Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-03-13COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE CEUCLID OFF-RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWAYJ March 6, 1985 NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING DISTRICTS NOS. lJ 2J 3J SJ 6J 7J 11 & 13 WEDNESDAY) MARCH 13J 1985 -7:30 P.M. 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY) CALIFORNIA The next regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, will be held at the above hour and date. C).a~~ Se~tary Scheduled Upcoming Meetings: BUILDING COMMITTEE -Thursday, March 21st at 5:30 p.m. FISCAL POLICY COMMITTEE -Tuesday, March 26th at 4:30 p.m. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE -Wednesday, March 27th at· 5:30 p.m. DISTRICT NO. 3 -Thursday, April 4th at 7:~0 p.m. TELEPHONES: AREA CODE 714 540-2910 962-2411 March April May June July August I September October November December January February March COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of 0 RANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127 ·10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708 ~ (714)540:2910 (714) 962-2411 JOINT BOARD AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING DATES Joint Board Meetings Executive Committee Meetings Mar 13, 1985 Mar 27, 1985 Apr 10, 1985 Apr 24, 1985 May e, 1985 May 22, 1985 Jun 12, 1985 Jun 26, 1985 Jul 10, 1985 Jul 24, 1985 Aug 14, 1985 None Scheduled Sep 11, 1985 Sep 25, 1985 Oct 9, 1985 Oct '-6) 23, 1985 Nov 13, 1985 None Scheduled Dec 11, 1985 None Scheduled Jan 8, 1986 Jan 22, 1986 Feb 12, 1986 Feb 26, 1986 Mar 12, 1986 Mar 26, 1986 .\.._. -~1()ARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts Post Office Box 8127 -.._; ~ of Orange County, California t 0844 Ellis Avenue Fountai~ Valley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: JOINT BOARDS Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA MEETING DATE MARCH 13J 1985 -7:30 P.M. ANY DIRECTOR DESIRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON ANY AGENDA ITEMJ PLEASE CALL THE MANAGER OR APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENI HEAD. IN ADDITION} STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE AT /:00 P.M. IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING WEDNESDAY'S MEETING (1) Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation ( 2) Roll call (3) Appointment of Chairmen pro tern, if necessary (4) Recognition of persons who wish to be heard on specific agenda items (5) Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts, if any. See supplemental agenda (6) EACH DISTRICT ACTION: If no corrections or amendments are made, the following minutes will be deemed approved as mailed and be so ordered by the Chairman: District 1 -February 13, 1985, regular District 2 -February 13, 1985, regular District 3 -February 13, 1985, regular District 5 -February 13, 1985, regular District 6 -February 13, 1985, regular District 7 -February 13, 1985, regular District 11 -February 13, 1985, regular District 13 -February 13, 1985, regular (7) ALL DISTRICTS Reports of: , (a) Joint Chairman (b) General Manager (c) General Counsel (8) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of roll call vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts as follows: (Each Director shall be called only once and that vote will be regarded as the same for each District represented unless a Director expresses a desire to vote differently for any District.) See page(s) "A" and "B" ~ ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - Joint Working Capital Fund Self-Funded Insurance Funds DISTRICT NO. 1 DISTRICT NO. 2 DISTRICT NO. 3 DISTRICT NO. 5 ,.DISTRICT NO. 6 DISTRICT NO. 7 DISTRICT NO. 11 DISTRICT NO. 13 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT 2/06/85 $459,498.78 132,559.62 120,832.61 4,609.72 31,498.73 93,115.52 8,841. so 40.76 4,406.19 19,387.10 109,446.59 3,372.92 $987,610.04 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS NOS. 9 (a) THROUGH 9 ( t) (9) ALL DISTRICTS 2/20/85 $ 258, 158 •. 72 317,424.97 110,309.31 3,828.84 869.64 23,417.77 13,444.84 16,903.39 5,568.73 14,076.20 1,719,564.06 7,723.70 $2,491,290.17 All matters placed on the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member, or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All i terns remov·ed from the consent calendar.shall be considered in the regular order of business. Members of the public who wish to remove an i tern from the conse.nt calendar shall, upon recognition by the chair, state their name, address and designate by letter the item to be removed from the consent calendar. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Chairman will determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. Consideration of action to approve all agenda items appearing on the consent calendar not specifically removed from same. -2- 3/13/85 (9) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-42, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Digesters C & D at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-2, ano Rehabilitation of Digesters F & G at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-3, to Kiewit Pacific Company in the amount of $2,435,555.00. See page "C" (b) Consideration of motion authorizing the staff to complete the Entry Gates at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-125, under force account procedures for a total amount not to exceed $80,000.007 and authorizing the General Manager to solicit bids for the individual items of work in accordance with the Districts' procurement regulations, and to issue purchase order contracts for such items to the lowest responsible bidders. · (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-50, approving Amendment No. 1 to the Sludge Management Agreement with EKO Systems/Orange County, Ltd., providing for a time extention relative to obtaining a site for offsite reuse/disposal of Districts' sludge from February 15, 1985 to April 15, 1985. See page "D" (d) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Paving and Drainage at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-119, authorizing an addition or $5,405.24 to the contract with Frank Ultimo, General Building Contractor, for revisions, installation of additional drainage facilities and a deletion of soil amendment, and granting a time extension of seven calendar days for said additional work. See page "E" (e) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Lube Oil Storage Tank at Foster Pump Station, Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-129, authorizing an addition of $714.75 to the contract with Frank Ultimo, General Building Contractor, for removal of heat exchange equipment which interfered with the placement of the lube oil tank, and granting a time extension of two calendar days for completion of said additional work. See page "F" (f) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-44, approving plans and specifications for Installation of Replacement of Centrifuge with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (tentative bid date 4/23/85). See page "G" (g) (1) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue Change Order A to Purchase Order No. 17021 issued to Advanco Constructors, Inc. for Installation of Pressure Relief Bypass Around 10 Positive Displacement Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, increasing the total amount from $15,810.00 to $16,354.40 for additional work to install two valves supplied by the Districts at Pumps A, B and c. See page "H" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-45, accepting Installation of Pressure Relief Bypass Around 10 Positive Displacement ~ Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, as complete, and authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion. See page "I" -3- 3/13/85 (9) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (h) Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding purchase order contract for Installation of Flex-A-Tube Medium Bubble Diffusers and Appurtenant Equipment, Specification No. M-020, to Spiess Construction Company, Inc. in the total amount of $128,610.00. See page "J" .. ' (i) Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding purchase of Wood Shavings/Sawdust·, Specification No. P-073, to Gas Chem Products, Inc. for the price of $4.19 per yard, for a total amount not to exceed $63,000.00 plus tax for a one-year period commencing March 15, 1985. See page "K" (j} (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 1 to the Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint Works Wastewater Treatmenb and Disposal Facilities, providing for additional services to incorporate the findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study; to prepare an Executive Summary; and to respond to public commentary received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report See page "L" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-46, approving Addendum No. 1 to the Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, ~nc. for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal '4..1 Facili tie·s, providing for additional services to incorporate the findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study1 to prepare an Executive Summary; and to respond to public commentary received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, on an hourly-rate basis including labor, overhead and profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $15,770.00, increasing the total maximum compensation from $34,165.00 to an amount not to exceed $49,935.00. See page "M" (k) (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 5 to Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of the Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, providing fo~ preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual. See page "N" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-47, approving Addendum No. 5 to Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of the Hydraulic Reliablity Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, providing for preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus prof it, for an additional amount not to exceed $18,500.00, increasing the total maximum compensation from $664,231.00 plus actual cost for outside services not to exceed $25,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $682,731.00 plus said outside services. See page "O" '--' -4- 3/13/85 (9) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-48, approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Fountain Valley for right-of-way required in connection with street improvements and widening of Garfield Avenue east of Ward Street and future maintenance of said area adjacent to the Districts' property, at no cost to the City. See page "P" (m) Consideration of motion authorizing the Fiscal Policy Committee to solicit proposals from auditing firms to conduct the annual . financial audit of the Districts' books of account DISTRICT 1 (n) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-51-1, approving and authorizing execution of a License Agreement with the City of Santa Ana providing for use of District right-of-way for a bicycle trail adjacent to the Dyer Road Trunk Sewer extending northeasterly from Bristol Street to Talbert Avenue, at no cost to the City. See page "Q" DISTRICT 2 (o) (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-52-2, approving plans and specifications for the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, and City of Orange Street Improvements, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (tentative bid date 4/23/85). See page "R" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-53-2, approving and authorizing execution of a Pipeline License Agreement with The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company for right-of-way required in connection with construction of the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, and authorizing payment of $250.00 in accordance with the provisions of said Pipeline License Agreement. See page "S" {p) (1) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for the Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA, transmitting fixed prices for gravel and bedding under the Schedule of Prices, advising that the flow may not be interrupted during construction, transmitting the signed Cal Trans Permit and clarifying jacking requirements at the invert of the Ocean View Channel (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-54-2, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding a contract for the Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA, to Nuevo Camino Constructors Company in the amount of $5,090,467.00 See page "T" -5- 3/13/85 (9) DISTRICT 3 (q) (1) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, authorizing an adjustment of engineer's quantities for a total addition of ~ $5,184.88.to the contract with Copp Contracting, Inc. See page nun (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-55-3, accepting Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos B~ulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. See page "V" (r) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-56-3, approving plans and specifications for Manhole Repairs, Knott Avenue Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 3-29R, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (tentative bid date 4/23/85) See page "Wn DISTRICT 7 (s) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-57-7, approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Santa Ana for right-of-way required to extend Wilshire Avenue, westerly of Village Way, at no cost to the City. See page "X" (t) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-58-7, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation, rejecting all bids received for Manhole Repair, :Red Hill Avenue, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, C9.ntract No. 7-SMD-l, and referring to staff for re-evaluation and recommendation. See page "Y" ~ END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 10) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of action on items deleted from consent calendar, if any -6- 3/13/85 (11) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve staff Summary Financial Report for six-month period ending December 31, 1984 (Copy enclosed with agenda material) (12) ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Executive Committee and consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Committee's written report (13) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of action on items recommended by the Executive Committee: (a) Consideration of actions relative to the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities: (1) Consideration of motion to receive and file the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan for the 1983 Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities (2) Consideration of motion establishing April 10, 1985, at 7:30 p.m., in the Districts' administrative office, as the date, time and place for public hearing on said Draft EIR (3) Consideration of motion establishing May 1, 1985, as ~he final date for receipt of comments on said Draft EIR (b) Consideration of actions relative to modifications to incoming wastewater.diversion structure at Plant No. 1 re accommodation of pretreated Stringfellow wastewater: NOTE: See related items considered below under Agenda Item No. 14 (1) Consideration of motion approving modifications to incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 re accommodation of pretreated Stringfellow wastewater to allow processing of Sunflower Trunk flows at Plant No. 1 and diversion of entire Santa Ana River Trunk flows to Plant No. 2 . (2) Consideration of motion authorizing completion of the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, as an urgency measure, for a total amount not to exceed $65,000.00 (3) Consideration of motion ratifying action of the Executive Committee in directing staff to purchase the pumps and controls required for the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, in an amount not to exceed $30,000 (included in the above "$65,000 maximum) (4) Consideration of motion ratifying action of the Executive Committee in directing the staff to solicit informal quotes for installation of the pumps and controls for the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, and authorizing staff to award a contract for said work to the lowest bidder in an amount not to exceed $35,000 (included in above $65,000 maximum) -7- 3/13/85 (13) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (c) Consideration of action respectfully denying the requests of the Cities of Fountain Valley and Newport Beach for the Districts to pay for an independent consultant engaged by the cities to study the proposed Stringfellow plan. -(d) (1) Consideration of motion adopting a general policy of the Boards of Directors re Settlement of Claims for Damage to Local Sewer Manholes connected to Districts' trunk sewers, and directing that each respective District Board establish the payment amount to be allowed per manhole for said claims (2) DISTRICT 3 ONLY Consideration of motion directing the staff to prepare a status report on corrective action on deteriorated manholes and the Malcolm Pirnie study, and submit to the Board for consideration · at an adjourned meeting on April 4, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. to consider the amount for the manhole damage claims settlement policy. (14) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of actions relative to DOHS/SAWPA proposal to pretreat groundwater from the Stringfellow waste site for discharge into the Districts' sewerage system for further.treatment and disposal: (Copies of supporting documents enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (NOTE: Considered above under Agenda Item No. 13(b) is the incoming wastewater diversion facilities modifications at Treatment Plant No. 1 so that water from the Sunflower Interceptor can be pumped into Plant No. 1 to enable the diversion of the entire flow from the Santa Ana River Interceptor--which will convey the treated wastewater proposed to be discharged from the Stringfellow pretr.eatment plant--to the Districts' Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach to preclude it from flowing to the Orange County Water District's Water Factory 21. There would be no measurable impact on water quality at Plant No. 2 or the ocean discharge from the change.) (a} Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from the Orange County Water District dated February 27, 1985, supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2 (b} Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from the City of Costa Mesa dated February 25, 1985, expressing concern re the proposed acceptance of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater, and supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2 (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from Mayor Ben Nielsen, City of Fountain Valley, dated February 21, 1985, transmitting a copy of an independent report commissioned from George Kurilko, Ph.D., by the City, finding that the Stringfellow proposal is in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal requirements and should not have a significant impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the Districts' treatment plants, supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2: and requesting consideration of a supplemental trunk line monitoring program, and referring said request to the Executive Committee for study and report back · (AGENDA ITEM 14 CONTINUED ON PAGE 9) -8- 3/13/85 (14) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (d) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from Cypress County Water District, dated February 5, 1985, expressing concern over acceptance of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater through the Districts' sewerage system (e) Consideration of motion to receive and file Final Report, Environmental Review for Treated Waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Disposal Program, Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site, dated March 1985 prepared by the Department of Health Services, Health and Welfare Agency, State of California (f) Consideration of motion directing staff to authorize Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) to issue an industrial waste discharge permit to California Department of Health Services (OOHS) for discharge of pretreated groundwater from the Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site to the Districts' sewerage system, upon completion of the modifications to the incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 (SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142) (15) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of action on items recommended by the Select Committee to Advise the staff re proposed formation of District No. 14: (a) Report of Committee (b) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Report of the Select Committee to Advise the Staff dated March 1, 1985, re proposed formation of District No. 14 to serve the Irvine area (Copy enclosed with Directores' agenda material) (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-49, approving Agreement with the Irvine Ranch Water District re acquisition of a member agency interest in Sanitation Districts' facilities relating to the formation of County Sanitation District No. 14 (Scheduled for approval by IRWD Board on 3/11/85) See page "Z" (16) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, making a clarification relative to the bonus/liquidated damages (penalty) provisions of the contract to expedite completion of the job to ensure compliance with AQMD regulations (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-43, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation for Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, and authorizing the General Manager to award said contract to Fraser Corporation in the amount of $376,000.00 with provision for early completion bonus of $1,000.00 per day, not to exceed $24,000.00, and penalty assessment of $1,000.00 per day for late completion after May 31st, upon receipt of a Permit to Construct from AQMD. See page "AA" (17) ALL DISTRICTS Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any -9- 3/13/85 (18) DISTRICT l Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (19) DISTRICT 1 Consideration of motion to adjourn (20) DISTRICT 2 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (21) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn (21) DISTRICT 3 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (22) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to adjourn (23) DISTRICT 5 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (24) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn (25) DISTRICT 6 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda it~ms, if any (26) DISTRICT 6 Consideration of motion to adjourn (27) DISTRICT 11 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (28) DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion to adjourn (29) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of timetable for hearings to collect user fees on the property tax bill beginning in 1985-86: (a) Verbal staff report (b) Consideration of motion approving Preliminary Timetable foe Collection of District No. 13 User Fees on the property tax bills beginning in 1985-86. See page "BB" (30) DISTRICT 13 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (31) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of motion to adjourn -10- 3/13/85 (32) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of actions relative to the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4: (a) Verbal Report (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file written conunents received from the following relative to the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4: (1) Orange County Transit District dated February 12, 1985 (2) Orange County Water District dated February 20, 1985 (3) County of Orange EMA dated February 25, 1985 (4) City of Irvine dated February 25, 1985 (5) State of California, Office of Planning and Research dated February 28, 1985 (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file Main Street Trunk Sewer Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared by Courton and Associates (copy enclosed with agenda material) (d) Consideration of motion to receive and file Staff Summary of Negative Declaration (copy enclosed with agenda material) (e) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-59-7, approving the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, and authorizing filing of a Notice of Determination re said project See page "CC" (33) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of Resolution No. 85-60-7, approving plans and specifications for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (tentative bid date 4/23/85) See page "DD" (34) DISTRICT 7 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (35) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn -11- i. . II ~- '..,_/ BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts Post Office Box 81~ 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: of Orange County, California (1) (2) (3) (4) <?> (6) (7) JOINT BOARDS Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA MEETING DATE MARCH 13, 1985 -7:30 P.M. ANY DIRECTOR DESIRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON ANY AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE CALL THE MANAGER OR APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENI HEAD, IN ADDITION, STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE AT /:00 P,M, IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING WEDNESDAY'S MEETING , Pledge of Alleg'iance and Invocation · Roll call · ! Appoin~ent of Chairmen pro tem, if necessary Recognition of persons who wish to be heard on specific agenda items· -Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts, if any. See sappie1ae1ital ageru~a EACH DISTRICT ACTION: If no corrections or amendments are made, the following minutes will be deemed approved as mailed and be so ordered by the Chairman: District 1 -February 13, 1985, regular District 2 -February 13, 1985, regular District 3 -February 13, 1985, regular District 5 -February 13, 1985, regular District 6 -February 13, 1985, regular • District 7 -February 13, 1985, regular District 11 -February 13, 1985, regular District 13 -February 13, 1985, regular ALL DISTRICTS Reports of: (a) Joint Chairman (b) General Manager (c) General Counsel :1;_L C.\LL VOT~ ....... --- 1 (8). ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of roll call vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts as follows: (Each Director shall be called only once and that vote will be regarded as the same for each District represented unless a Director expresses a desire to vote differently for any District.) See page(s) "A" and "B" ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - Joint Working Capital Fund Self-Funded Insurance Funds DISTRICT NO. 1 DISTRICT NO. 2 DISTRICT NO. 3 DISTRICT NO. 5 DISTRICT NO. 6 DISTRICT NO. 7 DISTRICT NO. 11 DISTRICT NO. 13 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT 2/06/85 $459,498.78 132,559.62 120,832.61 4,609.72 31,498.73 93,115.52 8, 841. so 40.76 4,406.19 19,387.10 109,446.59 3,372.92 $987 ,610. 04 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS NOS. 9 (a) THROUGH 9 ( t) (9) ALL DISTRICTS 2/20/85 $ 258,158.72 317,424.97 110,309.31 3,828.84 869.64 23,417.77 13,444.84 16' 903. 39 5,56-8.73 14,076.20 1, 719' 564. 06 7,723.70 $2,491,290.17 All matters placed on the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member, or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered in the regular order of business. Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar shall, upon recognition by the chair, state their name, address and designate by letter the item to.be removed from the consent calendar. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Chairman ~ill determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. Roll Call Vote or ~st · ·1imous Ballot Consideration of action to approve all agenda items appearing on the consent calendar not specifically removed from same. ~ -2- 3/13/85 (9) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-42, to reeeive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Digesters C & D at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-2, and Rehabilitation of Digesters F & G at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-3, to Kiewit Pacific Company in the amount of $2,435,5~5.00. See page "C" (b) Consideration of motion authorizing the staff to complete the Entry Gates at Plant No. 2, Job N~. PW-125 (Rebid), under force account procedures for a total amount not to exceed $80,000.00, and authorizing the General Manager to solicit bids for the individual items of work in accordance with the Districts' procurement regulations, and to issue purchase order contracts for such items to the lowest responsible bidders. (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-50, approving Amendment No. 1 to the Sludge Management Agreement with EKO Systems/Orange County, Ltd., providing for a time extention relative to obtaining a site for offsite reuse/disposa~ of Districts' sludge from February 15, 1985 to April 15, 1985. See ·page "D" (d) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Paving and Drainage at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-119, authorizing an addition of $5,405.24 to the contract with Frank Ultimo, General Building Contractor, for revisions, installation of additional drainage facilities and a deletion of soil amendment, and granting a time extension of seven calendar days for said additional work. See page "E" (e) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Lube Oil Storage Tank at Foster Pump Station, Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-129, authorizing an addition of $714.75 to the contract with Frank Ultimo, General Building Contractor, for removal of heat exchange equipment which interfered with the placement of the lube oil tank, and granting a time extension of two calendar days for completion of said additional work. See page "F" (f) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-44, approving plans and specifications for Installation of Replacement of Centrifuge with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (tentative bid date 4/23/85). See page "G" (g) (1) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue Change Order A to Purchase Order No. 17021 issued to Advanco Constructors, Inc. for Installation of Pressure Relief Bypass Around 10 Positive Displacement Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, increasing the total amount from $15,810.00 to $16,354.40 for additional work to install two valves supplied by the Districts at Pumps A, B and c. See page "H" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-45, accepting Installation of Pressure Relief Bypass Around 10 Positive Displacement Primary Pumps, Specific?tion No. M-016, as complete, and authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion. See page "I" -3- 3/l.3/85 (9) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (h) Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding purchase order contract for Installation of Flex-A-Tube Medium Bubble Diffusers and Appurtenant Equipment, Specification No. M-020, to Spiess Construction Company, Inc. in the total amount of $128,610.00. See page "J" (i) Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding purchase of Wood Shavings/Sawdust, Specification No. P-073, to Gas Chem Products, Inc. for the price of $4.19 per yard, for a total amount not to exceed $63,000.00 plus tax for a one-year period commencing March 15, 1985. See page "K" (j) (l") Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 1 to the Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities, providing for additional services to incorporate the findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study1 to prepare an Executive Summary1 and to respond to public commentary received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report See page "L" (k) (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-46, approving Addendum No. 1 to the Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities, providing for additional services to incorporate the findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study1 to prepare an Executive Swmnary1 and to respond to public commentary received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, on an hourly-rate basis including labor, overhead and profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $15,770.00, increasing the total maximum compensation from $34,165.00 to an amount not to exceed $49,935.00. See page "M" (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 5 to Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of the Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, providing for preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual. See page "N" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-47, approving Addendum No. 5 to Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of the Hydraulic Reliablity Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, providing for preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $18,500.00, increasing the total maximum compensation from $664,231.00 plus actual cost for outside services not to exceed $25,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $682,731.00 plus said outside services. See page "O" -4- 3/13/85 (9) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-48, approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Fountain Valley for right-of-way required in connection with street improvements and widening of Garfield Avenue east of Ward Street and future maintenance of said area adjacent to the Districts' property, at no cost to the City. See page npn (m) Consideration of motion authorizing the Fiscal Policy Committee to solicit proposals from auditing firms to conduct the annual . financial audit of the Districts' books of account DISTRICT 1 (n) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-51-1, approving and authorizing execution of a License Agreement with the City of Santa Ana providing for use of District right-of-way for a bicycle trail adjacent to the Dyer Road Trunk Sewer extending northeasterly from Bristol Street to Talbert Avenue, at no cost to the City. See page "Q" DISTRICT 2 (o) (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-52-2, approving plans and specifications for the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, and City of Orange Street Improvements, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (tentative bid date 4/23/85). See page "R" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-53-2, approving and authorizing execution of a Pipeline License Agreement with The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company for right-of-way required in connection with construction of the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, and authorizing payment of $250.00 in accordance with the provisions of said Pipeline License Agreement. See page ·"S" (p) (1) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for the Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA, transmitting fixed prices for gravel and bedding under the Schedule of Prices, advising that the flow may not be interrupted during construction, transmitting the signed Cal Trans Permit and clarifying jacking requirements at the invert of the Ocean View Channel (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-54-2, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding a contract for the Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA, to Nuevo Camino Constructors Company in the amount of $5,090,467.00 See page "T" -5- 3/13/85 (9) DISTRICT 3 (q) (1) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, authorizing an adjustment of engineer's quantities for a total addition of $5,184.88.to the contract with Copp Contracting, Inc. See page "U" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-55-3, accepting Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos BQulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. See page "V" (r) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-56-3, approving plans and specifications for Manhole Repairs, Knott Avenue Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 3-29R, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids ·(tentative bid date 4/23/85) See page "W" DISTRICT 7 (s) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-57-7, approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Santa Ana for right-of-way required to extend Wilshire Avenue, westerly of Village Way, at no cost to the City. See page "X" (t) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-58-7, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation, rejecting all bids received for Manhole Repair, ·Red Hill Avenue, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, C~ntract No. 7-SMD-l, and referring to staff for re-evaluation and recommendation. See page "Y" END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 10) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of action on items deleted from consent calendar, if any -6- 3/13 /85 (11) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion to receive, f ile and approve staff Summary Financial Report for six-month period ending December 31, 1984 (Copy enclosed with agenda material) (12). ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Executive Committee and consideration of motion to recei ve, file and approve. the Cammi ttee' s written report (13) ALL DISTRICTS ~\,,! ( R,'f(l l>u1J c,'1 l.. I l J. 1"' v (J \ \, J" Consideration of action on items recommended by the Executive Committee: (a) Consideration of actions relative to the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities: (1) Consideration of motion to receive and file the Draft Env.ironmental Impact Report on the Master Plan for the 1983 Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities (2) Consideration of motion establishing April 10, 1985, at 7:30 p .m., in the Districts' administrative office, as the date, time and place for public hearing on said Draft EIR (3) Consideration of motion establishing May 1, 1985, as the final date for receipt of comments on said Draft EIR (b) Consideration of actions relative to modifications to incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. l re accommodation of pretreated Stringfellow wastewater: NOTE: See related items considered below under Agenda Item No. 14 (1) Consideration of motion approving modifications to incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. l re accommodation of pretreated Stringfellow wastewater to allow processing of Sunflower Trunk flows at Plant No. l and diversion of entire Santa Ana River Trunk flows to Plant No. 2 . (2) Consideration of motion authorizing completion of the SARI /Sunflower Diversion Structure Modi f ications, Job No . PW-142, as an urgency measure, for a total amount not to exceed $65,000.00 (3) Consideration of motion ratifying action of the Executi ve Conunittee in directing staff to purchase the pumps and controls required for the SARI /Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, in an amount not to exce ed $30,000 (included in the above $65,000 maximum) (4) Consideration of motion ratifying action of the Executi v e Committee in directi ng the staff to solicit 'informal quotes for installation of the pumps and controls for the SARI /Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, and authorizing staff to award a contract for said work to the lowest bidder in an amount not to exceed $35,000 (included in above $65,000 maximum) ITEM SOH (5 ) Consideration of mo tion to rece i ve and fi l e bid tabula tio n and SU l'l'tEMENTAl AGEN'O A r e commendation and a ut hori zing the staff t o i s sue a purchase o rder t o Dorado Enter pris es, Inc. in the amoun t of $1 5 ,7 21 .00 for i nstalla tio n o f t he pumps, pip ing a nd appurte n a nces fo r the SARI /Sunf l ower Diversion .St r uctur e Modificati o ns, Job No . PW-1 42. See page "I " -7- 3/13/85 (13) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (14) (c) Consideration of action respectfully denying the requests of the Cities of Fountain Valley and Newport Beach for the Districts to pay for an independent consultant eng~~edf by the cities to study the proposed Stringfellow plan. jJfL'-JV,Q.r.. ltlo (d) (1) Consideration of motion ad~pting a general policy of the Boards of Directors re Settlement of Claims for Damage to Local Sewer Manholes connected to Districts' trunk sewers, and directing that each respective District Board establish the payment amount to be allowed per manhole for said claims (2) DISTRICT 3 ONLY Consideration of motion directing the staff to prepare a status report on corrective action on deteriorated manholes and the Malcolm Pirnie study, and submit to the Board for consideration at an adjourned meeting on April 4, 1985, at~.m •. to consider the amount for the manhole damage claims settlement policy. ALL DISTRICTS l"}'l3v Consideration of actions relative to DOHS/SAWPA proposal to pretreat groundwater from the Stringfellow waste site for discharge into the Districts' sewerage system for further treatment and disposal: (Copies of supporting documents enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (NOTE: Considered above under Agenda Item No. 13(b) is the incoming wastewater diversion facilities modifications at Treatment Plant No. 1 so that water from the Sunflower Interceptor can be pumped into Plant No. 1 to enable the diversion of the entire flow from the Santa Ana River Interceptor--which will convey the treated wastewater proposed to be discharged from the Stringfellow pretreatment plant--to the Districts' Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach to preclude it from flowing to the Orange County Water District's Water Factory 21. There would be no measurable impact on water quality at Plant No. 2 or the ocean discharge from the change.) (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from the Orange County Water District dated February 27, 1985, supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2 (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from the City of Costa Mesa dated February 25, 1985, expressing concern re the proposed acceptance of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater, and supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2 (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from Mayor Ben Nielsen, City of Fountain Valley, dated February 21, 1985, transmitting a copy of an independent report commissioned from George Kurilko, Ph.D., by the City, finding that the Stringfellow proposal ~s in compliance with all applicable local, state and .federal requirements and should not have a significant impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the Districts' treatment plants, supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2~ and requesting consideration of a supplemental trunk line monitoring· program, and referring said request to the Executive Committee for study and report back (AGENDA ITEM 14 CONTINUED ON PAGE 9) -a- .:S/ .L.:S/H!> (14) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (d) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from Cypress County Water District,.dated February 5, 1985, expressing concern over acceptance of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater through the Districts' sewerage system (e) Consideration of motion to receive and file Final Report, Environmental Review for Treated Waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Disposal Program, S~ringfellow Hazardous Waste Site, dated March 1985 prepared by the Department of Health Services, Health and Welfare Agency, State of California · (f) Consideration of motion directing staff to authorize Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) to issue an industrial waste discharge permit to California Department of Health Services (DOHS) for discharge of pretreated groundwater from the Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site to the Districts' sewerage system, upon completion of the modifications to· the incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 (SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. l?W-142) )\-o 5~~ (15) ALL DISTRICTS l~ Roll Call Vote or <:ast Consideration of action on items recommended by the Select Conunittee to Advise the Staff re proposed formation of District No. 14: (a) Report of Committee (b) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Report of the Select Committee to Advise the Staff dated March 1, 1985, re proposed formation of District No. 14 to serve the Irvine area (Copy enclosed with Directores' agenda material) Unanimous Ballot ( C) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-49, approving Agreement with the Irvine Ranch Water District re acquisition of a member agency interest in Sanitation Districts' facilities relating to the formation of County Sanitation District No. 14 (Scheduled for approval by IRWD Board on 3/11/85) See page "Z" (16) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, making a clarification relative to the bonus/liquidated damages ·(penalty) provisions of the contract to expedite completion of the job to ensure compliance with AQMD regulations P.ol! ::all Vote or ~st (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 85-43, to receive and file bid t;nanimous Bat:ot tabulation and recommendation for Ferrous Chloride System for -~'\L...!-~L.Lt~ Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, and authorizing the _ M<:+·\ ei...i.) . Jer .. J L 11).J P'fcGeneral Manager to award said contract to Fraser Corporation in the _ ~ 'f~")~-'J~\ amount of $376,000.00 with provision for early completion bonus of -vA,CJ.Jv" L~ $1, 000. 00 per day, not to exceed $24, 000. 00, and penalty assessment of --c1v· j \.,.,~ ~c · w.(.C> l$1, 000. 00 per day for late completion after May 31st, upon receipt of r~ ~'~' .¥L.) r>..,.~r a Permit to Construct from AQMD. See page "AA" \...! tv).t-C~llJo:. ~lo I I . , _ ~,...t.v __ ~I:' '°"-Ld C-t.rv \,-eC.~ .. b~d\-.. (A,.~ ~~I (17) ALL DISTRICTS \ Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any -9- 3/13/85 (18) DISTRICT 1 (19) (20) (21) (21) Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any DISTRICT 1 ( . ' Consideration of motion to adjourn ~ · DISTRICT 2 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda i tems, if any DISTRICT 2 t., · I f Consideration of motion to adjourn l ' DISTRICT 3 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any ITEMS oH (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and deny the claim of Davi d ~?PtcME NTAl AGENDA Mikus dated November 27, 1984, in the amount of $ 30, 000. 00 for alleged damages resulting from a motorcycle accident at the site o f Contract No. 3-28R, Rehabilitation of 19 Manholes on the Mill e r-Holder Trunk Sewer, and refer to the District's liability claims administrator, General Counsel, contractor and contractor's insurance company for appropriate action. (b) Consideration of motion to receive, file and deny the claim of t~MSOM Frank P. McHale dated December 19, 1984, in the amount of $179.08 for s u i'PL~1'o\EN TA1 AGCNY>A alleged damages to his vehicle resulting from an acciden t at the site of Contract No. 3-28R, Rehabilitation of 19 Manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer, and refer to the District's liability claims administrator, General Counsel, contractor and contractor's insurance company for appropriate action. (22) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to adjourn t _. (23) DISTRICT 5 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (24) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~·. 11.,,- (25) DISTRICT 6 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (26) DISTRICT 6 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~'./'l/ (27) DISTRICT 11 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any mMSOM ;UPPtElv\EHT Al AGENDA (a) Consideration of motion ratifying action of staff in procur ing services for Emergency Removal and Disposal of Oil Spilled i n to the Di strict's Coast Highway Trunk Sewer Siphon (Contract No. ll-13-2-M2 ) f or a total amount not to exceed $50,000.00 (28) DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~ ·,i V -10- ... (29) (30) (31) 3/13/85 DISTRICT 13 Consideration of timetable for hearings to collect user fees on the property tax bill beginning in 1985-86: , 1 l 1 \., r tJo f v M"'?./ -(ft..~~ "~ ~IV c.~'--. ~ ~ \~. !.>-:,...,. ~ O'\.. ~,I( , I ( -.le..--~ 1 t "fi.f L\'V" '11--V" k ( (a) Verbal staff report -Cu,.~_J.\;~ c.\~ ... ~ \?.J l,J,, •. ..LL. k_, J\.A ~~· "~ <fVtJK!·,, YI..-Ct,')'''> -fv-c"~ ~~~_,..,~L .l.... c..l~.:i "''-<.N "'2·1 't \'"' ~ -·~ ~ tv.r--f0 Gl"-:7\ d\JA,.,.., ..., tJ..,.;IJ wc,....,,,.,...f (b) Consideration of motion approving Preiiminary Timetable fo Collection of District No. 13 User Fees on the property tax bills beginning in 1985-86. See page "BB" DISTRICT 13 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any DISTRICT 13 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~', rf (32) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of actions relative to the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4: (a) Verbal. Report (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file written comments received from the following relative to the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4: (1) Orange County Transit District dated February 12, 1985 (2) Orange County Water District dated February 20, 1985 (3) County of Orange EMA dated February 25, 19~5 (4) City of Irvine dated February 25, 1985 (5) State of California, Off ice of Planning and Research dated February 28, 1985 (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file Main Street Trunk Sewer Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared by Courton and Associates (copy enclosed with agenda material) (d) Consideration of motion to receive and file Staff Summary of Negative Declaration (copy enclosed with agenda materiai) Roll Call Vote or Cast ( e) Ur.~:ii:nous Ballot Consideration of Resolution No. 85-59-7, approving the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, and authorizing filing of a Notice of Determination re said project See page "CC" (33) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of Resolution No. 85-60-7, approving plans and Roll Cnll Vote or C-ast • • • f h • k c t t N 7 2C 4 and Un:miir.ous Ballot specif icat1ons or t e Main Street Trun Sewer, on rac o. --, authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (tentative bid date 4/23/85) See page "DD" (34) DISTRICT 7 Other business or communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (35) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~·,fl, -11- MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California JOINT BOARDS Meeting Date March 13, 1985 -7:30 p.m. Post Office Box 81 2 7 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 Tele phones: Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 The following is a brief explanation of the rrore .i.nq;:ortant, non- routine items mich appear on the enclosed agenda and mich are not other- wise self-explanatory. Warrant lists are enclosed with the agenda material surrmarizing the bills p:iid since the last Joint Board reeting. To minimize the anount of redundancy and duplication in the agenda material and reduce the m.nnber of corments in the Manager's Report, we have expanded the description of the agenda items in the agenda itself, particularly with regard to change orders and contracts mich have been publicly bid and are within the contract b.ldget or engineer's estimate. Detailed change orders are included in the supporting material as well as the bid tabulations for the contracts being reccmrended for award. ALL DIS'IRIC'IS No. 9(a): Award of Contract for Rehabilitation of Digesters C & D at Treatrrent Plant No. 2, Job No. IW-061R-2, and Rehabilitation of Digesters F & G at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. IW-061R-3. On February 26, 1985, three bids were received for the rehabilitation of four digesters at Plant No. 2. This is the first of several digester rehabilitation jobs that will be issued over the next few years. 'lhe Y.Ork includes the installation of high-velocity pump mixing systems on the existing digesters similar to those installed under recent contracts for new digesters, which have proven to be highly successful in minimizing scum and grit buildup inside of the structure. Also included is the repair of three deres and the replacerent of one dore found to be beyond repair. All four digester danes will be sealed to prevent fugitive gas from escaping • Bids ranged from a high of $2,657,500 to a low of $2,435,555 sub- mitted by Kiewit Pacific Carpany of Arcadia, California. A complete bid tabulation is attached to the agenda. The design engineer, Kennedy-Jenks Engineering, Inc., has reviewed the bids and determined that they are representative of the costs for the work. Therefore, staff recamends award to Kiewit Pacific Canpany for their low bid arrount of $2,435,555. March 13, 1985 No • 9 ( b) : Authorizing Corrpletion of En try Gates at Plant No • 2, Job No. EW-125, by Districts' Force Account. At the regular February rceeting, the Directors rejected the single bid received for the construction of Entry Gates at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-125. '!his contract, which includes rrodifications to all three entry gates at the Huntington Beach Treatrrent Plant, was est.i.ma.ted to cost $60,000 while the single bid received was $109,800. Staff has reviewed the design and the bids and feels that the original Engineer's Estimate is sorrewhat low but that the work could be accorrplished within a bldget of $80,000. Accordingly, staff believes that the job could be accomplished by performing the work under Districts' force account procedures. Staff, therefore, recomrends approval to corrplete the Entry Gates at Plant No. 2, Job No. EW-125 under Districts' Force Account procedures in the total arrount not to exceed $80,000; and that the General Manager be authorized to solicit bids for the individual items of equiprcent or work in accor- dance with the Districts' procurerrent regulations, and to award p.rrchase contracts for such items to the lowest responsible bidders. No. 9(c): '6?roving Arrendment No. 1 to the Sludge Managerrent Agrearent with EKO Systems Orange County, Ltd. At the Septernrer 12, 1984 rceeting of the Joint Ebards, the Directors approved a Sludge Managerrent Agreerrent with EKO Systems/Orange County, Ltd. to haul and reuse or dispose of 100 % of the slu:iges generated by the Districts' two treatrrent facilities. 'Ihe agreerrent, which corcmits the Districts to pay EKO $10 per wet ton of sllrlge rerroved f rorn the plants conmencing on July 7, 1986, establishes various milestones that EKO must rreet to ensure that the canpany is capable of accepting the Districts' slu:lges on July 1, 1986. '!he first milestone to be rret by EKO was to acquire/lease a site at which the corrpany would construct and operate a facility to process the approximately 2,500 tons per week of slu:ige generated in our treatrrent facilities. EKO is presently negotiating with various landowners to secure a site, rut has not successfully corrpleted negotiations at this t.irre. 'Ihe corcq;>any has requested that the Districts allow a 60-to-90 day extension to provide additional t.irre to corcplete negotiations for a processing site. The Select Cormittee to advise the staff rret on February 28, 1985 to consider EKO's request for an extension, and recourrends that the Ebards approve Arrendrnent No. 1 to the Sludge Managerrent Agrearent, providing for a 60-day ti.me extension from February 15, 1985 to April 15, 1985 for obtaining a site for reuse/disposal of the Districts' sllrlge. No. 9(d): Approval of Change Order No. 1 to Paving and Drainage at Treatrrent Plant No. 2, Job No. EW-119. Change Order No. 1 covers five items of work and adds $5,405.24 and seven calendar days to the contract. Inclu:ied in the work is the installation of additional drainage facilities, delay costs encountered when the approved work schedule at the main gate was held up because of conflicting Districts' ·operational needs, rerroval and replacerrent of -2- March 13, 1985 concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the nain gate entrance not included in the original contract and encaserrent of several electrical ducts. '!here was also a deduction to the contract for the deletion of soil arrendrnent due to a misinterpretation of the specifications. Staff recomrends approval of Change Order No. 1 adding $5,405.25 and seven calendar days to the contract. No. 9 Ce) : Approval of Change Order No. 1 to Lube Oil Storage Tank at Foster Pump Station, Plant No. 2, Job No. tw-129. Change Order No. 1 adds $714.75 and t~ calendar days to the contract for the rercoval of old heat exchange equiprent whidl interfered with the placerrent of the lube oil tank at al:andoned Engine Number 4 position in the Rothrock Outfall 13ooster Station. C'lbe tank is located in the Rothrock Station and piped to the Foster Station due to space limitations in the Foster Station) Staff recomrends approval of Change Order No. 1 adding $714.75 and two calendar days to the contract. No. 9Cf): Approval of Plans and Specifications for Installation of Replacerrent of Centrifuges with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21. In June, 1984 the Directors approved a contract with John Carollo Engineers providing for the preparation of plans and specifications for the replacerrent of five ~m out and inefficient centrifuges at Plant No. 1 with four new belt filter presses. '!he centrifuges are being replaced with filter presses because they nore effectively dewater solids from the activated sludge process to enable corrpliance with Regional Water Quality Control lbard requirerrents for disposing of the material in the landfills. The design ~rk has been corrpleted, and the project is now ready for advertising. '!he engineer's estinate for the ~rk is $4. 8 million. Staff recomrends approval of the plans and specifications for Job No. Pl-21, the Installation of Replacement of Centrifuges with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1 and authorization for the General Manager to establish the bid date, tentatively April 23, 1985. No. 9 Cg) : Approval of Change Order A Increase to Purchase Order No. 17021 to Advance Constructors, Inc. for Installation of Pressure Relief Bypass Around 10 Positive Displacement Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, and Acceptance of Job as Canplete. In July, the Directors approved Purchase Order No. 17021 to Advance Constructors, Inc. for the installation of Pressure Relief Bypass around 10 Positive Displacerrent Prinary Pumps. 'Ihis ~rk was necessary to comply with OOHA requirerrents. Change Order A, in the anount of $544. 40, is for installation of two District supplied valves at pumps A, B and C that was requested by staff to provide nore system flexibility. · -3- March 13, 1985 The contractor has completed the work in accordance with the specifi- cations and the above change order. 'llle staff is now reconmending approval of 01.ange Order A to Purchase Order No. 17021, increasing the total anount from $15,810.00 to $16,354.40, acceptance of the· job as corrplete and authorization to file a Notice of Corrpletion. No. 9(h): Award Specification M~20 Installation of Flex-A-Tube Medium Bubble Diffusers and Appurtenant F,quipm?nt. In June, 1984, the Districts' staff corrpleted a pilot installation of Wyss Flex-A-'D.lbe Medium Bubble Diffusers in order to evaluate a product which refX)rtedly could increase the efficiency of air distribution in our secondary treat:Irent process aeration tanks at Plant No. 1 and improve suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand rerroval rates. After a six-ffi'.)nth evaluation, it was determined that the Wyss diffusers not only increased process efficiency by 25-30% but also decreased energy costs significantly. In December, 1984, the Boards approved a separate i;xrrchase of 11,700 Wyss Flex-A-TUbe Medium Bubble Diffusers from Parkson Coq::oration to retrofit the remaining Plant No. 1 basins. '!he Boards also approved the solicitation of bids for installation of these diffusers in accordance with Specification No. M-020. On February, 25, 1984 the Districts received bids for the installa- tion of the Wyss Diffusers. ~bids were received; one at $173,817 and the low bid at $128,610, which was well below the engineer's estimate of $183,000. '!he staff is reconmending that Specification No. M-020 be awarded to the low bidder, Spiess Ccnstruction Corrpany, Inc. of Santa Maria, califomia for their low bid anount of $128,610. · No. 9(i): Award Specification No. P-073, Purchase of Wood Shavings/Sawdust. On February 26, 1985, bids were received for furnishing and deliv- ering a combination of wood shavings and sawdust to Treatrrent Plants No. 1 and 2. 'Ibis material is used to mix with dewatered sludge that is transJ;X)rted to the County landfill for disposal, in order to comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board's landfill diSJ;X)Sal requirerrents of 22!% solids. It is only necessary to add sawdust to the sludge vtlen the dewatering equiprrent is overloaded. We anticipate a maximum usage of 15 ,000 yards of wood shavings/sawdust during the next year. We presently disJ;X)se of up to 140,000 cubic yards of sludge annually at the landfills. The replacement of old worn out centrifuges at Plants No. 1 and 2 with new belt filter presses, about to go to bid for Plant No. 1 and presently under design for Plant No . 2, will alleviate this situation. There were five bids received ranging from $4.19 to $8.31 per yard. The staff is, therefore, reccmrending the bid be awarded to Gas 01.em Products, Inc ., low bidder, for an anount not to exceed $63, 000, plus sales tax, for a one-year period. '!his dollar anount is based on a maxi- mum usage of 15,000 yards during the course of the contract. Provisions are included in the specifications for an extension agreerrent for up to one year. -4- March 13 I 1985 No. 9( j): AB?rove Selection Carmittee Certification and Addendum No. 1 to the Agreerrent with K. P. Lindstran, Inc. for Preparation of a Draft Environmental !rrpact Rep?rt for the Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatm:nt and Disp?sal Facilities. In March, 1984, the Directors approved a contract with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for the preparation of necessary envirorurental docu- rrentation for the proposed Joint Works Master Plan Irrproverrents. Since the inception of the contract with Mr. Lindstran, ~ important studies have been prepared that have changed the scope of his \'K)rk. '!he first is the Odor Mitigation Study conducted by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. and adopted by the Boards \'tbich recormended certain odor control facilities be incorporated into any future improverrents. '!he second study is the Digester Gas Utilization Study \'tbich contains certain recornrendations for future power generation for the Districts. It is desirable that the results of these studies be incorporated into the Joint Works Master Plan Environrrental Irrpact Report. In addition, in order to facilitate review of the lengthy Draft Environmental Irrpact Report, the staff has asked the consultant to prepare an Executive Surnnary of the docmrent for use by ITE1n- bers of the Boards of Directors and others mo may wish a surnnary of the EIR. K. P. Lindstran, Inc. has integrated the results of the odor abate- rrent study at no cost to the Districts, however, the additional services are clearly beyond the original scope of v.urk. Lastly, Addendum No. 1 includes the estimated services necessary to respond to the cornrents that will be received on the Draft Environrrental Irrpact Report. However, if, based on the public corrmentary, a rrore extensive effort than is antici- pated is needed, it may be necessary to further revise the scope to fina- lize the EIR. '!he Selection Comnittee has negotiated a fee with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. to perform the additional 'YK)rk on an hourly rate basis including lal:cr, overhead and profit for a maximum anount not to exceed $15,770. The actions appearing on your agenda are to receive and file the Selection Carmittee Certification of the final negotiated fee for the al:cve v.urk and adoption of a Resolution approving Addendum No. 1 to the agreerrent with K. P. Lindstran, Inc. for additional ~rk necessary due to the change in scope in the EIR, and to answer cornren ts received on said report for preparation of the Final EIR. Oopies of the certification and resolution are attached with the supporting docmrents. No. 9(k): Approve Selection Carrnittee Certification and Addendum No. 5 to the agreerrent with John Carollo Engineers for Preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual for Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2. At the December m=eting, the Directors authorized the Selection Conni ttee to negotiate Addendum No. 5 with John Carollo Ehg ineers for the preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the Hydraulic Reliability Facilities nearing canpletion at the Plant No. 2 "C" Headworks. '!he Hydraulic Reliability Project is a grant-funded project, and the preparation of an operations and maintenance manual is a require- rrent on all grant-funded jobs. -5- March 13, 1985 The Selection Carmittee has negoitiated a fee with John Carollo Engineers based on labor and overhead plus profit to perform this w:>rk, plus provide staff training, for a l.l\3Xirnum anount not to exceed $18,500.00 The actions appearing on your agenda are to receive and file the Selection Comnittee Certification of the final negotiated fee for the ·above w:>rk and adoption of a resolution approving Adlendum No. 5 with John Carollo Engineers for preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual for Job No. P2-25-2. Copies of the Selection Comnittee Certification and Resolution are attached with supporting doet.nrents. No. 9( 1) : Approval of Grant of Easerrent to the City of Fountain Valley. 'rtle City of Fountain Valley has requested a road easerrent 20 feet wide, extending from Ward Street easterly approximately 700 feet on the north side of Garfield Avenue to permit future widening and maintenance of Garfield Avenue by the City. 'rtle property is adjacent to the Sanitation Districts' 20 acre parcel that is under a 15-year lease to a private firm that provides mini warehouse storage. The staff recomrends that the easerrent te granted at no cost to the City. No. 9(m): Authorizing Fiscal Policy Comnittee to Solicit Proposals for Annual Financial Atrlit Services. At the Novemter 14, 1984 rreeting of the Joint Ebards, the Directors received and filed the Annual Financial Statercents for the year ended June 30, 1984. These audited financial reports were prepared and subnitted to the Directors by the Newr::ort Beach office of Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Corrpany, a national certified public accounting firm. 'llle 1983-84 audit by Peat, Marwick corrpleted their three-year audit contract. The Fiscal Policy Carmittee is reconmending that Requests for Proposal CRFP's) te issued to certified public accounting firms to provide annual audit services. '!he Coomittee would evaluate the responses and sutmit a recomnendation to the Executive Comnittee regarding selection of a firm to conduct the annual financial audit of the Districts' books of account. DISTRICT NO. 1 No. 9(n): Approving License Agreerrent with the City of Santa Ana for Use of District's Right-of-Way for Bicycle Trail. T~e staff is reconmending the approval of a license agreerrent with the City of Santa Ana providing for the City's use of District sewer right-of-way for a bicycle trail adjacent to the Dyer Road Trunk Sewer. The proposed trail is adjacent to railroad right-of-way extending in a northeasterly direction from the intersection of Bristol Street to Taltert Avenue. '!he City \\Uuld maintain the District's right-of-way and hold the District harmless from any liability resulting from its use. Staff reconmends approval of the license agreerrent at no cost to the City of Santa Ana. -6- March 13, 1985 DIS'IRICT NO. 2 No. 9(o): Approval of Plans and Specifications for the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2 and City of Orange Street Inprovenents. (1) In July, 1984, the Directors approved an agreexrent with Berryrran and Ste:r;:henson, Inc. to prepare plans and specifications for the Taft Interceptor Sewer from the Santa Ana River Interceptor to Glassell Street. 'llle job is a ccx:>perative contract with the City of Orange and incorporates City AHFP street irnprovem:nts in accordance with an approved agreexrent between the District and City, which will result in considerable savings for both the District and the City. The plans and specifications have J:een reviewed by the District, the City of Orange and the County and are ready for µiblic bidding. 'nle engineer's estimate is $2,100,000, which inclmes approximately $250,000 in road improvements funded by the City of Orange through the County Arterial Highway Funding Program. The staff recorrmends approval of plans and specifications. (2) This project requires the installation of a p:Jrtion of the sewer within the Atchison, Topeka, Santa Fe Railway Corrpany right-of-way, ....tiich requires the execution of a pipeline license agreexrent. 'nle processing of the agreexrent inc:::ludes payrrent of a $250 .00 fee. 'nle license agreexrent includes certain construction requirem:nts and assurances to the Railway Canpany. The staff recorrmends execution of the pipeline license agreem:nt and paynent of the $250.00 fee. No. 9(p): Awroval of A&iendum No. 1 and Award of Contract for Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA. In January, the Directors approved plans and specifications for the construction of a master planned relief trunk sewer in Euclid Avenue from Plant No. 1 to approximately Etlinger Avenue. 'nle sewer will range in size from 51" to 36" within the reach. Installation of this relief trunk sewer will alleviate surcharging and back up of flows in the Euclid Trunk in Fountai~ Valley during high flow .i;:eriods and storms. 1. A&iendum No. 1: A&iendum No. 1 fixes prices for gravel and bedding in the schedule of prices and added a provision that flow may not be interrupted during the construction. It also transmits a final signed copy of the Cal Trans .i;:ermit and clarifies jacking requirements at the invert of the Ocean ViE!N Olannel. Staff reconrrends approval of A&iendum No. 1. 2. Award of Contract: On February 26, 1985 seven bids were received for the Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA. '!he bids ranged from a high of $5,529,120 to a low of $5,090,467 sul:mitted by Nuevo Camino Construction Corrpany of Upland, California. A complete bid tabulation is attached to the agenda. -7- March 13, 1985 Staff recorrrrends award to Nuevo Camino Construction canpany for their low bid arrount of $5 ,090, 467. 'Ihe engineer's estimate for this w:::>rk was $5 I 800 ,000 • DIS'IRICT NO. 3 No. 9(q): Awroval of Change Order No. 1 to Trench Reconstruction, I.os Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R and Acceptance of Job as Complete. (1) Change Order No. 1: Change Order No. 1 is an adjustment of engi- neer's quantities to accurately reflect the materials used in construction of this contract. It increases the quantities for rerroval of old asp-ialtic concrete and the application of slurry/l:ackf ill and reduces the quantity of new asp-ialtic concrete paving for a net addition to the contract of $5,184.88. Staff reconmends approval of Change Order No. 1 adding $5,184.88 to the contract. 'Ihere is no tine extension associated with this change order. ( 2) Closeout: 'Ihe con tractor, Copp Contracting , Inc • , has fulfilled all contractual obligations within the specificed tine for Trench Reconstruction, IDs Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3.-21-3R. The staff recorrrrends adoption of the resolution attached to the agenda material authorizing acceptance of ·the w:::>rk as complete, execution of the final closeout agreem:nt and filing of the notice of completion as required. 'Ihere was one change order to this contract (Change Order No. 1 described herein) totaling $5,184.88 for a final arrended price of $206,040.88 No. 9(r): Approving Plans and Specifications for Manhole Repairs, Knott Avenue Interceptor Se~r, Contract No. 3-29R. In recent rronths, extensive rehabilitation w:::>rk has been done on the unlined manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer due to deterioration as a result of high sulfide gas levels within the se~r. Staff has also con- ducted an investigation of the manholes on the Knott Avenue Interceptor Sewer and found that Thhile the lined vaults are in excellent condition, the unlined grade rings are showing signs of corroding . '!he grade rings are the top 2-3 feet of the structure and were not lined at the tine of construction . Staff believes that installing a protective coating now will avoid m:::>re extensive repairs or replacement at a later date. The staff is, therefore, recorrrrending approval of the plans and spec- ifications for installation of a protective coating on 93 manholes on the Koott Avenue Interceptor from Brookhurst Street in Fountain Valley to Orangethorpe Avenue in Buena Park. A tentative bid date of April 23, 1985 has been established. '!he engineer' s estimate for the ~rk is $100 , 000 • -8- . . March 13 , 1985 DISTRICT NO. 7 No. 9(s): Authorizing Grant of Easerrent to the City of Santa Ana for Extension of Wilshire Avenue. The staff is recorrm:nding the granting of an easerrent for road µir- poses to the City of Santa Ana for the extension of Wilshire Avenue westerly of Village Way. W:len the District's West Trunk Sewer was constructed in 1963, a 10-foot right-of-way was obtained. 'llle City pro- poses to use a 60-foot length of this 10-foot wide fee parcel to construct an extension of Wilshire Avenue. Staff recarrnends granting of the surf ace easerrent for road purposes to the City of Santa Ana at no cost. No. 9(t): Rejecting bids for Manhole and Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, Orange County, Contract No. 7-SMD-l. On February 26, 1985 bids were received to replace bro deteriorated manholes and a damaged section of sewer in Red Hill Avenue in the 7th Sewer Maintenance District. Engineer's estimate for this work was $25,000. Tv.o bids were received ranging from a high of $124,703 to a low of $106,000. '!'he staff is, therefore, recorrm:mding that the bids be rejected and that the .project re referred to staff for further evaluation and recorrm:m- dation. ALL DISTRICI'S No. 11: Financial Rep?rt for Six~nth Period Ending Decernl:er 31, 1984. Enclosed are the budgetary financial staterrents for the second quarter of the fiscal year. 'Ihe Joint Operating report was reviewed by the Fiscal Policy carmi. ttee on February 20th. If any Directors have questions on the statements, please call Bill Butler, Director of Finance, at 540-2910. Nos. 12 and 13: Report of the Executive Carmi ttee. The carmi.ttee met on February 27th, and enclosed for Board rreml:ers is a written report of their discussions and recarrnended actions for con- sideration by the Boards. No. 14: Receive and File Cornnunications and Final 'Environmental R~view Report re Proposed Discharge of Pretreated Stringfellow Wastes to Districts' Sewerage System and Authorizing Issuance of a Permit. At the February 13th Joint Board Meet ing, the staff was directed to explore the feasibility of rrodifying the existing incoming wastewater diversion facilities at Treatment Plant No. 1 to enable pumping of the water from the Sunflower Interceptor to allow it to flow through Plant No . 1. -9- March 13, 1985 'lllis rrodification would enable the diversion of the entire flow from the Santa Ana River Interceptor (which will convey the treated wastewater pro- i;x:>sed to be discharged from the Stringfellow pretreatrrent plant) to the Districts' Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach. '!his would preclude it from flowing to the Orange County Water District as part of the Plant No. 1 treated effluent for further treatment at Water Factory No. 21 and use in their seawater intrusion barrier protection program. The staff was also requested to obtain a cost estimate for said mod- ifications and a rei;x:>rt from the Orange County Water District as to any concerns they rray have regarding any effluent that would care to their Water Factory 21 and to give this information to the 'E}(ecutive C.omnittee at their next rceeting, for a rei;x:>rt to the Boards at the March 13th rreeting. The Executive Cornnittee has revie~ the requested information and has recarm:mded in their rei;x:>rt to the B:)ards (considered separately under Agenda Item No. 13 (b)) that the rrodifications be rrade at an estimated cost of $65,000. Included under this agenda item are actions to receive and file the rei;x:>rt requested from the Orange County Water District v.hich endorses the plan; and a letter fran the City of Fountain Valley; transmitting a copy of an inde:pendent rei;x:>rt comnissioned from Grorge Kurilko, Fh .d., by the City, finding that the Stringfellow proi;x:>sal is in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal requirerrents and should not have a significant impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the Districts' treatment plants and supi;x:>rting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2. Fountain Valley also requests consideration of a supple- mental trunk line rronitoring program v.hich is reconnended for referral to the Executive Comnittee for study and rei;x:>rt l:ack. Letters from the City of Costa Mesa and the Cypress County Water District expressing concern about the profX)sal to accept pretreated Stringfellow wastes are also inclu:led. Lastly, the agenda lists the Final Rei;x:>rt on the Envirorurental Review conducted by IXHS /SAWPA at the request of the Boards, v.hich has been included with the Directors' agenda material, to be received and filed; and an action directing staff to authorize Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) to issue an industrial waste discharge permit to the California Department of Health Services CIXHS) for discharge of pretreated groundwater from the Stringfellow Waste Disi;x:>sal Site to the Districts' sewerage system, ui;x:>n conpletion of the rrodifications to the incaning wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 (SARI /Sunflower Diversion Structure Mo:iifications, Job No. IW-142) No. 15: Report and Reconnendations of the Select Comni ttee to Advise the Staff re Prop:?sed Formation of District No . 14. On November 14, 1984, the Boards approved the formation of District No. 14 in concept with the understanding that a formal agreerrent with the Irvine Ranch Water District CIRWD) would be prepared for consideration by the Joint Boards. Finalization of the agreenent has been held in abeyance -10 - . . March 13, 1985 pending corrpletion of a land appraisal for Treatment Plants Nos. 1 and 2 which is now finished. Enclosed with the Directors' agenda material is a report of the Select Comnittee to Mvise the staff reconnending approval of the agreement with IRWD. No. 16: Afproval of .Ad:lendum No. 1 and Award of Contract for Ferrous Cllloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141. In February, the Boards approved a program to ensure compliance with progressively stricter Air Quality Maintenance District CACMD) re:Julations and enable continued utilization of digester gas as an energy source by the Districts. Presently, the Districts produce approximately three million cubic feet of digester gas per day. 'nlis rrethane gas is utilized as an energy source to power many of our engines and other equiprrent. Use of this resource in lieu of purchasing natural gas, diesel fuel or electricity saves the Districts about $4 million per year in energy costs. Recent changes in the ACMD Prohibitions Rule 431.1, that regulates the allowable sulfur content in digester gas for use either as a fuel or for sale have .imposed new requirerrents on the Districts' operations. under arrended Rule 431.1, digester gas must now have a sulfur level below 800 ppm if used as a fuel by the Districts, and below 250 ppm if it is sold. The sulfide level of our digester gas is currently 2000-4000 ppm . '!he AQMD has set up a schedule to assure compliance with these standards by July 1, 1985. Since the digester gas is such an .important and cost saving energy source for the Districts, it is necessary to install facilities to reduce the gas sulfur .content to enable its continued utilization as a fuel. In order to rreet the ACMD' s corrpliance date for Rule 431.1, it is necessary to proceed with a project to install a full scale ferrous chloride system at Plant Nos. 1 and 2. 'llle addition of ferrous chloride (iron salts) to the slooge to precipitate out the hydrogen sulfide is the only system that can be installed by July 1st to rreet the ACMD require- rnen ts. However, in addition to the reduction of sulfur con tent in the digester gas, there are several potential side benefits to adding iron to the digesting slooge. 'lllese inclooe a reduction in other chemicals pre- sently used to reduce sulfur odors, potential reduction in dewate ring polymer costs, and the potential that scale formation now being experienced by the Districts on the dewatering belt press units may be reduced. (a) Addendum No. 1: At the February BJard rreeting the Directors approved plans and specifications for the full scale ferrous chloride system and authorized bidding the project. 'llle contract had a special pro- vision to give incentives to corrplete the job on schedule, by inclusion of a B::nus /Penalty Clause. The General Counsel requ=sted issuance of an addendum clarify ing the provision and changing it to Bonus /Special Liquidated Damages. -11- March 13, 1985 The Bonus /Sp=cial Liquidated Darcage clause provides a bonus of $1,000 per day for each day the project is conpleted prior to May 31st, not to exceed $24,000, and special liquidated darcages of $1,000 per day for each day completion is delayed after May 31st. Project corrpletion by May 31st is required to allow a 30-day testing i;:hase prior to beginning full scale operation on July 1st to conply with ACJwm. Staff recarmends approval of Ad:lendum No. 1. Cb) Award of Contract: On March 5th bids were received on the Ferrous Cllloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. IW-141. The low bid was subnitted by Fraser Corp::>ration in the arrount of $376,000. Four other bids were received ~d ranged from $440,000 to $458,000. 'Ihe engineer's original estirrate was $299,000. 'Ihe engineer has reviewed the bids and found that the low bid reflects the cost of the ~rk for con- ditions and tirre constraints imposed on the job. He recornrends that the contract proceed, as unnecessary delays could impact other rrajor projects underway for 'itbich AQMD permits have been applied. It is, therefore, recarmended that the contract be awarded to Fraser Corp::>ration in the arcount of $376,000, with provision for the early completion bonus of $1,000 per day not to exceed $24,000 and penalty of $1,000 per day for late canpletion after May 31st. Staff has applied to ACJwm for a Permit to Construct (PIC) this system. However, the PIC, which will impose conditions on the Districts relative to the project, is yet to be issued. It is, therefore, further recarmended that the General Manager, after receipt and rev iew of the per- mit, be authorized to award the contract upon receipt of the PIC from AQMD. If an acceptable permit is not forthcoming, it rray re necessary to consider applying for a variance. DISTRICT NO. 13 No. 29: Schedule for Hearing to Collect User Fees on Property Tax Bill :Beginning in 1985-86. · In January, upon the forrration of District No. 13, the Board adopted an ordinance that established a $70 user fee to finance annual operating and rraintenance costs. CUrrently the District's staff issues invoices to collect this fee from the few properties that are developed in District No. 13. The original District No. 13 forrration plan provides for the collec- tion of the annual user fee on the property tax bill. 'Ibis is the rrost cost effective way to do it and is the same rrethod used by Districts Nos. 5 and 6, the only other Districts with a similiar fee. In order to implerrent this rrethod of collection, state law requires that all property owners be notified and a hearing held. '!he schedule attached to the agenda rrate rial sets forth a preliminary tirre table for implerrenting collection of the annual user fee on the property tax bill comnencing with the 1985-86 fiscal year. Staff will r eview the schedule in rrore detail at the Board rreeting. -12- .. . .. March 13, 1985 DIS'IRICT 00. 7 No. 32: Actions concerning Neqative Declaration re Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4. In January, 1985, at the reqrest of the Irvine Ranch Water District (IBWD), the Directors approved Amendment No. 3 to the District No. 7 Master Plan which deleted the Main Street Sub-Trunk Relief Sewer between Von Karman Avenue and Jaml:x:>ree B:mlevard and replaced it with the Main Street Trunk Sewer between Von Kannan Avenue and San Diego Creek (Peter 's Canyon Wash). '!his project was originally incorpJrated into the District No. 7 Master Plan through adoption of Airendrnent No. 2 in May, 1984 as the Main Street Sub-Trunk Relief Sewer between Von Karman Avenue and Jarrobree Boulevard. Also in January, the Directors reviewed an Initial Study and Envirorurental Irrpact Assessment for the Main Street Trunk Sewer . '!he Main Street Trunk Sewer extends to the mwo boundary and would provide the ser- vice connection for proposed District No. 14. '!he size of the line has been increased from 21 inches to 60 inches in order to accomrodate the proposed District No. 14 flows. In accordance with ~ procedures, a Negative Declaration has been prepared by Courton and Associates, and circulated for public ccmnent, a copy of which is enclosed with the agenda naterial. Also enclosed with the report is a staff surrmary of the environmental consultant's findings and re~dations. The action before the B:>ard is to receive and file the comrents, approve the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, authorize the filing of a Notice of Determination for the project in accordance with CEQA procedures. No. 33: AI:Proving Plans and Specifications for Main Street Tunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4. In May, 1984, the Directors engaged Boyle Engineering CorpJration to prepare plans and specifications for the Main Street Trunk Sewer. Subseqrently, in December, the Directors anended Boyle's contract to incorpJrate the necessary design changes to accomrodate the formation of proposed District No. 14 to serve the mwo territory. '!his sewer was ori- ginally incorpJrated into the District No. 7 Master Plan by anendrnent to serve najor hotels, office and ccmnerical developnent l::eing constructed to the east of Ven Karman Avenue. HONever, ad.di tional capacity is required in the line to serve proposed District No. 14, and the Directors approved Arrendrnent No. 3 to the Master Plan to extend the line to the IBWD boundary and increase the size of the pipe. '!he plans and specifications have now been canpleted, and the engineer's estinate is $2,500,000. Staff recormends approval of the plans and specifications and authorization for the General Manager to establish the bid date, ten- tatively set for April 23, 1985. -13- -.. ~ 4 - t Rf: AGENDA ITEM #11 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ~J February 27, 1985 Joint Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California of 0 RANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA P0.80X8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-2910 (714) 962-2411 Subject: Summary Financial Report for Six Months Ended December 31, 1984 Transmitted herewith is the Summary Financial Report for six months ended December 31, 1984. The statements summarize the fiscal activities of the joint operations and the individual Districts for the second quarter of the 1984-85 fiscal year and the status of each with respect to the approved budgets. The combined 1984-85 budget for all Districts is $221.S million, of which approximately 87% is for capital expenditures for facilities improvements and additions, including reserves for said capital projects. The total budgeted revenue and expense .categories of the several Districts are set forth ho1t""lw. aM?AR?filVE :surx:E1 StM-rurl (MIILIOO.S CF IDUAR;) ~ 1984-85 ~ 1984-85* 1983-84* ~) % CF BUX?EI' JOINr-'IREMMENr ~ 0 & M $ 23.6 $ 18.0 $ 5.6 10.6% Q)IIECI!CN SYSIEM & OJHER DISIRicr 0 & M 3.3 3.2 0.1 1.5 ~ E'UNI' a:NSlR£l'ICN APPRPRIAT.ICNS 33.6 39.8 (6.2) 15.2 DISIRicr ~ CX:H3'lllCI'ICN APPRJPRIATICN; Si.8 21.1 25.7 23.8 DEBT SERIJICE 1.9 1.9 -0-0.9 SUKomL $115.2 $ 90.0 $ 25. 2 52.0% CINS'IRJCT[CN RESERVES $ 80.7 $ 96.8 $ (16.1) -36.4 OIHER RESERVES 25.6 18.S 7.1 ll.6 SUKomL $106.3 $115.3 $ (9.0) 48.0% '10.mL~ $221.5 $205.3 $ 16.2 100.0% FUIDOO CAm.Y-OJER $ 19.6 $ 32.2 $ (12.6) 8.8% APPRJPRIA'IED RESERVES 149.2 125.0 24.2 67.4 SUHOmL $168.8 $157.2 $ ll.6 76.2% 'Il\X ALIJrATICN (1 % Sfi\.RE:) $ 18.2 $ 18.0 $ 0.2 8.2 'm.X rENY F<R s:ND REl»PI'ICN 0.2 0.2 -o-0.1 a:Nsm.crICN GRnNIS 6.3 4.7 1.6 2.8 EEEs 10.8 8.8 2.0 4.9 17.2 16.4 a.a 7.8 $ 52.7 $ 48.l $ 4.6 23.8% $221.5 $205.3 $ 16.2 100.0% * ADJtE'lED FOR mmIH>ISTRrcr 'mA~CNS Included in each District's statement is a summary of the above major income and expense categories and an itemization of their trunk sewer construction projects and respective share of the joint works expansion. Authorized general reserves and inter-fund transfers have been excluded from the budget column.on said statements as expenditures are not charged directly against such appropriations. Summarized below are comments relative to the financial statements. The statements are presented on an accrual basis and, therefore, inter-district cash transactions for fiscal 1984-85 which were accrued in 1983-84 are not reflected in the year-to-date balances. CASH AND INVESTMENTS Earned interest from our continuing program of investing reserve funds (primarily capital funds accumulated for construction of required sewerage facilities) is $11.3 million for the second quarter of the year. Virtually 100% of our funds are invested in short-term government securities or time deposits. We presently have our funds invested with the County Treasurer's commingled investment program to take advantage of the higher yields available. JOINT OPERATING FUND This fund accounts for operations, maintenance, and administrative activities relative to the Districts' jointly-owned treatment and disposal facilities. The JO expenditures along with the self-funded insurance program costs are monitored by the Fiscal Policy Committee and if the staff experiences some unexpected expenditures, they are reviewed by the Committee. The major items that have occurred to date that impact the Joint Operating expenditures are (1) additional employees required to operate and to maintain the expanded treatment plants and the rising cost of labor and benefits, (2) additional expenditures associated with sewage solids treatment and disposal, (3) increased electrical energy costs, and (4) higher operations and maintenance costs for treatment facilities. Salaries and Wages -Even though we have had to add employees, there are several authorized but unfilled positions and, thus, considerable payroll savings have been realized to date. Employees' Benefits -Includes Retirement, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Insurance, Group Medical Insurance and Uniforms. Unemployment insurance premiums again are zero because claim experience continues far below reserve levels. Other benefit accounts will also recognize considerable savings because of unfilled positions mentioned above under Salaries and Wages. Chargebacks to Districts and CORF -Payroll expenses are charged back to CORF through the cost accounting system for work on the treatment plants' capital _ expansion program, and to individual Districts for work on Districts' collection facilities capital expansion projects as well as maintenance and repair of said systems. Also reflects industrial waste division charges to respective Districts. Gasoline, Oil & Fuel -Includes all fuel for motor pool. A large portion is recovered through our equipment billing system and included in revenue below. -2- Insurance -Annual premiums are expensed at time of payment, which is generally during the first quarter of the fiscal year. Budget amount includes Board and staff out-of-county travel policy, employee fidelity, boiler, fire, earthquake and all risk insurance policies, and pro-rata cost of the self-funded liability insurance program. Memberships -Includes the cost of membership in CASA, AMSA, SARFPA and other organizations. Office Expense -This account includes various types of office supplies, stationery and related items. Chlorine and Odor Control Chemicals -Primarily for influent and sludge odor control at treatment plant sites. The main chemicals used to control odors are chlorine and hydrogen peroxide. Ferric chloride is used as a supplemental odor control chemical, and caustic soda is also used in air scrubbers throughout the plants to reduce hydrogen sulfide emissions. The approximate $4,500 per day expenditure peaks during the summer months and is lower through the fall and winter. Chemical Coagulants -Expenditures for this item are required to dewater our sludges prior to disposal to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements. They are presently running well below the budget allocation. Other Operating Supplies -Miscellaneous items such as solvents, cleaners, janitorial, tools, lab chemicals, etc. purchased throughout the year. Contractual Services -The major elements in this line item are for payment of gate fees at the Coyote Canyon landfill, and payment for grit and waste-activated sludge removal and disposal at the BKK landfill. Professional Services -Primarily consists of General Counsel's fees, audit fees, and miscellaneous consulting services. Printing and Publications -Includes all reproduction activities in-house and with outside services. Rents and Leases -Equipment Outside Equipment Rental -Primarily for the rental of large cranes and equipment necessary for removing and replacing major pumps, engines and other large equipment during the course of maintenance and repair operations. CSDOC Equipment Rental -Reflects the charges for District-owned equipment used for overhead type activities. There is an offsetting credit applied through the allocation system for these charges. Repairs and Maintenance -This item includes parts and supplies for repair of plant facilities. Escalating costs continue to have a significant impact on this item. Generally this account runs close to budget each year due to the unpredictability of major equipment failures. This year we have experienced major failures in two large outfall engines. This account is presently over budget due to the high cost of these repairs. -3- -. Research and Monitoring -Budget includes funds for operational research and evaluation of processes to develop optimum operating parameters, and also contains the Districts' annual share of participation in the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. In anticipation of receipt of our 30l(H} Waiver, we have increased the ocean monitoring budget to $2,000,000, but do not expect to expend these funds until EPA requirements regarding the ocean monitoring program are established. Travel, Meetings & Training -Major items are authorized by specific Board actions. Expanding activities of regulatory agencies have required additional staff and Board travel. Utilities -The major item in the Utilities Expense Account is for purchased electrical power. Natural gas usage is also increasing due to more stringent south Coast Air Quality Management District regulations which govern use of our digester gas and require reductions in Nox emissions. A significant portion of the power budget is for the Pure Oxygen Activated Sludge Plant at Plant 2. Other Expenses -For items not chargeable elsewhere. Prior Year's Expense -This account is required by the Uniform Accounting System and represents adjustments to an operating or non-operating account balance from the previous year. Allocation to Dist~icts and CORF -This is an account established in connection with the cost accounting system and represents materials, supplies, and services overhead chargebacks to the individual Districts and CORF. CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND This fund accounts for the costs of expanding and improving the Districts' jointly-owned treatment and disposal facilities and represents an average of 61.7% (including reserves) of each District's budget requirements for 1984-85. During the first six months, $6.4 million was expended on joint works treatment and disposal facilities improvement and expansion projects. The pro-rata share of joint works improvement and expansion costs are reflected in the financial statements of the respective Districts. tNDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS -The statements reflect the accounting transactions for the seven Districts and include each respective District's share of the Joint Operating Fund and the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund. Taxes: Tax revenue is allocated to two separate accounts: Tax Allocation -This account represents the anticipated allocation of the Districts' pro rata share of the maximum 1% basic property tax allowed under Proposition 13. The Districts average approximately 3% ($.03 for each $1.00) of the basic levy. Tax Levy -This account represents tax funds necessary to make voter- approved outstanding general obligation bond principal and interest payments. In accordance with the Jarvis-Gann initiative, tax levies to satisfy these obligations are not restricted. The 1984-85 levy was waived for Districts 2, 3 and 7, and debt service is being financed by a transfer from other District funds. -4- Federal and State Construction Grants -EPA and SWRCB fund up to 87~% of treatment plant construction for approved projects. Estimates reflect anticipated payments based on receipt of our full secondary treatment waiver and grant funding of eligible projects at 80% (net) of project cost, except for the $5.S million hydraulic reliability project at Plant No. 2 (Project No. P2-25-2), for which we expect to receive only 30% grant financing. Fees -All Districts now have an adopted sewer connection fee schedule. This account also reflects industrial waste user charges levied by all seven Districts pursuant to the Uniform Industrial Waste Ordinance and the Revenue Program, and the user fees implemented in Districts Nos. 5 and 6. Annexation fee revenue is undeterminable and, thus, not included in the estimates unless there is an existing agreement providing for payment of fees. Sale of Capacity Rights -This account records income from sale of capacity rights to outside agencies such as SAWPA and IRWD, including the capital replacement charge. Joint Works Equity Sale -Revenue from the annual joint facilities inter- district equity adjustment required by the recalculation of the respective ownership percentages. Cost of this adjustment for purchasing Districts is included in each District's Share of Joint Works Construction as discussed below. Share of Joint Works Construction -Represents each District's share of joint treatment and disposal facilities expansion discussed above under Capital Outlay Revol~ing Fund (CORF). Bond Retirement and Interest Expense -Payment of principal and interest on outstanding general obligation bonds of the respective Districts. Annual expense for all Districts is approximately $1.9 million. Share of Joint Operating -Represents each District's share of operating and maintaining the jointly-owned treatment and disposal facilities, and administrative activities. Costs are distributed based upon each District's respective gallonage flow (see Joint Operating Fund statement for details). District Operating and Other Expenditures -Consists primarily of individual Districts' general operating expenses, industrial monitoring, operations, maintenance and repair of the respective Districts' collection systems. -s- -. CIXJN1Y SANI'mTICN DIS!mCIS CF ORPNCE CXlJNIY Sll+f\RY JOIN!' ~ OO>rmL :FlH) BOIXEl' RE.VIEW 6 MNlHS ENrE) 12/31/84 APPlOJED '.._I BOIXEl' YE'AR-'RrDME WEXPENDED YEM-'IO-Dm: 1984-85 E.XIBIDrruRES BOIXEl' % EXP.ENIE) SAIARIES i WN'.m & BENEFI'lS sa:Laries & ~es 9,765,000 4,099,828. 