HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/16/1992, C-3 - AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO TRANSIT COACHES MEETING DATE:
j��lll city Of San LUIS OBISPOITEM
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NUMBED.
FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer
Prepared by: Harry Watson, Transit Managero
SUBJECT: Award of Contract for the Purchase of Two Transit Coaches
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a contract for the construction of two transit
coaches with the firm of Gillig Corporation in the amount of $410,559.88.
DISCUSSION:
Background
At the March 17, 1992 City Council meeting, staff was directed to issue specifications and
Request for Proposals (RFP) for the acquisition of two heavy duty transit vehicles,
consistent with the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). During the adoption of the SRTP,
this capital expenditure was identified as phase one of the five year bus replacement
expansion program. One bus is scheduled as an expansion bus for a new fifth route and
the second as a replacement bus.
The buses will be 40' in length and constructed to withstand the demands put upon them
for continual maximum capacity ridership. Staff will assign the 40 foot buses to the
perimeter and tandem routes while using the shorter buses on the downtown core routes.
The buses will be wheelchair lift equipped so as to conform to the requirements of the
recently legislated Americans with Disabilities Act, and will have improved seating comfort.
Per direction from Council, the specifications for these 40 foot buses are for advanced
design diesel equipped with dual trap exhaust scrubbers. This is the cleanest technology
available today (see compliance certification Exhibit B attached). Bus emissions and the
status of efforts to gain approval for CNG vehicles are discussed later in this report.
On May 15, 1992 the RFP process was closed.
Purchasina Procedure/Proposal Comparison
The provisions of Municipal Code 3.24.060(G) applies to this contract, which provides for
the use of the Request for Proposal process (instead of a formal bid) when an RFP 'Will
result in a more favorable and efficient comparison of supplies, equipment and/or
services". Under an RFP approach, factors other than cost are appropriately considered
in the award of the contract, and not all of the numerous specification preferences need
to be completely met (although staff is recommending the lowest cost bid).
In the case of a heavy duty transit bus, durability, passenger amenities, and locally
performed maintenance directly translate into operational costs, a key factor to be
considered in determining value for cost. These can be somewhat subjective factors, but
are important features in evaluating which vehicle will lead to the greatest overall
productivity for our transit system. el
n�itiilllilllll��' IIIIIII MY Of SAn y_ AS OBI S130
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 2
Bus Purchase
i
There were two responses to the RFP. The two respondents were Gillig Corporation of
Hayward, California and Bus Industries of America who manufacture the Orion bus in
Oriskany, New York. Following are the results of the comparison of the two proposals.
Both met our specifications which were a part of the March 17, 1992 agenda item.
Bus Industries of America Gillig Corporation
I
Basic Features Destination Sign Destination Sign
P.A. System P.A. System
Driver Seat Upgrade Driver Seat Upgrade
Brake Retarder Brake Retarder
Price + Tax $233,575.00 ea. $205,279.94 ea.
Delivery 3/26/93 180 days After receipt of
order
Service &
Parts Location Yes Yes
Buy America Yes Yes
DEB Yes Yes
Training Here. Up to 30 days (inc. tapes) 2 days - driver & mechanic
Parts guarantee 15 years 15 years
I
Cert. of Specs Yes Yes
Non Discrimination Yes Yes
Air Pollution ,
Certification Yes Yes
Manufacture Cert. Yes Yes
Advanced Design
Particulate
Trap Equipped
Clean Diesel Yes Yes
•e2
i, ����iu�llllill Iim�u�I `II city of san . ,s oBispo
,11111
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 3
Bus Purchase
Warranty:
Coach 1 year, 50,000 miles 1 year, 50,000 miles
Engine 2 years, no miles 2 years, no miles
Transmission 2 years, 100K miles 2 years, 100K miles i
Wheelchair Lift 1 year, 50K miles 1 year, 50K miles
Body 1 year, 100K miles 3 years, 150K miles
Axle 2 years, 100K miles 2 years, 100K miles
Recommendation
i
After an item by item comparison of the conformance to specifications, it is staff's
recommendation that the Gillig Corporation be awarded the contract to construct two
heavy duty transit coaches. They meet the specifications contained in the Request for
Proposal, can deliver the buses in the least amount of time, and have also provided the
least expensive bid.
CNG/Bus Emissions
At the time Council approved the specifications, a great deal of interest was expressed
in the acquisition of buses capable of running on compressed natural gas (CNG). Staff
advised Council that CNG engines were not approved for production buses in California.
