City of Richmond March 11, 2022
Request for Proposals (RFP) – Strategic Planning and Governance Advisor Page 5 R3F Principles & Practices:
Meeting the immediate needs and priorities of our community is paramount. Naming and transforming the systemic inequities that have created the conditions culminating in this pandemic are tantamount. Towards this, the R3F commits to the following principles and practices.
● We center relationships, healing, and justice.
● We center the priorities and lived expertise of residents and families most vulnerable to systems harm and dehumanization.
● We disrupt white supremacy and anti-Blackness in our systems, policies, practices, investments, and relationships.
● We disburse, coordinate, and advocate for resources through equitable, humanizing, and transparent processes.
● We cultivate power as we procure resources.
● We partner with other response efforts and funds to grow the ecosystem of community assets and power.
● We engage in healthy struggle so that we stay attuned, accountable, innovative, and creative.
● We give ourselves and each other grace and space. We learn and adapt through ongoing inquiry and reflection.
● We celebrate and appreciate.
Guided by our community, priorities, principles & practices, the R3F is moving towards a framework from crisis to recovery with the goal of community stabilization. The R3F seeks to inform and create transparent plan for which activities we may lead, join, or follow.
Key stakeholder (shortlist):
The City of Richmond, Richmond Rapid Response Fund, and their partners The RYSE Center, West Contra Costa Public Education Fund (EdFund West), Richmond Promise, Building Blocks for Kids and the Richmond Rent Program and other partners are key stakeholders in the WCC Care Coalition.
The Consultant will work with:
1. R3F Core Partners and Staff
2. WCC Care Coalition
3. Community Members
West Contra Costa Care Coalition:
→ Collaborative Lead (Kanwarpal Dhaliwal)
→ Collaborative Key Funders (up to 6 funders)
City of Richmond March 11, 2022
Request for Proposals (RFP) – Strategic Planning and Governance Advisor Page 6 Richmond Rapid Response Fund:
→ R3F Staff (Executive Director & Program Officer)
→ R3F Core Partners (5 - 9 people)
→ Rent Relief Working Group
→ Priority Area Partners
→ Key Funders (top 5-6)
→ Richmond residents
Additional scope/proposal considerations:
Written Recommendations and Implementation Plan:
➔ Program Feasibility & Impact Study
➔ Priority Area SWOT/Gap Analysis, Policy Recommendations ➔ Governance Recommendations
➔ Timeline for implementation
Technical Assistance Resources
→ Governance Models:
a. Community Engagement and Leadership
b. Bylaws and Implementation
c. Virtual engagement protocols
d. Transparency and Equity Grantmaking Best Practices
Eligibility:
WHO MAY RESPOND - The City of Richmond and the West Contra Costa Public Education Fund require a consultant with demonstrated experience in developing successful consensus-based and community-driven strategic plans, strong facilitation skills, and extensive work with non-profit strategic planning. We seek an experienced strategic planning consultant to design and facilitate a participatory planning process that will create an equity-centered strategic plan and governance design for the R3F. We desire for community engagement to take place in person with residents and community groups.
Consultant Qualifications:
The R3F is seeking Governance Advisor/Strategic Planning Facilitation Consultant who will help design the planning process and will then facilitate the planning process (June 1, 2022 - TBD). The R3F desires this portion of the work to be completed by end of 2022. The response for this RFP should identify the pros and cons of this. The consultant will be working with Core group, WCC Care Coalition, staff and key stakeholders who are deeply invested in manifesting the organization’s vision to coalesce diverse perspectives and input toward an aligned plan and direction.
City of Richmond March 11, 2022
Request for Proposals (RFP) – Strategic Planning and Governance Advisor Page 7 Consultant Qualifications Desired
1. Demonstrated experience with facilitating a strategic planning process with collaboratives, collectives and/or coalitions, foundations, or endowments
2. Demonstrated and active analysis and application of racial justice praxes in areas of community engagement, systems change, and strategic planning.
3. Familiarity/ Expertise or experience working to support organizations be successful in transformative collaboration in the Priority Areas*
4. Demonstrated experience in co-facilitating Strategic Planning processes
5. Demonstrated experience with community development and/or economic development issues and community stabilization or recovery efforts.
6. Able to utilize virtual technology and innovative engagement for group interviews, retreats, and breakout sessions
7. Effective communication and facilitation skills.
8. Shared values with Priority Areas and commitment to equity Additional and important qualifications of a consultant would be a working analysis and application of racial equity, anti-racist, racial justice frameworks, systems change, community development, community fund governance and community-led grantmaking. As these are part of our commitments and growing aspirations as an organization, the R3F seeks a consultant who can assist on aligning our work with these values. The consultant must have a minimum of 5 years of experience or more organizing and leading strategic planning work in the nonprofit sector, experience with philanthropy preferred.
Proposal Process and Timeline:
Process
PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING
To provide general information and guidance to all potential respondents, the R3F will hold a virtual Pre-Proposal Meeting. All potential respondents are strongly encouraged to attend the pre-proposal meeting. The meeting information and the video of the meeting will be provided to all prospective bidders via BidsOnLine. Pre-Proposal Meeting date will be Monday, March 21, 2022, at 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.
OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT QUESTIONS VIA BIDSONLINE
Submission of questions regarding this RFP must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnLine system on the Q&A tab by Friday, March 25, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. If the City finds it necessary to issue an addendum, prospective bidders will receive e-mail notification of addendum. Otherwise, answers to questions received will be provided on the Q&A tab by Thursday, March 31, 2022 by 5:00 pm.
City of Richmond March 11, 2022
Request for Proposals (RFP) – Strategic Planning and Governance Advisor Page 8 Timeline:
Request for Proposals (RFP) Released 3/11/2022
Pre-Proposal Meeting
Virtual/Video Conferencing
3/21/2022 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm
Questions Due by Q&A Tab -BidsOnLine 3/25/2022 by 5:00 pm Frequently Asked Questions Published -
BidsOnLine
3/31/2022
Online Proposals Due 4/11/2022 by 3:00 pm to BidsOnline An online receipt will be produced in the
form of an email upon submission.
Proposals submitted after the deadline will
not be considered for review.
Interviews (if held) 4/29/2022 (1:00 pm – 4:00 pm)
City Council Contract Approval 5/2022
Projected Contract Period June 1, 2022 - December 31, 2022 Proposal Contents and Selection Criteria
Based upon the submitted written responses to this RFP, City’s selection team will review and rank the proposals according to the following criteria and minimum required materials:
Proposals shall include the following:
1.) Firm/Team Introduction and Background (10 points)
2.) Demonstrated Expertise (30 points)
A. Credentials and qualifications of consultant, including three professional references.
B. Selection of one or more subject area(s) for which you are qualified:
a. Community-Led Governance Structure Implementation//Design b. Collective Impact Strategic Planning
c. Results-Based Accountability
d. Community-Based Planning and Evaluation
e. Supporting successful multi-sector partnerships
f. Poverty Reduction, Community Development, Economic Recovery/Stabilization C. A summary of prior engagements that include multiple audiences and co-facilitators, if any.
City of Richmond March 11, 2022
Request for Proposals (RFP) – Strategic Planning and Governance Advisor Page 9 D. Resumes of key Consultant staff to work on project
3.) Proposal Narrative & Scope (40 points)
A. A description of the applicant’s general approach to strategic planning process, including general methodology, perspective, and/or guiding philosophy.
B. A list of project deliverables, including estimated timelines for each deliverable and overall project completion including the following:
a. Strategic Planning Dates/Activities
b. Strategic Planning Summary & Recommendations Due
4.) Project Budget (20 points)
A detailed project budget that includes the cost of the consultant’s time and any other expected expenses to bring the project to successful completion. We anticipate an overall budget not to exceed $100,000 including all indirect costs. If tasks requested cannot be completed within the overall budget, respondents shall provide a list of optional tasks with associated costs.
A maximum of four (4) Consultants will be interviewed. Staff anticipates interviews will be held via Zoom on April 29, 2022 beginning at 1:00 p.m. The City reserves the right to not hold interviews.
Final proposals must be submitted by 3:00 pm on April 11, 2022.
Proposal submission process is entirely online and must be completed and submitted through BidsOnLine to be considered.
CITY OF RICHMOND GENERAL GUIDELINES
1. City Disclaimer: The City reserves the right to reject any or all the Proposals, to waive any informality in any Proposal, and to select the Proposals that best meet the City needs. The City also reserves the right to reduce or revise elements of the scope of services, or to amend or modify the contractual requirements, or to negotiate with any qualified consultant.
No representation is made that any contract will be awarded pursuant to this RFP. In no way shall a contract be viewed as exclusive. The City reserves the right to retain additional consultants as necessary. All costs incurred in the preparation of the qualification, in the submissions of additional information and/or in any other aspect of qualification prior to the award of a written contract will be borne by the proposed firm. All qualifications submitted to the City in response to this RFP will become the property of the City of Richmond and will not be returned. The “technical” portion of the Proposal will be considered public information.
2. Comments/Questions on the City Standard Service Provider Agreement: The City’s standard service provider agreement, which the Consultant Team will be required to sign, is attached for your consideration (see Exhibit A).
City of Richmond March 11, 2022
Request for Proposals (RFP) – Strategic Planning and Governance Advisor Page 10 The proposer shall state whether it takes exception(s) to this RFP, including but not limited to the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement (Exhibit A). If the proposer does take exception(s) to any portion of the RFP or contract, the specific portion to which exception(s) is taken must be identified by section number and explained. Requests for changes, additions or requesting deletion of specific words and/or by providing new requested contract language shall be provided. Requests for complete replacement of the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement for another contract will not be considered. Failure to make exceptions to the RFP or Standard Services Agreement within the proposal will be deemed a waiver of any objection. Exceptions will be considered during the proposal evaluation process and are not guaranteed to be approved.
3. Insurance Requirements: The City requires consultants doing business with it to obtain insurance, as shown in RFP (see Exhibit B). The required insurance certificates must comply with all requirements of the standards as shown and must be provided within fifteen (15) days of issuance of the Notice of Intent to Award and prior to the commencement of any work on the project.
4. Business Licenses: The successful Contractor and all subcontractors used in the work will be required to hold or obtain a City of Richmond business license for which the fee will not be waived.
5. Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance (SCCO): The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 N.S. (Exhibit C) prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Bidders/Proposers must submit the attached Sanctuary City Compliance Statement with their Bid or Proposal/Qualifications (Exhibit D).
6. Limited Liability Companies Disclosure Statement (LLCS): Resolution No. 86-21, approved by City Council on July 6, 2021, requires disclosure of the identities of beneficial & responsible owners of Limited Liability Corporations (LLC) (Exhibit E). Bidders/Proposers must submit the attached Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form with their Bid or Proposal (Exhibit F).
Exhibits
Exhibit A: City’s Standard Service Provider Agreement
Exhibit B: Insurance Requirements
Exhibit C: Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 N.S.
Exhibit D: Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
Exhibit E: Limited Liability Corporations (LLC), Resolution No. 86-21 Exhibit F: Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
STRATEGIC PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ADVISOR FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND RICHMOND RAPID RESPONSE FUND (R3F) (CD - RFP-03112022), bidding on 04/11/2022 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 04/22/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
Vendor Proposal Interviews Total Rank
Dalberg (SF, NY, Washington) 456 344 800 1
Empathy in Action (Richmond) 428 278 706 3
Public Works, LLC (Philadelphia) 413 289 702 4
Social Contract, LLC (Delaware) 425 336 761 2
DECISION MATRIX PROPOSALS AND INTERVIEWS
Request for Proposal - Strategic Planning and Governance Advisor April 29, 2022
July 26, 2022
Community Development
DATE: July 26, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Jesus Morales, Housing Manager
Subject: Contract for Castro Encampment Resolution Project Manager
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no impact to the General Fund related to this contract. The contract will be funded by an Encampment
Resolution Funding grant from the California Interagency Council on Homelessness.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
April 5, 2022
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
On April 5, 2022, the City Council accepted and
appropriated a $4.8 Million Encampment Resolution
Funding grant from the Interagency Council on
Homelessness to assist the City in providing services to support people living at the Castro Encampment onto
paths to safe and stable housing and result in sustainable restoration of this Bay Trail segment. City staff issued a Request for Qualifications for a Project Manager and is recommending a contract with Way2Love Inc., in the
amount of $235,000, for a term ending June 30, 2024.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a contract with Way2Love, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $235,000, for a term beginning July 26,
2022, and ending June 30, 2024, to provide project
management services for the Castro Encampment
Resolution Project to be funded by the City’s Encampment Resolution Funding grant – Community Development (Lina
Velasco 620-6841/Jesus Morales 620-6649).
AGENDA
REPORT
July 26, 2022
DISCUSSION:
In December 2021, the City applied for Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF) seeking resources from the State of California to fund a local demonstration project, which would provide services to address the immediate crisis of experiencing unsheltered homelessness in encampments; support people living in encampments onto paths to safe and stable housing; and result in sustainable restoration of public spaces to their intended uses while safeguarding the needs of unhoused people seeking shelter.
Applications were required to focus on one encampment site. City staff selected the Castro Encampment for this funding application.
On February 24, 2022, the City was provided a notice of intent to award the ERF. The City Council accepted and appropriated the grant funds on April 5, 2022.
Summary of Richmond’s Castro Encampment Resolution Project The Castro Encampment Resolution Project (CERP) will include resources to hire an ERF Project Manager who will lead management of the project and oversee the Castro Site Care Team (SCT), which will include a Site Manager, Housing Navigator, a projectspecific CORE team (comprised of an outreach specialist and social worker), and other service providers working directly with encampment residents to triage and ensure services are timely, responsive, coordinated, trauma-informed, and achieving goals and objectives.
The CERP encompasses an 18-month plan to deliver an array of supportive services to 100+ individuals currently living at the Castro vehicle encampment near Castro and Hensley Streets. The project aims to move all encampment residents into stable housing by June 2023. CERP’s goals and objectives will be met in stages that include:
1) improving living conditions at the site, 2) assessing the behavioral and health needs of residents, 3) reducing barriers to stable housing and support, and 4) providing jobrelated training. Grounded in Housing First principles, CERP is anticipated to be an innovative model whose successes—and challenges—will be continuously evaluated, so that the approach can be refined and replicated throughout the State. A third-party evaluator will be brought in to support the assessment and evaluation of the CERP.
The CERP Project Manager will serve as the day-to-day project manager, under the direction of the City’s Housing Manager. The CERP Project Manager will lead the coordination of the Site Care Team, lead in the preparation of Request for Qualifications/Proposals (RFQ/Ps) to solicit bids from service providers, engage with surrounding area residents and businesses, engage encampment residents in program development and execution, complete required grant reporting, oversee the sunset of the encampment by rehousing residents, and restoration of the site to its original use.
The City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) on June 3, 2022, via the City BidsOnline system, seeking a CERP Project Manager. The City notified 349 vendors and there were 17 prospective bidders. Responses to the RFQ were due on June 30,
July 26, 2022
2022, and two responses were received. Submittals were reviewed by City Community Development staff and a representative from Contra Costa County Health, Housing, & Homeless Services. Effort was made to include, as part of the review, a resident with lived experience, but they cancelled their participation the day before the interviews.
Two interviews were held with each respondent, conducted on July 11 and 12, 2022.
Based on the respondents’ submittals to the RFQ and the interviews held, Way2Love, Inc., was the highest ranked respondent. Therefore, Housing staff is recommending that the Council award the contract for the CERP Project Manager to Way2Love, Inc., for up to $235,000, for a term ending on June 30, 2024.
CONCLUSION:
The ERF Project Manager is needed to ensure timely management of services and implementation of the Castro Encampment Resolution project.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Contract
Attachment 2 – Request for Qualifications
Attachment 3 – BidsOnline Report
CITY OF RICHMOND
STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: Project Manager:
Project Manager E-mail: Project Manager Phone No:
PR No: Vendor No: P.O./Contract No:
Description of Services:
The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:
1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond (herein referred to as the “City”) and the following named Contractor:
Company Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Email:
Business License No: / Expiration Date:
A California [ ] corporation, [ ] limited liability corporation [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:] ,
[ ] other [specify:]
2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is and it
terminates unless terminated as provided herein.
3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $ . City shall not pay for services that exceed
the Contract Payment Limit unless a contract amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager.
4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor shall provide those services and carry out that work described in the Service Plan (Exhibit A) which is attached hereto and is incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
5. City's Obligations. City shall make to the Contractor those payments described in the Payment Provisions (Exhibit B) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.
7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein. (Note:
other than Public Works contracts, the City will agree to Special Conditions only in unusual circumstances.)
9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.
10. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' Contract hereto:
CITY OF RICHMOND CONTRACTOR:
a municipal corporation
By:
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice President should sign below)
Title: By:
I hereby certify that this Contract Title:
has been approved by City Council.
Date Signed:
By:
City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:
By:
By: Title:
City Attorney
Date Signed:
(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations
Code Section 313, if Contractor is a corporation
or nonprofit organization, this Contract (1) must
be signed by (a) the Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice-President and (b) the
Secretary any Assistant Secretary, the Chief
Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Standard Contract/EJ/TE 9-26-07
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT A
SERVICE PLAN
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the , perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below:
PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE
The Castro Encampment Resolution Project Manager will provide the following services within the specified time frames to accomplish the goals and objectives of the Castro Encampment Resolution Project. The City reserves the right to adjust the goals and time frames of the Project Manager as the Project’s performance is regularly evaluated.
Goal Time
Meet with City Housing Manager and provide project goals and objectives updates.
Initially weekly from
effective date of Contract.
May be adjusted later
Aug 1 - ongoing
Implementing the Encampment Resolution Project, including developing systems, policies, and procedures
Within 30-45 days from
effective date of Contract,
August 30-Sep 15
Complete resident assessments to determine needs and priorities. Within 45-60 days from effective date of Contract,
Sep 15 – Sep 30
Coordinating the Castro Site Care Team, including managing roles, responsibilities, and reporting.
Upon execution of
Contracts with service
providers
September 13-September
30 Convening a Castro Residents’ Advisory Group, to meet weekly and provide site residents with an opportunity to learn about the project, contribute to its development, and voice concerns.
Within 30-45 days from
effective date of Contract,
August 30-Sep 15
Engaging neighboring residents and businesses through active outreach. Within 30-45 days from effective date of Contract,
August 30-Sep 15
and ongoing
Establishing a community advisory group that seeks public input on the grant progress, solicits feedback, and encourages information sharing.
Within 30-45 days from
effective date of Contract,
August 30-Sep 15
Place 10-20 residents through Housing Assistance.
Within 60-90 days from
effective date of Contract,
Sep 30 – Oct 31
Place 5-15 residents through Housing Assistance on a monthly basis. Months 4 through 11 Nov 2022 – June 2023
Providing updates and reports to Richmond City Council. Quarterly from effective date of Contract
Oct ‘22-Jan ’23- April ’23-
June ‘23
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT PROVISIONS
{PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY OF RICHMOND SHALL NOT PAY FOR SERVICES
THAT EXCEED THE CONTRACT PAYMENT LIMIT UNLESS A CONTRACT
AMENDMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY MANAGER}
1. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated as provided below.
2. Any and all payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photo copying, meals and travel etc). Invoices, shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.
3. Contractor shall submit timely invoices to the following address:
Attention: City of Richmond, Finance Department - Accounts Payable Project Manager: Department:
PO Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
4. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Project Manager, before payments shall be authorized.
5. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.
6. A Richmond business license shall be obtained before any payment under this Contract shall be authorized and the business license must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized.
7. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract shall be executed by the City. The insurance coverage must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized.