5,665,172 41.98 Payroll BE!lef1ts 2,902,000 1,050,108 1,851,892 36.19 '10mI.. mYK>IL 12,667,000 5,149,936 7,517,064 40.66 Less: Olargeouts to Disrs & CORF (3,167,000) ~919,589) ~2,247 ,4ll) 29.04 NE:!' JOIN!' oPEPJml(; PAYlUIL 9,500,000 4,230,347 5,269,653 44.53 MMERIAIS, SCJPPUES & $RVIQS Gas:>liDa, Oil & Diesel 265,000 108,160 156,840 40.82 Insurcn:::e 214,000 170,918 43,082 79.87 Msrbership; 18,000 6,000 12,000 33.33 Offioa~ 97,000 36,518 60,482 ~.65 Ollorim & Obr O:ntrol 1,690,000 692,677 997,323 40.99 Ol!mi.cal ~ts 1,150,000 317,948 832,052 Zl.65 other Operatif'l1 Stg;>lies -;;J0,000 132,822 237,178 35.90 Ccntracttal Servioas 1,818,000 742,913 1,075,087 40.86 Professicnal Servioas 210,000 71,511 138,489 34.05 Printif'l1 & Plblicaticn 100,000 41,198 58,802 41.20 F.q.rl.JillSlt Rental 130,000 57,463 72,537 44.20 Repurs & Maintenan::le 1,540,000 877,724 662,Z'/6 57.00 Research & M:nitori.R] 2,181,000 88,782 2,092,218 4.07 Travel, MeetillJ & Tra:inirg 50,000 21,805 28,195 43.61 Un:x>lla:::tabl.e Aco:Junts 2,000 749 1,251 37.45 Utilities 5,090,000 2,215,671 2,874,329 43.53 otter Expenses 95,000 46,624 48,376 49.08 Prior Years E>cpEnses 50,000 39,745 10,255 79.49 Ncn Operatin.; Expenses 10,000 73 9,9Zl .73 ~'!OmL Mm:RTMS & SERVIQS 15,000,000 5,669,301 9,410,699 37.59 Less: ALLO:AnCN '10 DISJS & ClJ£F (83,000) ~91,431) 8,431 ll0.16 1'£1' JOIN!' Of£R MMERIAI8 & smvIQS 14,997,000 5,577,870 9,419,130 37.19 '10mL JOINT CJ£EPATm; ~ 24,497,000 9,808,217 14,688,783 40.04 REVENUES Revenues (900,000) (355,756) (544,244) 39.53 Less: Allooatim to mS"JS & OH' 2,000 1,013 987 50.65 ?£'!' JOINr OEERATIN3 REVENUES (898,000) ~354, 743) ~543,257) 39.50 Ne? JOINr OEERATIN3 ~ 23,599,000 9,453,474 14,145,526 40.06 ~CME M.G. E!a-1 ~ msmrcr ™1' '10 DME SOliit!l' '10 rm:E 1 9,997 4,959 2,770,500 1,094,524 2 26,444 13,421 7,3Z7,SOO 2,962,059 3 26,152 13,305 7,247,200 2,936,574 5 4,902 2,441 1,359,300 538,721 6 5,595 2,738 1,550,500 604,386 7 5,424 2,743 1,503,300 605,447 ll 6,647 3,225 1,840,700 711,763 85,161 42,832 23,599,000 9,453,474 -. a:xNl'Y SANrmTIOO msim:cr ro. 1 ~ ~ FINl!\tOAL RE:JX:R1' 6 MNmS nmm 12/31/84 JDXEP RE.VIEH 1984-85 RslaWng Year-To-Date Bu:1get Year~te Btd;Jet % Experrled Begimin:J Fll1d Balmces, July 1 Zl,844,042 ~= Tax ISNY (Bend Fmd (s) ally) 70,678 35,441 35,237 50.14 Tax Al.lccaticns/Srbventiais (Share of 1%) 1,186,000 571,572 614,428 48.19 Federal and State Ccrstru::tim Grants 572,000 254 571,746 .04 Comecti.m Fees -0--o--o-.oo Ot:bar Fees 531,000 183,266 347,734 34.51 sale of CBIB;:ity Rights 39,000 -o-39,000 .oo Interest & Misc. Receipts 733,000 527,503 205,497 71.96 other -o--o--o-.oo Total Peven.ie 3,131,678 1,318,036 1,813,642 42.09 Total Revenue & Beginnin:J Balan:::es 29,162,078 EXEENDI'lmES: Share of Joint rorks Trmt. Plant & Reserves 6,076,000 575,297 5,500,703 9.47 District Tnnk Sewer Cl:n3tr & ieserves 550,000 20,505 529,495 3.73 Bcn3 Retirenmt arrl Interest Expense 79,625 74,522 5,103. 93.59 Share of Joint ~ks OperatinJ Expenses 2,m,000 1,094,733 1,676,267 39.51 PIOvi<Ed for Ie:intursenelt Agreeltr;nts -0--0--o-.oo District OperatiRJ & otter E>cpemitures Z75,000 93,016 181,984 33.82 Total ~itures 9,751,625 1,858,073 7,893,552 19.05 F o.;J Flml Bal.arms \.,;! Tl,304,005 ~EXPANSICN Ba1an:::e Adjustnents Transfer 'lb Ba1an:::e 7-1-84 & Ad:litioos Fixed Assets 12/31/84 CINSmccICN m PIOORESS: Talbert Magnetic Fl.ow ~ter ?37 20,394 20,691 Districts 1, 6 & 7 Master Plan 32,259 ill 132,259) lll St.b-'lbtal 32,556 20,505 20,802 Share of Joint W::>rks 1,489,250 575,29 I ~:~~ 2,050,829 CIP Integratim 1\djust:ment St.b-'lbtal 1,489,250 575,"297 ~13, 718) 2,050,829 OM?I.E'1ED PlUl:ERlY, PIANr & EJJJIP: Land and Pro~ty Rights 82,595 82,595 Collecti.m Lire3 and Pt.mp Stns 5,596,961 5,596,961 Treatnel.t Fccili ties -0--0- D~ Fa::ilities ll,593 11,593 ~ral Plant am Pdnin Facil 13,709 13,709 =y in Joint Treatmant Facil 18,606,641 (12,598) 13,718 18,607,761 Assets at Coot Less 1\nDrt. (3, 764) 32,259 28,495 'lbtal PIO};erty Plant & Ekp.lip 25,833,305 579,440 -o-26,412,745 CIX.lNl'Y S\NI'm.TICN DISTRicr NJ. 2 ~~~REEORI' 6 M'.NIHS ENDED 12/31/84 BUXEr REmEW 1984-85 Rstainirg Year~te Blrlget Year-'lb-Date Btrlget % ExpeOOed Begimirg E\nd Bal.arDes, July 1 145,354,382 RE.VENUES: Tax TJ!!N'f (BoOO Ftn:1 (s) 01ly) -0-22 (22) .oo Tax All.cx:ations/St.:bwntiais (Share of 1%) 5,219,000 2,614,354 2,604,646 50.09 Federal a'rl State a:nstrootim Grants 1,899,000 (1,967) 1,900,967 (.10) Onn:!ctim Fees 730,000 302,319 427,681 41.41 Other Fees 3,621,000 1,890,265 1,730,735 52.20 sale of Ccip:city Ricjlts 126,000 -0-126,000 .oo Interest & Misc. Receipts 6,559,000 4,129,876 2,429,124 62.97 Other -o--o--0-.oo 'lbt:al Pevenue 18,154,000 8,934,869 9,219,131 49.22 'lbtal Re\1enUe & Begimirg Balances 154,289,251 ma:mornms: Share of Joint ~ks Trrnt. Plant & Reserves TJ,820,000 1,917,656 35,902,344 5.07 District Tnnk Serer o:nstr & Reserves 29,277,000 128,382 29,148,618 .44 Bad RetirenBlt am Interest ElcpenSe 382,688 63,656 319,032 16.63 Share of Joint W:>rks ~atirg ~ 7,328,000 2,961,830 4,366,170 40.42 Provided fer ReirrbJrse.nelt Agreemsnts -0--0--0-.oo District ~ating & Other E>cpenditures 711,000 225,030 485,970 31.65 'lbt:al E>rpe'Ditures 75,518,688 5,296,554 70,222,134 7.01 E~19 Furrl Balances 148,992,697 mCTLITIJ!S EXPANSICN Balance Adjustnelts Transfer 'lb Balance 7-1-84 & .Adlitioos Fixed Assets 12/31/84 ~CN lN PKG<ESS: Lin::oln Stbtr\mk Cl:nn to SARI 6,998 6,998 Taft Interce~tX>r Serer Fran SARI tX> Gl.assell 141 14,484 14,625 2/14/1 Additimal F.as:melt Ccsts 97,309 97,309 Salta Ana River Magnetic Fl.cw Meter 278 33,055 33,333 Fullertx:n/Brea Interceptor 223,109 19,212 242,321 Elclid Tnnk Relief 136,981 1,511 138,492 ~th::>rpe Trtnk Q:nnectim to ~ 12,661 12,661 Fairvi~t InterceptX>r ~r 161,436 161,436 District 13 Ftcmatim Share lD3,120 13,668 116,788 carbcn canycn Dam Pt.mp statim M.'.xlifn 31,356 39,454 70,810 District 2 & 7 FlGI Analysis 26,195 26,195 Districts 2, 3 & 11 Master Plan 59,973 ~59,973) -o- Stb-'lbtal 852,559 128,382 ~59,973) 920,968 Share of Joint ~ks 4,964,16/ 1,911,656 45, /25) 6,836,098 CIP Integratim Adjustment Slb-'lbtalsx 4,964,167 1,917,656 (45, 725) 6,836,098 ClM?IE'lED PHPER11!£ I PIAN!' & EJ'JJIP: Tald am Pro~ty Rights 420,384 420,384 lla:::tim Lll'ES am Pt.mp St:ns 44,053,319 44,053,319 ~eatnmt Fccilities 1,186 1,186 Oisp:sal Fccili ties 33,172 33,172 Gsleral Pl.alt and Admin Fccil 33,581 33,581 ~ty in Joint Treat:m:nt Fa::il 62,022,141 (41,994) 45,725 62,025,872 r AsSets at Cl:st Less .Anort. (7,996) 59,973 51,977 'lbta1 Property Pl.alt & E>:pi.p ll2,380,509 1,996,048 -o-114,376,557 .. CllJN.lY Sl\N1'lM'ICN DISJRicr N:>. 3 ~ ~ FINAt+CAL REKRl' 6 M:NnlS ENDED 12/31/84 BIXm' REVIEW 1984-85 Remµning Year~te Bldlet Year..JIO-Date Bu:1get % ExpeOOed Begimin:J Ft.rd Bal.atxes, July 1 141,907,402 RE.VENJES: Tax I2'l':/ (Bcrd Ftnd (S) ally) -0-31 (31) .oo Tax All.ccatialS/Slb7entiais (Share of 1%) 6,662,000 3,448,744 3,213,256 51.77 Federal md State Ccnst:ro::tim Grants 1,951,000 880 1,950,UO .OS camectim Fees 575,000 248,233 326,767 43.17 other Fees 1,357,000 919,444 437,556 67.76 Sale of ~ity Ricjlts 90,000 -o-90,000 .oo Interest & Misc. Receipts 4,922,000 3,068,505 1,853,495 62.34 other 9ll,OOO -o-9ll,OOO .oo 'lbtal Pe.Teuie 16,468,000 7,685,837 8,782,163 46.67 'lbtal Reverue & Ba3imin:J Bal.atxes 149,593,239 EXPENDI'RBES: Share of Joint ~ks Tnnt. Plant & Reserves 39,152,919 1,972,448 37,180,471 5.04 District Trilnk Sewer o:nstr & Reserves 13,468,000 907,113 U,560,887 6.74 Bcn1 Retirenmt ard Interest Expe!lSe 596,913 65,810 531,103 ll..03 Share of Joint W:xks OperatiRJ Expenses 7,247,000 2,937,250 4,309,750 40.53 Pro1idad for Re:i.rrb.Jrsenmt Agteenmts -0--o--o-.00 District Operating & other E>pnlitw:es 804,000 250,'Z76 553,724 31.13 'lbtal E>pnlitures 61,71>8,832 6,132,897 55,135,935 10.01 E..._,;19 Ftm Bala1ces 143,460,342 H\CILITIES EXPR5ICN Bal.atxe Adjustm:nts Transfer 1b Bal.atxe 7-1-84 & Al:XlitiO'lS Fixe:I Assets 12/31/84 a:N.9'1'H.CrICN 1N PRkiRE5S: OO:>r cmtrol Stu:ly & cmstructim-Miller H:>ld& 2,598 2,598 Seal Beach Plmp Statim 2 2 Influent .Mc.grEtic Flew Maters 2,030 99,864 101,894 Miller-fi:>l.d& Manh:>le Inprovermt Phase II 32,930 469,049 501,979 Im Alamitos Blvd. , Phase III 3-21-3R 3,964 3,964 Ia; Alamitos Blvd. TrelCh Rea>nst., 3-21-2R 221,248 8 221,256 Iix>ver-westem Relief-LanpeDn & Katella 126,575 331,628 458,203 Orange-Western Stbtnmk Relief 29,170 29,170 Districts 2, 3 & ll Master Plan 59,814 (59,814) -0- 3 & 7 Fl.GI M:nitoriRJ Program 13,198 13,198 Stb-'lbt:al 484,965 907,113 ~59,814) 1,332,264 Share of Joint ffXks S,IDS,999 1,9/2,448 u,w2> 1,031,415 CIP Integratim Adjustment Stb-'lbt:al 5,105,999 1,972,448 (47 ,032) 7,031,415 CI:M?IE'IED PlO?ERtY, Pimr & EXJ]IP: Lard ard Pro~ty Ri<jlts 280,231 280,231 Collecti.m Li~S ard Plllp Stns 53,343,285 53,343,285 '11reatnelt Fa::ilities 15,036 15,036 ~l Fa::ilities 28,419 28,419 ral Pl.alt ard Mn.in Fa::il 52,006 52,006 =y in Joint Treatment Fccil 63,794,202 (43,196) 47,032 63,798,038 O Assets at O:St Less l\n'Ort. ~2,991) 59,814 56,823 'l'Otal Proi,:Ety Plcnt & ~p 123I104t143 2,833,374 -0-US,937,517 -\ CIXJN1'Y SANrm'fiCN DISI'R.Ic.r N:>. 5 $(J.M\R{ ~ ~ REroU' 6 MNlHS ENIE) 12/31/84 '--" BtlOOEI' RE.VIEW 1984-85 Retaining Year~te Btrlget Year.JD::>-Date. Btrlget % ExpeOOed ~imirg Ftnd Balances, July 1 25,487,620 RE.VENUm: Tax T.J:Ny (Bcnl F\nl (s) mly) lB,295 ll,542 6,753 63.09 Tax Al.1.ccatioos/StbJenticns (Share of 1%) 1,434,000 768,528 665,472 53.59 E'Erleral cm st.ate Cmstrootion Grants 421,000 1B7 420,813 .04 CO'me:::tial Fees 130,000 203,191 (73,191) 156.30 Other Fees 954,000 298,744 655,256 31.31 Sale of ~ity Rights Zl,000 -o-27,000 .oo Interest & Misc. Ra::eipts 731,500 509,556 221,944 69.66 ~r -o--o--o-.oo Total Revaue 3,715,795 1,791,748 1,924,047 48.22 'lbtal RevenUe & BEgimirg Balances Z1 ,279,368 EXEENDITCRES: Share of Joint ~rks TIInt. Plant & Reserves 4,562,000 425,581 4,136,419 9.33 District Tnnk Sewer Q:nstr & Paserves 4,350,000 47,680 4,302,320 1.10 Barl Retirenmt arrl Interest E:xpe1Se 24,015 22,145 1,870 92.21 Share of Joint ~ks Operati113 Expenses 1,359,000 538,858 820,142 39.65 Provid9d for Re:i.nb.lrseftent Agreeamts 79,000 -0-79,000 .oo District ~ati113 & ~r E>q;>en3itures 474,000 189,324 284,676 39.94 Total Expenditures JD,848,015 1,223,588 9,624,427 ll.28 E'••iYJ ~ Balances 26,055,780 EM:ILITIES EXPANSICN Balance Adjust:Ilelts Transfer 'lb Balance 7-1-84 & ACHiticns Fixed Assets 12/31/84 a:NSIRCI![CN m ~: D'ciease Ela::t service at Lid:> P.S. 2,637 2,637 Replcce Lid:> Force Main 5-26 3,344 3,344 Ccast Trunk Phase I 102 44 146 A&B Trmk ~tic Fl.cwreter 174 4,131 4,305 Balbca Peninsula Sb.rly "An St. to "G" St. 1,521 3,445 4,966 Sli<E Gate Irstallati01 5 & 6 1,563 49,490 51,053 Palinsula Trlllk Sb.rly "A" St. P/S to Lid:> P/S 2,026 2,026 A & B Vault Wet Protectim 5 & 6 167 167 Bed< Bay Tnnk Misc 0-g 458 458 5 & 6 Master Plan 16,434 903 (16,434) 903 Rehab & Relo:2te lOl Trulk 20 (16,772) (16, 752) M:rl EM Cross :EOi @ Bitter pt., 5 & 6 (222) (222) StbJ!btal 21,785 47,680 ~16,434) 53,031 Sl:Bre of Joint Vb'.'ks l,I0!,681 425,581 10,148) I,5!7,114 CIP Integrati01 Adjustnelt StbJ!bt.al l,lDl,681 425,581 (10,148) l,517,ll4 c:x:M?IE:lED ~~, PIAN!' & EJJJIP: Lard am ~ty Rights 6,231 6,231 roll.a::tim Lll'ES am PlJlp Stns 7,866,451 7,866,451 eatrrelt Fccilitie.s 7,347 7,347 ~~ilities 7,115 7,115 Geleral Plant am Adnin Fccil 12,643 12,643 =Yin Joint Treatrrelt Fccil 13,764,383 (9,320) 10,148 13,765,211 Assets at O:St Less Anort. 29,897 (8,081) 16,434 38,250 'lbtal Property Plant & FJ:p.lip 22,817,533 455,860 -o-23,273,393 -, CDWlY SANITATICN DISl'RIC!' 00. 6 S{M!AR{ ~ FINAlOAI. REFCRI.' 6 MNIHS ENDED 12/31/84 '..._/ lDXm' R!VIEW 1984-85 IelairrlnJ Year~te . 13!J:1aet Year...JD::>-Date Btrlget % Expenjed Be:Jimirg Flnd Balames, July 1 14,362,748 REVENUES: Tax ~ ~ Fln3 (s) a'lly) 40,306 16,158 24,148 40.09 Tax Al.lix::atims/S\blentiO'lS (Sha.re of 1%) 852,000 635,402 216,598 74.58 Ftderal arXl State Cl:l'lstnction Grants 372,000 164 371,836 .04 c.cnnact.im Fees 70,000 211,815 (141,815) 302.59 Other Fees 914,000 539,752 374,248 59.05 Sale of ~ity Rights 25,000 -o-25,000 .oo Interest & Misc. Receipts 317,500 250,969 66,531 79.05 Other -0--o--o-.00 Total Revenue 2,590,806 1,654,260 936,546 63.85 'lbtal ~ & Be]imirg Balaroes 16,017,008 EmN:>rnms: Share of Joint W::>rks Timt. Plant & Reserves 2,761,000 374,612 2,386,388 13.57 District Trunk Sewer Cl:l1str & Reserves 1,231,000 80,260 1,150,740 6.52 Earl Retirement am Interest ~ 28,234 26,481 1,753 93.79 Sh:lre of Joint Wxks OperatiOJ Expenses 1,550,000 604,089 945,911 38.97 Provi<Ed for ReillbJrsenmt Agreenmts -0--o--o-.oo District Operati03 & Other E:)q:>enditures 124,000 35,880 88,120 28.94 Total E:xperxlitures 5,694,234 1,121,322 4,572,912 19.69 ~~Furxl~s 14,895,686 ~ClLITIES EXPANSICN Balaroe Adjustnelts Tran&er 'lb Balaroe 7-1-84 & Adlitirns Fixed Assets 12/31/84 CINSl'IUCJICN :m PKX:2RESS: Airbase & A&B Trunk Mcgnetic Fkwteter 708 61,375 62,083 FairviaM:;isler Tnnk 28,593 28,593 Sli<E Gate Installation 5 & 6 565 17,871 18,436 A & B Va1lt Wet Protectim S & 6 60 60 5 & 6 Master Plan 16,433 903 (16,433) 903 Districts 1, 6 & 7 Master Plan 31,944 lll (31,944) ill r-trl PM Cross PCl! @ Bitter Pt., 5 & 6 6 6 Sl.'b-'lbt:al 78,309 80,260 (48,377) no, 192 Share of Joint ~ks 9')g,~~ 374,612 (8,932) 1,335,424 CIP Integratim Adjustnmt Slb-'lbtal. 969,744 374,612 ( 8,932) 1,335,424 CIM?IE'IED PIDa:a<!.Y' pfmr & EUJIP: :r..am am Pro~ty Rights 562 562 Colle:::tim LineS and PUnp Stns 1,156,148 1,156,148 Treatnmt Fa::ilities 2,653 2,653 Disp:sal Fccilities 7,394 7,394 General Pl.ant arrl Admin Fa.ell 16,740 16,740 sty in Joint Treatnmt Fa::il 12,115,952 (8,203) 8,932 12,ll6,681 r Assets at O:St Less Anort. 497 (5,763) 48,377 43,lll 'lbta1 Property Pl.alt & E):plip 14,347,999 440,906 -o-14,788,905 <DtNr.l Sl\Nl'mTICN DIS'l'Ricr ro. 7 Sfl.H\Rl ~ FINANCIAL REECRl' 6 M:NlBS ENDED 12/31/84 ~ BtJXm' RE.VIEW 1984-85 Rem:!ining Year.Jfo-Date BlDget Year~te Blrlget % ExpeOOErl Begimirg Fun3 Bal.arces, July 1 49,865,418 .RE.VEt-1.lES: Tax J2fY (Bcni F\Di (S) ally) -o-8 (8) .oo Tax Al.lix:atims/Sl:blentiOlS (Share of 1%) 1,931,000 938,489 992,5ll 48.60 Federal cm State Q:nstnctioo Grants 618,000 Z/2 617,728 .04 ~tiooFees 690,000 443,212 246,788 64.23 Otb!r Fees 704,000 414,822 289,178 58.92 Sale of cap:.;:ity Rights 38,000 -0-38,000 .00 Interest & Misc. ~ipts 2,146,000 2,157,921 (ll,921) 100.56 Other -o--o--o-.oo 'lbtal Reverue 6,127,000 3,954,724 2,172,276 64.55 'lbtal Revenue & BEgimin:J Bal.arres 53,820,142 EXEEIDrruRES: Share of Joint lb'ks Trnlt. Plant & Reserves 12,185,000 625,628 ll,559,'I72 5.13 District Trunk Seer o:nstr & Reserves 7,633,000 195,299 7,437,701 2.56 Ben] Retirenmt am Interest Expe'lSe 681,058 4ll,301 269,757 60.39 Share of Joint W:Xks Operatin:r Expeises 1,503,000 605,034 897,966 40.26 Provided fcx Re:irrb.lrsem:nt Agreers its -0--o--o-.oo District Operatill3 & other E>rperDitures 512,000 231,497 280,503 45.21 'lbtal ~itures 22,514,058 2,068,759 20,445,299 9.19 ~ Fln3 Balalces 51,751,383 mcJLI'fiES EXPANS:Irn ~ Adjustments Transfer 'lb ~ 7-1-84 & AffiitiO'lS Fi.xa::l Assets 12/31/84 CINSl'RJCl'.ICN lN PKG<ESS: Fairview Sd::>trunk camectioo 7-9 2,500 2,500 Airtese Mi:gn3tic Fl.cwnet:er 759 1,874 2,633 City of orange tnc:;tal.l.nslts 19,877 19,877 Vm Kamal Tnnk 7-8 102,002 87,004 189,006 Mam st. Tnnk Sewer 7-~-4 20,711 20,771 So. Irvire Lift Stn & Relief Stbtrunk 237 82,108 82,345 District 13 Fomatioo Share 5,428 719 6,147 Districts 2 & 7 Fl.cw Analysis Zl,729 27,729 Districts 1, 6 & 7 Master Plan 33,641 323 p3,641) 323 Stb-'lbtal 189,673 195,299 (33,641) 351,331 Share of Joint Nxks 1,619,538 625,628 (14,918) 2,230,248 CIP Integration 1djustm3lt Stb-'lbtal 1,619,538 625,628 ~14,918) 2,230,248 CIM?IElED PRCIERI":l, PIAN!' & EaJip: Land am P~ty Rights 276,454 276,454 Coll~ticn I.ires am Pmp Stns 18,652,767 18,652,767 Treatment Fa::ilities -0--o- ""is~ Fa::ilities 10, 782 10,782 ineral Plant am .Admin Fa::il 12,440 12,440 ~ty in Joint Treat:nelt Fa::il 20,234,465 (13, 700) 14,918 20,235,683 r Assets at O:St LeSs Anort. (3,925) 33,641 29,716 'lbtal PrO{:et'ty Pl.cnt & Fquip 40,996,119 803,302 -0-41,799,421 . ., -. ClXJNlY Sl\NI'mTICN DISJmcr N). 11 ~ gJARIERLY FINAlCIAL lE?CRl' 6 MNmS ENDED 12/31/84 '..,J BlOCBl' RE.VIEW 1984-85 Retaining Year..J!b-Date Bld]et Year~te Bu:i;Jet % E>q:lerx1ed Be;iming FlJ'd· Balarees, July 1 36,769,952 REVENUES: Tax 'fJ#!Y (8cn:I Ftni{s) mly) rsl,123 34,136 22,987 59.76 Tax Al..l..O::atiais/Slbwntiais (Share of 1%) 1,600,000 761,231 838,769 47.58 E'eleral and State Ctnstructioo Grants 477,000 209 476, 791 .04 came::tim Fees 250,000 745,993 (495,993) 298.40 otter Fees ~9,000 117,439 171,561 40.64 Sale of Ccq:a;:ity Rights 33,000 -o-33,000 .oo Interest & Misc. Receipts 846,000 613,290 232,710 72.49 ~r -0--o--o-.oo 'lbtal Reveiue 3,552,123 2,Z72,298 l,Z79,825 63.97 'lbtal RelenUe & BEgiming Bal.a'loes 39,042,250 :e:Kl:QDl'l'mES: Share of Joint Wxks TIInt. Plant & Reserves 6,916,000 479,733 6,436,267 6.94 District Tnmk Sealer a:nstr & Reserves 1,031,000 3,294 1,027,706 .32 Bend Retiremsnt am Interest E>cpeme 75,100 lB,450 56,650 24.57 Share of Joint ~ks Operatirr;J Expe1SeS 1,841,000 711,860 1,129,140 38.67 Provi~ far PJain'blrse'IBlt ~ts 1,000,000 268,026 731,974 26.80 District Operatirr;J & other E>cperrlitures 396,000 171,590 224,410 43.33 'lbta1 E>cpmlitures 11,259,lDO 1,652,953 9,606,147 14.68 El.-h:J Furrl BalaY:es T/,389,297 F2>0LITIES EXPl\NSm Ba1aree Adjust:rrelts Transfer 'lb Ba1aree 7-1-84 & Ad:litioos Fixa:I Assets 12/31/84 ~~CN lN PIOGRESS: Inter~ant ~tic Fl.ometer 3,294 3,294 Districts 2, 3 & 11 Master Plan 13,ll3 (13,113) -o- Ccast Hwy. Trunk 8,199 8,199 StbJ!btal 21,3U 3,294 ~13,ll3) ll,493 Share of Joint ~ks 1,241,866 479,733 11,439) 1,7Tu,160 CIP Integration Adjust:nelt Slb-'lbtal 1,241,866 479,733 ~ll,439l 1,710,160 CIM?IE1ED PlUPERIY I PU\Nr & EJJJIP: Lem ard ~ty Ricjlts 146,986 146,986 Collectim L.i.reS arrl Punp Stns 18,337,524 18,337,524 Treat:nJ:!'lt Fccilities -0--0- Disp:sal Fccilities 3,053 3,053 General Plant ard Admin Facil 29,031 29,031 =Y in Joint Treatmsnt Fccil 15,515,837 (10,505) 11,439 15,516,771 assets at oost less anort. ~2,185l 13,113 10,928 TOtal Property Pl.alt & a;pi.p 35,295,609 470,337 -o-35,765,946 ......., ..;;;: ' ... t RE: AGENDA ITEM NOS. 12 & 13 March 6, 1985 COUNT Y SA NITATION DISTRICTS of 0 RANGE C OUNTY. C ALIFORNIA P.O . BOX 8 127 10844 EL LIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708 (714)540-2910 (71 4) 962-2411 REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE February 27, 1985 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: Present: Richard B. Edgar, Joint Chairman Don R. Griffin, Vice Joint Chairman Robert Hanson Buck Catlin Don Roth Evelyn Hart James Wahner Don Smith Ruth Bailey Absent: Convene: Adjourn: Supervisor Roger Stanton 5: 30 p. m. 7:45 p.m. Others present: Director Carol Kawanami Director Philip Maurer Director James Neal Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel Staff present: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager Blake P. Anderson, Director oE Operations Tom Dawes, Deputy Chief Engineer William Clarke, Superintendent Gary Streed, Chief Adm inist rati ve Assistant 1) Draft EIR on the Master Plan for Joint Works wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities. The Districts' environmental consultant, K. P. Lindstrom and Associates, has completed the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on the 1983 Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities. Mr. Lindstrom reviewed the findings of the DEIR which addresses the improvements recommended in the 1983 Joint Works Master Plan and post-Master Plan improvements which have been proposed as a result o f special studies. These facilities improvements include a new headworks,.new primary treatment capacity, new sludge digestion facilities, a new outfall booster pump sta t ion, and many general ope ratio n a l improvement projects, including major expendi tur es for odor control, air pollution control, and energy conservation facilities . The Master Plan is a 20 year projection, but the DEIR focuses on the construction needs for the next five years. -1- \ Executive Collll1littee Report February 27, 1985 In accordance with CEQA procedures, the Executive Committee recommends that the Boards receive and file the DEIR and fix the hearing and public commentary period as follows: March 13, 1985 -Receive and file DEIR April 10, 1985 -Public hearing on DEIR May 1, 1985 -Close of public commentary period on DEIR The final EIR is scheduled to be submitted to the Directors for consideration at the regular Joint Board Meeting on June 12, 1985. Enclosed is a copy of the Executive Summary for the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the 1983 Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities. If any Director desires a copy of the full DEIR, please call staff member Hilary Baker at 540-2910. Copies of the full DEIR will also be available at the Board Meeting on March 13th. 2) Report on Modifications to Incoming Wastewater Diversion Structure at Plant No. 1 re Accommodation of Pretreated Stringfellow Waste. At the February 13th Joint Board Meeting, the staff was directed to explore the feasibility of modifying the existing incoming wastewater diversion facilities at Treatment Plant No• 1 to enable pumping of the water from the Sunflower Interceptor eo allow it to flow through Plant No. 1. This modification would enable the diversion of the entire flow from the Santa Ana River Interceptor {which will convey the treated wastewater proposed to be discharged from the Stringfellow pretreatment plant) to the Districts' Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach to preclude it from flowing to the Orange County Water District for further treatment at Water Factory No. 21 and use in their seawater intrus ion barrier protection program. Staff reviewed the enclosed report on the proposed modification to the diversion facilities. It appears as if the work could be completed within 60 days of Board authorization to proceed at a cost estimated not to exceed $65,000.00. Although the change would result in less than optimum operating conditions at the joint works, the Plant No. 1 effluent supplied to the Wat e r District would improve slightly over what is now provided. There would be no measurable impact on water quality at Plant No. 2 or the ocean discharge from the change. The Committee also considered the enclosed letter from the Orange County Water District. The Boards had requested a report as to any concerns the Wat e r District might have regarding Plant No. 1 treated effluent that would be provided to Water Factory No. 21. ·The Water District report fully supports the proposal. The Committee endorsed the proposed modifications to the incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 and directed staff to start the -2- Executive COlllJllittee Report February 27, 1985 necessary procurement procedures for pumps and controls (standard equipment used throughout the District's facilities) and installation services on an urgency basis to allow the project to be completed as expeditiously as possib le in the event it is authorized by the Joint Boards. The staff was also directed t o as k for cost reimbursement for the work from SAWPA/DOHS. The Executive Committee recommends that the Boards approve the proposed modifications to the incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1, and: Authorize completion of t~e SARI /Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, under force account as an urgency measure, for a total amount not to exceed $65,000.00. Ratify action of the Executive Committee in directing staff to purchase the pumps and controls required for said modifications, in an amount not to exceed $30,000.00 (included in above $65,000 maximum). Ratify action of the Executive Committee in directing staff to solicit informal quotes for installation of the pumps and controls, and authorize staff to award a contract for said work to the lowest bidder, in an amount not to exceed $35,000.00 (included in above $65,000 maximum). 3) Request of the Cities of Fountain Valley and Newport Beach to Pay for Independent Study of Proposed Stringfellow Plan . The Joint Chairman reported that the cities of Fountain Valley and Newport Beach had engaged a special consultant to conduct an independent study of the proposed discharge of pretreated Stringfellow waste to the District's sewerage system. The cities have requested (copies of letters enclosed) that the Districts pay the $7,500.00 cost of said independent study. (The consultant, George Kuril ko, Ph.D., has completed his study and found that the Stringfellow proposal is in compliance with all ·applicable local, state and federal requirements and should not ha ve a significant impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the Distri c t's facilities. A copy of the report is included with the Agenda material on Stringfellow.) The Executive Committee recommends that the Boards respectf ully deny t he cities' request to pay the cost of said independent study. 4) Policy re Claims for Damage to Local Manholes Connected to Di stricts' Trunk Sewers. In July, 1984, the Executive Committee considered a claim from the City of Fountain Valley in the amount of $10,000.00 for costs to repai r ten (10) manholes adjacent to the Districts' Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer which were damaged by hydrogen sulfide gases. The claim was subsequently approved by the Boards. The City Attorney and our General Counsel proceeded with drafting a settlement agreement. However, before it was completed, the District recei v ed requests for repair o f manholes from two additional cities and the Midway City Sanitary District, plus a request to pay for the repai r of twel ve (12) additional manholes from the City of Fountain Valley, as tabled below: -3- -. Executive Committee Report February 27, 1985 Fountain Valley Huntington Beach Buena Park Midway City Sanitary District 20 manholes adjacent to the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer, plus 2 manholes adjacent to the Knott Interceptor Sewer. Revised estimated cost of repair is now $45,000.00. 58 manholes repaired at a cost of $83,014.00 adjacent to the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer be'tween March, 1980 and September, 1984. 31 manholes. No cost estimate. 5 manholes adjacent to the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer. Not cost estimate. After reviewing this issue a't the last meeting of the Executive Committee, the General Counsel. and staff were directed to draft a policy statement for consideration by the Boards relative to claims for damage to local manholes connected to the Districts' trunk sewers. The staff and General Counsel reviewed the draft policy statement that had been requested. In formulating the policy several factors were taken into consideration--namely: There is no evidence to show that 100% of the damage is caused by hydrogen sulfide gases in the Districts' trunks. There is evidence to show that the hydrogen sulfide does cause substantial damage. The Cities/Sanitary Districts are not totally free of fault, in that their local maintenance programs failed to adequately detect the deterioration or to adequately take corrective measures in time to minimize the damage to the manholes. Thus, once repai r ~d, the Cities and Sanitary Districts should be required to waive any future claims for damages. The Districts have certain legal defenses to any such claims based upon the statute of limitations (January 1, 1982) and the claims filing · requirements of the State of California. The Districts wish to assume major responsibility for maintaining good relationships with the Cities and the Sanitary Districts, and to provide assistance and advice in assuring that the local facilities will not suffer from further damage. The Districts' experience in manhole rehabilitation work should be made available to the Cities and Sanitary Districts a nd should use the Districts' specifications for the repairs. -4- Executive Committee Report February 27, 1985 The Committee also discussed what an appropriate settlement amount might be for each damaged manhole, including the previously approved $1,000 per manhole for Fountain Valley. There are four settlement alternatives: (1 ) the full cost of repairs, (2) a percentage of the cost, (3) a fixed (average) amount, or (4) denial of the claim. The Committee concluded that each District should deter- mine the basis and/or amount of its settlement policy. It is the Executive Committee's recommendation that the Joint Boards adopt the enclosed Policy of the Boards of Directors re Settlement o f Claims fo r Damage to Local Sewer Manholes, and that each respective District determine its own settlement basis and/or amount. All of the damaged manholes that have been identified to date are in the local sewers in District No. 3 adjacent to the Miller-Holder and the Knott Trunk Sewers, which are two of the Districts' longest and largest sewers. The District No. 3 Directors will recall having authorized Malcolm-Pirnie to study means of controlling hydrogen sulfide and other gases which are generated in the Miller-Holder Sewer due to the lengthy retention time. ~hat study is wel l under way and a report is expected shortly. The Director s are also aware that the Districts have awarded contracts in the last year and one-half totaling nearly $900,000.00 for the repair o f 20 large vaults on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer which have deteriorated to a condition where complete replacement is required, including the installat ion of a protective plastic liner. Our staff is nearing completion of a survey of the remaining 200 ma~holes and vaults on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer between its terminus at Treatment Plant No . 2 in Huntington Beach and the City of La Habra. A repair contract for about 85 manholes and vaults south of Orangethorpe Avenue is necessary and is planne d fo r Fall 1985. Manholes north of Orangethorpe Avenue generally need no repai r . The staff has suggested, and it is District No . 3 Chairman Roth's recommendation, that inasmuch as the manhole deterioration problem is pr esently limited to District No. 3, its Board direct staff to prepare a status report o n corrective action for deteriorated manholes, and the Malcolm-Pirni e study, fo r submittal to the Directors at an adjourned meeting, at which time the Board could also consider the basis and/or amount of its settlement policy. -5- -=--· i , ... ·- February 20, 1985 STAFF REPORT COUNTY SANITAT ION DISTRICTS of 0 RANGE C OU NTY . CA LI FORNIA P 0 BOX 6127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92706 (714)540-2910 (714) 962-2411 Investigation of Diverting Santa Ana River Interceptor Sewer to Treatrrent Plant No. 2 Introduction As a result of discussions regarding the SAWPA/IXHS proposal to discharge pretreated effluent from the atandoned Stringfellow Waste Site to the Districts ' Santa Ana River Interceptor Sewer (SARI) Une, staff has investigated the permanent diversion of the SARI to Treatrrent Plant No. 2. The SARI and six other rra.jor trunk sewers are tributary to the Fountain Valley Reclarra.tion Plant No 1. With the exception of the Sunflower Interceptor Sewer, staff can select flow from all or any of the other six sewers for treatrrent at Plant No. 1 and divert renaining flows to the Huntington Beach Treatrrent Plant No. 2. 'Ihis flexibility allows the District to treat an average daily flow of about 60 r-GD at Plant No. 1. Treati~g a nearly constant flow allows the secondary facilities to operate at naximum efficiencies. Actual flow processed at Reclanation Plant No. 1 varies from a high daytirre rate of 66 M3D to a low nighttirre rate of bet- ween 55-60 M:m. At the February 13 Board Meeting , staff was directed to explore with contractors and engineers the feasibility of providing the necessary rrodi- fications to the existing diversion facilities at Plant No. 1 so that wate r from the Sunfl<J<.Ner Interceptor can be pumped into Plant No. 1 . This would enable the diversion of the entire flow from SARI (currently pro- cessed at Plant No. 1) to the Districts' Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach to preclude it from flowing through the Orange County Water District's water Factory 21. This m::xiification ~uld allow us to replace rrost of the wastewater diverted out of Plant No. 1 from SARI with flows from the Sunflower Trunk • The staff was also requested to obtain a cost estinate for said rrodifica- tions and a report from the Orange County Water District as to any con- cerns they may have regarding any effluent that ~uld cone to their Water Factory 21 and to give this information to the "Executive Carmittee at their next meeting, for a report to the Boards at the M3.rch 13th rreeting. Discussion When diverting SARI flows to Plant No. 2, at certain tirres during the night, the renaining wastewater available at Plant No. 1 will be less than desirable for optimum treatrrent capacity. Unless other flow is subst i- tuted, the biochemical oxygen derrand ( OOD) discharge requirerren ts of the pro- posed NPDES permit could be violated. The SARI currently contributes about 26 million gallons a day to the Districts' flow; however , as with all trunk sewers, about 2/3 of this flow corres during the daylight hours with the remaining 1/3 during the night. As a partial solution to the water "shortage" problem that ~uld occur at Plant No. 1 frorri diverting SARI to Treatrrent Plant No. 2, and in order to maintain adequate flows at the Fountain Valley Treatrrent Plant, tv.u changes can be made. First, the flow from the Santa Ana Trunk Se'N'er (Talbert) which is now nor- mally diverted to Treatrrent Plant No. 2 can be treated at the Fountain Valley Plant. This change is an operational change, easily rrade at the Plant No. 1 di version structure. Second, in order to maintain adequate Plant No. 1 flows at night, flows from the Sunflower Interceptor Se'N'er could supplerrent other flows treated at the Fountain Valley Plant. While the Sunflower Interceptor Sewer is tributary to the Fountain Valley Plant, it enters the plant lower than the influent sewer pumping plant (head.works), and has always been diverted to Plant No. 2. In order to treat wastewater from this sewer, a small pumping plant v.uuld be required to lift the water from the trunk sewer at the diversion structure to the Plant No. 1 head.works. Although with these changes the operating situation at Plant No. 1 ~uld be less than optimum because the water available for treatrrent at the Fountain Valley Plant will be a little less at night (about 6-8 M3) , the staff believes that it will not cause any significant problems with respect to the Districts ability to achieve the roo discharge requirerrents of the proPJSed NPDES permit. water Quality Staff has investigated the effect of diverting the water from SARI to Treatrrent Plant No. 2 and treating water from the Talbert and Sunflower Sewers at Plant No. 1. Diverting this flow to Plant No. 2 and supple- menting the loss at least in part with flow from the Talbert and Sunflower Trunk will improve sorre aspects of the Plant No. 1 activated sludge plant effluent quality. Plant No. 1 effluent total dissolved solids ('IDS) which are not ordinarily significantly reduced in the activated sludge process nay be reduced up to 250 rrg/L ( 20 % ) as a result of rerroving SARI flow from Plant No. 1. Serre rretals are found in higher concentration in SARI than in the Talbert line. However, concentrations of priority pollutants in the plant influent are generally not of great concern in terms of secondary effluent quality because rrost of these pollutants undergo a 90% reduction through the -2- ~ .... - treatm:mt process. 'llle much higher TDS levels and higher quantity of water treated at the Huntington Beach Plant will preclude any affect of the switch on that plant as the treated water from the Huntington Beach Plant is not used for reclanation. The rrost important element of the switch is to assure that an adequate arrount of water is available for treatm:mt in the Plant No. 1 primary and secondary facilities. I.aver flows available for treatm:mt at Plant No. 1 could have an affect on biochemical oxygen demand reduction, a rreasure of the organic loading in sewage. Except for this possible BOO impact, the change will have no rreasurable affect on ocean disposal standards. As the Directors are aware, the !bards have previously authorized the final testing of a physical/chemical advanced primary treatm:mt process which will improve overall BOD rerroval efficiencies in the Districts' treatm:mt f ac ili ties • Cost of MJdifications to Diversion Facilities The pumping plant on the SUnflower Interceptor Sewer would be a relatively low hydraulic lift and low cost station. It is estimated that four ( 4) pumps, each with a 2 r-GD capacity would be required. Total estimated construction cost is al:x>ut $65,000. J:lilded energy charges for pwnping are estimated to be $10,000 per year. The station would be generally operated at night to augment Talbert flows diverted into Plant No. 1. St.mmary The proposed diversion station rrodifications would require a qne-tirre capital expenditure of about $65,000 plus on-going energy charges, esti- mated at about $10,000 per year. 'llle rrodifications could be completed within 60 days of authorization by the !bards of Directors. Water quality at Plant No.· l will improve relative to total dissolved solids, l:::.ut could have a potential to be periodically degraded relative to roo loading in the ocean. HoNever, the !bards have previously authorized the testing of physical/chemical advanced primary treatm:mt rreasures which should improve current 000 rerrovals. The switch will not affect the ocean discharge. -3- Offlce of Secretary Manager ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT February 27, 1985 Mr. Wayne Sylvester General Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County· P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Dear Wayne: Diversion of SARI Line to Plant No. 2 The Orange County Water District recently held discussions with with your staff regarding the proposal to divert the Santa Ana River Interceptor {SARI) sewer to Treatment Plant No. 2. This change is being contemplated as a result of past discussions regarding the SAWPA/DOHS proposal to discharge pretreated groundwater from the abandoned Stringfellow waste site to the District's SARI sewer line. A review of the data and discussions with your staff indicate that this modification will significantly improve the waters available to OCWD for reclamation at Water Factory 21. The data indicates that there could be a reduction in the total dissolved solids concentration of approximately 250 mg/l. This reduction in salt concentration will significantly improve the quality of the water being reclaimed and used for groundwater barrier injection as well as improve the quality of water available for our future Green Acres Project. A review of the quality changes with respect to potentially toxic or priority pollutants indicates that diversion of the SARI line will have no impact on our water reclamation activities. There- fore, since the changes can only improve water quality by reducing 10500 ELLIS AVENUE • P.O. BOX 8300 FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92728-0300 TELEPHONE (714) 963-5661/556-8260 Mr. Wayne Sylvester February 27, 1985 Page 2 TDS, and since your staff analysis shows they can be acco~odated without having any negative impact on your ocean discharge or operations, we would strongly urge you to proceed with. these changes as soon as possible. Very truly yours, fJtil ()W Neil M. Cline Secretary Manager DA/mm -..,--. CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY CITY HALL 10200 SLATER AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 FROM THE OFFICE OF TH£ MAYOR December 20, 1984 Mr. Richard E. Edgar,Chairman Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Members of the Board: On behalf of the City of Fountain Valley, we believe that it would be in the best interests of everyone concerned if the District agreed to hire an independent, third-party expert to analyze the effluent to be discharged from the pre-treatment at Stringfellow and your current testing procedures and discharge ordinances. The purpose of this analysis is to reassure the citizens in the Fountain Valley/Huntington Beach/Newport Beach/Costa Mesa area that any discharge to be pt.Urped through the interceptors to Plant No. ·1 located in Fountain Valley is within acceptable limits. In particular, we want to make sure that every potential hazardous substance is being monitored and should any limitations be exceeded that dUJl)ping will cease immediately. Also, we want to make sure that effluent will be tested prior to discharge into the system and if the pre-treatment process does not adequately remove any hazardous materials or toxins, it will not be processed at all through the Sanitation District. If the Sanitation District is unwHling to secure the services of an independent consultant on this matter, we feel it incumbent to seek our own analysis. If we hire a consultant, I hope that we can expect every cooperation from the Sanitation District, EPA, State Department of Health, and Santa Ana Water Protection Authority in gathering the data necessary for this analysis. Obviously, we believe any analysis must be done prior to the corrmencing of discharge into the Sanitation District system. I would appreciate an irranediate reply to this request in order that we can determine what steps we may feel necessary to protect the residents of our City. Ben Nielsen Mayor BN:JK:bjs CC: Mayor of Huntington Beach Newport Beach Costa Mesa ~~ 11 (4ange County Board of Supervisors EPA SAWPA Attach: Resolution #8007 Mavor Philip R. Maurer ~favor Pro Tern R~thelyn Plummer Council Members Bill Agee John C. Cox Jr. Evelyn R. Hart f ackie Heather Donald A. Strauss CITY OF ·NEWPORT BEACH January 16, 1985 Board of Directors Ora·nge County Sanitation Districts 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Dear Board Members: OFFICE OF THE· MAYOR (71~) 644-3004 FILED In t!ie Office of ··ri-: Se.-;r,.,tary County Sanitat!I"":-. 0. ~·· · .. --: Nos. I . &~ S, t.,. 7,...LL'!.l.L At its meeting on.January 14, 1985, the City of Newport Beach City Council voted to support the request of the City of Fountain Valley for an independent consultant study on the ef f~cts of the use of the facilities of the· Orange County Sanitation District for the disposal of treated wast~ from the Stringfellow site into the Pacific Ocean. This letter is written at ~he request of the Newport Beach City Council to ask that the Sanitation District fund the cost of this consultant study which is estimated to be seventy-five hundred dollars. If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to call the Newport Beach Utilities Department at 644-3011. Mayor City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 POLICY OF THE BOARDS OF DIREcrORS RE SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGE TO LOCAL SEWER MANHOLES 2/20/85 Draft 2/27/85 Revised The Board of Directors, upon receiving a detailed report of its staff and General Counsel, relating to damages incurred by Cities and Sanitary Districts to their local manhole facilities which are located in the proximate vicinity of Districts' trunk sewer lines, determined that it was in the best interests of the Districts to effect a settlement of claims for reimbursement of these damages by each of the entities. The Directors have taken into consideration the relative degree of responsibility between the Sanitation Districts and the local sewering agency, together with the estimated costs of repair of said facilities, and based thereon, the Board of Directors does hereby adopt as its policy: "The Board of Directors does approve ·the settlement of claims made by any local sewering agency wherein damage has been incurred to its local trunk sewer facilities, including manholes, which are connected to the Districts' Trunk Sewers. Pursuant to this policy, the Districts will pay to each local sewering agency, the sum of (amount to be determined by each respective District) for each manhole proven to have incurred damage resulting, in part, from hydrogen sulfide gases emanating from the Districts' Trunk Sewers. The policy is to he implemented by the payment of this sum, provided the Districts receive a general release of all claims including a waiver of any future claim for damages tq its facilities and that the local sewering agency will immediately undertake to repair its manhole facilities with materials and in accordance with specifications approved by the Districts. This policy shall further be limited with regards to reimbursement for manholes already repaired by any local sewering agency to those which have been repaired since January 1, 1982." AGENDA ITEM #13(A) March 6, 1985 M E M 0 R A N D U M TO: All Directors COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708·7018 17141 540·2910 1714) 962·2411 RE: Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treated at Disposal Facilities Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Executive Summary for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on the 1983 Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities. If any Director \._) desires a copy of the full DEIR, please call staff member Hilary Baker at 540-2910. Copies of the full DEIR wil~ also be available at the Board Meeting on March 13th. In accordance with CEQA procedures, the Executive Committee is recom- mending that the Boards receive and file the DEIR and fix the hearing and public commentary period as follows: March 13, 1985 -Receive and file DEIR April 10, 1985 -Public hearing on DEIR May 1, 1985 -Close of public commentary period on DEIR The final EIR is scheduled to be submitted to the Directors for con- sideration at the regular Joint Board Meeting on June 12, 1985. JWS:sl - - .... - - - - - - - - - ..... - - - Joint Treatment Works Wastewater Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report I •• S•M f A U U .IU V (illl 0 1suuc r l ,,·-.cwM O ~f ·~l..t.C(11t T U.~•~·.,~·,.~~: l.uu OIST llt tCT Z 1 ° &l lll l A.S ( f lUJ .. I( 4 z• (UCl.10 • 01 .S TlltlCT Z 0 1.SHtlC f 6 1•" S U N f l.OW C l!· OIS TJlllCTS •• ~=?)·~ ~)/;~ .. u• (L.L I S AV ( f0 fll:C ( WA IN , ... oion IH U:llllC [ll .. T<>" 04 .STlllC TS ) • 11 0 ~ ~. -?~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~,.........._ '--' '--' ><K '-.-I '-" 0 PLANT 1 March 1985 Executive Summary r:~~!~i~~~:O\.D>!_(:_o --:L-------------------- OI S f'U C'T S l a 11 PREPAR E D FOR PLANT 2 ... ·co•sr """"ie u wt 11 Q IS T NIC T 11 J J J LJ l J J u j . I -I u i bJ . I ... ' i I I bsl j EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Joint Treatment Works Wastewater Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report March, 1985 PREFACE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY JOINT TREATMENT WORKS WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (MARCH, 1985) This Executive Summary and background information addresses proposed improvements to be made to the two regional wastewater treatment plants owned and operated by the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC). This sununary document capsulizes some of the major findings of a Draft Environmental Impact Report addressing the facilities proposed in the 1983 CSDOC Master Plan for Joint Works Treatment and Disposal Facilities and post-Master Plan· improvements which have been proposed as a result of special studies. These improvements include a new headworks, new primary treatment capacity, new sludge digestion facilities, a new outfall booster pump station, and many general operational improvement projects including major expenditures for odor control, air pollution control, and energy conservation facilities. Total cost for these projects is estimated to be $112.7 million. Of the total expenditures proposed some $33.6 million are to be spent on projects to provide for -mitigation of existing environmental concerns such as odor, air pollutant emissions, volatile organic gases and energy and chemical use. .... The summary is divided into two parts, an Executive Summary section for those desiring to read an overview of the proposed projects and their impacts and measures to mitigate these impacts, and Background Information containing an explanation of the need for and description of the proposed improvements as well as an overview of the Districts, their history, planning process, and facilities. -1- - - ... - - - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The County Sanitation Districts of Orange County CCSOOC) have provided wastewater collection, treatment, amd disposal services for northwestern Orange County for over 30 years. CSDOC is made up of eight separate sanitation districts which serve all or part of 23 cities (Figure 1). Each District is governed by a Board of Directors of elected officials representing the cities or sanitary districts within the District and· a member of the Board of Supervisors. The Districts service area includes 353 square miles of highly developed land, containing about 85 percent of the County's population of about 2.1 million persons. The service area's population of nearly 1.8 million persons has grown from 200,000 since the inception of CSDOC and wastewater flows have increased from about 30 million gallons per day (MGD) to approximately 230 MGD. CSDOC's wastewater treatment facilities constitute the third largest wastewater treatment system on the Pacific Coast. The facilities include approximately 600 miles of major interceptor sewers, 200 miles of subtrunks, 33 pump stations and two large treatment plants collectively referred to as the Joint Works Facilities. The facilities consist of Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley, Treatment Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach, and various interplant facilities to transfer flows from Plant No. 1 to Plant No. 2 and an ocean outfall effluent disposal system. These facilities, illustrated in Figure 2, are operated, maintained and administered by a staff of over 300 persons • Only municipal, commercial, and industrial wastewaters enter this system, with each District providing the required trunk sewers for individual drainage areas. -2- - - - - - - - ~ MllES RECLAMATION PLANT NO. 1 ~-..a---~ FOUNTAIN VALLEY PACIFIC OCEAN TREATMENT PLANT N0.2 HUNTINGTON BEACH SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 1089 LOS ANGELES CO OCEAN OUTFALL NO. 2 SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA , 1985 FIGURE 1 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY I I I I I I I I I I I [ I I I I I I I A ~a·'?N-<M' ~~.........,.., ...... ~ ...... -. _ ....... ea.--.---....-----...,...---...-.---- It• NEWHOPE-Pl.ACENTIA DISTRICT 2 42• EUCLID-DISTRICY 2 ---- 14• SUNFLOWER------- Dl8TRICT8 1&7 re• DIVERSION CONNECTION ee• KNOTT INTERCEPTOR DISTRICTS S& t 1- 94• SANTA ANA RIVER-DISTRICT 2 ---48• SANTA ANA-DISTRICT t 39• AIRBASE TRUNK- DISTRICT 8 .. 0 8 00. Plant No. 1 Q o 6~·. '+1'~ 19,ol '.f+,. 1e• INTERPLANT INTERCEPTOR 54 • MAGNOLIA-BUSHARD INTERCEPTOR DISTRICTS 2&3 ·78~ MILLER-HOLDER INTERCEPTOR -DISTRICTS 8&11 u• COAST TRUNK SEWER DISTRICT 11 Plant No. 2 CSDOC JOINT TREATMENT WORKS SCHEMATIC COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY NO SCALI FIGURE 2 ... Local jurisdictions (cities and sanitary districts) are still responsible for providing collector sewer systems for individual parcels which then connect to the CSDOC system. The Orange County Flood Control District owns and operates a separate extensive local storm draim system, not connected to the CSDOC sewer system, designed to accommodate surface and storm runoff and eliminate inflow into the sewer • This Master Plan DEIR evaluates in a general manner the impacts associated with providing treatment facilities necessary to serve anticipated regional needs for a 20 year period. However, specific projects to meet projected wastewater needs are constructed to meet needs on a five-year incremental basis. Some facilities, such as the proposed Headworks at Plant No. 1 and Outfall Booster Station at Plant No. 2, are designed and initially constructed to serve long-term needs on a scale of 20-40 years, but pumps and other equipment are ... added only as needed. As the need for treatment facilities to meet both capacity and level-of-treatment demands is experienced, the Districts will ... .. .. respond through an on-going construction program. The two regional treatment plants have an existing nominal design capacity to treat 220 million gallons per day (MGD) (with 12 MGD of standby capacity at Plant No. 2) of flow to a level adequate to meet applicable State and Federal discharge limitations. The total treatment capacity of 232 MGD (which includes all available 12 MGD of standby capacity) is now fully utilized to treat existing flows. Additional treatment capacity proposed includes the addition of 24 MGD of primary treatment facilities at Plant No. 1 to accommodate flows expected by the year 1988 • -3- - - - - Need for Proposed Joint Works Facilities Improvements The Joint Treatment Works presently have a combined nominal rated design treatment capacity of 232 MGD. There is currently no standby capacity as the Districts are using all capacity to handle current flows. It is desirable to have 12 MGD standby capacity at Plant No. 1 and 24 MGD at Plant No. 2 to use when facilities are down for repair. In the 1983-84 fiscal year the CSDOC treated an average of 230 MGD of wastewater. This average represents an increase of approximately five percent over the average daily flow (ADF) of 221 MGD in 1981-82 and 25 percent over the ADF of 185 MGD in 1977-1978. The increase is a result of an increasing population within the CSDOC area, an increase in per capita flows, and wastewater flows from the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed (SAWPA) which began in 1982 and now average about 2.67 MGD. The Santa Ana River Interceptor was constructed in 1972 to provide for management of upper basin brines which were contaminating Orange County's groundwater. Water and air pollution regulatory agencies specify that all wastewater facilities must be designed to meet the needs of all normal anticipated growth with a reasonable reserve capacity. Facilities are designed in accordance with the latest population projections of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), stipulating that population projections must be consistent with forecasts used in the Areawide Air Quality Maintenance Plan and the Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan (Section 208) developed under mandates of the Federal Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. Immediate improvements are needed to provide additional treatment and hydraulic capacity to accommodate the service area's growing population. In -4- 1983, it was estimated that in 1987-88, the total projected average flow rate at the CSDOC plants was expected to increase 16 percent (270 MGD) and by 2002-3, the flow rate is expected to increase by 33 percent (307 MGD). To date, the Districts have successfully met their current discharge requirements with the existing facilities by operating efficiencies in excess of rated capacity. This has been the result of superior operation and maintenance, decreased sewage strength, encroachment into standby capacity and a general lack of intense storms. The major exception was the 100 year storm event in March of • 1983 which overtaxed the existing system's capabilities resulting in the overflow of untreated sewage in local streets, due to a lack of influent pumping capacity to handle the 400-plus MGD of storm flow. As flows increase and discharge requirements become more stringent, however, it will become progressively more difficult to meet discharge requirements without additional ... Joint Works treatment improvements, both in capacity and level of treatment. ... ... .. ... ... Description of Proposed Improvements The following sections describe the proposed improvements to the two treatment plants recommended in the 1983 Master Plan as well as post-Master Plan improvements and recommended odor control facilities and cogeneration*** facilities, as a result of special studies ordered by the Board of Directors. ***Cogeneration is the process of generating electricity and recovering heat from a combination of engines and generators with optimzed waste heat recovery. The proposed power stations will burn existing surplus digester gas in new engines equipped with the best available air pollution control equipment. The two proposed projects will greatly reduce the need to depend upon purchased power from the Southern California Edison Company while reducing overall air pollutant emissions. This will result from substitution of electric motors for internal combustion engines used to drive pumps, blower and other equipment • -5- .. .. .. .. Reclamation Plant No. 1 Proposed 1983 Master Plan Improvements Average daily flow rates reaching Reclamation Plant No. 1 are expected to increase by as much as 24 MGD by 1987-88. A new Plant No. 1 headworks, and additional primary clarification and digestion capacity will be required to accommodate these projected flows. A new 100 MGD (average flow) headworks has been proposed with an initial pumping capacity of 80 MGD (peak pumping capacity to handle storm flows is proposed to total 200 MGD by the year 2002). Initially, the new headworks would feed the additional 24 MGD (average flow) of primary clarification capacity and two new 110-foot diameter digesters that would be added. The location, estimated costs, and appearance of these proposed improvements are depicted in Figure 3 • Treatment Plant No. 2 Proposed Improvements Treatment Plant No. 2 has now reached its planned capacity of 174 MGD (allowing for an additional 24 MGD of standby capacity) for primary treatment and 75 MGD for secondary treatment. Addition of the following facilities is still needed to provide improvements for hydraulic reliability and environmental mitigation: replacement of two pumps in headworks C and construction of a new 600 MGD outfall booster pump station to serve both plants. Figure 4 shows the location, estimated costs and appearance of these facilities proposed in the 1983 Master Plan. Post Master Plan Improvements at Joint Works Facilities Subsequent to completion of the Master Plan, the Districts have authorized two major studies of the Joint Works facilities which recommended major improvements and projects to mitigate existing environmental concerns. -6- D '0RKS CAUSTIC SODA f; ·:m -GRIT HOPPER SCRUBBERS •I ___ ,. .. - ~· ... · ··--· ... - NEW HEADWORKS AT PLANT NO. 1 s "" RESIDENTIAL ··~~VELOPMENT "" CSDOC PLANT N0.1 "'-· 106 ACRE SITE J "- PLANT WATER 'PUMP ST~_TJON ~=---=--~ . ......___ . ··~, /[]gs i I c COGENE RA TION A ER ATION IMPRO VEMENTS (MEDIUM BUBBL E DIFFUSERS) OPEN SPACE FACILITY I I I~ :~ I~ -··1 -----------· '"""""''"''"""""' I i \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ . ~ . ,~W0.\'V\\\\'\~ I: . \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ . I DISTRICT OWNED LAND ,. I n~n u • i , ..... """' '". uu u 0 I .. ----'---·--·----------·--·----J A " 0 ST SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION ENTIAL DE V E LOPMENT -·-1 1 · LEGEND D EXISTlllG LJ . PROPOSED NEW FACILITIES ~ IMPROVEMENTS TO EXIST ING FACILIT I ES A AERATION BASIN Bl BLOWER BUILDING DC DISTR IBUTI ON CENTER(l 2KV) HW HEAOWORKS l LABORATORY D DIGESTER OB OFF ICE BUILD ING HS METERI NG & DIVERS ION STRUC TUR E s SERVICE BUILDING P SEDIHE NTATI ON BASIN C CLAR I fl ERS TF TRICKL ING FILTER T THICKENERS CB CON TRD ~ BUI LD ING SC SCRUBBERS (odo r control) RECLAMATION PLANT N0 .. 1 IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 3 TYPICAL DOME SUHllARY Of FIV E YEAR HEEDS AT RECLAllAT JON PLANT NO . I Dtscrlptlon of Proposed Additional Facllltlts BASIC HYCRAULIC HEEOS New Htad works Facility Structurt (Encl . Bldg .) Bir Scrttns Raw SewaC)t Pu11'4ls (67 MGD ta) Grit Remova 1 No . of Bulns Stand-by Power Foul At r Control Prt Chlorination Facility Chl orl nators Bulk Stor19f Prl1114ry Sedl aorntatlo n Rtctan9uhr Tanks Primary Sol Id s Handll ng Sludgr Dlqtstlon Ho. of Units Plant Wattr Pu111p Stat i on Eltctrlcal Rtllablllty OPERATIOllAl EFFICIENCY HEEDS Aeration Effluent Improv eme nts Htat Rtcovrry Gas utilization Equipment Mixing Equip ment Low Prtss Stg. Sphert High Prtss Compressor Bo11tr Facility EHYIROHIEHTAL HITIGATIOH HEEDS Prechlorination Facilities Coqeneratlon Facility Odor Control Facilities Headworks Priinary Clariflers Dewatering Bldg . Value a nd Capacity 100 MGO 3 + 2 future 3 + I future 4 tach goo KW Estimated Project Cost (al S2 2 , 120,000 (stt Env . Mitigation Needs) 3 + I futurr I t xt 5,000 gallon tank 4 {I 6 HGO ta 2 {I 110 ft . diameter ea 1800 GPH I ea TO TAL 46 HGD Exist i ng engines 3 di gesters 25,000 cu . ft. 500 CFM TOTAL I ea {I Headwo rks 2700 KW Cove r /Sc rub b 5 ea cover/scrubb 30,000 CFH sc rub b TOTAL GRAN O TOTAL SS,4 00,000 S8,800,000 S2,250,000 S2, 700,000 S41,270 ,000 SI ,800)000 SI ,440 ,000 S670,000 S330,000 $890,000 s 230 1000 SS,360,000 S830,000 $7 ,990,000 $810,000 $2,090,000 S450,000 Sl2, 170,000 ss01 000 1 000 (a ) January, 1985 Pr ojec t Costs (EHRLA 5300) Incl udes 151 for enginerr!ng, ad•lnlstratlon and con tingencies 11EfEfUHO & OIVlllSIOll STRUCT UR E l'OWEll~ 8Ullo+HO LJ_J PLAN VIEW PROPOSE NEW HEAD\ :IC a: < Cl. ...J < a: .... tn :> a z c i q;=J -·· --··--·---··---·--·· 10 D 1 o[JAUGd COJJY i 0 CJ· '"D'"" L= .. _______________ _ r·-- RESIOI ~- --~- 'OSED OUTFALL 9 HER PU M P STATI O N J CG SURGE TOWER ~EXTENSION ·~~--'- NEW BOOSTER PUMP STA TION AT T REATM ENT PLANT NO. 2 CSDOC PLANT N0.2 108 ACRE SITE FLAP GA TES / / / / LEGEND D (XISTillG (===:J PROPOSED NEW FACILITIES ~ IMPROV£MEIHS TO EXISTING FACILI TIE S C CLARIFIER BPS OUTFA LL BOOSTER PUMP STATION D DIGESTERS P SEDH1ENTATION BASIN HW HEADWORKS GCB GAS COMPRESSOR BUILDING PS POWER BUILD ING GS GAS STORAGE CTB CE NTRIFUGE BU ILD ING CF CH LORINAT ION FACILITIES 0 OXYG ENATION BAS IN co CRYOGE NIC OXYGEN FACILITIES SH SOLi OS HMD LJ NG CG COGENERAT ION FACILITY T TH I CKENER TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2 IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 4 . ~ ·----------------~~~~~---------~ T Y PICAL DO ME SUllMARY Of 5 YEAR riEEOS AT THATMEN T PLANT NO. 2 {Includes Joint Facilities Located at Plant No. 2) Description of Proposed Additiona l Facilities BASIC HYDRAULIC HEEDS Outfall Booster Pump Station Extend Surge Tower Flap Gates for Discharge 003 Headworks C Pump Upgrade OPERATIONAL EFFIC I ENCY HEEDS Value and Capa city 480 MGD 2 ea 2 II 48 HGD TOTAL Odor Hoods fo r Belt Presses l 4 ENVIRONMENTAL HI TIGATJOH HEEDS Cogeneration Facili ty Fu! 1 Clari f ier Covers & Scrubbing Fu 11 Surge Tower Cover & Scrubbing Trunk Line Sc rubber 11ods 5, 300 KW 15 I I GRANO TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL Estimated Project Costs (a ) S28 ,6t!O ,OOO S90 ,000 SI 10 ,000 S66 0 ,000 S29,S4 0,000 S2,89S,OOO S2,89S ,OOO Sl 2 , 700,000 SS,240,000 S270,000 S290,000 S2 I , SOO , 000 SS3, 935,000 (a ) January, l985 Project costs (E HRLA 5300) inc ludes 151 for engineering , administration and contingenc ies ·-, I I I SCRUBBER S I I )-FUTURE EX T E NSION '~, II ~ OF BA NNING AVE . -,, I "'J "") ',_ .o ;z: 1-I ~ I I I n ~·E L O PME N T =1C BUSHARD STREET ( I The first of these was an odor evaluation study by a firm with expertise in odor control. This study, completed in November of 1984, recommended several odor control projects at both treatment plants. Included were covers for odor collection and scrubbing on primary clarifiers at Plant No. 1, Plant No. 2, plus other odor control facilities. In December, 1984, the Districts' Boards of Directors authorized implementation of the complete odor control program recommended with full covering of existing primary clarifiers at both plants. In addition, they approved a policy to control odors from existing facilities through an aggressive retrofitting program and inclusion of odor mitigation measures in all future facilities. The facilities approved are addressed in the DEIR and depicted in Figures 3 and 4. Another study of major importance is a Digester Gas Utilization Study which was done to evaluate various means of optimizing the use of CSDOC-generated digester gas while at the same time complying with new more stringent air pollution control regulations for controlling sulfur and oxide of nitrogen emissions. Major retrofitting of existing engines and advanced technology on new engines is required to meet these regulations. Cogeneration will provide a centralized means of generating electrical power from digester gas, improved and more efficient use of waste heat from engines, and a more effective, less costly means of complying with air pollution control regulations. As recommended, cogeneration facilities will allow the use of electric motors for the new headworks at Plant No. 1 and outfall booster station at Plant No. 2. Also, greater use of existing electric motors and less dependence on existing digester gas-fueled -7- I internal combustion engines can be achieved with substantial cost savings and overall reductions in air pollutant emissions. Details on the cogeneration facilities and consideration of their construction will soon be evaluated by the Districts• Boards of Directors. The cogeneration facilities are being addressed in this DEIR to expedite their completion since they are a major environmental mitigation project. Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures A detailed evaluation of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed improvements at the two treatment plants is contained in Chapter IV of the DEIR and summarized herein in Table 1. To the extent possible, impacts have been quantified where sufficient information exists to do so. Of particular concern has been the use of energy, the generation of air pollutant emissions in the form of malodorous gases and gases from internal combustion engines used to drive pumps and other equipment, and the use of chemicals for odor control and wastewater solids conditioning. The major concerns relate to the need to control odors, reduce air pollutant emissions, and reduce the usage and costs of energy and chemicals. Maintaining effluent quality within prescribed limitations and preventing the overflow of untreated sewage to local streets and/or effluent to the Santa Ana River is another very important consideration. Short-Term Construction Impacts Construction of the proposed facilities will generate short-term construction-related impacts which to a large extent can be mitigated. Construction of various facilities has been underway at Plant No. 2 on -8- almost a continuous basis for the past six years without any adverse impacts on the neighboring residential community except for the occasional presence of odors (created by operational conditions which often can be impaired during certain critical periods when tie-ins are made between old and new facilities). No new facilities have been constructed at Plant No. 1 in over 10 years and the new major facilities proposed are not expected to cause any significant impacts if appropriate mitigation measures are employed to reduce traffic, congestion or interferences, noise, and air pollutant emissions (particularly dust). Long-Term Operational Impacts Operation of the improved facilities will result in a net reduction in impacts of concern to local residents. Odors, air pollutant emissions, chemical use and energy consumption will be reduced by the proposed improvements. The most significant improvement will be the implementation of odor control through the covering of existing primary clarifiers and other facilities and the collection and treatment of malodorous air streams. This will also capture organic gases that may be released during the treatment process. Covering will also reduce the need for extensive prechlorination, thus reducing chlorine usage. Energy use at both plants will be reduced through the construction of two cogeneration facilities to optimize the use of digester gas generated during the digestion of captured sludges from the treatment processes. This will reduce air pollutant emissions also, since older engines will gradually be phased out or replaced with electric motors and the new cogeneration engines will be equipped with the latest air pollution control equipment. -9- Secondary Growth-Related Indirect Impacts Growth-related impacts associated with the Districts' accommodation of planned urban growth of the member cities and the County areas which are served by the CSDOC facilities are beyond the control of CSDOC to mitigate. However, these impacts are addressed on ·a case-by-case basis during the development of General Plans of the cities and County and other local planning efforts or by regional agencies during the development of the Water Quality Control Plan or Air Quality Maintenance Plan. Such impacts are of concern on a regional basis, since air quality standards are not now achieved and traffic congestion is getting worse. A general discussion of these impacts, the types of utilization measures which can be employed and the agencies responsible for their implementation is included in the DEIR . in Chapter V. A summary of the various agencies influencing the proposed project and having general authority to help mitigate some of the growth-related impacts are listed in Table 2. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures A summary of the construction-related and post construction operational impacts associated with the proposed projects (the primary or direct project impacts) are shown in Table 1. Also included in Table 1 are the indirect or secondary growth-related projects which are associated with the growth of the CSDOC service area. These impacts are not within the scope of mitigation of CSDOC which is a single-purpose agency providing wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal facilities and serves to accommodate the planned urban growth of its members. -10- 1 ] 1 J 1 ] J J 1 ) ] ] ] ] ) ] J 1 Table 1 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES* Area of Concern/ Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures Geology/Soils/ Seismicity Mitigable Mitigable Mitigable Water Resources Mitigable PRIMARY: Construction The existing soil profile at Plant #1 would be destroyed to a depth of up to 15 feet to construct the facilities. Foundations and structures would be built to withstand a maximum expected earthquake The Plant #2 site will be excavated to a depth of up to 15 feet to construct the proposed facilities. The excavation will alter the existing remaining soil profile to a depth already modified by sludge drying operations PRIMARY: Operational (Both Plants) A major earthquake along the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone could damage proposed facilities resulting in the release of untreated sewage into the streets. The hazard is greatest at Plant #2 with liquefaction a potential concern at Plant 11 PRIMARY: Construction (Both Plants) Construction may require site dewatering for deep foundations or excavation work Soil and geological studies will be conducted to evaluate foundation resistance During construction, soil subject to wind blowing will be watered to minimize dust Soil and geological studies will be conducted to evaluate foundation resistance During construction, soil subject to wind blowing will be watered to minimize dust Rubber gasketed mechanical joints will be used to connect pipes to treatment faci- lities to minimize ruptures during earthquakes. All facilities are and will be designed to earthquake st"andards. Desanding of water and water disposal in accordance with EPA and RWQCB NPDES Permit guidelines *For a description of definitions and terms used in this summary see the end of this table j ) 1 1 ) ) ) ] ) J j 1 ] 1 1 J 1 1 ] ·Area of Concern? Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures Positive Impact Mitigable Air Quality and Microclimate Mitigable Positive Impact PRIMARY: Operational (Both Plants) An increase in the ability to handle existing peak and hydraulic flows will result from the project, thereby resulting in a beneficial impact of preventing overflows of raw waste- water. No adverse impacts on water quality are expected SECONDARY Future water demands are anticipated to exceed the developable supply resulting in higher water costs PRIMARY: Construction Dust emissions at Plant #1 are estimated to be as high as 110 lb/day per acre over a 21 month period for a two acre maximum area. Dust should not pose a nuisance to residential areas of Costa Mesa and Fountain Valley if mitigation measures are implemented PRIMARY: Operational (Both Plants) A net benefit in terms of existing air quality should occur. Odors, largely in the form of hydrogen sulfide, are estimated to be reduced from over 280 pounds per day to less than 3 pounds per day through construction of covers and scrubbers on existing facilities. An increase in prechlorination capacity and digester gas clean-up projects will further reduce odors and SO and NO emissions x x No mitigation measure& are required Provide additional imported water supplies. Continue to implement wastewater conserva- tion and reclamation projects. During construction, watering should occur on a daily basis as needed for dust suppression. Use of well tuned and properly maintained equipment can reduce gaseous pollutant emissions. Discontinuing con- struction during second stage smog alerts will also reduce air pollution problems on poor air quality days Implementation of cogeneration facilities*** will reduce air pollutant emissions. Retrofitting of existing internal combust- ion engines with approved air pollution control equipment (i.e., selective dilution) for meeting required reductions for NO and CO. Addition of ferrous chlori~e to digesters will reduce SO • . x emissions I I I I ] Area of Concern/ Impact Status Unavoidable Adverse Impact Biotic Resources No Impact I ] J J J j I Impacts Estimated emissions from engines installed in the new booster station and. headworks are expected to be lower than the emissions from the existing engines which will be abandoned. No , so 2 and hydrocarbons will decrease a~d CO may increase or decrease depending on the engine ultimately selected for co-generation facilities. SECONDARY Continued population growth in Orange County will increase air pollution emissions associated with transporta- tion, fuel combustion, and industrial production. Districts provide facilities to accommodate urban growth planned and approved by cities and the County. PRIMARY: Construction A few existing trees originally planted by the District will have to be removed at Plant #1. Portions of the plant site are suitable urban wildlife habitat and will remain as such following construct- ion if landscaping is reintroduced No impacts on biotic resources will occur as a result of construction activities at Plant #2. 1 J I J ) ] J Mitigation Measures **Emissions control measures include vapor recovery and reduction in volatility; motor vehicle inspection and maintenance programs; extended warranty on new cars; additional emission controls on motor vehicles; and home utility engine replacement No mitigation measures are required but landscaping around plant perimeters and interior is recommended I J ) J J J J J I J J 1 ] ) J I J J j Area of Concern/ Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures Positive Impact/ Mitigable Unavoidable Adverse Impact Cultural and PRIMARY: Operational (Both Plants) Seagulls and crows which feed on food floating in primary clarifiers will be displaced once covers are placed. on clarifiers. This will reduce potential transmission of pathogens. Existing trees and landscaping which will be removed will reduce potential wildlife habitat for some birds. Marine dis- posal of effluent is not expected to adversely affect biota SECONDARY Continued development will reduce agricultural land, open space, and wildlife habitat. Fish and other riparian fauna will be affected by water resources development projects Scientific Resources PRIMARY: Construction (Both Plants) No Impact Archeological surveys have concluded that there are no known cultural or scientific artifacts at either site. Thus, construction impacts at the two sites will have no impact on any known cultural, scientific or historical resources~ 1. Means of providing improved wildlife habitat should be evaluated 2. Industrial and non-industrial source control programs should continue to be enforced. 3. Continue to maintain effluent quality to meet NPDES Permit limitations and conduct $1.5 million annual marine monitoring program 4. Research on improved wastewater disposal practices should continue **Promote preservation of wildlife habitat, open space, and agricultural land; encourage higher density (less space con- sumptive) development; preserve endangered species habitats No additional site survey work is needed to identify cultural artifacts. However, if something of potential scientific, cultural or historic interest is discovered during construction, an expert should be called in to investigate and work stopped in the immediate area ) J I ) J I 1 ] J ] 1 ] 1 J 1 j J ] J Area orconcern/ Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures No Impact Mitigable Land Use Unavoidable Adverse Impact PRIMARY: Operational (Both Plants) No i~pacts will occur SECONDARY Continued urbanization threatens to destroy significant historic and cultural landmarks. PRIMARY: Construction The proposed Plant il facilities will encompass less than two acres. About 41 acres will remain available for future construction. The proposed Plant #2 facilities will encompass one acre of land. Sufficient land will remain available for con- struction of future treatment facilities if needed. PRIMARY: Operational A new digester cleaning area at Plant #2 may be needed resulting in an additional use of one to two acres of fallow, disced land No impacts will occur at Plant il SECONDARY Depending on the actual rate of growth in Orange County, remaining agricultural land could continue to be developed at the rate of 150 acres per year. Other land will be developed as General Plans are implemented. No mitigation measures are required **Continue inventory and mapping programs to identify cultural resources; support historic preservation efforts. Support archeological, paleontological and scientific research for important sites Orange County. No mitigation measures are necessary No mitigation measures are necessary No mitigation measures are required No mitigation measures are required in **Preserve agricultural land; carefully plan shoreline development, development near water courses and floodplains, and pro- tect scenic and wildlife areas ) ] ] ) j j I j -J ] J ] 1 J 1 .I J J ] Area of Concern? Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures Visual/Scenic Qualities Unavoidable Adverse Impact No Impact Unavoidable Adverse Impact Unavoidable Adverse Impact Public Service and Utilities No Impact Mitigable PRIMARY: Construction (Both Plants) Cranes will be visible during construction. PRIMARY: Operational The proposed facilities at Plant il will have an appearance similar to existing plant structures and will be built in the interior portion of the site. The outfall surge tower at Plant #2 will be raised to a height of 85 feet and will be highly visible. The out- fall booster station will be visible from Route 1 and the Costa Mesa Bluffs area. SECONDARY Scenic views tend to decrease with continued urban growth. PRIMARY: Construction (Both Plants) No significant impacts expected during construction of the proposed facilities. PRIMARY: Operational (Both Plants) Energy use will increase substantially unless cogeneration projects are constructed. No mitigation measures are required. Efforts to visually enhance the plant sites should continue in the form of perimeter berms, walls and landscaping, and post- construction landscaping of thP. interior grounds. Use of texturing or paint to improve appearance of the surge tower extension should be considered. **Consider visual impacts in the siting and design of structures and land development projects; retain open space for its scenic value. No mitigation measures are required. Implement the most cost effective treatment facilities which use the least amount of energy, such as: J 1 ] I j ] j ) ] ] ] 1 ] ] ] ] ] ] ] Area of Concern/ Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures Mitigable Transportation Unavoidable Adverse Impact SECONDARY Urban growth will place greater demands on existing transportation systems and create a need for additional waste disposal facilities, schools, police, fire protection and other governmental services PRIMARY: Construction Construction worker traffic will number 60-80 vehicles per day at Plant #1. At certain stages of construction, temporary local impacts will be signi- ficant. Construction of the headworks will require transport of a significant amount of concrete and thus a great number of trucks will be necessary for concrete delivery (550 trucks over a two to three month period) Plant #2 Construction-related traffic will be similar to Plant #1 but fewer projects will be underway. Impacts should not be significant 1. Maximizing use of digester gas 2. Optimizing sludge dewatering operations to minimize polymer and potable water use 3. Implementing cogeneration projects **Improve public transportation; encourage carpooling; reuse and recovery waste material, etc. A traffic management plan should be developed in cooperation with the selected contractors, the District, Caltrans, and the Cities of Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley. Plant #1 has almost direct access to the San Diego Freeway which should minimize local impacts. Relocation of the existing new service entrance and access road has been proposed to provide direct signalized access to and from Plant #1. J 1 J I ] ] ] ] j ] ] ] ] ] J ] ] j ] Area of concern/ Impact Status Impacts ___ __ Mitigation Measures Unavoidable Adverse Impact Mitigable Noise Mitigable Mitigable PRIMARY: Operational There will be approximately a ten percent increase in truck and automobile traffic over existing operations. Truck trips will increase between three and five per day as a result of delivering chlorine, polymers, sodium hydroxide and other chemicals and supplies and hauling grit, sludge and other residues tb an offsite disposal site. SECONDARY Continued overcrowding of Orange County's freeway system will occur unless the region's transit system under- goes some changes. PRIMARY: Construction Noise levels associated with construct- ion at Plant il are expected to range from 75 dB(A) to 105 dB(A) within 50 feet of the equipment being used. Pile driving operations (if employed) will generate the greatest source, ranging from 95 dB(A) to 105 dB(A). Noise levels associated with construction of the outfall booster station and replacement of pumps in Headworks C at Plant #2 are expected to range from 70 dB(A) to 96 dB(A) within 50 feet of the equipment being used. These levels should not result in nuisance noise levels off the site. CSDOC staff should meet with local municipal jurisdictions and agree on a traffic control plan for each of the treatment plants as is proposed for construction-related impacts. **Convert local streets into high-flow arterials: encourage vanpools, staggered work hours, modified work weeks, parking disincentives, promote telecommunications and other menas of reducing dependency on automobiles for transportation or increasing efficiency of existing faci- lities. Construction activities should not conunence before 7:30 a.m. nor extend past the hour of 5:30 p.m. or the hours stipulated by local ordinances. Low noise level equip- ment and noise barriers should be used. If feasible, pile drivers should not be used. Construction activities should not commence before 7:30 a.m. nor extend past the hour of 5:30 p.m. or the hours stipulated by local ordinances. Low noise level equip- ment and noise barriers should be used. If feasible, pile drivers should not be used. J 1 I J I J j J J I .I 1 ] 1 1 ] ] J 1 Area of Concerri/ Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures Mitigable Economic Factors Positive Impact Impact Positive Impact PRIMARY: Operational (Both Plants) Community noise sources of greatest concern if not controlled are internal combustion engines, centrifugal blowers or turbines. PRIMARY: Construction District funds are available to complete the projects without neces- sitating additional revenue-raising actions. Additional jobs will be created through the design of the f?cilities, construction, and the administration of contracts. PRIMARY: Operational: The present operating budget of $23.6 million will probably increase by $2.4 million. The increase will occur as a result of improvements made as part of the environmental mitigation projects proposed. SECONDARY The economy of Orange County is expected to prosper with increased development. Nearly all the noise associated with operations can be mitigated by enclosure of noisy operations, selection of low-noise equipment, and scheduling of operations to avoid nighttime operation of vehicles on local surface streets. Workers can be protected by participating in safety training programs and using protective hearing equipment. All future facilities and many existing facilities will be enclosed for odor control purposes. This will also reduce noise. No mitigation measures are required. No mitigation measures are required. **Provide employment opportunities and affordable housing and require new development to pay for capital improve ments needed to accommodate growth. I ] I ) j ] J 1 ] ] ] ] ] ] ] j ] ] 1 Area of Concern! Impact Status Impacts . Mitigation Measures Health and Safety Considerations No Impacts Mitigable Energy/Resource Commitment Unavoidable Adverse Impact Partially Mitigable PRIMARY: Construction No health and safety impacts are anticipated. PRIMARY: Operational Covering and treating air streams will reduce the concentration of organic gases volatilized during wastewater treatment. PRIMARY: Construction Secondary energy embodied in concrete, steel, equipment and labor constitute the largest commitments of energy. PRIMARY: Operational Energy: Based on a 24 MGD increase, it is estimated that for each million gallons of .wastewater treated 11,000 cubic feet of digester gas, 595 Kilowatt hours of electricity and 1,000 cubic feet of natural gas will be utilized. Energy consumption by odor control systems and chemical and con- sumable materials are also quite high· No mitigation measures are required. Cover or enclose existing and new facilities to minimize odors, aerosols, and volatile compound emissions; purchase and maintain best available safety equipment; and con- tinue to conduct safety and training classes. Maximize use of materials by good design and one-time construction of major structures to be fitted with equipment when needed. Energy: Cogeneration and heat recovery projects will reduce energy use; reduce chlorine sodium hydroxide and activated carbon use to the lowest possible level; consider use of digester gas in District vehicles. ) I I ) J 1 I ] ] ] ) I I J ) I ] j J Area of Concern/ Im~a._c_t__Status ~ ___ Impact~--__ Mitigation Measures Unavoidable Adverse Impact Unavoidable Adverse Impact Nuisance Factors Resources: Implementing the odor mitigation project will re.ducP. the amount of chlorine used by the Districts: however, use of hydrogen peroxide, sodium hydroxide, polymers and ferrous and ferric chloride will increase SECONDARY Urban development will increase demands for energy resources such as gasoline, natural gas and electric power PRIMARY: Construction The most significant nuisance conditions likely to occur are odor and traffic. Odors will be greatest when tie-ins with existing facilities occur or when start up of operations commence PRIMARY: Operational See operational impacts under individual subject Resources: Implement proper handling and storage techniques to minimize risk of hazards associated with use of chemicals **Conserve energy in existing and new development projects and commercial and industrial operations See mitigation measures under individual subject headings See operational mitigation measures under individual subject headings I I I I J 1 ] ] J 1 J 1 1 ] Table 1 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Footnotes 1 j I 1 1 * Definitions: ** *** Primary Impacts: Those impacts which are directly associated with construction and operation of the proposed projects. Construction Impacts: Relatively short-term impacts which will occur during the construction of the facilities or improvements. They can range from excavation-associated changes in the soil profile to traffic in~reases associated with construction worker commuting and deliveries of building materials and equipment. Operational Impacts: Impacts associated with operation of the completed facilities. These can be either increases or decreases in existing usage patterns for energy, chemicals, air pollutant emissions, expenditures for operation and maintenance or supplies. Operational improvements can reduce these impacts, while the addition of new facilities may change existing conditions either positively (i.e., reduced odors or energy use), or negatively (more employees required, hence increased commuting). Secondary Impacts: Indirect impacts associated with project implementation or accommodation of new urban development. These impacts are numerous in nature and relate to all the activities, needs and demands associated with continued development or redevelopment of portions of the Districts' service area. These impacts are not generated or controlled in any way by the District, but are associated indirectly by their provision of increased treatment capacity to service planned and approved urban growth of member agencies. Mitigation Measures: Measures taken to reduce, minimize or eliminate environmental impacts or the effects of a project. Mitigation can include the following: 1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. 2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. 3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment. 4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. 5) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. The Districts will cooperate with agencies responsible for implementing these measures. partial listing of agencies. See Table 2 for a Cogeneration is the process of generating electricity and recovering heat from a combination of engines and generators with optimized waste heat recovery. The proposed power stations will burn existing surplus di- gester gas in new engines equipped with the best available air pollution control equipment. The two proposed projects will greatly reduce the need to depend upon purchased power from the Southern California Edison Company while reducing overall air pollutant emissions. This will result from substitution of electric motors for internal combustion engines used to drive pumps, blower and other equipment. J Agency Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region Orange County Water District Air Resources Board Table 2 AGENCIES INFLUENCING PROPOSED PROJECT OR HAVING AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT MAJOR MITIGATION MEASURES FOR GROWTH-RELATED IMPACTS Authority Shares responsibility with SWRCB to coordinate and control water quality. Formulates and adopts water quality control plans for CSDOC service area. Implements portions of the Clean Water Act when EPA and SWRCB delegate authority as is the case with issuance of NPDES Permits for waste dischar9e. Protects and manages the County's groundwater basin. Also, (1) provides for importation of water; (2) prevents water waste; (3) provides advanced treatment for reclamation of wastewater for beneficial reuse, and (4) pro- vides for conservation and control of storm water and flood water flowing into the District. Responsible for maintaining and managin9 groundwater rechar9e facilities, multi-purpose projects and sea water intrusion control projects including the Water Factory 21 advanced treatment facilities. Responsible for the adoption and enforcement of standards, rules, and -regulations for the control of air pollution from mobile sources throughout the State. Southern California Association of Governments Formed to provide more effective regional planning in Southern California. Charged with providing a framework for orderly regional growth and developmentr a clearinghouse for Federal grant applications such as those required to obtain a Clean Water Grant for wastewater treatment facilities. Local Agency Formation Commission State Department of Water Resources ~etropolitan Water District State Department of Health South Coast Air Quality Management District California Enerqy Commission County of Orange Local Cities (within CSDOC service area) Empowered to approve or disapprove all proposals to incorporate cities to form special districts or to annex territories to cities or special district. Also empowered to guide growth of governmental service responsibilities. Provides planning, desiqn, construction and management of water resources on a statewide basis to serve local water management agencies with dependable supplies of water. Responsible for the development, storage, transportation and wholesaling of water to member agencies for domestic and municipal purposes. Obtains water from California State Water Project and Colorado River Aqueduct. Responsible for the purity, wholesomeness, and potability of domestic water supplies for the State. Assists State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Boards in setting quality standards of wastewater discharge. Adopts and enforces local regulations governing stationary sources of air pollutants. Issues Authority to Construct Permits and Permits to Operate. Provides compliance inspections of facilities and monitors regional air quality. Requires enerqy needs forecasts from public utilities serving the CSDOC service area. Considers applications for new enerqy facilities and certifies as to their need and grants necessary approvals through rigorous regulatory process to assure compliance with environmental protection laws and regulations. Responsible for planning, land use and environmental protection of unincorporated areas. Of particular importance are development of presently undeveloped lands, provision of regional solid waste management facilities, and regional transportation, air quality and flood control improvement programs. Responsible for adoption of local General Plans and various planning elements and local land use regulation. Responsible for local collector sewerage facilities. Adopt and implement local ordinances for control of noise and ether environmental concerns. Participate in regional air quality maintenance planning through adoption of local programs to control emissions via transportation improvements. Responsible for enforcing adopted enerqy efficiency standards in new construction. . ~ BACKGROUND INFORMATION Historical Overview Historically, there have been several comprehensive studies to evaluate Orange County's wastewater facilities needs. These have guided the formation of the Districts and the location of existing regional facilities. These include: Rawn, A. M., C. Gilman Hyde, and F. Thomas, 1947. "Report Upon the Collection, Treatment, amd Disposal of Sewage and Industrial Wastes of Orange County, California." July 1. (Prepared for the Orange County Board of Supervisors.) Lowry and Associates and Engineering Science, Inc., 1966. "Wastewater Disposal and Reclamation for the County of Orange, California, 1966-2000.11 July. John Carollo Engineers, 1975. 