The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-10-10; City Council; 10296; Lease Purchase of Sewer/Wet Well Cleaner! I I , I ! I z 0 g -( ...I u z ::, 0 (.) "AB# /0, {).CJ (a I ,MTG. 10/10/89. LEASE PURCHASE OF A SEWER/WET WELL CLEANER . 'DEPT. PIIR· RECOMMENDED ACTION: DEPT. Hitt6--. CITY ATTY \Jf/3 CITYMGR~ Adopt Resolution No.~~3~f&>awarding the bid for the sewer/wet well cleaner and directing the Finance Director to return with a lease purchase agreement. ITEM EXPLANATION: The 1989-90 budget includes $30,000 in the Utilities and .Maintenance Sewer Lease Account for the 1 ease purchase of a sewer/wet we 11 cleaner. The present sewer/wet well cleaner will be sold at fair market value to the Street Division for catchbasin cleaning-. A transfer of funds will occur between the General Fund and the Sewer Maintenance Fund as a result of this sate. In accordance with Section 3.28.120 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, Notice to Bidders, was published and Request for Bids was made of twelve vendors. Haaker Equipment Company, 3505 Pomona Boulevard, Pomona, CA 91768, submitted the lowest, most responsive bid, of $130,688.00 plus tax. The staff is recommendi11g that the City Council accept this bid and authorize the Finance Director to solicit proposals for a lease purchase agreement for·the acquisition of this equipment. FISCAL IMPACT: According to staff analysis, the City has an opportunity to lease purchase this equipment and effectively reduce the present value purchase price to the City. A survey of lease purchase rates indicates that the City can expect lease terms with interest rates of approximately 7.7%. This rate compares favor.ably with the present earn·ings on the City's portfolio which are averaging approximately 9.25%. According to an anc1lysis prepared by the Financ~ Depar.tment, the City can expect to save up to $20,000 in present value terms if a favorable lease purchase contract can be entered into. Staff is recommending that the City Council direct the Finance Director to seek proposals from financial institutions for the lease purchase of this equipment and that the lease contract be presented to the City Counci 1 within 60 days. The estimated annual lease purchase payment on this equipment will be $32,000 assuming a lease purchase rate of 7. 7%. No additional appropriations are necessary to fund this lease purchase contract. EXHIBITS: 1. Tabulation of bids -Exhibit A. 2. Resolution No.8Cf ,3Slo awarding the bid for the sewer/wet well cleaner and directing the Finance Di rector to return with a lease purchase agreement. I ',r ' l ti •\ . ' \ I . I I I ' I i ! :'. . j l l ~ ., . I t '/ ' \ SEWER/WET WELL CLEANER Elec~ric Eel MFG. Co. Inq. P.O. Box 419 Springfield OH, 45501 Dew-Par Sales .and Service 23891 Via Fabricante #611 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Guzzler P.O. Box 396 American Fork, UT 84003 'Ha~ker Equipment company 3505 Pomona Blvd. Pomona, CA 91768 EXHIBIT "A" No Bid 142,454.00 No Bid 130,688.00 l l l I i l. I l 1 ,, ·i ~ J ,, t I / I / - l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 89-356 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE BIO ANO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PURCHASE ORDER FOR A SEWER/WET WELL CLEANER AND DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO REQUEST PROPOSALS FROM LENDING INSTITUTIONS FOR A LEASE PURCHASE CONTRACT WHEREAS, bids have been received by the City of Carlsbad for the sewer/wet well cleaner; and WHEREAS, the lease purchase of the sewer/wet well cleaner is advantageous to the City of Carlsbad. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the bid of Haaker Equipment Company, 3~05 Pomona Boulevard, Pomona, CA 91768, is hereby accepted and the Purchasing Officer is hereby authorized to execute a Purchase Order for the sewer/wet well cleaner in the amount of $130,688.00 plus tax. Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill l 2 3 4 5 6 •":'" ', ' 7 I ,:I I <,t 8 ,'j ., .-~ 9 j 10 ,, ' '! '·1 ll I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ;as 27 28 3 That the City staff is hereby directed to seek lease purchase proposa 1 s from 1 ending institutions for the 1 ease purchase of the sewer/wet well cleaner and to return to Council with a proposed purchase agreement within 60 days. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of City of Carlsbad, California, held on the --"'l=O=th.;..__ day of October , 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux and Larson NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: {SEAL) J ! ,l i/-- . ' I . i . ; August 28, 1989 Ms. Aletha L. Rautenkranz City Clerk City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 Dear Ms. Rautenkranz: ~ 19\oEW-PAR 'Al 'Sales &Service DEW-PAR Sales & Service has received a Bid Request from the City of Carlsbad for a Sewer/Wet Well Cleaner, Bid No. 8. DEW-PAR is a dealer for Aquatech Inc., one of the nation·s leading manufacturers of truck mounted sewer cleaning, jetting and vacuum equipment. We have several concerns about liability and safety factors pertaining to the equipment specified and would like clarification and additional information prior to submitting a bid. Our concerns include, but are not limited to the following: A. The siz~ pf the truck chassis DO which the body is to be mounted and the weight cf the assembled unit. The City has specified a single rear axle chassis for a 9-cubic yard combination machine. The California Motor Vehicle Code requires that no more than 20~000 pounds may be carried by any one axle and 34,000 pounds by each set of tandem axles. It is DEW-PAR·s experience that most truck mounted, 9-yard combination sewer jetting and vacuum machines require a chassis rated for approximately 52,000 pounds GVW, with tandem rear axles. It has been common for manufacturers of combination machines to contend that these machines are never fully loaded with debris when transporting loads to dump sites. It also has been assumed that water for jetting will be used up and excess water in the debris tank drained out or dewatered before debris is transported. However, these assumptions are true only under theoretical conditions which assume that operators conscientiously drain off excess water and transport less than full loads. The alternative is an obviously overweight condition. 