This is still the case. Staff has investigated applying for a specific City exemption to act
as a "demonstration project" but have been advised that it would not be forthcoming
from the California Air Resources Board (CARB). (Attachment 3)
It is likely that CNG will be approved at a future date based on large bus fleet
demonstrations in Orange County and Sacramento. CNG buses could be added to the
fleet at such time as there is a fueling station in operation in San Luis Obispo and CNG
buses are approved in California. Staff is working very hard to achieve both these goals,
and a CNG fueling station near the bus yard (Dewarsite) is expected to be available in
the Fall.
With regard .to this acquisition, the very cleanest State approved technology is being
recommended. The California Transit Association has been successful in obtaining a
conditional approval for state of the art "clean diesel", particulate trap equipped engines.
The attached flyer (Attachment 4) gives a brief description of the technology and the
expected results. They will not emit smoke like our existing buses do. The City is
including low sulphur diesel in its current fuel bid process, which will also contribute to
cleaner exhaust.
r�i�i�Ifililll►° lllllii City Of San its OBiSpO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
i
Page 4
Bus Purchase
i
FISCAL IMPACT:
Cost
The Gillig Corporation response was low at $410,559.88 for two coaches. The Bus j
Industries of America's response was in the amount of $467,150.00. This is consistent
with staff's estimate of $210,000 each as contained in the March 17, 1992 agenda item.
Funds Available
i
Adequate funds are available to cover this expenditure from an approved Federal Mass
Transportation Administration UMTA Grant in the amount of$251,600, and the beginning
fund balance carryover TDA for FY 1991-92 ($204,800, page G-10, Approved 1991-92
Budget).
t
CONCURRENCES:
i
A Subcommittee of the Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) made up of Karl Hovanitz,
Ken McCracken, Dr. Walter Rice, and Jim Forrer received a comparison of the two RFP's
and concurs with staffs recommendation, with one exception: Staff originally had favored
electronic destination signs, but has since agreed to the MTC's desire to have standard
roller destination signs. This is due to concerns by the MTC regarding the readability of
liquid crystal destination (LCD) signs for visually impaired riders. Maintenance was also
an issue. It should be noted that the City of Seattle recently placed an order for 100
buses equipped with standard roller signs even though they currently have several
hundred buses with LCD signs.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Contract
2. Compliance Form
3. CNG ,Exemption Investigation Letter
4. Clean Diesel Flyer
NOTE: Original specs and bid proposals are in the Council Reading File.
\coach.rpt
-3-�
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this _
day of j1992, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and GILLIG CORPORATION,
hereinafter referred to as SUPPLIER.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, on March 17, 1992, CITY invited RFP's for the procurement of two heavy
duty transit buses per Specifications No. TR-92 203.
WHEREAS, pursuant to said invitation, SUPPLIER ,submitted a proposal which was
accepted by the CITY for said equipment.
NOW,THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations, and covenants
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of the Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made
and entered, as first written above, until acceptance of said equipment.
2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. The Notice Inviting RFPs, the General Bid
Terms and Conditions, the Special Bid Terms and Conditions, Bid Specifications
and SUPPLIER's Letter of Response are hereby incorporated in and made a part
of this Agreement (Attachment A).
3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For furnishing equipment as specified in this Agreement,
CITY will pay and SUPPLIER shall receive therefore compensation in a total sum
not to exceed $410,559.88. Payment to the SUPPLIER shall be made within 30
days after receipt of an original invoice from SUPPLIER and acceptance of
equipment by CITY.
4. SUPPLIER'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and
agreements hereinafter mentioned to be made and performed by CITY, SUPPLIER
agrees with CITY to furnish the equipment and to do everything required by this
Agreement and the said specifications. Without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, SUPPLIER warrants on behalf of itself and all subcontractors engaged
for the performance of this Agreement that only persons authorized to work in the
United State pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1985 and other
applicable laws shall be employed int he performance of the work hereunder.
5. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFY. SUPPLIER agrees to defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless CITY, its officials, officers, employees, representatives, and
agents from and against all claims, lawsuits, liabilities, or damages of whatsoever
nature arising out of or in connection with, or relating in any manner to any act or
omission of SUPPLIER, its agents, employees, and subcontractors of any tier and
employees thereof in connection with the performance or non-performance of this
Agreement. The SUPPLIER shall thoroughly investigate any and all claims and
indemnify the CITY and do whatever is necessary to protect the CITY, its officials,
officers, employees, agents, and representatives as to any such claims, lawsuits,
liabilities, expenses, or damages.
ATTACHMENT 1 3-S
6. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification, or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the
Director of Finance.