11 1975-2000 Wastewater Facilities Plan for Joint Works Facilities". John Carollo Engineers, 1983. "Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities". Reclamation Plant No. 1 lies at the site of the original Joint Screening Plant constructed in 1923 by the Joint Outfall Sewer Organization (JOS). The JOS was a joint powers group of several cities and sanitary districts and was the predecessor of the County Sanitation Districts which took over sewerage operations in 1954 • -11- The selection of the location of the two CSDOC treatment facilities was the result of the decision in the late 1940's to form the Districts and assume the operation of the JOS facilities (Rawn, A. M. et al.). Portions of the CSDOC Treatment Plant No. 2 were originally constructed in 1953 with monies provided by a 1951 bond issue. The plant consisted of an 18-MGD primary treatment facility connected to a 7,000-foot, 78-inch outfall extending offshore of the mouth of the Santa Ana River. The outfall also received effluent from the old Joint Outfall Sewer Plant in Fountain Valley (now Reclamation Plant No. 1). Over the past 35 years, over $382 million (current value estimated at over $750 million) has been invested to expand the capacity and upgrade the level of treatment necessary to handle flows from the growing service area while meeting effluent discharge requirements and protecting public health and the marine environment along Orange County's intensively utilized coastal zone. Within the past decade, major projects have been the addition of secondary treatment facilities, including a 46 MGD air activated sludge process at Plant No. 1 and 75 MGD of pure oxygen activated sludge process at Plant No. 2. In addition to those listed above, numerous planning studies have been conducted which analyzed and recommended CSDOC facility improvements for the Joint Works. These include: *Project Report for 1971-71 Joint Works Improvements and Additions. *Project Report No. 1 for 1972-73 Joint Works Improvements and Additions. *Project Report and Environmental Impact Report for Improved Treatment at Plant No. 2 (August, 1972). -12- *CSDOC Wastewater Management Program, Facilities Plan and Draft EIR/EIS (March, 1977). *Areawide Waste Treatment Management (208 Plan) and Water Quality Planning Framework (April, 1979). *CSDOC Wastewater Management Program, Environmental Impact Report. Flow equalization and Hydraulic Reliability Project (August, 1980). *CSDOC Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities (April, 1983). To facilitate planning through the year 2002 and budgeting for the next five years, and to identify needs in the system, the Districts, during fiscal year 1982-83, prepared three District master plan studies and a Joint Works study. These reports reviewed the existing system, identified deficiencies in the collection and treatment facilities, proposed new construction projects to alleviate these deficiencies, recommended a sequence of construction and estimated project costs. The 1983 Joint Works Master Plan identified facilities needed to serve the Districts' projected sewage treatment and disposal needs through the year 2002 and is the basis of this DEIR. The specific facilities on which this impact assessment is focused, however, are those anticipated for design and construction during the next five years at the two joint works facilities. Facilities needs are determined through a two-part, on-going (in 5-year incremental periods) planning process. The first element consists of Master -13- ... Plans for wastewater collection facilities consisting of regional and subregional interceptor sewers. These facilities are determined as a response to periodic review and evaluation of local city land use plans to determine projected land use changes and planned and approved urban growth. Various flow coefficients are applied to these land use projections, and various collector sewer capacity needs are calculated. Appropriately sized facilities are subsequently evaluated to accommodate urban growth. Collection facilities are then constructed for conveyance of flow to the two regional treatment facilities. During the next 20 years, average wastewater flows to be treated by the Districts are projected to increase to 307 MGD. During the next five years, flows are expected to increase by as much as 24 MGD. Projected increases in sewage flows beyond present reclamation needs for some areas adjacent to the present District service area have raised the issue of proposing the formation of a new District (No. 14) which would encompass a portion of the area served by the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). The major impetus for such an action is the high cost of providing complete reclamation for the entire wastewater flow generated by this area, insufficient reuse areas and protection of the water quality of areas where the wastewater might be discharged at present (i.e., tributaries to Newport Bay). A formal proposal for the formation of District No. 14 is being addressed in a separate EIR. Such a proposal is presently outside the scope of this report. The interest in forming a new District is noteworthy, however, because it is indicative of the high costs associated with the smaller IRWD subregional -14- facility which does not have an ocean outfall for effluent disposal. The IRWD must reclaim all wastewater since a discharge to a sensitive estuarine environmental area such as Newport Bay is restricted. Such an action illustrates the tremendous pressure placed on urban services to provide low cost services to a growing population. The 1983 CSDOC Master Plan for Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities identified treatment and disposal facility improvements which were needed at the Joint Treatment Works of the CSDOC over the next twenty years focusing on those facilities needed during the next five years (1983-1988). Due to delays in implementing the Master Plan recommendations and preparing environmental documents, the time frame for the needed facilities has now been shortened and the need is more immediate. The purpose of this EIR is to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with constructing the facilities proposed in the 1983 Master Plan. It also addresses facilities proposed since ~hen, such as retrofitting of primary clarifiers and other uncovered facilities with odor control facilities, and a cogeneration facility at each of the two plants for purposes of maximizing use of digester gas and reducing air pollutant emissions. Description of Existing Facilities Generalized Treatment Process Descriptions A generalized description of the sewage treatment processes used at the two treatment plants is contained in the following paragraphs. A process flow diagram depicting these processes in shown in Figure 5. -15- 1 J J I J J -1 ] ] j 1 ] ] ] 1 ] J ] ,.....,...w.,.. ~·~~....... .,,, ________ _ lnlluenl Wastewater EHls Ave. Pump Slatlon lnnuent Wasrewaler lnnuenl Diversion Struclure ~ I Prechloflnatlon Bar Screens Screenings lo Burial I ' Grit to Burial Flllrale Rel urn Digested Sludge CSOOC Reclamallon Plant No I Digester Gas lo Engines CSOOC Trealmenl Plant f>!o 2 .. ' landlill Sludge Disposal Primary Effluent Oxygen A8riiiiOn RAS WAS Betl Presses Plant No. t Ellluenl 120• Ocean Oullal OuUall Boosler Pump Stallons Plant No. 2 Eflluenl PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM FOR CSDOC TREATMENT PLANTS FIGURE 5 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY J . ......, .. Influent flow to the two treatment plants enters a headworks and then passes through bar screens. Screenings are discharged on conveyor belts which transport them to bins for disposal in a sanitary landfill. The headworks pumps lift the influent to provide gravity flow through the primary treatment process. The treated effluent is pumped again at the secondary treatment facilities and once again for ocean disposal. Pumps are either gas-engine driven or are electric-motor driven. The gas engine pumps are fueled by either natural or digester gas while the electric motors use purchased electrical power from the Southern California Edison Company. Emergency power generators of limited capacity are available to assist if there are temporary power outages. After initial pumping at the headworks, wastewater enters one of two aerated grit chambers, where the grit is then washed to remove organics. Removed grit is conveyed into storage hoppers where it is then removed for disposal at a sanitary landfill. Wastewater from the grit chambers flows to distribution boxes and is dispersed among primary sedimentation basins. Each basin has a theoretical holding time of 2.1 hours. After primary treatment at Plant No. 2, wastewaters flow by gravity to either a conventional activated sludge treatment plant or trickling filters (at Plant No. 1), or pure oxygen activated sludge plant (at Plant No. 2). Digested sludge is dewatered with belt filter presses and hauled to Coyote Canyon disposal by direct incorporation with municipal solid waste at a required mixing ratio of 10:1 to facilitate moisture absorption • -16- .. .. A more detailed description of the primary and secondary treatment processes at Plants Nos. 1 and 2 is available in the Districts' Annual Report. Reclamation Plant No. 1 Reclamation Plant No. 1, located in the City of Fountain Valley on a 108 acre site, now has treatment facilities covering about 65 acres of the site. Facilities at Reclamation Plant No. 1 include screening, grit removal, primary treatment, and secondary treatment. A process flow diagram is shown in Figure 5. The Plant treats about 26 percent (60 MGD) of the 230 MGD of wastewater presently received at the Joint Works. The Plant has a design capacity of 46 MGD, however, optimization of secondary treatment capabilities through more efficient operation has enabled the facility to treat up to 60 MGD. The secondary treatment processes are a combination of air activated sludge and trickling filters. The 14 MGD of extra treatment capability has resulted from changes in operation of various tributary food processing industries (less loading to system) and an active source control program by the Districts which has reduced influent wastewater strength. Up to 15 MGD of secondary effluent from Plant No. 1 can be diverted to the Orange County Water District's advanced wastewater treatment plant (Water Factory 21) for further treatment and reclamation. The balance of the secondary effluent is co-mingled with the effluent from Plant No. 2 prior to ocean disposal via a 27,400 foot long ocean outfall which includes a 6,000 foot long diffuser section. -17- .. .. Treatment Plant No. 2 Occupying 105 acres of land, Treatment Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach provides screening and grit removal and primary treatment for a design capacity of 186 MGD of primary treatment and 75 MGD of secondary treatment. Capacity is presently fully utilized with standby or reserve capacity. Wastewaters enter the plant's headworks via trunk sewers or via the 78-inch to 96-inch interplant diversion sewer which brings flows from the metering and diversion structure at Plant No. 1 which diverts flows in excess of 60 MGD tributary to Plant No. 1 to Plant No. 2 for treatment (Figure 2). The water receives primary treatment using the same processes at Plant No. 1 (Figure 5). Secondary treatment is provided for an average of 75 MGD using the pure oxygen activated sludge process. Interplant System The interplant system is comprised of a metering and diversion structure located at Plant No. 1, a 78 to 96-inch influent wastewater diversion system to divert wastewater from Plant No. 1 to Plant No. 2, and 66 and 84-inch interplant effluent lines that carry Reclamation Plant No. 1 effluent to Treatment Plant No. 2 and to the outfall system (see Figure 2). The combined capacity of the 66 and 84-inch interplant effluent lines that parallel the Santa Ana River is 174 MGD. Joint Facilities The Joint Facilities (those used by both plants) consist primarily of outfall disposal facilities. The ocean outfall system is composed of two -18- .. ... .. outfall booster pump stations and two ocean outfalls. The outfall system includes an older 78-inch, 7000-foot long outfall (now for emergency use only) and a newer 27,400-foot long, 120-inch outfall placed in service in 1971. The two pump stations pump to the 120-inch outfall which is the main discharge point for the District. The 78-inch outfall has not been used since the 120-inch outfall was put in service, but can be used for emergencies. The outfall system capacity is a function of the outfall size, frictional drag, surge tower height and ocean tide level at the time of discharge. With sufficient pumping capacity installed, the outfall system could discharge about 420 MGD at high tide. Outfall booster pumping capacity, however, is currently limited to 350 MGD (plus 150 MGD of standby capacity) at high tide. Recorded Wastewater Flows Wastewater flow is metered on a continual basis at the Districts' treatment facilities. Each District is responsible for the cost of its share of the flows. Historically, a greater quantity of trunkline flow has been tributary to Plant No. 2. This trend has changed and recent data indicate that a greater amount of flow has been tributary to Plant No. 1, necessitating more improvements to hydraulically handle and treat these flows. Flows tributary to Plant No. 1 that exceed 60 MGD are currently diverted to Plant No. 2 via the metering and diversion structure and influent interplant lines. This trend is expected to continue. Reclamation Plant No. 1 treats 60 MGD to a secondary level and is capable of passing a hydraulic peak of 100 MGD through the plant • -19- Waste Discharge Requirements for Ocean Disposal With the exception of wastewater reclaimed at Water Factory 21, all wastewaters curently generated in the CSDOC service area are discharged into the Pacific Ocean through the 120-inch marine outfall. Discharge requirements for these wastewaters are established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, and are defined in the Districts' NPDES permit issued under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The permit is issued to each discharge point source and includes requirements imposed by EPA and RWQCB. Table 3 shows a comparison of proposed discharge requirements under the 30l(h) NPDES Permit and recent wastewater effluent quality. The current discharge consists of a blend of primary and secondary effluents. -20- - - TABLE 3 NPDES Discharge Requirements and CSOOC Annual Average Ocean Effluent Discharge Values, 1983-84. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. Constituent 800 5 , mg/l Suspended Solids, mg/l Grease and Oil, mg/l Settleable Solids, ml/~ Toxicity Concentration, tu Turbidity, JTU Arsenic, ug/l Cadmium, ug/l Hexavalent chromium, ug/l Copper, ug/l Lead, ug/l Mercury, ug/l Nickel, ug/l Silver, ug/l Zinc, ug/l Cyanide, ug/l Total chlorine reeidual,ug/l Ammonia -N, ug/l Phenolic compounds, (non-chlorinated), ug/l Phenols, chlorinated, uq/l Aldrin and dieldrin, ug/l Chloradane and related compounds, ug/l DDT and derivatives, ug/l Endrin, ug/l HCH (BCH), ug/l Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's), ug/l**** Toxaphene Radioactivity NPDES Effluent Limits JO-Day Average 7-0ay Average Maximum At Any Time 100 63-66 25 l.O 1.5 75 150 40 1.5 2.0 100 75 3.0 2.5 225 6-Month Daily Instantaneous Median Maximum Maximum 10 20 100 JOO 100 1 100 JO JOO 100 1 J0,000 500 150 0.3 0.3 0.07 0.3 0.6 40 80 400 1200 400 4 400 120 1200 400 4 40,000 2000 600 0.6 0.6 0.15 0.6 1.2 100 200 1000 3000 1000 10 1000 200 3000 1000 10 60,000 5000 1500 0.9 0.9 0.22 0.9 1.8 1.5 3.0 4.5 i.os 2.1 3.15 -see monthly reports - * Analysis reported is for total chromium. June, 1983 to June, 1984 Annual Average 106 69 lJ 1.0 4J Annual Average continued 4 8 61* 151 50 0.41 60 13 160 15 0 24,000 40 no analysis O*** O*** 0.062** O*** .287 1.69 O*** ** The number reported has been calculated by averaging the data above and data below the detection limits (which was assumed to be zero) • .... The compound is consistently below the analysis equipment detection limits and has been assumed to be zero. **** Interim ermit limits - - - - - ..... ..... MAl.N ·sTREET' TRUNK SEWER Negative Declaration And Initial Study Prepared For COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUN T'{ Prepared By COURTON & ASSOCIATES - . ,., NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INITIAL STUDY MAIN STREET TRUNK SEWER January 1985 PREPARED FOR COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY LEAD AGENCY COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-:8127 (714) 540-2910 Contact Person: ~-~~ary Bake~ PREPARED BY COURTON & ASSOCIATES Contact Person: Lawrence H. Buxton (714) 852-8010 ; ~ I f'l=l i I ' r;q ! Fi i I ' I 1-'1 , I I r.m:J . I ~ I i ~ i pq I : I ~ , I I --' TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Project Description Environmental Analysis Findings Page 1 2 5 13 - - INTRODUCTION This Negative Declaration assesses the environmental effects of the construction of the Main Street Trunk Sewer. The preparation of this document has been pursuant to the guidelines of the implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the County Sanitation Districts of Orange. County (CSDOC) guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. The information included in this Negative Declaration provides the appropriate decision making bodies and responsible agencies, as well as the general public, with analysis of the environmental consequences of the proposed project. Approval of this document by the County Sanitation District's Board of Directors, including the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, will result in the reduction of impacts to the extent that a Negative Declaration of Impacts is appropriate under the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. The mitigation measures which could be applied to this project are summarized at the end of this report. The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District.No.7 of Or.ange County authorized the preparation of this document at their meeting of January 9 , 1985 for a cost of $2·, 500. -1- -- PROJECT DESCRIPTION The County Sanitation District No. 7 is proposing the construc- tion of the Main Street Trunk Sewer to provide for adequate capacity to treat sewage originating in the Irvine Industrial area and the City of Irvine and its environs. The facilities will be constructed to provide capacity for anticipated flows from land use designations which have been approved by local City and County jurisdictions. The construction of the new facilities will coincide with the anticipated demand for ser- vices from these areas. The trunk sewer facilities are being upsized at the request of the Irvine Ranch Water District CIRWD). The Sanitation Districts' Boards of Directors, in November, 1984 approved in concept the formation of new District, to be known as District No. 14, which would encompass a large area now served by IRWD. Further, in January, 1985 the Directors hired consultants to pre- pare an Engineer's Report and an Environmen~al Impact Report regarding the formation of said District. Those reports are in process, and it is anticipated that a Notice of Preparation for the District No. 14 Environmental Impact Report will be circulated in early February. Tentative schedules indicate the completion of the formation of activities of District No. 14 in October, 1985. The Main Street Trunk Sewer will enable CSDOC to treat wastewater collected at San Diego Creek to the east of Jamboree -2- Road extending.in Main Street to a connection point with the existing system at Von Karman Avenue directly to the northeast of John Wayne Airport. These facilities will provide· service to areas.discussed in the Environmental Impact Report on Consolidated Master Plan of Trunk Sewer Facilities to Serve County Sanitation Districts No. 1, North Half of No. 6 and No. 7, April, 1984. That EIR addressed the impacts associated with accommodating growth in the Irvine Business Complex area and is hereby incorporated into this document as a reference. The Irvine Ranch Water District Master Environmental Assessment CMEA) and Wastewater Management and Action Plan Environmental Impact Report CWMAP) also assessed the growth-related issues for -the proposed service to the area and is also hereby incorporated into this document as a reference. The Main Street Trunk Sewer is proposed to be a 60-inch gravity sewer constructed in Main Street. The line will extend in Main Street from San Diego Creek to a point of connection at Von Karman Avenue. An Initial Study and Environmental Assessment on the project were prepared by CSDOC and are included in this Negative Declaration. The explanations to the Initial Study responses· indicated the degree of the impacts of the proposed project. The impacts and mitigation measures associated with land use, traffic, soils, biology, air quality and visual/aesthetics are discussed in greater detail. The mitigation measures proposed will reduce impacts to a level of nonsignificance. -3- - - - - - - ..... MAIN STREET TRUNK SEWER ...J w z z w <( J: => () z w > C!:J < z 0 ~ z (/') < ::E :E a: < a: < :::c:: z 0 > LEGEND TRUNK SEWER . LOCATION MAP McGAW AVEME w 0 :::> z a: w < > > < w s z :s 0 a: KELViN CD w 0 BARRANCA CHANNEL MICHELSON -4- stRt.ET w w a: 0 CD :E < ...., AVENlE END PROJECT NORTH NO SCALE ...J w z z <( J: () ~ w w a: () 0 C!:J !!::! 0 z <( (/') - ... ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS LAND USE The service area includes existing land uses of business, commercial and industrial facilities, and residential areas which have been constructed in response to the General Plan. The surrounding region to the west of the project area is developed, including John Wayne Airport. The a_rea to the east includes the University of California, Irvine and its service area and the El Toro Lighter Than Air Base lies to the north of the project site with general, industrial, and business office uses and hotels to the south of the project area. The City of Irvine has master planned the service area within CSDOC No. 7. The installation of n~w facilities at this time is required due to the planned implementation of several developments east of Von Karman Avenue. Existing land uses are becoming more intensified due to the conversion of industrial condomioniums to small business offices, the sudden influx of new hotels in the area, construction of new office space and the occupancy pf commercial and business buildings which have not been fully occupied. In addition, other new planned and improved developments being constructed in the vicinity affect the capacity available in the backbonetrunksewer systems. Project Impacts The propos~d facilities will accomodate new development and implementation of General Plan densities east of Von Karman Avenue, as approved by local agencies. The new trunk sewer will allow the Sanitation Districts to operate facilities with adequate capacity and greater reliabi..l·ity· tco in.~ure pUb,i~. ~a.1-th:; .. All ... Na::e-i:onaL Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) requirements will be met. There ~re no archeological or historical resources present. The project alignment is within existing disturbed roadways and utilities and biological and aesthetic resources will not be ~s- impacted. No public services facilities will be impacted by the construction as a result of the proper design of facilities. Partially developed land will be further developed reflecting the approved General Plan densities. Mitigation Measures The sizing of the Main Street Trunk Sewer is proposed to :accommodate the growth which will be realized through the tributary systems in response to the local Gene7~l_Plans~ Any change in existing land use for the Main Street Trunk Sewer alignment is insignificant because the streets have already been constructed. No mitigation measures other than the restoration of the streets to previous conditions are required. Conversion of partially developed land to a more developed status is in conforLJ.a.i1ce with the·aa9pted General Pl~ns and requires no mitigation. TRAFFIC The traffic on Main Street is generally commuters going to and from work in the existing developed areas as well as trucks providing. deliveries to commercial and industrial facilities in the area. Main Street currently supports commuters which are seeking avenues to convey.them from the area east of John Wayne Airport to the west of John Wayne Airport. Main Street is often times used as an alternativ~ route to the San Diego Freeway and MacArthur Boulevard. Project Impacts \ Short Term Project Impacts The primary impact of the proposed project will occur during the construction of th~ proposed Main Street Trunk Sewer. The placement of the sewers will require the excavation of some portion of the roadway, although tunneling in some sections may also occur. Significant impacts in terms of traffic congestion and changes to present patterns of circulation could result, particularly if -6~ - no traffic mitt'igation measures are implemented. In addition, improper traffic control techniques and warning signs could potentially result in hazards to traffic during project construction. Impacts to existing traffic volumes can be minimized by varying construction techniques on a road segment by road segment basis. Potential construction techniques can be implemented which would reduce traffic volume impacts including tunneling under busy intersections, reduced hours of construct~on, and construction within the roadway shoulders where appropriate. To minimize traffic hazards which may exist during project construction, traffic control plans will be prepared which comply with the Manual of Traffic Controls as published by CALTRANS, as well as local, City and County requirements. The construction phase of the project will generate some additional traffic volumes to the construction site on a daily basis. The additional traffic generated will include employee trips; and transport of equipment and materials to the site. The additional construction project site traffic generation will have a negligible effect on daily traffic volumes and the roadways on which construction is proposed. Long Term Project Impacts Upon project completion the roadways will be restored to their existing ·conditions in terms of roadway geometrics and intersection controls. From a traffic engineering perspective, the proposed sewerage system improv~ments will have no direct long •.term impacts in terms of the generation of additional traffic or modifying. existing traffic flow, once the proposed system is installed. Mitigation Measures The following guidelines are provided for ways to reduce traffic impacts during project construction. These techni~~es should be considered to minimize the impacts of project construction: -7- .. 1. Where feasible, locate the sewerage line within the public right-of-way. 2. Where feasible, locate the sewerage line along the center line and provide for the existing number of travel lanes. 3. Reduce hours of construction during peak travel hours only on heavy traffic days. 4. Full street closure during night time construction hours except to service local access traffic. 5. Traffic Control Plan should be prepared prior to the construction phase of each project as implementation proceeds. 6. CSDOC should comply with traffic control requirements as identified by local jurisdictions to the maximum extent possible. 7. The construction techniques for the implementation of the proposed trunk sewers, such as tunneling, cut and cover with partial street closure, or cut and cover with full street closure should include consideration of the ability of the . -roadway system, both the street in question and alternate routes, to carry existing traffic volumes during project construction. 8. Public streets should generally be kept operational during construction, particularly in the morning and evening peak hours of traffic. 9. Public roadways should be restored to their existing condition after project construction is completed. 10. Traffic control plan should comply with the Manual of Traffic Controls published by CALTRANS, and local requirements, to n -c.,,- - •· ... minimize any traffic hazards.which may exist during project construction. 11. CALTRANS Encroachment Permits will be obtained as necessary. SOILS The project will result in the removal and replacement of soils during construction. The project area is developed and landscaped. Project Impacts Construction activities will result in the removal and replacement of soils and asphalt within the project area. Recompaction of the trenches will be tested by an approved laboratory. Construction activities will create dust on a short-term basis and those portions of the project which have excavation and open trenches will be subject to wind and rain erosion. It is anticipated that no more than 1,.000 feet of roadway will be opened at any given time. :< Mitigation Measures .. i:.. •• 1. Exposed soil areas should be watered periodically during construction to minimize dust and wind erosion. 2. Grading should be staged to lessen soil erosion and minimize the area of bare soil exposed to precipitation. 3. Compliance with the appropriate provision of the "·Model ~rosion Control and Drainag~ Ordinance,. contained in Appendix B of the adopted 208 Plan, South Coast Area. ~ HYDROLOGY ~ The project area lies within disturbed and engineered roadways. Project Impacts The project site will be subject to erosion during rainstorms and alteration of the flow of run off water during construction. -9- Mitigation Measures 1. Run off from construction should be controlled on site and directed off site in compliance with the CSDOC's General Dewatering Permit (NPDES NO. CA0106119). 2. The pipeline is designed to be protected from 100 year flood flows. BIOLOGY The project site lies within already disturbed roadways. Project Impacts There will be little or no impact to biological systems as a result of the project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. AIR QUALITY The air quality in the project is generally good. Project Impacts Construction activities may create dust from operations. Construction equipment will generate emissions on a short-term basis. Mitigation Measures 1. The implementation of soils erosion techniques as identified in previous sections of this Negative Declaration will accomplish the mitigation of fugitive dust. ~io- - - I 1iMI - 2. Use of d~esel-powered construction equipment rather than gasoline-powered construction equipment may be encouraged to effect exhaust emission reductions and evaporative and crank case HC emissions reductions. VISUAL AND AESTHETICS The project area is generally developed with improved streets and landscapings. Project Impacts The project will result in short-term impacts including open trenches, stockpiled materials and the presence of construction equipment. The completed project will be beneath the existing asphalt and will not be visible. Mitigation Measures 1. Construction activities should be limited to 1,000 feet of open trench at a given time. 2. All trenches should be closed or covered as soon as possible; trenches should be covered during periods of nonconstruction, such as holidays and weekends. 3. All streets and landscaping will be restored to previous conditions. NOISE Noise in the project area is currently generated by surface vehicles and by aircraft landing at John Wayne Airport. Project Impacts Implementation of the project will result in noise generated by construction equipment. There will be no noise generated by the completed project. -11.- .. ... Mitigation Measures 1. Use of noise attenuation devices on motorized construction equipment to reduce acoustic impacts during the· construction phase. 2. Limiting construction activities to normal work days and day light hours in compliance with appropriate noise ordinances . -12- Fl ' i \ 1 , I ~ I I ~ I F!t I 'i i '9 I I , ! FINDINGS The project will not have a significant long term effect on the environmental because .of the mitigation measures incorporated. -13- ,., I 191 I INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ,.. . •... '' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of Q RANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-2910 (714) 962-2411 . Name of Project: MAIN STREET TRUNK SEWER Contract No. 7-2C-4 Location:-In Main Street between Von Karman Avenue and Peters Canyon Wash in the City of Irvine Entity or Person Undertaking Project: A • Dist r i ct : __ c .... o .... u........,.n...,.t..,.y_s_a~n....._i_t_a_t_l .... o.....,.n_D_i_s._t_.....r _i_c_t_N_o_...... _7_o_f ___ _ Orange County B. Other: Staff Determination: The District's staff, having undertaken and completed an Initial Study of this project in accordance with Section 15063 of the Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the: proposed project might have a significant effect on the env~ronment, has reached the following conclusion: XXX 1. The project will not have a significant long term effect on the environment because of mitigation measures incorporated7 therefore, a N~gative Declaration can be prepared. 2. The project could have a significant effect on the environment1 therefore, an EIR will be required. January 9, 1985 Date ·- - INITIAL STUDY (To Be Completed by Lead Agency) of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127 10844 El.LIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VAl.1.EY, CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-2910 (714) 962-2411 I. Background A. Name of Proponent COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT #7 of ORANGE COUNTY 8. Address and Phone Number of Proponent ----------~--------~--~~ 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 714/540~.2910 C. Contact Person Hilary J. Baker, Senior Engineering Aide D. E. Title and Location of Project Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract 7-2C-4 I:n Main Street between Von Karman Avenue and Peters Canyon Wash Description of Project Installation of a 60" trunk sewer in Main Street between Von Karman Avenue and Peters Canyon Wash necessary to serve the increased develop- ment areas east of Von Karman along Main Street and to serve the needs of IRWD - I I. Guidelines A. Does the proposed activity qualify as a project as defined in Section 28. Yes X No -- (If activity does not qualify as project, do not complete remainder of farm.) B. Does the project qualify as: 1. Ministerial (Section 6) Yes No X -- No X 2. Emergency (Section 13) Yes -- 3. · A :feasibility or planning study (Section 33) Yes __ No X 4. Categorically exempt pursuant to Article 8 of the State Guidelines (Section 40) Yes No X -- 5. Involves another agency which constitutes the lead agency (Section 36) Yes No X If yes, identify lead agency: (If yes has been checked for any of the above, an Environmental Impact Assessment/Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration need not be prepared.) · III. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No A. Earth. Will the proposal result in: 1. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in ge~logic substructures? 2. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or o!ercovering of the soil? 3. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? 4. The destruction, covering or modification x ~f _ ~!1Y unique geologic or physical features? __ 5. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? -2- x x x x • 6. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands or changes in silation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the oc~~n or any bay, inlet or lake? 7. Exposure of people or property to geological hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar haz~rd? B. Air. Will the proposal result in: 1. Substantial air emissions or deteriora- tion_ of ambient air quality? 2. Th~ --~re at ion of objection ab 1 e odors? 3. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature or any change in climate, ei~her locally or regionally? C. Water. Will the proposal result in: 1. Changes in currents or the course of .. direction of water movements in either mari __ ne or fresh water? 2. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of sut:face runoff? 3. Alterations to the course or flow of - flqg9 waters? 4. Change in the amount of surf ace water in -~ny water body? 5. Discharge into surface waters or in any alteration of su~face water quality, in- cluding, but not limited to, temperature, dis~9lved oxygen or turbidity? 6. Alteration of the direction or rate of fjow of ground waters? 7. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aq~if er by cuts or excavations? -3- Yes Maybe No x x x x x x x x x x x x • -Yes Maybe No 8. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public x ~~t~_r supp 1 i es? 9. Exposure of people or property to related x hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? o. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: l. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops and aquatic x ,_ pl~r:J~S)? 2. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare_or endangered species of plants? x 3. Introduction of new species of plants into .. an area or in a barrier to the normal repJ_enishment of existing species? x 4. Reduction in acreage of any agriculture -croQ? x E. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: 1. Change in the diversity of species or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or x insects? .. 2. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, r.!r_~or endangered species of animals? x -3. Introduction of new species of animals into an area or result in a barrier to the .. mjgr_~tion or movement of animals? x 4. Deterioration to existing fish or ~ wildlife habitat? x F. Noise. Wi 11 the proposal result in: ~ 1. Increase in existing noise levels? x 2. ~xpo_sure of people to severe noise levels? x ~ G. Light and GJare. Wi 11 the proposal produce new light or _glare? x -4- ..I - - H. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? I. Natura 1 Resources. Wi 11 the propos a f resu 1 t in: 1. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? 2. Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? J. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: 1. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals. or radiation) in the event of an accident or_~pset conditions? 2. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation . p 1 ~11_1 K. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of t~e human population of an area? L. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? __ -· M. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: 1. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? 2. Effects on existing parking facilities or ~~mand for new parking? 3. Substantial impact upon existing trans- por~~tion systems? 4. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people ~11-~f Qr goods 1 5. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? -5- Yes Maybe No x x x x x x x x x x x - - 6. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehi~les, bicyclists or pedestrians? N. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upori or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the fa 11 owing areas: 1. Fire protection? 2. Poli~e protection? 3. Schools? 4. Parks or other recreational facilities? 5. Maintenance of public facilities, in- cludj_ng roads? 6. Other governmental services? O. Energy. Will the proposal result in: 1. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 2. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? P. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities? 1. Power or natural gas? 2. Communications systems? 3. Water? 4. Sewer or septic tanks? 5. Stor__!ll water drainage? 6. Soligs waste and disposal? Q. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: 1. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? -6- Yes Maybe No x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x • ,., Gilt\ 2. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? R. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? s. T. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of exi sti ng_recreat i ona 1 opportunities? Cultural Resources. 1 • Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or _hjstoric archaeological site? 2. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, str~cture or object? 3. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a pnysical change which would affect uni~ue ethnic cultural values? 4. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? U. Mandatory Findings of Significance. 1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehjstory? -7- Yes· Maybe No x x x x x x x x ''• .. -~XPLANATION OF YES AND MAYBE ANSWERS IN SECTION III-ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ~II A 2 Disruptions, displaceme~ts, compaction or overcovering of· the soil.may occur during the construction of the facilities. - 3 Change in topography or ground surface relief features may occur during construction. 5 Construction will expose soils to wind and. water erosion until activities are completed. B 1 The use of construction vehicles and equipment may affect ambient air quality. C 5&7 Dewatering devices may be employed during the construction of the proposed facilities. The water from the dewatering activities may be discharged to the existing flood control system. F 1&2 Noise levels may increase as the result of trenching and paving operations during construction. M 2&4 The traffic patterns in the construction area may be disrupted •. 6 Traffic hazards in· the area may be increased by construction activities. O 1&2 Energy will be consumed during construction and the ultimate ~ operation of the facilities. P 1 Increased use of power or natural gas may result from the ~ larger sized facilities. - 4 The implementation of the new facilities will change the existing sewerage system to acconunodate growth projections of agencies with planning jurisdiction. 5 Drainage patterns may be altered during construction. R The proposal may result in the obstruction of a scenic vista during the construction process. O 3 Short ~erm impacts associated with project construction, i.e., .traffic congestion, noise, air emissions, etc. may be significant on a cumulative basis. A mitigated negative declaration will-be prepared. ' . - 2~ Does the project have the pote~tial to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? CA short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, de- finitive period of time, while .long-term imp~cts will endure well into the future.) 3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulative con- siderable? CA project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively sma11, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is signjficant.) 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will ca~se substantial adverse effects. on human beings, eith~r directly or indirectly? IV. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation See attached sheet. v. Discussion of Zoning Compatibility See attached sheet. VI. Determination (To be completed by Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: Yes I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find th~ proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: January 9, 1985 Maybe No x x x D D anager ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS otORANGECOUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540.2910 (714) 962-2411 Name of Project: MAIN STREET TRUNK SEWER Contract No. 7-2C-4 Location: In Main Street between Von Karman Avenue and Peters Canyon Wash in the City of Irvine Entity or Person Undertaking Project: A • Dist r i ct : __ c.;....;;;.o..;;;u~n~t~y,.,_.;;.S..;;;a;.;;,n;;...;i-..t ....... a_.t-i-o;;.,,;n;.;._.;;.D...-i_s;;....t-..r ___ i_.c-t.__N._o---.._7_o-.-f ___ _ Orange County B. Other: Staff Determination: The District's staff, having undertaken and completed an Initial Study of this project in .accordance with Section 15063 of the Amendments to the California .Environmental Quality Act, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project might have·a significant effect on the environment, has reached the following conclusion: xxx 1. The project will not have a significant long term effect on the environment because of mitigation measures incorporated; therefore, a N~gative Declaration can be prepared. 2. The project could have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, an EIR will be required. · January 9, 1985 Da.te - .... INITIAL STUDY of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-2910 (714) 962-2411 (To Be Completed by Lead Agency) I. Background A. Name of Proponent COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT #7 of ORANGE COUNTY B. Address and Phone Number of Proponent ----------------~----~--- 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 714/540.~2910 C. Contact Person Hilary J. Baker, Senior Engineering Aide D. Title and Location of Project Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract 7-2C-4 .-. In Main Street between Von Karman Avenue and Peters Canyon Wash E. Description of Project Installation of a 60" trunk sewer in Main Street between Von Karman Avenue and Peters Canyon Wash necessary to serve the increased develop- ment areas east of Von Karman along Main Street and to serve the needs of IRWD •. I I. Gui de 1 i nes A. Does the proposed activity qualify as a project as defined in Section 28. Yes X No -- (If activity does not qualify as project, do not complete remainder of form.) B. Does the project qualify as: 1. Ministerial (Section 6) Yes No x 2. Emergency (Section 13) Yes No x 3. A fe~sibility or planning study (Section 33) Yes No x 4. Categorically exempt pursuant to Article 8 of the State Guidelines (Section 40) Yes No x 5. Involves another agency which constitutes the lead.agency (Section 36) Yes No X If yes, identify 1 ead agency: ('If yes has been checked for any of the above, an Environmental ·Impact Assessment/Environmental Impa~t Report or Negative Declaration need not be prepared.) III. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all 11 yes 11 and 11 maybe 11 answers are required on attached sheets.) \ A. Earth. Will the proposal result in: 1. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geo)~gic substructures? 2. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or o~ercovering of the soil? 3. Change in topography or ground surface re 1 i ef features? 4. The destruction, covering or modification Yes x . o~---~Y unique geo 1 ogic .or physical features? __ 5. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? -2- Maybe No x x x x .. '*' - - 6. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands or changes i~ silation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channe·l of a river or stream or the bed of the . oce~n or any bay, inlet or lake? 7. Exposure of people or property to geological hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar haz~rd? B. Air. Will the-proposal result in: 1. Substantial air emissions or deteriora- tion~. of ambient air quality? 2. The_~reation of objectionable odors? 3. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? C. Water. Will the proposal result in: 1. Change~ in currents or the course of direction of water movements in either mari_oe or fresh water? 2. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surf.ace runoff? 3. Alterations to the course or flow of flog.d waters? 4. Change in the amount of surf ace water in _qflY water body? 5. Discharge into surface waters or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding, but not limited to, temperature, diss_olved oxygen or turbidity? 6. Alteration of the direction or rate of _ _f] ow of ground waters? 7. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aru,tifer by cuts or excavations? -3- Yes Maybe No x x x ·X x x x x x x x x 8. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? 9. Exposure of people or property to related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? D. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: 1. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops and aquatic pl_a!:JtS)? 2. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare __ or endangered species of pl ants? 3. Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 4. Reduction in acreage of any agriculture crqp] E. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: 1. Change in the diversity of species or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects? 2. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, ra.r_Lor endangered spec.ies of animals? 3. Introduction of new species of animals into an area or result in a barrier to the mig~ation or movement of animals? 4. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? F. Noise. Will the proposal result in: G. 1. Increase in existing noise levels? 2. Expg~~re of people to severe noise levels? Light and GJare. Will the proposal produce new 1 i ght o~ __ glare? -4- Yes Maybe No x x x x x x x x x x x x x H. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned l~nd use·of an area? I. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: 1. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? 2. Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? l'5:\ J. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: -1. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals. or radiation) in the event of an accident o~-~~set conditions? 2. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? K. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of an area? L. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? -· M. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: 1. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? 2. Effects on existing parking facilities or.c;t~mand for new parking? 3. Substantial impact upon existing trans- por~~tion systems? 4. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people an_9/or goods? 5. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? -5- Yes Maybe No x x x x x x x x x x x x 6. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? N. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: o. 1. Fire protection? 2. Police protection? 3. Schoo 1 s? 4. Parks or other recreational facilities? 5. Maintenance of public facilities, in- cluding roads? 6. Other governmental services? Energy. Will the proposal result in: 1. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or enet:_gy? 2. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the -~ev~lopment of new sources of energy? P. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities? 1. Power or natural gas? 2. ColTDTiunications systems? 3. Wat~r? 4. Sewer or septic tanks? 5. StorJll water drainage? 6. Soli.ds waste and disposal? Q. Human Health. Will the proposal result ii: 1. Creation of any health hazard or potential heal~h hazard (excluding mental health)? -6- Yes Maybe No x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x I• ~ . ... Yes Maybe No ,. 2. Exposure of people to potential health haz~ds? x ~ R. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open_ to public view? · x s. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing_recreational opportunities? x T. Cultural Resources. 1. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or .. b..istoric. archaeological site? x 2. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, x st.~y_c;ture or object? 3. Does the proposal have the potential to ~ cause a physical change which would affect uni_g_ue ethnic cultural values? x 4. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the pot~ntial impact area? x u. Mandatory Findings of Significance·. 1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to ~ eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant pr animal, .. or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or pr_ehi story? x -7- - ... 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, de- finitive period of time, while long-term impa~ts will endure well into the future.) 3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulative con- siderable? (A.project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is signJficant.) 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects. on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Yes IV. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation See attached sheet. V. Discussion of Zoning Compatibility See attached sheet. VI. Determination (To be completed by Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in thfs case because the mitigation measu.res described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: January 9, 1985 Maybe No x x x D D anager ' ' ... ~XPLANATION OF YES AND-MAYBE ANSWERS IN SECTION III-ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ~II A 2 Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil may occur during the construction of the facilities. 3 Change in topography or ground surface relief features may occur during construction. 5 Construction will expose soils to wind and water erosion until activities are completed. B 1 The use of construction vehicles and equipment may affect ambient air quality. C 5&7 Dewatering devices may be employed during the construction of the proposed facilities. The water from the dewatering activities may be discharged to the existing flood control system. F 1&2 Noise levels may' increase as the result of trenching and -paving operations during construction. M 2&4 The traffic patterns in the construction area may be -disrupted. - 6 Traffic hazards in the area may be increased by construction activities. o 1&2 Energy will be consumed during construction and the ultimate operation of the facilities. P 1 Increased use of power or natural gas may result from the larger sized facilities. 4 The implementation of the new facilities will change the existing .sewerage system to accommodate growth projections of agencies with planning jurisdiction. 5 Drainage patterns may be altered during construction. R The proposal may result in the obstruction of a scenic vista during the construction process. U 3 Short term impacts associated with project construction, i.e., _traffic congestion, noise, air emissions, etc. may be significant on a cumulative basis. A mitigated negative declaration will be prepared·. - .... - ..... _ - .... - - - - RE: AGENDA ITEM #14 -ALL DISTRICTS ENCLOSED ARE THE FOLLOWING COMMUNICATIONS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS TO BE RECEIVED AND FILED RELATIVE TO DOHS/SAWPA PROPOSAL TO PRETREAT GROUNDWATER FROM THE STRINGFELLOW WASTE SITE FOR DISCHARGE INTO THE DISTRICTS' SEWERAGE SYSTEM FO R FURTHER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL: COLOR (ODE (1) ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 27, 1985 (SALMON ) (2) CITY OF COSTA MESA LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 1985 (GREEN ) '3) CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 21, 1985 (YELLOW ) (4) CYPRESS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 5, 1985 (BUFF ) (5) FINAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR TREATED WASTE DISCHARGE, INTERIM TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL PROGRAM, STRINGFELLOW HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE DATED MARCH 1985 (WHITE) - Offi ce of Secretary Manager ORANGE COUNTY WAT ER DISTRICT - - February 27 , 1 98 5 Mr . Way ne Sylvester Ge neral Mana g er Co u n t y San itati o n Distric ts of Orang e Co unty P .O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley , CA 92708 Dear Wayne: Di v ers io n of SAR I L ine to P larit No. 2 The Orange County Wa ter District r ecently held discussio ns with with your staff reg a rding the proposal to div ert the Santa Ana Ri ver Inter ceptor (SARI ) sewer to Treatmen t Plant No . 2. This c h a n g e i s being co ntemp l ated a s a resu l t of past dis c ussions regard i ng t he SAW P A/DO HS p r opo s a l to d i s charge pretreated ground water from t he a b andone d Stringfellow waste site t o t h e Distr i ct 's SARI sewer line . A review of the data and discuss ions with your staff i n di c ate t h at this modification will sig n ific antly improve t h e waters ava ilable to OCWD for reclama tio n at Wa t er Factory 2 1. The data i nd icates t ha t t he r e cou l d b e a r educ tio n i n the t otal disso l ved so l ids conc e n t ra t ion of app roximate l y 250 mg /l. This reducti o n i n salt concen t ration will significantly improve the quality of t he water b e ing recla i med and used for groundwater barrie r i n jection a s well as imp rove the quality of wat e r available for o ur fut u re Gr e e n Ac r e s Project. A rev i ew of the qual i ty change s with respe ct to p o tential l y t o xic or priority pollutant s indicat es that dive rsion o f the S AR I l ine will have no impact on our water recl a mation acti v ities . The re - fore , since the changes can only improve water quality b y r educi ng / 10500 ELLI S AV ENUE • P.O . BOX 8300 FO UNTA IN VALLEY, CALI F O RNIA 9 2728-03 00 TELEPHONE (714) 963-56 61 556 -8260 . r- - Mr. Wayne Sy lvester February 27, 1985 Page 2 TDS, and s i nce your staff analysis shows t h e y can be ac c ommodated without having any negative impact o n yo ur o cea n disc har ge or operations, we would strongly urge you to proceed with t he s e changes as soon as possible . Very truly yours, ~,J. ~ Neil M. Cl i ne S e cretary Manager DA/mm / CITY OF l:OSTA ~IESA CALIFORNIA 92626 P.O. BOX 1200 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis Aven~e Fountain Valley, california 92708 February 25, 1985 Re: Strirqfellow Hazardous Waste I:Unp Site Gentlemen: At the regular meetiIYJ of the Costa Mesa City Council held on February 19, 1985, the Council discussed the StriIYJfellow Hazardous waste J)Jmp Site in Glen Avon, California. '!he City Council is extremely concerned about the possible threat to the health of the people of the City of Costa Mesa, and strorxJly protests the acceptance of effluent water. 'Ihe Council also requests the bypass of Water Factory 21. EPP:rne cc: Ora~e County Board of Supervisors Hall of Administration 10 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, Ca:lifornia 92701 77 FAIR DRIVE (714) 754-5223 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY CITY HALL 10200 SLA TER AV E NU E FO UNT.AIN VALL EY c :.uFO ? J.:. ;r:5 Mr. Richard Edgar Joint Chainnan FROM TH E O FF IC E OF THE MAYO R County Sanitation Districts of Orange Coi.mty, California P .O. Box 8127 Fotmtain Valley, CA 92728 Dear Chainna n _.~.s~-r:-":D ~ c: ... J <.._ CX:SD STRI~Gr~.....LJ·i c Enclc:s ed is a cc:py of t he Envirormental Assess:nent of t he String fe llo..; \'aste Treat- r.ent Plant conducte::l by Larry Seerra.n Associates, Inc. for the City of Four1tain Valley . As you wi 11 note in the cover letter, the consultant ' s rev ie..; o f t.'1e pr:JP:)sal states that appro priate technical procedures have been f ollowed in selec:::.ing t~e prq::osed treatment plant .Eran among the numerc:us alternatives . The rep::>r:. f urt'--ter states that the proposed discharge should not have a signi ficar1t impact on the quality of treated wastewater fran the County Sanitation Plant. We are very pleased to recently learn that your District will L-npler.ent a ?r<::gr~. whereby the SARI line will no longer be treated at the Fountain Va lley Plant ::1, b ut i nstead will be d i verted to Huntington Beach Plant !i=2 for treatment an·1 eventual d ischarge thrc:ugh the ocean c:utfall. This will alleviate cu r fears a s to the contamination of the underground \I.Elter basin from the Stringfello . .; aci i 9its . i\n interestirr:r r:oint w:i.s uncovered in the r er:ort fran Larry Sesnan Ass..')c iates . "We ll ~5, a s hallow irrigation well at the corner of Brookhurst and FJ.'!inge~, is contarninated . There is a fOS sib ility that the leak fron se.ver lines , either the SARI line o r other rrain lines, could have caused this cont::ini:v:i.tion ." The City hereby requests that _you investigate for p:::>ssible leaks i n the SI.RI l ine and also other rrain trunk sewer lines rtmning through our City . We appreciate the co:perat i on your s t aff has g i v en 01r City in providin3 inf')r- rrat i on concerning this project . We lcx:k furv.ard t o wor'icing with the Sanitatio n District in the future on 9L0jects which have an effect on the City o f Fountain Valley . With early notification of any imP=rrling project , the City can resp:Jnd in a resp::msibl e and timely .-r.a:"l ner . trul y y ours , -FDUNI'i\I L VALLEY Mayor BN/DH/rrib ... I I -_., ____ .&.. CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY CI TY HALL 10200 S LAT ER AV EN U E FO UN T A I N VALL EY. CA LI FO R I ~. 9r ~s FROM THE OFFIC E OF THE MAYOR February 2 1 , 1985 Dear Interested Party : STRINGF ELL0 Vi c At the February 19 Fountain Valley Council meeting, Mr . George Kurilko of Lar r y Seeman Assoc iates, Inc . presen ted his E nvi ro n - mental Assessment of the Stringfellow Waste T reatment Plant . Enclos ed is a copy o f the report completed by Larry Seeman Ass o ci - ates and Esma ili & Assoc iates , I nc. As stated in Mr . Kur i lko 's cover letter , the results of his re vi e w indicat e that appropriate technical procedures have been followed in selecting the prop o s~d treatment plant from among the numerous alternatives, and tha t t h e proposed discharge i s in compliance with app licable regulatory re - quirements of local, state and fede ral agenc ies . ~r. Kurilk o h as confirmed that the proposed discharge s nould not have a signific a nt impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the County Sani t a- t i o n District Plant . We are very pleased to r ecently learn that the Orange Co unt! S a n i - tation District wi l l i mplement a program that will d ivert a ll o f th e fl o w fr om the SARI line around Plant =1 to ?lant =2 for tr eat- ment and d ischarge into t he ocea n ou t fall . Your participation and c ooperation in resol v i ng t h is issue ha s heen greatly appreciated by myself a n d the entir e City Co unci l . Very truly your s , OFFOU0~ BEN NI ELSEN Mayor BN /DLH/mb Attachment cc : California Regional Water Quality Control Board Department of Health Se r v i ces Environmental Protection Agency Ray Lewis , Lowry Associates ~range County San i tation District Orange County Water Distr i ct Santa Ana Watershed Project Auth o rity Susan Trager -50) \.'~:.::·:'i ce~:::r :;· .~. ~. :~ ::'5 -,'~e \ ~·:rl Sc:2cn . C ... ~ '.: ,_ a .... -: .. ~ ph c ne 17: ..:· ~..:.::-~ ~'.>3 : 2&:/6 E ~c;r :n S: .. e~: Se r:<e:ey . C2 ,,'orr.1 a s;.17; 0 phor.e (4 i SJ f ..: i -:..,.~..:..J Communicy Planning Feb r ua ry 14 , 1985 Na t u ral Resource Managemenc Env 1ronrr.e n[2 I Assi:ss .11t·m The Hono r ab l e ~aye r an d l ~e;:ib er s o f t he Ci ty Counc i 1 Ci t y of Fountain Valley 10200 Slater Avenue Foun t ain Valley , CA 92708 RE: ENVIROSME NTA L ASS ESSME NT OF ST RI NGFELLO W WAS TE TREA7~~NT PLhN Ladies and G2ntlemen : Pu r suan t to you r request , c. ·1 a i 1 a b l e d r, t a t h a t r e l a t e t o effect o n l ocal gr o11n'.:'..,vater . info nr.c:tiGn .3'.ld 1JSe . 'n'e hc:ve r evie·,·:ed pert i ne nt d0cu;--:-:nt s .:·~d ct:'·':r· the St r ir,gfellc·d 1-.·aste tr·~.:~.-.. -:nt p1 .:n .:::'·j i::.s ',! e a t t r. c h a r E: p o r t o f c 1.; r f 1 r, c ' ·~ s s = c r" : :; .,.- The rc:sults o f our r'Evie ·,.,. ind icat~ that appr•)pri=te ~::·:~nic :.1 ,:":c,;:~_··2s h ave be2n followed in selecting t he pr opo sed tr2e:t-.i::n t ;;:::n ~;-j;i :._-:,.-j ~:e n·J.1 t:rous alternatives , a nd t h at t he prc·pos ed dischcrge js in o -;:;i.:;'i:~ ... ·~h a;:ipliccble r·egulator·y require:n-..:nts o f l oc al , stdte arid feccral .:~-:nci 2s . The pr opo s e d discharge s ho uld not have a signif ic c:n t qucl ity of treat ed waste·t1ater from the CSDOC plant . Ou r rep or t addresses th i s and re la t ed mat t e rs in s r e=~er d~ta!J .... ~ 'J~~ f on:a rd to the oppo rt unit y of discussing our f ir.dint;s ·,...i :ii :n u ci: ~r:,.,_,r ·~2'(\: c on v en i e n t s c h e d u 1 2 d me e t i n g . L SA h a s bee n a s s i s t e d i n t '1 l s s ~ J .j y '::J y :: s ~ 3 i J i & Asso ciat e s , Consulting Engineers . Rep r esentc.tiv e s of to :h c f c0r fl ·T s ~1 J be present at t he mee ti ng . Very truly y o urs , LARR Y SED').N ASSO CIATES , INC . --.# f ~~(r,~ ti u .\ \ ~. . (~' ~~ ~·v ~-0 Geo r ge K~rllKO , rn .D. ?rincipcl GK :cc Jr ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPAC T OF S T RINGFEL LO ~ ---WASTE DISCHARGE ON G ROUND ~AT ER RES OUR CES ··-·----OF THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY EY U\RR Y SEE~· .. ~N ASS OCP.TE S, i .':C. NE 'n'POR T B ~ .. \C H C!\L IF CR ,'~IA AND E S:-'..i\ I LI .~ ASSOC !A E S, I .'~C . BERK ELEY CAL !F OR:~! . .\ FESRU .-1.R Y 19 85 TABLE OF COrtrDtTS ASSESSMENT OF TI:IE IXPACT OF SIRil~FELI..arl 'n'ASTE DISCHARGE CN Gl:\CUN!Yl'lAJ."ffi RLCCURCT.S OF 'ffiE CI1Y OF ~IT.ADl V AJLF.:r . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I ntrOOuction .. ~ ............................. ,..... 1 The Pro~sed Project.............................. 1 Alternative Me thods for Handling Co ntamina ted Gr ow1d~ate r ·from Str i ngfellow S i te ............... 4 Selection of the Required Level of PretreatffiGnt .. 5 Comp lie; ne e \.,'ith SA'n'PA c.nd CSCOC Ordinc.nces ....... 8 s.~hrpA Ordinances .................... I ••••••••• <.. 8 CSOCC Ord:_nences . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . • 8 Strir.gfelloW' ~lest e Dische:rge Permit .............. 10 Evalu.:;tion of Co r::plionce ~;itJ1 Applicc::ble Ordin.::.nces .............. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 11 Analysis o f Environ:-:-.0 2ntal Ir.:pac ts of the Pro?Jsed Project ............. ,............................ 12 Ground· .. ,.a ter QJ0lity Ii:7 c.c ts ...................... 12 t\eed for A.dditionc.l Gr oi...!nd· . .-c.ter Quz~lity Ir::f'-'c t /\n e.lysis ......................................... 14 Hydrogeolcgy of Fountain Valley Area .... ·. . . . . . . . . 16 h'at er Q...iality Condi tions in th.: City h1ells . . . . . . • 18 Cc;:iclusions c.nd R.::cc::-_-:-r.:ndat ions................... 21 R e :er t~nc•?s ........................................ /..2 Ar 02r.dix A -t,.,',::ter <:.-J.~lity D<:ta for Fc!Jnt .:; i.n Yclley \.,'e ll No . 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 i .. LIST OF TABLES Table 1 . Proposed Pretreatc-~nt Ob jective for Strir.,s-6 fellow Interim Project Table 2 . cscx::x:; and SA 'n'PA Discharge Limitations ·9 Table 3 . Effects of Treated Stringfellow Discharge 13 on Waste·,.·ater Quality in SA.t:\I Syste..rn Te.ble 4 . Co m?a rison o f Estiii'lated Mineral Co:.ip-Ositi on 15 of String.fellow Discharge \hth the Corres - ponding Quality P.?.raff:e ters for the SAPJ Line Table 5. Constru:::tion DetE1ils for Fotmtain Valley 19 \..'2lls LIST OF FIGL.0 £.S Fn·;e _ .. __ .;;,_ Figuce 1 . Pr-op)sed US EPA & State Departr7·-:?nt of P2 ~lt:h 3 Servic e s Interim Prct r eat.r..en t end Disf0 sa l f o r St ri ngfel lm<' Ha::ardo;_is h'aste Site Figure 2 , Generalized Cross-Section o f Ar;~.!if ers in Fa,intai n Valley Area F igure 3 . Historic h'c::te r Qi..:zlity TrE:nds f o r Fo·....:ntai:i Valley 's Well No . 5 J.J. 17 20 ASSE....~.B .T OF lliE DIPACT O r S1'RI~<GF1:11.Dd \{!.SlC: DISC!'..!-~CE O~ GRCUlJJ'rh\_TER R.L~""'\...."R.C'SS OF THE CTIY OF FCU~ITA.m VALLEY Introduction The San ta Ar.:a Wa t e rs hed P roj ec t Au t h o r ity (S.!J,'PA) ·has issc ed a wast e dischar ge per mi t t o t he Depa r t r....2n t o f Heal t h S..::rvices (C0!1S) fo :- t he disch a r ge o f up to 0 .1 8 7 mg d (mil lio n gal l ons F~r cay) o f tre at~j ;.:as t e f rom th e Str i ngf e 1 1 o·,... h&zo rdous "'as te dis posa 1 site into the Sc.n ta Ana Reg ion a 1 Intercepto r ( SA3I) line subj E:c t to 1 i rr.i tc. t icr. s s peci fied in t he pe r mi t. TI-1e f i nal r each o f the s.~_u line tr&'.'E:rs es the City of Fountain Valley alo.:g Santa /..na Ri"·-::r end discr...::.r.:;es to the County Sanita ti o n Dist r ict s o f Orange Co un ty (CSDOC) Tr ce:t ~~.2 ;-,t Plant t\o. 1 ·n·hich i s also l occ;ted in Fountain Valle:-. Environrnc.;ntal rev i e,..,. ciocur.:e:nts pr e?a r ed by L\Jn S st.::te tl·.:_:t tr.2 pr:oposed dischc.r6e would cre3 te no adverse :iJ-;-.?.e..:t o :-. r..s t u ral r-::sc·.:r•>:s of the &reas loc3ted along the S.~..Q.I li;-;e a nd tr.e t:-~.<:: .. x .. ~:1t pl c.nt s.:..t.2 or are a s of final dis;:x>sal &nd r t:use of tr c-c.ted C~_1 :•.: ., .. ;;0ste:<..:.:::2 r . .L<'.2 C i t y o f F o u n ta in V a 11 e y he. s r e t a in e d th e s e r v i c e s o f L.:; r r y S 12 ·::-:: .:-. n S. Associates to c o:iduc t a r evie'rl of the i:::r.vi1·or::-:.:::-.t~l i:-.;::::,c t e::~a :::sis ca r ried out by COH S on this project . Esrr:8ili & .!.s3 o c :i .~te s , I nc ., r.c s . prepared t his technical report as a subcontrc.ctor to La rry S.:;e -:-.Jn & Associates . Th e P i:~se-d Project The St r ing fel l oW" haz a rdous wast e site is l occted in R.ivers:.,::2 County , Cal ifocnia , approxirr.a te ly f i·.,re r::i les r:ortl-:.·::-s t o f the: Ci::.y c f Ri v ers ide , c.nd or.e mile north of the corL-:-,uni ty of Glen 1\v o n. Con t 2--::- in a ted g rou nd ~a ter f lo ~ing out of the canyon in ~h i ch the s~t2 is loc a t ed is posing a threat to th e groun d ~a ter S ~??l ies o f ~ea rb ; c osr:,unities l ocated do·~-ng ra dien t fro;:; t he canyo n. In o r d2 r to 2t.~te this t hrea t , COHS and U.S . Enviroi'_-:.e nta l Prot E:cti.o:-; 1\.(y::K y (E.?.~) l-. .:. .. 'e 1 proposed an i n terii:l .. elution .,.·hich cal ls f o r t~e :.nst?.ll 8 t:.c :1 c :.:::. -system o f ext r a cti on ·,.·e ll s and tr eatr:c:nt fecilit:.es a t t~e Str :.:.5 - fel l o w site. Gr ound·.,•ater pumped fr or:i t he e xtract i o n ;.;el ls ·,.·il 1 ~e treated f o r the r e:.:ov al of h eavy r..etals and organic cor.:;::ou:x!s c.r.d tr.2 tre a te d wa ter ·will be truc ked to a discharge point along s;...q_r li:;e . The discharg ed ..... ·ater ;.·ould then co mm ingle ;.·ith the c onten ts of SARI line and would flow by gravity to CSDOC Tre atruent Plant No . 1 in Fountain Valley (F i gure 1). At the treat ie e nt plent , all inc o ;n ing ..,,.c:.s t ewa ter undergoe s secondary l ev?l treatCE:nt a nd a poc tio n o f t:-.e treated ..,.·a stewate r is pwr:ped to c:dvailced treat;:-ient fc.c i liti e s a t ',1'5 f:,;:r Factory 21. The discharge fr o:n ~iate r Factory 2 1 is injc--ctt::d ii~to tr.e unde r g r ou nd aquif e rs t h rough se v e n inj e c tio n ~e lls w~ich a re el l l ocated al or.g Ellis Stree t in Foc::t e in Valley. A nu r:ib er o f question s r .av e been ra:.s ed by the r.2:~b~rs of t;ic Ci :y Council o f F ountain Valley with r ega rd to t he propos ed rr oj·?<:t .;s foll o ..,.,·s : 1. Heve all other f easibl e a lt e r n~t i ves 'c -::t:n ~i·;E:;i :::.::~·i c~,;3 cons i de r a ti o n prior to the selection o f ti--.e r.:c i: .. ~-.:::;:.: ~ projec t f o r h c:.ndling o f c ont.::.:::i ::eted 6;::-01.:;i ,.:·-·:::t~r f .:-.:."'.: Stringf e l lo·,.; site? 2. Is tr.e discherge peri7:i t in COG?lic.r.ce -.•it'.1 c.ppl :.c ~J'!.e 0:·-:!i - na nces of SAh?A and CS rx>e:? 3 . Ha s th e ques ti on of the impact of the pr opos2d prc ject o n genera 1 natura l r esources ['.nd g r o"Jnd"·:'c te r supp 1 i l': s of t :-.2 City of Foun tain Va lley , in pertj cule r, b een aj~r cs~2d c:d€-quately? The purpose o f this r e?o rt is to p ::ov ic e c;r,s·,.·e :-s to t:-it2 2.to ·:2 ·~·-:2s ­ tions cased on evoil cbl e de.ta and .,.·i thin the c onst r c.ints of t:~e s -:.:·~·2 o f this study. 2 lITTY.lUH Pll.l:'.TltUTXY.NT l'ACILI Tll'.S SOURCE: OOHS, 1065. ; JlfiUU HTS I nv:rrn \.'ASH r. • STIUN GHLl.OIJ Tlllll.X.rn TO ?; ) f: ....... ~ . SA\JPA APrllOVtD o j /-. \ AC ID PITS nwcx DISPOSA.L u 1· ·-' J ~TATI O tl ~ ~ V) I I ) . ~•z :."i t.I, ~' .... ""' ... !-... + " .. l"'"'C'1£l1~ . ., .. '-' -J · C• ... '-\'?nn . ..--...., ~-_I !!~ \JK~ I 0.187 HGDL ·~;. co N r M<I 11 A n:n ,.., 1 K"' -;: GR.OVND \JAHR I ' '(/ / 't..Y:nv. er I ON \Jl:LLS OCSO Tl\E.ATI!Vtr I' LA.'IT tlO. l fOUllTAlH VALLEY ...... ,-.. U0 L._ __ _ I ~00 !'HT I . 12 HllfS I~ ~i ; swTA A"'· "MR tttTERCHTOR l ocso , -ttr1.e OCSD 5 -Hll.E ' ... I )6 MILLS (APPROX) I WID OllftAL L i OCE.All OlJTfALL ··-··.-, ,....,. . ~ -~ .----: '""" ~-~ :i...J J.-.1. U .:..-U 0 L .LY • -.... ,...,, "!'" . r s r-, ·:-1: ~ •. ..,. ., -.--. .,...... •e' • • ..-,, Ii', •t •.• ·.~ • ) •• ;;., ·-_, u "-:' l ._, .-I ~ ·-,_, I , -( •\(j -:\· ' .LJ .!. .l ;_ l)!. J;. .:.. .l. .1.....1 ~ ~ .... J.-)... .... .. ~ .... ' -..&.-4 .:... ;; 1. O? i:_:fS_J\LTfi SEliVICES ~· • \ •• S-""'I "':" • ::> ~.· ., 1: .J.. l. \, l L i-~ l .i ... .l ""'~"-=--1 -~ ......... -•. ·~ ·-t · .-., .. ,,.{ .. "'-..~' ... r., ...J -,:-I • " -. ' ·\ . -\ \ .L .A. I.. .!LI A JJ..;,. .L,g .;,,-,,._ ..i. ..:.. A. .Lai.~ .J.. ·---o·-, ;..._-< ..... -.i. .... '\' ... ~ _.:c.l.1..: ;_) ·.; ...... ·: .c:? 0 c:1 AT lJ~0 u ~ "·-· -'r i: -~· · · ·l" --i P-"'I • -• • '\" ""l • ., ··"""" '· • • r '· ·~:;· 0 ..L .1. :.. A. l. ~ \J ...1. .LILL U i..· . :.: • /J"' r:·p.1 -.:::. .. :1 ·~. /"' ·.:." .::· ...!. ..1. * .:.. .. :_. .t... ~ -' i_) v \....J >...J \j"l '{:; S r'l ~;-::" . C ·,.· r ,"l ·~ ,lJ ..1...1..· l;._, uJ...A..l.....a FiGUf"i C 1. Altet:"n.3tiYe P.ethods for G.3...;dli.r:;; Cont~·r.ri.r..:!tr::<l Grourx.....i.,..ate r f roo Str ir.gf ellO'lr' Site Thirteen interim technica l alternatives were r ev i e ~e~ by E?A Consultant f o r treatr..ent and disposal of conta ~inated g r ou:;C:·.·a t e .r f r c·~ Stringfellow s i te (CH2M Hil l, 1984). Ten of tr.e se alternati·•es 1,..2 :·e r ejec t ed e f te r a p r e 1 imina r y re vie·,,. bee a use they >•ere dci::r::2d to l>2 t echnica lly o r environr.:enta lly infeasible. \..'e concur ;;ith t!-'.e r a tic 1:- ale us ed by EPA Consultants fo r reduc ing the i n itic.l list of c.lterr.J- tives f o r the in te rim solutic::. n-.e alterna tive ir.'lol vir.g tr.:::?.~: .. ..:::1t c n d rein j e ct ion a t the s it.:: sh o u 1 d , h o·"· e v e r , be g iv en f u 1· u~::: r co :-. - s idera tion as a p e r r.:ar.en t r e::.2\:lial rr:c.:.s ure f o r r ..crr:ilir-..?, of c o,·t,;-:::..-- rn~ted g r ot.L:1d· .. ·ater at St1·ingfell ow site e.:i d EPA Co :-.s uJ t an ts :i r;.~: 2:,~e t h at all vi.:.blc c.ltc:rr.ativ es >•Ould be re:vi e '..ied i n Cet-:;1.1 f o r C.c-.-.:::~.:,;­ ing a pe r:::anen t re::-.edic.1 c.c tion plan. by EPA Co n sul t &n t prior to the sel ec tion of Al t12L"r:c ti ve '.~o . l e '3 t!~e reco:._-;.2nced i ntE:1·im rc::..2 die 1 actio1.: 1. Pretr ee.t :;-:en t follo· .. ·ed by d i scl:.::;r be to a p \..:blic l;·-. .>:.~.~ tre.::trr:en t .,.·orks (?O'Th'). 2 . Disrosal at a Class I l and dis~0s.::l site . 3 . Di s~sa l at a Cl .s ss II-1 l o r.d dis~•)Sal site • .. ·ith o r pretreat:;..ent . ' . .: ..... ,,, ..... ~ ,, • t.... •• · .... • •• ._ Alt crn:,:tives 1 and 2 c.bove ·~·ere de 2:::2 d to be t ·oth t -=c.l·,11ical ly f.:Jsi::le c.nd er.viror.:::2 r.tally c:;ccer t e'.:>le sol u :::.'i o ns r r o vi•~t.?d t:-.::t tr.~ ·~·.::ste: .. ·.~r::rs ... , e re e d .:: q u 3 t e 1 y t r cc t e d prio r t o d i s c r: c. r 6 e t o t ~1 e s . .:; ·.-2 r s y :::. t ~ "'.' o E e PJTW . Al tern.?. ti ve No . 3 , h o ·,;e ver , i r:vo 1 ve d s or..e u .. "".::-i.?s o l ., .. cd t:-1·, .,.1 :·0 ~­ r:.2 n t a l c occt:r ns c.;id r e 6L.:1 c.::.o ry prohi':::.it i r:::r.s ct;.::ir:s : t:-.e cisci-.~·,:·5e c : r . .?.za r-.:o us 1.~:::?ri.:ils e:: e Cl.::ss I I -1 lc:iid c:.s;::osc.l s:..c.e . I;i :;,e E.i:-::1 cnelysis , .!.l t.::rn2.tiv e ~\o . 1 · .. ;as j L.:d:;2d t o pro-.1i ce t r.~ t2st s oli..;ti..::1 c 1 t he be.sis of the <'ssumption th a t di s ;o sa 1 o f trc .:;ted 3 r ou r·:1.:'.· .. ·.:~t0 r in '· .. th2 ocee.:1 .,,-a s c0re d esi r cb le t ha n dis;:-..:-s.31 of tr.e s.:.~e i:"" .• ::te ri.:o 1 i.-i s Cl as s I site. Econor.i ic ana lysis of tr-.e t:-ir·ee a lt2rT.a ti·:es also :i.r.Ci - cated th3t Alternative .No . 1 •,..:ould provide by fer the l e.;st costly solution for the r equired inte rim re;.;ecial actio n at the Stringf el l o'.< site . Three candida te POTH ;.;ere c on sic!er8:! by E?A Co:1sultc.n t to re ce ive t he pr-e treat e d ground·,.,ate r f rorn S tringf e 11 o ,..,. site . The se inc luct.?d CSDOC , City of Los An g eles and Chino B~sin Municip a l Wate r District Los Angeles County treat r~.e nt f ac ilities . The City of Los J..115eles sy s t ew ,~·.ss ruled out b'2cause of r err:ote;-,..;s s fr o:;i t~e Str·in;f el l e,.,; site and the cpt'c.rer.t p:·ohibition on t he d i scr . .:i rg e of c h l ori.r".:::t ed hydrocc:r- bo:;s i n to the s e ..,·e r syste:TL. choice b-=::',,._::e n Los .~r:;e l es C a~:;ty ·':l ''....: c. •• i\... Or cng e County syste:.:s ;..·a s rr:e.de on the 'c.:.s is o f t r.e l oce.tio n of String fellow site ~hi c h falls within 'th e area o f j u r-i sd i c tion o f 1n'e concu r •,,;ith the r c:tiona l e u sed ty EPA Co:1sultc:nts ir; s<::~ . .:,:t.:.i·:; th<.? environ~enta l i~?act a~~l ysis sectio.-i of t his r ~~0rt . ~-~l i=.~tion <;>_f the F5'_t:S-£cxi ~-v e l of Prc:tr en t_~-_?n t . The r-c;---;:J :_:.·.~.j level cf pretre3tr.<::nt f o e cont&r...in3ted gro'-1:,.::·~·:oter e;·:t r &ctc-d f::-c::: t:'.-.2 Strir.gfe ll o· ... site hGS c..::en d e t e r mined by E?A Cons1 _;l tcn t on t he b.:::s:..s of the r..ost r es tricti ve critecia estc.b l ishe-J by t ~2 f ol lc· . .-.::.n.s .:..:;-:r:- ci es : 1 . Chino Basin ~\miciral h'a.t e r Distric t. 2 . Sc.:!t a Ana h'aters:-:2d Frojec t /.,u::J-:o rity . 3. County -Sanitation Distric t o f Orcr\~e Co ... n~ty . 4 Pret -::eatc-.<::nt st~=:;;d 2.rds f o r ;-.::·...-SO'.J f Ces f i.:.·r ::--;ta 1 f :i .:-1ish.i..!\6 industry proculg~ t ed by EPA .. S.:sed o n t he r ,z'i'.J i c er.-2 nt s of e3c h of t ;-.e c?.t'o ve c.2/:n:::..es , tr.e pr•:!t r 2 .:.t- ~en t objectives s l;o · .. m in T .:ib l e 1 ..,·e r e d e ';elo~cd b y EP P.. C o n sultc::nt . Th 0 s e obj.:: c ti v es s c. tis f y t he e xi s t i n g r es u ire:;, 0 n:: s es t c. bl i s l; e d by 5 Tcble 1. Frof'Osed Pret :-eatJ2:it Cb~.:-.:t.:.v.::" f or Strin£,f ello'W Ir.::.eri.rJ Project Constituent Arsenic Cad mium Chromium CT) Copper Lead ~~e r:cu ry Nic~e l Silver Zi nc Cy anide (Tota 1) Cy anide (A~enable t o Chlori~ation) PCB 's and Pesticide s Tot&l Toxic Or bznics Su1 fide (Totcl) Sulfide (Dissol ~ed) Oil or Greas e pH BO D Q)D TSS Source : CH2 M Hill , 1984 6 Haximum C or.~ent r ction ~&11 2 0 .11 0 .5 2 0 .69 0 .03 3 .98 0 .43 2 .6 1 1.20 1 0 .02 o.ss 5 0 .5 lC·J 6-9 250 S:\'n'?A and CSDX for · ... ·aste· .. ·aters disch.3 r g'2 d i,;to t:-:e se· .. ·..::r~3e s:,:s::-::-s in t he arecs of j uri sd i ction o f these egenc ies . Fo llowing the establ ishr.:en t of tre a t irent objectives , EP :\ Coils:..:l- t an t deve l oped a conceptual design f o r the pretreatr..ent facilities f o r at t aining t he above objectives. Lir.U.ted labor a tory pilot testir.g ·,..·es clso conducted on groundwater sornp l es fr om the site to confir;: the adequ.=.cy of t he proposed pretreatr.-ient f ac ilities. Tr.e pr o~osed pre- tree t r.en t f acilities consist of l irr.e preci?itatio n f acilities for t~e r er::0va l of he&vy r.,etals e.nd gre.nular ac ti vc;ted ce rbon col ur.:-is f o r the r e rr.)v .=.l o f orga nic co:q:ounds from groJ n(•,.;a te r extracted fro::-1 J.e.::c;·.~.::.e collec tion ¥.·e l ls. Tne precipitation process c o nsists o f e-que. J.j 7. •. ~tio:-i t a r.ks to eccept the influent fr om th e ..,,.eJ. ls , influ ent pur.:pir~g to a r c.p id rr::i.x unit f or addition of rreci pi t c.nts a r:d fl <:xc ·Jl ants , fl.1:-i:c ·..::i . .::- tion and cla rific at ion , end sand filtratio n . Fro1.1 the s c.n d filt :::rs , t he e fflu1::n t is purr.p e d t o e c;1..!eliz c tio !l tc.n~s o f th e c .::r bon f i1.t-::rs 't:her-e it wil 1 be bl endt:d ..,,·ith influe nt fr o;:i t !-:e r..ic-c<.::-j c :1 -..·2 l ls. -::-'.--.-; bl ended ..,,·a t e rs a re th en pu ;r.p e d to the car bon c o l1..!::::--.s . The ef f h :2:.t fr om the carbon filt e rs ••ill b.:: stored c ;r-si::e pri c.:..r to t.cuc ~ t !." .. :~.:.­ ~ort to S/.JU line. All slud 32s g,:::;;e r c t cd e t the tr~::tr:--:;n t f .:=.c :iJ-'.t:~:;;:; wi l l b:2 dis~osed of in a Cl c::ss I fill end s~-::~1t ccrC.c.:1 •.·ill t .::: t°<-!::.·.::·:-.·- ed to t he su pp li e r for th er;;-,a l ces tn.:ction o r r.::.:,en ~r &tion . ···~ effluen t froril the p-re tr e3t:. . .e nt facilities .,.·ill 'te r c r-.i t o ::-c,j by t e:s :::. 'i; f o r .indicator parcrr.ete rs such as chro:7:i.un on a d.::i ly o r h ou rly t.: .. -s:.s . To tal org&n ic carbon (TCC) ..,.·il l be r.,o nit o r ed continuo,..:sly c•1d a c •:.:·:-.:- l ation be t·"·ee n TOC a nd To te 1 Toxic Orgc:nics (1TO) ·.,:ill be es t c bl: . .s '.-' ·:·:L I-le believe that t he pro?osed pretre8 t :..e nt process is c.-:~c :.::2 t o r..€e t the tre a t i:'.en t obje c tiv es. establis 'hed by f.PA Co:-.sultc.n t. r~..:~ to t he use of b a tch pilot t ests f o r determin ir.g t'.i c ctf:i.c iccc y cf t:·.e pr o~o::;ed tr ee t::..::nt p r ocess , r.odif i c0 tions in the t r0<'.t::-.·2nt fr:1 :ili .~·:'S or o~erc t iona l proc edure s ~ay be cece:ssitatcJ u~~er actua l fi2id conditions . 7 All disch a rges into· Santa An a Re gio n a l Inte r ce:p t o r mu s t c 0 ;:-.?ly 'With ap p licable ordin a nces of SA'n1P A and CSvJC . A brie f re:vie ·,.,i o ::: these ordinanc es is carr i ed out in this section. S M1'PA Ordinance s. SAWPA Ordina nces No . 1 aild ~o . 2 r egulc t e th e a v ail a bility end use of SAR.I system and t h e d i schz r ge o f ;.·z ste·...-·.:;t.:::.r in to ..:his system by truck, respectively. SA 'r.'PA Or d i n a n ce No . 1 cont a i n s s p e c i fic l c.ngu.c5e o n disc l·:;;r 6 G pro h i b i tio ns to S/JU line, limita t ion s on ,,.,·zs t e~·c.te r str • .::ne,th , F2- tr eo t ~en t r eq uir e r:..:~nts, &n d provi s ions f o r plan t i:--1s p.:.·c t i on by p e r sor.ne l. Or din <;nce No . 2 pe rtains to t he pro.:e-.:w.:-e for r e,::u ::..~t i :·:5 the dis.-:J13 r ge o f i ndustrial ;.·c..s t e· ... ·ate:r s b y t ruci-: at <:.uthorizE:d t n . .:::~ discha r;e loc a t i o n s i nto t h e S/JU lin e . This 0 :-Ji.1.<'.nce in c GC [.~0 :-,:~::s al l the pr o vi sions of Or dinc:nc e No . 1 by r efe r e :·,,:e c:.;:d i :v:h:::,~s ,:,·L~i ­ ti ona l p r o vi s i o ns f o r co ns e nt t o pe ri odi c in s ?~ct io n o n d c~,.=··,iu:l ana lysis o f t h e di s c ha r ge . Bo th o f th e c:::-o ve o :::di;;,~.;-,ce s c .... ~r-.t.:. i;-1 p r o vi sio ns f o r e nforce;:.-=n t a n d f o r r t:::1~ed ~_es i n ca s.::.s ·,..;:.~n d ~s,:1 ~,-<i,·.::s f ei il to c o mp ly ,,.,·i th t he c onditioils specified in U ·:e:i r di &:h.~rz.e ~i:::c·.·i t or a n y o t he r pe rtin ent r egu l a tions o f S.-\',,'?A c.:· . .:: t :-:•:: c.:f e ct .::d J •)0:.::l s ~nita ry dist ri c ts . CS OO C O.rdin 0 nce. CS CCX:: h a s issue d d etc.ile:i ;:eg:.ilc :::.o r:s f o r t:-.e u se of d i st rict se· ... ·e r a g e f ac ilities w-hich s e ts f -:.::-~:-i p:·o :-1 ib it:.c :~s c1:J limit a tio ns o n d isc harge ; pr oced ur e s f o r obt a ini r.5 •..,·.:!s te dis d· .. q r ge p e rmits; r..o n ito ring , r eFO rtir.g c:.nd i nspec tion r 0.;u i :-2 :~<2nts ; rci:-t r 12::.:.- r.,e nt f c.cility r equire:r e nts ; and er.fo;:·ceG:ent pc-c.c-::-.::.J :«?s . ~lost o f the prov i s i ons c o n ta i ne d in SA'n'?A c.:1d CSDOC or d .i.1.-J1~cc s f o r r egu l a ti ng t h e di sch3 r g e of i n d ~st ri a l ~s st e s i ~Lo S ~~I l i~e a ::-e simila r. Mino r d iffe r e nces ex .. is t i n the all c .. .-:::.:.e s~r-.::::::;th o : ·,.-.::s ::e dischDrb-:::s as i ndi c a t e d in Tc.ble 2 · ... i.th S.\',·,?A r 7 ;·Ji r 0~(:r.::s t -2 i 1\5 :~.;re 1 ' . H ~')D <~OD T ~ ~ stri ngen t with r espe ct to tot a cn r o lll :i.u m, COt:f:C:r, f'-, t: .. , J , .::i ::i Table 2 . Csrxx::: and SAh'PA Disc ha rge Lir.ci.tatio:is Cons tit u ent Cad mi UJ'il Ch r o:nium (T) Coppe r Lead t'.e rcury Ni ckel Silve r Zinc Cyanide (T o ta l) Cyan ide (A~~nable to Chlorir.o tio n) PCB 's and Pc~ticidcs Total Toxic Or 8c.nics Su l f ide (Tot3l) Sulfi~e (Dissolve d) Oil or Crease pH , units BOD COD TSS SAWPA Maxirr:u;;i Li mi ts8 CSCCC ~c.:cimum Lirr.i ts3 2 1 0 .5 2 2 0 .03 10 5 10 s 1 0 .02 0 .5 100 6-9 250 5 ,0CO 300 2 1 2 3 2 0 .03 10 5 10 5 1 0 .02 0 .58 5 0 .5 i OO 6--1 2 -----------·-· ----··--··-----·- a All conc entrations a re in rr:g /l and CSDOC requi r ~~ents b e ing ~ore str i ~g~nt ~ith r2sFect to tc~~~ t oxic o r ganics and total sul fi de. S tri n g f e ll ov Waste Di scharge P e r mit . S:\f. ?A hes iss;..:E:d permit t o the State of Ca l ifornia , C'2partrr.e n t o f He a lth Sec.;ices, for t he discharge o f pret r eated ground~ater extrac ted fr o ra t he Stri~g ­ f e ll ow hazardous waste disposa l site into the SA RI line at true~ disposa l stations (CB-1 and h'-U . The effective date of this p=:-r. . .i.t i s J an uary 1 , 1 985 . The permit has b ee n i ssued for a t h r ee -y ea r p e r i od wi t h the specification th a t no vested right o f 2.ny k ind , i~­ cluding the r igh t to discharge has b ee n acq ui red by th2 state by virtue o f the 8ranting of tr.e pe r mi t. OOHS is c.lso oblig::':..::d to c om?lY with a ll e:.<_ist i ng and future app J.icable rc-:;,:.1 :.:-~:-.. ..=nts o f C:·:!X<:, c;nd S~.l..'PA re se rves the ri3ht to sus?E::r.d o r r evc~~e t:-.e s•..:b j .::ct p -.'.'.:-;·j t f . 1 . i· .. c:··7 i• .. , o r (;n y vio a tio:1s o r no :1-co;:i? :i.anc e .,.·1 tn -····" ... , s (1r •:.:sc.:-,c12c;, r.:·-:o _;_;- tions or r egu latio ns govt:rn i r.g the S!·~:.<.I syste:!'~ A~ c.ttcci-.."7,·.::nt to t:·.2 di scha r ge permi t es tc:b l is hes the f o l lo ,~·i i~g c.'3d itic. r..::. l c .::~·.: i r.:-:-:-•.;i; ts : 2 • 1-'.o n th 1 y v e r i f i cc t ion o f tot .e. 1 t o ;~ i c o ::-6 2 ~ i c s (TT 0) :..· :_ : h d a i 1 y c ~rt if i ca ti on of co.:: p 1 i d n c ~ i n c. cc o r d c :. •: 2 .,.,. i th t :-; 2 provisio ns of F12.Je r al Clec.n h'~ter Ac t. 3 . A p'2nalty schedule fo r v iolation of s~.:cific rro·;i s i o :•s c: the di scr2.r ge perr.ti t . . 4 . Si=·~cif ic lir.c-i.tc.tions o f the re!"i::.it .;s f o llc--·s : e.. L imiting th e t ota l dai ly d .~scr-:;:-~e '::>/ DOHS to O,l S7 nil lion gallons pe r dcy (:::gd). b . I r~.rosing the f o 11 o·,..;ing r. .. ::.s s c.Esc:-.~ :-5e 1 i :~ its on t h e S?ecified constitue nts : :·'.axi;:;c:: ~'.:. s s L~-::.i.ts Constiti.:er.t lbs/day -~/l~ Arsenic 3 .1 Cl . 99 ) Cadmium 0 .1 (0 .06) Chromium (Total) 3.1 ( 1. 99) Copper 4 .7 (3 .0 1) Cyanid e (Total·) 2 .0 (1 , 28) Cy .snide (Free) 1.6 (0 ,82) Lead 0 .9 (0 .58) }1ercu ry 0 .0 5 (0 .03) Nickel 5 .5 (3 .5 ) Silver o. 7 (O .l1S ) Zinc 1.1 (0 .70 ) To t al T oxic Organics (TIO) 0 .9 (0 .53) Pesticides and PCB 's 0 .0 3 C0 .0 2) *TI-.e dischc.r ge penn.it docu :.-,.=nt coes no t i ncl.u:i2 :-.~.ss 1 i..r-'..t s in my'l of i,:c.ste disch.:-:rged. T.-.cse ve:l c-=s !-:-:;·:.; ~_:-:,:n c.:::-j S . Al th.)ugh no t Si?Gcific a lly ice;.t-i..fied i;-i t f-.2 cis.::·,;:-,:·52 ::·::~-~:_:.t li~its on othe r c onsti ti.:~nts such a s si.:lfi~2 1 oil ~~~ grease, pH , BOD , COD and TSS c.re incluced i n t he p er~-.:i.t b y r e f e r ence to t he general r equ ir e~en ts o f 6;plica ~le CS00C or din~nces . ~v a l t .i::ition of O:x:i;:ilicnce ~.'~~ r'·:2 pli•=.3ble Or 1:Ji:::~~cs . .'. c·~. ~),~·ci.­ son of d a ta prese~ted in th e ~recedi~g sections on t~e rr c ;o s~d Stringfell o w pre:t r e a tr..en t ob j ec tives · .. i th d:i.schc:::·c:;-:; r•.:.-=iu~.::-,,:·.-. ..=:1t s o: S,\\·t?A e.nd CSC'CC in d ic a tes t hat the µroros ed .,,·e:s te ci :;,:h::rz·::: ·,.;ill i7.-~·.-::t el l t he establ i shed r~quir~~ents o f t~e abov e a~~~ci es . A ~i~0 ::­ c i s c r ep a n c y in th e S .~\.;?A ·..,·.::. s :: e d i sch a r 6 e ? e r m i t :_ .s t i-.13 co:. f 1 ::.. c t ';:,-:: - t·,.:ee n the a lln,,;.;b le l e\·e l o f t ota l c r.r oi ~.:i.u ::i (2 r-.y l) -,.-ith t :~·3 1::-::·:el yr2scribed in SA'r.'PA Or din.:.r.ce ~;•J . 1 (0.5 cg/l ). T r.e hit/.·.:>:-co:-:::>~nt :-.::.- tion leve l, ho-..;eve r, is i;i accord • .. •ith CS80C .,.·as::.e di sch.:i.re;e 0;:..::.- nance . An.tlysis of Enviror:.;ental I mpacts of the Proposed Projec t OOHS has issued an envir onrr.ental review d ocu!.'.12n t for tJ-.2 proF'Jsc::d String fellow interim treatr:-..ent and disFOsal prog ram (OOHS , 1985). Th.::.s docu r.~nt addresses potential envir on~ental i Q?acts of the proposed String fellow '.-«::s te discharge project in the c o :-1t.Ext o f the foll c · ... ·i.:-:3 iss ues : 1 . I r.:pa ct of the i n terim progr,;,r:i on .,.,·.:;t e r c;·-:3 lity in t'.-;e C-('~;-::n or i n the Orange County g r our.d· .. ;;; ter t ~s ir.. 2 . I mpa ct of a bre a~age in the S .... _U line . 3. Potential danger due to the -::-c.dio eic t.ivity in r;:(:: t_r:,~.:;t~~.:i Strinafe llo w ~at er . -., ~. -•. , .. L..;...-- n .::tive end o n v&riOL.'.S regul zto r y r equi r c::-.er.ts f o r i ss:; .. ::-.. :c o f t'.-.c:: r.~.;:.-Je d disci-..c :..-g e pe r !-:-Qt. A bdef su:::r:-2r; o f t !-:2 i nfo r r .:ti •)n l· ~-o·: ~·:'.2 d in the COHS ' s env ir0nr.:-?n ta 1 re v ie·.,. docu:--,::n t is [: :-es2r.:::2d 1.>::: ~c · .. , ·~·:.t ~: sp12cial eii.?h.ss is o n g ;:-0LL11c,.,·at er q ,__:.;.lity i::-.~.:;cts . Cr01..Lrx,"-,,;c.te r Q~l3li~~cts. The focu s o f th-e DJ!i S E:;1viru·_-e:.tc:.:i. r e vie;.: cocu;·12nt is on a c or.pa ri so n be::· .. ·2c-n the c;'J.?.lity o f S tr.: :~<.Je~ !.c .,· disc'1a r ge <::nd .,.·c:.s t e .•e t e r fl o ,.,·i :-ie; in tr.c S/-_U lil.e e.s · .. ell cs t c ca i infl o w t o the CSDOC t r ce tr.:.:n t plc::nt s:,-s te'.:1 . The re sults of t!-'.•::s.:: c o~p n ri son s c:r c s:-:'J'nT1 in Table 3 . D::ta i:;::-t:s•::::te<l in Tc'..i '..e 3 i:. ~; . .::.:te that f or p2.r a;;-12ters liste d in this t ob le the e:~r-c:ctcd Str5.:-:c,'.:2llc· .. , dis chci.re,.: ...,.Oi..!ld J-.e:ve 0:1l y a 1.:ini::-.31 ef f ect on t '.-.e c;1..::::.l:..ty o f ·,.·::s tc-- ...,·a te r flc·~·:i.r.3 ir. SA?J lir.e c t Oro;;ge County b1 )1 ..:.:-"'~<::-/ 2:id ··o·.1lJ ~-..:::.:: r . .) e C f e c t on the q u .=. 1 i t y l? a r a r.: e t <: r s a t tr. e p oi n t o f d is....: h.:: c.::.:, c of S .! . .?_I l ir.e to CSOOC t::-e .3 t r:-.en t plants in F ountc.in Vc:.l le:y . Tol,lc J . a Effcc t !l of Trcn t L'd SL r i "i:r c ll o w D i sch11 r t,:e o n l·fo s tcwn tcr: Qun l ity in SAH I Sy stem At Ornn1~e Count :z'. r.-...indnrv At Tr:cntm c nt Pla n t No . SAIU ConccnL nit.ion ConsLitucnt mJ l 0 .002 ND Arsenir. Corlrn ium Ch r om ium Co1 •1 icr l .c11d OJJ29(C r1 6) N u :k1_·l S1 lvcr Zinc Cymn de Tot11 l Tox i c O rLn ni c ~ rA I [l,·cL r i t:11l Cond u c Ltvity, ulfltY>~/c m 'i\Jl 111 FI ()W . "'1~d -------------- .l 1: 'OJI:; , I 'Jiiii Cll.'M 11111 , l 'J!!I, r:I A = N•>L f.n1il y.1 .... 1 t:IJ = Nu L IA!L •~.:Lc d 0 .01!7 0 .004 0 .026 NI A 0 .11 Ill) 0 .53 7. l 2 .5 1'..!rmitLcd Con .hi ned S t r: .i nt,:flerw FI ov md l nri.:/l 2 .00 o. ]l.J 0 .061, 0 .())1, 2 .<:X.> 0.1&6 J .00 o .:~'>J 0 .67 o .u~o 3 . '.JI 0 .208 0 ,1,J O , /O 0 .1 5 1 1 .20 0 ,0/jj 0 .'.Jd 0 .'.JJJ &-') 0 . l l l7 'L .Gh'/ SAHI Conccn Lrotion mJl :-I/A 0 .07 0 .1 9 0 .1.1, i:1 .1J5 O.OJ 0 .0 7 0.:10 ~!/,\ 9.J25 7.1 2 ,J'JO 23 .0 P c.-mitLcd SLringflow m~/l 2 .00 0 .064 2 .00 J.00 0.67 J .51 0.1,3 0 . 70 1.20 0.58 6-9 0 . ltl7 Corr.bincd Expected u FlO'w' S tr in~fcllow my'l m't/l -0.01,3 0.07 0 .018 0.20 0 .005 0 .46 0 .08 0.06 0 .005 0 .06 0 .1 6 0 .0 7 o.w. 0.JO 0 .0J4 -NIA 9.25 0 .021, -9.0 23 .187 0 .1 07 Cornbincd Fl ov m&l 0.07 0 .1 9 0 ,41, 0 .05 O.OJ 0.07 0 .JO 9.25 23 .107 Pretrez t ed ;..·ater fr om the Str i ngfel l cw site, h c· ... ·e ·1e r , c o::t.::i:-.s other c onstituents such as tota 1 dissolved s a lts, ni t rete , s·..:l f c te , etc., et c oncentretio ns which are sig;-lif i cen t ly et.ove the l e•;e ls :..:i t he SARI line and in the inflow to the SDOC tre a t r:;en t plcnts . 7 h 2 environ ~~n tal r ev iew d ocum ent an d p revi o us r eports p r epa r ed by Consult a nt do no t add r ess t he imp ac t of t hese c onsti t u e nts b eyond making stetemen t s to t he effect th a t Stringfello·.,, disch a r ge would cons titute a .mnu t e portion of the t o tal flow to t he t r eat:.-.en t pl.:::1 ts and ..,,.ould hcv e a minimal impact o n t he O\'erall pl c.nt efflt,;ent.. Fo r cor.ipa.rison purpose s , the estirr.ated r.,ine ral co~?Ositi o n o f Stri.r.-3 f el l :.:·,,. disch ;:;r ge is lis t e d in T a ble 4 e.nd tr.e eppro:<irr:cte i :::?8Ct o f t iics.~ c onsti t u8n t s on the q 1J.a lity of SARI lir.e at t h e f-Oi n t o f di sc!-. .::::-;s'= to the t rea t r.-.::n t pl 6nt i s ce lcu l ated . 11-:t::se cat a i ndic .. .tt e u-~,;t ,:.; i.th .::;-~_:;;1 Strir._;f e 110·.,, di sch.:; r ge is highly c ont&f!cir.c:ted · .. •ith nit r.:;tes , si.: l (._; ::.:·s .::nd othe r disso lved rr.ine r a l species , t he i ;;;p.sc t o f Lhis d.is.:r..::::-3,= 0 :1 the o\·era ll qua lity o f SAR.I lir.e ·~·c.s te·,.;.::ter is Sl.".:.11 ~~;_:2 to t::2 i':i(/l diluti o n ra tios i n the l ine. 1l\e :iJ~·.r-a ct of t hese c o'1s ti!:t :·::nt:s is ; .. :!·,'h rr.o re rro:1o u nced in the ini t ial r eacr.e s of S ,!~~ l ine (for c r::.:.:.:::i1,~. c ':. th e b ou n dcr y o f On:.nge Cou nty) •,;he re l es s fl o .,,.s .:-.r.:: c:.v<1iL:.01.e [(.;:- diluting the S t r ingf el lo·,.. dischc:rge . The unde rlying assurr.ption of a 1 1 pr ev i ous r t:F o rts pr 2 ~ cr2j f ,x the Stringfel l a ... ; i nte ri m pcoj t:c t is t hat the S.-'8,I lir:e r.,::s n o ,:ir.o<t i rr.pac t on the qua 1 it y of g r 0u nd· .. ;a t e r re sou re es GOhn s t r e..:i :J : r o :i: t l-.2 po i n t of di schGrge o f pret r ec.ted St rin g f e ll o·,.., >;zst e · .. ·a te r s . Th .:;s2 s tudies r.e.v e , t ht:refore , f ocus sed on t he i;-nr ac t cf th i.s d i sc:i -.~::c,e c:1 t he overa ll c;ua lity o f t r ea t ed -..·~1stc · .. ·.::"lters .,,.'.-1i ch e..-e di.s.:J::;r2/:d co t>.e ocean a nd the po rtio n o f the SDO C ~c stt:vater thct is r ec lai ~~d C0 r inj 2ction into the grou:1d . As stc::tc:d pre:vicus ly , ·,,·e c oncu r ·~·itr1 t:--..~ g0nera l c o ncl u sion o f thes e s tud i e s th.ct t l-.e pro~x·st:.-d d i sc:r.::r _:.e C 0·2 S n o t r..sve a sign ifican t &dvers2 ir.pe.c t on t he q u.:!lity of t c.:.:.t.:.-j ·,.:.::s t:c ·- W2.t e r tha t is discha r ged to the ocean o r th2 f-Ortion o f th<: ·,..·:;s t.:•.::-.te r t hat is r ec lair.:e d for injec tion into g,rour;d•,.:.:=.te.r e.;uif 2 rs i n th .~ S ~n t3 Ana G8 ? a.rea by O r e.nge Co unty ~l a tE:r Dist r i ct . 'r.'e b e 1 iL!ve , l-.o·~.:::-.·e r , TDble 4 . Co rn poris on of Es tirnDtcd Mi n c r nl Corn;?osition of S trin[;fello w Discharge With the Corresponding QuDlity Pnrnrnc ters f or the SJ\IU Line Quality Parameter m~l Nitrntc Sulfnte TotAl Dissolved Solids a J\vcn1r-e S trjnpfcll m,i D.i .. <;c !1.<trp,c To t Dl b St ream A Stream D (0 . L1A +O. 60) 319 12 ,890 28 ,00J 297 1 ,8ll1 3 Jcxf , 306 6 ,2411 13 ,180 Est j mn ted Composition of SNU Line Dt FV d 120 269e f 1 ,530 Combined StrinPfel low ·-· a nd SAJU Linc Qu D.lity a t FV 121.5 317 1,624 '\:stimnted by ovcrneint?, r eported monitor ing dot!\ in Cll2 M !!i ll , 198L1. l) Based o n n~por lcd n1 tios :i_n trL:tJLttb.ility stuJic~~ (Cl l 2l·1 if .ill , l 9l3'1). cEs timntcd f~om repo rted electrics: conductivity dntn . df~stir.1..'lt L'ci on t he oo~i s of r eported ~:iiJ-N conccntrn t .i.ons in cornbir1cd inflow to the jo.i.nt worlc (C11rollo EnL,ineers , 190J). <~i{cporLcd .•;u~_[ntc.: co nccn~r11Uon i.n T rc~1lrnL'l1C Plll 11t ECCl u cnt (Stnf .:>rd lJnj_v ., 1982 ) fi·:st:im.·tt:l'<: o n Lhc lwsi .. ·~ nC repr11·t1·d c.:l 1'...::.ci.c;11 c o nuucL..ivity cJ11t11 fo ; the SAJ\I l i ne ,.,,,1 ~tL'\,•:1tL:r (C~1c ol. lo Ent: i lll'l:cs , l 91JJ). '· th a t t h ere is a p o te n tial f o r direct ad v er se i c:?ac t of ;..·3ste·,.·at2 ;:-s floving in the SARI lir.e on ground ·.;a t e r bodies ur:d erlying t h e line d •..:e to possible chro nic, lo·..t-level leakage of wa st e 1 .. •ci.t er fr om t hi s lir:e . We are not aware of any data W"hich wou l d indic a t e t h e o cc u rre n ce o f any l eakage along this line o r show adverse i rtpa cts of any s uch l e2....~­ age on the quality of shal l ow, intermediate or d ee p l oca l c q uife rs, ho ..... ·ever , t .his question has not be e n address e d i n a n y of tr.e r epo rts which have been prepared in conjW1Ction with t he S t ri ng fe llo·.r i n t e rim proj e ct. A review of c vailable inf onnation on g e ologic f o r mz ti o ns in Fo 1..Lrit a in V el ley indi c a tes that t h ere is a potent ia l f o r the r..ov e:-;-,~n t of c on t cm.in.cn ts fr om sha llo· .. · wa t e r zone s i n t o the p 1:c<luctive c:.r.p.ti f e rs . Acc o r d ing ly , this q u estio n wo u ld d e serve furt he r con s i d eratio n .,..