23891 Via Fabricante/ Suite 611 / Mission Viejo, California 92691 / Telephone (714) 768-1202 / FAX (714) 768-6275 l f! r>; On July 21st, 1989 a letter was submitted to the Purchasing Department of the City of Carlsbad. This letter was in response to a request for comments on the proposed specifications. These comments and concerns also were discussed with the Fleet Operations Division. In reviewing the revised Bid Specifications, many of the changes suggested by us were incorporated, while others were not. However, the issue of an undersized chassis has not changed. The specifications still call for a 16,000 lb. front axle and a single 23,000 lb. rear axle. To illustrate the danger of mounting the Specified equipment on a single rear axle chassis, the following table may be of interest: Single Axle, Emptv Weia}1ts, in Pounds Eroo:t Rear Total Single axle chassis only (1) 7,053 4,395 11,448 Driver and 100 gal of fuel 804 396 1,200 Tools, tubes and accessories 245 755 1,000 Body only, empty (2) ~.331 lQ.762 .l.5,Q86 Total, empty 12,436 16,308 28,744 (1) International 2554 4 x 2 (2) Average estimated weight for Vactor, Vac-Con, Camel and Aquatech 9 yd. single engine combination machines, with front .mounted hose reels. Add 700 pounds for auxiliary engine. These figures show that with no payload or water, the unit is near the legal maximum on the rear axle. With a typical full load of mixed debris consisting of sand, gravel, rocks, bricks, and sludge, the weight distribution will be approximately as shown below: Typical Full Load, SinG1le Axle, in Pounda Er.ant. Raar._ To:tal Total empty weight 12,436 16,308 28,744 9 cu. ~rd. payload, no water !13Q 21,Q'.ZQ 2J,5QQ Total weight 12,866 37,378 50,244 Based on this example, the City-struck would be legally overloaded 17,378 pounds on the .~ear axle. Only a tandem rear axle capable of carrying legal loads of 34,000 pounds would be suitable. I j t l I I t For additional confirmation of problems encountered by users operating combination machines mounted on single axles, it is recommended you speak with Barry Greenberg, Power Equipment Specification Writer, at the County of Los Angeles, (818)458-7345. In fact, the County found it necessary to remount a~ capacity combination machine from a single ~ear axle to a tandem axle in order to carry legal payloads. Also, it is noted in the specifications that this unit is to be used as an emergency "off-road" fire truck requiring "extra heavy suspension". We assume that to be of value in this application, the unit would, of necessity, be completely loaded wi•th water (using both fresh water and debris tanks). This typf:? of application would add 23,482 pounds to the empty body and chassis and yield a total gross vehicle weight of 52,226 pounds. It then would be ~equired to negotiate rough terrain on an undersized chassis" .. in remote areas". With a specified GVW rating of 39,000 pounds, this clearly would constitute a potentially hazardous and unsafe operating condition. To enable DEW-PAR to properly appraise the risks of offering Aquatech eguipment to the City of Carlsbad, we would appreciate a letter from the City Attorney which addresses the following issues and concerns per·taining to the manner in which the City plans to operate the vehicle: 1. The City cf Carlsbad acknowledges that the sewer/wet well cleaner specified may violate weight le.ws stlpulated by California Motor Vehicle Code, Section 35550 of Chapter 5, Article 1, when operated with partial or full loads on chassis equipped with a single rear axle. 2. The City acknowledges that its operation of the equipment may contradict Bid Specifications requiring that equipment offered complys with the California Vehicle Code, the California Administrative Code, and federal laws. 3. The City of Carlsbad agrees to hold harmless and and indemnify any dealer or manufacturer of equipment offered in accordance with the Bid Specifications against losses from claims brought by the City or third parties due to operation of the equipment in a manner which violates State of California Department of Motor Vehicle weight laws. 7 I J ' ~-~....,..----------- 4. The City agrees to modify the Bid Specifications to provide for the installation of an automatic engine shutdown safety governor when the weight of the machine specified exceeds 20,000 pounds on any single axle or such lesser weight as may be dictated by the capacity limits of axles, wheels, or tires as provided by the manufacturers of th.:,:1e components. !further, the City agrees it will regularly inspect and maintain such engine shutdown device in an fully operating condition, as long as the machine is in service. B . .Tb.fLYC.i.lume.tric capacities of water and debris tanks, DEW~PAR wishes to ascertain the documentation and testing methods which will be required by the City to validate representations made by vendors concerning the ability of machines bid to meet the volumetric capacities specified in thP- Bid Request for water and debris tanks. DEW-PAR also wishes to verify the extent to which th~ City will accept a machine which does not have a water tank capacity of 1,000 gallons or a debris tank capacity of 9 cubic yards. In addition, the bid specifications, as presently written, do not distinguish between "usable" capacity and "design" or "engineered" capacity. DEW-PAR wishes to advise the City that its reason for concern is due to tests recently conducted on a co □petitive machine similar to that specified. This machine had water and debris tank rated capacities of 1,000 gallons and 9-cubic yards respectively. The results of these tests are shown in the table below. These results, which are documented by certified weight tickets, show that the actual capacity of the water tank was 779.11 gallons, not the rated 1,000 gallons and the actual capacity of the debris tank was 6.53 cubic yards, compared to a rated capacity of 9-cubic yards. 1. 2. Weight of vehicle w~th full water tank 35,540 lbs. Less: vehicle empty weight -29,QBQ lbs, Payload of water in water tank 6,490 lbs 6490 lbs. payload divided by 8.33 lbs. per gallon = 779.11 gallons of water Weight of vehicle with full debris tank 40,040 lbs. Less: vehicle empuy weight -29.Q5Q lbs, Payload of water in debris tank 10,990 lbs. 10,990 lbs payload divided by 8.33 lbs. per gallon= 1319.33 gallons divided by 202 gallons per cu. yd. = 6.53 cu. yds. g l ! j l J 1 I 1 l I ,, M..