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT C
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES
1. Notices. All notices, demands, statements, or communications provided for by this Contract shall be in writing and may be delivered by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid. Notices to the City shall be addressed to the Department Head and (as delineated below in section 1.1) to the project manager responsible for the administration of or the supervision of the scope of work under this Contract. Notices to the Contractor shall be addressed to the party designated by Contractor (as delineated below in section 1.2). Notice shall be deemed delivered (a) upon personal delivery; (b) as of the fifth business day after mailing by United States certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the proper party; or (c) as of 12:00 p.m. on the second business day immediately after the day it is deposited with and accepted by Federal Express, or a similar overnight courier service, addressed to the proper party and marked for next business day morning delivery. For the purposes of this Contract, a "business day" means any day Monday through Friday that is not a holiday recognized by the federal government or the State of California.
1. 1 CITY hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:
City of Richmond
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
1. 2 CONTRACTOR hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 1 of 13
EXHIBIT D
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Independent Contractor. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor is not a regular or temporary employee, joint venturer or partner of the City, but rather an independent Contractor. This Contract shall not be construed to create an agency, servant, employee, partnership, or joint venture relationship. As an independent Contractor, Contractor shall have no authority to bind City to any obligation or to act as City's agent except as expressly provided herein. Due to the independent Contractor relationship created by this Contract, City shall not withhold state or federal income taxes, the reporting of which shall be Contractor's sole responsibility.
2. Brokers. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor has not hired, retained or agreed to pay any entity or person any fee, commission, percentage, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Contract.
3. City Property. The rights to applicable plans, drawings, reports, calculations, data, specifications, videos, graphics or other materials prepared for or obtained pursuant to this Contract, which, upon request, are to be delivered to City within a reasonable time, shall be deemed assigned to City. If applicable, Contractor shall prepare check prints upon request. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 15 below, indemnify, defend and hold harmless City from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data.
4. Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights and Rights in Data. Contractor shall not publish or transfer any materials, discoveries, developments, concepts, designs, ideas, know how, improvements, inventions and/or original works of authorship resulting from activities supported by this Contract without the express prior written consent of the City Manager. If anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract is patentable, trademarkable, copyrightable or otherwise legally protectable, City reserves the exclusive right to seek such intellectual property rights. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor may, after receiving City's prior written consent, seek patent, trademark, copyright or other intellectual property rights on anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract. However, City reserves, and Contractor irrevocably grants, a nonexclusive, fully paid-up, royalty-free, assumable, perpetual, worldwide license, with the right to transfer, sublicense, practice and exploit said license and the right to make, have made, copy, modify, make derivative works of, use, sell,
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 2 of 13
import, and otherwise distribute under all applicable intellectual properties without restriction of any kind said license.
Contractor further agrees to assist City, at City's expense, in every proper way to secure the City’s rights in any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto, including the disclosure to City of all pertinent information and data with respect thereto. Contractor shall also assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations, and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to apply for, obtain, maintain and transfer such rights, or if not transferable, to waive such rights. Contractor shall further assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to assign and convey to City, and any assigns and nominees the sole and exclusive right, title and interest in and to any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto. Contractor further agrees that its obligation to execute or cause to be executed, when it is in Contractor's power to do so, any such instruments or papers shall continue during and at all times after the end of Contractor's services and until the expiration of the last such intellectual property right. Contractor hereby irrevocably designates and appoints City, and its duly authorized officers, agents and servants, as its agent and attorney-in-fact, to act for and in its behalf and stead to execute and file any such applications and to do all other lawfully permitted acts to further the application for, prosecution, issuance, maintenance or transfer of letters of patents, copyright and other registrations. This power of attorney is coupled with an interest and shall not be affected by Contractor's subsequent incapacity.
5. Inspection. Contractor's performance, place of business and records pertaining to this Contract are subject to monitoring, inspection, review and audit by authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.
If the project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work without notice. If such project or services shall not be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work upon reasonable notice.
6. Services. The project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed to the full satisfaction and approval of City. In the event that the project or services set forth in Exhibit A are also itemized by price, City, in its sole discretion, may, upon notice to Contractor, delete certain items or services set forth in Exhibit A, in which case there shall be a corresponding reduction in the amount of compensation paid to Contractor.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 3 of 13
Contractor shall, at its own cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment necessary for Contractor to complete the project or perform the services required herein, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit A.
7. Records. Contractor shall keep and make available for inspection and copying by authorized representatives of the City, the State of California, and the United States Government, the Contractor's regular business records and such additional records pertaining to this Contract as may be required by the City.
Contractor shall retain all documents pertaining to this Contract for a period of five (5) years after this Contract's termination (or for any further period that is required by law) and until all Federal or State audits are complete and exceptions resolved for this contract's funding period. Upon request, CONTRACTOR shall make these records available to authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.
Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts, maintain records, and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Contract. The Contractor’s accounting and control systems shall be satisfactory to City. Contractor's accounting systems shall conform to generally accepted accounting principles and all records shall provide a breakdown of total costs charged under this Contract, including properly executed payrolls, time records, utility bills, invoices and vouchers. The City shall be afforded prompt access to Contractor's records, books, and Contractor shall preserve such project records for a period of at least five (5 years after the termination of this Contract , or for such longer period as may be required by law.
Contractor shall permit City and its authorized representatives and accountants to inspect, examine and copy Contractor's books, records, accounts, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to the project or services set forth in Exhibit A, and any and all data relevant to this Contract at any reasonable time for the purpose of auditing and verifying statements, invoices, or bills submitted by Contractor pursuant to this Contract and shall provide such assistance as may be reasonably required in the course of such inspection. Contractor shall also allow City access to the record keeping and accounting personnel of Contractor.
City further reserves the right to examine and re-examine said books, records, accounts, and data during the five (5 year period following the termination of this Contract; and Contractor shall in no event dispose of, destroy, alter, or mutilate said books, records, accounts, and data in any manner whatever for five (5 years after the termination of this Contract.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 4 of 13
Pursuant to California Government Code § 10527, the parties to this Contract shall be subject to the examination and audit of representatives of the Auditor General of the State of California for a period of three (3) years after final payment under this Contract. The examination and audit shall be confined to those matters connected with the performance of this Contract including, but not limited to, the cost of administering this Contract.
8. Changes and Extra Work. All changes and/or extra work under this Contract shall be performed and paid for in accordance with the following:
Only the City Council or the City Manager may authorize extra and/or changed work. Contractor expressly recognizes that other City personnel are without authorization to either order extra and/or changed work or waive contract requirements. Failure of Contractor to secure the authorization for such extra and/or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in contract price due to such unauthorized work and Contractor thereafter shall be entitled to no compensation whatsoever for performance of such extra and/or changed work.
If Contractor is of the opinion that any work which Contractor has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work, Contractor shall promptly notify City of the fact. The City shall make a determination as to whether or not such work is, in fact, beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work. In the event that City determines that such work does constitute extra work, City shall provide extra compensation to Contractor on a fair and equitable basis. A change order or Contract Amendment providing for such compensation for extra work shall be negotiated between City and Contractor and executed by Contractor and the appropriate City official.
In the event City determines that such work does not constitute extra work, Contractor shall not be paid extra compensation above that provided herein and if such determination is made by City staff, said determination may be appealed to the City Council; provided, however, a written appeal must be submitted to the City Manager within five (5) days after the staff's determination is sent to Contractor. Said written appeal shall include a description of each and every ground upon which Contractor challenges the staff's determination.
9. Additional Assistance. If this Contract requires Contractor to prepare plans and specifications, Contractor shall provide assistance as necessary to resolve any questions regarding such plans and specifications that may arise during the period of advertising for bids, and Contractor shall issue
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 5 of 13
any necessary addenda to the plans and specifications as requested. In the event Contractor is of the opinion that City's requests for addenda and assistance is outside the scope of normal services, the parties shall proceed in accordance with the changes and extra work provisions of Section 8 of these General Conditions.
10. Professional Ability. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor and its employees are skilled and able to competently provide the services hereunder, and possess all professional licenses, certifications, and approvals necessary to engage in their occupations.
City has relied upon the professional ability and training of Contractor as a material inducement to enter into this Contract. Contractor shall perform in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards of Contractor's profession. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, desires the removal of any person employed or retained by Contractor to perform services hereunder, such person shall be removed immediately upon receiving notice from City.
11. Business License. Contractor shall obtain a Richmond Business License before performing any services required under this Contract. The failure to so obtain such license shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumstances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.
12. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder, immediately upon written notice to Contractor. Contractor may terminate this Contract at any time in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause upon 30 days' written notice to City. In the event of termination by either party, Contractor shall be compensated for: (1) all authorized work satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination; (2) necessary materials or services of others ordered by Contractor for this Contract, prior to receipt of notice of termination, irrespective of whether such materials or services of others have actually been delivered, provided that Contractor is not able to cancel such orders. Compensation for Contractor in such event shall be determined by City in accordance with the percentage of the project or services completed by Contractor; and all of Contractor's finished or unfinished work product through the time of the City's last payment shall be transferred and assigned to City. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 6 of 13
13. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Section 12 of these General Conditions; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
14. Conflict of Interest. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.
15. Indemnification.
(a) If this Contract is a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) and Contractor is a design professional, as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses including attorneys’ fees arising out of, or pertaining to, or relating to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of the City. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall immediately defend and indemnify the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all liabilities, regardless of nature or type, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, or its employees, agents, or subcontractors.
Liabilities subject to the duties to defend and indemnify include, without limitation, any and all claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments; associated investigation and administrative expenses; defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys’ fees; court costs; and costs of alternative dispute resolution. Contractor’s obligation to
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 7 of 13
indemnify applies unless it is finally adjudicated that the liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an indemnified party.
(b) If this Contract is not a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) or Contractor is not a design professional as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers from any and all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind and description, brought forth on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property arising from or connected with the willful misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions, ultra-hazardous activities, activities giving rise to strict liability, or defects in design by Contractor or any person directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as, the agent for Contractor in the performance of this Contract, including the concurrent or successive passive negligence of the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers.
(c) It is understood that the duty of Contractor to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Contractor shall be obligated to defend, in all legal, equitable, administrative, or special proceedings, with counsel approved by the City, the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, immediately upon tender to Contractor of the claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established. An allegation or determination that persons other than Contractor are responsible for the claim does not relieve Contractor from its separate and distinct obligation to defend under this Section 15. The obligation to defend extends through final judgment, including exhaustion of any appeals. The defense obligation includes an obligation to provide independent counsel if Contractor asserts that liability is caused in whole, or in part, by the negligence or willful misconduct of an indemnified party. (d) The review, acceptance or approval of the Contractor’s work or work product by any indemnified party shall not affect, relieve or reduce the Contractor’s indemnification or defense obligations. This Section 15 survives completion of the services or the termination of this Contract.
The provisions of this Section 15 are not limited by, and do not affect, the provisions of this Contract relating to insurance.
(e) Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Contract does not relieve Contractor from liability under this Section
15. This Section 15 shall apply whether or not such insurance policies are determined to be applicable to any such damages or claims for damages.
16. Safety. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor shall perform all work hereunder in full compliance with applicable local, state and federal safety requirements including but not limited to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements, and shall assume sole and complete
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 8 of 13
responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any subContractor's employees. If a death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract, Contractor shall immediately notify the City by telephone.
17. Insurance. Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.
18. Non-Liability of Officials and Employees of the City. No official or employee of the City shall be personally liable for any default or liability under this Contract.
19. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations, and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals, with respect to this Contract, including without limitation environmental laws, employment discrimination laws and prevailing wage laws. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable.
Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor shall promptly provide to City documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Also as prescribed in § 2.60.070, Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance.
Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or subcontractor under a contract or subcontract with the City for public work or for goods or for services to refrain from discriminatory employment or subcontracting practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential subcontractor.
Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies . Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.
20. Limitations upon Subcontracting and Assignment. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 9 of 13
under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee.
Contractor acknowledges that the services which Contractor shall provide under this Contract are unique, personal services which, except as otherwise provided herein, Contractor shall not assign or sublet to any other party without the prior written approval of City, which approval may be withheld in City's sole and absolute discretion. In the event that City, in writing, approves any assignment or subletting of this Contract or the retention of subcontractors by Contractor, Contractor shall provide to City upon request copies of each and every subcontract contract prior to the execution thereof by Contractor and subcontractor. Any assignment by Contractor of any or all of its rights under this Contract without first obtaining City's prior written consent shall be a default under this Contract.
The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.
21. Integration. This Contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous oral or written agreement; provided, however, that correspondence or documents exchanged between Contractor and City may be used to assist in the interpretation of the Exhibits to this Contract.
22. Modifications and Amendments. This Contract may be modified or amended only by a change order or Contract Amendment executed by both parties and approved as to form by the City Attorney.
23. Conflicting Provisions. In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Conditions as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.
24. Non-exclusivity. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the services provided by Contractor hereunder shall be non-exclusive, and
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 10 of 13
City reserves the right to employ other Contractors in connection with the project.
25. Exhibits. All Exhibits hereto are made a part hereof and incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, that any language in Exhibit A which does not pertain to the project description, proposal, scope of services, or method of compensation (as applicable) , or any corresponding responsibilities of City, shall be deemed extraneous to, and not a part of, this Contract.
26. Force Majeure. Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.
27. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Contract. Contractor and City agree that any time period set forth in Exhibit A represents their best estimates with respect to completion dates and both Contractor and City acknowledge that departures from the schedule may occur.
Therefore, both Contractor and City will use reasonable efforts to notify one another of changes to the schedule. Contractor shall not be responsible for performance delays caused by others, or delays beyond Contractor's control, and such delays shall extend the times for performance of Contractor's work.
28. Confidentiality. Contractor agrees to comply with, and to require its employees, agents and partners to comply with, all applicable State or Federal statutes or regulations respecting confidentially, including but not limited to, the identity of persons served under this Contract, their records, or services provided them, and assures that:
All applications and records concerning any individual made or kept by Contractor or any public officer or agency in connection with the administration of or relating to services provided under this Contract will be confidential, and will not be open to examination for any purposes not directly connected with the administration of such service.
No person will publish or disclose or permit or cause to be published or disclosed, any list of persons receiving services, except as may be required in the administration of such service.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 11 of 13
29. Third Parties. Nothing herein shall be interpreted as creating any rights or benefits in any third parties. For purposes hereof, transferees or assignees as permitted under this Contract shall not be considered "third parties."
30. Governing Law. This Contract shall be construed in accordance with the law of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of law.
This Contract is made in Contra Costa County, California, and any action relating to this Contract shall be instituted and prosecuted in the courts of Contra Costa County, California.
31. Nonrenewal. Contractor understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that the services provided by Contractor under this Contract will be purchased or renewed by the City under a new contract following expiration or termination of this Contract, and waives all rights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to continue the purchase of all or any failure to continue purchase of all or any such services from Contractor.
32. Claims. Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.
33. Interpretation. This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.
34. Warranty. In the event that any product shall be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.
35. Severability. In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 12 of 13
toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
36. Authority. City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City. The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if he or she is not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.
37. Waiver. The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach.
Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payments therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.
38. Possessory Interest. If this Contract results in the Contractor having possession of, claim to or right to the possession of land or improvements, but does not vest ownership of the land or improvements in the same person, or if this Contract results in the placement of taxable improvements on tax exempt land (Revenue and Taxation Code 107), such interest or improvements may represent a possessory interest subject to property tax, and Contractor may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest.
39. Performance and Final Acceptance.
Contractor represents that it is experienced, qualified, registered, licensed, equipped, organized and financed to perform the services under this Contract.
Contractor shall perform the services under this Contract with that degree of skill and judgment normally exercised by professional firms performing services of a similar nature in the State of California, and shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and coordination of the services it performs under this Contract. In addition to the other rights and remedies which City may have, Contractor shall, at its own expense, correct any services which fail to meet the above standard.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 13 of 13
City shall provide Contractor an opportunity to cure errors and omission which may be disclosed during the review of submittals, with no increase in the authorized Contract Payment Limit. Should Contractor fail to make necessary corrections in a timely manner, such corrections shall be made by the City and the cost thereof shall be charged to Contractor.
If warranted, City shall determine, and Contractor may request such determination, that Contractor has satisfactorily completed performance of this Contract. Upon such determination, City shall issue to Contractor a written Notice of Final Acceptance, after which Contractor shall not incur further costs under this Contract. Contractor shall respond to such Notice of Final Acceptance by executing and submitting to City a Release and Certificate of Final Payment.
40. Survival. The rights and obligations of the parties which by their nature survive termination or completion of the services covered by this Contract shall remain in full force and effect after termination or completion.
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT E
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable):
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT F
INSURANCE PROVISIONS
During the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, the CONTRACTOR shall keep in effect insurance policies meeting the insurance requirements specified in the insurance provisions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond Insurance Requirements – Type 5:
Vendors, Suppliers, Small Grant Recipients & Nonprofit
Organizations
Type 5 - Page 1 of 3
Revised: September 2011
In all instances where CONTRACTOR or its representatives will be conducting business and/or providing services to the City of Richmond (City), or will be awarded City of Richmond (City) funds to provide programs or services, the City requires the following MINIMUM insurance requirements and limits.
CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, agreement, or other order for work, services or supplies, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the CONTRACTOR, its agents, representatives, or subcontractors. Maintenance of proper insurance coverage is a material element of the contract. Failure to maintain or renew coverage or to provide evidence of renewal may be treated by the City as a material breach of contract.
CONTRACTOR agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has agreed to provide Commercial General Liability insurance, CONTRACTOR shall look solely to its insurance for recovery.
CONTRACTOR hereby grants to CITY, on behalf of any insurer providing Commercial General Liability insurance to either CONTRACTOR or CITY with respect to the services of CONSULTANT herein, a waiver of any right to subrogation which any such insurer of said CONTRACTOR may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
Original, signed certificates and original, separate policy endorsements, naming the City as an additional insured for general liability, as well as a waiver of subrogation for Workers’ Compensation insurance, shall be received and approved by the City before any work may begin. However, failure to do so shall not operate as a waiver of these insurance requirements.
City reserves the right to modify or require additional coverages for specific risk exposures depending on scope of CONTRACTORS work.
Minimum coverage is detailed below. The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy. The minimum limits stated herein shall not serve to reduce the policy limits of coverage of CONTRACTOR.
Minimum Scope of Insurance – the following forms shall be provided and coverage shall be at least as broad as the following:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (ISO Occurrence Form CG 0001)
2. Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability coverage (ISO Form CA 0001, Code 1, Any Auto)
3. Original and Separate Additional Insured Endorsements for General Liability (ISO Form CG 20 10 11/85 or its equivalent) with primary and non-contributory language.
4. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California including Employer’s Liability (for CONTRACTOR’s with employees);
5. Original and Separate Waiver of Subrogation for Workers’ Compensation Insurance.
6. Fidelity Bond/Crime Coverage – in an amount stipulated by City depending upon scope of contract.
Required Coverage Minimum Limits
Workers’ Compensation and
Employers’ Liability
Statutory limits as required by the State of California including $1 million Employers’ Liability per accident, per employee for bodily injury or disease.
If CONTRACTOR is self-insured, provide a certificate of Permission to SelfInsure, signed by the California Department of Industrial Relations and SelfInsurance. If contractor is a sole proprietor (has no employees) than contractor must sign “Contractor Release of Liability” located at:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.
General Liability
(primary and excess limits
combined)
$1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If the policy includes a general aggregate, either the general aggregate shall apply separately to this project, service or location or the minimum required aggregate limit shall be twice the per occurrence limit ($4 million aggregate).
Policy shall also include coverage for liability arising out of the use and operation of any City-owned or City-furnished equipment used or operated by the CONTRACTOR, its personnel, agents or subcontractors.
Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured per the conditions detailed below.
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond Insurance Requirements – Type 5:
Vendors, Suppliers, Small Grant Recipients & Nonprofit
Organizations
Type 5 - Page 2 of 3
Revised: September 2011
Automobile Liability (If auto is used.) $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage.
