Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-07-12COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 10844 ELLIS AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP, SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) July 7, 1972 TO: MEMBERS OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS Nq_§. .. ~_.1_0_.l_J, 6, 7, 8, .AND 11 Gentlemen: TELEPHONES: AREA CODE 714 540-2910 952.:2411 The next regul2r meeting cf the BoarJs of Directors of County Sanitation D::.strict;-,:, Hos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 11, of Orange County, Californi~will be held: Wednesday evening, July 12, 1972 at 7:30 p.m. 10844 Ellis Avenue F.ountain Va.lley, California Tentative adjournment prior to next regular meeting: Executive Committee 5:30 p.m., July 25 II ii I I !i II Ii BOARD S OF DIRECTORS County San itation Districts of Ora n ge County, California JOll'JT July 1 2 , 1 9 72 -7 :30 p .m. (1 ) Pl e dge of All egiance P. 0. Box 812 7 10844 Ell is Avenue Fo untain Valley, Ca liF ., 92708 A GEN D A ADJOURNMENTS - COM P & MILEAG·~-.·.·.·.·2.-.~ FILES SET UP ... -~ ....... RESOL~TIONS CE2TIFI ED,l(' LE TTERS W!l lTTEN ...... ~ .• (2) Roll Call IOtl CAL( vo-m,..:.....,_;:;, ~ [)~~,g MI NUTES WRITTEN MI NUTES f l LED ......... ..........-...- (3) DI STR IC TS 2 , 3 & 8 Consider~tion of motion to rece ive and f ile minute excerpts \{\\S from the Cities of Fountain Valley , Seal Beach and Laguna Beach regarding e l ectionsof mayors and appointments o f alternates , and seating new members of the Boards (5) (6) ( 7) D3§TR~ 8~ Annual e l ec tion of Cba._irman Annual election of Joint Chairman Annual e l ection of Vice Joint Ch airman Appointment o f Chairmen pro tern , if necessary (8 ) EACH DISTRICT Consideration of motions approving minutes of t~e following meetings, as mailed: District 1 June 14, 1972 regular Di stri ct 2 June 14, 1972 re g u lar and J une 29 , 1972 adjourned mis M l '.:> Dis tr ict 3 J u ne 14 , 1972 regular (\I) ) cs, June 14, 1 972 regu l ar and M )s June 21, 1972 adjourned District 5 <Tune 14~ 1972 regular and fY\ Is. J une 21 , 1972. adjourned District 6 June 14, 1972 ··regular ·and N1/ S J une 27 , 1972 adjourned District 7 Distri ct 8 October 1 3 , 1971 regular, J anuary 1 2 , 1972 re gular , and April 12 , 1972 regular Di s trict 11 Jun e 14 , 197 2 r egular MlS (9) ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Jo int Chairman (~ AL L DISTRICTS ~ Report of the Gene r a l Manager < i 1 ) A'I,.L DISTR\s:rs ""-"'- Report of the Gene~l Coun~l ~~~2) A/C .... TKLR ·-· ALL DISTRICTS Report of t h e Executive Comm ittee and consideration of mo ti on to receive and file the Commit tee 's written report ···················-c-r3) ALL DISTRICTS ·······;sJ·········· Consideration of action on i terns recomm ended by the i'vU\''~.\... Executive Committee: · -·_,~)(a) Roll call vote motion approving 1 972 -73 Capital Out l ay ROLL cALl VO TE--.;;-Revolving Fund budget (Joint Works Construction) (14) ALL DISTRICTS Ro:! Call Vote or Cas t ~0 '\ S Unanimous Ballot \ * * * * * * * * * * * CONSENT CAL END AR All matters placed on t he consent calendar are considerP.d as not r equiring discussion or further explanation and un le ss any particular item is re q uested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member, or member of the public in attendance , t here wi ll be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the cons ent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions , and casting a unanimou s ballot for res o lu tions included on th e consent calendar . All items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered separate ly in the regular order of business . Mem bers of the public who wish to r emove an item fr om the consent calendar shall, upon recognition by the chair , state their name, address and de s ignate by letter the item to be removed from the consent calendar. * * * * * * * * * * * The Chairman will determine i f any items a re to be deleted from the cons ent calendar. Con sideration of ac tion to approve all agenda i tems appearing on the consent calendar no t specifically r emoved from same . (a) Consid erat i cn of motion authorizing the General Manager to des i gnate one staff membe r to observe the hydraulic L-::?·Vi/~-' test s on pumps at the Fairbanks Morse p l ant in Kansas FI LE·················· City, Mis souri , to b e installed in connection with tEn:ER ············-expansion of Head works "C" at. Pl ant No . 2 , Job No . A/c .... TKLR ·-· P2-ll-l, to ens u re the i r performance in accordance ---··-········-···--with the plan s and spec i fications of sa i d contrac t; ···--·-··· .. -·········· and a uthori zing reimb ur sement for trav el , meals , lodging , and incidental expe ns es incurred in connection with said 'insp e ction. (b) Considerat ion of motion to rece i ve, file and accept propos a l of Mar ine Biological Consultants , Inc. dated July 6 , 1972 , for ocean ecol·ogical moni t-orin g . See page :~~E~·§.::...r.:~f) Consid era tion of motion authoriz !n g the General Ne _rn ~, Manager to dir~ct Marin e Biolo gica l Consultants , •••••••H•••••a.ou-- •••u•,.•••••o ••h•U4- I n c . to proc e ed with th e wo rk for a ma xi mum fee of $8 ,500 for the p eriod Ju ly 1 through December 31, 197 2 , inclusive ; and , ,· "D" LrrR -Ma na ge r to e xercise Options 4 a nd 5 o f Sub -para gr a ph F~i te~····--·····T2) Cons i deration of motion 1uthori z ing the Gene r a l N L _ b , Par a g r a ph I for t h e period January 1 t hr o u gh ··--.............. _ June 30 , 1 973 , for a ma ximum f e e of $7 ,5 00 ...... -. ................ ,...~ .... -2 - ..... ' i,_,·-'1 (c) Consideration of .Resolution No. 72_=.93, directing the ftl.E -··········-·····County Audi tor to pay disaster relief f unds to Peter ~---'·-~Kiewitt Sons' Company , Contractor for Ocean Out.fal l ~ ~o. 2, Job No. J-10, received from the State of .Ate .... TKLR --·ca lifornia in connection with the 1969 ·floods, as --·-··--·········-·-recomrnended by the General Counsel. See pages "E" and "F" . (d) FILE <> .... ~--/ --.... v ~--······- A/C .... TKLR ·- ................... --...... - Consideration of motion to ~ecei v e, file and deny claim in the amount of $154.3 1 submitted by General Telephone Company for alleged damages incurred in connection with construction of the Interplant Influent Interceptor, Job No. I-8 · ···········-··-;w) Consideration o:' motion to .receive and file _Stop Notice ~ILE -··--···-rrom Keene Corporation, West Coast Metal Products LE~ER -··-·········Divisi on , in the amount of $577 . 00 in connection with Ate .. :_rKLR\···construction of Sedimentation Basins L & M and Digesters ---······-·····-·······L & Mat Plant No . 2, Job No. P2-19 01LE~----([_) LETIER -·-·---·-- A/C ...• TKLR ·- ~-$?.! .... --- Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to award purchase order contract to Porter Boiler Service, Inc. in the amount of $5,192.00 for Plant No . 2 Boiler Repairs , Specification No. PW-023. See page "G" I n'/ ·-rme--:h~·:).v.:;."Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager LETTER .............. to negotiate purchase contract for acquisition of A[J ____ TK LR .... Dow Synthetic Chemical Floccu.lent A-23 for a total y,<O>. amount not to exceed $4, 000 .... _ ........ _ ......... _._ .·-·····-··-on·-···· Consideration of motion approving Change Order No . 2 , FILE -······-···-·-··-- LEITER ··-·-------- A/C --~.TKLR .... ···--····-·~····-- FILE -------{i-} LEITER -----··-·- A/C .... TKLR .... to the plans and specifications of Odo r Control and Improved Influent Screening Facilities at Rec lam.at ion Plant No . 1, Job No. Pl -3-1, authori zing an addition of $1,705 and granting an extension of time of 103 calendar days to the contract with F . T. Ziebarth Company, Inc. See page ''H" Consideration of Resolution No. 72-911, accepting Odor Control and Improved Influent Screening Facilities at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No . Pl -3 -1, as complete and authorizing execution of a Notice of Comple:tiQ.n. See page "I11 FILE (j) Consideration of mo·cion approving Change Order No . 4, ·-····-······-·-·· to the plans and specifications of Interplant Influent ·LETTER-----···---·-· Interceptor, Job No. I-8, authorizing an adjustment of Ate .... TKLR ·-·· engineer's quantities and a total deduction of $25 , 800 -·-·-······-··-··-·····--· to the contract with Kordick & Rados~ a Joint Venture. ···-··-··-····--····-·-·-See page "J" (k) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No . 4 , FILE ........... " .. -to the plans and specifications of Sedimentation Basin LETTER········-·-K a.nd Digester K at Plant No . 2, Job No_. P2 -l 7 , authorizing A/C .... TKLR ··-an addition Of $7, 159, 64, and granting an extension Of ····-'-················· time of 30 calendar days to the contract with J . Putnam tf ,1 ..... ·····--------Henck, a Corporation. See page "K" ~ v-- F ,.L .... "'('15) ALL DISTRICTS LETI ER ---····--··---Consid eration of items deleted fr:'om consent qalendar , if any A/C .... TKLR .. ~· ----·············-··· .. {-16) ALL DISTRICTS :.-::':: .. ~.-~f. Consideration of Resolution No . 72-95, approving and authorizing Roll call v ote or c ast execution of agree ment for additional contributi on to Job unan imo us Ballo t No. I-8 ( Interplant Influent Interceptor) by Districts Nos . 3 N\ \ s_ and 11. See page "_L_" __ -3- (17) DISTRICT 3 FILE._,........ Consideration of Resolution No. 72-96-3, approving and ~Ro~ote or cas tauthorizing execution of an agreement with the City of Long ~ \ouSs .Ball ot Beach to provide ·sewerage s e rvice to an area located outside A/c •... TKLR N\ the District. See page "M'' ···---{-18) .ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of Resolution No. 72-97, approving and FILE ····~"'tJ'a'tl Vote or Cas t authorizinO" execution of an agreement between District No 3 LETIER Unani mous Ba ll ot , 0 · • ----· \3 and the City of Long Beach to provide sewerage service to an Al e .... TKLR _j\'\ area located outside the District. See · page "N" ················----·~ ...................... ( .. { 19 ) ) A LL DISTRICTS · "----/ Report of Special Committee on agreement with Orange County FILE ·······-········· Water District to provide 15 mgd secondary treated water LETIER ············-for Water Di strict reclamation facility and the right to A/c ..•. TKLR -· discharge a like amount of salt brines and other residual ------------··--material to Sanitation District facilities. (20) FI LE ................ - LEITER ·······-TV\\~ A/C .. TKLR : ••• ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion to receive and file certification of the General Manager that he has checked all bills app earing on the agenda, found them to be in o_rder, and that he recommends authorization for payment ~21) ALL DISTRICTS R 9\fi:\~-~~--~~···~-'----r;c;:-o-;;n-;;s-:ri-;:;di:;e::-:;r:;-::a:;-:;ti="".if':· o~n of roll call vote mot'ion app roving Joint tme \···-rmf S Operating and Capital Ou tlay Rev olvin g warrant books for Ale .... l~~'l sig nature of the Chairman of District No. 1, a nd authorizing " payment of cla ims l isted on page "A" ···············-·"T·22) (2 3) " FltE ................. . . LET'iER ..•..•••• TV\\~ A/C ... TKLR •••• ·--·--··-· ' ... 0{\ ) s (24) M/s !V1 ls (2 5) ~\ls (26) / (29) FILED .... -......... w LETIE R -····Jii1 S A/C .... TKLR .... ···········-······.PA ls •••••••••••••••••••••n ••• ALL DISTR ICTS Other business and communications, if any DI STRICTS 1 & 7 -Consideration of motion authorizing payment to Southern Pacific Tra nspor ta tion Company in the amo unt of $4,969 .4 5 for removal and repa ir of r ai lroad cro ssing on Sun f lower Av enue in connect i on with construction of Sunflower Int er- c eptor , Co n tract No . 7-6-1 DISTRICTS 1 & 7 Consider a tio n of motion appr oving suspense fund wa r r a n ts , if any. See page "C" DISTR I CT 1 Consider a t io n of motion a pprovin g wa rrant s , if any ~ See pa ge "B" D'!§TR I ~ 1 Otber b u";;Lne ss~d comm lil'l.~ca ti o ns~ any DISTRIC T S 3 & 11 Con s id e r a tio n of mo ti o n to r e c e ive a nd f ~l e lett e r fr om Fra nkly n G. Sc hot t , dat e d Jun e 20 , 1 972 , in co nne c t i on with ri gh t o f way for con s truction o f Knott Int e r c ept o r , Contrac t No . 3-17; a nd dir e cting s t a ff t o r e ply. 1N. page "0 11 -4- (30) DISTRICTS 3 & 11 M l ~ Consideration of motion approving s u spense fund warrants , fV\ \S if any . See page "B" ( 31 ) DISTRICT 3 \::; Co nsideration of motion appr oving warrants , if any . M \. · See page "B " (3 2) (33 / Ml~ ' j~4) ~ ....... -~~~~ A/C .... TKl R - ......................... - i f°"a-ny DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to ad j ourn g ·. t./ :5 DISTRIC'I' 11 Considerat ion of motion to receive , file and accept proposa l submitted by Keith & Associates , dated June 27, 1972 , for e ngineering services in connection with design of Sl ater Avenue Trunk Sev.rer Extens i on , Con t ract No. 11-12, for a lump sum Fee of $9,700 . See page "P " (3 5 ) DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion approving warrants , if any . See page "C" (3 6 ) UASTR~ 11~ 0-e'her bu"'Sine'S-s and~mmuniC:a.tion Sj-if~y (3 7 ) DISTRICT 11 . if Co n sideration of motion to ad j ourn i~~ ~8). DISTHI CTS 5 & 6 flt\······· .... -·-Considera tion of Resolution No . 72 -89, authorizing execution t ETTER --~~;~,Vote or Ca !(!)f an agreement with Donald J . Scholz & Company for oversizing A/C -~-TK~mous Ba ll ot Pacific Coast Highway Sewer Crossing in connection v.fith ···-····---·---~ replacem~1nQ~' of a portion of Newport Beach Trunk A. See page ,,__ . ..--.. ................ ... (3 9) DISTRICTS 5 & 6 Consideration of motion approving suG-peft"'ue-f-tt--ftE!.--wa:P-Pfu~~-s, ±f any. See page 11 B " (4 0 ) DISTRICT 6 -Consideration of FRotion approving -warrants, if &!+Y-r -See page "C " (41 ) D}..$TRICT ----6 other busirress a~mmunicat--i.o.ns , if'--a-ny (4 2 ) DISTRICT 6 Consideration of mot i on to adjourn ( 4 3) D IS'l'RICT 5 Pr oposed Ordinance ·ordinance No. 505, No . 507 , amending Uni form Connectiori and Use and repealing Ordinance No . 506 . See page "R 11 N\, \ ~ ....... ~ .. (~ ) LEITER····- A/C .... TKLR -- (b ) FILE ·······7·· ~s. .. : ........ - "l..1c .. T~~ ···-··--.. ··--- ········-··-··--·····- Consideration of motion dec l aring intent to consider adoption of propo sed Ordinance No . 507, amending Uniform Connection and Use Ordinanc~ No . 505, arid repealing Ordinance No. 506 , effective October 1 , 1972, at an adjourned meeting on August ·2~, 1972 Consideration of motion directin g the ~taff to notify the City of Newport Beach a nd each firm hold in g a valid Industrial Waste Discharge Permit oI' the Board 's i n tent ion to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 50~ in accordance with prov 1 s ions of Qr_dinan.ce N_o . ~'J5 ~ (44) {'{\ \~ (45) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. See page "B 11 rr:r-sg;:R I C ~ Oth&r bUSiness ~comm~icati;~ if a~ (4 6) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~" ~~ (47) ISTRICT 8 YlP c~-., ROLL CA LL voni.._ C ideration M~roll catl--.....y ote moti0--B-9J2.proving the'-l..9_72 -73 Oper ting Fund Buaget in the amount of $3 ,400. See page 11 s 11 ( 48) (49) (50) IqSTRICT 8 CChlSideration of , ion to rece~~nd file Annua l Report sub IDl~~d by Hanson , ·terson, Cowles-a~Sy l vester , Certified Public kccountants , for the period ending June 30, 1 971 , previ ous ly mailed to Directors by auditors D~RIC T 8 ------------Other business and communicationS;---il' any DI~ICT 8 Conslcleration 01'-mot ion tO'actjourn (51) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of Reso lution No. 72 -98-7, approving plans and Ro ll Co~I Vote or Castspecifications for West Relief Trunk Sewer ' Reaches 19 ' 20 ' FILE ••• ~.~~~~~~us Ba llo t and 22 , Contract No. 7 -5-lR; and authorizin g General Manager LffiER ••.• 1 ~ A/C .J.\'kLt .... (52) FILE -- lETTER -----;;\\ ~ >JC ... :TKL.N.\..t _ .. ----··-'"- -·--·- (53) FI LE ·--·-··-·- lTTER ····-- \ ····T~\S ... -.. --....... _ .. _ (54) FILE ................ ~ lETTER ···--s A/C .•.. KLR ft'\ \ to establ i sh bid date following assurance from the Cities of Santa Ana and Tustin that funds will be releas e d to f inance c onstruction of said facility from their respective County Sanitation District Number Seven Main Trunk .Funds . See pa ge 11 T " DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion a p proving Chan g e Order No . 2, to the plans and specifications for Sunflower Interceptor, Reach 3, and Red Hill Interceptor~ Reaches 4 and 5, Contract No. 7-6 -3, authorizing an addition of $2,151 .08 to the contract with Coli ch Constr uc tion Company. · ·See page 11u 11 -------- DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion a p proving Change Ord e r No . 3, to t he p l ans and s p ecificati ons for Sunflower Interceptor , Reach 3, and Red Hill Intercept or , Reach e s 4 and 5 , Contract No. 7-6 -3 , authorizing an adjustme nt of engine er 's · quantities and a total deduction of $528 .82 to the contract with Co l ich Construct ion Company . See page 'tv 11 DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion appro ving Chan g e Order No . 4, to the p l ans and specifications for Su n flower Int erceptor, .Reach 3 , and Red Hill Interceptor, Reaches 4 and 5 , Contract No . 7 -6 ~3, granting an extension of time of 56 calendar days to the contract with Colich Construction Company . See page 11 w11 FILE ·······-··-···.(55) DI STRICT 7 LETTER-·-····· Co nsid e r a tion of Res o lution No . 7 2-1 00 -7, acceptin g Sunfl o wer A/c ~J L C a~1 vote or cast Interceptor , Re a ch 3, and Red Hill Interce ptor, Re ac he s 4 a nd ···· l:ni ammou s Ba ll ot 5, Contract No . 7 -6-3 , as c o mp lete and authorizing e xecutio n --·-·--·······-N\ \$ of a Not i ce of Completion . See page "X" ----··---····· -6- .. I ... ~ ¥!/---~·t·(156) DISTRICT '( · LETIER •...•.•••••••• J Further consideration of delegation of authority to approve A/c •••. TKLR •• N\\ '<;;;> Chang e Orders to construction contracts to the General Ma nager ···················-·.... (See material in meeting folders) }; 0 /l.£,c.> .......-'-:-"'.....____,. z:. .).._/ 7.;>--\cl-~ ···············---~ DISTRI CT 7 .i: ···-~ · Report of General Counse l regarding easement obtained ~E:E: •. ~~~~~ for construction of -~unflower Interceptor , Contract No . 7 -6-1 ···············{-5-&) DISTRICT 7 ~~\~ A/C .... TKLR .... Consideration of motion to receive , file and accept · proposa l submitted by Boyle Engineering , dated June 30, 1972, for engineering services in connection with preparation of plans and specifications for Jamboree Road Subtrunk No .· 1 , Reach 47 , Contract No. 7 -2C-2, and Jamboree Road Subtrunk No. 2, Reach 53, Contract No. 7 -2D -6, for a lump sum fee of $2,400; and rescinding action of June 14, 1972, accepting proposal for pr~paration of plans and specifications for Contract No. 7-2C-2. See page "Y" •t-·:: .. :.:.~~---······· . . ~. ( 59) DISTRICT 7 ~A \'::> Considerat ion of motion app r oving warrants, if any. 11 \ See page "C" (60) DI§TRICT~ Ot'tler bus1ness~d communicatio~, if any ( 61) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn l1 ·.t-/1?. FILE ······-~ DISTRICT 2 . @_).:~.........-Further consideration of request of Anaheim Hills, In~. T~R • . that annexation fees for 1,024.87 acres of proposed Anaheim A/C ···· -Hills Annexation No. 1 be paid in five equal annua l install- ························-ment-s on the tax bill . ···-·······: ..... ~ ~ DISTRICT 2 Proposed Ordinance No. 203 establishing connection charges for c residential and commercial units a nd amending Uniform Connection ~~\~---·······and Use Ordinance No. 202 LETIER .t..£)..'.~. TKLR .••• (a) Consideration of motion directing the staff to forward A/C-proposed Ordinance No . 203 to the loc a l sewering agencies ···-····················· for review ancl comment. See page ".Z" ........................... FILE ···'··············( b ) LETIE R ·····-- Consideration of motion directing the staff to forward copy of proposed standard agreement to be en t ered into with l ocal sewering agencies to provide for collection of connec - tion fees, to said agencies for review and comment . See page "AA" A/C •... TKLR ·- ----··-·····-···-- ....................... - ( 611) DISTRICT 2 Gons1deration of mG-t-i-on approving warrants 3 if a-HTo- 8 See page 11 B i: DISTRICT 2 Other business and communications, if any (66) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn -7- MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County Sanitation Districts Post Office Box 8127 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain· Valley, Ca l if., 92708 Telephones: of Orange County, California JOINT BOARDS REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, July 12, 1972 7:30 p.m. Area Code 714 540-29 _10 962-2411 July 7, 1972 The following is a brief explanation of the more important non- routine items which appear on the enclosed agenda and which a re not otherwise self-explanatory. Warrant lists 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 .Nos. 5 and 6 -ELECTION OF JOINT CHAIBM.AN AND VICE JOINT CHAIBMAN: 'Yne Districts' rules of procedure provide that nominations for the Joint Chairman and Vice Joint Chairman be made at the regular June meeting and that these two officers be elected and seated at the July meeting. However, only one nomination for each o f fice was made, and the nominations closed at the June meeting. The nominees for the two offices are Directors Robert F. Finnell and Jesse Davis, respectively. Nos. 12 and 13 -REPORT OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE .AND ACTION ON COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS: The Committee met on the evening of June 27 with Directors DJke , Finnell, Stevens and Store as guests , and is scheduled to meet again immediately preceding the Joint Board meeting. A written report of the June 27 meeting,-toge ther with the recommendations to the Joint Board was mailed on July 6. Item No. 13 is consideration of actions recommended by the Committee to the Joint Boards. No. 14 -CONSENT CALENDAR: The following agenda items fall into this category in accordance with the definition established by the Boards: (a) Authority to Travel to Kansas City to Witness Pump Tests~ Enlargement of the capacity of Headworlrn. "c 11 at Plant No. 2 (Job No. P2-ll-l) now Under construction, requires the installation of two large (36 " diameter, 31,000 gpm) pumps. The manufacturer's (Fairbanks Morse Company) factory is located in Kansas City. The specifications require the witnessing of hydraulic tests on the pumps to -insure their specified performance . We i:ecommend that our Associate Engineer in charge of Plant construction activities, be authorized to _tr~vel to Kansas City to be present at the testing of the pumps. .