-:-:~n a dd re ssing the i mp a ct of waste di s chc rges to the SAR.I l i ne on g r ou r.::- wa t e r resourc e s of Fount·ain Valley. fqdrog e o~ of F o untain y a ll~~r.ea. Foc!1 t e i n Vo lle y c:.re a i s loca t ed in the S a nt a fu.1 a Gap hyd r o l ogic s ubar ea o f t h e Sc:nta /....r,a P.i ve r hydr o log ic unit. \~'a t e r-be e ri ng f o r rr:a tion s i n t~lis or ea i n tr.e o r c:'.,:;r of o c currence fro m gr o und s urf a ce consist of T c.bl e r t , Al pha , B,:;t3 , La mbd a a nd r.:0in a qui f e rs. Re cen t a lluv i al d er-osi ts of v c r;fr~g r-2 ::-- r.;e a bi lity a n d thi c k ne ss o v erl ie the Teb l e rt a qu ife r e:n d pr ov~_d·2 a c onf inir.g c a p ove r this f o rrr.a tio n. The underly i ng ,.,·3ter-1x:c:-ir--s f o ;:-- ma tions are in c o nt a ct with the Tablert aqui fe r znd wi th e a ch o th 2.r and are also s e parated by d e pos its of lm<e r perr:-,e a bil ity . A r epr 12 s e ;;- t a tiv e cross -s e ctio n of t h e g eo l o gic f o r matio n s i n F o u nt ai n Va l ley a r ea a l o r.g a line p as sing through Ellis Av e r.ue fro r:i San ta Ar.a Ri •:e r ::o Bea ch Bo ule va rd is s ho"m in F ig ure 2 . Da t a on ... .-at e r q ual i t y c on d i- tio ns a nd direction of u;ov er.i ent o f grc.u :idwa ter in indi v i c uz l 1,.:a te r- bea rino for ma tio ns a n d in the nea r surf ac e perched 'r>a te r z o ;;e a re r.ot 0 . avail cble for Fount ain Va lley area. Thes e p arc;:..e te r s hav e been r..::i :...::..- t o r ed by Ora nge County h1a t e r District in o bs e r vc.t i o n · .. 121 ls d ri l led in t h e v icinity of Elli s Avenue r e clairr.ed ••ater in j ection i,.·el l s , hc·~·e ve r, as exr.,cc ted thes e d a ta refl e ct the effect o f t he i n j e c tio ;-i oreratio:1s both in terms of qua lity and h y d r a ulic heei d c o r:c'.i tio ns a nd could f".;)t be assu~ed to r epr esent t h e overa ll g r o unc· ... ate r c o ndi tior.s i n Foun t c;.i n Va ll ey a r e a. SOURCE: CSDOC, 1902 •. B' NEWLAND S T MAGNOLIA S T WARD ST EUCLID ST OUSHARD S T ORO OKHUn 3T ST I t -~i::t-_:; _ _::_ _.___ -_:_ _ ----:... --------'---· ---'---'-:...-' _:c;_:_:.:.:__:.. _ ::J.SU.'.:~!\.'.12'!:02?.'.'~'.;i '.:'.'~'~ ;: ~ I 160 L·-.. ·. · . 200 2 5 0 I 300 t--' .· I I i . . . I 350 t_ · •. .• .: .... :\f >. • t~ . , . ~ -. , ·-~~·:::.:.:'.·. :~ .. ). :. ~ ~- ~.~-~~:\:.~ . 'l ·, .· .... , . ' ., ~ . ..,..__. ,~ ,; ; . GENERALIZ ED CRO S S S E CTION OF AQUIF E RS IN FOU NTA IN VALLEY AR E A F I GURE 2 . . If con tar.ti.nan ts are introduced into .the alluvia 1 formations o·:t::-- lyir.g the Talbert aquifer in significant quantities and ov e r a pro- longed period of time, it is probable t hat these contami nan ts ,,,·ould eventually reach the Talbert aquifer and fX=>SSibly t he deepe r 'riate:-- bearing deposits. Water Quality Conditions in t he City Wells. Ci ty of FOL:ntc in Valley c u rrently withd ra w·s v;ater from local aqu ifer through six ;-,'ell s of varying depth and yield. Available .,.·a t e r q ua lity moni t o ring cbta for these wells was revie·,..ed in this study . The q ua lity of · ... ·.;:.te r purr:ped from all wells ••ith the exception of Well No . 5 ei.JFA2ared to be satisfactory and did not indicate th e exi stence o f any source o f c ontarr:inotion . Informa tion on construction details for e.xisti n5 City wells is presented in Table 5. These d ata indi c a te t ha t Hell ~~o . S (5S-10W -19 A0 5Y) is the shallo·,.'est c.rrong all City .,.·el l s and is pi=:r h.:-~?s the only ·.,·e ll .,.-hich is perforated in the Tablert a1u if er. Water q ual ity analy ses f o r We ll No . 5 i ndica te elevated 1:or,c 2 :.- tra tions o f sulfates , bicorbo nates c.nd tota 1 dissol v ed sol ids . A ? lo t of nitra t e and sulfate concentration l evels o v.c:r t he p<.st 11 y2.:~r s indicates a signif icc>.nt u?'.·•c.rd trend in the c:oncE:n t ration o f so th o f these constituents in r ecen t years (Figu re 3). The rr.os t recent cor:-.- plete .,.,·ate r quality analysis for this 1,.:ell is prese~ted in AVi.endi;( A. The incr eas ing tr end in the concentration of sulf ate s and nitrat e s in We ll No . 5 may be indic a tiv e of a source of g r ounc·.,·ate r pollution in Fountain Val ley area. The major se1 .. .-2r 1 ines t e rm::.natir:g at ~SCX:X:: cannot be r uled ou t as a possible c ont ribJ ting source to this po 11 uti o n . Othe r s ou rces o f co ntai:lina t ion such as ag r icu l t ur a 1 o r landsca?ing fertilize r use, indus t r-ia 1 sp i 11 s 5 nd unde r ground t & r.k le akage , and le akage of degraded shallo·,.; ground •,;ate r th r ough a corrcded well casing could also be r esfX>nsible f o r al l o r part o f the observ e d water qua lity ~egrada tion in t~e City 's We ll No . 5 . Table 5 . Construction Det a ils f or Fountain Val ley h'ells. Well Date Total Casing Number Dr illed Dep th Di amete r Perfor a ted Interval 3 10/77 590 0-162' 18" 222-270 -590' 14" 318-570 4 11 /70 920 0-920' 18" 250-640 760-800 860-900 5 c.1955 38 5 0-385' 1 4 " 103-117 350 -355 135-1 54 357 -370 6 5/74 10 40 0-280 ' 18" 37-0-390 8 60-910 -1040 ' 14" 450-4 90 4 72-557 391-414 572-589 600-779 7 8 1 77 800 0-206' 18" 250 -300 422-440 -800 ' 14 " 342-368 472 -557 391 -414 572-539 6C0-779 8 11/77 86 4 0-204' 18" 312-420 -864' 14" 456 -564 600-844 ------·----"'--- Source : Montgor.:ery Er.gi nee :::-s , 1984 1 Q r--------,~-- / \ I \ I \ I \ N03 , 50 (mg/l ) 40 30.l 20 · 10 I I I \ I f \ . I I! \ : I 1 1 , r : , I . I I I I · I ' \ : I I \ : . I \ i I I \ ! I ; \ I I , '/ ~ \ ; I ; '. \ ! . .. I . : I I I ' ' . ; I O I ' I , ..... : 1. 1 I • • ! I I I I I ' V · ! I . I ;· : \ : I I I I I . . . I I • I I • . I . . I I • • : . ' .. :· . s-1 ' ., , . . . ; • : I : ' I . . . , , •I i .. . : . I : ; . : I I /.,;: U4i : . I . ; : • I ·-· .. , .. .. • ..! ! ' . I ' . : ' ··1·· .I . I / 1·· I I ' .... ,. i ' : . · I t').. . 1 ./ • ' • • • ' • i ~ 1-~-: · ...... : · I . I . ' ( ""lit' ' -I .. . '. I I . I . . . I . . 'I . I I I I • • I I I , . No l . · 1 " .. I ' ;J .. I ' I . : : :,.,J . ! I ,,,.,,.' I r:' i '· .. i . I I . . , I l _I .. ·~ ! I I I . . . I ! : I I I I 1 · . I . I 1 -: I ... ' ! 1 ... 1\/· i ·I ; \ I I I . I I' . I . . : I ; I • . I ' . I I I • I. : ~ I ' ' ' ' . ; l i . ' I ,..,..... . ; \ : ........ ~-' . ........ I \ ........ :..,............. ; :I ,v : cl"" . ' : I · 'i · · · 1 ; i ; i:, 1 .• • , : . -I : . I '' i . ·I I 1--1· .... • I ' .... 1. I '! I ' I . : I : 'I i ' : '':: -i .. ' . '' i'' I ' I 1. · 1--I .. • 1 ·. I ' I .1 I ••• I .... ' ' . ' ' ' .. , . ' . ' ' . ' : I ' I ' : I ' ,._ ......... ;1 i ' ., I ' I : .. I. ., .... '" _, I I .. ·1 ··! .! I ·I I I I o 1L ' I : " ' ' ' I ' . ' ' I ' . I I . . I I __ . --' ' ' " . ! : ' " " . ! " ' I I; ' " I . i .. , =~==!:==-·-. i ' . j ." ! .· ,. ·1: ,•' I. ; I . --~-'....--• I ,· I I •• , •• 1 ·· .,. I . . ---=-----J--: ; I I • . . . i . I I . : . " I I __ , -----' _L i ' ; : . I ; ' . I . I "' ' -· ... .---·-·--· -__ , ___ :___--= . . . . 2rl'J [J /7 5 1/77 017 0 Orto O/CO O/t31 G/52 'J/C:l e1u4 Sampling Dato O/l3~ 275 250 225 200 175 150 125 100 HISTORIC WATER QUJ\UTY TRENDS FOR FOUN-1-AlN VALLEY'S WELL NO. 5 F IGURE J . S04 , (mo/I ) •, Cunclusions end Rec~tion s The r esults of our review of avail able infor ~~ti o n a n d repo rts on the proposed Stringfe llow interim project ind icate that app r o ;:i r izte tech n ic a l procedures have been foll owed in se lec ti ng the pro p osed alternative and t ha t the proposed discharge is in compli a nce ~ith applicable regulatory r equirements of l ocal , state a nd fed eral age rr cies . We have also concluded that degrad a tion of useable, shall o·,. groundwater supplies r.iay be occurring in F o u n tain Val l ey a l thcugh available d a ta are inadequ a te to identify the sourc e o r s our c e s o f such degradation. In light of the above conclusion a nd due to the l ack o f s~;ciEi c infor mation o n groundwater qua lity in s hal l o w water b odie s a ~d in Talbert a quifer in th~ Founta in Val l e y a:-ea , ,,..e belie v e tho t a fie l d investigatio n pro.sram should be L.mderta't-;.e n to provide inf on ~.s ti o n 0n the followin5 items : 1. Direc tion of ffiOVe ffie nt a nd qua lity condi t ions i n the sh3llc~ ·,.;a t e r bod ies in F o un t a in Val ley orc a. 2 . Ge nera 1 direction of move :-;;.ent c.r.d ;.;a ter <;ue l i t y co;K~i.t ic:-:s in the Talbert aquifer. 3. The i rr;pact of wa ter qualit y in t h e Tal b er t aqui fer on groundw a ter quality conditio n s in Alpha, Be t a an d L.:.:::bGa aquifer s which are tapped by mo st of the Cit y 's s upp l y wells. 4 . The i mp act of SAR I line z n d o t he r i::e j o r ~e'.·;e r trunk l i:-.::::s traversing t h e City o f Founta i n Va lley o n g r oui1C ·..,·.:,te r qc.:.1 - ity c o nditio ns in this area. Tne di s cha r g e p e rr.i.t a nd r equ irerr.ents f o r S t ri ng fell c.,.· in t e:rim pro j;::c t shoul d be re v i e ,.;ed in lioh t o f the fi ndi ngs of the obvve progr am . . 0 ·. \ . RITERlliCES 1. J ame s M. Mo nt gome r y , Consu 1 ting Engineer , Inc . Lette r Repo rt: Conditio ns of Fountain Va lley We lls ; March 1 , 19 84 . 2. Joh n Ca r o l l o Enginee r s , County Sani t ation Districts of Or.::! nge Co u n t y , Mas t e r Pl an f o r Joint \iorks ~aste ~a ter Treatffient end Disposa l F acil i t ies , Ap ril 1 983 . 3 . Or ange Co un t y Wa t er Dist r ic t , Talbe r t Barrier , Sta t u s Repo rt 1 979 -1981. 4 . CH2M Hill , Ecol ogy & Enviro;tment. Rer;;edi.;l Plc.n~ing/F:.eld I ;-,'.''2 S- t iga t ion Tea m (REM/FIT ) Zone 11 , Contract No . 68-Dl-6692: a . Fas t T r ack Rer.ie dial Inve s tigation Feas ibility St ccy , S . f 11 s . R . . d c 1 . c . v 1 8 '') C' I tr1ng e ow 1te , ,1vers1 e , Ja 1L orn1a , 1.ay _ , 1 ,.<...:.i . b . Stringfellow Suti:i;ia ry Re;:;ort , Stringfello"' H.?.zarc!ous ~:;::;t e Site , Gl en Avo n He i gh ts , CA , July 1S 84 . c , Test Prog ram Su ~ma ry Repor t , Str i.ngfellcw Site , Ri v1:!:-sice County , California , Au gus t 1984 . 5 . Depa rt men t of Hea lth Services , State of California , Enviro ru. . .::~tal Review f o r T r eated \iaste Discha rge , I nterir.i Trec:t:..~n t &nd Dis;o- sa l Program , Stringfello·,,. Hazardous Was te Site , J&r.'J.::ry 1$85. 6 . D epar t~ent of Civil Engin eering , Stanford University , Advanced Trea t;nent for Was t e·,.,:ate r Re:cla i":',,3 tio n and 'ri'.:ite r foc t Of)' 21 , f..t.:;1...lst 19 82 . .. APPENDIX A WATER QUALITY DA.TA FCR Fet.JNIAIN VALLEY WELL KO . S 23 · .. ' .\....._/ r> :, f J ('' Mn N T G ij Mr-:: 17 y L (':, i:: n r? .-:-i T 0 r? 1 ::: s .=1 rl:iv~:--:i.on of J<•Ml'"·S M. M0nt<~o.·11 ·'•·y 1 CiH1~::.t1l ~i~~ l:.n qi11"·r:·r•0,1 T ,1 r . c.:; '·i S F: .:i ,_; t 1,.J a l. n 11 t St r ~ f~ t 1 r> ,, s ,1 d ·~ n a 1 Ca l i r or n i .. 71 '=I \ \ 0 \ ._, < 8 j 8 ) 7 9 6 -9 i t; i I < ;; ~ "?. ) fi ~~; t -4 ;~SS T P. J e x 6 '? -S .1, ? 0 R e !) o r t o f C ~:·" n 1 r. I M i n <? r ,;1 l ~\ n Cl l y s 1 s F ,; u n t .:1 i n V ,:i l l e y ... ... D .. 1,."" s.:i r-it::i l f:·d , Ji 17 1 ·t P. C 0 Mp ] e t 1:~ 0 : 7/t2/Fl4 8/8/84 E70835 C'1 TT (] t~S : (Mq/]. ) ( MP.C(/ 1 ) -... -···-···-··--···-·------··-------~··- <; (i Ci i I) M ~1 0 ') ·-1. 7 r· (1 \ ~ !:,. ~.; i u ('1 ·1 s 0 iiS .-. ,71 ·1. c j ll 1'1 1. .<~ '7 ".) '·· ·7 '~ ,':, !'1 .. , ( 2 ,-, (-\; j_ lJ h ?E1 6 ') '·· -r ,-, ,JO J o h 1~ I P 0 :l!: : Worko1dr=:r *' f-\'~:-p0 r t :!!:: 1. l 3 . 11 :·Fi Ii ~I f.'i l! i . () 2 l~ I ) (J~'.'JQ S '" ,.,, ~ l r·~' T D : A~H ON~~: B'.i cc,rhonate C ,7, r h o n .1 t P. ChJ o ri clP. ~; u T f rl t P N:i'trate F ·1. ti o r ]. cl e Hy G 1· ox i cl e 2. 7 /.i ~~'.233 . .:.", i. 0 . () (1 '~ . S2 () . (J :.~ 2 ') '') I •• '-i1 •. .'j . ::;· ;.3 ~1 .-S?·.'r (j . fi :: j_ .s 0 . !j ~l C: ,~, T T f': r~ SUM = 1.? . 1 r-1.,:q/ l r; l 1-: ·-: R 1,) (:, ., F~ r~ nu (1 I _ l T y p t1 I< AME T ,.~. :< s D Fl 1 ~~ R M 1 ~~ r:: D ( M q I :.. ) : r·i 1 C or·, rl u r: t a n r: 0 ~' I !( ::. .1. i n i. t y !DS I . .:, n .-1 J. i . ··~· r I n d ·~ :: r• H i• f' C '1 C D 3 1.:. ~ ·t u r "'' 't :i. o n ( 2 S C ) t' H n f r; rl C U ~.:. s ,:., 1' u r a t :i. o n ( 6 D C ) F1· P<-co2 < 2:ic > r·::1,~ i'• !"\ i. IJM l.!-7· ,,, d r, .• , ~rn' 7 .5 l ' .', () ;:'.;?.7 0. 119 '/ . 0 j h.S :\. 7 . s . fl 4 < 0 . 0 ('J 2 C 0 pp F:f' Ir n n H .:i r' dn ess M "' n q .71 n I?: ·.; e f-lurf,1c t c.n 1s line t-, I '.; (? n :i. C Sil.vr.-r f<2>r:i.u M C;1 rl M j, I) M M ·~ i' r: 11 r y !:~ (-" J (~ n. :i. U M <O .C0 '7 . i ~.~ 4 <;>(1 <ri.fl.1 2 (fl . 0 ;:. . (J '\. s < () . 0 0 ~. ( Ii . I) 0 '~) .U .Ofi 3 < o . n r) ri 3 ( (I . 0 0 }. ~ f'1ppr·ovr-:«I by -~ ···----.. 7:':d.-;,-/_ .. _ 3231 KATELLA AVENUE LOS ALAMITOS. CALIFORNIA 90720 TELEPHONE: !7141 527-6800 February 5, 1985 County Sanitation Districts of Oran9e County, California P. 0. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California 92728-8127 ~ATTENTION: Mr. Richard B. Edgar, Joint Chairman • Your letter dated December 27, 1984, on the Subject: "Information on Proposed Discharge of Pretreated Stringfellow Groundwater to the Sewage System of the County Sanitation Districts", and the related correspondence enclosed, has been re~iewed by the Cypress Countv Water District Board of Directors at a reqular meeting held Januarv 23, 19 85 . The majority of our Board members opposed the decisions made to ulti- mately dump the toxic wastes into the sea off Huntinaton Beach, and are concerned about contaminated qroundwater seepino into nearby com- munity wells. Additionally, as a sewerin9 aqency in the countv, we are not in favor of transportin9 chemically treated waste waters through the sewer systems beyond what is now aoina throuah, reaardless of the estimated lessened hazards eluded to in vour reoort. The Cypress County Water District aqrees with the Oranae Countv Board of Supervisors in their stand aqainst the proposed plan outlined in your report. CYPRESS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT ~A .. ~ Q~ ' ~ Feraz~ President of the Board cc: County Board of Supervisors: Stanton, Wieder, Nestande, Clark, Riley Cypress County Water District Board Members: Ferazzi, McNamee, Osborne, Southfield, Swain / Wll~~[L ~rnWJ©~ tr ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR TREATED WASTE DISCHARGE INTERIM TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL PROGRAM STRINGFELLOW HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE MARCH 1985 PINAL llBPORT BNVIRONKBNTALRBVIBW POil TRBATBD WASTB DISCHAB.GB INTBIUll TB.BATllBNT AND DISPOSAL PROGRAM STRINGPBLLOW HAZARDOUS WASTB SITB This Final Report summarizes the public response in Orange County regarding the interim clean-up program for the Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site. At the request of the Board of Directors of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, an Bnvlronmental Review Report was prepared and distri- buted on January 23, 1985. Two public meetings were held which were noticed in four newspapers in Orange County. Answers to many of the questions pre- sented by attendees at the public meetings are found in the Bnvironmental Review Report. However, many of the attendees did not have access to the report prior to the meetings and some of the responses to the questions contained in this Report are referenced to the Environmental Review Report. Publication of Notice of Public Discussion in following newspapers: Huntington Beach Independent Published January 17th and January 24th The Register Published January 17th and January 21st The Los Angeles Times Published January 16th and January 21st The Daily Pilot Published January 16th and January 21st j .... ' l _ ... A summary of this Environmental Review Program, along with details of the proposed interim treatment and disposal program for the String- fellow Hazardous Waste Site was presented to the Board of Directors of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County at their regular Board meeting of February 13, 1985. In addition, the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley had expressed concerns of the interim program for Stringfellow and retained the services of an independent consulting engineer to review the impacts of the interim Stringfellow program on the City. A copy of the rpeort prepared by Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., the independent consultant retained by the City, is contained in the Appendix of this Report. ! .~ l i NOTICE OF PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS PUBLIC MEETINGS TO BE CONDUCTED BY SANTA ANA WATERSHED PROJECT AUTHORITY With Representatives of CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES and CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, · SANTA ANA REGION SUBJECT: Public discussion of interim remedial action selected by the State Department of Health Services and the U.S. En~J"Onmental Protection Agency to minimize potential danger to groundwater in the upper Santa Ana River Basin and in Orange County posed by continued migration of hazardous material from the Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Disposal Site MEETING LOCATIONS: City of Huntington Beach City Countil Chambers 2000 Mam Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Fountain Valley City Council Chambers 10200 Slater Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 MEETING DATES: Wednesday. Janwy 23, 1985 (H.B. Location Only) Wednesday. Janwy 30. 1985 (F.V. Location Only) MEETING TIME: 7:30 p.m. WHO SHOULD ATI'END: All persons interested in the interim remedial measures selected to minimize the threat of contamination of groundwater in the Santa Ana River basins from continued migration of hazardous waste material from the Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Disposal Site are invited to hear a presentation and to present their views and to ask questions at this meeting. It is requested that any written presentations be submitted to Andy Schlange, General Manager. Santa.Ana Watershed Project Authority, 2060 Chicago Avenue, Suite C-3, Riverside, California 92507, telephone (714) 682-6080 before the hearing date. For further information please call Andy Schlange. General Manager. Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, (714) 682-6080: Charles White, Unit Chief of Site Mitigation. California Dept. of Health Services, (916) 324·3773: James Anderson, Ezecutive Offi~er, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, (714) 684-9330; J. Wayne Sylvester. General Manager, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, (714) 962·2411: or David G. Argo._ Assistant Manager and Chief Engineer, Orange County Water District, (714) 963-5661. A written Review of the Interim Waste Discharge will be available after Janwy 15. 1985 at these locations: Orange County Water District Library 10500 Ellis Avenue P.O. Box 8300 Fountain Valley. California 92i08 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley. California 92i08 California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Santa Ana Region 6809 Indiana Avenue. Suite 200 Riverside. California 92506 Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority 2060 Chicago Avenue Suite C·3 Riverside. California 92507 t · . ... QUBSTIONS Pit.OK ATrBNDBBS OP PUBLIC KBBTING HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA January 23, 1985 J HUNTINGTON BBACH January 23, 1985 QUBSTIONS PROK A1TBNDBBS OP PUBUC llBBTINGS The following ls a_ list of questions submitted by attendees at the public meeting held in Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley on January 23rd and January 30th, respectively. The questions have been grouped Into general topics be- cause of similarity. The answers to many of the questions are contained ln the Report entitled, "Environmental Review for Treated Waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Disposal Program, Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site", but because many of the attendees did not have the opportunity to review the report prior to the public meetings, the answers to the general topics are . referenced to the report and the Executive Summary distributed at each public meeting. L GBNBllAL TOPIC -HBALTH CONCBRNS 1. What does the County plan to do about the recently publicized air pollution around County Sanitation Districts that process volatile toxic organics. These organics increase the risk for lung cancer and they permeate the air from sewers located near sanitation f aclllties in residential neighborhoods. 2. Major emphasis of material dispersed to the public has been on water quality standards. What consideration bas been given to the air qual- ity aspects --ls air pollution a probable result of thermal or aeration processes of disposal? 3. What liablllty insurance ls there lf local neighborhoods of Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach ts affected, i.e., people getting cancer, deformed children, etc., as in Love Canal. Who will pay? 4. What about people and health hazard risks at Fountain Valley, Hunt- ington Beach and Newport? 5. What about fumes, and carcinogens carried in the air now around Fountain Valley Treatment Plant? 6. Can you provide a list of the individual organic compounds lumped together as "Total Toxic Organics"? 7. ls there any potential danger from radioactive materials found in the Stringfellow water? J .• D. GBNBllAL TOPIC -SAPBGUAlt.DS OP Plt.OGlt.All 1. Is there to be a sa~pling and shutdown if that product 18 toxic or radioactive? 2. What safeguards wlll be used to assure compliance with the permit? 3. What happens if the SARI line breaks or leaks? 4. Since the original belief in safe dumping· were proven wrong, why should anyone believe your new methods are safe? m GBNBllAL TOPIC -SA WPA'S R.OLB IN INTBRlll PR.OGRAM 1. What ls SA WPA's role and interest in this interim solution? 2. Will SAWPA finance construction of the SARI line and its extensions with revenue collected from processing and handling the Stringfellow discharge? 3. What are the financing plans to extend the SARI line? 4. Would the loss of Stringfellow funds affect the financing of the ex- tension of the SARI line? 5. How much exactly (or at least a reasonable approximate) will SA WP A profit form this project? 6. Does SA WPA stand to "profit" from this interim program? If so, to what extent? IV. GBNBllAL TOPIC -PUBUC INPOR.llATION TO OR.ANGE COUNTY 1. Why was an BIR not prepared by BP A or OOHS prior to the selection of this interim project? Further, why was an BIR not prepared by SAWPA prior to its issuance of the discharge permit? 2. In light of the public's general fears related to the dangers posed by toxic chemicals in the environment and particularly with respect to the Stringfellow project, why were there no public meetings held in Orange County on this matter? 3. Why was the Orange County Board of Supervisors not asked to review and approve the interim program? 4. When Stringfellow took waste originally, people in Glen Avon had no public meetings and were not told of any danger -according to Mr. Dendy you did the best with the information you had! Now we are being told the same thing --lf you are so sure it is safe, why not satisfy the "concerned and frightened" people --a few more months is not going to make that much difference and might help us all sleep better???? · 5. Why can't the Kern Dump take the type of waste from Stringfellow after it is treated in the proposed treatment plant instead of sending it to the Orange County ocean and groundwater? Y. GBNBRAL TOPIC -ALTBRNATIYBS TO INTBR.lll PROGRAM 1. Did you consider alternatives to the selected interim program? If so, why were the alternatives rejected? 2. Why can't the interim treated water be injected into the groundwaters near Stringfellow? 3. Why not remove salts -desalination -on site, as well as using lime and carbon treatments and reinject into groundwater? 4. Where can we obtain the evaluation of the 13 technologies proposed for the interim solution and the criteria by which the discharge to a publicly owned treatment works was chosen. YI. GBNBRAL TOPIC -IOSCBLLANBOUS 1. The Cities of Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley are employing an independent chemical consulting firm for an analysis of the con- tents. Will you cooperate with this study? 2. What other toxic .. dump sites does SA WPA intend to clean with a similar process? 3. Doesn't this plan encourage the cleanup of dumps outside Orange County with Orange County facilities? 4. Why does Orange County have to be involved in the cleanup of a River- side County dump? S. If this project ls not completed, isn't it more likely that Stringfellow would be cleaned by Riverside County facilities? LIST OP A TTBNDBBS AT PUBLIC llBBTING IN HUNTINGTON BBACH, CA January 23, 1985 ( ( A'ITBNDBBS AT PUBLIC MBBTING OP (/23/85 -HUNTINGTON BBACH ( PLEASE SUPPLY US WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER AND ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATION, IF APPROPRIATE. WHEN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN CONCLUDED, WE WILL SEND YOU THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DISCUSSED TONIGHT. Name Diane Palmer Jeanne Malbon Address Telephone No. (designated day/evening) 22091 Rockport Lane. H.B. 964-5017 22121 RockPOrt Lane. H.B._ 963-2432 Organization Kathleen Gabriel 22081 Rockport_Lane~B. ____ 9-64 ... 2-162 F.P. Glenn 20131 Lawson Lane, H._B_.___ _ 963-2442 ____ _ Judco. Inc. Marsha Johnson 7622 QuebeQ, _H~ _ _ __ _____ _ _ 599,..S871_ (davl SNAG ~. Neal Saltzer 401 Atlanta, H.B. 960-3393 _Jdav/eveninal Harine Science OCC Glen Sorum 6092 Tyndall, H.B. William Mullee 20211 Big Bend Lane, H.B. Janice Goss 10 Civic Center Plaza, S.A. Leo Hildenbrand 11391 Acacia Parkway, G.G. Sat Tarmaribuchi 550 Newport Center Dr., N.B. Phyllis Sariego 21671 Saluda Circle, H.B. Dean Albright 17301 Breda Lane, H.B. Bettie Nosek 19772 Ranger Lane, H.B. Tom Dahl Denver, Colorado Robert Shokes 476 Prospect, La Jolla, 92038 R. Penkwitz 3510 Marcus Avenue, N.B. Nancy Penkwitz .. .. .. -·- 894-6189 Homeowner 834-3220 (day) Sup. Harriett Wiede· city of G.G. 633-6871 (day) Water Services Mgr. 720-2371 (day) 968-2176 (day/evening) 846-9430 (evening) 536-7528 (day) (303)236-5139 (619)456-6632 972-6812 (day) 673-4430 (day) The Irvine CoApany Stop! Stop! Stop! Stop! U.S. EPA -NEIC JRB/SAIC Stop! Stop! (\ ATTBNDEBS AT PUBLIC llBBTING 0, l/23/85 -HUNTINGTON BBACH ( ... i PLEASE SUPPLY US WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER AND ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATION, IF APPROPRIATE. WHEN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN CONCLUDED, WE WILL SEND YOU THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DISCUSSED TONIGHT. ~ ~' Name Address Telephone No. (designated day/evening) Organization Courtnev Smith __ 3506 Marcus Avenup ___ .._JLR~------__ _ fi7-=t-4QAI\ ~f-,,.nl· ~+,...nt Patricia Smith Bob Barker Neil Cline Blake Anderson Kris Lindstrom Jim Orr Charles Bennett Bud Nagel Bob Wright ·Art Archer Kay Cooperman Bobby Lovell Mike Thornton It .. n " It Stonl S-t.onl 330 w. BaYL__Cost._a M~~a_ _ 64_2_-432_1_ .---_ Dai1v Pilot. P.O. Box 8300, F.V. 963-5661 OCWD 10844 Ellis, F.V. 540-2910 (day) Orange Co. San. Dist. 1177 Brownwyk Dr., SAC (916)447-5893 K.P. Lindstrom. Inc. 17195 Newhope Ste. 201, F.V. 17114 Courtney Lane, H.B. 2432 Glengre St. Anaheim 3402 Sparkler Dr., H.B. 8709 El Costa Cir., F.V. 2300 N. Harbor Blvd., 18, C.M. 1242 W. Ocean Front, N.B. 177-F Riverside Ave., N.B. -2- 662-5503 842-8387 634-1567 846-3783 847-8908 754-6272 (day) 673-1303 650-5667 Assemblyman Frizzelle S.A. Water Quality Control Board i • Anaheim Bulletin Archer & Assoc. The Register QUBSTIONS PROM An'BNDBBS OP PUBLIC llBBTING FOUNTAIN VALLBY, CA January 30, 1985 I • ' -. POUNTAIN VALLBY January 30, 1985 QUBSTIONS PllOll ATTBNDBBS OP PUBUC llBBTING L GBNBllAL TOPIC -BBALTH CONCBR.NS 1. Why ts the PPM of Cadmium higher at CSDOC Plant 111 than leaving the interim treatment plant? 2. What ls the maximum allowable amounts of PCB's discharged? 3. Why not remove the contaminants from Stringfellow? This should resolve future problems. 4. After all of the cleanup already done, how much toxic waste remains in the dump and how long to get rid of it? S. Has there been any dumping of pesticides or checking for them at Stringfellow? Water Factory 21? n. GBNBllAL TOPIC -SAPBOUAR.DS OP PllOGllA.11 1. If there is a break in the SARI line or a spill of the effluent and there ls contamination, who will be liable? 2. Does Water Factory 21 have equipment to monitor "heavy metal"? How often is it done? (Argo) 3. Is Water Factory 21 currently checking for radiation? How often? (Argo) 4. If this cleanup doesn't stop the movement of these problems toward the water supplies (you admit it was worse than you thought 3 times already), will your standards be maintained? S. You mentioned that you can stop the trucks easily if the tests show inadequate processing. What happens when the SARI sewer line is completed to Riverside County -there will be no trucks to stop? 1 6. Why were/are water safety levels compared with Stringfellow, whose levels are so grossly unsafe? (Dendy) How far away from an unsafe level are we now. Wtll that possibly go up after this interim treatment starts? Stringfellow started safe also -what happened? 7. After treatment, does this basin water gQ to residential homes? Do we drink it? ; . . .. Is there lime residue? 8. How do I stop this project as a resident of Fountain Valley? What are my rights? 9. If there needs to be a study, then there Is doubt -when In doubt, don't do it. 10. How long Is Interim 11 6 months, 1 year 11 11. What ls Water Pacotry 21? 12. Is the Interim period the period only to alleviate the Stringfellow dan- ger and until another treatment plant ts built, or are we in Fountain Valley stuck with Stringfellow permanently? 13. How safe ts water purified by reverse osmosis? 14. What will happen when a truckload of water does not meet the standards after being treated? 15. Will each truckload of treated wastewater be thoroughly analyzed for contaminants prior to the wastewater being discharged to the sewer system 1 Is there any analysis that will take place after the fact? 16. Can you guarantee that this system will: (a) Pix the problem, and (b) Be completed In time? 17. This plant Is rneant to last for from 3 to 5 years --what happens at that time? What guarantee do we have you will be ready to take the next step? 18. Although safety measures have been addressed In this project, what long-range residual effects wl~l the effluent from Stringfellow have on the groundwater table? Cumulative effect? 19. Do you plan to extend the sewer system right up to Struigf ellow In order to do away with the trucking? If not, what guarantee do we have that you won't do It in the future? 20. Using chromium as your reference -to show that all other elements are also acceptable -what test to you run on truck content? ( 1) Spec- tograph analysis, (2) Infra-Red scan, or (3) New x-ray analysis? 21. What precautions have you instituted to check for human error at the four water quality test sites? 22. Is the discharge from interim treatment plant automatically monitored with redurdent Instrumentation, or ts it done by a human being -a person? 23. How often wlll the pretreatment plant and its processing system be monitored for reliability? J .. • • 24. Will the radiation readings of water leaving Stringfellow be bounced against the readings at Water Factory 21? How often? 25. Why does page 9 of the Sanitation Districts report elated 27 December say water will not be flt to drink? · 26. Please describe the treatment process at the Fountain Valley Plant. What part of the toxic materials wlll end up in our air? 27. If there were a break in the line, if there were physical damage to groundwater, if there were health problems as a result of the String- fellow tr~ated water -who would bear the liability? 28. Standards were set to create Stringfellow. They have failed. Why should we the citizens believe "new standards" wlll be met? m. GBNBllAL TOPIC -SAYPA'S llOLB DI DITBIUM PllOGllAK 1. Will this project provide SAWPA with revenues to extend the SARI line in San Bernardino County, which in turn wlll encourage industrial growth in Riverside County and generate expansion demands on the Fountain Valley plant to handle San Bernardino County industrial wastes? 2. When will SA W~A stop helping adjacent counties with sewage and toxic waste by using Orange County faclllties? We are beginning to process Stringfellow wastewater and SA WPA ls now making agreements to process industrial and sewage waste for NORCO in Riverside County. And, what about air pollution from county facllltles that process indus- trial waste? The EPA has identified a county facility as a major air pollutor in a residential community in Philadelphia. IV. GBNBllAL TOPIC-PUBLIC INPOllKATIQN TO ORANGE COUNTY 1. How wlll this project affect the Green Acres project to use recycled water to irrigate parks, golf courses and high schools? (Argo) 2. If, by chance, everyone here tonight wants this project stopped, what effect will that have on your plans to continue? 3. Do you personally believe the stuff your're saying?! (Dendy) 4. How were the three consulting firms selected? Who selected them? If there was a bid --how were the various consulting firms informed of the bid -and how were the bids approved? (Dendy) S. How much money was paid to each of the firms for their proposal? (Dendy) 6. Why did all three consulting firms come up with the same treatment concept vs. a number of alternatives? (Den~y) , . 7. Why should the public have confidence in this plan when this ls the 4th time you have attempted to solve it? (Dendy) 8. How do you expect to divert trucks to Casmalla when the citizens of Santa Barbara County have asked for a court order to atop trucking from the McColl dump site until an BIR ts done for Santa Barbara County? 9. Will the check point records be available for public view? How often wlll these samples be taken? Will the sample at output of CSDOC and input at Water Factory 21 be compared? 10. Please explain the amount and quality of input given to and received by Riverside County citizens? Compare this input and public process with that afforded to Orange County citizens. (Galloway) 11. How long wlll the "interim" solution be in place? 12. What ts currently being done to develop a permanent solution? 13. Will the public be involved in the planning stages for the permanent solution? 14. Was your lengthy presentation designed to wear the public out and have them leave before they could question you? 15. "BIR not required" ts not good enough. If everything ts okay, why should you fear an BIR? 16. Where ts the proposed treatment of Stringfellow wastewater now being implemented and what results have been made public? 17. Why did some supervisors on the Orange County Board of Supervisors change their mind about approving this plan? 18. Why have the Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to ask that the process be halted until an Environmental Impact Report has been fi- nished? Could this change of vote have been because the elected officials did not have the time or technical expertise to plow through S pounds of paper presented by SA WP A? They could have relied on expert opinion from SA WP A -only to study the process further and change their mind. 19. If the program you propose ls so safe --shy not satisfy and relieve the worry of us in Orange County by doing a "Proper Bnvlronmental Impact Report"? A few more months ts ~ going to change things that much. Y. OBNBR.AL TOPIC-ALTBB.NATIYBS TO PB.OOB.AK 1. If this plan ls implemented and proves successful, could this same system be used to treat the toxic wastes that wlll eventually seep into the groundwater from Orange County's sanitary landfills? 2. Your program for interim· treatment at Stringfellow seems excellent. What of other currently operating or closed landfills in the Santa Ana River Basin? Don't they also pose potential hazards? What investi- gative/ monitoring programs are in force/proposed/funded? 3. Why not .dump in the desert? 4. Why isn't water completely treated at Stringfellow rather than sending It to Fountain Valley/Huntington Beach for treatment? S. Why wasn't the Los Angeles connector line considered? It is just as accessive as OCSD and would not have the possibility of contaminating a groundwater basin as would happen in Fountain Valley. 6. What are the 13 other means of cleanup and what happened to the Los Angeles sewer line? Why wasn't it used? Why were 13 alterna- tives never made public? 7. Supervisor Stanton has stated that there ls a Los Angeles sewer line near Stringfellow which does not have a bypass line to underground water like we have in Fountain Valley, but goes directly to the ocean. Was this line one of the 13 alternatives considered? If not, why? If so, why was it not selected? 8. ls it possible to stop this program? 9. Why can't the treated water be sent straight to the ocean outfall and not into the ground? 10. You say 13 alternatives were not selected for "good reason". If an BIR were done, would not these alternatives be discussed and would not the public then have greater confidence in the current solution? 11. At this point, what alternatives do we as Orange County citizens have? Is our presence here tonight an exercise in academics? Or can we ask for an environmental Impact report before this process begins, and expect to get the process halted until the report ls finished? VI. GBNBR.AL TOPIC -IOSCBLLANBOUS 1. How can adding any percentage of pollutants to existing wastewater be considered a dilution --lf you add 0.028 lbs to 40 lbs, you get more = 40.028 (not less). 2. Why does Cd flag after sample point, between Plants 1 and 2, show 0.012 as actual level and same water going to WP 21 shows only 0.009. Credlblllty is at stake unless you can explain the loss of 0.003 without further treatment. . . 3. 1 wish to present my view as you have so advertised in a public hearing. 1 wish to speak. STOP! STOP! How do you propose to remove all the salts and lf you can do here, why not up at Stringfellow? 4. Are you prepared to ~ a glass of the water prior to being Injected into Fountain Valley groundwater? (Argo) 5. After the interim program begins, what will the time frame be for long-ter~ remedial investigation and feasibility study and eventual cleanup of the site? 6. Why is it necessary to "truck" some treated water to a landfill which in essence moves the problem? 7. Table Il-B-4 (Lime Treatment Data Treated Samples) indicates an increase in certain metals/organics from the raw samples on Table ll-B-2. An example is mercury, which shows an increase for all 5 wells. Why is this? 8. What "SPECIFIC" agency is to be accountable for monitoring and making data available to the public, samples from the various points ("ANY NUMBER OF" makes it an ambiguous responslblllty). 9. How long ls "temporary"? 10. Where ls the Chief Engineer and what has been his expressed opinion? 11. Why not RO unit at site and reinjectlon in Chino Basin? 12. No elected body was consulted until after discussion was made. (a) OCWD is elected body. (b) CSDOC Board ts comprised or elected officers. 13. Voss concludes Orange County Basin ls at risk. 14. Somehow, Orange County thinks it can dictate industrial development and growth in other counties?? ? VD. GBNBRAL TOPIC -DBVBLOPKBNT IN UPPBR BASIN 1. Will the extension of the SARI line act as a deterrent to a fast track solution to the long-range cleanup of the site? 2. Do you realize the same water you want to protect, i.e., Upper Newport Bay, ts the same water you want to allow Stringfellow toxic waste and now NORCO's waste for the next 10 years to be dumped into. Do you speak with forked tongue?? (for Mr. Philip Maurer) 3. As per Mr. Andrew Schlange --he and SAWPA have solved NORCO's sewage problem by sending lt to Orange County -ultimately the ocean! Now Riverside and San Bernardino will be able to have growth! More industrial waste! and this for the next 10 years! Does Mr. Schlange own property in NORCO, etc •• that he wants to develop! or does Mr. Lewis! or does Mr. Dendy! What is the reason for Orange County becoming the dumping ground for Riverside's toxic and industrial waste? 4. At the Huntington Beach 1/23 meeting, Betty Nosek predicted Orange County to become the answer to other areas waste disposal problems (she ls a prophet)! January 27 -I read where "Andrew Schlange,SAWPA" has arranged for NORCO to send their waste -domestic and industrial down the same sewer that they propose for Stringfellow -now NORCO can develop more economically and lndustrialy -more heavy metals --more toxic waste from Riverside --WHAT NBXT? 7 7 S. What future effect will the development of Corona NORCO industry have on Orange County waste treatment plants? 6. You guys blew it in 1972 by opening Stringfellow in the first place. What guarantee do we have that you're not making another mistake with this system? ; . UST OP A TTBNDBBS AT PUBLIC llBBTING IN FOUNTAIN VALLBY, CA January 30, 1985 ( ( ATTBNDBBS AT PUBLIC MBBTING OP 1/30/IS-POUNTAIN VALLBY ( PLEASE SUPPLY US WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER.AND ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATION, IF APPROPRIATE. WHEN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN CONCLUDED, WE WILL SEND YOU THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DISCUSSED TONIGHT. Name - James\/. Dick W.R. Conrad Edward L. Kwon Marilyn Nelson Kay Cooperman David D. Lopez Jennifer Duclett Theodore H. Crane Debbi Lowry Sara Scott Jim. Knapp Address Telephone No. (designated day/evening) Organization 8774 Nightingale Ave., Fountain Valley (714) 962-5157 llistorlcnl Society 9359 Shrike Ave., Fountain Valley (714) 964-0347 (Anytime) 4830 W. 5th St., Santa Ana (714) 554-6708 (Bvenlng) 10739 Los Jardlnes West, Fountain Valley (714) 962-8205 (Day) 2300 N. Harbor Blvd., 118, Costa. Mesa (714') 754-6272 (Days) 2060 Chicago Ave., #C-3, Riverside (714) 682-6080 2060 Chicago Ave., #C-3, Riverside (714) 682-6080 16468 Scotch Pine, Fountain Valley (714) 842-7058 9601 Shamrock Ave., Fountain Valley (714) 775-4918 9140 Wagner River Circle, Fountain Valley (714) 962-6280 (Bvenlng) 9180 Bl Verde Circle, Pountaln Valley (213) 43S-930S Self 4 Ster Enterprises Green Valley Homeowners' Recreation Assn. The Register SAWPA SAWPA Consulting Bnglneer Address & Phone II for StAt'Ptt PurlV'\wa nnlv Barbara Parle_t___ _ _ --~--l0_428_Sa1Jnas_Ri_ver__ClrcteJ_ountaln Y-8.Jie1 " n " n Bllery_Qeaton_~-_ 10449 Salinas River. Fountain Vallev (714) 968-_1_7_!0 CltlZf!ILJlatch Mark Belzer, P.B. 4014 Long Beach Blvd., Long_Be_a<:h_ __ U13) 426-9544 (Days) SCS Bnsrlneers David Guth 4014 Long Beach Blvd., Long Beach Pete Werrlem Coral Cay Homeowners' 16852 Coral Cay Lane. Huntington UBeach_____j~l_3) 560-0056 (Days) As•nrtatfnn_ Pat Smith 3506 Harcus Ave ... Hewoort___Beacb __ _ _ __j7_t4) 675-4986 STOP Nancy Penkwltz 3510 l&arcus Ave., Newport Beaclt_ (714) 673-4430 STOP. STOP Robert Penkwltz 3510 Marcus Ave., Newport Beach (714) 673-4430 STOP, STOP .. ( ( ( ATTBNDBBS AT PUBLIC KBBTING.OP 1/30/BS-FOUNTAIN YALLBY PLEASE SUPPLY US WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER AND ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATION, IF APPROPRIATE. WHEN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN CONCLUDED, liE WILL SEND YOU THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DISCUSSED TONIGHT. Name Address Joe Wujcik 10R60 Bl Mar Ave., Fountain Vnlte~ Telephone No. (designated day/evening) Organization !.tnrltyn Hendrickson 416 Plazza Lido, Newport Beach Request a Hearing In Newput Beach ----------~-- Fred AdJarian Courtney J. Sm Ith ~hirley Rasmussen R. L. Sigmond Hilary J. Baker Paul Wilson Lots D. Clark Frayda Bllbert llilltam J. Trader Mrs. John Soule Helen Kohl Thomas G. Kohl Bleanor Boberg 1950 B. 17th Street, # 150, 3antn Ann 3506 Marean Ave., Ne•vport Beach 16347 Filbert Street, Fountain Valley 1835 Iowa St., Costa Mesa 13511 Farmington, Tustin (714) 545-1539 (714) 54lFZ9ICJlDaysJ (714) 838-1672 (Evening) 17676 San Candelo, Fountain Valley· (714) 962-:_7?_~3J~\'~_nl~g~) 10468 Salinas River Circle, Fountain Valley (714) 962-3164 (Bvenlngs) 9199 McBlwer River Cir., Fountain Valley (714) 963-8568 22181 Wood Island Lane, Huntington Beach (714) 963-4482 17635 San Marino, Fountain Valley (714) 962-5824 10286 OrloleAve., Fountain Valley (714) 968-2135 10286 Oriole Ave., Fountain Valley (714) 968-2135 18551 San Felipe St., Fountain Valley (714) 962-5406 MWOOC STOP Resident CS DOC NONB NONB W.D. FVC/C PVHS-PVWC P. V. Hlltorlcal Society Prlends of the Library P. V. Historical Socletv Carl R. Boberg 18551 San Felipe St., Fountain Valley (714) 962-5406 F.V. Historical Society Friends of the Library Dolores Hlghum 17250 Walnut St., Fountain Valley (714) 842-6874 p y Htsrartcal snctetf Orvle Hlghum 17250 Walnut St., Fountain Valley _.,_ (714) 842-6874 Friends of the Library ~is.tarlcal Snclet_v ( ATTENDB~S AT PUBLIC MBBTING(,., 1/30/BS-FOUNTAIN VALLBY ( PLEASE SUPPLY US WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER AND ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATION, IF.~ APPROPRIATE. WHEN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN CONCLUDED, WE WILL SEND YOU THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DISCUSSED TONIGHT. Name Vivian Lou Reuter llrhvlna P. Martz Anne W. Llndegren Col. George Llndegren Leonard Liberto Allen Katz Judy Kelsey Susan Trager Jtm Neal Barbara Brown Suzanne Victor Jim Orr Bettle Nosek Jim Nosek J~ce Abbott Dean Albright Address Telephone No. (designated day/evening) 16586 Hemlock Circle, Fountain Valley (714) 775-3412 16561 Teak Circle, Fountain Valley (714) 847-4037 17135 Santa Madrlna·St., Fountain Valley (714) 847-8023 17135 Santa Madrlna St., Fountain Valley (714) 847-8823 16444 Mt. Newberry Circle,-Fountain Valley 9158 Pelican Ave., Fountain Valley City of Fountain Valley (714) 963-8321 2061 Business Center Dr., Irvine (714) 752-8971 . Organization STOP, STOP SAWPA (714) 964-6583 10200 Slater Ave., Fountain Valley {714) 963-8321 City pf Pguptgln valley (714) 775-7256 (Bvenlngs) 10200 Slater Ave •• Fountain Valley (714) 963-8321 {Days) City of fountain valley Board of Supervisors 10 Civic Center Dr.LSanta A_na _ · _ _ _ __ _ (1l4}_834~.lUO{Dau_l____ _B.02__e_1_R. Stanton Assemblyman 17195 Mt. Baden Powell, Fountain Valley (714) 662-5503 Nolan Frlzzlllo 19772 RangerLane,, Huntington Beach (714) 536-_2_~~~ ___ !TOP, STOP 19772 Range_!_ Lane, Jl!lf!th1gton Beach 714 Adams, Suite 209, Huntington Beach 17301 Breda Lane, Huntington Beach -3- (714) 536-2S28 (714) 960-2407 (714) 846-9430 STOP, STOP City of Huntington Beach STOP, STOP ANSWBR.S TO QUBSTIONS SUBlll'ITBD AT PUBUC KBBTINGS IN HUNTINGTON BBACB, CA AND POUNTAIN VALLBY, CA . . OBMBRAL TOPIC -BBALTH COMCBllMS The discharge of industrial waste to sanitary sewers, the discharge of treated sewage effluents to any of the waters of the United States including the ocean waters in California and the reuse of any reclaimed wastewaters are regulated and controlled mainly by the following laws and regulations: • Federal Clean Water Act • Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan) • Federal Safe Drinking Water Act • Federal Clean Air Act • California Porter-Cologne Act • California Air Quality Control Act Additionally, for the control, cleanup and disposal of toxic and hazardous waste, the following laws have been adopted: • The Comprehansive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabtlity Act of 1980 (CBRCLA), known as "SUPBRPUND". • The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) • Toxic Substance Control Act • Hazardous Material Transportation Act CPR 49 • CRP 40, Part 1510 (National Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan) • Carpenter-Presely-Tanner Hazardous Substance Control Account Act (California State "Superfund") With the paasage of these State and Pederal laws, the U. S. BPA, the State Water Resources Control Board, the Regional Quality Control Boards and the State Department of Health Services established standards and limitations to protect the public health and safety, as well as the affected environment. These standards, regulations and procedures have been adopted after extensive technical evaluation and public comment. Regarding the interim cleanup program for Stringfellow, the permit limitations for discharging treated waste to the SARI line are based upon the llmitations In the SA WPA/CSDOC Industrial Waste Ordinance. A detailed description of the development of the permit requirements are contained in Section 3.3 of the Bnvlronmental Review. . . No air pollution wlll result from the Interim Strlngf ellow program. The pum- ping and treatment processes for volatile contaminants at the onalte treatment plant wlll be sealed. The treated water wlll have such low concentrations of po~entially volatile matter that It wlll not later contribute to air pollution. The thermal process for burning the removed organic matter (ln Kentucky) at 2000 ° P wlll convert to carbon dioxide and water, neither of which is an air pollution threat. Regarding the impacts on the Ocean and Water Factory 21, the Bnvironmental Review Report details th~ projected water quality Impacts of this interim program. The standards that have been developed for discharge to sanitary sewers, the discharge of treated waste to the ocean, and the reuse of treated wastewaters are designed to protect the public health and welfare. As long as these standards are strictly complied with, no health problems should exist. .. GJDIBllAL TOPIC -SAPBGUARDS OP PROGRAM The "safety" of the initial operation of the Stringfellow site depended upon integrity of the geology in the area. This interim program provides for posi- tive mechanical. pumping of the contaminated groundwaters directing them to a highly sophisticated $3.0 million treatment facility. The treated waste ls sampled during the treatment process to insure permit compliance. If the treated waste does not meet requirements, the waste ts returned to the be- ginning of the plant for additional treatment. No treated waste ls placed into the trucks if it does not meet the permit llmitations. After traveling 12 miles to the truck disposal station on the SARI line, the treated waste ls sampled again to verify compliance. If the truckload at the truck disposal station does not for some reason meet the permit limits, the truck ls returned to the String- fellow treatment plant for further treatment or diverted to a Class I landfill site for disposal. Some concerns have been expresaed as to what would happen if the SARI line broke in Orange County •. · It ls highly unllkely that this would occur but If it did happen, upon notiflcat-lon of the breakage, truck disposal to the SARI line would cease Immediately and the treated waste diverted to a Class I landfill until the repair to the sewer line has been made. It must be remembered that this interim program relies on the removal and destruction of hazardous material and compliance with very strict water quality standards. If the treated waste does not meet these standards, the liquid waste will not be disposed of to the SARI line. 1 1 GBMBRAL TOPIC -SA WPA'S ROLB IN INTBRIK PROGRAM · SA WPA is a joint powers public agency empowered mainly to undertake and implement projects for: (a) Water quality control; (b) Protection and pollution abatement in the Santa Ana River Watershed, including development of waste treatment management plans for the area within the Santa Ana River Watershed; (c) The construction, operation, and maintenance and rehabllltation of works and factlities for the collection, transmission, treatment, disposal and/or reclamation of sewage, wastes, wastewaters, poor quality groundwaters and stormwaters; (d) The construction, operation, maintenance and rehabilitation of projects for irrigation and municipal and industrial water supplies; (e) Projects for aquifer rehabilitation; (f) Projects for reclamation, recycling and desalting of water supplies for irrigation and municipal and industrial purposes. To neglect their responsibilities to protect and improve the groundwaters of the Santa Ana River Basin would not be in the public interest of the people utilizing the waters of the Basin. The Santa Ana River Basin Plan has been adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board after many years of study, including public comments and input. This Basin bas set goals for the quality of the water in the entire Basin, as well as specific projects required for implementation to meet these goals. San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange C.ounties started developing this Plan over 30 years in a cooperative manner for the betterment and protection of all the water supplies ln the Basin. A summary of major events, agreements and documents is contained in this Pinal Report. SAWPA's primary role is to implement the programs set forth in the Basin Plan and the concerns and efforts of the three counties. SA WP A will not in any way profit from this interim program. By agreement with the Department of Health Services and the Environmental Protection Agency, SA WPA will receive an $0.00S per gallon of accepted treated waste disposed of in the SARI line. At the maximum rate of 187,000 gallons per day, SA WP A would realize $336,600 per year, or approximately $28,000 per month. Water sample analysis for heavy metals and toxics to insure compliance may exceed disposal fees from OOHS and BPA. SAWPA is more concerned about having to subsidize this Stringfellow interim program beca"'"U'ieits commit- ment to insure water quality standards are continuously met. . . GBNBR.AL TOPIC -PUBLIC INPOR.llATION TO OR.ANGB COUMTY The Executive Summary distributed to all attendees at the two meetings has covered this topi~ in detail, as well as discussions at the meetings. The clean- up of hazardous waste sites in the United States will receive considerable amount of public concern due to the lack of understanding of the facts surround- ing any particular program and the emergency powers contained in the "Super- fund" law. As long as adopted water quality standards are strictly adhered to, some of the concerns should be satisfied; but all studies for this interim program have shown it wlll be safe and that there is no cause for worry. The monitoring program and safeguards built into the project are more than suffi- cient to detect and avoid problems. As a result of these public meetings, an Orange County Advisory Committee is being proposed in order that public officials and concerned citizens may have input from Orange County regarding the final closure program for String- fellow. . . OBMBRAL TOPIC -ALTBRMATIVBS TO INTBRIK PROGRAll In the Record of Decision and the Past Track/Remedial Instigation Report prepared by BPA, 13 alternatives were investigated for this Interim program. The following Interim remedial actions were considered: • No action • Discharge to publicly owned treatment works (POTW) • Pretreatment followed by discharge to a POTW • Relnjectlon (either onsite or offsite) • Treatment followed by relnjectlon • Solar Evaporation • Incineration • Surface Discharge • Treatment followed by surf ace discharge • Disposal at a Class I land disposal site • Disposal at a Class D-1 land disposal site • Disposal at a permitted hazardous waste treatment faclllty • lleuae as industrial process water • Puture treatment of drinking water at the tap Although the alternatives not chosen for implementation for this interim program they are being considered for the permanent or final closure program for Stringfellow. The Record of Dec ls ion ts contained in the Appendix of the Environmental Review Report and discusses all factors analyzed In the selection of the alternative for this interim program. " A •I GBNBR.AL TOPIC -lllSCBLLANBOUS Buatlngton Beach Meeting January 23, 198S 1. Q. The Cities of Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley are employing an independent chemical consulting firm for an analysis of the contents. Will you cooperate with this study? A. Yes, an independent review of the program is welcome. 2. Q. What other toxic dump sites does SA WPA intend to clean with a similar process? A. None 3. Q. Doesn't this plan encourage the cleanup of dumps outside Orange County with Orange County facilities? A. No, however, protection of the groundwaters in the Santa Ana River Basin must be c:ontinually guarded against for quality degradation. 4. Q. Why does Orange County have to be involved in the cleanup of a Riverside County dump? A. This ts a Basin problem and should be solved in this Basin. The L. A. Basin has its own problems and must solve them to protect their groundwater supplies. S. Q. If this project ls not completed, isn't it more likely that String- fellow would be cleaned by Riverside County facilities? A. No. SA WPA is the best agency to solve this groundwater problem. Pountaln Valley Meeting January 30, 198S 1. Q. How do you propose to remove all the salts and if you can do here, why not up at Stringfellow? Q. Why not RO unit at site and relnjectlon in Chino Basin? A. Cost. Water Factory 21 does remove the salts before injection into the groundwaters. Demineralization at the Stringfellow site is one of the alternatives being considered for the final closure plan. .. 2. Q. How long ts "temporary"? A. This interim program and permit ts for 3 years. The final closure plan will be developed before the end of 3 years. 3. Q. Why is it necessary to "truck" some treated water to a landfill which in essence moves the problem? A. All treated waste that meets the permit limits wlll discharge to the SARI line. Only treated waste that does not meet the re- quirements will be diverted to a landfill. 4. Q. What "SPECIFIC" agency ts to be accountable for monitoring and making data available to the public, samples from the various points ("ANY NUMBER OF" makes it an ambiguous responsiblllty). A. SAWPA. SAWPA ts responsible for all waste discharged to the SARI line in the Upper Basin. S. Q. After the interim program begins, what will the time frame be for long-term remedial investigation and feasibility study and eventual clea~up of the site? A. The final closure program is presently being developed and is scheduled to be finalized in the later part of 1985. After the final closure program has been decided, it wlll be implemented before the expiration of the permit which has been issued for only 3 years. 6. Q. Are you prepared to drink a glass of the water prior to being in- jected into Fountain Valley groundwater? (Argo) A. Yes (answered by Dave Argo at meeting) 7. Q. No elected body was consulted until after discussion was made. (a) OCWD ls elected body. (b) CSDOC Board ts comprised of elected officers A. SAWPA ls comprised of elected officials and OCWD ts a member of SA WPA that supports this program. 8. Q. Somehow, Orange County thinks it can dictate industrial development and growth in other counties? ? ? A. Standards developed for discharge to the SARI line are equally applied to all dischargers connecting to this sewer regardless of their location. .. . BNVIR.ONKBNTAL ASSBSSKBNT OF STR.INGFBLLOW WASTB TR.BATMBNT PLAN Prepared By: LARRY SBBKAN ASSOCIA TBS, INC. NBWPORT BBACH, CA February 14, 1985 . ' CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY CITY HALL 10200 SLATER AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR February 21, 1985 ftECllVID I _: ~ s \985 LCft\'RY&~ Dear Interested Party: STRINGFELLOW c At the February 19 Fountain Valley Council meeting, Mr. George Kurilko of Larry Seeman Associates, Inc. presented his Environ- mental Assessment of the Stringfellow Waste Treatment Plant. Enclosed is a copy of the report completed by Larry Seeman Associ- ates and Esmaili & Associates, Inc. As stated in Mr. Kurilko's cover letter, the results of his review indicate that appropriate technical procedures have been followed in selecting the proposed treatment plant from among the numerous alternatives, and that the proposed discharge is in compliance with applicable regulatory re- quirements of local, state and federal agencies. Mr. Kurilko has confirmed that the proposed discharge should not have a significant impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the County Sanita- tion District Plant. We are very pleased to recently learn that the Orange County Sani- tation District will implement a program that will divert all of the flow from the SARI line around Plant #1 to Plant #2 for treat- ment and discharge into the ocean outfall. Your participation and cooperation in resolving this issue has been greatly appreciated by myself and the entire City Council. Very truly yours, Mayor BN/DLH/mb Attachment cc: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Department of Health Services ....____~nvironmental Protection Agency -itay Lewis, Lowry Associates Orange County Sanitation District Orange County Water District Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority Susan Trager lsa CSOO Newport Center Drive. Suite 525 Newport Beach. Calif orn1a 92660 phonel714)640<>363 C 2606 Eighth Street Berkeley. California 94 71 O phone(41SJ 841-6840 Community Planning February 14, 1985 Natural Resource Management :---Environmental Assessment The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Fountain Valley 10200 Slater Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF STRINGFELLOW WASTE TREATMENT PLAN Ladies and Gentlemen: Pursuant to your request, we have reviewed pertinent documents and other available data that relate to the Stringfellow waste treatment plan and its effect on 1oca1 groundwater. We attach a report of our findings for your information and use. The results of our review indicate that appropriate technical procedures have been followed in selecting the proposed treatment plan from among the numerous alternatives, and that the proposed discharge is in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements of local, state and federal agencies • .. The proposed discharge should not have a significant impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the CSDOC plant. Our report addresses this and related matters in greater detail. We look forward to the opportunity of discussing our findings with you at your next convenient scheduled meeting. LSA has been assisted in this study by Esmaili & Associates, Consulting Engineers. Representatives of both of our firms will be pr~sent at the meeting. Very truly yours, LARRY SEEMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Ph.D. GK:cc ) I ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF STRINGFELLOW WASTE DISCHARGE ON GROUNDWATER RESOURCES OF THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY BY LARRY SEEMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA AND ESMAILI & ASSOCIATES, INC. BERKELEY CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 1985 ·. '. UBL.£ OF <DNrENrS ASSESSKENl' OF '!HE IMPACT OF SIRIN:FELUM WASTE DISCHARGE ON GROONDWAIER RESO.RCFS OF TBE CI'IY OF FClJNrAIN VAi.LEY••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Introduction•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• The Prop:>sed Project•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Alternative Methods for Handling Contaminated Groundwater from Stringfellow Site ••••••••••••••• Selection of the Required Level of Pretreatment •• Compliance With SAWPA and CSDJC Ordinances ••••••• SAWPA Ordinances ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• CSDOC Ordinances••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Stringfellow Waste Discharge Permit •••••••••••••• Evaluation of Compliance With Applicable Ordinances •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Analysis of.Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Groundwater Quality Impacts •••••••••••••••••••••• Need for Additional Groundwater Quaklity Impact Analysis ••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Hydrogeology of Fountain Valley Area ••••••••••••• Water Quality Conditions in the City Wells ••••••• Conclusions and Recommendations •• ~ •••••••••••••••• References•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Appendix A -Water Quality Data for Fountain Valley Well No. 5••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• i l l 1 4 5 8 8 8 10 11 12 12 14 16 18 21 22 23 \ I I I '..._,/ usr OF TABLES Page Table 1. Proposed Pretreatment Objective for String-6 fellow Interim Project Table 2. CSDOC and SAWPA Discharge Limitations 9 Table 3. Effects of Treated Stringfellow Discharge 13 on Wastewate~ Quality in SARI System Table 4. Comparison of Estimated Mineral Composition 15 of Stringf e11ow Discharge With the Corres- ponding Quality Parameters for the SARI Line Table 5. Construction Details for Fountain Valley 19 Wells usr OF FIGUU:S Page Figure 1. Proposed US EPA & State Department of Health 3 Services Interim Pretreatment and Disposal for Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site Figure 2. Generalized Cross-Section of Aquifers in 17 Fountain Valley Area Figure 3. Historic Water Quality Trends for Fountain 20 Valley's Well No. 5 ii .. ~~T OF lliE na>Acr OF S'IRDl:Flll.OW WASTE DISCHARGE ON CROONDWATER RFSXRCES OF THE Cin OF FOONTAIN VMJ..E! Introduction The Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SA~PA) has issued a waste discharge peimit to the Department of Health Services (IX>HS) for the discharge of up to 0.187 mgd (million gallons per day) of treated waste from the Stringfellow hazardous waste disposal site into the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) line subject to limitations specified in the permit. The final reach of the SAt\I line traverses the City of Fountain Valley along Santa Ana River and discharges to the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) Treatment Plant No. 1 which is also located in Fountain Valley. Environmental review documents prepared by OOHS state that the proposed discharge would create no adverse impact on natural resources of the areas located along the SARI line and the treatment plant site or areas of final disposal and reuse of treated CSDJC wastewater. The City of Fountain Valley has retained the services of Larry Seeman & Associates to conduct a review of the environmental impact analysis carried out by OOHS on this project. Esmaili & Associates, Inc., has prepared this technical report as a subcontractor to Larry Seeman & Associates. 'lbe Proposed Project ·The Stringfellow hazardous waste si.te is located in Riverside County, California, approximately five mi~es nortrr.~st of the City of Riverside, and one mile north of the community of Glen Avon. Contam- inated groundwater flowing out of the canyon in which the site is located is posing a threat to the ground~ater supplies of nearby communities located downgradient from the canyon. In order to abate this threat, OOHS and U.S. Environmental Protectio:i Agency (EPA) have 1 .. proposed an interim ~olution which· cal ls for the installation of a system of extraction wells and treatment facilities at the String-· fellow site. Groundwater pumped from the extraction wells will be treated for the removal of heavy netals and organic compounds and the treated water will be trucked to a discharge point along SARI line. The discharged water WO\lld then commingle with the contents of SARI line and would flow by gravity to CSDOC Treatreent Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley (Figure 1). At the treatment plant, all incoming wastewater undergoes secondary lev~l treatment and a portion of the treated wastewater is pu:nped to advanced treatment facilities at Water Factory 21. The discharge from Water Factory 21 is injected into the underground aquifers through seven injection wells which are all located along Ellis Street in Fountain Valley. A number of questions have been raised by the members of the City Council of Fountain Valley with regard to the proposed project as follows: 1. Have all other feasible alternatives been given serious consideration prior to the selection of the recommended project for handling of ~ontaminated groundwater from Stringfellow site~ 2. Is the discharge permit in compliance with applicable ordi- nances of SAWPA and CSlX>C? 3. Has the question of the impact of the proposed project on general natural resources and groundwater supplies of the City of Fountain Valley, in particular, been addressed adequately? The purpose of this report is to provide answers to the above ques- tions based on available data and within the constraints of the scope of this study. 2. ( JUIUU. KTS 1NT!llM rattau:nt!NT rACILITl!S TlEAT!D VAST! TlllCltO to SAUPA APPlOV!D TRUCK DISPOSAL ~· 0.181 HCD / r..rrucrtrM \IELLS 500 FE!T • U Hlt.!S I I I ~ r; 8 5 .... 8 ii ........ a 3 eJo "'I • I ( SAHTA ANA llY!l IMTERCEPTOR 36 HILES (APPROX) FOUNTAIN VALLEY OCSD ~ • HtL! I.AHO OUTFALL PROPOSED . ( SOURCE: OOHS, 1886. OCSO 5 -HILE OCEAN OU?FALL US EPA & STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES INTERIM PRETREATMENT AND DISPOSAL FOR STRINGFELLOW HAZARDOUS WASTE; SITE FIGURE 1. .. ) Alternative Methods for Handling Contaminated Croundwater from Stringf ellov Site Thirteen interim technical alternatives were reviewed by EPA Consultant for treatment and disposal of contaminated groundwater from Stringfellow site (CH2M Hill, 1984). Ten of these alternatives were r~jected after a preliminary review because they 'tiere deemed to be technically or environmentally infeasible. We concur with the ration- ale used by EPA Consultants for reducing the initial list of alterna- tives for the interim solution. The alternative involving treatment and reinjection at the site should, however, be given further con- sideration as a permanent remedial measure for handling of contami- nated groundwater at Stringfellow site_and EPA Consultants indicate that all viable alternatives would be reviewed in detail for develop- ing a permanent remedial ~ction plan. The following three alternatives received more detailed analysis ~ by EPA Consultant prior· to the selection of Alternative No. 1 as the recommended interim remedial action: 1. Pretreatment followed by discharge to a publicly-owned treatment works (PO'IW). 2. Disposal at a Class I land disposal site. 3. Disposal at a Class II-1 land disposal site with or without pretreatment. Alternatives 1 and 2 above were deemed to be both technically feasible and environmentally acceptable solutions provided that the wastewaters were adequately treated prior to discharge to the sewer system of a PO'IW. Alternative No. 3, howe1er, involved some unresolved environ- mental concerns and regulatory prohibitions against the discharge of hazardous materials at a Class II-1 land disposal site. In the final analysis, Alternative No. 1 was judged to provide the best solution on the basis of the assumption that disposal of treated groundwater in . the ocean was m:>re desirable than disposal.of the same material in a Class I site. Economic analysis of the three alternatives also indi- cated that Alternative No. 1 would provide by far the least costly solution for the required interim remedial action at the Stringfellow site. Three candidate POTW were considered by EPA Consultant to receive the pretreated groundwater from Stringfellow site. These inclu9ed CSDOC, City of Los Angeles and Chino Basin Municipal Water District Los Angeles County treatment facilities. The City of Los Angeles system was ruled out because of remoteness from the Stringfellow site and the apparent prohibition on the discharge of chlorinated hydrocar- bons into the sewer system. The choice between Los ~eles County and Orange County systems was made on the basis of the location of the Stringfellow site which falls within the area of jurisdiction of SAWPA. We concur with the rationale used by EPA Consultants in selecting . . the recommended alternative subject to reservations expressed under the envirorunenta~ impact analysis section of this report. Selection of the Required Level of Pretreatment. The required level of pretreatment for contaminated groundwater extracted from the Stringf ellO\i site has been determined by EPA Consultant on the basis of the most restrictive criteria established by the following agen- cies: 1. Chino Basin Municipal Water District. 2. Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. 3. County ·Sanitation District of Orange County. 4. Pretreatment Standards for new sources for D'.etal finishing industry promulgated by EPA. Based on the requireu~nts of each of the above agencies. the pretreat- ment objectives shown in Table 1 were developed by EPA Consultant. These objectives satisfy the existing requ~rements established by 5 Table 1. Proposed Pretrea.tment Objective for Stringf el1ow Interim Project Constituent Arsenic Cadmium Chromium (T) Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Silver Zinc Maximum Concentration tr@/l 2 0.11 0.5 2 0.69 0.03 3.98 0.43 2.61 Cyanide (Total) 1.20 Cyanide (Amenable to Chlorination) 1 PCB's and Pesticides Total Toxic Organics Sulfide (Total) Sulfide (Dissolved) Oil or Crease pH 000 000 TSS Source: CH2M Hill, 1984 6 0.02 0.58 5 0.5 100 6-9 250 5,000 300 SAWPA and CSDOC for wastewaters discharged into the sewerage systems in the areas of jurisdiction of these agencies. Following the establishment of treatment objectiv~s, EPA Consul- tant developed a conceptual design for the pretreatment facilities for attaining the above objectives. Limited laboratory pilot testing was also conducted on groundwater samples from the site to confirm ~he adequacy of the proposed pretreatment facilities. The proposed pre- treatment facilities consist of lime precipitation facilities for the removal of heavy metals and granular activated carbon columns for the removal of organic compounds from groundwater extracted from leachate collection wells. The precipitation process consists of equalization tanks to accept the influent from the wells, influent pumping to a rapid mix unit for addition of precipitants and f locculants, floccula- tion and clarification, and sand filtration. From the sand filters, the effluent is pumped to equalization tanks of the carbon filters w~ere it will be blended with influent from the mid-canyon wells. The blended waters are thel) pumped to the carbon columns. The effluent from the carbon ·filters will be stored on-site prior to truck trans- port to SARI line. All sludges generated at the treatment facilities will be disposed of in e Class I fill and spent carbon will be return- ed to the supplier for .thermal destruction or regeneration. The effluent from.the pretreatmen~ facilities will be monitored by testing for indicator parameters such as chromium on a daily or hourly basis. Total organic carbon ('IOC) will be monitored continuously and a corre- lation between 'roC and Total Toxic Organics (TIO) will be established. We believe that the proposed pretreatment process is adequate to meet the treatment objectives established by EPA Consultant. Due to , the use of batch pilot tests for determining the efficiency of the proposed treatment process, modifications in the treatment facilities or operational procedures may be necessitated under actual field conditions. 7 ... Compl.:iance With SAl.'PA and CSIX>C Ordinances All discharges into Santa Ana Regional Interceptor must comply with applicable ordinances of SAWPA and CSDOC. A brief review of these ordinances is carried out in this section. SAWP A Ordinances. SAWPA Ordinances No. 1 and No. 2 regulate the availability and use of SARI system and the discharge of wastewater into this system by truck, respectively. SAWPAOrdinance No. 1 contains specific language on discharge prohibitions to SARI line, limitations on wastewater strength, pre- treatment requirements, and provisions for plant inspection by SAWPA personnel. Ordinance No. 2 pertains to the procedure for regulating the discharge of industrial wastewaters by truck at authorized truck discharge locations into the SARI line. This ordinance incorporates all the provisions of Ordinance No. 1 by reference and includes addi- tional pr~visions for consent to periodic inspection and chemical analysis of the discharge. Both of the above ordinances contain provisions for enforcement and for remedies in cases when discharges fail to comply with the conditions specified in the?-r discharge permit or any other pertinent regulations of SAWPA and the affected local sanitary districts. CSDOC Ordinance. csrx:x: has issued detailed regulations for the use of district sewerage facilities which sets forth prohibitions and limitations on discharge; procedures for obtaining waste di~charge permits; monitoring, reporting and inspection requirements; pretreat- ment facility requirements; and enf orcereent procedures. Most of the provisions contained in SAWPA and CSDOC ordinances for regulating the discharge of industrial wastes into SARI line are similar. Minor differences exist in the allowable strength of waste discharges as indicated in Table 2 "1.th SAw~A requirements being more stringent with respect to total chromium, copper, pH, BOD, COD, TSS 0 . -.... . . .... -· -. ··-·... . . . -~ ... ...,...,_. - .. Table 2.. CSOOC and SAWPA Discharge Limitations Constituent SAWPA Maxin:um Limits8 CSDX Maximum Limitsa Arsenic 2. 2 Cadmium 1 1 Chromium (T) o.s 2 Copper 2 3 Lead 2 2 Mercury 0.03 0.03 Nickel 10 10 Silver 5 5 Zinc 10 10 Cyanide (Total) 5 5 Cyanide (Amenable to Chlorination) 1 1 PCB's and Pesticides 0.02 0.02 Total Toxic Organics 0.58 Sulfide (Total) 5 Sulfide (Dissolved) 0.5 0.5 Oil or Crease 100 100 pH, units 6-9 6-12 BOD 250 COD 5,000 TSS 300 a All concentrations are in mg/1 and CSDOC requirements being more.stringent with respect to total toxic organi~s and total sulfi~e. Stringfellov Waste Discharge Permit. S>MPA has issued a waste . permit to the State of California, Department of Health Services, for the discharge of pretreated groundwater extracted from the String- fellow hazardous waste disposal site into the SARI line at truck disposal stations (CB-1 and W-1). The effective date of this permit is January 1, 1985. The permit has been issued for a three-year period with the specification that no vested right of any kind, in- cluding the right to discharge has been acquired by the state by virtue of the granting of the permit. DOHS is also obligated to comply with ~11 existing and future applicable requirements of CSIXX:, and SAh~A reserves the right to suspend or revoke the subject permit for any violations or non-compliance with SAWPA's ordinances, resolu- . tions or regulations governing the SARI system. An attachment to the discharge permit establishes the following additional requirenents: 1. Daily verification of heavy metals limitations on a 24-hour flow rated composite sample. 2. Monthly verification of total toxic organics (TTO) with daily certification of compliance in accordance with the provisions of Federal Clean Water Act. 3. A penalty schedule for violation of specific provisions of · the discharge permit, 4. Specific limitations of the pennit as follows: a. Limiting the total daily discharge by DOHS to 0.187 million gallons per day (mgd). b. Imposing the fol lowing mass discharge limits on the specified constituents: > ··-·--·--····· -·---· ..... ······· Maximum Mass Limits Constituent lbs/day mg/l* Arsenic 3.1 (1.99) Cadmium 0.1 (0.06) Chromium (Total) 3.1 (1.99) Copper 4.7 (3.01) Cyanide (Total) 2.0 (1.28) Cyanide (Free) 1.6 (0.82) Lead 0.9 (0.58) Mercury o.os (0.03) Nickel 5.5 (3.5 ) Silver 0.7 (0.45) Zinc 1.1 (0.70) Total Toxic Organics (TIO) 0.9 (0.58) Pesticides and PCB's 0.03 (0.02) *The discharge permit document does not include mass limits in mg/l of waste discharged. These values have been added for comparison with applicable SAWPA and CSDOC standards. 5. Although not ~pecifically identified in the discharge permit limits on other constituents such as sulfide, oil and grease, pH, BOD, COD and TSS are included in the permit by reference to the general requirements of applicable CSDOC ordinances. Evaluation of Cianpliance With Applicable Ordinances. A compari- son of data presented in the preceding sections on the proposed Stringfellow pretreatment objectives with discharge requirements of SAWPA and CSIX>C indicates that the proFOsed waste discharge will meet all the established requirements of the above agencies. A minor discrepancy in the SAWPA waste discharge permit is the conflict be- tween the allowable level of total chromium (2 mg/l) with the level prescribed in SAWPA Ordinance No. 1 (0.5 mg/~h The higher concentra- , .. -~··· -. .. . . .. ---. . ..... --. _,, ............ ~ --. . -· -. . tion level, however, is in accord with CSDOC waste discharge ordi- nance. Analysis of Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project OOHS has issued an environmental review document for the proP,sed Stringfellow interim treatment and disposal program (OOHS, 1985). ·This docu~~nt addresses potential environmental impacts of the proposed Stringfellow waste discharge project in the context of the following issues: 1. Impact of the interim program on water quality in the ocean or in the Orange County groundwater basin. 2. Impact of a breakage in the SARI line. 3. Potential danger due to the radioactivity in the treated Stringfellow water. The environmental review document also includes information on the procedures followed in selecting the interim trea~ment/disposal alter- native and on various regulatory requirements for issuance of the needed discharge permit. A brief summary of the information provided in the DOHS's environmental review document is presented below with special emphasis on groundwater quality impacts. Groondvater Quality Impacts. The focus of the OOHS environmental review docurrent is on a comparison between the quality of Stringfellow discharge and wastewater flowing in the SARI line as well as to~al . . inflow to the CSDOC treatment plant system. The results of these comparisons are shown in T~ble 3. Data presented in Table 3 indicate that for parameters listed in this table the expected Stringfellow discharge would have only a m:i.nin:al effect on the quality of waste- water flowing in SARI line at Orange County boundary and would have no effect on the quality parameters at the point of discharge of SARI line to CSOOC treatir.ent plants in Fol.mtain Valley. ' ( l a Table 3. Effects of Treated Stringfellow Discharge on Wastewater Quality in SARI System At Ora~e Count~ Bounda!:I At Treatment Plant No. 1 SARI Permitted Combined SARI Permitted Combined Expected b Concentration Stringflow Flow Concentration Stringf low Flow Stringfellow Constituent ng/l Arsenic 0.002 Cadmium ND Chromiura 0.029(Cr+6) Copper Lead Nickel Silver Zinc Cyanide Total Toxic Organics pH Elcctric"l Conductivity, wnhos/cm Total 1-'lov, ~d ~IS, 1984 012H Hill, 1984 NIA • Not Analyzed ND • Not Detected 0.087 0.004 0.026 NIA 0.11 Ml 0.53 7.1 2.5 mg/l mg/l 2.00 0.141 0.064 0.004 2.00 0.166 3.00 0.290 0.67 0.050 3.51 0.268 0.43 - 0.10 0.151 1.20 0.083 0.58 o.533 6-9 - 0.187 2.687 "fVl mg/l mg/l rng/l N/A 2.00 -O.Olel 0.01 0.064 0.07 0.018 0.19 2.00 0.20 0.005 0.1,4 3.00 o.1e6 0.08 0.05 0.67 0.06 o.oos o.oJ 3.51 0.06 0.16 0.01 0.43 0.07 0.02 O.JO 0.10 O.JO 0.034 NIA 1.20 -NIA 9.325 0.58 9.25 0.024 7.1 6-9 -9.0 2,390 23.0 0.187 23.187 0.187 ( ·~ Combined Flow qVl 0.01 0.19 0.44 0.05 o.ol 0.01 0.30 9.25 2l.187 .. Pretreated liater froro the Stringfellov site, however, contains other constituents such as total dissolved salts, nitrate, sulfate, etc., at concentrations which are significantly above the levels in the SARI line and in the inf low to the SDOC treatment plants. The environmental review document and previous reports prepared by EPA Consultant do not address the impact of these constituents beyond making statements to the effect that Stringfellow discharge would constitute a minute portion of the total flow to the treatment plants and would have a minimal impact on the over al 1 plant effluent. For comparison purposes, the estimated mineral composition of Stringfellow discharge is listed in Table 4 and the approximate impact of these constituents on the quality of SARl line at the point of discharge to the treatment plant is calculated. These data indicate that although Stringfellow discharge is highly contaminated with nitrates, sulfates and other dissolved mineral species, the impact of this discharge on the overall quality of SARI line wa·stewater is small due to the high dilution ratios in the line. The impact of these constituents is much more pronounced in the initial reaches of SARI line (for example, et the boundary of Orange County) where less flows are available for diluting the Stringfellow discharge. Need for Additional Groundwater Quality Impact Analysis The underlying assumption. of all previous reports prepared for the Stringfellow interim project is that the SARI line has no direct impact on the quality of groundwater reso\Jrces downstream from the point of discharge of pretreated Stringfellow wastewaters. These studies have, therefore, focussed on the impact of this discharge on the overall quality of treated wastewaters which are discharged to the ocean and the portion of· the SDOC wastewater that is reclaimed for injection into the ground. As stated previously, we concur with the general conclusion of these studies that the proposed discharge d~es not have a significant adverse impact on the quality of treated waste- water that is discharged to the ocean or the portion of the wastewater that is reclaimed for injection into groundwater aqu:i.f ers in the Santa Ana Cap area by Orange County Water District. We believe, however, 14 ' ( ( Table 4. Comparison of Estimated Mineral Composition of Stringfellow Discharge Wit~ the Corresponding Quality Parameters for the SARI Line Quality a Estimated Combined Parameter Average Stringfellow Discharge Composition Stringfellow rng/1 ~roto.l b of SARI Line and SARI Line Stream A Stream B (0.4A+0.68) at FV Quality at FV Nitrate 319 297 306 . 120d 121.5 Sulfate 12,890 1,814 6,244 269e Total Dissolved 28,000 3,3cxf 13,180 l,53(l Solids aEstimated by averaging reported mof.itoring data in CH2M Hill, 1984. bBased on reported ratios in treatability studies (CH2M Hill, 1984). c Estimated from reported electrical conductivity data. 317 1,624 ~stimated on the basis of reported NH3-N concentrations in canbined inf low to the joint work (Carollo Engineers, 1983). · ~eported sulfate concentration in Treatment Plant Effluent (Staford Univ., 1982) fEstimated on the basis of reported electrical conductivity data for the SARI line wastewater (Carollo Ergineers, 1983). { • •• -... ~ --4. ----• • •• • --_.._ -·· that there is a potential for direct adverse impact of wastewaters flowing in the SARI line on groundwater bodies underlying the line due to possible chronic, low-level leakage of wastewater from this line. We are not aware of any data which would indicate the occurrence ~f any leakage along this line or show adverse impacts of any such leak- age on the quality of shallow, intermediate or deep local aquifers, however, this question has not been addressed in any of the repo.rts which have been prepared in conjunction with the Stringfellow interim project. A review of available information on geologic formations in Fountain Valley indicates that there is a potential for the uovement of contaminants from shallow water zones into the productive aquifers. Accordingly, this question would deserve further consideration when addressing the impact of waste discharges to the SARI line on ground- water resources of Fountain Valley. · Hydrogeology of Fountain Valley Area. Fountain Valley area is located in the Santa >J.ia Cap hydro logic subarea of the Santa Ana River hydrologic unit. Water-bearing formations in this area in the order of occurrence from ground surf ace consist of Tablert, Alpha, Beta, Lambda and w.ain aquifers. Recent alluvial deposits of varying per- meability and thickness overlie the Tablert aquifer and provide a confining cap over this formation. The underlying water-bearing for- mations are in contact with the Tablert aquifer and with each other and are also separated by deposits of 10\ller permeability. A represen- tative cross-section of the geologic formations in Fountain Valley area along a line passing through Ellis Avenue from Santa Ana River to Beach Boulevard is shown in Figure 2. Data on water quality condi- tions and direction of movement of groundwater in individual water- bearing formations and in the near surf ac~ perched water zone are not available for Fountain Valley area. These parameters have been moni- tored by Orange County Water District in observation wells drilled in the vicinity of Ellis Avenue reclaimed water injection wells, however, as expected these data reflect the effect of the injection operations both in terms of quality and hydraulic head conditions and could not be assumed to represent the overall groundwater conditions in Fountain Valley area. ,. . < . Clil m ~ co w w 0 a: ... cc cS < :l 0 > C> 0 O') LU -... LL. u °' ..J c ..J w ::; < 0 u > ~ :l :::> "" i; 0 (Q < ~ z ::> 0 LL. ~ en a: w W:: ::> 0 < LL. 0 z 0 ~ (.) w ~ "' U) CJ') 0 cc .o 0 w ~ ...I < a: w z w. CJ .. . .... ,,, ... --.... . .. . .. . If contaminants are introduced into the alluvial formations over- lying the Talbert aquifer in significant quantities and over a pro- longed period of time, it is probable that these contaminants wou~d eventually reach the Talbert aquifer and p:>ssibly the deeper water- bearing deposits. Water Quality Conditions in the City Wells. City of Fountain Valley currently withdraws water from local aquifer through six wells of varying depth and yield. Available water quality monitoring data for these wells was reviewed in this study. The quality of water pumped from all wells with the exception of Well No. 5 appeared to be satisfactory and did not indicate the existence of any source of contamination. Information on construction details for existing City wells is presented in Table 5. These data indicate that Well No. 5 (5S-10W-19A05Y) is the shallowest among all City wells and is perhaps the only well which is.perforated in the Tablert aquifer. Water quality analyses for Well No. 5 indicate el~vated concen- trations of sulfates, bicarbonates and total dissolved ·solids. A plot of nitrate and sulfate concentration levels over the past 11 years indicates a significant upward trend in the concentration of both of these constituents in recent years (Figure 3). The most recent com- plete water quality analysis for this well is presented in Appendix A. The increasing trend in the concentration of sulfates and nitrates in Well No. 5 may be indicative of a source of groundwater pollution in Fountain Valley area. The major sewer lines terminating at ~SDOC cannot be ruled out as a possible contrib.Jting source to this pollution. Other sources of contamination such as agricultural or landscaping fertilizer use, industrial spills and underground tank leakage, and leakage of degraded shallow groundwater through a corroded well casing could also be responsible for all or part of the observed water quality degradation in the City's Well No. 5. . ~able 5. Construction Details for Fountain Valley Wells Well Date Total Casing Number Drilled Depth Diameter Perforated Interval 3 10/77 590 0-162. 18" 222-270 -590' 14" 318-570 4 11/70 920 0-920' 18" 25o-640 760-800 860-900 5 c.1955 385 0-385' 14" 103-117 350-355 135-154 357-370 6 5n4 1040 0-280' 18" 370-390 860-910 -1040' 14" 450-490 472-557 391-414 572-589 600-779 7 . 8171 800 0-206' 18" 250-300 422-440 -800' 14" 342-368 472-557 391-414 572-589 600-779 8 11/77 864 0-204' 18" 312-420 -864' 14" 456-564 600-844 Source: Montgomery E~ineers, 1984 N03 , 50 {mg/I) 40 30 20 10 ( ( ------,------------------~ I\ \ I \ I I I : I I . . . . .. ! . I : :·~ . ! . I . I \ I • I 'I I . I .. I . I . \ • ; . . . I I • • i . ; ' . I I I 1 · •• I : . : . .. . I • I .. . . . . \ . . . ! .• . : • ' :·. • • • . • • • • • I • • • ' •••• -• I I . ; . : : i. : ': . . i : . : . . I· : : : . : : : : · 1 ~ .. : • s·o·' .. : ~ ! : I . : ! · . · ; ; , 1 · \ · . • I · . • ; · : : : . · : : , , : · · r.· : 41 · · · ; i . . · LI I : I I . . ' I . : . I • , • : ' ·I I : : I,,. /: . I . I .. ! . ' .. f. ··1· ·I .j·•······'··;" .... ,,·,·r ·:· .. ·:. -~····-· ··t•· ... -:: ·~·1.:·· ..... l ... !1·1··: .:_ •.... , ., .. I·.· ,1.' ., :. 'i'1: :•: '!• ·''~'. ,! ···! ,,, I' . ' . . : . . . . . I'.. . . I • • • • ' . • / . I\! . I I I . I •• I. ,., I I· . I . I i ! I i . .. I . ' ~ I I. : ; . I I : ' .. I . .. .. ; . . . ' , . :. . If. :· . ~ : . ; .... I . • . . . I • . ' I .. ' I. I I I I ' ·I I I . I . I . ; . . i . ! ; ' ! I/. I ! . i I I • • \ . I I ' I I. ' • . . I ! .. ·. I ' \ ; ; .. ' : . : '·:·: I . ~ :·; I · .. I • I ! . : . I . , . i I ' I . \ .. I . . . I . r:; 1 · . I . I .. I · 1 · .. I I . . . I I. I I . . . ! . I I I • . • • •• I . • . • I . i . I ! \ 1·: . . ... ·I· .. i ...... ': . I . . . 1 ·. \. I. . . I I • I I .. I • • I . I I . I . • . .. . I . . I I I \I · I ' I: ~ • I l . . . . . NO ~ I : ! I . I ' .•• I. • I. • • i : . . i ; . .. ! I I . I . .. \'1 ! ••. : : .. ,...... ' . I . 31 ' . ; I · : ..... I •••• I -' . I .. ' . I': I .• I I.• I . . : . . • . : I I. ' ..• ' • • I. ; I. . . I I: ' 1 · ; ~ I • I .. I .. I : I. I... . • ' I . I. : I .,-• I I • I ! . t ~ I . • . . : . . I •. I . • .,,,,. ;. : • • \. ,. . . I . : .• ·-·. .. ; .... I • • • • • ' .•.. I .. ·-"' . . I I . . . . .,Iii-.... : I I I . . ' . . .,,,,. . . . . \,-....-: . . I . ; : I ! . I .. i•. it . • .... ·I . I ' r: I i 1 I I . '". ! . I 11' : I ! .. •I;· 1 I , .. I •• : ··: .. 1···:j ... j:·:~· ·,·.·~" ..... , .. ~~-:-· !;-~·:· :-;~! ~··-·''j'·:··:: ·:::· .... :1··: .. j· ... I I . I I ' . : . I ..• I ' • ! . I • : .• ! . ': I I .. I ' : ' . ! .. , • : ii I .. l i:; . : . .. . : . I I . I. I . • • : . I I : I I I I. I .. I . . ··.· !· I• I~·· 1·'."'·-r-t····~""' ~i'" ·--··-·"········''.I ..... ! .•. I •• I ! I I'.. . 'I! I ; I I I! . I I. I . I· 1 .. I ' . I . I . I • : .. I I I, .. I. 'I I' : I • • I I: ... I I I • •I I I I • ; . : ii'! 1, I .. • i . ::• . : ' 1 · . . . I . . 'I .. I 'J I I I 'I ' . . . I . J · 1 . I I . .. .. ·~· , .. ;:-····---.. ·~··~1·~--·. ~!' ... ; ..... , .~ ... ,., ·i· .......• , ...... . I I . ' . ' .. ,! I;• I; ' I;·; I j• I : • : : I I I . . : .. . . . '. . . . . . I I •• '.. 1, I. I •• I 1 .• I .. I I '. • • • ••• • I • • I . . . I I . . . .. I . I·... . ' .. 'I I. I . . . . . . . . . . I I .... • . ! i : ' ! • ' • : • • • I. t : It •. I I • • • ••• 275 250 ·225 200 175 150 125 { S04 , (mg/I) I .. ~ t· •. -.. , : ~ , ... ~ .. J . ---:--r 1 · t'' ... • ·i·. . .. : ~ ·~ I ., • t ..... I ~.. . -:-... J t .... '." i ~-· • . . . . I I . . . .. I • • •••• I. . .... I. . I. I'. · 1 '. · 1 ... . I. I·.;: . ' ;, .. ' 1 11 ·I• .• ! ··=I : .• : .• I'. • ..... , . ' •• : ' . • . : •• I .•• ! I.; : , , • I: .• : : .. I I ; ..•. I .. O' , : I I. I I .. l •. : ! . . I • I I ! • I I • . . . . : I t • I I • . I •. I ! 11100 2na ena 1n1 ene eno 8/80 8/81 e/82 3/83 9/82 &/84 Sampling Date HISTORIC WATER QUALITY TRENDS FOR FOUNTAIN VALLEY'S WELL NO. 5 FIGURE 3. 1= , .. Conclusions and Recoanendations The results of our review of available information and reports on the proposed Stringfellow interim project indicate that appropriate technical procedures have been followed in selecting the proposed alternative and that the proposed discharge is in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements of local, state and federal agen- cies. We have also concluded that degradation of useable, shallow ·groundwater supplies may be Qccurring in Fountain Valley although available data are inadequate to identify the source or sources of such degradation. In light of the above conclusion and due to the lack of specific information on groundwater quality in shallow water bodies and in . . Talbert aquifer in the Fountain Valley area, we· believe that a field investigation program should be undertaken to provide information on the following items: 1. Direction of movement and quality conditions in the shallow water bodies in Fountain Valley area. · 2. General direction of movement and water quality conditions in the Talbert aquifer. 3. . The impact of water quality in the. Talbert aquifer on. groundwater quality conditions in Alpha, Beta and Lambda aquifers which are tapped by most of the City's s~pply wells. 4. . The impact of SARI line and other major sewer trunk lines traversing the City of Fountain Valley on gro1.Dldwater qual- ity conditions in this area. The discharge permit and requirements for Stringfellow interim project should be reviewed in light of the findings _of the above program. 1. James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineer, Inc. Letter Report: Conditions of Fountain Valley Wells; March 1, 1984. 2. John Carollo Engineers, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Master Plan for.Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities, April 1983. 3. Orange County Water District, Talbert Barrier, Status Report 1979-1981. 4. CH2M Hill, Ecology & Environment. Remedial Planning/Field Inves- tigation Team (REM/FIT) Zone 11, Contract No. 68-01-6692: a. Fast Track ·Remedial Investigation Feasibility Study, Stringfellow Site, Riverside, California, May 18, 1984. b. Stringfellow Summary Report, Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site, Glen Avon Heights, CA, July 1984. I c. Test Program Summary Report, Stringfellow Site·, Riverside County, California, August 1984. 5. Department of Health Services, State of California, Enviromental Review for Treated Waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Dispo- sal Program, Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site, January 1985. 6. Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Advanced Treatment for Wastewater Reclamation and Water Factory 21, August 1982. APPENDIX A . WATm QUALI1Y DATA FOR FOONrAIN VAUEl WELL 00. 5 23 \_' r-> ;. q e 1 o f \ MONTGOMERY LABORATORIES ~ djvi~ion a~ J~MPS H. M~ntqoMPry, Cansultin~ En~in~Pr~. Jnr. ~SS E~st Walnut Stre~t. P~~arl~nat Californt~ 9t\O\ <R18) 796-9141 I (2j3) &81-42SS Telex 67-5420 -· ··--..-.----------------·-------· --------------··--·----· -----·-Rep or 1 of G~nral Miner~l Analysis Fountain V~lley ~· ,,, .... •1' Da tP. !i1lMp l.P.d: . D,:t ·te Co Mp l etc~d: 1/12/A4 8/8/84 ------------------· Sattar>le Lc.b NuMber: E70B3S \.ATIONS: c; 0 di IJ M n '' ta~siu,.-. t:rll.ci UM MiHJOPSiUM (Mg/l) so 4.S 149.2 28.6 CATION SUM= 12.1 (Meq/.l) 2 .11 0.115 ?.46 2.38 Meq/l S.'llMp1e Joht/PO•: 1\3.03~0 Workorder •~ W00102 Report *: R00270 Date R~~cP.ived: 1/i.;:'1 /84 ti): IJJELL ts ~-'.S -/" ,J · 11 A-t' !;' y' AN:rONS: (M(!/J.) (f'aP('\/l) --------- Bicarhonate 271-> 4.S2 Carhon~te 0. 66j. 0.022 Chloride 8(-, 2.42 Sul.Pate 234 4.88 Nitrate ~ 32.·3~ '1.S?.1 Fluoride • 41. 0. 02j.6 Hydroxide 0 . 