·-------------- C. Bid ReguirementeJor the specified auxiliary engjne. The Specifications for the Sewer/Wet Well Cleaner call for the vacuum exhauster to be able tc produce air flow of 8000 cubic feet per minute. Clarification is needed as to whether the chassis engine or auxiliary engine is to be used to power the exhauster. For your benefit, enclosed is a performance curve chart submitted at a bid opening in June, 1988 at Spokane County for a Vactor model 810 ,Jet Rodder. Among other things, it suggests that the horsepower requirement needed to achieve the specified 8000 cfm rating approximates 200 hp. Since the ra~ed capacity of the Cummins 4BT engine commonly used for auxiliary power is 91 h.p., the implication is that significantly larger auxiliary engines or the truck engine must be usod to attain the specified air flow capacity. If the City has no intended application for the auxiliary engine, DEW-PAR wishes to know this prior to submitting its bid. In addition, DEW-PAR wishes to verify if the City~s requirement for 8000 cfm air flow is to be measured as "free air" or against a pressure of 107 inches of water, as stated in the Specifications. Such distinction is important to DEW-PAR in its determination of the size exhauster to be bid. Finally, DEW-PAR wishes to know how the City plans to test the exhauster selected by the City to ensure it is capable of meeting Bid Specifications. Also, we note that the City has omitted any requirement for performance curves or other certifications pertinent to exhauster performance. D. Mounting regui~ements for froot mounted hose reel. In view of the off-road operating conditions which the Specification envisions. the Specification does not make clear whether the hose reel is to be bolted to the front bumper of the chassis selected or mounted directly to the frame. Also, no indication of minimum acceptable ground clearance for· the front hose reel is provided. Small variations in terrain will have a magnified impact on the vertical movement of hose reels extending 6-feet or more in front of the front axle. This, presumably, should be an area of concern to the City. In addition, some truck manufacturers provide alternative chassis depending on reguirements for front mounted implements. Prior to developing its bid, DEW-PAR wishes to know if the City has a strong preference for the manner in which the front hose r.eel is to be mounted. -..... ,l l I 1 t / -- E. Hose reel mounting location..... DEW-PAR wishes to advise the City that Aquatech~s newly intt•oduced rear mounted, pivoting hose reel may be a convenient solution to ground clearance and driver visability problems. Numerous safety and operational features have made this the design of choice in recent months by several Southern California municipalities and public agencies. While Aquatech provides both front and rear mounted hose reels, DEW-PAR would be pleased to explain how a rear mounted reel alternative could be of significant value to the City. Thank you for your attention to the foregoing matters. Please call me if I can provide further clarification. cc: City Attorney Purchasing Officer Sincerely, ~~~ Gaylord ff Area Ma ger ----~ '' August 30, 1989 Ms. Aletha L. Rautenkranz City Clerk City of Ca~lsbad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 Dear Ms. Rautenkranz: Attached, please find the performance curve chart that should have been sent with letter dated 8/28/89. Sincerely, Gaylord Ruff 23891 Via Fabricante / Suite 611 / Mission Viejo, California 92691 / Telephone (714) 768-1202 / FAX (714) 768-6275 JI ~ r~ --,,..,....,..,..._ ,..,--~-,#' _,, ,r...,.., .... ~. -~ ~ ,_ ~ • I t i ! I f I I I 1 I i I I I I : t I I I I I ; ·I .. or-n I"- --I I I • --r---,---r~n-,-~~---_, 1 , t __ L ___ L I ' -,~7, :· , --- I ! • I ~ I \ I_ I -.--I I I I JJ_-'-1 ICh3:_· _____ --~1.r, 111 1 ftJ JLLL,b~J: I •1~ -: • • . --• -- , ; L • : • -~ I ; l II I I I I I i I I ! i . F -: ---. : l I • I : I ; • . ·, ·1 i I l -I . . • I I l I . . -I i I . ' bbo'.""". • -------..... • , ., , • , , , , • , • i • r--1-~ -r 2W, I 1•. i t I tJJJW 00 ,~ ----I !. I I ~ .. :--,--1 , --,----i i 1 ! ; I '. i I I I ' ! I I r I ~ _ ! ·-r I I ; pi I i I ,... . ' ' ' • ,dff -j I I I ; I i i I '!I'. -+-..-' -• •-::.µ_:...-.:.;.i...-F~---=~:+L-.,_,__,'-+---+---,i---J-1....+---i...J ! ! I • I • i j I I -I i I f- "';J1··-~i..i--r.Uc1~~..µ..~-+--ir--~4--+--+~4--<'-·~----'-_.;..~--..;._-' : : • ' • ; I C 2 ' ; I . . I I I I f· i '7 "1" l I ar'o.1 Al. ..,..--'..:.-F-"::+-=---t-'9=-~c..+-:-..a.;-;.~1--+--+--+...,C..---f-~ l ! i ~ • ; i i ' --'i---. _ --= r -r -,-·,· · ~ ··:----...-- N I I F ;ROM i • "'~-:..;-;~;...=;--+--,---~'l'---+--r--. ---I ! ! 1 ! I i ; : ?"",... -r ·-·t -·---..--7-1 ~ ---... '--' : . ! t I f ! w ; ! • • ~ i -· l i I I ·-' -f -~------.....---r---t--,,+-...--.......---t---..-...--t-·--t--+ ! ' I ! I I • ! L. _ w ! I I;; i I ! I : Ii I IC , .... a , 1 I , I ! : , . 1 • • ~r<) 1 , i 1' I 1 ·,· {-1· l 1 1 1 i : __,J. ~ t a i I I I ··="--+---r---t-,--·---r--. ---, • • •--- l/1 ; ! : • I : i -+--~ . ... l I '! ! ' I I i ! i i . l --··1··-r---?---T-r -t· h --rr -·7 I I --.--r I • : --;-· ___ w. W . ! I I I !~ _J_I I I I i I,· •• :::> . • J I I ' . I I • • I ; _,. I rr O ·:·"T···1· ···1-7---r ·-f ··r-, ·---,· I 7-· • !34.~ 6-··1 .-• -! ·;--·! ~ 0 c1 ('\J • . ' . • I ., • I I . I • • I I • ' '--4--' I ! : I : ; J . I ! J I I • ! i I j i I I l .... . r --! •• --• r· 1··· .... ,--, • 1···· . "T" i--r-·-, r .• -·---, . -~ I • ·rT--r ---7--· ··-r i • -r f ~ i i + ·1 r r· ----, 1 i • _J -t·-----' ·:--f-·1 ·1 • -+--i i ·r-t· • 0 ·r-··-l----t--~·-·1·--~-+ T-··7-t • ,· --j----t-r -➔-•----;---i-.... :---j" r· -Tr-· , ---·--. : • 1 o I f -t , ! ! , • , , I ?o 3 . 1 i • , : : , o -~----• ! --· .1: . -!.--i . ~-i---~----r--·-r.= -· ~-$.Er· 1 j __ ; ··-'1·-·1' ·-~-i i_J __ ~ .. 1 I I j ! j ! ; ; ! , I fig-I \ . . I I . -·' ·-••• J. J. ··1 • l J.-.! •••••• ; ••• i··---1-·~ : .. -··r· -t--···--· • ...;. -···, ·-------..•--·· f 1 .. -t--..... -·t··: .. . i -.. -1'. : ! C ~M! --~-·o·-~~ 7-·I---~ ... H 2-0·1-.. i ..• } .• --f-~. ~--~.J--t-J. 7. ~--. 1 ! I : r-rJ v 1 1 , • , , • , ! • : , , • , 1 i., • • ' , I • : ,f • ' • e • ♦ , f 1 e ! L • i • • 1 1 5 , · ,... 3 ·' · 4· I • ~ · ·• 6 ·· ., ! I I e • · ! •• -!-.(~ ... • •• f:_ ... !·· l-Cr-; • i : ··-..• ~!·-·· ,., {, ,'_• --, •. '! .1\ •. , .:r---=-.: .. _!,_. • • • • • -• •• · · \:~ • ;:~ kA-,~·,i.· et>j ~-Ji 6 I ea·· -· • '!-;;:~.,,.~,' -~:,..-~ .... ~ -<_..--~~~~~~;:~_:::· .. v--:~·,i'i_;.+:~, .. (',dw,-~_,,.....,,-.._....,,1 .... ..,,, ~--------- ~ -·, , __ ..,,' ._~_~.!' •· ...,.