HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GUS_04.11.2014Notice of Meeting for the
Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board and the Governing Body
of the City of Georgetown
April 11, 2014 at 2:00 PM
at Georgetown Municipal Complex, 300-1 Industrial Avenue, Georgetown, Texas
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable
assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four
(4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for
additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Regular Session
(This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose
authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.)
A Call to Order
The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of
the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General Manager of Utilities,
City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas
Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows.
B Introduction of Visitors
C Discussion regarding the Project Progress Report, timelines including projects and Council Actions. –
Michael Hallmark, Project Manager
D Industry Updates
Legislative Regular Agenda
E Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the regular GUS Board meeting held on
March14, 2014. - Sheila K. Mitchell, GUS Board Liaison
F Consideration and possible recommendation to amend Task Order M&S-14-001 with M&S Engineering,
LLC in the amount of $30,000.00 for a total of $75,000.00. -- Jimmy Sikes, T&D Services Manager
G Consideration and possible recommendation to award the bid for two substation transformers to Virginia
Transformer Corp., of Roanoke, Virginia in the amount of $1,304,556.00. -- Jimmy Sikes, T&D Services
Manager
H Consideration and possible recommendation to approve an Offsite Utility Construction and Cost
Reimbursement Agreement for the Westinghouse Road Wastewater Improvements between the City of
Georgetown and Westinghouse Road Development Group, LLC. -- Glenn W. Dishong, Utility Director
I Presentation and possible discussion regarding the Customer Care Initiative and the Customer
Information System (CIS) software opportunities. -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Manager/Micki
Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
J Discussion and presentation of the draft 2014-2015 Capital Improvement Plan -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director
K Executive Session
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular session.
Sec. 551.086 Competitive Matters
-- Discussion and presentation of the draft 2014-2015 Electric Capital Improvement Plan -- Wesley
Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
L Action from Executive Session
Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times,
on the ______ day of __________________, 2014, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72
continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
____________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Call to Order
The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of
the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General Manager of Utilities,
City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas
Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows.
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Introduction of Visitors
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding the Project Progress Report, timelines including projects and Council Actions. –
Michael Hallmark, Project Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
GUS Projects:
EARZ 2013-14
EARZ Phase 1 year 12-13
James Street EST
North Georgetown Addition
Park Lift Station and Miscellaneous Lift Station Improvements
Public Training Facility WW
Snead Drive Streets and Wastewater Improvements
Solid Waste Public Drop Facility Improvements
Tin Barn Alley/17th & Austin Avenue Waterline Improvements
Council Actions
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Michael Hallmark
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
GUS April project reports Backup Material
Council Rpt Mar mtg for Apr GUS Backup Material
GUS BOARD ITEMS FORWARDED TO COUNCIL
March 25, 2014
U Forwarded from the Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS):
Consideration and possible action to approve the contract for construction of the Tin Barn
Alley / 17th St / 8th St. Pavement and Utility Improvements to Patin Construction, LLC., of
Taylor, Texas for the amount of $882,678.00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering
Director
V Forwarded from the Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS):
Consideration and possible action to award the contract for construction of the Park Lift
Station and Miscellaneous Lift Station Improvements to Central Road and Utility of Austin,
Texas in the amount of $492,000.00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
W Forwarded from the Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS):
Consideration and possible action to approve a contract for construction of the Solid Waste
Public Drop Facility to BPI-Bauerle Partners, Inc., of Lakeway, Texas for the amount of
$184,125.80 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
X Forwarded from the Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS):
Consideration and possible action to approve Task Order KPA-14-005 with Kasberg,
Patrick & Associates, LP of Georgetown, Texas, for professional services related to Edwards
Aquifer Recharge Zone Rehabilitation 2013-2014 in the amount of $284,540.00 -- Wesley
Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
Y Forwarded from the Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS):
Consideration and possible action to award a bid to Power Line Services of Houston, Texas,
in the amount of $203,294.52 for labor associated with the 2014 Electric System Overhead
Construction and Maintenance Projects -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering
Director
ALL ITEMS PASSED
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Industry Updates
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the regular GUS Board meeting held on
March14, 2014. - Sheila K. Mitchell, GUS Board Liaison
ITEM SUMMARY:
Board to review, revise and/or approve the minutes from the regular meeting held on March14, 2014.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Sheila K. Mitchell/GUS Board Liaison
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
GUS March 2014 Minutes Backup Material
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board and the
Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas
March 14, 2014 at 2:00PM
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require assistance in participation at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable
assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four (4)
days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512)930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional
information: TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Board Members Present: Arthur Yaeger, Bill Stump, Ed Pastor, Joyce Mapes, John Hesser
Board Members Absent: Patty Eason
Staff Present: Jim Briggs, Mike Babin, Glenn Dishong, Wesley Wright, Michael Hallmark, Jimmy Sikes,
David Munk, David Thomison, Chris Foster, Sheila Mitchell
Others Present: Ben Lake/Steger & Bizzell, Trae Sutton/KPA
Regular Session
A. Called to Order by Chair, Yaeger at 2:00PM
Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an
Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, The City Manager, Assistant City Manager,
General Manager of Utilities, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open
Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that
follows.