Fidelity Bond/Crime Coverage
(Applies if receiving City
funds.)
In an amount stipulated by City depending upon the scope of Contract. (Usually based upon the amount of money the Contractor is handling that could be embezzled over a period of time.)
Required Policy Conditions
Additional Insured Endorsement Applicable to General Liability Coverage.
The City of Richmond, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be named as additional insureds for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured including bodily injury, deaths and property damage or destruction arising in any respect directly or indirectly in the performance of this contract.
ISO form CG 20 10 (11/85) or its equivalent is required. The endorsement must not exclude products and completed operations coverage. If it does, then CG 20 37 (10/01) is also required.
SAMPLE ENDORSEMENT can be found at:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.
Waiver of Subrogation
Endorsement Form
Contractor’s insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for Workers’ Compensation Insurance providing coverage during the life of this contract.
SAMPLE ENDORSEMENT can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.
Primary and Noncontributory The contractor’s insurance coverage must be primary coverage as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self insurance maintained by the City is wholly separate from the insurance of the contractor and in no way relieves the contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.
A. M. Best Rating A:VII or Better. If the A.M. Best Rating falls below the required rating, CONTRACTOR must replace coverage immediately and provide notice to City.
Deductibles and Self-Insured
Retentions
Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retention as respects the City or the contractor shall procure a financial guarantee in an amount equal to the deductible or self-insured retention guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.
Contractor is responsible for satisfaction of the deductible and/or self-insured retention for each loss.
Umbrella/Excess Liability Policies
If an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy is used to meet the liability limits, coverage shall be as broad as specified for underlying coverages and cover those insured in the underlying policies.
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond Insurance Requirements – Type 5:
Vendors, Suppliers, Small Grant Recipients & Nonprofit
Organizations
Type 5 - Page 3 of 3
Revised: September 2011
Subcontractors
CONTRACTOR shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish to the City for review and approval, separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
CONTRACTOR agrees to defend and indemnify the City of Richmond for any damage resulting to it from failure of either CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor to take out or maintain the required insurance policies. The fact that insurance is obtained by CONTRACTOR, and/or CONTRACTOR’s subcontractors, will not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONTRACTOR, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this contract. Damages recoverable by CITY from CONTRACTOR or any third party will not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
Verification of Coverage
All original certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work may begin.
The City of Richmond reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies including endorsements affecting the coverage at any time.
Original insurance certificates and required policy endorsements shall be mailed or delivered to the Designated Project Manager for the City of Richmond.
Insurance certificates and endorsements may be faxed to the Designated Project Manager. However, Contractor must mail the original certificates and endorsements to Designated Project Manager once faxed.
Continuous Coverage
CONTRACTOR shall maintain the required insurance for the life of the contract. Should the CONTRACTOR cease to have insurance as required during this time, all work by the CONTRACTOR pursuant to this agreement shall cease until insurance acceptable to the City is provided. In the event that CONTRACTOR fails to comply with the City’s insurance requirements, the City may take such action as it deems necessary to protect the City’s interests. Such action may include but is not limited to termination of the contract, withholding of payments, or other actions as the City deems appropriate.
If services or the scope of work extend beyond the expiration dates of the required insurance policies initially approved by the City, CONTRACTOR must provide updated certificates and endorsements indicating that the required coverage, terms and conditions are still in place. Renewal certificates and updated endorsements shall be mailed to the Designated Project Manager.
Cancellation
CONTRACTOR shall ensure that coverage shall not be cancelled, reduced or otherwise materially changed except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice has been given to the City.
Reporting Requirements
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 or volunteers.
Consistent with Public Policy
The insuring provisions, insofar as they may be judged to be against public policy shall be void and unenforceable only to the minimum extent necessary so that the remaining terms and provisions herein may be consistent with public policy and thus enforceable.
1 City of Richmond
Community Development Department
Housing Division
Request for Qualifications
Encampment Resolution
Project Manager
Date: June 3, 2022
Closing Date and Time: June 30, 2022, by 4:00 PM PST
Electronic Submittal: BidsOnLine
Contact Person: Lina Velasco, Director of Comm. Dev.
2 The Housing Division of the Community Development Department of the City of Richmond announces a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) seeking qualified applicants for a fee-based contract to serve as the Project Manager for the Castro Encampment Resolution Project and accomplish the tasks outlined in this solicitation.
OVERVIEW
The City of Richmond is located in western Contra Costa County along the shore of the San Francisco Bay. It is the county’s second largest city (population 116,448), but has the highest number of known unsheltered people of any city in the county—more than 1,000 in 2021. The Castro Encampment Resolution Project (CERP) will be overseen by the Housing Division of the Community Development Department, which strives to develop quality neighborhoods citywide by partnering with neighborhood residents and community groups to develop new affordable housing, assist homeless and disabled individuals in obtaining housing, and expand economic and employment opportunities for low- and moderate-income residents.
CERP encompasses a two-year plan to deliver an array of supportive services to 100+ individuals currently living in a sprawling 2.66-acre vehicle encampment near Castro Street. The project aims to move all encampment residents into stable housing by June 2023. CERP’s goals and objectives will be met in stages that include: improving living conditions at the site, assessing the behavioral and health needs of residents, providing job-related training and support, and reducing barriers to stable housing. Grounded in Housing First principles and one of just 10 projects statewide that received Encampment Resolution Funding in 2022 from the California Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council, CERP is an innovative model whose successes— and challenges—will be continuously evaluated, so that the approach can be refined and replicated throughout the State.
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
This RFQ is seeking (1) one CERP Project Manager (PM) who will lead a Castro Site Care Team (SCT) comprised of a Site Manager, CORE Social Worker, CORE Outreach Specialist, Housing Navigator, and the other providers working directly with encampment residents to triage and ensure services are timely, responsive, coordinated, trauma-informed, and achieving the project’s goals and objectives to resolve the encampment through a Housing First model. The PM will also be the key liaison between CERP and city officials, reporting on progress, supervising subcontractors, and ensuring CERP is meeting evaluation metrics. Reporting to Richmond’s Housing Manager, the CERP PM will provide overall project management, help with policy development, and supervise subcontractors. The CERP PM will assist in the preparation of RFQ/Ps to solicit bids from service providers to assist individuals currently living at the Castro encampment in charting durable paths toward long-term housing and stability; address community concerns; manage and sunset the encampment by rehousing residents; and restore the site to its original trail use.
3 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The successful CERP PM will be highly skilled and empathetic, experienced with managing not only projects and people but also in working with diverse communities and the unhoused. The CERP PM is a new role and the person who fills the position will use Richmond’s Encampment Resolution Funding project description as a roadmap, while solving unforeseen problems and proposing programs shifts in response to on-the-ground realities—always prioritizing lowbarrier, person-centered Housing First approaches. The CERP PM will lead a Site Care Team, supervise and manage subcontractors, convene a Residents’ Advisory Group, engage neighborhood stakeholders, and prepare reports and updates.
A clear and careful communicator, the successful PM will be responsible for both informing city officials, Castro site residents, community members, and government officials—and for soliciting feedback from them—while also building community onsite by fostering a team approach among Castro encampment residents and service providers. Detail oriented and experienced in collecting and reporting data, the CERP PM will play a significant role in the success of CERP and demonstrate excellent judgment, appropriate flexibility, and proven accountability.
The selected candidate will be responsible for principal activities that include, but are not limited to:
● Implementing the Encampment Resolution Program, including developing systems, policies, and procedures
● Coordinating the Castro Site Care Team, including managing roles, responsibilities, and reporting
● Convening a Castro Residents’ Advisory Group, to meet weekly and provide site residents with an opportunity to learn about the project, contribute to its development, and voice concerns
● Engaging neighboring residents and business owners through active outreach ● Establishing a community advisory group that seeks public input on the grant progress, solicits feedback, and encourages information sharing
● Developing RFPs for service providers and contractors ● Creating program metrics to evaluate ongoing service delivery ● Implementing reporting systems to meet requirements for oversight, evaluation, and sharing data
● Working with outside evaluators by providing data needed to measure project success and identify replicable systems
● Providing updates and reports to Richmond City Council ● Identifying meaningful milestones and implementing appropriate timeline for project completion
● Attending meetings as needed to provide project updates to the community ● Sharing information about CERP with the public, including content for Richmond’s web site
4 Minimum Qualifications:
AA / AS degree in Human Services, Psychology, Counseling, or related field; OR High School degree or equivalent AND four years of full-time direct experience working in a professional capacity with people experiencing homelessness and facing behavioral health challenges or other medical complexities.
Preferred Qualifications:
● Education: Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university with a major in health services, counseling, psychology, social welfare, or a closely related field. ● Previous experience or training in street outreach and/or case management. ● Prior experience with documentation and billing procedures. ● Experience working in Contra Costa County and knowledge of social service providers in the area.
● Background in adolescent and/or adult mental health services and/or homeless services. ● Applicants who are bilingual in Spanish are encouraged to apply.
Essential Skills and Duties:
● Ability to gather and analyze data, prepare reports, and propose solutions to resolve systems issues.
● Prepare accurate and concise reports.
● Exercise good judgment and discretion in handling confidential matters. ● Deal tactfully, diplomatically and objectively with residents, service providers, government and elected officials, and members of the general public. ● Strong verbal and written communication skills.
● Ability to work thoughtfully and effectively with staff and clientele who are diverse in culture, language, sexual identity, gender, and other aspects. ● Ability to be supportive and provide guidance in a non-judgmental manner; possess effective crisis de-escalation skills.
● Ability to answer after-hour crisis calls.
● Dedication to creating new housing for people who experience homelessness. ● Experience managing complex projects that required attention to detail, time management skills, and an ability to stay focused and organized.
● Capacity to manage multiple projects simultaneously.
● Experience supporting unhoused individuals.
● Commitment to Cultural Competency and Equity.
● Ability to work independently.
● Excellent problem-solving skills, including flexibility when finding solutions resolving conflict.
● Commitment to involving people with lived experience in all aspects of the project. ● Experience working effectively with low-income, diverse, multi-ethnic populations. ● Excellent interpersonal and business skills, both written and verbal. ● Strong computer skills, including facility with major software tools for word processing, spreadsheets, and project scheduling.
5 LICENSE, INSURANCE, AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Candidates must possess a valid Class C California Driver’s License.
2. The Selected Respondent will be required to sign the City’s standard service provider agreement, attached for your consideration (see Exhibit A). If the candidate has any questions/concerns related to the standard form contract, they must be submitted in writing with the applicant’s response to this RFQ. Requested changes must be provided in redline. The City does not guarantee that requested changes will be granted.
3. The City requires consultants doing business with it to obtain insurance, as shown in RFQ (see Exhibit B). The required insurance certificates must comply with all requirements of the standards as shown and must be provided within fifteen (15) days of issuance of the Notice of Intent to Award and prior to the commencement of any work on the project.
4. Business Licenses: The successful Contractor and all subcontractors used in the work will be required to hold or obtain a City of Richmond business license for which the fee will not be waived.
5. Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance (SCCO): The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 N.S. (Exhibit C) prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Bidders/Proposers must submit the attached Sanctuary City Compliance Statement with their Bid or Proposal/Qualifications (Exhibit D).
6. Limited Liability Companies Disclosure Statement (LLCS): Resolution No. 86-21, approved by City Council on July 6, 2021, requires disclosure of the identities of beneficial & responsible owners of Limited Liability Corporations (LLC) (Exhibit E). Bidders/Proposers must submit the attached Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form with their Bid or Proposal (Exhibit F).
FUNDING
The Housing Division of the Community Development Department will award one contract not to exceed $235,000 (inclusive of all expenses) to the successful respondent for the anticipated period of August 1, 2022 - June 2024. The funding source is CA Encampment Resolution Funding.
This is a fee-for-service contract paid per hour and is inclusive of all expenses, including mileage. The contracted hourly rate is negotiable. The contract estimates approximately 37.5 hours per work week for the term of the contract.
6 RESPONSE TO THE RFQ
1) COVER LETTER
A cover letter describing interest in the position and relevant experience and abilities, including availability to start work.
2) RESUME
Current resume that includes work experience and qualifications (including licenses) relevant to the tasks, skills, and qualifications described in this RFQ. Resume must include respondent’s email, mailing address, and phone number.
3) PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES
Include three professional references., including Name, Address, phone number, emails, and how they know the respondent.
4) SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Describe your familiarity with cultural competence and your experience working within a race equity framework?
2. What is your experience working with unhoused populations and communities impacted by trauma?
3. What opportunities do you see for strengthening Richmond’s local response to its unhoused residents and network of service providers? Can you name any existing or potential partner organizations you might engage with for CERP?
4. What is your working knowledge of Contra Costa County’s Coordinated Entry System and Continuum of Care? How do you see the roles of Richmond and the county within that network?
5. How would you characterize the benefits and drawbacks of short-term motel vouchering, interim housing placement, and permanent supportive housing? Recognizing that resources are constrained, how would you approach the development of participant selection criteria for each option?
6. How would you approach the task of monitoring the pulse of unhoused resident needs?
7. An important goal of CERP is to identify best practices that could be replicated elsewhere in Richmond and the State. How would you approach achieving this goal?
7 8. Please share with us the most creative and innovative program you have encountered related to homelessness services. What were the results and how might you draw on those lessons to ensure the success of CERP?
ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL
The Qualifications submission process is entirely online and must be completed and submitted through BidsOnLine to be considered. Interested parties must submit a letter of interest, resume, references, and supplemental questionnaire responses, as attachments via BidsOnLine.
Attachments must be in MS Word or PDF formats.
Responses must be received no later than 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 30, 2022.
OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT QUESTIONS VIA BIDSONLINE
Submission of questions regarding this RFQ must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnLine system on the Q&A tab by Monday, June 13, 2022, at 5:00 p.m. If the City finds it necessary to issue an addendum, prospective bidders will receive email notification of addendum.
Otherwise, answers to questions received will be provided on the Q&A tab by Wednesday, June 15, 2022, by 5:00 pm.
REVIEW AND SELECTION CRITERIA
The submissions will be evaluated by a Review Panel consisting of City and Contra Costa County H3 staff to identify the most qualified respondent. If more than one Respondent is deemed to be highly qualified, the Department may require oral interviews and/or supplemental information from those Respondents before making a final selection. Contract negotiations will begin upon identification of the most qualified Respondent.
City will not discriminate against any interested firm or individual on the grounds of race, creed, color, sex, age, disability or national origin in the contract award. City reserves the right to reject any and/or all proposals at its discretion.
CITY DISCLAIMER
The City reserves the right to reject any or all the Qualifications, to waive any informality in any RFQ Response, and to select the Response that best meet the City needs. The City also reserves the right to reduce or revise elements of the scope of services, or to amend or modify the contractual requirements, or to negotiate with any qualified respondent.
No representation is made that any contract will be awarded pursuant to this RFQ. In no way shall a contract be viewed as exclusive. The City reserves the right to retain additional consultants as necessary. All costs incurred in the preparation of the qualification, in the
8 submissions of additional information and/or in any other aspect of qualification prior to the award of a written contract will be borne by the respondent. All qualifications submitted to the City in response to this RFQ will become the property of the City of Richmond and will not be returned. The “technical” portion of the RFQ will be considered public information.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A: Standard Contract
Exhibit B: Insurance Requirements
Exhibit C: Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 N.S.
Exhibit D: Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
Exhibit E: Limited Liability Corporations (LLC), Resolution No. 86-21 Exhibit F: Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
City of Richmond
Encampment Resolution Project Manager (CD-CERP-RFQ- 06302022), bidding on 06/30/2022 4:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/30/2022
PlanetBids, Inc.
July 26, 2022
Community Development
DATE: July 26, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Nicole A. Heath, Supervising Accidental Release
Prevention Engineer, Contra Costa Health Services
(CCHS)
Subject: Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance 2021 Annual Report by Contra Costa Health Services
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund related to receiving this report.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Pursuant to Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) Section
6.43.160, Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) shall
provide an annual performance review and evaluation of
the previous year’s activities related to the Richmond
Industrial Safety Ordinance. CCHS will present the 2021 Annual Report.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE a presentation by Contra Costa Health Services of the 2021 Annual Richmond Industrial Safety
Ordinance report pursuant to Richmond Municipal Code
Section 6.43.160 – Community Development (Lina
Velasco 620-6841).
DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) Section 6.43.160, Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) shall annually review its activities to implement the Richmond AGENDA
REPORT
July 26, 2022
Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO) and to evaluate the effectiveness of the chapter in achieving its purpose and goals. The RISO specifies that the annual performance evaluation shall be provided to the City Council on or before October 31st of each year.
More specifically, RMC Section 6.43.160(b)(1)-(3) specifies that the annual performance review and evaluation shall contain the following:
(1) A brief description of how Contra Costa Health Services is meeting the requirements of this chapter as follows:
(A) Effectiveness of Contra Costa Health Services' program to ensure stationary source compliance with this chapter;
(B) Effectiveness of the procedures for records management; (C) Number and type of audits and inspections conducted by Contra Costa Health Services pursuant to this chapter;
(D) Number of root cause analyses and/or incident investigations conducted by Contra Costa Health Services;
(E) Contra Costa Health Services' process for public participation; (F) Effectiveness of the public information bank, including status of economic accessibility;
(G) Effectiveness of the hazardous materials ombudsperson; and (H) Other required program elements necessary to implement and manage this chapter;
(2) A listing of all stationary sources covered by this chapter, including for each:
(A) The status of the stationary sources' safety plan and program; (B) A summary of all stationary source safety plan updates and a listing of where the safety plans are publicly available;
(C) The annual accident history report submitted by the stationary source pursuant to Section 6.43.090(e)(2) of this chapter; (D) A summary, including the status, of any root cause analyses conducted or being conducted by the stationary source and required by this chapter, including the status of implementation of recommendations; (E) A summary, including the status, of any audits, inspections, root cause analyses and/or incident investigations conducted or being conducted by Contra Costa Health Services pursuant to this chapter, including the status of implementation of recommendations; (F) Description of inherently safer systems implemented by the stationary source;
July 26, 2022
(G) Legal enforcement actions initiated by Contra Costa Health Services, including administrative, civil, and criminal actions pursuant to this chapter;
(H) Process safety indicators reported by the stationary source as required under Section 6.43.090(a)(13)(D)(i) of this chapter; (3) Total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this chapter; (4) Total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of this chapter;
(5) Total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this chapter;
(6) Comments from interested parties regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues;
(7) The impact of this chapter in improving industrial safety.
CCHS staff prepared their annual performance review and evaluation report for calendar year 2021 including facility metrics covering calendar year 2020 and County activities covering fiscal year 2020-2021. Ombudsman activities cover December 2020 through December 2021.
There are two facilities in Richmond covered by the RISO, Chevron Richmond Refinery and Chemtrade.
