Back

PROPOSAL:

Execute Contracts for AQIP Proposals Received During the Second Quarter of 1999

SYNOPSIS: 

Rule 2202 - On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options was adopted on December 8, 1995. One of the compliance strategies under Rule 2202 allows employers to invest in the AQIP. Monies received are placed in a restricted account to fund programs that result in equivalent emission reductions that would otherwise have been achieved by the participating employers. Staff evaluated the proposals received during the second quarter of 1999. This action is to recommend two for funding. The amount available for this quarter is $411,148.

COMMITTEE: 

Mobile Source, September 24, 1999, Recommended for Approval

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Authorize the Chairman to execute two respective contracts for a total amount not to exceed $242,044 from the AQIP Special Revenue Fund to obtain mobile source emission reductions with The Vons Companies, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $49,476, and with OceanAir Environmental for an amount not to exceed $192,568.

Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Executive Officer

Background

The Rule 2202 AQIP allows subject employers to participate by electing to invest in an AQMD-administered restricted fund. Investment can be either $60 annually per employee reporting to the worksite during the 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. peak window, or $125 triennially per employee. The restricted monies are to be used by the AQMD to fund proposals that achieve mobile source emission reductions that would otherwise have been achieved by implementing a rideshare program. This Board letter contains a discussion regarding the disbursal of funds from the AQIP compliance option for the second quarter of 1999.

Upon registering under this option and submitting the designated investment amount, an employer is considered to be in compliance with the rule and there is no need for the employer to take further action to reduce mobile source emissions. The collected monies are used to fund alternative mobile source emission reduction strategies that reduce mobile source emissions at a more cost-effective rate which could potentially result in greater overall emission reductions.

The second quarter of 1999 submittal period ended on August 9, 1999 with 18 employers participating in the AQIP program. The total AQIP funds received during this period were $205,283, which includes both annual and triennial participants (see Attachment 1). In addition, $62,109 is being carried forward from the previous quarters. Interest in the amount of $143,756 was accrued during the fiscal year 1998-99. Therefore, the total amount available for this quarter is $411,148 (see Attachment 1, Table 4). Staff recommends that $242,044 be used to purchase emission reductions to satisfy the one-year and the three-year requirements for the quarter.

Proposal Evaluation

During the bidding process of the second quarter of 1999, six proposals were received requesting funds ranging from $49,476 to $370,734. The project proposals received can be grouped in three categories: Old-Vehicle Scrapping, Alternate Fuel, and Other. Attachment 2 gives a summary of emission reduction targets and the emission reduction credit balance. Attachment 3 gives a summary of each proposal received and funds requested. Attachment 4 provides an overall summary of the proposals by type, listing the proposals received, funds requested, total proposal costs, and emission reductions expected from each proposal.

All proposals submitted were reviewed and scored based on the information in the proposal as submitted to the AQMD, and according to the selection criteria described in the RFP. The evaluation panel consisted of five AQMD employees: three from Transportation Programs; one from Planning; and one from Technology Advancement; comprised of three Program Supervisors, one Air Quality Specialist and one Transportation Specialist. The panel consisted of one female and four males; one Asian Indian, two Caucasian, and two Hispanic. Attachment 5 discusses the selection criteria, the scoring process, and the overall ratings for each proposal.

Attachment 5 also provides a summary of the proposal rankings. While cost-effectiveness is the most heavily weighted criteria for determining ranking, the amount of funding available ultimately determines the recommendation. The Vons Companies, Inc. and Ocean Air Environmental's Proposal 2 were the most cost-effective in regard to available funds and meeting the necessary emission reduction targets.

The following proposals are recommended for approval (as detailed in Attachment 6):

1. The Vons Companies, Inc. $49,476

   The Vons Companies, Inc., propose to reduce emissions by replacing seven existing diesel spotting tractors with seven spotting tractors powered by Cummins' B5.9 LPG engines. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $0.42 per pound.

2. OceanAir Environmental Proposal 2 (Ford) $192,568

   OceanAir Environmental proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering a pusher tug boat based in the Port of Long Beach with a low-emissions diesel engine. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $1.35 per pound.