(b) (c) (d) / Proposal for Ocean Ecological Monitoring. The Regional Water Quality Control Board r equi res the Districts to maintain a.rl on-going monitoring prog ram to determine the effect, if any, of the discharge of our effluent on the marine ecosystem. The work involves eight quarterly trawls and taking sediment samples to determine, among other things, the number and diversity of species of both vertibrates and invertibrates. It also.includes an annual diving survey of conditions on the ocean bottom at selected locations. Supervision of this work and the writing of the necessary reports requires the expertise and unbiased con- clusions of an outside consulting firm . Since .the prog ram was inaugurated in 1969, the Districts have employed Marine Biological Consultants, Inc., of Costa Mesa for this purpose. The present contract with this firm terminated on July 1 and the staff recommends that they be retained again for a six months period, with an option to extend the agreement for an additional six months . The reason for the short term of the agreement is that with the adoption by the State Water Resources Control Board of a new Ocean Wat er Quality Cont r ol Plan, the Re g ional Board wi ll be formulating new requirements which, in all probab ility, wi ll establish a monitoring program considerably different than the one presently in effect. When this new monitoring program becomes effective it will be necessary to review our agree- · ment with Ma rine Biological Consultan ts ·and enlarge or reduce its scope as the case may be, or possibly terminate· it completely. A proposal for the interim monitoring program is included in the agenda material and we recon;unend its acceptance. Payment of Disaster Relief FUnds to Peter Kiewit Sons' f2!!p~. Sho rtly after the floods of January and February OfJ."909 which completely changed the ocean bottom profile near the mouth of the Santa Ana River at the Ocean Outfall No. 2 construction site, the .contractor filed, through the State, a claim for disaster relief because of the unantici- pated additional excavation expense, etc. The Federal law requires that the constructing agency (.County Sanitation District No . 1) file the claim in behalf of ·:the contractor with payment to be made to the public agency rat he r than to th~ affected party, the contractor. Durin~ June we received a warrant from the State in the amount of $132,397. Since ·the Federal law requires that this money be turned over to the contractor, the General Counsel recomm ends the adoption of the resolution included with the agenda material under this item. Receive and File General Telephone Com pany Claim. Some of the telephone company 1 s underground facilities were apparently damaged a few weeks ago by the contractor con- structing the Interplant Influent Interceptor in Brook.hurst -2- (e) (f) (g) Street. Rather than take the matter up with the contractor directly, the telephone company chose to file a formal claim which must be received and filed and denied. The contractor has furnished us evidence _that he has already paid the small amou:it ($154.31) of damages claimed. Receive and File Sto Notice Job No. P2-l . We have receive a Stop Notice in the amount of 5 77.00 on this construction job which, to make it a matter of ~ecord, should be received and filed. Award of Boiler Repairs. Bids will be taken Monday, July 16, for retu6ing and renovating the existing large boiler at Plant No. 2. If the bids are satisfactory, award of the repair work to the lowest bidder will be recommended. Purchase of Synthetic Che mical Flocculant. The Directors will r e call that at the June meet ing I was authorized to award a contract for purchase of ferric chloride for use in a Plant scale experimental proj e ct to determine the efficiency of grease and solids removal in. our new physical- chemical sedimentation basin nearing canpletion at Plant No. 2. In addition to the ferric chloride, previous research has shown that the addition of small amounts of synthetic proprietary polymer flocculants g r e atly enhance the removals. All previous work has shown that a Dow Chemical · product designated A-23 is the most efficient in the terms · of removals per unit cost of the chemical. Since there is only one supplier of this material, the staff recomm ends purchase, not to exceed $4000, of this particula r pol;ym er flocculant from the Dow Chemical Company. (h & i) Completion of Pla nt Job No. Pl-3-1. This Plant .project, Odor Control and Improved Inf luent Screening Faciliti e s at Reclamation Plant No. 1, was successfully completed today and it is recommended that the work be accepted for a total cost of $110,105. 80% of this amount is exp ected to b e· funded by State and Federal grants. Item (h) is recommended Change Order No. 2 adding $1705 to the contract price for additional paving and granting an extension of time of 103 days for the reasons set forth in the change order. Item (i) is the customary resolution accepting the wo~k as complete and authorizing filing a Notice of Completion. ( j) Change Order No. 4, Job No·. I-8. The plans and specifi- _cations for this job, the Interplant Influent Interceptor, called for tunneling in Brookhurst Street under Adams Ave~ue in order to minimize interf erence with traffic. However, after several weeks of attempting the tunneli ng operation it became obvious that an unexpected lens of quicksand would prevent the completion of the tunnel within a reasonable length of time. The tunneling operation itself was creating a traffic bottleneck on Brookhurst and after consultation with the staff of the City of Huntington -3- (k) Beach and the leading businessmen in the area, ·the decision was made that it would be be·st for all concerned to abandon the tunneling operation and cross the intersection with an open cut as rapidly as possible. Accordingly, the ·con- tractor was instructed to do so which was accomplished by working weekends and overtime before the 4th of July weekend. The recommended change order for this change in the work results in a $2 5,800 reduction in the cost of the contract as detailed in the formal change order included with the agenda material. Change Order No . 4, Job No. P2-17. During the final stages of construction of this job, the experimental sedimentation basin mentioned under Item (g), the nece ssity for a n umbe r of small changes became evident. Authorization for these changes totaling $7159.64 have all been combined in one change order as included in the agenda material. No. 16 -AGREEMENT FOR DISTRICTS NOS. 3 AND 11 ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION TO INTERPLANT INFLUENT INTERCEPTOR: At the June mee ting, the Boards directed the General Counsel to prepare an agreement between the Districts providing for an additional contribution by Districts Nos. 3 and 11 to the construction cost of the Interplant Influent Interceptor. This agreement has been prepared and it is recommended that it be authorized for execution. Nos. 17 and 18 -SEWER SERVICE FOR 20 ACRE PARCEL IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH: In April, 1972, the Board of District No . 3 directed the preparation of an agreement between District No . 3 and the City of Long Beach to provide sewerage service for a 20 acre parcel of p roperty (being annexed by the City) on Westminster Avenue, easterly of the San Gabriel River. On the same day; the Joint Boards adopted a motion declaring their intent to consent to such serv ice, which action is required by the terms of the Joint Ownership, Operation and Construction Agreement. The General Counsel has prepared such an agreement between District No. 3 and the City and a resolution of .the Joint Boards approving the service. The agreement, which is recommended for execution (Item No. 17), provides for the lump sum payment of $13,236 .30 by the City to the District, representing the annexation fee if the parcel were actually annexed to the District, plus 10%. It also provides that the City shall pay the District an amount equal to the' same truces (or future use charges) which would be collect ed if the parcel were in the District, plus 10%. The joint resolution (Item No . 18) provides that the above two 10% surcharges be paid .into the Joint Operating Fund for the benefit of all of the Districts. The r esolution is recommend ed for adoption. No. 19 -REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGREEMENT WITH ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT: In April of this year a Special Committee was appointed to negotiate the terms of an agreement between the Sanitation Districts and the Water District for delivery of Plant No. 1 effluent and acceptance of wastewater from "water Factory 21 11 , now under construction adjacent to Plant No. 1. It is anticipated that the Committee (Director Mcinnis, Chairman) will have a recommendation for action by the Joint Boards. -4- Districts Nos. 1 and 7 No. 23 -PAYMENT TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY: The contract documents for the Sunflower Interceptor, Contract No. 7-6-1, provided that the District would be responsible for removal and replacement of a railroad crossing of Sunflower Avenue while the contractor was working in the area. Accordingly, the Company was authorized to do the necessary work and bill the District. We have received a bill totaling $4969.45 for the work and it is.recommended that it be approved for payment. District No. 3 No. 28 -APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE TO STUDY POSSIBLE SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES: Those Directors who are not also Directors of District No. 2 are advised that the latter District is considering the establishment of a District-wide sewer connection charge (Item No . 62). At the June 29 adjourned meeting of District No. 2 it was suggested that District No. 3 should a lso study the establishment o f such charges. Accordingly, the Board may wish to authorize the Chairman to appoint a committee to study this matter. No. 29 -COMMUNICATION: Included in the agenda material is a letter from Mr. Franklyn Schott, a resident of Fountain Va lley, reg arding the routing of the Knott Interceptor (Contract No. 3-17), the construction of which is now getting under way. District No. 11 No. 34 -PROPOSAL FROM KEITH AND ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN OF SLATER AVENUE TRUNK SEWER EXTENSION: At the June 14 Board meet ing , the staff was directed to solicit a proposal f rom this firm for the design of this project, estimated to cost $350,000 . Keith and Associates have proposed to do the required engineering work for a lump sum fee of $9700, which the staff considers quite reasonable and therefore we recommend acceptance of the proposal. Districts Nos. 5 and 6 No. ·38 -FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF AGREEMENT WITH D. J. SCHOLZ AND COMPANY: This proposed agreement, providing for payment by the Districts to this Company of $4000 for oversizing a sewer crossing in · the Pacific Coast Highway, was discussed at the June 21 a d journed meeting of the two Boards . Action was deferred until the Scholz Company executed the agreement. It is possible that the agreement will be executed by the time of the Board meeting and, if so, it is recom- mended that it be approved for execution by the two .Districts. District No. 5 No. 43 -CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO CONNECTION CHARGE ORDINANCE : At the June 21 adjourned meeting , the staff was dire cted to prepare an amendment to Ordinance No . 505 which set.s up the District's sewer con- nection charges . A draft of the new ordinance (No . '507) i s included with the agenda material for the Directors 1 considerati on . The ame nd- ment provides for a basic $155 charge for each dwelling unit, with -5- annual escalation of $5.00, providing the Board so directs, and a basic charge of $80 per 1000 square feet of floor area for other than re sid ential buildings, with an annual escalation of $2 .50, if the Board so directs. The draft ordinance has been discussed with the Building Department of the City of Newport Beach, whose representatives have stated that it is acceptable and preferable to the present charges base d on plumbing fixture units. The ordinance cannot be adopted without prior notif~cation to permit holders and others, as mandated in Ordinance No. 505, Accord- ingly if the Directors find the ordinance to be satisfactory, the actions listed on the agenda under this item are recommended. District No. 8 No. 47 -ADOPTION OF 1972-73 BUDGET: The other Districts normally adopt their final budgets at the August Joint Board meeting. However, since District No. 8 meets only quarterly, and thus will not meet again until October, the staff recommends the adoption of the budget included in the agenda material which does not require a tax. No. 48 -RECEIVE AND FILE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT: This is a routine action already taken by the other Boards at a previous meeting. The Districts' independent auditors have previously mailed this report to the Directors. If there are any questions on this report, the staff will be prepared to answer them. District No. 7 No. 51 -PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WEST RELIEF TRUNK: Boyle Engineering has submitted the plans and spec ific a tions for this project, which has been discussed at previou9 Board meetings and which is estimated to cost $650 ,000. It will be noted that the reco-qimended resolution specifies that the General Manager wiil establish the bid date after s uitable arrangements have been made with the Cities of Santa Ana and Tustin to finance the project out of their District No. 7 sewer connection funds. · Nos. 52 through 55 -CLOSEOUT OF CONTRACT NO. 7-6-3: This project, the last one to be completed out of 1970 bond issue funds, has been completed. As noted in the June 9 Agenda Report, its completion will afford permanent relief to the Red Hill and Gisler syst~m. In order to close out the contract, we recommend the adoption of' three change orders (Items Nos. 52, 53, and 54 ), copi es of which are included in the agenda material, and which a re self-explanatory. Item No . 55 is the customary resolution accepting the job as complete on July 7 and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion. No. 56 -DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY FOR EXECUTION OF CHANGE ORDERS: This matter was discussed at the June 27 adjourned meeting and a motion adopted approving, in principle, the execution of routine change orders of less than $2000 by the Ge neral Manager. The Boa rd also requested the staff to present informa tion regarding the magnitude of recent change orders for further cpnsideration by the Board. The requested information will be available by the time of the Board meeting and appear in the Directors' folders. · -6- No. 58 -ENGINEERING PROPOSAL FOR JAMBOREE ROAD SUBTRUNKS 1 AND 2: Shortly after the engineering proposal for preparation of plans and specifications for Jamboree Road Subtrunk No. 1 (Master Plan Reimburse- ment Agreement facility) was approved, the Board declared its intent to enter into a reimbursement agreement with the Irvine Industrial Complex for Jamboree Road Subtrunk No. 2. Consequently, the staff was directed to request a new proposal from Boyle Engineering combining services for preparation of plans and specifications for Jamboree Road Subtrunk No. 1, Reach 47, Contract No. 7-2C-2 and Jamboree Road Sub- trunk No. 2, Reach 53, Contract No. 7-2D-6. Accordingly, Boyle Engineering has submitted a new proposal for these services, a copy of which is included in the agenda material. We recommend its acceptance. District No .. 2 No. 62 -FURTHER REQUEST OF ANAHEIM HILLS, INC., FOR DEFERMENT OF ANNEXATION .FEES: This matter was discussed in depth at the adjourned meeting on June 29, and action was deferred until this meeting. Sub- sequent to the June 29 meeting, representatives of Anaheim Hills, Inc., advised that they will obtain a surety bond covering the deferred annexation fees and accumulated interest as previously recommended by the District's. General Counsel. The proponent will pay five annual payments, including 6% interest. The deferred fees will not be placed on the tax rolls. · No. 63 -ESTABLISHMENT OF SEWER CONNECTION FEES: At the June 29 adjourned meeting, .the staff was directed to draft an ordinance esta- blishing a basic connection charge of $100 per dwelling unit with proportionate fees for building construction other than dwellings. The staff was also directed to prepare a draft agreement with the Cities and the District for collection of such fees. Both of these draft documents are included in the agenda material. It should be noted that the draft ordinance is quite similar to the one being considered by District No. 5 which, with slightly different provisions, has been found to be very satisfactory. -7- Fred A. Harper General Manager MEETING DATE Jul y 1 2 , 1972 TI ME 7 :30 o .m. DI ST RI CT S l,2,3 ,5,6,7,8 & 11 DISTRIC T 1 ACTIVE DIRECTORS HE RRIN ....•. GR I S ET ...... ~ . CASPERS ) ..... BA TTI N ...... -V ---- WE LSH)•· · · · .• MILLER. . • • • . z:;;.--== == PORTER ...... _____ _ D..,_,;R I CT 2 (P ERE Z)· .... · SMITH .. · · • · ~ -- CULVER . . • • . i/ -- (LANGER) ....•. FINNELL •.•• __tL' ___ _ ~KOWALSKI) ••.. FOX .•.•.•.. G ---- \GRISET) ...... HER RIN . . • • • ,z--__ (HOLLI NDEN ) ... JU ST.:..... ___ _ (ROBERTS).···. NEVIL ...... ~~ __ (CASPERS).···· PHI LLIPS ..• _A_ ---- (RE I NHAR DT) .•• ROO T .••.... ~ ___ _ ~DU TT ONj· .•••• ST EPHENSON . _ ~ ____ _ CASTRO ...•.. VvED AA .•.•.. _ 7 ___ _ POTTER •...•. WINN. ...•... _J..L ___ _ DISTR IC T 3 -----CUL VER····· ___iL __ -- (C ASPE RS).···· BA TTI N ····. ~ ---- (HI NES).······ DP.V I S ··· ... _JL ___ _ !KOWAt.,SKI) · · · FOX........ i_...-/ ___ _ COEN)········ GREEN ··· .•. =-c:7 ___ _ F RANl\IE\~ICH). LACAY O ··· .. __ L./7 ___ _ (N U I JE NS) • • • • LEW I S ····.. s:---__ (MILLE R} · • • · • LONG · · · · · · · _ _ __ _ (GR!S E T ~ · · · · • HERRIN ····· ;::::::7 ___ _ (BLAC KM AN) · • . S/l.L ES . . • . . 7 . ~--MC h'HINNEY . ______ _ (RE I NHARD T<-.. ROOT ······· --~--__ _ (HOLL !NDEiV · · SCOTT···· .. -~­ (D UTT ON)····· STE PHEN SON. _ 17 == == (ROBERTS)···· STEV ENS .... ~ (B YRNE)······ VANDERWAAL.. 7 == ==· DISTRICT 5 JO I NT BOARD S ACTIVE DIRECTORS coit i:: (HOLLINDEN) ... JU ST ........ L./ ~ (CA SPERS) •...• BAKER .•••••• ~ ~ (CASPER S) ....• BATTIN .••.•. ~ ~ -&.~ffis ....• (CASPERS).·· ··CLARK······· ~ ~ CULVE R······ __i.::::::_ ~ (HINES).··· ···D AVIS·······~ i__.../ (COEN)······ ··DU KE········ ~ i-./ (LA NG ER)······ FI NN ELL ····· ~ ~ ( KOWA!-S KI ) .• · ·FOX .......... -1..c:::::.. ~ ( C 0 EN ) · · · · · · · · etti5-B-S · • · • · • • -b-L -i?"c (COEN)· .. ··•· ·G REEN .······ --l.-L ~ (HERRIN)····· ·GR I S ET· · • · • · ~ ~ (GR I SE T).)···· HERRIN.····· ~ ~ (BLAC KM AN , ..•• SALES •••.•• _t./' ~ (MC I NN IS) .. ··KYM LA· · ••. ·• ~ i---- (FRA NK IE WIC H) ·LACAYO ...••. ~ ~ (NUIJENS) ..... LE WIS······· ~ ~ (MILLER)····.' ·LOMG ········ -1.L i._./ (CROUL) •. ·····MC IN NIS···· ~ ~ ~ MC \.'JHINNEY· • ~ ~ (WELSH)······ ·MILLE R······ ~ ~ (ROBERTS)···· ·NEVI L······· ~ ~ (CASPER S)· · · • ·f>tt!LtlVS ~~. · · ._.,..--~ PORTER ······~~ (FI SC HBACH) •.. QUIGLEY .••.. __ ~ (Mc I NN I S) •..• R OG E f~s .•••.. ~ ~ (REI MHAR DT) ROOT ....... • ~ i:----. (HOLLINDEN) ··.SCOTT·· ..... ~ ~ (PEREZ) .. ···· ·SM ITH······· ·,__.--~ (D UTT ON) • · · · · ·STEPHENSON · · ~ . ~ (ROB ERTS) •• ·· ·STEVE NS ·····~_.-:::::::: (MC I NN Is)· · · ·STORE · · · · · · · -?'/'_ · '-'"" ( •.. _,_\ • ·n-. ·r . \BY Rm:;······· VAf'llJt.RWAAv • --~ (CAST RO )····· ·WEDAA · · · · · · · ~ ~ (POTTE R)······ \I-JINN········ ...--: ~ (CROUL) • • , • • • MC INNIS • • - (BAKER ) · · · · · · ~~s · · · · (MC 11m Is) ..• KYM LA .••... ~---­ ~---- I ( GOL~BERG) ••.. B-<?¥B .... · · · · ---- l oTHERS ~-... - - DISTRI CT 5 <or:- ( PR I LL I P"S) · • · (MC I NN IS)· .. DISTRICT 7 1WELSH0-· · · (C ASPERS)· · · · (HEH RIN). • · • · ( S CH BA CH) .. CMC I NN IS).·· (PE REZ )· · · · · · DISTRICT 11 1COEt·l) .-.. · · · (CASP[.:RS) ... . (C OEN )··· ... . DIS TRiCT 8 · - (GOLD BER G) ... (CL ARK)····· • 7/11/7 2 PO RTER ····· I,/' CeiSf&~~S· • • • ~ ~ STORE······ ~----· MILLER ····· ~----·-CL A R K ······~-- GRISE T...... ~--- PO RTER .•.•.• ~ -~ QUIG LE Y .••. ·------- ROGERS ...... ~----- S MITH ....... ~--__ ~·'G ~ ... ~::r • • • • • • --------J BAKE · • • • • · · . ~------t Du '<c ' . _,....,-' I t.. • ' • • • • _.-l.:::::;::. -----I ~~U-¥1 BO YD ••••••• -~-----I ~····-~----- MITCHELL ... ~'-:::::... ----I HARPER BR Ovm SYLVESTE R LEY.f IS DUNN CLA Rl<E SI GLE R NISSON TAYLOR BROWN BOE TT NER CARLSON FIN STER GAL LOWAY HOHENER HOWARD HUNT KE ITH LYNCH MADDOX MARTINSON MU RON EY PIER SA LL STEV ENS MEETING DATE Julv 12, 1972 TIME 7:30 p.m. DISTRICTS l,2,3,5,6,T,8 & 11 DISTRICT 1 ACTIVE DIRECTORS (HERRIN) ..•••• GR I SET •••••• __:!__ ___ _ (CASPERS) .•••• BATTIN •••••• -~-. ___ _ (WELSH) • · · • • • • M I LL ER. • • • • • " __ __ PORTER •••••• --r-___ _ D_.JRICT 2 . (PEREz). ·····SMITH······ _j_ ---- CULVER ••••• --4------~LANGER) •••••• FINNELL •••• ------ KOWALS I) •••• FOX •••••••• __.::!__ ---- GR I SET~ .••••• HERRIN ••••• ~ ___ _ (HOLLINDEN) ••• JUST • ~ ••••• --. --__ ~ROBERTS).···· NEVIL •••••• _./ ____ _ CASPERS) .•• •• PHILLIPS ••• -f ___ _ REINHARDT) ••• ROOT ••••••• _____ _ ~DUTTON~ •••••• STEPHENSON • -"-· ___ _ CASTRO •••••• WEDAA. •••••• _..; ____ _ POTTER •••••• WINt..i ••••••• _v ____ _ DISTRICT 3 . / CULVER····· ---- (CASPERS).···· BATTIN····· ~ ---- !HI t~ES ). • • • • • • DAV IS •••••• _v'_. ___ _ KOWAl-S KI) • • • FOX • • • ••• • • -~-___ _ COEN).·· • • • • • GREEN .••••• _.;_' ___ _ FRANKIEWICHi LACAYO· •••• _v' ____ _ ~U I JENS) • • • • LEW IS • /!'fl ••• __.:L_ ___ _ MILLER).····· LONG····.·· _::(___ ___ _ GR I SET) • • • • • HERR I N • • •• • ./ __ __ LACKMAN) • • • SALES ..•••• ~ _-__ _ .MCWHINNEY·~ ___ ·_ !REINHARDT) ••• ROOT·· f · · · · --y----- HOLLINDEN) ··SCOTT· •11 •••• ---;-___ _ DUTTON) · • • • • STEPHENSON. " ___ _ ROBERTS) • • · • STEVENS • •• • 7: ___ _ BYRNE) • • • • • • VANDERWAAL • ~ ___ _ DISTRICT 5 ----- .. (CROUL) • • .• • • • MC INNIS··· (BAKER)··· • • • CA~JitRS. · · · (MC INN I S) • • • KYM LA • • • • • • " ~---- __..::L_ ----_v ____ _ DISTRICT 5 PORTER· • • • • _L ___ _ (PHILLIPS)... __£__ _____ _ (MC INNIS)··· STORE······ _L ---- DISTRICT 7 (WELSH)······ (CASPERS)···· (HERRIN)····· ( -SCHBACtf) • • t1'TC INNIS) ••• (PEREZ).····· DISTRICT 11 ./ MILLER····· ------ CLARK· • • • • • _./_ ---- GR I SET. ••••• _..;_ ---- PORTER ••••.• ~ ---- QUIGLEY ••••• _v_ ---- ROGERS •••••• ~__:!_ ---- SMITH ••••••• _I_ ---- (corn) · . · · · · -GIBB& • • • • • • 4 ---- ( cAs P~Rs) •••• BAKER ••••••• ------ (COEN)···.. • • DUKE .•••••• __L_ ---- DISTRICT 8 (GOLDBERG)... BOYD··· • ~ • • ~ ---- (CLARK)······ CASPERS • • • • _v_ ----a.. MITCHELL.·· ----- 7 /11F12 JOINT BOARDS . ACTIVE DIRECTORE()-6 0 ( \ ( HOLL I NDEN 1 ••• JUST •••••••• _v _ --r-~CAS PERS) ••••• BAKER ••••••• _v __ _ ) . v CASPERS .