Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994-06-08 A�4&"' COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 0127. FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 9272B-8127 10844 ELLIS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92700-7018 ^st c°°xr (714)962-2411 June 3 , 1994 NOTICE OF MEETING JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY. JUNE 8. 1994 - 7:30 P.M. DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 108" Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 The Regular Meeting of the Joint Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, will be held at the above location, time and date. Assistant and cretary Tentatively-Scheduled Upcoming Meetings: JOINT WORKS SELECTION - Wednesday, June 8th, at 6: 30 P.M. COMMITTEE (immediately preceding the Joint Board meeting) FISCAL POLICY COMMITTEE - Wednesday, June 15th, at 5: 30 p.m. DISTRICT 3 SELECTION - Wednesday, June 22nd, at 4: 30 p.m. COMMITTEE (immediately preceding the Executive Committee meeting) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE - Wednesday, June 22nd, at 5: 30 p.m. EXECUTIVE SUBCOMMITTEE - Thursday, June 23rd, at 12 :00 noon COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS nl ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 10244 EWS AVENUE An WX 812, MUNTAN VALLEY.LAUMRNIA 92728-8127 9141892.2411 JOINT BOARD AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING DATES Joint Board Meetings Executive Committee Meetings June Jun 08, 1994 Jun 22, 1994 July Jul 13, 1994 Jul 27, 1994 August Aug 10, 1994 None Scheduled September Sep 14, 1994 Sep 28, 1994 October Oct 12, 1994 Oct 26, 1994 November Nov 09, 1994 None Scheduled December Dec 14, 1994 None Scheduled January Jan 11, 1995 Jan 25, 1995 February Feb 08, 1995 Feb 22, 1995 March Mar 08, 1995 Mar 22, 1995 April Apr 12, 1995 Apr 26, 1995 May May 10, 1995 May 24, 1995 June Jun 14, 1995 June 28, 1995 :W AGENDA JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 8, 1994 - 7:30 P.M. .............. .......-....... --.- ......._....... ..... ............ ...i !, In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code i Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts' Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to th meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agendalp{rtti3 available for public Inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. V11n the event any matter not listed on this agenda"Is proposed to be submitted to The Boards for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as at) emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which needdcame,to the attention of the Districts subsequent to the posting of the agenda, oi,� #,pff"n'a supplemental agenda posted not less than 72 hours prior to the maeting'idate. ; (1) Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation (2) Roll call (3) Appointment of Chairmen pro tem, if necessary (4) Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts of member agencies relating to appointment of Directors, if any. (See listing in Board Meeting folders) (5) Public Comments: All persons wishing to address the Boards on specific agenda items or matters of general interest should do so at this time. As determined by the Chairman, speakers may be deferred until the specific item is taken for discussion and remarks may be limited to five minutes. Matters of interest addressed by a member of the public and not listed on this agenda cannot have action taken by the Boards of Directors except as authorized by Section 54954.2(b). LP' Y O6108/94 (6) The Joint Chairman, General Manager and General Counsel present verbal reports on miscellaneous matters of general interest to the Directors. These reports are for information only and require no action by the Directors. (a) Report of Joint Chairman; consideration of Resolutions or commendations, presentations and awards (b) Report of General Manager (cl Report of General Counsel (7) 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 - May 11, 1994 regular District 2 - May 11, 1994 regular District 3 - May 11, 1994 regular District 5 - May 11, 1994 regular District 6 - May 11, 1994 regular District 7 - May 11, 1994 regular District 11 - May 11, 1994 regular District 13 . May 11, 1994 regular District 14 - May 11, 1994 regular (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 pages 'A' and 'B' 0¢104/ 4 95/18/94 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $798,460.68 $644,903.95 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 518,697.10 1,619,112.79 Joint Working Capital Fund - 294,523.82 150,868.80 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 11,959.56 117,598.35 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 7,035.85 162.50 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 40,866.55 7,424.43 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 36,569.95 42,701.27 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 72,584.29 3,896.88 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 4,693.47 115.00 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 7,529.96 16,436.07 DISTRICT NO. 11 365,709.67 7,853.14 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 100.60 32.86 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 12,477.79 8,756.92 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 20,007.00 3,109.26 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 0.00 2,658.62 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 14 6.102.02 92.191.230.99 32.631.732.86 -2- Y 06/08/94 (9) CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS 9(a) THROUGH 9(s) ---...-_.--._...------..._...__._.__.._.__._._....__.._............................,—_____.__......... _......................... .i 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 I one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous i 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. The 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, as follows: ALL DISTRICTS (a) Consideration of motion receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding purchase order contract for Microcomputer Hardware, Software and Associated Peripherals, Specification No. E-243, for 14 systems, to GST, Inc. for a total amount not to exceed $43,125.00 plus sales tax. See page "C" (b) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to Thermo Jarrell Ash Corporation in the amount of $115,000.00, plus freight and sales tax, for Purchase of One Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectrometer (Specification No. E-244). See page "D" (c) Consideration of motion receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation, rejecting unsolicited alternate bids of Carmenita Truck Center, Fuller Ford, Inland Empire White GMC and Morgan Crane Co., Inc. for not meeting the specifications, and that Purchase of One Flat Bed Truck with Chassis Mounted Crane, Specification No. V-004, be awarded to Westrux International for a total amount not to exceed $66,508.00 plus sales tax. See page "E" -3- v" 06/08/94 (9) ALL DISTRICTS - (CONSENT CALENDAR Continued) (d) Consideration of motion receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding Purchase of One Hydroflush Sewer Cleaning Truck, Specification No. V-005, including Option A, to Haaker Equipment Company for a total amount not to exceed $138,507.00 plus sales tax. See page "F" (e) Consideration of motion receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding Purchase of Five Four-Wheel Electric Personnel Carriers, Specification No. V-006, to Taylor-Dunn Manufacturing Company for a total amount not to exceed $21,135.00 plus sales tax. See page "G" (f) Consideration of motion receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding Purchase of Six Four-Wheel Electric Cargo Carriers, Specification No. V-007, to Taylor-Dunn Manufacturing Company for a total amount not to exceed $28,384.50 plus sales tax. See page "H" (g) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue Purchase Order Contract to Gartner Group for ongoing Computer Technology Analysis and Assessment for 1994-95 (Specification No. P-153), in an amount not to exceed $34,500.00. (h) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 3 to the plans and specifications for Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-38-2, authorizing a net addition of $10,780.00 to the contract with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for 14 items of added or deleted work. See page "I" (i) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-43-1, authorizing a net deduction of $40,084.00 from the contract with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for ten items of added or deleted work. See page -4- Y 06/08/94 (9) ALL DISTRICTS - (CONSENT CALENDAR Continued) (j) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 3 to the plans and specifications for Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-1, authorizing a net addition of $29,260.00 to the contract with Amelco Construction, a Division of Amelco Industries, for five items of added or deleted work, and granting a time extension of three calendar days for completion of said additional work. See page K" W Consideration of Resolution No. 94-55, approving Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with CH2M Hill for design and programming services required for Expansion of Existing Computerized Monitoring and Control Systems at Plants 1 and 2, Job No. J-31, deleting the specified completion deadline date of June 1994, with no change in the maximum authorized compensation of $742,148.00. See page "L" (I) Consideration of motion to receive, file and deny claim filed by attorneys for Richard Holm, Lacey Miller, a minor, through her Guardian Ad Litem, Georgianne I. Miller, Andy C. Patterson and Jackie J. Venezio (Patterson) dated May 12, 1994, in undetermined amounts for wrongful deaths and personal injuries in connection with construction of Miscellaneous Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-49, and refer to the Districts' General Counsel and liability claims administrator for appropriate action. Reference Memorandum dated May 24, 1994 from General Counsel. See page "M" (m) Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to designate members of the Boards and/or staff to attend and participate in various training programs, meetings, hearings, conferences, facility inspections and other functions which, in his opinion, will be of value to the Districts or affect the Districts' interests, including, but not limited to, those conducted by organizations providing specific training, state and federal legislative and regulatory bodies and the California Association of Sanitation Agencies, California Water Pollution Control Association, Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, and the Water Environment Federation; and authorizing reimbursement for travel, meals, lodging and incidental expenses in accordance with existing Districts' policies and the approved annual budget for 1994-95; and directing staff to provide the Fiscal Policy Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. -5- w O6/08/94 (9) DISTRICT 2 - (CONSENT CALENDAR Continued) (n)l Consideration of Resolution No. 94-62-2, approving agreement with Orange County Flood Control District providing for the installation of protective concrete structures for two sewer line crossings under the Santa Ana River at Katella, Santa Ana River Interceptor, from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Contract No. 2-14-1, and at the Garden Grove Freeway, Olive Subtrunk - Santa Ana River Crossing, Contract No. 2-5R-1, in connection with construction of the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project, and authorizing payment of required deposit in an amount not to exceed $11,000.00 for said work. See page "N" DISTRICT 3 (o) Consideration of the following actions relative to Rehabilitation of Magnolia Trunk Sewer, Orangethorpe Avenue to Ellis Avenue, Contract No. 3-35R, and Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation, between Westminster Boulevard and 405 Freeway, Contract No. 3-11 R: (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-66-3, approving Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Garden Grove providing for reimbursement of costs to the City for construction and rehabilitation of two manholes as part of the City's storm drain and street improvement project in Magnolia Street, and authorizing payment in an estimated amount not to exceed $100,000. See page "0"" (2) Consideration of motion authorizing the Selection Committee to negotiate Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc. for permitting, design and construction services relative to Rehabilitation of Magnolia Trunk Sewer, Orangethorpe Avenue to Ellis Avenue, Contract No. 3-35R, and Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation, between Westminster Boulevard and 405 Freeway, Contract No. 3-11 R, providing for additional services for preparation of pothole plans with traffic control and permitting of the plans. -6- 06/08/94 (9) DISTRICTS 5 & 6 - (CONSENT CALENDAR Continued) (p) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Improvements to Bitter Point and Rocky Point Pump Stations, Contract No. 5-32, and Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, authorizing a net addition of $35,460.00 to the contract with Uhler, Inc., for four items of additional or deleted work. See page "P" (q) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer, between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive, Contract No. 5-37-4, authorizing an addition of $68,117.50 to the contract with Colich Bros., Inc., dba Colich & Sons, for seven items of additional or deleted work, and granting a time extension of 43 calendar days for completion of said additional work. See page "0" DISTRICT 5 (r) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-67-5, accepting South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2, Contract No. 5-35-2, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. See page "R" DISTRICT 7 (s) Consideration of motion to receive and file petition from Thomas L. Gunckell, II and John M. Mitchell requesting annexation of 1 .65 acres of territory to the District, in the vicinity north of the intersection of La Vereda Drive and Skyline Drive in Lemon Heights in unincorporated county territory; and consideration of Resolution No. 94-68-7, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 146 - Gunckell and Mitchell Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). See pages "S" and "T" END OF CONSENT CALENDAR (10) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any -7- 06/08/94 (11) ALL DISTRICTS Nominations for Joint Chairman (Election to be held at regular July Board Meeting) (12) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve staff Summary Financial Report for nine-month period ending March 31, 1994 (Copy enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (13) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Receive and file draft minutes of the Joint Works Selection Committee for meeting held on May 25, 1994. (Copy enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (b) Consideration of action on the following items recommended by said Committee: (1) Consideration of the following actions relative to Professional Services Agreements with the following firms for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150: (a) (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Bush & Associates, Inc. for said services (Copy enclosed with Selection Committee Minutes). (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-56, approving Professional Services Agreement with Bush & Associates, Inc. for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus supplies and materials, at cost, for a total annual amount not to exceed $120,000.00 for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for up to two one-year extensions. See page "U" -B- [ITEM (13) CONTINUED ON PAGE 91 O6108/94 (13) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page e) v (b) (1) (b) (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Clifford A. Forkert, Civil Engineer, for said services (Copy enclosed with Selection Committee Minutes). (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-57, approving Professional Services Agreement with Clifford A. Forkert, Civil Engineer, for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus supplies and materials, at cost, for a total annual amount not to exceed $120,000.00 for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for up to two one-year extensions. See page "V" (c) (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with DGA Consultants, Inc. for said services (Copy enclosed with Selection Committee Minutes). (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-58, approving Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc. for said services on an hourly- rate basis for labor including overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus supplies and materials, at cost, for a total annual amount not to exceed $120,000.00 for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for up to two one- year extensions. See page 'W" (2) Consideration of the following actions relative to Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order No. 53935 agreement with Raisin Marine Studies, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services for Marine Bioassay and Toxicity Analysis (Specification No. P-152), extending the agreement for one additional year: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for said services (Copy enclosed with Selection Committee Minutes). (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-59, approving Change Order No. 1 to said purchase order agreement with Raisin Marine Studies, Inc. for said services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead and profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $16,000.00, increasing the total authorized compensation from $24,000.00 to an amount not to exceed 540,000.00. See page "X" -9- [ITEM (13) CONTINUED ON PAGE 101 v 06/08/94 (13) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 9) (b) (3) Consideration of the following actions in connection with Amendment No. 11 to Agreement with SAIC for NPDES Ocean Monitoring Program Year Ten (July 1994 - February 1996) relative to Districts' NPDES Ocean Monitoring Program required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Special Joint Works Selection Committee Certification, with attached staff report, of the negotiated fee and recommendation for Amendment No. 11 to Agreement with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-Inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. 5-032 (Copy enclosed with Selection Committee Minutes). (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-60, approving Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120- Inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. 5-032, extending the contract from July 1, 1994 through February 29, 1996, for an amount not to exceed $2,287,334.00 for Year Ten of said contract. See page "Y" (14) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Minutes of the Fiscal Policy Committee and Executive Committee (copies enclosed with Directors' Executive Committee agenda material). (1) Receive and file draft Executive Subcommittee Minutes for the meeting held on May 11, 1994 (2) Receive and file draft Fiscal Policy Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 18, 1994 (3) Receive and file draft Personnel Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 19, 1994 (3) Receive and file draft Joint Executive Committee/Fiscal Policy Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 25, 1994 -10- [ITEM (14) CONTINUED ON PAGE 111 V 06/08/94 (14) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 10) (b) Consideration of action on the following items recommended by various Committees: (1) Consideration of Special Selection Committee Re Computers recommendations: (a) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to negotiate an agreement with Digital Equipment Corporation for the Purchase of Two Model 4700A VAX Computers (Specification No. E-245) for an amount not to exceed $400,000.00 plus tax, for future consideration by the Boards. (b) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to negotiate an agreement with Square D Company for a Site License for Plants 1 and 2 to use the CRISP/32 Plant Monitoring and Control Software (Specification No. E-246) for an amount not to exceed $438,715, plus tax, for future - consideration by the Boards. (c) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to negotiate an Annual Software Maintenance Agreement for CRISP/32 Plant Monitoring and Control Software (Specification No. M-048) to provide automatic software update releases and ongoing support and warranty services, for an annual amount not to exceed $77,283, for future consideration by the Boards. [ITEM (14) CONTINUED ON PAGE 121 06/08/94 (14) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 11) (b) (2) Consideration of Fiscal Policy Committee and Executive Committee recommendations: (a) Consideration of motion authorizing the Districts' Broker, Robert F. Driver Associates, to place All-Risk Property Insurance coverage as follows: CURRENT PROGRAM I PROPOSED PROGRAM TERMS: All-Risk Insurance including earthquake and flood, personal property and business interruption. Total Asset Value $1,335,088,274.00 COVERAGE: All-Risk $200,000,000 $200,000,000 Earthquake 80,000,000 45,000,000 DEDUCTIBLE: All Perils $25,000 $25,000 Earthquake 5% Per Unit, 5% Per Unit, $250,000 min $250,000 min. PREMIUM: $1,075,375 $1,100,00041,200,000 (b) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order No. 67642 issued to Public Financial Management, extending their transitional financial advisory services to July 1, 1994, in the amount of $25,000.00, increasing the total authorized amount from an amount not to exceed $25,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $50,000.00. (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file the Executive Committee's report and recommendations re 1994-95 personnel requirements and joint works operating and construction budgets. -12- [ITEM (14) CONTINUED ON PAGE 131 v 06/08/94 (14) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 12) (b) 12) (d) Roll call vote motion approving proposed 1994-95 Joint Operating Budget Funds, as follows: Fund Total Amount Joint Operating/Working Capital $ 49,542,000 Workers' Compensation, Self-Insured 307,000 Self-Funded Health Plan Trust 375,000 Public Liability, Self-Insured 222,000 (e) Roll call vote motion approving proposed 1994-95 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Budget (CORF Joint Works Construction) in the total amount of $67,805,000.00. (3) Consideration of Executive Subcommittee recommendations: (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-69, approving Professional Services Agreement with Ernst & Young to conduct a two-phase independent review of the Districts' Capital Projects Management Function including current Districts' organizational structure and management practices, and authorizing Phase 1 for an amount not to exceed $85,000.00. See page "Z" (15) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion authorizing the Director of Finance to certify claims and forward to the Orange County auditor for immediate payment for expenditures incurred after June 30, 1994, and declaring that such certification shall comply with the provisions of Resolution No. 76-10 pertaining to procedures for payment of claims against the Districts until the 1994-95 budgets are adopted by the respective Districts. -13- u O6108/94 (161 ALL DISTRICTS (a) Receive and file draft minutes of Conservation, Recycle and Reuse Committee for meeting held on May 26, 1994. (Copy enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (b) Consideration of action on the following item recommended by said Committee: (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-61, Declaring A Policy Re Water Reclamation. See page "AA" (17) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of the following actions relative to Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2; Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2.53-2: (Copies of supporting documents enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file staff report dated June 2, 1994 re description of Districts' construction safety program. (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter dated May 24, 1994 from Pascal & Ludwig Engineers regarding the construction contractor's safety program. (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's memorandum dated June 1, 1994 re award of bid issue. (d) Discussion (a) Consideration of action relative to bids received for said project: (1) Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P11-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2, Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; AND 12) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-34, to award contract to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers in their total bid amount of $1,003,899.00 - OR - (31 Consideration of motion to reject all bids - OR - (4) Consideration of motion to reject bid of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers based on non-responsible contractor, and to schedule hearing with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers at the Joint Board Meeting of July 13, 1994 -14- 4 O6108/94 (18) ALL DISTRICTS .-...._.... _.__..... CLOSED SESSION: During the course of conducting the business set forth ion this agenda as a regular meeting of the Boards, the Chairman may convene the Boards in closed session to consider matters of pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6. Reports relating to (a) purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or potential litigation; (c) employee compensation; or which are exempt from public disclosure under the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Boards during a permitted closed session and are not available for public inspection. At such time as final actions are taken by the Directors on any of these subjects, the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. I ..._.._---------------............_............._....................._.._._...__.._____..____a (a) Convene in closed session, if necessary (b) (1) Confer with Districts' representatives concerning status of negotiations with employee group representatives on salaries, benefits and terms of employment. (a) Districts' Representatives: General Manager, General Counsel, Director of Personnel and Director of Finance (b) Employee Organizations: (1) International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 501 (2) Professional and Supervisory Employees (2) Confer with Districts' Legal Counsel re claim for damages filed by District employee, Louis Sangermano (3) Confer with General Counsel re anticipated litigation pertaining to construction accident at Plant 2 involving Districts' contractor, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers (4) Confer with General Counsel re CSD v. Brinderson Corporation reconfirmation of arbitration award (c) Reconvene in regular session (d) Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session. -15- G 06/08/94 (19) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to execute a letter agreement with R. Craig Scott & Associates for specialized labor and employment legal services, and authorizing payment for said services based on the firm's discounted hourly rates in effect at the time said services are performed. (20) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (21 ) DISTRICT 1 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (22) DISTRICT 1 Consideration of motion to adjourn (23) DISTRICT 3 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (24) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to adjourn (25) DISTRICT 6 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (26) DISTRICT 6 Consideration of motion to adjourn (27) DISTRICT 7 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (28) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn (29) DISTRICT 11 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (30) DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion to adjourn (31) DISTRICT 13 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (32) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of motion to adjourn -16- i 06/08/94 (33) DISTRICT 14 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (34) DISTRICT 14 Consideration of motion to adjourn (35) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of the following actions relative to Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1 : (a) Verbal report of Staff (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-63-2, approving License Agreement with Robert A. Jackson, providing for temporary construction access for said project on a portion of Mr. Jackson's property, at no cost to the District. See page "BB" (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-64-2, approving License Agreement with Donald J. Ornellas, providing for temporary construction access for said project on a portion of Mr. Ornellas's property, at no cost to the District. See page "CC" (d) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said project, making miscellaneous modifications and clarifications. (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 94-65-2, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, to Colich Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons in the total amount of $2,482,762.00. See page "DD" (36) DISTRICT 2 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (37) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn -17- 06/08/94 (38) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of the following actions pertaining to appeal of capital facilities connection charges for self-storage project in Newport Beach: (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter dated May 23, 1994 from Dahn Corporation appealing said charges. See page "EE" (b) Verbal report of Staff and General Counsel (c) Discussion (d) Consideration of action on appeal (39) DISTRICT 5 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (40) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn _18_ AGENDA County Sanitation Districts REPORT of Orange County,California P.O. Box 8127. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714) 962-2411 JOINT BOARDS MEETING DATE June 8, 1994 AT 7:30 P.M. The following is a brief explanation of the more important, non-routine items which appear on the enclosed agenda and which are not otherwise self-explanatory. Warrant lists are enclosed with the agenda material summarizing the bills paid since the last Joint Board meeting. ALL DISTRICTS 9(a): AWARD PURCHASE OF MICROCOMPUTER HARDWARE, SOFTWARE AND ASSOCIATED PERIPHERALS, SPECIFICATION NO. E-243. The Districts utilize microcomputers (also known as personal computers, or "PCs")for a wide variety of applications, technically and administratively, within each department and at each of the two treatment plants. Uses include word processing; spread sheets for data analysis and reporting; data base management for data collection, analysis, manipulation and storage; data acquisition for laboratory instruments; data modeling and statistical analysis; graphical data representation for analysis; and many more. The necessary growth of the Districts' activities to keep pace with expanding system demands and the attendant need for more sophisticated management and operational "tools", and the replacement of old equipment, require periodic purchases of new microcomputer systems with related hardware, software and peripheral equipment. Periodically, staff prepares a schedule of current computer needs and solicits formal competitive bids. A total of fourteen, nine replacements and four new systems, are needed, together with related peripherals and equipment. This new equipment is being requested to replace existing, outdated Model 286 computer work stations with Model 486 work stations, and to add units for additional clerical and administrative support within the departments. The Model 286 computers cannot support the software programs used at the Districts and have been declared obsolete by Information Services. In addition, the replacement and new work stations will begin addressing the Division's needs to standardize and conform to a fully integrated computer program. June 8, 1994 Sealed bids were opened May 10. 1994. Seven bids were received. Of the seven bids received, five vendors bid on all fourteen systems and components and two responses were "no bid". Staff recommends award of Specification No. E-243, Purchase of Microcomputer Hardware, Software and Associated Peripherals, to GST, Inc., Cerritos, the lowest responsive bidder, for a total of$43,125.00, plus applicable sales tax. A bid tabulation is included with the supporting agenda material. These systems will be allocated as follows: Dept. city. cost User Director of Operations Office 6 $18,482.16 1 -(Replacement)Environmental Specialist II 1 -(New) Clerk 1 -(New) Clerk 1 -(Replacement)Principal Environmental Specialist 1 -(Replacement) Senior Scientist 1 -(Replacement) Department Secretary Treatment Plant Operations 8 24,642.84 1 -(Replacement)Shift Information Passdown for Senior Plant Operator use 1 -(Replacement) Shift Supervisors use 1 -(Replacement) Clerk 1 -(Replacement)Training Supervisor 1 -(Replacement)Training Clerical 1 -(Replacement) Central Power Generation Supervisor 1 -(New) Plant 1—Chief Operator 1 -(New)Chief Operator's Secretary 14 3 725.00(plus sales tax) 9(b): PURCHASE OF ONE INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA EMISSION SPECTROMETER, SPECIFICATION NO. E-244. The responsibilities of the Environmental Sciences Laboratory include analyzing metals in wastewater and source control samples. Approximately 45,000 individual metals concentrations are determined by the Laboratory each year. This work is nondiscretionary in that it supports both wastewater monitoring and the industrial source control programs required by the Districts' National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Ocean Discharge Permit. The proposed inductively coupled plasma-emission spectrometer (ICPES) will perform analyses that are currently conducted on instruments which have poor reliability and long analysis times. -2- June 8, 1994 The Laboratory staff is recommending a sole source because the Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP has a superior detector and compatible software for instrument control and data handling. The Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP is the only instrument available that can detect a sufficient number of wavelengths to ensure that data are always free of errors caused by interferences from other elements in the samples. It is also the only instrument whose control and data handling is performed by a Microsoft Windows program which is compatible with the Laboratory computer system. The Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP inductively coupled plasma-emission spectrometer can perform analyses simultaneously at a reduced cost and with up to ten times greater accuracy and precision than existing flame atomic absorption spectrometer and ICPES equipment. The proposed new ICPES has an estimated annual cost savings of$41,075 and an estimated payback period of 3 years. Laboratory staff recommends Purchase of One Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectrometer(Specification No. E-144) from Thermo Jarrell Ash Corporation in the amount of$115,000.00, plus freight and sales tax. Included with the supporting agenda material is a Laboratory Staff Report which provides a more detailed explanation of the proposed purchase. 9(c): PURCHASE ONE FLAT-BED TRUCK WITH CHASSIS MOUNTED CRANE. SPECIFICATION NO. V-004. In addition to the two treatment plants, the Districts operate and maintain twenty-six pump stations and two flow metering stations spread throughout our service area. As the Districts facilities have been expanded, modified and upgraded over the past years, more and larger equipment has been added. For proper maintenance of this equipment, the use of an additional flat-bed truck with chassis mounted crane is required. On May 3, 1994, staff received nine sealed bids for a new truck with a crane. The lowest responsive bid was for a 1995 International 4700 Series chassis with a HIAB Model 125-2 mounted crane, including flat bed and tool boxes. Unsolicited optional bids were received for a PM Model 1122 crane that does not meet the technical specifications due to insufficient lifting capacity. Staff recommends that the unsolicited alternate bids of Carmenita Ford Truck Sales, Inc., Fuller Ford, Inland Empire Equipment and Morgan Crane Company, Inc., be rejected for not meeting the specifications and that award be made to Westrux International of Anaheim, the lowest responsible bidder meeting the specifications, for One Flat-Bed Truck with Chassis Mounted Crane, Specification No. V-004, for their bid amount of$66,508.00, plus applicable sales tax. A bid tabulation is included in the supporting agenda material. -3- June 8, 1994 9(d): PURCHASE OF ONE HYDROFLUSH SEWER CLEANING TRUCK, SPECIFICATION NO. V-005. The proposed Hydroflush Sewer Cleaning Truck will be operated by the Collection Facilities Division of the Maintenance Department. This equipment is utilized in the field for high-pressure cleaning of smaller sewer lines, usually 12-inch diameter and less, and for breaking up grease stoppages. It can also be adapted for root cutting in the main lines and laterals, which is an increasing problem. In addition, it has a hand- held washdown nozzle used in manhole inspections and a flusher nozzle feature for street cleanup. This unit is scheduled to replace Vehicle No. V-199. V-199 is an older style hydroflush truck that was purchased in 1981, which now has over 128,000 miles and will be used in the treatment plants and as a backup for sewer work. In this service, V-199 will replace V-160 which will be retired and sent to auction. A unique feature, available from two body manufacturers, is a front-mounted hose-reel design which allows it to rotate on a vertical axis and telescope fore and aft. This design is extremely useful in difficult access areas such as easements and limited space areas found in District Ts unincorporated areas. It also improves worker protection from possible rear-end collisions. The specifications are based on a tilt-cab type chassis available from several truck manufacturers. This chassis allows the vehicle more maneuverability and greater visibility. This is essential in many narrow streets and hard-to-access easement areas. Several cities and agencies are utilizing this chassis configuration today. Specifications were developed to allow for eighty-four possible combinations of body/chassis/- engine/transmission suppliers capable of meeting or exceeding our minimum requirements. Due to root problems encountered in smaller sewer lines and laterals, the Districts use an EPA-approved foaming herbicide for root growth control. The Districts therefore included Option 'W' in the specifications which is a truck-mounted chemical mixing and blending system for the Vaporooter product. It is only available from one body manufacturer at this time. This option was listed separately for evaluation purposes because it may add length to the vehicle, thereby limiting its usefulness. The Notice Inviting Bids was issued on May 3, 1994, with a bid opening date of May 17, 1994. Bid packages were mailed to thirteen firms that expressed interest in bidding. The Districts received two additional requests for bid documents in response to the newspaper announcement. The Districts received only one responsive bid. "No Bids"were received from Westrux, Inc., Carmenita Truck Center, and South Coast Peterbilt. The additional firms had no questions during the bid preparation period and no formal responses were noted. -0- June 8, 1994 In June 1992, an award was made (Specification No. A-162)for similar equipment for $109,319.00, plus sales tax. Specification No. A-162 was used as a basis for this award. Major changes were the tilt-cab chassis, higher front axle capacity and the Vaporooter option (Option "A"). The increased price is appropriate for these changes. Staff has prepared performance-based specifications and established minimum acceptable ratings to seek maximum competition. It is our analysis that GMNolvo has created a market niche with its chassis configurations, and that other heavy truck manufacturers who technically meet or exceed our specifications chose not to compete. Additionally, staff has since contacted firms that chose not to bid. Vacon chose not to bid because they could not comply with the Vaporooter Option (Option A), so they did not respond at all. Carmenita Truck Center chose not to bid due to issues unrelated to this proposal with another bidder, Haaker, who supplies flushing equipment. Westrux was not able to comply with the specification requirement for tilt- cab chassis, and South Coast Peterbilt could not comply with the wheel base specification. No firm has taken issue with the specifications. The Purchasing and Maintenance staff therefore recommend that the award of Purchase of One Hydroflush Sewer Cleaning Truck, Specification No. V-005, be made to Haaker Equipment Company, the only responsive bidder, for their proposed bid of$138,507.00, including Option 'W', plus applicable sales tax. A bid tabulation is included in the supporting agenda material. 9(e and f): PURCHASE OF FIVE FOUR-WHEEL ELECTRIC PERSONNEL CARRIERS, SPECIFICATION NO. V-006: AND PURCHASE OF SIX FOUR-WHEEL ELECTRIC CARGO CARRIERS, SPECIFICATION NO. V-007. The Districts present-day motor pool consists of trucks, various pieces of heavy equipment, automobiles and electric carriers. As part of an ongoing effort of evaluating our operations to ensure that we are being as efficient as possible, and our program of utilizing electric carts instead of motor vehicles where possible to help reduce air emissions, staff has studied our motor pool and determined that eleven new electric vehicles are needed to transport workers, equipment and tools within the confines of the treatment plants (each treatment plant site is over 100 acres in size). Eight units are required due to expanding treatment facilities maintenance needs at the two plant sites. Five of the units are to replace old, worn-out carts that are no longer economical to repair. Accordingly, staff has prepared specifications for five four-wheel electric personnel carriers as well as six four-wheel electric cargo carriers and recommends the following actions: -5- June 8, 1994 (a) Award Purchase of Five Four-Wheel Personnel Carriers, Specification No. V-0O6• Four bids were received on May 20, 1994 for the five personnel carriers. Two of the bids were no bids. It is recommended that award of Purchase of Five Four-Wheel Electric Personnel Carriers, Specification No. V-006, be made to Taylor Dunn Manufacturing Company, the lowest responsive bidder, for their proposed amount of$21,135.00, plus applicable sales tax. A bid tabulation is attached to the supporting agenda material. The carts will be assigned as follows: uanti Department User 1 - Mechanical Division Mechanical Division at Plant 2 Replacement 1 -New Instrumentation New Staff at Plant 1 Division 1-New Operations Day Shift, Plant 2 Process, Senior Operator in Digester/Dewatering 1 -New Operations Night Shift, Plant 2 Process, Senior Operator in Digester/Dewatering 1 - Operations Replacement for V-603, Night Shift, Replacement Plant 2 (b) Award Purchase of Six Four-Wheel Electric Cargo Carriers. Specification No. V-007. Four bids were received on May 20, 1994 for the six cargo carriers. Two bids were no bids. It is recommended that the Districts award the Purchase of Six Four- Wheel Electric Cargo Carriers, Specification No. V-007, to Taylor Dunn Manufacturing Company, the lowest responsive bidder, for their proposed amount of$28,384.50, plus applicable sales lax. A bid tabulation is attached to the supporting agenda material. The carts will be assigned as follows: -6- June 8, 1994 Quan Department User 1 - Maintenance Replacement for V-614 at Plant 1 Replacement 1 - Mechanical Division Replacement for V-589 at Plant 2 Replacement 1 - Instrumentation Replacement for V-663 at Plant 2 Replacement Division 3-New Instrumentation New staff at Plant 2 Division 9(g): AUTHORIZING PURCHASE ORDER AGREEMENT WITH GARTNER GROUP FOR ONGOING COMPUTER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS AND ASSESSMENT FOR 1994-95 (SPECIFICATION NO.P-153). The Districts have contracted with Gartner Group during this past fiscal year to provide staff with expert opinion and analysis regarding information technology (IT) products and services. Gartner Group provides a wide range of continuous services through the research, analysis and recommendations of Gartner Group analysts. The Gartner Group has established itself as a leader in independent and impartial analysis of new and emerging products, services and standards related to IT. Gartner's clients include the County of Orange, who highly recommended their services to Districts' staff. The standard continuous service deliverables the Districts have received during this past year from the Gartner Group include Research Notes, Strategic Analysis Reports, telephone consultation as needed, periodic audioconferences on special topics and exclusive industry-specific symposia. The Districts have contracted with Gartner Group for research in two specific IT categories: Personal Computing (PC) and for Local Area Communications (LAC)for a cost of$17,417 this past year under staff procurement authority. Staff is requesting the services be utilized for the coming year and that the Industry Service (IS) be added, which will provide Districts' staff with analyses for products and services related to computer-aided design and plant automation technology. In addition, it is recommended that the deliverables be received in the form of CD-ROM instead of hard copy printed format. The cost of each service (PC, LAC and IS) is $11,500 with the CD-ROM option. The new service agreement with Gartner Group for all three services will cost $34,500.00 plus tax. The new one-year service agreement would begin July 1, 1994. The staff, therefore, recommends authorization to issue a purchase order agreement to the Gartner Group for Ongoing Computer Information Technology -7- June 8, 1994 Analysis and Assessment for 1994-95 (Specification No. P-153), in an amount not to exceed $34,500.00. 9(h): APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 FOR PRIORITY PROJECTS ELEMENTS OF MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS TO FACILITIES AT PLANT NO. 1. JOB NO. 131-38-2. Job No. P1-38-2, Priority Projects Elements of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1 provides for replacement of all sluice and slide gates within the existing Metering and Diversion Structure, installation of new foul air scrubbers at Headworks No. 2, modifications to existing primary sedimentation basins, and other miscellaneous facilities and work items. The design for this $3.3 million project was performed by John Carollo Engineers and the construction contract was awarded in June 1993 to Pascal and Ludwig Engineers. Change Order No. 3 is an addition in the net amount of$10,780.00 to the contract for nine items of additional work and five items of deleted work. Item 1, in the amount of$569.00, is for additional reinforcing steel incorporated into concrete encasement around a new 42-inch buried fiberglass air duct serving the new Metering and Diversion structure scrubber complex. On the contract drawings a typical concrete encasement detail was shown to provide support for buried thin wall air duct pipe. The buried air duct pipe will not support earth loads by itself and requires reinforced concrete to be placed around the circumference of the pipe for additional support to prevent the pipe from being crushed. The encasement detail shown on the contract drawings was a typical detail used for smaller size pipe (up to 12- inch diameter) and did not show enough steel reinforcement for encasement of the large 42-inch air duct specified in the contract. This item includes costs resulting from a design error. Item 2, in the amount of$368.00, is for the removal of undisclosed utilities and temporary support of an existing electrical ductbank. These utilities, when uncovered in the field, were found to be shown incorrectly on the contract drawings and conflicted with the contract-specified abandonment of an old water well. The existing utilities were plotted in the wrong location on the contract drawings, which showed no interference with the well abandonment work area. Item 3, in the amount of$2,115.00, is for the reroute of a new electrical ductbank around an existing automobile access ramp at Primary Sedimentation Basins 1 and 2. The ramp is used to access parking on top of the basins and was not shown on the contract drawings. This item includes costs resulting from a design omission. Item 4, in the amount of$557.00, is for the repair of an undisclosed ductbank which was damaged during excavation for a new chemical containment structure -8- June 8, 1994 around the existing solution polymer facility. The existing ductbank was not shown on the contract drawings due to the fact that no as-built drawings showing this electrical installation were found during the design phase. Item 5, in the amount of$2,608.00, is for the addition of a new area drain and associated piping at the existing solution polymer facility. Construction of a new chemical containment structure around this facility blocked surface runoff from rain or washdown in this area, requiring the additional drainage system. This item includes costs resulting from a design omission. Item 6, in the amount of$960.00, is for furnishing and installing a new stainless steel pipe spool, required to install a new sludge density meter in Primary Sedimentation Basins 1 and 2. The density meter was supplied by the Districts for installation by the Contractor. The requirement for the stainless steel pipe spool was not envisioned during the design phase and, as a result, was not addressed in the contract drawings. Item 7, in the amount of$6,235.00, is for furnishing, installing and removing a temporary 18-inch foul air duct to control odors at the Metering and Diversion Structure on an interim basis. The temporary foul air duct system was required because the existing Metering and Diversion Structure underground foul air duct interfered with a new utility trench serving a new scrubber complex being constructed under this contract. The contract drawings did not show this interference. This item includes costs resulting from a design error. Item 8, in the amount of $615.00, is for rerouting an existing 4-inch pipeline over the new chemical containment structure wall at the existing solution polymer facility. The pipeline interfered with construction of the new containment structure wall and the interference was not shown on the contract drawings. This item includes costs resulting from a design omission. Item 9, in the amount of$11,747.00, is for a number of modifications to high pressure air and plant water pipelines extending into the grit chamber hoppers. These modifications included the changing the contract-specified galvanized iron piping materials to stainless steel, which is resistant to corrosion. The design engineer recommended changing pipe materials as there are a total of 40 pipe penetrations into the grit hoppers, with each pipe being grouted in place. Once each pipe is installed, it will be very difficult to replace in the future if a failure occurred from corrosion. Also included in this item are the furnishing and installation of an additional 18 stainless steel ball valves, which are required to make the system operational but were not shown on the contract drawings. Concrete coring costs are included for coring an additional 12 inches into the hoppers for each pipe penetration, the core length having been shown incorrectly on the contract drawings. This item includes costs resulting from design errors. -9- June 8, 1994 Item 10, a credit in the amount of$9,123.00, is for the contractor to delete the furnishing and installation of two temporary bulkheads in the main influent channel. The contract specifications required the contractor to fumish and install two leakproof bulkheads for diversion of flows during installation of new slide gates at the existing Metering and Diversion Structure. The contractor requested to use existing Districts' slide gates in lieu of specified bulkheads, which resulted in a credit to the contract. Item 11, a credit to the contract in the amount of$1,200.00, is for deleting the contract requirement of furnishing and installing new steel backer bars for the spiral skimmer blades at the Primary Sedimentation Basins 1 and 2. During replacement of the rubber wiper blades, the backer bars were found to be in excellent condition and not in need of replacement. Item 12, a credit to the contract in the amount of$1,050.00, is for deletion of six of the twelve contract-specified high pressure air and plant water service connections in the grit chambers. It was determined that half of the service connections shown on the contract drawings were redundant and could be deleted. Item 13, a credit in the amount of$2,280.00, is for deleting the furnishing and installation of brackets that support the top grating (known as the bed limiter) that covers the demisting section on four existing scrubbers at the primary scrubber complex. It was determined that the brackets were not necessary to hold the bed limiter in place. Deletion of this work resulted in a credit to the contract. Item 14, a credit in the amount of$1,341.00, is to delete the furnishing and installation of a portion of new 8-inch piping in the grit chambers, shown to be replaced on the contract drawings. The contractor was able to make use of existing 8-inch PVC piping previously installed, resulting in a credit to the contract. Miscellaneous rehabilitation projects within the plants, including Job No. P1-38-2, cover a large variety of different unrelated construction items located in many different areas of the plants. Due to the complexity of these projects, changes are often initiated from actual conditions encountered in the field, rather than being discovered or known in the design phase. All of the above changes fall into this category. The changes described above would have been included in the original design if discovered or known in the design phase. Items 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 9 are for additional costs resulting from design errors. Staff will seek reimbursement from the designer for an appropriate portion of the costs added to the project that would not otherwise have been incurred had the original contract drawings been correct. The original contract amount for this project was $3,364,600.00. The project is now approximately 35% complete. The net amount of change orders to date is $6,347.00, representing a net increase of 0.19% above the original contract amount. _10- June B, 1994 Staff recommends approval of Change Order No. 3 for an addition of $10,780.00 to the contract with Pascal and Ludwig Engineers. There is no time extension associated with this change order. 9(i): APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 TO PRIORITY PROJECTS ELEMENT OF MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS TO FACILITIES AT PLANT NO. 2. JOB NO. P243-1. Job No. P243-1, Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2, provides for construction of four chemical storage containment areas, addition of an anionic polymer storage and feed facility, installation of a new flow bypass gate at an existing effluent junction box, construction of a flowmeter test facility, replacement of demisting sections of existing air scrubbers, removal and replacement of asbestos-insulated steam piping, installation of new strainers at the plant water pump station, electrical modifications, and other miscellaneous work items. The design for this $3.4 million project was prepared by John Carollo Engineers and the construction contract was awarded in April 1993 to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers. Change Order No. 2 is a net credit in the amount of$40,048.00, from the contract for seven items of added work and three items of deleted work. Item 1, in the amount of$26,715.00, is for providing additional pumping and process isolations required to complete the contract-specified modifications to Junction Box 1. The contract specification assumed that the Contractor would simply dewater the leakage past one existing slide gate. However, actual conditions required that additional temporary 108-inch bulkheads be installed at the Ocean Ouffall Booster Station and the old termination channel, and the work required additional shifts to complete. Additional pumping was also required to dewater the sewer between these bulkheads and their subsequent leakage. These requirements were not identified in the design phase and therefore not included in the contract documents. Item 2, a no-cost item, is for substituting model numbers for components of electrical switchgear equipment provided under this contract. Staff recommended the substitutions as they will provide better coordination with existing plant electrical relaying than those specified in the original contract documents. Item 3, in the amount of$1,485.00, is for additional labor to install bolt-on Size 5 starters in existing motor control centers for the backup cooling water and HI/LOW pressure plant water pumps. The contract plans indicated that plug-in type starters were to be installed. However, plug-in Size 5 starters are not manufactured by the motor control center manufacturer. The additional labor required is for the installation of a vertical bus to tie bolt-on starters to the main bus. This did not add costs that would have otherwise not been incurred had the original contract documents reflected bolt-on starters. The contractor is providing the necessary materials at no additional costs to the Districts. _11_ June 8, 1994 Item 4, in the amount of$3,045.00, is for clean up of chemicals spilled at the Ferric and Ferrous Chloride Containment Facilities. It was necessary to keep these facilities in operation during the installation of the containment area lining. Small amounts of chemicals used in the normal course of operation were spilled by the Districts, which damaged the surface preparation or initial lining coats in the new containment area. The chemical residue had to be cleaned and any damage repaired prior to proceeding with subsequent surface preparation and coating of the containment areas as called for in the contract documents. Item 5, in the amount of$3,257.00, is for providing new supports for two 16- inch plant-water check valves located in existing Scott Tunnel. Supports detailed in the contract drawings conflicted with an existing electrical cable tray and could not be installed. These supports had to be redesigned. Additional labor and materials for temporary supports and pipe handling are included in this item. This item includes added costs resulting from designer error. Item 6, in the amount of$17,270.00, is for rerouting a 24-inch diameter plant- water force main connecting two proposed strainers to the plant-water system. This additional work was necessary to make corrections in the pipe routing due to an erroneous elevation of the strainer pad shown on the contract drawings, and to avoid conflicts with existing facilities not disclosed in the plans. This item includes credit for demolition of an existing equipment base, new pipe support requirements, and related work that was no longer required with the new plant-water pipe routing. The costs for the relocation of existing electrical equipment that conflicted with the new pipe routing are also included in this item. This item includes added costs resulting from designer error. Item 7, a credit in the amount of$487.00, is for deleting some of the conduit and wire intended to be routed to the proposed automatic roll filters for the Ocean Outfall Booster Station ventilation fans. The contract drawings incorrectly indicated conduits were required for five roll-filter motors. The equipment approved for the project only has two motors. The credit is for conduit and wire to the three motors that are no longer required. Item 8, in the amount of$1,267.00, is for the labor for installing two District- fumished drain valves on proposed piping installed with the digester isolation knife gate valves at Digesters E and H. These drain valves were not required by the contract documents, but were part of scheduled maintenance on the adjacent digester mixing pumps. The work could be easily performed by the contractor while working on the associated piping. Item 9, a no-cost deletion/addition item, is for the deletion of the plant effluent pump transformer Section A (PEP A) pull section in the Bus A switchgear lineup located in the 12KV Distribution Center B. Credit for the deleted pull section was offset by the -12- June 8, 1994 required revision of associated conduit, conductors, and other miscellaneous alterations to adjacent existing enclosures. The pull section is not required and was deleted to allow space for installing future switchgear enclosures. Item 10, a credit in the amount of$92,600.00, is for the deletion of a temporary hydrogen peroxide feed system which was unnecessary because the Districts accelerated the long-term replacement of chlorine with hydrogen peroxide through work unrelated to this contract. After the project design was complete, the Districts began phasing out the use of chlorine in the wastewater treatment process. As a result, most of the requirements for new chlorine equipment will also be deleted from this contract in a future change order. This temporary chemical feed system was originally intended to replace the plants existing chlorine feed used to control odors in the plant influent during the installation of the chlorine equipment. This temporary system is no longer required because this contract will not provide the modifications to the existing chlorine feed system, which is now obsolete. Miscellaneous rehabilitation projects within our plants, including Job No. P243-1, cover a large variety of different, unrelated construction items located in many different areas of the plants. A particular area of a plant may have been revised many times over the years by construction contracts or by Districts' maintenance crews. Documentation of these changes is not always recorded and centralized. (We are addressing this problem with a fairly recent computer-assisted design (CAD) group and by better documenting our as-built conditions.) For this reason, and because of the complexity of these projects, field changes are initiated where actual conditions encountered differ from those anticipated or known in the design phase. Except for Items 5 and 6, the above items would have been included in the original design if discovered or known in the design phase. Portions of Items 5 and 6 are design errors involving rework. Staff will seek reimbursement from the designer for those portions involving designer errors. The original contract amount for this project was $3,398,000.00. The net credit amount of change orders to date is $08,855.00, representing a net decrease of 2.61% below the original contract amount. The contract is nearly complete. Staff recommends approval of Change Order No. 2 for a net credit of $40,048.00 to the contract with Pascal and Ludwig Engineers. There is no time extension associated with this change order. 90): APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 TO SEISMIC RETROFIT AT PLANT NO. 2. JOB NO. P2-53-1. Job No. P2-53-1, Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, provides structural modifications and additions to Headworks B and C at Treatment Plant No. 2 to minimize -13- June 8, 1994 damage that would occur to these facilities from a major earthquake (Plant No. 2 is located on the Newport-Inglewood fault). This $1.4 million project was designed by Dames and Moore, and the construction contract was awarded in October 1993 to Amelco Construction. This change order involves four items of added work and one item of deleted work for a net addition of$29,260.00 to the original contract amount. Item 1, in the amount of$25,429.00, is for the relocation of existing conduit and cable that provides power to the Main Sewage Pump Nos. 2 and 4, and the relocation of a two-inch utility air pipe. These existing conduits and pipe conflict with the construction (under this contract) of a proposed column located in Headworks C. Design drawings incorrectly indicated that these conduits penetrated an adjacent wall and only required sleeves for the wall penetrations. However, because of the interference of the column, relocation of the pipe and conduits was necessary. Item 2, a credit in the amount of$2,495.00, deletes the removal of existing paint at the underside of the Headworks B metal roof deck and the costs for repainting. The existing paint was tested after this contract was awarded and found to contain excess lead, which requires special removal and handling procedures. The presence of excess lead was not known at the time that the contract documents were prepared. This work does not prevent completion of any other work required under this contract. This work activity will be combined with similar work items within the treatment plants and accomplished on a future contract. Item 3, in the amount of$1,628.00, is for repair of two existing electrical conduits. One of the existing conduits provides power to an existing influent flowmeter and the other conduit provides power to a fresh air supply fan. The influent flowmeter conduit, whose exact location within the concrete wall was unknown and therefore could not be shown precisely on the contract documents, was damaged during the concrete drilling for reinforcement dowels. The air supply electrical conduit was previously damaged by others and wire could not be pulled through it. Item 4, in the amount of$1,553.00, is for revising the seismic retrofit of existing columns shown in the contract drawings. Reinforcing steel in the existing columns interfered with drilling for new dowels, as shown on the contract drawings, because the reinforcing steel locations were impossible to determine. The dowel location and associated added reinforcing steel was changed to allow drilling. Item 5, in the amount of$3,145.00, is for removing existing guard posts, relocating an existing handrail, modifying two existing ladders, and removing a portion of an existing concrete wall, and rerouting existing pipe. These items were not shown on the contract drawings and conflicted with the construction of a wall buttress. These conflicts were not recognized by the designer at the time the contract documents were prepared. -14- June 8, 1994 Except for Item 1 and the removal of a portion of a wall under Item 5, the above items would have been included in the original design if discovered or known in the design phase. Item 1 is a design error that does not involve rework, but the wall under Item 5 does involve rework. Staff will seek reimbursement from the designer for the added costs. The original contract amount for this project was $1,377,000.00. The project is nearly complete. The net amount of change orders to date is $32,696.00, representing a net increase of 2.37% above the original contract amount. Staff recommends approval of Change Order No. 3 for the addition of $29,260.00 to the contract with Amelco Construction. There is a 3 calendar-day time extension associated with this change order (liquidated damages are $500.00 per day). 9(k): APPROVE ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CH2M HILL RE EXPANSION OF EXISTING COMPUTERIZED MONITORING AND CONTROL SYSTEMS AT PLANTS 1 AND 2. JOB NO. J-31. In April 1993, the Directors authorized a professional services contract with CH2M Hill which provides for the tie-in of approximately 30 process control computers to our central monitoring system, and replacement of our Ocean Outfall Booster Station control system. In December 1993, the Directors approved Addendum No. 1 to the agreement providing for a review of the existing computerized monitoring system, currently being installed by HSQ Technology Company under Jobs Nos. J-23-2 and 132-44, to evaluate compliance with specifications and to prepare a plan for the eventual evolution of the computer system from plant monitoring only, to plant automation (monitoring and control). The Addendum No. 1 report has been previously submitted to the Directors. The original April 1993 agreement included a contract completion date of June 1994. Addendum No. 1 added considerable work to the contract but did not change the completion date. Because of the delay associated with Addendum No. 1, and the changes in the overall work plan caused by the findings of inadequacy of the HSQ-furnished system to meet our short-term and long-term monitoring and control needs, the consultant's originally assigned design work cannot be completed by June 1994. The reports prepared as a result of Addendum No. 1 did make several recommendations to upgrade the system's performance and capabilities, which are under review by the Special Selection Committee Re Computers. These changes include development of standardization for the programmable logic controller software, hardware and a new architecture for interfacing with the new central system. If these -15- June 8, 1994 changes are recommended by the Districts' Computer Committee, they will be reported separately to the Boards for consideration at a later date. If approved by the Directors, it is likely that the CH2M Hill Professional Services Agreement may be nearly doubled in a third addendum, based on the findings of the CH21M Hill report completed under Addendum No. 1. This third addendum would accommodate the integration, modernization and upgrades to many of the unit process instrumentation systems into the plant's central computer systems as recommended by CH2M Hill. Our Operations, Maintenance and Engineering staff have identified many of these systems as needing improvements. Portions of the existing unit processes now have only local monitoring and control capabilities and/or depend on instrumentation systems that require high maintenance due to their age and are, therefore, increasingly unreliable. The recommended action is consideration of a resolution to approve Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with CH2M Hill for Expansion of Existing Computerized Monitoring and Control Systems at Plants 1 and 2, Job No. J-31, which deletes the completion date of June 1994 and does not reestablish a new completion date because Districts' staff and CH2M Hill conclude that the planning and design efforts have an uncertain rate of completion because of the complexity of the work ahead. There is no change in the maximum authorized compensation of $742,148.00 nor the billing rates of CH21M Hill professional and technical staff doing the work. 9(I): DENY CLAIMS OF RICHARD HOLM, LACEY MILLER, GEORGIANNE MILLER. ANDY PATTERSON, JACKIE VENEZIO (PATTERSON) RE FATAL ACCIDENT ON MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS AT PLANT NO. 2. JOB NO. P2-49. Enclosed with the supporting agenda material is a memorandum from the General Counsel recommending that the above claim be routinely received, filed and denied. 9(m): GENERAL AUTHORIZATION FOR ATTENDANCE OF PERSONNEL AND DIRECTORS AT TRAINING PROGRAMS, LEGISLATIVE, REGULATORY AND OTHER MEETINGS AND FUNCTIONS IN 1994-95. On an annual basis, the General Manager is routinely authorized to designate members of the Board and/or staff to attend training programs, legislative, regulatory and other meetings and functions, conferences, etc., which he believes will be of value to the Districts. Such attendance is in accordance with existing Districts' travel and expense reimbursement policies (the maximum per diem for meals and incidentals is $40/day) and the approved annual budget. It is recommended that this authorization be renewed for 1994-95. Included in the 1994-95 budget is the amount of$250,000 for training, meetings and travel. -16- June 8, 1994 The budget amount includes funds for staff training for treatment plant and electrical, mechanical, instrumentation and other systems; wastewater treatment and laboratory work; computerized systems; supervisory and management training; attendance and participation in state and federal legislative and regulatory proceedings; participation in various wastewater management-related groups; Board committee meeting expenses, and other related expenses. Last year the Directors reviewed their policy and amended it to include a quarterly review of expenses by the Fiscal Policy Committee. The new policy has been followed and the recommended action for 1994 is consistent with that policy. DISTRICT 2 9(n): APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH COUNTY OF ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PROTECTIVE STRUCTURES FOR TWO SEWER LINE CROSSINGS UNDER THE SANTA ANA RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF KATELLA AND AT THE GARDEN GROVE FREEWAY. The Orange County Flood Control District and the Army Corps of Engineers entered into a local cooperative agreement for the construction of the Santa Ana River Mainstream Project. This construction, in part, consists of grading and placing riprap on the slopes of the Santa Ana River from the Riverview Golf Course to Glassell Street. The Districts own, operate and maintain a 24-inch diameter VCP sewer line located near the Garden Grove Freeway, and a 66-inch diameter RCP sewer line located near Katella. These sewer lines cross under the Santa Ana River from east to west. The work being performed on the slopes of the river places these lines in danger and they will require special protection. That protection consists of a 10-inch thick reinforced concrete slab placed over the sewer lines on the east and west side at the toe of the river levee slope. This will keep any overburden from the riprap from damaging the sewer lines. OCFCD has agreed to include the coordination and placement of the concrete protection slabs with the Corps of Engineers in the Mainstem Project contract. The cost would be an estimated maximum of$11,000.00 which includes 10% for inspection and administration costs. A deposit for the work is required in the amount of $11.000.00. Similar cooperative agreements between the Districts and OCFCD over the last ten years have been very successful. Staff therefore requests authorization to execute an agreement with the Orange County Flood Control District for the placement of protection slabs over Olive -17- June 8, 1994 Subtrunk-Santa Ana River Crossing, Contract No. 2-5R-1, and Santa Ana River Interceptor, from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Contract No. 2-14-1, for a total amount not to exceed$11,000.00. DISTRICT 3 9(o): APPROVE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE AND AUTHORIZE SELECTION COMMITTEE TO NEGOTIATE ADDENDUM NO, 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DGA CONSULTANTS, INC RE MAGNOLIA TRUNK SEWER REHABILITATION, CONTRACT NO. 3-35R AND SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD INTERCEPTOR SEWER MANHOLE REHABILITATION, BETWEEN WESTMINSTER BOULEVARD AND 405 FREEWAY, CONTRACT NO. 3-11 R. The Magnolia Trunk Sewer, located between Orangethorpe Avenue and Ellis Avenue in Magnolia Street and Bushard Street, was constructed circa 1951, under the jurisdiction of the Joint Outfall Sewer Organization, the predecessor authority to the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. The sewer line consists of approximately 19,000 feet of 39-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and 44,000 feet of reinforced concrete pipe, varying in size from 39 to 78 inches. The original contract included the construction of 64 manholes. Since that time, six additional manholes have been constructed under separate contracts. Staff has investigated the condition of this sewer by videotaping the entire Magnolia Trunk Sewer between Orangethorpe and Ellis Avenues and conducting a comprehensive manhole survey and found that the 40-year old manholes have deteriorated and are in need of repair. Staff also surveyed the condition of nine manholes along the Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor between the Seal Beach Pump Station, located at Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster Boulevard and the 405 Freeway and found these manholes also in need of repair. In January 1991, the Directors authorized the Selection Committee to solicit proposals and negotiate a professional services agreement for the preparation of plans and specifications for the Rehabilitation of the Magnolia Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 3-35R, and for the Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation, Contract No. 3-11 R. In February 1992, the Directors approved a Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc. for preparation of plans and specifications for said projects. -18- June 8, 1994 (1) Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Garden Grove Following the initiation of design for the rehabilitation of manholes for said projects, the Districts' Maintenance Department requested that all the existing shaft- and vault-type manholes be replaced with the current standard of large diameter shaft-type manholes, which we use in new construction. The original intent was to replace only those manholes that had deteriorated beyond rehabilitation. This would have amounted to approximately one-fourth of the manholes and reduced the overall project cost. However, the large diameter shaft-type replacement manholes allow for easier communication, removal and work space for maintenance employees, which results in a safer work environment. In addition, we expect a longer service life by replacing rather than rehabilitating the manholes. The design consultants agreed to the design revisions at no additional costs providing a time extension was granted to make said revisions. This design change will provide added serviceability of the trunk line in the future, but due to the extended time required for the redesign of the project, the City of Garden Grove's own schedule for their Magnolia Street Storm Drain and Street Improvements Project has now overtaken the Districts' construction schedule. The City, naturally, is interested in our avoiding new construction in Magnolia Street months after repaving it. For this reason, the City has agreed to incorporate the rehabilitation of the two manholes within the limits of the City's project into the City's contract. The condition of the two manholes is in such a state that total replacement is required soon. The City's policy to not allow excavations of resurfaced streets for a period of five years, would delay the replacement too long and risk possible failure of the manholes. A reimbursement agreement has been drafted by the Districts' General Counsel for an estimated cost for demolition and replacement of the two manholes of $100,000.00. Staff recommends approval of the Reimbursement Agreement. (2) Addendum No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc. During the final design of the manholes for inclusion in the City of Garden Grove's contract, it was determined that many utilities have been constructed over the vault sections of the existing manholes along the entire length of Magnolia Trunk Sewer. The replacement of seventy shaft and vault manholes with large diameter shafts will require that these utilities to be relocated or adjustments made to the final location and configuration of the new manholes. Potholing of utilities adjacent to, or crossing, the vault structures is necessary to minimize change orders and delays in construction. The work required is the preparation of pothole plans with traffic control for twenty-nine of the seventy -19- June 8, 1994 manholes and the permitting of the plans through the Cities of Fullerton, Garden Grove, Anaheim, Westminster, Stanton, and Fountain Valley. The final, permitted plans and specifications will be submitted to the Directors for approval and authorization prior to advertising the contract for bid. Staff recommends that the Selection Committee be authorized to negotiate Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc. for the above described additional work. (Staff anticipates a cost of approximately $20,000.) Following the Selection Committee's negotiations, the proposed addendum will be presented to the District No. 3 Board for consideration. DISTRICTS 5 AND 6 9(p): APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 TO IMPROVEMENTS TO BITTER POINT AND ROCKY POINT PUMP STATIONS. CONTRACT NO. 5-32, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BAY BRIDGE PUMP STATION, CONTRACT NO. 5-33. Improvements to Bitter Point and Rocky Point Pump Stations, Contract No. 5-32, and Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, designed by Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, are being constructed by Uhler, Inc. This $1.77 million project within the City of Newport Beach includes new piping, pumps, motors, drives, seismic strengthening, and architectural improvements. Change Order No. 2 is a net addition of$35,460.00 to the contract for three items of added work and one item of deleted work. Item 1, in the amount of$8,545.00, is for a new electrical transformer concrete pad including a precast concrete vault and ductbank added because of changed conditions. Southern California Edison had determined after the project was designed that their existing transformer was not of adequate size and therefore they provided the transformer, but the Districts had to provide its location. Item 2, in the amount of$16,151.00, was for several architectural changes covering mansard framing (two slopes on each side) on the pump station roof from being painted to a covering of stucco to match the remainder of the building. Also included is the addition of skylight gutters and redwood fascia. Item 3, in the amount of$12,342.00, was for the relocation of seven electrical conduits and an air duct because the height of two new 250 HP electric motors was greater than designs had anticipated. The increased heights interfered with the conduits and air duct. Item 4, a credit of$1,578.00, is for modifications to the front entrance, which consists of moving the fence to the front property line adding approximately 1,400 square feet of additional work area for maintenance, and changing from the specified bominate concrete paving to the less costly asphalt concrete (which, incidently, should also cost less to maintain). -20- June 8, 1994 The added work described in Items 1 and 3 would have been included in the original design and bid if discovered or known in the design phase. They add no costs over and above what would have otherwise occurred had the original drawings included these features. Items 2 and 4 will actually save the Districts future maintenance costs and were electively added by the Districts. The original contract amount for this project was $1,756,757.00. This contract is nearly complete. If the Directors approve this change order in the amount of $35,460.00, the total cost of the change orders to date on this contract will be $37.505.00. This represents an increase of 0.02% over the original contract amount. Staff recommends approval of Change Order No. 2 for the addition of $35,460.00 to the contract with Uhler, Inc. There is no time extension associated with this change order. 9(q): APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO REPLACEMENT OF PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY GRAVITY SEWER, BETWEEN THE ARCHES (NEWPORT BOULEVARD) AND DOVER DRIVE, CONTRACT NO. 5-37-4. In May 1993, the Directors approved the plans and specifications for Contract No. 5-37-4, Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer, between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive in the City of Newport Beach. This sewer is used to transport wastewater collected jointly from the collection systems of the Cities of Newport Beach and the southern sections of Costa Mesa to Treatment Plant No. 2. The $1.7 million project consists of a new 30-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) gravity sewer from Dover Drive to the Rocky Point Pump Station (at the Balboa Bay Club) and the rehabilitation of the existing 24-inch V.C.P. gravity sewer from west of the Rocky Point Pump Station to Newport Boulevard. The rehabilitation consists of inserting a flexible polyethylene liner pipe into the existing pipe. The rehabilitation work also includes complete removal of existing manholes and construction of new manholes. In addition, there is a reimbursement agreement with the City of Newport Beach for construction of city laterals and manholes. Work along Pacific Coast Highway has consistently proven nettlesome because of the age and amount of conflicting utilities and the lack of good documentation. This project was designed by Boyle Engineering Corporation and awarded to Colich Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons in July 1993. Change Order No. 1 adds $68,117.50 and a 43-calendar-day time extension to the contract for seven items of added work. The changes are caused by undisclosed, interfering utility conditions that were unknown because of incomplete and inaccurate historical documents and drawings. -21- June 8, 1994 Item 1, in the amount of$22,500.00 and a 32 calendar-day time extension, represents costs incurred during the boring operations for the installation of a new 30- inch V.C.P. sewer line under the Pacific Coast Highway in front of the Balboa Bay Club. The boring method, proposed subsequent to initiation of the job to reduce impacts on traffic and local businesses, had to be abandoned due to the interferences of a massive undisclosed 46-inch steel encasement containing a 27-inch sewer line and an undisclosed oversized concrete thrust block on an existing force main. The sewer was built in 1953. The large thrust block on the 22-year-old force main probably was the result of an overpour by the original contractor in 1972. The as-builts did not show this enlarged thrust block. The contractor shared equally in the added costs resulting from the work by the open trench method, rather than the boring method. Item 2, in the amount of$18,276.00 and an 8-calendar-day time extension, is for the removal of an undisclosed concrete and steel pipe encasement of an abandoned 27-inch OCSD sewer line which was replaced with a new 30-inch line under the contract. The 27-inch line was known to exist, but the encasement was not known because of inaccurate "as-built" drawings. Item 3, in the amount of$9,852.00, is for exposing and modifying undisclosed 4-inch and 6-inch water mains inside the Balboa Bay Club in front of the Rocky Point Pump Station. Isolation valves were installed to minimize disruption of service to the property. Item 4, in the amount of$5,087.50, is work added at the direction of the Districts for the rehabilitation of a badly deteriorated manhole adjacent to the Rocky Point Pump Station. Item 5, in the amount of$5,970.00, is for the removal, at the city's request, of a portion of the thrust block on our force main that was also in contact with a City of Newport Beach water main. The purpose of this added work was to ensure that no damage could occur to the water main in the future during sudden changes in flow or pressures that cause movement and vibration of our force main. Item 6, in the amount of$6,069.00 and a 3-calendar-day time extension, is for the added work to remove reinforced concrete manholes and related concrete encasement rather than unencased brick manholes shown on the contract drawings. Item 7, in the amount of $363.00, is for the removal of a section of an undisclosed 10-inch abandoned water main. Work on the contract is nearly complete. If the Directors approve this change order, the total cost of the change orders to date on this contract will be $68,117.50. This represents an increase of 0.4% over the original contract amount. The changes above would have been included in the original design if discovered or known in the design phase. No additional costs were incurred over-and-above what would have been, had the conditions been shown in the original contract drawings. Staff recommends approval of Change Order No. 1 for an addition of $68,117.50 and 43 calendar days time extension to the contract with Colich Bros., dba -22- June 8, 1994 Colich & Sons. (The contract provides for assessment of liquidated damages in the amount of$1,000.00 per calendar day for the rehabilitation work from Rocky Point Pump Station to Newport Boulevard and $500.00 per calendar day for the overall project, including the new sewer from Rocky Point Pump Station to Dover Boulevard). DISTRICT 5 9(r): ACCEPTANCE OF SOUTH COAST TRUNK SEWER, PHASE 2. CONTRACT NO. 5-35-2. AS COMPLETE. In October 1992, the Directors approved the plans and specifications for Contract No. 5-35-2, which will serve the developing areas adjacent to Crystal Cove. This project was built at the same time that the County of Orange and CALTRANS were rebuilding, realigning and widening Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) through the Crystal Cove area. This contract was designed and scheduled to interface with and be completed ahead of the PCH widening job. This work was originally included in the County project as a deletable bid item, which bid at a cost of$2,644,389.40 (plus 6% County administrative cost). Staff felt this bid amount was too high and decided to delete the work from the County project and bid it separately. This rebid by the District was awarded in the amount of$1,667,559.00. The project was designed by The Keith Companies. This $1.7 million project includes the construction of a new double force main and a single gravity sewer line under a cost reimbursable construction funding agreement for facilities to serve the Down Coast area between Irvine Ranch Water District and District No. 5. Portions were constructed using "micro-tunneling" techniques where excavations were too deep along with the open trench-type operations. The contract is now complete. Mike Prlich & Sons has fulfilled all contractual obligations within the specified and extended time. Staff therefore, recommends adoption of the resolution attached with the agenda material, authorizing acceptance of the work as complete, execution of the Final Closeout Agreement and filing of the Notice of Completion as required. The final project cost is $1.841,975.46. DISTRICT 7 9(s): RECEIVE, FILE AND INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNEXATION NO 146—GUNCKEL AND MITCHELL ANNEXATION TO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7. The District has received a request from Thomas L. Gunckel, II and John M. Mitchell to annex 1.65 acres of territory in the vicinity north of the intersection of La Vereda Drive and Skyline Drive in the Lemon Heights area of unincorporated County -23- June 8, 1994 territory. This area has 123 acres left for annexation to the District. The property is currently inhabited with two single-family residences. This annexation is in accordance with the terms of the negotiated agreement with the County of Orange re AB 8 tax exchanges for annexing properties, under which the District no longer receives a percentage of the basic levy and, instead, collects a higher annexation fee. Staff recommends approval of the resolution attached to the supporting agenda material, authorizing initiation of proceedings for Annexation No. 146—Gunckel and Mitchell Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7. ALL DISTRICTS 11: NOMINATIONS FOR JOINT CHAIRMAN. As provided in the Joint Boards' Rules of Procedures, nominations for Joint Chairman are made at the regular June meeting and the election takes place at the July regular meeting. Nominations and election of the Vice Joint Chairman will be conducted at the July regular meeting. For new Director's information, we have included below an excerpt from the current Rules of Procedures for meetings relative to the election of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Joint Administrative Organization. "8. Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Joint Administrative Organization. "A Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Joint Administrative Organization shall be elected by a majority vote of the Districts at the regular meeting in July of each year. The nominations for Joint Chairman shall be made at the regular Board meeting in June each year, and the nominees may prepare a statement of not more than 100 words slating their qualifications for the office of Chairman. The statements shall be mailed to members of the Joint Boards of Directors with the agenda and other meeting material for the July regular meeting. 'The nominations for Vice Joint Chairman shall be made at the regular Board meeting in July each year and shall be made immediately following the election of the Joint Chairman. 'The Chairman and Vice Chairman shall serve at the pleasure of the majority of the Districts. In the event the office of Chairman becomes vacant due to resignation or retirement of the incumbent prior to the expiration of the regular term, the Vice Chairman shall automatically -24- June 8, 1994 succeed to the office of the Chairman and shall continue to serve through the remainder of the regular tens unless sooner removed by action of a majority of the Districts. In the event the office of Vice Chairman becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the regular tens, nominations and the election of a Director to serve in that capacity shall be conducted at the next regular Board meeting. The person so elected shall serve the balance of the regularly scheduled term unless sooner removed as a result of action by a majority of the Districts." 12: FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE NINE-MONTH PERIOD ENDING MARCH 31. 1994. Enclosed are the budgetary financial statements for the third-quarter of the fiscal year. The Joint Operating and Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Budget statements were reviewed by the Fiscal Policy Committee on May 18, 1994. If any Director has questions pertaining to the statements, please call Gary Streed, Director of Finance, at (714) 962-2411, extension 2500. 13: MINUTES AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE JOINT WORKS SELECTION COMMITTEE. The Joint Works Selection Committee met on May 25, 1994. Enclosed for the Directors are the draft minutes of the Committee's meeting, including recommendations for consideration by the Boards. 14: MINUTES AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FISCAL POLICY COMMITTEE. PERSONNEL COMMITTEE, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. AND EXECUTIVE SUBCOMMITTEE. The Executive Subcommittee met on May 11, 1994; the Fiscal Policy Committee on May 18, 1994; the Personnel Committee on May 19, 1994; and the Executive and Fiscal Policy Committees met jointly on May 25, 1994. Enclosed for the Directors are the draft minutes of their respective meetings including recommendations for consideration by the Boards. Also included are recommendations from the Special Selection Committee re Computers that are being submitted through the Executive Committee. The draft minutes of the Computer Committee April 28, 1994 meeting were received and filed by the Boards at the May 11, 1994 Board meeting. -25- June 8, 1994 15: PAYMENT OF CLAIMS AFTER JUNE 30, 1994. The individual District's 1994-95 budgets will not be adopted until the July Joint Board Meeting and, therefore, it is necessary to have Board authorization for the payment of claims from July 1 to the date of adoption of next year's budgets. It is recommended that this routine action, taken annually, be approved as set forth on the agenda listing. 16: RECEIVE AND FILE MINUTES AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONSERVATION. RECYCLE AND REUSE COMMITTEE. The Conservation, Recycle and Reuse Committee met on May 26, 1994. Enclosed for the Directors are the draft minutes of their meeting including recommendations for consideration by the Boards. 17: APPROVE AWARD OF MISCELLANEOUS ARCHITECTURAL AND TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS AT PLANT NO 1 JOB NO P1-48 MISCELLANEOUS WORK FROM JOB NO. P2-47-2 AND FLARE IMPROVEMENTS AT PLANT NO. 2. JOB NO. P2-56: AND SEISMIC RETROFIT OF STRUCTURES AT TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2 JOB NO P2-53-2. In December 1993, the Directors approved the plans and specifications for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work from Job No. P2-47-2 and Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-53-2. This project includes several jobs designed by both consultants and staff, combined to reduce administrative costs as well as attract lower combined bids through economies of scale. In March, the Directors considered the award of this project and directed staff to further evaluate the safely activities and performance of the low bidder. The first project, Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48, combines miscellaneous projects designed by staff with items of work designed by Lee and Ro Consulting Engineers, Inc., under Job No. P1-40-2. Work items from Job No. P1-40-2 include handrail systems, demolition of old gas Flare bases at Plant No. 1, and modifications to existing gates on Primary Clarifier Nos. 6 through 15 to use portable motorized gate operators. Miscellaneous projects designed by staff and included in Job No. Pl-48 are as follows: Revisions to Building H to provide work areas for previously assigned staff and to construct an air-gun paint booth. -26- June 8, 1994 ° Construct a wheelchair lift in Building 5 as part of an overall effort to allow handicapped access to all personnel-occupied buildings, to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Construct an access ladder and railing system for safe roof access to the Central Power Generation facility at Plant No. 1. Replace hatches for the overflow boxes on Digesters 12, 14, 15, and 16 because the existing hatches are too heavy to lift safely. ° Construct soundproofing modifications to offices in the Administration and Control Center Buildings. ° Modify the Primary Polymer facility to switch the polymer feed system from reclaimed water to City water to improve chemical usage efficiency. Repaint the flares at Plant No. 1 to improve their appearance and to limit corrosion. The second job in this contract package is Job No. P2-56. This project includes work items designed by Lee and Ro from the previously approved Job No. P2-47-2, as follows: An improved hand-rail system for Plant No. 2 required for safety purposes. ° Removal of old gas compressors and conversion of the Compressor Building for secured electric cart parking. ° Install sludge piping in the dewatering facility, to improve operation of the system. ° Reroute hot water supply and return lines at Digesters F and G, and install piping and valving for isolation of either digester to improve operational flexibility. Modify the bulkhead storage rack at the Ocean Ouffall Booster Pump Station pit to adequately store them for routine maintenance and emergency use. Work incorporated into Job No. P2-56 by staff includes the repainting of the flares at Plant No. 2 to improve their appearance and to limit corrosion. -27- June 8, 1994 The third job included in this contract is Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2. Plant No. 2 is located on the Newport- Inglewood Fault. This project, designed by Holmes and Narver, provides earthquake strengthening to the Plant Water Pump Station Building and Primary Power Building A. This will limit the degree of damage that would be encountered in the event of an earthquake. At the March meeting, the Directors expressed concern with both the safety policies of the Districts and those of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, the low bidder for this contract. Final action regarding the consideration of the award of the contract was continued for sixty days to provide staff with time to report back to the Directors on the Districts' Construction Safety Program and to await Cal-OSHA findings with respect to the February 1, 1994 accident. After the March meeting, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers agreed to extend the time period of their bid for sixty days. At the May 11, 1994 Joint Board meeting, the matter was further discussed by the Boards and continued until June 8, 1994 because the report by Cal-OSHA had not been issued. Staff had been awaiting the report, which Cal-OSHA had originally expected to complete in March, to evaluate it and discuss, as appropriate, its findings in our staff report. Pascal & Ludwig Engineers subsequently agreed to extend their bid until the June 8, 1994 Board meeting. On May 13, 1994, Cal-OSHA served the Districts four citations pertaining to the February 1, 1994 accident. Also on May 13, 1994, the Districts' General Counsel provided the Board members with a copy of an analysis of the accident relative to Cal- OSHA's draft citation and their related investigation in a memorandum dated May 12, 1994, a copy of which is included with the Directors' supporting material for Agenda Item 17. In a letter dated May 24, 1994, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers provided the Districts with a summary of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers safety program. It is included with the Directors' supporting material for Agenda Item 17. Staff has completed a report dated June 2, 1994 entitled, "Description of the Districts' Construction Safety Program". It provides a summary of the major elements of the Districts' construction safety program as it existed on February 1, 1994, and as it has now evolved. A copy of this Staff Report is also included with the Directors' supporting material for Agenda Item 17. Also enclosed with the Directors' supporting material for Agenda Item 17 is a memorandum from the General Counsel regarding the issues pertaining to the award of this project. -28- June 8, 1994 The Districts' construction management staff has found, based on the performance of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers in the last year and a half on the four jabs they have been awarded, that the company conducts its work satisfactorily and safely, notwithstanding the tragic February accident. Pascal & Ludwig Engineers cooperation and workmanship have been consistently good. The actions before the Boards are to consider either: (a) Award of the contract to the low bidder, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers in the total amount of$1,003,899.00; or, (b) Reject all bids and authorize rebidding the project; or, (c) Reject the bid of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers as a non-responsible contractor and set the matter for hearing with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for the July 13, 1994 meeting of the Joint Boards. Staff recommends award of the contract to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, for their low bid amount of$1,003.899.00. The engineer's estimate was $1.000,000 for Job No. P1-48, $200,000 for Job No. P2-56 and $150,000 for Job No. P2-53-2, for a total of $1,350,000. 18 : AGENDA FOR CLOSED SESSION. From time to time it is necessary for the Boards to convene in closed session to consider purchase and sale of real property, potential or pending litigation, personnel matters or other matters which are authorized by law to be discussed and acted upon in a session that is closed to the public. All items to be discussed at this meeting are listed under Agenda Item No. 18 unless a matter has arisen subsequent to posting the agenda. 19: AUTHORIZING EMPLOYMENT OF R. CRAIG SCOTT & ASSOCIATES FOR SPECIALIZED LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LEGAL SERVICES. As the Boards are aware, the Districts have been recently faced with several personnel issues. Directors have advised staff of the need to obtain specialized legal services to assist us on labor and employment law matters. Accordingly, staff has engaged the firm of R. Craig Scott & Associates for initial work pursuant to staffs procurement authority which is $25,000. At this time it is unclear what the full extent of the required legal services will entail. Therefore, in order to ensure that the needed legal services can proceed beyond staffs authority in an uninterrupted manner, it is recommended that the Boards -29- June 8, 1994 authorize the General Manager to execute a letter agreement with R. Craig Scott& Associates for specialized labor and employment legal services, and authorizing payment for said services based on the firm's discounted hourly rates in effect at the time said services are performed. The current hourly rates are: Legal Assistant—$115.00; Associate—$125.00; Litigation Partner—$175.00; and Principal—$225.00. DISTRICT 2 36: APPROVAL OF LICENSE AGREEMENTS. ADDENDUM NO, 1 TO THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. AND AWARD REHABILITATION OF THE CYPRESS AVENUE SUBTRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-9-R1. The Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9, was completed in February 1961 from Yorba Linda Boulevard to Imperial Highway, following the natural drainage pattern of the terrain in the area. The pipe, installed in the low-lying area of the drainage course, consists of an 18-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) in the lower reach and a 15-inch VCP in the upper reach. The original plans show little development adjacent to the pipe at that time. Subsequent fill from encroaching development in lower-lying areas of the drainage course has caused an overburden on the existing pipe and, as a result, the existing Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer is cracked and damaged. The line has required emergency repairs in two locations and current maintenance capabilities are limited by both development and lack of access easements in other areas. In October 1990, the Directors authorized Willdan Associates to prepare a project report to review the status of the line and make recommendations for its rehabilitation, replacement or relocation. The report recommended that the District replace the existing 18-inch VCP with a new 21-inch VCP sewer in Associated Road from Yorba Linda Boulevard to Bastanchury Road, and within Bastanchury Road from Associated Road to the Parkside Apartments. The report also recommended relocating the existing 18-inch sewer within the apartment complex to relieve the excessive surcharge conditions and to connect to the District's existing 18-inch relief sewer constructed under the Orange Freeway per Contract No. 2-9-1. The Directors approved an agreement in September 1992 with the owners of the Parkside Apartment Complex for a free easement and a temporary construction easement through the apartment complex, provided the District initiates construction before September 1994. The Directors approved a Professional Services Agreement with Church Engineering in August 1992 for the design of the Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1. -30- June 8, 1994 Between the Orange Freeway and Rolling Hills Drive, the line was originally constructed adjacent to the natural water course. Fill for development was placed on the line about twenty-five years ago causing detrimental effects to the sewer. The Willdan Associates Project Report recommended rehabilitation of the line by inserting a interior line or replacement of the 15-inch VCP in a new alignment which would require easements from the City of Fullerton. During design of the rehabilitation project, it was discovered that the fill placed over the existing pipe was continuing to settle within Gilman Park, eliminating any guarantee that rehabilitation would last for the full design life. For this reason anew alignment was chosen through the park. The new alignment requires tunneling through most of the park as a mitigation measure to protect old growth trees and the stream bed in the park. The line in the Imperial Golf Course between Rolling Hills Drive and Imperial Highway will be relocated with future development. The Rolling Hills Subtrunk Sewer had been scheduled for replacement in accordance with the 1989 Master Plan. However, this design combines flows from the Rolling Hills Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-11-1, into the proposed Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer at the intersection of Associated Road and Bastanchury Road to the intersection of Associated Road and Yorba Linda Boulevard. Considerable cost savings for design and construction as well as minimizing public inconvenience associated with construction activities are realized by combining these projects. (a) and (b) Approve License Agreements A portion of the proposed alignment is within an existing easement between two houses at 2533 and 2523 Deerpark Drive (owned by Robert A. Jackson and Donald J. Ornellas, respectively). The work between the houses will be tunneled to mitigate disturbance to the existing improvements and prevent possible settlement of the house foundations. The homeowners have agreed to license agreements allowing the Districts' Contractor to utilize an existing driveway and additional work areas outside the existing easement. The agreements serve to expedite construction and reduce the inconvenience to the residents. There is no cost to the Districts other than that borne by the contractor to restore the property to a satisfactory condition following the construction work. (c) Approve Addendum No. 1 About 1,100 linear feet of the sewer through the Parkside Apartments will be ductile iron pipe (DIP). However, it has recently come to the Districts' attention that most ductile iron pipe suppliers will no longer supply ductile iron pipe with a polyethylene interior liner, the Districts' current standard. The liner is installed to protect the ductile iron pipe from corrosion due to sewer gases. The suppliers cite their reason as insurance problems due to failures with this liner in prior applications. The end result is that the polyethylene liner is supplied by only one manufacturer and has become a -31- June 8, 1994 propriety specification. Nevertheless, the Districts have not experienced failures with this liner and, to date, have had only favorable results from the specification of this pipe liner to prevent corrosion and wish to use protected ductile iron pipe. The Districts' staff has performed a review of interior pipe lining materials and have prepared specifications for three materials that should provide adequate protection of the ductile iron pipe and allow for competitive bidding. The materials specified are polyurethane, fusion bonded epoxy, and ceramic epoxy and are incorporated into Addendum No. 1. Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications also makes miscellaneous modifications and technical clarifications to the plans and specifications. (d) Award Contrail On April 13, 1994, the Directors approved plans and specifications for the Rehabilitation of the Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1. On May 10, 1994, four bids were received for said contract. The bids ranged from a high of$2,696,235.00, to a low of$2,482,762.00, submitted by Colich & Sons. A complete bid tabulation is attached to the supporting agenda material. The engineer's estimate of$1,500,000 was provided to the Districts by the design consultants as part of their contract and was not double-checked by the Districts' Project Manager. Following receipt of bids, the estimate was compared to other bids recently received for trunk sewer projects. The bids received are consistent with the unit cost bids recently received from similar projects. Staff therefore concludes that the bids received are reflective of the costs for this project. Staff recommends approval of the License Agreements, Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications, and award of a contract to Colich & Sons of Gardena, California, the apparent low bidder, for their low bid of$2,482,762.00. DISTRICT 5 38, APPEAL OF CAPITAL FACILITIES CONNECTION CHARGES BY DAHN CORPORATION. District 5's Uniform Ordinance for Wastewater Discharge Regulations (Ordinance) provides for payment of a capital facilities connection charge for new development. The charge is currently $2,350 for a residential unit and $470/1000 square feet for non-residential property, with a minimum $2,350 charge. The Dahn Corporation is proposing a self-storage project in the City of Newport Beach in the vicinity of MacArthur and Bison. The project is two buildings -32- June 8, 1994 totalling approximately 42,000 square feet, which calculates to $20,000 for the capital facilities connection charge. The developer objects to the charge and has requested that the Districts reduce the fee because there is no sewer service demand from the self-storage areas. One building will have a residence and office/public restroom and a public restroom facility. Under the Uniform Building Code, if the residence and office/public restroom are separated by a two-hour fire wall, they can be considered separate buildings. Dahn has, therefore, proposed that they pay two minimum $2,350 charges for these two facilities, or a total of$4,700. Staff is understanding of Dahn's argument, but the Ordinance is structured and administered to collect on a square-footage basis. Other agencies collect on other bases, such as fixture units. A study and restructuring of our connection fee program would be required to systematically approach this issue. Today, the ordinance does not allow for flexibility to adjust the charge and, accordingly, Dahn is appealing to the Board of Directors. According to the Ordinance, a permit applicant may file an appeal to the Board regarding a District action relating to fiscal issues such as the imposition and collection of a connection charge. Payment of disputed charges is still required during review of any appeal. -33- e RE : AGENDA ITEM NO. 12 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 01 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ip Elul AVENUE 60.WX 8127 June 8, 1994 r AUM VALLEY,GLIM MA 9072&8127 U1412E22411 Joint Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 & 14 of Orange County, California Subject: Summary Financial Report for Nine Months Ended March 31, 1994 Transmitted herewith is the Summary Financial Report for nine months ended March 31, 1994. The statements summarize the fiscal activities of the joint operations and the individual Districts through three quarters of the 1993-94 fiscal year and the status of each with respect to the approved budgets. The combined 1993-94 budget for all Districts is $635.9 million, of which approximately 33% 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 below. TABLET COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY (MILLIONS OF DOLLARS) Increase 1993-94 REQUIREMENTS 19924 3• 1993-94' Decease %of Budoet JOINT TREATMENT WORKS 0,M&R E 48.6 E 49.6 E 1.0 7.8% COLLECTION SYSTEM&OTHER DISTRICT 0,M&R 11.3 12.6 1.3 2.0% TREATMENT PLANT CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS 80.6 70.0 (10.6) 11.0% DISTRICT SEWER CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS 29.4 27.4 (2.0) 4.3% DEBT ISSUE&SERVICE(G.O.&C.O.P.) 39.0 41 4 24 695% SUB-TOTAL E208.9 $MIO E (7.9) 316% CONSTRUCTION RESERVES $110.1 $110.0 E (.1) 17.3% OTHER RESERVES 219.2 324.9 1D5.7 511% SUB-TOTAL $329.3 E434.9 E705.6 68.4% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS E538.2 E6M 9 E R7 7 100.0% FUNDING CARRY-OVER E 95.4 E 73.3 E(22.1) 11.5% APPROPRIATED RESERVES 208.8 347.0 138.2 54.6% SUB-TOTAL 3M.2 $420.3 $116.1 66.1% TAX ALLOCATION E 3C2 E 31.9 E (2.3) 5.0% FEES" 77.5 89.6 12.1 14.1% BORROWING 96.5 60.0 (38.5) 9.4% INTEREST&OTHER 23.8 34.1 10.3 5_4% SUB-TOTAL E234.0 $915.6 E 1r 8.41 33.9% TOTAL FUNDING $538.2 E635.9 E 97.7 100.0% 'ADJUSTED FOR INTER-DISTRICT TRANSACTIONS. 1992-93 USER FEES WERE INCREASED$9.6 MILLION TO RECOVER PROPERTY TAXES CONFISCATED BY THE STATE SUBSEQUENT TO BUDGET ADOPTION, THE BUDGETS WERE NOT REVISED. 0 G Summary Financial Report t Page 2 June 8, 1994 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 1993-94 which were accrued in 1992-93 are not reflected in the year-to-date balances. CASH AND INVESTMENTS Earned interest generated by our continuing program of investing reserve funds (primarily capital funds accumulated for construction of required sewerage facilities) is $22.1 million through three quarters of the year. As of March 31,1994, 90% of our funds were invested with the County Treasurer's commingled investment program. The remaining 10% of funds, representing the debt service reserves for the 1990-92 Series B and C COP issues and the unspent proceeds of the 1990-92 Series C issues, is in a separate special bond fund at the County Treasurers or a guaranteed investment contract, both controlled by the trustees for each issue. JOINT OPERATING FUND This fund accounts for operations, maintenance, and administrative activities relative to the Districts'jointyowned treatment and disposal facilities. The JO expenditures along with the self-funded insurance program costs are monitored by the Fiscal Policy Committee and if some unexpected expenditures are experienced, they are reviewed by the Committee. Salaries and Wages -There are several authorized but unfilled positions and, thus, some minor payroll savings have been realized to date. Employees' Benefits - Includes Retirement, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Insurance, Group Medical Insurance and Uniforms. 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. Source Control Division charges to respective Districts are also included in these chargebacks. Gasoline. Oil & Fuel - Includes all fuel for motor pool. A large portion is recovered through our equipment billing system and included in revenue below. Summary Financial Report Page 3 June S, 1994 Insurance - Budget amount includes Board and staff out-of-county travel policy, employee fidelity, boiler, fire, earthquake and all risk insurance policies. Expense is in line with annual budget. Memberships - Includes the cost of membership in CASA, AMSA, SARFPA, WateReuse and other organizations. Annual membership costs are recorded when paid. Office Expense -This account includes various types of office supplies, postage, stationery, computer supplies 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 ferrous chloride. 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 suede emissions. The cost of chlorine increased significantly with the bids in the first quarter. Chemical Coagulants - Expenditures for this item are required to dewater our sludges prior to disposal to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements. 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 payment for grit removal and disposal at the BKK landfill and payment for removal and off-site beneficial reuse of biosolids or sludge. Professional Services - Primarily consists of General Counsel's fees, other legal services, audit fees, and miscellaneous consulting services. Printing and Publications - Includes all reproduction activities in-house and with outside services. Equipment Rental 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 cost allocation system for these charges. Summary Financial Report i Page 4 June 8, 1994 Repairs and Maintenance -This item includes parts and supplies for repair of plant facilities. Escalating costs continue to have an impact on this item. Generally, this account runs close to budget each year due to the unpredictability of major equipment failures. Research and Monitoring - Budget includes funds for the ocean monitoring contract required by our NPDES permit. Other projects include operational research and evaluation of processes to develop optimum operating parameters, and also include the Districts' annual share of participation in the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. Travel, Meetings 8 Training - Major items are authorized by specific Board actions. Expanding activities of regulatory agencies and the Clean Water Act reauthorization have required additional staff and Board travel. Utilities -The major item in the Utilities Expense Account is for natural gas purchased for central power generation. Total utilities expenses are in line with the budget estimates and are down $2,501,419 from last year. Other Expenses- For items not chargeable elsewhere such as freight, safety supplies, grounds maintenance supplies, etc. Prior Years 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 or payment of charges which could not be accrued at year end. Generally, all expenses to this account are recorded in the first quarter. Allocation to Districts 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 CORK 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 35% (excluding reserves) of each Districts' budget requirements for 1993-94. Through nine months, $26.7 million was expended on joint works treatment and disposal facilities improvement and expansion projects. The pro-rata share of joint works improvements and expansion costs is reflected in the financial statements of the respective Districts. INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS -The statements reflect the accounting transactions for the nine Districts and include each respective Districts share of the Joint Operating Fund and the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund. Summary Financial Report Page 5 June 8, 1994 Taxes: Tax revenue is allocated to two separate accounts: Tax Allocation-This account represents the anticipated allocation of the Districts' pro- rate share of the maximum 1% basic property tax allowed under Proposition 13, subsequent to the 92-93 state tax shift. Receipts are in line with expectations. Tax Levy -This account represents tax funds necessary to make principal and interest payments on voter-approved outstanding general obligation bonds. In accordance with the Jarvis-Gann initiative, tax levies to satisfy these obligations are not restricted. Only District 11 has a 1993-94 tax levy for bond service. Federal and State Construction Grants - EPA and SWRCB have previously funded up to 87%% of treatment plant construction for approved projects. All outstanding grant funds have been received and no new grants or SRF loans are budgeted. Fees-All Districts now have an adopted, uniform sewer connection fee schedule. This account also reflects industrial waste user charges levied by seven of the nine Districts pursuant to the Uniform Industrial Waste Ordinance and the Revenue Program, and the user fees implemented in Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13. Annexation fee revenue is unpredictable and, thus, is not included in the budgets unless there is an existing agreement providing for payment of fees. Sale of Capacity Riahts -This account records income from sale of capacity rights to outside agencies such as SAWPA, including the capital replacement charge. SAWPA is billed in the fourth quarter each year. Other- Includes the annual joint facilities interdistrict 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. Share of Joint Works Construction - Represents each Districts share of joint treatment and disposal facilities expansion discussed above under Capital Outlay Revolving Fund (CORF), and the purchase of joint facilities interdistrict equity when appropriate. Bond Retirement and Interest Expense - Payment of principal and interest on outstanding general obligation bonds and certificates of participation of the respective Districts. Annual budgeted expense for all Districts is approximately$38 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). Summary Financial Report f Page 6 June 8, 1994 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. DD:GGS:Ip C:WP(JOC )V.RPf .W COUNTYSANITATIONDISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY SUMMARYJOINTOPERATINGN RRING CAPITAL FUND BUDGETREVIEW 9 MONTHS ENDED 3I31y84 APPROVED BUDGET YEAR-TO-DATE UNUPENDED YEAR-TO-DATE 1993414 EXPENDITURES BUDGET %EXPENDED SALARIES.WAGES&BENEFITS Salaries&Wages 30,053.00D 21,330,281 8.722,739 70.98% Payroll Benefits, 6,317.000 4,359,214 1.962.766 68.93% TOTAL PAYROLL 36.370.000 25,694,475 10.605.525 70.62% Lose: Chargeoule to Dists&CORF (10,200,000) (7,263.227) (2,938,T73) 71.21% NET JOINT OPERATING PAYROLL 26.170,000 18.421,248 7,748,752 70.39% MATERIALS SUPPLIES&SERVICES Gasoline.0il& Giosal 220,000 111.970 108,030 50.90% Insurance 1.165,000 878.326 286.674 75.39% Memberships 58,000 50.697 7,303 87.41% Office Expense 395,000 254,260 140.740 SL37% Chlorine&Odor Control 2,376,000 1,476,204 899.796 62.13% Chemical Coagulants 1,778,000 687,681 1,090,319 38.665A Other Operating Supplies 1.105,000 699,325 405,675 63.29% Contractual Services 6,702,000 4,529.065 2,172,935 67.58% Professional Services 909.000 427.713 476.287 47.31% Printing&Publication 345,000 212A42 132.558 61.56% Equipment Rental 235.000 146.274 88.726 62.24% Repair B Maintenance 3,870.000 2,277,079 1,592.121 58.86% Research&Monitoring 3.431.000 1.981,813 1.449.187 57.76% Trsvel,Meeting&Training 225.000 132,606 92,394 58.94% Uncollectible Accounts 10.000 (1,831) 11,831 -18.31% UUliffes 3,650.000 2,534,325 1.115.675 69.43% Other Expenses 930,000 595,781 334,219 64.06% Prior Years Expense 50.000 (79,260) 129,280 -158.56% Non Operating Expense 60,000 42,262 17.735 70.44% TOTAL MATERIALS&SERVICES 27,509.000 16,957,512 10.651,488 61.04% Lass: Allocation W Diets&CORF (600.000) (385,840) (214,160) 64.31% NET JOINT OPER MATERIALS B SER 28,909.000 16.571,672 10,337,328 81.68% TOTAL JOINT OPERATING EXPENSE 53.079,000 34,982.920 18,086,Ow 65.93% REVENUES Revenues (3,610,000) (2,805.149) (704,551) 79.92% Less: Allocation to mile&CORF 10.000 14.592 (4.592) 145.92% NET JOINT OPERATING REVENUES (3,500,1)(10) (2.7W.557) (709.443) 79.73% NET JOINT OPERATING EXPENSES 49,579,0gg 32,202,363 17,376.637 64.96% GALLONAGE DATA M.G.FLOW CHARGES DISTRICT BUDGET TO DATE BUDGET TO DATE 1 8,584 6.346 4.663,000 3,305.686 2 28,450 21.025 15,490,000 10.952,407 3 28.730 17.378 15,643,000 9.052,666 5 2,924 2,293 1.692.000 1.194.467 6 4.632 2.932 2,522,000 1,527,395 7 6,70 5.637 3.693.000 2.936,304 11 5,753 3,985 3,133.000 2,076.197 13 798 625 434.000 325,734 14 2.788 I.W6 1,518.00D 831,507 89,422 61.817 48,686.000 32.20.363 Count'SeNfeUan D/sblcf Na f Summery puartorty Flrmnplal Repoli B MmrMS EntladYJfN4 Budget Revlow 103-H Remaining Year4 ate Budget Year-to-Dale Budget %Expended Beginning Fund Balance%July 1 39,191,470 REVENUES: Tax Levy(Bond Fund(Q Only) 0 0 0 0.00% Tax AllocationWSubvontiens(Sham of l%) 2,03AM 1,280,271 749,722 0.07% Federal and Stale Construction Gmnls 0 0 0 0.00% Connection Fags 185,000 39,485 125,515 23.93% M.Fees 6,590,000 4,802.718 1,707,292 72.88% Sala of Capacity Rights 136,000 0 13g000 0.00% Intemel A Mise.Recelpb 2,008,000 1,784,153 223p47 88.85% Mar 1125,000 0 1,125,000 0.0% Total Revenues 12,OU,000 7,908b27 4,147,373 GASH% Total Revenue&Beginning Balances M,098,D9T QPENDITURES: She.of Joint Warkn TnnL Plant A Reserves 18,58d000 2,612,753 lS,980,20 1406% Dist lct Trunk Sower Canatr.A Reserves 403,000 46,657 356,343 IlSG% Band Retimmaroml lntmat Esponae 9,814.000 2,312,301 7,501,699 23.56% Sham of Joint WOrke Opomerlg Expenses 4,748,000 3,305,BB8 1.442,314 69.62% Provided W Relmbumement Agreements 0 0 0 O.DO% District Optimal,B Other Eap9ndibnes 651,000 4111 232,750 64.25% Total Expendlluma 34,198.000 8,693,647 26,602,363 25.4.1% Ending Fund Balances 35,402p50 FacillODa Expansion Balance Adjustments Tnneforts Balance MAKI 8Madame Fixed Aisela =194 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 1.16 SA Byer Rd.Trunk ModlRca6ons 663.631 45,730 709,361 240 Memory Lane IrderceptorI A 2 399,248 927 400175 SubTOMI %HZ8T9 46,BST 0 1,109,536 Sham of Join World 12,T26,795 2,612,753 (I,659,M) 7,680,571 Sub-Tot01 1;T26,T95 2,612,T53 f7,669,BTT) 7,680.01 COMPLETED PROPER".PLANT A EQUIP: Land and Property Rights 81.308 81.398 Collection Linea and Pump Sma. S,TM.133 5,TTg,133 Treatment Faclll0es 0 D Diamond Facilities 11.693 11,593 General Plant and Admin.Facil. 58241 58,241 Equity In Joint Treatment path. 56,930,184 (129,333) 7,658,BTT 64,459,808 Mor Asada At Cost Lass Alpert. 0 0 Total Property Plant B Equip. 76,660,203 2,630,O77 0 79,100,280 County Sanhatlon Ushict No.2 Summary Quarterly Financial Report 9 Months Ended"VS, • Budget Rovlow 1993-94 Remaining year-leData Budget Year-to4)ale Budget %Ea,mw Beginning Fund Balances,July 1 210,76D,071 REVENUES: Tax Levy lBorW panels)Only) 0 0 0 0.0014 Tax Allasallonal5ubventsns(Sham of l%) 9,580,000 8.410.701 3,140.209 67.06% Fadoral and State CgnstrutBon Brenta 0 0 0 0.00% Connection Fees 1.763,000 1,030,920 124.OR 5296% Other Fees 22.8R,000 18.488,531 8,169,409 7285% Sale of Capacity Rights 398.000 0 3911 0.0016 Interest B MISC.patches 8.319,000 e1707,9R 1,521.052 8I.T2% Other 0 0 0 0.0016 Total Revenues 42.me,DR 31.314.100 11"1.908 7342% Total Novo..&Baglnning Balances 242,074,1171 EXPENOrrURES: Share of Joint Works Treat Plant&Reserves 55,067,000 7.y87,500 48.179.500 13.91% District Trunk goner Conslr.&Revenues 2.162.000 06.631 2,075,469 4.00% Bond Retirement and Interest Expense 25,974,00D e,T21,228 19,282,724 25.88% Sham of Joint Works Dimmer,Expenses 15,724,000 10,052.4" 4,821.50 69.43% Provided for Reimbursement Agreements 0 0 0 0.00% District Operating&Other Expenditures 2,2A3,000 1,90,737 972.263 56.65% Total Expenditures 102,1M,oW 28,518,4R 75,301,R9 26.26% Ending Fund Belancas 21BAR,670 Facilities Expansion Balance Adjuehnmds Tranderlo Balance TIIAN, SAddNons Piano Assets 3M1194 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 2-1"R2 SARI Manhole 0 1.435 1,435 Foul Air Bypass@ SARI Master Meter 8.600 (8,636) 0 24.1 Lincoln Interceptor Serer 20 0 28 2-36 Senor Enta60mond for AT B SF Commuter Ball 108 2.940 3,048 2-S-2 Orange&011.Suatel 2,047 a04 Z931 2.30 Memory Lane not.l&2 2.035,191 a,T]S 2.039,010 2-32 gawps Trunk Line Diversion Gate&Monitoring Sys. 104 104 2-31 SARI Relief Ssvrer 62,784 771 63,535 243 Palm Ave.Pureness Agreement 31.517 i6,S2S 47p48 2-9Jtl Cypress Ave.Subtrunk Serer Rehab. 213,338 62,T24 MNo Mist Chile W Closed Work Orden 2.202 8,962 9.244 2.35 Euclid Trunk&Intercepter 570 133 TO3 Su4Total 2,3sl 86,01 (8,6881 2p34,450 Sharoof Jolnl Works 37,933,137 7.787.R0 (22.828,138) 22,092,499 Sub-Total 37,933,137 7,787.500 (22,828,130) 22,992,499 COMPLETED PROPERTY.PLANTS EOUIP: Land and Property Rights 517,694 517,694 Collection Lines and Pump Stan. 91,811,008 91,611.608 Treatment Facllltles 0 0 Disposal Faclll0os 33.172 33.122 General Plant and Admin.Fac1I. 200,649 8688 209,337 Equity In Joint Treatment Facll. 16111.4311.2913 (1,004,791) 22,828.138 188,261,643 Other Asses at Cast Less AmoM 0 0 Total Property Plant&Equip. 299,091,193 6,869,240 0 305,960,403 eeuery Steadman DLmacf No.3 Summary DYdmaNy Fleanchd Report 9 Mancha Faced"194 Budget Review x 1993.94 Remaining Yearto4ets Budget YeMto-0dte Budget %Expended Beginning Fund Balances,July 1 203,897,888 REVENUES: Tax Le,(Bond Fundp)Only) 0 a 0 0.00% Tax AhoosUonMSubvontions(Sham of l%) 10,829.000 8,365,642 2,483,350 ".25% Foderel and Stem Construction Grants 0 0 0 0.00% Connection Face 1,058.000 1059760 (1,768) 100.17% Omer Fees 23,515,000 13.904.034 8,530,986 SBAM Sale of Capacity Rights "1'000 0 "I'm 0.0014 Internet&Mlsc.Receipts 8.360.000 6,697.897 1,668,103 80.00% Omer 0 0 0 0.00% Total Revenues 14,2011,000 30.107,341 14,101.60 68.10% Total Revenue&Beginning Balances 234,005,229 EXPENDRURES: Some of Joint Works Trmt Plant&Roaemes 60,437.000 8,40 .769 51.02,232 14.04% District Trunk Sewer Conrad.&Renamed 2.167,000 173,057 1,083,133 8.02% Bond Retirement and Internet Expense 24,286,600 5373,191 18.912.809 22.12% She.of Joint Warke Operating Belmar.. 15,929000 9,052.666 6,876,334 56.83% Provided for Reimbursement Agreements 0 0 0 Bm District Conrad,&Omar Expendkuree 5,35&000 1352.283 4,001 1) 25.34% Total Expendlmree 108,1n.000 24p42,US 83,734,T25 22.5916 Ending Fund Balanced 209682,954 Facilities Expansion Balance AdfustrnMds Tramper to Belanca 711193 &Addmona Fixed Adssts 391M4 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 3-243 Lampoon intarteptar Sewer 3.256 7,035 10.281 3-UOrange4Weamro Sub-Trunk Relief Sdeor 4BWO 48.900 Agancy Owned Manhole 24 24 11-17 Slater PIS Unman-3&II 1:Is.lM 26.247 1511385 Seal Reach PIS VFD Upgrade 5 5 TecMte Pip Replacement 180,658 23,261 182,917 346R Repl.Westrnbutsr Ave.Force Milne 16.783 101,385 119.168 347 1.5 WMdning Project 206 7,667 7,873 348 Mlllerilolder Trunk Sewer lmpciamerda 0 9.280 9.280 Mbcellaneoua Chalgoi m Closed W.O. 0 (0) (8) SubTotal 365,988 173,867 0 BH,036 Share of Joint Works 41,328,552 0<84,T6B (24,8T2,099) 24.942,221 Sub-Total 4132g,552 8,484,768 (24,8T2,088) 24,942,221 COMPLETED PROPERTY PLANT&EOUIP: Land and Property Rights 2S%MI 289231 Collection Lined and Pump Sold. 62.025.501 62,025,591 Treatrnard Facilities 9.M 9.922 Diepoaal Petunia. 28.419 28,41E General Plant and Admin.Facll. 311.988 311.965 Equity In Joint Treabnent Filed. 179.814.281 (ses,920) 24,BT2.089 204.087.450 Omer Assets at Coal Lees Amok 7.027 (4,216) 2.811 Total Properly Plant&Equip. 284,162,959 8,o65,499 0 292,228,469 County Sarmatian Wool No.5 Swnmary,Quild"Flnanthl Report 9 Mo rfes EPded09194 Budget Review 1993-94 Remaining Yeervto-Oats Budget Ye.. o w Budget %Eaperse6 Beginning Fund Balances,July 1 46,956A6S REVENUES: Tea Levy(Bond Fund(al Only) 0 0 0 Tan Allocathem .Wmvea(Sham of l%) 2.471,000 1,681,312 789.688 6804% Fachrel antl Slate Construction Gnnls 0 0 0 0.00116 Conn ocean Fees 118,000 28,133 91,e8T M16% Other Face 2831A00 11000.050 650,950 75.26% Sam of Capacity Rights St.= 0 81,000 000% Interest S Mine.possible 1,56P,000 1.474.180 87,840 94.38% Me, 5,093,000 599.498 4,503,562 Dom Total Revenues 11,908,000 5,751,153 6,te4A4T 48.18% Total Revenue 8 Beginning Balances 65,108,608 El(PENDRURES- Sham of Joint Works TrmL Pont S Roaorves 7,117,000 1,057,925 6.059.075 14.86% DxWcl Trunk Sewer COnstr.S Reserves 4,895,000 4,126,655 510,314 88,98% Bond Retirement and lnmreal Expense 4,604,000 1,517,376 3.146,624 3253% Sham of Joint WOrka Operoug Extoncea 1.621.000 1,194,467 420,533 73.69% Provided for Reimbursement Agreements 1091000 0 109,000 D00% District Operating BONer Expenditures 504,000 485,411 316,589 60.37% Total Expenditures 19,010,000 8,41,865 10,518,135 44.35% Ending Fund Balances 47,274,743 Facilities Exparelon Balance Ad)usbame Tmmlere, Betsnce 7I193 SAdd9ons Flail Assets 3131IH CONSTRUCT ION IN PROGRESS: SJ3 Bay Bridge PIS Inner. 822505 738,991 1,501,791 Slibline BoyEridge Force Main 5-ISR-2 I= ton Incr.Electrical Service @ Lido PIS IN IN 5J69o.Coat Trunk Semr4ncl Phases lS 2 778.857 1,197,349 I,976,Y06 5J6 Crystal Cove PIS 168,416 710913 858,329 Sri Beholds Dr.Trunk Sower Imp,Phases 1,2 S 3 5,DBQ994 99857 5.199.851 540 Coy Del Mar PIS 0,427 8,427 Lida PIS 02 MSP Upgrade 25.070 25,870 Techhe Pipe Replacement 2.414 (2414) 0 Miscellaneous Charges to Closed W.O. 0 248 248 541 Coast Highway FOrce Main Replacement 5 8 6 5,TT5 163 SAM SJ2 Bitter Pt S Rocky K PIS Improv.5&6 250,640 125,Ids 375,645 547.152 Repl.Plan 401 5&6 2,215 2716 547464 PCH Gravity Ever Rehab 5&6 1".685 1,306.474 1,495,139 Sd9 Siphon E&6 695,190 695.190 Sub-Total g04QBo0 4,176,666 0 12,21),48] Share or Joint Works, 5,1"jan, 1.D57,925 (3,191,181) 3,109.924 Su0.Tmtal 51163,180 1,D62,926 (3,1e1,181) 3,108,93li COMPLETED PROPERTY PLANT 8 EQUIP, Land and Property Rights 8,231 6,231 Collation Linea and Pump Sins. 22,002,621 226D2.921 Treatment Facilities 7,347 7,347 Ompoeal Fecllitiee 7,915 7,115 General Plant and Admin.Facil. 22.347 27.347 Equity In Joint Treatment Feel). 22,016,505 358.704 3,101,181 26.470.393 Omer Assets at Cast Lore Amon 72,694 (20,605) 51,989 Total Property Plant S Equip. 80,1934,043 5,572,710 0 63,506,154 Ca unly Sawwwo DIa01R No.6 Summary OuarmNy Financial Report 9 Months Ended"Mae Budget Ravlew - 1993-94 Remelolag Yea'Aondte Budget Year40-Date Budget %Expendod Beginning Fund Balances,July 1 31,801.796 REVENUES: Tax Levy hand Fund(s)Only) 0 0 0 0.00% Tax Allocatfonel5ubvenkne(Sham of l%) 1.491.000 866,742 824,258 58.13% Federal add State COnsWcUen Granta 0 0 0 0.00% Connection Fee. 235,000 19,062 215.08 8.11% Other Fees 3,3117,000 2,456519 920,481 72.74% Sale of Capacity Rights 76,000 0 76.000 0.0% Inherent 6 Mlsc.Receipts 1,315,000 943.700 371,300 71.76% Other 1,15g000 0 1.150. 00 am Total Revenue. ],6M,000 4,286.023 3,367,977 66.OT% Total Revenue 6 Beginning Balances 36,087,818 EXPENDITURES: She.of Joint Works TohL Plant B Resorvos 11.374.000 1,407,865 9,968,105 12.38% District Trunk Sewer Coney.6 Reserve 1,925,000 385A73 1.239,627 2852% Bond Retirement and Interest Expense 3,040,000 M'M6 2,413,]64 2060% Sham of Joint Works Operating Expenses 2,568,000 1,42T,395 1,040,80.5 5948% Provided for Reimbursement Agreements 0 0 0 0.90% District Operatn98Other Expenditures 321,000 (21.606) 342,995 -019% Total Expenditures 18,928.000 3,92li'm 15,002,796 20.74% Ending Fund Balance. 32,162,614 Fa,IIIUes Expansion Balance Adluetmenls Tranaferto Salanc0 71193 SAddidov Fixed Assets 39194 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: MI...Chg.to Cloned Work Order 0 23 23 Id-1-1 A S B Gisler ln6,1414 Baker Street 403.365 7,876 491,244 642 Fernier Relief 248,267 309 248,576 6.13 Air Base Saves Abandonment 0 227 227 $41 Cant Rlghwey Fame Main Replacement 5 6 345 10 355 542 Bator S Rocky PI PIS Improve.566 91,121 45.501 136,622 &37-132 Repl.Plan 4015&B 679 979 5-374M PCR Gri Swr Rehab 6 86 42.357 331.425 373.782 549 SIpMn 68 8 36.580 36.589 Sub-Total 902,724 385,373 0 1,266,08] Shamof Joint Works 6.857.094 1.407,895 (4,127,077) 4,13 .712 Sub-Total G,BaTJ191 1,407,895 (4,127,017) 4.130,712 COMPLETED PROPERTY.PLANT a EQUIP: Land and Property Rights 582 562 Collection Lines and Pump Set . 1.768.80 1,786,e ss Treatment Facllitlea Zen Zan Disposal Facilities 7,394 7,391 General Plant and Admire.FacII. 03,421 93.421 Equity In Joint Treatment Facll. 28,883,984 70,715 4,IV.0" 33,081,778 Omer media at Cost Less Amort. 31,117 (10,574) 29,643 Total Property Plant S Equip. 38,664,818 1.853,409 0 a0,sa8,02e COunySn fttl DeReth a7 Summery0uanpyFlnanr4lRepan BYonMa EnJNN1M Budget Rumors, 1993-86 Remaining Y..M Dab Budget Yearto-OaU Budget %Expenders Beginning Fund BeNnces,Juy1 133,733,229 RlFMEoYUE$, I.Larry(Ohm!Fumk.)Ony) 0 O 0 0.00% Tax Alhanim Y5u0nn00e(She.W 1%) 3,355,OW 2270.786 1.084,214 87.8099 Federal and Stab Construction Gnnb 0 0 0 O.W% ConnxOon Fees Ila.= M3491 935,801) MAN Mar Fees 5.]9],0011 0,5034T7 1,260,9YJ ]l.Bl% Sale of Capacly Rykb PJ,Wu Il 9BW0 01)09, Inbnsla MNs.R .Mks 3MAM 2597,665 BW,135 2824% Mer 85.000 0 95.000 COO, Total Revenues 12,822,000 8,889,618 3,123,381 79.11 Tabl Revenue A Beginning Boils... 93,4.11,848 El(PEAIDMRES: Share atJelnl Works TmL Poont 6 Reserves 15,765,W0 1.907470 13.857.530 1210% Diabi Tmnk Sewer Constr.A Rnnves 3,997,0W 1.407303 2509.697 8531% Bond ReOrtment and Internet Eapenes 5.238.0041 1,363.728 3.874.272 20.04% Sham olJolm Works 0,amblg Eapenan 3.761.00t) 26JB30C 824.61 70.0196 Pmvlded lee RelmCmushorl Agreements 0 0 0 am DUVId Mariana to Mer ExpendNuns 1.7W,WD 884,637 783.353 55.W% Total Ex,ralllmee 30.529,000 8,501,442 21,929,09 28.17% EMMB Fund SM..... 84,032,406 FacllPon Expensbn Sham AdfusMenb Teaneforb Bale. IR93 AAWMa.e Flied Assets N1M4 CON52NUC310NINPROGRESS: 7-22 Parallel A Rapt.Lemon Helghts 447 42.139 42„5114 733.1 College Ave.Pump SM Repl Fora Falls 831 13,887 MAN 7-100nn..Park Acres Sewer SWdk BA13 ID0$W 100516 7-24Men0ob Avehoo Modn. 0 no WB 7-10C.nHe10h1sS.r 37,TJS 12=5 50.001 M.Gaw lM Saudi Woodmen Unied0 0 9.10 O.180 7-7-1 Win Start P9 12NS S"a 18.02 Manhole Adjustments Re.Ones go Count, 0 209 208 1 ski-0A S B Gig lerIAL,1444 Baker Street ForkoMMOBhkts6,7A14 lJDM.B13 17,808 1.055,)1B 7A14,23 AWndenomat and each.at PAS 1.742AQ Mi 1p42,601 See Mts EesemenllnkxBkke 13=7 13.237 ]44AOmdon9P5,]-14-1A2 203.908 42.4% 320,45] T4.14 Sunnoeer ML 10,763 23B 10,892 1.16 L.mon HOlgbts Sewer 57.002 57,092 Mal.Sheet Flume Lasser, 151 234 305 74-0 Glcleraachlll Trunk Abandonment 238E 2R02 TxhRa Pipe Replacement 4OA27 7.698 4a,115 74O Navy Wee P9 Abandonment 99.223 IABOAW 1,179,827 ]-0]0....PMRAaes Sewer Repl. 44 IDA67 10.911 749-20ebl Channel SipWn 73.833 (49.418) 24515 7.1&1 Mac Arthur TmnkA 70214 111.491 181,701 HamN Ave.Trunk Sower IA22A83 1.922AS2 MlawOansous Charges M Closed W.O. 1A59 235 tire, Sub�Totsl Stil r 9,a0T,3o3 0 "MA00 Sham dlJObt Works 9.291,341 1.907.470 (SNIA23) S,BOT,2B0 Suo-]Oul 9,291.341 1,O07A70 lk"IA23) BAo7,20B COMP/EIEO PROPERTY.PLAN76 EQUIP: land and PropeM R19W 276.454 238.454 Wiseaon Linea and Pump Stns. 31265,717 31.265.717 Treatment Fesllldea 0 0 Disposed Faclllon, to,T82 10,78E Samurai Plant and Admin.Fas11. TSA81 79.01 Equity In Joint TrxOknt FaCll. 38515.281 p0,.581) 5.591,523 44,942.223 Come Asnb At Cost Les.AmOM1 W.632 (13. 8 10,780 Total Pmpamk Plant A Equip. 0SA00A36 3,136,528 0 OSA28.101 County Semtegon DlsOlat No.11 Summery Quarterly Financial Report 9 MMNS EnOed"1114 Budget Roview 1993-N Remaining Year-to-Date Budget Year-ta-Date Budget %Expanded Beginning Fund Balance,July 1 56,208,648 REVENUES: Tax Lavy(Bond Funds)Only) 15.000 10.766 4.234 0.00% Tax Alloca0oniu SubvMtiOM(She.of l%) 2.133.000 1,435,815 697,105 V.31% Federal and State Construction Grants 0 0 a 0.00% Connection Faes 363,000 78.550 276,450 21.69% Omer Fees 3,624,000 2,273.143 1,420.857 6154% Sete of Capacity Rights 83A00 0 83,000 0.00% Interest S Mile.Receipts 2.2"AOO 1.536,530 740,470 67.48% Me, 0 0 0 o.d6% Total Revenues 8,565.000 6,332A04 3,222,196 62.34% Total Revenue&Beginning Balances 01,541,450 EXPENDITURES: Sham olJoint Works Trust Plant B Reserves 12,980,000 1,608,259 11,351,741 12.41% District Tronk Sewer Cause,B Reserves 7.00,000 MASI` 8,802,413 2.24% Bond Re0romanl and let amet Expense 4,490.000 8T3,006 3,016,831 19.44% Share of Jolts Works Operating Expenses 3,19U,000 2,076,197 1,113A03 65.08% Provided for Reimbursement Agroemenill 0 0 0 &M District Operating&Other Expenditures M,000 381,Tye ST3,224 311.6914 Total Expenditures 28AUJIM 5A76A88 2;848,112 17.74% Ending Fund Balances 56,464,662 Facilities Ex,emslon Balance Adjustments Tmnehrto Balance 7111113 &Addition Flied Assets U31194 CONSTRUCTION IN PIMAIESS: 11-104IR Valve Repalr@ Slater Ave.PIS 0 187 167 1147 Sister PIS Sewage Sys Improv. 747,205 148,711 895,996 J-24&J44A FlovOnetere 0 252 252 X.B.Wetlands Conservancy VIetl01s Center 0 0,437 8,437 Sub-Total 747,20 15y,58T 0 904.872 Sham of Joint Wallis 7,633.675 1.608,259 (4714,421) 4,7TL713 Sub-Total 2,833,81% 1,008,259 (4,714,421) 4,727,713 COMPLETED PROPERTY PLANT&EDUY r Land and Property Rights 149.088 145,986 Collection Lines and Pump Sine. 19,011,159 19.011,150 Treatment Facilities 0 0 Disposal Facilities 3.053 3.053 General Plant and Admin.Facil. MAN 28.699 Equity In Joint Treatment Feed. 33.244.000 (168,021) 4,714,421 37.790,409 War Assets at Cost Leas Amon. 0 0 Total Property Plant It Equip. 61A15AS5 1.697,625 0 62.812,890 1 County Saaha0on Warder No.13 Summary Quarterly Financial Report 9Moc0s Eaded3Qf94 Banner Review 1993.94 Remaining Yur4cDate Budget Year4 zA Budget %Expended Beginning Fund Balances,July 1 17,858,560 REVENUES: Tax Levy(Bond Fundts)Only) 0 0 0 0.00% Tax All0cationNSubventions(Sham of l%) 0 547 (547) 0.00% Federal and Scale Computation Grande 0 0 0 OAM Constantino Fees 470,000 552,720 (82.720) 117.0% War Fees 732.000 520,518 211,404 71.11% Sale of Capacity Rights 0,000 0 0,000 0.00% Interest S Misc.Receipts 690,000 604.574 85,428 57.62% Other 0 0 0 0.00% Total Revenues 1,901,000 1,678,357 22 w Bi Total Revenue&Beginning Balances 19,536,917 EXPENDITURES: Share of Joint Works Tout Plant B Reserves 2.462,000 213,723 2,248,277 8.68% District Trunk Sewer Consul.B Reserves 473.000 0 473,000 0.0036 Bond Retirement and Interest Expense 28.000 6.016 21,0&1 21.494 Share of Joint Woms Operating Expenses 442,000 325,734 110,208 73.70% Provided far Relmuareemenl Agreements 0 0 0 O.W. District Operating&War Expenditures 100.000 42,674 Sui 39.15% Total Expenditures 3,514,000 588,147 2,825,653 16.74% Ending Fund Balances 18,948,770 Facilities Expansion Balance Adlusbnenm Treneterus Balance 711R3 &Auditors Read Assets NNI04 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Shareof Joint Workp 1,0411046 213,723 (020,501) 628,260 SYIFTOtal 1p41,046 213,723 (626,501) 628,268 COMPLETED PROPERTY.PLANT It EQUIP: Land and Property Rights 0 0 Caliection lines and Pump Sure. 2.286.357 2.205,367 Treatment Facilities 0 0 Disposal Facilities 0 0 General Plant and Admin.Facll. 0 0 Equity In JointTrealmenl Facll. 4.481,576 (155,413) 626.501 4,951.684 OMer Aseotx at Cost Less Amort, 0 0 Total Property Plant&Equip. 7,907,979 57,310 0 7,865,289 County Sensation District No.14 r Summary Quarterly Flnnnolal Report 9 Months Ended Ml1 Budget Review 1993.as Remaining Yeardo-Date Budget Year-to-Date Budget Y•Eapended apinning Fund Salomon..July 1 63,050,512 REVENUES: Tax Levy(Bond Fund(c)Only) 0 0 0 0.00% The AllocatlonWhiltueMlone(Sham of l%) 0 0 0 0.00% Federal and State Constroc60n Grants 0 0 0 Sore IRWD Fees 18,4W.OW 5,159,204 11,240,795 31.4616 Other Free 0 2,600 (2.688) 0.00% Sale of Capacity Rights 81,0W 0 81,000 0.M Interest&MISC.Receipts M ,= 1T2015 210,985 44.91% Other 0 0 0 0.00% Total Revenues 16JMAW 5,313.9111, 11,530,093 31.63% Total Revenue&Beginning Balances M.M4,419 E NORURES: Shen of joint) rks T.1-Plant&Reserve tdTM,OW 1,634.974 11.149.CM 12.7^ District Trunk Sewer Concur.&Reserves 4.825,000 59,0109 4,815,931 111% Bond Retirement and Internet Espense 165.= M,Oa9 129.612 21.46% Shan of Joint Works Operating Expenses lasiSOW 631,WT 714,403 5178% Provided for Relmbunement Agreements 0 0 0 0.00% Dimina Opened,&Other Expendtiuna 40,00D 10jew 343,014 23.77% Total Expenditures 19,020,000 2,M71924 17,152,076 13A8% Ending Fund Balances M,118p96 Fac1110es Expansion Balance Adjustments Transform Balance 711193 &Mealess Flied Aaeota =IM CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Capacity Purehee from Discrete 5&6 4.015 (418) 3,597 Main Sleet Flume Flowmemr 2.544 2,544 14dd A&B Ginter lnt,14AS Baker St Force Mal.,DlMritets 6,T&to 2,615,065 46.920 2.661,995 Main St Pump Station Improvements 7J-1 08,731 12.%7 81,298 Su0.TOMl 2,590,355 69,069 0 2,749,424 Shan of Joint Works 7,964,006 1.634.974 (4,792.733) 4.806,247 Sub-Total 701p0G 1.634,974 (4,792,733) 4.806,247 COMPLETED PROPERTY PLANT 6 EQUIP: Land and Pmperly Rights 0 0 Collection Lines and Pump SW. 16,01,4M 16.631488 Treatment Facillties 0 0 Disposal Facilities 0 0 General Plant and Admin.Fad]. 6,747 6,747 Equity in Joint Treatment Fadl. 33,655,137 (392.616) 4,792,733 37,955,254 Other Assets at Cost Less Amort 0 0 Total Property Plant&Equip. 0,847,T30 1,301.427 0 $2,149,160 CAPITAL OUTLAYREVOLVWGFUNO SCHEOULEB4 SUMMARY OF JOINT WORKS CONSTRUCTION REOUIREMPNTS Page 1 of 4 FISCAL YEAR 1993-W 9 MONTHS ENOEO W311M Prepared By: Bill Aldridge Ill (2) (3) 12) + (3) I11-131 MEMO WORK REVISED TOTAL REQUIRED ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEA I PROJECT UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JOBS ORDER PROJECT EST BUDGET COST OUTLAY COST BUDGET TRANSFER TO 1993-94 1993.94 @ 6130193 TO 3/31194 TO DATE FIXED ASSETS A.Plant 1 New and Rebudgeted Major Projects: 1.Wsetehauler Disp&Sample St0 P1.27-1/213 51942-A,B 305,000 200,000 2 2 200.ODO Transfer to Projects Below (176,5911 0 1176.591) Chemical and Wasteh uri.,Facility Modifna,P1.46 52239-A 1,400,000 142,519 6,817 224.563 231.380 182,0441 Interim Wasteh under Dumping Fee.P146-1 52239-C 217,000 34,072 262.247 282,247 (228.175) 2.Secondary Tmd Expansion to 80 MGD.P1-36 53717.0 36,222,000 750.000 3.329.262 206,966 3.536,228 543.034 Transfer to projects Below 135,035) (67.062) 0 167.0621 Electrification of Pump Drives,Pt-36-1 53717-A 36.254 36,254 36,254 0 Secondary Treatment Expansion,P1-36-2 53717-8 17.910 17,910 17,910 0 Bldg 5 Medlin for Rates of Source Control Inspectors to Make Way for P1.36 5216" 35.035 12.898 14,675 12,898 27.573 0 (27.458) 3.Primary Treatment 72 MGD Expansion,P1-37 53719-0 31.425,000 5001000 115,210 3,122 116,332 496.878 4.Security&Landscaping,P1-38-1 52108-F 1,630,000 1,0001000 200,655 83,137 283,792 916.863 S.Misc.Mods.Rloriry Element.PI-38-2 52108-13 6.370,000 3,500,000 750,059 1,145,759 1,895,818 2.354.241 6.Min.Modifications Pt-384 52108-H 4,100,000 2,000,000 341,141 45,940 387.081 1,954.060 Transfer to Project Below 1584,0001 (585) 0 (505) 12KV Distribution System for Support Facilities,P1 47 62255-0 584,000 58s 585 585 0 7.Fire Protection.Si9nage and Water Dist.Mods.,P1-38.5 52108-J 2.475.000 ISO" 174.346 93.656 267.902 56,444 S.Elect Facility Meagre&Safety Upgrades Pl-40.1 52187-A 21902.500 200,000 16.803 15,279 32.082 184,721 9.Fee Modifns&Safety Upgrades,PI-40-2 52187-B 4,506,000 500.000 33,670 160,130 193.800 339,870 Transfer to Project Below (61.0171 D (61,017) Misc Architectural&Treatment Ht Imprvmts, Pt-48 5226M 1,625,500 B1,017 61.017 61.017 0 10. Prim Clarifiers 3A Is 5 Rehab. Pt-41 52199-A 2,021.500 75.000 20,968 9,071 30.039 65.929 11.Min Improvements,P142.P1.46 52219-0 2,205.000 140.000 14.353 174,426 188.779 (34,426) 12.Searle Retrofit of Non-Structure Systems,P1.43 52229-A 4,250,000 1,500,000 50,856 58,613 109,469 1,441.387 13.Seismic Retrofit Strumill,P1.44 52125-B 24,000,000 700,000 304,410 418,284 722,694 281,716 14.40 MGD Oxygen Activated Sludge&DAF'4 70.0001000 0 0 IS.Belt Presses 14 Units) 15,5001000 0 0 16.Solids Storage(4 Beni 11,000,000 0 0 17.Dissector: 2 @ 110' Diameter 91100,000 0 0 18. 12kv Electrical Power Distribution 2,300,000 0 0 IS.Emergency Sewage Bypass System 4,000000 0 0 20.Remove Trickling Filters 1 &3 11000,000 0 0 21.Central Air Compressor Station 250,000 0 0 22. Misc.Projects (See Schedule CI 13,250,000 2,000.000 7,157 121.323 128,480 1,878,677 0 23.Other Master Plan Projects a.Headworka No. 1 Rebuild, 2003 14,950.000 0 0 b.Headwbrb No.2 Impeller/Pump Speed. 2016 2.60OOD0 - 0 0 c. Remove Trickling Filters 2&4,2007 1,300.00D 0 0 d.40 Mgd Oxygen Aat'd Sludge&DAF. 2017 34.000.000 0 0 6. 110'It Digesters,2003 It 2012 18,200000 0 0 f.4 Belt Presses.2004 10.92O00O 0 0 g. 12 KV Power Distribution,2001.2012 1,10g000 0 0 h.Standby Power Generation, 2005&2015 5,000.000 0 0 1.72 Mild Primary Treatment,2004&2012 32.500 CO0 0 0 SUB-TOTAL -RECLAMATION PLANT F 372,624.500 13.215,000 5,380.386 3,151,080 8.531,464 10.063,920 127,4581 CAPITAL OUTLIY REVOLVING FUND SCHEDULES-1 SUMMARY OF JOINT WORKS CONSTRUCTION REOUIREMENTS Page 2 of 4 FISCAL YEAR 1993-W 9 MON7NS ENDED 3/31/94 Ill (2) (3) (2) + 131 111-131 MEMO WORK REVISED TOTAL REQUIRED ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEA PROJECT UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JOBS ORDER PROJECT EST BUDGET COST OUTLAY COST BUDGET TRANSFER TO 1993-94 1993-94 @ 6/30193 TO 3/31/94 TO DATE FIXED ASSETS 8. Plant 2 New and Rebudgeted Major Projects: 1.Support Facilities and Site Improvements a.Operations Building.P2-23-5-1 53715-O.A 2.510,000 1.500,000 549.799 1,499,611 2,049,410 389 (2,935) b.Warehouse Building. P2-35-2 51813-N 2.625,000 1,400,000 181.729 58,154 239,883 1,341,846 c.Maintenance Building,PZ-35-3 51813 F 2.725,000 1,8001000 163.133 34,975 198.108 1.765,025 d.Construction Management Office, M 044 51813-G 60,000 50,000 145.874 40,575 186,449 9,425 e.Phase II Site&Security Imp.,P2-35-5 51813-E 2,100,000 850,000 97,383 17,785 115,168 832,215 2.Rehab Digester 1.J.K.P2-39-1 62045-0 7,925.000 1001000 415,911 1.707 417.618 9%293 3. Rehab Digester L.M.P2-39-2 3,800.000 100,000 0 100,000 4. Rehab Digester N. 0.P2-39-3 4,800,000 100,000 0 1001000 5.Primary Treatment 24 MOD Expansion,P2-41 53714-0 15,204,500 4,501 96 4,597 1961 S.Electrification Project,P2-42-/ 53718-A 10.1501000 150.000 9,483.057 584.426 10,067.483 (434,4261 7.Secondary Treatment Expansion,P2.42-2 5371a.%s 17,100,000 8.0001000 2,168.619 6,518.684 8,687,303 1,481,316 S. Priority Misc.Mod.,P2-43-1 52108.8 5,7501G00 3.000,000 952,533 2.283.751 3.236.284 716,249 9.Misc.Modifications,P243-3, P2-55 52108-E.52239 7.555,000 2.500,000 73,557 197,643 271.200 2.302.357 10.Monitor/Control System,P2341See J-23-21 5209" 3,225,000 275,000 11898,145 135,247 2.033.392 139,753 11.Rm Protection, Signs&Water Dist.Modifies,P2-46 52176-0 4.654,000 150.000 62.270 131.684 193,954 18,316 12. Elrod Fee Nchfi s&Safety Upgrades. P2./74 52189-A 3,452,500 200,000 8.698 10,787 19,485 189,213 13.Fee MadUns&Safety Upgrades,P247.2 52189.8 4,006,000 500.000 191061 164,220 183.281 335,780 14.Primary Clarifier Rehab. P2.48 52199.8 5,247,000 40D,000 63,912 8.525 72.437 391.475 15.Misc Improvements at Plant 2,P249 52220-0 303,000 20%000 15,538 74,481 90.019 125.519 Transfer to Project Below 123.2451 123,2451 Construction Accident.P1-49 52220-A 23,245 23,245 23,246 0 16.Seimic Retrofit of Non-Slmctew Systems,P2-50 52229.8 4,750,000 2,000,000 113,068 25.855 138.923 1,974,145 17.Seismic Retrolit Structural P2.53 52108-C 35.000,000 5,000,000 738,803 1,443,499 2,182,302 3,556,501 Transfer to Project Below (17,0201 0 117,020) Misc Seismic Modifns&Flare Improvements,P2-56 52269.0 239,000 17,020 17.020 17.020 0 IS.Sales Storage: 2 81. 5,200.000 0 0 19.Additional 105 Foot Digester, 4,000,000 0 0 20.Plant Water Pump Station 1.200,000 0 0 21.Misc.Projects Mes Schedule DI 13,180,000 2,000,000 58.605 228.341 286.846 1,771.669 152.2231 22.Other Master Plan Projects a. Replace Prmary Basins A. B.C.2006 11,700,000 0 0 b.Standby Power Generation,2005&2015 101000.000 0 0 c.Mordtoring and Control System, 2005 620.000 0 0 SU&TOTAL -TREATMENT PLANT 2 188,981,000 30.275,000 17,214,096 13.500,311 30,714,407 16,774,689 155.1581 C.Ofisito Water Reclamation Rants 1.Site Acquisition 5.100.000 5,000.000 0 5.000,000 Transfer to Project Below 16081 0 (608) Raclma[ion Plant No. 1 Water Quality Management Study 58231-0 280,000 608 608 608 0 2.Reclamation Rant 3 52133-A 40,600.000 50.000 506,090 31,332 537,422 18,668 SUB-TOTAL RECLAMATION PLANTS 45.980.000 5,050,000 5061090 31,940 538,030 6.018.060 0 D. Interplant and Joint Facilities 0 1. Inlarplant Facilites.19 53713.0 24,000,000 50D,000 20,999.092 1.109,227 22,108.319 (609.227) Transfer to Project Below 1235.9001 1314.6041 0 1314.6041 Industrial Water pipeline Extension at Plant 2 53713- 235,900 314,6041 24,728 314,604 339,332 0 N CAA7AL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND SCHEDULES-1 SUMMARY OF JOINT WORKS CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS Page 3 of 4 FISCAL YEAR/99394 9 MONTHS ENDED 3/31/94 (1) 121 13) (2) + (3) (1).(3) MEMO WORK REVISED TOTAL REQUIRED ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEA PROJECT UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JOBS ORDER PROJECT EST BUDGET COST OUTLAY COST BUDGET TRANSFER TO 1993-94 1993.94 @ 6130193 TO 3/31/94 TO DATE FIXED ASSETS 2.Support Facilities end Site Improvements a.Admin.Annex at Old Lab Site,J-30&J-11-1 52083.0,A 4,150,000 200,000 98,985 16,968 115.953 183,032 b.Operations/Control Center,J-23-1 53712-A 5,000,000 1 W,000 126,933 30.681 167.614 69.319 c.Computer Equipment,J-23-2(Be.P2-44) 53712-B 2,525,000 25,000 2.073,454 149,563 2,223.017 (124,6631 d.Personnel Building at Pit 1,J-26 53716-0 2,950,000 1.4W.W0 107,401 29.722 137,123 1,370.278 e. Demolition of Old Control Center 450,0D0 350,W0 0 350.OW f.Demolition of Support Bldg.@P2,J-27 52084-0 1,300,000 500.000 89,952 0 89,952 500,OW g.Central Lab Improvements/Upgrades J-17-1.2.3 52257-0 742,000 742,000 18,532 18,532 723,468 3.Central Generation Facility a. Equipment Prepurchase.J-19A 53707-C 22,730.O00 360,000 20,466,832 160,803) 20,406,029 420,803 (20,2W,901) b.Emission Purchase,J-196 53707-A.8 3.100,000 0 3,050,080 3,050.080 0 13,050,0801 c.Plant 1 Facility.J-19.1 53707-A 20,80Q,O00 3001000 20.419.110 740,152 21,159.262 (400,152) (20.766,808) d.Plant 2 Facility.J-19.2 53707-8 29,050,O00 BW,UW 27.624.455 393,822 28,018,277 406,178 (27.981.0861 a.Engine Evaluation and Restoration 3,500.000, 2,000,000 0 2,000.000 Transfer to Projects Below (2,894,702) 0 (2,894,702) J-19-2 Engine Damage Rehab 0 Plant 2 53707-E 2,840,800 1,554.355 2.840.800 4.395,155 0 (1.462) J-19-1 Engine Damage Rehab @ Plant 1 53707-F 44,320 364,941 44,320 399,261 0 Luba Oil Strainers for Plants 1 &2 53707-G 9,582 9,582 9,582 0 4.Waste Gas Flares,J-21,J-21A 52040-0 30,000 S,OW 125.7D6 96,962 222.668 (91,962) S.Outfall&Booster Pump Stations a.Rend.Outfall No. 1 Land Section,J-22-2 53711-A 1.640,000 401000 1.601,490 35,663 1,637,153 4,337 b. Equipment Prepurchase J-15-A 53703-A 4,500,000 3001O00 23,453 (50.7581 (27.305) 350,758 c.Temp C12 Station for Outfall No. 1 2,600.000 0 0 0 all.Second Discharge Header OOBS-Cm 4,425,000 25,00O 0 25,WD a. Replace 78-w/120'Outing to Deep Water 51,250,0130 50,000 0 50,W0 6.Computerized Facility Records and Dwg.System J-25-1 58216-0 3.610,O00 1.000,000 63,326 68,525 131,851 931,475 7. Used.Power Systems Rehab.Studies J-25-2 58216-A 500.O00 300,000 4.564 4,564 295.436 S.Telephone/Telemetry Monitoring Esp.J-28 52146.0 63O0W 400,000 56,297 430,518 486,815 (30,5181 12,688) 9.Standby Power Reliability Modifna,J-33 52240.0 15,000,000 1.000,000 2,186 321,676 323.862 678,324 10.Ocean Outfall Reliability Upgrades.J-34 52241-0 14.000CW 21000,000 2,147 466.362 468.609 1.533,638 11.Bushard Interplant Trunk Replacement 31.OW,OW 0 0 0 12.Sludge Disposal Projects 0 0 0 a.Compost Demonstration Plant 910001000 0 0 0 b.Land Acquisition 21.950.000 1 W,000 0 100.000 c.Landfill Development Phase 1 28,6OO.DW 0 0 0 d.Compost Facility 50.360AW 0 0 0 13.District Information Management Network 0 0 0 a.Mint.&Doer Migrant Computer System 52149-A 900.000 250,000 509,577 193,2D4 702,781 56,796 (15,6311 b.Lab Information Management System Upgrades 52149-8 250.000 250,000 16.334 16,446 32,780 233,554 c.Purchasing/Accounting/Financial Information System 52149-C 1,501.0013 750.000 1,412 54.825 56.337 695,075 (12.1901 d.Network System Integration 820.0013 340.000 0 340,000 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLWNC FUND SCHEDULE B.I SUMMARY OF JOR/T WORBS CONSTRUCTAMY REQUPEMENTS Page 4 of 4 F/SCAL YEAR I993-94 9 MONTHS ENDED 3y IM Ill 121 13) (21 ♦ (3) (1).(3) MEMO WORK REVISED TOTAL REQUIRED ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEA PROJECT UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JON ORDER PROJECT EST BUDGET COST OUTLAY COST BUDGET TRANSFER TO 1993-94 1993-94 @ 6/30/93 TO 3/31/94 TO DATE FIXED ASSETS 14.Improved In-Plant Sampling Facilities 115.000 100.000 0 100.000 15.Effluent Sampler Systems J-32-1.2 522124 325,000 185,000 47.492 293.164 340.666 (108,164) 1 G.Other Master Plan Projects a.Expand 00SS*Cm to North 2019 27.125,000 0 0 0 b.Sludge Div.Landfill Phase II 2011 15,600,000 0 0 0 c.Sludge ON,Equip Phase I&II 2001 11.500,000 0 0 0 17.Water Quality Diversion and Treatment Study(SARI) 58221.0 120.000 20.000 0 0 0 20,000 0 18.Misc Projects IS..Schedule El 11,710.000 1.500.000 200.798 388.863 589.661 1.111.137 113.7821 SUB-TOTAL -INTERPLANT&JOINT 429,258,000 15.992.000 99.640,536 7.957.284 107.597.820 7.934.716 (7].049.5281 SUBTOTAL - MAJOR PROJECTS 1.036.843,500 64.432.000 122,741,106 24,640.615 147,381,721 39.791,385 172.132.1441 E.Special 4olecte.Studies,Research&Development 1.Action Plan: a. NPOES Permit l Application) 58209-F 375.000 60.000 340,307 39.586 379.893 10,414 b. NPDES Permit IMontoring Changes) MOOD 50'coo 0 50,000 2.Solids Treatment,Disposal and Reuse 1.160.000 I N,= 0 150,000 Transfer to Project Below 11.710) 0 0.710) Sludge Disposal Related Projects 58214.0 1,710 254.441 1.710 256,151 0 3.Air Quality Control Program a.Air Toxlca Inventory(AB2588 w/PEEP) 1.548.000 300.000 0 300.000 b.Toxics and ROG Contras:8lofiller R&D 59227.0 300,000 330,000 31,225 119.951 151.176 210.049 c.Air Emissions Source Control 50,0G0 60,000 0 501000 d.SCAOMD Rule 431.1:Sulfur Control 200.000 2L10.000 0 200.000 a.SCAOMO Rule 1179:Odor Control 670,000 420,000 0 420,000 I.SCAOMD Marketable Parmta Program 50,000 50,000 0 SO.00D g.Toxics Risk Reduction Program 250.000 260,000 0 250.000 h.A.G.Database Development 75.030 50.000 0 50,000 4.Water Consery&Reclamation R&D Projects 850.000 100,000 0 1001000 Transfer to Projects Below (80.097) (21,0271 0 121.9271 Flow Monitoring for Water Consery Project Ph 1 Pan 3 58223.0 38.170 0 24.389 24.389 0 Ultraviolet Light Pilot Rant 52133-C 21.927 21,927 21.927 21,927 0 5.Enviornmental Research&Development 2.785.0130 5001000 0 500,000 Transfer to Projects Below 11.000.739) (138,399) 0 1130.399) Decal&Appl of Molecular Tech to Detect Indicator&Pathogenic Microorganisms in Treated W/W NWRI Reject WO.91.0 58228.0 453,918 110,212 MAN 110,212 270,675 0 12,142) Collaborative Nand Study Using Molecular Tech to Detect Hepalitus A Vim &Virulence Factor Gene.in E.COII.NWRI Proj HR-92-06 58229.0 498,821 121.813) (18.176) (21,813) (39,988) 0 Spatial Temporal Wastewater Discharge Plums Study 58230.0 50,000 50,000 37,661 37,661 12,439 (1.471) S.Master Ran Update 3,600,000 100,000 0 100.000 Transfer to Project Below (5,841) 0 (5.841) Air Quality Management Implementation Plan 58232-0 375.000 5,041 5,841 5,841 0 SUB-TOTAL-SPECIAL PROJECTS 12.083,000 2.600.000 792,650 314.976 1 1,107.fi21 2#2850026 13.6131 F. Equipment Item, 48.469,000 3.000,000 248.257 1,74/.635 1,889,892 1,268,366 (1,872,638) SUB-TOTAL-JOINT WORKS CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS 1,097,396,500 70,032.000 123.782.013 26,097.225 150.479,238 43,334,775 (74.008.395) CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS COMPLETED AT 6/30/93 SCHEDULE F 6,369,222 2.590 6,371,812 (2,590) (4,304,2511 TOTAL JOINT WORKS CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS 1.087.395,b00 70.032.ODO 130.161.235 26.699.815 156,851,050 43,332.185 (78.312,646) Y N v RE: AGENDA ITEM NO 13 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California '! P.O.Box 8127.10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 927284127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 MINUTES OF JOINT WORKS SELECTION COMMITTEE MAY 25, 1994 -4:30 P.M. A meeting of the Joint Works Selection Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, and 14 of Orange County, California was held on May 25, 1994 at 4:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative Offices. The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: JOINT WORKS SELECTION COMMITTEE: OTHERS PRESENT: William Mahoney, Joint Chairman None John C. Cox, Jr., Vice Joint Chairman Don R. Griffin, Past Joint Chairman STAFF PRESENT: Blake P. Anderson, ABSENT Director of Engineering Margie Nellor, Director A. B. "Buck" Catlin, Past Joint Chairman of Technical Services Irwin Haydock, Manager, Compliance Division George Robertson, Senior Environmental Specialist Award Professional Services Agreements for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects. Specification No. P-150. The Committee reviewed the proposals received in response to the Districts' request for proposals submitted to seven firms for providing on-call surveying services for design and construction projects in the collection system and treatment plants. Proposals were received from five firms. The Committee reviewed an evaluation booklet on the proposals prepared by staff. In order to accommodate the large volume of collection system and treatment plant work, and to assure that surveying services will be available when needed, the Committee has negotiated new agreements with three firms, Bush & Associates, Clifford A. Forkert Civil Engineer, and DGA Consultants. Minutes of Joint Works Selection Committee Meeting May 25, 1994 Page 2 Bush & Associates, Inc., of Irvine, is proposed to be assigned surveying work generally in the collection system within the Districts in the southern half of our service area. Clifford A. Forkert Civil Engineer, of Huntington Beach, is proposed to be assigned surveying work generally within Plants 1 and 2. DGA Consultants, of Santa Ana, will be assigned surveying work generally in the collection system within the Districts in the northern half of our service area. On occasion, the firms will be assigned work out of their generally assigned area when the workloads so warrant the action. The intent of assigning work in the above described manner is based on location of the firm in relation to the needed work and to maintain an even distribution of the work in order to manage the Districts' construction program effectively. The agreements provide fixed prices for the first year and an option to renew the contracts for up to two additional years if a satisfactory price increase (within a maximum 1.5% annual escalation rate as set forth in the contract) can be negotiated by staff. The contracts provide hourly rates (at straight time) including profit, for requested services as follows: Bush& Clifford DGA Associates Forkert Consultants Licensed Surveyor,Civil Engineer/ per hour(maximum) $68 $58 $60 Two-Man Crew,per hour $128 $125 $130 Three-Man Crew, per hour $168 $162 $164 Draftsman, per hour $44 $36 $53 Maximum Escalation Rate for 95/96 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% Maximum Escalation Rate for 96/97 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% Minimum Charge for Travel (each way) 0 0 0 Supplies and Materials At Cost At Cost At Cost Minimum Numbers of Hours per Call Out 0.5 0 0 Maximum Allowed/per year $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 The total surveying requirements over the next three years are estimated to average about$360,000 per year. The Selection Committee recommends that the three firms, Bush and Associates, Clifford A. Forked Engineering, and DGA Consultants, be awarded one-year contracts in an amount not to exceed $120,000 each, with provision for two one-year extensions, provided the maximum escalation rate not exceed 1.5% per year. Enclosed are copies of the Selection Committee's certifications of the final negotiated fees with the recommended firms for said services. Minutes of Joint Works Selection Committee Meeting May 25, 1994 Page 3 Consideration of Professional Services Aoreements for Soils. Concrete and Other Materials Testino Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects. Specification No. P-151. The Committee reviewed the proposals received in response to the Districts' request for proposals submitted to seven firms for providing soils, concrete and materials testing services for construction projects in the collection system and treatment plants. Proposals were received from six firms. The Committee reviewed an evaluation booklet on the proposals prepared by staff. The Committee requested additional information and clarification of several items and staff is to report back to the Committee on June 8, 1994 at 7 p.m. for further consideration of the award of contracts for these services. It is anticipated that a recommendation will be submitted to the Boards at the regular July meeting. Chance Order No. 1 to Purchase Order No. 53935 for Marine Bioassay and Toxicity Analyses Aareement (Specification No. P-1521 with Reish Marine Studies. Inc. The Director of Technical Services reported that in 1991 the Districts entered into an agreement with Reish Marine Studies, Inc. to conduct research on the development of sediment bioassays and marine toxicity tests. It was noted that these testing protocols will be incorporated into a revised NPDES ocean monitoring program, and in recognition, the Districts entered into a purchase order contract with Reish Marine Services to begin developing these testing procedures. The contract was for$24,000.00 issued in accordance with staff procurement authority. Staff reported that additional work is needed to complete some of these studies and to assess the utility of the methods. Staff reported that Dr. Reish, who is former professor at California State University at Long Beach, is an expert in this field, and works closely with the EPA and State Water Resources Board. His experience is also unique inasmuch as he has trained most of the other scientists currently working in this field. Staff recommended that the agreement with Reish Marine Services, Inc. be amended in an amount not to exceed $16,000.00 for the additional work. The Committee recommends approval of Change Order No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Reish Marine Studies, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services, for an increased amount not to exceed $16,000.00, increasing the total authorized compensation from $24,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $40,000.00. Enclosed is a copy of the Selection Committee's certification, with attached staff report, of the final negotiated fee with Reish Marine Services, Inc., for said services. Minutes of Joint Works - Selection Committee Meeting " May 25, 1994 Page 4 Amendment No 11 for Year 10 (July 1994—February 1996) Ocean Monitoring Services with SAIC (Specification No. S-032). The Director of Technical Services and the Compliance Manager reported that the amendment being presented to the Committee represents the tenth year of the Districts' National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit's ocean monitoring program (OMP). Staff reported that the recommendation includes our participation in the Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP). Staff reviewed three options for the Year 10 OMP based on our participation or non-participation in the SCBPP. The SCBPP is a first-time, multi-agency regional monitoring effort which is designed to assess the cumulative effects of all inputs on our coastline. The three options reviewed were (1) to continue with the Districts' mandated 301(h) program; (2) do both the mandated OMP and participate in the SCBPP; and (3) do a modified mandated OMP and participate in the SCBPP. The staff has recommended the third option as the most cost effective and comprehensive alternative. The proposed Year 10 OMP contract with SAIL, is for$2,287,334. This represents a 7.8 percent cost increase over the Year 9 OMP, and reflects our participation in the SCBPP, increased program costs, and increased monitoring costs. A portion of the increased monitoring costs reflect our commitment to add an additional ten percent to the regular summer OMP to qualify for a minor permit modification to our NPDES permit as a result of modifications to the required OMP. Staff reported that it is anticipated that we will receive a new NPDES permit and OMP for Year 11, and that proposals will be solicited from qualified firms for the Year 11 OMP. Staff reported that the information garnered from the OMP supports our application to obtain a 301(h) waiver. This in turn has resulted in cost savings of$50 million per year by providing a high quality but less than full secondary wastewater treatment. The Year 10 OMP is viewed as a water mark year, representing ten years of data collection and evaluation, and will be summarized in a ten year report for publication and peer review. Staff is recommending that the amendment for Year 10 be approved for the following reasons: • It is important to maintain contractor continuity in the tenth year of the program; SAIC provides a total team effort, and has the experience with our program to be able to focus on the critical issues and evaluations in support of our 301(h) waiver; SAIC has the means and ability to integrate our special studies with our compliance monitoring activities; Minutes of Joint Works Selection Committee Meeting May 25, 1994 Page 5 SAIC has the experience throughout the Southern California Bight and will be able to work with other agencies and organizations in collecting and analyzing information as part of the SCBPP regional monitoring effort. The Committee recommends approval of Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-Inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. S-032, extending the contract from July 1, 1994 through February 29, 1996, for an amount not to exceed $2,287,334.00 for Year 10 of said contract. Enclosed is a copy of the Selection Committee's certification, with attached staff report, of the final negotiated fee with SAIC for said services. A mournment At approximately 5:30 p.m., the Committee adjourned. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS u s OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127.FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92728-8121 yam• 10841 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 �hcrcW (714)982-2411 May 25, 1994 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Professional Services Agreement with Bush & Associates, Inc. in Connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150 In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with Bush & Associates, Inc. for providing surveying and other related services in connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, on an hourly-rate basis including labor, overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus materials at cost, in an annual amount not to exceed $120,000, with provision for two one-year extension periods, as follows: Licensed Surveyor $68/Hour Two-Man Crew $128/Hour Three-Man Crew $168fHour Draftsperson $44/Hour Supplies and Materials At Cost Maximum Escalation Rate 95196 1.5% Maximum Escalation Rate 96/97 1.5% Minimum Hours Billed per Callout 0.5 Minimum Charge for Travel 0 TOTAL ANNUAL CONTRACT, not to exceed 5120.000 The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fees as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fees will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. Ls/William D. Mahoney /s/John C. Cox, Jr. William D. Mahoney John C. Cox, Jr. Joint Chairman Vice Joint Chairman Selection Committee Selection Committee A/Don R. Griffin Is/Blake P. Anderson Don R. Griffin Blake P. Anderson Past Joint Chairman Director of Engineering Selection Committee Selection Committee COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX e127. FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 9272"127 10944 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708-7019 (714)962-2411 May 25, 1994 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Professional Services Agreement with Bush & Associates, Inc. in Connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150 In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with Bush & Associates, Inc. for providing surveying and other related services in connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, on an hourly-rate basis including labor, overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus materials at cost, in an annual amount not to exceed $120,000, with provision for two one-year extension periods, as follows: Licensed Surveyor $68/Hour Two-Man Crew $128/Hour Three-Man Crew $168/Hour Draftsperson S44/Hour Supplies and Materials At Cost Maximum Escalation Rate 95/96 1.5% Maximum Escalation Rate 96/97 1.5% Minimum Hours Billed per Callout 0.5 Minimum Charge for Travel 0 TOTAL ANNUAL CONTRACT, not to exceed 3120.000 The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fees as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fees will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. /stWilliam D. Mahoney /s/John C. Cox. Jr. William D. Mahoney John C. Cox, Jr. Joint Chairman Vice Joint Chairman Selection Committee Selection Committee /s/Don R. Griffin Is/Blake P. Anderson Don R. Griffin Blake P. Anderson Past Joint Chairman Director of Engineering Selection Committee Selection Committee COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 �1hGe ca+'� (714)962-2411 May 25, 1994 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Professional Services Agreement with Clifford A. Forkert Civil Engineer in Connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150 In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with Clifford A. Forkert Civil Engineer for providing surveying and other related services in connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, on an hourly-rate basis including labor, overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus materials at cost, in an annual amount not to exceed $120,000, with provision for two one-year extension periods, as follows: Licensed Surveyor (maximum) $58/Hour Two-Man Crew $125/Hour Three-Man Crew $162/Hour Draftsperson S36/Hour Supplies and Materials At Cost Maximum Escalation Rate 95/96 1.5% Maximum Escalation Rate 96/97 1.5% Minimum Hours Billed per Callout 0.5 Minimum Charge for Travel 0 TOTAL ANNUAL CONTRACT, not to exceed 125 0.000 The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fees as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fees will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. Is/William D. Mahoney /s/John C. Cox, Jr. William D. Mahoney John C. Cox, Jr. Joint Chairman Vice Joint Chairman Selection Committee Selection Committee Is/Don R. Griffin /s/Blake P. Anderson Don R. Griffin Blake P. Anderson Past Joint Chairman Director of Engineering Selection Committee Selection Committee COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ' OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX$127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92729-e127 10844 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7019 Abe cW (714)962-2411 May 25, 1994 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants in Connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150 In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with DGA Consultants for providing surveying and other related services in connection with Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, on an hourly-rate basis including labor, overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus materials at cost, in an annual amount not to exceed $120,000, with provision for two one-year extension periods, as follows: Licensed Surveyor S60/11our Two-Man Crew S130/Hour Three-Man Crew $164/11our Draftsperson $53/Hour Supplies and Materials At Cost Maximum Escalation Rate 95/96 1.5% Maximum Escalation Rate 96/97 1.5% Minimum Hours Billed per Callout 0.5 Minimum Charge for Travel 0 TOTAL ANNUAL CONTRACT, not to exceed S7 The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fees as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fees will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. Is/William D. Mahoney /s/John C. Cox. Jr. William D. Mahoney John C. Cox, Jr. Joint Chairman Vice Joint Chairman Selection Committee Selection Committee Is/Don R. Griffin /s/Blake P. Anderson Don R. Griffin Blake P. Anderson Past Joint Chairman Director of Engineering Selection Committee Selection Committee COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS F�• e OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA y V.O.BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 9272M127 108"ELLIS,FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714)962-2411 May 25, 1994 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order No. 53935 agreement with Reish Marine Studies, Inc., for Environmental Consulting Services for Marine Bioassay and Toxicity Analysis (Specification No. P-152) In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with Reish Marine Studies, Inc. for Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order No. 53935 agreement for technical support, on an hourly-rate basis, including labor plus overhead and fixed profit and provision of living test specimens, in an amount not to exceed $16,000.00 for a period of one year. Existing Proposed Amended Consultant Services Agreement Addition Agreement (labor at hourly rate, overhead, $24,000.00 $16,000.00 $40,000.00 profit and specimens) TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT (not to exceed) $24,000.00 $16,000.00 $40,000.00 The attached Staff Report provides more detailed information on the professional services provided by Reish Marine Studies, Inc. 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. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA lU9AA ELLIS AVENUE Boards of Directors aC Solt S,z> May 25, 1994 FOUNTA N VAUEY.CAUraeeu 92VB4121 oiosezxn Page Two William D. Mahon- /s/John C. Cox, Jr William D. Mahoney John C. Cox, Jr Joint Chairman Vice Joint Chairman /s/Don R. Griffin /s/Margaret Nellor Don R. Griffin Margaret Nellor Past Joint Chairman Dir. of Technical Services Tc:a REFA20092.LTR COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS May 13, 1994 M ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA f tOBGt EWS AVENUE VO WM 0127 FOUNTAIN VA Y.CALIFOIPIIA SM226127 STAFF REPORT m419624411 CHANGE ORDER No. 1 TO PURCHASE ORDER No. 53935 AGREEMENT WITH REISH MARINE STUDIES, INC. FOR MARINE BIOASSAY AND TOXICITY ANALYSIS (SPECIFICATION NO. P-152) Summary In December 1991, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (Districts) entered into a Purchase Order agreement with Reish Marine Studies, Inc, to advise and conduct research on the development of sediment bioassays and marine receiving water toxicity tests for determining the impacts of wastewater discharges on marine organisms. The agreement provided for funding not to exceed $24,000.00 based on a rate of$40 per hour. Staff is recommending that agreement be amended for a one-year extension in an amount not-to-exceed $16,000. Background During the past several years, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) have been working on the development of water quality criteria for marine sediments. The State Ocean Plan, which is updated every three years, is currently in the process of being reviewed, and is expected to include requirements for sediment quality criteria and sediment bioassays. These requirements will become part of our National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit upon renewal. In recognition of these pending requirement, the Districts contracted with Reish Marine Studies, Inc. in December 1991 to begin developing sediment bioassays using local species that could be used to assess the potential impacts of the Districts' wastewater discharge. The terms of the agreement established a contract rate of$40 per hour, not to exceed $24,000.00. Specific tasks included the following: The development of sediment testing procedures with the juvenile Neanrhes arenaceodenrara (polychaete worm) which evaluated growth, as measured by body weight, to determine whether or not the sediments in the vicinity of the ocean outfall had any effects on growth. . Tests using Neanrhes to determine whether or not sediments effected reproduction or survival of offspring. Tests using Neanrhes to ascertain the potential for bioaccumulation of metals and organic constituents. The development of additional sediment bioassays using Dinophilus gyociliarus (polychaete worm), Grandidierella japonica and Corophium insidiosum (amphipods), Stuff Report to Reish Marine Studies.Inc. A,eemem a Page I and Amphiodia urrico (brittle star). Preparation of technical papers and presentations describing the test protocols and results. Future Work Tasks The results of this initial work have shown that some of the bioassays evaluated will be useful in assessing the impacts of the Districts' wastewater discharge. However, additional work is needed for final determinations, and to assist with performing a required element of our NPDES monitoring program related to marine receiving water toxicity tests. For the next fiscal year, this work includes the following tasks: Completion of the reproductive test with Neamhes and a final evaluation as to its utility (July 1994 - January 1995). Completion of the evaluation of the Neamhes metals and organics bioaccumulation data to determine the utility of the test for uptake studies (July 1994 - October 1994). Collection of samples and development of an amphipod test organism which can be used for survival and reproduction studies (October 1994 - June 1995). Collection of samples and development of test protocols for Pectinaria californiensis (polychaete worm) in accordance with the requirements of our NPDES permit (October 1994 - June 1995). In addition to the sediment bioassay work, staff is recommending that Reish Marine Studies, Inc. provide assistance with projects related to two marine receiving water toxicity tests. The 1990 State Ocean Plan requires NPDES dischargers to conduct a series of bioassays to identify the most sensitive species using at least three marine organisms (fish, invertebrates and algae). The results of work completed to date have shown that the Strongylocemrorus purpuratus (sea urchin) is one the most sensitive tests. Work proposed for Reish Marine Studies, Inc. during the next fiscal year related to marine toxicity testing includes: Conducting urchin fertilization and development tests to assess reliability and repeatability of the tests (July 1994 - November 1994). Conducting tests using Photobacrerlian phosphoreum Ouminescent bacteria) and correlating the results to standard acute bioassay tests (July 1994 - November 1994). This test method is advantageous because it is very quick; however, it is necessary to see how the results compare to standard bioassays which take up to 96 hours to complete. If the test proves to be useful, it could be used for not only marine testing, but source control and storm water testing as well. Conducting Neanthes tests on primary and secondary effluent to compare with - previous work done by the Districts in 1990 (Ann [Martin] Dalkey, CSULB MS Thesis). Comparison of results will show if major improvements in treatment and SUR Repon to Reish MarLu Studies,Inc.Agrtemem a Page 2 source control have resulted in reduced toxicity of today's effluent (January - April 1995). W Conducting whole effluent toxicity tests on juvenile Neanthes to develop a 7-day chronic protocol. A 20-day test has been submitted to the State for evaluation. Acceptance is presently on hold pending modifications to a shorter test period (July 1994 - January 1995). California marine toxicity testing around ocean outfalls is still in its infancy. As EPA and the SWRCB develop new tests with new species, and impose new regulations based on these tests, it is imperative that we have a complete working knowledge and understanding of these tests. Staff believes that the expertise offered by Reish Marine Studies in the field of marine biology and ecology, and through the firm's previous work with the EPA and the SWRCB's Toxicity Protocol Committee will add credibility and confidence in the test results as they relate to repeatability, reliability and validity of sediment and marine bioassays. Recommendation Staff recommends that the present agreement with Reish Marine Studies, Inc. be amended to extend it one year in an amount not-to-exceed $16,000 based on a rate of$40 per hour. The total amount for the amended contract will not exceed $40,000. Sun R<POn In R.Wh Marian Sludke .Inc. Agrcemanl• Page 3 is! :,Y•, �h4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX$127.FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92728-9127 s 108"ELLIS.FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA W708-7019 �h�hcE cW`� (714)982-2411 May 25, 1994 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708-7081 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Amendment No. 11 to Agreement with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. S-032 In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering and architectural services, the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee with Science Applications International Corporation to perform services for the tenth contract period as part of the Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for the Districts 120-inch ocean outfall in conformance with the requirements of the United States Environmental Protection Agency. SAIC will prepare equipment, conduct field surveys, perform data analysis and interpretations, report results and recommendations for Contract Period 10 (July 1994-February 1996) for a net amount not to exceed $2,287,334.00 as follows: Basic Program Tasks (Labor & Other Direct Costs), including Southern California Bight Pilot Project participation $1,590,053 Profit (Basic Program Tasks) $ 122,812 Options -Ten Year Monograph Support, Water Quality Atlas, Bioaccum./Trophic Transfer, Sediment Sources Fates, Benthic Resource Allocation Technique, Plankton Tows, Histopathology, Outfall/Reef Study, Iron/Aluminum Analysis, Chemistry QA/QC (CRMs) $ 531,250 Profit (Optional Tasks) $ 43,219 Year 10 Contract Amount $2,287,334 COUNTY SANRATION DISTRICTS M ORANGE COUNTY. CAUrORNIA Boards of Directors 'opaw.8127 P.0.BO%Nt2) May 25, 1994 E0.urrtux v%urr.uuxmm°szme+z) Page Two The attached Staff Report provides more detailed information on the services provided by SAIC. The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fee as reasonable for the services to be performed and that the said fee will not result in excessive profits for the contractor. /s/William D. Mahoney /s/John C. Cox, Jr. William D. Mahoney John C. Cox, Jr. Joint Chairman Vice Joint Chairman /s/Don R. Griffin /s/Margaret Nellor Don R. Griffin Margaret Nellor Past Joint Chairman Dir. of Technical Services COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 0 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1 9 ELL5 AVEMIE P.O.RO%9127 May 19, 1994 F WMN VALLEY.CAGW9MA 92M2 127 n1a19W-2H1 STAFF REPORT Comprehensive Ocean Monitoring Program and Ocean Monitoring Contract: Amendment No. 11, Year 10 (July 1994 - February 1996) to Contract with Science Applications International, Corporation (SAIC), Ocean Monitoring Services Specification No. S-032 I. BACKGROUND ON THE DISTRICTS' OCEAN MONITORING PROGRAM The 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA) required Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) to provide full secondary treatment to their discharged effluent. In 1977, the CWA was amended to include Section 301(h) that authorized the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to grant variances ("waivers") from full secondary treatment for POTWs that discharged into deep, well-mixed marine waters; administered a stringent industrial waste source control program; and demonstrated protection of public health and the environment. Congress added Section 301(h) to the CWA in recognition that, under certain carefully proscribed circumstances, such discharges do no harm and there is no legitimate reason to incur the significant monetary costs of secondary treatment along with its attendant air and land environmental impacts. In 1985 EPA and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB)jointly issued the first 301(h) waiver to the Districts and revised the Districts' National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This specially modified permit was issued for a five-year period subject to evaluation and reissuance by mutual agreement of State and Federal regulatory agencies. As a condition of the (301(h) modified) NPDES Ocean Discharge Permit, the Districts were required to conduct extensive monitoring designed to characterize the effects of our discharge on the ocean environment and to provide a basis for determining compliance with EPA's extensive 301(h) regulations. In parallel with our 1989 facilities planning, environmental review, and public participation efforts leading to our 30-year Wastewater �a s Management Action Plan called "2020 VISION", the Districts' Boards of Directors, in July 1989, authorized staff to apply for a five-year renewal of the 301(h) permit. The Districts submitted a detailed five-volume application for the 301(h) modified NPDES Ocean Discharge Permit renewal on August 28, 1989, in full accordance with all applicable requirements of the CWA. Most recently, EPA has indicated that the formal evaluation leading to a Technical Review Report has been completed and the issuance of a tentative EPA decision, leading to the public review process, is imminent. Meanwhile, the Districts continue to operate under the terms and conditions of our 1985 permit which has been administratively extended since February 1990. Staff believes that the Districts' application provides the factual basis to support renewal of the 301(h) permit by EPA and the CRWQCB. This is supported by analysis of eight years of detailed data gathered under the monitoring program, which was specifically designed for 301(h) evaluation by the EPA Region IX office in 1985. Over the years, the bulk of our effort has been devoted to measuring, documenting and evaluating changes in the receiving waters, sediments and fauna within a 75 square mile sampling area. The Districts' consulting experts say that thus far, any outfall-related changes that have been measured are not ecologically significant, and that some of the observed changes may be due to natural variability or other sources of pollution in the Santa Ana River watershed. This year's program proposes participation in a Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP) to address some of these larger issues. It is incumbent on the Districts to continually assess the effects of our discharge to ensure that it does no harm and meets all mandated regulatory requirements. Therefore, we believe that we must refine our future monitoring agenda, and devote less effort and funding to measurement and description, and more towards understanding and explanation. This shift in emphasis to a more functional approach to monitoring has been addressed over the past few years by conducting various special projects that have built upon and enhanced our permit-mandated sampling program. These special projects have allowed the Districts the flexibility, not available under our current NPDES permit, to more fully explore the effects (or lack thereof) of our discharge on the marine environment. Since 1985, the EPA, CRWQCB, Districts' staff, consultants and other marine scientists, have attended over thirty Quarterly Ocean Monitoring Meetings to discuss the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP). This has led to a consensus that some elements of the OMP need refinement. The EPA and the CRWQCB have both acknowledged the need to modify our program and to reallocate efforts so we can more effectively address the informational needs of regulators, managers and the public. During the past year, we have discussed the necessary changes that need to be made, and have reached an informal consensus with EPA and the CRWQCB that a new OMP should include the following three elements that: (1) address basic compliance issues, (2) 2 I examine functional relationships in the ocean environment, and (3) develop a regional perspective. Staff is therefore recommending additional special projects for Year 10 that will aide in the design of an improved monitoring program — one that will better address regulatory and management issues and enhance public understanding of the environmental conditions that exist in the marine environment off of Southern California. To keep the program in context, it is important to remember that our overall purpose continues to be to address the three basic questions and their relationship to our outfall: (1) is it safe to swim, (2) is it safe to eat the fish, and (3) is the coastal marine environment being protected? H. SUMMARY OF SAIC OCEAN MONITORING CONTRACTS FOR YEARS 1-9 In 1985, the Districts issued a request for proposals to provide ocean monitoring contract services for the Districts' 120-inch ocean outfall, Specification No. S-032. After the evaluation of seven proposals, only four were considered responsive with bids ranging from $1.0 million (SAIC) to $2.2 million (see Exhibit 1). The Districts entered into an agreement with SAIC to provide these services for the five-year life of the permit, and negotiated a fee for Year 1 totalling just over one million dollars ($1,002,705) after adding Amendments 1 and 2 (see Exhibit 1). At the time of the original contract award, this comprehensive monitoring program was the first of its kind. It was so new that the EPA had yet to fully define all of the work to be accomplished, but the Districts went forward anyway because our permit required that the work begin immediately. Because of this, it was anticipated that as the program proceeded and the requirements were refined, it would be necessary to modify the contract to provide for the then unknown changes that would be required by EPA. Therefore, the total annual contract amount has changed as follows: $1,530,486 (Year 2), $1,707,294 (Year 3), $1,942,265 (Year 4), $1,609570 (Year 5) $1,821,365 (Year 6), $1,856,923 (Year 7), $1,639,938 (Year 8) and $2,120,480 (Year 9). Exhibit 1 provides a cost breakdown (by year) for comparable program elements. The changes for Years 2-4 included significant increases in the scope of work required by EPA and the CRWQCB to better document the environmental conditions in the vicinity of the Districts' ocean outfall. The Year 5 program included fewer current measurements, additional analyses and reporting (our 5-Year Monitoring Summary Report), and shifted water quality tasks from SAIC to the Districts. The Year 6 program shifted all NPDES-required tasks back to SAIC. The Year 7 program substantially enhanced database management, computer-assisted evaluations and graphical display of results by both SAIC and the Districts. During the course of Year Ts program responsibility for water quality sampling and sample analysis was taken back by the Districts. The Year 8 program was essentially identical to Year 7. The major portion of the cost reduction from Year 7 to Year 8 was due to the fact that SAIC did not do any of the water quality sample collection or analysis in Year 8. This element of the OMP was again carried out by the Districts' laboratory for an estimated Year 8 cost of 3 C $127,000. Due to efficiencies developed over the course of the years, the base portion of the program, not including water quality, was reduced in Year 8 by $14,893. For the Year 9 OMP, it was necessary to use a different subcontract chemistry laboratory which resulted in an increase in the base OMP cost. To reduce the cost increase, the Districts entered into a separate cost reimbursement agreement with SAIC for chemistry analyses. Because this was a new, unproven subcontractor, a chemistry contingency fund of$110,000 was approved by the Board in case the laboratory could not complete the required work and SAIC needed to utilize another, more expensive chemistry laboratory. Since the contract laboratory proved able to analyze the Districts' chemistry samples, this fund was not utilized, except for approximately $10,000 expended for the analysis of fish tissue samples, specifically requested by the CRWQCB. The Year 9 program also included several special projects totaling $461,292 (including profit) to be conducted under the SAIC OMP contract While representing an increase in the SAIC contract, the increase was associated with the increased monitoring effort necessary to perform these additional tasks. The funds for these special projects and the chemistry contingency fund were more than offset by allocating funds from the Districts' Joint Operating Fund Ocean Research Budget for Fiscal Year 93-94. Districts' staff again completed the field collection and laboratory analyses for the water quality program element for a budgeted cost of$140,000 (Table 1). III. PROPOSED SAIC OCEAN MONITORING CONTRACT SERVICES, SPECIFICATION NO. S-03Z FOR YEAR 10 (July 1994-February 1996) During the past nine years, program efficiencies have been gained by utilizing the same prime contractor, which has stabilized costs for most program elements. Additionally, the efforts and oceanographic capabilities added by the Districts' staff have proved to be cost-effective, saving money as well as enhancing our ability to analyze the burgeoning OMP database. However, over time the program has experienced some cost increases due primarily to the additional requirements imposed by EPA and the CRWQCB but also because of increased costs of services (e.g., labor, field sampling costs — fuel, boat insurance, etc.) and chemical analyses. The Districts' permit stipulates the use of many analytical methods that are not routinely run by environmental laboratories. Many laboratories lack experience in these 301(h)-specific methods, and find it difficult to achieve the minimum detection limits required by EPA. This situation creates a smaller pool of qualified laboratories and leads to higher analytical costs. For Year 10, however, since the Districts will be utilizing the same subcontract laboratory it was determined that the Chemistry Contingency Fund of$110,000 from Year 9 could be eliminated from the SAIC contract (Table 1). Other cost increases are directly attributable to increases in effort by our contractor that have been requested by the Districts. These tasks include enhanced quality assurance and quality control and high-level review of our mandated annual OMP report prepared for the EPA and CRWQCB. For Year 10, these added elements will again he required 4 of the contractor. Total cost increases due to higher costs and additional required work comes to $83,488 (including profit). Staff reviewed three options for the Year 10 OMP based on our participation or non- participation in the Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP). The SCBPP is a first-time, multiagency, regional monitoring effort, which is expected to serve as a model for long-term integrated monitoring in Southern California to better assess the cumulative effects of all inputs on our coastline (see Section IV and Appendix B for more discussion). The three options reviewed were: (1) continue with the Districts' mandated 301(h) program, (2) do both the mandated 301(h) OMP and participate in the SCBPP and (3) obtain some regulatory relief from EPA and the CRWQCB for our summer sampling and participate in the SCBPP. The costs for the three options are summarized in Exhibit 2. Option 3 (modifying our 301(h) summer OMP and SCBPP participation) resulted in a cost increase of $53,677 in the Year 10 OMP due to sampling costs for the SCBPP and increased sampling costs for the remainder of our mandated summer 301(h) OMP. Of this increase approximately $43,300 represents the Districts adding ten percent of its regular summer monitoring effort cost to the SCBPP (see below and Appendix A). Our participation was reviewed with the Executive Committee at the March 1994 meeting. Participating in the SCBPP required a modification of our mandated summer monitoring efforts. This modification was approved by the EPA and the CRWQCB as a "minor modification" to our NPDES permit in conformance with Federal regulations (see Appendix A). Minor modifications to permits have been legally interpreted to mean additional monitoring. The EPA and CRWQCB language (Appendix A) was reviewed and accepted by the Districts' legal counsel. We required EPA and the CRWQCB to provide these letters before we would agree to participate in the SCBPP to assure that it would not jeopardize our 301(h) NPDES ocean discharge permit. As a result, some of the required program elements in the Year 9 OMP have been modified and other new elements added, to meet the specifications of the SCBPP. In exchange for doing our NPDES specified monitoring this summer, the Districts agreed to add an additional ten percent to the regular summer quarter OMP costs associated with benthic and trawl sample collection and analyses (roughly $428,000 including profit). When discussed at the March 1994 Executive Committee, an amount of $30,000 was presented as the additional ten percent cost increase for the Districts to participate in the SCBPP. However, this amount was based on the summer benthic sampling costs only (approximately $302,000). This has amounted to an increase of about $43,300 (our additional ten percent to the SCBPP) for an operating budget contribution for the SCBPP by the Districts of around $471,000. The proposed cost for the SCBPP sample collection and analyses is $496,119 (including profit), but this also includes portions of our mandatory OMP program. Overall, the increase in the proposed combined modified OMP and SCBPP from the 5 Year 9 base OMP is $53,677 (an increase of 3.2%) (Table 1). Finally, the Year 10 OMP includes a number of special projects (see Section V) that will address the quality and applicability of our ten year monitoring effort. With the additional special projects, the total proposed cost for Year 10 comes to $2,287,344 versus the Year 9 cost of $2,120,480 (a net increase of $166,854, or 7.8%). Again, as in Year 9, the Year 10 contract work by SAIC does not include costs associated with water quality field sampling and laboratory analysis. The Districts will continue to carry out the water quality sampling and chemical analyses at a budgeted cost of $140,000. The costs for data handling and reporting, plus additional data quality assurance and quality control ($25,369) have been retained in the SAIC contract as was done in the past (Table 1). The Year 10 contract amendment also differs from past amendments in that the duration of Amendment No. Il will be 18 months versus the 12 month duration of past SAIC OMP contract amendments thereby completing the original OMP contract with SAIC.. This is in anticipation of the Districts obtaining a new NPDES permit and soliciting new bids for the new OMP. However, since the each contract period actually spans 18 months (in order to complete the fiscal year data analysis and report writing) this amendment needs to span the period of time (July 1995 to February 1996) when SAIC may not be sampling for the Districts but will be completing the mandated Year 10 annual OMP report. The attached exhibits summarize the cost history and resource allocation for OMP Years 1-10: Exhibit 1 shows the yearly history of SAIC contract costs by program element. Exhibit 2 shows cost summaries for the three summer sampling options reviewed for the Year 10 OMP. , Exhibit 3 graphically presents, by contract year, the costs of each major program element, the total yearly contract costs and the cumulative costs for the program. , Exhibit 4 provides a cost breakdown for the combined Year 10 OMP and SCBPP. > Exhibit 5 presents the cost breakdown for the recommended special projects. IV. DISCUSSION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BIGHT PILOT PROGRAM The Districts discharge treated wastewater effluent onto the San Pedro Shelf, a portion of the Southern California Bight (SCB). The SCB is the indented portion of the Pacific coastline that extends from Point Conception, California in the north to Cape Colnett, Baja California, Mexico in the south. Approximately 15 million people live in the Southern California coastal region, and directly or indirectly effect the environmental quality of the SCB. 6 The SCB is an important and unique ecological resource that contains an abundance of fish and invertebrate species; over 500 fish and 1,500 invertebrate species have been identified to date. At the same time, the SCB is also an important economic resource supporting various designated beneficial uses, such as recreational activities (e.g., swimming, diving, boating, etc.), commercial and sport fishing, municipal and industrial wastewater discharges, oil extraction and shipping traffic. Averaging only 3 km in width, the coastal shelf of the SCB land margin is particularly susceptible to the effects of human activities spread throughout the coastal plain and mountain watershed. Various local, state and federal regulatory and wildlife agencies are charged with protecting the environmental quality and natural resources of the mainland shelf of the SCB. POTWs, as well as other dischargers, are required to monitor their wastewater effluents and the fresh or marine receiving waters into which they discharge in accordance with their NPDES permits. To date, these monitoring programs, while useful, have focused on smaller scale, discrete questions (e.g., permit compliance) centered around a localized discharge site. Because the marine monitoring programs and subsequent data of each discharger are significantly different, comparability among datasets has become an issue in terms of assessing the environmental quality of the SCB. Even if the results of all monitoring programs were fully integrated, the available data would not be sufficient to provide a regional assessment. An integrated regional monitoring effort in the SCB would allow resource managers to better assess the cumulative effects of anthropogenic inputs to the mainland shelf. During the past twenty years, meetings have been held among dischargers and regulators to discuss regional monitoring in the area. More recently, reports by the National Resource Council urged the development of regional monitoring. The reports illustrated that while the amount of sampling presently done may be adequate, the narrow focus on compliance testing and the general lack of a coordinated effort by the responsible monitoring agencies restricts the utility of the information collected. Ultimately, having a coordinated, integrated regional monitoring program in the SCB would allow resource managers to select the most cost-effective management strategies. Recently, EPA-Region IX, the California State Water Resources Control Board, the Los Angeles, Santa Ana and San Diego CRWQCBs, the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) and its four member agencies (of which the Districts is one) and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project began exploring ways to develop a regional monitoring program. EPA's national Environmental Monitoring Assessment Program (EMAP) provided the framework and a source of funding ($500,000) for establishing a pilot SCB regional monitoring program known as the Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP; see Appendix B). EMAP is a national monitoring strategy that measures biological responses to environmental stress in a variety of habitat types. 7 The SCBPP represents a transitional step towards coordinated interagency regional monitoring. As the mandated monitoring programs of each discharger are converted to contribute to a wider-scale effort each monitoring agency will adopt common methods and equipment and will monitor on a coordinated schedule at designated sites chosen in a statistically unbiased fashion designed to be proportional to available SCB habitat. Although, the success of this pilot project cannot be predicted in advance of the planned evaluation, there is general agreement among the participants that a larger scale, better coordinated program is necessary addition to the historical end-of--the-pipe approach. The Districts have agreed to participate in the SCBPP this summer, and as such, it has been necessary to modify our summer monitoring effort. As discussed previously in this report in Section HI, to insure that these changes only constituted a minor modification to our NPDES permit we have agreed to commit an additional ten percent in resources (based upon the cost of the Districts' regular summer program) to our OMP. This commitment satisfies our need to demonstrate both compliance with the Federal CWA Section 301(h) requirements and a good faith effort toward regional monitoring and to satisfy the legal requirements of a minor permit modification pursuant to Federal regulations. This plan represents our best attempt to cost-effectively meeting both our mandate and our environmental protection obligations. The SCBPP has been designed by the participants as a cooperative sampling and analysis event involving the four major Southern California POTWs, EPA, SCCWRP, and the Los Angeles, Santa Ana and San Diego CRWQCBs. The SCBPP is intended to provide a framework for combining the monitoring efforts of several, independent participants to evaluate environmental conditions from a regional perspective. The SCBPP is intended to replace our normal 301(h) summer sampling for Year 10. It includes sampling and sample analyses for a subset of the Districts' NPDES permit-specified stations and at new designated SCBPP locations. The Districts' prime and sub-contractors (SAIC and MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.) will perform benthic and trawl sampling at a series of predesignated SCBPP stations on the shelf between Solana Beach (northern San Diego County) and San Pedro Bay (southern Los Angeles County), as well as at 17 of the Districts' regular benthic and two of the regular trawl stations. Districts' staff will conduct a modified summer water quality sampling effort as well as the sampling for the SCBPP. Sampling for the SCBPP will be conducted in accordance with the SCBPP Field Sampling Manual and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP); sampling at the Districts' mandated stations will be performed in accordance with the Year 10 QAPP and the Districts' Environmental Sciences Laboratory's Standard Operating Procedures. Data from the SCBPP will used to evaluate the EMAP approach as a possible model for regional monitoring in Southern California. Findings will also be useful for comparisons between conditions near the Districts' outfall and those at other areas of the SCB, including the immediate vicinities of other outfall discharges, near stormwater and river discharges, and at remote sites removed from point-sources. 8 V. DISCUSSION OF RECOMMENDED SPECIAL PROJECTS During the history of this contract, the Districts have attempted to extract added value from the mandated OMP by including special projects that compliment, enhance and lead to better understanding of the required OMP elements. By doing this in conjunction with our annual OMP, the Districts have been able to leverage the effort normally expended to include studies that look at functional aspects of the marine environment, answer relevant questions that our compliance program was not designed to address, and enhance the temporal and spatial understanding of the data collected during the normal course of sampling. In Year 9, the Districts funded several special projects that improved the quality and statistical power of the data collected; made the data collected more comparable to other existing data sets; investigated new and possibly better field sampling methods; and addressed important public and environmental health questions raised by our mandated OMP. The results of these studies will be reported in peer-reviewed journals, incorporated into the annual OMP report, or both. The funds allocated for these special projects were offset by reallocating research funds from the 1993-94 Joint Operating Budget. The total amount expended in Year 9 for special projects was $461,292 (including profit) (Table 1). The special projects recommended for Year 10 (see Exhibit 5 for individual project costs) again address the quality and completeness of our extensive and unique ocean monitoring dataset. The Year 10 projects continue our goal of changing the focus of monitoring from a descriptive approach to a more functional one that addresses questions of the future rather than those of the past. Over the course of the Districts' OMP a massive amount of data has been generated. Each year an annual report is prepared that focuses on the results obtained from the prior year's field sampling. These reports are narrowly focused, see a limited distribution and do not benefit from the peer-review of the scientific community. Two projects , the ten-year summary monograph and the Water Quality Atlas (Projects #1 and #2, Exhibit 4) address these limitations of our typical annual report. These two projects will provide comprehensive summaries of the results of ten years of Districts' monitoring on the San Pedro Shelf while putting the Districts' results into a broader perspective by incorporating other relevant regional data that effect the Santa Ana River watershed and the marine environment of the San Pedro Shelf. One of the required elements of the Districts' NPDES permit is to obtain measurements of the accumulation of contaminants in benthic infauna and fish (bioaccumulation). While elevated concentrations of some contaminants have been observed in fish and macroinvertebrates, the EPA designed benthic infauna bioaccumulation program has been unable to obtain enough infaunal material to run chemical analyses. Because of 9 this we have not been able to establish any correlations (or lack thereof) between fish, the benthic infauna upon which they feed, levels of contaminants in tissues and sediment contaminant levels. This is an important issue since contaminants may be undetectable in the sediments in which these creatures live, but can become detectable after accumulating in tissue matter. To better address these important human and environmental health questions, five projects have been designed for the Year 10 OMP. These projects (#3-#7, Exhibit 4) are well integrated and will address several fundamental questions that we have been unable to answer under our mandated OMP. The question of transport and fate of contaminants in the marine sediments around the Districts' outfall will be addressed by utilizing chemical biomarkers specifically associated with our wastewater effluent and/or other known sources of contamination (e.g., California crude oil). The transfer of contaminants between marine organisms (i.e., trophic level transfers) and the effect of any contaminant body burden upon the health of these animals will also be examined. Additional histopathology, work (Project #7) will allow the Districts to measure chemical contaminant levels in the liver and muscle tissues of the same fish that are examined for liver diseases. This would be a program first and may provide more definitive information on the causes of fish disease that our mandated program wasn't designed to answer, but has nonetheless measured. Finally we are proposing a new analysis technique (Project #5) that will provide a method of determining the relative importance of the habitats sampled by the Districts and the proportion of food resources available for the target species. This should help explain spatial patterns observed in the fish populations studied under our mandated OMP. The Districts' outfall represents, in and of itself, a change in the marine environment. The area away from the outfall is typified by a sandy, low relief bottom. Normally, this area would appear (from the surface) to be quite barren, since the animals present burrow in or live at the surface, showing very low vertical profiles to avoid predation by fish. The construction of the outfall created, in essence, an artificial reef that has become an attraction to marine organisms. The Directors may have seen videos of the outfall showing extensive amounts of marine life on and around outfall "reef". During the course of the Districts' OMP there has been much discussion about changes that have occurred within the ZID (Zone of Initial Dilution: an area roughly 60 meters from the diffuser pipe). Unfortunately, there has never been any way to distinguish changes caused by the discharged effluent and changes brought about by creating an artificial reef. The Outfall as a Reef project (#8, Exhibit 4) will compare species types and numbers as a function of distance from the pipe barrel and compare this to gradients seen near the diffuser. This should allow us to differentiate the effect of the outfall on biological community structures from what we believe to be the biological responses to the Districts' discharged effluent. The last two proposed projects (#9 and #10, Exhibit 4) address the quality assurance and interpretation of our chemistry data. The Districts has always attempted to obtain 10 the highest quality and most relevant chemistry data that it could. While not mandated by our NPDES permit we have, over the past several years, analyzed certified reference materials (samples with know concentrations of various chemical contaminants) that provide us with a measure of the quality of the analysis of OMP samples by our contract laboratory. This information allows us to better compare results obtained in previous years of our OMP as well as with data available other studies. Finally, staff is proposing to continue measuring iron and aluminum, not mandated by our permit, to aide in the normalization and subsequent interpretation of our chemistry data. The total amount for special projects for Year 10 amounts to $574,469, including profit (Exhibit 4). VI. RECOMMENDATION SAIC continues to provide competent ocean monitoring services to the Districts. Staff recommends that the SAIC contract be amended (Amendment No. 11) to extend it for Year 10 (1993-96), in an amount not to exceed $2,287,344. Table 2 summarizes the Year 10 SAIC OMP contract. As previously pointed out in Section III, we anticipate that the EPA and the CRWQCB will issue a new NPDES ocean discharge permit with a new OMP for Year 11. Therefore, once the new program has been specified and defined the Districts will solicit proposals from qualified firms for the new Year 11 OMP. 11 TABLE 1 Comparison Between the SAIC Year 9 and Year 10 OMP Contracts Program Element Year 9 Year 10 Change from (1993-94) (1994-96) Year 9 to 10 Water Quality $ 21,516 $ 25,369 $ 3,853 Benthic $ 769,238 $ 530,545 $ (238,693) Trawls $ 175,884 $ 66,219 $ (109,665) Rig Fish $ 51,123 $ 54,106 $ 2,983 Data Management/Evaluation $ 351,078 $ 372,171 $ 21,093 Program Management $ 69,391 $ 80,220 $ 10,829 SCBPP' NA $ 461,423° $ 461,423 Base OMP Profit` $ 110,958 $ 122,812 $ 11,854 SAIC Base OMP Contract Costs $1,549,188 $1,712,865 $ 163,677 Chemistry Analysis Contingency $ 110,000 N.A. $ (110,000) Fund° Total - Base OMP $1,659,188 $1,712,865 $ 53,677 Special Projects $ 423,188 $ 531,250` $ 108,062 Profit - Special Projects $ 38,104 $ 43,219 $ 5,115 Total - SAIC Contract $2,120,480 $2,287,334 $ 166,854 Districts Water Quality` $ 140,0100 $ 140,000 $ 0 Total - OMP $2,260,480 $2,427,334 $ 166,854 'See Section IV and Appendices A and B. 'Budgeted funds for SCBPP without profit (SCBPP profit amount = $34,6%) 'SAIC profit is equal to 10% of SAIC direct costs only, net profit is equal to 7.7%. 'Budgeted funds allocated for Year 9 chemistry analysis reimbursement. 'See Section V. `Represents budgeted water quality sampling/analysis costs. 12 TABLE 2 Year 10 Budget Summary Basic Program Tasks (Labor & Other Direct Costs), including Southern California Bight Pilot Project participation $1,590,053 Profit (Basic Program Tasks) $ 122,812 Options -Ten Year Monograph Support, Water Quality Atlas, Bioaccum./Trophic Transfer, Sediment Sources/Fates, Benthic Resource Allocation Technique, Plankton Tows, Histopathology, Outfall/Reef Study, Iron/Aluminum Analysis, Chemistry QA/QC (CRMs) S 531,250 Profit (Optional Tasks) $ 43,219 Year 10 Contract Amount $2,287,334 13 EXH-HITS EXHIBIT 1 Scimm AA71iwtiom Inlemationel Corfr im Oeean Monitoring Program Contract History Orginal Year I Bids SAIC Contract Y. Pro mEl.., KmdiWKPL EcoArel a lib C.M. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 watn Qoolity $292.079 $672,471 5466.181 $136,675 091,225 v94,252 $558.704 30 S243,289 5252,910 S21,491 $21,516 S25,%9 Bmthim U32,001 S901,157 S706.465 S402,297 S530.798 S582J42 S708,199 S7d7,267 $762.279 S76g616 $751,025 $769,239 $530,545 Trawls $95.352 $92.121 $121,779 S79.328 S105,922 S115,576 S143,746 $179,100 S188.646 S192,%2 $186.294 S175.884 S66,219 Rig Fish S54.768 $22.142 S32.875 $20.915 $31.614 $34.271 539.976 S54,236 S53.983 S52.569 S51,352 $51.173 S54,106 Data,bsal/Imerprclntion S413.670 S484.402 S385.804 S162.634 $247.075 S274.578 $342.680 S410.567 S322709 $360.499 $338,249 5351,078 S372,171 Additional Smdm 545.824 S21.414 S23.846 S30.079 $39.394 S48723 %0.660 $89,909 E62.692 S59,482 %8.430 369J91 W.220 Base OhlP Costs SL513,693 S2.191.707 SI.736.%9 SR11.928 31.346,02R S1,449,742 S1.853.965 S1A71,079 S1.633.5% S1,683,038 S1,416,831 $1,438,230 S1,128,630 SCBPP so w SO SO $0 S0 so so so $0 so $0 $461.423 SPaial lwj, nCmling l w m w S112933 S55.M9 S131.276 $76.399 $12.264 $44.769 S47.691 S92.464 $533.198 $531,250 A rlb m w 50 587.824 S128.549 S126.276 sl Im S126.227 S143,000 S126,194 S130."3 S149.062 $16Q031 T-IOMP Cs $1,513,693 32.193707 $1.736.949 SLW2,705 S1.530,486 S1,707.294 $1.942.265 S1.609,570 $1,921,365 $1.856.923 $1.639,939 $2,120,480 5;287J34 CYMn1a l,= Y199I.am Exhibit 2 Ocean Monitoring Program Options 1993-94 1994-95 Delta Option 1: Our Regular OMP Costs Base Program $1,549,188 $1,632,676 $83,488 ' SCBPP $0 $0 $0 Special Projects $461,292 $574,469 $113,177 Contingency Fund $110,000 $0 ($110,000) Total $2,120,480 $2,207,145 $86,665 Option 2: Combined Regular OMP and SCBPP Base Program $1,549,188 $1,632,676 $83,488 SCBPP $0 $465,000 $465,000 Special Projects $461,292 $574,469 $113,177 Contingency Fund $110,000 $0 ($110,000) Total 52,120,480 $2,672,145 $551,665 Option 3: Modified OMP and SCBPP Base Program $1,549,188 $1,216,746 ($332,442) SCBPP/Modified 301(h) $0 $496,119 $496,119 Special Projects $461,292 $574,469 $113,177 Contingency Fund $110,000 $0 ($110,000) Total $2,120,480 $2,287,334 $166,854 'This increase reneets increases in sampling costs and added program elements related to our 301(h) waiver application. b This increase reflects the addition of projects related to our 301(h)waiver application. c This includes some of our base monitoring stations plus a commitment to EPA and the CRWQCB to expand our summer ONT by 10%to qualify for a"minor modification"to our NPDES permit. This enabled us to modify our OMP and do the SCBPP at a lower cost than doing both our regular OW and the SCBPP. YRIOEXLx 5/1"&GLR EXHIBIT 3 Water Quality Benthics ,soo,000 $a00000 5400,00" 'e S600:000 c 5300,000 a 5400,000 1% S2o0,000 < $200.000 $100.000 Corbett Yew Contract Year Trawls Rig Fish $200,000 5601000 5150,000 E ESQ0U0 a INS 55 40,000 000 o 5100,000 ® E 5 30, S50,o00 < 520.000 E10,0o0 Eo SO \ Contract Year Contract Yew Data Analysis/Interpretation Additional Services S500,000 5100,000 _ 3400,000 \ E80,000 O0 E300, 6 N 0 IM E S2o0,000 ` < SI00,00�0 — n .-. 