CCHS will be providing an overview of their annual report at the Richmond City Council meeting.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – 2021 Annual RISO Report
Attachment 2 – City of Richmond Presentation
RICHMOND INDUSTRIAL SAFETY
ORDINANCE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
REVIEW AND EVALUATION REPORT
March2022
2 Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 3 Public Participation..................................................................................................................... 3 Audits......................................................................................................................................... 3 Major ChemicalAccidentsorReleases ........................................................................................ 3 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 4 County Industrial Safety Ordinance....................................................................................................... 4 Effectiveness of Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs’ Implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.............................................................................................................................................. 6 Effectivenessof theProceduresfor RecordsManagement........................................................... 7 Number andType of Audits and Inspections Conducted............................................................... 7 Root Cause Analyses and/or Incident Investigations Conducted byCCHMP Program ............... 8 CCHMP's Process for Public Participation .................................................................. 8 Effectiveness of thePublic Information Bank ............................................................................... 8 Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson............................................................................. 8 Other Required Program Elements Necessary to Implement and Manage the Industrial Safety Ordinance .................................................................................................................................. 8 RegulatedStationarySourcesListing...................................................................................................... 9 StatusofSafetyPlansandPrograms ........................................................................................... 5 LocationsoftheRegulatedStationarySourcesSafetyPlans.......................................................... 6 Annual Accident History Report and Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as Submitted by the RegulatedStationarySources...................................................................................................... 9 Statusof theIncidentInvestigations,IncludingtheRootCauseAnalyses ConductedbytheRegulated StationarySources ....................................................................................................................10 Major ChemicalAccidentsorReleases ....................................................................................... 10 LegalEnforcementActions Initiated byContraCostaHazardous MaterialsPrograms ..................12 Penalties Assessed as a ResultofEnforcement ......................................................................................12 Total Fees, Service Charges and Other Assessments Collected Specifically for the Industrial Safety Ordinance.................................................................................................................................................. 12 TotalPersonnel andPersonnel Years Used by Hazardous MaterialsProgram to Implement the Industrial SafetyOrdinance ................................................................................................................................. 12 Comments from InterestedParties RegardingtheEffectiveness of theIndustrialSafetyOrdinance......... 12 The Impact of the Industrial Safety Ordinance on Improving Industrial Safety......................................... 12 HazardousMaterialsOmbudsmanReport.......................................................................................15—19 AttachmentB-CountyRegulatedSourcesAnnualPerformance ....................................................... 20—33 AttachmentC-RichmondRegulatedSourcesAnnualPerformance................................................... 34—57
3 Executive Summary
In 2002, the City of Richmond adopted the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO) requiring regulated facilities to implement safety programs similar to those required in Contra Costa County. A multitude of safety programs are required to be developed that aims to prevent chemical accidents that could have detrimental impacts to the surrounding communities. The RISO’s requirements are some of the most stringent in the United States, if not the world. The goal is for facilities to implement comprehensive safety programs, instill a safety culture at the workplaceand create management systems that prevent incidents that could have detrimental impacts to surrounding communities. The RISO also mandates outreach and participation from industries, agencies, elected officials, and the public.
Two facilities (one refinery and one chemical plant) within the City of Richmond are required to comply with the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO). Two major oil refineries and two chemical facilities are required to comply with ISO requirements, which mandates the same requirements from a separate municipal authority. Both ordinances are administered by Contra Costa County’s Health Hazardous Materials Programs (CCHHMP), a division of Contra Costa Health Services. Per RISO Section 6.43.160, CCHHMP annually evaluates and reports on RISO performance to the Board of Supervisors.
CCHHMP’s Accidental Release Prevention (ARP) Program engineers oversee the RISO and ISO programs and work with other agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal-OSHA), CSB and other local program agencies. This Interagency collaboration includes sharing of incident and inspection results, discussion of regulatory interpretations and joint training Public Participation
CCHHMPhas an established public outreach process and is continually looking for ways to improve it. Due to COVID 19 restrictions CCHHMPdoes not have any activities to report for 2021.
The Board of Supervisors also requested that staff provide copies of the annual report to communities through the Community Advisory Panels (CAP). This 2021 Annual Report is available on our website and will be sent to CAP representatives for distribution.
Audits*
Audits of regulated businesses are required at least once every three years to ensure that the facilities are implementing required programs. We completed no RISO and one ISO audits in 2021:
• Martinez Refining Company February 2021
*audits were conducted without on-site inspections due to COVID-19 health order precaution.
Major Chemical Accidents or Releases
There was one MCAR at a RISO-regulated facility (2/9/2021) and there were no MCAR events at ISOregulated facilities in this reporting period and there.
Conclusion
The severity of MCAR events in Contra Costa County has declined since the implementation of the RISO, with a few minor irregularities in the trend. The RISO has improved regulated facilities’ safety programs and operations.
CCHHMP has sought assistance from stakeholders, including regulated facilities, workers, and community members, to include the CSB-recommended improvements to the ordinance that the City of Richmond adoptedin 2014.
These further reduce likelihood of chemical accidents at these industrial facilities.
4 Introduction
The City of Richmond adopted the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO) after the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors passed the County Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO) due to significant accidents that occurred at oil refineries and chemical plants in the county in the 1990s. The effective date of the RISO was January 7, 2002. The ordinance applies to oil refineries and chemical plants with specified North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes that were required to submit a Risk Management Plan to the U.S. EPA and are Program Level 3 Stationary Sources as defined by the U.S. EPA Risk Management Program. The timeline below shows the requirements of the ordinance and various changes to date: Responsibilities Stationary Sources CCHMP 1/1/2002 12/31/2014 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 • Perform Root Cause Analysis after an MCAR
• Consider Inherently Safer Systems for new and existing processes, expanded (2014 amendments) to include reviewing during major changes that could result in MCAR occur
• Submit Safety Plan every 3 years
• Perform Safeguard Protection Analysis (2014 Amendments) • Include Maintenance in the Human Factors and Management of Organizational Change Programs (2013 Amendments) • Perform Security Vulnerability Assessments and Safety Culture Assessments (2013 Amendments) • Develop and Track Performance Indicators (2014 Amendments) • May perform individual Root Cause Analysis after an MCAR • Develop and Maintain Safety Plan Guidance Document
• Review submitted Safety Plans
• Audit every three years after initial ISO/RISO audits • Create Safety Culture Guidance and update as needed
2013 - 2014
RISO AMENDMENTS
2012
RISO 2ND AMENDMENTS APPROVED
2003 - 2012
ISO/RISO EXECUTION
2002 - 2003
RISO INITIAL
IMPLEMENTATION
2011
2013 RISO AMENDMENTS APPROVED
County Industrial Safety Ordinance
The Contra Costa County ISO has been in effect since January 15, 1999. The County’s Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO) mirrors the RISO, covering four stationary sources: Martinez Refining Company (MRC, formerly Shell), Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery, Air Products at MRC, and Air Liquide Rodeo.
There was one audit conducted for ISO facilities in this reporting period. CCHHMP receives annual performance updates from these 4 facilities each June.
Regulated Stationary Sources Listing
There are a total of two stationary sources covered by the RISO and four stationary sources covered by RISO:
1. Chevron Richmond Refinery
2. Chemtrade West Richmond Works (formerly General Chemical Richmond)
3. Martinez Refining Company – MRC (formerly Shell Martinez Refinery) (ISO)
4. Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery (ISO)
5. Air Liquide Rodeo Plant at P66 (ISO)
5 6. Air Products at MRC (formerly Shell Martinez Refinery) (ISO) Status of Safety Plans and Programs
Stationary sources were required to initially submit safety plans in 2003 (RISO, ISO facilities submitted in 2000) and resubmit every 3 years. Audits have also been completed on the same schedule. The most recent status of each of the regulated stationary sources is given in Tables I and II and includes:
• When the latest updated safety plans were submitted
• Status of safety plans (complete/incomplete)
• When audits were last completed
• When public meetings were held on preliminary audit findings in last 3 years A full summary of all Safety Plan Updates and audits is maintained via database at CCHHMP’s office.
Table I
Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance Stationary Source Status (Most Recent)
Table II
Industrial Safety Ordinance Stationary Source Status
(Most Recent)
Name Safety Plan (SP)
Received
Safety Plan
Complete
Audit/
Inspection
Audit
Public
Meeting
Chevron 7/22/2021 No 6/03/19 5/05/19
Chemtrade 11/26/18 Yes 6/15/20 5/05/19
NAME Safety Plan (SP)
Received
Safety Plan
Complete
Audit/
Inspection
Audit
Public
Meeting
Air Liquide
Rodeo
12/01/19 Yes 1/22/19 10/12/2017
Air Products—
MRC
10/20/20 No 10/26/20 8/06/19
Phillips 66 Rodeo
Refinery
08/06/21 Yes 1/06/20 7/15/18
8/16/18
Martinez
Refining
Company – MRC
(formerly Shell Martinez
Refinery)
8/23/19 Yes 1/25/21 8/06/19
6 Locations of the Regulated Stationary Sources Safety Plans Regulated stationary sources are required to update their safety plans at least once every three years. These plans are available for public review at the Hazardous Materials Programs office, 4585 Pacheco Blvd., Suite 100, Martinez. When CCHHMP determines that a safety plan update is complete, prior to the required 45-day public comment period, staff places the updated plan in the Contra Costa Library branch or branches closest to the regulated stationary source so it is easily accessible for public review. Table III lists each safety plan location.
Table II
Location of Safety Plans—Libraries
Regulated Stationary
Source
Location 1 Location 2 Location 3
Chevron Richmond Refinery Hazardous Materials
Programs Office
Point Richmond
Library
Main Richmond
Library
Chemtrade Hazardous Materials
Programs Office
Point Richmond
Library
Main Richmond
Library
Air Liquide Large Industries Rodeo
Hydrogen Plant
Hazardous Materials
Programs Office
Rodeo Public Library Crockett Public Library
Air Products at MRC (formerly Shell) Hazardous Materials Programs Office
Martinez Public
Library
Martinez Refining Company – MRC (formerly
Shell Martinez Refinery)
Hazardous Materials
Programs Office
Martinez Public
Library
Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery Hazardous Materials
Programs Office
Rodeo Public Library Crockett Public Library
Effectiveness of Implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs has developed policies, procedures, protocols, and questionnaires to implement the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program and the Industrial Safety Ordinance. The policies, procedures, protocols, and questionnaires for these programs are listed below:
• Audits/Inspections Policy
• Conducting the Risk
Management Plan/Safety Plan
Completeness Review Protocol
• Risk Management Plan
Completeness Review
Questionnaires
• Safety Plan Completeness
Review Questionnaires
• Conducting
Audits/Inspections Protocol
• Safe Work Practices
Questionnaires
• CalARP Program Audit
Questionnaires
• Safety Program Audit
Questionnaires
• Conducting Employee
Interviews Protocol
• Employee Interview
Questionnaires
• Field Verification Protocols
• Covered Process Modification Policy
• Public Participation Policy
• Dispute Resolution Policy
• Reclassification Policy
• CalARP Internal Performance
Audit Policy
• Conducting the Internal
Performance Audit
• CalARP Internal Audit
Performance Audit Submission
• Fee Policy
• Notification Policy
• Unannounced Inspection
Policy
•Risk Management Plan Public
Review Policy
7 Hazardous Materials Programs also developed the Contra Costa County CalARP Program Guidance Document and the Contra Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document, which was updated and reissued to regulated facilities on July 22, 2011. All policies, procedures, protocols and questionnaires are available through Hazardous Materials Programs office, and the guidance documents are available electronically at: http://cchealth.org/hazmat/calarp/ guidance-document.php and http://cchealth.org/groups/hazmat/industrial_safety_ordinance_guidance.php CCHHMP staff is working with regulated facilities and labor representatives to revise the Safety Program Guidance Document based on audit results and set expectations for compliance with the ordinance.
Effectiveness of the Procedures for Records Management
CCHHMPhas digital files for each stationary source. The files include:
1. Annual status reports
2. Audits & inspections
3. Communications
4. Completeness review
5. Emergency response
6. Incident investigation
7. Trade secret information
Digital copies of the files are stored on the Hazardous Materials Programs network and are accessible to the Accidental Release Prevention Program engineers, supervisor and the Hazardous Materials Director. Portable document format (PDF) versions of these files are also available for public viewing at the CCHHMP office. The Accidental Release Prevention Program files contain regulations, policies, information from the U.S. EPA, the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, CSB, and other information pertinent to the engineers. The risk management and safety plans are received in hard copy, scanned and kept at the CCHHMP office.
Number and Type of Audits and Inspections Conducted
Beginning in the fall of 2020, CCHHMP began its next round of required audits at each of the ISO and RISO facilities. This is the eighth round of audits since 2000. When the Health Order was issued on March 16, 2020, in response to the COVID-19, pandemic, CCHHMP adjusted the audit protocol to perform the audit remotely through file sharing records review, web conference and interviews with Subject Matter Experts and select employee and employee representatives and “live” navigation and query of selected databases. Procedure review was part of the audit but in-person procedure walkdown was not performed.
When CCHHMP ARP engineers review a safety plan, a notice of deficiencies is issued documenting any changes the stationary source must make before the plan is determined to be complete. The stationary source has 60 to 90 days to respond. The ARP engineer will work with the stationary source until the plan contains the required changes.
When the plan is complete, the ARP engineer will open a public comment period and make the plan available in a public meeting or venue as well as at the public library branch closest to the stationary source. The ARP engineer will respond to all written comments in writing and, when appropriate, use the comments in upcoming audit/inspections of the regulated stationary source.
An ARP engineer will issue a Preliminary Audit Findings report after each facility audit/inspection. The stationary source will have 90 days to respond, and the ARP engineer will review the response. The stationary source must submit an action plan to correct any uncovered ISO compliance issues, which the ARP Engineer will review. If the ARP Engineer agrees with the action plan, CCHHMP will issue the Preliminary Audit Findings for public comment and make them available in a public meeting or venue and at the public library branch closest to the stationary source.
The ARP engineer will consider comments received during the public comment period and may revise the
8 Preliminary Audit Findings report. When the public review process is complete, the ARP engineer will issue the Final Audit Findings report and respond in writing to any written public comments received. Table I lists the status of each stationary source’s safety plan, audit and inspections of their safety programs, and public meetings.
Root Cause Analyses and/or Incident Investigations Conducted by CCHHMP CCHHMP performed no root cause analyses or incident investigations in the past year. A historical listing of MCAR events starting in 1992 is available at http://cchealth.org/groups/ hazmat/accident_history.php. This list also includes major accidents that occurred prior to the adoption of the ISO/RISO.
CCHHMP’s Process for Public Participation
CCHHMP continues the practice of sharing results of safety plans and preliminary audit findings and receiving public comment about them at community events, as recommended by community members in 2005. Based on a 2012 recommendation from the Board of Supervisors, CCHHMPalso shares RISO/ISO annual reports and makes presentations to Community Advisory Panels.
Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank
The Hazardous Materials Programs section of the Contra Costa Health Services website (http://cchealth.org/hazmat) includes:
Programs
Incident Response and
Follow-up Resources
ISO and RISO HazMat Incident Response
Team Page
Links to Refinery Fenceline
Monitoring
Land Use Permitting List of recent Incidents HazMat Interagency Task Force CalARP (including P4) MCAR Accident History Chemical Safety Board Incident Search
Underground Storage Tanks Incident Search Database CCHHMP Guidance Documents Green Business Program Incident Notification Policy CalARP/ISO/RISO Regulations Unannounced Inspection
Program
72 hr. and 30- day Reports
Business Plan
Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson
The Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson is a conduit for the public to express their concerns about how CCHHMP personnel are performing their duties. Attachment A is a report from the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson on the effectiveness of the position for this reporting period.
Other Required Program Elements Necessary to Implement and Manage the ISO The CalARP Program is administered in Contra Costa County by CCHHMP. Stationary sources are required to submit risk management plan similar and in addition to RISO safety plans. An ARP engineer reviews risk management plans and performs CalARP Program audits simultaneously with ISO audits.
CCHHMP staff also perform unannounced inspections of CalARP program stationary sources that are also required to submit a risk management plan to the U.S. EPA. These inspections aim to exercise how a facility will respond to an incident, including notifying emergency response agencies and CCHHMP.
9 Annual Accident History Report and Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as Submitted by the Regulated Stationary Sources
The ISO requires stationary sources to update their accident history in their safety plans and include how they have used inherently safer processes within the last year. Tables III and IV summarize Inherently Safer Systems that have been implemented during this reporting period. Attachment B includes individual reports from stationary sources that also include the required reporting of four common process safety performance indicators.
Table III
Inherently Safer Systems Richmond ISO Facilities
(July 2020-June 2021)
Regulated
Stationary source
Inherently Safer System Implemented Design
Strategy
Approach
Chevron
Richmond Refinery
Reduced the potential of exposure by equipment
design (2 times)
Inherent Moderate
Reduced potential of exposure and hazard by
equipment design (2 times)
Active Moderate
Reduced potential of exposure by updating
procedures to reduce human error
(1 time)
Procedural Simplify
Chemtrade West
Richmond Works
Eliminated chemicals in process (1 time) Inherent Eliminate
10 Table IV
Inherently Safer Systems Contra Costa ISO Facilities
(July 2020-June 2021)
Regulated
Stationary
Source Inherently Safer System Implemented
Design
Strategy Approach
Air Liquide Large
Industries Rodeo
Hydrogen Plant
No new inherently safer systems have been implemented N/A N/A Air Products at MRC Simplified equipment design by changing equipment metallurgy.
Passive Simplify
Phillips 66 Rodeo
Refinery
Reduced hazard by changing chemicals used in
process (2 times)
Inherent Substitute
Reduced potential of exposure by changing layout or
design of equipment (5 times)
Passive Moderate
Reduced potential unit upset by changing equipment
or adding alarms (5 times)
Active Moderate
Reduced potential of exposure by removing
equipment from service (2 times)
Inherent Eliminate
Martinez Refining
Company – MRC
(formerly Shell
Martinez
Refinery)
Reduced potential of error by changing service in
procedure (10 times)
Procedural Simplify
Reduced potential of exposure by repairing
equipment or adding/replacing equipment (6 times)
Passive Moderate
Reduced potential unit upset by adding alarms (1
time)
Active Moderate
Status of the Incident Investigations, including the Root Cause Analyses Conducted by the Regulated Stationary Sources
The RISO requires regulated stationary sources to conduct an incident investigation including a root cause analysis (RCA) after each MCAR incident. MCAR incidents meet the definition of a Level 3 or Level 2 incident in the Community Warning System incident level classification system defined in the Hazardous Materials Incident Notification Policy, as determined by Contra Costa Health Services; or result in the release of a regulated substance and meet one or more of the following criteria:
• Results in one or more fatalities
• Results in at least 24 hours of hospital treatment of three or more persons • Causes on- and/or off-site property damage (including cleanup and restoration activities) initially estimated at $500,000 or more. On-site estimates shall be performed by the regulated stationary source. Off-site estimates shall be performed by appropriate agencies and compiled by Health Services • Results in a vapor cloud of flammables and/or combustibles that is more than 5,000 pounds The regulated stationary source is required to submit a report to CCHHMP30 days after the root cause analysis is complete. There was one MCAR incident that occurred within this reporting period in Contra Costa County at a RISO
11 facility. All RCA reports for MCAR incident reports are available at the CCHHMPoffice and website.
Major Chemical Accidents or Releases
CCHHMPanalyzed the number and severity of MCARs that occurred since the implementation of the ISO:
• Severity Level III — Resulted in a fatality, serious injuries or major on-site and/or off-site damage • Severity Level II — Resulted in an impact to the community, or could easily have become a Level III incident if the situation was slightly different, or it is a recurring type of incident at that facility • Severity Level I — Resulted in no or minor injuries, no or slight impact to the community, and no or minor on-site damage
These charts show MCARs from January 1999 through December 2021 for all stationary sources in Contra Costa County.
The charts include MCARs at stationary sources only, none that occurred during transportation. 0 2
4 6
8 10
12 Number of MCAR's
Year
MAJOR CHEMICAL ACCIDENTS AND
RELEASES
Severity Level III Severity Level II Severity Level I
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 19992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021 Total MCARS vs ISO/RISO MCARS
Total MCARs Total ISO MCARs Total RISO MCARS Page 2187 of 2464 12 Legal Enforcement Actions Initiated by Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs As part of the enforcement of the ISO and CalARP Program, CCHHMP staff may issue notices of deficiency on the safety and risk management plans of ISO-regulated facilities and may issue audit findings detailing what a stationary source is required to change to come into compliance with the regulations. CCHHMPhas taken no legal enforcement actions on the ISO facilities during this reporting period.
Penalties Assessed as a Result of Enforcement
No penalties have been assessed in this period for noncompliance with the ISO.
Total Fees, Service Charges and Other Assessments Collected Specifically for the RISO
Fees charged for the ISO cover the time ARP engineers use to enforce the ordinance, the position of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson, outreach material and to cover a portion of the overhead for CCHHMP.