~, --~-... --~,.., •• .,,~,. .. fl f t ! l ' i I ! I ~ ~ City of Carlsbad I 4 • i 14 O½t-1 i ,Hi •Ji4 •Eli i; ,i4M September 5, 1989 Gaylord Ruff Area Manager Dew-Par 23891 Via Fabricante Suite 611 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Dear Mr. Ruff: Oh-Friday, September 1, 1989, the Fleet Maintenance :Superintendent's response to concerns listed in your letter dated A~gust 28th was sent via FAX to youL· office. The spec~ficatioris for the Sewer/Wet Well Cleaner have been written to meet the City's needs in a cost effective manner. They have been designed with the objective of clearly describing ~he Cityis .requirements and, at the same time, to permit maximum p~acticable competition consistent with our requirements. The original response covering additional information and specific concerns is enclosed for your records. We appreciate your interest and look forward to receiving your bid on September 7th. Very truly yours, Fletcher chasing Officer Enclosure C: ·cJty :clerk·, City Attorney rdu'-- Fleet Maintenance Superintendent 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive • Carlsbad, California 92008-1989 • (619) 434-2803 -., l I I \ l 'i RCV BY:xEREl~fELECOPIER 7010; 9-5-89 2:31PM; ·-.. ,.s?~r BY:DEW PAR Sales & SerA; 9-5-89 2:39PM ; ,. -. 71476862"?5 ➔ 7886275 ➔ 24070;ij 1 24070;ij 1 19\oeW-PAR \al Sales &Service OUR AUTOMATIC TELECOPIER (FAX) NUMBER IS (714)768•6275 TO; f'\S. f.\ \e. "° '"'~ L. R ~v-..--\-e"' ~~Cl.r\ <.. c,"''( c \et"-. FROM: Ga,( \.o~ e0 Ru..~{ SUJSJ!CT: FOR YOUR INFORMATION .. P!R YOUR REQUEST FOR YOUR ACTION COMMENTS: . NUHHBER OP COPltS TO FOLLOW; 3 U' YOU PO NOT R£0EIVE ALI. OF TUE COPIES PLEASE CALL (714)768-1202 23891 Via Fabrlcante/Sulle 6111 Mission Viejo, Callfomla 82691/Telephone (714).7M 1w2 . ,· l l i l \ ! I RCU BY:XEROX TElECOP!ER 7010; 9-5-89 ' ·SENT BY:DEW PAR Sales & SerlJ; 9-5-89 September 5, 1989 Ms. Aletha. L. Rautenkranz Cit-v Clerk City of Ca:rlsbad. 1200 llm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 Dear Ha. Rautenkranz: 2:39PM ; f J.~ 1000.:::· t~➔ 7-86275 ➔ 24070:# 2 /9\oew-PAR \Al Sales &Service We have ~eoeived a copy of the Fleet Maintenance Superintendent*a responses,to our inquiries and appreciate the courtasy provided to us. ApparentlYt however our concerne were not understood clearly. The eac&latina volmne and size 0£ product liability damage awards simply makes it impr.udent to take risks of sianificant consequence. We do not wish to debate issues with the City but only tobrinS an important aafety matter to the CityAe attention. The numbers used by ua illustrate the reaaona for our concern about leaal weight. The opnglusipne are nnohenpd regardless of differences in ellll)ty aross vehicle weiaht, type of debrie weighed, or weight dietribution. Since the emersenoy, off road conditions which •ive rise to the need for maneverability ar& likelv to be 11 very infrequent" we are confused by tho rational used to support the need for a single axle chassis. l'urther, our concern with lesal wei8ht pertains .anl1' to loads carried in the d•bria tank. While the superintendent hae offered ooneiderable information about empty body and chaeeio weight~ and the weiaht of water in the fresh water tank, dabrii, tank loada, iDdopendont of other considerationa, are paramount. 23891 Via ~abricante / Suite 811 / Mission Viejo, California 92691 t Telephone (714) 768·1202 / F!AX (714) 788-6275 I RCV BY:XEROX TELECOPIER 7010; 9-5-89 2:33PM; , SENT B'I: DEW PAR Sa 1 es 8. Ser-; 9-5-89 2: 4OPM ; 71476862.75 ➔ 7~86275 ➔ The Superintend~nt b.PJ.e elected to use wet sand as a basis £or determining the prospective weight of a loaded debris tank. 24070;1:1 3 24070;H 3 Usina his fisurees, 9-cubic :yards of wet sand will wei.eh approximately 18,000 PoWld.8. If added to the prerrumed empty body and chasaia wei,sht of 25,890 pounds uaed by the Superintendent, the total unit weight would be 43.390 pounde veraue a specified GVW of 39,000 p0unda and a legal load uximum of 207000 pgunde per axle. Additional weight of perhaps 2..,200 pounds for fuel, operating personnel, and toola alao were not conside~ed by the Superintendent and will :fu.rther overloPd the unit. In addition to beina overloaded in total •eight, lt also will be overloaded on the :rear axle, perhaps sisnificantly, depending on veiaht distribution with absolutely~ water in the fresh water tank. The apeci~ications call for dealere to eubmit bides for equipment which will conform to the Department of Motor Vehicle Code and other State and Federal regulations. Based on the Superintendent~a calculations, this will not be possible usina a chaeaie with a ainale rear axle, even with tbc frcab ntor tonlt NQPty, reaardleee of equipment chosen by the City. Assuming the Citv Attornev is unwillina to indemnify dealers and manufacturers qainst liabilit;v claims from overweight operatinJl conditione, DBW-PAR may be obliaed to bid a. tandem 1•ear axle chaseie at additional cost. To ensure that all bidders are fairly treated. DRW-P.AB wiehea to have aaauranoea prior to the bid openins that equipment accepted will be publicly waia}led empty and fully loaded on each axle to verify that equipment eelectGd by the City meets both legal weight ,md volumetric capacity 0011ditiona epecified. Jtxbaw,te~ gapahi11t1ea. DBW-PAR appreciates the 8uper1ntendent•a clarification that the City desires only· "free air" capacity of 8,000 CFM and that achievement of a rated pressure of 107 inchea of water is independent of the machines· free air C8.Pftbility. With a rated "fri,e eix-" capocity of 8,.500 CPM and a vacuum rating of 207. inches of water for its etandard exhauater, Aquateoh consistently baa out performed competitor machines under the operatins condition8 required bv the Specifications, even where ~uoh deb~ie ie ooinpletely erubmerged. i I I I I ! ' R.Cl,,J EY-:xEROX TELECCPIER 7010 ; 9-S-8'8 SEl'lt BY: DEW PAR Sales & serfa; 9-5-89 2:41PM ; r .1.<+ tooo~ ro ➔ 7-86275➔ 24070:i:f q 24070;1:t 4 Front ho11a rw mountlna-Our question ie unanawerod. While we understand that the City has experienced no problems with its present front mounted hose reel, DBW-PAR wishes to know whether the reel ie to be anchored to (a) the front bump,r or (b) the frame for purposes of oor~eotly specifying ohaaaia. Beel Jocetion. Thie ia a matter of City preference. The issue of weight is an academic matter only ~ince a single rear axle chassis with a full debria tank will be leaally overloaded, in aJ1¥ event. DBW-PAR appreciates the City-a interest in selecting equipment of greatest value to it for the job :r-equired. We and A<1uateoh are pleased to be Southern California-a leading municipal and public agency dealer for saw,1r .jetting and vacuum equipment d'Ut'ing the past ll'ar. Service to the City of Carlsbad is important to us and we look forward to reepondins to your i,peoificationa. co: Citv Attorney PurchaailJS Officer Sincerely, .....