111 V r x �� < 820,00�0 — e�. � _ Contract Year c r Contract Year Special Projects/SCBPP ! Profits SCury 5600,000 $200,000 3 ...00 "IN SI30,000 SRC S200:006 6 SI00,000 \\\\ 5200.000 \ 5100,000 550,000 \ O S0 — EO 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 8 9 10 Contract Year Contract Year Total Ol\7P Costs Cumulative Costs S2,500,000 $20.000,000 S2,o00.000 SI,SOO. li S51I 0.s.000,000.000000 o 000 \ \ F E $ .0o0 \ < ss,oao.0g0 ME S500 0 Q ssoo.000IN Eo _ 1 2 ] 4 5 6 l 8 9 10 r Contract Year x Contract Year COSTHSTINIS 5118194-CIA EXHIBIT4 SAIC's Year 10 Price Proposal-Modified MI(h)Program with SCBPP and Special Projects Description of Costs Task A Task B Task C Task D Task E Task F Task G Total 1 e Task H Total (Water Duality) (Benthics) (Trawling) (Pig Fishing) (Data Analysis) (Add.Sam's) (SCBPP) (Base/SCBPP) a (Span.Pilots) Subcontracts/Direct Materials A MEC Analytical $22,251 $193,758 $46,585 $27,488 $175,666 $25,686 $174,795 ' $666,229 ; $146,783 $813,012 B. Coast-to-Coast Analytical Services $0 $225.551 $0 $13,220 $0 $0 $222,721 'il $462,492 $201,762 $564,254 C. MBC Environmental $0 $14,839 so so $0 $0 $0 'j', $14,839 1 $0 $14,939 Total Subcontracts/Direct Materials $22,251 8435,148 $46,585 $40708 $175,668 $25,688 $397,5/8 ':I': $1,143,5W t1 $348,545 $1.492.105 M&S Overhead(2.0%) $445 $8,703 $932 $815 $3,514 $514 $7,951 i $22,874 'di. $6,972 $29.846 SAID Labor A Program Manager/Sr.Scientist/ DA/OC Officer $144 S9,462 $1,598 $458 $12,162 $10,838 $2.882 %. $36,544 ''y $17,741 $54.285 B. Deputy Program Manager/ Sr.Scientist $501 $12.655 $2,506 $2,130 $22,693 $8.521 $6,619 $55,625 $33,050 $88,675 C. Midlevel Scientist $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,W2 -_ $1,W2 „_ $0 $1.802 D. Cruise Scientist $425 $9,494 $1.671 $1.552 $6,965 $680 $7.316 $28.103 $5.156 $33,259 E. Admin/Editor $0 $12.2 $244 $60 $12,743 $182 $122 $13,473 $4,294 $17,767 F. Clerical/Word Processing W $400 $1W $220 $11,3% $1,083 $1W !j $13,411 i. $2,846 $16,257 F Total Direct Labor $1,070 $31,133 $6,199 $0,420 $65,931 $21,W4 $18,901 $148,958 € $63,D87 $212,045 Labor Overhead A Overhead(87.1%) $932 $27,117 S5,399 $3.851 $57,426 $18,556 $16,462 ll $129,743 z $54,947 $184,690 B. Fringe Benefits(35.5%) $380 $11,053 $2.200 $1.570 $23,406 $7,563 $6.709 7 $52,881 $22.394 $75,275 Total Labor Overhead $1,312 $38,170 $7,599 $5,421 $80,832 $26,119 $23,171 $182,624 '': $77,341 $259,965 Travel $0 $2,275 $477 $740 $119 $702 $5,316 $9,627 'ri $4,294 $13,921 Other Direct Costs $0 $6,207 S2.594 $752 $27,762 $002 $2,600 $40,717 ?: $13,950 $54,667 Subtotal Direct Costs $25,078 $521,636 $64.386 $52.856 S3531822 $75,127 $455.455 $1,548,360 $514,189 $2,062,549 G&A items 2-6(10.3%) $291 $8,909 $1,833 $1.250 $18.349 $5.093 $5,968 $41,693 ; $17,061 $58,754 Total Costa $25.369 $530.545 $66,219 $54,106 $372,171 $80,220 $461,4Zi '.' $1,50,053 $531,2W $2,12l.W3 Profit $1,648 $40,477 $4,757 $4.048 SW'191 $6.995 S346% S122,812 ';' $43,219 $166.031 Total CoslB Profit $27017 $571,022 $]0,9]6 $58,154 $002,362 $87,215 5496,119 $1,712,Bfi5 $5]4,469 52,28],334 EXHIBITS SMCes Ymr IR OMP Prim-P"wal for Spacial Pnljrc2x YWT 10 SPCCI01 PmOCCtS CCAIS Its np6n M'C',rax 1'njat•2 1%,jlvl:.3 Njal-4 IY,w.15 Njoa`N P.*,i,9 Pr..jm,12 Pmjx1913 Pmjnlx14 PagMNlS Tm 6 ('rrphc'1'raral(FA Srgmw (kxf CO..) (S4 Pals) (Frk.\p Illia.•ryalh) (W0A16ral (N.R.A:r.) (RaQ (PM1d1a0 ISryllYjas) Sulwannna 1h.Nhwiak A VRC indn,nl Sa L62J W,1.1 9) S7.10.1 Si, SI14•MI SL 2MJ $I5.450 SM.(47 SI7,65l) SIM..7" It a'wa14r.{a1+1.%n,I% ;al S,sri, SS).512 VI $17.I1.1 SxgmW SLIM. SJJ.rnal 91 91 9) Y) 5201762 C. NOW Loin+mhmal Mll 91 91 91 V1 91 91 $0 91 S0 91 'I'•aal tinlwrntra l+IM:A 3laeriala $N I.U9 V•.1 I! S17.1(MI SN7,511, 51.110 SSJJ'MI S11284 SI5A60 529.(A7 SI7.650 $148.14i 31 k S I hoi,.d 1211.r SI1.2.4 $123 SJ42 517511 S21 SIA50 17116 SAW S$93 S151 S6,972 SAW Izlvx 91 \. ITvura 31ana_cr Sr.Soil dir QA 13C(Ili< SIU 512.2MJ S141 VI S72 SI.710 52.162 S2NM $]MN $144 SI7741 It lalwh l4•nam\IaiWgu Sr.S.iaYia SM.111.1 52.21N 5251 V1192 51.629 SIJLII S7.4NI 91 SO 91 511,0$0 l'. Vib6•.d 4i Niq VI Al SO VI Si VI til sa $11 Y, 11 Cmiw•Saiania SJIIJ SJ21 SLY, SJJJ 91 V•17 S1f)73 9) S249 SM1 SM.% I[. .\•0nin lxli6M 5122 51.191 51) S264 W S476 SI 911 SW S30 91 SJ.MJ F. Clsi,,I W.ad l4.w.wrr_ SJI11 S1N1 91 SI01 SIM, SIM S992 $21) $20 SW1 S2.N46 1,4a11NhU Ialan W."I SI6.W11 S72N SO I.1114 SL'P_< S7.01I4 SIJ.Jrc) SUN SSW S1117 V,3.097 Ialaa0...I ad A. ("'A.J IMT.1'.) S'N.411 SI4.617 9,14 V).671 S1.477 W.101 SI2.550 SMJ S510 S442 S54947 IL Frilru'I1,1n1i1.VS 5'•1 "Aw, S5.94.6 S25M 51942 9p0 S14W SAI I 5120 H109 SIW1 522.394 r,4a11 a6nr 1),-M..ad SO I.WA 520.(+l3 SM92 SU.(,II SLXA Sx.SNJ S170.5 S4I4 SJIN 5622 S77.141 'Ini i 91 S2.971 VI 5111 91 S516 9I M SINS SINS 51.29J 41w+I NrM U.vl, 53,654 51.$62 S1,W0 S2.344 S36x S1714 S1.2NN S0 S0 M SIMM SMla,nol Ihrst C,o> SI0J.W" S424.20I S22.W2 S116.746 S'_N26 S16.461 W)352 110.511 $31.729 $I9.337 5514.IN9 0 N A lwn,U,,(103".) 52763 14733 5511 $3.013 S492 51951 St.." Sim 5214 5174 SIJ.WI "I'rnal C. SII0.727 552.534 $22.571 S119JY) S6_10N SJKJIJ 572.116.I SI6.620 UI.W3 519.111 S531210 M.il S2018 55.007 SI.9I5 510.077 SW)M 9.422 S5.M75 SLOp4 S2.009 $1.245 S13.219 Tnal C.A 1m1i( 5119.745 S57.541 S24A88 SI29.936 56.916 S84M36 S79114 SI7664 513,951 1207% S574469 TRI, TS...V.S slim-Om APPENDIX A i UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION a 76 Nawthcros Street San FrandsM Ca. 941 OS i901 Mr. J. Wayne Sylvester General Manager 1 H?P, County Sanitation Districts 1334 of Orange County P.O. Boa 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Mr. Sylvester: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region IX, the California State Water Resources Control Board, the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and San Diego), the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP), four large municipal wastewater dischargers (City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, Orange County and City of San Diego) and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project are all involved in an effort to coordinate and integrate existing permit-mandated marine monitoring programs into a more regionalized monitoring plan for the Southern California Bight. Working with the national Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program(EMAP),a pilot project for regional monitoring in the Southern California Bight has been developed As proposed, the four municipal dischargers specified above and SCCWRP will coordinate their monitoring efforts during the summer of 1994,using an EMAP-based design and consistent sample collection and comparable analytical methods. The County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) operate under Waste Discharge Requirements included in Order No. 84-1, issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB), and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CA0110604, issued jointly by EPA and the RWQCB. The NPDES permit incorporates a variance from secondary treatment requirements provided under section 301(h) of the Clean Water AcL As a condition _ of this variance, CSDOC is required to implement an extensive marine monitoring program that includes measures of water quality, sediment chemistry, benthic biota and bioaccumulation. In order for CSDOC to participate in the EMAP Southern California Bight pilot project (SCBPP), EPA and the Regional Board will modify CSDOC's monitoring program by substituting a portion of the SCBPP for a portion of the compliance monitoring that would normally be conducted during the 1994 Rummer quarter under the existing permiL Participation in the pilot project is expected to increase CSDOC's existing summer quarter monitoring effort by about 10 percent, as new EMAP stations are added and critical aspects of the permit-mandated compliance monitoring program are maintained. R,i W.M cW FeW The Regional Board conducted a special public meeting an March 25th to receive public input on the proposed changes to the monitoring program. There being no significant comments and no objections to the proposed changes, the Board approved the proposed changes to the monitoring program. Therefore,as specified under 40 CFR 122.63, elements of the permit-mandated marine compliance monitoring program agreed upon by EPA and CSDOC will be replaced with elements specified in the SCBPP for the 1994 summer quarter. CSDOC will follow the guidelines for the SrMTYP Fos sperifred in the SCBPP project z'.=a, =d the associated field,laboratory and QA/QC manuals. CSDOC will resume its permit- mandated marine compliance monitoring in the 1994 fall quarter. kraydarian- � Director, Water Management Division M r(I✓ L. : t:Nl!-0WiA-CAIMMO EIMION.BrrAL W10TELDp1 AGEMY PEIE WLSOn. ao m� - CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD SANTA ANA REGION 2DiD IOWA AVRAE. SAME Im WVEIMM CA 9=7-2f ' R - (MM 7S241M April 14, 1994 Mr. J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Post Office Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Mr. Sylvester. PARTICIPATION BY THE DISTRICTS IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BIGHT PILOT PROJECT DURING THE SUMMER QUARTER, 1994 The County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) is hereby directed to participate in the Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCB-PP) during the summer quarter, 1994, in lieu of conducting the normal offshore marine monitoring program specified in Order 84-1 and NPDES Permit No. CA0110604, under the additional terms and conditions discussed below. USEPA Region IX, the State Water Resources Control Board, the three local Regional Boards (Los Angeles, Santa Ana and San Diego), the four major municipal dischargers (City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, Orange County and City of San Diego), the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project have all been working with the national Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Project (EMAP) to develop a pilot project for monitoring the Southern California Bight. CSDOC has developed and submitted a proposal for SCB-PP monitoring and sampling, dated January 7, 1994 which amounts to approximately 11 O% of the normal summer quarter effort. - - -- - -- - On March 25, 1994 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board conducted a public hearing on the question of CSDOC's participation in the SCB- PP. Notice of the hearing and information about the issues was widely distributed to those persons thought to be interested in this issue. Testimony was received from representatives of the public who attended the hearing, as well as from the staff of the Regional Board, SCCWRP, EPA-IX and CSDOC. No concerns or objections to the proposed involvement of CSDOC in the SCB-PP were heard. Final details of the participation by CSDOC in the SCS-PP will be negotiated with SCCWRP, subject to review by EPA and staff representatives of the Regional Mr. J. Wayne Sylvester April 14, 1994 SCB-PP Participation Page 2 Board. CSDOC is to resume their normal monitoring program, as specified in Order 84-1, in the 1994 fall quarter. - Please call me at (909) 782-3284 if you have any questions, or call Gordon Anderson at (909) 782-4329. C�7 TY?e and J. Thibeault ecutive Officer cc: Regional Board Janet Hashimoto, Terry Fleming, MPS, EPA-IX Craig J. Wilson, Archie Matthews, DWO, SWRCB 9 `' SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT 7171 FENWICK LANE WESTNINSTER, CA 92683.5218 714-894-2222 FAX 714.894.9699 DATE: December 23, 1993 TO: EMAP Pilot Committee SCCWRP Commissioners and Alternates SCCWRP CTAG Members FROM: Jeffrey Cross, Executive Director RE: EPA/EMAP SCBPP PROPOSAL Enclosed is the proposal for the Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP) submitted to EPA/EMAP on December 23. The proposal is substantially the same as the draft sent to you in November. However, the outfall areas of eleven of the largest stormwater discharges have been included as a subpopulation of interest. In addition, chapters on information management and OA/OC have been added. Because of the change in the sample design, the number of samples in each subgroup (Table II-3) has changed. Unfortunately, ManTech Environmental Technology was unable to revise the maps and the list of sampling locations in time to meet the deadline for submission of the proposal, so Appendices A and B have not been updated as yet. The enclosed proposal is the result of many meetings and much hard work by the Pilot Project Committee. The Committee has resolved many issues, such as the basic sampling design and the approach to be used for information management and OA/OC. However, many issues remain to be resolved between now and April, when the final sampling plan is expected to be finalized. Thus, while the framework of the sampling program presented in the proposal is not expected to change, many of the details will, in all probability, be changed in the next few months. If you have any comments or questions about the technical proposal, please bring them to the attention of the Pilot Project Committee. The Committee will appreciate your help in developing the final sampling plan. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Enclosure cc: Steven Bay, SCCWRP Bruce Thompson, AHI Eddy Zang, SCCWRP A Public Agency for Marine Environmental Research THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BIGHT PILOT PROJECT TECHNICAL PROPOSAL Prepared for: U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Prepared by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX Bureau of Sanitation, City of Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Department of Water Utilities, City of San Diego Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board California State Water Resources Control Board Southern California Coastal Water Research Project December 1993 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Background and Rationale for the Project 1 B. Purpose of the Proposed Project 3 C. Anticipated Benefits 5 II. TECHNICAL APPROACH FOR ASSESSMENT 8 A. Overview of Approach 8 B. Sampling Design 10 C. Sample Collection Methods 11 D. Sample Processing Methods 12 E. Data Analysis and Interpretation 13 III. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 20 A. Overview of Approach 20 B. System Description 20 C. Database Development 20 D. Field Computer System 21 IV. QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITYCONTROL 21 A. Introduction 21 B. General Approach to Quality Assurance 22 C. Measurement Quality Objectives 23 D. Quality Assurance Activities 23 E. Quality Control Activities 26 F. Quality Assurance for Information Management 27 V. PROJECT MANAGEMENT 33 VI. PROJECT BUDGET 37 Table of Contents (continued) VII. LITERATURE CITED 41 APPENDIX A. LOCATION OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES FOR BASE DESIGN APPENDIX B: COORDINATES OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES BASE DESIGN APPENDIX C: LOCATION OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES FOR FISH DESIGN APPENDIX D: COORDINATES OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES FOR FISH DESIGN I. INTRODUCTION A. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR THE PROJECT The Southern California Bight (SCB; Figure I-1) is an important and unique ecological resource. Pelagic and benthic fishes and invertebrates are abundant in the coastal waters. The mainland shelf is also an important migratory route and foraging area for many marine mammals and birds, including at least three endangered bird species. More than 500 species of fish and 1,500 species of invertebrates occur in the Southern California Bight, which is the northern end of the San Diego Biogeographic Province (Briggs 1974). Shallow-water organisms in the bight are warm-temperate species whereas those north of Point Conception (and on the outer islands in the bight) are cold-temperate species of the Oregonian Province. Many of the species typical of Southern California are seldom found north of Point Conception. The mainland shelf is an important economic resource. It is used for recreation (boating, diving, swimming, surfing), commercial and recreational fisheries, municipal and industrial wastewater discharge, oil extraction, and ship traffic (NRC 1990a). Fifteen municipal wastewater treatment facilities, 8 power generating stations, 10 industrial treatment facilities, and 18 oil platforms discharge to the open coast (California State Water Resources Control Board 1991, unpubl. data). Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbors are among the busiest commercial ports in the world. San Diego Harbor has one of the largest U.S. Naval facilities in the country. About 40,000 pleasure boats are docked in 13 coastal marinas (NRC 1990a). Commercial fishing is focused on pelagic fishes and hard-bottom shellfish. Recreational fishing targets seasonally abundant pelagic game fish, resident nearshore fishes, and deepwater rockfish. The SCB is a large eddy that extends from Point Conception, California, to Cape Colnett, Baja California, Mexico. It is bounded offshore by the main flow of the California Current and the Patton Escarpment, a submerged ridge that is the outer boundary of the Southern California Continental Borderland. The borderland consists of offshore islands, banks, ridges, submarine canyons, deep basins, and a narrow mainland shelf, which averages about 3 km in width (ranging from 1 to 20 km) (Emery 1960). Elsewhere in the United States, the shelf may be 10 to 200 times wider. The narrowness of the mainland shelf off Southern California makes it particularly susceptible to the effects of human activities. Nearly 15 million people live in coastal Southern California (NRC 1990a). The population has increased 36% (4 million) since the early 1970s and is expected to increase by about 20% (3 million) by 2010 (SCCWRP 1973, NRC 1990a). About 73% of the population is concentrated along the central coast in Los Angeles and Orange counties; most of the remaining population occurs in the San Diego-Tijuana area to the south (Hoffman et al. 1992). 2 . . Local, state, and federal agencies monitor the status and trends of environmental quality and natural resources of the mainland shelf in the SCB. The municipal, power plant, and industrial dischargers are required to monitor their effluent and the receiving waters in accordance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region LC, the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, or both. These permits require the discharger to comply with the California Ocean Plan and the Federal Clean Water Act, which set water quality standards for effluent and receiving waters. The dischargers conduct monitoring programs to assess compliance with their permits. These assessments are documented quarterly by each discharger. Although these compliance monitoring programs provide useful information, they address small-scale, discrete questions, not bightwide questions of regional interest. The sampling designs, parameters, methods, sampling frequency, and QA protocols for the compliance monitoring programs differ significantly among the dischargers. Even if the data from these programs were integrated, they are not sufficient to provide a regional assessment of environmental quality. Compliance monitoring programs do not meet all of the needs of resource managers who must develop management strategies for the SCB. Integrated regional status and trends monitoring in the SCB would enable resource managers to assess the cumulative effects of anthropogenic inputs to the mainland shelf. Recent reports by the National Research Council (NRC 1990a,b) laid the foundation for development of a regional monitoring program for the SCB by pointing out the lack of standardized sampling methods, survey designs, and reporting requirements. Development of regional monitoring would also encourage participating agencies to adopt common sampling design and methods, which would facilitate comparisons among the many programs in the region- Resource managers would have the data to evaluate the relative influence of the various anthropogenic inputs to the region- Ultimately, this would allow resource managers to select the most cost-effective management strategies. The mainland shelf off Southern California has been monitored for more than 20 years and there is a history of cooperative surveys among participating organizations. However, the level of interest in regional monitoring and the spirit of cooperation in Southern California are higher now than at any time in the past two decades. The U.S. EPA Region I%;the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB); the Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Boards; and the member agencies of the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) have been exploring ways to develop a regional monitoring program. SCCWRP conducted several regional reference 7 surveys (Word and Mearns 1979, Thompson et al. 1987, 1992) at the request of the Vmunicipal wastewater dischargers. SCCWRP also initiated efforts in 1993 to standardize monitoring methods in the SCB. The Santa Monica Bay Restoration 3 Project (SMBRP), part of U.S. EPA's National Estuary Program, is exploring ways to develop a comprehensive monitoring program for Santa Monica Bay. To achieve the full benefit of this spirit of cooperation, these activities must be coordinated and integrated around a set of clearly defined management objectives and monitoring questions. EPA's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) provides a framework for establishing regional monitoring in the SCB. EMAP is a national, interagency monitoring program that measures biological responses to environmental stress in terrestrial, aquatic, and marine ecosystems, including estuaries and near-coastal systems. The probability-based sampling design and standardized methods developed for EMAP can provide estimates of ecological status and trends in a region with known statistical confidence. Although EMAP was developed to address management questions on national and large regional scales, its flexible sampling design can be applied to smaller regions like the SCB. In addition, EMAP's emphasis on interagency participation encourages cooperation among the local, state, and federal monitoring programs operating within a region and results in improved data and reduced cost for all participants. According to EPA's original plans, EMAP activity on the West Coast would begin in 1995 or 1996 with sampling in the estuaries and coastal waters of the California Province (Cape Mendicino to Baja California). The EMAP sampling design would include 100 samples in the province with approximately 50 samples in the SCB. The need for and interest in regional monitoring expressed by environmental managers and dischargers in Southern California suggests that it is timely and useful for EMAP to begin its activity on the West Coast earlier. By coordinating and building upon regional interest and effort, EMAP will have an opportunity to test its design and indicators in an open coastal system at a higher level of effort than originally planned. In addition, the agencies in Southern California will be assisted in their efforts to coordinate and integrate monitoring in the SCB to produce more useful and cost-effective data. The proposed Southern California Pilot Project will be the largest regional survey of environmental conditions attempted on the mainland shelf in the SCE. If will capitalize on the interest and cooperation existing in Southern California and leverage the available resources to develop an integrated and coordinated regional monitoring program that addresses the needs of local, state, and federal agencies. B. PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP) will apply EMAP assessment approaches to provide synoptic information about the ecological condition of reference, treated wastewater and nonpoint discharge areas on the mainland shelf. The SCBPP will evaluate the EMAP assessment approach as an alternative design for compliance monitoring programs. The SCBPP will also test 4 EMAP indicators in an open coastal environment and will test indicators specific to - the SCB that have not been used in EMAP studies to date. The SCBPP will include three major parts: 1)An assessment of the current environmental status of the mainland shelf in the Southern California Bight; 2)An evaluation of a demonstration compliance monitoring program based on EMAP assessment methods; and 3) An evaluation of indicators and elements of EMAP sampling design for use in the nearshore and offshore marine environments. The first element in the SCBPP will provide information to support management decisions for allocating resources and for controlling pollution and its effects in the Southern California Bight. It will address the following questions: 1) What is the extent and magnitude of ecological change on the mainland shelf in the Southern California Bight? 2) Is the degree of change similar throughout the Southern California Bight, or is it more severe in particular areas? 3) Can the change be associated with identifiable sources of pollution, such as municipal outfalls, rivers, or harbors? Are the associations the same throughout the Southern California Bight? If not, what associations are moat important in each area? -- The second element of the SCBPP also will contribuie to management decision-malting by determining whether a compliance monitoring program based on EMAP methods would be more efficient and provide better information than existing monitoring programs. The demonstration compliance monitoring program will compare data from an EMAP survey design with data collected from an existing compliance monitoring program. This study will help managers determine whether the EMAP approach can be incorporated into compliance monitoring programs and whether compliance monitoring data can be comparable to data from bightwide surveys. The third element of the SCBPP will evaluate EMAP and Southern California indicators and the applicability of the EMAP survey design to an open coastal environment. Several EMAP indicators developed for use in Atlantic estuaries will be tested for effectiveness on the mainland shelf in the Southern 5 California Bight and compared to measures used in local NPDES marine monitoring programs. C. ANTICIPATED BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT The SCBPP will be a collaborative effort between EMAP, EPA Region IX; the California State Water Resources Control Board; the Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Boards; the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles; County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County; County Sanitation Districts of Orange County; Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Facility of the City of San Diego; the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project; and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (U.S. EPA National Estuary Program). The primary beneficiaries of the SCBPP will be the environmental managers and scientists of the cities and counties of Southern California, the state of California, EPA Region IX, and U.S. EPA. The SCBPP will provide the first opportunity for environmental managers and scientists to design and implement regional monitoring in the Southern California Bight, and test a new approach to compliance monitoring. The SCBPP will evaluate the EMAP approach as the potential framework for a regional monitoring program that coordinates, integrates, and standardizes existing NPDES compliance monitoring programs among the publically-owned treatment works (POTWs). The data produced by the SCBPP will be valuable to the municipal wastewater dischargers and to the environmental managers of the regulatory agencies. The municipal wastewater dischargers regularly compare the results of their compliance monitoring to reference conditions in the Southern California Bight. The SCBPP will be the largest probability-based survey of the mainland shelf in Southern California in the last three decades and will provide unbiased information with which to assess outfall and reference conditions. Analyses of the data produced by the SCBPP will also help to identify management priorities, suggest appropriate strategies for addressing environmental problems, and provide statistically rigorous baseline information about water and sediment quality for measuring the effects of management actions. The SCBPP will provide a basis for implementing a comprehensive monitoring program for Santa Monica Bay. The Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project is required to develop a monitoring program as part of their Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. The study design, indicator evaluations, protocol development, QA procedures, and information database used in the SCBPP, as well as the cooperation among participating agencies, will help in developing the SMBRP monitoring program and ensure that it is compatible with a larger, bightwide monitoring program. l EMAP will vain short-term and long-term benefits from the SCBPP. In the short-term, EMAP will benefit from early testing and development of new indicators designed specifically for the near-coastal environment. EMAP will also benefit from lessons learned through the SCBPP about operating in an open coastal environment with unique deep-water logistical and pollution concerns. In the long-term, the SCBPP's intensification of EMAP-type sampling in the SCB will provide more data and increased confidence in pmvincewide estimates for the California Province. EMAP will also derive long-term benefits from cooperating with organizations that have more than 20 years of experience in monitoring the mainland shelf off Southern California. The data, information, and experience available from participating in the SCBPP will facilitate development of new EMAP programs for other coastal marine provinces. A secondary benefit of the SCBPP will be data-sharing, communication, and an integrated approach to ecosystem monitoring. The proposed study has already been effective in establishing communication among the participants regarding research objectives, design approaches, study methods, indicator development, quality assurance protocols, and information management. The SCBPP will stimulate and strengthen cooperation among the participating monitoring and research agencies. It will improve environmental monitoring, research, and decision-making in the Southern California Bight. 7 FIGURE I-1. Map of the Southern California Bight. Surface Circulation Point CwcW'*n of Y •`�•�:• � �•t: .. - the Southern California Bight 34 4""• `�g}�� ! r` Paros Verdes Peninsula Ls a •.a � Southern Car�o'rnia� Diego �� '`•;t Countercurrent rA J32° t Ensenada San :'~•;�►.. �- o min /i 100 30 '•' ,300om 2000m2oom`: 122° 1200 1180 116° t r . U. TECHNICAL APPROACH FOR ASSESSMENT A. OVERVIEW OF APPROACH The goal of the Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP) is to develop and implement an integrated, coordinated regional environmental monitoring program. The SCBPP will provide synoptic information about the ecological condition of the mainland shelf in the Southern California Bight (SCB), and it will evaluate the utility of the EMAP assessment approach as an alternative design for compliance monitoring programs. The proposed program will improve upon present monitoring efforts in the SCB in three ways. First, it will provide estimates of ecological condition for all areas of the bight. Present POTW monitoring efforts are spatially limited; some areas are sampled intensively, while large expanses are not sampled at all- Developing an effective management strategy for the SCB (as opposed to addressing site specific problems) requires an un4erstanding of the extent and distribution of environmental modification throughout the bight. Regional monitoring in the bight will provide that information. Regional monitoring will also provide a baseline against which to assess the effects of specific point sources or unanticipated future contamination (e.g., off or hazardous material spills). Second, the data will be collected using a probability-based sampling design. This design will ensure unbiased estimation of ecological condition, which is not possible when sampling sites are preselected, as in the present POTW monitoring efforts in the bight. The probability-based sampling design also allows investigators to calculate confidence intervals around estimates of condition. Confidence intervals provide managers with full knowledge of the strengths or weaknesses of the data upon which their decisions will be based. Another advantage of the probability-based sampling design is that it allows investigators to estimate the area (ie., number of hectares) of the system in which ecological conditions differ from reference areas. This is the primary goal of the SCBPP. The emphasis on estimating areal extent departs from traditional approaches to environmental monitoring, which generally estimate the average condition. Estimating the areal extent of modified ecological condition offers several advantages. First, it provides a more direct assessment of current status. For example, identifying that the average concentration of dissolved oxygen in the bight is 5.7 ppm provides less usable information for environmental managers than does identifying that 12% of the bight fails to meet water quality standards. A second advantage of estimating areal extent concerns the detection of trends. If conditions in the bight change over time such that some areas improve and others worsen, the average condition might not change. By estimating the areal extent of modification, however, it is possible to develop an area-weighted distribution 9 function that highlights changes in the distribution of altered environmental conditions rather than obscuring them. The third improvement associated with the proposed project is that the SCBPP will use a uniform set of indicators and sampling methods throughout the SCB. The probability-based sampling design provides a framework for integrating data into a comprehensive regional assessment; however, the validity of such an assessment depends on ensuring that all of the data that contribute to it are comparable. To ensure that each participant in the SCBPP who collects and processes samples will produce comparable data, the SCBPP will develop and document standard field and laboratory methods and quality assurance protocols to be used by all participants. Developing standard methods manuals for regional monitoring in the SCB will not only ensure that all data collected for the SCBPP can be integrated, but also provide a framework upon which to build further monitoring efforts. Specifically, the success of the SCBPP will provide a framework for implementing regional monitoring in the Southern California Bight and EMAP in the Californian Province. The assessment of ecological conditions in the SCB will be based largely on the bottom-dwelling, or benthic, community. The condition will be measured by a common group of indicators (Table 11-1). The characteristics of the benthic community or assemblage are reliable indicators of ecological condition in the SCB (Thompson et al. 1987, 1992). Benthic organisms are relatively sedentary and cannot easily escape adverse conditions (Gray 1982); therefore benthic assemblages are good indicators of local conditions. Benthic assemblages are taxonomically and trophically diverse. Individuals within these assemblages have a wide range of physiological tolerances and respond to multiple types of stress (Pearson and Rosenberg 1978, Boesch and Rosenberg 1981). The life span of benthic organisms is sufficiently long for assemblages to display population and community level responses to environmental stress. Benthic assemblages integrate environmental conditions that existed during the weeks and months before sampling. Such - integrated information about ecological condition cannot be obtained from point samples of water quality. The SCBPP will collect measures of habitat, contaminant exposure, and biological response. Collecting measurements of contaminant exposure with measurements of biological response allows investigators to identify statistical associations between altered ecological conditions and particular environmental stresses. Although statistical associations do not conclusively identify the cause of the response, associations are valuable for establishing priorities for further investigations. The statistical associations may also contribute to developing efficient regional strategies for protecting or improving the environment by identifying the predominant types of stress in the system. 10 B. SAMPLING DESIGN The sampling design proposed for this project is based on the EMAP protocol presently used for sampling the estuarine habitat of the Louisianian Province. Using this design, a hexagonal grid is placed randomly over a map of the sampling area, and one sample is obtained at a randomly selected site within each grid cell. The hexagonal grid structure ensures systematic separation of the sites, maximizing the ability to develop spatial statistics (e.g., kriging). Selecting sites randomly within hexagons ensures an unbiased estimate of condition. The sampling design is flexible to enhancement so that greater sample density can be achieved in subpopulations of interest. The SCBPP identified six subpopulations of primary interest: 1) Three geographic zones of the bight: northern (Pt. Conception to Pt. Dume), central (Pt. Dume to Dana Pt.), and southern (Dana Pt. to Mexico); 2) Three depth zones on the mainland shelf shallow (10.25 m), mid-depth (25- 100 m), and deep (100-200 m); 3) The outfall areas of the four largest POTWs treated cumulatively; 4) The outfall areas off the eleven largest stormwater discharges treated cumulatively; 5) Santa Monica Bay; and 6) Hyperion outfall area. The precision goal for the SCBPP is to develop estimates for each of the subpopulations such that the 95% confidence interval is no larger than 10% of the area in that subpopulation. Confidence intervals for estimates of percent of a population can be approximated by considering the samples to have come from a binomial population in which responses are classified as either "changed" or "not changed." Achieving a 95% confidence interval of 10% for a binomial population with a p=02 requires about 40 samples in each subpopulation (Figure II-1). The base design for the SCBPP will involve a 9 x 3 enhancement of the EMAP grid. This design will provide sufficient sample density to meet the project's precision goals for the bight as a whole, and for the depth and geographical subpopulations. To develop precise estimates for the Hyperion outfall and Santa Monica Bay, Hyperion will be enhanced to a 9 x 3 x 7 grid, and the remainder of Santa Monica Bay will be enhanced to a 9 x 3 x 3 grid. To address the cumulative POTW outfall subpopulation, the area around the JWPCP, CSDOC, and Point Loma outfalls will be enhanced to a 9 x 3 x 3 grid. To address the cumulative stormwater subpopulation, the stormwater outfall areas will be enhanced to a 9 x 3 u x 12 grid. The size of the outfall area for each stormwater discharge was defined by a semicircle with the radius proportional to the flow (Table 1I-2). Applying this design yields 275 sites throughout the bight; the sample size in each subpopulation is shown in Table 1I-3 and the locations are shown in Appendix A with coordinates in Appendix B. Three measures of fish condition will be collected as part of the SCBPP: assemblage structure, fish gross pathology, and fish tissue chemistry. It is not financially feasible to measure fish condition at all of the sites. Fish sampling will be conducted at a reduced sampling intensity and with a smaller set of subpopulations of interest than for the other indicators. For fish pathology and assemblage structure, the subpopulations of interest will be limited to geographic zones, depth zones, and the cumulative POTW outfalls. To achieve the desired precision, the base EMAP grid will be enhanced 7 x 3 x 3 in each outfall area, to 7 x 3 in the deep (100-200 m) and shallow (10-25 m) areas away from the POTWs, and sevenfold elsewhere. Appendix C shows the locations for the fish sampling points and Appendix D contains the coordinates. For fish tissue bioaccumulation, enhancement will address only the 7 cumulative outfall population, which will be achieved by processing fish from a subset of those sites where they were collected for assemblage structure and pathology. All sampling will occur in a summer index period between mid-July and the lend of August. This period was chosen because the indicators are generally stable during the summer. This index period also ensures comparability with EMAP data from other parts of the country. C. SAMPLE COLLECTION METHODS _ Sediment " A 0.1 mz modified Van Veen grab will be used to collect sediment samples for physical, chemical, and infaunal analyses by the dischargers and SCCWRP (Stubbs et al. 1987, Environmental Monitoring Division 1992, Water Utilities Department 1992). Sediment samples will be collected from the top 2 cm for grain size and chemical analyses, placed in clean containers, and stored on ice. Trawline A semiballoon otter trawl with 7.6-m headrope length and a 1.3-cm cod-end mesh will be used to collect epibenthic invertebrates and demersal fish by the dischargers and SCCWRP (Meares and Stubbs 1974, Meares and Allen 1978, Environmental Monitoring Division 1992). Trawls will be towed for 10 min at 1.0- 1.2 m/sec along isobaths. 12 Water Column The dischargers will use a Seabird CTD and SCCWRP will use an EG&G CTD to measure temperature, conductivity, depth, dissolved oxygen, and transmissivity (Environmental Monitoring Division 1992, Water Utilities Department 1992). D. SAMPLE PROCESSING METHODS Benthic Infauna Sediment samples will be sieved through a 1.0 mm screen and preserved with 10% borax-buffered formalin for 24 hr. The samples will then be rinsed with water to remove formalin and stored in 70% ethanol until sorted (Stubbs et al. 1987, Environmental Monitoring Division 1992, Water Utilities Department 1992). Demersal Fish and Benthic Eoifauna The trawl catch will be sorted on deck into containers. Board-standard length will be measured on bony fishes and total length will be measured on cartilaginous fishes (wingspan for rays). All target and nontarget species of fish will be measured to the nearest millimeter for species with 10 or fewer individuals, but to the nearest centimeter for species with more than 10 individuals, (Meares and Allen 1978, Environmental Monitoring Division 1992). Macroinvertebrate target species will be measured unless they are very abundant. Then suhsamples will be returned to the lab and 50-100 individuals will be measured-' tar�eit macroinvertebrates will not be measured. Biomass of individual JSXand macroinvertebrates will be measured to the nearest 0.1 kg with a spring scale and a tare bucket with holes in the bottom. Small species with few individuals will be measured together to provide a composite biomass. Sediment Chemistry Each agency will analyze a list of sediment parameters that are common to all of the participating agencies (Table II-4). Metals in sediments will be analyzed by atomic absorption spectrophotometry after sample digestion. Mercury will be analyzed by cold vapor technique. Metals in tissues will be analyzed by modifications of the above procedures. Organic compounds in sediments and tissues will be extracted with solvents and cleaned to remove interfering substances. Base- neutral and acid extractable organics will be analyzed on a GC/MS. Organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls will be analyzed on a GC with an ECD detector. 13 E. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION Analyses for the SCBPP will address the questions of greatest interest to environmental managers and scientists for developing management strategies for the Southern California Bight. The critical questions to be answered will fall into two general categories: 1) Ranking spatial subpopulations (e.g., comparing the spatial extent of contamination on the inner, middle, and outer mainland shelf), and 2) Ranking types of pollution exposure (e.g., comparing the spatial extent of organic contamination that exceeds some critical value to the spatial extent J 1A of inorganic contamination that exceeds some critical value). Most of the analyses will fall in the first category since the sampling design was deliberately enhanced for specific spatial and geographic subpopulations of .+ interest. For example, the SCBPP will compare conditions at the POTW outfalls with conditions in other areas of the bight. Because the design is probability-based, and the inclusion probability of each sampling site is known, outfall areas can be compared with a variety of other sampled areas, such as the bight as a whole, or with a geographic subpopulation (e.g., central bight), or with a specific depth zone (e.g., mid-shelf throughout the bight). Most questions to be addressed in SCBPP analyses will be similar to: "What percent of the area of a specific subpopulation differs from reference conditions with respect to the selected indicators?" These questions will be approached in two steps. The first step will be to develop cumulative distribution functions (CDF) that describe the range of values of each parameter in each subpopulation. CDFs provide essential information about the central tendency (e.g., median) and extreme values of indicators in a single, easily summarized graph. The second step will be to select the critical value that can be used to classify the condition of several subpopulations of interest. To create these CDFs, a binary response will be determined for each sample at each X-axis interval. Selection probabilities for each site and joint selection probabilities for pairs of sites will be calculated based on the survey design. Horvitz-Thompson estimation will be applied to the data to obtain unbiased estimates of the mean response and standard error of the response using the following formulae: 14 L. n ni Y = i=1 A where: Y = estimate of the proportion of changed area Yi = sample response for unit i (1 if changed, 0 otherwise) 7% = selection probability of unit i n = number of samples A = total area and Virl j—rI ij 1-1 — rJ �.1 J=1 rI Y11 i rI j SEV)_ A where: SEM = estimate of the standard error of estimated changed proportion nb = joint selection probability of two units Based on the CDFs, areas within subpopulations will be classified as meeting or not meeting reference conditions by indentifying threshold values for each indicator. Selecting threshold values allows managers to identify percent of the area that may be a concern. Although selecting threshold values from the CDF is an important activity, consensus is often lacking about where to set the threshold. Developing CDFs for each subpopulation will allow managers to reassess and redefine the threshold values easily when the thresholds used in the proposed analyses are questioned. • is ' FIGURE II-1. Confidence intervals around an estimate of percent degraded areas as a function of sample size (U.S. EPA, Region III et al. 1993). 95% Confidence Intervals About Estimated 0-44 Surface Area of Contaminated Sediments. N 0 0.39 O. j 0.34 O a Q 0.29 H R Z 0.24 m c — 0.19 c d 0.14 v 0 0.09 U 0.oa 3 5 7 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Sample Size 16 TABLE II-1. Indicators that will be measured during the Southern California Bight Piolot Project benthic assemblages sediment contamination dissolved oxygen temperature, salinity transmissivity sediment characteristics marine debris fish assemblages fish gross pathology fish bioaccumulation sediment toxicity n Table II-2. Location and size of outfall areas for stormwater discharge Stormwater Discharge Latitude Longitude Radius (km) Ventura River 340 16.1' 1190 18.8' 1 Santa Clara River 340 13.6' 1190 16.0' 4 Calleguas Creek 340 5.9' 1190 5.5' 2 Malibu Creek 34° 1.6' 1180 41.0' 1 Ballona Creek 330 58.0' 1180 27.2' 2 7 San Gabriel River 33° 44.T 1180 7.0' 4 c5af- Santa Ana River 330 38.1' 117 58.3' 2 (-0 Santa Margarita River 330 13.8' 1170 25.0' 1 cy� San Luis Rey River 330 9.9' 1170 21.3' 2 San Diego River 320 45.5' 1170 15.2' 2 15ajuana River 320 33.5' 1170 7.5' 2 �g TABLE II-3. Sample sizes in the subpopulations of interest for the f three sampling designs. Base Fish Bioaccumulation Total 145 85 * gj' Northern 91 51 23 Central 125 55 34 Southern 59 39 27 10-25 in 65 39 9 25-100 m 132 50 50 100-200 m 78 56 26 Santa Monica Bay 80 25 17 POTW Total 81 46 46 Hyperion 401 14 14 JWPCP 71 5 5 CSDOC 11 9 9 Point Loma 23 18 18 Stormwater Total Irr 5 0 � 3v TABLE II-4. Sediment chemical contaminants that will be measured during the Southern California Bight Pilot Project. CONVENTIONAL MEASUREMENTS Grain Size TOC ..--. Sulfides, dissolved PRIORITY POLLUTANTS Metals Base Neutral ExtraCtables/PAHs antimony 1,2,4-tnchlorobenzene arsenic 1,2-diphenylhydrazine beryllium 2,4-duutrotoluene cadmium 2,6-dinitrotoluene chromium 3,3-dichlorobenzidine copper 4-bromodiphenylether lead 4-chlorodiphenyl ether mercury acenaphthene nickel acenaphthylene selenium anthracene silver benzidine tballium benzo(a)pyrene zinc benzo(k)fluoranthene bis(2-chloroethoay)methane bis(2-chloroethyl) ether bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether bis(2-ethylheayl)phthalate butyl benzyl phthalate Oreanic Comnounds chrysene dibenz(a,h)anthracene Pesticides diethylphthalate dimethylphthalate DDT di-N-butylphthalate p,p'-DDT(4,4'-DDT) di-N-octylphthalate p,p'-DDE (4,4'-DDE) fluoranthene p,p' DDD (4,4'-DDD) fluorene aldrin hexachlorobenzene dieldrin hexachlorobutadiene endrin indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene toxaphene isophorone naphthalene nitrobenzene PCs N-nitrosodimethylamine Aroclor-1242 N-nitrosodiphenylamine Aroclor-1254 N-nitroso-di-N-propylamine Aroclor-1260 phenanthrene pyrene 20 DI. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT t A. OVERVIEW OF APPROACH An Information Management System (IMS) will be needed to create an integrated, well-documented database and to analyze the data for the final report. More specifically, an IMS will be needed to: (1) integrate the field and laboratory data, (2) support program logistics and sample tracking, (8) provide access to project data and a limited number of statistical and graphical tools for data analysis and (4) facilitate communication between project members. The proposed structure of the IMSis a centralized node, located at EPA Region IX, linked by phone lines or Internet to project members. The node will hold the project database and will act as-aliink to project members. This system takes advantage of pre-existing UNIX hardware and software at EPA Region IX and, at the same time, allows project members to use their own computer systems as needed. This system also has the potential for becoming a regional node for linking other UNIX systems (e.g., the Aquatic Habitat Institute in San Francisco Bay, California's Teale Data Center as well as EMAP Central in Narragansett, R.I.). B. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The SCBPP will use an existing EPA, Region IX, UNIX server with a normal complement of storage, analytical and graphical tools. EPA's GIS programs, ARC/INFO and ARCVIEW, will be available for use along with a variety of GIS data layers developed specifically for the Southern California region. Specialized software from EMAP Central will be evaluated and added as it is proven and becomes available for use. Some custom, easily modified, tools developed for monitoring programs in Southern California may also be added to the system. To support the system, EPA IX will provide computer system maintenance and a half- time database administrator to the Pilot Project. Pilot Project team members will access the central node via phone lines (8 connections). Since Region IX is a regional node, members with accounts could also access the data though Internet. This system will allow team members to use the data and tools on the main system at EPA Region IX or to download the data for use on their own computer systems. It also provides the means for communicating between project members. C. DATABASE DEVELOPMENT Each of the project members has a computer and management system, including QA/QC procedures, for marine monitoring data. As samples are analyzed, the participants will use their existing systems to track samples and generate data. QA/QC will be performed on the data at all stages of the process. However, once the data has been approved by project members, it must he integrated into a database. To take advantage of existing software and protocols, the SCBPP is proposing to use EPA's Ocean Data Evaluation System (ODES) for data integration. One of the project participants has developed programs to convert data into ODES format �, /- as well as to check the data for errors. Since these programs are well tested, they 21 can be easily used to create an integrated dataset. This will also allow the SCBPP to use ODES QA/QC procedures to check the final dataset. In addition, ODES procedures will be used to produce supporting documentation for the dataset. The integrated dataset will be stored in an Oracle (Version 6) database on EPA Region IX's UNIX system. Funds are budgeted to have a contractor modify the existing ORACLE database structure used by County Sanitation Districts of Orange County to accept all the data types generated by the SCBPP. Since most of the EMAP variables are already routinely included in the database, modification of the database structure should be straightforward. The SCBPP is also proposing to submit a copy of the integrated dataset and supporting documentation to ODES. In addition, ODES will be funded to provide two new EMAP tools, a Cumulative Distribution Function and Variance. This will allow outside parties to access and analyze the data on ODES or to download the data to their own systems. D. FIELD COMPUTER SYSTEM The EMAP (Esturaries) program has developed a Field Computer System (FCS) to standardize a number of essential field sampling, sample tracking and management activities. This system has been improved with two years of use in the Virginian Province. A nearly completed contract is expected to produce a more generic system, which could be converted at a nominal cost for use in the SCBPP. Pilot Project members will continue to follow the development of the FCS over the next few months. Field teams have not as yet met to discuss details of field equipment and sample tracking. However, if the Field Computer System is ready, and Project members decide to use the system, it should be possible to adapt the FCS for use in the SCBPP. IV. QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL A. INTRODUCTION A quality assurance (QA) program is an important part of any environmental monitoring project. A carefully planned quality assurance program helps to ensure that the data collected are scientifically valid, comparable, and adequate to meet the goals of the study. QA is particularly important for large monitoring projects that involve many participants because the many different field crews and laboratories involved frequently have difficulty producing comparable data (NRC 1990a). Such problems usually arise because, in the haste to initiate the data collection program, field crews are not adequately trained to employ standard collection methods, and the comparability of the laboratory capabilities and processing methods is not evaluated (Taylor 1985). A QA program is especially important for the SCBPP because of the widely distributed implementation proposed for the project. At least five different organizations (including the POTWs, SCCWRP, and contractors) will collect samples for the SCBPP, and at least six different organizations will be involved in laboratory processing of samples. The POTWs and SCCWRP, who will be u responsible for much of the SCBPP sampling, each have their own processing laboratories; consequently, several different laboratories will perform the same kinds of functions, such as chemical analyses or sorting and identifying benthic samples, for the project. Encouraging and maintaining consistency in field and laboratory operations and ensuring data comparability, therefore, will be critical to the success of the SCBPP. The primary goal of the QA/QC plan is to ensure that the data generated by the participants is comparable. This goal will be achieved through a combination of common methods (where appropriate) and performance based standards. Where common methods are agreed upon for the SCBPP, QA/QC measures can be used to assure that methods are applied consistently. Where performance based standards are appropriate, QA/QC measurements can be used as a measure o pe rmance. The appropriate QA/QC procedures for each of the monitoring program components (e.g. field operations, water quality, sediment and tissue chemistry, benthic analyses, demersal fish)will be established by the SCBPP steering committee. B. GENERAL APPROACH TO QUALITY ASSURANCE The QA program for the SCBPP will consist of two distinct but related kinds of activities: quality assurance and quality control. Quality assurance includes design, planning, and management activities conducted prior to implementation of the project to ensure that the appropriate kinds and quantities of data will be collected. The goal of quality assurance is to ensure that standard collection, processing, and analytical techniques will be applied consistently and correctly; that the number of lost, damaged, and uncollected samples will be minims d; that the integrity of the data will be maintained and documented from sample collection to entry into the data record; that all data will be comparable; and that results can be reproduced. Quality control (QC) activities are implemented during the monitoring project to evaluate the effectiveness of the QA activities. QC activities ensure that measurement error and bias are identified, quantified, and accounted for or eliminated, if practical QC activities include both internal and external checks. Typical internal QC checks include repeated measurements, internal test samples, use of independent methods to verify findings, and use of standard reference materials. Typical external QC checks include exchanging.samples among laboratories for reprocessing to test comparability of results, independent performance audits, and periodic proficiency examinations. Because of the SCBPP's distributed implementation scheme, the QA program for the pilot project will emphasize quality assurance activities. The capabilities of the laboratories that process samples from the current compliance monitoring programs are well established and generally thought to be acceptable for the SCBPP. QA activities, therefore, will focus on developing a common field manual and documenting the comparability of laboratory methods. Training of field and laboratory personnel will focus on communicating goals and objectives of the pilot program as well any modifications in methods or procedures that may have been made for the pilot project to ensure data comparability. The purpose of this training is to verify that all participants will be able to implement the agreed-upon procedures in a consistent manner with comparable proficiency. Quantitative measures of the overall effectiveness of training will be identified to translate QA activities such as communication and training into QC activities such as 2 performance audits and proficiency examinations. These quantitative measures are known as measurement quality objectives (MQOs). C. MEASUREMENT QUALITY OBJECTIVES MQOs establish acceptable levels of uncertainty for each measurement process in an environmental monitoring project. MQOs typically address the major components of data quality: representativeness, completeness, precision, accuracy and comparability. Data comparability, or"the confidence with which one data set can be compared to another" (Stanley and Verner 1985), is a primary concern in the SCBPP. Comparability of reporting units and calculations, data base management processes, and interpretative procedures must be ensured if the overall goals of the SCBPP are to be realized; furthermore, SCBPP data must be generally comparable with EMAP data to facilitate data sharing. Specific MQOs for precision and accuracy, the most readily quantifiable components of data quality, have been identified for the SCBPP to ensure that the data produced by the many field crews and laboratories involved in the project will be comparable. Accuracy is defined as the difference between the measured value of an indicator and its true or expected value, which represents an estimate of systematic error or net bias (Kirchner 1983, Hunt and Wilson 1986, Taylor 1985). Precision is the degree of mutual agreement among individual measurements and represents an estimate of random error (Kirchner 1983, Hunt and Wilson 1986, Taylor 1987). Together, accuracy and precision provide an estimate of the total error or uncertainty associated with a measured value. Requiring participating field crews and laboratories to achieve standard, quantitative MQOs for accuracy and precision will help to ensure that individual data sets are free of any crew- or laboratory-specific bias and that the degree of random error is consistent across data sets. Accuracy and precision goals for indicators to be measured during the SCBPP are provided in Table IV-1. Accuracy and precision cannot be defined for all parameters because of the nature of the measurements. For example, accuracy measurements are not possible for toxicity testing, sample collection activities, and fish pathology measurements. An MQO for completeness has also been defined for the SCBPP. Completeness is a measure of the proportion of the expected, valid data (i.e., data not associated with some criterion of potential unacceptability) that is actually collected during a measurement process. The MQO for completeness in the SCBPP is 90% for each measurement process. The sampling design for the SCBPP is sufficiently redundant to absorb the loss of up to 10% of the samples without compromising the goals of the program, provided that the lost samples are not concentrated in a single subpopulation of interest. Redundancy was incorporated at this level because monitoring programs of this size typically lose as many as 10% of samples as a result of logistical difficulties or failure to achieve quality control criteria. D. QUALITY ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES Establishing MQOs is of little value if the proper quality assurance activities are not undertaken to ensure that such objectives will be met. Quality assurance in the SCBPP will be achieved by 24 developing a common field manual and documenting the comparability of laboratory methods that are consistent with the MQOs; and implementing training workshops to ensure that participants are familiar with methods and are capable of achieving the MQOs. Field and Laboratoru Manuals SCBPP participants use similar methods for the existing compliance monitoring programs; however, methods do vary slightly between organizations. Using common methods for the SCBPP would eliminate this variability and help to ensure comparability of data between organizations. However, this is not always practical and in many cases performance based standards may be more appropriate. For the SCBPP, field and laboratory manuals will be prepared detailing either acceptable methods or performance standards and the appropriate level of QA/QC. These manuals will be prepared by the field and laboratory coordinators who will work with the appropriate personnel within each of the participating agencies to establish the appropriate procedures for the SCBPP. The preparation and review of these manuals will serve to highlight potential problem areas. Copies of these manuals will then be distributed to all participants in the program prior to the training workshops. These manuals will form the basis for training workshops and provide a reference for field and laboratory personnel during sample collection and processing activities. The field manual will include detailed descriptions of all procedures to be used for sample collection and field analyses. The manual will also identify criteria for acceptable samples and conditions under which samples need to be recollected. This degree of specificity is intended to ensure that all data are collected in a similar manner by all field crews. Areas expected to be covered in the field manual include: — Navigation and positioning — Standardization of CTD deployment — Collection of sediment samples for grain size, chemistry, infauna and toxicity — Standardization of fish trawling operations Shipboard analyses of fish and epibenthic invertebrates — Sample tracking and shipboard information management The laboratory manual(s) will address the appropriate procedures or performance standards for analyses of sediment grain size, benthic infauaa, and sediment and tissue chemistry. For benthic infauns, appropriate taxonomic keys will be identified by the field and laboratory coordinators, working in consultation with regional professional groups such as the Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists (SCA=. Since the chemical analyses are expected to be performance based, the man ,nl >�.w 7�br i;=ed nrimarito doc„mom the methods used by each of the participants and establish the performance standards. u ✓' Field and laboratory manuals will also contain sets of standard data sheets to ,Y be used by all personnel working on this project. Standard data sheets will provide a framework for ensuring that all groups record all of the proper data. Standard data sheets will also ensure comparability of measurement units recorded by each group and provide a means for ensuring that common taxonomic nomenclature is used.by all participating laboratories. Using standard data sheets will facilitate development of dataentry protocols and mirim+ e transcription error. Training Proper training of field and laboratory personnel is a critical aspect of quality assurance. SCBPP participants will provide field and laboratory personnel who have extensive experience, therefore, training for the SCBPP will focus on ensuring consistency in data collection among all personnel. <—Mraining, particularly for field crews, will also focus on ensuring that all personnel understand the goals and sampling design of the project. In any field project, sampling crews will need to make decisions in the field, such as what to do if a selected site cannot be sampled for a particular variable (e.g. rock substrate prevents use of the benthic sampling gear). The field manual will attempt to address the situations most likely to arise during the SCBPP and will identify who in the SCBPP management structure should be consulted for advice regarding situations that are not covered in the manual. The most efficient way to ensure that field crews make wise choices, however, is to ensure that all_lkarticipants understand the gpgls of the-pmgram. Part of the training process will include establishing reference collections that can be accessed by crew members for verification both before and during the project. Three types of reference collections will be established: fish taxonomy, fish pathology, and invertebrate taxonomy. Reference collections will be established by J asking each participating group that presently maintains any such reference collection to submit specimens to the SCBPP field or laboratorycoordinators. Developing reference collections in this way will help to identiy differences in current practices, as well as providing a common reference for the current project. Upon completion of the formal training program, each organizations's field crew and p""' uued to pass roficieie examina ions before Bing allowed to participate in the SCBPP. rield crews will be- required to demonstrate proficiency in the following areas: -- checking sampling equipment prior to deployment locating stations using the navigation system using all the sampling gear entering data on field data sheets identifying fish species and fish pathology Laboratories will be required to demonstrate proficiency by achieving the MQOs for blind samples provided by the QA Officer or his designee. For chemistry and grain size measurements, the proficiency examination probably will involve participating in a multi-laboratory intercalibration exercise using standard reference materials. For benthic invertebrate samples, the proficiency may be demonstrated by the w�� 26 correct identification of a common set organisms compiled from a reference collection. E. QUALITY CONTROL ACTIVITIES The effectiveness of quality assurance efforts will be measured by quality control activities, which fall into two categories: routine QC checks coordinated by each laboratory or field crew's internal QA Officer, and performance audits conducted by the SCBPP QA Officer or designee The goal of these activities is to quantify accuracy and precision, but, most importantly, they will be used to identify problems that need to be corrected as data sets are generated and assembled. Routine OC Checks Field and laboratory crews will perform routine QC checks daily or weekly, as specified in the field and laboratory manuals. Routine QC checks will identity problems with particular personnel or instrumentation at the earliest possible stage, so that problems can be corrected, and data corruption or the cost of reprocessing can be minimized. For benthic macroinvertebrates, both sorting and taxonomic identification will be evaluated on a routine basis. Each technician's efficiency at sorting organisms from sediment and debris will be evaluated through an independent resort conducted by a second, experienced technician. A minimum of 10% of all samples sorted by each technician (i e., one sample chosen at random from every I batch of ten samples) will be resorted. The minimum acceptable sorting efficiency is 90%. If a technician's sorting efficiency falls below that level, all samples in the failed batch will be resorted. QC checks for taxonomic accuracy will be performed on a minimum of 10% of all samples processed by each taxonomist. Only senior taxonomists will be permitted to perform quality control checks on taxonomic identifications. The minimum acceptable level for accuracy for identification and enumeration is 90%. If results fall below this level, the entire QC batch will be reidentified and counted. If taxonomic efficiency is between 90% and 95%, the original technician will be advised, and species identifications will be reviewed as part of continuous training. All results will be documented in a QC logbook maintained in the laboratory. For chemistry, routine QC checks will include processing duplicate, blank, spike and calibration samples and may also include processing blind performance evaluation samples. The type and frequency of QC activities that will be performed for each sampling activity are summarized in Table IV-2. Field and laboratory technicians and analysts will be apprised routinely of their performance on quality control samples. Corrective action resulting from a failed QC check will depend on the magnitude of the problem. Both warning and control criteria will be established to guide the selection of corrective action. Exceeding a warning criterion will require only rechecking calculations or measurement processes; exceeding a control criterion will require reprocess' all 27 samples processed since the last QC check- Field and laboratory technicians and analysts who repeatedly exceed warning or control criteria will be prohibited from handling SCBPP samples until they are retrained. Examples of the warning and control limits that will be used in conducting chemical analyses of sediments and tissue samples collected during the SCBPP are shown in Table N-3. Recommended detection limits for chemical analyses are shown in Table IV-4. Performance Audits The second kind of QC activity will consist of field and laboratory audits performed by the SCBPP QA Officer or a designee. Whereas routine QC checks are designed to ensure accuracy within a laboratory, performance audits are designed to ensure consistency across all field crews and laboratories participating in the project. Each crew and laboratory will be audited at least once during the program. Field QC audits will be conducted to verify each field crew's compliance with the standard sampling protocols identified in the field manual. If the auditor observes any deviations from the field methods manual, the auditor will review the correct protocol with the crew immediately. Crews will be audited for adherence to proper sampling technique, correct identification of an acceptable sample, sample processing, and data entry. The QA Officer or a designee will perform laboratory performance audits. The QA Officer may introduce additional performance evaluation samples as part of the laboratory audit. Such performance evaluations during the middle of the effort will verify that laboratories are maintaining the levels of precision and consistency demonstrated during proficiency examinations prior to initiating processing. Each field crew and laboratory will be responsible for establishing and maintaining a reference collection of identified taxa. This collection will be used to verify identifications, provide consistency in the training of new taxonomists, and help resolve any taxonomic problems that may occur during the project. During performance audits, representative samples of each laboratory's reference collection will be reviewed by a selected taxonomic expert to ensure accuracy and consistency among all the laboratories. F. QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Quality control activities will also be instituted for establishing the database for the SCBPP. When manual entry of data is required, a hard copy of the entered data will be checked against the original by a second data entry operator to identify mismatches and correct keypunching errors. When data are transferred, the transfer will be done electronically, if possible, using communications protocols (e.g., Kermit software) that check the completeness and accuracy of the transfer. When data are transferred using floppy disks or tapes, the group sending the information will specify the number of bytes and the file names of the transferred files. These data characteristics will be verified upon receipt of the data. If the file can be verified, it will be incorporated into the data base. Otherwise, new files will be requested. Whenever feasible, a hard copy of all data will be provided with transferred files. Erroneous numeric data will be identified using range checks, filtering algorithms, and comparisons to lists of valid values established by experts for 28 specific data types. EPA's ODES data management system provides well established QA/QC procedures which includes computerized error checking (range checks and format errors) and an independent technical review by a qualified database manager. When data fall outside an acceptable range, they will be flagged in a report for the SCBPP Quality Assurance Officer (QAO). 29 Table IV-1. Measurement Quality Ob]'ectives (MQO's) for SCBPP indicators and associated data. Accuracy Precision Completeness INDICATORS goal goal goal Water quality salinity 0.5 ppt NA* 90% temperature 1 oC NA 90% dissolved oxygen 0.5 mg/l NA 90% pH 0.2 NA 90% Sediment grain size NA 10% 90% Sediment contaminants organics 30% 30% 90% inorganics 15% 15% 90% Sediment toxicity NA NA 90% Benthic infauna sample collection NA NA 90% sorting 5% NA 90% counting 10% NA 90% identification 10% NA 90% biomass NA 10% 90% Demersal fish sample collection NA NA 75% counting 10% NA 90% identification 10% NA 90% length 5 mm NA 90% biomass NA 10% 90% gross pathology NA NA 90% Contaminants in fish 30% 15% 90% * NA= not applicable 30 Table IV-2. Type and Frequency of recommended Quality measures for the SCBPP INDICATOR QUALITY CONTROL FREQUENCY MEASUREMENT QUALITY OBJECTIVE Salinity Field calibration daily Accuracy bf 0.5 ppt Temperature Field calibration daily Accuracy of PC Dissolved oxygen Field calibration daily Accuracy of 0.6 mgUl pH Field calibration daily Accuracy of 0.2 pH unite Grain size Duplicate splits (L6 ,p) 10% of samples 10%precision Sediment contaminants Duplicate analyses (Ls nor°) 10% of samples Accuracy and precision 30% for organics; 15% for metals Benthic sorting Resort 10% of samples 95%Accuracy Benthic identification Recount and ID of 10% of samples 90%Accuracy and enumeration sorted animals Fish identification Field audit at least once 95%Accuracy Fish abundances Field audit at least once 90%Accuracy Fish length and biomass Field audit at least once 10% Precision Fish pathology Lab verification all fish with Not applicable pathology 31 Table IV-3. Warning and control limits for quality control samples. Recommended Recommended Analysis Type Warning Limit Control Limit Method Blanks Less than detection (organic and inorganic) limit Matrix Spikes 50% Not specified Laboratory Control Sample Organic 80% - 120% 70% - 130% Inorganic 90% - 110% 85% - 115% Laboratory Duplicate 30% relative (organic and inorganic) percent difference Ongoing Calibration Check 15% of the (organic and inorganic) initial calibration Standard Reference Material Organic 80% - 120% 70% - 130% Inorganic 90% - 110% 85% - 115% 32 Table W-4. Recommended method detection limits (in ppm dry weight) for SCBPP chemical analyses. Analyte Inssue Sediment Sample Sample Inorganics (Concentrations in ug/g (ppm), dry weight) Tissue Sediments Aluminum not measured 1500 Antimony not measured 0.2 Arsenic not measured 1.5 Cadmium not measured 0.05 Chromium not measured 5.0 Copper not measured 5.0 Iron not measured 500 Lead not measured 1.0 Manganese not measured 1.0 Mercury not measured 0.01 Nickel not measured 1.0 Selenium not measured 0.1 Silver not measured 0.01 Tin not measured 0.1 Zinc not measured 2.0 Organics (Concentrations in ng/g (ppb), dry weight) Tissue Sediments PAHs not PCB congeners 2.0 measured 10�� w � Chlorinated pesticides 2.0 1. �{ 33 V. PROJECT MANAGEMENT Effective project management is a vital component in the success of any environmental monitoring project. This is especially true when the project requires coordinating the efforts of many diverse groups to produce data that are reliable and comparable. The proposed Southern California Bight Pilot Project will involve 12 participating organizations, including federal, state, and local agencies. The participants in the pilot project include regulators and regulated dischargers with diverse goals and interests. The pilot project represents the first significant attempt to develop integrated regional monitoring throughout the Southern California Bight and has already required considerable coordination to define mutual objectives and develop a standard sampling design and methods. Continued coordination will be vital to the success of the pilot project and to evaluating the feasibility of regional monitoring in the bight. The Southern California Bight Pilot Project will be a cooperative effort among ORD/EMAP; EPA Region D:; the California State Water Resources Control Board; the Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Boards; the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles; County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County; County Sanitation Districts of Orange County; Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Facility of the City of San Diego; the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project; and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (U.S. EPA National Estuary Program). The management structure is shown in Figure III-1. Overall coordination of the project will be the responsibility of the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP). SCCWRP is a joint powers agency formed in 1969 to study the effects of wastewater discharge and other anthropogenic inputs on the ecology of the Southern California Bight. It is governed by a nine-member Commission composed of representatives from the four largest POTWs in Southern California and from federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with responsibilities for wastewater discharge. In 1992, the SCCWRP Commission endorsed the concept of regional monitoring (Resolution 92.3) and charged SCCWRP to facilitate and coordinate a regional monitoring effort. Dr. Jeffrey Cross, Executive Director of the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) will serve as Project Manager. He will provide overall guidance and direction. Dr. Cross has worked for over a decade on studies that have addressed the sources, fates, and effects of contaminants in the coastal marine ecosystem off Southern California. He has extensive experience in providing oversight for large-scale projects. Most recently, he directed a multiyear effort to estimate the mass loadings of anthropogenic contaminants to the Southern California Bight. Mr. Terrence Fleming, Project Officer at U.S. EPA Region IY, will be the QA Officer and will be responsible for directing the QA components of the project. He will review the manuals, assist with training, conduct proficiency tests and audits, 34 and summarize the QA information. Mr. Fleming has extensive experience in project management, both at EPA and at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In this capacity, he has provided QA support for projects similar to the SCBPP. Dr. M. James Allen, Regional Monitoring Coordinator at SCCWRP, will be the Field Coordinator. He will oversee the administrative and technical components of field operations. He will coordinate the schedule and logistics of field sampling; determine equipment sharing needs; write procedures manuals; develop sample storage and transfer protocols; develop data sheets and a tracking system; implement training programs; and work with the QA Officer and Information Management Coordinator. Dr. Allen has more than two decades of experience working on a variety of sampling vessels with all of the sampling gear that will be used in the SCBPP. He has also had extensive experience in large-scale marine surveys from Southern California to the Bering Sea. Mr. Richard Gossett, Chemistry Laboratory Manager at County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, will be the Laboratory Coordinator. He will oversee the administrative and technical components of laboratory analyses. He will coordinate the schedule and logistics of laboratory analyses; write procedures manuals; develop data sheets and a tracking system; implement training programs; and work with the QA Officer and Information Management Coordinator. Mr. Gossett has two decades of experience analyzing water, sediments, and animal tissues from the coastal marine ecosystem off Southern California. He has more than a decade of experience managing analytical laboratories responsible for analyzing marine samples. And he has organized and implemented multiagency intercalibration programs in analytical chemistry of marine samples in Southern California. Robert Hall, Environmental Scientist, EPA Region M is the Information Management Officer. He will coordinate the schedule and logistics of data reporting and management; develop data transfer formats and protocols; write procedures manuals; and work with the QA Officer and the Data Analysis and Reporting Coordinators. Mr. Hall has more than ten years of experience with UNIX operating systems. He has extensive experience with digital cartography and GIS. Dr. Mary Bergen, director of the Benthic Laboratory at SCCWRP, and Dr. M. James Allen, Regional Monitoring Coordinator at SCCWRP, will be the Data Analysis and Reporting Coordinators. They will be responsible for coordinating the various groups addressing the different assessment questions with the data collected during the pilot. They will also be responsible for collating and editing the various portions of the report written by these groups. Between them, Drs. Bergen and Allen have four decades of experience analyzing and interpreting data from large-scale surveys, and writing reports. Most recently, Dr. Bergen wrote the marine portion of the California Comprehensive Offshore Resource Study for the California State Lands Commission. Most recently, Dr.Allen wrote the Santa Monica Bay Characterization Study report for the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (U.S. EPA National Estuary Program). 35 Each of the coordinators described above will be supported by technical representative of each of the agencies and organizations participating in the SCBPP. The coordinators will be responsible for overseeing all technical effort in their project areas, and for soliciting and compiling the comments of all members of their technical support groups. The coordinators will act as liaisons for maintaining communication and consensus among project participants throughout the further development and implementation of the SCBPP. Such distributed coordination provides a mechanism for ensuring that the interests of all SCBPP participants are recognized and considered; it also creates a forum for constructive resolution of any conflicts that may arise during the course of the project. Finally, distributed coordination of the technical areas of the project will help to ensure that the full range of abilities and expertise available from the diverse participants in the SCBPP are exercised to the fullest advantage throughout the project. The project will be supported by an advisory committee composed of representatives of the participating agencies and other individuals whose technical and programmatic expertise will provide project guidance. The advisory committee ensures that the SCBPP is a multi-agency effort and that decisions are achieved through consensus. The advisory committee will also review all documents before they are released. The advisory committee, which will meet bimonthly, is composed of the following members: Ms. Janet Hashimoto, U.S. EPA Region IX Mr. Terrence Fleming, U.S. EPA Region IX Dr. John Dorsey, Environmental Monitoring Division, City of Los Angeles - Ms. Janet Stull, County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County Dr. C. Irwin Haydock, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Ms. Patricia Vain ,ik Water Utilities Department, City of San Diego Mr. Michael Lyons, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Mr. Gordon Anderson, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Mr. Peter Otis, San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Mr. Craig Wilson, California State Water Resources Control Board Dr. Rainer Hoenicke, Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project, National Estuary Program Mr. John Mitchell, State Stormwater Quality Task Force Dr. Jeffrey Cross, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Dr. M. James Allen, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Dr. Mary Bergen, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Dr. Kevin Summers, ORD/EMAP Dr. Steve Weisberg, Versar 36 FIGURE V-1. Management structure for the Southern California Bight Pilot Project. QA Officer Project Advisory T. Fleming Manager Committee EPA Region IX J. Cross SCCWRP Field Laboratory Information Data Analysis Coordinator Coordinator Management and Reporting J Allen R. Gossett Officer Coordinators SCCWRP CSDOC R. Hall M. Bergen EPA Region IX J.Allen SCCWRP 37 VI. PROJECT BUDGET The Southern California Bight Pilot Project will be a cooperative effort funded by the following organizations and agencies: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD) through EMAP EPA Region I% Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles, County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, and Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Facility of the City of San Diego (collectively]mown as POTWs) Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (U.S. EPA National Estuary Program) California State Water Resources Control Board Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Boards Together, these participants will provide a total budget of$2,513,000 (Table VI.1). The budget contributions and the anticipated uses are described below. All contributions described herein are tentative and contingent upon approval of the respective organizations. The POTWs will contribute the equivalent of$1,338,000 in the form of planning, management, field sampling, laboratory processing of samples, quality assurance, data analysis, and reporting. This contribution will be "revenue neutral" with respect to the existing POTW annual monitoring budgets; no additional internal appropriations will be required to enable these participants to meet their commitments to the SCBPP. Maintaining revenue neutrality for the POTWs was a guiding principle in developing the budget for the proposed project. Revenue neutrality ensures the support and cooperation of the organizations that currently perform most of the environmental monitoring in the Southern California Bight. Cooperation of the POTWs is the cornerstone of successful'regional monitoring in the bight. SCCWRP will contribute the equivalent of$305,000 in the form of in-kind services for planning and management of the SCBPP, as well as field sampling, laboratory processing of chemistry samples, sediment toxicity testing, quality assurance, data analysis, and reporting. The contribution will come from internal resources. EPA Region IX will contribute the equivalent of$180,000 for planning and management, quality assurance, and data analysis and reporting. Approximately $100,000 of this contribution will be in the form of contract fund to fulfill project requirements that cannot currently be met through in-kind services of Region Ig staff. Region IX's contribution also includes in-kind personnel support in the form of a QA Coordinator and Information Management Coordinator for the SCBPP. 36 C The Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project will contribute $167,000 in in- land services and contract funds. The in-land services will be in the form of general support for planning and management, quality assurance, data analysis, and reporting for the SCBPP. The contract funds will be dedicated exclusively for field sampling, laboratory processing of samples, and data analysis and reporting for the design "enhancements" in Santa Monica Bay. EMAP will contribute $500,000 to aid in developing regional monitoring in the Southern California Bight. EMAP funds are currently allocated for contract support to sample areas outside the geographic boundaries of the existing POTW monitoring programs. Sampling these areas will require separate boats, and sample processing may require additional taxonomic experts, particularly to identify specimens from sampling sites north of Point Dume. The Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Boards will contribute the equivalent of$17,000 in in-kind services for planning and management of the SCBPP, as well as quality assurance, data analysis, and reporting. The California State Water Resources Control Board will contribute the equivalent of$6,000 in in-kind services for planning and management of the SCBPP, as well as quality assurance, data analysis, and reporting. 39 TABLE VI-1. Budget for the Southern California Bight Pilot Project. EMAP SCCWRP3 EPA IX POTWS2 In thousands of dollars Planning 12 70 70 73 Field Sampling Benthos 22 44 Fish 41 75 Equipment 20 40 Administration 30 10 60 Lab Processing Benthos 60 115 Grain size 19 Sediment Chemistry 40 40 358 Fish Tissue 25 25 154 Sediment Toxicity 80 40 Information Management 100 50 200 Analysis and Reporting 100 100 50 200 Total 500 305 180 1338 3Funding is contingent on approval by the SCCWRP Commission. 2Funding is contingent on regulatory approval to exchange present monitoring requirements for the summer quarter of 1994 for the program described in this proposaL 40 (TABLE VI-I. Continued) i SMBRP3 RWQCBS SWRCB TOTAL In thousands of dollars Planning 11 11 3 250 Field Sampling Benthos 9 75 Fish 116 Equipment 60 Administration 100 Lab Processing Benthos 25 200 Grain size 19 Sediment Chemistry 62 500 Fish Tissue 204 Sediment Toscity 120 Information Management 50 400 Analysis and Reporting 10 6 3 469 Total 167 17 6 2,513 3Funding is contingent on approval of the SMBRP Management Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory Committee. 41 VII. LITERATURE CITED Boesch, D.F. and R. Rosenberg. 1981. Response to stress in marine benthic communities. pp. 179-200, In: Stress effects on natural ecosystems. G.W. Barret and R. Rosenberg (eds.). John Wiley & Sons, New York. Briggs, J.C. 1974. Marine zoogeography. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, NY. 475 p. Emery, K.O. 1960. The sea off Southern California. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 366 p. Environmental Monitoring Division. 1992. Santa Monica Bay annual assessment report 1990.1991. Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles, CA- 225 p. Gray, J.S. 1982. Effects of pollutants on marine ecosystems. Neth. J. Sea Res. 16:424-443. Hoffman, M.S., J. Foley, and T. McGuire. 1992. The world almanac and book of facts, 1993. World Almanac, New York, NY. 960 p. Hunt, D.T.E., and A.L. Wilson. 1986. The Analysis of Water: General Principles and Techniques. 2nd ed. Royal Society of Chemistry, London, Eng. 683 p. Kirchner, C.J. 1983. Quality control in water analysis. Environ. Sc i. and Technol. 17(4):174A-181A. Mearns, A.J., and H.S. Stubbs. 1974. Comparison of otter trawls used in Southern California coastal surveys. So. Calif. Coastal Water Res. Proj., El Segundo, CA. TM 213. 15 p. Mearns, AJ., and M.J. Allen. 1978. Use of small otter trawls in coastal biological surveys. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agcy., Environ. Res. Lab., Corvallis, OR. EPA- 600/3-78-083. 33 p. National Research Council. 1990a. Monitoring Southern California's coastal waters. Nat. Acad. Press, Washington, DC. 154 p. National Research Council. 1990b. Managing troubled waters: the role of marine environmental monitoring. Nat. Aced. Press, Washington, DC. 125 p. NRC. See National Research Council. Pearson, T.H. and R. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 16:229-311. SCCWRP. See Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. 1973. The ecology of the Southern California Bight: implications for water quality management. SCCWRP Tech. Rep. 104. So. Calif. Coastal Water Res. Proj., El Segundo. 531 p. 42 ' Stanley, T.W. and S.S. Verner. 1985. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's quality assurance program. pp 12-19 In: Quality Assurance for Environmental Measurements J.K. Taylor and T.W. Stanley(ads.). ASTM STP 867. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA. Stubbs, H.S., D.W. Diehl, and G.P. Hershelman. 1987. A Van Veen grab sampling method. So. Calif. Coastal Water Res. Proi., Long Beach, CA. 4 p. Taylor, J.K. 1987. Quality Assurance of chemical measurements. Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, Michigan. 328 p. Thompson, B.E., J. Laughlin, and D. Tsukada. 1987. 1985 Reference site survey. SCCWRP Tech. Rep. 221. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Long Beach, CA. 50 p. Thomppson, D. Tsukada, and D. O'Donohue. 1992. 1990 Reference site survey. SCCWRP Tech. Rep. 355. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Long Beach, CA. 58 p. U.S. EPA see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, State of Delaware, State of Maryland, and Delaware Inland Bays and Estuary Program. 1993. The Delaware/Maryland coastal bays joint assessment technical proposal. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III. 56 p. Water Utilities Department. 1992. City of San Diego ocean monitoring pro am receiving waters monitoring report. Metro Water Division, City of San Diego, CA. 225 p. Word, J. and A. Mearns. 1979. 60-meter Control Survey off Southern California. SCCWRP Tech. Rep. 229. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Long Beach, CA. 58 p. APPENDIX A LOCATION OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES FOR BASE DESIGN' Does not include stormwater samples a - oe C � 1 1 r _ 1 l2 {\ \i / \ � ■ - :�/ �� (�/ • �\ �\ � �¥ ; = »7� � @ FEE | �. \ « ��\��/ » � =�� , - ��x . � __�� ° �� . ��\� . � we . . wS \� ) `�� \ � ,y�� . _�� . � ` ` % �� ^ � » a�l� � � ® � � �l APPENDIX B COORDINATES OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES FOR BASE DESIGN' Does not include stormwater samples f Design 1 Point ID Longitude Latitude Point ID Longitude Latitude 1 1171954 33 00 51 44 118 09 18 33 40 26 2 1171832 32 58 45 45 118 10 07 33 42 42 3 117 15 42 32 52 45 46 1181655 3341 08 4 117 09 16 '32 37 29 47 118 15 40 33 3B 11 5 117 09 10 32 34 52 48 118 12 10 333904 6 11711 50 32 35 58 49 118 09 20 33 37 34 7 117 12 02 32 37 38 50 118 14 44 33 35 44 8 117 15 44 32 35 38 51 118 10 41 33 33 20 9 117 14 10 32 32 28 52 118 16 57 33 37 09 10 117 15 55 32 33 12 53 117 16 30 32 47 10 11 117 20 33 32 32 13 54 117 IS 39 32 46 20 12 117 32 41 33 19 00 56 117 17 00 32 43 00 13 117 34 37 33 20 16 67 117 16 43 32 40 35 14 117 36 57 33 22 13 58 117 18 38 3241 59 15 117 28 07 3,911 15 61 117 19 02 32 47 49 16 117 30 34 33 15 32 62 117 19 13 32 46 26 17 117 29 10 33 13 40 64 11721 17 32 47 14 18 117 22 15 33 09 57 67 1171837 32 45 05 19 11721 14 33 04 07 68 1171732 32 43 24 20 117 26 31 $3 10 04 70 118 50 57 33 59 44 21 117 23 07 33 08 18 71 1171914 32 44 23 22 1171935 32 56 36 74 117 21 37 32 44 36 23 1171601 32 50 17 75 117 20 55 32 42 47 24 11721 20 32 48 28 77 118 53 15 33 59 45 25 117 17 44 32 35 54 79 118 56 50 34 00 14 26 117 20 08 32 35 41 80 118 5B 51 34 00 16 27 117 37 41 33 24 49 81 119 00 33 34 00 24 28 117 44 04 33 27 18 82 119 05 38 34 04 35 29 117 48 51 3331 30 63 119 02 51 34 02 58 30 117 43 18 33 26 09 84 119 07 57 34 04 28 31 11741 19 33 25 33 85 119 10 00 34 03 06 32 117 40 41 33 22 55 86 119 00 45 33 59 46 33 117 41 26 33 24 18 87 119 18 03 34 14 35 34 117 36 55 331853 88 119 18 57 34 12 44 35 118 04 54 3341 02 89 119 22 07 34 17 43 36 118 02 16 33 39 04 90 119 21 26 34 14 12 37 118 03 47 33 38 27 91 119 22 24 34 14 44 38 118 05 67 33 36 15 92 11911 14 34 07 44 39 11808 14 33 35 43 93 11911 57 34 04 41 40 118 09 37 33 33 41 94 119 16 41 34 09 09 41 118 08 08 33 43 39 95 119 14 11 34 08 44 42 118 08 51 3341 32 96 119 16 27 34 07 29 43 11805 10 33 36 50 97 119 22 24 34 13 11 ZOOfB Y d 3 Ja LZ:DT LO/ZT/TT Design 1 Paint ID Longitude latitude Point ID Longitude Latitude 68 119 21 07 34 09 12 141 -1200830 34 27 32 99 11921 53 34 09 12 142 120 07 58 34 24 36 100 119 27 59 34 09 18 143 120 10 20 3.42433 101 1191323 34 03 12 144 1201265 34 25 23 102 119 33 11 34 23 07 145 120 16 47 34 25 07 103 119 32 45 34 23 02 146 120 02 20 34 24 56 104 119 28 5B 341932 147 120 21 03 34 25 27 105 11935 14 34 18 21 148 1201835 34 24 17 106 119 38 16 34 24 28 149 120 23 17 34 27 04 107 119 34 25 34 20 36 150 120 26 29 34 24 39 108 119 39 52 34 20 52 151 120 24 00 34 22 13 109 119 26 14 34 18 34 152 120 26 32 34 22 10 110 119 26 01 34 16 03 153 11718 0B 32 48 35 111 119 27 55 34 16 05 154 117 19 48 32 49 04 112 119 27 30 341334 159 117 19 45 32 42 07 113 119 24 36 341122 160 117 20 13 3241 00 114 11928 19 341235 162 117 20 23 32 42 00 115 119 32 26 341703 165 117 17 28 32 40 58 116 119 2B 38 34 13 54 166 117 18 35 32 38 55 117 119 34 03 341243 167 117 19 46 32 38 50 118 119 37 28 34 17 59 172 117 19 52 32 37 27 119 119 34 27 34 17 04 174 117 57 16 33 36 23 120 119 38 38 341708 175 117 56 21 33 36 28 121 119 35 48 34 14 24 176 117 56 03 33 35 46 122 119 36 48 3411 58 177 117 56 14 33 34 02 123 117 15 41 32 38 49 178 117 58 01 33 34 28 124 119 39 56 34 12 56 179 117 58 3B 33 32 34 125 119 45 05 34 14 22 180 118 00 17 33 34 31 126 119 30 22 34 12 13 181 118 00 16 33 35 30 127 119 41 23 34 23 47 182 118 02 24 33 35 52 128 119 46 23 34 23 39 183 118 03 56 33 36 20 129 119 43 09 34 19 58 184 118 05 02 33 36 00 130 119 39 37 34 18 21 185 118 02 47 33 34 55 131 119 44 47 341839 186 117 56 21 33 33 20 132 119 48 15 34 23 55 187 118 20 3B 33 42 15 133 119 46 13 34 19 54 188 118 22 06 33 42 46 134 119 49 04 3421 33 189 118 19 27 33 40 16 135 11051 03 34 22 36 190 118 23 21 33 42 32 136 119 56 36 34 23 13 181 118 25 33 33 43 24 137 119 5B 42 34 25 35 192 118 20 36 3341 43 135 120 00 49 34 25 40 193 118 34 0B 3401 08 139 120 02 58 34 26 19 194 118 36 22 3401 13 140 120 05 02 34 25 38 195 118 32 00 34 00 12 Coo® v a 3 $ BZ:>T COMM Design 1 Point ID Longitude Latitude Point ID Longitude Latitude 196 118 32 00 33 59 00 239 118 28 05 3351 46 197 118 34 42 33 59 04 240 118 27 52 33 50 54 198 118 35 32 34 00 30 241 1182810 33 50 03 199 118 36 42 '33 5B 23 242 116 28 53 33 49 17 200 118 37 00 33 58 55 243 118 29 5B 33 50 54 201 118 36 47 34 01 03 244 118 26 41 33 48 32 202 118 41 21 34 00 34 245 118 27 43 33 46 51 203 118 43 13 34 00 57 246 118 28 02 33 49 20 204 118 29 64 33 59 48 247 118 28 27 33 47 13 205 118 28 48 33 57 05 24B 118 26 67 33 49 32 206 118 30 OB 33 57 51 249 118 25 50 33 48 55 207 118 29 04 33 55 06 250 118 26 24 33 47 51 208 118 28 46 33 54 19 251 118 26 47 33 47 22 209 118 26 47 33 53 03 252 118 28 25 33 47 35 210 1183031 33 53 32 253 118 30 08 33 49 43 211 118 31 42 33 53 49 254 118 29 24 33 48 50 212 118 30 44 33 54 01 255 118 34 36 3351 14 213 118 28 59 33 52 22 256 118 35 56 3351 54 214 11831 07 33 51 35 257 118 33 11 3354 15 215 118 31 23 33 52 41 25B 118 33 03 33 52 56 216 118 33 58 33 58 15 259 118 33 05 33 52 36 217 118 36 10 33 56 55 260 11831 51 33 50 02 218 118 33 05 33 57 31 261 115 32 17 33 49 40 219 118 33 56 33 56 55 262 118 32 49 33 50 53 220 118 32 01 33 55 11 263 118 33 07 33 50 14 221 118 34 01 33 56 15 264 118 32 00 3351 49 222 118 32 12_ 33 57 00 265 118 30 21 33 51 02 223 11831 29 33 55 47 266 118 30 45 33 50 21 224 118 30 58 33 54 56 297 118 36 05 33 50 07 225 118 32 42 33 54 55 266 118 44 21 34 00 04 226 118 33 26 33 54 57 269 118 43 05 33 59 14 227 118 35 24 33 53 06 270 118 46 3B 33 59 12 228 118 38 08 33 54 27 271 1184663 33 58 30 229 118 34 42 33 66 07 272 118 40 05 34 00 34 230 11835 17 33 64 40 273 1183951 33 58 23 231 118 25 44 33 53 18 274 118 40 50 335906 232 118 26 04 33 50 53 - 275 118 3B 04 33 57 52 233 1182500 33 48 51 276 118 38 18 33 53 16 234 118 25 05 33 48 17 277 118 37 29 33 53 30 235 118 24 11 33 43 52 278 116 36 27 3351 38 236 118 26 25 33 45 55 237 118 28 20 33 50 16 238 118 29 26 33 50 63 toot v a 3 A BZ!sT LB/ZT/TT APPENDIX C LOCATION OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES FOR FISH DESIGN z g tTzl Pp �i4c � t R'K �- ♦ !� ti CS-: r ? __ © o, 2\� !ix! us� � �� lB21TW©MP3 WaRl©o » V 0 t • V A � `4�t � V �^�. �y • L� �u�J APPENDIX D COORDINATES OF PROPOSED SAMPLE COLLECTION SITES FOR FISH DESIGN Design 4 Point ID Longitude Latitude Point ID Longitude Latitude 371 117 29 29 33 15 50 414 11731 06 33 19 03 372 117 30 54 33 18 10 415 117 33 55 331558 373 117 21 28 33 06 14 416 117 36 59 33 16 54 374 1172211 32 44 44 417 117 22 43 32 35 12 375 117 23 30 32 34 23 418 117 20 06 32 34 48 376 117 25 47 32 38 57 419 11721 45 32 32 53 377 11721 09 32 38 28 420 117 51 02 333428 378 117 20 25 32 34 22 421 117 43 08 33 25 50 379 117 36 07 33 18 23 422 117 35 3D 33 16 46 380 11811 49 33 40 35 423 118 02 21 33 39 51 381 11811 36 33 42 38 424 118 04 19 33 40 53 382 118 07 28 33 37 12 425 118 01 07 33 37 19 383 118 13 39 33 34 33 426 117 54 21 33 35 52 384 118 28 45 33 54 04 427 1181255 33 40 12 385 118 27 54 33 52 36 428 118 16 13 33 42 03 386 118 45 09 3401 05 429 118 07 54 33 43 49 387 11901 05 34 D3 54 430 118 07 57 33 40 51 388 119 23 40 341534 431 11811 37 33 43 18 389 119 14 22 340634 432 118 07 12 33 34 44 390 119 20 27 341132 433 118 10 51 33 33 17 391 1191434 34 08 42 434 118 32 12 34 00 15 392 119 21 46 34 08 18 435 118 26 01 33 53 49 393 11931 52 34 22 32 436 118 37 22 34 01 43 394 119 35 33 3421 03 437 1183711 33 58 32 395 119 33 30 34 10 45 438 115 40 22 335861 396 119 33 01 34 19 08 439 118 33 06 33 49 26 397 119 26 49 34 14 17 440 118 24 22 33 50 22 398 119 24 51 34 13 42 441 11841 29 3401 13 399 11941 47 341334 442 118 50 43 34 01 29 400 119 47 17 34 22 40 443 119 03 30 34 03 20 401 11941 05 34 20 49 444 118 5e 07 34 02 09 402 119 44 47 341453 445 1191730 341302 403 12001 36 34 23 14 446 119 20 37 34 14 09 404 120 07 01 34 26 53 447 119 19 40 341233 405 119 58 34 34 24 53 448 119 27 01 34 20 53 406 1201127 34 25 32 449 119 17 28 34 05 45 407 120 19 19 3425 10 450 119 19 09 34 09 57 408 12021 48 342334 451 119 21 43 34 07 48 409 120 25 24 34 22 45 452 118 16 53 34 OS 41 410 1170901 32 34 47 463 119 07 41 34 05 10 411 117 10 43 32 38 13 454 119 14 10 34 04 33 412 117 30 34 33 16 57 455 119 35 29 34 23 53 413 117 31 35 33 14 43 450 119 36 16 3411 10 TTO® V d 3 $ SC:tT CB/ZT/TT r Design 4 Point ID Longitude Latitude Point ID Longitude Latitude 457 119 36 03 341424 500 118 18 55 33 41 51 458 119 37 18 341620 501 118 19 11 3341 32 459 119 26 46 34 10 05 502 118 31 27 335525 460 119 29 26 '34 10 46 503 1183226 33 57 20 461 119 39 46 34 12 09 504 118 34 34 33 58 20 462 119 43 07 34 18 32 505 118 28 29 3351 38 463 119 42 40 341833 506 118 30 58 33 52 32 464 120 03 55 34 23 53 507 118 33 31 33 54 44 465 120 01 30 34 23 27 508 118 34 20 33 56 12 466 120 17 46 342625 509 118 34 01 33 53 56 467 120 19 15 34 24 55 510 118 32 53 33 52 24 46B 120 26 23 34 22 59 511 118 31 23 3361 10 469 120 26 29 34 26 36 512 118 32 30 3351 58 470 117 17 15 32 44 54 513 118 26 28 33 45 02 471 117 16 41 32 46 50 514 11 B 27 10 33 46 41 472 117 20 19 32 37 20 515 118 28 13 33 49 49 473 1171709 32 42 32 516 118 28 23 33 48 00 474 1171916 32 43 56 517 118 29 17 33 49 48 475 117 16 37 32 39 47 518 118 22 44 33 43 21 476 1171756 32 40 12 519 118 25 47 33 43 53 477 1171954 32 40 51 478 1171901 32 42 00 479 117 20 10 3241 15 480 117 17 22 32 49 06 481 117 19 53 32 46 52 482 117 19 41 32 48 46 483 1171859 32 45 12 484 117 20 31 32 44 40 485 117 20 34 32 45 56 486 117 20 56 32 47 58 487 11721 59 32 45 24 4BB 117 57 03 33 33 09 489 1176904 33 32 33 490 117 59 41 33 36 11 491 118 00 59 33 34 67 492 118 02 09 33 33 63 493 118 02 39 33 36 38. 494 1180421 33 36 06 495 118 04 43 33 36 05 496 117 56 25 33 33 58 497 117 56 24 33 35 39 498 117 67 04 33 34 00 499 117 58 68 " 33 35 43 NOIM V d 3 $ 9C:4T C6/ZT/TT AGENDA ITEM #16 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California P.O.Bm 8127 • 10944 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714)962.2411 MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION, RECYCLE, AND REUSE COMMITTEE MEETING DATE MAY 26, 1994 - 5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Conservation, Recycle, and Reuse Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on May 26, 1994 at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative offices. The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: CRR COMMITTEE: OTHERS PRESENT: PRESENT: John C. Cox, Jr., Chairman None John J. Collins Burnie Dunlap STAFF PRESENT: Norman Z. Eckenrode James Ferryman J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager Victor Leipzig Blake P.Anderson,Director of Engineering Pat McGuigan Margaret H. Nellor, Director of Carrey J. Nelson Technical Services Phil Sansone Bob Ooten,Assistant Director of Operations Sal Sapien Gary Hasenstab, Director of Personnel Peer Swan Charles Egigian Nichols, Conservation, Recycle. and Reuse Manager Michael D. Moore,Principal Environmental Specialist ABSENT: George Brown Glenn Parker Iry Pickler Daniel T. Welch Minutes of the Conservation, ' Recycle, and Reuse Committee May 26, 1994 Review of Proposed Joint County Regional Water Reclamation Project: A 100 Million- Gallons-Per-Day Recycled Water Project: and Recommended Policy Resolution Regarding Water Reclamation In October 1993, the Committee authorized and directed staff to continue to work cooperatively with the Orange County Water District (OCWD) on studying the feasibility of a regional water reclamation project. The project would pump up to 100 million-gallons- per-day (mgd) of treated, recycled water from either the Sanitation Districts' Reclamation Plant No. 1 or OCWD's treatment plant in Fountain Valley, to a pipeline adjacent to the Santa Ana River. The water would be delivered to the OCWD's recharge facilities in Anaheim,where it would percolate into the ground water basin for recharge of the aquifer. The preliminary estimated capital costs for the project are $231 million or approximately $340-470 per acre foot ($110.150 per million gallons). The Committee directed staff to report back to the Committee on the project's feasibility. Staff was also directed to develop an amended water recycling policy statement. The status of progress on the project was reviewed utilizing the enclosed presentation summary (light green) and as detailed in the attached Staff Report (blue). The Districts' water recycling history and policy was summarized. A brief overview of recent water recycling studies was provided. The Committee reviewed the scope and progress in completing a feasibility study of the joint regional water reclamation project, including a draft random listing of the individual project tasks. Staff noted that the listing was preliminary pending further refinement of the proposed project and additional tasks have or will be added to the project including public education activities. The Committee requested that the final task reports be prioritized into the logical sequence of the work. The staff also reported on the safety of recycled water in relation to recent articles in the press about the detection of Legionella in reclaimed water. Staff reported on the preliminary findings of the Districts' research project which is the subject of these articles, and proposed follow-up research. A separate enclosed statement (lavender)was developed at the Committee's request regarding these issues, noting that there is no known indication of a public health problem due to Legionella microorganisms in recycled water. Staff also presented a draft amended water recycling policy statement as previously requested by the Committee. The Committee suggested changes to the draft policy including language pertaining to additional Districts' history and the statewide water supply perspective, and recommended adoption of the enclosed revised resolution regarding Declaration of Policy with regard to Water Reclamation (yellow) by the Joint Boards. -2. Minutes of the Conservation, Recycle, and Reuse Committee May 26, 1994 Closed Session. The Chairman reported of a need to add one item to the agenda pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, as having need for immediate action, and the need came to the attention of the Districts subsequent to the agenda posted. The matter would be discussed in closed session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, as a personnel matter regarding the evaluation of performance of Districts' employee - Laboratory Manager. The Directors then duly voted to add to the closed session agenda the matter of evaluation of performance of Districts' employee - Laboratory Manager. The Committee then convened in closed session to consider the above matter. Adjournment. The Committee reconvened in general session and adjourned at approximately 7:05 p.m. CEN:gc Ref#430107.rp -3- HISTORY OF DISTRICTS' POLICY FOR USE OF RECYCLED WATER • 32-YEAR CORE IITMEIVT BEGINNING IN 1961 "...the Districts urge that al; methods of reclamation of water from sewage in Orange County...be thoroughly investigated; and that if such studies prove said reclamation to be feasible...make all possible efforts to put said reclamation into effect at the earliest possible date." • 1972 Partnership with OCWD for Water Factory 21 with 15 MGD Commitment • Secondary Effluent to OCWD • OCWD Provide Tertiary Treatment • OCWD Operate Seawater Intrusion Barrier n 1989 Master Plan Adoption • Construct up to Three Upstream Plants • Continue to Supply Secondary Effluent to OCWD • Continue Cooperation with Other Agencies • Develop New Reuse Markets • 1990 Phased Implementation Approach • First Implement Anaheim Forebay/Fullerton Project • Second Implement Crescent Basin Project 0 Third Implement Seal Beach Project Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Facility Map Orange County Water District Boundary Santa Ana River Recharge Facilities ta Ana K Ri " "ver . ago Creek Pipeline to Imperial Head Gates Santiago Creek Recharge Basin OCWD/CSDOC Treatment acilities PadRc Ocean N PROJECT BENEFITS • COST-EFFECTIVE • MAXIMIZES EXISTING FACILITIES • MINIMIZES COMMUNITY DISRUPTIONS • USES LOCAL RESOURCES TOWARDS GOAL OF RELIABLE LONG-TERM WATER SUPPLY • EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS AND BENEFITS • BACKBONE DELIVERY PIPELINE FOR OTHER POTENTIAL USES v THE PROJECT • TREATMENT: DISTRICTS' OCWD • PUMP STATIONS & PIPELINES • RECHARGE FACILITIES • ESTIMATED COSTS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS AI ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA IOSAA ELLIS AVENUE oo.BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 714)e62-2411 May 20, 1994 STAFF REPORT STATUS OF THE JOINT ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT* A 100 MILLION-GALLONS-PER-DAY (MGD) RECYCLED WATER PROJECT 1) INTRODUCTION This Staff Report describes the recent activities of the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (Sanitation Districts) to evaluate the feasibility of developing a large scale water reclamation project. As envisioned, this project would reclaim as much as 100 million-gallons-per-day (mgd) of the Sanitation Districts' secondary effluent by pumping the treated, recycled water through a pipeline up the Santa Ana River along the alignment of the existing levee to the OCWD's Anaheim Forebay recharge facilities for percolation into the groundwater basin. 