Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-07CHLORINE USED FOR EFFLUENT April, 1967 Day Pounds Hours Rema r ks 1 -Sat . 0 0 2 -Sun. 11,233 0930 -2400 ~14 .5) 3 -Mon . 8,065 0000 -1200 12) 4 -Tues . 0 0 5 -Wed. 6,336 1800-2400 ~41 6 -Thurs . 20,673 0000-2400 7 -Fri . 19,851 0000 -2400 24 8 -Sat . 20,378 0000 -2400 24 9 -Sun. 17,116 0000 -2400 24 10 -Mon. 1 7,766 0000 -2400 24 11 -Tues . 5,559 0000 -0800 8) 12 -Wed. 0 0 13 -Thurs . 5,458 1800 -2400 mi 14 -Fri. 25,605 0000 -2400 ·'' 15 -Sat. 10,812 0000 -1200 16 -Sun . 0 0 17 -Mon . 5, 769 1800-2400 6) ... 18 Tues . 15,091 0000 -1500 15) ·' 19 -Wed. 6,792 1800-2400 ~4 ., ·. 20 -Thurs . 21,977 0000 -2400 21 -Fri . 20,701 0000 -2400 24 22 -Sat . 21, 156._· 0000 -2400 24 23 -Sun . 22,031 0000 -2400 24 24 -Mon. 20,989 0000 -2400 24 25 -Tues . 21,638 0000 -2400 24 26 -i·led. 23,844 0000 -2400 24 27 -Thurs . 1 0,460 0000 -1200 12 28 -Fri . 7,500 1800-2400 6) 29 -Sat . 9,311 0000 -1030 10 .5) 30 -Sun . 0 0 TOTALS 376,111 426.0 j Copies to Harpe r, Galloway, Dunn, Sigler, Hunt Day 1 -Mon . 2 -Tues . 3 -Wed. 4 -Thurs. 5 -Fri. 6 -Sat. 7 -Sun . 8 -Mon . 9 -Tue s. 10 -Wed. 11 -Thurs . 12 -Fri . 13 -Sat . 14 -Sun. 15 -Mon . 16 -Tues. 17 Wed . 18 -Th u rs . 19 -Fri. 20 Sat . 21 -Sun . 22 --Mon. 23 -Tues . 24 Wed . 25 -Thurs . 26 -Fri. 27 -Sat . 28 -Su.u. 29 -Mon. 30 -Tues. 31 -Wed . TOTALS J Pounds 0 0 0 8,330 12,875 19,467 1 3,936 0 0 0 0 8,353 23,394 10 ,730 0 0 0 8~667 31,791 31,509 14,887 0 0 0 9,106 28, 765 28,890 30,114 30,572 10 ,518 0 321,904 CHLORINE USED FOR EFFLUENT May, 1 967 Hours 0 0 0 1800-2400 0000 -1330 0400 -2400 0000 -1730 0 0 0 0 1700-2400 0000 -2400 0000 -1200 0 0 c 1800-2400 0000 -2400 0000 -2400 0000-1300 0 0 0 1800-2400 0000 -2400 0000-2400 0000 -2400 0000 -2400 0000 -1200 0 ! 6) 1 3 .5) 20) 17 .5) 2 8 1 .0 Remarks Holly discharge to sewer begins Holly water to Irvine ·1 " , " Holly partial to sewer Copies to Ha rper, Galloway, Dunn, Sigle r, Hunt ... CHLORINE USED FOR EFFLUENT June 1967 Day Pounds Hours Remarks 1 -Thurs . 0 0 2 -Fri . 11,523 1600-2400 ~8) 3 -Sat. ll,832 0000 -1200 12) 4 -Sun. 0 0 5 -Mon . 0 0 v 6 -Tues . 7,729 1800-2400 !~fr l Holly all to sewer begins 7 Wed. 31,100 0000 -2400 8 -Thurs . 30,667 0000 -2400 9 -Fri . 8,875 0000-0600 6) 10 -Sat . 0 0 11 -Sun. 12,673 1600-2400 ~4 12 Mon . 34,744 0000 -2400 '. 13 Tues. 36,266 0000 -2400 24 14 -Wed . 40,109 0000 -2400 24 15 -Thurs . 39,171 0000 -2400 24 : 16 -Fri. 37,149 0000 -2400 24 ·'· 17 -Sat . 35,920 0000 -2400 24 ., .. 18 -Sun. 32,203 0000 -2400 24 19 .Mon. 11 ,463 0000 -1000 10 20 -Tues. 0 0 21 -Wed . 0 0 22 -Thurs . 0 0 23 Fri. 26,096 1000 -2400 14 24 -Sat. 34,674 0000 -2400 24 25 -Sun . 29,975 0000 -2400 24 26 -Mon . 32,259 0000 -2400 24 27 -Tues . 1 4,1 58 0000 -1200 12 28 -Wed . 0 0 29 -Thurs . 0 0 30 -Fri . 14,863 1600-2 4 00 (8) TOTALS 533,449 372 . ' / / _:;. J!,·)_. ~ \\ j "-.J Copies to Harper, Galloway, Dunn, Sigler, Hunt The staffs of the entities proposing this study believe there is more than a 50 -50 chance that this study may reveal that ~osal of digested sludge in a suitabl e manner may be beneficial to the over-all marine environment rather than detrimental as alleged by certain conservation groups . information which should N have a bearing on a national scale as to the future requirements set for (imposed on) public agencies discharging to coastal waters . The biggest problem faei Bg with which we are confronted today is the disposal of the s l udge (solids re~overed from the sewage ). At the present time the Federal government disapproves of the discharge of slu dge, raw or digested, to the ocean; howeve r, it is generally be l ieved that they do not have factual information to support their position . At the present time the Orange County Sanitation Districts sell {eemme~ei a l ~j sludge to two/fertilizer firms on a day-to -day basis . This cannot be considered a permanent so l ution to the problem, as ma~y agencies have found out . It is known that ocean disposal is the cheapest (most economical ?) method; in fact , the City of Los Angeles, after spending an enormous amount o f money to process s l udge for fertilizer production, abandoned the p r oject and installed a 20 11 s l udge disposal line which extends seven miles to sea . COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10844 ELL.IS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 5175, FOUNTAIN VAL.LEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708 July 7, 1967 TO: ALL DIRECTORS RE: Proposed Study Entitled "EVALUATION OF COASTAL WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESOURCES" TELEPHONES: AREA CODE 714 540•2910 962•2411 More and more articles are appearing in magazines and newspapers concerning the alleged pollution of the ocean because of sewage and industrial waste discharge. Actually, most of the statements are based on supposition and theories. In fact, the Federal requirements are based on experience with fresh water effects which are entirely different from sea water·. This situation results in the taxpayers being required to make certain expenditures involving continuing operating costs as well as capital improvement costs to meet standards which may later be shown to have no basis of fact and therefore drastically revised. The purpose of the study outlined in the attached report is to establish a factual background on this subject which hopefully will result in rational and meaningful require- ments in the future and a savings to the taxpayers of the Districts. FAH:jb Enc. Fred A. Harper General Manager .... ~ 11111•., .. ' ~.· .. '.._,) ~Vi<.-L/ v.?' / 'f6 7 EV .. L\.LUATXON OF COASTA!.1 WASTE OE' SCIE1'1I'IF1.C CRITERIA FOR 'Io Introduction D!SPOSAT.. PRl\.CTICES AND DEVELOPHENT CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESQURCES Utiliz~tion of tha marine environment for disposal of evcr~increaoing quantitico of treated wastes --while at the same time protecting and cons~rving marine resource~ represents one of b~e greatest challenges in the emerging field of environmental sc~enc~. and engineering. In spite of a long history of marine waste disposal with gradually improving techniques ruid treatment methods, there is relatively little ocientifically based knowledge on the influence of treated wastes on the ecology of adjacent coastal waterso Too frequently, the true situation has been obscured by conflicting claims that waste discharges have damaged or are enhancing the beneficial ~sea of the ocean. Undoubtedly it is possible for the waste discharge to do both -- er.hance and degrade --depending on the degree of waste treat- ment, t.~e _conditions and location of discharge, and the funda- mental physical, chemical, and biological parameters of the sp~cific mari.~e environmento Zn the past two de~ades, beginning research efforts have been carried out in the United States (especially in . · c~lifornia) and ~road which have been sufficient to point up \ ,/ .· . ·~ . ,• .... .! .. ··.· \._) \.,.) . I the importance and complexity of the ouhject. It io conoludod thn~ with aufficient rosGarch to dovclop the: fundamental sci~n­ tific facts, it ohould be possibla to design and oper~te waate disposal f acilitioG which not only guarantee protection and cono~rvation of marina reaourceo but enl1ance some of tho receiving water valuas through .increased productivity of the.·· , . ocean and hence its beneficial useso .. . , ·. " . As a reoult of the factor~ noted above, all concerned·J with the discharging of treated waatea to ~~rine waters have recognized the need for improving the status of acientif ic I 'knowledge in thiri field. Despite the considerable research otudies already ca:r:r:ied out and underway, the present situation ·· m.ay b~ des02:ibed as confusing and in urgent need of a compre- .. hensive collation and evaluation of the atato of existinq "khc\:lledge a : . Interest in improving marine waste disposal technology is nation-wido and universalr how·evar, in the USA, California · has h~en a focus of interest and knowledge in this field -- particularly with respect to development·of regulatory criteria, of marL~e monitoring programs, and of research programs both in the laborat.o:ry and in the field. In Southern California, four waste disposal agencies have been particularly concerned, namely the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, the City of Loo Angeles; The County Sanitntion District of Orange County, nnd t.~e City of San Diego. All have major disposal facilities ,. ,: • ~f ! .. i I '; ,'I ; ' I •I : I ! . I I . ··1 I ··, .. ··' '.~ ;·,: :: '. ; ·i i .. · . ·- -...,,,_,,· . / diechnrging to open nm.rino wutcro nnd nll·havo ocrricd out sizcuble continuing progranm of monitoring, opeoial inveatiga- tione, and rece~rch. Tho two oyst0mo within Loa P.ng~lea County are umong t.~e largeot nmrL~e dispooal operations in the ~10rld, each discharging in exceo:1 of 325 MGD. The research program proposed herein would bo a Joint Venture of these four agencieo, opc~nting together wi~ aesiitanco from o·the:r interested public and privD.to agencies, and, hopefully, with major finai1ci~l support from the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. A three-year program is envisioned, to be carried out by a selected ?taff of acienticts and engineers, with the f9llowing specific objectives:. (l) collation ~d evalua~ ~ ~ ~~-M(1-"Y\ 4t~4 . tion of presently available data o~1.t..~Aecology of coastal watera ~ -__ ./ and~rine waste dis~~E!.-2!..~~~' (2) generation of supplemental .data on the reievant inter-related parmuetera, (3) development of a mathematical model aupported b~ pilot and field exparimenta to relate environmental factors to waste qunlity parameters, and (4) conclusions and recommendations on modifying present waste disposal practices, if requiredo It is anticipated that each yec.r of effort as outlined i~ th~ Work Plan will result in significant findings and progress toward the ultimate qoalo IIo Work Plan ·A. Establish nn advioory committee of outstanding experts in relnted diociplinea to provide genersl guidance, conceive specific go~la and procedures, ·-3-' ·--------·-----·--··-· .. ': ' ... · . . ': . . ~ . ·. .. •. .· •, '.:-.·.... • •• : # review findings, and author finol rcporto Rolatcd disciplines should include but not ncceDsarily be lL~ited to oceanography, resourcca man~gcmcnt,. cnvironmentul health, m~ine eoicnce, economica, and environmental engineering. Advicory committee mcrr~ers will be oelected en the basiz of yeara of eA-perience, competency, and objectivity~ · Bo Assemble ~ competGnt working ataff headed by a ./ .. project directo~ to prosecute the study under the direction ·of th~ advisory committee. This group will.be supported by t..~a existing sta~fs and I ·oceanographic data collection resources of tho supporting agenciese Prosecute the study in three general phaaea. l. First Phase -Review W"nat is Known a. Define The Physical Boundaries The physical boundaries.of the study would include all coastal waters from the Ventura- Los Angeles co~~ty line to the Mexican Border, but exclud~ e3tuaries and enclosed harbors. The .offshor~ boundary ohould extend to, but not be specifically limited at, the toe of.tho · coastal shelf" Thia wat0r zono incorporates the major bio- logical environment of the Southern California _ _A __ • .• ........ ·--·· .............. -...... ···-· ... -~ ..... ··-. . . . I ~~ .' '._,) '·' coa~t, in tcr~s o~ both biorazioo and aivercity o~ spccicso Zt con~titutec tho zone of mL~imum water int.e:cchangc whe:co physicc.l boundi:lriee limit water cr~ant.:Ltieo and creZlte th~ localized·.- ecological eyztcm3 toi'lUrd which thi3 study ia · directed. It L~cludcs "ll of the wat~ra i.~- fluenccd by n'~rinc w~ote disrJOaal sy:;te~. .. I b$ Ass~n-J)le ~ .. vailable D~ta I' The areu has been otudied hy many oceano- graphers, biologists, and engineers over the past years. Data. on the physical,:! chemicul and i biological chaxactcristics of thia·ar0a can be obtained from the agencies involveda Tve most concentr~ted studieo have been conducted ~, the vicinity o~ submarine waDte- w~ter outfallc, the Scr!pp 0 s pier at La Jolla, and the NaV'J Electronic Laboratory Station at l'oint Loraao · 'A p~eliminary listing of .soW:ce data must includez l) Allen Hancock Foundation -USC 2) Califo~r.ia Department of Fish and ~rune Lahoratory~ Terminal Ialando 3) . California wate~ Quality Cont:ol Eoardo 4) Loa Ang~lec City, Bureau of Sanitation. ~ ., '· , ~ ~· p' • . • •' .. 5) Los Angeleo County, Department of Recreation and Parka. 6) Los Angeles Cou~ty Sanitation Districtao 7) 'Navy Electro1·dcs Laboratory, Sa.~ Diego.·· 8) Orange County Sanitation District. 9) City of San Diego. 10) Scripps Institute cf Oceanographye ll) Uo s. Army Corps of Engineers. ! I 12) Vo S. Coast ~nd Geodetic Survey.o 13) u .. s. weathGr Bureau. 'i 14) California Institute of Technologye I 15) University·of California~ Several other prominent data sources can be expected to be dizcoveced in the course of preliminary invest.igati~n •. · c. · Collate a.~d Evaluate Data Once the existil1g data has been asserabled. cystema analy~is and computer processing method~ will he used to collate t..~e data and to identify t.~e cont~olling physical characte=istics of Ioca!.- ized ecological oystemso Such parameters may include temperature, salinity, bottom topography . .. and characteristics, nutrient levels, water velocity, turbidity, or other parameters that may evolve -6- .. :J. • ... ': ·. f ::orl the st.udic:J" . Be.ch lccol ocologica.l zystcm I "'i Da\:.a r:>rocc.csing juct cno J •' ··salinity -~urfucc to 200 feet -10,000 ··-: .:,. .. · .. .• .. ·. . . ' oamples (co~sisting of some 65 species, identified individually and by groups in terms of dominance)e Dissolved OY.'Jgen -Surface to 200 feet - 10,000 samples ~~~.monia Nit~ogen -Surface only -l,000 samples Water Color -Surface only -l0,000 samples Transparency -10,000 sa.~ples I 'I Fish (90 bottom species) -100,000 samples Invertebrates (240 bottom species) 500,000 samples ! This one data source alone can' supply more than 10~ data bits with considerable inter- related complexity. ,• d. Present fir.dings a.~d recommend modifications in existing data coll~ction techniques. It is anticipated that the foregoing.data analysis will reveal gaps in our.understanding of ecological systems and d~termine the reliability or correlation factors of existing data. ~he need for inf ormatio1~\heretofore overlooked in· marine studies will lead to revisions in existing. 'data collection procedures and programs. 2o Second Phase -Collect and Evaluate New Data a.. .. Collect additional data on and evaluat~ \ \ -s- I: J.i .11 • i1 . ii 11 11 . f l ...... ~------.-........ -----·---.. ··--··---··-·----·---------·---··--.. -...... ·---....... .. .. ~ ~ '.,•-:. ~ ., the ii1fluc~1co of t.:::eatcd wast.ca o=ri. the produc- tivity of pl~nt ~nd .p ~ ~'h .......... ..., ... life in the oceano ComparutivG datu o~ the effects of waste dis- churges of dif f exent types and quantities on ( ·gradually d0f ilK:d ecological cystemz t·1ill . ! ., . ·'· permit correlation of cauacs ~nd effectso Po R~f ine and co~:.1ple·c0 previous classificz..tionz . ' of ecologic~l cyctems as daecribed in the First I?haseo c. Revise the ~il1dings of the Fizst Phaoe und ·; utake recorwlendations for apnlication of d~tao I -. . 3. Third Phase -Fo:::mulute Mathematical !·!od.e.ls and I , Initiate Pilot studies and Field Experiments a. Mathematical· f:!odel l1. ma:cheraaticz:l model =elating vari.able :wast.e discharge characte:cistics to ecologicul effects in the l11ZlrL'""l~ · envi::Cl1.lnent will be developed and . . .. tested with krJ.01.1:-.i data and o'bzerved response~. ;: -<- Whcl1. t.11.e model responds p:coperly to e:-:isting data,. it will be used t~ predict effects by varying the ·input ~uch ~~ specific benef!ci~l usez, productiyity ~ffects, -~egrees of wast~ .treatment, • etco bQ. Pilot Ste.die~ and Field E:{periments '....,! Some of th~ p~adicticns obtained in thG . -9- I ... .,,. ... --J.o .- " p~evious Phaceo arc subject to confirmation by controlled iicld e::.:p~rimcnt:l. It will bo possible to n:.okc sclc·cted cha.7l.geo in ·waste dis- posal practiccz ~nd obcerve the effecto. Selected fr~gmenta of the entire ecological. system may al~o be cubject to close scrutiny a."ld controlo 'I Co Prepa=e final Report of Findings., concluoion ar.~d reco~unendationso . ! not be conducted in le~s than 3 ycarso The cost of the·program han been estimated on thG basis o~ e 4 or 5 man professional staff; supplemented by suppo~t p~rzor~el end oceanographic facilities as required. Zt is estimated that the.proposed p~cgratn would cost $300,000 per yearo Th0 participating agencies il~ the form of exi~ting d~ta collection and staff aervices, with th~ Pederal Water Pollution control Administration requested ~o p~cvide $200,000 p~r year in direct suppo~to -' . ...._ • I J .• • July 6, 1967 E:sat..oh..a-JCL. tex-, Jt210. OCEANOGRAPHIC RESEARCH 19332 S. MESA DRIVE •VILLA PARK, CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE: 637-8464 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue v Fountain Valley, California Gentlemen: 1 The following is the itemized hourly bill for boating·services in, the month of June, 1967: ~ Day Time Service. Hours 1 Thr. 0500-1230 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • 1.? .. 2· Fri. 0400-1500 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • 11.0./. 3 Sut. 0200-0830 Current Study, Div~ng • • • • • • • • • • 6.5/ 4 Sun.. 01~00-osoo Current Study • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 •• 0"' 5 Mon. 01.oo-11~00 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • 10.0·/ 6 Tue. 0400-1330 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • 9.~ 7 Wed. 0400-1230 Current Study, Diving • • • • . • • . • • 8. / /_-z.. 8 Thr. 0800-1530 Current Study, Diving, Nearshores • • • • 7 • .x::=.- 9 Fri. 0400-1200 Current Study, Diving • . • • • • • • • • 8-.~ 10 Sat. 0500-1300 Current Study, Diving • ••• • • • . • • • 8.~ 11 Sun. 0500-1400 Current Study, Diving • • • • • . • • • • 9.~· 12 Mon. 0700-1100 Current Study • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4.· 13 Tue. 0700-1100 Current Study • • • • . • • • • • • • • • 4.g:/ 14 Wed. 0530-0930 Current Study • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4 • J..·Z 15 Thr. 0400-1430 Current Study, Diving, .Nea~sho~es • • . • 10~ 16 Fri. 0330-1330 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • . • • 10. 17 Sat. 0330-1530 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • 12.~ 18 Sun. 0330-1400 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • 10. 19 Mon. 0400-1200 Current Study, Diving (No diving charge , to Districts. • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8.V". 20 Tue. 0330-1300 Current Study, Diving • • • • • . • • • • 9.S/ 21 Wed. 0400 .. 2400 (Carollo 16 hours) Current Study, Diving, 4.~ Salinities. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 22 Thr. 0000-1130 (Carollo 8 hours) Current Study, ii~· Salinities. • . • • • • • . • • • • • . L-2. 23 Fri. 0330-1530 Current Study, Diving, Nearshores • • • • 24 Sat. 0400-0800 Current Study • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4.V 25 Sun. 0400-0800 Current Study • • . • • • • • • • • • . ·• 4.