•••• BATTIN •••••• _v __ _ CASPERS ••••• _&-__ _ (CASPERS) ••••• CLARK· •••••• ___L:_ ____::___ CULVER······ _..,_.· -~·-· (HIN ES) • • • • • • • DAV I S. • • • • • • v / (COEN)······· ·DUKE········ v-· / (LANGER)·· •••• FINNELL··. • • ~ -/- ( KOWAl-S KI ) • • • • FOX. • • • • • • • • _,/ _ __.:::..__ (COEN) •••••••• ~ •••••• _./_~ (COEN) • • • ••• • ·GREEN· • • • • • • _L_ _/_ (HERRIN)····· ·GRISET······ -~-__L__ ~GRISET) •••••• HERRIN······ -~-__L__ BLACKMAN) •••• SALES •••••• _I ___ /_ MC INN Is) •• • • KYMLA • • • •• • • _..;_ --' -( ) / / FRANKIEWICH ·LACAYO ••• ••• ----" - (tW I JENS) ••• • ·LEWIS· • • • • • • _/ ___ /_ (MILLE~)· • • • ··LONG· • • • • • • • _/ ___ /_ ( / . CROUL ·······MC INNIS···· --__ /_ MC WHINNEY· • _/ _ _L_ (WELSH)······ ·MILLER······ _/ __ /_ (ROBERTS)···· ·NEVIL·······_/ ___ I_ (CASPERS)····· PH I LLI PS· • • • _/_. _ _L_ PORTER· • • • • : _/_ ~ (FISCHBACH) ••• QUIGLEY ••••• _I ___ /_ (MC INNIS) •••• ROGERS •••••• _/ ___ /_ (RE I NHARDT) ROOT •.•••••• _/ ___ 1 _ (HOLL I ~DEN) ••• SCOTT ••••••• ~. __ 1 _ (PEREZJ ·······SMITH······· ----'.- (DUTTON)····· ·STEPHENSON··~/---'­ (ROBERTS)···· ·STEVENS····· _/_ --/ - ·(MC INNIS)··· ·STORE······· _/_. _I_ I (BYRNE) •••••. ·VANDERWAAL·. -+ _/_ (CASTRO)······WEDAA······· ---f-.--4- (POTTER)···· ··WINN·.······ ____ 1 * * * * * (GOLDBERG) ••.• BOYD········ ·---- ·, MITCHELL···· ----- OTHERS ~ I .. HARPER JtA-" /! , t BROWN rJ ) .1 SYLVESTER \Y ",. ,·; .. f~ ...-~zj~EWIS " c. ·· DUNN ~' ',,. ,J: '.'' "'.. CLARKE ri tJ~ SIGLER . \.Y': L~C NI SSON t , {~ .. _ TAYLOR -, A, . BROWN ((_ r:/ ~V ~I , .~ ·--i/ ~ ~ BOETTNER CARLSON FINSTER GALLOWAY ~ HOH EN ER ~ HOvlARD _L_ HUNT v' KEITH . ( ~ LYNCH /'~ . .,.;:._._· __ MADDOX d'aA.~·'-__ _ MARTINSON ..; MURONEY ~ / PIERSALL STEVENS . .. RESOLUTIONS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS July 12, 1972 -7:30 p.m . .· 0 WARRANT NO. 18252 253 ~254 18255 18256 18257 18258 18259 18260 18261 18262 18263 18264 18265 18266 18267 18268 18269 18270 18271 18272 18273 18274 18275 18276 18277 18278 18279 18280 18281 18282 18283 18284 18285 18286 18287 18288 18289 18290 18291 18292 18293 18294 18295 18296 18297 18298 18299 18300 18301 . 302 te"'303 18304 18305 18306 18307 18308 18309 18310 18311 18312 18313 JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRAHTS IN FAVOR OF ACE Truck Lines, Freight $ Advance Electric, Motor Rewind Air Seals Corp., Engine Parts Alchem Laboratories, Inc., Research Supplies All Bearing Service, Inc., Belting Material American Compressor Coo, Compressor Parts City of Anaheim, Power · Andersen Tool & Machinery Co., Tools Apco Supply, Filters Aquatic Center, Safety Supplies Bell's Radiator Service, Radiator Repair Bomar Magneto Service, Inc., Magneto Repair Bristol Park Medical Group, Inc., Pre-employment Exams Certified Laboratories, Inc., Solvents Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co., Compressor Parts Coast Insurance Agency, Liability Insurance Premium College Lumber Company, Inc., Building Materials Consolidated Electrical Distro, Electrical Supplies Constructors Supply Co., Saw Blades & Tools Cook & Tillitt Freight Service, Freight Paul A. Cooper, Grit Removal Costa Mesa Auto Parts, Inc., Truck Parts Costa Mesa County Water District, Water County Sanitation District Noo 2 of L.A. County, Disposal Fee Mr. Crane, Equipment Rental Clarence s. Cummings, Employee Mileage C.R. Davis Supply Co., Groundskeeping Supplies Dean-Standefer Co., Printing Diamond Core Drilling Co., Core Drilling Diesel Control Corp., Governor Repair Dominguez Marine & Industrial Supply, Valves Dow Chemical Co., Test Materials (MO 3-8-72) Eastman, Inco, Office Supplies Ecomatics, Chlorinator Electronic Balancing Co., Equipment Repair Enchanter, Inc., Ocean Research & Monitoring Ensign Products Coo., Lubricants FMC Corp., Freight Fischer & Porter Coo, Charts Alex Fish Co., Ecological Research Specimens Foss Company, Lab Supplies William H. Fox, Employee Mileage Freeway Machine & Welding Shop, Machining Garden Grove Lumber Co., Building Materials & Supplies Gasket Manufacturing Co., Gaskets General Electric Supply Co., Eiectrical Supplies General Telephone Company Golden Anderson Valve Specialty Co., Freight & Valves Hach Chemical Co., Inc., Operating Supplies Hanson, Peterson, Cowles & Sylvester, Audit Services Hardy Graphics, Printing · Fred A. Harper, Various Mtg. & COD Expense Harron, Rickard & McCone Co., Equipment Repair Hewlett Packard Coo, Motor Repair Honeywell, Inc., Telemetering Supplies & Controls Howard Supply Co., Piping Supplies Hunt Wesson Foods, Use Charge Refund City of Huntington Beach, Water Industrial Water Conditioning, DI Lab Wat~r Inland Nut & Bolt Co., Hardware Keenan Pipe & Supply Co., Pipe Supplies Kelly Pipe Co., Pipe Supplies A-1 AMOUNT 27.39 107.16 15.66 24.15 58.28 384.98 9.84 71.45 65.36 16.oo 14.oo 168.59 12.50 364.61 2,023.77 4,717.87 143.27 739.80 55.84 4.07 1,104.00 276.34 6.oo 105.38 410.63 32.34 133.69 25.20 155.00 176.42 434.89 2,397.57 623.96 1,249.50 175.00 1,950.00 225.76 59.36 70017 52.50 42000 18.oo .548.94 414.76 327.38 3,401.95 1,686063 1,803060 12.85 1,719.16 64.60 119.68 28.00 196.10 319.25 940.77 1,929.51 42.30 40.00 658002 1:695.24 5I~.24 WARRANT NO. 18314 18315 18316 , '317 ~318 18319 18320 28321 18322 18323 18324 18325 18326 18327 18328 18329 18330 18331 18332 18333 18334 18335 18336 18337 18338 18339 18340 18341 18342 18343 18344 18345 18346 18347 18348 18349 18350 18351 18352 18353 18354 18355 18356 18357 18358 18359 18360 18361 18362 18363 18364 18365 -"366 )!ffj67 18368 18369 18370 18371 18372 18373 18374 18375 18376 18377 IN FAVOR OF King Bearing, Inc., Couplings & Belts Kleen Line Corp., Janitorial Supplies rJ'lOX Industrial Supplies, Tools & Hardware LBWS, Inc., Welding Supplies L & N Uniform Supply Co., Uniform Rental Judy Lee, Employee Mileage Lewis Bros. Battery, Batteries Los Angeles Times, Subscription R.W. McClellan & Sons, Inc., Building Materials M.B. Industrial Supply, Tools Majestic Fasteners Co., Hardware . Marine Biological Consultants, Ecological Research Matheson Scientific, Lab Supplies Mesa Supply, Truck Parts Mine Safety Appliances Co., First Aid Supplies NCR Systemedia Division, Forms Nashua Corp., Reproduction Supplies Newark Electronics, Telemetering Supplies City of Newport Beach, Water c. Arthur Nisson, General Counsel Retainer Noland Paper Coo, Reproduction Paper Nordson Corp., Tools Orange County Water District, Replenishment Assess. Orange County Radiotelephone Oreo Plastics, Piping Pacific Telephone Parker Supply Co., Freight & Gauges Norman I. Parsons, Employee Mileage EeL• Pearson & Associates, Reproduction John J. Phillips, Employee Mileage Pierce Chemical Coo, Lab Supplies Richard c. Pigmon, Employee Mileage Postmaster Douglas E. Preble, Employee Mileage Pryor-Giggey Co., Cement Red's Frame Wheel & Brake Service, Truck Repair San Bar, Inc., Ecological.Research Supplies Santa Ana Blue .£>rint Co., Printing Santa Ana Electric Motors, Motor Repair Santa Ana Electronics Co., Electronic Supplies Sargent Welch Scientific Co., Lab Supplies · Scientific Products, Lab Supplies SeFo Serrantino, Employee Mileage F.Ao Sherry Equipment Coo, Equipment Rental Sherwin Williams Co., Paint Supplies A.H. Shipkey, L~c., Truck Tires John Sigler, Employee Mileage Lee Smith & Co., Fidelity Bond 72-73 Smith Optical Service, Safety Glasses South Orange Supply, Piping Supplies $ AMOUNT 93.30 249.79 201.74 941.78 1,553.75 19.95 91.19 42.00 105.08 13.18 89.84 l, 585. 74 468.93 80.64 26.10 773.79 80.52 23.63 308.16 700.00 202.02 60.35 475.25 49.46 86.39 409.84 466.81 6.75 25.20 114.14 120.57 12.00 328.80 42.42 157.50 19.70 66.14 199.68 20.00 30.43 72.45 131.05 35.10 120.44 913.12 117.15 6.90 133.00 52.82 23.56 Southern Calif. Coastal Water Research Project SCCWRPA Deposit 72-73 Southern Calif. Edison Co. Southe~ Calif •. Gas Co. Southern Calif. Water Co. .Authority, 71,298.58 17, 290.95 1,821.46 Southwest Flexible, Equipment Rental ., Sparkletts Drinking Water Corp.,i Bottled ·water Sp~ed-E .Auto Parts, Truck Parts . . Standard Oil Co. of Calif., Gasoline & 011 John w. Stang Corp., Pump Repair & Parts .. State Compensation Insurance Fund, Premium Deposit Bruce Taylor, Employee Mileage · Transport Clearings, Freight Triangle Steel & Supply Co., Steel Stock Harry L. '::.·zining, Employee Mileage A-2 3.59 945.00 38.22 389.51 1,391.13 111.13 14,000.00 36.66 29.32 21.47 2lol5 18378 18379 18380 ~8381 18382 18383 18384 18385 18386 l8387 18388 18389 18390 18391 18392 18393 1839!~ 18395 18396 18397 18398 18399 18400 18401 18402 18403 18404 18405 18406 18407 18408 18409 18410 IN FAVOR OF Two Guys Department Store, Groundskeeping Supplies $ U.S. Equipment Co., Inc., Compressor Parts Union Oil Coe of Calif., Gasoline Union Sign Co., Signs United Technology Center, Sealer Utilities Supply Co., Tools VWR Scientific, Lab Supplies Virgil's ·Delivery Service, Freight Wall Colmonoy Corp., Resurfacing John R. Waples R.s., Odor Consultant Warren & Bailey Co., Inc., Compressor Parts & Hardware Waukesha Engine Servicenter, Inco, Engine Parts Wilson Engine & Equipment Co., Transformers Wilson Ford Sales, Truck Parts Russ Wold, Employee Mileage World Travel Bureau, Inc., Meeting Travel Expense Worthington Corp., Pump Pa~ts Donald J. Wright, Employee Mileage John M. Wright, Employee Mileage Xerox Corp., Reproduction Service Zodiac Paper Co., Printing Supplies TOTAL JOINT OPERATING CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND WARR.ANTS IN FAVOR OF Carollo & Keith, Survey I-8 $ John Carollo Engineers, Engineering -Plant Constr. County of Orange, Compaction Test I-8 ETI & Kordick, Contractor P2-ll-1 J. Putnam Henck, Contractor P2-17 Kordick & Rados, Contractor I-8 LBWS, Inc., Floor Cranes B.H,. Miller Construction Co., Contr. J-7-2/J-12 Osborne Laboratories, Inc., Pipe Testing I-8 Richard Terry & Associates, E.I.S. 72-73 Projects Twining Laboratories, Testing P2-ll-l, J-7-2 F.T. Ziebarth Company, Inc., Contractor Pl-3-1 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING TOTAL JOINT OPERATING & CORF A-3 AMOUNT 17.89 696.11 20.70 139.13 29.60 146.86 223.11 6.37 102.45 216.10 313.89 2,017.01 464.0l 6.54 102084 86040 413.70 159. 78 22050 855.08 161084 160,299.51 3,,045.00 23,244.65 984.66 66,312.00 7,159.74 658,883.59 843.78 9,974.04 1,277.50 2,200.00 53.10 12,545.00 786,523006 946,822057 DISTRICT NO. 1 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS WARRANT NO. IN FAVOR OF ~411 18412 18413 18414 18415 Peter Kiewit Son's Company, Disaster relief payment, Job No. J-10 DISTRICT NO. 3 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Boyle Engineering, Engr. Serv., 3-17-1 & 3-18 Boyle Engineering, DISTRICTS NOS. 3 & 11 SUSPENSE FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Survey 3-17 Osborne Laboratories, Pipe Testing 3-17 DISTRICT NO. 5 OPERATING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF City of Newport Beach, Connection Administration -B- AMouwr $ 132,397.00 $ 16,802.25 50.00 862.~o $ 912.50 $ i16.oo DISTRICT NO. 7 OPERA·rING FUND WARRANTS WARRAt1"T NO. IN FAVOR OF 18417 18418 18419 18420 18421 18422 18423 18424 18425 18426 18427 18428 Boyle Engineering, Engr Serv., Annexation Processing Fees, Survey A. D. #9 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Boyle Engineering, Engineering Services 7-5-lR CONSTRUCTION FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Boyle Engineering, Engr. Serv. 7-6-3 & 7-6-4, Colich Construction Co., Contr~ctor 7~6-3 Northern Contracting Co., Release Rentention 7-6-4 City of City of City of City of FIXED OBLIGATION FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Anaheim, Distribution of 71-72 Oil Royalty Payments Fullerton, Distribution df 71-72 Oil Royalty Payments Orange, Distribution of 71-72 Oil Royalty _ Payments Santa Ana, Distribution of 71-72 Oil Royalty · Payments FACILITIES REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Boyle Engineering, Survey 7-2D-4 & 7-2D-5 Osborne Laboratories, Pipe Testing 7-2D-4, and 7-2C-l 7-2D~5, DISTRICTS NOS. 1 & 7 SUSPENSE FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF City of Santa Ana, Street Striping 1-12 Southern Pacific Transportation, Facility 7-6-1 -C- Relocation AMOUNT $ 2,018.68 $ 4,746.oo $ 7,242,00 102,829.13 48,967.98 $ 159 .. 059.11 $ 134.78 134.78 134.78 134.78 _$ 539.12. $ 1,435.50 J00.00 $ lz735·20 $ 1682098.41 $ 443.84 427~0.26 $ 5;174.40 Marine Biological Consultants, Inc. PROPOSAL FOR BIOLOGICAL MONITORING NEAR THE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS. OCEAN OUTFALLS Nos·. 1 AND 2 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY* The firm of Marine Biological Consultants, Inc.,* proposes to furnish services required for the. conduct of, and report on, quarterly benthic trawls and annual diving studies near OCSD Outfalls Nos. 1 and 2. The proposed sur- vey is in accordance with specifications set forth by the California Water Quality Control Eoard--Santa Ana Region ,LResolution 59-5(J-6Bl7. This proposal will continue the existing monitoring program performed by Charies T. Mitchell and MBC since July 1969. For maximum flexibility in the scope of the program (present discharge requirements are being revised by the Ca- lifornia Water ,Quality Control Board), this proposal is based on a six-month study period (through December i972), with the option to continue under the present scope of work or a modified scope dictated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. * For brevity, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County and Maririe Biological Consultants, Inc., are hereafter re- ferred to as "OCSD" and "I-'!BC", respectively. 186~ ~ark A rrnue, C0st~ ~frsa. Califclrnia 926.~7 • (714) 6-16-1601 Agenda Item #14(b) D-1 All Distr2-cts 2 I. Scope of Services. Services to be provided will include, but will not necessarily be limited, to the following: a. Conferences. Conferences with representatives of OCSD and regulatory agencies as required throughout. the study period. b. Monitoring Study. 1. Benthic trawls will be taken in August and November, 1972, at stations T-1 through T-6, and stations T-0 and T-OC. Equipmeµt and techniques will be similar to those presently used. 2. Sediment samples will be taken at benthic trawl stations with a Shipek bottom grab or similar device. All sediments will be sifted through a 0.5 mm screen, labeled and preserved. OCSD wil1 retain these samples for future reference. J. Diving studies of the benthic 6iota conducted in October 1972 at stations D-l through D-4, ~nd ... D-OC (permanently marked station on the 72-inch outfall) and K-l. The following items are included as additional options: 4. Continuation of trawling studies and·:collection of b.enthic sediment samples in February and May of 1973. 5. Preparation of annual summary report (May 2972 to May 1973) for trawl studies. This would in- clude a synopsis of inclusive trawl data with a compilation and discussion of catch by species and station. Agenda Item #14(b) D-2 All Districts ' J II. Progress and Completio~. Services to be provided herein will begin in August 1972 and will be completed by January 1, 1973 (Article I, 'section b, items 1 through J). If the options (Article I, section b, items 4 and/or 5) are included, the completion date will be September 197J. III. Compensation. Fees for services provided in Article I of ~his agreement shall be determined on a time and expense basis, subject to the guaranteed maximum fee given in Article IV, as follows: a. Salary Exnenses: Principal Senior Marine Biologist •' Laboratory Director Marine Biolo~ist III Marine Biologist II Marine Biologist I Technician III Technician II Technician I Clerical $J7 . .50/Hr. 25.00/Hr. 16. 6J/Hr. 16.2.5/Hr. lJ.75/Hr. 11.87/Hr. 11. 2.5/Hr. 8.75/Hr. 6.25/Hr. 7. 50/Hr. b .. For direct, non-salary expenses, an amoux:.t equal to the actual costs plus ten percent (10%). Direct expenses include the following: ·1. Living and travelling expenses of employees when away from the home office on business connected with the project. 2. Identifiable communication expenses such as long distance telephone, automobile, mileage and postage, other than for general corres- pondence. Agenda Item #14(b) D-3 All Districts 4 J. Services directly applicabls to the work, subject to prior approval by OCSD, such as boat and equipment rental, special consultants, commercial printing and binding, and similar costs that are not applicable to general overhead. 4. Identifiable drafting supplies and steno- graph{c supplies and ~xpenses charged to the client's work, as distinguished from such supplies and expenses applicable to two or more projects. 5. Identifiable reproduction costs applicable to the work, such as blueprinting, photostat- ing, mimeographing, printing, etc. IV. Guaranteed Maximum Fee. ·The maximum or limiting fee for the work to be per- formed under Article I, section b, items l through J, will be $8,233.00. Separate cost estimates for Article I, section b, items 4 and 5 are included in Appendix I. V. Payment of Fees. Charges determined on the basis·· set forth in Article III will be billed on a monthly basis and will be paid on approved invoices from MBC for each report upon final submittal of said report. VI. Changes in Scone of Project. If conditions beyond the control of MBC necessitate a Agenda Item #14(b) D-4 All Districts 5 change in the scope of the project after work :-ia.s commenced, the guaranteed maximum fee will be increased by the amount of charges for any work accomplished to the date of change in scope which cann.ot be incorporated into the revised project. VII. Termination of Work. OCSD, by notifying MBC in writing, will have the right to terminate any part, or all, of the work covered by this agreement. In the event of such termination, MBC will have the right to expend additional time to assemble work in pro- gress for the purpose of proper filing and closure of the job. Such additional time will not exceed ten percent (10%) of the total time expended to the date of notice of termina- tion. All charges thus incurred, together with any other charges outstanding at the time of termination, will be pay- able by OCSD within thirty (JO) days following presentation of a .final report and statement by MBC. VIII. Publication Rights. OCSD reserves exclusive rights to all data, summaries, comments, and conclusions regarding all work performed under this contract. Publication of conclusioi:1s and/or hypotheses derived from the data by MBC shall not be made without prior consent in writing from MBC. Submitted 6 July, 1972, by: MARINE BIOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, INC. /l/ / ---/~ ~~~//;/ (~ /. l<Z~t;~ Charles T. Mitchell~ President Agenda Item #14(b) D-5 All Districts COST ESTIPlATES FOR QUARTERLY BENTHIC TRAWL STUDIES July 1, 1972 to December Jl, ·1972 1. Trawling studies. 2. a. Labor-Field. Principal Marine Biologist I Technician I 24 hrs @$37.50/hr 24 hrs @ 11.87 24 hrs @ 6.25 $900.bO 284.88 150.00 b. Labor-laboratory & Renart Preparation. Principal 20 hrs @$37.50 $750.00 Sr. Marine Biologist24 hrs @ 25.00 600.00 Laboratory Director 16 hrs @ 16.63 266.08 Technician II JO hrs @ 8.75 262.50 Technician I l.J.o hrs @ 6.25 250.00 Clerical 20 hrs @ 7.50 150.00 Direct Costs. Preservation supplies Vessel charter* 2 days @$150/day Report reproduction Service charge $ 25.00 300.00 50.00 375.00 (10%)~········· 3.75 $1]]!t·88 J22za~sa TOTAL COST. . . • • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $'3992. 21 -··-~ *If not supplied by OCSD Submitted July 6, 1972, by: MARINE BIOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, INC'o Charles T. Mitchell, President Agenda Item #14(b) D-6 All Districts COST ESTIMATES FOR ANNUAL DIVING STUDIES 1. Diving Studies. 2. a. Labor-Field. Principal 20 hrs @$37,50/hr Sr. Marine Biologist 20 hrs @ 25.00 Technician I 20 hrs @ 6.25 b. Labor-Laboratory & Reoort Preparation. Principal 20 hrs @$37.50 Sr. Marine Biologist 20 hrs @ 25.00 Laboratory Director 16 hrs @ 16.63 Marine Biologist I 16 hrs @ 11.87 Technician II 40 hrs @ 8.75 Techniciad I 4o hrs @ 6.25 Clerical 16 hrs @ 7.50 Direct Costs. Preservation supplies Vessel charger 2 days @$150/day Equipment rental $750.00 500.00 125.00 $750.00 500.00 266.08 189.92 350.00 250.00 120.00 $ 10.00 J00.00 Diving system 2 days @$ 50/day 100.00 25.00 435.00 (10%) . . . . . 4. 35 Report reproduction Service charge J2426.oo § 4:J9. 35 . TOTAL COST ....... H. · •• ; ........ J4240.22 Submitted July 6, 1972, by: MARINE BIOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, INCo Charles T. Mitchell, President Agenda Item #14(b) D-7 All Di.stricts CLARK MILLER C. ARTHUR NISSON NELSON KOGLER H. LAWSON M E:AD MILLER. NlSSON &3. KOGLER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2 0 I 4 N 0 r~ T H B R 0 A() WA Y SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92706 July 6, 1972 Mr. J. ~ayne Sylvester Director of Finance County Sanitation Districts P. O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California Subject: Public Law 89-769 January-February, 1969 Floods Contract No. OEP-253-DR State Application No. 253-A-7. Reference: Ocean Outfall No. 2, Job N9. J-10 Peter Kiewitt & Sons Company, Contractor· Dear Wayne: • TE:LEPHO'OE AREA CODE 714 542·6771 Responding to your letter of June 28, 1972, please be advised that the application was made on behalf of the contractor and the payment should be made to Pe.ter Kiewi tt & Sons Company in the full amount of $132,397.00. You should notify Peter Kiewitt & Sons Company of the receipt of the money and authorize payment to them by resolution, reciting the application and the award made on the application. You are referred to my legal opinion of April 29, 1969 regarding application for relief. and disposition of funds if and when received. See Section 9 Disast~r Relief Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-769) (8 C Stat. 1316). Yours very truly, C. Arthur Nissan CAN:cp AGenda Item #14(c) -E-All Distr2.cts RESOLUTION NO. 72-93 DIRECTING COUNTY AUDITOR TO PAY DISASTER RELIEF FUNDS RECEIVED TO PETER KlEHIT SONS 1 HE J0:3 HO. J-10 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, AND 11, OF ORANGE COUNTY, DIRECTING THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO PAY DISASTER RELIEF FUNDS TO PETER KIEWIT SONS'COMPANY, CONTRACTOR FOR OCEAN OUTFALL NO. 2~ JOB NO. J-10, RE- CEIVED FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN CONNECTION WITH PUBLIC LAW 769, FEDERAL DISASTER RELIEF ACT OF 1966. * * *· * * * * WHEREAS, pursuant to the recommendation of the General Counsel, County Sanitation District No. 1, of Orange County, on April 29, 1969, adopted Resolution No .. 