Yaeger thanked previous board members Robert Young and Brian Lindsey for their service to the Board
and introduced 2 new members, Joyce Mapes and Edward Pastor.
B. Introduction of Visitors -- None
C. Discussion regarding the Project Progress Report, timelines including projects and Council Actions. – Michael
Hallmark, Project Manager
Discussion: All reports included in packets. All items passed at Council. No discussion.
D. Industry Updates
Discussion: Briggs noted increased activities in preparation for the next Legislative Session; committees
preparing preliminary legislation for filing. Regarding the TCEQ process for the Chisholm Trail consolidation,
the next deadline is April 15th for the Executive Director to make a ruling. Approximately 800 comments were
received; approximately 30 were requesting a hearing. If a hearing is called, this will extend into late summer
or early fall. Yaeger reminded board to RSVP to board reception on March 26th.
Legislative Regular Agenda
The Board will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items:
E. Nominations and election of Vice-Chair of the GUS Board. – Arthur Yaeger, GUS Board Chair
Discussion: Yaeger nominated Kostka for Vice- Chair, seconded by Pastor. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent).
Kostka accepted position of Vice-Chair.
F. Nominations and election of Secretary of the GUS Board. – Arthur Yaeger, GUS Board Chair
Discussion: Kostka nominated Mapes, however Mapes declined. Kostka nominated Hesser for Secretary,
seconded by Yaeger. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent). Hesser accepted position of Secretary.
G. Review and possible action related to the Day and Time of GUS Board Meetings. – Arthur Yaeger, GUS Board
Chair
Discussion: Yaeger reviewed current date and time of meetings. No further discussion. Motion by Kostka,
seconded by Hesser to approve the Day and Time of Meeting to remain the same; at 2:00PM on the second
Friday of each month with the exception of the December meeting to be held on second Thursday of
December. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent)
H. Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GUS Board meeting held on February 14,
2014. – Sheila K. Mitchell, GUS Board Liaison
Discussion: None. Motion by Hesser, seconded by Stump to approve the minutes from the Regular GUS
Board meeting held on February 14, 2014. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent)
I. Consideration and possible recommendation to approve the contract for construction of the Tin Barn
Alley / 17th St / 8th St Pavement and Utility Improvements to Patin Construction, LLC., of Taylor,
Texas for the amount of $882,678.00. - Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director/Michael
Hallmark, Project Manager
Discussion: Wright stated project is ready for construction. Was originally a utility project for Tin Barn
Alley and grew to incorporate electric and paving projects in the area. Yaeger asked and Wright further
explained history and location of project for the benefit of new members. Work will provide conduit to
facilitate electric when funding available. Lumped projects together for a competitive bid. Patin has done
work for us in past and performed well. Kostka stated this was the first he remembered seeing the
engineer’s estimate included in the bid. Hallmark and Wright explained we try and include those costs if
available at time of board review; this cost was for engineer design work of packaging quotes. Kostka
asked what you would do if only one bid received and Wright responded if bid was competitive then staff
would bring forward to board. If bid not competitive and funds not in budget, then bids would be sent out
for re-bid. Sometimes companies bid out to stay active and meet requirements of their bonding company.
Pastor asked and Wright noted completion date of 150 days; will start after Red Poppy Festival and
contractor should be able to make timeline. Stump asked about depth of trench and Hallmark noted 3-7
feet depending on electric needs. Pastor commented about natural springs under palace and Hallmark felt
we would not trench that deep. Motion by Kostka, seconded by Hesser to approve the contract for
construction of the Tin Barn Alley / 17th St / 8th St Pavement and Utility Improvements to Patin
Construction, LLC., of Taylor, Texas for the amount of $882,678.00. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent)
Yaeger asked staff to introduce themselves for benefit of new board members – introductions around the
room. Ben Lake of Steger & Bizzell introduced himself, stating they were engineer of the Tin Barn Alley
project.
