases. You know, [indiscernible] stage 1, I don't have to support the same person on phase 2 or 3.
>> that's correct. You will have that --
>> so if there's any questions in my mind about the allegiance to the landfill operators as oppose it ised to what the neighborhood and anyone else was doing, he stated that he was unbiased, I asked him, he said yes that's affirmative. I'm going to have to take his word on that. If it is not in my opinion I would not vote for him in face 2 and 3. I guess my point now is that since we talk about a 60 to 90 daytime frame? Is this all inexclusive as far as what we are doing here in here today, as far as in writing on this first phase.
>> I will have to do with your permission because it's not an increase in cost, I can do an administrative change order which includes a specific time frame in which they will accomplish the work, 06 to 90 days, also the other issue that I brought up that it's a firm fixed contract now. I believe -- I have the authority to do that without bringing it back to court.
>> okay.
>> so if you would like to approve that--
>> I move approval.
>> I will second that with --
>> motion [indiscernible] county purchasing agent to do as she described.
>> exactly.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? Show Commissioners Davis and yours truly voting in favor. Voting against, Commissioner Daugherty. Thank you very much.
>> thank you.
Last Modified: Wednesday, June 4, 2003 9:52 AM