69-31-1, authorizing execution of an application for Federal financial assistance under the Federal Disaster Relief Act of 1966 (Public Law 769) without prejudice to the District and without admitting any liability to the contractor relative to extra costs incurred on said Job No. J-10 due to a change in the condition of the jobsite; and, WHEREAS, County Sanitation Districts Nos. 2., 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, on May 14, 1969, ratified the aforementioned action of County Sanitation District No. l; and, WHEREAS, County Sanitation District No. ·1, on June 21, 1972, received and deposited payment in the amount of $132,397 from the State of California, Office of Emergency Services, in full 'pay- ment of disaster relief in connection with the aforementioned application, Public Law 89-769, January-February) 1969 Floods, Contract No. OEP-253-DR, State No. 253-A-7; and, WHEREAS, the General Counsel has, by letter dated July 6, 1972, recommended that said disaster relief payment in the amount of $132,397 be paid to Peter Kiewit Sons' Company, Contractor for Ocean Outfall No. 2, Job No. J-10. The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, do hereby RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Agenda Item #14(c) F-1 All Districts Section 1. That the letter from C. Ar~hur Nissan, Districts' General Counsel, dated July 6, 1972, advising that disaster relief payment funds received from the State of California, Office of Emergency Services, be paid to Peter Kiewit Sons' Company, Contractor for Ocean Outfall No. 2, Job No. J-10, be received and ordered filed; and, Section 2. That the County Auditor-Controller is hereby orde~ed and directed to sign a warrant payable to Peter Kiewit Sons' Company in the amount of $132,397, drawn on the account of County Sanitation District No. 1 Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund, in accordance with Section 9 Disaster Relief Act of 1966 (Public Law 89~769) (8 C Stat. 1316). PASSED.AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held July 12, 1972. Agenda Item #14(c) F-2 All Districts B I D T A B U L A T I 0 N Contract for: 1. 2. 3. Bidder PLANT NO. 2 BOILDER REPAIRS SPECIFICATION NO. PW-023 Porter Boiler Service, Inc. 2459 Orange Avenue Long Beach, California Orange City Boiler & Industrial Repair 1829 S. Maintain View Anaheim, Ca1ifornia H. R. Kelly Corporation 21324 S. Alameda Long Beach, California * * * * * * * * * * * Date: July 10, 1972 Total Bid $5,192.00 5,307.00 No Bid It is recommended that award be made to Porter Boiler Service, Inc. 2459 Orange Avenue, Long Beach, California, the lowest .and best bidder. '; W. N. Clarke Maintenance Superintendent Agenda Item #14(f) -G-All Districts co~;::-r-1 ·) .. :r·r, .. :1 j~_:~ .iiiS·i·::1~~·1·~ n::·o=~-· .. ::·:;:= cc :::·.:·y P. (J, i)OX ~127 -lOJ-~.: }:llis .. \·,rcnuc Fount ail l Va 11 c y , Ca 1 i [or n i·a ~J 2 7 0 8 CHA;·:GE o:rnr:R :w. 2 crn~TRACTO~: p. T. z II: DART: i CO~·f PJ\?~Y' I :\C. c.o. DATE j' u 1 y l ~ ' l ~ 7 ·2 ODO!t co:'ffl~OL .\~:D T:!Pl~OVLD r:~foLUE>1T SClU::E:H~!G L\CILITIES AT JOB~ .' 'RECLJ\.d.idlU~"J eL1\1'a 1'HJ. 1, JOti :m. Pl-3-1 Amount of this Change Order (ADD) ~(lJJ3J:mcr~ S _ __;;;...1 .ll...., 7...;;;o...;..s...;.. • .;;_a o ___ _ In accordance with contract provisions, the follO\dn~ changes in the contract and/or contr;tct work arc hereby authorizecl .and as COi.lpensation therefor, the following additions to or dc<luctions from the contract price are hereby approved. · Reference: Contractor's letter dated Aprii 7, 1972 Districts' letter dated April 7, 1972. Drawing "ADDED PAVING" . ADD --Pave an additional 1, 000 square feet with ·3-inch asphaltic concrete over 4-inch aggregate base and construct new concrete swale ·with drain to. Plant No. 1 Headworks influent \vet we 11. ADD$ 1,705.00 TOTAL ADD$ 1,705.00 TIME EXTENSION Due to operational requirements and the above noted additional work, a time extension is _he!eby granted for 103 calendar days TOTAL TIME EXTENSION 103 calendar days SUM~·lARY OF CO:-ff RACT TI; IE Or1g1nal Contract date Original Contract Time Original Contract Coopletion Date Time Extension Previous Change Orders Time Extension This Change Order Revised Contract Completion Date October 28, 1971 150 calendar days ~.larch 26, 1972 0 calendar davs 103·calen<lar days July 7, 197 2 · · Original Contract Price Prev •. Au th. Changes This Change (ADD) NN~Jl.RXlC) Amended Contract Price Hoard authorization date: Approved: $ 108,400.0Q $ o.oo $ 1,705.00 $ 110,105.00 July 12, 1972 COU:\TY SAXIT~\TIO:J DISTRICTS of Orange County, California .. By ----------~--~~--------~- By ------~---------------c-h~i-c-t---~-n-~~1-;:~.c~< •' Lon tractor Agenda Item #14(h) -H-All Districts RESOLUTION NO. 72-94 ACCEPTING JOB NO. Pl-3-1 AS COMPLETE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, ·AND 11, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING JOB NO. Pl-3-1 AS COMPLETE * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Dir~ctors 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, F. T. Ziebarth Company, Inc., has completed the construction in accordance with the terms of the contract for Odor Control and Improved Influent Screening Facilities At Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-3-1, on July 7, 1972; and, Section 2. That by letter, Boyle Engineering, District's engineers, have recommended acceptance of said work as having been completed in accordance with the terms of th.e contract·; and' Section 3. That the Chief Engineer of the Districts has concurred in said engineers' recommendation, which said recornmenda- tion is hereby received and ordered filed; and, Section 4. That Odor Control and Improved Influent Screening Facilities At Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl~3-l,(~s hereby accepted as completed in accordance with the ter~s of the contract therefor, pated the 28th day of October,·1971; and, Section 5. That the Chairman of District No. 1 is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Notice of Completion therefor. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held July 12, 1972. Agenda Item #14(i) -I-All Districts Cuu:n ! 5.\: ~: ·~·. :r l ( ·.·' ;)l ST;~ j ~~TS OF O!~\?;f;:. cuu::TY P. 0. Box ,d .:.7 · 108-l4 Ellis .-\venue Fountain ._, ~Ll 1 c )', Ca 1 if or n i a 9 2 7 0 8 CilA:~GE ORDER c .. 0. :w. 4 CONT RA CT 0 R : _r OP. L~ c K G K ... \iJ.Q :· ~ ..a..-J ~-•. 1 _g_;Li;. V c ......,a __ t __ u_...r_..c ___ _ DATE July 12, 1972 JOH: Amount of this Chan~!,<.: Order ~\Lill):. (DEDUCT) $ 25,800.00 In accordance with contract provisions., the following changes in the contract anJ/or contract work :~Te he:reby authorized .:ir.d as co:-:lpcnsation therefor, the £allowing a<lditions to or deductions from ti1c contract price are hereby approved. . . REFERENCE: Districts' letter to Contractor dated June 20, 1972 City of liuntington Beach letter datc<l April 6, 1972 ADD PART I The Contractor was directed, at. the request of .the City of Huntington .';)each, to tenporarily pave the area north of".Harnilton from Station 51+~0 to 57+50, to coordinate the Hi<lening of the east side of Brookhurst and provide rae<lian traffic islands in- stead of pen:iancnt resurfacing of the sewer trench. This work was accomplished at a lump sum price of $6,400.00 .ADD $ 6,400.00 ADD The Contractor was di rcctcd to cease tunne.l operation at Brookhurst ·and AJams after completion of 30-fcct of a 180-foot tunnel. This cessation of \'/Ork was mutually agreed Hith the. City of Huntington Beach because of encountering a 2-foot lcnse of quick sand. The Contractor was directed to open cut the in.ter- . section at the unit price for 96-inch pipe as provide<l in Pay Itcn No. 3. The Contractor was also directed to provide t e r:l po r a r y s i g n a 1 i z at ion , re I.10 v e and replace traffic signals, traffic control and special backfill. ~\dJ.i tional work required for open cutting intersection to be accomplished for a lump sum price of $16,250.00 ADD TOTAL PART I, ADD Agenda Item #14(j) J-1 16,250.00 $22,650.00 All Districts "" """ """ • ' 4 I • J ' • ~ ' i ' •. l I \ "' -'-, ' • ... ! \. i J _.• P. 0. ~-:ox .1J~·/ -]Q:;.i..i Ellis ,\\·e1:ue fountaiH Valley, California 92708 CllA:~GE OIUJER c. 0. i\O" 4 co~~TRACTOl"(: KOiZDICK G KAIJJS, A J0int Venture ----------DATE __ J_t_1 l_,"-· _1_2 L-, _1_~_7_~""'-J --- PART 2 ADJUST~·lENT OF ENGINEER'S QUA;~TiTIES ADU Item Change Est'd Qty,s No. Unit From To Change Unit Price 3 L.F. 20,39~ 20,548 DEDUCT 5 L.F. 140. Bo~d authorization <late: July 12, 1972 . A7.enda Item #14(j) 150 227.00 ADD $ 34,050.00 150 550.00 DEDUCT 82,500.00 TOTAL PART 2 DEDUCT $ 48,450.00 TOTAL DEDUCT $ 25,800.00 Original Contract Price $ 6,387,511.00 Prev. Au th. Changes $ 91,125.34 CO#'s 2 & 3 This Change Xf~\1ID9 (DEDUCT) $ 25,800.00 Amended Contract Price s 6,452,836 .. 34 Approved: COU~TY SA~ITATION DISTRICTS of Orange Couaty, California . By------------------~~-----~---~ Clue± hngince KORDICK & RADOS, A Joint Venture J-2 All DL..;trict.s P • 0 • BOX 51 7 j -1 (I.._:.·~:~ r.: 1 l i s /'. · ,r '_. :~ u e Fountn in Valley, California 9;~/0o CH/\NGE ORD~R C. (1. NO • ~~ ----------~----~ COUTM CTOR: J·. PUT:\ .. \~.1 HEXG1~, .\ CORPORATION Ju 1 y 1 2 ' 1'9 7 2 JOB: SEDI:lEiff~\TIO:·~ BASIN K. <1 DIGESTER KAT PLAUT ?W.· 2, JOD NO. P2-17 Amount of this ch<:inge order (ADD) :{~~~~~~ $ 7 ;159.64 In accordance with contract provisioni, the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as corirnensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the co~tract price are hcrc_by approved. · · · REFERENCES: Contractor'·s letters dated 10-20-71; 10-29-71; 11-19.:71;11-24-71; 1 2 - 2 3 - 7 1 ; 3 -13 - 7 2 ; 4 -14 - 7 2 ; 4 -18 -7_ 2 ; 5 - 1 - 7 2 ; 6 - 2 -7 2 ; : 6 -14· -7-2 ; 6 - 1 5 _. 7 2 ; 6 -15 - 7 2 ; .6 - 2 2 - 7 2 Districts' letters dated· 10-29-71; 11-4-71; 11-10-71; -11-11-71; 12-6-71;.4-6~72; 4-17-72; 4-21-72; 4721-72i 6~21-72; 6-21-72; 6-27.-72 '·\-, _, and ·drawings and cbrrespondence referenced therein. ADD. Up1:·ate_ three sludge heat. exchangers· from 30 psi to l 0 0 p s i to. pt o vi de cap a c it y for hi g 11 er sys t em • pressure and capacity · . . . . Under force account deinoJ.ish and remove l:o'ncrcte at footing of Digqstqr E, install cxpansioil joint and modify forr.1ing as directed by the engineer due to undisclosed footings encountered Lower 4-in~h digester gas ·piping~and modify 8-inch bala.ncc pi.ping. systeras un<lcr force 'account as directed by the enginper. .• Alter steam piping, add ~teara connections and install toppc-<l ells at 1 .. 1oyno pumps as directed By the engineer .. · ·Add sample connections and ~alves at b6ilet water systera · . . To comply with insurance and State of Californi~ ITivision of Industrial Safety, boiler code requirements, mo~ify steam piping, add valv~ng, and Pressure Code system Modify high press~re air pipi~g at Brerton Tunnel R'emove, modify an<l replace 8-inch cast i ro·n bottom sludge piping anJ. .install connection tet! at Digester 'K! an<.l Ella Tunnel for con- nect ion of Dig es t er s ' L ' & ' t· I ' A~enda· Item #14(k) K-1 ADD $ 900.00 j\dd 229.07 Add 2 ,.616. 65 Add Add 146.94 Add 1,857.35 Add 34.57 Add 693.00 All Districts cou::1y s .. -..:~IT;\TTC~~ DIST::IC'i'S CF Ci.',_•\:~Gr cc:t;:;ry P. O. Box 8127 -100-t·i Ellis ,\\·cnue Fountain Valley, California 92708 CJIA~~GE OiWER c.o. ".:o. 4 (Cont'd) co;~TRACTOR: J. PUTXA~.j HE>~CK' A CORPORA TI Ol~ ·DATE July 12, 1S7~ J(ll~: SED r: lE:ff .\TI o: ~ DAS n~ K Ci DI GE STER K /\ T l'L~\NT .\O. 2' Jun :-~o. P2 -1 7 ....., ADD (Cont'd) Revise plant water system and post chlorination system at Chlorine Station Add TOTAL ADD DEDUCT Due to change in load cell at chemical facilities TOTAL DEDucr TOTAL ADD THIS CHANGE ORDER ... . . Due to operational requirer.tents and the above noted additional work, the contractor is hereby granted an extension of contract tine of $ 547.29 $7,179.64 $ 20.00 $ 20.00 $7,159.64 TOTAL TDIE EXTENSIO!~ 30 calen<lar days 30 calendar days SU~·i:.IARY OF COlffRACT THIE March 10, 1971 365 calen<lar Jays Harch 9, 1972 Contract Date . Original Contract Time Original Completion Date Time Extension Previous Change Orders 2 & 3 Time Extension This Change Order 145 calendar <lays 30 calendar days 175 calendar Jays 540 calendar days August 1, 1972 Total Extension of Contract Time Revise<l Contract Tir.1e Re~ise<l Completion Date Board authorization date: July 12, 1972 · By __________________________ ~----- C on tractor Agenda Item #14(k) O~iginal Coniract Price $ 1,164,540.00 Prev. Auth. Changes $ ____ L_6~~-4_2_4_._2_3~~ This Change (ADD):{.DD.UJ.Of."~ $ 7, 159. 7 4 --------------~~- Amended Contract Price s 1,198,123.97 K-2 ·Approved: COU~TY SANITATION DISTRICTS of Orange County, California By ----------~------~----.c-1-11_c __ £~t-n_r._i_n~c.c All Districts RESOLUTION NO. 72-95 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION TO JOB NO. I-8 BY DISTRICTS NOS. 3 AND 11 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, AND 11, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN ADDITIONAL PAYMENT OF INTERPLANT INFLUENT INTER- CEPTOR, JOB NO. I-8, COSTS FOR SPECIAL BENEFITS TO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 3 & 11 . * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, the public interests and equity between County Sanitation. Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, ·5, 6, 7, and 11, of Orange County, California, will be best served and maintained by execution of an agreement providing for additional contribution to costs of Interplant Influent Interceptor, Job No. I-8, by Districts Nos. 3 and 11 ror additional capacity in said ~acility by Districts Nos. 3 and 11; and, WHEREAS, on June 14, 1972, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, directed the General Counsel to prepare an agreement between the Districts providing for said additional contributions by Districts Nos. 3 and 11. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED: Section 1. That the Agreement to Participate in Additional Payment of Interplant Influent Interceptor, Job No. I-8, Costs fdrp Special Benefits to County Sanitation Dfstricts No.s 3 and 11, by and between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That said additional P.ayments by County Sanitation Districts Nos. 3 and 11 shall be in addition to the proportionate costs to be paid by s~id Districts Nos. 3 and 11, respectively, with reference to each District's participation in the balance of the construction costs of the Interplant Influent Interceptor, Job No. I-8; and, Section 3. That the Chairman and the Secretary of County Sanitation District No. 1, acting for itself and County Sanitation District Nos. 2, 5, 6, and 7, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement; and, Agenda Item #16 L-1 All Districts Section 4. That the Chairman and the Secretary of County Sanitation District No. 3, acting for itself and County Sanitation District No. 11, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held July 12, 1972. AP-:enda Item #16 L-2 All Districts RESOLUTION NO. 72-96-3 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY SANITATION DISTF\ICT HO. 3 AND THE CITY OF LOIJG BEACH A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3, .AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF LONG BEACH TO PROVIDE SEWERAGE SERVICES FOR AN AREA LOCATED OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, it appears in the best interests of the p~blic heal th, safety and wel,fare for County Sanitation District No. 3, of Orange County, California, to enter into an agreement with the City of Long Beach to provide for disposal of wastewater originating outside the District by means of the sewerage facilities of said County Sanitation District No. 3: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED: Section 1. That the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 does hereby authorized and approve execution of Agreement to Provide Sewerage Services by County Sanitation District No. 3 to a Portion of the City of .Long Beach, California, dated ; and, Section 2. That the Chairman and Secretary of County Sanitation District No. 3 are hereby ~uthorized and directed to execute said Agreement in form approved to the General Counsel. f: PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular m·eeting held July 12, 1972. Agenda Item #17 -M-District 3 RESOLUTION NO. 72-97 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 Alm ll, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN DISTRICT NO. 3 AND THE CITY OF LONG BEACH TO PROVIDE SEWERAGE SERVICES FOR AN AREA LOCATED OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11, of Orange County, California, hereby resolve as follows: . WHEREAS, County Sanitation District No. 3 proposes to contract with the City of Long Beach to provide sewerage service to a portion of said City lying easterly of the San Gabriel River, which is to be known as Tract No. 29312, Co~nty of Los Angeles, and, WHEREAS, it is not feasible for the City of Long Beach or the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts to provide sewerage service to said territory, and said territory adjoins County Sanitation District No. 3, and it is feasible for County Sanitation District No. 3 to provide sewerage s~rvice for said territory; and, WHEREAS, it appears in the best interests of the public health, safety and welfare for County Sanitation District No. 3p to enter into an agreement with the City of Long Beach to provide for the disposal of wastewater originating in s~id territory through the facil.i ties of District No.· 3 for co?veyaAce to the jointly owned treatment and disposal f~cilities; and, WHEREAS, the Joint Ownership, Operation and Construction Agreement dated March 10, 1971, as amended, provides that each Sanitation District which is a party thereto, must approve the use of joint treatment and disposal facilities or any part thereof for the disposal of sewage and/or indu~trial wastes originating outside the territorial limits of said Districts; and, Agenda Item #18 N-1 All Districts WHEREAS, on April 12, 1972, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 5, 7 and 11, and on April 17, 1972, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6, declared their intent to consent to District No. 3 sewering sald territory outside the District; and, WHEREAS, District No. 3 has concurrently adopted Resolution No. 72-96-3, authorizing execution of an agreement between District No. 3 and the City of Long Beach to provide sewerage services for said territory located outside the District: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3 5, 6, 7 and 11 hereby grant their approval and consent to District No. 3 to provide such sewerage service beyond its territorial limits to Tract No. 29312 in the City of Long Beach, providing that all sewerage quality criteria rules and regulations as they now exist or may hereafter be amended appertaining to District No. 3 shall appertain to said territory; and, Section 2. That certain Agreement to Provide Sewerage Services by County Sanitation District No. 3 to a Portion of the City of Long Bea.ch dated , is hereby approved; and, Section 3. That upon receipt of payment of the amounts from the City of Long Beach as provided for in Paragraph 2 of the afore- mentioned agreement, District No. 3 shall pay into the Joint Operating Fund of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11, the swn of $1,203.30; and, Section 4. Annually, upon receipt. of the amount from the City of Long Beach provided for in Paragraph 3 of the aforementioned agreement, District.No. 3 shall pay into the Joint Operating· Fund of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7.and 11, a swn equal to.the 10% surcharge so received. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held July 12, 1972. Agenda Item #18 N-2 All Districts Fr·anklyn G. Schott 1?983 Oak Street Fountain Valley County Sanitation District No •. 3 County of Orange ATTEN: District Directors Gentelmen: 20 June 1972 Sewer construction planned to start in July 1972 will disable most or the main streets of Fountain Valley. I feel that the choice of route for the improvement is most unwise •. Residents and businesses will be hampered,school traffic and work routes put out of operation. The City of Fountain Valley will have its newly paved streets cut and patched. The cost of the sewer has been increased also due to this poor choice of route. Specifically, that portion of the route So. on Magnolia to Talbert, east on Talbert to Bushard and So. on Bushard is.in question. This line does not service this area as it is a.thruput line. There does not seem to be any reason that the line ·should not be placed under the flood control ditch (located between Oak and Bay). The Slater (easterly) line would cross Hagnolia to the Ditch,-run So. under the Ditch at 20 ft. depth as planned to Ellis th~n east to the· plant. I would speculate that cost and trouble avoided by the District, City, Contractor and Community is worth while, even at this late date. Also, the messy flood control ditch would get cleaned up in the process. Sincerely, 7(£. gC'L;z/---- F. G. Schott 71i4/968-3506 Agenda Item #29 -0-D1stricts 3 ~·-11 KEITH AND ASSOCIATES CONSUL TING CIVIL ENGINEERS Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 11 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Attn: Fred Harper, General Manager Paul Brown, Chief Engineer ~e: Engineering Services -Slater Avenue 1!52!5 SOUTH GRAND AVENUE SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 02705 17141 541-5306 June 27, 1972 Trunk Sewer Extension, Est. Const~ Cost $350,000 Gentlemen: In accordance with your request of June 13, 1972, we are pleased to submit herewith our proposal for furnishing engineering and related services for the subject project. We propose to furnish the following services: I. Preliminary Phase 1. Gather basic data from District and the City of Huntington Beach. 2. Prepare basic data for field surveys and soils report. 3. Attend conferences with District.s~aff and City of Huntington Beach staff. II. Design Phase HYDRAULICS 1. Prepare final design plans. 2. Prepare rough draft of Notice Inviting Bids, Schedule of Bid Items,. and Special Provisions. a. It is anticipated that the Dist~ict will furnish the General Provisions and Standard Specifications for the project. MUNICIPAL SEF.VICE:S Agenda Item #34 P-1 District 11 Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 11 6-27-72 Page 2. III. 3. Review final plans and specifications with the District, the City of Huntington Beach, State Division of Highways and all utility companies. Bid Phase 1. Prepare all necessary plans and specifications, bid documents, incorporating all requirements of the District, the City of Huntington Beach, the State Division of Highways and the utility companies, complete, ready for bid. a. 50 copies of Notice Inv1ting Bids, Bid Schedule, and Special Provisions. IV. Construction Phase 1. Assist in securing_ bids. 2. Provide general field supervision . . 3. Provide As Built Plans. In addition to the above basic services we propose to furnish the following supplementary services, as follows: S-I. Survey Services 1. Preliminary topography surveys. 2. Construction Staking. S-II. Soils Engineering 1. Field Testing. 