0 (\ 0.00 ANION SUM = 12.4 Meq/1 OTHr-:R 1>JATF.:R QUALITY PAl~AMETERS DETERMINED (Mg/l >: r1H ?.S Copper (0.007 Condur.:tanr:e U.~O Iron . i.3 ·~1l1<alinity 227 Hardness 490 TDS 762 M;rnq;.rnese (0.012 ... : l Surfactants <0.02 Lc.nqU.er IndP.x 0.49 Zi.nc : 0 1. t; pH of CaCL13 sa1urat:i.on (2SC) 7.01 Ar ~en :i. c <O.OOj- r>H OT CaC03 ~nt11ratic>n (bOC> 6.S Si.1. uP.r <O.OOS Fr Pe-C02 <2SC) 17.S T-<~r i UM .1.i C.:\rlMi IJ M .003 f:hT'OMlUM .04 Merr:urv <o.oo.r13 Lt~c-.d (0.002 SeleniuM (0.001 '..._! ---·--·--·---· ·------------NA: Nat Analy1ed ND: Not De1ectPd .. _._.... ____________ , Ru b ,., i. t t e d h y Approved by ·._; PR.OJBCT R.BPOR.T POR THB SANTA ANA ltBGIONAL INTBR.CBPTOR SUBKrrrBD BY SANTA ANA WATBRSHBD PROJECT AUTHORITY Pebruary, 1974 I. .. I I • • ' • • ~. J • . ~ : • 1 . ~ : . ·~ ·~ • • : & # •. • •. • I . ' . . , . . SAWPA LIBRARY DO NOT REMOVE PROJECT REPORT for the SANTA ANA REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR P"o. submitted by the ~'.~'·-· ,· / ,.~ _. ~, r-~·.:u~ • . • J _,.., ~ .. ,. .. · ..... ""' ...... ~ ......... --... , ___ . ,. ~~ ... ·. -.·-~~.~~ .... 150 • '\.. . "--.... .,, ---'\ ........_lil-...... ~ ~-:-, . sANT·A ANA W-a.TEasa:Ea, . . ---"' . .. ,. .... . . " . . .. -,-. :-,. _.,, ·-.. ·--: ·.· ,. ~ · . ..., ;~-':".······---~--r. ·' .;'. -..... ·-... .,,, :.. . '.r .•. ~~·-' PROJECT -~P.~tJ.J~R;E'F~ -. .... , .... ~t ........ tr -·.-.IJ .. ..._.. --~~ I •. . .. ; '""'. ~IJ --...:.-/:::··~:~ -·-··· -· -. .. !-., ·• ...... ·J· "J ·--~~~I·-~· ' •• ; ,)-_ -~ • : ~:.... • • Jf#~ • , ., I : ' ~-... • -·~ ~· I. ... l V"''· ·--~ ~ ,./·-' .. ,: , .... . . . \ -·-t:.. ~, ,;'·' . • . • • J /~ .... ~-.J • ~· .• :· . ,. '\. ..... , --. J_ • . . • • • ·-· ,rr" i.-(t n<:'luding a _Secdo~ prepared by J • • . . • I / LoWfr. . ._and AS~~ciat;eS for Reach III of the Interc~ptor i_n, Orange County) . : ; . -, , -. -... , . __ , .' · ~_; ?' ;· ..... -: . .. ~ •• . . . _·1 '·" ~. ) .· J . ~---·-....._.,.:i.· February 1974 , ft r ..._,; 1010 • _;," .MES M. MONTGOMERY, CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. AO.ENA • IRVINE • LA JOLLA • WALNUT CREEK • FORT LAUDERDALE • LAS VEGAS ,· l' ~ \ t " \ : •. ~ ' . • • ' ---, ... , ..J J J J ] . ., \_,I APPENDIX C BACKGROUND OF SANTA ANA REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR 1 MARCH 1951 -Report on Water Pollution Control Santa Ana River Basin, California Drainage Basin, prepared by Federal Security Agency, Public Health Service, Division of Water Pollution Control. Report recommended provision of a sewer with ocean disposal. 1952 -Santa Ana Regional Water Pollution Control Board.adopted as part of policy "the eventual provision of ·an industrial sewer with ocean disposal ••• " Z9 OCTOBER 1956 -Board Minute Order directing Chief Engineer Riverside County Flood Control le Water Conservation District* and Health Officer to contact San Bernardino County to make a joint study of "a proposed industrial outfall sewer to the Pacific Ocean. " 9 NOVEMBER 1956 -Minutes of meeting of Santa Ana Regional Water Pollution Control Board. Mr. Bryant stated that he had been directed by his Board to study the feasibility of construction of an industrial drain from this area, and that he believes such a study should be enlarged to encompass a master plan fol" sewage and industrial waste disposal for both counties. taking into consideration conservation of usable water and disposal of degraded water. The Executive Officer stated that it was his understanding that the San Bernardino County Flood Control District had received similar direction, and that it appears desirable that the two studies be coordinated. ACTION: The following motion was made by Mr. Heil, seconded by Mr. Riegel and unanimously carried: That the executive officer be directed to address letters to the San Bernardino and Riverside County Boards of Supervisors pointing out the desirability of a coordinated study of a master sewerage plan for the area of both counties within this region, taking into consideration conservation of water and maintenance of water guality objectives at Prado, ·soon to be established by the Board. * Hereafter abbreviated RFCD C-1 __ __,_ ____________ .. 13 NOVEMBER 1956 -letter to Boards of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties from Executive Officer of Pollution Control Board: "in connection with water quality in the Santa Ana River Watershed, it is well-known that the Board intends to establish water quality objectives for the Santa Ana River as it leaves this area as well as tributary streams and ground water basins which affect "the quality of the water in the River. Accordingly we believe the studies discussed above should be concurrent with and related to studies of the economic feasibility of construction of a waterway to the ocean to carry the more deleterious materials which may result from in- dustrial and general development of the area." 5 DECEMBER 1956 -letter report to Board by Chief Engineer RFCD and Health Officer regarding Board ordered meeting with San Bernardino County Health Officer on ocean export proposal. The meeting concensus was that a recommendation go to both County Boards advocating the appointment of an advisory group of engineers from industry to study the ocean outfall matter and return with recommendations. 11 JANUARY 1957 -Board Minute Orde~ directing Chief Engineer RFCD to submit names of persons for appointment to advisory COllDittee which would study the proposal for construction of an outfall sewer to the Pacific Ocean. 6 FEBRUARY 1957 -RFCD Chief Engineer's letter to Board listing names of industrial people recommended for appointment to outfall advisory committee. Same date the Board accepted named persons and instructed Chief Engineer to contact them and activate co1111ittee study. 11 MARCH 1957 -RFCD Chief Engineer's letter inviting industrial, State and C-Z ·~ _J J J -1 J J J J J J J r ] San Bernardino County representatives to attend a meeting on the possible need for waste disposal by ocean outfall set for 28 March 1957 at District Office. 18 APRIL 1957 -Meeting Minutes showing 21 persons in attendance were transmitted to all participants. Discussion of nonreclaimable waste problem was extensive but no group action was taken. 16 JUNE 1958 -Letter from R. D. Skelley, President for the Board of Directors, Gage Canal Company to RFCD District transmitting a resolution of the company directors. "Be it resolved: That the Gage Canal Company strongly believes that the increasing amount of liquid industrial waste matter being released in the Cities and Counties of Riverside and San Bernardino constitute a serious hazard.to the quality of the water stored in our underground basins. Therefore, we respectfully request that such governing bodies as are charged with planning the future of our City and County give serious consideration to the future construction and use by industry of an industrial waste outfall sewer from these areas to the ocean." JO JUNE 1958 -RFCD Chief Engineer's letter inviting Industrial Waste Out- fall Comnittee to attend a second meeting on 16 July 1958 at District office. 16 JCLY 1958 -Minutes of Outfall Sewer Study Coanittee included a Committee motion adopted and directed to the Boards of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties stating in part: "Engineering studies should be initiated now to determine the time of need for such an outfall facility as well as the C-3 :. ,· 1·apucity, route, nnd esti1n&-.ted cost ••• " The Boards were asked to hire consultants to accomplish the above in the same motion. 25 JULY 1958 -RPCD Chief Engineer's letter to Board traDSIDitting Committee action on ocean outfall proposal. By Committee motion the action was in part: "Engineering studies should be initiated now to determine the time of need for such an outfall facility as well as the capacity, route, and estimated cost." 7 AUGUST 1958 -Minutes of Tri-County Supervisors Assoc. meeting at Lake Arrowhead: Present: "Buss" Callan, Wm. H. Hirstein, Larry Oxley, B. Switzer, Willis H. Warner, Robert Andersen, Paul J. Anderson, George V. Berkey, John Bryant, Curtis A. Chamberlin, Bud Keith, Seymour, Ray Sullivan, S. W. Break, Magda Lawson, Nancy E. Smith, Paul J. young, Harold Zenz. John Bryant, Riverside County, tells of the study and interest in the future needs of an outfall sewer for the Riverside-San Bernardino areas. The growing need for protection of our ground water forces the study, in order that future industrial and domestic growth can be accommodated. Riverside has a citizen's committee working and also a professional planning study. San Bernardino County has its staff of three departments working on a basic study, aimed for preliminary report in January, 1959. Riverside County is using flood control funds, primarily; that County feels an outfall can be built for 18 to 20 million dollars, exclusive of right-of-way. After discussion, the following action is had: On motion of Paul Anderson, seconded by Willia Warner, the Association agrees that representatives of each county meet with Riverside County, on call of John Bryant, for summary and clarification prior to a Tri-County Supervisors meeting in January or February, 1959, when C-4 \ • ,• .. ... • --· discussion will be had on the entire program • Motion carried. 19 NOVEMBER 1958 -RFCD Chief Engineer's letter and questionnaire sent to industries seeking information on water use and waste water quantity and quality to be ~sed in studying the possible need for an ocean export facility. 22 JANUARY 1959 -RFCD Chief Engineer, as Chairman of the Tri-County Study Committee, letters inviting San Bernardino and Orange County representa- tives to attend a 30 January 1959 meeting on the joint outfall study at RFCD District Office. 30 JANUARY 1959 -Minutes of initial meeting of Tri-County Outfall Sewer Study Comnittee. (Meeting attended by representatives of the three Basin Counties plus Mr. Willets of DWR Water Quality Division and Mr. Stone, Executive Officer of the Regional Water Pollution Control Board.) It was generally agreed without specific action taken that: 1. We will ultimately need an outfall sewer from the interior Santa Ana Basin to the Pacific Ocean. 2. More data is needed regarding the total waste problem to be expected, and the portion of the total which is reclaimable. 3. Route studies should get early consideration. 26 AUGUST 1960 -·Minutes of special meeting on "Water Quality of Upper Santa Ana River Basin." Mr. Stone, Water Pollution Control Board Executive Officer acted as moderator and prepared minutes. A wide range of salt balance problems were discussed including a lengthy discussion of the eventual need for an outfall sewer to the ocean: "I t would rid the Upper Basin of unusable and unwanted wastes. It was finally concluded that additional work needed to be done and data collected C-5 .· ·-..._1 on the-adverse salt balance conditions to further show the need for. the outfall sewer. The study should provide a time-table prediction when the sewer need be constructed. Mr. Stone agreed to coordinate the various State and County agencies that had an interest in making field studies and reporting on this proposed investigation. It was further agreed that should data and information come to light, a similar meeting would be called whereby all persons would be invited to r~view and discuss the information obtained." 14 SEPTEMBER 1962 -Minutes of Santa Ana Water Pollution Control Board Meeting read in part: "A discussion followed as to staff participation in preliminary study of the need for an possible industrial participation in an outfall sewer for now reclaimable wastes in the Upper Basin. Mr. Stone asked the Board's wishes as to staff participation in planning and cooperation with the local governments and industries. The Board indicated they thought that tbis was one of the important water pollution control activities in the region and that the time to be given to it should be left to ~he staff's discretion. A meeting of the Tri-County Committee of the Boards of Supervisors is to be held on October 18, 1962 and the Executive Officer was asked to attend the meeting to discuss this problem ••• " 18 OCTOBER 1962 -Minutes, meeting of Tri-County Supervisors Association in San Bernardino. General discussion of basin sewerage problems with emphasis on coordinated efforts toward solutions. Ray Stone to coordinate and secure facts and information for next meeting in Riverside, 17 January 1963. 29 OCTOBER 1962 -RFCD Chief Engineer's letter to Supervisor's Chairman Norman Davis recommending that upon completion of the Sewerage Master Plan for West Riverside County by Koebig & Koebig that either "the County or this District should proceed with plans for the outfall sewer." C-6 .. -, • ·~ • • _I J J J J J J J J 1 ] ] r l ----- 9 NOVEMBER 1962 -Minutes, Santa Ana Water Pollution Control Board meeting: "Mr. Stone briefly discussed the meeting of the Tri-County Board of Supervisors group in San Bernardino at which meeting the possible removal of non-recoverable wastes from the Upper Basin by outfall sever was discussed • Representatives of the three boards expressed enthusiasm towards gathering t9gether for review all data that has already been developed on the subject. The Group's feeling was that since the Regional Board was the only existing organization that embraced the total area involved it would be desirable to have the staff coordinate this phase of the study. ACTION: It was moved by Mr. Schroeder, seconded by Mr. Brooks and unanimously carried: "that the staff should take on the responsibility of preparing a preliminary report covering the compilation of existing reports and data pertaining to the possible need for an ocean outfall sewer to take non-recoverable wastes out of the Upper .Basin." 13 DECEMBER 1962 -Zone 1 Coani'RSioners meeting minutes: Present: Alex Hanson and Dr. A. M. Boyce -Zone 1 Coanissioners; Paul J. Anderson, Supervisor -Second District; M~ B. Peterson -Former Zone 1 Coanissioner; John W. Bryant and R. O. Eid -RCFC&WCD. The matter of continuing the investigation of the need for an outfall sewer from the Upper Santa Ana Basin to the ocean was discussed. It was decided that Mr. Bryant should contact Mr. Nicholas of the San Bernardino County Flood Control Di~trict regarding the possibility of cooperation between the two districts in selecting and hiring a consulting engineering firm to plan the proposed line. 27 DECEMBER 1962 -IFCD Chief Engineer's letter to M. A. Nicholas, San Bernardino County Flood Control District advising that the Zone 1 Commissioners had decided to recommend funding for initiation of planning studies for an C-7 outfall sewer to the ocean. The Commissioners also ask if, and on what basis, the SBCFC District would be willing to participate in the planning study costs. 18 JANUARY 1963 -Minutes of Santa Ana Water Pollution Control Board meeting read in part: "Mr. Stone also mentioned the study undertaken by the staff for the Tri-County Board of Supervisors which will be presented at a meeting on January 31, 1963 ••• Mr. Brooks asked if the staff report would be a progress report. Mr. Stone stated that he hoped this was the end of the staff's assigned work for this phase of the study." 31 JANUARY 1963 -Minutes, Tri-County Supervisors Assoc. Meeting on sewerage problems of Santa Ana River Basin. Ray Stone presented a Bibliography and Summary of all existing studies on the subject of nonreclaimable Santa Ana Basin wastes entitled "Possible need for ocean disposal of nonreclaimable wastes from the Santa Ana Valley." Richard Hall, Manager, Chino Basin, Municipal Water District informed the group that his Board has hired J. M. Montgomery of Pasadena to make a study for them on the problem of how to dispose of industrial sewerage. Ray Stone, Executive Officer Santa Ana Regional Water Pollution Control BBoard volunteered to prepare the first rough draft of the specifications for such a basin-wide industrial sewerage study and to bring it back to the next meeting of the Tri-County Boards of Supervisors, scheduled for March 14. February 1963 -"Progress Report on Disposal of Non-Reclaimable Wastes Originating within the Chino Basin Municipal Water District," Chino Basin Municipal Water District, James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. 1 MARCH 1963 -Letter from Ray Stone to three flood control district chief C-8 I I 1~ I , -' I . .1 ~ _J J J ~J -] -] "] ~ ~ "] J 1 j 1 1 ] ] y J engineers transmitting first draft of a proposed engineering study to determine feasibility of constructing a nonrcclaimable waste disposal lin~ for the Santa Ana River Basin. 28 MARCH 1963 -Minutes, Tri-County Supervisors Assoc. Motion by Supervisor Paul Anderson, seconded by Nancy Smith, and carried, that the flood control engineers of each County report back to the Tri-Counties within 90 days on the proposed outfall study and thdt they coordinate with other departments. 29 MARCH 1963·-Minutes, Santa Ana Water Pollution Control Board meeting. (C) Non-recoverable waste water study with Tri-Counties. Mrs. Smith reported on the March 28, 1963 meeting of the Tri-County Boards of Supervisors. The Boards felt they should proceed with defining the rudimentary aspects of the problem. Each board was to commission its flood control engineer to work with the other two flood control engineers to define the exact scope and na~ure of an engineering feasibility study for non- recoverable waste handling facilities and to present its recomnendations to the Tri-County Boards within 90 days of March 28, 1963. The flood control engineers are to estimate the cost of the study and estimate the proportionate cost to each County. The nature and extent of outside consulting services is also to be recommended. 3 JUNE 1963 -Letter, Sidler to Bryant and Osborne confirming meeting date of 27 June 1963 4t OCFC District on the outfall study. 6 AUGUST 1963 -Letter, Osborne to Bryant, transmitting copy of his proposed agreement for securing consulting engineer services for the outfall sewer study. C-9 . J !~. At.:<~l'Sr ~~3 -Lt.'th'r. Brvitnl t,1 Ot.ch1,r1w. slat inJ~ hiH nf>inir1n Lh•rl r.111d1 'f thL~ (&>~bl>rnc?) prapuscJ a~r"'~mcnt involvl•d HmarcJ ft11I it:y .met f in:mcing "-'hfru w~•~ n''\t th"' provfnL:-.a ,,f th"' .flood l~,1ntrnl '•nglnt•~rs, mad thotl Ir w:1s tii· un.:h•ncta:1dlng th" Tri-Counti~·s Supurvlsnr f:ruup w:1nt<~d RfH•c.·lfJ•-.1lion:. 11·: .,; L'n.~inL· ... •ring study. Hl" ~'ncl&lR~d ;1 draft form of :1gr..·1~mc·n1 whida c·mhu 0 Ji•d 1):-:~'.\rn~·~ h'~hnkal ih.'!DS 3nd ext.•ludl'd poli«y amtl••rs. L~-~·~;rsr _196J -L-.?ttt!r, llsb,lrne to Br_ynnt, arrrnving Urynnl's dr.ift oi agr~t?l:ll'nt anJ Rtat ing that a short joint powers agreem,·nt bl·b1L•c·n tl1l· thr .. ·t: "''unt h•s would probably et lso be net!ded. Hu added: "As I have.· E•xpla fr,,.,! ;,r,,v1 .. .,u~ly, we down here regard this probll'lll largely uni! afCN:ting the• twc. t'?l''"r ,·,"unt h's so that we feel that you 8hould probably hnvt.• tlw s~y f n ,.·rut is t1.' be done. We will wait word from you and Hr. Nidaolas htfnr1.• ~tt~~pting to expedit~ this matt~r further." !f,_ACGCST 1963 -Letter, Sidler to Bryant and O,;bornc, com·urring in th~ Jb,w\? tWl' letter exchanges of 15 and 19 AuguHt 1963. l 1 llCT,'BER 1963 -Letter, Chief t-:ngineer to Supervisor /md1•rson, l ransrd tt i :-;.· Cl"?Y of the Jraf t of agreem~nt and letter apprt>vaJ s by Osbornl• and 8 lcf IM". I APRIL 1963 -Minutes, Tri-County SuperviHnrH Dll!<.•ting. "SpN·if k:atfons : .:r I c~ntracting for engineering services to study dispoRal nf nnnr<'r·l~imahl~ liquid wastes from Santa Ana Basin" as formulated by the thr('t• r loud .'Vilt re.~ chfof engint'&?rs was the basis fur dis<"uRsion. There wt•re npinions (~Xpr~s·:··'.; th.lt r~ther than outshte l'ngint!~ring firms bt-i ng useari th<~ r I oucJ conL rn I district st.dfs be utilizeJ. Otherz.c ft.~Jt private f frms were! tlal' w;ay t•• ~'. It w.ts agrt!ed that the planning directors and chfc•f c.anAfnl•l•rh Hhould ml!H re.·~arJing land use,· J'l.:inning and t!ngint!ering Mtudi£'s and to ilpprn:u·h ~u:?ic· f lr:n~ with r~spe" .. t to engint.•t.•ring propnsalN. C-10 I I I I I l 1.· , ""'-' -'-( J ., .. ~· ).lI.fil: 1964 -Meeting ,,f S3nta Ami Water Pnllutinn C:nntrnl Kn;1r1t. ~c.·~iJ.•at i: .:· .6_:.-1!!. 1:RG IXG THE CllU~'f IES m· ORANGE t R 1v1-;Ks U>fo: A?lD SAN BERJ~.-\RDINO TO SUPPORT STUDIES RELAflVI~ TO t>fo:VELCW- ~E:-tT OF A JllINT NON-RECl..AIMABLI~ WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTI::M: Wh~r~3s, on 0.ctob~r 17, 1952 this Board adopted n document entitled "Long Rnng~ plans and poli.:=ies with rcttpect to water pollution control" fndhding as a spe~ific Board policy the following statement which reads in part: "liw ev~ntual provision of an industrial sewer with ocean dispos~l for us~ by indu!;try in th~ Upper Santa Ana River Valley, particularly in the Chino Basin. is imperative for the orderly growth of industry in that nr(!a and (or th~ pr~tection of underground water resources downstr~nm; and "t.-lh:!reas, since there has been considerable effort on the part of s~vrr;1 l ,,ff ic lal agenci\!s during the past seven yt!ars tn generate i ntercst and ''\.·gin ~"irking on a study to d<?termlnt! the feasibility of a non-rt!r.ow•rnt,J,_. wa~te W3tcr line serving th~ Santa Ana River VnllPy; and "\\h~rt!as, the Counties ._,f Orange, Rivt!rside 'and Snn Bcrn;1rclino ;art· n••W cnn~id~ring various stages in a study of the ncud for such fn~llitirs; .ind '''"11 ... •rc?.:ts, a coordinated effort m3y eventually ba requln•d to r«.•nli1w ttw , ... ,nstruction of !egion:tl dispos:t1 facilities. "~~,\~ TH~:l\EFtlRE BE IT RESllLVI::~ th3t thb Board lwn,hy urg<.•s ·tht• Crmnt ie·s ,,f Or.in~..?. Rtv~rside and S3n Rern:irdln"i to support th .. , prompt unclt•rt•Jkin~~ ,,f :n~. nt-,'\.?S~ary local studies and plitnning activities to permit an 1.•:1rly dc.-c:i\.\inr. ~Y ~.1lJ Counties on the type, ext~nt, and datl' uf c.-unstrurt ion of non- re"·.~verabl'"· wast~ water facilitit!R to serVl' tlua Snnt•• J\na Rivc•r V~l l~y •• .and C-11 C'uti.111 study prl°'P"S~l and why the Tri-County ml!l'l ill>~ propost•J fnr 1 ~ay 196.f and flood control-planning de1lartmc•nts met·tings had nnt tu·•·n h~lJ. .!~ .J~1964 -L~tter :tnd resolution from WN;tc.•rn Munh:ip:ll ~at~·r Di .. ari t: "ll~Jr John: Thi~ District i~ very much inttan•stl!J in Keeing tlw pro jt·•:l mcwt" aheaJ for a non-rr.claJmablc wn~tl-! water line to Ht:rvc• ttw Santa Ana River Valley. We ar"• enC'll"sf ng a copy of a ret•rnt rt.'Snlutlon of nen !Snurd ~f Directors ~n this subj~~t. v~ry truly yours, WESTERN MUN 1 CJ PAL WATER 0 I STIH C:T OF RIVl~KSJOI~ CntlNTY EVERE1'T L. GRUBK, G~:NER1\I. HANAc:t::R" RESOLUTION NO. 410 RESOJ.UTJON OF THI-: BOARD 01-· DIRl~C'fORS OF WES'l'l·:KN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF RlVl::RS ll>E COUNTY SUPPORTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A JllJNT NON-Rl~CJ ... \IMAIU.1-. WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEM FOR THE COUN'rlKS OF ORANGE. RIVERSIDE AND SAN BERNARDINO. 3nJ s~1n Bt?rn.udino art' hereby urgcad to work LujtcathL•r with minimum dl·lny nr. C-lZ \ l [ ( ( [ ( ( ( ( ( l l l l l l l ·I l 1· , '--' J J ~. "] 1 1 1 l J J 1 ] CllUi•tics on the type, extt: .. nt, estlaaatl•d l·nst, alhwntion of cc•Hts, and ti~~ of construction of non-recov~rable waste watrr facilitj1•s to serve Snnt~ Ana River Valley. Be it further resolved that ~opies of this resolution b~ HPnt to ~11 ~pprnpridte local Agencies in the Counties u{ Orange, RiverHid~ and S1n Bern~irdino. June 17, 1964 2 Jlil .. Y 1964 -Letter 1 Bryant to Osborne (OCFCD), pointing nut that hh District had been prepared to proceed with consultant studies a y~ar pr~vious, pri~r to the Tri-County Group activity and is now including funding for consulting engineering along the lines agreed upon by the f Jood control ~hi<'f engineers. Also that Osborne had indicated a desire to have the out- f.111 constructed but no interest in its use within Orange County. Sidl<'r, sl::lifarly, was not interested in cost participation. 3 JCL1 _l964 -Letter, Osborne to Bryant, offering cooperation of his stnff in a~sisttng Zone 1 with the pnrti,1ns of the nutf:1ll inw•stig:ition whi<'h might affect Orange County. l!_J_tl,I Y 196~ -Chief Engineer's l~tter t<> Distrfrt 8o:irct ndvising that in vi~w ,,f no action by the rc'sponsib le bodira on previous re,•omm<!ndat i,,ns f ••r Pngaging consulting services for ocean outfall Htudics, thl! Zone I . cummissioners were providing funding for a planning Ktudy. Also r~qucstcrl exe~uti\ln by Bc.iard "'f proposed ngrcemt1nt bt1 tw(•t.m Distrirt and Cnnsult:tnts P1.lDh?roy, Johnston 3nu Bailey to acctmpJ.ish the study. .1 DECEMBER 196~ -RFCD Chief EnRineer's h•tter to indu!-Ctrh•R In the art:~ C-13 . ' • tr.1nsmitting n copy ,,f th1.• t-.•nt•UiV&.' "t·rlh•ri:a Jor m·c·t•pt;rnc·•· 11f nunr't·c·J:d~·- nhh· waste water" Int,., tht• pro1,os~J nutfitll s\·st,•n1. 1n,h1strh···' ····~••n•·nl!-, R"'hr l\lrporatilln, Rivcrf;iJe, By R. J. Phi J l fps. Pl:tnt Englmwring Mmwv.1 r, with ~OCUDt!nts as Cl' pH 3nJ tempt.'rature of W:tRll• Kuhr agn•t.•J w i Lh th<· l·rih·ri:a. 3t least inltiall~. Ah;o --· "R,,hr naturally has wastl.!S which Clluld b~ dispusc•d uf hi' lhh t::p. ,,f syst~m, and would be intert1stc:ad if t t wc.•re t~c·nnom Ira J ly romp<!t It i ·1l• w: L i1 exi:;ting dispc.>sal methods. We would. requl!st to be k~pl infonnt:d of tl1t· i•ro;·r•·o.. .. 2~-~_ECE~tl'ER 1964 -Letter,.,£ gelleral concurrf'nct• wlth wnstc.a c·rit1~rJ:1 fr 1 1m Sunk1st, Lemon Pr.iducts Divi,.;i,,n, Corona, Owc:an K. Kutman, l>in·rlor • .:. .J..\~t.'.\RY 1965 -Letter of l'••mment on waste.a er I Lcr la from .Juhm:-M:mv i l l•·, ~<,n,!;ulting firm, et-:. 18 JANtTARY 1965 -RFCD Chief Engint~ttr's lc:atter to Mr. Hart f ncak transmi' tir:i' tht.• t\?ntative waste acceptance criteria and requuf;ting comnh.·nts on hl•ha Ii ~r ~ity of Riverside. !!. ..:k.~NUARY 1965 -"C:AO" Robert Anderson 1 ettr.r tn "CAO" Covington of Sar. Rt•rnardino County request in~ a staff-level meeting with Cbit-?f t.:n~ineer r.ry.1nt .ln possible ti~-in ~f S:in Bfarnardlno County to Dl1:1lrkt 's outfdl l ~y~t~m being pl3nned. l.Yt::BRl'ARY 1965 -Letter of concurrent't> Jn wcistr ac-erpt61DC't! criteria frn:·: ~tr. Martinek, Riverside Dircclllr ,.,f Public Works. C-14 \ _.1·. _l j J -., --1 J J J ~] _., ~ -] 1 J J ~ J 1 ti .1r~t.: 1965 -Pomt!roy •. ll>hnsh1n and 8.-iih•y Rl·pnrt. "Uispo.-1JI of nonr•·· !:d~.1t,1• W•hlt~s produced In the llpp•"r Snnt3 An3 H:tsin nf Rlvcrsldl• County, Cnlif·~rni:1.'' rrer3red for The Rivt>rsidt" County Fl11od Control :and W:itl'r t:onsl!rVntJ•m lJistrl<.t. Thls report st-itt"d that "water qut11lty be malntnlnt4 d in thtt •H:-.tri<t :tt"t!3 by the constructil'n of a n,1n-reclaimahlll w.1st<• outfall. This '''lti:Jll wa1ul l rem\we segr&!gated, 'ait;h t;alinity industrial wastl-!S from thf! SISV~Wf> .ut··• Jir .. ~,~tly t~ the llCean vin a l!oncretc pipeline ••• The non-rl"Claim.'lhlr w:1r-.tt• outfall would also be used for oc-ean disposal of wastes which are cost l:; or dlffi~ult to· treat in existing local sewage treatment facilltieA." This study recommended disposal through an outfall sewer rnnst. r•Jc..:tr·ri :1,·r\'-.s~ Orange County and discharging into the ocean. 8 JGLY 1965 -Resolution in support of, and ~xpresHing ne~d fnr, industri~l waste outfall facility by Riverside County Board of Trade Directors. 10 JAN. 1966 -Dlst~ict Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 658 solictling the cooperat·ion of the supervisors of Or:inge County Flond Control f.\istrict" ••• in preservir&g adPquate right of way .in the ri~ht bank l~vc:c.: of the Santa Ana River through Orange County to .1ccommodate :an outf;tll I int• f1·r .... <'n\•t?yance of n~nreclaim~ble wastes to the Pa,·lfic Ocann." .l.LJ . .\.~. 1966 -(By unanimous vote) "It was furth<. .. r ordered that thr· l<FC:l1 C:hief Engineer be authorized to proceed to l'Xpudite th<· t~nnHt rurt ion of the proj~ct." li. T"EB. 1966 -"1lnute order llf lliKtrkt BonrJ :authori?.ing prt?parati<'n .,f findndng plan for outfall project by B:artlc-Wl'lls At1HOt~intc.:s. .V~~!9!.J~ -Board Restllution No. 672 nuth11rizing appl 1&·:.tinn for f',:Jt:rll ! iun,I~ for outf :1 l l. C-15 ~4_ !~\R~H_~ -RFCD Ch it'f rn~ i 1h•t•r ;11hl t:1msu 11 ~ml U1 • l•umc·r11 J prt•":•.·11 f ,.,1 • ·1! t · f :1 l J proJ ec t p l~an to Or:uoil' ,:,•unt ~ Sc1i1t·r••JW St ml v U1•v i .. w Uoarcl. "N"'nr, .,. J :a imabh, "°·'Sh'ti Prtllhlcl'd in l h&.' llp1•l•r S•rnt ;1 An:1 KI Y•·r Um, i" of s,,,. Bt!rn.erd in,, C\lunt ~·, Ca I if orn i ~•... ~l:1r1'11 I 9M>; pr•·1•:Jrc•d by l'um••rc.y, lohn:;" : ,, B.1i ly f'""'r the San Bern:irdint• \'illky HunidJml W.itt.•r Ill st rfrL. APR!!:. J!!'f> -Applications by District to "HUI>" and "J~l>A" fnr t'edl·ra J funding J~sistanc~ ~n the prop~sed outfall project. :r~~ 1966 -"Engineering Plan -Non-Rcclaim:1blta lndu.stri'11 Wantewattar Di:;posal System," Chino Basin Municipal Water District, .htmt•s M. Honlgun11:ry, ~onsulting Engineers, Inc-. ThiR study. as well as Barth· Wells A~soc·., ~tunfriral Financing Consultants report, were thl, basis for impl~~l·ntin)! th .. · t~K~1>'s n~n-re~laimable industrial waste water RYRtem. ; JULY 19b6 -Memo of :understanding between Zones J and 2 Slitl in~ the· ~tlntnti~sion,;ars intent to sh:ir~ th\! l~osts of d<.•si~n eand "omttnwtion ,.f tia <'Uti tJ 1. 11 Jl .. LY 1966 -District entered into contrat•t with PnmC'rny •. Jnhn~ton :tn,: B.1ih·y for design of the outfall proj<'ct. :!,.t'I.\.:. 1966 -"W:iste Water Disposal and Re~lamation for the· Ccnmly r•t ur:my.•·. C.tlifornia, 1966-200," Lowry & Assoc. and ~ngr. Sci. ln<·. _hate Summer, 196~ -State Wat('r Qua I ity Cont ro I Board, lnh•r to h•!<:omt.· t "'' i..u"11 r \.lu;i li ty Oi vision of the Statt.a Water Rcsourc-es Control Board, con tr;J•' t!-, with ~.iter Resourc~s Engfncc-rs, Inc., Walnut Crt.••'k, CalifornitJ tu study th•· salt halanc~s of several hydrologic units in the Santa Ana Rfv•·r Basin up~tream from Prado Dam in nrder to Identify reasons fnr inc-r~asing s.11 t con"·E.'ntratiltnS in this :irea and t'' predkt future prohl1~ms in Jnr•ll i?.1:d :trc·;:!-0. C-16 i l l [ l I. l [ [ [ [ r L ~J -:l \..,I , _ _J _J _J ~] -1 _J -_ J -J ~ ~-] ~1 ~1 ~1 L-1 ..J1 ~ ~ ~ ~~1 Li ~ I 27 OCTOBER 1966 -RFCD Chief Engineer and Consultants presented project to Orange County Sanitation Districts' Executive Committee. 14 NOVEMBER 1966 -Board authorized $2, 000. 00 engineering study payment to CSDOC on possible use of their submarine outfall by John c·arollo Engineers. 14 DECEMBER 1966 -Report on Capacity required in the Proposed Non- Reclaima.ble Waste Outfall for San Bernardino Valley, based on Measur~d Waste Water Quantities from Industrial Facilities, SBVMWD. MARCH 1961 -Pomeroy, Johnston, and Bailey analysis of Carollo' a report and t~eir recommendation that a j<>intly-funded new larger sub- marine outfall would be more economical than purchasing the old 78" line. AUGUST 1967 -"Non-Reclaimable Waste Disposal System -Upper Santa Ana River Basin -Riverside County, California, " Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Pomeroy, Johnston and Bailey. NOVEMBER 1967 -The Santa Ana Watershed Planning Agency (SAWPA) was created by a Joint Powers Agreement for the purpose: " ••• to create a public entity which will conduct a water quality management program study for the Santa Ana River Wate rahed .•• " 8 MARCH 1968 -San Bernardino Mayor Ballard letter stating City staff studying outfall participation. 5 JUNE 1968 -Agreement between the County of San Bernardino (West Valley Planning Agency) and the CBMWD to prepare "General Plan for Water and Waste Water Systems." 17 JUNE 1968 -Corona Chamber letter of support for 1968-69 outfall budget funding. . 17 JUNE 1968 -City Corona Res. No. 3522 supporting budget appropriations in District budget for fiscal year 1968-69. C-17 ·_,; ~· I -----·-----"• m 17 JUNE 1968 -Yater Quality Control loard support letter for 1968-69 outfall 1Mad1et funds. 19 JURE 1968 -Rohr Corp. letter of •upport for 1968-69 outfall •udaet. JIARCI 1969 -Flaal ~port "An Inveettaation of Salt Balance in the Upper Santa Ana River Baein," eubaitted to the State Water Re•ourcea Control loard & The Santa Ana River ... in Regional 11ater Quality Control Board. Prepared by Vater Reeource• Engra., Inc. Aa interi• report vaa iasued in Sept. 1967, and eeven progreaa report• vere •ubld.tted. They atate: "The Water quality llOdel• developed b7 tbe Departaent of Water leuurcea (D1''1) and others were uaained lD order to daoastrate the effectiveness of the developed model in predicttaa future ground vater quality. The couultanta indicated that the aoat effective Mana of controlling aalt accuaulatlon within the Upper laain vas the selective export of aunicfpal and industrial waste• and upon the utilization of high- quality imported water." 10 MARCH 1969 -Board ordered IFCD Diatrict (1/3) co~t-sharing with CSDOC of atudiea for joint-use of propoaed new 120-inch diaaeter submarine outfall to be COD8tructed by CSDOC. JUNE 1969 -"Feasibility Report for Joint Outfall Sever Project vitb Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District." County Sanitation District Ho. 2, Lowry Eaglneerlng-Science. 14 JULY 1969 -City of San Bernardino execution of •1ree•nt with IFCD for capacity in outfall system. 13 MAY 1970 -Execution of agreements with CSDOC for acceptance, transport, treatment and disposal of upstream waste flows. C-18 ' I 1 l I l l L .l L -·· .. "' ) 'I.. I -' =-, '_,/ , _J ... I _J , _J ( . -' "] -] "] ~ -] -1 -] -] -] -] ~] ~ -] _.:;_o ~1AY 1970 -Tran~mfttal of csnoc: :agr«.!cmcntH plus prc•liminnry d•:Hign pl:tr." t"' •·edt"ral Watt!r Qunl lty Admin. --in Washington, O. C. !21..Q --"Gener:il Pl .. m F<'r Water nnd Waste Wat<'r SyHtt•mH, prl•parc·d by ttw i.~st Valley Planning Agenc-y.(W\'PA) (3 cnopcr:itivt• ar..•a-wJd•" 1•13nning pr• .•r;.r-:J • AmC'ln~ th<' WP..\' s recomm~nd3tion~ wert.1 : "Jn tlmtw instnnc-c.•s wlwre· r•xt•·n"' i ·:1· r,~-~y~llng .. ,£ w3stcwatcr is anticipated, planning !=;hnuld requin· cvc·ntu:,1 J\! li v~ry of the c'1ncentrated wastewater resl.dueH to the art'&1s non-r<.·~ la ir.:a'.J •· wast41!water system." In addition, the WPA stated that rt•sults to that d&Jl~ (published 1970) on the three DWR/WRE plans "am far conside?red by thems<· l vl·s ~1r~ not indicative of an optimum basin management plan. Additin1'al 1>l:1ns !'lht"uld b~ d~veloped, run anc.I evaluated. Regardless, the export from th<.· t"pper Santa Ana River Basin (via Orange County or Los Angcl~s C~Junty) for re-use or for ocean disposal," was included as part of the.· rN·nmmendat 1'-n:.;/ •. ,,n ..... lus ions. !.'?..~:.!. 1970 -Regional W3ter Qu3Uty Control Board hearing on non-d~imah!-.: ~a~t~ line opened. ~ 1 JULY 1970 -~orco Chamber cndorsc.•d the nonrc.>claimuh h! '-':lHll~ 11 nc pro i&:L t. ~-8_SEPT. 1970 -Second and closing day of Watt!r Quality Control Board h~aring on outfall project. ; OCT. 1970 -Bu.,ard Minute Order stating th:it future prc."c is«.? rn11t inr. nf w.1st~ lint! Ahauld nvuid. wih.•re pnsKible, cutti11g through ripari•in vt•g•·t.?t,·d ~•rt?as, all-.>w fnr riding and hikln~ ust' ,,f I inc• K.O.W., anJ Pl&1nning ~•'111."Ui:o;sion to h,lld henrin~s on &.?ffc-c-ts ,,f prnpmh•d prn.1ec.·t nn surroundin~ 1 :1nd us~s. C-19 •, l~_,!E~J.!ZQ -RFCD Chh•f J~nginrL'r's ll'ltc•r In JinnrJ t•x1,l1dnl11g lhnt pruj• r·t 1 K.tl.1'. costs ar~ bae;~d on only .l!!!!t.~·n~.r.o_u_~.d us .. of tlw prnpl?rly with n•> lh.•rm.1n~nt surf :ace r I ghts which wuu LJ scvc-r 1>rnpL•rl i cs and incrL•mo· .,,.,,u i "it i '"' "·ost:-; cxc~st:tiv~ly. The t."Xcf.•ss "·ost for non-prujN'L uses may nor he :1 I··~ ,J I cxpt.'nJiture for tbe District. He suggested th.it lht" propu1ted plunnJm~ ,.,.,cunis:;h1n hearings were not necessary and r€'qucst«.!d that tlw Ho:Jrd Ordc·r l be res~inded. lJ .. or.r. 1970 -Board ordert'd requci:;t of RFCD Chit?f 1-:ngfneer on outhll fu .. nl:-.~ bt."for~ Planning Comnission be filed with the Cnmmission. & ~llV. 1970 -Regional Board endorsed project concept with conditions I relating to capacity and quality control. !L_:'iOV. 1970 -"Watershed Climate, Geohydrology, und Water 'lunl i ty," 1 \ submitted by Wat~r Resources Engrs., Inc. to SAWPA. This Thi~ report further documents salt balance problem. l 25 FEB. 1971 -Res. No. 71-11, Regional Board recommended indusiun nf capacity for future use by upstream agencies in the first reach nf the t • Santa Ana River Interceptor pipeline from San Diego Freeway crn~Rin~ tu ~~1tella Ave. in Orange County. ( ~\lh~H 197 l -"Interim Five YPar Master P Jan of Wn~ tc Water r'ar ill t ief:;, County Sanit3tion District No. 2 of Orange County, C:iUf." l .. owry & Assoc:. ,\Pf\11 .. 1Q7l -"Pre-Certification Report, Sant~ Ana Interceptor, County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County;" Lowry & Assoc. i .Ju_nt! l~J! -The RWQCB adopts Interim WatPr Quality Control Plan for the ' • Santa An~1 River Basin wherein it is recomnrndPd that "In addition, the CSIJUL C-ZO l .. -·-., ~ , ~ ... __ , -~· _ _t _] -1 ] 1 ' ~ J 1 J 1 1 ] ] --y ] "" 1 should provide interceptor, treatment and ocean disposal capacity to accommodate parts of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties principally for the purpose of removing highly mineralized wastewatera from these areas ••• 11 28 JULY 1971 -Minutes of CBMWD Board Meeting, Mn-7-16. moved and carried by unanimous vote that CBMWD convey genuine and deep interest in Interceptor and programs with CSDOC and be permitted 30 days to evaluate the program. OCTOBER 1971 -"Water Reclamation Reconnaissance Study, County Sanitation District No. 2 and Orange County Water District, 11 Lowry 8t Assoc. 15 OCTOBER 1971 -"Preliminary Draft, Section 1 of SAWPA Final Report to the EPA. 11 Summarizes problems and alternative concepts for water quality management. The recommended plan includes the following element: "To correct adverse salt imbalances in some sub-basins with a combination of actions, including extraction and export and/ or desalting of brackish waters; ••• " NOVEMBER 1971 -"Project Report for 1971-1972 Joint Works Improvements and Additions, 11 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, John Carollo Engineers. FEBRUARY 1972 -"Preliminary Draft Section 2 of SAWPA Final Report to the EPA." Report provides Test Plan, and alternatives, for solving salt balance problem in Upper Watershed. 23 FEBRUARY 1972 -Memorandum on Santa Ana River Interceptor cost analysis to all directors, Joint Management Board, SAWPA from Bill Dendy, Manager, SAWPA. 24 FEBRUARY 1972 -Letter on adverse salt balance situation and recommendation of brine line of 30 MGD capacity to Joint Management Board, SAWPA, from Bill Dendy, Manager, SAWPA. 12 APRIL 1972 -Waste Water Treatment and Disposal Agreement, County Sanitation Districts l, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 of Orange County, and CBMD, regarding Santa Ana River Interceptor. 12 APRIL 1972 -Waste Water Interceptor Capacity Agreement, County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County and CBMWD, regarding the Santa Ana River Interceptor capacity rights. APRIL 1972 -'·Project Report for the Santa Ana River Interceptor of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, 11 James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. C-Zl .. - , ._, APRIL 1972 -"Environmental Impact Statement for the Santa Ana River Interceptor of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California," James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineer•, Inc. APRIL 1972 -"Orange County Supplement to the Project Report for the Santa Ana River Interceptor County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California," Lowry Ii Assoc. 28APRIL1972 -Letter to J. Andrew Scblange, CBMWD, from Howard T. Anderson, Registered Geologist, expressing concern with flooding as related to the Santa Ana River lntercepto.r above Prado Dam. 28 APRIL 1972 -Application and documents (for Reach I) submitted to State Water Resources Control Board by cover letter from Fred Harper, CSDOC. 28 APRIL 1972 -Project Report, EIS, and Project Summary form submitted . to RWQCB-Santa Ana River Basin by cover letter from Fred Harper, CSDOC. 17 APRIL 1972 -Transmittal of Notice of Intent for Reach I to Office of Intergovernmental Management, State Clearing House by Fred Harper, CSDOC 17-18 APR!~ 1972 -1. 972. EIS for Reach I sent by Fred Harper, CSDOC, with cover letter to planning com.missions of City of Orange, County of Orange, City of Fountain Valley, City of Sauta Ana and City of Anaheim. 20 APRIL 1972 -Letter to Fred Harper, CSDOC, from William Fitchen, Orange County APCD, on review of EIS for Reach I. 21APRIL1972 -Letter to State Water Resources Control Board transmitting request to EPA for waiver and acknowledgment from the State Clearing House of receipt of EIS and ~otice of Intent. 21APRIL1972 -Request for Waiver of 850/o BOD removal to EPA from Fred Ha t'pe r, CSDOC. 26 APRIL 1972 -Public Hearing on Environmental Impact Statement, Santa Ana River Interceptor Sewer from Reclamation, Plant No. 1 to Katella, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California. 27 APRIL 1972 -Public Hearing on Environmental Impact Statement, Santa Ana River Interceptor Sewer from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Chino Basin Municipal Water District. 6 JUNE 1972 -Letter to Wilfried Langer, James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc., from Fred Harper, CSDOC, enclosing copies of conunents of Department of Fish and Game and Air Rea,,urces Board. C-22 I I [ ! [ [ [ [ [ l L l L l L l L L •• _=.; ~ ·..,.; , ' - • I -J _J -J -] -·1 -] ~ '--" - -1 ' -] J -] -] -] -] J -] { 14 JUNE 1972 -Letter from MaTk E. Briggs, State Clearingho~se ~·iinato;to Fred Harper, CSOOC, stating Santa A."la River Interceptor Project {Phase I) had been Teceived and disseminated. ~JUNE 1972 -"Amendment to Environmental Impact Statement for the Santa Ana River !nterceptor of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California," James M. Montgomery Co:isultlng Engineers, Inc. 29 JUNE 1972 -SCAG Grant Application Review in letter to Paul Brown, CSOOC, from Ray Remy, SCAG. 30 JUNE 197Z -Grant Application Certification, State Water Resources ------Control Board approved Santa Ana River Intercep~or (Reach I) in letter from Pa:il Bond-!rsoa to Paul DeFalco, Jr., Regional Ad..-ninistrator, EPA. 3 JULY 1972 -Letter to State Water Resources Con4;rol Bo~.r•t fr:un Pa1.U. Brown, CSDOC, enclosing review by SCAG dated June 29, 1972. AUGUST 1972 -"Project Report No. l for 1972-73 Joint Works Improvements and Additions, " CSDOC, John Carollo Eng rs. 18 AUGUST 1972 -Proposal to increase interceptor size in Rea:ch I to 184MGD in letter from Fred Harper, CSDOC to State. 23 AUGUST 1972 -Grant offer of $1, 586, 000 from EPA to CSDOC and CBMWD for Reach I of Santa Ana River Interceptor in letter from Paul DeFalco, Jr., EPA, to Fred Harper, CSDOC. 24 AUGUST 1972 -State approves concept of increased capacity for Reach I at no additional cost to grant program subject to EPA approval in letter from Paul Bonderson, State Water Resources Control Board to Fred Harper, CSDOC. 28 SEPTEMBER 1972 -Environmental Impact Assessment and Project Report for "Santa Ana River Interceptor, Katella Avenue to La P~a Avenue, 11 submitted prepared for County Sanitation District No. 2 and CBMWD. EIR prepared by ·Richard Terry &t Assoc. /Environmental Sci. · &t Services; Project Rpt. prepared by Lowry &t Assoc. 25 OCTOBER 1972 -Resolution No. 72-10-1 of the Board of Directors of Chino Basin Municipal Water District authorizing application and acceptance of State and Federal Grants for construction of Santa Ana River Inter- ceptor, Katella Avenue to La Palma Avenue (Reach II). C-23 K '~~VEMHEa: 197l -·.etfolulion No. 72-155-2 o! the Board oJ Dirt:dors of County Sanitation uistrict No. 2 of Urange County, authorizing and directing execution and filing 0£ documents necessary for Federal Grant. 1DECEMBER1972 -Letter from State Clearing House, Governor's Office with comments from State Water Resources Control Board and Air ,<.e- sources Board to Fred Harper, CSDOC. ZS JANUARY 1973 -Approval by SCAG Executive Committee of the second phase of Santa Ana River Interceptor in letter from Ray Remy to Fred Harper, CSDOC. FEBRUARY 1973 -Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement creating Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. The purpose of the Agreement was for common power of undertaking projects for water quality, contr~l. and protection and pollution abatement in the Santa Ana River Watershed. 7 FEBRUARY 1973 -Brine Line Treatment Capacity Agreement between Chino Basin Municipal Water District and Western Municipal Water District of Riverside County. 27 APRIL 1973 -Application for Clean Water Grant with supporting documents from Ilay E. Lewis~ Chief Engineer, CSDOC, to State Water Resources Control Board. 1 MAY 1973 -Letter from Donald Martinson, Lowry and Assoc., to Kay Lewis, CSDOC, on E-0 Population Projection Analysis. MAY 1973 -"Preliminary Draft, Section 3 of SAWPA Final Report to the EPA.'' Recommended water quality objectives, programs, projects and strategy for implementation. z MAY 1973 -Letter from Ray E. Lewis, CSDOC, to State Water Resources Control Board submitting population and flow projections. 8 JUNE 1973 -Concept to provide an interceptor to serve CSDOC and discrete flows from the upper Santa Ana Watershed Basin is approved by State Water Resources Control board in letter from Larry F. Walker to Fred A. Harper, CSDOC. 29 JUNE 1973 -Grant Application Certification, State Water Resources Control Boa rd approved Santa Ana .River Interceptor, Katella Avenue to La Paln1a Avenue (:t.each II) in letter from Paul R. Bonderaon to Paul DeFalco, Jr. , Regional Administrator, EPA. C-24 . ....,, j_ RE: AGENDA ITEM #15 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS March 6,_ 1985 REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE TO ADVISE THE STAFF RE of0RANGECOUNTY. CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-2910 (714) 962-2411 PROPOSED FORMATION OF DISTRICT NO. 14 TO SERVE THE IRVINE AREA On November 14, 1984, the Boards of Directors approved the formation of District No. 14 in concept with the understanding that a formal agreement with the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) would be prepared for consideration by the ~oint Boards. Finalization of the agreement has been held in abeyance pending completion of a land appraisal for Treatment Plants 1 and 2 to determine the acquisition cost to IRWD for equity in the real property of the Districts' joint treatment and disposal system. The appraisal has been completed and the formation agreement language finalized, a copy of which is attached. The key provisions of the agreement are: • District No. 14 will encompass approximately 59,000 of IRWD's 72,200 acres and will include portions of the cities of Irvine, Orange and Tustin, as well as unincorporated county area. • The Board of Directors will include a council member from Irvine, Orange and Tustin, a county supervisor and a member o~ the IRWD board of directors. • Upon formation of District No. 14, the existing Districts will amend their Joint Ownership Operation and Construction Agreement to include District No. 14. • IRWD will pay all costs relative to the proposed formation of District No. 14, including requisite engineering, environmental and other studies or reports, necessary facilities redesign, membership in the JAO and revisions for inclusion in the Districts' NPDES Permit. tRWD has deposited $490,000 with the Districts to cover these costs and the Districts' Boards have already engaged consultants to prepare the Engineering Report required for formation, and the EIR. -1- .~ The tentative formation schedule is: January, 1985 -Notice of Preparation Issued April, 1985 -Draft EIR June, 1985 -End of Public Comment Period July, 1985 -Final EIR -File with LAFCO September, 1985 -LAFCO Hearing October, 1985 -Board of Supervisors Hearing • The initial acquisition of equity in the JAO real property shall be for 32 MGD (IRWD's planned ultimate capacity requirement} in the appralsed amount of $4,653,000, one-half payable within 20 days of formation and the balance within five months. • The initial acquisition of equity in the JAO treatment and disposal facilities (JW!'F) shall be for 15 MGD (current flow at the IRWD Michaelson Reclamation Plant is 8 MGD) in the amount of $31,293,000, one-half payable within 20 days of formation and the balance within five months. The acquisition cost is based on original cost escalated by the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index to current day value at 6/30/83, ENRLA of 4934. Future increments of capacity will be purchased in accordance with the provisions of the JAO agreement. • If IRWD fails to provide funding, they shall have· 'acquired no rights in the JAO. • If inclusion of District No. 14 in the JAO affects the Districts' NPDES Permit, IRWD must pay any attendant costs1 or, in the alternative, District No. 14 flows can be limited, or this agreement cancelled. • IRWD shall receive credit for its existing equity in the Districts' Outfall System in the amount of $1,414,000 based on current value. • District No. 14 will pay its share of future JAO improvement and expansion costs beginning July 1, 1985 based on the proportion of 15 MGD flow to the total existing Districts' flow (estimated initially at 6.23%) until its actual flows exceed 15 MGD after which the actual flows will be used to calculate its proportionate share. • The Boards, pursuant to an inte~im report submitted by this Committee on August 8, 1984, have agreed to change the current method of calculating the JAO ownership equity from a formula using flow and assessed valuation to a 'formula using· flow only. The Boards have determi'ned that a flow based formula better reflects use of the system and, thus, capacity requirements. The estimated effect of this change, coupled with the formation of District No. ·14, is shown on Attached Exhibit B. -2- • District No .• 14 shall pay the cost of facilities for metering its flows. • Wastewater solids residuals from IRWD's reclamation plant cannot be discharged to the JAO without appropriate studies. !f such studies show added costs to the Districts, or any problems, District No. 14 must pay such costs, or the Districts may prohibit such discharge. • District No. 14 will jointly construct sewers for wastewater conveyance with Districts 6'and 7 in accordance with the master plan of sewers and pay its proportional share of the cost. IRWD has deposited $867,696 as its incremental share of the District No. 7 Von Karman Trunk and will pay the balance of the proportional cost upon formation of District No. 14. IRWD' is also paying for redesign of other master plan facilities to accommodate District No. 14. Until all master planned facilities are built, District No. 14 will rent capacity in existing District 1, 6, and 7 facilities at current day value. • District No. 14 will pay annual maintenance and operation costs for collection facilities based on trunk sewer capacity, and for treatment and disposal works based on flqw, in the same manner as existing Districts. • Costs of any odor mitigation measures deemed attributable to District No. ·14 shall be paid by IRWD. • If this agreement is cancelled within five years, the Districts will reconvey the existing IRWD Outfall Sys_tem Capacity, and repurchase the real property and JWlF equity initially purchased by IRWD at the price paid by IRWD (see above). There shall be no obligation on the part of the Districts to repay IRWD for District No. 14's share of JWl'F expansion and improvement costs incurred after July 1, 1985 should the agreement be cancelled. The Select Committee recommends approval of the agreement with IRWD re the proposed formation of District No. 14. The initial acquisition cost to IRWD and the District No. 14 estimated share of joint works treatment and disposal ' facilities improvements and expansion costs (CORF) through 1990-91 are shown on attached Exhibit A. The overall financial benefit to the existing Districts, resulting from the sale of capacity to District No. 14 and the change in the JAO ownership equity formula in 1985-86, is shown on Exhibit B. Respectfully submitted, SELECT COMMITTEE TO ADVISE THE STAFF Richard B. Edgar Don R. Griff in Don Roth Don Saltarelli David Sills Don Smith -3- ( A 1'lEM 1. 15 MD JWlF Equity 2. ~ Credit for EXistir¥j Qitfall ~ity 3. Slb-'Ibtal 4. Iarx1 Based ai mtirrete Fl.GI of 32 MD s. ?et 9.Jy-In @ Present Value 6. fhlre of CDRF Cash Fl.CM @ 6. 23% 7. 'lbtal Annual Capital Paym:nts ( CD.NlY SANI'IJm:CN DIS'JRICI' N'.l. 14 lUOfASE CF JOIN!' NHS EQqr.lY 15 MD INI'BAL lUOfASE/32 MD tJill'lMME CAPICl.'lY B c D E 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 $31,293,000 (1,414 ,000) $29,W79,000 4,653,000 ----- $34,532,000 3,788,000 2,654,000 . 1,585,000 1,246,000 $38,320,000 2,654,000 ·1,sa5,ooo 1,246,000 F 1989-90 1 246 000 1,246,000 G 1990-91 I ( Exhibit A 3/1185 . H 'lOmL I $31,293,000 . I (1.414,000 $29,W79,000 -_I -.!!653.000 I $34,532,000 1,246,000 11.765.000 1,246,000 $46.297.000 ..q a\ ( (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) ClJRRENr DISIRICIS Frll1'1'Y Based a\ E)cisti.rg Fbrnula Based oo F.Lcw QUI 6/30/84 6/30/85 &3t 6/30/84 6/30/85 Ebt B:JJity BJ.Jity In B}uity 8}uity In District ~ Joint Nxks ~ Joint Nxks 1 9.03 21,038,000 1.1.61 27,048,000 2 30.08 70,079,000 30.65 71,407,000 3 30.94 72,082,000 31.70 . 73,853~000. 5 6.68 15,563,000 5.90 13,745,000 6 5.88 13,699,000 6.41 14,934,000 7 9.80 22,831,000 6.31 14,701,000 11 7.53 17,543~000 7.39 17,217,000 13 .06 140.000 .03 70,000 Sth-'Ibt.a 1 100. 00 232,975,000 100.00 232,975,000 14 -0--0--0--0- 'JOIN, JOO 00 232,975:@.0 rnn M '>'l'> o?c;. nnn - ( ~ NEl' Eff1!Cl' CF CJPmE IN QJr1Y maNl' CAIOJIATICN MEmD> IR> SAIB '10 I!Nl Em ~ N>. 14 15 MD INITIAL ~2 MD UUl'lMME CAP1C1'lY (F) (G) (H) (I) (J) PiaaH> DISDUCIS lDJ1'IY R;ql.tired ~ired Based oo F.Lcw QUI (PUrchase) sale Allirate PUrchase (Sale) 6/30/84 6/30/85 &>t Of BJJity At Dist 14 Buy-In of B:Jiity 8'Jity 8}uity In 8:xJk Value * Bscalatial 'lb l!l-<9 Percent Joint N:>rks <El-m> Present value 6,010,000 10.89 25,371,000 1,677,000 2,324,000 l,~,000 28.74 66,957,000 4,450,000 6,136,000 1,771,000 29.73 69,263,000 4,590,000 6,346,000 (1,818,000) 5.53 12,884,000 861,000 1,181,000 1,235,000 6.01 14,002°,000 932,000 1,283,000 (8,130,000) 5.92 13,792,000 909,000 1,263,000 (326,000) 6.93 16,145,000 1,012,000 1,479,000 (70,000) .02 47,000 23,000 6,000 -0-93:77 218,461,000 14,514,000 20,018,000 6.23 14,514,000 (14,514,000) (20,018,000) _/\_ 1nn M ?1? Q"JI;. Mn _/\_ _/\_ *CJUc;(Nl\L cmsm..crrrn om~ 1\llJlSlFJ> FUR DFllRFCIATICN m GRllNI' RN>OO (K) 'lbtal Dist 14 JOint W.Xks Buy-In OJst II) + (J) 4,001,000 10,586,000 10,936,000 2,042,000 2,215,000 2,172,000 2,551,000 29,000 34,532,000 (34 ,532,000) ::O::._. ( -i .,, EXHmrr a 3-1-85 (L) Net (OJst) 1 l'XXJOO of BJJity Cl1aB}e arkl Sam to Dist (F)-(K) (2,009,000) 9,258,000 9,165,000 3,860,000 980,000 10,302,000 2,877,000 99,000 34,532,000 (34,532,000) _______ _.:0::: __ -------- AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of ---------1985, by and between: AND COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 1 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, for itself and on behalf of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, hereinafter referred to as "CSDOC"; IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT, hereinafter referred to as 11 IR WD 11 • RECITALS WHEREAS, CSDOC is comprised of eight Sanitation Distticts formed under and existing pursuant to the County Sanitation District Act, Health and Safety Code Section 4700 et seq., and collectively operate as a Joint Administrative Organization (11 JA0 11 ), pursuant to a Joint Ownership, Operation and Construction Agreement, dated October 8, 1958, as amended and re-executed, effective July 1, 1970, hereinafter sometimes referred to as the "JAO Agreement"; and WHEREAS, IRWD is a California Water District, formed under and existing pursuant to the California Water District Law, Section 34000 et seq., of the California Water Code; and WHEREAS, IRWD was established and presently exists to plan, finance, construct, operate and maintain facilities to provide water service and to provide wastewater collection, treatment and disposal for an area encompassing approximately 72,200 acres included within the unincorporated area of the County -1- of Orange, and the incorporated Cities of Newport Beach, Irvine, Tustin, and Orange; and WHEREAS, IRWD and CSDOC have heretofore entered into various agreements for . . the mutual benefit of each party relating to wastewater collection and disposal, including but not limited to, CSDOC providing IRWD with capacity rights for effluent disposal amounting to 15.0 million gallons per day (MGD) in the ocean outfall facilities of CSDOC; and WHEREAS, IRWD operates a water reclamation plant having a nominal capacity of 15 MGD to treat wastewater and prepare reclaimed water for agricultural and landscape customers to meet their seasonal demands; and WHEREAS, IRWD has sought to determine the feasibility and methodology of treatment and disposal of certain portions of the wastewater from its service area by means of the CSDOC facilities, and towards that end, IRWD and CSDOC have accomplished various studies reviewing alternative proposals; and WHEREAS, IRWD and CSDOC hereby acknowledge their respective responsibilities to the community at large to address and resolve the issues of wastewater and wastewater residuals disposal; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of IRWD and CSDOC to enter into this agreement for the purposes of: (a) creating a new Sanitation District which would, subsequent to its formation, become a signatory party to the JAO Agreement among the existing Sanitation Districts, which new District would encompass a major portion of the IRWD territory; (b) providing the terms and conditions whereby the funding for the acquisition of rights and interest by the new District in -2- -. facilities owned by CSDOC would be provided by IRWD; and (c) providing for other terms and conditions necessary to carry out the intent of the parties. NOW, THEREFORE, IRWD and CSDOC do hereby agree to the following terms and conditions: Section 1: Recitals Incorporated. Each of the recitals set forth above is deemed to be true and correct and shall be included herein by reference and deemed as operative provisions hereof. Section 2: Formation of Sanitation District No. 14. Upon execution of this Agreement, CSDOC will undertake to initiate proceedings with the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), for the formation of a new Sanitation District, to be formed under the provisions of the County Sanitation District Act (Section 4730.1 of the California Health & Safety Code) to allow for respresentation on the Board of Directors by a California Water District. If formation cannot lawfully be accomplished under Section 4730.1, IRWD may initiate and seek.to obtain legislation to amend said Section, which CSDOC agrees to support. If such legislation is required but is not adopted, District No. 14 will be formed pursuant to Section 4730 of said code. Said District will be designated as District No. 14, and shall encompass the boundaries shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and generally described as including the presently master planned area of IRWD, exclusive of the coastal area, from which it is proposed to collect, treat and dispose of wastewater. This area is estimated to initially include approximately 59,000 acres of the 72,200 acres within IRWD, and includes areas within portions of the incorporated Cities of Irvine, Orange, Tustin, and the unincorporated area of the County of Orange. -3- Upon formation, District No. 14 and CSDOC shall jointly execute an amendment to the JAO Agreement, wherein District No. 14 will be accorded the rights, ·privileges and duties of all other Sanitation District members of the JAO, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the JAO Agreement, except .as hereinafter provided. The ultimate master planned flow from within proposed District No. 14 is estimated to be 32 MGD. Section 3: Required Studies. All requisite engineering studies, including surveys and all environmental proceedings including preparation of reports and conduct of hearings as required by law, shall be undertaken concurrently with the initiation of proceedings for the formation of the District No. 14. The cost for said engineering and environmental studies shall be borne solely by IRWD. Selection of the provider of the professional services shall be made jointly by IRWD and CSDOC, and a contract for such services shall be awarded by CSDOC. IRWD shall deposit with CSDOC an amount equal to the estimated cost of said studies prior to the execution of a Contract for said services. IRWD shall, within twenty (20) days after presentation of a statement by CSDOC, pay to CSDOC as reimbursement, an amount equal to the sums paid by CSDOC in excess of said deposit pursuant to professional service agreements relating to the formation. Section 4: IRWD Approval of New District. IRWD agrees that it shall not protest any proceedings conducted for purposes of the formation of District No. 14 in a manner consistent with this agreement and will aid and assist CSDOC in all regards towards accomplishing a successful formation of said District. IRWD hereby acknowledges that it has reviewed this proposal with The Irvine Company, -4- the major landowner within the proposed boundaries of District No. 14, and has obtained its approval in concept to the formation of the District~ Section 5: Acquisition of Capacity in JWTF and Land of CSDOC. Subsequent to the formation of District No. 14, and concurrent with the execution of the amendment to the JAO Agreement by District No. 14 and CSDOC, IRWD shall, for the benefit of District No. 14, make an initial purchase of capacity, as hereinafter set forth in Section 6, in the collection, treatment, disposal and general/administrative facilities and equipment, hereinafter referred to collectively as the Joint Works Treatment Facilities (11 JWTF 11 ) of CSDOC, together with a capacity interest in the real property (fee and easement interests) of CSDOC, and CSDOC agrees that it shall sell said capacities to District No. 14 for the benefit of District No. 14's member agencies, including IRWD •. Section 6: Purchase Price of Capacities. The purchase price for the initial capacity to be acquired by District No. 14, shall be in a proportionate amount as hereinafter described, equal to.the value of the real property owned by CSDOC, plus the value of the JWTF previously acquired or constructed and owned by CSDOC. The acquisition of interest in the existing real property of CSDOC shall be based on a formula of IRWD acquiring 32 MGO of capacity of the total CSDOC capacity of 320 MGO plus 32 MGO. The value of the real property shall be based upon an appraised land value as of December 1, 1984. The parties agree that the purchase price of the initial interest in the existing real property of CSDOC is $4,653,000.00 based on said appraisal. -5- The initial acquisition price of capacity in the JWTF shall be based on· ls MGD. The valuation of the JWTF shall be the original cost of the facilities of ·the JWTF, adjusted by the Engineering News Record Los Angeles CENRLA) construction cost index as of June 30, 1983, hereby agreed to be 4934. The purchase price of the initial 15 MGD capacity acquistion for the JWTF, exclusive of real property, is agreed to be $31,293,000. Payment of the acquisition of interest in real property and the initial JWTF capacity shall be due in two payments: one-half of the total within twenty (20) days after the amendment to the JAO Agreement by CSDOC and District No. 14; and one-half of the total amount within five (5) months after the amendment to the JAO Agreement. Section 7: IRWD -Provide Funding. IRWD shall provide the required funding necessary to enable timely payment by District No. 14 to CSDOC, for the acquisition of the interest by District No. 14 in the JWTF and real property of CSDOC as described in Section 6 hereof. In the event IRWD fails to provide the · required funding from sources determined at the discretion of IRWD, CSDOC shall ~ have the right to terminate the formation proceedings and to declare this agreement to be of no further force and effect. In such event, IRWD shall have acquired no right, title or interest in the JWTF and real property of CSDOC, or for utilization of JWTF and real property of CSDOC, except as provided herein and as may exist by separate pre-existing agreement, nor shall it have obtained any rights for the formation of the new District. Section 8: CSDOC -NPDES Permit. IRWD acknowledges that CSDOC presently has pending an application for a modified NPDES Permit/30l(h) Waiver before the California Regional Water Quality Control Board ("CRWQCB") and the U.S. -6- Environmental Protection Agency (11 EPA 11 ), which would establish discharge limitations on the existing CSDOC and which does not allow for flows from within . · IRWD and proposed District No. 14. It is further acknowledged that by reason of the foregoing, CSDOC will have to apply to CRWQCB and EPA to amend said NPDES Permit/30l(h) Waiver to accommodate flows from District No. 14, for which CRWQCB and EPA and others may require certain engineering and financial studies and a technical evaluation report. It is therefore agreed that: A. Application for such amendment to CSDOC's NPDES Permit shall not be made by CSDOC until the pending application for the modified permit, pursuant to Section 30l(h) of the Clean Water Act, has been approved, been issued and become effective, or has been rejected or denied. B. CSDOC wi 11 have .contra 1 of the NP DES Permi t/301 ( h) Waiver application process and will be responsible for conducting any necessary proceedings. IRWD shall pay all costs of CSDOC's application for an amendment to the NPDES Permit/30l(h) Waiver deemed attributable to District No. 14, including but not limited to, the costs of necessary reports. C. In the event CRWQCB and EPA approve an amendment but impose relatively more stringent conditions on CSDOC than contained in the preceding NPDES Permit/30l(h) Waiver, CSDOC may declare that this agreement shall remain in full force and effect, provided, IRWD agrees either: (i) to pay the cost of additional JWTF and ongoing operations and maintenance expenditures over and above what is necessary for CSDOC to meet the NPDES Permit/30l(h) Waiver limitations without District No. 14, for the life of said Waiver; or (ii) to take other necessary measures to limit the quantity of flows delivered to CSDOC so as -7- to avoid the imposition of stricter requirements on CSDOC and the need for additional JWTF. D. 1.n the event CRWQCB and EPA do not approve an amendment, under any conditions, to CSDOC's NPDES Permit/30l(h) Waiver, CSDOC shall have the option to terminate this agreement and the subsequent agreement between IRWD and District No. 14. Section 9: Transfer of IRWD Rights in Outfall. Subsequent to the formation of District No. 14 and concurrent with the execution of the amendment to the JAO Agreement by District No. 14 and CSDOC, IRWD shall convey to District No. 14 by requisite legal instrument, all of its previously-acquired and presently-owned rights to 15 MGD capacity in the ocean outfall facilities of CSDOC. As consideration therefor, District No. 14 shall receive, as a credit against its purchase price for capacity in the JWTF, an amount equal to the value of IRWD's outfall capacity rights based upon the value when constructed, adjusted by the ENRLA tndex dated June 30, 1983 hereinabove agreed to be 4934. It is agreed that the value of this credit is $1,414,000. Section 10: JWTF Equity of District No. 14. Upon District No. 14 becoming a member agency of the JAO, it shall receive from CSDOC a JWTF equity credit for the purchase of capacity in the JWTF of CSDOC. The credit shall be based upon the amount of District No. 14's initial Capital Outlay Revolving Fund ("CORF") percentage times the book value of the JWTF at June 30, 1985, consistent with the method used by CSDOC for allocation of equity among its member Districts. District No. 14 shall also receive an equity credit for existing real property. This credit shall be based upon the provisions of Section 6 -8- hereinabove and shall be equal to 9.09% {32/352 MGD) of the book value of real property owned by CSDOC at June 30, 1985. So long as the District No. 14 flows ·are less than 11,680 MG/Yr. (32 MGD x 365 Days/Yr.), annual equity exchanges for District No. 14 shall be based on the value of JWTF and shall not include the value of existing real property as established above. Should District No. 14 flows exceed 11,680 MG/Yr., annual equity exchanges thence forward for District No. 14 shall be on the same basis as other member Districts. Section 11: Capital Outlay Revolving Fund ("CORF") Percentage Calculation. IRWD agrees that it shall, subsequent to the formation of District No. 14, and prior to the execution of the amendment to the JAO Agreement by District No. 14 and CSDOC, enter into a separate agreement with District No. 14, whereby it will agree to fund annually the payment of District No. 14's proportionate share of the CSDOC CORF budget requirements for the ensuing years. District No. 14's share of the CORF budget shall be established on the following basis: A. District No. 14 Minimum Flow -5475 MG/Yr. In recognition of the fact that IRWD operates a water reclamation plant and can therefore control the quantity of wastewater discharged to the JWTF, the parties intend that District No. 14 shall pay an amount for CORF contribution based upon a minimum quantity of discharge. The minimum amount payable shall be equal to a percentage of the total cost to CSDOC represented by a flow of 5475 MG/Yr. (15 MGD x 365 days) divided by the combined total average annual flow of CSDOC for the preceding three (3) years, plus 5475 MG/Yr. By example, the combined total average annual flow of all other Sanitation Districts for Fiscal Years 1981-82 through 1983-84 was 82476 MG; thus, District No. 14 would be required to pay 5475/87951 or 6.23% -9- of the CSDOC CORF budget. At such time as District No. 14's flow exceeds 5475 MG/Yr., the provisions of Paiagraph B shall apply. B. District No. 14 Flow Exceeding· 5475 MG/Yr. At such time as the District No. 14 flow, computed using "X" as described in this Paragraph B, exceeds an amount of 5475 Mg/Yr., the CORF contribution shall be the greater of an amount equal the percentage determined pursuant to Section 11.A, or an amount equal to the percentage of the total cost to CSDOC represented by the flow of "X" MGD divided by the combined total average annual flow of CSDOC for the preceding three (3) years plus "X", where "X" represents the Average Daily Dry Weather Flow for the highest seven (7) day period each year delivered into the facilities of District No. 14. "Daily Dry Weather Flow" is defined to mean normal flow excluding storm inflow and infiltration. By example, if the highest Average Daily Ory Weather Flow for a seven (7) day period delivered to DistrictA No. 14 during the year is 20 MGD, "X" would equal 20 X 365 = 7300 MG/Yr., and if the combined total average annual flow of all other Districts for Fiscal Years 1981-82 through 1983-84 was 82476, District No. 14 would be required to pay 7300/89766 or 8.13% of CORF budget. C. Modification After 1994-95. Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph A above, if, after Fiscal Year 1994-95, District No. 14's annual flow computed using "X" does not exceed 5475 MG, the District No. 14 minimum 15 MGO CORF equity percentage calculation may be changed if mutually agreeable terms can be reached between CSOOC and District No. 14. -10- D. Revisions to Method of Allocating CORF. In the event the method used by CSDOC for allocating CORF costs among its Districts should be revised by · CSDOC, then the new allocation for District No. 14 shall be consistent with the revised method, subject to the minimum CORF contribution hereinabove set forth, in Section 11.A. Section 12: Calculation of JWTF Ownership Equity Percentage. The parties hereby acknowledge that CSDOC's Boards of Directors have declared their intent, and CSDOC hereby agrees to take final action, to change the basis for calculating the joint works ownership equity percentage from a combination of flow and assessed valuation to flow only, contingent upon the execution of this agreement. Section 13: IRWD Discharge to District No. 14 Facilities. IRWD shall have the right to collect and discharge raw sewage and treated wastewater to District No. 14 for treatment and disposal by CSDOC. Said right shall commence concurrent with District No. 14 becoming a member agency of CSDOC by amendment to the JAO Agreement. To ·accurately measure the flows discharged to the individual CSDOC's or the JWTF, meters will be installed at all points of connection to the CSDOC facilities. The costs of acquisition and installation and maintenance of said meters shall be borne solely by District No. 14. Section 14: Wastewater Solids Residuals. IRWD shall not transport or deliver to District No. 14 facilities or indirectly to JWTf, wastewater solids residuals from wastewater treatment or reclamation facilities owned or operated -11- by IRWD unless approved by CSDOC, after completion of engineering and other studies addressing the impacts, if any, of such discharge of wastewater solids ·residuals on the facilities, operation and costs of CSDOC. If such studies or subsequent experience demonstrate problems or added costs for mitigation, CSDOC may place conditions and/or establish charges on District No. 14 or prohibit delivery of such wastewater solids residuals. Section 15: Trunk Sewer System Purchase. District No. 14 shall provide permanent trunk sewer facilities for transportation of its wastewater to the JWTF by jointly constructing such facilities with County Sanitation Districts Nos. 6 and 7, on or before January 1, 1990, as generally contemplated in the engineering report entitled "IRWD Amendment to Master Plan for J~int Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities 11 prepared by Boyle Engineering Corporation. The cost of construction of said facilities shall be shared on the basis of each respective participating Sanitation District's ultimate proportional capacity requirements in said facilities. Pending completion of the construction of permanent facilities and to the extent capacity is available, District No. 14 shall have the right to acquire temporary trunk sewer system capacity rights needed by District No. 14 from Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 6 and 7 to transport wastewater from District No. 14 to CSDOC's JWTF. The cost of said temporary capacity right shall be a proportional current rental value based on the original cost of the facilities to be used for such transportation of District No. 14's wastewater, adjusted by the ENRLA construction cost index as of July 1, 1985, escalated annually thereafter on July 1, and shall be paid in the form of an annual rental payment -12- by District No. 14 to Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 6 and 7. The rental payment shall be the product of 2% of such annually adjusted facility cost and the ·percentage of the total capacity of such facilities consumed by the hi9hest daily flow delivered to District No. 14 during the preceding one year period. Said temporary capacity right shall terminate on January 1, 1990. If construction of the contemplated permanent facilities is not completed by January 1, 1990, Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 6 and 7 may extend the temporary capacity rental right to District No. 14 on mutually agreeable terms. Section 16: Von Karman Trunk Sewer -Purchase of Capacity Rights -IRWD. IRWO agrees to purchase and Sanitation District No. 7 agrees to sell up to 45 MGD capacity rights in the Von Karman Trunk Sewer to accommodate District No. 14's needs. The purchase price for this capacity right shall be comprised of an incremental cost and a pro rata cost as hereinafter described. The incremental cost shall be the difference between the respective costs of .constructing the Von Karman Trunk Sewer with and without the added 45 MGD capacity in accordance with the alternative bids submitted by the successful low bidder of the construction proje~t. Payment for this portion of capacity right shall be made in full by IRWD to CSOOC within 45 days of the award of the construction contract by Sanitation District No. 7. Upon the formation of District No. 14 and said District becoming a member agency of CSDOC, the capacity rights of IRWD purchased pursuant to this section in the Von Karman Trunk Sewer shall be assigned to District No. 14. At such time as District No. 14 has been formed and has become a member agency of CSDOC, IRWD shall also pay to District No. 14 for payment to District No. 7 the pro rata cost, which shall -13- equal the proportional cost of the 45 MGD capacity relative to the total capacity in the trunk sewer, less the incremental cost previously paid. It is -hereby expressly understood that acquisition of this capacity right in the Von ~ Karman Trunk by IRWD does not give IRWD any vested rights to acquire capacity rights in other facilities of other Sanitation Districts or the JWTF of CSDOC in the event District No. 14 is not formed. In the event-District No. 14 is not formed, or in the event this Agreement is terminated, neither IRWD nor District No. 14 shall have any continuing rights of use of capacity in said trunk. Neither CSDOC or Sanitation District No. 7 shall be obligated to repurchase, or refund any portion of the price paid by IRWD for, said capacity rights pursuant to this Section. Should CSDOC or any of the Sanitation Districts use the capacity represented by the cost paid by IRWD, prior to the year 2011, then·CSDOC will reimburse IRWD prorata for the capacity used, in an amount not to exceed the original cost. Section 17: Operations and Maintenance Charges -Trunk Sewer System. Operations and maintenance charges to District No. 14 for use of trunk sewer system facilities of other Sanitation Districts shall be based upon the proportionate percentage of ownership or capacity rights in such facilities. Section 18: Operations and Maintenance Charges and Capital Contributions - JWTF -Payment by IRWD. The agreement to be executed between IRWD and District No. 14, subsequent to the formation of District No. 14, shall provide for IRWD to fund, from time to time, capital expenditures which are the obligation of District No. 14 to CSDOC for the JWTF, as required by the CSDOC CORF budget. Payments of CORF allocations by District No. 14 shall become effective on -14- July 1, 1985. Such payments shall be due upon demand by CSDOC in accordance with CSDOC policy and procedures. Participation in the annual equity adjustment ·(an adjustment of ownership equity made by CSDOC among all of the Sanitation Districts according to CSDOC 1 s standard procedures) shall begin in the first fiscal year of existence of District No. 14. District No. 14 shall be required to pay to CSDOC, a proportionate share of the annual operations and maintenance costs of the JWTF. Such payments shall begin upon delivery of flows by District No. 14 to CSDOC, and shall be due upon demand by CSDOC in accordance with CSDOC policy and procedures, and shall be based on the flows delivered by District No. 14 to the JWTF as a percentage of all combined flows treated at the JWTF of CSDOC. The IRWD agreement with District No. 14 shall provide that funds be provided by IRWD to District No. 14 to pay such charges of CSDOC. Section 19: Odor Mitigation. If added capital facilities and/or maintenance. and operation costs are incurred by CSDOC to mitigate odors deemed attributable to District No. 14 by reason of discharges to facilities of CSDOC from facilities operated by IRWD, such additional costs ~hall be borne solely by IRWD. Section 20: State Treasurer Approval. IRWD has obtained informal approval of this Agreement by Districts Securities Division of the Office of the State Treasurer. Upon execution of this agreement, IRWD shall file a request for approval thereof with Districts Securities Division of the Office of the State Treasurer and seek approval prior to the formation of District No. 14. In the event approval is withheld by Districts Securities Division of the Office of the -15- State Treasurer, this agreement shal-1 be automatically terminated and of no further force· or effect, except for Section 16, wherein funds will be provided ·by IRWD for enlargement of the Von Karman Trunk Sewer. In that event, Sanitation District No. 7 shall cooperate with IRWD to induce its contractor to minimize the portion of construction costs allocable to IRWD. Section 21: Termination Provisions. In the event this agreement is cancelled pursuant to the provisions of Section 8, the following provisions will apply: A. If this agreement is cancelled within the first five (5) years after the effective date hereof, then except as hereinafter provided, CSDOC and District No. 14 (if then formed) shall reimburse to IRWD any uncommitted funds provided by IRWD and remaining in the District No. 14 reserve funds and shall reconvey to IRWD the 15 MGD capacity rights in ocean outfall facilities described in Section 9. In addition, CSDOC shall repurchase real property at the same price paid by IRWD and shall purchase from District No. 14 and pay IRWD for those portions of JWTF initially purchased by IRWD pursuant to the terms of this agreement. Payment for said JWTF shall be in the amount equal to that paid by IRWD. For any JWTF constructed by CSDOC subsequent to the effective date of this agreement, ("new JWTF") there shall be no obligation by CSDOC or District No. 14 to repurchase the interest paid by IRWD and provided further that IRWD agrees that it shall remain liable to pay CSDOC or District No. 14 for its proportionate share of encumbrances or other financial obligations incurred by CSDOC or District No. 14 owing on the date of termination for new JWTF facilities. In the event CSDOC or any of the -16- ,. ,. Sanitation Districts are required to use the capacity in new JWTF paid for by IRWD, prior to the year 2011, then CSDOC will reimburse IRWD prorata for that ·capacity, in an amount not to exceed the original cost. CSDOC payments for the repurchase of said real property and JWTF may be deferred up to five years after the date of notice of termination, in which case interest will be paid by CSDOC at the rate of return of CSDOC investments. B. If this agreement is_ cancelled, subsequent to the fifth anniversary of its effective date, then the provisions of the JAO agreement govern and District No. 14 shall have the same rights, responsibilities and capabilities respecting termination as the other Sanitation Districts. C. IRWD shall have acquired no right or title to the JWTF of CSDOC, nor for utilization of JWTF of CSDOC, except as may be provided by separate agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the partie~ hereto have set their hand on the date hereinafter set forth. -17- ... ' . .... COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 1 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By Chairman, Board of Directors Dated: By Secretary, Board of Directors COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By Chairman, Board of Directors Dated: By Secretary, Board of Directors COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By Chairman, Board of Directors Dated: By Secretary, Board of Directors COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 5 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By Chairman, Board of Directors Dated: By Secretary, Board of Directors COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 6 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By Chairman, Board of Directors Dated: By Secretary, Board of Directors COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By Chairman, Board of Directors Dated: By Secretary, Board of Directors -18- ~ Dated: ---------- Dated: ---------- APPROVED AS TO FORM: THOMAS L. WOODRUFF, GENERAL COUNSEL By _____________ ~ Dated: ----------- APPROVED AS TO FORM: BOWIE & RISLEY By _____________ ~ #20 3/01/85 -19- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 11 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By -.,,,..,.---=----=---....-,,,,.....,,..........---..,....----Ch airman, Board of Directors By -=--~---=-....,....-....,,,,.-~-----Secretary, Board of Directors COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. By -.,,,..,.---=----=---:--,,,,.....,,..........---..,....----Ch airman, Board of Directors By _,,,...-------,,----,-~__,,....-----Secretary, Board of Directors IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT By -.,,,...-..,,.....,...-.,...----------President By -=----.-------------Secretary -... - RE: AGENDA ITEM #~2Cn) COUNTY SANITATION DISTR ICTS March 6, 1985 STAFF SUMMARY REPORT of Q RANGE C OUNTY , CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127 10 844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VA LLEY , CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-2910 . (714) 962-2411 Main Street Trunk Sewer Negative Declaration County Sanitation District No. 7 In January, the Board of Directors reviewed an Initial Study and Environmental Impact Assessment for the Main Street Trunk Sewer and determinetj that a Negative Declaration was appropriate as any environmental impacts could be mitigated. The Main Street Trunk Sewer extends from the intersection of Von Karman Avenue and Main Street to San Diego Creek (Peters Canyon Wash). The sewer will prov ide an alternate service connection for proposed District No. 14 and has been increased in size from 21 inches to 60 inches in order to accommodate the IRWD flows. The connection point at Von Karman Avenue feeds into the new Von Karman Trunk Sewer which is presently under construction. The se facilities will pro- vide service to areas discussed in the Environmenta l Impact Report on Consolidated Master Plan of Trunk Sewer Facilities to Serve County Sani t ation Districts No. 1, N.orth Half of No. 6 and No. 7, prepared in April 1984. That EIR addressed the impacts associated with accommodating growth in the Irvine Business Complex area, and is incorporated by reference int o the Main Street Trunk Sewer Negative Declaration. The following impacts and associated mitigation measures are out l ined in the Negative Declarat i on. 1. Land Use The proposed facilities will accommodate new development and implementation of general planned densities east of Von Karman Avenue as approved by l ocal agencies, as well as accommodating proposed District No. 14 flows. ~itigation Measures : No mitigation measures are recommended other than the restoration of the st reets to previous conditions. Conversion of partially developed land to a more developed status is in conformance with the adopted General Plans and requires no mitigation. 2. Traffic There will be short-te rm project impa cts occurring during construct i on of the proposed Main Street Trunk Sewer. These include excavation of some por- tion of the roadway, potential impacts in terms of traffic congestion and present patterns of circulation, and generation of some additional traf f ic volumes to the construction site on a daily basis . There are no long term impacts associated with traffic. Mitigation Measures: Standard traffic control techniques will be implemented during construction of the project. A traffic control plan will be prepared prior to construe-. ti on and will be submitted to the City of Irvine for approval. All necessary encroachment permits will be obtained from local jurisdictions. 3. Soils Project impacts will include removal and replacement of soils and asphalt within the project area. Construction activities will create dust on a short term basis and open trenches will be subject to wind and erosion. Mitigation Measures: These include watering of exposed soil areas to min1m1ze dust and wind ero- sion. Grading will be staged to minimize the area of bare soil exposed to precipitation, and the contractor will be required to comply with the appropriate provisions of the Model Erosion Soil and Drainage Ordinance of the adopted 208 Plan for the South Coast area. 4. Hydrology Project site will be subject to erosion during rain storms .and alteration of the flow of run-off water during construction. Mitigation Measures: Run-off will be controlled on site and directed off site in accordance with the District's NPDES Dewatering Permit. 5. Biology The project site lies within already-disturbed roadways, therefore, there will be little, or no, impact to biological systems as a result of the pro- ject. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. 6. Air Quality There will be some air quality impacts from construction activities on a short-term basis. Mitigation Measures: Use of water trucks will eliminate fugitive dust from soil erosion, and diesel-powered construction equipment will be encouraged to effect exhaust emission reductions. -2- 7. Visual and Aesthetics The project will result in short-term impacts including open trenches, stockpiled material, and the presence of construction equipment. Mitigation Measures: Construction will be limited to approximately 1,000 feet of open trench at any given time, trenches will be closed or covered as soon as possible and ·all streets and landscaping will be restored to previous condition. 8. Noise The construction eq~ipment will generate additional noise when operating. This is a short-term construction impact and no long-term impacts have been identified. Mitigation Measures: The contractor will be required to use noise attenuation devices on motorized construction equipment and the construction activities shall generally be limited to normal work days and daylight hours to comply with appropriate noise ordinances. Availability of a Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer was advertised in the Daily Pilot on January 30, 1985. In addition, ten copies of the document were sent to the State Clearinghouse and twenty-two copies were sent to selected people in the area of construction as well as to the Cities of Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach. Comments received back from the public review include: 1. Orange County Transit District, February 12, 1985 The OCTD requested a construction schedule for the project to facilitate actions to prev·ent potential conflicts between construction and scheduled transit service. They also requested notification copies of all environmen- tal documents for Districts' projects which could affect Orange County public right-of-way as well as copies of construction schedules for those projects when available. 2. Orange County Water District, February 20, 1985 The Water District 1 s comments were arlvi sory concern fog potent i a 1 dewateri ng conditions, groundwater inflow into construction trenches and the TDS levels of groundwater in the area. 3. County of Orange Environmental Management Agency, February 25, 1985 The EMA had no comment. -3- 4. City of Irvine, February 25, 1985 The City requested that two changes be made to the Negative Declaration. The first refers to Page 9 Mitigation No. 11 and adds that local encroach- ment permits must be obtained. The second item refers to Page 10 Air Quality in which the city requests that the statement be changed from "air quality in the project is generally good" to "air quality at the project site is similar to that in the Irvine Business Complex as a whole;" and, 5. State of California Office of Planning and Research, February 28, 1985 OPR notified the Districts that the Clearinghouse has chosen not to cormient on the project and that the District has complied with State Clearinghouse review requirements. The consulta nt has reviewed the comments received and finds that there will not be any significant long term effects on the environment due to this project because of the mitigation measures incorporated through the Negative Declaration. -4-......,.. RESOLUTIONS AND··SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS MARCH 13~ 1985·-7:30 P.M. (" • ~1; '-. ~ )> I f:'.:_.F.~~D NO .... ( 9199 -Jl OIST WORKING CPf ITAL ( PROCESSING DATE 1/31/85 PAGE 1 ·R~PORT .NUHBt.1Cid>q·3 ... --·--·-··--~-~--------- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS Of ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 02/06/85 . ( • .... 1 9'\ ~IC. -··----·--~ --·-·-·-··----------··----·---------·---..--·---------·······-·---·-------------------... -·- . -~ WARRANT NO • VENCOR AMOUNT DES CR I PTI ON :10 01·216Ef. ADVANC°ED POLYMER SYSTEHs·~· It.IC. . -. suY;-75 LiW .. su·PPLl°ES I... 072769 ADVANCC CONSTRUCTORS1 INC. Slf71P8~10D CO~TRACTOR P2-25-? 0 07 2 770 ALBERT SONS FOOD_~~!"!~~----·_-··-_---··-_ : -·------·· ··--·---------~31..!. 37 __________ _!JlL~t!AJH!L.QV16fAltffH.I 10 72''fiC· .. ·--·--·---ALBERTSONS. INC~t tt67li $291.02 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT 11 72772 ALLIED CHEMICAL CORF. $21189."3 CHEMICAL COAGULANTS II 72773 ALLI s-CHALMERS CORP. n .691. lfO PUHP PARTS IJI -)>· . 07 2 7H ALT A SALES' INC. . i3oo; 82 .. ····-··· ... ··E~E·CT~"i°'CAL su"PPL. i ES ·-,·----,....,.-·--...,....--·~--·-·--··-· -······-·-----.... ______ )~le •· .'· '·if :, '1"1 · ':::'.''.,'··;:';·,··© c 1 .. 1 ~ 012115 AMERICAN CYANAMID coHPANY ,1,~~o.sa · CHEHICA~ coAGU~MTS ·: >:· .,c ., ·~ 0 7 2716 AMER IC AN DI~ TR IC~ .. '!.~.~E_GR_~~~-----····-... --· .... ····---·---~---···-·--·~? 8 t.!~ · .Ab.A.8.tL . .U.1.UtLU.P.AJ.Bl~~~~ ,~ t:::J -fi727'77 ........ ·--···-·AMERit-Ar•.i TfCHNICAL SUPPLY $86.28 OFFICE SUPPLIES n ( 1:~. ~ ~;~;;~ ~~~H~~~tl~~~~~c~~~~T~~~TION ····--· -. ;:~.-~·;·~ .. ~-·--·· .. ······--~ .. -~ .. ~~.-~.-~nQ .. :~.~~.-~~~' --·--.-,-··.-.·.-·:,.-.~-.. -... -..... ----,--·-··-·-··-···-····-.·--···-.--1,:~1'<9 _ __._.,~10 . '"~ 072780 ANILLO INDUSTRIES $287.H USE CHARGE OVERPAVttEtH: · ·:.··:1 . • • • • · "' ( l1ul rT1 072761 AQUA Bt:N CORP. $251lfOl,82 ' ', CH~t11CAL COAGULANTS . . , ;:10 11 3 C72782 . · ARMSTRONG PE TROLEUH .... _ --· ....... __ ·-·· . ·--·····-·--------·~·g_!!.~~---·---· __ J!U . ..£!1A.fHi.LOURR~YM~.tiT :::-, . · : ____ . ---·----· _ ,, ll---(f72'7El3 ..... AR.fH5i.f.:R1sco•·· Il\iC. -··· $lltl.53 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES /"J ( IH aB on1M AssocuT10N OF METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE AGENCIES s1t,1a1,oo' ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FEE ~-072785 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. Slf ,392.95 TUBING ~1 .. 1 ··· Ci7278b oCINDUSTRIAL SUPPLY, INc.· · · i5·2·~3·f. ···-·· ···· ···--si-iAL.CHAR.DWARE · -·--·-··--···· .............. -· ···--····-···-·- l. H )> 072787 BKK CORPORATION $~8,'ll.6.5~ St.LIDGE HAULING AND DISPOSAL ~·· r:". Ci72788 HILARY BAKER _ . -·· ... __ .. _. ····-·-·---·----~~-~!.2~-------~_;_ttr.llYEE Hlg~H--------· ----·-···-·-----·--·-/JI r· .. 072789 a·AKEP. PLYWOOD co., INC• U7'te'J9 SMALL HARDWARE ( ~ &72790 BECKMAN INDUSTRIAL t57.2't ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES :.u t::1 Q72791 BIG BOX RENTAL CO. $760.00 TRASH DISPOSAL ~10 ulc:;:; 072792 BLACK&. DECKER MFG. CO. ·t.·62;e6 ... TOOLS·-·····-··---·-·-···-·······-·---··-·· -··-·-·-·····-· < 1::l ~ ~~g:~ :~~~K~0 ~~~~~~~r~~~p n AL . . . .. ... .. . .. ·····-···· ___ ~-~-;_;~_;.;tL ___ ·------~-~IrJ.~.i~~L.~~~tr~~~-~~~--~--------·-·--········--··-··--·-·-;~ic I Jl1~·······G72795 . "liUtfKC.tNGI1"EER .. 1NG 'co.··-UOl.68 ·PIPE SUPPLIES ~~ (. j~ 1'727% C & R RECCNOITIONING CO. $23!l.OO PUMP REPAIRS ' 1"! ~ 1172797 CK PUMF' ANO DEWATER ING CORh :£2,0!lf.~On_ ...... -~~D.Q_!: g}l .rn~f\.~~~q R~f!UR§ ·············-·· 11; U7279a CPl CALIFOR~~IA, INC. $590.'tO WORD PROCESSING MAINTENANCE CI"•; C727~q CAL-TY U7 1t.Q6 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT. ::1 1 .. -· ~~~:~~ .. ~:t~~~ ~~~~~~A~: o~AN·. AGE NC iE s ....... $t !-~~-~~ -~-~-.. --·· .... ·-:·{~-~nHA~f~~~~·~~~~T.~fc-··---------·--·-·-·· C.. I" l'17~~u2 JUHN CAHOLLU itJGJllffERS Htl27.73 ENGR. P2-25-2 ,,! tH~B03 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINf.ERS S6,'t92.q2 EN,GR~ ~:-~-2, Pl-2? . ~7~POq CHESTE~TON LOS ANGfLES 1227.58 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ~72805 CHEVRON u.s.A., INC. $16,934.86 GASOLINE, ENGINE OIL "' J72f!~E-. CIVIC CENTER LOCK & SAFE $187.H LOCKS ··1· .. r:i2E'07 co·Asr F-IP[LJNE co. 1fu345~35 csooc ·ui I EMERGENCY REPAIRS " <'7280~ COMPUTE.!l PHCCES~ltJG SUPPLlfS • 11l't.63 OFFICE SUPPLEIS ~ J72R~9 CONNELL fHEVROLlT 13~.79 TRUCK PARTS ,.! :-i12a1c CON~OLIDATE[I EUCrnICAl. DIST. $2,143.52 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES . ,,., fi72f!ll CO~TlNffHAL Alt< TOOLS, INC. ia6't.% TOOLS .. ,: ti72812 Cl!NT~GL CC~!Cf.PTS CO~P. $l~2lf0.52 CONTROL EQUIPMENT ,.,--·-~ .. 072813 COOFfR f:NEl'GY ~.fr-:VJ f.ES 061f • 77 ENG I NE PARTS '1·-1 ... " :J:> I I .... I ..._. ••. j ... . , I..,! ... ::~I( •! >I' ~-'.!(~ l:'.I 1···lc ... ·1:i ..... .... , ..... ·•: .. ) ··~"-' .. i l····I . .. ,_ ,. : ' .. , '··'' . r :::: e @J =r-. ~j~ FUND NO ~ 1 .:. <; -J T 0 I S T ~J 0 R K HI r, CA I' I TA L F~OCESSING DATE 1/31/65 PAGE ~ '!l:--.-: 'I l~ -UARRANT '1 072614 ·•j l'.i72b15 :i----·----n~~i; NO. f172Al8 "I 1172819 .. ::z::.· f\72820 "l'!G'> 0 7 2P. 21 ... ~ .. r.72822 "·t:::::j (•72823 11 )> 072824 It 072825 ·~-1·· . 072826 '· r··m c112s21 ,.13 L7282A ·-·---c;·1~ 829 --. ( IJ72A30 072831 ,.. I -0728~2 ( 11·! :n 2 a 3 3 ,,!)> LH834 1r--·---·-·-· .... "I' U72A35 ( I·" rn 2A3b :. .. t:::::j 1)7 2837 .• :........ -07 2838 ( I"'!~ 012a3s w::::o 07264(1 ~I .=.·-. C 7 2 8 ~ f ( l•'· ~ (172642 '"(/') 072R't3 1• u72S4lf ( l:Mi ( Ill 012e1t5 07"6% (172~'11 fi728't8 {17 28't9 072A51J C728!:11 I'". I": f ~i '7.., ""'' l "I \.> c:. o_.., '•72€~2 u72e53 •. fi7 2855 ;,: 07285b '~·! ('1 2 8 !:I 7 I "; _____ 6728~8 J ... r.7~!'59 _: I· i-w-: ::l11 [~ . (. RfPORT NUMBER AP4~ .. CfiUNTY $ANJTATION DISTRICTS Of OkAN~E COUNTY CLAIMS PAIC 02/~6/8.5 '.