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.