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