J. Consideration and possible recommendation to award the contract for construction of the Park Lift
Station and Miscellaneous Lift Station Improvements to Central Road and Utility of Austin, Texas in
the amount of $492,000.00.- Wesley Wright, P.E., Director of Engineering / Michael Hallmark, Project
Manager
Discussion: Wright updated on CIP plan for upgrades of lift stations to be compliant with TCEQ
requirements. This year’s major plant upgrade is Park Lift Station serving San Gabriel Wastewater
Treatment Plant. Four additional smaller lift stations are included. Motion by Kostka, seconded by Hesser
to award the contract for construction of the Park Lift Station and Miscellaneous Lift Station
Improvements to Central Road and Utility of Austin, Texas in the amount of $492,000.00.
Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent)
K. Consideration and possible recommendation to approve a contract for construction of the Solid
Waste Public Drop Facility to BPI-Bauerle Partners, Inc., of Lakeway, Texas in the amount of
$184,125.80. -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Director of Engineering / Michael Hallmark, Project Manager
Discussion: Wright stated a Steger & Bizzell designed project. Wright referred to pictures in packet and
explained current facility and how it has fatigued over the years thus the need for redesign. Funds are
available in budget. No interruption of service to accommodate the public. TDS has been working close
with City on design of project. Kostka asked and Wright described concrete retaining wall being built.
Hesser asked length of wall; Wright noted approximately four dumpsters wide. Lake clarified
approximately 8 feet wide and approximately 8-9 feet high. Pastor asked about debris around current
containers (in pictures included in packet). Wright explained TDS will work through this process, noting
the re-design will take care of a lot of these issues and grounds will look much cleaner. Motion by Pastor,
seconded by Mapes to approve a contract for construction of the Solid Waste Public Drop Facility
to BPI-Bauerle Partners, Inc., of Lakeway, Texas in the amount of $184,125.80. Approved 6-0-1
(Eason absent)
L. Consideration and possible recommendation to approve a Task Order KPA-14-005 with Kasberg,
Patrick & Associates, LP of Georgetown, Texas, for professional services related to Edwards Aquifer
Recharge Zone Rehabilitation 2013-14 in the amount of $284,540.00. – Wesley Wright, P.E., Director
of Engineering / Michael Hallmark, Project Manager
Discussion: Wright explained EARZ and details of the project, to bring the new board members up to date.
Funds will become available for the construction work in the CIP Budget in October. This request is for the
design of construction work and funds are available in current budget. Pastor asked and Wright explained
process and materials used for replacing pipe and considerations taken during design work. Motion by
Hesser, seconded by Kostka to approve a Task Order KPA-14-005 with Kasberg, Patrick &
Associates, LP of Georgetown, Texas, for professional services related to Edwards Aquifer
Recharge Zone Rehabilitation 2013-14 in the amount of $284,540.00. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent)
M. Consideration and possible recommendation to award a bid to Power Line Services of Houston,
Texas in the amount of $203,294.52 for labor associated with the 2014 Electric System Overhead
Construction and Maintenance Projects. -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director and
Jim Ward, Electric Planning Supervisor
Discussion: Wright explained electric moving forward with multiple projects noting staff is not able to
construct all projects in-house. Staff feels it best to bid some work out and package together for competitive
bids. City provides all materials and contractor does labor work for us. Projects included in labor bid are
FM1460 Road Widening, Vine Street Reconductor and Tie, Georgetown East 60 Feeder Conversion. Yaeger
asked and Wright stated he did not think City has used this contactor before, however, McCord
Engineering, our contracted electrical engineering firm, has used them and received good service. Pastor
asked and Wright explained estimate process, stating this labor bid was a lump sum estimate instead of a
line item breakdown. Hesser asked and Wright explained how this is different than the Techline labor
agreement and why we’re not using them for this job. Techline chose three of the six projects proposed,
therefore, these three were bid out. Techline felt all six projects would be too large of a volume of work for
the one crew they have assigned to the City. Wes explained which 3 projects were given to Techline for this
year. Additional discussion continued. Kostka asked why projects were not bid independently and Wright
explained staff felt it would be a more attractive package for an electrical contractor than individual
projects. Briggs further commented on how this can affect receiving competitive bids. Discussion continued
about variances in bids and reasons for higher costs of materials in electric vs. water lines. Motion by
Hesser, seconded by Pastor to award a bid to Power Line Services of Houston, Texas in the amount
of $203,294.52 for labor associated with the 2014 Electric System Overhead Construction and
Maintenance Projects. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent)
Yaeger encouraged board members to attend the upcoming Board and Commissions reception for outgoing and
incoming board members. He noted the absence of board member Eason.