7. TERMINATION. If during the term of this Agreement, the CITY determines that
the SUPPLIER is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein,
CITY may notify SUPPLIER in writing of such defect or failure to perform; which
notice must give SUPPLIER a ten day period of time whereafter in which to perform
said work or cure the deficiency. If SUPPLIER has not performed the work or
cured the deficiency within the ten days specified in the notice, such shall
constitute a breach of this Agreement and CITY may terminate this agreement
immediately by written notice to SUPPLIER to said effect. Thereafter, neither party
shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or rights under this
Agreement, except however, any and all obligations of SUPPLIER's surety shall
remain in full force and effect and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in any
manner waived by the termination hereof. In said event, SUPPLIER shall be
entitled to the reasonable value of its services performed from the beginning of the
period in which the breach occurs up to the day it received CITY's Notice of
Termination, minus any off-set from such payment representing the CITY's
damages from such breach. CITY reserves the right to delay any such payment
until completion or confirmed abandonment of the project, as may be determined
at the CITY's sole discretion, so as to permit a full and complete accounting of
costs. In no event, however, shall SUPPLIER be entitled to receive in excess of
the compensation quoted in its bid.
8. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings
specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete
agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or
representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be
of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or
representation be binding upon the parties hereto.
9. ANTI-DISCRIMINATION. In the performance of the terms of this Agreement,
SUPPLIER agrees that it will not engage in nor permit such subcontractors as it
may employ to engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of
age, race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, or relation of such persons.
Violation of this provision may result in the imposition of penalties referred to in
Labor Code Section 1735.
10. AUDIT. CITY shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and
other written materials used by SUPPLIER in preparing its statements to CITY as
condition precedent to any payment to SUPPLIER.
11. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States
Postal Service, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as
follows:
2
CITY: Pamela Voges, City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
P.O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
SUPPLIER: Gillig Corporation
P.O. Box 3008
Hayward, CA 94540-3008
Attn: Ken Robinson, Sales Engineering Manager
12. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both CITY and SUPPLIER do covenant
that each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of each party is a person
duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such parry.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MAYOR RON DUNIN
ATTEST:
Parr Voges, City Clerk
SUPPLIER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ttor ey
Finance Director
\hw\coach.agr
3 -�-�
FOR SUPPLIERS
ar shalt procure and maintain for the duration of the contact insurance against claims for injuries to persons or dz—,a;es
rope try which may arise from or in Bonne=ion with the products and materials supplied to the Ci y, The ccst of such
�vranee shall be bome by the Vendor.
Aanimurn Scooe of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services CI Tice Commercial General Liability average (occurrence' form CG
Oxi1).
Wanfmum Limas of Irtstrrance
Vendor shall maintain limits no less than$I,=,= par occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. if
Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,either the general aggregate limit shall apply
separately to this project/iocation or the general aggregate limit shag be twice the required occurrence IimiL
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by ftCity. At the option of the City, either, the
Insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City,its Officers,officials,employees
and volunteers; or the Vendor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions
The general GabTty policy is to conWri, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The Cly,its officers,officials,employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: produrs
and completed operations of the Vendor. The coverage shag contain no special limitations on the scope of protection
afforded to the City, rs officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers..
2. The Vendor's insurance average shall be primary insurance as respects the City, Its officers. officials, employees,
agents and volunteers• Any insurance or self-insurance maiAtained by the CHy,Its officers,oYc:als,employees,agents
or volunteers shall be excess of the Vendor's insurance and shall not contribute with if.
3 Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect
coverage provided to the City, its officers,officials,employees, agents or volunteers.
4. The Vendor's insurance Shap apply separately to each Insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except
with respect to the limits of the insurers GabTity.
S Each insurance policy required by this clause shag be endorsed to seats that coverage shall not be suspended,voided,
cancelled by either parry, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days'prior written notice by certified
man, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurariee is to be placed with insurers with a current AAL Best's rating of no less than AVIL
Verification of Coverace
Vendor shall furnish the City with original endorsements affecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are !�
be signed by a person authori:ed by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsemems are to ba received and
approved by the City before the lease commences a
3t
ATTAC DM\T A
i
COMPLIANCE WITH CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY THE
SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Bidder represents and warrants that:
1 . Horsepower of the vehicle furnished is adequate for the speed
terrain in which it will operate. Such horsepower includes
the demands of auxillary power equipment.
2. Gases and vapors emanating from the crankcase are controlled
in such a manner as to minimize their escape to the atmosphere.
3. Visible emissions from the exhaust pipe will not exceed nl of the
Ringelmann Scale when measured at a point 6 inches from the tail-
pipe with the vehicle in a steady state of operation.
