BOARD MEETING DATE: December 5, 2008
AGENDA NO. 32
PROPOSAL:
Amend Contract to Prepare CEQA Documents for Readoption of Rule 1315 from Rule 1309.1 Priority Reserve Fund
SYNOPSIS:
This action is to authorize the Executive Officer to amend the existing contract with the firm of ICF Jones & Stokes to prepare CEQA documentation for the readoption of Rule 1315 utilizing funding available from the Rule 1309.1 Priority Reserve Fund.
COMMITTEE:
Not Applicable
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Authorize the Chairman to amend the existing contract with ICF Jones & Stokes for consulting services to prepare CEQA documentation for the readoption of Rule 1315, in an additional amount not to exceed $680,000 from the Rule 1309.1 Priority Reserve Fund
Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Executive Officer
Background
A judgment adverse to the District was entered on November 3, 2008 in a lawsuit brought by NRDC, CBE and other environmental groups challenging the District’s adoption of Rule 1315 - Federal New Source Review Tracking System, and the 2007 amendments to Rule 1309.1 – Priority Reserve. Rule 1315 tracks the debits and credits entered into the District’s internal credit bank and allow the use of certain sources of credits, such as minor source orphan shutdowns, that were not previously used. The Superior Court ruled that the District had not adequately analyzed the adverse impacts of the rules, including Rule 1315, under CEQA. As a result of the adverse judgment, the District is unable to issue permits that rely on credits from the District’s internal bank, which includes essential public services under the former version of Rule 1309.1 as well as sources that are exempt from offsets under Rule 1304. While the Board has authorized an appeal from the judgment, staff also intends to propose readoption of Rule 1315, either in its current form or as revised if necessary to address CEQA issues, in order to be able to issue permits which rely on the District’s internal bank once again. The readoption will require preparation of CEQA documents to address the concerns raised in the court’s ruling and any other comments that occur during the public review process. Staff does not currently have sufficient resources to prepare these documents in the rapid timeframe that is necessary to allow readoption as soon as possible, and assistance of an expert outside consultant is needed. Staff solicited a budget and workplan for carrying out these tasks from ICF Jones & Stokes, who prepared a proposal to do this work for an amount not to exceed $680,000. This amount will be added to a $10,000 existing contract with this consultant.
Sole Source Justification
The Board-adopted procurement policy authorizes sole-source contracts in specified situations, including Section VIII B 2 d, circumstances exist which in the determination of the Board require waiver of formal bidding in the best interests of the District. In this case, there is an immediate need to hire a highly-qualified CEQA consultant to prepare the necessary documentation for readoption. The delay resulting from competitive bidding a contract for a CEQA consultant would cause economic harm and possibly harm to the public health by delaying improvements for essential public services. Also, Section VII B 2 c allows a sole source contract where the desired services are available only from the proposed contractor due to the unique capabilities and experience of the proposed contractor. ICF Jones & Stokes is a highly regarded CEQA and NEPA consultant, having written widely used guides to each of these statutes. They were key consultants in preparing CAPCOA’s White Paper on the treatment of greenhouse gases under CEQA, and performed in an outstanding fashion. Their staffing includes lawyers, engineers, air quality specialists, and other experts in all subject areas of CEQA consulting. ICF Jones & Stokes has previously been awarded two separate contracts by the AQMD through a competitive bidding process to assist staff with CEQA-related projects.
Proposal
Staff recommends that the Board authorize the hiring of ICF Jones & Stokes to prepare the necessary CEQA documentation for the readoption of Rule 1315, in its present form or as revised, in the additional amount not to exceed $680,000. Staff is also recommending utilizing interest earnings available in the Rule 1309.1 Priority Reserve Fund for this contract. Although the adopting resolution which established the mitigation fees that have been deposited in the Priority Reserve Fund originally directed that the funds be used for projects to reduce emissions and related monitoring and enforcement, the Board is free to redirect some of those funds to this purpose.
Resource Impacts
Sufficient funds are available in the Rule 1309.1 Priority Reserve Fund.
Attachment (DOC, 26k)
A. Work Description