Adjournment
Motion by Kostka, seconded by Hesser to adjourn. Approved 6-0-1 (Eason absent). Adjourned at 2:42PM
Approved: Attested:
_________________________ ____________________________
Arthur Yaeger – Board Chair John Hesser – Secretary
_____________________________
Sheila K. Mitchell, GUS Board Liaison
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to amend Task Order M&S-14-001 with M&S Engineering,
LLC in the amount of $30,000.00 for a total of $75,000.00. -- Jimmy Sikes, T&D Services Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
The original Task Order for Engineering Review of relay settings, scheme, and relay operation review
was scoped at $45,000 for the fiscal year with work performed at an hourly rate. The review of the
settings and scheme for the East, South, and Lone Star facilities will require additional funds of
approximately $30,000.00, bringing the total Task Order to $75,000.00 for the year.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends amending Task Order for the additional funds of approximately $30,000.00, bringing
the total Task Order to $75,000.00 for the year.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Funds are available in the Electric Fund and budgeted in the T&D Operations budget 610-5-0525-51-330.
SUBMITTED BY:
Jimmy Sikes, T&D Services Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Task Order Backup Material
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to award the bid for two substation transformers to Virginia
Transformer Corp., of Roanoke, Virginia in the amount of $1,304,556.00. -- Jimmy Sikes, T&D Services
Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
This project encompasses the purchase of one 138/26kV, 41.67MVA transformer for the Rivery
Substation and one 138/26/13kV/41.67MVA transformer for the Georgetown East substation. The
transformers are needed to provide additional transformation capacity at the Rivery and Georgetown East
Substations. The Rivery Substation transformer will replace the Existing LCRA T1 which is being
removed as part of the LCRA Substations purchase. In addition to load capacity, the new GUS-owned
transformers will allow for increased system reliability, and will reduce the loading on the existing
transformers.
Bids were opened March 5, 2014 at 2:00 p.m. for the purchase of the two transformers. Bids were
received from 9 firms. M&S Engineering, LLC has evaluated the bids and recommended award to
Virginia Transformer Corp. Under the specifications in the bid package, payment for the transformers is
due upon delivery of each transformer, 24-26 weeks after receipt of order.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends awarding the bid to Virginia Transformer Corp., of Roanoke, Virginia in the amount of
$1,304,556.00.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Budgeted in 2013/14 CIP Budget 610-9-0585-90-003
SUBMITTED BY:
Jimmy Sikes, T&D Services Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Cip Budget Sheet Backup Material
Bid Tab Backup Material
Engineers Evaluation Backup Material
Engineer Letter of Recommendation Backup Material
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:5BY, 5CA 4/11/2014
Division/Department:Director Approval
Prepared By:Jimmy Sikes Finance Approval La'Ke03/28/14
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 4,637,000.00
(Current year only)
Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent
Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual
(A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget
Consulting 382,800.00 382,800.00 8%
Right of Way 0.00 0%
Construction 0.00 0%
Other Costs 1,795,786.54 1,304,556.00 3,100,342.54 67%
Total Current Year Costs 2,178,586.54 3,483,142.54
Approved
GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget
610-9-0585-90-003 4,637,000.00
Total Budget 4,637,000.00
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 4,637,000.00
(includes all previous yrs)
Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total
Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget
Consulting 382,800.00 382,800.00 8%
Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0%
Construction 0.00 0.00 0%