~ 26 Mon. 0330-1200 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • s. . J..-2-27 Tue. 0400-1600 Current Study, Diving, Offshores. • • • • 12~ 28 Wed. 0330-1330 Current Study, Diving • • • • • • • • • • 10.~ L .. 2.. 29 Thr. 0300-1130 Current Study, Diving, Nearshores • • • • 8.~ 30 Fri. 0330-1330 Current Study, Div~ng . ~ .. • • • • • • • • 10. . . Total Hours • • • • • • • • • • • • • .238~ fll...l.. on-1.ee CSGS. ~-10(,7 t .• ·'W" .. · .• ,· u,· ... • ... \.• . County Sanitation Districts of. Orange County:--July 6, 1967--Page · 2 . .,.• _FJM:jaa ·' • -238.S;~~ur~'~ $15.00 p~r hour· • ., . ... ' •, •' '1 •, ·. ,. ... ·. :.· .~ .. '. ~:-::··: .... ·. :i ··.; . -: ~ :-~ ; ~· · ... ~·. \.•; . · ........ ~..) ·~· .·: .... ...,· < •• A.". •;. Io ""••:••: ' ' ..... :,· .·. . , ,,·: ·. ·. ·' ·:·· , -~· I . .~ ._ ... : .... : \-: ... ..:..· .., ...... , .... . ,.·. ·l: ..•.•.. . ~:-. t'·.: .·• ·.· ..... ... :.,:.: •. ···.:.·.:··:. ····.· ...... • •. -.·.:. :: ! ..... :t -~ ' . .. ,· .. · .. . ; ... '• ·'' ... ' .· .... · .~· . ·~ ··. ·". r. ~;~ .·· .. ·,. •' .··. :,.·.· ~ : ;_ . ~ .. President " .. . ,,· .... .' .' .·. • ,1_,. .. ~_::;: ...... ~ 1 • • .. . . ~·"' . ~ -· ~: .i .. ·. • •. ·;· ... : r• •• • .• \:··.} . .. '~ .. ,• ~ . .. ·., . ~·. ;. I.-.:~:, ,' • • ,• • ·• .. ,• , .. . ... · .. ·." '~ ;~ . . .. : ., . ·.· .··.:.. ' .. :. '~.. .. .. ~·' .... : ..... . ·-.;...·.,:·:·.·· :·: .. ::- ·:,.'· ··-· ........ . .. ·. . ·. .··.· ·.:_.: . .... ......... .· :.- ;:.· .. .. • ..... . .. ·, . '· :• .· _ . . .. ~ ... , oi',: --;.:> '" · ... :_ .. ) :· .. : ~ . ~. . -~ . : •';. . ...... ~ .-: ~:·~>··.< ·' :·I. ~ ~• ' .·-... ···:-. .. ,. . .. . ·' July 5, 1967 OCEANOGRAPHIC RESEARCH · 19332 S. MESA DRIVE • VILLA PARK, CALIFORNIA· TELEPHONE: 637-8464 1, '• County Sanitation Districts of Orang~ County· 10844 Ellis Avenue .. Fountain Valley, California Gentlemen: The following are the diving services for the month of June, 1967. L-bc /.. -tr. E3. J,.-t,£ ?~31 Date. ~ 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 Thu. Fri. Sat. Mon. Tue. Wed. Thr. Service Inspected movement of flapgate •••• (2 divers) · Removed 30 Energy Dissipators •••• (2 divers) Removed 25 Energy Dissipators •••• (2 divers) Removed 41 Energy Dissipators •••• (2 divex::5) Recovered materials of two improperly installed 10 11 diffusers •••••• (2 divers) Removed 16 Energy Dissipators and installed one 10" plastic diffuser •••••••••••••• (l diver') Removed 4 Encrgy.Dissipators, in- spected plastic diffuser and flapgate Charge $200.00~~,. . 200.00 200.00~/ 200.ov :. 200.0~ 150.oc( structure, put 14" concrete diffuser / back in service •••••• ,. •••• 81 diver) 150.0~/ J...-fcr 9 Fri. . Installed .one ·10" plastic diffuser •• 2 divers) . 200.0~ _ .. 1.J.._._JQ_ ___ ~~~o __ ... _ .JJ1.$...t .. ~l.l .. ~~ one 1011 plas_tic_cU.f_fy.s.eu_• ~ ... dJ ve..;_L ___ :.. 150. 0 .... . . .. -..... ·-· .... ___ . . .. __ ......... ___ ·-------··-;· . . ... I,'~() ~(Ji.!:J -· ···-· ·---( --.--~-------------- 1: ;I ! ~b .. '\ ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS AUTHORIZED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER PER MINUTE ORDER 11-9-66 Dae. 5, 1966 Dae. 7:1 1966 Dae. 22) 1966 Jan. 5) -1967. Jan. 23~ 1967 Seminar on 11 Reoources Management and Environmental Engineeringu, held in Los Angeles; attended by two Directors and three staff members Meeting of Desert Section, State Water Pollution Control Association, held in Apple Valley; attended by five staff members .Meeting of American Society for Testing and Materials, held in Los Angeles; attended by the Operations Engineer Regional Water Quality Board meeting in Los Angeles; Assistant General Manager attended · $24.50 '. . $12.50 $ 5.00 $ 2.50 Meeting with John Merrill of the Federal $ 5.50 Water Pollution Control Administration; attended by the General Manager, Assistant General Manager,, .and Operations Engineer . Conference with Group Insurance Carrier $ 4~04 at the Santa Monica Regional office re: Retired employees' medical insurance coverage. Attended by General Manager Conference with Director of Public Works) $ 3088 City of Brea~ re: Sewerage of areas outside Orange County. Attended by General Manager and Assistant General Manager March 1, 1967 Luncheon meeJG:tng of Oranr;e County Water $ 7 .19 Coordinatin~ Committee; attended by General Manager and Assistant General Manager April 28> 1967.. ·Meeting of Anaheim City Engin,eer, General $ 4.30 Manager~ and Assistant General Manager re: Proposed Santa Ana Canyon ~runk Sewer K-1 All Districts May 3, 1967 t.·:ay 31, i967 June 20, 196,..( ·June 23, 1967 June 27, 1967 •·. Ar::rmrh Item .f/21 .. 18 Districts• personnel attended Training School for Treatment Plant Operations) in Long Beach Water Conservation and Recovery Sub- cornrni ttee meeting in Los Angeles; attended by General Manager and Assistant General Manager E.SuSoA. moetin~ on prediction of ocean conditions> in Loo An~cles; attended by Assistant General Manager and Ac1~inistrative Officer Coastal Water Study meeting in Los Angelos; attended by Assistant G<:me:r-al Mana~c:r· Luncheon meeting with representatives· of Regional Water Quality Control Board, State and County Health Departnents, Long Beach City Health Denartment, and State Division of Highways· re: Westside Force Main Repairo Attended by five staff members TOTAL $112.50 $ 5.15 •. $ .3.75 $ 1.70 $ 18.73 $211.24 K-2 All Districts ... "'> G\ -..J -..J -..J , ...... VJ ~ CD :J \[I Ul 'i1 C < .. J J vl 'f:.. \\ .J:>.1JJo ui u1 00m .J:>.::Joccco •(' - FORM .l 1 ~ ATLAS STATIONERS, L . A . MEMORANDUM TO DATE. __ ~7 ~-5~-_6-'-----~----~ :ROM SUBJECT _____________ _ Shou l d work up somethi ng showi ng what we were ab l e to accomp li sh through authori t y for G .M. to authorize attendance a t conferences, etc . ORAL messages waste your time and the time of the other person; they often cause annoying interruptions and are apt to be misunderstood or forgotten. Put it in writing . ~~-1~·>-nPa ~SJ ~1-?nL rY ~~ ~U'?-p-n#r? ~ ~,; ~ ~ ~rf~~ )2~ ~-I. °lb/ 'f, ~r· -~ ~~~l1 ~ ~ /.T-":P / -vf. vt1 'T hf <?-Z,r r~~ ~~j ~rvi Pf;-~ ):., ~~ F~1 ~?'~ JDJbt'U~Q. ~-~ "'-.o ~ '-7' Y~<t., rr""b "~ r1 f 0 ~ ~~ rr~ 1"'111~~ i"Jbt 1L ~(J_ ~-c··· .... ,-.. -~~1~-:-2 ~ -"?~ ~~;J~ ''F".Y'-if-_ -v ~ ).. ~ n~ ~ 7 ~rvnPo /}61 1 s ~<C -~4 rpr/~--d7 ti~ ~~CJ ~('IJ )/:'1-7' ~ <Jo ~-~,fj~<r:.1+ );. ~'OrV1~ ~n-tljrplt?~-t i16t ~~ ~ JI 'L Q l '/ L 1.61 Mr. Miller July 7, 1967 Verbal Progress Report of the Executive Committee and Building Committee on discussions with Willard T. Jordan, Architect employed for the purpose of developing a Master Plan for improving the appearance of Treatment Plant No. 2. '. ' \I ARCHITECT 1 S INSTRUCTIONS: \ l v Proceed with the preparation of estimates for the remedial ·work on the existing buildings and the new structures which he will work with John Carollo Engineers on, including a layout for an Operatorst building (Project No. 2072,-included in 1967-68 budget). With regard to the landscaping: Phase 1. Immediate perimeter landscaping and wall including the entrance to the ~lant, with cost estimates based on what he presents. Phase 2. Cost estimates for the interior landscaping, etc. Phase 3. Perimeter planting of the north section of the plant ~ site northerly of the entrance, (wit~ cost estimates). Jordan was given a tentative date,.fof August 2nd for an Executive Committee meeting; and should the Committee approve it on Augur.rt 2nd, Jordan will mak.e a presentation to the Joint Boards at the August 9th meeting. .. \ C OUNTY SANITATION DISTRI CT S of ORANGE COUNTY, C ALIFORNIA P. o . eox 5175 10844 fLLIS AVi:NUE l=OUNTAIN VAL LEY, CALll=ORNIA, 92708 June 29 , 1 967 MANAGER'S REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE' Chairman Parsons has invited Directors Hock and Walters to attend this meeting and to participate in the discussions . The fo llowing is an explanation of the items of business proposed to be taken up at the July 6th joint meeting of the Executive Committee and the Building Committee . 1 . MASTER PLAN FOR I MPROVING THE APPEARANCE OF TREATMENT PLANT NO . 2 . At the June 7th meeting of the Committees , Architect Willard T . Jordan presented preliminary drawings and discussed his ideas with the Committees . His presentation emphasized remedial architectural treatment to existing structures within the Plant grounds, and interior landscaping . It was the consensus among the Committee members that the primary emphasis should be placed on the master plan for improving the appearance of the treatment plant as viewed from neighboring properties . Mr . Jordan will submit his over-all plan for Plant No ·. 2 for con~ideration at this meet - ing . 2 . REVIEW OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL'S COMPENSATION . During the latter part of 19b6, the Executive Committee reviewed with the General Counsel, his fee schedule as established by Resolution No . 63-150 (attached). At that meeting, it was agreed that a monthly report of his activities would be submitted with his invoice for services rendered, and the Committee would review the reports and re -examine the General Counsel 's fee schedule prior to the adoption of the 1967-68 budgets . Enclosed is a summary of the General Counsel's time, based on his billings for the past seven months . (See page ''A''). 3 . TEN'I'ATIVE TOUR OF TREATMENT PLAl\TTS AND DINNER MEETING , SEPTEMBER 13TH . As the Committee members may recall, the last treatment plant tour and dinner meeting was held in July, 1966 . A number of Directors have suggested a dinner meeting this year so that they would have an opportunity to visit both facilities during daylight hours . If this is ac ceptable, we will begin making t he necessary arrangements for the September 13th meeting . 2 . ~. PROPOSED SALE OF THE DISTRICTS' 78-INCH OUTFALL . Chairman Parsons has requested that the staff report on the progress of the negotiations with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District concerning the proposed sale of our 78 -inch outfall . Following transmittal of the John Carollo Engineers report to the Riverside interests relative to the value of the Districts ' outfall, the firm of Pomeroy, Johnston and Bailey, engineers for the Riverside interests, reviewed the report and made certain recommendations . (It will be recalled that the Districts offered the facility for sale at a price of $2,000,000). Enclosed is ~ copy of a letter from John W. Bryant, Chief Engineer of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Con - servation District, and a copy of the recommendations made by their engineers . · We have asked Mr . Harvey Hunt of John Carollo Engineers to be present at the meeting to participate in this d~scussion . Also, the staff and engineers would like to discuss with the Committee, the roll of the Orange County Sanitati on Districts in future regional planning for waste disposal . ' Since receipt of Mr . Bryant 1 s letter we have learned, through the enclosed newspaper clipping, that sufficient funds were not budgeted for the coming fiscal year for them to proceed on the time schedule they had anticipated . The staff will repo rt on this, and related matters, at the meeting . (See page 11 B 11 ). 5 . COOPERATIVE STUDY OF COASTAL WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES Al\ffi DEVELOPIVJ.ENT OF SCIENTI F'IC CRITERJ.A FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESOURCES . At the June 7th meeting of the Committee , I reported that staff members had been meeting with personnel from the Los A..Dgeles County Sanitation Districts and the Los Angeles City Bureau of Sanitation, to study areas of mutual interest in which we could work jointly to effect a savings to the taxpayer s of all three entities . After considerable discussion we decided that, since the three agencies discharge their treated wastes to the ocean, our combined efforts to investigate 0he effect of our current dis - posal practices is mos t important . As stated in the enclosed joint statement of purpose, the recommended study will involve an annua~ expenditure of not more than $25,000 each as the project should warrant Federal participation . Tne three agencies recommend that the City of San Diego be included because it i s the fourth major waste disposal a gency discharging to the Southern California coastal waters . The fou r agencies 3 . provide services for approximately eight million inhabitants of Southern California . We believe that the results of this study will have a far -reaching economic effect on the future development of waste water treatment processes for ocean dischargers . (See page 11 c 11 ). 6 . AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE INSTALLATION OF 10-INCH PIPE DIIi'FUSERS ON EXISTING OUTFALL . At the June 14th Board meeting, Mr . Fred Munson of Enchanter , Inc ., and Paul Brown and T . A. Dunn of the Districts 1 staff reported on diffuser experiments being conducted by the Districts in an attempt to improve the aesthetic appearance of the ocean and reduce the amount of chlorine required for disinfection . ive have compared the quantity of chlorine used prior to the installation of our temporary diffusers, with the amount of chlorine required after the barrel diffusers were installed . It is the staff 1 s conclusion that the Districts can save $150 to $300 per day by increasing the diffusion of the treated wastes with the ocean waters . I strongly recommend that the Districts proceed ,:immediately with the permanent installation of the 10-inch diffusers as explained at the June Board meeting . The Cost will be approxi - mately $25, 000 . (See page 11 D11 ) • 7 . POSSIBLE CHANGE IN THE MEETING TIME OF THE JOINT BOARDS . From time to time, Directors have requested that the meeting time of the Joint Boards be moved to an earlier hour . The staff has no recommendation on this matter ; however , the Committee may wish to consider such a change . FAH : jb Fred A. Harper General Manager 4 ..l'U~N \V. DRYANT .r.cc.c, CH<.:~;n,.c;a:. ;..v;;Nuz:. ?. O. uOY. ;c,:;:; r::;;;,1;7;1~·.~:.;~~:=l-caz (/.-.) ,.,./·~-·"' RIVERS!DE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WAT'ER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVER$10E, CALIFORNlA ~2u02 25 May 1967 County Sanitation Districts oi Orunge County, California. P. o. Box 5175 Fountain Valley, Califor~ia 92708 Attention:· Mr. Fred A. Harper Ge;;'leral ManagC?r Ge~ t ler.1en: Re: Sale· of existing 78-inch ocean outfall. upo~ receipt of your proposal to sell to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District an existing 78-inch outfall, set forth in a letter dated 9 February 1967, t::e r.:atte~ was referred t.o oi;.r consulting £irr:L of Pomeroy, ~Toh~sto:-l and Bailey for study and recornmendation. Enclosed ~s a co9y of the report and recommendations which I £eel will be of i~terest to you. At a meeting of Zone Conh~issioners and Supervisors of the District on 25 May 1967 it was the consensus that your Dis~rict give =u~t~er consideration to the joint use of the new outfall to be co~structed. We believe that by sharing in the cost a~d use of a new outfall there are many advantages to both agencies. Because of unavoidable delays we have had to revise our date 0£ co:-:.9letion of the preliminary plans for the outfall. Our co~sultants advise us t7q.at the final plans will be completed by :.. Augus"t: 1967. Based upon this information and allowing ti~c to finalize financial arrange~ents, Riverside County Flood Co~t~ol and Water Conservation District will not be in a ~ositio~ to enter into an agreeme~t with County Sanitation Districts of Orange County:prior to 1 January 1968. Aiter you have had tDue to review the report by Pomeroy, Jo~~ston and Bailey I hope we may have the opportunity of dis- cussing this matter with you more fully. :S~clost.:re. Sincerely, ·~ :Jl~ta;~::+ 4oEN W. BRYP .. NT Chief Engineer B-1 l ! I ·1 I I I I I I ' .- . ' ~ <'., -...... '·: : ' '. , .. _.., -.... The following are the recommendations contained in the report of POMEROY, JOHNSTON AND BAILEY, entitled "Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District -Ocean Outfall Appraisal". is possible" This plan v1ill ccs"_; RC~-ic~l~D be .. C\1ea:1 S965 ~COO a~d. Sl, 385, Ci""'° based on Ca~ollc 9 s 0st:.z~~0 cf cost b~t ag~oe~ent should bo based on fo-.. .. "!;!'.is outfall is ~31, 130,SCO. ot tl".e The cost ot this ia est~ted o··· -11 B-2 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. C, BOX 5175, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708 July 7, 1967 TO: ALL DIRECTORS RE: Proposed Study Entitled "EVALUATION OF COASTAL WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESOURCES" TELEPHCN ES: AREA CODE 714 540•2910 962•2411 More and more articles are appearing in magazines and newspapers concerning the alleged pollution of the ocean because of sewage and industrial waste discharge. Actually, most of the statements are based on supposition and theories. In fact, the Federal requirements are based on experience with fresh water effects which are entirely different from sea water. This situation results in the taxpayers being required to make certain expenditures involving continuing operating costs as well as capital improvement costs to meet standards which may later be shown to have no basis of fact and therefore drastically revised. The purpose of the study outlined in the attached report is to establish a factual background on this subject which hopefully will result in rational and meaningful require- ments in the future and a savings to the taxpayers of the Districts. FAH:jb Enc. Fred A. Harper General Manager ....... , ~·:.._ ..... , \.,.1 . .·. ·. ·1 ~ ~V.<-Z/ v.?, If 6 7 EVALUATION' OF COJ..STAT-1 WASTE DISPOSJl~L PR,.~CTICES ~ .. ND DEVELOPHE1'TT -Op SCIE~rj:FIC CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE ;RESOURCES ' ... ~o Introduction Utiliz~tion of the marine environment for disposal of ever-increasing quantities of treated w~stea --while at the same time protecting and conserving marine resourceo represents one of the greatest challenges in the emerging field of cnvirol1mental scienc~. an~ engineering. In Dpite of a long history of marine waste diapoaal with grudually improving techniques u.~d treatment methods, t..1le:ra is-relatively little scientifically based knowledge on ~~a influence of treated wastes on tl~e ecology of adjacent coastal waterso Too frequently, the true situation has been obscured by conflicting claims th~t waste discharges have de.mag·ed or a_:re enhancing the b.eneficial '.Uses of the ocean. Undoubtedly it is possible for the waste discharge to do both·-- er.hance and degrade --depending on the degree of waste treat- ment, ~~e .conditions and location of discharge, and the funda- mental physical, chemical, and biological parameters of the J .... spec~z:ic marine environmento !n the p"st two de~ades, beginning research efforts have ba~n carried out L~ the United States (especially in . · . . culifcrnia) and abroad which have been sufficient to point up " ' ,, .· .. , . , ..,. . ----··---·-··-··---···. ___ _. .. _.._. ...... ·-· .... ' ...... -· ... . . _ ... ·····-·---........ ----· ··-·-----.. -----·-----. ··.