Fees charged for administering this ordinance for fiscal year 2020–2021 total $ 575,404.
Total Personnel and Personnel Years Used by Hazardous Materials Program to Implement the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance
ARP engineers review resubmitted Safety Plans, prepare and present information for public meetings, perform audits of stationary sources for compliance with both the CalARP Program and RISO and do follow-up work after MCARs. During the current reporting period:
• Approximately2,668hourstotalofCCHHMPpersonneltimewas spentontheISOduringthe currentreporting period. This includes hours spent performing on-site audit activities, reviewing, and updating information forthe website, performing safety plan reviews, follow-up of deficiencies from audits or plan reviews, preparing materials for presentations and/or public meetings, and participating in investigations(includingRootCauseAnalysis).Thetotaldoesnotinclude Ombudspersontimespent preparing for public meetings, working with engineers on questions arising from the ISO, and answering questions from the public on the ISO.
Comments from Interested Parties Regarding the Effectiveness of the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance
No comments were received by CCHHMP regarding RISO or ISO during current reporting period.
13 The Impact of the RISO on Improving Industrial Safety The RISO is one of four programs that work together to reduce the risk of accidental release from a regulated stationary source that could impact communities in Contra Costa County. Those programs are:
• The Process Safety Management Program administered by Cal/OSHA • The federal Accidental Release Prevention Program administered by the U.S. EPA • The California Accidental Release Prevention Program administered by CCHHMP • The Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance, also administered by CCHHMP Each of the programs is very similar in requirements. On October 1, 2017, California petroleum refineries are required to comply with requirements of CalARP Program 4 and OSHA PSM for refineries. Both are based on the ISO.
CalARP Program 3 differs from the Federal Accidental Release Prevention Program in the following ways:
• The number of chemicals regulated
• The threshold quantity of these chemicals
• An external events analysis, including seismic and security and vulnerability analysis, is required • Additional information in the Risk Management Plan
• CCHHMP is required to audit and inspect stationary sources at least once every three years • The interaction required between the stationary source and CCHHMP The ISO differs from CalARP Program 3, which the chemical facilities are required to follow, in the following ways:
• Stationary sources are required to include a root cause analysis with the incident investigations for Major Chemical Accidents or Releases
• The stationary sources are required to consider inherently safer systems for existing processes, in the development and analysis of recommended action items identified in a process hazard analysis, as part of a management of change review, as part of incident investigation or root cause analysis development of recommendation, and during the design of new processes, process units and facilities. • All of the processes at the regulated stationary sources are covered • The implementation of a Human Factors Program evaluation of latent conditions in existing units, operating and maintenance procedures and in root cause analysis
• Managing changes in the organization for operations, maintenance and emergency response • A requirement that the stationary sources perform a Security and Vulnerability Analysis and test the effectiveness of the changes made as a result of the Security and Vulnerability Analysis • The stationary sources perform Safety Culture Assessments • Conduct, document and complete safeguard protection analysis for process hazard analysis to reduce catastrophic releases
• Use and report of process safety performance indicators in the annual performance review and evaluation report
Major Program difference of RISO from CalARP Program 4 and PSM for Refineries is that the Program 4 requirements include:
• Mechanical Integrity must include assessment of Damage Mechanism Review based on operating history and industry experience
• Process Hazard Analysis must include review of Damage Mechanism Review report compiled as part of process safety information
• Contractor and any subcontractors use a skilled and trained workforce pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 25536.7
• Require a Management System with specific requirements for managing and communicating recommendations from the prevention program elements
14 • Require a Stop Work procedure and an anonymous hazard reporting system The Safety Culture Assessment guidance chapter was finalized in November 2009. The Industrial Safety Ordinance Guidance Document was updated to reflect all the updates in September 2010. The Accidental Release Prevention Engineers have participated with the Center for Chemical Process Safety on developing the second edition of Inherently Safer Chemical Processes, a book that is referenced in the ordinance and with the Center for Chemical Process Safety on developing process safety metrics for leading and lagging indicators. CCHHMP also participated in developing the third edition of CCPS: Inherently Safer Chemical Processes to further clarify and promote the practice and consideration of Inherently Safer System.
The success of Contra Costa’s programs at reducing MCARs and improving facility safety practices have been frequently cited as exemplary or model policies within the regulatory community:
• Contra Costa County was recognized as an alternative model for doing process-safety inspections by the CSB in its report on a 2005 refinery accident in Texas City, TX. The board also mentioned Contra Costa in its DVD, “Anatomy of a Disaster: Explosion at BP Texas City Refinery,” as a model resource. • CSB Chair Carolyn W. Merritt also recognized Contra Costa County in testimony to the House of Representatives Committee on Education and Labor.
• Senator Barbara Boxer, during a 2007 hearing to consider John Bresland’s nomination to chair of the CSB Board, asked Mr. Bresland about the Contra Costa County program for process safety audits of refineries and chemical companies.
• In its final investigation report of a 2008 incident at the Bayer CropScience Institute in West Virginia, the CSB recommended that regulatory agencies in the area audit their chemical facilities using Contra Costa County’s process. CCHHMP staff and a representative from the local United Steelworkers Union were part of a panel when the CSB presented this report to the Kanawha Valley community. • CCHHMP was asked to give testimony at a June 2010 hearing on “Work Place Safety and Worker Protections in the Gas and Oil Industry” before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety regarding the success of Accidental Release Prevention Programs in place in Contra Costa County.
• In September 2012, CCHHMP was asked to present at the “Expert Forum on the Use of Performance-based Regulatory Models in the U.S. Oil and Gas Industry: Offshore and Onshore” in Texas City, Texas to share the regulatory experience at Contra Costa County and give testimony on how local, state and Federal agencies can work together and have an unprecedented alignment on regulations that is required for the same facilities. This meeting was spearheaded by Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration and attended by Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. EPA, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, United Steelworkers, American Petroleum Institute, academia and industry representatives.
• CCHHMP staff also testified at a June 2013 hearing on “Oversight of Federal Risk Management and Emergency Planning Programs to Prevent and Address Chemical Threats, Including the Events Leading up to the Explosions in West, TX and Geismar, LA” before the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Environment and Public Work
ATTACHMENT A
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
OMBUDSMAN REPORT
Hazardous Materials
Ombudsperson Evaluation
December 2020-
December 2021
16 1
I. INTRODUCTION
On July 15, 1997, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors authorized creation of an Ombudsman position for the County’s Hazardous Materials Programs. The first Hazardous Materials Ombudsman began work on May 1, 1998. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors adopted an Industrial Safety Ordinance on December 15, 1998.
Section 450-8.022 of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the Health Services Department to continue to employ an Ombudsman for the Hazardous Materials Programs. Section 450-8.030(B)(vii) of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requires an annual evaluation of the effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman, with the first evaluation to be completed on or before October 31, 2000.
The goals of section 450-8.022 of the Industrial Safety Ordinance for the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman are:
1. To serve as a single point of contact for people who live or work in Contra Costa County regarding environmental health concerns, and questions and complaints about the Hazardous Materials Programs.
2. To investigate concerns and complaints, facilitate their resolution, and assist people in gathering information about programs, procedures, or issues.
3. To provide technical assistance to the public.
The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman currently accomplishes these goals through the following program elements:
1. Continuing an outreach strategy so that the people who live and work in Contra Costa County can know about and utilize the program.
2. Investigating and responding to questions and complaints, and assisting people in gathering information about programs, procedures, or issues.
3. Participating in a network of environmental programs for the purpose of providing technical assistance.
This evaluation covers the period from December 2020 through December 31,2021 forthe Hazardous Materials Ombudsman program. The effectiveness of the program shall be demonstrated by showing that the activities of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman meet the goals established in the Industrial Safety Ordinance. Due to the COVID 19 pandemic, 2021 was an unusual year. For the entire year the Ombudsman worked from home and conducted all business by phone or via virtual meetings. For those reasons, many of the activities of the Ombudsman were reduced this year in relation to previous years.
II. PROGRAM ELEMENTS
1. Continuing an Outreach Strategy
This period efforts were focused on maintaining the outreach tools currently available. The web page was maintained for the program as part of Contra Costa Health Services website. This page contains information about the program, links to other related websites, and information about upcoming meetings and events.
A toll-free phone number is published in all three Contra Costa County phone books in the Government section.
17 1
2. Investigating and Responding to Questions and Complaints, and Assisting in Information Gathering During this period, the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman received 137 information requests. Over 95 percent of these requests occurred via the telephone and have been requests for information about environmental issues. Requests via e-mail are slowly increasing, mainly through referrals from Health Services main web page. Most of these requests concern problems around the home such as asbestos removal, household hazardous waste disposal, pesticide misuse, mold and lead contamination.
Information requests about environmental issues received via the telephone were generally responded to within one business day of being received. Many of the information requests were answered during the initial call. Some requests required the collection of information or written materials that often took several days to compile. Telephone requests were responded to by telephone unless written materials needed to be sent as part of the response.
In 2019 the Ombudsman began facilitating monthly debriefings of the Hazardous Materials Program Incident Response team incidents.
3. Participating in a Network of Environmental Programs for the Purpose of Providing Technical Assistance.
Technical assistance means helping the public understand the regulatory, scientific, political, and legal aspects of issues. It also means helping them understand how to effectively communicate their concerns within these different arenas. This year, the Ombudsman continued to staff a number of County programs and participate in other programs to be able to provide technical assistance to the participants and the public. All of these programs were virtual this year due to the COVID-19 pandemic. • CAER (Community Awareness and Emergency Response)—This non-profit organization addresses industrial accident prevention, response and communication. The Ombudsman participated in the Emergency Notification subcommittee of CAER.
• Hazardous Materials Commission—In 2001, the Ombudsman took over as staff for the Commission. As staff to the Commission, the Ombudsman conducts research, prepared reports, drafts letters and provides support for 3 monthly Commission meetings. This year, the Commission made recommendations to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure committee of the Board of Supervisors concerning potential policies to address the impacts of sea level rise on the storage, use and transportation of hazardous materials and hazardous waste in Contra Costa County. Conducted a survey of businesses potentially impacted directly by sea level rise, made recommendations to the County Board of Supervisors concerning the update to the County’s General Plan, made recommendations to the Board of Supervisors concerning treated wood waste management, provided input to the Hazardous Materials Program on proposed changes to the Hazardous Materials Notification Policy, sponsored two student internships for the 2020/2021 school year and appointed two new student interns for the 2021/2022 school year, and recommended candidates to the Board of Supervisors for the Environmental Engineer seat and alternate.
• Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee—During this period the Ombudsman represented
18 1
the Health Department on the County Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee. This Committee brings Department representatives and members of the public together to help implement the County’s Integrated Pest Management policy.
• Asthma Program—The Ombudsman participated in the Public Health Department’s Asthma Program as a resource on environmental health issues. The Ombudsman served on the Technical Advisory Board for RAMP, the Regional Asthma Management Prevention program, and supported the Public Health Department’s participation in the AB 617 Community Air Quality program in Richmond. The Ombudsman continued to facilitate the implementation of two grants to provide asthma trigger mitigations and energy efficiency improvements to Contra Costa Health Plan Medical clients with poorly controlled asthma. The Ombudsman partnered with staff from MCE, AEA, the Department of Conservation and Development, and Contra Costa Health Plan to implement this program. One grant was for three years and $528,000 from the Sierra Health Foundation and the other was for one year and $100,000 from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The Ombudsman also began managing a two-year EPA grant for $200,000 to provide two community health clinics, Lifelong and La Clinica, funding to provide asthma trigger education and mitigations to their clients.
• Climate Change
During this period the Ombudsman provided technical assistance to the Public Health department on a variety of climate change issues. The Ombudsman participated in a County work-group to updatethe Climate Action Plan and the General Plan.
The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman also attended workshops, presentations, meetings and trainings on a variety of environmental issues to be better able to provide technical assistance to the public. Topics included Environmental Justice, Air Quality, emergency management, energy policy and land-use planning for greenhouse gas reduction.
III. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
The Hazardous Material Ombudsman continued to report to the Public Health Director on a day-to-day basis during this period, while still handling complaints and recommendations about the Hazardous Materials Programs through the Health Services Director. The Ombudsman was also a member of Health Services Emergency Management Team (EMT), participated in EMT trainings and drills, and participated on its HEEP management team
19 1
IV. GOALS FOR THE 2022 PERIOD
In this period, the Ombudsman will provide essentially the same services to Contra Costa residents as was provided in the last period. The Ombudsman will continue respond to questions and complaints about the actions of the Hazardous Materials Programs; answer general questions that come from the public and assist them in understanding regulatory programs; staff the Hazardous Materials Commission; represent the Public Health Department in the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee; and participate in the CAER Emergency Notification committee.
The Ombudsman will continue to be part of the Health Department’s EP3RC team and the Emergency Management Team.
During this period the Ombudsman will continue to provide technical assistance to Contra Costa Health on Climate Change issues by being on the County-wide work group updating the Climate Action Plan, providing input on the BCDC regional ART project, and representing Contra Costa Health on the BARHII Built Environment Committee. The Ombudsman will continue to work with collaboratives at the local, regional and state level. The Ombudsman will continue to coordinate the implementation of the three grants that were received to conduct the Asthma Mitigation Program and anticipates receiving another grant from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District to conduct additional in-home asthma trigger assessments.
July 2020-June 2021
ATTACHMENT B
RICHMOND REGULATED
SOURCES ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE
With accident history and inherent safety implementation
46 AnnualPerformance ReviewandEvaluation
Submittal June 30,2021
*Attach additional pages as necessary
1. Name and address of Stationary Source:ChevronU.S.A.Inc.(CUSA), Richmond Refinery, 841 Chevron Way, Richmond, California 94801
2. Contact name andtelephone number(should CCHMPhave questions):Maggie Botka,: 510-242-3361
3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)):
The CUSARichmond Refinery (Refinery)initialSiteSafetyPlan(SSP)was completedin 2003, andthemostrecent revision is dated July 24, 2018.. The SSPwas prepared in accordance with the City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO), which was adopted by the Richmond City Council on January 17, 2002.
4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The SSP was updated in 2018. Thenext revision will be shared in 3Q2021.
5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMPOffice at 4585 PachecoBoulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library, Richmond Public Library at 325 Civic CenterPlazaRichmond, CA94804; andPoint Richmond Public Library at 135 Washington Ave., Richmond, CA94801.
6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There was one major chemical accidents or releases (“MCAR”) as defined in Section 450-8.014(h) between June 1, 2020 and June 1, 2021.The 2021 Site Safety Plan update will include the February 9, 2021 Wharf spill, which is the MCAR in question.
7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There was one MCAR event between June 1, 2020 and June 1, 2021, which was the February 9, 2021 Wharf spill. This event is still under investigation.
8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): The 2011 Cal APR/ISO Audit had 73 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 85 total action items were created, and 85 of those action items are complete. The final report and action plans from the 2013 Cal ARP/Richmond ISO audit were accepted by the County and Richmond Refinery in 2015. The 2013 Cal ARP/ISO audit had 163 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 177 total action items were created, and 177 of those action items are complete. The report and action plans from the 2016 Cal ARP/ Richmond ISO audit had 74 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 80 total action items were created, and 80 of those action items are complete. The ensure and consider items for the 2016 audit were finalized on November 6, 2017. The 2019 Cal ARP/ISO audit closing meeting was held on June 28th 2019.
There were 97 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 110 total action items were created, and 100 of those action items are complete.
47 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See Attachment 1 on page5.
10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B) (2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period.
11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)):
No penalties have been assessed against this facility.
12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $603,958. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was—$575,404.(NOTE: Thesefees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities).
13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 2,668 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments were received during this period regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues.
15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)):Operating safely is one of CUSA’s core values and underpins our commitment to enhancing our process safety programs. The RISO assists CUSA in improving our process safety performance. We have worked closely with CCHMP in its implementation of the RISO and its oversight of our operations, including during its periodic reviews of our operations. Consistent with this commitment, and as part of the company’s efforts to continually improve its process safety performance, CUSA will continue to confer with the CCHMP as it refines and implements these actions.
16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCAs) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases.
InadditiontotheInherentlySaferSystemsimplementedinQuestion9,CUSAhasalsomadeotherchangesto thefacilitypursuanttotheRISOandbeyondtodecreasetheseverityorlikelihoodofaccidentalreleases.Afew examples include the following:
• Changes implemented based on findings from Tier 1 and Tier 2 Incident Investigation with solutions due between June 2020 to June 2021
48 » Replace in kind bad order flow meter.
» Stress analysis to determine if/where additional supports need to be added » Upgraded to alloy 825 on bottoms piping system from carbon steel » Replaced heat exchanger shell with upgraded alloy
• Continued effort to conduct Fixed Equipment Asset Strategies (FEAS) Piping studies. These studies improve the refinery’s existing asset strategy, designed to prevent and mitigate loss of containment in piping systems and to describe the process for creating and maintaining these strategies. • SRCM (Streamlined Reliability-Centered Maintenance) continued implementing studies to set up ITPM’s (inspection, testing, and preventative maintenance tasks) refinery wide. • Continued effort to conduct Damage Mechanism Reviews (DMRs) on PSM-covered equipment and piping. • Equipment and procedural changes implemented to reduce risks identified during PHAs, including:
» Richmond has developed a comprehensive Centrifugal Pump Seal Upgrade (CPSU) program.
Centrifugal pump seal upgrades are inherently safer solutions. Seal upgrades will either reduce or eliminate the hazard associated with seal failure.
» Continued effort to conduct procedural PHAs across refinery units to identify and mitigate potential human factors that may lead to loss of containment; with a focus on emergency, startup, and shutdown procedures.
17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There was one CWS 2 activation on February 9, 2021 in response to an MCAR. The Chevron Fire Department Incident Command System took lead of the incident for oil spill recovery and clean up. There was mutual aid (Spill response taskforce) for this event. Everyone listed on the communications responded to this event. The following agencies responded: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), CDFW-OSPR, Richmond Fire Department, Contra Costa County Health Services Department, Easy Bay Regional Parks, MSRC, Oiled Wildlife Care Network (OWCN), Cal OSHA, Richmond Local Police Department, USCG.
18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: Data collected October 2020 and ready to report to work force.
19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management:
Ready to report out to work force.
20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation Previous to the one listed in 18:
• Survey method: Online survey
•Areas of improvements being addressed: Training, resource planning, staffing/succession planning •Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) Yes~ o If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Yes, action plan and metrics developed. In the process of being implemented. o If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) N/A
21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes, or if not, Why not? Yes, milestones are tracked in the Chevron Database system of record (KMS)
49 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Employees and their representatives were involved in the review of data, development of the improvement suggestions as well as the development of the final action items. Through the process of meeting with the representatives we came to agreement on what data needed an action and what actionwould solve the milestones.
23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: Not required until ~May 2024 from the RI-333. The PSCA team (with Union Representatives) shall conduct a written Interim Assessment of the implementation and effectiveness of eachPSCAcorrective actionwithin three (3) years following the completion of a PSCA report. If a corrective action is found to be ineffective, the employer shall implement changesnecessary toensureeffectiveness in atimelymannernottoexceedsix (6)months. » o Did the action plan(for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement?Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No) N/A
24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: N/A.
25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators:
Overdue inspection for piping and pressure
vessels based on total number of circuits
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Total number of circuits: 6,883*
Total number of annual planned circuit inspection: 2,196* *Anongoingprojectisre-evaluatingpiping circuitdesignationsto align eachcircuitwith the anticipateddamage mechanisms.Astheprojectprogresses,thetotalnumberofpiping circuits and subsequently, the number inspected, will change to accommodate the long-term strategy for inspections and reliability.