-.i71~~Wi'~~ .,,.,, Area Manaaer . , / l j j, I, !' September 5, 1989 Ma. Aletha L. Rautenkranz City Clerk City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 Dear Ms. Rautenkranz: ,.. 19\oEW-PAR '-' Sales&Service We have received a copy of the Fleet Maintenance Superintendent·s responses to our inquiries and appreciate the courtesy provided to us. Apparently, ha~ever our concerns were not understood clearly. The escalating volume and size of product liability damage awards simply makes it imprudent to take risks of significant consequence. We do not wish to debate issues with the City but only to bring an important aafety matter to the City·s attention. The numbers used by ua illustrate the reasons for our concern about legal weight. The conclusions are unchanged regardless of differences in empty gross vehicle weight, type of debris weighed, or weight distribution. Since the emergency, off road conditions which give rise to the need for maneverability are likely to be "very infrequent" we are confused by the rational used to support the need for a single axle chassis. Further, our concern with legal weight pertains mil.y: to loads ca.r-ried in the debris tank. While the Superin·cendent has offered considerable information about empty body and chassis weights and the weight of water in the fresh water tank, debris tank loads, indepc3ndent of other considerations, are paramount. 23891 Via Fabricante I Suite 611 / Mission Viejo, California 92691 / Telephone (714) 768-1202 / FAX (714) 768-6275 / .. The Superintendent has elected to use wet sand aa a baaia for determining the prospective weight of a loaded debris tank. Using his figures, 9-cubic yards of wet sand will weigh approximately 18,000 pounds. If added to the presumed empty body and chassis weight of 25,390 pounds used by the Superintendent, the total unit weight would be 43,390 pounds versus a specified GVW of 39,000 pounds and a legal lo~d maximll1'l of 20,000 pounds per axle. Additional weight of perhaps 2,200 pounds for fuel, operating personnel, and tools also were not considered by the Superintendent and will further overload the unit. In addition to being overloaded in total weight, it also will 'be overloaded on the rear axle, perhaps significantly, depending on weight distribution with absolutely IlQ water in the fresh water tank. The speci£ications call for dealers to submit bids for equipm.Ant which will conform to the Department of Motor Vehicle Code and other State and Federal regulations. Baaed on the Superintendent·a calculations, this will not be possible using a chassis with a single rear axle, even with the fr.esb water tank em.pty, regardless of equipment chosen by the City. Assuming the City Attorney is unwilling to indemnify dealers and manufacturers against liability claims from overweight operating conditions, DEW-PAR may be obliged to bid a tandem rear axle chassis at additional coat. To ensure ~hat all bidders are fairly treated, DEW-PAR wishes to hav~ assurances prior to the bid opening that equipment accepted wlll be publicly weighed empty and fully loaded on each axle to verify that equipment selected by the City meets both legal weight and volumetric capacity conditions specified. Exhauster capabilitia~-DEW-PAR appreciates the Superintendent .. s clarification that the City desireo only "free air" capacity of 8,000 CFM and that achievement of a rated pressure of 107 inches of water is independent of the machines· free air capability. With a rated "free air" capacity of 8,500 CFM and a vacuum rating of 2.0.1. inches of water for its standard exhauster. Aquatech consistently baa out performed competitor machines under the operating conditions required by the Specifications, even where auch debris is completely aubm~rged. Front hose reel mountin~. Our question is unanswered. While we understand that the City baa experienced no problems with its preaent front mounted hose reel, DEW-PAR wishes to know whether. the reel is to be anchored to (a} the front bumper or (b) the frame for purposes of correctly specifying chassis. Beel location. Thia is a matter of City preference. The issue of weight is an academic matter only since a single rear axle chassis with a full debris tank will be legally overloaded, in any event. DEW-PAR appreciates the City""s interest in selecting equipment of greatest value to it for the job required. We and Aquatech are pleased to be Southern California-a leading municipal and public agency dealer for sewer jetting and vacuum equipment during the past year. Service to the City of Carlsbad ia important to ua and we look forw.ird ·to responding to your specifications. cc: City Attorney Purchasing Officer Sincerely, ~~44Y ra-t~ Ruff 1/ 71 Area Manager ' . September 1, 1989 TO: PURCHASING AGENT FROM: FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT ANSWER TO LETTER OF CONCERNS DATED AUGUST 28, 1989 FROM 'DEW-PAR SALES AND SERVICE In response to the letter from DEW-PAR SALES AND SERVICE, these are the responses from Fleet Operations Division: A. THE SIZE OF THE TRUCK CHASSIS ON WHICH THE BODY IS TO BE MOUNTED AND THE WEIGHT OF THE "ASSEMBLED UNIT. In summary, DEW-PAR has concerns about the configuration of the truck in ,comparison with the State ... of California Motor Vehicle Code. A copy of their letter is attached. FLEET OPERATIONS RESPONSE The figures supplied by DEW-PAR are specious. Even though the figures supplied by DEW-PAR apparently do not apply directly to any equipment presently owned by the City of Carlsbad, they do warrant examination. First of all, these figures are to represent an average estimated weight for a Vactor, Vac-con, Camel, Aquatech. These m~chines cannot be directly compared with each other on axle loadings. Vactor and Vac-Con separate the fresh water tank from the debris tank. Camel and Aquatech have an integral fresh water/debris tank. Using Dew-Par's own figures 8.33 lbs. per gallon of water, the issue addressed here is where 8 1 330 lbs. will be placed on the truck when the specified 1,000 gallon capacity fresh water tank is full. The figures supplied by Dew-Par must be from one of their machines -either an Aquatech or a camel because of the heavy rear axle loading configuration. concerned about the safety of its own equipment, the Fleet Operations Division contacted Haaker Equipment company for figures on axle loading. Carlsbad I s equipment is presently at Haaker for repair and was not available to be weighed. The information from Haaker indicates that a typical empty machine as specified will weigh about 25,390 lbs.; 12,990 lbs. on the rear axle (not 16,308), 12,400 lbs. on the front axle. Upon receipt of our Vactor from their