2. Project Soils Report. We propose to furnish the above services for the following fee schedule: I. Basic Design Engineering Services for a lump sum fee of $9700·. 00. Ap;enda Item #34 P-2 District 11 Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 11 6-27-72 Page 3 . . II. Survey Services at the regular hourly rates, as follows: III. 3-Man Survey Party 2-Man Survey Party Survey Supervi~or Soils Testing ~nd Report at actual invoiced costs. $52.00/hour '-+2. 00/hour 22.00/hour -If we are authorized to proceed with this work, we plan to ~omplete the plans and specifications.in accordanc~ with a schedule to be prepared for timing of bid, and construction of the subject project, in relation to the Knott Interceptor construction. scf:ledule. The schedule to be approved by the staff of County Sanitation District No. 11. Very truly yours, KEITH and ASSOCIATES '-/ ,..J~ 1.< Kt!-Ldi. Milo K. Keith MKK:m ... -:-.-... Agenda Iter!l #34 P-3 District 11 RESOLUTION NO. 72-89 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT RE PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY SEWER A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 5 AND 6, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN·AGHEEMENT WITH DONALD J. STOLTZ AND COMPANY FOR OVERSIZING PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY CROSSING * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors· of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 5 and 6, of Orange Cowity, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain agreement dated ------~~---~-, between County Sanitation District No. 5 and Donald J. Stoltz arid Company for oversizing Pacific Coast Highway crossing in connection with replacement of portions of Newport Beach Trunk A, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 5, acting for itself and as agent for District No. 6, are h~reby authorized and directed to execute said agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a. regular meeting held June 12, 1972. Ar-enda Item #38 Districts r.::: & 6 ,..) .ORDIUAITCE no. 507 AN ORDnrA?.TCE .A2·EimE;G OP.DIEl\..:·iCE NO. 505 AND RE~··~~.~LL.1} O:iWJ.~~:i~;cz I;o. :)Ob W\rl.1' l' 7-7-72 The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California, does ordain as follows: ARTICLE 1 Article 2 of Ordinance No. 505 is hereby amended by adding thereto the follm'ling sections: (o) District Connection Charge. Is a connection-charge imposed by District No. 5 as a charge for the use of District's sewerage facilities whether such connection is made directly to a District sewerage facility or to a sewer which ultimately discharges into a District sewerage facility. (p) District Sewerage Facility. Shall mean any property belonging to County Sanitation District No. 5 used· in the treatment, transportation, or disposal of sewage or industrial wastes. (q) Domestic Sewage. Shall mean the liquid and water borne wastes derived from the ordinary living proc~sses, fre·e from indus- trial wastes, and of such character· as to permit. satisfactory disposal, without special treatment, into the public sewer or by means of· a private disposal system. (r) Sewerage Facilities. A:re any facilities used in the collection} transportation, treatment or disposal Of S(Wage and industrial wastes. (s) .Family Dwelling Building. Is a building designed and used to house families and containing one or more dwelling units. (t) Dwellin~ Unit. Is one or more habitable rooms which are ,__. occupied or which are intended or designed to be occupied by one family with facilities for .living, sleeping, cooking and eating . . (u) Floor Area. Is the area included within the surrounding exterior walls of a building or portion thereof, exclusive of vent shafts and courts. The floor area of a building, or portion thereof, not provided with surrounding exterior walls shall be the usable urea under the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above. Agenda Item #43 R-1 District 5 (v) Other Terms. Any term not herein defined is defined as being the same as set forth ln the Lt'lternational Conference of Building Officials Uniform Building Code, 1970 Edition, Volume I. ARTICLE 2 (a) Section (a) of Article 6 of Ordinance No. 505 is amended to read as follows: "(a) District Connection Charges. Before any connection permit shall be issued, the applicant shall pay to the District, or its agent, the charges specified herein. (1) Connection Charge for New Construction, Family Dwelling Buildings. For each new family dwelling building constructed, the connection charge shall be $155 per dwelling unit. If on or before December 1, 1972, and on or before each succeeding December 1, the Directors of the District by resolution ~uly adopted resolve and direct, the aforesaid connection charge shall be increased, effective the next succeed- :tng January 1, by adding thereto the sum of $5.00. (2) Connection Charge for New Construction, Other Than Family Dwelling Buildings. For all other new construc- tion, including but not limited to· commercial and industrial buildings, hotels and motels and public buildings, the connection charge.shall be $80 per 1000 square feet of floo~. area contained within such construction, provided that the minimum connection charge for such new construction shall be $80.· If on or before December 1, 1972, and on or ~efore each succeeding December 1, the Directors .of the District by resolution duly adopted· resolve and direct, effective the next succeeding January 1, the aforesa:td charges shall be increased by.adding thereto the sum Of $2.50. Agenda Item #43 R-2 District 5 (3) Connection Charge for Renlacement Buildin~s. For new construction replacing former buildings, the con- nection chaTge shall be calculated on the same basis as provided in Paragraphs (1) and (2) hereinabove. If such replacement construction is commenced within two years after demolition or destruction of the former building, a credit against such charge shall be allowed, calculated on the basis of the current connection charge applicable for the new construction of the building demolished or destroyed. In no case shall such credit exceed the connection charge. (4) Connection Charges for Additions to or Alterations of Existing Buildings. In the case of structures where further new construction or alteration is made to increase the occupancy of family dwelling buildings or the area of buildings to be used for other than family dwelling buildings, the connection charge shall be $155 for each dwelling unit added or created and in the case of new construction· other than family dwelling buildings, it shall be $80 per 1000 square feet of additional floor area contained within such new cen- struction, provided that the minimum connection charge for such construction shall be $80. If on or before December 1, 1972, and on or before each succeeding December 1, the Directors of the District by resolution duly adopted resolve and direct, the aforesaid charges shall be increased, effective the next succeeding January 1, by adding thereto the sums of $5.00 and $2.50, respectively." When Charge is to be Paid. Payment of connection charges shall be required at the time of issuance of the building permit for all construction within the District, excepting in the case of a building legally Agenda Item #43 R-3 District 5 exempt from the requirement of obtaining a building permit in the City of Newport Beach. The payment of the sewer connection charge for such buildings will be required at the time of and prior to the issuing of a plumbing connection permit for any construction within the territorial limits of the District. Schedule of Charges. A schedule of charges specified herein will be on file in the office of the Secretary of the District and in the Building Depart- ment of ~he City of Newport Beach. ARTICLE 3 Section (b) of Article 6 of Ordinance No. 505 is amended by adding thereto Section (3) to read as follow$: (3). When an excess capacity connection charge is payable · by a user, as hereinabove ·provided, a credit equal to the connection charge paid by the user, if any, shall be allowed against such excess capacity connection charge. ARTICLE 4 Article 21 is hereby added to Ordinance No. 505 to read as· · follows: "Ordinance No. 506 and all other ordinances, or parts of ordinances, inconsistent with this 6-rdinance are hereby repealed to the e~tent that they are incon- sistent with the provisions of this Ordinance · effective n ------------------ ARTICLE 5 Except as herein am.ended, Ordinance No. 505 is ratified, reaffirmed and is to become effective , as amended by this Ordinance. Agenda Item #43 R-4 District 5 ARTICLE 6 The Chairman of the Board of Directors shall sign this Ordinance and the Secretary of the Districts shall attest thereto and certify to the passage of this Ordinance, and shall cause the same to be published once in the Orange Coast Daily Pilot, a daily newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in County Sanitation District No. 5, of Orange County, California, within fifteen (15) days after the date of the passage of this Ordinance by said Board of Directors, and said Ordinance shall take effect -------------------- PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District .No. 5, of Orange County, California, at a regular meeting held day of , 1972. --------------on the ATTEST: Secretary of the Board of Directors, County Sanitation District No. 5, of Orange County, California Chairman of the Board of Directors, County Sanitation District No. 5, of Orange County, California · Agenda Item #43 R-5 District 5 \JUUN I T :JAN I IA 11 UN U I~ I t1 I Li I NU. t) --- BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS 1972/73 FISCAL YEAR FUND #8 OPERATING ...._,,. DESCRIPTION OR ACCOUNT TITLE Directors Fees Contractul Services -Share of Joint Operating Professional Services Off ice Expense Printing & Publication Travel & Meeting·-Directors' Mileage Sub-Total Ur.appropriated Reserve TOTAL REQUIREMENTS Less: Cash Carry-Over & Revenue Funds Available July l Budgeted "Requirements 71/72 Actual Expenditures 71/72 Allowance for Accruals, Other Income & Transfers Cash Carry-over Interest & Misc. Receipts TOTAL CASH & REVENUE AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAXES *Reclassified Agenda Item #47 ESTIMATED ASSESSED VALUATION $ 108, 932,45C EST. A.V. ADJUSTED FOR %0EUNO. $ l03,485,82e EST. TAX RATE PER $100 OF A.V. S No Tax Rate ONE CENT IN TAX RATE WILL RAISE $ No Tax Rate APPROVED BUDGET 1970/71* 400 600 2,900 150 . 4 ,362 150 4,512 -0- APPROVED : BUDGET i 1971/72* i I I L I I l 400 600 2,350 150 3,817 143 3,960 -0- 600 I l I l ! I I I I i j i I ! i I I I ' i i I I I I I I l I l i l I ! ! I I ! ; I i ! ! i ! i I i I I i I ! I ~ I I ! I i ; ; i I ' : I 3,96 7~ 3,22 .:_6 3,28 0 0 0 2 2 f I I I r ' ·i' District 8 600 1,600 509 100 3,400 ' 3, ll.oo 3,282 118 3,400 -0- RESOLUTION NO. 72-98-7 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WEST RELIEF TRUNK SEWER, REACHES 19, 20, AND 22, CONTRACT NO. 7-5-lR A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WEST RELIEF TRUNK SEWER, REACHES 19, 20, AND 22, CONTRACT NO. 7-5-lR * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7, of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the detailed plans, specifications and contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors by Boyle Engineering, District's engineers, for construction of the WEST RELIEF TRUNK SEWER, REACHES 19, 20, AND 22, CONTRACT NO. 7-5-lR, ~re hereby approved and adopted; and, Section 2. That the Secretary be authorized and directed to advertise for bids for said work pursuant to the provisions of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California; and, Section 3. That the General Manager be authorized to establish bid date, following assurance from the Cities of Santa Ana and Tustin that funds will be released to finance construction of said facility from their respective County Sanitation District Number Seven Main Trunk Funds, at which time they will be publicly·opened and read; and,· Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board of Directors of District No. 7 and the District's Engineers be authorized to open said bids on behalf of District No. 7; and, Section 5. That County Sanitation District No. 7 is hereby authorized to award contract for said Contract No. 7-5-lR. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meet~ng held July 12, 1972. Agenda Item #51 -T-District 7 cou: ~TY S.-\:; l T:·:~ L ' 01 s·~·: \ i c~ s :,;r -c <_·,:: (~ ;; (:; : ; :-:· )' P .. 0. !~ox ~;1z7 -l'_j;;.i,i Elli~ :\venue· Fountain \'alley, California S}270~ c.o. ;,o.. 2 ;cx~T1! .. \CTO~: COLI Ca cm~STRUCTIO-:~. CO~lP.1\::y ~~~~~~~~~~~ DATE July 12, 1S72 jQB: su~~FLOHER I !~TERCEFTOk' REJ\CII .) (1 RED III LL L~TERCEPTOR' RE.-\CHES 4 :~~ s' c01~·uL\c't :.o. i -o-s Amount of this Ch::mgc Order (ADD) QUEDUOGA) $ 2, 151. OS In accordance with contract provisions, the following chan~·cs in the ::ontract arid/or contr3.ct work arc hereby o.uthorizc<l.and as coi.lpensation therefor, the following a<lditions to or deductions from the contract price are ~creby approved. ... REFERENCE: County Road Department Permit N6. 32259-E dated January 26, 1972 ADD Contractor's letters to ti:e District Jated January 27, 1972; February 17, 1972 and April 20, 1972 with invoices. --At the direction of the Orange County Road·Department ADD the Contractor was requested to move the location of the tunnel at the intersection of I~ed Hill an<l :,IacArthur· 29-fect to the north. This.necessitated working around a signal conduit and a 12-inch water line, work which was not anticipated. ~he Contractor was directed to by-pass se,rnge at Station 217+36 and to renovc and replace the 15- ·inch VCP sewer at this location, relaying at the grad~. and clearance which was shmm on the plans. This work was necessary ·in order to lay the 66-inch l(CP on proper grade. ADD $ 519.84 ADD 1,631.24 TOTAL ADD $2,151.08 Board authoriz8tion date: July 12, 1972 By -----------------~---,-.----~-~-~ Contractor Agenda Item #52 Original Contract Price $ 1.060,422.58 Prev •. Au th. Changes $ o 00 2,151.03 Amen<lcd Contract Price s 1,062,573.66' -u- Approved: COU:\TY SA~~JT;\Tim~ DISTRICTS of Orange Cou~ty, California By ------------c-J-1 i-c-1--r. n ~ in,_. ~:-: '~ District 7 tOB~ cou:~TY ~"..\:~~-!X! L .: j;JS;:,JCr:~~ (·;: u:·~-\::~~:: CVJ:~TY P • 0 . 1: 0 x ~; 1 2 'i -l U :_, ~ · ~ L 1 1 i s ..-\ v c ;1 u c Fountain Valley,. California ~2700 C 0 ·,.o 3 • • l' • COLICli co:~S1T.UCT·IO~~ CO~W.\~·~Y DATE -.r=-u--=l~)-. _,1.....,2..-, _l,,._9,,_,,_ =-7 ..,...2 ---- Sl.Jl'~FLm·iD~ L~TEI<CEVfOR, Kt.A.Cd 3 l{ RED ii I LL DffEi~CEPTOil, REACdES 4 4 => .col~ rr~1ccr ho. 1 -G-3 Araount of this Change Order ~~XN~~ (DEDUCT) $ 5 2 8. 8 2 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the :ontract and/or contract work arc hereby authorized_ and as cor:lpensation : h c r cf or , t :1 c f o 11 owing add it ion s to or d c cl u ct ions fro rn th c contra c t pr i c c are Jereby approved. . Board authorization <late: July 12, 1972 By ----~~--~----~--~C~o-n~t-ra-c-to_r_ Ae;enda Item #53 Original Contract Price $ 1,060,422.53 Prev •. Au th. Changes .CO#Z $ 2,151.08 This Change ~~'DJ.l) (DEDUCT) $ 528.82 Amended Contract Price s 1,062,044.84 Approved: ., COUNTY SA:·~ITATIO;~ DISTRICTS of Qra;1ge County, Califor;1ia By ------------c ..... h-..1._(' ___ r-1::..-' P.-. ~,-.. )-_ f'-. ·~· •.. -v-District 7 COG\TY s.-..:; ~-i,'.T 1 ·:.:; ;; 1 s·; :: ; ~~·; ~--, ',,: .i::.\.: .. ;:. cc~::;-ry P.O. Lo;~ s12·; ·· l~~:.i·~·~ :::J..is :\\'enuc Fouj1tai11 Valley, Califor:J.i.~ ~2708 cc:<1Tv\CTC~: COLICii co~~ST~UCTIO:"~ C01W,\~~y c.o. DATE 4 ~ l Q. -J-L-ll-}-,-1-~->-,---l-~)~y-z~~~~ JOB: su:~L-LO\iER IKfERCEPTOR, RBACH 3 t{ _:q~u lilLL INTEl~CtPTOR, RE,\CIIES 4 & 5 CO~iTi~\CT iW. 7 -u-3 Araount of this Ch3nze Order (:\DD) (DEDUCT) $ O. 00 In accordance with contract provisions, the followin~ changes in the corltract and/or contract work arc hereby auti1orizcd and as co:;ipensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price arc hereby approved. . .. EXTEI~SION OF THlE REFERENCE: Contractor's Letter to the District dated November 30, 1972 for the following reasons: 1. The pipe supplier and the PVC liner plate supplier were unable to nak.e deliveries on sc.i1edulc due to manufacturing problem and ti1erefore hel<l up the start of construction for. approxi~ately a month. 2. The District was unable to handle any sewage in the I-7-3 Punp Station due to lack of pUI:1ping capacity until July. 1, 1972 and therefore the Contractor was unable to divert sewage into the new line so that bid item #lS·coul<l be accomplished. 30 calendar days 26 calendar davs TOTAL Tii·iE EXTEN~ION 56 calendar days SU~h·IARY -Original Contract Date Original Contract Time Original Completion Date Time Extension Previous Change Orders Time Extension This Change Order Total Extension of Contract Time Revised Contra.ct Time Revised Completion Date October 15, 1971 210 calendar days May 12, 1972 0 calendar days 56 calendar <lays 56 calendar days 266 calendar <lays July 7, 1972 · Original Contract Price Prev •. Au th. Changes This Change (ADD) (DEDUCT) Anen<lcd Contract Price -~ Board authorization date: Approved: $ 1,0602422.58 $ 2,679.90 $ 0.00 s 1,062,044.84 July 12, 1972 COU:\TY SANIT,\TIO~~ DISTRICTS of Orange County, California 'D ... c1 ________________________ ~~---- Con tractor By ______ _ Agenda Item #54 -w-District '7 RESOLUTION NO. 72-100-7 ACCEPTING CONTRACT NO. 7-6-3 AS COMPLETE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING CONTRACT NO. 7~6-3 AS COMPLETE * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7, of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the contractor, Colich Construction Company, has completed the construction in accordance with the terms of the contract for the Sunflower Interceptor, Reach 3, and .Red Hill Interceptor, Reaches 4 and 5, Contract No. 7-6-3, on July 7, 1972; and, Section 2. That by letter, Boyle Engineering, District's engineers, have recommended acceptance of said work as. having been completed in accordanc~ with the terms of the contract; and, Section 3. That the Chief Engineer of the District has concurred in said engineers' recommendation,° which said recommenda- tion is hereby received and ordered filed; and, Section 4. That the Sunflower Interceptor, Reach 3, and Red Hill Interceptor, Reaches 4 and 5, Contract No. 7-6-3, is hereby accepted as completed in accordance with the terms of the contract therefor, dated the 15th day of October~ 1971; and, Section 5. That the Chairman of the District is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Notice of Completion therefor. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held July 12, 1972. Agenda Item #55 -x-District 7 ENGINEERS o ARCHITECTS 412 SOUTH LYON STREET SANTA ANA. CALI FORNI A 92702 TELEPHONE i 714 > 547-4471 ADDRESS REPLY TO P.O. BOX 178 June 30, 1972 County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County P. 0 . Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California 92708 Attentior. Mr. Fred A. Harper, Genera I Manager Jamboree Road Subtrunk No. 1, Reach 47 -Contract No. 7-2C-2 Jamboree Road Subtrunk No. 2, Reach 53 -Contract No. 7-20-6 As requested by the board at their adjourned regular meeting of June 27, 1972, we are submitting a new proposal for engineering services combining the two contracts above into one project and rescinding our proposal of June 8, 1972, for Contr:act No. 7-2C-2. Contract No. 7-2C-2 will still begin at Main Street and Jamboree Boulevard and extend approximately 1, 250 northeasterly in Jamboree Boulevard. Contract No. 7-20-6 will begin at Alton Avenue and Jamboree Boulevard and extend approximately 900 feet northerly in Jamboree Boulevard. The estimated construction cost of the two contracts together is $62,000. Design of the two subtrunks wi II conform to district standards. The two contracts wi II be combined into one project with the Irvine Industrial Complex acting as the contracting agency, letting the contract to the lowest responsible bidder through pu~lic bidding procedures. Specification format will conform to Irvine Industrial Complex standards. . Our fee for preparing the plans and specifications for the project will be a lump-sum amount of $2,400. The usual field surveys for design, construction, :;taking, and checking as-bui It conditions wi II be required and we suggest that they be on a per diem basis at $51 per hour for a three-man survey c_rew, $41 per hour for a two-man survey crew, and $21 per hour for a licensed sµrveyor. Since we have already started work on Contract No. 7-2C-2, we· wi II continue with the project including the new work unless otherwise instructed by your office. . BOYLE ENGINEERING &w'1L'J/u1U r.L·~ f;l. Conrad Hoh en er, Jr. C. E. 10951 B-C07-120-50 PROFESSIONAL E t'J G I N E E R I N G Agenda Item #58 AND t11.RCHITECTURAL SERVICES -y-District 7 O:F.DDL.;.!