50 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes
seismic and LCC recommended actions
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Past due investigation recommended actions
for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
51 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2
INCIDENTS AND RATES
STARTING 2011
Refinery or
Industry Rate1
Refinery or
Industry Mean2
Tier 2 LOPC
Incident rate for
Tier 2
Refinery Rate1
Refinery Mean2
0.1553
**
**
**
0.0995 0.0947 0.0995 0.1038 0.0627 0.0761 0.0570 0.0608 **
1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 **
0.2405 0.2531 0.2380 0.2063 0.1726 0.1843 0.1728 0.1574 ** ** ** ** 3.08 2.78 2.73 2.79 2.67 **
1Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1
26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only:
I. Number of Major Incidents in 2018:0
II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair. 2020 Total Overdue Repeat
January 65 0 0
February 66 0 0
March 66 0 0
April 66 0 0
May 67 0 0
June 68 0 0
July 68 0 0
August 68 0 0
September 68 0 0
October 68 0 0
November 67 0 0
Year '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20
No. Tier 1 LOPC 4 3 0 1 2 1 1 1 0 0
Incident rate for 0.14 0.11 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 Tier 1
5 8 3 1 3 5 4 0 1
0.18 0.29 0.19 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.06 0.00 0.31
52 December 38 0 0
TOTAL 38 0 0
*the total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems.
53 Attachment 1—Question 9
Risk Reduction
Category ISS Approach Description
Inherent Moderate
Installed piping for rerouting SDA feed piping around charge solution trim coolers and routing only circulating solvent through them because feed has a history of plugging charge solution trim coolers.
Active Safeguard
EliminatedknownreliefdeficienciesandintegritythreatsontheNorth/ South Isomax relief header. Scope included removing out of service inert gas piping and installing new relief valves, inlet and downstream piping, and a new letdown station..
Active Safeguard
Implemented multiple Safety Instrumented functions such as furnace trips andreverseflowpreventiondevicestoproperlymitigatescenariosthat could result in major incidentsfrom loss of containment.
Inherent Eliminate
& Moderate
Implemented multiple centrifugal pump seal upgrades to either reduce or eliminate loss of containment resulting from seal failures.
Procedural Safeguard Updated procedures resulting from Procedural PHAs to reduce human error that could result in a major incident from a loss of containment Inherent Substitute Richmond Refinery can convert a portion of the existing anhydrous ammoniainventory intoHydrogenandNitrogenandthis will leadtoa reductioninanhydrousammoniainventorywithintherefinery.
54 AnnualPerformance ReviewandEvaluation
Submittal June 30,2021
*Attach additional pages as necessary
1. Name and address of Stationary Source:Chemtrade LogisticsWest US, LLC. 525 CastroSt.Richmond, CA 94801
2. Contactname andtelephone number(shouldCCHMPhave questions):Mike Shepherd – 510- 685-8791
3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)):
The sites Safety Plan is currently up to date after program reviews were completed in 2019.
4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The 2019 Safety Plan submittal included updates to meet current site practices including changes to the site’s investigation and corrective action plans, human factors program, process hazard analysis procedures and document control procedures.
5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source).
6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e., updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): No new accidents in the previous 12 months.
7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): N/A
8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): N/A
9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): Source has eliminated the production of petroleum as of December 2020.
55 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period.
11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)):
No penalties have been assessed against this facility.
12. Summarize the totalfees, service charges, andother assessments collected specifically forthe supportoftheISO(450-8.030(B)(4)):The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $603,958. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was - $575,404. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities).
13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 2,668 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No additional comments have been received by the source.
15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): The ISO ordinance helps the site to continually improve its implementation of new policies and changes to processes by encouraging more thorough system reviews, executing a more inclusive Human Factors program and continually promoting Inherently Safer Systems.
16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases: Site has made significant improvements to its MOC, PHA and ISS programs due to the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: No major chemical accidents or releases since last report
18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed:8/14/18
19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: 9/19/18
20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation Previous to the one listed in 18:
• Surveymethod: Anonymousmultiple choicesurveydevelopedwithcommentsavailableforeachquestion • Areas of improvements being addressed:Improve safety incentives and improve including hourly employees when conductinginvestigations
• Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) Yes
56 » If Yes, did the improvements meet the goalsand if not was the action planamended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Process is on-going. Another SCA will be conducted to measure success.
» If No, has a newaction planbeen developed to address theidentified areas of improvement?(Yes or No)
21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? Yes
22. Describe the process in place that includes employees and their representatives that will determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: A follow-up SCA will be conducted in 2022.
23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: Scheduled for October 2021 o Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No)
24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items:
No. A new action plan will be developed post safety culture assessment conducted in 2022.
25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators:
Overdue inspection for piping and pressure
vessels based on total number of circuits
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Total number of circuits: 382
Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 382
57 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes
seismic and LCC recommended actions
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Past due investigation recommended actions
for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
58 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2
INCIDENTS AND RATES
STARTING 2011
Tier 1
Refinery or
Industry Rate1
Refinery or
Industry Mean2
Tier 2 LOPC
Incident rate for
Tier 2
Refinery Rate1
Refinery Mean2
1Petroleumrefineries toreportpublicly availablerefinery rateforAPITier 1and Tier 2classification.Chemicalplantstoreportpublicly available mean onlyforACCTier 1 2Petroleum refineries to reportpublicly availablerefinery meanforAPITier 1and Tier 2 classification.Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1
26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only:
I. Number of Major Incidents in 2018:N/A
II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair. 2020 Total Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
TOTAL 0 0
*the total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems.
Year '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20
No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Incident rate for 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 0
July 2020-June 2021
ATTACHMENT C
COUNTY REGULATED
SOURCES ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE
Contra Costa Health Services Page 2210 of 2464
21 AnnualPerformance ReviewandEvaluation
Submittal June 30,2021
*Attach additional pages as necessary
1. Name and address of Stationary Source:Air LiquideRodeo Hydrogen Plant, 1391 SanPablo Ave., Rodeo, California 94572
2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Nidhi Jacob (281)917-3895
3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)):
This facility utilizes the programs and procedures identified in the ISO Safety Program/Plan. Additionally, the site is in regular communicationwiththecounty regardingupdates fortheongoingsectionE.SafetyPlanguidancedocumentreview.
4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): Several documents have been updated – Rodeo Inherently Safety Systems Policy (Dec 2020), Rodeo Latent Conditions Procedure (Dec 2020), Rodeo Process Hazard Analysis for Covered Processes (Oct 2020).
5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMPOffice at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library, (libraries closest to the stationary source).
6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases during the past 12 months.
7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases in the past 12 months.
8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases in the past 12 months.
9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): Reviewed MOCs following ISS evaluation and change methodology
10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period.
22 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)):
No penalties have been assessed against this facility.
12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $822,604. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was $575,404. (NOTE: Thesefees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities).
13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 2,668 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None
15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B) (7)): This chapter reinforces the need to maintain, follow, and continuously improve our structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our employees and the community in which we operate.
16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. LCC Procedure reviews were facilitated by RMP Corp in October 2020. The recommendations that resulted from the reviewwere incorporatedtotheprocedures and updated.PHAevaluationforthefacility scheduledforAugust 2021.
17. Summarizetheemergencyresponseactivitiesconductedatthesource(e.g.,CWSorTEN activation)inresponsetomajorchemicalaccidentsorreleases:TabletopEmergencydrillwas conducted in Dec 2020 and attendees included Rodeo-Hercules Fire dept, Air Liquide Operations and HSE specialist, CCHS, P66 Emergency Response. A drill will be conducted in 2021 as well.
18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: October-November 2019
19. Datethe resultsoftheSafety CultureAssessmentwere reportedtotheworkforce andmanagement: December2019
20. Answerthe following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation Previous to the one listed in 18:
• Survey method: 34 Question Survey with contractors & operations personnel
21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? N/A
22. Describe the process in place that includes employees and their representatives that will determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: N/A The processes include CCHS ISO & Safety Plan audits, the inclusion of LCC & ISS within the ISO program, and organizations PSM efforts internal to Air Liquide
23 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: N/A
o Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No) N/A
24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: N/A
25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators:
Overdue inspection for piping and pressure
vessels based on total number of circuits
1. Totalnumberof circuits: 187 piping circuits&36 vessels
2. Totalnumber of annual planned circuit inspection: 11 water circuits deferred till July 2023 due to Low consequence of failure based on RBI study. Deferral letter attached. 2020 Overdue Repeat
January 11 11
February 11 11
March 11 11
April 11 11
May 11 11
June 11 11
July 11 11
August 11 11
September 11 11
October 11 11
November 11 11
December 11 11
TOTAL 11 11
24 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes
seismic and LCC recommended actions
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 5 5
February 5 5
March 5 5
April 5 5
May 5 5
June 5 5
July 5 5
August 5 5
September 5 5
October 5 5
November 5 5
December 2 2
TOTAL 2 2
Past due investigation recommended actions
for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2
INCIDENTS AND RATES
STARTING 2011
Year '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20
No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Incident rate
for Tier 1
Refinery or
Industry Rate1
Refinery or
Industry Mean2
Tier 2 LOPC
Incident rate for
Tier 2
Refinery Rate1
Refinery Mean2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1 Petroleumrefineries toreportpublicly availablerefineryrateforAPITier1andTier2classification.Chemicalplantstoreportpublicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2 Petroleumrefineries toreportpublicly availablerefinerymeanforAPITier1andTier2classification.Chemicalplantstoreportpublicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1
26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only:
I. Number of Major Incidents in 2020: N/A
II.The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair:
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
*the total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems. 25 Page 2215 of 2464
26 AnnualPerformance ReviewandEvaluation
Submittal June 30,2021
*Attach additional pages as necessary
1. Name and address of Stationary Source:
Air Products—Shell Martinez Refinery, 110 Waterfront Road, Martinez, CA 94553
2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Nicola Maher, 925-723-1517
3. Summarize the status oftheStationarySource’sSafetyPlanandProgram (450-8.030(B)(2) (i)): The stationary source’s safety plan was submitted to CCHS in October 2020. CCHS audited the site in Q4 2020 and at time of submission, the report was in draft.
4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The October 2020 Safety Plan submission included routine updates to sections describing Process Safety Programs and changes required from previous audit items. There were no MCARS so no additions to that section in the Safety Plan.
5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source).
6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no MCARS in the 12 month timeframe.
7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): No Root Cause Analysis were required in the last calendar year and there are no outstanding action items from previous root cause investigations
8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): FCCHS Site Audit occurred in Q4 2020. At time of submission of this document the audit is under review and not finalized. At time of submission, there are no open recommendations from inspections, root cause analyses or incident investigations.
9. Summary of inherently safer syste. ms implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)):
TE-109 Steam Superheat Thermocouple was replaced with a model with Upgrade CG Detectors w/ Draeger Polytron 8200 DQ Model (Simplification) PSA Vote Boat Configuration Changes - Help reduce single point of failure on PSA voting scheme (Simplification)added material that reduces the risk of failure of the thermocouple in service. (Simplification).
10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period.
27 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)):
No penalties have been assessed against this facility.
12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): Thetotal CalARPProgram fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial SafetyOrdinancewas $603,958.ThetotalIndustrialSafetyOrdinance programfees for these eight facilities was— $575,404 (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities).
13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 2,668 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None received.
15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B) (7)): Air Products is committed to the safer operation of our facilities and has implemented applicable requirements outlined in theISOandCalARPregulations.BoththeISOandHumanFactorsprogramsareanintegralpartofourfiveyearOperating Hazard Review revalidations and on going management of change process. The most recent OPHR (PHA) was conducted in February2020.Therehavebeennoincidents resultinginanoffsiteimpact.TheChapterhashelpedreinforcetheneedto maintain and follow a structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our employees and the communities in which we operate. The site conducted its Safety Culture assessment in August and September 2019.
16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidentalreleases. None in 2020.
17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: None.
18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: January 2015 Surveymethod:
August 2019.
19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: Sept. 16-18,2019.
20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation previous to the one listed in 18:
• Survey method: Electronic, Anonymous Survey
• Areas of improvements being addressed: 2020 actions focus on improving Accident Prevention Techniques (APTs), safety suggestions and near miss reporting. BSPs (Monthly Safety Meetings) used as the forum for communication. Future actions will focus on Contractor safety and Maintenance Safety
• Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) – IfYes,didtheimprovementsmeetthegoalsandifnotwastheactionplanamendedtoaddresswhatis being done to meet the goals? N/A
– IfNo, has anewaction plan beendeveloped to address theidentified areas ofimprovement?(Yes or No).
21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? No – N/A (only Program 4 requires this)
22. Describe the process in place that includes employees and their representatives that will determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: The next survey results will show whether actions were effective.
Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: N/A Program 4 • Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No) N/A
23. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: N/A – Program 4
24. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators:
Overdue inspection for piping and pressure
vessels based on total number of circuits
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Total number of circuits: 89 Circuits were inspected in FY20 (660 total) Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 57 circuits are scheduled for FY21 28 Page 2218 of 2464
29 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes
seismic and LCC recommended actions
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Past due investigation recommended actions
for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
30 Year '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20
No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Incident rate
for Tier 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2
INCIDENTS AND RATES
STARTING 2011
Refinery or
Industry Rate1
Refinery or
Industry Mean2
Tier 2 LOPC
Incident rate for
Tier 2
Refinery Rate1
Refinery Mean2
1Petroleumrefineries toreportpublicly availablerefineryrateforAPITier1andTier2classification.Chemicalplantstoreportpublicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2 Petroleumrefineries toreportpublicly availablerefinerymeanforAPITier1andTier2classification.Chemicalplantstoreportpublicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1
26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only:
I. Number of Major Incidents in 2020:
II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair:
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
*the total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems. .155 .099 .094 .092 .103 .062 0.07 .053 .067 0
0 1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 .24 .253 .238 .206 .172 .179 .172 .017 0
0 0 0 0 3.08 2.78 0 0 0 0
31 AnnualPerformance ReviewandEvaluation
Submittal June 30,2021
*Attach additional pages as necessary
1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery, 1380 SanPablo Avenue, Rodeo, CA94572
2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Morgan Walker 510-245-4665
3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)):
The Safety Plan was last updated in August of 2018. The Phillips 66 Refinery was audited by the county’s Hazardous Materials Program in January 2020
4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The original Safety Plan for this facility was filed with Contra Costa Health Services on January 14, 2000. A revised plan was filed on April 7,2000 with the updated recommendations requested by CCHS.
A Human Factors Amendment was submitted on January 15, 2001. In conjunction with CCHS's required 2nd public meeting on our plan and audit findings, we submitted a complete revision of the plan to reflect the change in ownership of our facility and to update where needed. We took this opportunity to include Human Factors within the plan instead of having it as an amendment. On August 9,2002 the plan was resubmitted. Public meetings for our plans were held on June 22, 2004 in Rodeo and July 8, 2004 in Crockett. As required the Plan was fully updated in August 2005 on the 3 year cycle. The Plan was reviewed by CCHSand was revisedon July 28, 2006 with recommended changes. The Safety Plan was updated in July 2009 per the 3 year cycle.. Recommendations requested by CCHMP were incorporated into the Safety Plan on November 4, 2010. Safety Plan was updated in August 2012 and August 2015 per the 3 year cycle. Recommendations requested by CCHMP on May 22, 2017 were incorporated into the plan on August 4, 2017. An updated Safety Plan was submitted in August 2018. The plan will be updated in 2021 per the 3 year cycle.
5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMPOffice at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Crockett and Rodeo Libraries (libraries closest to the stationary source).
6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the June 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021 reporting time period.
7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)):There were no root cause analysis of major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2018–2019 time period.
32 8. Summary of the status of implementation o45f recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): There are 20 Ensure and 34 Consider recommendations from the 2020 county ISOCalARP audit. Phillips66 responded to the Administrative Draft Audit Report on December 18, 2020. There were no other audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department.
9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See ATTACHMENT 1 for the listing of Inherently Safer Systems Improvements that were implemented.
10.Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period.
11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)):
No penalties have been assessed against this facility.
12.Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): Thetotal CalARPProgram fees for theeight facilities subject tothe Industrial Safety Ordinance was $603,958. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was—$75,404.(NOTE:Thesefees includethosefor theCountyandCityof RichmondISOfacilities).
13.Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 2,668 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
14.Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments were received.
15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): In addition to the Phillips 66 Corporate Health Safety Environment Management Systems the ISO provides another tool for the improvement of process safety performance and industrial safety.
16.List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. Units that were not coveredby RMP,CalARP, and PSM arecoveredunder theISO and PHAs arescheduled and performed on all these units. Recommendations from the PHAs are implemented at an accelerated rate. A list of inherently safer system improvements, required by the ISO for PHArecommendations and projects, are listed in ATTACHMENT1.
17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases:Therewere nomajor chemicalaccidentsor releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2018–2019 time period.
33 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: 4/15/2016 Survey method: written survey
19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce: 6/24/16 management: 4/15/16
20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation for no. 18:
– SURVEY METHOD: written survey
– Areas of improvements being addressed:
» No areas were identified as scoring significantly below normal values. » Improvements require too many reviews/approvals.
» Employees are reluctant to reveal problems or errors. » Having enough qualified people to do the work in their area. – Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement? YES » If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not, was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Yes, Progress was made and improvements observed in the subsequent SCA. Improvement opportunities were identified in the most recent SCA and recommendations identified.
» If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No)
21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? YES. Specific improvements were identified by a management & union teamandimplemented.
22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: A midcycle team review was done to evaluate the effects of the actions on the safety culture. The evaluation team included management and union representatives per policy.
23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: November 1, 2019 » Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No) ()N/A
24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives used to determine whether the action items from the SCA and the mid-cycle progress effectively changed the expected culture items: By policy, our process includes management and union representatives to review the results and develop modified recommendations as appropriate. Each action was discussed and compared to site performance indicators to determine if improvement was made. The Mid-Cycle Review was conducted on November 1, 2019 by the Process Safety Director, USW PSM Representative, and Senior H&S Consultant.