Outreach

In accordance with the AQMD’s consulting and contracting policies, a public notice advertising the RFP and inviting bids was published in the following publications:

 

1. Antelope Valley Press	13. Los Angeles Sentinel
2. The Black Voice News	14. Los Angeles Times
3. Chinese Daily News	15. M/W/DVBE Source
4. Eastern Group Publications	16. Orange County Register
5. El Chicano	17. Palm Springs Desert Sun
6. Excelsior, The	18. Philippine News
7. Inland Empire Hispanic News	19. Precinct Reporter
8. Inland Valley Daily Bulletin	20. Rafu Shimpo
9. Korea Central Daily	21. Riverside Press Enterprise
10. La Opinion	22. San Bernardino Sun
11. La Voz	23. Santa Clarita Signal
12. Los Angeles Daily News	24. State of California Contracts Register

Additionally, potential bidders were identified from the Los Angeles County MTA and Caltrans Directories of Certified Minority, Women, Disadvantaged and Disabled Veterans Business Enterprises; the Inland Area Opportunity Pages Ethnic/Women Business & Professional Directory; the AQMD’s own electronic listing of certified minority vendors; and AQMD Purchasing’s mailing list. Notice of the RFP was mailed to the Black and Latino Legislative Caucuses and various minority chambers of commerce and business associations; and placed on the Internet at AQMD’s Web site [http://www.aqmd.gov, "Business and Job Opportunities" icon] and AQMD’s 24-hour telephone message line for bidders (909) 396-2724.

A Bidders Conference was convened at the AQMD on July 8, 1999 to highlight the requirements of the proposals and to answer questions from the prospective bidders in attendance.

Resource Impact

Not applicable.

Attachments

1. AQIP Funding and Participation – Second Quarter 1999
2. Summary of Emission Reduction Targets and Credit Balances
3. Summary of AQIP Proposals Received
4. Summary of Proposals By Type
5. Summary of Proposal Ratings
6. Recommendation for Funding

ATTACHMENT 1

AQIP Funding and Participation - 2^nd Quarter 1999

TABLE 1

Funds Received (as of March 31, 1999)

TABLE 2

Annual Participation

TABLE 3

Triennial Participation

ATTACHMENT 1

(Continued)

TABLE 4

Total Available Funding

ATTACHMENT 2

TABLE 1

Emission Reduction Targets

(Pounds)

TABLE 2

Emission Reduction Credit Balances

(Pounds)

ATTACHMENT 3

Summary

Air Quality Investment Program

Proposals Received

The following proposals were received in response to the AQIP Request for Proposals (RFP) on or before August 9, 1999. The proposals are not listed by classification or rank.

 

1. Ecology Auto Wrecking	$266,000
	County: All

Ecology Auto Wrecking proposes to generate MSERCs through an old-vehicle scrapping program and provide triennial credits. Based on the information provided, the proposal is estimated to have a cost-effectiveness of $2.06 per pound. (Not Funded: Ranked seventh overall.)

2. Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking	$267,392
	County: All

Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking proposes to generate MSERCs by eliminating pre-1982 vehicles through old-vehicle scrapping. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $1.76. (Not Funded: Ranked sixth overall.)

3. OceanAir Environmental	Proposal 1 (Larcona) $358,209
	Proposal 2 (Ford) $192,568
	Proposal 3 (Hermosa) $170,812
	Proposal 4 (Redando) $370,734
	County: Los Angeles

OceanAir Environmental proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering pusher tug boats based in the Port of Long Beach with low-emissions diesel engines. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal ranges from $1.00 to $1.40 per pound. (Funded: Proposal #2, Ford.)

 

4. The Vons Companies, Inc.	$49,476
	County: Los Angeles

The Vons Companies, Inc., propose to reduce emissions by replacing seven existing diesel spotting tractors with seven spotting tractors powered by Cummins' B5.9 LPG engines. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $0.42 per pound. (Funded: Ranked first among all the proposals.)

 

5. L.A. County Sanitation District	$228,000
	County: Los Angeles

L.A. County Sanitation District proposes to reduce emissions by repowering seven diesel crawler tractors with CARB certified low-emission diesel engines. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $2.68 per pound. (Not considered as this proposal was funded under the Carl Moyer Program.)

 

6. Earthguard Environmental Services Option A	$76,076
	County: Los Angeles

Earthguard Environmental Services proposes to provide District approved Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs) generated by "Process Change." The quantification of these ERCs was verified by the District according to the methodology contained in Regulation XIII, Rule 1306. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $1.10 per pound. (Not Funded: Ranked eighth overall.)

ATTACHMENT 4

Proposal Summary By Type

ATTACHMENT 5

Summary

Proposal Ratings

All proposals submitted were reviewed and scored according to the selection criteria in the Board-approved RFP. Points were also allocated for "Local Business," "Small Business," DBVE and DBVE "Joint Ventures."

ATTACHMENT 6

TABLE 1

Proposals Recommended for Funding

Anticipated Emission Reductions

(Pounds/Year)

TABLE 2

Proposals Recommended for Funding

Funding Request

/ / /