Back

PROPOSAL:

Execute Contracts for AQIP Proposals Received During Fourth Quarter of 1997

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 fourth quarter of 1997 and this action is to recommend one for funding. The amount available for this quarter is $938,831.

COMMITTEE:

Mobile Source, June 26, 1998, Recommended for Approval

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Authorize the Chairman to execute a contract for a total amount not to exceed $216,000 from the AQIP Special Revenue Fund to obtain mobile source emission reductions with Ecology Auto Wrecking.

Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Acting 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 fourth quarter of 1997.

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 fourth quarter of 1997 submittal period ended on December 31, 1997 with 22 employers participating in the AQIP program. The total AQIP funds received during this period were $200,146, which includes both annual and triennial participants (see Attachment 1). In addition, $738,685 is being carried forward from the previous quarters. Therefore, the total amount available for this quarter is $938,831. Staff recommends that $216,000 be used to purchase emission reductions to satisfy the one-year and the three-year requirements.

Proposal Evaluation

During the fourth quarter of 1997, four proposals were received requesting funds ranging from $101,000 to $515,000. The project proposals received can be grouped in two categories: old-vehicle scrapping and transportation demand management. 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 six AQMD employees: four from Transportation Programs; one from Planning; and one from Technology Advancement. The panel consisted of three females and three males; one Asian Pacific American, three Caucasian / Anglo American, and two Hispanic American. Attachment 5 discusses the selection criteria, the scoring process, and the overall ratings for each proposal.

The following proposal is recommended for approval:

Ecology Auto Wrecking

Option A $216,000

Ecology Auto Wrecking proposes to generate MSERCs through an old-vehicle scrapping program. Three options have been offered. Cost-effectiveness of the options varies between $1.32 and $1.34 per pound and Option A meets the entire emission reduction requirement of the quarter.

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. The Excelsior	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 through 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. Copies of the RFP were mailed to the Black and Latino Legislative Caucuses and various minority chambers of commerce and business associations; and were placed on the Internet at AQMD’s Web site [http://www.aqmd.gov, "Business and Job Opportunities" icon] and on AQMD’s 24-hour telephone message line for bidders (909) 396-2724.

A Bidders Conference was convened at the AQMD on September 4, 1997 to highlight the requirements of the proposals and to answer questions from the nine prospective bidders in attendance.

Resource Impact
Not applicable.

Attachments
1. AQIP Funding and Participation
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

The following proposals were received in response to the AQIP Request for Proposals (RFP) on or before October 3, 1997. The proposals are not listed by classification or rank.

1. Ecology Auto Wrecking		Option A $216,000
		Option B $315,000
		Option C $515,000
		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 range of $1.32 to $1.34 per pound. (Funded: Proposal provides the emission reductions needed over the three year period.)

2. Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking		Option 1 $197,500
		Option 2 $225,000
		Option 3 $250,000
		Option 4 $300,000
		Option 5 $350,000
		Option 6 $400,000
		Option 7 $450,000
		Option 8 $500,000
		County: All

Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking proposes to generate MSERCs by eliminating pre-1982 vehicles through old-vehicle scrapping. The eight options have a cost-effectiveness range of $1.29 to $1.35. (Not funded: Ranked second among the old-vehicle scrapping proposals.)

3. Market-Based Solutions, Inc.		Option 1 $131,000
		Option 2 $276,850
		County: All

Market-Based Solutions proposes to generate MSERCs through an old-vehicle scrapping program. This proposal offers two options with cost-effectiveness values of $1.89 and $2.36 respectively. (Not funded: Ranked third among the old-vehicle scrapping proposals.)

4.LAB2ATRA, The City of Torrance, The Boeing Co.		$101,000
		County: LA

This project proposes to reduce emissions by deploying three natural gas vans in the Torrance, Long Beach and general South Bay area. (Not funded: Did not meet technical criteria.)

All proposals submitted were reviewed and scored according to the selection criteria in the Board-approved RFP. The evaluation process consists of two steps: Step 1 - Technical, and Step 2 - Cost and Other Factors. Proposals scoring a minimum of 70 points for technical criteria are then scored for cost and other factors. Proposals that score below 70 points are not scored any further and would be scored zero for the total score. The resulting total and average scores are summarized in the table below.

/ / /