34 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators:
Overdue inspection for piping and pressure
vessels based on total number of circuits
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 2 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Total number of circuits: 29,176. Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 2,413 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes
seismic and LCC recommended actions
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 2 2
February 1 1
March 3 1
April 1 1
May 1 1
June 1 1
July 1 1
August 1 1
September 2 1
October 1 1
November 1 1
December 0 0
TOTAL 5 2
35 Year
No. Tier 1 LOPC
Incident rate
for Tier 1
'11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20
Past due investigation recommended actions
for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2
INCIDENTS AND RATES
STARTING 2011
Refinery or
Industry Rate1
Refinery or
Industry Mean2
Tier 2 LOPC
Incident rate for
Tier 2
Refinery Rate1
Refinery Mean2
1Petroleumrefineries toreportpublicly availablerefineryrateforAPITier1andTier2classification.Chemicalplantstoreportpublicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1
2 Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1
* Tier 1 & 2 Refinery Rate and Mean data was not available at the time of submittal. 2 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
0.17 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.15 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06
* 1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.00 1.11 0.92 1.03 0.84
5 3 0 1 2 2 2 0 2 2
0.43 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.21 0.17 0.22 0.00 0.16 0.21
* 0.24 0.25 0.23 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.13
* * * * 3.08 2.75 2.75 2.79 2.67 1.80
36 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only:
I. Number of Major Incidents in 2018:NONE
II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair:
2020 Total* Overdue Repeat
January 30 0 0
February 31 0 0
March 31 0 0
April 31 0 0
May 31 0 0
June 34 0 0
July 35 0 0
August 34 0 0
September 35 0 0
October 35 0 0
November 32 0 0
December 32 0 0
TOTAL 32 0 0
* Tier 1 & 2 Refinery Rate and Mean data was not available at the time of submittal
37 Attachment 1: June 2020—June 2021 ISS improvements
Reference Approach ISS Category MOC Description
M20212637-001 Substitute Inherent Introduced a more inherently safe and renewable feedstock to Unit 250 called RB Soybean Feed
M20201934-001 Moderate Active Installed germicidal UVC light to kill virus COVID-19 in the Central Control Room air conditioning unit M2021456-001 Simplify Procedural Converted existing Crude/Coker Complex Operating Procedures to Digital Versions M20205613-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded gasket material to increase the reliability of E-809 as part of the Refinery Wide Heat Exchanger Upgrading Gasket to Kammpro Style effort
M20202207-001 Eliminate Inherent Permanently removed Tank TK-674 from service M20201741-001 Moderate Procedural
Active
Implemented new alarms to protect against the potential of chloride stress corrosion cracking for 300 series stainless steel sour water piping system as a result of a Damage Mechanism Review M20196214-002 Moderate Passive Installed dual mechanical pump seals on the 236:G- 801 Regenerator Reflux Pump M20195796-001 Substitute Inherent Substituted the liquid boiler feed water treatment chemical, Nalco BT-3811, for Nalco BT-3411 which is more stable and will decrease the plugging in the injection lines M20194263-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded Unit 250 Diglycolamine (DGA) sample station to a closed-loop system M20194092-001 Moderate Passive Installed three closed-loop foul water sample stations and associated piping at Unit 267 M20193185-002 Moderate Active Installed pump seal integrity alarms on Unit 200 Crude/Coker pumps M20162681-001 Eliminate Inherent Disconnected and plugged a 150# steam-to-process connection line to prevent blackflow M20203088-001 Moderate Active Upgraded 6" check valve on discharge of G-3 Richmond Shipping Pump M20201360-010 Moderate Active Installed a check valve, bleed valves, and spectacle blind on 150# steam utility cross connection to prevent backflow
M20201925-001 Moderate Active Installed a valve and other piping on top of Tank 104 roof hatch to allow for safer degassing of the vapor space
M20201453-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy of antifoulant piping from carbon steel to stainless steel for better chemical compatibility and less corrosion
38 AnnualPerformance ReviewandEvaluation
Submittal June 30,2021
*Attach additional pages as necessary
1. Name and address of StationarySource:MartinezRefinery Company,3485PachecoBlvd.,Martinez,CA94553
2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions):Ken Axe: 925-313-5371
3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)):
The current revision of the Safety Plan was submitted in August 2019. The Safety Program elements are generally consistent with the descriptions in the Safety Plan. There will be revisions to the Safety Plan as a result of the ISO/CalARP audit conducted in February/March 2021.
4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): In addition to the revisions mentioned above, pending updates to the Safety Plan will address change ofrefinery ownership (sale of Refinery from Shell toPBFEnergy), and sale of two hydrogen plants (HP-1 and HP-2)to AirProducts. During the transition of hydrogen plant ownership, Martinez Refining Company personnel continue to operate the plants as described in the currentSafetyPlan.AirProducts is currently maintaining the hydrogen plants. The operations transition is anticipated in September 2021.
5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library 740 Court Street Martinez.
6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)):There have been no MCARs at the Martinez Refinery in the 12-month period beginning July 1, 2020.
7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There have been no RCAs for MCARs or potential MCARs in the 12-month period beginning July 1, 2020.
8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)):Ofthe49recommendations fromtheauditconductedbyCCHSin2018,all49havebeen completed.Proposedremediesandduedates foractions stemmingfromtheFebruary/March2021auditwillbe submitted to CCHS by July 29,2021.
9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)):SeeAttachment 1
10.Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during the period.
39 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)):
No penalties have been assessed against this facility.
12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): Thetotal CalARPProgram fees for theeight facilities subject tothe Industrial Safety Ordinance was $603,958. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was—$575,404.(NOTE:Thesefeesincludethosefor theCountyandCityof RichmondISOfacilities).
13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 2,668 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None received
15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): MRC has integrated requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance into our Process Safety Management System; in the context of our Process Safety Management System, the ISO requirements drive continual improvement in our HSE performance.
16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. All process units arenow covered under CalARP Program 4. Examples of changes made to thestationary source during the reporting year are summarized in Attachment 1 (see question 9).
17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents orreleases: Therewere no MCARs at the stationary source during the reportingyear.
18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: 3/31/2019
19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: 4/10-22/2019
20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation for no. 18:
– Survey method: Anonymous computer based and paper based survey – Areas of improvements being addressed: Incident reporting and learnings from incidents and rewards and recognition
40 – Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) YES » If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Goals for working off backlog of investigations, timely investigation completion, and timely communication of results have been achieved. » If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? Yes
21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? New milestones and metrics being established as a result of mid-cycle assessment.
22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Assessment team includes employee representatives.
23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: February 9, 2021 » Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No) Yes
24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Assessment team included employee representatives
41 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators:
Overdue inspection for piping and pressure
vessels based on total number of circuits
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
Total number of circuits: 11,930
Totalnumber of annualplanned circuit inspections: 1,182 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes
seismic and LCC recommended actions
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 1 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 1 0
September 1 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
TOTAL 3
42 Year
No. Tier 1 LOPC
Incident rate
for Tier 1
'11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20
Past due investigation recommended actions
for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents
2020 Overdue Repeat
January 0 0
February 0 0
March 0 0
April 0 0
May 0 0
June 0 0
July 0 0
August 0 0
September 0 0
October 0 0
November 0 0
December 0 0
TOTAL 0 0
API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2
INCIDENTS AND RATES
STARTING 2011
Refinery or
Industry Rate1
Refinery or
Industry Mean2
Tier 2 LOPC
Incident rate for
Tier 2
Refinery Rate1
Refinery Mean2
1 Petroleum refineries to report publicly availablerefinery rate for APITier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2 Petroleumrefineriestoreportpublicly availablerefinerymeanforAPITier1andTier2classification.Chemicalplantstoreportpublicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1
1 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 2 0
0.07 0.07 0.08 0.07 0 0.11 0.06 0.12 0
0.15 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06
* 1.49 1.30 1.41 1.53 1.00 1.11 0.92 1.03 0.84
2 0 5 2 5 1 2 2 5 1
0.14 0 0.41 0.11 0.42 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.31 0.11
* 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.13
* * * 3.59 3.07 2.75 2.75 2.79 2.67 1.80
43 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only:
I. Number of Major Incidents in 2020: 0
II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair:
2020 Total Overdue Repeat
January 132 0 0
February 130 0 0
March 130 0 0
April 129 0 0
May 130 0 0
June 132 0 0
July 135 0 0
August 136 0 0
September 136 0 0
October 139 0 0
November 141 0 0
December 142 0 0
44 Attachment 1
Table 1: Summary of Implemented ISS
Approach MOC Description
Procedural Upgradedexisting6”checkvalveinCRU,upstreamofthehydrogeninjectionpoint,toaClass1checkvalve Procedural Upgraded 4ES007 SIF Trip of J-240 on high level in V-1320/1321/1322 to SIL1 Procedural/
Simplify
Lowered CGDP V-14229 Critical High-Level alarm setpoint on 41LC23 to provide required operator response time to the alarm
Procedural/
Simplify
CarSeal Open (CSO)inlet and outlet block valves on local pressure controllers:PIC-2505,PIC-2520, PIC-2532,PIC-2588andPIC-2729andaddedCSOvalvestoPentaneStoragePSV/CarSealChecklist.
Procedural
Established and implemented routine testing/inspection/preventive maintenance for identified C5 Storage local control loops (PIC-2505, PIC-2520, PIC-2532, PIC-2588 and PIC-2729) in order to ensure sufficient availability to qualify for IPL credit
Passive/Moderate Replaced 3L4 PSV with a liquid certified PSV in order to accommodate liquid relief Procedural/
Simplify
Added 6" block valve on shell side outlet of E-551 to SRHT PSV/Car Seal Checklist Procedural/Simplify Added 8" block valve on inlet of V-15759 (from E-15760) to car seal/PSV checklist in SRHT and Car Seal Open valve in field.
Procedural/Simplify Added block valve on TB-121 (for J-76) discharge to SRHT car seal/PSV checklist and Car Seal Open valve in field
Procedural/Simplify Add 1 block valve on TB-139 (for J-76 lube oil pump, P-2350) discharge to SRHT car seal/PSV checklist and Car Seal Open valve in field.
Procedural/
Simplify
Added valves to ensure H2 purgeflows toPSV H194 inlet/outlet and HV166 inlet(on topof HPSV-414) and PSV M60 inlet(on top of LPSV-416)to car seal/PSVchecklist and CarSeal Open valve in field.
Active/Moderate Added a high temperature ESP alarm on 3TC243 Passive/Moderate Repaired damaged concrete at base of V-651 (Seismic) Passive/Moderate Repair concrete cracking on E-1424 north pedestal, west side (Seismic) Passive/Moderate Repaired cracks and spalling on E-542A/B concrete pipe supports that also support walkway for J-80 (Seismic)
Passive/Moderate Repaired E-548 spalling at ~1 ft above grade on west side of north support (Seismic) Passive/Moderate Installed a new relief valve on the 300 psig condensate line downstream of PCV-110 with relief to the process sewer
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
A Division of Contra Costa Health Services
Richmond Industrial Safety
Ordinance Annual Report
Nicole Heath
Supervising Accidental Release
Prevention Engineer
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 925-655-3240
https://cchealth.org/hazmat/calarp/
July 26, 2022 Page 2236 of 2464
A Clean, healthy and safe
environment
Our mission is to protect human health and
the environment by promoting pollution
prevention, increasing process safety
knowledge and environmental awareness,
responding to incidents and implementing
consistent regulatory compliance and
enforcement programs.
COUNTY
HAZMAT
PROGRAMS
Hazardous Materials Business Plans
Hazardous Waste Generators
Underground Storage Tanks
Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act
CalARP Program
Green Business Plans
Storm Water Program
HazMat Response Team
Unannounced Inspection Program
Integrated Pest Management
County’s Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO)
ACTIVITIES
• Perform Audits
• Develop Guidance
• Review Documents
• Public Outreach
Photo by Jamie Templeton on Unsplash
STAFFING 7
450
1-
7 1-
5 3
REGULATIONS
Incidents
1989 Chevron
Isomax Unit
Fire
1993 General
Chemical
Richmond Oleum
Release
1992 Rhone
Poulenc Fire
1996 Shell
Cat Gas Fire
1994 Unocal
Catacarb®
Release
1999
Chevron
Isomax Unit
Fire
1999 Tosco
Crude Unit
Fire
1997 Tosco
Hydrocracker
Fire
2012
Chevron
Crude Unit
Fire
•Performance Based
• Regulated Substance
• Above Threshold Quantity
• 77 vs. 276 Toxic Chemicals
Risk Management Program
PROGRAM 3
Process Safety Information
Process Hazard Analysis
Operating Procedures
Training
Mechanical Integrity
Management of Change
Pre-Startup Safety
Review
Compliance Audits
Submit of a Risk Management
Plan
Off-Site Consequence Analysis
Emergency Response
Employee Participation
Contractors
Hot Work Permits
Incident Investigation
INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE (ISO)
Human Factors
Management of Organizational Change
Inherently Safer Design
Root Cause Analysis Investigations
Safeguard Protection Analysis
Safety Culture Assessment
Common Process Safety Metrics (Indicators)
Submittal of a Safety Plan
(All Program 3 Requirements)
Human Factors
Management of Organizational Change
Hierarchy of Hazard Control / Inherently Safer Design
Root Cause Analysis Investigations
Safeguard Protection Analysis
Safety Culture Assessment
Management System
PROGRAM 4
Damage Mechanisms
(All Program 3 Requirements)
Map of ISO Facilities in Contra Costa
COUNTY
HAZMAT
REGULATIONS
ISO
ANNUAL
REPORT
Presentation: Industrial Safety
Ordinance (ISO) report brief
Contains all of the information required by ISO
Major Chemical Accidents or Releases
Annual report –Metrics
Performance Indicators
API incident rates
Audits Performed
• Martinez Refining Company Feb 2021
Major Chemical Accidents or Releases
(1999 – now)
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 Number of MCAR's
Year
MAJOR CHEMICAL ACCIDENTS AND RELEASES
Severity Level III Severity Level II Severity Level I
County and Richmond ISO
MCARs
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total MCARS vs ISO/RISO MCARS
Total MCARs Total ISO MCARs Total RISO MCARS
Performance Indicators
Overdue
Inspections
Past due
PHA Rec.
Past due II
Rec.
Air Liquide Large Industries 11 2 0
Air Products Shell 0 0 0
Chemtrade Richmond* 0 0 0
Chevron* 0 0 0
Martinez Refining Company 0 3 0
Phillip-66 Refinery 0 5 0
2020
* Indicates the facility is located in Richmond.
Performance Indicators
Tier 1 Loss Of Primary Containment
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Refinery mean - 1.49 1.3 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 .84 Air Liquide Large
Industries 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Air Products Shell 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chemtrade Richmond* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chevron* 4 3 0 1 2 1 1 1 0 0
Martinez Refining
Company 1 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 2 0
Phillip-66 Refinery 2 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
* Indicates the facility is located in Richmond.
Performance Indicators
Tier 2 Loss Of Primary Containment
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Refinery mean 3.08 2.78 2.73 2.79 2.67 1.8
Air Liquide Large
Industries 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Air Products Shell 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chemtrade Richmond* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Chevron* 5 8 6 3 1 3 5 4 0 1
Martinez Refining
Company 2 0 5 2 5 1 2 2 5 1
Phillip-66 Refinery 5 3 0 1 2 2 2 0 2 2
* Indicates the facility is located in Richmond.
Chevron Richmond Refinery
2019 Audit
• This was the 7th audit for this facility
• There was a total of 45 Ensure Action Items
• Areas for Improvement:
Many programs need to have gaps addressed to meet new regulatory standards
Employee participation
Incident Investigation
PSSR
Fatigue management needs to be evaluated to address
increases in employee working hours
• Areas of Note:
The 2022 audit was completed in June 2022 results will be shared in next years report out.
Nicole A. Heath
Supervising Accidental Release
Prevention Engineer
925-655-3240
[email protected]
https://cchealth.org/hazmat/calarp/
July 26, 2022
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA To report a hazmat incident call please call 925-655-3200.
July 26, 2022
Public Works
DATE: July 26, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM: Joe Leach, Director of Public Works
Samantha Carr, Environmental Manager
SUBJECT: Receive a Quarterly Update from PG&E
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
September 28, 2021, April 19, 2022
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Over the last several months, Richmond residents have
experienced numerous power outages. On September
28, 2021, PG&E gave a presentation regarding the power
outages in Richmond. It has been requested for PG&E to
give quarterly updates to City Council.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE a quarterly presentation from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) – Public Works/City Manager’s Office,
Economic Development (Joe Leach/Samantha Carr 510-
620-5407).
DISCUSSION:
Background
On September 28, 2021, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) gave a presentation regarding the power outages in Richmond. It has been requested for PG&E to give an update to City Council. Moving forward, PG&E will be providing quarterly updates to City Council.
AGENDA
REPORT
July 26, 2022
City Council may provide suggestions on information or data they’d like to see presented at the next quarterly update from PG&E.
On April 19, 2022, PG&E gave a quarterly update presentation including background and information on the recent Richmond blackouts as well as resources for residents.
All resources noted below are posted on, www.richmondenvironment.org.
Preparation:
Update Contact Information - Receive outage and restoration notifications. Prepare an emergency plan including portable backup power, hotel accommodations and accessible transportation at disabilitydisasteraccess.org. Backup Power Meter Support - PG&E has developed a new meter program to help our customers safely power their homes during emergency outages.
Currently the offer is available for qualified PG&E customers who have been issued a rebate for a qualified backup generator.
Medical Baseline Program - Apply to receive energy savings and extra outreach. Explore Backup Power Options - Determine the right solution and generator rebate qualifications. Options include generator rebates for customers who rely on well water and portable batteries for Medical Baseline customers in high fire risk areas.
Self-identify for Vulnerable Customer Status - The program’s goal is to help address the needs of customers whose life or health would be at risk should their electric or gas service be disconnected. To self-certify for Vulnerable Customer status, you must download, print, and submit an application that is valid after acceptance by PG&E.
During a Power Outage:
PG&E Report It Safety Mobile App - The new “PG&E Report It” safety app allows customers to submit photos of non-emergency potential safety concerns with our electric system. Customers will also receive notifications when their concern is being reviewed and when it has been resolved.
Report or View Outages Online - View PG&E’s live map for electric outages, restoration times, or report an outage online.
Find Community Resource Centers during PSPS Events - Resources to find locations to charge devices, charge Electric Vehicle, and get basic supplies during a PSPS events.
Resources for Accessibility, Aging, Financial, and Language Needs During PSPS Events - Includes information on in-language support and replacing lost food at your local food bank during and up to three days after a PSPS outage.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
July 19, 2022
City Council
DATE: July 19, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Claudia Jimenez
Subject: Recommendation from the Community Police Review Commission (CPRC)
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact related to this item.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
No previous action by the City Council.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The CPRC is concerned about retaining and recruiting
Richmond Police Officers.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE a report from the Community Police Review Commission Council Liaison on recommendations to the
City Council – Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (510-
620-6565).
DISCUSSION:
The Community Police Review Commission (CPRC) is concerned about the number of police officers that are retiring and the lack of applications from potential candidates. At the July 6, 2022, meeting, the CPRC approved a motion by a vote of 4-2 to recommend AGENDA
REPORT
July 19, 2022
that City Council work together with the Richmond Police Association, Richmond Police Management Association, and the Richmond Fire Department to come to an agreement that benefits the broader community and makes sure it serves the community as a whole.
The motion was made by Chair Yenny Garcia and seconded by Vice-Chair Dow Tunis.
Motioned by Chair Yenny Garcia Voted Yes
Seconded by Vice-Chair Dow Tunis Voted Yes
Commissioner Diego Garcia Voted No
Commissioner Carol Hegstrom Voted No
Commissioner Andre Jackson Abstained
Commissioner Randy Joseph Voted Yes
Commissioners Steven Lacy Voted Yes
Commissioner Oscar Garcia Absent
Councilmember Claudia Jimenez will provide a report to the City Council for consideration and discussion.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
None
July 26, 2022
Finance Department
DATE: July 26, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM: Shasa Curl, City Manager
Delmy Cuellar, Director of Finance
Antonio Banuelos, Accounting Manager
Subject: 2005 Pension Bond Refinancing/Restructuring, approving bond sale documents and revised fees for underwriter
and consultants.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Potential increase in annual debt service required because of need to fund termination payment on an
interest rate swap. Potential future interim General Fund budget savings because of term extension.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
April 6, 2021; October 5, 2021; December 7, 2021, June
7th, 2022, June 21, 2022, July 19, 2022
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
On June 21st, the City Council approved a resolution
authorizing the issuance of refunding bonds for the 2005 POBs. The City Council is being asked to approve a final resolution (“Resolution”) confirming its authorization of the bonds and approving certain sale documents and
offering documents related to the 2022 Refunding Bonds
and providing for the defeasance of the 1999 POBS
RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT a resolution authorizing the sale of the taxable pension refunding bonds, and approving an official
statement for such bonds, approving the execution of the bond purchase agreement, a continuing disclosure
certificate, and escrow agreements, and approving and
directing related matters in connection therewith and
approving increased fees for underwriter, bond counsel
disclosure counsel, and other city consultants as
AGENDA
REPORT
July 26, 2022
provided in the Staff Report.– Finance Department
(Delmy Cuellar 510-620-6790).
DISCUSSION:
Background
The City currently has the following outstanding two series of 2005 POBs: (i) $17.899 million principal amount series maturing in 2023 (the "B-1 Bonds"), and (ii) $127.868 million principal amount series maturing in 2034 (the "B-2 Bonds" and, together with the B-1 Bonds (the “2005 POBs”). The City is strongly recommended to refinance the B-1 and B-2 Bonds given existing outstanding challenges. The City is party to two interest rate swaps (the “Swaps”) associated with the 2005 POBs. However, the swap for the B2 Bonds (the “B-2 Swap”) is subject to mandatory early termination on August 1, 2023, before which time the City will need to either (a) arrange financing to pay the market value of the B-2 Swap upon such early termination or (b) amend the B-2 Swap to remove, reduce, or delay the mandatory early termination.