~CE r;o. 203 AN ORDINAHCE PJ·IBNDING ORDilTANCE NO. 202 DRAFT 7-7-72 The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, does ordain as follows: ARTICLE 1 Article 2 of Ordinance No. 202 is hereby amended by adding thereto the following sections: (o) District Connection Charge. Is a connection charge imposed by District No. 2 as a charge for the use of District's sewerage facilities whether such connec·tion is made directly to a District sewerage facility or to a sewer which ultimately discharges into a District sewerage facility. (P) District Sewerage Facilitl. Shall mean any property belonging to County Sanitation District No. 2 used in the treatment, transportation, or disposal of sewage or industrial wastes. (q) Domestic Sewage. Shall mean the liquid and water borne wastes derived from the ordinary living processes, free from indus- trial wastes, and of such character as to permit satisfactory disposal, without special treatment, into the public sewer or by means of a private disposal system. (r) Sewerage Facilities. A:re any facilities used in the collection, transportation, treatment or disposal of sewage and industrial wastes. (s) . Family Dwelling Building. Is a building designed and used to house families and containing one qr more dwelling units. (t) Dwelling Unit. Is one or more habitable rooms which are occupied or which are intended or designed to be occupied by one family with facilities for living, sleeping, cooking and eating. ·(u) Floor Area. Is the area included within the surrolJ.Ilding exterior walls of a building·or portion thereof, exclusive of vent shafts and courts. The floor area of a building, or portion thereof, not provided with surrounding exterior walls shall be the usable area under the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above. A~enda Item #63(a) Z-1 District 2 (v) Other Tc~s. Any term not herein defined is defined as being the same as set forth in the International Conference of Building · Of'~.i~ials Uniform Building Code, 1970 Edition, Volume I. ARTICLE 2 (a) Section (a) of Article 6 of Ordinance No. 202 is amended to read as follows: "(a) D"lstrict Connection Charges. Before any connection permit shall be issued, the applicant shall pay to the District or its agent the charges specified herein. (1) Connection Charge for New Construction, Family Dwelling Buildj_ngs. For each new fal!lily dwelling building constructed, the connection charge shall be $100 per dwelling unit. If on or before December 1, 1972, and on or before each succeeding December 1, the Directors of the District by resolution duly adopted resolve and direct, the aforesaid connection charge shall be increased, effective the next succeeding January 1, by {2) adding thereto the sum of $5.00. Connection Charge for New Construetion, Other Than Family Dflelling Buildings. For all other new construction, including but not limited to commercial and industrial buildings, hotels and motels and public buildings, ·the connection charge shall be $50 per 1000 square feet of floor area contained within such construction, provided that the minimum connection charge for such new construction shall be $50. If on or before December 1, .1972, and on or before each succeeding December 1, the Directors of the District by resolution duly adopted resolve and direct, effective the next Agenda Item #63(a) Z-2 District 2 succeeding January 1, the aforesaid charges shall be increased by adding thereto the sum Of $2.50. (3) Connection Charge for Replacement Buildings. For new construction replacing former buildings, the connection charge shall be calculated on the same basis as provided in Paragraphs (l)·and (2) hereinabove. If such replacement construction is commenced within two years after demolition or destruction of the former building, a credit against such charge shall be allowed, calculated on the basis of the current connection charge applicable for the new construction of the building demolished or destroyed. In no case shall such credit exceed the connection charge. (4) Connection Charges for Additions to or Alterations of Existing Buildings. In the case of structures where further new construction or alteration is made to increase the occupancy of family dwelling buildings or the area of buildings to be used for other than family dwelling buildings, the cormection charge shall be $100 for each dwelling unit added or created and in the case of new construction other than ~amily dwelling buildings, it shall be $50 per 1000 square f~et of additional floor area contained within such ne~ construction, provided that the minimum connection charge for such construction shall be $50. If on·or before December 1, 1972, and on or before ~ach succeeding December 1, the Directors of the District by . resolution duly·adopted resolve and direct, the aforesaid charges shall be increased, effective Agenda Item #63(a) Z-3 District 2 the next succeeding January 1, by adding thereto the sums of $5.00 and $2.50, respectively. When Charge is to be Paid. Payment of connec.tion charges shall be required at the time of issuance of the building permit for all construction within the District, excepting in the case of a building legally exempt fro~ the requirement of obtaining a building permit. The payment of the sewer connection charge for such buildings will be required at the time of and prior to the issuing of a plumbing connection pennit for any construction within the territorial limits of the District. Schedule of Charges. A schedule of charges specified herein will be on file in the office of the Secretary of the District and in the Building Department of each city within the District. ARTICLE·3 Section (b) of Article 6 of Ordinance No. 202 is amended by adding thereto Section (3) to read as fQllows: (3) When an excess capacity connection charge is payable by a user, as hereinabove prov.1.1ed, a credit equal to the connection charge paid by the user, if any, shall be allowed against such . excess capacity connection charge.· ARTICLE 4 Except as herein amended, Ordinance No. 202 is ratified, reaffirmed and is to become effective , .as ------------------------ amended by this Ordinance. Agenda Item #63(a) Z-4 District 2 , , - ARTICLE 5 The Chairman of the Board of Directors shall sign this Ordinance and the Secretary of the Districts shall attest thereto and certify to the passage of this Ordinance, and shall cause the same to be published once ~n the ---------------, a daily newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in the District, within fifteen (15) days after the date of passage of this Ordinance by said Board of Directors and said Ordinance shall take effect --------------------- PASSED A.l'ID ADOPT~D by the Board of Directors of County Sani- tation ~strict No. 2, ·of Orange County, California, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 1972. ------- ATI'EST: Secretary, Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2, of Orange County, California Agenda Item #63(a) Chairman, Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2, of Orange Cotmty, California Z-5 District 2 p .. , I ~I STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this Draft 7/6/72 day of , 1972, by and between the City of , ----------------- a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, Cal~fornia, herein- after called "District", W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, District, has by the enactment of Ordinance No. 202, as amended, established a schedule of sewer connection charges; and WHEREAS, all or a portion of the improved territory of the District is within the city limits of City; and WHEREAS, the City by and through its building department regulates all new construction within the City; and WHEREAS, it is for the mutual benefit of City and District that the sewer connection charges provided for in said Ordinance No. 202, as amended, of the District be collected in a maiu1er most expedient and least burdensome on the owne+s of property within the City; and WHEREAS, the City will benefit by the construction and maintenance of sewerage facilities of _the District within the city limits of City by District from the funds to be collected from said sewer connection charges. NOW, THEREFORE-, it is mutually. agreed as follows: 1 .. City as agent will and does hereby agree to issue permits and collect the charges established by District'under said Ordinance No. 202, as amended. 2. District shall prescribe those classifications of charges to be collected by City .. 3. City will account for the charges collected and remit to District monthly the monies so collected. Agenda Item #63(b) AA-1 District 2 4. District does hereby appoint and nominate City and its agents and employees as the same may be designated by City as agents o:f the District :for the purpose o:f issuing permits and determining and collecting the sewer connection charges established under Ordinance No. 202, as amended. This does not authorize City to act as agent :for the General Manager or to perform the duties of the General Manager of the District as set forth and established in said Ordinance No. 202, as amended, except as expressly set forth in this Agreement. 5. City agrees to act as agent for District as herein provided for a fee equal to four (4) percent of the fees collected by City for permits issued pursuant to the provisions of this agreement, and District agrees to pay said fee monthly upon receipt of itemized invoice from City. 6. It is agreed that at the request of either party hereto formal renegotiation of this agreement shall be made at twp years from the effective date hereof. 7. This agreement may be terminated by either party giving 180 day written notice to the other party designating a termination date, which date shall be the first day of a calendar month. 8. This agreement shall become effective on the day of ' 1972. (SEAL) (SEAL) Agenda Item #63(b) CITY OF a municipal corporation By -----------------------------------Mayor By ~--------~~--~-----c-i_t_y_,.,C_l_e_r_k ___ CITY COUNTY SANITATION~DISTRICT NO. 2, of Or~g~ County, California, a ·public corporation By -=:"""---:--------=-----...--~~--------------Ch airman, Board of Directors By =---------------------~~----------Secretary, Board of Directors AA-2 District 2 84 The REGISTER Friday (e) June 16, 1972 Ocean Deterioration Cited In Coast Study By TO:.\I EICHJIOn:-; ! A study was needed of the Register Staff Writer I ocean within city limits, he JIUNTIXGTOX BEACH _ A! said, to establish a baseline for city-sponsored coastline study is ~omparison. with futu~e find- turning up ''absolutely unbeliev-mgs. E .mercury l~'~e1;5 mcrease able" dcita pointini:r lo contami·, or dechr.e, the o.f1c1al asked, nation of the occ2; and deterio-! ''l"p from what? We nero these ration of it~ em·ironmcnt, a city baselines for scientific compari· official ~aid Thursday. j sons." "You can't believe some of· About 8,000 ''data-points'' the things we're finding." said h3 ve been established since the Vince Moorhouse director of: .study began early this year, the harbors and b~aches depart-· each data-point pro\iding a ment~ ; c~emical. and. biological analy- .. . , sis at a pmpomted location. Divers surfacing fron: some i :'i1oorhouse said 230 000 dat - ocean areas are required to· . ' a I t k · d"rt r , f b th ,points are needed before con- a ·e imm.e la e an isc~ 1.c ? s crete conclusions can be made· and recc1n· regular mJect1ons ah-·ut th · •~t A ). h ·d ! lJU e oceans S1-<1 us. pre-1 of gamma glubu m, e .sai · · liminary report is due in six. Strepotcocous bactenl, cau~e. months. or some serious human diseas-: Th b·oo-t bl h £5 is bcin found 50 feet be-\ . c . 1 :>~cs pro em area, e • g . . s<11d, hes near the county se- ncath _the_ surface a, mile off-wage outfall which dumps li5 Ehore rn 58 degree v. atcr tern· .11 . 11 f ffl d m1 ion ga ons o e uent a ay pcraurcs. . . . ! into the ocean. E\·en though the Althou~h longtime residents sewage effluent has been-thor- have noticed the disa~pear~~ce· Ollf.'hl)· treated, Moorhouse said, . cf kelp beds and ccrlam species• waste-related problems are ar· of fish, ~!oorhouse said no sci· 1 isin<"'. - entific study has ever been i ';T.:. i. th tf ll . 1. 1:e area near e ou a made o! the ocean ccologica has the greatest imbslance of balance. . the ecosystem," he said. "In some areas, the (bacteria) counts are so high they could be a danger to one's health." . Another problem area is Hun- tiogton Harbour. surrounded by the most expensive homes in the city. But :\Ioorhouse said the difficulties there resuit pri- marily from poor seawater cir- culation in the harbor. Some councilmen have called for cut- ting another jetty entrance into the harbor to co::rect this prob- lem. The study also seeks to deter- mine the impact of other man-~made changes, such as flood I co~trol works that bottle up . ram water-borne sands which used to replenish oce:m beach- es. and the use of fertilizers and other chemicals. some of which f ine\·itably wash down to the I ocean in rain runoff. .. The effect or micturition of 4.5 million sv.immers each summer also· must be considered, he said. ''I mean, even if we could build enough restrooms, well y'know, when the water's cold everybody answers the call." Both :\Ioorhouse and City Ad- ministrator D a v i d Rowlands ·have been highly critical of the : federal state and co1:nty gov· 'e r n m e n t s for "neglecting•: ! ocean studies. I "Wc·re undertaking a project ·that should've been undertaken by the federal government or the state," Rowlands told coun- cilmen last wl'ek. ''We need their help." 1 'It shouldn't be just Huriting- ~n Be?ch," :\'roorhouse added. Also included "should be Kew. port Beach Ctnd Laguna and the cou11ty areas." Migratory fish help carry Or- ange County's bacteria and oth- er problems througr.out the world's oceans. he said. In charge of the city's pro- gram is marine biolobist Jerry Jackson, a recent graduate of· UCI's biology department. He was hired v.ith fu.11ds pro\.ide<i the f e<leral Public Employment Prograni (P£U), administered by the county. Moorhouse lauded the rom- munitJ effort making the study possible. The ~.teDonnell-Doug­ Ias Astronautics facilitv here provides the sen ices of· its mi- cro-biology laboratory, he said, while Golden West College and UCI ha\•e given students aca- demic .credit for participating in and aiding the study. ~ ~'~ ··-.. ··:s::-;? ... • f~.:..-.;. \ f-..1 i '-") ,. ~ ~ 1': -· ~,... i-:> SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA , ~--:.-~-COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT ~ ~ ~ 1100 GLENDON AVENUI: LOS ANGF.LCS. CALoFORNIA 90024 • (213).t?G•OBOB C0'4M1'5>SION ftE.RT 80NO. rP£<;10tl'(f LINOSLCY PAfl~'ONS. v:c1: PltCWIOCNT KCLtN COB9 THOMAS C. LAl.JllACHCF! L. L TIMf1£nLAKt: f"ROJECT MA,..AG£R GFORGC C. HLAVKA, PH.0. CONSULTING COARO P1tot • .JOHN 0. ISAACS. CH41Rlotl>N 'llCHARO K C. LfC: MD ~HMA.t4 A. f>fAHS0."1. Sc 0. DONALD YI. PHITCt-<ARO. PH.0, .IOHN H. RYTHER. Pti.D. June 21~ 1972 Mayor Alvin Coen City of Huntington Beach P. Oo Box 190 Huntington Beach, California Since the article concerning sewage contamination which appeared in a recent edition of the Santa Ana Register originated in the Huntington Beach Department of Harbors and Beaches, I thought that I should inform you of the steps I am taking to counteract its effect. Those of us who have been associated with the Sanitation Districts are aware of our great concern for the env:Lronrnent and the efforts we are making to eJ5minate the harmful effects of waste \\Tater on the Pacific Ocean. I \dsh that everyone could be as \·:ell informed. · LP:j With kindest personal. regards, Lindsley Parsons Vice President and Commissioner for. the Orc:,nge County· ·sani~,tion Districts, Southern California Coastal Wate~ Research Project cc: George Hlavka, Ph.D. :OM MISSION Bf.RT f\0:"(0. ""C~•OCNT L..lflDSl.EY PARSONS. Vl":C ,.A(SIO(NT rl(LE.N COUO rt~OMAS £.. LAUBACHCR ~. E. TIM[JERLAKE •RO.JCCT MANAGCR :>tCRGE C. HL.A\'KA. PH.0. :oNSUL.1 ING llOARO "ROf". JOHN 0. IS.AACS. CH .. IAMAN ~ICHAAO K C L£C M 0. CRMAN A. PC.-..RSCN. Sc 0. :>ONALO W. PP.llCt-tAP.!:> PH.0. IQl~N H. RYTHtR. PH.0. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT 1100 GLENDON AVENUE LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90024 • (213) 470·0006 June 2r_, 1972 Mr. Vincent G. Moorhouse, Director Department of Harbors, Beaches and Development City of Huntington Beach P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Moorhouse: The article quoting you in the Santa Ana Register of June 16, 1972, filled me with considerable chagrin, because it appeared that your new.marine biologist -i.·ms unaware of the current studies con- cerning the effect of waste discharge on the Pacific Ocean vmters \·1hich have been e;oing on . for the past three years under the ausp·ices of the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, of \·;hi ch the Orange County Sanitation Districts is one of the co-sponsors. The fault probably lies with us,· in that we have not publicized our project sufficiently to the scientific comrr.uni ty, hm·:ever, it has peen our policy to announce no conclusions tUitil the end of the first three-year phase of the project which ends October, 1972. · I am requesting that Dr. George Hlavka, Project. Manager, send you copies of the most recent pro- gress reports and our publications to date. · Lindsley Parsons Vice President and Commissioner for the Orange County Sanitation Districts, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project cc: George ·Hlavka, Ph.D. :Mayor Alvin Coen, Huntington Beach City Manager, Huntint;ton Beach ·. ·. COMMISSION IJERT P.ONO, ""CSIC>CNT LIND~LCY PARSONS. v1cr rJ1C!llDChT tiELtN COBB 1'HOMAS £_ LAU!lACHER L. E. TIMD!:RLAKE PROJl:CT MANAGER GCORGE E. HLAVt<A. PH.0. CONSUL, ING BOARD Pl>Of. JOHN 0. IS.II.ACS. CHA.l"MAN ~ICHARO K. C LCC. M 0. EHMAN A. P£Ak!:.Otl, Sc 0. DONA.LOW. PRITCHARD. P11.0. JOHN H. RYTHER. PH.D. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT 1100 GLENDON AVENUE LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 9002,4 • (213) 478-0eoe June 21, 1972 Mr. James Dean Executive Editor The Register 625 North Grand Avenue Santa Ana, California 92711 Dear Sir: In reference to your article "Ocean Deterioration Cited In Coast Study", published June 16, I find it some\·1hat distressing that Huntington Beach city officials appear to be una·ware of ocean studies conducted over the past three years in waters adjacent to their beaches. Com~rehensive. research designed to provide ~nswers to the very questions raised by Mr. Moorhouse in the article is being sponsored by the five leading sanitation agencies in Southern California through the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP), a local government agency. The impression left from statements by Mr. 1•1oorhouse and Mr. Rowlands in the article is that indiscrimin~te use is made of the ocean as a se,·:age effluent dump, with no effort to safeguard the marine environment. Nothing could be further from the truth. Perhaps no public entities are more aware than the Sanitation agencies on the Southern ~alifornia coast- line of the potenti'al damage that may be dc~he to the ocean waters by the increasing discharge of domestic and industrial waste into the ocean. The concern of these public entities was demdnstrated in the iall of 1969 when they establiihed a joint authority composed of representatives of Ventura Gounty, the City of Los Angeles, the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, the Orange County Sanitation Districts and the City of San Diego to engage in a three-year ecological study of the effect 6f waste ·"' ,,· .... : .. . ' # , I Mr. James Dean June 21, 1972 Page 2 .' disposal on the marine environment along the Southern California Coastline. The five sponsoring agencies budgeted $lo2 million for the study, which as the first of its lr-..ind, will no doubt_, serve as a pilot project for the entj_re \mrldo Testirnony presented in December, 1971, before the State Water Resources Control Board at a public hearing in San Diego W}3.S instrumental in redrafting proposed ocean discharge requirements about to be adopted by the stateo Dr. George E. Hlavka, Project Manager; is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin and \·tho received his Ph.D. from the California Institute of Technology, has extensive background and experience in the analytical sciences and in management. He is assisted in the research program by a consulting board comprised of some of America's most distinguished authorities in the fields of marine bio1ot:;y, oceanography,:_ enviroP..I:1ental engineering, organic chemistry and public health. These autl1orities are; Dr, John Do Isaacs of Scripps Instj_tute of Oceanography, Dr. Donald W. Pritchard of Chesapeake Bay Institute, John Hopkins University, Dr. Er:r.1an· A. Pearson, Professor of Environmental Engineering! .. University of California at Berkeley_, Dr. t.TOP.J1 H. Ryther of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Massachusetts, and Dr. R~chard K. C. Lee, M.D., School of Public Heal th_, University of Bawa.ii- In all fairness, the Sanitation Districts should be considered as anti-pollution agencies. Contrary to the general public belief, the Sanitation Districts are not using the ocean for disposing of the county's daily 140 million gallons of· :ra\·T influent. The liquid wastes are processcid in the Diatricts' treatment plant~ to assure that the discharge meets receiving water standards established by the state and local regulatory- agencies. The entire Orange County coastline adjacent to the outfall· is monitored daily by the Sanitation Dj_stricts to assure that these standards are maintained. &'Ctensi ve labo:ratory and ocean research and testing programs complement the efforts. I am certain that the SCCHRP Cornrnissi.on members '\·Till be pleased to hear of the city's effortso I am sure also, that the city's citizens will be glad to hear that a competent authority for the past three years has been researching ocean pbllution problems along the Southern California Coast. · Mr. James Dean June 21, 1972 Page 3 .· Local residents can be assured that the area's major sanitation agencies continuously implement whatever steps are deemed necessary to preserve, and possibly even to enhance, our ocean environment. Very t.ruly yours, ~~er~ Lindsley Parsons Vice President and Commissioner f'or the Orange County Sanitation Districts, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project ,. .. ;. . ... Agenda Item No. 5 b MILLER. NISSON M KOGLER CLARK MILLER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2014 NORTH BROADWAY TELEPHONE C. ARTHUR NISSON NELSON KOGLER AREA CODE 714 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92706 H. LAWSON M E:AO July 12, 1972 Board of Directors County Sanitation District #7 of Orange County Legal Opinion re Authority of General Manager.to Approve Change Orders to Contracts 542-6771 Question: Can the Board of Directors authorize the District's General Manager to approve change orders to its construction contracts? The District is empowered to contract for the construc- tion of sewerage facilities as public works. Health & Safety Code 4741. The governing body of the District is its Directors. Health and Safety Code Section 4730. The County Sanitation District Act does not contain any express restriction on the authority of its Board of Directors to delegate its authority to enter into change orders on construction contracts. So long as the Board of Directors continues to awa~d its public works construction contracts and to finally approve the change orders made to the contracts at its final acceptance of the work, I see no reason why the Board of Directors could not delegate its general manager to approve change orders that he deems necessary during the course of construction to a pub~ic works construction contract. Limitation on this authority should be set by the Board of Directors and the Board of Directors should continue to formally accept the work when completed and approve the change orders made during the course of construction at the time of acceptance of the work. This has been customarily done in a close-out agreement. It is recommended that this continue. If the Board of Directors delega~es such authority .... -· , ... , the general manager it would be bound by the actions of the general manager in approving change orders in the absence of fraud or malfeasance. July 12, 1972. C. Arthur Nisson General Counsel .._;ontract Number 1-12 2-13 3-11 3-12 3-13 3-14 3-15 3-16 5-18 7-6-1 7-6-2 7-6-3 7-6-4 11-11 ANALYSIS OF ;CHANGE ORDER AMOUNTS TRUNK SEWER CONSTRUCTION Title Main-Dyer Interceptor, Reaches 25, 26, 27 and 28 Trask Avenue Interceptor Sewer Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor Los Alamitos Pumping Station Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) Westminster Avenue Interceptor Sewer (Revised) Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer Manhole Repair Beach Relief Trur1k. Sewer, Reaches 17, 18 and 19 Sewer Trunk nB 11 , Unit 7, Upper Newport Bay Crossing Sunflower Interceptor, Reach 1 Sunflower Interceptor,. Reach 2 Sunflower Interceptor, Reach 3, & Red Hill Interceptor, Reaches 4 and 5 Red Hill Interceptor, Reaches 6, 7 and 8 Slater-Springdale & Edinger Relief Trunk Sewer Change Orders Add Deduct $ 1,050.59 14,480.00 1,739.76 4,088.46 1,593.44 1,871.51 11,125.18 3,703.26 2,500.00 255.49 1,148.23 977.87 850.00 1,137.50 8,250.00 6,445.00 i,728.00 122.25 6,447.13 1,960.00 2,142.00 1,195.00 2,151.08 665.53 1,959.67 .2, 750. 