2) BACKGROUND The Sanitation Districts have more than a 30-year policy commitment to maximizing the use of recycled wastewater. In 1961, the Sanitation Districts' Board of Directors adopted a policy with regard to water recycling that states, in part, the following: . . the Districts urge that all methods of reclamation of water from sewage in Orange County . . . be thoroughly investigated; and that if such studies prove said reclamation to be feasible . . . make all possible efforts to put said reclamation into effect at the earliest possible date." This policy led to a formal partnership in 1972 between the Sanitation Districts and OCWD that included delivery of up to 15 million gallons per day (mgd) of Sanitation Districts' secondary effluent for reclamation purposes; and provided the foundation for the Sanitation Districts' extensive on-site water recycling activities. Since 1972, OCWD has used approximately 6 mgd of the Sanitation Districts' secondary effluent, that has received tertiary treatment, for injection deep into the soil to act as a fresh water barrier to seawater intrusion. In the past several years, OCWD has expanded their facilities to include use of up to another 8 mgd of the Sanitation Districts' secondary effluent. These expanded facilities use reclaimed water to irrigate parks, golf courses, landscaping, and for process water at the Sanitation Districts' treatment plants. Staff Report Status of the Joint Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project: A 100 Million-Gallons-Per-Day (mgd) Recycled Water Project May 20, 1994 In 1989, with the adoption of the Sanitation Districts' 30-year Wastewater Management Action Plan, "2020 VISION," the Sanitation Districts reinforced support for water recycling to maximize water recycling potential and use. On-site use of recycled water for treatment processes at the Sanitation Districts' Plant Nos. 1 and 2 is part of this commitment and is based on the desire to conserve California's precious water resources by offsetting and minimizing the use of potable water, ensure employee safety and use of the highest quality water that is economically reasonable for specific plant needs. The Sanitation Districts' Master Plan adopted long-term goals for water reclamation that include: • Constructing and operating up to three new, upstream water reclamation plants. • Continuing to provide secondary effluent for reclamation. • Continuing cooperation with other water agencies. • Developing new reuse markets to maximize reclamation. In total, the proposed projects would amount to 48 mgd of additional water reclamation. These projects are summarized as follows: • Crescent Basin - 25 mgd • Seal Beach - 13 mgd • Anaheim Forebay - 10 mgd In 1990, the Sanitation Districts further expanded their commitment to achieving water recycling when the Boards approved the "Phased Reclamation Implementation Plan' for expanding water recycling. -2- Staff Report Status of the Joint Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project: A 100 Million-Gallons-Per-Day (mgd) Recycled Water Project May 20, 1994 A) Previous Water Recycling Study Efforts For the past several years, the Sanitation Districts and the OCWD have evaluated the feasibility of jointly constructing water recycling facilities in the north county area. Accordingly, Sanitation Districts' staff has conducted numerous activities toward the goal of the Sanitation Districts acquiring land in the vicinity of Anaheim and Fullerton where available wastewater, potential treatment plant sites, and reuse opportunities seemed to coincide most favorably. Five-acre site minimums were targeted to accommodate 10 mgd minimum facilities. If a satisfactory site could be acquired in the near future, and allowing for public hearings and acceptance, permitting, design and construction, recycled water could be provided around the year 2000. The location of the sites heretofore under consideration are shown in the attached Figure 1. A conclusion of these initial studies was that the cost to produce and deliver recycled water ranged between $423 per million gallons (mg) and $521 per mg ($1,300 to $1,600 per acre foot (af)), respectively. These costs are extremely high and not competitive with the cost of local or imported water that ranges in cost between approximately $150 and $400 per af. As a consequence, the proposals have appeared to be infeasible until the recycling project costs can be reduced or the cost of potable water increases substantially, or there is a well-defined demand for reclaimed water by the Orange County water producers, at virtually any price. B) Proposed Joint Regional Water Reclamation Program During discussions in the fall of 1993 with the OCWD staff on the fate of water recycling in north and central Orange County, our joint staffs began preliminary analysis of the concept of regional water reclamation. This concept would pump up to 100 mgd of OCWD recycled water from the Sanitation Districts' Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley, up the Santa Ana River along the existing levee through a pipeline to the OCWD's Forebay recharge facilities in Anaheim, where it would percolate into the groundwater basin for recharge of the aquifer. The conceptual layout is also shown in Figure 1. Preliminary estimates show that the costs for such a project could range between $110 to $150 per mg ($340 to $470 per 4. A draft technical analysis of the proposal is provided as Attachment 1. The report describes the proposed project, the treatment processes assumed, and cost estimates. The benefits are summarized below: -3- Staff Report Status of the Joint Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project: A 100 Million-Gallons-Per-Day (mgd) Recycled Water Project May 20, 1994 SUMMARY OF BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED JOINT REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION PROGRAM 1. Cost-effective in comparison to estimated costs for new, upstream water reclamation plants and projected costs of imported potable water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). 2. Maximizes the use of existing water reclamation facilities and sites and minimizes community disruptions or impacts associated with new, upstream reclamation plants. 3. Helps achieve the goal of a reliable long-term water supply for sustainable economic development in Orange County through use of local resources to increase Orange County's groundwater supply by as much as 100,000 acre- feet per year. 4. Provides water to all of north Orange County and is therefore equitable in that all within the county service area share the costs through groundwater pumping and property taxes for sanitation services while having access to the recharged water. 5. Provides a backbone delivery pipeline north through the county and the opportunity to tap into this source for irrigation and other allowable uses. C) Direction to Staff In light of these benefits, action was taken at the October 1993 meeting of the Conservation, Recycle, and Reuse Committee and the November 10, 1993 meeting of the Sanitation Districts' Joint Boards, for staff to: ► Continue to work cooperatively with the OCWD on further study of this proposal, and to report back to the Committee on its technical, financial, environmental, regulatory, community, policy implications, and comparative costs; and A- Staff Report Status of the Joint Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project: A 100 Million-Gallons-Per-Day (mgd) Recycled Water Project May 20, 1994 Develop an amended water recycling policy statement for consideration by the Committee. 3) STATUS OF PROPOSED JOINT ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL. WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT A) Feasibility Analysis Scope and Schedule Since the fall of 1993, staffs of OCWD and CSDOC have worked extensively in further studying this proposal. To effectively manage the fast phase feasibility study, the team generated a Feasibility Study Scope of Work (SOW), Attachment 2. The SOW identifies the project team, tasks, and assignments of personnel. At this time, there are fifteen major tasks ranging from cost estimates to evaluating pre-treatment and disinfection alternatives. A preliminary project schedule shows the completion of the feasibility study by January of 1995. Substantial progress has been made on each of the tasks in the project. A summary report of progress on the project is included as Attachment 3. B) Suggested Additional Sanitation Districts' Water Recycling Policy Statement The Sanitation Districts have adopted three sets of policies establishing positions for support of water recycling. The existing policies are as follows: Resolution No. 971 adopted August 9, 1961 - Declaration of Policy with Regard to Water Reclamation. It provides: 1. That the Boards of Directors of these Districts urge that all methods of reclamation of water from sewage in Orange County and all methods for the conservation of water discharged to the sewers in Orange County be thoroughly investigated; and 2. That if such studies prove said reclamation to be feasible that an appropriate public agency make all possible efforts to put said reclamation into effect at the earliest possible date; and -5- Staff Report Status of the Joint Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project: A 100 Million-Gallons-Per-Day (mgd) Recycled Water Project May 20, 1994 3. That the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California will deliver if and when available to an appropriate public agency at no cost a minimum of 15,000 acre feet annually of secondary treated water from sewage of reasonable mineral quality at or near the intersection of the Santa Ana River and Garfield Avenue at an elevation of approximately twenty (20) feet above sea level. Resolution No. 72-27 adopted August 9, 1972 - Authorizing Execution of an Agreement to Provide Orange County Water District 15 mgd Secondary Treated Water for their Reclamation Facility and the Right to Discharge a Like Amount to Sanitation Districts' Facilities. It provides: Section 1: That certain agreement dated August 9, 1972, between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, of Orange County and Orange County Water District, to provide 15 mgd of secondary treated water for said Water District's reclamation facility and the right for Water District to discharge 15 mgd of salt brines and other residual material to Sanitation Districts' facilities, is hereby approved and accepted. The Sanitation Districts Master Plan "2020 VISION" adopted July 19, 1989, also supports water reclamation and establishes the following goals: • Constructing and operating up to three new, upstream water reclamation plants. • Continuing to provide secondary effluent for reclamation. • Continuing cooperation with other water agencies. • Developing new reuse markets to maximize reclamation. In total, the proposed projects would amount to 48 mgd of additional water reclamation. These projects are summarized as follows: • Crescent Basin - 25 mgd -6- Staff Report Status of the Joint Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project: A 100 Million-Gallons-Per-Day (mgd) Recycled Water Project May 20, 1994 • Seal Beach - 13 mgd • Anaheim Forebay - 10 mgd In accordance with the Board of Directors guidance at the October 1993 meeting of the Conservation, Recycle, and Reuse Committee and the November 10, 1993 meeting of the Sanitation Districts' Joint Boards, staff drafted a new policy resolution supporting water reclamation (see Attachment 4). C) NextNextSteos Subject to concurrence by the Districts, the staffs of the OCWD and Sanitation Districts will continue working on the feasibility study as discussed above. 4) RECOMMENDATION Based on the information provided above, staff recommends the following item for the Committee's consideration: 1) Adopt the new policy resolution (Declaration of Policy with Regard to Water Reclamation). CEN:gc Attachments Ref #430094.rp -7- Figure 1 Proposed Regional Water Recycling Project LOS ANGELES COUNTY W OF SARANA RIVERR ER SANTA ANA RIVER RECHARGE FACILITIES 99 PRADO Fy DAM OMMETIWR '/E 0 a`y5� N71AGO CREE „a O CHARGE BA yO9 �P° rur wE a SANTIAGO g CREEK awrwxvE I Pipeline to Imperial Head Gate Yq tlE OC`IfO;CSD C' PACIFIC OCEAN 1 POTENTIAL SITES Q WASTEWATER DISPOSAL COMPANY © LA PALMA N © CRESCENT BASIN O GSA SURPLUS SITE 0 STATE COLLEGE BLVD/WINSTON RD SITE CSDOCSIaa r , c r:j AFT ATTACHMENT 1 A JOINT WATER RECYCLING STRATEGY FOR ACHIEVING WATER SUPPLY INDEPENDENCE �ttut�uv o eta '°,li OCWD/CSDOC Draft October 8, 1993 a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 Water reclamation or recycling is a critical part of water resources management in Southern California. Continued population growth and recurrent drought conditions intensify the need for a reliable, drought-proof water supply. Although ongoing reclamation projects operated by Orange County Water District (OCWD) and Irvine Ranch Water District recycle over 38,000 acre feet per year (AFY), there is a need to do more with local recycled water resources that are not fully utilized. For the past several years, OCWD and County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) have investigated the feasibility of siting and constructing up to three new satellite water reclamation plants within Orange County. The projects ranged in size from 5,600 to 11 ,000 AFY (5 - 10 million gallons per day, mgd) and had projected costs between $50 and $133 million each (primary through tertiary treatment and distribution system). The cost to produce recycled water was projected to be $1 ,300 - $1 ,600 per AF, two to four times the current cost of imported MWD water ($385 per AF). These estimated costs are high due to the large capital expense involved in acquiring a site and constructing new facilities that would produce a limited amount of recycled water. Such facilities do not appear to be cost effective and because of local siting issues, these treatment plants may not receive support from local communities. Recently, CSDOC and OCWD staff began collaborative investigations into the feasibility of a large scale reclamation project utilizing existing and planned wastewater resources. A large regional 100,000 AFY (100 mgd) project is envisioned as a joint effort between OCWD and CSDOC. Highly treated effluent produced by tertiary treatment and organics removal, at CSDOC's Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley, would be pumped up the Santa Ana River via a pipeline. Energy to pump the recycled water may be provided by CSDOC's central generation system. The recycled water would be placed into the OCWD's spreading basins located in the Anaheim Forebay for groundwater recharge. The project would utilize the OCWD's available capacity in its existing 1 ,600 acre groundwater recharge facility. Facilities would be expanded in three phases. Phase I would produce 50,000 AFY of reclaimed water in the year 2000. Production would be increased to 75,000 AFY and 100,000 AFY in the years 2010 and 2020, respectively. Initial cost estimates for Phase I show that from the start, the regional reclamation facility would produce water equivalent to or less than in the cost for Metropolitan Water District water (approximately $600 per AF in the year 2000). The cost to produce reclaimed water from the regional project could be as low as $340 per AF. Costs estimates show that reclaimed water meeting all regulations would not exceed $475 per AF. 2 AFT An.integral part of the water recycling program would be total dissolved solids control in wastewater. A regional brine and salts management program could be required to ensure low TDS for recycling purposes, thus reducing the cost of demineralization. Public acceptance of the proposed water recycling project is anticipated to be positive since the project ensures a firmer water supply by using local resources. The water recycling program maximizes the use of existing facilities and minimizes unit costs. No additional treatment facilities would be sited within the community other than the pipeline along the Santa Ana River and new support facilities at the existing CSDOC and OCWD sites. The program is designed to benefit all users of the Orange County water basin by offering a firm water supply rather than recycled water to a limited number of prospective recycled water users. In conclusion, Southern California's stability is threatened by inadequate regional water supplies. However, a sound and economical solution, is. water recycling, is within reach for Orange County through development and implementation of an aggressive, comprehensive water recycling master plan. The proposed CSDOC/OCWD 100,000 AFY project would be the largest water recycling program in Southern California and would ensure a drought-resistant water supply at minimal cost. 3 DRAFT Present water supplies will not meet future demands in Orange oun Southern California has historically enjoyed the advantage of receiving potable water from a variety of sources including Northern California, the Eastern Sierras, the Colorado River, and local groundwater basins. The past several years' experience with drought and environmental restrictions lie. new Endangered Species Act listings) indicate that Southern California will very likely experience increased water shortages as imported water supplies become less dependable. The water supply situation is exacerbated by the addition of 250,000 new residents each year to Southern California, despite the state's sluggish economy. Approximately 60% of the population growth is internal. Historically, the amount of water expected to be transferred from Northern to Southern California has never materialized. Recent environmental concerns in the Delta have caused the State Water Project (SWP) to fall short of its contractual water commitments most of the time. The need to reserve an average of 800,000 acre feet per year (AFY) of SWP and Central Valley Project water for endangered species as proposed by the State Water Resources Control Board suggests that there may be further limitations on water supplies for transport to Southern California. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency has indicated that the state proposed water allocations for endangered species may not be sufficient and may require additional water. Agriculture presently uses approximately 85% of the state's water supply. Marketing and transfer of water from agricultural areas for urban use is possible, but environmental needs in the Delta must first be met. Most of the agricultural water available for transfer occurs north of the Delta. Transport of the water must occur through the Delta, thus placing the transferred water under the environmental restrictions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In accordance with the ESA, pumps in the Delta can only operate unrestricted one month each year. In addition, contractual, legal and political issues regarding water transfers have not been resolved. Therefore it appears that water transfers will not constitute a dependable resource for Southern California's water supply in the future. Southern California also receives approximately 1 .2 million acre feet per year (MAFY) of Colorado River water. This supply will decrease as Arizona takes its full water allocation. Completion of the Central Arizona Project will reduce the amount of dependable Colorado Aqueduct water to Southern California by 50%. 1 RAFT MWD plans to increase water supply reliability through an Integrated Resource Plan In response to Southern California's potential water shortage problems, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) has implemented an ongoing Strategic Plan whose mission is to provide "adequate and reliable supplies of high quality water to meet present and future needs in an environmentally and economically responsible way." One of MWD's tools for implementation of the Strategic Plan includes an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). MWD plans on increasing reliability of water resources by . increasing Colorado River and SWP supplies, as well as promoting water conservation, local reclamation, desalination, and conjunctive groundwater use. The Strategic Plan states, "The region must also move ahead with present commitments of hundreds of millions of dollars to the construction of projects to reclaim and reuse water." The IRP will determine what combination of the resources mentioned above is best to increase and maintain reliability. There are local concerns over the long-term reliability of MWD's water supply. MWD plans to increase its reliability by the year 2010 to meet 100% of water needs 90% of the time. Several problematic issues include an aging distribution system, lack of reservoirs, and decreased water quality of imported Delta water which provides greater than 50% of MWD's supply. These concerns are being currently addressed by MWD in its Strategic Plan. Orange County's economy depends on a reliable water supply The lack of a reliable water supply can have a significant economic impact on Orange County as determined in a 1991 survey of California industries by Spectrum Economics, Inc.' The survey was conducted to determine the long-term impact of a water shortage on the state's industries by county. It was estimated that prolonged drought conditions in Orange County could result in the loss of 1.5% of manufacturing production valued at $400 million. If a 30% cut-back in water supplies to Orange County industries occurred, the loss of employment was estimated to be 1 .9% or 4,800 jobs. Other losses due to a water shortage include decreased golf course and park revenues, as well as diminished productivity in commercial agriculture. Increasing water resources by development of local supplies in the Orange County Water District (OCWD) service area is critical. As shown in Figure 1 , the OCWD service area consumes about 450,000 AFY of water. Approximately 33% is imported water supplied by MWD. Each water retailer uses a combination of its own Cost of Industrial Water Shortages: Preliminary Observations, Report to California Urban Water Agencies, Spectrum Economics, Inc.. April 11, 1991. 2 RAFT groundwater supplies, if available, and MWD water. Growth between now and 2010 will result in an increased dependence on MWD for water, unless local water supplies are further developed to meet growing needs. An additional 130,000 AFY of water will be needed by the year 2010 to meet anticipated demands in Orange County. Currently, MWD supplies Orange County with 160,000 AFY of imported water. In order to increase reliability and dependence on local water supplies, it is anticipated that in the year 2010, 100,000 AFY of Santa Ana river water will be recharged into Orange County's groundwater via groundwater spreading basins. Another 130,000 AFY of water is envisioned from water reclamation projects. Therefore, in order to achieve 90% reliability in Orange County, reclaimed water must play an increasingly important role in water resources management. Figure 1. Demand and Sources of Water in OCWD's Service Area Mao.Mmrm.n.a.r, eee a.e oeo • ws• •eo r•sr•s� om 000 Soo 0 veru Sete Comprehensive water resources management can ensure Orange County a reliable water supply Having water available when we need it is critical for planning and economic development of sustainable communities in Orange County. This objective can be achieved through comprehensive local water demand and supply management. The high precipitation during January and February of 1993 and the resulting short-term increased water supply, does not change the fact that effective water management mandates that long-term planning for subsequent droughts and continued regional growth be addressed today. Presently, OCWD is able to meet its water demands by relying primarily on the local groundwater basin. However,future demands and drought conditions will require that reclamation projects, in combination with groundwater storage,satisfy a larger portion of the water supply demand as shown in Figure 2. Local supply is also critical for disaster preparedness planning for north Orange County since MWD's extensive 3 f LJ RAFT transmission system for imported water is susceptible to damage in the event of a major earthquake. Figure 2. Local Reliability Can be Achieved Through Comprehensive Water Resources Management M RY�ty o11o��M evo Sol 0� wnv..� R e.mc, vov r/ m.ma smu M. AM „� Rl,er ilw, ■00 � Rem e00 e CirwrD mo re un a me ve vase oe vere A dependable supply of water utilized by Orange County is the Santa Ana River. Baseflow has increased over the past 20 years from approximately 40,000 AFY in 1970 to over 120,000 AFY in 1992 as upper basin wastewater discharges to the river have increased. Flow projections indicate continued increase as upstream wastewater dischargers serve a growing population. For the past 60 years OCWD has captured river flow in its spreading basins for groundwater replenishment. However, a constraint on the use of river water for groundwater recharge is the seasonal nature of flows which are typically low in the summer when water demand is high. Therefore, resources such as reclaimed water, need to be expanded to meet Orange County's water requirements. Water reclamation is a critical factor in water resources management in north Orange County The potential demand for recycled water in Orange County has been well documented; it now amounts to about 38,000 AFY. Reclaimed water uses include landscape irrigation, industrial use, toilet and urinal flushing, agricultural irrigation, and groundwater replenishment. The largest potential use in Orange County is for landscape irrigation, ie. irrigation of golf courses, green belts, parks, school yards, etc. These are the easiest facilities to retrofit with reclaimed water pipelines. A chief constraint with reclaimed water distribution is the cost to install pipelines in existing streets. Traffic congestion and concern of local businesses for potential loss of revenue during pipe installation can be problematic. 4 ' RAFT The demand for reclaimed water is quite variable. Landscape irr-g-a-t-j5-n-w--nT rec alma water is typically nocturnal as well as seasonal. The highest demands occur between 9 pm to 6 am due to normal landscape irrigation schedules. For this reason, large capacity reservoir systems are needed to meet these peak demands. Seasonally, reclaimed water use is highest in the summer and decreases in the winter rainy months. It is very costly for water reclamation project treatment and storage facilities to be designed to meet peak daily and seasonal needs. For most Orange County uses, some portion of reclaimed water must be treated to reduce total dissolved solids (TDS) or salts to meet the Regional Water Quality Control Board's Basin Plan requirements and to avoid salt sensitivity problems in landscape and golf course irrigation. Desalting is an expense treatment process, costing up to $550 per AF. However, source control may provide some relief from this cost. There are examples of effective source control. Cities such as Irvine have limited the use of home regenerative water softeners. The city of Chino has also implemented a salts discharge limit for wastewater. Brines may also be appropriately disposed of in a brineline, such as the Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI) to segregate high salts away from reclaimable water. Additional planning on a regional basis for salts control in Orange County can help to further reduce salts and also the cost to produce reclaimed water. Water recycling, as a local resource, will become more economically attractive as MWD's rates increase for imported water supplies. Figure 3 illustrates that the MWD price is expected to approach $60O per AF by the year 2000. In comparison, costs for water recycling range from $300 to $600 per AF (not including primary and secondary treatment). MWD projects that development of a new imported water supply, if available, would cost an estimated $8O0 per AF. By the year 2000, the cost to produce recycled water is expected to be favorable when compared to MWD's price for imported water. Figure 3. MWD's Price for Imported Water Will Continue to Increase Despite Its Reliability 1,200 $/AF 0 MWD Seasonal Treaeld 1,000 21 MWD Seasonal Unnaledr Rll a00 60D 400 200 ti M 0 4 1995 2000 2006 2010 2015 2020 5 DRAFT Reclaimed water pricing can be a strategic approach to promoting a reuse market. Today, reclaimed water pricing in Southern California ranges up to 90% of the MIND imported water price. The cost to produce reclaimed water is often much higher than its market price. In order to increase the economic feasibility of reclamation projects, MWD currently offers a $154 per AF subsidy. Limited State Revolving Funds are also available as low interest loans to finance capital projects. The regulatory climate for implementing reclaimed water projects in California has become increasingly favorable as a result of more than 200 successful reclaimed water projects. Proposed state regulations will allow for approximately 36 new reclaimed water uses including toilet and urinal flushing. The state has mandated through law the use of reclaimed water, if available, for eleven beneficial uses including flushing of sanitary sewers, dust control, soil compaction, and fire fighting. The State Legislature's Water Recycling Act of 1991 declared that the use of potable water is wasteful when reclaimed water is available for landscape irrigation and other purposes. The act mandated the use of reclaimed water where it does not pose an economic hardship on the user. These new laws and regulations should facilitate the implementation of new projects which are expected to provide over 1 MAFY of recycled water to California by the year 2010. Local water agencies have had compelling reasons to implement water recycling Many of the local water reclamation success stories have occurred in areas unable to dispose of treated wastewater or without a local water supply. In the case of Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), difficulties in permitting for an ocean outfall for discharge made water reclamation the logical option. IRWD pioneered the first successful large scale water reclamation program in Orange County. Reclaimed water has been used for landscape irrigation and recently for toilet and urinal flushing in an office building. The lack of a groundwater supply and total dependence on MIND for imported water were reasons for agencies in south Orange County to implement reclamation programs. Since this area has only recently been developed, it was economical to install reclaimed water lines simultaneously with other utilities in new developments. As in the case of the IRWD, south Orange County was able to install reclaimed water distribution lines easily as the area was developed. Expensive retrofitting was not required in either case. 6 RAFT Future water reclamation projects face local constraints not encounters y previous projects By comparison, central and north Orange County agencies, which have access to potable water supplies from both groundwater wells and MWD supplies, have less interest in reclaimed water than south Orange County. In addition, wastewater disposal is not a problem. CSDOC discharges advanced primary and secondary effluent via a 4.5 mile long ocean outfall. Despite the lack of compelling economic or institutional reasons for these areas to use reclaimed water today, the importance of reclamation to help ensure a reliable future water supply is fully recognized by these agencies. The reclaimed water market in Orange County was defined as part of OCWD's water recycling master plan and feasibility reports. The results of the studies showed that potential recycled water use is widely dispersed based on current and predicted water demand. Golf courses and greenbelts, identified as the most likely users of reclaimed water due to their large water demands, could use about 29,000 AFY. Results of these studies showed that potential users were widely dispersed and the cumulative reclaimed water need for the Anaheim Forebay area was only 5,060 AFY. Water reclamation needs within the OCWD service area were estimated at only 29,000 AFY. The marketing studies were limited, however, in that they did not evaluate the economics of retrofitting existing facilities or the willingness of the potential users to commit to receiving reclaimed water. Dual plumbing systems exist but are very limited in their present application. Dial plumbing has been installed in an office building for toilet and urinal flushing in the IRWD service area and in the administration building of the OCWD. Anaheim's new City Hall has also been constructed to use reclaimed water for flushing purposes. Operating and maintaining dual systems requires additional resources. Forthis reason, use of reclaimed water within structures is restricted to commercial buildings and requires a yearly system check for cross connections to the potable water supply. Careful.plumbing maintenance is necessary in such buildings to ensure that no cross connections occur between potable and reclaimed water supplies. Backflow prevention devices, cross connection inspections, and the use of purple taped piping are also required for use of reclaimed water in buildings. Overall, the amount of water reclaimed by high rise buildings in the OCWD service area is not expected to be significant. Orange County clearly has a potential reclaimed water market; however, without a compelling need, the cost to lay distribution lines in major streets may make reclamation projects economically infeasible. This has prompted the need to evaluate alternative reclamation projects which provide regional reclaimed water rather than supplying the local end users. 7 RAFT Joint CSDOC/OCWD water reclamation activities have determined that the siting an construction of small reclamation projects may be cost prohibitive For the past three years, the OCWD and CSDOC staff have been investigating the feasibility of building up to three satellite water recycling facilities in Orange County (Anaheim Forebay, Seal Beach, and Central Orange County areas). The two districts have approximately the same service area and share common goals for implementation of water recycling projects. Master plans and siting feasibility reports describing recycled water demands and potential users were prepared for the districts. Water recycling goals and policies were set forth by the CSDOC board upon adoption of their 1989 Master Plan. Staff from both districts first focused on siting of the potential reclamation facility in the Anaheim/Fullerton area since this appeared to be the most feasible area. In many regards, the findings of these studies may be considered representative of the other locations in Seal Beach and Central Orange County. Three parcels were selected in the Anaheim Forebay as potential sites for a reclamation plant. Engineering feasibility studies were completed on the parcels to estimate capital as well as operations and maintenance (O&M) costs. A 5 mgd facility would cost $50 to $60 million, whereas a 10 mgd plant would cost $102 million (1991 dollars). A comparison of capital and reclaimed water production costs for the three sites is given in Figure 4. Costs were determined as part of the engineering feasibility studies completed for CSDOC and OCWD. The estimated cost to produce reclaimed water ranged from $1 ,300 to nearly $1 ,600 per AF. Even with MWD's $154 per AF subsidy, the cost to produce recycled water is much higher than the price of imported water (currently $385 per AF). Figure 4. Estimated Costs to Site and Construct 5 to 10 mgd Facilities and Produce Recycled Water are High Compared to MWD Prices $133 MI Sne i side am SIDS I i 5 Id I" 1 I j 1 1 i t Mon'❑ I I I 1555 ' I I W C Cm. nl UP.Im. WWOC Cmunt LA P.I m B..m Basin CAPITAL COSTS Spr 4,slo.1 Im mn5rn.1 8 DRAFT Several concerns arose from the site selection research. Most of the sites were previously used for industrial or agricultural activities and carry potential liability of subsurface and groundwater contamination. (Agricultural land may be contaminated with pesticides and fertilizers.) It was also difficult to locate sites close to potential recycled water users, yet far enough away from residential areas to minimize public concerns. In addition, only small sites are available in north Orange County, due to extensive development. Siting of a new facility in most locations would mean disruption of traffic along major through-streets. The support of city agencies would be required to coordinate with local businesses located along streets under construction. Siting of a new reclamation facility would require extensive air quality monitoring and permits, since low, but acceptable, levels of reactive organic gases and other emissions are produced during primary and secondary treatment. The feasibility reports researched potential reclaimed water users; however, the reports did not identify their willingness to incur retrofit costs or use reclaimed water. Several city planning and water departments felt that a site would have to be selected prior to obtaining commitment from potential reclaimed water users. In August 1992, letters were sent from CSDOC to cities in north Orange County requesting their support of water recycling policy and CSDOC's siting efforts. Several cities had financial concerns over cost of distribution lines and stated there was a lack of funds available to support reclamation facilities even though financial support was not requested of the cities in the letter. Other cities were interested in additional information on the proposed facilities. Although subsequent meetings were held between CSDOC staff and city planning and water departments, there was no commitment of funds or support for locating a facility at a particular site. The option to pursue siting and construction of up to three small facilities, .which has been under investigation, does not seem economically feasible or locally acceptable. The large capital outlay for these facilities ($50 to $133 million), compared to the relatively small amount of water potentially produced (up to 11,000 AFY) makes this option seem economically impractical at this time. A regional 100,000 AFY water reclamation facility is proposed as a cost effective water recycling solution A regional 100,000 AFY (100 mgd) project is envisioned to help ensure a reliable water supply to Orange County. In order to achieve a highly reliable water supply in Orange County, an additional 100,000 AFY of Santa Ana River water and 130,000 AFY of reclaimed water is needed (Figure 5). Approximately 30,000 AFY of reclaimed water will be available through expansion of existing reclamation projects at IRWD and OCWD. The proposed regional project would offset the need for the remaining 100,000 AFY by making use of local resources while maximizing groundwater storage 9 DRAFT as part of local comprehensive water resources management. Unlike other reclamation projects, this project would provide county-wide benefits by increasing the overall groundwater supply. Reclaimed water would reduce the amount of water purchased from MWD at increasing costs. Figure 5. The Regional Water Reclamation Facility Would Help Ensure Orange County a Reliable Water Supply as Future Demands Increase voo yv vnxo•tm..vounoF Soo Fav� M�� wuwA.awm� Nn.FIwFi�. i00 IvilF ltd 8,tpp�M +oo 0 +vvv.w oo+o The project would involve pumping approximately 100,000 AFY (100 mgd) of tertiary treated effluent from CSDOC's Plant No. 1 up the Santa Ana River to the OCWD's groundwater recharge facilities. The recharged groundwater basin would provide additional water to the region. Figure 6 shows the location of the proposed pipeline leading to the spreading basins along the Santa Ana River in north Orange County. Hydrological studies using the Army Corp of Engineers data from 1950 to 1985 show that groundwater recharge efforts can be maximized 10 months out of the year. Over 100,000 AF could potentially be recharged into the basin in addition to the current and anticipated flows in the Santa Ana River. Figure 6. The Proposed Regional Reclamation Project Would Provide 100,000 AFY of Reclaimed Water to OCWD's Groundwater Spreading Facilities 01 IIW,p.FFnLp.. i�p• yn„ 1 )QG NF[NgeB�n 0CwD600C WFNty,FO��,n[I+ y M1 � 5 Q 10 DRAFT ' Regional brine and salts management is essential to minimize project costs igure The lower the salts concentration in water and wastewater, the less desalting treatment required to produce reclaimed water. Increasing salt concentrations in water supplies and the subsurface have led to degraded water quality. Without a management plan to reduce salts loading, wastewater supplies in north Orange County will continue to increase in salts. Sources of salts in wastewater supplies include increased use of home regenerative water softeners, industrial desalting/deionizing processes and Colorado River water. Figure 7. A Regional Brine and Salt Management is Key to Reducing Reclaimed Water Costs iw f o Methods to facilitate brine management include the use of dedicated brinelines and water softener ordinances. The SARI line was constructed to receive brines from various point sources in Orange, Riverside and San Bernadino Counties. As additional brines are produced by proposed desalters and reclamation facilities, disposal of these brines into the SARI or similar dedicated brine lines which bypass CSDOC's Plant No. 1 prevents further degradation and improves wastewater quality. Ordinances limiting salt discharges from home water softeners may be developed through coordinated efforts with the cities. Ordinances have been developed for salts management in selected cities such as Chino and Irvine. In addition to TDS, sodium, chloride, and sulfate concentrations in reclaimed water must be minimized in order to be of acceptable quality. Ultimately, brine management should reduce the salt load in wastewater tributary to CSDOC's Plant No. 1 and therefore reduce treatment costs. Reclaimed water quality objectives are achievable for the regional 100,000 AFY project Reclaimed water pumped into the OCWD spreading basins will be monitored for and meet specific water quality standards. Newly proposed regulations for groundwater recharge require the total nitrogen concentration to be less than 10 mg/L as nitrogen. 11 DRAFT Partial nitrification/denitrification treatment can be cost effectively acc)mptisnea CSDOC's Plant No. 1 in order to meet nitrogen requirements. Total organic carbon (TOC) limits for groundwater recharge are based upon the percent reclaimed water contribution. For example, surface water spreading of 46 to 50% reclaimed water must meet a Department of Health Services water quality standard of 6 mg/L for TOC. Additional dilution of the reclaimed water with Santa Ana River water may help to meet this standard. Removal of TDS to meet Basin Plan requirements of 600 mg/L for groundwater recharge should be accomplished as a result of regional brine and salt management and the desalting of a portion of the reclaimed water, using reverse osmosis treatment. Underground detention times and production well set-back distances and blending of reclaimed water with Santa Ana River water and imported water would have to be evaluated thoroughly infeasibility studies for this project. The above mentioned water quality factors require further investigation but do appear to be achievable in a cost- effective manner for the regional 100,000 AFY project. Travel time of the water, once percolated through the basins and subsurface is estimated to be on the order of months to years. Preliminary cost estimates for the proposed 100,000 AFY project were based on the assumptions given in Appendix A. It was assumed that the facilities would be constructed in three stages over the next 30 years. Phase I would be completed in the year 2000 and would provide 50,000 AFY of reclaimed water to the spreading basins for groundwater recharge. Tertiary treated water produced at CSDOC would be pumped up a 15 mile pipeline to the groundwater spreading basins. A computer model was used to determine that reclaimed water could be used for recharge purposes for 10 months per year based on Santa Ana River flows and groundwater recharge practices from the past 60 years. Cost estimates in the Appendices are only for the Phase I construction and operation. Phase 11 and Phase III would be substantially less as more product water is produced using the existing pipeline and pump station. The cost for reverse osmosis treatment will be minimized by the implementation of a regional brine and salts management plan to maintain and reduce salts entering CSDOC's Plant No. 1. It was assumed in the cost estimates that source water to the regional treatment facilities would contain 900 mg/L TDS. Costs to pump the reclaimed water to the spreading basins offset a portion of energy costs for pumping to the ocean outfall. A certain portion of the energy required for the regional reclamation project could be supplied by CSDOC's central generation power and therefore reduce energy costs. 12 DRAFT Cost estimates were developed for three options or levels of tre itment of reverse osmosis and microfiltration) for Phase I are given in Appendix B. The amount of microfiltration and TDS level in the product water varied for the three options. Appendix B also shows the comparison of product water quality with water quality requirements set for the Santa Ana River Reach 3 and the groundwater quality objectives plus a reclamation increment or allowance. Based on the assumptions given in Appendix A and B, Appendix C shows the breakdown of the estimated facilities and O&M costs for Phase I of the regional project. Option A appears to be the most cost effective. The total cost for reclaimed water production in Option A is less than $3501AF. In this option the recycled water would contain approximately 650 mg/L TDS. Options B and C both produce water costing over $400 /AF and contain either more microfiltration or reverse osmosis treatment. The majority of the cost to produce reclaimed water in each case can be attributed to O&M costs for desalting and microfiltration. Costs to produce recycled water as shown in the various options are minimized by the large volume of reclaimed water produced which lowers the unit cost. Also, utilization of existing OCWD spreading basins and CSDOC primary and secondary treatment facilities helps to minimize costs. The regional project does not require land acquisition as in the case of the previously mentioned small satellite reclamation facilities. All of the options appear economically feasible when compared to the anticipated MWD price for water in the year 2000 (approximately $600 per AF). Most importantly, the regional project provides a firm water supply whereas MWD water is not as reliable. Public acceptance of the regional 100,000 AFY facility is expected to be favorable as a means of increasing local water supply reliability Public acceptance for the proposed joint CSDOC/OCWD project is expected to be favorable. Unlike other reclamation projects, no new facilities would be sited, thereby avoiding many community concerns. The constraints associated with siting, permitting and construction of a new treatment facility would be avoided or minimized. The proposed regional 100,000 AFY water reclamation option is an equitable concept, as it would serve the needs of all residents of Orange County rather than a limited area surrounding a traditional water recycling plant. This option maximizes the use of existing facilities owned and operated by CSDOC and OCWD. It would be the largest water reclamation project in Southern California and would ensure a firm water supply to Orange County. 13 DRAFT The proposed regional 100,000 AFY facility benefits all of urange Uounty an increases the reliability of its water supply using local resources The benefits of the regional water reclamation project are provided below; 1 . Helps achieve the goal of a reliable long-term water supply for sustainable economic development and environmental protection in Orange County. 2. . Keeps comprehensive water resources management at a local level. 3. Provides water to all of north Orange County and is therefore equitable in that all within the county service area share the costs through groundwater pumping and property taxes for sanitation services. 4. Utilizes local resources, not imported ones, to achieve a reliable water supply. 5. Increases Orange County's groundwater supply by as much as 100,000 AFY. 6. Maximizes the use of Orange County's groundwater basin for storage to meet peak demands and drought conditions. 7. Provides a brine management program, necessary to protect all wastewater reclamation resources. Conclusions Water reclamation is a major part of any program aimed at achieving water supply dependability. Regional and local planning must continue to develop firm water supply projects in spite of present unfavorable economic conditions. The need for support from the cities within the OCWD and CSDOC service area is critical in implementing a regional salt and brine management plan to protect water quality. Recommendations The OCWD and CSDOC staff recommend that both boards approve and support additional joint efforts in water reclamation for the reasons previously provided. A previously drafted policy statement is provided in Appendix D. It is envisioned that both districts will be involved to some extent in the adoption of new reclamation policies and drafting environmental impact reports. Plans for facilities expansion at CSDOC Plant No. 1 may have to be accelerated. Implementation of a regional salt and brine management program is needed as a first step. 14 DRAFT' The roles and responsibilities of the two districts must be defined. Financia considerations for the construction of the pipeline and additional tertiary treatment facilities need to be addressed. Additional costs include maintenance of the groundwater spreading basins, monitoring wells, and water quality analyses. An integrated surface and recycled water spreading program and a groundwater management plan would be required to effectively utilize the reclaimed water. In light of the identified needs presented above, staff from the OCWD and CSDOC present the following recommendations for implementing a proposed water reclamation program: 11 A joint policy statement or complementary policy statements should be approved by the boards of both the OCWD and CSDOC to set forth their joint water reclamation mission statement and reclamation objectives. 2) A regional salt and brine management plan must be prepared to ensure that wastewater at CSDOC's Plant No. 1 is of the lowest practical salt content for water reclamation purposes. 3) Public officials and staff from local and regional agencies must be informed of the proposed joint water reclamation program so that they may provide their guidance and support for a firm water supply. An education/public information program should be developed as soon as possible. 4) OCWD/CSDOC should jointly seek MWD's support of the proposed project which satisfies in part identified needs of MWD as described in their IRP. 5) OCWD/CSDOC should jointly seek state and federal funding. 6) CSDOC, in cooperation with OCWD, should seek the support of the cities within its service areas to put forth policies, ordinances, and facilities planning at the local level to support water reclamation and the proposed project. 15 DRAFT APPENDIX A Cost Assumptions for the Regional Reclamation Facility 1 . Project will pump water an average of 10 months (305 days) per year. 2. The pipeline up the Santa Ana River is approximately 15 miles long. If aligned mainly along the river then assume $50 million. 3. The project will be constructed in 3 phases according to the draft schedule. Phase 1 will produce 50,000 AFY in 2000 Phase 2 will produce 75,000 AFY in 2010 Phase 3 will produce 100,000 AFY in 2020 4. The pump station and pipeline costs are the same regardless of phase of the project lie. 50,000; 75,000; 100,000 AFY). The pump station will cost $12 million and the pipeline is estimated at $50 million. 5. Reverse osmosis & microfiltration costs are based on 900 mg/L TDS in source water. 6. Pumping costs are assumed to be the same regardless of the phase of the project (50, 75, 100 mgd). Pumping will use a blend of CSDOC's central generation energy and Southern California Edison. Cost estimated to be approximately 4 cents per Kwh. Pumping costs will be partially offset by the savings incurred from not pumping to the ocean (25% of cost to pump up the Santa Ana River). Costs are estimated at $ 1 million per year for 50,000 AFY (Phase 1). 7. It was determined that the groundwater basin can take up to 100,000 AFY on a long-term basis. 8. Disinfection will be required prior to pumping up the river and is factored in the capital and O&M costs. 9. Nitrification/denitrification will be required to meet the 10 mg/L limit. It was assumed that this would cost $50 per AF and would be a part of the CSDOC secondary facilities expansion at Plant No. 1 . 10. Costs were compared with requirements of the RWOC8 for the Santa Ana River Reach 3 and groundwater quality objectives plus reclamation increment requirements. 16 DRAFT APPENDIX B Assumptions Used for Cost Estimates for Three Treatment Options All Options assume production of 50,000 AFY in the year 2000 and that the influent water has a TDS of 900 mg/L. Option A Product water has 650 mg/L TDS. Treatment includes partial microfiltration. Option B Product water has 600 mg/L TDS. Treatment includes partial microfiltration. Option C Product water has 600 mg/L TDS. Treatment includes full microfiltration. Comparison of Product Water Quality for the Three Options Chemical Option A Option B Option C Santa Ana River Groundwater Constituent Reach 3 Req. + Reclamation Increment Req. TDS 650 mg/L 600 mg/L 600 mg/L 600 mg/L 600 mg/L Sodium 143 mg/L 139 mg/L 139 mg/L 110 mg/L 130 mg/L Chloride 151 mg/L 140 mg/L 140 mg/L 140 mg/L 130 mg/L Sulfate 140 mg/L 122 mg/L 122 mg/L 150 mg/L 160 mg/L TOC 8.6 mg/L 5.5 mg/L 5.5 mg/L 6 mg/L 6 mg/L Cost/AF S339/AF $446/AF $473/AF 17 L DRAFT APPENDIX C Cost Breakdown for the Phased Regional Reclamation Proiect Option A Option B Option C 50,000 AFY 50,000 AFY 50,000 AFY Phase I Phase I Phase I Pump Station $ 12 M $ 12 M $ 12 M 15 mi pipeline $ 50 M $ 50 M $ 50 M Capital repay Assume $20 M State loan at 3% and rest 600,000 600,000 600,00 (542 M) at 6% per yr. 2,520,000 2,520,000 2,520,000 3,120,000 3,120,000 3,120,000 Annual capital repay pump stat. + pipe $ 62.40 /AF $ 62.40 /AF $62.40 /AF 10 mo. pump 50,000 AF 50,000 AF 50,000 AF 50,000 AFY Pumping cost $ 1 M $ 1 M $ 1 M $/AF pumping 6 20/AF $ 20/AF $ 20/AF Capital MF/RO $ 31 ,581 ,701 $ 54,194,446 $ 66,057,991 6% repay $ 1 ,894,902 $ 3,251 ,667 $ 3,963,480 50,000 AFY prod. $ 37.90/AF $65.00/AF $79.00/AF Annual O&M $ 8,179,157 $12,200,222 $12,850,619 MF & RO $163.60/AF $244.00/AF $257.00/AF Nit./Denit. at CSDOC as part of secondary expansion $ 50/AF $ 50/AF $ 501AF Engineer's Report, EIR, Pre-design & final design, Operating plan, etc. $ 5/AF $ 5/AF $ 5/AF Total Cost/AF $ 339/AF $ 446/AF $ 473/AF 18 • _AFTVI APPENDIX D Wastewater Reclamation Policy Statement It is the joint policy of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) and Orange County Water District (OCWD) to develop wastewater reclamation within the districts' service areas, to the maximum practicable extent, considering individual project economic feasibility and the long term need for a dependable water supply to help meet the managed needs within the districts' service areas. To accomplish this objective, the districts will for those programs and projects approved by our Boards of Directors: • Acquire appropriate and feasible reclamation sites. • Plan, design, construct and operate projects for the reclamation and reuse of wastewater. • Develop programs to inform the public of the role of wastewater reclamation as an integral part of the areas' dependable water supplies. • Establish and encourage district and city sewer use ordinancesthat limitsalinity and other critical water quality constituents discharged into wastewater collection systems to facilitate wastewater reclamation. • Pursue state and federal financial assistance to reduce the financial burden on the districts' rate payers for developing reclamation projects. • Establish and encourage retail water pricing that promotes water reuse. 19 ATTACHMENT 2 Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Feasibility Study Scope of Work Joint Project of the Orange County Water District And County Sanitation Districts of Orange County April 20, 1994 ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY SCOPE OF WORK TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 IL Project Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 III. Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 IV. Task Descriptions and Assignments Task 1- Finalize Cost Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Task 2 - Determine Water Quality Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Task 3 - Develop Wastewater Quality Management Plan . . . . . . . 3 Task 4 - Develop Brine Issue Paper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Task 5 - Analyze Water Quality at Anaheim Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Task 6 - Evaluate Santa Ana River as Dilution Water . . . . . . . . . 4 Task 7 - Determine Impacts on 301(h) Waiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Task 8 - Analyze CSDOC Flow Conditions and Plant 1 Secondary Treatment Requirements . . . . . . . . . . 4 Task 9 - Conduct Facilities Site Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Task 10 - Determine Pipeline Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Task 11 - Determine Peak Energy Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Task 12 - Analyze Impacts on Recharge Operations . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Task 13 - Evaluate Microfilration for Virus Removal . . . . . . . . . 5 Task 14 - Evaluate Non-Potable Users Along Santa Ana River . . . 5 Task 15 - Evaluate Pre-Treatment and Disinfection Alternatives . . 5 INTRODUCTION The Orange County Water District (OCWD) and County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) are jointly developing the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. By the year 2000, Phase I of this landmark project will produce 50,000 acre-feet per year (afy)of reclaimed water,primarily for groundwater replenishment. Phase II and III of the project is estimated to develop an additional 25,000 afy of reclaimed water by the years 2010 and 2020, respectively. Thus, this project will ultimately produce 100,000 afy of reclaimed water. However, the timing and actualization of the ultimate capacity will depend upon the rate at which CSDOC's secondary effluent and funding sources become available. In October 1993, OCWD and CSDOC developed a paper titled "A Joint Water Recycling Strategy for Achieving Water Supply Independence." This paper evaluated the current and future water demand needs of Orange County and established a need for more local, cost-effective water supplies. The proposed project provides the ideal solution to the region's projected water shortfalls. The following is a scope of work for the project's Feasibility Study, which will primarily focus on Phase I related issues. The tasks described in this document have been assigned to the appropriate OCWD and CSDOC staff and selected consultants. The goals of the feasibility study are to identify and evaluate the questions and issues arising from the project's concept and develop a document by December 1994 that will serve as the foundation for the environmental documentation process, health effects study and preliminary design. The individuals identified in the following sections will prepare text on their assignments that will be compiled and organized into the feasibility study report. Iof5 PROJECT TEAM _ 9 00" Project Manager - Julie Lie Water Quality & Health Effects Study Marty Rigby Mike Wehner Nita Yamachika Harry Ridgway Susan Bradford Engineering Steve Conklin Jim Herberg Hydrogeological Investi ag lion Roy Herndon Tim Sovich Nancy La Mascus Recharge Operations - Allan Flowers SC DOC Propram Manager - Blake Anderson Technical Services - Margie Nellor Planning and Engineering Blake Anderson Tom Dawes John Dettle Wendy Sevenandt Qperations - Bob Ooten Source Control Majin Talibi Jim Wybenga Laboratory - Charles McGee CONSULTANTS Ric DeLeon - Microfiltration Analysis Kris Lindstrom - Brine White Paper and 301(h) Waiver 2of5 PROJECr DESCRIPTION Secondary effluent from CSDOCs Plant No. 1 will be treated through an advanced treatment system consisting of nitrification/denitrification, microfiltration and reverse osmosis. The project's effluent will be pumped about 15 miles through a 72-inch pipeline located along the Santa Ana River to OCWD's existing spreading basins. Task 1 - Finalize Cost Estimate (Julie Lie Re-evaluate capital and operational costs of Phase I facilities, classify costs by components and determine the amounts assumed by CSDOC and OCWD. Task 2 - Determine Water Ouality Standards (Marty Rigby, Mike Wehner and Susan Bradford) Evaluate the project's wastewater and water quality requirements as compared to the drinking water standards, the basin plan objectives and treatment constraints. Determine the limiting constituents and their desired concentrations in CSDOC's secondary effluent. Task 3 - Develop Wastewater Quality Management Plan (Margie Nellor and Jim Wvbenea) With the information developed in Task 2, assess the feasibility options and costs of source control for limiting the concentrations of critical parameters in CSDOC's wastewater. Determine the constituents that can be controlled at the source, other reduction programs and diversion options. Task 4 - Develop Brine Issue Paper (Kris Lindstrom) Develop white paper which evaluates the brine delivered into the CSDOC system. Task 5 - Analyze Water Ouality at Anaheim Lake (Roy Hemdom Nira Yamachika- Tim Sovich and Nancy La Mascus) Evaluate the TDS, Nitrate and TOC data from the existing wells around Anaheim Lake, Santa Ana River at Prado and Imperial Highway and other sources. Determine if the monitoring program should be expanded to collect additional data. Assess the transport of key constituents found in Anaheim Lake. 3of5 Tack 6 - Evaluate Santa Ana River as Dilution Water (MaM Rigby. Mike Wehner. Nira Yamachika and Susan Bradford) Evaluate existing water quality data on the Santa Ana River supplies (e.g. base flow, storm run-off and imported water) and discuss with the regulatory staff their questions and concerns. Determine if monitoring program should be expanded to collect additional data. Task 7 - Determine Impacts on 301(h) Waiver (Kris Lindstrom) Evaluate the provisions of the existing EPA discharge permit and analyze how the blending requirements potentially affect CSDOCs operations. Develop justification for relaxing the permit waiver for the sake of water reclamation. Task 8 -Analyze CSDOC Flow Conditions and Plant 1 Secondary Treatment Requirements (Bob Ooten) Assess the allocation of CSDOC's flows projected for the year 2000 and determine how Plant 1 can accommodate Phase I's requirement for 50 mgd of secondary effluent. Develop preliminary assessment of how CSDOC may deliver flows for Phases II and M. Task 9 - Conduct Facilities Site Analysis (Steve Conklin Jim Herberg. Tom Dawes and Wendy Sevenandt) Develop options for siting the project's Phase I treatment facilities on-site pipelines and pump station on OCWD, and/or CSDOC properties in Fountain Valley. Assess probable options for Phases II and III facilities. Task 10 - Determine Pipeline Ali nment (Tom Dawes and John Dertie) Analyze the optimum alignment for 72-inch pipeline from the project's pump station to OCWD's recharge facilities. Task 11 - Determine Peak Energy Requirements (Bob Ooten) Analyze the energy requirements for Phase I facilities and determine the most cost- effective energy sources. Conduct preliminary assessment of how energy for Phase II and III may be accommodated. 4of5 Task 12 - Analyze Impacts on Recharge Operations Wen Flowers and Tim Sovich) Evaluate the impacts of Phase I water supplies on OCWD's recharge operations and determine the projected additional yield of the Orange County groundwater basin. Determine preliminary impacts on the forebay operations from Phases II and III flows. Task 13 - Evaluate Microfiltration for Virus Removal (Ric DeLeon - Virus Removal/Jim Herherg - R, O. Pre-treatment) Evaluate 30 gpm microfiltration unit in three stages: 1. Evaluation of natural coliphage, 2. Seed with MS2 celiphage, and 3. Determine enteric viruses. Evaluate 500 gp t microfiltration pilot plant's performance for virus removal and pre- treatment for reverse osmosis. Assess the long-term viability of the microfiltration process and calculate actual operation and maintenance costs. Task 14 - Evaluate Non-Potable Users Along Santa Ana River (Julie Lie) Assess the options for providing reclaimed water to industrial, commercial and other appropriate users along the Santa Ana River. Task 15 - Evaluate Pre-Treatment and Disinfection Alternatives (Marty R-mby. Harry RideH= Mike Wehner and Jim Herber¢) Evaluate pre-treatment and disinfection alternatives that may be acceptable to the health department. c\do ent\jl\on.\pham.i 5 of 5 April 20, 1994 ORANGE COIIN'1Y REGIONAL WATER RECLAIk1A'1'ION 1'ROJLCI' Resised: Alnit 18, -994 IMA I9M TASKS(ASSIGNED LEADER) Frig MARCII APRIL MAY JUNE IULY AUGUST SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAIL A. Develop P...jecl Fcasihilily Smdy Repent (JL) 1. I'maline Cosl Eslimams(JL) J. Determine WO Standards (MR/MW/SB) 1. Develop Waslewams Oualky Management Plan A Brine Issue Paper (AIN/MT/KL/JW) I A. Conduct Facilities Site Analysis (TD/SC/JH) 5. Analycc CSDOC Flow Conditions and Plant 1 Scenndaty Treatment Requircmem(TD/BD) 6. Determine Impacts on Recharge Operations and Pumping Actiilius (TS/AF) y. Determine Peak Energy Requirements (TD/BO/R5) 8. Determinc Pipeline Ali,mo nls (TD/JD) 9. Evaluale Title n Users(JL) B. Adapt Joint Board Resnlutian(WM/JL/BA) mt7 I If9A _ ms TASKS (ASSIGNED LEADER) FEB. MARCII APRIL AIAV JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN. s'. Develop Pmjcd Financing Plan and Phase I Cosl-Sbaring Agreement(IVM/JL/BA) D. Dderminc Impart on JDI (h)Waiver(KL/BA) E. Gain DUS/R WUCB Approval(AIR/MW/SS) L Carded Ilealth Effects Study (MR/M)V/SB) a. Evaluate SAR as'Dilution Watci(MW/SB) Is Analyae WO Impacts al Anaheim Lake Area(RJI/Ny') c. Evaluate PrClleateent and Disinfection Alternatives (MR/HR/MW/JH) Z Consirud MinoGllration PON Plant (Jll) J. Evaluate MF(us Virus Removal(RDL) 1'. Develop Community Involvement Program (]LIRA) G. Begin CEGA/NEPA Proem(JL/n) PRO.IECT TEAM: O CSDOC AF = Alan Flowers BA = Blake Anderson JH = Jim Herberg BO = Bob Omen HR = Harry Ridgway CM = Charles McGee JL = Julie Lie CN = Charles Nichols MR = Many Rigby JD = John Dettle MW = Mike Wehner JW = Jim Wybenga NY = Nira Yamachika MN = Margie Nellor RH = Roy Herndon MT = Majin Talibi SB = Susan Bradford TD = Tom Dawes SC = Steve Conklin WS = Wendy Sevenandt TS = Tim Sovich WM = Bill Mills CONSULTANTS KL = Kris Lindstrom RD = Ric DeLeon r.\documcnl\jl\bbla\rtg1u41b1 RCN BY: 5-16-01 6:37fM 7143783370, O.C.SAWN DIST:N 2 ATTACHMENT 3 AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL MEETING DATE: May 18, 1994 Budgeted] Yes Program/Line Item No.: 901.4030-600.39.03 TO: Board of Directors Cost Estimate. N/A FROMt William R. Mills Jr. General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/FeasiblIlty Report Approved: N/A Start Contact: Julie Lie/Beth Flammini CEQA Compliance: N/A SUBJECT: THE ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT (CENTURY PROJECT) SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS Brine issue Paper/3o1(h) Permit Waiver - A draft Brine Issue Paper has been completed and it discusses the existing brine flows and their constiment levels. It appears that legal issues are continuing to delay EPA's decision on CSDOC's August 1989 301(h) waiver application. Water Oualily at Anaheim Lake - Water level data entry is completed; the next step is to plot water quality data for the Santa Ana River at Prado, Imperial Highway and the surrounding wells. CSDQC Flow nnditions and Plant 1 Secondaly Treatment Requirements - Initial analysis indicates that CSDOC will be able to accommodate OCRWR Phase I flow requirements. In order to meet the flow requirements for all three uses (WF21, GAP and OCRWRP), trickling filter effluent will likely be a part of the water supplied to OCWD. Facilities Site Analysis . Preliminary site analysis of CSDOC and OCWD's properties indicate that the project facilities can be accommodated by utilizing either the existing OCWD or CSDOC areas. Eille Alignment - CSDOC staff is scheduled to complete a preliminary pipeline layout and a materials quantities estimate by the cud of May. OCWD and CSDOC staff plan to schedule a meeting with EMA to formally present the proposal for the OCRWR Project and the pipeline. Energy Requirements - CSDOC staff has distributed the energy analysis for review. CSDOC staff has asked that a consultant estimate the energy toss associated with nitrification and denitrification as a further refinement to the estimate. For planning and cost estimating purposes, it will be assumed that energy will be purchased from SCE for the OCRWR Project. 5-18 as k0 B1' - , „-, _ ,-- 6-10.lM ? 6�M,..:. 711:i783370+ O.C.SWM DIST•• a Recharge_Oneratiora - OCWD's recharge facilities are not expected to have operational problems accommodating Phase I flows and will be able to accommodate 100 mgd, an average of 300 days per year. Groundwater mounding may be a problem for Phase D and III flows. Health Effects Study OCWD is proposing a three-year, $4 million Health Effects Study for the OCRWR Project. This study will address some of the Department of Health Services' questions and concerns since this project goes beyond their zone of comfort with respect to health effects. In addition to evaluating water quality, treatment technologies are also being evaluated to assess removal efficiencies. Water Quality Standards/Wastewater Quality Management Plan OCWD and CSDOC staff have been evaluating existing water and wastewater quality data and it appears that TOC levels will drive the treatment requirements. The Department of Health Services has not developed an official position on TOC limits for groundwater recharge, Minofltrain t - OCWD's consultant is assessing the removal effectiveness of the 30 gpm microflitration test unit Tests will eventually be performed on the 500 gpm MF unit. OCWD staff expects the 500 gpm MF unit to arrive on site on May 1Z 1994. The target date for operation of the 500 gpm unit is August 24, 1994, in time for the International MF Workshop on August 25 and 26, 1994 sponsored by OCWD and NWRL Pie-Treatment Alternatives - OCWD staff will be evaluating the effectiveness of Rotating Biological Contact Discs for TOC removaL This low-tech" analysis will be done to determine if RBC has potential applications in the OCRWR Project RECOMMENDED ACTION For information only. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S) 10/20/93-M93-380 - Authorize discussions with regulatory agencies regarding the Century Project now referred to as the OCRWR Project 3/16/94-M94-97 - Approve negotiation with potential outside funding partners. 4/6/94-R94.4.55 - Adopt resolution supporting OCWD's development of the OCRWR Project with CSDOC. r I) AFf ATTACHMENT 4 RESOLUTION NO. 94- DECLARATfON OF POLICY WITH REGARD TO WATER RECLAMATION A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING POLICY WITH REGARD TO WATER RECLAMATION WHEREAS, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California ('Districts") provide wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services to serve all or part of 23 Cities and unincorporated areas occupying the central and northwestern areas of Orange County; and, WHEREAS, there exists a continuing and growing need for additional sources of useable water in Orange County; and, WHEREAS, one of said sources is the reuse of reclaimed water from treated wastewater; and, WHEREAS, these Districts believe that projects for reclamation and reuse of water from treated wastewater in Orange County should be thoroughly studied and if feasible should be put into effect; and, WHEREAS, the Districts have long supported and continue to support the beneficial reuse of wastewater, wastewater processing residuals and by-products; and, WHEREAS, the Districts are authorized to construct, maintain and operate such facilities as may be necessary to conserve, recycle, and put to beneficial use reclaimed water, including use in treatment plants as processing and irrigation water and, in cooperation with the Orange County Water District (OCWD), replenishing the underground water basin, landscape irrigation and industrial process uses; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD have adopted policies supporting the reclamation of wastewater and the development of projects for providing the delivery and beneficial reuse of reclaimed water; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD have studied numerous alternative proposals for reclamation of water including a project known as the "Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project" (Project), said Project having been conceived to develop a safe and reliable source of water by providing up to one hundred thousand acre feet of reclaimed water per year primarily for groundwater replenishment and appearing to be the most cost-effective water reclamation project of all the alternatives considered by the Districts; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD are authorized to enter into agreements between themselves and others to carry out their respective powers and authority and to jointly determine the feasibility and implement such projects. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts No. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER: Section : That the Boards of Directors of the County Sanitation Districts hereby declare that all promising methods of conservation and reclamation of wastewater within the Districts' service area in Orange County should be thoroughly investigated and studied; and, y Section 2: That if such studies prove conservation and reclamation programs to be feasible, that appropriate public agencies make all reasonable efforts to institute said reclamation programs into effect at the earliest possible date; and, Section 3: That the Conservation, Recycle, and Reuse Committee of the Boards of Directors is hereby authorized and directed to receive and review reports from staff and provide direction and advice, as needed, from time to time, in furtherance of the goals of this policy. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. Ref#430103.rp COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS EI ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 18844 ELUS AVENUE va BOX a1v MUNTNN VALLEY.GUFUNMA 82728-8127 June 1, 1994 914)982-xn Reclaimed Water and Legionella Research Recently, there have been articles in the press about the results of a County Sanitation Districts of Orange County's (CSDOC) research project which reported the detection of Legionella bacteria in reclaimed water used for landscape irrigation at Mile Square Park in Fountain Valley, and for greenbelt irrigation in Irvine. Legionella are naturally occurring bacteria that can, in rare cases, cause respiratory illness such as Legionnaires disease. Legionella can be found in all types of water, and are thus not unique to reclaimed water. The research project, which was funded by a matching grant from the National Water Research Institute (NWRI) and CSDOC,utilized new methods of detecting Legionella that cannot differentiate between live and dead bacteria. Consequently, these methods cannot be used to determine if there are Legionella present in reclaimed water at levels that are cause for public health concern. This would have necessitated the use of standard methods for detecting Legionella, as well as conducting comparative studies of other types of water used for irrigation, which was not done. It is also important to point out that the occurrence of Legionnaires disease is rare in Orange County. Dr. Hildy Meyers of the Orange County Health Care Agency has reported that there has been only one reported case in the county in 1994. Onset of the disease is a function of exposure including dosage and other conditions such as the susceptibility of the individual to the disease. Reclaimed water has been widely used in Orange County for irrigation for over 25 years and statewide since the turn of the century. Reclaimed water used for irrigation of parks, schoolyards, greenbelts and golf courses in Orange County consistently meets the requirements of the California Department of Health Services. There has never been an illness associated with the use of this water. Although there is no evidence of an imminent health problem, local water, wastewater and health agencies will be meeting to discuss what steps should be taken to verify the safety of reclaimed water use. A kick-off planning meeting was held on June 1, 1994 with representatives from the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA), Orange County Water Districts(OCWD), Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD),CSDOC,County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC), Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD), and NWRI. The group agreed to complete the following action items in preparation for further discussions at a meeting scheduled for June 13, 1994. Reclaimed Water and Legionella Research June 1, 1994 Conduct a thorough literature review on health studies related to Legionella and wastewater - IRWD and NWRI. Review the cases of Legionnaires disease in Orange County - OCHCA. Review the results of CSDOC Legionella research - CSDOC, IRWD, OCWD, NWRI. Contact the State Department of Health Services to identify issues that should be addressed in follow-up investigations - OCWD. Districts' staff will provide updates on the progress of these discussions as appropriate. MHN:gc Ref #430109.rp -2- RESOLUTION NO. 94- DECLARATION OF POLICY WITH REGARD TO WATER RECLAMATION A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING POLICY WITH REGARD TO WATER RECLAMATION .............................. WHEREAS, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California ("Districts") provide wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services to serve all or part of 23 Cities and unincorporated areas occupying the central and northwestern areas of Orange County; and, WHEREAS, the statewide water supply is becoming increasingly unreliable; and, WHEREAS, recycled wastewater has been widely used as a source of water in the State of California for nearly a century; and, WHEREAS, there exists a continuing and growing need for additional sources of useable water in Orange County; and, WHEREAS, one of said sources is the reuse of reclaimed water from treated wastewater; and, WHEREAS, the Districts have long supported and continue to support the beneficial reuse of wastewater, wastewater processing residuals and by-products; and, WHEREAS, in 1961, the Districts adopted a policy urging that all methods of reclamation of water from sewage in Orange County be thoroughly investigated; and, WHEREAS, in 1972, the Districts and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) entered into a cooperative agreement to reclaim 15 million gallons per day of Districts' secondary effluent for beneficial reuse purposes, which said reclaimed water has been successfully used for greenbelt irrigation and to provide a barrier to prevent seawater intrusion with the underground fresh water supply; and WHEREAS, these Districts believe that additional projects for reclamation and reuse of water from treated wastewater in Orange County should be thoroughly studied and, if feasible, should be put into effect; and, WHEREAS, the Districts are authorized to construct, maintain and operate such facilities as may be necessary to conserve, recycle, and put to beneficial use reclaimed water, including use in treatment plants as processing and irrigation water and, in cooperation with the OCWD, replenishing the underground water basin, landscape irrigation and industrial process uses; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD have adopted policies supporting the reclamation of wastewater and the development of projects for providing the delivery and beneficial reuse of reclaimed water; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD have studied numerous alternative proposals for reclamation of water including a project (mown as the "Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project" (Project), said Project having been conceived to develop a safe and reliable source of water by providing up to one hundred thousand acre feet of reclaimed water per year, primarily for groundwater replenishment, and appearing to be the most cost-effective water reclamation project of all the alternatives considered by the Districts and OCWD; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD are authorized to enter into agreements between themselves and others to carry out their respective powers and authority and to jointly determine the feasibility and implement such projects. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts No. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER: Section 1: That the Boards of Directors of the County Sanitation Districts hereby reaffirm their long-standing declaration and support of a policy that all promising methods of conservation and reclamation of wastewater within the Districts' service area in Orange County should be thoroughly investigated and studied; and, Section 2: That if such studies determine new conservation and reclamation programs to be feasible, that appropriate public agencies make all reasonable efforts to institute said reclamation programs into effect at the earliest possible date; and, Section 3: That the Conservation, Recycle, and Reuse Committee of the Boards of Directors is hereby authorized and directed to receive and review reports from staff and provide direction and advice, as needed from time to time, in furtherance of the goals of this policy. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. Ref #430103.rp RE: AGENDA ITEM NO. 17 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ,f ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 10944 ELLIS AVENUE vo.BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 82728.8127 Q141882-2411 Attached are the following documents pertaining to actions relative to Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2; Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2; Job No. P2-53-2: 1. Staff Report dated June 2, 1994 re description of Districts' construction safety program. (Blue) 2. Letter dated May 24, 1994 from Pascal & Ludwig Engineers regarding the construction contractor's safety program. (Stone) 3. General Counsel's memorandum dated June 1, 1994 re award of bid issue. (Gold) 4. Bid tabulation and recommendation. (White) 5. Resolution No. 94-34, awarding Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. 1`1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P247-2, Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2; Job No. P2-53-2. (Green) 6. Copy of General Counsel's May 12, 1994 letter to Cal-OSHA regarding the Pascal & Ludwig Engineers accident at Plant No. 2 in February on Job No. P249. (Buff) COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS M ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA AGENDA ITEM 17(1) O9C BOX AVENUE v ELU a VE FOUWMN VP Ey.CALIFORNIA 92729.9127 June 2. 1994 0111962aa11 STAFF REPORT DESCRIPTION OF THE DISTRICTS' CONSTRUCTION SAFETY PROGRAM The purpose of this staff report is to provide a summary of the major elements of the Districts'construction safety program as it existed on February 1, 1994,and as it has now evolved. This report describes the written policies as well as the practices utilized within the field. SAFETY PROGRAM AS OF FEBRUARY 1. 1994 Written Procedures The Districts'written procedures concerning safety that were in effect prior to February 1, 1994 include: a. "Construction Safety Manual",prepared by the Engineering Department,September, 1988. (See Exhibit 1) b. "Confined Spaces Work Practices" prepared by the Personnel Department,January, 1990. (See Exhibit 2) C. "Department 3790(Construction Management Division) Safety Policy/Procedures Confined Space Work Practice Logic Diagram" , Undated. (See Exhibit 3) d. "General Provisions,Standard Specifications, and Standard Drawings, 1991", prepared by the Sanitation Districts contain safety requirements. The excerpts of the General Provisions concerning safety are included. (See Exhibit 4) The Districts'"Construction Safety Manual"included as Exhibit 1 begins with an introduction that reads,in part: "The primary responsibility for contractor safety rests with the contractor...(T)he General Provisions are very clear on job responsibilities. However,the Engineer has the authority and duty to enforce safety requirements to protect the public and workers...If the contractor does not heed verbal warnings, a written notice shall be issued...These procedures are to be followed and will apply to any individual...(f)...,in the opinion of the inspector, (there is)...immediate danger to life or health..." This interpretation of contractor responsibility to safely manage the conduct of The work is somewhat contradicted by the General Provisions, Section 4-2,Safety and Accident Prevention,included in Exhibit 4 which reads,in part: "The Contractor shall possess copes of the"Construction Safety Order","Trench Construction Safety Order","Tunnel Safety Orders",and"General Safety Orders"issued by the Division of Industrial Safety of the State of California,Department of Industrial Relations,OSHA, and to any and all other applicable laws,or regulations to which the Contractor is required by law to comply. The Contractor shall have copies of each of these"Orders","Laws",and"Regulations"or suitable extracts therefrom,on the site of operations and shall be governed by the requirements thereof._" "In accordance with generally accepted construction practices,THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS OF THE WORKSITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE r WORK. This requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours" (Emphasis is as actually shown in the General Specifications) "The right of the Engineer to conduct a construction review of the Contractor's performance is not intended to and will not include review of the adequacy of the Contractor's safety measures in,on or near the construction site.." The"Construction Safety Manual"says that the Engineer has the duty and responsibility to enforce safety requirements while the General Provisions say the right of the Engineer to conduct construction review is not intended to review the contractor's safety measures. How our inspectors addressed this ambiguity is addressed two sections below. Regarding confined space entry,the Districts'"Construction Safety Manual"states: "A confined space is a space defined by the concurrent existence of the following conditions (emphasis added): 1. Existing ventilation is insufficient to remove dangerous air contamination and/or oxygen deficiency which may exist or develop. 2. Ready access or egress for the removal of a suddenly disabled employee is difficult due to the location and/or size of the opening(s)" This definition of a confined space is consistent with the Districts' Safety Policy/Procedure entitled "Confined Spaces Work Practices"included as Exhibit 2 and"Confined Space Work Practice Logic Diagram"Included as Exhibit 3,both of which use essentially the same language in defining a confined space. Cal-OSHA Reouirements According to Title 8 of Cal-OSHA,the world of confined space entry is divided into two separate and distinct parts. Section 5157 deals with general industry operations. Section 5158 deals with construction activities. Over the years our practice has been to recognize this division and to manage the activities within our facilities accordingly. Districts: Section 5157 of Title 8 of Cal-OSHA applies to general industrial operations. The Districts'own operations and maintenance activities were (and are)governed under this section. This section requires the employer(the Districts)to determine If a work area is a confined space. If so,then a work permit is required to be completed by the crew and submitted to supervision for approval. The permit describes the procedures that will be employed by the crew in conducting the work. Ventilation, monitoring,training and rescue procedures must be fully described. If a contractor is in our facilities doing non-construction work (such as equipment servicing,inspection services or maintenance),then the Districts are obligated to enforce a confined space permitted entry procedure and to provide a safety information exchange program that fully describes the potential hazards associated with the contractor's activifies. According to Section 5157,the definition of a confined space applies to a very wide range of conditions. A confined space has limited or restricted means of entry or exit,Is large enough for an employee to enter and perform assigned work, and is not designed for continuous occupancy by the employee. Under this definition,far more work area conditions would be defined as confined spaces than does the Districts' definition of a confined space for construction activities listed above,or according to Section 5158 of Title 8 of Cal-OSHA discussed below. What this implies Is that a particular work area may or may not meet the definition of a confined space ,depending upon which section of Title 8 is applied. Contractors: Section 5158 of Title 8 of Cal-OSHA applies to construction activities. Construction is treated separately by Cal-OSHA(and,Incidentally, by federal OSHA as well) because of conditions unique to construction. If the work area meets the definition of a confined space as defined by Cal-OSHA, -2- then the construction contractor must provide training for the standby employees and entrant employees, must perform atmospheric testing,must provide a method of rescue, and must document results of atmospheric testing. Under Section 5158,there is no mention of any obligations on the part of the owner of the property on which the construction work is occurring. Section 5158 has the same definition of a confined space that the Districts"'Construction Safety Manual" uses;that is, a confined space is present when the concurrent conditions of insufficient ventilation and hampered access to the work area exist. Districts'Construction Safety Practices The Districts'construction safety practices complied with our written procedures and guidance as well as Title 8,Section 5158 of Cal-OSHA. In the conduct of construction within our facilities,the Districts' construction inspection and management staff did as they were directed: to observe construction projects while providing little or no ongoing daily input to the conduct of the work. Only under conditions of obvious or imminent jeopardy to the safety of the workers employed by the contractor did a Districts'inspector stop the work and provide a written directive to correct the problem. For tens severe conditions,the inspector's input would be in the form of a verbal directive. This was normally sufficient to change the practice. In short, in accordance with the strategy and policy of the Districts',construction inspection and management staff maintained only a reviewing role in the conduct of the work for the reason of holding the contractor clearly responsible for the work it performed within our facilities. The Districts'construction inspection and management staff evaluated a construction project work area as a confined space by using the two concurrent criteria listed in our written procedures and in full accordance with Section 5158—not according to the far more restrictive Cal-OSHA definition of Section 5157. That is, they looked at a site to determine whether insufficient ventilation and difficult exit conditions coexisted. If either was not present,then a confined space was not perceived to exist. In the absence of a confined space,the inspector would take no action to direct or suggest to the contractor that confined space safety practices were necessary. At times this could directly contrast to work by our maintenance staff occurring virtually simultaneously and under similar work area conditions. Because the work conducted by our maintenance staff fell under the definitions and requirements of Section 5157,they might operate with full confined space procedures in place while the contractor,operating under Section 5158,was not. Isolation Procedures While the overall conduct of the work under a general construction contract was the responsibility of the contractor,there was(and is)one very important area of responsibility that the Districts'conducted. The isolation of a work area for the purpose of providing safe and adequate access by the contractor is the responsibility of the Operations Department. An isolation is conducted to protect workers from hydraulic, electrical,pneumatic, mechanical,chemical and other potential hazardous conditions. Plant isolations are conducted routinely for a number of reasons. Besides providing access to a contractor,an Isolation may be performed to allow the Districts'own maintenance staff to conduct a variety of maintenance tasks. Also,an isolation for the purpose of obtaining access to otherwise inaccessible tank or pipe interiors, as an example,would be conducted by Operations. Operations has responsibility for isolations because they have the best working knowledge of the unit processes within the plants. With this knowledge the isolations can be performed effectively to ensure that the work area is made ready for the contractor so the construction can be done with limited delay and interference,can be performed without affecting normal operations and jeopardizing our ability to consistently meet the obligations of our operating permits, and can be performed safely to protect the workers from harm. There are no general written procedures that are implemented in designing,conducting and overseeing the isolation of various portions of the treatment plants because every isolation is unique. Instead,the Districts'Operations Department designs isolations on an as-needed basis,using their general knowledge of plant operations and their specific knowledge of the existing conditions of the unit process(es)where -3- the isolation is to occur. Depending upon the complexity of the isolation,the Operations Department Construction Coordinator assigned the job of isolating the work area for construction activities will consult an Operations Supervisor,the Chief Operator or other knowledgeable staff. Consultation with other departments is occasionally done. Planning for an isolation begins when a requesting department(in most cases this is either construction management and inspection staff working for the Engineering Department,or staff working for the Maintenance Department)informs the Operation Department of an upcoming need for an isolation of some portion of the treatment facilities to provide safe and adequate access to a work area. The general contractor or his subcontractors are required to make requests through the Engineering Department and are not to contact the Operations Department directly because the administration of the contract is the sole responsibility of the Engineering Department. The scheduling and duration of the isolation are developed through consultation between the Operations Department and the requesting departmenl(s). Districts'Worker Training Prior to February 1994, employee safety training was the responsibility of each department. The training program consisted of instruction from the Safety and Health staff on a limited basis,departmental personnel on a limited basis and consultants(i.e., hazardous response,DPR and self-contained breathing apparatus training). Documentation of the training was not adequately centralized or computerized so analysis is limited. Training program content and methods were not standardized,thus the quality and scope of the training was not consistent. In short,a far more systematic approach is needed. (See the discussion under The Future of Our Safety Program below.) Districts'Previous Efforts to Promote Construction Worker Safari The Districts have implemented a Master Course of Construction Insurance Program. Essentially,this program is a Districts'liability and workers'compensation insurance program which covers new facilities construction and major renovation projects that are completed by contractors/subcontractors for the Districts. This program allows the Districts to realize cost savings in project insurance premiums by securing volume discounts with a single carrier. From a worker safety perspective,the benefit of the program is that the Districts are able to concentrate premium savings in loss prevention and loss control programs,which enhance overall worker safety for Districts' projects. The Districts have also pursued a Project Wrap-up Insurance Program for Districts'construction and renovation projects. Like"Course of Construction"insurance,"Wrap Up"insurance also promotes overall worker safety by providing an incentive to maintain safe conditions which produce a cost savings in premiums when accident losses are reduced. In 1993,the Districts sponsored a legislative amendment to the Government Code which now grants(effective January 1, 1994)the authority for a"Wrap Up"program to the Districts. The Districts are currently evaluating implementation alternatives for this insurance program. Unfortunately,this program had not filtered down to any appreciable extent to the field level. Job meetings are conducted regularly between the construction contractor and representatives of Operations and Engineering staff. But these meetings are designed to discuss the progress of the job. Safety and health issues of any substantive degree were occasionally addressed and had limited documentation when they were discussed. Any particular discussions or observations by construction inspectors would be written in the inspecfion log for the job. These issues were infrequently broken out as a special memorandum or action Rem. In short,documentation of the Districts'safety program, as It applied to contractors,was relatively invisible. To a large degree this was by design—we desired to avoid the trap of directing any of the work of the construction contractor because that job was his job. We wanted to avoid having the Districts usurp the contractor's responsibilities and assume liability implications. -4- The Record—How Well We Have Done Our workers'compensation loss experience history does not reflect the safety records of the construction contractors within our facilities bulk is a reliable indicator of our own organization's commitment to worker safety. In the case of the Districts,the overall number of workers compensation claims is proceeding on a downward trend, WORKER'S COMPENSATION CLAIMS Number of Number of Work Force Fiscal Year Employees Claims Filina Claims 1986-87 375 52 14% 1987-88 404 50 12% 1988-89 435 40 9% 1989-90 503 60 12% 1990-91 558 75 13% 1991-92 So0 58 10% 1992-93 607 55 9% 1993-94 607' 33" 7%' 40' ') Estimated full-time employees. % Actual for first ten months of FY 1993-94. Projected for FY 1993-94. Although the number of Districts'employees has increased from 375 to 607 during the seven complete fiscal years covered by the chart,work force claims have decreased from 14%to 9%. Looking at a projection of this year's figures,our experience for this fiscal year should be even better. As of April 30, 1994, 33 claims have been fled. Thus,the claims frequency has decreased from 14 per 100 employees to 7 per 100 employees. The Record—How Well Have General Contractors Done We have not attempted to characterize the safety records of the general contractors that perform construction work within our treatment facilities or in the collection system. We could. it would require that we contact each of them and request their workers compensation reports for the last year or two and compile the data. We presently see no productive reason to invest the significant staff time necessary to conduct the survey and compile the results. Staff will, of course,conduct such a study if a comparative analysis of the safety records of our past and present construction contractors is determined necessary. However,one contractor of interest,Pascal 8 Ludwig Engineers of Ontario,California,has recently Informed us of its safety record through a letter written to our Director of Engineering (see Exhibit 5). According to their letter,they have had,generally,a very good safety record. During their last twelve- month worker's compensation rating period report(ending October 1993),the company did not sustain a single loss time accident during a total of 149,600 manhours worked. Part of this achievement may result from the safety training that is provided to all of their supervisory and key workers. In their letter,they point out the bitter irony that all of the individuals involved in the February 1, 1994,accident had been certified in five different safety subjects(although confined space entry wasn't one of them). They state that their safety record will provide them with a worker's compensation experience modification factor in -5- the low 90's, based on their last full reporting period which does not include February 1st. A factor of 100 is the industry average. Anything under 100 is considered better than average. A rating of 80 would be considered very good to outstanding. SAFETY PROGRAM PRACTICES ESTABLISHED SINCE FEBRUARY 1. 1994 Today,our construction safety program is now being operated under a different paradigm than we had in place on February 1st. We will still endeavor to remain at arm's length from nearly all aspects of how a construction job is conducted. Directing the work is clearly the responsibility of the construction contractor. But how safely the work is conducted can no longer be a matter that is purely the responsibility of the construction contractor. The Districts will provide front-end advice and review of jobs and job tasks prior to their being undertaken by the construction contractor. In this way, believing the old adage that two heads are better than one,we will attempt to make the construction jobs within our facilities as accident free as we can. After February 1 and unfil May 19.confined space entry by the construction contractors continued to be performed in accordance with Title 8, Section 5158. A permit program (as described under the Section 5157 discussion above)was not required. However,since March 17, pre-job meetings are required to be conducted between the contractor and our construction management and inspection staff prior to entry into the confined space to discuss the potential hazards and precautions unique to the job (see Exhibit 6). Beginning May 19,confined space entry by a construction contractor is now conducted in accordance with the more strict requirements of Section 5157. We have basically embraced the best features of Section 5157 and 5158 and are administering the program accordingly. A work permit is now required. All construction contractors entering a confined space must submit their written program to our staff. This includes the procedures to be conducted to safely perform the work as well as a plan for rescue if it is needed. Construction contractors must attend a pre-job meeting to discuss the safety aspects of the job. Construction contractors are now required to submit their safety and health program to the Districts for review prior to starting a project. This provides the Districts with the opportunity to make comments that will improve the construction contractors ability to safely conduct work on our facilities. At this time we are not actually approving their programs but instead are pointing out inadequacies that we perceive. A work space analysis is now conducted on all jobs. The work space analysis consists of looking at the job from a safety and heath perspective. A checklist has been developed and is now used that provides a systematic analysis of the work space(see Exhibit 6). This checklist continues to be refined as we develop experience with its utilization. A work space analysis meeting is attended by representatives from construction management and inspection,the Districts Safety and Health Officer,Operations, and the contractor. How the job is isolated and how the work is to be safely conducted are discussed. The meeting is documented and copies are distributed to all in attendance. Construction management supervisory staff now meet a minimum of once per month with the Safety and Health staff to discuss current issues and concerns. This group will continue to refine our safety program to assure that it will insure construction worker health and safety to the greatest possible extent. THE FUTURE FOR OUR SAFETY PROGRAM The safety and health program of the Districts will remain influx for some time. The cornerstone of the Districts' program is the concept of employee participation and shared responsibility. The Safety and Health Officer and the two staff assigned to her from the Operations Department can only provide general -6- policy guidance and advice and limited on-the-job inspections. The responsibility for the day-today safe conduct of construction jobs and all the other activities of the Districts will continue to rest with the managers and staff responsible for all of the other aspects of those activities. To help in this effort the Districts'Employee Safety Committee,which has existed in several forms since January 1992, has addressed some of the more significant issues facing the Districts. The Committee has successfully addressed such issues such as hazardous energy control,emergency response,emergency eyewash stations, handrail improvements and fixed ladder improvements. Since February 1994,four new areas of concern have surfaced. Districts'staff is currently examining these issues and considering new components to add to the overall safety effort. These include: 1. Establish a Safety and Health Task Force to examine Districts-wide policies and practices. Consisting of representatives from all departments,the task force would prioritize issues, remove internal barriers to implementing changes and formulate consistent policy across all departments. This would move from the existing level of focus of the Safety Committee from beyond procedures to policies. 2. Develop standardized contract policies for performing all work—not just construction. All contracted work within the Districts'facilities or on behalf of the Districts should be conducted to the highest standards of safety. A contractor orientation checklist is currently being finalized. The orientation form has evolved during the past six months. Review of this document with the contractor will provide comprehensive safety and health information which is pertinent to safe work activities within our facilities. 3. Implement a Districts-wide training program. Each division and each job classification may have its own unique set of safety training needs. They would be identified and an appropriate training program would be recommended. A computerized tracking system is being installed to insure that the program can be adequately and uniformly administered. This would significantly improve our existing program which is now conducted by individual divisions and which suffers from a lack of standardization and documentation. 4. Review of safety and health staffing requirements. The appropriate staffing level must be determined for effectively implementing the safety, health,emergency preparedness and emergency response programs of the Districts. Staffing within the Safety and Health Division is an obvious first area of concern. But the staffing impacts on the Operations, Maintenance and Engineering Departments must also be evaluated. Adequate staffing is crucial in achieving the short-term and long-term objectives of these programs. As these concepts mature and take final form,appropriate staff recommendations will be conveyed to the Directors for consideration and approval,as necessary. file:construction safety EXHIBIT 1 CONSTRUCTION SAFETY MANUAL PREPARED BY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT F% tia '' SEPTEMBER 1988 SAFETY MANUAL FOR CONSTRUCTION Approved: 94,V,2 i La� Thomas M. Dawes, Director of Engineering COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1988 SAFETY MANUAL FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 I. EXCAVATIONS 2 II. CONFINED SPACE OPERATIONS 7 III. UTILITIES 8 IV. HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND BARRICADES 9 V. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL 17 VI . EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 18 ' SAFETY MANUAL FOR CONSTRUCTION INTRODUCTION The primary responsibility for contractor safety rests with the contractor. Sections 4-2 and 4-6 of the General Provisions are very clear on job respon- sibilities. However, the Engineer has the authority and duty to enforce safety requirements to protect the public and workers. Accordingly, this manual has been prepared to assist in the evaluation of on-site conditions and provide necessary guidance. If the contractor does not heed verbal warnings, a written notice shall be issued. These procedures are to be followed and will apply to any individual or group of individuals in, on or near the construction site that, in the opinion of the inspector, are in immediate danger to life or health. 1. Notify the job superintendent verbally and in writing of the hazardous situation and order a work halt and/or evacuation as necessary. 2. Notify your immediate supervisor and forward all documentation and writ- ten notices to the office of the Director of Engineering before the end of the work day. 3. Never argue with the contractor. If necessary, simply issue the written notice to halt work (have Contractor sign acknowledging receipt of noti- ce) and proceed to the nearest telephone and notify Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), Santa Ana office (phone: 8181901-5403), stating the following: - a. I want to report the following violations ............ b. I feel that workers are in immediate danger to life and health. c. Give contractor's name, location of job, name of superintendent, and number of people in danger. 4. The inspector is reminded not to put him or himself into the hazardous situation as this act would cause the Districts to be liable for citation by DOSH as well as the contractor. i I. EXCAVATIONS According to the DOSH construction safety and health standards, a trench is referred to as a narrow excavation in which the depth is greater than the width, although the width is not greater than 15 feet. Tools, equipment, and excavated material must be kept 2 feet or more from the lip of the trench. DEPTH: DOSH required that all excavations over 5 feet deep be sloped, shored, sheeted, braced, or otherwise supported. When soil conditions are unstable, excavations shallower than 5 feet also must be sloped, supported or shored. INSPECTION: Daily inspections must be made of trenches and excavations to assure adequate slopes, shoring, and bracing, and that there is not evidence of possible slides or cave-ins. More frequent inspections may be necessary as work progresses or after heavy rains. Appropriate barricades and warning signs must be utilized to prevent employees and the general public from falling. UNSUPPORTED MKS: One method of ensuring the safety and health of workers in a trenc or excavation is to slope the sides of the cut to the "angle of repose", the angle closest to the perpendicular at which the soil will remain at rest. (See Figure 1.) Figure 1. "m"wn.saes urmr � ¢ ag � G A� aiE l �w - - -- - APPROXIMATE ANGLE OF REPOSE FOR SLOPING OF SIDES OF CUMVATIONS 2 SUPPORT STRUCTURES: A second method of support is shoring-sheeting, tightly p aceT�hores, bracing, trench jacks, piles, or other materials installed in a manner strong enough to resist the pressures surrounding the excavation. (See Figure 2.) Figure 2. CWW Srangen� ONE EXAMPLE OF SEVERAL TYPES OF SHEETING \_sneer Pi4np a. Contractors also may use a trench box, a prefabricated movable trench shield composed of steel plates welded to a heavy steel frame. DOSH standards permit the use of a trench box as long as the protection it provides is equal to or greater than the protection that would be provided by the appropriate shoring system. (See Figure 3.) Figure 3. snW1 i ' ' Trenen enmWiep —Temoei/� 0iTreneeirymaenirro TRENCH SHIELD 3 Whatever support system is used, workers should always apply shoring starting , from the top of the trench or excavation and working down. In installing the shoring, care must be taken to place the cross beams or trench jacks in true horizontal position and to space then vertically at appropriate intervals. The braces also must be secured to prevent sliding, falling, or kickouts. (See Figure 4.) Figure r/ See Up 21 gure 2 for examples eting. TRENCH LICKS IN TRUE HORIZONTAL POSITION AND SPACED VERTICALLY All materials used for shoring must be in good condition, free of defects, and of the right size. Timbers with large or loose knots should not be used. 4 1 MAINTENANCE: Installing the shoring should closely follow the excavation work�is dangerous to allow trenches to remain unshored even if no work is being done in them: dirt walls will slough off causing dangerous overhangs. The longer a trench is left open and unsupported, the greater the chance of a cave-in. (See Figure 5.) Figure 6. AVOID DANGEROUS OVERHANGS! Any pedestrian walkways and sidewalks must be kept free of debris and, if undermined, must be adequately shored to prevent a collapse. Sometimes the contractor will have to guard against an unstable excavation bottom, such as below the water line. Sheeting may have to be driven below the bottom of such an excavation to add to the soil stability. (See Figure 6.) Figure 6. snMu�¢ WMtlIIM EXCAVATION BOTTOM BELOW WATER LINE SHEETING SHOULD BE DRIVEN BELOW BOTTOM 5 DOSH standards require that diversion dikes and ditches or other suitable " means be used to prevent surface water from entering an excavation and to pro- vide adequate drainage of the area adjacent to the excavation. Water causes soil erosion and softening and should not be allowed to accumulate in a trench or excavation. EST: According to DOSH regulations, when employees are required to be in trenches 4 feet deep or more, adequate means of exit, such as a ladder or steps, shall be provided and located so as to require no more than 25 feet lateral travel . ladders must be in good condition, extend from the floor of the trench to 3 feet above the top of the excavation, and be secured at the top. BACKFILUNG: As soon as work is completed, the trench should be backfilled as e s oring is dismantled. After the trench has been cleared, workers should remove the shoring from the bottom up, taking care to release jacks or braces slowly. In unstable soil workmen should not be in the trench and ropes or other mechanical means should be used to pull out the jacks or braces from above. 