shop these figures may be confirmed at a local scale. PURCHASING AGENT September 1, 1989 Page 2 At the tilne the specifications were being written it was considered to exclude manufacturers with combined fresh water/debris tanks from bidding on a maintenance standpoint. This consideration was discarded as being too exclusive. However, in light of the loading problems associated with an integral fresh water/debris tank enumerated by Dew-Par it is the recommendation by the Fleet Operations Superintendent that should the situation arise where the submitted bids are close, the manufacturer with the separate tanks be selected based on safety considerations. Again, using Dew-Par's figures, they attest that the weight of the empty body will be about 15,000 lbs. More than 4,000 lbs., or 29% of this weight, will be on the front axle. Almost 11,000 lbs., or 71% of this weight, will be on the rear axle. Under the heading "Typical Full-Load, single Axle, In Pounds" as an example a nine cubic yard body is loaded with a material which weighs more than wet sand. As a rule of thumb, one cubic yard of wet sand will weigh one ton, 2,000 lbs. The nine cubic yard body load in the example weighs 3,000 lbs. more than this. What is important to note is that the load within the body is not distributed in the same proportion a$ the empty body itself. The empty body distributes its weight 29% to the front, 71% to the rear. After loading this body with 21,500 lbs. of material 2% (4:30 pounds) of the payload is on the front, 98% of the payload is oh the rear. This would suggest a column of material placed directly over the rear axle. Using figures from Haaker Equipment Company representing Carlsbad's current equipment, a Vactor with a full fresh water tank should -·weigh approximately 15,580 lbs. on the front axle, 17,445 lbs. on the rear axle. This would be a total vehicle weight of 33,025 lbs. These figures may be confirmed on Carlsbad's machine when it returns from repairs. It is the conclusion of the Fleet Operations Division that the vehicle as specified will meet all of the state of California vehicle code requirements. - THE VEHICLE SHALL HAVE OFF-ROAD CAPABILITY The definition of "off-road" by Fleet Operations Division is any non-paved road. These may be roads which are encountered entering a typical landfill. Therefore, off-road conditions do not necessarily imply the extreme rough terrain conditions suggested to by Dew-Par. ' I I ,1 , '. PURCHASING AGENT September 1, 1989 Page 3 In the state of an emergency, it remains the option of the City of Carlsbad to operate its equipment as it sees fit. If necessary the new equipment will serve as a water tender, using the 1,000 gallon fresh water tank only, or at its option using th~ nine cubic yard debris tank (1,818 gallons), or to fill both ta·~~. The City of Carlsbad realizes that this does not const.i tut~ a safe loading condition, but also realizes that the emergency situation like this is very infrequent. To allow the specified equipment to operate on a day to day basis in off-ro~d conditions, the rear axle is specified at 3,000 lbs. greater than the legal loading limit. Extra heavy rear springs are also specified. It is the intention that this will benefit the city .of Carlsbad in cost avoidance of suspension repairs. RESPONSES REQUESTED FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY After examining the figures from by Dew-Par and those figures supplied representing The City of Carlsbad• s current equipment, the Fleet Operations Division emphatically states that the specified machine will not violate weight laws stipulated by the Californi~ Vehicle Code, that there is no, contradiction in the bid specifications requiring that th~ equipment comply with California Vehicle Code, California Administrative Code, and federal laws. Further, Fleet Operations Division asserts that it will not be necessary to hold harmless any dealer for the specified equipment. As far as instal.ling an automatic engine shutdown safety governor when the vehicle is overloaded on any one axle, this equipment is not available on the market. The Fleet Operations Superintendent has had over 20 years experience in the maintenance of refuse collection equipment. A devise as described by Dew-Par to notify the operator·of any overloading condition is highly desired by the r~fuse collection industry and to date has not been supplied. If it had, there would be a ready market for this device, and it would be a common device industry-wide. In addressing the problem of filling both the fresh water tank and the debris tank and overloading the equipment, the Fleet Operations Division and the Sanitation Division currently require that the In- Line water scree~ be removed after jet rodding. This screen is at the inlet to the high-pressure fresh water pump. Removing the screen essentially empties the fresh water tank. This practice will ensure that both the debris tank and the fresh water tank will not both be full while transporting. PURCHASING AGENT September 1, 1989 Page 4 B: THE VOLUMETRIC CAPACITIES OF WATER AND DEBRIS TANKS It is the intention of the Fleet Operations Di vision to use physical measurements to determine the capacities of the fresh ~ater and debris tanks. The specifications will not be modified. Fleet Operations admits that there was possibly an error on its part and not specifying the difference between "usable" capacity and •11 design11 capacity. However, all of the prospective vendors are dealing with this on an equal basis. It is common to imply that a 11 1,000 g·allon capacity fresh water tank" will hold i,ooo gallons, and the same for a nine cubic yard debris tank. C: BID REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SPECIFIED AUXILIARY ENGINE The Fleet Operations Division did not specify that there must be an auxiliary engine. The requirements by the City of Carlsbad are simple and they are stated on the first page of the bid specifications: 1) The unit must be able to clean rocks and other debris from the bottom of a 30 foot deep wet well. 2) .The unit specified must be able to move at the same time it is vacuuming. It was assumed that each prospective vendor would assess the • capabilities of their equipment in submitting bids meeting these ~pecifications. It is a primary concern with the Fleet Operations Division that the unit "perform" as specifi~d rather than meet factory CFM requirements. The specifications for ~,ooo CFM at 107 inches of water can be assumed to be "free air" at the intake to the vacuum exhauster. For clarification, this specification