-i • ·: .. .. ~· . the importance and oomplcxity of the oubjccto It ia conoludod that witl1 oufficicnt rQsearch to dovclop the: fundamental ~cien­ ti~ic f~cts, it ohould be poocibla to dcsi~ and opernte w~cte dispo~al fac!litieo which not only quarantea protection and .conoQrvation of marina resources but enl1ance some of tho r~ceiving water values through .increased productivity of the.·· .' . ocean and hence its beneficial uaeso As a result of the factoro noted above, all concerned with th~ discharging of trentcd waatGa to marine watero have ~ecognized the need for improving the status of scientific 'knowledge in t..~is fieldo Despite the considerable r~search ctudics ~lready carried out nnd underway, the present situation ·· nm.y be described aa confusing and il• urgent need of a c:ompre- · hcnsive collation and evaluation of the state of existin~ 'kno\:/ledge e : . Interest in improving marine waste disposal technology is nction-wido and universal~ however, in the USA, California has been a focus of interest and knowledge in this field -- particularly with reapect to development·of regulatory criteria, of marine monitoring proqrams, and of research programs both in the;: laboratory and in the field. In Southern California, four waste disposal agencies have bGen particularly concerned, namely the Sanitation Districta of Los Angeles County, the City of Loo Angeles; The County Sanitntion District of Orange County, ~ and the City of San Diego. All have major disposal facilitias ·. ,. . , .. " . . : ~ : , ~ !' . . ~ I t 'i : I I 'i I ··J .. · 1 ·.;I . .. :1 ·. ·' • ! ·:I :·: ! •I '!. ~; :· '; ;; . . . . / · .... diecha:-ging to open marine wut.cro c.nd all·havo co.rricd out sizeable continuing prcgrrunz of monitoring, opeoial inveotiga- tione, and reeearch. Tho two oyst~ma within Loa Ang~lea County arc emong the largest marine disposal operations in the world, each discharging in exces3 of 325 MGDo The research program proposed herein ~10uld bo a Joint Venture of these four agenciec, operuting together wi~ aasiitanco from other interested public and priv~tG egenciea, and, hopefully, with major financi~l aupport from the Foder~l Wnter Pollution control Administration. A three-year program is envisioned, to be carried out by a selected ?taff of scientists and engineers, with the f9llowing specific objcctivco:. (1) collati~n ~pd cvalu~~ <M-o.,.t_ J~ L~·~ Mf'•\'\ -c,_,., tion o~ ... £.~~:_x:t1~-~.::,:-1~bla dat.u 0111~~1\ccolo9y of co2lata.l watora r .............. ~ ... -.... ...... _........._... ·'' and~rine waste dis~~~.E_.~tic~·§), (2) generation of supplemental . "data on the reievant inter-related para.tnetera, (3) development of a mathematical model aupported b~ pilot and field experimento to relat~ environmental factors to waste qu~lity parameters, and (4) conclusions and recommendations on modifying present waste disposal practices, if requiredo It ia anticipated that each y0ur of effort' aa outlined in th<:3 Work Plan will result in significant findings and progress toward the ultimate goal. :!Io Work Plan ·Ao Establioh nn advioo=y committeo of outstanding experts in related dicaiplinea to provide general guidance, conc~ive specific gonla and procedures, . : , . : .. • ~ .. .. •"; .... .· ·. .:....... . .. : , review findil'lgs, 0-.l.'1.d o.uthor fin\:ll rcporto Related disciplines should include but not necessarily be limited to oceanography, resourcea manngcmcnt,. ·cnvironmentul health, marine science, economics, ~d environmental engineering. Advisory com:nitteo members will be ~elected on the basia of yeara of e~-perience, competency, and objectivity. Bo Assemble ~ compet~nt working ataff headed by a / . '' project director to prosecute the atudy u..~der the direction ·of thG advisory committee. This group will be supported by th~ existing sta~f s and ·oceanographic data collection resources of tho supporting agencieoe Prosecute the study in three s0neral phases. l. First Phase -Review W::.-iat. is Known ao Define The ~hysical Boundaries The physical boundaries.of the study would include all coastal waters from the Ventura- Los A.~geles County line to the Mexican Border, but exclude e~tuaries and enclosed harbors. . .. The .offshor~ boundary should extend to, but not be specifically limited at, the toe of.t.~0 · coaatal shelf o Thia water zone incorporates the major bio- logical env!~onrncnt of tho southern Califo~nia A • . ' . ' . II • •" \_,I j '..._,,; coo~t, in tcr~z o~ both bio~co and diveroity of spccicoo :rt. cO:l~titut.ce t.110 zone of minimum water interchange whe::-co physical bowtd~ies limit watc~ cr~an~itieo und create tho localized ecologicul systems to~-mrd which thie study io · diractedo It L~cludcs all of the watcra i.~- fluenced by mzlrinc w"ote disposal syotemne .. I b. Assemble ! .. vailablc D'l·::a I' The area has been otudied by many oceano- graphers, biologists, and engineers over the past years. Dat.u. on the physical,·! chemicul and f biologic~l chaructcristica of t..~is·ar0a Cml be obtained from the agencies involved. Tge most concentrated stud!eo have been conducted in the vicinity of &ubmarine wacte- water outfalleg the Scripp 0 s pier at La Jolla, and the NaV'J Electronic Laboratory Station at Point LOI'tlao · 'A preliminary liating of .soUrce data must include: l) Allen Hancock Foundation ~ USC 2) Califo~nia D~part.mant of Fish and ~ame Laboratory, Terminal Islana. 3) . California water Quality Control Sou.rd• 4) Los Ang~leo City, Bureau of Sanitation. .... .......... •1 , ' ,. ,, I; :r . jj ·I! .11 'I 11 11 I/ 11 r t • . . ... \wl· .. 5) Los Angeleo CoUJ.~ty# Department of Recreation ru'd P~rkoo 6) Los Angeles county Sanitation Districtao 7) N~vy Elcctrordcs Laboratory, Sa.~ Diego.·· 8) Orange County Sa.~itation District. 9) City of San Diego. 10) Scrippn Xnstitute of Oceanographye ll) U. So Army Co~ps of Engineerso ! I 12) Uo s. Coast and Geodetic Survey. 13) Uo s. weather Bureau. 14) California Institute of T~chnologyo 15) University·of California~ Several other prominent data sources can be expected to be discove~ed in the course of preliminary investigation .•. · Co · Collate ru~d Evaluate Data Once the e:~istL'1.g data has been asserabled •. cystems analyzis and computer processing methods .' will be used to collate the data a.'ld to identify .. t..~e contzolli..ncr nh~mi.caI c!1aracte:istics of local- J -- ized ecological ~ystemso Sue.~ parameters may include temperature, salinity, bottom topography .~ and characteristics, nutrient levels, water velocity, turbidity, or other parameters that may evolve -....; ,· -6- ... '; f::or1 t.hc st.udic8 '1. Ee.ch lccol ccologicul .cyot.czn ) •' Salinity ourface to 200 fc~t -10,000 10,000 cc.:.nplC~· Pletnkton -Su:cf~cc to 50 ~cct -.500,000 ··~ ·' ... Damples (conciGting of 3ome 65 species, ·· .· identified individually and by groups in terms of dominance). Dissolved O~Jgcn -Surface to 200 feet - 10, 000 sarnpl~a .AL-nmonia Nitrogen -surface only -1,000 samplea Water Color -Surf~ce only -10,000 samples Transp~rency -10,000 samples ' , , Fish (90 bottom species) -100,000 samples !nver~ebrat~s (240 bottom species) 500,000 samples ! This one data source alone can' supply more . than 10~ data bits with considerable inte:c- related complexity. •' d. Present findings and recommend modifications in existing data coll~ction techniques. It is anticipz.ted that the foregoing.data analysis will ~eveal gaps in our understanding cf ecological systems and d~termine the reliability or correlation factors of existing data. The need for informatioi~\heretof ore overlooked in· marine studies will lead to revisions in existin~ ·aata collection procedures and programs. 2o Second Phase -Collect and Evaluate New Data a. Collect additional data on and evaluate \. -a- l I l ~ l • I . ! . I .1 I I i ·--· -··--~--Jo-4----------·-------··-~------· _________ .. ____ _ ..... ------·-·~ .. ----·--------_,-. ~ \._) ... . .. " the inf luc::lcc o:Z t.::cat.cd wu~t.es on the produc- tivity of pl~nt ~nd fish life in the oceano Ccmpar~tiv0 data on the c~~ects of wnstc die- charges of diif erent typce and quantitiea on ·gradually O.efi.:..1ea ecological cyst.eras will perrai t correlatic:.i. of caunes and ef fecte o ho Refine and comple~e p~evious classific~tiona of ecological systeus as dascribed in the First Phase,. Co Revise the £L~dings cf the First Phaoe ~~"ld ., ~mke reco~m1endutions for appli~ation of datao 3 o Third l?hG:.se -:2ormulute Mathematical !-Zod.e.ls and ) , Initiate Pilot Studies and Field Experiments a. Mat.heraat.icul· i~odel .?. mat.hematic:;.l model ~elating vari_able :wasce discr.arge ch~racte~istics to ecological effects in the mZlrine ·envi::-or..ment will be developed al"ld tested with k11own dat~ and observed responses. --· ;. ; . ·~. '' When ~he model responds p~operly to existing data,. it :will be used to nredict effects b"' varvinN -.. -:; the ·input ~uch ~a speci~ic beneficial use~, productivitv . -effects, ·degrees of wust~ .treatment, 0 etc. be. ?ilct Studiec mid Field E:~pe~iments '-..I Some of the p~~diction5 obtained in th3 ~ i' I l · .. ·: <.. ..... I , .. ·. p~evious Phaseo a:co subject to confirmation by controlled field exp~=imcnt~o !t will bo possible to make seloctod changeo in \iro.ste dis• pozal practicez ~nd oboerve the effecto. Selected fr~gmentm of the entire ecological. syotcm mo.y also be oubject to clooe scrutiny U.."ld co11trol o I I co Prepare finul Report of Findings., conclucion ·Cos·~ u:n.d Dtn:o. 'i:.:Lon. . ! ! Xt is anticipated thut·a ctudy of this 3copa could not be cond~ctcd in le~s than 3 ycarso· The cost of the ·program han been estimated on the busis of ~ 4 or 5 man professional staff, ~upplemented by support personnel and oceanographic facilities a3 ~equired. !tis estimated that t..~e·proposed pzcgr~m would co3t $300,000 per year. Tha participating agencieo are p::ep!!zeed to oor..t~.ibute u to·~al of $100,000 por year largely ~~l t~a form of exinting d~ta collection a.~d staff aervicea, with th~ ~eder~l water Pollution Control Adm{niotration reauested to ... . provide $200,000 per year in direct support • . . ENCHANTER, INC. 19332 South Mesa Drive Villa Park, California June 23, 1967 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County P. O. Box 5175 Fountain Valley, California Proposal for Underwater Services , I• .., Enchanter, Inc., proposes the following price schedules in the Underwater installation of the aspirating, ehergy dissipating, sewage effluent to seawater 10-inch diameter plastic diffusing tubes: 1. First 60 feet from each 6-in9h port on 78-inch diffuser -----------$ 1.25/ft. 2. Any subsequent extension past first 60 feet ---· ---------$ 1.00/ft. 3. Either the footage rate, or the already Board-approved per diem rate of $200 per two man diving day shall be in effect, whichever results in the lesser installation cost to the Districts on a monthly basis. ENCHANTER, INC. s/ F. J. Munson, President ' -D- July 6, 1967 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 5175 10844 RLIS AVfNUE: FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708 From: Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Manager Mr. T.A. Dunn, Purchasing Officer Subject: BID TABULATION & RECOMMENDATION FOR AWARD 10,000 LF 10" ABS I Thin Wall Plastic Pipe Kerona, Inc. 805 E. Washington Avenue Santa Ana, California Trans-American Pipe, Inc. 1100 Glendon Avenue Los Angeles, California Harrington Industrial Plastics, Inc. 918 North Eastern Avenue Los Angeles, California Price Bid per 100 L.F. $ 74. 98 F.O.B. Fountain Valley $76.61 F.O.B. Fountain Valley $86.06 F.O.B. Phoenix, Arizona The lowest and best bid was submitted by Kerona, Inc. of Santa Ana. It should be noted Kerona, Inc. is a subsidiary company of the only manufacturer known to produce this particular pipe at this time. Trans-American Pipe bid is based on production proposed to start by mid August. It is recommended that award be made to Kerona, Inc. as the lowest and best bid for 10,000 LF of 10 11 ABS Type I, Thin Wall Plastic Pipe. If the award can be expedited, it is almost a certainty that the money saved by reduction in chlorine consumption during the summer months will rapidly amortize the diffuser project. TAD:fhh T.A. Dunn Purchasing Officer II MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County Sanitation D is tricts of Orange County, Californi a JOINT BOARDS REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, July 12, 1967 8:00 p.m. P. 0 . Box 5 17 5 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: Areo Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 July 7, 1967 The following is an explanation of the more important non- routine items which appear on the enclosed agenda and which are not otherwise self-explanatory . Warrant registers are not attached to the agenda since they are made up immediately preceding the meeting but will appear in the complete agenda available at the meeting. Joint Boards No. 4 -COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIES: We have received official notice from the Cities of Anaheim and Stanton concerning recent elections of mayors and designations of alternates to the mayors on the Sanitation District Boards. In Anaheim, Mr. Calvin Pebley is now mayor and Councilman A. J. Schutte will remain as his alternate . In the City of Stanton, Mr. Frank Kohl has been elected mayor and Mr. Harry L. Miller will be his alternate on the Board of District No. 3. It is also anticipated that before the time of the meeting , we will have received notice from the City of Seal Beach regarding the election of a new mayor and designation of an alternate for the Board of District No. 3. Nos. 16 and 17 -REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: The Committee met on July 6, jointly with the Special Building Committee, and after a lengthy and comprehensive discussion arrived at recommendations on three separate matters. These recommendations are discussed in the accompanying written report and recommendations of the Committee. Consideration of Joint Board action on these recommendations constitutes Items Nos. 17a, 17b, and 17c. Nos. 18 and 19 -COMPLETION OF LAND SECTION OF NEW OCEAN OUTFALL: On June 16, Vinnell Corporation of Alhambra successfully completed its contract with the Districts for construction of the land section of the new 120-inch diameter outfall at a total cost of $1,115,825. As discussed in previous reports, this portion of the new outfall extends from the outfall booster pump station complex in Plant No. 2 practically to the edge of the water where it will be extended 20,000 feet into the ocean by the marine outfall contractor, starting in 1968. Completion of this facility is a major step towards the eventual provision of an outfall disposal system which is expected to be adequate for the Districts' needs for the forsee- able future. Although it will not be regularly used until the new marine section is in place, it is capable of being put into service on short notice by inter-connection with the existing 78-inch outfall on the beach. Item No. 18 is a change order granting an extension of time of 22 d a ys to the contractor for delays caused by inclement weather last winter and Item No. 19 is the customary resolution of acceptance of the work as of June 16 and authorizing filing of a Notice of Completion. No. 20 -PURCHASE OF DIESEL TRACTOR AND APPURTENANT EQUIPMENT: On Monday, July 10, bids will be opened for this new piece of equipment needed in the Districts' expanding operations. It consists of a 40 H.P. diesel tractor equipped with a heavy-duty, industrial-type front loa der and suitable for attachment of the District's backhoe. If the bids are satisfactory, a recommendation for award of purchase of this tractor and equipment will be made at the time of the meeting. No. 21 -AUTHORIZATION FOR ATTENDANCE OF PERSONNEL AT CONFERENCES: At the November, 1966 Bo a rd meeting, the General Mana g er was autho- rized to desi g nate members of the Board and/or staff to attend meetings, conferences, etc., which are not of an overnight duration and which he believes will be of value to the Districts. At the time this authorization was g ranted, I stated that this matter would be reviewed annually in the lig ht of previous experience. Attached to the agenda under this item is a list of such meetings and confer- ences attended. It is my conclusion that this authorization has been of considerable benefit in transacting Districts' business and, a c cordingly, it is recommended that it be renewed at this time. The total cost during the p a st eight months for meals, mileag e and incidental expenses under this authorization was slightly more than $210. No. 22 -RECEIVE AND FILE FINANCIAL REPORT: The Districts' inde- pendent auditors, Hanson, Peterson, Cowles and Sylvester, have recently submitted their interim financial report for the quarter ending March 31. A copy of this report is being forwarded with this agenda and it will be in order for it to be received and filed. Also, any questions concerning the report will be answered by the staff at the meeting in any detail desired. District No. 2 No. 31 -ENGINEERING PROPOSALS -RECONSTRUCTION OF EUCLID TRUNK SEWER: The next planned and budgeted segment of the Euclid Trunk Sewer to be constructed lies between Edinger Street in Santa Ana -2- and Trask Avenue in Garden Grove. The completion of this segment will tie together an existing section in Ga rden Grove, now inoperable, and Treatment Plant No. 1. The Garden Grove Sanitary District is quite anxious for the missing segment to be constructed since it will considerably ameliorate capacity problems in that Districts' system. The existing Euclid Trunk through Garden Grove is at too high an elevation for efficient use by the Sanitary District and conse- quently sewage from the eastern part of that City must be taken further west to connect with the Magnolia and Miller-Holder Trunk systems. In order to get this needed construction under way as soon as possible, we have requested that the District's engineers, J. R. Lester Boyle and Sidney L. Lowry, submit proposals for two new contracts to complete the missing segment. The first will be Contract No. 2-10-7, a one-mile stretch between Edinger Street and Bolsa Avenue, and the second, Contract No. 2-10-8, the remaining stretch between Bolsa and Trask Avenues. The engineers' existing agreement with the District calls for submittal and acceptance of lump sum engineering proposals for each construction contract. The requested proposals have been submitted and analyzed by the staff. It is our recommendation that the proposals, as included with the agenda material, be accepted and the General Manager authorized to direct the engineers to proceed with the necessary design work. District No. 8 No. 44 -REPRESENTATION AT LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION HEARINGS: At the Joint meeting in June, the other District Boards adopted a resolution naming representatives authorized to appear at LAFC hearings on annexations, formations, etc., affecting the Districts. It is therefore recommended that the District No. 8 Board adopt the same resolution at this their regular quarterly meeting. No. 45 -ADOP'l'ION OF 1967-68 BUDGET: The balance of the Districts will adopt their formal budgets at either the regular or adjourned meetings in August. Since the Board of District No. 8 meets only quarterly, however, it will be advisable to adopt the District budget at this meeting. A copy of the budget is included with the agenda attachments and is recommeded for approval. It will be noted that, following the practice of the last several years, no tax rate will be levied under this budget since the Reserve Funds of the District and the interest thereon are sufficient to meet the very small expenses anticipated. District No. 11 No. 48 -NOTICES TO WITHHOLD, CONTRACT NO. 11-10-2: Five additional notices to withhold payments, received from subcontractors and material suppliers on this contract, have been filed to date and it -3- is possible that more of the same will be forthcoming before t h e Board meeting. To make these notices a part of the District's reco rds, it is ne c essary that these notices, as listed on the agenda, be received and filed. No. 49 -ASSIGNMENT OF FUNDS TO BONDING COMPANY OF PAYMENTS FOR CONTRACT NO. 11-10-2: We are in receipt of a letter, dated June 16, 1967 (copy included with agenda material), from the attorneys for the Pacific Indemnity Company claiming the right to receive any a n d all contract balances now in the District's possession or herein - after produced by the contract. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed and receipt of acknowledgement by the Gener a l Manager authorized. In connection with this work, which has been discussed at length at previous meetings, we were hopeful of closing out this contract at this meeting, but it appears at the time of this writing that the contractors have not settled their difficulties with the Telephone Company and the City of Huntington Beach. Under the terms of the contract documents, the work cannot be formally accepted until these matters are settled. However, if by the time of the meeting these problems can be cleared up, final closeout documents will be presented for Board action. District No. 7 No. 51 -SETTLEMENTS WITH PROPERTY OWNERS IN ASSES SMENT DISTRICT NO. 6 -As the Directors will recall, the bonding compa ny for t h e contractor (William R. Shriver, Jr.) deposited $5,000 with the District to cover the cost of damage to property and i n completed work in Assessment District No. 6. Paul Hogan and William Kroeger of the District's staff, with the assistance of Gilbert Ramirez, one of our Pla nt Operators, contacted the property owners involved and with the ex ce ption o f t wo property ow ner s, a ll ha ve f i led releases f or the a mounts itemized in t he agend a mate r ia l. Inasmuch as all negotiations for settlements were made on the same basis, the staff recommends that the two property owners who, to date, have not agreed to a settlement be offered t h e a mounts appearing on the agenda. The prope rty o wners (with t h e exceptions noted a b o ve) were very cooperative and most appreciative of the fact that the Directors were concerned about the conditions in the area and had taken actio n to protect their interests. Patlll Hogan a nd William Kroeger both dese r ve a pa t on t he b a ck for a job well done. No. 52 -REVISION OF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SEWERS WITHIN THE DISTRICT: In 1964, the District Bo a rd adopted -4- standard specifications for the construction of sewers as District No. 7 has the responsibility for the approval of plans and inspection of the local street sewers in unincorporated territory within the District. Because of numerous changes and revisions we have updated these standard specifications and recommend that the Board adopt a resolution approving the specifications, as revised. No. 53 -CONCURRING IN AWARD OF CONTRACT NO. 7-2C-P (LANE ROAD SEWAGE LIFT STATION): At the June 14 meeting of the Board, the plans and specifications for this project were approved. Con-· struction bids were opened on June 23, 1967, and the District's engineers have recommended the award of contract to Ecco, Inc., of Garden Grove, for the low bid of $69,430. This facility is being financed by the Irvine Industrial Complex who will award the contract. When the work is complete, the District will enter into a Master Plan Reimbursement Agreement with the Irvine Industrial Complex organization. -5- Fred A. Harper General Manager CO UNTY S ANITATION DISTRI CTS o f ORANGE C OUN TY, C A LI FORNIA July 7 , 1967 P. O . BOX 5175 10844 GLLIS AVGNUG FOUNTAIN VALL GY, CALIFORNIA, 92708 REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE JuJ_y 6, 1967 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PRESENT : Directors Parsons (Chairman), McMichael, Porte r Miller , Culver and Baker (until 7 :15 p .m.) ABSENT : Directors Speer and Shipley OTHERS PRESENT: Fred A . Harper, Paul G. Brown , No r man R . Tremblay and H. Harvey Hunt Convened: 5 :30 p .m. Adjourned : 9 :15 p .m. **************** 1 . TENTATIVE TOUR OF TRF.ATMENT PLANTS AND DINNER MEETING FOR .JJ~l-"l.'J•:MB.l•:H lj . The General Manager reported that a number of Directors have suggested a combined meeting and tour of the treatment plants this summer, similar to the dinner meeting held in July, 1966 , so that they would have an opportunity to visit the facilities during daylight hours . The Executive Committee recommends that the staff be directed to make the necessary arrangements for the regular joint meeting to be held in September . 2 . COOPERATIVE STUDY OF COASTAL WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMENT OF SCiENTIFIC CRiTERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESOURCES . Staff Report The staff members have been meeting with personnel from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and the Los Angeles City Bureau of Sanitation to study areas of mutual interest in which we could work jointly to effect a savings to the taxpayers of all three entities . After considerable discussion we decided that , since the three agencies discharge their treated wastes to the ocean, our combined efforts to investigate the effect of our current disposal practices is most important . As stated in the enclosed Joint Statemen~ of Purpose , the recommended study will involve an annual expenditure of not more than $25,000 each, as the project should warrant Federal participation . The staffs of the three agencies are recommending that the City of San Diego be included as a partic ipating agency because it too is a major waste disposal agency discharging to the southern California coastal waters . The four agencies, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, City of Los Ange les, Orange County Sanitation Distric~s and the City of San Diego , prov i de services for approxi - mately eight million inhabitants of southern California . We believe that the results of this study will have a far reaching economic effect on the future development of waste water treatment p roces ses for ocean dischargers . Executive Committee Recommendation : Approve participation of the Orange County Sanitation Districts in the cooperative study . However, the Committee questions the monetary participation by our Districts on an equal basis with the other entities and suggests that participation should be on the basis of amount of waste water discharged daily to the ocean . It was the concensus of the Committee members pres ent that the staff should review the benefits hoped to be accrued as a result of this study and supply this information to the Board members for a determination . 3 . AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE INSTALLATION OF 10 -INCH PIPE DIFFUSERS ON EXISTING OUTFALL Staff Recommendation : At the June 14th Board meeting, Mr. Fred Munson of Enchanter , Inc ., and Paul Brown and T . A . Dunn of the Districts ' staff reported on diffuser experiments being conducted by the Districts in an attempt to improve the aesthetic appearance of the ocean and reduce the amount of chlorine required for disinfection . We have compared the quantity of chlorine used prior to the installation of our temporary barrel diffusers, with the amount of chlorine required after these diffusers were installed . It is ~he staff's conclusion that the Districts can save $150 to $300 pe r day by increasing the diffusion of the treated wastes ·with the ocean water . We strongly recommend that the Districts proceed immediately with the permanent installation of the 10 -inch diffusers as explained at the June Board meetin~. The cost will be approxi - mately $25,000 . (See Agenda Item #17C) Executive Committee Recommendation : Approve the recommendation of the staff as out l ined . .. II Harper • BOARDS OF DIRECTORS Cou nt y Sa nitat ion Dist ricts P. 0. Box 5175 of Orange Cou nty, Ca lifornia )0844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 JOINT BOARDS AGENDA JULY 12TH, 1967 -8:00 p.m . (1) Pledge of Allegiance (2) Roll Call (3) Appointments of Chairmen pro tem, if necessary (4) DISTRICTS 2 AND 3 (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) Cons ideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts showing elections of mayors and appointments of alternates to serve on the Districts' Boards DISTRICT 1 Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular meeting held June 14, 1967, as mailed DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular meeting held June 14, 1967, as mailed DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular meeting held June 14, 1967, as mailed DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular meeting held June 14, 1967, as mailed DISTRICT 6 Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular meeting held June 14, 1967, as mailed DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion approving minutes of the adjourned regular meetings held April 26, and April 27, and the regular meeting held June 14, 1967, as mailed DISTRICT 8 Conside ration of motion approving minutes of the adjourned r e gular meeting held May 10, 1967, as mailed DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular meeting held June 14, 1967, as mail ed ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Joint Chairman ALL DISTRICTS Report of the General ALL DISTRICTS Report of the General Counsel I (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Executive Committee ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion to receive and file the written report of the Executive Committee, and consideration of the following actions on the Committee's recommendations: a. Motion authorizing tour of Treatment Plants, wrvR~ b. c. and dinner meeting, September 13, 1967. Motion declaring intent to participate in cooperative study of coastal waste disposal practices and development of scientific criteria for conservation of marine resources, as recommended by the Executive Committee. Motion accepting proposal of Enchanter, Inc., for underwater services relative to installation of 10-inch diameter plastic diffusing tubes; and authorizing purchase of the required amount of 10-inch plastic pipe without regard to the $ 2,000 limitation set forth in Resolution No. 884. (See pages "F" and "G" ) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion approving Change Order #2 to Job No. J-9 (Ocean Outfall No. 2, Land Section), granting ./ a time extension of 22 dar.s to Vinnell Corporation, Contractor. See page "H' ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of Resolution No. 67-75, accepting Job No. J-9 as complete, and authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion of Work. See page "I" , ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion authorizing issuance of a purchase order for a 40 hP. diesel tractor and a~purtenant equipment, Specification HA-032. (BidB opened July 10th) See page "J" ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager ~ to designate members of the Board and/or staff to attend meetings, conferences, facility inspections and other functions which are not of an overnight duration that, ~.l/-" in his determination, will be of value to the Districts; "'?;~-­ and authorizing reimbursement for travel, meals, registra- tion fees and incidental expenses incurred. See page "K" ALL DISTRICTS ~ Consideration of motion to receive and file Financial ,A\t;J,- Report for the period ending March 31, 1967 (submitted vv by Hanson, Peterson, Cowles & Sylvester, Certified Public Accountants). ALL D!fS~i!CTS Consideration of motion to receive and file the certification of the General Manager that he has checked all bills on the agenda, found them in order, and that he recommends authorization for payment. -2- I , . (24) (25) (26) (27) (28) (29) (30} (31) (32) (33) (34) (35) (36) . ~)/~7) (38) (39) ALL DISTRICTS eonsioeration of roll call vote motion approving Joint Operating Fund and Capital Outlay Revolving Fund warrant books, and authorizing payment of claims listed on pages "A" , '1 B11 • and "C" ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications, if any Consideration of motion recommending and endorsing proposed Solid Waste Disposal Study by the Orange County Road Department, and authorizing the General Manager to represent the Districts on the Inter-Agency Planning Comm! ttee. See Page "S" DISTRICT 1 ~Ii appr(Jidng warrants, if any. S page ' 11 DISTRICT 1 Other business and communications, if any DISTRICT 1 Consideration of motion re: Adjournment ~ "f I DISTRICT 2 A ~ .. ~~ Consideration of motion accepting proposal of J. R. ~ Lester Boyle and Sidney L. Lowry for engineering services in connection with Contracts 2-10-7 and 2-10-8 {Euclid Trunk Sewer); and autr.orizing the General Manager to direct the engineers to'proceed with the work. See page "L" DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. page "D" ---- DISTRICT 2 Other business and communications, if any DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion re: Adjournment DISTRICT 3 COriSJldiH! a c ion of tnb't.:l.o~ approv~ing~_:w~aa.:rurwa"n""'t'"'"s ... ,__,,1,.f~a ... n¥.,.-.....1S111111e .... e..._._..,~ ~~'D" -·~ DISTRICT 3 Other business and communications, if any DISTRICT 3 Cons~deration of motion re: Adjournment DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any • See page 11 D" DISTRICT 5 r;J-cJ/ ~ ~.._j.__J /;; ~~ Other business ~nd co~ications, if any ~ ~ DISTRICT 5 ,..... donalderation of motion re: Adjournment f ', j~ f "'- .. ·o (40) (41) (42) (43) (44) (45) (46) (47) (48) (49) (50) (51) (52) DISTRICT 6 Other business and communications, if any DISTRICT 6 o , 1 ~ (o A1 lN\ Consideration of motion re: Adjournment ~ ~ ~ DISTRICT 8 Consideration of Resolution No. 67~77.~8, designating persons authorized to represent the District before the Local Agency Formation Commission. See page "M" DISTRICT 8 ConSideration of motion approving the District's budget for the 1967-68 fiscal year. See page "N" DISTRICT 8 Other business and communications, if any DISTRICT 8 Consideration of motion re: Adjournment to September 13th DISTRICT 11 Consfderation of motion to receive and file Notices to Withhold, received from the following, in connection with Contract No. 11-10-2: Blinker-Lite Supply Co. $ 623. 78 ~ J,/1'-. Sully-Miller Contracting Co. 772.44 ()/f Associated Concrete Products, Inc. 276.50 Hardy & Harper, Inc. 850.00 Kirst Pump & Machine Works 9,347.52 ( William M. West Company 2,428.75 DISTRICT 11 ' ny consideration of motion to receive and file letter from LI~~ . J the attorneys for Pacific Indemnity Company claiming a 11 right to receive all funds due under Contract No. 11-10-2 II {Slater Avenue Gravity Sewer and Slater Avenue Sew8'1e Pumping Station and Force Ma.in Sewer). See page O" DISTRICT 11 -~hon of motteA..approying :wa.tra.nts 1 if any. See ~~n > DISTRICT 11 Other business and communications, if any DISTRICT 11 -Consideri:tion of motion re: Adjournment DISTRICT ..1.. Consideration of motion approving settlements with property owners in Assessment District No. 6 in connection with damage to their properties and/or incomplete workfi and authorizing payment of amounts shown on page "P 1 upon receipt of signed releases in form approved by the Assessment District Counsel. DISTRICT 7 --Consideration of Resolution No. 67-76-7, approving the District's standard specifications, as revised. See page "Q" -4- I , ... (53) (54) (55) (56) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation, and concurring in award of Contract No. 7-2C-P (Lane Road Sewage Lift Station) to Ecco Construction, Inc., in the total amount of $69,430.00. See page "R" Q;[STRI<lU. . Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. See page "E" DISTRICT 7 Other business and communications, if any Consideration of Resolution No. 67-78-7, authorizing acceptance of an easement for Parcel No. 7-6-9j (Assessment District No. 6), and authorizing payment L for said easement in the amount of $25.00 See page \M~ II T" v I\ DISTRICT 7 -consideration of motion re: Adjournment "::> YJ W\ q', 0 ~ -5- l96t 'at x'lnr SiliNgwnooa DNI~HOddflS <INV SNOLLn'IOSili -'!-· WARRANT NO. 7641 7642 7643 7644 7645 7646 7647 7648 7649 7650 7651 7652 7653 7654 7655 7656 7657 7658 7659 7660 7661 7662 7663 7664 7665 7666 7667 7668 7669 7670 7671 7672 7613 7674 7675 7676 7677 7678 7679 7680 7681 7682 7683 7684 7685 7686 7687 168e 7689 7690 7691 7692 7693 7694 7695 7696 7697 7698 7699 JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Acore Drilling Service, Concrete Drilling $ Advance Electric, Elect. Motor Repair All Bearing Service, Inc., Bearings American Air Filter, Filter Material American Compressor Co., Compressor Parts City of Anaheim, Power Anchor Packing Co., Gaskets Arizona Plastic Extrusion Co., Plastic Pipe A. Sanitation, Chemical Toilets ~ B. Jean Bankston, Employee Mileage Barnes & Delaney, Truck Tires Bay City Bearing Co., Couplings, Fittings Bell's Radiator Service, Gas Tank Repair Benz Engineering, Inc., Gaskets Blowers Duke Trailer, Equipment Rental Blystone Equipment Co., Rental Equip. Charles Bruning co., Reproduction Supplies Buena Park Wholesale Electric, Elect. Supplies Burke and Co., Wire Screening Business Publishers, Inc., Technical Journal Cal's Cameras Inc., Photo Supplies Certified Building Materials, Cement City Sand & Gravel, Fill Sand C-L Chemical Products, Odor Control Chemicals College Lumber Co., Lumber, Tools, Hardware Concrete Coring Co., Concrete Sawing Consolidated Electrical Dist., Elect. Supplies Corrigans Cameras, Equipment Rental Costa Mesa Auto Parts, Truck Parts & Tools Costa Mesa County Water Dist., Water Crown Crane & Equipment, Equipment Rental John M. Deck Co., Mobile Equip. Parts Dept. of General Services, Technical Pub. Dollinger Corp., Filter Elements The Drawing Board, Office Supplies The Eimco Corp., Clarifier Scrapers Enchanter, Inc., Ocean Monitoring & Research Ensign Products Co., Lubricant Dave Epperson Co., Water Trunk Rental Daniel Estrada Co., Lateral Replacement Fischer & Porter Co., Chlorinator Parts Flair Drafting Service, Drafting Service Fowler Equipment Co., Equipment Rental Freeway Machine & Welding Shop, Machine Work Gar Wood-Los Angeles Truck Equip. Inc., Winch General Electric Supply Co., Tools, Supplies General Telephone Co. Gladman & Wallace, Truck Tires Gosche Co., Small Hardware AMOUNT 191.50 217.23 82.40 173.94 335.49 31.21 156.oo 1,714.94 41.05 29.40 158.18 187.82 7 .50 60.43 25.00 33.95 74.79 872.88 33.93 18.oo 18.76 34.40 452.86 64.90 244.46 415.00 190.76 7.28 339 .83 4.40 800.00 19.57 5.20 76.65 97.50 ~ 179 • 71~1 i,(O~p:f 5, 227. 