8 II . CONFINED SPACE OPERATIONS A confined space is a space defined by the concurrent existence of the following conditions: 1. Existing ventilation is insufficient to remove dangerous air con- tamination and/or oxygen deficiency which may exist or develop. 2. Ready access or egress for the removal of a suddenly disabled employee is difficult due to the location and/or size of the opening(s). Entry into and Work Within Confined Spaces. 1. At least one employee shall stand by on the outside of the confined space ready to give assistance in case of emergency. At least one additional employee who may have other duties shall be within sight or call of the standby employee(s). a. The standby employee shall have appropriate, approved, respiratory protective equipment, including an independent source of breather air which is available for immediate use. b. A standby employee (or employees) may enter the confined space but only in case of emergency and only after alerting at least one addi- tional employee outside of the confined space of the existence of an emergency and of the standby employee's intent to enter the confined space. 2. When entry must be made through a top opening, the following requirements shall also apply. a. The safety belt shall be of the harness type that suspends a person in an upright position. b. A hoisting device or other effective means shall be provided for lifting employees out of the space. 3. Head Protection A protective head covering (hard hat) is required in situations where workers may be struck in the head by falling objects. 7 III. UTILITIES ` Section 9 of the General Provisions provides some guidance regarding the pro- tection and relocation of utilities. On contract construction, the Detailed Specifications also provide guidance regarding disclosure of utilities. Generally, the General Provisions specify payment procedures for protection, relocation, or disposal of utilities shown and not shown on the Plans. On all contract and permit inspection assignments, the District inspector should make sure that the Contractor has contacted USA to mark out the loca- tions of all known utilities. Together with the information provided on contract documents, this should go quite far in reducing utility hazards. UTILITY DAMAGE: When and if the Contractor hits a utility, prompt action must e takb en to made sure that the employees and the public are not in danger. In all cases, contact the utility company involved. Phone numbers can be found on the title sheet of the Plans. Contact only the agencies and emergency department involved (i .e. police, fire department, paramedics, if necessary). Do not have the Contractor attempt to repair the break or leak. In all cases only utility company designated personnel shall repair the utility. Oil and Gas: Call the Police, Fire Department and utility company. Shut down all equipment in the area that could cause a spark. No smoking. Evacuate all people from the immediate vicinity of the damaged pipeline. Halt all vehicle traffic. Keep unauthorized people out. Electricity: Make sure you have plenty of clearance from line utilities prior to the start of the job. All conduits shall be treated as though they are high voltage or high current electrical ducts. (Don't guess if the utility is cable or a 12KV line!) When encountered, call the Police, evacuate all people from the immediate vicinity and call the utility owner. Water: Evacuate the trench immediately. The breakage of a high pressure water line could cause trench failure and quickly flood the trench or pipeline endangering workers. Call the Police and utility company. DO NOT try to shut off the water yourself. Divert traffic as necessary to eliminate possible hazards. Telephone: Call the telephone company. Sewer: If an O.C.S.D. line, call '_ine Maintenance. If a City line, contact the local sewering agency. 8 Iv. HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND BARRICADES A. Traffic Signs Construction areas must be posted with legible traffic signs at points of hazard. All traffic control signs or devices must conform to state and local regulations. All signs intended to be used during hours of darkness must be reflectorized or illuminated. Signs must be placed in positions where they will convey their messages most effectively. As a general rule, signs must be located on the right side of the street or roadway. Placement must, therefore, be accom- modated to highway design and alignment and so placed that the driver will have adequate time for response. Closing a roadway shall also conform to state and local regulations. Figure 7 (Page 10) shows typical signing of detours for work in a four- lane road for more than one day. Figure 8 (Page 11) shows the signs required for a typical street closing and closing of half a roadway. Figure 9 (Page 12) shows signing required for typical closing of a lane of a four-lane street. Figure 10 (Page 13) shows the typical signing for lane closure on a two-lane highway with reversible control. 9 TRAFFIC CONTROLS Figure 7 TYPICAL SIGNING OF DETOURS NOTES: OF MORE THAN ONE DAY C16 or C23 1. The maximum ep.clna services cones In a leper �• \\\\? vagina 0e apprnlmamly equal in rem m ON,apace m Ilmll:erMro should oe s0'mulmum. uW C/ a. Tabor Formula: W / L= . for apaeda*fail or mom. L=WW heirmetla u140 I.OF. OWa / Bo (Sao Table 1.Fly.Y5) AMAD /f Whore: / L=Nlrrrmum Ienaln of raper. C21 or C20(RA / S=Nemedeal vales Wpasted epees limit prior to worts or 65 pemsmlle a"" Yhwldlh of.nut Nano& / W 1 (Lt.) t 3. Use where necessary•advisory speed is to M de- of / Immh R at job figsite.Should W2 ILt.) 4. Close Road luting movm be Stopped at Infer O / sections;ledIt crewing movements should be elllm Ineletl It eusetanllal geslllels OeeYr. / S. Raised pavemenl maraem may be used to supple. / meet striping. Gp �D (Continued below. right) C2 0 / adbo *We C13 or C14 nOSEp TYva N R7 ru ,� Imrpwrea C� ® 1 (deal— LEGEND O� F Sign C ( qOq Cone Bartieaee R7 To : f ~ Direction al Traffic w11RL1 W44 O FbeMng Arrow Sign(OmaNall or W2(RI.) Eewum <� end 5[aE[r C13 or C14 1 WON L lawau muiruiprm q0 a W6 A63 1 / 90 noum.boo.Sonar Serer W44 \ / C20(Lt.l 1f / aarr Ea U / / reins R63 6. Striping 15 ophoMI an detour& in place lose then one / Mook If cones are used and maintained In their proper r/ Cl60f C23 position. 7. Type l or If barricaded may be us"In lieu of cones when / saw they are intendedke to re prehNovids additional empheals In areas where workers are vre&anl. 10 TYPICAL CLOSING OF HALF ROADWAY G)0� sw pw '0 M .q O O O• •n m . q r` i� Iwlb W 9 IY I/Y 11 ' r► II y r_ _ _ — — — — _ — — y wblb.n y i ibeun N N N III pq [rr[w�. O x DT0I nl M n nlb0 b'I W }$i n OQ© Ipl vo. Z � M/br 9 C r.r p �: Mbn.11bo W I pwl 0 . . . I p.pel pf rY Y •.plM09MWID.�- [M/ypbNYb MI IUb I bl/ 1,.. 4 b Pel/IDw�/r�N/ 90RYDIOT M• MI NYbn.b.e]F4 VurlVw�b�rY� NY./VU MUsbMJNI.b4 Ob�w./b Wsbb.N lb III !1 bYwrbw/eY wl Y/Yb.bpiYwY .1[.rltl nV N V sV Mpbvm.. [[rpnni9rblbN nM�/N Wy.as®b• •Y b 11 Y [Mm/pbTbd. Iw Y4Ye.lp Ospl 4NbpY/II.V• y 11 bNbMYeYmJ• Y9[IYllgpgigqllql YYIrbw Yaeprys 1.1 yrl M�II bMi u�.rw.� s�yywe.N btiewq�b4 Yb vlr//..rr Y.Yrrb bMVYV64./ bMIgY..N 'NefWbb.rl�bn b/..rorYm.Nbm w•rr bM.Yw[o....l:/.Y ..rb.b V.r `v`°a r".�./.Nnr wre.mrMws [rwbbws.m.rwb b.wrwesmm..b r a..brbb• y� Figure 8 TYPICAL LANE CLOSURE F F ~ O see siB... arem /muu F } h $ F D ® nSq m In mm com 0 OOO 0 O pmrlmmloq uam Z 0 OIT a.a �PVstlluY y nm YA..MW{..bnb.yamry Ogmn Yb.q.In YanM YpW YmYYCvq MFVM b4bY0hmnaWwO ].MMtO.TbM.1n Wu �wMegWbb WIPwI b Yeq]vMnle INYtYYMO..VMbnYb b.4tl {N.1Fb wF6w WV1.W bM[m•Tb 4V MIMn Vvv 4•Ye f byRY.A4bbY w �e•I•nbwlMm.e Nll PH I�a.t Pv40f dv lM1M1pmiT lYYi..{pl lfN'CU RIIaWIOM'eCl. vFTt 9OItl➢ ....e Mphb fMambw gYpMwnmw b. 015 la f a dYbpnfibdtlbin Ya MYMobyye Ya nF ISq In f q dv.MYb M}n1MYA WlmlbMwbrm.ptlpm 4a In a a tub M.Fb.bpyF�tlYb Yqn. to a•vhq P imwa.�NW m uwm�w.b.vaM..b B/InhbwPv. bIb W.Abb I•�w•nw.Wmn. '6WEWIMMI WMIMIKNMIfI Onln...l.MfmnMl.'W.b Yl9'.ur.t6M4 Mmva.YlYabrgi..vp bn tive.vi9M. Figure 9 TYPICAL LANE CLOSURE WITH REVERSIBLE CONTROL 000 4 m I I Q o O 1 m O v. � Ii II xi°a ue o D m { dl{ A 1 ab'Y W W n _ I YV.1®• 'ly ! CT ao....w .1m.a O r 0 awm` -r � Y � m w• y s � Y.b mFly r O .on •1- nY VIII fb Ss� uOOv� x. 0 w o. mYm• m m m m m m m mr.n®w um Q y y mIW�'�y m i-:i�:)�rYY.'0iiniwr vn b� m P.r •�� Ywl+ m r.P FrYYYY �.e. Q � �; r.rYFM1r.sa x a...YYmbwwwb•Yr ..bnbw+n.mm.w .�mweaor�.a�wa. b�mbrp.by bfeem T9Emx�@41RIFim MA. �wxmy��v. ml iNw•gq.bprY.Yu... IY{y.w.mb�b .YOtlw.1�m 41yly YLLa WY� • Nb\.YiYf v.x.Muly 4NM.v®K M. iMY.WwewS pwO iM1Y Fn0 i•YYbbivbtw ltlmers•b YlxM6mvq RNE011P1-RV.MWN 0 M lYWeai94MY6n 11 bMYfYb bvbY.lx WI'YP. b�g4Ndb}bbb. PYYYYw F{aJYFb .bb/uv�eYbl My N'.e+ 1.M1Fu� ..4 yi M1mF W�ba4 m.x qrb I•yaT�b Y.e YPW1•i l.lm9Y mliRlClpfvN bJma bOryu Wbw M4MlMNJNY.wa .l�tlu' b4m aA.Nb bb.GT i4YM w41.ISbl FYbb.M1 .Ygvm4b N•rd.1..b MMsmMepEn6ptlM1 M.YOahGW'. Figure 10 B. Flagmen When construction is of such a nature that signs, signals, or barricades don't provide adequate protection on or adjacent to a highway or street, flagmen or other appropriate traffic controls shall be provided. Flagmen stations must be located far enough in advance of the work site so that approaching traffic will have sufficient distance to reduce speed before entering the project. This distance is related to approach speed and physical conditions at the site; however, 200 to 300 feet is desirable. in urban areas the distance necessarily must be decreased. Flagmen shall wear red or orange vests. The vest shall be reflectorized material if worn at night. C. Barricades A means of obstruction to deter the passage of persons or vehicles shall be provided to protect the public from falling into an open excavation. A barricade may be used where a collision with an object would be more severe than a collision with the barricade. Where fencing is required, fences shall be secured at night. (See Figure 11, Page 15) D. , Warning Lights Warning lights shall be electric lanterns, electric markers, or flashers provided to indicate an obstruction or restriction during periods of low visibility. The type and use of warning lights can be found in the State of California Manual of Traffic Controls, 1988 , on file in the Districts office. Lighting may be used to illuminate an obstruction, structure or an area of restriction. Typical applications are street lighting, flood lighting of a structural portal and illumination of a non-reflectorized sign. The type, intensity and placement of the lighting must be adequate to accomplish the desired illumination without confusing other delineation or creating unnecessary glare. E. Delineation Delineation consists of any method or technique for outlining a vehicle path. Special attention must be given in the delineation of a vehicle path through a work area to protect both workmen and motorists. Delineation includes but is not limited to lane, edge, and channelization striping, raised pavement markers, various forms of posts, and cones. For nighttime guidance, delineation shall be reflectorized or illumi- nated. Continuous surveillance is necessary to assure that the traveled way through a construction or maintenance area is adequately delineated. Acceptable and non-acceptable methods of delineation are shown on Figure 12. 14 TRAFFIC CONTROLS BARRICADE CHARACTERISTICS TYPE' I II III WIDTH OF RAIL 8"mfn:12"max. B"min:12"max. 8"min:12" wx. LENGTH OF RAIL 2 ft.min. 2 ff.ntin. 4 ft.min. WIDTH OF STRIPES 8 in. 8 in. B In. HEIGHT 3 8.min. 3 R.min. 5 ff.min. NUMBER OF 2 lone each drectiun) 4(two own drection) 3 it facing tregic In one Direction REFLECTORIZED 8 if facing traffic in two directions RAIL FACES e For wooden barricades nominal lumber dmeneions will be satisfactory. •• For rails less than 3 feet long.4 inch Mae stripes shell be used. Figure 11 TYPICAL BARRICADES WANNNO T UGNT I0,Wntl1 a"Ie 12- 1 16' II� a•'1. 12"=®—{ l-2'MINIMUM�1 S 9"ia 12"= a5• F 4- I-2 � TYPE I BARRICADE TYPE II BARRICADE 8"W 12" z a® N Z e"b 12'•E7 S 3 —a MINIMUM TYPE III BARRICADE HIGH LEVEL WARNING DEVICE (Ranee) 15 TRAFFIC CONTROLS Figure 12 DELINEATION DEVICES USE THESE Reflective Cone _ Sleeve -- �1'K\ PERMANENT TYPE CHANNELIZER CONES Note: Reflectorized material for the above devices shall be silver white Raised Pavement Markers NOT THESE : Used Oil Drum l �-�• Metal Old Tire �ipe Rock or r Sandbags Concrete or Metal Base Chunk of Concrete 16 V. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL When a Districts Inspector is working in the vicinity of one of the following materials, the Inspector shall obtain a Material Safety Data Sheet or an Occupational Health Guidance from Ray Young. These data sheets contain emergency and first aid procedures as well as effects of exposure and methods of waste disposal . Liquid Oxygen Hydrogen Peroxide Caustic Soda (Sodium Hydroxide) Chlorine Natural Gas Ferric Chloride Potassium Permanganate Hydrated Lime Polymer Methane Gas HYDROGEN SULFIDE: Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) is the most commonly known malo- dorous gas emanating from domestic wastewater collection and treatment facili- ties. Hydrogen Sulfide can be identified by its rotten-egg odor H2S. It can cause highly corrosive conditions and is an extremely toxic substance. The toxicity of H2S is on the same order of magnitude as hydrogen cyanide (HCN), and death may result when exposed to an H2S concentration of 225 ppm by volume in the air. The maximum permissible 8-hour H2S concentration is about 20 ppm. Hydrogen sulfide is treacherous because a person's ability to sense large con- centrations is quickly lost. If the person ignores the first notice, the olfactory senses will become numbed and will no longer give warning; the results may be fatal . ENTRY INTO SEWER LINES: The Districts require that the sewer line be checked with a Gastech atmosphere analyzer prior to entry to determine the presence of toxic gas, oxygen deficiency or combustibles. The line must also be ven- tilated with portable blowers. Only trained personnel may enter the sewer line. Procedures are the same as those for entering a confined space. 17 VI. EMERGENCY PROCEDURES The quickest and easiest way to obtain professional help for any type of emergency including: Personal injury Radioactivity spill Oxygen enriched atmosphere Fire Chlorine hazard Chemical spill Explosive atmosphere Vehicular accident IN AN EMERGENCY - call Control (dial 222). When calling, stay calm and: 1. Tell Control you wish to report an emergency. 2. Give your name and phone number. 3. Give location of emergency. 4. Give description of emergency. 5. Report any injuries. 6. Report number of people injured. 7. Do not hang up until told to do so by Control . (It may be necessary for you to give more information.) EMERGENCY PHONE NUMBERS: Division of Occupational Safety & Health (DOSH) 818/901-5403 CalTrans 213/620-3030 General Telephone Company (BAN to 5PM) 1-800/422-4133 (after hours) 213/435-6321 Pacific Telephone Company (SAM to 5PM) 1-800/422-4133 (after hours) 714/739-3031 San Diego Gas and Electric 714/235-6323 Southern California Edison Company 714/835-5200 Southern California Gas Company TRANSMISSION DEPT. (8AN to 5PM) 714/529-7070 (after hours) 213/689-2641 DISTRIBUTION DEPT. (24 hours) 714/634-0251 OR 714/835-0221 U.S.A. 1-800/422-4133 V:ENG/FORMS/SAFETY 18 / EXHIBIT 2 M E M 0 R A N D U M NO. SP-002 ��y ,•_•- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY DATE: °••�� REVISED: �. SAFETY POLICY/PROCEDURE APPROVED: SUBJECT: Confined Spaces Pbrk Practices PAGE: 1 This Bulletin establishes a uniform set of safety procedures for working with confined spaces. 1. Application - Districts' wastewater collection and treatment facilities; i.e. within such spaces as silos, tanks, vats, compartments, ducts, sewers, pipelines, vaults, vessels, boilers, tubs and pits. 2. Confined Space - A space defined by the concurrent existence of the following conditions: - Existing ventilation is insufficient to remove dangerous air contamination and/or oxygen deficiency which may exist or develop. - Ready access or egress for the removal of a suddenly disabled employee is difficult due to the location and/or size of the opening(s) . 2.01 Dangerous Air Contamination - An atmosphere presenting a threat of causing death, injury, acute illness, or disablement due to the presence of flammable and/or explosive, toxic, or otherwise injurious or incapacitating substances. 2.01-1 Flammability - An atmosphere containing a gas or vapor at a concentration greater than 20 percent of its lower explosive (lower flammable) limit. 2.01-2 Toxicity - An atmosphere containing an atmospheric concentration immediately hazardous to life or health (containing a substance at a concentration greater than its permissible exposure level (PEL) . 2.01-3 Oxygen Deficiency - An atmosphere containing oxygen at a concentration of less than 195 percent by volume. NO. SP-002 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY DATE: y''�,• REVISED: SAFETY POLICY/PROCEDURE APPROVED: SUBJECT: Confined Spaces Work Practices PAGE: 2 4. Pre-entry - 4.01 Lines which may convey flammable, injurious, or incapacitating substances into the space shall be disconnected, blinded, or blocked off by other positive means to prevent dangerous air contamination or oxygen deficiency. The disconnection or blind shall be done in such a manner that reconnection or removal of the blind cannot be done by accident. 4.02 The space shall be emptied, flushed, or otherwise purged of flammable injurious or incapacitating substances to the extent feasible. 4.03 The air shall be tested with a devise determine whether dangerous air contamination and/or oxygen deficiency exists, I 4.04 If dangerous air contamination and/or oxygen deficiency does not exist within the space, as demonstrated by tests performed, entry into work within the space may proceed. 4.05 The continuous monitoring combustible/oxygen deficiency test equipment _ r for confined space work will be operated and monitored by a designated person outside of the confined space while there is anyone inside the confined space. 4.06 If the development of dangerous air contamination and/or oxygen deficiency is demonstrated by tests once entry has been made, personnel within the confined space will immediately be removed and existing ventilation shall be augmented by appropriate Weans. 4.07 When additional ventilation has removed dangerous air contamination or oxygen deficiency, as demonstrated byadditional testing, - re-entry into and work within the space may proceed, 4.08 No source of ignition shall be introduced into a confined Space until the testing procedures have ensured that dangerous air contamination due to flammability and/or explosive substance does not exist. 4.09 Whenever oxygen consuming equipment is to be used, measures shall be taken to ensure adequate combustion and exhaust gas venting. 5. Confined Space Operation - 5.01 Each FeMn .who has been designated to work within a confined Space shall be properly fitted with a safety belt (of harness type) with an attached line. The free end of the line shall be secured outside of the entry opening. The line shall be at least 1/2 inch diameter and 2,000 pounds test. NO. BP-002 �ryyl!•y.; COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY DATE: ^^ REVISED: a„ e SAFETY POLICY/PROCEDURE APPROVED: SUBJECT: Confined Spaces %brk Practices PAGE: 3 5.02 At least one employee shall stand by on the outside of the confined space to give assistance in case of emergency. At least one additional employee who may have other duties shall be within sight or call of the standby employee(s). 5.03 Voice and visual contact shall be maintained between the employee inside a confined space and his standby person. 5.04 Only lighting and electrical equipment approved _ Per 05 hQ - Skgll f L umd in confined spaces subject to dangerous air contamination due to flammable or explosive substances. 5.05 Protective clothing and equipment appropriate for the conditions within the space shall be worn by the employee. Hard hats are a mandatory piece of protective equipment for the employee when others are working over the employee. 5.06 Tools and other equipment shall be lowered on a line. If there is not adequate roan for the employee in the confined space to be safely out of the drop zone, the employee will exit the space while heavy equipment is being lowered. 6. Respiratory Protection Equipment and Use - 6.01 whenever an atmosphere free of dangerous air Contamination or oxygen deficiency Cannot be assured or whenever, due to the existence of a emergency, it is not feasible to insure the removal of dangerous air contamination or oxygen deficiency, appropriate approved respiratory protective equipment shall be provided and worn. 6.02 The standby employee shall have appropriate approved respiratory protective equipment, including an independent source of breathing air. 6.03 A standby employee, protected as in 6.02, may enter the confined space, but only in case of emergency and only after alerting at least me additional employee outside of the confined space, of the existence of an emergency and of the standby employee's intent to enter the confined space. 6.04 At least one person trained in first aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or Fire Department assistance, shall be immediately available whenever the use of respiratory protective equipment is required for the initial entry into a confined space. SP-002( .l-.2) O1/88 EXHIBIT 3 Ma Pi . JJve S /. T%TT TO L 2 c T " 10C 2OO a2 fyI® v,[R NOPL P22CRta LOGIC OI.MEW T 2meelesm[ am[SL[Sw P[[t[1ccf a uMr.tl/er .erm [M/er Mang "eodlinuCYran 0.f1claor, P[[- l" W...—riw Err— utn O[n[. a. Oleo .'t tfvel Ltav[ OLwvue[(. {ted NmP 21R, Floc. PVR[ END". Flo hr ToR[ TY[ .L in[tli 1 Y[ 6vWn[[Sw/ GopA Yr 'lap[ S[ .Sr Pwrufytlov/ or,A f or No On[[PvDefio" rr Wv[G. Morrlowr, �:! 0.fN .nR "Ivor 1"NRPncr 1. WpLz*1 Gur Coatimou M[Nor 1. Olnw 1 W.,, 1. rserfl wI Xwi[pr la al.d T... rwt. " w"". tloo Sn. MEN'. by w[- 2. SodbywR". M1nm 2. Too Op. Do- Wv I"I F.. ro lo,o. Mf I . R I .pol.ec Um o J. twat "[ Veit. Sim M a[...... Soon. mC/er r4vo1 ;,ART T WII[ J. Now uo" Sv Tw Po. coo boon 1. unli.ren c..i If svinr fvlfer[.. riot"C 1v[d1- Cwo.. v.ir. S. w. SlandbT v/ Cm.elerRm ei [n1T 1 0 1. fo�v/uct1 fvd.v.m.ec bn.[LSry M u[1Re vR A. Ceoom[ Moouvr Bvwlr swn. doo.ir P.[oe®ri iu. rqr.. Sr TEND- ft.". I.nw F. e1[er OUT w24 b. unw iO tv.e m and Ogp,mlbl. "mI T rfn[hlo }�tl"[.Sr "Error v ..lLtlev pyr.. �[ 1pp21c. I[ Moelnr Jmor.n. 1[olyb" w.0 T. . er G as,,or or J. Ive.uv[ Mevloi Sef TP}A ORS" 0.43e1.m1 C"opl I... 2n[. br niv.T p[. 2, m W P..-roorl .r"Error w..1d. how for P[ee.dvi.. vn[SLifw Ov[fi Ce[bno.al. dovoplrn. Lo. e[ fa Sv[ Tf mplfubl. olpin[aR 2YP[. T® I vebon. C1PQ OO[IIDQ LEGEND ' Mer . Ceeflmd 9nn (Ooo. Me[ W.[ 2 w..tmc Co iri000). O COM1vtl Spn.. EXHIBIT 4 GENERAL PROVISIONS, STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, ! r — and STANDARD DRAWINGS 1991 ig EL 0.00 —�--p- _ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of -'- I'� :°'.�• :" ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Lan 16 AHtlnmvr UNIEMNION3 d0 90L73tl1O `S3MVG 7N SMOHl �1 EMNION3 HOIN38 `imH=m invd SONIMVER] aavaNviS pus `SNOLLdOId133dS auvaNV1S `SNOISIAOUd lVH3N3J 1 I 1. Substitution of any person(s) or Subcontractor(s) designated in the original Bid. 2. The assignment or transferred of any subcontract or allowing any subcontract to be performed by anyone other than the original Subcontractor. 3. The subletting or subcontracting of any portion of the Project not so designated in the original Bid when the value of said work is greater than one-half of one percent of the Contractor's total Bid. A violation by the Contractor of any of the provisions of Sections 4100 to 4114, inclusive, of the Public Contracts Code, shall be deemed a violation of Contract and the Districts will impose the penalties provided therein. I. Workers' Compensation. Pursuant to the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1860, the Contractor shall secure the payment of Compensation to Contractor's employees in accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code. Prior to the commencement of work, the Contractor shall sign and file with the Districts a certification in the following form: "I am aware of the provisions of California Labor Code Section 3700 which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." G. Federal Regulations. All requirements applicable, as established by the EPA, OSHA, or other federal regulatory agencies. 4-2 SAFETY AND ACCIDENT PREVENTION The Contractor shall possess copies of the "Construction Safety Order", "Trench Construction Safety Order" "Tunnel Safety Orders", and "General Safety Orders" issued by the Division of Industrial Safety of the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, OSHA, and to any and all other applicable laws, or regulations to which the Contractor is required by law to comply. The Contractor shall have copies of each of these "Orders", "Laws", and "Regulations" or suitable extracts therefrom, on the site of operations and shall be governed by the requirements thereof. Particular attention is directed to the requirements concerning shoring and timbering of excavations and those concerning warning signs, lights, and barricades. In accordance with generally accepted construction practices, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS OF THE WORKSITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. This requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours. 4-3 i The right of the Engineer to conduct a construction review of the Contractor's performance is not intended to and will not include review of the adequacy of the Contractor's safety measures in, on or near the construction site. The Contractor shall have standing arrangements for the immediate removal and hospital treatment, if necessary, of any employee who may be injured during work on the Project. The Contractor shall keep at the Project site, ready for immediate use, all articles necessary for the giving of first aid. The Contractor shall file "accident reports" as they may be required by the Districts. 4-3 GENERAL INDEMNITY The Contractor shall , with respect to all work covered by or incidental to this Contract, be responsible for any liability imposed by law and shall indemnify and hold the Districts, the Engineer, the Consulting Engineer and their consultants, and each of their directors, officers, agents and employees, and all public entities issuing permits to the Contractor, harmless from and against all of the following: Any claim, suit or actions of every name, kind and description, loss, damage, cost, expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, costs of litigation, awards, fines, penalties or judgments, arising by reason of death or bodily injury to person(s) , injury to property, or other loss, damage or expense, resulting from the construction of the work, design defects (if design originated by the Contractor only) , defects in the work, or by or on account of acts, errors or omissions of the Contractor or Contractor's agents or from any other cause whatsoever arising during the progress of the work or at any time prior to its completion and Final Acceptance, including any of the same resulting from the Districts' alleged or actual acts, errors, or omissions, regardless of whether such acts, errors, or omissions are active or passive and whether on or off of the worksite. Said responsibility shall extend to claims, demands or liability for loss, damage or injuries occurring or discovered after completion of the work, as well as during the progress of the work. However, the Contractor shall not be obligated under this Contract to indemnify the Districts or their Consulting Engineer with respect to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Districts or their Consulting Engineer. In any and all claims against the indemnified parties by an employee of the Contractor, any subcontractor, any supplier, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, the indemnification obligation under this section on GENERAL INDEMNITY shall not be limited in any way by the amount or type of damages, compensation, or benefits payable by or for the Contractor, or any subcontractor, or any supplier or other person under Workers' Compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee acts. The obligations of the Contractor under this section on GENERAL INDEMNITY shall not extend to the liability of the Engineer, the Consulting Engineer, and their consultants, and each of their directors, officers, agents and employees, 4-4 EXHIBIT 5 PASCAL & LUDWIG ENGINEERS O TELEPH)"TONE: 2049 EAST FRANCIS STREET FAX: (909)9474722 ONTARIO,CALIFORNIA 91761 May 24, 1994 Orange County Sanitation District PO Box8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728 E Attention: Blake Anderson N G Reference: Safety I N E Gentlemen: E R It has come to our attention that several of the Board members of the Orange County S Sanitation District have questioned the Safety practices and/or record of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers in connection with consideration of the award of the Miscellaneous a Improvement project bid I February 1994. While we suffered a catastrophe and tragic accident at Plant #2 on I February 1994, C this incident is in no way representative of the Safety Plan of the Company nor the 0 safety measures exercised by our employees, nor is it indicative of the safety record that N we have achieved. S T As a matter of record, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers and its employees work extensively R and diligently at providing a safe work place and working in a safe manner. This tl "Safety First" attitude works and is reflected in the fact that during the last worker's C compensation rating period (September 1992 - October 1993) Pascal & Ludwig T Engineers worked over 149,600 manhours (18,700 mandays) without a single loss time 0 accident -Z&M. R S As a result. our worker's compensation modification factor is projected to be in the low 90's for the next rating period. In addition a review of our Cal-Osha file reveals that the Company has undergone site inspections at numerous times within the last three years without any citations, general or otherwise, having been issued. As a further indication the soundness of and confidence in our Safety Program, we suggest that the District review our safety performance with Bill Loupe of Cal-Osha. We believe such a call will reveal that the Company's plan and Safety effort is far above average to those in the construction industry. Among the training that is undertaken by all supervisor and key workers of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers are certification in the following areas: Certification in: First Aid CPR Competent Person Trench Shoring Hazardous Materials (40 hours) Orange County Water District - Safety May 25, 1994 Page Two It is ironic that all the individuals involved in the 1 February accident attended and were certified in all of [he shove courses. In addition, all Company workers attend weekly "Tool-Box" job safety meetings at which time general and specific site topics are covered. Furthermore, all supervisory personnel attend a Saturday morning Safety Conference every three months to improve, review and discuss safety/work topics. It is believed that this "in the trench" participation and implementation is the key to our program. It is hoped that the above will assist the District in becoming aware of the "Safety First" work attitude of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, of our success in minimizing exposure to accidents, and of our on-going program to improve safety. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 909/947-4631. Respectfully, PASCAL&LUDWIG ENGINEERS Alan G. Ludwig CEO AGL:sz + ` - EXHIBIT 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS M ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA IM'-ELLIS AVENNE oa.wX a+n Eauxrux vu�Er.aauwxmN Nzna.e+n VUIGWB -" March 17, 1994 MEMORANDUM TO: Construction Management Staff F�Yy'� .�� FROM: John Linder / Phil Serrantinol �i SUBJECT: confined Space Policy Effective this date, Construction Management / Safety & Health / and the Operation department staff have developed a confined space policy for the Districts. This policy conforms with the requirements of Article 108 of'the General Industry Safety Orders, amended December 24, 1993. Attached are: a) Confined Space Procedure, March, 1994 b) Work Space Analysis, Form Analysis.WSA Mar, 1994 c) Confined Space Report, Form Confined.SP Mar, 1994 The forms and procedure have been developed with two objectives in mind. 1) To comply with the minimum standards of the General Industry Safety Orders as amended for preventing employee exposure to confined space hazards. 2) To assure that all effective measures have been considered and complete, and that accurate documentation has occurred and becomes part of the permanent record. Training sessions are being developed and will be forth coming for all concerned. Please formulate any questions you may have and be prepared to discuss them when these training sessions become available. With your help, focus, and positive commitment we will assure a safe work environment for our contractors and District employees when entering confined spaces. cc: TMD i � h- CONFINED SPACE PROCEDURE March 1994 I 1. The project manager shall notify the contractor at each pre-job conference (or at their regularly scheduled weekly construction meeting) that the Districts recognizes and enforces the requirements as specified in Article 108 of the General Industry Safety Orders. 2. The contractor shall notify the Districts at least two weeks in advance of any work which will occur in an area that may be considered a confined space. 3. The project inspector will coordinate a meeting with Safety & Health staff and Operation staff during the first week. During this meeting, the -,Work Space Analysis" form (Analysis.WS 1994) will be completed. 4. The project inspector shall copy the contractor on the analysis and discuss the hazards and procedures of the confined space work. 5. The project inspector shall insure that prior to any work being performed, Safety & Health staff has reviewed the contractors confined space procedures. 6. The project inspector shall insure items 1 through 4 "Confined Space Report" form (Confined. SP Mar 1994) are complete with initials. This will authorize the work to commence. 7. The project inspector shall secure a Districts permit issued by Safety & Health staff and coordinate activities with the contractor prior to any work being performed. 8. The project inspector shall conduct a debriefing of the contractor at the conclusion of the work activity and provide the contractor will a courtesy copy for the record. 9. The project inspector shall immediately notify Safety & Health staff and Operations staff if conditions or procedures change. WORK SPACE ANALYSIS A'�4[COVM� DATE: PROJECT NO: CONTRACTOR: WORKSPACE LOCATION: WORK DESCRIPTION: ATTENDEES: ATMOSPHERE: Oxygen (Min 19.5% - Max 23.5%) LEL (Max 10% or 201) HIS (Max 10 PPM) CO (Max 35 PPM) HAZARDS OR POTENTIAL HAZARDS OF WORKSPACE: A) Access: B) Adjacent Work: C) Traffic: D) Flooding / Engulfment: E) Fire / Explosion: F) Hot Work: G) Noise Disturbance: H) Energized Equipment: I) Compressed Gases: i�j.• Y' CONFINED SPACE REPORT DATE: PROJECT NO: CONTRACTOR: LOCATION: SPEC SECTION: INSPECTOR: ITEMS TO CHECK 1. The Contractor has been informed that the workplace contains confined spaces and that entry is allowed only through compliance with a program meeting the requirements of the General Industry Safety Orders, Article 108. 2. Contractor's Program reviewed by on 3. The Contractor has been appraised of the elements including the hazards identified by the Districts experience with this confined space. 4. The Contractor has been appraised of any precautions or procedures that the Districts have implemented for the protection of contractor personnel. (Lock & Tag, Purge, etc.) 5. Districts personnel shall coordinate entry operations with the Contractor. 6. The Contractor has been debriefed at the conclusion of the entry operations regarding the confined space program followed and regarding any hazards confronted or created in the spaces during entry operations. Comments: Note: The conditions above require initials when complete or access will be denied. Minutes of all meetings shall be attached to this report. AGENDA ITEM 17 (2) PAvr;AL & LUDWIG ENGINEERS O �gTpE� ,E 2W EAST FRANCIS STREET FAx: 50747T2 ONTAMO,CAUFORNIA 91761 May 24, 1994 Orange County Sanitation District P O Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728 E Attention: Blake Anderson N G Reference: Safety I N E Gentlemen: E It has come to our attention that several of the Board members of the Orange County R Sanitation District have questioned the Safety practices and/or record of Pascal & 8 Ludwig Engineers in connection with consideration of the award of the Miscellaneous & Improvement project bid 1 February 1994. While we suffered a catastrophe and tragic accident at Plant #2 on 1 February 1994, e this incident is in no way representative of the Safety Plan of the Company nor the O safety measures exercised by our employees, nor is it indicative of the safety record that N we have achieved. S T As a matter of record, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers and its employees work extensively R and diligently at providing a safe workplace and working in a safe manner. This u "Safety First" attitude works and is reflected in the fact that during the last worker's C compensation rating period (September 1992 - October 1993) Pascal & Ludwig T Engineers worked over 149,600 manhours (18,700 mandays) without a since loss time G accident-T&M. R g As a result, our worker's compensation modification factor is projected to be in the low 90's for the next rating period. In addition a review of our Cal-Osha file reveals that the Company has undergone site inspections at numerous times within the last three years without any citations, general or otherwise, having been issued. As a further indication the soundness of and confidence in our Safety Program, we suggest that the District review our safety performance with Bill Loupe of Cal-Osha. We believe such a call will reveal that the Company's plan and Safety effort is far above average to those in the construction industry. Among the training that is undertaken by all supervisor and key workers of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers are certification in the following areas: Certification in: Fast Aid CPR Competent Person Trench Shoring Hazardous Materials (40 hours) Orange County Water District- Safety May 25, 1994 Page Two It is ironic that all the individuals involved in the 1 February accident attended and were certified in all of the above courses. In addition, all Company workers attend weekly "Tool-Box"job safety meetings at which time general and specific site topics are covered. Furthermore, all supervisory personnel attend a Saturday morning Safety Conference every three months to improve, review and discuss safety/work topics. It is believed that this "in the trench" participation and implementation is the key to our program. It is hoped that the above will assist the District in becoming aware of the "Safety First" work attitude of Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, of our success in minimizing exposure to accidents, and of our on-going program to improve safety. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 909/947-4631. Respectfully, PASCAL&LUDWIG ENGINEERS 1 . I Alan G. Ludwig CEO AGL:sz AGENDA ITEM 17 (4) COUNTY SANITATION Mamas February 1, 1994 d ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA 11:00 a.m. 2 Addenda am AM 10 BO B°VEN1x- oa nn wuxraix vnuEr.uuwmxa n,nai°, 6 1 D T A B U L A T I ON al<I°n3C11 Jobs Nos. P1-48, P2-56 and P2-53-2 PROJECT TITLE: Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1. Job No. Pi-48: Miscellaneous Work from Job No. P2-47-2 and Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2. Job No 132-56: and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2. Job No P2-53.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct architectural and treatment olant improvements to uporade eauioment and provide handicap access and work areas for previously assigned staff at Plant No. 2. Install safety eauioment at Plants 1 and 2 Seismic retrofit for Plant Water Pump Station and Primary Power Building A at Plant No. 2 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $1,350.000 BUDGET AMOUNT: $2,064,000 TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID 1. Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, Ontario, CA $1,003,899.00 2. Advanco Constructors Div. of turn Constructors, Upland, CA $1,043,788.00 3. Colich & Sons Environmental, Long Beach, CA $1,291,675.00 4. Great West Contractors, Inc., Yorba Linda, CA a1,774,430.00' -Corrected total. 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 Pascal & Ludwig Engineers in the bid amount of $1,003,899.00 as the lowest and best bid. n homes M. Dawes Director of Engineering I HERE Y CJJNCDR nWIT10OVE REC P1Fe T TITI . ) BT.RKR P hNDFRSON, DIRECTOR OF DATED: ENGINEERING AGENDA ITEM 17 (5) i RESOLUTION NO. 94-34 AWARDING JOB NOS. P1-48 . P2-47-2 . P2-56 AND P2-53-2 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AWARDING CONTRACT FOR MISCELLANEOUS ARCHITECTURAL AND TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS AT PLANT NO. 1, JOB NO. P1-48; MISCELLANEOUS WORK (RE FACILITY MODIFICATIONS AND SAFETY UPGRADES AT PLANT NO. 2) , JOB NO. P2-47-2, FLARE IMPROVEMENTS AT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. P2-56; AND SEISMIC RETROFIT OF STRUCTURES AT TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. P2-53-2 x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 6, 7 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the proposed construction contract for Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2 , Job No. P2-53-2 is for a project which is a portion of the previously-approved 1989 Collection, Treatment and Disposal Facilities Master Plan. The project is to be constructed as per the Master Plan approval. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and Section 15090 of the Districts' Guidelines, the Program Environmental Impact Report on the Collection, Treatment and Disposal Facilities Master Plan covering this project was approved by the Boards of Directors on July 19, 1989; and, Section 2. In accordance with the Districts' Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, the Boards of Directors, on December 8, 1993, authorized filing a Notice of Exemption in connection with the proposed project for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48, Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2) , Job No. P2-47-2; and Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and, Section 3 . That a written bid tabulation and recommendation has heretofore been submitted this day to the Boards of Directors by the Districts' Director of Engineering that award of contract be made to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2) , Job No. P2-47-2, Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; and, Section 4. That the written proposal submitted by Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2) , Job No. P2-47-2, Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2, is hereby received and ordered filed; and, Section 5. That the contract for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2) , Job No. P2-47-2, Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit 1 of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2, be awarded to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, in the total amount of $1,003,899.00 in accordance with the terms of their bid and the prices contained therein; and, Section 6. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 1, acting for itself and as agent for Districts Nos. 2, 31 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14, 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 7. That all other bids for said work are hereby rejected. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. rc3ej.034 i AGENDA ITEM NO. 17 (6) _.w orrc cs o• ROURKE. WOODRUFF be SPRADLI:C c n�1 eae'eoc}.ms .«a•...ronu w..w..e. r.cs wLo . C R,nc Ger °TOv SWTC TODD >OI sOVTN PARKER J oa[or w. IOPa.Tv STREET ORPN00. C4LtromN14 gases .O.LRT wrLULM cncan LTNv wwrtcRs viwccT DIAL Nune cR am. o. MRvuolvn M4a I. NIC Ov •.MLB W. .MMCR J4Mcs a. BouNxL (714) 564-2612 •.s. xLNN.R9".w4Rt.JB. o^ ,C L VLNCC NICL K. aM"'°"" May 12 , 1994 ,Ta MtNs T.v"4a .ww000wurr VIA TELEFAX AND FIRST CLASS MAIL James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. District Manager Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Health 2100 East Katella Avenue, Suite 140 Anaheim, CA 92806 RE: County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Date of Injury: February 1, 1994 Dear Mr. Brown: Thank, you for taking the time to meet with Terri Josway, Dan Spradlin and myself on May 11. We appreciate your courtesy in discussing this matter with us. As we discussed at our meeting, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County ("Districts") are submitting herewith additional information regarding both legal and factual issues relating to the incident occurring on February 1, 1994 . This information confirms our opinion that it would be both legally and factually improper to issue a citation to the Districts as a result of this incident. ADDlication of Cal-OSHA Regulations Cal-OSHA regulations recognize two distinct regulatory schemes pertaining to confined spaces. Title 8, Article 108 , section 5156 provides in pertinent part as follows: 5156 (b)(1) for operations and industries not identified in subsection (b)(2), the confined space definition along with other definitions and requirements of section 5157, permit. Required Confined spaces shell apply. 5156 (b)(2) The confined space definition alone with other definitions and requirements of section 5153, Other confined space Operations shell apply to: (A) Construction operations regulated by section 1502; . . It is undisputed that the activities in which Pascal and Ludwig Engineers ("Pascal & Ludwig") were engaged on February 1, James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. IF Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 2 1994 were construction operations. It is contradictory for Cal- OSHA to cite Pascal and Ludwig under section 5158, which deals with construction operations, while at the same time citing the Districts under section 5157, which applies to non-construction operations. As you are aware, one significant difference between sections 5157 and 5158 is that section 5157 contains requirements for permit entry and specifically imposes requirements upon host employers whereas section 5158 does not. The subsections under which Cal-OSHA has indicated its intent to cite the Districts are set forth in section 5157 (c) (2) and (c) (8) (A-C) . Under those subsections the duty to the contractor is one of providing information. However, those subsections are inapplicable for the following reasons. 1. Construction operations are governed by section 5158 with respect to confined space operations. If a host employer were required to inform a construction contractor under 5157 (c) (8) (A) that a permit space program was required, the construction contractor would then be required under 5157 (c) (9) (C) to inform the host employer of the permit space program that the contractor will be following. This would make the provisions of section 5158 pertaining to confined space operations of construction contractors meaningless. 2. Construction operations are specifically governed by Construction Safety Orders which take precedence over the general orders. Section 1502 provides as follows: (a) These Orders establish minixum safety standards whenever employment exists in connection with the construction, alteration, painting, repairing, construction maintenance, renovation, removal, or wrecking of any fixed structure or Its parts. These Orders also apply to all excavations not covered by other safety orders for a specific industry or operation. (b) At construction projects, these Orders take precedence over any other general orders that are inconsistent with than, except for Tune) safety Orders or Coupressed Air 'safety Orders. (p Machines, equipment, processes, and operations not specifically covered by these Orders shall be governed by other applicable general safety Orders. Sections 5157 and 5158 are part of the General Industry Safety Orders and are thus general orders which are superseded under section 1502 (b) by specific Construction Safety Orders such as section 1510 (safety instructions for employees) , section 1511 (general safety precautions) , section 1528 (dusts, fumes, James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Heath May 12 , 1994 Page 3 mists, vapors, and gases) , section 1541 (g) (hazardous atmosphere at excavation sites) and section 1707 (b) (pneumatic power tools) , to the extent of any inconsistency. Applicable General Safety Orders referenced in section 1502 (c) are those set forth in section 5158 which expressly governs construction operations rather than section 5157 which is inapplicable to construction operations. 3 . Adequate protection to employees of construction contractors are set forth in section 5158 . For example, section 5158 (c) imposes duties upon a construction contractor for employees entering confined spaces: 5158(c) operation procedures and Esployee Training. The employer shall iaplement the provision of this subsection before any mployees is permitted to enter a confined space. (1) Operating procedures. (A) written, understandable operating and rescue procedures shall be developed and shall be provided to the affected eaployees. (B) operating procedures shall conform to the applicable reciu(resents of this section and shall (elude provision for the surveillance of the surrounding area to avoid hazards such as drifting vapors from tanks, piping and severs. Section 5158 (e) also applies to construction activities as they relate to confined space operations and subsection 5158 (e) (1) (F) specifically prohibits the use of sources of ignition within or near a confined space: 5158(e)(1)(F) York involving the use of flame, arc, spark, or other source of ignition is prohibited within a confined space (or any adjacent space having commn walls, floor, or ceiling with the confined space) which contains, or is likely to develop, dangerous air contamination due to flammable and explosive substances. If the contractor is not going to implement and follow safe procedures under section 5158 , there is no reason to believe that it will act any differently due to involvement of the host employer under section 5157. 4 . Because the Districts had no actual awareness of the factors leading to the incident, the Districts could not have apprised the contractor of such hazards, of such experience nor of previously implemented procedures under 5157 (c) (8) (B) or (C) . James Treat Brown, C.S. P. , P.E. , Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 4 We understand that Cal-OSHA may be relying on the preamble to the federal OSHA regulations regarding confined spaces to justify an interpretation that the Districts may be cited under section 5157. However, the preamble to the federal regulations affirmatively states that construction activities are expressly exempted from the permit-required confined space regulations and that the federal agency concluded that sufficient differences existed between construction and general industry to warrant separate rulemaking activities: "With respect to the agriculture, construction, and shipyard eaployment industries . . . OSHA is retaining the proposed language exempting these industries from §1910.146 . . . "OSHA is aware that confined space accidents occur in agriculture, construction, and maritime and that employees in those industries do face a significant risk of death and serious injury from these accidents. .However, the Agency believes that sufficient differences exist between these industries and general industry to warrant separate rulemaking activities. . . "The Agency also believes that agriculture, construction, and shipyard work are likely to pose permit-space working conditions that are unique to these industries. . . . . OSHA believes that confined space standards for agriculture, construction, end shipyard work should be addressed separately so that the Agency can focus on aspects of permit space safety that are specifically appropriate for these areas. According, §1910.146(a), as prmulgated, retains the proposed language exempting these industries from the requirements of the generic persit space standard." Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 9, Jan. 14, 1994 , pgs. 4469-4470. 29 CFR Part 1910 sets forth the Final Rule for Permit-Required Confined Spaces for General Industry, the federal OSHA regulation, as follows: §1910.146 Permit-required confined spaces. (a) Scope and application. This section contains requirements for practices and procedures to protect eockoyees in general industry from the hazer& of entry into permit-required confined spaces. This section does not apply to agriculture, to construction, or to shipyard employment. . See Federal Register, Vol 58, No. 9, Jan. 14 , 1994, pg. 4549. Thus, the regulatory intent of the parallel federal regulations from which section 5157 is derived is clearly to exempt construction operations from general industry permit space requirements. James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 5 In this case, the general industry permit requirements and host employer duties under section 5157 do not apply. Instead, the confined space operation requirements of section 5158 and the construction safety orders under section 1502 et seq. that are solely the responsibility of Pascal and Ludwig would apply. Citation For A Serious Violation In the course of an investigation, violations in differing degrees of severity may be found to exist: regulatory violations, general violations, serious violations, repeat violations, and willful violations. (Section 334 of regulations) A serious violation is defined under section 334 (c) (1) of the regulations as follows: A •serious violation" shall be deemed to exist in a piece of employment if there is a substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result free a series exposure exceeding an established permissible exposure limit or a condition which exists, or from one or more practices, means, methods, operations, or processes which hove been adopted or are in use, in the place of employment unless the employer did not, and could not with the exercise of reasonable diligence, krow of the presence of the violation. The statutory definition of serious violation under Labor Code section 6432 is: ca) as used in this part, a "serious violation" shall be deemed to exist in a place of employment if there is a substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a series exposure exceeding an established permissible exposure limit or a condition which exists, or from ame or more practices, exam, methods, operations, or processes which have beer, adopted or are in me, in the piece of employment unless the employer did rot, and could not with the exercise of reasonable diligence, know of the presence of the violation. (b) As used in this section, "substantial probability" refers rot to the probability that an accident or exposure will occur as a result of the violation, but rather to the probability that death or serious physiut harm will result assuming an accident or exposure occurs as a result of the violation. In looking at the state of mind of employers, courts construing the element of knowledge under Labor Code section 4558 (which deals with an employer's removal of machinery operational guards) have held that the word "known" as used in that section means a sense of actual awareness. Saldana v. Globe-Weis Systems Co. , 233 Cal. App. 3d 1505, 1516 (1991) ; Flowmaster. Inc. v. Superior Court, 16 Cal. App. 4th 1019, 1022 (1993) . In the present matter, it is undisputed that there was a complete lack of actual awareness by the Districts of the potential for the harm which resulted. Even now, it is our understanding that Cal-OSHA has been unable to identify the cause of the incident. It is incongruous to cite the Districts for a serious violation and ascribe "actual James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 6 awareness" of the danger to the Districts in view of the inability to even identify the cause of the incident. Factual Matters Even though the Districts contend that section 5157 is inapplicable, we believe that there is significant factual information indicating compliance by the Districts with the intent of this section. We are providing herewith copies of portions of the project plans and specifications and minutes of meetings between the Districts and Pascal & Ludwig which confirm that the Districts provided significant information to Pascal & Ludwig on plant operations and safety procedures. The following materials impose duties upon Pascal & Ludwig for all aspects of job site operations at Job No. P2-49: 1. General Provisions, Standard Specifications, and Standard Drawings 1991 2. Notice Inviting Bids, Special Provisions, Proposal and Bond Forms, and Detailed Specification and Plans for Miscellaneous Improvements at Plant No. 1 Job No. P1-42 and Miscellaneous Improvements at Plant No. 2 Job No. P2-49 April 1993 Pertinent provisions from these documents are discussed as follows: GENERAL PROVISIONS, STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, AND STANDARD DRAWINGS 1991 General Provisions The general provisions imposed upon Pascal & Ludwig responsibility for safety and accident prevention and for the specific means of implementing the required work under the contract. Section 2-2 [pg. 2-11 provides for the examination of the site by Pascal & Ludwig and states in pertinent part: James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 7 The Bidder stipulates that a careful examination was made of the Plans, Specifications and other Contract Documents; as Nell as the site where work is to be performed. The Bidder further stipulates that the Bidder is familiar with all local conditions and federal, state and local lows, ordinances, rules and regulations that may affect in any manner the performance of the work. Pursuant to section 4-1 [pg. 4-1] , Pascal and Ludwig was responsible for observing all laws and regulations and provides in pertinent part: The Contractor shall observe, furnish and keep fully infurued, at his own cost and expeme, all materials, equipment, and facilities required to comply with all existing and future federal, state, city, cmmty, local agency or a Special District, and regulations which my in am mercer affect those engaged or employed on the Project, or the materials to he used or furnished, or which may in any respect govern, control or otherwise affect the conduct of the Project of any part thereof. Section 4-1 goes on to direct Pascal & Ludwig's attention to specific regulations and requirements while stating: This list of regulations is not warranted to be complete and the burden of ascertaining legal requirements that oast be complied with, shell rest solely with the Contractor. The regulations listed include: [pg. 4-3] Federal Regulations. All remuirements acclieab[e. as established by the EPA. OSHA, or other federal regulatory agencies. Since federal OSHA in turn refers to the State's own OSHA requirements, this provision effectively incorporated the Cal-OSHA requirements by reference. More specifically, however, Cal-OSHA requirements are covered in section 4-2 [pg. 4-3] pertaining to safety and accident prevention which provides: 4-2 SAFETY AND ACCIDENT PREVENTION The Contractor shall possess copies of the "Construction Safety Order", "Trench Construction Safety Order", "Tunnel Safety Orders", and "General Safety Orders" issued by the Division of industrial Safety of the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, OSHA, and to any and all other applicable laws, or regulations to which the Contractor is required by Law to comply. The Contractor chat[ have copies of each of these "Orders", "Laws", and "Regulation" or suitable extracts therefrmn, on the site of operations and shalt be governed by the requirements thereof. Particular attention is directed to the requirements concerning shoring and timbering of excavations and those concerning warning signs, lights, and barricades. In accordance with generally accepted construction practices, THE Contractor SMALL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS OF THE WORKSITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. This requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours. The right of the Engineer to conduct a construction review of the Contractor's performance is not intended to end will not include review of the adequacy of the Contractor's safety measures in, on or near the construction site. James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety 6 Heath May 12, 1994 Page a The Contractor shall have standing arrangements for the immdiete removal and hospital treatment, if necessary, of any eaployee who may be injured during work on the Project. The Contractor shall keep at the Project site, ready for immediate use, all articles necessary for the giving of first aid. The Contractor shall file "accident reports" as they my be required by the Districts. By making Pascal and Ludwig responsible for having possession of and complying with the General Safety Orders issued by Cal-OSHA and all other applicable safety regulations, Pascal and Ludwig was referred to the requirements of Permit-Required Confined Space Operations as set forth in Cal-OSHA regulations section 5157 including subsection (c) (9) thereof which imposes upon the contractor the duty of making inquiry of the host employer when section 5157 is applicable. Section 6-2 [pg. 6-1) pertains to the scheduling of work and places Pascal and Ludwig on notice that unless otherwise specified, all work is being accomplished while the treatment plants and trunk and local sewers are in operation. unless otherwise specified, ell work shall be accaoplished while the existing treatment plants and/or trvde and local sewers are in operation. The Contractor shall notify the Engineer of the Contractor's planned procedure for each specific alteration of the existing facilities before the alteration begins. The Contractor shall not begin an alteration until specific written approval has been granted by the Engineer in each case. The making of connections to existing facilities or other operations that interfere with the operation of the existing epnipsent shall be completed as quickly as possible. This provision, together with the site plans and sketches attached to the standard specifications as well as to the detailed specifications, certainly informs the Contractor that all work is being performed in the vicinity of a complex operational plant which utilizes various chemicals in its ordinary operations in treating materials. Section 7-1 [pg. 7-1) provides that Pascal and Ludwig is responsible for providing materials, equipment and supplies that fully conform with all applicable state and federal safety laws, rules, regulations and orders. Section 7-6 [pg. 7-33 makes Pascal and Ludwig responsible for furnishing operation and maintenance manuals for each component and each assembly furnished under the contract which is to include provisions for the recommended installation for all equipment supplied. Thus, it was Pascal and Ludwig's responsibility to have written recommended installation procedures for the installation of the gate. James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 9 Section 8-5 [pg. 8-3] requires Pascal and Ludwig to give personal attention to the work under the contract and to have a site superintendent available on site at all times during progress of the work. That section goes on to provide [pg. 8-4] that Pascal and Ludwig is solely responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures of construction and requires Pascal and Ludwig to have representatives available at any time in case of emergency who are to be fully authorized and equipped to correct unsafe conditions on short notice. Standard Specifications Section 21-3100 [pg. 21-3] requires Pascal and Ludwig to comply with all safety rules, orders and regulations of Cal-OSHA and section 21-3200 [pg. 21-3] further provides that safe conditions shall be maintained at the job site meeting all provisions of Cal-OSHA and all other applicable safety codes for excavation. Section 39-0140 [pg. 39-2] places Pascal and Ludwig on notice of the various contents in the piping at the Districts' facilities including sludge, chlorine solution, digester gas, ferric chloride, ferrous chloride, high pressure air, high pressure digester gas, industrial water, natural gas, effluent, and influent. Section 41-5000 [pg. 41-7] deals with the installation of gate lifts and requires factory trained personnel to check certain installation procedures. Section 43-0200 [pg. 43-2] relates to installation of equipment not being permitted until required installation instructions have been provided to the Engineer. Section 44-0100 [pg. 44-1] provides for the installation of electrical systems by Pascal and Ludwig. Section 45-2400 at seq. [pg. 45-24] provides for various gas monitoring devices such as section 45-2410 toxic gas sensors/analyzers [pg. 45-24] , section 45-2420 chlorine detectors and monitors [pg. 45-241 , and section 45-2430 combustible gas analyzers [pg. 45-25] . The reference to such devices clearly places Pascal and Ludwig on notice of the potential of the presence of substances such as toxic and combustible gasses at the plant facility. James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 10 Standard Drawings The Standard Drawings include process device symbols, valve and gate actuator symbols, and various details of piping and other installations that placed Pascal & Ludwig on notice of the nature and complexity of the plant facility operations. NOTICE INVITING BIDS. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. PROPOSAL AND BOND FORMS, AND DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS AND PLANS APRIL 1993 The detailed specifications and plans for this job also impose responsibility for work site conditions on Pascal and Ludwig. Special Provisions Section 50-9 [pg. 5] requires the Contractor to possess a General Engineering Contractor-Class "A" license. Such a license requires more specialized knowledge on the part of Pascal and Ludwig than a general contractor's license would involve. Detailed Specifications The scope of work under the job P2-49 is set forth in section 52-0300 [pg. 52-1] as comprising five independent projects. 1. Rectangular Butterfly valve 2. Canpressor Drain Piping 3. Pover Supply Replacement <. Batter System Discemects S. Fuse Replacement Section 52-0400 [pg. 52-1] pertaining to Job. No. P1-42 provides that compressed air is not available from the Districts. Thus, since the incident involved a pneumatic tool operated by compressed air provided by Pascal and Ludwig, the safe operation of such tools and equipment was the sole responsibility of Pascal and Ludwig. Section 52-0500 [pg. 52-1] pertaining to Job. No. P2-49 informs the Contractor that other Contractors will be working simultaneously in adjacent and other areas of the plant site and lists the following non-exclusive list of projects. P2-42-2 secondary Treatment Expensicn (5/93.5/93) P2.35-2 warehouse Building (8/93-8/96) P2-35-3 Maintenance Building (8/93-8/94) J-19-2 Central Generation Facilities (3190-6/93) P2-43-1 Miscellaneous Improvements (urgent) (5/93-9/94) James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. Department of Industrial Relations Division of Occupational Safety 6 Heath May 12, 1994 Page 11 P2-63-3 Miscetleneous 1wrovwrcnts (10/93.10-94) P2.43-2-1 seismic Retrofit of Neadwrds 6 end C (6/93.3-94) J-32-1 Einsl Eff(mrt seapler (5/93-12/93) P2-23-5.1 Operation Center Expansion (3/93.1/94) It should be noted that Pascal and Ludwig itself did work other than this job and was provided with information concerning plant operations in connection with these other projects. Plans In addition, the plans show site details of the entire plant facility and show the interrelationship and proximity of other areas of the plant with the particular work site. Meetinc With Pascal & Ludwic District representatives met with Pascal and Ludwig on numerous occasions to discuss this project, including the installation of the butterfly valve. These meetings occurred on October 25, 1993 , November 30, 1993 , December 6, 1993, December 13 , 1993 and January 26, 1993 . Copies of the minutes of these construction meetings are included with this packet. Furthermore, on December 13, 1993 , Pascal and Ludwig outlined their procedures for installation of the butterfly valve. A copy of this material is enclosed. As you are aware, the Cal-OSHA regulations do not specify the form of meetings to take place between a contractor and host employer, nor the manner in which information must be conveyed. The Districts submitted all available information of which it was aware to Pascal and Ludwig regarding safety considerations. This information is reflected in the contract specifications and associated documents enclosed herewith. Furthermore, the Districts met with Pascal and Ludwig on numerous occasions to ensure that the job was proceeding according to these plans and specifications. These actions were sufficient to comply with the intent of section 5157 . Conclusion While safety concerns uppermost in the Districts' priorities, the Districts simply had no actual awareness of additional information regarding potential dangers to provide to Pascal and Ludwig. Frankly, it is our understanding that the Cal-OSHA investigation confirms that there is still no such information available to provide any actual awareness of the type of danger James Treat Brown, C.S.P. , P.E. j Department of Industrial Relations Division of occupational Safety & Heath May 12, 1994 Page 12 where the incident occurred. It is our understanding that the cause of the incident has still not been discovered. We believe that both the foregoing legal and factual matters confirm that citation of the Districts by Cal-OSHA would be incorrect both from a factual and legal standpoint. While we are sending this letter by facimile today, the documents referred to in this letter will accompany the original which will be delivered to you tomorrow. We ask that Cal-OSHA consider this information in making its ultimate determination in this matter. Cordially, ROURKE�, WOODRUFF & SPRADLIN 1 - �` THO S F. NIXON TFN:tw:D:5/11/94 :N4331.tw cc: Thomas L. Woodruff, Esq. v COUMY SAWATION DISTINCTS d ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA tOeaa¢W8 AVENUE P.O.BOX 8127 F WAIN V1 Y.MIFO N1A 98)¢&8127 O1418822 11 RESOLUTIONS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS JUNE 8, 1994 - 7:30 P.M. FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4/27/94 PAGE DI 4 a REPORT NUMBER AP43 7 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05104/94 POSTING DATE 05104/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137284 AG TECH COMPANY $61,028.18 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9.91 137285 AMERICAN TELEPHONE&TELEGRAPH $969.10 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 137286 AT&T $579.24 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 137287 ACCELERATED POWER TECH $3,673.49 PUMP PARTS 137288 AGGREKO,INC. $14,816.72 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137289 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICAL INC. $17,788.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY.GEN SYST.M.0.8-8-89 137290 ALHAMBRA FOUNDRY CO.,LTD $355.06 MANHOLE COVER 137291 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $56.68 FREIGHT n 137292 AMERICAN CABLING B COMM. $210.11 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES m 137293 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSOC. $360.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION z 137294 ANAHEIM SEWER CONSTRUCTION $752.50 SEWER REPAIRS t7 137295 ANDCTER-DISTRIBUTION $2,9D4.36 CABINET L 137296 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $330.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137297 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $245.00 LAB SUPPLIES -q 137298 ABC LABORATORIES $1,990.00 LAB SERVICES M.O.1A-92 rn 137299 AQUATIC CENTER $220.00 AIR BOTTLES 3 137300 ARENS INDUSTRIES,INC. $1.900.63 INSTRUMENT PARTS Ri 137301 ARMOR-VAC $1.500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 00 137302 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $1.442.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 1 137303 ASSOCIATED VACUUM TECH.,INC. $158.61 COMPRESSOR PARTS ]a 137304 AA&C/ACORDIA $2,057.03 MEDICAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION r 137305 AMSA $7,485.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION r 137308 AUTO SHOP EQUIPMENT $246.26 TRUCK PART 137307 BFI PORTABLE SERVICES $104.81 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137308 BKK LANDFILL $34.746.56 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 N 137309 BRW SAFETY&SUPPLY $1,239.12 SAFETY SUPPLIES --q 137310 B OF A AS CUSTODIAN OF IRA ACCT. $14,902.91 DEFERRED COMP TRANSFER 137311 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $192.66 BATTERIES t, 137312 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $5.305.27 LAB SUPPLIES 137313 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. SMIA5 TRUCK WASH TICKETS N 137314 BELL SECURITY $2.720.60 SECURITY SERVICES 137315 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. $1,240.11 COMPRESSOR PARTS 137315 BIOMERIEUX VTTEK JNC. $1.041.22 LAB SUPPLIES 137317 BIOTECH NET,INC. $282.50 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137319 BIG VENTURES.INC. $162.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137319 BLACK&VEATCH $22.800.51 ENGINEERING SERVICES P146,J-25 137320 BLACK BOX CORP. $65.47 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 131321 BOERINGER MANNHEIM $362.49 LAB SUPPLIES 137322 BONA-RUES 5303.88 TRUCK PARTS 137323 BROOKLYN THERMOMETER CO.,INC. $153.47 LAB SUPPLIES 137324 BUSH&ASSOCIATES,INC. $9,632.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.G70.92 137325 BUY-CHEM DISTRIBUTORS $2,920.03 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1373M CEM CORPORATION $22.704.26 LAB EQUIPMENT 1373V C.L.TECHNOLOGY $720.00 GAS ANALYSIS 13732B C.P.I. $3.110.11 LAB SUPPLIES 197328 CRC PRESS,INC. $%4.90 LAB SUPPLIES D x FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4127194 PAGE 02 REPORT NUMBER AP43 n COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY N CLAIMS PAID 05AW94 POSTING DATE 05/04/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137330 CAD ONE,INC. $5,898.45 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137331 CAD VENTURES $365.58 COMPUTER SERVICES 137332 CALTROL,INC. $3.762.27 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137333 CALIFORNIA AUTO COLLISION,INC. E62 m TRUCK PARTS 137334 CAPITAL WESTWARD 5259.46 MECHANICAL PARTS 137335 CARLETON ENGINEERS $127.50 ENGINEERING SERVICES AIR QUALITY 137336 CENTREPOINT COMMERCIAL INT. $159.62 OFFICE FURNITURE 137337 CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $346.96 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137338 CHEMICAL ABSTRACTS SERVICE $210.00 SUBSCRIPTION 3� 137339 FIBERGRATE/CHEMWEST $1.169.09 PUMP PARTS Cl 137340 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $625.00 PUMP REPAIRS m z 137341 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $191.83 LAB SUPPLIES O 137342 COUCH AND SONS E20,007.00 CONSTRUCTION 5-37-4 n 137343 COUCH&SONS $354,314.70 CONSTRUCTION 11-17-1 137344 COMPUS0.1NC. $4.664.31 COMPUTER SOFTWARE - 1 137345 CONNEL GM PARTS I DIV. $450.91 TRUCK PARTS m 137346 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $12,814.78 ELECTRIC PARTS 3 137347 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO. $376.25 HARDWARE # 137348 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $1,382.44 TOOLS GD 137349 CONTINENTAL CHEMICAL CO. $2.230.43 CHLORINE M.O.10.9.91 1 137350 CONTINENTAL GRAPHICS 53D9.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES D 137351 COOPER INDUSTRIES,INC. $8,604.63 ENGINE PARTS 137352 COUNCIL ON EDUCATION $595.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION r 137353 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $3.117.31 ELECTRIC PARTS 0 137354 CRANE VEYOR CORP. 5221.02 PAINT SUPPLIES 137355 STATE OF CALIFORNIA - $16.561.00 STATE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE N 137356 D&D COMPRESSOR,INC. $255.29 VALVES 137357 DO ENGINEERING $80.00 TRUCK PARTS ��. 137358 DME,INC. $1,250.27 MECHANICAL PARTS 137359 A.DMGGER&COMPANY,INC. $364.00 LAB SUPPLIES (n 137360 J.W.OANGELO CO.,INC. $374.47 HARDWARE 137361 DAPPERTIRE $1,543.56 TIRES 137362 DE GUELLE&SONS GLASS CO. $457.59 GLASS 137363 DEPT.OF TOXIC SUBSTANCE CNTRL $1.094.00 TOXIC WASTE DISPOSAL 137364 DIATEC ENVIRONMENTAL $9,169.33 ANIONIC POLYMER M.0.8.11-93 137365 DIETERICH-POST CO. $24.52 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137366 DIFILIPPO ASSOCIATES $1,304.85 PRINTING 137367 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $879.30 COMPUTER SOFTWARE LICENCE 137368 DIONEX CORP. $5.848.68 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137369 DISPOSAL CONTROL SERVICE,INC. $7,917.48 HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL M.OA-13-92 137370 DOMAR ELECTRIC,INC. $21,456.00 ELECTRICAL REPAIRS 137371 ARNIDUNN,MFCC $900.00 EMERGENCY CONSULTING SERVICES 137372 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $671.23 PAINT SUPPLIES 137373 ESP NORTH $595.64 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 137374 EASTMAN.INC. $4.228.03 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137375 ELEC.AIR TOOL CO. $1,003.41 CONVEYOR PARTS 3- N 14 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4127194 PAGE 03 .� REPORT NUMBER AP43 3? COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY w CLAIMS PAID 05/04/94 POSTING DATE 05104194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137376 EMERGENCY MGMT NETWORK $3.760.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 137377 EMERY WORLDWIDE $236.86 FREIGHT 137378 ENCHANTER,INC. $5,040.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6-10-92 137379 ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT,INC. $2,000.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 137380 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $359.60 LAB SERVICES 137381 FMC CORP. S480.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137382 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $54,429.28 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0./0.9.91 137383 FARWEST TOWING $65.00 TOWING SERVICES 137384 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $273.00 AIR FREIGHT D 137385 FILTERLINE CORP. $256.55 PUMP PARTS m 137386 FILTER SUPPLY CO. $13.864.04 FILTERS 137387 FISCHER B PORTER CO. $294.60 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES Ly 137388 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $245,21 LAB SUPPLIES Y 137389 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $242.20 LAB SUPPLIES 137390 FLAT AND VERTICAL,INC. $164.00 CONCRETE CUTTING 137391 FLO-SYSTEMS $5,699.07 PUMP PARTS m 137392 FOOTHILL PROJECT MANAGEMENT $714.00 RESIDENT NOTIFICATION SERVICES 3 137393 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $76.68 PHOTO SUPPLIES ii 137394 EST,INC. $16.199.07 OFFICE SUPPLIES W 137395 GATES FIBERGLASS INSTALLERS $3,469.75 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 137396 GENERAL BINDING CORP. $130.41 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137397 GENERAL CABLE CORP. $824.30 INSTRUMENT PARTS D 137398 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $510.32 ELECTRIC PARTS r 137399 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $1.877.14 TELEPHONE SERVICES 137400 GENE TRAK SYSTEMS $711.36 LAB SUPPLIES 137401 GIERLICH-MITCHELL,INC. $18,828.50 MECHANICAL PARTS (/1 137402 GLOBAL GEOCHEMISTRY CORP. $2.512.50 LAB SERVICES 137403 GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES,INC. $82.00 PUBLICATIONS 137404 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $272.14 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES t--1 137405 GRASSY S.T.I. $2.630.33 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 137406 THOMAS GRAY B ASSOC.,INC. $37.00 LAB SERVICES N 137407 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $2.955.92 PRINTING 137408 DGA CONSULTANTS $11,630.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6.10.92 137409 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $1,273.21 PUMP PARTS 137410 HACH COMPANY $842.39 LAB SUPPLIES 137411 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $5.946.22 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137412 HAWIONS ASSOCIATES $1,392.00 LAB EQUIPMENT 137413 PL HAWN CO,INC. $32.923.04 FILTERS 137414 HELLO $187.10 TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT 137415 HILTI,INC. $638.75 HARDWARE 137416 HOERBIGER CVS CALIF.,INC. $157.00 COMPRESSOR PARTS 137417 HOME DEPOT $279.37 HARDWARE 137418 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $2,621.02 PAINT SUPPLIES 137419 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $46.488.98 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.0.11.18-92 137420 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY SHOE CO. $3,119.16 SAFETY SHOES 137421 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $741A0 CONNECTORS FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 427/94 PAGE04 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY r CLAIMS PAID O501/94 POSTING DATE 05/04/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137422 INLAND EMPIRE EQUIPMENT CO. $382.62 TRUCK PARTS 137423 INORGANIC VENTURES 5755.80 LAB SUPPLIES 137424 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $526.57 BATTERIES 137425 JAMISON ENGINEERING $1,400.00 PIPING 137426 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $1,677.08 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137427 JAPAN LANDSCAPING,INC. $16,775.00 LANDSCAPING 137420 JAVID CONTRACTORS,INC. $4.197.50 CONSTRUCTION P2-23-5-1 137429 JIM'S SUSPENSION SERVICE $25.00 TRUCK REPAIRS 137430 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $95.81 ELECTRIC PARTS n 137431 JONES INDUSTRIAL 1ARDWARE CO. $187.81 HARDWARE I''l 137432 KARV ADVANCED MATERIALS,INC. $10,000.00 ENGINE ANALYSIS Z 137433 THE KEITH COMPANIES $4.831.80 ENGINEERING SERVICES 3-36R 137434 KING BEARING,INC. $2,727.40 MACHINE SUPPLIES n 137435 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $2.692.79 TOOLS 137436 KURTZ INSTRUMENTS,INC. $102.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS m 137437 LA MOTTE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS $188.64 CHEMICALS 3 137438 LATRONICS $646.44 VIDEO RECORDER-TRAINING it 137439 LEE B RO CONSULTING ENGR. $68,724.09 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI4&1 OO 137440 LIMITOROUE CORP. $610AS ELECTRIC PARTS 137"1 LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INS.CO. $72,185.74 DEFERRED COMP TRANSFER 137442 LORAIN PRODUCTS $1,251.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT y 137443 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $3.554.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.&I&92 r 137444 MACOMCO $105.55 SERVICE AGREEMENT r 137445 MSA $233.53 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES ty 137446 MARVAC ELECTRONICS $56.51 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137441 MATRIX SERVICE,INC. $13,545.85 DIGESTER GAS HOLDER REPAIRS M.O.11-10-93 N 137440 MEMBREX $1,086.73 LAB SUPPLIES 137440 MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS $73,695.20 COP REMARKETING AGREEMENT 137450 MICROBIAL INSIGHTS,INC. $916A3 CONSULTING SERVICES M.0.11-18-92 C'T 137451 MIDWAY MFG 6 MACHINING $5.158.58 PUMP PARTS N 137452 MILLER CONSTRUCTION CO. $3.468.00 OFFICE REMODELING 137453 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,737.22 UNIFORM RENTALS 137454 MITCHELL INTERNATIONAL $265.00 PUBLICATION 137455 MOORE INDUSTRIES $2,470.82 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137456 MOORE PRODUCTS CO. $3.404.90 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137457 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $1.868.34 PUMP PARTS 137458 NEC INFORMATION SYSTEMS $275.02 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137459 NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS $126.60 BOOKS 137460 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $2.101.92 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137461 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $59.05 WATER USE 137462 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $123.27 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137463 ORANGE COURIER $133.65 COURIER SERVICES 137464 ORANGE VALVE B FITTING CO. $1.938.78 FITTINGS 137465 ORION PRINTING 6 DESIGN $1.605.40 PRINTING 137466 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT $5.369.90 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 137467 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $134,745.00 GAP WATER USE r FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4127194 PAGE 05 n REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY Lj1 CLAIMS PAID O5W/94 POSTING DATE 05104194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137468 PARASITOLOGY RESEARCH LABS $750.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137469 PSSI $1.502.74 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 137470 PACIFIC PARTS $72.09 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137471 PACIFIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT CO. $3,402.18 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137472 PACIFIC BELL $169.06 TELEPHONE SERVICES 137473 PACIFIC BELL $6,567.46 TELEPHONE CABLE RELOCATION 137474 PACIFIC WALK-IN MEDICAL $110.00 MEDICAL EXAMS 137475 PAK WEST $103.37 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES n 137476 PARTS UNLIMITED $426.37 TRUCK PARTS 137477 PASCAL&LUDWIG.INC. $236,036.65 CONSTRUCTION PI-38-2 m 137478 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $1.080.40 LAB SUPPLIES Z 137479 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $143,558.45 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.5-8-91 C 137460 PITNEY BOWES CREDIT CORP. $183.18 SERVICE AGREEMENT a 13748 POLYMETRIC $ 6 . SERVICE AGREEMENT 137482 POLVPURE,INC. E0.66 4.92 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3-11-92 n 137483 POST,BUCKLEY,SCHUH&JERNIGAN $1.530.50 ENGINEERING SERVICES 2-9-R1 3 137484 POWER ELECTRO SUPPLY CO. $549.00 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137466 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $84.00 ICE ODO 137486 PUBLIC FINANCIAL MONT.,INC. $863.86 FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES 137487 PULSAFEEDER $199.69 PUMP PARTS 137488 PLITZMEISTER,INC. $2,514.59 PUMP PARTS 3. 137489 QUEST MEDIA&SUPPLIES $562.19 OFFICE EQUIPMENT r 137490 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $1,035.69 ELECTRIC MOTORS f" 137491 BOLT DELIVERY $159.00 FREIGHT C7 137492 RICH ROBERTSON $2,232.50 CONNECTION FEE REFUND 137493 ROYCE PRODUCTIONS $8,500.00 PUBLIC INFO.VIDEO PRODUCTION --1 137494 SAFETY CARE,INC. $193.94 SAFETY FILM RENTAL .� 137495 MATTHEW SALABEN $260.00 VEHICLE CLAIM ("t 137496 SANCON ENGINEERING,INC. $7.160.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES __q 137497 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $798.95 PLUMBING SUPPLIES to 137498 DOUG SARVIS $375.00 CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING 137499 SCHULER ENGINEERING CORP. $62,459.28 CONSTRUCTION 5.36 137500 STEPHEN SCHULTZ $548.41 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 137501 SCHWING AMERICA $1.692.81 PUMP PARTS 137502 SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS $4.165.29 LAB SUPPLIES 137503 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $272.64 SPECIALTY GASES 137604 SENSOR-MEDICS CORPORATION $593.61 LAB SUPPLIES 137505 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $2,288.35 TOOLS 137506 SHURELUCK SALES $7.263.39 TOOLS/HARDWARE 137507 SIEVERS INSTRUMENTATION $178.68 LAB SUPPLIES 137508 SIMS RARE&SPECIALTY GASES $110.05 SPECIALTY GASES 137509 SKALAR,INC. $611.56 LAB SUPPLIES 137510 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $844.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 137511 MATT SMITH $860.67 DEFERRED COMP PAY-OFF 137512 SOUTH COAST WATER $488.66 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137513 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $34,648.38 POWER FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4/27IN PAGE 06 REPORT NUMBER AP43 I COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY m CLAIMS PAID 05104/94 POSTING DATE 05/04194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137514 SO CALIF EDISON CO. $9,052.00 POWER CABLE RELOCATION 137515 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $19.934.14 NATURALGAS 137516 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $5.659.50 DIESEL/UNLEADED FUEL 137517 WESTALLOY,INC. $932.03 WELDING SUPPLIES 137518 GARY G.STREED $4.926.76 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL 137519 SUMMIT STEEL $660.72 METAL 137520 SUPELCO,INC. $304.09 LAB SUPPLIES 137521 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $34.43 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 137522 SUPER CHEM CORP. $4/462 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES CD 137523 SURVEYORS SERVICE CO. $59A0 TOOLS m 137524 SYMANTEC CORP $11570 COMPUTER SOFTWARE z 137525 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG.COMPANY $890,11 TRUCK PARTS :r. 137526 TEKTRONIX,INC. $298.73 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137527 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $3.203.05 MECHANICAL PARTS 137528 TOLEDO SCALE CORP. $930,00 SERVICE AGREEMENT m 137529 TONY'S LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $180.00 LOCKS&KEYS 3 137530 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $478.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.0.7-13.93 3t 137531 TREBOR ELECTRONICS $441.76 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 00 137532 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $687.38 TRUCK PARTS 137533 TRUESDAIL LABS $4,046.91 LAB SERVICES 137534 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $2,856.70 INSTRUMENT PARTS n 137535 TUTHILL CORP/COPPUS DIV. $784.85 VENTILATOR r 137536 TWINING LABORATORIES $3.608.72 LAB SERVICES r 137538 UVP.INC. $253.00 LAB SUPPLIES d 137539 ULTRA NITED PARCEL $253.00 LAB SUPPVERY ES !n 137640 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE _ .474.28 DELIVERY SERVICES 137541 VWR SCIENTIFIC $1,831.43 FIT SUPPLIES � 137541 VALIN CORPORATION E831.43 FITTINGS n 137542 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $6,324.03 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137543 VAN WATER&ROGERS $115.94 CHEMICALS N 137544 VETREE SERVICE,INC. $10,000.00 LANDSCAPING 137545 VILLAGE NURSERIES S20.78 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 137546 CARL WARREN&CO. $300.00 LIABILITY CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 137647 ALLAN WATTLES $3.432.45 OEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 13754E K.H.WATTS CO. $2,022.11 VALVE 137549 ASS DRIVES $365.35 VFD PARTS 137550 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $16.174.34 CAUSTIC SODA M.O.B-12-92 137551 WEST-CITE SUPPLY CO. $1,088.67 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137552 WILLARD MARKING DEVICES $45.26 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137553 WITEG $856.61 LAB SUPPLIES 137654. ROURKE,WOODRUFF&SPRADLIN $73,935.22 LEGAL SERVICES M.0.2-19.92 137555 WORDPERFECT $195.00 PUBLICATION 137556 XEROX CORP. $14.813.19 COPIER LEASES 137657 E.L.YEAGER CONSTRUCTION CO. $11,446.00 SECURITY FENCING y TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 05/04/94 $2,191,23M99 c� 4 , FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 427/94 PAGE 07 n REPORT NUMBER AP43 :m. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY V CLAIMS PAID OSM4194 POSTING DATE 05MI94 SUMMARY AMOUNT 91 OPER FUND $7,035.85 92 OPER FUND 21.366.59 92 CAP FAG FUND 19,499.96 93 OPER FUND 31,738.15 93 CAP FAC FUND 4,831.80 y 95 OPER FUND 10,125.01 Cl 95 CAP FAC FUND 62,459.28 rn z 960PER FUND 4,693.47 p #7 OPER FUND 7.529.98 n 911 OPER FUND 7.129.37 911 CAP FAC FUND 358,580.30 --1 913 0PER FUND 100.60 m #14OPERFUND 847.79 3 914 CAP FAC FUND 11,630.00 Rt 95860PER FUND 20,007.00 00 978140PERFUND 14.70 I dT OPER FUND 796.460.68 b CORF 518,697.10 T-- SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 11,959.60 f'- dT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 294,523.02 b E2.191.230.99 N C-i cn N D V FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/1V94 PAGE 01 REPORT NUMBER AP43 I COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY I-' CLAIMS PAID 51IM4 POSTING DATE 5/18194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137591 AG TECH COMPANY $55.689.88 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10-9-91 1375112 AT&T $310.43 FAX SERVICES 137503 AT&T $1.39 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 137594 AWWAANQT CONFERENCE $567.00 TRAINING PUBLICATION 137595 ACOUSTICAL MATL SERVICES $537.89 BUILDING MATERIALS 1375N ADVANCO CONSTRUCTORS,INC. $417,736.38 CONSTRUCTION PI-36A 137597 AIR COLD SUPPLY,INC. $105.24 COMPRESSOR PARTS 137598 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $17,788.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.M.89 137599 ALDUS CORP. $169.58 OFFICE EQUIPMENT D 137600 AMELCO CONSTRUCTION $162,831.60 CONSTRUCTION P2-53-1 n' 137WI ANGEL SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS $1,241.65 LAB SUPPLIES Z 1370M ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $2,399.68 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 9 13T61q A-PLUS SYSTEMS $805.08 NOTICES&ADS 137604 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS, INC. $605.30 LAB SUPPLIES 137M ABC LABORATORIES $3,110.00 LAB SERVICES T137608 AQUATIC CENTER $360.00 AIR TANKS 3 137807 AMSA $495.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 13761M ATKIWJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $642.60 SERVICE AGREEMENT *h 137809 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $833.85 LAB SUPPLIES 00 137610 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $4,172.33 PAYROLL SERVICES 1 137611 BC WIRE ROPE&RIGGING $2D4.73 CABLE D 137612 BKK LANDFILL $2,876.34 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10-9-91 I— 137613 BANANA BLUEPRINT $4.742.36 PRINTING M.0.10-1D-90 r 137614 BASLER ELECTRIC $1.448.13 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES L7 137615 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $782.22 BATTERIES 137016 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $11,623.06 LAB SUPPLIES U) 137617 BELL SECURITY $3.927.62 SECURITY SERVICES A 137816 SIOMERIEUX VITEK,INC. $155.47 LAB SUPPLIES 137019 BLACK&VEATCH $10.813.79 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-25.1 Cn137620 BLACK BOX CORP. $1.565.65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 4 13MI 130ERINGER MANNHEIM $177.16 LAB SUPPLIES 137622 BON-A-RUES $88.00 TRUCK PARTS 137623 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $32,277.12 ENGINEERING SERVICES 7.18 137624 BRENNER-FIEDLER&ASSOC..INC. $255.27 LAB SUPPLIES 137025 BUDGETJANITORIAL $3.330.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 13MB BUY-CHEM DISTRIBUTORS $1,130.73 JANITORIAL SERVICES 137627 CEPA $1.360.00 LAB CERTIFICATION 137828 C.L.TECHNOLOGY S720.00 GAS ANALYSIS 137629 CMI $525.85 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137630 CS COMPANY $36.180.62 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137631 CALTROL $112.63 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137632 CWPCATCP $975.00 REIMBURSABLE TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION 137633 CALSCIENCE ENVIRONMENTAL LABS $3.070.00 LAB SERVICES 137OU DENNIS CANAVAN $22,000.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 137635 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $807.50 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-33 137636 CASHCO $113.95 VALVE a Od f r z FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 511V94 PAGE 02 n REPORT NUMBER AP43 10 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY N CLAIMS PAID 5/16194 POSTING DATE 5118194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137637 CENTURY SAFETY INST.B SUPPLY $786A7 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137638 FIBERGRATE/CHEMWEST $13,156.71 PUMP PARTS 137639 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $81.16 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137640 COLD SPRING HARBOR $65.00 LAB EQUIPMENT 137041 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $207.35 PUMP SUPPLIES 137642 COUCH 8 SONS $1.497.00 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 137643 COMPUSA,INC. $489.45 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137644 COMPUSERVE $123.96 COMPUTER SERVICES 137645 CONNEL GM PARTS/DIV. $26.93 TRUCK PARTS OD-) 137646 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $3,557.69 ELECTRIC PARTS Z 137647 CONSOLIDATED REPOGRAPHICS $119.65 PRINTING SERVICES rj 137648 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $319.05 TOOLS 137649 CONTINENTAL CHEMICAL CO. $2.230.43 CHLORINE M.O.104)91 137650 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $6.200.47 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.8-11-93,7-17-91 137651 COOPER INDUSTRIES,INC. $357.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 3 137652 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $710.74 TRUCK PARTS 137653 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $1,112.46 ELECTRIC PARTS # 137654 DBH TRUCK EQUIPMENT $3.043.94 TRUCK PARTS 00 137655 DAILY PILOT $49.60 NOTICES&ADS 137656 DAYTON SUPERIOR $518.49 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137857 DE ANZA CORPORATION $150.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137658 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF $99.809.57 EMPLOYEE DENTAL PLAN M.0.1-12-94 r 137659 DEZURICK ANDIOR CS CO. $96.50 FREIGHT 137660 DIATEC ENVIRONMENTAL $4,584.65 ANIONIC POLYMER M.0.8-11.93 d 137661 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $2,252.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT N 137662 DORADO ENTERPRISES,INC. $727.50 PLANT MAINTENANCE&REPAIRS 137663 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $820.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE a 137664 ERI INTER-BIO $3.679.57 LAB SERVICES n 137665 EASTMAN,INC. $3,451.60 OFFICE SUPPLIES —I 137656 EDWARDS DIV.OF GS BLDG SYS. $430.40 INSTRUMENT PART N 137667 ENCHANTER,INC. $5,040.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.610-92 137668 ESSCO PUMPS AND CONTROLS $305.18 PUMP PARTS 137669 ENTECH LAB AUTOMATION $3,244.25 LAB SUPPLIES 137670 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $359.60 LAB SERVICES 137671 ERDCO ENGINEERING CORP. $6.511.51 METERS 137672 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $9.880.00 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9-91 137673 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $443.70 AIR FREIGHT 137674 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $282.55 LAB SUPPLIES 137575 FLEET WASHING SYSTEMS,INC. $2.182.16 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137676 FLO-SYSTEMS $1.371.46 PUMP PARTS 137677 FOSS MARITIME CO. $1.767.60 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137678 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA 5482.95 PHOTO SUPPLIES 137679 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $2,308.86 HAZMAT INSPECTIONS 137600 GMF SOUND,INC. $89.61 TELEPHONE PARTS 137681 DST,INC. $12.939.57 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137682 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $135.12 LUMBERMAROWARE Lx1 N FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE SH2194 PAGE03 REPORT NUMBER AP43 Ib COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY W CLAIMS PAID 5118/94 POSTING DATE 5118/90 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137683 GANNET DIRECT MARKETING $269.D0 TRAINING REGISTRATION 137684 CITY OF GARDEN GROVE $6,349.98 SEWER REPAIRS DIST3 137685 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $3,966.69 TELEPHONE SERVICES 137686 GENE TRAK SYSTEMS $711.36 LAB SUPPLIES 137687 GIERLICH-MITCHELL,INC. $9,655.56 MECHANICAL PARTS 137688 GRASBY S.T.I. $5,865.01 ENGINE PARTS 137689 DGA CONSULTANTS $7,260.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6-IM2 137690 GROTH EQUIPMENT CORP. $127.76 FREIGHT 137691 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $147.73 TOOLS 137692 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $1.650.00 CONTAINER RENTALS TrI 137693 PL HAWN CO.INC. $8.226A2 FILTERS 2 137694 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2,083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. C 137695 HEWLETTPACKARD $2.940.00 SERVICEAGREEMENT D 137696 HEWLETT PACKARD COMPANY $276.93 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137697 HILTI,INC. $157.32 WELDING SUPPLIES fn 137698 HOLMES 8 NARVER.INC. $60.932.27 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI-44 3 137699 HOME DEPOT $43.54 HARDWARE :vh 137700 IRS HUGHES CO.INC. $463.07 PAINT SUPPLIES 00 137701 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH $15,076.50 WATER USE 137702 HUNTINGTON ENG.S EVIRON. $2.800.00 CONSULTING SERVICES M.0.11-18-92 137703 HUNTINGTON SIGNAL OIL CO. $16.14 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 137704 HUNTINGTON VALLEY SCHWINN $136.67 BICYCLE PARTS r 137705 HUNTS FINAL PHASE $4,370A0 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES f" 137708 HYTORIC OF CALIFORNLA $479.38 GAUGE p 137707 IRD MECHANALYSIS $1.841.17 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137708 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $54,857.36 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11-18-92 N 137709 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $540.24 CONNECTORS 137710 INGRAM PAPER $617.23 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137711 INSTRUMENT SOCIETY OF AMERICA $412.50 INSTRUMENT PARTS n 137712 IBM FULFILLMENT HEADQUARTERS $84.99 LAB SUPPLIES N 137713 IRVINE PHOTO GRAPHICS $41.82 PHOTO SERVICES 137714 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $101.07 WATER USE 137715 JBWSCIENTIFIC $843.77 LAB SUPPLIES 137716 JAMISON ENGINEERING $16.211.20 ENGINEERING SERVICES 137717 JAVID CONTRACTORS,INC. $13.810.92 CONSTRUCTION P2-23-5-1 137718 JAYS CATERING $322.44 DIRECTORS'MEETING EXPENSE 137719 JIM'S SUSPENSION SERVICE $50.00 TRUCK REPAIRS 137720 KAMAN BEARINGS&SUPPLY 5452.61 ELECTRIC PARTS 137721 KING BEARING,INC. $1,111.43 MACHINE SUPPLIES 137722 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $154.62 TOOLS 137723 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $830.51 CELLULAR TELEPHONE CHARGES 137724 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY CO. $219.15 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137725 LAUNDERLAND $182.96 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 137726 LEARN KEY $145.02 PUBLICATION 137727 LEG4TECH 1320.00 COMPUTER SERVICES 137728 LEE B RO CONSULTING ENGR. $32,129.82 ENGINEERING SERVICES P1-38-5,P140.2 Iz W FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE W12194 PAGE 04 n REPORT NUMBER AP43 w COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY r CLAIMS PAID 5/18194 POSTING DATE 5118/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137729 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $4.533.98 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIRONMENTAL 137730 LIQUID AIR CORP. $1,696.07 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137731 MDT BIOLOGIC COMPANY $477.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137732 MACOMCO $520.65 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137M MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $517,067.00 CONSTRUCTION P242-2 137T34 MARVAC ELECTRONICS $135.66 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 13MS MATT-CHLOR,INC. $4.461.39 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 137736 MCMAHAN DESK,INC. $2,280.48 OFFICE FURNITURE n 137737 MEMBREX $637.75 LAB SUPPLIES 13773E MERIDIAN DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $443.00 LAB SUPPLIES m 137739 MICRO MOTION $520.58 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES z 137740 MIDLAND MFG.CORP. $252.06 VALVE C7 n 137741 MIDWAY MFG.8 MACHINING $1,071.81 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 137743 MISSION I A WESTERN VISUAL PRES. 859.23 LAB SUPPLIES 137713 MISSION INDUSTRIES E4,859.23 UNIFORM RENTALS m 137744 MONTGOMERY LABORATORIES $1.580.OD LAB SERVICES 3 137745 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $5.172,73 FITTINGS # 137746 MOTOROLA,INC. $211,87 INSTRUMENT PARTS 00 137747 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL 870.35 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 137746 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $919.00 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137749 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $316.93 INSTRUMENT PARTS ➢ 137750 NI INDUSTRIES $452.90 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT r 137751 OI CORPORATION $2.69 LAB SUPPLIES r- 137752 DX SYSTEMS CO. $6,977.74 CHLORINE M.0.11-18.92 CJ 137753 ORANGE COAST PETROLEUM EQUIP. $1.305.76 TRUCK PARTS N 137764 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $300.21 TRUCK PARTS _{ 137755 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL $1.024,64 LAB SUPPLIES A 137756 ORANGE COUNTY FARM SUPPLY $1.991.87 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 137767 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $287.02 ELECTRIC PARTS ti 137758 ORANGE COURIER $69.10 COURIER SERVICES 137769 ORANGE VALVE 8 FITTING CO. $5,080.12 FITTINGS 137760 COUNTY OF ORANGE $2.220.00 DATA PROCESSING SERVICES 137761 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 515,705AS REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP CLAIMS 137762 PACCO SALES $246.48 PAINT SUPPLIES 137763 PACIFIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT,INC. $941.81 PUMP PARTS 137764 PACIFIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT CO. $1,924.68 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137765 PACIFIC WATER CONDITIONING CO. $188.40 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 137766 PAGENET $1.171.66 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137767 PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $1.126.30 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.8-12-91 137768 PAN VERA CORP. $290.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137769 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 137770 PARTS UNLIMITED $205.67 TRUCK PARTS 137771 PASCAL B LUDWIG ENGINEERS $19,213.00 CONSTRUCTION J-32 137772 PASCAL 8 LUDWIG,INC. $87.690.40 CONSTRUCTION P1-38.2 137M PASCAL 8 LUDWIG $98.140.00 CONSTRUCTION P2J531 137774 PIERCE CHEMICAL COMPANY $78.0D LAB SUPPLIES bC r FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/12/94 PAGE 05 REPORT NUMBER AP43 w COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY I CLAIMS PAID 5/18%4 POSTING DATE 5/18/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137775 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS.INC. $156,335.98 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.5-8-91 137776 PLAINS TRUEVALUE HARDWARE $199.43 HARDWARE 137777 POLY ENTERPRISES,INC. $347.49 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137778 POLYPURE,INC. E23,93B.73 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3.11-92 137779 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $42.00 ICE 137780 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $250.29 SOIL TESTING 13TFBI PULSAFEEDER $4.344.72 PUMP PARTS 137782 PUTZMEISTER,INC. $794.29 PUMP PARTS 137763 QUEST MEDIA&SUPPLIES $10.550.96 COMPUTER SOFTWARE n 137784 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1.662.71 TRASH REMOVAL C71 137785 BOLT DELIVERY $85.05 FREIGHT 2 137786 REISH MARINE STUDIES,INC. $480.00 OCEAN MONITORING C 137787 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $4,312.03 PLUMBING SUPPLIES Y 137788 ROBINSON FERTILIZER CO. $2,074.13 CHEMICALS 137789 ROSOZ SURGICAL INSTRUMENT CO. $92.55 LAB SUPPLIES 137790 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL $129.65 INSTRUMENT PARTS m 137791 ROYAL WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $301.05 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 3 137793 S C E C f24,$96.97 SOURCE TESTING 00 137783 SAFETY CARE,INC. 621.00 SAFETY FILM RENTAL 00 137795 SANTA AENGINEERING, INC. $1,730.00 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 13TT96 SANTA FE I ELECTRIC MOTORS E$217.65 ELECTRIC MOTOR 137786 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS f217.65 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 7n- 137797 DOUG SARVIS $3,000.00 CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING 1- 137798 SCHWING AMERICA E661.80 PUMP PARTS ' �y 137790 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $499.95 SPECIALTY GASES 137800 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $331.68 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES N 137901 SHEPHERD MACHINERY CO. f294.12 ENGINE PARTS A 137802 SHURELUCK SALES $8,215.55 TOOLSIHARDWARE 137803 SIGMA CHEMICAL WALK-IN $$77.11 LAB SUPPLIES Cl 137804 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC f77.11 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS N 137805 SOFFA ELECTRIC,INC. $31.139.50 CONSTRUCTION 3-28 137808 SOUTH BAY FOUNDRY,INC. E2,338.17 MANHOLE COVERS 137807 SO.COAST AIR QUALITY 9293.62 PERMIT FEES 137BOB SOUTH COAST ENVIRONMENTAL CO. $12,718.40 EMISSIONS TESTING 137809 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $96.753.00 POWER 137810 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $22.613.41 NATURAL GAS 137811 SO.CALIF.WATER CO. $26.08 WATER USE 137812 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $2,930.52 DIESELfUNLEADED FUEL 137813 SOUVENIR PHOTO $10.41 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 137814 SPEX INDUSTRIES,INC. $879.35 LAB SUPPLIES 137015 STERLING ART $185.64 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137016 STEVENS WATER MONITORING SYST. $18.761.48 MONITORING SYSTEM 137BIT GARY G.STREED $2.399.77 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING 8 TRAVEL 137818 SUNSETFORD $57.74 TRUCK PARTS 137619 SUPELCO, INC. $118.70 LAB SUPPLIES 137820 SUPER CHEM CORP. $343.50 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES OCI FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 51IVNI PAGE 06 CO REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAIDSH8194 POSTING DATE SH8194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137621 SUPER POWER PRODUCTS E155AB JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137822 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG.COMPANY $1.060.13 TRUCK PARTS 137823 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $449.02 HARDWARE 137824 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $1,907.50 TRAVEL SERVICES M.0.7-13-93 137925 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $164.74 TRUCK PARTS 1378H TRUESDAIL LABS $2,374.11 LAB SERVICES 137827 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $841.63 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137828 MHILL CORP/COPPUS DIV. $6,948.05 MECHANICAL PARTS y 137829 U.S.C.SPONSORED PROJECTS ACCT. $1.674.01 AIR QUALITY PROJECT +n 137830 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC E768.OD LAB SUPPLIES fn 137831 UNOCAL CHEMICALS&MINERALS $8,775.40 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT z n 137832 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $546.77 49 LARCELSERVICES 137833 VWR SCIENTIFIC $1,347.86 PLUMBIAB NPUES G 737834 VALLEY CRIES SUPPLY CO. E7,347.85 PLUMBING SUPPLIES --I 137835 VARIIN ANALYTICAL INSTRUMENTS $3,236.80 LAB SUPPLIES m 137836 VULCAN PEROXIDATION SYSTEMS $75,917.63 CHEMICALS 3 137837 WARRINGTON $147.