00 3,841.85 $ 564.oo 17,000.00 . -, RESOLUTION NO. DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDERS TO GENERAL MANAGER A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER OF THE DISTRICT TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDERS IN CONTRACTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SEWERAGE FACILITIES FOR THE DISTRICT * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7, of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Fred A. Harper, as General Manager of the District, be and he is hereby authorized to approve, execute and deliver change orders to all contracts for the construction of sewerage facilities for t~e District providing that no one change order shall increase the contract price in an amount over the sum of $2,000.00; and, Section 2. That this authority shall apply to all existing contracts for the construction of sewerage facilities and all such contracts entered into in the future until this resolution is amended or repealed; and, Section 3. That nothing contained in this resolution shall be construed to authorize the General Manager to execute a final close-out agreement with the contractor in any such contract or to finally accept the work constructed under such a contract. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held July 12, 1972 MEMORANDUM TO: Boards of Directo rs .::rws COUNTY S ANI TATION DISTRIC TS of. ORANGE C OUNTY, C ALI FORN IA P. 0 . BOX 81 27 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTA IN VALLEY, CALI FORNIA 92708 (714) 54 0-2910 (7 14 ) 962-24 l I SUBJECT: Interest Earned from Distric ts ' Investment Program The staff administers a comprehensive inves tment p r ogram of cap i tal funds for maximum yield to the financial benefit of t he Districts ' taxp aye r s . The funds , accumulated to construct r equi red se we rage facilities, a.re invested in short term go ve rnment se curities and bank t i me deposits , generally for periods of 90 to 1 80 day s , and are scheduled to mature to meet current obligations . Interest ear nings for the fiscal year 1971 -72 under this program are $1,444 ,844 . This represe nts a n average savi ngs equal to 5¢ per $1 00 assessed valuati on on the tax bill of every homeowner served . b y the Sanitation Di stricts . Listed below are the interest earnings by individual dis t rict fo r this pa.st fiscal year end ing June 30th and t he total earni ngs by district since the inve stmen t program· was authorized by t he Boa rds thirteen years ago . 1 959 -1972 1 971 -72 To tal Earnings I n v e stment Since Inception District Earnin gs Of Investment P rogram 1 $ 96 ,452 . $ 876 ,034 . 2 450,672. 2 ,876,873 . 3 475,527. 3,220 ,575 . 5 69,739 . 502 ,822 . 6 48,707. 363 ,733 . 7 203 ,370 . 9 17,727 . 8 204 . 4 , 201. 11 100,173 . 649 ,529 . GRAND TOTAL $1)_l~44'81.~4 . $9 ,411,494 . ... ..., CO UNTY SAN I TATION DI STRI CTS OF ORAN GE COUNTY SCHEDULE OF AC TUA L FUND BALANCES (1 ) JUNE 30 , 1972 Cash in Co . District & Fund Treasur~ Investments ~istrict No . 1 Operating Fund $ 3 ,757 . $ 284 ,367 . In terest & Sinking Fund (1951) 8 ,643 . 79,059 . Accumulated Capital Outl ay Fund 16,734 . 1,451,2290 District No . 2 Operating Fund 12,244. .843,058 . Interest & Sinking Fund ?1951~ 6 ,513 . 49 ,4 19 . Interest & Sinking Fund 1958 109,451 . (1) 294 ,977 . Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund 2 ,186 . 9,402,219 . Distric t No . 3 Operating Fund 14,572 . 881,787 . Interest & Sinking Fund (1951) 156 ,645 . ( 1) 531 ,609 . Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund 10,648 . 1 0 ,225,425 . District No. 5 Op erat ing Fund 5,240 . 264. ,927 . Interest & Sinking Fund ( 1951) 6,851 . 19,736 .~ Accumula ted Capital Outlay Fund 2,536. 1 ,092,057 . Facilities Revolving Fund District No . 6 Opera.ting 10,5 710 2 15,662 . Interest & Sinking Fund (1951) 3,764 . 29 ,682 . Accumul ate d Cap ital Ou t lay Fund 2,698 . 855 ,212 . District No . 7 Op erating 9,976 . 343, 362 . In te rest & Sinking Fund !19 5ll 6,774 . 9,889 . Interest & Sinkin g Fund 1962 7,920 . 88 ,790 . Inte rest & Sinking Fund 1970 7,080 . 227 ,353 . Accumulated Cap ital Outlay Fund 17,407 . 1,050 ,847 . Construc tion 49 ,34.7 . 516,681 . Fixed Obligation 6,007 . Facilities Revolv in g Fund 22 ,256 . 373,351 . Di stric t No . 8 Operating 3,282 . District No. 11 Operating 9 ,443. 294.·, 009 0 1terest & Sinking Fund ~19 5 1~ 5,734. 9 ,889 . ~terest & Sinking Fund 1958 25,459. (1) 39,?f09 . Accumul ated Capit~l Outlay Fund 3.2535. 2.2022 ~569 , -f'f f, '],., 3 3 , 'f-'11 , ')?{ 1) Large cash balance for principal and in ere st payment due 7-1-7"2 /17 7" 9&:'3 Total $ 288,124 . 87' 702. 1 ,467 ,963. 855,302 . 55,932 . 404,428 . 9,404 ,405: 896,359 . 688,25 4 . 10' 236 ' 073 . 270,~67 . 26,58 7 . l_,094·,593 . 226,233 . 33,446 . 857,910 . 353,338 . 16 ,663. 96,710 . 234,433. l_,068 ,254 .· 566,028 . . 6,007 . 395,607 . 3,282 . 303 ,45 2 . 15,623. 64,868 . 2,029,104 . 3 J.., o'f t., f'l 7 Joo/" _ .... .. July 3, 1972 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR OCEAN WATERS OF CALIFORNIA In furtherance of legislative policy set forth in Section 13000 of Division 7 of the California Water Code (Stats. 1969, Chap. 482) ~nd pursuant to the authority contained in Section 13170 (Stats. 1971, Chap. 1288) the State Water· Resources Control Board hereby finds and declares that protection of the quality of the ocean waters fqr use and enjoyment by the people of the State requires control of the discharge of waste.!./to ocean watersl/ in accordance with the provisions contained herein. CHAPTER I. BENEFICIAL USES The beneficial uses of the -ocean waters of the State that shall be protected include industrial water supply, recreation, esthetic enjoyment, navigation, and preservation and enhance- ment of fish, wildlife, and other marine resources or preserves. CHAPTER II. WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES This chapter sets forth limits or levels of water quality characteristi.cs for ocean waters to ensure the reasonable pro- tection of beneficial uses ~nd the prevention of nuisance. The 31 discharge of waste shall not cause violation of these objectives.- A. Bacteriological Characteristics 1. Within a zone bounded by the shoreline and a distance of 1,000 feet from the shoreline or the 30-foot depth ~ontour,4 ~hiche~er is further from the shoreline, and in areas-outside this zone used for body-contact sports, the following bacteriological objectives shall be maintained throughout the water column: Samples of water from each sampling station shall have a most probable number of coliform organisms less than 1,000 per 100 ml (10 per ml}; provided that not more than 20 percent of the samples a.t any sampling station, in any 30- day period, may exceed 1,000 per 100 ml (10 per ml), and provided further that no single sample when verified by a repeat sample taken within 48 hours shall exceed 10,000 per 100 ml (100 per ml). Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Chapter II. A. 2. 4/ . At all areas-where shellfish may be harvested for human consumption, the following bacteriological objectives shall be maintained throughout the water column: The median total coliform concentration shall not exceed 70 per 100 ml, and not more than 10 percent of the samples shall exceed 230 per 100 ml. B. Physical Characteristics 1. Floating particulates and grease and oil shall not be visible. · 2. The concentration of grease and oil (hexane extractables) on tne· water surface shall not exceed 10 mg/m2 more than 50 percent of the time, nor 20 mg/m 2 more than 10 percent of the time.21 3. The concentration of floating particu·late_s of waste origin on the 2water surface shall not exceed 1.0 mg dry weight/m more than 50 percent of the time, nor 1.5 mg dry weight/m2 more than 10 percent of the time.V 4. The discharge of waste shall not cause esthetically undesirable discoloration of the ocean surface. 5. The transmittance of natural light shall not be significantly~/ reduced at a~y point outside the initial dilution zone.11 6. The rate of deposition of inert solids and the characteristics of inert solids in ocean sediments shall not be changed such that benthic communities are degraded.Bl c. Chemical Characteristics 1. The dissolved oxygen concentration2./ shall not at any time be depressed more than 10 percent from that which occurs naturally. 2. The pH-~/ shall not be changed at any time more than 0.2 unit~ from that which occurs naturally. -2- Water Quality Control Plan. Ocean Waters of California Chapter II. c . . . . 3. 4. 5. 6. The dissolved sulfide concentration of wat7rs in and near sediments shall not be significantly.§. increased above that present under natural conditions. The concentration of substances set forth in Chapter IV, Table B,in marine sediments shall not be signi- ficantiy§./ increased above that present under natural conditions. The concentration of organic ·materials in marine sedi- ments shall ·not be increased above that which would degrad~ marine life. Nutrient materials shall not cause objectionable aquatic growths or degrade.~/ indigenous biota. D. Biological Characteristics 1. 2. Marine communities, including vertebrate, inverte- brate, and plant species, shall not be degraded • .§./ The natural taste, odor, and color of fish, shellfish, or other mari~e resources used for human consumption shall not be altered. E. Toxicity Characteristics 1. The final toxicity ·concentration shall not exceed 0.05 toxicity units.10/ F. Radioactivity 1. Radioactivity shall not exceed the limits specified in Title 17, Chapter 5, Subchapter 4, Group 3, Article 3, Section 30269 of the California Administrative Code. -3- Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California CHAPTER III. .. PRINCIPLES FOR MANAGEMENT OF WASTE DISCHARGES TO THE OCEAN A. Waste management systems that discharge to the ocean must be designed and operated in a manner that will maintain the indigenous marine life and a healthy and diverse marine community. B. Waste discharged to the ocean must be essentially free 111 of: c. D. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. material that is floatable or will become floatable upon discharge, settleable material or substances that form sediments which degrades/ benthic communities or other aquatic life, substances toxic to marine life due to increases in concentrations in marine waters or sediments, substances that significantly decrease the natural light to benthic communities and other marine life, and materials that result in esthetically undesir- able discoloration of the ocean surface. Ocean outfalls and diffusion slstems must be designed to achieve rapid initial dilution.=1/ and effective disper- sion to minimize concentrations of substances not removed by treatment. Location of waste discharges must be determined after a detailed assessment of the oceanographic characteristics and current patterns to assure that: 1. pathogenic organisms and viruses are not present in areas where shellfish are har- vested for human consumption or in areas used for swimming or other body-contact sports,13/ -4- . Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Chapter III. D. 2. natural water quality conditions are not altered in areas designated as being of special biological significance, and 3. maximum protection is provided to the marine environment. CHAPTER IV. QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR WASTE DISCHARGES (EFFLUENT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS) This chapter sets forth the quality requirements for waste discharges to the ocean.l/ · TABLE A Grease ahd Oil Unit of measurement (hexane extractables) Floating Particulates mg/l mg/l mg/l ml/l JTU (dry weight) Suspended Solids Settleable Solids Turbidity pH units -5- Concentration not to be exc~eded more than: 50% of time 10. 1.0 50. 0.1 50. 10% of time 15. 2.0 75. 0.2 75. within limits of 6.0 to 9.0 at all times. ·Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Chapter IV. TABLE B Uni·t of measurement Arsenic Cadmium Total Chromium Copper .Lead Mercury Nickel Silver Zinc Cyanide Phenolic Compounds Total Chlorine Residual Ammonia (expressed as nitrogen) Total Identifiable 141 Chlorinated Hydrocarbons~ . . c t. 10/ Toxicity oncentra ion~ Radioactivity mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l I]lg/l mg/l rng/l mg/l mg/l mg/l tu CHAPTER V. Subject To Revision Concentration not to be exceeded more than: 50% of time 10% of time 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 ·0.005 0.01 0.2 0.3 0.1 ·O. 2 0.001 0.002 0.1 0.2 0.02 0.04 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1. 0. 2.0 40. 60. 0.002 0.004 1.5 2.0 not to exceed the limits specified in Title 17, Chapter 5, Subchapter 4, Group 3, Article 5, Section 30285 and 30287 of the California Administrative Code. DISCHARGE PROHIBITIONS A. Hazardous Substances The discharge of any radiological, chemica~, or biological warfare agent or nigh-level radioactive waste into the ocean is prohibited. B. Areas of Special Biological Significance Waste shall be discharged a sufficient distance from areas designated as being of special biological significance to assure maintenance of natural water quality conditions in these areas. -6- Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Chapter v. c. Sludge The discharge of municipal and industrial waste sludge and sludge digester supernatant directly to the ocean, o~ into a waste stream that discharges to the ocean without further treatment, shall be prohibited. D. By-Passing The by-passing of untreated waste to the ocean shall be prohibited. CHAPTER VI. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Effective Date This plan is in effect as of the date of adoption by the State Water Resources Control Board. Th~ less restrictive provisions of each of the extant policies and plans ·for ·the ocean shall be void and superseded by all applicable provisions of this plan. · B. Mass· Emission Rates In addition to receiving water objectives and· efflue.nt quality requirements, waste discharge requirements shall set forth the Maximum Allowable Daily Mass Emission Rate and the Maximum Allowable Monthly Mass Emission Rate for each effluent quality constituent included in the waste discharge requirements. The Maximum Allowable Daily Mass Emission Rate for each constituent shall be calculated from the total waste flow occur- ring each specific day and the concentration specified in waste discharge requirements as that not to be exceeded more than 10 percent of the time. The mass emission rate of the discharge during any 24-hour period shall not exceed the Maximum Allowable Daily Mass Emission Rate. The Maximum Allowable Monthly Mass Emission Rate for each constituent shall be calculated from the total waste flow occurring in each specific month and the concentration specified in waste discharge requirements as that not to be exceeded more than 50· percent of the time. The mass emission rate of the dis- charge during any monthly period shall not exceed the Maximum . Allowable Monthly Mass Emission Rate. -7- I Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Chapter VI. c. Technical Reports Persons responsible for existing waste discharges to the ocean shall be required by the Regional Board. to submi·t a technical report prior to January 15, 1973. The technical report shall include but not be limited to: 1. A proposed program of improvement of waste treatment facilities necessary to assure compliance with all provisions of t~is plan. 2. A proposed time schedule for construction of necessary facilities •. 3. Ari estimate of the capi.tal cost of necessary facilities. 4. Any request, with supporting evidence, for less restrictive effluent quality requirements. 5. An analysis of all other factors· deemed necessary by the Regional Board to permit.establishment of waste discharge requirements. · · For discharges exceeding 40 mgd the technical report shall include a correlation of the effluent quality requirements for the parameters set forth in Chapter IV, Table A, with all water quality objectives set forth in Chapter II, and with all effluent qualitX requirements set forth in Chapter IV, Table B. D. Waste Discharge Requirements The Regional Boards may establish more restrictive water quality objectives and effluent quality requirements than those set forth in this plan as necessary for the protection of beneficial uses of the ocean. Effluent quality requirements shall not be less restrictive than those set forth in Chapter IV, Table B, of this plan. Effluent quality requirements may be less restrictive than those set forth in Chapter IV, Table A, of this plan provided the Regional Board finds that the discharge shall comply with all water quality objectives set forth in Chapte.r II and all effluent quality requirements set forth in Chapter IV, Table B. Less restrictive effluent quality requirements shall be effective only upon approval by the State Board. -8- I Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Chapter VI. E" Revision of Waste Discharge Requirements The Regional Board shall revise the waste discharge requirements for existing discharges as necessary to achieve compliance with this plan and shall also establish a time schedule for compliance. Prior to adoption, but not later than April 15, 1973, the Regional Board shall submit to the State Board all technical reports provided by the waste dis- chargers, proposed waste discharge requirements, and time schedules for compliance for all discharges to the ocean. F. State Board Review of Time Schedules The State Board shall review proposed time ~chedules for all municipal discharges throughout the State and shall recommend to the Regional Boards specific schedules to assure the maximum benefit from, and· equitable distribution of, available state and iederal grant funds. G. Monitoring Program The Regional Board shall require dischargers to conduct self-monitoring programs and submit reports necessary to determine compliance with the waste discharge requirements. Such monitoring programs shall comply with Guidelines for Monitoring the Effects of Waste Discharges on the Ocean which shall be issued by the Executive Officer of the State Board. H. Areas of Special Biological Signiflcance Areas of special biological significance shall be desig- nated by the State Board after a publ.ic hearing by the Regional Board and review of i~s ~ecommendations. -9- Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California FOOTNOTES ~/ This plan is not applicable to vessel wastes, the con- trol of dredging, or the disposal of· dredging spoil. Provisions regulating the thermal aspects of waste dis- charged to the ocean are ·set forth in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California dated May 18, 1972. ll Ocean waters are waters of the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the California coast outside of enclosed bays, estuaries, and coastal lagoons. Enclosed bays are indentations along the coast which enclose an area of oceanic water within distinct head- lands or harbor works. Enclosed bays include all bays where the narrowest distance between headlands or outer- most harbor works is less than 75 percent of the greatest dimension of the enclosed portion of the bay. This definition includes but is not limited to: Humboldt Bay, Bodega Harbor, Tamales Bay, Drakes Esterc:>., Sa,n Francisco Bay, Carmel Bay, Morro Bay, Los Angeles Harbor, Upper and Lower Newport Bay, Mission Bay, and San D~ego Bay. Estuaries and coastal lagoons are waters at the mouths of streams which serve as mixing zones for fresh and ocean waters during a major portion of the year. Mouths of streams which are temporarily separated from the ocean by sandbars shall be considered as estuaries. Estuarine waters will generally be considered to extend from a bay or the open ocean to the upstream limit of tidal action but may be considered to extend seaward if significant mixing of fresh· and salt water occurs in the open coastal waters. The waters described by this definition include but are not limited to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta as defined by Section 12220 of the California Water Code, Suisun Bay, Carquinez Strait downstream to Carquinez Bridge, and appropriate areas of the Smith, Klamath, Mad, Eel, _Noya, and Russian Rivers. -10- ~Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Footnotes .. l/ The Water Quality Objectives and Effluent Quality Requirements are defined by a statistical distribution when appropriate. This method recogni·zes the normally occurring variations in treatment efficiency and samp- ling and analytical techniques and does not condone poor operating practices. The 50 percentile va~ue (concen- tration not to be exceeded more than 50 percent of the time) and 90 percentile value (concentration not to be exceeded more than 10 percent of the time) establish an acceptable distribution for any consecutive 30-day period. The distribution of actual sampling data for any consecu- tive 30-day period shall not have any percentile value exceeding that of the acceptable distribution. 4/ Body-contact sports areas outside the shoreline zone set forth in Chapter II. A.l. and all shellfishing areas shall be determined by the Regional Board on an individu_al basis. ~ Surface samples shall be collected from stations repre- sentative of the area of maximum probable impact. E./ The mean of sampling results for any consecutive 30-day period must be within one (1) standard deviation of the mean determined for natural levels for the same period. · 21 Initial Dilution Zone is the volume of water near the point of discharge within which the waste immediately.mixes with ocean water due to the momentum of the waste discharge and the difference in density between the waste and the receiving water. 8/ Degradation ·shall be determined by analysis of the effects of waste discharge on species·diversity, population density, growth anomalies, debility, or supplanting of normal species by undesirable plant and animal species. 