50' ~r1 1 98.84 65.25 144.oo 1, 373.37 490.10 312.53 59.80 1,064.98 57.51 1,123:>66 47.86 38.80 458.90 Graybar Electric Co., Electric Supplies A. P. Green Refractories, Inc., Incinerator G. W. Mtce. & Installation, Gas Pump Equip. Harbor Clinic, Employee Medical Exams Insl.304.90 43.72 67.00 64.45 Fred A. Harper, Various Meeting Expenses Heathkit Electronic Center, Electric Supplies Hennig, Inc., Truck Painting Hertz Equipment Rental, Equipment Rental James E. Hilborn, Employee Mileage Honeywell, Inc., Instrumentation Repair -A~ 155. 75 48.90 610.18 6.50 173.00 WARRANT NO. 7700 7701 7702 7703 7704 7705 7706 7707 7708 7709 7710 7711 7712 7713 7714 7715 7716 7'717 7718 7719 7720 7721 7722 7723 7724 7725 7726 7727 T728 7729 7730 7731 7732 7733 7734 7735 7736 7737 7738 7739 7740 7741 7742 7743 7744 7745 7746 7747 7748 7749 7750 7751 7752 7753 7754 7755 7756 7757 7758 7759 7760 IN FAVOR OF House of Trpphies, Plaques & Engraving $ Howard Supply Co., Pipe Hydrocarbon Const. Co., Return of Deposit Hykil Sales Corp., Spraying Equipment IBM Corp., Office Equipment Mtce. International Harvester Co., New & Used Trucks Johns-Manville, Lab Supplies Jones Chemicals, Inc., Chlorine Jones-Gillespie, Insurance Premium KAR Products Inc., Small Hardware Keenan Pipe & Supply Co., Small Hardware Knox Industrial Supplies, Piping Supplies Herbert H. Kyzer, Jr., Employee Mileage LBWS, Inc., Tools, Welding Supplies Judy Lee, Employee Mileage Lewis Bros. Batteries, Batteries Litton Business Equip. Center, Office Supplies L & N Uniform Supply Co., Uniform Rental Donald J. Lord, Employee Mileage Los Angeles Times, Employment Ads Lumber Land Co., Plywood Mahaffey Machine Co., Machine Shop Work Main Photo Service, Photo Serv. & Supplies Matheson Scientific, Lab Supplies Dennis L. May, Employee Mileage Mccalla Bros., Pump Parts McCoy Motor Co., Truck Parts Jack Edward McKee, Consultant Milan's Electric Motor Serv., Motor Repair Morrison Co., Gaskets, Valves Munselle Supply Co., Welding Supplies Nalco Chemical Co., Boiler Inspection National Lead Co., Protective Coating C. M. Nelson Agency, Insurance Nelson-Dunn, Inc., Engine Parts City of Newport Beach, Water c. Arthur Niason, General Counsel Retainer County of Orange, Testing · Orange County Radiotelephone Orange County Stamp Co., Rubber Stamp OrangeCbunty Water District, Water Tax Orenda, Inc., Electric Circuits Pacific Telephone Donald D. Peters, Employee Mileage A. c. Peterson Co., Asphalt Postmaster -City of Santa Ana, Postage Postmaster -City of Santa Ana, Box Rental RAM Chemicals, Paint Supplies The Register, Employment Ads Reliable Delivery Service, Freight Repco Engineering, Inc., Equip. Repair & Test Reynolds Aluminum Supply Co., Metal Fab. Robbins & Meyers, Inc., Pump Parts Charles L. Robinson, Insurance Consultant Ruff's Saw Service, Tools Sharpened Santa Ana Blue Print, Printing Service Santa Ana Electric Motors, Elect. Motors Russell M. Scott, Sr., Employee Mileage Sherwin-Williams Co., Paint Supplies John Sigler, Employee Mileage Signal-Flash Co., Barricade Rental -B- AMOUNT 40.10 170.04 25.00 89 .54 I 17 .94 ,~ 31301.50) I ~u..r/' 58.52 27 J 9 55 • 20 J •. I ~ 12,736.00 ~ . 60.75 26.62 60.45 29.90 274.38 23.60 206.73 18.15 889.69 7 • 50 -;/'Vt"' 247.64 /U~, 47.99 179.44 3.24 140.78 23.00 11.75 22.00 450.00 189.51 48.82 143.68 112.50 39. 31 ·tL. )... 1, 202 .18 .., ~ pJ. 426.68 7.60 700.00 18.20 415.70 29.75 385.90 275.00 290.15 12.10 21.66 150.00 9.00 122.56 J "~* 143.83 I ~¢.r;, I 5.02 ~~ 147.98 589.13 216.32 80.00 12.10 218.40 63.10 40.60 176.71 9.60 297,73 WARRANT NO. 7761 7762 7763 7764 7765 7766 7767 7768 7769 7770 7771 7772 7773 7774 7775 7776 7777 7778 7779 7780 7781 7782 7783 7784 7785 7786 7787 7788 7789 7790 7791 7792 7793 7794 7795 7796 7797 IN FAVOR OF Snow Gates & Valves, Inc., Valve Parts $ Southern California Edison Co. Southern California Water Co. Southern Counties Gas Co. Southern Marine Supply, Small Hardware Speed-E-Auto Parts, Truck Parts Standard Oil Co., Diesel Fuel Star D Iron Works, Steel Stock State Board of Equalization, Sales Tax State Compensation Insurance, Ins. Premium Sully-Miller Contracting Co., Asphalt T & H Equipment Co., Equipment Rental c. o. Thompson Petroleum Co., Kerosene Tiernan 1 s Office Equip., Office Machine Parts Tony's Lock & Safe Service, Key Service Triangle Steel & Supply Co., Steel Rebar Union Oil Co., Gasoline United Expressways, Inc., Freight Valvate -Associates, Piping Supplies Wallace & Tiernan Inc., Lab Equipment John R. Waples R.s., Odor Consultant Warnock~Bancroft Equip.Co., Loader Parts Warren & Bailey Co., Valves, Fittings Waterman Supply Co., Ocean Research Supplies Waukesha Motor Co., Engine Parts Welch's Coastal Concrete co., Concrete Western Salt co., Industrial Salt Woodward Governor Co., Turbine Parts Xerox Corp., Reproduction Service Yoder & Sons, Paving M. A. Gentile Co., Masonry Work Consolidated Freightways, Freight AMOUNT 89.08 2,783.32 3.90 136 .55 128.10 200.71 63.39 31.11 168.65 14,ooo.oo "",.l""" ~j 38.18 395.36 201.03 3.12 8032 409c80 847cl5 6.86 89.22 176.78 222.00 150.46 271.85 68.95 389. 79 473.80 20.80 450.00 365.07 200.00 516 .oo 1-~tJ. 6.65 TOTAL JOINT OPERATING FUND $ 96,068.69 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Bank of America NT&SA -Assignee of $ ll,180.00 Vinnell Corporation 2,012.67 John Carollo Engineers J. Putnam Henck 112,641.88 Don s. Mozley 230003 Twining Laboratories 16.oo TOl'AL CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING $ 126_, 080 .• 58 TOTAL JOINT -OPERATING AND CORF $ 222,149.27 -c- WARRANT NO. 7798 7799 7800 7801 DISTRICT NO. 2 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY ~)JN}5 WARRANTS J. R. Leste~_B~ and Sidney L. Lowry Industrial ~line Construction M. P. Mitrovich DISTRICT NO. 5 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Gangi Excavating Company -D- $ AMOUNT 3,264.50 46,753.20 47,761.80 $ 97,779.50 $ 296 .00 DISTRICT NO. 7 OPERATING FUND WARRANTS WARRANT NO. IN FAVOR OF AMOUNT ~ 7802 Boyle and Lowry $ 908.00 7803 William Kroeger 20.80 *County of Orange 66.28 $ 995.08 *Payment being withheld pending receipt of monies from Assessment District #6 FIXED OBLIGATION WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF 7804 City of Anaheim $ 95.07 7805 City of Fullerton 95.06 7806 City of Orange 95.06 7807 City of Santa Ana 95.07 $ 380.26 FACILITIES REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF 7808 Boyle and Lowry $ 878.00 7809 Tustin Elementary School District 777.00 7810 Val Verde Corp. 264.27 $ 129l9.;27 $ 3,294.61 -E- ENCHANTER> INC. 19332 South Mesa Drive Villa Park, California June 23, 1967 I , County Sanitation Districts of Orange County P. O. Box 5175 Fountain Valley, California Proposal for Underwater Services .•'I ., Enchanter, Inc., proposes the following price schedules in the ·Underwater installation of the aspirating, ehergy dissipating, sewage effluent to seawater 10-inch diameter plastic di·ffusing tubes: .1. First 60 feet from each 6-inph port on 78-inch diffuser -----------$ 1.25/ft. 2.· Any subsequent extension past first 60 feet ---· --------- 3. Either the footage rate, or the already Board-approved per diem rate of $200 per two man diving day shall be in effect, whichever results in the lesser installation cost to the Districts on a monthly basis. . ENCHANTER, INC. $ l.00/tt. s/ F. J. Munson, President Agenda Item #17-c -F-All Districts ·-........ ---....... July 6> 1967 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. O. BCX 5175 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708 MEMORANDtJM TO: Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Manager FROi\'I: Mr. T. A. Dunn, Purchasing Officer SUBJECT: BID TABULATION & RECOMMENDATION FOR AWARD 10,000 LF 10 11 ABS I Thin Wall Plastic Pipe Kerona, Inc. 805 E. Washington Avenue Santa Ana, California Trans-American Pipe, Inc. 1100 Glendon Avenue Los Angeles, California Harrington Industrial Plastics, Inc. 918 North Eastern Avenue Los Angeles, California Howard Supply Company 13061 Safford Garden Grove, California Price Bid per 100 L.F. $ 74.98 F.O.B. Fountain Valley $ 76.61 F.O.B. Fountain Valley $ 86.06 F.O.B. Phoenix, Arizona $ 97.95 +Freight F.O.B. Fountain Valley The lowest and best bid was submitted by Kerona, Inc. of Santa Ana. It should be noted Kerona, Inc. is a subsidiary company of the only manufacturer known to produce this particular pipe at this tJrnc. Trans-American Pipe bid is based on production proposed, to start oy mid August. It is recommended that award be made to Kerona, Inc. as the· lowest and best bid for 10,000 LF of 10" ABS Type I, Thin Wall Plastic Pipe. If t~e award can be expedited, it is almost a certainty that the money saved by reduction in chlorine consumption during the summer months will rapidly_ amortize the diffuser project. TAD:fhh Agenda Item #17-c -G- Ls/ T. A. Dunn T. A. Dunn Purchasing Officer All Districts .. !'. r ,. '; I I ,. 1· .. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P.O. BOX 5175 -10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 CHANGE ORDER C .O. NO • __ 2 ____ _ CONTRACTOR: Vinnell Corporation DATE: July 12, 1967 JOB: Ocean Outfall No. 2, Land Section, Job No. :F-9 Amount of this change order (ADD) (DEDUCT) $ None In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as com- pensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. EXTENSION OF TIME Inclement Weather 1966 November December 1967 January February March April TOTAL Days 2-rain 3-rain 6-rain 1-high wind 5-rain _2-rain 22 * * * * * * * * * * * * * Original completion date: Change Order No. 1 (15 Days) Completion date with this extension of time (22 days) Actual completion date: May 21, 1967 June 5, 1967 June 27, 1967 June 16, 1967 Original Contract Price $ 1,118,000.00 Prev. Auth. Changes DEDUCT 2,175.00 This Change (ADD) (DEDUCT) ___ No_n_e ____ _ Amended Contract Price $ 1,115,825.00 Board authorization date: Approved: July 12, 1967 Agenda Item #18 -H- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of Orange County, California By __ ~/~s~/__;:P~a-u~l--.G~·~B~r~o~w~n-=-~~~--­Chief Engineer VINNELL CORPORATION By ____________________________ __ All Districts RESOLUTION NO. 67-75 ACCEP!'ING JOB NO. J-9 AS COMPLETE A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, AND 11, OF ORANGE COUif"fY, CALI- FCRNIA, ACCBPTING JOB NO. J-9 AS CuMPLETE The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the Contractor, VINNELL CORPORATION, a California corporation, has completed the construction in accordance with the terms of the contract for OCEAN OUTFALL NO. 2, LAND SECTION, JOB NO. J-9, on the 16th day of June, 1967; and, Section 2. That by letter the engineers for the Districts have recommended acceptance of said work as having been completed in accordance with the terms of the contract; and, Section 3. That the Chief Engineer of the Districts has concurred in said engineers' recommendation, which said recom- mendation is hereby received and ordered filed; and, ~ction 4. That the c~nstruction of OCEAN OUTFALL NO. 2, LAND SECTION, JOB NO. J-9, is hereby accepted as completed in accordance with the terms of the contract therefor dated the 26th day of May, 1966; and, Section 5. That the Chairman of County Sanitation District No. 1 is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Notice of Completion of Work therefor. Agenda Item #19 -I-All Districts BID TABULATION AND RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD Date: July 10, 1967 For: INDUSTRIAL TRACTOR AND ATTACHMENT EQUIPMENT, SPECIFICATION #A-032 VENDOR TOTAL BID 1. McCoy Motor Company 401 N. Anaheim Blvd. $5,733.69 Anaheim, California 2. T & H Equipment Co. 2506 South Harbor Blvd. $6,115.20 Santa Ana, California 3. Artesia Implement & Parts 18824 South Pioneer $6,734.oo Artesia, California 4. McCoy Motor Co. 401 N. Anaheim Blvd. (Option Bid) $5,575.94 Anehim, California It is recommended that the award be made to McCoy Motor Company, 401 N. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, as the lowest and best bid. Agenda Item #20 -J- T. A. Dunn Purchasing Officer BY __ .....,,... ___________ ~~~--~----- Wi 11 i am N. Clarke, Sr. Maintenance Superintendent All Districts ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS AUTHORIZED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER PER MINUTE ORDER 11-9-66 '.,Oct. 12, 1966 '~- Nov. 30> 1966 Dae. 5, 1966 Dec. 7, 1966 Dae. 22, 1966 Jan. 5, ·1967 Jan. 23, 1967 March 1> 1967 April 28, 1967 Agenda Item .f/21 Seminar on 11 Resources Management and Environmental Eneineeringrr, held in Los Angeles; attended by two Directors and three staff members Meeting of Desert Section> State Water Pollution Control Association, held in Apple Valley; attended by five staff members Meeting of American Society for Testing and Materials, held in Los Angeles; attended by the Operations Engineer Regional Water Quality Board meeting in Los Angeles; Assistant General Manager attended · Meeting with John Merrill of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration; attended by the General Manager, Assistant General Manager, and Operations Engineer Conference with Group Insurance Carrier at the Santa Monica Regional office re: Retired employeesi medical insurance coverage. Attended by General Manager Conference with Director of Public Works, City of Brea~ re: Sewerage of areas outside Orange County9 Attended by General Manager and Assistant General Manager Luncheon meet:Lng of Orange County Water Coordinatin~ Committee· attended by l..> , General Manager and Assistant General Manager Meeting of Anaheim City Engineer, General Manager, and Assistant General Manager re: Proposed Santa Ana Canyon Trunk Sewer K-1 All Districts May 3, 1967 . May 31, 1967 June 20, 1967 ·June 23, 1967 June 27, 1967 Agenda Item #21 18 Districtsi personnel attended Training School for Treatment Plant Operations, in Long Beach Water Conservation and Recovery Sub- corrL.~i ttee meeting in Los Angeles; attended by General Manager and Assistant General Manager E.SuS.A. moetin~ on prediction of ocean conditions, in Los An~eles; attended by Assistant General Manager and Administrative Officer Coastal Water Study meeting in Los Angeles; attended by Assistant Gener·al Manae;er· Luncheon meeting with representatives of Regional Water Quality Control Board, State and County Health Departments, Long Beach City Health Department, and State Division of Highways· re: Westside Force Main Repairo Attended by five staff members K-2 All Districts ·. ]. H. LEgr.i: n EOY /_ E (ll/{l ~/ J)f\J E)' L. LO\V HY .SOYLE ENC!NE~WNG & LOWHY AND ASSOCilrTES So-:::-d of Di roctoi's Co~mfy Scnitation District No. 2 Pos·:· Office Sox 5175 to;.;r1rcin Valley, California Attention Mr. Fred A. Harpe•· General Manager Gen~·lemcn: 4 I 2 So H di I.yo a S: rec: P.O. Bo:.: l iS Sau/11 Aua, Calif., !J2i02 Tcfo11Iwm: KI mhcrly 7··H7 I Pursuoni· ·i·o Mr. Harper's request of Jur.e 26, i 967, regcrdi ng engineering services in conr:.3.:tion wit+: the preparation of pbr.s and specifications for reconstruc~·!on of two sections of the Euclid rrunk, as outlined i:£ the engineer's report of March 19~5, we are p!eosed to submit this proposai for your consideration. VI e wi i ! oreocre pl a:1s and soec! fi cations for Contract No. 2-10-7 which extends from Eci~gef Avenue in the 1 city of Foun~·ain Va! ley to Boisa Avenue in the city of Senta Ana; and Contract No. 2-l 0-8 which begins at Bo Isa Avenue and extends i·o Trask Avenue in the ci\·y of Garden Grove, in accord once with the conditions as set forth in our bosi c agreement of September 15, 1965. Co;;sti·ucVion of these ~wo contracts will connect the lower end of the trunk rncon- s1-ructcd during i 964 in the city of Fountain Val icy and the recently completed po;ifons in the ci~·y of Garden Grove. The directors will recoil that the schedule cf the reconstruci·ion of cpproximate!y 1-3/4 r.1iles of i·he Euclid trunk was cdvcnced 1·0 coop0ra·:·e with the city of Garden Grove because they had plans for the improve- rr;ent end realignment of Euc!id Aver.ue through the ceni·er of the city. This section of :-he EtJc!:d i-runk is, of course, in a dry stai·us at present, but will be brought into service by complei"ion of the two confracts now under consideration. The Garden Grove Scn:i·a:y District· is especial !y inrerested in having the new Euclid trur.k put into service through the Garden Grovz aiea. The avciiability of this sectio:1 for conr;~ctions will reiieve certain portio:-is of their system presently flowing ur.der maxi mum capacities. for Contract No. 2-·!0-7, it is proposed that our fee be $i3,630 and for Contract !'-!o. 2-"!0-8, ~> 19, 850. l f we are authorized to proceed on these proiects at tha :-e9u!ar July mee)·ing of the Board cf Directors, plans and specifications for Contract Ne. 2-10-7 can be reedy for the Board's approval at the November, 1967 Soard me.::;:fog end Notice ! nvi ~·i ng Bids cdvertisec!; also / the scme wou Id apply for Contract t • r-. • "' 8 . I J 19'8 B d .. :'\:o. L.-1 u-ar t:ie anuary, o oar mee•mg. Vet'/ truly yours, J .. ~. LESTER BOYLE and Sl ONEY L. LOWRY // . / . /] ' ·' /-) /· / / , ' .•-:' .' I //Ji -../--,,.._ /;, d/° ... / (,..-, ' :.. /(, (Jw~C.. r_,,/'-.ft.I/.:.. .. /d ( ... ·./ ... <.. ". /.;· Cct;;-ad 1-lohener, J:., C. E. 10951 P? Ar;<::nda Item //29 -L-District.2 RESOLUTION NO. 67-77-8 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 8 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE DISTRICTS BEFORE THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 8 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the !Deal Agency Formation Commission has adopted new Bylaw No. 25 whereby it may require a legislative body of such district appearing before it to designate by resolution those persons authorized to represent or appear on behalf of such district. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1. That the following named persons are hereby designated and authorized to appear on behalf of County Sanitation District No. 8 of Orange County or any or all of them individually before the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County, California: Fred A. Harper, General Manager; Paul G. Brown, Assistant General Manager; Norman R. Tremblay, Construction Engineer; c. Arthur Nisson, General Counsel. ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 12th day of July, 1967. Agenda Item #42 -M-District 8 DISTRICT 8 MOVED: M 0 T I 0 N ------ That the 1967-68 fiscal year budget for funds of County Sanitation District No. 8, of Orange County, California, submitted to the Board of Directors this 12th day of July, 1967, be and it is hereby approved and adopted in the following total amount, and said budget is hereby ordered filed in the office of the Secretary of the District: DISTRICT NO. 8 Operating Fund Budget $6,287. The Chairman or Chairman pro tern of this Board of Directors is hereby authorized and directed to sign said budget; and, The required copies of said approved and signed budget are hereby ordered transmitted to the County Auditor-Contr o ller . Agenda Item #43 N-1 District 8 July 6, 1967 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 8 1966-1967 OPERATING FUND EXPENDITURES AND PRELIMINARY BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1967-1968 FISCAL YEAR INCO:ME AND REVENUE ACCOUNT: Cash and Investments, July 1 Interest Total Revenue ·Available DETAIL OF EXPENDITURES: Salaries and Wages: Directors Engineers Attorneys Clerical· Total Maintenance and Operations: Project Expense Office Supplies and Expense Mileage Transfer to Joint Operating for Share M & 0 Total Unappropriated Reserve Grand Total TOTAL REQUIREMENTS: Operating Fund Tax Rate l~genda Item /143 N-2 $ -~ $ $ $ $ 66-67 Actual 300. -0- -0- -0- 300. -0- -0- 29. 