requires that the equipment have some kind of vacuum exhauster which will be capable of emptying a completely full 30 foot deep wet well using an 8 inch inside diameter intake tube. This equipment should be capable of not only emptying the wet well but also retrieving rocks and other debris from the bottom. If vendors desire to state an exception to the bid to achieve these performance specifications then they are invited to do so. D: MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FRONT MOUNTED HOSE REEL In the recent past it was the experience of the Fleet Operations Division to have to repair its current equipment in the field. In .. PURCHASING AGENT September 1, 1989 Page 5 preparation for the sale of the Pacific Rim Properties the city equip~e~t was in an off-road condition severe enough to break the boom off of the·unit. From this experience the bid specification includes a boo~·rest, frame mounted, with_a locking device in the saddle. At no time were there problems with the front mounted hose reel!' ::Ct is the recommendation from Fleet Operations that the ~pecifications for the front mounted hose reel not be changed. E: HOSE REEL MOUNTING LOCATION ~he Fleet Operations Division did not experience any -ground clearance ·problems with its present -equipment. It does not recommend annot~ting the bid specifications for this requirement. If Dew-Par wiphes to bid an exception to the present specifications they may 'do so. However, a rear mounted hose reel we>uld only compound the rear axie weight problem which Dew-Par finds so significant. c: City A~torney City Cl~rk ·V { l l I I • j j r i r j f l f. ! I i • i f ' 1 ' .I' August 28, 1989 Ms. Al~tha L. Rautenkranz City Clerk City of Carlsoad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 Dear Ms. Rautenkranz: . ~ t fl/\ DEW-PAR \Al Sales & Service DEW-PAR Sales & Service has reced.ved a Did Reguest from the City• of Carlsbad for a Sewer/t,1et Well Cleaner, Bid No. 8. DEW.:..PAR is a dealer for Aguatech lnc., one of the nation·s leadinj manufacturers of truck mounted sewer cleaning, jetting and vacuum equipment. We have several concerns about liability and_~afety factors pertaining to-the equipment specified and w6uld like cla~ifidation and additional information prior to submitting a bid. Our concerns incl'ude, but are not limited to the foliowirig: A. Thff siz~_Q_f the truck -chassjs oflJllliclLthe.._llo.clv is to be ~he· {.,eight of the ... ..asaembl.e.d-unj t, The City has specifie~ a sin~le rear axle chassis for a 9-cubic yard combination machine. The California Motor Vehicle Code requires that no more than 20,000 pounds may be carried by any one ax'le and 34,000 pounds by each set of tandem a:des. It is DEW-PAR·s experience that most truck mounted, 9-yai'd combination sewer jetting and vacuum machines reguir& a chassis rated for approximately 52,0~0 pounds GVW, with tandem·rear axles. It has been common for manufacture1's of combination machines to cotitend that these machines are never fully loaded with debris when transporting loads to dump sites. It also has been assumed that water for jetting will be used up and excess water in the debris tank drained out or dewatet•ed before debris is transported. However, these assumptions are true only under theoretical conditions which assume that operators conscientiously drain off excess water and transport less than full loads. The alternative is an obviously overweight condition. • 23891 Via Fabricante I Suite 611 / Mission Viejo, California 92691 /Telephone'(714) 768-1202 / FAX (714) 768-6275 i •, ., ---✓- On July 21st, 1989 a letter was submitted to the Purchasing Department of the City of Carlsbad. This letter was in response to a request for comments on the proposed specifications. These comments and concerns also were discussed with the Fleet Operations Division. In reviewing the revised Bid Specifications, many of the changes suggested by us were incorporated, while others were not. However, the issue of an undersized chassis has not changed. The specifications still call for a 16,060 lb. front axle and a single 23,006 lb. rear axle. To illustrate the danger of mounting U1e Specified equipment on a single rear axle chassis, the following table may be of interest: Single axle chassis only (1) Driver and 100 gal of fuel Tools, tubes and accessories Body only, empty {2) Total, empty 0L) I~ternational 2554 4 x 2 &out 7,053 804 245 .4~ 12,436 fu:lai:_ To.:taL 4,395 11,448 396 1,200 755 1,000 l.Q....1..62 .11Ll2afi 16, :308 28,744 ( 2) Average estimated we.ight :foi• Vactor, Vac-Con, Camel and Aquatech 9 yd. single engine combination machines, with front mounted hose reels. Add 700 pounds for auxiliary engine. These figures show that with no payload or water, the unit is near the legal maximum on the real' axle. With a typical full load of mixed debris consisting of sand, gfavel, rocks, bricks, and sludge, the weight distribution will be approximately as shown below: Tlm.i.~LE:u.ll--L!:IBcL.-5.ing]_e___fu~a .. _jj1_P.n11nds Il't.'£.mt Haar._-_ T.!ital_ 'l'otal empty wei.ght 12,436 J 6,308 2fJ,744 9 cu. yd. payload, no water -~ 2.L.Q1.Q ~].50{) Total weight 12, fJ66 37,378 50,244 Bas~tj on this example, the City·s truck would be legally overloaded 17,378 pounds on the rear axle. Only a tandem rear axle capable of ca1•rying legal loads of 34,000 pounds would be suitable. ) j l ' \ I ! j ' . ' For additional confirmation of problems encountered by users operating combinat1on machines mounted on sil1gle a:des, it is recommended you speak with Dc1rry Gree:nberg, Power Equipmi'.:nt Specification Writer, at the County of Los Angeles, (818)458-7345. In fact, the Cc,unty found it necessary to remount a fl.:::mJb..iQ_YJ:lr.d capacity combinc.ltion machine ft·om a single rear axle to a tandem axle in order to carry legal payloads. Also, it is noted in the specific~tions that t11is unit is to be used as an emergency "off-1,oad" fi.re truck req_uiring "e::-:tra heavy suspension". We assume that to he of value in this application, the unit: would, of ueceasiiy, be completely loaded with water (using both fresh water aud dt::lwis tanks). 