·I Vf N[;OP AHnurn DESCRIPTION . l~b CORE-ROSION PRODUCTS :i.'ttlllf.28 FIBERGLASS TANK 1·· ~. E. CJULTEk CRANE RENTAL $848.UO CRANE RENTAL ~( COUNTY MHNTf.NANCE ~ERYICE5 $650.uO WINDOW WASHING SERVICE !11 ···cAL wATEli ·· · ·· ·--·-·· i2a5;50 · -·-·wATER ·soFTENER RENTAL ·· ·· -·· --·-··-···1·,, CYCLOPS COMFANY $950.0D CSDOC. #.11 EHER .. GEN·CY R.EPA·l·RS . :~1c· OELCO-P.EHY $5,548.11 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ·~ DENNY'S RESTAURANT u1205 .. in.29 tfs"E CHArfoE··ovERPAYMENT · ··-···-· ....... 11 I .. . ~~~-~~ ~K~.~~E ~~.~p ;~~~I CE ... ·--· ·-... S.3 • ;~-~; ;_~. --·--·-. ···-~~~.h!U~~-~ ~ypP.~ ! ~ S, ___ ---·······--. . ........ _ . _ .. ~. ( . DO~AOO ENTERPRISES, INC. l2,087.36 PLANT #2 REPAIRS " ~~~~~~\~~~~R~ ~~~t SE ARCH AS,N ·-·-. !~=~ ~: ---~~~nRENCEREG I STRATI ON • -----. . ·-1:;1c EASTMAN, INC. u,n~.96 OFFICE SUPPLIES ;1 ~ LNCHANTER, INC. $3,5()0.0G OCEA'i MONITORING ·;~IC ENERGY UEY. OF CAL., INC. S15e05 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT 1 11 ·· · -m~~: ~~~£~~:~~~~~'.-er ~0 : --· ··· ·· ··· --~ ----:! :m;Jr---.:-·--m:~~:m;i~~R~~ y~~~-~-=-~--------· --: ~----}c FISCHER !. PORTfR co. S3,708e88 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES Ill: FI SHER CONTROLS $32. 60 REGULATOR PARTS. ~IC FLAT & VERTICAL CONC~ETE $368.50 CORE DRILLING i.11.' ·-----···--.. ---· ----.. ---.. ---····· ---. ··--·····-····--·-··-------·-·-·-···--·· --------·-------------·---· -·-·-----··---.. . --.... -------·-·-----···--·-··--·----------, FORD AEROSPAC[ & COHH. CORP. $l9,q69.0~ USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ' lu CLIFFORD A. FORKfRT $3,616.03 SURVEY 5-6 ~j('. CITY OF FULLfRTON $1~.l~ WATER USEAGE ~ H(R BER 1 L. GAL LE Gl y -. . . ··-·-·---· ·$·q ~-7"3 a; ao··--. ---·--cs·p'oCj'l .... EHER~ENCf .. l\E"i>AfR~· ....... --. . .. . . ........ i:; . GAMMA f4ANUF AC TUR I NG, I NC. S.502. 59 USE CHMG E OVERPAYMENT '.ill. CANAtll LUMBER co. $995.97 BUILDING MATEDIALS Ju ·6ATE:5. rrnERGLAss··nfsrA.LL£R5 · ...... ···· ·-· ········· ----,2·;5a·1:~ff·---· --~···--·· HA.Nf·#f···;;ri>i~6----·---·-·--··--·-----·---··-----·--·--·-·-· -··t· Gt:M-0'-LITE PLASTICS CORP. Ul't•99 GLASS ·,;~!0 GENERAL ELECTRIC co. $q9e.20 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES " GE~f.kAL MEDICAL CENHRS $246.88 R~Ti"1H:o··EHPLOYEES-MEDl°Ci\~ .. --i°tiSURANCE PREMIUM 1:~. GENt: fi AL T fLE PHuNE co. l6l 5. 6 O TELEPHONE "IC GRIFFITH Aik TOOLS $133,02 TOOLS ~ GROOM'~ ASPHALT ... s.465. 00 .. .. ····csoof" un EMERGENCY RE°PAiRS ·--.. .. . .. ·-· --· ·· 1·~.:~ . HACH CCMPAl\JY $%1.1)1) LAB SUPPLIES .... l_,. tlALPRI N SUf'PL Y CCJ. -"'52.59 SMALL HARDWARE : .. , TED t. HAP'Mf.TT $2,830.:JO CSDOC ill EMERGENCY REPAIRS •''I' HAf<RINGTON INOUSTRl/\l fLASTICS $327.56 PIPE SUPPLIES . :·~\.... JOHN c. HENflERGEfi co., INC. $673.28 SAFETY SIGNS ~ ~.c. HtNORIE & CO., INC~ $3t28S~95 PIPE ~tiPPLIES tt(RClllf.S INC. $9,456.85 CHEMICAL COAGULANTS tlONEY\JfLL, INC. $474.H ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES R.S. HUC,HfS CO., INC. f263~fil: PAINT SUPPLIES CITY OF HUNTIN~TON PEACH $176.9" WATER USEAGE I"'. rr~~ '...,I !.,! ~--- 11ur~TINuTON HAlH f?UCiBLI\ STA~P 1H.lt~ OFFICE SUPPLIES I HUNTINGTO~ VALL£Y SCHWINh CYCLERY t25.4~ BiCYCLE TIRES l"i :. '-·' '·j ( ( :, ,t. I;,• ·-. .. ., ::::: ):::ii I ,,.... 1 :, ~FUND NC ·- ( 1: WARRANT NO. I'• ;1 1 cd2f\6o I t~ 012e61 ,, 07 2862 !······--·--·· -· ..... IJ 072863 .. 1 07286/t :1 . i.172865 nj .:J:> .. 07 2866 .. ,_ Ci"'> (, 7 2. s 6 7 Ii~ ~ 072868 1 ... s-·--072869 h :I> 072670 :ltl...... 072871 ·,,, --i 072872 IU n1 072873 JI 3 07267'f n ·;;;-···.Ii 7 2 B 75 H 00 072876 C72677 , .. , I OH878 ,.I 072879 11r~ _ 07 ?AB~. 11; 1 012ae1 ( 12'.I . 012 882 "'I 8 i)Jt'8S3_ ... en G12ee't < I;! --i o 1 2 s a 5 >• :::C OH886 ~· ··....-c··---t 120e1 "' ~ l'7288P ··: en o 12 a e 9 "'. . 07 2890 .. ' 072891 '··' .. .I uHS52 l•1--· ----117 ~ 89:3 -. G72A9lf I•!! ('7 2k95 .. [ 'j 7 2H9Ei ul fl7 2897 ·~·· f.72898 ·~1------· -f,72H99 II (172q(,(J IS 072'701 •• ll729Ci2 '" •17291'.i~ ' 1t G72'l0lf . L ·--·-· il 125 o s ·.j ::: ..• ):> ''i~ ,.! :::: (-1, ·-· .. ·-····· .,._. ( 91S5 -JT OJST ~ORKlNE CAPITAL P~OCESSING DATE 1/31/85 PAGE REPORT NUMBER AP43 '3 ( ~~, 0 ;t. COUNT~ SANJT~TION OIST~lCTS Of ORANGE COUNTY I :.( .. VE.NOOR HURLEY ELECTRONICS, INC• INGRAH fl.PER HHERClifH CORP• )NTtR~ATIONAl tECHNOLOGY . SHELi A IV INS THE JANITOR'S SHOPP£ b.f. JEPSON DIV. t<.E.C. COMPANY KAISER PERHANENTE HEO. CfNTER .KAISER. ROLLHET --.. -... KAMAN SEARINGS & SUPPLY KAYNAR KING BEARING, INC. KRYLER CORP. L.O.\J.S., INC. LA""P.ffMA·-·1 rilTER •. HOSP I TAC LAURSEN COLOR LAB LERNER PHOTO, INC. -Ll~(CdH~SAFETY SERVICE. SUPPLY LIGHTING DlSTRIBUTORSt INC, LILLY TYPESlTTING -···-UfCAL. -A-GE NCY 0 FORM AT ·10N· 'c't>MH''"'"". MBL INCUSTRIES MAJuR ENTERPRISES A.C. MARION, TRUSTEE HARVAC fLECTRONICS MATERIAL HANDLING SUPPLY ········f.1Afl--:-·cHLO~,-INC.---·---·- MATTHEWS INTEKNATIGNAL SCOTT MA><IJ(LL MCCOOK. PUHP MCDONNEL DOUGLAS MCMA5TER-CARR SUFPLY CO. ~~s~ MEANS co.; •~t.· MEDICAL CENTER OF G.G. MESA CONSOLIOATEO WATE~ MESA HCHNOLOGY MINE SAFETY APPLI~NCES CO. MITCHELL INST~UMENT CO, KONO.(i°ROUPt lfJC. MOkGAN EOUIPMENT CO. MENSCO, INC. NATEL 8. CO. NEWFOR T 01..H'H.S, I ~C:. NUHATIC [~GINEERING OCCIDENTAL CHfMICPL CORF. CLAIMS PAID J2/U6f6~ AMOUNT DESCklPTJON S31.6lt ELECTRICA( SUPPLIES $lt330.67 OFFICE SUPPLIES SltU71.42 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT . $933~20 FREIGHT·--· ·-··· ·······-·- ~16.&1 EMPLOYEE MILEAGE $167.9U JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 11q,771,7~ c6~t~~~i~~ PW~083 (R) $107,901.00 5-19-Rl EMERGENCY REPAIRS i (>! ~~~!..?~----·-________ _u~ L~t!MGLQ\J~l\PAYM~tff ________ --···--_ .. ___ ---· ·-· ... ·-·-- $~29. 52 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT t92.63 BEARING SUPPLIES Slt271.39 • USE CHARGE OVERPAYHENT ·u1,"77.55 ····· f>iPE-suri>Lies; .. e'EARING suPPL1Es i2B.89 us~ CHARGE OVERPAYHE~T -1 , .. I"! I~'( :·:v I/ IJ :~1r~· :~1c . ,/I ::1c JI ;;1c S221.71 WELDING SUPPLIES · . · :if6·ti·;-2·9--·----·~ .. ·---···-usE-fiiA.RG f·ov·t i\i>A vHfifT'--·--------·--··-··-· ---·-··-·-· -··-· ·--· ·· .. -··--····-· ·· .... $22't.93 FILH PROCESSING s6'1.~~.?.! ..... __ -~g ~J~M~.~ .9V~~~WfM~~T, .fH~. P~~~~~~ ~~~ ..... . S2t238t63 SAFETY SUPPLIES 111 sq59,11 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ~C S70't,90 TYPESETTING a -·----··---·-s2s·o:«iir ··-··---------·A"N-iH. xA TToicnr-fi"Rcf fE s·fiNGFH--------------------··----11 tlt191.'t5 USE~CHARGE:OVERPAYHENTi $79.50 USE CHARGE OVERPAYHENT . ifs; If i ·-·usf.CHARGE° OVERPAYMENT ········· ...... -· .. ···------· -·-... ····-.. $26.lf5 ELECTRICAL SUPPLl~S $355,10 SHALL HARDWARE i2 ~ 39~·;·66·--------P-IPESUPPL-iis--· ..... ----·---------·----·-- s5as. 39 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT f51.5B EHPLOYEES UNIFORM REIMBURSEMENT :£'t5.94 ......... PUMP.PARTS--·· ....... ·-··--·-.. ··-· ·--·----·· f'ftl26,7l USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT $77.03 TOOLS . . $ i 1 s:s2 . ······-TE c'tl"N i°C:A·i.: JC>°URNAL .... ··-····-.. ······-................ . Sl,599.9J USE CHARGE OVERPAYHENT i19.Ab WATER-USEAGE !f.151.89 USE .. CHARGE .OVERPAYMENT. U,701.30 SAFETY SUPPLl°ES \37~.ou PIPE SUPPLIES $.51f8~l2 -·PUHP.PAins"·~ $1f30.2l SHALL HARDWARE t756.6~ ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES $lt593.75 co~~u~ic~Tl6~s CONSULTANTS i\,~62.7~ USE CHARGE OVERPAYHENT t357.b0 COMPRESSOR PARTS Slt,807.20 tAU~Tlt ~OD~ ···1 ... , ··•C ~I ~-'.I(_. ~. •,: .FIL 1 ·::1 •• :1......, L1 . .... ;t:>.'- :l '···1 !'·'! : .. ::: ., )> I .,i::-F UNO NO I ... !""' 11 1-~ [ I~ IJARR ANT tJO • ! i tl7 2906 d 012qo1 l··r------· _ O} 2 9 IJ~ 10 lJ 7 2 909 '. II r.72910 •,, 1)7 2911 H)> 072912 ::1~ ----~~g~-~ .. •• t:::::1 r; 7 2 ~ l 5 II~ (172916 37~517 ··--1 ·~ 7 2918 ( 11• rn o 12919 113 072920 "~---fi·ff~Hd .... noo 07 2922 H 012q23 ) , ....... -'072924 q19q -JT OJSl ~o~~ING c•~IlAL PROCESSING O~TE 1/31/Q~ PA~~ RfPORT NUMBER AP'l3 COUNTY SANITATION OISlRJCTS OF ORANGf COUNTY ~~AJMS PAJP O?IQ6/~5 VENOOH AM CIUNT DES CR I PTI ON . OL~HPIC CHEMICAL CO. $291723.'15 C~LORl~E· ORANGE ~LOSSOM RESTAUR~NT $175.'ll USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ORANGE VALVE & FITTING CO. 1379.52 PIPE SUPPLIES r e ~ ~Ir ~Ir) I :·:1(· I/ " ()Xl'GEN SERViCE -· ..... ·-$213:6·0 DEHURRAGE,-·SPECIALTY GASES COUNTY OF ORANG£ $3 ,6'15.27 PRE EHPLOYHENT EXAHS, TESTING 3-28-R, SURVEY 2-24 1:.'.1c· co~ Of OkAt\GE-AUOlHR CONTROLR $5h8~Q, OQ ~QVOTE -~~~yq~ GATE fU~ .... --.. CSOOC SELF-FUNDED MEOICAL I~S $2,395.52 RETIRED EMPLOYEES HEDICAL INSURANCE PREHIUH COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY $~t609.72 WORKERS' COHP. REIMBURSEMENT ::1c._ __ f:.~<2 !fH ~P:HAN ~ ~ ~~. $Y~.U~$ ___ . .. _. _ .. ____ . ·-----_ ~h ~zg! ~g _______ ---~Q!H.R~f.TQ!t ~::J JR.. PACIFIC SAFETY £,UJPMENT CO. S266.11 SAFETY SUPPLIES PACIFIC BELL $790.09 TELEMETERING -------·-----------. ---------ii ::1c: PANEL-AIR CORP. $q85.76 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT .... PARAGON BUSINESS SYSTr.MS i36o~oo ------·-··c-ch~PUTER-SERV.ICES _____ ,, __ _ PARKER HANNIFIN #2 $lt502·97 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT . ;~1c.· .. ........ ~{_NN.P. SL ~~~ER ~ N~L ... ···---. -·---· . -·-..... ,, ____ --... ····----·---.. U ~ ~?.~.!-~.'t----·------------~g __ ~!!A!..G.L.~V.~~PAY.M~J _______________ ··-· FEROXIDATION SYSTEMS, INC. $l7t26q.2~ HYDROGEN PEROXIDE PICKWICK PA~ER PRODUCTS $973e29 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES --·-·---·---------lt fJ ;:1c PITNEY BOWES $1~.82 POSTAGE HETER RENTAL 'f>Lishcs'PROOUCTS 'co~ ... . ···-............... ·s9·9;~~--.. ··----.-----·usf-·cti'Al\-Cff'"iHiERPAYHENT .. __ ...... ,,. .. ~--------.. ,,,. . .... -----···" llJ ( ,,.I 072925 ( I:~---mm.···· ..... _ ,.t::j c 7 ?929 1•cn · n1293CJ ( l'-'!-1 u72931 P 0 ~J ER SP E C I A LI S TS , I NC • $ 3 7 Q , 61 £ 0 ~TR 0 L E Q U I PM E NT '::10 ------~-~~~~~. 0 ~.~. ~~~o_§f. -gf; ------·--------·---------------·---i·2 ;-~~~-!~~-·· .. ·--------/.-~~u~~:!~~--M~H~-A~~~t~.t~_HL __ . __ -----------------·--t'; MIKE PRLICH & SONS $92,582.55 CONTRACTOR 3-28R :10 RACERS PIT STOP $135.85 ENGINE Oil d _m:~~~:~:~h~~~·~r. _ -· ... _ ......... -•···-··--_ ~.· .m:~ff ______ J~~timt::;~::~~:··:~-=-----~~-·~-·--~---j~~1 c :::c 07 2932 ·------·o"7 2 935 (l72Ci3'1 l~ 0·1~·937 '"IC/) u7~':735 ll. . -tH2936 :1------· -~ H n-~ -· . ( In! 0729'ili '~1 1 u729'tl :JI r.7?942 (_ h 0729't3 "l --...... r11? 9'+'1 ~·1 L 12 9'15 HI IJ729'1f:. I~:.: f17;i9'17 , .. : ,.,., ~ 54ffj , .• : u729'19 ~·i ~7,950 ,'·r--·--unc;51 .. •"L::: ...... ~~ '".k 1:.j ::: l,, -L •.. ( RUDCO 1NOUSTRIES 1 INC. 194.02 · USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ~ RYAN-tiERC 0 S.892 .14 PI PE SUPPLIES :,IQ SFJ CORPORATION U67 !593.35 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT sr~ Juot HosPITAL. u,i36~61 -------·us·E CHARGE ovERPAYHENT ______ ...... .... ~:~~~ :~:. ~~~~~~. --·-. -H ! :~:; :~ ---..... --------~-;~.-~-~~~~:l.~_QVP~PAYMrnL _________________ ---··· --·-------· ..... --___ Jc CITY OF SCAL BEACH \122.25 WATER USEAGE ~ SH AMR 0 CK SUPPL Y U t 1 2 0 • 5 9 SA FE TY SU PP LI E S • T 0 0 LS ~:I(... S I G NA L FL AS ti C 0. 'f.7 77 • 'i 5 CS D 0 C H 1 1 EM E R GEN CY REP A I RS '.L' SM I TH -[HE R Y CO • U 5 3 • 5 0 TE ST i NG P 2 :. 2 6 . . -. ... . . . . ... SOUTHERN CALJf. EDISON CO. $232,~67.13 POWER SO. CALlf. l.'AT£l< CO. $8.S't WATER USEAGE -~OUTHE~N COUtllTirS OIL ·co. $5,16't.10 oiESEL, -KEROSENE STfPHEN CHfMICAL CO. ~4,IB7.3h USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT SU~GRADE CONSTkUCTJON COPP. i271u~o.uo CONTRACTOR 2-2~ lHf SUPPLifRS $1,881.66 TOOLS. . J. ~AYNf SYLVESTER $6~q.30 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT T4YLOR-UUNN ~213.~G ELECTRIC CART PARTS TJH[ CLOCK SAL[S t SERVICE S65.1G il~E-~LOCK REPAIRS ( ( "' '··· 1. ... 1c . -·1 .. . .. .... i.d\_. ,~.'.1 q'- 1:.:1 I·'.'--~ !. .j 1111 '1. __ -~ .• ( .~ V1 •'::: FUND NO ( 9199 -JT OIST WO~KlNG C4~11Al P~OCESSING DATE 1/31/85 PAGE Rf PORT NUMBER AP43 ( t·· ~ r·., COUNTY SA~ITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY e j'.1r· !:. ( l I r-mRANT NO. ·~ 072952 : -----~j~:~! ·~ 07:>955 II 0725~6 1·11 . iJ72'157 1·!:t> fl72%6 ., 07('959 :· _____ gg:t~ .... II C72962 ... 072563 Ci7296'f b72%~ ii72%b VEtWOR TRANS-AMERICA OELAVALt INC. TRAVEL BUFF~ TRAVEL TRAVlL TRUCK-~ AUTO SUPPLY, INC. TRUKSPECT UMA ENINEERING, INC. U.S. AUTO GL~SSt INC. fRAHI< ULTIMO UNION SIGN CO. 0NiTt6 .. FARCE(-SERVICE UNITED STATES SAF£ DEPOSIT CO VWR SCIENTIFIC . VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. WAHLCO, INC. WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER CLAIMS PAID ~2/06/85 AMOUNT OESCf\IPTION i~i(' 1" 1·· h•ir··. ... \ $15'f.q3 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES $l5b.JO AIR FARE $336.00 AIR FARE $117~4:9~ jiu~k-~iR~S i1,2s1.oo DRIVER EXAMINATIONS I/ ti :'.1r $3,529.86 E~GR. ~-26 $5 8 • 8 2 . TRUCK RE PA I RS t2~t372.4'l CONTRACTOR PW-129, PW-119, PW-121 _ ~~ !o~~!~~----··-· _____ 7:-:~---~AfnL~urn~ _ .. --··------·-···· .. . -··-·-····· _ . ··::1c $36.46 DELIVERY SERVICE $16 9 • 6 0 D I SC DR I VE C 0 NT A I NE RS :~1 C S3t61l.~6 LAB SUPPLIES n 9 a 3 3. 5 9 .. . . .. .. j>"1 PE: -Su PPL I Es . . .. . .. .. . .. U'l~36 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ~:IC -----li1 296 7 .. -· .......... -i.iE"S°T I'NGHOUS(. ntt'rR .. 1 c·-co1H5 . --····-··--· ____ ... ~?.~.~ .. !.9.~. ---··--·-'"--·..llH~!tAR~ LQ.Yrnr.8 YM~HL_'._ __ .. ~----·····--~-··· .. ····-··-··--·-· ·-··---'~ $723.87 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES "I l"j C72568 072%9 SUMMARY #2 OPER FUND #2 F/R FUND XEROX CORP. ZIP TEMPORARY PERSONNEL -·· -.. -. $41918.25 XEROX REPRODUCTION . $~!~~~~0? ..... _ ·-· .HtU~.QMRV...~HP ~IC JI -~-----~~--~-·---~iC ....... ~T_Q_T~~ ~!:~-~~~ ~~~-C?. .. ~~_!Of>/~~----··-----~-~-E!~H!.~-'----~-'--·-----·--------·-··--·------····----··-----·--·-·--·-·j ============:==== AMOUNT $ 2,250.85 ' ' .... · . H3 ·of>ER 'f'(J°No-···-·--·-·····-·-· ........ -.. -------··· .. ···· ... . .... ·-···-· -···-····--··-·----··· .J~ •. l~I!_~!_------~~~--.:.~ . ..;.;_ _____________________ , _____ ------'---,.--·-··· ··-·--·- 256. 31 #3 ACO FUND #5 OPER FUND . 115 ACO FUND. 92,859.21 4t426!61_ 4,414.89 40.76 ~. 1~1---···· 116 OPER FUND #7 OPER FUND #]FIR.FUND ........ . #11 OPER FUND #13 ACO FUND -~• ~~) :H .. 1,162.68 19,387.10 95. 15 1,545.59 107,901.00 3,H2!92 459,498.78 1:~1c ---··· _____ .. 1::.'.1c... •g I -·----·---·---· ---·-----------· --~---·- (_ ,H~ I "1 ~·1 '··· l l> i .. ····I _.i "~ ' .. r" ::: .. ... ; I ..•. ~ I .,. ,,. #5&6 OPER FUND #5&6 SUSPENSE FUND #6&7 OPER FUND jr OPER FUND CORF SELF FUNDED WORKERS 1 COMP. INSURANCE FUND JT WORKING CAPITAL FUND TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 02/06/85 132,559.62 4,609.72 120,737.46 $987,610.oi. ::1c .... -·:.·:1 ··I·. ... ,c .... , ''V '" , ... · ... :··~ \.. :: t:C CL . I ........ I .. .,.FUND NO 9199 -JT DIST WORKING CAF-ITAL · ,r e (' r:I ._ l:r- PROCESSING DATE 2/l't/fif, PAGE-· ··l · R[FORT NUMBER AP't3 CGUNTY SANlTATlON DISTRICTS OF ORA~G[ COUNTY ~Ir- ,. '• l . ,. \IARRHIT NO. -·-·---····-··· ------VLAJ,.,,S·· PHO 02/2;l/A5 ~. -·· ---~I ...... -· : <) VENlJOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION I t" ! : 0 7 2 9 8 9 AU C PA I NT ST R IP I NG SER V I C ( 11 1 6 3 5 • il 0 PA I NT S TR I P I NG :~I { . 072990 ACACIA TCRRACE tl25.82 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT u . 1, .. u7?c;91· ····--·AIR··CALIFORIHA .. ··--··--·-···---· ------···-----·-··--·-······$188.~0--·-··-AIR.FARE··-------·-11 ( ,, 07;>992 AIR INDUSTRIES CORP. U77.13 REFUND OVERPAYMENT ::IC 0729'i3 ALLEN £L(CTRJC co. $1,698.10 CONTRACTOR PW-118 " . lJ7 2 99't AHf.A ICAN s 1 GMA '2 h oo LAB ·sup PLI Es · · ········--·-··· -· ···-· ·· ······---··· .. -( E:; 072995 AHf.RICAN HCHNICAL SUPPLY U,60't,J5 . OFFICE SUPPLIES ::1( ( 1 '· rT1 li729% THE ANCHOR PACl\ING CO. U,136.65 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 1a. ··· _ :z o 12 997 ·-·-.. -----·-ANGEl:·lGA~EN.:r-AL-SER·VlC:~S-GROUP-----·------··--------uo-o.-ao---··· -· · ·· ··-···-·-·----.own· RENTAr---------· " ·~· t:::j G72998 AQUA BEN CORP. $23,07iJ.95 CHEMICAL COAGULANTS "IC ( 111 li072999 ARENS JNOUSTRHS INC. $510.02 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES :: 1 :: ~ :~~ ~~~~ ... -...... ·-··· ~~ T~~~~:~R-i~L-;~~-;~ .. ~-~ .. !~~~------------· ..... -·-><•-• ······-. :_ ~-~t~~ .. . ..... ········--" -~. ~.! :·:~ .. ··-... --. -·-· ----·.. -·-----·-·-----·· :IC ( I':~ 073002 SKK CORPORATION . $271391.20 Sl.UDGE HAULING/DISPOSAJ. :: ·' 1 ...,;,:. 07!il03 -SA·N-GROF-J-\;H.J-l-NE-¥-&0-. S3!-a62-----· PUBLICATION n . Ill :it: C73i.lC:'t 6(ACON HA'( rrHERPRJ S(St INC. $360.00 CAR WASH COUPONS )'JIC ( jiJ 00 0Bu05 BERRYMAN & STEPHENSON,JNC U3tlD0.59 ENGINEERING 2-6-2 ~' -. -·' 07 :S\lu& ' .. ···---·-·b·I l;f\l·Y-.. &···ASSOC. AlE-~h-·I NC-.·--·-···----·--···--···---·-···-····-~·-~··---·· ~66 ~··00 ···-··· ......... -··. ·-·-··-:-·"";or-W·;c·;"" ADM I~ IS TRAT't'OH-· ----·-----·-·-······-·-JJI (('I 1 073007 B, R[NNt:~-FIEDLE:R &. ASSOC" INC. i;2.l .• !)O·. . , •.. ··.··.·.:.··.,COMPRESSOR PART~ .. :.' . "I(. '"I J:> J73008 RUCt<EYE GAS PRODUCTS $19"l3 . ·. . ·._ .... :_;.:BUTANE . . ~: . II ---07 3.')(;9 BUC-*6-€-l-OC:-K-84P-GR-tUH 608.·9&-..;....~----~· -··-· _._,;_t:EVEL-'RECORD'fR~RE'P-Kt"RS____ JI I CIBulO c.w.p.c.A./ BILL MOORHEAD ua.oo SEMINAR REGISTRATION 111c ( I'"' t:::::I 073Llll CALIF •. ASSOC. ·Of SAN. AGENCIES S't't0.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION : . JU 1l7 3u12 ·· --· --·-· -... '. · CARHCN 1-T A-F·ORO--J.RUG K-SALES r·lN---···-··---.. --·-----··-···--S.97 .·ll .. ---.. --~ ·······----~·-:~--.,..o:--TRUCK ·-PARTs·--·-----.-·--···----····--... -·--------------.. ( ,:: (/') 073013 CASE .. SWArnE co. ' INC. $251995,(t2 USE CHARGE OVERPAYHE~T :~1c ·· . --I fi730H CHEMICAL ENGINEERING $'t9.00 PUBLICATIONS u !• • C:: +H O·l S-------GHE-Y-R-O-N-\J5-A..,-J-NG-. 2-9-i.·9/f-· -------·-----GAS 0 tl NE ... ____ '~ i~ r> 073016 COMPRESSOR & INDUSTRIAL l'IRQ.75 BEARING SUPPLIES "IC (. 1·~ --1 03ul7 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST. 53t551.U9 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 41 11 •• U'> tl"/30ld ·COr~SOL·IDATtO RfPRODUCHONS··-.... ·"· ---···---.. ·-···-····· ......... $4,l%~3G···.. .. · · ,.~····---~·-BlUEPRINT· REPRODUCTIOtt· ~73Ll9 CONTINCNTAL RADIATOR $72,00 TRUCK REPAIRS.. . C.I"' C.73020 COSTA H(SA AUTO PARTSt JNC. $62;?,(>5 TRUCK PARTS ~~le --'173\121-·· ~-.-f:-.-GOUL-f[.R-{H~·ANf-R&Nl·Al----· ··-··-$42-0.aO--····-··-··-···· .. ··-·---·-cRANE'"'RENTAt·---------·--···----·-·--··---~I ·----1 U' 07 3ll2? COUN TV WtiOLESALE ELECTk IC U t 583. '12 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 073023 CAL WATER S130.00 WATER SOFTENER RENTAL ti73G21f ······ ·OAILV-HLOT··-·----·-····--·......... ---·-· ...... ···-·-· U0-7.lff>-··· .. -··-·CLASSIFIED ADVERTlSING. - u73J25 DECO $26.'16 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES C.l"r 07='>02b DELTA ANAL't'TICAL DIV. :s.s1.01 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 1 ' ---ti7·3n2T-------D·IGKso.Ns----------------------s1 ··24+.'t'f·· ·· · : ....... ·-· · ·-------·--puHp·· PARTs·-------·--------· .. ·---·-------~ 073'120 OIC;JTAL f.GUlf'HfNT CORP. UH.4'• ELECTRICAL REPAIRS C. I" 0 73 r,? 9 0 0 R A 0 0 EN J [RP f< JS l S, 1 NC • U • 6 ~H • 78 PLANT I 2 BAS I N REP A I RS IL I 0 0 PUMP RP RS !.,1 f173U3i) . GUMAS· OJESEL INJECTlOM · · H1il31.74 ENGINE REPAIRS t'l 07 31;31 OUf'.N El'WAROS CORF·• i572 • 72 PA I NT SUPPL I ES l ... f'" 0"/3J32 DWYCN INSTRUM£1~lt H!C. · $'4'5.36 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 11~1 -----i.J7 3l~33------·-·--E-·lt4C-O-PROGE.-SS-·F.<iUlfl·.--CCh-------·-·· ··-·-··-·-·----···· ········ S lR .8'19. §2 · ... BEAR I NG SUPPL I ES" . .,, u73u3't EASTMUJ, INC. u,25lt.~7 OFFICE SUPPLIES I . ''I :: .. _. ( t:C 1::;~ . , . ~I :: .,L. ______ ................. ·( ...................... ---------···--· <., '" ~I •J ·( ( ~ ~~iv ~I'-~· '" i~I (.. "' :~1 '-' :t••! ,. 111 \.. .. , I/ l ::J '· II .,.,. ( ( ( r· , :::: • tf e-.i -FUND ··NO -. --SJ 199·---~T ··-Ol S·T·-WOf\I< I NC.-C·AfLJ TAL--------···--···--·-~------···-·--:--·-·-·-·--·-------·-.. ··· P~ OC(SS ING ··DAH-2 I l'tl8b-P.·A~~ ·~2---------....,...,....,--,T>., C· COUNTY SANlTATJON Dl~TRICTS Qf O~A~GE COUNT~ ~ :::: REPORT NUMBER AP't3 ' l:-A-Hls-PA-J-9-02-J.~O·l-8·§ · . '·' · · · ·' , .. ' ( L -. \J~~~~_!_-~-~.· .. ---··--·-·-----···-----~~-~-00~~-------·-----·---------··-·--..... ~-~~~N-~---··· -·----·----~---·· -·-..... -------·····--·~-~-SCR -~~-~_ .. _ON (I· 073036 FAfHLIAN PIPJ: "'SUPPLY nn.10 .PIP~ ~'JPPLH~ ·,< ... :: 1,.: ·;'i ~ --6-13031-F-H>~AL EXPR~S GORP. . $88·.-00 "· DH·tv-Ettv-S-f·RVT'C"~'' ... . ... ,. ' .. ., . .,, ..... r·1 ;ii[ 117:3035 JEFF ESBER .uia.oa EHPf.OYH 11ILEl\(i~ •~ 11n036 FISCHER & PORTER CO. $lt377wl6 .. PIPE SUPPLIES. ( 1:: -···-g~i~~~ ·-·····-·--~~.o~o-~~~~~~K ~~~!:~s __ ---·----·----····-···------~--~:~:.~::;::_ --.-···-······---·· ' '>•' ~!~~~~-~A~~Q~~~~~-~~1.~~~~.1 RS l"l'J> 0730'tl FLUID HANDLING SYSTEMS, JNC, $~?~ .• ~9 .· . . , :._'.;(. PUHP P.MH . . :,Ji,:~1 ;:. ,j• ( .. ~ 01301t2 q.1f.F(>Ro A, FORKP<T ..... U•H~~l~ -,;, : . :'/,;:: .,,;;·:"' ENql .. HfUNQ rw.,.i6':: .. :;·/'. . _ n !..:.! -0-7-~043--H£ fOXBOR-O-C-<»4P"'NV ' ···. '89-8:.-1·8 .. " . . ,,, "' . fl:E-e'fR·tC-AL4UPPftES. . .. ·~··-... , .. ,, .. 1 11 073044 FRUIT GROWE~S LAEORATORYt INC. $30.00 LAB ANALYSIS 073&45 CllY Of FULLERTON i22.6l WATER USAGE ( 1210 2l \.::;.< 0 7 3046 ... GA l ES--~·· O(fh'.il.ASS-JN STALL £RS-·--····-----·--··-····~-·--···-····---·· $28 ~' ~o ..... ·-· ....... ·····-· ····--·· ... ELECTRICAL·· SUPPL·1 Es--·-·-·· -··· ·--........ ··--··---···-··· o 7 3 llH GENERAL. TEL£ PHON~ C 0 • $7 t 097 • 78 TELEPHONE l'•I (: u730lt8 GJERLlCH-HllCHE'-L' me, $2't3,3Q64100 ' BUDD CHAIN SYSTEH:: . i..-o;;:IL--IJ..#-;J.ltJt9 HA.C~ $-1-1-.4+-----·-t·AB-eHEH I c·At-S " ll ( ··1 11 onnsu GEORGE T. HALL co. Sl27.37 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ( ~·~ 073tl51 TED A. HAMHfTT $2,022.29 VACUUM TRUCKING. CSDOC #II EHERG, RPRS 14 .... ··---fH lUf.2 ·-·---UAtKOCK---EX TRAC(';Rf!OR&Al------~-· ·--------~---·····-· ---·-----~-462•hU·-:--·---, .... ' ·-·----:--·-·-c:·-··USE··-eHARGE·-ovfRPAYMENT .................... --·---·--- :1c . 1'~ I 073053 HAR~lNGTON JNOUSl~l*'L PL~STJCS H,6n.aa ENGl"E SUPPLl~S ( "J> OD~5't ·Ml CHA[L liE INZ ~~5,~5 EMPLOYE~ ·MILEAGE . 11 ---f•·H·\.f>§-T-~O.~F-14 2$2-.~2 -S EH·l·NAR-·f-XPENS-e-e----------------1 11 '"I (1 73056 ttOLMES TUTTLE OAT SUN U57e 01 TRUCK PARTS lllc· .. ( I"• 0 1 3 0 5 7 ti 0 N ( HI f L l t I NC • S 11 2 • 0 b El E CTR I CAL SUPPL I E S n ·' "" t::j CJ 7 lUE.U ..... ·-·--·· OAL [. r:-•·-tlOVE~M AN.,---:-·--------·-·----------·· --·-···--· ·· · -·· ··--..... -~c. • 15~ • ~1-· ---.... ---····--;··-··-:-'.·---DE FE RREP· ·COM PENSA ll O" ··DI Sl f\ I BUT I ON·-·-·---------:~ en 07!J59 R.s, ttUGHES co., INC, $/t0?,93 SHALL HAIH>WARE . ( IJ'--1 onr1t.O tlUNOLEY COf'.PANY, •Ne, $lt7,70.. PIPE SUPPLIES ' 1 .::;;c. ___ A-1-3u61---------C·l+¥-O~UN-T-J-N.{;..'f.(»l-8(A Ct4 -$14-w-14-----· -WAl'fR-USEAGe------------------1 u ~ 073062 ISCO COHFANY S.115.52 CONTROL EQUIPMENT ( I•~ q 073063 JMF(RIAL WEST CtlEHICAL CO. $3tBlf7.81 . FERRIC CHLORIDE ·~ (/) (;73(Jt.lt ... JNGRM1-flAl1[R-... -·-····-·---·-----···-·-·--"· ... ' -... ·-·---····-··-:-·--··--l2t't7Sw23 .... ~·· .............. -····-----·-··OfFlf;E··SUPPLI ESfJANt'fOR ·SUPPL' I e:s-------·---··--:: . " u 7 ~ ll 6 5 IRV I N £ R AN CH \ii AHR 0 I S TR J C T $It • fl 0 . WATER U ~AG E ~I· ; · c_ ,... on Hf. IRV rnE S~IEEf lfllG SER v J CE 'lt5 0. DQ SWEEP I NG SE RV ICES H '-' ·· ____ .. on i; 6 1 ....... -----T·ttt-JAN-1-T-nru.s-Swo~ ------ua s •. a G---·--·· · ·-·-··------J ANHO R 1 AL ·-sup Pt:H·s :~ O 7:.! a 6 fl G • [ • J E PS 0 N 0 I V • U • 6 6 5 • 0 C1 C 0 NT RAC T 0 R PW -0 8 3 ( R) Ml " · cp ~g~;~ ~~~rs~-~~~~1/;~~t~~~.1Nc .. ··--··--····-·· ................ --$~~:~~~:~~. . .... ~~~~R~~~v~_N_G __ s·········· ...... ... ----·······------~;v I"' 073071 KAS SAFElY PROuUCTS $66.85 SAFETY SUPPLIES. ~. l 111 i OJ3ll"/2 KCJTtt & ASSOCIATES Ut2DO.CIO ENGINEERING 7-SHD-I \!Iv ~-....... on.r .. 73 .... -··-··--· Ill llrn--BE;Al\-ltJG .• ~.rnc. ·-·--·····----· -··· ........... _ -.. . .......... $11t645.04 . BEAR I NG SUPPL I Es----------·--·-· WI I• 073f;7'i KL[(N-LJN( CORJ· SH.77 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES n73D75 ~NO~ INOUSTRJAL SUPFLJ(S S~0.95 SAFETY SUPPLIES O ·1 3 u 7 f. L • B • \J • S • t 11'1: C • · · · · i 2 31 • 6 8 WE L D I NG S Up pl I E S ( il73C77 LCIWlR PHOTO, INCw . $31.70 FILH PROCESSING L-(i .:inn1e u:wco [L[CTltIC co. S3q't.3G ELECTRIC CART PARTS ~-··-f.·7.3~179 ----··--·l-1-GHl-U-IG-O J S-TRJOUTO-NS-t--INC-.--·-· · ··· · ·--------··--··· · · -· ·· 115 'l. b'3 · ELECTRICAL SUPPU Es--· --.. '. . f: ::: ll7 ~ ~ H ~ LI l L Y lY P E sr TT I NG tl • 'I 'J 9 • 9 ll TY p E S E TT I NG ... o:::t .... ' I .. .!N I . I;·"--~---· ll\., _ _.. 1•1 •\ u "'\....,' --1~ .j Id . ,.,,,_ ,, II -__ J·'.1'-.. :::: & ~ e ~FUND NO ~lfJ9_,. JT OIST IJORKING CA~-llt.L PROClSSINC. OAH 2/14/Ht-PAGE ,, 11 l """ . Rf PORT NUM6ER AP't 3 : COUNTY SANIT~TlON UISTHICTS Of ORANG£ COUNlY ---· ---·-·-· --------···------------··---------------·----·-· CLA ·I H S··-PA-1-D-0 2 12 JI A & --· ---·· · · · · ,. !~I 1JA~R11rn NO. '•·· .-:.-----··------· .- :1r • ~ ~It) I I VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION ~· ~. --·• ' ::1r 11 II 073~81 K.P. LINDSTROM, INC. tl9t666.59 EIR CONSULTANT: OCEAN WAIVER 073082 LOS ANGELES TIMES $775.84 CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING 07 :H83 MA.RYAC·· ELECTR0f>H€-S--·----· -·· -.. ·---·----------·-·--·· ------$1-2. 35·--·-··· . . .. .. . ELECTR I CAL·-sUPPUEs·----------·· r·· ::1r 07308q HCOAIN INSTRUHfNTS $5,656.44 LAB SUPPLIES 073085 HC~ASTER-CAHR SUPPLY CO. \396.54 SHALL HARDWARE ( · J 73 CJ~ 6 ME NS C 0 t I NC • i l t 81 9 • 1 5 EL EC T R I CAL S UPP U ES .... · · · .. ! ~ 1H3C.87 MOBILE STRUCTUR(S t INC. S8,526.0U CONSTRUCTION TRAILER '· " rn f.i 73 OAE! MONTGO~ERY fLEVATOR COMPANY $328 • 48 PLANT #2 ELEVATOR HAt NTENANCE (~.:Z--iJ73t;B9 ------HORG-A~U-1-PMHH-tO-. -·$31-.h-H--·---··· ---··---·------TRUC-K--PARTS· -----------i 1 · ;::1§; 073090 JERRY L. HORRIS, M.D. $175.(10 HEDICAL EXAMINATION \. I 073!191 t-.ATJONAL CAStf R[GISTER Ut606e26 OFFICE SUPPLIES ." ....... . a 73C.92 .......... ·-· N(IJARl<··-LL E CTRONJCS---····· -··-· ------·----· ·····-···--·---··· ····--···-···· ---~us. 6~. . ..... ····----·······-·· El:ECfR I CAL. SUPPl.; I es---:---··----·· ..... ········------.--· .. -·-··-I" -I u73CJ93 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U~e(,G WATER USEAGE ( ,. rn onl'•94 NU-W(ST FABRICATION n,102,ou PLANT #1 BELT INSTAl.LATtOtf 11 =~--H-309S------on-c-1-eE-J.1-J.A-l-Gt-tE-1+1-e-AL~oRP. $-h·788.-6!------C-Aus-r1·c--soDA-• . Ill =it: oni;cn occ IO[NTA L COLLEGC-CAStU (R • $~7 0. QCI OCEAN HON I TOR I NG s ERV ICES < IJ 00 0Bil97 OLYHPIC CHEMICAL CO. $271052.90 CHLORINE " .... -·· o-n\ic;a ...... ------01<ANG£---couNn--FAfU4-GUPPL-v--co.----····-·-----------··-~-----· '11-1 .. -96-··--·-·-······-···--· ····~---···-·-·tANDSCAP·1 NG···suppL:·u~-s------···---·------------ . " I 073C99 OXYGEN SERVICE $588,03 WELDING SUPPLIE.S (_ 1:: ):> 073100 COUNTY SANITATION DlSTRJCT ~3,003,3~ REIHB WORK~RS ~OtlP~N$ATIOti FUN~ ·t--07-3101 P.F.T. IN&-T-HUHEN-t-G-0. &2Jh2 fOOL-RE·NTAt . II I \1731£•2 P.lil.A. PRINTING !.63.60 PRINTING :1110 ( I: t:j u731(;3 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SYSTEMS $580.50 CONTRACTOR J-111\ : . v7 31 ll'I ... ·----·······-·-flAC·-WELI} --·---------···-·· ··--·-··--~---------·--··-···-··-·-····-----------~21·9. .. 112~---.. --. . .. ---·----~---·-WELD I trn· ·supPL-fEs---·----·--·-----·---····-------u ( ·1:: (/) £.73105 PARAGON BUSJNtSS SYSTEMS ~83?.50 . MIN.I COMPUTER $ERVtCES .,IC · 1 " ~ 07 310b PASCAL & LUDWIG U6t9,.'t 1188 CONTRACTOR P2-26 _ 0 -· u ··~·-u7 3-i01------PA·ff~Rf1-e ·$85·.·6+-----s-Tltl P-CHARTS (. 1 1~ ('"'") Cl731CJ8 PERIPH[RAL MFG. , INC. $624.62 DISC PACK MAINTENANCE ·· -I 073109 PICKIJICK i:>APER PllODUCTS '-'tS.58 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES JL c.n. C:7.H1 li PLASH C···I NOUS H(·J ES---------·--····-·-······· · -· · ··-·---··· ·· --· •··· ··· t-27 6 t'f 5 · ······ · · ·· ···· · ·-· ··· ----·-··JANHOf\AL·· SUP PLH·S·-·-······· · ········ ·. ·----------·---·----·· - " 073111 POSTMASlER $2tOOO,OO · POSTAGE <_I""' C73112 RAINBOW DISPOSAL co. $355.00 TRASH DISPOSAL ---0 7 3113 ··--·JH E-fl~&l·S-lER 5·h 07 6·.-32---·--·--··--· ··-·· ···--------c LASS I FI ED-ADV f R1'-l"S tN c------··-···-------1 "' \173114 REYNOLDS fRl:NCti & CO. S9t750.UO ENGINE PARTS 073115 RICOH CORP t182.18 COPIER RENTAL u731lb · ·· ROUOJNS & MCYERS· · ········ ··--····· ···· ·· · ···· S.226.67 ··· PUHP PARTS I! ~~· 1....... ~' ••... ··-···· .... ···---··--·--~, 073117 AOBOZ SURGICAL INSTRUMENT co. $15~.98 LAB SUPPLIES "' 073118 RODBUSTERS, INC. $53.QO STEEL STOCK ------·-·-C-73119 ·-··-· --·-·-··ROSEfolOUNl-t-1 NG·· -------·-·--·---··--·----$28 • 52 · ·· ·· ·---· · ·· ·· FREIGHT· · -· <. .. IU :1c 'Ml ---· ------... 073120 RYCO~ INSTRUHEMTS, INC. 1186.21 CONTROL EQUIPHENT fi 7 3 1 2 1 S & J CHEV~ 0 Ll. T U q • h If TR UC K PARTS ',.,i C-73122 SCl10LL & CO. AOVERllSING Ut723 • .35 PRESS RELEASE PREPARATION ·~ 'i 073123 YVONNE SCHIJAB $32.00 EMPLOYEE HILEAGE L• .. :~:: 07312'1 sc·rrrHJFIC [QUJP. PRODUCTS 1121.67 LAB SUPPLIES ~:1 \-· .> O~t>t:D t 7 3125 ··· ----·-·-S(ACU-Ff-·EST AT£$--··-·--------·---· -· ·· · -·-------·H • 712 t 6~8. 00 COAST TRUNK RE"IHBURSEHEHT PAYMENT.:. DI ST:-n-t 1-"' ,. <i731U. SHAMROCK SUPrLY u.~17.16 TOOLS , • . .... [:_::j == . . . :r-..··~ . td . ll :-'·i I I 111 ·-1~ ~ I -~-·-·--·· .. ( ·--·-·· .. ····--·-------------··· . -----·-.... ·-. .. . -I -· ( ( }'!/ .r ::1( c. 1;1 .. ( ( ( ... .,, f 5' t:f -r~I ~u~o-N~--~199 -JT OlSl ~ORKING-CAFJTAL PROCESSING DATE 2/14/85 PAGE RlPORT NUMUER AP~3 " O:.t .. ·--··-----1~r · COUNTY SA~JTATION DISTRICTS Of ORANGE COUNTY ---------Cl:-~ H4S·-PA I 0-U2 /20189 1:1 UARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION I ... I,' 073127 SIMS lNDUSTRlAL SUPPLY $U48el0 WELDING SUPPLIES 673128 SHITH PIPE & SUPPLY, INC S62D.49 PIPE SUPPLIES '------0-7 3129--------&-0U.'.fk-C-OAS-T-OF-~ICE-t;QU IPMF:NT-·--·-·------· -----·------·$1-t 15 7. S2 .... · · -··· OFF I CE· FURNITURE '"I £!73130 SOUHIEf<N CALIF. EOISO~J CO. :S.98t't't8.93 POWER 11 073131 SO. CAL. GAS CO. $121725.06 NATURAL GAS " ll73132 SOUTHERN COUNT-IC:& OlL co •.. -. . .. ua,au,02 DIESEL FUEL 073133 SCOTT STEV(NS s~:s.os EMPLOYEE MILEAGE J73134 SUPfR CHEH CORP $801,36 SOLVENTS 0-7-.H36 THf-SUJlPL-1-FR---lh-109-.-82---··--------------------·---TOOLS---· &73136 J. ~AYNE SYLVEST(R s1,oe2.22 PETTY CASH REIHBURSEHENT ~73137 TAK TAKAHINf. Sl,960.00 PLANT MAINTENANCE ~7 3 I 3U· ... -·· --· .. ·-·-·T ARBY--[NG-1Nt-ER1 NG--------------------------------.. ·· -·-· .. ·· ··--·· .. $ 1t97 Q, 79 -...... -........ ·· ..... ·-··--·····--PUMP -PARTS -··· ······------·--·--· ····-·-· ··· ----··----·-·--- u 73139 THOMPSON LACQUER co, s1,191,s2 PAINT SUPPLIES fJ731'tU CHANNON c. TIA $21.53 ~MPLOYEE MILEAGE • 1 I ~IC ::1c II ::1 { 4~ t'I :1 ('' /0 II tl-7-31-4-1 O~OCIC--l.-SAF-&-S~ ·$69·r62-----·--· l:OeKS-AND-KE·V ---------------l l ~ mm ... _____ ~:~~:~~m~~fo:~~~:l~~!~:_· ____ . ___ --···· ·-·---~-2 mm.___ ··-------... J~mum~ '~: __ : ---;-·-·---------·-------------- ,.., I C173145 TURBOCHARGERt INC, U,857,70 . ·:ENGINE REPAIRS .. :1c '~i ):::a 073146 20TH CENTURY PLASTICS, INC, _ . $281,'tl : . :, .:,., :: OFFICE SUPPl-IES 11 ~1-3·14 U~N--0-H..-GG-.-OF-G-A·l-l-F-. 1-6..t> . . . ... · .. ··oltSOt-t-NEto----...... ---'-· ---·-----------'----l~lli a I 0 7 3 14 8 UN IT ED PAR C [ L · SER V I CE S 8 3 • 9 0 DEL I V ER y S E RV I CE : ... O C·731't9 UNITED STATES £QUIP. co., HJC. 1555.28 COHPRESSOR PARTS .. IC l: b731~0 ·--·--···-··, .. ··U"H. t:P-ST-Al[S-. f.JH.--_--&.-f-OUNOR¥-------·---·-···--_-·----·----~l<:lt86lt ,38----~-. ·-···-·-····· .. ··--··.--.. -. _.~-:-_ -_. 5-19-Rl-A··-·P-I P·I N_ O-._ -__ ··_-.• __ -. -__ -·---------;--_· ·_--_ --_--_--_---._ ·1u • u en r73l51 VWR SCIENTIFIC . $3t3H.~o\ . :_.· ... ·LAB SUPPLIES .. · . -.,, ·-· . . ,.·1 1 ' ·--I 073152 VALLARTA R(STAURANTS t INC, :f.285"11~ . . · · ·USE CHARGE OVf:RPAYHt;NT .· . . · · u C u 0-7-311)3--------V-4&.b-&-¥-C-l-l-l-tS-SUPP.L~. . $3.,.01-0 .• .u . . P+P·E-SUPPl:H·S. . . . . .. :: 1 '....,.. C'7315't VALVE & SHEL SUPPLY CO. Slt'l22,86 VALVES··· l'. .. ·'-·:: " . •. :1J~ ~ C73155 VARIAN lNSTRUHHH GROUP $800.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION nlC (/.) (i 73156 .. v AU GHAN.ts .. 1N0 us TR IA l--flE ~A J.R ... c 0 .... -. ------·-----·--··•---» .. --· . $.25 0 •. o 0---·-···--··-·· .. .... . ··~------:----ENG ·I NE .. RE p Al-RS-. -------------------. m 073157 LAHRY ~ALKER ASSOClAT[S, lNC, $3,770.~0 ' ENGINE~Rl"G P2·23-6 ca ,, 073158 JOHN Ra WAPLES $~77,2~ ODOR CO~TROL CONSULTANT ----lj 73169------IJ-AUK-&SHA-[.NG-llJ.f;-Si:M-lCfNt-f-R -------$67-1l.-83-------··-·--------·-·--ENG l·NE·--PART·S------ J73160 wESTINGHOUSf. ELECTRJC CORP Sl93.'15 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES l\731&1 l.:ILLAHO MARKING OEVJCfS $:5't.56 · OFFICE SUPPLIES 073162 ~OURKE & -lilOOORUff. ... · ..... ·· ·-· .. ····· ··· · ..... U3t05l.OO · LEGAL· .SERVIGES··--···· (;73163 ZfP TE'HPORA~Y PERSONNEL U,'t71al2 TEMPORARY "HELP ~~L u -~----------~ 1~1: '-·1H ~l u~. u! :1L.: 1~5' ~' ~I\. $2,'t'Jl,290.17 -··--·----------·--·---·-··----------1~ •• 11 ~·' 14 ~..11·:: r-~-·' -----. t .J -.. ~· o3 ·" I •. ..t:" ' -., I I -., i----------· ··-. ---··~· - TOTAL CLAIMS PAID C2/20/85 ----------------------------------!~1 ·:-... · ., •'I '-' .. /0 111 •, __ . ll ,•J •II ; .. ,, \. ~ ··~ ~ .. ~ (Ir_."' ___ ~:::A:: -----------.-_. ·-. .. --~~~~U~~~-~~!-~~! ~? AHOU~T -----~~~----------------~--- ;·! #1 OPER FUND • 13.94 9199 -.JT p'~T ~Q~~,~~ cAr!T~~ PROCESSING DATE 2/l~/85 PAGE 5 REPORT NUHBER AP~3 .... -.... -·--·- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORAN~E COUNTY _ __n A I ~~ --~~ I .... .. .. I .. ,. I 0 r- 1"f-----____ I l .ACO .fUNO ___ . ·-----------------··---------~~~, 1.~--. --·-· ...... -···---····· -------- ••. #2 OPER FUND 5,036.27 ( d #2 ACO FUND 15,098.67 .·, ... 02 f/R FUNP. .... ____ . ___ . .... _3,282~83 . . (I a:; #3 OPER FUND .. . . .. 8, i~).31 . ·-.............. ··--····--··· ..... -.. ( ;::1 rr1 #3 ACO FUND ·5,301.53 . . ( 1::1-~-ff m>~~~:---'HU:~?---------------- . ·::; ~~ ~~~Rf~~~ D .............. ···--··--.. ---------·-------·-··-··--·---·--· -·· --·--...... ·----,·····~··--.,--. -·-------···--···· ;··---~ :-~~~: ~~-............. -·-·-· ..... --..... ·---· ....... ,.. ... --·....,..-----···· .. ··--·-·-··-···· .. ·-·-···-·-··--···--·· (I'· rr1 #7 ACO FUND 216.77 Ja -~-1.Lf./R .Fl!N(L. 8.1 552, 80 . u H 11 OPE R FUND 6",5·97:·3 5----· --·---· 0 ur ( 11, ~ /111 ACO FLIND 338, 71 . :: --.---··-· .. ~-~ !-6 f ~ ~ E ~ u ~ Sti o ···------·--------·-----------·----~----···-~ ~ ·-·:-:-~~~.,..~ _L.?JJ:-~ ~ ~-·: -~ K--···-.. ·:~~y~-7-·c·,··-····· -·: ~---~-·-:---:-~r~-:: -. ······--········--··· ·--.. -······---·--:·----· ll ( 11• )> H 5 & 6 Ac 0 Fu ND ' !' • 6 , 0 It 1 • I 0 . . . J4 c 11 ~.L.o..f.EJLEJ.UU!. ':"' 2 5 8 1 12.8 • ll . ,,,. · ', ., : · · : . I CORF 317, 4211:97 21 ( l:.j :::::! _ ~~L~O~~~~~D~~~~~~~~-;y~~HP. I HSURAHCE FUND ------------····---U-~~~~; ~ ;t_·-·-······-·-·-·-·-··-----·-····-·-··--·---..,.---·-·---·-----·--·---·-·------~; C ~ I (/') c 1·!1 --1 .. :~1 o :r~-TllIALC.LA I HS .. fA ID 0 2 / 2 0 / 8 5 iL1t2.J.Ll~. 1 7 {. 1~1 ~ :I (/') -------·-··-·· ·-. ---------------···------------------······-·--. --.. --.... -···-····--......... ··-·--·------·------······--·····-·-···------------------------··------- ( 1~ ¥•r----·--------------------------------------· -----·· ~I <...1::1 ., .. ,. u .,I .. l~I I~/ . , .. , :: '., • H tt1 I U1 ,,.I ~ -· ·( l .. ,L ___________ -. ··---· ·. ·-···-··--·------- ~----···----------------------------·------·--··------·-····· .... ·········-.. --··- --·----·-------------------·--·--·-----·-···. -------·-... --·----------~~_.,_- --c ~I~ I~' --. -. --·-·---.. ---·--·..--·----~· :1c '" lu 1.11 \... ,,a ·~ .,, '···· /U "' "--~ I.' ( I ii ···. It! ,,~ RESOLUTION NO. 85-42 AWARDING JOBS NOS. PW-061R-2 AND PW-061R-3 A JOINT RFSOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REHABILITATION OF DIGESTERS C & D AT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. PW-061R-2, AND REHABILITATION OF DIGFSTERS F & G AT TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. PW-061R-3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the written recommendation this day su~mitted to the Boards of Directors by the Districts' Deputy Chief Engineer that award of contract be made to Kiewit Pacific Company for Rehabilitation of Digesters C & D at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-2, and Rehabilitation of Digesters F & G at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-3, and bid tabulation and proposal submitted for said work are hereby received and ordered filed1 and, Section 2. That the contract for Rehabilitation of Digesters C & o at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-2, and Rehabilitation of Digesters F & G at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-3, be awarded to Kiewit Pacific Company in the total amount of $2,435,555.00 in accordance with the terms of their bid and the prices contained therein1 and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No •. 1, acting for itself and as agent for Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13, are hereby authorized and directed to enter into and sign a contract with said contractor for said work, pursuant to the specifications and contract documents therefor, in form approved by the General Counsel1 and, Section 4. That all other bids for said work are hereby rejected.· PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, .1985. "C-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(A) -ALL DISTRICTS "C-1" February 26, 1985 ll:OO a.m. BID TABULATION SHEET JOB m. PW-061R-2, -3 PROJOCT TITLE REHABILrrATION OF DIGESTERS c & D at PLANT NO. 2, PN-061R-2 REHABILrI'ATICN OF DIGESTERS F & G AT PLANT NO. 2, PN-061R-3 ·PROJEX:T DESCRIPTION Installation of pumped mixing system and done repair ENGINEER'S FST™ATE-PW-061R-2 $1,100,000 BUOOEI' A"DUNT--PN-061R-2 $1,556,000 PW-061R-3 $ 950,000 EW-061R-3 $1,456,000 'IUI'AL BID 1. Kiewit Pacific Co., Arcadia, CA 91006 $2,435 ,555 .00 2. Merco Coostruction Engineers, Inc. , Canarillo, CA 93011 $2, 64 9, 850 • 00 3. James 'E. Hoagland Co., Long Beach, CA 90801 $2,657 ,500 .00 I have reviewed the bids and find that the Engineer's Estimate is low. I, therefore, recacm:nd award to Kiewit Pacific in the bid aIOOunt of $2,435,555 as the lowest and best bid. "C-2" Thanas M. Dawes Deputy Chief Engineer AGENDA ITEM #9(A) -ALL DISTRICTS. "C-2" RESOLUTION NO. 85-50 APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. l TO SLUDGE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH EKO SYSTEMS/ORANGE COUNTY, LTD. A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. l, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE CX>UNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. l TO SLUDGE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH EKO SYSTEMS/ORANGE COUNTY, LTD. PROVIDING FOR A TIME EXTENSION RELATIVE TO OBTAINING A SITE FOR OFFSITE REUSE/DISPOSAL OF DISTRICTS' SLUDGE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, the Districts have heretofore entered into a Sludge Mana~ement Agreement with EKO Systems/Orange County, Ltd. for offsite reuse/disposal of digested, dewatered sludge generated by the Districts' two treatment plants; and, WHEREAS, said agreement provides that EKO Systems shall have acquired a site for its processing operation by February 15, 1985; and, WHEREAS,.EKO Systems ha~ diligently pursued the acquisition of several alternative potential sites but has not yet secured a site lease or purchase option and has, therefore, requested an extension of said acquisition date of 60 to 90 days; and, WHEREAS, the Select Committee to Advise the Staff has reviewed said request and has deemed it appropriate to recommend an amendment to their agreement to provide for a 60-day time extension relative to obtaining a site for said offsite reuse/disposal of Districts' sludge from February 15, 1985 to April 15, 1985. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Amendment No. l dated March 13, 1985, to that certain Sludge Management Agreement dated September 12, 1984, for offsite reuse/disposal "D-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(c) -ALL DISTRICTS "D-1" of Districts' sludge, providing for a time extension relative to obtaining a site for said.offsite reuse/disposal of sludge from February 15, 1985 to April 15, 1985, is hereby approved1 and, Section 2. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 1, acting for itself and on behalf of Districts Nos. 2, 3, s, 6, 7, 11 and 13, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said amendment in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "D-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(c) -ALL DISTRICTS "D-2" li C~UNTY S..l.NITATION ors1~rc1s OF OR..l.~4G2: C-JUNTY P. o. sex 8127 -10844 ELLIS AV~~UE FOUNTAIN VALL:Y, C.~.L!FOR~HA 92703 CH.A.NGE OR !JER G~ANT NO. ~/.-\ --~~------------~----~ C.O. NO. One (1) ~------------------~-------- 0 ATE February 5, CONTi<ACTCR :.Frank Ultimo, General Bui I ding Contract.or -------------------------------~ JCS: Paving & Drainage at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-119 . Amount or this Change Order (AOO) ~3~~) $ 5,405.24 .. Jn accordance with contract provisions, the following changes tn the con~r~ct and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions frcm the contract price are hereby approved •. Item 1: 1be Contractor is directed to install additional drainage facilities including concrete curbs and gutters, on a time and material basis, in accordance with Section 10-6 of the General Provisions and Contractor submittals No. 1 and 3, for the lump s·wn amount of $1,978. 73. TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS (J{A.~GE ORDER ITE~I: $1,9i8. i3 TOTAL TU=E EXTE~ISION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITE~·I: 2 Calendar days Item 2: The Contractor is allowed costs of delay when approved work schedule at Mab Gate was delayed due to operational needs. Cos-t allowed includes additional move in and move out changes, in accordance wi~h Contractor, ·sub~J.ttal No. 2 for the l~~ SUI!l amount of $1,250.00. '..) TOTAL ADDED COSTS nus OiANGE ORDER ITEM: $1,2SJ.OO. TOTAL TIME EXTENSION nus OIANGE ORDER ITE~: 2 Calendar days Item 3: Contractor is directed to remove and replace concrete curb and gutte: on bot~ sides of the Main Gate entrance, not included in this contract and to encase 6 buried electrical ducts with color coded concrete for the lump sum amount of $3,035 .97. (Ref: .Contractor Submittal No. 4) TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CiANGE ORDER ITEM: -$3,035 .97 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION 1HIS OfANGE ORDER ITEM: 3 Calendar days Item 4: Contractor was directed to work overtime to complete an item of work necessary to allow traffic through the Bushard gate, and is allowed extra overtime premiwn, less normal work costs, in the aJ11ount of $60. 54. Cre: Con .S ab .Xo. Sl TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS ai~'IGE ORDER ITEM: $ 60. 54 TOTAL TDIE EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITE~t: 0 Calendar Days "E-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(0) -ALL DISTRICTS "E-1" :l • ·: • S :· :-: : 2 7 -l 0 :... :.:. E ~ L ! S ;. './ = · ~ ·-· = Cr~.!.~~ T ~ ... 0 • __.N.;.,;.' !....,A..._ _______ _ C: • O • ~, O • _ _...o ..... n ..... e..__..f ..... 1 .... J ______ _ Frank Ultimo. r,ener~l Building Contr~ctor~AT~ ___ __....F_...e~b-~~~-a_rv ___ s_._1_9_~~·5 ___ _ \ JCS: Paving & Drainage at Treatment Plant No. 2. Job. No. PW-119 Item 5: Item 12, the proposed installation of soil amendment is deleted from the contract at no cost. Contractor made an obvious mistake in bidding this ite~ due to a mis·-interpretation of the specifications. The delet:irm., in accordance "-"Ith. th~ birl a~ount submitted, $920.00. TOTAL ADDED COSTS 1HIS OiANGE ORDER ITEM: (.$920 .001 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS OiANGE ORDER ITE?-1: 0 Calendar days TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $5,405.24 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION TiiIS CHANGE ORDER: 7 Calendar days The additional work contained in this change order can be perfoTmed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for in the original contract plus the 7 days time extension granted hereby. It is therefore, mutually agreed that no time extension other than the 7.days approved herein is required for this c..~ange order and no direct or indirect, incidental or consequential costs or expenses have been or will be incurred by contractor. SUMM.~RY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date Original Contract Time Original Completion Date Time Extension this Change Order Total Time Extension Revised Contract Time Revised Completion Date December 10, 1984 120 Calendar Days April 8, 1985 7 Calendar Days 7 Calendar Days i27 Calendar Days April 15, 19 85 Ori~inal Ccntrac: Price Prev. A~th. Ch~n;es $ 142. i71!80 s -0- This Chanse (ADC) (!O!-~) $___5_,_AOS.....2_4 ____ ~-- A~e~ced Ccntrac: Price $ 148.17'7.04 Seard au~hc~i:::ic~ date: March 13, 1985 Ap;:rovec: Contractor "E-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(n) "E-2" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. o.· BOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708. CHANGE ORDER GRANT NO. °:'J/A ~~~~~~~~~~~~ C • 0 • N 0 • One (1) CONTRACTOR: Frank Ultimo, General Building DA TE February 5, 19 SS Contractor JOB: Lube Oil Storage Tank at Foster Pump Station, Plant No. 2 , JOB NO. PW-129 . Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (~) $ 714. 75 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contr~ct and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. Item 1: lbe Contractor is directed to remove heat exchange equipment which interferes with placement of lub oil tank at abandoned engine ~o. 4, Rothrock Outfall Booster Station, in accordance with Section 10-6 of the General Provisions, for the lump sum amount of $714.75. The Contractor is allowed a two (2) day time extension for this work. TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $714. 75 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CllANGE ORDER: 2 Calendar Days The additional work contained in this change order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original contract plus the 2 days time extension granted hereby. It is therefore, mutually agreed that no time extension other than the 2 days approved herein is required for this change order and no direc't or indirect, incidental or consequential costs or expenses have been or will be incurred by contractor. S.UMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date Original Contract Time Original Completion Date Time Extension this Change Order Total Time Extension Revised Contract Time Revised Completion Date Board authorization date: March 13, 19_85 oz.--07-~ ~ ·By\~ &o~ December .10, 1984 180 Calendar Days June 7, 1985 2 Calendar Days 2 Calendar Days 182 Calendar Days Jun~ 9, 19.85. Original Contract Price $ 24,0il.OO ~---~~~~~~~- Pre v~ Auth. Changes $~~---0--~~~~~~ This Change (ADD) (~) $ 714. 75 ~~~~~~~~~- Amended Contract Price $ 24 '785. 75 Approved: COUNTY SANITATION DI STR I C7S OF Orange Cou~t;r:aJ~forn i a ( I /. I . /. 1'/_ ·' I \ i ev / ./,~,ij,~7 7.11 "->..zic:1/'e, "F" AOONEAacit"PEM #9(E) ALL DISTRICT~cputy Chief ~:igir.:er "F" RESOLUTION NO. 85-44 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR JOB NO. Pl-21 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR INSTALLATION OF REPLACEMENT OF CENTRIFUGE WITH BELT FILTER PRESSES AT PLANT NO. 1, JOB NO. Pl-21 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, John Carollo Engineers, have completed preparation of the plans and · specifications for Installation of Replacement of Centrifuge with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That pursuant to the Districts' Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, the Districts have concurrently undertaken an environmental review of the proposed project and hereby determine that said project is categorically exempt from further CEQA requirements; and, Section 2. That the project for Installation of Replacement of Centrifu~e with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21, is hereby approved, and that the Secretary be directed to file any documents required by said Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended; and, Section 3. That the detailed plans, specifications and contract documents this day submitted· to the Boards of Directors by John Carollo Engineers, for Installation of Replacement of Centrifuge with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21, are hereby approved and adopted; and, Section 4. That the Secretary be authorized and directed to advertise for bids ~ "G-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(F) -ALL DISTRICTS "G-1" '--11 . for said work pursuant to the provisions of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California1 and, Section S. That the General Manager be authorized to establish the date and time at which said bids will be publicly opened and read1 and, Section 6. That the Secretary and the Districts' Deputy Chief Engineer be authorized to open said bids on behalf of the Boards of Directors. PASSED ANO ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "G-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(F) ALL DISTRICTS "G-2" ...,, a· •••U • v n.J.H..1"-&.n. a a:.~ \ 1 a "J 1 ~ o ·;ll" •" • •" • • • &> PURCHASE REQUISITION NlY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNlY SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS P.O. NUMBER Change OrcJer 11 A11 to 17021 -i~ ~ROO: ):> G'> m :::z t=' ):> :rteM 3 -· U5 ~ G> ........,, 1--' ........,, I J> r- I ~ --(/) --1 :::::c n -I VJ FUND Advanco Constructors P.O, Box 1210/1500 West 9th St~ Upl~nd, CA. 91785 ORG. ACCOUNT W.O. OR STK. # w.e. 3790 51883.-0~00 FOB 0 DEST. 0 SHIPPING POINT EST. CHGS. VIA ______ _ 0 SHIP TO REC., 10844 ELLIS, F.V. 92708 REQUISITION NO.----------- AUTHORITY M. 0 ! 3/13/es 0 SHIP TO REC., 22212 BROOKHURST, H.B. 92648 Item No. 0 CONFIRMS PICK-UP O 0 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS----- NON-CONFIRMING 0 CONFIRMING Change Order TERMS: Board Meeting -March BUYER--------------~ EST. DELIVERY DATE ------- QUAN. UOM * ~ITPRKJ: EXTENSION ITEM DESCRIPTION Construction of Installation of Pressure Relief Bvoass Around 10 Positive Dis- placement Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, for an increased total amount from $15.810.00 to $16.354.40 for install· ation of two District Supplied valves at Pumps A .. B, & C. - * 1£ nus ITEM IS NOT PRESENTL y IN THE WAREHOUSE CATALOG AND YOU REQUEST IT ~E ADDEO, CHECK nus COLUMN ANO INDICATE MIN.IMAX QUANTITIES. FOR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT: 0 ADDITIONAL EO. EXPECTED USEFUL LIFE IN YEARS__ SALVAGE VALUE 0 REPLACEMENT EO. REPLACES----------·---PURCHASED ON P.O.# !isitioned by: ' == j ;:c: I == I f!B5 ....___ _( __ ,K_. - Date Employee -·---. -----------------------r--------------------- 1 certify the above are essential to the operation of this Division, and the Purchasing Approval ~ charge instructions are proper. Budget Amount ________ , ___ _ Page Item# f _ _( ____ _ Date Supervisor Dau: Dept. Head Date Chief of Purch115ing -, ' RESOLUTION NO. 85-45 ACCEPTING PURCHASE ORDER CONTRACT FOR INSTALLATION OF PRESSURE RELIEF BY-PASS AROUND 10 POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT PRIMARY PUMPS, SPECIFICATION NO. M-016, AS COMPLETE A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING INSTALLATION OF PRESSURE RELIEF BY-PASS AROUND 10 POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT PRIMARY PUMPS, SPECIFICATION NO. M-016, AS COMPLETE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the contractor, Advanco Constructors, Inc., has completed in accordance with the terms of Purchase Order No. 17021 (Installation of Pressure Relief By-Pass Around 10 Positive Displacement Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016) on January 15, 1985: and, Section 2. That by letter the Districts' Deputy Chief Engineer has recommended acceptance of said work as having been completed in accordance with the terms of the purchase order contract, which said recommendation is hereby received and ordered filed: and, Section 3. That Installation of Pressure Relief By-Pass Around 10 Positive Displaceme~t Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, is hereby accepted as completed in accordance with the terms of the purchase order contract therefor, dated July 31, 1984: and, Section 4. That the Districts' Deputy.Chief Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Notice of Completion therefor. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. II I II AGENDA ITEM #9(G)(2) -ALL DISTRICTS II I II II Jll February 26, 1985 11:00 a.m. BID TABULATION SHEET SPECIFICATICN NO. M-020 PROJECr TITLE Installation of Flex-A-TUbe Medium Bubble Diffusers and Appurtenant Equipnent PROJECI' DE5CRIPTIOO Installation of 11,700 diffusers in nine remaining basins ENGINEER• s ESTIMATE __ s1_8_3_,_oo_o _____ _ BUOOEI' AK>UNT _$ _7_50_., __ o_oo ___ _ 1. Spiess Calstruction caopany, Inc. , Santa Maria, CA 2. Dorado Ehterprises, Inc. , Signal Hill, CA 'lUl'AL BID $128,610 .oo $1 73 , 817. 00 I have reviewed the proposals suJ:mitted for the above project and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. I, therefore, reconmand award to Spiess Caistruction CCJDpany, Inc. in the bid anount of $128,610 as the lowest and best bid. vv11dL w. N. Clarke, Sr. Superintendent AGENDA ITEM #9(H) -ALL DISTRICTS II Jll \.i February 26,. 1985 ~00 A.M. BID TABULATION SHEET SPECIFICATION NO. P-073 TITLE P~chase of Wood Shavings/Sawdust DFSCRIPTION One year contract deliveries of above product to Plant ~:o. 1 and/or No. 2 locations as needed. ENGINEER'S FSTIMAT.E $ 4.50/yd. (CUrrent Price) B~ AMJtJNT $ N/A ~--~~~~~~~~ VENOOR GAS rnEM PRODUCIS, INC. · 1. Torrance, CA ~ B.P. JOHN HAULING 2. Anaheim, CA 3. IDNG BFACH SHAVINGS CO. !.Dng Beach, CA CROWN SHAVINGS, INC. 4 • I.Dng Beach, CA SEAVY-COPELAND SAWDUST 5 • Anaheim, CA BID PRICE $ 4.19 YARD $ 4.40 YARD $ 6.25 YARD $ 7.00 YARD $ 8.31 YARD It is recomrrended that the award be made to Gas Chem Products, Inc., low oidder, for a one-year contract in an anount not to exceed $63,000.00 plus 6% sales tax. "K" AGENDA ITEM #9(1)-ALL Property "K" "L" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TELEPHONES: AREA CODE 714 540-2910 962-2411 P. 0. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE CEUCLID OFF-RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWA YJ Board of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018 March 5, 1985 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for preparation of EIR on Joint Works Master Plan re Change in Scope of Work In accordance with the District's procedures for selection of professional engi- neering services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for the additional work required in the preparation of EIR on Joint Works Master Plan for Joint Works Treatment and Disposal Facilities, for the additional amount not to exceed $15,770 on a per rliem basis, including profit and overhead. The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fee as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fee will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. ls/Richard B. Edgar Richard B. Edgar Chairman Selection Committee ls/Thomas M. Dawes /s/Don R. Griffin Don R. Griffin Vice Chairman Selection Conmittee Thomas M. Dawes Deputy Chief Engineer Selection Committee AGENDA ITEM #9(J)(l) -ALL DISTRICTS "L" \.-1 ' i RESOLUTION NO. 85-46 APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH K. P. LINDSTROM, INC. FOR PREPARATION OF EIR ON MASTER PLAN OF JOINT WORKS WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH K. P. LINDSTROM, INC. FOR PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ON THE MASTER· PLAN OF JOINT WORKS WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES, PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, the Districts have heretofore entered into an agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for consulting services in connection with preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities; and, WHEREAS, it is now deemed appropriate to amend the agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. to provide for additional services to incorporate the-findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study; to prepare an Executive Sununary; and to respond to public conunentary received on the Draft EIR; and, WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation ~istricts Nos. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County have heretofore adopted a policy establishing procedures for the selection of professional engineering and architectural services; and, WHEREAS, the Selection Conunittee established pursuant to said procedures has negotiated and certified a fee for said services included in Addendum No. 1. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: "M-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(J)(2) -ALL DISTRICTS "M-1" Section 1. That Addendum No. 1 dated March 13, 1985, to that certain agreement dated March 14, 1984, by and between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 and K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint Works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities, providing for additional services to incorporate the findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study1 to prepare an Executive Summary1 and to respond to public commentary on the Draft EIR, is hereby approved and accepted1 and, Section 2. That the contract provision re compensation for said consulting services be increased from $34,165.00 to an amount not to exceed $49,935.00, as follows: Professional services at hourly rates, including labor, overhead and profit, Original Contract to exceed ••••••••••••••••• $28,665.00 Direct costs including travel, conununications, supplies, copying, drafting materials, photographs, etc •••••••••••• 4,000.00 Direct costs for typing •••••• 1,500.00 TOTAL, NOT TO EXCEED $34,165.00 Addendum No. l $15,770.00 $15,770.00 TOTAL C.ONTRACT $44,435.00 4,000.00 1,500.00 $49,935.00 Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 1, acting for itself and on behalf of Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said addendum in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "M-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(J)(2) -ALL DISTRICTS . ' "M-2" 0.\ "N" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA . P. 0. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE CEUCUD OFF-RAMP, SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) Board of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018 March 5, 1985 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Amendment No. 5 to TEL.EPHCN ES: AREA CODE 714 540•2910 962·2411 contract with John Carollo Engineers for Design of Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, re Preparation of Operation and Maintenance Manual and Additional Training In accordance with the District's procedures for selection of professional engi- neering services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with John Carollo Engineers for the preparation of Operation and Maintenance Manual and additional training of District's employees on a per diem basis, including profit and overhead at the rate of 134%, in an amount not to exceed $18,500.00. Labor and Overhead, at 134%, not to exceed Fixed Fee Total $16,100 2,400 $18,500 The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fee as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fee will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. ls/Richard B. Edgar Richard B. Edgar Joint Chairman Selection Committee ls/Thomas M. Dawes lslDon R. Griffin Don R. Griffin Vice Joint Chairman Selection Committee Thomas M. Dawes Deputy Chief Engineer Selection Committee AGENDA ITEM #9(K)(l) -ALL DISTRICTS· "N" RESOLUTION NO. 85-47 APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 5 TO AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS RE JOB NO. P2-25 TO PROVIDE FOR PREPARATION OF AN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL FOR JOB NO. P2-25-2 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 5 TO AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS FOR DESIGN OF FLOW EQUALIZATION AND HYDRAULIC RELIABILITY FACILITIES AT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. P2-25, PROVIDING FOR PREPARATION OF AN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL RE HYDRAULIC RELIABILITY FACILITIES AT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. P2-25-2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, the Districts have heretofore entered into an agreement with John Carollo Engineers for engineering services in connection with design of Flow Equalization and Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-251 and, WHEREAS, it is now deemed appropriate to amend the agreement with John Carollo Engineers to provide for additional services in connection with preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the Hydraulic Rel~ability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-21 and, WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County have heretofore adopted a policy establishing procedures for the selection of professional engineering and architectural services1 and, WHEREAS, the Selection Conunittee established pursuant to said procedures has negotiated and certified a fee for said services included in Addendum No. S. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, "0-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(K){2) -ALL DISTRICTS . ) "0-1" DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Addendum No. 5 dated March 13, 1985, to that certain agreement dated March 14, 1984, by and between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, .6, 7, 11 and 13 and John Carollo Engineers for design of Flow Equalization and Hydraulic Reliability Facilities .at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25, providing for preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That the contract provision re fees be increased to provide compensation for said additional services, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $18,5090.00, which increases the total maximum compensation from $664,231.00, plus actual cost for outside services not to exceed $25,000.00, to an amount not to exceed $682,731.00 plus said outside services not to exceed $25,000.00; and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 1, acting for itself and on behalf of Districts Nos. 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 and 13, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said addendum in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regula~ meeting held March 13, 1985. "0-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(K)(2) -ALL DISTRICTS "0-2" RESOLUTION NO. 85-48 AUTHORIZING GRANT OF EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY RE CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON GARFIELD AVENUE A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROV.ING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A GRANT OF EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY RE CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON GARFIELD AVENUE EAST OF WARD STREET * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain Grant of Easement dated Marcq 13, 1985, wherein a 20-foot wide easement extending easterly from Ward Street approximately 700 feet on the north side of Garfield Avenue, required by the City in connection with street improvements and widening of Garfield Avenue and future maintenance of said area adjacent ~o the Districts' property, is granted. to the City of Fountain Valley, is hereby approved7 and, Section 2. That the real property over which said easement is granted is more particularly described and shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part of this resolution1 and, Section 3. That said easement is hereby granted for no fee1 and, Section 4. That the General Manager be authorized and directed to execute said easement on behalf of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. ' I• "P" AGENDA ITEM #9(L) -ALL DISTRICTS "P" RESOLUTION NO. 85-51-1 APPROVING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF SANTA ANA FOR USE OF DISTRICT RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A BICYCLE TRAIL ADJACENT TO DYER ROAD TRUNK SEWER A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 1 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF SANTA ANA FOR USE OF DISTRICT RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A BICYCLE TRAIL ADJACENT TO THE DYER ROAD TRUNK SEWER * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. ·That the certain License Agreement dated March 13, 1985, by and between County Sanitation District No. 1 (Licensor) and the City of Santa Ana (Licensee), providing for use of District right-of-way to construct and maintain a bicycle trail adjacent to the Dyer Road ~runk Sewer, extending northeasterly from Bristol Street to Talbert Avenue, is hereby approved1 and, Section 2. That said use of the District's right-of-way is granted at no cost to the City of Santa Ana1 and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of the District are hereby authorized and directed to execute said License Agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "Q" AGENDA ITEM #9(N) -DISTRICT 1 "Q" RESOLUTION NO. 85-52-2 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTRACT NO. 2-6-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR TAFT INTERCEPTOR SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-6-2, AND CITY OF ORANGE STREET IMPROVEMENTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, Berryman & Stephenson, Inc., District's engineers, have completed preparation of the plans and specifications for Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, and City of Orange Street Improvements. ... NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That.the project fo~ construction of the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, is hereby approved. Said project was included in the Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Sewage Collection for Districts Nos. 2, 3 and 11 approved by the Boards of Directors on February 8, 1984. A Notice of Determination was filed by the Secretary on April 17, 1984, in accordance with the District's Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended7 and, Section 2. That the detailed plans, specifications and contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors by Berryman & Stephenson, Inc., District's engineers, for construction of Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No; 2-6-2, and City of Orange Street Improvements, are hereby approved and adopted7 and, Section 3. 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, "R-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(o)(l) -DISTRICT 2 "R-1" I \ Section 4. That the General Manager be authorized to establish the date and ~ time at which said bids will be publicly opened and read; and, Section 5. That the Secretary and the District's Deputy Chief Engineer be authorized to open said bids on behalf of the Board of Directors. · PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "R-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(o)(l) -DISTRICT 2 "R-2" RESOLUTION NO. 85-53-2 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING OF PIPELINE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY RE CONTRACT NO. 2-6-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PIPELINE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY IN CONNECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE TAFT INTERCEPTOR SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-6-2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * •.• * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETEBMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain Pipeline License Agreement dated February 15, 1985, by and between The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company (Licensor) and County Sanitation District No. 2 (Licensee), wherein Licensor grants to Licensee the right to construct the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, through The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company right-of-way in Taft Avenue westerly of Glassell Street, is hereby approved1 and, Section 2. That payment in the amount of $250.00.for said right-of-way is hereby authorized, in accordance with the provisions of said Pipeline License: and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of the District are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Pipeline License Agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "S" AGENDA ITEM #9(0)(2) -DISTRICT 2 "S" '. RESOLUTION NO. 85-54-2 AWARDING CONTRACT NO. 2-10-lA A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AWARDING CONTRACT FOR EUCLID RELIEF TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-10-lA * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County California, DOFS HEREBY RF30LVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the written recommendation this day submitted to the Board of Direc~ors by the Districts• Deputy Chief Engineer that award of contract be made to Nuevo Camino Constructors Company for Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA, and bid tabulation and proposal submitted for said work are hereby received and ordered filed1 and, Section 2. That the contract for Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA, be awarded to Nuevo Camino Constructors Company in the total amount of $5,090,467.00, in accordance with the terms of their bid and the prices contained therein1 and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of the District are hereby authorized and directed to enter into and sign a contract with said contractor for said work, pursuant to the specifications and contract documents therefor, in form approved by the General Counsel; and, · Section 4. That all other bids for said work are hereby rejected. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "T-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(p)(2) -DISTRICT 2 "T-1" .. February 26, 1985 ~ 11:00 a.m. BID TABUL.ATION SHEET CCN'lRACT NO. 2-10-lA PROJEx:T TITLE EOCLID RELIEF '!RONK SEWER PROJEx:T DFSCRIPTICN Construction of 2.5 miles of relief sewer ENG !NEER' S ESTIMATE $5. 8 million EUOOEI' AK>UNT $4.0 million a:>N'IRAC'D:R IDrAL BID Nuevo Cainino 1. Ccnstructors Canpany, Uplandr; CA 91785 $5r;0901.467.00 2. SUlly-Miller Contracting Co. k>ng Beach t. CA 90805 $5 r;l 65 , 256. 00 3. S. A. Healy Caupany M:Cook, IL 60525 $5r;269,995.00 4. Mike Prlich & Soos So. El M:>nte, CA 91733 $51.278,872.00 5. Colich and Sons (JV) Gardena, CA 90248 $51.320,000.00 6. L. H. woads & Sons1. me. Escondido1. CA 92028 $51,3361.800.66 7. Steve P. Rados t. Inc. Santa Ana;; CA 92708 $51.529,120.00 I have reviewed the proposals subnitted for the above project and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. I, therefore, reconnend award to Nuevo Camino Caistructors Canpany in the bid ancunt of $5,090,467.00 as the lowest and best bid. "T-2" /; -(.i . ·' ~;{ ~A1 , Y • '-'-_.,,-1-ffi. ._,,.1 ,,,, "\:: tz.' .. '"Thanas M. Dawes Deputy Chief Engineer AGENDA ITEM #9(p)(2) -DISTRICT 2 "T -2" v ... "U" ~ SANITATICN DIS'!RICTS OP atAmE CDtJN'l.Y P. O. BJX 8127 -10844 EIJ:.IS AVENUE EOCNTAIN VAI.LEY, CALm:!mIA 92708 . c. o. m. l CON'lRAC'roR:. Copp COntracting , Inc. --~-------DATE P\!bruary 28, 1985 JOB: 'IRENCB REX:c:NS'mOCTICN, U::S ALAMITCS BJULEVMID, a:N'IRACT NO. 3-21-3R Ancunt-of this Chanqe Order (Add) CDe!ttet:l $ ------5,184.88 In accoxdance with c:cntract provisions, the foll~ changes in the contract and/or c:cntract work are hereby authorized and as CXJ11p2nsation therefor, the follc.wing additions to or deductions frau the c:attract price are hereby approved. ADJtE'lMENT OF ~J:NEERS.QTJANTITIFS ADD: I ten Change Estimated Qty. -1!2.:. Unit ~cription PROM 'ID Difference 2. S.Y. 4. L.F. Rettcve A/C Slurry/B3ckfill 5,220 3,650 7,379 2,159 @ $ 3.19/SY = S 6,887.21 3,727 77@ $25.75/LF = $ 1,982.75 'IOl'AL AJX) 8,869.96 DEDOCT: . Item Change Estimated Qty. No. unit 57 'lbnS Description A/C PROM 'ID Difference 2,010 1888.3 121.7@ $30.28/Tal =$ 3,685.08 'IOl'AL DEDOCT S 3,685.08 'IOl'AL ArD s 5,184.88 The additional work contained in this change order can t::e perfonned incidental to the prime t,..0rk and within the time allotted for the original contract. It is, therefore, Imltually agreed that no time is required for this change order. St:JMt!MY OF ~ TIME Original Contract Date Original Contract Tine Original Car;>letion Date Tilre Extension this C .o. Total Time Extension Revised Contract Tine Revised Cat1pletion Date December 10, 1984 100 Calendar Days March 19, 1985 -o- -o- No Change No Change Original Caitract Price $ 200,856.00 Prev. Auth. Changes $ -~~~......._.--This Change (AdJ.) CDefltlet:) $ 5,184.88 Amended Contract Price $ 206,040.88 Soard authorization date: March 13, 1985 3/13/85 Cai tractor Approved: COONTY SANITATICN DIS'IRICTS OF ORAmE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA By a,,, ~ ~ 3/13/85 Deputy Chief Engineer AGENDA ITEM #9(Q)(l) -DISTRICT 3. "U" RESOLUTION NO. 85-55-3 ACCEPTING CONTRACT NO. 3-21-JR AS COMPLETE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING TRENCH RECONSTRUCTION, LOS ALAMITOS BOULEVARD, CONTRACT NO. 3-21-3R, AS COMPLETE AND APPROVING FINAL CLOSEOUT AGREEMENT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the contractor, Copps Contracting, Inc., has completed the construction in accordance with the terms of the contract for Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, on February 20, 1985; and, Section 2. That by letter the Districts' Deputy Chief ~ngineer has recommended acceptance of said work as having been completed in accordance with the terms of the contract, which said recommendation is hereby received and ordered filed; and, Section 3. That Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, is hereby accepted as completed in accordance with the terms of the contract therefor, dated December 10, 1984; and, Section 4. That the Districts' Deputy Chief Engineer is hereby authori~ed and directed to execute a Notice of Completion therefor; and, Section S. That the Final Closeout Agreement with Copps Contracting, Inc., setting forth ~he terms and conditions for acceptance of Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-JR, is hereby approved and accepted in form approved by the General Counsel; and, Section 6. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 3 are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the District. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "V" AGENDA ITEM #9(Q)(2) -DISTRICT 3 "V" .... RFSOLUTION NO. 85-56-3 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTRACT NO. 3-29R A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR MANHOLE REPAIRS, KNOTT AVENUE INTERCEPTOR SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 3-29R • * * * * • * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, District's engineers have completed preparation of the plans and specifications for Manhole Repairs, Knott Avenue Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 3-29R. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That pursuant to the District's Guidelines Implementing the Cali~ornia Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, the District has conciurrently undertaken an· environmental review of the proposed project and hereby determine that said project is categorically exempt from further CEQA requirements; and, Section 2. That the project for Manhole Repairs, Knott Avenue Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 3-29R, is hereby approved, and that the Secretary be directed to file any documents required by said Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of .1970, as amended; and, Section 3. That the detailed plans, specifications and contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors by District's engineers for Manhole Repairs, Knott Avenue Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 3-29R, are hereby approved and adopted; and, Section 4. That the Secretary be authorized and directed to advertise for bids for said work pursuant tp the provisions of the Health and Safety Code of the State "W-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(R) -DISTRICT 3 "W-1" of California1 and, Section S. That the General Manager be authorized to establish the date and time at which said bids will be publicly opened and read1 and, Section 6. That.the Secretary and the District's Deputy Chief Engineer be authorized to open said bids on behalf of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "W-2" AGENDA ITEM .#9(R) -DISTRICT 3 "W-2" .... RESOLUTION NO. 85-57-7 AUTHORIZING GRANT OF EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF SANTA ANA RE EXTENSION OF WILSHIRE AVENUE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A GRANT OF EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF SANTA ANA RE EXTENSION OF WILSHIRE AVENUE * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain Grant of Easement dated March 13, 1985, wherein a 10 x 60 foot easement over the District's West Trunk Sewer is granted to the City ~f Santa Ana in c_onnection with construction of an extension of Wilshire Avenue~ is hereby approvedi and, Section 2. That the real property over which said easement is granted is more particularly described and shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part of this resolutioni and, Section 3. That said easement is hereby granted for no fee~ and, Section 4. That the General Manager be authorized and directed to execute said easement on behalf of County Sanitation District No. 7. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "XII AGENDA ITEM #9(s) -DISTRICT 7 "X" RESOLUTION NO. 85-58-7 RF.JECTING ALL BIDS FOR MANHOLE AND SEWER PIPE REHABILITATION, 7TH SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICT, ORANGE COUNTY, CONTRACT NO. 7-SMD-l A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, RF.JECTING ALL BIDS FOa MANHOLE AND SEWER PIPE REHABILITATION, 7TH SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICT, ORANGE COUNTY, CONTRACT NO. 7-SMD-l, AND REFERRING PROJECT TO STAFF FOR RE-EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY DETERMINE THAT: WHEREAS, the Districts, on behalf of the 7th Sewer Maintenance District, have published Notice Inviting Bids for Manhole and Sewer· Pipe Rehabilitation, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, Orange County, Contract No. 7-SMD-l, in accordance with the provisions of Section 4755 of the State Health and Safety Code, and on February 26, 1985, publicly opened and read all bids ~ubmitted; and, WHEREAS, the bids received have been evaluated by the Districts' engineers and the low bid substantially exceeds the amount budgeted by the County of Orange for said project; and, WHEREAS, the Deputy Chief Engineer has this day submitted a written recommendation that all bids be rejected and the project re-evaluated by staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED: Section 1. That the bid tabulation and recommendation of the Deputy Chief Engineer be received and ordered filed; and, Section 2. That all bids received for said work be, and are hereby, rejected; "Y:.-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(r) -DISTRICT 7 "Y-1" ... and, Section 3. That the proje~t for Manhole and Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, Orange County, Contract No. 7-SMD-l, be referred to the staff for re-evaluation and recommendation. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "Y-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(r) -DISTRICT 7 "Y-2" February 26, 1985 11:00 a.m. BID TA:BULATION SHEET CCNIRACT NO. 7-S40-l PRC>JECI' TITLE MANHOLE AND SEWER PIPE REHABILITATICE-7'1H SEWER MAINTENANCE DIS'IRicr, ORAmE (l)tJNTY PROJEX:T DESCRIPl'ICN Replace two deteriorated manholes and connector pipe. ... mGINEER'S ESTIMATE __ $2_5....z,;._o_oo ______ _ BUOOEI' AM:>UNT $25,000 County CCNl.RAC'IOR '!Ol'AL BID 1. 'lbibodo Construction, Vista, CA 92083 $106,000.00 2. a< PUmp and Dewatering Corp., I.Dng Beach, CA 90801 $124' 703 .oo - The bids received are high and adequate funding is not available. I recannend rejection of all bids and that the Engineering Departnent investigate less costly repairs. -c. f ;£.,n, 'I'' "" a • ~ {., /. t ..... ., ~~ M. Dawes Deputy Chief Engineer "Y-3" AGENDA ITEM #9(r) -DISTRICT 7 "Y-3" RESOLUTION NO. 85-49 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT RE ACQUISITION OF A MEMBER AGENCY INTEREST IN SANITATION DISTRICTS' FACILITIES RELATING TO THE FORMATION OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 14 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT RE ACQUISITION OF A MEMBER AGENCY INTEREST IN SANITATION DISTRICTS' FACILITIES RELATING TO THE FORMATION OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 14 * * * * WHEREAS, the the Irvine Ranch Water District ("IRWD"), a California Water District, was established and presently exists for the purposes of operating a wastewater collection and treatment system in an area located generally ~ast and south of present Sanitation District boundaries; and, WHEREAS, IRWD has requested County Sanitation pistricts N.os. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 and 13 to approve the formation of a new Sanitation District to encompass a portion of the IRWD service area and to include IRWD as a member agency of the Districts' Joint Administrative Organization; and, WHEREAS, the Districts have completed a thorough study and examination to determine the feasibility of including the territory presently served by IRWD into the service area of the Districts; and, WHEREAS, the Districts have determined that the proposal of IRWD to be included into the service area of the Districts is viable, provided a new Sanitation District No. 14 is created which would encompass areas within the Cities of Irvine, Orange, Tustin and unincorporated County area; and, "Z-1" AGENDA ITEM #15(c) -ALL DISTRICTS "Z-1" WHEREAS, the Districts have determined the fair and equitable price for the acquisition of rights in the Districts' trunk sewer system, treatment facilities and ocean outfall which would be required to be paid by IRWD to District No. 14 upon its formation; and, WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated an agreement setting forth a·11 of the terms and conditions for the creation of a new District No. 14 and the inclusion of territory presently served by IRWD. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13, of Orange .County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, ORDER AND DETERMINE: Section i: That certain agreement dated March 13, 1985, between the Irvine Ranch Water District, a California Water District, and the Districts rel a ting to the acqui si ti on of interest by Irvine Ranch Water District in the Joint Administrative Organization and an ownership in the real property and joint works treatment facilities of the Joint Administrative Organization, is hereby approved. Section l: The General Manager and General Counsel of the Districts are hereby authorized and directed to initiate any and all proceedings with the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission for the creation of County Sanitation District No. 14, and to carry out all other terms and conditions of said agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Boards of Directors held this 13th day of March, 1985. "Z-2" AGENDA ITEM #15(c) -ALL DISTRICTS "Z-2" .. i. RESOLUTION NO. 85-43 AWARDING JOB NO. PW-141 A JOINT RE~OLUTION OF THE BO~S OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER TO AWARD A CONTRACT FOR FERROUS CHLORIDE SYSTEM FOR DIGESTER GAS SULFIDE REDUCTION, JOB NO. PW-141, UPON RECEIPT OF A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT FROM AQMD * * * * * * • * * * * * • * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation District~ Nos. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the written recommendation this day submitted to the Boards of Directors by the Districts' Deputy Chief Engineer that award of contract be made to Fraser Corporation for Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, and bid tabulation and proposal submitted for said work are hereby i...._; received and ordered filed1 and, Section 2. That the contract for Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, be awarded to Fraser Corporation in the amount of $376,000.00 with provision for an early completion bonus of $1,000.00 per day, not to exceed $24,000.00, and a penalty assessment of $1,000.00 per day for la·te completion after May 31, 1985, in accordance with the terms of their bid and the prices contained therein1 and, Section 3. That the General Manager is hereby authorized and directed to award and execute a contract with said contractor for said work, in form approved by the General Counsel, upon receipt of a Permit to Construct from the Air Quality Maintenance District1 and, Section 4. That all other bids for said work are hereby rejected. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. -~ "AA-1" AGENDA ITEM #16(s) -ALL DISTRICTS "AA-1" .... COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 1 ADDENDUM March 5, 1985 11: 00 A.M. B I D T A B U L A T I 0 N S H E E T JOB NO. PW-141 of ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708 (714)540-2910 (714) 962-2411 PROJECT TITLE FERROUS CHLORIDE SYSTEM FOR DIGESTER GAS HYDROGEN SULFIDE REDUCTION AT PLANls I ANO 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION INSTALLATION OF FERROUS CHLORIDE SYSTEM TO CONTROL AMOUNT OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE PRODUCED IN DIGESTERS ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE $ 299,000 --~------ BUDGET AMOUNT $ 400,000 ==========~===================================================================== CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID ================================================================================ \._.,) 1. Fraser Corporation, Arcadia, CA $376,000.00 2. Kiewit Pacific, Arcadia, CA $440,517.00 3. Ultimo General Contractors, Oana Point, CA $449,698.00 4. AGL Construction, Ontario, CA $452,500.00 5. Spiess Construction Company, Inc., Santa Maria, CA $458,200.00 I have reviewed the proposals submitted for the above project and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. The engineer's estimate was low. I, therefore, recommend award t~ Fraser Corporation in the ~i amount ~f $376,000.00 as the lowest and best bid. · (i) . ~· / . t141 1 ~ , \.. J () -r:·~1 r.·, "-.. u·~-,, .._., lhomas M. Dawes Deputy Chief Engineer "AA-2" ·AGENDA ITEM #16Cs) -ALL DISTRICTS "AA-2" ::: tc tc ::: :J> ( CO'rpl•:?ted or ChJolr¥J Activities fan Prfor f.tnths Establish lJser Fee Flnarci~ ~licy am User Fee Rates - 1904/85 Ord. N:>. 206: 8/8/84 U"> .--------- rn ::z t::j :J> ...... --11--~~~~~~~ rn :::3: ~ 1904-05 Bl.dpt ard l/l-6/30/85 ard Fub1re Umr Fee Rates en> NJ. 1301: l/9/85 =tt: Febnary, 1985 March, 1905 RevlewfAR>rove Umr Fee DEM! lcpnent Timetable ard Iss1:e ltltim of Plblic He.1ring Re Use of Tax Bill foe User Fee Billin;J Purp:ses ( PIH JMIN.\R'l TIM:.-iJ\81.E ftR CDIUJJl'ICN CF l..mR F1:E rot 1985-86 FIOCAL YF.AR msuucr m. 13 April, 1905 ~1985 Cl:niuct Plblic Hearing Re use of 'l'ax R:>l1. foe Billin;J of Distr let USec Fees/Pass Pml>lutiaa A(provin;J Use of Tax lbll 1985 ( Mi:"U'dl 6, 1985 ~, 1985 July, 1985 Ali} 1st, 1985 "-l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ lO .-..,.--~~~~~~-. ,.-~~~~~~~-r~~~~~~~~~--. ~ '"""" t::1 ...... tbti fy Ctmty Alrl ltor- COltroller of Desice tD (Bl}' User Fee Via O:unty Property Tax Bill ~I lD/84-l/BS I ::::o--~~~~~~--...... ...... \") N:>tify <hnty AsSP.SIDr --1 of Prop:BXI Data Dam ~ Develqnmt/EIP \.N ~t ~irem;nt :::: to to :::: fer LeJy of Dist. 13 Usu Fee Via 1905-06 Tax Bill l/85 Pmtim <hnty 1\ssesoor with Parcel Listings to Establish Dist. 13 User Data Base '85 N:>tify Dist. 13 Users of PrOp:se3 P\.blic Hearings Re Use of PIOpcc ty Tax R:>ll fa: FUture Billin;Js (Ltr to All CUst:arers with Jan- JlJl, 1985 Billing) 2/25/85 N:>tice ard etmuct of WXkstcp tD Disolss Use of Tax a:>ll for Billirg of District Fees Mlr~il. 1985 Ccnpl.ete "n!Sting of M:xUfica- tiaas to Eldsting EIP Prograrre to Set:/t5ill User Fee Rates in 1985-86 FJP Ptocessing to Establish Data Baseft'repare User Fee Tape foe Cb.lnty Tax R:>l1. Billirg 3/29/BS tbtify O:ulty Au:Utor-O:ntroller il1d Assessor of BcDrd Afproual of Use Of Tax R:>ll foe Billln:j PUrp:ses , 1985 Fc>Ntrd l\dJptEd User Fee Rat.e fee 1985-86 to <h.nty Assesoor 1905 Airil'"\Jl.K'le, 1985 Prepare Foonal N:>tiflcatim letter/Deliver Aes>lutkn, User Fee Tape ard lu.dlt Trail Listlrg tD <h.nty lu.dltor- Q::ntroller foe Prooessi.rg mto 1985'-86 Tax Bill Jllle-Julv. 1985 • fl RESOLUTION NO. 85-59-7 APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION RE MAIN STREET TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 7-2C-4 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INCORPORATING CERTAIN MITIGATION MEASURES RE MAIN STREET TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 7-2C-4, PROVIDING FOR NOTICE THEREOF AND DIRECTING FILING OF A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the project concerning which this determination is made is described as follows: Construction of a 60-inch gravity sewer in Main Street between Von Karman Avenue and San Diego Creek (Peter's Canyon Wash) Section 2. That an Initial Study, which said study is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", of the environmental effects of said project has been undertaken and completed by the District, and the results thereof have been reviewed by this Board; and, Section 3. That based on the findings of the Initial Study this Board determines that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, but there will not be a significant effect because of the mitigation measures described within the Negative Declaration which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B"; and, Section 4. That said Negative Declaration has been circulated for public review for a period from February 1 to February 28, 1985, during which time the following comments were received on the document: "CC-1" AGENDA ITEM #32(E) -.DISTRICT 7 "CC-1" .... A. Orange County Transit District, February 12, 1985. The OCTD requested a construction schedule for the project to facilitate actions to prevent potential conflicts between construction and scheduled transit service. They also requested notification copies of all environmental documents for Districts' projects which could affect Orange County public right-of-way as well as copies of construction schedules for those projects when available. B. Orange County Water District, February 20, 1985. The Water District's comments were advisory concerning potential dewatering conditions, groundwater inflow into construction trenches and the TDS levels of groundwater in the area. c. County of Orange Environmencal Management Agency, February 25, 1985. The EMA had no comment. D. City of Irvine, February 25, 1985. The City requested that two changes be made to the Negative Declaration. The first refers to encroachment permit mitigation measures and -adds that local encroachmen·t permits must be obtained in addition to those issued by Cal Trans. The second item refers to air quality in which the City requests that the statement be changed from nair quality in the project is generally goodn to "air quality at the project site is similiar to that in the Irvine Business Complex as a whole;" and, E. State of California Office of Planning and Research, February 28, 1985. OPR Notified the Districts that the Clearinghouse has chosen not to conunent on the project and that the District has complied ·with State Clearinghouse review requirements. "CC-2" AGENDA ITEM #32(E) -DISTRICT 7 "CC-2" Section s. That this Board hereby notes all comments received on the Main Street Trunk Sewer Negative Declaration and hereby incorporates the changes in mitigation measures requested by the City of Irvine; and Section 6. That, for reasons set forth in said Exhibit "A" and in accordance with the mitigation measures incorporated in Exhibit "B" and by this Resolution, it is hereby found that said project will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the Board hereby approves the Negative Declaration regarding the environmental impacts of said project~ and, Section 7. That the Secretary be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution, the aforesaid Initial Study, and the Negative Declaration at the District's office to be available for public inspection and copying; and, Section 8. That the Secretary be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with the Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. "CC-3" AGENDA ITEM #32(E) -DISTRICT 7 .. -.. . ~- "CC-3" ,. ... RESOLUTION NO. 85-60-7 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTRACT NO. 7-2C-4 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFI~TIONS FOR MAIN STREET TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 7-2C-4 * * • • • * * • * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, Boyle Engineering Corporation, District's engineers, have completed preparation of the plans and specifications for Main Street Trunk Sewer, Cont~act No. 7-2C-4. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the project for construction of the Main Street Trunk Sewer, ~ Contract No~ 7-2C-4, is hereby approved. Said project was included in the Master Plan of Trunk Sewer Facilities to Serve District No. 1, the Northern Half of District No. 6 and District No. 7, as amended. Resolution No. 85-59-7 adopted March 13, 1985, approved a Negative Declaration on the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, and directed the Secretary to file a Notice of Determination re said project, in accordance with the Districts' Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended1 and, Section 2. That the detailed plans, specifications and contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors by Boyle Engineering Corporation, District's engineers, for construction of the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, are hereby approved and adopted1 and, Section 3. 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 California1 and, "DD-1" AGENDA ITEM #33 -DISTRICT 7 "DD-1" Section 4. That the General Manager be authorized to establish the date and time at which said bids will be publicly opened and read; and, Section 5. That the Secretary and the District's Deputy Chief Engineer be authorized to open said bids on behalf of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 13, 1985. . ·• "DD-2" AGENDA ITEM #33 -DISTRICT 7 "DD-2" ; . .. .~- COUNn SANITATION. DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, &, 7 AND 11 OF ORANGE coum, CAUFORNIA . MINms OF THE REGULAR MEDING 011 FEBRUARY 13) 1985 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS A VENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA .... ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, was held on February 13, 1985, at 7:30 p.m., in the Districts' Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was cailed and the Secretary reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. J., 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 as follows: DISTRIC'r NO. 1: DISTRICT NO. 2: DISTRICT NO. 3: DISTRICT NO. 5: DISTRICT NO. 6: DISTRICT NO. 7: DISTRICT NO. 11: DISTRICT NO. 13: ACTIVE DIRECTORS x Robert Hanson, Chairman X-Dan Griset, Chairman pro tem x Don Saltarelli _!_Roger Stan ton x Buck Catlin, Chairman X-oon Roth, Chairman pro tem Richard Buck x Sam Cooper X-Dan Griset X-John Holmberg x Carol Kawanami x James Neal X-eob Perry x Don Smith x Roger Stanton x Gene Wisner x oon Roth, Chairman x Carrey Nelso~, Chairman pro tem x Ruth Bailey X-oscar Brownell X-Buck Catlin X-Norman Culver X-Richard Polis X-Don Griffin -x-Dan Griset X-John Holmberg -John Kanel X-James Neal -x-Richard Olson a-sal Sapien X-Roger Stanton x Charles Sylvia x Evelyn Hart, Chairman x Philip Maurer, Chairman pro tem _x_Roger Stanton x James Wahner, Chairman x Ruthelyn Plummer, Chairman pro tem _x_Roger Stanton x Don Smith, Chairman -x-David Sills, Chairman pro tem -x-Richard Edgar X-Dan Griset x Philip Maurer x Roger Stanton x James Wahner x Ruth Bailey, Chairman --x--Roger Stanton, Chairman pro tem John Thomas x Don Smith, Chairman x Michael J. Beverage x Sam Cooper x Don Roth __ x __ Roger Stanton -2- ALTERNATE DIRECTORS Orma Crank Robert Luxembourger Ursula Kennedy Harriett Wieder __ Chris Norby ___ E. Llewellyn Overholt, Jr. x Arthur Newton ----Carrey Nelson · Robert Luxembourger Bill Mahoney William Odlum George Scott Norman Culver Gene Beyer ---Harriett Wieder Michael J. Beverage ___ H. Llewellyn Overholt Sam Cooper John Thomas Joyce Risner -Chris Norby --Bob Perry Norma Seidel James T. Jarrell ---·Robert Luxembourger Bill Mahoney __ x __ Richard Partin ____ George Scott Bruce Finlayson ---Jean Siriani Harriett Wieder ___ David Lander Bill Agee Bill Agee __ Harriett Wieder John Cox, Jr. __ Harriett Wieder Gene Beyer Sally Anne Miller __ Ursula Kennedy __ Robert Luxembourger Bill Agee Harriett Wieder __ Harry Green Robert P. Mandie, Jr. Harriett Wieder _x_Ruth Finley __ Gene Beyer __ Gene Wisner __ carrey Nelson __ H. Llewellyn Overholt __ Harriet Wieder 2/13/85 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: DISTRICTS 5, 6 & 7 J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager, Rita Brown, Board Secretary, William N. Clarke, Thomas M. Dawes, Blake Anderson, Bill Butler, Gary Streed, Hilary Baker, Penny Kyle, Richard von Langen, Chuck Winsor, Robert Ooten Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Suzanne Atkins, Harvey Hunt, Bill Knopf, KaEen R. Peters, Joan Riddle, Stacie Young, Phil Hutton, Darryl Miller, Deborah Fox, Ray E. Lewis, Bill B. Dendy, J. Andrew Schlange, Susan M. Trager, Peer Swan, Neil Cline * * * * * * * * * * * * * Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file minute excerpt re Board Appointments That the minute excerpt from the City of Newport Beach appointing a different Alternate Director on the Boards of Districts 5 and 7, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed, as follows (*Mayor): District (s) Active Director Alternate Director 5 & 7 Philip Maurer* John c. Cox, Jr. 5 Evelyn Hart John c. Cox, Jr. 6 Ruthelyn Plummer John c. Cox, Jr. DISTRICT 1 There being no corrections or amendments \,,.) Approval of Minutes to the minutes of the regular meeting held January 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held January 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 3 There being no corrections or amendments Approval of Minutes to the minutes of the regular meeting held January 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 There being no corrections or amendments Approval of Minutes to the minutes of the regular meeting held January 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered· that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 6 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held January 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -3- \.,.! _-.. 