600. 629. -0- 929. Approved Budget, 66-67 $6,978. -0- 67-68 Estimated $ 300. 450. 250. 200. ~12200. $4,ooo. 150. 100. 600. $4,850. $ 237. $62287. Proposed Budget, 67-68 $6,287. -0- District No. 8 .-~ .. . :~.,..,"~~ v. ~,-:_, .. ,,"°''~~:" ""·~~ • ."\~\ .J • .:~~., ...... ~~ .,..:~~~:~,, ..:. ~i:w,::, ''"":0~\.:1.\"; ..:. ,10:-.~=~» ~Ui'iL: .:?.::io fiOWAN uUll.ulNG. 4~ t> SOUiH ::. Pn i l'IC. !:i'l'R C &:T l.o:. .A;lsolos, C-.l~..:.'\i:rn.fa uOOl;J AfiCA co~ie: 21~ IN ki:?L.V P;..Cl•!#C F~!;fC.fc TCI t•L.C. ,..c,._ ~,:~:.;,,):"ii. ;". :,.;-: ..:.-: .: :'~J~ro\":9 ~. n ... \.-'~.; • ..J,~. June 16, 1967 1701-60-KEL Com:.ty Sa:;.i·~~:tion District No. 11 of O ''<::~"lo·-:-. 1,-.,0''r:""y f°"~\.;~0._.....,:":'I ---·~c: '-' "'"' .. ~ ' '-'.;;........... .6. u.:.~ 10844 Ellis A ven~0 Fo ui1tain Valley, C~lifornia 927 08 Re: Job: Cont~:·actor: Surety: Om."' File No. Sl2.t0r A venue Sewer Orang·c County Pine line Inc. ?acific Indemnity• Company 1701-60-D-KEL Gant~emen: We represent the Pacific Indem~ity Company who w:. .. ot.8 t:1e P~l"'fo! .. ~:nar .. ce and Labor a:1d Material Bonds on behalf ,, ·• ~-,.~·~1rr,-:. f""o1~·~~·y "01Y":l'.",i:nn ''-"" i1 ........ ~0-~rc:i to '·he '"')~"OVC-c'"'r.•.:onea, ''• \.. ,,._ ""' c.-v '-'' "'"~"' ... ..,~JloJ .. .L• "' J.••'-'• "• .L '-'v'"-.t l. t.i.U '4.,Jl...1. , '\ .. , ... j,,,,J. Y:11,1 ·•···'< .. 1.,,, '"c'v1',_.,,,.J {1···~~· 0'"''"'0 ''' r''t1 11ty P·1'11nl1'1'c·· ·.1.:1'\c i's • I • \) •• \. ~ \.. .. '" • '. #. '\> .. ' J • \,,.-• "' ' .. I \, l • ~ ' ' " "' I J.. .. ' ' .. &_-• \.# ......, ' I • • \..• • .. , ' I • :.~ c:~:~·~~~dt '...llld\:~' ~-~le: tu::."ms oi' Uw Labor· ~rnd Matorial l3oncis by , · ( ... ~:-. ...... ~ .... ,.. f ';.. ,.Q t· ... ; '1n"'-:. r· o r0 y· v·.., ""~o·· c c · ... r. ... 1' {·o·~s \u}10 n' "."Iv~ c·, P')1 l. ed -............ v ... u... i...., ......... ._..., \,:;;; .,J..,.. ""• J. u.., .L \JU.I.."' .I. ,y4 ..._ \:::: ... u ~ 4. ~::ate2 .. :als Ol ... perf'orn1ecJ work i~ conjunction with the above- C2..~~:.or:.ed prcj ac~. Agenda Item .f/47 " (~' r~ 1:u .... ,_ ..... 0 '1" C"" ... s;~e~":'l"-1·0~ of ~ ... ·~"'e execu~1on • • • u) .i..1.& ~ "" \..:..,..:... Vi..;. •U .L G..l. l• a! .. _ .. of Such Bor;.ds, the unde1 .. signed hereby assigns> transfers, 2..::d conveys to the Cornpa.ny all monies due or to beco~a due to the 'L4ndersigned under said contracts covered by ... \, 0-1 District 11 .o -2 - 0 Ple2..s~ be advised th~t in view of the fa4.ilure of Ora!;.ge County Pipeline, Inc. to ~11::..ke payr .... 1ents to the creditors .... -1-i.: ... : t +-~ ... ·':I v..-. : -:~·,.. ·r d '-"'""'"' ~ ·:-y r"'I .,.no...,.,.. l'"l · m · ht t o ... " ... .L.~ JOO, "~ .. \;;, .1. ..... c.:.. ... h ...... n .~.1..;. .... n .... "' '-'01.,. C4.uy c "'1 s a rig o ~ .. aceive any and all contra.ct balances now in your possession or . herein~dter produced by said contract. It will be appi'"eciatod if you would acknowledge a · col"JY of the receipt of this lcttc1 .. by so indicating on tr:e photocopy er.closed and return the same to me i~ the self-addressed stamped e:1velope provided fo~ that purpose. Thank you. .. Very truly ~ours, · /;+~ r-;~ "2J,;,,.-~n dJ ~~~ ~ I(EL:::iat :Sncl. ACKNOWLEDGED B-X,: cc: Construction Engineer Ar;enda Item 11~·2 0-2 KEN"NETH E. LEWIS .. i ,i .. District 11 --\ Lot Easement No. No. 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 40 33 7-6-9a 7-6-9b 7-6-9c 7-6-9d 7-6-9e 7-6-9f 7-6-9g 7-6-9h 7-6-91 7-6-9j 7-6-9k 7-6-91 7-6-9m 7-6-9n 7-6-90 7-6-9p SETTLEMENTS WITH PROPERTY OWNERS FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE AND/OR INCOMPLETE WORK Release Settlement Name Signed Description Amount Gerardo Ramos Tamblin Smith Eloise Beltran Antonio Napolis Policarpio Jaime Steve Jaime Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Jesus Reyes Yes Jesus Herrera Yes Leonardo Ramos Yes Antonia Beltran No Elijio Ramos Yes Dolores Herrera No Dolores Herrera No John Roderiquez Yes Victor Gonzalez Yes Charles Roderiquez Yes David Cortez Yes Edward Arballo Y.es Pearl Street -fence settlement (not a part of easement #9.) Minimum (ground leveling) " 11 " " '' " 15' new fence $30. 25 1 repair 25 Destroyed shack 25. 20 1 side fence Cactus replace.$10 45' new fence 90. 40 1 new fence $80. 20 1 side fence 40. $ 10.00 10.00 80.00 20.00 100.00 120.00 Fence repair 25.00 Fence repair 25.00 Minimum (ground leveling) 10.00 Minimum (ground leveling) 25.00 Minimum 10.00 (ground leveling} 40 1 new fence $80. 20' side fence 40. 120.00 40 1 new fence $80. 15' side fence 30. Rear Y &leveling gQ. 130.00 15' side fence $30. Rear fence rpr. ~· 75.00 30' side yard fence repair 30.00 Minimum (ground leveling} 10.00 Driveway repair $60. Excess dirt removal 10. Bedrm. Cracks 20. 90.00 (Contractor equipment used too close to home) 40.00 TOTAL $ 950.00 ~·~.·~.t...= Agenda Item # 51 ~P-District # 1 RESOLUTION NO. 67-76-7 APPROVING STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AS REVISED A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, AS REVISED, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWERS WITHIN THE DISTRICT The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1, of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Boyle and Lowry, Consulting Engineers, have this day submitted Standard Specifications (Revised), for the construction of sanitary sewers in County Sanitation District No. 7; and, Section 2. That said Standard Specifications, as revised, are hereby approved, adopted and ordered filed; and, Section 3. That said Standard Specifications shall be incorporated into all regular specifications for construction of sanitary sewers within County Sanitation District No. 7. Agenda Item #52 -~ District 7 Engineer's Estimate: $65,000. B I D TABULATION Contract for: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Lane Road Sewage Lift Station Contract No. 7-2C-P CON'rRAqTOR Ecco, Inc. 7931 Lampson Ave. Garden Grove, Calif. M. E. Fridrich Co. 2712 w. 134th Place Gardena, Calif. Loren B. Smith 17111 E. Francisquito W. Covina~ Calif. Pascal & Ludwig 1500 W. 9th St. P. o. Box 626 Upland, Calif. Foster Const. Co. 280 N. Wilshire Suite 112 Anaheim, Calif. Healy Tibbits Const. 1400 W. 7th St. Long Beach, Calif. *As corrected Agenda Item #53 -R- Date: June 23, 1967 2:00 p.m. TOTAL BID $ 69,430.00 75,898.00 77,830.00 89,445.00 97,177.00* 102,447.00* District 7 July 12, 1567 Board of Supervisors County of Orange P. O. Box 838 Santa Ana, California 92701 Subject: Solid Waste Disposal Study Proposed by the Orange County Road Department The Directors of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County heartily endorse the project incorporating the proposed subject study, now under consideration by your Honorable Body. As your Board is aware, the Districts' Directors have authorized, from time to time, long-range studies in the field of liquid waste treatment and disposal of the general type now being recommended by your Road Department for solid waste handling and disposal. These studies have invariably proved to be beneficial from the aspect of over-all economy of operation and maximum service to the Orange County community. The Districts' Directors, being concerned with one phase of the total problem of environmental sanitation, also recognize that, in the long term, solid waste disposal is a problem of similar magnitude to that of liquid waste disposal. Consequently, the Directors feel that it is imperative that steps be taken, such as the proposed study, which will result in a better present and future understanding of the total environment and its influence on the welfare of our citizens. The staff of the Districts has carefully reviewed the proposed project plan and concurs in the methodology set forth. If it is desired that our Districts be represented on the proposed Inter-Agency Planning Committee for the project, the Boards of Directors will authorize participation by a Districts' representative. FAH:~B:gg Agenda Item #25 . -S- Fred A. Harper General Manager All Districts RESOLUTION NO. 67-78-7 AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT ----------·-· - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZ- ING ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT FOR PARCEL NO. 7-6-9j {ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 6) The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7, of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain Grant of Easement wherein Antonia Beltran grants to County Sanitation District No. 7 a per- manent easement for sewer purposes in connection with the con- struction in Assessment District No. 6, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That the real property over which said ease- ment is granted is more particularly described as follows: P ARC~L 7-6-9 j : The Westerly 10.00 feet of Lot 28 of Tract 586, as shown on a map thereof, recorded in Book 18, page 39 of Miscellaneous Maps of Orange County, California. Section 3. That payment for said Grant of Easement, in the total amount of TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($25.00), is hereby autho- rized to be made to Antonia Beltran, 7831 12th Street, Westminster, California; and, Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board of Directors be authorized and directed to record said Grant of Easement in the Official Records of Orange County, California. Agenda Item # 55 -T-District 'l EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF THE REGUIAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 8 , OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A regular meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 8 , of Orange County, California, was held at the hour of 8:00 o'clock p.m., July 12 , 1967 , at 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California. ' The Chairman called the meeting to order at 8:00 o'clock p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum of the Board present. Directors present: William Martin (Chairma~1. Clay N. Mitchell, / Directors absent: Present: and David L. Baker A ,~ :/ / ,. , _ .. ,,/ . '! NONE Fred A. Harper, $~.6retary of the Board. ' ! . I / .' / ~ ----~ /-~ - . / . / Moved, seconded/and duly carried: . ! DISTRICT 8 Adjournment That this mee·t'ing of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation Distr1c1tNo. 8 be adjourned to September 13, 1967, in the District's office. g ~ b1 "if ,m, The ~hairman then declafed the meeting so adjourned at 8:57 p.m. • July 12, 19~7 .. · / I STATE OF CALIFORNIA) SS COUNTY OF ORANGE ) • I FRED A. HARPER, Secretary of the Board of Directors of County S~nitation District No. 8 , of Orange County, California, do hereby certify the above and foregoing to be full, tru~ and correct copy of minute entries on record taken from the minutes of the regular meeting of said Board on the 12th day of July , 1967 · IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of County Sanitation District No.8 , of Orange County, California, this 13th day of July , 196 7 · Secretary, Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 8 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 5175 10844 liLLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708 Chairman Parsons Agenda Item No. (13) (17-ct) a. Call meeting of Executive and Building Committees for 5:30 p.m., August 2nd (to review Architect's recommendations). Perhaps invite Directors Workman and Gruber to attend. If they are unable to do so, perhaps Directors Hock and Walters could be re-invited. b. Re: Possible change in hour for Joint Board meetings. (A show of hands to see if the Directors wish to consider a change?) c. The staff reviewed with the Executive Committee the Directors' Information Book, which the staff hopes to have ready for distribution to the Directors at the August meeting. d. Presentation of plaque to Director Rex Parks, to give specific recognition of his efforts. Rex Parks has served on the Boards since 1955 (Districts 2 and 7) He served as Chairman of District 2 from 1962 to 1967 a. Determination should be made as to the number of guests each Director may invite to the dinner meeting on September 13th. (At the last meeting, it averaged approximately 2 guests). CO UNTY S ANITATI ON DIST RI CTS of ORANGE COUNTY, C ALI FO RNIA P. 0 . BOX 51 75 10844 aus AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 9 2708 June 29 , 1967 MANAGER 1 S REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE' Chairman Parsons has i nvited Directors Hock and Walters to attend this meeting and to participate in the discussions . The following is an explanation of the items of business proposed to be taken up at the July 6th joint meeting of the Executive Committee and the Building Committee . 1 . ;~ASTER PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE APPEARANCE OF TREATMENT PLANT NO . 2 . At the June 7th meeting of the Commi~tees , Architect Willard T . Jordan presented preliminary drawings and discussed his ideas with the Committees . His presentation emphasized remedial architectural treatment to existing structures wi thin the Plant grounds, and i nterior landscaping . It was the consensus among the Committee members that the primary emphasis should be placed on the master plan for improving the appearance of the treatment plant as viewed from neighboring properties . Mr . Jordan ~ill submit his over -all plan for Plant No . 2 for consideration at this meet - ing . 2 . REVIEW OF TFI~ GEi\TERAL COUNSEL 1 S COMPE:\TSATION. During the latter part of 1966, the Executive Committee reviewed with the General Counsel, his fee schedule as established by Resolution No . 63 -150 (attached). At that meeting, i t was agreed that a monthly report of his activities would be submitted with his invoice for services rendered, and the Committee would review the reports and re -examine the General Counsel 1 s fee s c hedul e prior to the adoption of the 1 967-68 budgets . Enclosed is a summary of the General Counsel 1 s time , based on his b i llings for the past seven months . (See page 11A11). 3 . TEi.'TTATIVE TOUR OF TREATiliENT PLANTS A.L\11) DINi'J-:ER MEETIKG , SE?TEMBE3. 13TH . As the Commit~ee members may recall _, the last treatment plant tour and dinner meeting was held in July, 1966 . A number of Directors have suggested a dinner meeting this year so that ~hey would have an opportunity to visit both fac ilities during daylight hours . I f this is acceptable, we wi l l begin making the neces s ary arrangements for the Septembe r 13th meeting . 2 . 4 . PROPOSED SALE OF THE DISTRICTS 1 78-INCH OUTFALL . Chairman Parsons has requested that the staff report on the progress of the negotiations with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District concernin~ the proposed sale of our 78-inch outfall. Following transmittal of the John Carollo Engineers report to the Riverside interests relative to the value of the Districts ' outfall, the firm of Pomeroy, Johnston and Bailey, engineers for the Riverside interests, reviewed the report and made certain recommendations. (It will be recalled that the Districts offe.red the facili"Gy for sale at a price of $2,000,000). Enclosed is a copy of a letter from John W. Bryant, Chief Engineer of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Con - servation District, and a copy of the recommendations made by their engineers . We have asked Mr . Harvey Hunt of John Carollo Engineers to be present at the meeting to participate in this discussion . Also, the staff and engineers would like -co discuss with the Committee, the roll of the Orange County Sanitation Districts in future reg:.onal planning for waste disposal . Since receipt of Mr . Bryant's letter we have learned, through the enclosed newspaper clipping, that suf:icient funds were not budgeted for the coming fiscal year for them to proceed on the time schedule they had anticipated . The staff will report on this, and related matters, at the meeting . (See page 11 B11 ). 5 . COOPERATIVE STUDY OF COASTAL WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES Jl.NTI DEVELOPME~T OF SCIENTIFIC CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESOURCES . At the June 7th meeting of the Committee , I reported that staff members had been meeting with personnel from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and the Los Angeles City Bureau of Sanitation, to study areas of mutual interest in 11hich we could wor~ jointly to effect a savings to the taxpayers of all three entities . ~-cer considerable discussion :ve decided that, since the three agencies discharge their treated wastes to the ocean, our conbined efforts to investigate the effect of our current dis - posal practices is most important . As stated in the enclosed joint statement of purpose, the recommended study will involve an annual expenditure of not more than $25,000 each as the project should warrant Federal participation . The three agencies recommend that the City of San Diego be included because it is the fourth major waste disposal agency dischar ging to the Southern California coastal waters . The four agencies 3 . provide servi c es for a ppro ximately eight million inhabitants of Southern California . We believe that the results of this study will have a far -re aching economic effect on the future development of waste water trea tment processes for ocean dischargers . (See page "C"). 6 . AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE INS TAL LATIO N OF 10-INCH PIPE DIFFUSERS ON EXISTING OUTFALL . At the June 14th Board meeting, Mr . Fred Munson of Enchanter, Inc., and Paul Srowh and T. A. Dunn of the Districts' staff reporte d on diffuser e xperiments being conducted by the Districts in an attempt to improve the aesthetic appearance of ·the ocean and r educe the amount of chlorine required for disinfection . We have compared the quantity of chlo r ine used prior to the installation of our temporary diffusers, with the amount of chlorine required after the barrel diffusers were installed . It is th e staff's conclusion that the Districts can save $150 to $300 per day by increasing the diffusion of the treated wastes with the ocean waters . ·1 I strongly rec ommend that the Districts proceed :immed iately with the permane nt installation of the 10-inch diffusers as expla i ned at the June Board meeting . The Cost will be approxi - mately $25 , 000 . (S ee page "D") . 7. POSSIBLE CHANGE IN THE MEETIN G TIME OF THE JOINT BOARDS . From time to time, Directors h a ve requested that the meeting time of the Joi nt Boards be moved to an earlier hour . The staff nas no recommendation on this matter; however , the Committee may wish to consider such a change . FAH : jb Fred A. Harper General Manager .. -. I ·~ RESOLUTION NO. 63-150 \ FIXING COMPENSATION FOR LEGAL COUNSEL A~1D REP,l!;ALlNG H.l!!