2_/ Compliance with water quality objectives shall be determined from samples collected at stations representative of the area within the waste field where initial· dilution is com- pleted. The 10 percent depression of dissolved oxygen may be det~rmined after allowance for.effects of induced upwelling. -11- J Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Footnotes 10/ This parameter shall be used to measure the acceptability of waters for supporting a healthy marine biota until improved methods are developed to evaluate biological response. a. Toxicity Concentration (Tc) Expressed in·Toxicity Units (tu) 100 . Tc (tu) = 96 h TLmwo -r. /C b. Median Tolerance Limit (TLm%) The TLm shall be determined by static or continuous flow bioassay techniques using standard test species. If specific identifiable substances in wastewater can be demonstrated by the discharger as being rapidly rendered harmless upon discharge to the marine environment, the TLm may be determined after the test samples are adjusted to remove the influence of those substances. When it is not possible to measure the 96-hr. TLm due to greater than 50 per- cent survival of the test species in 100 percent waste, the toxicity con- centration shall be calculated by the expression: Tc (tu) = log (100 -S) 1.7 S = percentage survival in 100% waste. c. Toxicity Emission Rate (TER) Is the product of the effluent Toxicity Concentration (Tc) and the waste flow rate expressed as mgd. TER (tu.mgd) = Tc (tu) x Waste Flow Rate (mgd) -12- Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California Footnotes d. Final Toxicity Concentration FTC (tu) (FTc) expressed in toxicity -units (tu) shall be determined by a bioassay and estimated by the following calculations: = Toxicity Emission Rate Initial Dilution Water + Waste Flow TER = Qd + Qw e. Initial Dilution Water (Qd) Shall be calculated as the product of estimated current velocity, effective diffuser length normal to the pre- vailing current, and effective mixing depth. 11/ Essentially free means the specific· limitations set forth in Chapter IV of this plan. 12/ Diffusion systems should provide an initial dl.lution of wastewater with seawater exceeding 100 to 1 at least 50 percent of the.time, and exceeding 80 to 1 at least 90 percent of the time. If a waste is essentially identical tG natural seawater, less restrictive dilution require- ments may be permitted by the Regional Board. 13/ Waste that contains pathogenic organisms or viruses should be discharged a sufficient distance from shellfishing and body-contact sports areas to maintain applicable bacterio- logical standards without disinfection. Where conditions are such that an adequate distance cannot be attained, reliable disinfection in conjunction with a reasonable separation of the discharge point from the area of use must be provided. Consideration should be given to disinfection procedures that do not increase effluent toxicity and that constitute the least environmental and human hazard in their production, transport, and utilization. _14/ Total Identifiable Chlorinated Hydrocarbons shall be mea- sured by summing the individual concentrations of DDT, DDD, DDE, aldrin, BHC, chlordane, endrin, heptachlor, lindane, dieldrin, polychlorinated biphenyls, and other identifiable chlorinated hydrocarbons. -13- •• ~ \).,tC\"/.a.; REPORT OF THE JOI UT CHA IRMAN ·1. Call meeting of the Executive Committee for 5:30 p.m., Tuesday, July 25th. Invite Directors --__--:-c-=~ '----~denmal, or Lacayo an~~~ .·Election of Joint Chairman Finnell. Presentation of padd le. Election of Vice Joint Chairman Davis. Herrin moved applause for those who just stepped down . Called Executive Committee meeting -see above. ·. J~l y 1 ') ..L. L. ,. 1 97 2 #1 0 Report of Ge n e r a l Ma nager: $1.4 mill i o n earned on funds inve s ted i n government securities during t he past ye a r. Used f or con s truc t ion , etc. Dur i ng the p ast 13 years have acc umu l a t ed ear nings to $9 .5 mi llio n . New s tand ards n o w a p pro v ed by SWRC B (Water q ua l ity plan for oceans of Calif orn i a). Had three different hearin gs t h i s past year on proposed s tandard s b u t were rather sur p rised when regula t ions were adopted on J u l y 6th . Had a n t icipated tha t r egulations would be quite similar to what had b een propo sed as of Ma r ch 14th; how ever, what they did adopt , i n many areas, was v e r y r estrictive , par t i cu larly in heavy meta l s and h i ghly t o xi c mat e ria l s. .Regu lations , in some a r eas ,far exceed what we th o u ght i t wo ul d be . We were not awar e of what happ e n ed a t last hear ing i n . Ap ril. The co n cern of the Distric ts i s how we can comply with r egulat i o n s and wh at can we do . HHH: Re ported that he j u st r e ceived regulat io ns Mond ay and hadn 't talked t o staff or Specia l comm i ttee y et . The plan outlined last month seems t o be the prop er appro a ch--Activated Sludge at Plant 1 this year and cont i nue o n at Plant 2 , as requi red. Only effect of r equirements is t hat t he treat me nt wo r ks at Plant 2 would be of a h i g h er qu a lity than they would have been other wise . Highlig hts of requirements: Waste d i schar ge requir ement s we re brought down for Orange County Water Dis t rict De sal inz a tion Plant. May no t be a cceptab le to Distric ts ' effluent r line because of heavy metals--copper a nd nicho l. Would exceed copper limi t by ov e r four times; nicho l _limi t wo u l d just about meet their d i scharge requ ir em ents . Committee wo rkin g on thi s shoul d look at these two met~ls a nd remainde r of heavy metals . F our heavy metals in Districts ' own wastewater: calcium, lead , silve r and chr om ium . Calcium -can handl e with so u r ce contro l. Lead -So u rce c ontro l a n d t r eat ment may handle t h e p r oblem ; bor der line. Si l ver -OK with sour ce control and t r eatment ; treatment basic method. Chromium -Next t o imposs ible to meet t his limit . 40 times more restrictive than the r equir em ent talked a b out at the Marc h meeting . Gr ease r equirement from 2 5 parts to 1 0 parts per million . Al most f o rc es a bio -chemi cal type tre a tment . St ate has a sked that the techn ical report on how the Districts wi l l meet r equ ireme n ts be received by January 31 , 1 973 , and Regional Boar ds have t o s ubmit by April 15. Gr ise t as ked ho w t hi s compares ~i th congr es s i ona l legislation . HHH: Said c ongre s sion al leg islation no more restr ictive and possibly less re s t r ictive . Federal legis l at i o n haven't i nd icated levels of heavy metals y et . Don't kno w wh y t his took ·p~ace except that a profes so r from Utah was hired t o review h e arings and giv e h i s report to committee of .staff and the State Boar d. Any possibility of modifying th is bill? Ques tion re f e~r ed to Nissan : He stated that the General Counse l for L.A. p . 2 Sanitation Tii.stricts had called a nd asked what position the Board of Director s would take t o get another heari ng on thes e requirements as t h ey a re totally new . LA wo uld have to spend $300-600 mi llion in the next e i g h t years. Districts and City Atto rney of City of LA should get ~gethe r and ge t some type of review or heari ng or something . Our est imate is $85 mil l ion over a 6-8 year period. Wou ld like to know what the attitude o f the Boards i s on pursuing @N review or revision if possible . If we fi nd an avenue of approa ch, it will take some e xper t test i mony to do it . Miller said this i s a cris is and ought to have a stra tegy session . Only openi ng is some type of polit i cal approach. Don 1 t know how hard we are hit y e t b u t har der than we anticipat ed . This act ion taken and standards set witho ut basis of any sound k nowledge. "Go i ng to have water better than drinkin g wa t er " is only ta.s is for act ion. Just mentioned that we needed eight more JWS's if e a ch one coul d s a v e $9 mi llion , would give us about wha t we n eed . Gre en asked if there had been any c ontact with county legis l ators & was auwer ed no . Just sai d had met with Burke & Carpenter and be~n in contact with other s in writing , fo l lo wed up with Cha i rman of State Water Bo ard a nd made ext ensive contact s i n Wa shington. Gris et asked i f this was a surprise to Fred , then who did know any thing about it . FAH mentioned that Vice Ch a irman Dibble of State Bo a rd was at LA mee ting whe r e th i s wa s adopted and pr esented an ame ndme nt to these requir ements wh ich wa s very much in line with what we were p r oposing but was no t adopted. F i n ne l l moved that a committee be appointed to work wi th the City of LA a nd LA County t o attempt to get a rehearing on the se regu lations . An a men d ment to this mo tion was made to keep the cities informed by g ivi ng themttatus rep o rts on what is happ eni ng with regard to g ett ing a r e h ear ing . The mo tion was seconded and car ri ed . Niss o n s t ated at this t i me we need to kn ow that the Board wants to p r oceed to r ec tify the damage. Should be ab le to present an idea of approac h to go a b out i t by next meet i ng. It was a s ked if this is a leg is lat i ve act and Nisson answered it was u nd er the Porter-Colo g ne Act. FAH stated that the requirements were ado pted as a Wa ter Qua lity Plan by t he Stat e Water Rescurces ·Contro l Board and wo u ld have to work wit h t h em and Winn Adams. Was me n tioned that the Gener a l Manager already has authority to trave l within the State of California wi t h r egard t o meetings necessary to discu ss thi s . Mille r suggested tha t we invo l ve Lindsley Parsons t o allow h i m to work wi th u s because he has been one of the most effectiv e memb ers being a repr esentative o f SCC WR PA . It was moved a nd seconded that Lindsley Parsons be as k e d to work with us . It was suggested t hat Bake r be asked als o and Finnell s aid he wou l d be talk i ng to him about i t. p . 3 FAH stated t hat he propo ses to have a session sponsored jointly b y the Districts a nd Orange County Chamber of Commerce to adv ise Committee and industry . Will be inv iting Dick Bueermann to comment o n regulations-. Hopefully, wi ll take p l a ce in the nex t couple weeks . Had previously been advising i ndust ries that they were complying and n ow will have to go back and advis e th em they a re not c omp l ying . #1 3 Ex ec ut i ve Commi ttee Report : Executiv e Comm it tee met on Jun e 27 a nd No. 1 item wa s John Ca r ollo Engineers ' d esign of s e condar y treatment facilities . An other meeting was held t h is d ate (7/12) and met with Caro llo engineers who submitted a new propos al not to e xceed $700,000. The man-hours i n the proposal were presented be cause a numb er of Direct or s had asked for this break down . 36,000 Man -ho ur s ma ximum .. Possible it would not take that long . Executive Commit tee recomme nds that Board accepts John Carol lo Engineers pr oposal, t aking into cons ideration the critical timing for federal grants . It was mqved and sec onded to approve agreement with John Carollo Engineers fo r 4 .4% of the cons truction cost. It was asked if these new requirements would aff ect this p roposal and Harvey Hunt answered no , this will be the fi rst stage. Onl y t hing affected is what we do at Plant 2 later . Duke stated he wanted to register a minori ty op inion here disagreeing with rec ommendation f or $700,000 outlay for John Carollo Engineers . Although J C had done the job for the County, he personally felt that a capital outlay for engineering should be more closely scrutinized by the Board . No. 1 i s t h at we have not looked into other possib ilities of less expensive work. Secondly, t hat on that basis we s h ould attempt , as a Board , to bring about a future cost savings for the County Sanitat io n Districts . If we are talkin g about such a long-ter m investment on this and other projects , we should go out for b id .on other engineer i ng jobs to show us what they can do. It was then mentioned that at both Exec . Comm . meetings it was the consensus o f th e Co mmittee that we should, at an appropriate time , rev iew oth er engineering d esig n services but felt that this proposal ti~d to mo st i mportant proj ect the Dis tricts ha v e had and it wa s not t he mos t op portune time , from the Districts' s tandpo int , to hav e other design engin eers co ntac ted. #1 3 -JWS report on CORF budget #19 -Orange Co . Water District Agreeme nt Mcinnis st a ted that two mo nth s ago he reported on lack of progress wit h Wa ter Fac tory a n d had aske d staff to g et a dditional information, which they have d one, but have n 't complet ely diges t ed informat ion yet. Have suggest ed to staff tha t they go out t o local areas such as ~~x i ~g~ golf · courses and farm ing o p erations and a sk if the y wo uld be wil l i ng to purchase gal lons of secondary wa ter and how much they wo uld pay for it .. Ho pe during the next month and befor e Au gust meet i ng to be able to make fi rm report to Boards and giv e a time tabl e . Wou l d like to as k for one more g r ant paym ent while working out o"t her problems on agreeme nt . In trod uc ed new Direct o r F rank Sales aft er item 21 . #38 -Moved and s econded to defer item re Dona l d J . S c h ol z Co mpany agreement. p. 4 #56 -Miller though t Change Order amount should be c hanged to $2 ,500 which would include about 75% of all change orders. It wa s mov e d and sec o nded that r esolution be changed to inc l ude $2 ,500 maximum fo r change orders to be approved b y General Manage r . Resolution was adopted . #57 -Niss on 's report re Sunflower Intercept or easement . Sa2.d will qui t - claim back to them the old e aseme n t. Paper work underway at this time. Before Item 6 2 F i nne ll cal led a rec es s a t 8:50 and reconvened at 8 :54 . #62 -Anaheim Hills, I n c. Sm i th reported that Committee studied annexation fees and ha d quite a lot of discussion on wh ether the y anuld be on tax assessme nt o r not ; and if it would be fair if someone purchased prop erty fro m s@m~~ perso n who sold the first year, as t h ey would pay muc h g reat er portio n of a ss essment than if sold later; so thou ght i t wouldn 't be fa ir . Suggest e d they d iscus s th i s further wit h Develo per re gar ding pos sib i l i ty of paying the f ive equal payments ~t 6% by us i ng a bonding p roc ess. Poss i bly 1 /2 % wou l d p ay for bonds. Comm i ttee f e lt maybe should .c ons i d er 5 -1 /2 % interest r ate to avoid mak ing it unfa i r by p utt i ng it on tax b ill fo r a ss essments. Haven't receiv ed letter fro m g rant cor poration on that so referre d q ues tion to representative at meeting . · He answer ed that there were a number of fine details to be worked out o n staff level. He ind icat ed that he was prepar ed to p os t a d ecreasing type bond for five y ears i n the am o u n t of the total anne x ation fee fo r t otal acres. Details such a s interest rate wo uld l ike t o wo rk out at a b out 1/2 to 3/4 %. Ha ve chec ked with bond counc i l and corporat i on fi nance people and the y indicated we re get ting maximum o f X!X 4 -1 /2 to 4-3/4%. Don Smith re stated that Co mm itte e didn 't come t o a de finite dec ision o n r ecommending the 5-1/2 % or whatever, but suggested they h ave anothe r meeting after they find out mor e details . J ust sa i d that inasmu c h as we wer e n 't far enough a l ong for c h ange in annexatio n m d connec tion f ees on agend a , wa s wond e r ing about p utting rec o mmendation i n to e ffec t a fter tha t rec omm e ndatio n s o they know what they a r e faced wi th . Finnell asked General Counsel i f change in anne xation pol i cy that answer8d , yes it could be done. such a hurry. we could estab l is h c o nne ction fee and night wi thout p u b lic hear i ng , and he Sm it h o bjected to c onsid ering it in Nisson sugg ested tha t a Moti o n be ma de to a gree i n pr inciple to go to LAFC and t hen to k e e p f ees e x actly the s ame a s an~exa tion fees when annexation fi n al l y approved . Mi l ler said should appr ove subje ct t o whatever a pproval i s g i ve n by Boar d at a late r date . p. 5 Smith moved to ap prove in principle payment of annexation fees in five equal payments b y Anaheim Hills c6nditioned u pon the Board 's establishment of new fee s and that this annexation be subject to those fees. Niss on r estated motion as approvi ng Anaheim Hi lls ann exat io n subject to fees for annexation to be paid over a period of five years with interest to be set after LA FC recommendations are determined . Mo tion was seconded and carried. #63 -Ordinance No. 203 FAH reviewed item and said that proposed ordinance is an amendment to existing ordinance that covers the industrial discharges. What is being propos ed es tablishes a dwelling char ge at $100 with the ability o f the Board annually to increase the dwel ling char ge by $5. Is not mandatory but gives the ability. Item 2 is a charge of $50 per thousand squar e feet for commercial. Finnell asked if industrial blildings would be excluded b ecause handled under industrial waste ordinance and question was referred to PGB. PGB said ordinance was similar to Dist. 5 ordinance which has work ed out very well . Howe ver, they do not pay any connect ion charge unless assessed valuatio n is so low that connection charge is warr anted under existing ordinance. If we didn 't have to charge for industrial and commercial use , they wo uld pay nothing if their a ss essed val uation were hi gh enough . Culver asked if this is in addition to a City 's or District 's connect i on fee and how is it g oing to be contro ll ed . Yes , is in addition and informa- tion will go out to cities. In addition to Special Districts ' charges and annexation fees also . Wedaa s tated that mod i fication of annexation fees was also d i scussed and was acted upon in same manner . Just pointed out that when he presented sample documents to his staff , City Manager asked that he make sure before Board took any action that staff of Citie s had a chance to review it with staff here and see what/the effect would be on their particul ar city . They were interested also in seeing what th e charges would be for commercial and i nd ustrial , and the . effect on them and a lso residential. Council wants more informa tion on this. Proposed that FAH hold a meeting and invite representatives from each of the cities within District 2 to get questions answered after information has been sent out . Finne ll would like to see what percentage of the r evenue is anticipated to be deri ved from industrial. Residential and co mme rcial will go a l l over the County. The industrial is not· competitve with other Districts within t he County . Don Ma r t i nson said al l of revenue calculation based st rictl y on residential . Did not includ e industrial . Nis san sa id he was leary of leaving out entirel y one typ e of connection s . p . 6 It was moved and sec ond ed t h at the staff be d i rected to forwa rd Ord i nan c e No . 203 to c it i e s and FAH hold a meeting t o a n swe r quest i o ns and g et comme n ts . Smith re q u e s ted t h a t the le t ter t ransmitting the i n formation go t o t h e Dir e ctor , wit h a cop y to the respective c it y. Wi nn said sho uld a lso i nc l u de in forma tion de a ling with propo sed reduction in annexation f e e s, shou l d tie them toge the r. He a s k ed i f redu c t i o n in annexat i on f ees wa s g o i ng t o be done by res olution and if s o , c ould re s olut i on be pr e p a.red and s e n t out wit h t h i s packag e a l so . FA H pointed o ut that t his wo uld br i n g about an u ltimate t ax reduction of 6 -1 0 ¢ by having this $1 00 d wellin g charge . Sm i t h csked i f all o f t h is coul d b e reviewed and re p ort l;>a ck at the next me eting , i f possible. #65 -Chino Grant ap p l ication f o r Sant a Ana Ri v e r I n terceptor wa s approv ed and have cop y o f cer t i fi ca t i o n f r om State. Wi l l get over $2 mil lio n wh ic h eventua l ly e nds up i n Or a n g e Co u nt y (80% o f $2 ,9 59 ,0 00) Me ans t hat · we can get a l arger pip e if we want to. Th i s is a ls o why it was i mp ortant that Pl a n n i n g Commission a p prove I mpa c t Statement, a n d i t pa i d off. Have a dead l ine of t wo mo re mont Ms to award cont ract to Sully Mille r . Will meet on the 2 5t h of Aug . wi th st a t e a n d fede r a l peop l e a n d ge t their thoughts on this , parti cul a r l y a s to whe ther o r not t he Bo ard can d e cide on what s i z e pip e t h ey want . Ho pe t o de c id e at next me e ti ng and maybe by then Ch i no Ba sin will ra ve r e c eived t h e i r fede r al g r ant o ffer so t hat they c a n p roc eed . The y hav e 1 0 day s p r ior to t h e dat e that we award c ontract to decid e whethe r th e y a r e i n o r not . Don 1 t think St ate wants the m out . Th i s i s o ne · o f t he maj or s e g me n t s of th e Ba s i n Plan that i s now b e i ng d e v e l ope d . I f they di d n ot have suffi cien t c apacit y i n this p i p e line , wo uld rui n t h e ir wh o l e p rogram. Just sa lin e wa ter wou ld come do wn to fa c i lities nw~x he r e . It was aske d i f there was any cha nc e that Rive rsid e mi gh t c h ang e the ir minds and want t o g o al o n g wit h t h i s and it wa s a n swe r ed that i t is d oubt fu l at t h is s t a g e . Ch ino Ba si n will rav e to enter i n t o agreements with thr ee or fo u r a genc ies u p str eam t o provdie c apaci ty in t his l i n e . Stat e is actual l y making them s hare wh at capaci ty th ey ha v e in thi s line , includ i ng s haring wi th Rive r sid e . Sm i th a sked if FAH t hought n e w r equir ements will a ff ect Chino Bas in on th is and FAH s a i d he didn 't think s o as long as they know r e quir e me nts a r e thr o ugho u t the stat e . Wi nn asked i f there was anybody aware t h a t t hi s se l ected g roup in Sa cramento wa s g oing t o b ring i n t h e pro fess or fro m Utah be f ore they did i t . FAH answered that the y to l d us t hey we r e g oin g t o h ire this consult a nt to r evi ew t he test i mony of the thr e e h earings a nd h ave him make r ecom- mendations a nd bo il the who l e thing do wn fo r t he St a te Bo ard and staff . Wi nn mention ed that ab o u t a ye a r and a half a go he me n tio ned that may b e we n eed s om eone in Wa s hi ngt on with a b i g e a r t o k now what i s g oing o n . Ap p ar e ntly we ~i~~xx weren 't eve n a wa r e of t h i s di ng-a -ling (s t rike t ha t)Ha and wha t was g oing t o happen . Ding -a -li ng 's n a me was Prof . Middlebrook . Win n aske d if we c ou ld ask Exe c utive Comm it tee t o review this matt er with po ssiblity of engaging a lobbyi st . p . 7 Finn ell mentioned that it was only our staff t hat e nv~sioned t he entire prob lem a n d ke pt right on top of it . Just said that our membership in CASA essentially provides us that lobbyist i n Sacramento a nd Washingt on ,.D .C. and this hearin g wa s a closed hearing where no one pew what was happening. The Chairman a pp oi nted t he f o JJo wi ng per son s to a Special Comm ittee to see about g ett in g a Stat e Board re-hearing ; Edward J ust Lorin Griset Norman Culver Jesse Davis Member of Board of Supervisors Joint Chairman-Finnell General Counsel and General Ma nager -Ex-officio me mber s