Other Costs 3,100,342.54 3,100,342.54 67%
Total Project Costs 0.00 3,483,142.54 3,483,142.54
Comments:
Gus/Electric
2014 Transformer Purchases
CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet
ITEM#Virginia Transformer ABB
Texas Electric
Cooperative Iljin Weg Techline
Doubletree
Systems Shihlin Electric
Efacec Power
Transformers
1-transformer for Rivery $636,778.00 $650,852.00 $637,115.00 $834,604.00 $833,900.00 $887,035.00 $1,069,000.00 $775,000.00 $899,016.00
Off loading & placement for
item #1 $719,520.00 $19,590.00 $865,511.00 $880,900.00 $1,054,276.00 $1,113,000.00 No bid No bid
Field assembly and field tests
for item #1 $41,135.00
2-transformer for Georgetown
East $667,778.00 $696,910.00
Off loading & placement for
item #2 $15,570.00
Field assembly, drying
process, vacuum oil filling &
field tests for item #2 $52,990.00
OPTIONAL ITEM - Hydran M2
monitoring equipment $14,430.00
OPTIONAL ITEM - Kelman
Transfix monitoring
equipment in lieu of Hydran
M2 $46,400.00
Notes:
quote valid through
4/4/14
includes offload
and install
pricing does not incl
spare parts - see bid
financials
included quote valid for 60 days
quote valid for 30
days incomplete bid incomplete bid
took exception to our
T&Cs
quote valid through
4/25/14
see bid for exceptions
to technical specs
took exception to liquidated
damages - capped at 10% of
affected transformer price
Howard Industries
T&Cs apply
see bid for payment
terms
milestones for
payments not incl
took exception to
techical specs
took exceptions to our
standard T&Cs
capped liquidated
damages at 2% of
quoted price
spare parts not
included in cost - see
bid
no financials included
took exception to
our standard T&Cs Quote valid for 30 days
T&Cs indicate
installation, setup,
field testing, etc. not
incl
quote valid for 30
days
financials available
upon request
no financials
included
TOTAL $1,304,556.00 $1,370,372.00 $1,524,140.00 $1,700,115.00 $1,714,800.00 $1,941,311.00 $2,182,000.00 $775,000.00 $899,016.00
TERMS Progress payments Net 30 Net 30 Net 30 Net 30 Net 30 Net 30 Net 30
Progress payments
FOB Dest, ppy & allow Destination Destination Destination Destination See Bid
China Destination Destination
DEL 24-26 weeks ARO 26 weeks ARO 25-29 weeks ARO 36 weeks ARO 28 weeks ARO 32-34 weeks ARO 36 weeks ARO 32 weeks ARO 10 months ARO
Bid Invitation No.:
Division:
Bid Opening Date:
GUS - Electric
201413 - Transformers for Rivery & Georgetown East
05 March 2014, 2PM
Georgetown Transformer Bid Evaluation
ITEM
MANUFACTURER/VENDOR
Vendor Virginia Transformer ABB Texas Electric Coop.
Manufacturer Virginia Transformer ABB GE Prolec
Rivery Substation
Purchase Price $636,778 $587,942 $637,115
Off-Loading & Placement Included $5,575 $19,590
Field Assembly & Testing Included $57,335 $41,135
No-Load Losses (kW/$) 18.48 kW/$68,746 18.17 kW/$67,592 24 kW/$89,280
Load Losses (kW/$) 92.7 kW/$193,743 91.98 kW/$192,238 85 kW/$177,650
Auxiliary Losses (kW/$) 4.8 kW/$5,520 6.3 kW/$7,245 3.0 kW/$3,450
Field SFRA* Included Included $10,000
Total Evaluated Cost $904,787 $917,927 $978,220
Core & Coils (Lbs.) 57,640 56,600 69,000
Tank & Fittings (Lbs.) 50,780 46,700 44,490
Oil – Gals/Lbs. 7,552 gals./56,640 lbs. 7,290 gals./54,700 7,010 gals./52,690 lbs.
Total Weight (Lbs.) 176,000 (165,060) 158,000 166,180
Shipping Weight (Lbs.) 152,602 81,300 145,960
Height (inches) 238 198 209
Width (inches) 274 228 308
Depth(inches) 180 224 204
Height Over Cover (inches) 162 139 152
LTC Reinhausen – RMV-II Reinhausen – RMV-II Reinhausen – RMV-II
East Substation
Purchase Price $667,778 $656,610 $696,910
Off-Loading & Placement Included $5,575 $15,570
Field Assembly & Testing Included $57,335 $52,990
No-Load Losses (kW/$) 18.73 kW/$69,676 18.78 kW/$69,862 25 kW/$93,000
Load Losses (kW/$) 97.27 kW/$203,294 88.89 kW/$185,780 87 kW/$181,830
Auxiliary Losses (kW/$) 4.8 kW/$5,520 6.3 kW/$7,245 3.0 kW/$3,450
Spare Parts - $ Included $20,670 $25,705
Field SFRA* Included Included $10,000
Total Evaluated Cost $946,268 $1,003,077 $1,079,455
Core & Coils (Lbs.) 58,792 67,000 79,630
Tank & Fittings (Lbs.) 51,796 49,000 49,520
Oil – Gals/Lbs. 7,703 gals./57,773 lbs. 8,160 gals./61,200 lbs. 8,980 gals./67,460 lbs.