~OL'O'l'lON~ 98, z1r03, 459, '(68 A RESOLUTION OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. . EMPLOYING LEGAL COUNSEL, FIXING AND IlliTERMINING DUTIES AND COMPENSATION THEREOF AND REPEALING RESOLUTIONS NOS. 98, 403, 459 and 768. · · WHEREAS,, all. of' the· .. county Sanitation Districts in Orange County, California, employ the same ·legal counsel in accordance with the provisions of the Joint Administrative Agreement dated December 8, 1948, and WHEREAS, it is desired to consol~date the various actions '· : of the Districts into one resolution and to bring tne compensation and terms or employment up, to date, NOW, THEREFORE BE.IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That c. Arthur Nissen, Jr., be and he is hereby· . appointed legal counsel for the Joint Administrative Organiz~tion 1· and for each of the eight County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California, and of' their works and operations, and that his title shall be General Counsel. Section 2. That the salary of the General Counsel shall be Seven Hundred {$700.00) Dollars per month, said salary to be a reta.1ner fee and shall be payment tor the general legal services required by the Joint Administrative Organization and the County Sanitation~Districts· of Orange County individually and collectively. Section 3. That the· following types .or work shall be deemed extra work: l. ·Preparation for lawsuit~ court appearances, legal briefs or petitions. 2. Appearances 1n any court of law, before any admin- istrative or· legislative committee or. agency, or at any public hearing on behalf of the County Sanita- ---··· _,, .. -~--------------~tion _ _D1_f;~-~1cts of OranBC County. .. A-1 ··-~-·-·-··-.... ·-' ·-··· ·-. ~···· .. ·+-·---·---··-.. ,,_,._ --:· .. --. -' 3. Other work on behalf of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange county which in the opinion of the General Manager and General Counsel 1a not within the work contemplated under tho .retainer, subject to approval of the Distri9ts. Section 4. -Compensation' for appearances in any court of law or before administrative or legislative committees or agencies or at public hearings on behal.f of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, shall be at ~he rate of Two Hundred ($200.00) Dollars per day or any part of a day. 'Ibat all other extra work shall be compensated at the rate · of T~irty-five ($35.00) Dollars per hour. I .. Tnat, in addition to the compensation hereinabove pro- vided, the actual expenses of travel, food and lodging outside the County of Orange on the business or the Districts and all other necessary expenditures on the business of. the Districts shall be reimbursed in the actual amounts so expended. Section 5. That where special counsel have heretofore ·been employed and are now employed on behalf of the Districts, their compensation shall be in accordance with that hereinabove provided for the General Counsel for extra work, and that,· in the absence of special provisions to the contrary, any future special counsel . employed by the Districts· or a District shall be compensated in accordance with the compensation hereinabove provided for the General Counsel ·ror extra work. Section 6. That Resolutions Nos. 98, 403, 45~ and 768, together with any and all other actions of the ~istricts heretofore tru<en contrary to or inconsistent herew~th, are hereby repealed and made of no effect; and that this resolution shall take effect November l, 1963. A-2 0 . ·' • •.• .-....., ·,....--....' ... !· .. :. .... ·~r-~.._..,, T \.__... u "---" .:.. '\ .:. - ~-: ·, ... ,. rv-.. -.~.-, ·~· ,,-. .. ,-.-.\' J_J l0.:. ~\...:...'.._,, J.. 0 ,,..... ":-. ' , ' • ..\ \,.;I ~ !·, : : : ' : \ l • /-, : l ;-. ~ { • : I ;..... .~... , ... ,,......_ ........ co":"" ... :-:!,,.. ....... ,/ 0 "'~ ·.··: .... o· .... :\ .... ·" \..);_ ..... ,,,,,_'\.. • ..,_,_._ ----j -------'" ... --- Ai<~:A ::;::;:,~'/';..I'., !:,.I",!:-~':;~~ ~.:.~-24~~ -·.==:=;=========~=====================~-================================:==== -...... ,. ,,.... ..:..;:~o ~..Jve::: 'bcr· 2)e: c ~; ... ~::,a:.-"\ ~ ::;57 7 ~ ·.-~ "' ~ ·~·"\ ... -.,,i' • ~ ------:; :?e ·o:: .. ·J..s.r·y :(s.::-·c:*! ).:9::·il :1::-a.y AVERAGE: . l3 /'"\ ..!.V 29 16 ' Q -...1 24 :::> To-'cal S:irr.c o~~ Dist~ict Business hr·s . 0 ~ins . :.-:::·s . 10 r~i:'1s. hrs 10 rri . ....., <:i . • 1 .. -.:. ... ...., . .,.....,.,.... .... 50 mins ··-~. . h~·s 5C Y',,,..4 ·r1 ~ . :. ···-·-.., . l:.:r·s. 25 m:l!~.:.S •. h~·s . ) 40 rnins . 16 hrs., 9 mins. r~'"i r!i-=· --···~ 2 hrs . :i 20 ~ins . ..!. ~·r·.::- ··-.J :J j ;:::: -..1 rr~ins. i -:: :-.i.r·s )·,..... 'rf1 "i 'I'"\ C! -...1 . ) .+:) ........ -.. •• tJ . l ""·r-· ··-. ) 0 mir.!.s . 4 ·i":-'•Q 0 rr~ins ··-oJ" :, . 10 hr·s. ;i 55 rt:: ins c hr., ) 0 rr~i::-is 4 hrs., 45 mins. I . . Time An~l~c&ble to ~ r7 0 0 ... ::.. ·~ .. ,, .,,, c·r, "'-i-: 'i" I ~.) ~ -•U • • \ti•! Retai:;~e~· .t-·ee "i lO ~ .... rs . :, 40 .,..~~ ...... t:::! ···-··"""'. 8 ~-~·o r=;: .,,,.,~·re ..... .._,. :, ..,1..,1 ···-··..,. 15 h"l"•C:.• ...... ,,,,,,., . 25 .,..,...: 'I"\~ ... ~ .. .:. . 15 ~-..... Q 50 ,..._.;~ ." '=' ··~ lrrJ. ' -··-··..,. 9 h:c·s. 50 'rr.-7·~c ) ··•-••"'1J. 13 hrs. ) ..... "' .)U mi::--is • ,... ~Y·s~ 40 r-::i~s. ? ) •1 ~rs oL.: ~ ••. --:-.. ~.~. ..&.• ... • ) '-• ... •. 0 A-3 .. '· ., :.~ l .. ;' 1• 11 ~ I; ,· ~ : : ' 'l ! f : t ! ~ ;· I I d . ; ' j l l , I 'i ; i • \ : : ~ I; i ' ~ . ! ;;' ~ : .i : ! ~ I : I . ! . I I i i I i l . •_-:,-~···~,......_,...: -- ,· .. .A .. r~:-;~ ,, .. :...~:".\'.'.'\;\;";,. .1, r..v~ '~Hr.~·:11.fJsa; N/;:1 ".;~ ii. "· :,c:,;1. :t..~;:; ~~~i.'i#::;._;:.~#~~;;:,--;.z ~ '"-"' ..:."''""i ~~~;.:-...;~ ... RIVE:RS!DE: COUNTY FLOOD CONTRCL ANO WA-rER CONSSRVAT!ON DISTRICT RlVCR~l::nt. CAl..,1CnNIA. O~GC,a 25· May 1967 Co~~ty s~nit~tion Dist=icts -"'~= o·-":""'"'"V.; co··"'•v C-"l l.' fo·'"ni· --.... _ ....... ';;l..:O '""'••'-.. ' c:.-J;. C4. l") . 0 . 3 ox 51 7 5 Po~~t~i~ Valley, California 92708 At~~~tio~: · M~. Prod A. Earper Genaral Manag·~r ,, ... , '_, ..... ., , •. G "":'.'. ... ··-, ".'\ ··~ ".'\ '"' • -\.;..; .. \...;...\;,;.,.~ ... Re: Sale· of existing 78-inch ocean c~tfall. 'C;_Jc:: r2c~ip".: of your proposz.l to sell to the Riversi'c1e County 2~cod Cont~cl and Water Conservation District an ex~st~~g 78-i~c~ outfall, set forth in a letter dated 9 Febru~ry 1967, .:.:::.'2! :"'.:a"' .. :::.e:: was referred to Oi;.r consul ting fir::L cf '2or .. 10rcy, .. J"o:::.::sto:: and Bailey for study and reccmr:iendation. Er.closed i.s a co.~")Y of tne report and recommendations which I feel will bo o= i::te~est to you. At ~ m~ati.ng o~ Zone Co~~issio~ers and Supervisors of t~e D~s~::i~t on 25 May 1967 it was the consensus that your Dis~~ict ·givG =~~t~er consideration to the joint use c= the n~w c~tfall to ba co~structed. ·we believe that by sharing in the cost · a~c use of a r.aw outfall there are many advantages to both . as·~::-.c:..es • .?..::;cau.se 0£ unavoidable delavs we have had to revise ou:: date C .:= ""'""'-....... ; r--=-i· ,,...,..., ·o.r-.:--;...e ""·,...el ;"""-1.0 ""'-.,..V .,...: ans .r-0 ... .:..~nc. o·,~-=.,,,i i Q·~-,. -\..-V •• ,·..1-~...., v.. -'-'1.4 v-. ..,....,.,,, •• c....,. v.... .a. J.. J.. '-• -.:;: ~ '--'-~.._.._. """.- C ,...~"" C'~: ·:. .... ~.:.. <'!' -dv.!se us ... "-41~ ... ,,_ •-;....e 7Fi.·;.al ni--ns w~11 b~-co-~-01e---=-~ v .... ..J~-.,_c.., ... 1...;;;. c. J.. 1....1.. C4."' '-•• -•• .i:: ... c... ...... \:;,; •··... ...\;;~ ~'.! .:.. ]l .. ~g~s-:. 1967. Based upon· this information and allowing -:.:.::"'.o •.:o iir..alize financial ar~ange::1ants, Riverside County Flood Cc~t~cl and Wat.e~ Conservation Dis'!:ric~ will not be in a .:?Osi.:.:.i.o::: to e~te:c into an agreeme:'lt wi'!:h County Sanita-:ion ~~s.:.:=ic'!:s of Orange County!prior to 1 January 1968. A=~e:: yo~ ~ave had t~~a to review '!:~e report by Pomeroy, ~c~~stc~ ane Bailey I hope we ~ay have the opportunity o= c~ssing tnis matter with you more fully. Sincerely, ... Cl.S- .· . 17 . ·~ ?J~t81~:A .. aQ'L'"'!\.,. W 'Q. 'OVu ~"l'r.'\ ""' ~' • JJ., ..... ~,. E~clcs~~G· Chief Enginaar B-1 . , l •I , . ; I i I; l t I ' I i ~ : ',' ~ ; ; .. , i :i • 1 'I I·' I •l I ;i 1 1 1 . I: l \• i fl .. I r d 11 ! I ~ ·! : ! ! ii : : I I I ! i i l· I I I ; I i I ' l i • i '· ... ··-..... · ... . , .... ... ....; ... ,. ; ' ··! I ; . -· _ . ., : ~ · ....... ... ; . . . ...• ... ·.·-. ; ..... . -- ... .. .. '• .. ····--·-·. --··------·------·-~--·· ··-·····. -····-·-• :1 ~I : fl The following are the recommendations contained in the report of POMEROY, JOHNSTON AND BAILEY, entitled 11 Riverside County Flood Control and.Water Conservation District -Ocean Outfall Appraisal 11 • . , ' ... •:: . ,,., .. ·;:h~ poi.·1:·~ can "oa r.:ade and. acco~r~<::d. tli.a;; amicable s~..:i~i:ls; c'! an. c~"~fZ:.ll t : · . is :possible. This pla~'l vtill cos"i; RC~-ic~iCD be·ii\1ee~'l $965,COO a~ Sl,~85 1 V"JO . ~· ..·. ·-. ; .... . ..:; . . •, I.· .• ~ ; . ... • .. . ·, ·• .. B-2 • I .. , , ., 1 .. ... ~vv...u ~. lf6 7 EVALUATION OF COASTAL WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMENT bF SCIENTIFIC CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESOURCES Introduction Utilization of the marine environment for disposal of ever~increasing quantities of treated wastes --while at the same time protecting and conserving marine resources --. . represents one of the greatest challenges in the emerging field of environmental sc~enc~. and engineering. 'I In spite of a long history of marine waste disposal with gradually improving techniques and treatment me17bods, there is-relatively little scientifically based knowledge on the influence of treated wastes on the ecology of adjacent coastal waters. Too frequently, the true situation has been obscured by conflicting claims that waste discharges have damaged or are enhancing the beneficial ~sea of the ocean. Undoubtedly it is possible for the waste discharge to do both -- enhance and degrade --depending on the degree of waste treat- ment, the.conditions and location of discharge, and· the funda- mental physical, chemical, and biological parameters of the speoifia marine environment. In the past two decades, beginninq research efforts have been carried out in the United States (especially in . . California) and abroad which have been sufficient to point up ., ' ·~ .· -C- » the importance and complexity of the subject. It is concluded that with sufficient research to develop the: fundamental scien- tific facts, it should be possible to design and operate waste disposal facilities which not only quarantee protection and conservation of marine resources but enhance some of the receiving water values through.increased productivity of the·· I ' ocean and hence its beneficial useso As a result of the factors noted above, all concerned with the discharging of treated wastes to marine waters have recognized the need for improvinq the status of scientif ia ·1 ·knowledge in this field. Despite the considerable re'search studies already carried out and underway, the present situation may be desCJ:"ibed as con.fusing and in urqent need of a compre- hensi ve collation and evaluation of the state of existing knowledge. .. Interest in improving marine waste disposal technology is nation-wide and universalr however, in the USA, California has been a focus of interest and knowledge in this field -- particularly with respect to development of regulatory criteria, of marine monitorinq programs, and of research programs both in the laboratory and in the field. In Southern California, four waste disposal agencies have been particularly concerned, namely the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, the City of Los Angeles; 'l'he County Sanitation District of Orange County, and the City of San Diego. All have major disposal facilities ,· ·, • 4' • .... ·, ·i .· . ,. discharging to open marine waters and all·have carried out sizeable continuing programs of monitoring, special investiga- tions, and research. ~he two systems. within Los Ang~les county are among the largest marine disposal operations in the world, each discharging in excess of 325 MGDo . ' The research program proposed herein we>uld be a Joint Venture of these four agencies, operating together wi~ assi.Stance from other interested public and private agencies, and, hopefully, with major financial support from the Federal Water Pollution control Administration. A three-year program is envisioned, to be carried out by a selected 'taff of scientists and engineers, with the following specific objectivesa. (1) collation and evalua• . a....-l ~ ~~ Mf"~ -e~ . tion of ~resen~l~ available data o~1;CbeAecology of coastal waters and~ine waste dis~~;J.~t~. (2) qeneration of supplemental data on the reievant inter-related parameters, (3) development of a mathematical model supported b~ pilot and field experiments to relate environmental factors to waste quality parameters, ~d (4) conclusions and recommendations on modifying present waste disposal practices, if required. It is anticipated that each year of effort as outlined i~ the Work Plan will result in significant findings and progress toward the ultimate goal. IIo Work Plan ·A. Establish an advisory committee of outstanding experts ~ related disciplines to provide general guidance, conceive specific goals and procedures, ' ... . ·-3-' .. ' ~·. '. . . .. .. ·~. ~·· . . .review findings, and author final report. Related disciplines should include but not necessarily be · limited to oceanography, resources management,. environmental health, marine science, economics, and environmental engineering. Advisory committee members will be selected on the basis of years of experience, competency, and objectivity. B. Assemble ~ competent working staff headed by a · .• ~ ; project director to prosecute the study under the direction ·of the advisory committee. 'l'his group will.be supported by the existing staffs and ·oceanographic data collection resources of the supporting agencies. C• Prosecute the study in three general phases. l. First Phase -Review What is Known a. Define The Physical Boundaries The physical boundaries of the study would include all coastal waters from the Ventura- Los Angeles County line to the Mexican Border, but exclude estuaries and enclosed harbors. '?be offshor~ boundary should extend to, but not be specifically limited at, the toe of.the coastal shelf. This water zone incorporates the major bio- logical environment of the southern California -4-· ----------~-----·.·-·---------·----.. -# ____ .... _ .... ---··-·--··--.... ·--···----·-·--·--. .. / I ' ---..-.... -~ ... ·------· ... ----··------i .... _ .... coast, in terms of both biomass and diversity of ~pecies. It constitutes the zone of minimum water interchange where physical boundaries limit water quantities and create the localized ·. ecolo9ical systems toward which this study is directed. It includes all of the waters in- fluenced by marine waste disposal systems. bo Assemble Available Data , , The area has been studied by many oceano- gr aphers, biologists, and engineers over the past years. Data on the phyoical,/ chemical and biological characteristics of this·area can be obtained from the agencies involvedo Tpe most concentrated studies have been conducted in the vicinity of submarine waste- water outfalls, the Scripp 0 s pier at La Jolla, and the Navy Electronic Laboratory Station at Point Loma.·· 'A preliminary listing of .solirce data must include a l) Allen Hancock Foundation -USC 2) California Dapartment of Pish and eame Laboratory, Terminal Island. 3) California Water Quality Control Boarde 4) Los Angeles City, Bureau of Sanitation. -s- I . . ·'. -·. ·: . ! 5) 6) 7) Los Angeles County, Department of Recreation and Parke. Los Angeles County Sanitation Districtso Navy Electronics Laboratory, San Diego.· 8) Orange County Sanitation District. 9) City of San Diego. 10) Scripps Institute of Oceanographyo ll) u. s. Army Corps of Engineers. I I 12) u. s. Coast and Geodetic.Survey. 13) u. s. Weather Bureau. 14) · California Institute of TTchnolo9y. 15) University of California. Several other prominent data sources can be expected to be discove~ed in the course of preliminary investigati9n .•. · · c.· Collate and Evaluate Data Once the existing data has been assembled,. systems analysis and computer processing methods will be used to collate the data and to identify the controlling physical characteristics of IocaZ- ized ecological systems. such parameters may include temperature, salinity, bottom topography and characteristics, nutrient levels, water velocity, turbidity, or other parameters that may evolve -6------· ·---· --· I I . : from the etudiesp. Each local ecological syatem would be characterized in terms of theae i~enti~ f ied physical parameters and correlated with the existing biological lifeo The need for systems techniques and Electronic Data Processing is dictated by the maae of available datao orhe following example is presented as an illustration of the magnitude of the data process- ing tasko 'rhe marine study program of just one of the many references listed above,. the City of Los Angeles, includes weekly aampltng at twent~ .' four otationa in Sant~ Monie~ Day. Samploo of temperature, sali?ity, plankton, dissolved oxygen, ammonia nitrogen, wate~ color and several other minor indices have been taken over the past 10 yearso In addition the City operated a quarterly · trawling proqram at some 40 stations in Santa Monica Bay for a 6 year period from 1957-630 *J!he type and quantity of available data.isa salinity -surface to 200 feet ~ 10,000 samples .. Water Temperature -surface to 200 feet ca 10, 000 samples · . Plankton -surface to so feet ~.soo,ooo -1-. ···--···· .. ·"; .. . .. . ......,.,, samples (consisting of some 65 species,. identified individually and by groups in terms of dominance). Dissolved Oxygen -Surface to 200 feet - 10,000 samples Ammonia Nitrogen -surface only -l,000 samples Water Color -surface only -10,000 samples Transparency -10,000 samples I 'I Fish (90 bottom species) -100,000 samples Invertebrates (240 bottom species) -500,000 samples ! This one data source alone can supply more . than 106 data bits with considerable inter- related complexity •. d. Present findings and recommend modlf ications in existing data collection techniques. It is anticipated that the foregoing.data analysis will reveal gaps in our understanding of ecological systems and d~termine the reliability or correlation factors of existing data. The need for informationhheretofore overlooked in· marine studies will lead to revisions in existin~ data .collection procedures and programs. 