4. When the vehicle has idled for 3 minutes and then accelerates to
80% of rated speed under load, the capacity of the exhaust will
not exceed #2 on the Ringelmann Scale for more than 5 seconds,
and not more than #1 Ringelmann thereafter.
5. The coaches vrill comply with the Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
as established by the U.S. Department of Transportation.
GILLYG CORPORATION
BY 4�
BRYAN MACLEOD
TITLE Vice President
DATE May 14, 1992
i
ATTACHKENT 2
i��►��i�I�illl�lllllllfl►l'II �►►i►<<;Ir �!'�
III ;lII cityo sAn tuffs oBispo
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100
May 18, 1992
California Transit Association
c/o Ed Gerber, Executive Director
1400 K Street, Suite 301
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Ed:
San Luis Obispo City Transit is currently on the verge of awarding contracts for the
purchase of new transit vehicles and also developing specifications for the rehabilitation
of a number of our older units. Our City Council has taken the lead in requiring the
absolute cleanest technology available at the time of purchase for powering all of the City
vehicles in our fleet.
Staff is aware that the only approved engine for transit vehicles in the State of California
is a methanol powered diesel conversion, but that recently with the assistance of the CTA
a blanket waiver has been made available for the advanced design diesel/trap technology
engine. It is our understanding that the target date for certification of this new clean
diesel will be Summer 1992.
Both staff and the Council are aware of fleets of transit buses within the State of California
that are powered by compressed natural gas engines. The latest addition to that list is
in your own backyard in Sacramento, but we are aware of other demonstration projects
in Orange County and we have heard of one in San Diego.
The purpose of this letter is to ask what the City of San Luis Obispo could do to see if we
too can gain an exemption from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) which would
allow us to explore the possibility of adding CNG vehicles to our fleet. If it is impractical
to embark on the application process within the timeframe that we are currently operating
under (award targeted for mid June 1992) on our current two bus purchase, then
potentially for the next round of bus purchases. Please give us your opinions on the
following:
1. Would a property the size of San Luis Obispo be considered for a State
demonstration project waiver?
2. What would be the expected timeframe for approval of such a waiver?
3. Is there a target date for certification of CNG engines in the State of California?
4. Based on your knowledge of experience statewide with CNG vehicles, should SLO
Transit be undertaking such a program at this time?
ATTACHMENT 3
d.3-1a
Page 2
Caltrans
5. Would you speculate that CNG is the alternative fuel of choice in the future?
Ed, because of our extremely short timeframe, could you please fax your response back
to this office as soon as possible (FAX NO. 805-781-7109)? Thanks.
Sincerely,
Harrytson
Transit anager
C. Penny Rappa - Per your request
HW:bw
catrans.ltr
C'-3•�I
Clean ese .
The words CLEAN and DIESEL are not contradictory.
In fact, in several major cities they are synonymous.
12.000,000 miles have been racked up by
CLEAN DIESEL transit buses in several
major cities, around the U.S. including 400 . _
units in New York City. Diesel power is the
overwhelming preference today. It is the
economical, reliable, fuel efficient,easy to °
service power alternative. The diesel engine i
is the most efficient means of convening fuel
to power.
However, anyone driving behind a diesel
powered bus will also attest to its sooty _
disposition. It has led to talk about major
expenditures in new types of fuel and new
engines to use those fuels. A costly
proposition to contemplate.
CLEAN DIESEL bus in operation.
Whilc many look for alternatives to diesel
others have worked to clean up the act of
the good old diesel engine. Diesel engine
manufacturers themselves have been
successful in reducing the exhaust emissions
from their new generation power plants. Low
sulphur diesel fuel has also contributed to
cleaner exhaust.
The CLEAN DIESEL we alluded to adds
exhaust aftenreatment as the final clean-up
stage. Over 12 million miles of revenue service
have been piled up by transit buses with
Donaldson diesel particulate trap oxidizers
(DPTO). The DPTO systems trap over 85% of
Each cloth patch was placed over an exhaust pipe. The the exhaust carbon panicles and bum
them off. Water vapor and carbon
clean patch covered a CLF,AN DIESEL exhaust pipe.
dioxide are the primary byproducts.
The CLEAN DIESEL with Donaldson Diesel Particulate Trap Oxidizer is a dynamic technology that is
available now. It promises to preserve the position of the diesel end=ine as the power source of choice and
help cleanup Califomia air.
donaldsonFor More Information Contact:
Donaldson Company, Inc ATTACHMENT 4
M.S.115
_� P.O. Box 1299
d—c, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55440
C_3-/IL