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137838 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $17,776.50 CAUSTIC SODA M.0.8-12-92 00 137839 WINONICS,INC. E6D9.87 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT I 137840 XEROX CORP. $310.32 PRINTING SUPPLIES n E2,831.732.B6 r r ty SUMMARY AMOUNT #1OPERFUND - $162.50 02 0PER FUND 6,057.51 02 CAP FAC FUND 1.366.92 t'1 83 0PER FUND 26,921.59 n #3 CAP FAC FUND 15,779.68 05 OPER FUND 2.091.4 05 CAP FAC FUND 2,091.48 06 OPER FUND 115.00 07 OPER FUND 6,044.03 #7 CAP FAC FUND 10,392.04 #11 OPER FUND 7.792.19 #11 CAP FAC FUND 60.95 #13 OPER FUND 32.86 014 OPER FUND 57.24 014 CAP FAC FUND 8.699.68 #5&6 OPER FUND 2.329.25 #5&6 CAP FAC FUND 780.01 #6&7 OPER FUND 2,858.62 07914 OPER FUND 6,102.02 JT OPER FUND 6",903.95 CORF 1,619,112.79 I SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 117,598.35 m JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 160,068.80 f2,831.732.88 May 12,1994 - COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS AI ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA MEMORANDUM 'O EW5AVCWE I PO.BOX B127 rOYMUN VALLEY.CALWORNIA 92726-0127 To: J.Wayne Sylvester, General Manager a141989Q411 From: Katherine yarosh, Senior Buyer Re: PURCHASE OF MICROCOMPUTER HARDWARE,SOFTWARE AND ASSOCIATED PERIPHERALS, SPECIFICATION NO.9-243 Sealed bids were Opened May 10.1994,for the Purchase of Microcomputer Hardware, Software and Associated Peripherals. Tabulation of bids Is as follows: Vendor Price GST, Inc, S 43,125.00 Cerritos PC Systems Design $47,281.50 Costa Mesa Connecting Point Computer Center S 47,320.00 Mission Viejo Mlcroage Computer S 49,107.00 Fountain Valley Computer Bay $49,309.00 Huntington Beach COMP USA NPBID Fountain Valley Forbes Computer Group, Inc. NO-BID Anaheim The above Cost figures represent nineteen(19)different Items of various quantities. Bid proposals were received from seven vendors. Analyzing all bids,staff recommends award to GET,Inc.,the lowest responsive bidder for all Items, for a total Cost Of S43,125.00, plus applicable sales tax. Respectfully Submitted, 11 l O.A—lW1AlYt11 1 OJ1" Katherine yarosh Senior Buyer we here�y conloir with the foregoing recommendations: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager Ttelie Hovey, (Gary 0.Streed, Information Services Manager Director of Finance "C" AGENDA ITEM #9(a) - ALL DISTRICTS "C" COUNTY SANITATION Dimas 0 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA ` 1p 44 EWS AVENUE n.o.Box 81E7 A0UWNNVAU.EV.LAU10AN1A 89z&Stz) n141M-2A11 June 1, 1994 STAFF REPORT PROPOSED PURCHASE OF INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA EMISSION SPECTROMETER, SPECIFICATION NO. E-244 IN SUMMARY The Environmental Sciences Laboratory is responsible for analyzing metals in wastewater and source control samples. This work is non-discretionary in that it supports both the wastewater monitoring program and the industrial source control program which are required by the Districts' National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Ocean Discharge Permit. The routine quarterly source control samples, down-stream enforcement samples, and industrial source control special project samples are now analyzed by flame atomic absorption (FAA) separately for each metal element. The wastewater samples am now analyzed by graphite fumace atomic absorption (GFAA) separately for each element, except beryllium, copper, and zinc which are analyzed with an inductively coupled plasma emission- spectrometer (ICPES). Laboratory staff is recommending that a Thermo Jarrell Ash 11US/AP ICPES be purchased. The IRIS/AP will yield a shorter analysis time with comparable accuracy and precision to the GFAA The IRIS/AP is approximately ten times more accurate and precise than both the FAA and the existing ICPES. BACKGROUND The Districts' Laboratory annually analyzes approximately 5,600 samples which are routine quarterly source control samples, down-stream enforcement samples, industrial source control special project samples, and EPA-required quality assurance samples including blanks, duplicates, external reference samples, and spiked samples to ensure the accuracy of the analyses for a total of approximately 39,000 metal constituents. The Laboratory also analyzes 900 wastewater samples for a total of 6,405 metal constituents annually in the influent and final effluent including the quality assurance analyses and instantaneous maximum samples. Source Control samples are currently analyzed using FAA. When the metal concentration is higher than the source control limit, the sample is reanalyzed on the existing ICPES to ensure the high reading is not due to a matrix affect. The existing ICPES has an extensive down- time of approximately 40 percent and has inconsistent performance, in that it frequently fails established quality assurance controls and requires repeating the analysis until acceptable quality is obtained. This is due to systemic design problems. The new ICPES will replace 99 percent of the uses of the Varian FAA and 86 percent of the Varian GFAA workload. These instruments were installed at the Districts approximately five years ago. The instruments are used in a highly corrosive environment, because all samples for metals "D-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(b) - ALL DISTRICTS "D-1" analyses are prepared by adding nitric and hydrochloric acids prior to analysis. The samples are then introduced into the instruments' sample chambers. Consequently, acid fumes permeate the area where the ICPES, GFAA, and FAA are used. Both instruments show evidence of corrosion. The circuit boards have dull, pitted electrical components and solder. Rust is present on the valves and fittings. The Zeeman background correction magnet on the GFAA is beginning to crack. The GFAA autosampler is failing approximately once every two months. The gas controller on the FAA failed four times this year. It is becoming more difficult to obtain replacement parts, because Varian no longer stocks many of the parts in the United States. Information Services has replaced the computer and floppy disk drives and had to purchase additional external floppy disk drives due to corrosion. The Varian instruments have poor corrosion resistance, because they have a single wall construction and all electrical components are exposed to the ambient laboratory environment. Laboratory staff recommends keeping the existing FAA and GFAA, but not renewing their service contracts, and replacing the existing ICPES with the proposed ICPES. Advantages of newer instrumentation include greater reliability, better construction (far example, double wall construction, the components are purged with inert gas, and the detectors are completely sealed), shorter analysis time with comparable accuracy and precision to the GFAA, improved accuracy and precision with shorter analysis time than both the FAA and the existing ICPES. The proposed ICPES has a payback period of 3.0 years (see Table 1). Table 1: Cost Savings Analysis (all figures are based on a one year period) 01d M.1bo2 N..M.Ihea Tuk N.et Cmt BemPln Tlme, LWor Phil That, LWer F1 .l 5.0'. Aee1P.d hn aeb• Coro he. au.. C.'" Source C.M.1 5,641 0.19 340 $3059.110 0.02 Sto $4,51180 $33,846 Semple. 111.0ld. 156 .17 54o 1,Wso .05 S40 311W 749 Wut...W 900 .22 540 7,920.00 .O4 S40 1,44o.o0 6.480 Tole) Co.l $41,075 Serl.q. Pgb.ck Perl.d 3.0 yeen •A....,,,. 1.6 buNe.hue ($Z5.002r.X 1.6)=40E SmR Report for Purchase of a Inductively Coupled Plasma-Emlesion spectrometer Page 2 "D-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(b) - ALL DISTRICTS "D-2" EVALUATION OF INSTRUMENTATION Staff evaluated two instruments which were capable of performing low level analyses of metals in wastewater and source control samples,the Perkin-Elmer Optima 3000 and the Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP. Only two instruments were evaluated, because these two instruments have a unique, recently developed design that increases their sensitivity by a factor of ten over conventional designs. The plasma is viewed through the axis which runs parallel with the torch rather than perpendicular to the torch. The shape of the torch is elongated. This increases the amount of time spent detecting each constituent We have contacted users and witnessed sample analyses at the Pittsburgh Conference. The results of the evaluation indicated that the Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP has the best qualifications as discussed below. Perkin-Elmer Optima 3000 The Perkin-Elmer Optima 3000, which costs $123,000 plus tax and freight, is not recommended because it utilizes a charge-coupled device (CCD) to detect light emission from the sample and a DOS-based program for instrument control and data handling. The CCD detector detects light at approximately 220 different wave lengths during an analysis. This number of wavelengths is insufficient to insure that spectral interferences are detected and corrected Spectral interferences are the most significant source of errors in ICPES analyses. A larger number of wavelengths must be measured to allow for the selection of alternate wavelengths that are not affected by interferences and to allow the detection of these interfering wavelengths. (Iron alone produces over 3,000 emission lines that can interfere with the quantification of other elements if not properly corrected.) CCD detectors are susceptible to a phenomenon called "blooming." This occurs when an emission at one wavelength is so intense that adjoining wavelengths ate affected. These adjoining wavelengths will cause erroneously high results to be reported for some metals if there is a high concentration of another metal which has an adjoining wavelength line to the metal of interest. The Perkin-Elmer Optima 3000 uses a DOS-based program for instrument control and data handling. The program complexity requires more extensive raining of operators and requires analyst intervention to send data to the network for data handling. A similar DOS-based program is used on another Laboratory instrument, a fourier transform infrared spectrometer manufactured by Perkin-Elmer. Due to incompatibility problems, the computer was removed from the Laboratory computer network and a portion of the software is not used. The Districts have had extensive problems both running the program and interfacing the program with the Laboratory's computer network system. Staff Report for Purchase of a Inductively Coupled Plasma-Emission Spectrometer Page 3 "D-3" AGENDA ITEM #9(b) - ALL DISTRICTS "D-Y Thermo Jarrell Ash T4/ P The Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP, at $115,000 plus tax and freight, is recommended because it has a superior detector and compatible software for instrument control and handling. a The Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP uses a charge-injection device (CID) detector-which simultaneously detects light at 260,000 different wavelengths. This number of wavelengths is sufficient to ensure that all spectral interferences are detected and corrected. A large number of wavelengths must be measured to allow for the selection of alternate wavelengths that are not affected by interferences and to allow the detection of these interfering wavelengths. • CID detectors are not susceptible to "blooming", therefore, ensuring that trace levels of metals can be determined in samples that also contain high levels of other metals. The Thermo Jarrell Ash IRIS/AP utilizes a Microsoft Windows-based program for instrument control and data handling. The software will be able to store information on the computer network so that data handling, reduction, reporting and archiving can be performed from any Laboratory computer. Results for each analysis can be automatically transferred to the Laboratory Information Management System to promote fast tum-around times and a reduction in errors. The IRIS/AP is a benchtop instrument which will be easier to install in the Laboratory than the floor standing Perkin-Elmer Optima 3000. RECOMMENDATION Laboratory staff recommends the purchase of an IRLS/AP inductively coupled plasma spectrometer from Thermo Jarrell Ash Corporation for a total purchase price of$115,000, plus tax and shipping. The addition of this instrument to the Laboratory will result in an annual savings of approximately $41,075 for a cost payback of 3.0 years. Start Report for Purchase of a Inductively Coupled Plasm-Emission Spectrometer Page 4 "D-4" AGENDA ITEM #9(b) - ALL DISTRICTS "D-4" May 12, 1994 MEMORANDUM COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 0 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA TO: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager ioem EEnS AVENUE Pa 80xe+n FROM: Ted E. Hoffman, Purchasing Manager POurrtmn vAlLEy.CP110.x'A B2188.8+27 mm 962-241 1 SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF ONE FLAT BED TRUCK WITH CHASSIS MOUNTED CRANE SPECIFICATION NO.V4)04 Sealed bids were opened Tuesday,May 3,1994,forthe Purchase of One Flat Bed Truck with Chassis Mounted Crane. Tabulation of bids IS as follows: DEALER/LOCATION/EQUIPMENT UNIT PRICE ALTERNATE BID Westrux International $66,508.00 None Anaheim IHC Cab and Chassis, HIAB Cane Cahnenita Ford Truck Sales, Inc. $66,864.00 S63,945.00 Santa Fe Springs Ford Cab &Chassis, HU18 Cane Fuller Ford $67,131.00 $64,231.00 Chula Vista Ford Cab &Chassis, National Cane Inland Empire Equipment $67,655.00 $64,535.00 Riverside OMC Cab &Chassis, HIAB Cane Morgan Cane Company, Inc. S68,200.00 $63.725.00 Santa Ana Ford Cab &Chassis, HIAB Cane Ole Lee, Inc. $69,137.00 None El Monte GMC Cab &Chassis, UNIT Cane Los Angeles Frelghtiiner $70,607.57 None Anaheim GMC Cab &Chassis, National Cane Golden Sate Ford Truck Sales, Inc. $70,658.82 $67,658.82 Los Angeles Ford Cab &Chassis, HAS Cane GMCTNCk Division $71,313.13 $68,161.61 Santa Fe Springs OMC Cab &Chassis, HIAB Cane Six of the nine bidders offered as an alternative bid, a Model PM 11022 Cane, manufactured by AutogaU. This equipment does not meet Districts specifiations. It Is recommended the alternate bids be rejected for not meeting required specifications. It Is further recommended the award be made to Westhol International, the lowest responsive bidder meeting specifications, for their pmposed amount Of$66,508.00,Pius applicable sales tax. Sufficient funds are available In the Maintenance Departments equipment budget for this purchase. Re5pCrUllN supinitted I o`�Cl 7 1 i ` Ted E. Hoffman Purchasing Manager We thereby ConCUr wlttf1 the above recommendation: GEE D.SOUDd I Edwin E. HOdg DIR, nr Of Finance Assistant Drecti of Maintenance „E" AGENDA ITEM #9(c ) - ALL DISTRICTS „E„ May 17, 1994 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 0 ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFDRNIA MEMORANDUM 1p EW5 AVENUE , PO BOA 519 E AIN VL Y,MMAMA NM.e127 TO: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager O1AIM' 11 FROM: Ted E. Hoffman, Purchasing Manager RE: PURCHASE OF ONE HYDROFLUSH SEWER CLEANING TRUCK, SPECIFICATION NO. V-005 Sealed bids were opened on Tuesday, May 17, 1994, for the Purchase of One Hydroflush Sewer Cleaning Truck. Tabulation of bids Is as follows: VENDOR BASE PRICE `OPTION A TOTAL PRICE 1. Haaker Equipment Company $127,794.00 $10,713.00 $138,507.00 2. Carmenita Truck Center NO- BID 3. South Coast Peterbllt NO-BID 4. Westrux, International NO-BID It Is recommended the award be made t0 Haaker Equipment Company, the lowest responsive bidder, for their proposed amount of $138,507.00, including Option "A', plus applicable sales tax. Sufficient funds are available for this purchase In the Maintenance Department Budget. Respectfully submitted, Ted E. Hoffman Purchasing Manager We hereby Concur wKh the foregoing recommendad0n: Edwin E. Hodg DID of Finance Assistant DIrecVJr of Maintenance MF" AGENDA ITEM #9(d) - ALL DISTRICTS "F" COUNTY SANRATION DISTRICTS May 20, 1994 41 ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA 1C F AKNUE V O.0OX 8127 MEMORANDUM r WAISVA V.fJL R"W2 127 014. 8 4411 TO: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager FROM: Ted E. Hoffman, Purchasing Manager RE: PURCHASE OF FIVE FOUR-WHEEL ELECTRIC PERSONNEL CARRIERS, SPECIFICATION NO. V-006 Sealed bids were opened on Friday, May 20, 1994, for the purchase Of Five Four-Wheel Electric Personnel Carriers. Tabulation of bids is as follows: VENDOR UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1. Taylor-Dunn Mfg. Company $4,227.00 S21,135.00 Anaheim, CA 2. Blasius Electric Truck Inc. S4,654.30 S23,271.50 Stanton, CA 3. Frankson's Inc. NO-BID Glendale, CA 4. Southwest Material Handling Inc. NO-BID Anaheim, CA It is recommended the award be made to Taylor-Dunn Mfg. Company, the lowest responsive bidder, for a total of S21,135.00, plus applicable sales tax. \ Respect full submlttetl, Ted E. Hoffman -' Purchasing Manager We hereby concur with the foregoing recommendation: ry 6v�eo 9�� &� Gary G. Str ed Edwin E. Hodges Director of Finance Assistant Director of Maintenance 11611 AGENDA ITEM #9(e) - ALL DISTRICTS "G" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS May 20, 1994 0 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 108 C E W S AVENUE BOX @127 UMPN MEMORANDUM Po. EUUMAIN VALLEY."UEOPNIA fflT2B-0127 p4186$X11 TO: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager FROM: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager RE: PURCHASE OF SIX FOUR-WHEEL ELECTRIC CARGO CARRIERS, SPECIFICATION NO. V-007 Sealed bids were opened on Friday, May 20, 1994, for the purchase of Slx Four-Wheel Electric Cargo Carriers. Tabulation of bids is as follows: VENDOR UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 'I. Taylor Dunn Mfg. Company $4,730.75 S28,384.50 Anaheim, CA 2. Blasius Electric Truck S5,160.40 $30,962.40 Stanton, CA 3. Frankson's, Inc. NO-BID Glendale, CA 4. Southwest Material Handling, Inc. NO-BID Anaheim, CA It Is recommended the award be made to Taylor Dunn Mfg. Company, the lowest responsive bidder, for a total price of S28,384.50, plus applicable sales tax. Respectfully Su bmftted, ff .ate Ted E. HOffntan PureWng eRariao r we hereby concur with the ror'egohM recommenoatlon: Gary G. Str/ ed �C..S& Edwin E. Hodges Director of Finance Assistant Director of Maintenance "H" AGENDA ITEM #9(f) - ALL DISTRICTS "H" Page 1 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Priority Proiects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers Amount of this Change Order (Add)(9eduet) $10,780.00 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract 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 - ADDITION OF REINFORCING STEEL FOR FIBERGLASS AIR DUCT ENCASEMENT The Contractor was directed to add #4 longitudinal steel reinforcing bars at 12 inches on center for the full length of new 42-inch concrete encasement placed around the new scrubber fiberglass air duct . The design engineer required the additional reinforcement as the typical detail shown on the contract drawings required longitudinal reinforcement only at each corner. The longitudinal reinforcement shown in the typical detail was not adequate for the large encasement section. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #2) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $569.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 2 - REMOVAL OF ABANDONED UTILITIES AT WELL SITE The Contractor was directed to remove portions of an existing undisclosed 2-inch plant air pipeline, 4-inch plant water pipeline and provide temporary support of an existing electrical ductbank. These utilities were not accurately shown on the contract drawings and conflicted with abandonment of an old deep water well, required by the contract. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #5) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $368.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days I-1"" AGENDA ITEM #9Ih) - ALL DISTRICTS I-1"" Page 2 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728.8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal 8 Ludwia Enaineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Priority Proiects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Enaineers ITEM 3 - REROUTE DUCTBANK AT PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS The Contractor was directed to reroute the scum pump remote input/output control panel electrical ductbank around an existing automobile access ramp at Primary Sedimentation Basins 1 and 2. The ramp conflicted with the ductbank routing as shown on the contract drawings. It was necessary for the Contractor to reroute the new ductbank around the ramp, requiring additional trenching, conduit and concrete encasement. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #6) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $2,115.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 4 - REPAIR DAMAGED DUCTBANK AT POLYMER CONTAINMENT AREA The Contractor was directed to repair an existing electrical ductbank damaged during excavation for the new solution polymer containment structure. The existing ductbank, serving the caustic pumps, was not shown on the contract drawings and not encased in concrete. Repairs included furnishing and installing new conduit, pulling in new conductors, and addition of concrete encasement. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference::FCO #7) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $557.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days "I-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS "I-2- Page 3 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1 Job No P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 5 -ADDITION OF DRAIN UNDER NEW SOLUTION POLYMER CONTAINMENT AREA The Contractor was directed to add a new area drain for surface runoff from the existing paved area east of the new solution polymer containment wall. Construction of the new containment wall blocked existing surface runoff, causing ponding of water. The work consisted of furnishing and installing 30 linear feet of 4-inch schedule 40 PVC pipe, one surface drain box and connection to an adjacent existing 8-inch chemical drain. This drain was not shown on the contract drawings. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #8) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $2,608.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 6 - SPOOL FOR SLUDGE DENSITY METER The Contractor was directed to furnish a new 4-inch type 304 stainless steel pipe spool east in order to install the new Districts furnished sludge density meter in Sedimentation Basins 1 and 2 per the contract drawings. The spool was required to install the new meter and was not shown on the contract drawings. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCC) #9) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $960.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days "I-3" AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS "I-3" Page 4 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Priority Proiects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 7 -TEMPORARY FOUL AIR DUCT FOR METERING AND DIVERSION STRUCTURE The Contractor was directed to furnish, install and remove an 18-inch flexible foul air duct to serve the existing Metering and Diversion Structure on an interim basis. The temporary foul air duct system was required because the existing underground Metering and Diversion structure foul air duct interfered with construction of the new utility trench serving the new Headworks 2 series scrubbers. This interference was not shown on the contract drawings. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #10) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $6,235.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 8 - REROUTE POLYMER SOLUTION PIPING The Contractor was directed to reroute an existing 4-inch schedule 80 PVC solution polymer pump pipeline over the top of the new containment structure wall. It was necessary to reroute the pipeline over the top of the wall due to interference between the existing pipeline and the location of the new concrete block wall, being constructed as part of the containment structure. This interference was not shown on the contract drawings. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #13) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $615.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days "I-4- AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS "I-4" Page 5 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 9 - MODIFICATIONS TO GRIT CHAMBER PLANT WATER AND AIR PIPELINES The Contractorwas directed to modify the existing 1-inch high pressure air and 1'/cinch high pressure plant water pipelines extending into the 5 existing grit chambers. 1'/h-inch stainless steel ball valves were also added to each high pressure plant water penetration into the grit chambers. The work consisted of changing the piping materials from galvanized iron pipe to type 316 stainless steel in 20 locations for a total of 40 penetrations. Included is the furnishing and installation of an additional 18 each 1'/cinch ball valves not shown on the contract drawings. Also included in the work is additional Contractor costs for concrete coring into the existing grit chambers, as a 36-inch core length was shown on the contract drawings, but the actual length measured in the field was 46 inches. The project design engineer recommended changing the piping entering the grit chambers from the contract-specified galvanized iron pipe to stainless steel to avoid future corrosion problems. This item of work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #12, #14) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $11,747.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 10 - DELETION OF TEMPORARY BULKHEADS AT THE INLET CHANNEL The Contractor was directed to delete the furnishing and installation of two temporary bulkheads on the main inlet channel on the downstream side of the existing Metering and Diversion Structure. The contract specifications required the Contractor to furnish and install two leakproof bulkheads for diversion of flows during installation of new slide gates at the existing Metering and Diversion Structure. The Contractor will be able to make use of existing Districts' slide gates which will result in a credit to the contract. This item of work was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #21) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: ($9,123.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days "1-5" AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS "I-5" Page 6 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor. Pascal & Ludwio Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 11 - DELETE REPLACEMENT OF WIPER BLADE BACKER BARS AT PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS The Contractor was directed to delete the furnishing and installation of new steel backer bars for the spiral skimmer blades at Sedimentation Basins 1 and 2, required in the contract. During replacement of the skimmer rubber wipers, the existing backer bars were found to be in excellent condition and did not require replacement, resulting in a savings to the contract. This item of work was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10.6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO#22) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: ($1,200.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 12 - DELETE AIR AND WATER CONNECTIONS IN THE GRIT CHAMBERS The Contractor was directed to delete three each 1-inch high pressure air and three each 1 Yrinch plant water connections in the grit chambers for new grit hopper piping. The contract drawings required connections for each high pressure air and plant water piping system in the grit chambers. The design engineer determined that one connection for each piping system was adequate and the additional connections shown on the contract drawings were redundant. This item of work was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #23) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: ($1,050.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days "I-6" AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS "I-6" Page 7 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June B. 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 13 - SCRUBBER DEMISTING SECTION MODIFICATIONS The Contractor was directed to delete the furnishing and installation of a portion of the demisting section on four existing scrubbers at the primary scrubber complex. Deleted was the furnishing and installation of angle supports at the top and bottom of each bed limiter, as shown on the contract drawings. This item of work was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-8(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO #24) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: ($2,280.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 14 - GRIT CHAMBER PIPING DELETIONS The Contractor was directed to delete the furnishing and installation of a portion of new 8-inch PVC piping in the grit chambers, shown to be replaced on the contract drawings. The Contractor was able to make use of existing 8-inch PVC piping previously installed, resulting in deletion of the contract-specified piping. This item of work was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-8(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO#25) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: ($1,341.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days TOTAL COST THIS CHANGE ORDER: $10,780.00 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER: 0 Calendar Days "I-7" AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS ^I-7" Page 8 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers The additional work contained within this Change Order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original Contract and any extensions to the Contract time made by this and all previously issued Change Orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that no time is required for this Change Order, and no direct or indirect, incidental or consequential costs, expenses, losses or damages have been or will be incurred by Contractor, except as expressly granted and approved by this Change Order, SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date: July 21, 1993 Original Contract Time: 420 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: September 13, 1994 Time Extension this C.O.: 0 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 0 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: Not Applicable Revised Final Completion Due Date: Not Applicable Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: Not Applicable Actual Final Completion Date: Not Applicable Original Contract Price $ 3,364,600.00 Prev. Authorized Changes $ (4,433,00) This Change (Add) (PedWG )$ 10,780.00 Amended Contract Price $ 3.370.947.00 "I-8" AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS "I-8" Page 9 of 9 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor. Pascal & Ludwig Engineers C.O. No.: Three (3) Date: June B. 1994 Job: Priority Proiects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-38-2 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers Board Authorization Date: June 8, 1994 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted by: Re mended by: s2"" 47 We7- = aff Engineering Manager Dam C nstruction Manager Dale Appr a bye Approved as to Form: s /6A ( 4044f Director of Engineering Dat6 Genera Counsel Date Accepted by: PASCAL & LUDWIG ENGINEERS Contractor q to "1-911 AGENDA ITEM #9(h) - ALL DISTRICTS "1-9 Page 1 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108" ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwia Engineer C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June B. 1994 Job: Priority Proiects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-43-1 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers Amount of this Change Order (Add)(Deduct) $ (40,048.00) In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract 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 -ADDITIONAL PUMPING AND PROCESS ISOLATIONS This item provides additional pumping and installation of temporary bulkheads at the Ocean Outfall Booster Station and the Old Termination Channel as required to complete the Junction Box No. 1 modifications. This was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10.6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2431-025) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $26,715.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 2- CENTRAL POWER GENERATION 12KV SWITCHGEAR REVISIONS This Rem revises the following switchgear components as described below. A. Current Transformer Ratios for PBB-A and PBB-B shall be General Electric Catalog No. 788-401, 400/5. B. Phase Relays (50151) for PBB-A and PBB-B feeders shall be General Electric Catalog No. 12SFC177BBA. The relays for the spare breaker are unchanged. C. Ground Relays for PBB-A and PBB-B feeders shall be General Electric Catalog No. 12HFC21B1A, Device 50GS. D. The Ground Relay for spare breaker shall be General Electric Catalog No. 12SFC177B2A, Device 50/51G. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2431-022) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $0.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS "J-1" AGENDA ITEM #90 ) - ALL DISTRICTS "J-1" Page 2 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineer C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Priority Proiects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-43-1 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 3- BOLT ON SIZE 5 MOTOR STARTERS The Backup Cooling Water Schematic on Contract Drawing E-9 and the Hill-ow Pressure Plant Water Pumps Nos. 1 and 2 Schematic on Contract Drawing E-11 indicate that provisions for plug-in type starters are provided in the existing motor control center enclosures. Plug-in Size 5 motor starters are not available from the motor control center manufacturer. This item provides additional labor for the installation of vertical bus for three bolt on Size 5 motor starters in existing motor control centers. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(8)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2431-026) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $1,485.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 4 - CONTAINMENT AREA CLEANUP This item provides cleanup of chemicals spilled by the Districts during the installation of the Containment Structure Lining as called for in Detailed Specification 57-0200. The spills occurred at the Ferric and Ferrous Chloride Containment areas. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $3,045.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 5- SCOTT TUNNEL PIPE SUPPORTS This item furnishes revised pipe supports for two 16-inch check valves located on the discharge of the low pressure plant water pumps as shown on Partial Plan F of Contract Drawing M-8. The supports required on Section G of Contract Drawing M-9 conflicted with an existing cable tray and were not installed. Costs for this item include new supports, providing temporary supports while new supports were being designed, and additional pipe handling charges. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions, ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $3,257.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS "J-2" AGENDA ITEM #90 ) - ALL DISTRICTS "J-2" Page 3 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineer C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2. Job No. 132-43-1 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 6- RELOCATION OF PLANT WATER PUMP STATION STRAINER PIPING This item reroutes the 24-inch diameter plant water force main connecting two proposed strainers to the plant water system shown on Contract Drawing M-7. This additional work was necessary to make corrections in the pipe routing due to an erroneous elevation of the strainer pad shown on Section G of Contract Drawing M-7 and also to avoid conflicts with existing facilities not disclosed in the plans. This item includes credit for demolition of the existing equipment base and related work that was no longer required with the new pipe routing. Additional pipe support requirements and relocation of existing electrical equipment that conflicts with the pipe routing are also included. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: PCH P2431-003, 003a, 003b, 003c) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $17,270.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 7- DELETE CONDUIT AND WIRE FOR AUTOMATIC ROLL FILTERS This item deletes conduit and wire to three of five automatic roll filter motors shown on Contract Drawing E-10. The automatic roll filters approved for this project only require two motors. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: PCH P2431-012) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $(487.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 8- DRAIN VALVES AT DIGESTER E AND H MIXING PUMPS This item installs two owner-supplied drain valves on proposed piping installed with the digester isolation knife gate valves at Digesters E and H. This item was accomplished by Contractors force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2431-023) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $ 1,267.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS "J-3" AGENDA ITEM #90 ) - ALL DISTRICTS "J-3" Page 4 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108" ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineer C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June B. 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2A3-1 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers ITEM 9 - DELETION OF TRANSFORMER PEP A PULL SECTION This item deletes the Transformer PEP A pull section in the Bus A switchgear line up located in the 12KV Distribution Center B as shown on Contract Drawing E-20. The deletion of the pull section required revision of associated conduit, conductors, and miscellaneous additional alterations to adjacent existing enclosures. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: PCH P2431-010) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $0.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 10- DELETION OF TEMPORARY HYDROGEN PEROXIDE SYSTEM This item deletes the temporary chemical feed systems as specified in Detailed Specification 63-7000. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: PCH P2431-004) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $(92,600.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $(40,048.00) TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER: 0 Calendar Days "J-4" AGENDA ITEM #9( I ) - ALL DISTRICTS "J-4" Page 5 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwia Engineer C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Priority Proiects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2. Job No. P243-1 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers The additional work contained within this Change Order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original Contract and any extensions to the Contract time made by this and all previously issued Change Orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that no time is required for this Change Order, and no direct or indirect, incidental or consequential costs, expenses, losses or damages have been or will be incurred by Contractor, except as expressly granted and approved by this Change Order. SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date: May 11, 1993 Original Contract Time: 420 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: July 4, 1994 Time Extension this C.O.: 0 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 420 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: Not Applicable Revised Final Completion Due Date: Not Applicable Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: Not Applicable Actual Final Completion Date: Not Applicable Original Contract Price $ 3,398,000.00 Prev. Authorized Changes $ (48,807.00) This Change fAdd) (Deduct) $ (40,048.00) Amended Contract Price $ 3,309,145.00 "J-5" AGENDA ITEM #90) - ALL DISTRICTS "J-5" Page 6 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108" ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Pascal & Ludwig Engineer C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 2. Job No. P243-1 Consultant: John Carollo Engineers Board Authorization Date: June 11, 1994 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted by Reco ended by: ngineering Manager 'Date Con truction Manager D to Appro a Approved as to Form: 16 4rj�---- Director of Engineering D to General Cognsel Date Accepted by: . NLUDWIG ENGINEERS ontr ctor Date "J-6" AGENDA ITEM #90 ) - ALL DISTRICTS "J-6" Page 1 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor. Amelco Construction, C.O. No.: Three (3) a Division of Amelco Industries Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-53-1 Consultant: Dames and Moore Amount of this Change Order (Add)(Dedust) $29.260.00 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract 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 - INFLUENT PUMP ELECTRICAL CONDUIT AND CABLE RELOCATION This item is for the relocation of a two-inch utility air pipe, existing conduit, and cable providing power to the Main Sewage Pumps Nos. 2 and 4. These existing conduits conflict with the construction of the proposed column strengthening at Headworks C Building Lines 3.2 and E. Work includes removing the electrical cables, relocation of the conduits to the west, installation of explosion-proof seals, repulling the cables, relocation of an electrical pull box, reconnecting the pumps, and relocation of a two-inch utility air line. This item was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2531-015) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $25,429.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 3 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 2 - DELETE PAINTING OF METAL ROOF DECK AT HEADWORKS B This item deletes the removal of existing paint at the underside of the Headworks B metal roof deck as required on Note 11 of Contract Drawing 1A03 and the painting of metal roof deck as specified in Detailed Specification Section 90. This item was negotiated with the Contractor pursuant to Section 10-0(B)2(a) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2531-018) CREDIT THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $ (2,495.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS "K-1" AGENDA ITEM #9( 1 ) - ALL DISTRICTS "K-1" Page 2 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. 0. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Amelco Construction, C.O. No.: Three (3) a Division of Amelco Industries Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-1 Consultant: Dames and Moore ITEM 3 - HEADWORKS C ELECTRICAL REPAIRS This item is for repair of an existing electrical conduit providing power to an existing influent flowmeter and an existing conduit providing power to a fresh air supply fan. This item was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-0(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2531-009,012) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $1,628.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 4 - REVISED COLUMN REINFORCEMENT This item is for revising column strengthening Detail 7 of Contract Drawing S22. Existing reinforcement in the column prevented drilling for dowels proposed in the column strengthening as shown on the contract detail. The dowel location and associated new reinforcing steel was changed to allow drilling. This item was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-0(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2531-005) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $1,553.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS ITEM 5 -MISCELLANEOUS CONFLICTS WITH PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION This item is for removing existing guard posts, relocating an existing handrail, modifying two existing ladders, rerouting existing pipe in Headworks B, and removing a portion of an existing concrete wall. These items were not shown on the contract drawings but conflicted with the new construction. This item was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2(b) of the General Provisions. (Reference: FCO P2531-004) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $3,145.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 CALENDAR DAYS "K-2" AGENDA ITEM #9( J ) - ALL DISTRICTS "K-2" Page 3 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. 0. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Amelco Construction, C.O. No.: Three (3) a Division of Amelco Industries Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-53-1 Consultant: Dames and Moore TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $29,260.00 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER: 0 Calendar Days The additional work contained within this Change Order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original Contract and any extensions to the Contract time made by this and all previously issued Change Orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that 3 days extension of time to perform the work is required for this Change Order, but that no direct or indirect, incidental or consequential costs, expenses, losses or damages have been or will be incurred by Contractor, except as expressly granted and approve by this Change Order. SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date: November 30, 1993 Original Contract Time: 180 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: May 28, 1994 Time Extension this C.O.: 3 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 3 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: 183 Calendar Days Revised Final Completion Due Date: May 31, 1994 Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: Not Applicable Actual Final Completion Date: Not Applicable Original Contract Price $ 1,377,000.00 Prev. Authorized Changes $ 3,436.00 This Change (Add) (Bedust) $ 29,260.00 Amended Contract Price $ 1,409,696.00 "K-3" AGENDA ITEM #90 ) - ALL DISTRICTS "K-3" Page 4 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Amelco Construction, C.O. No.: Three (3) a Division of Amelco Industries Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-1 Consultant: Dames and Moore Board Authorization Date: June 8 ,1994 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted by: B� Rec n mennded by: Engineering Manager Date C nstruction Manager Date Appro Approved as to Form: Director of Engineering Date G eral Counsel Date Accepted by: AMELCO CONSTRUCTION, A DIVISION OF AMELCO INDUSTRIES Contractor' D e "K-4" AGENDA ITEM #9( 1 ) - ALL DISTRICTS "K-4" RESOLUTION NO. 94-55 APPROVING ADDENDUM NO, 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CH2M HILL FOR DESIGN AND PROGRAMMING SERVICES FOR JOB NO. J-31 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CH2M HILL FOR DESIGN AND PROGRAMMING SERVICES REQUIRED FOR EXPANSION OF EXISTING COMPUTERIZED MONITORING AND CONTROL SYSTEMS AT PLANTS 1 AND 2, JOB NO. J-31, DELETING THE SPECIFIED COMPLETION DEADLINE DATE OF JUNE 1994 WHEREAS, the Districts have heretofore entered into an agreement with CH2M Hill for design and programming services required for Expansion of Existing Computerized Monitoring and Control Systems at Plants 1 and 2, Job No. J-31; and, WHEREAS, Addendum No. 1 to said agreement provided for preparation of a study to review the existing supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system and recommendation of possible control system changes; and, WHEREAS, it is now deemed appropriate to further amend said agreement to delete the specified completion deadline date of June 1994; and, NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Addendum No. 2 dated June 8, 1994, to that certain Professional Services Agreement dated April 14, 1993 , by "L-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(K) - ALL DISTRICTS "L-1" and between County Sanitation District No. 1, acting for itself and on behalf of Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14, and CH2M Hill for design and programming services required for Expansion of Existing Computerized Monitoring and Control Systems at Plants 1 and 2, Job No. J-31, deleting the specified completion deadline date of June 1994, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2 . That said deletion shall be accomplished with no increase in the total authorized compensation of $742 , 148. 00; and, 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, 13 and 14 , are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Addendum No. 2 in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994 . x V.mt "L-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(k) - ALL DISTRICTS "L-2" RESOLUTION NO. 94-62-2 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT TO INCLUDE PROTECTION OF DISTRICT'S CONTRACT NOS. 2-5R-1 AND 2-14-1 SEWERS WITH THE COUNTY'S SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT INCLUDING PROTECTION OF DISTRICT'S CONTRACT NOS. 2-5R-1 AND 2-14-1 SEWERS IN COUNTY'S SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx WHEREAS, the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) , San Bernardino County Flood Control District and Riverside County Flood and Water Conservation District and Department of the Army Corps of Engineers entered into a cooperative agreement for the construction of the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project improvements; and, WHEREAS, the District owns, operates and maintains the Santa Ana River Interceptor, from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Contract No. 2-14-1, and for Olive Subtrunk - Santa Ana River Crossing, Contract No. 2-5R-1, which traverse the Santa Ana River in the vicinity of the Garden Grove Freeway and at Katella Avenue, respectively, and need protection for construction of OCFCD's project; and, WHEREAS, County Sanitation District No. 2 desires that OCFCD include protective concrete structures for said lines, into OCFCD's project; and, WHEREAS, OCFCD has agreed to include within its construction contract protective concrete structures for District's said sewer lines, as shown on plans and specifications prepared by the District; and, WHEREAS, OCFCD has opened bids and total contract bid amounts for Santa Ana River Interceptor, from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Contract No. 2-14-1, is $4,346, and Olive Subtrunk - Santa Ana River Crossing, Contract No. 2-5R-1, is $5,300. "N-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(n) - DISTRICT 2 "N-1" 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 certain Agreement dated June 8, 1994, by and between County Sanitation District No. 2 and the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) , providing for OCFCD to install protective concrete structures for Santa Ana River Interceptor, from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Contract No. 2-14-1, and for Olive Subtrunk - Santa Ana River Crossing, Contract No. 2-5R-1, as part of OCFCD's Santa Ana River Mainstem improvement project, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2 . District No. 2 shall deposit $11,000. 00 with OCFCD as the estimated cost for construction of Santa Ana River Interceptor, from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Contract No. 2-14-1, and for Olive Subtrunk - Santa Ana River Crossing, Contract No. 2-5R-1, within 30 days of the execution of said agreement; and, Section 3 . District No. 2 shall pay to OCFCD the total actual costs for construction of said project upon acceptance of construction work plus 10% for administrative costs incurred by OCFCD. Section 4. That the Chairman and Secretary of the District are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. , gV.061 "N-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(n) - DISTRICT 2 "N-2" RESOLUTION NO. 96-66-3 APPROVING REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF GARDEN GROVE RE CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT NOS. 3-35R AND 3-11R A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE RE REHABILITATION OF MAGNOLIA TRUNK SEWER, ORANGETHORPE AVENUE TO ELLIS AVENUE, CONTRACT NO. 3-35R ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WHEREAS, District No. 3 .owns, operates and maintains trunk sewer facilities in Magnolia Street; and, WHEREAS, the District has under design the refurbishment of certain manhole structures on said trunk sewer; and, WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove is planning a project for Magnolia Street Storm Drain and Street Improvements; and, WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of District No. 3 and the City of Garden Grove to coordinate and combine said work in a single project to minimize costs, public inconvenience and disruption of their respective facilities. The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain Reimbursement Agreement relative to Rehabilitation of Magnolia Trunk Sewer, Orangethorpe Avenue to Ellis Avenue, Contract No. 3-35R, providing for reimbursement of costs to the City by the District for construction and rehabilitation of two manholes, is hereby approved and accepted; and, "0 1" AGENDA ITEM #9(o)(1) - DISTRICT 3 "0-1" Section 2. That reimbursement of District's costs to the City, estimated to be an amount of $11,000.00, is hereby authorized to be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of said Reimbursement Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part of this resolution; and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of the District are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Agreement on behalf of the District in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. mgIZ066 "0-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(o) (1) - DISTRICT 3 "0-2" Page 1 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Uhler. Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Improvements to Bitter Point and Rocky Point Pumo Stations, Contract No. 5-32, and Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33 Consultant: Robert Bein. William Frost and Associates Amount of this Change Order (Add)(Seduef) $35,460.00 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. CONTRACT NO. 5-33 ITEM 1 - NEW ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER PAD During the design phases of the project, Southern California Edison advised the Districts that an existing electrical transformer across the Pacific Coast Highway in front of the Bay Bridge Pump Station would be adequate to supply the pump station primary power. This later proved to be an incorrect assumption and a larger transformer was prescribed by Southern California Edison and had to be placed within the confines of the pump station. The new transformer required the installation of a precast concrete vault, conduit and cable encased in a concrete ductbank, concrete pad and 5-inch diameter pipe barricades. The Contractor performed the work on a negotiated basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(8)(2)(a). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $8,545.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 2 - ROOF MODIFICATIONS The contract drawings required that the mansard framing around the perimeter of the Bay Bridge Pump Station roof consisted of two vertical sections of%-inch plywood with roofing felt in between. The outer section of plywood was to be painted. In order for the mansard to blend architecturally with the building, the outer section of plywood and felt was deleted for which a credit was received and the inner section was coated with stucco and painted to match the pump station. Additional work included custom metal gutters around four skylights, coping at top of wall adjacent to built up roof and cap at top of parapet under ridge tile, tile pan and counterfiashing long vertical walls and additional framing and redwood fascia around the eave. The Contractor performed the work on a negotiated basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(6)(2)(a). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $16.151.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days "P-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(D) - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 "P-1" Page 2 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Uhler, Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Dale: June 8. 1994 Job: Improvements to Bitter Point and Rocky Point Pump Stations, Contract No. 5-32, and Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33 Consultant: Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates ITEM 3 - RELOCATION OF ELECTRICAL CONDUIT AND AIR DUCT The two new 250 HP electric motors for the Bay Bridge Pump Station are much larger in physical dimensions than was initially planned. Due to an unforeseen increase in height, the motors could not be positioned due to an interference with several overhead electrical conduits and an air duct. The conduit and air duct had to be rerouted to relieve the interference. The Contractor performed the work on a force account basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)(2)(b). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $12,342.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 4 - FRONT ENTRANCE MODIFICATIONS In order to gain greater efficiency by adding additional work space for maintenance and improving eye appeal, Staff made the following changes to the initial designs. 1. Relocated the front redwood fence and gate to the property line at the sidewalk from the face of the building, thereby adding additional work space for vehicles within the confines of the building area. The also added to the amount of redwood fencing to be installed. 2. Changed the bominite concrete paving to asphalt concrete paving which requires less maintenance. 3. Deleted landscape shrubs that would now be behind the fence and out of view. 4. Changed main entrance double door to steel from wood providing greater security and less maintenance or replacement due to atmospheric conditions. The Contractor performed the work on a negotiated basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)(2)(a). CREDIT COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $(1,578.00) TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $35,460.00 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER: 0 Calendar Days "P-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(p) - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 "P-2" Page 3 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Uhler, Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Improvements to Bitter Point and Rocky Point Pump Stations, Contract No. 5-32, and Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33 Consultant: Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates The additional work contained within this Change Order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original Contract and any extensions to the Contract time made by this and all previously issued Change Orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that no time is required for this Change Order, and no direct or indirect, incidental or consequential costs, expenses, losses or damages have been or will be incurred by Contractor, except as expressly granted and approved by this Change Order. SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date: November 3, 1992 Original Contract Time: 365 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: November 2, 1993 Time Extension this C.O.: 0 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 365 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: Not Applicable Revised Final Completion Due Date: Not Applicable Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: Not Applicable Actual Final Completion Date: Not Applicable Original Contract Price $ 1.767.75T00 Prev. Authorized Changes $ 2,045.00 This Change (Add) (Deddel) $ 35,460.00 Amended Contract Price $ 1 ,805,262.00 "P-3" AGENDA ITEM #9W - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 "P-3" Page 4 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108" ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Uhler. Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Improvements to Bitter Point and Rocky Point Pump Stations, Contract No. 5-32, and Imorovements to Bay Bridoe Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33 Consultant: Robert Bein. William Frost and Associates Board Authorization Date: June 8, 1994 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted by: Recommended by: 'Engineering Manager Date Cotistruction Manager Date Apr Approved as to Form: r 9 !i== s/I:/?* irector of Engineering to Generdl Counsel Date Accepted by: UHLER, INC. 1 1 i' r Cont 17 r Date "P-4" AGENDA ITEM #9(0) - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 "P-4" Page 1 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Colich Bros. Inc.. dba Colich & Sons C.O. No.: One (1) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Replacement of Pack Coast Highway Gravity Sewer. between The Arches (Newoort Boulevard) and Dover Drive, Contract No. 5-37-4 Consultant: Boyle Engineering Corporation Amount of this Change Order (Add)(Bedust) $68.117.50 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract 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 - DISCONTINUE BORING OPERATIONS UNDER PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY The contract drawings required the removal of an abandoned 27-inch V.C.P. sewer, Station Nos. 104+38 and 103+50, which crosses the Pacific Coast Highway at the Rocky Point Pump Station and in front of the Balboa Bay Club. The drawings called for an open trench excavation across the Pacific Coast Highway in order to remove the existing pipe and install a new 30-inch V.C.P. sewer. In order to reduce the traffic congestion and reduce the hardships that would surely be suffered by the local businesses, the Contractor approached the Districts with a plan to bore and jack pipe under the Pacific Coast Highway, a plan in which the Districts agreed to participate. The boring operation encountered an undisclosed massive concrete thrust block at a depth that the boring had to be discontinued. The Contractor shared equally in the actual costs when the decision was made by staff to return to the original plans of installation. ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $22,500.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 32 Calendar Days ITEM 2 - UNDISCLOSED CONCRETE ENCASEMENT The contract drawings specified the removal of a 27-inch abandoned sewer line running under the Pacific Coast Highway at Station 104+38. However, upon beginning the excavation operation, the V.C.P. pipe was found to be encased in a steel pipe with the annular space between the sewer pipe and the steel pipe filled with concrete. The outside of the steel pipe was also encased in concrete, making it extremely difficult to remove because only small sections of the Pacific Coast Highway could be blocked during this operation. The Contractor was instructed to perform the work on a force account basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)(2)(b). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $18,276.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 8 Calendar Days "0-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(a) - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 110-11, Page 2 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Colich Bros. Inc.. dba Colich & Sons C.O. No.. One (1 ) Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer. between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive, Contract No. 5-37-4 Consultant: Boyle Engineering Corporation ITEM 3 - UNDISCLOSED WATER MAIN During "potholing" operations, prior to the installation of the 30-inch sewer line at the Rocky Point Pump Station, undisclosed 4-inch and 6-inch water mains were located on the bay side of the wall that runs along Pacific Coast Highway. These water lines were the mains feeding the Balboa Bay Club. These lines had to be exposed and isolation valves installed in order to minimize disruption of service to the club while the sewer line was installed. The Contractor was instructed to perform the work on a force account basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)(2)(b). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $9,852.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 4 - REHABILITATION OF MANHOLES The interior of the existing 72-inch manhole at Station No. 103+50.57 in front of the Rocky Point Pump Station was found to be in a badly deteriorated condition. Repairs to the manholes were not in the original scope of work, but the Contractor was instructed to rebuild the interior with gunite concrete and then coat with polyurethane for protection from future deterioration. The Contractor performed the work on a negotiated basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)(2)(a). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $5,087.50 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days "Q-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(q) - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 "Q 2' Page 3 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108" ELLIS AVENUE, P. 0. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor. Colich Bros. Inc. dba Colich & Sons C.O. No.: One (1) Date: June B. 1994 Job: Replacement of Pack Coast Highway Gravity Sewer. between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive. Contract No. 5-37-4 Consultant: Boyle Engineering Corporation ITEM 5 - REMOVAL OF THRUST BLOCK SECTION AND CONCRETE ENCASEMENT While excavating across the Pacific Coast Highway in front of the Rocky Point Pump Station a concrete encasement of an abandoned 33-inch sewer force main and undisclosed concrete thrust block for the 24-inch force main were found to interfere with a City of Newport Beach 24-inch water main. A portion of the concrete encasement of the abandoned 33-inch force main was removed and dumped to insure no future damage to the water main. However, that portion of the concrete thrust block on the active 24-inch force main that was removed was replaced in order to provide the required stability but still not interfere with the water main. This work was at the request of the City of Newport Beach Public Works. The Contractor was instructed to perform the work on a force account basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)(2)(b). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $5,970.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 6 - REMOVAL OF CONCRETE MANHOLES The contract drawings provided for the replacement of existing 60-inch diameter manholes at Station Nos. 96+30 and 91+61. The specifications indicated that the existing manholes were brick when, in fact, they were reinforced precast concrete shafting encasing in additional concrete. This required additional labor to remove the concrete manholes, additional material to be hauled and dumped, and placing slurry in the voids required by added excavation. The Contractor performed the work on a force account basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10.6(B)(2)(b). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $6,069.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 3 Calendar Days 0-3" AGENDA ITEM #9(q) - DISTRICTS 5 & G "Q-3" Page 4 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Colich Bros. Inc., dba Colich & Sons C.O. No.. One (1) Date: June 8, 1994 Job: Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer. between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive, Contract No. 5-37-4 Consultant. Boyle Engineering Corporation ITEM 7 - REMOVAL OF UNDISCLOSED WATER MAIN During the excavation operation of the newer 30-inch sewer line, an undisclosed 10-inch cast iron water main was uncovered. This line later proved to be abandoned but caused delay and additional work to remove and haul away a section of the pipe. The Contractor performed the work on a force account basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)(2)(b). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $363.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $68,117,50 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER: 43 Calendar Days "0-4" AGENDA ITEM #9(q) - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 "Q-4" Page 5 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728.8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Colich Bros. Inc.. dba Colich 8 Sons C.O. No.: One (1) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer, between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive, Contract No. 5-37-4 Consultant: Boyle Enoineerina Corporation The additional work contained within this Change Order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original Contract and any extensions to the Contract time made by this and all previously issued Change Orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that 43 days extension of time to perform the work is required for this Change Order, but that no direct or indirect, incidental or consequential costs, expenses, losses or damages have been or will be incurred by Contractor, except as expressly granted and approve by this Change Order. SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date: August 2, 1993 Original Contract Time: 182 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: January 30, 1994 Time Extension this C.O.: 43 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 43 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: 225 Calendar Days Revised Final Completion Due Date: March 14, 1994 Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: Not Applicable Actual Final Completion Date: Not Applicable Original Contract Price $ 1,674,539.00 Prev. Authorized Changes $ 0.00 This Change (Add) (De9dct) $ 68,117.50 Amended Contract Price $ 1,742,656.50 "0-5" AGENDA ITEM #9(a) - DISTRICTS 5 &`6 "Q-5" Page 6 of 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P. 0. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728.8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Colich Bros. Inc., dba Colich & Sons C.O. No.. One (1) Date: June 8. 1994 Job: Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer, between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive, Contract No. 5-37-4 Consultant: Boyle Engineering Corporation Board Authorization Date: June 8, 1994 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted by: Re ommended by: ngineering Manager f ZDa e Zonstruction Manager Date Appro� Approved as to Form ez�'-L PI/ Director of Engineering Dafe General o nsel Date Accepted by: -C{OLIICH BROS., INC. dba COLICH & SONS L�L1�.-- -I(.-5 4 Contractor Da e 110-61, AGENDA ITEM #9(q) - DISTRICTS 5 & 6 110-6" RESOLUTION NO. 94-67-5 ACCEPTING CONTRACT NO. 5-35-2 AS COMPLETE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 5 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING SOUTH COAST TRUNK SEWER, PHASE 2, CONTRACT NO. 5-35-2, AS COMPLETE AND APPROVING FINAL CLOSEOUT AGREEMENT ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the contractor, Mike Prlich & Sons, has completed the construction in accordance with the terms of the contract for South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2, Contract No. 5-35-2, on December 15, 1993 ; and, Section 2 . That by letter the Districts' Director of Engineering 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 South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2, Contract No. 5-35-2, is hereby accepted as completed in accordance with the terms of the contract therefor, dated January 27, 1993; and, Section 4. That the Districts' Director of Engineering is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Notice of Completion therefor; and, Section 5. That the Final Closeout Agreement with Mike Prlich & Sons, setting forth the terms and conditions for acceptance of South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2, Contract "R-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(r) - DISTRICT 5 "R-1" No. 5-35-2 , is hereby approved and accepted in form approved by the General Counsel; and, Section 6. That the chairman and Secretary of District No. 5, is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the District. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994 . RC6AD.067 "R-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(r ) - DISTRICT 5 "R-2" PETITION FOR ANNEXATION Date: 3 c/ of 3 TD: Hoard of Directors County Sanitation District No. 7 P. 0. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 I (We) , the undersigned landouner(s), do hereby request that proceedings be taken to annex /, 9(o acres (Gross - to nearest hundredth) of territory to the District located in the vicinity of yp v< c - , r C (Indicate adjacent street intersection or area description) in the off¢ of SA,--h more particularly Co- ,oy (Indicate city or unincorporated territory) described and shown on the LEGPL DESCRIPTION and MAP enclosed herewith which has been prepared in accordance with the District's annexation procedures. The street address of the property is: •. 1.1 4 'a A,w) u2 :'A 44 Jei;c P� c,(, The reason for the proposed annexation is: S F K,-n. c oN Nc t M.14 Said property is ✓ Inhabited / Uninhabited. Nmber of registered voters, if any: The assessed value of the property is: $ Also enclosed are the JUSTIFICATION OF PROPOSAL QUESTIONNAIRE required by the local Agency Formation Co mission (and an Environmental Impact Report, if appropriate) and a check in the amount of $500.00 representing payment of the DISTRICT PROCESSING FEE. Notices and rnmmnications relative to this proposal for annexation should be sent to the following: YNn,NAS .(. Cw.r.G NiL T Jol{I� M, Ms'MHt[G //NV2 UER,GOf¢ �OQ, //�r1 fN VC-KG ait Pf, 6,4,Lna .f-w , 9��5' Tele:(2/y) 83A-PYS9 Tele: (-2/5/) .SVY- 9Z9O SIGNATURE OF EAEDMER DATE SIGNED ADDRESS OF IANDUMER X l.' U2 I'A umeaa- DY , INoTyA .ped L. $4/ tA_ nk_A . Al Name ( or printed) ' x .� Ran; i� / i S ? tf,4 /7r, 4'c or prin ) "S" AGENDA ITEM #9(s) - DISTRICT 7 "S" RESOLUTION NO. 94-68-7 AUTHORIZING INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS AND FILING OF APPLICATION TO LAFCO RE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO DISTRICT NO. 7 (ANNEXATION NO. 146 - GUNCKELL AND MITCHELL ANNEXATION) A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS AND REQUESTING THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO TAKE PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT OF TERRITORY KNOWN AS ANNEXATION NO. 146 - GUNCKELL AND MITCHELL ANNEXATION TO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That proceedings are hereby authorized to be initiated by District No. 7, and the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County is hereby requested to take proceedings for the annexation of territory designated as "Annexation No. 146 - Gunckell and Mitchell Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 701, the boundaries of which are more particularly described and delineated on Exhibits "A" and "B., attached hereto and by reference made a part of this resolution, according to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth in this resolution in the manner provided by the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985; and, Section 2. That this proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985, Division 3, commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code; and, "T-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(s) - DISTRICT 7 "T-1" Section 7 . That this application is for the purpose of annexing approximately 1. 65 acres of territory to District No. 7 in the vicinity north of the intersection of La Vereda Drive and Skyline Drive in Lemon Heights in unincorporated County territory, to provide sanitary sewer service to said territory, which said service is not now provided by any public agency, as requested by Thomas L. Gunckell, II and John M. Mitchell, owners of said property; and, Section 4 . That the territory to be annexed is uninhabited; and, Section 5. That this proposal is consistent with the adopted sphere of influence of the affected District; and, Section 6. That the proposed Annexation No. 146 - Gunckell and Mitchell Annexation to District No. 7, shall be subject to the condition that all fees required to be paid to the District must be satisfied prior to completion of the annexation proceedings; and, Section 7. That the District hereby agrees, pursuant to Section 99.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, to waive its ad valorem property tax allocation exchange with other affected taxing agencies. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. x Lass "T-2" AGENDA ITEM #9(s) - DISTRICT 7 "T-2" RESOLUTION NO. 94-56 ' APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BUSH & ASSOCIATES. INC. FOR SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS COLLECTION SYSTEM AND TREATMENT PLANT PROJECTS, SPECIFICATION NO. P-150 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BUSH & ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS COLLECTION SYSTEM AND TREATMENT PLANT PROJECTS, SPECIFICATION NO. P-150 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2 , 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County have heretofore adopted a policy establishing procedures for the selection of professional services; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to said procedures, an agreement has been negotiated with Bush & Associates, Inc. for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, for various collection system and treatment plant projects to be constructed over the next three years; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to authorization of the Boards of Directors on April 13, 1994, the Selection Committee, established pursuant to said procedures, has negotiated and certified the final negotiated fee for said services. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3 , 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: "U-1" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (1) - ALL DISTRICTS "U-1" Section 1. That the certain Professional Services Agreement dated June 8, 1994, by and between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County and Bush & Associates, Inc. for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, for various collection system and treatment plant projects to be constructed over the next three years, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2 . That payment for said services is hereby authorized in accordance with the provisions set forth in said agreement, for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994 , with provision for two one-year extensions, for a total amount not to exceed $120,000.00. 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, 13 and 14, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. RAO1A/.066 "U-2" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (1) - ALL DISTRICTS "U-2" RESOLUTION NO. 94-57 APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CLIFFORD A. FORKERT, CIVIL ENGINEER, FOR SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS COLLECTION SYSTEM AND TREATMENT PLANT PROJECTS, SPECIFICATION NO. P-150 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3 , 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CLIFFORD A. FORKERT, CIVIL ENGINEER, FOR SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS COLLECTION SYSTEM AND TREATMENT PLANT PROJECTS, SPECIFICATION NO. P-150 tx****f•+f***��++twxfrff��*+rt��f.,rs WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County have heretofore adopted a policy establishing procedures for the selection of professional services; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to said procedures, an agreement has been negotiated with Clifford A. Forkert, Civil Engineer, for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, for various collection system and treatment plant projects to be constructed over the next three years; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to authorization of the Boards of Directors on April 13, 1994, the Selection Committee, established pursuant to said procedures, has negotiated and certified the final negotiated fee for said services. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: "V-1" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (1 ) (b) - ALL DISTRICTS "V-1" Section 1. That the certain Professional Services Agreement dated June 8, 1994, by and between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County and Clifford A. Forkert, Civil Engineer, for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, for various collection system and treatment plant projects to be constructed over the next three years, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That payment for said services is hereby authorized in accordance with the provisions set forth in said agreement, for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for two one-year extensions, for a total amount not to exceed $120,000.00. 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, 13 and 14 , are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. "V-2" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (1) (b) - ALL DISTRICTS "V-2" RESOLUTION NO. 94-58 APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DGA CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS COLLECTION SYSTEM AND TREATMENT PLANT PROJECTS, SPECIFICATION NO. P-150 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5„ 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DGA CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS COLLECTION SYSTEM AND TREATMENT PLANT PROJECTS, SPECIFICATION NO. P-150 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County have heretofore adopted a policy establishing procedures for the selection of professional services; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to said procedures, an agreement has been negotiated with DGA Consultants, Inc. for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, for various collection system and treatment plant projects to be constructed over the next three years,; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to authorization of the Boards of Directors on April 13 , 1994 , the Selection Committee, established pursuant to said procedures, has negotiated and certified the final negotiated fee for said services. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2 , 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: "W-1" AGENDA ITEM #13(b)(1) (C) - ALL DISTRICTS "W-1" Section 1. That the certain Professional Services Agreement dated June 8, 1994, by and between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County and DGA Consultants, Inc. for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, for various collection system and treatment plant projects to be constructed over the next three years, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That payment for said services is hereby authorized in accordance with the provisions set forth in said agreement, for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for two one-year extensions, for a total amount not to exceed $120, 000. 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, 13 and 14, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. MG1W..0" "W-2" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (1) (C) - ALL DISTRICTS "W-2" RESOLUTION NO. 94-59 APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO PURCHASE ORDER NO, 53935 AGREEMENT WITH REISH MARINE STUDIES. INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR MARINE BIOASSAY AND TOXICITY ANALYSIS (SPECIFICATION NO. P-152) A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO PURCHASE ORDER NO. 53935 AGREEMENT WITH REISH MARINE STUDIES, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR MARINE BIOASSAY AND TOXICITY ANALYSIS (SPECIFICATION NO. P-152) x+xxx+++++++xt++xx++++++++++xxxx+x WHEREAS, the Districts have heretofore entered into Purchase Order No. 53935 Agreement with Reish Marine Studies, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services for Marine Bioassay and Toxicity Analysis (Specification No. P-152) ; and, WHEREAS, it is now deemed appropriate to amend said agreement to provide an extension to the agreement for one additional year for needed additional marine bioassay and toxicity analysis work and services pertaining to the Districts' NPDES Ocean Discharge Permit. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2 , 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Change Order No. 1 to the Purchase Order No. 53935 Agreement dated December 18, 1991, with Reish Marine Studies, Inc. , for Environmental Consulting Services for Marine Bioassay and Toxicity Analysis (Specification No. P-152) , providing for extension of the agreement for one additional year "X-1" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (2) - ALL DISTRICTS 11X-1" for needed additional marine bioassay and toxocity analysis work and services pertaining to the Districts' NPDES Ocean Discharge Permit, is hereby approved and accepted; and, section 2. That said additional work shall be accomplished for an amount not to exceed $16,000.00, increasing the maximum authorized compensation from $24,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $40,000.00, as follows: Existing Amended Purchase change purchase Order Order No. 1 Order Consultant Services, at hourly rates for labor plus overhead, profit and specimens $24,000.00 $16, 000. 00 $40,000.00 TOTAL, not to $24 , 000. 00 $16, 000.00 $40, 000.00 exceed section 3: That the General Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Change Order No. 1 in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. RdDL.0J9 "X-2" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (2) - ALL DISTRICTS "X-2" RESOLUTION NO. 94-60 APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. it TO AGREEMENT WITH SAIC FOR OCEAN MONITORING CONTRACT SERVICES FOR CSDOC 120-INCH OCEAN OUTFALL, SPECIFICATION NO. 5-032 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3 , 5, '6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 11 TO AGREEMENT WITH SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION (SAIC) FOR OCEAN MONITORING CONTRACT SERVICES FOR COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 120-INCH OCEAN OUTFALL, SPECIFICATION NO. 5-032 , EXTENDING CONTRACT FROM JULY 1, 1994 TO FEBRUARY 28, 1996 WHEREAS, the Districts have heretofore entered into an agreement with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 120-Inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. 5-032; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 1 provided for the acquisition of additional laboratory instrumentation and authorized additional laboratory work to perform analyses an ocean sediments for trace constituents to comply with additional requirements imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 provided for modifications to the Current Monitoring Program required by EPA; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 3 extended the contract from July 1, 1586, to June 30, 1987; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 4 extended the contract from July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988; and, "Y-1" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (3) - ALL DISTRICTS "Y-1" WHEREAS, Amendment No. 5 extended the contract from July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989, and provided for program modifications for the contract period from July 1, 1987 through June 30, 1988 as well as the fourth year of said contract, July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989; and provided for a reduction in fees to be negotiated for years one, two and three of said contract; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 6 extended the contract from July 1, 1989 to June 30, 1990; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 7 extended the contract from July 1, 1990 to June 30, 1991; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 8 extended the contract from July 1, 1991 to June 30, 1992; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 9 extended the contract from July 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993; and, WHEREAS, Amendment No. 10 extended the contract from July 1, 1993 to June 30, 1994; and, WHEREAS, it is now deemed appropriate to further amend the agreement to extend the existing contract from July 1, 1994 to February 28, 1996; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with the established procedures for selection of professional services, the Selection Committee has negotiated and certified a fee for said services. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6,- 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, "Y-2" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (3) - ALL DISTRICTS "Y-2" DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Amendment No. 11 dated July 1, 1994, to that certain agreement dated August 7, 1985, by and between County Sanitation District No. 1, acting for itself and on behalf of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14, for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for County Sanitation Districts of orange County 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. 5-032, providing for extension of the existing contract from July 1, 1994 through February 28, 1996 (Contract Period Ten) , is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That the contract provision for fees be increased by $2,287, 334. 00 for the tenth year of said contract, increasing the total authorized compensation from $15,277,799.00 to $17,565,133.00; and, 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, 13 and 14, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Amendment No. 11 in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. RAM]2.W "Y-3" AGENDA ITEM #13(b) (3) - ALL DISTRICTS "Y-3" RESOLUTION NO. 94-69 APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ERNST & YOUNG FOR TWO-PHASE INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DISTRICTS' CAPITAL PROJECTS MANAGEMENT FUNCTION A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ERNST & YOUNG TO CONDUCT A TWO-PHASE INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE DISTRICTS' CAPITAL PROJECTS MANAGEMENT FUNCTION WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County have determined the need for an independent review of the District's capital projects management function; and, WHEREAS, District desires to engage a consultant to conduct, as Phase 1, a Factual Assessment, related to specific capital projects, including adequacy of District's organization, construction contract procedures and project management; and Phase 2, Detailed Analysis, of the District's capital project management function, based upon findings in Phase 1 and as directed by District's Directors; and, WHEREAS, Ernst & Young is qualified to provide the necessary services in connection with these requirements and has agreed to provide the necessary professional services; and, WHEREAS, District, acting through its Executive Committee, has determined the final fees and expenses to be paid for Phase 1 of said services. "Z 1" AGENDA ITEM #14(b) (3) (a) - ALL DISTRICTS "Z-1" NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain Professional Services Agreement dated June 8, 1994, with Ernst & Young to conduct a two-phase independent review of the Districts' Capital Projects Management Function including current Districts' organizational structure and management practices, is hereby approved and accepted; and, section 2. That Phase 1 of said review is hereby authorized, and payment therefore authorized in accordance with the provisions of said agreement for a total amount not to exceed $85,000.00; and, Section 3 . That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 1, acting for itself and as contracting agent for Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14, are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. MGJ�.av "Z-2" AGENDA ITEM #14(b) (3) (a) - ALL DISTRICTS "Z-2" RESOLUTION NO. 94-61 DECLARATION OF POLICY WITH REGARD TO WATER RECLAMATION A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING POLICY WITH REGARD TO WATER RECLAMATION WHEREAS, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California ("Districts") provide wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services to serve all or part of 23 Cities and unincorporated areas occupying the central and northwestern areas of Orange County; and, WHEREAS, the statewide water supply is becoming increasingly unreliable; and, WHEREAS, recycled wastewater has been widelky used as a source of water in the State of California for nearly a century; and, WHEREAS, there exists a continuing and growing need for additional sources of useable water in Orange County; and, WHEREAS, one of said sources is the reuse of reclaimed water from treated wastewater; and, WHEREAS, the Districts have long supported and continue to support the beneficial reuse of wastewater, wastewater processing residuals and by-products; and, WHEREAS, in 1961, the Districts adopted a policy urging that all methods of reclamation of water from sewage in Orange County be thoroughly investigated; and, WHEREAS, in 1972, the Districts and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) entered into a cooperative agreement to reclaim 15 million gallons per day of Districts' secondary effluent for beneficial reuse purposes, which said reclaimed water has been successfully used for greenbelt irrigation and to provide a barrier to prevent seawater intrusion with the underground fresh water supply; and, "AA-1" AGENDA ITEM #16(b) (1) - ALL DISTRICTS "AA-1" WHEREAS, these Districts believe that additional projects for reclamation and reuse of water from treated wastewater in Orange County should be thoroughly studied and, if feasible, should be put into effect; and, WHEREAS, the Districts are authorized to construct, maintain and operate such facilities as may be necessary to conserve, recycle and put to beneficial use reclaimed water, including use in treatment plants as processing and irrigation water and, in cooperation with OCWD, replenishing the underground water basin, landscape irrigation and industrial process uses; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD have adopted policies supporting the reclamation of wastewater and the development of projects for providing the delivery and beneficial reuse of reclaimed water; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD have studied numerous alternative proposals for reclamation of water including a project known as the "Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project" (Project) , said Project having been conceived to develop a safe and reliable source of water by providing up to one hundred thousand acre feet of reclaimed water per year primarily for groundwater replenishment, and appearing to be the most cost- effective water reclamation project of all the alternatives considered by the Districts and OCWD; and, WHEREAS, Districts and OCWD are authorized to enter into agreements between themselves and others to carry out their respective powers and authority and to jointly determine the feasibility and implement such projects. NOW, THEREFORE, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts No. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: "AA-2" AGENDA ITEM #16(b) (1) - ALL DISTRICTS "AA-2" Section 1: That the Boards of Directors of the County Sanitation Districts hereby reaffirm their long-standing declaration and support of a policy that all promising methods of conservation and reclamation of wastewater within the Districts' service area in Orange County should be thoroughly investigated and studied; and, Section 2: That if such studies determine new conservation and reclamation programs to he feasible, that appropriate public agencies make all reasonable efforts to institute said reclamation programs into effect at the earliest possible date; and, Section 3: That the Conservation, Recycle and Reuse Committee of the Boards of Directors is hereby authorized and directed to receive and review reports from staff and provide direction and advise, as needed from time to time, in furtherance of the goals of this policy. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. .70 "AA-Y AGENDA ITEM #16(b) (1) - ALL DISTRICTS "AA-Y RESOLUTION NO. 94-63-2 APPROVING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT A JACKSON RE CONTRACT NO 2-9-Rl A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT A. JACKSON, PROVIDING FOR TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS IN CONNECTION WITH REHABILITATION OF CYPRESS AVENUE SUBTRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-9-Rl ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WHEREAS, District No. 2 is proposing the construction of Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1; and, WHEREAS, a portion of said contract is adjacent to the property of Robert A. Jackson; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary for the District and its contractor to temporarily enter onto the property of Robert A. Jackson to perform said construction work. 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 certain License Agreement dated June 8, 1994, wherein temporary construction access is granted to County Sanitation District No. 2 in connection with Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, over a portion of Robert A. Jackson's property, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That said temporary construction access is granted at no cost to the District, except for any costs included in said contract to restore the property after said construction work is completed; and, Section 3 . That the Chairman and Secretary of the District are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994 . . v57.063 "BB" AGENDA ITEM #35<b> - DISTRICT 2 "BB" RESOLUTION NO. 94-64-2 APPROVING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH DONALD J. ORNELLAS RE CONTRACT NO. 2-9-R1 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT A. JACKSON, PROVIDING FOR TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS IN CONNECTION WITH REHABILITATION OF CYPRESS AVENUE SUBTRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-9-Rl xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx+++++xxxxxxxxx:x+x+ WHEREAS, District No. 2 is proposing the construction of Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1; and, WHEREAS, a portion of said contract is adjacent to the property of Donald J. Ornellas; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary for the District and its contractor to temporarily enter onto the property of Donald J. Ornellas to perform said construction work. 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 certain License Agreement dated June 8, 1994, wherein temporary construction access is granted to County Sanitation District No. 2 in connection with Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, over a portion of Donald J. Ornellas' property, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That said temporary construction access is granted at no cost to the District, except for any costs included in said contract to restore the property after said construction work is completed; and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of the District are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Agreement in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 8, 1994. mg57.054 "CC° AGENDA ITEM #35(c) - DISTRICT 2 "Cc,, RESOLUTION NO. 94-65-2 AWARDING CONTRACT NO. 2-9-R1 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REHABILITATION OF CYPRESS AVENUE SUBTRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-9-R1 The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2, of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. In accordance with the Districts' Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, the Board of Directors, on April 13, 1994, authorized filing a Notice of Exemption in connection with the proposed project for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1; and, Section 2. That the written recommendation this day submitted to the Board of Directors by the Districts' Director of Engineering that award of contract be made to Colich Bros. , Inc. dba Colich 6 Sons for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, and bid tabulation and proposal submitted for said work are hereby received and ordered filed; and, Section 3. That the contract for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, be awarded to Colich Bros. , Inc. dba Colich 6 Sons in the total amount of $2, 482,762 .00 in accordance with the terms of their bid and the prices contained therein; and, "DD-1" AGENDA ITEM #35(e) - DISTRICT 2 "DD-1" Section 4. 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 5. That all other bids for said work are hereby rejected. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June S, 1994. Raaaoea "DD-2" AGENDA ITEM #35(e) - DISTRICT 2 "DD-2" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS May 10, 1994 M ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFONNIA 11:00 a.m. tOMO EW6>VEN11E 1 Addendum PA BOX Mt) w NN Vw Y,cw IA 92R 127 BID TABULATION me+aszza++ Contract No. 2-9-Rl PROJECT TITLE: Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of 6,900 LF of VCP and DIP Sewer, Sizes 39 inches to 18 inches between Yorba Linda Boulevard and Rolling Hills Drive and Addendum No. 1 to Contract No. 2-9-R1: Sewer Modifications for ATBSF Commuter Rail, Contract No. 2-36 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $1,500.000 BUDGET AMOUNT: $3,000,000" ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID 1. Colich 8 Sons, Gardena, CA $2,482.762.00 2. Albert W. Davies, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, CA $2,599,928.00' 3. Mike Prlich 8 Sons, South El Monte, CA $2,650,000.00 4. Mladen Buntich Construction Co. Inc., Sunland, CA $2,696,235.D0' 'Corrected Totals "As proposed in 1994-95 budget for District No. 2 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 Colich 8 Sons in the bid amount of$2,482,762.00 as the lowest and best bid , - Blakea%/a%/'/v/j//. Anderson Director of Engineering "DD-3" AGENDA ITEM a35(e) - DISTRICT 2 "DD-3" 1� AHN CORPORATION _._._ REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS &ASSET MANAGEMENT May 23, 1994 Mr. J. Wayne Sylvester General Manager Orange County Sanitation Districts 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 RE: APPEAL OF SANITATION DISTRICT FEES FOR A SELF STORAGE PROJECT IN NEWPORT BEACH, CA Dear Mr. Sylvester, As you may know, Dahn Corporation is in the process of developing a self storage project in the City of Newport Beach. For the past several months I have been working with Mr. Thomas Dawes regarding the reduction of the Sanitation District fees for that project. We have requested that the fees be assessed only on the sanitation requirements of the managers residence and the office. These are the only areas throughout the entire project that require sanitation service . The self storage buildings do not have any water or sewer requirements and therefor should not be subject to the square footage fee calculation. We have redesigned the project to separate the managers residence and office to legally comply with the UBC code by providing a two hour separation. This is satisfactory to the City of Newport Beach. We maintain that is design should also be satisfactory to the Sanitation District. We propose to pay the fee based on the residence and office as two „n; rs and eliminate the square footage calculation entirely. Using that method, the fee would come to S4, 700. 00 for two units. Dahn Corporation believes that this offer is fair. In the event the District declines to accept this offer, we would like to request an appeal of the fee to the Board of Directors. Sincerely, Dahn Corporation 7 Robert R. Bradley, Jr. Executive Vice President CC, Ted Hamilton, Esq. 18552 MacArthur Blvd,#495,Irvine,CA 92715 (714)752.1282•FAX(714)752.0301 "EE" AGENDA ITEM #38(a) - DISTRICT 5 "EE" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 19 29 39 59, 69 79 119 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MELTING ON MAY 119 1994 ►SATIOA,G 3 MIS �7aCE COS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA ROLL CALL A regular meeting of Ore Boards of Dfrettnrs of County Sanitation Diebicts Nees. 1. 2, 3. S. G. 7, 11, 13 and 14 Of Orange Coumy, California,was hats an May 11, 1994,at 7:30 p.m..In the Districts' Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Alleglenot sold invpea4on the had Was called and after Seermery reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. 1, 2,3, 6.6,7, 11, 13 and 14 a6 follows: ACTIVE ALTERNATE DMECTORS DMECTORS OLS'rNCT NO, 1: L Fred sellers, Clhelman Gone Beyer L James M. Ferryman, Chairman pro tam Wte Reese L Pet McGuigan Thama.E. Laatr v Z Roper Stanton William G. Steiner Tracy A.Worley i Thomas R. Selleredi DLSTRICT NO.2: 3� Jam Collins,Chairmen George Scott L In,Reader.Chairman pro hem Tom Dery y Fra4 Bmmn _ Gene Bays, Buck CaWn Cma No" 9any Game Bob Bell Norman 2. Eraemode Katmai Maemweiler William D. Memnev James N.Flo. Caney J. Nelson Glum PeM1er Miguel PWido L Thames E.Lutc Hager Stamon William G. Steiner Danel T.Welch John M.Goloson y George L.Laket _ Sheldon Singer DISTMR NO.3: _J` Sal A.Si Chairman William C.Estates y_ Bume Dunlap. Clumtun pro rem _ Can"J.Nelson Grants Brown Gwen A. Forsythe 11 i Catlin Clem;Nara, Jam Cvllms 6...v Swrt y James H.Flora William D. Mamney Don R.Griffin Donald Bone Welly Wm Eva G.Mirer TI,mas L LuD Pat MCGupen find. Muula facterrson Fade Rneitaille _ Richard Patin Joyce C.Nicholson L Iry Raider Tom Daly Msroie L Rice _ James V. Evens L Sheldon Sdpen George L 2Lket y Roper Sumon William G. Starer • CNnes SyNie AnVnM Selvaggi DLS'i NO. 6: 1_ PtW Samons. Chwmun Jan DpWy y Wiliam G.Sonar.Claimant pro tam _ doper Stamen y_ John C. Cos. Jr. Jan Dewy DISTRICT NO.6: 1— Jamaa A.Warmer, Chairman Mho Party Evelyn Win.Chaiman pro tam L Joan C.U.,Jr. y William G.Steiner Raper Sumon DISTRICT NO.7: 1_ Berry Hemmund. Chairman Mike Ward y Thomas R. SeltarelF.Cluimun We tam J.Pons Fred Berke. Gem Bever y J.n Geller, _ Pnil Samore y Ted Mariana Miguel PWId. y_ Wilfom G. Steiner _ Roper Stamon y Jam..A.Warman Mike Schaefer DISTRICT NO. 11: 3_ Grace Wanehall. CMlman Ease Roaiaille y Victor"long. Chaiman pro am _ Lvda Modt.m4a nereon i Roper Samara William G. Steiner o DISTRICT NO. 13: y Jam M.GWlieson, Chairmen Daniel T.Welch Gbml Parker,Chairman pro tam Burma DuNep Fred genera Gera Bever In,Ratter Tom Defy y Wllum G. Shelter Roper Stamon DI,STR=NO. 14: Peer A.Swan,Chairmen Osnyl Miller Berry Hammond.Chaanan We tam Mike Ward Fred Banera Gene Beyer Z Jim Pons Tree,A.Worley y Wllgm G. Seem _ Royer Salmon —2— 05/11/94 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager, Blake P. Anderson, Margie Nellor, Gary G. Streed, Penny Kyle, Assistant Board Secretary, , Catherine Biele, Mike Broyles, Mark Campbell, Chris Cervellone, Corinne Clawson, Bernardo Deanda, Roy English, Charles Frey, John Finias, Gary Hasenstab, Roy Handy, David Hise, Ed Hodges, Steve Hovey, Tod Jacobson, Larry Lazorek, John Linder, Paul Mitchell, Robert Morris, Kent C. Nelson, Rory Nelson, Karl Nordgren, Bob Ooten, Phil Serrantino, Curt Shelp, Mary Simpson, Manny Stoffer, George Thuro, Jack Vincent, Ray Young, Paula Zeller OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, David L. Hamilton, Kevin Johnson, Bill Knopf, Leslie A. Pontious, Dan Spradlin, Phil Stone DISTRICTS 1. 7 & 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file minute excerpts re Board Appointments That the minute excerpts from the City of Tustin re election of mayor and appointment of alternate Directors, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed, as follows: 1' Mayor) District Active Director Alternate Director 1 Tracy A. Worley Thomas R. Saltarelli 7 Thomas R. Saltarelli• Jim Potts 14 Jim Potts Tracy A. Worley ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman announced that the office of Election of Vice Joint Chairman Vice Joint Chairman had been vacated by a change in Board representation and that election of a new Vice Joint Chairman would, therefore, be in order. It was then moved: That Directors John C. Cox, Jr. and Peer A. Swan be nominated as candidates for the office of Vice Joint Chairman. The Joint Chairman then declared a five-minute recess to allow each District to caucus. The vote was then polled by roll call, following which the Assistant Secretary announced that Director Cox had been elected Vice Joint Chairman. b -3- 05/11/94 DISTRICT 1 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman oro tem of the Board Chairman pro tam of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared • nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1. It was then moved: That Director Fred Barrera be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Barrera as Chairman. It was further moved: That Director James M. Ferryman be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Ferryman as Chairman pro tem. DISTRICT 2 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board Chairman pro tem of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2. It was then moved: That Director John Collins be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Collins as Chairman. It was further moved: That Director Iry Pickier be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Pickier as Chairman pro tem. DISTRICT 3 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board Chairman pro tem of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. It was then moved: That Director Sal A. Sapien and Iry Pickier be nominated as candidates for the office of Chairman. Director Pickier respectfully declined his nomination. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the • Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Sapien as Chairman. It was further moved: That Director Burnie Dunlap be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Dunlap as Chairman pro tem. -4- 05/11/94 DISTRICT 5 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman pro tern of the Board Chairman pro tem of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tern of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5. It was then moved: That Director Phil Sansone be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Sansone as Chairman. It was further moved: That Director William G. Steiner be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Steiner as Chairman pro tem. DISTRICT 6 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board Chairman pro tem of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6. It was then moved: That Director James A. Wahner be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Wahner as Chairman. It was further moved: That Director Evelyn Hart be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Hart as Chairman pro tem. DISTRICT 7 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board Chairman pro tem of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7. It was then moved: That Directors Barry Hammond and Ted R. Moreno be nominated as candidates for the office of Chairman. The vote was then polled by roll call, following which the Assistant Secretary announced that Director Hammond had been elected Chairman. It was further moved: That Director Thomas R. Saltarelli be nominated as a candidate for , the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Saltarelli as Chairman pro tem. -5- 05/11/94 DISTRICT 11 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman Pro tem of the Board Chairman pro tern of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 . It was then moved: That Director Grace H. Winchell be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Winchell as Chairman. It was further moved: That Director Victor Leipzig be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Leipzig as Chairman pro tem. DISTRICT 13 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board Chairman pro tem of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13. It was then moved: That Director John M. Gullixson be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Gullixson as Chairman. It was further moved: That Director Glenn Parker be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Parker as Chairman pro tem. DISTRICT 14 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chairman and are to be held for Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board Chairman pro tem of each of the Boards of Directors, the Assistant Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chairman and Chairman pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14. It was then moved: That Director Peer A. Swan be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Swan as Chairman. • It was further moved: That Director Barry Hammond be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Assistant Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Hammond as Chairman pro tem. -6- 05/11/94 ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman and Vice Joint Chairman Presentation of resolution of presented a plaque and resolution of appreciation acpreciation and plague to retiring to retiring active director Leslie A. Pontious, who Director represented the City of Tustin on the Board of District No. 14. The Joint Chairman reported that retiring active director Charles E. Puckett, former representative from Tustin would be present at the June Sth meeting. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman welcomed newly-seated Presentation of District Dins to new Director Jim Potts, who is representing the City Directors of Tustin and Alternate Director Joyce C. Nicholson, who is representing the City of Cypress, to the Boards. He then presented pins bearing the Districts' new "2020 VISION" Wastewater Management Action Plan logo. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman announced that at the Presentation of CWPCA State-Wide annual meeting of the California Water Pollution Awards Control Association (CWPCA) held last month, the Sanitation Districts' Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley was selected for the state-wide, Large Plant of the Year Award. He then recognized John Finias, Chief Plant Operator of Plant No. 1, and Rory Nelson, Senior Operations Supervisor of Plant No. 1, who accepted the award. Chairman Mahoney also recognized Mahin Talebi, Acting Source Control Manager, for receiving the state-wide Industrial and Hazardous Waste Person of the Year Award. Margie Nellor, Acting Director of Technical Services, accepted the award on behalf of Ms. Talebi. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman announced the tentatively Report of the Joint Chairman scheduled upcoming meetings as follows: Fiscal Policy Committee - Wednesday, May 18th, at 5:30 p.m. Personnel Committee - Thursday, May 19th, at 4:30 p.m. Joint Works Selection Committee - Wednesday, May 25th, at 4:30 p.m. Executive Committee/Fiscal Policy Committee - Wednesday, May 25th, at 5:30 p.m. (Directors James M. Ferryman and James H. Flora were also invited to attend.) Executive Subcommittee - Wednesday, June 1 st, at 7:00 a.m. at the Irvine office of Ernst & Young -7- 05/11/94 ALL DISTRICTS The General Manager reported that second Report of the General Manaaer New Directors' Orientation and Treatment Plant Tour, tentatively scheduled for Saturday, May 14th, for those Directors who were unable to attend on March 19th, had been cancelled due to scheduling conflicts for those Directors. He stated that staff was in the process of contacting the Directors to try to reschedule the orientation for sometime in June. Mr. Sylvester also reported that a memorandum had been included in District Nos. 6, 7 and 14 Directors' meeting folders that evening regarding possible petroleum contamination in the soil near the intersection of Baker Avenue and Harbor Boulevard in connection with the Baker-Gisler Interceptor project. Testing for contamination has already begun and, if found, could add substantially to the cost of the job. DISTRICT 1 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes - the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 3 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 6 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 7 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -8- 05/11/94 DISTRICT 11 Thera being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 13 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 14 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held April 13, 1994, the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. 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" 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. 0 4 04/20/94 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $623,913.39 $648,656.13 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 163,850.32 1,316,931.36 Joint Working Capital Fund - 217,980.33 426,829.24 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 278.10 43,636.73 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 1,028.24 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 12,443.44 20,199.90 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 18,697.65 33,682.54 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 65,600.10 3,780.16 DISTRICT NO, 6 0.00 1,607.01 DISTRICT N0. 7 - 1,011.78 9,317.89 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 287,187.84 13,399.23 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 27.14 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 1,807.66 87,346.18 DISTRICTS NOS. 3 & 11 JOINT - 0.00 937.50 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 17,470.55 6,731.56 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 13.53 2,277.86 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 143.73 6,754.50 $1.410.398.42 32.623.143.17 -9- 05/11/94 ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Landscape Maintenance Specification No. M-047 Receive and file letter from Azteca Landscape Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the letter dated April 25, 1994, from Azteca Landscape, apparent low bidder, requesting that they be allowed to withdraw their bid for said work due to a mathematical error, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. Awardina Landscape Maintenance. Specification No. M-047. to Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-50, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Landscape Maintenance, Specification No. M-047, to Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc., for a one-year period beginning June 1, 1994, for the maximum annual amount of $41,470.00, with option for four one-year extensions. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Phase I Wastehauler Dumping_ Facilities Modifications, Job No. P1-46-1 Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Job No. P1-46-1 Director William G. Steiner questioned if contract drawings had failed to be complete or if the engineering consultant for this project had failed to include in their design drawings complete information on an existing bulkhead in this project, or if during the original construction of the bulkhead the inspection process had not been properly conducted. The Director of Engineering stated that there was more concrete poured than called for but if the contractor sees more concrete being poured than what is specified, it is deemed acceptable and no one at that time 0 5 years ago) saw a need to document the added bulk as changes to the bulkhead in the future were never anticipated. -10- 05/11/94 It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Phase I Wastehauler Dumping Facilities Modifications, Job No. P11-46-1, authorizing a net addition of $49,998.00 to the contract with Dorado Enterprises, Inc. for five items of added or - deleted work, and granting a time extension of 29 calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. Accepting Job No. P1-46-1 as complete Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-51, accepting Phase I Wastehauler Dumping Facilities Modifications, Job No. P7-46-1, as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 3 to the Plans and specifications for Job That Change Order No. 3 to the plans and No. P2-42-2 specifications for Secondary Treatment Expansion at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-42-2, authorizing a net deduction of $90,328.00 from the contract with Margate Construction for three items of added or deleted work, and granting a time extension of 74 calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Industrial Water Pipeline Extension at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-51 Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Job No. P2.51 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Industrial Water Pipeline Extension at Plant No. 2. Job No. 122-51, modifying two items of work and granting a time extension of 38 calendar days for completion of said modified work at no increase in cost to the contract with Amick Construction Co., Inc., be, and is hereby, approved. -11- 05/11/94 Aoorovina Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Job No. 102-51 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Industrial Water Pipeline Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-51, authorizing a deduction of $12,750.00 from the contract with Amick Construction Co., Inc. for adjustment of engineer's quantities, be, and is hereby, approved. Acceptina Job No. P2-51 as complete Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-52, accepting Industrial Water Pipeline Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-51, as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Office Trailer Relocations at Plants Nos. 1 and 2. Specification No. M-044 Aoorovina Settlement Aareement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company re Specification No, M-044 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-53, approving Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company, providing for completion of Office Trailer Relocations at Plants Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -12- 05/11/94 Receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum Moved, seconded and duly carried: That General Counsel's Memorandum dated May 3, 1994, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Receive and file Summons and Cross-Complaint entitled Park Rose Construction. Inc. vs. Frontier Insurance Company. County of Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 093070 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Summons and Cross-Complaint entitled Park Rose Construction, Inc. vs. Frontier Insurance Company, County of Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 093070, seeking damages for breach of contract, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Districts' General Counsel be, and is hereby authorized to appear and defend the interests of the Districts and to seek recovery of its costs and fees related thereto. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to issue Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order No. 66300 That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue issued to Aggreko. Inc.. for Temporary Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order Rental of Emergency Standby Generator No. 66300 issued to Aggreko, Inc., for for Plant No. 2 Raw Sewage Power Temporary Rental of Emergency Standby Building (Specification No. R-043) Generator for Plant No. 2 Raw Sewage Power Building (Specification No. R-043), authorizing an increase of $9,381.11, increasing from an amount not to exceed $25,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $34,381.11, plus sales tax. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft Executive Subcommittee Minutes That the draft Executive Subcommittee Minutes for the meeting held on April 11, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. -13- 05/11/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft Fiscal Policy Committee Minutes That the draft Fiscal Policy Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 20, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft Executive Committee Minutes That the draft Executive Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 27, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Declaring the 1994-95 Sewer Use Fees and Connection Fees will not increase That the Boards of Directors do hereby declare from rates established for the 1993-94 that the 1994-95 Sewer Use Fees and fiscal year Connection Fees will not increase from rates established for the 1993-94 fiscal year and will continue to be in effect for 1994-95, provided the Governor and State Legislature do not confiscate Districts' property taxes, as follows: ANNUAL SEWER USE FEES - 1994-95 District Single-Family Multi-Family Non-Residential No. Residential Residential Properties 1 S 83.24 $49.94/Unit $59.52/1,000 SF 2 71.52 42.91/Unit 51.14/1,000 SF 3 73.89 44.33/Unit 52.83/1,000 SF 5 96.75 58.05/Unit 69.18/1,000 SF 6 76.47 45.88/Unit 54.6811,000 SF 7 50.09 30.05/Unit 35.81/1,000 SF 11 60.00 36.00/Unit 42.90/1,000 SF 13 100.00 60.00/Unit 71.50/1,000 SF 14 1 NONE - District No. 14 is fully funded by IRWD CAPITAL FACILITIES CONNECTION FEES - 1994-95 DISTRICTS NO. 1 . 2. 3. 5. 6, 7. 11 & 13 RESIDENTIAL $2,350/DWELLING UNIT NON-RESIDENTIAL $470/1,000 SQUARE FEET, $2,350 MINIMUM DISTRICT NO. 14 NONE - District No. 14 is fully funded by IRWD -14- 05/11/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approvina the proposal from KPMG Peat Marwick to extend their That the proposal from KPMG Peat Marwick to independent professional audit extend their independent professional audit services agreement for the 1993-94 services agreement for the 1993-94 fiscal year fiscal year annual audit annual audit, for an amount not to exceed $46,800.00 plus out-of-pocket expenses at cost, be, and is hereby, approved. Director William G. Steiner requested that his abstention from voting on this item be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of Special Joint Works Selection That the draft minutes of Special Joint Works Committee Re Computers Selection Committee Re Computers meeting held on April 28, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Directors questioned when they would be Continuing consideration of receiving additional information requested from Resolution No. 94-34 awarding staff on March 9, 1994 with reference to the Miscellaneous Architectural and industrial accident resulting in two deaths that Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant had taken place on a different project by the No. 1. Job No. P1-48: Miscellaneous same contractor, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, Work he Facility Modifications and Safety who was deemed to be the low bidder for this Upgrades at Plant No. 21, Job project. The Director of Engineering reported No. P2-47-2: Flare Improvements at Plant that staff would not be able to finalize their No. 2. Job No. 122-56: and Seismic report until the Cal/OSHA report and findings Retrofit Structures at Treatment Plant had been received. He anticipated that staff No. 2. Job No. P2-53-2. to June S. 1994 would complete the report in about 30 days. The Directors then entered into discussions concerning the propriety of rejecting all bids and rebidding the project including a review of the legal issues with General Counsel. Also discussed was the delay in the issuance of the Cal/OSHA report. It was concluded that extending the award period an additional 30 days, as had been previously done March 9, 1994, would allow a review of the Districts' and contractors' safe work environment issues together with safety policies and procedures. -15- 05/11/94 It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That consideration of adoption of Resolution No. 94-34, awarding a contract to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2; Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2, pending completion of review of construction project safety program, be, and is hereby approved. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported to the Directors the General Counsel's Comments Prior to need for a closed session as authorized by Closed Session Government Code Section 54956.9 and 54957.6 to discuss and consider the item that is specified as Item 16(b)(1) on the published Agenda. The General Counsel reported of a need to add an item to the agenda pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2 as having need for immediate action and the need came to the attention of the District subsequent to the agenda being posted. The matter would be discussed in closed session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 as a matter of potential litigation arising out of a construction site accident at Plant No. 2, to be initiated by Cal-OSHA. He advised Directors that the Districts had been afforded the opportunity of a conference the preceding day with Cal-OSHA concerning the on-site construction accident involving Districts' contractor, Pascal & Ludwig, that, in his opinion, the results of which lead to the potential of litigation. In response to a request from Director Stanton the General Counsel assured the Directors that nothing would be discussed in closed session that is not authorized pursuant to the new amendments to the Brown Act or relate to other actions of the Joint Boards that are agendized for open session. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Add Item to the Closed Session Agenda That Item (16)(b)(2) be added to the Agenda to consider a matter of potential litigation arising out of a construction site accident at Plant No. 2. -16- 05/11/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Convene in closed session oursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9. The Boards convened in closed session at 54957 and 54957.E 8:34 p.m. pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9, 54957 and 54957.6. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Board(s) of Directors have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.2 and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. A report of actions taken will be publicly reported at the time the approved action becomes final re: Agenda Item 16(b)12). No actions were taken re Agenda Item 16 (b)(1). ALL DISTRICTS At 10:00 p.m. the Boards reconvened in regular Reconvene in regular session session. 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 10:00 p.m. 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 10:00 p.m. DISTRICT 3 In response to Director Sal Sapien's question of Authorizina Chanoe Order No. 2 to filing a lawsuit prior to completion of testing the Purchase Order No. 54292 issued to balance of sewer lines and the chances of being David R. Griffin. Attorney at Law. and/or able to recover all costs including legal fees, the his firm Byrum. Holland & Griffin for General Counsel explained that the Westminster special counsel leaal fees re: Litioation Force Main, which is constructed of a special for recovery of District damages - fabricated fiberglass and sand product called County Sanitation District No. 3 v. Techits pipe, has two parallel force main lines Amoco. Inc. and United Technoloov which were constructed in 1971 and 1978. The Corporation, at al. line constructed in 1971 has suffered several failures. He further stated that District 3 Directors had previously decided to design and replace this line with a new line which is currently underway. So far the 1978 line has not failed, but the probability of failure is high because of the same type of pipe and soil conditions. He further explained that the Board of Directors had previously elected to file action against Amoco, Inc. and United Technology Corporation, the fabricators of the techite pipe, based on product defect warranty. The estimated cost of replacement is $2-3 million for each line. In addition, there are four other lines throughout the other Districts that are newer and have not failed ` yet. No testing has been done on these four lines that would enable us to proceed with litigation, but possibly some settlement may occur as a result of the District 3 suit. _17_ 05/11/94 Mr. Woodruff further reported that David Griffin, special counsel engaged by District No. 3, has been successfully involved in several similar litigation matters representing public agencies against Amoco and United Technology. Mr. Griffin is optimistic the District will recover costs on the 1971 line that has actually failed. The 1978 pipe has not failed but has gone through testing and some very sophisticated lab results of which, again, Mr. Griffin feels fairly optimistic. Mr. Woodruff then stated that there is no provision in which to recover attorney fees. The fees would be recoverable only if there was a contractual agreement between the parties. In response to Director Steiner's questions regarding the warranty of the techite pipe, Mr. Woodruff explained that the pipe was not covered by an explicit warranty but a warranty of merchantability. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue Change Order No. 2 to Purchase Order No. 54292 issued to David R. Griffin, Attorney at Law, and/or his firm Byrum, Holland & Griffin, increasing the authorized amount from an amount not to exceed $85,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $235,000.00 for special counsel legal fees re: Litigation for recovery of District damages - County Sanitation District No. 3 v. Amoco, Inc. and United Technology Corporation, at al. DISTRICT 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 10:00 p.m. DISTRICT 5 Actions to South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2. Contract No. 5-35-2 Approving Chance Order No. i to the plans and specifications for Contract No. 5-35-2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2, Contract No. 5-35-2, authorizing a net addition of $231,211.46 to the contract with Mike Prlich & Sons for 10 items of added or deleted work, and granting a time extension of 143 calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. -1 B_ 05/11/94 Approving Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Contract No. 5-35-2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2, Contract No. 5-35-2, authorizing a deduction of $56,795.00 from the contract with Mike Prlich & Sons for adjustment of engineer's quantities, be, and is hereby, approved. 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 10:00 p.m. 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 10:00 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving License and Reimbursement Agreement with Jack C. Chou. orovidina That the Board of Directors hereby adopts for reimbursement of costs to the District Resolution No. 94-54-7, approving License and re Contract No. 7-14-2 Reimbursement Agreement with Jack C. Chou, providing for reimbursement of costs to the District for abandonment of Mr. Chou's private Shady Canyon Road Pump Station and construction of a new gravity sewer in Shady Canyon Road in connection with construction of a new District gravity sewer relative to Abandonment of Bent Tree, Cowan Heights, Derby Nos. 1 and 2, Lake Court and Shady Canyon Pump Stations, Contract No. 7-14-2, at a later date. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive. file and deny claim of Betty Loffel That the claim submitted by Betty Loffel dated February 3, 1994, in the amount of $44,488.45 for alleged damages due to a sewer stoppage, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and denied; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said claim be, and is hereby, referred to the District's General Counsel and liability claims administrator for appropriate action. -19- 05/11/94 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 10:00 p.m. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adiournment 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 10:00 p.m. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adiournment 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 10:00 p.m. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adiournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:00 p.m. /n/ / -4 Assistant Seeftry,of Boards of Directors of County Sarf0tion Di tricts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 -20- FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE MM4 PAGE bi REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04fM94 POSTING DATE 04MOM WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 136692 MAG SYSTEMS $1,027.94 INSTRUMENT PART 136693 AG TECH COMPANY $63,277.71 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9.91 IMB94 AMERICAN TELEPHONE&TELEGRAPH $989.19 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 136695 ADVANCED COOLING TECHNOLOGIES $420.00 LEAK TESTING 136896 AGGREKO,INC. $16,384.22 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 136697 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $35,576.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.0-9-89 136698 ALDRICH CHEMICAL CO. $33.98 LAB SUPPLIES 136699 ALTA-ROBBINS $527.71 INSTRUMENT PARTS 136700 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $737.87 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 136701 ANGEL SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS $54122 LAB SUPPLIES 136702 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $140.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 135703 APCO VALVE&PRIMER CORP. $134.10 VALVE PARTS 136704 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $5,724.36 LAB SUPPLIES 136705 ADS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) $1,593.28 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 136708 BC WIRE ROPE&RIGGING $134.31 TRUCK PARTS 136707 B.M.I. $1,225.00 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 136708 BRW SAFETY&SUPPLY $3,173.79 SAFETY SUPPLIES 136709 BAUER COMPRESSOR $59.83 COMPRESSOR PARTS m 136710 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $6,247.95 LAB SUPPLIES X 136711 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $283.40 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 136712 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $1,037.09 LAB SUPPLIES CO 135713 BELL SECURITY $6,053.90 SECURITY SERVICES 136714 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. 52,168.78 COMPRESSOR PARTS 136715 J&H BERGE.INC. $289.05 LAB SUPPLIES 136716 BID 101,INC. $308.78 LAB SUPPLIES 136717 BIOMERIEUX VITEK,INC. $34,551.18 LAB EQUIPMENT >✓ 136718 BID VENTURES,INC. $162.00 LAB SUPPLIES 136719 BLACK&VEATCH $36,073.66 ENGINEERING SERVICES P146 136720 BLOOMBERG L.P. $4,832.59 FINANCIAL MONITORING M.OAA1 93 136721 BOERINGER MANNHEIM $938.96 LAB SUPPLIES 1367M BON-A-RUES $131S5 TRUCK PARTS 136723 BUDGET JANITORIAL $370.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 136724 BUDGET JANITORIAL $6.845.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 136725 SNI BOOKS $364.97 BOOKS 136726 BUY-CHEM DISTRIBUTORS $1,470.79 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 136727 CMI $63.58 INSTRUMENTPARTS 136728 CS COMPANY $1,629.82 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 136729 1994 CWPCA CONF.CIO NIVER $145.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION M.0.7-17.93 136730 CALTROL,INC. $1,361.53 INSTRUMENT PART 136731 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $867.24 SERVICE AGREEMENT 136732 CALSCIENCE ENVIRONMENTAL LABS $9,470.00 LAB SERVICES 136733 CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $622.01 SAFETY SUPPLIES 136734 CERFNET $134A4 COMPUTER SERVICES 136735 CHEM SEARCH $2,569.03 JANITORIAL 136736 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $635.00 PUMP PARTS 136737 COLD SPRING HARBOR $150.00 LAB EQUIPMENT FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 3/31M4 PAGE 02 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04AMM POSTING DATE 041O6/94 WARRANTING. AMOUNT 136738 COUCH AND SONS $17.459.10 CONSTRUCTION 5.374 136739 COUCH S SONS $287.174.70 CONSTRUCTION 11-174 136740 COLORADO MEMORY SYSTEMS $99.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 136741 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $24.567.00 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 136742 COMPUTER POWER,INC. $4.700.00 VFD PARTS 136743 COMPUSA,INC. $2,310.15 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 136744 CONNEL GM PARTS/DIV. $87.28 TRUCK PARTS 136745 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $6,662.56 ELECTRIC PARTS 136746 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $2,586.98 TOOLS 136747 CONTINENTAL CHEMICAL CO. $2.230.43 CHLORINE M.O.10-9-91 135748 CONTROLCO $076.76 ELECTRIC PARTS 136749 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $1,713.78 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.7-17-91 136750 COOPER INDUSTRIES,INC. $2.125.84 ENGINE PARTS 136751 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $10.72 TRUCK PARTS 136752 CHARLES P.CROWLEY,CO. 53,138.97 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 136753 CUMMINS CAL PACIFIC,INC. $237.22 ELECTRIC PARTS 136754 CYBREX 53,454.63 INSTRUMENT PARTS fT1 136755 DAVIS INSTRUMENTS $2.486.80 INSTRUMENT X 136766 DE ANZA CORPORATION $300.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT x 136767 HSKIDECKER $2.022.36 INSTRUMENT PARTS v 136758 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $336.67 VALVES 136759 DATED ENVIRONMENTAL $3.206.34 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.&11-93 --A 136760 DIFILIPPO ASSOCIATES $386.71 PRINTING 136761 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $879.30 COMPUTER SOFTWARE LICENCE D 136762 DORADO ENTERPRISES,INC. $13.376.00 PLANT MAINTENANCE B REPAIRS N 136763 D'VALS SALES $1.150.70 FITTINGS 136764 EASTMAN.INC. $3,406.56 OFFICE SUPPLIES 136765 MONICA EDWARDS,ILLUSTRATION $2.060.72 ILLUSTRATION SERVICES 136766 EMERGENCY MGMT NETWORK $2.665.00 HAZMATTRAINING 136767 ENCHANTER,INC. $5.040.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10.92 136768 FLUID TECH.SALES $271.03 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 136769 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $322.50 AIR FREIGHT 136770 FILTERLINE CORP. $449.81 CHLORINATION PARTS 130771 FILTERSUPPLYCO. $9,902.82 FILTERS 136712 FISCHER&PORTER CO. $643.06 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 138773 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $640.09 LAB SUPPLIES 136774 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $13,03 LAB SUPPLIES 136775 FLOSYSTEMS $3,855.15 PUMP PARTS 136776 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $181.44 PHOTO SUPPLIES 135777 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $10,057.36 WATER USE 136770 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $1,885.00 PUBLICATIONS 136779 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $340.49 PAINT SUPPLIES 136780 FREEDOM IMAGING $72.66 SERVICE AGREEMENT 136781 CITY OF FULLERTON $81.51 WATER USE 136782 GST,INC. $1,964.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 136783 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $1,886.28 LUMBER/HARDWARE FUND NO 9199 - JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 3/31/44 PAGE03 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04MV94 POSTING DATE OM06194 WARRANT NO. AMOUNT 136784 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $836.68 CHEMICALS 136785 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $3,005.32 ELECTRIC PARTS 136786 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $1,810.25 TELEPHONE SERVICES 136787 GENE TRAK SYSTEMS $1,422.72 LAB SUPPLIES 136788 GERHARDTS,INC. $714.32 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 136789 GIERLICH-MITCHELL,INC. $4,073.31 PUMP PARTS 136790 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $247.50 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 136791 GRASSY S.T.I. $2,409.60 ENGINE PARTS 136792 GROTH EQUIPMENT CORP. $2,204.57 VALVES 136793 HACH COMPANY $1,780.94 LAB SUPPLIES 136794 HATCH&KIRK,INC. $5.897.50 ENGINE PARTS 135795 PL HAWN CO,INC. $332.53 FILTERS 136796 HILTI,INC. $32.80 TOOL REPAIRS 136797 RC HOFFMAN AND/OR ISCO $349.58 LAB SUPPLIES 136798 HOME DEPOT $459.11 HARDWARE 136799 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $300.27 PAINT SUPPLIES 136800 HUNTINGTON VALLEY SCHWINN $213.09 BICYCLE PARTS 136BD1 IDEXX $604.61 LAB SUPPLIES fn 136802 IDEA MAN,INC. $665.66 SAFETY SUPPLIES X 136803 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $72,769.30 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.0.11.18.92 ._. 136604 INDUSTRIAL AIR COMPRESSOR $181.23 VALVE PARTS Lz1 136805 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $668.98 CONNECTORS 136806 INLAND EMPIRE EQUIPMENT CO. $57.32 TRUCK PARTS 136807 IN PLACE MACHINING CO. $3,483.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS D 136808 INSTITUTE FOR RES.&TECH ASSIST. $17,000.00 VOIDED WARRANT 136809 INT'L CONF ON FUEL CELLS $5,000.00 CONFERENCE SPONSORSHIP W 136810 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $1,506.86 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 136811 JAYS CATERING $349.28 DIRECTORS'MEETING EXPENSE 136812 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $1,224.77 ELECTRIC PARTS 136813 KAHL SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS $314.54 LAB SUPPLIES 135814 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $260A8 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 136815 KAMAN BEARINGS&SUPPLY $1,36T78 MACHINE SUPPLIES 136816 THE KEITH COMPANIES $6,357.12 ENGINEERING SERVICES 3-36R 136817 KELLY PAPER $335.94 PRINTING 136818 KING BEARING,INC. $533.02 MACHINE SUPPLIES 135819 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $3.453.14 HARDWARE 136M LA LIQUID HANDLING SYSTEMS $1.918.06 PUMP PARTS 136821 LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT L.LAVOIE $94.09 LEGAL SERVICES-NTTZEN 135822 LECO CORPORATION $70.00 LAB EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 136823 CHARLES P.CROWLEY CO. $618.63 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 136824 LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INS.CO. $53.64 DEFERRED COMP TRUSTEE 136825 LIQUID AIR CORP. $572.08 SPECIALTY GASES 136826 LOCALAGENCY $250.00 LAFCO FEE 136827 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $3.043.20 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10-92 136828 MPS $376.24 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 136829 MACK CONSTRUCTION&EQUIP. $8.287.57 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 3131194 PAGE04 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 01AHM POSTING DATE 04/O6194 WARRANT NO. AMOUNT 136830 MACOMCO $321.78 SERVICE AGREEMENT 136831 MANHOLE ADJUSTING $800.00 MANHOLE ADJUSTING 136832 MANTEK $147.85 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 136833 MARVAC ELECTRONICS $52.49 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 136834 VIRGINIA MASON CLINIC $240.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAM 136835 MATT-CHLOR,INC. $1.404.23 VALVES 136836 MAVERIK,INC. $4.648.13 HOIST 138837 MIDWAY MFG.B MACHINING $3.745.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 136838 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES $736.96 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 138839 MISSION INDUSTRIES $2.398.06 UNIFORM RENTALS 136940 MOBILE MINI,INC. 52,440.64 LAB SUPPLIES 136841 MONTGOMERY LABORATORIES $2,890.00 LAB SERVICES 136842 MORTON SALT 5484.68 SALT 136843 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $1.028.33 PUMP PARTS /36W NASCO WEST,INC. $299.72 LAB SUPPLIES 136845 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $590.96 FITTINGS 136846 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $210.53 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES fT1 136847 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $SA7 WATER USE 130848 OI CORPORATION $173.02 LAB SUPPLIES = 136849 OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $450.81 SAFETY GLASSES 136850 OFFICE PAVILIONS/INTERIOR RESOURCES $377.99 OFFICE FURNITURE 136851 ON-LINE ELECTRONICS $292.04 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES --I 136852 CRAMP TECHNICAL BOOKS $40.05 PUBLICATION n 135853 ORANGE COAST PIPE SUPPLY $25.00 FREIGHT I 136854 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. 582.59 TRUCK PARTS r 136855 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL $990.05 CHEMICALS 136856 ORANGE VALVE&FTTTING CO. $2.659.39 FITTINGS 135857 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $71,790.00 GAPWATERUSE 136858 PGC SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION $171.39 LAB SUPPLIES 138859 PSY HEALTH SYSTEMS $150.00 MEDICAL EXAM 136860 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $359.63 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 136861 PACIFIC MOBILE OFFICES $1,935.91 OFFICE MODIFICATIONS 136862 PACIFIC PNEUMATICS,INC. $66.25 FILTER 136863 PACIFIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT CO. $003.46 SAFETY SUPPLIES 136864 PACIFIC BELL $138.57 TELEPHONE SERVICES 136865 PACIFIC WALK-IN MEDICAL $105.00 MEDICAL EXAM 136866 PALLETS&ACCESSORIES CO. $1,544.08 PALLETS 136867 PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $007.66 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6-12-91 136868 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 136069 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $996.75 LAB SUPPLIES 136870 PIERCE CHEMICAL COMPANY $373.00 LAB SUPPLIES 13BB71 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $127,453.20 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.&8-91 136872 PITNEY BOWES CREDIT CORP. $183.18 POSTAGE MACHINE LEASE 136873 PLAINS TRUEVALUE HARDWARE $28.38 HARDWARE 136874 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.75 LAB SUPPLIES 136875 POLYPURE,INC. $13,151.88 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3.11-92 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 3/31194 PAGB05 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/0601 POSTING DATE O4/0604 WARRANT NO. AMOUNT 136876 POST,BUCKLEY,SCHUH S JERNIGAN $12,361.93 ENGINEERING SERVICES 2-9-R1 136817 POWER ELECTRO SUPPLY CO. $161.57 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 136878 POWER ENGINEERING B EQUIPMENT $464.40 BUILDING MATERIALS 136679 POWER TRACK,INC. $65A5 PUMP PARTS 136880 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $126.00 ICE 136881 PROCESS EQUIPMENT COMPANY $2.012.55 PUMP PARTS 136882 PUBLIC FINANCIAL MGMT.,INC. $3.698.89 FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES 136883 PRYOR REPORT $349.32 TRAINING MATERIALS 136884 PULSAFEEDER $314.41 PUMP PARTS 136885 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $148.70 ELECTRIC MOTORS 136886 RED WING SHOES $316.35 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 136887 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $7.299.88 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 136BBS ROBINSON FERTILIZER CO. $1,382.76 CHEMICALS 136889 S 8 C OIL CORP. $80.08 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 136890 SANTA FIE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $888.14 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 136891 SARSTEDT 1298.77 LAB SUPPLIES 136892 DOUGSARVIS $1.875.00 CPRIFIRST AID TRAINING 135893 BASCO ELECTRIC $1,575.00 ELECTRIC SERVICES T1l 136894 SCHULER ENGINEERING CORP. $65.262.74 CONSTRUCTION 5.36 X 136895 SEA-BIRD ELECTRONICS,INC. $81.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE s. 136896 SEACOASTDESIGNS $166.24 OFFICE MACHINE w 136897 LUDECA,INC. $361.98 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 136898 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $5,405.18 TOOLS 136899 MARC SHIPMAN $2,125.00 LANDSCAPING SERVICES D 136900 SHURELUCK SALES $8.195A5 TOOLS/HARDWARE 136901 SKALAR,INC. - $9.899.00 LAB SUPPLIES 136902 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $129.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 136903 SOFFA ELECTRIC,INC. $14,332.31 INSTRUMENT PARTS 136904 SOUTH BAY FOUNDRY,INC. $2.359.72 ADJUST MANHOLES 136905 SOCOASTAIROUALITY $133.00 PERMIT FEES 136906 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $37.597.54 POWER 136907 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $27,033.41 NATURAL GAS 136908 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $25.194.25 DIESELAINLEADED FUEL 136909 SOUTH PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL $3,091.58 CHEMICALS 136910 SOUVENIR PHOTO $19.12 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 136911 SPARLING INSTRUMENT CO.,INC. $250.00 INSTRUMENT PARTS 136912 STAMEN Z.SPASSOFF P.E. $7,2B0.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-19-2 136913 WESTALLOY.INC. $120.93 WELDING SUPPLIES 136914 SPEX INDUSTRIES,INC. $1.078.18 LAB SUPPLIES 136915 STERLING ART $IlA5 OFFICE SUPPLIES 136916 STRATAGENE $394.51 LAB SUPPLIES 136917 GARY G.STREED $3,704.17 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING 8 TRAVEL 136918 SUMMIT STEEL $1.005.74 METAL 136919 SUNSET FORD $88.42 TRUCK PARTS 136920 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $97.80 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 136921 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG.COMPANY $690.49 ELECTRIC CART PARTS FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 3131194 PAGE 06 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 041DW94 POSTING DATE 04/08/91 WARRANT NO. AMOUNT 136922 TEKORAUUCS $14,199.98 PUMP PARTS 136923 THERMAL WINDOW SYSTEMS,INC. $80.00 WINDOW SEALING SERVICES 135924 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $1,504.65 MECHANICAL PARTS 138925 TONY'S LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $761.47 LOCKS&KEYS 136926 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $642.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.7-13.93 136927 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $632.07 TRUCK PARTS 136928 TRUESDAIL LABS $6.024.99 LAB SERVICES 136929 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $432.19 INSTRUMENT PARTS 135930 TUSTIN DODGE $93.47 TRUCK PARTS 136931 USI,INC. $48.49 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 136932 THE UNISOURCE CORP. $571.08 OFFICE SUPPLIES 136933 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $208.45 PARCEL SERVICES 136934 VWR SCIENTIFIC $2.924.06 LAB SUPPLIES 136935 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $2.417.64 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 138936 VERNES PLUMBING $369.80 PLUMBING SERVICES 136937 VORTEX INDUSTRIES $380.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 136938 CARL WARREN&CO. $184.01 UAB.CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 136939 WATER ENVIRONMENT FED. $431.00 PUBLICATIONS fr1 136940 ADS DRIVES $8.149.27 VFD PARTS X 136941 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $11.750.23 CAUSTIC SODA MOB-12-92 .s. 136942 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $169.56 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES Oy 136943 XEROX CORP. $19.970.20 COPIER LEASES 136944 YELLOW SPRINGS INSTRUMENT CO. &199.81 INSTRUMENT PARTS 136945 ZIEBARTH&ALPER/C.S.ALPER $1,032.00 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES P242-1 ➢ 136946 INSTITUTE FOR RES.&TECH ASSIST. $8,500.00 POLLUTION PREVENTION CENTER 736947 SO.COAST AIR DUALITY - $2,952.00 PERMIT FEES 736675 " COOPER INDUSTRIES,INC. $2,098.304.00 THREE PARTY AGREEMENT-J-19.2 TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 02MSM4 $3.520.234.42 WARRANT DATE 3026/94 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE W31164 PAGE 07 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/06/94 POSTING DATE 04/OB/94 SUMMARY AMOUNT #2 OPER FUND $81.51 #2 CAP FAC FUND 12,361.93 #3 OPER FUND 12,330.53 #3 CAP FAC FUND 6,367.12 #S OPER FUND 337.30 05 CAP FAC FUND 05,262.74 #7 OPER FUND 1,011.70 #11 CAP FAC FUND 287,187.84 014 CAP FAC FUND 1.807.66 #596 CAP FAC FUND 17,470.65 #887 OPER FUND 13.53 #7&14 OPER FUND 143.73 JT OPER FUND 635,365.39 CORF 2,262,234.32 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 278.10 fTl JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 217,980.33 X 2 E3,520,234.42 bU n V 'FUND NO 9199 IT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4N3194 PAGE 01 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 4120194 POSTING DATE 4R0/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 136973 AG TECH COMPANY $71,643.33 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9.91 136974 ACTION DOOR REPAIR CORP. $1,500.00 DOOR REPAIRS 136975 ADVANCED ENGINE TECH CORP. $5,579.93 ENGINE TESTING 136976 AIR COLD SUPPLY,INC. $109.19 AIR CONDITIONER PARTS 136977 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $17.788.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.8-9-89 136978 ALAN'S LAWNMOWER B GARDEN $73.94 LAWNMOWER PART 136979 ALDRICH CHEMICAL CO. $220.90 LAB SUPPLIES 13698D ALLIED SIGNAL $99.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 136981 AMELCO CONSTRUCTION $203.015.80 CONSTRUCTION P253-1 136982 ANCHOR CONSTRUCTION SPEC. $316.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 136983 ANDREWS GLASS CO. $245.93 LAB SUPPLIES 136984 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $305.45 OFFICE SUPPLIES 136985 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $140.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 136986 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $425.50 LAB SUPPLIES 136997 AQUATIC CENTER $400.00 OXYGEN BOTTLES 136988 AQUATIC RESOURCES $351.76 LAB SUPPLIES 136989 ARIZONA INSTRUMENT $53SA5 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 136990 ARMOR-VAC $1.332.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES X 135991 ASSOCIATED VACUUM TECH,INC. $111.94 MECHANICAL PARTS z 136992 ATLAS SALES $5,258.20 COMPUTER PARTS 136993 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $4,191.16 PAYROLL SERVICES Do 136994 BRW SAFETY&SUPPLY $452.55 SAFETY SUPPLIES 136995 BANANA BLUEPRINT $3,253.27 PRINTING M.O.10-10-90 136996 BARCLAYS LAW PUBLISHERS $177.00 PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL to 136997 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $1,300.96 BATTERIES 1369N BAUER COMPRESSOR $56.91 COMPRESSOR PARTS 136"9 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $2.167.24 LAB SUPPLIES 737000 BELLCO GLASS,INC. E2,187.24 LAB SUPPLIES 137001 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. $740.21 COMPRESSOR PARTS 137002 J 6 H BERGE.INC. $223.93 LAB SUPPLIES 137003 BETA TECHNOLOGIES $2,011.59 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137004 A BIEDERMAN,INC. $76.81 INSTRUMENT PART 137005 WT BILLARD,INC. 5236.32 BUILDING REPAIRS 137006 BID TECH NET,INC. $64.53 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137007 BLACKS GARDEN SUPPLY $850.00 GROUNDSKEEPING SUPPLIES 137008 BONA-RUES $116.00 TRUCK PARTS 137009 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $5,885.22 ENGINEERING SERVICES TAB 137010 BUDGET JANITORIAL $3.330.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 137011 BUSH 8 ASSOCIATES,INC. $7.512.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6-10-92 137012 BUTLER PAPER COMPANY $256.60 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137013 BUY-CHEM DISTRIBUTORS $515.50 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137014 CRC PRESS,INC. $97.45 LAB SUPPLIES 137015 CS COMPANY $492.38 VALVE PARTS 137016 CAL-PAC CHEMICAL CO.,INC. $34T79 CHEMICALS 137017 CALTROL,INC. $493.65 - INSTRUMENT PARTS 137018 CALIF ASSOC.OF SAN.AGENCIES $880.00 REGISTRATION M.O.7-13-93 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4/iW94 PAGE02 REPORT NUMBER AP43 ITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY PAID 420/94 POSTING DATE 420/94 WARRANT NO. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137019 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $4.954.32 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137020 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $64,088.14 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-33 137021 CENTURY SAFETY INST,6 SUPPLY $4,658.84 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137M SOUTHERN CAL MATERIAL HANDING $325.29 WAREHOUSE SUPPLIES 137023 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $460.63 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137024 COLD SPRING HARBOR $410.00 PUBLICATIONS 137025 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $1.131.38 BOILER PART 137026 COMPUSA,INC. $12,074.51 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137027 COMPUSERVE $46.51 COMPUTER SERVICES 137028 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $5,146.53 ELECTRICPARTS 137029 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $311.83 TOOLS 137030 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $3,271.40 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.&11.93 137031 COOPER INDUSTRIES,INC. $368,99 ENGINE PARTS 137032 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $5B9.09 TRUCK PARTS 137033 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $621.61 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137034 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIV.OF CALIF. $8,018.49 NMI PROF.SERVICES M.0.11-13.91 137035 CALIF.DEPT.OF HEALTH SERVICES $4,020.00 RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS LICENCE FEE 137036 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION $169.40 UNDERGROUND FUEL STORAGE FEE T 3 X 137037 J.W.O'ANGELO CO.,INC. $113.74 SPOOL = 137038 DAPPERTIRE $828.98 TIRES 137039 HSK/DECKER $998.67 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137040 DE GULLE 8 SONS GLASS CO. $730.57 GLASS -1 137041 DELOITTE&TOUCHE $44.728.00 FIN.INFORMATION SYST.M.0.2-9.94 137042 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF. $23,000.00 DENTAL PLAN ADMINISTRATORS 137043 DELTAPOINT,INC. $027.70 COMPUTER SOFTWARE N 1370" DEZURICK ANDIOR CS CO. $20,156.94 VALVES 137046 DIAGNETICS $1,225.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION M.O.7-13-93 137046 DINTEC ENVIRONMENTAL $4,723.01 ANIONIC POLYMER M.0.841-93 137047 DIETERICH-POST CO. $469.10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137D48 DIFILIPPO ASSOCIATES $4,640.10 PRINTING 137049 DOMAR ELECTRIC,INC. $9,541.00 ELECTRICAL SERVICES 137050 DORADO ENTERPRISES,INC. $1,000.00 PLANT MAINTENANCE&REPAIRS 137051 DORADO ENTERPRISES,INC. $6,866.74 CONSTRUCTION P1.46.1 137052 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $820.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 137053 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $98.27 PAINT SUPPLIES 137054 DUALS SALES $282.79 FITTINGS 137055 ESP NORTH $569.94 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 137056 EAGLE ENTERPRISES $2,155.00 HEADWORKS PARTS 137057 EASTMAN.INC. $3,709.62 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137056 80MOFTWARE $2.185.51 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137059 ELECTAIRTOOLCO. $225.25 CONVEYOR PARTS 137060 ENCHANTER,INC. $5,600.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.8-10-92 137061 ESSENCE GROUP $668,35 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137082 FST SAND AND GRAVEL,INC. $259S5 ROAD BASE MATERIALS 137053 MARSHALL PARRIES $78.08 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 137064 FARR SALES 8 SERVICE $165.63 ELECTRIC MOTOR FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4113194 PAGE 03 REPORT NUMBER AP43 ITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY PAID 420/94 POSTING DATE 4/20194 WARRANT NO. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137065 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $165.00 AIR FREIGHT 137066 FILTER SUPPLY CO. $755.41 FILTERS 137087 FISCHER S PORTER CO. $1.770.61 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 137058 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $3.135.95 LAB SUPPLIES 137059 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $4.000.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137070 FORESTRY SUPPLIERS,INC. $298.03 OPERATING SUPPLIES 137071 CLIFFORD A FORKERT $5,907.17 ENGINEERING SERVICES 137072 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $203.14 PHOTO SUPPLIES 137073 FREEDOM IMAGING $129.22 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137074 FREEMEN ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES $10,332.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 137075 DST,INC. $6.517.52 COMPUTER PARTS 137076 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $3.789.57 CHEMICALS 137077 GATES FIBERGLASS INSTALLERS $75.43 LAB SUPPLIES 137078 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $1.369.52 GAUGES 137079 GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. $6,300.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137080 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $50.95 ELECTRIC PARTS 137081 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $4.577.42 TELEPHONE SERVICES 137082 GERHARDTS,INC. $3,166.12 INSTRUMENT PARTS TAT 137083 GOLDEN COAST SAWDUST PROD. $1.616.25 SAWDUST X 137094 GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES,INC. $450.00 TECH JOURNAL 137085 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $594.75 LAB SUPPLIES w 137086 GRASSY S.T.I. $10.011.88 ENGINE PARTS 137087 HS TYPE 9 GRAPHICS $329.72 PRINTING 137088 HACH COMPANY $118.03 LAB SUPPLIES CO 137089 FREDA HARPER $1,500.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION I 137090 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $640.41 PLUMBING SUPPLIES W 137091 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $1,650.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 137092 HAZCOSERVICES,INC. $249.35 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137093 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2,083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 137094 HILTI,INC. $489.83 WELDING SUPPLIES 137095 HOKE CONTROLS DIVIHOKE,INC. $152.20 VALVE PARTS 137M HOLMES 8 NARVER,INC. $40,009.41 ENGINEERING SERVICES P1 44 137097 HOME DEPOT $86.74 HARDWARE 137098 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $442.21 PAINT SUPPLIES 137099 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH $20.16 WATER USE 137100 IMAGING PLUS $469.58 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137101 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $45.831.78 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11-18-92 137102 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $1.249.99 CONNECTORS 137103 INGRAM PAPER $348.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137104 INTEGRATED CONTROLS $736.17 GAUGE 137105 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $947.34 BATTERIES 137106 IRVINE PHOTO GRAPHICS $71.07 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 137107 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $53.15 WATER USE 137108 ISOLAS,INC. $364.77 LAB SUPPLIES 137109 J S W SCIENTIFIC $143.45 LAB SUPPLIES 137110 JAMISON ENGINEERING $14.226.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4113194 PAGE 04 REPORT NUMBER AP43 RATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY PAID 420AJ4 POSTING DATE 420194 WARRANT NO. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137111 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $536.38 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137112 JAVID CONTRACTORS,INC. $24,418.82 CONSTRUCTION P2-23-5-1 137113 JAYS CATERING $187.49 DIRECTORS'MEETING EXPENSE 137114 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 5231.61 ELECTRIC PARTS 137115 KAMAN BEARINGS 8 SUPPLY $302.42 MACHINE SUPPLIES 137116 KARV ADVANCED MATERIALS,INC. $24,965.00 ENGINE TESTING 137117 KING BEARING,INC. $1.012.30 MACHINE SUPPLIES 137118 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $2,290.24 TOOLS 137119 LCD POWER SYSTEMS $1.100.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137120 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $463.60 CONNECTION FEE REFUND 137121 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY CO. $237.34 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137122 LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT L.LAVOIE $763.65 LEGAL SERVICES-NITZEN 137123 LEARN KEY $424.80 TRAINING REGISTRATION M.O.7-13-93 137124 LEGI-TECH $320.00 COMPUTER SERVICES 137125 LIMITOROUE CORP. $715.96 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137125 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $10.220.15 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIRONMENTAL 137127 LIQUID AIR CORP. $1,372.82 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 13712E DR.MILTON LOVE $2.003.09 LAB SERVICES rn 137129 MACOMCO $520.65 SERVICE AGREEMENT X 137130 MAGNA ENTERPRISES,INC. $42,658.00 EASEMENT PURCHASES 14-1-1A 2 137131 MAINTENANCE PRODUCTS,INC. $2,467.86 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 137132 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $501,509.D0 CONSTRUCTION P242-2 137133 MARVAC ELECTRONICS $16.88 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES -1 137134 MATRIX SERVICE,INC. $8,303.10 ENGINEERING SERVICES M.O.11.10.93 137135 MATT-CHLOR,INC. $688.73 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 137136 MCBAIN INSTRUMENTS - $420.00 LAB MAINTENANCE r 137137 MEASUREMENT VARIABLES $582.35 ELECTRIC PARTS 137138 MIDWAY MFG.8 MACHINING $7,785.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 137139 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRES. $725.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137140 MISSION INDUSTRIES $2,647.65 UNIFORM RENTALS 137141 MOODY'S INVESTOR SERVICE $5,000.00 RATING AGENCY FEES 137142 MOORE INDUSTRIES $2,470.91 ENGINE PARTS 137143 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $7,596.91 MECHANICAL PARTS 1371" NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES $937.50 SEWER CLEANING SERVICES 137145 NATIONAL VISUAL SYSTEMS $698.02 PLEXIGLASS 137146 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $1,509.66 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137147 SPRINT NORTH SUPPLY $29.32 TELEPHONE PART 137148 OI CORPORATION $212.58 LAB SUPPLIES 137149 OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $402.10 SAFETY GLASSES 137150 OFFICE PAVILIONSIINTERIOR RESOURCES $713.54 OFFICE FURNITURE 137151 OX SYSTEMS CO. 58,850.31 CHLORINE M.O.11-18-92 137152 ORACLE CORPORATION $5,600.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION M.O.743-93 137153 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $418.53 TRUCK PARTS 137154 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL $1,920.04 CHEMICALS 137155 ORANGE COUNTY FARM SUPPLY CO. $808.13 CHEMICALS 137155 ORANGE COURIER $140.65 COURIER SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4113194 PAGE05 REPORT NUMBER AP43 ITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY PAID 4120N4 POSTING DATE 4=94 WARRANTING. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137157 ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $1,536.09 FITTINGS 137158 OXYGEN SERVICE $7,219.81 SPECIALTY GASES 137159 COUNTY OF ORANGE $1,834.00 DATA PROCESSING FEES 137150 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT $17.789.85 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 137161 PSSI $500.00 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 137162 PACIFIC PARTS $1.670.05 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137163 PACIFIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT CO. $3,718.32 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137164 PACIFIC BELL $14.12 TELEPHONE SERVICES 137166 PACIFIC COACHWAYS CHARTER $291.45 BUS RENTAL 137166 PACIFIC WATER CONDITIONING CO. $188.40 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 137167 PACTEL MERIDIAN SYSTEMS $7,910.20 TELEPHONE SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS 137168 PAGENET $1,299.92 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137169 PARTS UNLIMITED $115.56 TRUCK PARTS 137170 PASCAL&LUDWIG $211,943.00 CONSTRUCTION P243-1 137171 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $1,424.18 LAB SUPPLIES 137172 PERMA SEAL $1,083.39 OIL 137173 PFEIFFER&CO. $188.86 PUBLICATION 137174 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $130,306.40 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.54491 m 137175 PITNEY BOWES $277.46 POSTAGE MACHINE SERVICE AGREEMENT X 137176 POLYPURE,INC. $21,872.51 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3-1142 ._. 137177 POSTAGE BY PHONE $5.000.00 POSTAGE bU 137178 POST,BUCKLEY,SCHUN&JERNIGAN $13,880.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES 2-9R-1 137179 POTTORFF COMPANY $503.63 ELECTRIC PARTS 137180 POWER PUMPS INC. $89.56 PUMP PART to 137181 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $152.44 SOIL TESTING OJT 137182 PUMP ENGINEERING CO. $56.45 PUMP PARTS 137183 QUEST MEDIA&SUPPLIES $10,074.71 OFFICE FURNITURE 137184 OUESTRON CORP. $3.350.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137185 RMB ENGINEERINGIMILLTRONICS $644.30 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 13718E R M CONTROLS $540.42 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137187 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $302.10 ELECTRIC MOTORS 137188 R&R INSTRUMENTS $1.519.28 ELECTRIC PARTS 137189 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1.662.71 TRASH REMOVAL 137190 RAININ INSTRUMENT CO. $415.09 LAB SUPPLIES 137191 RAYVERN LIGHTING SUPPLY $239.08 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137192 REDWINGSHOES $102.68 SAFETY SHOES 137193 BOLT DELIVERY $56.70 FREIGHT 137194 THE REGISTER $179.40 NOTICES&ADS 137195 MCJUNKIN.REPUBLIC SUPPLY $10,976.26 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137195 RESEARCH PRODUCTS INT.CORP. $518.91 LAB SUPPLIES 137197 ROBBINS SCIENTIFIC $86.20 LAB SUPPLIES 137198 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL,INC. $1,953.97 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137199 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $1,921.70 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137200 SANWA BANK CALIFORNIA $42,655.00 EASEMENT PURCHASES 14-1-1A,M.O.12-9-92 137201 DOUG SARVIS 5760.00 CPRIFIRSTAID TRAINING 137202 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $999.92 SPECIALTY GASES FUND NO 9149 - JT 61ST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4138M PAGE 06 REPORT NUMBER AP43 ITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY PAID 4120M POSTING DATE 42D/94 WARRANT NO, AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137203 SEA COAST DESIGNS $105.60 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137204 CITY OF SEAL BEACH 5216.55 WATER USE 137205 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $232.19 TOOLS 137206 SHURELUCK SALES $10,573.98 HARDWARE 137207 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $80.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 137208 SO COAST AIR QUALITY $17,128.00 PERMIT FEES 137209 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY $1,856.00 PERMIT FEES 137210 SOUTH COAST ENVIRONMENTAL CO. $44.040.93 EMISSIONS TESTING 137211 SO CALIF COSTAL WATER $299.740.00 SCCWRP PAYMENT M.O.2-9-94 137212 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $00.940.42 POWER 137213 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $80.965.80 NATURAL GAS 137214 OCEAN STUDIES INSTITUTE $5,070.00 LEASEAGREEMENT 137215 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $14,86D.24 DIESEUUNLEADED FUEL 137216 SOUTH PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL $150.00 FREIGHT 137217 SOUTH SHORE WINDOW MAINT. $2,001M BUILDING MAINTENANCE 137218 SOUVENIR PHOTO $56.46 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 137219 SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER $2,477.28 DRINKING WATERICOOLER RENTALS 137220 WESTALLOY,INC. $519.19 WELDING SUPPLIES m 137221 TIMOTHY STEGELVIK,GUCHERAU& $2,000.00 EASEMENT PURCHASES 14-1-1A,M.O.12-9-92 X 137222 STILLEY'S PHOTO SUPPLY $886.28 LAB SUPPLIES s 137223 GARY G.STREED $3.402.22 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL be 137224 SUPELCO,INC. $297.67 LAB SUPPLIES 131225 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $11.11 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES --1 137226 SUPER CHEM CORP. $1.338.85 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137227 SUPER ICE CORP. $92.22 LAB SUPPLIES �I 137225 SUR-LITE CORPORATION $1.200.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 131229 TNEMEC COMPANY,INC. $74.79 PAINT SUPPLIES 137230 TEKTRONIX,INC. $825.31 LAB SUPPLIES 137231 THOMAS REGISTER $225.80 PUBLICATION 137232 THOMASON MECHANICAL CORP. $3.466.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 137233 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $397.57 MECHANICAL PARTS 137234 THORPE INSULATION $121.71 INSULATION 137235 TONY'S LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $212.26 LOCKS&KEYS 137236 TOYO LANDSCAPING CO. $9.248.80 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.0.1-13.92 137237 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE,INC. $6.792.66 TRUCK PARTS 137238 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $1,582.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.7-1 M3 137239 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $414.37 TRUCK PARTS 137240 TRUESDAIL LABS $2,958.73 LAB SERVICES 137241 U.S.AUTO GLASS CENTERS $161.26 TRUCK PARTS 137242 U.S.C.SPONSORED PROJECTS ACCT. $12.133.23 TECHNICAL SERVICES 137243 THE UNISOURCE CORP. $227.03 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137244 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $329.01 PARCEL SERVICES 137245 VWR SCIENTIFIC $3.460.73 LABSUPPLIES 137246 VALLEY CRIES SUPPLY CO. $3,622.34 PLUMBING SUPPLIES - 137247 VAN WATER&ROGERS $523.76 CHEMICALS 137248 VERTEX SYSTEMS $3,640.00 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 41IN94 PAGE 07 REPORT NUMBER AP43 ITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 9199 - IT DIST WORKING CAPITAL WARRANT NO. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137249 VM METRONICS $764.22 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137250 VILLAGE NURSERIES $262.37 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 137251 VULCAN PEROXIDATION SYSTEMS $43.088.66 CHEMICALS 137252 WATER ENVIRONMENT FED. $23025 TRAINING REGISTRATION M.O.7-13-93 137253 WATERUSE MEMBERSHIP $1.250.00 MEMBERSHIP FEES 137254 WESTERN PACIFIC EQUIPMENT CO. $130.00 FREIGHT 137255 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $16,652.02 CAUSTIC SODA M.O.8-12-92 137256 WEST-IJTE SUPPLY CO. 5252.62 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137257 WHATMAN LAB SALES,INC. $103.80 LAB SUPPLIES 137258 XEROX CORP. $870.75 COPIER LEASES 137259 ZYMARK CORP. $489.88 LAB SUPPLIES 137260 RICHARD B.EDGAR $200.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 0420194 $2.623.143.17 ITI X s SUMMARY AMOUNT b #1 OPER FUND $6.213,78 #2 OPER FUND 3,986.12 42 OAP FAC FUND 13.682.54 #3 OPER FUND 33,93t(K) V #5 OPER FUND 1,931.00 05 CAP FAC FUND 1.849.16 #6 OPER FUND 1,607.01 #7 OPER FUND 3,381.76 #7 CAP FAC FUND 5,936A3 #11 OPER FUND 7.974.79 #11 CAP FAC FUND 5,424.44 #13 OPER FUND 27.14 #14 OPER FUND 30.18 #14 CAP FAC FUND 87.316.00 #3&11 OPER FUND 937.50 #5&6 OPER FUND 3,453.09 05&6 CAP FAC FUND 3,278.47 #6&7 OPER FUND 2,277.86 #7&14 OPER FUND 6,754.50 JT OPER FUND 648,656.13 CORF 1,316,931.36 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 43,636.73 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 426.829.24 32.823.743.17 3�y RE: AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.b.2.a COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CA ALL RISK PROPERTY, EARTHQUAKE AND FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM RENEWAL EFFECTIVE JUNE 25, 1994 STATUS REPORT AS OF JUNE 8, 1994 OPTION COVERAGE COST 1. - $ 3 million CSDOC Primary Level participation $1,115,000 - $32 million carrier Primary Level insurance 2. - $ 5 million CSDOC Primary Level participation $1,060,000 - $30 million carrier Primary Level insurance 3. - Houston Casualty replaces Commonwealth $1,335,000 (withdrew 6-7-94) - $35 million carrier Primary Level insurance 4. - Delegate renewal authority to Fiscal Policy Committee up to $ (Note: $1.1 million included in Proposed FY 1994-95 Budget). C:V`COZ TQINS& .W REPORT OF THE JOINT CHAIRMAN 6-8-94 1) Presentation of Plaque and Resolution to Charles E. Puckett. As you know, Chuck Puckett recently retired from the Boards as Vice Joint Chairman. We would like to acknowledge his efforts on behalf of the Districts with the presentation of a plaque and a resolution expressing the Boards' appreciation for his outstanding service and contributions to the Districts' wastewater management program. 1 2) Present the 1993 CWPCA Southern California Plant of the Year Award to Cherry Textron #1 in the Large Industrial Category. Recognize George Andrews, President; Ahmed Dehbozorgy (pronounced Daybazorgee), Director of Environment & Safety; Michael Harhen, Director of Maintenance. Cherry Textron #1 is a large metal finishing facility located in Santa Ana that manufactures aerospace fasteners. The Districts nominated Cherry Textron #1 for the 1993 California Water Pollution Control Association (CWPCA) Plant of the Year Award in the large industrial category, based on the following criteria: -2- 1 . Implementation of a Pollution Prevention Program that includes source reduction, recycling, and/or treatment. 2. Application of an innovative solution and/or technical advance to solve a waste management problems. 3. An effective operation and maintenance program. 4. Compliance with all environmental regulatory agency requirements during calendar year 1993. 5. Activities to educate or inform the community about environmental protection. -3- 6. Additional activities that excel in waste/wastewater management practices. Cherry Textron #1 was selected to be the winner of the 1993 CWPCA Plant of the Year Award in the large industrial category because of the company's excellence in the following areas: 1 . Installation of a cadmium recovery system which recovers cadmium from rinses. 2. Installation of an electrodialysis unit to recover cadmium from process solutions. 3. Installation of a large sludge dryer to reduce the volume of dried sludge cake being waste-hauled offsite. -4- \ 4. Product substitution to eliminate hazardous solvents. 5. Implementation of a waste management program that encourages employees' input and ideas, and provides excellent management support. 6. Implementation of an excellent training program for employees on the subject of environmental protection. 7. Implementation of an effective operation and maintenance program. Present Award to George Andrews, President. (He'll be accepting award and would like to give a 5-minute talk.) -5- 2) Upcoming Meetings. A. Fiscal Policy Committee - The Fiscal Policy Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, June 15th at 5:30 p.m. B. District 3 Selection Committee - The District 3 Selection Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, June 22nd, at 4:30 p.m. (immediately preceding the Executive Committee meeting). C. Executive Committee - The Executive Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, June 22nd, at 5:30 p.m. -s- Invite two of the following Directors to attend and participate in the discussions: Evelyn Hart and Victor Leipzig -or- Wally Linn, or Tom Lutz Executive Subcommittee - The Executive Subcommittee is scheduled to meet on Thursday. June 23rd, at 12:00 Noon. Special Selection Committee re Computers - One meeting that was inadvertently left off of the listing is The Special Selection Committee re Computers. The Computer Committee is scheduled to meet on Thursday. June 30th, at 5:30 p.m. - End of Report - jAwpdoclgm1jcrpts\jc0694 -7- MEETING DATE ,Tune 8, 1994 TIME 7:30 p.m. DISTRICTS 1,2,3,5,6,7,11,13 a 14 �.�(e)C�1 jsV, :9N DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS IBEYERI . BARREM . .. IBEYERI .. . .. .. . . .....SAME RA ..........JL L IREADEI . . ... . .... . . FERRYMAN . . . . . ... IFORSYTHE)) .. . .... . .I ....BROWN . .......... ✓ — ISTEI ...... . . ... MC NUINAN . . . . . . INORBYI ... . ... . . . ....COLLIN. . ..........�L — ISALTARI .. ..... . . STAWORLEYN . . . . .... ISCOTTI ..COLLIES . .......... ISALTARELLII . . . . .... WOflLEY .. . . . ... .. _. IOEBAYI ... . ..........COX . ............. ISANSO ............DENY . ......... IBELLI . ............. . .DENES . . ........ DISTRICT 2 (NELSON) EIUP ......DUNLAPECKENR . . ....... . .A ff_(SCOM ............ COLLIES .. . . ...... _� IMAERTZ. . . . . 1 .... . ..ECKENRODE . .......�, t _ IDALYI .. . .. .. . ..... MCKLER .. ✓ IREADEI . . . . . . ......FERRYMAN ....... . . IBEYERI ............ CATLIN . .. ....... _� IMAHO(BONE) EYI... .. .. . ......FLORA . . ..... ... .. fg — IBELL) . .......... .. DENES . .......... �L (BONE) ...... ... . . . ...GRIFFIN IN ........ ,�_ _ (BELLI .............. GENES ........... _`/ —_ IWELCHI . . . .... . ......Y111MRBBN ........ IMAERTZWERERI ..... ECKENRODE ....... JG IWARDI . . ..... ..... . .HAMMOND ...... .....16d � (FLORA) ......... ... MAHONEY . . .. ..... JG ICOXI .. ... . . ... . . ....HART .. . . . ........ — (PARKER) ........ ... NELSON . . . ....... ll� IMOULTON-PATTERSONI .. LEIPZIG......... ...FL ILUTZI . WMDG . .......... . IMINERI . . ...... .... ..LIEN..............(STEINER) ........... STANTON . ........ JL IMC GUIGANI . .... . ....LUTZ ..... ........ — (GULUXSON)..... .... WELCH .......... . (FLORA) . . .......... . .MAHONEY ...... J]_ — (SINGER) ............ !MILK..... . ... .. JL MUTZI ......... . . . ...MC GUIGAN . ....... �- CMLIDOI . . . ......... . .MORENO .......... DISTRICT 3 IROSITAILLEI ......... . .MOULTON-PATRTSON L jJ_ — (ESTHADA) .......... SAPIEN ..... ...... . :PARKER) . ........... .NELSON ..... ......,EL INELSONI ... ........ DUNLAP .......... IOUNLAPI ........... . .PAII!BR ... ..... . ..TT— _ (FORSYTHE) . .. . .... . BROWN .. . . ....... -e (NICHOLSON) . .. .. ..... PARTIN..... . .. . ... L (HORSY) .. . . .. . ..... CATLW .. . . . ...... J IDALYI ... .. ... . ......POTTS .... ....... _ (SCOTT) COLLINS .......... _K :DAM .......... .. .POTfS ............ IMAHONEYI .. . . ..... FLORA .. . ........ . ILUTO ........ . ......WBBO............ _ (BONE) . ...... .. . . .. GRIFFIN . . . ........ �� IEVANSI .......... . ...RICE . .. . .......... IMINERI ... . . . . .... . LINN ... . . . ....... (POTTSI ... ... ... . ....SALTARELLI ........ IMC GUIGANI ...... . . LUR..... . ....... IDEMYI ... ... . . ...SANSONE ... ....... f� — IROBRAILLEI . ... . . ... MOULTON!PATTERSGN IESTRADA) ... .... . ....SA%EN ............ — (NICHOLSON) .. . ... . . PARTIN .. . ....... 12LAKET) . . . . . ........SINGER............ — IDALYI .. ... . .... . NCKLES .... . ... .. STEINERI . . . . ... .. ....STANTON . .........(EVANS) ... . ... . . . .. RICE ... . . ....... (STANTONI . . . ... .. ....STEINER . . . ........ _ (STEINR .. . .. . . . ... SINNER . . ......... ,/ (MILLER) .. . . . . .... ....SWAN .. .. ...... DLAKERI .. . . .. ..... SINGER ........ /j4 (MILLER) ... . .... .. ....SWAN ............ — ISELVAGGII . . .. . .... . SYLVIA .. ........ (PERRYISCHEAFEH) ......WAHNER .......... _ IGUUJXSONI . . ... . .....WELCH .. . . ........ _ DISTRICT 6 (ROBITAILLE) . . ... .. ....WINCHELL . ........ :OEBAYI . ... ..... . SANSONE . . ....... ISALTARELLII ....... . . .WORLEY . . . ........ — (STANTON) . ... ..... . STEINER .. . ...... :SINGER: . . . . ..........LLl11KlP .. ...... _ IDEBAYI ... ........ . COX .. .......... STAFF OTHERS DISTRICT 8 SVLVEBTER . .JL WOODRUFF L LIFAL/W r (FERRY) . ........... WAHNER ... ....... BROWN . . .. ANWAR ... /1. (COX) . ............ HART ... ...... ANDERSON ..,JL DEMIR .. .. . . .. . Ll�l ISTAMONI ......... . STEINER .. . ....... JG N . .JL FLEEING HASENSCLAWS .. . — HASENSTAB HONENER . . . '(rw�,%-J(A'IF"��'-' DISTRICT 7 KYLE . ... . HOUGH . .. . _ D-CI�`�+W (WARD) ............ MAMMOND . . ...... g/ KYLE ...... ✓ HUNT . . .. . IPOTTSI SALTARELLI. . . ..... J/ LINDER ..... ✓ HUNT . . .... — IBEYERI ... . . .. .... . BARREN . . . . ..... �L HELLOS .. ..y KNOPF ... . . i NICHO (MUDD)EI . . . . . . ... . DEBAV . . .... . . . . . JI OOTEN ....._� LEE LINDSTROM . (PALING: .. . . . . .... MORENO EWER .. . . . . .... OOTEN .....L NIXON ... . — JG SIMPSON . . . SHAW .... . _ (STANTON)I .. . . . . .... WA STEINER .. . . . ..... � STREED .. STON . _ ISCMEAFEm . . .. . . ... WAHNER .. . . . ..... y ��" — TALEBI .....� STONE .... . y DISTRICT 11 VINCENT... .— WASON ... . _ IROBITAILLEI ..... . ... WINCHELL ... . ..... M'RISOR . . . ... YOUNG ... . — IMEINER) -PAITERSON).. . . . STANTON (STEINER) .... ... . . .. STANTON ... . . .... . #' 4�DISTRICT 13:WELCH: . . ...y� � 6tlltlf . . . . . . . . . . !Y� IDUNLA% ':JAYRI .. PARRERA . . . . . . . . . JC IBEYERI ..... .. MflRERA . ... . . ... , IDALYI .......... % . CXLER . ..... .... JG ISTANTONI ........ . . STEINER . . ........ _K DISTRICT 14 C��4R�C!`,,/L (MILLER) . ......... . . SWAN .... ........ . SI/FJ/'y�_"L�.' IWARDI .......... .. HAMMONMRSERAD ..y..."'... . � /1�� DLI014 IBEYERI ) . .... ... ... MRREM�,M... J[ LAT/11'J OSI11196 ISTANTWORLEVI ........ ... POWSTEIN . ....... . _F[ — ISTANTONI .......... STEINER .. .. . . . ... J[ PUBLIC SIGN-IN SHEET COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY June 8, 1994 BOARD MEETING NAME ORGANIZATION/FIRM Please Print Please Print o GCS ocyD K o O C S p 'c::5 O JCS C, ✓ D �5,2 o 5 06/08/94 JOINT BOARD MEETING #3 - A000intment of Chairmen oro tem - Districts 13 & 14 JC: Alright, Burnie how about being Chairman Pro Tem if you will for District 13 and Fred will you be Chairman Pro Tem for District 14 please this evening. Thank you. #6(a) - JOINT CHAIRMAN'S REPORT First item that I have this evening, I would like to say is we are honored tonight to have a past Joint Chairman in the audience who I cannot remember has been back in sometime, Ron Hoesterey. Ron stand up if you would. Ron came back to see if we are doing it right, is that right Ron? Glad to have you with us tonight. Presentation of Plague to Director The Joint Chairman and Vice-Joint Chairman presented a plaque and resolution of appreciation to retiring active Director Charles E. Puckett, who represented the City of Tustin on Districts Nos. 1 and 7. Charles Puckett: Thank you. I enjoyed my Public Service and I have retired. My wife has told me I have retired and I can't go back. But the best part of being involved in public service was my time on the Districts. And I really enjoyed the four years I got to spend here, all the good friendships I made, the money I won on the golf course. People are certainly special and this has really been an honor for me to have participated in the Sanitation Districts. Thank you very, very much. The Joint Chairman then requested Mr. Puckett introduce his wife. Charles Puckett: Let me introduce my wife who is now getting to see me every night when I was not home at all. Donna, stand up please. I don't think she voted for me in the last election. Presentation of award to Cherry Textron JC: This evening I would like to recognize George Andrews, President; Ahmed Dehbozorgy, Director of Environmental and Safety; Michael Harhen, Director of Maintenance of Cherry Textron #1 who is to be presented with the 1993 CWPCA Southern California Plant of the Year Award in the Large Industrial Category. Cherry Textron #1 is a large metal finishing facility located in Santa Ana that manufactures aerospace fasteners. The Districts nominated Cherry Textron #1 for the 1993 California Water Pollution Control Association Plant of the Year Award in the Large Industrial Category based on the following criteria: 1. Implementation of a pollution prevention program that includes source reduction, recycling and/or treatment. 2. Application of an innovative solution and/or technical advance to solve waste management problems. 3. An effective operation and maintenance program. 4. Compliance with all environmental regulatory agency requirements during the calendar year of 1993. 5. Activities to educate and inform the community about environmental protection. 6. Additional activities that excel in the wastewater management practices. Cherry Textron #1 was selected to be the winner of the 1993 CWPCA Plant of the Year Award in the Large Industrial Category because of the company's excellence in the following areas: 1. Installation of a cadmium recovery system which recovers cadmium from rinses. 2. Installation of an electrodialysis unit to recover cadmium from processed solutions. 3. Installation of a large sludge dryer to reduce the volume of dried sludge cake being waste hauled off site. 4. Product substitution to eliminate hazardous solvents. 5. Implementation of a waste management program that encourages employees input and ideas, and provides excellent management support. 6. Implementation of an excellent training program for employees on the subject of Environmental Protection. 7. Implementation of an effective operations and maintenance program. At this time I would like to have those three gentlemen come forward if you would, and I would like to make a presentation. I have a plaque Industrial Hazardous Wastes In -2- recognition of Outstanding Achievement of Hazardous Waste Control Cherry Textron #1 is hereby presented with this Industry of the Year Award in the category of Large Industry Southern California_ April _, 1994. Congratulations. Andrews: Thank you. On behalf of Cherry Textron I would like to accept this award from the Orange County Sanitation Districts and to give you a little bit of a background about Cherry. We have been in Santa Ana for almost 40 years, since the early Fifties. Back in the times when we had a lot of orange groves and open space down in that part of Orange County. I think that having grown to a population now of about 650 employees, being one of the largest employers in Orange County, and I think having a product line in Aerospace and Personal Fasteners that are sold and distributed in approximately 50 countries around the world. Being in fact market share leader in Aerospace Line Fasteners. Having grown up in Orange County, being one of the early companies to move from LA down to Orange County, you know we are certainly proud of the achievements, both in terms of what we have done with our market and developing our business, but also what we have done in improving our situation in being a better citizen, particularly relative to discharge of our waste. It was only a couple of years ago that we had occasion to be here in this same Board Room and discussing with Margie Nellor and Mahin Talebi about our situation where we had some issues where we were discharging incorrectly and we ended up having some fines at that time. We discussed what our correct actions would be and how we would handle these issues. And due basically to the leadership of Ahmed Dehbozorgy, we have done a very good job of changing our situation and have reduced our effluent, and we are proud to say that in reducing our adverse waste and particularly related to the constituents that were mentioned, reducing our metal concentrations and having a program in effect to reduce and eliminate the source of the effluent and pollutant causing materials. Looking at both our product design and our process design, as well as treating those effluents that we could not get rid of in the process. Again, I think that the leadership of Ahmed has been a key in getting us to this point. So the achievement that belongs to the team at Textron, and there have been a lot of people who have been involved in getting us to the point of having a reductions in our effluent, and we certainly view this as a step in the direction where we want to get our business to and ultimately to having zero emissions and having zero effluent materials in our wastewater, and certainly we are moving in that direction. So again, thank you very much for the award today and certainly we will work at deserving further recognition. Partin: Since you have been so successful in this . How do you size up what your cost effect on your product has been with respect to bringing your plant in line with our requirements. Do you think it has driven it up? .Still I think there is profit. Curious how companies can do this when so many claim that they can't. That they can't make it if they have to -3- abide by the laws of the State. Andrews: Well I think Ahmed would be able to answer the specifics of the mechanics, but one of the things that comes to mind. We had a significant with issue with white, and one of the things, as an example, that we have done within the operations is we first of all we end up buying or lubricating oils for our machines and we have some three hundred or so metal working machines, basically like presses and rolling machines that move metal. And our view is that we spend $10/gallon to buy this oil and then we end up having the oil sticking to the product and we end up washing the product and we have oil going into our waste strainer. So what we been working on is processes that will enable us to recycle that oil, to extract that oil, to take the oil off the surface of the product, put it back into the machine from whence it came. We have two favorable issues, one is that we do not spend $10/gallon to buy new stuff. We are recycling what we bought in the first place. Secondly, we do not pay a second chunk of dollars to have the oil extraction and so forth that we had to have hauled away as we had in . So we have two favorable issues. Basically, our volume has continued to increase with the operation, both with the aerospace being down but our commercial non-aerospace business is actually growing. Partin: ?? Andrews: Actually our environmental costs have gone down. We have reduced the size of our staff and secondly, we have reduced the costs of our waste hauling and waste extraction. ?? Ahmed?: From the '90,'91 and '92 we have gone down by about $350,000. Andrews: And the way we do that, $350,000 would need to make a profit. We are a part of Textron, which is a Fortune 100 Company - $9 billion corporation. We are here to make a profit in return for our owners. And the way I view this $350,000 dollars, that's probably roughly equivalent to six or seven jobs. Partin: Is this something that you were able to come up with inside your plant in order for this recovery system, or did you have to go out to outside sources, engineers or whatever in order to adapt the process in order to come into guidelines of the San Districts, what they were asking. Andrews: It was really both. I think the majority of the work, more than half, was done in-house, but some of the equipment was supplied by outside sources and some of it has been modified by our design. But again, Ahmed and our Operations Managers and Michael Harhen are responsible for all the facilities and support groups within Cherry. They have all had a key involvement because it is one thing to come up with a set of criterium and a set of rules, to say this is what we are -4- going to run with, this is how we are going to run our business, but when you have seven focus factories within the plant, those focus factories all need to comply, need to be diligent, rigorous at making sure that everybody, all three shifts, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, do comply and take it to heart. I think Ahmed has done a good job in making this total line. ?: Well, we of Santa Ana thank you. Director ?: Has it been a real financial burden to come in line. Andrews: Well, actually we have saved money. And we think that we will be able to save even more money. JC: Thank you, gentlemen. Presentation of Director Pins JC: Tracy Worley, will you come up here please? You did not know that this was going to happen, probably. I would like to welcome you to the Districts, give you one of our pins, ask you to wear it all of the time. Tracy is serving on District 1 for the City of Tustin. Uocominc Meetings The Joint Chairman announced the following upcoming meetings: Fiscal Policy Committee - Wednesday, June 15th, at 5:30 p.m. District 3 Selection Committee - Wednesday, June 22nd, at 4:30 p.m., immediately preceding the Executive Committee meeting. Director Sal Sapien questioned why he, Chairman of District 3, and the Chairman pro tem had not been advised about the meeting before being scheduled as he could not attend as scheduled. The General Manager explained that it was set as a tentative date and Director Sapien could change the date and time. Executive Committee - Wednesday, June 22nd, at 5:30 p.m. (Directors Evelyn Hart and Victor Leipzig were invited to attend) Executive Subcommittee - Wednesday, June 23rd, at 12:00 noon Special Selection Committee Re Computers - Thursday, June 30th, at 5:30 p.m. Joint Chairman announced that was inadvertently left off the meeting notice. -5- #6(bl - GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT GM: Just one brief item, Mr. Chairman. We have a long agenda this evening. We have been trying for sometime to find a convenient Saturday for the new Directors that were not able to attend the March Orientation and Treatment Plant Tour and we have had absolutely no luck at all. Those of you who are new Directors that have not taken the tour, we have a form in your folder tonight. We have used Saturday in the past because it takes about a half day to have a session, but now, with the extended daylight hours and we have a fifth Wednesday this month, we are going to try for the 29th of June, if that is convenient for you. So we would really appreciate if you would check this form and leave it with the clerk tonight or leave it in your folder. If that date is confirmed then, of course, we will invite all the Directors. We encourage all the Directors to attend this Orientation/Treatment Plant Tour. #61c) - GENERAL COUNSEL'S REPORT GC: I have nothing that is special. There are a couple of items in the closed session, Item 18. Other than that I have no report. #9 - CONSENT CALENDAR Director Collins: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Directors realize that the last _ extremely critical and suggestions that have given . We shouldn't use this hour to map that. I would just like to make some positive comments because I have noticed that several of these change orders are documented extremely well. It is clear what the admissions are, and the summations statement, for example, in #9(h). It says staff received reenforcement from the designer for the appropriate portion of cost added to the project that would not have otherwise occurred had the original contract drawing been done correctly. It is outstanding and I just wanted to congratulate staff for a job well done. I think this is terrific. Director Stanton: Mr. Chairman, I just wondered if I could get a show of hands of any Director that understood anything that _several of his friends in line for a course called, "Ax LA" Director Leipzig: My question (something about donating old computers to schools)? JC: Gary, do you want to answer that. GGS: Actually, I was trying to get General Counsel to speak up on this. At this point we have been able to reuse those in less strenuous environments for servers -6- of various sorts. We have been investigating the possibility of a policy of donation and are looking into that at this time. #11 - NOMINATIONS FOR JOINT CHAIRMAN JC: As you read in the agenda, the policy for the election of the Joint Chairman is nominations are made this evening. Nominations are not closed this evening. They continue open until next meeting so further nominations can, in fact, be made at that time if someone so wishes. Otherwise, at the next Board Meeting nominations will be closed and the election will be held. So at this time I would like to open for nominations for the Joint Chairman. Steiner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to nominate Director John Cox for Joint Chairman. JC: Thank you. Are there any other nominations? If there are none then, nominations will continue to remain open. We have one person's name for nomination and that is John Cox. Thank you. #13(b)(3) - AMENDMENT NO. 11 TO SAIC RE S-032 JC: There is going to be a brief staff presentation on this matter. GM: Yes, I would like to ask Margie to introduce Dr. Haydock and brief you on the presentation that he will be giving you. Nellor: This evening, Dr. Irwin Haydock Is going to give an overview on our Ocean Monitoring Program. Dr. Haydock is the manager of our Compliance Division, and has been Involved with our monitoring for longer than I can even guess. Tonight he would like to show you what the program entails and what this particular contract consists of. Haydock: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And Margie, thank you for the introduction. I just wanted to spend a few minutes telling you a little about this program, because it has been going on for ten years now or nine years. We are going on our tenth year that we are proposing and recommending the SAIC Corporation continue with the monitoring program. But this year is a little different from the past years because we have become involved in a larger scale regional program. And we are at the end of a five-year wait for a renewal of our 301(h) permit which we have applied for back in 1990. So I want to give you a few details and the bottom line, and then I want to go to slides that will allow you to see kind of the flavor of the program, some pictures of the ocean and so on and maybe get you in the mood. First of all, I need to say something about what a 301(h) program is. The 301(h) permit is one of a very limited number of permits -7- issued by EPA. We happen to be the largest organization with a 301(h) permit. It allows discharge of less than full secondary wastewater. Everyone else under the 1972 Clean Water Act has to have full secondary treatment and some of those have been struggling mightily for years trying to achieve that. On the other hand, our treatment system is built with 50% secondary treatment and 50% advanced primary treatment. We recycle all of our bio-solids and we have a very stringent Source Control Program that allows our effluent to meet effluent quality standards for the ocean after dilution. So in terms of the treatment system, we believe that is a good mix of treatment, source control and reuse. We also have to prove there are no significant environmental impacts in the ocean. That is most important of all to us. I think that our program, over the last nine years, has done that. We have had this program, which was jointly developed through EPA, the Regional Water Quality Control Board and ourselves, and we have been carrying out that same mandated program now nine times. The key questions of course are; is it safe to swim in the ocean?, is it safe to eat the fish?, are the fisheries protected? and is the ocean being protected? So those are the basic questions to be answered by this program and I think we have done that to a great degree through our program over the last nine years. We have held thirty quarterly meetings with our EPA and Regional Board regulators and with SAIC and sub-contractors and with our staff here on the Districts and discussed all of the details. We have a very strong quality assurance program that takes care that all of the data meets strict quality requirements and all of the sampling is done under a strict project plan which is delivered as a part of each of the contractors. So overall we are looking for a balanced environmental protection and a cost effective treatment system that we can hold up as one in the nation and I think that overall that I could say that our program is one of the best in that regard. The final product of each of our contracts is an Annual Report that covers all of the subjects, and comes to conclusion in terms of do we meet all of the standard?, are we in compliance? and we find that we are 100% of the time. Are there changes in the marine environment as a result of our discharge? Yes, there are changes. But they are not significant changes and they meet all of the stringent 301(h) requirements. In the year ten program, though, we are doing something a little different. Actually a lot different. We have our 301(h) program which is reduced under a modified permit allowed by the Regional Board and EPA, less stations but all of the same kind of parameters will be measured so we will be able to keep our finger on the pulse to ocean, not just dropping the program but actually carrying out enough to tell that we are on track, as with the previous nine years. The second part of the program is even larger, it is a regional program, Southern California Big Program, that is carried out in conjunction with the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, three regional boards, a state board and the EPA, as well as other POTWs (Publicly Owned Treatment Works) along the coast. In the third program is the special projects that fill the gaps in the program over the last nine years. All of these together make up the total program that will be done by our contractor for the most part during this summer season we will do the regional -8- program we will continue to do our regular program during the rest of the year. So here is the bottom line for you, this is the estimated savings over the ten year period, about $500 million dollars in foregone costs and the cumulative total for the contracts over that same ten year period of time and we think that is a cost effective program and certainly should we be able to demonstrate that the waiver, 301(h) waiver, deserved and we can continue for another five years or another five years after that, that will continue those cost savings, we estimate $1.4 billion dollars is the difference between partial secondary treatment and full secondary treatment. Now the rest of these slides are simply pictures that show you some of the program. This is an outfall cartoon, the next picture shows a picture of a plume coming out of an outfall and you can see the growth that occurs on that outfall, fishes live around the pipe and we even have one of the special projects that's looking at the outfall as a reef structure, and it does have a different character both at different depths along the pipe and different kinds of growth, some very abundant along the inshore. These soft corals that you see here and fishes. As compared to what the bottom of most of the area looks like it is a very soft mud or sandy bottom, with pock marks where animal live under the bottom, but you don't see them. Some large creatures crawling over the bottom here and there that are curled up with our troll. Our overall program includes rig fishing, trolling, benthic sampling and water quality sampling in about a 75 square mile area. This is the Crusader, the ship that goes out and gets the samples, this shows the troll net coming on board, you can see spread out there in a balloon like shape, that goes all the way down in the bottom and drags the bottom, brings up a nice load of fish that we can then sort through, measure, weight, count, identify, take samples of their tissues for chemistry measurements of the tissue concentration to tell whether they are eatable or not. The benthic program on the other hand uses grab sampling devices that go down to the bottom and grabs a piece of bottom. We take a slice off the top of that sample and that is the sediment chemistry sample that is used to measure all of these chemistries and accounts for a large fraction of the cost of the program. The sample is them put through a screen, to screen out all the little creatures, and they are put into bottles. We found over 1500 different kinds of creatures that live in the bottom sediments and 500 different kinds of fishes and bentica vertebras. Then we go out once a month and do sampling of the water column itself. Using a large apparatus, a profiling system to measure various parameters electronically and take big bottles to take water samples, which are then sent off to the chemistry lab. And finally we look at coastline on a daily basis and measure chyliform bacteria is an indicator of whether any sewage can possibly be coming a shore. And we are in compliance with our chyliform sampling standards, indicating that is not occurring. And that is done by everyday going out and taking samples of the water column. Basically that is what I wanted to show you about the program. If you have any questions I would be happy to try and answer them. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. JC: Thank you; Irwin. Evelyn, did you have something? -9- Hart: Commented on a job well done. JC: Thank you. I have a motion to second discussion. Director Steiner. Steiner: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to reiterate to the rest of the Directors _ (a portion of monitoring services will go out to bid) JC: Will the maker of the motion agree to the addition? Fine. And the second as well? Alright, thank you. Alright, we have a motion to second. Any further discussion? Alright, is there any opposition to the motion? Seeing none then it will be deemed approved. Thank you. #14(b)(1) - SPECIAL SELECTION COMMITTEE RE COMPUTERS Director Sal Sapien opposed the motion on Items #14(b)(1)(a), (b) and (c)• #14(b)(2)(a) - FISCAL POLICY COMMITTEE JC: We would like to have a Staff Report. GM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There have been some developments of late this afternoon on this item. I would like to ask the Finance Director, Gary Streed, to report to you with what the current status is. GGS: Thank you, Wayne. In the Directors' folders tonight there was a white, one- page summary of the results of the actions of today. One of the carriers in the primary layer of the property Insurance has withdrawn its bid.' It is a $3 million piece of the pie, citing how close we are to the fault and the danger of liquefaction at both plants. Our broker, Robert F. Driver, has been struggling to find someone to replace them and they have found two potentials, one that we have a firm quote from, which is reflected in Option #3 on this page, and the other one we are not so sure of but the price would be a little bit lower. In any case, the options that we seem to have available to us tonight are these four. The action of the committee was to recommend that we buy between $35-50 million of insurance and stay within our current budget allocation from 93-94 which was $1.1 million. The removal of that layer of that $3 million caused the price to go up considerably. The first option we have would be for us to assume that $3 million piece ourselves, essentially to self-insure the first $3 million of earthquake damage. If we did that after we replaced the fire because that is part of the property, the premium would drop to $1.15, $1.115 million, approximately the budget estimate. Because another of the carriers are a little bit soft, we've included an option of $5 million self-insurance. The premium for that then, with $30 million of purchased insurance and $5 million of our own coverage, would be $1,O6O,OOO on all three of these options that include insurance. The deductible would stay the same, it's still a 5% -10- deductible in addition to the $3 or $5 million. Then the third option that is quoted here is the replacement company for the commonwealth that has withdrawn and that give us $35 million of coverage for $1,335,000, approximately $235,000 more than we have allocated in this year's budget. And then the fourth option would be to, for this board to delegate the renewal authority to the Fiscal Policy Committee for some amount we've left that blank for you to determine, but I would remind you again that we have $1.1 million in the budget. This year we did spend about $1.1 million for $80,000,000 worth of coverage. We thought last year we could buy about a $100,000,000 and $80 million was all we could find. Things have become significantly worse, as you have probably read in the Staff Report. Those are the current developments. We would _ some discussions or recommendations from the Board. Collins: My question is that you mentioned another carrier is soft. GGS: Yes. There is a $2 million piece that can't be placed. They can't commit to it today. They are right now under a moratorium but they expect that to be lifted between now and the 251h. If it is, they will bid on the $2 million and that is included. Collins: The bid is soft not the carrier. GGS: Yes, I'm sorry. Collins: Alright. I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't an early morning detection signal that I was getting. The second question is the commonwealth made a bid, did they not? In fact, the Executive Board approved and passed. GGS: They had indicated that they would likely provide coverage for those amounts but it wasn't a bid process that they were committed to. Collins: So that what you keep cutting me off to ask, because I was going to say, is they've made a bid and we haven't accepted, even though we have a contract but, so their giving Driver an indication that we would be willing to do that so there is nothing firm and hard. GGS: That's correct. Steiner: Mr. Chairman, I think it's appropriate to self-insure $3 million and I go with option Number 1 . JC: Alright we have a motion and a second for option number 1. Further discussion? Is there any opposition to that motion? Seeing none then that will be a yes. Now that Is an addition to the 5% that is currently in the policy, but that -11- would be are $3 million plus that, ok. Any opposition to the motion, seeing none then that will be deemed approved. #14(b)(2)(d),(e) Alright, let's have a roll call please, Penny. Let's just go this way - Is there any opposition to the motion? If there is none we do not have to have a roll call. We will cast a unanimous ballot and that will be it. Let's move to #14(b)(2)(e), proposed 1994-95 Capitol Outlay Revolving Fund Budget, known as the CORF. We have a motion, second? Any discussion here. #17 - AWARDING JOB NOS. P1-48. P2-47-2. P2-56 & P2-53-2 TO PASCAL & LUDWIG ENGINEERS Steiner: recommends (e)(3)• JC: Alright, we have a motion to reject all bids. Alright, we have a motion to second. Any discussion? ?: General Counsel has written a letter. JC: I am going to ask General Counsel to make comments. GC: The options are set forth. I did a memo. It is dated June 1st. It is the dark yellow in the Staff Report. There in I articulated the three options that were available. I don't make a recommendation. The Engineering Department made a recommendation I sent forth. You can reject them for cause, reject all bids or award it. 0 ,K[/ C J:lasfiefl ILA � G T: Are we open for{e- GC: The question was are we open for legal action if we reject all bids. The only requirement is that the rejection be made in good faith and the bid specifications, the call for bids specifically reserves to the Districts the right to reject all bids. I don't see that on its face that there is anything that would expose us to liability. JC: Alright, in discussion. Director Collins. Collins: This is just , right? This does not reject bids and go out for re- bid. JC: This will reject all bids. All bids. And you will have to re-bid the job. In discussion, I'll indicate I am going to vote against the motion. I do not feel that, personally, it is proper to reject the bids. I do not find justification in doing it, very -12- candidly. The bid came in under the Engineer's estimate. I have no reason to feel, very candidly, that Pascal and Ludwig is not a qualified firm to do this job, irrespective of the fact that we have had an accident on this facility that involved them. I can tell you that I do not think that there is legal cause, personally, to reject their bid. So I will be voting against the motion. Any further discussion? Alright, is there any opposition to the motion? And I will say that I oppose. We have two...alright, let's get them... GC: ...six, seven, eight, nine, ten...it is getting pretty close... JC: Do you think we ought to do a Roll Call? Let's do a Roll Call and count. Alright, as the Roll is called please answer yes or no to the motion. Is there anyone who has any question on what the motion is and what it will do? Alright, then let us proceed with the Roll Call on the motion which is Item 3, a motion to reject all bids. Collins: A yes will support the motion? JC: A yes will support the motion, a no will vote against it. Alright, the motion fails fifteen to nineteen. Alright, we have a motion to approve the Staff recommendation and a second. Discussion. Yes, Sal. Sapien: JC: Wayne, can we have a comment, please? GM: I will ask Blake Anderson to comment on the need for this project to go ahead at this point. BPA: From a technical point of view, the project collects four miscellaneous jobs that cover a wide range of projects at both plants. One into that includes safety issues, seismic retrofit at Plant 2, miscellaneous jobs at both facilities. Some of the work has been on the lists of things to do for well over a year. With that staff believes that the projects are definitely needed and most of them came from design contracts from outside consultants who came in with recommendations on the projects. Sapien: That is not the question. The question is would there be any harm in delaying this project for three or four months until we have a Management Practices Study done by Ernest & Young? BPA: Well, admittedly a few months delay will not put us that much further behind. I don't know what the response will be to the low bidder to continued delay. We would have to check it. -13- Stanton: Mr. Chairman, if I may ask, please. I am rather interested in what my good friend Sal Sapien. Because the previous motion which I deemed members in the room went on record and yet would not have held it up three or four months because it would have put together a re-bid package in, I would imagine, less time than three or four months. So I don't quite understand why is an ingredient here if there is some question regarding this firm. I think the fifteen of us that voted for the previous motion to reject the bid had some concern with this firm's involvement with the accident and citation by OSHA and I think there are some questions that are unresolved in some peoples' minds in regard to the facts that . So if nineteen of you said no, you are comfortable with this firm, in spite of their own judgements and citation and you don't want to mess with going through a re-bidding process, then why are we talking about holding this up for three more months I don't understand the logic at all. JC: Address it. Sapien: The reason I voted against the motion is because I don't feel that access . Therefor I feel that even though we don't like the we have a firm grasp of what our contractors' practices ?: Are there any unresolved questions in terms of insinuating OSHA investigation relative to this company that ? GC: I don't think I quite understood the question out there. Are there continuing... Stanton: Is OSHA still investigating this company? GC: It is my understanding that they are not. They have advised that they are finished. It is my understanding that they have wrapped the whole thing up from their perspective with this exception. Their office is apparently, one of the attorneys out of the regional office was present and has advised that their office is working with the District Attorney to see whether there are criminal penalties to be assessed, but I gather that is more as an assist because they don't act as prosector. Stanton: To broaden my question, there is still some investigation on the part of an outside agency in OSHA or the District Attorney with regard to that involved this company. GC: That is correct. Stanton: That of course was the initial reason that fifteen of us voted for the last motion. -14- Sapient: The second question Tom would be, according to your memo, we could ask or be advised their findinas or because they have been disqualified one of our employees. GC: We have already filed with the state appeal of the local office citation issuance. That has already commenced pursuant to the action of the Boards. JC: Director Collins and then Director Steiner. Collins: A couple points, first point is I don't think we can stop all contracts until this Ernst study is finished. We have to continue with our work and quite frankly I'm not sure that the management study is going to touch upon this particular issue at all and it may not and there are concerns that there are certain things of seismic retrofit and other things that I would like to get done in expedient and quick fashion, especially if we just picked up $3 million bucks of it ourselves again tonight. So I would like to do it as fast as we can. I don't feel comfortable with Pascal and Ludwig. I know that there is a disagreement with that but right now and with my own reasons, obviously because of the incident, I don't feel comfortable with it. I would like to move the project as fast as I can. Tom, how do we go about doing that? What way is there that we can get Pascal and Ludwig put aside, other than, we just had a failed motion to do that, is there any way we can do that and move this thing to bid? I look at Item 4 and I am not entirely certain that would cover it. It says, "To dismiss for non-responsible contractor", but that says meet with them. //GC: That is another option, but in my memorandum I pointed out a couple of points that are very significant, very critical. One is that if you elect to make a finding to support a decision that rejects the award of the contract to the low bidder, Pascal and Ludwig Engineers, on the basis that they are not a responsible contractor, as a matter of law we are required to give them a public hearing and allow them the opportunity to submit evidence on their behalf that they in fact are a responsible contractor. So that is an option. I have also in my memorandum indicated that there really is no evidence available to show that. By example, they sent an unsolicited letter, I think that they were probably aware of the Boards' actions over the last two meetings, setting forth their safety record, 18,700 man days without an accident loss for safety, things of this nature. We also know that they have been on our site for several jobs without accident, so finding that I think is going to be probably Impossible. Even with the existence of this accident, we still do not have hard evidence yet as to what did happen out there, so that is not going to help us establish a case. Collins: If we went with Item 3 Would there be legal liabilities that could occur? In other words, we certainly have a certain area of liability that we assume, correct? -15- GC: This District has discretion to reject all bids and I put that in the memo as I have indicated. The only small asterisk there is, it must be done in good faith. Now a suggestion was made, well we could go right back out to bid. I would submit to you that if you reject them tonight and go right back out to bid tomorrow, somebody is going to ask you the question, "Why are you going out tomorrow". And you really have one answer and that is, "Well, we did not like the low bid contractor", and that is probably going to come back to be a legal challenge that we would then have to ward off and it may be difficult to do that. JC: And they may be the low bidder next time, too. We had Director Steiner, then Director Potts. Steiner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think this is a very important issue tonight and this Board is divided. Very significant on this issue and I agree that this issue should not be delayed for a management audit. It should address other areas, but I agree with Sal that we really should continue this at least 30 days because there are unresolved issues in regard to the _ ability and the OSHA investigation and we are not going to go into closed session, right Tom, on this? GC: Not on the award of this contract. Steiner: I really urge that we be cautious on this. 30 days is very prudent and I would hope that there might be a middle ground without rejecting these bids since that motion did fail, to continue this for 30 more days. ?: If that is a motion, I will second it. JC: Alright, that will be a substitute motion. Director Potts. Potts: another motion on the floor. All the requests approach later JC: Alright, Director Stanton. Stanton: That is pretty much...yea, that is fine...the subsequent motion will take precedence over any...but again I just want to remind the Directors that the reason why we voted against, voted for the motion that was originally approved by because the investigations were going on and I would hope that all the Directors in the room knew that the certain liability investigation was going on. And that seems to be a good reason to reject all bids. I know we are not voting on that but I am disappointed that failed JC: Well, if I can respond to that, Roger. The only thing I can say is the fact that I don't know just because a contractor has had some kind of citation by OSHA that -16- it just automatically makes them a non-responsible bidder. I am having difficulty with that. They have provided...they have done projects for us in the past...what I am hearing people say here is that until the investigation is over, well, my point is, what if the investigation is over and they are already cited and what if the investigation says, "no criminal activity", 'cause that is all that is left. Okay, what if they even say there was, does that mean that they have not provided good quality service to this District in the past? There was an accident. We have been cited in it. What does that make us? Are we a non-responsible organization? No. That may be somebody's opinion but none the less I am telling you that I think that what we are doing is mixing up the pot here. I think that they have provided service. They have provided good service. They have a long history of accident- free service. And because of this, regardless of what you say, some people are saying, "I don't want to hire these people again because they have had this problem", and I cannot say that makes them a non-responsible organization. So that is where I think we are getting mixed up here, is the fact that even if they cite them, even if they are found guilty, that does not mean that forever they are barred from public service or working for public agencies because they are not responsible. Pickier: Roger mentioned a vote of 19-15. 