2. Second Phase -Collect and Evaluate New Data a. Collect additional data on and evaluate °' -a- I / the influence of treated wastes on the produc:- ti vi ty of plant and fish life in the ocean. Comparative data on the effects of waste dis- charges of different types and quantities on ·gradually defined ecological systems will permit correlation of causes and effects. b. Refine and complete previous classifications of ecological systems as described in the First '' Phase. c. Revise the findings of the Firat Phase ~nd ·I make recommendations for application of data. 3. Third Phase -Formulate Mathematical Mod,e.ls and Initiate Pilot Studies and Field Experiments a. Mathematical·Model A mathematical model relating var~able waste discharge characteristics to ecological effects . . in the marine·environment will be developed and. tested with known data and observed response~. ;. When ~he model responds p4operly to existing data,. it :will be used t~ predict effects by varying the ·input such as speci~ic beneficial uses, productiyity effects, ·Qegrees of waste .treatment, etc. bo Pilot Studies and Field Experiments Some of the predictions obtained in the -9- ·'' • J mathematical model and the f indinga of the previous Phases are subject to confirmation by controlled field experimentao It will be possible to make selected changes in waste dis- posal practices and observe the effectso Selected fragments of the entire e~ological system ma.y also be subject to close scrutiny . and controlo I' c: o Prepare final Report of Findings., conclusion and recommend.ationso ·; IIIo Cost and Duration · It is anticipated that·a study of this scope could not be conducted in less than 3 yearso· The cost of the ·program has been estimated on the basis of a 4 or 5 man professional staff, supplemented by support personnel and oceanographic facilities as requiredo It is estimated that the.proposed program would cost $300,000 per yearo The participating agencies are prepared to contribute a total of $100,000 per year largely in the form of existing data collection and staff services, with the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration requested to provide $200,000 per year in direct eupporto ·. . \,,,,,.,I ENCHANTER, INC .• 19332 South Mesa Prive Villa Park, California June 23, 1967 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County P. O. Box 5175 Fountain Valley, California Proposal for Underwater Services , .. I I ., Enchanter, Inc., proposes the following price schedµles in the "Underwater installation of the aspirating, energy dissipating, sewage effluent to seawater 10-inch diameter plastic diffusing tubes: .1. First 60 feet from each 6-inch port on 78-inch diffuser ------·· -----$ 1. 25/ft. 2.· Any subsequent extension past first 60 feet ---· ---------$ 1.00/ft. 3. Either the footage rate, or the already Board-approved per diem rate of $200 . per two man diving day shall be .in effect, whichever results in the lesser installation cost to the Districts on a· monthly basis. ENCHANTER,· INC. s/ F. J. Munson: President ' . -D- July 6, 1967 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. O. BOX 5175 10844 ELLIS AVE;NUE: FOUNTAIN VALL~, CALIFORNIA, 92708 MEMORANDUM TO: From: Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Manager Mr. T.A. Dunn, Purchasing Officer Subject: BID TABULATION & RECOMMENDATION FOR AWARD 10,000 LF 10" ABS I Thin Wall Plastic Pipe Kerona, Inc. 805 E. Washington Avenue Santa Ana, California Trans-American Pipe, Inc. 1100 Glendon Avenue Los Angeles, California Harrington Industrial Plastics, Inc. 918 North Eastern Avenue Los Angeles, California Price Bid per 100 L.F. $ 74.98 F.O.B. Fountain Valley $76.61 F.O.B. Fountain Valley $86.06 F.O.B. Phoenix, Arizona The lowest and best bid was submitted by Kerona, Inc. of Santa Ana. It should be noted Kerona, Inc. is a subsidiary company of the only manufacturer known to produce this particular pipe at this time. Trans-American Pipe bid is based on production proposed to start by mid August. It is recommended that award be made to Kerona, Inc. as the lowest and best bid for 10,000 LF of 10" ABS Type I, Thin Wall Plastic Pipe. If the award can be expedited, it is almost a certainty that the money saved by reduction in chlorine consumption during the summer months will rapidly amortize the diffuser project. TAD:fhh T.A. Dunn Purchasing Officer COU NTY SANITATIO N DISTRICTS of O RANGE COU NTY , CALIFORNIA July 7, 1967 P. 0. BOX 5175 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708 REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE July 6, 1967 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PRESENT : Directors Parsons (Chairman), McMichael, Porter Miller , Culver and Baker (until 7 :15 p .m.) ABSENT : Directors Speer and Shi p l ey OTHERS PRE SENT : Fred A . Harper , Paul G. Brown , Norman R. Tremblay and H. Harvey Hunt Convened : 5:30 p.m . Adjourned : 9 :15 p .m. **************** 1 . TENTATIVE TOUR OF TREATMENT PLANTS AND DINNER MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 13 . The General Manager reported that a number of Directors have suggested a combined meeting and tour of the treatment plants this summer, similar to the dinner meeting held in July, 1966, so that they would have an opportunity to visit the facilities during daylight hours . The Executive Committee recommends that the staff be directed to make the necessary arrangements for the regular joint meeting to be held in September . 2 . COOPERATIVE STUDY OF COASTAL WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENT IFIC CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE RESOURCES . Staff Report The staff members have been meeting with personnel from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and the Los Angeles City Bureau of Sanitation to study areas of nrutual in terest in which we could work jointly t o effect a savings to the taxpayers o f all three entities . After considerable discussion we decided that , since the three agencies discharge their treated wastes to the ocean, our combined efforts to investigate the effect of our current disposal practices is most important . As stated in the enclosed Joint Statement of Purpose, the recommended study will involve an annual expenditure of not more than $25,000 each, as the project should warrant Federal participation . The staffs of the three agencies are recommending that the City of San Diego be included as a participating agency because i t too is a major waste disposal agency discharging to the southern California coastal waters . The four agencies, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, City of Los Angeles, Orange County Sanitation Districts and the City of San Diego, provide services for approxi- mately eight million inhabitants of southern Cali forn i a . We be l ieve that the results of this study will have a fa r reaching economic effect on the future development of was t e water treatment processes for ocean dischargers . Executive Committee Recommendation : Approve participation of the Orange County Sanitation Districts in the cooperative study. However , the Committee question s the monetary participation by our Districts on an equal basis with the other entiti es and suggests that parti cipati on should be on t he basis of amount of waste water discharged daily to the ocean . It was the concensus of the Committee members present that the staff should review the benefits hoped to be accrued as a r esult of t his study and supply this information to the Board member s for a determination . 3 . AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE INSTA LLATION OF 1 0 -INCH PIPE DIFFUSERS ON EXISTING OUTFALL Staff Recommendation: At the June 14th Board meeting, Mr . Fred Munso n of En c hant er , Inc ., and Paul Brown and T. A. Dunn of the Distr i c ts ' staff reported on diffuser experiments being conducted by the Districts in an attempt to i mprove the aesthetic appearance of the ocean and reduce the amount of chlorine required for disinfect i on . We have compared the quant i ty of chlorine used prior to t h e installation of our temporar y bar rel d i ffusers , wi th t h e amount of chlorine required after the s e diffusers were installed . It is the staff's conclu s i on that the Di stric ts c a n sav e $1 50 to $300 p er day by i ncreas i ng the dif f usi on of t he tre ated wastes ·with t he oc ean water . We strongly recommend that the Districts with the permanent installation of the 10 -inch explained at tne June Board meetin~. The cost mately $25 ,000. (See Agenda Item #17C) Executive Committee Recommendation : proceed immed iately diffusers as will be approxi - App rove the recomme n d a tion of the staff as outlined . ~ v!J,lf67 EVALUA'l'ION OF COAS'l'AL WAS'l'E DISPOSAL PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMEN'l' Oi' SCIEN'l'IJrIC CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION OF MARINE BESOURCES I. Introduction Utilization of the marine environment for disposal of ever-increasing quantities of treated wastes --while at the same time protecting and conservinq marine resources -- represents one of the greatest challenges in the emerginq field of environmental actenc•. and engineering. In spite of a long history of marine waste disposal with gradually improving techniques and treatment methods, there ia relatively little scientifically based knowledge on the influence of treated wastes on the ecology of adjacent coastal waters. Too frequently, the true situation has been obscured by conflicting claims that waste discharges have damaged or are enhancing the beneficial uses of the ocean. Undoubtedly it is possible for the waste discharge to do both -- enhance and degrade --depending on the degree of waste treat- ment, the conditions and location of discharge, and the funda- mental physical, chemical, and biological parameters of the apeaifia 11\arine environment. In the past two decades, beginning research efforts have been carried out in the United States (especially in . . California) and abroad which have been sufficient to point up the importance and complexity of the subject. It ia concluded that with auffiaient research to develop the: fundamental acien-- tific faata, it should be possible to design and operate waste dispoaal facilities which not only quarantee protection and conaervation of marine reaourcea but enhance some of the receiving water values through increased productivity of the I • ocean and hence its beneficial uaea. As a reault of the factors noted above, all concerned J with the discharging of treated wastes to marine waters have recognized the need for improving the status of scientific ·knowledge in thia field. Despite the considerable research atudiea already carried out and unde:rway, the present situation may be described as oonfusinq and in urgent need of a compre- henai ve collation and evaluation of the state of existing ·khowledge. Interest in improving marine waste disposal technology ia nation-wide and univeraalr however, in the USA, California baa been a focus of intereat and knowledge in this field -- particularly with respect to development of regulatory criteria, of marine monitoring programs, and of research programs both in the laboratory and in the field. In Southern California, four waste disposal agencies have been particularly concerned, namely the Sanitation Districts of Loe Angeles County, the City of Loa Angelea; The County Sanitation District of Orange County, and the City of San Diego. All have major disposal facilities ,· .· discharging to open marine water• and all·have carried out sizeable continuing programs of monitoring, special inveati9a- tions, and research. 'l'he two systems within Los Angeles county are among the largest marine disposal operations in the world, each discharging in excess of 325 MGD. The research program proposed herein would be a Joint Venture of these four agencies, operating together wi~ aaaititance from other interested public and private agenaiea, and, hopefully, with major financial support from the Federal Water Pollution control Administration. A three-year program is envisioned, to be carried out by a selected •taff of scientists and engineers, with the following specific objectivesa (1) collation apd evalua• . ~~~~~ . tion of preaent_l!_ a~ailable data 5icaeAecology of coastal waters ancr~e waste dis~~~ct"i~ (2) generation of supplemental data on the reievant inter-related parameters, (3) development of a mathematical model supported by pilot and field experiment• to relate environmental factors to waste quality parameters, and (4) conclusions and recommendations on modifying present waste disposal practices, if required. It is anticipated that each year of effort· as outlined in the Work Plan will result in significant findings and progress toward the ultimate goal. II. Work Plan ·A. Establish an advisory aommittee of outetandin9 experts ~ related diaaiplinea to provide general guidance, conceive specific goals and procedures, ·.-3-' .· _review findings, and author final repor~. Related disciplines should include but not necessarily be limited to oceanography, resources management, environmental health, marine science, economiaa, and environmental engineering. Advisory committee members will be selected on the basis of years of experience, competency, and objectivity. B. Assemble ~ competent working ataff headed by a project director to prosecute the atudy under the direction of the advisory committee. This group will be supported by the existing staffs and oceanographic data collection reaouraes of the supportinq agencies. C• Prosecute the study in three general phases. 1. First Phase -Review What is Known a. Define 'l'he Phyaiaal Boundaries The physical boundaries of the study would include all coastal waters from the Ventura- Loa Angeles county line to the Mexican Border, but exclude estuaries and enclosed harbors. The offshore boundary ahould extend to, but not be specifically limited at, the toe of.the coastal shelf. Thia water zone incorporates the major bio- logical environment of the southern California -4- .· coast, in terms of both biomaae and divereity of species. It conatitutea the zone of minimum water interohan9e where physical boundaries limit water quantities and create the localized ecological systems toward which this etudy is directed. It includes all of the waters in- fluenced by marine waste disposal systems. b. Assemble Available Data 'l'he area has been studied by many oaeano- qraphers, biologists, and engineers over the past years. Data on the phyeiaal,. chemical and biological characteristics of thia·area can be obtained from the agencies involved. Tl.le most concentrated studies have been conducted in the vicinity of submarine wast .. water outfalls, the Saripp'a pier at La Jolla, and the Navy Electronic Laboratory Station at Point Loma.· ·A preliminary listing of solirce data muat includes 1) 2) 3) 4) Allen Hancock Poundation -USC California Department of Piah and Game Laboratory, Terminal Island. California water Quality Control Board• Loa Anqelea City, Bureau of Sanitation. -5-__ _ -------------·----- 5) Los Angeles County, Department of Recreation and Parka. 6) Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts. 7) Navy Electronics Laboratory, San Dieqo. 8) Orange county Sanitation District. 9) City of San Diego. 10) Scripps Institute of Oceanography. 11) u. s. Army Corps of Engineers. 12) u. s. coast and Geodetic.Survey. 13) u. s. weather Bureau. 14) · California Institute of Technology. 15) University of California. several other prominent data sources can be expected to be discovered in the course of preliminary investigation •. · c. Collate and Evaluate Data Once the existing data has been assembled, systems analysis and computer processing methods will be used to collate the data and to identify 'the controlling physical characteristics of Ioc:a.l- ized ecological systems. Such parameters may include temperature, salinity, bottom topography and characteristics, nutrient levels, water velocity, turbidity, or other parameters that may evolve -6- · .. from the studiee •. Each local eeologieal system would be characterized in terms of these identi• f ied physical parameters and correlated with the exiating biological life. '.rhe need for systems techniques and Blec:tronJ.a Data Processing ia dictated by the mass of available data. 'the f ollowin9 example is presented ae an illustration of the maqnitude of the data proceea- ing taak. 'l'he marine study pr09ram of just one of the many references listed above,_ the City of LO• Angeles, include• weekly •ampl1n9 at twenty-;. ; four station• in Santa Monie~ Bay. Samples of temperature, sali~ity, plankton, dissolved oxygen, ammonia nitrogen, water color and aeveJ:'al other mino~ indices have been taken over the past 10 years. In addition the City operated a quarterly trawling program at some 40 stations in Santa Monica Bay for a 6 year period from 1957-63. The type and quantity of available data.lea Salinity -surface to 200 feet -10,000 samples Water Tempera~ure -surface to 200 fee~ - 10,000 aampl••· Plankton -Surface to 50 feet •.500,000 -1 ... samples (consisting of some 65 species, identified individually and by groups in term& of dominance). Dissolved Oxygen -Surface to 200 feet - 10,000 samples Ammonia Nitroqen -surface only -l,000 samples water Color -Surface only -10,000 samples Transparency -10,000 samples Pish (90 bottom species) -' 100,000 samples Invertebrates (240 bottom species) -500,000 samples 'l'his one data source alone can supply more than 106 data bits with considerable inter- related complexity. d. Present findings and recommend modifications in existing data collection techniques. It is anticipated that the foregoing.data analysis will reveal gaps in our understanding of ecoloqical systems and d~termine the reliability or correlation factors of existing data. The need for informationhheretofore overlooked in· marine studies will lead to revisions in existin~ data collection procedures and programs. 2. Second Phase -Collect and Evaluate New Data a. Collect additional data on and evaluate -a- . .. / the influence of treated wastes on the produc::-- ti vi ty of plant and fish life in the ocean. Comparative data on the effects of waste dis- charges of different types and quantities on ·gradually defined ecological systems will permit correlation of causes and effects. b. Refine and complete previous classifications of ecological systems as described in the Pirst Phase. c. Revise th~ findings of the First Phase and make recommendations for application of data. 3. Third Phase -Formulate Mathematical Mod.e.ls and. Initiate Pilot Studies and Field Experiments a. Mathematical· Model A mathematical model relating var~~le waste discharge characteristics to ecological effects . . in the marine environment will be developed and tested with known data and observed response~. <._ ;. When ~he model responds properly to existing data,. it will be used t~ predict effects by varying the ·input such as speci~ia beneficial uses, productiyity effects, ·degrees of waste .treatment, etc. b. Pilot Studies and Field Experiments Some of the predictions obtained in the • . >- \. mathematical model and the f 1ndin9• of the previous Phases are subject to confirmation by controlled field experiments. It will be possible to make selected chan9ea in waste dia-- posal practices and observe the effects. Selected fragments of the entire e~ological system may also be subject to close scrutiny anCl control. c. Prepare final Report of Pindinge, conclusion and recommendations. III. Cost and puration It is anticipated that·a study of this scope could not be conducted in less than 3 years. The cost of the ·program baa been estimated on the basis of a 4 or S man professional staff, supplemented by support personnel and oceanographic facilities aa required. It is estimated that the proposed program would cost $300,000 per year. The participating agencies are prepared to contribute a total of $100,000 per year largely in the form of existing data collection and staff services, with the Pederal water Pollution control Administration requested to provide $200,000 per year in direct support.