Total Weight (Lbs.) 179,520 (168,361) 177,200 196,610
Shipping Weight (Lbs.) 121,747 92,700 115,980
Height (inches) 238 205 219
Width (inches) 274 232 322
Depth(inches) 190 224 214
Height Over Cover (inches) 162 146 158
LTC Reinhausen – RMV-II Reinhausen – RMV-II Reinhausen – RMV-II
Warranty (Months) 60 months from
shipment; 60 months
from energizing
60 months from
delivery
66 months from
shipment; 60 months
from energizing
In/Out Coverage (Months) 12/18 months 12/18 Months
Quote Expiration April 4, 2014 April 25, 2014 30 days after submittal
Payment Terms 100% Net 30 Days from
Invoice Date
100% Net 30 Days from
Invoice Date
100% Net 30 Days from
Date of Shipment
Approval Drawings ARO 6 weeks 6-8 weeks 10-12 weeks
Final Drawings ARO 10-12 weeks TBD 14-16 weeks
Shipment From Factory ARO 24-26 weeks 24 weeks 25-29 weeks
Arrival at Destination ARO 25-27 weeks 26 weeks 26-30 weeks
Total Evaluated Cost $1,851,055 $1,921,004 $2,057,675
Evaluated Bid Over Low $69,949/3.78% $206,620/11.16%
Manufacture Location Pocatello, ID. Crystal Springs, MS. Apodaca, N.L. Mexico
Excludes bushings,
radiators, arrester
brackets, etc. – weight
the crane will be
required to lift on site
Shipped with oil Shipped with oil
12 months after
energizing/18 months
after delivery
12 months after
energizing/18 months
after shipment –
capped at 10% of item
price
Price valid if service
performed within 3
months after ship date
Galvanized radiators –
not painted
Galvanized radiators –
not painted
Galvanized radiators –
not painted
Exceptions: 5.4.7 Exceptions: 9.3.9 (LDs
limited to $10K)
Exceptions: 4.4.1;
5.3.7; 5.6.2; 5.19; 6.9.3;
etc.
*SFRA – Sweep Frequency Response Analysis
Bid Evaluation – Per Specification
Manufacturer
Virginia Transformer ABB GE Prolec
Purchase price (45%) 45% 37.5%
30%
Loss evaluation (30%) 25% 30%
25%
Ability to meet bid
specification and
requirements ((15%)
15% 15%
7.5%
Experience and past
performance (10%)
7.5% 7.5%
10%
TOTAL (100%)
92.5% 90% 72.5%
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to approve an Offsite Utility Construction and Cost
Reimbursement Agreement for the Westinghouse Road Wastewater Improvements between the City of
Georgetown and Westinghouse Road Development Group, LLC. -- Glenn W. Dishong, Utility Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
The purpose of this agreement is to facilitate the construction of wastewater infrastructure to serve the
Westinghouse Road area through a cost reimbursement contract. Under the terms of the agreement,
WRDG is to construct a major wastewater interceptor running north from Westinghouse Road to a point
of connection near Inner Loop. The interceptor is sized to serve the entire area in accordance with the
Land Use Plan. Once constructed, the City will reimburse WRDG over a ten year period using the Water
Fund with performance requirements made a condition of the repayment. The cost of the interceptor is
estimated to be $1,800,000.00.
The agreement also requires WRDG to convey the necessary property and easements for the City to
construct a regional lift station. The new lift station will allow for the decommissioning of the ACM lift
station and will provide service to areas south of Westinghouse Road. The cost of the lift station and force
main is estimated to be $3,200,000.00.
If a TIRZ is formed in the area, the tax increment will be used in part to reimburse the Water Fund for the
cost of infrastructure, including the Westinghouse Interceptor and the Westinghouse Lift Station.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The funds for the reimbursement to WRDG will be from the Water Fund paid over a ten year period. If
TIRZ is formed, tax increment will reimburse the Water Fund for the cost of the reimbursement.
SUBMITTED BY:
Glenn Dishong, Utility Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
WRDG Deal Point Summary Backup Material
WRDG
Deal Point Summary
WRDG To:
1) Design and Construct Westinghouse Road Interceptor from a point on the south side of
Westinghouse Road to the existing wastewater interceptor near Inner Loop.
2) Design and Construct Westinghouse Road Interceptor using escrowed funds supplied
by WRDG
3) Complete such design and construction such that the Westinghouse Road Interceptor is
completed by approximately December 31, 2014.
4) Convey property and easements necessary for City to construct Westinghouse Lift
Station and force main.
5) Develop the WRDG Properties to facilitate new utility connections including
Georgetown electric service.
City To:
6) Design and Construct Westinghouse Lift Station and force main.
7) Complete design and construction such that the Westinghouse Lift Station and force
main is completed by approximately May 31, 2015.
8) Reimburse WRDG for the design and construction cost of the Westinghouse Road
Interceptor in 10 annual payments subject to development performance.
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Presentation and possible discussion regarding the Customer Care Initiative and the Customer Information
System (CIS) software opportunities. -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Manager/Micki Rundell, Chief
Financial Officer
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Manager/Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Coversheet Cover Memo
Vision Backup Material
4 11 14 CCinitiative-businessopps FINAL Presentation
Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board
(GGFAS) Meeting Date: April 11, 2014 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Presentation and possible discussion regarding the Customer Care Initiative and the
Customer Information System (CIS) software opportunities.