At its meeting of June 21, 2022, the City Council adopted a resolution (the “Resolution Authorizing Issuance of Series 2022 Bonds”) approving the issuance of the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds in one or more series for the purpose refunding all or a portion of the outstanding 2005 POBs, paying the termination payment associated with the Swaps, and paying costs of issuance, subject to certain conditions. The Resolution Authorizing Issuance of Series 2022 Bonds also, among other items, approved a form of First Supplemental Indenture for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds and directed staff to return to the City Council for final approval of the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds and related documents. The City Council is now asked to authorize the sale of the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds and approve other related documents. As structured, the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds will (1) pay the termination fee and eliminate both the B-2 Swap and another outstanding swap on the 2005 B-1 Bonds, as well as (2) refund both the B1 Bonds and the B-2 Bonds Approval of Resolution
The proposed resolution (the “Resolution”) confirms the City Council’s actions in the Resolution Authorizing Issuance of Series 2022 Bonds and approves the following documents (1) Preliminary Official Statement, (2) Bond Purchase Agreement and (3) Escrow Agreements to refund the 2005 POBs and defease the 1999 Bonds. Note that the form of First Supplemental Indenture for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds was approved by the Council on June 21, 2022, as described above. The proposed resolution also, as noted above, allows for a term extension on the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds through 2044 and a maximum underwriter's discount of .40%. The Authorizing Resolution also specifies that the Mayor, Assistant City Manager, City Manager or Finance Director, each acting alone, (“Authorized Officers”) are authorized
July 26, 2022
to execute legal documents. The Authorizing Resolution also provides for the transfer of up to $2.5 million in City cash to defease the 1999 Taxable Limited Obligation Pension Bonds ("1999 Bonds"). These provisions are discussed in more detail below.
Authorization of Term Extension for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds The City's finance team has made a preliminary determination that extending the amortization period for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds beyond the current final maturity for the B-2 Bonds of August 1, 2034, is advisable. In making the recommendation, the City’s finance team took a holistic look at all of the City’s outstanding pension debt including normal payments, unfunded liability (currently estimated at $360 Million and the 2005 POBs. The City's finance team recommends an extension to August 1, 2044. Such an extension can reduce General Fund expenses needed to pay CalPERS costs from regular General Fund revenues by an average of approximately $7 million per year through 2034. Because of the term extension, the City would be paying debt service on the proposed refinancing bonds through 2044 instead of 2034. Therefore, there would be debt service that would be paid from general fund revenues following 2034 which would not be there with no term extension. However, the term extension would lower the huge hump of required debt service prior to 2034 and more manageably distribute the obligation for the City. The proposed Authorizing Resolution allows for an extension of the amortization period of the 2022 Refunding Bonds through 2044. Other alternatives which were looked at were keeping it at the same term or extending the term to 2054. The finance team believes 2044 is an appropriate term there is a good balance between cash flow savings to the General Fund through 2034 and the extra interest payments after 2034 to provide lesser burden on the general fund now. The refunding of the bonds does not deal with the other $360 Million in unfunded liability or any future unfunded liability. The City will have to deal with this in the future. One recent item approved by the City Council was the 115 Pension Trust and staff will be working on plans to reduce liability overall.
Underwriter's Discount
The proposed authorizing resolution sets a not to exceed amount for the fee paid to the bond underwriters of 0.4% of the principal amount of the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds.
The underwriting firms retained by the City for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds are Loop Capital and Hilltop Securities. It is notable that this amount is an increase from the original amount authorized for the underwriters. Please review the section entitled increased fees below.
Cash defeasance of the 1999 Bonds
The proposed resolution provides for the transfer of up to $2.5 million to pay off the 1999 Pension Obligation Bonds. This is necessary to eliminate the complex and cumbersome covenants and legally mandated cash flow provisions for both the 1999 Bonds and the 2005 B-1 Bonds and 2005 B-2 Bonds. The proposed structure of the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds will result in full reimbursement of this amount to the City within a combination of the FY 2023 and FY 2024 budget cycle from cash flow savings to both the General Fund and the pension tax override. This is a cost to the City to
July 26, 2022
prepay the 1999 Bonds prior to their maturity but it will strengthen the security on the 2022 Bonds so they will not have to be subordinate to the 1999 Bonds in any respect.
Note that while a loan of $2.5 million is authorized, the outstanding par value of the 1999 Bonds is $2.1 million. The difference is the estimated cost of fully funding an escrow to pay principal and interest on the 1999 Bonds through their maturity date of August 1, 2029.
Approval of Preliminary Official Statement
In order to effect a public sale of the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds to the underwriters, the City is required under federal securities laws and regulations to prepare a preliminary official statement (the “Preliminary Official Statement”) disclosing material information about the City and the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds. The proposed resolution approves the form of Preliminary Official Statement presented to this meeting together with such changes, insertions and omissions as the Authorized Officer, acting alone, may, upon consultation with Best Best & Krieger LLP, the City’s disclosure counsel, require or approve.
The attached Preliminary Official Statement has been reviewed and approved for transmittal to the City Council by the City’s financing team. The distribution of the Preliminary Official Statement by the City is subject to federal securities laws, including the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These laws require the Preliminary Official Statement to include all facts that would be material to an investor in the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds. Material information is information that there is a substantial likelihood would have actual significance in the deliberations of the reasonable investor when deciding whether to buy or sell the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds. If the City Council concludes that the Preliminary Official Statement includes all facts that would be material to an investor in the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds, it must adopt a resolution that authorizes staff to execute a certificate to the effect that the Preliminary Official Statement has been “deemed final.” The Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), the agency with regulatory authority over the City’s compliance with the federal securities laws, has issued guidance as to the duties of the City Council with respect to its approval of the Preliminary Official Statement. In it’s “Report of Investigation in the Matter of County of Orange, California as it Relates to the Conduct of the Members of the Board of Supervisors” (Release No. 36761 / January 24, 1996) (the “Release”), the SEC indicated that, if a member of the City Council has knowledge of any facts or circumstances that an investor would want to know about prior to investing in the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds, whether relating to their repayment, tax-exempt status, undisclosed conflicts of interest with interested parties, or otherwise, he or she should endeavor to discover whether such facts are adequately disclosed in the Preliminary Official Statement. In the Release, the SEC indicated that the steps that a member of the City Council could take include becoming familiar with the Preliminary Official Statement and questioning staff and consultants about the disclosure of such facts.
July 26, 2022
The entire document should be reviewed by the Council, however, set forth below are sections of the Preliminary Official Statement of particular importance.
Section 1. Plan of Financing. This section discusses the payment of the swaps together with the refunding of the 2005 Bonds.
Section 2. Security and Sources of Repayment for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds.
This section summarizes the sources of repayment for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds which includes a discussion of the Pension Tax Over-ride and the General Fund.
Section 3. Risks Factors. This section discusses risks inherent to the ownership of the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds and discusses the risks existing in the City and the State of California which could have a negative impact on the tax revenue sources to the General Fund and the Pension Tax Over-ride.
Section 4. The City and Appendix A Information Regarding the City of Richmond.
These two parts of the POS, one in the body of the document and the Appendix A. The body of the POS contains a very general description, and the Appendix A is very detailed in the discussion of the City, its outstanding obligations, revenue sources, and known impacts to the General Fund.
Approval of Continuing Disclosure Certificate
The continuing disclosure certificate is attached as Appendix F to the Preliminary Official Statement. It describes the City’s obligations to provide annual reports and notices of certain of listed events so long as the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds are outstanding. This document is required in order to assist the underwriters to comply with federal securities laws. This allows the City to keep current the information in the market for future purchasers of its bonds and requires it to disclose certain material facts if they happen subsequent to the bond issue.
Approval of Bond Purchase Agreement
This document sets for the conditions under which the bond underwriting firms will commit to purchasing the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds from the City and reselling them to investors. The proposed resolution approves the form of the Bond Purchase Agreement in substantially the form presented to this meeting, together with such changes, insertions and omissions as an Authorized Officer, acting alone, may, upon consultation Jones Hall, A Professional Law Corporation, as Bond Counsel (“Bond Counsel”), require or approve. The purchase price for the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds, interest rates and other pricing related information in the Bond Purchase Agreement will be determined on the date the bonds are priced by the underwriters in the market, which is currently anticipated to occur in late August or September. The Purchase agreement, among other items, contains many representations of the City relative to the Official Statement and its completeness and other representations related to litigation and finances.
July 26, 2022
Approval of Escrow Agreements
These agreements are between the City and US Bank, serving as both trustee and escrow agent to the City. The funds provided from the Series 2022 Refunding Bonds or from the City's own cash to pay the remaining principal and interest on the 2005 B-1 Bonds, the 2005 B-2 Bonds and the 1999 Bonds must be held in escrow until the respective call dates on the 2005 B-1 Bonds and 2005 B-2 Bonds, and until the final maturity on the 1999 Bonds. These funds will be invested as permitted by the original bond documents until needed to pay off the 2005 Bonds and the 1999 Bonds. The escrow agreements set forth the terms and conditions for these escrows. The proposed resolution approves the form of the forms of the Escrow Agreements in substantially the form presented to this meeting, together with such changes, insertions and omissions as an Authorized Officer, acting alone, may, upon consultation with Bond Counsel, require or approve. The escrow will be verified by a verification agent.
Other Agreements
The resolution also approves other agreements, like insurance agreements, or swap termination agreements as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of the refunding.
Increased Fees
All of the City’s consultants and the Underwriters have requested increased fees due to the complexity of the transaction. The City has received a letter from the underwriters with their request and the proposed increases and a summary from the municipal advisor for the proposed increases in the fees of bond counsel, disclosure counsel and the municipal advisor. The requests are attached as Attachment 6. City staff is requesting that the City Council approve an increase that is approximately half of that requested and is illustrated in the table below. The City’s municipal advisor has recommended that the underwriter’s fee is warranted due to the current volatility of the market. Furthermore, the City Attorney’s Office and City staff members are continuing to negotiate with the consultants
.
Firm
Best Best
& Krieger Jones Hall
NHA
Advisors
Henry
Gardner
Underwriters
(assumes
$155 million
par value Total
Role
Disclosure
Counsel
Bond
Counsel
Municipal
advisor Consultant
Original Contract
Amount 50,000 55,000 110,000 15,000 465,000 695,000
Proposed New
Contract Amount 65,000 75,000 130,000 20,000 620,000 910,000 Difference 15,000 20,000 20,000 5,000 155,000 215,000
Payable from bond
proceeds Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
July 26, 2022
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Richmond Authorizing the Sale of its Taxable Pension Refunding Bonds, Series 2022 to Refund Certain Outstanding Taxable Pension Funding Bonds of the City, Approving an Official Statement for Such Bonds, Approving the Form of and Authorizing the Execution of a Bond Purchase Agreement, A Continuing Disclosure Certificate and Escrow Agreements in Connection Therewith, and Approving and Directing Related Matters
Attachment 2 – Preliminary Official Statement for the Series 2022 Bonds Attachment 3 – Bond Purchase Agreement for the Series 2022 Bonds Attachment 4 – Escrow Agreements for the Series 2022 Bonds Attachment 5 – First Supplemental Indenture for the Series 2022 Bonds Attachment 6 – Requests
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF ITS TAXABLE PENSION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2022 TO REFUND CERTAIN OUTSTANDING TAXABLE PENSION
FUNDING BONDS OF THE CITY, APPROVING AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT
FOR SUCH BONDS, APPROVING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT, A CONTINUING
DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE AND ESCROW AGREEMENTS IN
CONNECTION THEREWITH, APPROVING AN INTERFUND LOAN TO
DEFEASE ITS OUTSTANDING TAXABLE LIMITED OBLIGATION PENSION BONDS, 1999 SERIES A, AND APPROVING AND DIRECTING RELATED
MATTERS
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond (the “City”) is a contracting member of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (the “System”), and as such the City is obligated to make certain payments to the System (the “PERS Obligation”); WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 35-05, adopted by the City Council of the City (the “City Council”) on March 29, 2005 (the “2005 Authorizing Resolution”), the City Council authorized, among other things, the issuance by the City of pension funding bonds (the “Series 2005 Bonds”) for the purpose of refunding its PERS Obligation and additional pension funding bonds in the future from time to time for similar purposes (“Additional Bonds”), and interest rate swaps or swaptions (collectively, the “Swap Agreements”) in connection with any such bonds pursuant to Section 5922 of the California Government Code for the purpose of lowering the cost of borrowing;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the 2005 Authorizing Resolution, the City Council also authorized the institution of, and the City commenced, a proceeding for judicial validation of the Series 2005 Bonds, the Additional Bonds, the Indenture and the Swap Agreements therefor in the Superior Court of Contra Costa County in the matter entitled City of Richmond v. All Persons Interest in the Matter, et. al, Case No. 05-0063, under and pursuant to the provisions of Sections 860 et seq. of the California Code of Civil Procedure (the “Validation Proceeding”); WHEREAS, a default judgment was entered in the Validation Proceeding on May 25, 2005, to the effect that, among other things, the Series 2005 Bonds, the Additional Bonds, the Indenture, and the Swap Agreements are valid and legal obligations of the City; WHEREAS, for the purpose of refunding a portion of the City’s PERS Obligation, the City subsequently issued the Series 2005 Bonds in three separate series bonds as follows: (i) City of Richmond Taxable Pension Funding Bonds, Series 2005A (the “Series 2005A Bonds”), in the initial principal amount of $26,530,000, (ii) City of Richmond Taxable Pension Funding Bonds, Series 2005B-1 (the “Series 2005B-1 Bonds”), in the initial principal amount of $47,061,960, and (iii) City of Richmond Taxable Pension Funding Bonds, Series 2005B-2 (the “Series 2005B-2 Bonds”), in the initial principal amount of $41,403,172.50; WHEREAS, the City issued the Series 2005 Bonds pursuant to an Indenture, dated as of November 1, 2005 (the “Original Indenture”), by and between the City and U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association, as successor trustee (the “Trustee”) (capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings given to such terms in the Original Indenture);
WHEREAS, the Series 2005A Bonds matured in full on August 1, 2013, and are no longer outstanding;
WHEREAS, the Series 2005B-1 Bonds are outstanding in the principal amount of $17,899,000, have a final maturity date of August 1, 2023, and bear interest at a variable rate; WHEREAS, the Series 2005B-2 Bonds were issued as Convertible Auction Rate Securities, are accreting interest (with a full accretion date of August 1, 2023, at which time the full accreted principal amount thereof will be $127,968,000), and have a final maturity date of August 1, 2034;
WHEREAS, in an effort to lower the cost of borrowing of the Series 2005B-1 Bonds and the Series 2005B-2 Bonds (collectively, the “Series 2005B Bonds”) and in compliance with Section 5922 of the California Government Code, the City entered, following earlier swaps, into two interest rate swaps pursuant to an ISDA Master Agreement, together with the schedules and confirmations thereto (collectively, the “2016 Swap Agreement”), between the City and the Royal Bank of Canada (“RBC”), pursuant to which the variable rate of interest on the Series 2005B Bonds was exchanged for a fixed rate of interest; WHEREAS, the portion of the 2016 Swap Agreement relating to the Series 2005B-2 Bonds is subject to mandatory termination on August 1, 2023; WHEREAS, the Original Indenture provides that the City may at any time issue Additional Bonds for the purpose, among others, of refunding any outstanding Series 2005 Bonds, including payment of all costs incidental to or connected with such refunding, upon compliance with the procedure set forth in Article III of the Original Indenture; WHEREAS, the City has determined that it is in the best interest of the City and the public to refund all of the outstanding Series 2005B Bonds, terminate the 2016 Swap Agreement and pay the related termination fee or payment (the “Termination Fee”) in connection with the termination of the 2016 Swap Agreement for such bonds (the “Termination”);
WHEREAS, the City is authorized under the provisions of Articles 10 and 11 of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code, commencing with Section 53570 of said Code (the “Bond Law”), to issue its bonds for the purpose of refunding certain outstanding obligations of the City, including all or a portion of the outstanding Series 2005B Bonds and paying the Termination Fee;
WHEREAS, to that end, pursuant to Resolution No. 86-22, adopted by the City Council on June 21, 2022 (the “Resolution Authorizing Issuance of Series 2022 Bonds”), the City Council, among other things, authorized the issuance by the City of its Taxable Pension Refunding Bonds, Series 2022 (the “Series 2022 Bonds”) to (i) refund all or a portion of the outstanding Series 2005B Bonds, (ii) pay the Termination Fee, and (iii) pay all other related costs of issuing the Series 2022 Bonds, and
WHEREAS, the City has levied and continues to levy an ad valorem property tax override at a rate of 0.14% of the assessed value of all taxable property within the City (the “Pension Tax Override”) to pay for pension obligations of the City approved by the voters prior to July 1, 1978 as permitted under Section 1(b)(1) of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution;
WHEREAS, Loop Capital Markets LLC and Hilltop Securities Inc. (collectively, the “Underwriters”) have proposed to purchase and underwrite the Series 2022 Bonds and have presented to the City a form of Bond Purchase Agreement for the Series 2022 Bonds, to be entered into by the City and the Underwriters (the “Bond Purchase Agreement”); WHEREAS, in order to effect a public sale of the Series 2022 Bonds to the Underwriters, the City is required under federal securities laws and regulations to prepare a preliminary official statement (the “Preliminary Official Statement”) disclosing material information about the City and the Series 2022 Bonds;
WHEREAS, the form of Preliminary Official Statement has been prepared by the City with the assistance of Best Best & Krieger LLP, the City’s disclosure counsel (“Disclosure Counsel”);
WHEREAS, a form of Escrow Deposit and Trust Agreement (the “Escrow Agreement (Series 2005 Bonds)”) has been prepared and presented to this meeting, to be entered into by the City and U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association, as escrow bank and trustee of the Series 2005 Bonds, in connection with the refunding of the Series 2005 Bonds, has been prepared and presented to this meeting;
WHEREAS, the City previously issued its City of Richmond Taxable Limited Obligation Pension Bonds, 1999 Series A (the “Series 1999 Bonds”), which are outstanding in the principal amount of $2,725,000;
WHEREAS, the Series 1999 Bonds are not subject to optional redemption prior to maturity;
WHEREAS, in an effort to improve the credit quality of the Series 2022 Bonds, the City desires to defease all of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds with funds on hand of the City and, to that end, a form of Escrow Deposit and Trust Agreement (the “Escrow Agreement (Series 1999 Bonds)” and together with the Escrow Agreement (Series 2005 Bonds), the “Escrow Agreements”) has been prepared and presented to this meeting, to be entered into by the City and U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association, as escrow bank and trustee of the Series 1999 Bonds, in connection with the defeasance of all of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds; WHEREAS, the City Council wishes at this time to (i) confirm its actions in the Resolution Authorizing Issuance of Series 2022 Bonds, including without limitation, the authorization of the issuance of the Series 2022 Bonds and approval of a First Supplemental Indenture between the City with the Trustee, supplementing and amending the Original Indenture (the “First Supplemental Indenture”), (ii) approve the sale of the Series 2022 Bonds, (iii) approve the forms of the Preliminary Official Statement, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Escrow Agreements, and (iv) authorize the Authorized Officers to cause one or more interfund loans to be made to the Secured Pension Override Fund of the City in the amount not to exceed $2,580,000 for deposit into the Escrow Agreement (Series 1999 Bonds) to effect the defeasance of all of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds; WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 5852.1, the City disclosed certain financial information relating to the Series 2022 Bonds in Appendix A to the Resolution Authorizing Issuance of Series 2022 Bonds;