1 think the 19 people who voted felt the same thing, that we should go ahead. John mentioned that we should not delay. We keep delaying month after month and I think it is costing us something I think we should do. I know that there is a substitute motion on the floor, and we have to vote on that, but the majority of the people, the 19, knew that what we are trying to do is go ahead with this and I still think that we should. JC: Thank you. Director Leipzig. Leipzig: I just wanted to ask if there is any delay. JC: Let me ask General Counsel to answer that. GC: Two comments. One, the call for bids and all said that we would award in 60 days. The first time the boards continued it we obtained the concurrence with Pascal and Ludwig. Last month it was continued again. They did send us a letter post facto that did not object to the continuance. They do not have to agree to it. Now what would be the effect? Well, they would reject and you would lose the bid, but I would suggest that it could be looked upon unfavorably to the actions on the Districts. The second thing is, you recall last month, if we think we are going to get a resolution, we won't see anything further in terms of results or action by OSHA for a long....on the complaints that we have appealed we were advised last week, a minimum of one year before we get docketed to hear that appeal. It is discouraging but it is not our call. I don't see that we would get any word of finality within 30 days. -17- Saltarelli: Mr. Chairman, it might also be relevant for us to know whether or not Pascal and Ludwig have been cooperating with us on issues of the accident. GC: There has really been somewhat limited contact. I guess I could ask Blake to respond. My understanding, but he could tell you better is, that have been fully cooperative relative to the temporary shutdown of that job and getting it restructured and ready to go. Blake, I would like to ask him in terms of the actual investigation, all parties have really been pretty distant from each other. We have not had the opportunity afforded to us to interview any of their employees. Vice- versa. They have not sought to interview any of ours. There has been nothing that they have not cooperated but there has just not been an opportunity to do any exchange. Blake, can you indicate in terms of... BPA: Our contact with Pascal and Ludwig has been on the contracts, the active contracts, that they have at this moment at both Plants 1 and 2. Other than basically try to collect ourselves, Districts' staff and Pascal and Ludwig staff have continued to work on the various projects at the two facilities. I might say that right now we are administering about a $110 million worth of construction work between the two plants. This is a $1 million project and probably Pascal and Ludwig has in the vicinity of maybe $2 million worth of projects going right now, give or take. 7: Four times that. BPA: Four times that. So Pascal and Ludwig has in progress right now about $B million worth of work for us. So in may ways, well, I guess as Director of Engineering I would ask, well, "What do we do with the existing projects that are now underway by Pascal and Ludwig". We have a very good relationship with them and the work that they give us is high quality and we have been happy with them from that technical point of view, all along the way. JC: Director Stanton, then Director Barrera. Stanton: With great respect here, 1 am sure you did not intend to do this, but I think we are talking about different things. You said that we are not going to get an answer to our appeal to OSHA for a year. I've noticed some Directors saying, "Oh, well, why should we delay for 30 days because we are not going to resolve anything, and we certainly do not want this thing to be hanging for a year." We are not talking about our appeal to OSHA as the issue that bothers me or bothers Bill, or bothers most of the other 15. We are talking about a District Attorney's potential criminal investigation, that is the issue. That is going on. We do not know if that is going to be another week or another month. We don't know that. So the Districts appeal of OSHA's citation is not the issue. The issue is that there is a firm where an on-going investigation is in progress which may _ tomorrow. -18- I don't know, neither do you, with regards to criminal liability on an accident. I have great difficulty saying to anyone that I represent that I am going to award a contract to a firm when that investigation is going on. With regard to on-going projects, we are talking about projects that have already been awarded. We are not talking about a brand new contract. different things . The issue is real simple, the other firm, I am not differing with my good friend the Chairman, that services have been adequate and maybe even better in the past. That is fine, I will take your word for it. The issue is we are talking about a firm that has a potential criminal Investigation by the District Attorney and we are talking about whether we are going to award a contract today or not, or reject all bids. That is all it is. It has nothing to do with our appeal of citations from OSHA. JC: Thank you. Director Barrera and then Director Welch. Barrera: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our General Counsel, question. Is there a possibility going on out there now, as Stanton said a possible DA, of the families coming across with a shotgun to sue all involved, Ludwig and us, to this thing, I am sure those won't stand still no matter what the D.A. says. They are going to come forward and I hate to see ourselves in court along with our contractor, trying to defend this thing and then telling our Counsels back home that the Districts that we represent that here we are again. GC: The District has received claims from the family members already. We are going to be reviewing the potential of litigation by the family members against the District. As you know, under the Tort Claim Act they must file claims with us first. Whether they will go, the families probably are limited relative to Pascal and Ludwig to Worker's Compensation Claims. They may have some theories but they are pretty remote, and that is why the claims have been filed against us also. JC: Alright, Director Welch and then we are going to move on the motion, the substitute motion, Welch: I just wanted to voice my concern in addition to Director Stanton's concern about the ongoing District Attorney's Investigation. I don't have any problem with bothering contracts that we have with Pascal and Ludwig. Something you ought to do the contract will be honored. I do have a problem entering into a new contract with a company that we may be turning around and suing. I feel a bit awkward about that. I anticipate that we have got to receive, file and deny claims. As I look at it, from the family members the next step is that they will file suit against the Districts and the next step, logically, I think, is the District, nothing against Pascal and Ludwig. As a business man I would turn around and cross litigate and whatever theories might seem appropriate. And I just feel a little bit awkward about on-going or contemplating new contracts with a company that we are suing. -19- JC: We are not yet, and don't know that we will, but I understand your position. Wonder if General Counsel has any comments in regards to....If none that is fine. GC: The claims, you already denied the claims tonight on Item 90) on the Consent Calendar. We have one additional claim from the surviving spouse and that just came in and that is not on the agenda yet. JC: Alright, we are going to go ahead with the substitute motion. The substitute motion, I believe, if my memory serves me right, is to continue this Item for 30 days. Is that correct, Bill? That is the motion and the second. We have had discussion. All in favor of the motion raise your hands, please. Alright, all....how many did you get? Raise them once more if you would, please, and take a double count there. How many did you get? TLW: 18 JC: Alright, thank you. All opposed to the motion? Do we have 18 more? I don't know that we have. The substitute motion passes and the item will be continued for 30 days. Collins: What was the count? JC: It was 18 to 14, 1 believe. GC: I think there were two abstentions because we had 34 votes the last time. JC: Alright then, that is the action of the Board and we will move on. I believe that is all you needed, Wayne. #35 - DISTRICT 2 - AWARDING CONTRACT NO. 2-9-Rl JC: Alright, I am going to advance an Item because we do have a lengthy closed session this evening. I am going to advance Item #35. It is a District 2 matter only, so if any of the other Directors go to get coffee or something, please try to be quiet because we would like to get through this quickly. I'll ask for a verbal staff report at this time. GM: Mr. Anderson will give a report. BPA: Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce Mr. John Dettle, who is the project manager, who will give a brief oral report on the project. Dettle: Thank you, Blake. What I would like to do is briefly describe the project and then the item on the agenda. This project is the second rehabilitation. The -20- sewer is an 18" and 15" sewer . It starts off at Cal State Fullerton and ends up at Rolling Hills Drive. The problems that we have been having with the sewer is insufficient capacity associated with Bastanchury Road and through the Parkside Apartment complex. The apartment complex was built on the sewer on the . That is still has sewer has had the tendency to break on the north portion of the apartment complex. The alignment goes underneath the 57 freeway and through Gilman Park. Gilman Park has been put on a housing development and support from the owners of the houses there. demonstrated their flows are continuing to decrease and that is why we have so many offset joints, 29 offset joints, through the park alone. So what we are proposing to do is replace the whole line. We are going to replace the alignment of the park with 18" sewers and tunnel the whole sewer through the park to reduce any impact on the park. And then it comes to the 57 Freeway where it crosses in between two houses, and one of the items is to approve the license agreements we have obtained with the owners there, which gives us additional construction access there. The alignment runs through the apartment complex. We are going to realign through there, replace it and Bastanchury Road with 21" sewers and then connect it to another sewer, Rolling Hills Subtrunk Sewer, at the intersection of Associated Road and Bastanchury Road. Then it will go from a 21" to a 36" sewer, a 39" inch sewer The items on the agenda are to approve two license agreements with the property owners. The second one is to approve an addendum that would require a . The engineer's estimate on this project is $1.5 million, but the bids that were received ranged from a high of $2,696,235, to a low of $2,482,762, submitted by Colich & Sons. JC: Alright, we have a motion, we have a second? Alright, discussion? Director Collins. Collins: My discussion is to the Director of Finance. This is a $2.5 million bid. How does this get absorbed into our budget? Our contingency funds or something that will have to be added up to a user fee type deal? GGS: This project was provided for in the projections that we did with last year's budget and has been included in the projections revised for those amounts due in next year's budget and will be funded through sales of Certificates of Participation, repaid from property taxes. Collins: So there is no GGS: That is correct. JC: Further discussion? Alright, we have a motion and second. This again is a -21- District 2 item only. Those in District 2 is there any opposition to the motion? Seeing none, it will be deemed approved. Thank you. #38 - DISTRICT 5 - DAHN CORPORATION Alright then, that concludes the agenda. Oh, by the way #38 has been removed and there will be no action on that Item this evening. In fact that is going to end up being, I believe it was a District 7 Item and it was listed as District 5 so it will be re-noticed and heard later. Alright, at this time we will adjourn to closed session. I will ask all of those in the room that are not Directors or staff persons associated with these matters, if you would please leave the room at this time. _22_ COUNTY SANITATION 4 DISTRICTS NOS. 13, 29 39 59 69 79 119 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MF*MTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ON JUNE 89 1994 t SAT'ro G F uev. g4n 199 GE COV ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES a 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA POLL CALL A regular mining of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts; Nos. 1, 2,3. S. 6. 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, was held on June 8, 1994. at 7:30 p.m.,in the Districts' Administrative Offices. Following Me Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation the roll was railed and the Secretary reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5. 6, 7. 11, 13 and 14 as follows: ACTIVE ALTERNATE DIRECTORS DIRECTORS DISTRICT NO. 1: Fred Barters. Chairman Gene Beyer • James M. Ferryman,Chairman pro tam Nate Rude Pat McGuigan Thomas E. Lure y_ Roger Stanton William G. Steiner Tracy A.Worley Thomas R.SMtarelll 9 DISTRICT NO.2: y_ John Collins. Chairman George Scon IN Finlike, Chairman pro tam Tom Daly 3_ Fred Banes Gene Beyer Buck Cabin Chins Nomy y_ Barn Deres —_ Bob Bell Norman Z. Eckermile Michael Ma ittvveiler William D. Mahoney James H.Flom Caney J. Nelson Glenn Parker Miguel Pulido �_ Thomas E. Luts y_ Roger Stanton William G. Star. y Darnel T.Welch _ John M. Gullissun George L. 2lakat Sheldon Singer DISTRICT NO. 3: Sal A. Sapien, Chairman William C.Estrada Shame Dunlap. Chairmen pro tam Carrey,J. Nelson George Brown Gwen A.Forayme Buck Catlin Chris Norty John C.M. George Scan y James H.Floe William D.MaMney Don R.Griffin Donald Sore Wally Linn Eva G. Miner g_ Thomas E. Lun Pat McGugan y Onda Moulton-Patterson Eade Robitaille a Richard Partin Joyce C.Nicholson x IN Fickler Tom Daly Margie L. Rice _ James V.Fans Sheldon Singer George L Laket Roger Stanton William G.Steiner Charles Sylvia Anthony Selvaggi DISTRICT NO.S: y Phil Sareone,Chairmen Jan Debay y William G.Stainer. Chairman pro tam Roger Stanton Jahn C.Car,Jr. Jan Debay DISTRICT NO.6: James A.Wanner, Cleiman Arthur Perry Evelyn Nan,Chairmen pro tam John C. Cos,Jr. William G. Steiner Roger Stanton DISTRICT NO.7: a Ban,Hammond, Chairman Mike Ward x _ Thomas R.Benumb, Citeman pro tam Jim Potts Fred Barters Gene Beyer Jan Debay Phil Sansone L Ted Moreno Miguel Puli z William G. Steiner Roger Stamon James A.Wahw Mike Schaefer DISTRICT NO. 11: �_ Grace Wrichen, Chairman Fade Robitaille a Victor Loci Chairman pro tam finds MoukonVattercan Roger Stanton William G.Steiner • DISTRICT NO. 13: _ John M.Gultmon, Chairman Daniel T.Welch _ Glenn Parker, Chairman pro tam Burnie Dunlap x Fred Banana Gene Beyer IN Fickler Tom Daily William G.Steiner Roger Stamon DISTRICT NO. 14: Peer A.Swan, Chairman Deny)Miller i Barry Hammond, Chairman We tam Mike Ward y_ Fred Bums. _ Gene Beyer y Jim Pots Tracy A.Worley William G. Steiner. Roger Stamon —2— 06/08/94 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager, Blake P. Anderson, Margie Nellor, Gary G. Streed, Penny Kyle, Assistant Board Secretary, Mike Broyles, Chris Cervellone, Corinne Clawson, John Dettle, Mark Esquer, John Finias, Gary Hasenstab, Irwin Haydock, Tony Handy, Ed Hodges, Steve Hovey, John Linder, Mike Moore, Mark T. Mutz, Kent C. Nelson, Charles E. Nichols, Bob Ooten, Ken Ramey, George Robertson, Mary Simpson, Manny Stoffer, Mahin Talebi, Chuck Winsor, Mike Wilson, Ray Young, Paula Zeller OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, George Andrews, Ahmed Dehbozorgy, Michael Harhen, Ron Hoesterey, Bill Knopf, Charles Puckett, Donna Puckett, Phil Stone DISTRICT 13 In the absence of Chairman John M. Gullixson Appointment of Chairman pro tam and Chairman pro tam Glenn Parker, Director Burnie Dunlap was appointed Chairman pro tam of District No. 13. DISTRICT 14 In the absence of Chairman Peer A. Swan and Appointment of Chairman pro tam Chairman pro tam Barry Hammond, Director Fred Samara was appointed Chairman pro tam of District No. 14. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman and Vice Joint Chairman Presentation of resolution of presented a plaque and resolution of appreciation and plaque to retiring appreciation to retiring active Director Charles Director Puckett, who represented the City of Tustin on the Board of District No. 7, and also served as Vice Joint Chairman from July 14, 1993 to May 11, 1994. ALL DISTRICTS Joint Chairman Mahoney reported that Cherry Presentation of CWPCA Southern Textron #1 of Santa Ana, who discharges California Plant of the Year Award under permit into the Districts' sewage to Cherry Textron #1 system, was selected as the recipient for the 1993 California Water Pollution Control Association (CWPCA) Plant of the Year Award in the large industrial category. The purpose of the award is to stimulate interest on the part of industry to take positive steps to meet strict water pollution control standards. This firm, nominated by the Districts' Source Control Division, was recognized for their efforts over the past year to comply with discharge requirements and foster an awareness in the business community for the need to control industrial wastewater to help protect public health and the environment. .3- 06/08/94 The Joint Chairman then recognized George Andrews, President, Ahmed Dehbozorgy, Director of Environmental and Safety, and Michael Harhen, Director of Maintenance, of Cherry Textron #1. Chairman Mahoney then presented the award to Mr. Andrews, recognizing their efforts over the past year to comply with Districts' requirements. On behalf of the Boards of Directors, Chairman Mahoney commended the firm and expressed the Boards' appreciation for their efforts. Mr. Andrews thanked the Boards for the recognition. He gave a background of his firm and its manufacturing and environmental programs, and noted that his firm is proud of their achievements and being a better citizen with regard to reducing the amount of waste discharged. In response to Directors' questions, Mr. Andrews noted that the cost of coming into compliance was very small because of their ability to reduce the costs of waste hauling and by recycling lubricating oil used in their machines through the implementation of new programs. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman welcomed newly-seated Presentation of District pin to Director Tracy A. Worley, who is new Director representing the City of Tustin, to the Boards. He then presented her with a pin bearing the Districts' new "2020 VISION" Wastewater Management Action Plan logo. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman announced the Report of the Joint Chairman tentatively scheduled upcoming meetings as follows: Fiscal Policy Committee - Wednesday, June 15th, at 5:30 p.m. District No. 3 Selection Committee - Wednesday, June 22nd, at 4:30 p.m. Executive Committee - Wednesday, June 22nd, at 5:30 p.m. (Directors Evelyn Hart and Victor Leipzig were also invited to attend.) Executive Subcommittee- Thursday, June 23rd, at 12:00 noon Special Selection Committee re Computers - Thursday, June 30th, at 5:30 p.m. Director Sapien, Chairman of District No. 3, requested that the District No. 3 Selection Committee meeting be rescheduled. -4- 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS The General Manager reported that a New Report of the General Manager Directors' Orientation and Treatment Plant Tour had been tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, June 29th, at 4:00 p.m. for those Directors who were unable to attend the Match 19th session, and requested that those Directors complete the form that evening that had been placed in their folders. He further stated that once the orientation and tour date had been finalized, all Directors would be notified and encouraged to attend. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman recognized Director Recognition of Director Collins to Collins who stated that he had commented comments on change orders previously many times, often critically, on change orders, but wanted to compliment the staff on this month's agenda report explanations which were very well done. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chairman recognized Director Recognition of Director Leipzig re Leipzig who questioned staff regarding donation of old computer equipment Districts' computers that were being replaced by newer computers, and whether the retired computers could be donated to schools. The Director of Finance, Gary Streed, stated that these computers are being used throughout the Districts in less strenuous environments. However, staff and counsel are investigating the possibility of a policy of donating surplus computer equipment in the future. STRICT 1 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 There being no corrections or amendments Approval of Minutes to the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 3 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -5- 06/08/94 DISTRICT 6 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 7 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11. 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 11 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 13 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 14 There being no corrections or amendments to Approval of Minutes the minutes of the regular meeting held May 11, 1994,the Chairman ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. 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" 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. 05/04/94 05/18/94 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - 8 798,460.68 5 644,903.95 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund 518,697.10 1,619,112.79 Joint Working Capital Fund - 294,523.82 150,868.80 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 11,959.56 117,598.35 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 7,035.85 162.50 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 40,866.55 7,424.43 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 36,569.95 42,701.27 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 72,584.29 3,896.88 DISTRICT NO, 6 - 4,693.47 115.00 DISTRICT NO, 7 - 7,529.96 16,436.07 DISTRICTNO. 11 - 365,709.67 7,853.14 DISTRICT NO. 13 100.60 32.86 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 12,477.79 8,756.92 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 20,007.00 3,109.26 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 0.00 2,658.62 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 14.70 6,102.02 $2,191 ,230.99 52.631 .732.86 -6- 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awardina Microcomputer Hardware. , Software and Associated Peripherals. That the bid tabulation and recommendation Specification No. E-243. to GET. Inc. re award of purchase order contract for Microcomputer Hardware, Software and Associated Peripherals, Specification No. E-243, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase order contract be, and is hereby, awarded to GST, Inc. for a total amount not to exceed $43,125.00 plus sales tax. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to Thermo Jarrell Ash That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to Corporation for Purchase of One issue a purchase order to Thermo Jarrell Ash Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Corporation in the amount of $115,000.00, Spectrometer (Specification plus freight and sales tax, for Purchase of No. E-244) One Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectrometer (Specification No. E-244). ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase of One Flat Bed Truck with Chassis Mounted Crane. That the bid tabulation and recommendation Specification No. V-004.to Westrux re Purchase of One Flat Bed Truck with International Chassis Mounted Crane, Specification No. V-004, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the unsolicited alternate bids of Carmenita Truck Center, Fuller Ford, Inland Empire White GMC and Morgan Crane Co., Inc., be, and are hereby, rejected for not meeting the specifications; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase order be, and is hereby, awarded to Westrux International for a total amount not to exceed $66,508.00 plus sales tax. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase of One Hvdroflush Sewer Cleanina Truck Specification That the bid tabulation and No V-005.to Hooker Equipment recommendation re award of Purchase of Company One Hydroflush Sewer Cleaning Truck, Specification No. V-005, including Option A, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase be, and is hereby, awarded to Haaker Equipment Company for a total amount not to exceed $138,507.00 plus sales tax. - -7- 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase of Five Four-Wheel Electric Personnel Carriers. That the bid tabulation and recommendation Specification No. V-006. to Taylor- re award of Purchase of Five Four-Wheel Dunn Manufacturing Company Electric Personnel Carriers, Specification No. V-006, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase be, and is hereby, awarded to Taylor-Dunn Manufacturing Company for a total amount not to exceed $21,135.00plus sales tax. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase of Six Four-Wheel Electric Cargo Carriers. Specification That the bid tabulation and recommendation No. V-007.to Taylor-Dunn re award of Purchase of Six Four-Wheel Manufacturing Company Electric Cargo Carriers, Specification No. V-007, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said purchase be, and is hereby, awarded to Taylor-Dunn Manufacturing Company for a total amount not to exceed $28,384.50 plus sales tax. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizino staff to issue Purchase Order Contract to Gartner Group for That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to ongoing Computer Technology issue a Purchase Order Contract to Gartner Analysis and Assessment for 1994-95 Group for ongoing Computer Technology (Specification No. P-1 53) Analysis and Assessment for 1994-95 (Specification No. P-153), in an amount not to exceed $34,500.00. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 3 to the plans and specifications for Job That Change Order No. 3 to the plans and No. Pt-38-2 specifications for Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-38-2, authorizing a net addition of $10,780.00to the contract with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for 14 items of added or deleted work, be, and is hereby, approved. -8- 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 2 to the , plans and specifications for Job That Change Order No. 2 to the plans and No. P2.43-1 specifications for Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at •- Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-43-1,authorizing a net deduction of $40,084.00 from the contract with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for ten items of added or deleted work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 3 to the Plans and specifications for Job That Change Order No. 3 to the plans and No. P2-53-1 specifications for Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-1,authorizing a net addition of $29,260.00 to the contract with Amelco Construction, a Division of Amelco Industries, for five items of added or deleted work, and granting a time extension of three calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt CH2M Hill for design and Resolution No. 94-55,approving Addendum programming services for Job No. J-31 No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with CH2M Hill for design and programming services required for Expansion of Existing Computerized Monitoring and Control Systems at Plants 1 and 2, Job No. J-31, deleting the specified completion deadline date of June 1994, with no change in the maximum authorized compensation of $742,148.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive. file and deny claim filed by attorneys for Richard Holm, Lacey That the claim submitted by attorneys for Miller, a minor, through her Guardian Richard Holm, Lacey Miller, a minor, through Ad Litem. Georgianne I. Miller. her Guardian Ad Litem, Georgianne I. Miller, Andy C. Patterson and Jackie J. Andy C. Patterson and Jackie J. Venezio Venezio (Patterson) re Job No. P2-49 (Patterson) dated May 12, 1994, in undetermined amounts for wrongful deaths and personal injuries in connection with construction of Miscellaneous Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2.49, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and denied; and, FURTHER MOVED: That said claim be, and is hereby, referred to the Districts' General Counsel and liability claims administrator for appropriate action. ' -9- 06/O8/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing the General Manager to designate members of the Boards That the General Manager be, and is hereby, and/or staff to attend and participate authorized to designate members of the in various training programs. Boards and/or staff to attend and participate meetings, hearings, conferences. in various training programs, meetings, facility inspections and other functions hearings, conferences, facility inspections and other functions which, in his opinion, will be of value to the Districts or affect the Districts' interests, including, but not limited to, those conducted by organizations providing specific training, state and federal legislative and regulatory bodies and the California Association of Sanitation Agencies, California Water Pollution Control Association, Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, and the Water Environment Federation; and, FURTHER MOVED: That reimbursement for travel, meals, lodging and incidental expenses be, and is hereby, authorized in accordance with existing Districts' policies and the approved annual budget for 1994.95;and, FURTHER MOVED: That staff be, and is hereby, directed to provide the Fiscal Policy Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Annual nominations for Chairman of the Joint Administrative Oroanization The General Counsel briefly reviewed the provisions of the Districts' Rules of Procedure relating to nomination and election of the Joint Chairman and Vice Joint Chairman. This being the annual meeting fixed by the Boards at which nominations are to be made for the office of Chairman of the Joint Administrative Organization, the Secretary then declared the nominations open. Director John C. Cox, Jr., was nominated as a candidate for the office of Chairman of the Joint Administrative Organization. It was pointed out that nominations would remain open until the regular July Board meeting. The Secretary then reported that the election would be held at said July meeting in accordance with the Boards' Rules of Procedures for the Conduct of Business of the Districts. Nominations and election of a Vice Joint Chairman will also be held at the regular July meeting. -10- 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive file and approve staff Summary Financial Report for nine- That the staff Summary Financial Report for month period ending March 31. 1994 the nine-month period ending March 31, 1994, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of Joint Works Selection Committee That the draft minutes of the Joint Works Selection Committee meeting held on May 25, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Professional Services Agreement with Bush & Associates- That the Selection Committee certification of Inc. for Surveying Services for the final negotiated fee relative to the Various Collection System and Professional Services Agreement with Bush & Treatment P'ant Proiects. Specification Associates, Inc., for Surveying Services for No. P-150 Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-56, approving Professional Services Agreement with Bush & Associates, Inc. for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus supplies and materials, at cost, for a total annual amount not to exceed $120,000.00for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for up to two one-year extensions. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Professional Services Agreement with Clifford A. Forkert. That the Selection Committee certification of Civil Engineer for Surveying Services the final negotiated fee relative to the for Various Collection System and Professional Services Agreement with Treatment Plant Projects. Specification Clifford A. Forkert, Civil Engineer, for No. P-150 Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-57, approving Professional Services Agreement with Clifford A. Forkert, Civil Engineer, for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus supplies and materials, at cost, for a total annual amount not to exceed - $120,000.00for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for up to two one-year extensions. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. _11_ O6/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants,Inc. That the Selection Committee certification of for Surveying Services for Various the final negotiated fee relative to the Collection System and Treatment Plant Professional Services Agreement with DGA Proiects, Specification No. P-150 Consultants, Inc. for Surveying Services for Various Collection System and Treatment Plant Projects, Specification No. P-150, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-58, approving Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc., for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, direct expenses and profit, plus supplies and materials, at cost, for a total annual amount not to exceed $120,000.00for a one-year period beginning June 12, 1994, with provision for up to two one-year extensions. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Aoorovino Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order No. 53935 agreement That the Selection Committee certification of with Reish Marine Studies. Inc.. for the final negotiated fee relative to Purchase Environmental Consultino Services for Order No. 53935 agreement with Reish Marine Bioassay and Toxicity Analysis Marine Studies, Inc., for Environmental (Specification No. P-152) Consulting Services for Marine Bioassay and Toxicity Analysis (Specification No. P-152), extending the agreement for one additional year, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-59, approving Change Order No. 1 to said purchase order agreement with Reish Marine Studies, Inc., for said services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead and profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $16,000.00,increasing the total authorized compensation from $24,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $40,000.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Amendment No. 11 to Agreement with SAIC re Districts' NPDES Ocean Monitoring Program reouired by EPA Verbal report of staff The Director of Technical Services, Margie Nellor, introduced Dr. Irwin Haycock, Manager of the Compliance Division, to review the major elements of the -12- 06/08/94 Districts' ocean monitoring and research programs. Using slides, Dr. Haydock spoke to the Directors in depth about the Districts' programs. He stated that the Districts' have an obligation to conduct a very extensive monitoring program as they operate under a special provision of the federal Clean Water Act, which is often referred to as Section 301(h), which allows for a high quality, but less than full secondary treated discharge for those municipal wastewater agencies that discharge into deep, well-mixed ocean waters such as in Southern California, and can meet the stringent 301(h) requirements. The Districts'treatment system is built with 50% secondary treatment and 50% advanced primary treatment. All of our bio-solids are recycled and the Districts have a very stringent source control program that allows our effluent to meet effluent quality standards for the ocean after dilution. In terms of the treatment system, he stated that it is a good mix of treatment,source control and reuse. The Districts also must prove there are no significant environmental impacts in the ocean, which is most important. Dr. Haydock stated that the program, over the last nine years, has done that. This mandated program, which was jointly developed through EPA, the Regional Water Duality Control Board and the Districts, has been carried out during the nine years of our 301(hl permit. The key questions, of course, are: Is it safe to swim in the ocean? Is it safe to eat the fish? Are the fisheries protected? And, is the ocean being protected? Those are the basic questions to be answered by this program, and Dr. Haydock observed that the Districts have done that to a great degree through our program. He further stated that the Districts have a very strong quality assurance program that takes care that all of the data meets strict quality requirements and all of the sampling is done under a strict project plan which is delivered as a part of each of the contractors' requirements. Overall, the Districts are looking for balanced environmental protection and a cost-effective treatment system. The final product of each of these contracts is an Annual Report that covers all of the subjects, and comes to a conclusion in terms of whether we meet all of the standards and are in compliance with our permit. Are there changes in the marine environment as a result of our discharge? Yes, there are changes. But they are not significant changes and they meet all of the stringent 301IN requirements. In the year ten program the Districts are doing something different. We have our 301 IN program which is reduced under a modified permit allowed by the Regional Board and EPA. Less stations, but all of the same kind of parameters, will be measured so that staff will be able to keep their finger on the ocean's pulse, not just dropping the program but actually carrying out enough to tell that it is on track, as with the previous nine years. The second part of the program is even larger. It is a regional program, the Southern California Bight Pilot Program, that is carried out in conjunction with the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, the three Regional Boards, the State Board and the EPA, as well as other POTWs (Publicly Owned Treatment Works) along the coast. -13- 06/08/94 The third part of the program is the special projects that fill the gaps in the program over the last nine years. All of these together make up the total program that will be done by the Districts' contractors. For the most part, during this summer season, we will do the regional program. The regular program will be continued during the rest of the year. The bottom line for ratepayers is that the estimated savings over the ten year period is about $500 million. Receive, file and approve staff report and recommendation for NPDES Ocean Monitoring Program Year Ten (July 1994- February 19961 and the Special Joint Works Selection Committee Certification re Amendment No. 11 to Agreement with SAIC re Specification No. 5-032 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Special Joint Works Selection Committee Certification, with attached staff report, of the negotiated fee and recommendation for Amendment No. 11 to Agreement with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-Inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. S-032, be, and are hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. Approving Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement with SAIC re Specification No. 5-032 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-60,approving Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-Inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. 5-032,extending the contract from July 1, 1994 through February 29, 1996,for an amount not to exceed $2,287,334.00for Year Ten of said contract. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes; and, FURTHER MOVED: That proposals will be solicited from qualified firms for the Year Eleven Ocean Monitoring Program, expected to be modified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, in conjunction with issuance of the Districts' new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) ocean discharge permit. -14- 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of Executive Subcommittee That the draft minutes of the Executive Subcommittee meeting held on May 11, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered file. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of Fiscal Policy Committee That the draft minutes of the Fiscal Policy Committee meeting held on May 18, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of Personnel Committee That the draft minutes of the Personnel Committee meeting held on May 19, 1994,be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of Joint Executive Committee/Fiscal Policy That the draft minutes of the Joint Executive Committee Committee/Fiscal Policy Committee meeting held on May 25, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to negotiate an agreement with Digital Equipment That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to Corporation for the Purchase of Two negotiate an agreement with Digital Equipment Model 4700A VAX Computers Corporation for the Purchase of Two Model (Specification No. E-2451 4700A VAX Computers (Specification No. E-245) for an amount not to exceed $400,000.00plus tax, for future consideration by the Boards. Director Sal A. Sapien requested that his opposition to the motion be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to negotiate an agreement with Square D Company That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to for a Site License for Plants 1 and 2 negotiate an agreement with Square D to use the CRISP/32 Plant Monitoring Company for a Site License for Plants 1 and 2 and Control Software (Specification to use the CRISP/32 Plant Monitoring and No. E-246) Control Software (Specification No. E-246) for an amount not to exceed $438,715,plus tax, for future consideration by the Boards. Director Sal A. Sapien requested that his opposition to the motion be made a matter of record. -15- 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to negotiate an Annual Software Maintenance That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to Agreement for CRISP/32 Plant negotiate an Annual Software Maintenance Monitoring and Control Software Agreement for CRISP/32 Plant Monitoring (Specification No. M-0481 and Control Software (Specification No. M-048) to provide automatic software update releases and ongoing support and warranty services, for an annual amount not to exceed $77,283,for future consideration by the Boards. Director Sal A. Sapien requested that his opposition to the motion be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS The Director of Finance referred the Directors Authorizing the Districts' Broker, to a one-page summary that had been placed Robert F. Driver Associates, to place in their meeting folders this evening regarding All-Risk Property Insurance coverage new developments that had been brought to his attention earlier in the day by the Districts' insurance broker, Robert F. Driver Associates, pertaining to proposals for renewal of the Districts' All Risk Property Insurance coverage. Mr. Streed reported that one of the carriers in the primary layer of property insurance had withdrawn its bid of $3 million, citing how close the plants are to the earthquake fault and the danger of liquefaction. Two potential replacement quotes were obtained, with difficulty, by the Districts' insurance broker. The Director of Finance stated the Fiscal Policy Committee had recommended the Districts purchase $35.50 million of insurance and stay within the current budget allocation from 1993-94,which was $1.1 million. With the removal of the $3 million in coverage, premium costs could go up considerably. The new viable options were as follows: 1. Districts self-insure for the first layer of $3 million for earthquake and $32 million of carrier Primary Level insurance, the premium would be approximately $1,115,000,which is also the approximate budget estimate. 2. Districts self-insure for the first layer of $5 million and $30 million of carrier Primary Level insurance, the premium would be approximately $1,060,000. 3. Houston Casualty would replace Commonwealth, who withdrew their quote June 7, 1994,at a $35 million carrier Primary Level insurance, the premium would be approximately $1,335,000. This is approximately $235,000 higher than what is allocated in the current budget. 4. Delegate renewal authority to the Fiscal Policy Committee up to an amount the Directors would determine. -16- O6/08/94 Mr. Streed stated that the Districts spent about $1.1 million for $80 million of coverage this year. It was anticipated last year that the Districts could buy $100 million, but could only find $80 million, and the market has tightened even further this year. Following a brief discussion it was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That Option No. 1, for the Districts to self-insure for the first $3 million layer, plus $32 million of carrier Primary Level insurance, at a premium of approximately $1,115,000,be, and is hereby, approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Districts' Broker, Robert F. Driver Associates, be, and is hereby, authorized to place All-Risk Property Insurance coverage, as shown in the following table under the 1994-95 Proposed Program. Also shown is the comparative 1993-94 information: CURRENT 1994-95 PROGRAM PROPOSED PROGRAM TERMS: _::. All-Risk Insurance including earthquake and flood, personal property and business interruption. Total Asset Value ' $1,335,088,274.00 COVERAGE: S. All-Risk $200,000,000 $200,000,000 Earthquake: CSDOC 0 3,000,000 Purchased 80,000,000 32,000,000 DEDUCTIBLE: All Perils $25,000 $25,000 Earthquake 5% Per Unit, 5% Per Unit, $250,000 min $250,000 min. PREMIUM: $1,075,375 Approx. cost $1,115,000 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to issue Chance Order No 1 to Purchase Order That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to No 65384 issued to Public Financial issue Change Order No. 1 to Purchase Order Management No. 65384 issued to Public Financial Management, extending their transitional _ financial advisory services to July 1, 1994, in the amount of $25,000.00,increasing the total authorized amount from an amount not to exceed $25,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $50,000.00. -17- O6/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file Report of the Executive Committee and Fiscal Policy That the report and recommendations of the Committee re 1994-95 Personnel Executive Committee and Fiscal Policy reauirements and joint works budgets Committee re 1994-95 personnel requirements and joint works operating and construction budgets, be, and are hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried by the Approving the 1994-95 Joint Operating following roll call vote: Budget AYES: Fred Barrera, George Brown, John Collins, John C. Cox, Jr., Jan Debay, Barry Denes, Burnie Dunlap, Norman Z. Eckenrode, James M. Ferryman, James H. Flora, Don R. Griffin, Evelyn Hart, Victor Leipzig, Wally Linn, Thomas E. Lutz, William D. Mahoney, Pat McGuigan, Ted R. Moreno, Linda Moulton-Patterson, Carrey J. Nelson, Richard Partin, Iry Pickler, Jim Potts, Margie L. Rice, Thomas R. Saltarelli, Phil Sansone, Sal A. Sapien, Sheldon S. Singer, Roger R. Stanton, William G. Steiner, Charles E. Sylvia, James A. Wahner, Daniel T. Welch, Grace A. Winchall, Tracy A. Worley NOES: None ABSENT: Buck Catlin, Barry Hammond, Peer A. Swan That the proposed Joint Operating Budget Funds of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 for the 1994-95 fiscal year, be, and are hereby, approved and adopted as follows: Fund Total Amount Joint Operating/Working Capital $ 49,542,000 Workers' Compensation, Self-Insured 307,000 Self-Funded Health Plan Trust 375,000 Public Liability, Self-Insured 222,000 _1 g_ 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried by the Aoorovina the 1994-95 Caoital Outlay following roll call vote: Revolving Fund Budget AYES: Fred Barrera, George Brown, John Collins, John C. Cox, Jr., Jan Debay, , Barry Denes, Burnie Dunlap, Norman Z. Eckenrode, James M. Ferryman, James H. Flora, Don R. Griffin, Evelyn Hart, Victor Leipzig, Wally Linn, Thomas E. Lutz, William D. Mahoney, Pat McGuigan, Ted R. Moreno, Linda Moulton-Patterson, Carrey J. Nelson, Richard Partin, Iry Pickier, Jim Potts, Margie L. Rice, Thomas R. Saltarelli, Phil Sansone, Sal A. Sapien, Sheldon S. Singer, Roger R. Stanton, William G. Steiner, Charles E. Sylvia, James A. Wahner, Daniel T. Welch, Grace A. Winchell, Tracy A. Worley NOES: None ABSENT: Buck Catlin, Barry Hammond, Peer A. Swan That the proposed 1994-95 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Budget (CORF Joint Works Construction) of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 be, and is hereby, approved and adopted in the total amount of $67,805,000.00. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Aoorovina Professional Services Agreement with Ernst & Young to That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt conduct a two-phase indeoendent Resolution No. 94-69,approving Professional review of the Districts' Capital Proiects Services Agreement with Ernst & Young to Management Function conduct a two-phase independent review of the Districts' Capital Projects Management Function including current Districts' organizational structure and management practices, and authorizing Phase 1 for an amount not to exceed $85,000.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing the Director of Finance to certify claims and forward to the That the Director of Finance be, and is hereby, County auditor for payment authorized to certify claims and forward to the Orange County auditor for immediate payment for expenditures incurred after June 30, 1994; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors do hereby declare that such certification shall comply with the provisions of Resolution No. 76-10 pertaining to procedures for payment of claims against the Districts until the 1994-95 budgets are adopted by the respective Districts. _19_ 06/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of Conservation. Recycle and Reuse That the draft minutes of the Conservation, Committee Recycle and Reuse Committee meeting held on May 26, 1994, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Declaring a Policy Re Water Reclamation That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 94-61, Declaring A Policy Re Water Reclamation. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1 . Job No. P1-48: Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2). Job No. P2-47-2: Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-56: and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-53-2 Receive and file staff report Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the staff report dated June 2, 1994 relative to description of Districts' construction safety program, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Receive and file letter from Pascal & Ludwio Engineers Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the letter from Pascal & Ludwig Engineers dated May 24, 1994 regarding the construction contractor's safety program, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Receive and file General Counsel's memorandum Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Counsel's memorandum dated June 1, 1994, relative to award of bid issue, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. 20 06/08/94 Consideration of action relative to bids received and/or award of contract for oroiect It was moved and seconded that the bid tabulation and recommendation for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2; Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-53-2, be received and ordered filed, and that all bids be rejected. In response to a question from the floor regarding the Boards' options, the General Counsel stated that the options available to the Directors were contained in his memorandum dated June 1, 1994, included with the agenda material. He reviewed the memo which detailed three options: to reject bids for cause, reject all bids or award the contract; but he did not make a recommendation. The Engineering Department, however, had made a recommendation to award to the low bidder, Pascal & Ludwig Engineers. Directors questioned if the Districts would be open for legal action if all bids were rejected. General Counsel stated that the only requirement would be to reject the bids in good faith. The bid specifications reserves to the Districts the right to reject all bids. Following a roll call vote, the motion to reject all bids failed by a vote of 15 to 19. It was then moved and seconded that the bid tabulation and recommendation for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2; Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2, be received and ordered filed; and that Resolution No. 94-34, awarding the contract to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, in their total bid amount of S1,003,899.00,be adopted. Directors then asked for comments from staff on the need for this project to go ahead at this time, and if any harm would be done in delaying the project three or four months until the Management Practices Study is completed by Ernst & Young. The Director of Engineering stated that the project, which is a collection of four miscellaneous jobs, covers a wide range of work. The projects include safety items, seismic retrofit at Plant 2 and miscellaneous jobs at both plants. Mr. Anderson stated that a few months delay would not put staff that much further behind but he did not know what the low bidder's response would be to a continued delay. -21- 06/08/94 The Boards then entered into a discussion of Directors' different views of rejecting all bids and rebidding versus delaying the project several months, and the desire to proceed immediately with certain work in the project. Also raised was the issue of the status of the investigation by Cal/OSHA and the District Attorney of the low bidder's fatal accident on another job at Treatment Plant No. 2. Also reviewed were the issues and procedures necessary to make a determination on whether a contractor is deemed a responsible bidder. A substitute motion was then moved and seconded, to continue the consideration of adoption of Resolution No. 94-34,awarding a contract to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-48; Miscellaneous Work Ire Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2; Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2,for approximately 30 days until the regular July Board meeting. Further discussion followed by the Directors concerning the reasoning both for and against delaying consideration of awarding the contract to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers, including the legal issues. Also discussed was Pascal & Ludwig Engineers's work and cooperation on other Districts' jobs, the ongoing accident investigation and pending lawsuits. The vote was then polled on the substitute motion that consideration of adoption of Resolution No. 94-34, awarding a contract to Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pt-48; Miscellaneous Work (re Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2), Job No. P2-47-2; Flare Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-56; and Seismic Retrofit of Structures at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2, be, and is hereby, continued for approximately 30 days until the regular July Board meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 18 to 14. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported to the Directors the General Counsel's Comments Prior to need for a closed session as authorized by Closed Session Government Code Sections 54956.9 and 54957.6 to discuss and consider the items that are specified as Items 18(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) on the published Agenda. _P2- O6/08/94 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Convene in closed session pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9. The Boards convened in closed session at 54957 and 54957.E 9:07 p.m. pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9,54957 and 54957.6. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Board(s) of Directors have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.2 and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. A report of actions taken will be publicly reported at the time the approved action becomes final re: Agenda Item 18(b)(1). No actions were taken re Agenda Items 18(b)(2), (3) and (4). ALL DISTRICTS At 9:52 p.m. the Boards reconvened in Reconvene in regular session regular session. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing the General Manager to execute a letter agreement with That the General Manager be, and is hereby, R. Craig Scott & Associates for authorized to execute a letter agreement with specialized labor and employment legal R. Craig Scott & Associates for specialized services labor and employment legal services; and, FURTHER MOVED: That payment for said services be, and are hereby, authorized based on the firm's discounted hourly rates in effect at the time said services are performed. 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 9:52 p.m. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Aporovina agreement with Orange County Flood Control District Providing That the Board of Directors hereby adopts for the installation of protective Resolution No. 94-62-2,approving agreement concrete structures for two sewer with Orange County Flood Control District line crossinas re Contract Nos. 2-14-1 providing for the installation of protective and 2-513-1 concrete structures for two sewer line crossings under the Santa Ana River at Katella, Santa Ana River Interceptor, from Reclamation Plant No. 1 to Katella Avenue, Contract No. 2-14-1, and at the Garden Grove Freeway, Olive Subtrunk - Santa Ana River Crossing, Contract No. 2-5R-1,in connection with construction of the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project, and authorizing payment of required deposit in an amount not to exceed $11,000.00 for said work. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -23- 06/08/94 DISTRICT 2 Actions re Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R 1 Verbal report of staff The Director of Engineering introduced John Dettle, the project manager for Contract No. 2-9-R1, to give a brief presentation. Mr. Dettle reported that the Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer currently contains an 18-inch and 15-inch sewer. The sewer line starts at Cal State Fullerton and ends at Rolling Hills Drive. The sewer has been experiencing insufficient capacity within Bastanchury Road and throughout the Parkside Apartment complex. The sewer has also had the tendency to break on the north portion of the apartment complex. He further stated that the alignment goes under the 57 Freeway and through Gilman Park. Additional housing developments have been added in the vicinity of Gilman Park putting additional strain on this portion of the sewer. This rehabilitation project proposes to replace the entire sewer line. Within the park, 18-inch sewers will be tunneled to reduce any impact on the park. Also, at the 57 Freeway the sewer runs between two homes for which two license agreements have been obtained for temporary construction access at no cost to the District. The sewer portion which currently runs through the Parkside Apartments will be realigned and replaced with a 21-inch sewer, as well as within Bastanchury Road. From there It will then connect to the Rolling Hills Subtrunk Sewer at the intersection of Associated Road and Bastanchury Road where a 36-inch sewer will be installed. Mr. Dettle then stated that on May 10, 1994,four bids were received for this project. The bids ranged from a high of $2,696,235.00to a low of $2,482,762.00,submitted by Colich & Sons, and recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder. The engineer's estimate was $1 ,500,000. Directors Questioned how the additional expense for this project would be absorbed in the budget. The Director of Finance responded that the project was provided for in last year's budget and has been included for the new budget and would be funded through sales of Certificates of Participation. -24- O6/08/94 Aoorovina License Agreement with Robert A. Jackson Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 94-63-2,approving License Agreement with Robert A. Jackson, providing for temporary construction, access for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, on a portion of Mr. Jackson's property, at no cost to the District. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Aoorovina License Agreement with Donald J Ornellas Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 94-64-2,approving License Agreement with Donald J. Ornellas, providing for temporary construction access for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, on a portion of Mr. Ornellas's property, at no cost to the District. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for for Contract No. 2-9-R1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1, making miscellaneous modifications and clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Awarding Contract No. 2-9-Rl to Colich Bros.. Inc. dba Colich & Sans Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 94-65-2, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Cypress Avenue Subtrunk Sewer, Contract No. 2-9-R1,to Colich Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons in the total amount of $2,482,762.00.Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -25- 06/08/94 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 9:52 p.m. DISTRICT 3 Actions re Rehabilitation of Magnolia Trunk Sewer, Orangethorpe Avenue to Ellis Avenue. Contract No. 3-35R.and Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation. between Westminster Boulevard and 405 Freeway, Contract No. 3-11 R Approving Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Garden Grove providing for reimbursement of costs to the City for construction and rehabilitation of two manholes Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 94-66-3,approving Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Garden Grove providing for reimbursement of costs to the City for construction and rehabilitation of two manholes as part of the City's storm drain and street improvement project in Magnolia Street; and, FURTHER MOVED: That payment in an estimated amount not to exceed $100,000,be, and is hereby authorized. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Authorizing the Selection Committee to negotiate Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants. Inc. re Contract Nos. 3-35R and 3-11R Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Selection Committee be, and is hereby, authorized to negotiate Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc. for permitting, design and construction services relative to Rehabilitation of Magnolia Trunk Sewer, Orangethorpe Avenue to Ellis Avenue, Contract No. 3-35R,and Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation, between Westminster Boulevard and 405 Freeway, Contract No. 3-11 R, providing for additional services for preparation of pothole plans with traffic control and permitting of the plans. -26- 06/08/94 DISTRICT 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 9:52 p.m. DISTRICTS 5 & 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Contract That Change Order No. 2 to the plans and Nos. 5-32 and 5-33 specifications for Improvements to Bitter Point and Rocky Point Pump Stations, Contract No. 5-32,and Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, authorizing a net addition of $35,460.00to the contract with Uhler, Inc., for four items of additional or deleted work, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICTS 5 & 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Contract That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and No. 5-37-4 specifications for Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer, between The Arches (Newport Boulevard) and Dover Drive, Contract No. 5-37-4,authorizing an addition of $68,117.50to the contract with Colich Bros., Inc., dba Colich & Sons, for seven items of additional or deleted work, and granting a time extension of 43 calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby approved. 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 9:52 p.m. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Accepting South Coast Trunk Sewer. Phase 2. Contract No. 5-35-2 as That the Board of Directors hereby adopts complete Resolution No. 94-67-5,accepting South Coast Trunk Sewer, Phase 2, Contract No. 5-35-2,as complete, authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion and approving Final Closeout Agreement. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 5 Staff requested that the item pertaining to Appeal of capital facilities connection appeal of capital facilities connection charges by Dahn Corporation _ charges by Dahn Corporation for a self- storage project in Newport Beach be deleted from the agenda. -27- 06/08/94 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 9:52 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file request for annexation and authorizing initiation of That the request from Thomas L. Gunckell, II oroceedinas re or000sed Annexation and John M. Mitchell for annexation of 1.65 No. 146- Gunckell and Mitchell acres of territory to the District, in the Annexation vicinity north of the intersection of La Vereda Drive and Skyline Drive in Lemon Heights in unincorporated county territory, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 94-68-7, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 146 - Gunckell and Mitchell Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby 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 9:52 p.m. 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 9:52 p.m. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adiournment 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 9:52 p.m. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:52 p.m. Assistant Seer, y oft f Boards of Directors of County San Lion ' trios Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 -Y8- FUND NO 919E - JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4127M PAGE 01 REPORT NUMBER AP43 - COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05104194 POSTING DATE 05/04/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137254 AG TECH COMPANY $61.026.18 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9.91 137285 AMERICAN TELEPHONE&TELEGRAPH $969.10 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 137286 AT&T $579,24 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 137287 ACCELERATED POWER TECH. $3,673.49 PUMP PARTS 137268 AGGREKO,INC. $14.016.72 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137289 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICAL INC. $17.788.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY.GEN SYST.M.O.8-9-89 137290 ALHAMBRA FOUNDRY CO.,LTD $355.05 MANHOLE COVER 137291 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $56.68 FREIGHT 137292 AMERICAN CABLING&COMM. $210.11 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137293 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSOC. $350.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 137294 ANAHEIM SEWER CONSTRUCTION $752.50 SEWER REPAIRS 137295 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $2.904.36 CABINET 137296 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $330.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137297 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $246.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137298 ABC LABORATORIES $1.990.00 LAB SERVICES M.O.141-92 137299 AQUATIC CENTER $220.00 AIR BOTTLES 137300 ARENS INDUSTRIES, INC. $1,900.63 INSTRUMENT PARTS fTl 137301 ARMOR-VAC $1.500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 137302 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $1.442.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 137303 ASSOCIATED VACUUM TECH., INC. &188.61 COMPRESSOR PARTS CO 137304 AA&CIACORDIA $2.057.03 MEDICAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION 137305 AMSA 81,485.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 137306 AUTO SHOP EQUIPMENT $246.26 TRUCK PART D 137307 BFI PORTABLE SERVICES $104.81 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137308 BKK LANDFILL $34,746.56 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 F� 137309 BRW SAFETY&SUPPLY $1,239.12 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137310 B OF A AS CUSTODIAN OF IRA ACCT. &14,902.91 DEFERRED COMP TRANSFER 137311 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $192.66 BATTERIES 137312 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $5,305.27 LAB SUPPLIES 137313 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $361.15 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 137314 BELL SECURITY $2.720.60 SECURITY SERVICES 137315 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. $1.240.11 COMPRESSOR PARTS 137316 BIOMERIEUX VITEK,INC. $1,041.22 LAB SUPPLIES 137317 BID TECH NET,INC. $282.50 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137318 810 VENTURES,INC. $162.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137319 BLACK&VEATCH $22,800.51 ENGINEERING SERVICES P146,J-25 137320 BLACK BOX CORP. $65.47 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137321 SOERINGER MANNHEIM $362.49 LAB SUPPLIES 137322 BONA-RUES E303AB TRUCK PARTS 137323 BROOKLYN THERMOMETER CO.,INC. $153A7 LAB SUPPLIES 137324 BUSH&ASSOCIATES,INC. $9.632.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6-10.92 137325 BUY-CHEM DISTRIBUTORS $2,920.03 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137326 CEM CORPORATION $22.704.26 LAB EQUIPMENT 137327 C.L.TECHNOLOGY &720.00 GAS ANALYSIS 137328 C.P.I. $3,110.11 LAB SUPPLIES 137329 CRC PRESS,INC. $194.90 LAB SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4127194 PAGE 02 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05N4I94 POSTING DATE 0501194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137330 CAD ONE.INC. $5.698.45 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137331 CAD VENTURES $355,58 COMPUTER SERVICES 137332 CALTROL,INC. $3,762.27 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137333 CALIFORNIA AUTO COLLISION,INC. $823.51 TRUCK PARTS 137334 CAPITAL WESTWARD $269.46 MECHANICAL PARTS 137335 CARLETON ENGINEERS $12750 ENGINEERING SERVICES AIR DUALITY 137335 CENTREPOINT COMMERCIAL INT. $159.62 OFFICE FURNITURE 137337 CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $346.96 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137338 CHEMICAL ABSTRACTS SERVICE $210.00 SUBSCRIPTION 137339 FIBERGRATEICHEMWEST $1.169.09 PUMP PARTS 137340 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $625.00 PUMP REPAIRS 137341 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $191.83 LAB SUPPLIES 137342 COUCH AND SONS $20.007.00 CONSTRUCTION 5-374 137343 COUCH 8 SONS $354.314.70 CONSTRUCTION 11-17-1 137344 COMPUSA,INC. $4,664.31 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137345 CONNEL GM PARTS I DIV. $450.91 TRUCK PARTS m 137346 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $12,814.78 ELECTRIC PARTS X 137347 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO. $376.25 HARDWARE x 137348 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $1.382.44 TOOLS 137349 CONTINENTAL CHEMICAL CO. $2.230.43 CHLORINE M.O.10-9-91 137350 CONTINENTAL GRAPHICS $309.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES -1 137351 COOPER INDUSTRIES,INC. $6,604.63 ENGINE PARTS D 137352 COUNCIL ON EDUCATION $595.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION I 137353 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $3,117.31 ELECTRIC PARTS N 137354 CRANE VEYOR CORP. 8221.02 PAINT SUPPLIES 137355 STATE OF CALIFORNIA $16,561.00 STATE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE 137356 DBD COMPRESSOR,INC. $255.29 VALVES 137357 DO ENGINEERING $80.00 TRUCK PARTS 137350 DME,INC. $1,250.27 MECHANICAL PARTS 137359 A.DAIGGER&COMPANY,INC. $364 00 LAB SUPPLIES 137360 J.W.D'ANGELO CO.,INC. $374.47 HARDWARE 137361 DAPPERTIRE $1,543.85 TIRES 137362 DE GUELLE&SONS GLASS CO. $457.89 GLASS 137363 DEPT.OF TOXIC SUBSTANCE CNTRL $1,094.00 TOXIC WASTE DISPOSAL 137364 DIATEC ENVIRONMENTAL $9,169.33 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.&11.93 137365 DIETERICH-POST CO. $24.52 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137366 DIFILIPPO ASSOCIATES $1.304.85 PRINTING 137367 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $879.30 COMPUTER SOFTWARE LICENCE 137366 DIONEX CORP. $5.848.68 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137359 DISPOSAL CONTROL SERVICE.INC. $7,917.48 HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL M.0.1-13.92 137370 DOMAR ELECTRIC,INC. $21,456.00 ELECTRICAL REPAIRS 137371 ARNI DUNN,MFCC $900.00 EMERGENCY CONSULTING SERVICES 137372 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $671.23 PAINT SUPPLIES 137373 ESP NORTH $695.64 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 137374 EASTMAN.INC. $4.220.83 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137375 ELEC.AIR TOOL CO. $1.003.41 CONVEYOR PARTS FUND NO 9199.- JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4127M PAGE 03 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05104/94 POSTING DATE 05/04/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137375 EMERGENCY MGMT NETWORK E3,760IX) TRAINING REGISTRATION 137377 EMERY WORLDWIDE $236.86 FREIGHT 137378 ENCHANTER,INC. $5,040.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10-92 137379 ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT,INC. $2,000.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 137350 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $359.60 LAB SERVICES 137381 FMC CORP. $480.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137352 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $54,429.26 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9.91 137383 FARWEST TOWING $65.00 TOWINE SERVICES 137394 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $273.00 AIR FREIGHT 137385 FILTERLINE CORP. $255.55 PUMP PARTS 137386 FILTER SUPPLY CO. 813,864.04 FILTERS 137381 FISCHER&PORTER CO. $294.60 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 137368 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $245.21 LAB SUPPLIES 137369 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $242.20 LAB SUPPLIES 137390 FLAT AND VERTICAL,INC. $164.0D CONCRETE CUTTING 137391 FLOSYSTEMS - $5.699.07 PUMP PARTS 137392 FOOTHILL PROJECT MANAGEMENT $714.00 RESIDENT NOTIFICATION SERVICES m 137393 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $76.68 PHOTO SUPPLIES X 137394 EST,INC. $16.199.07 OFFICE SUPPLIES = 137395 GATES FIBERGLASS INSTALLERS $3,469.75 MECHANICAL REPAIRS Ly 137396 GENERAL BINDING CORP. $130.41 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137397 GENERAL CABLE CORP. 5824.30 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137398 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $610.32 ELECTRIC PARTS n 137399 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $1,877.14 TELEPHONE SERVICES 1 137400 GENE TRAK SYSTEMS $711.36 LAB SUPPLIES W 137401 GIERUCHMITCHELL,INC. $16,028.50 MECHANICAL PARTS 137402 GLOBAL GEOCHEMISTRY CORP. $2.612.50 LAB SERVICES 137403 GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES,INC. $82.00 PUBLICATIONS 137404 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $272.14 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 137405 GRASSY S.T.I. $2.636.33 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 137408 THOMAS GRAY&ASSOC..INC. $37.00 LAB SERVICES 137407 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $2.955.92 PRINTING 137408 DGA CONSULTANTS $11.630.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6-10-92 137409 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $1.273.21 PUMP PARTS 137410 HACH COMPANY $942.39 LAB SUPPLIES 137411 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $5.946.22 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137412 HAWKINS ASSOCIATES $1,392.00 LAB EQUIPMENT 137413 PL HAWN CO,INC. $32.923.04 FILTERS 137414 HELLO $167.10 TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT 137415 HILTI,INC. $638.76 HARDWARE 137416 HOERBIGER CVS CALIF.,INC. $157.00 COMPRESSOR PARTS 137417 HOME DEPOT $279.37 HARDWARE 137418 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $2.521.02 PAINT SUPPLIES 137419 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL 546.488.98 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11-18-92 137420 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY SHOE CO. $3.119.16 SAFETY SHOES 137421 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $741.10 CONNECTORS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 41271W PAGE 04 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05ID4194 POSTING DATE O5104194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137422 INLAND EMPIRE EQUIPMENT CO. $382.52 TRUCK PARTS 137423 INORGANIC VENTURES $755.80 LAB SUPPLIES 137424 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $626.57 BATTERIES 137425 JAMISON ENGINEERING 51,400.00 PIPING 137426 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $1,677.08 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137427 JAPAN LANDSCAPING,INC. $16,775.00 LANDSCAPING 137428 JAVID CONTRACTORS,INC. $4.197.50 CONSTRUCTION P2-23-5-1 137429 JIM'S SUSPENSION SERVICE E25.00 TRUCK REPAIRS 137430 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $95.81 ELECTRIC PARTS 137431 JONES INDUSTRIAL HARDWARE CO. $187.81 HARDWARE 137432 KARS'ADVANCED MATERIALS,INC. 510,000.00 ENGINE ANALYSIS 137433 THE KEITH COMPANIES $4,831.80 ENGINEERING SERVICES 3-36R 137434 KING BEARING,INC. 52,727A0 MACHINE SUPPLIES 137435 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES 52,692.79 TOOLS 137436 KURTZ INSTRUMENTS.INC. $102.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137437 LA MOTTE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS $188.64 CHEMICALS 137438 LA TRONICS $646.44 VIDEO RECORDER-TRAINING TTl 137439 LEE&RO CONSULTING ENGR. $68,724.09 ENGINEERING SERVICES P140-1 X 137440 LIMITORQUE CORP. $610.48 ELECTRICPARTS 137441 LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INS.CO. $72.185.74 DEFERRED COMP TRANSFER t" 137442 LORAIN PRODUCTS $1.251.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137443 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $3.554.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10-92 137444 MACOMCO $105.55 SERVICE AGREEMENT n 137445 MSA $233.53 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES t 137446 MARVAC ELECTRONICS $56.51 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137448 MATRIX EMBR SERVICE,INC. $$1.086.73 DIGESTER GAS HOLDER REPAIRS M.O.11-f0-93 137448 MEMBRIX 51,086.73 LAB SUPPLIES 137449 MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS $73,695.20 COP REMARKETING AGREEMENT 137450 MICROBIAL INSIGHTS,INC. $916.53 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.11.18.92 137451 MIDWAY MFG&MACHINING $5,168.58 PUMP PARTS 137452 MILLER CONSTRUCTION CO. 53,466.00 OFFICE REMODELING 137453 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,737.22 UNIFORM RENTALS 137454 MITCHELL INTERNATIONAL $285.00 PUBLICATION 137455 MOORE INDUSTRIES $2,470.82 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137456 MOORE PRODUCTS CO. $3.404.90 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137457 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $1,868.34 PUMP PARTS 137458 NEC INFORMATION SYSTEMS $276.02 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137459 NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS $126.60 BOOKS 137460 NFAL SUPPLY CO. $2.101.92 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137461 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $59.05 WATER USE 137462 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $123.27 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137463 ORANGE COURIER $133.55 COURIER SERVICES 137484 ORANGE VALVE&FITNNG CO. $1,936.78 FITTINGS 137465 ORION PRINTING B DESIGN $1.605.48 PRINTING 137466 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 55,369.90 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 137467 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $134.745.00 GAP WATER USE FUND NO 9194 - JT D19T WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 41Z7194 PAGE 05 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/04/94 POSTING DATE 05104194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137468 PARASITOLOGY RESEARCH LABS $750.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137469 PSSI $1,502.74 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 137470 PACIFIC PARTS $72.09 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137471 PACIFIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT CO. $3.402.18 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137472 PACIFIC BELL $169.06 TELEPHONE SERVICES 137473 PACIFIC BELL $6,567.46 TELEPHONE CABLE RELOCATION 137474 PACIFIC WALK-IN MEDICAL $110.00 MEDICAL EXAMS 137475 PAK WEST $183.37 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137476 PARTS UNLIMITED $426.37 TRUCK PARTS 137477 PASCAL B LUDWIG,INC. $236.936.65 CONSTRUCTION PI-38.2 137470 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $1,080.40 LAB SUPPLIES 137479 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $143,558.45 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.5-6-91 137480 PITNEY BOWES CREDIT CORP. $103.10 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137401 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1.262.75 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137482 POLYPURE,INC. 38,664.92 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.}11-92 137483 POST,BUCKLEY,SCHUH B JERNIGAN $1,530.50 ENGINEERING SERVICES 2-9-RI 1374114 POWER ELECTRO SUPPLY CO. $549.00 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES X B4 137485 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE 3 .00 ICE = 1374B8 PUBLIC FINANCIAL MGMT.,INC. $863.86 FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES 137487 PULSAFEEDER $199.59 PUMP PARTS CO 137488 PUTZMEISTER,INC. $2,514.59 PUMP PARTS 137489 QUEST MEDIA 6 SUPPLIES $562.19 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137490 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $1,035.69 ELECTRIC MOTORS n 137491 BOLT DELIVERY $159.00 FREIGHT 137492 RICH ROBERTSON 32,232.50 CONNECTION FEE REFUND 137493 ROYCE PRODUCTIONS $8.500.00 PUBLIC INFO.VIDEO PRODUCTION 137494 SAFETY CARE,INC. $193.94 SAFETY FILM RENTAL 137485 MATTHEW SALABEN $260,00 VEHICLE CLAIM 137496 SANCON ENGINEERING,INC. $7,150.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES 137497 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 6798.95 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137498 DOUG SARVIS $375.00 CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING 137499 SCHULER ENGINEERING CORP. 362,459.28 CONSTRUCTION 5.36 1375DO STEPHEN SCHULTZ $548.41 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 137501 SCHWIND AMERICA $1,692.81 PUMP PARTS 137502 SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS 34,165.29 LAB SUPPLIES 137503 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $272.64 SPECIALTY GASES 137504 SENSOR-MEDICS CORPORATION $593.61 LAB SUPPLIES 137505 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $2,288.35 TOOLS 137506 SHURELUCK SALES $7.263.39 TOOLSIHARDWARE 137507 SIEVERS INSTRUMENTATION $178.68 LAB SUPPLIES 137508 SIMS RARE B SPECIALTY GASES $110.05 SPECIALTY GASES 137509 SKALAR,INC. !A11.56 LAB SUPPLIES 137510 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $944.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 137511 MATT SMITH $86887 DEFERRED COMP PAY4OFF 137512 SOUTHCOASTWATER $488,66 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137513 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $34,648.38 POWER FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4127194 PAGE O6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/04/94 POSTING DATE 05/04AM WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137514 SO CALIF EDISON CO. $9.052.00 POWER CABLE RELOCATION 137515 SO,CAL.GAS.CO. $19,934.14 NATURAL GAS 137516 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $5,659.50 DIESEUUNLEADED FUEL 137517 WESTALLOY,INC. $932.03 WELDING SUPPLIES 137516 GARY G.STREED $4,926.75 REIMB.PETTY CASH,TRAINING 8 TRAVEL 137519 SUMMIT STEEL $660.72 METAL 137520 SUPELCO,INC. $304.09 LAB SUPPLIES 137521 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $34A3 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 137522 SUPER CHEM CORP. $414.62 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137523 SURVEYORS SERVICE CO. $59.10 TOOLS 137524 SYMANTEC CORP $115.70 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137525 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG.COMPANY $890.11 TRUCK PARTS 137526 TEKTRONIX.INC. $298.73 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137627 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $3,203.08 MECHANICAL PARTS 137528 TOLEDO SCALE CORP. $980.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137529 TONTS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $180.00 LOCKS 8 KEYS fn 137530 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $470.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.7-13.93 X 137531 TREBOR ELECTRONICS $441.75 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES s 137532 TRUCK B AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $687.38 TRUCK PARTS 137533 TRUESDAIL LABS S4,046.91 LAB SERVICES 137534 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $2,856.70 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137536 TUTHILL CORPICOPPUS DIV. $764.85 VENTILATOR y 137536 TWINING LABORATORIES $3,608.72 LAB SERVICES i 137537 UVP.INC. 8177.37 LAB SUPPLIES 137530 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $263.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137539 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $822.28 DELIVERY SERVICES 137540 VWR SCIENTIFIC $1.474.28 LAB SUPPLIES 137541 VALIN CORPORATION $031.43 FITTINGS 137542 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $6.324.03 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137543 VAN WATER 8 ROGERS $115.94 CHEMICALS 137544 VETREE SERVICE,INC. $10,000.00 LANDSCAPING 137545 VILLAGE NURSERIES $20.76 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 137546 CARL WARREN B CO. $300.00 LIABILITY CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 137647 ALLAN WATTLES $3.432.45 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 137548 K.H.WATTS CO. $2.022.11 VALVE 137549 ABB DRIVES $355.35 VFD PARTS 137550 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $16,174.34 CAUSTIC SODA M.O.8-12-92 137551 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $1,088.67 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 137652 WILLARD MARKING DEVICES $45.26 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137553 WITEG $856.61 LAB SUPPLIES 137554. ROURKE,WOODRUFF 8 SPRADLIN $73,935.22 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.2-19-92 137555 WORDPERFECT $195.00 PUBLICATION 137550 XEROX CORP. $14.813.19 COPIER LEASES 137557 E.L.YEAGER CONSTRUCTION CO. $11.446.00 SECURITY FENCING TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 05ID4194 $2.191.230.99 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIET WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 4124194 PAGE07 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/04194 POSTING DATE 05/04194 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $7.035.85 02 OPER FUND 21.366.59 02 CAP FAC FUND 19,499.95 03 OPER FUND 31,738.15 03 CAP FAC FUND 4.831.80 OS OPER FUND 10,125.01 95 CAP FAC FUND 62,459.28 #8 OPER FUND 4,693.47 07 OPER FUND 7,629.96 011 OPER FUND 7,129.37 611 CAP FAC FUND 358,580.30 013 OPER FUND 100.80 014 OPER FUND 847.79 014 CAP FAC FUND 11,630.00 m 0586 OPER FUND 20,007.00 X 07814 OPER FUND 14.70 JT OPER FUND 798,460.68 W CORF 518,697.10 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 11,959.56 D JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 294,523.82 - V $2 191 230.99 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/12/94 PAGE O1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 5/18/94 POSTING DATE 5/18/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 137591 AG TECH COMPANY $55,689.88 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 137592 AT&T $310.43 FAX SERVICES 137593 AT&T $1.39 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 137594 AAIWAWQT CONFERENCE $567.00 TRAINING PUBLICATION 137595 ACOUSTICAL MATL SERVICES $537.89 BUILDING MATERIALS 137596 ADVANCO CONSTRUCTORS,INC. $417,735.38 CONSTRUCTION P1-36-1 137597 AIR COLD SUPPLY,INC. $105.24 COMPRESSOR PARTS 137598 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $17,788.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.8-9-89 137599 ALDUS CORP. $169.50 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137600 AMELCO CONSTRUCTION $162,831.60 CONSTRUCTION P2-53.1 137601 ANGEL SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS $1.241.85 LAB SUPPLIES 137602 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $2.399.58 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 137603 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $605.98 NOTICES&ADS 137604 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $605.30 LAB SUPPLIES 137605 ABC LABORATORIES $3,110.00 LAB SERVICES 137608 AQUATIC CENTER $36000 AIR TANKS 137607 AMSA $495.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 137608 ATKIWJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $642.60 SERVICE AGREEMENT m 137609 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $833.85 LAB SUPPLIES x 137610 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING 54,172.33 PAYROLL SERVICES ._. 137611 BC WIRE ROPE&RIGGING $204.73 CABLE to 137612 BKK LANDFILL $2.876.34 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.1041-91 137613 BANANA BLUEPRINT $4.742.38 PRINTING M.O.10.10.90 137614 BASLER ELECTRIC $1.448.13 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES w 137615 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $782.22 BATTERIES 1 137616 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $11.623.08 LAB SUPPLIES ~ 137617 BELL SECURITY $3,927.62 SECURITY SERVICES 137618 BIOMERIEUX VTTEK,INC. 8155A7 LAB SUPPLIES 137619 BLACK&VEATCH $10.813.79 ENGINEER NG SERVICES J-25.1 137620 BLACK BOX CORP. $1,555.65 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 137621 BOERINGER MANNHEIM $177.16 LAB SUPPLIES 137622 BONA-RUES $88.00 TRUCK PARTS 137623 - BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $32,277.12 ENGINEERING SERVICES 748 137624 BRENNER-FIEDLER&ASSOC.,INC. $258.27 LAB SUPPLIES 137625 BUDGET JANITORIAL $3.330.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 137625 BUY-CHEM DISTRIBUTORS $1.130.73 JANITORIAL SERVICES 137627 CEPA $1.360.00 LAB CERTIFICATION 137628 C.L.TECHNOLOGY $720.00 GAS ANALYSIS 137629 C M I $525.85 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137630 CS COMPANY $38.180.62 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137631 CALTROL $112.63 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137632 CWPCATCP $975.00 REIMBURSABLE TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION 137633 CALSCIENCE ENVIRONMENTAL LABS $3.070.00 LAB SERVICES 137634 DENNIS CARAVAN $22,000.00 DEFERRED COMP WRHDRAWAL 137635 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $807.50 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-33 137636 CASHCO $113.85 VALVE FUND NO 9199 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5112194 PAGE 02 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID SH8194 POSTING DATE 5118M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137637 CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $788.17 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137638 FIBERGRATFJCHEMWEST $13.156.71 PUMP PARTS 137639 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $81.16 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137640 COLD SPRING HARBOR $65.00 LAB EQUIPMENT 137641 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $207.35 PUMP SUPPLIES 137642 COUCH&SONS $1.497.00 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 137643 COMPUSA,INC. $489.45 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137644 COMPUSERVE $123.98 COMPUTER SERVICES 137645 CONNEL GM PARTS I DIV. $26.93 TRUCK PARTS 137646 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $3.557.69 ELECTRIC PARTS 137647 CONSOLIDATED REPOGRAPHICS $119.65 PRINTING SERVICES 137648 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $319.05 TOOLS 137649 CONTINENTAL CHEMICAL CO. $2.230.43 CHLORINE M.0.10-9-91 137650 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS 0 C $6.200.47 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.&11-93,7-17-91 137651 COOPER INDUSTRIES,INC. $367.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137652 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $710.74 TRUCK PARTS 137653 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $1,112.46 ELECTRIC PARTS m 137654 D&H TRUCK EQUIPMENT $3,D43.94 TRUCK PARTS X 137665 DAILY PILOT $49.50 NOTICES&ADS 137656 DAYTON SUPERIOR $610.49 RENTAL EQUIPMENT co 137657 DE ANZA CORPORATION $150.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT =I 137658 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF $99.809.57 EMPLOYEE DENTAL PLAN M.0.1.12-94 737659 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $95.50 FREIGHT Cd 137M DIATEC ENVIRONMENTAL $4,594.66 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.&11-93 IJ 137661 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $2.252.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137662 DORADO ENTERPRISES,INC. $727.50 PLANT MAINTENANCE&REPAIRS 137663 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $820.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 137664 ERI INTER-BIO $3.579.57 LAB SERVICES 137685 EASTMAN.INC. $3.451.60 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137668 EDWARDS DIV.OF GS BLDG SYS. $430.40 INSTRUMENT PART 137667 ENCHANTER,INC. $5.040.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6-10-92 137668 ESSCO PUMPS AND CONTROLS $305.18 PUMP PARTS 137669 ENTECH LAB AUTOMATION $3.244.25 LAB SUPPLIES 137670 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. WILE0 LAB SERVICES 137671 ERDCO ENGINEERING CORP. $6.511.57 METERS 137672 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $9,880.00 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10-9-91 137673 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $443.70 AIR FREIGHT 137674 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $282.55 LAB SUPPLIES 137675 FLEET WASHING SYSTEMS,INC. $2,182A6 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137676 FLO-SYSTEMS $1,371.46 PUMP PARTS 137677 FOSS MARITIME CO. $1,767.60 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137678 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $482.95 PHOTO SUPPLIES 137679 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $2,3GBA8 HAZMAT INSPECTIONS 137680 GMF SOUND,INC. $82.61 TELEPHONE PARTS 137681 GST,INC. $12.939.57 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137682 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $136A2 LUMBERIHARDWARE FUNO NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/12/94 PAGE 03 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 5/18194 POSTIN3 DATE 5118/94 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137683 GANNET DIRECT MARKETING 5269.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 137694 CITY OF GARDEN GROVE $6.349.98 SEWER REPAIRS DIST 3 137685 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $3,968.69 TELEPHONE SERVICES 137665 GENE TRAK SYSTEMS $711.38 LAB SUPPLIES 137687 GIERUCH-MITCHELL,INC. $9.655.56 MECHANICAL PARTS 137608 GRASSY Ell $5.865.01 ENGINE PARTS 137689 DGA CONSULTANTS $7,260.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.WO.92 13769D BROTH EQUIPMENT CORP. $127.76 FREIGHT 137691 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $147.73 TOOLS 137692 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $1.650.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 137693 PL HAWN CO,INC. $8.226.92 FILTERS 137694 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2.083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 137695 HEWLETTPACKARD $2,940.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137696 HEWLETT PACKARD COMPANY $276.93 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137697 HILTI.INC. $157.32 WELDING SUPPLIES 137698 HOLMES 8 NARVER,INC. $60.932.27 ENGINEERING SERVICES P144 137699 HOME DEPOT $43.64 HARDWARE m 137700 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $463.07 PAINT SUPPLIES Y- 137701 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH $15,076.50 WATER USE 137702 HUNTINGDON ENG.8 EVIRON. $2,800.00 CONSULTING SERVICES M 0.11-18.92 UO 137M HUNTINGTON SIGNAL OIL CO. $10.14 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT .� 137704 HUNTINGTON VALLEY SCHWINN $136.67 BICYCLE PARTS 137705 HUNTS FINAL PHASE $4,370.00 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES b7 137708 HYTORIC OF CALIFORNIA 5479.38 GAUGE ' 1 137707 IRD MECHANALYSIS $1.841.17 INSTRUMENT PARTS W 137708 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $54.057.36 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.0.11-1&92 137709 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $540.24 CONNECTORS 137710 INGRAM PAPER $617.23 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137711 INSTRUMENT SOCIETY OF AMERICA $412.50 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137712 IBM FULFILLMENT HEADQUARTERS $84.99 LAB SUPPLIES 137713 IRVINE PHOTO GRAPHICS $41.82 PHOTO SERVICES 137714 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $101.07 WATER USE 137715 J 8 W SCIENTIFIC $043.77 LAB SUPPLIES 137716 JAMISON ENGINEERING $16,211.20 ENGINEERING SERVICES 137717 JAVID CONTRACTORS,INC. $13.11HOB2 CONSTRUCTION P2-23-5-1 137718 JAY'S CATERING $322.44 DIRECTORS'MEETING EXPENSE 137719 JIMS SUSPENSION SERVICE $50.00 TRUCK REPAIRS 137720 KAMAN BEARINGS 8 SUPPLY $452.61 ELECTRIC PARTS 137721 KING BEARING.INC. $1,111.43 MACHINE SUPPLIES 137722 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $154.62 TOOLS 13M3 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $830.51 CELLULAR TELEPHONE CHARGES 137724 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY CO. $219.16 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137725 LAUNDERLAND $182.96 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 137726 LEARN KEY S145U2 PUBLICATION 137727 LEG4TECH $320.00 COMPUTER SERVICES 137729 LEE 8 RO CONSULTING ENGR. $32,129.82 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI-36.5,P140-2 FUND NO 9199 - JT DST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 542194 PAGE O4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 5118I90 POSTING DATE 5116M WARRANTNO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137729 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $4,533.98 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIRONMENTAL 137730 LIQUID AIR CORP. $1,11N.07 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137731 MDT BIOLOGIC COMPANY $477.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 13T732 MACOMCO $520.65 SERVICE AGREEMENT 137733 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $517.067.00 CONSTRUCTION P2A2-2 137734 MARVAC ELECTRONICS $135.88 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137735 MATT-CHLOR,INC. $4,461.39 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 137736 MCMAHAN DESK.INC. $2,260.48 OFFICE FURNITURE 137737 MEMBREX $637.75 LAB SUPPLIES 137738 MERIDIAN DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $443.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137739 MICRO MOTION $520.58 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 137740 MIDLAND MFG.CORP. $252.06 VALVE 137741 MIDWAY MFG.B MACHINING $1,071.61 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 137742 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRIES. $68.65 LAB SUPPLIES 137743 MISSION INDUSTRIES $4.859.23 UNIFORM RENTALS 13TT44 MONTGOMERY LABORATORIES $1.580.00 LAB SERVICES 137745 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $5.172.73 FITTINGS m 137746 MOTOROLA,INC. $211.87 INSTRUMENT PARTS X 137747 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $70.35 SAFETY FILM RENTALS S 134 NEAL SUPPLY CO. 1 . PLUMBING SUPPLIES 17"7749 $3 NEWARK ELECTRONICS 3316.9393 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137760 NI INDUSTRIES 3452.80 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 137751 01 CORPORATION $2.69 LAB SUPPLIES 13T752 DX SYSTEMS CO. 88,9T7.74 CHLORINE M.O.11-18.92 r 137M ORANGE COAST PETROLEUM EQUIP. $1,305.70 TRUCK PARTS 1377LM ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $300.21 TRUCK PARTS 113711111 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL $1.024.64 LAB SUPPLIES 13TM ORANGE COUNTY FARM SUPPLY $1.991.87 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 137757 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $287.02 ELECTRIC PARTS 13775B ORANGE COURIER $89,10 COURIER SERVICES 137759 ORANGE VALVE 8 FITTING CO. $5.080.12 FITTINGS 137760 COUNTY OF ORANGE $2,220.00 DATA PROCESSING SERVICES 137761 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT $16.705.45 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP CLAIMS 137762 PACCO SALES $246.40 PAINT SUPPLIES 137763 PACIFIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT,INC. $941.81 PUMP PARTS 137764 PACIFIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT CO. $1,924.60 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137765 PACIFIC WATER CONDITIONING CO. 4108.40 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 137766 PAGENET $1,171.56 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 137767 PALMIERI.TYLER,WIENER, $1,126.3D LEGAL SERVICES M.O.8-12.91 137768 PAN VERA CORP. $290.00 IAS SUPPLIES 137769 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 13T770 PARTS UNLIMITED $208.67 TRUCK PARTS 13TT71 PASCAL B LUDWIG ENGINEERS $19,213.00 CONSTRUCTION J-32 137772 PASCAL 8 LUDWIG,INC. $87,690.40 CONSTRUCTION P1-36-2 13TT73 PASCAL 3 LUDWIG $98,14D.00 CONSTRUCTION P2413-1 13T774 PIERCE CHEMICAL COMPANY $78.00 LAB SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5112194 PAGE 05 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 6110/94 POSTING DATE 5118194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137775 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. - $156.335.98 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.5-8-91 137776 PLAINS TRUEVALUE HARDWARE $199.43 HARDWARE 137777 POLY ENTERPRISES,INC. $347.49 SAFETY SUPPLIES 137778 POLYPURE.INC. $23,930.73 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3-11-92 137779 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE S42.D0 ICE 137780 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. S250.29 SOIL TESTING 137781 PULSAFEEDER $4,344.72 PUMP PARTS 137782 PUTZMEISTER,INC. $794.99 PUMP PARTS 137783 QUEST MEDIA B SUPPLIES $10,550.98 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 137784 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1.682.71 TRASH REMOVAL 137785 BOLT DELIVERY $85.05 FREIGHT 137788 REISH MARINE STUDIES,INC. $450.00 OCEAN MONITORING 137787 MGJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $4,312.03 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137788 ROBINSON FERTILIZER CO. $2.074.13 CHEMICALS 137789 ROBOZ SURGICAL INSTRUMENT CO. $92.55 LAB SUPPLIES 137790 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL $129.65 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137791 ROYAL WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $301.05 ELECTRIC SUPPUES 137792 S C E C $24,980.16 SOURCE TESTING i 137793 SAFETY CARE,INC. $96.97 SAFETY FILM RENTAL 137794 SANCON ENGINEERING,INC. 34.821.00 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 137795 SANTA ANA ELECTRIC MOTORS $1.730.72 ELECTRIC MOTOR -1 137796 SANTA FIE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $217.65 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137797 DOUG SARVIS $3,000.00 CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING 1 137798 SCHWINGAMERICA 5861.80 PUMP PARTS - v1 137799 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $499.98 SPECIALTY GASES 137800 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $331.85 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137801 SHEPHERD MACHINERY CO. S294A2 ENGINE PARTS 137802 SHURELUCK SALES $6.215.55 TOOLS/HARDWARE 137803 SIGMA CHEMICAL CO. $118.28 LAB SUPPLIES 137804 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $77.11 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 137805 SOFFA ELECTRIC,INC. S31,139.50 CONSTRUCTION J-28 137806 SOUTH BAY FOUNDRY,INC. $2.338.17 MANHOLE COVERS 137807 SO.COAST AIR QUALITY $293.52 PERMIT FEES 137608 SOUTH COAST ENVIRONMENTAL CO. $12.718.40 EMISSIONS TESTING 137809 50 CALIF.EDISON CO. $95.753.60 POWER 137810 SO.CAL GAS.CO. $22.613.41 NATURAL GAS 137011 SO.CALIF.WATER CO. $28.08 WATER USE 137812 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. S2,930.52 DIESEUUNLEADED FUEL 137813 SOUVENIR PHOTO $10.41 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 137814 SPEX INDUSTRIES,INC. $879.35 LAB SUPPLIES 137815 STERLING ART $185.64 OFFICE SUPPLIES 137816 STEVENS WATER MONITORING SYST. $10,761.40 MONITORING SYSTEM 137817 GARY G.STREET) $2.399.77 REIMB.PETTY CASH,TRAINING S TRAVEL 137818 SUNSETFORD $57.74 TRUCK PARTS 137819 SUPELCO,INC. $118.70 LAB SUPPLIES 137820 SUPER CHEM CORP. $343.50 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES FUNDNO 9193 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5112/ 4 PAGEN REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 5118194 POSTING DATE 5118194 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 137821 SUPER POWER PRODUCTS $155.16 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 137822 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG,COMPANY $1,060A3 TRUCK PARTS 137823 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $449.02 HARDWARE 137824 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $1,907.50 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.7-13-93 137825 TRUCK 8 AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $164.74 TRUCK PARTS 137526 TRUESDAIL LABS $2.374.11 LAB SERVICES 131827 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $841.63 INSTRUMENT PARTS 137828 TUTHILL CORP./COPPUS DIV. S6148.05 MECHANICAL PARTS 137829 U.S.C.SPONSORED PROJECTS ACCT. $1.674.01 AIR QUALITY PROJECT 137830 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $766.00 LAB SUPPLIES 137831 UNOCAL CHEMICALS 8 MINERALS $8,775.40 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 137832 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $546.77 PARCEL SERVICES 137833 VWR SCIENTIFIC $1,636.49 LAB SUPPLIES 137834 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $1,347.86 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 137035 VARIAN ANALYTICAL INSTRUMENTS $3,235.50 LAB SUPPLIES 1378M VULCAN PEROXIDATION SYSTEMS $75,917.63 CHEMICALS 137837 WARRINGTON $147.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT m 137838 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $17,776.50 CAUSTIC SODA M.O.8-12-92 X 137039 WINONICS,INC. $606.87 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 137840 XEROX CORP. 010.32 PRINTING SUPPLIES UO 52,631.7 22.86 r-4 UU SUMMARY AMOUNT ' 1 Q1 M OPER FUND 0182.50 02 OPER FUND 6,057.51 02 CAP FAC FUND 1,366.92 03 OPER FUND 26.921.59 03 CAP FAC FUND 15,779.68 05 OPER FUND 1,805A2 05 CAP FAC FUND 2.091.46 06 OPER FUND 115.00 07 OPER FUND 6,044.03 07 CAP FAC FUND 10.392.04 011 OPER FUND 7,792A9 011 CAP FAC FUND 60.95 013 OPER FUND 32.86 014 OPER FUND 57.24 014 CAP FAC FUND 0.699.68 0586 OPER FUND 2.329.25 0586 CAP FAC FUND 780.01 0687 OPER FUND 2,658.62 07514 OPER FUND 6.102.02 ,IT OPER FUND 644.903.95 CORF 1,619,112.79 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 117,598.35 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 150,868.80 52,631,732.86 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) Ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, 1 hereby certify that the Agenda for the Regular Board Meeting on 19ft/was duly posted for public inspection at t ee main f the Districts' offices on � a 19-&- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 19� Penny Kyle, is nt Secretary o each of the Oar of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 s 14 of Orange County, California F27A.1