ITEM SUMMARY
A Customer Care overview and update will be presented. It will include discussion of the
evolution from a billing only environment (Utility Office) into a full service Customer Care Center
providing customer information and interaction along with enhanced billing options.
Technical challenges with the current Customer Information System (CIS) software will also be
presented with plans for future replacement. Ways to leverage the new system capabilities to
allow GUS to meet future expansion goals will also be discussed.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
ATTACHMENTS
Presentation
Leticia Zavala Micki Rundell
Customer Care Manager Chief Financial Officer
Georgetown Utility Systems (GUS) Customer Vision
Georgetown, the premier community in Central Texas, is the City of Excellence
As such, Georgetown Utility Systems is dedicated to providing customers with high quality services and
is a leading innovator in customer care for public power and municipals in the state of Texas.
Customer Expectations:
A single call/one stop resolution center
Multiple customer interaction & service opportunities
Relationships providing customers a unique “small town” experience with “Big City” services
Customer Service Representatives that are advocates for all customers
Timely resolution of issues
Georgetown’s Customer Care Representatives are:
Knowledgeable about the City’s utility operations
Respectful of others, both customers and coworkers
Friendly, personable, and accept responsibility for their actions
Problem solvers dedicated to helping others
Fair and compassionate customer advocates
Technologically savvy and understand the importance of accurate data
Empowered professionals who understand their role in the success of the City’s utility operations
Customer Care “Tools” should include:
Proactive multimedia communications
Easy access to customer information
Seamless integration of customer
information from other systems
Streamlined call handling capabilities
Multiple types of program and service
offerings
Historical customer interaction
database to facilitate relationships
Innovative services that support sales
and marketing efforts
Customer Care “Tools” enable us to:
Educate and inform customers of
services
Answer and resolve issues in a timely
and effective manner
Increase efficiency and reduce call
queue wait times
Improve customer loyalty through a
variety of program offerings
Increase conservation efforts by
providing individualized services and
analytics on usage information
Implementation Strategies include:
Develop an organizational design and staffing plan to meet our Customer Service Vision
Develop a foundation of behavior based standards to create a culture that fosters positive and
interactive customer relationships
Reengineer Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System to enhance capabilities and improved
services
Replace existing Customer Information Software (CIS) that includes a Customer Relationship
Management (CRM) system to facilitate interactions with customers
Establish a unified customer portal and architecture that allows customers to self-serve while
offering interactive capabilities (Chat,
Incorporate use of Social Media as a key element of customer communications
Expand and utilize new technologies to enhance the customer experience
Customer Care Initiative &
Customer Information System (CIS)
Software Opportunities
GUS Board Meeting
April 11, 2014
Evolution to Customer Care
•In 2009, City was at a crossroad
Establishing Citywide Software (IT) Master Plan
End of life replacement for Utility Automated Meter
Reading (AMR) system
Evaluating Customer Information System (CIS)
capabilities for post AMR implementation
•Change was propelling us to “think outside the
box” to meet future demands
Potential to leverage existing structure in Utility Office to
provide enhanced customer service
Now viable opportunity
Evolution to Customer Care
•Utility Office Review
–Pivotal function could be leveraged to provide
issue resolution in one place
•Already providing “meter to cash” services
–Philosophy shifting from being “order takers” into
becoming “information managers ”
•“Point of contact” for meter replacement project
–Evolving into a Customer Care environment
•Applying lessons learned during the meter
replacement project
Evolution to Customer Care
•Automated Meter Reading (AMR)
Replacement Project
Replaced 45,000 meters, impacting every customer
on the system
Provided systematic communication
•Neighborhood specific
•Coordination with Field, Office, & Installation staff
Customer Care served as the “front line” for
•Customer communication on the project
•Customer issue resolution with installation vendor and
field operations
Customer Care Focus
Enhance Customer interactions and build
Customer relationships
–Set behavior based standards
•Worked with outside consultant to identify,
develop, & implement desired behaviors
–Soft skill development training
•Communication, Listening, Flexibility, Initiative,
Professionalism, & Task Orientation
Centralize utility related calls into Call
Center
–Control Center
–Permitting
Customer Care Focus
Standardize customer communications
–Email templates that communicate day -to day
business activities
•New connects, draft authorizations, New service, etc.
–Telephone scripting
•“Thank you for calling the City of Georgetown, my name is..”
–Integrating phone system call flows
•Providing one path for customer entry
–Utility Bill modifications
•eStatements, Statement billing, enhancing information
on utility bills (meter size, rate tiers, etc.)