2/13/85 DISTRICT Approval . that DISTRICT Approval that DISTRICT A1212roval 7 of Minutes said minutes 11. of Minutes said minutes 13 of Minutes be deemed approved, be deemed approved, There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held JanU.Pry 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held January 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held January 9, 1985, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Joint Chairman Joint Chairman Edgar reported that the Select Committee of Directors to Advise the Staff had met in a joint study session with the Fountain Valley City council on February 6, 1985. The staff reviewed the history, organization and finances of the Districts and their operations and facilities planning activities. Several topics were then discussed including proposed Plant No. 1 improvements, proposed formation of District No. 14, odor control measures being undertaken, and the proposal to accept pretreated Stringfellow groundwater into the Districts' sewerage system. Mr. Edgar announced that the Fiscal Policy Committee would meet Wednesday, February 20, at 4:30 p.m. The Joint Chairman then called a meeting of the Executive Committee for Wednesday, February 27, at 5:30 p.m. and invited Directors Carol Kawanami and Philip Maurer to attend and participate in the discussions. Chairman Edgar also announced that the Select Committee to Advise the Staff would meet on February 28, at 5:00 p.m. Resolution of Commendation for The Joint Chairman reported that retiring Director Wedaa Director Henry w. Wedaa was retiring from the Boards after 15 years of service. Mr. Edgar then introduced Resolution No. 85-41, commending Director Wedaa for his outstanding contributions and dedicated service to the Districts since 1970; whereupon, adoption of said resolution was moved, seconded and carried by unanimous acclamation. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS The General Manager reported that the Report of the General Manager U.S. Senate had confirmed Mr. Lee Thomas as the new Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. Thomas previously headed up EPA's Superfund Program. Mr. Sylvester reported on a Supplemental Agenda item relative to purchase of spare pintle chain that is used in repairing secondary clarifier basins at Plant No. 1 and bar screens at both plants. The current inventory of pintle chain has been exhausted because of the need to make temporary repairs at the Plant No. 2 -4- 2/13/85 final clarifiers pending previously authorized retrofitting with plastic chain, which is required because of the rate of deterioration of metal chain at Plant No. 2 due to its pure oxygen system. Plant 1 does not use pure oxygen and, therefore, metal chain can still be used there. The General Manager recommended award of Specification No. E-162 to Bearings, Inc. for replenishment of the \..,) Districts' depleted spare metal chain inventory. The General Manager reported that the Districts' pending NPDES Permit was expected to be approved very soon by the Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C. He indicated that the Directors would be notified as soon as approval is received. ALL DISTRICTS The General Counsel reported on his Report of the General Counsel attendance at recent meetings of the California Association of sanitation Agencies (CASA) and the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) held in Palm Springs. He indicated that the AMSA Attorneys Committee had developed a legislative program for the upcoming year. He also noted that he and the General Manager sit on an ad hoc CASA committee to provide direct input to Congress with regard to the proposed 1985 Clean Water Act Amendments. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Ratification of payment of Joint and Individual District Claims That payment of Joint and individual District claims set forth on pages "A", "B" and "C" attached hereto and made a part of these minutes, and summarized below, be, and are hereby, ratified by the respective Boards in the amounts so indicated. ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - Joint Working Capital Fund Self-Funded Insurance Funds DISTRICT NO. 1 DISTRICT NO. 2 DISTRICT NO. 3 DISTRICT NO. 5 DISTRICT NO. 6 DISTRICT NO. 7 DISTRICT NO. 11 DISTRICT NO. 13 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT ALL DISTRICTS Awarding Specification No. A-122, Three (3) One-Half Ton Pickup Trucks! to Mission GMC Trucks, Inc. 1/9/85 1L23L85 1L2a1as V $373,385.76 $ 299,535.60 $ 44,593.35 1,163,928.10 40,685.65 66, 001. 21 849.42 4,089.84 4,502.52 428.24 535.50 981.72 3, 541. 03 3,962.33 16,089.74 4,636.41 62,194.80 1,568.33 54,019.18 2,638.71 864.47 S,446.66 5,135.28 1,139.20 3!498.37 $537,848.93 $1,625,553.07 $ 849.42 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the bid tabulation and recommendation re purchase of Three (3) One-Half Ton Pickup Trucks, Specification No. A-122, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, -s- ;.• 2/13/85 FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase be, and is hereby, awarded to Mission GMC Trucks, Inc. in the amount of $22,050.00 plus tax. ALL DISTRicrs Awarding Specification No. S-033 (Revised), Blueprinting, Photo- copying and Relatsd Services to Consolidated Reprographics Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the bid tabulation and recommendation re Specification No. S-033 (Revised) for Blueprinting, Photocopying and Related Services, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed1 and, FURTHER MOVED: That said services be, and are hereby, awarded to Consolidated Reprographics for an amount not to exceed $25,000.00 for a one-year period beginning March 1, 1985. ALL DISTRicrS Rejecting the single bid received for Entry Gates at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-125, and referring project to staff for re-evaluation Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-20, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation, rejecting the single bid receive for Entry Gates at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-125. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes·, and, FURTHER MOVED: That said project be referred to staff for re-evaluation and recommendation. ALL DISTRI.crS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Job No. PW-139 to Kiewit Pacific Company That the Boards of Directors hereby_ adopt Resolution No. 85-21, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Replacement Sluice Gates at Headworks "en, Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-139, to Kiewit Pacific Company in the amount of $307,667.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Specification No. M-021 to Dorado Enterprises, Inc. That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-40, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding purchase order contract for Removal of the Existing Deteriorated Chain and Installation of the Replacement Budd Chain System, Specification No. M-021, on the Plant No. 2 rectangular sedimentation basins, to Dorado Enterprises, Inc. for the total amount of $215,700.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRicrS Authorizing staff to issue Change Order A to Purchase Order No. 17826 re Specification No. M-018 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue Change Order A to Purchase Order No. 17826 issued to Falcon Services for disposal of dewatered sludge in connection with Emergency Repairs to the Conveyor at Plant No. 2 Sludge Handling Facilities, Specification No. M-018, increasing the total amount from $6,500.00 to $16,837.39 to include. the $16.90 per -6- 2/13/85 ton sludge hauling and disposal fee from Wilmington to BKK in west Covina, inadvertently omitted from the staff's original estimate of the cost for these emergency services, which included only the $300 per load charge to transfer the sludge from Plant No. 2 to the Wilmington holding facility. ALL DISTRIC!'S Approving Change Order No. 7 to the plans and si;>ecif ications re Job No. P2-25-2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 7 to the plans and specifications for Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, authorizing an addition of $5,599.47 to the contract with Advanco Constructors, Inc. for fabrication and installation of additional parts, additional electrical work, and a safety modification, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRIC?S Approving Change Order No. 6 to the plans and specifications re Job No. P2-26 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 6 to the plans and specifications for Primary Sedimentation Basins P & Q at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-26, authorizing an addition of $16,944.88 to the contract with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for miscellaneous modifications and several items of additional work, and granting a time extension of 34 calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRicrS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Accepting Job No. P2-26 as complete That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-22, accepting Primary Sedimentation Basins P & Q at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-26, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRicrS Approving Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications re Job No. PW-083 (Rebid) Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Auto Shop Hoist at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. PW-083 (Rebid), authorizing an addition of $1,850.00 to the contract with G.E. Jepson, Division of Charles E. Thomas Company, for installation of upgraded motor controls, control enclosures and related electrical work, and granting a time extension of 8 calendar days required for redesign and delivery of modified electrical equipment, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRicrS Accepting Job No. PW-083 (Rebid) as complete Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-23, accepting Auto Shop Hoist at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. PW-083 (~ebid) as complete, authorizing execution of Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part ·of these minutes. -7- ;. 2/P/85 ALL DISTRicrS Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications re Job No. PW-118 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for pH and Conductivity Meters for "C" Headworks Influent Trunks, Job No. PW-118, authorizing an addition of $2,109.00 to the contract with Allen Electic Company for additional electrical work, remdbilization required by the contractor to install platforms, ladders and handrails in the meter vault, and for additional hot taps required to add pH and conductivity probes to the Miller-Holder Trunk, and granting a time extension of 142 calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRicrS Moved, seconded and duly carrie~: Accepting Job No. PW-118 as complete That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-24, accepting pH and Conductivity Meters for "C" Headworks Influent Trunks, Job No. PW-118, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications re Job No. PW-132 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Fabrication and Installation of Adapter Spools for Meter Replacements, Job No. PW-132, authorizing an addition of $21,884.80 to the contract with Floyd-Kordiak, a Joint Venture, to provide for installation of magnetic flow meters furnished under separate contract, repair of the existing deteriorated facilities and for delays required to accommodate plant shutdowns, and granting a time extension of 101 calendar days due to the delay in delivery of the new meters and for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRicrS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Accepting Job No. PW-132 as complete That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-25, accepting Fabrication and Installation of Adapter Spools for Meter Replacements, Job No. PW-132, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications re Job No. J-llR Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Replacement Chiller Package for Laboratory Air Conditioner, Job No. J-llR, authorizing an addition of $645.00 to the contract with Pacific Mechanical Systems for substitution of heavier duty aluminum louvered fence around the Chiller Unit, and granting a time extension of 79 calendar days for the redesi9n, manufacture and delivery of the new fence material, be, and is hereby, approved. -8- 2/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Accepting Job No. J-llR as complete That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-26, accepting Replacement Chiller Package for Laboratory Air Conditioner, Job No. J-llR, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. A certified copy of this. resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Agreement with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. re consulting services to optimize the efficiency of the odor control scrubber system, re preparation of an operators' manual, for training services, and for odor assessment of digester cleaning beds beds, be, and is hereby, received, Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Selection Committee certification re final negotiated fee re Agreement with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. for consulting services to optimize the efficiency of the odor control scrubber system, for preparation of an operators' manual, for training services, and for odor assessment of digester cleaning ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-27, approving Agreement with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. for consulting services to optimize the efficiency of the odor control scrubber system, for preparation of an operators' manual, for training services, and for odor assessment of digester cleaning beds, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus expenses and profit, for a total amount not to exceed $86,750.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: \..) Approving Addendum No. 11 to Agreement with Butier Engineering, That the Selection Committee Inc. re Construction Management certification re final negotiated fee re Services Addendum No. 11 to Agreement with Butier Engineering, Inc. for Construction Management Services, providing for additional services to assist in the preparation of a Request for Reconsideration of the eligibility of a $2.3 million claim settlement relative to Job No. P2-23-6 and other disallowed items, and extending the agreement expiration date from June 30, 1985 to September 30, 1985, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-28, approving Addendum No. 11 to Agreement with Butier Engineering, Inc. for construction Management Services relating to the construction contracts for 75-MGD Improved Treatment Facilities at Plant No. 2, including Jobs Nos. P2-23 and P2-24, P2-25-1A, P2~25-2 and P2-26, et. al., providing for additional services to assist in the preparation of a Request for Reconsideration of the eligibility of a $2.3 million claim settlement relative to Job No. P2-23-6 and other disallowed items, on an hourly-rate basis, plus overhead, direct expenses and profit, for a total additional amount not to exceed $20,000.00, increasing the total contract for all Construction Management Services from $2,087,525.00 to $2,107,525.00, and extending the agreement expiration date from June 30, 1985 to September 30, 1985. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. -9- .. 2/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Approving and authorizing staff to issue Change Order C to Purchase Order No. 17054 to Larry Walker Associates, Inc. re additional services to assist in the preparation of a Request for Reconsideration of the eligiblity of a $2.3 million claim settlement re Job No. P2-23-6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee re Change Order c to Purchase Order No. 17054 issued to Larry Walker Associates, Inc. re additional services to assist in the preparation of a Request for Reconsideration of the eligibility of a $2.3 million claim settlement relative to Job No. P2-23-6 and other disallowed items, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue Change Order C to Purchase Order No. 17054 to Larry Walker Associates, Inc., increasing the total amount on an hourly-rate basis including overhead and profit, plus direct expenses, from $32,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $52,000.00, for additional services required to assist in the preparation of said Request for Reconsideration of the eligibility of a $2.3 million claim settlement relative to Job No. P2-23-6 and other disallowed items. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Engineering Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers re Jobs Nos. Pl-21, P2-28-l and P2-28-2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Selection Committee Certification of the final negotiated fee re Addendum No. 2 to the Engineering Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of Installation of Replacement Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21, Installation of Replacement Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-28-l, and Ventilation Improvements at Plant No. 2 Solids Handling Facilities, Job No. P2-28-2, providing for design changes to Jobs Nos. Pl-21 and P2-28-l to comply with the odor mitigation policy recently approved by the Boards for upgrading of support facilities and for corrective work on existing facilities, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-29, approving Addendum No. 2 to the Engineering Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of Installation of Replacement Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21, Installation of Replacement Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-28-l, and Ventilation Improvements at Plant No. 2 Solids Handling Facilities, Job No. P2-28-2, providing for design changes to Jobs Nos. Pl-21 and P2-28-l to comply with odor mitigation policy recently approved by the Boards for upgrading of support facilities and for corrective work on existing facilities, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus direct expenses and profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $153,874.00, increasing total authorized compensation from $720,500.00 to an amount not to exceed $874,374.00; and providing for an extension of time for completion of design work for Job No. Pl-21 from February 14, 1985 to April 14, 1985 and for completion of design work for Job No. P2-28-l from April 14, 1985 to June 14, 1985. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. -10- 2/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Agreement with Lee and Ro Consulting Engineers re design of That the Selection Committee Rehabilitation of Primary Basins D certification of the f in~l negotiated \_,,) & E at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-29 fee with Lee and Ro Consulting Engineers re Agreement for design of Rehabilition of Primary Basins D & E at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-29, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved: and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-30, approving Agreement with Lee and Ro Consulting Engineers for design of Rehabilitation of Primary Basins D & E at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-29, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus direct expenses and prof it, for a total amount not to exceed $47,500.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Agreement with Kennedy/ Jenks Engineers re design of Rehabilitation of Domes and Installation of Sludge Pump Mixing Systems, Digesters E & H, Job No. P2-30 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Kennedy/Jenks Engineers re Agreement for design of Rehabilitation of Domes and Installation of Sludge Pump Mixing Systems, Digesters E & H, Job No. P2-30, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved1 and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-31, approving Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Engineers for design of Rehabilitation of Domes and Installation of Sludge Pump Mixing Systems, Digesters E & H, Job No. P2-30, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus direct \..,) expenses and profit, for a total amount not to exceed $37,900.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRicrS Authorizing the General Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to Lease Agreement with East Bay Municipal Utility District for Lease of Districts' Cobey Composter (Specification No. L-012) Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to execute Amendment No. 1 to Lease Agreement with East Bay Municipal Utility District for Lease of Districts' Cobey Composter being used by the Districts, 1985 to May 31, 1985, at the (Specification No. L-012) not currently extending the term of said lease from January 30, current rate of $300 per month. ALL DISTRICTS Actions relative to investigation and resolution of Mexican radio interference with the Districts' radio system Authorizing the Districts' staff to work cooperatively with appropriate local, state and federal govern- ments and the Mexican government to perform technical feasibility tests in Mexico The following actions relative to cooperating with the County of Orange and other local, state and federal agencies to investigate and resolve Mexican radio interference with the Districts' radio system were taken: -11- Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Districts' staff be, and is hereby, authorized to work cooperatively with appropriate local, state and federal governments and the Mexican government to obtain 2/13/85 authorization to perform technical feasibility tests in Mexico to demonstrate to the Mexican licensee of the interferring radio station that reversing the input and output frequencies of their station to conform to the U.S. convention would eliminate 90% of the severe interference now being experienced on both sides of the border. Authorizing the Districts' personnel to enter Mexico with the necessary eguipment to conduct tests and demonstrations Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Districts' personnel be, and are hereby, authorized to enter to conduct the tests appropriate U.S. and Mexico with the necessary equipment and demonstrations after proper coordination with the Mexican governmental agencies. Authorizing participation with the County of Orange to exeedite approvals required to investigate and resolve Mexican radio inter- ference with the Districts' radio system Moved, seconded and duly carried: That participation with the County of Orange and payment of up to $10,000.00 for the services of the County's legislative advocate to take whatever action is appropriate to expedite the ~pprovals required to investigate and resolve Mexican radio interference with the Districts' radio system, and to explore possible avenues that will lead to an agreement between the U.S. and Mexican governments to recognize the u.s. convention, be, and are hereby, authorized. ALL DISTRICTS Receive, file and deny Application to File Late Claim of Henry M. Salgado Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Application to File Late Claim dated January 7, 1985 and supplement thereto dated January 15, 1985, submitted by the attorney for Henry M. Salgado, an employee of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, contractor for Job No. PW-123, Piping for Return Sludge Chlorination at Plant No. 2 Secondary Settling Basins, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and denied, as recommended by the General Counsel. ALL DISTRICTS Receive, file and deny claim of Ralph A. Lim Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the claim submitted by Ralph A. Lim dated December 26, 1984, in the amount of $1,381.76 for medical expenses and damages to his vehicle allegedly caused by a District-owned vehicle, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and denied1 and, FURTHER MOVED: That said claim be, and is hereby, referred to the Districts' liability claims administrator and General Counsel for appropriate action. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive, file and approve written report of the Executive Committee That the written report of the Executive Committee's meeting on January 23, 1985, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved.· -12- 2/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Approving plans and specifications re Job No. PW-141, and authorizing the General Manager to award a contract for said project Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-32, approving plans and specifications for Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, and authorizing the General Manager to receive bids and award a contract to the lowest bidder with the concurrence of the Joint Chairman and General Counsel. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Amending Positions and Salaries Resolution No. 79-20, as amended That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-33, amending Positions and Salaries Resolution No. 79-20, as amended, deleting the authorized personnel for the position of Principal Laboratory and Research Analyst, Range ~ Number 1064E ($2408/2997} from the Laboratory Division and transferring said authorized personnel to the position classification of Senior Environmental Specialist in the Treatment Plant Evaluation Group in the Operations Department and reclassifying at the same salary range. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Approving the Long-Term Odor Mitigation Implementation Plan 1985, .be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Revised Fiscal Policy Committee Guidelines dated February 1985 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Long-Term Odor Mitigation Implementation Plan dated January 16, Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Revised Fiscal Policy Committee Guidelines dated February 1985, increasing the membership from five to seven Directors, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Appointments to various Special Committees of the Boards of Directors Joint Chairman Edgar referred Directors to a listing of his proposed Boards of Directors Committee Appointments. He reported that in making the appointments, he had tried to assure that each Director was represented on a committee. ALL DISTRICTS Presentation by DOHS/SAWPA on Environmental Review re proposal to pretreat groundwater from Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site for disposal into the Districts' sewerage system and directing staff to study Plant No. 1 diversion structure modifications re accommodation of Stringfellow flows The Joint Chairman recognized Mr. Andrew Schlange, Mr. Bill Dendy, Mr. Ray Lewis and Ms. Susan Trager, representing the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA} and the California Department of Health Services (OOHS), who addressed the Boards of Directors regarding the SAWPA/DOHS proposal to dispose of pretreated groundwater from the Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site into. the Districts' sewerage system. They reviewed the history of the events -13- 2/13/85 leading to the current situation at the Stringfellow site and what measures had been taken to help correct the problem. The purpose of the project is to protect the upper (Riverside County) and lower (Orange County) Santa Ana River underground basin fresh water supply from being contaminated. They reviewed the env~ronmental issues of the proposal and the environmental review that had been prepared at the request of the Boards. It was· noted that all federal and state environmental regulations had been satisfied. The on-site treatment plant facilities and treatment process and the safeguards that will be imposed to assure the pretreated groundwater meets all the federal, state and .Districts' industrial waste standards prior to depositing it in the Santa Ana River Interceptor for conveyance and further treatment at the Districts' facilities were also reviewed. The Board entered into a discussion relative to the testing and monitoring that will done on the effluent from the Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site prior to being deposited in the Districts' sewerage system. The Stringfellow treatment plant will operate for about one month with continual testing of the effluent before any of the water would be deposited into the Districts' Santa Ana River Interceptor. The Districts' Director of Operations also reviewed the ongoing testing and monitoring procedures that would be administered by the Districts Industrial Waste Division to assure that the treated Stringfellow effluent complies with federal, state and Districts' requirements. The Chair recognized Mr. Neil Cline, Orange County Water District Manager, to respond to concerns expressed by some over any potential effect of the proposal on the Water District's Water Factory 21. Mr. Cline stated that his agency supported the project and.urged the Boards' support. He said that the Water District was more concerned over the probable impact on the basin groundwaters if the project did not proceed than any impact on Water Factory 21. The Water Factory is capable of producing a high quality effluent for the Water Districts' program of reclamation and the seawater intrusion barrier. The Joint Chairman stated that the Districts have the ability to divert the Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI) flow (that will include the pretreated wastes from Stringfellow) to Plant No. 2 for processing which would eliminate it from the Plant No. 1 treated effluent that is made available to the Water District. This would allay any concerns about impacts on Water Factory 21. However, it was pointed out that to divert the SARI flow to Plant No. 2 and yet maintain treatment Plant No. 1 efficiencies, it would be necessary to modify the Plant No. 1 incoming wastewater diversion structure to allow the Sunflower Trunk flow to be processed at Plant No. 1 to help make up for the wastewater shortage resulting from diverting the SARI line to Plant No. 2. It was then moved and seconded: That the Joint Chairman and Vice Joint Chairman be authorized to review with the staff the design and construction of Plant No. 1 diversion facility modifications to allow the Sunflower Trunk flow to be processed at Plant No. l and, thus, enable the SARI flow to be diverted to Plant No. 2 for treatment: and to approve such modifications in an amount not to exceed $50,000. -14- 2/13/85 Following further discussion by the Board relative to obtaining more detailed information and costs in connection with this alternative prior to authorizing the construction of said facilities' modifications, and to request a written report from the Orange County Water District concerning the affect on Water Factory 21, the motion was withdrawn. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That the staff be directed to explore with contractors and engineers the feasibility of providing the necessary modifications to existing diversion facilities at Plant No. 1 to enable pumping of the water from the Sunflower Interceptor to allow it to flow through Plant No. 1, in order to enable the diversion of the entire flow from the Santa Ana River Interceptor to the Districts' Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach to preclude it from flowing through the Orange County Water District's water Factory 21; and, FURTHER MOVED: Th~t the staff obtain a cost estimate for said modifications and a report from the Orange County Water District as to any concerns they may have regarding any effluent that would come to their Water Factory 21, and that this information be given to the Executive Committee at their next meeting for a report back to the.Board at the March 13th meeting. ALL DISTRICTS Authorizing formation of a Special Advisory Committee re Water Quality in the Santa Ana River Basin The Chair recognized Mr. Andrew Schlange, General Manager of the Santa Ana watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) who suggested that an advisory committee to encourage a dialogue between upper and lower basin officials, be formed in order that SAWPA could keep citizens and officials in Orange County informed of the progress that is being made at the Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site as well ongoing plans for improved water quality in the entire Santa Ana River Basin. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors do hereby approve the formation of a special Advisory Committee re water Quality in the Santa Ana River Basin. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file Environmental Review for Waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Disposal Program, Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site, dated January 1985 Services, Health and Welfare Agency, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file (Interim) Final Report, Environmental Review for Treated waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Disposal Program, Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Environmental Review for waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Disposal Program, Stringfellow Hazardous waste Site, dated January, 1985, prepared by the Department of Health State of California, be, and is hereby, Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the (Interim) Final Report, Environmental Review for Treated Waste Discharge, Interim Treatment and Disposal Program, Stringfellow Hazardous waste Site, dated February 1985 prepared by the Department of Health Services, Health and Welfare Agency, State of California, be, an~ is hereby, received and ordered filed. -15- as~ 2/13/85 ALL DISTRicrS Receive and file letter from Mayor Philip R. Maurer of Newport Beach supporting the City of Fountain Valley's request to fund the cost of an independent consultant to study the effects of using the Districts' facilities for disposal of treated waste from Stringfellow waste Disposal Site received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRicrS Receive and file letter from Supervisor Roger Stanton re December 27th information package on proposed discharge of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater to the Districts' sewerage system hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRicrs Awarding purchase of 10,000 Feet of Pintle Chain, Specification Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the letter dated January 16, 1985, from Mayor Philip R. Maurer of Newport Beach, supporting the City of Fountain Valley's ·request to fund the cost of an independent consultant to study the effects of the use of the facilities of the Districts for the disposal of treated waste from the Stringfellow Waste Disposal site, be, and is hereby, Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the letter dated January 28, 1985, from Supervisor Roger Stanton re December 27th informational package on proposed discharge of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater to the .Districts' sewerage system, be, and is Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the bid tabulation and No. E-162, to Bearings, Inc. recommendation re award of purchase of 10,000 Feet of Pintle Chain, Specification No. E-162, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase be, and is hereby, awarded to Bearings, Inc. in the amount of $72,100.00 plus tax. DISTRicr 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:43 p.m., February 13, 1985. DISTRicrs 5 & 6 Approving Change Order A to Purchase Order No. 18276 issued to K.E.C. Company re Contract No. 5-19-Rl Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order A to Purchase Order No. 18276 issued to K.E.C. Company for Emergency Replacement of Portions of "B" Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-19-Rl, from the Santa Ana River junction structure to a point approximately 2,100 feet easterly, increasing the total amount from $113,580.00 to $126,856.82 for additional work required to spread rock to provide access to the job site during inclement weather conditions, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRicrs 5 & 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Accepting Contract No. 5-19-Rl as complete That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-39, accepting Emergency Replacement of Portions of "B" Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-19-Rl, as complete and authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion. A certified copy of the resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. -16- 2/13/85 DISTRICTS 5 & 6 Approving Change Order B to Purchase Order No. 17859 issued to u.s. Pipe and Foundry Company re Contract No. 5-19-Rl-A Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order B to Purchase Order No. 17859 issued to u.s. Pipe and Foundry Company for purchase of Ductile Iron Pipe, Wrap and Fittings, Contract No. 5-19-Rl-A, used for the increasing the total amount additional material used in emergency replacement of portions of "B" Trunk Sewer, DISTRicr 5 Adjournment from $65,877.14 to $66,908.74 plus tax to provide for the repair of said.sewer, be, and is hereby, approved. Moved, seconded and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:43 p.m., February 13, 1985. DISTRICT 6 Moved~ seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 be adjourned·. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:43 p.m., February 13, 1985. DISTRicr· 11 Receive and file Staff Reports dated January 11, 1985 and February 5, 1985, re Goldenwest Trunk Sewer north of Warner warner, be, and are hereby, received DISTRICT 11 Adjournment Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Staff Reports dated January 11, 1985, and February S, 1985, in connection with the recent blockage in the Goldenwest Trunk Sewer north of and ordered filed. Moved, seconded and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:43 p.m., February 13, 1985. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:43 p.m., February 13, 1985. DISTRICT 1 The Districts' General Counsel reported Approving stipulated Agreement with that subseEJUent to the mailing of the v.A.L. Circuits, Inc. Pertaining to agenda material, the staff and counsel Industrial Waste Permit No. 1-348 had met with V.A.L. Circuits, Inc. concerning enforcement actions being instituted by the District against the permittee for non-compliance with their industrial waste permit requirements. He reported that V.A.L. Circuits, Inc. has agreed to enter into a stipulated Agreement setting forth a detailed time schedule for construction of pretreatment facilities and providing for the deposit of funds with the District to be used to cover any of the District's costs in monitoring their program over the next six months and, if necessary, any penalties assessed could be automatically taken from this deposit rather than going through the litigation process. He stated that the District would not be giving up any of its rights to revoke the permit if all of the c~nditions are not met. During the term \..,.) of the agreement V.A.L. Circuits, Inc. must comply with all permit requirements. -17- .. 2/13/85 The General Counsel reviewed the provisions of the enforcement agreement and advised the Board that it had the option of approvi"ng the stipulated Agreement or setting an enforcement hearing to consider revoking the permit. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That the stipulated Agreement with V.A.L. Circuits, Inc. Pertaining to Industrial Waste Permit No. 1-348, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRicr 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:54 p.m., February 13, 1985. DISTRicr 7 Approving plans and specifications re Manhole Repair, Redhill Avenue, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, Orange County, Contract No. 7-SMD-l Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-34-7, approving plans and specifications for Manhole Repair, Redhill Avenue, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, Orange County, Contract No. 7-SMD-l, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRicr 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Ordering Annexation No. 101 - Samways Annexation That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-35-7, ordering annexation of .73 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity of lower Foothill Drive and Plantero Drive in the unincorporated territory of the County of Orange, proposed Annexation No. 101 -Samways Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRicr 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Ordering Annexation No. 103 - Hartman Annexation That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-36-7, ordering annexation of 3.70 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity of Santiago Canyon Road and Lolita Street in the unincorporated territory of the County of Orange, proposed Annexation No. 103 -Hartman Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICI' 7 Approving stipulated Agreement with Metropolitan Circuits, Inc. Pertaining to Industrial waste Permit No. 7-217 The Districts' General Counsel reported that subsequent to the mailing of the agenda material, the staff and counsel had met with Metropolitan Circuits, Inc., concerning enforcement actions being instituted by the District against the permittee for non-compliance with their industrial waste permit requirements. He reported that Metropolitan Circuits, Inc. has agreed to enter into a stipulated Agreement setting forth a detailed time schedule for construction of pretreatment facilities and providing for the deposit of funds with the District to be used to cover any of the District's costs in monitoring their program over the next six -18- 2/13/85 months and, if necessary, any penalties assessed could be automatically taken from this deposit rather than going through the litigation process. Re stated that the District would not be giving up any of its rights to revoke the permit if all of the conditions are not met. During the term of the agreement Metropolitan Circuits, Inc. must comply with all permit requirements. · \._.) The General Counsel reviewed the provisions of the enforcement agreement and advised the Board that it had the option of approving the stipulated Ag~eement or setting an enforcement hearing to consider revoking the permit. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That the stipulated Agreement with Metropolitan Circuits, Inc. Pertaining to Industrial waste Permit No. 7-217, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:55 p.m., February 13, 1985. DISTRicr 2 The Board of Directors of County Convene in closed session Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, declared that it had read and discussed a confidential memorandum of the General Counsel, dated February 13, 1985, submitted pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9: and that it had found the memorandum of the General Counsel and the facts and circumstances on which it is based ·to be adequate for the purpose of holding a closed session of. the Board of Directors •. THEREFORE, by motion made and seconded in open session, the Board of Directors ordered that: A closed session of the Board of Directors be held for the purpose of discussing and, if necessary, taking action on the subject matter set forth in said memorandum of the General Counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b). The Board then convened in closed session at 9:55 p.m. DISTRICT 2 Reconvene in regular session DISTRICT 2 Adjournment The Board of Directors reconvened in regular session at 10:15 p.m. Moved, seconded and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:15 p.m., February 13, 1985. 1, 2, 3, -19- .... ; ,I : 1· ! . !-·: 1 •• 1 !:i I,. I. l'"i ·' . I I r· ' ::: :J::> I ......... ::: ( fllfJ[': ~·0 ~lAkk tt T ~~O. •, 7 ::.· '-'•4 f7:'44~ ~7?446 '.'7C'447 ~72"48 (•7?'t49 U7245\J 072451 (1 72452 (.72 1f5'3 0 7 24~1f 0724~5 072456 07?lt57 0721f58 07?4b9 0 7246G U72'tE.1 071'462 ~·7 2463 .172%1f l.'72465 072466 fl724b7 072468 h7 2ltf.9 C72'f70 "72471 fl72472 072473 '.172ltH 07;:47~ 072476 1!72477 \.7;47f'. fl 7 ~~ 4 79 l!724l'l! 'J721ttH Q72'1~2 1J72'1Jl3 l•72H.lt (17~~"'=' i!7 241;6 072487 t:7C:4ef1 {' 7L 1H'9 ( ') 1 c, 9 -J T f• I 5 T \. C: 11 1' 1 ~l c r LI r l .~ L I H1rl~Sl'1G 0111[ l/. ~/,.,:,I :u:.t f•! I (di T t.IJl-~~~[I· t.Ptt 1, c:; U ~! T Y $ t f, l T H J or-~ ~ I '; T I{ I C l <:, 0 f U ll t !11 C t C < • lif-J T Y V[N(:Uf 4 L) .\ M ~-0 f•' I f.J r: U ~ P. J i S , I NC • J.LUM-~-THEP~ ~~ERlCtN AIR flLl[h, INC. A~[~ICAN CO~FPCSSUk CO> THE ~NCHOR ~icwJ~G ro. Al)UA fH!I! CORP. AR~OU-RISCO, INC. ASSOCIATED CONCRLll PROO., INC RALPH w. ~TKlNSO~ bC INOUSTRIAL ~UPFLft INC. el<k CORPORATI0 11J BAK(k PLHJOOD co., INC. HFCKMAN INSTRUMENTS CECKMAN INOUSTRlAL BCNZ ENGIN[lRING, INC. e.rvco · BIG ~ox RENTAL co. BLAC~ 8 OECKE~ MFG. CO. BOYLE (NGI~EERING CORP &URK[ EHGINEERING CO. C ~ R RECO~DITIONlNG CO. C P I C Al I F 0 R fH A , INC • CS COMHNY CAL-PAC CHEMICAL co., INC. CALIF. AS~OClATION Of PUALIC JOHN CAPOLLO ENGlN[[~S CASTLE CONTROLS, INC. CHESTERTON LOS ANGf LES CHlV~Or~ u.s.A., INC. YILLlA~ N. CLA~K[ CONSOLJD~T[O £L£CTHICAL OIST. CONTINENTAL CHfMICAL CO CONTROL CAhLCSt INC. COOPER [Nf~GY SERVJf[S COUNTY ~hOllSALE EllCTRJC C.H ~IA Tfff O~IVlfLS TIRE Sff.VICf TOM OA lJES Df:CO OICKSONS OUNf~ EOwAROS C(1flf.'. [ ~ ~ 1 MA f\!, I "IC• fNCt!ANT[R, INC. FAMILIAN PJPl l suii1=·LY FISCH[P ~ p~qJ[R CO. FL 0-SY S JE ~~~; cu. l I.\~ -~ ;, I II ~Jl / .: ~, / 'l ':.. \~·' (1UN f 1.5:~.lt. 1.llt9eHI 'f.1 t .. B7.~1 1.~22.•~'J \17~.IIJ t)J,733.J'J tl2't •. H l.;n.9r; ilt,l63.2'f i 1 '1 n. 7~ S 12 , !1 H 4 • 4 '3 ~1·10.rJu H22. 81 :L1R3. ~8 s11,:;51.•H S3 7. l 0 u 'li45. ;\(! une.86 t5lt7l2.29 13CJ.ll2 :l-25~. 0 .) 1.84.lf3 i.4 7. 3tt l 7 :1. 't't !I lf,lJ.{!U $1,35.3 • .37 t589.34 $2 l. ti7 $ 4, Bit 6. C:l 1.9'l.5i..' 1.'139.16 s1,'.?2q.f:t• :J.29'1.21 H·.11287.50 !llY.~3 !.'Hi.6£1 :s.~.l.d6.4Cl 11 :i.:.-.5 '1t't48.7~ ! \, l"iHeH~ j.'~:?C:..?5 '£1.,'.ll.f? i. -~ t '; •l :, • ·" L 'I. 1 7 't. q ~- i. 2'1~.·~~· .i7:~.b 0 l•f. ~-Cl< IP TI O"I LAB SUPPLIES USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES COMPRESSOR PARTS ENGINE PARTS CHEMICAL COAGULANTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MATERIALS PUMP PARTS SHALL HARDWARE SLUDGE HAULING AND DISPOSAL LUMBER ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES COMPRESSOR PARTS ELECTRIC CART PARTS TRASH DISPOSAL TOOL REPAIRS ENGR. 7-7. 7-8. 7-2C-~ TUBING PUMP PARTS WORD PROCESSING MAINTENANCE FREIGHT LAB SUPPLIES CONFERENCE REGISTRATION ENGR. P2-25-2 VALVES FREIGHT ENGINE OIL CONFERENCE EXPENSES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES CHLORINE TRUCK PARTS ENGINE PARTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES LAB SUPPLIES TRUCK TIRES MEETING EXPENSES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES AIR CONDITIONING REPAIRS PA I NT SUPPLIES OFF I CE SUPPLIES OCEAN MONITORING PIPE SUPPLIES PIPE SUPPLIES FREIGHT ( -- !.. FUtJO NO 91r1q -JT DIST WORl\lNl. CAl·lTAL •~Of[SSJ~L OATl l/~'/t~ ~AL[ ~rro~T ~UM~Ek A~4' COlJNTY S.tt11TATIOf-J IJIST~ICT'> or Ot<At.Cf COUNTY ! : ~ WAP.RANT NO. 11•' H j,, 1::1 I, 1 •. 1 !. ... · i.•: : ! ::: ):::a . I ('..) t I' I' I !"I ;I'•! .. : i .. · I. 1:·:! :.· : .I ::: iJ72lfli0 il72491 H2lf92 07,'lf93 07 ~· 49lf il7?'t95 l'724~6 07~'197 072lf98 07 24~i:=a 072 1HC 072~01 t1H5C2 072503 07 2 504 0725~~ C72506 072~07 C7250H lln''5l1 9 072510 J72511 1)72512 !172513 <!725llf 07?515 C72516 ;J7?517 ": . ..\72~·1h (172519 072520 ~72521 ::!7 2~22 1172!:.23 (17 (>~21f 1172~25 r!7'i'~2f.. ':J72~27 cn~2fi l•H!:-~5 cn!'>? . .:i 17 :' ~31 (•7L-~.32 H~!':?.!i ~7 C:53't rn53!.1 ( VF tHJO k flTY Of FOUNTAIN VALL£Y THE fO~BORO COMPA~Y GENLRAL (LlCTRlC CO. GfNEFAL Tflf PHOWE CO. CICRLl~H-MlTCHlLLt INC. t-1/tS TY llL J G~JHEN T JOHN C. HEN&ERfiE~ CO., INC. W.C. t1£NORIE & CO., INC. HOOSJ£R PLASTIC FABRICATION CITY Ot HUNTINGTON PEACH ISCO COMPANY INOU5TF1AL THREADED PRODUCTS IRVI~E RA~CH wiTfR DISTRICT IRVIN[ SWE(FIN~ Sl~VlCE ORYO~ JACKSON PUMP DlVISlO~ THr JANJTO~•s SHO~P[ JOHNSTON PUMP CO. ~EENAN PIPE & SUPPLY CO. ~ELCO SALES & fN~J~[EPING CO. KINu ~[ARING, INC. K~OX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLlfS L.B.w.s., INC. LAUPSE~ COLOR LAU LlfECOt-1-SAHTY Sf.kVICE: SUPPLY LIGHTING OJ~TRlfUTORSt INC. LOC~L ~G[NfY FOk~ATJON COMH LOS ANGELLS Tl~ES LOS ANGf.LES TI~rs MAC. -TR Ol t l NC. JOl~N T • f'!A LL OY MAROEN SUSCO MATl -Ct-tLORt INC. MCCROMETER CORf' "CLU.N HI 01.lt:ST MC~AST[H-CAHP SUPPLY CO. MJTCHlLL MANUALSt INC. MOIJO tr<OUPt INC. MOO?[ PRODUCTS CO. MY ms T HH. SUPH y t.:ATEL F. CO. UCCl[ENIAL CHEMIC~L COPP. OC(f.N ~ALT ro., me. OLYMPJf CHf~IC&L CO. ORA~G[ COUNTY PUNP CO. OqA~Gl VALVf & FJTllN~ CO. 0 X Y '.it: N H r< V I C [ c Lr. 1 ~ s pf. I (' I l I ;; C) I H 5 AMOUlll T iuqt.S5 $1 • .?54.J.7 'L !:) ) 1 • lf If t.ti7 :l. 5lf 126,732. ·10 $'t6~.54 3. 2 't ~~. 3 ') "755.~5 t79f..89 st 5 .64 1.755.l!'I 11'13.(q •J.q. ,, (, 't't5 :i. "JI! 1.1 'J. 7f. ~ ?.lf 11. ~9 'i.2 .5. !°) 7 il • 5 .) '} • 4 It :i.132.30 'l29J4.51 .$21. Hlf 1.236.3~ t164.3!J t2't9.i16 $2,897.'Jl .\25 u ~ tJJ s2 .. n!.1.tiO S 1 • l 7 IJ • 7 fl. $ l 't l). 1 ::i is.1.1u.!1\I i10,o;.13.·1e s3.1u2.'3~ 1.54 ~. n s5,251.4tt H.33.116 t5 3. "/(I 11 B. ·15 112q.o;i2 i~\11. q 7 3.lt"iq3.7'l S. ~! , 4 :! I • ~ 'J l(,?7.U. ·1.27,171.'Jq ''-1 '5 .~. 7 tl i.~.1':17.tt9 1 .~z H. If 3 ( IJ[SCl<IPTION WATER USEAGE CONTROL EQUIPMENT ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES TELEPHONE FILTER PRESS BELTS TRUCK REPAIRS SHALL HARDWARE, ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES PIPE SUPPLIES SMALL HARDWARE -WATER USEAGE ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES SMALL HARDWARE WATER USEAGE PLANT MAINTENANCE FREIGHT JANITORIAL SUPPLIES FREIGHT VALVES PIPE SUPPLIES BEARING SUPPLIES TOOLS WELDING SUPPLIES FILM PROCESSING SAFETY SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ANNEXATION #121 PROCESSING FEE LEGAL ADVERTISING CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES RETENTION 5-21-IR-l PIPE SUPPLIES PIPE SUPPLIES PIPE SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES SMALL HARDWARE TECHNICAL JOURNAL FREIGHT CONTROL EQUIPMENT TOOLS COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANT CAUSTIC SODA SALT CHLORINE PUMP PARTS VALVES SPECIALTY GASES r.• c • ) ;. ( & ( ( ,. jll1 ! ~I i ··'· !11:. (I : • i ~ I' i ::: ::t:> I \.N ... ij; 111 1 .. 1:;· I I· I I~.! ::: ( ru~m NO t.IARR ANT NO• CJ72!J36 (:7 253 7 0725!-8 C72!i~9 Ct725lfC l'.'72541 (172542 07251t3 07 251tlf l'7 25lf5 v7.t'546 l•7<547 07t'548 07?549 Ll7 2550 Q725!H C72552 f.7(5~! r.7 ;:>~,54 072!'155 072556 r;725e,7 072!'.158 0725'59 G72560 c.72561 1;72-;.62 0 72 "Jf.3 C7256't (•72!:65 C,72566 :'172567 072%8 '172%9 072S7C 'l72571 :17 2572 nn~.n "7 2~· 7'i tl7 2~· 75 iJ7 2 ~. 76 •: 7 2 5 77 1)72570 on579 ')72!:1h\! C725fll ( 9 l 5 q -J T [J) ~ T ~ 0 RI< I foJ G c A J. 1 T A L I Hi r i. 5 ~.d '·.j c (I I\ T [ 1 I ..... If".. , . AG r. P£ fQlq i~UMIJH Af•'t ~ CGLNTY s•~lTAllO~ r1~1~1cT~ OF OQA~GL C~UNTY VE NOOR CO. OF O~AWFE-AUOJTO~ COMTkOLR COUNTY SANITATION OISTPICT P.W.-. PRINTING PACIFIC HLL PAkAGON ~USINE~S SYSTEMS f'l\~TS UNLIMITED PA ITEN CORF-. PIC~WICK PAPER PRODUCTS FITl'JEY BOW[S PO~TMA.STER PROCESS EGUIPMfNT CO~PANY ~AFFERTY IKTEP~ATIO~AL TPUCKS P[XNORO, INC. REYNOLD ALUMl~UH ~UPPLY CO. ROH[S AUTO TRIH SALfS CNGlNEfR~ LI~ITED SA~T~ AUA LLECTRIC ~OTORS SC~ANTON GILLETT( COM~, INC S(ARSt ROEUUCK & CO. SHAHPOCK SUPPLY SOUTH COAST OFFICf E~UIPKENT SOUT~EMN CALIF. CUISO~ CO. $0 • CAL IF • Ii' AT f. ~ CO • SOUTH[~N COUNTIES OIL CO. SUPE~INTENOENT OF OOCUMfNTS THf SUfrLJ£RS CLAIMS riJD Ul/19/H~ A"' uU"I T t'f 1. 7 4 "'. i; r, i3,9:10.•.l7 l-'tlf.lQ 1.56!i. '•f. f.:.i-1~ •• ·:v S.l 1L:G3.54 i112.~5 't4lll.6? t.116. ii 1 S. 2 t J ,; [; • '.I L: 153?.l.5 lfff.. 'J't 1.2'5Ca 0 ft s.BH.tte 1.75.~IO 't7 3. 74 S.291. 24 $) 9. :i!I '184 .!jl 169f,.~l5 $715.'::>0 t22f,,5lf2.84. 111.tA $b,J.)7.15 ~121.~0 s.79. 71 DESCHIPTION COYOTE CANYON GATE FEES WORKERS' COMP. REIMBURSEMENT PRINTING TELEMETER I NG COMPUTER ANALYSIS TRUCK PARTS LAB SUPPLIES JANITORIAL SUPPLIES POSTAGE HETER RENTAL POSTAGE VACUUM PUMPING TRUCK PARTS SAFETY SUPPLIES STEEL STOCK TRUCK REPAIRS PIPE SUPPLIES ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS PUBLICATIONS TOOLS SAFETY SUPPLIES, TOOLS OFFICE FURNITURE POWER WATER USEAGE DIESEL FUEL PUBLICATIONS TOOLS ( TAK TAKA~lNE. T f.. YLOR -DU~JN i2.u4iJ.il0 'i.218.f..9 tl ,1tr,~.22 U6.1t:J s.47.~.o ·t..~~6.92 t1~'5.q3 PLANT MAINTENANCE, SEAL BEACH PUHP STATION HTCE . ELECTRIC CART PARTS THO~PSON L~CQUfR CO. C~IANNOtv C • TI A TONY'S LOCK & SAfC SERVIC[ T~ANSAMERJCA DELAVALt INC. TRANSHATIONt INC. T~UCK L AUTO SUP~LYt INC. J.&. TUCKER 8 SONt JNC. UNlTfD PAPCEL S[RVICf VI.In SC lt:NT IF IC VALLEY CITifS SUP~LY CO. VALVE & SJ[(L SUPflY CO. VA~f.Ct INC. CA~L WARREN & tO. UAkRl~tTO~ LAbO~ATO~JlS, J~C. ~AlEPMAN JNOUSTRJlS WAUKfS~A [NGJNE SERVICfNTF~ WESTINGH0US[ ELECTRIC CO~P ~HJTft Fl~[ & V[RVILL[ n.1H.llf 1477.11 1l'll.'l7 t.747.u~ Lf,"l r;. 1 (; ij,211t.n 1.hJHef,CJ 't l 1tq • .! 1 1.1:.> 1. c,;u 'L '>!'I. ,:.1• 12.~4~ •. "') J.') 'f. :i (, ! b!1 I • I CJ PAINT SUPPLIES EMPLOYEE MILEAGE LOCKS AND KEYS FREIGHT, ENGINE PARTS ELECTRICAL REPAIRS TRUCK PARTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES DELIVERY SERVICE LAB SUPPLIES PIPE SUPPLIES VALVES PIPE SUPPLIES WORKERS' COMP. ADMINISTRATORS LAB REPAIRS PI PE SUPPLIES ENGINE PARTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES DEEP OCEAN SLUDGE DISPOSAL STUDY , ._ I 1 ~ '.! I ( 't; I !'' H I '••r. ( 1··: :• ( ~ I i : . ~ :: :-'> I ~ I 1,,1 ( !...! ( 1· ! I 1,,,. I,, ! \·' .. .... FUND NCJ 919Y -Jl DISl WORKING CAPIT~L rf•OCf SSHJu O/llf l/1!:•,/e~. P.tG[ H f·O!t T r~UMl!(R A~·4 j c (l u IH )' s .e. N IT AT It; N u I s T p I c r s 0 f 0 ,, f. I Jn er: u f·! T y C LI I MS fl A ID J 1 I ., 1 h ~ 1.iAkR Jlf\JT r.o. n725H2 J7?59~ 012e..ett ~7?~H5 SUMMARY #I ACO FUND #2 OPER FUND 12 ACO FUND //3 OPER FUND #3 ACO FUND #5 OPER FUND #5 ACO FUND #6 OPER FUND #6 ACO FUND #7 OPER FUND H7 ACO FUND #7 F/R FUND #11 OPER FUND #11 ACO FUND #5&6 OPER FUND #5&6 ACO FUND #6&7 OPER FUND JT OPER FUND CORF VENOO~ WILSON FORD SALES Y -Tl~( GEORGE YARULfY ASSOCIATES ZIP TEMPORARY PERSONNEL TOTAL CLAIMS PAlO 01/09/85 SELF FUNDED LIABILITY CLAIMS INSURANCE FUND SELF FUNDED WORKERS' COMP. INSURANCE FUND JT. WORKING CAPITAL FUND TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 01/09/85 ( t.~Aourn $7~~~J t~~lt.~~ l1t~56.q5 t~67.~5 !"137,llltA.9.3 ================= AMOUNT $ 428.24 337.24 644.48 289.87 3,672.46 3,515.99 1,120.42 41. 08 1,527.25 2,235.48 21. 41 51,762.29 724.97 139.50 35.28 5,100.00 3,498.37 373,385.76 44,593.35 189.27 3,900.57 40,685.65 $537 ,848.93 ( r1f.~C.RIPTIUN TRUCK PARTS TRUCK TIRES VALVES TEMPORARY HELP fl) r. 4 .> ( , ( ( e '.[---l'UNL• NO ------- •;\.'J -,JI 1.d! .. r j.j.,t.l\JI.:•·· <.t.t JT:.1 i (•[:·.:,; •. ,;·, l·~li l/l,/i''· t-/.GI ~ 1 · l·" 1 : t::, n r .1~ 1.1 ,, .s Cl'lif\•n ~f.l:JT.\lh,!; !'iJ!·)ft•iCI:~ Of OFt:,df C·lli>JlY L l ;. J ;.; ~-.. ~ 111 I t I ?. $ I ••.. [ ·~ WA f( k I 111 T ~. (, • vr t,r1ri1• ~: 11 H ltJ'I ~·l '; I :,. It-' 1 J IJ (o.J r f;7~c:,q9 H•VP:.ocr, CON~TRUClOl"St H1r. 1.5, l!ll.~q PLANT Ill REPAJRS 0 n 6 !J:} t l t~ r H IF!) l./1\1 I A ~ t •l H •. •.· A I R FARE ~+2-bi'.1---·····------./.J.Ji.--l.!~(irilJ(;lS.X. .. f.IHA!JGs.L!. ••.. lh.IG .. ----·-·----:f-~\.1.7~ .. · ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES .~ 7 ;i., I. =-' I L I. -~' T ;. Tf: v I. tH (. lf ~ • J I\:(. • :it • 'I ·:: •j • 1. v EH I c l E l EA s I NG t."/"b'i.~ U'·L~;)(t.i·~ Vlll.rt.I\. er .. ;.... 1·~thiti\ FREIGHT r 'II 't---·: Z <Lu• 111 L -l.IJ l HO b I.AC• I~" CO. --1 d I •. ''" COMPRESS OR PARTS ,. 1 11 t. 7 ~ f. ~. 5 '' r-.;c~ [ LI C A fl OH A L ~ f f< V JCT!. fl. 0 LI f' l l 2 5 • · ·' TO.WE l .. RENT Al . •• l~7U.:"·b Hiii/i flfN CuRP. :t.?9tl25•'"" CHEMICAL COAGULANTS •~ 1-~lf.1;1 --··------·· J.._UAl-1 l~-C-f.Ni.f.~-·-·------.. ------·· ·-------~2 k ·--~·'.----------··--·LAB ·.SUPPlt ES· -···- i. 7:,; f 1.:11 ti:1,1.1~1-•·:t~cri, JM:. 1-1~6. "~ ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ·l7t-·ff:~? ~~:hbf;Of,o1 -~·.JMi.H~ -tlt.t1 TU Y 1«< 1 St:..·•i.1 •" BELT FILTER PRESSES 111 -.:.1;!£.l:J--......... t.TU .. ~ l!t.DIUCR-~t:.i..v .. LCL----···----····--············ ··----....... ·1:.: .. .:Hj.H(. ----TRUCK-REPAIRS " ( Ill C7H11 f;C fM.Jl 1 STIUAL ~IJPfLYt rnr. 1~7';.% CHAIN i1nt12 fKI< r.01.-i::oRAllOl'i :).,3,,,,.) •. :.5 SLUDGE DISPOSAL 11 1 i,~3-------l:.At~!{.-OJ: __ AJtt-Jl-J-CA N-l---~-SA ··---------f.-.i~~ •. ~f}--------·-·:rRAVEL-EXPE·NSES -·-·· ..... -..... ·-····· ··- " ( llu <.,7?614 r•rvco £'\''i.07 ELECTRIC CART PARTS ;:J:>f.15 l'IULY ,,, ,\';~GCI/IH~. llJC. t~">J.:11 WORKERS' COHP. ADHINISTRATOR ll ( ru ----~7-~-t.}(; ... ---··-.. _ .. h~.J~.TUL····~Afl1< .. r.ern1cA-t ... c1i~ .. --tf'wt---_ .. ____ ..... -... ---· . ·-· -+l·~·~; •. -... -. ·-· .. PRE·EHPLOYHENT EXAHS 072617 ~.r. 9POOKE in~.2b EHPLOYEE MILEAGE ~72~1~ CAL-GLfSS ro~ H[S[A~c~. JNr. S8~5.9e LAB SUPPLIES ea ( c ·I i:'l)r .,. I Ii ,··: ,i l , . ~ '. .. I, j;., .• 1.1: :-.:1 ~ :.J !"I " . L: . j ,, , • I. ·'i . ·.; ~ I ~ ::: --l'l ..... 7+~ .... f.. 19-----C-A L4 f.Ji.l-1-T-l ~S-,--1.~t--~'l & •.-~»------PAR l· 1 f I 0 NS··---·-----·-·--··--·---·· · · -· ·-··-··---··· ··· · ····· ... · ·--· ·· ·· · ··,";: n;.·r,21; Cl\H:t:r.JJT1' rotiu HllCtc ~AU~. me. ~:'H.10 TRUCK PARTS 1 .. r .. 7~fi'l ,Jf.t<r>J Ct.~01.LC f.t;c.aivLti;~ :>lo17t~b~.~7 ENGR. Pl-21, P2-28, DIGESTER GAS STUDY, ENERGY TASK:•"· ·····--· .... -.. t..1;. f,2~ ·····--··-······-···-··CAD l L( ... COfH IWL~., -1 ll!.C ..... ------·-··---·-· .. ·-·· · · -··-.... --· --!1.~!).7 • r.l1 · ··· -.... ·· ·VALVES C· 1:1 1';7:.'f:.23 c..,rv1rnP~ u.s.A •• trJC. f.3t567.h1 ENGINE Oil · C7f62~ COAST PtFrLINE co. ~1.1!2.~0 CSDOC #11 REPAIRS -.~:i~-·------..C.0-t.U•~-~-W~U~l-f-l ----------i. 1-4 .. n~------lRUC K .. ··PARTS--· ···----·--· · .. ---···--·-·-- : Hf.2t CCH,l=llCt< COKFt.NY 'l ~?:>.71 BUILDING HATERIALS "I -~~;~~:. --· --.. ~~. '.~~~:~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~-~-~~~:~~; .. ~.G~~~:: f.. --. ·-. ~ 1 ~;:;. ~: ~:~ . ... .:~~~!::~~\~~:~~~~~I ON C .11 ' t7?U~Y cnr1Tlt>fU,l/\L Ct1CMJOL co Utc14lt.4'' CHLORINE • :11 tl 7 U 3 U CU J.Jf I N [ N T AL ~ ArJ l A lfJf! l. 9 b • % TR UC K REP A I RS 1' ~w }... COt.L.T.!LOL-Sl-'-tC.JAL.J ~-lS ... -.Ul.C-.----·----------------·-· l-2a~.n -. -----.... CONTROL EQU I PHENT (. ll~ )4 ~7~b3? ccurr~ lNF~GV srRVtrrs 14q.~9 ENGINE PARTS 117:?f.~.3 CC\:,T1 t't.Sd tllll: Pt.l'T~, Jl''C • 11' "1'.i.c.10 TRUCK PARTS L.7~·t.!tt -· -·--·--f~. r.. LulJLHf. l..l!AH fd l~TAL 1~.1 11'J.?~ CRANE RENTAL . 1H~07::'6.3~ rour,1v ~tiOLfSHl uremic ~17':1.~-)f: ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES '-.. li7~•f,3b fi1L 1'/A Hk 'drip. ~;i WATER SOFTENER RENTAL ·~ 'C!.7 .. -------·S.-T .. Ut-hf .... C:.t.L.lf-U!tJIA ····-------------· ----·---.. 1-1.u:..~>-.:,. #65 REORGANIZATION f'EE I•• 'J7 : l. 3 ~ [ 11\ I l Y I I l f; 1 d h • 11 c: L EGA L ADV E RT I S I NG n:"1 ~'1 r.:f (1 1 ·11. ,·,4. ~~·· ELECTRICAL SUPPL I ES ( ... I~/ u (. 141 l-l~'t-.lja ClCl\.!;.C. !.Ht.TY lit,1L.lltl!.:. LL. :i.},j-.J·J.n SAFETY SUPPLIES • ~0 wf 7 ~' f. 4 J r· J r ~, f I. L 0 (.., J ~; T J f S • 1 r,! C • I ;~ h 7 • qt EH G I NE p ARTS t..., 1)7?f.42 l'Hllfl'"' /.~·-$nrtilf<, llt;ll'-."11 OFFICE FORHS 1~' .U.ll~---· .. -··-----DOU.LO U~lll.d:~l~:t~ •. 11 ... l ... -----·-------_ 1.1f••-·1l•··I PLANT #1 REPAIRS ' 1 ~.1;f.'i4 t1J1·~~ :li~:JL It.ti fl Jr;:., i·~•11·i •• ;. EHGINE REPAIRS ~' ~· ~~ "' ·-···---·---·-... --- ... , d: •:i, 1"1 '-· .j"i ,.·, 1···i , .. : \... i..· ,,; L- ... 1 : ~. ! : :·· .... ,, I i..... I '- e ·---UJNLl 11,0 •. ~ ,, . ' ' ··•···· ,J( l,)::,i WlJhY.11-,(, C:/.l·ll.t.l 1.f;rr~-.~ .. P.l. ;.•.lit 1/1,./H'.· 11.,,r l 1~(,,. J hll'1 1:.~ ;I ,\f 4 j Ct;\!l-.T' <;_H,Tli.l ll·r! 1 J',l'·ICT:) M 1;~;.1.1-[ U•tlrJIY tl .i. J 1. ~-I l. 11 · . '1 I;; ~ I H :., w fl P r' 1. r~ T f\• <, • v1 r-li-flr f. '' ;. lf1~ T (. t ~CI· I PT I 0 I\: ~J7rb45 1.1u11r.. f!.\.11\rdJ~. CnR~·. i ~> 7 ~ • -. ;> PA I NT SUPPL I ES n~r'lb T•if wr-·10t~ ru •• u·r. 111i.~2 PUMP PARTS O .f.P+7 --· · ------fl,:.:· C.llt.. ..... A~Y-, ·-Jf>lf.-.---------·-- iu ·2 f. 41• f M f· , I r C ( II ~ ... (, 4 9 E A ~~ Jfo! A ~-t I N c • •• •! c'i·h;J t ~..ivJr.or.,MfNl.AL· H ~i.ILl'<-L /.~~,.r. 4~1Q.~1 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 'i.?.tt.d•:• 111 P2-23-6 COt.iPUTER PROGRAMMING ~. H ·: ~ • u f 0 FF I CE SUPPL I ES \~7.~~ LAB SUPPLIES ( "I on· r, 51 F H.I L. i ;:; N r 1 H 1<. ~ lJr 1-L v 14 c7U:~2 flt•[Rf>id,J( C.Of<f'. ij4~.H~ PIPE SUPPLIES f')q. -,~ FREIGHT n ~Pf-9;1----~ ---H-t--T~UF<Pl-Y-f.th·-----------1--h·2~ !-. b-(}·--.. __ -· ENG l·NE --PARTS ----· 117 ~ 65'1 r 1~.n•r1; & r-·01n tfl to. ~7~'E:5!'1 rL.Al & V[l·TJCl.1. CONCH H 16 ( Ill 1qql.7J PIPE SUPPLIES t\~J.~v CORE DRILLING 1l----~-7 ~E+hb-.. --,---·"'·---··-· f. L uu:..y f~ H: :tS----.. ---·------~ 67~f57 FL~IL HANC(ING SYSTEMS, lNL. 07~65€ OON~L~ L. f01 & ASSOCl~TfS C1w · -----·· ----· -.. ~ l 4 7 • f, 4 P I PE S UPP L I E S $87~.3h ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES t825.~L SAFETY CONSULTANT II 1 ~ ~ ~9 ... f'-P-U-1-l-GR.O-Wf,l<-S---t.A-ll-OR-.l-T (l PY, I f.l.C.•·---------------t.~ .. \ •. r~O-----... ·--------LAB ANALVS IS ·---------· ----.... · ··-·· ·-- 1j 7 ;· (, 6 IJ r I 1 't 0 f F IJ L L H T 0 N l•7i?H~l (AfHilil LUt-'f'tR (CJ. 11 c In i5 l. S9 WATER USEAGE s1,71j.J3 LUMBER. BUILDING MATERIALS 1~ ·---t;..lc''-"£..2------------\.L;~ ... Ul •Ll l k-~L-'-~-l l-t~C..Cf:.J:..r-----·---------·•H~. U PA I NT SUPPL I ES 0 7? t63 &£NtHAl Tf L ff'llDt~ ( CO• 0726&4 GlF~LlCH~MITC~FLL, INC. c ca i71134.75 TELEPHONE tl~~.1;5.~1 BASIN CHAINS. PULLEYS I ~..) ~~&§ (; (Htt-tl-4Ul4'2h-J~C---------------------~~-.. ~1l7.f1-J,---·-------IMPELLER -PARTS---· ........ ·--------- l' 1 r ,,f:.f, •<>u~r r1f !~ "1 H" If:; L'13.11:. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 1.!7'tt7 fl IY {:f llU~HHh;TOt-1 L!E i.Cti 1q~1~q.t5 WATER USEAGE ---41 c ~E:k----·-------11U~"J T-l~f.lOti-Ul-1..f.M-·-foUMil~--~-l-M4~-------· -· 'l7U6CI llUlllTLfY fNGINErRING S/IL[S u! . -.J.~S. 't3 . · · ---OFF I CE SUPPLIES !~1~58.~0 PUMP PARTS c I»~ c JJ ~7~67~ lhTfRNATIONAL TEChNOLOGY ~bbt452.6r MINI COMPUTER MAINTENANCE, ITG COMPUTER SYSTEM JI (.1:: ( \I --41-1 ~&-1-l----------S..14!-l--1 A-1 V. .J.~- :;'/ 1·12 ~.7 f.73 -· '-7 '· 71t 1'·7 f,75 [· .r· • J(lllt~ tltl!L I Nl· l\(o11L SClfNllfJr IN~IJ<lll-'-f.NT~ re Ki.~'.IJ bLAh.IfJCaS ~ ~Ul'f:L.¥---------. ~lf.NhN ~JP[ t SUFPLY CU. (17::'676 l<l!-/1, l!LARJf.H,, JNC. L--'1.l U. H ......... --------. t ---~ . ~ ---l..i-tJlf-OldL ~ U~ll.l..¥--LO----------·---------·· 07~~7R ~7?~79 L7~~g~ ~7?f.81 07?6h2 --fi.:/ fl. £,A~- •17 i: ~Pit l17 ~'hl!~l ll7;"'L~-u tl7"f.A7 07."f.f-P --J..t1. ~ l.-f• 9 i· 7 ;-f,C} .-. -·-· .. -· .. ( l • I· .• t • ~' • • I l'j c • L~11:>~£"-COLl)if L/lf' l Li.;(.; ll t U C l!i 1 C C:.G • llffCOl-'.-$4H.TY ~HiVJCf !;UH U' L F-11 r I '-; \1 LI T s nu ritJ Hlf• ~ t r ~ c • -~A I• VJ.C--fl-fr Hl Ot.: Ir.!;-------· ·-· !·'t IT -Ct-'L;)lt t I r:L. t'CC1>Y L'rll'fT M[Tf.L ~.-C1H::<t II'.• ~'-(:t:t.l.::rr1 ,, urn 1 ~· 1 •,•;I <'1'1 f c.111,~., rqy:, ~'t:~.LI Nl.;l;q:1.y, lll•. ~~~l: (;ld.IUf. I t.i(. Mt:r, 11;(,:·•1 .-·1 :.Lf\,':Tl.r Ciil·I r.r' ... -- -------·S..?~ ... ,,. .. --------EMPLOYEE--HI LEAGE ,2,\4b."4 WOOD SHAVINGS tJ!H.7~ LAB SUPPLIES llft.K! BEARING SUPPLIES i7,J55.~~ PIPE SUPPLIEi, VALVES Vi~ J • :.f: BEAR I NG SUPPLIES . . ~8 • 1 :n • ~} i• --..... UN I FORM RE NT AL i4~3.~7 WELDING SUPPLIES, SAFETY SUPPLIES 1 !. ·: fi • '' <.• F I L M P R 0 C E S S I NG iS~3.1~ ELECTRIC CART PARTS i2?2.Ll SAFETY SUPPLIES 1j~7.?7 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES '11.~~ ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 'i'.. I i • ·1 "I P I PE S UP PL I E S 1~~b.~4 STEEL STOCK ~21.~7 CONTROL EQUIPMENT 'I l'tn. ~ USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT I~.?. '~ LANDS CAP I NG SUPPL I ES i. • '• ··1 • ..~ PUMP PARTS i '·'·1 •111· PLANT #2 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE .. ( f) ( c 1"1 r1 . .. ) I:/ ( ::'.1( H I•:! l··lr I .,, H(-n '1:1 :.'.1( _ ... , j'l! ;*•!. I,: di\. •. 1:::; i'''--. . I I i ::1· '-! . j.::, I "'I· I 1. •• \.... • :..... ' "I ! ·'1, I ·1 ·-· ' 1.11 1·11 ''\,.. ' -, ( { • ,---i:.Uflif; r~o 'il'·'· -JT r.1:-.1 W,lln"H.;» tM-11;..L Jl--\0~1~-~~~.~-~·C··~ -V( f•io(.f. CHilJlY ~tldltJ'1,r.: ;:)<;lf.JCn ')f Oi'H•rt -----------·-CL t 1~c, ._1.1~.1 ··l l?".J/l-t, Vi~ <.u .\IT t-rl.J\.i ·,·, 1 1 •• ;·. 1.1.1~· 1 /I ~/h'· I /lt,r i;!·rc1P.T ~:Uf''!'('P l'.f'lt' r. liUi~ T '\' j,i!:(I IPTIO~~ I' f.7;-691 ti1•Wt t ROOllCTS co. .LH.4~ SHALL HARDWARE \t 7 U: 92 f-~ 0 !di Atl £ iJ U I PM E iH Cf• • 1 ~ , I 1't •Cl TRUCK PARTS 1----. ~~~3---------........ .f.:o.tOIOOtA•··--1-fJ(; .•. -·---------------··--·---·----·--·q.:.;,.%~.c.. -· ;. -PAGERS··· r f 7 ?t. "" r-;y r i_j I f"'l:LI~. T~ 1 ( :. 1iF,7. 1'1 SHALL HARDWARE . 1;7~·e;-o r.:,·.11oru.L LU!~l'f!• SUI PLY 11r:,1+.<t<:-SHALL HARDWARE 11 --u-1-.;;.f;nf. . -, .c 1 r 1· ';I .. "llU.:'-uR 1 hLl.CH------------· -· -·· U ,1. ;.;,. ·WATER USEAGE · u C72f.'17 f\:CKTh .. •[~T MOT(lfi WflrJJtl(;, Ifl(. $l:i~.111. WELDING SUPPLIES 672hGP NUMATlC ENGIN[tRIN~ ~l~~.~n PIPE SUPPLIES '~ i----++~99 -4C.(:.J..lJf-f.H...A.t:~tµT-~UIH' :t E> ti\bl-.-1-~---_.:_ ____ ·CAUSTl-C-·-SODA----··---·--------·· · --···· l17~1tiu CILYH·JC c11nitct.L er.. 1'•bd'•?..l!'.1 CHLORINE ~7~7r1 OXY(tN SERVICE SlJ~.1, SPECIALTY GASES II --~-1.;.1t-.2---------·---.(...{)Uil,; IV-Cf--O~·l.111(,(. -----------·--------. ----------1-chon. '11 --. ·-. --2-24 SURVEY I NG. IJ7. -ANNEXATION ·HAPS 07270! COllNTY OF ORANC1E. i67.:l't PUBLICATIONS ~1210~ tOUNTY S4NIT~TIO~ OISTPJCTS OF ORANGE COUNTY l3,~63.~2 REIHBURSE WORKERS' COMP. FUND i\-1-?-=I•".~ -~A.{"-H-J·t--MlHHl-f-~F F J CE S ---H~H •. Et~------·-------OFHCE·-TRAl-LER -·RENTAL·--------·-··--- i; n 7 .16 f·.\i'iC11-.:it1H· :1.24.~.~;2 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 14 11727i:7 Hd·.TS t1NLIMJTEl1 Ht?.'>l.'J3 TRUCK PARTS (' 1 ::~---·~;-g~~·------------·i,·!·~~~~·G~~·~-~:~~·;_·F~~~·UG-f·~-----·-·--... ·--.. -.. ------· ···--~~~~: :~~ ... ~~~~~~= ::~ ~~;~~ 1 ;!H.PL l NG I CE I 'J7 2 11 o F. A rn r, o t.i o 1 ~"' o ~ n c (l • L\ 5 i:, .... :-, TR As H D 1 s Po s AL " c llU 11 11 (;Ill ..., --4~ 1-------·-flf 4~·-1'-H:·~H+fL 9.-lQ..lj--. tf't---·---ENG IN£ ... REPAIRS-·· ·· --- ~ u 7 n 12 ltH f·: [l. 1 S Tr ft t1 tl H J • H~ CLASS l F I ED ADVERT l S I NG I c.1:~1n T11r Pfr'LIHL1C SIJl'PLY co. Of-CALIF •• INC. '.f.J ..i(~4.(1b PIPE SUPPLIES ~~ -----vH·114 ···-------·· klCOH COhP.·-----------·----·-------·---------·--·-1-D!l.fill COPIER RENTAL ... (jJ<>7] 5 I\ Orm ll\IC: ,, M[Y(HS Hq.1~~ PUMP PARTS ( J• --4-1-;J-1-1-1-t~~fl-J..G~toq >·q+A-l~~~·r • -.. f-h "'_ M'h h;'------------POLYMERS------·-----------···· ---· -· -· · -· ·-· ( ll~ llH7H :.,Hn. lil·LLAN f!l1SINl~~ fl.PMS '!.fllt.f\.1 OFFICE SUPPLIES ' 1 ::~ CH-716 HOCCO•S Tl<UCK WRfr.k JfllG i-42.4t' TRUCK PARTS i1 7 ~ "'fl c; ~-t. t f :' t i:. O [f• lJC K & r 0 • 1 -:i 7 l • ~. 5 T 0 0 LS s, _____ o7:·7~\u ---:,11:.~r.Q(tr,, ~UH-LY . --·--· ..... ---·-i!-.11;..7;· SMALL .HARDWARE ( 1: i17~7n ~h[t'llft-0 kACtfltll'HY co. ~nu.H TRUCK PARTS · I :.1~nc ~Mllt-: HH. & suPPlv, 1M· ·1.~''·":i. PIPE SUPPLIES )j --U-1-r-f~ ~--------------&4tt-Ht[:...,~.--t:.e.l-l-F-.---f.~t<I· -&<+. · ----·· ---·---~.a.~, ·:·t,U. !-0 1--·--· ·POWER .. · ·--·· - •u 1·7~·7::'+ ~~'• C/.l. (;;.~ r.n. ·1.f,:?t7lh.,q1 NATURAL GAS u7«7i~ ~otir11rr.r~ U1l.1Nlf[~ C;JL ro. \b•''l ·•' •. DIESEL P.UEL, COOLANT ·J1"'/';{t ..... -----·· ::.1 AIO\L[Jl~ .~~iil14l<-lM. ~J..IU, :Lf>'i'•.llt BOTTLED WATER ( • l•r ., 4J f.1~121 ~T~f\fl"-:-:.Tffl ti,<'"••'·'' STEEL STOCK o H 7?.tl SUPU CC, UJC. VH. It~; SHALL HARDWARE -...1-;1;Js. _____ . _____ l-b~.~llJ.~l-U:P.S---·-·--. -------------·-----. -------h.l~.I,,_ TOOLS . I•~ 17~7:4.\· J. i!l-Y~.i. C:HVl•H.1~ :~·· •• 71-PETTY CASH REIHBURSEHENT ,,7;:1.1 1 1/.1·1··, ~r1f,JNf'l.Plt•c. 1.:~ •. :._,,,~.;.1· PUMP PARTS f.7; 1.•,~· Ct:.£.f.1.0, .. c. 1 H ·,.1.·,.:i•. EMPLOYEE MILEAGE (: 1 :: n 3 1 R ,. v u T p, ft v r L , •, " !. • 1 •. A I R FA R E r.727.!'+ 1;.rui.rr-1 Pt'.{1Lil1Cl~ :1~.:,>~.~-l.":l USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ' c 1-~1 J.~ ... ·---·-.... u. n~r , ... C-f-------·--·----------·-·--'.j ;· (, h.) ~' EL E c TR I CAL supp LI Es f: 7 :• 7 :'. t: T ,. 1 :: I' ~ 1, IJ 1 f, ~ t ! r, I I V • l t. ( • ·• I • · :,• .~ • 1 •: T RU C K PARTS I• ~ t' II . ~· 1:; ~~ " ·I 1. ,.. 0 ·1;i.) : .. , ·, .'·'1. :••1 I . ' ~ . --·1· ·! 1"• !": :, I ,.';j !"j.· '· .l"I 1:··1: Fj I" ,,. .. j.1. !•·: ! :!r :1.j i ,, ~ !":'\ ' ~ . : \ ... -··-H -· ··-l'"l 1::iL i. 1·1i .. l· j•_. . . '-...· \.. '-- I' • F -L!JM.J l'.;(I ·n·-~> .,,. .JI i..l:.;I i.~1.in:1o.(. Ct.•·11:..L . fll,: l ~=~1;~,. n:.11 )/j1./b'; l·A;..f 1 td r r.r.· l : .• ur-.a!I •< 1i111, ,a: 1 c ' ';..: i11 1 " c; it rd l ;. , i M. ' . 1 •• l 1 J L 1 ., a F n : ; : • u_ r " u r-:r y J ----·--·· ---...... ------.. ---·--·-·-··-.. ···----------------·-· .... Cl. A! fl·; ,...1. If· !d f :l'. /i..h . ~ Yt.~1<n1T r:r•. VP!1.0r· !l'•!C,ti:n :,t~f~Jr·11c1rJ . ,r··----~---,.2·;·.2.·1 l11-:IO~! l)JL r.u. Cf C/o.LJf. ( I· n 2 n h t: •H H 1.1 f· Id< er. L ~ l " v 1 n t7~. ~ GASOLINE '~j.~7 DELIVERY SERVICE .. ~1,~ • .:J47.4l ... ··· --·· 5-19-Rl-A PIPING ' -~1-~!-r;;.. -· ... ___ ---U~ l.·Tt-0 .. -~T /.ll:b--J.:.ll-f-11,-F-f.Uf"~-¥--·----·----· 10 ; 7 ;· 7 4 lJ V :.I 1 ~ C l :'f:T It IC ( 111 I 7 ~· H 1 Vt I L t Y C 11 I[ S : lJ P 1-L V C (, • t1,~~1.qe LAB SUPPLIES 1?,~5J.?t PIPE SUPPLIES II . h 7 ,. 7 4 2 . " A f. 1 4 l'f I If-Is l .. u IH j, T (; IV J:, Ill!\: 111 :j 7 ==· 7 4 ~ L f· rf< Y ti AL'< ( R ~ ~ ~ n C I AT f S ' Ji.. C • u Ct7 2744 JOl•M I~• U.\P.Lf$ ;JJ6.&5 LAB SUPPLIES i~.~~H.r.o P2-23-6 CLAIMS CONSULTANT t.377 .1->; ODOR CONSUL TANT 1~ • 7-f'.-14 ~---------t A!..{.---\,: L..&.;+l.f-U-&-f. c. • ---------++.i••h-~-':L-------· L·t AB I l-1 TY· HA I HS ADH-1N1-SfRATeR .. -······ ( · 1" f.7;.·1~t ~l·ll~.!.~tl! lN(,Jt~I ~ff<VJ(f~.T~.t. - 11 .11;1i.1 1r.-t::-.1rr.a11r1 u~f rLrcrnrr co1n- 1~·~34.~3 ENGINE PARTS '.C-61 !I •. lb EL EC TR I CAL SUPPL I ES 11 ---·-~ 7;. 74t{ --· ----...... ;u)lH.l\l. ~ -:,;(,(>vRUi:~---------·---· __ ,. _______ _ ---:a.~<hh7;;.~'.~: ·--· LEGAL SERVICES , ~ h7~749 JAM(S UYbENGA I.. 110 1,7~n!'lc lf P Ht;roPAtn HPtGNNfL 11~.~h EMPLOYEE MILEAGE S),Jl3.~f TEMPORARY HELP 11 ---. ------------------------------------------· ---· -------------· ll t3 H' T / l CL A IM~ l A J f) •I 11; j fl'! i l • r, c: ':) , Y:i 3 • ,, 1 ---------------------------------- I ...... -·-::: ----S-UHHARV---------·-·---AH&U Hf---·-·· ·--·--------·--····----·-----------------· .. ---·- ( In #1 OPER FUND $ 535.50 -#2 OPER ·FUND -· -·. --·-. ----·--· ··-· ··-·--. -·-----·--··-··--· --· ·-.... aoa.07 #2 F/R FUND 2,732.96 ( #3 OPER FUND 16 1 089.74 1------115--0PER -FUND ---·--6 I-; 306. 03---------·-------------·-------------- . ~ #5 ACO FUND 888.77 ( ~ #7 OPER FUND 2,638.71 ''--------·#11 OPER FUND· ----·-· --------· · -5,lt46.66 ·,. v #13 ACO FUND 2,6lt5.50 . l~l ,~J ~-.. #14 SUSPENSE FUND 2,388.25 i-----#5&6--0PER··FUND----.. .: -· -··--·--·---·-----1,-139. 20 JT OPER FUND 299,535.60 CORF 1 1 163 1 928.10 SELF FUNDED LIABl~ITY CLAIMS INSURANCE FUND 689.00 SELF FUNDED WORKERS' COMP. INSURANCE FUND 3, 813. 52 JT WORKING CAPITAL FUND 60,967.lt6 -----··· -·. -----. TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 01/23/85 $1,625,553.07 ...___-·-··( .. ; ~, ( ,• •.. ' .... ( ·I ( ', ... " I (· ( l' .. , !''i 1::1 c ; ... , ~ 'I • 1 :'.';l "! t . ~; "· '.:it : ... I: .. l:i to.·:. (; '· --c: , •• :1 1'';' ..... I ~l . ' .·•1 ; ' i···i 1· ·- " :) ,,... ( . ,, ( c .. .('! i:i .FUND NO S199 • JT DIST WC~Kl~G CAFITAL PFOCESSJNG DATE l/2~/R5 fAGE RffORT NUMnf~ AP43 COUNTY SANITATION OIST~lCTS Of OPiNGE COUNTY f 1r-WARP A~T NO. CLAI~S PAJO Jl/28/85 V£tJDOR DE'SCRIPTION 4MOUNT EL ECTR OLURGY $8'19.'t2 USER CHARGE DEPOSIT REFUND :r--07-2752 IQ II I/ TOTAL CLAIM~ fAIO ~l/2~/85 $8lt9.42 ::1 ·~• ·----·-.SUHHARL. ---· ... ·~ ( Ill JU l• 11 ( ·In ( ,1' l~ ( 1· JI ( u JI JT WORKING CAPITAL FUND TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 01/28/85 1----------·--·------·---· -------- ----~-----·-· ........ ---.... _,. ___ .. _ .... -· ---.. -··----.. -·-·. ··- ~ Cl ~ ================= -.. ---..... ---AMOUNT ___ .... $849.42 $8Ja9.42 -------------------------·-··-·---·--·-····-·-----···-·. . -·----·--· -... . ·-·-· ·····-· -··· -----···--------------··-----------------------------· M ( h ~ I ( n ... <.. 1·· Q " , IH " ' tt q ~ L • ~· w ~· ~ ~ r •. , ....... ---... --. r e i~1) I i·' ! .. 1 1 '·1 :. : : i'.'l ·I 'I ··I i·:I .i! .I :111 i'.'.i ·,. \, ~ \. . .. t: D. '.t ' 1'" II BOARDS OF . DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts Post Offic e Box 8 127 of Orange County, California 10844 Ellis Avenue Founta i n Volley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: JOINT BOARDS SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS MARCH 13J 1985 -7:30 P.M. Area Code 71 4 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA ALL DISTRICTS (13) (b) (5) Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and authorizing the staff to issue a purchase order to Dorado Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of $15,721.00 for installation of the pumps, piping and appurtenances for the SARI /Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142. See page "I" DISTRICT 3 (21) (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and deny the claim of David Mikus dated November 27, 1984, in the amount of $30,000.00 for alleged damages resulting from a motorcycle accident at the site of Contract No. 3-28R, Rehabilitation of 19 Manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer, and refer to the District's liability claims administrator, General Counsel, contractor and contractor's insurance company for appropriate action. (b) Consideration of motion to receive, file and deny the claim of Frank P. McHale dated December 19, 1984, in the amount of $179.08 for alleged damages to his vehicle resulting from an accident at the site of Contract No. 3-28R, Rehabilitation of 19 Manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer, and refer to the District's liability claims administrator, General Counsel, contractor and contractor's insurance company for appropriate action. DISTRICT 11 (27) (a) Consideration of motion ratifying action of staff in procuring services for Emergency Removal and Disposal of Oil Spilled into the District's Coast Highway Trunk Sewer Siphon (Contract No. ll-13-2-M2 ) for a total amount not to exceed $50,000.00 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORN!t. P.O BOX ~12- FOUl'JTAIN VAL•.cY. CAL1FOl=lN1.:. -~·· :.: :'. ;:- 10844 ELLIS AVEN-.f. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA =::27::iS-7 '.:: ~: 17141540-2810 17141962-2411 March I I, 1985 I 1:00 a.m. BID TABULATION SHEET PROJECT TITLE: SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications (PW-142) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of Districts Supplied Submersible Pumps Four (4) Each, Piping, and Appurtenances. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $20,000 BUDGET AMOUNT: $35,000 I. 2. . 3. CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID Dorado Enterprises, Inc., Signal Hill, CA Deist-Binsfield, Inc., Laguna Niguel, CA Spiess Construction Company, Inc.., Santa Maria, CA $15,721.00 $23, 768.00 NO BID I have reviewed the proposals submitted for the above project and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. I, therefore, recommend award to Dorado Enterprises, Inc., in the bid amount of $I 5, 721.00 as the lowest and best bid. ~~~ Superin ten dent WNC/pr . "I" AGENDA ITEM #13(B)(5) -ALL DISTRICTS II I II REPORT OF THE JOINT CHAIRMAN -~ MARCH 13, 1985 !) INTRODUCE SUZANNE ATKINS, SITTING IN FOR TOM WOODRUFF. 2) NPDES OCEAN DISCHARGE PERMIT. WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY INFORMED YOU BY A WRITTEN , COMMUNICATIOW ON FEBRUARY 25TH THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY HAS ISSUED OUR NEW NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM OCEAN DISCHARGE PERMIT. LAST JULY, THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD HAD APPROVED THE PERMIT THAT IS BEING ISSUED JOINTLY WITH EPA. THE 5-YEAR PERMIT BECOMES EFFECTIVE APRIL !ST AFTER A 33 DAY PUBLIC NOTICE PERIOD. THE PERMIT WAS GRANTED BECAUSE OF OUR DEMONSTRATED ABILITY TO MEET EPA CRITERIA AND THE CALIFORNIA OCEAN PLAN WHICH SETS \.._) STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION OF THE OCEAN. APPROVAL OF THE PERMIT COMES AFTER FIVE YEARS OF INTENSIVE STUDY BY EPA AND THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, ONE OF THE MOST RIGOROUS REGULATORY REVIEWS OF ANY WATER QUALITY ISSUE EVER CONDUCTED. THE DISTRICTS ARE THE FIRST LARGE SEWERAGE AGENCY IN THE NATION TO RECEIVE SUCH A PERMIT WHICH HAS SERVED AS A MODEL FOR OVER 200 PE~MIT APPLICATIONS NOW BEING PROCESSED BY EPA NATIONWIDE. UNDER THE NEW PERMIT THE DISTRICTS ARE REQUIRED TO INCREASE THE REMOVAL OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS FROM 50% TO 75% AND BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND FROM 35% TO 60%. IN ADDITION, SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THESE BOARDS IMPLEMENTED AN INDUSTRIAL WASTE SOURCE CONTROL THAT HAS ENABLED·THE DISTRICTS TO PROPOSE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE l ~·· RESTRICTIVE TOXIC MATERIAL LIMITATIONS IN THE DISTRICTS' PERMIT , , CONDITIONS THAN THE CALIFORNIA ·OCEAN PLAN REQUIRES. THE BOARDS HAVE ALSO APPROVED ADDITIONAL MEASURES THAT WILL FURTHER·ENHANCE THE DISTRICTS' TREATMENT AND ENSURE -CONTINUED LONG-TERM COMPLIANCE WITH THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. As YOU KNOW, WE HAVE RECENTLY COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION OF $124 MILLION OF ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMENT FACILITIES AT TREATMENT PLANT No. 1 AND PLANT No. 2 TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT AND THE CALIFORNIA OCEAN PLAN. RECEIPT OF THE 30l(H) WAIVER WILL SAVE $142 MILLION IN ApD~TIONAL FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND $5 TO $7 MILLION IN ONGOING ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS WILL BE REALIZED BY THE CITIZENS OF ORANGE COUNTY. A MAJOR REQUIREMENT OF THE PERMIT, OVER-ITS FIVE YEAR TERM, IS A COMPREHENSIVE OCEAN MONITORING PROGRAM THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED IN SCOPE. THE MONITORING PROGRAM WILL COST THE DISTRICTS $1.5 MILLION ANNUALLY AND IS DESIGNED TO EVALUATE ANY EFFECTS OF THE DISCHARGE ON THE MARINE LIFE. THE PERMIT CAN BE MODIFIED OR REVOKED IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT THAT THE MONITORING SHOWS ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT. THE DISTRICTS' DEMONSTRATED ~BILITY TO MEET THE STRINGENT DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS AND THE EXTENSIVE SCIENTIFIC DATA THAT WILL BE PRODUCED BY THE MONITORING PROGRAM WILL ASSURE THAT THE OCEAN WATERS OFF OF THE ORANGE COUNTY COASTLINE WILL BE PROTECTED. 2 '.._/ 3) TOXICS ROUND-UP DAY. DIRECTORS WILL RECALL THAT IN JANUARY THE BOARDS APPROVED A COOPERATIVE EFFORT WITH THE COUNTY OF ORANGE FOR A TRIAL "TOXICS ROUND-UP." IT WILL ALLOW HOMEOWNERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES TO. BRING _SMALL AMOUNTS OF TOXIC MATERIALS TO A CENTRAL LOCATION FOR PROPER DISPOSAL PACKAGING~ MATERIAL WILL THEN BE.TRUCKED TO A CLASS I LANDFILL. IF THE TRIAL PROGRAM IS SUCCESSFUL, THE BOARDS WILL BE ASKED TO CONSIDER PROPOSAL TO CONTINUE IT ON A PERMANENT BASIS. SATURDAY, APRIL 20TH HAS BEEN SELECTED AS THE DATE FOR THE TOXICS ROUND-UP TRIAL. IT WILL BE CONDUCTED AT THE ABANDONED HUNTINGTON BEACH TRANSFER STATION No. 2, LOCATED ON GOTHARD. BETWEEN TALBERT AND ELLIS, FROM 9:00 A.M. -3:00 P.M. WE HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM SUPERVISOR WEIDER, WHO ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THE PROGRAM, EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO OUR DIRECTORS FOR CO-SPONSORING THE PROGRAM. IN ADDITION TO THE COUNTY AND.OUR ~ISTRICTS, T~E CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THE ORANGE COAST CHAPTER OF THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ARE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THE PROJECT. 4) UPCOMING MEETINGS. ANNOUNCE/CALL THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS: A) BUILDING COMMITTEE -THURSDAY, MARCH 21ST AT 5:30 P.M. B) FISCAL POLICY COMMITTEE -TUESDAY, MARCH l6TH AT 4:30 P.M. C) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE -WEDNESDAY, MARCH 27TH AT 5:30 P.M. INVITE TWO OF THE FOLLOWING TO ATTEND: CARREY NELSON • tJo AND ~!CHARD DL~ OR ~ OR RUTHELYN PLUMMER D) DISTRICT No. 3 ADJOURNED BOARD MEETING -THURSDAY, APRIL 4TH A~30.~(SEE BELOW FOR EXPLANATION.) 3 ?-"::-""Y" THE BOARDS HAVE BEFORE THEM, UNDER AGENDA ITEM 13D, A RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE TO ADOPT A GENERAL POLICY REGARDING SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGE TO LOCAL SEWER MANHOLES CONNECT~D TO DISTRICT TRUNK SEWERS. DISTRICT No. 3 CHAIRMAN, DON ROTH, IS RECOMMENDING THAT INASMUCH AS THE MANHOLE DETERIORATION PROBLEM IS PRESENTLY LIMITED TO DISTRICT No. 3, ITS BOARD MEET ON APRIL 4TH TO RECEIVE A REPORT·FROM STAFF AND CONSIDER ESTABLISHING THE BASIS AND AMOUNT OF A SETTLEMENT POLICY. . !T IS ANTICIPATED THAT PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE MALCOLM-PIRNIE ODOR CONTROL FOR THE MILLER-HOLDER TRUNK SEWER WILL ALSO BE READY AT THAT TIME. 4 r_ .e:o...~ ~ ·ti' MEETING DATE March 13, 1985 TIME 7:30 p.m.DtSTRICTS 1,2,3,5,6,7,11 & 13 JOINT BOARDS DISTRICT 1 (CRANK) I I I I I I I I HANSON I I I I I I ._,,,,. (LUXEMBOURGER) .GR I SET I I I I I.~---- (KENNEDY) I. I I I .SALTARELLI I.~ ---- (WIEDER) ••••••• STANTON ••••• ~::::::: DISTRICT 2 (NORBY),,,,,,,,CATLIN,,,,,,~---­(OVERH01T),,,,,ROTH,,,,,,,,~ !NEWTON ,,,,,,,BUCK,,,,,.,,~::: NELSON ,,,,,,,COOPER,,,,,,~ LUXEMBOURGER) ,GR I SET I. I •• ·~ -- MAHONE y) I I I I • I HOLMBERG I I I ·~::: ODLUM) I I • I I • I • KAWA NAM I I •• ·~ ---SCOTT) •• I I I ••• NEAL •• I I I I I • ....---__ _ CULVER) ••• I I I .P'!mn'. I. I I··~ ---~ BEYER),,,,,,,,SMITH,,,,,,,~ ___ ____ (WIEDER),,,,,,,STANTON,,,,,~ ____ _ (BEVERAGE),,,,,WISNER,,,,,,~----__ __ DISnll~T 3 (OVERHO~T),,,,,ROTH,,,,,,,.~ ____ ____ ~CuuP~Rl .•.•••• NELSON •••••• ~ -------- THOMAS • I. I I •• BA I LEY I I I •• ·~ -------R l SNER ,,,,,,,BROWNELL,.,,~ ____ __ (NORBY),,,,,,,,CATLIN,,,,,,~ ____ ___ l PERRY) t I I I I I I • CULVER I I I I I I """"' ------SE I DEL J 1111111 POL IS ,,,,,.~ __ ____ JARRELL) I I 11 t ,GRIFFIN. I. I·~ -------- LUXEMBOURGERJ ,GR I SET I I I I.·~ ---MAHONEY),,,,,,HOLMBERG,,,,~ ____ ____ PARTIN). I I I I I .~-.NEt. I. I I I·~ ----- SCOTT) ••• , •••• NEAL •••••••• ~ ----____ FINLAYSONJ OLSON,,,,,,,~ ----____ SIRIANJ),,,,,,SAPIEN,,,,,,~ ---·-____ WIEDER),,,,,,,STANTON,,,,,~ ____ ____ LANDER) I I I I I I .SYLVIA. I I I •• ~ - DISTRICT 5 (COX) I I. I I. I I I ,HART I I I I I I I I V' ----(cox) ........•. MAURER •••••• ~ --- (WIEDER) I I I I I •• STANTON. I I I·~ ---- DISTRICT 5 ( ),,,,,,,,WAHNER,,,,,,~ __ __ (cox) .. t ••••••• .PLYPlllER ••••• ~ __ __ (WIEDERJ,,,,,,,STANTON,,.,.~--- DI STRICT 7 (BEYER),,,,,,,,SMITH,,,,,,, ,,,,,, ---- (MILLERJ,,,,,, ,SILLS,,,,,,.~---­ ( KENNEDY) •• I ••• EDGAR I I •••• ·~ --- (LUXEMBOURGER) ,GR I SET I I I I.·~ -- (cox) •••••••••• MAURER •••••• ~ ---- (WIEDER),,,,,,,STANTON,,,,, ~ _ (GREEN),,,,,,,,WAHNER,,,,,, ~--- DI STRICT 11 (MANDIC),,,,,,,BAILEY,,,,,,~--­ (WIEDER) I I ••••• STANTON, •••• ~ --(FINLEY) ••••••• THOMAS •• ,,,,~ __ DISTRICT 13 <BEYER> •••••••• sMtTH ••••••• v __ _ (WISNER),,,,,,,BEVERAGE,.,,~---~NELSON). I I I I. ,COOPER. I I. I·~ -- OVERHOI.. T) I I I I • ROTH. I I I I I I ·~ ---WI EDER),,, •••• STANTON ••••• __ .,,,_ ---- 2/13/85 (THOMAS/MANDIC)BAILEY,,,, •• ~ (WISNER),,,,,,,BEVERAGE,,,,~ (RISNER) I I I I I I I BROWNELL I I I ·~ -- (NEWTON),,, •••• BUCK ••••• ,,,~:::: (NORBY),,,,,,,,CATLIN,,,,,,~ (~NELSON),,,,,,,COOPER.,,,,,~:::: PERRY),,,,,,,,CULVER,,,, •• ~ ___ KENNEDYJ,,,,,,EDGAR,, ,,,,,~ (JARRELL),,,,,,GRIFFIN,, ,,,~ --- LUXEM80URGER),GRISET.,,,,,~:::: CRANK) I 11 I I I I ,HANSON. I I I I·~ cox) ... , .•.... HART •••••••• ~:::: MAHONEYJ,,,,,1HOLMBERG,,,,~ PARTIN),,,,,,.~.,,,,,,~ ---- ODLUM),,,,,,, ,KAWANAMJ,,,,~ --- COX),,,,,,,,,,MAURER,,, ,,,~ (SCOTT>. I I. I I I .NEAL. I I 11 11 ·~ !COOPER) I It. I I .NELSON. I. I I I .,,,,,,, FINLAYSONJ,,,,OLSON,,,,,,.~ CULVER),,,,.,.~ ••• ,,,, -- (COX). 11I11 •••• PUHHtE!R. 11 I .-v (SEIDEL),,,,,,,POLIS,,,,,,.~ ~OVERHOLTJ,,,,,ROTH,,,, ,,,,i::c;- lKENNEDY),,,,,,SALT~RELLI •• ~ (SIRIANJ),,1111SAPI~N ••• II·~ (MILLER),,,,,,,SILLS,,,, ••• ~ (BEYER), ••••••• SMITH •• II II.~::::: (WIEDERJ,,,,,,,STANTON,,,,, ...,,....- (LANDER),, ,,,,,SYLVIA,,,,.,~~ --- (FINLEY). I I I I I I THOMAS I I I I. I --- (GREEN) •• , ••••• WAHNER ••• ,,, --- (BEVERAGEJ,,,,,WISNER,,,,,,-;::::;-':::: illEE: OTHERS: SYLVESTER. I·~-­ CLARKE •••••• ~---­ DAWES •• I I I I·~ -- ANDERSON, I I·~ -- BUTLER I I I • I·~ --BROWN •• ,,,··~ __ BAKER,,,,,,,~ __ KYLE,,,,,,,,~ __ __ YOUNG,,,,,,.~ ___ VON LANGEN ~ __ WINSOR,,,,··~ __ __ STREED,,,,,·~--- WOODRUF~••••---..----­ATKINS,,,, ,, V"' ___ HOHENER,,,,, ______ __ HOWARD,,,,,, ______ __ HUNT. 111111 ·~ --- KEITH ••••• ••---__ __ KNOPF I I I I I I.~ ---LE BLANC,,,, __ _ LI NOST ROM I • ·--LYNCH ••••• ,, ___ MART I NSON I • ·--PEARCE ••• ,,, __ __ PLEASE SIGN IN -MARCH 13, 1985 JOINT MTG . NAME (Please Print ) ]) ict.nct.. Pa.lyY\e.r 1\~u't ._ .... 4-v .; (},"""' 1 I~ fftleN 1~A--rz kofG\>1yt{!_ w~ 'xJ l?1r tJ /-1lllK1 (,H T 1)\.!.c . ._ ~\_~ .... ~~~ FIRM/ORGANIZATION/AGENCY '::::> p. CJ.) I K :;; y ll v l t A:~ .,,, 4 I NTerz.,z STeD f:Rs ( DR~ S To P -~ roFJ S TCPP ·-<;;r6P ~;z5, ~/~ ~MEE TI NG DA TE __ M_a_r_ch~~l.;;;..3.i.., .....;:;;;.19;...8;:;.;5;;.__T IM E DISTRICT 1 ~ --(CRANK),,,,,,,,HANSON •• ,,,,~ (LUXEMBOURGER), GR I SET,,,,. '--7-" ---- (KENNEDY) •••• I .SALTARELLI. I == -- (WIEDER) ••••••• STANTON ••••• ~. ___ == DISTRICT 2 (NORBY),,,,,,,,CATLIN,,,,,, / (OVERHOLT) •• I I .ROTH. I I I I ••• -.-- (NEWTON) ••••••• BUCK •••••••• ~ (NELSON),,,,,,,COOPER,,,,,,---:7"" (LUXEMBOURGER) .GR I SET I I •••• ::z -- (MAHONEY) •••••• HOLMBERG •••• ~::=: ( OOLUM) •••• I •• I KAWANAM I ••• I ./ -- (SCOTT) •••• I I I .NEAL. I I I I. I I t,(" (CULVER),,,,.,,~ ••• ,,,, ::=: (BEYER),,,,,,,,SMITH,, •••••~ (WIEDER),,,,,,,STANTON,,,,,---V---- (BEVERAGE),,,,,WISNER,,,,,,---::;7" DISTit!~T 3 (OVERHO~T),,,,,ROTH,, ,,,,,, ______ __ \ l.uurtR/ ••••••• NELSON ••••• , / (THOMASJ,,,,,,,BAILEY.,,.,,~ ----~ (RISNER),,,,,,,BROWNELL •••• ~ (NORBY),,,,,,,,CATLIN,,,,,, (PERRY),,,,,,,,CULVER,,,,,,--;r (SEIDEL),,,,,,,POLIS •••••• ./ (JARRELL),,,,,,GRIFFIN,,,,, ./ (LUXEMBOURGERJ .GR I SET I I I I I ,--::::7 -- (MAHONEY) I I. I •• HOLMBERG ••• ,--;;T -- (PARTIN) ••••••• ~ ••••••• --:7"" __ (SCOTT),,,,,,,,NEAL.,,,,,,, v' ___ (FJNLAYSONJ OLSON,,,,,,, ./ (SIRIANJ),,,,,,SAPIEN,,,,,,~::::: (WJEDER),,,,,,,STANTON,,,,, v (LANDER),,,,,,,SYLVJA,,,,,, V"" DISTRICT 5 (cox). I I ••• I I. I HART I I. I I I. I / (cox) •••••••••• MAURER •••••• ~ (WIEDER),,,,,,,STANTON,,,,, ./ ___ DISTRICT 5 ( ) I I I • I I I • WAHNER I I I I I I / (cox) I I I I I I I. I .?ltll\MeR I I I I.~ -- (WIEDER) ••••••• STANTON ••••• ""' --- DISTRICT 7 (BEYER),,,,,,,,SMITH,,,,,,, ./". (MILLERJ I I I I I I .SILLS. I I I I I I ..,/ (KENNEDY),,,,,,EDGAR,,,, ••• ~ (LUXEMBOURGER),GRISET,,,,,, ~, (cox); I I I I •• I I I MAURER I I I I I I . --- ( WJ EDER) ••••••• STANTON ••••• ~ --- (GREEN),,,,,,,,WAHNER,,,,,, :;:;r:::: DISTRICT 11 (MAND IC) I I I I I I I BAILEY I I I I I I / (WJEDER),,,,,,,STANTON,,,,, =;;,....--- (FINLEY),,,,,,,THOMAS,,,,,, ___ :::: DISTRICT 13 ((BEYER) I I I I I I I .SMITH. I I I. I I .,/" WISNER),,,,,,,BEVERAGE,,,,--;;;::'""' (~NELSON) I I I I I I .COOPER. I I I I,---:;:;--- OVERHOLT) I I I I I ROTH I I I I I I I ·~::::: WIEDER),,,,,,;STANTON,,,,, ___ V"' ________ _ 2/13/85 --------~-- JOINT BOARDS -v.A!.~s ~ (THOMAS/MANDIC)BAILEY,,,,,, ~ (WISNER),,,,,,,BEVERAGE,,,,4 l ~ISNER),,,,,,,BROWNELL,,,, NEWTON),,,,,,,BUCK,,,,,,,, NORBY),,,,,,,,CATLJN,,,,,.~ (NELSON) I I I I I I ,COOPER I I I I I I -r (PERRY),,,,,,,,CULVER,,,,,, v" (KENNEDYJ,,,,,,EDGAR,,,,,,, ../' JARRELL),,,,,,GRIFFIN,,,,, :;.< LUXEMBOURGERJ,GRISET,,,,,, CRANK),,,,,,,,HANSON,,,,,,--:;:;- COX) I I I I I I I I I I HART I •• I. I I I~ MAHONEY),,,,,,HOLMBERG,,,,~ PARTJN),,,,,,,u.Na,,,,,,, ,,,- ODLUM),,,,,,,,KAWANAMJ,,,.~ cox) I ( I •••••• I MAURER •••••• --;;- (SCOTT J •••••••• NEAL •••••••• ~ !COOPER),,,,,,,NELSON,,,,,, ti"" FINLAYSON} •• I • OLSON •••••• I .,.,.... CULVER) I •••• I I PERRY I I I •• I I""¥'" Ccox) •••••••••• PLUMMER.,, •• ;;;-< ---- (SEIDEL),,,, ,,,POLIS,,•••,, -- (OVERHOLJ),,,, .ROTH,,,,,, ,,-r;[;':::: lKENNEDYJ,,,,,,SALTARELLI •• ~ (SJRIAN·J). I ••• ,SAPIEN •• I •• ,--;;r -- (MILLER) ••••••• SILLS ••••••• --;? ---(BEYER),,,,,,,,SMITH,,,,,,.~ --- (WIEDER) •• I I I I .STANTON. I ••• z,,,-- (LANDER) ••••••• SYLVIA...... --- (FINLEY),,,,,,,THOMAS,,,,,, ti"" --- (GREEN),,~,,, ,,WAHNER •••••• ~<:::: (BEVERAGEJ,,,,,WISNER,,,,,,---:;:;:;:"° __ __ S.18EE: OTHERS: SYLVESTER,,, / CLARKE,,,,,,--:;;r DA\olES,, •••• .~ ANDERSON,,,,~ BUTLER,,,,,,-:;:r BROWN,,,,,,,--::::r- BAKER. I •• ,,,--:;:;- KYLE •••••••• ./" YOUNG,,,,.,,~ VON LANGEN --::;;- WINSOR,,,,,, :;;;,........ STREED I I ••• I o:m:N ..£. -- ·woooRuF~ •••• ATKINS,,,,,,--;:;" HOHENER,,,,,---- HOWARD I I I I. I HUNT,,,,,,,, V"'" KEITH ... II II KNOPF,,••••• V"""' ---~UWuH.-.t:E BLAf~C. I I.--;;?·== LINDSTROM •• I LYNCH •• I I ••• MART I NSON I •• PEARCE. I I I I I ~ ttJJf~J ~~1;r~-q_ .;£ ~rn.t '1 Yr:MiJ c,. .L. ~~ Mt~1 ...L/.-OJD J?ofl-Q.D 1-1tL£ P€E11.. J-uJ~, fl-8 1 ~ 11 ,,. . - A: ~TLW B. -~~ M.,.~01-~Ti/ C . -11 Ffc ~get.s 1-( tAJ -.:fo~r W-Mfl..MAN -/ rJ~ ~ iJf-'fr -:;,/)-s~5""-3fJj{i.) ())Mv'EL / f3fF. Mf.11-rr /~srkfr=r> ;UiuTVf- J~ u A~:tU .. '1 If f,{, ~. ro ~,/ I S1> 1--";o-7-5 -1° -~£) {4'"'1"tb~/ 1s1o -"> t,o 'to -~ ( ~or~/ J_.vJ A-i>-'1 ~r 2 J2-f µ,.., I~ l/4-~1>111 ;;J /Jtx;/L. wsr. + !s-_ 7 >1M 0 /;,, - ~ ~ }1111 Con-,Mt\/IA.lh--Otf:~ ;1h~IT9-/.-tN~ l~<o fow~ouf' -&w.~/cu:oc -~ltu.-IH17!. .. of ~re -.brr. ,Jt714L 7c-ll -!IS~ ~o.J: (,ol?l-IA/l b -w..~e;B__/ewJ fm.Jr/l))ru.rr:-01L--.I~AL y:. f~ 1Jr.,~t(Lsj~ll - 1-A~ f/tiK tp~ Po(..( C"( -j)/.J.(, J -MP1L.. 4- ?{b)-GM fuL WPc.Akc-t/f;,l-{.k-Jf,-0~/~lrrl? :P11JtJ 1r f<~~) )f{l-8 /~-53 -L..1:r!$r Z1u..- CAs,:i / ~ tlJ lf1 TE - ~ff. ~A -/ 3 ~{ S"J : $~ ~t'le<-lJ)i ~M~ ro J:;of/J]oo -Dlj:r: ~ -'l.1.(1..) -Mo"MtYc£ ltmM (h) ~-o /l-r1 ~Clli>~ -Awt~1 f,~1 'l>eN Y/AftL 10 bl.+ItJs . -'iJ {.!. T. 11. -&4,51 Tt<J,~t:., ,Jr./fjoN -~~ /4-0 / J>e=_f -01 ~ ~ lJ l);f / fJE_ C,o, EV 'Ef> VG?-f,&1.00t= p ~ . ()Hh /_l..t;W ~L..L~ ~~1914trJnmo~ -ffff'.,/L -@ 3 /#-~) fµ. 1 TtUA~ 9 (c) -&C. tfr:-No~e - r .,'J"J--ok-/v..tJ!W1M<J14 - 1 SCol)t~t-11 . (_b) 1 ~ S'" -t \ 4)~; uwP~ -llbt t.t-&e 14-tW'1 /?ft=-,J - (S.'i ~ I No -i;-1fl !Jem.- :rr. j,-S$. µ~-J/tJ/<(.< ........ ,~ (<1\ (t)+(i) -~ To ?< 3rp /1-(~~{_J)-v.#~ 1~~~ le) :eiJ vlh-f?t, ~ -Lt~ iJ U,) 1~~ xv) r>tJ.~ ~1r-1 tJof1 t Na-L.- 1 <:" -~:rµ-: H-_ twP'11rt~ 4-t. j s-{o Jht-11--Ro~-,eJ.]) F h« . ~ //>#::.'44; ,J ro A:Plw! f9-1- _t HP~-.1Ju}f:> _~Hftu...'1 Ac~ o,A} 3/J1 /gs--- (_~ ~{_c) -uJ~ -~ lflfu. kr/1M fortNrJM-M-€4 tjf-rpr~ ti--Jj_cLv.¥3:> :riJ tJ>f.11~¥€ $f..- ~1Mb /rwt-at! l~uc..: CoMt«·IJr 1~ A-Pfl.tL - it,(~) -Afj}1U.O k~ '. 4-3j, {_ -r-&..ut~ .Siu .. f~ ... ~ (J;N7c't.Jr ;,J °/:>16/?JTEl-t,~ft-,>-8tx; ({M. - -TL(L'·f'11 [185°"' -~L1~&/@. fe1.~11 ro ooill~lf Y,;:r-W-E tJe·-tr ~IWJ -- ........, ~ 1-f. M-'\/AAIWl€ * frr_ iJ:,r AiJ 1t1L 1 .J IJ n MEL '7 -fty417otJ / #16 lkl-/.pM TJ. - Jl..rL . ~ l£'l1 t,TP-1~~ Mo~lr~~f,-f.a>!ifM.fTrec--7 -iJa;:e LR!&<.:: ~'Jbj_!i£ n/eJ51:1 wft;;J.1M1ffeF- ~) ,J~r lv{QA)nJ - i..q (_ o..) -~ Tlf(ef I A)~ ~~I /.J.d..T ~CA~ i!:ASJ{ -I H" itu.. _,Po I 'I 'CE /I (h} -iJJ - tj~ {_o..) ~e)-IA~~ ,, MARCH 13, 1985 JOINT MEETING NOTES #7(a) -Report of the Joint Chairman See Attached Notes. #7(b) -Report of the General Manager The General Manager reported that last year the House reauthorized the Federal Water Pollution Co n trol Act. At that time the Senate failed to pass a similar bill so it failed to get out of the last Congress. Congress is now in session this year and both the Senate and House have reintroduced this bill--HR8 & S53. He added that he and the General Counsel are on a committee that will be tracking those bills and working with Lee White also to be sure our interests are protected. Mr . Sylvester reported on Supplemen tal Agenda Item No. 13(b) (5). He said the Executive Committee is making several recommendations re modifications of Plant No. 1 diversion facilities in order to divert the Santa Ana River Interceptor Flow from Plant No. 1 to Plant No. 2. One of the Committee's recommendations is to authorize staff to solicit proposals to install pumps. We have taken those bids . The original estimate was $35,000 but we received two bids and the staff is recommending award of that contract to the low bidder for $15,721.00. He further reported that in District 3 we are nearing completion of the rehabilitation of manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer. Two claims have been filed. One was a motorcyclist who hit a patch of asphalt and lost control of his motorcycle and the police report indicates he was at fault. The other claim involves an automobile that hit a barricade that had fallen over. The items on the Supplemental Agenda are routine actions to receive , file and deny and refer to Districts ' liability claims admininstrator, General Counsel, contractor, and contractor's insurance company for appropriate action . Re District 11, Mr. Sylvester reported that we have ·had an oil spill in the Coast Highway Trunk Sewer Siphon from Plant 2 to downtown Huntington Beach. The siphon goes under the Huntington Beach steam plant, 35-40 feet deep. Occasionally, we have experienced oil spills from oil companies. This will not go through to the Treatment Plant but backs up and plugs the siphon. Our staff has developed a method that will save a considerable amount of money. We take it out in vacuum trucks and mix it with sawdust and haul it to a Class I dump. The estim ated cost for thi s spill i s $50,000. We are able in many cases to track down the oil companies that cause this and we will try to back charge them for this cost. We did review this with Chairman Bailey at the time and are asking the Board to ratify this action. The General Manager then announced that inasmuch as there have been several new Directors seated in the past few months, staff is planning a Directors' Orientation sometime the latter part of April for these new Directors and for the old Directors also. The orientation meetings usually last about 3 hours. Will review new programs, long-range financing and budgets and tour Plant No. 1. #7(c) -No report of General Counsel #13(a) -Re Draft EIR on Master Plan for Joint Works Facilities The Joint Chairman advised that any Director or member of the public that would like a copy of the full EIR on the Master Plan should see Hilary Baker after the meeting. He also asked that the Directors acknowledge that they received one so they wouldn't be sent a duplicate . #13(b) -Actions re modifications to diversion structure at Plant No. 1 It was reported that these actions are ratifications of actions that the Executive Committee has taken to acquire four pumps for a cost not to exceed $35,000. and authorizing construction of the diversion structure modifications. He added that all of this will enable us to start work tomorrow on this particular structure. The timetable is for less than 45 days. That is probably going to be very close to when Stringfellow wastewater will be available. il3(c) -Denying request of Fountain Valley & Newport Beach re payment for independent consultant to study Stringfellow plan Director James Neal voted no on motion denying said request. il3(d) (2) -Adjourned District 3 meeting -April 4, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. Supervisor Stanton said they he wouldn't be able to attend this meeting and asked if the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors could attend in his place? He was told yes, he could. #14(e) -Final Report re Stringfellow Chairman Edgar reported that this is essentially a redundant report to the one received and filed last month. The data was good enough that the additional meeting that had been suggested to be held in Fountain Valley was not needed. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried to receive, file and accept this report. il4(f) -Authorizing SAWPA to issue I.W. Permit to DOHS The Joint Chairman reported that this enables us, upon completion of the diversion structure and the checking at the treatment plant at the Stringfellow site, to authorize the General Manager to give a use permit when all of these things are in order. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried to direct staff to issue this permit. Supervisor Stanton voted no on motion. #15 -Re Agreement with IRWD re District No. 14 Chairman Edgar reported that three months ago we reached a conclusion regarding the District 14 agreement, but the only element we were uncomfortable with was the appraisal of the land. The appraisal came back within about 15% of the estimate. An essential part of the agreement was to fund a lot of money. we felt a reasonable approach was to delay some of the money. With that in mind, have now finalized the entire agreement. It has been submitted to IRWD and they have -2- formally approved the agreement. It is now appropriate to acknowlege these actions. It is a very good and fair agreement. They will be paying a lot of money and the people in the Irvine area are going to be given more efficient treatment of the wastewater and all of the Districts will benefit from the money. Director Catlin questioned Exhibit B of the Summary of the agreement , and Chairman Edgar explained that the $31.2 million is just for the facilities or the actual value, and from that we deduct what they have invested in the outfall and then add the land value. He stated that there is no discrepancy on Exhibit B. The total cash will be $34 million but will defer some of it for 5 months. They won't be putting material into our pipes for a good number of months. It was moved and seconded to approve items (b) and (c). Motion carried. Voice vote on motion. Director James Neal commented re District 14 that it looks like it is going to go through. Said the City of Fountain Valley's concern is the ultimate area which will come into the plant. It may become so great that it will cause further problems for the City. Asked if staff could review t~e possible area that will come in? Chairman Edgar replied that, basically, with District 14 coming in, we are saying that all the water on the south side of Irvine will be in the District. There isn't any simple gravity movement of the water. Just the geography of Orange County says that we have have gone as far as we can. Can't go over the hill. The plan created 30 years ago shows the same geographical area. An EIR will be prepared and presented, and all the Directors will have the opportunity to read it and make any conclusions regarding this plan before it becomes final .. Director Neal asked when would be a good time to have the Board adopt a policy regarding the ultimate area? Edgar answered, at the end of the EIR. He added that staff will think through a position paper. The General Manager added that the approval this evening for the issuance of a Draft EIR would be an appropriate place to address that issue. He added that we have also issued a Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR for District 14 and that report is due sometime in April and will come out for comment at that time. il6 -Re Job No. PW-141, Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction The General Manager reported on the Districts' required compliance with the new AQMD regulations for Rule 431.1. It restricts the sulfur content of digester gas to 800 parts per million. Currently, our gas runs between 2,000 and 5,000 parts per million. The ferrous chloride system to reduce this sulfur must be installed to insure compliance with these standards by July 1, 1985. We are on a very tight time schedule. In order to construct the facilities, the AQMD must give us a permit to construct. We have not received it yet. We have met with the staff of AQMD and talked to them on the phone that afternoon, and they believe they can get this permit to us by next Tuesday. If permit is not forthcoming, we may not be able to meet the deadline . In that event, would have to file for a time variance and the staff would like to be authorized to file for that if this permit is not issued within the next week or so, or if permit conditions are such that they are not practical or obtainable. It was then moved and seconded to approve Items (a) & (b) and to authorize staff to file for a variance if the timetable and delayed receipt of the permit keeps us from moving as expediently as we want. Motion carried. -3- #17 -All Districts Other Business Director Ruth Bailey asked about the Special Committee that was mentioned last month relative to the Stringfellow operations. Chairman Edgar indicated that he has discussed this committee with the General Manager and it is going to be formed, but said he first wanted to be sure of what our legal obligations and commitment is in terms of SAWPA's line. Have asked our General Counsel for that opinion and then will set up Committee. Expect it will be within one month. Director Stanton asked if he was talking about what may have developed since original agreement and what may or may not be the contractor's obligation? He added that we should also set the game plan for what Committee is to achieve. #29 -Preliminary Timetable for Collection of District 13 User Fees on Tax Bills The General Manager reported that upon formation of District No. 13, the Board adopted an ordinance that established a $70 user fee to finance the annual operation and maintenance costs. Currently the staff issues invoices to collect this fee, but the original formation plan provided for the collection of the annual user fee on the property tax bills which is the most effective way to do it . In order to implement this method of collection, State law requires that all property owners be notified and a public hearing be held. Mr. Sylvester reviewed the preliminary timetable for implementing collection of the fee on the property tax bills commencing with the 1985-86 fiscal year. It was moved , seconded and duly carried to approve this timetable. i32(a) -Re Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4 Chairman Edgar briefly reviewed the Negative Declaration on the Main Street Trunk Sewer. The trunk sewer extends to the IRWD boundary and would provide service for proposed District 14. The size of the line has been increased from 21-60 inches to accommodate the proposed District 14 flow. The Negative Declaration prepared by Courton and Associates has been circulated for comment and the consultant has reviewed all the comments and finds that there will not be any significant long-term effects on the envir onment due to this project because of the mitigation measures that have been incorporated. Items (b) thru (e) were then moved, seconded and duly carried. -4- -~ p " ,--;.. ' --. REPORT OF THE JOINT CHAIRMAN MARCH 13, 1985 !) INTRODUCE SUZANNE ATKINS, SITTING IN FOR TOM WOODRUFF. 2) NPDES OCEAN DISCHARGE PERMIT. WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY INFORMED YOU BY A WRITTEN COMMUNICATION ON FEBRUARY 25TH THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY HAS ISSUED OUR NEW NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM OCEAN DISCHARGE PERMIT. LAST JULY, THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD HAD APPROVED THE PERMIT THAT IS BEING ISSUED JOINTLY WITH EPA. THE 5-YEAR PERMIT BECOMES EFFECTIVE APRIL !ST AFTER A 33 DAY PUBLIC NOTICE PERIOD. THE PERMIT WAS GRANTED BECAUSE OF OUR. DEMONSTRATED ABILITY TO MEET EPA CRITERIA AND THE CALIFORNIA OCEAN PLAN WHICH SETS ~ STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION OF THE OCEAN. APPROVAL OF THE PERMIT COMES AFTER FIVE YEARS OF INTENSIVE STUDY BY EPA AND THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, ONE OF THE MOST RIGOROUS REGULATORY REVIEWS OF ANY WATER QUALITY ISSUE EVER CONDUCTED. THE DISTRICTS ARE THE FIRST LARGE SEWERAGE AGENCY IN THE NATION TO RECEIVE SUCH A PERMIT WHICH HAS SERVED AS A MODEL FOR OVER 200 PE~MIT APPLICATIONS NOW BEING PROCESSED BY EPA NATIONWIDE. UNDER THE NEW PERMIT THE DISTRICTS ARE REQUIRED TO INCREASE THE REMOVAL OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS FROM 50% TO 75% AND BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND FROM 35% TO 60%. IN ADDITION, SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THESE BOARDS IMPLEMENTED AN INDUSTRIAL WASTE SOURCE CONTROL THAT HAS ENABLED·THE DISTRICTS TO PROPOSE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE 1 '...,_/ r ........ RESTRICTIVE TOXIC MATERIAL LIMITATIONS IN THE DISTRICTS' PERMIT CONDITIONS THAN THE CALIFORNIA OCEAN PLAN REQUIRES. THE BOARDS HAVE ALSO APPROVED ADDITIONAL MEASURES THAT WILL FURTHER ENHANCE THE DISTRICTS' TREATMENT AND ENSURE -CONTINUED LONG-TERM COMPLIANCE WITH THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. As YOU KNOW, WE HAVE RECENTLY COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION OF $124 MILlION OF ADVANCED SECONDARY TREATMENT FACILITIES AT TREATMENT PLANT No. l AND PLANT No. 2 TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT AND THE CALIFORNIA OCEAN PLAN. RECEIPT OF THE 30l(H) WAIVER WILL SAVE $142 MILLION IN ApD~TIONAL FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND $5 TO $7 MILLION IN ONGOING ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS WILL BE REALIZED BY THE CITIZENS OF ORANGE COUNTY. A MAJOR REQUIREMENT OF THE PERMIT, OVER ITS FIVE YEAR TERM, IS A COMPREHENSIVE OCEAN MONITORING PROGRAM THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED IN SCOPE. THE MONITORING PROGRAM WILL COST THE DISTRICTS $1.5 MILLION ANNUALLY AND IS DESIGNED TO EVALUATE ANY EFFECTS OF THE DISCHARGE ON THE MARINE LIFE. THE PERMIT CAN BE MODIFIED OR REVOKED IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT THAT THE MONITORING SHOWS ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT. THE DISTRICTS' DEMONSTRATED ~BILITY TO MEET THE STRINGENT DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS AND THE EXTENSIVE SCIENTIFIC DATA THAT WILL BE PRODUCED BY THE MONITORING PROGRAM WILL ASSURE THAT THE OCEAN WATERS OFF}( THE ORANGE COUNTY COASTLINE WILL BE PROTECTED. 2 3) TOXICS ROUND-UP DAY. DIRECTORS WILL RECALL THAT IN JANUARY THE BOARDS APPROVED A COOPERATIVE EFFORT WITH THE COUNTY OF ORANGE FOR A TRIAL "TOXICS ROUND-UP." IT WILL ALLOW HOMEOWNERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES TO BRING _SMALL AMOUNTS OF TOXIC MATERIALS TO A CENTRAL LOCATION FOR PROPER DISPOSAL PACKAGING •. MATERIAL WILL THEN BE -TRUCKED TO A CLASS I LANDFILL . IF THE TRIAL PROGRAM IS SUCCESSFUL, THE BOARDS WILL BE ASKED TO CONSIDER PROPOSAL TO CONTINUE IT ON A PERMANENT BASIS. SATURDAY, APRIL 20TH HAS BEEN SELECTED AS THE DATE FOR THE TOXICS ROUND-UP TRIAL. IT WILL BE CONDUCTED AT THE ABANDONED HUNTINGTON BEACH TRANSFER STATION No. 2, LOCATED ON GOTHARD . BETWEEN TALBERT AND ELLIS, FROM 9:00 A.M. -3:00 P.M. WE HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM SUPERVISOR WEIDER, WHO ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THE PROGRAM, EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO OUR DIRECTORS FOR CO-SPONSORING THE PROGRAM. IN ADDITION TO THE COUNTY AND -OUR D1STRICTS, THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THE ORANGE COAST CHAPTER OF THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ARE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THE PROJECT. 4) UPCOMING MEETINGS. ANNOUNCE /CALL THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS: A) BUILDING COMMITTEE -THURSDAY, MARCH 21ST AT 5:30 P.M. B) FISCAL POLICY COMMITTEE -TUESDAY, MARCH 2bTH AT 4:30 P.M. C) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE -WEDNESDAY, MARCH 27TH AT 5:30 P.M. INVITE TWO OF THE FOLLOWING TO ATT END: CARREY NELSON ~ AND ~HARD OL ~ OR OR RUTHELYN PLUMME R D) DISTRICT No. 3 ADJOURNED BOARD MEETING -THURSDAY, APRIL 4TH AT 7:30 P.M. (SEE BELOW FOR EXPLANATION.) 3 " . . THE BOARDS HAVE BEFORE JHEM, UNDER AGENDA ITEM 130, A RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE TO ADOPT A GENERAL POLICY REGARDING SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGE TO LOCAL SEWER MANHOLES CONNECTED TO DISTRICT TRUNK SEWERS. DISTRICT No. 3 CHAIRMAN, DON ROTH, IS RECOMMENDING THAT INASMUCH AS THE MANHOLE DETERIORATION PROBLEM IS PRESENTLY LIMITED TO DISTRICT No. 3, ITs·BOARD MEET ON APRIL 4TH TO RECEIVE A REPORT·FROM STAFF AND CONSIDER.ESTABLISHING THE BASIS AND AMOUNT OF A SETTLEMENT POLICY. . IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE ·MALCOLM-PIRNIE ODOR CONTROL FOR THE MILLER-HOLDER TRUNK SEWER WILL ALSO BE READY AT THAT TIME. 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ON MARCH 13J 1985 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS A VENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 3/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Approving Amendment No. l to the Sludge Management Agreement with EKO Systems/Orange County, Ltd. (Specification No. S-030) Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby ad~pt Resolution No. 85-50, approving Amendment No. 1 to the Sludge Management . Agreement with EKO Systems/Orange County, Ltd., providing for a time extension relative to obtaining a site for offsite reuse/disposal of Districts' sludge from February 15, 1985 to April 15, 1985. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications re Job No. PW-119 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Paving and Drainage at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-119, authorizing an addition of $5,405.24 to the contract with Frank Ultimo, General Building Contractor, for revisions, installation of additional drainage facilities and a deletion of soil amendment, and granting a time extension of seven calendar days for said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications re Job No. PW-129 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Lube Oil Storage Tank at Foster Pump Station, Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-129, authorizing an addition of $714.75 to the contract with Frank Ultimo, General Building Contractor, for removal of heat exchange· equipment which interfered with the placement of the lube oil tank, and granting a time extension of two calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving plans and specifications re Job No. Pl-21 That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-44, approving plans and specifications for Installation of Replacement of Centrifuges with Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-21, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Authorizing staff to issue Change · Order A to Purchase Order No. 17021 issued to Advanco Constructors, Inc. re Specification No. M-016 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue Change Order A to Purchase Order No. 17021 issued to Advanco Constructors, Inc. for Installation of Pressure Relief Bypass Around 10 Positive· Displacement Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, increasing the total amount from $15,810.00 to $16,354.40 for additional work to install two valves supplied by the Districts at Pumps A, B and c. -7- 3/13/85 The General Manager then announced that a new Directors' orientation session is being planned in the near future for the benefit of any of the Directors that wished to attend. The Districts' long-range facilities planning, budgets and proposed new programs would be reviewed at the meeting.. A tour of Reclamation Plant No. 1 would also be conducted. More information and a firm date would be mailed to the Directors when the plans are finalized. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Ratification of oayment of Joint and Individual District Claims That payment of Joint and individual District claims set forth on pages "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part of these minutes, and summarized below, be, and are hereby, ratified by the respective Boards in the amounts so indicated. ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - Joint Working Capital Fund Self-Funded Insurance Funds DISTRICT NO. 1 DISTRICT NO. 2 DISTRICT NO. 3 DISTRICT NO. 5 DISTRICT NO. 6 DISTRICT NO. 7 DISTRICT NO. 11 DISTRICT NO. 13 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT ALL DISTRICTS Awarding Jobs Nos. PW-061R-2 and 2/06/85 $459,498.78 132,559.62 120,832.61 4,609.72 31,498.73 93,115.52 8 ,841. 50 40.76 4,406.19 19,387.10 109,446.59 3,372.92 $987,610.04 2/20/85 $ 258,158.72 317,424.97 110,309.31 3,828.84 869.64 23,417.77 13,444.84 16,903.39 5,568.73 14,076.20 1,719,564.06 7,723.70 $2,491,290.17 Moved, seconded and duly carried: PW-061R-3 to Kiewit Pacific Company That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-42, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Digesters C & D at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-2, and Rehabilitation of Digesters F & G at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-061R-3, to Kiewit Pacific Company in the amount of $2,435,555.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Authorizing the staff to complete Job No. PW-125 (Rebid) under force account Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the staff be, and is hereby, authorized to complete the Entry Gates at Plant No. 2, Job No. PW-125 (Rebid), under force account procedures for a total amount not to exceed $80,000.00: and, FURTHER MOVED: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to solicit bids for the individual items of work in accordance with the Districts' procurement regulations, and to issue purchase order contracts for such items to the lowest responsible bidders. -6- CIJ. 3/13/85 The Joint Chairman announced that the Building Committee would meet on Thursday, March 21, at 5:30 p.m. Mr. Edgar also advised that the Fiscal Policy Committee meeting would be held on Tuesday, March 26, at 4:30 p.m. He then called a meeting of the Executive Committee for Wednesday, March 27, at 5:30 p.m. and invited Directors Richard Olsori and Bob Perry to attend and participate in the discussions. Chairman Edgar reported 'that a District No. 3 Adjourned Board Meeting was proposed for April 4, at 7:30 p.m. to receive a report from staff relative to a policy regarding settlement of claims for damage to local sewer manholes connected to District trunk sewers. The District No. 3 Board would consider establishing the basis and the amount of a settlement policy for that District at the adjourned meeting. ALL DISTRicrS Report of the General Manager The General Manager reported that last year Congress adjourned without renewing the Clean Water Act. Congress is now in session again and both the Senate and House have introduced legislation to reauthorize the Act, s.53 and H.R.8, respectively. Mr. Sylvester reviewed staff and Washington Counsel, Lee White's, efforts to obtain legislative authorization for the Districts proposed deep ocean sludge disposal research project to continue. He added that he and the General Counsel sit on an ad hoc CASA committee that will be tracking the bills to keep the Districts' interests protected. Mr. Sylvester reported on a Supplemental Agenda item relative to the proposed modifications of the diversion facilities at Plant No. 1 in order to route the Santa Ana River Interceptor flow from Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley to Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach. The Executive Committee, later in the agenda, recommends several items relative to the proposed modifications, including ratification of the Executive Committee's action in directing staff to solicit proposals to install the required pumps so that the work could be expedited. He reported that bids were received and staff recommends award to the low bidder in the amount of $15,721. The General Manager also reported on two claims appearing on the Supplemental Agenda, filed against District No. 3 relative to accidents which occurred in connection with the construction of Contract No. 3-28R, Rehabilitation of 19 Manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer. He recommended the routine actions appearing on the agenda to receive and file said claims and refer them to the appropriate parties for further action. Mr. Sylvester then reported on a Supplemental Agenda item in District 11 relative to an oil spill in the Coast Highway Trunk Sewer Siphon. When this occurs, the oil backs up at a siphon under the Southern California Edison steam plant sea water intake and outlet lines and plugs the siphon. The material must be pumped out and disposed of at a Class I landfill. He indicated that the staff had developed a cost-saving method of removing the oil using a vacuum truck and then mixing it with sawdust to be transported more cost effectively in larger trucks to the Class I dump site. The General Manager advised that authorization of this emergency expenditure in an amount not to exceed $50,000 had been received from the Chairman of District No. 11, and the agenda· item is to ratify said action in accordance with the procurement procedures. -s- 3/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Chairman Edgar announced that the Report of the Joint Chairman Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had issued our new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) ocean discharge permit. Last July the ~ California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) had approved the permit that is being issued jointly with EPA·. Mr. Edgar reviewed the basic prov is ions of the five-year permit which becomes effective April 1st af.ter a 33-day public notice period. The permit was granted because of the Districts' demonstrated ability to meet EPA criteria and the California Ocean Plan which sets standards for protection of the ocean. Approval of the permit comes after five years of intensive study by EPA and the CRWQCB. The Orange County Sanitation Districts are the first large sewerage agency in the nation to receive such a permit, and the Districts' permit is serving as a model for over 200 permit applications now being processed by EPA nationwide. Under the new permit the Districts are required to increase the removal of suspended solids from 50% to 75% and biochemical oxygen demand from 35% to 60%. This improved treatment capability will be provided by recently completed advanced treatment facilities constructed by the Districts at a cost of $24 million. · Chairman Edgar also noted that several years ago, the Boards impiemented an industrial waste source control that enabled enable the Districts to propose substantially more restrictive toxic material limitations in the Districts' permit conditions than the Califo~nia Ocean Plan requires. The Boards have also approved additional measures that will further enhance the Districts' treatment and ensure continued long-term compliance with the permit requirements. Receipt of the 30l(h) Waiver/NPDES Permit will save the citizens of Orange County $142 million in construction costs for additional facilities and $5 to $7 million in ongoing annual operating costs. The Joint Chairman also commented that a major requirement of the permit is a comprehensive ocean monitoring program that is unprecedented in scope. The monitoring program will cost the Districts $1.5 million annually. It is designed to evalue any effects of the discharge on the marine life. The permit can be modified or revoked in the unlikely event that the monitoring shows any adverse impacts on the marine environment. Mr. Edgar stated that the Districts' demonstrated ability to meet the stringent discharge requirements and the extensive scientific data that will be produced by the monitoring program will assure that the ocean waters off the Orange County coastline will be protected. Joint Chairman Edgar then reported that in January the Boards approved a cooperative effort with the County of Orange to conduct a one-day trial nToxics Roundupn to allow homeowners and small businesses to bring limited amounts of toxic materials to a central location for proper packaging and disposal at a Class I landfill. If the trial program is successful, the Boards will be asked to consider a proposal to continue it on a permanent basis. The "Toxics Roundup" will be held Saturday, April 20th, at the abandoned Huntington Beach Transfer Station No. 2, located on Gothard between Talbert and Ellis, from 9:00 a.m. to 3 :-00 p.m. \..) -4- '.._/ \._,! 3/13/85 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHERS' PRESENT: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager, Rita Brown, Board Secretary, William N. Clarke, Thomas M. Dawes, Blake Anderson, Bill Butler, Gary Streed, Hilary Baker, Penny Kyle, Ray Young, Richard von Langen, Chuck Winsor, Robert Ooten Suzanne Atkins, Harvey Hunt, Bill Knopf, Sat Tamaribuchi, Kay Cooperman, Stacie Young, Darrel Miller, Peer Swan, Kathleen A. Gabriel, Diana Palmer, ,1. Andrew Schlange, Art Bruington, Allen Katz, Corinne Welch, Dean Albright, ouane Flahen * * * * * * * * * * * * * DISTRicr 1 There being no corrections or amendments Approval of Minutes to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 13, 1985, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRicr 2 Approval of Minutes that said minutes DISTRICT 3 AE:eroval of Minutes that said minutes DIS TRI er 5 AEproval of Minutes that said minutes DISTRicr 6 A:eproval of Minutes be deemed approved, be deemed approved, be deemed approved, There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 13, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February ·13, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the ~egular meeting held February 13, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 13, 1985, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRicr 7 Approval of Minutes that said minutes DISTRICT 11 Approval of Minutes that said minutes DIS TRI er 13 Approval of Minutes that said minutes be deemed approved, be deemed approved, be deemed approved, There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 13, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 13, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 13, 1985, the Chairman ordered as mailed. -3- ROLL CALL · A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. l, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, was held on March 13, 1985, at 7:30 p.m., in the Districts' Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was callad and the Secretary reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 11 and 13 as follows: DISTRICT NO. 1: DISTRICT NO. 2: DISTRICT NO. 3: DISTRICT NO. 5: DISTRICT NO. 6: DISTRICT NO. 7: DISTRICT NO. 11: DISTRICT NO. 13: ACTIVE DIRECTORS _x_Robert Hanson, Chairman _x_Dan Griset, Chairman pro tem _x_Don Saltarelli _x_Roger Stanton _x_Buck Catlin, Chairman a Don Roth, Chairman pro tern x Richard Buck x Sam Cooper -x-Dan Griset -x-John Holmberg x Carol Kawanami _x_James Neal __ Bob Perry _x_Don Smith _x_Roger Stanton ~Gene Wisner a Don Roth, Chairman x C~rrey Nelson, Chairman pro tern _x_Ruth Bailey x Oscar Brownell x Buck Catlin x Norman Culver -x-Don Griff in x Dan Griset x John Holmberg x Richard Partin x James Neal -x-Richard Olson -x-Richard Polis a Sal Sapien x Roger Stanton x Charles Sylvia x Evelyn Hart, Chairman x Philip Maurer, Chairman pro tem _x_Roger Stan ton x James Wahner, Chairman Ruthelyn Plummer, Chairman pro tern _x_Roger Stanton x Don Smith, Chairman -x-David Sills, Chairman pro tern -x-Richard Edgar x Dan Griset __ x_Philip Maurer x Roger Stanton x James Wahner x Ruth Bailey, Chairman x Roger Stanton, Chairman pro tern _x_John Thomas _x_Don Smith, Chairman x Michael J. Beverage -x-Sam Cooper a Don Roth _x_Roger Stanton -2- ALTERNATE DIRECTORS __ orma Crank __ Robert Luxembourger __ Ursula Kennedy __ Harriett Wieder __ Chris Norby E. Llewellyn Overholt, Jr. Arthur Newton Carrey Nelson Robert Luxembourger __ Bill Mahoney __ will iam Odlum __ George Scott _x_Norman Culver ___ Gene Beyer Harriett Wieder Michael J. Beverage __ a. Llewellyn Overholt __ Sam Cooper __ John Thomas __ Joyce Risner __ Chris Norby __ Bob Perry James T. Jarrell Robert Luxembourger __ Bill Mahoney __ John Kane! George Scott Bruce Finlayson Norma Seidel ---Jean Siriani ---Harriett Wieder David Lander Bill Agee --Bill Agee Harriett Wieder -x-John Cox, Jr. Harriett Wieder Gene Beyer ---Sally Anne Miller Ursula Kennedy Robert Luxembourger --Bill Agee Harriett Wieder __ Harry Green Robert P. Mandie, .1r. ---Harriett Wieder _Ruth Finley __ Gene Beyer Gene Wisner ---Carrey Nelson --H. Llewellyn Overholt Harriet Wieder 3/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Accepting Specification No. M-016 as complete That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-45, accepting Installation of Pressure Relief Bypass Around 10 Positive Displacement Primary Pumps, Specification No. M-016, as complet.e, and authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Awarding Purchase Order Contract re Specification No. M-020 to Spiess Construction Company, Inc. Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the bid tabulation and recommendation re award of purchase order contract for Installation of Flex-A-Tube Medium Bubble Diffusers and Appurtenant Equipment, Specification No. M-020, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed7 and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase be, and is hereby, awarded to Spiess Construction Company, Inc. in the total amount of $128,610.00. ALL DISTRICTS Awarding Specification No. P-073 to Gas Chem Products, Inc. Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the bid tabulation and recommendation re award of purchase of Wood Shavings/Sawdust, Specif~cation No. P-073, be, and is hereby, received and ordered f iled7 and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase be, and is hereby, awarded to Gas Chem Products, Inc. for the price of $4.19 per yard, for a total amount not to exceed $63,00~.00 plus tax for a one-year period commencing March 15, 1985. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Addendum No. l to the Agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. re preparation of an EIR on the Master Plan of Joint Works Waste- water Treatment and Disposal Facilities Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 1 to the Agreement· with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint Works wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities, providing for additional services to incorporate the findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study7 to prepare an Executive Summary7 and to respond to public commentary received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved7 and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-46, approving Addendum No. 1 to the Agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Master Plan of Joint works Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facilities, providing for said additional services to incorporate the findings of the Digester Gas Utilization Study7 to prepare an Executive Summary: and to respond to public commentary received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, on an hourly-rate basis inclµding labor, overhead and profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $15,770.00, increasing the total maximum compensation from $34,165.00 to an amount not to exceed $49,935.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. -8- 3/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 5 to the Agreement with John Carollo That the Selection Committee Engineers re Job No. P2-25-2 certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 5 to Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of the Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, providing for preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved: and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-47, approving Addendum No. 5 to Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of the Hydraulic Reliability Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-25-2, providing for preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Manual, on an hourly-rate basis including labor and overhead, plus profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $18,500.00, increasing the total maximum compensation from $664,231.00 plus actual cost for outside services not to exceed $25,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $682,731.00 plus said outside services. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Fountain Valley re widening of Garfield.Avenue Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-48, approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Ea~ement to the C~ty of Fountain Valley for right-of-way required in connection with street improvements and widening of Garfield Avenue east of Ward Street and future maintenance of said area adjacent to the Districts' property, at no cost to the City. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Authorizing the Fiscal Policy Committee to solicit proposals for Districts' annual financial audit Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Fiscal Policy Committee be, and is hereby, authorized to solicit proposals from auditing firms to conduct the annual financial audit of the Districts' books of account. ALL DISTRICTS Receive, file and approve staff Summary.Financial Report for six- month period ending December 31, 1984 ALL DISTRICTS Receive, file and approve written Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the staff Summary Financial Report for six-month period ending December 31, 1984, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. Moved, seconded and duly carried: report of the Executive Committee That the written report of the Executive Committee's meeting on February 27, 1985, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. -9- -. 3/13/85 ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file Joint Treatment Works Wastewater Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Joint Treatment Works Wastewater Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Fixing April 10, 1985 as the date for public hearing on the Joint Treatment Works Wastewater Master Plan Draft EIR Joint Treatment Works Wastewater ALL DISTRICTS Establishing May 1, 1985 as the final date for receipt of comments for Joint Treatment Works Waste- water Master Plan Draft EIR Moved, seconded and duly carried: That April 10, 1985, at 7:30 p.m., in the Districts' Administrative Office, be, and are hereby, fixed as the date, time and place for public hearing on the Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. Moved, seconded and duly carried: That May 1, 1985, be, and is hereby, established as the final date for which all comments must be received on the Joint Treatment Works Wastewater Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. ALL DISTRICTS Actions relative to modifications to incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 to accommodate pretreated Stringfellow wastewater The following actions were taken relative to modifications to incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 re accommodation of pretreated Stringfellow wastewater to allow processing of Sunflower Trunk flows at Santa Ana River Trunk flows to Plant No. 1 and diversion of entire Plant No. 2: Approving modifications to incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 re accommodation of pretreated Stringfellow wastewater Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the modifications to incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1 re accommodation of pretreated Stringfellow wastewater to allow processing of Sunflower Trunk flows at Plant No. 1 and diversion of entire Santa Ana River Trunk flows to Plant No. 2, be, and are hereby, approved. Authorizing completion of Job No. PW-142 as an urgency measure That the Boards of Directors hereby authorize completion of the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, as an urgency measure, for a total amount not to exceed $65,000.00. Ratifying action of the Executive Committee in directing staff to purchase the pumps and controls required for Job No. PW-142 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the action of the Executive Committee in directing staff to purchase the pumps and controls required for the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, in ·an amount not to exceed $30,000.00 (included in above $65,000.00 maximum), be, and is ·hereby, ratified. -10-. 3/13/85 Ratifying action of the Executive Conunittee in directing the staff to solicit informal guotes for installation of pumps and controls re Job No. PW-1421 and authorizing award of Purchase Order Contract to Dorado Enterprises, Inc. for said work Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the actions of the Executive Conunittee in directing the staff to ~ solicit informal quotes for installation of the pumps and controls for the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142 be, are and are hereby, ratified1 and, FURTHER MOVED: That the bid tabulation and recommendation re award of a Purchase Order Contract to Dorado Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of $15,721.00 for installation of said pumps, piping and appurtenances for the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed1 and, FURTHER MOVED: That the staff be, and is hereby, authorized to award said Purchase Order Contract to Dorado Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of $15,721.00 (included in above $65,000.00 maximum) for installation of pumps, piping and appurtenances for the SARI/Sunflower Diversion Structure Modifications, Job No. PW-142. ALL DISTRICTS Respectfully denying the requests of the Cities of Fountain Valley and Newport Beach for the Districts to pay for an independent consultant to study the proposed Stringfellow plan Moved, se9onded and duly carried: That the requests of the Cities of Fountain Valley and Newport Beach for the Districts to pay for an independent consultant engaged by the cities to study the proposed Stringfellow plan be, and are hereby, respectfully denied. Director James Neal requested that his vote in opposition to the motion be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS Adopting a general policy re Settlement of Claims for Damage to Local Sewer Manholes connected to Districts' trunk sewers sewers, as follows: Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors do hereby adopt a general policy re Settlement of. Claims for Damage to Local Sewer Manholes connected to Districts' trunk POLICY OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS RE SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGE TO LOCAL SEWER MANHOLES The Boards of Directors, upon receiving a detailed report of its staff and General Counsel, relating to damages incurred by Cities and Sanitary Districts to their local manhole facilities which are located in the proximate vicinity of Districts' trunk sewer lines,. determined that it was in the best interests of the Districts to effect a settlement of claims for reimbursement of these damages by each of the entitites. The Directors have taken into consideration the relative degree of responsibility ~ between the Sanitation Districts and the local sewering agency, together with the estimated costs of repair of said facilities, and based thereon, the Boards of Directors do hereby adopt as their policy: -11- .- .J/13/85 "The Boards of Directors do approve the settlement of claims made by any local sewering agency wherein damage has been incurred to their local trunk sewer facilities, including manholes, which are connected to the Districts' Trunk Sewers. Pursuant to this policy, the Districts will pay to each local sewering agency, the sum of (amount to be determined by each respective District) for each manhole proven to have incurred damage resulting, in part, from hydrogen sulfide gases emanating from the Districts' trunk sewers. The policy is to be implemented by the payment of this sum, provided the Districts receive a general release of all claims including a waiver of any future claim for damages to their facilities and that the local sewering agency will immediately undertake to repair its manhole facilities with materials and in accordance with specifications approved by the Districts. This policy shall further be limited with regard to reimbursement for manholes already repaired by any local sewering agency to those which have been repaired since January 1, 1982." . and, FURTHER MOVED: That each respective District be, and is hereby, directed to establish the payment amount to be allowed per manhole for said claims for damage to local sewer manholes connected to Districts' trunk sewers. DISTRICT 3 Directing staff to prepare a status report re corrective action on deteriorated manholes and on the Malcolm Pirnie odor control study Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the staff be, and is hereby, directed to prepare a status report re corrective action on deteriorated manholes and on the Malcolm Pirnie odor control study relative to the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer for submission to the District 3 Board at an adjourned meeting to be held on April 4, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. to consider establishing the payment amount to be allowed per manhole pursuant to the general policy re settlement of claims for damage to local sewer manholes. ALL DISTRICTS Actions relative to DOHS/SAWPA proposal to pretreat groundwater from Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site for discharge into the Districts' sewerage system for further treatment and disposal Receive and file letter from the Orange Cou~ty Water District The following actions were taken relative to DOHS/SAWPA proposal to pretreat groundwater from Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site for discharge into the Districts' sewerage system for further treatment and disposal: Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the letter from the Orange County Water District dated February 27, 1985, supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Receive and file letter from the City of Costa Mesa Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the letter from the City of Costa Mesa dated February 25, 1985, expressing concern re the proposed acceptance of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater, ·and supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. -12- ~/13/85 Receive and file letter from Mayor Moved, seconded and duly carried: Ben Nielsen, City of Fountain Valley That the letter from Mayor Ben Nielsen, City of Fountain Valley, dated February 21, 1985, transmitting a copy of an independent report \.-J commissioned from George Kurilko, Ph.D., by the City, finding that the Stringfellow proposal is in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal requirements and should ·not have a significant impact on the quality of treated wastewater from the.Districts' treatment plants; supporting the diversion of the SARI line to Plant No. 2; and requesting consideration of a supplemental trunk line monitoring program, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said request for a supplemental trunk line monitoring program be referred to the Executive Committee for study and report back. Receive and file letter from Moved, seconded and duly carried: Cypress County Water District That the letter from Cypress County Water District, dated February 5, 1985, expressing concern over acceptance of pretreated Stringfellow groundwater through the Districts' sewerage system, be, and is hereby, received and or~ered filed. Receive and file Final Report, Mo~ed, seconded and duly carried: Environmental Review for Treated waste Discharge, Interim Treatment That the Final Report, Environmental and Disposal Program, Stringfellow Review for Treated Waste Discharge, Hazardous Waste Site, dated March, Interim Treatment and Disposal 1985 Program, Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Site, dated March 1985 prepared by the Department of Health Services, Health and Welfare Agency, \..,.) State of California, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Directing staff to authorize SAWPA to issue an industrial waste discharge permit to California Department of Health Services re Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site Moved, seconded and duly carried: That staff be, and is hereby, directed to authorize Santa Ana Wastershed Project Authority (SAWPA) to issue an industrial waste discharge permit to California Department of Health Services (OOHS) for discharge of pretreated groundwater from the Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site to the Districts' sewerage system, upon completion of the modifications to the incoming wastewater diversion structure at Plant No. 1. Director Roger Stanton requested that his vote in opposition to the motion be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS Joint Chairman Edgar reported that Report of Select Committee to after extensive negotiations, the Advise the Staff re proposed Districts and the Irvine Ranch Water formation of District No. 14 District (IRWD) had reached an agreement in connection with proposed formation of District No. 14 to serve the IRWD area. The agreement is in accordance with the conceptual approval given by the Joint Boards in November, 1984. He added that the agreement is a fair agreement and beneficial to both parties, and it was now appropriate for the Sanitation Districts to consider formally approving said \.,) agreement. -13- 3/13/85 The Joint Chairman reported that an Environmental Impact Report on the proposed formation of District No. 14 is being prepared and is scheduled to be issued for public commentary in April. ALL DISTRICTS Receive, file and approve the Report of the Select Committee to Advise the Staff Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Report of the Select Committee to Advise the Staff dated March 1, 1985, re proposed formation of District No. 14 to serve the Irvine area, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Agreement with the Irvine Ranch Water District re proposed That the Boards of Directors hereby formation of District No. 14 adopt Resolution No. 85-49, approving Agreement with the Irvine Ranch Water District re acquisition of a member agency interest in Sanitation Districts' •· facilities relating to the proposed formation of County Sanitation District No. 14. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS. Staff Report re Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction,· Job No. PW-141 The General Manager reported that the Districts' are required to comply by July 1, 1985 with the new South Coast Air Quality Management District {AQMD) regulations for Rule 431.1, which restricts the sulfur content of digester gas utilized by the Districts' digesters to 800 parts per million. Currently, the gas contains 2,000 to 5,000 parts per million. The only proven system that will enable compliance on such a short time schedule is by installing a ferrous chloride dosing system at a cost of approximately $450,000. However, before construction can commence AQMD must issue a Permit to Construct. The Districts have filed for the permit but it has yet to be issued by AQMD. Mr. Sylvester expressed staff's concern that if the permit is not received within the next few days to enable construction to proceed, the project would be delayed and it would not be possible to meet the July 1st compliance date. In that event it would be necessary to request a variance from AQMD. He, therefore, recommended that staff and the General Counsel be authorized to file for such a variance in the event the permit is not immediately forthcoming or if the permit or events make compliance by July 1st impractical or unattainable. ALL DISTRICTS Approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications re Job No. PW-141 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, making a clarification relative to the bonus/liquidated damages (penalty) provisions of the contract to expedite completion of the job to ensure compliance with AQMD regulations, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Awarding Job No. PW-141 to Fraser Corporation Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 85-43, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation re Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, and authorizing the General Manager to -14- 3/13/85 award said contract to Fraser Corporation in the amount of $376,000.00 with provision for early completion bonus of $1,000.00 per day, not to exceed $24,000.00, and penalty assessment of $1,000.00 per day for late completion after May 31st, upon receipt of a Permit to Construct from AQMD. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto.and made a part of these minutes. \...-! ALL DISTRICTS Authorizing staff to file a request with AQMD for a variance re Rule 431.1 if Permit to Construct Ferrous Chloride System is not forthcoming from AQMD It was moved, seconded and duly carried: That the staff and General Counsel be, and are hereby, authorized to file a request with the Air· Quality Management District (AQMD) for a variance relative to compliance with Rule 431.1 regulations governing sulfur content of digester gas, if a Permit to Construct the Ferrous Chloride System for Digester Gas Sulfide Reduction, Job No. PW-141, is not inunediately received from AQMD, or if the permit conditions or subsequent events make compliance by July 1st impractical or unattainable. ALL DISTRICTS In response to an inquiry relative to Status report re formation of formation of the Special Advisory Special Advisory Committee re Committee re Water Quality in the Santa Water Quality in the Santa Ana Ana River Basin to be comprised of upper River Basin (Riverside/San Bernardino County) and lower (Orange County) Santa Ana River Basin officials, which was previously authorized by the Boards, the Joint Chairman stated that he is placing an item on the agenda for the next Executive Committee meeting to discuss the Committee's goals and objectives and its membership. The purpose of the proposed committee is to maintain an ongoing dialogue and keep citizens and officials in Orange County informed about Stringfellow and the programs to improve the water quality in the entire Santa Ana River Basin. Mr. Edgar indicated that he had also asked the Districts' General Counsel to review I..._) the agreement with SAWPA relative to the rights and responsibilities of the respective parties, and to report to the Executive Committee. DISTRICT 1 Approving and authorizing execution of a License Agreement with the City of Santa Ana for a bicycle trail Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-51-1, approving and authorizing execution of a License Agreement with the City of Santa Ana providing for use of District right-of-way for a bicycle trail adjacent to the Dyer Road Trunk Sewer extending northeasterly from Bristol Street to Talbert Avenue, at no cost to the City. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:11 p.m., March 13, 1985. DISTRICT 2 Approving plans and specifications re Contract No. 2-6-2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-52-2, approving -15- 3/13/85 plans and specifications for the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, and City of Orange Street Improvements, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these· minutes. DISTRICT 2 Approving and authorizing execution of a Pipeline License Agreement with the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company re Contract No. 2-6-2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-53-2, approving and authorizing execution of a Pipeline License Agreement with The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company for right-of-way required in connection with construction of the Taft Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 2-6-2, and authorizing payment of $250.00 in accordance with the provisions of said Pipeline License Agreement. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and ma~e a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 2 Approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications re Contract No. 2-10-lA Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications .for the Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA,. transmitting fixed prices for gravel and bedding under the Schedule of Prices, advising th~t the flow may not be interrupted during construction, transmitting the signed Cal Trans Permit and clarifying jacking requirements at the invert of the Ocean View Channel, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Contract No. 2-10-lA to Nuevo Camino Constructors Company That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-54-2, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding a contract for the Euclid Relief Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-lA, to Nuevo Camino Constructors Company in the amount of $5,090,467.00. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:11 p.m., March 13, 1985. DISTRICT 3 Approving Change Order No. 1 to the. plans and specifications re Contract No. 3-21-3R Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, au~horizing an adjustment of engineer's quantities for a total addition of $5,184.88 to the contract with Copp Contracting, Inc., be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 3 Accepting Contract No. 3-21-3R as complete Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-55-3, accepting -16- 3/13/85 Trench Reconstruction, Los Alamitos Boulevard, Contract No. 3-21-3R, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion, and approving Final Closeout Agreement. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving plans and specifications re Contract No. 3-29R That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-56-3, approving plans and specifications for Manhole Repairs, Knott Interceptor Sewer, Contract No. 3-29R, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive, file and deny the claim of David Mikus That the claim of David Mikus dated November 27, 1984, in the amount of $30,000.00 for alleged damages resulting from a motorcycle accident at the site of Contract No. 3-28R, Rehabilitation of 19 Manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and denied1 and, FURTHER MOVED: That said claim be, and is hereby, referred to the District's liability claims administrator, General Counsel, contractor and contractor's insurance.company for appropriate action. DISTRICT 3 Receive, file and deny the claim of Frank P. McHale Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the claim of Frank P. McHale dated December 19, 1984, in the amount of $179.08 for alleged damages to his vehicle resulting from an accident at the site of Contract No. 3-28R, Rehabilitation of 19 Manholes on the Miller-Holder Trunk sewer, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and denied1 and, FURTHER MOVED: That said claim be, and is hereby, referred to the District's liability claims administrator, General Counsel, contractor and contractor's insurance company for appropriate action. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned to 7:30 p.m., Thursday, April 4, 1985, at the Districts' administrative offices. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:12 p.m., March 13, 1985. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:12 p.m., March 13, 1985. DISTRICT 6 MoveQ, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:12 p.m., March 13, 1985. '--1 -17- 3/13/85 DISTRICT 11 Ratifying action of staff in procuring emergency services re Contract No. ll-13-2-M2 Moved, seconded ·and duly carried: That the action of staff in procuring services for Emergency Removal and Disposal of Oil Spilled into the District's Coast Highway Trunk Sewer Siphon, Contract No. ll-13-2-M2, for a total amount not to exceed $50,000.00 be, and is hereby, ratified. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:12 p.m., March 13, 1985. DISTRICT 13 Approving Preliminary Timetable for Collection of District No. 13 User Fees on property tax bills The General Manager reported that upon formation of District No. 13, the Board adopted an ordinance that established a $70 user fee to finance the District's annual operation and maintenance costs. At the present time invoices are issued to collect this fee, but the original formation plan provided for the collection of the annual user fee on the property tax bills, which is the most efficient, cost-effective method of collection. In order to implement this method of collection, State law requires that all property owners be notified and that a public hearing be held. Mr. Sylvester then commented briefly on the preliminary timetable for implementing collection of the fee pn the property tax bills commencing with the 1985-86 fiscal year. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Preliminary Timetable for Collection of District No. 13 User Fees on the property tax bills beginning in 1985-86 dated March 6, 1985, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m., March 13, 1985. DISTRICT 7 Approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Santa Ana re extension of Wilshire Avenue Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-57-7, approving and authorizing execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Santa Ana for execution of a Grant of Easement to the City of Santa Ana for right-of-way required to extend Wilshire Avenue, westerly of Village Way, at no cost to the City. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. -18- 3/19/85 DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Rejecting all bids received for Manhole Repair, Red Hill Avenue, 7th Sewer Maintenance District, That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-58-7, to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation and rejecting all bids Contract No. 7-SMD-l, and referring to staff for re-evaluation Avenue, 7th Sewer Maintenance received for Manhole Repair, Red Hill District, Contract No. 7-SMD-l; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said project be, and is hereby, referred to staff for re-evaluation and recommendation. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 The following actions were taken relative to the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4: Actions relative to the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4 Staff report re Negative Joint Chairman Edgar reported that Declaration re Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4 the Board had previously reviewed an Initial Study and Environmental Impact Assessment on the Main Street Trunk Sewer and determined that a Negative Declaration was appropriate inasmuch as any environmental impacts could be mitigated. Said trunk sewer extends from the intersection of Von Karman Avenue and Main Street to the San Diego Creek (Peters Canyon Wash) and will provide an alternate service connection for proposed District No. 14. The size of the proposed sewer was increased from 21 inches to 60 inches in order to accommodate the IRWD flow. The Environmental Impact Report on the Consolidated Master Plan of Trunk Sewer Facilities to Serve_ County Sanitation District No. 1, the Northe~n Half of District No. 6, and District No. 7, prepared in April 1984, addressed the impacts associated with accommodating growth in the Irvine Business Complex area and is incorporated, by reference, into the Negative Declaration. The Negative Declaration prepared by the District's consultant, Courton and Associates, had been circulated for review and comment. All comments received were addressed by the consultant. The Negative Declaration finds that there will not be any significant long-term effects on the environment as a result of this project due to the mitigation measures that have been incorporated into said project. Receive and file written comments re Negative Declaration for the Moved, seconded and duly carried: Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4 That the written comments received from the following relative to the Negative Declaration for the Main (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed: Orange County Transit District dated February 12, 1985 Orange County Water District dated February 20, 1985 County of Orange EMA dated February 25, 1985 City of Irvine dated February 25, 1985 State of California, Office of Planning and Research, dated February 28, 1985 -19- ·, ~ 3/13/85 Receive and file Main Street Trunk Sewer Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared by Courton and Associates Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Main Street Trunk Sewer Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared by Courton and Associates, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Receive and file Staff Sununary of Moved, seconded and duly carried: Negative Declaration That the Staff Summary of the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Approving the Negative Declaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, and authorizing filing of a Notice of Determination Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-59-7, approving the Negative· Delcaration for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, and authorizing filing of a Notice of Determination re said project. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving plans and specifications re Contract No. 7-2C-4 That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 85-60-7, approving· plans and specifications for the Main Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 7-2C-4, and authorizing the General Manag~r to establish the date for receipt of bids. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:16 p.m., March 13, 1985. -20- e., r I ,j rl 1· 1:1 l::.1' I" 1 1·' .. fl!fllO NU lrJ.11.f.\Rf.l'il 11.0. U7276fi 07 27f,q C72770 . (17 2 771 'H2772 r.72773 C,7C77't ( 1··1 u7 217':J (:72776 . (172777 1·· 1··1 ( ,II . :. ll 7-:t 779 .J7277fJ , I I I•; 0727fHI ( ) D7?7El !•I --·---__ .. c n 76? ,, H27tn .... :; 7? 7f.lt ,..I 07278~' ; . ..., G7 278t. ·· :.i> iJ 1na1 I u 7 2 7tJfi '·'\ 1-~ (;"/27fl9 ( l:i :-. (1 7 2 7 9 f) ( .. 1·'! I. "i j" ( 1"1 I, t.. i·:1 ,. . 1'·i 1·.r .. ,. I: L· H ,. l:i . l .. ·. . :)7 ~' 7c; 1 fl72792 072793 ~7 ~ 79'f ii 7 :! 755 ;j72"/% :i7 2 797 u121'Ja c,7~77q .172800 ~7:1ll;)l (17 ~I'. u2 iH::?t:d n 2E-i11+ ~72~05 n 2e J(. c.1 ~ E< o7 il"/;';ltiiW ."17 ;.: II ii" i1721~]f. ii 7 ~) E• l J ·~ 7? ti 12 U7('.~13 ( 'i'}l19 -Jl ()JST ~JOf<KJI\!(· CIJ-·llfll u~off.SSIN(, OATr~ l/~l/U~-PAG[ k~~UHT ~UKHfk AP'f3 t0UN1Y SA~JTATION Ul~TPICTS OF OFANCf COUNTY CLAIM$ rAID U2/G5/85 v c m·o~ llGVANC£D POLYMfH ~YSHM~, il11C. AOV~.NCC CONSTRUr.TCR~;, INC. ALBE~TSON~ FOOD CEHl(R 11 LI~ Ek TS ON S I NC. , 11 £; 7 u ALLIED CHf.MlCAL CC•f<J-=. ALLI~-CHhLMLRS COk~. /1LTA SALESt INC. AKlRICtN CYA~AMIO COMP~NY AMERICAN OJSTRlCT TELC~RAPH AMERICAN TfCHNlCAL $UPfLY ANAH£1M SEYfR CONSTRUCTION THf ANCUOR fACKING CO. ANILLO JNOUS1RIE$ AOUA BC:N CORf'. ARMSTRONG PETRULEUM ARHO~-P.ISCO, I~C. ASSOCl•llON OF METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE AGENCIES ~ A ND 0 U' Ii .AUS T I N C 0 • UC INOU~TklAL SUfFLY, INC. BKK CORPORATION til L111n u At< ER BAKfR FLYWOOO CO., INC. BECKMAN INDUSTRIAL RIG 80~ HfNTAL CO. ~LACK ~ OECKfR MFL. CO. B~fA COMMUNITY HO~PITAL BROOKS JNSTkUMfNTS BURKf ENGI~EERING CO. c & R RlCCNulTIONINC ro. Cl\ PUMfJ AND DE\~AHHJNG CORI·. CPl CALIFO~~JA, INC. f. /\L -TY CALGON CORP&RAllON CALIF. t.SSOC. CJF SAN. l'lf:UJCIES JOHN CAHOLLU (~Gl~ffRS JOHN CA~OLLO fNGINflRS CH(Sl[~TON LGS ANGfLE~ CHEVRON u.s.A., INC. CIVIC CENTfk LIJCK K SHE CUJISJ r1rrLINE co. C 0 MI' UH!< F-I< 0 CC>~. HJ G ~ U Fl"' L IL ~ CONN[LL CHEVROLlT COl\~OL Jl)AT[(1 E If CTI< ICAI. f•I:.:J. Cll:-OTll'llrH/l.L Alt\ l()QLS, 11'.C. Cu N 1 ~CL C C 1"C t:I 1 ~; C f1 f-< P. c n r. r: Et< u~ r '' c; v -:. r 1-. v 1 n ~ A.I-' OUNT !. LB 7. 7!1 f. 't 7 t ,} p, •) • J !) i3 l. 37 !1291.02 $2,189.'tS Slt691.lfU ~30il.tJ2 llt6'10.db $5 8. (ju $>i6. 2tj t·ti:i:J.Ou :l-.H l .H5 i2tn.41 125,'tUl.R2 1.21.6f; :HlJ.53 $'t,7Ul.ll0 S'+t392.'J5 l.52.3b :Hbt'tl6.53 i59.2't $17'1.'JY 1-57.2't i.76!1.lJO \62.Hu S.2,Q2C'j.ttlJ 1268. 12 Hill~bR :1.2.rn.Jo t 2 t 0 /'+.II 0 $590.40 UH.J6 $856.60 $l • 1)5 'l. 0 0 u.121.n $6t't92.'J2 ~227.58 U£.,'fl't.l16 $18"1.'t't 10,d'+~...55 ~ 11 'I o to .3 ~· :1 'J. I '".J ! ~· t 1 't ~ • :) .-:· ·1.::6 '1 • 1!f, f.l,'?1til.'.·2 i~6'i.-/7 ( DESCRIPTION LAB SUPPLIES CONTRACTOR P2-25-2 USE CHARGE OVERPAYM~NT USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT CHEMICAL COAGULANTS PUMP PARTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES CHEMICAL COAGULANTS AL.ARM SY~TEM R~PA!~S OFFICE SUPPLIES CSDOC H7 REPAIRS COMPRESSOR PARTS USE. CHARGE OVERPAYMENT CHEMICAL COAGULANTS Y$~ ~HA~G~. QV~RPAYMENT. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FEE TUB I NG SMALL°' HARDWARE SLUDGE HAULING AND DISPOSAL ~~P1QY~~ Ml~~~~~ SHALL HARDWARE ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES TRA~t! D!SPO~A!- TOOLS USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ~l~~--~~PPil~~ . -. -- PUMP REPAIRS CSOOC #I I EMERGENCY REPAIRS WORD PROCESSING MAiNTENANCE USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT CH~~l~A.l CQA~U~~NT~ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FEE ENGR. P2-25-2 ENGR'. J-6-2, Pl-22 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES GASOLINE. ENGINE Oil LOCKS CSDOC #11 EMERGENCY REPAIRS OFFICE SUPPLEIS TRUCK PARTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES TOOLS CONTROL EQUIPMENT ENGINE PARTS ( 0 1. 'I l''r I I I'' 1.: .. 1 .. ( .. J:.1 ''I .. ,( . ... '.:1 j,,/ I.,. . ~'J( l:ic ,, I ''• .::.10 ''I I , ,., ···\. " I ... 11IL ,I ;l 1··1 I ·:._:\. ···I :··1 If ;· 1·-- I\ .... '' (I --· I'. i 1·1 -f 1:1· !· ... , ,:'! 1 •• I .. ,.I .. I " ,, I .... .'·•, I ,, ' ti ·I 1 .. . I I :; ( ·'1> f.l ·: 1:• ::: i. I''" '.I ( I·'· ''.1 · "I ;•J ,. 1·' •,. ::1 _ .. '''! "! i::! [' .... i "' I··. "·I I'"• • j I r·I lj ,I ( FUND'MO 1.lARR t.tH NO. 01nl't C>72bl5 [.728lb f.72817 f.7~AH .~7281Y r.7282:) C72f'21 r.ne22 {o"/2f.23 il7 "8211 fl7282$ 07 282b (172e~7 L7282~ ····"(,7~H2Y &72~3(l 072831 fl728:32 H2833 C17Hl3'1 ··-·u72A35 1)7t>836 ')7 283 7 '172838 072&39 07264{1 t12e41 fl72M2 C7c Alf?, C72l:·'l'I CJ72P't~ C7Ui'tb. (17 2 fi"7 li7~·84H [1'/ 21\ti<J 072R~IJ C72li!:>l f17 2£~2 ;; 12es.3 C7 :?h~'t fi7 ('l15~1 f72P~b l7?6!:>7 072B~H £, 1 :'l•S9 •, ( q 1.:.. 'i -J T Di S 1 ~J 0 i-i K I M f, C.: t.. I· J I ::. L .. F~OCf~SING OATf l/31/85 PAGE Rf PO~T NUMLJE~ AP43 { < rru~T' ~A~lltlION OISJRICTS or Oh~Nt~ COUNlY V HI r; 0 P CORE -R GS I or~ PR (i(lUCT s P. E. CJULTEk L~tN[ RlNTt..l COU~TY M~INTf.NANCl ~Ef\VJ(;[5 CAL IJA T£f( CYCLOPS COMF ANY DEL CG-P.::::: t-'Y DENNY'S kESTAURANT Ul2~5 DEW-fAk SAlfS ~ S(RVJC£ lHf DICKSON COMfANY DO~AOO ENTERPRISES, l~C. OUCTlLf IRCN FlPf RESfARCH ASN OYNf[R CO~PORATIO~ EASTMAN, INC. ENUIANTf.R, INC• ENERGY ~rv. OF CAL •• INC. (Nul~([RS SALlS-SERVJC[ CO. [X)ON COMPANY, U.~.A. FILTER SU~fLY CO. FJSCH[R 1 PORTfR CO. FISHCH CONTROLf. FLAT & VERTICAL CONC~ETE ~6~o iE~b~~•tE• &"cri~H. "toR~~ CLIFFORD A. FORKfRT CITY OF FULLlRTON . HERBERT L. GALLEGLY GAMMA ~ANUFACTURINC, INC. CANAHL LUM~£R CO. GATES rIA[~GLA~s· l~STA(LfRS GEM-0 1 -LITE FLA~TICS CORP. GENERAL ELECTRIC co. GENf.kAL ~f.OICAL CENTERS GENE~AL Tflf~HONE co. GRIFFITH Alk TOOLS Gt~OOM'~ ASFtiAL T HACH CCMPHJY tlALPRlN 5Uf-PLY C(i. TED ~. HAt'Mf.TT HARRINGTON INOUSTRlhl fL~STICS JOHN C. HfNttERGEk CO., INC. ~.C. H[NORif & C0.1 INC. tlfi<CllU.S ltJC. 110"-0UfLL, INC. ti.~. MUf11-"f~ CO., INC. CITY OF llUNllNf-TON PEACH HIJfvTJNtlOI\: HA(h PU(>Bi.I\ !.'.Ttnr ~:UNl INC.TOI\ VALLfY setn!IN~l CYCLERY C L A 1 M ~ P ~ Ir: '.I 2 I J 5 I cP'1 AMOUNl DES Cit IPT ION l41114.28 FIBERGLASS TANK i846.uu CRANE RENTAL 0 $6~0.~U WINDOW WASHING SERVICE i285.~0 WATER SOFTENER RENTAL t950.~a CSDOC #II EMERGENCY REPAIRS $5,546.Jl USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT t4~.2~ USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT $3,b&7.6U HOSE ~17.92 ELECTRICAL SUPfllES i2,oa7.3& PLANT #2 REPAIRS t2U.OL CONFERENCE REGISTRATION t69.J4 TOOLS ~1,132.96 OFFICE SUPPLIES i3,5ao.o~ OCEAN MONITORING 115.05 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT tl ,.?ti8~68 PUMP PARTS . .. . ·• .... S2,101.09 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT S43.3tt ENGINE PARTS $3,708~88 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES $32.eO REGULATOR PARTS $368.50 CORE DRILLING U 9 1 % q : 0 't ... . . --·. --.. U S E . C if AR G E . 0 V E RP A Y ME N f .... ·-·-. -. . . . . . ·-·· ··-.. . . lj,616.0~ SURVEY 5-6 114.14 WATER USEAGE i4,730.HO CSDOC #11 EMERGENCY REPAIRS $502.5Y USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT i995.q7 BUILDING MATERIALS $2,5a1:22 -···PLAtfT-lii p"lp"it~c··· i11q.~9 GLASS t'l98.20 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES \246.flH RETIRED EMPLOYEES MEDICAL INSURANCE PREMIUM t615.60 TELEPHONE !133.02 TOOLS l'lb~·DO CSDOC #II EMERGENCY REPAIRS t4&l.~~ LAB SUPPLIES t32.~~ SMALL HARDWARE i2,&30.~0 CSDOC #II EMERGENCY REPAIRS t327.56 PIPE SUPPLIES tb73.~~ SAFETY SIGNS !3,288.95 PIPE SUPPLIES iY,456.H5 CHEMICAL COAGULANTS ~414.~1 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 1~~3.hr PAINf SUPPLIES SIU..% WATER USEAGE 1i4.4b OFFICE SUPPLIES t25.4~ BICYCLE TIRES r e I' l:lr !·I ·I· I i.I,) !:',II I l''I i"ll'. ::I I •(,:'' ". :,I j·' nc !., I 1 .... :~I( (i . l:'.IC. !;.'.IC. "' .. ,JI, I·'' ~ ·•! '--· hi~ :'.1c. ]C I' [IC I "' ... _1. •'\.:.. 1.·· . )~ •''1 ':·i\._.. .• t. " F U ~! D N 0 9 1 1; 5 -J T n I $ T ~J 0 f< I< 1 1\1 C C fl I · I 1 fl l ·ol ~~OCl~~ING DAT( l/31/H5 PAG[ PLFOkT ~UHil[R AP~3 ~. I, -· I i'.1 CCJUNT'r ~IHJIPTION fllSlttlCTS Of Gfct.NCE cour·.iTY !·'1 , .. WARR~NT NO. VENDOf ·j ., "I I, 1::1 I !:: 1::! ·.• .. : I• : !111 ::1! :• !·· ~. I'·:~;~ ,J,•~ , .. · 1.....,.~ !'11 ... 1~"· I .. : ll.'! J:' '..:1 :i j::li· 1" I::! II l·::, .. 1 1 1.,,11 .... l ·.J ... ( .. , , .... . •I ~.' fJ72fl.6v f•72f:61 CJ72662 u72Ei63 07 2E6't iJ728£.5 (17 2f:i6t-. (."ft> Sf. 7 072f,E18 U72R69 0721570 072871 l.172872 f172873 07?87'1 {;7 2e75 072£76 C72877 f17c·U7" 07~879 07 28f!ll 072881 072BH2 eiine3 Ci7 2 884 U72B85 OH8P6 c, 1 ::ieP.1 f!"/ 2e8P 1.172889 072890 (I 72 891 G7285:? · 1;1 ~a<.n i,7 c ~C:'f (1 7 2 ll95 IJ 12 P. 96 0723?7 U7 2 i!% (; ·12 899 H2%CI U7~"01 ll7 =~9!J2 ·112%~ C7:?'l0'1 u12c.us (. HURLEf fLECTRONICS1 INC. ING R AH 1: ~ P CR lfHE.RClifH ,CORP. INTtRNATIONAL Tlf~~OLOGY S~•f.LJA IVINS 1 tt E Jon r o R • 5. s tt u F P r &.f. JEPSON DIV. i< .t. .c. COt'.P/.NY KAISER FE~MANENTf MEO. CfNTlR KAJSEK ROLLHET KAMAN bEARINGS ! SUPPLY l<AYNAR KING BEARl~G, JNC. KflYLER CORP. L.a.w.s., INC. LA PAL~A .INTER. HOSPITAL LAURSEN COLOR LAD LERNER PHOTO, INC. LIFECOH-SAFLTY SEP.VICE SUPPLY LIGHTING CISTRIOUTO~S, INC. LILLY TYfESl TT ING .LOCAL AGENCY FORMAT ION COMM M~L JNCUSTRIES MAJUR fNTEkPklSES A.C. MA~JON, TRUSTf.( MARVAC fLECTRONICS MATERIAL HANDLING SUPPLY MATT -CHLO~,. INC.· - MATTHEWS INTEkNATIONAL SCOTT MAXIJE'LL MCCOOK PUMP ~COONNlL DOUGLAS HCHASTfR-CARR SUFPLY CO. R.s. MfANS co •• ·~c. MEDICAL Cf.NTfP. OF G.G. MESA CONSOLlOATfD ~'TER M[SA HCHNOLOGY MIN[ SAFETY APfLltNCCS CO. ~IlntELL INSTRUMENT CO. MONO Gl<OUPt INC. KOkGAN EOUIPM£Nl CO. t-fNSCO t I r11c. NA.TEL ~ en. NiwfORT OU~4t.s, lfltC. NUMATIC [~blNEtRl~G OCCIDENTAL ·CHfMICH CORF. C L A I HS f· A I 0 J 2 I It 6 I 8 t• AM OUN l i ~ l. 6'! u. ~30.67 :l.l1U7l.1t2 $53j. 20 :i.u ... bl ~.167."1U ~l't,771.HJ U:J7,~Hll.OO t 6 • il (J 2 • 2 ;j ict29.52' .i92.f>3 u,211.~.9 Ul t'i77.~5 i-28.89 .:1-221. 71 $16~ ;29 $224.<i3 i6'i a. 21 S.2,238~63 $'159.11 $7il't.90 s.250;00 s.ltl91.'15 $79.50 H 5~ '11 $26. 't5 :r.555.10 S.2,394:66 i585.3'1 $5 l. 5CJ :£'i5. ~If ~-.4,12u.11 s.77.33 n 1.s.5~ i1,59q.y5 uq.tt6 s.t5t.tt:i i.Jt701.30 intt.;rn i54B.t'· 't'ijJ.U 1.756.h~ .i1,s'n.7':.· 1 l , •Jf. 2 • 7 ·~ :!. ~51. h ii ·i. 4 ' /j II 7 • ? IJ c OESCklPTION ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES USE CHARGE OVERPAYM~~T FREIGHT EMPLOYEE MILEAGE JANITORIAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTOR PW-083 (R) 5-19-RI EMERGENCY REPAIRS V~~ C~A~~~ 9ViRPAYM~NT USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT BEARING SUPPLIES USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT PIPE SUPPLIES, BEARING SUPPLIES USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT WELDING SUPPLIES ·us£ .. ctii\RriE' ovERi>AYMENT·--··· ··· · FILM PROCESSING USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT, FIL~ ~ROCESS~N~ SAFETY SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES TYPESETTING ANN E x AT i 0 N • H 6 •... p R 0 c E s s 1-N G-·-F E E USE'CHARGE. OVE~PAYMENT USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES . SMAk~ HARJ>WA~E PIPE SUPPLIES USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT EMPLOYEES UNIFORM REIMBURSEMENT PUMP PARTS. . . . . ... USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT TOOkS TECHNICAL JOURNAL USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT WATER .uSEAGE USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT SAFETY SUPPLIES PIPE Sl)PPLIES PUMP PARTS SMALL HARDWARE ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANTS USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT COMPRESSOR PARTS CAUSTIC SODA :: ''• ( ~ e ~ 1· r· ' : ' ( I , .. · 1; i'I:::· :.ir· .:! 1•-I 1·'1 .;.; ( : .. :, L·::(. J'.:j iJ f.'.!'c .. ,.:IC 1., .• :•· l'.'.1c ' :·~ ! •i.' >jl. ·-1 -~~Ii . :~.c ~ :";1 \,:~ :'.': I •,, 'I ... 1 :.._. ... !·., ! . ~ 1···''-: 1: ''.I ~ i: ,: '--· '' ~ " •I .-. I I 'j 1:1 1::1 .. .. , I I• .. I 1•.i ··1 .. I ( ,,.,: 11! .. I !I C' I .._ ... . .._ ... ):::a ,a . 1•1..r.:-( !·~~I === ( ,::1 ~· ( IU .. , i •. I ... ,, l''i I .. , 1 .::1: - ' .. . 1! 1.: I: r·~ ~ .. ( f Ul'!D N(I UAHR ANT rw. l'7 290£. on907 C1729CJU J72909 f.7291(1 1)72911 072Cf12 C.72913 07 ?914 ll7 2~1!> (17 2916 ~17~517 l.:72918 072CJ19 072920 t17 2q21 fl72922 072q23 (!7 2924 072925 Q72926 072927 072928 C7?921J 07293(1 ~172931 {172932 67~~33 ll7 2 93'1 \17~535 C.72936 07:!931 r:·1293u J7293'J 'J729'tli u7291t1 n7?'H2 [j7('~'t.3 (J7 2 94 11 t:H'H5 fJ7 294£, ti.., ;>':Jlf 7 ,-,, =-c:lt~ :.J72<J4tl (, -, c 95(; t11;:c,51 .. ( I* 'll'l'i -J'r OJSl \.:CUt<IrJ~, Ct.t-IHL t·f:OC:U.SING l)faif 1/31/Hf: fAfof Rf~OµJ NUMdER Af't3 rnurnv SANIT.AllON n1~1rqcrs OF OHM1C.l COUNTY vr Nnor< DLYMFIC CH(HICAL CO. ORANG£ ~LOSSOM ~ESTlUk,Nl ORANG[ VALVf & FITTING CO. OXtGEN sc~~ICf . -. . C L A I MS t-11 IU ,J 2/ ~ 6 I H ~; /I MOUNT 1.291723.'t~ 1.175.'tl 'q7'J!52 1273.HO DESCRIPTION CHLORINE USE CHARGE OVERPAYHENT PIP~ SUPPLIES OEHURRAGE, SPECIALTY GASES ( r e 't :1r .I JJ·) ::·,,·( !f• COUNTY Of OHANH CO. OF OkA~GE-AUDlTPP CONTnOLR CSDDC S(Lf-f UNDED HEOICAL l~S COUNTY SANlTATION OISTRICTS OF fACifJC H~CtiANICJs.L SYSTfMS ~ACIFIC SAFLTY [~UlrMfNT c~. PAClflC BELL s.3.~'15.27 1.53,83Q~fl0 $~1395.52 PRE EHPLOYHENT EXAHS, TESTING 3-28-R, SURVEY 2-2~. COYOTE CANYON GATE FEES LI: ,,.(· 1::i H. F MH: l -A J r< C 0 f{ P • PARAGON BUSINfSS SYST[MS PA~K[k HANNIFIN ~2 PENNlY SLEE~ER INN Ft~OXIDAJION SYSTEMS, INC. HCKlrJJCK PAHf< PRUOUCTS PITNEY l'OIJES ~(ASTICS PRODUCTS CO. POWER SPECIALISTS, INC. ~AROLO P~IMROSf ICE PklNTRONIX . -. -.. HIKE P~LICH & SONS 11 A C i. P S f' I T S 1 u P THE R(GISTEP .. ROBAINS t HEYE~S ROMAC SUPPLY COHPANY i<uuco· 1r\JoustP.1£s~ fNr. · RYAN-ll[RCO. SFI CO~PORATION U67 ST. JUDE HOSPITAL SANT A fl.NA OODH S~NTA ANA TOWERS CITY OF S[Al BLACH SHAHHOCK SUPPLY SIGNAL FLASH CO. SMITH--l:MERY CO. SOUTH[~N CALIF. EDISON CO. SO. CALIF. WAT[k CO. SOUTHE~N COUNTl[S OIL CO. STFPHEN CHfMJCAL CU. s uh; RA r. r c o ~; s H u c r 1 Gu co 1• F • lrtf SUPl"l 1 fR!:: J. WAYNf SYLVEST[R TA. Yl OR -IJUNN TIM[ CLOCK ~ALlS ~ SfRVICl ORANGE COUNTY !'ltb09.72 ~~,:H?!?.fi 'f.266. 11 1.7?0.09 H85. lb :i..s66: IJO tl .~02.97 ~~ t-155~3~ tl7,2f..'t.U. 1.973.29 :£1'1. 82 i98 ~ 'tlt 1370.61 ~~Q,QQ_. 3.2,554.63 s.92 , 58 2. 55 1135.8~ ·$875~03 ilt'tH.57 $516.53 "iq~~o:F 'J.h9 2. l 't ~.5CJ3 • .i5 .tl, 136.61. $39.8& 1~~8~6.lf'l 1.1:?2 .25 lltl2U.5'3 1.777.45 :t.15.3.50 i::32,967.73 ·is.~'" i5tl6't.lli t4 'Jp. 7 • ..'.b 1~7,,,.10.:Jli tl,fit.l.H<-i tt,:1 't. 5 a i~'l.5 •. ~~J 'lfl !l. 11} RET~RED EHPLriYEES MEDiCAL INSURANCE PREHIUH WORKERS' COMP. REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTOR J-1 IR SAFETY SUPPLIES TELEHETER I NG USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT COMPUTER SERVICES USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT HYDROGEN .PERo)c"li>E ____ .. JANITORIAL SUPPLIES POSTAGE METER RENTAL USE.CHARGE.OVERPAYMENT CONTROL EQUIPMENT .. !JH~IJ~T~!~L WA~TE .~AH.PblN~ _L~.L··--······-·· USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT CONTRACTOR 3-28R ENGINE OIL LEGAL.ADVERTISING PUMP PARTS E L E.H f\ I. f AL ... ~ .IJ r P ~ ! -~-§ _ USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT PIPE SUPPLIES USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT TRUCK PARTS USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT WAHR USEAGE.. . . . . SAFETY SUPPLIES, TOOLS CSDOC 611 EHERGENCY REPAIRS TESTING P2-26 POWER WATER USEAGE DIESEL, KEROS[NE USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT CONTRACTOR 2 -211 TOOLS PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT ELECTRIC CART PARTS TIME CLOCK REPAIRS ..,, ll:.:1 .. ··· ..• :I ,;~I( . j:;1c I ~.·1c ... ~IC ····1., ... II :_. 1·~IC. -···· ··--···<::! l::1c ~ .: I: i !:'.le l:. .. ·11\.._. 1, •• c l .:;IL '" .. j'' ,:·'i.... ·•\.... r .. \ .. ~ f UNO rm ' ·.I WAHkANT NO. i"1 07~CJ52 U729:i3 !· ~n'%"1 1·f-1)7~955 "I 0725bf. ;• ;°J7 2q5 7 f1729bb Lj}';C: -JT n1~1 lolO"KINu (IH ITAL Pf<OCE.SSING DATE 1/31185 PAGE Rf PORT ~UM~ER AP•3 ClllHllTY ~;Al'JIHTION DISTP.JCTS Of Ol'~llJC•l CvUNTY VE MIOH TRANS-AMERICA UELAV~Lt INC. TR Av EL nu f F <\ Tl'~AVfL TRAVLL TrtUCK ~AUTO SUPPLY, lhC. TRUK$P[Cl . CLAIMS PAID J2/J6/e~ AMOUNT $15ti.ti3 11 ~ h .-:'Jll S336~:1Q f.l17't 1t.9iJ ii.,251. ju $3,529.b6 DESCl\IPTION ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES AIR FARE AIR FARE TRUCK PARTS DRIVER EXAMINATIONS ENGR. 5-26 TRUCK REPAIRS !'. .. i. (;7~5~9 ' , .. II 12 9f.ll UMA ENIN£(fHNG1 INC. u.s. AUTO GLiss, INC. rRAIH\ ULTIMO UNION SIGN CO. UNITED fA~CEL.5fnVICE 1.5&. H2 $-:?!:> t .H2. 1t• 1.11065.52 $36; 4f, '.!>169.t,O ':{.j,bll.'tb H,833.~CJ ii 't .36 t2Cd.q9 $723.87 $'t,IJ18.25 S.3,639.t.12 CONTRACTOR PW-129, PW-119, PW-121 7-~ ~~fETY S!G~~ l .. i 07?%1 !'.'.I t:72qt? 1.172%3 f.72%'t ,,-, 2';65 "· u72'%b ,f--"' .. --0 7 2 % 7 '.'j C72%0 r17:.>Q69 UNITED STATE5 ~AF( DfPOSll CO V WP f.C I UJT IF 1 C V4LLEY CITllS SU~fLY CO. lJAtlLCO, INC. ~ESTERN HfOICAL CENTE~ WiSTINGHOUS£ flfCTRIC CORF XEROX CO~P. ?IP TEHPORAkY PERSONNEL I'.' ~ 1~:' ::; I ~:~,·~~-·- rJ ~ h 1 ··1. JI• a1 ( l:'.'1· I .. I·,: l. I" " l. l·· I ll '"! !'I ··1 ... ·•' , .. : ,···1 r··1 I"•~ 1··': c· I'.:., .,, TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 02/0~/h5 SUMMARY /12 OPER FUND #2 F/R FUND #3 OPER FUND #3 ACO FUND #5 OPER FUND #5 ACO FUND #6 OPER FUND 07 OPER FUND 07 F/R FUND #1 I OPER FUND #13 ACO FUND #5&6 OPER FUND /15&6 SUSPENSE FUND #6&7 OPER FUND JT OPE R FUND CORF SELF FUNDED WORKERS' COMP. JT WORKING CAPITAL FUND TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 02/06/85 ( INSURANCE FUND :f.9~7!6~0.tJ'f • ================= AMOUNT $ 2,250.85 2~.?lt7!~~ 256.31 92,859.21 4,426~61 4,lt14.89 i.0.16 L24~.51 1,162.68 19,387. IO 95. 15 1,545.59 107,901.00 3,372.92 459,498.78 132,559.62 li. 609. 72 120,737.lt6 $987,610.0lt ( DELIVERY SERVICE DISC DRIVE CONTAINERS LAB SUPPLIES PIPE SUPPLIES USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT . U~~ ~~ARG~ 9VEBPAYtt~~T ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES X~ROX REPRODUCTION TEMPQRARY H~~p ..... ( ,.~. e I :·:r .. : I ;,' .1· J·' !,l 1 .. 1 .. 11· ·;.:1 il"' · .. ! I ·I. I ' 1 I I 1 ~ . .. 1., 1 .. 1 -1~: (_ I'' j-"• JC j~1c he· '.'I . ·-.. -----1·· II :~(' . ,•·•1 ;·•i ,··1 , ... (_, --·<i 1::10 ... , .. ··il....- .. 11 ... "' :::-;~ <iL I >I (IL, 1.: ·I,..., \,,..... "• ( : . ~ ( r-· e 9l~Y -JT OJSI WO~KJNG CA~ITAL l'I; uC I. SS IN~ OAT [ 2 /l'i I~!. Pt.Gf ~ftOMT ~UMOfR AP•3 -· --I COUNT~ SAHITAllON OIST~ICTS OF ORAN6[ COUNlY :1r CLAJ~S PAID 021~~/Hb VENlJOR AMOUNT 072969 AOC PAINT STRI~ING SFRVIC[ 072~90 ACACIA TERRACE ~7?;91 AIR CALIFORNIA ( " 07~992 Alk INOUSTRl[S COHP. 0725~3 ALLEN [LfCTRIC co. ileb35~JG U25. A2 ~188.-)lt 1.177-13 $1 • 89 H. 10 i21.uo U t6D't .j5 Utl.36.65 uoo.ao $23,IJ7J.95 LJ72~9q AHf.RJCAN SIGMA ,. ~729~5 AHERJCAN TECHNICAL SUPPLY L729~6 TH( ANCHOR PACKING CO. 07 l'.~97 -ANG£l l-CA-AEN1"-AL-SE~VI CFS--GROUP G7299U AQUA BEN cowp. ( '"; 072999 ARfNS JNDUSTRH.S l~C. !.510.1}2 ··~ 1l7 .3 a 0 0 AST R 0 a~ AK --·-·-· · U l't • \I 0 ( 1 ::! 07.HOl P.C INDUSTRIAL SUPfLYt lNC. $573.5(1 I 073002 6KK CORPORATION $27,391.21) 11 ~·-··--·-0 7-3 ilG3 ------· -··----BAN-EROH-"1HHNEY--eo. ··--------------·--· ... -.. -$33 .62 .. c· i::1· 073\i(:'t fiEACON HAY [fJHRPRJ.SlSt INC. '£3bO.OO · I 013..;r.s fiERRYHAN & STCPUEN~ONtlNC UJ,100.59 II ) 073.:Jub ull:f\LV -& ASSOCIATE~ .. me... .... $.550,00 1 1 :..i :-: 07!.QC7 .BRf.NNER•FIEOLH & ASSOC., INC. S.'121.50 .,,i td J7.3Ct18 OUCKEYE GAS PRODUCTS · U9.13 j. ~--.L._ OH .. )09 ·-·--··----------BU€K-S--H0€K-E·HPOR·IUH--------------···-------·---·-····-···-·· S.600. O&--··--···· 1::i ~ (IJ3:jl0 . c.w.p.c.A~/ OILL MOORHCAO uu.oo ( j I 0 7 3 u 1 1 Ct. L If • AS~ 0 C. 0 F S At~• A GEN C 1 ES $ lf 't 0 • 0 C ": ll7~Hl2 CARMEN I TA FORD TRUCI< SALfSt HI '97.17 " 073013 CASE -SMAYNl CO. , INC. $25t995.'t2 07301'1 CH(MJCAL (NGINEERl~G l~9.~0 l;7-3615-----···--eHE-VRGN-USA·t-·-1 NC-....... -------------·-----···-------------·--·· ·-·$2 & • 9't -·· ·· bl3Cl6 COMPRESSOR & INDUSTRIAL S4tt~.75 r73Ll7 COWSOLIOATCO ELECTRICAL DIST. l3t551.09 07301~ CONSOLIOATEO Rf~RODUCTIONS $4,l96.3~ ~7~L19 CONTINENTAL RAOIATOR i72.00 ~73&~0 COSTA MESA AUlO PARTSt INC. \622.65 1173~·21 -· ----R.--(-.---COUL-ltR--CR-Af.J£-Rl:-~l/ll-----·-·-·-·-··-·· · ·-·-·--· ·· Slf2i).JU D73~2~ COUHTY WHOLlSALE ELfCTK!C i1,~83.lf2 073tt23 CAL UATEA il30.00 ~73C24 DAILY ~ILOT ~1U7.45 G73a25 DECO S2&.46 ~7~02h DELTA ANALYTICAL OIV. '51.01 117 :H27 ··· ··GI GKSONS·-------------·-····-· ·-·------·--·· -··· · 1.l ,?'1't. 44 · 07:~'120 flff;ITAL fGlllf'Ml"NT CORP. 'l7U.lt4 073f;;>9 OOflACJO [NHIH'klSESt INC. 17,6~4.7U r.1:•.:.,!riJ Lur-:As (}Jf.SEL Jt>J(CJJON itt •. ;H.74 ·!·· 111 c H 1'·: ( 1~:1 I": .. .. ' Ci·': ,_.t •Ji (. 111 ! ···; r ( H , .. , ... I l•7.h3l DUC\.N EDWAROS CORf· • i!172.7-.! 1173.-:32 OwYCH INSTRUM£Nlt H 1C.. i.'t5 •. H. l'173•1!3 ·-·-EIMCO-P~OCE:&S-fuUUJ •.. (;() •.. ····· ·· ·· i·lll10">9.~2 )73,JS4 lA~Tl~Al\lt INC. ~ltl~'t.~7 '--· (""l ... •. ,,-· " 1"·1 "' , .• , . . ~:~---· - U[SCRIPTION PAINT STRIPING USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT A IR FARE ··--------- REFUND OVERPAYMENT CONTRACTOR PW-118 LAB SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUfPLIES TOWEL RENTAL .. -·-···----· CHEMICAL COAGULANTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES TUBING CHAINS SLUDGE HAULING/DISPOSAL · · ··· ······-· -. PUBLICATION ····-·---·-----·----··-----"'·-····------·· --- CAR WASH COUPONS ENGINEERING 2-6-2 W.C. ADMINISTRATIOtr··-· ..... COMPRESSOR PARTS :1'.) I' II ::ir .. II ::1c '~ BUTANE h ·LEVEL· REC ORDER ... RrPA 1 Rs·-·------··---·-----------------11 SEMINAR REGISTRATION CONFERENCE REGISTRATION ·····.··TRUCK PARTS ··-· ............ ····-··-·· USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT PUBLI CAT I OHS "GASOLINE --· BEARING SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES BLUEPRINT REPRODUCTION TRUCK REPAIRS TRUCK PARTS CRANE RENTAL . -. --· . - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES WATER SOFTENER RENTAL CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES PUMP PARTS ELECTRICAL REPAIRS PLANT #2 BASIN REPAIRS/LIDO PUMP RPRS ENGINE REPAIRS PAINT SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES BEARING SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES I\ :~1 (_, a• ~·1 (: ... '-' "' >I . ·~ \~I'·-· ... ! .. , 1 .... ... ,, \._. "'· I:'.!· .... : . ..i cl I···-~ :~: 1:·: ;'..:j . 1. J @, ,,i ,-I I fUNU MD 'il')fJ -Jl Ll$1 ~IOl"-KINf, CM ITAL e f'll(lC[SSH1G DATE 2/llf/lH. f'AGl ;;· Rrro~r NUMAE~ AP43 I i'I 1:! courdY Sl.tll Hl ION llISlfdCTS or OHJltJGF. CNHHY CLAIMS UAJD U2/2u/8~ -IY I :•·1 ( II ( WARf\~NT NO. VENIJOf. J73035 JfFF ESCfR 073036 f AHILIAN PIP[ K SUPPLY Ci 7 3 j3 7 -----F f.l.)[.f( A l--£-.1' PR[ S& --CORP. J7~G38 FISCH[R & PORTER CO. 373~39 C. M. flORfS RLNTALS 07~u~fi fLOYD-~OROJCKt J.v. ~73~41 FLUIO HANDLING SYSllM~, INC. J73J't2 CLJFFORO A. fO~KlkT AM OUCH $llB.flO uo1.n $11 O. Ou tl.377.16 11,7'33.iJU 12u,1CJa.'j1:. \226 • .3U :~II U73ll43 . -· -·----Hlf--f'.o.xuOR-0-COMP-ANV------·······--·--······ t6,7H.~n Sf4ijft. lb· $H.OO 122.61 :£200.CJU 17. 09 7. 78 12't3t.SB6.0D D7~u4~ FRUIT G~O~[~S LALO~~TOkYt INC. L73~45 CJTY Of FULLERTON 073046 CATLS ll~ERGLASS JNSTALLCRS ( l::. 073tq7 G[N(RAL TELEPHONE CO. '"1 on f-48 G IERLI CH-M 11 CHELL. I NC. "r' --~-C,1~ft49---· ------HACH--CO~f.t.U.J-¥------· ( I" 0"/31151! GEOHG( T. ltALL Cu. . II 073051 TED A. 1-iAMMflT .. ,, G7J~~2 llANCOC~ DTRACOfUeOREAL· 1 1 ,.·. ::: o 1 ?. !j 5 3 1-1 AR H 1 N G To~ 1 N u us rn 1 ti L r L A s 1 1 c s ' '"'. l:d (j 7 3 :J 5 'i H I c II Ar L Ii [ rn z --------·····-··--------·····-· ... $11 •. 47 ------- 1.327 •. H· $2,022.29 t624.l>2 u t632. ~rn $.55. 35 . l,, t'::? l!/:1.115b tt0Lf1ES TUTTlf CJ/IT SUN ,,r: L .. _ h-7 :!-~£:.§ -·----------Tr-0--HOt:r.MA-N --------··--·-·-···--·------_, 2~ 2 • .:S2 .... ---. l. ro ... \l730f.7 tlO~JfYIJfLLt INC. '"1 ;'.l"/.~l;~H C::ALf f. • llOV£RM~N ''1 !.l"I ~ u59 R • S • HUGHE. S CO., J NC. (I•! 07~-llLO t-IUNOLlY CO~PANYt JNC. "I . 1l-/J.t.:f.1 . ··--·C 1-1 V--O~UUNT-J N <· T-ON--Ul-~CH------· .. -----...... ··-----·--· " 0730&2 JSCO COMFA~Y ... O B flt 3 1 M f' U I Jll I.IE S T Cll ( M I C AL C O • '"• u7~Lt.li JNCi(~AM PAP[R (. 1'.:! I ' ,::1 .. I ( I" (. 1·· c 1::1 H l,·,-.: 1''· '-·· ~73~&5 IRVINE RANCH UATCR DISTRICT (17-:if,ff; IRVINE S~IEEfJNC SE'RVICE 117 3 ,16 7. ---······----TH[---JAN ITOfH.S--.S~WfiP-(--'----------····· ......... --····· ......... -·- U 7~G6~ G.f. JEPSON OJV. ~73i·f.'.i 07 ~ i1 7(j :l"/ 3 u 71 u 7 ~-i!72 nn.1.73 [1131;7l1 n7 ~·. ;17~ ;;1.~ .• 1"/t. H3:'1'/ u7 :rn7P. I; 7:.."-•• 79 l11.~a~r; ( IJ.P. JOl1N ltAULING JOillf s CU[ !ti cr.u~. I NC. KAS SAFETY r~o~uCT~ K[ITH ~ ASSOCIAlEt K JIJG. B[-AI\ IfJG' me. KL frN-ll Nf CO Hf· t<l'JOJ( JNl1USTRlkl SUFF'LJ[S L. t! • IJ. S • t I ~C • LEhfotR l'tlOTO, HJC. Ll~CO [lfCThlC CO. L I G ti J J l~G -D I ~TR IOU T 0 ll S , -I fJC • - LILLY TYPESfTTING •1 ,., U57.0l :t.11 2. Ob $.C.tl59,87 :t.'•02.93 H7. 70 U4.71f S.115. f>2 i 3, U't 1. It l :£2t't7c:J.23 :J.4. o·u i1tso.au --$3i}9.60 Sl.-b65.llh $3,2.H.\Jn U2, jl)iJ • 66 ~nU.85 1. ) t 2 0 0 • (I L) :£4,045.04 'B7.17 ·i.q 11. 9~ ~237.LO Bl.Hr s l'~ 'I. j {, s 1 :; '.). t.9 :f, l • " '1 ') • 'i i' ( 0 [ S C P I P T I 0 f'I EMPLOYEE MILEAGE PIPE SUPPLIES DELIVERY SERVICE PIPE SUPPLIES CSDOC #2 MANHOLE REPAIRS CONTRACTOR PW-132 PUMP PARTS ENGINEERING Pw-26 ELECTRICAL-SUPP~IEs--­ LAB ANALYSIS WATER USAGE ll ll•1 ( " 11 .. Jr. i., . r l"I .. /J ~ ,, ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES TELEPHONE BUDD CHAIN SYSTEM ---·-·--LAB CHEM I CAts····· --·--····--·- ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES VACUUM TRUCKING, CSDOC #11 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT ENGINE SUPPLIES ··-·----~ -·-··----·1i~:1 ( • 11 EHERG, RPRS _, •.. ~IC t;:1c EMPLOYEE MILEAGE -·-·--------SEMINAR -EXPENSES TRUCK PARTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES DEFERRED COMPENSATION DISTRIBUTION SHALL HARDWARE PIPE SUPPLIES -··-··· WATER USEAGE CONTROL EQUIPMENT FERR IC CHLORIDE OFFICE SUPPLIES/JANITOR SUPPLIES· · WATER USAGE SWEEPING SERVICES · · · -· · ·· ·--·JAN I TOR i AL· SUPPLH s--·-···--·-··-·····-------- C ONTRACTOR PW-083(R) WOOD .SHAVINGS CHLORINE SAFETY SUPPL I ES ENGINEERING 7-SMO-I BEARING SUPPLIES JANITORIAL SUPPLIES SAFETY SUPPL I ES WELOING SUPPLIES FILM PROCESSING ELECTRIC CART PARTS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES TYPESETTING tl ~ . ( JI :1 \... ::f 1,4_, u '~ ::1c " ~.' ~II ·..._... ~I ~l ~:1 '--. \. .,,, \..-' ~· ;\oJI 1.JI \_,' ---.. I:: ,,, ,.1: 11 i:: !.·.1· .. ,,, j. ( ( ., FU~O NO· ~lq~ • Jl OISl WO«KINL CAF11AL .. pf: 0 c [ s s IN(, n Al r 2 / l 4 / "f.. p AGE ~:I POtc T r.JUMH[I{ AP 1d , r r: c nu NT y s A l'Jl T Al I 0 N u I s rn I c rs 0 F u ~ Al'! t f c (Ju N 1 y CLAIM~ PAIU U2/2J/8~ " j.· r ( " ,,i I ... ( I:• WA~R~NT HO. ~ENDON tt73j8J K.P. LINOSTkOMt I~C. G73~h2 LOS ANGfL[S TIH[S 073H1J HARV~C ELECTROr>-lCS 073•184 f'lCl;AJN INSTJIUMfNTS i• 7j r·e~ KC~AS T rn-c AtCR SUPl'L y c 0. J73C1~6 r<t:NSCOt INC. ~7lGA7 MOHJLE STRUCTU~[S t INC. ~ljU~8 MONlGO~ERY fl(VATOR COMPAN~ lJ 7 3 u011 .... MOHGAN·-·HsU I PME-IH-.fO • ··-------·-.. ---· __,_ ... -· -···-·~···· 0730~0 JERRY L. MORRl~t M.O. ~7!~91 NATIONAL CASP RfGJSTEP 07~~~~ N[UA~~ [LECJ~ONICS u73L53 CITY Of NEWPORT BEACH G7~~94 NU-W(ST FABRICATION --------(1·7:Sll%------·---··-0£l:·HJE-U·T-AL-<;HE-Hl·£Al---tOIH~-.-------·-----··-· . 1 ::1 0731.% OCCIO(NTAL COLLEGl-CAStH(R 1 073~97 OLYMPIC CHEMICAL CO. " U7 3'.~8 · .. O!iANG[: .. COUNTY-.. FAkM :iUF'PLY ·CO. f.fo\OUN T DE.SCf<JPTION llqt66t.~q EIR CONSULTANT: OCEAN WAIVER i775.84 CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING U 2 ..3 5 E L E CTR I CAL S U PP LI E S · ---- S5,b56.4~ LAB SUPPLIES \396.54 SHALL HARDWARE il,619.lfi ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES sa.~26.0u CONSTRUCTl~N TRAILER $328.qb PLANT 02 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE ·$313.31---· ··-·TRUCK PARTS 1175.UO MEDICAL EXAMINATION $lt606.2h OFFICE SUPPLIES SllS.5~ ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES $12.6U WATER USEAGE $7,102,uo PLANT #I BELT INSTALLATION u,788.6~-... -... ------·----·-cAUSTIC -soDA·------------- ~570.G~ OCEAN MONITORING SERVICES 5271052.9~ CHLORINE UH.%. ··· ......... LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES ...... . ( e l:1r ;I!") I . ... ~ I/ :~1r ::1 ( II 11li .. " ,., ;:ic II ,, :i1c )l u ,. I ·~ (J 7 3 (; 9 9 0 x y GEN s E R v l c E ' ,. tij U731JO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT $588.03 WELDING SUPPLIES ,( $3,003,~4 REIMB WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND ~ -· &2ll·· 2 0---,_ _________ --·---------roo L:-' R £ NTA t-·----------- $6l.60 PRINTING $580.50 CONTRACTOR J-11R ·$21'.h42 ···-.. WELDING SUPPLIES---·····-------·-·-·- "~--l-.. '"' 131n1--·-----·---·P .·F-.-h--1 Ns-T-HUHEN-T-G-t)...--- • 14 1 ~ ll7.31Cl2 P.W.A. PRINT ING ( 1 11 1 • (JBluJ PACIFIC HECHArUCAL 'SYSTEMS '" \173lu't · · fJltC-W£LO ---·-··-------·---·--······-- i8l2.50 HINI COMPUTER SERVICES $16,9~4.6& CONTRACTOR P2-26 u1.3l05 PARAGO~ bUSINESS SYST(HS 07~10b PASCAL t LUDWIG ( •~· ------------------------$85.64···-· ---· ·· -····-------···STRIP-CHARTs------------·--07?.llH-------··--PA·HEN-C:ORP. •. -----~I. h: u I\ G731~0 PERIPHERAL HFG. , INC. 073109 PJCK~!CK ~APER PRODUCTS (. 1:~i • JI C 73 l 11 P 0 S HI A S l E R . 1 OJlJtj PLASTIC INDUSTldfS· <,, I" ("7 3 1 l 2 R A I NB 0 w D I s p 0 s Al co • "1. •. ·-... on 1 D -------------·THE·-REG Is lER----------·----···--·-·--·-·--.. .-• I... ~17 j l l 't R E y N 0 L D s rR l N c Ii 8. c 0. ( iJ7jJl!:> ftICOH CORP ( lt73llb ROlJDINS & MCYE:RS . ,··. C•Bl17 f<OHOZ SURGICAL INSTPU,,,ENT CO. ~· 1:.:. ~7~llh ROOAllSlERS. me. It (·7311~ HOSf,.OUNh-JN(; ... --. -------------·- i'": ( B120 llYCOf4 ltJSTRUt1E.NTSt INC. C. ( I 1 ·n 1 2 1 S & J C H [ VI~ 0 LL T ,, ... ; C7312? S.CllOLL r.. CO. AOVCRl JSING "i (I 7 S l 2 3 Y V 0 N NE SC IHJld3 · C:i H.H24 SCIENTIFIC L:OUIP. PRODUCTS UO"I:.~(C f.73125 S[ACLIFF ·ESTA HS .· l:'.1 0 73 I 2t •tiAHR OCK SUl•f'L V • .. , Cl -L. ···- i624.62 DISC PACK MAINTENANCE ~45.58 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES $27&~46 JANITORAL SUPPLIES·· l2,00G.OO POSTAGE $355.aO TRASH DISPOSAL $1,076.32 ..... --CLASSIFIED ... AOVER'flSING $91750.UO ENGINE PARTS $1~2.lb COPIER RENTAL i226.57 PUMP PARTS i15q.98 LAB SUPPLIES isJ.00 STEEL STOCK 128.~2 FREIGHT !166.21 CONTROL EQUIPMENT l79.~4 TRUCK PARTS $11723.j~ PRESS RELEASE PREPARATION 132.h~ EMPLOYEE MILEAGE ~121.&7 LAB SUPPLIES :~1c l'l ~~IC -·-----·--·---···I ~I ~· !,,\I.._.,, j~: ~Ii.._. :•• ~~:I ' .... .1 1 ... , '., ....... · 11 , 71 2 , 6 2 H • 0 ll C 0 AS T T RUN K RE I M BURS E HE tH PAY H E NT -D I ST . U · 1 1 ,1,~11.1~ TOOLS I :~; .:·.1 ~· 1 I~ : .. 1 @, ~".[_ F UNO f\10 YlY9 -JT 01$1 WORKlNL CA~IT'L ~ROC[SSJNG OAT£ 2/1~/ij5 PAGE Rt~OHT NU~U[R AP~3 C 0 UN TY S /. fl: I H T l 0 N 0 l S TIU CT S 0 F Ci IHI tJ G E C U U I HY ··-····-··· --·-CL'-IMS PAID tt2/21t/O'l '. I ~JARR/.t.JT NO. VENDOR 4MOUNT DESCRIPTION '• C7~127 SIMS JNDUST~JAL SUPPLY 1ttlttt.JC WELDING SUPPLIES Ci n l 20 s H l rn p 1 Pt: t s u Pf' L y ' I N c :s.·6 2 0 • " 9 p I p E s up p LI E s 1'i --· -G73l29 · ------SOUTH-COAST--OF·f-JC[·-l~GUIPl4£NT -H tl'57.fJ2 OFFICE FURNITURE ·'"j rt73130 SOUTtl(f<N CALJf. EOISON CO. :198,'l't8.':l3 POWER 11 l;Jjl31 SO. CAL· GAS CC. U.2,-125.0f NATURAL GAS il73132 SOUTl1ERN COUNTICS OIL CO. Utl,B.H.02 DIESEL FUEL 073133 SCOll STlV(NS S~3.05 EMPLOYEE HILEAGE u 7 3 l 3 't SUP fR C tt El-I C 0 RP $ 8 O l • 3 f> SOLVENTS It =' :vi ,. ...... i' 1:;·· -i· ~ .... ~ .,,( II II• 111 1 -.. ... ::1-· ····g~~;~-·----·--~l:[~:~~~L-~·~~-!·ESTE~-----·-----·····-·········-·· ....... -··-·---·:!:~:::~~ ···-·~~~~~CASH REIHBURSEMENT 11 u°/3137 TAK TAK/\MINf. Ut960.UO PLANT MAINTENANCE 14 • ~I 7 3 1 3 H T A I\ 0 y rn G JN LE R 1 C\I G .. u ' ~n 0 • 7 9 p u Mp p ART s . t '." · ti 7 3 l 3 9 TU 0 MPS 0 N L AC Q U [R C: 0 • $1, 1 9 1 • 5 2 p A I NT S Upp L I E S h ( ::i -----~~i::~ --·-... ·------~-~::~~l~~IC~~~AH-~~-V-1-CC---------------------· -· · !!!:~~ ··· ·· · ··-·-----~~~~~y!~DM ~~~~~! ____ -------·--·----·-------~~ C731~2 TRAFfIC CONTROL SERVICE1 I~C. $307.50 SAFETY SUPPLIES ~731~3 TRANSAHfRICA O(LAVAL1 INC. S2,q33.17 ENGINE PARTS ,, ~IC. Jt f, 7 31 ltlt -TkUCt< ~ AU TO· SUF-PL·'i·t ··I UC• -· UllK • 24 ·TRUCK PARTS (i ... l·"/3l't~ TURBOCHARGER, JNC. $21857.70 ENGINE REPAIRS 1" 1 ~:1~ ...... ~~ i~ :~ -------~~ !~N~~~~~~~ .• ~~~!-~~;_. J Nr • ------··-··-----------·---~~.~~: :~ ----····-·-------·-------~~~~~-~ N~~~-~~--'·-~-~---. ---.. ··------·------------------·--------· :' L ·f!::-(1731418 UNIHO PARCEL S(RVJC( t.83.90 DELIVERY SERVICE :.I !"I ::: (, 7 .3 1 It 9 UN I 1£ 0 ST A Tf. S £Q U I P • C 0 • t INC • S. 5 5 5 • 2 8 C 0 MP R E S S 0 R PARTS " ( . ·~ ~731~0 UNll[O STAT[S rJp[ & FOUNDRY s10,~~4,J& ·5-19-Rl-A PIPING- . , '' l' r n 1 51 v IJ H s c I ( N Tl F J c s. 3 ' 3 't q • 5 'i I-AB s up p l I E s u 073152 VALLARTA RCSTAURANTS 1 INC. S.205.93 USE CHARGE OVERPAYMENT u . . 0 73153· . -----···---·V4L-L (-Y---CIT--1 fS--SUPPL·~C-0.-------·---------··· ····---....... _ .. ___ $3 'IH 0.10 · ·--· ----p I PE SUPPLIES -·---·-------- Jll l'7~151t VALVf 8. STrfL SUPPLY CO. :£l1422.H6 VALVES II ,. I 1:~! .. ·i'" h· --1::1 ... I .... I -'!... .),--- F r·· ·I· .... : ·' 'L -- l731~5 VARIAN JNSTRUHlNT GkOUP IA00.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION v7315b VAULUAN•S lNDUSTHlAL--Rl:l!AJH CO i251.l.OO ···ENGINE REPAIRS C73157 LA~RY ~ALK[~ ASSOCIAT(S, INC. J3,770.10 ENGINEERING P2-23-6 073158 JOHN R. U•PLES 1377.26 ODOR CONTROL CONSULTANT i,73169---·------------WAUK[SUA--ENC'dNC:--SU<VICf.NT£-R----------·---------· -· ~57fl.fl3 --· --ENGINE ·PARTS------------------- .lBJt:ri wCSTINlitlOUSf HECTR IC CORP U93.lt5 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES ~73161 ~ILLiRD MA~KING OfVICfS $Jq.~~ OFFICE SUPPLIES 073162 NOURKE & WOOORUff tl!1tt57.00 LEGAL SERVICES [7~163 ZIP TE~PORA~Y PERSONNEL Slt471.12 TEMPORARY HELP -----~----------- TOTAL CLAIHS PAI~ r~/~O/H5 S·214'Jl12YO.l7 =====~====~====== ( ( ... .\ .. · .. ~~ ·-- Ill II '::1c ·~ ::1 (_ 'I ·~ :1l --------··--.. ----·----·\l ~I ~ ~~1 '- ~, ... ~·· i.. •" ~· .. t c !~: ~~· -----1:~ ·.. I • I ( ' i'' r" 1:J. ( ( ~ .. . .. ( &. FUND NO 9199 -JT DIST ~OR~!~g CAPITA~ j•i c-1. : , I ,··1 SUHHARY #1 OPER FUND #I ACO FUND "', #2 OPER FUND ( "I #2 ACO FUND "', Hi F/R FUND ~··1 #3 OPER FUND ( j"; 113 ACO FUND ;··~ .. __ H 5 OPE R FUNP. w #5 ACO FUND ( I" #6 OPER FUND K 16 ACO fU~O i"' #7 OPER FUND ( j'"t 117 AC 0 f UN D I:: . --~~If ~~E~U~~ND ----·--·- ( " # 11 ACO FLINO I" . . u ! I f I R fl.I N P. . IA , 15&6 OPER FUND COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORAN~E COUNTY ~ -·-·-----.. H~ ! H~ PA!~ g?/?0/~5 AMOUNT I 3. 9lt 855,70 5,036.27 15,098.67. 3,282.63 6 t 1lt3. 31 5,301.53 ·12,829.58 -,. , 013. 81 28.71 5r5lt0.02 5,306.63 216. 77 ···-~·'·~~~: ~o. 6,597.35 -· . ,. PROCESSING DATE 2/llt/85 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP~3 c ."·I ta H 5& 6 ACO FU NO '' --1-_._._JT _OfELfUHJt '" U1 CORF 338. 71 ! 1?.~~2628.00 t,682.60 6 1 041.10 258 158.72 ·------Lt: -L -····-··-·-· .. ·---·--·--317, '12'I.97 ( 1·=! :: ~~L~Q~~~~~o ~~~~~~~s ~y~~~-~:_.~~-SURANCE FUND . i"'I 3,828.6~ ~ 10,~~9.31 t ii." .. I·· .. I'' ( 11•. ( ... '( 111 ( "' i:1 l ··'L ··'I . - ·1··· . , ... I I: j""i (. \:'· -····--· . TOTAL .CLAI HS ... P.A.l.D-02L20l.8..5 ______ .. , __________________ . _______ --·-·---··HI ~~-L..?2Q..:J 7 . ·---------·-·--·----·-------------------------· ---·---------~----------·--·--------········- -~+-•+++ ___ ----------·-·--·---··-··----··-·---·--·-U-· ( ·-· -·. ·-·- 0 ,._ ~I: J . ··1·t· II II 14 ·~· .... ,,,• .. II ~:11.= 1' h ;;IC." ------1'' " ~IC Jl JJ :1c ~~~~~~~~ ....... ~ II :1c ......... ______ ,, ·~ ::1c :~1c ~~I \. \I ~~· '-· i~'. J(.1 '-· ___ ..., . [1· i•• (·1 .. ---:~: ' ... - !t I 11111 1,,1....._, ~. ' ; . : .. J' !'·; ~· EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 AND 13 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A regular joint meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, was held at the hour of 7:30 p.m., March 13, 1985, at 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California. The Chairman of the Joint Administrative Organization called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. DISTRICT 3 Adjournment * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Moved, seconded and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned to 7:30 p.m., Thursday, April 4, 1985. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:12 p.m., March 13, 1985. STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, RITA J. BROWN, Secretary of each of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 of Orange County, California, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of minute entries on the meeting of said Boards of Directors on the 13th day of March, 1985. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 13th day of March, 1985.