'l'his type of application would add 23,482 pounds to the empty body and chassis and yield a total gross vehicle weight of 52,226 pounds. It then would be required to negotiate rough terrain on an undersized chassis " ... in remote areas". With a specified GVW rating of 39,000 pounds, this clearly would constitute a potentially haz~rdous and unsafe operating condition. To enable DEW-PAR to pt•operly appraise the risks of offe2.'jng Aquatech equipment to the City of Carlsbad, we would appi'eciate a letter from the City Atto1-ney which addresses the followiug issues and concerns pertaining .to the manner 1n which the City plans to ope1·a t;.e the vehicle: 1. The City of Carlsbad acknowledges that the sewer/wet well cleaner specified may violnte \oJeight laws stipulated by CalifornifJ. Moto:t• Vehicle Code, Section 35550 of Chapter 5, Article 1, when operated \•lith partial or full loads on chassis eguipped with a single rear axle. 2. 'l'he City acknowledges that its ope1'ation of tha equipment may contradict Bid Specifications requiring thut egu:i pment offered complys with the Califo1•nia Veldcla Co~~. the California Administrative Code, und federal laws. :, . The City of Ca1•lsbad ag1'ees to l1old hurmless and and indemnify any dealer or manufacturer of egui~nent offered in acco:t'dance with the Bid Specifications against losses from claims brougl1t by the City or third parties due to operation of the equi1:,ment in a mannel.' which violates State of California Department of Motor Vehicle weight laws. 4. The City agrees to modify the Bid Speciifications to provide for the installation of an automatic engine shutdown safety governor when the weight of the machine specified exceeds 20,000 pounds on any single axle or such lesser weight as may be dictated by the capacity limits of axles, wheels, or tires as provided by the manufacturers of those components. Further, the City agrees it will regularly inspect and maintain such engine shutdown device in an fully operating condition, as long as the machine is in service. B. Iha vohm1e_trj c capaoj ti es of Nlll.er.Jll~bris tanl~ DEW-PAR wishe:s to ascertain the documentation and testing methods which will be required by the City to validate representations made by vendors concerning the ability of machines bid to meet the volumetric capacities specified in the Bid Request for water and debris tanks. DEW-PAR also wishes to verify the extent to which the City will accept a machine which does not have a water tank capacity of 1,000 gallons or a debris tank capacity of 9 cubic yards. In addition, the bid specifications, as presently written, do not distinguish between "usable"· capacity and "design" or "engineered" capacity. DEW-PAR wishes to advise the City that its reason for concern is due to test~ recently conduc~ed on a competitive machine similar to that specified. This machine had water and debris tank rated cap~cities of 1,000 gallons and 9-cubic yards respectively. The results of these tests are shown in the table below. These results, which a1.'e documented by ce1•tified weight tickets, show that the actual capacity of the water tanlt was 779.11 gallons, not the rated 1,000 gallons and the actual capacity of the debris tank was 6. 53 cubic yards, compaz•ed to a rated capacity of 9-cubic yards. 1. Weight of vehicle with full water.' tank Less: vehicle empty weight Payload of water in wate1• tank 35,540 lbs. =2fl.....Q.filLl~ 6,490 lbs 6490 lbs. payload divided by 8.33 lbs. per gallon= 779.11 gallons of water 2. Weight of vehicle with full debris tank Less: vehicle empty weight Payload of water in debris tank 40,0-10 lbs. =2.9...D.50-1.lm ... 10,990 lbs. 10,990 lbs payload divided by 8.33 lbs. per gallon= 1319.33 gallons divided by 202 gallons per c11. yd.= 6.53 cu. yds. --~ . ; ., ' ,, I i ! ! I I t t l I .,. C. Bid Regu i rP,rnents for tbe..__sper, if.ied au:d 1 i ar:v en~ The Specifications for the Sewer/vlet Well Cleaner call for the vacuum exhauster to be able to produce air flow of 8000 cubic feet per minute. Clarification is needed as to whether the chassis engine or auxiliar-y engine is to be used to power the e:-chauster. For your benefit, enclosed is a performance cu?.·ve chart submitted at a bid opening in June, 1988 at Spokane County for a Vactor model 810 Jet Rodder. Among other things, it suggests that the horsepower requirement needed to acl1ieve the specified 8000 cfm rating approximates 200 hp. Since the rated capacity of the Cummins 4BT engi.ne commonly used for auxiliary power is 91 h.p., the implication is that significantly larger auxiliary engines 01' the truck engine must be used to attain the s~ecified air flow capacity . If the City has no intended application for the auxiliary engine, DEW-PAR wishes to know this prior to submitting its bid. In addition, DEW-PAR wishes to verify if the Cit.y·s requirement for 8000 cfm air flow is to be rneasur•ed as "free air" or against a-pre1.'lsure of 107 inches of water, as stated in the Specifications. Stich distinction is important to DEW-PAR in its determination of the size exh,auster to be bid. Finally, DEW-PAR wishes to know how the City plans to test the exhauster selected by the Ci t.1 ·to ensuz·e it is capable of meeting Bid Sp~cifications. Also, we note that the City.has omitted any requirement for performance curves or other certifications pertinent to e:<hauster performance. -D. Mo.unt.i.ruL.r.a9.~ment.a..fQr frqnt mounted hnse r:F>e l . In view of the off-road operating conditions which the Specification envisions, the Specification does not make clear whether the hose reel is to he bolted to the front bumper of th~ chassis selected or mounted directly to the frame. Also, no indication of minimum acceptable gi•ound clearance for the front~ hose reel is provided. Small variations in terrain will have a magnified impact on the vertical movement of hose reels extending 6-feet 01• more in front of the front a:de. This, presumably, should be an area of concern to the City. ln addition, some truck manufacturers provide alternative chassis depending on :reguiremen.t.s for front mounted implements. Prior to develoi:,ing its bid, DEW-PAR wishes to know if the City has a strong p1•efe1•ence for the manner in ·which the fl•ont hose reel is to be mounted. . ,-' .. ,. I I I I E. HQ.se reel mount.ing location... DEW-PAR wishes to advise the City that Aquatech-s newly introduced rear mounted, ~ivoting hose reel may be a convenient solution to ground clearance and driver visability problems. Numerous sa·fety and operational features ha.ve made this the design of choice in recent months by several Southern California municipalities and public agencies. While Aquatech provides both fi-ont and rear mounted hose reels, DEW-PAR would be pleased to explain how a rear mounted reel alternative could be of significant value to the City. Thank you for your attention to the foregoing matters. Please call me if I can provide further cla1•ification. cc: City Attorney Purchasing Officer Sincerely, kPIY /V-r,t"f'/ Gaylord lf.~11ff Area Manager . I