Customer Care Focus
Offer additional Self-Serve options to
Customers
–Automated bill payment via phone system
–Usage data availability via web portal (GUARD)
–Capability to view prior bills online
Actively communicate available programs
–AquaMessenger
–Low Income Discounts
–Irrigation audits
–Good Neighbor Fund
Incorporate Marketing & Public Relations
–Education & Awareness Advertising Campaigns
–Develop & Implement “Welcome Brochure”
–Integrate Social Media
•Planned outages; Conservation Tips; Programs &
Promotions
Leverage Customer Care structure to provide
customer service and billing services to
surrounding communities
•CTSUD
Customer Care Focus - Future
Utility Office
Customer Care
initiative
Customer
Experience
Evolution Process
Basic “Meter to
Cash” Services:
•Usage Data collection
•Usage Data validation
•Bill presentment
•Payment processing
•Credit & collection
services
Added Service Options:
•Call center environment
•Revised organizational structure
•eStatements & Statement billing
•Web portal
•Reengineered phone system
and menu options
•Standardized customer
communications (email
templates, statements, etc.)
Enhanced
Customer
Interactions
CIS/CRM
software
acquisition Marketing
& Public
Relations
Facility
Remodel
Multiple
product
offerings
Multiple
rate
options
Social
Media
Data
analytics
Technical Challenges with Current
Customer Information System
(CIS) Software
What Next?
Customer Information System (CIS)
•Purchased current system in 1994
Less than 10,000 customers when implemented
Now at 36,000 w/CTSUD management contract
•Major system upgrade in 2001
•Current system is “COBAL” based
Difficult to integrate with other software systems
Incapable of Time of Use (TOU) Rate Pricing
Inflexible to modify – “Legacy System”
Odyssey 2010
2009 – Released Request for Proposal (RFP)
to replace CIS system
•4 Responses
–1 - Tier 1 – SAP
•Eliminated due to costs (Approximately $8M) and
complexity
–3 – Tier 2 – All Harris products
•Costs estimated between $2.5M and $3.5M
•Narrowed selection to 2 finalists
Odyssey 2010
•Conducted “site visits” - July 2010
–Team of 6 different perspectives (GUS & Finance)
–Implementation sites didn’t look like software demo’s
–Software was not integrated - processes were silo’s
•Could NOT make business case to select
either finalist
CONCLUSION: 2010 market did not have
solution for City’s long term software
needs!
Tier 1 Solutions Provide…
•Cutting edge technology to meet the needs
of an integrated solution
–Takes best advantage of AMI investment
–Provides tools necessary for CSRs in meeting
customer care goals
•Broadens customer care opportunities
–Integrates to Enterprise Asset Management
system and other key systems
–Provides analytic tools to determine trend
analysis
•Tier 1 Venders…. SAP and Oracle
CIS Market – 5 Years Later
Tier 1 vendors pushing into new smaller
markets
Vendors see profitability of partnering with
utilities for expanded services
Tier 1 systems that were cost prohibitive are
now within reach
–Offering alternative software acquisition models
•More cost effective for smaller utilities
–Offering software as a “service” rather than an
“equipment” purchase
WHY ORACLE?
•Staff has evaluated software via demos over
the past 2 years
•Leading edge provider of CIS/CRM services
–Expanded Microsoft Dynamics platform
–Easily integrates into other City systems
•Larger customer base
–Larger & more sophisticated organizations
•More intuitive in providing CSR available
information from other systems to resolve
Customer issues
ORACLE - Tier 1 Solution
•Price point…. WAY more than the City
wants to spend as a traditional “license”
purchase
•BUT… what if the City could get the features
it needs on a per customer “rental” basis?
•Utilize creative funding opportunities
–Leveraging partnership with Westin Engineering
•Westin has developed a model that offers Oracle
services on a “per customer” cost
•Hosted solution
Oracle Partnership Solution
•Westin Engineering
–Owns Oracle licenses
•Cincinnati Water is 1st customer
•Hosted Solution
–Manages servers in the “cloud”
•City pays for implementation/conversion of
existing system
–Consultants needed to implement the Oracle
software
•Estimated costs up to $4M to $5M
Next Steps:
Over the next 3 months:
•Staff to attend CS Week in San Antonio to
further research this option
•Further refine customer costs and operational
“hosted” model
•Site visits and reference checks
Fall 2014:
•Contract & cost of service approvals to
Boards & City Council
January 2015 – Begin software
implementation
Questions?
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Discussion and presentation of the draft 2014-2015 Capital Improvement Plan -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Executive Session
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular session.
Sec. 551.086 Competitive Matters
-- Discussion and presentation of the draft 2014-2015 Electric Capital Improvement Plan -- Wesley
Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Action from Executive Session
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY: