Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-06-28 YO15tPIR} f f COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA �^"",........ P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 9272E-8127 c0 b 10844 ELL IS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714) 982-2411 June 23, 1995 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 28, 1995 - 7:30 P.M. DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 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 he held at the above location,time and date. oard Secret' Tentatively-Scheduled Upcoming Meetings: STEERING COMMITTEE - Wednesday,June 28, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. OPERATIONS,MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 5, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. AD HOC COMMITTEE RE SPACE UTILIZATION STUDY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEES - Thursday,July 6, 1995,at 4:30 p.m. (preceding the Planning, Design and Construction Committee) PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE - Thursday,July 6, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. FINANCE,ADMINISTRATWE AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 12, 1995,at 5:30 p.m. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 19, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. STEERING COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 26, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10S44 ELLIS AVENUE RO so.812, FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 927A J 1]1A196P-2A11 �/ JOINT BOARD AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING DATES Executive Committee Meetings Joint Board Meetings June Jun 21, 1995 Jun 28, 1995 July Jul 19, 1995 Jul 26, 1995 August None Scheduled Aug 23, 1995 September Sep 20, 1995 Sep 27, 1995 October Oct 18, 1995 Oct 25, 1995 November None Scheduled Nov 15, 1995 December None Scheduled Dec 13, 1995 January Jan 17, 1996 Jan 24, 1996 February Feb 21, 1996 Feb 28, 1996 March Mar 20, 1996 Mar 27, 1996 April Apr 17, 1996 Apr 24, 1996 May May 15, 1996 May 22, 1996 June Jun 19, 1996 Jun 26, 1996 EiNrIpN p COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ! A OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 0127,FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92720-8127 c4 �y 10844 ELLIS.FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 4714)962-2411 June 22, 1995 To the Chairman and Members of the Joint Boards of Directors Subject: Board Letter The following is an update on some of the things that are happening at the Districts that are important to staff and management and that I think might be of interest to you. If you have questions on any of the items, please give me a call. New Directors' Orientation and Plant Tour We had fifteen directors attend the orientation and plant tours June 3 and June 17. Thank you for your interest in the operations of the Districts. Enchanter Boat Tour for Directors .. The dates of July 12, 13 and 14, 1995 have been set aside for tours of the Districts' marine monitoring vessel, The Enchanter. The Enchanter IV is a 40-foot wooden hull vessel weighing 15 tons powered by a 671 Detroit diesel, single screw-powered engine. The vessel utilizes Differential G.P.S. and Loran C navigational systems which allow the captain to position the vessel within 10 meters of any given coordinates. Captain Tom Pesich spends a considerable amount of time making the Enchanter IV not only functional but attractive. The General Manager is extending an invitation to interested Board members to view our contract vessel, the Enchanter IV, and take an approximately three-hour cruise. Weekday or weekend days could be arranged depending upon the number of Directors interested and their schedules. Three to four Directors could be accommodated at a time. The cruise would depart from the Balboa Boat Basin in Newport Harbor mid moming and return around noon. Several Directors have indicated interest, and I would like to encourage as many of you as can make it to take advantage of this opportunity. Please contact my office if you are interested and indicate which date is most convenient. Los Alamitos County Water District Wants Representation on District No. 3 Board Joe Martin, President of the Los Alamitos County Water District, will be addressing the District No. 3 Directors following the regular meeting of the Joint Boards on June 28 with the intent of the Water District seeking representation on our Boards. Attached to the agenda item on this subject are copies of Mr. Martin's most recent letters as well as our original response. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1 Chairman and Members of IWAA EEUS AVENUE the Joint Boards of Directors ?o.CAUFO o ` / wuNiuN vA4Er.W 2-2411 A 82128�' Page 2 of n+u ssz.zan June 22, 1995 Green Acres Project Water Orange County Water District Green Acres water is used for various processes throughout the treatment plants. The agreement between the two agencies includes a provision for pricing revisions. For the years 1993 and 1994, the cost of the water was $114/acre-foot (AF) and $89/AF, respectively. For the period May 1, 1994 through April 30, 1995, we were been billed by OCWD for 5,049.9 AF of water at $150/AF. However, the water price for that period has been revised to $1141AF, resulting in a $36/AF credit, or$181,796.40, which will be applied to our account towards the future purchase of Green Acres Water. We have also been advised that the water price for the period May 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996 will be $89/AF, a considerable savings. Savings on the Purchase of Natural Gas The Districts use natural gas to supplement digester gas in the Central Power Generation facilities. Natural gas has historically been purchased from Southern California Gas Company (The Gas Company). Due to the deregulation of the natural gas industry, natural gas is now available on the market for less than it is available through The Gas Company. In order to take advantage of the savings, the Operations staff solicited bids from private suppliers for the purchase of natural gas. Sealed bids were received on May 23, 1995, for the supply of natural gas for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. The low bid was a discounted price of$0.0259/million BTUs below the monthly Natural Gas Intelligence Index price. The low bid price averaged 20% below the unit price paid for natural gas to The Gas Company during the 1994 calendar year, which should result in estimated savings of$150,000 per year. District 3 Wins a Big Onel The Techite Pipe trial has ended, successfully, after more than eight weeks before the jury. On Wednesday, June 14, the jury awarded District 3$147,500 in compensatory damages and $6,445,000 in punitive damages. Attached is a copy of the press release prepared by General Counsel on the award. Ed Hodges, who spent many days in the court room assisting Counsel, deserves much credit for representing the District in this case. We have not heard whether or not there may be an appeal. State of California Constitution Revision Commission Attached is a report from CASA on the status of the Constitution Revision Commission most recent meeting. Supervisor Bergeson's restructuring proposal, Orange County 2001, was presented and the Commission will be reviewing it during their meetings in June. We will keep you posted on the proceedings of this Commission, which could have an impact on this agency. Also attached is a newsletter from the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers outlining other aspects of the Commission's efforts. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 0 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA Chairman and Members of +uaAA Eua AVENUE vo 6ox e+n �J the Joint Boards of Directors FOUNTAIN VaLE .CAufoFNiA W72e-e127 Page 3 of 7 7141662-2415 June 22, 1995 Good As Gold Recovery Notes Gary Streed reported that on Monday, June 19, $20,086,771.47 was deposited into our account by the County, making a total recovery to date of approximately$316,044,801, or approximately 80% of our investment. Every little bit helps. Independent Report on Year 11 Ocean Monitorina Program RFP At the June 21 Executive Committee meeting, the members were addressed by Dr. Jeff Cross, Executive Director of SCCWRP,who was the leader of a panel that reviewed the Districts' RFP for Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program, as well as the proposals received, and the allegations made by Kinnetig Laboratories. The report from the panel is attached. Board Agenda Mailings Included with this month's package is a questionnaire which resulted from a cost-saving measure suggested by one of the Alternate Directors. If it is feasible, we would like to mail the complete agenda packages to only the Active Directors and provide copies of the Notice and Agenda Listing to the Alternates. When an Active Director knows he cannot attend a Board meeting, the package can then be given to the Alternate Director. Please give us your thoughts by filling out and returning the questionnaire. Continuing Investigation into the 1994 Fatal Accident at Plant No. 2 Terri Josway, Safety and Emergency Response Manager, reports that a Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) was conducted by the State of California, Department of Health Services on the fatal accident at Plant No. 2. The purpose of the FACE Report is to help the employer identify conditions that contributed to the fatality and recommend actions to prevent a recurrence. The report was prepared without input from Districts' staff, and is replete with technical errors concerning the design and the operation of the facilities. Therefore, the recommendations are based on inaccurate information. Staff will be preparing a rebuttal letter to the Department of Health, the agency responsible for the preparation of the FACE Report. "A Really Big Catch" During the routine cleaning of clogged water diffuser ports on the 120-inch ocean outfall, the port cleaning contractor discovered a 400' x 20' gill net on the Rap gate structure and removed R. We're glad that was one catch that got awayl Annexation of Crystal Cove State Park Historic District to District 5 On the agenda is a District 5 item to approve an agreement with the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, providing for annexing the historic district of Crystal Cove Stale Park, resulting in fees totaling $193,460. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA Chairman and Members of +peas Ewa AVENM op ep.e+27 the Joint Boards of Directors fONNINN VG CLIR 11 9212 M sezan Page 4 of 7 n+ne June 22, 1995 Engineerina Department Implements "Partnering" The Engineering Department will be using the Partnering concept with the contractor, Margate Construction Co., on the Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2. Partnering is a team-building process designed to ensure that the construction project is a positive, ethical, win-win experience for both owner and contractor. Partnering, as a positive process, is a team agreement that aims to get the parties involved with the project to let go of their animosities towards one another and work together on the basis of personal trust. The Partnering process is a facilitated workshop in which the parties come together to create a way of working together as a team. We expect the benefits to include reduced time and cost growth by keeping the project on time and on budget. We also expect a reduction of the possibility of construction claims and litigation. Energy Conservation The Districts' Operations and Engineering departments are working with Southern California Edison (SCE)on a joint energy conservation project. The SCE program "Envest" proposes to study, design and construct energy conservation measures at the Districts'treatment plants. The Operations' staff have identified about 800 KW of energy conservation measures that appear to meet the SCE criteria to forth a project. The 800 KW savings would equal about 7% of the present treatment plant electricity usage. Staff is continuing to negotiate with SCE on potential contract details. Continuous H-S Scrubber Sulfide Monitoring The Operations Department is working with the Air Quality Division to secure a research permit from the South Coast Air Quality Management District to perform research on a continuous monitoring and control system for hydrogen sulfide. The monitoring and control system would provide automatic operation of the scrubbers that are presently manually operated. Ad Hoc Committee re Soace Utilization Study The Ad Hoc Committee meeting will be held on Thursday, July 6, 1995, after the PDC Committee. 1995-96 Budgets As you know, the budget format has changed this year, resulting in a one-volume document. As a cost-savings measure, we are not going to mail this document with the agenda package but will have them available at the meeting for those Directors that do not have one. Those Directors who are members of the PDC, OMTS, FAHR and Executive Committees have already received copies of the budget, and we're asking that you bring them to the Board meeting. Enclosed is a blue sheet that lists the revisions made to the original budget. If you do not have any of the revisions, they will be available for you at the meeting. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS W ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA Chairman and Members of 10244EWE AVENUE the Joint Boards of Directors P.0.SO%B1E] fOUHINN V1lLEY.GLIFOPNIG 82129.E127 Page 5 of 7 0rnee24?+11 June 22, 1995 Baker-Gisler Interceptor Update Blake Anderson addressed the Costa Mesa City Council meeting on June 5, apologized for the incoveniences the citizens have experienced and explained the changes that will be made to minimize the impacts through completion of the construction. He also gave a heads-up on the planned construction of the Fairview Relief Sewer, scheduled for late 1996, and promised that the problems that have occurred on the Baker-Gisler job would not be repeated. He handed out postage-paid Citizen's Comment Cards and asked those people with concems and problems to fill them out and mail them to him. To date, we haven't received any response. The construction of the Baker-Gisler Interceptor in Costa Mesa is nearing completion. We have been directed by City staff to stop construction at the intersection of Baker and Fairview for the duration of the Orange County Fair, and to pave and stripe Fairview and Baker. This is being done, however, work is not totally complete in that area and the contractor will have to return after the Fair is over. During the Fair, the contractor will be finishing up some work on the east side of Fairview along the Paularino Channel, out of traffic. Request by Owner for Waiver of Connection Fee in District 2 Staff is working with General Counsel to verify the facts of Mr. Jerome P. Greubel's request for �..: demolition credit for a parcel in the City of Orange. Enclosed is a memo dated June 8, 1995 that details what is known to dale. General Counsel has requested staff to further investigate the title transactions to try to determine the actual date of title transfer. When all of the facts are received, General Counsel will report the findings to the Directors of District 2 at the next regular Board Meeting. Revisions to the SAWPA Agreement or. "The Devil is in the Details' There's a neighbor agency of ours in the upper portion of the Santa Ana River Watershed that provides regional water quality protection projects that serve the west ends of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Their activities are important to us because some of the effluent that goes into the river up there eventually comes out of the laps of the homes and industries down here by way of our groundwater. For this reason, their interests are also our interests—and vice versa. The agency is the Santa Ana Watershed Protection Authority(SAWPA)which is a five- party JPA made up of five water agencies (including the Orange County Water District). The Sanitation Districts and SAWPA have a 23-year-old agreement in place that gives SAWPA the right to purchase up to 30 million gallons per day (MGD) of treatment capacity within our facilities. SAWPA has purchased 8 MGD of treatment capacity and uses most of it. At times they exceed their treatment capacity rights. They also own 30 MGD worth of transport capacity in the Santa Ana River Interceptor(SARI) line that carries their wastewater first through two branches within Riverside and San Bernardino County and then through a single line in Orange County to our treatment facilities in Huntington Beach. Salty industrial and ground water reclamation brines were originally intended to be discharged into the line to prevent their reaching the upper portions of the Santa Ana River and thus impacting the quality of our drinking water. Today, these wastewaters, plus a large component of domestic wastewater, come through the SARI line. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNN Chairman and Members of roeaa 0=81VEMJF aa.aaxe�V the Joint Boards of Directors rourrtow vauer.rsurpen.W4.� Page 6 of 7 nu me 11 June 22, 1995 Money is todays topic. The devilish details are how much does SAWPA owe us and when should they have paid us? We have been haggling with SAWPA for over three years over these issues. To bring this issue to a head, in late 1994 we invoiced them for everything owed us under the strictest reading of the 1972 agreement. That strategy worked. Over the last six months we've intensified our talks. SAWPA's Rows to the SARI line have continued to increase and, according to the 1972 agreement, they are now obligated to buy an additional treatment capacity increment of 5 MGD. That's expensive. Under the terms of the 1972 agreement, todays cost for Capital buy-in is over$13 million. Other charges Calculated under a complex formula for operating costs add more than $200,000 to the amount they now owe us. However, SAWPA is in no financial position to pay this amount because they are saving money for a new regional wastewater treatment plant they plan to build with the help of state money. Also, they don't need a full 5 MGD increment. We believe that 1MGD is enough and is fair. We also believe that it's time for a new agreement that makes capital and operating costs charged SAWPA to be equitable with dischargers within our service area. SAWPA doesn't want to buy 5 MGD. They don't even want to buy 1 MGD. They argue that as soon as the new 8 MGD regional plant is built four years from now, they will have far less need for the 8 MGD of treatment capacity in our system that they now own. I might note that their lack of need will only be temporary because they will eventually need all of the 8MGD rapacity— k. ) and more—according to their own flow projections. But, today, Cash flow is killing them. They want to reserve all the cash they can to build the regional plant. So they're pushing for some sort of a capacity leasing arrangement. We want to be fair and equitable with all of our customers, whether they are within our service area or within a contract service area. And we also want to be cognizant of what is truly affordable by a public agency. But we also want to insist that everyone does his fair share. Part of SAWPA's dilemma springs from having insufficient user fees collected from the west-end communities that will eventually benefit from the regional treatment plant. While we are understanding and flexible, we are not patsies. We continue to meet with their staff to resolve our differences and to develop a proposal that the Sanitation Districts' Boards of Directors can consider. Another meeting is scheduled for July 7. I'll keep you updated. Incident Commander Training Attached is a June 20 memo from Ed Hodges on the 16-hour training for incident commanders for responding to Hazardous Materials spills that he attended. Since January 1993, the Districts' Safety and Emergency Response Division has been training staff in hazardous materials emergency response and management. The goal is to train all employees who may be involved in hazardous materials incidents to be trained in accordance with Fed/OSHA and Cal/OSHA regulations. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS At ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA r Chairman and Members of ,oerr ELLIS AVENUE the Joint Boards of Directors PEO 99e 9,2] FOUNTAIN VALLEY.LAOf99N1q 92]20L912] Page 7 of 7 992zA11 June 22, 1995 1 want to thank you for your comments regarding my Board Letter. If you want additional information on any of the items I've addressed in this letter, or past letters, please give me or Jean a call at 7141962-2411. Respectfully, Donald F. McIntyre General Manager DFM:jt J 1VrP 10DFM ANO.LIR 895 Attachments ' L AL/ %MffCf WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM L O S A L A M I T 0 S C O U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T March 9 , 1995 Mr. John Cox, Joint Chairman County Sanitation Districts of Orange County - PO Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear-Mr. Cox: The Los Alamitos County Water District is the sewage collection agency for Rossmoor, Los Alamitos and portions of Seal Beach. Our sewage is transported and treated by your District. We are interested in representation on your District's Board. We are requesting to address the Board. Please advise us of a convenient date when we can be on the Agenda. If you have any questions , please contact our General Manager, Sandra Montez at (310)431-2223. Thanks for your assistance in arranging for this Agenda item. Sincerely, �✓�� / /A ca oseld' pMartin/ President �- 3243 Keteua Avenue • P.O. Box 542 • Los Alamitos, Callfornia90720 • 310431 -2223 -BOARD OF DIRECTORS- ARLYSS M. BURKETT ART DE BOLT JOSEPH C MARTIN WILLIAM a POE JACK W. ROSENTHAL Legal Councit Rourke,Woodwff&Spreblin Engineer: Boyle Engineenng Core COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ' OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714)962-2411 April 4, 1995 Joseph C. Martin, President Los Alamitos County Water District 3243 Katella Avenue Post Office Box 542 Los Alamitos, CA 90720 Dear Mr. Martin: Thank you for your March 9, 1995 letter expressing interest in having a representative of your agency sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. Our General Counsel previously reviewed this subject and issued an opinion as evidenced in the v.✓ enclosed copy of a memorandum dated November 2, 1993. County Sanitation District No. 3 was originally organized and is presently structured under Section 4730 of the Health & Safety Code of the County Sanitation District Act, and therefore membership is limited to representatives from each City and each Sanitary District within County Sanitation District No. 3 boundaries, together with the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors. The present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Board of Directors of District No. 3. If the Board of Directors of District No. 3 wants to consider reorganization, a Resolution of Intent must be adopted to establish the body in accordance with Section 4730.1. A time and place must be established to hear objections to the proposal and thereafter, the intent must be published and a hearing conducted. After the hearing, the Board may order the governing body (Joint Board of Directors) to be constituted in the reorganized manner. However, you should be aware that the County Sanitation Districts in the past year have made some major changes in the makeup of the Boards of Directors. In an attempt to reduce costs and streamline the Districts, the Directors recommended that each city have one representative for all Districts. Previously, every city within a district was represented. This resulted in as many as five directors from each city because there were five districts within a city's boundaries. Every city but two now has only one Board member and the number of Directors has been reduced from 42 to 30. COUNTY SANITATION DISTPIM d ORANGE COUM, CAIIFORNIA 1 WAA EWE AVENUE Joseph C. Martin oo.E0..127 Page Two rtu A'VAW,CAUMAOA92r - Aprll4, 1995 mu9azzAn If, after reading the above, you still wish to pursue representation on the County Sanitation District No. 3 Board, please give me a call and we can discuss it further. . Sincerely, Donald F. McIntyre General Manager DFM:jt wpdmVmWmZ4049s.11 Enclosure c: General Counsel Directors, District No. 3 Cecilia L. Age, Cypress George Brown, Seal Beach John Collins, Fountain Valley Burnie Dunlap, Brea James Flora, La Habra Don R. Griffin, Buena Park Victor Leipzig, Huntington Beach Wally Linn, La Palma Pat McGuigan, Santa Ana Margie Rice, Midway City Sanitary Dist. Julie Sa, Fullerton Sal A. Sapien, Stanton Sheldon S. Singer, Garden Grove Sanitary Dist. Roger Stanton, Board of Supervisors Charles Sylvia, Los Alamitos Bob Zemel, Anaheim L-J \t/ Mn= WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM L 0 S A L A M I T 0 S C 0 U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T June 8, 1995 Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 Dear Mr. McIntyre: The Board of Directors of the Los Alamitos County Water District requests approval to address the Board of Directors of District No. 3, after your normal June 28, 1995, Board meeting. Because our District encompasses a portion of Orange County, City of Seal Beach, City of Cypress, and the whole of the City of Los Alamitos, we express interest in having a representative of the District sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. We look forward to confirmation of this request for our attendance. Sincerely, L2a�� C. Martin President .. 3243 Kete lla ave npe • P.O. Box 542 • Los Alamitos, California 90720 • 310 431-2223 -BOARD OF DIRECTORS- ARLYSS M. BURKETT ART BE BOLT JOSEPH C. MARTIN WILLIAM C POE JACK W ROSENTHAL Legal Councit Rourkq Woodruff&Spradlln Engineer: Boyle Engineering Corp June 15, 1995 n I `--% PRESS RELEASE b> C7 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE SUBJECT: JURY AWARDS $6,592,570.00 TO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Contact: Thomas L. Woodruff General Counsel (714) 558-7000 SANTA ANA, CA.—On Wednesday, June 14, an Orange County jury awarded $147,570.00 in compensatory damages and $6,445,000.00 in punitive damages to County Sanitation District No. 3 in the action entitled County Sanitation District No. 3 vs. Amoco Chemical Company, Untied Technologies Corporation, et al.. Orange County Superior Court Case No. 722816. The Orange County Sanitation Districts are the third largest wastewater treatment agency on the west coast, and are responsible for collecting, treating and safely disposing of wastewater and its residuals for 2.1 million residents and businesses in metropolitan Orange County. This was an action for products liability, negligence, breach of warranty and fraud arising out of the use of the Techite pipe invented, designed, manufactured, tested, assembled and sold by United Technologies to the Sanitation District in 1971 for use in the Westminster Avenue Force Main project in the cities of Westminster and Seal Beach. The District claimed that the Techite pipe was defective and unsafe for its intended purpose and, as a result, the defects caused the pipe to deteriorate and break, thus allowing sewage to spill. The Jury found that United Technologies defrauded the District by intentionally suppressing adverse technical information about their pipe. District Chairman, Sal Sapien, Council Member of the City of Stanton, expressed great satisfaction with the verdict noting, "Due to the diligence and excellence of our legal team, the replacement of the pipe is one expense that will not have to be bome unnecessarily by the Orange County taxpayers.'On May 24, 1995, the District awarded a contract to Albert W. Davies, Inc. In the amount of$3,760,000 to replace the entire 14,000 foot sewer line. County Sanitation District No. 3 was represented by its General Counsel Thomas L. Woodruff and the Law Firm of Rourke, Woodruff 8 and Spradlin, with Special Counsel David R. Griffin of Bakersfield. ### CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of SANITATION AGENCIES 925 L Street,Suite 1400 Saa enta,CA 95814 TEL:016)446-0388-FAX(916)448-4808 June 9, 1995 TO: CASA MEMBER AGENCIES FROM: Mike Dillon, Executive Director Christina Dillon, Lobbyist RE: CONSTrrLMON REVISION COMMISSION The Constitution Revision Commission met in May for a two-day hearing on "Contracting For Governmental Services," "Local Finance" and "Loral Government Reorganization." As we have reported previously, the Commission is having difficulty zeroing-in on specific revision proposals to submit to the legislature in August. Senator Lucy Hillea, the author of the bill that formed the Commission, encouraged the Chairman to conduct "less informational" meetings and begin the deliberation process. Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill and Judge Roger Warren expressed concern that if the Commission did not begin developing actual draft language soon for proposals, a mere skeleton document would be sent to the legislature, lacking tight policy wording. Lastly, one Commissioner begged Senator Rillea to request a time extension for the Commission, to which Chairman Hauck retorted, "No. We're going to adhere to this schedule." The Commission has decided to develop during June, three or four "packages" of revision proposals, wherein all state and local government financing and restructuring elements within each package would be complementary. Three "packages" will be placed on the ballot and the voters will select one of the three to implement statewide. The discussion regarding contracting out, featured four panelists, including Bill Eggers of the Reason Foundation's Privatization Center. (The Reason Center is "a nonpartisan, nonprofit, public policy research and educational organization dedicated to advancing the principles of a free society.") Eggers made two separate references to a wastewater treatment plant and a sludge processing plant in Indianapolis which, by using contracting out and cost analysis, "saved the city 44%" and "reduced 79 employees" respectively. Said Eggers, "Privatization is not always going to be the best option, but right now public agencies are insulated and there is no hammer for quality." During the local finance discussion, Joel Fox of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, announced the development of the "Protect Proposition 13 Act," which will more than likely be slated for the November ballot in 1996. The proposition u would ban the use of assessments, except those that directly benefit property, and "would be limited to only those used traditionally to finance the capital costs or f maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, or flood •/ control, drainage systems and vector control." Further, it redefines all other new assessments as "special taxes" and requires a 2/3rds vote to levy them, and requires majority voter approval of utility user taxes and other local taxes placed in the general fund. Finally, the group was given a copy of "Orange County 2001" which is former State Senator and now Supervisor'Bergeson's answer to the Orange County Bail-Out. The Commission is being asked to give serious consideration to her radical local government restructuring proposal. Specifically, Orange County 2001 would: * Eliminate the Board of Supervisors and replace it with a single elected "county Mayor, who would manage the cost-effective delivery of regional services throughout the geographic county." * Establishes a county Regional Services Authority, who advises and assists the County Mayor in providing these services. Authority board includes 10 members from the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities, one each from four specific community groups or organizations (ie: United Way, Grand Jurors Association, etc.). * The Mayor shall operate four administrative divisions, including Health and Human Services, Public Facilities, Public Protection, and Transportation, with guidance from the Authority board. * "Sanitation and Waste Management - The Orange County Sanitation Districts (OCSan) and several other independent sanitation districts and water districts administer the area's sewage treatment and collection systems. OC 2001 would consolidate these separate districts into a single department within the Division of Public Facilities — the department could be competitively bid to OCSan or a private firm (as is done by the City of Indianapolis). The Waste Management function of this department would also be put to bid with the current Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD) expected to compete for the area's hazardous waste collection program and three area landfills. Sanitary districts held $185 MN in reserves in FY 1994-95, with $29 MN in salary/benefit and directors' expenses. They collected $79 MN in user fees and $3.2 MN in property taxes. OC 2001 assumes that these expenses could be reduced by 40% (similar to that which occurred in Indianapolis) and estimates a $26 MN savings with consolidation." The Commission left the "Bergeson Proposal" open, and are expected to revisit it during the two-day meeting next week in Sacramento. minl- NEWS Dedicated to Excellence in Municipal Financial Management June1995 Constitutional Revision Commission Discusses Finance CCRC Newsletter Impose sanctions if a balanced accountability and understandabil- April 1995 budget is not passed by the con- ity. The commission also discussed stitutional deadline. the current configuration of local The Constitutional Revision Com- The current constitutional prohi- agencies and their duties and respon- mission has been meeting regularly bition against incurring mul- sibilities,and reviewed the con- to submit a preliminary report to the tiple-year debt without a vote of straints that interfere with the alloca- Legislature and the Governor by the people would be strength- tan of state and local responsibili- their August deadline. The discus- ened. ties. The following is a list of op. sion recently has focused on local The vote requirement for the tions discussed: government finance and the state/ budget would be changed to a local relationship which the Com- simple majority,but the two- Options for Changing the Structure mission recognizes as being"one of thirds vote requirement for tax offmcal Government the most difficult tasks assigned to increases would be retained thecommission." The objective: Maximize account- LocalGoveroment ability by increasing local control Following are highlights from a re- Reorganization and Fiscal Powers ofprograms and resources. cent Commission meeting and de- tails of some of the assumptions that The commission discussed the The only elected offices for coun- framedthediscumion. structure of local government and ties would be boards of supery i- modifications that could increase Please see Constitutional Revision,page 3 The State Budget and FiscalProcesses - The objective: Increaseflexibiliry in the budget-making process. ` i What's Inside .. Min News is It is importantto reconnect the always seeking budget process to the people. input from all Presidents Message................ ................2 Provide foratwo-year budget CSMFO a Sop7alk.....................................................3 and create a process for periodic Spotlight......................................................4 members on T reconciliation of the two years. GFOA Legislative Agenda ..........................5 topics in any ¢ Strengthen the requirements for a ? In the Courts................................................5 department balanced budget so that the Leg- upcoming Conferences ..............................6 section. " islature would be required to ? Matting Notices ...........................................6 ass-and the Governor to si a = MPthers Profder................enricas.................7 P sign- Members' Professional Services.................? It's yQllf ;• balanced budget. In addition,re- Capitol Action.........................................Add newsletter.! quire that each budget contain a prudent reserve and impose a limit on the amount of debt that may be incurred by the state. California Society of Municipal Finance Officers CSMFO Mini-News June 1995 Constitutional Revision Commission, Continued property tax,would require ap- proval by a majority vote of the son,sheriffs,and district attor- cal reorganizations by pooling all people. neys. All other officials would be funds received by all local entities Taxes used for specific purposes appointed by the board of supervi- within each of the 58 counties and would require a majority vote; sors so that it is elm that the requiring local officials to appor- taxes used for general or unidenti- board is the accountable body. tion local responsibilities and rev- fied activities would require a Provide the county chief adminis- enues based on local priorities two-thirds vote. It was also sug- trative officer(CAO)with powers within a specified time period. gested that each tax proposal be similar to those of a city manager. - An alternative would be to allow judged with a representation Consider reducing the number of for a local reorganization process, test—those who would pay the tax counties,even though changing allowing local communities to es- are ones who should vote on the boundaries maybe complex. The tablish their own charters. respective tax increase proposal. commission considered changing The property tax rate could be the current requirement for the Options for Changing the Local changed by a two-thirds vote of creation of a new county from a Finance System the people. majority of those in the new TerminateMello-Roos financing county and a majority of those in The objective: Increase account- and benefitassessmenn ortighten the remainder of the old county to ability and flexibility at the local the rules on the proliferation of a majority of those who would re- level. benefitasae ssments and other side in the new county. mechanisms that end-run the pro- Extend charter city revenue au- CeSS• The commission considered an al- thority to counties;and all county- Give local agencies the ability to temative that would stimulate lo- and city-imposed taxes,other than levy and allocate the property tax. ShopTalk ElectricludustryRestructuring that before any final decisions are The PoolCo model proposes cre- made,a number of major technical ation of a pool in which all generators In April 1994,the California Public and policy issues must be resolved deliver electricity and from which Utilities Commission(PUC)an- within the PUC. In addition,the userspurchase electricity. Electricity nounced that it intends to"deregu- California Legislature has made it prices would be based upon frequent late"California's electricity services clear that it intends to participate in (hourly)auctions based upon the market. This article discusses the any restructuring program ultimately prices generators would bid to sell to changes being considered and major created. the pool and the demand for electric. issues. Next month,we'll discuss ity by users. All users would pay the likely impacts on municipalities and Two Maio Models same price for buying electricity from League of California Cities lobbying The two most predominant re- the pool. The PoolCo model envi- strategies, structuring proposals am"direct ac- sions the opportunity for direct access cess"and"PoolCo." In direct access, between generators and users as an Background customers would enter into bilateral option to buying and selling within The primary reason given by the contracts directly with sellers(or gen- the pool. The PoolCo model would PUC to deregulate California's elec- emtors)of electricity. Generators be applied to all users at the same tricity services market is to reduce could be a traditional utility or an in- time. the cost of electricity in California. dependent power producer.The price Direct access is favored by The PUC proposal stimulated consid- would be negotiated between the user PG&E and was proposed in the emble debate,discussion,and alter- and generator.The direct access PUC's original Bluebook proposal. native proposals. While the original model would be phased in overtime, PoolCo is favored by Southern Cal; PUC proposal was to be implemented with large users incorporated into the fomia Edison and San Diego Gas ah✓ in January 1995,it has become clear system first and smaller users later. Please see ShopTalk, next page Page 3 4 CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of SANITATION AGENCIES 925LStr.t,SWW1400 Seaame.W,CA95814 TEL:(916)446-0388-FAx:(916)448-4808 June 9, 1995 TO: CASA MEMBER AGENCIES FROM: Mike Dillon, Executive Director Christina Dillon, Lobbyist RE: CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION The Constitution Revision Commission met in May for a two-day hearing on "Contracting For Governmental Services," "Local Finance" and "Local Government Reorganization." As we have reported previously, the Commission is having difficulty zeroing-in on specific revision proposals to submit to the legislature in August. Senator Lucy Rillea, the author of the bill that formed the Commission, encouraged the Chairman to conduct "less informational" meetings and begin the deliberation process. Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill and Judge Roger Warren expressed concern that if the Conunission did not begin developing actual draft language soon for proposals, a mere skeleton document would be sent to the legislature, lacking tight policy wording. Lastly, one Commissioner begged Senator Rillea to request a time extension for the Commission, to which Chairman Hauck retorted, "No. We're going to adhere to this schedule." The Commission has decided to develop during June, three or four "packages" of revision proposals, wherein all state and local government financing and restructuring elements within each package would be complementary. Three "packages" will be placed on the ballot and the voters will select one of the three to implement statewide. The discussion regarding contracting out, featured four panelists, including Bill Eggers of the Reason Foundation's Privatization Center. (The Reason Center is "a nonpartisan, nonprofit, public policy research and educational organization dedicated to advancing the principles of a free society.") Eggers made two separate references to a wastewater treatment plant and a sludge processing plant in Indianapolis which, by using contracting out and cost analysis, "saved the city 44%" and "reduced 79 employees" respectively. Said Eggers, "Privatization is not always going to be the best option, but right now public agencies are insulated and there is no hammer for quality." During the local finance discussion, Joel Fox of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, announced the development of the "Protect Proposition 13 Act," which will more than likely be slated for the November ballot in 1996. The proposition would ban the use of assessments, except those that directly benefit property, and "would be limited to only those used traditionally to finance the capital costs or maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, or flood control, drainage systems and vector control." Further, it redefines all other new assessments as "special taxes" and requires a 2/3rds vote to levy them, and requires majority voter approval of utility user taxes and other local taxes placed in the general fund. Finally, the group was given a copy of "Orange County 2001" which is former State Senator and now Supervisor Bergeson's answer to the Orange County Bail-Out. The Commission is being asked to give serious consideration to her radical local government restructuring proposal. Specifically, Orange County 2001 would: * Eliminate the Board of Supervisors and replace it with a single elected "county Mayor, who would manage the cost-effective delivery of regional services throughout the geographic county." * Establishes a county Regional Services Authority, who advises and assists the County Mayor in providing these services. Authority board includes 10 members from the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities, one each from four specific community groups or organizations (ie: United Way, Grand Jurors Association, etc.). * The Mayor shall operate four administrative divisions, including Health and Human Services, Public Facilities, Public Protection, and Transportation, with guidance from the Authority board. * "Sanitation and Waste Management - The Orange County Sanitation Districts (OCSan) and several other independent sanitation districts and water districts administer the area's sewage treatment and collection systems. OC 2001 would consolidate these separate districts into a single department within the Division of Public Facilities -- the department could be competitively bid to OCSan or a private firm (as is done by the City of Indianapolis). The Waste Management function of this department would also be put to bid with the current Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD) expected to compete for the area's hazardous waste collection program and three area landfills. Sanitary districts held $185 MN in reserves in FY 1994-95, with $29 MN in salary/benefit and directors' expenses. They collected $79 MN in user fees and $3.2 MN in property taxes. OC 2001 assumes that these expenses could be reduced by 40% (similar to that which occurred in Indianapolis) and estimates a $26 MN savings with consolidation." The Commission left the 'Bergeson Proposal" open, and are expected to revisit it during the two-day meeting next week in Sacramento. mini- NEws- Dedicated to Excellence in Municipal Financial Management June 1995 Constitutional Revision Commission Discusses Finance CCRC Newsletter Impose sanctions if a balanced accountability and understandabil- April1995 budget is not passed by the con- ity. The commission also discussed stitutional deadline. the current configuration of local The Constitutional Revision Com- The current constitutional prohi- agencies and their duties and respon- mission has been meeting regularly bition against incurring mul- sibilities,and reviewed the con- to submit a preliminary report to the tiple-year debt without a vote of straints that interfere with the alloca- Legislature and the Governor by the people would be strength- Lion of state and local responsibili- their August deadline. Thediscus- ened. ties. The following is a list of op- sion recently has focused on local The vote requirement for the tionsdiscussed: government finance and the state/ budget would be changed to a local relationship which the Com- simple majority,but the two- Options for Changing the Structure `...t mission recognizes as being"one of thirds vote requirement for tax of Local Govemment the most difficult tasks assigned to increases would be retained thecommission." The objective: Maximize account- IAWGoverument ability by increasing local control Following are highlights from a re- Reorganirition andFuualPowers afprograms and resources. cent Commission meeting and de- tails of some of the assumptions that The commission discussed the The only elected offices for coun- framed the discussion. structure of local government and ties would be boards of supervi- modifications that could increase Please sit Constitutional Revision,page 3 The State Budget and Fiscal Processes •w:r;:=: w , :�:::-r.�:=.�:.,..e.._. - . The objective: Inereaseffexibility ? y in the budget-making process. t What's Inside .. Mini-News is It is important to reconnect the always seeking budget process to the people. input from all Provide for a two-year budget President's Message...................................2 CSMFO and create a process for periodic ShopTalk.....................................................3 P p Spotlight......................................................4 members on 1 reconciliation of the two years. GFOA Legislative Agenda ..........................5 topics in any ! Strengthen the requirements for a In the Courts................................................5 department y balanced budget so that the Leg- Upcoming Conferences..............................6 section. islature would be required to Meeing Notices ...........................................8 pass-and Governor to si n " Up the Ladder.............................................7 P B -it Members Professional Services.................7 It's ygltf •• balanced budget. In addition,re- Capitol Action.........................................Ada newsletted quire that each budget contain a _ prudent reserve and impose a 4 limit on the amount of debt that may be incurred by the state. -. ,.'_.',cc.�t. -•:c:,;:..,-=x•.-�� .-r .,:�:-,:cc u .. California Society of Municipal Finance Officers CSMFO Mini-News June 1995 Constitutional Revision Commission, Continued property tax,would require ap- proval by a majority vote of the sors,sheriffs,and district attor- cal reorganizations by pooling all people. l� neys. All other officials would be funds received by all local entities Taxes used for specific purposes appointed by the board of supervi- within each of the 58 counties and would require a majority vote; sors so that it is clear that the requiring local officials to appor- taxes used for general or unidenti- board is the accountable body. tion local responsibilities and rev- fied activities would require a Provide the county chief adminis- enues based on local priorities two-thirds vote. It was also sug- trative officer(CAO)with powers within a specified time period. gested that each tax proposal be similar to those of a city manager. - An alternative would be to allow judged with a representation Consider reducing the number of for a local reorganization process, test—those who would pay the tax counties,even though changing al lowing local communities to es- are ones who should vote on the boundaries maybe complex. The tablish their own charters. respective tax increase proposal. commission considered changing The property tax rate could be the current requirement forthe Options forChangingthe Local changed by a two-thirds vote of creation of a new county from a Finance System the people. majority ofthose in the new Terminate Mello-Roos financing county and a majority of those in The objective: Increase account- and benefit assessments ortighten the remainder of the old county to ability and Jlezibiliry at the local the rules on the proliferation of a majority of those who would re- level. benefit assessments and other side in the new county. mechanisms that end-run the pro- Extend charter city revenue au- cess• The commission considered an al- thoriry to counties;and all county- Give local agencies the ability to temative that would stimulate lo- and city-imposed taxes,other than levy and allocate the property tax. ShopTaik ElectriclndustryRe stmeturing that before any final decisions are The PoolCo model proposes cm- made,a number of major technical ation of a pool in which all generators In April 1994,the California Public and policy issues must be resolved deliver electricity and from which Utilities Commission(PUC)an. within the PUC. In addition,the users purchase electricity. Electricity nounced that it intends to"deregu- California Legislature has made it prices would be based upon frequent late"California's electricity services clear that it intends to participate in (hourly)auctions based upon the market. This article discusses the any restructuring program ultimately prices generators would bid to sell to changes being considered and major created. the pool and the demand for electric- issues. Next month,we'll discuss ity by users. All users would pay the likely impacts on municipalities and Two Main Models same price for buying electricity from League of California Cities lobbying The two most predominant re- the pool. The PoolCo model envi- strategies. structuring proposals am"direct ac- sions the opportunity for direct access cess"and"PoolCo." In direct access, between generators and users as an Background customers would enter into bilateral option to buying and selling within The primary reason given by the contracts directly with sellers(or gen. the pool. The PooICO model would PUC to deregulate California's elec- erators)of electricity. Generators be applied to all users at the same tricity services market is to reduce could be a traditional utility or an in- time. the cost of electricity in California. dependent power producer.The price Direct access is favored by The PUC proposal stimulated consid- would be negotiated between the user PG&E and was proposed in the ereble debate,discussion,and alter- and generator.The direct access PUC's original Bluebook proposal. native proposals. While the original model would be phased in overtime, PoolCo is favored by Southern Cal, PUC proposal was to be implemented with large users incorporated into the forma Edison and San Diego Gas ahowl in January 1995,it has become clear system first and smaller users later. Pleas sec ShopTalk, next page Page 3 r SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT 7171 FENWICK LANE WESTMINSTER, CA 92683.5218 714-894.2222 FAX 714.894.9699 Date: June 14, 1995 To: Edward M. Torres, Director, Technical Services Department, CSDOC From: Jeffrey N. Cross, Ph.D., Executive Director, Southern California Coastal iv Water Research Project u John H. Dorsey, Ph.D., Assistant Division Manager, Environmental Monitoring Division, Bureau of Sanitation, City of Los Angeles Alan C. Langworthy, Deputy Director, Metropolitan Wastewater Department, City of San Diego Re: Independent Review and Report on Kinnetic Laboratories Allegations Concerning Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program RFP and Consultant Selection On May 25, 1995, Mr. Edward Torres, Director, Technical Services Department of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC), requested that we review the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories concerning the consultant selection process for the Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP). The following documents were reviewed by the panel: • Letter dated April 28, 1995 from Kinnetic Laboratories to Pat McGuigan, chairman of the CSDOC Operations Committee; • CSDOC staff summary of the allegations contained in the April 28 letter; • Original CSDOC request for proposal (RFP) dated November 15, 1994 • Minutes from the mandatory pre-bidders meeting December 1, 1994; • Brown and Caldwell proposal dated January 3, 1994; • CSDOC staff evaluation of Brown and Caldwell's proposal; • CSDOC staff report on site visits to Brown and Caldwell and Kinnetic Laboratories; and • Revised CSDOC request for proposal dated March 31, 1995. Mr. Torres requested that, after reviewing the documents, the panel address the following questions: • Was it appropriate for CSDOC staff to conclude that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the original RFP; and • Did CSDOC revise the RFP to exclude all consultants except SAIC? The panel reviewed the documents provided and herein present our findings. A summary of the findings is followed by a detailed discussion of each of the questions and the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories. v A Public Agency for Marine Environmental Research Panel Review-p. 2 q 1. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Was it appropriate for CSDOC to conclude that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the oricinal RFP? The Brown and Caldwell proposal was deficient in a number of areas. It lacked detail for several important OMP program areas, such as methods and detection limits for analytical chemistry, QA/QC procedures for sorting and identification of benthic samples, qualifications of important subcontractors, and procedures for problem solving and resolution. The Brown and Caldwell proposal did not explicitly recognize that continuity with the data from the previous 10 years was of utmost importance. Consequently, Brown and Caldwell did not demonstrate that they understood the scope of work of the Districts' OMP. Based on the review process in the original RFP, CSDOC staff was correct in finding that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the RFP. Did CSDOC revise the RFP to exclude all consultants except SAIC? The original RFP was weak in several areas. It did not specify all of the methods that the contractor should use to ensure comparability with the data collected during the previous 10 years. The RFP should not have encouraged innovation and cost cutting at the expense of data continuity. And it was vague on how the technical evaluation of the proposals would be handled. It appears that the shortcomings of the original RFP became apparent during staff review of the proposals. The Districts rejected all proposals and rebid the contract. The fact that two of the original three bidders responded to the revised RFP suggests that CSDOC did not revise the RFP to exclude all bidders except SAIC. The original RFP could have been better thought out in terms of the technical specifications and the proposal evaluation process. It appears that not having bid the OMP for 10 years was detrimental to the formulation of the original RFP. Because the Districts' OMP is critical for maintaining the 301(h) waiver, the technical issues override strict cost considerations. The lack of recent experience in dealing with these types of issues appears to have resulted in an inadequate RFP. Staff was correct in rejecting all of the bids and starting over, rather than trying to sort out the original process. This shows due diligence in trying to maintain a level playing field while ensuring that the Districts get the best possible monitoring program. However, panel members felt that some of the requirements in the revised RFP were unreasonable (e.g., chemical and benthic invertebrate analyses had to be done in California; possession of a voucher collection with 90% of the species in the study area). Given that the bidders were asked to respond to the revised RFP in eight working days, and because some of the requirements in the revised RFP were the result of the site visits conducted during proposal evaluation, it is apparent why Kinnetic Laboratories felt that they were targeted for exclusion. r Panel Review-P. 3 a 2. WAS BROWN AND CALDWELL'S PROPOSAL RESPONSIVE TO RFP? The Districts' original RFP in section VI. Contents of Proposal states that the proposal ...must provide the Districts with the following information..." (page 11). A. Qualifications of Firm 1. Date firm established 2. Similar ongoing projects 3. Resumes of principals 4. Organization chart 5. Description of training program 6. Subcontracting organizations B. Ability to Provide Services C. Acknowledgment of Scope of Work D. Cost of Services E. Financial Statements and Related Confidentiality A. Qualifications of fine 1. Date firm established - provided. 2. Similar ongoing projects -names, dates, descriptions, location, contacts, and price provided. The proposal did not address the following areas specified in the RFP: a) problems encountered and resolutions; b) taxonomic protocols; c) experience with EPA's 301(h) chemistry analytical procedures. 3. Resumes of principals - provided. 4. Organization chart - provided. 5. Description of training program - elements of training program are listed, but the descriptions are vague and short on specifics. 6. Subcontracting individuals and organizations - names are provided, but addresses are missing. 7. Copy of recent reports - one report is provided. 8. Vessel specifications - vessel specifications and available sampling equipment are provided in section VI.B. (page 2-2). B. Ability to Provide Services -the proposal addresses Brown and Caldwell's ability to provide services, but it does not address contingency plans for equipment failure or withdrawal of a subcontractor, both of which were requested in the Districts' original RFP. C. Acknowledgment of Scope of Work- The Brown and Caldwell proposal stales that it will conduct the monitoring in accordance with 301(h) Technical Support and Guidance documents. It addresses the work that needs to be accomplished, the types of sediment and biological samples that will be collected, the types of sediment and biological sampling devices that will be used, how the data will be analyzed and submitted, and how the reports will be prepared and submitted. The Districts' original RFP in section 11. Background calls for "...detailed descriptions of the proposed data analyses and how those analyses will be conducted..." (page 3). Brown and Caldwell provided detailed descriptions of the data analyses for each program element, which Panel Review-p. 4 • M F indicates that they have the necessary background in statistics and know how to proceed. The original RFP requires the bidder to address the submission of data to ODES. In their proposal, Brown and Caldwell mentioned that they have submitted data to ODES as part of other 301(h) monitoring contracts.. However, given the emphasis in the original RFP, this issue should have been addressed more fully in the proposal. It is easy to miss the fact that Brown and Caldwell has successfully entered data into ODES. The CSDOC staff evaluation indicates that they were not satisfied with the method of submission, but this is immaterial. It does not matter whether the programs are sophisticated or simplistic, as long as they work. The Brown and Caldwell proposal is inadequate in that it does not mention the methods that wilr be used to analyze 1) sediments and tissues for priority pollutants; 2) sediments for grain size, Fe, Al, TOC, BOD, etc.; and 3) fish tissues for lipids. It is not clear from the proposal that the principals in chemistry have experience with marine sediments or marine biological tissues. Furthermore, their QA experience is largely with water quality and field operations data; there is no mention of chemistry QA experience. The chemistry methods for sediments and tissues are critically important for the Districts' OMP. The original RFP identifies method detection limits as a particular concern (section V.3. Tissue and Sediment Chemistry Analyses, page 9), but there is no information in the Brown and Caldwell proposal on chemical methods or detection limits. It is particularly surprising that proposal did not address this issue since Brown and Caldwell proposed different methods from those of the current OMP. This is a serious deficiency in the proposal. The proposal is deficient in that it does not address the QA/QC process for sorting, identification, and verification of invertebrate or fish samples. It is possible to infer from the resumes that Brown and Caldwell has people experienced with invertebrate taxonomy, but given the importance of this issue (continuity of the data over the life of the OMP), the proposal should have addressed this issue explicitly. Brown and Caldwell apparently does not have people experienced with fish taxonomy. Two of the weaknesses identified in the evaluation of the Districts staff are unjustified: 1) that the taxonomists' experience is mostly from the Santa Barbara Channel and the people are not active in SCAMIT, and 2) the taxonomists are distributed throughout the western US. By these criteria, internationally recognized taxonomic experts would not qualify. Moreover, the difference between the invertebrate fauna of the Santa Barbara Channel and the shelf off Huntington Beach is not substantial. A taxonomist familiar with a particular group that occurs in the Districts' OMP and possessing experience with infauna on the coastal shelf off California should be able to accomplish the task; where they live is immaterial. The proposal is vague on how fish and invertebrates would be preserved aboard the ship for bioaccumulation studies and the proposal does not describe how tissues for the bioaccumulation studies would be collected from the organisms. The proposal is Panel Review-p. 5 incorrect on sample handling for fish histology— it states that the livers be removed and fixed whole, when in actuality, thin (<1 mm) slices of liver should be dissected and fixed onboard ship for processing in the lab. The Districts' original RFP in section II. Background states that the annual summary report "...should combine and integrate the results of the various mandated program elements with historical trends and relevant environmental data from external sources" (page 3). The Brown and Caldwell proposal addresses the historical data (page 3-15), but it does not address how or what external environmental data will be incorporated into the annual summary report. The 1993 Goleta Sanitary District NPDES Report was reviewed and found adequate. The fact that the Goleta report did not contain comparisons with external environmental data may have been at the direction of the contracting agency and not the contractor. The proposal should have explicitly addressed how Brown and Caldwell would assure the Districts that the data collected in year 11 would be comparable with the data collected in the previous years by other contractors. Continuity is of vital importance in a long-term monitoring program, such as the Districts' OMP, where data are combined from several laboratories and analyzed for long-term trends in ocean conditions. The Districts pointed out the importance of data continuity in the pre-bid meeting and they also stated that continuity with previous data would be considered during proposal evaluation. However, the original RFP is vague on the importance of data continuity. For example, the original RFP in section VI.C. Acknowledgment of Scope of Work n. slates that "Innovative and cost effective approaches to the problems encountered in each of[the tasks in the scope of work] should be described" (page 12), suggesting that the contractor is encouraged to use new and/or different methods. In the revised RFP, section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph 2) Benthic Monitoring states that "Physical and chemical analyses of sediment samples will be performed according to the procedures in the Districts' present OMP QAPP" (page 13). In paragraph 21 Trawling of the same section, it states that"Chemical analyses [of biological tissues] will be performed according to procedures detailed in the Districts' QAPP" (page 15). And in section VILA. Chemistry, it asks for the costs of US EPA Methods 624 and 1624 for extractable and volatile organic compounds (pages 27-28). In responding to the original RFP, Brown and Caldwell should have made it clear that they understood that continuity of data was extremely important. By the same token, the Districts should have explicitly stated in the original RFP the methods that the potential contractors should use to ensure data comparability. D. Cost of Services - provided. E. Financial Statements and Related Confidentiality - provided. \fto/ Panel Review-p. 6 8 3. DISTRICTS CONDUCTED SITE VISITS INSTEAD OF AWARDING THE CONTRACT The Districts' original RFP in section VI.F. Evaluation Procedures specifically states that site visits are part of the proposal evaluation process. "If deemed necessary by the selection committee, site visits by Districts personnel will be conducted" (paragraph 2, page 14). During the visits, the selection committee would evaluate vessels, equipment, laboratories, and data and program management abilities. Brown and Caldwell did not submit the "winning bid" (Letter dated April 28, 1995 from Kinnetic Laboratories to Pat McGuigan, chairman of CSDOC's Operations Committee) to the original RFP. It may have been the lowest cost proposal, but the proposal must be evaluated on its technical merits rather than just cost. 4. DISTRICTS GAVE EIGHT WORKING DAYS TO RESPOND TO REVISED RFP The revised RFP is dated March 31, 1995; the panel understands that it was hand delivered to the bidders on that date. The bidders had 12 total days or eight working days to respond. This may not be an unreasonable amount of time if the bidder is motivated to obtain the contract. See section 5 paragraph 1 below. 5. DISTRICTS DEVELOPED REVISED RFP TO PRECLUDE ALL BIDDERS EXCEPT SAIC 1. Allowed only eight working days to respond to detail new RFP. The scope of work in ;...� the revised RFP is much more specific and detailed than the original RFP. For example, the revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph >1 Offshore Water Quality Monitoring provides a one page explanation of the water quality data that will be collected by CSDOC staff and given to the contractor for inclusion in the annual report. In the original RFP, this was covered in five lines with no further explanation (section V.B.1. Task A— Off-shore Water Quality Monitoring, page 9). The revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph 2 Benthic Monitoring states that "Physical and chemical analyses of sediment samples will be performed according to the procedures in the Districts' present OMP QAPP" (page 13). This provision was lacking in the original RFP. In paragraph 3) Trawling of the same section, it states that "Chemical analyses [of biological tissues]will be performed according to procedures detailed in the Districts' QAPP" (page 15). This provision was lacking in the original RFP. The revised RFP contains requirements for work that were not in the original RFP. For example, the revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph Offshore Water Quality Monitoring states that "..Districts' personnel will collect all surf zone bacteriological and grease and oil samples, that the Awarded Contractor will be required to integrate...into the OMP Annual Report" (page 12). The revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph 7) Addition Services e) Analysis of Panel Review-p. 7 4 Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) requires that "The Awarded Contractor will analyze CRM's [sic)for both tissues and sediment matrices" (page 20). The revised RFP is more specific on acceptable methods than the original RFP, and the revised RFP contains requirements that were not in the original RFP. These changes could affect the bidder's ability to obtain timely cost estimates for the revised proposal. Bidders responding with a full and complete proposal to the original RFP should have been positioned to respond quickly to the additional information required; two of the three original bidders were able to respond. However, some of the requirements in the revised RFP may have made it difficult for Brown and Caldwell to respond by the April 13 deadline. Specifically, the requirement that the taxonomic and chemical analyses be done within California (which the panel decided was an unreasonable criterion) would have required Brown and Caldwell to find new subcontractors before they rebid. 2. Disqualification of bidders that deviate from current OMP. The Year 10 QAPP was not supplied to the bidders with the original RFP, but the Year 9 QAPP was supplied. 3. Selection of proposal that Places the least burden on staff. This is not a reasonable criterion. The Districts only experience is with the existing contractor. Assessing the burden placed on staff by a new and unfamiliar contractor would be highly subjective. 4. Required detailed SOPS for chemistry and biology methods and data management. This is a reasonable criterion that is designed to ensure the continuity of data over the 11 years that the Districts' OMP has been operating. It would have been irresponsible of the Districts to ignore the methods of a new contractor and laboratory. Consultants actively engaged in this field should have standard operating procedures (SOPS) available for their clients. This requirement should have been contained in the original RFP. 5. Required chemical analyses and benthic sorting, and taxonomy to be done in California. These are not reasonable criteria. Any chemistry laboratory should be considered if it demonstrates that it consistently produces acceptable QA/QC results, meets acceptable levels of detection for all compounds and elements it measures, transports and analyses samples within the required holding time, and can produce data in the required time. Any taxonomy laboratory should be considered if it has taxonomic experts familiar with the fauna, can demonstrate that it can meet all of the QA1QC criteria, and can produce data in the required time. The criterion that the benthic samples be"...shipped once to a single laboratory..' (section VII.B. Biology paragraph B, page 29 in the revised RFP) is not reasonable. It is possible to ship samples to several laboratories and maintain data integrity. 6. Required experience with 301(h) isotope dilution. The revised RFP in section VII.A. Chemistry states "...that the proposed chemistry laboratory and its personnel have Panel Review-p. 8 8 current, relevant experience doing chemistry...analyses for all matrices...required of this OMP" (page 28). This is a reasonable criterion. 7. Requirement for voucher of 90% of species in study area. This criterion is not reasonable. It is reasonable to require that the bidder demonstrate their experience and knowledge of California soft-bottom invertebrate species and to have an in-house reference collection of soft-bottom fauna, but setting the voucher level at 90% is not reasonable —the voucher collection could represent the abilities of previous staff. Rather, the Districts should provide their voucher collection developed over the past 10 years to the successful bidder after the award of the contract to ensure that the taxonomists have the material they need. 8. Soecifications of the ocean vessel. Most of the specifications were reasonable. However, the revised RFP in section VII.C. Field Sampling requires the "Vessel [to] have a A-frame/hydraulic system capable of safely lifting a minimum of 2000 pounds" (page 30) is unreasonable. Vessels currently used in POTW ocean monitoring perform the same type of monitoring at similar depths without an A-frame. The Kinnetic vessel is small and accommodates a crew of 4-6 people. CSDOC would occasionally have more people on board and the boat would be crowded and the working space cramped, but it would be safe. 9. Cost not a factor in selection. The Districts' original RFP in section VI.D. Cost of Services states that the "Lowest price will not be the sole criteria [sic] used by the Districts for selecting the successful firm..." (their emphasis; page 12). The Districts' revised RFP in section VI.D. Cost of Services states that "Evaluation of the proposals...will be based upon technical merit and company qualifications...Proposed costs will be compared with an amount predetermined to be fair compensation for the Scope of Work..." (page 26). The original RFP was vague on how the Districts' staff would do the technical evaluation of the proposals. The original RFP referenced procedures established by CSDOC's Board of Directors, but it did not discuss the importance or method for the technical review. The revised RFP presented a more detailed evaluation procedure. 10. Used arbitrary and biased ranking criteria for selection. The ranking criteria for the proposals in Table 4 (page 36) of the Districts' revised RFP are not arbitrary in the sense that the categories are reasonable. It is reasonable to judge the proposals on responsiveness, program management, the QAIQC program, field sampling, laboratory analyses, data management, and reporting. Most of the "Examples of questions to be asked/answered for each area" (page 35) are reasonable. However, some of the questions are subjective and difficult to quantify. For example, "Can the company provide the necessary reports on time..'?" "Can the company provide the type of integrated report required by [the] Districts? Some of the questions are arbitrary; e.g., "Is the histopathologist experienced with...our species?' Panel Review-p. 9 e 6. PANEL CONCLUSIONS The original RFP was inadequate on technical specifications for the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program and it was vague on how the technical evaluation of the proposals would be handled. It appears that the shortcomings of the original RFP became apparent during CSDOC staff review of the proposals and staff was correct in rejecting all of the bids and starting over. • The Brawn and Caldwell proposal was deficient in several important areas. Brown and Caldwell did not demonstrate that they understood the scope of work for the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program. CSDOC staff was correct in finding that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the RFP. • Most of the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories in their letter to the CSDOC Operations Committee were without merit. However, a few of the requirements in the revised RFP were unreasonable and therefore, some of the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories were valid. VN alas County Sanitation Districts of Orange County :1 Listing of Changes Made To Proposed Budget c June 1995 c� Below is a listing of the additions/changes that have been made to the Proposed Budget: Subject Pages Listing of Administrative Officials Introduction General Mangers Budget Message-5 year trend chart on cost of processing wastewater. Section 1, Page 2 Fin.Overview&Budget Issues-Technical Services Department narrative added. Section 1, Page 20 Fin.Overview&Budget Issues- Privatization Efforts added. Secton 1, Page 20 Background Info. 8 Description of Services Section 1, Pages 22-23 Policies,Systems, and Process Fiscal Policies-Vechicle Replacement Policy added. Section 2, Page 3 Summary-All Districts Where The Money Comes From and Where The Money Goes charts added. Section 3, Page 1 DepartmendDivision Budgets(Section 5) Divisional Organization Chart changed. Section 5, Pages 45,69, 109 Staffing Trend Charts changed. Section 5, Pages 1, 9, 13, 17,21, 53,61,69,89, 105, 109 Budget Overview Changed Section 5, Pages 47,99 Expenditure Trends Changed Section 5, Pages 4, 12,48, 100 Sell Insurance Funds Public Liability Fund-Added 1993-94 Actuals column. Section 7, Page 2 Workers'Compensation Fund- Added 1993-94 Actuals column. Section 7, Page 3 Self-Funded Dental Plan-Added 1993-94 Actuals column. Section 7, Page 4 Joint Capital Improvement Program Joint Works Construction Requirements-added CIP Description(Column B) Section 8, Pages 4, 5,6,8 7 2020 Vision Constr. Requirements-added 2020 Vision ADP&Constr. Req. Projections. Section 8, Page 62 Proposed CORF Equip. Budget-added. Section 8, Page 64 Joint Works Capacity and Needs-added. Section 8, Page 65 Plant Capacity and Needs-added. Section 8, Page 66 Appendices `.J Index-Added. - Section 10, Pages 8,9 u Citizen's Comment Card To: Bl.t p.A ft. phone:(714)SB22411 x 2020 A smn[C mml Manager paper.pl4)2199509 County San U.oi.a of Ov W C..ty From: Iwdmal wcam.m ,.eam.. My comments concern the work at: My comments are: COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS W ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 103aa aLK aVFMIE June B, 1995 MINUS," Rax,ram vauay.rsuramaA ezaze-e,r. nm r�z�n MEMORANDUM TO: Don McIntyre General Manager THRU: Blake P. Anderson Assistant General Manager FROM: John D. Linder Director of Engineering RE: Request for Demolition Credit at 510 W. Chapman Avenue The purpose of this memorandum is to submit background regarding a request heard by the Boards of Directors at the May 24, 1995 regular Board meeting. The request was made by Jerome P. Greubel. The Sanitation Districts received a letter dated April 13, 1995 from Mr. Greubel requesting that the Sanitation Districts Capital Facilities Connection fee be waived for a property on Chapman Avenue. The letter explained that the property suffered a partial condemnation by the City of Orange around August 1990. By letter dated April 24, 1995, we responded to Mr. Greubel stating staff cannot waive the requirement for completing the start of new construction within two years of a demolition which is necessary to receive a demolition credit. The letter further stated that if a credit was requested, it should be addressed to the Board of Directors of CSD 2 and give specific reasons why new construction was not started within two years of the building's demolition. Mr. Greubel contacted Joe Rycraw and the undersigned after receipt of that letter and, in accordance with his request,we scheduled a time-extension to obtain the demolition credit for the May 24, 1995 Board meeting. Mr. Greubel was informed of this item via a letter dated May 3, 1995. Subsequently Tom Woodruff, General Counsel, by a memorandum dated May 17, 1995, fell that additional information originally requested was still needed and we informed Mr. Greubel that it would not be heard at the May 24 regular Board meeting. Mr. Greubel then appeared at the meeting to make a formal request. After the meeting, I spoke with Mr. Greubel. He indicated that he would furnish me with additional information regarding the request and the reasons why a demolition credit should be granted. To date, we have received nothing from Mr. Greubel. However, I had staff investigate the matter and here are the facts we discovered: 1. The property originally contained a walnut packing plant that was connected to the �„� sewer in 1912. Blake P. Anderson June 8, 1995 Page Two 2. The north portion of the property was condemned in 1990 for street right-of-way. At that time, the City of Orange offered to remodel the remaining portion of the building, or buy the entire site. The owner declined and the building was demolished. 3. Here, the facts are somewhat confusing. We have evidence from the City that the building was demolished by the owner in December 1988 and that could have occurred while negotiations were going on for the acquisition of the parcel. The plans for the road widening that the City used in the 1990 did not show the building. 4. It appears that Mr. Greubel purchased the property within the last two years. We say that because the ownership record in our file does not show Mr. Greubel as the owner. Mr. Greubel plans to develop a 2,000 sq. ft. 4-bay car wash, and he would then owe, under our ordinance, a Capital Facilities charge of$2,350, the minimum charge. As I stated, Mr. Greubel has furnished nothing in the way of information; we obtained these facts by visiting with the City of Orange and going through all records. The City adequately compensated the former owner for the site; we can see no reason why Mr. Greubel should be extended a demolition credit. The City staff concurs with our analysis. This information is being provided to Tom Woodruff. Tom will provide guidance as to an agenda item for the June 28 Board meeting. JDL:TMD:sI eng%Q2 1060995.ml c: Joe Rycraw Tom Dawes General Counsel June 20, 1995 MEMORANDUM TO: Donald F. McIntyre General Manager FROM: Edwin E. Hodges Director of Maintenance SUBJECT: June 28, 1995 Board Letter Item California Government Code Section 8574.20 deals with responding to Hazardous Material events. There are five levels of responders: First Responder Awareness Level, First Responder Operations Level, Hazardous Materials Technician Level, Hazardous Materials Specialist Level, and On-Scene Incident Commander. Currently, the Districts have personnel trained at the First Responder Awareness Level, First Responder Operations Level and On-Scene Incident Commander level. This past month, ten Districts personnel including the Directors of Engineering and Maintenance ` successfully completed the training at the On-Scene Incident Commander level. First responders at the awareness level are individuals who are likely to witness or discover a hazardous substance release. Although they are not expected to commence with defensive or offensive operations, these personnel are trained to report the incident to proper authorities, isolate the immediate site, deny entry to unauthorized persons and begin evacuation. First responders at the operations level are individuals who respond to the scene of emergencies that may involve hazardous materials. They are trained to respond in a defensive fashion without actually trying to stop releases within the"hot"zone. Their function is to contain the release from a safe distance, keep it from spreading, prevent exposures, implement the Incident Command System, summon a higher level of response when offensive operations are necessary, isolate the immediate site, deny entry to unauthorized persons, and evacuate the public. Incident Commanders will assume control of an incident beyond the first responder awareness level. Incident Commander duties include: all functions and roles listed for First Responder Awareness and First Responder Operations Levels, an understanding and ability to implement the Incident Command System, including the hazardous materials module, an understanding of the hazards and risks associated with employees working in chemical protective clothing, the knowledge and understanding of the importance of decontamination procedures, the ability to implement the Fire Service's Haz-Mat Emergency Response Plan, the knowledge of implementation procedures for the County Hazardous Materials Area Plan, and the knowledge of the State emergency response plan and of the Federal Regional Response Team. EEH:cm r AGENDA JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 - 7:30 P.M. j In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts'Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Boards f for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an j i emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the Districts subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a i supplemental agenda posted not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. I i .......................... (1) Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation (2) Roll call (3) 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) (4) Appointment of Chair pro tem, if necessary (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 Chair, 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). O6/28195 (6) The Joint Chair, 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 Chair, consideration of Resolutions or commendations, presentations and awards (b) Report of General Manager (c) 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 Chair. District 1 - May 24, 1995 regular District 2 - May 24. 1995 regular District 3 - May 24, 1995 regular District 5 - May 24, 1995 regular District 6 - May 24, 1995 regular District 7 - May 24, 1995 regular District 11 - May 24, 1995 regular District 13 - May 24, 1995 regular District 14 - May 24, 1995 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.) 05/31/95 14 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $1,404,438.38 $538,073.30 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 626,873.39 270,677.09 Joint Working Capital Fund - 226,361.10 196,842.70 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 15,309.90 19,976.94 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 5,032.64 DISTRICT NO, 2 - 11,241.23 52,026.71 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 182,577.61 230,137.88 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 6,901.50 4,458.23 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 0.00 3,402.12 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 8,659.04 4,464.37 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 53,020.33 20,464.11 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 186,212.03 17,295.25 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 2,739.48 2,061 .88 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 206.80 2,652.26 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 976.09 5,239.1 $2,725,516.88 $1 ,372,804.62 -2- 06/28/95 (9) CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS 9(a)THROUGH 9(n j All matters placed on the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered in the regular order !! of business. i I Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar shall, upon { recognition by the chair, slate their name, address and designate by letter the item to be 1 removed from the consent calendar. The Chair will determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. I 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 Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044, to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., for a total amount not to exceed $57,160.00, plus sales tax. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-56, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160, to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, for the discount price of $.0259/MMBTU, for a one year period beginning August 1, 1995 (Estimated annual cost not to exceed $900,000.00). (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-57, Supporting the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC); and appoint the Joint Chair as the primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as the alternate representative. (d) Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager, or his designee, 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and directing staff to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses Incurred. -3- 06/28/95 (9) DISTRICT 3- (CONSENT CALENDAR Continued) r (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file Summons 8 Complaint for Subrogation Recovery, 20th Century Insurance Company vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, at al., West Orange County Municipal Court Case No. 215248, relative to property damage sustained in connection with a Districts' vehicle, and authorize the District's General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the District. DISTRICT 5 (f) Consideration of the following actions re proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 5: (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-72-5, approving Agreement with the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, in connection with proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park Annexation, annexation of a 20-acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District. (2) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter dated May 22, 1995, from the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation requesting annexation of a 20-acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District, and consideration of Resolution No. 95.73-5, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 9- Crystal Cove State Park Annexation to county Sanitation District No. 5). END OF CONSENT CALENDAR (10) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any -4- O6/28/95 (11) ALL DISTRICTS Nominations for Joint Chair(Election to be held at regular July Board Meeting). (12) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Minutes of the Executive Committee (1) Receive and file draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 24, 1995. (2) Receive and file draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 1, 1995. (3) Receive and file draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 7, 1995. (4) Receive and file draft Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 14, 1995. (5) Receive and file draft Executive Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 21, 1995. (b) Consideration of the following actions recommended by said committees: (1) Consideration of motion authorizing the funding of$100,000.00 in the 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. (2) PDC95-21 Consideration of the following actions relative to Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2: (a) Verbal report of Director of Engineering (a) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (b) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-58, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2, to Margate Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$35,291,000.00. i -5- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 6] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 5) (b) (3) PDC95-22 Consideration of the following actions relative to the Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Planning, Design and Construction Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-59, approving Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for said services on an hourly- rate basis for labor plus overhead, subwnsultant fees and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $193,100.00. (4) OMTS95-029 Consideration of motion adopting a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts' owned and/or Operated Systems. (5) OMTS95-030 Consideration of the following actions relative to Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc. for environmental consulting services to assist staff on NPDES Permit activities; regulatory and legislative liaison activities; and for technical support for sludge management, air quality, reclamation and conservation issues and in connection with CEQA compliance for Master Plan projects, providing for a six-month extension of the agreement: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with K P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said services. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-60, approving Addendum No. 3 to said agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said services, providing for a six-month extension of said agreement, on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, plus direct expenses, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500.00. [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 7] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 6) (b) (6) OMTS95-033 Consideration of the following actions relative to agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Oulfall, Specification No. P-156R: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee certification of the negotiated fee with SAIC. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-61, approving agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, for the period July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, with option for two one-year extensions, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463.00. (7) OMTS95-035 Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in an amount not to exceed $250,000.00 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995-96, estimated as follows: Tyne of Fee Amount Annual Emissions $85,000.00 Operating Permits 50,000.00 CARS Emissions 20,000.00 Compliance Source Testing 20.000.00 Permit & Plan Applications 60,000.00 Miscellaneous 15,000.00 TOTAL $250.000.00 (8) Consideration of motion ratifying Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement with PaineWebber providing that if the Certificates of Participation are converted to a fixed rate of interest mode, "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable [remarketing agent's] fee". (9) FAHR95-26 Consideration of motion authorizing the Districts' Insurance Broker, Robert F. Driver Associates, to place All-Risk Property Insurance Coverage for 1995-96, as follows: -7- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 8] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 7) (b) (9) 1995-96 PROGRAM TERMS: All-Risk Insurance including earthquake and flood, personal property and business interruption. Total Asset Value $1,375,032,593 COVERAGE: All-Risk $200,000,000 Earthquake: CSDOC 30,000,000 DEDUCTIBLE: All Perils $25.000 Earthquake 5% Per Unit, $250,000 min. PREMIUM: '$1,358,000 'Plus taxes and fees of$33,456 (10) FAHR95-29 Consideration of the following actions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program: (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-75, approving Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company, to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-76, approving Professional Services Agreement with Mellon Trust Company, to serve as master custodial services bank, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in forth approved by General Counsel. (11) FAHR95-30 Consideration of motion approving the following revisions to MPRP (Management Performance Review Plan) Performance Incentive Values: (a) Effective July 1995, authorize funds totaling $173.000 beyond the 3.0% of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. (b) Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0% of payroll (totaling $453,000) for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst &Young. (c) Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program as recommended by Ernst &Young. -8- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 9] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 8) (b) (12) EXEC95-01 Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated June 14, 1995 re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving, in concept, the consolidation of the Boards; and authorizing staff and General Counsel to proceed with additional studies. (13) EXEC95.03 Consideration of Resolution No. 95-62, amending Resolution No. 95.9, authorizing the General Manager to approve expenditure of funds up to $50,000.00 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements governed by Resolution No. 95-9. (14) Roll call vote motion approving proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets Funds, as follows: Fund Total Amount Joint Works Operating/Working Capital $ 54.380,000 Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 (15) Individual District Budgets: (a) Verbal report of General Manager/Director of Engineering re proposed fiscal year 1995-96 budgets (b) DISTRICT 1 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,809,000 Capital Facilities Fund 10,904,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 8,872,000 TOTAL $33.585.000 (c) DISTRICT 2 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $53.245.000 Capital Facilities Fund 60,455.000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 24,024,000 TOTAL S 137.724.000 -9- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 101 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 9) (b) (15) (d) DISTRICT 3 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $65,946,000 Capital Facilities Fund 61,204.000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 22,459,000 TOTAL $149,609,000 (e) DISTRICT 5 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,415,000 Capital Facilities Fund 14,361,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 5,674,000 TOTAL $33,450,000 (f) DISTRICT 6 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $12,073,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,473,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 2,964,000 TOTAL $22,510,000 (g) DISTRICT 7 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $21,726,000 Capital Facilities Fund 17,604,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 7,323,000 TOTAL $46,653,000 -10- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 11] "" 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 10) (b) (15) (h) DISTRICT 11 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,801,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,920,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 5,054,000 Bond & Interest Fund- 1958 33 000 TOTAL $28,808,000 (i) DISTRICT 13 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $2,046,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,511,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 27,000 TOTAL $9,584,000 () DISTRICT 14 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $3,521,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,601,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 158,000 TOTAL $13,280,000 (16) DISTRICTS 1. 2. 3, 5. 6. 7 & 11 (ONLY) Consideration of the following resolutions selecting the annual change in California per capita personal income as the cost-of-living adjustment factor, and establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for each District in accordance with the provisions of Division 9 of Title 1 of the California Government Code: DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. LIMITATION 1 95-63-1 $2,760,000 2 95-64-2 10,548,000 3 95-65-3 14.521.000 5 95-66-5 2.604.000 6 95-67-6 1,689,000 7 95-68-7 4,805,000 11 95-69-11 3,142,000 -11- 06/28/95 (13) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion delegating authority to the Planning, Design and Construction Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for actions required to solicit, negotiate, award and issue purchase orders to various vendors for Modifications to the Existing Interior Office Spaces in the Administration Building for the General Management Administration and Communication Offices (Specification No. E-256), in an amount not to exceed $165,250.00. (14) ALL DISTRICTS Update by Staff and Consultants concerning developments related to the County's Commingled Investment Pool. (15) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of the following actions relative to Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid): (a) Verbal report of Director of Engineering (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-70, approving Amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company, providing for time constraints and Surety's right to perform work. (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-71, receiving and fling bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), to Colich Brothers, Inc., dba Colich 8 Sons in the total amount of$298,700.00. (16) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of the following actions relative to introduction and adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 126, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early: (a) Verbal report of General Counsel (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated June 22, 1995. (c) Consideration of motion to read said Ordinance No. 126 by title only, and waive reading of entire ordinance (must be adopted by unanimous vote of Directors present). (d) Consideration of roll call vote motion adopting Ordinance No. 126, as an urgency measure to be effective immediately[requires four affirmative votes of Directors]. -12- 06/28/95 (17) DISTRICTS 13 & 14 Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed Ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: (a) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: (1) Consideration of motion to read Ordinance No. 1315 by title only and waive reading of said entire ordinance (must be adopted by unanimous vole of Directors present). (2) Consideration of motion adopting Ordinance No. 1315. (b) DISTRICT 14 Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: (1) Consideration of motion to read Ordinance No. 1407 by title only and waive reading of said entire ordinance (must be adopted by unanimous vote of Directors present). (2) Consideration of motion adopting Ordinance No. 1407. (18) ALL DISTRICTS I I CLOSED SESSION: During the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Boards,the Chair may convene the I Boards in closed session to consider matters of pending or potential litigation,or j i 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 ipending or potential litigation; (c)employment actions or negotiations with i employee representatives;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 Boards on any of these subjects,the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. (a) Convene in closed session, if necessary -13- [ITEM (18) CONTINUED ON PAGE 14] 06/28/95 (18) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 13) (b) (1) Confer with Districts' representatives (General Manager,General Cours Dnector of — Peraonnel and Director of Finance) concerning status of negotiations with employee group representatives on salaries, benefits and terns of employment, (a) Confidential Employees (2) Confer with Special Counsel David Griffin re status of litigation, County Sanitation District No. 3 v. United Technologies Corp., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 722816 (c) Reconvene in regular session (d) Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in dosed session (19) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (20) ALL DISTRICTS Matters which a Director would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting (21) ALL DISTRICTS Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report (22) DISTRICT 1 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (23) DISTRICT 1 — Consideration of motion to adjourn (24) DISTRICT 2 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (25) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn (26) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of the following actions relative to Los Alamitos County Water District's request for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3: (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file letters dated March 9, 1995 and June 8, 1995 from the Los Alamitos County Water District requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. (b) Verbal report of General Counsel (c) Presentation by Los Alamitos County Water District (d) Discussion (e) Consideration of motion denying request of Los Alamitos County Water District -or- (f) Consideration of motion approving request of Los Alamitos County Water District -14- 06/28/95 (27) DISTRICT 3 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (28) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to adjourn (29) DISTRICT 5 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (30) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn (31) DISTRICT6 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (32) DISTRICT6 Consideration of motion to adjourn (33) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of the following actions relative to Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24: (a) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (b) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specficalions for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-74-7, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, to Callon Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$1,391,195.00. (34) DISTRICT 7 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (35) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn (36) DISTRICT 11 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (37) DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion to adjourn -15- 06/28/95 (38) DISTRICT 13 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (39) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of motion to adjourn (40) DISTRICT 14 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (41) DISTRICT 14 Consideration of motion to adjourn i NOTICE TO DIRECTORS: To place items on the agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Joint i Boards, Directors shall submit items to the Board Secretary not later than the close of business 14 days preceding the Joint Board meeting. The Board Secretary shall include on the agenda all items i submitted by Directors, the General Manager and General Counsel and all formal communications. Board Secretary: Penny Kyle (714) 962-2411, ext. 2026 Secretary: Patricia L. Jonk (714) 962-2411, ext. 2029 -16- aas i _ r COUNTY SANITATION u DISTRICTS NOS. 1 , 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 , 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES JOINT BOARD MEETING MAY 24, 1995 .✓ Np\SIWCTS pfo 5e `� "o G z � v a ww •.09 CJ p ��. - F�l�NG THE ENS\Pp� ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 u ROLL CALL s A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Dlstricte Noe. 1, 2, 3, 5, B, 7. 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, Was held on May 24, 1885. at 7:30 p.m., In the Districts'Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was celled and the Secretary reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5,6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 as follows: �ar/f ACTIVE ALTERNATE DIRECTORS DIRECTORS DISTRICT NO.l: v Pat McGuigan,Chair _ Ted R.Morena James M.Ferryman.Chair Pro tam _ Arthur Perry y Meek A.Murphy — Joanne Copnu �It Thomas R.Seltarelli Jim Pous g Royer Stanton Wiliam G.Steiner DISTRICT NO.2: ._ John Collins,Chair George Soon x Daniel T.Welch, CMir pro tam JPM M.Gullisson 1� Barry Dams Bob Bell g Burnie Dunlap Glenn Parker Norman Z.Eckenrode Carol Demos James H.Flora _L_ Stave Anderson 1_ Pat McGuigan Ted R.Moreno x Mark A.Murphy Joanna Coonte JL� Julie So Came Neray x_ Sheldon Singer George L.Zoltat y Royer Suntan _ Wiliam G.StNmr Bob Zemel Tom Dely DISTRICT NO.3: Sol A.Sooner, Chair He"M.Dotson �L Burnie Dunlap. Chair pro tam Glenn Parker Cealka Age Welter Bowman George Brown Frank Laeelo _a_ John Collins George Bob" James H.Flora 1 Sieve Anderson Don R.Griflin _ Pony MarsMll vicmr Wo ly Ralph Bauer is Welly Lim Eye G.Miner y Pat McGuigan Tad R.Morom Margie L.Nice Grace Epperson `y 3� Julia Sa Chris Noray Sheldon Singer George L.Zlakat j, Roger Stamen Wiliam G.Steiner 3 Charles Sylvia Reach WeN.Ime Bob Zemel Tom OSIsy DISTRICT NO.B: Joe Deasy,CMir Joe C.Cps.Jr. William G.SMner,Chair pro tam .L Boost Stanton Joan C.Ces,Jr. An Deasy DISTRICT NO.B: James M.Ferryman.Chair Arthur Petry Jan Deasy.CMIr pro tam John C.Cos,Jr. William G.Stainer y Royer Suntan DISTRICT NO.7: Barry Hammond,Chair Mika Want y Thomas R.Stearns,Chair pro tam it.Pone Joe Decay _ John C.Cos.Jr. James M.Ferryman Anne,Perry Pat McGuigan Tad R.Monet Mark A.Murphy Joanne Coon" W Iliam G.Steiner y Roger Stanton DISTRICT NO. 11: �{� veneer Leiarno,Choir Ralph Bauer Shirlsy Motion,Chair We tam Ralph Bauer Royer Stamen Wiliam G. Steiner DISTRICT NO. 13: x John M.Galilsso r.Chair Daniel T.Welch Bob Zemel,CMir pro tam Tom Daly * Mark A.Murphy Jeanne Coon" * Glenn Parker Burnie Dunlap W Illam G. SMiner Roper Stanton DISTRICT NO. 14: x Thomas R.Batteries,Chair Jim Pond Mark A.Murphy.Cher pro tam Jeanne C4pnD �k x Barry Hammond Mike Ward _ Wiliam G.Steiner Roger Stamen y. Peer A.Swan (MINI Miller .2. i 0 05/24/95 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager, Blake Anderson, v Assistant General Manager, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary, John Cattle, Gary Hasenstab, Irwin Haydock, Ed Hodges, Patricia Jonk, John Linder, Charles McGee, Pat McNally, Mike Moore, Bob Ooten, Misha Rozengurt, Gary Streed, Ed Torres OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Jamel Demir, Mary Lee, Phil Stone DISTRICT 1 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual Election of Chair and Chair Pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tern of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tern of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1. It was then moved: That Director Pal McGuigan be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director McGuigan as Chair. It was further moved: That Director James M. Ferryman be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Ferryman as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 2 This being the annual meeting at which elections V Annual election of Chair and Chair Pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair 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 Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Collins as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Daniel T. Welch be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Welch as Chair pro tem. -3- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 3 This being the annual meeting at which elections `..� Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tern of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. It was then moved: That Director Sal A. Sapien be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Sapien as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Burnie Dunlap be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Dunlap as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 5 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. S. It was then moved: That Director Jan Debay be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vole was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Debay as Chair. It was further moved: That Director William G. Steiner be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Steiner as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 6 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6. It was then moved: That Director James M. Ferryman be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Ferryman as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Jan Debay be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Debay as Chair pro tem. .�. -4- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 7 This being the annual meeting at which elections v Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tern of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7. It was then moved: That Director Barry Hammond be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vole was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Hammond as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Thomas R. Saltarelli be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Saltarelli as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 11 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair Pro tern are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11. It was then moved: That Director Victor Leipzig be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Leipzig as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Shirley Dettloff be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Dettloff as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 13 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tern are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair 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 Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Gullixson as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Bob Zemel be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Zemel as Chair pro tem. �..� -5- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 14 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tern are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14. It was then moved: That Director Thomas R. Saltarelli be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Saltarelli as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Mark A. Murphy be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Murphy as Chair pro tem. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chair recognized Mr. Jerry Grubel, a Recognition of Persons who wish to be property owner in the City of Orange and within heard on matters of general interest District No. 2. He requested a waiver of connection fees for a parcel at the comer of Pixley and Chapman Avenue because connection fees were apparently paid in 1914. The property was condemned and demolished in 1989 by the City of Orange for a street-widening project. Mr. Grubel is now in the process of rebuilding. However, the City will not issue the building permit until a new connection fee has been paid. General Counsel stated that he and the Director of Engineering were familiar with this issue and had been working on getting it resolved. Calculations are needed based on the ordinance in �.,.� effect and the square footage of the new project. In addition, the actual date of demolition is needed to determine if the applicant is late in his request for a waiving of fees which would violate the ordinance in effect. The ordinance provides that if someone wishes to come in and obtain a permit for a new facility, the application must be made within two years of the date of demolition of the old unit. Mr. Woodruff also stated that the Districts have had similar Issues previously. Fees are set forth in an ordinance and Districts' Staff and Directors do not have the authority to waive the ordinance. The ordinance would have to be amended to do so. The Districts do not have a variance procedure in their statutes and ordinances. The Joint Chair then suggested that Mr. Grubel meet with the Director of Engineering after the meeting to see if the issue could be resolved. -8- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chair advised the Directors that l� Report of the Joint Chair orientation meetings and plant tours were scheduled to be held on Saturday, June 3rd and June 17th. He encouraged all Directors to attend. Mr. Cox also commented that tours to observe off-shore testing facilities were being scheduled aboard the Districts' monitoring vessel, Enchanter. Any Directors interested were advised to contact the General Manager. Joint Chair Cox then announced the following tentatively scheduled upcoming meetings as follows: Planning, Design and Construction Committee-Thursday, June 1st, at 5:30 p.m. Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees- Following the July meeting of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee - Wednesday, June 7th, at 5:30 p.m. Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee-Wednesday, June 141h, at 5:30 p.m. Executive Committee - Wednesday, June 21 st, at 5:30 p.m. ALL DISTRICTS The General Manager commented on items that Report of the General Manager should not have been on the agenda as the items are less than $50,000 and need authorization only from the Planning, Design and Construction Committee. ALL DISTRICTS The General Counsel reported on the Association Report of the General Counsel of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) conference he recently attended, along with the General Manager and Assistant General Manager. He reported that the Clean Water Act would probably not be approved this year. DISTRICT 1 There being no corrections or amendments to the Aooroval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -7- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 3 There being no corrections or amendments to the u Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 6 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 7 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 11 There being no corrections or amendments to the Aooroval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. �...� DISTRICT 13 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held March 8, 1995, the special meetings held March 29, 1995 and April 12, 1995, and the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 14 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held March 8, 1995, the special meetings held March 29, 1995 and April 12, 1995, and the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -8- 05/24/95 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 exhibits "A", "B", "C", "O", "E"and"F" 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. o3roa�ss g wms�ss 041199s DISTRICT NO.13 - 0.00 O.OD 0.00 W.01 DISTRICT NO.14 - 227,6S4.01 2,575.00 347,572.25 5,826.77 DISTRICTS NOS.7&14 JOINT - 77�.94 01.17 fi�.10 691.17 4 265.17 231 � .Zis 05/03/95 0517 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $804,262.45 $449,899.42 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 405,563.40 471,447.11 Joint Working Capital Fund - 210,240.65 464,347.47 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 78,626.43 4,042.26 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 7,065.63 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 25,478.88 69,850.90 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 55,381.28 167,012.17 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 6,706.64 6,429.09 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 4,672.86 0.00 v DISTRICT NO. 7 - 7,420.18 17,345.53 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 42,016.27 5,164.82 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 101.37 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 119,681.33 2.180.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 3 & 11 JOINT - 2,500.00 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 0.00 2,637.94 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 210.71 3,161.28 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 19.79 26. 21.73 $1.769.947.87 $1,669,739.72 '9' 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to issue a Purchase order to Pioneer-Standard Electronics, Inc.. That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue a for the Purchase of Eight Celebris 590 purchase order to Pioneer-Standard Electronics, Desktop Computers, Specification Inc., In a total amount of$36,342.72, plus sales tax, No. E-255 for the Purchase of Eight Celebris 590 Desktop Computers, Specification No. E-255, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Multiple Awards Schedule Program of the Stale of California and State of California Contract No. 3-94-70-0037A. Director Mark A. Murphy requested that his abstention from voting on this Item be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive, file and approve staff Summary Financial Report for nine-month Period That the staff Summary Financial Report for the ending March 31, 1995 nine-month period ending March 31, 1995, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee That the draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held on April 26, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for That the draft minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Administrative Employees Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees meeting held on April 26, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Operations Maintenance and Technical That the draft minutes of the Operations, Services Committee Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting held on May 3, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. �" -10- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: V Receive and file draft minutes of the Planning. Design and Construction That the draft minutes of the Planning, Design and Committee Construction Committee meeting held on May 4, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Finance Administrative and Human That the draft minutes of the Finance, Resources Committee Administrative and Human Resources Committee meeting held on May 10, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Executive Committee That the draft minutes of the Executive Committee meeting held on May 17, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-023) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing a 1995 Summer Work Program That a 1995 Summer Work Program for painting and grounds maintenance and other miscellaneous work, be, and is hereby, authorized. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-024) Awardino Marine Monitoring Vessel for Moved, seconded and duly carried: Surveying Coastal Waters. Specification No. P-158. to Enchanter. Inc. That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-49, awarding contract for Marine Monitoring Vessel for Surveying Coastal Waters, Specification No. P-158, to Enchanter, Inc. for the period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996, for an annual amount not to exceed $100,800.00, with provisions for two one-year extensions. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -11- 05/24/95 �../ ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-025) Actions re Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey Authorizing the Districts' participation Moved, seconded and duly carried: in the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Proied (SMBRP) epidemiological That the Districts' participation in the Santa Monica survey Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey, be, and is hereby, authorized. Authorizing the General Manager Moved, seconded and duly carried: to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SMBRP That the General Manager be, and is hereby, and to enter into a contract with the authorized to enter into a Memorandum of State Water Resources Control Board Understanding (MOU)with SMBRP; and, (SWRCB) FURTHER MOVED: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a contract with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)to implement said MOU and to reimburse the Districts for an amount not to exceed$180,000.00 for costs associated with labor and materials to analyze virus samples and continue in-house efforts during this project period through a Specific Term Employment Agreement, in form approved by General Counsel. Authorizing the General Manager Moved, seconded and duly carried: to enter into a six-month Specific Term Employment Agreement for a That the General Manager be, and is hereby, Laboratory Analyst authorized to enter into a six-month Specific Tenn Employment Agreement for a Laboratory Analyst, at a rate not to exceed $25.00 per hour, for a total amount not to exceed $26,000.00. Authorizing the General Manager Moved, seconded and duly carried: to enter into additional contracts. as necessary, to implement the terms of That the General Manager be, and is hereby, the MOU authorized to enter into additional contracts, as necessary, with no increase in the authorized amount of$180,000.00 to implement the terms of the MOU. -12- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-16) Actions re Warehouse Building at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-35-2: Maintenance Building at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-35-3: Process Area Fire Protection. Sionane and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 2. Job No. P246: and Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2. Specification Nos. M-044 (Rebid) and M-044-1 Separating Specification No. M-044 Moved, seconded and duly carried: (Rebid) from balance of the project That Office Trailer Relocations at Plants Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), is hereby authorized to be separated from the balance of the project for Warehouse Building at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-35-2; Maintenance Building at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-35-3; and Process Area Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-46. Approving plans and specifications Moved, seconded and duly carried: re Specification No. M-044 (Rebid) That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 9550, approving plans and specifications for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-17) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 6 to the Plans and specifications for Job No. P1-38-2 That Change Order No. 6 to the plans and specifications for Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. 131-38-2, authorizing a net addition of$34,878.00 to the contract with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for five items of additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (POC95-18) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 7 to the plans and specifications for Job No. P2-42-2 That Change Order No. 7 to the plans and specifications for Secondary Treatment Expansion at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-42-2, authorizing an addition of$31,673.00 to the contract with Margate Construction, Inc. for two items of additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. -13- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-19) Moved, seconded and duly carried: V►' Aoorovina Chanae Order No. 5 to the Plans and specifications for Job Nos. P1-36-1, That Change Order No. 5 to the plans and P1-38-1: P1-38.4: and P243-3 specifications for Electrification of Pump Drives at Treatment Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-1; Security and Landscaping Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P7-38-1; Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-384; and Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-43-3, authorizing a net addition of$40,069.00 to the contract with Advanco Constructors, Inc., Division of Zum Constructors, Inc., for 13 items of additional or deleted work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-14) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Lee That the Planning, Design and Construction & Ro Consultina Engineers. Inc. re Job Committee certification of the final negotiated fee Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46 relative to Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Lee& Ro Consulting Engineers, Inc. for preparation of a project report, preliminary design, plans and specifications and providing construction support services relative to Process Area Fire Protection Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-38-5, and Process Area Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P246, providing for additional design services and construction support services, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95.51, approving `...� Addendum No. 2 to said agreement with Lee & Ro Consulting Engineers, Inc. for said additional services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $186,670.00, increasing the total authorized compensation from an amount not to exceed $523,640.00 to an amount not to exceed $710,310.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95.20) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 4 to the Professional Services Aareement with John That the Planning, Design and Construction Carollo Engineers re Job Nos. P1-36 and Committee certification of the final negotiated fee P242 relative to Addendum No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design and construction services, preparation of operations and maintenance manuals, and training services re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P11-36, and Secondary Treatment Expansion at Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-42, providing for additional construction support and programming of process control equipment and computers, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-52, approving Addendum No. 4 to said agreement with John Carollo Engineers for said additional services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses and fixed profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $750,215.00, increasing the total authorized compensation from an amount not to exceed $5,889,150.00 to an amount not to exceed $6,639,365.00. `►1 -14- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS (FPC95-16) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approvina Final Draft Investment Policy Statement prepared by Chandler Liquid That the Final Draft Investment Policy Statement Asset Manaaement Inc. and Callan prepared by Chandler Liquid Asset Management, Associates Inc. and Callan Associates, Districts' investment advisors, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR95-24) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Extending Early Retirement Incentive Program Provisions for all eligible Districts' That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt employees Resolution No. 95-53, extending Early Retirement Incentive Program Provisions for all eligible Districts' employees. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS fFAHR95-25) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adopting Resolution Providing for Classification. Compensation and other That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Terms. Conditions. Rules and Regulations Resolution No. 95-54, Providing for Classification, of Employment of Districts' Employees. and Compensation and Other Terms, Conditions, Rules Repealing Resolution Nos. 79-20 and 79-21 and Regulations of Employment of Districts' Employees, and Repealing Resolution Nos. 79-20 and 79-21, as amended. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported that his office had Status Report re County's Commingled received invoices for services through March 1995 Investment Pool from the Districts' bankruptcy counsel, Bronson, Bronson and McKinnon. The gross charges were $238,704.00. From that sum, General Counsel has deducted $17,557.00, most of which should have been charged to the Investment Pool Committee and not the Districts. The total charges from General Counsels office were $74,153.00. General Counsel also reported that he sent a letter to Bronson, Bronson and McKinnon dated May 17, 1995, advising them that their services would only be needed on a specific requested issue basis. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Changing the Regular Joint Board meeting date due to the Thanksgiving holiday That the change in the Regular Joint Board meeting date from Wednesday, November 22, 1995 to Wednesday, November 15, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. due to the Thanksgiving Holiday, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Changina the Regular Joint Board meeting date due to the Christmas holiday That the change in the Regular Joint Board meeting date from Wednesday, December 27, 1995 to Wednesday, December 13, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. due to the Christmas Holiday, be, and is hereby, approved. 15 05/24/95 DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second readina of proposed Ordinance No. 125 That proposed Ordinance No. 125, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 125 by title only. DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adoptina Ordinance No. 125 roll call vole: AYES: Pat McGuigan, Chair, James M. Ferryman, Mark A. Murphy, Thomas R. Sallarelli NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 125, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. ``..� DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 219 That proposed Ordinance No, 219, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 219 by title only. "� -16- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following `../ Adootino Ordinance No. 219 roll call vote: AYES: John Collins, Chair, Steve Anderson, Barry Denes, Norman Z. Eckenrode, Pat McGuigan, Mark A. Murphy, Julie Be, Sheldon S, Singer, Daniel T. Welch, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Burnie Dunlap, Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 219, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of Proposed Ordinance No. 322 That proposed Ordinance No. 322, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 322 by title only. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adopting Ordinance No. 322 roll call vote: AYES: Sal A. Sapien, Chair, Steve Anderson, George Brown, John Collins, Don R. Griffin, Victor Leipzig, Wally Linn, Pat McGuigan, Margie L. Rice, Julie Be, Sheldon S. Singer, Charles E. Sylvia, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Cecilia L. Age, Burnie Dunlap, Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 322, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. -17- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second readina of proposed Ordinance No. 531 That proposed Ordinance No. 531, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 531 by title only. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adoatina Ordinance No. 531 roll call vote: AYES: Jan Debay, Chair, John C. Cox, Jr. NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: William G. Steiner That Ordinance No. 531, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. `.: DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of Proposed Ordinance No. 625 That proposed Ordinance No. 625, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 625 by title only. DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adootina Ordinance No. 625 roll call vote: AYES: James M. Ferryman, Chair, Jan Debay NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: William G. Steiner That Ordinance No. 625, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. � -18- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 732 That proposed Ordinance No. 732, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 732 by fitle only. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the Adopting Ordinance No. 732 following roll call vote: AYES: Barry Hammond, Chair, Jan Debay, James M. Ferryman, Pat McGuigan, Mark A. Murphy,Thomas R. Saltarelli NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: William G. Steiner That Ordinance No. 732, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of Proposed Ordinance No. 1121 That proposed Ordinance No. 1121, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 1121 by title onty. -19- 05/24/95 �.d DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the AdoWina Ordinance No. 1121 following roll call vote: AYES: Victor Leipzig, Chair, Shirley Dettloff NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 1121, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICTS 13 & 14 Actions re first reading and public hearing of proposed ordinances Establishina Excess Capacity Charge Program Public hearino The Joint Chair announced that this was the time and place fixed by the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 13 and 14 for the public hearing on the following proposed Ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: .�. District Ordinance No. 13 1315 14 1407 Open Public Hearing The Chair declared the hearing open at 8:04 p.m. Verbal report of General Counsel General Counsel reported that the public hearing was continued to this date for Districts Nos. 13 and 14 due to a lack of a quorum at last month's meeting. The excess capacity charges are identical and structured the same as in the other Districts. Close hearino There being no public comments, the Chair declared the hearing closed at 8:05 p.m. "✓ -20- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 13 v Actions re first readino and introduction of Ordinance No. 1315 First readinc of proposed Ordinance Moved, seconded and duly carried by unanimous No 1315 vote: That proposed Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only and that reading of said ordinance in its entirety be waived. Following the reading of Ordinance No. 1315 by title only, it was moved, seconded and duly carried: That Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be introduced and passed to second reading and adoption on June 28, 1995. DISTRICT 14 Actions re first readino and introduction of proposed Ordinance No. 1407 First reading of proposed Moved, seconded and duly carried by unanimous Ordinance No. 1407 vote: �..� That proposed Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only and that reading of said ordinance in its entirety be waived. Following the reading of Ordinance No. 1407 by title only, it was moved, seconded and duly carried: That Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be introduced and passed to second reading and adoption on June 28, 1995. Director Roger R. Stanton arrived at 8:07 p.m. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported to the Directors the General Counsel's Comments Prior to Closed need for a closed session as authorized by Session Government Code Sections 54956.9 and 54957.6 to discuss and consider the items that are specified as Items 19(b)(3) and (5) on the published Agenda. No other items would be discussed or acted upon. _41_ ..� 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Convene in closed session Pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 and The Boards convened in closed session at 54957.6 8:06 p.m. pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 and 54957.6. Confidentis 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. No actions were taken re Agenda Items 19(b)(3) and (5). ALL DISTRICTS At 8:14 p.m., the Boards reconvened in regular Reconvene in regular session session. DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 P.M. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 P.M. �.,.� DISTRICT 3 Actions re Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R Approving Addendum No. 1 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications That Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R, changing the date for receipt of bids from April 11, 1995 to April 25, 1995, and making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. V -22- 05/24/95 Awardina Contract No 3-36R to Albert W. Moved, seconded and duly carried: Davies. Inc. That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-55-3, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R, to Albert W. Davies, Inc. in the total amount of$3,760,000.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 P.M. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. -23- 05/24/95 `✓ DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approvina Chanae Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Contract No. 14-1-1A That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Baker-Gisler Interceptor, from Fairview Road to Plant No. 1, Contract No. 14-1-1 A, for an addition of$33,676.16 to the contract with Mladen Buntich Construction Co., Inc., for twelve items of additional work, and granting a time extension of two calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. ,,(,�filu Secretary of th oarKif Directors of County Sa ion Wricts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 "� -24- FUND NO 9199 - JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/07/95 PAGER COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY REPORT NUMBER AP43 CLAIMS PAID 03106195 POSTING DATE 03/08195 m SUMMARY AMOUNT x S p1 OPER FUND 1P p2 OPER FUND 23,340.18 02 CAP FAC FUND 359,084.39 "1 #3 OPER FUND 9 03 CAP FAC FUND 0.974.7 6 6 0.974.78 I 05 OPER fUN0 10.599.i8 p8 OPER FUND 271.79 p7 OPER FUND 4.02.22 07 CAP FAC FUND 280.00 411 OPER FUND 13.887.30 011 CAP FAC FUND r 019 OPER FUND 2.203.01 014 CAP FAC FUND p586 OPER FUND 3,339.80 $227,694.01 p887 OPER FUN 07914 0PER FUND 7,74894 7.748.94 JTOPERFUND 1,045,932.70 $235.442.95 CORF 245.680,50 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 15,187.62 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 243,761.50 $2.824.935.58 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 031IM5 PAGE 7 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 030V95 POSTING DATE 0302795 SUMMARY AMOUNT 02 OPER FUND $20D.00 42 CAP FAC FUND 19774.43 X 43 OPER FUND 31.003 67 x 93 CAP FAC FUND 0.525.90 45 OPER FUND 9.055,45 m 95 CAP FAC FUND 575.00 47 OPER FUND 1.707.35 1p 97 CAP FAC FUND 23.IWA I 411 OPER FUND 007.35 $14 CAP FAC FUND 2.575.00 $Z $75.UU 0596 CAP FAC FUND - - -- -------- 20,062.50 '691.17 4697 OPER FUND 453.60 07914 OPER FUND 691.1] JT OPER FUND 544,000.97 ALL66.17 CORP 464,079.43 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 30,723.70 JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL 435,300.29 $1.613.346.19 F(NONO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE MOMS PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAID04M0 S POSTINGDATEOMB5W5 WARRANT NO, VENDOR AMOUNT 144087 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $280.93 PARCEL SERVICES 1440M UNITED SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS $127.32 LAB SUPPLIES 144089 DATAVAULTSIUS SAFE DEPOSIT CO. $1,498.00 SAFE DEPOSIT BOX RENTAL I"D90 VWR SCIENTIFIC $1,356.44 LAB SUPPLIES 144091 VALLEY CRIES SUPPLY CO. $405.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144092 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $10,796.47 LAB EQUIPMENT 144NG VERTEX SYSTEMS $3.155.01 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT m 1440M CARL WARREN B CO. $494.99 INSURANCE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR y 144095 WAXIE $2.154.08 JANRORIAL SUPPLIES 144M WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $37.015.28 CAUSTIC SODA 8 HYPOCHLORIDE M.0.8.12-92 8 4-13-N 144097 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. 11873.95 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES y 144098 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL $71.882.37 TRICK PARTS 144099 WESTTECH $13.640.82 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1441M ROURKE.WOODRUFF B SPRADLIN $47,752.52 LEGAL SERVICES MO.2-MI12 144101 WOODWARD GOVERNOR CO. $3.138.00 MECHANICAL REPAIR$ 1M102 XEROX CORP. $11,333.88 COPIER LEASES 2,111,559.57 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $1,632,89 02 OPER FUND 5,324.87 /2 CAP FAC FUND 6B 646.75 /3 OPER FUND 29,984.95 03 CAP FAC FUND 10, 45.34 05OPER FUND 4.197.37 05 CAP FAC FUND 87,194.82 08 OPER FUND 48.00 47 OPER FUND 21,38871 07 CAP FAC FUND 9.376,83 611 OPER FUND 9.964.32 /11 PFAC FUND 114,46944 i140PER FUND 688.00 I $397r$72.25 014 CAR FAC FUND 348.BB4 25 6,659.10 0588OPER FUND 2,535.10 088T OPER FUND __ 3.134.87 $j54.231.35 /)8110PER FUND SWIG G JT OPER FUND 715,612.54 CORF 477.196.45 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 43,098.02 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 152.008.45 2,111,588.57 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 04/14/95 PAGE 7 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY REPORT NUMBER AP43 CLAIMS PAID 04/19/95 POSTING DATE 04/19/95 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $335.89 02 OPER FUND 1,557.95 ly a2 CAP FAC FUND 28,724.87 x a3 OPER FUND 14,659.33 H a3 CAP FAC FUND 149,052.93 W a5 OPER FUND 4,589.98 H a5 CAP FAC FUND 20.46 96 OPER FUND 238,02 C 07 OPER FUND 19,542.64 a7 CAP FAC FUND 32.16 all OPER FUND 4.159.91 all CAP FAC FUND 24.74 a13 OPER FUND 68.01 $ 68.01 014 CAP FAC FUND 5.828.77 5,826.77 a7814 OPER FUND 691.17 691.17 453.596.55 CORF 831,772.06 6 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 9.916.20 jkr585.95 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 306.703.56 1.831.524.42 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE WI/95 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBERAP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OSIM5 POSTING DATE 0510395 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 14"INI AG TECH COMPANY 72M.609.46 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M 0.10-9-91 14405 ASU $174.46 LAB SUPPLIES 14"M ATM M.INC. 5200.00 LAB SERVICES 144401 AT&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2.411.11 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144408 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $160A2 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144409 ACCURATE MEASUREMENT SYS. $24.961.26 COMMUNICATION SUPPLIES 44410 ACOPIAN CORP. $942.60 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144411 ADVANCED COOLING TECHNOLOGIES $113A4 ELECTRIC PARTS 144412 ADVANCO CONSTRUCTORS,INC. 693.025.D0 CONSTRUCTION P141-1 144413 AEROCHEM,INC. $3.356.64 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT [n 144414 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $18,037.20 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST,M.0.8-9419 Y 1p 15 ALLIED SUPPLY CO. $1,206.43 VALVE PARTS 1N416 AMERIDATA 61100,123 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 14M17 AMERICANWATERWORKS 581.90 MEMBERSHIP DUES H 14 18 AMICON,INC. 11750.90 LAB SUPPLIES 14 19 ANXTER-DISTRIBUTION $217.75 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 14 m ANTHONY PEST CONTROL 51B5.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144421 APPUED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $2.619.99 LAB SUPPLIES 1N 22 ARROWHEAD ELECTRIC CORP. $59.53 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144423 ARTS DISPOSAL SERVICE.INC. 5MAO WASTE REMOVAL 144424 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $65m WASTE OIL REMOVAL 1N 25 ASSOCIATED VACUUM TECH,INC. $252.38 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144426 ATKIWJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144427 AVNET COMPUTER 5162,027.99 COMPUTER EQUIPMENT M O 2- 95 14 28 AWARDS B TROPHIES $310.85 PLAQUES 14H29 SFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS 54.00 LAS SERVICES 144430 BKK LANDFILL $2.411.63 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.169-91 144431 BRW SAFETY&SUPPLY $146.43 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144432 BATTERY SPECIALTIES 5662.81 BATTERIES 144433 BAUER COMPRESSOR $137.39 COMPRESSOR PARTS W4M SAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. SI,500.57 LABSUPPLIES 14H35 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $388.76 LAB SUPPLIES 144436 J&H BERGE.INC. 5259.45 LAB SUPPLIES 14 37 SETATECHNOLOGIES $15229 INSTRUMENT PARTS 14443& BOLSA RADIATOR SERVICE $527.97 TRUCK REPAIRS 14439 BONA-RUES $97.33 TRUCK PARTS 144 10 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $971.30 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.O.12-&W 144441 BUDGET JANITORIAL 53,330.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 144442 BURNIE ENGINEERING CO. $04.84 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144 13 BUSH&ASSOCIATES.INC. $1.062.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6 M 144441 CADIRECTION $269.38 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144445 CALTROL,INC. $784.57 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144448 CALFON CONSTRUCTION 585.00 PIAN&SPEC.REFUND 14 11 CALIF ASSOC.OF SAW.AGENCIES $8,000.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES M 0.1-11-95 144448 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $115.00 SERVICEAGREEMENT 144449 CANUS CORPORATION 551,200.65 FIBER OPTIC CABLE FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE SHAIS PAGE2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05103MB POSTING DATE OSI03195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144450 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $13.094.26 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI.38 A OCEAN OUTFALL 144451 CENTURY PAINT $215.86 PAINTSUPPLIES 144452 CENTURY SAFETY INST.B SUPPLY $1,243.99 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144453 CERFNET $66.84 COMPUTER SERVICES 144454 CHANDLER LIQUID ASSET MGMT. $6,400.00 INVESTMENT CONSULTANT M.O.2.6.95 14440 CHEM SERVICE,INC. $132.69 LAB SUPPLIES 144456 CHEMWEST,INC. $418.27 PUMP PARTS 144457 CLONTECH LABORATORIES,INC. $148.36 LAB SUPPLIES 144458 COUCH AND SONS $1,147.50 CONSTRUCTION 2-6R1 m 144459 COUCH&SONS $30,657.94 CONSTRUCTION 11-17-1 >4 144460 COMPUSERVE $286.43 COMPUTER SERVICES 144461 CON WAY WESTERN EXPRESS $60,47 FREIGHT CHARGES 1444W CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C 53,862.40 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.8-11.93 i.y 144463 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $327.73 INSTRUMENT PARTS H 1444" COORDINATED EQUIP CO.,INC. $175.00 MECHANICAL PART 144466 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $235.27 TRUCK PARTS 144466 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $214.66 ELECTRIC PARTS ^� 144457 CA DEPT,OF HEALTH SERVICES $3.493.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144468 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF. 556,281.47 DENTAL INSURANCE PLAN MO.I-12-94 144469 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. 59,091.90 SERVICE AGREEMENTS 1"470 DISCO PRINT COMPANY S64A8 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144471 COVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $940.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 144472 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $379.05 PAINTSUPPLIES 1"473 E.C.S. $167.00 PUBLICATION 144474 EASTMAN,INC. $1,005.96 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144475 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,920.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6.1692 144476 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $750.60 LAB SERVICES 144477 ERNST 6 YOUNG $17.6110.00 REVIEW OF FINANCE DEPT.M.O.9-14-94 14A478 EXXON CO. $8.637.56 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144479 FLUID TECH.SALES $413.67 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 14480 FMC CORP. $34,170.96 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9.14-N 14N81 FST SAND AND GRAVEL.INC. $266.25 ROAD BASE MATERIALS 144402 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $335.00 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9.91 144483 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $529.75 AIR FREIGHT 1444M FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $289.79 US SUPPLIES 144485 FLOSYSTEMS,INC. $188.33 PUMP PARTS 144466 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $22.02 PHOTO SUPPLIES IM467 CST,INC. $4,681.17 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144488 GTE TELEPHONE OPERATIONS $300.00 TELEPHONE CABLE SERVICES 14N69 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE 51,730.21 INSTRUMENT PARTS lww GIERLICH-MITCHELL.INC. $2,98IA5 PUMP PARTS IM91 GA INDUSTRIES,INC. $1,539.00 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144492 GRAHAM COMPANY $400.00 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144493 ODA CONSULTANTS $5.500.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.64414 144494 DAVID M.GRIFFITH B ASSOC, $1,1011.27 PROF.SERVICES-EXEC.SEARCH IM95 HARBOUR ENGINEERING $10,30.56 PUMP PARTS C FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5MI95 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAID05X13/95 POSTING DATE 05103M5 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144496 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $1.217.09 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144497 PL RILWN CO,INC. $32.054.66 INSTRUMENTS/INSTRUMENT PARTS M.0.3-10-93 144498 HEWLETTPACKARD $72.20 LAB SUPPLIES 1"499 HIBINO USA,INC. S20,257.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1"500 HOME DEPOT $203.90 SMALL HARDWARE 1"501 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $1,280.19 PAINT SUPPLIES 144502 HYCLONE LABORATORIES,INC. $378.54 LAB SUPPLIES 1"503 IPCO SAFETY $539.45 SAFETY SUPPLIES 1445N IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL 588,543.21 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.0.11-1692 1N505 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $269.19 CONNECTORS P4 1445M INGERSOL-RAND EQUIP.CORP. 11103.91 COMPRESSOR PARTS x 144507 INTERMOUNTAIN SCIENTIFIC CORP. $227.59 LAB SUPPLIES S 144SDB INVITROGEN CORP. $299.76 LAB SUPPLIES 1N509 J2 PRIN71NO SERVICES $1,184.78 PRINTING '-' 10510 JAMISON ENGINEERING $548.10 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES `j 144511 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $156.13 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES m 144512 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. S332.47 INSTRUMENT PARTS 14451I JOHNSON CONTROLS,INC. $219.79 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES w 144514 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $395.18 ELECTRIC PARTS 144515 THE KEITH COMPANIES $246.10 ENGINEERING SERVICES 136R 1p518 KING BEARING,INC. $304.99 MACHINE SUPPLIES 144517 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $1,238.01 TOOLSISAFETY SUPPLIES 14451E LADDER MAN.INC. $90.00 TOOLS 1"519 LAKEWOOD INSTRUMENTS $4,116.22 MECHANICAL PARTS 1"520 LEARN KEY $5415 TRAINING VIDEO 144521 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $9.738.43 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIR.M.0.12-9-90 144522 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $970.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10-92 1"523 MPS $204.88 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 1"524 MACOMCO $577.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144525 MAINTENANCE PRODUCTS,INC. $654.52 MECHANICAL PARTS 1"526 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $604.21 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1"527 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $485.03 GAUGES 144528 NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFO SVC. 5250.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 1"529 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES $236.51 HARDWARE 144530 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.202.73 UNIFORM RENTALS 144531 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $139.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 144532 MLADEN BUNTICH CONSTRUCTION $108.107.57 CONSTRUCTION 14-1-IA 1N533 MOTELS$1256.14 $1.933.18 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144534 NAT WEST MARKETS S750.00 INTEREST DRAW FEES 1"535 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES $2,500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 1"535 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $140.70 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 144537 NETWORK GENERAL $6,000.00 COMPUTER NETWORK CONSULTING 1"538 NEUTRON $10,405.45 ANIONIC POLYMERMOA-10-94 1N539 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $545.76 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1"540 NORMS REFIG.R ICE EQUIP. 528.81 ELECTRIC PARTS 144541 OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $1,317.02 SAFETY GLASSES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 511M PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 050N95 POSTING DATE 0ME195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144542 OLYMPIC CREATIONS $851.22 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144543 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $187.55 TRUCK PARTS 144544 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL $2,900.04 CHEMICALS 144545 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $9,684.81 ELECTRIC PARTS 144546 ORANGE VALVE B FITTING CO. $540.52 FRTINGS 144547 OXYGEN SERVICE $3.194.66 SPECIALTY GASES 144548 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $15,520.66 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 144549 PGC SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION $721A8 LAB SUPPLIES 144550 PSI $237.74 HARDWARE 1"551 PACIFIC PARTS $30,904.72 OFFICE EQUIPMENT m 144552 PAGENET $1,009.32 RENTAL EQUIPMENT >4 1"553 PARAGON CABLE $38.78 CABLE SERVICES 5 1"564 PARALLAX EDUCATION $7,236.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION ^^ 1N555 PARKHOUSE TIRE CO. $334.76 TIRES H 144556 PERMA SEAL $546.02 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES ri 144557 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $3,146.86 REIMBURSE PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL Ly 144558 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $109,220.93 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.Ob8-91 I 144659 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS 56,D29A3 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 144560 PITNEY BOWES $302.88 POSTAGE MACHINE SERVICE AGREEMENT 144551 POLY CAL PLASTICS,INC. $205.55 MECHANICAL PARTS 1N1562 POLYPURE,INC. $18.223.21 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3-11-92 1"563 POWER DESIGN $29,395.28 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1"554 POWER SYSTEMS $1,310.58 TRUCK PARTS 1"565 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND, $2,128.00 SOIL TESTING 144565 PUBLIC FINANCIAL MGMT.,INC. $10,278.79 FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.64-94 144557 PRYOR REPORT $".00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144686 RAHN INDUSTRIES $347.03 ELECTRIC PARTS 144569 REDWINGSHOES $493.93 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 1"570 THE REGISTER 5676.60 NOVICES&ADS 144571 REMEDY TEMP $4.063.21 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL SERVICES 144572 RICOH ELECTRONICS,INC. $17.745.19 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144573 RODNEY-HUNT CO. $563.88 MECHANICAL PARTS 1"574 DR.ROOTER SERVICE 6250.00 PLUMBING SERVICES 144575 SANTA ANA ELECTRIC MOTORS $3,464.54 ELECTRIC PARTS 144576 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $221.86 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"577 SANWA BANK $4,997.48 CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 1F14A 1"578 DOUG SARVIS $750.00 CPRIFIRST AID TRAINING 1M579 R.CRAM SCOTT&ASSOC. $6,137.52 LEGAL SERVICES-PERSONNEL ISSUES 144580 SERPENTIX CONVEYOR CORP. $3,123.12 MECHANICAL PARTS 1445B1 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $121.16 TOOLS 144582 LAWRENCE SHAPIRO.MD $136.80 MEDICAL CLAIM 144583 SHURELUCK SALES $1.333.09 TOOLSIHARDWARE 144584 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $8.430.77 DIESEL/UNLEADED FUEL 144585 SPEX INDUSTRIES,INC. 5336.22 LAB SUPPLIES 1"585 STRATAGENE 5790.77 LAB SUPPLIES 144587 SUPELOO,INC. $88.24 LAB SUPPLIES C FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE S/I/M5 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OSAWS POSTING DATE OS/O MS WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT I44588 TEKMAR COMPANY $161.64 LAB SUPPLIES 144589 CHARLES E.THOMAS $102.18 TRUCK PARTS 144590 THOMAS BROS MAPS $3.798.19 PRIMING 144591 THOMAS FISH CO. $585.25 LAB SUPPLIES 144592 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES &I,197.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.64F94 144593 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $279.03 TRUCK PARTS 1"594 TRUESDAIL LABS $20.159.60 LAB SERVICES 144595 U.S.AUTO GLASS CENTERS $150.86 TRUCK PARTS 144596 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $507.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144597 UNISOURCEWOR BUTLER PAPER $337.37 OFFICE SUPPLIES to 144598 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $237.08 PARCEL SERVICES K 144599 VWR SCIENTIFIC $2,996.34 LAB SUPPLIES 2 144600 VAUN CORPORATION $278.55 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 144601 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $2,830.07 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144602 VANIER BUSINESS FORMS $1.114.71 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144603 VERTEX COMPUTER CABLE PRODUCTS $397.33 OFFICE EQUIPMENT Iy 1446M CARL WARREN&CO. $300.00 INSURANCE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR I 1"605 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL FED. $101.25 PUBLICATION 144606 WATERS CORPORATION $92.28 LAB SUPPLIES 144607 WATERUSE MEMBERSHIP $275.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 144608 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $45.384.01 CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.O.8-12-92&4-13.94 144609 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $254.73 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144610 CITY OF WESTMINSTER $4.201.25 MANHOLE ADJUSTING 14461t WIRTH GAS EQUIPMENT CO. $4,799.87 INSTRUMENT 144612 ROURKE.WOODRUFF&SPRADLIN $66,253.92 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.2-19.92 144613 XEROX CORP. $12,006.27 COPIER LEASES 1"614 GEORGE YARDLEY CO. $683.77 HAROWARE 1M615 JOHNSON YOKOGAWA CORP. $360.04 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 144616 RICHARD YOUNG PRODUCTS $146.98 TRAINING VIDEO 1"617 ARAMARK SERVICES.INC. $17.44 OPERATING SUPPLIES 144618 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. 6298.19 TELEPHONE SERVICES 1"619 MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS $72,616.44 REMARKETING AGREEMENT 144620 PACIFIC BELL $1.215.62 TELEPHONE SERVICES 144621 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLICSUPPLY $3.90 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144622 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. 634,523.16 POWER 1"623 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $61,516.49 NATURAL GAS 1,769,947.87 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE VMS PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/03M5 POSTING DATE O5M3/95 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $7,055.63 02 OPER FUND 21,549.38 02 CAP FAC FUND 3,929.50 03 OPER FUND 38,055.61 03 CAP FAC FUND 17,315.67 05 OPER FUND 6.706.64 06 OPER FUND 4,672.86 1y 97 OPEN FUND 7,420.18 pq 011 OPER FUND 10,899.98 5 011 CAP FAC FUND 31,116.31 0130PER FUND 101.37 m '+ 014 0PER FUND 1,014.28 014 CAP FAC FUND 118,637.05 M 03811OPER FUND 2,500A0 0887 OPER FUND 210.71 a 07414 OPER FUND 19.79 JT OPER FUND 804,262.46 CORF 405,583.40 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 78,626.43 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 210,240.65 1,769,947.87 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/12M5 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0W17MS POSTING DATE OS117/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 144652 AG TECH COMPANY $33,357.67 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 144653 ATM AA,INC. 57,680.00 LAB SERVICES 1446M AT&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2,558.66 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144655 A T&T-MEGACOM SERVICE f967.80 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144656 AT&T-FAXR40DEM SERVICE $22.89 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144657 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $36.074.40 O&M AGREEMENT OKY GEN.SYST.M.O.B-94I9 14465E AMERICAN PROTECTIVE SER.,INC. f1,007.29 SECURITY SUPPLIES 144659 AMERICAN SIGIAA $1.528.10 SAMPLER PARTS P1 144660 ANGEL SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS,INC. $520.17 LAB SUPPLIES X 144651 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $675.02 LAB SERVICES S 144662 ABC LABORATORIES 5470.00 LAB SERVICES 144663 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $35.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 144664 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $5.314.79 PAYROLL SERVICES 144%5 SFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS f11.00 WASTE DISPOSAL +f 1446M BKK LANDFILL $2.630.16 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M,O.10- 91 144667 GRW SAFETY&SUPPLY f836.38 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144660 BAUER COMPRESSOR $68.71 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144569 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $427.35 LAB SUPPLIES 144670 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $252.15 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 1"671 SERENDSEN FLUID POWER f444.99 ENGINE PARTS 144672 BETA TECHNOLOGY.INC. $26.69 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144673 BID VENTURES,INC. $237.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144674 BOOT BARN $101.73 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 144675 BORIAND INTERNATIONAL 11354.64 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 144676 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $36.291.61 ENGINEERING SERVICES 7-7-1&P141 1446" BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $40,363.08 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.0.1244N 144678 BUDGET JANITORIAL 54,320.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 1"679 BURLINGTON SAFETY LAB,INC. $175.50 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144880 TOM BYER ROOFING SERVICE,INC. $1.588.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 144681 CEPA $1,030.50 LAB SUPPLIES 144682 CS COMPANY 54,714.33 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"683 CALTROL,INC. $1,914.85 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144684 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $600.42 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144685 CASHCO,INC. f7383 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144686 CERFNET 548.31 COMPUTER SERVICES 144687 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA f274 70 VALVE PARTS 144688 CONNEL GM PARTS I DIV. $48.04 TRUCK PARTS 144689 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $822.45 CONSULTING SERVICES W0.8-11-93 1446M COOPER CAMERON CORP. f634.77 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144691 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY 5243.39 TRUCK PARTS 144692 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES 5647.4E COMPRESSOR PARTS 144693 COUNTY CLERK $38.00 JOB NO.7-24 EXEMPRON FEE 144694 COUNTY CLERK $38.00 ANNEXATION FILING FEE 14460 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC f3,371.16 ELECTRIC PARTS - 144696 STATE OF CALIFORNIA SB.B/L00 STATE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE 144697 DE GULLE&SONS GLASS CO. $1.171.64 GLASS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE WIMS PAGE2 REPORTNUMBERAP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAIDOW17M5 POSTING DATE 0WIV95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 1M698 DELL MARKETING L.P. E2,972.98 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1M699 DEZURICKANDIORCSCO. E1,0".44 VALVES 1M700 LASCLEAR $88.13 LAB SUPPLIES 1M701 DICKSONS $1,827.M AIR CONDITIONER 1447M DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $2.50.37 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 144703 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $235.W PAINT SUPPLIES 144T04 OVALS SALES 551.90 FITTINGS 144705 EASTMAN,INC. $429.15 OFFICE SUPPLIES m 1M706 ECOANALYSIS,INC. $1,320.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 24 1M707 EL-COM HARDWARE $312.70 ENGINE PARTS S 1M708 JIM ELO $377.19 LIABILITY CLAIM J-CSD-95-L-7 m 1M709 EMERGENCY NOW NETWORK $3.815.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES I-I 1M71 ENCHANTER,INC. f3, 0.50 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6-10A2 1M711 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. E75750.50 LAB SERVICES ,q 1M712 E%IDE ELECTRONICS E742.65 INSTRUMENT PARTS I IM713 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE S9,220AO RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.ID-9-91 ^� 1M714 FILTERLINE CORP. $185.83 FILTERS 1M716 FISCHER 6 PORTER CO. S:491.75 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1"716 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. E1,273.98 LAB SUPPLIES 1M717 CLIFFORD A.FORKERT $2,716.55 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6 U 144718 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY E1,965.00 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DISCLAIMER 1M719 DST,INC. $11.473.55 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1M720 GANAHL LUMBER CO. E96A9 LUMBERIHARDWARE 1M721 GATES FIBERGLASS INSTALLERS $965.50 FIBERGLASS REPAIRS 1M722 GENERAL TELEPHONE 00. $996.98 TELEPHONE SERVICES 1M723 GIERLICH-MITCHELL,INC. $1.092.59 PUMP PARTS 1M724 GLOBAL NETWORKIJOHN NAISBITTS $195.00 SUBSCRIPTION 1M725 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS E4,490.49 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 1,4726 GRASSY S.T.I. S3,3ALM ENGINE PARTS 1M727 DGA CONSULTANTS $1,46D.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0641-94 144728 DAVID R.GRIFFIN $27,071.0 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.O.13,1494 1M729 HB TYPE 6 GRAPHICS $10.78 PRINTING 1M730 HACH COMPANY $TbK.36 LAB SUPPLIES 144731 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $421.46 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1M732 HATCH S KIRK.INC. $2,611.93 ENGINE PARTS 1M7M HAULAWAY CONTAINERS S550.0D CONTAINER RENTALS 1M734 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2.083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 44735 HOLMES B NARVER,INC. $66.959.77 ENGINEERING SERVICES 2-14-R-2 1M736 HOME DEPOT S229.70 HARDWARE 1M737 RS HUGHES CO,INC. E122.56 PAINT SUPPLIES 1M738 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH $14,330.25 WATER USE 1M739 HUNTS FINAL PHASE $1.350.00 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 1M740 IPCO SAFETY $2.045.63 SAFETY SUPPLIES 1M741 IMPERIALWESTCHEMICAL $54,215.06 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11.18-92 1M742 INDUSTRIAL FILTER MFG. $2,922.9D FILTER W743 INDUSTRIAL POWER SYSTEMS $171.00 INSTRUMENT PARTS i` FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/12J95 PAGE REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/17/95 POSTING DATE OU17M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 1M7M INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $896.15 CONNECTORS 144745 INTERMOUNTAIN SCIENTIFIC CORP. $562.47 LAB SUPPLIES 144746 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $656.68 BATTERIES 144747 IRVINE PHOTO GRAPHICS $88.36 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 1M746 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $39.59 WATER USE 1M749 JAMISON ENGINEERING $27,607.23 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 1447M GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $234.36 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144751 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $1,997.10 GAUGE c4 144752 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $1,166.13 ELECTRIC PARTS >e 1M753 KARS'ADVANCED MATERIALS,INC. $2.497.00 MACHINE TESTING 5 1M754 KING BEARING,INC. $3,718.29 MACHINE SUPPLIES Ly 144755 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $3.623.52 TOOLS r+ 144756 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $597.55 CONNECTION FEE REFUND r6 144757 LAIDLAW ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $429.W WASTE DISPOSAL DRUMS .,1 144758 DAVID 0.L'ANGELLE,PH.D. $4,358,M TRAINING SYSTEMS IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE 144759 LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT L.LAVOIE 5627.40 LEGAL SERVICES-NITZEN �+ 144760 LEE&RO CONSULTING ENGR. $30,498.93 ENGINEERING SERVICES P1461&2 1M761 CHARLES P.CROWLEY CO. $764.38 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1M762 LEHMAN BROTHERS,INC. $246.50 REMARKETING AGREEMENT 1M763 LEWCO ELECTRIC $592.63 TRUCK PARTS 1447" LOCAL AGENCY $5M.00 ANNEXATION FEES 144765 MAGNETROL 5458.26 ENGINE PARTS 1M7W MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $327.729.00 CONSTRUCTION P242.2 1M767 MAVERICK,INC. $5,340.00 CRANE INSPECTION 144768 MCKENNA ENGR.&EQUIP. $5.829.83 PUMP PARTS 144759 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $5W.66 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1M770 MICROBIAL INSIGHTS,INC. $600.00 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.11-18-92 144771 MICROSICS CORPORATION $1,404.97 CHEMICALS 144772 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $1,725.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 144773 MILLTRONICS $1.930.03 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1M774 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.961.14 UNIFORM RENTALS 1M775 MORELAND&ASSOCIATES $4W.25 FINANCIAL AUDIT SERVICES 1M776 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $270.05 FITTINGS 1M777 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $311.01 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 144778 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $1.82372 MECHANICAL PARTS 1M779 NEUTRON $3,455.42 ANIONIC POLYMER M.01.11)-94 1M7B0 NEOTRONICS $215.30 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1M781 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $56.92 WATER USE 1M782 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL $9,684.10 DISABILITY INSURANCE 144783 OI CORPORATION $314.79 LAB SUPPLIES 144784 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $142.73 TRUCK PARTS 144785 ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS JOURNAL $79.00 SUBSCRIPTION 144786 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL CO. $2,152.57 CHEMICALS 144787 ORANGECOUNTYWHOLESALE 54,314.83 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 144788 ORANGE COURIER $511.50 COURIER SERVICES 1M789 ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $1,473.56 FITTINGS FUNDNO 91" - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 5112I95 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP03 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05117MS POSTING DATE 05117/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 100790 PARASITOLOGY RESEARCH LABS $125.00 LAB SUPPLIES 1"791 PSSI $1.500,00 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 1"792 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $90.90 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"793 PACIFIC PARTS $8,225.99 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1 0780 PACIFIC BELL $136.76 TELEPHONE SERVICES 100795 PADRE JANITORIAL SUPPLY $484.65 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 10796 PALMIERI.TYLER.WIENER, $980.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6.12.91 1"797 PARKHOUSE TIRE CO. $360.98 TIRES 104798 PASCAL AND LUDWIG $13,023.00 CONSTRUCTION P243 m 1"799 PASCAL B LUDWIG $6,376.50 CONSTRUCTION P142 S 100800 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS B0,5111.07 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL �+ 100B01 PIERCE CHEMICAL COMPANY $102.00 LAB SUPPLIES 100802 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $106.026.01 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O."-91 y 100803 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS f03,516.57 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 10B00 PLAN OLYMETHOLD CS.IN f262.75 OFFICE FURNITURE t00B05 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.73 LAB SUPPLIES p 100807 POWER SYSTEMS INC. $1$701.36 CATIONIC POLYMER M O.I-11-92 t0aB07 POWER SYSTEMS f701.S8 ENGINEERING PARTS 1NB08 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $175.00 ICE I"m PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $368.00 SOIL TESTING 100610 PRYOR REPORT $79.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1"811 RJN COMPUTER SERVICES,INC. $7,723.76 COMPUTER SERVICES 1"512 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $3.033.65 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS 10813 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1.715.43 TRASH REMOVAL 100810 THE REGISTER 3652.OD NOTICES B ADS 100815 REMEDY TEMP $3,594.40 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL 104816 ROYCE PRODUCTIONS $323.25 PUBLICATIONS 1"517 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 5526.12 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 10AB18 SARTORIUS CORP. 5082.39 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 100818 DOUG SARVIS $1.125.00 CPIVFIRST AID TRAINING 1"820 SCHWINGAMERICA 53.230.51 PUMP PARTS 100821 CITY OF SEAL BEACH $M.00 ENGINEERING INSPECTION-3W 104822 SHURELUCK SALES $4.300.69 TOOLSINARDWARE 1"823 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC 5550.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 104820 SOCOASTAIROUALITY S4,109.25 PERMIT FEES 100825 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY $12,810.00 CLEAN AIR ACT FEE 10826 SO CALIF.COSTAL WATER $299,700.OD ANNUAL SCCWRPA FEES M.O2.9.90 100627 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. 562,675.08 POWER 100828 SO.CAL GAS.CO. $9.307.07 NATURAL GAS 1NB29 $O.CALIF.WATER CO. $77.52 WATER USE I"S30 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $10.573.03 DIESEIAINLEADED FUEL 1"831 SOUVENIR PHOTO $107.Q PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 1"832 SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER $70.25 DRINKING WATERICOOLER RENTALS 1"03 SPECIAL PLASTICS SYSTEMS,INC. $2.638.80 MECHANICAL PARTS 1N830 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION $200.00 ANNEXATION FEE 1"835 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 5200.00 ANNEXATION FEE C FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5112195 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAR)05H7195 POSTING DATE 057178Y4 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144836 SUNCUPSE,INC. $720.33 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144537 SUNSET FORD $517.90 TRUCK PARTS 144838 SUPELCO.INC. $Iu.60 IAS SUPPLIES 144839 SUPER CHEM CORP. $414.62 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144840 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG.COMPANY $1.112.52 ELECTRIC CART PARTS 144841 TEKTRONIX,INC. $305.55 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144M THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 6987.56 MECHANICAL PARTS 144843 TOKIO MARINE&FIRE $954.34 LIABILITY CLAIM 3-CSD-96-L-6 1448" TOWS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $103.09 LOCKS&KEYS % 1M845 TRAVELEXECUWES $1.667.19 TRAVEL SERVICES M.0.64594 S 144846 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. &981.00 TRUCK PARTS I"S07 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,749.56 LAB SERVICES 144808 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $233.35 INS71RUMENTPARTS H 1M809 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $59T00 LAB SUPPLIES „1 144850 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $116.24 PARCEL SERVICES 144851 DATAVAULTIUS SAFE DEPOSIT CO. $238.00 DATA STORAGE I^ 144852 VAUN CORPORATION $450.35 MECHANICAL PARTS 144853 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $318.51 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144854 VORTEX INDUSTRIES $849.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 144655 WATERS CORPORATION $37.33 LAB SUPPLIES 144858 WECO INDUSTRIES,INC. 67,W7.64 MECHANICAL PARTS 144857 WGRA WORKSHOPS 9345.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 144858 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $37,735.71 CAUSTIC SODA&XYPOCHLORIDE M.0.8.12A2&4-1344 144859 WEST-UTE SUPPLY CO. $192.44 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144860 WITEG $716A7 LAB SUPPLIES 144861 XEROX CORP. $9,922.22 COPIER LEASES 144862 ZYMARK CORP. S265AS LAB SUPPLIES 144863 DAVID R GRIFFIN 675.=.00 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.09-14-94 $1.669,739.72 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING OATE S 12M5 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/17/95 POSTING DATE 05/17/95 SUMMARY AMOUNT 82 OPER FUND 2.891.13 42 CAP FAC FUND 86,959.77 93 OPER FUND 53.695.14 83 CAP FAC FUND 113,316.03 05 CRIER FUND 0,429.09 87 OPER FUND 5.852.54 [n 87 CAP FAC FUND 11,492.69 K 611 OPER FUND 4.796.82 5 011 CAP FAC FUND 388.00 914 CAP FAC FUND 2,18BW 0586 OPER FUND 2,637.94 H 9687 0PER FUND 3,161.28 M 97814 OPER FUND 6,22t.73 I JT OPER FUND 449,899.42 CORF 477,447.11 SELF4'UNDED INSURANCE FUND 4.042.26 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 464,347.47 1,689,739.72 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (8): Consideration of roll call vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts (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). Summary See attached listing of claim payments. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of payment of claims listing. nwrooaesncasosoe FUND NO SIN - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 526195 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0513195 POSTING DATE 0513195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 1M883 AS TECH COMPANY $150.024.31 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.OAD-9-91 144864 A-Z LOGIC SYSTEMS $197.71 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 1M885 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $1,274.99 MECHANICAL PARTS 144886 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSOC. $695.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144887 AMERICAN DIVERSIFIED SILVER $1.485.67 REFUND ECSA DEPOSIT 1M888 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE $1.899.00 TRAINING MATERIALS 144589 ANAHEIM SEWER CONSTRUCTION S3.WO.00 EMERGENCY SEWER REPAIRS 1M890 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $20.87 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144891 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $465.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT W892 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $2,478.01 NOTICES 8 ADS 1M893 APPLIED SIOSYSTEMS,INC. E2,476.86 LAB SUPPLIES 1M894 ABC LABORATORIES $2.560.00 LAB SERVICES 1N895 ATKIWJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144896 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $574.93 FITTINGS 144897 AWARDS B TROPHIES $26.36 PLAQUES 1M898 BKK LANDFILL $2.376.39 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9-91 1M899 BANANA BLUEPRINT $9.600.54 PRINTING M.O.11-07-94 144900 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $274.43 BATTERIES 1M901 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. 54,313.52 LAB SUPPLIES IM902 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $83,84 LAB SUPPLIES 144903 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. $255.27 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1M904 J 8 H BERGE.INC. E79.33 LAB SUPPLIES 1M905 A BIEDERMAN.INC. $164.79 MECHANICAL PARTS 144906 BISHOP COMPANY $33020 TOOLS 144907 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $33.840.51 ENGINEERING SERVICES P141 1M9DB BRENNER-FIEDLER&ASSOC.,INC. $592.30 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1M909 MARK E.BRIGHTLY $3,2W.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 1M910 BRONSON.BRONSON B MCKINNON $64.889.71 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.O.12-8-94 1M911 BUSH S ASSOCIATES,INC. $678.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6- 94 144912 CN2M HILL $68.365.85 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-31 144913 C.L.TECHNOLOGY $720.00 GAS ANALYSIS SERVICES 144914 CS COMPANY $4,464.38 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144915 CALFON CONSTRUCTION $78,231.40 CONSTRUCTION 3.38-2 1M916 CALTROL,INC. $498.24 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 144917 CALTEX PLASTICS,INC. $346.40 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES W918 CANUS CORPORATION $26.581.95 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 144919 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. $45.18 REGULATOR 1M920 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $7.645.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES M.O.3.8-95 144921 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $431.613.92 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI.38,PI-36 1M922 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION S3,2M.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 1M923 CENTRAL VALLEY WASTEWATER MGRS $100.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1M924 CETAC TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $264.M LAB SUPPLIES 144926 M.C.KENNICUTT $1,671.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144926 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $1,460.00 PUMP PARTS 1M927 COASTAL CHLORINATION $1,008.00 WATER LINE DISINFECTION 1"928 COASTALMOTION $1,332.00 MEMBERSHIP FEES FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126/95 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/3IN5 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144929 COLD SAWS OF AMERICA.INC. $88.76 WELDING PARTS 144930 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $242,58 LAB SUPPLIES 1M931 COUCH AND SONS $66,991,00 CONSTRUCTION M.O.2A-95 1"932 COUCH&SONS $5Q262.06 CONSTRUCTION 11-17.1 144933 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $2.467.48 PUMP REPAIRS 144934 CONNEL GM PARTS/DIV. $139.57 TRUCK PARTS 1"935 CONSOLIDATED FREIGHIWAYS $2,335.81 FREIGHT 144936 CONSUMER PIPE $61.20 MECHANICAL PARTS 144937 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. S456.66 TOOLS 144938 CONTROL DESIGN SUPPLY $332.87 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 1M939 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $241 29 TRUCK PARTS 1M940 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $1,049.35 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1M941 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $2.572.78 ELECTRIC PARTS 1M942 DAILY PILOT $102.00 NOTICES&ADS 144943 HSK/DECKER $2.951.74 GAUGES 1M9M DELTA POINT,INC. $61,32 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144945 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $13.945.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"948 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $3,533,57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 1M947 DNERSIFIED BIOTECH,INC. $33.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144948 ESP NORTH $395.18 TOOLS 144949 EASTMAN.INC. $6,513.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1M950 ECOANALYSIS,INC. $1,320.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 144951 EDWARDS DIV.OF GS BLDG SYS. $535.49 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144952 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6.10.92 1M953 ENVIROGEN,INC. $1.569.00 PILOT PROJ.EQUIPMENT-SIOTRICKLING FILTER 144954 FMC CORP. SM,153.90 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9.14-94 144955 MARSHALL FAIRRES $28.08 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144956 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $1,820.00 RESIDUALS REMOVALM0. 10-9-91 144957 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $836.80 AIR FREIGHT 144958 FIRST COMPANY WOR NORTHERN DIST. $155.41 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144959 FISCHER&PORTER CO. $38.12 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 144960 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1,174.38 LAB SUPPLIES 1M961 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $290.60 LAB SUPPLIES 144952 FLICKINGER CO. $1.309.16 PLUMBING PARTS 144963 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $147.76 PHOTO SUPPLIES 144964 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $216.59 PAINT SUPPLIES 144965 FREEDOM IMAGING $70.72 SERVICE AGREEMENT 1M966 CITY OF FULLERTON $900.00 WATER USE 144967 EST,INC. $3,608.94 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144968 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $824.95 LUMBER/HARDWARE 1M969 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $182.10 CHEMICALS 144970 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $290.00 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 1M971 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $6,558.26 TELEPHONE SERVICES 1M972 GIERUCH-MITCHELL,INC. $4.403.65 PUMP PARTS 1M973 N.GLANTZ&SON,INC. $189.10 PAINT SUPPLIES 144974 GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES,INC. $47.M PUBLICATION FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5IM195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID O5131195 POSTING DATE 05131/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144975 VAN GRAINGER,INC. $612.59 ELECTRIC PARTS 144976 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $45.38 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 144977 GRASSY S.T.I. $4.225.82 ENGINE PARTS 144978 DGACONSULTANTS $8.060.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.".94 144979 HACH COMPANY $300.93 LAB SUPPLIES 144980 HARBOUR ENGINEERING $13,687A2 PUMP PARTS 144981 FRED A HARPER $1,100.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144982 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $820.10 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144983 HATCH&KIRK,INC. $1.924.40 ENGINE PARTS 144984 PL HAWN CO,INC. $146.09 FILTERS 1"965 HILTI,INC. $1,029.94 TOOLS 1"986 HOME DEPOT $209.43 HARDWARE 144987 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $51177 PAINT SUPPLIES 144968 ORANGE COUNTY FED.CREDIT UNION $680,00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144989 IBGIMICROSE MASTER,INC. $14,38kW DIGESTER CLEANING 144990 IDEXX $777.07 LAB SUPPLIES 144991 IPCO SAFETY $3,353.58 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144992 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $57,726.07 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11.18-92 1"993 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $28.56 CONNECTORS 144994 ISI INFORTEXT $1,593.54 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144995 INORGANIC VENTURES,INC. $735,51 LAB SUPPLIES 144996 J2 PRINTING SERVICES $50&35 PRINTING 144997 J.D.I.TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $2.613.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144998 JAMISON ENGINEERING $24,434.83 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 144999 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $887.69 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145000 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $55.34 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145001 JOHNSON CONTROLS,INC. $686.63 ELECTRIC PARTS 145002 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $131.15 ELECTRIC PARTS 145003 THE KEITH COMPANIES $234.70 ENGINEERING SERVICES 3-36R 145004 KING BEARING,INC. $556.65 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145005 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $2.420.99 HARDWARE 145006 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $388.75 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICES 146007 LAUNDROMAT 345.85 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 1450DS LAWICRANDAL.INC. $6.242.50 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.7-13.94 145009 LIMITORQUE CORP. $2,241.17 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 146010 LOCALAGENCY $450.00 LAFCO FEES 146011 MPS $15.30 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 145012 MACOMCO $577.20 SERMCEAGREEMENT 145013 MAG-TROL,INC. $68.47 ELECTRIC PARTS 145014 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $199.17 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145015 MCKENNA ENGR.&EQUIP. $142.01 PUMP PARTS 145018 MECHANICAL DRIVES CO. $248.18 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145017 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $3,496.27 GAUGES 145018 MICRO MOTION $522.25 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145019 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $6,363.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 145020 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRIES. $85.00 OFFICE REPAIRS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 526/95 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05731195 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145021 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.347.85 UNIFORM RENTALS 146022 MLADEN BUNTICH CONSTRUCTION $61.772.98 CONSTRUCTION 1414A 145023 MONITOR LABS $91.90 FITTINGS 145024 MONITOR PUBLISHING CO. $213.75 SUBSCRIPTION 145025 MONTGOMERY WATSON $1,664.12 AIR TOXICS PROJECT M..12-12-90 145026 MORTON SALT $500.52 SALT 145027 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $359.32 FITTINGS 145028 MOTOROLA.INC. $513.95 COMMUNICATIONS SUPPLIES 145029 NASCO $308.76 LAB SUPPLIES 145030 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES,INC. $9,500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 145031 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $1,282.81 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145032 NEUTRON $1.742.36 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8-10.94 145033 CUMMINS CAL PAC/ONAN $45.23 ELECTRIC PARTS 1450M OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $161.13 SAFETY GLASSES 145035 ON TECHNOLOGY $106.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145036 ORANGE COUNTY FARM SUPPLY $1.529.71 CHEMICALS 145037 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $8,508.12 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145038 ORANGE COURIER $151.05 COURIER SERVICES 145039 ORANGE VALVE B FITTING CO. $707.65 FITTINGS 14504D OXYGEN SERVICE $3,563.04 SPECIALTY GASES 145041 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $9.091.19 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145042 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $66.955.00 GAP WATER USE M.O.6-9.93 14MM3 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $2.338.20 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1450" PACIFIC PARTS $13,994.14 INSTRUMENT PARTSIOFFICE EQUIPMENT 145045 PACIFIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT,INC. $314.93 PUMP PARTS 145046 PACIFIC BELL $1,247.70 TELEPHONE SERVICES /45047 PACIFIC LAND DEVELOPMENT $2.232.50 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145048 PACIFIC WATER CONDITIONING CO. $590.00 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 145049 PAGENET $1,043.49 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 145050 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 145051 PARALLAX EDUCATION $4,740.89 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145052 PARKER DIVING SERVICE $34.895.00 OCEAN OUTFALL REPAIRS NL0.4-26.95 145053 PARTS UNLIMITED $773.91 TRUCK PARTS 1450M COUNTY SANTATION DISTRICTS $3.524.89 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL 145055 PHARMACIA BIOTECH,INC. $460.49 LAB REPAIRS 145055 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $104.515.60 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.54-91 145057 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $36.337.67 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145058 PLAINS TRUEVALUE HARDWARE $19.37 HARDWARE 145059 POLYPURE,INC. $15,874.42 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3-11-92 145060 POSTAGE BY PHONE $5,000.00 POSTAGE 145061 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $96.00 ICE 145062 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $779.00 SOIL TESTING 145063 PROMINENT FLUID CONTROL $799.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 145084 QUALITY BUILDING SUPPLY $167A4 BUILDING SUPPLIES 145065 RJN COMPUTER SERVICES,INC. $995.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1450SS RB R INSTRUMENTS $569.76 INSTRUMENT PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5I46105 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OM1195 POSTING DATE 0501195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 14SW7 REBIS $11.693.82 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145DSB REISH MARINE STUDIES,INC. $580.00 OCEAN MONITORING 14%69 REMEDYTEMP $1.511.80 TEMPORARY SERVICES 145070 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $1,991.63 VALVES 145071 ROBINSON FERTILIZER $1.411.31 CHEMICALS 145072 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL,INC. $114.56 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145073 RYAN-NERCO $574.34 METAL 145074 SARRS-PDC $1,800.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145075 SANWA BANK $113.595.17 CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 14-1-1-A 145076 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTL 5553.703.96 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6.&94 145077 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $1.764.04 SPECIALTY GASES 145078 SEA-BIRD ELECTRONICS.INC. $345.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145079 SEA COAST DESIGNS $144.60 OFFICE REPAIRS 145080 SEARS ROEBUCK 8 CO. $359SO REFRIGERATOR 145081 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $478,41 HARDWARE 145082 SHURELUCK SALES $4,701.82 TOOLSIKARDWARE 145063 M.LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS 8 ASSN. $487.00 SUBSCRIPTION 14SD54 SO COAST AIR QUALITY $3.481.80 PERMIT FEES 145085 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY $60.00 PERMIT FEES 145088 SOUTH COAST WATER $140.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145087 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16,114.10 POWER 145088 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $56.274.83 NATURAL GAS 146089 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $28.015A4 DIESELIUNLEADED FUEL 145090 SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER $2,653.63 DRINKING WATERICOOLER RENTALS 146091 WESTALLOY,INC. $236.16 WELDING SUPPLIES 145092 SPECTRUM CHEMICAL $166.71 LAB SUPPLIES 14W93 SPEX INDUSTRIES.INC. $2,455.45 LAB SUPPLIES 1450Bd SQUARE DICRISP AUTOMATION SYST. $96,883.03 SOFTWARE LICENSE M.O.7-13.94 145M STERLING ART $138.10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145098 SUMMIT STEEL $1,900.45 METAL 145097 SUNSET INDUSTRIAL PARTS $186.73 PUMP PARTS 145098 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $11.84 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 145099 SUPER CHEM CORP. $406.82 CHEMICALS 145100 TCH ASSOCIATES $491.91 LAB SUPPLIES 145101 THERMO JARRELL ASH CORP. $1,308.72 LAB SUPPLIES 145102 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $322.42 MECHANICAL PARTS 146103 TOLEDO SCALE CORP. $1.049.81 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 1451M TONY'S LOCK B SAFE SERVICE $651.95 LOCKS 8 KEYS 145105 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $999.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.6-8-94 1451M TREBOR ELECTRONICS $569.48 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145107 TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY.INC. $3,456.84 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.O.5-11.94 145106 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,OB4.25 LAB SERVICES 145109 JG TUCKER B SON,INC. $814.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145110 TUSTIN DODGE $38.19 TRUCK PARTS 145111 TUTHILL CORPORATION $16.941.62 MECHANICAL PARTS 145112 URISA $90.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE W6195 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05131/95 POSTING DATE 05131/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR 145113 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $318.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145114 UNISOURCE81OR BUTLER PAPER 8844.13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 146115 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 8614.87 PARCEL SERVICES 145116 VWR SCIENTIFIC $743.65 LAB SUPPLIES 145117 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. 8883.57 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145118 VERNE'S PLUMBING $3,002.30 PLUMBING SERVICES 145119 VERTEX SYSTEMS $1.252.71 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT 145120 VILLAGE NURSERIES $297.67 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 145121 CARL WARREN&CO. $185.21 LIAB.CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 145122 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL FED. $261.50 PUBLICATIONS 145123 WAXIE $475.39 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145124 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $30,558.59 CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.0.8-12-92 8 4-13.94 145125 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $732.36 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145125 WITEG $172.40 LAB SUPPLIES 145127 ROURKE,WOODRUFF&SPRADLIN $55.221.05 LEGAL SERVICES M.0.2-19-92 145126 WORDPERFECT $195.00 PUBLICATION 146129 XEROX CORP. $1,060.70 COPIER LEASES 145130 RICHARD B.EDGAR $200.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 2,725,516.88 SUMMARY AMOUNT 02 OPER FUND 10,452.23 02 CAP FAC FUND 779.00 R3 OPER FUND 8,193.31 03 CAP FAC FUND 174,354.30 05 OPER FUND 6.901.50 07 OPER FUND 4,048.75 07 CAP FAC FUND 4,610.29 011 OPER FUND 2.018.34 011 CAP FAC FUND 51,001.99 014 OPER FUND 46A0 014 CAP FAC FUND 186,164.03 05&6 OPER FUND 126.97 05&6 CAP FAC FUND 2.612.51 06&7 OPER FUND 2D8.80 67&14 OPER FUND 976.09 JT OPER FUND 1.404.430.38 CORF 628,873.39 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 15,309.90 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 226.361.10 (� 2.725.510.98 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6/09/95 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID W14/95 POSTING DATE W14195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 145157 AA EQUIPMENT $861.27 PUMP 145158 AG TECH COMPANY $88,274.21 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 145159 A T&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2.39&92 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145160 AT&T-MEGACOMSERVICE $958.94 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145161 AT&T-FAX SERVICE $1.041.42 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145162 ADAMS PRECISION INSTRUMENTATION $142.77 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145163 ADVANCED MFG.INSTITUTE $795.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145164 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS,INC. $36,074.40 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.8-9-89 145165 ALLIED ELECTRONICS $139.00 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145165 AMERIDATA $4,518.70 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145167 AMERICAN SIGMA $434.79 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145168 AMSCO $406.07 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145169 BLAKE P.ANDERSON $79.97 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145170 APCO VALVE&PRIMER CORP. $3,825.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145171 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $6,330.25 NOTICES&ADS 145172 ACS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) $3,M.50 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145173 ABC LABORATORIES $235.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145174 ARIZONA INSTRUMENT $175.37 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145175 ARTS DISPOSAL SERVICE,INC. $282.20 RECYCLABLE MATERIALS REMOVAL 145176 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $3.408.41 PAYROLL SERVICES 146177 AWARDS&TROPHIES $412.29 PLAQUES 145178 BKK LANDFILL $2,793.36 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 145179 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $1.161.68 BATTERIES 146180 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $3.193.37 LAB SUPPLIES 145181 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES.INC. $210.80 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 145182 J&H BERGE.INC. $79.64 LAB SUPPLIES 145183 BETA TECHNOLOGY,INC. $53.64 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145184 BID TECH NET,INC. $3.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 146185 BUCK&VEATCH $52.844.67 ENGINEERING SERVICES P145 146186 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $25,885.40 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.O.1241-94 145187 SNIBOOKS $153.64 BOOKS 146188 BURKE ENGINEERING CO. $946.05 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145189 CEM CORPORATION $272A3 LAB SUPPLIES 145190 CEPA $2,142.06 LAB SUPPLIES 146191 C.P.I. $755.87 LAB SUPPLIES 145192 CPRA REGISTRAR $1.012.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 145193 1995 CONFERENCE,CWPCA.INC. $190.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 145194 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $530.10 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145195 CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE $108.30 PUBLICATION 145195 CANUS CORPORATION $39,793.64 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 145197 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. $136.86 REGULATOR 146198 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $6.752.44 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI-43,P1 J8 M199 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION $142.58 ELECTRIC PARTS 1452M CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $150.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 145201 CHEMWEST,INC. S414.08 PUMP PARTS 145202 CLARK CONSULTANTS $390.00 ELECTRICAL CONSULTING FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CMMS PAID 08/14/95 POSTING DATE O5114195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145203 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $75.51 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145204 COLICH AND SONS $26,033,22 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 3.36 145205 COMPUSERVE $282,39 COMPUTER SERVICES 145208 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO. $323,35 TOOLS 145207 CONSTRUCTION FABRICATORS,INC. $1,644.70 MECHANICAL PARTS 145206 CONSUMER PIPE $954.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145209 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $345,79 ELECTRIC PARTS 145210 CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT CO. $158.23 FITTINGS 145211 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $2.73244 ENGINE PARTS 145212 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $30605 TRUCK PARTS 145213 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $1,368,76 ELECTRIC PARTS 145214 DAILY PILOT $96.00 NOTICES 8 ADS 145215 DATASTORM $153.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145215 DAVIS INSTRUMENTS $506.95 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145217 HSK/DECKER $1.324.75 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145218 DEZURICKAND/ORCSCO. $10.033.69 VALVES 145219 THE DICKSON COMPANY $106.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 145220 SYCON CORP. $1,198.29 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145221 DIPPER DAN $60.00 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS 145222 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $1.858.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 146223 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $699.10 PAINT SUPPLIES 145224 E.C.S. $26T00 PUBLICATION 145225 ESP NORTH $690.44 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 145226 EASTMAN,INC. $2,960.14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145227 ECOANALYSIS,INC. $5,220.50 CONSULTING SERVICES 145228 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-1Q92 145229 ENSYS,INC. $325A8 LAB SUPPLIES 145230 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $1.096.50 LAB SERVICES 146231 EQUESTRIAN FORGE $1,096.56 PLAQUES 145232 FMC CORP. $33.588.35 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9-14-94 145233 FST SAND AND GRAVEL,INC. $249.00 ROAD BASE MATERIALS 145234 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $3,677.50 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.D. 10.9.91 145235 FIRST COMPANYWOR NORTHERN DIST. $195.61 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145236 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1,935.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145237 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $1,271.78 LABSUPPLIES 145236 FLICKINGER CO. $3,534.20 VALVES 145239 CUFFORD A.FORKERT $2.6M.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.64-94 145240 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $91.68 PHOTO SUPPLIES 145241 CT'OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $11.276.60 WATER USE 145242 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $193.61 PAINT SUPPLIES 145243 THE FOXBORO CO. 54,749.01 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145244 CITY OF FULLERTON $139.23 WATER USE 145245 GST,INC. $629.94 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145246 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $884.15 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145247 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $216.30 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145240 GRAHAM MANUFACTURING CO. $111.79 PUMP PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID O04195 POSTING DATE W14195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145249 GRASBYS.T.I. $324.65 ENGINE PARTS 145250 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $294.18 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1452SI GREAT LAKES INSTRUMENTS,INC. $22,691.32 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145252 DGA CONSULTANTS $2.730.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6-5-94 145253 DAVID R.GRIFFIN S164,306.85 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.O.9-W94 1452M HACH COMPANY $2,003.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145255 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $1,403.82 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145256 HATCH 8 KIRK,INC. $575.07 TRUCK PARTS 145257 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $1,925.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 145258 PL HAWN CO.INC. $8.809.39 INSTRUMENTPARTS 145259 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2.083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 145260 HOLMES 8 NARVER,INC. $33.323.52 ENGINEERING SERVICES P1d4 145261 HOME DEPOT $263.11 HARDWARE 145262 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $1,018.50 PAINT SUPPLIES 145263 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH $19.66 WATER USE 1452M IPCO SAFETY $1,992.49 SAFETY SUPPLIES 145255 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $110.690.27 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11-18-92 145266 IMPULSE ENTERPRISE $404.99 LAB SUPPLIES 145267 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $1,400.73 CONNECTORS 145265 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $703.62 BATTERIES 145269 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $45.13 WATERUSE 145270 J2 PRINTING SERVICES $602.04 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145271 AT COMPUTER SOURCE,INC. $818.90 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145272 JAMISON ENGINEERING $8.830.33 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 145273 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $233.47 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145274 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $1.997.07 GAUGE 145275 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $410.06 PAINT SUPPLIES 145276 KALUEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $62.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES 146277 KEYE PRODUCTIVITY CENTER $139.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145278 KING BEARING,INC. $1.515.84 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145279 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $1.752.34 TOOLS 145280 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $57.59 SERVICEAGREEMENT 145281 LATRONICS $2.527.07 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 145282 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $1.475.64 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIR.M.O.12-9�90 146283 SOHO-LYNCH CORP. $135.61 JANITORIAL SERVICES 145284 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $974.10 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10-92 145285 MAGNETEK $5.830.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145286 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $103,477.00 CONSTRUCTION P242-2 145287 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $638.06 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145288 MATT-CHLOR,INC. $1.815.69 VALVE PARTS 145289 MAVERIK.INC. $2,887.28 CRANE REPAIRS 145290 CHUCK MCRANEY $511.14 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145291 MEDLIN CONTROLS,INC. 53,825.84 INSTRUMENTPARTS 145292 METRA CORPORATION $1.205.40 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145293 MICROSOFT PRESS $169.57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE , 145294 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES $996b9 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6MI95 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OB114195 POSTING DATE=14195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145295 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.182,67 UNIFORM RENTALS 145296 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $1.214.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 145297 MONITOR LABS $1,616.86 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145298 NASCO $617,60 LAB SUPPLIES 145299 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $70.35 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 146300 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $57A7 PUBLICATION 145301 NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP $594.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145302 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $7.386.05 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145303 NEUTRON $8,693.11 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.S-I4N 145304 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTER $60000 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145305 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $225.43 LAB SUPPLIES 145306 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $5.29 WATER USE 145307 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL $35000 NEW HEALTH ACCOUNT 1453M OI CORPORATION $6 00 LAB SUPPLIES 145309 THE OHMART CORP. $554.41 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145310 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $135.79 TRUCK PARTS 145311 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $2,787.54 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145312 ORANGE VALVE&FTTTING CO. $1,178.93 FITTINGS 145313 OXYGEN SERVICE $2,207.26 SPECIALTY GASES 145314 COUNTY OF ORANGE $5,682,71 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145315 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $17,543,61 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145316 COUNTY OF ORANGE $104,00 PERMIT FEES 145317 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $16,175.44 GAP WATER USE M.O.6.9-93 145310 COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH CARE 51,215.00 SEWAGE SPILL REIMBURSEMENT 145319 P&D ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $1.336.91 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY 145320 PSOC(POOL SUPPLY OF GO) $79.24 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145321 PACIFIC PARTS $8,843.39 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145322 PACIFIC BELL $75.74 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145323 PAINE WEBBER $28,144.69 COP REMARKET FEES 145324 PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $40.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6.12-91 145325 FARMHOUSE TIRE CO. $909.24 TIRES 145326 PASCAL&LUDWIG $8,753.50 CONSTRUCTION P142 145327 PERFORMANCE TRAINING ASSOC. $590.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145328 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $3.085.69 LAB SUPPLIES 145329 PERVO PAINT $148.48 PAINT SUPPLIES 145330 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $5,228.54 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL 145331 PIERCE COMPANIES $398.98 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145332 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $5,572.03 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145333 POLY FABRICS $2,068.80 PVC LINER 145334 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.75 LAB SUPPLIES 145335 POLYPURE,INC. $28,547.43 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3-11-92 145336 POWER SYSTEMS $47.45 ENGINE PARTS 145337 PRITCHETT AND ASSOCIATES,INC. $201.50 PUBLICATION 145338 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $2.128.00 SOIL TESTING 145339 PUBLIC FINANCIAL MGMT.,INC. $13.895.10 FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.6-8.94 145M RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $4,852.64 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6/09/95 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID O6114195 POSTING DATE 06/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145MI R&R INSTRUMENTS $52.08 ELECTRIC PARTS 145342 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1,715.43 TRASH REMOVAL 145343 REGISTRAR,A&WMA $750.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1453" REMEDYTEMP $3,899.56 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL SERVICES 145345 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY 53.719.87 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145346 RENOLD.INC. $0.19 MECHANICAL PARTS 145341 HOWARD RIDLEY CO. 38,9W.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 145348 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $12.139.24 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145349 MILTON RIVERA $13,844.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 145350 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL,INC. $114.56 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145351 SAFETY CARE,INC. $193.96 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 145352 SANCON ENGINEERING,INC. $16,987.32 ENGINEERING SERVICES 145353 R CRAIG SCOTT&ASSOC. $10.231.28 LEGAL SERVICES,PERSONNEL 145354 CITY OF SEAL BEACH $362.30 WATER USE 145355 SEIKO INSTRUMENTS $76.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145356 SHUREWCK SALES $8,532.04 TOOLSIHARDWARE 146357 SIGMA CHEMICAL CO. $36.69 LAB SUPPLIES 145358 SIMON&SCHUSTER $84.86 PUBLICATION 145359 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $401.50 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 145360 SMITH-EMERY CO. $475.00 SOIL TESTING M.O.7-13-94 145361 SOUTH COAST WATER $375.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145362 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON CO. $60,58217 POWER 145353 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16,933.94 POWER 145364 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $4.005.99 NATURAL GAS 145365 SOUTH PACIFIC MARBLE&TILE $1,426.16 GROUNDSKEEPING SUPPLIES 145366 SOUTHWEST SCIENTIFIC $927.81 LAB SUPPLIES 146367 SPECIAL PLASTIC SYSTEMS,INC. $946.92 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145368 STERLING ART $50A4 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145369 SUMMIT STEEL $2,175.69 METAL 145370 SUNSETFORD $273.21 TRUCKPARTS 145371 TAYLOR INDUSTRIAL SOFTWARE $150.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145372 TONY'S LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $593.48 LOCKS&KEYS 145373 TOSHIBA INTERNATIONAL $76.26 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145374 SO CALIF TRANE SERVICE $4.384.14 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145375 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $2,628.60 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.6-8-94 145376 TRIBEST VISUAL DISPLAY $446.00 PROJECTOR SCREEN REPAIR 145377 TRUCK PARTS SUPPLY $310.74 TRUCK PARTS 145373 TRUESDAIL LABS $4,732.98 LAB SERVICES 145379 JG TUCKER&SON.INC. $Z122.99 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145350 UNISOURCE&ROR BUTLER PAPER $395.30 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145381 DATAVAULTAIS SAFE DEPOSIT CORP. $104.00 SAFE DEPOSIT BOX 145382 VWR SCIENTIFIC $860.67 LAB SUPPLIES 145383 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $718.95 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145384 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $2,647.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145355 VERNE'S PLUMBING $430.00 PLUMBING SERVICES 145386 VILLAGE NURSERIES $113.41 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06/14/95 POSTING DATE 0fi114195 WARRANTNO. VENDOR 145387 WATER ENVIRONMENT FED. $187.25 LAB SUPPLIES 145388 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $57,869.12 CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.0.B-12-92&4.13-94 145389 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $439.73 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145390 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL $243.52 TRUCK PARTS 145391 XEROX CORP. $11,428.57 COPIER LEASES 1,372,804.62 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 CONSTR.FUND $5.032.64 #2 0RER FUND 2,983.38 #2 CAP FAC FUND 38.396.73 #2 CONSTR.FUND 10.646.60 #3 OPER FUND 30.421.69 #3 CAP FAC FUND 109.620.35 #3 CONSTR.FUND 10,095.84 #5 OPER FUND 3.462.41 95 CONSTR.FUND 995.82 #6 OPER FUND 1,430.33 #6 CAP FAC FUND 1,700.00 #6 CONSTR.FUND 271.79 #7 OPER FUND 3.556.93 07 CAP FAC FUND 142.53 #7 CONSTR.FUND 764.86 #11 OPER FUND 17.986.99 #11 CAP FAC FUND 2.139.98 #11 CONSTR.FUND 337.14 #14 OPER FUND 17,295.25 05&6 DEER FUND 2.081.88 #8&7 OPER FUND 2,652.26 #7&14 OPER FUND 5,239.14 JT OPER FUND 538,073.30 CORE 270.677.09 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 19,976.94 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 196.842.70 1.372.804.62 a JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(a): consideration of motion to award purchase order for Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044, to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., for the amount not to exceed $57,160.00, plus sales tax. Summary A temporary bleach disinfection system is proposed to replace the existing chlorine emergency outfall disinfection system. The temporary unit is required because the existing system does not have adequate capacity to disinfect treated wastewater as required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. Implementation of the temporary facility will eliminate the need to develop a Risk v Management Prevention Plan which is required by November 1995 at an estimated cost of $100,000.00. The cost for the temporary facilities will be offset by reducing the $75,000.00 per year maintenance expenditures. Installing temporary units will also eliminate a hazardous chemical from the treatment facility, thus improving worker and public safety. Sealed bids, for one-year rental period, with an alternate bid for direct purchase, were received from two (2) prequali ied suppliers. Only one company bid on the rental period, whereas both companies bid on the direct purchase alternate bid. On the direct purchase alternative, the low bid of $57,160.00, was submitted by Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., and the high bid of $69,900.00 was submitted by Arden Industries. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends award of a purchase order to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc.,the lowest responsible bidder, for the purchase of the temporary emergency outfall disinfection system in the amount of $57,160.00, plus applicable sales tax. Fiwwww�mwrnoass COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS + April 14, 1995 0 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA tp8aa EW 6 sVBAIE MEMORANDUM eo.BD%6+a, n+naszza++ TO: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager FROM: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager SUBJECT: Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System Specification No. R-044 Sealed bids were opened May 9, 1995, for the Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044. Tabulation of bids is as follows: Twelve-month Direct Purchase Firm Rental Period (Alternate) Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc. Pittsburgh, PA $60,960.00 $57,160.00 Arden Industries Rancho Cordova, CA No-Bid $69,900.00 Sealed bids, for one-year rental period, with an alternate bid for direct purchase, were received from two (2) prequalified suppliers. Only one company bid on the rental period, whereas both companies bid on the direct purchase alternate bid. On the direct purchase alternative, the low bid of $57,160.00, was submitted by Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., and the high bid of $69,900.00 was submitted by Arden Industries. Staff recommends award of a purchase order to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., low bidder, for their alternate bid of direct purchase of the temporary emergency outtall disinfection system in the amount of $57,160.00, plus applicable sales tax. Katherine Yarosh Senior Buyer WeAereby,yoncur whit."foregoing recommarKWM: i Ted Moffman, Pur asing Me ger aryector of ,G. St, ad, Robert J. Ooten Dirsince Assistant Director of Operations COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS r April 14, 1995 01 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10E44 EWE AVENUE MEMORANDUM Go.BOX B127 FDUWAIN VAUSY,CGUFeM11A 8272E-8127 0141EE2-2411 TO: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager FROM: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager ` SUBJECT: Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System - Specification No. R-044 Sealed bids were opened May 9, 1995, for the Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044. Tabulation of bids is as follows: Twelve-month Direct Purchase Firm Rental Period (Alternate) Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc. Pittsburgh, PA $60,960.00 $57.160.00 Arden Industries Rancho Cordova, CA No-Bid $69,900.00 Sealed bids, for one-year rental period, with an alternate bid for direct purchase, were received from two (2) prequalified suppliers. Only one company bid on the rental period, whereas both companies bid on the direct purchase alternate bid. On the direct purchase alternative, the low, bid of $57.160.00, was submitted by Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., and the high bid of $69,900.00 was submitted by Arden Industries. Staff recommends award of a purchase order to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., low bidder, for their alternate bid of direct purchase of the temporary emergency outfall disinfection system in the amount of $57,160.00, plus applicable sales tax. )i L�L..1-4J 7a)C]Jl Katherine— Yarosh r Senior Buyer We hereby,yoncur wkh ))e foregoing recommendation: TedHoffman,' Pur asing Ma } &. �.✓ ry G. Str ed, Robert J. Ooten Director of nance Assistant Director of Operations i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(b): consideration of Resolution No. 95-56 authorizing staff to procure natural gas from a private manufacturer and award a contract for the purchase of natural gas to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation,for a discount price of$0.0259/MMBTU below monthly National Gas Intelligence Index price, for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Anticipated annual savings of between $100,000.00 and $200,000.00, for the estimated monthly natural gas use of 34,000 MMBTU. Summary The Districts use natural gas to supplement digester gas in the Central Generation facilities. Natural gas has typically been purchased from Southern California Gas Company (the Gas Company). Due to the de-regulation of the natural gas industry, natural gas is now available on the market for less than it is available through the Gas Company. In order to take advantage of the savings, staff solicited bids from private .. suppliers for the purchase of natural gas. Staff estimated consumption is 34,000 MMBTU (Million British Thermal Units) of natural gas per month. Refer to the attached staff report for additional detail. Sealed bids were received on May 23, 1995, for the supply of natural gas for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Three bids were received. The low bid was a discounted price of $0.0259/MMBTU below the monthly Natural Gas Intelligence Index (NGI) price and the high bid was a zero-dollar discount price from the NGI price. The low bid price averaged 20% below the unit price paid to the Gas Company during the 1994 calendar year. Based on a monthly anticipated usage of 34,000 MMBTU and fluctuations in market price, the Districts will spend between$800,000.00 to$900,000.00 annually for Central Generation fuel (natural gas). Natural gas used for building heating, hot water, or other domestic plant uses has not been de-regulated and the Districts will still purchase natural gas from the Gas Company for those uses. Staff Recommendation Staff requests authorization to purchase Central Generation natural gas from a private supplier during the one-year contract period beginning August 1, 1995. In addition, staff recommends the Districts award the natural gas contract to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, the lowest responsible bidder, for the purchase of natural gas at the discounted unit price of$0.0259/MMBTU below the Natural Gas Intelligence Index pricing, for a one-year period. MWPOC4YIELMT PRIW.% _ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS �. W ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA June 7, 1995 10em ELLS AWNUE PO BOX 8127 FOUNTNN VALLEY.G FOAMA 92129�9127 En.n 9923Ai1 STAFF REPORT Award Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160 The Districts purchase natural gas for plant uses and as a supplement to digester gas as fuel for the Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 Central Generation facilities. Central Generation produces electricity for the Districts' treatment plants. The utilization of natural gas offsets the purchase of electricity from Southern California Edison. Staff estimates a savings of $6,000,000.00 annually with the operation of the Central Generation facility. In addition, staff estimated that the annual consumption for Plant No. 1 (CG1) and Plant No. 2 (CG2) Central Generation facilities is 360,000 million and 48,000 million British Thermal Units (MMBTU) respectively. In 1991, the California Public Utilities Consumption (CPUC) de-regulated the natural gas industry. This decision by the CPUC allowed private marketers to provide natural gas service to California customers, rather than the Southern California Gas Company (the Gas Company). Districts' staff studied the alternative of purchasing natural gas from a private marketer and concluded that natural gas could be procured from a private marketer at a lower cost without compromising service or product quality. Because the CPUC has not de-regulated natural gas for building heating, hot water, or domestic uses of less than 250,000 themes per year, some natural gas will be purchased from the Gas Company for those purposes at a cost of approximately $200,000.00. The Districts have traditionally purchased natural gas for the Central Generation facilities from the Gas Company. The Gas Company purchases gas from fields in Utah, Texas and other locations, transports it to Southern California, and then distributes the gas to its customers. The Gas Company has long-term contracts with the various gas fields which locks in higher unit priced fuel. The higher cost for natural gas is passed to the customer. Gas marketers, on the other hand, purchase natural gas from the gas field offering the lowest gas prices and can offer the customer a lower priced gas than the Gas Company. The Gas Company will continue to transport the gas from the California border to the customer's site, irrespective of who the supplier of gas is. The Districts will have a contract with the Gas Company to pay for the cost of natural gas transportation. The Districts opened bids on May 23, 1995, for the purchase of approximately 30,000 MMBTU/month and 4,000 MMBTU/month for CG1 and CG2 respectively, for a one- year period beginning August 1, 1995. The low bidder, Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, proposes to supply natural gas at a dry unit cost per MMBTU at a proposed discount of $0.0259 from the specified monthly value as indicated in the appropriate Natural Gas Intelligence Price Index (NGI). The NGI is a monthly publication that publishes the average price of gas during each monthly period. The unit price of gas fluctuates from day to day, and the NGI summarizes the average monthly unit price. The discounted price of $0.0259 when applied to the 1994 NGI r average translates into natural gas cost of $1.815/MMBTU for that 1994 calendar year. This cost represents approximately a 20% decrease from the 1994 Gas Company average border price of $2.338/MMBTU. As an example, the Districts purchased 404,868 MMBTU of natural gas during the 1994 calendar year. Had the Districts purchased fuel from the lowest bidder, we would have paid $735,000.00, plus gas transportation charges. The Districts actually paid $946,000.00, plus transportation charges during 1994. This difference in cost represents a savings of about $200,000.00 a year from the Gas Company prices. Staff anticipates that the Districts may save as much as$150,000.00 during the contract period,depending on fluctuations in gas market prices. The Districts received sealed bids on May 23, 1995, for the supply of natural gas for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Three bids where received. The low bid was a discount price of$0.0259/MMBTU below the NGI and the high bid was a zero discount from the NGI. The low bid price averaged approximately 20% below the price currently paid to the Gas Company. Based on usage of 34,000 MMBTU of fuel/month, it is anticipated that the Districts will spend between $800,000.00 to $900,000.00 for the one year period. As a point of information, the Districts will still be paying an estimated $250,000.00 in transportation charges to the Gas Company for conveying the gas from the California border to our gas meter and we will be purchasing approximately $200,000.00 of fuel from the Gas Company for building heating and hot water. The estimated total fuel costs for the twelve month period is $1,300,000.00. The Districts will be entering into a transportation contract with the Gas Company in order to transport the fuel from the California border to our facility. The cost associated with transporting natural gas must be paid regardless of who supplies the fuel. Staff Recommendation Staff is requesting authorization to purchase natural gas from a private marketer rather than the Gas Company during the contract period indicated. In "addition, staff recommends that the Districts award the natural gas contract to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, the lowest responsible bidder, for the purchase of natural gas at the discounted unit price of $0.0259/MMBTU below the Natural Gas Index listed price, for a one-year period. MAE:FD:ct BASPHP-160.GAS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS y of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA April 14, 1995 iOW ELLIE AVENUE AD.Box E127 MEMORANDUM NTNNTAIN VALLEY.uuroFNIA e272e.8127 o+<i EEa-a4n TO: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager FROM: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF NATURAL GAS SPECIFICATION NO. P-160 Sealed bids were opened May 23, 1995, for the Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160, for a one year period August 1, 1995. Tabulation of bids is as follows: PROPOSED DISCOUNT COMPANY FACTOR Amoco Energy Trading Corporation $0.0259 Newport Beach, CA Enron Capital & Trade Resources $0.01 Long Beach, CA Broad Street Oil & Gas $0.0 Pismo Beach, CA Staff recommends a contract be awarded to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, for the purchase of natural gas, for a discount price of$0.0259IMMBTU below monthly National Gas Intelligence Index price, fora one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Anticipated annual savings are between$100,000.00 and $200,000.00, for the estimated monthly natural gas use of 34,000 MMBTU. Provisions are in the specifications for four consecutive one-year contract extension periods. k OJD-u,2:.'11.L. yan Katherine Yarash Senior Buyer We.h§reby concur with the foregoing recommendation: Ted Hoffman, PUT asing Ma ary G. Stre Robert J. Ooten Director of Finance Assistant Director of Operations JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(C): Consideration of Resolution No. 95-57, Supporting the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC); and appoint the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as the altemate representative. Summary On April 20, 1995, Regional Advisory and Planning Committee (RAPC) members approved a proposed RAPC reconfiguration that increases the membership from 14 to 21. The purpose of the reconfiguration is to strengthen Orange County's collective voice in regional issues, particularly concerning the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and air quality matters. While the new RAPC structure was approved by the County and League of Cities, they have requested that the new configuration be endorsed by all agency participants since RAPC's actions are only advisory to the jurisdictionstagencies RAPC represents. `...� Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of the resolution regarding reconfiguration of RAPC, as identified in Attachment A, and the appointment of the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as an alternate representative for RAPC. O&K COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ea .1 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 109 ELLIS AVENUE PO.8OX2127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728.8129 47M852-2411 June 15, 1995 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item (9)(c): Consideration of motion to approve the resolution Supporting the reconfiguration of the Regional Advisory and Planning Committee (RAPC) as identified in Attachment A and appoint the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as an alternate representative for RAPC. Background The Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC) was organized as an advisory body in 1991, by the Board of Supervisors and the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities. RAPC is comprised of elected officials representing the interests of cities, Orange County, the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and the `.d County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. RAPC has provided policy-level guidance and advice to its members on a range of regional issues of mutual interest. These issues have focused on the development of a countywide strategy for the 1991 and 1994 Air Quality Management Plan updates, development of the Measure M Growth Management Component Implementation Manual, and approval of related Growth Management Area boundaries. More recently, RAPC has been given the role of coordinating input and making recommendations to the cities, Orange County and affected special districts and agencies on the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG's) proposed Regional Comprehensive Plan. During the last several months, discussions have occurred among RAPC members regarding how Orange County should continue to accomplish regional planning in general, with specific emphasis on the future role of RAPC. At a meeting on March 17, 1994, RAPC members provided direction to staff to begin exploring this issue and suggested that the Executive Steering Committee (ESC) should undertake these discussions. RAPC members indicated that the focus of these activities should be on how best to continue to provide positive Orange County input to SCAG and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on air quality issues within the region. The members also suggested that an examination be made as to how Orange County should be involved in other regional matters as well. On April 20, 1995, RAPC members approved a proposed reconfiguration to increase the RAPC membership from 14 to 21 as identified below. The purpose of the reconfiguration is to strengthen Orange County's collective voice in regional issues, particularly as they pertain to SCAG and air quality matters. r Existing RAPC 1 Board of Supervisors representative 10 City representatives (one from each Supervisorial District, three Division ESC officers, one large cities representative, one small cities representative) 1 OCTA representative 1 TCA representative 1 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County representative 14 Total Proposed RAPC 11 SCAG Orange County representatives 1 SCAG Board of Supervisor representative 1 Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Governing Board representative (from Cities) 1 AQMD Governing Board representative (from County) 3 Orange County Division League of Cities ESC Officers 1 OCTA representative 1 TCA representative 1 Special Districts representative 1 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County representative 21 Total RAPC Functions Listed below are the draft RAPC functions that will be included in the new proposed reconfiguration bylaws. As you may conclude from reviewing this information, RAPC provides an avenue for the Districts and other Orange County government agencies to have a mechanism to influence the development of controversial and complex regional issues that affect us by uniting through RAPC. a 'w �..✓ Functions 1. Provide a cooperative, coordinated and cost-effective process for its member agencies and interested parties in the development of countywide strategies that address, in general, regional activities that impact or potentially could impact Orange County interests. These activities include: (1) continued development and implementation of air quality management strategies, and (2) subregional review of various regional activities performed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), including SCAG's proposed Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. 2. Provide non-binding policy recommendations and advisory positions on regional activities for transmittal to and consideration by individual member agencies. 3. Exchange information among members pertaining to regional activities and/or activities/issues which could impact members. 4. Serve as a forum for discussion and debate regarding transportation- related and non-transportation subregional activities and governance. 5. Identify and study additional regional issues as requested by members/member agencies and make commensurate advisory recommendations. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of the resolution regarding reconfiguration of RAPC, as identified in Attachment A, and the appointment of the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as an alternate for RAPC. LKH:dk Ref#540073.rp a W+ RESOLUTION NO. SUPPORTING THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL ADVISORY AND PLANNING COUNCIL (RAPC) 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 SUPPORTING THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL ADVISORY AND PLANNING COUNCIL (RAPC) FOR CONTINUED STUDY AND POLICY ADVICE ON REGIONAL ISSUES. WHEREAS, the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC) has met since 1991 to develop consensus and provide policy guidance to Orange County jurisdictions and agencies on regional issues; and, WHEREAS, RAPC's major accomplishments include developing strategies for the `..� 1991 and 1994 Air Quality Management Plan updates, development of the Measure M Growth Management Component Implementation Manual and approval of Growth Management Area boundaries, and providing Orange County subregional input to SCAG in its preparation of a proposed Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 1994, RAPC members directed staff to examine avenues for continued cost effective coordination on regional issues; and, WHEREAS, on April 20, 1995, RAPC approved a proposed RAPC reconfiguration that will allow elected officials who work closest on these matters to be more directly involved in the development of subregional strategies and responses to local, regional, state and federal mandates and requirements; and, ATTACHMENT A i WHEREAS, the proposed RAPC membership would include the following: 11 Orange County Cities delegates to SCAG's Regional Council 1 Orange County Board of Supervisors representative to SCAG's Regional Council 1 Orange County Cities representative to AQMD Governing Board 1 Orange County Board of Supervisors representative to AQMD Governing Board 3 League of Cities Executive Steering Committee Officers 1 OCTA elected representative 1 TCA elected representative 1 Special Districts representative 1 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County elected representative 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 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County endorses the proposed reconfiguration of the Regional Advisory and Planning Council. Section 2. That the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County appoints John C. Cox as its primary representative and Peer A. Swan as an alternate for RAPC until otherwise determined by this body. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(d): Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager, or his designee, 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and directing staff to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. Summary 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 1995-96. Included in the 1995-96 budget is the amount of$647,500 for training, meetings and travel. 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. Recommendation Staff recommends approval. ososo JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(d): Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager, or his designee, 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and directing staff to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. Summary 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 1995-95. Included in the 1995-96 budget is the amount of$647,500 for training, meetings and travel. 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. Recommendation Staff recommends approval. `d OFa9D JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT 3 Agenda Item (9)(e): Consideration of motion to receive and file Summons &Complaints for Subrogation Recovery, 20th Century Insurance Company vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, at al., West Orange County Municipal Court Case No. 215248, relative to property damage sustained in connection with a Districts' vehicle, and authorize Districts' General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the Districts. Summary See attached memorandum dated June 21, 1995 from General Counsel. u Recommendation Staff recommends to receive and file Summons &Complaints from attorneys for 20th Century Insurance Company, and refer to Districts' General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the Districts. \.d 0699E JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT 5 Agenda Item (9)(1): Consideration of Resolutions approving Annexation Agreement with the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation re Annexation/Connection fees for the twenty acre site described by the agreement and known as the "historical district" of the Crystal Cove State Park, in a form acceptable by General Counsel, and authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District(proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park to County Sanitation District No. 5.) Summary In August 1993, the Directors approved a license and reimbursement agreement with Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) and the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation (State) for construction, reimbursement and ownership of sewer facilities to serve the Crystal Cove State Park. These facilities are built with the exception of the future local sewer facilities in and around the"historical district" of Crystal Cove State Park. County Sanitation District No. 5 (CSD 5) has never annexed the 20 acres which surround the"historic district"which includes the old cottages right on the beach. To provide sewer service to this portion of the State Park, it is necessary for the State to request and pay for the annexation to District 5 of these 20 acres. This is proposed as Annexation No. 9 to CSD 5. The annexation agreement provides for the State to pay for a CSD 5 annexation processing fee, a LAFCO processing fee, a State Board of Equalization processing fee, an annexation acreage fee, a connection permit fee and a CEOA documentary handling fee within sixty(60)days of the execution of the agreement and notification by COS 5 to the State. The District received a request dated May 22, 1995 from the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation to annex the said 20.0 acres of territory to the District. This annexation is in accordance with a 1984 property tax agreement with the County of Orange. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the agreement, in a form acceptable to the General Counsel, and recommends approval of initiating proceedings for said Annexation No. 9. � roar JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING U JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (11): Nominations for Joint Chair Summary As provided in the Joint Boards'Rules of Procedures, nominations for the Joint Chair are made at the regular June meeting and the election takes place at the July regular meeting. Nominations and election of the Vice Joint Chair will be conducted at the July regular meeting. For new Directors' information, we have included below an excerpt from the current Rules of Procedures for meetings relative to the election of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization. "H. Chair and Vice Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization. "A Joint Chair and Vice Chair 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 Chair 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 stating their qualifications for the office of Joint Chair. 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 and election for Vice Joint Chair shall be made at the regular Board meeting in July of each year and shall be made immediately following the election of the Joint Chair. "The Joint Chair and Vice Chair shall serve at the pleasure of a majority of the Districts. In the event the office of Chair becomes vacant due to resignation or retirement of the incumbent prior to the expiration of the regular tern,the Vice Joint Chair shall automatically succeed to the office of the Joint Chair and shall continue to serve through the remainder of the regularterm unless sooner removed by action of a majority of the Districts. In the event the office of Vice Joint Chair becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the regular term, 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." 'Subject to the provisions of serving at the pleasure of a majority of the Districts,the Joint Chair shall not serve more than two consecutive one-year terms for which he/she has been elected to the office of Joint Chair.' Recommendation Staff has no recommendation. osii JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING v AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (12)(a): Minutes of the Executive Committee Summary (1) Receive and file draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 24, 1995. (2) Receive and file draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 1, 1995. (3) Receive and file draft Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 7, 1995. (4) Receive and file draft Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 14, 1995. (5) Receive and file draft Executive Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June21, 1995. Summary See attached minutes. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors Receive and file minutes listed above. J 1WPpJf.16^AOBSDlf]A. i County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O. Box 8127 • 10544 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE May 24, 1995 -5:30 p.m. A meeting of the Steering Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held Wednesday, May 24, 1995, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative office- (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: STEERING COMMITTEE: OTHERS PRESENT: Present Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Chair .. Jahn J. Collins, Chair, PDC Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMITS George Brown, Chair, FAHR STAFF PRESENT: Absent: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Roger Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR Jean Tappan, Secretary (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments by any member of the public. (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES `.✓ The minutes of the April 26, 1995 Steering Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 2 May 24, 1995 (5) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR. GENERAL MANAGER AND GENERAL COUNSEL The General Manager reported on information on the Clean Water Act he received while at the AMSA Conference in Washington, DC. It appears that while AMSA supported the Act, there are portions of it that could negatively affect the Districts. We will continue to work with AMSA to try to clear up some of the misunderstandings. (6) STEERING COMMITTEE DISCUSSION ITEMS (a) Recruitments. The Districts are currently recruiting for four positions—Assistant General Manager- Administration, Technical Services Director, Laboratory Manager, and Director of Engineering. The AGM position closes May 26 and it looks like there will be close to 75 applications. David Griffin Assoc. reports that there are some very strong candidates. Three candidates are being interviewed May 25 for the Director of Technical Services position. The interview team will consist of Don McIntyre, Blake Anderson, Bob Murray (David Griffin Assoc.) and Margie Nellor. Dennis Smith of Thev Smith Group, a Human Resources specialist firm, will test the applicants on their perception of the job and the existing department managers will also interview the candidates. The three candidates for the Lab Manager position will be interviewed after the Director of Technical Services is on the job and can be part of the interview team. The Director of Engineering position has been advertised and staff will be doing the recruiting. (b) Budget. The draft budgets will not be mailed with the agenda packages for the PDC Committee, but rather will be presented at the meeting. The revised budget process has taken more time than in the past, but the result will be a much easier to understand document. The major change is in training. The General Manager stated that he believes this is essential. There is $500,000 allocated for training and $134,000 for travel and meetings. This total is about 2% of the total payroll, the industry average. All personnel will be involved. Another consideration is tuition reimbursement. Director Swan indicated that written goals and objectives should be included stating what is the intent and what is to be accomplished. This is included. Training may be considered a requirement for promotion. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 3 May 24, 1995 The effects of reorganization on the personnel budget were discussed. Div. 2150, Management, will add a Communications Division. This group will be responsible for all internal and external communications, including the office aides, and the receptionist. ° Human Resources will separate Safely and Health from Training and make them separate divisions. Finance will break out Information Services as a separate Department under the AGM for Administration and give it Department Head Status. Plant Automation will be left in Information Services for now, though it may be returned to Engineering, depending on several factors, including the qualifications of the new Director of Engineering. Information Services will be broken into two sections; hardware and software. Maintenance and Operations will be separated, each with department status. The security function is going to be privatized. Technical Services is combining the Air Quality, Conservation, Recycle and Reclamation, and Compliance into one division, the Environmental Services ..✓ ° Division. The Microbacteria Lab has been eliminated, reducing the lab personnel from 54 to 47. There will also be a Planning section in Engineering. Director Swan asked about a tracking section, or contracts administration group. This is being included. Blake Anderson explained some of the problems with the Engineering Department and indicated that the new Director of Engineering will have to make them the major effort. The net increase in the Personnel Budget will be 6 authorized positions, or 7.5%. The total actual positions will increase from 600 to 660. This increase is a result of trying to put in place all of Ernst & Young's recommendations and filling many vacancies. The Capital Budget was discussed. The booklet has been prepared and there will be summary of the projects presented at the meetings. (c) Consolidation. The Committee was advised that at the June Board Meeting, Joseph Martin of the Los Alamitos County Water District, would be addressing the District No. 3 Board seeking representation and a seat on the Board. His agency provides sewerage services to the City of Los Alamitos. Tom Woodruff discussed the background and stated that District ,� No. 3 would have to be reorganized and restructured to accommodate this request. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 4 lr May 24, 1995 The idea of one super District with one member from each agency was discussed. The financial ramifications of combining the nine Districts into one must be detailed. The General Manager indicated that this is a governance issue, not a money issue. Staff will report in June on this issue. (d) Privatization. There was a discussion on the privatization of Santa Margarita Water District and the effects it could have on the Districts. The General Manager and Assistant General Manager have had discussions on this as well. The benchmark goal is the cost per million gallons for treatment. that cost now is just over$500 per million gallons. There are other things being considered to reduce expenses, including having SCE take over the operation of Central Power Generation and selling the power. Everything is being considered to meet our goal. (g) Deferred Compensation. The first increment of the money has been received from the County. The General Manager would like to bring this issue to the Executive Committee because it is a policy decision, not a finance decision. Staff was directed to prepare a couple of options. (f) Bankruptcy. Blake Anderson reported on the current status. On Friday, May 19, $295,000,000 was received. The remaining funds due will be in "good as gold" recovery notes due on June 5, and $44 million in claims. Measure R was discussed. County staff asked the OCIP Committee for support. At this time, the County has a deficit of$1.7 billion and Measure R appears to be the only way the County anticipates making up the majority of it. In the event Measure R fails, the County will not have a second chance. All bond holders may be asked to forgive the 11 cents. Blake requested direction about supporting Measure R. The Boards originally supported Blake in his efforts to collect 100 cents on the dollar, and he was directed by the judge that appointed him to the OCIP to use his best judgment on behalf of the Districts, and the interests of all the special districts in representing them. Now some of the cities, and the Directors of the Districts, are opposing the sales tax. The Committee directed Blake to do what he considered proper. The Committee and the General Manager indicated that they would support Blake. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting .. Page 5 May 24, 1995 (7) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (8) OTHER BUSINESS No other business was discussed. (9) MATTERS TO BE REPORTED AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were no matters to be reported. (10) MATTERS ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT ..✓ There were no matters for a future agenda. (11) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting will be at the call of the Joint Chair. (12) ADJOURNMENT The Steering Committee adjourned at approximately 7:20 p.m. Submitted by: e e n Tappan, St#erfhg Committee Secretary j:M9tlx'@mktrummMe,%D12fi%.min County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O.Box 8127.10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728.8127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE Thursday, June 1. 1995 at 5:30 P.m. A regular meeting of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, and 14 of Orange County, California was held on Thursday, June 1, 1995, at the Districts' Administrative Office. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was taken and a quorum declared present, as follows: PLANNING. DESIGN AND OTHERS PRESENT: CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE: Mary Lee, John Carollo Engineers John Collins, Chair Bill Knopf, John Carollo Engineers John Cox, Joint Chair `.� Shirley Dettloff Barry Hammond STAFF PRESENT: Margie Rice Don McIntyre, General Manager Sheldon Singer, Vice Chair Blake Anderson, Assistant General Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair Manager Charles Sylvia John Linder, Director of Engineering Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance ABSENT: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Don Griffin Mark Esquer, Operations Engineer Bob Zemel Jeff Shubik, Project Manager Paul Mitchell, Project Manager Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 2 June 1, 1995 (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM The Vice Chair was in attendance, therefore, there was no need for a Chair pro tem. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments received. (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF April 6. 1995 MEETING The minutes of the May 4, Planning, Design and Construction Committee were approved as written. (6) REPORTS OF COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR There was no report made by the Committee Chair. (b) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager apologized for the confusion regarding the Ad Hoc Committee meeting, but wanted all committee members to be in attendance and thus reported that the Ad Hoc Committee meeting will be held after next month's Planning, Design and Construction Committee meeting on Thursday, July 6, 1995. There will be a report sent out to the Ad Hoc Committee members before that meeting so they can be familiar with the subject matter. (c) REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING The Director of Engineering introduced Staff that were present and Mary Lee and Bill Knopf from John Carollo Engineers. (d) REPORT OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL There was no report made by the General Counsel. `..� Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 3 June 1, 1995 (6) STAFF OVERVIEW OF DISTRICTS' PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES (a) Status Report on Planning. Design and Construction Projects The Director of Engineering discussed the concept of Partnering and gave a verbal report on it. Partnering is the contracting of trust and cooperation between people or parties entering into a contract, especially construction contracts. Job No. P1-36-2 is targeted as the project to be used. A Facilitator, with wastewater experience, will be hired to lead the "team' consisting of contractor, owner, subcontractors, representatives from Operations and Maintenance and Engineering staff. Because of the size of this project (P1-36-2, Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1), it was determined that it would serve not only as a good test project but that it would be a way of getting an improved project. The General Manager stated that he had been to a meeting where the concept was discussed and that he thought it was a good idea. ... Chair Collins stated that he would like for the Committee to encourage this test case opportunity and to complete a procedure book for future reference. The Director of Engineering stated that there would be an agenda done for all meetings which will take place off site. (b) Status Report on Budget re Operational and Capital Issues The General Manager thanked the Director of Finance and his staff for their hard work on the budget and gave a brief overview of the new format. He went over the operational part of the budget and noted each part and its importance in the overall clarity of the budget picture and discussed how each department's expenses were broken down individually. The committee then had a question and answer period. One question brought up by a committee member was in regard to the lease on the storage facility at the comer of Garfield and Ward. The Director of Finance reported that it was presently on a 15-year lease and the Districts receive $50,000. per year. The Assistant General Manager discussed the capital part of the budget, section by section, and gave a brief synopsis on each. Questions were asked by the Committee Chair and Committee members and answered by the General Manager, the Assistant General Manager and the Director of Finance. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting , Page 4 June 1, 1995 Due to the fact that the budget was presented to the Committee the evening of the meeting, there was no action taken on the budget at this time. (c) Status Report on Process Area Fire Protection. Signage, and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plants 1 and 2. Job Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46 The Assistant General Manager presented a report regarding the status of the Process Area Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications Systems at Plant No. 1 and 2. He discussed how the Districts' fire protection and emergency response facilities must grow as our plants expand and how we must use City water, not secondary or reclaimed water for these systems. It was moved, seconded and passed that the Planning, Design and Construction Committee reaffirm its position that Job Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46 are critical to the operation and maintenance of the treatment plants due to safety concerns. ..J (d) Status Report on Delegation of Authority The General Manager presented the report on the Delegation of Authority to the Committee. After discussion, it was decided that there needed to be some changes, clarifications and modifications to the document. It was moved, seconded and passed to approve the concept with suggested changes made. (a) Status Report on Orange County Water Reclamation Project The Assistant General Manager gave the Committee the status report on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. The study identifies the preliminary technical, financial and siting issues associated with the project which could be built in phases over the next thirty years and reclaim up to 100 million gallons per day. It was moved, seconded and passed to receive and file the Staff Report dated June 1, 1995. (7) OLD BUSINESS None to report. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 5 June 1, 1995 (8) ACTIONS REPUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS (a) Monthly Change Order Report by Director of Engineering The Director of Engineering discussed the Monthly Change Order report on items approved by General Manager in accordance with Resolution No. 95-9. It was moved, seconded and passed to receive and file the Monthly Change Order Report. (b) Action Items PDC95.21: Consideration of the following actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2: (1) Recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and 2 to the Plans and Specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. (2) Receive and file bid tabulation, and recommend to award contract to Margate Construction Inc., in the amount of$35,291,000. It was moved, seconded and passed to recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and 2 to the Plans and Specifications of Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2, for clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues, and to receive and file bid tabulation and recommend award of contract to Margate Construction Inc., in the amount of$35,291,000. (9) ADDENDA TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS There were no addenda to Professional Services Agreements (10) NEW PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS PDC95-22: Consideration of the following actions relative to Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2: Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 6 , June 1, 1995 (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of a Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers, providing for design and construction support services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, direct expenses, subconsultants, and fixed profit, in an amount not to exceed $193,100. Jeff Shubik gave a presentation on the Main Sewer Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No J-33-2 and staff recommendation on the award of a Professional Services Agreement. It was moved, seconded and passed to receive and file Planning, Design and Construction Committee certification, proposals and award of Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers re Main Sewer Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2-for an amount not to exceed $193,100.00. (11) CONSIDERATION OF NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS There were no new or miscellaneous items discussed. (12) CLOSED SESSION The Chair determined that there was no need for a Closed Session. (13) OTHER BUSINESS. IF ANY No other business was discussed. (14) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING v There were no matters discussed. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 7 June 1, 1995 (15) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT There were no matters discussed. (16) NEXT MEETING (a) Executive Committee Meeting -Wednesday, June 21, 1995 at 5:30 p.m. (b) Joint Boards of Directors Meeting -Wednesday, June 28, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. (c) Planning, Design and Construction Committee -Thursday, July 6, 1995 at 5:30 p.m. (d) Ad Hoc Committee -Thursday, July 6, 1995 following the PDC Committee Meeting. (17) ADJOURNMENT 4.. The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Linda lb. Himenes Planning, Desig and Construction Committee Secretary wPdwIpdc95 Ju yMI95.min County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O. Box 8127 • 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone:(714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 7. 1995 - 5:30 PM A meeting of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on June 7, 1995, at 5:30 P.M. at the Districts' Administrative offices. (1) ROLLCALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present as follows: Committee Directors Present: Staff Present: Pat McGuigan, Chair Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Gary Hasenstab, Director of Human Resources Barry Denes Irwin Haydock, Compliance Manager Norman Z. Eckenrode Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance James M. Ferryman John Linder, Director of Engineering `.r Mark A. Murphy Don McIntyre, General Manager Julie Be Hai Nguyen, Environmental Specialist I Sal Sapien Bob Ooten, Director of Operations Peer Swan George Robertson, Principal Environmental Specialist Michael Rozengurt, Associate Engineer III Gary Streed, Director of Finance Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Committee Directors Absent: Others Present: Victor Leipzig, Vice Chair John Collins, PDC Chair Bernard Halmos, Fountain Valley Fire Chief Dr. Andrew Lissner, SAIC Ron Pitman, Brown and Caldwell (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN PRO TEM. IF NECESSARY No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 2 of 6 June 7, 1995 (4) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF OPERATIONS, DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Director Pat McGuigan, Committee Chair, welcomed Director John Collins, Planning and Design Committee Chair and Bernard Heimos, Fountain Valley Fire Chief to the meeting. (b) REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER Don McIntyre briefly mentioned the plant tours being given for the Directors and encouraged any Directors who wish to come for the June 17 tour to do so. (c) REPORT OF ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF OPERATIONS Blake Anderson brought the Committee up-to-date with the ongoing bankruptcy situation. (d) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE Ed Hodges reported that the Techite Pipe case is winding down. (e) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL No report was given. (5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 3. 1995 There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held on May 3, 1995, it was moved, seconded and carried that said minutes be deemed approved as mailed. (6) OLD BUSINESS OMTS95.04a: Consideration of motion to authorize the Engineering Department to proceed with the Process Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Job Nos. `..� Pt-38-5 and P2.46 - Reference PDC(6)(c) - Blake Anderson Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance .. and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 3 of 6 June 7, 1995 Blake Anderson gave a brief but detailed presentation on the necessity of this project. After some discussion, it was moved seconded and carried to authorize the Engineering Department to proceed with the Process Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Job Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46. (7) NEW BUSINESS Consideration of the following for review or action was made out of order: OMTS9"26: PDC(6)(b) Overview of the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 1995- 96 - Don McIntyre and staff Don McIntyre gave an overview of the proposed budget and the philosophy behind its new look and content. Gary Streed walked the Committee through the layout and pointed out staffs intent for the "eyes to match the stomachs." Blake Anderson presented the Joint Capital Improvement section of the budget for the . , coming year and how it fits in the plan for the next ten years. Gary Streed and his key staff members were praised for their immense efforts in the production of the budget book. OMTS95-027: PDC(6)(d) Consideration of Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Approve Expenditure of Funds up to $50,000 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9 - Don McIntyre and staff Don McIntyre gave a brief presentation on the Delegation of Authority and the intent, by implementation of the document, to put responsibility at the lowest possible level. There was a change noted (in gray) on Page 4, Item I(E), first line of the first paragraph: "The General Manager, Assistant General Managers, Department Directors and Division Managers will receive monthly cumulative updated reports from the Finance Department on all major contracts, services and .✓ purchase orders." Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 4 of 6 June 7, 1995 Blake Anderson also noted the following change on Page 8, Item III(C) as suggested by Tom Woodruff, General Counsel: "All hiring and promotions will adhere to all recruitment and hiring policies of the Human Resources Department, Board of Directors, resolutions and Memoranda of Understandings, and require the co-signatures of the Director of Human Resources and the Department Head,:with a statement affirming that the policies have been followed." With the noted changes, it was moved, seconded and carried to approve this item to be sent to the Executive Committee and the Joints Boards. OMTS95-028: PDC(6)(e) Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project It was moved, seconded and carried to recommend to the Executive Committee and the Joint Boards the adoption of this policy. OMTS95-029: Consideration of a Motion for the Adoption of a Policy for the U Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems - Ed Hodges Ed Hodges gave a presentation on the Districts' current practice for the control and containment of spills. After some discussion, it was moved seconded and carried to recommend the adoption of this policy to the Executive Committee and the Joint Boards. In conjunction with the decision to carry this item forward, the Committee asked that Ed Hodges inform all the City Managers in our Districts of our policy and make a presentation of the policy available to them. OMTS95-030: Consideration of Addendum No. 3 to Professional Services agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. For Environmental Consulting Services - Ed Torres After a brief discussion, it was moved, seconded and carried to approve staff s recommendations. OMTS95-031: Consideration of an OMITS Committee Request for Information on the Required and Elective Elements of the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP) - Irwin Haydock A brief presentation by Irvin Haydock, Compliance Manager, was given In response to a request for information by the OMTS Committee. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance .d and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 5 of 6 June 7, 1995 The Committee requested that this item be readdressed at a future meeting. OMTS95-032: Consideration of Executive Committee's Request for Staff Response to Kinnetic Laboratories' Allegations Concerning the Consultant Selection Process for the Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program - Ed Torres A brief presentation was given by Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services, in response to a request by the OMTS Committee for a response by staff to the allegations of Kinnetic Laboratories. OMTS95-033: Consideration of Resolution No. 95-033, awarding the contract for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Ouffall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997 for a cost not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one- year renewals - George Robertson George Robertson, Principal Environmental Specialist in the Compliance Division, gave a brief presentation. After some discussion, a vote was taken of how many Committee members were in favor of supporting staffs recommendation. All members were in favor with the exception of Peer Swan who wished to abstain. OMTS95-034: Consideration of a Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Issue a Purchase Order to the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) for the period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 - Ed Torres It was moved, seconded and carried to approve staffs recommendations. OMTS95-035: Consideration of Motion Authorizing Staff to Issue a Purchase Order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995- 96 - Ed Torres It was moved, seconded and carried to approve staffs recommendations. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 6 of 6 June 7, 1995 (8) CLOSED SESSION The Chair declared there were no items for closed session. (9) OTHER BUSINESS. IF ANY Staff is to look into the free training that FEMA offers . (10) MATTERS ON WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING 1. The Committee requested that Information on the Required and Elective Elements of the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP), item OMTS95-031, be readdressed at a future meeting. 2. Staff is to provide to the Committee, at the next meeting, information of the Clean Water Act going to Congress. 3. Staff is to report on the Districts' safety and security situation at the July OMITS Committee meeting. 4. Staff is to look into worse-case scenarios and the planning needed, once the Districts get their feet more firmly on the ground and recover from the bankruptcy situation. (11) MATTERS A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT None. (12) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING DATES AND ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS From now on, the Committee meeting calendar will be kept as a one-year calendar and will be brought up-to-date for the next meeting. (13) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 8:15 P.M. /cm R:\W PDOCM10�EH10MTSWINUTES.95t.W PD County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California t P.O.Box 8127.108"Ellis Avenue j Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714(862-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Wednesday, June 14, 1995. 5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on June 14, 1995 at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative offices. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: Committee Directors Present: Staff Present: John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chairman Don McIntyre, General Manager George Brown, Chairman Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Jan Debay Gary$treed, Director of Finance Burnie Dunlap Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance John M. Gullixson Bob Oaten, Director of Operations Wally Linn Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Thomas Sallareili John Linder, Director of Engineering Roger R. Stanton, Vice Chairman Mike White, Controller William G. Steiner Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Peer Swan Others Present Committee Directors Absent: Tom Woodruff, General Counsel James H. Flora (2) APPOINTMENT OF A CHAIRMAN PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments were made. (4) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER. ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER(S). DIRECTOR OF FINANCEITREASURER, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND GENERAL COUNSEL �..✓ (a) Report of the Committee Chair George Brown, Chairman, reported that a change to current remarketing Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 2 June 14, 1995 agreements was requested by one of the parties to the previously authorized reassignments. A vote was taken to add consideration of this change to the agenda, and to take action as a part of the Report of General Counsel. (b) Report of the General Manager General Manager Don McIntyre, reminded the Committee of the Directors' orientation and tour to be conducted Saturday, June 17, 1995. (c) Report of Assistant General Manager(s) Assistant General Manager Blake Anderson updated the Committee on recent events regarding the resolution of the County bankruptcy and the potential impact on the Districts and a quick settlement. (d) Report of the Finance Director/Treasurer Finance DirectorfFreasurer Gary G. Streed reviewed the report included with the agenda package and updated the Committee on the status of the Orange County Investment Pool and the Districts' self-managed bank and investment accounts. The December 6, 1994 reserves receivable from the County will be reported as a long-term receivable and not as an investment in the future. (a) Report of the Director of Human Resources None. (f) Report of General Counsel Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, gave a status report on previous action taken by the FAHR Committee and Joint Boards relative to changing the Remarketing Agents on all three of our current outstanding financing programs. He advised that the Series A and C have been fully completed, with all documents executed. The Agreements and documents relating to 1993 Series Refunding are complete and approved by all parties, however Societe Generale would like clarification on a provision relating to obligation to pay the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement. It was moved, seconded and duly carried to accept the requested amendment of Societe Generale to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement that provides that if the Certificates are converted :J to a fixed mode "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable fee." Minutes of Finance. Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 3 June 14, 1995 �...' (5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the draft minutes of the May 10, 1995, meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee. (6) Consideration of motion recommending approval of the proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets and forwarding them to the Executive Committee as follows: Joint Works OperatinarNorking Capital $54,380.000 Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance 307.000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272.000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolvina 33,530,000 After discussion on this item, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Executive Committee approve the proposed Joint Works Operating, Joint Works Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets for 1995-96. (7) Consideration of Planning. Design and Construction Committee recommendation PDC(6)(d): and Operations. Maintenance and Technical Services Committee recommendation OMTS95-027 Re: Consideration of Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Approve Expenditure of Funds up to $50,000 for Contracts. Services and Purchase Orders. Excludina Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law and Professional Services Aareements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9 After discussion on this item, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Executive Committee recommend the Boards of Directors: Authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to $50,000 for contracts, services and purchase orders, excluding public works contracts governed by State law, and professional services agreement governed by Board Resolution 95-9. (6) OLD BUSINESS FAHR95-25 Classification. Compensation. and Other Terms, Conditions. Rules and Regulations of Employment After discussion on this matter, staff was directed to return this item, including examples and amounts, for future consideration. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 4 June 14, 1995 FAHR95-26 Consideration of Motion for Renewal of All-Risk Insurance (including Fire. Flood and Earthquake Coverage)for FY 995-96 After discussion on this matter, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend the Executive Committee approve renewal of the Districts' All-Risk insurance program including earthquake, flood, personal property and business interruption, in the amounts of$200 million All-Risk, and $30 million earthquake with deductibles of$25,000 for all perils except earthquake and 5% per unit ($250,000 min.) for earthquake, for a total premium not to exceed $1.4 million. FAHR95-29 Consideration of Motions to Select External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program After discussion on this matter, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend the Executive Committee: 1. Select the firm of Pacific Management Investment Company to serve as the Districts' external money manager, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. 2. Select Mellon Trust Company as master custodial services bank, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. (9) NEW BUSINESS FAHR95-30 Consideration of Motion to Make Revisions to MPRP (Management Performance Review Plan) Performance Incentive Values After discussion on this matter, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Executive Committee approve the following multi-phased approach, in order to realize the initial objectives of the MPRP program to provide an incentive for consistent meritorious performance: 1. Effective in July 1995, authorize funds totaling $173,000 beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. Payments will be made in 1995-96. 2. Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll (totaling $453,000)for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst &Young. This fund would be distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1) as in the past, and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund which would Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 5 June 14, 1995 `J be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. Payments would be made in 1996-97. 3. Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program, and particularly the review process as recommended by Ernst&Young. (10) CLOSED SESSION The Chairman reported to the Committee the need for a Closed Session as authorized by Government Code Section 54957.6 to discuss and consider the item that is specified as Item 10 on the published Agenda. The Committee convened in closed session at 7:45 p.m. At 8:00 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommendations of the Management Staff contained in the report of June 14, 1995, relating to changes in job titles for certain confidential employees, the dissolution of the confidential employees bargaining unit, and the designation of certain job classifications as confidential employees. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Committee 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. (11) OTHER BUSINESS, IF ANY None. (12) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING None. (13) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT None. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 6 June 14, 1995 (14) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING DATES AND ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS Committee Chairman George Brown requested the Committee refer to the calendar of future meetings on the back of the Notice of Meeting and reminded the Directors that the next Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, July 12, 1995. He recommended the Committee also review the list of future meeting topics. The Committee will not meet in August, November and December 1995, as no Executive Committee meetings are scheduled, and no FAHR Committee recommendation could be carried to the respective Joint Board meetings. (15) ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. GGS:Ic J:\W POOL VIMCRPNtIFPC Mfp\FPCBSVANIfIESYFNIRR.85 I County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California V P.O. Box 8127 a 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-0127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE June 21, 1995 - 5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Executive Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on Wednesday, June 21, 1995, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative offices. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: OTHERS PRESENT: Present: Director George Brown, FAHR Chair Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Chair Jeff Cross, Exec. Dir., SCCWRP Pal McGuigan, Chair, District 1 and OMTS Chair STAFF PRESENT: John J. Collins, Chair, District 2 and PDC Chair Don McIntyre, General Manager Sal A Sapien, Chair, District 3 Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Jan Debay, Chair, District 5 Gary Hasenstab, Director of Personnel Barry Hammond, Chair, District 7 Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance Victor Leipzig, Chair, District 11 John Linder, Director of Engineering Roger Stanton, County Supervisor Bob Ooten, Director of Operations William Steiner, County Supervisor Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Don R. Griffin, Past Joint Chair Gary Streed, Director of Finance Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary Absent: Irwin Haydock, Compliance Manager George Robertson, Sr. Environmental Specialist James Ferryman, Chair, District 6 Michael Rozengurt, Associate Engineer Thomas Saltarelli, Chair, District 14 Mike Moore, Project Specialist (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments by any member of the public. L r Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 2 of 7 June 21, 1995 (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the May 17, 1995, Executive Committee meeting were approved as revised. (5) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER. AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR The Committee had no report. (b) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager asked to delay his report until Supervisor Stanton arrived. At that time he reported on meetings he has had with County of Orange staff, including Mr. Popejoy and Sheriff Gates as well as Supervisor Stanton, on the possibility of the Districts acquiring the landfills. After a discussion on liability, staff was directed to continue to study the possibility of operating, or acquiring and operating, the solid waste landfills and report back to the Executive Committee at the July 26, 1995 meeting. (c) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel reported on the results of the Techite Pipe (CSD No. 3 v. United Technologies Corp.) trial. The jury awarded District No. 3 over $6.4 million. It is expected that the case will be appealed. (6) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held May 24, 1995. (7) (a) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting held June 1, 1995. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to concur in the recommended actions of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting held June 1, 1995, as follows: Item (6)(e) Consideration of motion authorizing staff support and funding in the amount of$100,000 as proposed in the 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. « Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 3 of 7 June 21, 1995 PDC95-21 Consideration of the following actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2: (1) Consideration of motion approving Addenda 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. (2) Consideration of a resolution receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P2-36-2, to Margate Construction, Inc., in the total amount of$35,291,000. PDC95-22 Consideration of the following actions relative to Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2: (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the PDC Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of a Professional Services Agreement to John Cardillo Engineers, providing for design and construction support services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, direct expenses, subconsullanls, and fixed profit, in an amount not to exceed $193,100. (8) (a) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting held June 7, 1995. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to concur in the recommended actions of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting held June 7, 1995, as follows: OMTS95-029 Consideration of motion to adopt a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems. OMTS95-030 Consideration of the following actions re Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc., "` providing for Environmental Consulting Services: Minutes of the Executive Committee a Page 4 of 7 June21, 1995 (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said additional services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc., providing for an extension of services for a six-month period beginning July 1, 1995, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of $295,500. OMTS95-032 Consideration of Executive Committee's request for Staff response to Kinnetic Laboratories' allegations concerning the Consultant Selection Process for the Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program. There was a verbal report by Jeff Cross, Executive Director of SCCWRP, member of review panel. After discussion, staff was directed to forward recommendations to reject bids to the Board for consideration from now on. OMTS95-033 Consideration of the following actions re Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Ouffall, Specification No. P-156R, providing for Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program, (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Science Application International Corporation for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution recommending award of a Professional Services Contract to to Science Application International Corporation, for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals. OMTS95-035 Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for payment of various FY 1995-96 fees required by SCAQMD rules and regulations. Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 5 of 7 June 21, 1995 (9) (a) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting held June 14, 1995. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to concur in the recommended actions of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting held June 14, 1995, as follows: Item 4(f): Recommend approving an amendment of the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement with Societe Generale that provides that if the Certificates are converted to a fixed mode, .at the direction of the Bank. the Bank will Pay the reasonable fee." FAHR95-26: Consideration of motion approving Renewal of All-Risk Insurance (including Fire, Flood and Earthquake Coverage) for FY 1995-96, for a total premium not to exceed $1.4 million. FAHR95-29: Consideration of the following motions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program: (1) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to negotiate a professional services agreement with Pacific Management Investment Company to serve as the Districts' external money manager. (2) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to negotiate a professional services agreement with Mellon Trust Company as master custodial services bank. FAHR95-30: Consideration of motion to make the following revisions to Management Performance Review Plan (MPRP) Performance Incentive Values: (1) Effective in July 1995, authorize funds totaling $173.000 beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. Payments will be made in 1995-96. (2) Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll (totaling $453,000) for implementation in July �.d 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst & Young. This fund would be t Minutes of the Executive Committee , Page 6 of 7 June 21, 1995 distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1) as in the past, and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund which would be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. Payments would be made in 1996-97. (3) Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program, and particularly the review process as recommended by Ernst & Young. (10) (a) EXEC95-01 A motion was made, seconded and carried to receive and file General Counsel Memorandum dated June 14, 1995, re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving in concept the consolidation of the Boards, and authorizing staff and General Counsel to proceed with additional studies and report back to the Executive Committee. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried recommending that the Boards of Directors authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to $50,000 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, excluding Public Works Contracts governed by state law and Professional Services Agreements governed by Board Resolution No. 95-9. (c) A motion was made, seconded and carried recommending approval of the proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets and forwarding them to the Boards of Directors, as follows: Joint Works Operating/Working Capital $54,380,000 Worker's Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 U Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 7 of 7 June 21, 1995 (11) CLOSED SESSION The Chair reported to the Committee the need for a Closed Session as authorized by Government Code Section 54957.6 to discuss and consider the item that is specified as Item 11(b)(1) on the published Agenda. The Committee convened in Closed Session at 7:15 p.m. At 7:17 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommendations of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee contained in the Confidential report of June 20, 1995, relating to changes in job titles for certain confidential employees, the dissolution of the confidential employees bargaining unit and the designation of certain job classifications confidential employees. Confidential minutes of the Closed Session held by the Committee have been prepared in accordance with California Goernment Code Section 54957.2 and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. (12) OTHER BUSINESS d.✓ There was no other business. (13) MATTERS TO BE REPORTED ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were no matters to be reported on at a subsequent meeting. (14) MATTERS ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT. There were no matters for a future agenda. (15) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING The next Executive Committee meeting is scheduled for July 19, 1995. (16) ADJOURNMENT The Executive Committee adjourned at approximately 7:18 p.m. Submitted by: Jean Tappan, Secretary J\WGDJQGMEMELlIlIN85`M11 Pv.MIN `f i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (12)(b)(1): Consideration of motion authorizing the funding of$100,000.00 in the 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. Summary Personnel at the Sanitation Districts and Orange County Water District have prepared a feasibility study evaluation for a large-scale water reclamation project that will produce recycled water primarily for groundwater recharge. The study identified the preliminary technical, financial and siting issues associated with the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR), which could be built in phases over the 6ext thirty years and reclaim up to 100 million gallons per day of water. Continued study funding in the amount of$100,000 for fiscal year 1995-96 has been requested in the 1995-96 CORF Budget. A staff report dated June 21, 1995 is attached. OMTS and PDC Recommendation This project was reviewed at the June 1, 1995 PDC Committee meeting (Item No. 6[ej) and at the June 7, 1995 OMTS meeting (Item No. 95-028). Both Committees recommended continuing funding in the amount of$100,000 in fiscal year 1995-96. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors Authorize staff support and funding in the amount of$100,000 as proposed in the FY 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the OCR Project. J1WPWQOMh MUNB HMEC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR JUNE 21 , 1995 PDC Item (6)(e): Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Summary Personnel at the Sanitation Districts and Orange County Water District have prepared a feasibility study evaluation for a large-scale water reclamation project that will produce recycled water primarily for groundwater recharge. The study identified the preliminary technical, financial and siting issues associated with the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR), which could be built in phases over the next thirty years and reclaim up to 100 million gallons per day of water. Continued study funding in the amount of$100,000 for fiscal year 1995-96 has been requested in the 1995-96 CORF Budget. A staff report dated June 21, 1995 is attached. OMTS and PDC Recommendation This project was reviewed at the June 1, 1995 PDC Committee meeting (Item No. 6[e]) and at the June 7, 1995 OMTS meeting (Item No. 95-028). Both Committees recommended continuing funding in the amount of$100,000 in fiscal year 1995-96. Proposed Executive Committee Recommendations Authorize staff support and funding in the amount of$100,000 as proposed in the FY 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the OCR Project. wpdw1pdc95yun1a109e.w COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS N M ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA ,Tune 21, 1995 1BBEAEwsAVEMUE P.O.BOX B127 '✓ Po WMY VALLEY,MIFQRMA92P2B.8127 O1.1M.N11 STAFF REPORT Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project The long-term need for added water sources is well documented. The need for reclamation as a water source is based on a predicted increase in water demand, and the absence of future large scale, new water development projects. In fact, it is difficult to see how future southland water needs will be met without water reclamation. Water reclamation is not inexpensive due to the treatment costs required to meet the Department of Health Services' standard and distribution system costs. This has often been the case for newer water supply projects. Some may remember that the State Water Project, which now provides a high percentage of the south's water, was criticized because of its projected high costs—a cost that presently is a bargain. Personnel at the County Sanitation Districts (CSDOC) and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) completed a feasibility study in March 1995 on a large-scale water reclamation project entitled the"Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR Project)'. (Executive Summary attached and full report available from Tom Dawes, (714) 962-2411, extension 5060). For many years, CSDOC and OCWD have cooperated to develop water reclamation projects. Water Factory 21 produces high quality water used to maintain a groundwater barrier against seawater intrusion. The Green Acres Project provides a reclaimed water source for landscape irrigation in coastal areas. Over the last five years, CSDOC and OCWD have jointly studied the development of water reclamation plants at several sites. These studies have shown that while everyone, to varying degrees, supports water reclamation, nobody wants the plant nearby and the cost of producing reclaimed water from wastewater is high (approximately $1200/acre foot (AF). The OCR Project is different from many other water reclamation projects in two ways: first, the water will be treated at the CSDOC/OCWD sites in Fountain Valley where acceptance of the project should not be a problem, and second, most of the water will be spread in OCWD's existing recharge basins in Anaheim, eliminating the need for a separate distribution system. In the feasibility study, the Project was evaluated in three phases with Phase I planned as a demonstration project that will produce 50,000 acre feet (AF) of reclaimed water after the year 2000 and Phases II and III, an additional 25,000 AF of reclaimed water years 2010 and 2020, respectively. Phases, I, II, and III, . w will result in development of 50 million gallons per day (mgd), 75 mgd and 100 mgd advanced water treatment facilities, respectively. ..� Proiect Description The Sanitation Districts will provide secondary treated wastewater and OCWD will provide tertiary treatment, which will remove nitrogen, salts and organic and disinfect the water. The tertiary treat effluent, which meets drinking water standards, will be pumped from the proposed treatment site in Fountain Valley to existing spreading basins north of the intersections of 91 and 57 freeways in Anaheim. At that location, the water will be settled for groundwater recharge. In order to support the project, significant capital investments and long-term operating commitments must be made in wastewater treatment facilities, water treatment facilities, pumping plants and pipelines, plus operational and maintenance costs. The project would be built in phases with the first phase on-line as soon as the year 2000. Proiect Costs The feasibility report presents capital and operations maintenance cost estimates of the project by phase for both wastewater treatment (costs to produce and pump tertiary treated water). Under the existing terms of CSDOC's waiver from the full secondary treatment requirements under Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act, secondary treatment water used for reclamation must be replaced by new secondary facilities. A future "wild card" that could significantly decrease the wastewater treatment portion cost L of the project is a further relaxant of our secondary treatment obligation required under a revised Clean Water Act. The cost of additional secondary facilities, plus solids handling and biosolids disposal costs, add to the project's costs. Metropolitan Water District's (MIND) commodity rate for non-interruptible service is $426/AF and OCWD's groundwater replenishment cost is $85/AF (fiscal 1995-96). MWD projects increases in the commodity rate, plus the addition of 'readiness to serve' and new 'demand' charges which result in higher water costs. These costs, which may total about $772/AF by the year 2005, may be compared to the estimated cost of OCR Project water, which follows: ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS(s Millions) Reclaimed Water PhaseNear Produced (AFY) Wastewater Reclaimed Water Total 112000 50,000 $17.7 51783 - $193.9 II/2010 75,000 47.9 49.0 96.9 111/2020 100,000 70.4 -527 123.1 $413.9 4 ESTIMATED ANNUAL COSTS I$/AF) AMORTIZED DEBT OPERATION&MAINTENANCE COST Phase Wastewater Reclaimed Water Wastewater Reclaimed Water Total 1 . $28. $369 196 $371 $964 II 68. 367 231 472 1138 111 106 424 237 623 1390 The project costs will be offset in part by MWD's local projects programs which currently reimburses $154/AF. The table shows that the cost of Phase I reclaimed water could be comparable to the projected cost of MWD water in 2005 ($964/AF - $154/AF = $810/AF vs. projected MWD charges of$772/AF). The sharing of capital, operations and maintenance costs between CSDOC and OCWD, as well as funding sources, has not been completed. Future Events Staff has requested a $100,000 allocation in the fiscal 1995-96 CORF budget to provide continued support for the project. The funds would be used to hire consultants for environmental and design analyses. Contracts are currently planned to be awarded by OCWD with CSDOC paying fifty percent of the consultant charges. (It is expected that the contracts will require more than $100,000 as a fifty percent share, with additional funding required in fiscal 1996-97). pdc95Vur� iD6e.sr ORANGE COUNTYREGIONAL RECLAMATION • March 1995 Final Feasibility Study Report Executive Su=ary :� IQfti�T �i ,t. 4•. , AGE )P'es Orange a�• 0 County . •n Districts of Orange b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .J In response to projections of future droughts and water shortages, local water agencies, including the Orange County Water District (OCWD), have been evaluating alternatives for increasing local water supplies. The Metropolitan Water District (MWD), the imported water agency serving about 5,200 square miles of Southern California, estimates that the region needs to develop 1.1 million acre-feet of new supplies during a drought condition in the year 2000 (MWD, 1994). This report briefly examines the water supply alternatives in the region and focusses on the preliminary technical and economical issues for OCWD and its reclamation partner, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) in evaluating a large-scale reclamation project that will produce recycled water primarily for groundwater recharge. Historically, OCWD and CSDOC have been proponents of reclaimed water as exhibited by the successful operation of Water Factory 21 and the Green Acres Project. In 1991, OCWD coordinated with CSDOC to complete a District-Wide Water Reclamation/Reuse Master Plan that identified the area's potential for nonpotable recycled water use. This report concluded that three satellite reclaimed water treatment plants and over 70 miles of distribution pipeline would be required to serve about 25,000 acre-feet per year (afy) of reclaimed water to landscape irrigation and industrial customers. The cost associated with this plan was estimated at over$500 million(OCWD, 1991). Another costly alternative for new local water is ocean desalination. MWD is currently developing a small ocean desalination demonstration project in Huntington Beach that will test the potential of multi-effect distillation in producing water at a cost of about $700/af, not including the distribution costs. In contrast, current technologies offer desalinated seawater at a cost of$1,300 to $2,000/af(California Coastal Commission, 1993). At this time, these two local water supplies(nonpotable recycled water and desalinated seawater) are very costly and unattractive alternatives for OCWD. In attempting to develop a new, cost-effective, reliable local water supply, OCWD and CSDOC arejointly evaluating the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR Project). This feasibility study report was developed to identify and discuss the preliminary technical, financial and other issues associated with the OCR Project. This project is being evaluated in three phases with Phase I being planned as a demonstration project that will produce 50,000 acre-feet per year (afy) of reclaimed water by the year 2000 and Phases II and III, an additional 25,000 afy of reclaimed water by the years 2010 and 2020, respectively. Phases 1, II and III will result in development of 50 million gallons per day (mgd), 75 mgd and 100 mgd advanced water treatment facilities, respectively. The OCR Project water will be primarily dedicated to groundwater recharge at OCWD's existing recharge facilities in the City of Anaheim(See FIGURE ES-1). ES-1 `.+ '0 `..' PIPELINE ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 1 Yorba Linda arm+wir r. -.�, ... OCWD ------- RECHARGE FACILITIES `-- PIPELINE Anahelln - ALIGNMENT s ALTERNATIVE is 2 -- ..... . ... r 5, .,�..... .... i Garden :Grove a: :... �Cm. PROPOSED DELIVERY:... PIPELINE ALIGNMENT 0 ..... ......... :a' a_ Santa Ana $: .. ...-C:.... OCWD/CSDOC Faun rj valley pC TREATMENT FACILITIES ---•• -• '••- Costa Mdso D:\\alanninp\n•Dutt.dwp FIGURE ES-1 �I 0 12000 ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL tp WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT \� Scale In Feet PROJECT FACILITIES MAP +r.+..:.i 'omwaoue'rrm• Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Feasibility Study Report. OCWD and CSDOC, 1995 Consistent with its commitment to improving and promoting new water treatment - technologies, OCWD envisions that Phase I of the OCR Project will incorporate various emerging advanced water treatment technologies, such as microfiltration(MF) and ultrafiltration. These new membrane technologies offer potential for improved pretreatment for the reverse osmosis (RO)process. As part of Phase 1, different RO units may also be evaluated for both treatment reliability and cost effectiveness. Manufacturers are currently developing new RO units that would require less operating pressure while maintaining their superior treatment capabilities. OCWD is currently building a 500 gallon-per-minute(gpm) microfiltration/reverse osmosis demonstration project that will provide much needed reliability and cost data for varying process train alternatives and each unit process. The 500 gpm MF system is currently on-line while the RO unit is on order. The data developed from the 500 gpm MF/RO demonstration project and Phase I of the OCR Project will likely provide widespread benefits to the water industry by evaluating the reliability of emerging advanced water treatment technologies. Both of these demonstration efforts represent unique endeavors that have potential to change the course of the water industry. For the purpose of this report, Phase I of the OCR Project is currently being considered with MF as a pretreatment process for RO and RO membranes of the thin film composite low pressure-high rejection type. Based on the quality of the secondary effluent from CSDOC, three treatment train alternatives are discussed in this report. Two alternatives assume receipt of nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent that would allow partial bypass of the RO process. The third alterative assumes receipt of conventional secondary effluent that would depend on additional RO treatment for adequate nitrogen removal. The treatment facilities for this project will be accommodated on existing properties in the City of Fountain Valley owned by OCWD and CSDOC. From the treatment site, the OCR Project water will be delivered via a pipeline proposed to be located within the Santa Ana River right-of-way to OCWD's existing recharge facilities located in Anaheim. The groundwater basin will serve as both a storage reservoir and distribution system for this project. By using the OCR Project water to increase the overall yield of the Orange County groundwater basin, all communities with access to the basin will be able to increase their respective local production levels. To optimize the use of the OCR Project water, injection wells may be incorporated into the project. Implementation of this project will allow the northern and central Orange County area to increase its local water supplies, alleviate the effects of dry years, and reduce its reliance on imported water sources. According to a recent study developed by OCWD and the Municipal Water District of Orange County, the OCWD service area will achieve nearly 100 percent (water)reliability when the OCR Project comes on-line(MWDOC/OCWD, 1993). Compared to other areas of Southern California, the residences and businesses in ES-3 the OCWD area will have access to very reliable water supplies that are less susceptible to `...� droughts. The OCR Project water is envisioned to be primarily dedicated for groundwater replenishment, with access given to interested industrial and irrigation customers located near the project's delivery pipeline. In addition to improved water reliability and efficiency, the OCR Project also offers water quality benefits. The current recharge supplies for the Orange County groundwater basin are upstream treated wastewater discharges, storm flows, and MWD imported supplies (primarily Colorado River Water). In terms of total dissolved solids, total organic carbon and turbidity, the OCR Project water is expected to be of better or equal quality than the existing recharge supplies. Thus, implementation of the OCR Project will likely result in an improvement in groundwater quality. Based on the two preferred treatment trains presented in FIGURES ES-2 and ES-3, the capital cost in 1995 dollars associated with Phase I of the OCR Project is estimated at $167.3 to $176.2 million. (Refer to TABLE ES-1). The project's estimated operations and maintenance costs are presented in TABLE ES-2. Because the OCR Project is being evaluated to include emerging technologies and maximize OCWD's current recharge capabilities and it is not going to require any purchases of land, the project is expected to produce water at a competitive rate. Compared to imported water supplies, ocean desalination and nonpotable recycled water, the unit costs of producing the OCR Project are competitive(See FIGURE ES4). The added advantage provided by the OCR Project as compared to imported water is increased reliability from developing a drought-proof �"✓ supply. The capital costs in 1995 dollars of CSDOC's wastewater treatment and support facilities that are associated with the OCR Project is estimated at $136.0 million for Preferred Alternative I which requires nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent and reduces CSDOC's wastewater treatment capacity for Phase I of the OCR Project. The cost for the wastewater facilities are estimated at$12.7 to $17.7 million for Preferred Alternatives 1 and 2, respectively. The wastewater treatment costs and corresponding operations and maintenance costs for Preferred Alternative 1 are presented in TABLE ES-3. Preferred Alternative 2 requires the same wastewater facility modifications for Phase III and does not require any wastewater facility modifications for Phase 11. As part of the planning process for the OCR Project, OCWD is currently coordinating with the regulatory and scientific communities on a three-year effort to conduct the Santa Ana River Water Quality and Health Study. This effort, which is currently in the middle of its first year, aims to develop water quality data that will assist the regulatory community in evaluating the OCR Project. Preliminary analysis indicate that the water quality objectives for Phase I of the OCR Project are consistent with the proposed groundwater recharge guidelines that have been proposed by the Department of Health ES-4 CSDOC Plant No. 1 OCR Project AWT Processes Backwash CSDOC Plant Water No. t Primary ' Effluent Brine CSDOC : ii —W? Outlall 's ; Pump Station Activated 66 Sludge H Microfiltration 14-0 Reverse Osmosis DisWection Primary `� Conveyance Effluent Product Water Pipeline to 32% Primary Pump Station Anaheim Pump Station Disinfection Forebay, Activated Sludge Recharge with Nitrificatiord Facilities Denitrification FIGURE ES-2 OCR PROJECT PHASE I Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Feasibility TREATMENT PROCESS AND Study Report, OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. FLOW TRAIN-PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 41 CSOOC Plant No.1 Treatment OCR Project AWT Processes Backwash Water 10 CSDOC Plant No. 1 I Rom►CSDOC Ocean Outfall 71% �lJ Primary Treatment i f I Reverse f Pump Osmosis Product Water Pipeline to Activated Station Microfiltration 129-/. __I* Primary Pump Station Anaheim Forebay Sludge p Disinfection Recharge Facilities Disinfection FIGURE ES-3 OCR PROJECT PHASE I Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Feasibility Study TREATMENT PROCESS AND Report, OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. FLOW TRAIN - PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE #2 TABLE ES-3 SUMMARY OF CSDOC WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES COST ESTIMATE' PHASE ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED CAPITAL ANNUAL O&M COSTS TOTAL UNIT COST COST CONSTRUCTION ($Million) ANNUAL ($!Million Gallonsy ($Million) COST' COST ($ MiOion/Vr) ($MillionfVr) 1 17.7 1.4 9.8 11.2 116 II 47.9 4.1 17.3 21 A 183 III 70.4 6 23.7 1 29.7 1 226 TOTAL: 136.0 — 23.7 1 - I - 'Includes all emu associated with providing niMfled/deninlfied secondary effluent W-femdAlternative IJ. 2Annud capital recovery bated on 15 years amortisation @ 7M intenel. 'S/million gallant of inafed wastewater. Orange County Regional WaterRedamaaon profect Feasibility Study Report,OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. ES-10 Services (DHS) and are scheduled for adoption in 1995. DHS recently used these proposed guidelines to issue a permit for the West Coast Barrier Project, a recycled water injection project sponsored by the West Basin Municipal Water District. OCWD staff discussed with DHS staff in December 1994 the option of issuing a conditional approval for Phase I of the OCR Project as a demonstration project that falls within the proposed groundwater recharge guidelines. OCWD hopes to receive DHS' response to this request in early 1995. At that time, DHS will define the preliminary dilution water and water quality strategy for the OCR Project. Completion of this feasibility study represents the first formal step undertaken by OCWD and CSDOC in amlyzing the viability of the OCR Project. The next steps include continuance of the water quality and health study, evaluation and testing of the MP/RO demonstration project, other RO pretreatment processes, and different RO units, implementation of a community involvement program, development of the required environmental documentation, and examination of various preliminary design issues. "' ES-11 TABLE ES-1 SUMMARY OF RECLAIMED WATER CAPITAL COST .. ESTIMATES FOR OCR PROJECT PROJECTPHASE PROJECTED ESTIMATED RECLAIMED WATER CAPITAL COST PRODUCED(Am) (s I,1 ()N) In DOLLARS Phase I-Yr 2000 50,000 Alternative 1* 176.2 Alternative 2** 167.3 Phase H-Yr 2010 75,000 Alternative 1 * 49.0 Altemative 2•* 56.7 Phase HI-Yr 2020 100,000 Altemative 1* 52.7 Altemative 2** 47A TOTAL Altemadve 1* 277.9 Alternative 2** 27IA * Alternative 1 - Ninified/cImAdfied secondary effluent provided. *' Altetnanve 2 - No a itrified/deninified se=dary effluent provided. Omnge County Regional WaterReclamadon Project Feasibility Study Report, OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. ES-7 TABLE ES-2 SUMMARY OF RECLAIMED WATER ANNUAL O & M COST ESTIMATES FOR OCR PROJECT PROJECT PHASE PROJECTED ESTIMATED RECLAIMED WATER ANNUAL PRODUCED(APT) O&M COST a 1nm.D onrccnx> 995 OI.IARS Phase 1-Yr 2000 50,000 Alternative 1• 15.1 Altemative 2•• 14.9 Phase H-Yr 2010 75,000 Altemative 1 • 22.1 Ahemative 2 •• 22.7 Phase HI-Yr 2020 100,000 Altemative 1• 29.5 Alternative 2•• 30.8 �"'� • Altmaiive I - Nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent provided. •• Alternative 2 -. No nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent provided. Orange County Regional WaterReclamadon Project Fearibiliy Study Report,OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. ..: ES-8 $1,300 to $2,000 Unit Cost($per acre-foot) "'-- 1200 Cost of new production walls Range of Costs 1000 Energy cost for pumping ($58/af) B00 $630 to $654 sog $574 7 M 400 Production i Costs a $562 to$586 200 ul 0 OCR Project Phase P MWD Imported Weler° Ocean Desalinatlorn Nonpotable Recycled Water OCR Project water production cost based on using thin film composite low pressun -high rejection RO membranes and receipt of Metropolitan's local projects program incentive of$154/af. FIGURE ES4 •Metropolitan Water District's Imported water rate In the year2000, Including the commodity rate for noninterruptible service and the readiness to serve charge(does not Include the new demand charge). UNIT COST COMPARISON OF OCR Range of Costs for ocean desalination is$1,300 to$2,000(California Coastal Commission, 1993.) PROJECT WATER, IMPORTED (Watereuse Association of California, 1992.) WATER,OCEAN DESALINATION AND NONPOTABLE RECYCLED Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project, OCWD and CSDOC, 119995 WATER �. JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(2): (PDC96-21) Consideration of Actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2. Summary Job No. Pt-36-1 is the final of four construction contracts that will improve the ability of existing secondary treatment facilities to treat primary effluent. The work associated with this construction includes a completely new upgraded aeration system,three new dissolved air flotation tanks(DAF)and systems, upgrade three existing DAF,improved waste activated sludge and return activated sludge systems, rehabilitate wasting secondary clarifiers,construct ten new secondary clarifier, miscellaneous auriliary systems,and construct a new Orange County Water District Pump Station.These upgrades will allow the Districts to treat 80 million gallons per day of primary effluent through the facility. The plans and specifications were modified through two addenda that provided a simpler schedule of prices,provided better details of items to be constructed,and other miscellaneous issues. Staff Recommendation A. That the PDC Committee recommend approval of Addenda Nos. 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications of said project,clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. B. That the PDC Committee receive,file bid tabulation,and recommend award of contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1,Job No. P1-36-2,to Margate Construction, Inc.in the amount of$35,291,000. Recommendation to the Executive Committee Consideration of the following actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1,Job No. P1-36-2: (1) Consideration of motions approving Addenda 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. (2) Consideration of a resolution receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No.1,Job No. P1-36-2,to Margate Construction,Inc.,in the total amount of$35,291,000. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the PDC Committee. J 1WPOLPGMIE]IEL1UnB5W1]eLEC COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS �'. M ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA IOW ELLIS AVENUE June 1, 1995 Ro.SOX nn FOVMNNVALLEY,L WORW 82)211-912) 17141352.2411 STAFF REPORT PDC95-21: Consideration of Motion Approving the Following Actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2 Summary In October 1989, the Directors awarded a Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers for the preparation of plans and specifications for design and construction support services related to the expansion and improvements to the existing secondary treatment facilities at both wastewater treatment plants. The design has resulted in a total of four different construction contracts which expand the secondary treatment facility capacity from 46 million gallons per day (mgd) to 80 mgd at Plant No. 1 and from 75 mgd to 90 mgd at Plant No. 2. This overall design and construction effort includes extensive structural and mechanical modifications to existing facilities, expansion of secondary treatment capacity and design of various miscellaneous support facilities. The design will also provide for the removal of 16 internal combustion engines which cannot be operated because of restrictions of the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Permit to Operate. The three Central Power Generation engines at Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 are replacing these engines. The design and construction effort has required four Amendments to the original Professional Services Agreement with Carollo. These Board authorized items have raised the total cost for the design and construction support effort from $4,997,841.00 to a not-to-exceed cost of$6,639,365. This project will expand the secondary treatment capability to 80 mgd as noted above, and will include the construction of ten new secondary clarifiers, expanded return activated sludge and waste activated sludge pumping capability, three new Dissolved Air Flow Thickener Tanks and systems, rehabilitation of the existing secondary clarifiers, rehabilitation of the existing aeration basins with completely new air supply and diffusion systems, and automation to operate the facility from a remote location. Engineer's estimate for this construction work was $42,300,000. The bids reflect the very competitive construction market in Southern California where we currently have many good contractors competing for few large construction projects. Our engineer's estimate is based on what we refer to as a normal economy. The low `.� bidder, Margate Construction, Inc. has an ongoing contract at Plant No. 2 which may have had some influence on the low bid in that the contractor's mobilization and project staffing costs may be lower than other bidders. U A summary of the submitted construction bids is attached. There were two addenda associated with the bidding of the work. Addendum No. 1 included modifications to simplify the bid form, extend the amount of days the price will be good until the Board awards this work, clarifying various mechanical specifications, and addressing potential contractor issues. Addendum No. 2 better defined mechanical equipment and addressed potential contractor issues. Staff Recommendation A. That the Joint Boards of Directors recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. B. That the Joint Boards of Directors receive and file bid tabulation, and recommendation to award contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2 to Margate Construction, Inc., in the amount of $35,291,000. Recommendation to the Executive Committee A. That the Executive Committee recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. B. That the Executive Committee receive and file bid tabulation, and recommendation to award contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2 to Margate Construction, Inc. in the amount of $35,291.000. pdcM5 unW95-21.sr y COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS r AI ORANGE COUNTY, CAOFORNIA Ip ELLIS AVENUE RO.8OX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 927MRI1 7 ",A)9522.11 May 16, 1995 11:00 a.m. 2 Addenda R I D TA Rill A T I n N Job No. P7-36-2 PROJECT TITLE: Secondary Tmatmant ImprCv,,mAme at Plant NO t PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction Of haw far'rr'pA to enhance Aecondary♦rAatmAnt dArman and retrn£t avict'ng_aq ipmpnt and s=Ecturag ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: 947 Inn 00n BUDGET AMOUNT: S42 mnlinn TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- Margate Construction, Inc. 35,291,000.00 2. Kiewit Pacific 37,210,188.00 3. J. R. Flanc Construction Co. Inc. 37 575,000.00 4. Dillingham Construction 38,816,000.00 5. Ray Wilson Company 38,915,358.00 6. Advance Constructors, Inc. 38,979,108.00 7. M. A. Mortenson Company 39,205,332.00 8. Tutor-Saliba-Scott - Joint Venture 40,427,000.00 9. 10. 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 Margate Construction in the bid amount of $35,291,000.00 as the lowest and best bid. Oh n D. Linder Director of Engineering JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(3): PDCSS-22 Consideration of motion approving the following actions re Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2 Summary This project provides redundancy and reliability improvements at Headworks No.2,at Plant No. 1 by Installing Main Sewage Pump No. 3 electric motor drive. Major project elements include installation of the new electrical motor drive,solid state motor controller,and respective modifications to the plant electrical distribution system. Recent intense rainstorms produced the highest flows ever treated throughout the plant. The key to keeping our treatment plants operating and to avoid pollution during natural or man-made emergency situations is system reliability and redundancy. This specific enhancement of system reliability and redundancy at Plant No. 1 was recommended by John Carollo Engineers in the report entitled, Evaluation V►� of Hydraulic Reliability and Standby Power Requirements,Job Nos.J-33 and J34, 1994. Thinking about future rainstorm conditions,staff believes that the Districts should proceed with implementation of this recommendation without further delay. Staff believes that further delays in the installation of Drive No.3 may jeopardize Plant No. 1 reliability during emergency situations. The Districts staff solicited and evaluated Consultants'proposals to provide engineering design services for the project. See the attached matrix of proposal and evaluation results. Staff Recommendation That the PDC Committee receive and file Committee Certification, proposals,and recommendation to award Professional Services Agreement for Main Sewage Pump(MSP) No.3 Drive at Headworks No.2 at Plant No. 1,Job No.J-33-2,to a consultant selected by the Committee. PDC Committee Recommendation to the Executive Committee Consideration of the following actions relative to Main Sewage Pump(MSP) No.3 Drive at Headworks No.2 at Plant No. 1,Job No.J-33-2: (1) Consideration of motion to receive,file and approve the PDC Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of a Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers,providing for design and construction support services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead,direct expenses,subconsultants,and fixed profit,in an amount not to exceed$193,100. 5.,,�,i Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the PDC Committee. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA o. n•N P.O.BOX 8127.FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 9272M127 10044 ELLIS,FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 82708.7018 °h�hce c°u� (714)02-2411 June 1,199$ Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 108" Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers in Connection with Main Sewage Pump(MSP) No.3 Drive at Headworks No.2 at Plant No. 1,Job No.J-33-2 In accordance with the Districts'procedures for selection of professional engineering services,the Planning, Design and Construction Committee has negotiated the following fee with John Carollo Engineers for the preparation of construction plans and specifications,and design documentation and supporting materials, Operations and Maintenance Manual update, and construction support and training services in connection with Job No.J-33-2,on an hourly-rate basis including labor plus overhead, plus subconsultants fees, and V.✓ other direct costs and fixed profit,in an amount not to exceed$193,100. Engineering Services, direct labor at hourly rates plus overhead at 164%,not to exceed $147,800, Subconsultants Fees,not to exceed $ 12,500. Other Direct Costs $ 18,000. Fixed Profit $ 14,800. TOTAL CONTRACT, not to exceed 5193.100 The Planning,Design and Construction 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. /s/ John Collins /s/Sheldon Singer Chairman Vice Chairman PDC Committee PDC Committee /a/John D.Linder John D. Linder Director of Engineering eng433-2%c-psn.nr JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS `d REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 21 , 1995 Item (12)(b)(4): OMTS9"29: Consideration of motion adopting a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems Summary Since January 1990, the Districts have reported a total of 71 spills to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). These 71 spills resulted in a total of 1.56 million gallons of untreated wastewater being released on the streets of Orange County. Although as an overall percentage of total wastewater treated during this same time period, this represents a small fraction (0.00043%), increasing pressure is being placed upon us by the RWQCB to contain spills and return them to the system. Staff believes that it would be prudent for the Districts to adopt a policy directing staff how to deal with the containment of spills in the future. To that end, the Maintenance department has prepared a spill containment policy,for the Directors' consideration, that deals with how to handle spills. Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance,will be presenting this policy. Budget Considerations Staff believes that this policy will have no fiscal impact. Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending adoption of the attached policy. OMTS Committee Recommendation to the Executive Committee The OMTS Committee is recommending adoption of the attached policy. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee recommends adoption of the attached policy. JAWS GMLX UN95WIQB4.EC COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS M ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA May 30, 1995 10B"E11I9 AVENUE Y V.o.Box B127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CAUFOANIA 927284127 Tl141SS2.2411 STAFF REPORT OMTS9"29: Consideration of a Motion for the Adoption of a Policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems Over the past five years, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (Districts) have reported 71 sewage spills that have occurred in the Districts' system, to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). A summary of these spills by year is as follows: TOTAL ESTIMATED YEAR TOTAL# GALLONS SPILLED 1990 11 86,000 1991 14 1,181,050 1992 15 66,845 1993 13 9,474 1994 10 12,025 1995 8 206,992 71 1,562,386 The causes of these spills were: grease- 12; roots- 9; vandalism - 3; rocks - 3; contractor caused-9; heavy rains-7; Districts caused- 1; unknown causes-22; Techite pipe-5. The Districts currently report all spills. The State Water Code Section 13271 requires notification and reporting on spills of 1,000 gallons or more. The RWQCB would like to see us develop a policy to contain spills, as much as possible, and return them to our system. Staff has been testing containment products for the past few months that are commercially available. These products include sandbags, absorbent materials and rubber sheeting. Staff believes that, whenever feasible, the responsible thing to do would be to contain spills and keep them from entering the waterways. To that end, staff has prepared the following policy. We have trialed this policy for the last five months and find it to be the most workable for our field crews. We also follow the directions of local fire and law enforcement staff with regard to containing sewage on city streets. We are following current EPA activities in formatting a new policy regarding Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO) and will keep the Committee appraised of developments. This policy is being submitted for your guidance and information. Staff welcomes any comments or questions that the Directors might have on the policy or how to improve it. It is `.� staffs opinion that the member cities and local agencies will be affected by the outcomes of this policy. K OMTS95-029 Page 2 of 3 May 30, 1995 POLICY PURPOSE The purpose of the spill response policy of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County(Districts) is to, whenever possible, protect public health and the environment by taking the steps necessary to prohibit untreated wastewater from entering the public waterways. Implementation of this policy will vary dependent upon whether the spill occurs on public or private property. Both scenarios are described below. IMPLEMENTATION GENERAL Staff shall, upon arrival at a spill, protect the public storm drain system, as much as is reasonably possible, by placing a containment barrier at the inlet of the storm drain system. Also whenever possible, runoff wastewater shall be pumped back into the local sewer or vacuumed up. Disinfectant shall generally not be applied to any water that would get into the storm drain or would make its way into a public waterway. PUBLIC PROPERTY AND DISTRICTS'EASEMENTS: �..✓ If, upon request, the Districts'staff responds to a spill in a city-owned system, they will assist the city crews, if requested, in resolving the problem. Responsibility for formal notification and spill reporting shall be with the City. PRIVATE PROPERTY., It is the responsibility of the properly owner to relieve any stoppage in a private facility and contain any spill, and all cleanup. Districts'staff, if requested to respond, will coordinate with the property owner for the removal of all materials that may cause a blockage to any of the City owned or Districts'facilities downstream. Districts'staff will not direct the work activities of the owner or their contractors. Responsibility for formal notification and spill reporting shall be with the property owner. RECORD KEEPING AND REPORTING: A Collection System Problem Report form and sketch of the spill area shall be completed by Districts'staff and shall contain the contact person's name and phone number for future use. All time and equipment used shall be charged to the appropriate "Miscellaneous Indirect Trunk Maintenance"work order number for possible back-charge use. V OMTS95-029 Page 3 of 3 May 30, 1995 PHASE-IN: Discussion, procurement of materials and staff training shall take place, as soon as practical, after this policy is approved. This policy shall be revised as it becomes necessary and in conjunction with subsequent changes in public law or issues affecting the Districts'NPDES Permit, Recommended: Ken Ramey, Maintenance Manager, Collection Facilities Date Approved: Edwin E. Hodges, Director of Maintenance Date 4.✓ Edward M. Torres, Director of Technical Services Date Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Date Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager Date EEH:cm B19SOP9.SR JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(5): OMTS95-030 Consideration of Addendum No. 3 to Professional Services Agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services. Summary In October 1990, the Directors approved a two-year professional services agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. in the amount of$164,000 to provide technical support services in a number of areas including the ocean discharge permit renewal, ocean monitoring program,water reclamation,water conservation, biosolids, legislative and regulatory reviews,environmental impact reports and facilities planning. The agreement was amended in December 1992 for an additional two years, with a maximum amount not to exceed$295,500. The agreement was amended again in December 1994 for an additional six-month period with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Because the activities which the consultant supports are ongoing, consisting primarily of continued support in evaluation and assembly of ocean monitoring data and discussions with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)and California Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB) regarding our permit renewal and 301(h)waiver application, staff is recommending that the agreement be extended for an additional six-month period beginning July 1, 1995 with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Staff feels that the approximate$50,000 of unexpended funds remaining in this contract should be adequate to provide the services needed through the end of the year. A staff report regarding the proposed addendum to the professional services agreement is attached. Staff anticipates that a tentative decision on our application for permit renewal and our 301(h) waiver should be made by December 1995 and that permit negotiations will then begin. At that point, staff will recommend that the Districts'contract with KP. Lindstrom, Inc. be amended to address the new scope of services required to develop and negotiate a permit with EPA. OMTS Committee Recommendation The OMTS Committee recommends consideration of the following actions re Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc., providing for Environmental Consulting Services: (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc.for said additional services. y (2) Consideration of a resolution approving Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc., providing for an extension of services for a six-month period beginning July 1, 1995,with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the OMTS Committee. 110.P LCC�OW}lEN W'45NILHiEC _ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS Al ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA May 19, 1995 IDEAL Ews AVENUE vo.E0A e121 `V FOUMAIN VALLEY.CAU[ORMA 9272EA127 M.19E2.2A11 STAFF REPORT OMTS95-030: Addendum No. 3 to Professional Services Agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services. Introduction Over the past several years, KP. Lindstrom, Inc. has assisted the Districts with many environmental issues including technical reports supporting our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit renewal and waiver for full secondary treatment (ocean waiver), preparation of environmental impact reports (EIRs) supporting master-planned documents; and other environmental technical support on an as-needed basis for such activities as water reclamation, conservation, biosolids management, ocean monitoring, air quality and legislative/regulatory reviews. K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. also provided extensive review of our 30-year master plan and accompanying EIR. Mr. Lindstrom, the President of KP. Lindstrom, Inc., is one of the country's acknowledged ocean waiver experts, and has been of significant assistance in our discussions with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding their V review of our permit renewal application and proposed marine monitoring program. In October 1990, the Directors approved a two-year professional services agreement with KP. Lindstrom, Inc. in the amount of$164,000 to provide the technical support services described above. The agreement was amended twice, once in December 1992 for an additional two years with a maximum amount not to exceed $295,500, and again in December 1994 for an additional six-month period with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Through May 1995, a total of $248,251.56 has been expended (94% of the total contract) as shown in Table 1. Table 1: Contract Status Original Addendum Addendum Expenditures Expense Agreement No.1 No.2 Revised Through Unencumbered Category W logo Doc 1992 Dec 1994 Total May 95 Funds Consultant $142,50000 $111,000.00 SO,W $253,500.00 E227,77250 $25,727W Sery ces' Direct E>mmises $12,000.00 $20,000.00 Saw $32,00000 $20,47906 $11,520.94 subconwllanls $10,o00o0 $0.00 som $10,001I som $10,01D0.00 Fans Total. $164,500.00 $131,000.00 $0.00 $295,500.00 5249,g51.56 $47,249./4 y 'CoimuAam services wneisl of tlirest tabor basetl on hourly mtee Including DroPo aM ovemeatl. OMTS95-030 Page 2 May 19, 1995 Recommendations Because the activities which the consultant supports are ongoing, consisting primarily of continued support in evaluation and assembly of ocean monitoring data and discussions with EPA and California Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding our permit renewal and 301(h) waiver application, staff is recommending that the agreement be extended for an additional six-month period beginning July 1, 1995 with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Staff anticipates that a tentative decision on our application for permit renewal and our 301(h) waiver should be made by December 1995 and that permit negotiations will begin. At that point, staff will recommend that the Districts' contract with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. be amended to address the new scope of services required to develop and negotiate a permit with EPA. J:\W%T5MOPERCOMM"LSTMF.RPr V „1E COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS `f OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127.FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 ,y 10844 ELLIS.FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 04'40E COY„, (714)962-2411 June 7, 1995 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Ca 92708 Subject: Certification of Fee for Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with KP. Lindstrom, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering services, the Operation, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee (OMTS) has approved a six-month extension of the Professional Services Agreement with KP. -'u►� Lindstrom, Inc. providing for environmental consulting services in connection with ocean discharge permit renewal, ocean monitoring program, water reclamation, water conservation, biosolids, legislative and regulatory reviews, environmental impact reports and facilities planning. Addendum No. 3 provides for a six-month extension of said agreement on an hourly rate basis including labor plus overhead, plus subconsultants fees, and fixed profit, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of $295,500. Existing Change per Amended Agreement Addn. No. 3 Agreement Engineering Services Direct labor based on hourly rates including profit and $253,500 $0 $253,500 overhead. Direct Expenses $32,000 $0 $32,000 Subconsultants Fees, not to exceed $10,000 $0 $10,000 TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT, not to exceed $295,500 $0 $295,500 dad COUNTY SANITATION UISTIUCTSI .1 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 1O ELLSAVENUE P.O.BOX B127 FOUNTAIN VALI Y.CALIFORNIA 9212 QW 952-2A11 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County June 7, 1995 Page Two The OMTS Committee hereby certifies the above fee as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fee will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. UDirector McGuigan /s/Director Leipzig Director Mc Guigan, Chair Director Leipzig, Vice Chair OMTS Committee OMTS Committee /s/Ed Torres Ed Torres Director of Technical Services OMTS Committee MHN:ahh REF# J:\3500\510033B.LTR v JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS ,~ REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(6): OMTS95-033 Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Science Application International Corporation in connection with Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-15611; and consideration of a resolution recommending awarding said contract to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997 for a cost not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals. Summary The Districts' mandated Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP) is designed to determine compliance with federal and state ocean requirements in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Districts' special National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit; this permit allows for less yr than full secondary treatment of our wastewater. This'waiver'from the requirement of going to full- secondary treatment is allowed under section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Our present OMP was implemented in 1985 when a jointly issued (by state and federal regulators) NPDES permit was given to the Districts. At that time, Science Application International Corporation (SAIC)was awarded an initial five-year contract as part of a competitive bidding process to conduct the program. The contract was annually extended from 1990 to 1994 while awaiting a decision from EPA on our 1989 application for a renewed ocean discharge permit and modified monitoring program. In June 1994, upon the approval of the one year extension of the contract for Year 10 of the OMP, the Boards of Directors directed staff to seek proposals for Year 11 of the program. This process was initiated in November 1994 and a status report was given to the OMITS Committee on January 4, 1995. Subsequently, staff has received two responses to our request for proposals (RFP) and has evaluated them in accordance with the Districts procedure for selecting professional services (Resolution No. 90-43). From that evaluation staff determined that: (1) SAIC was the most technically qualified firm, and (2) SAIC's cost proposal was the lowest of the two firms. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends awarding Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for the Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation fora 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals of this contract, the need of which will be determined by the issuance of a new five-year NPDES permit. Costs for these additional years, if needed, will be negotiated annually. 1 OMTS Committee Recommendation The OMTS Committee recommends the following actions by the Executive Committee: (1) Consideration of a motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Science Application International Corporation for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for the Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals of this contract. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the OMTS Committee. 4.d IMPCtt1GM,FX UNB IID EC L COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1p EWSnvEMNE PC Po 8127 �..� May25, 1995 EWNTNNVR Y.W6pPNtWJ 127 almm- ,, STAFF REPORT OMTS96-033: Consideration of Resolution No. 95-033, Awarding the contract for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20- month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997 for a cost not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals. Background In June 1994, for the first time in ten years, the Boards of Directors directed staff to seek proposals for the Districts' administratively extended permit and its mandated Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP). The OMP, which is mandated by the Districts' National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, has been contracted to Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) since 1985 when the Districts received our present NPDES permit incorporating a waiver from full secondary treatment under section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). In 1985, we envisioned obtaining competitive proposals for the OMP contract every five years, in concert with the renewal of our NPDES permit and subsequent changes to the OMP. However, to date our permit has not been renewed, but has instead been administratively extended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)for the past five years while EPA makes a decision on the Districts' 1989 301(h) waiver reapplication. Due to the Districts' permit conditions not changing and our satisfaction with SAIC's work, the Boards decided to continue SAIC's contract on a year-by-year basis. Although a variety of integrated special projects have been important adjuncts to the Districts' base OMP over the past ten years, staff decided to focus on the basic, permit- required program elements in the request for proposals (RFPs) for the Year 11 OMP. This was done for two primary reasons: (1) to maximize the number of proposals from potential firms for a very specialized and highly technical program, and (2) to allow staff to better compare submitted proposals based on the Districts' OMP requirements. The proposal process was initiated in November 1994, when staff mailed RFP packages out to 27 prospective firms; from those 27 RFPs the Districts received a total of six responses, three of which were proposals. The three firms that provided proposals V.d OMTS95-033 Page 2 v May 25, 1995 were Brown and Caldwell (B&C), EcoAnalysis, Inc. (ECO) and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). After reviewing the three proposals and conducting site visits, staff determined that problems existed with some of the proposals received that precluded a final selection from being made. These problems included, but were not limited to: (1) assumptions made by firms in their proposals that were not acceptable to the Districts, and (2) incomplete responses to RFP requirements. Of the three proposals received, only SAIC fully addressed and met all of the stated requirements of the November 1994 RFP. However, staff felt that there existed potential ambiguities concerning minimum Districts' requirements (i.e., analytical methods, vessel requirements, quality assurance program) in the RFP that may have affected the content of the proposals. Therefore, rather than select SAIC outright, staff felt it was in the best interest of the Districts to send out a revised RFP that provided additional information on minimum OMP requirements and the required content of the proposals. This process would allow the firms to modify their original proposal in accordance with the Districts' needs. Subsequently, staff rejected all proposals and a revised RFP was prepared, advertised and delivered to B&C, ECO and SAIC on March 31, 1995. All three responded to the revised RFP; however only two submitted proposals. At the May 17, 1995 Executive Committee meeting, the Directors discussed a letter received from one of the three firms who proposed on the Year 11 OMP. The firm's letter stated their belief that they should have been awarded the contract and that the revised RFP released on March 31, 1995 unjustly excluded them from resubmitting a proposal. A separate staff report responding to these allegations has been prepared by staff and will be discussed. Discussion The two companies that submitted proposals were ECO and SAIC. Both companies proposed to act as the primary contractor of a "project team" consisting of specialty subcontracting firms and individuals. A selection committee made-up of Districts' staff was formed to conduct the technical review and evaluation of the submitted RFP proposals. Each proposal was evaluated based on the seven (7) criteria listed in Table 1. Table 1 OMTS95-033 .� Page 3 May 25, 1995 Evaluation Criteria Overall Responsiveness to RFP 5 Program Management 15 QA/QC Program 15 Field Sampling 10 Laboratory (Chemistry & Biology) 25 Data Handling & Reporting 5 Data Analysis & Report Writing 25 Overall Ranking 100 After the technical evaluation was completed, the sealed proposed cost-for-services that ECO and SAIC provided separately from their technical proposals were opened and compared with the average cost over the past five years for the mandated OMP contract (Figure 1). The Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP)was an alternative monitoring program required by EPA in Year 10 and is included in the baseline program costs for calculation of a 5-year average. Conclusion Based upon evaluation of the two proposals, the following conclusions can be made: 1. Of the two firms submitting proposals only SAIC's proposal was evaluated as qualified to meet all of the Districts' requirements for the Year 11 OMP. 2. SAIC had the highest technical ranking of the two firms. 3. SAIC's proposed cost-of-services was approximately $215,000 below the average cost the Districts had paid for similar services over the past 5 years (Figure 1). 4. SAIC proposed the lowest cost of the two firms as validated by the Districts' General Counsel. Staff Recommendation OMTS95-033 Page 4 ..J May 25, 1995 Based upon the conclusions stated above, staff recommends awarding the contract for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for the Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals of this contract, the need of which will be determined by the issuance of a new five-year NPDES permit. Costs for these additional years, if needed, will be negotiated annually. GR:m m G1WPWQGMISfIFP2 51 ML $25W." 6-year average cost for base OMP($1,701,071) SAIC proposal \ cost($1,496,453) oo oo Ez.00 Ef 50o,000 0 E I a NV l C U E1 O 'Ooo f500,000 $0 19w91 1991-92 1992-93 IN 94 1994-95 1N9 w Contract Year OBase OMP Program Elements OSouthem California Blght Pllat Project Especial Studies USAIC Proposed Year 11 Cos1 Figure 1. CSDOC 1991-95 annual ocean monitoring costs compared to SAIC's proposed Year 11 (1995-96) cost. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127,FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 4 10844 ELLIS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714)962-2411 June 7, 1995 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708-7081 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Agreement with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for the Ocean Monitoring Program Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering and architectural services, the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee (OMTS) has negotiated the following fee with Science Applications International Corporation to perform services for Ocean Monitoring Program Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R 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 the period July 1995- February 1997 for a net amount not to exceed $1,486,463 as follows: Basic Program Tasks (Labor & Other Direct Costs for Tasks A-F) $1,327,676 Profit (Basic Program Tasks A-F) $93,501 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Analysis (Task G) $61,174 Profit (Quality Assurance/Quality Control Analysis Task G) $4,112 Year 11 Contract Amount $1,486,463 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICIFJ W ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 19944 ELLIS AVENUE vU Box 9127 ( � MUNENN VALLEY.CAUMMIA 92726 Boards of Directors 7141992.2411 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Page Two June 7, 1995 The OMTS 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/Director McGuigan /s/Director Leipzig Director McGuigan, Chair Director Leipzig, Vice Chair OMTS Committee OMTS Committee U /s/Ed Torres I Ed Torres Director of Technical Services OMTS Committee ET:ahh Ref# J:3500\510034.LTR JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item ( 1 2)(b)(7): OMTS95-035 Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District ISCAQMD), in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995-96. Summary The California Clean Air Act (CAA) authorizes the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to assess and collect fees from public agencies for annual fees for emission of criteria pollutants, air toxics and ozone precursors; evaluating and issuing Permits to Construct and annual operating permits; compliance source testing reviewing; and permit/plan applications and other applicable requirements. SCAQMD did not propose across-the-board fee increases in fiscal year 1995-96. The small increase (510,000) in the proposed budget for the next fiscal year is due to the expected submittal of Federal Operating Permits (Title V of the CAA Amendments of 1990) for our facilities for approval by SCAQMD. Other expenses are expected to be lower than in the previous fiscal year due to a reduced number of permits and a greater emphasis on in-house compliance administration. The 1994-95 authorization was $240,000. The estimated fees payable to SCAQMD in fiscal year 1995-96 are as follows: Type of Fee Amount Annual Emissions $ 85,000 Annual Operating Permits 50,000 CARE Emissions 20,000 Compliance Source Testing 20,000 Permit & Plan Applications 60,000 Miscellaneous 15,000 Total: $250,000 Staff Recommendation Staff is requesting authorization to issue a blanket purchase order to SCAQMD, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 and to pay all applicable fees for the 1995-96 fiscal year in compliance with SCAOMD rules and regulations. OMTS Committee Recommendation to the Executive Committee The OMITS Committee recommends that staff be authorized to issue a blanket purchase order to SCAQMD, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 and to pay all applicable fees for the 1995-96 fiscal year in compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the OMTS Committee. JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(8): FAHR Item 41f) Consideration of motion ratifying Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement with PaineWebber providing that if the Certificates of Participation are converted to a fixed rate of interest mode, "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable (remarketing agent's) fee". Summary Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, will give a status report on previous action taken by the FAHR Committee and Joint Boards relative to changing the Remarketing Agents on all three of our current outstanding financing programs. The Series A and Series C have been fully completed, with all documents executed and in place. The Agreements and documents relating to 1993 Series Refunding are complete and approved by all parties, however Societe Generale would like clarification on a provision relating to obligation to pay the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends that the Executive Committee approve the requested amendment of Societe Generale to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement that provides that if the Certificates are converted to a fixed mode "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable (remarketing agent's) fee." Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. �� J.i�G9 12N i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(9): FAHR95-26 Consideration of Motion for Renewal of All-Risk Insurance (including Fire, Flood and Earthquake Coverage)for FY 1995-96 Summary At the Committee's May meeting, staff reported that the Districts' current All-Risk property insurance, including fire, flood and earthquake coverage expires at the end of June. Staff further reported that Robert F. Driver Associates, the Districts' broker of record, had made preliminary inquiries of the major All-Risk insurance carriers in anticipation of our renewal, and in view of current insurance market restrictions, presented two renewal options for consideration by the Districts: The Committee directed Robert F. Driver Associates to proceed to obtain sublimits of $30,000,000 to $35,000,000 of earthquake coverage at an estimated annual premium of .► approximately$1.3 to $1.4 million. The attached insurance renewal schedule presents summary information about the All- Risk insurance renewal efforts as of June 8, 1995. Our insurance broker has informed staff that final placement commitments with the carriers are expected by next week. The estimated premium cost for FY 1995-96 is $1,309,000. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends the Executive Committee approve renewal of the Districts' All-Risk insurance program including earthquake, flood, personal property and business interruption, in the amounts of$200 million All-Risk, and $30-35 million earthquake with deductibles of$25,000 for all perils except earthquake and 5% per unit ($250,000 min.) for earthquake, for a total premium not to exceed $1.4 million. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. xAw�UH Im w JuN ur '95 14 :41 No .026 F .01 5 • '�/'UG ROAERT F. DRIVL'_R ASSOCIATES l.'UMYI.RE(N.f(/kaNla'IflON0.5'IJfI'l('E n Dtwvw, oJRolm 11'. DrAwr Co.,N, ASSOCIATES June 7, 1995 Mr. Steve Kozak Financial Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County P. O. Sox 8127 Fountain Valley CA 92728-8127 Re: All Rick - 1995 Property Insurance Renewal Program for County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Dear Steve: Per our discussions, we outline a schedule of insurance companies with their respective participation within our proposed 1995 renewal program: Proposed Participation Laver L"jr Premium Comnenv Participation Premium $ 7,500,000 $ 525,000 Reliance S 3,000,000 $ 210,000 Primary Lexington $ 2,500,000 $ 175,000 (Including Pending $ 2,000,000 $ 140,000 Earthquake and Flood) S 2,500,000 $ 100,000 RLI $ 2,500,000 $ 100,000 Excess $ 7500,000 (Including Earthquake and Flood) 3636 8JN(1/5TREE7',.SUITE 230 NtN'r0RT BEACH.CAUFURN9A 91060-2619 (714) 756-0271 • TAX,714)756-2713 ,.U6Crti r . U�1Vcrt MJOUI 14-r�17-Li li )uN 07 '95 14 :41 No .026 F .02 p Mr. Steve Kozak June 7, 1995 Page 2 Participation Lever L,ay;r Premtum Company Participation Premium $ 10,000,000 S 300,000 Agricultural S 3,000,000 $ 90,000 Excess ($325,000?) Royal $ 2,500,000 $ 75,000 $ 10,000,000 Reliance S 2,000,000 $ 60,000 (Including Associated $ 1,000,000 $ 30,000 Earthquake Pending S 1,500,000 $ 45,000 and Flood) $ 5,000,000 S 125,000 Essex S 2,500,000 S 62500 Excess Pending S 2,500,000 $ 62,500 S 20,000,000 (Including Earthquake and Flood) S 5,000,000 $ 87,500 Pending Excess S 25,000,000 (Including Earthquake and Flood) $ 15,000,000 $ 90,000 Fireman's Fund $ 15,000,000 $ 90,000 Excess S 30,000,000 (Excluding Earthquake and Flood) $ 155,000,000 $ 81,500 Fireman'5 Fund $ 155,000,000 $ 81,500 Excess S 45,000,000 (Excluding Earthquake and Flood) Proposed Total Premium: S 1,309,000 i uacrti r ."mivcn HoJul IV; /14-f 3G-Lf1J JUN UI ,Vb 14 :41 Ne .U.' P.03 Mr. Steve Kozak June 7, 1995 Page 3 All carriers specifically identified in the schedule have offered quotations as speed and can bind coverage accordingly. We further specify as "pending" those layers of the program on which we continue to negotiate terms and conditions. Note that there are several insurers who have quoted a higher price to participate in the primary layer at an overall premium of $750,000, or $225,000 more than proposed. Note further that CNA has offered a quotation of $164,000 for their provision of $2,000,000 within the primary layer, and we may consider binding that coverage after binding Lexington and Reliance in order to avoid an overall $615,000 layer premium. In the meantime, we continue our dialogue with several other insurers to support the program costs as shown in the schedule. There may be some pressure from the participating carriers to increase the $10,000,000 excess of $10,000,000layer premium to $325,000 approximately. We anticipate Essex providing an additional $2,500,000 in the $5,000,000 excess of $20,000,000 layer and are .✓ hopeful that Westchester will offer coverage in the $5,000,000 excess $25,000,000 layer. We shall keep you apprised of our progress as we strive in this obviously chaotic market place to complete the program as outlined. Sincerely, ROBERT F. DRIVER ASSOCIATES Donald H. McLean First Vice President DHM:rw FAIIR95-26 r June 14, 1995 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CA $200 MILLION ALL RISK PROPERTY AND EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE PROGRAM FY 1995-96 CARRIER PARTICIPATION LIMITS LAYER PREMIUMS $7,500,000 PRIMARY LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING ED'&FLOOD) Reliance Ins. Co. $3,000,000 $210,000 Lexington Ins. Co. 2,500,000 175,000 Pending 2,000,000 140,000 $7,500,000 $525,000 $2,500,000 EXCESS OF$7,500,000(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ-&FLOOD) Reliance Ins. Co. $2,500,000 $100 000000 $2,500,000 $100,000 $10,000,000 EXCESS OF$10,000,000 LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ-& FLOOD) Agricultural Ins.Co. $3,000,000 $90.000 Royal Ins. Co. 2,500,000 75,000 Reliance Ins. Co. 2,000,000 60,000 �; Associated Ins.Co. 1,000,000 30,000 Pending _ 1,500,000 45500 $10,000,000 $300,000 $5,000,000 EXCESS OF$20,000,000 LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ-&FLOOD) Essex Insurance Co. $5.000.000 $125 000000 $5,000,000 $125,000 $5,000,000 EXCESS OF$25,000,000 LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ.& FLOOD Westchester Fire Ins. Co. $5,000,000 $87500 (Pending) $5,000,000 $87,500 'Earthquake Sublimit Total . . ... . . . . . . .. . . . . .... $30,000,000 $15,000,000 EXCESS OF$30,000,000 LAYER(NO EARTHQUAKE) Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. $15,000,000 $90500 $15,000,000 $90,000 $156, 000,000 EXCESS OF$45,000,000 LAYER(NO EARTHQUAKE) Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. $155.000.000 $81500 $155,000,000 $81,500 TOTAL ALL RISK LIMITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . $200,000,000 TOTAL PREMIUM COSTS . . . . .. . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . .... . . . . . $1,309,000 a JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(10): FAHR96-29: Consideration of the following actions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program: (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-75, approving Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company, to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-76, approving Professional Services Agreement with Mellon Trust Company, to serve as master custodial services bank, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. Summary .,. Recommendations from the interview process conducted by the ad hoc Money Manager Selection Subcommittee were presented for consideration by the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee at their June 14, 1995 meeting. Also, results of the RFP process for master trust/custodial bank services were also presented for consideration by the Committee. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends that the Executive Committee: 1. Select the firm of Pacific Investment Management Company to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. 2. Select Mellon Trust Company as master custodial services bank, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. `'^� �vemoxiesenasm,za+o COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS •1 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA June 14, 1995 1 B EWS AVENUE vo Boxn2v OIUBB2.2.1 STAFF REPORT FAHR95-29 Selection of External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program Summary A short-list of external money manager candidates, prepared by Callan Associates, Inc., the Districts' investment advisor, was presented to the FAHR Committee at your May meeting. At the May meeting, the Committee appointed a Money Manager Selection Subcommittee and instructed the Subcommittee to conduct interviews and return with selection recommendations for Committee and Board consideration at the June meetings. ... The Subcommittee interviewed the following finalist firms on May 22, 1995: • Chandler Liquid Asset Management, Inc., San Diego • Pacific Investment Management Company, Newport Beach • Payden & Rygel, Los Angeles • Scudder, Stevens & Clark, Inc., Los Angeles • Western Asset Management Company, Pasadena At the conclusion of the interviews, the Subcommittee determined that Pacific Investment Management Company (PIMCO) was the most qualified firm and should be recommended as money manager for the Districts' two portfolios (Liquid Operating Monies and Long-Term Operating Monies) on the condition that PIMCO reduce its annual fee proposal from 27 to 15 basis points. The Subcommittee also developed an alternative recommendation should PIMCO be unable to accommodate the Subcommittee's request. On May 23, 1995, PIMCO responded to the Districts with an offer of a 15 basis point fee per annum for management of the Districts' investments (see attached letter). FAHR95-29 - Section of Money Manager& Custodial Services Bank Page 2 June 14, 1995 Custodial Bank Services On June 2, 1995, the Districts released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Master Trust/Custodial Bank Services to five banks. The selected custodial bank will provide the Districts with custodial safekeeping for the Districts' securities, and will provide investment accounting and reporting services as an integral part of the Districts' investment program. This will include accounting of the principal and interest earnings amounts for each of the nine Districts. Proposals are due to the Districts on Monday, June 12, 1995, and will be evaluated by Callan Associates and staff. Results of the RFP process will be presented to the Committee at your meeting for selection of a custodial services bank. Performance Monitoring A comprehensive set of performance guidelines and ongoing monitoring is essential to the Districts' investment program. Section 15.2 of the Districts' Investment Policy Statement states, in part, that the Committee ". . . shall adopt guidelines for the ongoing review of duration, quality and liquidity of the Districts' portfolio." Staff is working with Callan Associates to develop the review guidelines required by Section 15.2 and to establish an ongoing investment performance monitoring and reporting program. Draft review guidelines and an outline of the monitoring system will be presented to the Committee at your July meeting. Staff Recommendations 1. Select the firm of Pacific Management Investment Company to serve as the Districts' external money manager, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. 2. Select a master custodial services bank, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. SK:lc J\NP000.IHdiAN1FVL,ARGU'p'S15�STAFFRGf,FP0.FFNIPBS�BA �_� PACIFIC INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT COMPANY May 23, 1995 Mr. Gary Streed Via Facsimile: (714) 962-3954 Director of Finance County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Mr. Streed: John Hague and I want to thank you and the other members of the Districts' Selection Committee for inviting Pacific Investment Management Company (PIMCO) to make a presentation yesterday. We are interested in this management assignment. The reasons go far beyond our respective geographical proximity and our desire to see assets under management grow. As a long-time Orange County-based money manager, we feel an obligation to help local agencies recover from the devastating losses they incurred in the collapse of the Orange County investment pool. The best way that we can do that is to offer our investment management `J expertise which is among the best to be found anywhere. The nature of the proposed assignment for the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, with its very restrictive investment guidelines and relatively short-term orientation, is significantly different from our other clients. This gives us some flexibility from a fee standpoint. If PIMCO is awarded the entire assignment, we are prepared to offer a 15 basis point fee per annum for the management of the assets. We have tried to be as accommodative as we possibly can in trying to meet the fee objectives of your committee. In addition, we can offer the following: A well-balanced, experienced, and specialized staff with continuity of key professionals. Full client servicing for your account. A willingness to innovate within a conservative framework, i.e., development of proprietary computer analytics to be able to breakdown complex securities and to understand their performance characteristics in different interest rate environments. A philosophy that gives weight to long-term trends which are fundamental indicators of change and important in identifying turning points in the bond market; by integrating a longer-term orientation with shorter-term cyclical factors, we have been able to avoid the �..✓ short-term aberrations that produce performance volatility. P.O. Box 9000 840 Newport Center onve Newport Beach. California 92658-9030 (714)640-3031 •FU(714) 720-1375 Page 2 - Continuation Our success in attracting and keeping clients has been largely based on our ability to generate consistent returns over the past twenty years. The strengths listed above have been the key factors behind this record. You can be assured that we will work hard to maintain our record of consistency if we are retained by the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. The other information that was requested at the meeting yesterday will be sent to you under separate cover today: PIMCO's Derivatives Policy statement, insurance coverages, and a copy of our annual bank custodian survey. Again, thank you very much for your interest in PIMCO. We look forward to hearing from you when you have made your final decision. In the meantime, please call me at 714f 45.5i4M we may provide further information or assistance. Very m�ily yours, Leland T. Scholey, CFA o�3 hn L. Hague Vice President Managing Director �..J cc: Bill Gross, Managing Director Brent Harris, Managing Director Bill Thompson, CEO & Managing Director V Cuutm SANrrATiON Dimas ul GRANGE COUNv. CAUFORNIA June 14, 1995 10B'00f16°�4" na WX e,n `/ rwxrax vu�v.cauroxwx ezne.e,2r maeersa, STAFF REPORT FAE R95-29 Selection of Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program Summary On June 2, 1995, the Districts released a Request for Proposal (RFP)for Master Trust/Custodial Bank Services to five banks. The following banks submitted proposals to the Districts: o Mellon Trust Company o Northern Trust Company o State Street Bank& Trust Company The proposal evaluation panel determined that while each of the proposals meets the minimum qualifications of the RFP, several factors help to distinguish the overall features of one bank proposal from the other. These factors include: �,�✓ o Service Office Location o Qualifications of the Client Service Officer o Fees o Optional Services The attached Proposal Evaluation Sheet summarizes the three proposals. Based on the evaluation results of the panel, staff recommends selection of Mellon Trust Company to provide master mist/custody bank services for the Districts' investment program. Of the three banks, Mellon Trust was ranked in the top tier in a 1994 custodian bank survey. Mellon's accounting system is accessible through an on-line Windows product, and provides a wide range of accounting and performance reports to the client and the investment manager. Custom reports are also available. The Client Service Officer who would be responsible for day-today coordination of the Mellon team, is based in Mellon's San Francisco office, and has more than twenty years experience in the fields of employee trust and investment portfolio administration. Mellon's proposed fee schedule is in the mid-range of the three banks. Finally, Mellon offers training to client staff to familiarize them with Mellon systems and team members. Staff Recommendation Select Mellon Trust Company to serve as the Districts' master custodial services bank, and �,,.i authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. FAHR95-29 June 14, 1995 PROPOSAL EVALUATION SHEET MASTER CUSTODIAL BANK SERVICES lnnB-Term Debt CIMnturrk cllmtuwly A UntlnB Asml Under Raft. Mm OBka S Mcfftnal Firm Malupement MO ". ISSP'F l bm, GualNkeepnn MpertlnB Sssbms Insumirm COsarepa F. C rmmls MEUM tM CI TgLLR+MO A-1 A• Sim Fln bcl bYeJM111n1Wl:MMIn M To $I"Fr,NG BVW .KQ\I Aemb OlralmplLp MUST 31PYGe Fu la sgMems;enMeesa (WIN00W$) SSOIA EPam cu • 21 m pSMmro mrb. EI dwip M 1MEIdE S .palq • I rmml mnuvemei] eddl.repnn. S]OM EBO gMA.ao1. . GneggmW o Auet AccwnX Trane desks. 9dm3 $yuN [_ O�q . %OTfty" . Il Bmlmld rer, e. 1.5bp .Cwlan Mm. SA,SW 3T.500 ftix fT,$EOlyr 9r,prm Ymr .-p ft 7w 000 31,= $5mv. m0 se SIZI Md, ft;BBB NIMFNPRN ]OBcI T24,no Cnkapl Bewnrylt M1m;lm 10 KlNrm Pob, VSW ftM .BNMu1 1.Obp INf/SF SOP F~758 AU M. Tn egglece:rmlme5 Cmeemrm s Bgtl awvb. p6bkb, SRWp ,Cmm M'" f),= slix .PMAM. 9 IB ebMeNrepW YOMEW 31,50w A] A. NpdumnN tlA. leppb. Etlhuled FlM Yor Ceq Jd;OaS SMMSFRFET f1AFUMer C." Ae] M Sn Fm Lw Jgro1 MW( 7,mt Mcwm, a Sim M.mA But 20bp 00en mpdp SANASMUST "PMdll FmgMfVBB ogsWlee;egdu]] (1 mH s) S Bm Bkkml pMmmrre gmmb. Cm vmrvmYle9 f4xM Bmn SeC.P.l, f10,OW s10,tlq SMZ pl nm M mwulwm4 ObTks. YAM S.UmdIN N.5W dml,l.m • It 8bngsd npwb. VW EAO . Mgie10ee WOO. � . wirshrq. repMle. 000 �.mow:eeeo�r..evxurmeossurwrmcwwevwert C 1 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(11 ): FAHR95-30 Consideration of motion approving revisions to MPRP (Management Performance Review Plan) Performance Incentive Values Summary In October of 1991,the Finance and Personnel Committee submitted a recommendation to the Joint Boards to modify the Management Performance Review Plan(MPRP)in an effort to resolve the salary topping-out problem,enable the Districts to recruit and retain competent management,supervisory and professional staff,and to allow for the reward of exemplary performance. This recommendation included provisions that established a program based more on private sector compensation practices that would increase the spread within the salary ranges from 30 to 40 percent in a phased effort over a three-year period,and established salary ranges to be affective in July of 1991, 1992 and 1993 based on market survey data used to determine the mid-point of the range rather than the tap. In the Intervening years since 1991,the amount of funding provided for the Merit Pool has been equal to the wage adjustments received by the groups represented by the Orange County Employees Association (OCEA)and Operating Engineers Local 501. The actual increases received by employees represented by OCEA and the Operating Engineers have actually exceeded increases received by employees under the MPRP program as the represented groups also receive adjustments under a traditional five-step program. Finance.Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation In order to realize the initial objectives of the MPRP program to provide an incentive for consistent meritorious performance,the following multi-phased approach is recommended: 1. Effective In July 1995,authorize funds totaling$173,000 beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. Payments will be made in 1995-96. 2. Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll(totaling$453,000)for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst&Young, This fund would be distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1)as in the past,and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund which would be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. Payments would be made in 1996-97. 3. Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers In proper administration of the program,and particularly the review process as recommended by Ernst&Young. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. t_J J.IYICWI]GM,ElfEL1111NB5NH]B11.EC L COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS M ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA V June 14, 1995 108AAEll.PVENDE E D 9D%a127 WYNTMN VALLEY.CALL 9RMA 92728.8127 01019622<t1 STAFF REPORT FAHR95-30 MPRP Performance Incentive Values Background In October of 1991, the Finance and Personnel Committee submitted a recommendation to the Joint Boards to modify the Management Performance Review Plan (MPRP) in an effort to resolve the salary topping-out problem, enable the Districts to recruit and retain competent management, supervisory and professional staff, and to allow for the reward of exemplary performance. This recommendation included provisions that established a program based more on private sector compensation practices that would increase the spread within the salary ranges from 30 to 40 percent in a phased effort over a three-year period, and established salary ranges to be effective in July of 1991, 1992 and 1993 based on market survey data used to determine the midpoint of the range rather than the top. In the intervening years since 1991, the amount of funding provided for the Merit Pool has been equal to the wage adjustments received by the groups represented by the Orange County Employees Association (OCEA) and Operating Engineers Local 501 as shown in Table 1 below. TABLET. Six Year History of SalaryIncreases OCEA AND OPERATING ENGINEERS Eft.Date Nov.'90 Nov.'91 Nov.'92 Nov.'93 Nov.'94 Nov.95 TOTAL AV Inc.% 5.0 5.5 5.5 -0- 3.0 3.0 22.0 3.67 PROFESSIONAL AND SUPERVISORY ER.Date JuL'91 Jul.92 JUL'93 Jul.94 JuL'95 Jul.'96 TOTAL AV Inc.% 6.2 &0 3.8 -0- 3.0 3.0 22.0 3.67 The fact that wage increases received by employees represented by OCEA and the Operating Engineers have actually exceeded increases received by employees under the MPRP program (due to the additional impact of step advances) does not support one of the original goals of the MPRP program to ". . . allow for the reward of exemplary performance." This, and other factors currently being addressed, has resulted in .. widespread employee dissatisfaction with the MPRP program as reported in the Ernst v FAHR95-30 - MPRP Performance Incentive Values Page 2 June 14, 1995 and Young audit of the Human Resource Department, and the observation that ". . . the MPRP does not 'incentivize' performance and therefore does not meet its stated goal of providing an incentive for consistent and meritorious performance." (see Attachment 2, an excerpt of Ernst and Young Report). Employees under the traditional five-step merit pay program receive 5.5 percent upon completion of probation as well as a 5.5 percent anniversary adjustment until they reach the fifth step, all in addition to the negotiated range adjustment. While it is true that these employees' performance must at least meet expectations to qualify for these adjustments, most easily meet that requirement. These considerations result in an employee reaching the fifth step in about three and one-half years, with annual increases of typically 8 to 11 percent. While the fifth step is targeted at the market rate for classifications in the five-step program, a perception of 8 to 11 percent annual wage increases is generated without reference to market position. This phenomenon has an important impact on satisfaction within the MPRP program. Employees in the MPRP program receive one wage adjustment each year, varying from zero to about ten percent and averaging the amounts shown in Table 1. Since the v middle of the range is targeted to market rates, and not the top step as with employees under the traditional five step merit pay program, the goal for employees whose performance at least meets expectations is to reach mid-point in approximately three to five years, which is normally when an employee becomes fully proficient in performing the essential duties of the job. This is not currently possible, since the average increases are equal to or less than the annual range adjustment, and thus there is no change in the relative position within the range. MPRP employees who supervise employees in the five step program face a unique problem in that their subordinates quickly reach step five of their range, which, because of range overlap and inability of the supervisor to advance into the MPRP range, results in an inappropriate differential between the employee and their supervisor. Recommendation In order to realize the initial objectives of the MPRP program in providing an incentive for consistent and meritorious performance, the merit pool fund must be established in an amount in excess of the cost-of-living and the range adjustment increases negotiated by OCEA and Operating Engineers Local 501, and the amount required to move an employee to mid-range in a three to five year period. Further, individual employees must achieve a salary range position that is commensurate with their level of experience, proficiency and performance, relationship to individuals in similar classifications, and ..✓ relationship to other positions within the organizational unit. a Y FAHR95-30 - MPRP Performance Incentive Values Page 3 June 14, 1995 Staff would propose a multi-phased approach in addressing this complex issue: 1. Effective in July of 1995, provide sufficient funds beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year (and included in the Professional and Supervisory MOU) to adjust the more critical range position issues. Staff recommends 2.0 percent of payroll ($173,000), to be funded through salary savings, in addition to the 3.0 percent now authorized. 2. Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll for implementation in July 1996. This fund would be distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1) as in the past, and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund established in the Professional and Supervisory MOU, which would be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. err' Staff recommends 5.0 percent of the 1995-96 payroll for this group, or $453,000, be funded in the 1996-97 budget. 3. Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program, and particularly the review process. Cost is included within the training program and organization proposed in the 1995-96 budget. GH:lc k: RP MSR o w.wner o-o-e ATTACHMENT worms PROPOSED FY1995M MERIT MATRIX E-; P&�1FF#M AT 1ST O 2ND Q 3RD Q 4TH Q �o%-zs%) (25%-50% ' 51%-75%L (75%-100%) 10% 8% 7% 50A OUTSTANDING 80A 8% 5% 3% EXCEEDS 6 4% 3% 3% MEETS 0% 0% 0% O% NEEDSIMPROVEMENT 0 0% UNACCEPTABLE PAYOUT 4.91% County Sanitation MOM of Orange County Human Resources Review Action Plans 4. Improve quality of Findings the Management Performance Review as Managers and subordinates express concern that the MPRP does not"incentivize"performance and therefore does not meet its stated goal of providing"...an incentive for consistent and meritorious performance."The Program (MPRP) pool percentage is viewed as an entitlement at the low end of performance and is not viewed as significant enough to impact performance at the high end of performance.In addition,percentage spreads are not seen m large enough to differentiate top from bottom performers and thus arc not effective performance drivers ■ There is widespread employee dissatisfaction with the MPRP.Employees express in focus groups and inter- views inequity concerns relative to the step process,market rates and the stated intent of the program.We iden- tified that zero percent of employees were in the top salary quartile in the 1993 and 1994 performance years. Some portion of outstanding employees should reside in the top quartile to effectively Seward performance at Fiscal year 1993-94 reviews were completed haphazardly because they were not initially tied to a salary increase as Certain MPRP procedures have not been communicated since the roll-out of the revised program in 1991 e.g. pro-rated procedure for new hires.In addition,overall MPRP policies and procedures do not exist in any acces- sible format,though they are referenced to in the MOU at There has been no training on the MPRP since the revised program was rolled-out in 1991 as Comments to support review ratings generally reflect job responsibilities rather than performance outcomes. This pattern is seen at the lop levels also.Department Head reviews are typically narrative essays which do not reflect specific and measurable performance objectives at There is variability across the districts in the way managers are reviewing their subordinates. Reviews are not being calibrated across supervisors,making them invalid selection tools for promotions a ■ Though promotional postings indicate position requirements,guidelines for what individuals can do to achieve promotion are unclear %a 9 ■ See Appendix B for flowchart of the MPRP 0 N J ERNST&YOUNG UP 23 i County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Human Resources Review Solutions ■ Ensure reviews are completed and given annually for all exempt personnel regardless of monetary increase ■ Redesign process to allow employee input prior to finalization of review.Add self-appraisal worksheet to prompt dialogue during performance discussions ■ Increase emphasis on ongoing feedback ■ Develop instruction booklet for supervisors and employees including: • Program philosophy • Critical dates • Program design • Examples of specific and measurable performance objectives • Ratings definitions • Discussion of ratings errors ■ Provide supervisory training on the following: • Program design • How to write specific and measurable performance objectives • How to provide meaningful employee feedback • Mechanisms for ongoing feedback ■ Evaluate video training alternative for modelling performance feedback ■ Institute a quality control mechanism to monitor the consistency of ratings across supervisors and ensure that performance feedback is job-specific and outcome versus responsibility-based ■ Build accountability for quality and timeliness of MPRP feedback into managers' performance reviews ■ Utilize computerized tracking and reporting system to facilitate review issuance and compliance ''NST&YOUNGLLP - ( i 24m 4\ County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Human Resources Review at Place MPRP forms on disk to facilitate timely completion of reviews ■ Validate performance expectations against job descriptions ■ Establish linkage to promotions ■ Relate ratings definitions in performance dialogue to concrete examples of the performance results and behav- iors required to achieve various ratings so that employees know how to reach the next highest rating level ■ Include career planning component and link development plan to career planning to Recogniu constraints of union environment in development and implementation of action plan. Union mem- bership approval would be required for all substantive program changes i.e.,involving more than changes to administrative procedures. In instances where substantive changes are proposed,develop a plan to achieve union approval ■ Consider setting standard percentage increases by rating category and announcing the percentage ranges at the beginning of the performance year.The following is an example: 8- 10 percent Outstanding 6-8 percent Exceeds Expectations 4-6 percent Meets Expectations 2-4 percent Improvement Needed 0-2 percent Unacceptable In the above example,all employees rated outstanding could expect to receive the same percentage increase, which could range from 8 to 10 percent.In addition,consider making the percentage spread wide enough to differentially reward performance at the top and low ends.Although these changes could not be implemented until the 1997-8 fiscal year and would require passage by union membership,the proposed changes would motivate performance and thus achieve the stated goals of the MPRP Costs/Benefits Costs ■ Resources to develop instruction booklet and supervisory training course including possible video component. Cost estimate for footage and editing for a half hour training video is$3,000 to$5,000 `JERNST&YOUNG LIP 25 _ --I County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Human Resources Review ■ Staff time to deliver and undergo supervisory training related to the MPRP ■ Staff time to provide ongoing coaching and counselling,set goals,solicit employee input,monitor review qual- ity and negotiate substantive changes to the MPRP ■ Significant funding to allow the differential percentage spread necessary to motivate performance.This issue would need to be addressed by the Board Benefits ■ Enhanced performance motivation ■ Improved quality of reviews • Accuracy • Meaningfulness • Timeliness ■ Lessened legal risk through improved documentation ■ Valid selection tool ■ Reduced inequity concerns Implementatlon Framework Timeline: Six months Proposed Project Leader: Gary Hasenstab Proposed Team Members: General Manager Department Heads Chair of Union MPRP Review Committee Committee of Division Managers YST&YOUNGLLP f 6� JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING �.r AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(12): EXEC95-01 Consideration of motion receiving and filing General Counsel Memorandum dated June 14, 1995, re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving in concept the consolidation of the nine separate districts into a single County Sanitation District, and authorizing staff and General Counsel to proceed with additional studies to identify and evaluate the possible forms under which a single district can be organized. Summary At the direction of the Boards of Directors,staff and General Counsel were directed to prepare a comprehensive report addressing the issue of feasibility and desirability,of consolidating the nine independent Districts that presently exist into a single combined entity. Interim reports were provided to the Executive Committee in January and February(see attached). Attached is a Memorandum from General Counsel dated June 14, 1995 outlining the legal aspects of the issue,as well as an Executive Summary on the Consolidation of Districts and a General Outline for Consolidation of Districts(Cortese-Knox Act of 1985). There are no serious legal or financial impediments identified by staff regarding consolidation. The obvious advantage is having a single voting body making district-wide decisions, rather than the nine bodies now voting. For instance,in the case of selecting Option A or Option B on the Orange County bankruptcy,we were fortunate that the nine Boards voted in unison. Had the outcome been a split,then we would have faced the dilemma of having our Boards tatting somewhat adverse positions in our dealings with the County over the bankruptcy matters. Attached are two previous reports on this matter which should help provide background an previous issues that have been considered. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Executive Committee approve in conceptthe consolidation of the nine separate districts and that continued studies by staff and Counsel be authorized. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors Approve in concept the consolidation of the nine separate districts and authorize continued studies by staff and General Counsel. a:uwooaoavxacuuaeswnzen.Ec Executive Summary Consolidation of Districts A proposed consolidation of the County Sanitation Districts ("CSD") is considered a change of organization and is governed under the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act ("Act"), California Government Code Sections 56000, gt ems. which went into effect on January 1, 1986. The legal procedures for accomplishing such a change of organization is administered through the County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") and is conducted by the particular legislative body of the local agency proposing such a consolidation. However, under the Act, in the case of consolidation of Districts, the Board of Supervisors for the County of Orange is considered the conducting authority to conduct proceedings for any proposed consolidation of districts. LAFCO has the authority to initiate proposals for consolidation of districts; however, a proposal for consolidation may be submitted to LAFCO by the local agency through a resolution of application for the reorganization. Upon receipt of a resolution of application or petition for reorganization from CSD to LAFCO, LAFCO then has the option of either referring the proposed reorganization to a reorganization committee, or it may directly process the proposed reorganization in commission proceedings. As a general rule, at the conclusion of the LAFCO hearing on the proposed consolidation, the County Board of Supervisors usually will order the consolidation or reorganization without the necessity of an election. There are a number of steps and timelines required to be met during the reorganization process, the relevant of which are included in this outline. Upon the completion and existence of a change of organization such as a consolidation, a certificate of completion is executed for purposes of establishing the date of completion. Any action to challenge the validity of a completed consolidation must be brought pursuant to the validating statute found in the Califomia Code of Civil Procedure at Sections 860 at sea. NN400W 1 a 0 1 9 General Outline for Consolidation of Districts (Cortese-Knox Act of 1985) The Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act, California Government Code Sections 56000, es seq. went into effect on January 1, 1986. The Cortese-Knox Act unified into one statutory scheme into three major laws which governed local agency boundary changes. These laws were: The Knox-Nisbet Act of 1963, which established local agency formation commissions (LAFCOs) in each county, and gave them regulatory authority over local agency boundary changes; The District Reorganization Act of 1965, which combines separate laws governing special districts into a single statute; and The Municipal Organization Act of 1977, which consolidated the laws governing city incorporation and annexation. The basic impetus behind the Cortese-Knox Act was to unify the procedures for implementing any local government boundary changes. 1. "Change of organization" means any of the following: (f) A consolidation of cities or special districts. (§56021) 2. "Conducting authority" means the legislative body of an affected city, affected district, or affected county which is authorized by the commission to conduct proceedings for a change of organization or reorganization. Subject to compliance with any commission determination, the conducting authority for proceedings shall be determined as follows: d. The board of supervisors of the county in which the affected territory is located shall be the conducting authority and conduct proceedings for all of the following changes of organization or reorganization. (2) The consolidation of districts. (§56029) 3. "Consolidation" means the uniting or joining of two or more cities located in the same county into a single new successor city or two or more districts into a single new successor district. In the case of consolidation of special districts, all of those districts shall have been formed pursuant to the same principal act. (§56030) 2000.00004 14216 1 -1- 6114/95 y 4. No change of organization or reorganization, or any term or condition of a change of organization or reorganization, shall impair the rights of any bondholder or other creditor of any county, city or district. Nor shall any change of organization or reorganization, or any term or condition of a change of organization or reorganization, impair the contract rights, or contracts entered into by a public entity created by a joint exercise of powers agreement established pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with §54000) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code. Notwithstanding any provision of this division, or of any change of organization or reorganization, or any term or condition of a change of organization, each and every bondholder or other creditor may enforce all of his or her rights in the same manner, and to the same extent, as if the change of organization, reorganization, term, or condition had not been made. Those rights may also be enforced against agencies, and their respective officers, as follows: (f) Consolidation: against the consolidation successor city or district. (§56121) 5. The powers and duties of LAFCO include the following: (a) Initiate proposals for consolidation of districts. (§56375) 6. Proposed reorganizations may either be referred to a reorganization committee after a noticed, public hearing on the question of the committee referral, or may be processed in commission proceedings. (§56475, §56476) 7. Proceeding upon petition or application (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), upon the presentation of any petition or applications making a proposal for a reorganization, the commission may take proceedings pursuant to Part 3 (commencing with §56650) without referring the proposal to a reorganization committee, as provided in this part. 8. Reorganization Committees appointed persons and, duties are described at §56482 - §56495. The tasks of the reorganization committee include: (a) Preparing a summary of the "nature and extent of study of the committee;" (b) Preparing a plan of reorganization; and 2000-00004 14216 1 -26114/95 r (c) Recommending approval or disapproval of the reorganization plan. (§56496) 9. Reorganization committee approval of a plan must be made by vote of more than one-half (1/2) of the represented special districts on the committee. (§56497) 10. Commission reorganizations may be initiated by submission of a petition or a 'Resolution of Application" for the reorganization and a plan for service in the affected area (necessary for local agency resolutions of application ) in accordance with §56650 - §56706. 11. Initiation by petition or resolution Commission proceedings for a change of organization or a reorganization may be initiated by petition or by resolution of application in accordance with this chapter. (§56650) 12. Date proceedings initiated Commission proceedings shall be deemed initiated on the date a petition or resolution of application is accepted for filing and a certificate of filing is issued by the executive officer of the commission of the county in which the affected territory is located. (§56651) 13. Application form: contents Each application shall be in the form as the commission may prescribe and shall contain all of the following information: (a) A petition or resolution of application initiating the proposal. (b) A statement of the nature of each proposal. (c) A map and description, acceptable to the executive officer, of the boundaries of the subject territory for each proposed change of organization or reorganization. (d) Any data and information as may be required by any regulation of the commission. 2000-00004 14216 1 -3- 6114/95 (a) Any additional data and information, as may be required by the executive officer, pertaining to any of the matters or factors which may be considered by the commission. (f) The names of the officers or persons, not to exceed three in number, who are to be furnished with copies of the report by the executive officer and who are to be given mailed notice of the hearing. (§56652) 14. Plan for providing services: information included: (a) Whenever a local agency submits a resolution of application for a change of organization or reorganization pursuant to this part, the local agency shall submit with the resolution of application a plan for providing services within the affected territory. (b) The plan for providing services shall include all of the following information and any additional information required by the commission or the executive officer: (1) An enumeration and description of the services to be extended to the affected territory. �► (2) The level and range of those services. (3) An indication of when those services can feasibly be extended to the affected territory. (4) An indication of any improvement or upgrading of structures, roads, sewer or water facilities, or other conditions the local agency would impose or require within the affected territory if the change of organization or reorganization is completed. (5) Information with respect to how those services will be financed. (§56653) 15. A proposal for a change of organization or a reorganization may be made by petition The petition shall do all of the following: (a) State that the proposal is made pursuant to this part. 2000 00004 14216 1 -4- 6/14/95 (b) State the nature of the proposal and list all proposed changes of organization. U (c) Set forth a description of the boundaries of affected territory accompanied by a map showing the boundaries. (d) Set forth any proposed terms and conditions. (e) State the reason or reasons for the proposal. (f) State whether the petition is signed by registered voters or owners of land. (g) Designate not to exceed three persons as chief petitioners, setting forth their names and mailing addresses. (h) Request that proceedings be taken for the proposal pursuant to this part. (i) State whether the proposal is consistent with the sphere of influence of any affected city or affected district. (§56700) 16. Adoption: contents (a) A proposal for a change of organization or a reorganization may be made by the adoption of a resolution of application by the legislative body of an affected local agency. (b) At least 20 days before the adoption of the resolution, the legislative body may give mailed notice of its intention to adopt a resolution of application to the commission and to each interested agency and each subject agency. The notice shall generally describe the proposal and the affected territory. (c) Except for the provisions regarding signers and signatures, a resolution of application shall contain all of the matters specified for a petition in §56700 and shall be submitted with a plan for services prepared pursuant to §56653. (§56800) 2ooaa0004 142161 -5- 6/14/95 17. Reorganization proceedings (a) After completion of proceedings by the commission pursuant to Part 3 (commencing with §56650), proceedings for a change of organization or reorganization shall be taken pursuant to this part. (b) If a proposal is approved by the commission, with or without amendment, wholly, partially, or conditionally, the conducting authority shall conduct proceedings in accordance with this part. The proceedings shall be conducted and completed pursuant to those provisions which are applicable to the proposal and the territory contained in the proposal as, it is approved by the commission. If the commission approves the proposal with modifications or conditions, proceedings shall be conducted and completed in compliance with those modifications or conditions. (§57000) 18. Completion of proceedings: time limitations: extension of time If the conducting authority does not complete a proceeding within one year after the commission approves a proposal for that proceeding, the proceeding shall be deemed abandoned unless prior to the expiration of that year the commission authorizes an extension of time for that completion. The inability of the conducting authority to complete a proceeding because of the order or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction temporarily enjoining or restraining the proceedings shall not be deemed a failure of completion and the one-year period shall be tolled for the time that order or decree is in effect. (§57001) 19. Notice and date of hearing (a) Within 35 days following the adoption of the commission's resolution making determinations, the clerk of the conducting authority shall set the proposal for hearing and give notice of that hearing by mailing, publication, and posting, as provided in Chapter 4 (commencing with §56150) of Part 1. The date of that hearing shall not be less than 15 days, or more than 60 days, after the date the notice is given. (b) Where the proceeding is for the establishment of a district of limited powers as a subsidiary district of a city, upon the request of the affected district, the date of the hearing shall be at least 90 days, but no more than 135 days, from the date the notice is given. (§57002) 2o00-000a 14216_7 _6_ 6/14/95 20. Dissolutions incorporation formations disincorporations mergers establishments of subsidiary districts consolidations or any combination of U proposals actions by conducting authority (a) Where a change of organization consists of a dissolution, disincorporation, incorporation, establishment of a subsidiary district, consolidation, or merger, the conducting authority, not more than 30 days after the conclusion of the hearing, shall adopt a resolution making a finding regarding the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn, and take one of the following actions: (1) Terminate proceedings if a majority protest exists in accordance with §57078. (2) Order the change of organization subject to confirmation of the voters, or in the case of a landowner-voter district, subject to confirmation by the landowners, unless otherwise stated in the formation provisions of the enabling statute of the district. (3) Order the change of organization without election if it is a change of organization that meets the requirements of§57081, 57083 or 57087; otherwise, the conducting authority shall take the action specified in paragraph (2). (b) Where a reorganization consists of one or more dissolutions, incorporations, formations, disincorporations, mergers, establishments of subsidiary districts, consolidations, or any combination of those proposals, the conducting authority, not more than 30 days after the conclusion of the hearing, shall adopt a resolution regarding the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn and take one of the following actions: (1) Terminate proceedings if a majority protest exists in accordance with §57078. (2) Order the reorganization subject to confirmation of the voters, or in the case of landowner-voter districts, subject to confirmation by the landowners, unless otherwise stated in the formation provisions of the enabling statute of the district. U 200000004 14210 1 -7- 6/14/95 (3) Order the reorganization without election if it is a reorganization which meets the requirements of § 57081, 57083, 57087, or 57089; otherwise, the conducting authority shall take the action specified in paragraph (2). (§57077) 21. Consolidation or reorganization of districts into local agency public hearing: election, petition (a) If authorized by the commission pursuant to § 56839, the conducting authority shall conduct proceedings for the consolidation of districts or the reorganization of all or any part of those districts into a single local agency pursuant to this section. The conducting authority shall hold at least one noticed public hearing on the proposal within 30 days after approval of the application by the commission. After the conclusion of the hearing, the conducting authority shall order the consolidation or reorganization without an election, except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b). (b) An election shall only be held if the conducting authority finds either of the following: (1) In the case of inhabited territory, that the petition requesting that the proposal be submitted to confirmation by the voters has been signed by either of the following: (i) At least 25 percent of the number of landowners within the territory subject to the consolidation or reorganization who own at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the territory. (ii) At least 25 percent of the voters entitled to vote as a result of residing within, or owning land within, the territory. (2) In the case of the landowner-voter district, that the territory is uninhabited and a petition requesting that the proposal be submitted to confirmation by the voters has been signed by at least 25 percent of the number of landowners within the territory subject to the consolidation or reorganization, owning at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the territory. 2000-00004 _8_ 6/14/95 14216 1 i; a (c) The petition shall be filed with the conducting authority within 30 days after the public hearing required by subdivision (a) has been held. If U the petition has been filed, the conducting authority shall approve the proposal subject to confirmation by the voters of the district pursuant to § 57077 and 57103. (§57081) `.i 2000-00004 14216_1 -9- 6/14/95 Y._ ti EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR JANUARY 25, 1995 EXEC95-01 : Consideration of motion to receive and file initial staff report regarding consolidation of the nine separate districts;and direct staff to develop a comprehensive analysis of consolidation and report back to the Executive Committee at a future meeting. Summary When the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County were originally incorporated in 1954, they were organized into a number of separate districts that generally followed the drainage patterns of the county. This approach followed the original concept developed by the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts in the 1920's. When the Sanitation Districts were new and pushing new interceptor sewers into the existing and newly developing areas of their service areas, a localized approach made sense because sewer improvement bonds and the existing agreements between neighboring cities narrowed the focus of concern at that time. Every few years the question of consolidation is raised by the Joint Boards of Directors. In the interest of ease of administration, streamlining of board procedures, maintaining the "books" and reducing costs, consolidation makes sense. Our sewer system is well established. Today's focus is much more on the joint works facilities and the various regulatory issues surrounding them. On the other hand, subregional considerations of the separate boards and the problem of equitably commingling the reserves that have been accumulated over the years by each region must also be considered. At the Joint Boards meeting of January 11, 1995, the issue of consolidation was raised and staff was directed to evaluate it and report to the Executive Committee. The issues listed above and others will be analyzed by staff. Staff has compiled a list of the major issues it sees as relevant for analysis. A discussion outline (following) is provided for use by staff and the Executive Committee. The expected outcome of the discussion is to provide input and direction to staff on how to proceed on analyzing the question of consolidating the nine separate districts into one or more district. Staff Recommendation Consideration of motion to receive and file initial staff report regarding consolidation of the nine separate districts and direct staff to develop a comprehensive analysis of consolidation and report back to the Executive Committee at a future meeting. wpd=Vmbxmjan9 xe 14.a 6 Y) J • A a ... 4rF N�"c EXEC95-01 : Staff report regarding consolidation of the nine separate districts. Report to the Executive Committee County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Consolidation of Districts January 25, 1995 Report Contents • Background • Previous Consolidation Reports • Consolidation Issues • Policy Questions • Possible Next Steps � 3 r Orange County Sanitation Districts ffi Background • The 1947 Formation Report recommended creation of Districts based on geography, existing facilities, and to a lesser extent, political boundaries. • Each District originally financed its own trunk sewers and share joint works facilities capital and operating charges through property tax levy. After Proposition 13, each District received a share of basic levy based on previous percentage. • Over the years, many cost sharing agreements have resulted between Districts for construction and operation of collection facilities. Orange County.. Previous Consolidation Reports s • During 1981 -82 the Grand Jury commissioned Price Walterhouse to conduct a Study of Potential Restructuring on Special Districts in Orange County. • During July 1982 the Grand Jury issued a report which recommended that the Sanitation Board should formulate a policy to move toward consolidation of the then eight sanitation districts into one district and subsequently provide for Board membership based on a smaller group of elected representatives. • During February - August 1983, the Districts' Fiscal Policy and Reorganization Committees (Joint Committees) evaluated the Grand Jury recommendations and submitted findings and recommendations to the Executive Committee. • During February 1983, the Executive Committee voted that the Joint Boards immediately adopt a policy urging that each member agency limit the number of Directors representing the agency to one (reducing membership to 26). Oran"(nunty,5anitati C Previous Consolidation Reports (cont.) ,a.3•~ i • During February 23, 1983, Districts' General Counsel reported the following consolidation options: 1 . Make no change in the District organization. 2. Consolidate the present seven Districts into one single District. 3. Consolidate the present seven Districts into three Districts. 4. Retain the present organization with no consolidation, but by resolution, urge each member agency to limit the number of Directors representing that agency to one, regardless of the number of Districts included within each agency. 5. By District Resolution, limit the compensation payable per meeting to the equivalent of one Director per agency regardless of the number of Directors attending and the number of Districts represented. . .... Orange County Santtatiori°RWWI � _ . 6,.1 3. a Previous Consolidation Reports (cont.) • In April 1983, the Joint Boards of Directors adopted Resolution #83-84 urging each of its member agencies to have a single director represent all districts of which the agency is a member and approved in concept the consolidation of Districts into one. • On July 13, 1983, the Joint Boards reviewed several organizational alternatives including: ' , 1 . Consolidation into one District with establishment of an appropriate number of zones (co-terminus with existing District boundaries) for separate financing of specified O&M, capital or debt retirement activities. 2. Consolidation into one District with no zones. 3. Consolidation into three "super-districts" defined by recent engineering studies (District 1 , northern half of District 6 and District 7; Districts 2, 3 & 11 ; and District 5 and southern half of District 6). 4. Retaining the existing organization structure of the (then) seven separate districts. Orange County Sanitation Districts a Previous Consolidation Reports (cont.) • In 1984 and 1985 Districts 13 and 14 were formed, adding new member agencies and additional Directors. • Several Committee members expressed concern that Directors' responsibilities to their constituencies would be impaired and local control of some Districts would be lost by consolidation and that some local needs might not be met on a timely basis as the project priority system would be determined by the majority of all Board Members. If consolidation were to take place, Committee members would favor the zone concept for financing certain activities. This would reduce the then estimated $85,000 annual savings of consolidating. • The Joint Boards did not arrive at a unanimous agreement. The consensus was that the Districts' operations are functionally consolidated, therefore no significant overall benefit would accrue by reorganizing into a single District. • The Joint Boards of Directors concurred with the recommendation of the Special Committee to Study Reorganization of the Sanitation Districts, the Fiscal Policy Committee and Executive Committee that the Districts retain their existing organizational structure. Orange County Sanitation Di Y Consolidation Issues Y`! Issue Implications Potential $ Impart Property tax revenues District 13 does not Possible user fee receive property tax decline for District 13. revenues. Other Districts, to some degree, receive different shares of basic levy. User fee revenues Potential for a level user Some Districts could fee throughout the entire realize user fee service area. reductions/gains. Finance Rating agencies would no No need for Mutual longer review District for Benefit Advances potential weak District. Agreement - potential for rating upgrade. Accounting No need for separate Independent auditor Districts accounting. and Districts' staff No need for numerous cost savings would accounting ledgers for be substantial. shared trunk sewers. Orange aunty Sanitarian Dintfict �� " r_r ..H i 4 Consolidation Issues (cont.) alb:; Issue Implications Potential $ Impart s E Contractual A consolidated District Legal and administrative would assume previous costs reduction. District' contracts. Legal Less inter-District Legal and administrative agreements. costs reduction. Regional services Sewer services would be Potential for higher cost provided on a system- localities to pay less than wide basis - no distinction share and vice versa. for operational costs by locality. Cash and reserves Cash and reserves levels Some Districts have by Districts would be gathered more/less cash dissolved. and reserves - some districts would gain or lose. Consolidation Issues (cont.) Issue Implications Potential $ Impart Board membership Board membership would Board compensation costs be decreased to an would decrease, as would amount to be determined. staff support costs. Capital financing Connection fees are Connection fees may need collected specific to to be tied to regional facility needs. collector sewer and pump station costs. Bonded debt The consolidated district Some districts have would assume the district incurred more/less debt debt obligations of each than others. Some districts District. would gain or lose. Engineering Limited or no impact on engineering decisions. Operation & No change. Maintenance Orange County Sanitation Districts District 14 (cont.) Issue Implications Potential $ Impart Administration Simplified Board Secretary, Districts' staff cost savings recordkeeping, budget may be substantial. preparation and procurement requirements. Other Other advantages and Potential cost reduction/ disadvantages to be gain to Districts depending identified. upon specific issue identified. Orange County Sanitation Distrl' 155 Y� Policy Questions 3 is 1 . Should Districts' staff prepare a more detailed Districts' consolidation/Board membership report entailing cost estimates for each identified consolidation issue and an implementation plan? 2. Are there other consolidation issues which should be included in the next phase study? Possible Next Steps • Direct staff to develop cost estimates associated with each of the y consolidation issues identified on this report, and by committee members, and submit the report first to the Finance and Personnel Committee at a future meeting. • Direct staff to evaluate several consolidation alternatives ranging from one "super" district to two or more districts. • Direct staff to develop a draft implementation plan detailing consolidation options, consolidation steps necessary by option, implementation time frames and costs by option, and Board membership and compensation issues. Orange County Sanitatiofi I7isY _ V JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 8, 1995 Agenda Item (12)(b)(10): EXEC95.01 Consideration of motion to receive and file Staff Report dated February 17, 1995 regarding Consolidation of Districts (copies enclosed in Directors' agenda packages). Summary At the January 25, 1995 Joint Boards of Directors meeting staff was directed to evaluate the consolidation of the nine separate districts and to develop a comprehensive analysis of consolidation and report back to the Executive Committee at future meetings. Recommendation �..d Receive and file Staff report dated February 17, 1995 regarding Consolidation of Districts. J\WPp00.9A4c9 12M af (13) Staff report #2 regarding consolidation of the nine separate Districts Report to the Executive Committee County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Consolidation of Districts E Cost Savings Report j f. February 17, 1995 Cost Savings Report Contents • Map of Districts' Boundaries • Consolidated Cost Savings • District's Current Cash Revenues • Connection Fee Issues • Class III Industrial/Commercial User Fee Issues • District-Specific Service Cost Issues • 1994-95 Projected Flow by District • Revenue Zones in Consolidated District Issues • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of July 1994 Cash Reserves • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of 1994-95 Operating Expenses Orange County Sanitation Districts t i � Cost Savings Report Contents (Cont.) • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: ZZ Comparison of Secured Property Taxes ° y � • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of User Fee per Parcel • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of Taxes Plus User Fees per Parcel • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Class III Industrial/Commercial User Fees • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Fv Comparison of Long-Term Debt =' • Report Summary • Consolidation Study Report Schedule • Future Study Options Orange County Sanitation Districts a % Jo .. vim ; �!�► . �� f ,.a� old •Sit' a^ Consolidation Cost Savings Estimated Annual Cost Savings Accounting Costs Independent Auditor $ 12,0001 Accounting Staff 55,5002 Subtotal $ 67,500 Legal/Administration Costs ' Legal Services $ 5,0003 Districts' Administrative Staff 55,0004 Subtotal $ 60,000 Financing Costs l Reduction of Trustee Fees 16,5005 Total Estimated Savings $144,000 ' As estimated by KPMG Peat Marwick- prior Districts'independent auditor 2 Districts estimate based on reduction of 1,500 hours 3 Based on estimate provided by Rourke, Woodruff & Spradlin Districts' staff estimate based on one-half staff savings in Board secretary's office and one-half clerical staff savings 5 Based on estimates from Texas Commerce Bank Orange County Sanitation Districts District's Current Cash Reserves District 7/01/94 % Reserves Change Cities Special Districts Reserves' Per Parcel from Avg On Board On Board 1 30,301 6.9 842 39 Orange, Santa Ana,Tustin Costa Mesa Sanitary District 2 127,702 29.2 882 <1> Anaheim, Brea, Fountain Valley, Garden Grove Sanitary District Fullerton, LaHabra, Orange, Placentia, Santa Ana, Villa Park, Yorba Linda, 3 129,956 29.7 740 141 Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Midway City Sanitary District Cypress, Fountain Valley, Garden Grove Sanitary District Fullerton, Huntington Beach, La Habra, la La Palma, Los Alamitos, Santa Ana, Seal Beach, Stanton 5 27,210 6.2 1,307 <425> Newport Beach None 6 20,503 4.7 828 53 Newport Beach Costa Mesa Sanitary Distdct 7 52.280 12.0 1,267 <386> Irvine, Newport Beach, Orange, Costa Mesa Sanitary District Santa Ana, Tustin 8.3 11 36.442 999 <117> Huntington Beach None 13 10,834 2.5 1,311 <430> Anaheim, Brea, Orange, None Yorba Linda 14 2,169 �5 2M 626 Newport Reach, Tustin, Irvine Irvine Ranch Water District 437,397 100.0 081 'Thousands of dollars Orange County Sanitation Districts i .. Connection Fee Issues • Connection fees are currently charged on a flat fee basis per EDU District-wide (currently $2,350) • According to the Clean Water Act, connection fees must be tied to infrastructure costs and correlated to development ("fair share" rule) • Connection fees would remain on a flat fee basis under consolidation • Connection fees would become contributions to general capital improvement costs under a consolidated district, i.e. fees may be generated in one area and used in another Orange County Sanitation Districts Class III Industrial Waste User Fee Issues • Class III industrial/commercial user fees are general revenues to fund operating costs collected from commercial/industrial users with domestic strength waste • Class III industrial/commercial user fees range from $703 to $1 ,037 per million gallons depending upon the District, averaging $933 • Annual Class III industrial/commercial user fees range from $162 to $62,655 per year. The average annual fee is $3,415 • Some districts would experience increases/decreases in user fees, but the differential would not be major • Class III industrial/commercial user fees would become a flat rate in the future -- approximating today's average $933 per million gallons x Orange Cnunty Sanitation Districts ( 1 District-Specific Services Cost Issues • Each District has unique operating costs ♦ District 3 has sulfide control program ♦ District 5 has pumping stations ♦ District 7 has local collection • Each District has unique operating conditions within the District + Portions of Districts 2 & 3 adjacent to plant, portions 20 miles away ; ♦ Portions of District 5 flow are pumped, balance is gravity flow + + Portions of Ditricts 6 flow to Plant 1 , balance to Plant 2 i �j in thousands Orange County Sanitation Districts IT,", .;` 1994-95 Projected Flow By District 30,000 25,000 0 Z 3 0 20,000 0 J Q LL C7 J Z 15,000 O O _J H 10,000 Z 5,000 0 -1 1 . 01 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER Orange County Sanitation Districts i IL t t_ Revenue Zones in Consolidated District Issues to Revenue zones are currently authorized under the Sanitation District Act • Revenue zones would permit the creation of varying revenue and expenditure zones analogous to assessment Districts. Such zones could be drawn in any configuration in accordance with revenue requirements. • Revenue zones, could eliminate all of the accounting, legal/administrative and financing cost savings advantages identified with consolidation, (i.e. nine revenue zones would have costs approximately equivalent to nine districts) orange County Sanitation Districts9,i �, �s. Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of July 1994 Cash Reserves 1,400 1,200 J ¢U 1,000 a ¢ 800 w a w 600 ¢ rn 400 w 200 ILI 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER IN Separate Districts OConsolidated Orange County Sanitation'D�strtcts Separate • • • • Comparison of 1994-95 Operating Expenses 00 : i 44 Lu loo - m W Cc :0 0 IL .0 -- DISTRICT NUMBER Districts ■ Orsho Cww Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Secured Property Taxes 120 w w ¢ 100 Q a r 80 m X 60 H w 40 4 cc U 20 w m 0 - ItItit i i 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER 09 Separate Districts OConsolidated s k Y. Orange County Sanitation Districts Paroel$ whWn €Astrid$ 13 and 14 do not dde Property tax revenues tww - � l t Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Sewer Service User Fee Per Parcel A J 180 rWj 160 3 ¢ Q. 140 ¢ a w 120 w 100 ¢ 80 w e U) 60 a 40 7 Z 20 a 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER 09 Separate Districts ❑Consolidated � M Orange County Sanitation Districts Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of Taxes Plus User Fees Per EDU 1ao � w 160 W 140 w n 120 U w 100 l€ 2 W 80 '' Q o fi0 N % 40 H 20 0 t fl4 i 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER ■9 Separate Districts OConsolidated 5�P orange County Sanitation DistfMS ` f Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Class III Industrial/Comm User Fees 1200 z 1000 J Q 0 Z 800 J J_ 600 Lu W IL w 400 U. J Q Z 200 z Q 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER IN Separate Districts OConsolidated 'e7 », a Sri- ram ri Orange County Sanitation Districts �„ 11a Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Long-Term Debt 1,600 1,400 w U 1,200 a w 1,000 a w 600 0 600 w t- O 400 z 0 -J 200 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER ■9 Separate Districts ❑Consolidated Orang`County Sanitation D sttfCts Report Summary • The consolidation of Districts could achieve a levelling of revenues and expenditures by District • The implications of this levelling have been depicted by district • Cost savings up to $144,000 per year can be achieved from the various accounting, legal/administrative and financial savings so far identified • Connection fees will not be affected by consolidation • Total Class III industrial/commercial user fees will change insignificantly but, fees for a particular user may change up to 19% by consolidation • Revenue zones would reduce some or all cost savings since they would imply a new set of legal/administrative and financing requirements • Existing Districts have differing operating costs as indicated by the 94/95 budget and illustrated in this report Orange County Sanitation Districts -. Consolidation Study Report Schedule Concept Report/Board Direction January 25, 1995 Costs Savings Report February 22, 1995 LAFCO Process & Costs March 22, 1995 District 14 Implications March 22, 1995 Existing Debt and Grant Implications April 26, 1995 Board Composition May 24, 1995 Final Report to Executive Committee June 21 , 1995 Final Report to Joint Boards July 12, 1995 Orange County Sanitation Districts i Future Study Options 1 . Direct staff to proceed with further consolidation study efforts per the following consolidation study report schedule 2. Direct staff not to proceed further 3. Direct staff to proceed per other Board direction ,3 t 3 b Orange County Sanitation Districts ' Y ,s' ¢ y .y JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS �..� REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(13): EXEC95-03: Consideration of Resolution No. 95-62, authorizing the General Manager to approve expenditure of funds up to $50,000.00 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements governed by Resolution No. 95-9. Summary Over the past two years,staff has been fine-tuning a procedure for delegating approval authority down into the organization. This delegated authority,through providing increased responsibility and ownership,will contribute to the improved efficiency and effectiveness of the Districts. The Planning, Design and Construction Committee met on June 1, 1995,and the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee met on June 7, 1995. Both Committees considered a motion to authorize the General Manager to approve expenditure of funds up to$50,000 for contracts, services and purchase orders,excluding public works contracts governed by state law,and professional services agreements governed by Board Resolution 95-9. By this action,the Directors can more efficiently utilize their time to review and make decisions on the more significant financial and policy issues affecting the Districts. The attached staff report identifies the delegation of authority hierarchy and procedures. PDC and OMTS Committees'Recommendations The Planning,Design and Construction Committee,and Operations,Maintenance and Technical Services Committee recommend that the Boards of Directors authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to$50,000 for contracts,services and purchase orders,excluding public works contracts governed by State law and professional services agreement governed by Board Resolution No.95-9. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends that the Executive Committee recommend that the Boards of Directors authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to$50,000 for contracts,services and purchase orders,excluding public works contracts governed by State law and professional services agreement governed by Board Resolution No.95-9. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the PDC,OMTS and FAHR Committees'recommendation and recommends approval by the Joint Boards of Directors. \� C61RB13 w RESOLUTION NO. 95-62 M DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE GENERAL MANAGER AND STAFF RE EXPENDITURE OF DISTRICTS' FUNDS AND �../ PERSONNEL ISSUES 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 DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE DISTRICTS' GENERAL MANAGER AND STAFF RELATING TO EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR CONTRACTS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF SERVICES, CONSTRUCTION, SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS; EMPLOYEE TIMEKEEPING RECORDS; EMPLOYEE HIRING, PROMOTION, PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND DISCIPLINE; AND TRAVEL AND TRAINING EXPENDITURES .............. WHEREAS, the General Manager has submitted comprehensive management reports to each of the standing Committees of the Boards of Directors, recommending increased responsibility throughout the various levels of the employee organization; and, WHEREAS,the standing Committees of the Boards of the Directors have determined that an effective, comprehensive organization needs an administrative structure with support procedures that are understood by the Directors, management and the Districts'employees to enable timely and responsive performance of duties; and, WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors have determined that a delegation of authority structure provides for better training of employees which will result in improved efficiency and effectiveness of `..ri the Districts' operations; and, WHEREAS, the standing Committees of the Boards of Directors have determined that four major areas for delegation of authority and responsibility, as recommended by the General Manager, should appropriately be delegated to the General Manager and Staff for implementation; and, WHEREAS, the four major areas consist of(1) the awarding of contracts or purchase orders to acquire non-professional services, supplies and materials, and for minor construction projects; (2)employee timekeeping records and overtime authorizations; (3) personnel issues relating to hiring, promotions, performance reviews and disciplinary action; and (4)travel and training policies and expenditures. 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 General Manager and Staff of the Districts are hereby delegated authority to perform the duties,functions and responsibilities for the Districts' operations, in accordance with the detailed specifications and limitations set forth on Exhibit°A', attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 28, 1995. dad ese L COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 4 ei ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1OEkU EW6 AVENUE PO.WX 2127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CAUFOXNIA 02728.8127 nlale62X11 June 1, 1995 Revised 6/8195 STAFF REPORT OMTS96-027: PDC(6)(d) Consideration of Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Approve Expenditure of Funds up to $50,000 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law and Professional Services Agreements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY INTRODUCTION An effective, comprehensive organization needs an administrative structure with support procedures that make sense, are well documented, are understood by the organization's employees, and that enable timely and responsive administrative acquisition of contracts and services. The organization should also appropriately delegate authority to those persons and units having responsibility for these activities. THE NEED FOR DELEGATED AUTHORITY In an effort to remove barriers that prevent us from performing our jobs at the highest level, a delegation of authority structure will appropriately train our employees and, through providing increased responsibility and ownership, will contribute to the improved efficiency and effectiveness of the Districts. A critical component of the delegation of authority structure is the budget process. The budget process is being improved so that: 1. appropriate and equitable resources are provided to all divisions during the budget development process; 2. an iterative and interactive exchange (including goal setting) is undertaken during the assembly of the budget that actually authorizes expenses when a line item is approved; eft✓ 3. a realistic budget is developed; N OMTS95-027 Page 2 of 11 ,. June 1, 1995 4. a process is established to manage emergency or unbudgeted items; 5. an ongoing auditing program is established to provide checks-and- balances; and 6. managers are held accountable for managing their budget. PROCEDURE FOR DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY GENERAL The attached Tables 1 through 4 list delegated signature authority for four areas: (1) contracts, services and purchase orders; (2) time cards and overtime; (3) hiring, promotions, reviews and disciplinary action; and (4) travel and training, respectively. Each table lists, in the lefthand columns, signature authority from the Boards of Directors down through section and/or shop foremen. Listed on the top row of each table are the functions/services that require signature approval. With the exception of hiring, promotion, review and disciplinary action, delegated authority for that functional management level will be elevated one level in the absence of respective authority. The General Manager (GM) will formally delegate his authority to one of the Assistant General Managers (AGM) in his absence. These procedures establish the framework and boundaries within which a delegatee can operate, and also provide management with a mechanism to evaluate implementation and hold the delegatee accountable for his/her actions. I. CONTRACTS, SERVICES AND PURCHASE ORDERS (Excluding Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law and Professional Services Agreements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9) The following signature authority will be used. The functional authority level listed describes the highest level of signature approval needed. Intermediate management approval between the initiator/requestor and listed approval level is also obtained. V OMTS95-027 Page 3 of 11 June 1, 1995 A. Budgeted Items 1. Items exceeding $50,000 require Boards of Directors approval. 2. Items $25,000 to $49,999 require GM or AGM approval. 3. Items $10,000 to $24,999 require Department Director approval. 4. Items $5,000 to $9,999 require Division Manager approval. 5. Items $1,000 to $4,999 require Section Supervisor approval. 6. Items less than $1,000 require Foreman approval. B. Unbudgeted Items �r For unbudgeted items, approval for the acquisition of goods or services will not occur unless a budgeted item of equal or greater value is given up. No net increase in the Districts' budget will occur as the result of an acquisition of an unbudgeted item. 1. Items exceeding $50,000 require Boards of Directors approval. 2. Items $10,000 to $49,999 require GM or AGM approval. 3. Items $5,000 to $9,999 require Department Director approval. 4. Items $1,000 to $4,999 require Division Manager approval. 5. Items less than $1,000 require Section Supervisor approval. C. Co-signatures In addition to the signature of the Delegated Authority: 1. To ensure that all policies and procedures governing purchase orders and contracts are followed, all contracts or purchase orders less than $50,000 will be signed by the Purchasing Manager. All contracts or purchase orders $50,000 and above will be signed by the Director of ..✓ Finance after Boards' approval. J OMTS95-027 Page 4 of 11 June 1, 1995 2. All purchases for computer hardware, software and communication equipment will be signed by the Information Technology Director or designee. D. Procedural Requirements All policies and procedures governing the procurement of services, equipment or supplies, will apply. These are the following, including updates as appropriate: 1. Resolution No. 9043 - Professional Services Contracts 2. Resolution No. 86-81 - Purchasing Resolution 3. Resolution No. 95-9 - Professional Services Contract/Change Order to Consultant Contracts 4. Petty Cash procedures. For unbudgeted items prior to the acquisition of goods or services that were not budgeted, either a budget transfer request form must be completed demonstrating that adequate funds are available to cover the acquisition, or the Boards of Directors must authorize a budget amendment, at which time the Rem being acquired would fall into the budgeted category. E. Reporting The General Manager, Assistant General Managers, Department Directors and Division Managers will receive monthly cumulative updated reports from the Finance Department on all major contracts, services and purchase orders. The Boards of Directors shall receive this report on a quarterly basis. The format, reporting amount and other details will be worked out by the Finance Department. This will include the following: • Authorizing Division • Contract/Purchase Order Amount • Previous Amount Authorized (If Applicable) • Brief Description of Service or Item • Term of Contract • Budgeted or Unbudgeted Item ,,, V 0MTS95-027 Page 5 of 11 June 1, 1995 The Finance Department may develop interim reports that do not contain all of the information listed above during the period that the Financial Management System is being developed. TABLE 1: Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders CONTRACTS, SERVICES AND PURCHASE ORDERS (EXCLUDING PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS GOVERNED BY STATE LAW AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS GOVERNED BY BOARD RESOLUTION 95-9) Non Budgeted Budgeted `...� Boards of Directors >50,000 >50,000 GM and AGM a25,ODD to z10,000 to 49,999 49,999 Department Directors 210,000 to a5,000 to 24,999 9,999 Division Managers 2:5,000 to al.000 to 9,999 4,999 Section Supervisors t1,000 to <1,000 4,999 Foreman <7,000 - II. TIME CARDS AND OVERTIME A. Procedure for Time Card Approval The direct supervisor can approve time cards and overtime requests/reports for employees reporting to him/her. 1. In the absence of the GM, AGMs can approve each others timecards, but not their own. D OMTS95-027 Page 6 of 11 .J June 1, 1995 2. In the absence of the AGM, the other AGM or the GM can approve time cards of Department Directors. 3. In the absence of the Department Director, the GM or AGM can approve time cards of Division Managers, within that department. 4. In the absence of Division Manager, the Department Director, AGM or GM can approve time cards of employees within that division. B. Overtime Approval 1. Department Directors approve all overtime requests that are exceptions to the Districts' policy on overtime request. 2. Division Managers or Section Supervisors can approve all other overtime requests that conform with Districts' policy. C. Reporting and Monitoring 1. The Department Directors and Division Managers receive a monthly summary of overtime requests including exceptions. 2. The GM and AGM receive a monthly summary on exceptions to overtime requests. 0 4 OMTS95-027 Page 7 of 11 June 1, 1995 TABLE 2: Time Cards and Overtime Requests/Reports Time Cards Overtime Requests Overtime Reports GM - Approve AGM and - Receive monthly Executive Assistant II Summary Reports of exceptions only - Approve Department - Receive monthly AGM Directors and Executive Summary Reports of Assistant II exceptions only Department Director - Approve Division - Approve exceptions to - Receive monthly Managers and Districts' policy Summary Reports with Executive Assistant I exceptions Division Manager - Approve Section - Approve when meeting - Receive monthly Supervisors and Districts' policy Summary Reports with Division Secretary exceptions Section Supervisor - Approve assigned staff - Approve when meeting or Equivalent Districts' policy III. HIRING, PROMOTIONS, REVIEWS AND DISCIPLINARY ACTION All hiring and promotions will be jointly signed by highest level of initiating management listed below and the Director of Human Resources. All initiating management levels below the highest level must also provide approval. A. Procedure for Hiring and Promoting 1. Unbudgeted hiring or promotions require approval of the Boards of Directors. 2. Ahead-of-schedule hiring or promotions require the approval of the GM or AGM. No net increase in the Districts' salary and wages budget will occur as a result of ahead-of-schedule hiring or promotions. 3. Budgeted hiring requires approval of the Department Director. ,,, 4. Budgeted promotions require approval of the Division Manager. o 9 OMTS95-027 Page 8 of 11 J June 1, 1995 B. Disciplinary Action 1. Terminations are finally approved by the GM or AGM after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that the policies have been followed. 2. Suspensions exceeding five working days are finally approved by the Department Director (or higher management level) after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that the policies have been followed. 3. Suspensions of five days or less are finally approved by the Division Manager (or higher management level) after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that the policies have been followed. 4. Written or verbal reprimands on employee performance are finally approved by Supervisors (or higher management level) after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that policies have been followed. C. Co-Signatures All hiring and promotions will adhere to all recruitment and hiring policies of the Human Resources Department; Boards of Directors; Resolutions and Memorandum of Understandings and require co-signatures of the delegated initiating management and the Director of Human Resources with a statement affirming that the policies have been followed. D. Reporting and Monitoring The GM, AGM and Department Director will receive monthly reports on all hiring, promotions and terminations. 4 OMTS95-027 Page 9 of 11 June 1, 1995 TABLE 3: Hiring, Promotions and Disciplinary Action Hires and Disciplinary Action Promotions Boards of Unbudgeted Directors Positions GM or AGM Budgeted but Approves (after consultation with Director Ahead of Schedule of Human Resources) terminations and receives report on all hiring, promotions and terminations. Department All budgeted and Approves (after consultation with Director Director Scheduled of Human Resources) suspensions exceeding five working days and receives report on all hiring, promotions and terminations. Division Manager Budgeted Approves (after consultation with Director Promotions of Human Resources) five-day-or-less suspensions and other disciplinary actions. Supervisorl Approves (after consultation with Director Foreman of Human Resources and Division Manager Manager)written and verbal reprimands. IV. TRAVEL AND TRAINING A. General 1. Travel or training exceeding $500 will be itemized, as well as possible, in the approved budget. It is recognized that some travel cannot be preplanned. 2. All out-of-country travel requires approval by the Boards of Directors. 3. All out-of-state travel requires approval by the GM or AGM. 4. Established approvals must be received prior to arrangements for travel ..d or training being made. OMTS95-027 Page 10 of 11 June 1, 1995 B. Budgeted (excluding labor hours) 1. Travel or training requests exceeding $2,000 will be approved by the GM or AGM. 2. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $2,000 and exceeding $1,000 will be approved by the Department Director. 3. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $1,000 will be approved by the Division Manager. C. Unbudgeted (excluding labor hours) 1. Travel or training requests exceeding $1,500 will be approved by the GM or AGM. 2. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $1,500 and exceeding $1,000 will be approved by the Department Director. 3. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $1,000 will be approved by the Division Manager. D. Policies and Procedures All policies and procedures governing travel and training such as the use of Districts' forms and justification, will be followed. E. Reporting and Monitoring The GM, AGM, Department Director and Division Manager will receive monthly reports from the Finance Department on all travel and training. The Finance Administration and Human Resources Committee (FAHR) will receive quarterly reports that include the following: • Requesting Division • Dollar Amount • Brief Description • Budgeted or Unbudgeted • Number of Days • Number of Attendees s OMTS95-027 Page 11 of 11 June 1, 1995 TABLE 4: Travel and Training Approve Travel and Trainino Budgeted Unbudeeted Boards of Directors Out of Country GM or AGM Out of State > $2,000 > $1,500 Department Director > $1,000 to$1,999 > $1,000 to$1,499 Division Manager 5$1,000 5$1.000 BPA/ET J:1wp13510 operoommldoramp.fah JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12(b)(14): Consideration of motion recommending approval of the proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets, as follows: Joint Works OperatingfWorking Capital $54,380,000 Worker's Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 Summary A proposed Budget for 1995-96 was mailed to the Committee members last week. In the meantime, it has been presented to the Planning and Design Committee and the Operations,Maintenance and Technical Services Committee for their review. If approved by the Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee,the proposed Budget for 1995-96 will be forwarded to the Executive Committee and to the �..✓ Joint Boards. In previous years,the Fiscal Policy Committee has approved the Joint Works Budgets in parts,then recommended the total Joint Works Operating,Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets to the Executive Committee. When the Joint Works Budgets were approved by the Joint Boards,they were included in the individual District's budgets which were considered in July. For 1995-96,the entire budget,including the individual Districts,is being presented for consideration in June. A further change is that each Standing Committee will have an opportunity to review the proposal. it remains the responsibility of the Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee to recommend approval of these Joint Works budgets. Finance Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends approval of the proposed Joint Works Operating,Joint Works Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets for 1995-96. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the PDC, OMTS and FAHR Committees. a�wwoc�cnn�xrcuusesa+�auec ' COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA June 14, 1995 10e4 ELUS AVENUE o0.eox 912, ECUNTAIN VALLEY.CAU10ANIA e2M.8127 QW 992.2An STAFF REPORT 1996-96 Budget Recommendations A proposed Budget for 1995-96 was mailed to the Committee members last week. In the meantime, it has been presented to the Planning and Design Committee and the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee for their review. If approved by the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee, the proposed Budget for 1995-96 will be forwarded to the Executive Committee and to the Joint Boards. In previous years, the Fiscal Policy Committee has approved the Joint Works Budgets in parts, then recommended the total Joint Works Operating, Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets to the Executive Committee. When the Joint Works Budgets were approved by the Joint Boards, they were included in the individual District's budgets which were considered the following month. For 1995-96, the entire budget, including the individual Districts, is being presented for considered in June. A further change is that each Standing Committee will have an opportunity to review the proposal. It remains the responsibility of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee to recommend approval of these Joint Works budgets. As staff has previously reported, the entire format of the budget document has been revised for 1995-96. It is our intent that this format will be more informative and useful for the Directors and others who use the document. Section 4, "Summary - Joint Operating," Section 7, "Self-Insurance Funds," and Section 8, "Joint Capital Improvement Program; are the three sections that contain the budgets the Committee has approved in the past. There is extensive text, and even pictures for the capital projects, in each of these sections. Two new sections have been added for further detail. Section 5, "Division Budgets," includes four pages for each division. These pages show the organizational structure, staffing trends, a service overview, an analysis of the budget changes and a Joint Works Operating expenditure trend. This new level of detail is intended to better explain what services are performed. Section 9, "Staffing," presents the authorized staffing levels for five years for each division by position title. A complete listing of the staffing changes can be found in Section 1 beginning on Page 14. 4.j 1995-96 Budget Recommendations Page 2 June 14, 1995 The Self-Insurance Fund budgets and overview are found in Section 7. The following table summarizes the total Joint Works budgets for operations, maintenance and capital improvements for the past two years and the proposals for 1995-96: Approved Approved Proposed 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 Joint Operating Fund $49,579,000 $49,542,000 $54,380,000 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund 70,032,000 67,805,000 33,530,000 Self-insurance Funds 4,138,000 904000000 1,016.000 Total $123.749.000 $118.251.000 $88.926.000 Percent Change from 1992-93 6(G 48%) 1(=0.64%) Percent Change from 1993-94 (4.44°h) 2{ 8.14%) Percent Change from 1994-95 24.80%) While this Committee has not been responsible for approving or reviewing the individual District budgets in the past, it is charged with the overall borrowing/financial plan. The proposed budget includes no COP issue for 1995-96, instead we are funding the reduced capital improvement program from reserves. Delaying borrowing until next year allows us to postpone user fee increases to repay the debt and avoid higher required revenue ratios. The effect on budgeted reserve levels is shown below: Approved Approved 1993-94 1994-95 1995.96 Beginning Reserves $420,284,000 $435,401,000 $332,850,000 Ending Reserves 434,900,000 493,145,000 314,166,000 Future projected borrowings can be seen in Section 3, Page 9, on line 69 of the All Districts Summary Cash Flow Statement, and Reserve balances are on the following page on lines 89 and 99. Staff will review the Joint Works and Self-Insurance Fund Budget recommendations and the rest of the document at the meeting. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed Joint Works Operating, Joint Works Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets for 1995-96. GGS:Ic J\WPDOL1FlMCgN1flFPC.Nrt4�FPL9A5T�F}Ai?.fPOBUDRE:.9i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ., JUNE 28, 1995 ALL DISTRICTS Agenda Item (12)(b)(15): Consideration of motion recommending approval of the proposed FY 1996-96 Individual Districts' Budgets to the Joint Boards as follows: District No. 1 $33,585,000 District No. 2 $137,724,000 District No. 3 $149,609,000 District No. 5 $33,450,000 District No. 6 $22,510,000 District No. 7 $46,653,000 District No. 11 $28,808,000 District No. 13 $9,584,000 District No. 14 $13,280,000 Summal A proposed Budget for 1996-96 was mailed to various Committee members and has been presented to the Planning and Design Committee, the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee, the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee and the Executive Committee. The proposed Districts' Budgets for 1995-96 are now being presented to the Joint Boards. In previous years, the Fiscal Policy Committee has approved the Joint Works Budgets in parts, then recommended the total Joint Works Operating, Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets to the Executive Committee. When the Joint Works Budgets were approved by the Joint Boards, they were included in the individual District's budgets which were considered in July. For 1995-96, the entire budget, including the individual Districts, is being presented for consideration in June. A further change is that each Standing Committee will have had an opportunity to review the proposal. The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommended approval of these Joint Works budgets to the Executive Committee. Executive Committee Recommendation The Executive Committee recommends approval of the proposed Individual Districts' .r Budgets for 1995-96. O612B15 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICTS 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 11 (ONLY) Agenda Item (12)(b)(16): Consideration of the following resolutions selecting the annual change in California per capita personal income as the cost-of-living adjustment factor, and establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for each District in accordance with the provisions of Division 9 of Title 1 of the California Government Code: DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. LIMITATION 1 95-63-1 $2,760,000 2 95-64-2 10,548,000 3 95-65-3 14,521,000 5 9"6.5 2,604,000 6 95-67.6 1,689,000 7 95-68-7 4,805.000 11 95-69-11 3,142,000 Summary This routine annual action appearing in the agenda adopts resolutions for each of the Districts authorizing execution and filing of all documents necessary for state and federal construction grants and/or loan applications for 1995-96. Recommendation Staff recommends approval and adoption of above resolutions. err' RESOLUTION NO. 95- - ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 FOR THE DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE `.� WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. _OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995.96 FOR THE DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE ... . .. .... .... WHEREAS, Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California as proposed by the Initiative Measure approved by the people at the special statewide election held on November 6, 1979, provides that the total annual appropriations limit of each local government shall not exceed the appropriations limit of such entity for the prior year adjusted for changes in the cost of living and population except as otherwise specifically provided for in said Article; and, WHEREAS, the State Legislature added Division 9 (commencing with Section 7900) to Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California to implement Article XIII B of the California Constitution; and, WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the Government Code provides that each year the governing body of each local jurisdiction shall, by resolution, establish its appropriations limit for the following fiscal year pursuant to Article XIII B at a regularly-scheduled meeting or a noticed special meeting and that fifteen (15) days prior to such meeting, documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit shall be available to the public; and, WHEREAS, Section 7902 (a) of the Government Code sets forth the method for determining the appropriations limit for each local jurisdiction for the 1995-96 fiscal year, and, WHEREAS, the Board of Directors wishes to establish the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for the District. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER: Section 1: That it is hereby found and determined that the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County, California, for fiscal year 1995-96, was available to the public in the Finance Department of said District at least fifteen (15) days prior to this date. Section 2: The the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for County Sanitation District No. _ of Orange County, California, as established in accordance with Section 7902 (a) of the California Government Code is $ which sum is within the maximum authorized spending limitation for fiscal year 1995-96. Section 3: That the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No._of Orange County, California, has determined that the percent change in California per capita personal income from the preceding year would be the cost of living factor to be used in calculating the County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County, California's appropriations limit for the Fiscal Year 1995-96. Section 4: That the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County California, as established in accordance with Section 7902(b) of the California Government Code is $ which sum is within the maximum authorized spending limitation for fiscal year 1995-96. Section 5: The determination of the appropriation limit is based upon the best and most complete information available at this time. The District reserves the right to review and re- establish a new and different limit in the event that it subsequently determines that a modification of the limitation amount is appropriate. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 26, 1995. JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (13): Consideration of motion delegating authority to the Planning, Design and Construction Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for actions required to solicit, negotiate, award and issue purchase orders to various vendors for Modifications to the Existing Interior Office Spaces in the Administration Building for the General Management Administration and Communication Offices (Specification No. E-256), in an amount not to exceed $165,250.00. Summary The PDC Committee is charged with the overseeing of the Districts' Planning, Design and Construction activities. The PDC Committee has further established an Ad Hoc Committee to study administration space utilization for current and immediate future staffing requirements. The Ad Hoc Committee is also looking into long-term administration space needs. One of the immediate administration space requirements concerns office modifications and reconfiguration for the two newly established Assistant General Manager positions and the added Administrative Secretarial staff which provides direct support to the two Assistant `..✓ General Managers, and the reorganized Communications Office. The office modifications need to be started by the end of July in order to provide adequate facilities for the above mentioned staff. By delegating authority to the PDC Committee for this work, a minimum of 60 days will be deleted from the solicitation, awarding and construction process. The work to be done will be performed in two steps covering a two or three week period. The first step will be the removal of the existing floor-to-ceiling partition walls. The partition walls will be reconfigured and remodeled to fit the new floor plan layout and to add glass where solid walls now stand . The second phase will be to remove the existing partitions and reconfigure it to fit the new floor plan layout. In addition to the wall and partition changes, the job will include installation of all electrical, communications, computers, and furniture necessary to support the staffing changes. This new office reconfiguration will utilize over seventy percent of the existing equipment and the Districts will need to order only thirty percent more equipment to finish the reconfiguration. The cost of the mentioned work is estimated to be $165,250.00. Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors That the Joint Boards of Directors recommend approval to delegate authority to the PDC Committee for required actions for modifications to the existing interior office spaces in the Administration Building. 0&73 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (15): PDC95-16 Consideration of the following actions relative to Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid) (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-70 approving Amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company providing for time constraints and the Surety's right to perform the work. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-71 receiving and Tiling bid tabulation and awarding contract for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), to Colich Brothers, Inc., dba Colich and Sons, in the total amount of$298,700. Summary In May, the Boards approved the plans and specifications for Office Trailer Relocation at Plant No. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid). In 1993 the project was bid and awarded, but the contractor defaulted. In 1994 the contractors surety, Frontier Pacific Insurance Company agreed to complete the work or accept our rebid and pay the new contract amount in excess of the original bid amount of$199,200. An amendment to the agreement with the surety has been prepared by the District's legal counsel. The amendment requires (1) receiving bids by June 30, 1995, and if problems arise rebid by August 31, 1995 or the surety will no longer be obligated. (2) Surety has an absolute right to perform the work if it desires, but must notify the Districts of its intent within 5 days of the bid date. (3) If surety elects to perform the work, construction must begin within 60 calendar days of the notification of its intention. The PDC and Executive Committees have recommended approval of the Amendment to the Settlement Agreement with surety. The amendment is attached to the agenda. On June 6, 1995, two bids were received for this project. The bids were $479,031.00 from Schuler Engineering Corporation and a low bid of$298,700.00 from Colich and Sons, Inc. The engineers estimate for the work was $350,000.00. The bid tabulation is attached to the agenda. Staff Recommendation A) Approve amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company. B)Award Office Trailer Relocation at Plant No. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid) to Colich and Sons, Inc. for their low bid amount of$298,700.00. June 6, 1995 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 'r .. 11:00 a.m. of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1 Addendum 19944 ELLIS AVENUE vo 8018127 BID TABULATION F...IN VALLEY.cAUEORNIA 92728.8127 nlm 962-2411 Specification No.M-044 (Rebid) PROJECT TITLE: Office Trailer Relocations at Plants Nos. 1 and 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Relocate Existing Trailers at Both Plants Nos. 1 and 2 Create a New Construction Management Complex at Plant No. 2. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: 5a3 0,000 BUDGET AMOUNT: $690.000 TOTAL = — CONTRACTOR BID 1. Colich Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons, Gardena, CA $298,700.00 2. Schuler Engineering Corporation, Riverside, CA $479,031.00 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 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 Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons in the bid amount of $298,700.00 as the lowest and best bid. John D. Linder Director of Engineering JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (1 S): Consideration of motion to adopt Ordinance No. 126, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early. Summary The Boards of Directors on March 8, 1995 (for Maintenance Department employees) and May 24, 1995 for all other employees adopted Resolution Nos. 95-19 and 95-53, approving the early retirement incentive program. This provides two years additional service credit for those employees who retire before their scheduled time and do so during the period of March 1—June 30, 1995. The OCERS has advised that pursuant to Government Code Section 31641.04 the action of the Boards must be by ordinance and not resolution, as was done. General Counsel has prepared the ordinance for District 1 adoption as agent for all other Districts. The ordinance sets forth the necessary findings and, if enacted as an urgency measure, will become effective immediately. There are no changes from the actions taken previously by your Boards. This action is procedural only. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 126. Wl6 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (17): Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: District Ordinance No. 13 1315 14 1407 (a) Consideration of motion to read proposed Ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program by title only and waive reading of said entire ordinance.Public hearing (b) Consideration of motion adopting proposed Ordinances. Summary See attached memorandum dated March 22, 1995 from General Counsel. Staff Recommendations Staff recommends approval of proposed ordinances. has' osi> ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. _ OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING EXCESS CAPACITY CHARGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. _ of Orange County, California ("District") has heretofore adopted Ordinance No. _, an Ordinance Establishing Wastewater Discharge Regulations for Use of District Sewerage Facilities; and, WHEREAS, Section 309 of Ordinance No. _provides that the Board of Directors may determine the method for calculation of Excess Capacity Charges applicable to District users on a case-by-case basis; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to establish a standard, fair and equitable method for calculation of the Excess Capacity Charge for all users. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County, California does hereby find: A. That a comprehensive 30-year Master Plan of Capital Facilities entitled "Collection, Treatment and Disposal Facilities Master Plan- 1989", hereinafter the "Master Plan", which includes detailed financial and engineering reports, has been prepared, approved and adopted by the Board of Directors identifying the required future development of District and jointly-owned facilities, including the financial projections for providing sewer service to all properties within the District's service areas; and ✓ i B. That District Staff has prepared an analysis report of the proposed method for determination of Excess Capacity Charges; and C. That the financial and engineering reports of the Master Plan and the analysis report regarding Excess Capacity Charges have been made available to the public and have been subject to noticed public hearings, all in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 66016 and other provisions of law; and D. That the revenues, derived under the provisions of this Ordinance, from other public agencies for discharges from water or wastewater treatment facilities will be held in reserve and designated for possible future use in the construction of a separate ocean discharge outfall brine line, and revenues derived from other users will be used for construction of the sewage collection facilities, wastewater treatment and disposal facilities of the District, and E. That the users upon which the fees established by this Ordinance are levied, will discharge wastewater to the District's collection, treatment and disposal facilities, that the costs of construction of sewage collection facilities, wastewater treatment and disposal facilities has constantly increased due in part to increased regulatory requirements to upgrade the treatment process; and that said costs will exceed the amounts of any ad valorem tax revenues derived from these users; and F. That the fees imposed by authority of this Ordinance do not exceed the estimated amount required to provide the sewer service for which the fee is levied, as provided in Government Code Sections 66013 and 66016, and zoo 17 z 1..' eels-1 G. That the fees established by this Ordinance will not necessarily result 4./ in an expansion of facilities to provide for growth outside the existing service area. The establishment of these fees will not result in any specific project and will not result in a direct physical change or any reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the environment; and H. That the fees adopted by this Ordinance are established upon a rational basis between the fees charged each user and the facilities provided to each affected user by the District; and I. That the adoption of this Ordinance is statutorily exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act from further environmental assessment pursuant to the provisions of California Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8), and 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15273(a). NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. of Orange County, California, does hereby ORDAIN as follows: Section : Section 309 of Ordinance No. _ is hereby amended to read: Section 309. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to establish the method for calculation of fees payable by all applicants for a permit to connect to the District facilities for a new development or expansion of an existing development that expands operations, either of which require sewage, collection, treatment or disposal facilities capacity. Revenues derived under the provisions of this Ordinance from other public agencies for discharges from waste or wastewater treatment facilities shall be held in zoa 17 3 MIC i reserve and designated for possible future use in the construction of a separate ocean discharge outfall brine line, and revenues derived from other users shall be used for the construction of the sewage collection facilities, and wastewater treatment and disposal facilities of the District. Section 309.1, Method of Calculation. A The Excess Capacity Charge shall apply to any new connection or new user whose discharge is tributary to District's sewerage system and whose average daily loading to the sewerage system contains at least one of the following loadings: Parameter value Flow > 50,000 gallons per day Suspended Solids > 105 Ibs per day Biochemical Oxygen Demand > 105 Ibs per day B. As set forth in the Master Plan, the historical cost of District treatment ..: and collection facilities for Flow, Suspended Solids and Biochemical Oxygen Demand is as follows: Parameter Weighted - Percent (°kl Flow 58.38% Suspended Solids 18.66% Biochemical Oxygen Demand 22.96% C. The current Capital Facilities Connection Charge set forth in Article 7 of Ordinance No. _, also known as the Equivalent Dwelling Unit Rate, applicable to dwelling units is $2,350.00, and the charge applicable to other than dwelling buildings or z°000aon 4ti.,' e�ie i replacement buildings or additions or alterations to existing buildings is $470.00 per 1,000 e.: square feet of floor area, with a minimum charge of $2,350.00, based upon the District facility cost per dwelling unit existing in 1989, adjusted automatically for inflation in 1990 and 1991 pursuant to the Engineering News Report - Los Angeles Area (ENRLA) cost of construction index. Section 309.2. Effective July 1, 1995, the Excess Capacity Charge shall be calculated based on the following formula: Excess Capacity Charge = (Flow, gpd') /399 gpd x CFC' x 58% + (BOD, Ibs/d3) /0.83 Ibs/d x CFC x 19% + (SS, Ibs/d) 10.83 Ibs/d x CFC x 23% Section 309.3. The Excess Capacity Charge shall not apply to public sewering agencies located within District boundaries which agencies connect public collection sewers tributary to District facilities. Section 309.4. Within two years of commencement of discharge and upon review of actual discharge records every two years by District, if the actual loadings from a permitted facility are shown to exceed the loadings used to assess an Excess Capacity Charge by 25% for either Flow, Biochemical Oxygen Demand or Suspended Solids, then a supplemental 'Gallons per day 'Capital Facilities Charge as adopted by separate Ordinance of the District 'Pounds per day 158181 Excess Capacity Charge for the additional loadings will be assessed and collected using the prevailing Capital Facilities Charge. No adjustments will be made for actual use below that projected when the fee was calculated. Section 2: Severability. ff any provisions of this Ordinance or application to any person or circumstance are held invalid by order of court, the remainder of this Ordinance or the application of such provision to other persons or other circumstances shall not be affected. Section 3: Judicial Action to Challenge This Ordinance. Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or nullify this Ordinance shall be brought within 120 days of the effective date of the Ordinance. Section 4: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective July 1, 1995 Section 5: Certification. The Secretary of the Board shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the District as required by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held , 1995. 300DUW17 6 W18 1 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT NO. 3 Item NO. (26): Consideration of the following actions relative to Los Alamitos County Water District's request for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3: (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file letters dated March 9, 1995 and June 8, 1995 from the Los Alamitos County Water District requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. (b) Verbal report of General Counsel (c) Presentation by Los Alamitos County Water District (d) Discussion (e) Consideration of motion denying request of Los Alamitos County Water District or- (f) Consideration of motion approving request of Los Alamitos County Water District Summary We have received a request for representation on the District No. 3 Board of Directors from the Los Alamitos County Water District (copy attached). The General Manager has previously addressed this issue with Mr. Martin and a copy of his letter, which included an opinion by General Counsel, is also attached. Recommendation Information item only. wxe ■V���/ V�����/� WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM LL O s A L A M I T O S C O U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T March 9, 1995 Mr. John Cox, Joint Chairman County Sanitation Districts of Orange County PO Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Mr. Cox: The Los Alamitos County Water District is the sewage collection agency for Rossmoor, Los Alamitos and portions of Seal Beach. Our sewage is transported and treated by your District. We are interested in representation on your District's Board. We are requesting to address the Board. Please advise us of a convenient date when we can be on the Agenda. If you have any questions, please contact our General Manager, Sandra Montez at (310)431-2223. Thanks for your assistance in `✓ arranging for this Agenda item. Sincerely, ��aa os�Martin� President 3243 Katella Avenue • P.O. BOX542 a Los Alamitos, Californla90720 a 310431 -2223 -BOARD OF DIRECTORS- ARLYSS M BURKETT ART DE BOLT JOSEPH C MARTIN WILLIAM C POE JACK W. ROSENTHAL Legal Councit Rourke,Woodrufa SPradlin Engineer: Boyle Engineering Corp SJ \V M17= WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM L 0 8 A L A M I T O S C O U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T June 8, 1995 Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 Dear Mr. McIntyre: The Board of Directors of the Los Alamitos County Water District requests approval to address the Board of Directors of District No. 3, after your normal June 28, 1995, Board meeting. Because our District encompasses a portion of Orange County, City of Seal Beach, City of Cypress, and the whole of the City of Los Alamitos, we express interest in having a representative of the District sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. We look forward to confirmation of this request for our attendance. Sincerely, C �a�pC. Martin President 3243 Katella Avenue • P.O. Box 542 a Los Alamitos, California 90720 a 310 431-2223 BOARD OFD/RECTORS ARLYSS M. BURKETT ART DE BOLT JOSEPH C MARTIN WILLIAM C POE JACK W. ROSENTHAL Legal Counclk Rourke,Woodruff&Spradlin Engineer: Boyle Engineering Corp h�"YIT�i10h0+gt COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 9272E-8127 �j 10844 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 _'III "4hhcE cW (714)962-2411 April 4, 1995 Joseph C. Martin, President Los Alamitos County Water District 3243 Katella Avenue Post Office Box 542 Los Alamitos, CA 90720 Dear Mr. Martin: Thank you for your March 9, 1995 letter expressing interest in having a representative of your agency sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. Our General Counsel previously reviewed this subject and issued an opinion as evidenced in the enclosed copy of a memorandum dated November 2, 1993. County Sanitation District No. 3 was originally organized and is presently structured under Section 4730 of the Health & Safety Code of the County Sanitation District Act, and therefore membership is limited to representatives from each City and each Sanitary District within County Sanitation District No. 3 boundaries, together with the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors. The present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Board of Directors of District No. 3. If the Board of Directors of District No. 3 wants to consider reorganization, a Resolution of Intent must be adopted to establish the body in accordance with Section 4730.1. A time and place must be established to hear objections to the proposal and thereafter, the intent must be published and a hearing conducted. After the hearing, the Board may order the governing body (Joint Board of Directors) to be constituted in the reorganized manner. However, you should be aware that the County Sanitation Districts in the past year have made some major changes in the makeup of the Boards of Directors. In an attempt to reduce costs and streamline the Districts, the Directors recommended that each city have one representative for all Districts. Previously, every city within a district was represented. This resulted in as many as five directors from each city because there were five districts within a city's boundaries. Every city but two now has only one Board .. member and the number of Directors has been reduced from 42 to 30. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA 108 <EWS AVENUE Joseph C. Martin r.0.BOX 0127 Page Two FOUNTAIN VALLEY.MFORNIA 02920 Aprll4, 1995 914102Qan If, after reading the above, you still wish to pursue representation on the County Sanitation District No. 3 Board, please give me a call and we can discuss it further. Sincerely, Donald F. Mclntyre� General Manager DFM:jt vmdw%gmWWO4O495.11 Enclosure c: General Counsel Directors, District No. 3 Cecilia L. Age, Cypress George Brown, Seal Beach John Collins, Fountain Valley Burnie Dunlap, Brea James Flora, La Habra Don R. Griffin, Buena Park Victor Leipzig, Huntington Beach Wally Linn, La Palma Pat McGuigan, Santa Ana Margie Rice, Midway City Sanitary Dist. Julie Sa, Fullerton Sal A. Sapien, Stanton Sheldon S. Singer, Garden Grove Sanitary Dist. Roger Stanton, Board of Supervisors Charles Sylvia, Los Alamitos Bob Zemel, Anaheim LEGEND• ELI City of Seal Beach ® Orange County (ROssmOO . ® City of Cypress - I ® City of Los Alamitos M ■ City Boundary ..... Y W W /� �nII1ILI�I v :ay 0 � • LI F::•• •. . c•Ct �7 \ iriTci: is "�'{•• has✓ JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT 7 Agenda Item (33): Consideration of Resolution No. 95-74-7, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, to Calfon Construction Inc., in the total amount of$1,391,195.00. Summary The Lemon heights Sewer, Contract Nos. 7-3 and 7-3A were constructed in 1962. The 1989 Master Plan recommended the 8-inch and 10-inch sewers to be replaced with 12-inch or 15- inch parallel and/or replacement sewers. Surcharges in the system during the 1993 and 1994 rainy seasons have forced this project to proceed ahead of the planned replacements. The Board approved a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in August 1993 for the preparation of a project report to study the effects of surcharging the system and revisions of the drainage boundaries due to the abandonment of some of the Sanitation Districts No. 7 (CSD 7) pump stations in the Tustin Hills area and for the preparation of subsequent plans and specifications for the parallel and replacement of portions of the Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22. The project report recommended to mitigate the high rain water infiltration by increasing the proposed sewer replacement sizes to 15 or 18-inches. Four residents have accepted the Districts offer to have their sewer laterals constructed under this contract and have signed reimbursement agreements for the costs, which were approved by the Board of Directors on April 26, 1995. The County of Orange has recently realigned and widened Newport Boulevard in the vicinity of the CSD 7, RA-14 Sewer and now there are two manholes located within the landscaped area. The Districts staff has prepared plans and obtained an Encroachment Permit from the County of Orange to construct truck landing pads and a driveway to reestablish access. The Districts staff has included this project with Contract No. 7-22 because considerable savings can be realized due to the close proximity of the work areas and the fact the truck landing pads could be constructed with excess materials from the sewer project. Staff Recommendation to Joint Board of Directors On May 23. 1995, eight bids were received from a high bid of$1,979,877.50 to a low bid of $1,391,195.00, submitted by Calfon Construction , Inc. Staff recommends award of said contract to Calfon Construction, Inc, for their low bid of$1,391,195.00. The Engineers estimate for the construction of said project was $1,672,475.00. 0633 t May 24, 1995 STAFF REPORT DISTRICT 7 Approve Plans and Specifications and any Subsequent Addenda Approve Reimbursement Agreements and Authorize General Manager to Award Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk. La Calina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22 and Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24. Summary The Lemon Heights Sewer, Contract Nos. 7-3 and 7-3A, was constructed circa 1962 to serve the area generally bounded by Newport Boulevard, La Calina Drive and Skyline Drive. The Districts' 1989 Master Plan found much of the Lemon Heights Sewer system hydraulically deficient, requiring parallel or replacement sewers to meet future needs. The 1989 Master Plan recommended the 8-or 10-inch sewers be relieved or replaced with 12- or 15-inch parallel and/or replacement sewers. Surcharges in the system, particularly in the 1992-93 and the 1993-94 rainy seasons, have forced this work ahead of planned schedules. High infiltration of rainwater occurred. Smoke tests performed on portions of the system found a few illegal yard drains connected to the sewer system. These connections have been corrected. The main problem is due to the location of the sewer in a low-lying area, which results in rainwater infiltration. In June 1993, the Directors authorized the Selection Committee to solicit proposals and negotiate a Professional Services Agreement for the preparation of plans and specifications for the Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22. In August 1993, the Directors approved a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation for design and construction services for Contract No. 7-22. The first phase of the design was to prepare a Project Report to review the hydraulic capacity findings of the 1989 Master Plan, incorporate changes in the drainage area boundaries, and to mitigate against high rainwater infiltration. The "bottom line" of the Project Report is an increase in the recommendation pipe sizes to 15 inches in the case where the original recommendation was 12 inches, and to 18 inches in those cases where the original recommendation was 15 inches. The increased sizes are not intended to increase sewage rapacity of the system but are only a design measure to mitigate the local rainwater infiltration problem and prevent possible sewage spills. In September 1994, the Districts approved a Reimbursement Agreement for the County of Orange Environmental Management Agency (EMA) to do a road resurfacing project on Skyline Drive and Arroyo Avenue, and an EMA road widening project that was to follow the Districts' project. The street widening work has been dropped, due to the County of Orange bankruptcy; `, but the County has requested the street resurfacing work be kept as a separate bid item. d Many of the residents along the alignment of this project are still using a septic tank sewage systems. As a public service to these residents, the Districts' staff surveyed the non-permitted residents to see if they wished the Districts to manage the construction of a sewer lateral to their property line, within the scope of this contract, under the terms of a Cost Reimbursement Agreement. Four residents have accepted the Districts offer and the signed Reimbursement Agreements have been obtained and approved by the Board of Directors on April 26, 1995. The County of Orange has recently realigned and widened Newport Boulevard in the vicinity of Cowan Heights Drive. The County Sanitation District No. 7 (CSD 7), RA-14 Sewer was located in the old alignment of Newport Boulevard and now has a portion of the sewer located within a landscaped area. Two manhole frame and covers are now located in a dirt area next to a bike path. The Districts staff has prepared plans and has obtained an Encroachment Permit from the County of Orange to construct truck landing pads and a driveway approach to re-establish access to the two manholes in the landscaped area. A Districts' maintenance vehicle will damage the landscaped area and have to back up a considerable distance, without these modifications. The Districts staff has included this project, estimated cost of$5,000.00, with Contract No. 7-22 because considerable savings cen be realized. The Contractor can literally use excess materials from Contract No. 7-22 to construct the two truck landing pads in Contract No. 7-24 and omit additional mobilization costs because of the close proximity of the two work areas. r. MAJOR COST TABLE DESCRIPTION: Current Current Current Expended To Date: Budget Consultants Construction Date(3)' Costs/ Contract Estimate Date Date (4)• 1 • DESIGN: CONST.: Consultant Cost $100,000 $82,880 WA $72,668 0 Design Staff Cost $42,000 $42,000 WA $17,433 WA Construction Contractor $1,550,000 $1.672,475 $1,391,195 0 0 Costs(5) Construction Staff $78,000 $78,000 $78.000 WA $23,729 Casts Agreement Costs WA FREE FREE FREE FREE Permit Costs(2) WA $300 WA $300 WA Total Costs: $1,770,000 $1,875,655 $1,469,195 $90,401 523,729 'NOTES: (1) Includes all appmsed changes N original PSA (2) Paid under'Design Stan CosP (3) Includes all approved changes to original budge! (4) Includes all approved changes b original corNacl (5) Jab Plan revision pending rar pt of Contractors bid On April 26, 1995, the Districts approved plans and specifications for said contract. On May 23, 1995 eight bids were received. The bids ranged from a high of$1,979,877.50 to a low of $1,391,195.00 submitted by Calfon Construction, Inc. The engineer's estimate was $1,672,475.00. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends award of the contract to Calfon Construction, Inc. for their low bid of $1,391,195.00. SR06-07% COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS May 24, 1995 Al ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 11:00 a.m. 2 Addendum 10844 Ews AVENUE R0.eox a127 / FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728.8127 BID TARIII ATION P1 41 9 9 2 2411 Contracts Nos. 7-22 & 7-24 PROJECT TITLE: Parauwl and Rwnlarwmont of Pnrtinne of I amnn Heights R ,htnmk gPwPr I a rnina nr"va♦n Newport Rn elwvard rnntrart No 7_99, and Manhnla Hpightc nr va rnntrart Nn 7_94 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Hill AVwnna, S F Skyl'na ni vp Arrnyn Avenue and Foothill Rn davard ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $1 R79 47R47s BUDGET AMOUNT: at ssn On TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID 1. Calfon Construction, Inc., Rialto, CA $1,391,195.00 2. C. K. Pump and Dewatering Corp., Long Beach, CA $1,472,173.60 �f 3. Albert W. Davies, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, CA $1,508,000.00 4. Southern California Underground Contractors, Inc., Brea, CA $1,541,895.00 5. Simich-Masanovich, A Joint Venture, Arcadia, CA $1,645,769.00 6. Fleming Engineering, Inc., Cerritos, CA $1,691,519.00 7. Mike Erlich & Sons, So. El Monte, CA $1,797,990.00 S. Colich & Sons, Gardena, CA $1,979,877.50w • Corrected Total have reviewed the proposals submitted for the above project and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. I, therefore, recommend award to Cation Construction, Inc., in the bid amount of $1,391,195.00 as the lowest and best bid. Jr Cam' der ohn D. Linder' Director of Engineering �Ea SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 -7:30 P.M. ._.................._............................................................--------------'-'...............................................................------ In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts'Administrative Offices not less f than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the i Committee for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted in the manner as above, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. ................_............._............................_............._............._........_........_..._..._........_...................................... ..... (19) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any: (a) Consideration of motion authorizing consideration of Item (19)(c) listed below which arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda and which requires action at this time pursuant to authority of Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(2). (b) Verbal report of General Counsel (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file Summons and Complaint for Unlawful Employment Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 748432, relative to alleged discrimination and personal injuries as a result of Ms. Kaye's termination as a probationary employee, and authorize the Districts' General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the District. JIWP�G9A5 W AWARD OF ARBITRATORS FEBRUARY 24. 1994 Cooper entitled to recover from Districts all costs for labor, parts and materials to commence and complete disassembly repairs and restoration of engines, as follows: Labor $1.324,039.00 Parts $ 263,852.00 Consultants $ 258,005.00 Expenses $ 175,709.00 Field Support $ 40.779.00 Contested Charges $ 36,000.00 $2,098,384.00 Districts entitled to recover from Brinderson all costs for labor, materials, overhead and consultants, as follows: Labor $ 200,388.01 Materials $ 166,033.01 Charles Evans $ 570,063.00 AETC $ 200,069.64 KARS' $ 200,343.92 Overhead $ 151,407.42 $1,488,305.00 Districts also entitled to recover from Brinderson the sum of $2,098,384.00, which the Districts paid to Cooper. SUMMARY Brinderson to Pay CSDOC $2,098,384.00 $1,488,305.00 Subtotal: $3,586,689.00 Interest on Award $ 160,233.25 Total: $3,746,922.25 Payment from Home $1,000,000.00 Payment from Industrial Indemnity $1,000,000.00 Brinderson Off-Set $ 946,726.48 Payment from Allianz $ 800,195.77 $3,746,922.25 Joint Works Operating Fund Budget Recommendations 1995-96 Detail (A) (a) (C) (D) (E) Budget Description or Aunt Title 1993-94 1994-95 1994-95 1995-98 Tergel Acluel Budget Projected Proposed Sawmi, SALARIES WAGES&BENEFITS 1. SALARIES&WAGES 28.692,732 30.755.000 29.100,000 32,283,000 1.375.000 2. RETIREMENT 1,779.W9 2,507,000 2.200.000 3,077.000 12.000 3. WORKERS COMP 225,000 225,000 225,000 226.000 0 4. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE 39.994 75.000 43.000 75.000 0 & GROUP INSURANCE 3,802.797 3.653.000 3.620." 4.207,000 90.000 6. UNIFORM RENTAL 64,024 100.000 70,000 100.000 10,000 7. TOTAL BENEFITS 5.911.114 S460.000 6.158,000 7.854,000 225,000 S. SALARIES.WAGES,&BENEFITS 34,603,846 37.218.000 35,258,000 39.967.000 1.800,000 9. DIRECT CHARGESCORFANST (6,059.829) (7,000.000) (6.000,0(10) (6.875,000) 0 10. COST ALLOCCORFANST (3.473.962) (3,400.000) (3,800,000) (4.425.01 0 11. W.O.SALARIES&BENEFITS (9,533,791) (10.400.000) (9,800.000) (11.300.000) 0 17 NET J.O.PAYROLL 25.070.055 26.818,000 25.458.000 28.667.000 1,600,000 MATERIALS.SUPPLIES.&SERVICES 13. GASOLINE,DIESEL&OIL 196,133 175.000 175.000 175,000 10.000 14. INSURANCE 1.169.100 1200,000 1.254.000 1.250.000 (100.000) 15. MEMBERSHIPS 54.259 58.000 55.000 58,000 0 OFFICE EXPENSE 16. OFFICE SUPPLIES 141,692 170.000 125.000 203.100 10,000 17. OFFICE AUTOMATION 145.620 150,000 100.000 167.500 0 18. OTHER OFFICE EXPENSES 136,582 115.000 100.000 102,300 0 OPERATING SUPPLIES 19. ODOR CONTROL CHEMICALS 1.366,269 1,460,000 1,036,000 2,103,S00 150,000 20. SULFIDE CONTROL CHEMICALS 908.852 1,120,000 1.640,000 1.715,000 0 21. CHEMICAL COAGULANTS 1,105.595 1,145.000 1,441,000 1,545,000 0 22. LAB CHEMICALS&SUPPLIES 639.576 525.000 44%" 509'M 40,000 23. TOOLS 92,60 112.000 80.000 125.400 2.000 24. SOLVENTS,PANTS.&JANITOR SUP 118,639 170.000 140.000 146,000 0 25. OTHER OPERATING SUPPLIES 218,100 200,000 200,000 207,500 0 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 26. GROUNDSKEEPING&JANITORIAL 235,052 250,000 150,000 213.000 0 27. OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES 95,008 85.000 50.000 150.000 15.000 28. SOLIDS REMOVAL 5.435.971 5525.600 5,700.000 5,425.000 0 29. OTHER WASTE DISPOSAL 110.583 100,000 70,000 140.000 0 30. OXYGEN PLANT OPER&MTCE 494,148 490.000 490,000 510,000 0 31. OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 409.529 375.000 500.000 831.500 13.000 Joint Works Operating Fund Budget Recommendations 1995-96 Detail Budget Da=Plion or nt Tiffe IN3-94 1994-95 1994-95 1995-M Target Atlual Budget Projeded Proposed Savings PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 32. LEGAL SERVICES 428,570 6M.000 720.000 fiW,000 0 33. AUDIT B ACCOUNTING 92,404 90,000 90,000 70,WO 15,000 N. ENGINEERING 7,003 64,000 50.000 289.000 109,000 35. OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 45,329 400,000 600,000 553.600 0 PRINTING 6 PUBLICATION 36, REPRODUCTION-IN-HOUSE 203.167 210.000 250,000 219,100 6.000 37. PRINTING OUTSIDE 46,044 %000 26.OW W,5D0 10,000 38. PHOTO PROCESSING 30,850 35.000 20.0011 32,70D 1,000 39. NOTICES BADS 25.278 35,000 30.000 29,500 0 RENTS 8 LEASES 40. OUTSIDE EQUIPMENT RENTAL 146,302 90.000 70,000 109,000 4,000 41. DISTRICT EQUIPMENT RENTAL 109.969 125.000 150,000 126,700 6,000 REPAIRS 8 MAINTENANCE 42. MATERIALS 2,659.435 3.200,000 3,000,= 3.375,900 150,000 43. SERVICE CONTRACTS 431,976 475,000 434,000 834,000 0 RESEARCH 8 MONITORING 44. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 1,645,664 2,400,000 2.270.000 2,375,000 0 45. AIR QUALITY MONITORING 47.265 20 ." 1M.000 165,W0 SO= 46. RESEARCH 384.150 450,000 4130,000 665,000 0 47. MEETINGS B TRAVEL 61.170 75.000 60,000 134,000 1,000 0. TECH,SAFETY 8 MGMT TRAINING 150.000 175.000 140,DD0 513.500 6,0DD 49. UNCOLLECTABLE ACCOUNTS (1,831) 25,0W 10,000 15,000 S,OW UTILITIES 50. DIESEL FOR EMERG GENERATORS 31.251 95.000 20,000 25.000 0 51. POWER 1,273,645 1 100,0D0 1,000,000 1,075.000 125,000 52. -NATURAL GAS 1.787229 2.030,000 1200,000 1,400,WD 150,000 0. TELEPHONE 139.141 140,DD0 100,000 125,5D0 15,000 54. WATER 673,885 550,000 994,000 750.OD0 50,000 OTHER EXPENSES 55. FREIGHT 72.810 75.WO W.000 79,700 14,OW 56. GENERAL 2M,922 300,000 2M.000 282,OD0 2.= 57. AOMO OPERATING FEES 260.034 225.000 200,0W 250,000 0 58. SAFETY SUPPLIES 200.000 3DO.000 200,000 257.WD 500 59. PRIOR YEARS EXPENSE (76.742) 25,000 180.000 20,0W 0 so. OTHER NON-OPERATING EXPENSE 71.962 60.000 70,000 94,500 0 61. TOTAL MATL,SUPPLIES,S SERVICES 24.190,276 27.024.000 26.417.000 29 M.000 889,500 62. COST ALLOCATION-CORF B OTHER (459,913) (60).000) (549.000) (470.M) 0 63. NET J.O.MAIL,SUPPLIES.B SEW 23.730,363 26.424.000 25.868,000 29,513,000 889.500 64. REVENUE (3,620.154) (3,7W,000) (3,675.000) (3.800,000) 0 65, NET J.O.EXPENDITURES 45.180,264 49.542,000 47.651,000 54,360.000 2.489.600 66 Flows in Million Gallons K322 85.756 88,430 86,688 86.688 67 Cost Permian Gallons 538 578 538 628 599 r JOINT CHAIRMAN'S REPORT JUNE 28, 1995 1) In the General Manager's Board Letter, you all have been invited to take a cruise on the Districts' ocean monitoring vessel, The Enchanter. There are two trips scheduled, Thursday, July 13th and Friday, July 28th, both in the morning between 8 and 11 a.m. This is an excellent opportunity to learn more about the Districts' marine monitoring program. If you would like to go on either of these boat trips, please call Jean Tappan in the General Manager's office. 2) Upcoming Meetings A. The Operations. Maintenance and Technical Services Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, July 5th at 5:30 pm. 1 B. The Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees is scheduled to meet Thursday July 6th. at 4:30 p.m., before the PDC Committee Meeting. C. The Operations. Maintenance and Technical Services Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday June 7th. at 5:30 p.m. C. The Planning. Design and Construction Committee is scheduled to meet on Thursday. July 6th. at 5:30 p.m. D. The Finance Administration and Human Resources Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday. July 12th. at 5:30 p.m. E. The Executive Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday July 19th at 5:30 p.m. 2 r , As a reminder, there are no Committee meetings scheduled for August. 3) Members of the Executive Committee should have received an announcement from CASA on the 40th Annual Work Conference in San Diego August 9th through 12th. If you plan to attend, please call Jean in the General Manager's office no later than July 12. 3 C MEETING DATE: Jun 28, 1995 TIME: 7:30 p.m. DISTRICTS:1 2,3. 6,S.1. 11, 138 14 DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS IMORENOI ..... ...... MC GUIGAN . . .. ... . ✓ _ ISOWMANI ........... BAGEAD ............. ff( ICOON ............ RERRFNY . . . .. . ... ✓ PASZLO. ............ BSDIYN ........... ICOONTZI ........... MUPPHV . .. ... . . . . (SCOTT) ............. CW NB ........ Imml ............ . . .. . . . . S ) ............. D ............... J", ISTEINEN ........... STMTON ....... .. MOST ............... DELAY ........... JG IBELUMUE ) ............. DENTS F ......... _ IBARKE ............. DUNLAP ......... DISTRICT. .. (PARKER ............ EMENR .......... IOULLIX ............ COLLMS .......... t IDOWNEV............. EERRYMANE ....... I — (MILLI%SON. ......... MIWIP ........... JG IKRRV)ANDER .A ....... FLPPYMAN ........ — IBARKERI ........... DENTS ............ t (M RSHALL) .......... PLORA .......... (DOWNE ........... DMILAP ENRODE ........ Z IMARSHA.. .......... GRBFM ON........... —_ IDOWNEVI .......... FLORA .ODE ........ IVAiLCHI ............. GULLIHAMM SON ........ (ANDENO). ......... ROM ............ MARCH ............. MMIG ..OND ...... (MORENOI........... MCOUIOAN ........ . IBAUERI . . ........... LOIN . ......... MORAY) ........... MURPHY .......... 'L IMINERI ............. NO . ........... _ INOPBVI ............ M .............. - IMOPENOI ............ MC OUIOAN........ . —_ RLAKETI............ BMOER ......... ICOONRI ............ MARINV .......... nt (STEINEM ........... GUNTON ....... IDUNLAry ............ NBNIRI........... IDALY) ............. 2EMEL ............ JL IEPPERSON)........... PILE ...... — DISTRICTS IPOTTSI ............. ........ (DOTSON) ........... SAM ........... I IDUTSONI ............ GAREN ........... —_ (PARKERI ......... DUNLAP.......... - - RIAKETI............. SINGER ........... IBOWMANI .......... AM .......... STEINER)............. STANTON ......... ILAQLOI ........... GROWN ......... ISTANTONI ........... STEINER .......... — ISCOTR ............ COLLMS .......... IMILLERI ............. SWAN ............ IANDERSONI ......... ROM ............ - - IWAHLSTROMI ........ SYLVIA ........... IMARSHALM ......... OPBFIN ......... IGULLI%SON1 .......... MRASW........... IBAUER) ............ ulna ........... JG IDALYI .............. ZEMEL ........... � — IMINER) ............ LIMN ............. Je — IMORENO.......... .. MCRSGAN ...... — (EPPERSONI.......... RICE .. ... STAFF OTHERS ...... INONBYI SA ANDERSON WOODRUFF HASENSTAB I DEMIR...... ISTEINEry ... .. .... bTANTON .......:: HONK . ... J/ KNOPF ... IWAHLSTROMI . . . .. .. SYLVIA ......... JONK ..... LEE...... IDALYI ZEMEL .......... KYLE ..... LMOSTROM LINDER .... J/ NIXON...... CM DISTRIKT6 MTYAE.. SHAW...... Imm ............ .. MMY. ........... � MCNELLY .. STONE .....� ISTANTOM ......... . STEINER........... DOTER ... ........ IDEBAYI ........... . COX ............. STREED ... jAC. .......... � DISTRICTS TOMES ... JL .......... _ (PERRY( RPRVfMN......... VINCENT... . .. .. . . . . . /�///}r�•(��/ (COX) .............. DEBAY............ WINSOR (STANTON) .......... STEINER........... DISMICT7(WARD) ......... .. . HAMMONO......... �j,(L`(w /• N. (WARD) ........... . HAMMOND. ....... _ ICOXI ............. . DEMY ............ `/`- (KRIM ........... . FERRYMAN......... '✓ /ALPA/f� /' k . (MORENOI ........ .. . MCGUIGAN ...... L ICOONTLI ........... MURRIV ........ ISTANTONI .......... SIEINER DISTRICT Iv, (BAUERI ............ LID DETTL ...... - __ (BAUERI ............ STANTONO ....... �: ISTEINERI ........... BTAN ......... DISTRICT 13 (WELCH( . .. ... . .. . .. OVLLIXSON ........ (DALY) . . . ... .. . . ZEMEL . . . . . . . . .. ICOONTZI . . . . .. . . . . . MUPPHY . . . . . . ...: ( . . . . .. . . . . AIRIER. . . . . . . .. _ (STANTON)STANTO . . . .. . . . . . STEINER. . . . . . . .. _ DISTRICT 14 IPOTTSI . . . . . . . . . . . . �YiLYMN►. . . ..... ICOONR) . . . . . . . . . . . MURPHY . . . . . ..... (WARD) . . . . . . . . . . . . HAMMOND . .. ...... Jge — ISTANTONI . . . . . . . . . . STEINER. ........:: DLI02 (MILLER) . . . . .. , . . . . . SWAN . ......... 051 2619S PUBLIC SIGN-IN SHEET COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY June 28 , 1995 BOARD MEETING NAME ORGANIZATION FIRM Please Print Please Print Pz-A ELE So L 1If 2 I C- 05120 c. 06/28/96 -JOINT BOARD MEETING #2 - Roll Call JC: I don't believe we have a Chair or Chair pro tem in District 14, 7 & 14, Jim, you can be Chair of both of them tonight. #6 - Report of Joint Chair JC: You'll notice in the General Managers board letter that all of you have been invited to take a cruise on the Districts' ocean motor vessel The Enchanter. Two scheduled trips, Thursday July 13 and Friday July 28 in the morning between 8 a.m. and 11 a.m. This is an opportunity that many of you have asked about participating in, so if you'd like to go, call Jean Tappan in the General Manager's office and let her know about that. Any other questions about this item? All right. Upcoming meetings: Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee -Wednesday, July 5, 5:30 p.m. Ad Hoc Committee on Space Utilization for Administrative Employees -Thursday, July 6, 4:30 p.m. before the Planning Committee meeting Planning, Design and Construction Committee -Thursday, July 6, 5:30 p.m Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee -Wednesday, July 12, 5:30 p.m. Executive Committee - Wednesday, July 19, 5:30 p.m Our next board meeting is scheduled for July 26, same time same place and my question about that is, it is the same time as the league meetings, some of the state league meeting in Monterey, so would you raise your hands of those who are going to the state league meeting and won't be here? Three, OK. We were just checking to see whether it was a problem, I don't think it's a big enough problem so we will hold the meeting the board meeting will be held on the 26th at 7:30 p.m. As a reminder, there are no Committee meetings scheduled for the month of August. There will be a board meeting in the month of August. Members of the executive committee should have received announcement from CASA about the annual work conference in San Diego August 9-12, and if any of you who are on the executive committee, you need to call Jean Tappan in the General Manager's office no later than July 12. It's important for many of you to know if you're not aware of it, this agency has been a major player in CASA for a number of years. Tom Woodruff will be president of the CASA board next year. Both staff and electeds have been involved in this program, electeds who have been the chairs of the various districts. I serve as chair of the directors committee and I'm on the planning committee and several other committees. Sal just got on the water committee and has been participating but other members of the board here who used to participate aren't here any longer. It's valuable to have you get involved especially if 1 you're going to be around for a while, Don Brickman has been involved in a number of committees up there and activities and does participate. We just wanted to call it to your attention if you aren't aware of it. It is not unlike,just to put it in reference, a league of cities kind of program which many of us have been involved and we get involved in state legislative issues and many regulatory issues that have an impact on this district. Any questions about that? Don, do you have anything to add? You've been a key player in this over the years. There are workshops that are quite informative about how different aspects of sanitation operations work and they are a useful point of view. Let's move then, do you have a General Manager's report at this time, or Counsel. TLW: There's two items of litigation. One is going to be in closed session with District 3, Chair Sapien has requested review of that. And there is a supplemental agenda an item, it's a receipt of a summons and complaint that needs to be added to the agenda. It came in after the agenda was posted and the answer is due prior to the next board meeting and I prefer questions or concerns about that matter addressed in closed session. I believe on item 14 about the bankruptcy and the County's Commingled Investment pool--the commingled investment pool committee had a meeting this morning and when we reached that point in the agenda for some questions, I'll have some comments. #7 - Minutes JC: I will deem those approved unless there are any objections. Seeing none, they are approved. #8 - Ratification of Claims JC: Item 8 is ratifying claims. Penny. #9 -Consent Calendar JC: Item 9A-9F I'll entertain a motion. Motion, second, any opposition. Consider that unanimous. #11 - nominations for joint chair JC: It's that time of year again. It seems like its gone so fast as you may recall we nominate the joint chair at this session and official elect himther at the next meeting in July and then we do the vice joint chair in the July meeting. So with that I open the nominations. George? George Brown: I nominate John Cox JC: Any other nominations. We always do this everytime. The nominations have to remain open until the next meeting in July so thank you very much for the intent and we'll deal with it then. 2 #12a and 12b 1-13 - minutes of executive committee JC: This is all the agenda items that have been through the 3 committees, Planning, Operations, Finance and typically we've found ourselves where we beat these to death in other meetings so what I'd like to do here is either have you pull one you want for discussion if there is any, or have a motion to move item a & bl-13. The reason is item 14 has to do with the budget but everything else has to do with contracts that have been through these committees. Is there any item that somebody would like to have pulled for discussion? I move the package, a motion for 12a, b1-13, second? Any opposition? All right. Yes. We've done it, is this too fast? Oh well that was the idea, it save you time here, Sal. That's unanimous, then. #12b(14) JC: It has to do with a roll call motion approving the budget and I think, Don, did you want to make a comment about this before we gel into it? As an overview, we have, in each of the committees, reviewed the budgets and gone through them one by one. The items that we did not deal with, summarized here are all the individual districts budgets, so I'm jumping to 15 aren't' I? DFM?: You have a handout tonight that's a one page piece of information that is additional to your budget itself and it really reflects some debate and discussion at several committee meetings where we wanted to focus really on our major benchmark for the next years' operation. You'll see from the back page lower right-hand $599 figure which is the estimated cost of treatment of a million gallons of wastewater for next year. That's up some from the current year. It is going to be the subject of a great deal of discussion by all hands. I'll be making a presentation to every employee in the district about the budget, be giving them a summary handout on the budget and we'll be focusing their attention on this item. It's the way that we can begin to talk about how each employee can contribute to keeping that cost down or even reducing it, and that is the whole purpose of bench marking--to compare your costs to established trends and so you'll be hearing a lot more about that through the year because we'll be spending a lot of time talking about it and hopefully at the end of the year we can come to you and say we beat that considerably because we have employees contributing to solutions about how to do that. The only area that, as John said, we've not spend a lot of time on are the districts budgets, which are item 15, so if you have any questions there Gary can help you with them. But we've certainly have spent a good deal of time at all the committees with the budget. JC: Any questions about the budget? Jan? DEBAY: (unintelligible) JC: Gary, could you answer that? STREED: 19 is the odor control chemicals, and the current year budget, we're talking 3 , about columns B & C, is that the one, or C & D, projected this year and proposed for next year. There are several chemicals involved in that and the price on each of those chemicals has gone up. In the case of the chemical we use the most for odor control is caustic soda right now. The last bid that we got just a month or so ago was a 50% increase in the unit cost on that chemical. We are saving money, and we are also exposed to far less of a risk and the chlorine is out of the budget at this point. Ed's group is spending quite a bit of time evaluating alternatives to using the chemicals that we use in biofiltralion and the biotrickling filter. We hope that we will not bridge (?) these expenses but that's rather bad luck on the bids on chemicals. The other one was 27? It might be best if I ask Ed Torres to respond. ED TORRES: Unfortunately I don't have that form in front of me. The question was the increase from last year to this year? I believe there are certain services that—I know there is some compounds that we felt we could do better in terms of contracting outside and I think basically there is some level of increased contracting outside over compared years. There are more activities going on inside. For example, we started up the air quality group where we're going to bring in a lot of services which normally would have been in the air quality division budget which has gone down. And there are certain types of analytical services that we are doing more outside than we have in the past. There is kind of a balance in bringing some sluff inside and other stuff outside. JC: Other questions? Yes Chuck. SYLVIA: (re approaches to presenting the budget) JC: I would entertain a motion for item 14 & 15, 14 being the Joint Works Budget in total form; individual budgets are identified here in item 15. Motion, second, any opposition? Oh we have to take them separately? I'm sorry. Let me start over. Let's just deal with 14. Motion, second on item 14, any opposition. Consider that unanimous UNKNOWN: As long as its unanimous, the roll call will reflect the full, that's why we're checking to see if there are any abstentions or... #12bl5 - individual district budgets District 1, Motion, second, consider. District 2, any opposition, unanimous. District 3, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 5, second, any opposition, consider that unanimous, District 6, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 7, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 11, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 13 any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 14, any opposition, consider that unanimous. 4 #12b16 - resolutions on annual charae JC: Do we have a motion on districts 1-11, second. Those districts, we consider that unanimous if there is no opposition. #13 -delegate authority to PDC...Ad Hoc Committee re Space utilization JC: Any questions or discussion on this item? DFfN: A word of explanation: this is an unusual procedure only because we've had about 2 months delay in pulling this subcommittee together, so in order to not lose any more time with this, we'd like to have the approval of the joint board to delegate this decision to the PDC and to that subcommittee which will meet—its before the next meeting of the PDC and give them the authority to make these decisions. JC: I need a motion, second?Any opposition? Consider that unanimous. #14 - commingled investment pool JC: Tom brought that up. Any questions about that? Why measure R failed? TLW: Gary and I were at the meeting today, Blake was unable to be there, he's back in Washington. Gary went over, he may have his own thoughts and comments. It was basically a review of two or three things, one being of course a little bit of rehash that didn't require any action by the committee. Secondly, discussion relative to some outstanding issues one of which is the disbursement of the interest on the post-petition monies that were in the pool. In order to avoid delay in getting each of the agencies, this district, and all of the cities their checks, pursuant to the agreement, it was agreed that the post-petition interest that was earned on the fund would be set aside for a week or two or whatever because their was disagreement between the County's accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, and the pools accounting firm, Price Waterhouse. It's been going on for approximately two months since the agreement was negotiated. There is still dispute as to the numbers. There is a variance of$15 million. Arthur Andersen says it's $15 million less than Price Waterhouse. The committee today directed Pat Shay and the reps from Price Waterhouse to go to Arthur Andersen and make a demand for at least the uncontested amount and then we'll work around the difference so that money can at least be spun off back to each of our agencies. There is also some withheld monies from the Wall Street firms when they did liquidation they didn't send the check for a hundred cents on the dollar, they held money back—some people called it blackmail, others called it leverage, others called it good financing. Whatever, the...they're looking at seeing how much of that—one of those has been collected and those funds will likewise be dispersed. Perhaps the most important was discussion of Judge Ryan's ruling yesterday relative to the proposed roll over and the agreements related to it that were offered by the County. The investment pool had filed an opposition to the agreement on the basis that it was prejudicial to the rights of all of the poll participants, those rights being the ones that were set forth in the comprehensive settlement agreement. The effect of it was to place the claims of this agency and all of your agencies in a lower hierarchy and others would effectively have been able to move 5 ahead and so the protests and objection to the motion was lodged. It was first brought to Judge Ryan last Friday. He refused to approve—he effectively denied the motion but held it back until Tuesday, yesterday, and in the intervening 72 hours lots of people spend feverish amounts of energy and time and the agreement was restructured substantially. However, there was still a few or a couple of points that were unacceptable to the committee counsel and so the objection was still lodged in part. The Judge did approve the motion of the County yesterday, you probably all read that in the paper, in the revised form of the agreement. The committee this morning voted unanimously to direct its counsel to look at and report to the committee for final decision in a week the filing of the appeal of Judge Ryan's order for the same basic reason as the position of the districts and the cities has been prejudiced in terms of where we stood relative to the comprehensive settlement agreement. Gary, what else did they do? GARY: I don't think you missed a thing. JC: Questions. Jan (unintelligible) TLW: Well, Gary and Don can comment on that. But I think the last word from the committee has been that we don't have anything programmed for at least all of this fiscal year. GARY: We've not anything in the budget for 95-96, no borrowing budget. JC: Anything else? OK #15 - Office Trailer Relocations JC: John Linder, do you want to speak to this briefly, introduce it? LINDER: This is a project that was originally bid in 1993. The contractor went into default immediately after award and notice to proceed to the contract and its been some time. We've gone through a lot of gyrations trying to get this project underway again. The bonding company made arrangements with us through an agreement that they would pick up any costs over and above the original contract. The original contract amount was $199,200. The new bid was $298,700. So they're on the hook for about $100,000. We hope to get a check from them very soon for that. They'll be off the hook. We have a new bonding company with a new contractor, so if there are problems with that contractor, we'll face that at a later date. I don't think we'll have any problems. The action tonight is to approve those—the award to the contractor, Colich & Sons. There were two bidders, the other bidder was $350,000. JC: I'll entertain a motion for item#15b & c. Any opposition. We'll consider that unanimous. 6 #16 - Ordinance 126 JC: Tom, do you want to give a report on this? TLW: The Boards have previously acted on this issue and this relates to the early retirement program that was brought to you by the management and approved by committees and ultimately by your boards. All the documentation was submitted to the County. Our procedure here—the only ordinances we do and really are obligated to do are with respect to our fees, everything is done by resolution. And there is some disagreement was to whether ordinances have the same effect as resolutions. The county retirement system said well, their statute says they have to have it done by ordinance and it's simple enough to correct and re-do and that's all this ordinance does. There are no substantive changes whatsoever and what the boards previously approved and this is put on as agenda item solely to have it re-enacted in the form of an ordinance. I put it in because the Board has approved it to be effective for only those employees who retire between March 1, last past, and this weekend, June 30, and therefore I'd like the ordinance to be effective immediately and for that reason—any questions? JC: Ok, entertain a motion. Move the recommendation, do we have a second? TLW: The motion, first of all though, we do need is to read it by title and then secondly we will require for— I put in your memo by the way--this really is something that all the boards have done, but as you know under our joint agreement we have district No. 1 as your agent. I see no reason doing nine ordinances, bad enough we're doing one, but District 1 is the agent, is the enacting agency, but I would like to see and make sure that there is no other opposition. All the nine districts adopted a resolution unanimously to approve this, but I just point out the protocol and procedure that we're going through so it's a District 1 ordinance and we will require four votes. JC: But we can have a motion for items b, c and d, one motion? TLW: No, we can have a motion for b & c. District 1's motion. JC: OK. Move, motion, second, any opposition? Consider that unanimous. TLW: Motion to adopt it by District 1 JC: Any opposition. No it wasn't your motion. Let go to 13. #17 - Proposed Ordinances establishing excess capacity charge program Districts 13 & 14 JC: Has to do with Districts 13 and 14. These are ordinances establishing excess capacity charge program. This was before the Board last month. We did not have a quorum in Districts 13 and 14 and we couldn't pass it at that time. Two months ago, sorry. Motion on 17 a 1 and 2, second for District 13. Consider that unanimous. 7 District 14, any opposition? Consider that unanimous. Now before we go into closed session I'd like to take care of two other items. #33 -7-22 & 7-24 JC: This should be brief for District 7 and John, do you want to give a brief report on this? He tells me we can do it for District 7 we can dispose of it. LINDER: This project is about a 8,000 foot long line that we will put it that will replace some smaller older lines that are over capacity in the area in Tustin Hills and its starts from about Crawford Canyon and Newport, goes easterly and then south and ends up east of Newport on La Colina. The project was about $1.3 million was the low bid; our estimate was about $1.6, the high bid was about $1.9 1 think there we had about 12 bidders on that so our estimate was right in the middle of the pack. It's a good project, we don't see foresee any problems with it. JC: We could entertain a motion for 33a, b and c. have a motion, second? Any opposition. Consider that unanimous. #19 -supolemental agenda JC: We need to address--Tom, do you want to address the motion to bring this as an emergency item? TLW: Yes, we do need this--this is the item I mentioned in my report. Summons and complaint was brought in on the 22nd, served on the Districts, so it was after the agenda was prepared. The answer is required to be filed before your next board meeting so we do need to add it to the agenda under provisions of the Brown Act.\ JC: So I have a motion to consider, second, any opposition to that? OK. Item No. 19, Tom do you want to give us a report on that. TLW: Yes, this is a summons and complaint that has come in, it's an action claiming employment discrimination. I've reviewed it carefully and was aware of it from a long time back. There was a clerical employee, secretary, employed in the Board Secretary's office, and as with every employee of the Districts was probationary, and after about five weeks was terminated upon the determination of the Board Secretary and the Personnel office that the candidate or employee simply did not have the skills requisite for the position. The only wrinkle to it is the woman claims that it was because she was pregnant and that was why she was let go. We were aware of it, my office was aware of it from the outset. I've talked to everybody involved and I'm convinced that there is no valid basis for the action and we've made no progress in being able to reach any understanding with the claimant or her attorney. So it is recommended that the action to be received and filed and if there are any questions, I'd like to review in closed session, otherwise the actions on the agenda. JC: Motion, second, any opposition. That's unanimous. One other comment here from 8 Don. DFM: Peer brought to my attention that we've got probably a strange face on the—new face—that is not Bob Dolan with a new haircut—that's Mark Esquer who is here because Bob is on vacation. I wanted you all to know who he is, although some of you who took the tour recently heard him make an excellent presentation. JC: Welcome Mark. Thank you. With that, we will go into closed session. Just for everybody's awareness here, we do have one more item for District 3 but we're going to take that after closed session on Los Alamitos. We just have to get rid of this for a minute. #26 - Los Alamitos County Water District request for reoresentation on the Board of Directors of District 3 JC: Ok. Let's begin on item no. 26 for District 3, but all of you here are here to listen. (unknown DFM?) Mr. Chair, you have all been informed previously that Mr. Joseph Martin's interest in discussing with you representation on this board. We have been in communication with him over the last several months. He has discussed this with his board, some of whom I think are here, and they wanted to appear before you tonight and inform you of their interest. MR. Martin: Thank you. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much for allowing me to address you and thank you Chair and manager. My name is Joe Martin, and I'm a Director for the Los Alamitos County Water District. We're requesting District 3 to review and consider allowing Los Alamitos County Water District to have a seat on your board. The reason for this is: going by his—description of our district, Los Alamitos, by the way, I'm not long-winded. This isn't going to take very long. Los Alamitos County Water District was founded in 1952 to provide wastewater (sic) in the Los Alamitos area. At that time, Los Alamitos was unincorporated. Since that time, it is incorporated in '54 and '60 the water district added by annexation the Rossmoor residential area and the naval base. Today, the district services over 8,000 sewer connections and we have piping size in range from 8-18 inches in diameter. To give you a little idea (unintelligible, difficult to hear). So we're servicing Los Alamitos, Seal Beach and a portion of Orange County. When I made a comparison of another district that is similar to ours I go to Midway City. Midway City, according to the description from ISDOC (?) serves, let me read it. The District provides sanitary and refuse collection for 90 percent of the city of Westminster, and 25 percent of the city of Garden Grove and the unincorporated Midway City area, which is Orange County. So they are in two cities and the county, so they're very similar to us, but yet they have a director on your board, Midway City does, and so does Garden Grove. I received a letter from the Orange County Sanitation, your group, and my understanding from the letter was that the present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Boards of Directors of District 3. And that's what we're asking. Every year we send out an annual report to our constituents, we tell them what new projects are going on, what our budget is, but we have not heard from Orange County Sanitation, and if we were on 9 the Board, we could tell our constituents in our districts what upcoming projects are, where there are problems, what the budget is, if budgets up or budgets down, but people in the Orange County, especially in our district, since we send out this newsletter, would know what's going on currently. In summary, we feel we would like a representative on your board and we really think that's the way to go. Thank you very much. JC: Questions, Don? (could not hear)... Martin: We have, you have a person on the board from Cypress, Los Alamitos, and Seal Beach, but ... JC: Other questions, Sal? Sal: (Spoke about other Sanitary Districts that have been dissolved) Martin: All I can say is, the way Midway City is arranged, I feel it's only right that we be represented the same way. I can't tell you what's going to happen in the future. All know is right now, it's not equal. I'd like to introduce another director on our board, Art Debold. Art: If I could just answer a question regarding...that report has to do with whether multiple water or sanitary districts, serving the same community, in other words, not multiple cities within one water district, multiple districts within one community that those should be absorbed by that community and formed into one—not the other way around. We have downsized. We have one district serving 3 or 4 communities--- UNKNOWN (JC?): There are several issues thought relative to downsizing that's been put forth, and the one Sal's referring to is downsizing the membership. We have moved from over 42 members down to less than 30 and that's the direction we're hearing, taking away, not adding, and that's what he is referring to, our policy. That goes back to Don's question. Don why don't you stand up we have a few questions here. ?: (not clear) Martin: I saw a copy of the letter I received from Orange County Sanitation Districts and a copy went to Cypress, which means that they must be a board member and I saw a copy going to Garden Grove, and yet they're in the Midway District, so the district is overlapping there. JC: A question from George, well, I'm sorry, John, the question is why should we duplicate representatives. We already have reps from cities in your area; why should we also have a rep from the sanitation districts. That's not the case in other water districts. Maybe that a relationship of the representatives from your area, not necessarily being on the board. 10 (inaudible) Martin: Do we have to every time have an invitation to a person that's representing us to get any verbiage out of them. That's not fair. (inaudible) And by the way, this isn't just Los Alamitos, don't get me wrong. 49 percent is from the county, 49 percent of our systems— JC: We have a county representative. We have another question from Sheldon and then Pat. Singer. ..instead of going down... JC: Costa Mesa is another one, not the city. Pat? Pat: (inaudible) JC: I think that we're saying here is that your constituents are being represented by 4 or 5 people here in this room, same constituency. Martin: (inaudible) I think my concern here is...looking for options of how to control sewage treatment...we traveled around looking.....merge into other... JC: John? John Collins:( spoke re opening up communication, but that representation is OK) JC: In fact that's one of the challenges that all special districts is why is there this duplication, if there was one agency you wouldn't have this problem, and its one of the reasons we're trying to simplify this operation and the representation on this operation to make it more cost effective. So what you're proposing is contrary to the very direction that we, and many other people, have been trying to head and there's a real problem with this. This is a district 3 item, I think we've heard enough, do we have an action that we can take and I think there is no question that we can increase communications, you're always invited to attend all of our meetings if you want input, we can provide you on a regular basis with reports of what is going on relative to this district so you have the information to gather. And we have offers for participation at your meetings so I think we're trying everything we can. Motion? Any further discussion? Any opposition? Unanimous. Thank you and we're adjourned. 11 a COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 , 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES JOINT BOARD MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 �`oap\SZRICTS Of�9gG � G c�a a i09pl�cr/N�E ENS\PpP�A ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2.3, 5, 6, 7. 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, was hold on June 28, 1995, at 7:30 p.m.,in the Distrim' Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was called 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: y Pat McGuigan, Chair _ Tad R.Moreno y James M.Ferrymen,Chair pro tom _ Atthur Pent' y Mark A.Murphy _ Jgenne Copper _ Thomas R.SalGralli y Jr.Fork y Roger SMmon _ W Ilixm G.Stainer DISTRICT NO.2: y John Collins, Clair George Scon Daniel T.Welch. Clair pro learn y John M.Gulp ason y Berry Demo _ Bob Bell y Burma Dunlap _ Glenn Parker y Norman 2. Eckemode _ Carol Downey y James H.Flora _ Steve Anderson y Pat McGulgen _ Ted R.Me,em a Mark A. Murphy _ !Dana Connor y Julie Sa _ Chia Noun, y Sheldon Singer _ George L Zlekat y Roger Stanton William G.Steiner y Bob Zem u _ Tom Daly DISTRCT NO.3: _L Sal A.Search,Chair Harry M.coupon y Burnie Dunlap. Chair pro ter _ Glenn Parker 1 Coolie Age Walter Bowman y Gao,ge Brown _ Frank Laulo y John Collins _ George Scon y James H.Flora Slave Anderson 3 Don R.Griffin Patsy Marshall y Victor Leipaig _ Ralph Bauer y Wally Linn _ Eva G.Miner y Pat McGwpan _ Ted R.Marc. y Marpie L Nos _ Grace Epperson y Julie So Chris Noroy y Sheldon Sipper _ George L.Baker y Roger Stanton William G. Stainer _y Clones SYNM Rosen WahlMlam x Bob Zemel Tom Daly DISTRICT NO.5: y Jan CBhay.Chili, John C.Co.,Jr. y William G. Steiner,Clair pro tern Roger Stanton y John C. Car,Jr. — Jan Dehay DISTRICT NO.6: y James M.Penniman,Chair Arden Perry y Jan Deasy, Clair pro hem John C.Car.Jr. y William G.Siemer liogM SMmon DISTRICT NO.7: y Berry Hammond,Chair Mike Were _ Thomas R.Selurelli,Chair We tem y Jim Pons y Jan Deter _ John C.Co..Jr. y James M. FeaYman Anhui Perry y Pat McGuigan _ TO R.Mo era y Mark A.Murpy _ Joame Coonor y William G. Steiner _ Roper Science DISTRICT NO.11: y Vimpr Leipaig• Chair Ralph Bauer y Slid"Dettloff,Chir We ter _ Ralph Baum y Roger Stamon William G.Steiner DISTRICT NO. 13: y John M.Gullixeon, Chir Danel T.Welch x Bob Zemel,Chair pro hem Tom Daly y Mark A.Murphy Joanne Coomx Glenn Parker y Burme Dunlap y Wlliam G.Steiner _ Roper Suntan DISTRICT NO.14: _ Thames R.Shcueelli,Chair y Jim Potts '`slip/ y Mark A.Murphy.Chair pro tam Joanne Coon" y Barry HammaM _ Mike Ward y Willem G.Steiner Roger Suntan y her A. Swan Dactyl Mille, .2. 06/28/95 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary, Cathy Biele, Don Crapnell, Mark Esquer, Gary Hasenstab, Irwin Haydock, Steve Hovey, Ed Hodges, Patricia Jonk, John Linder, Pat McNally, Mike Moore, Rory Nelson, George Robertson, Misha Rozengurt, Gary Streed, Ed Torres, Chuck Winsor, Paula Zeller, OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Mr. Gold, Bill Knopf, Mary Lee, Andre Lissner, Joseph Martin, Mr. Rosenthal, Phil Stone DISTRICT 14 In the absence of Chair Thomas Saltarelli, Director Appointment of Chair pro tem Jim Potts was appointed Chair pro tern of District No. 14. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chair advised the Directors that they had Report of the Joint Chair been invited to lake a cruise on The Enchanter, the Districts' monitoring vessel, on July 13 or July 28. The Directors were requested to contact the General Manager's secretary if they were interested in participating. Joint Chair Cox then announced the following tentatively scheduled upcoming meetings as follows: Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee- Wednesday, July 5th, at 5:30 p.m. Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees-Thursday, July 6th, at 4:30 p.m. Planning, Design and Construction Committee-Thursday, July 6th, at 5:30 p.m. Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee-Wednesday, July 12th, at 5:30 p.m. Executive Committee -Wednesday, July 19th, at 5:30 p.m. The League of California Cities meeting in Monterey conflicts with the regular July 26th Joint Board meeting. The Joint Chair polled the Directors by a show of hands which reflected three Directors were planning to attend the meeting in Monterey, thus the Joint Board meeting would not be rescheduled. Joint Chair Cox then stated that Executive Committee members should have received an announcement from CASA regarding the annual work conference in San Diego on August 9th through 121h. For those Directors not aware, he stated that the Districts have been a major player in CASA for a number of years and that Directors on the Executive Committee and Districts' staff have been involved in this program. He also mentioned that Tom Woodruff, -3- 06/28/95 �e.✓ General Counsel, would be president of CASA next year. Joint Chair Cox also reported that he currently serves as the Chair of the Directors' Committee, as well as sits on several other committees and Director Sal Sapien was recently appointed to the Water Committee. Many of the other Directors who participated in CASA are no longer Directors and Chair Cox stressed the importance of the Directors on the Executive Committee to get involved in CASA. DISTRICT 1 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 3 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995. the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 6 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 7 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 11 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 13 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -4- O6/28/95 DISTRICT 14 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair 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 exhibits "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 1 60 /14/95 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $1,404,438.38 $538,073.30 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 626,873.39 270,677.09 Joint Working Capital Fund - 226,361.10 196,842.70 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 15,309.90 19,976.94 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 5,032.64 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 11,241.23 52,026.71 DISTRICT NO, 3 - 182,577.61 230,137.88 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 6,901.50 4,458.23 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 0.00 3,402.12 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 8,659.04 4,464.37 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 53,020.33 20,464.11 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 186,212.03 17,295.25 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 2,739.48 2,061.88 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 206.80 2,652.26 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 976.0 9 5,239.1 4 S2,725.516.86 57.372.804.62 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase Order Contract for Rental or Purchase of Emergency That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to receive Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed and file bid tabulation and recommendation and System. Specification No. R-044, to award purchase order contract for Rental or Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc. Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044, to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., for a total amount not to exceed $57,160.00, plus sales tax. -5- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase of Natural Gas. Specification No. P-160. to Amoco Enemy That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Trading Corporation Resolution No. 95-56, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160, to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, for the discount price of$.0259/MMBTU, for a one year period beginning August 1, 1995. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Su000rtino the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Planning Council (RAPC) Resolution No. 95-57, Supporting the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC); and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Joint Chair, be, and is hereby, appointed as the primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as the alternate representative. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing the General Manager to designate members of the Boards and/or That the General Manager, or his designee, be, staff to attend and Participate in and is hereby, authorized to designate members of various training Programs, meetings. the Boards and/or staff to attend and participate in hearings. conferences, facility inspections various training programs, meetings, hearings, y, and other functions 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and, FURTHER MOVED: That staff be, and is hereby, directed to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Annual nominations for Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization The General Counsel briefly reviewed the provisions of the Districts' Rules of Procedure relating to nomination and election of the Joint Chair and Vice Joint Chair. This being the annual meeting fixed by the Boards at which nominations are to be made for the office of Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization, the Secretary then declared the nominations open. .. -6- 06/28/95 Director John C. Cox, Jr., was then nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair of the Joint 1.. 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 Chair will also be held at the regular July meeting. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee That the draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held on May 24, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Planning. Design and Construction That the draft minutes of the Planning, Design and Committee Construction Committee meeting held on June 1, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Operations. Maintenance and Technical That the draft minutes of the Operations, Services Committee Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting held on June 7, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Finance. Administrative and Human That the draft minutes of the Finance, Resources Committee Administrative and Human Resources Committee meeting held on June 14, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Executive Committee That the draft minutes of the Executive Committee meeting held on June 21, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing funding in the 1995-96 CORF Budget for continuing studies in the Orange That the funding of$100,000.00 in the 1995-96 County Regional Water Reclamation Project CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project, be, and is hereby, authorized. -7- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-21) Actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1. Job No. Pt-36-2 Verbal report of Director of The Director of Engineering reported that this Enoineerino project was the final of four construction contracts that will improve the ability of existing secondary treatment facilities to treat primary effluent. Mr. Linder then stated that on May 16, 1995, eight bids were received for this project. The bids ranged from a high of$40,427,000.00 to a low of$35,291,000.00, submitted by Margate Construction, Inc., and recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder. The engineer's estimate was $42,300,000.00. Approving Addendum No. 1 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications for Job No. P1-36.2 That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36.2, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. AApprovino Addendum No. 2 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications for Job Not P1-36-2 That Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Awarding Job No. P1-36-2 to Moved, seconded and duly carried: Margate Construction, Inc. That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-58, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2, to Margate Construction, Inc., in the total amount of$35,291,000.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-22) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of That the Planning, Design and Construction Job No. J-33-2 Committee certification of the final negotiated fee relative to the Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-59, approving said agreement with John Carollo Engineers for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $193,100.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -8- O6/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-029) Moved, seconded and duy carried; Adootina a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts' owned That a policy for the Control and Containment of and/or Operated Systems Spills in the Districts' owned and/or Operated Systems, be, and is hereby, adopted. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-030) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K.P. That the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Lindstrom. Inc. for environmental consulting Services Committee certification of the final services negotiated fee relative to Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for environmental consulting services to assist staff on NPDES Permit activities; regulatory and legislative liaison activities; and for technical support for sludge management, air quality, reclamation and conservation issues and in connection with CEQA compliance for Master Plan projects, providing for a six-month extension of the agreement, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-60, approving Addendum No. 3 to said agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said services, providing for a six- month extension of said agreement, on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, plus direct expenses, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-033) Moved, seconded and duly canned: Approving agreement with SAIC for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Ouffall. That the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Specification No. P-156R Services Committee certification of the final negotiated fee relative to agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outall, Specification No. P-156R, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-61, approving agreement with SAIC for said services, for the period July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997. with option for two one-year extensions, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-035) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue a District P2-42 purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in an amount not to exceed $250,000.00 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995-96, estimated as follows: -9- O6/28/95 Tvoe of Fee Amount Annual Emissions $85,000.00 Operating Permits 50,000.00 CARB Emissions 20,000.00 Compliance Source Testing 20,000.00 Permit & Plan Applications 60,000.00 Miscellaneous 15,000.00 TOTAL $250.000.00 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duty carried: Ratifying Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series Refunding Agreement with That Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series PaineWebber Refunding Remarketing Agreement with PaineWebber providing that if the Certificates of Participation are converted to a fixed rate of interest mode, "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable[remarketing agent's]fee", be, and is hereby, rated. ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR95-261 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing Districts' Insurance Broker to place All-Risk Property Insurance Coverage That the Districts' Insurance Broker, Robert F. Driver Associates, be, and is hereby, authorized to place All-Risk Property Insurance Coverage for 1995-96, as follows: B'PA A TERMS: All-Risk Insurance including earthquake and flood, personal property and business interruption. Total Asset Value $1,375,032,593 COVERAGE: All-Risk $200,000,000 Earthquake: CSDOC 30,000,000 DEDUCTIBLE: All Perils $25,000 Earthquake 5% Per Unit, $250,000 min. PREMIUM: -$1,358,000 'Plus taxes and fees of$33,456 -10- O6/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR95-29) Actions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Proaram Approving Professional Services Moved, seconded and duly carried: Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-75, approving Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company, to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorizing the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Approving Professional Services Moved, seconded and duly carried: Agreement with Mellon Trust Company That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-76, approving Professional Services Agreement with Mellon Trust Company, to serve as master custodial services bank, and authoring the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS fFAHR95-301 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving revisions to the Management Performance Review Plan (MPRP) That funds totaling $173,000 beyond the 3.0% of �..J Performance Incentive Values payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring, be, and are hereby, authorized; and, FURTHER MOVED: That a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0% of payroll (totaling $453,000)for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance, as recommended by Ernst & Young, be, and is hereby, established; and, FURTHER MOVED: That provision of extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program as recommended by Ernst & Young, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (EXEC95-01) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum re Status Report on That the General Counsel's Memorandum dated Proposed Consolidation of Districts June 14, 1995 re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving, in concept, the consolidation of the Boards, be, and is hereby, received and filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That staff and General Counsel, be, and are hereby, authorized to proceed with additional studies for said consolidation. -11- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (EXEC95-03) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt $50,0000 for Contracts. Services and Resolution No. 95-62, amending Resolution Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works No. 95-9, authorizing the General Manager to Contracts novemed by State Law, and approve expenditure of funds up to $50,000.00 for Professional Services Agreements Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, governed by Resolution No. 95-9 Excluding Public Works Contracts governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements governed by Resolution No. 95-9. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS The General Manager referred the Directors to a Approving 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets one-page handout included in their meeting folders. Funds He referred to the$599 figure which is the estimated cost of treatment for a million gallons of wastewater for next year. Mr. McIntyre staled he would be making a presentation to every employee and provide them with a summary handout of the budget. Employees will be encouraged to talk and contribute to reducing and/or keeping this cost down. Directors then questioned the increased cost of odor control chemcals. The Director of Finance reported that there are several chemicals involved and the price on each of those chemicals has gone up. Currently caustic soda is the main chemical used for odor control. This chemical was recently rebid and the costs have increased 50% in the unit cost. Mr. Streed mentioned that the Districts are exposed to far less of a risk and the chlorine is out of the budget at this point. He \. V also mentioned that Technical Services is evaluating alternatives to the chemicals used in biofiltration and the biotrickling filter. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: George Brown, John Collins, John C. Cox, Jr., Jan Debay, Barry Denes, Shirley Dettloff, Burnie Dunlap, Norman Z. Eckenrode, James M. Ferryman, James H. Flora, Don R. Griffin, John M. Gullixson, Barry Hammond, Victor Leipzig, Wally Linn, Pat McGuigan, Jim Potts, Margie L. Rice, Julie Be, Sal A. Sapien, Sheldon S. Singer, Roger R. Stanton, William G. Steiner, Peer A. Swan, Charles E. Sylvia, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSENT: Cecilia L. Age, Mark A. Murphy That the proposed Joint Operating Budget Funds of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 for the 1995-56 fiscal year, be, and are hereby, approved and adopted as follows: .. -12- O6/28/95 Fund Total Amount �.../ Joint Works OperatingfWorking Capital $ 54,380,000 Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,809,000 Capital Facilities Fund 10,904.000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 8,872,000 TOTAL $33.585.000 DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving the 1995-96 budget rail vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: �....' Operating Fund $53,245,000 Capital Facilities Fund 60,455,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 24,024.000 TOTAL $137.724.000 DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving the 1995-96 Budoet rail vote: That the District's 1995.96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $65,946,000 Capital Facilities Fund 61,204,000 Construction Fund- 1990.92 22,459,000 TOTAL $149.609.000 ... -13- 06/28/95 DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered (led and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,415,000 Capital Facilities Fund 14.361,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 65. 74.000 TOTAL $33.450.000 DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $12,073,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7.473,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 92. 64,000 TOTAL $22.510.000 DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $21,726,000 Capital Facilities Fund 17,604,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 7,323,000 TOTAL $46.653.000 DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vole: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13.801,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,920,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 5,054,000 Bond & Interest Fund - 1958 33 000 TOTAL $28.806.000 a✓ -14- 06/28/95 DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll �..✓ Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $2,046,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,511.000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 27 000 TOTAL 9 5$ 84,000 DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $3,521,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,601,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 158,000 TOTAL $13.280.000 DISTRICTS 1. 2. 3. 5, 6. 7 & 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal Year 1995-96 That the following resolutions selecting the annual change in California per capita personal income as the cost-of-living adjustment factor, and establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for each District in accordance with the provisions of Division 9 of Title 1 of the California Government Code, be, and are hereby, adopted by the respective Boards of Directors: DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. LIMITATION 1 95-63-1 $2,760,000 2 95-64-2 10.548,000 3 95-65-3 14,521,000 5 95-66-5 2,604,000 6 95-67-6 1,689,000 7 95-68-7 4,605,000 11 95-69-11 3,142,000 Said resolutions, by reference hereto, are hereby made a pan of these minutes. -15- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: �..' Delegating authority to the Plannina. Desian and Construction Committee and the Ad That the Planning, Design and Construction Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee re Space for actions re Modifications to the Existing Utilization Study, be, and are hereby, delegated Interior Office Spaces in the Administration authority to solicit, negotiate, award and issue Building for the General Management purchase orders to various vendors for Administration and Communication Offices Modifications to the Existing Interior Office Spaces (Specification No. E-256) in the Administration Building for the General Management Administration and Communication Offices (Specification No. E-256), in an amount not to exceed $165,250.00. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported that he and Gary Streed, Status report re County's Comminaled Director of Finance, had attended a meeting earlier Investment Pool that day with the Investment Pool Committee members. One of the issues discussed at the meeting was the disbursement of interest on the post- petition monies that were in the pool. In order to avoid delay in getting each of the agencies their checks, it was agreed that the post-petition interest that was earned on the fund would be set aside for a week or two because of a disagreement between the County's accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, and the Pool Commmittee's accounting firm, Price Waterhouse. There is a dispute as to the numbers, a variance of$15 million, with Arthur Andersen saying it is $15 million less than Price Waterhouse. The Pool Committee today directed Pat Shea and the representatives from Price Waterhouse to make a demand for the uncontested amount to Arthur `a..� Andersen and then work around the difference so that money can at least be distributed to each of the pool members. Mr. Woodruff staled there were also monies withheld by the Wall Street brokerage firms when they liquidated the pool assets. Those sums are being challenged and will hopefully be recovered later. Also discussed was Judge Ryan's ruling of the prior day relative to the proposed roll over of the bonded debt and the agreements related to it that were offered by the County. The investment pool had filed an opposition to the agreement on the basis that it was prejudicial to the rights of all of the pool participants, those rights being the ones that were set forth in the comprehensive settlement agreement. The effect of it was to place the claims of the pool participants in a lower hierarchy and others would have been able to move ahead, thus the protests and objection to the motion were lodged. The Judge did approve the motion of the County on June 27th in the revised form of the agreement. The Pool Committee this date voted unanimously to direct its counsel to consider and report to the Pool Committee for final decision in one week, of the filing of the appeal of Judge Ryan's order for the same basic reason, as the position of the Districts and the cities has been prejudiced because it is contrary to the terms of the comprehensive settlement agreement. -16- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Action re Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos 1 and 2 Specification•No. M-044 (Rebid) Verbal Report of Director of The Director of Engineering reported that this Engineering project was originally bid and awarded in 1993, but the contractor defaulted. In 1994 the contractors surety, Frontier Pacific Insurance Company, agreed to complete the work or accept the Districts' rebid and pay the new contract amount in excess of the original bid amount of $199,200.00. Mr. Linder advised that on June 6, 1995, two bids were received for this project. The bids were for$479,031.00 and $298,700.00, the low bid submitted by Colich & Sons, Inc., and recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder. The engineers estimate for the work was$350.000.00. Approving Amendment to Settlement Moved, seconded and duly carried: Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95.70, approving Amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company, providing for time constraints and Surety's right to perform work. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Awarding Specification No. M4)44 Moved, seconded and duly carried: (Rebid). to Colich Brothers. Inc.. dba Colich &Sons That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-71, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), to Colich Brothers, Inc., dba Colich & Sons in the total amount of$298,700.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re adoption of Ordinance Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early Verbal Report of General Counsel General Counsel reported that the Boards had previously approved the Early Retirement Program for certain employees and all documentation has been submitted to the County. The County's retirement system requires this program to be approved by an ordinance adopted by the Boards of Directors. He further stated that there are no substantive changes in what was previously approved by the Boards of Directors. Mr. Woodruff then advised that only District No. 1 would be required to adopt the Ordinance as it would be acting as agent on behalf of the other Districts. -17- .✓ 06/28/95 Receive and file General Counsel's Moved, seconded and duly carried: Memorandum dated June 22, 1995 That General Counsel's Memorandum dated June 22, 1995, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Reading of Proposed Ordinance Moved, seconded and duly carried by unanimous No. 126 vote: That proposed Ordinance No. 126, an Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early, be read by title only, and that reading of said Ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived. Adoption of Ordinance No. 126 Moved, seconded and duty carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Pat McGuigan, Chair, James M. Ferryman, Jim Potts, Roger R. Stanton NOES: None ABSENT: Mark A. Murphy That Ordinance No. 126, an Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible �. Districts' Employees Who Retire Early, be, and is hereby, adopted as an urgency measure to be effective immediately. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported to the Directors the need General Counsel's Comments Prior to for a closed session as authorized by Government Closed Session Code Sections 54956.9, 54957 and 54957.6 to discuss and consider the items that are specified as Items 18(b)(1) and (2) on the published Agenda. No other items would be discussed or acted upon. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Convene in closed session pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 and The Boards convened in closed session at 54957.6 8:12 p.m. pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 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. No action was taken re Agenda Item 18(b)(2). ALL DISTRICTS At 8:24 p.m., the Boards reconvened in regular Reconvene in regular session session. �.✓ -18- O6/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Upon hearing a report of its management Termination of Confidential Employees Unit representatives, the Chair reported that during closed session the Boards of Directors acted to withdraw the formal recognition of the Confidential Unit of district employees and to terminate said unit. All employees that were previously in this recognized unit are transferred to either the management group or the recognized representative unit of District Administrative and Clerical Employees ("DACE"). These actions were approved following meet and confer sessions between Districts' management representatives and the Confidential Unit representatives which resulted in agreement to recommend the actions to the Boards. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Supplemental Agenda Item relative to Summons and Complaint re Unlawful Employment Discrimination. Jane Kaye vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange County Superior Court, Case No, 748432 Authorizing consideration of Moved, seconded and unanimously carried, Supplemental Agenda Item relative to Summons and Complaint re That the Boards of Directors do hereby authorize Unlawful Employment consideration of supplemental agenda item relative Discrimination. Jane Kaye vs. to the Summons and Complaint for Unlawful County Sanitation Districts of Employment Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. County Orange County, Orange County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange Superior Court Case No. 748432 County Superior Court Case No. 748432, relative to �.►/ alleged discrimination and personal injuries as a result of Ms. Kaye's termination as a probationary employee, which was not posted 72 hours prior to the Board meeting date because the need to take said actions arose subsequent to the agenda being posted. Verbal report of General Counsel General Counsel reported that this Summons and Complaint claims employment discrimination. Claimant was employed in the Board Secretays office as a clerical staff employee and, as with every employee of the Districts, was in probationary status for the first six months. After approximately five weeks this employee was terminated. -19- O6/28/95 Receive and file Summons and Moved, seconded and duly carried: Complaint for Unlawful Employment Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. That the Summons and Complaint for Unlawful County Sanitation Districtsof Orange Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. County Sanitation Counw, Orange County Superior Districts of Orange County, California, Orange Court Case No. 748432 County Superior Court, Case No. 748432, relative to alleged discrimination and personal injuries as a result of Ms. Kaye's termination as a probationary employee, 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 District. DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adiournmenl That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjoumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. yd DISTRICT 5 Actions re proposed Annexation No. 9- Crvstal Cove State Park Annexation Approving Agreement with the State Moved, seconded and duly carried: of California, Department of Parks and Recreation That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-72-5, approving Agreement with the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, in connection with proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park Annexation, annexation of a 20- acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. �,d -20- 06/28/95 Receive and (le request for Moved, seconded and duly carried: annexation and authorizina initiation of proceedings re or000sed That the letter dated May 22, 1995, from the State Annexation No. 9- Crystal Cove of California, Department of Parks and Recreation State Park Annexation requesting annexation of a 20-acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-73-5, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 9- Crystal Cove State Park Annexation to county Sanitation District No. 5). Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. 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 Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 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 Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Actions re Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24 Verbal report of Director of The Director of Engineering reported that this Engineering project is an 8,000 foot long line that will replace smaller, older lines that are over capacity in the Tustin Hills area. Mr. Linder then stated that on May 23, 1995, eight bids were received for this project. The bids ranged from a high of$1,979,877.50 to a low of$1,391,195.00, submitted by Calfon Construction, Inc., and recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder. The engineer's estimate for this project was $1,672,475.00. U -21- O6/28/95 Approving Addendum No. 1 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifcations That Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Awarding Contract Nos. 7-22 and Moved, seconded and duly carried: 7-24 to Calfon Construction, Inc. That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-74-7, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, to Calfon Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$1,391,195.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1315 That proposed Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 1315 by title only. -22- O6/28/95 DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adopting Ordinance No. 1315 roll call vote: AYES: John M. Gullixson, Chair, Burnie Dunlap, William G. Steiner, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSENT: Mark A. Murphy That Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of or000sed Ordinance No. 1407 That proposed Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 1407 by title only. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adopting Ordinance No. 1407 roll call vote: AYES: Jim Potts, Chair pro tem, Barry Hammond, William G. Steiner, Peer A. Swan NOES: None ABSENT: Mark A. Murphy That Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation Distdct No. 14 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. -23- 06/28/95 DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carded: �.d Receive and file Summons and Complaint for Subroaalion Recovery. 20th Century That the Summons and Complaint for Subrogation Insurance Company vs. County Sanitation Recovery, 20th Century Insurance Company vs. Districts of Oranae County, at al.. West County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, at al., Orange County Municipal Court, Case West Orange County Municipal Court Case No. 215248 No. 215248, relative to property damage sustained in connection with a Districts'vehicle, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the District's General Counsel, be, and is hereby, authorized to appear and defend the interests of the District. DISTRICT 3 Actions re Los Alamitos County Water Districts' request for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 Receive and file letters dated Moved, seconded and duly carried: March 9. 1995 and June 8. 1995 That letters dated March 9, 1995 and June 8, 1995 from the Los Alamitos County Water District requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. Presentation by Los Alamitos County The Joint Chair recognized Mr. Joseph Martin, Water District - Director of the Los Alamitos County Water District, who stated the Water District was requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. Mr. Martin stated the areas served by Los Alamitos County Water District are Los Alamitos, Seal Beach and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, providing service to approximately 8,000 sewer connections. In comparison, Midway City Sanitary District serves Westminster, 25% of Garden Grove and the unincorporated area of Midway City. However, Midway City Sanitary District has a representative on District No. 3, but Los Alamitos County Water District does not. He then referred to a letter he received from the Sanitation Districts which stated that the present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Board of Directors of District No. 3. He further stated that every year the Water District sends out an annual report to their constituents, telling them what new projects are going on,what the budget is, but they don't hear from the Sanitation Districts. If the Water District was represented on the Board, they would be able to keep their constituents apprised of projects, problems, budgets, etc. It was then pointed out to Mr. Martin that currently District No. 3 has sixteen Directors, and the areas served by Los Alamitos County Water District has representation on District No. 3 from the cities and Board of Supervisors. Directors also pointed out that W _P4_ 06/28/95 back in 1982 a study done by the Grand Jury recommended only one representative from each agency on the Board to serve and that the Districts have been downsizing the representation on all Districts' Boards. Recently the total number of active Directors had been reduced to 30 Directors from 42 members. Mr. Martin then introduced Art Gold, a Director from the Water District. Mr. Gold stated that the Grand Jury report had to do with whether multiple water or sanitary districts were serving the same community, and that the Water District was serving four communities through one District. Directors pointed out that representation by the Water District would go against current Districts' policy in downsizing and that there should not be duplicate representation for the areas the Water District serves. A representative from each of the cities within their boundaries already has representation on the Board. The Joint Chair also stated that one of the challenges of all special districts is to eliminate duplication of efforts. Deriving request of Los Alamitos Moved, seconded and duly carried: County Water District That the request of Los Alamitos County Water District for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3, be, and is hereby, denied; and, FURTHER MOVED: That, as amended by Director Don R. Gruen, annual budgets and portions of the annual reports be forwarded to Los Alamitos County Water District, based upon their request, so that there is ongoing communication. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:47 p.m. Secretary of the and Directors of County Sam n i ncts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 1 , 13 and 14 �.d -25- FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126/95 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAID05131/95 POSTING DATE 05/3l/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 144883 AS TECH COMPANY $150,024.31 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10.9-91 144854 A-Z LOGIC SYSTEMS $197.71 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 1"885 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $1.274.98 MECHANICAL PARTS 144886 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSOC. $695.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144887 AMERICAN DIVERSIFIED SILVER $1.485.61 REFUND ECSA DEPOSIT 144888 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE $1.899.00 TRAINING MATERIALS 144889 ANAHEIM SEWER CONSTRUCTION $3,000.00 EMERGENCY SEWER REPAIRS 144890 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $20.87 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144891 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $465.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144892 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $2,47801 NOTICES&ADS 144893 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $2,476.86 LAB SUPPLIES 1MB94 ABC LABORATORIES $2,560.00 LAB SERVICES 144895 ATKINIJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144896 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $574.93 FITTINGS 144897 AWARDS&TROPHIES $26.36 PLAQUES 1N898 BKK LANDFILL $2,376.39 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10$91 1N899 BANANA BLUEPRINT $9,600.54 PRINTING M.0.11-07-94 m 1"900 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $274.43 BATTERIES X 1"901 BAITER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $4.313.52 LAB SUPPLIES s 144902 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $83.84 LAB SUPPLIES 144903 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. $255.27 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1"904 J&H BERGE.INC. $79.33 LAB SUPPLIES 144905 A BIEDERMAN,INC. $164.79 MECHANICAL PARTS n 144906 BISHOP COMPANY $330.20 TOOLS 144907 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $33.840.51 ENGINEERING SERVICES P141 ~ 144908 BRENNER-FIEDLER&ASSOC..INC. $592.30 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144909 MARK E.BRIGHTLY $3.200.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL W910 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $64,11N.71 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.0.124894 144911 BUSH&ASSOCIATES,INC. $678.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6-0-94 144912 CH2M HILL $60,365.86 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-31 144913 C.L.TECHNOLOGY $720.00 GAS ANALYSIS SERVICES 144914 CS COMPANY $4,464.36 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1449i5 CALFON CONSTRUCTION $78,231.40 CONSTRUCTION 3.38-2 144916 CALTROL,INC. $498.24 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES W917 CALTEX PLASTICS,INC. $346.40 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144918 CANUS CORPORATION $26.581.95 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 144919 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. 545.18 REGULATOR 144920 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $7,645,00 ENGINEERING SERVICES M.0.3.8.95 144921 JOHN CARDLLO ENGINEERS $431,613.92 ENGINEERING SERVICES P138.P1-36 144922 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION $3.244,00 ELECTRIC PARTS 144923 CENTRAL VALLEY WASTEWATER MORS $100.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144924 CETAC TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $264.54 LAB SUPPLIES 141925 M.C.KENNICUTT $1.671.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144926 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $1 460 00 PUMP PARTS 144927 COASTAL CHLORINATION $1,008.00 WATER LINE DISINFECTION 144928 COASTALMOTION $1.332.00 MEMBERSHIP FEES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126/95 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0513IMS POSTING GATE 05/31195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144929 COLD SAWS OF AMERICA.INC. $88,76 WELDING PARTS 144930 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $242.58 LAB SUPPLIES 144931 COUCH AND SONS $65.991.00 CONSTRUCTION M.O.2&95 1"932 COUCH&SONS $50,262.06 CONSTRUCTION 11-17-1 144933 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $2,467,48 PUMP REPAIRS 144934 CONNEL GM PARTS I DIV. $139.57 TRUCK PARTS 144935 CONSOLIDATED FREIGHTWAYS $2.335.81 FREIGHT 144936 CONSUMER PIPE $61.20 MECHANICAL PARTS 144937 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $456.66 TOOLS 1"938 CONTROL DESIGN SUPPLY $332.87 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144939 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $241.29 TRUCK PARTS 144940 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $1,049.35 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144941 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $2,572.78 ELECTRIC PARTS 144942 DAILY PILOT $102.00 NOTICES&ADS 1"943 HSKIOECKER $2.951.74 GAUGES 144944 DELTA POINT,INC. $61.32 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144945 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $13,945.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES fTl 144946 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $3,533.57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE X 144947 DIVERSIFIED BIOTECH,INC. $33.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES i=+ 144948 ESP NORTH $396.18 TOOLS CO 144949 EASTMAN,INC. $6,613.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES 14495D ECOANALYSIS,INC. $1,320.00 CONSULTING SERVICES n 144951 EDWARDS DIV.OF GS BLDG SYS. $535.49 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144952 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6.10-92 N 1"953 ENVIROGEN,INC. $1.569.00 PILOT PROJ.EQUIPMENT-BIOTRICKLING FILTER 1"954 FMC CORP. $28.153.90 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9.14-94 144955 MARSHALL FAIRIES $26.08 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 1"956 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE IIIA20.00 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10.9-91 144957 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $636.80 AIR FREIGHT 144958 FIRST COMPANY WOR NORTHERN DIST. $156.41 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144959 FISCHER&PORTER CO. $36.12 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 1N960 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 00. $1.174.38 LAB SUPPLIES 1"961 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $290.613 LAB SUPPLIES 144962 FLICKINGER CO. $1,309.16 PLUMBING PARTS 144963 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $147.76 PHOTO SUPPLIES 144964 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $216.59 PAINT SUPPLIES 144985 FREEDOM IMAGING $70.72 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144966 CT'OF FULLERTON $900.00 WATER USE 144967 GST,INC. $3,508.94 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144968 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $824.95 LUMBER91ARUWARE 144969 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $182.10 CHEMICALS 1N970 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $290.00 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 1"971 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $6.558.26 TELEPHONE SERVICES 144972 GIERUCH-MITCHELL,INC. $4.403.65 PUMP PARTS 4973 N.GLANTZ&SON,INC. $189,10 PAINT SUPPLIES 4974 GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES,INC. ( $47.00 PUBLICATION t. FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/3195 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144975 VWY GRAINGER,INC. $612.59 ELECTRIC PARTS 144976 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $45.38 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 144977 GRASBY S.T.I. $0,225.82 ENGINE PARTS 144978 DGA CONSULTANTS $8,860.D0 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6.8-94 144979 HACH COMPANY $300.93 LAB SUPPLIES 140980 HARBOUR ENGINEERING $13,687.62 PUMP PARTS 144981 FREDA HARPER $1,100.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144982 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $820.10 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144983 HATCH&KIRK,INC. $1.924.40 ENGINE PARTS 144954 PL HAWN CO,INC. $146.D9 FILTERS 144985 HILTI,INC. $1.029.94 TOOLS IU986 HOMEDEPOT $209.43 HARDWARE 144987 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $817.77 PAINT SUPPLIES 144988 ORANGE COUNTY FED.CREDIT UNION $680.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION W989 IBG/MICROBE MASTER,INC. $14,3MA3 DIGESTER CLEANING 144990 IDEXX $T77.07 LAB SUPPLIES 144991 IPCO SAFETY $3,353.58 SAFETY SUPPLIES m 1N992 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $57,728.07 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11.18-92 = 144993 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $28.56 CONNECTORS 144994 IS]INFORTEXT $1.593.54 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144995 INORGANIC VENTURES,INC. $735.51 LAB SUPPLIES -I 1449M J2 PRINTING SERVICES $505.35 PRINTING 144997 J.D.I.TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $2.613.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES ]? 144998 JAMISON ENGINEERING $24.434.83 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES W W999 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $687.69 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145000 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $58.34 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145M JOHNSON CONTROLS,INC. $685.63 ELECTRIC PARTS 146002 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $131.15 ELECTRIC PARTS 145003 THE KEITH COMPANIES $234.70 ENGINEERING SERVICES 3.36R 145004 KING BEARING,INC. $556.65 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145005 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $2.420.99 HARDWARE 145006 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $388.75 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICES 145007 LAUNDROMAT $45.85 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145008 LAW/CRANDAL,INC. $5,242.50 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.7-13-94 145009 LIMITORQUE CORP. $2.241.17 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145010 LOCALAGENCY $450m LAFCO FEES 145011 MPS $15.30 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 146012 MACOMCO $577.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145013 MAG-TROL,INC. $66.47 ELECTRIC PARTS 145014 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $199.17 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145015 MCKENNA ENGR.&EQUIP. $142.01 PUMP PARTS 145016 MECHANICAL DRIVES CO. $248.18 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145017 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $3,496.27 GAUGES 145018 MICRO MOTION $522.25 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145019 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $6.363.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 145020 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL FIRES. $85.00 OFFICE REPAIRS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE SQ6195 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/3195 POSTING DATE 0501/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145021 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,347.85 UNIFORM RENTALS 145022 MLADEN BUNTICH CONSTRUCTION $61,772.98 CONSTRUCTION 741-IA 145023 MONITOR LABS $91.90 FITTINGS 145024 MONITOR PUBLISHING CO. 3213.75 SUBSCRIPTION 145025 MONTGOMERY WATSON $1.664.12 AIR TOXICS PROJECT M.12-12-90 145025 MORTON SALT $500.52 SALT 145027 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $359,32 FITTINGS 145020 MOTOROLA.INC. 5513.96 COMMUNICATIONS SUPPLIES 145029 NASCO $308.76 LAB SUPPLIES 145030 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES,INC. $9.500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 145031 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $1.282.81 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145032 NEUTRON $1.742.35 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8-10-W 145033 CUMMINS CAL PAC/ONAN 545.23 ELECTRIC PARTS 145034 OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $161.13 SAFETY GLASSES 145035 ON TECHNOLOGY $105.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 14SOM ORANGE COUNTY FARM SUPPLY $1.529.71 CHEMICALS 145037 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $8.508.12 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES m 145035 ORANGE COURIER $151.05 COURIER SERVICES Z 14W39 ORANGE VALVE 8 FITTING CO. $707.65 FITRNGS 145040 OXYGEN SERVICE $3,553.04 SPECIALTY GASES 14SMI COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $9,091.19 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145042 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $66,955.00 GAP WATER USE M 0.6.9-93 745043 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $2,330.20 PLUMBING SUPPLIES ni 7450N PACIFIC PARTS S13.994.14 INSTRUMENT PARTSIOFFICE EQUIPMENT r 145045 PACIFIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT,INC. $314.93 PUMP PARTS 145046 PACIFIC BELL $1,247.70 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145047 PACIFIC LAND DEVELOPMENT $2.232.50 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145048 PACIFIC WATER CONDITIONING CO. 5598.00 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 145049 PAGENET $1,043.49 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 145050 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 145051 PARALLAX EDUCATION $4.740.89 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145052 PARKER DING SERVICE SM.895.00 OCEAN OUTFALL REPAIRS M.O.4-28-95 145053 PARTS UNLIMITED $773.91 TRUCK PARTS 145054 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $3,524.89 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL 145055 PRARMACIA BIOTECH.INC. $460.49 LAB REPAIRS 145055 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $104,515.60 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.54491 145057 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $36.337.61 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145058 PLAINS TRUEVALUE HARDWARE $19.37 HARDWARE 145059 POLYPURE,INC. $15,874.42 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3-11-92 145060 POSTAGE BY PHONE $5,000.00 POSTAGE 145MI HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $96.00 ICE 145M PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. ST79.00 SOIL TESTING 145063 PROMINENT FLUID CONTROL $799.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 45054 QUALITY BUILDING SUPPLY E187,M BUILDING SUPPLIES C.15066 R&R INSTRUMENTS�CES,INC. ` $556 .78 INSTRUMENT ENT PINING A REGISTRATION ' FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/26195 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/31/95 POSTING DATE 0513U95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145067 REBIS $11,693.82 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 146M REISH MARINE STUDIES,INC. $580.00 OCEAN MONITORING 145069 REMEDYTEMP $1,511.80 TEMPORARY SERVICES 145070 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $1.991.83 VALVES 145071 ROBINSON FERTILIZER $1.411.31 CHEMICALS 145072 ROSEMOUNTANALYTICAL,INC. $114.56 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145073 RYAN-NERCO $574.34 METAL 145074 SERBS-PDC $1,1K)BOD TRAINING REGISTRATION 145075 SANWA BANK $113,595.17 CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 14-1-1-A 145076 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTL 5553,703.98 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6-8-94 145077 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $1.784.04 SPECIALTY GASES 145078 SEA-BIRD ELECTRONICS,INC. $345.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145079 SEA COAST DESIGNS $144.60 OFFICE REPAIRS 145080 SEARS ROEBUCK&CO. $359.80 REFRIGERATOR 145081 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $478.41 HARDWARE 145082 SHURELUCK SALES $4.70142 TOOLSIHARDWARE 145083 M.LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS&ASSN. $487.00 SUBSCRIPTION X 145084 SO COAST AIR QUALITY $3.481.80 PERMIT FEES S 145085 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY $80.00 PERMIT FEES 145086 SOUTH COAST WATER $140A0 LAB SUPPLIES ED 145087 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16.114.10 POWER 1450BB SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $56,274.83 NATURAL GAS n 145089 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $28,015.M DIESELAINLEADEO FUEL I 145M SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER $2,663.63 DRINKING WATERICOOLER RENTALS Ul 1451191 WESTALLOY,INC. $236.18 WELDING SUPPLIES 145092 SPECTRUM CHEMICAL $166.71 LAB SUPPLIES 145093 SPEX INDUSTRIES,INC. $2.455.45 LAB SUPPLIES 1450M SQUARE DICRISP AUTOMATION SYST. $96,883.03 SOFTWARE LICENSE M.O.7-13.94 145095 STERLINGART $138A0 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145096 SUMMIT STEEL - $1,900.45 METAL 145097 SUNSET INDUSTRIAL PARTS $188.73 PUMP PARTS 145098 SUPERS ONE-HOUR PHOTO $11.64 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 14W99 SUPER CHEM CORP. $406.82 CHEMICALS 14510D TCH ASSOCIATES $491.91 LAB SUPPLIES 145101 THERMO JARRELL ASH CORP. $1.308.72 LAB SUPPLIES 145102 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $322.42 MECHANICAL PARTS 1451M TOLEDO SCALE CORP. $1.049.81 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145104 TONYS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $651.95 LOCKS&KEYS 145105 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $999.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.6-" 145105 TREBOR ELECTRONICS $569.48 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145107 TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY,INC. $3.455.54 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.0.5-11-94 145105 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,064.25 LAB SERVICES 145109 JIG TUCKER&SON,INC. $814.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145110 TUSTIN DODGE $38.19 TRUCK PARTS 145111 TUTHILL CORPORATION $15,941.52 MECHANICAL PARTS 1451112 URISA $90.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 526/95 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05MI195 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANTNO. VENDOR 145113 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $318.OD LAB SUPPLIES 145114 UNISOURCEWOR BUTLER PAPER $644.13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145115 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $814.87 PARCEL SERVICES 145116 VWR SCIENTIFIC $743.55 LAB SUPPLIES 145117 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $683.57 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145118 VERNE'S PLUMBING $3.002.30 PLUMBING SERVICES 145119 VERTEX SYSTEMS $1.252,71 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT 145120 VILLAGE NURSERIES $297,67 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 145121 CARL WARREN&CO. $186.21 LIAR.CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 145122 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL FED. $261.50 PUBLICATIONS 145123 WAXIE $475.39 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145124 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $30,558.W CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.O.B.12-9284-13-94 145125 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $732.36 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 14512E WITEG $172.40 LAB SUPPLIES 145127 ROURKE,WOODRUFF&SPRADLIN $55.221.85 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.2-19-92 145128 WORDPERFECT $195.00 PUBLICATION 146129 XEROX CORP. $1,050.70 COPIER LEASES m 145130 RICHARD B.EDGAR $200.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION X 2 2,725,516.88 Cd n SUMMARY AMOUNT i #2 OPER FUND 10.462.23 02 CAP FAC FUND 779.00 #3 OPER FUND 8,193.31 03 CAP FAC FUND 174.384.30 #5 OPER FUND 6,901.50 07 OPER FUND 4.048.75 #7 CAP PAC FUND 4,610.29 #11 OPER FUND 2,018.34 #11 CAP FAC FUND 51,001.99 #14 OPER FUND 48.00 #14 CAP FAC FUND 186,184.03 #5&6 OPER FUND 126.97 #5&6 CAP FAC FUND 2.612.51 #6&7 OPER FUND 206.80 #7&14 OPER FUND 976.09 JT OPER FUND 1,404,435.38 CORF 626.873.39 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 15.309.90 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 226,361.10 2.726.616.68 . FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE SKIMS PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06/14/95 POSTING DATE 06/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 145157 AA EQUIPMENT $861.27 PUMP 145158 AG TECH COMPANY $88,274.21 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10-9-9/ 145159 AT&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2,398.92 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145160 AT&T-MEGACOMSERVICE $958.94 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145161 AT&T-FAX SERVICE $1,041.42 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145162 ADAMS PRECISION INSTRUMENTATION $142.77 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145163 ADVANCED MFG.INSTITUTE $795.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145164 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS,INC. $36.074,40 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN,SYST.M.0.8-9-89 145165 ALLIED ELECTRONICS $139.00 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145168 AMERIDATA $4,518,70 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145167 AMERICAN SIGMA S43 79 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145168 AMSCO $406,07 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145169 SLAKE P.ANDERSON $79.97 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145170 APCO VALVE&PRIMER CORP. $3.825.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 146171 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $6,330,25 NOTICES&ADS 145172 ACS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) S3,093.50 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 146173 ABC LABORATORIES $23500 SERVICE AGREEMENT X 145174 ARI20NA INSTRUMENT $175,37 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES = 145175 ARTS DISPOSAL SERVICE,INC. $282.20 RECYCLABLE MATERIALS REMOVAL 145170 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $3.408.41 PAYROLL SERVICES W 145177 AWARDS&TROPHIES $412.29 PLAQUES -1 145176 BKK LANDFILL $2.793.36 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MOOD-9-91 145179 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $1.161.68 BATTERIES �1 145180 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $3,193.37 LAB SUPPLIES 145101 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $270,80 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 145162 J&H BERGE.INC. $79.64 LAB SUPPLIES 145183 BETA TECHNOLOGY,INC. $53,64 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145184 910 TECH NET,INC. $3.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145185 BLACK&VEATCH $62,844.67 ENGINEERING SERVICES P146 145186 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $25.885.40 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.0.12.&94 145187 ONO BOOKS $153.64 BOOKS 145188 BURKE ENGINEERING CO. $946.05 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145189 CEM CORPORATION $272.13 LAB SUPPLIES 145190 CEPA $2,142.06 LAB SUPPLIES 146101 C.P.I. $755.87 LAB SUPPLIES 145122 CPRA REGISTRAR $1,012.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 145193 1996 CONFERENCE,CWPCA,INC. $190.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 145194 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $536.10 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145195 CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE $108.36 PUBLICATION 145195 CANUS CORPORATION $39.793.64 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 145197 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. $136.66 REGULATOR 145198 JOHN CARDLLO ENGINEERS $6.752.44 ENGINEERING SERVICES P143,Pi-38 145199 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION $142.55 ELECTRIC PARTS 145200 CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $160.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 145201 CHEMWEST,INC. $414.08 PUMP PARTS 145202 CLARK CONSULTANTS $390.00 ELECTRICAL CONSULTING FUND NO 9199 - Jr DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6/09195 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 08/14/95 POSTING DATE 06/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145203 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $75,51 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145204 COLICH AND SONS $26,033.22 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 3-36 145205 COMPUSERVE $282,39 COMPUTER SERVICES 145206 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO. $323,35 TOOLS 145207 CONSTRUCTION FABRICATORS.INC. $1,644,70 MECHANICAL PARTS 145208 CONSUMER PIPE $95COI PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145209 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $34579 ELECTRIC PARTS 145210 CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT CO. $158.23 FITTINGS 145211 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $2.732.N ENGINE PARTS 145212 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $306.05 TRUCK PARTS 145213 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $1.368.76 ELECTRIC PARTS 145214 DAILY PILOT $98.OD NOTICES 5 ADS 145215 DATASTORM $153.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 146216 DAVIS INSTRUMENTS $506.95 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145217 HSK/DECKER $1,324.75 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145218 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $10,033.89 VALVES 145219 THE DICKSON COMPANY 5108D0 ELECTRIC PARTS X 145220 SYCON CORP. $1,198.29 INSTRUMENT PARTS = 145221 DIPPER PAN $80.00 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS 145222 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $1,856.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE DO 145223 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $699.10 PAINT SUPPLIES 145224 E.C.S. $267.00 PUBLICATION 145225 ESP NORTH $690.44 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 145M EASTMAN.INC. $2.960.14 OFFICE SUPPLIES N 145227 ECOANALYSIS,INC. 55,220.50 CONSULTING SERVICES 145226 ENCHANTER,INC. $3.360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6.10.92 1452.29 ENSYS,INC. $325.48 LAB SUPPLIES 145230 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $1,D96.50 LAB SERVICES 145231 EQUESTRIAN FORGE $1,098.56 PLAQUES 145232 FMC CORP. $33,588.35 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9-14-94 145233 FST SAND AND GRAVEL,INC. $249.58 ROAD BASE MATERIALS 145234 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $3,877,50 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9.91 145236 FIRST COMPANYWOR NORTHERN DIST. $195.61 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145236 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1.935.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145237 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $1,271.78 LABSUPPUES M238 FLICKINGER CO. 53,534.20 VALVES 145239 CLIFFORD A.FORKERT $2,620.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6&94 145240 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $91.60 PHOTO SUPPLIES 146241 CRY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $11,276.60 WATER USE 145242 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $193.61 PAINT SUPPLIES 145243 THE FOXBORO CO. $4.749.01 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1452" CITY OF FULLERTON $139.23 WATER USE 145245 GST,INC. 5829.94 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145246 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $884.15 INSTRUMENT PARTS '5247 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $216.36�5248 TELEPHONE GRAHAM MANUFACTURING CO. ( $111.79 PUMP PAR S SERVICES . FUND NO 9199 - IT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0511,U95 POSTING DATE 06114/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145249 GRASSY S.T.I. $324.65 ENGINE PARTS 145250 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $294.16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145251 GREAT LAKES INSTRUMENTS,INC. $22,691.32 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145262 DGA CONSULTANTS $2,730.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6-8-94 145253 DAVID R.GRIFFIN $164,306.85 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.0.9-14-94 145254 HACH COMPANY $2,003.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145255 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $1.403.02 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145255 HATCH&KIRK,INC. $575.07 TRUCK PARTS 145257 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $1.925.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 145256 PL HAWN CO,INC. $8,089.39 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145259 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2,083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 145260 HOLMES&NARVER,INC. $33,323.52 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI-44 145281 HOME DEPOT $263.11 HARDWARE 145262 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $1.018.80 PAINT SUPPLIES 145263 CITY OF HUN INGTON BEACH $19.65 WATER USE 1452U IPCO SAFETY $1,992.49 SAFETY SUPPLIES T*1 145265 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $110,690.27 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11-18-92 X 145266 IMPULSE ENTERPRISE $404.99 LAB SUPPLIES 2 145267 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $1.480.73 CONNECTORS 145268 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $703.62 BATTERIES 145269 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $45.13 WATER USE '-I 145270 J2 PRINTING SERVICES $602.04 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145271 AT COMPUTER SOURCE,INC. $818.90 COMPUTER SOFTWARE I 145M JAMISON ENGINEERING $8.630.33 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES W 145273 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $233.47 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145274 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $1.997.07 GAUGE 145275 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $410.06 PAINT SUPPLIES 145276 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS 562.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145M KEYE PRODUCTIVITY CENTER $139.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145278 KING BEARING,INC. $1.515.84 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145279 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $1,752.34 TOOLS 145280 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $57.59 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145281 LA TRONICS $2,527.67 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 145282 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $1.475.64 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIR.M.0.12-9.90 145283 SOHO-LYNCH CORP. $138.61 JANITORIAL SERVICES 145284 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $974.10 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6.10-92 145285 MAGNETEK $5,11M.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT M286 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $103.477.00 CONSTRUCTION P2-42-2 145287 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS 5638.06 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145288 MATT-CHLOR,INC. $1,815.69 VALVE PARTS 145289 MAVERIK,INC. $2,887.28 CRANE REPAIRS 145290 CHUCK MCRANEY $511.14 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145291 MEDLIN CONTROLS,INC. $3,825.84 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145292 METRA CORPORATION $1.205.40 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145293 MICROSOFT PRESS $169.57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145294 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES $996.69 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 8/09/95 PAGE4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06/14/95 POSTING DATE D8/14/95 WARRANTNO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145295 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,182.67 UNIFORM RENTALS 145296 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $1.214.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 145297 MONITOR LABS $1.616.86 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145298 RASCO $617.60 LAB SUPPLIES 145299 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $70.35 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 145300 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $67.17 PUBLICATION 145301 NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP $594.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145302 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $7.386.05 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145303 NEUTRON $8,693.11 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8.10.94 145304 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTER $BD0.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145305 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $226.43 LAB SUPPLIES 146M CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $5.29 WATER USE 145307 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL $350.00 NEW HEALTH ACCOUNT 145308 OI CORPORATION $6.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145309 THE OHMART CORP. $554.41 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145310 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $135.79 TRUCK PARTS m 145311 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $2,787.54 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES X 145312 ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $1,178.93 FITTINGS s 145313 OXYGEN SERVICE $2,207.26 SPECIALTY GASES 145314 COUNTY OF ORANGE $5,682.71 SERVICE AGREEMENT tu 145315 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $17,543.61 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145316 COUNTY OF ORANGE $104.00 PERMIT FEES LA 145317 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $16,175.44 GAP WATER USE M.0.6.9.93 1 145318 COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH CARE $1,215.00 SEWAGE SPILL REIMBURSEMENT 146319 P&D ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $1,336.91 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY 145320 PSOC(POOL SUPPLY OF OC) $79.24 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145321 PACIFIC PARTS $8,8A13.39 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145322 PACIFIC BELL $75.74 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145323 PAINE WEBBER $28,144.69 COP REMARKET FEES 145324 PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $40.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6-12-91 145325 PARKHOUSE TIRE CO. $909.24 TIRES 145326 PASCAL&LUDWIG $8.753.50 CONSTRUCTION PIA2 145327 PERFORMANCE TRAINING ASSOC. $590.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145320 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $3,085.69 LAB SUPPLIES 145329 PERVO PAINT $148.48 PAINT SUPPLIES 145330 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $5,228.54 REIMB.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL 145331 PIERCE COMPANIES 5398.98 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145332 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $5.572.03 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145333 POLY FABRICS $2,068.80 PVC LINER 145334 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.76 LAB SUPPLIES 14SMS POLYPURE,INC. $28,647.43 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3.11.92 1453M POWER SYSTEMS $47.45 ENGINE PARTS 145337 PRITCHETT AND ASSOCIATES,INC. $201.W PUBLICATION +46338 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND, $2,121,01 SOILTESTING C.45340 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS"INC. $$4,852.64 ELECTRIC LMOTOR PARTS SERVICES M.O. III- , FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06114/95 POSTING DATE 08/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145341 R&R INSTRUMENTS $82.08 ELECTRIC PARTS 145342 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1.715.43 TRASH REMOVAL 145343 REGISTRAR,A&WMA $750.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145344 REMEDY TEMP $3,899.58 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL SERVICES 145345 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $3,779.87 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145346 RENOLD,INC. $95.19 MECHANICAL PARTS 145347 HOWARD RIDLEY CO. $6,900,00 BUILDING REPAIRS 145348 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $12,139.24 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145349 MILTON RIVERA $13,B44.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 145350 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL,INC. $114.55 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145351 SAFETY CARE,INC. $193.95 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 146352 SARGON ENGINEERING,INC. $16,987.32 ENGINEERING SERVICES 145353 R.CRAIG SCOTT&ASSOC. $10,231.28 LEGAL SERVICES,PERSONNEL 145354 CITY OF SEAL BEACH $362.30 WATER USE 145355 SEIKO INSTRUMENTS $76.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145366 SHURELUCK SALES $8,532.04 TOOLS/HARDWARE 146357 SIGMA CHEMICAL CO. $3669 LAB SUPPLIES m 145358 SIMON&SCHUSTER $54.86 PUBLICATION X 145359 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $401.60 PRE.EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 2 745380 SMItt4EMERV CO. E175.00 SOIL TESTING M.0.7-17.94 145381 SOUTH COAST WATER $376.00 LAB SUPPLIES -1 145362 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON CO. $60.582.97 POWER 145383 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16.933.94 POWER �i 145364 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $4.005.99 NATURAL GAS L71 145365 SOUTH PACIFIC MARBLE&TILE $1.428.16 GROUNDSKEEPING SUPPLIES 145366 SOUTHWEST SCIENTIFIC $927.81 LAB SUPPLIES 145367 SPECIAL PLASTIC SYSTEMS.INC. $940.92 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145M STERLINGART $50.14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145369 SUMMIT STEEL $2,175.69 METAL 145370 SUNSET FORD $273.21 TRUCK PARTS 145371 TAYLOR INDUSTRIAL SOFTWARE $150.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145372 TONYS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $593.48 LOCKS B KEYS 145373 TOSHIBA INTERNATIONAL $76.25 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145374 SO CALIF TRANE SERVICE $4.384.14 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145375 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $2,628.80 TRAVEL SERVICES M.0.6.8-94 145376 TRIBEST VISUAL DISPLAY $446.00 PROJECTOR SCREEN REPAIR 145377 TRUCK PARTS SUPPLY $310.74 TRUCK PARTS 145378 TRUESDAIL LARS $4,732.95 LAB SERVICES 145379 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $2,122.99 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145350 UNISOURCE&IOR BUTLER PAPER $395.30 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145381 DATAVAULTAIS SAFE DEPOSIT CORP. $104.00 SAFE DEPOSIT BOX 145382 VWR SCIENTIFIC $560.67 LAB SUPPLIES 145383 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $718.96 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145384 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $2,647.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145385 VERNE'S PLUMBING 5430.00 PLUMBING SERVICES 145386 VILLAGE NURSERIES $113.41 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OW14195 POSTING DATE 06114M5 WARRANT NO. VENDOR 145387 WATER ENVIRONMENT FED. 8187.25 LAB SUPPLIES 145368 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $57.869.12 CAUSTIC SODA 8 HYPOCHLORIDE M.O.8-12-92 a 4-13-94 145389 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. 6439.73 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145390 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL $243.52 TRUCK PARTS 145391 XEROX CORP. $11,428.57 COPIER LEASES 1,372.NM.62 SUMMARY AMOUNT N1 CONSTR.FUND $5.032.64 02 OPER FUND 2.983.35 92 CAP FAC FUND 38,396.73 N2 CONSTR.FUND 10,646.60 T N3 OPER FUND 30,421.69 X N3 CAP FAC FUND 189.620.35 ._. N3 CONSTR.FUND 10.095.54 W N5 OPER FUND 3.462.41 45 CONSTR.FUND 995.82 N6 OPER FUND 1,430.33 Ud N6 CAP FAC FUND 1,700.00 p� N6 CONSTR.FUND 271.79 07 OPER FUND 3,556.93 97 CAP FAG FUND 142.58 07 CONSTR.FUND 764.86 N11 OPER FUND 17,986.99 011 CAP FAC FUND 2.139.98 NH CONSTR.FUND 337.14 N14 OPER FUND 17,295.25 N586 OPER FUND 2,081.88 0687 OPER FUND 2,652.26 07814 OPER FUND 5.239.14 JT OPER FUND 538.073.30 CORE 270.677.09 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 19.976.94 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 198.842.10 1,312,804.02 EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11. 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A regular joint meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11. 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, was held at the hour of 7:30 p.m., June 28, 1995, at 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California. The Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. . .. ... ... . ...... . . DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Aoorovina 1995-96 fiscal Year budaet call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,809,000 Capital Facilities Fund 10,904,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 0,072.000 TOTAL $33.585.000 DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving the 1995-96 budget call vote: That the District's 1995.96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $53,245,000 Capital Facilities Fund 60,455,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 24,024,000 TOTAL 3137.724.000 DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approvina the 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $65,946,000 Capital Facilities Fund 61,204,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 22,459,000 TOTAL 3149.609.000 DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,415,000 Capital Facilities Fund 14.361,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 5,674,000 TOTAL $33,450.000 DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $12,073,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,473,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 2,964,000 TOTAL $22.5N 00 DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $21,726,000 Capital Facilities Fund 17,604,000 Construction Fund- 1990.92 7,323,000 TOTAL $46.653.000 DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approvina 1995-96 Budaet call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,801,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,920,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 5,054,000 Bond & Interest Fund - 1958 33 000 TOTAL $28.808.000 1 DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budoet call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $2,046,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,511,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 27,000 TOTAL 59.584.000 DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budoet call vole: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $3,521,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,601,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 0 0 TOTAL $13.280.000 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, PENNY KYLE, Secretary of each of 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 certify that the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of minute entries on the meeting of said Boards of Directors on the 28th day of June, 1995. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 28th day of June, 1995. Secretary of t s of Directors of County Sanit ' trots Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 41�01RMS9SF i STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, 1 hereby certify that the Notice and Agenda for the Regular Board Meeting of Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 held on r 19Qrwas//duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the Districts' offices on da 19�.T IN "WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3e*ay of 19Q� Penny Kyleklq6rjftary of each of the Boards of Direc1drs of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 & 14 of Orange County, California 651Fa 27A EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A regular joint meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, was held at the hour of 7:30 p.m., May 24, 1995, at 10644 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California. The Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-025) Actions re Santa Monica Bay Restoration Proiect (SMBRP) eoiderniological survev Authorizing the Districts' participation in the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Districts' participation in the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey, be, and is hereby, authorized. Authorizing the General Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SMBRP and to enter into a contract with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SMBRP; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a contract with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to implement said MOU, and to reimburse the Districts for an amount not to exceed $180,000.00 for costs associated with labor and materials to analyze virus samples and continue in-house efforts during this project period through a Specific Term Employment Agreement, in form approved by General Counsel. Authorizing the General Manager to enter into a six-month Specific Term Employment Agreement for a Laboratory Analyst Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a six-month Specific Term Employment Agreement for a Laboratory Analyst, at a rate not to exceed $25.00 per hour, for a total amount not to exceed $26,000.00. Authorizing the General Manager to enter into additional contracts. as necessary to implement the terms of the MOU Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into additional contracts, as necessary, with no increase in the authorized amount of$180,000.00 to implement the terms of the MOU. STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, PENNY KYLE, Secretary of each of 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 certify that the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of minute entries on the meeting of said Boards of Directors on the 24th day of May, 1995. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of May, 1996. Secretary of tt Boar of Directors of County Sanita ion Di ricts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 J:\WP0001 STORMSl961 m0 96.1 YO15tPIR} f f COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA �^"",........ P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 9272E-8127 c0 b 10844 ELL IS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714) 982-2411 June 23, 1995 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 28, 1995 - 7:30 P.M. DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 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 he held at the above location,time and date. oard Secret' Tentatively-Scheduled Upcoming Meetings: STEERING COMMITTEE - Wednesday,June 28, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. OPERATIONS,MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 5, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. AD HOC COMMITTEE RE SPACE UTILIZATION STUDY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEES - Thursday,July 6, 1995,at 4:30 p.m. (preceding the Planning, Design and Construction Committee) PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE - Thursday,July 6, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. FINANCE,ADMINISTRATWE AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 12, 1995,at 5:30 p.m. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 19, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. STEERING COMMITTEE - Wednesday,July 26, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10S44 ELLIS AVENUE RO so.812, FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 927A J 1]1A196P-2A11 �/ JOINT BOARD AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING DATES Executive Committee Meetings Joint Board Meetings June Jun 21, 1995 Jun 28, 1995 July Jul 19, 1995 Jul 26, 1995 August None Scheduled Aug 23, 1995 September Sep 20, 1995 Sep 27, 1995 October Oct 18, 1995 Oct 25, 1995 November None Scheduled Nov 15, 1995 December None Scheduled Dec 13, 1995 January Jan 17, 1996 Jan 24, 1996 February Feb 21, 1996 Feb 28, 1996 March Mar 20, 1996 Mar 27, 1996 April Apr 17, 1996 Apr 24, 1996 May May 15, 1996 May 22, 1996 June Jun 19, 1996 Jun 26, 1996 EiNrIpN p COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ! A OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 0127,FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92720-8127 c4 �y 10844 ELLIS.FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 4714)962-2411 June 22, 1995 To the Chairman and Members of the Joint Boards of Directors Subject: Board Letter The following is an update on some of the things that are happening at the Districts that are important to staff and management and that I think might be of interest to you. If you have questions on any of the items, please give me a call. New Directors' Orientation and Plant Tour We had fifteen directors attend the orientation and plant tours June 3 and June 17. Thank you for your interest in the operations of the Districts. Enchanter Boat Tour for Directors .. The dates of July 12, 13 and 14, 1995 have been set aside for tours of the Districts' marine monitoring vessel, The Enchanter. The Enchanter IV is a 40-foot wooden hull vessel weighing 15 tons powered by a 671 Detroit diesel, single screw-powered engine. The vessel utilizes Differential G.P.S. and Loran C navigational systems which allow the captain to position the vessel within 10 meters of any given coordinates. Captain Tom Pesich spends a considerable amount of time making the Enchanter IV not only functional but attractive. The General Manager is extending an invitation to interested Board members to view our contract vessel, the Enchanter IV, and take an approximately three-hour cruise. Weekday or weekend days could be arranged depending upon the number of Directors interested and their schedules. Three to four Directors could be accommodated at a time. The cruise would depart from the Balboa Boat Basin in Newport Harbor mid moming and return around noon. Several Directors have indicated interest, and I would like to encourage as many of you as can make it to take advantage of this opportunity. Please contact my office if you are interested and indicate which date is most convenient. Los Alamitos County Water District Wants Representation on District No. 3 Board Joe Martin, President of the Los Alamitos County Water District, will be addressing the District No. 3 Directors following the regular meeting of the Joint Boards on June 28 with the intent of the Water District seeking representation on our Boards. Attached to the agenda item on this subject are copies of Mr. Martin's most recent letters as well as our original response. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1 Chairman and Members of IWAA EEUS AVENUE the Joint Boards of Directors ?o.CAUFO o ` / wuNiuN vA4Er.W 2-2411 A 82128�' Page 2 of n+u ssz.zan June 22, 1995 Green Acres Project Water Orange County Water District Green Acres water is used for various processes throughout the treatment plants. The agreement between the two agencies includes a provision for pricing revisions. For the years 1993 and 1994, the cost of the water was $114/acre-foot (AF) and $89/AF, respectively. For the period May 1, 1994 through April 30, 1995, we were been billed by OCWD for 5,049.9 AF of water at $150/AF. However, the water price for that period has been revised to $1141AF, resulting in a $36/AF credit, or$181,796.40, which will be applied to our account towards the future purchase of Green Acres Water. We have also been advised that the water price for the period May 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996 will be $89/AF, a considerable savings. Savings on the Purchase of Natural Gas The Districts use natural gas to supplement digester gas in the Central Power Generation facilities. Natural gas has historically been purchased from Southern California Gas Company (The Gas Company). Due to the deregulation of the natural gas industry, natural gas is now available on the market for less than it is available through The Gas Company. In order to take advantage of the savings, the Operations staff solicited bids from private suppliers for the purchase of natural gas. Sealed bids were received on May 23, 1995, for the supply of natural gas for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. The low bid was a discounted price of$0.0259/million BTUs below the monthly Natural Gas Intelligence Index price. The low bid price averaged 20% below the unit price paid for natural gas to The Gas Company during the 1994 calendar year, which should result in estimated savings of$150,000 per year. District 3 Wins a Big Onel The Techite Pipe trial has ended, successfully, after more than eight weeks before the jury. On Wednesday, June 14, the jury awarded District 3$147,500 in compensatory damages and $6,445,000 in punitive damages. Attached is a copy of the press release prepared by General Counsel on the award. Ed Hodges, who spent many days in the court room assisting Counsel, deserves much credit for representing the District in this case. We have not heard whether or not there may be an appeal. State of California Constitution Revision Commission Attached is a report from CASA on the status of the Constitution Revision Commission most recent meeting. Supervisor Bergeson's restructuring proposal, Orange County 2001, was presented and the Commission will be reviewing it during their meetings in June. We will keep you posted on the proceedings of this Commission, which could have an impact on this agency. Also attached is a newsletter from the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers outlining other aspects of the Commission's efforts. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 0 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA Chairman and Members of +uaAA Eua AVENUE vo 6ox e+n �J the Joint Boards of Directors FOUNTAIN VaLE .CAufoFNiA W72e-e127 Page 3 of 7 7141662-2415 June 22, 1995 Good As Gold Recovery Notes Gary Streed reported that on Monday, June 19, $20,086,771.47 was deposited into our account by the County, making a total recovery to date of approximately$316,044,801, or approximately 80% of our investment. Every little bit helps. Independent Report on Year 11 Ocean Monitorina Program RFP At the June 21 Executive Committee meeting, the members were addressed by Dr. Jeff Cross, Executive Director of SCCWRP,who was the leader of a panel that reviewed the Districts' RFP for Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program, as well as the proposals received, and the allegations made by Kinnetig Laboratories. The report from the panel is attached. Board Agenda Mailings Included with this month's package is a questionnaire which resulted from a cost-saving measure suggested by one of the Alternate Directors. If it is feasible, we would like to mail the complete agenda packages to only the Active Directors and provide copies of the Notice and Agenda Listing to the Alternates. When an Active Director knows he cannot attend a Board meeting, the package can then be given to the Alternate Director. Please give us your thoughts by filling out and returning the questionnaire. Continuing Investigation into the 1994 Fatal Accident at Plant No. 2 Terri Josway, Safety and Emergency Response Manager, reports that a Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) was conducted by the State of California, Department of Health Services on the fatal accident at Plant No. 2. The purpose of the FACE Report is to help the employer identify conditions that contributed to the fatality and recommend actions to prevent a recurrence. The report was prepared without input from Districts' staff, and is replete with technical errors concerning the design and the operation of the facilities. Therefore, the recommendations are based on inaccurate information. Staff will be preparing a rebuttal letter to the Department of Health, the agency responsible for the preparation of the FACE Report. "A Really Big Catch" During the routine cleaning of clogged water diffuser ports on the 120-inch ocean outfall, the port cleaning contractor discovered a 400' x 20' gill net on the Rap gate structure and removed R. We're glad that was one catch that got awayl Annexation of Crystal Cove State Park Historic District to District 5 On the agenda is a District 5 item to approve an agreement with the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, providing for annexing the historic district of Crystal Cove Stale Park, resulting in fees totaling $193,460. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA Chairman and Members of +peas Ewa AVENM op ep.e+27 the Joint Boards of Directors fONNINN VG CLIR 11 9212 M sezan Page 4 of 7 n+ne June 22, 1995 Engineerina Department Implements "Partnering" The Engineering Department will be using the Partnering concept with the contractor, Margate Construction Co., on the Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2. Partnering is a team-building process designed to ensure that the construction project is a positive, ethical, win-win experience for both owner and contractor. Partnering, as a positive process, is a team agreement that aims to get the parties involved with the project to let go of their animosities towards one another and work together on the basis of personal trust. The Partnering process is a facilitated workshop in which the parties come together to create a way of working together as a team. We expect the benefits to include reduced time and cost growth by keeping the project on time and on budget. We also expect a reduction of the possibility of construction claims and litigation. Energy Conservation The Districts' Operations and Engineering departments are working with Southern California Edison (SCE)on a joint energy conservation project. The SCE program "Envest" proposes to study, design and construct energy conservation measures at the Districts'treatment plants. The Operations' staff have identified about 800 KW of energy conservation measures that appear to meet the SCE criteria to forth a project. The 800 KW savings would equal about 7% of the present treatment plant electricity usage. Staff is continuing to negotiate with SCE on potential contract details. Continuous H-S Scrubber Sulfide Monitoring The Operations Department is working with the Air Quality Division to secure a research permit from the South Coast Air Quality Management District to perform research on a continuous monitoring and control system for hydrogen sulfide. The monitoring and control system would provide automatic operation of the scrubbers that are presently manually operated. Ad Hoc Committee re Soace Utilization Study The Ad Hoc Committee meeting will be held on Thursday, July 6, 1995, after the PDC Committee. 1995-96 Budgets As you know, the budget format has changed this year, resulting in a one-volume document. As a cost-savings measure, we are not going to mail this document with the agenda package but will have them available at the meeting for those Directors that do not have one. Those Directors who are members of the PDC, OMTS, FAHR and Executive Committees have already received copies of the budget, and we're asking that you bring them to the Board meeting. Enclosed is a blue sheet that lists the revisions made to the original budget. If you do not have any of the revisions, they will be available for you at the meeting. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS W ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA Chairman and Members of 10244EWE AVENUE the Joint Boards of Directors P.0.SO%B1E] fOUHINN V1lLEY.GLIFOPNIG 82129.E127 Page 5 of 7 0rnee24?+11 June 22, 1995 Baker-Gisler Interceptor Update Blake Anderson addressed the Costa Mesa City Council meeting on June 5, apologized for the incoveniences the citizens have experienced and explained the changes that will be made to minimize the impacts through completion of the construction. He also gave a heads-up on the planned construction of the Fairview Relief Sewer, scheduled for late 1996, and promised that the problems that have occurred on the Baker-Gisler job would not be repeated. He handed out postage-paid Citizen's Comment Cards and asked those people with concems and problems to fill them out and mail them to him. To date, we haven't received any response. The construction of the Baker-Gisler Interceptor in Costa Mesa is nearing completion. We have been directed by City staff to stop construction at the intersection of Baker and Fairview for the duration of the Orange County Fair, and to pave and stripe Fairview and Baker. This is being done, however, work is not totally complete in that area and the contractor will have to return after the Fair is over. During the Fair, the contractor will be finishing up some work on the east side of Fairview along the Paularino Channel, out of traffic. Request by Owner for Waiver of Connection Fee in District 2 Staff is working with General Counsel to verify the facts of Mr. Jerome P. Greubel's request for �..: demolition credit for a parcel in the City of Orange. Enclosed is a memo dated June 8, 1995 that details what is known to dale. General Counsel has requested staff to further investigate the title transactions to try to determine the actual date of title transfer. When all of the facts are received, General Counsel will report the findings to the Directors of District 2 at the next regular Board Meeting. Revisions to the SAWPA Agreement or. "The Devil is in the Details' There's a neighbor agency of ours in the upper portion of the Santa Ana River Watershed that provides regional water quality protection projects that serve the west ends of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Their activities are important to us because some of the effluent that goes into the river up there eventually comes out of the laps of the homes and industries down here by way of our groundwater. For this reason, their interests are also our interests—and vice versa. The agency is the Santa Ana Watershed Protection Authority(SAWPA)which is a five- party JPA made up of five water agencies (including the Orange County Water District). The Sanitation Districts and SAWPA have a 23-year-old agreement in place that gives SAWPA the right to purchase up to 30 million gallons per day (MGD) of treatment capacity within our facilities. SAWPA has purchased 8 MGD of treatment capacity and uses most of it. At times they exceed their treatment capacity rights. They also own 30 MGD worth of transport capacity in the Santa Ana River Interceptor(SARI) line that carries their wastewater first through two branches within Riverside and San Bernardino County and then through a single line in Orange County to our treatment facilities in Huntington Beach. Salty industrial and ground water reclamation brines were originally intended to be discharged into the line to prevent their reaching the upper portions of the Santa Ana River and thus impacting the quality of our drinking water. Today, these wastewaters, plus a large component of domestic wastewater, come through the SARI line. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNN Chairman and Members of roeaa 0=81VEMJF aa.aaxe�V the Joint Boards of Directors rourrtow vauer.rsurpen.W4.� Page 6 of 7 nu me 11 June 22, 1995 Money is todays topic. The devilish details are how much does SAWPA owe us and when should they have paid us? We have been haggling with SAWPA for over three years over these issues. To bring this issue to a head, in late 1994 we invoiced them for everything owed us under the strictest reading of the 1972 agreement. That strategy worked. Over the last six months we've intensified our talks. SAWPA's Rows to the SARI line have continued to increase and, according to the 1972 agreement, they are now obligated to buy an additional treatment capacity increment of 5 MGD. That's expensive. Under the terms of the 1972 agreement, todays cost for Capital buy-in is over$13 million. Other charges Calculated under a complex formula for operating costs add more than $200,000 to the amount they now owe us. However, SAWPA is in no financial position to pay this amount because they are saving money for a new regional wastewater treatment plant they plan to build with the help of state money. Also, they don't need a full 5 MGD increment. We believe that 1MGD is enough and is fair. We also believe that it's time for a new agreement that makes capital and operating costs charged SAWPA to be equitable with dischargers within our service area. SAWPA doesn't want to buy 5 MGD. They don't even want to buy 1 MGD. They argue that as soon as the new 8 MGD regional plant is built four years from now, they will have far less need for the 8 MGD of treatment capacity in our system that they now own. I might note that their lack of need will only be temporary because they will eventually need all of the 8MGD rapacity— k. ) and more—according to their own flow projections. But, today, Cash flow is killing them. They want to reserve all the cash they can to build the regional plant. So they're pushing for some sort of a capacity leasing arrangement. We want to be fair and equitable with all of our customers, whether they are within our service area or within a contract service area. And we also want to be cognizant of what is truly affordable by a public agency. But we also want to insist that everyone does his fair share. Part of SAWPA's dilemma springs from having insufficient user fees collected from the west-end communities that will eventually benefit from the regional treatment plant. While we are understanding and flexible, we are not patsies. We continue to meet with their staff to resolve our differences and to develop a proposal that the Sanitation Districts' Boards of Directors can consider. Another meeting is scheduled for July 7. I'll keep you updated. Incident Commander Training Attached is a June 20 memo from Ed Hodges on the 16-hour training for incident commanders for responding to Hazardous Materials spills that he attended. Since January 1993, the Districts' Safety and Emergency Response Division has been training staff in hazardous materials emergency response and management. The goal is to train all employees who may be involved in hazardous materials incidents to be trained in accordance with Fed/OSHA and Cal/OSHA regulations. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS At ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA r Chairman and Members of ,oerr ELLIS AVENUE the Joint Boards of Directors PEO 99e 9,2] FOUNTAIN VALLEY.LAOf99N1q 92]20L912] Page 7 of 7 992zA11 June 22, 1995 1 want to thank you for your comments regarding my Board Letter. If you want additional information on any of the items I've addressed in this letter, or past letters, please give me or Jean a call at 7141962-2411. Respectfully, Donald F. McIntyre General Manager DFM:jt J 1VrP 10DFM ANO.LIR 895 Attachments ' L AL/ %MffCf WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM L O S A L A M I T 0 S C O U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T March 9 , 1995 Mr. John Cox, Joint Chairman County Sanitation Districts of Orange County - PO Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear-Mr. Cox: The Los Alamitos County Water District is the sewage collection agency for Rossmoor, Los Alamitos and portions of Seal Beach. Our sewage is transported and treated by your District. We are interested in representation on your District's Board. We are requesting to address the Board. Please advise us of a convenient date when we can be on the Agenda. If you have any questions , please contact our General Manager, Sandra Montez at (310)431-2223. Thanks for your assistance in arranging for this Agenda item. Sincerely, �✓�� / /A ca oseld' pMartin/ President �- 3243 Keteua Avenue • P.O. Box 542 • Los Alamitos, Callfornia90720 • 310431 -2223 -BOARD OF DIRECTORS- ARLYSS M. BURKETT ART DE BOLT JOSEPH C MARTIN WILLIAM a POE JACK W. ROSENTHAL Legal Councit Rourke,Woodwff&Spreblin Engineer: Boyle Engineenng Core COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ' OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714)962-2411 April 4, 1995 Joseph C. Martin, President Los Alamitos County Water District 3243 Katella Avenue Post Office Box 542 Los Alamitos, CA 90720 Dear Mr. Martin: Thank you for your March 9, 1995 letter expressing interest in having a representative of your agency sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. Our General Counsel previously reviewed this subject and issued an opinion as evidenced in the v.✓ enclosed copy of a memorandum dated November 2, 1993. County Sanitation District No. 3 was originally organized and is presently structured under Section 4730 of the Health & Safety Code of the County Sanitation District Act, and therefore membership is limited to representatives from each City and each Sanitary District within County Sanitation District No. 3 boundaries, together with the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors. The present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Board of Directors of District No. 3. If the Board of Directors of District No. 3 wants to consider reorganization, a Resolution of Intent must be adopted to establish the body in accordance with Section 4730.1. A time and place must be established to hear objections to the proposal and thereafter, the intent must be published and a hearing conducted. After the hearing, the Board may order the governing body (Joint Board of Directors) to be constituted in the reorganized manner. However, you should be aware that the County Sanitation Districts in the past year have made some major changes in the makeup of the Boards of Directors. In an attempt to reduce costs and streamline the Districts, the Directors recommended that each city have one representative for all Districts. Previously, every city within a district was represented. This resulted in as many as five directors from each city because there were five districts within a city's boundaries. Every city but two now has only one Board member and the number of Directors has been reduced from 42 to 30. COUNTY SANITATION DISTPIM d ORANGE COUM, CAIIFORNIA 1 WAA EWE AVENUE Joseph C. Martin oo.E0..127 Page Two rtu A'VAW,CAUMAOA92r - Aprll4, 1995 mu9azzAn If, after reading the above, you still wish to pursue representation on the County Sanitation District No. 3 Board, please give me a call and we can discuss it further. . Sincerely, Donald F. McIntyre General Manager DFM:jt wpdmVmWmZ4049s.11 Enclosure c: General Counsel Directors, District No. 3 Cecilia L. Age, Cypress George Brown, Seal Beach John Collins, Fountain Valley Burnie Dunlap, Brea James Flora, La Habra Don R. Griffin, Buena Park Victor Leipzig, Huntington Beach Wally Linn, La Palma Pat McGuigan, Santa Ana Margie Rice, Midway City Sanitary Dist. Julie Sa, Fullerton Sal A. Sapien, Stanton Sheldon S. Singer, Garden Grove Sanitary Dist. Roger Stanton, Board of Supervisors Charles Sylvia, Los Alamitos Bob Zemel, Anaheim L-J \t/ Mn= WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM L 0 S A L A M I T 0 S C 0 U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T June 8, 1995 Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 Dear Mr. McIntyre: The Board of Directors of the Los Alamitos County Water District requests approval to address the Board of Directors of District No. 3, after your normal June 28, 1995, Board meeting. Because our District encompasses a portion of Orange County, City of Seal Beach, City of Cypress, and the whole of the City of Los Alamitos, we express interest in having a representative of the District sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. We look forward to confirmation of this request for our attendance. Sincerely, L2a�� C. Martin President .. 3243 Kete lla ave npe • P.O. Box 542 • Los Alamitos, California 90720 • 310 431-2223 -BOARD OF DIRECTORS- ARLYSS M. BURKETT ART BE BOLT JOSEPH C. MARTIN WILLIAM C POE JACK W ROSENTHAL Legal Councit Rourkq Woodruff&Spradlln Engineer: Boyle Engineering Corp June 15, 1995 n I `--% PRESS RELEASE b> C7 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE SUBJECT: JURY AWARDS $6,592,570.00 TO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Contact: Thomas L. Woodruff General Counsel (714) 558-7000 SANTA ANA, CA.—On Wednesday, June 14, an Orange County jury awarded $147,570.00 in compensatory damages and $6,445,000.00 in punitive damages to County Sanitation District No. 3 in the action entitled County Sanitation District No. 3 vs. Amoco Chemical Company, Untied Technologies Corporation, et al.. Orange County Superior Court Case No. 722816. The Orange County Sanitation Districts are the third largest wastewater treatment agency on the west coast, and are responsible for collecting, treating and safely disposing of wastewater and its residuals for 2.1 million residents and businesses in metropolitan Orange County. This was an action for products liability, negligence, breach of warranty and fraud arising out of the use of the Techite pipe invented, designed, manufactured, tested, assembled and sold by United Technologies to the Sanitation District in 1971 for use in the Westminster Avenue Force Main project in the cities of Westminster and Seal Beach. The District claimed that the Techite pipe was defective and unsafe for its intended purpose and, as a result, the defects caused the pipe to deteriorate and break, thus allowing sewage to spill. The Jury found that United Technologies defrauded the District by intentionally suppressing adverse technical information about their pipe. District Chairman, Sal Sapien, Council Member of the City of Stanton, expressed great satisfaction with the verdict noting, "Due to the diligence and excellence of our legal team, the replacement of the pipe is one expense that will not have to be bome unnecessarily by the Orange County taxpayers.'On May 24, 1995, the District awarded a contract to Albert W. Davies, Inc. In the amount of$3,760,000 to replace the entire 14,000 foot sewer line. County Sanitation District No. 3 was represented by its General Counsel Thomas L. Woodruff and the Law Firm of Rourke, Woodruff 8 and Spradlin, with Special Counsel David R. Griffin of Bakersfield. ### CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of SANITATION AGENCIES 925 L Street,Suite 1400 Saa enta,CA 95814 TEL:016)446-0388-FAX(916)448-4808 June 9, 1995 TO: CASA MEMBER AGENCIES FROM: Mike Dillon, Executive Director Christina Dillon, Lobbyist RE: CONSTrrLMON REVISION COMMISSION The Constitution Revision Commission met in May for a two-day hearing on "Contracting For Governmental Services," "Local Finance" and "Loral Government Reorganization." As we have reported previously, the Commission is having difficulty zeroing-in on specific revision proposals to submit to the legislature in August. Senator Lucy Hillea, the author of the bill that formed the Commission, encouraged the Chairman to conduct "less informational" meetings and begin the deliberation process. Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill and Judge Roger Warren expressed concern that if the Commission did not begin developing actual draft language soon for proposals, a mere skeleton document would be sent to the legislature, lacking tight policy wording. Lastly, one Commissioner begged Senator Rillea to request a time extension for the Commission, to which Chairman Hauck retorted, "No. We're going to adhere to this schedule." The Commission has decided to develop during June, three or four "packages" of revision proposals, wherein all state and local government financing and restructuring elements within each package would be complementary. Three "packages" will be placed on the ballot and the voters will select one of the three to implement statewide. The discussion regarding contracting out, featured four panelists, including Bill Eggers of the Reason Foundation's Privatization Center. (The Reason Center is "a nonpartisan, nonprofit, public policy research and educational organization dedicated to advancing the principles of a free society.") Eggers made two separate references to a wastewater treatment plant and a sludge processing plant in Indianapolis which, by using contracting out and cost analysis, "saved the city 44%" and "reduced 79 employees" respectively. Said Eggers, "Privatization is not always going to be the best option, but right now public agencies are insulated and there is no hammer for quality." During the local finance discussion, Joel Fox of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, announced the development of the "Protect Proposition 13 Act," which will more than likely be slated for the November ballot in 1996. The proposition u would ban the use of assessments, except those that directly benefit property, and "would be limited to only those used traditionally to finance the capital costs or f maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, or flood •/ control, drainage systems and vector control." Further, it redefines all other new assessments as "special taxes" and requires a 2/3rds vote to levy them, and requires majority voter approval of utility user taxes and other local taxes placed in the general fund. Finally, the group was given a copy of "Orange County 2001" which is former State Senator and now Supervisor'Bergeson's answer to the Orange County Bail-Out. The Commission is being asked to give serious consideration to her radical local government restructuring proposal. Specifically, Orange County 2001 would: * Eliminate the Board of Supervisors and replace it with a single elected "county Mayor, who would manage the cost-effective delivery of regional services throughout the geographic county." * Establishes a county Regional Services Authority, who advises and assists the County Mayor in providing these services. Authority board includes 10 members from the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities, one each from four specific community groups or organizations (ie: United Way, Grand Jurors Association, etc.). * The Mayor shall operate four administrative divisions, including Health and Human Services, Public Facilities, Public Protection, and Transportation, with guidance from the Authority board. * "Sanitation and Waste Management - The Orange County Sanitation Districts (OCSan) and several other independent sanitation districts and water districts administer the area's sewage treatment and collection systems. OC 2001 would consolidate these separate districts into a single department within the Division of Public Facilities — the department could be competitively bid to OCSan or a private firm (as is done by the City of Indianapolis). The Waste Management function of this department would also be put to bid with the current Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD) expected to compete for the area's hazardous waste collection program and three area landfills. Sanitary districts held $185 MN in reserves in FY 1994-95, with $29 MN in salary/benefit and directors' expenses. They collected $79 MN in user fees and $3.2 MN in property taxes. OC 2001 assumes that these expenses could be reduced by 40% (similar to that which occurred in Indianapolis) and estimates a $26 MN savings with consolidation." The Commission left the "Bergeson Proposal" open, and are expected to revisit it during the two-day meeting next week in Sacramento. minl- NEWS Dedicated to Excellence in Municipal Financial Management June1995 Constitutional Revision Commission Discusses Finance CCRC Newsletter Impose sanctions if a balanced accountability and understandabil- April 1995 budget is not passed by the con- ity. The commission also discussed stitutional deadline. the current configuration of local The Constitutional Revision Com- The current constitutional prohi- agencies and their duties and respon- mission has been meeting regularly bition against incurring mul- sibilities,and reviewed the con- to submit a preliminary report to the tiple-year debt without a vote of straints that interfere with the alloca- Legislature and the Governor by the people would be strength- tan of state and local responsibili- their August deadline. The discus- ened. ties. The following is a list of op. sion recently has focused on local The vote requirement for the tions discussed: government finance and the state/ budget would be changed to a local relationship which the Com- simple majority,but the two- Options for Changing the Structure mission recognizes as being"one of thirds vote requirement for tax offmcal Government the most difficult tasks assigned to increases would be retained thecommission." The objective: Maximize account- LocalGoveroment ability by increasing local control Following are highlights from a re- Reorganization and Fiscal Powers ofprograms and resources. cent Commission meeting and de- tails of some of the assumptions that The commission discussed the The only elected offices for coun- framedthediscumion. structure of local government and ties would be boards of supery i- modifications that could increase Please see Constitutional Revision,page 3 The State Budget and FiscalProcesses - The objective: Increaseflexibiliry in the budget-making process. ` i What's Inside .. Min News is It is importantto reconnect the always seeking budget process to the people. input from all Presidents Message................ ................2 Provide foratwo-year budget CSMFO a Sop7alk.....................................................3 and create a process for periodic Spotlight......................................................4 members on T reconciliation of the two years. GFOA Legislative Agenda ..........................5 topics in any ¢ Strengthen the requirements for a ? In the Courts................................................5 department balanced budget so that the Leg- upcoming Conferences ..............................6 section. " islature would be required to ? Matting Notices ...........................................6 ass-and the Governor to si a = MPthers Profder................enricas.................7 P sign- Members' Professional Services.................? It's yQllf ;• balanced budget. In addition,re- Capitol Action.........................................Add newsletter.! quire that each budget contain a prudent reserve and impose a limit on the amount of debt that may be incurred by the state. California Society of Municipal Finance Officers CSMFO Mini-News June 1995 Constitutional Revision Commission, Continued property tax,would require ap- proval by a majority vote of the son,sheriffs,and district attor- cal reorganizations by pooling all people. neys. All other officials would be funds received by all local entities Taxes used for specific purposes appointed by the board of supervi- within each of the 58 counties and would require a majority vote; sors so that it is elm that the requiring local officials to appor- taxes used for general or unidenti- board is the accountable body. tion local responsibilities and rev- fied activities would require a Provide the county chief adminis- enues based on local priorities two-thirds vote. It was also sug- trative officer(CAO)with powers within a specified time period. gested that each tax proposal be similar to those of a city manager. - An alternative would be to allow judged with a representation Consider reducing the number of for a local reorganization process, test—those who would pay the tax counties,even though changing allowing local communities to es- are ones who should vote on the boundaries maybe complex. The tablish their own charters. respective tax increase proposal. commission considered changing The property tax rate could be the current requirement for the Options for Changing the Local changed by a two-thirds vote of creation of a new county from a Finance System the people. majority of those in the new TerminateMello-Roos financing county and a majority of those in The objective: Increase account- and benefitassessmenn ortighten the remainder of the old county to ability and flexibility at the local the rules on the proliferation of a majority of those who would re- level. benefitasae ssments and other side in the new county. mechanisms that end-run the pro- Extend charter city revenue au- CeSS• The commission considered an al- thority to counties;and all county- Give local agencies the ability to temative that would stimulate lo- and city-imposed taxes,other than levy and allocate the property tax. ShopTalk ElectricludustryRestructuring that before any final decisions are The PoolCo model proposes cre- made,a number of major technical ation of a pool in which all generators In April 1994,the California Public and policy issues must be resolved deliver electricity and from which Utilities Commission(PUC)an- within the PUC. In addition,the userspurchase electricity. Electricity nounced that it intends to"deregu- California Legislature has made it prices would be based upon frequent late"California's electricity services clear that it intends to participate in (hourly)auctions based upon the market. This article discusses the any restructuring program ultimately prices generators would bid to sell to changes being considered and major created. the pool and the demand for electric. issues. Next month,we'll discuss ity by users. All users would pay the likely impacts on municipalities and Two Maio Models same price for buying electricity from League of California Cities lobbying The two most predominant re- the pool. The PoolCo model envi- strategies, structuring proposals am"direct ac- sions the opportunity for direct access cess"and"PoolCo." In direct access, between generators and users as an Background customers would enter into bilateral option to buying and selling within The primary reason given by the contracts directly with sellers(or gen- the pool. The PoolCo model would PUC to deregulate California's elec- emtors)of electricity. Generators be applied to all users at the same tricity services market is to reduce could be a traditional utility or an in- time. the cost of electricity in California. dependent power producer.The price Direct access is favored by The PUC proposal stimulated consid- would be negotiated between the user PG&E and was proposed in the emble debate,discussion,and alter- and generator.The direct access PUC's original Bluebook proposal. native proposals. While the original model would be phased in overtime, PoolCo is favored by Southern Cal; PUC proposal was to be implemented with large users incorporated into the fomia Edison and San Diego Gas ah✓ in January 1995,it has become clear system first and smaller users later. Please see ShopTalk, next page Page 3 4 CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of SANITATION AGENCIES 925LStr.t,SWW1400 Seaame.W,CA95814 TEL:(916)446-0388-FAx:(916)448-4808 June 9, 1995 TO: CASA MEMBER AGENCIES FROM: Mike Dillon, Executive Director Christina Dillon, Lobbyist RE: CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION The Constitution Revision Commission met in May for a two-day hearing on "Contracting For Governmental Services," "Local Finance" and "Local Government Reorganization." As we have reported previously, the Commission is having difficulty zeroing-in on specific revision proposals to submit to the legislature in August. Senator Lucy Rillea, the author of the bill that formed the Commission, encouraged the Chairman to conduct "less informational" meetings and begin the deliberation process. Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill and Judge Roger Warren expressed concern that if the Conunission did not begin developing actual draft language soon for proposals, a mere skeleton document would be sent to the legislature, lacking tight policy wording. Lastly, one Commissioner begged Senator Rillea to request a time extension for the Commission, to which Chairman Hauck retorted, "No. We're going to adhere to this schedule." The Commission has decided to develop during June, three or four "packages" of revision proposals, wherein all state and local government financing and restructuring elements within each package would be complementary. Three "packages" will be placed on the ballot and the voters will select one of the three to implement statewide. The discussion regarding contracting out, featured four panelists, including Bill Eggers of the Reason Foundation's Privatization Center. (The Reason Center is "a nonpartisan, nonprofit, public policy research and educational organization dedicated to advancing the principles of a free society.") Eggers made two separate references to a wastewater treatment plant and a sludge processing plant in Indianapolis which, by using contracting out and cost analysis, "saved the city 44%" and "reduced 79 employees" respectively. Said Eggers, "Privatization is not always going to be the best option, but right now public agencies are insulated and there is no hammer for quality." During the local finance discussion, Joel Fox of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, announced the development of the "Protect Proposition 13 Act," which will more than likely be slated for the November ballot in 1996. The proposition would ban the use of assessments, except those that directly benefit property, and "would be limited to only those used traditionally to finance the capital costs or maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, or flood control, drainage systems and vector control." Further, it redefines all other new assessments as "special taxes" and requires a 2/3rds vote to levy them, and requires majority voter approval of utility user taxes and other local taxes placed in the general fund. Finally, the group was given a copy of "Orange County 2001" which is former State Senator and now Supervisor Bergeson's answer to the Orange County Bail-Out. The Commission is being asked to give serious consideration to her radical local government restructuring proposal. Specifically, Orange County 2001 would: * Eliminate the Board of Supervisors and replace it with a single elected "county Mayor, who would manage the cost-effective delivery of regional services throughout the geographic county." * Establishes a county Regional Services Authority, who advises and assists the County Mayor in providing these services. Authority board includes 10 members from the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities, one each from four specific community groups or organizations (ie: United Way, Grand Jurors Association, etc.). * The Mayor shall operate four administrative divisions, including Health and Human Services, Public Facilities, Public Protection, and Transportation, with guidance from the Authority board. * "Sanitation and Waste Management - The Orange County Sanitation Districts (OCSan) and several other independent sanitation districts and water districts administer the area's sewage treatment and collection systems. OC 2001 would consolidate these separate districts into a single department within the Division of Public Facilities -- the department could be competitively bid to OCSan or a private firm (as is done by the City of Indianapolis). The Waste Management function of this department would also be put to bid with the current Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD) expected to compete for the area's hazardous waste collection program and three area landfills. Sanitary districts held $185 MN in reserves in FY 1994-95, with $29 MN in salary/benefit and directors' expenses. They collected $79 MN in user fees and $3.2 MN in property taxes. OC 2001 assumes that these expenses could be reduced by 40% (similar to that which occurred in Indianapolis) and estimates a $26 MN savings with consolidation." The Commission left the 'Bergeson Proposal" open, and are expected to revisit it during the two-day meeting next week in Sacramento. mini- NEws- Dedicated to Excellence in Municipal Financial Management June 1995 Constitutional Revision Commission Discusses Finance CCRC Newsletter Impose sanctions if a balanced accountability and understandabil- April1995 budget is not passed by the con- ity. The commission also discussed stitutional deadline. the current configuration of local The Constitutional Revision Com- The current constitutional prohi- agencies and their duties and respon- mission has been meeting regularly bition against incurring mul- sibilities,and reviewed the con- to submit a preliminary report to the tiple-year debt without a vote of straints that interfere with the alloca- Legislature and the Governor by the people would be strength- Lion of state and local responsibili- their August deadline. Thediscus- ened. ties. The following is a list of op- sion recently has focused on local The vote requirement for the tionsdiscussed: government finance and the state/ budget would be changed to a local relationship which the Com- simple majority,but the two- Options for Changing the Structure `...t mission recognizes as being"one of thirds vote requirement for tax of Local Govemment the most difficult tasks assigned to increases would be retained thecommission." The objective: Maximize account- IAWGoverument ability by increasing local control Following are highlights from a re- Reorganirition andFuualPowers afprograms and resources. cent Commission meeting and de- tails of some of the assumptions that The commission discussed the The only elected offices for coun- framed the discussion. structure of local government and ties would be boards of supervi- modifications that could increase Please sit Constitutional Revision,page 3 The State Budget and Fiscal Processes •w:r;:=: w , :�:::-r.�:=.�:.,..e.._. - . The objective: Inereaseffexibility ? y in the budget-making process. t What's Inside .. Mini-News is It is important to reconnect the always seeking budget process to the people. input from all Provide for a two-year budget President's Message...................................2 CSMFO and create a process for periodic ShopTalk.....................................................3 P p Spotlight......................................................4 members on 1 reconciliation of the two years. GFOA Legislative Agenda ..........................5 topics in any ! Strengthen the requirements for a In the Courts................................................5 department y balanced budget so that the Leg- Upcoming Conferences..............................6 section. islature would be required to Meeing Notices ...........................................8 pass-and Governor to si n " Up the Ladder.............................................7 P B -it Members Professional Services.................7 It's ygltf •• balanced budget. In addition,re- Capitol Action.........................................Ada newsletted quire that each budget contain a _ prudent reserve and impose a 4 limit on the amount of debt that may be incurred by the state. -. ,.'_.',cc.�t. -•:c:,;:..,-=x•.-�� .-r .,:�:-,:cc u .. California Society of Municipal Finance Officers CSMFO Mini-News June 1995 Constitutional Revision Commission, Continued property tax,would require ap- proval by a majority vote of the sors,sheriffs,and district attor- cal reorganizations by pooling all people. l� neys. All other officials would be funds received by all local entities Taxes used for specific purposes appointed by the board of supervi- within each of the 58 counties and would require a majority vote; sors so that it is clear that the requiring local officials to appor- taxes used for general or unidenti- board is the accountable body. tion local responsibilities and rev- fied activities would require a Provide the county chief adminis- enues based on local priorities two-thirds vote. It was also sug- trative officer(CAO)with powers within a specified time period. gested that each tax proposal be similar to those of a city manager. - An alternative would be to allow judged with a representation Consider reducing the number of for a local reorganization process, test—those who would pay the tax counties,even though changing al lowing local communities to es- are ones who should vote on the boundaries maybe complex. The tablish their own charters. respective tax increase proposal. commission considered changing The property tax rate could be the current requirement forthe Options forChangingthe Local changed by a two-thirds vote of creation of a new county from a Finance System the people. majority ofthose in the new Terminate Mello-Roos financing county and a majority of those in The objective: Increase account- and benefit assessments ortighten the remainder of the old county to ability and Jlezibiliry at the local the rules on the proliferation of a majority of those who would re- level. benefit assessments and other side in the new county. mechanisms that end-run the pro- Extend charter city revenue au- cess• The commission considered an al- thoriry to counties;and all county- Give local agencies the ability to temative that would stimulate lo- and city-imposed taxes,other than levy and allocate the property tax. ShopTaik ElectriclndustryRe stmeturing that before any final decisions are The PoolCo model proposes cm- made,a number of major technical ation of a pool in which all generators In April 1994,the California Public and policy issues must be resolved deliver electricity and from which Utilities Commission(PUC)an. within the PUC. In addition,the users purchase electricity. Electricity nounced that it intends to"deregu- California Legislature has made it prices would be based upon frequent late"California's electricity services clear that it intends to participate in (hourly)auctions based upon the market. This article discusses the any restructuring program ultimately prices generators would bid to sell to changes being considered and major created. the pool and the demand for electric- issues. Next month,we'll discuss ity by users. All users would pay the likely impacts on municipalities and Two Main Models same price for buying electricity from League of California Cities lobbying The two most predominant re- the pool. The PoolCo model envi- strategies. structuring proposals am"direct ac- sions the opportunity for direct access cess"and"PoolCo." In direct access, between generators and users as an Background customers would enter into bilateral option to buying and selling within The primary reason given by the contracts directly with sellers(or gen. the pool. The PooICO model would PUC to deregulate California's elec- erators)of electricity. Generators be applied to all users at the same tricity services market is to reduce could be a traditional utility or an in- time. the cost of electricity in California. dependent power producer.The price Direct access is favored by The PUC proposal stimulated consid- would be negotiated between the user PG&E and was proposed in the ereble debate,discussion,and alter- and generator.The direct access PUC's original Bluebook proposal. native proposals. While the original model would be phased in overtime, PoolCo is favored by Southern Cal, PUC proposal was to be implemented with large users incorporated into the forma Edison and San Diego Gas ahowl in January 1995,it has become clear system first and smaller users later. Pleas sec ShopTalk, next page Page 3 r SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT 7171 FENWICK LANE WESTMINSTER, CA 92683.5218 714-894.2222 FAX 714.894.9699 Date: June 14, 1995 To: Edward M. Torres, Director, Technical Services Department, CSDOC From: Jeffrey N. Cross, Ph.D., Executive Director, Southern California Coastal iv Water Research Project u John H. Dorsey, Ph.D., Assistant Division Manager, Environmental Monitoring Division, Bureau of Sanitation, City of Los Angeles Alan C. Langworthy, Deputy Director, Metropolitan Wastewater Department, City of San Diego Re: Independent Review and Report on Kinnetic Laboratories Allegations Concerning Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program RFP and Consultant Selection On May 25, 1995, Mr. Edward Torres, Director, Technical Services Department of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC), requested that we review the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories concerning the consultant selection process for the Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP). The following documents were reviewed by the panel: • Letter dated April 28, 1995 from Kinnetic Laboratories to Pat McGuigan, chairman of the CSDOC Operations Committee; • CSDOC staff summary of the allegations contained in the April 28 letter; • Original CSDOC request for proposal (RFP) dated November 15, 1994 • Minutes from the mandatory pre-bidders meeting December 1, 1994; • Brown and Caldwell proposal dated January 3, 1994; • CSDOC staff evaluation of Brown and Caldwell's proposal; • CSDOC staff report on site visits to Brown and Caldwell and Kinnetic Laboratories; and • Revised CSDOC request for proposal dated March 31, 1995. Mr. Torres requested that, after reviewing the documents, the panel address the following questions: • Was it appropriate for CSDOC staff to conclude that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the original RFP; and • Did CSDOC revise the RFP to exclude all consultants except SAIC? The panel reviewed the documents provided and herein present our findings. A summary of the findings is followed by a detailed discussion of each of the questions and the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories. v A Public Agency for Marine Environmental Research Panel Review-p. 2 q 1. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Was it appropriate for CSDOC to conclude that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the oricinal RFP? The Brown and Caldwell proposal was deficient in a number of areas. It lacked detail for several important OMP program areas, such as methods and detection limits for analytical chemistry, QA/QC procedures for sorting and identification of benthic samples, qualifications of important subcontractors, and procedures for problem solving and resolution. The Brown and Caldwell proposal did not explicitly recognize that continuity with the data from the previous 10 years was of utmost importance. Consequently, Brown and Caldwell did not demonstrate that they understood the scope of work of the Districts' OMP. Based on the review process in the original RFP, CSDOC staff was correct in finding that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the RFP. Did CSDOC revise the RFP to exclude all consultants except SAIC? The original RFP was weak in several areas. It did not specify all of the methods that the contractor should use to ensure comparability with the data collected during the previous 10 years. The RFP should not have encouraged innovation and cost cutting at the expense of data continuity. And it was vague on how the technical evaluation of the proposals would be handled. It appears that the shortcomings of the original RFP became apparent during staff review of the proposals. The Districts rejected all proposals and rebid the contract. The fact that two of the original three bidders responded to the revised RFP suggests that CSDOC did not revise the RFP to exclude all bidders except SAIC. The original RFP could have been better thought out in terms of the technical specifications and the proposal evaluation process. It appears that not having bid the OMP for 10 years was detrimental to the formulation of the original RFP. Because the Districts' OMP is critical for maintaining the 301(h) waiver, the technical issues override strict cost considerations. The lack of recent experience in dealing with these types of issues appears to have resulted in an inadequate RFP. Staff was correct in rejecting all of the bids and starting over, rather than trying to sort out the original process. This shows due diligence in trying to maintain a level playing field while ensuring that the Districts get the best possible monitoring program. However, panel members felt that some of the requirements in the revised RFP were unreasonable (e.g., chemical and benthic invertebrate analyses had to be done in California; possession of a voucher collection with 90% of the species in the study area). Given that the bidders were asked to respond to the revised RFP in eight working days, and because some of the requirements in the revised RFP were the result of the site visits conducted during proposal evaluation, it is apparent why Kinnetic Laboratories felt that they were targeted for exclusion. r Panel Review-P. 3 a 2. WAS BROWN AND CALDWELL'S PROPOSAL RESPONSIVE TO RFP? The Districts' original RFP in section VI. Contents of Proposal states that the proposal ...must provide the Districts with the following information..." (page 11). A. Qualifications of Firm 1. Date firm established 2. Similar ongoing projects 3. Resumes of principals 4. Organization chart 5. Description of training program 6. Subcontracting organizations B. Ability to Provide Services C. Acknowledgment of Scope of Work D. Cost of Services E. Financial Statements and Related Confidentiality A. Qualifications of fine 1. Date firm established - provided. 2. Similar ongoing projects -names, dates, descriptions, location, contacts, and price provided. The proposal did not address the following areas specified in the RFP: a) problems encountered and resolutions; b) taxonomic protocols; c) experience with EPA's 301(h) chemistry analytical procedures. 3. Resumes of principals - provided. 4. Organization chart - provided. 5. Description of training program - elements of training program are listed, but the descriptions are vague and short on specifics. 6. Subcontracting individuals and organizations - names are provided, but addresses are missing. 7. Copy of recent reports - one report is provided. 8. Vessel specifications - vessel specifications and available sampling equipment are provided in section VI.B. (page 2-2). B. Ability to Provide Services -the proposal addresses Brown and Caldwell's ability to provide services, but it does not address contingency plans for equipment failure or withdrawal of a subcontractor, both of which were requested in the Districts' original RFP. C. Acknowledgment of Scope of Work- The Brown and Caldwell proposal stales that it will conduct the monitoring in accordance with 301(h) Technical Support and Guidance documents. It addresses the work that needs to be accomplished, the types of sediment and biological samples that will be collected, the types of sediment and biological sampling devices that will be used, how the data will be analyzed and submitted, and how the reports will be prepared and submitted. The Districts' original RFP in section 11. Background calls for "...detailed descriptions of the proposed data analyses and how those analyses will be conducted..." (page 3). Brown and Caldwell provided detailed descriptions of the data analyses for each program element, which Panel Review-p. 4 • M F indicates that they have the necessary background in statistics and know how to proceed. The original RFP requires the bidder to address the submission of data to ODES. In their proposal, Brown and Caldwell mentioned that they have submitted data to ODES as part of other 301(h) monitoring contracts.. However, given the emphasis in the original RFP, this issue should have been addressed more fully in the proposal. It is easy to miss the fact that Brown and Caldwell has successfully entered data into ODES. The CSDOC staff evaluation indicates that they were not satisfied with the method of submission, but this is immaterial. It does not matter whether the programs are sophisticated or simplistic, as long as they work. The Brown and Caldwell proposal is inadequate in that it does not mention the methods that wilr be used to analyze 1) sediments and tissues for priority pollutants; 2) sediments for grain size, Fe, Al, TOC, BOD, etc.; and 3) fish tissues for lipids. It is not clear from the proposal that the principals in chemistry have experience with marine sediments or marine biological tissues. Furthermore, their QA experience is largely with water quality and field operations data; there is no mention of chemistry QA experience. The chemistry methods for sediments and tissues are critically important for the Districts' OMP. The original RFP identifies method detection limits as a particular concern (section V.3. Tissue and Sediment Chemistry Analyses, page 9), but there is no information in the Brown and Caldwell proposal on chemical methods or detection limits. It is particularly surprising that proposal did not address this issue since Brown and Caldwell proposed different methods from those of the current OMP. This is a serious deficiency in the proposal. The proposal is deficient in that it does not address the QA/QC process for sorting, identification, and verification of invertebrate or fish samples. It is possible to infer from the resumes that Brown and Caldwell has people experienced with invertebrate taxonomy, but given the importance of this issue (continuity of the data over the life of the OMP), the proposal should have addressed this issue explicitly. Brown and Caldwell apparently does not have people experienced with fish taxonomy. Two of the weaknesses identified in the evaluation of the Districts staff are unjustified: 1) that the taxonomists' experience is mostly from the Santa Barbara Channel and the people are not active in SCAMIT, and 2) the taxonomists are distributed throughout the western US. By these criteria, internationally recognized taxonomic experts would not qualify. Moreover, the difference between the invertebrate fauna of the Santa Barbara Channel and the shelf off Huntington Beach is not substantial. A taxonomist familiar with a particular group that occurs in the Districts' OMP and possessing experience with infauna on the coastal shelf off California should be able to accomplish the task; where they live is immaterial. The proposal is vague on how fish and invertebrates would be preserved aboard the ship for bioaccumulation studies and the proposal does not describe how tissues for the bioaccumulation studies would be collected from the organisms. The proposal is Panel Review-p. 5 incorrect on sample handling for fish histology— it states that the livers be removed and fixed whole, when in actuality, thin (<1 mm) slices of liver should be dissected and fixed onboard ship for processing in the lab. The Districts' original RFP in section II. Background states that the annual summary report "...should combine and integrate the results of the various mandated program elements with historical trends and relevant environmental data from external sources" (page 3). The Brown and Caldwell proposal addresses the historical data (page 3-15), but it does not address how or what external environmental data will be incorporated into the annual summary report. The 1993 Goleta Sanitary District NPDES Report was reviewed and found adequate. The fact that the Goleta report did not contain comparisons with external environmental data may have been at the direction of the contracting agency and not the contractor. The proposal should have explicitly addressed how Brown and Caldwell would assure the Districts that the data collected in year 11 would be comparable with the data collected in the previous years by other contractors. Continuity is of vital importance in a long-term monitoring program, such as the Districts' OMP, where data are combined from several laboratories and analyzed for long-term trends in ocean conditions. The Districts pointed out the importance of data continuity in the pre-bid meeting and they also stated that continuity with previous data would be considered during proposal evaluation. However, the original RFP is vague on the importance of data continuity. For example, the original RFP in section VI.C. Acknowledgment of Scope of Work n. slates that "Innovative and cost effective approaches to the problems encountered in each of[the tasks in the scope of work] should be described" (page 12), suggesting that the contractor is encouraged to use new and/or different methods. In the revised RFP, section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph 2) Benthic Monitoring states that "Physical and chemical analyses of sediment samples will be performed according to the procedures in the Districts' present OMP QAPP" (page 13). In paragraph 21 Trawling of the same section, it states that"Chemical analyses [of biological tissues] will be performed according to procedures detailed in the Districts' QAPP" (page 15). And in section VILA. Chemistry, it asks for the costs of US EPA Methods 624 and 1624 for extractable and volatile organic compounds (pages 27-28). In responding to the original RFP, Brown and Caldwell should have made it clear that they understood that continuity of data was extremely important. By the same token, the Districts should have explicitly stated in the original RFP the methods that the potential contractors should use to ensure data comparability. D. Cost of Services - provided. E. Financial Statements and Related Confidentiality - provided. \fto/ Panel Review-p. 6 8 3. DISTRICTS CONDUCTED SITE VISITS INSTEAD OF AWARDING THE CONTRACT The Districts' original RFP in section VI.F. Evaluation Procedures specifically states that site visits are part of the proposal evaluation process. "If deemed necessary by the selection committee, site visits by Districts personnel will be conducted" (paragraph 2, page 14). During the visits, the selection committee would evaluate vessels, equipment, laboratories, and data and program management abilities. Brown and Caldwell did not submit the "winning bid" (Letter dated April 28, 1995 from Kinnetic Laboratories to Pat McGuigan, chairman of CSDOC's Operations Committee) to the original RFP. It may have been the lowest cost proposal, but the proposal must be evaluated on its technical merits rather than just cost. 4. DISTRICTS GAVE EIGHT WORKING DAYS TO RESPOND TO REVISED RFP The revised RFP is dated March 31, 1995; the panel understands that it was hand delivered to the bidders on that date. The bidders had 12 total days or eight working days to respond. This may not be an unreasonable amount of time if the bidder is motivated to obtain the contract. See section 5 paragraph 1 below. 5. DISTRICTS DEVELOPED REVISED RFP TO PRECLUDE ALL BIDDERS EXCEPT SAIC 1. Allowed only eight working days to respond to detail new RFP. The scope of work in ;...� the revised RFP is much more specific and detailed than the original RFP. For example, the revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph >1 Offshore Water Quality Monitoring provides a one page explanation of the water quality data that will be collected by CSDOC staff and given to the contractor for inclusion in the annual report. In the original RFP, this was covered in five lines with no further explanation (section V.B.1. Task A— Off-shore Water Quality Monitoring, page 9). The revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph 2 Benthic Monitoring states that "Physical and chemical analyses of sediment samples will be performed according to the procedures in the Districts' present OMP QAPP" (page 13). This provision was lacking in the original RFP. In paragraph 3) Trawling of the same section, it states that "Chemical analyses [of biological tissues]will be performed according to procedures detailed in the Districts' QAPP" (page 15). This provision was lacking in the original RFP. The revised RFP contains requirements for work that were not in the original RFP. For example, the revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph Offshore Water Quality Monitoring states that "..Districts' personnel will collect all surf zone bacteriological and grease and oil samples, that the Awarded Contractor will be required to integrate...into the OMP Annual Report" (page 12). The revised RFP in section V.E. Specific Statement of Work paragraph 7) Addition Services e) Analysis of Panel Review-p. 7 4 Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) requires that "The Awarded Contractor will analyze CRM's [sic)for both tissues and sediment matrices" (page 20). The revised RFP is more specific on acceptable methods than the original RFP, and the revised RFP contains requirements that were not in the original RFP. These changes could affect the bidder's ability to obtain timely cost estimates for the revised proposal. Bidders responding with a full and complete proposal to the original RFP should have been positioned to respond quickly to the additional information required; two of the three original bidders were able to respond. However, some of the requirements in the revised RFP may have made it difficult for Brown and Caldwell to respond by the April 13 deadline. Specifically, the requirement that the taxonomic and chemical analyses be done within California (which the panel decided was an unreasonable criterion) would have required Brown and Caldwell to find new subcontractors before they rebid. 2. Disqualification of bidders that deviate from current OMP. The Year 10 QAPP was not supplied to the bidders with the original RFP, but the Year 9 QAPP was supplied. 3. Selection of proposal that Places the least burden on staff. This is not a reasonable criterion. The Districts only experience is with the existing contractor. Assessing the burden placed on staff by a new and unfamiliar contractor would be highly subjective. 4. Required detailed SOPS for chemistry and biology methods and data management. This is a reasonable criterion that is designed to ensure the continuity of data over the 11 years that the Districts' OMP has been operating. It would have been irresponsible of the Districts to ignore the methods of a new contractor and laboratory. Consultants actively engaged in this field should have standard operating procedures (SOPS) available for their clients. This requirement should have been contained in the original RFP. 5. Required chemical analyses and benthic sorting, and taxonomy to be done in California. These are not reasonable criteria. Any chemistry laboratory should be considered if it demonstrates that it consistently produces acceptable QA/QC results, meets acceptable levels of detection for all compounds and elements it measures, transports and analyses samples within the required holding time, and can produce data in the required time. Any taxonomy laboratory should be considered if it has taxonomic experts familiar with the fauna, can demonstrate that it can meet all of the QA1QC criteria, and can produce data in the required time. The criterion that the benthic samples be"...shipped once to a single laboratory..' (section VII.B. Biology paragraph B, page 29 in the revised RFP) is not reasonable. It is possible to ship samples to several laboratories and maintain data integrity. 6. Required experience with 301(h) isotope dilution. The revised RFP in section VII.A. Chemistry states "...that the proposed chemistry laboratory and its personnel have Panel Review-p. 8 8 current, relevant experience doing chemistry...analyses for all matrices...required of this OMP" (page 28). This is a reasonable criterion. 7. Requirement for voucher of 90% of species in study area. This criterion is not reasonable. It is reasonable to require that the bidder demonstrate their experience and knowledge of California soft-bottom invertebrate species and to have an in-house reference collection of soft-bottom fauna, but setting the voucher level at 90% is not reasonable —the voucher collection could represent the abilities of previous staff. Rather, the Districts should provide their voucher collection developed over the past 10 years to the successful bidder after the award of the contract to ensure that the taxonomists have the material they need. 8. Soecifications of the ocean vessel. Most of the specifications were reasonable. However, the revised RFP in section VII.C. Field Sampling requires the "Vessel [to] have a A-frame/hydraulic system capable of safely lifting a minimum of 2000 pounds" (page 30) is unreasonable. Vessels currently used in POTW ocean monitoring perform the same type of monitoring at similar depths without an A-frame. The Kinnetic vessel is small and accommodates a crew of 4-6 people. CSDOC would occasionally have more people on board and the boat would be crowded and the working space cramped, but it would be safe. 9. Cost not a factor in selection. The Districts' original RFP in section VI.D. Cost of Services states that the "Lowest price will not be the sole criteria [sic] used by the Districts for selecting the successful firm..." (their emphasis; page 12). The Districts' revised RFP in section VI.D. Cost of Services states that "Evaluation of the proposals...will be based upon technical merit and company qualifications...Proposed costs will be compared with an amount predetermined to be fair compensation for the Scope of Work..." (page 26). The original RFP was vague on how the Districts' staff would do the technical evaluation of the proposals. The original RFP referenced procedures established by CSDOC's Board of Directors, but it did not discuss the importance or method for the technical review. The revised RFP presented a more detailed evaluation procedure. 10. Used arbitrary and biased ranking criteria for selection. The ranking criteria for the proposals in Table 4 (page 36) of the Districts' revised RFP are not arbitrary in the sense that the categories are reasonable. It is reasonable to judge the proposals on responsiveness, program management, the QAIQC program, field sampling, laboratory analyses, data management, and reporting. Most of the "Examples of questions to be asked/answered for each area" (page 35) are reasonable. However, some of the questions are subjective and difficult to quantify. For example, "Can the company provide the necessary reports on time..'?" "Can the company provide the type of integrated report required by [the] Districts? Some of the questions are arbitrary; e.g., "Is the histopathologist experienced with...our species?' Panel Review-p. 9 e 6. PANEL CONCLUSIONS The original RFP was inadequate on technical specifications for the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program and it was vague on how the technical evaluation of the proposals would be handled. It appears that the shortcomings of the original RFP became apparent during CSDOC staff review of the proposals and staff was correct in rejecting all of the bids and starting over. • The Brawn and Caldwell proposal was deficient in several important areas. Brown and Caldwell did not demonstrate that they understood the scope of work for the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program. CSDOC staff was correct in finding that the Brown and Caldwell proposal was not responsive to the RFP. • Most of the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories in their letter to the CSDOC Operations Committee were without merit. However, a few of the requirements in the revised RFP were unreasonable and therefore, some of the allegations made by Kinnetic Laboratories were valid. VN alas County Sanitation Districts of Orange County :1 Listing of Changes Made To Proposed Budget c June 1995 c� Below is a listing of the additions/changes that have been made to the Proposed Budget: Subject Pages Listing of Administrative Officials Introduction General Mangers Budget Message-5 year trend chart on cost of processing wastewater. Section 1, Page 2 Fin.Overview&Budget Issues-Technical Services Department narrative added. Section 1, Page 20 Fin.Overview&Budget Issues- Privatization Efforts added. Secton 1, Page 20 Background Info. 8 Description of Services Section 1, Pages 22-23 Policies,Systems, and Process Fiscal Policies-Vechicle Replacement Policy added. Section 2, Page 3 Summary-All Districts Where The Money Comes From and Where The Money Goes charts added. Section 3, Page 1 DepartmendDivision Budgets(Section 5) Divisional Organization Chart changed. Section 5, Pages 45,69, 109 Staffing Trend Charts changed. Section 5, Pages 1, 9, 13, 17,21, 53,61,69,89, 105, 109 Budget Overview Changed Section 5, Pages 47,99 Expenditure Trends Changed Section 5, Pages 4, 12,48, 100 Sell Insurance Funds Public Liability Fund-Added 1993-94 Actuals column. Section 7, Page 2 Workers'Compensation Fund- Added 1993-94 Actuals column. Section 7, Page 3 Self-Funded Dental Plan-Added 1993-94 Actuals column. Section 7, Page 4 Joint Capital Improvement Program Joint Works Construction Requirements-added CIP Description(Column B) Section 8, Pages 4, 5,6,8 7 2020 Vision Constr. Requirements-added 2020 Vision ADP&Constr. Req. Projections. Section 8, Page 62 Proposed CORF Equip. Budget-added. Section 8, Page 64 Joint Works Capacity and Needs-added. Section 8, Page 65 Plant Capacity and Needs-added. Section 8, Page 66 Appendices `.J Index-Added. - Section 10, Pages 8,9 u Citizen's Comment Card To: Bl.t p.A ft. phone:(714)SB22411 x 2020 A smn[C mml Manager paper.pl4)2199509 County San U.oi.a of Ov W C..ty From: Iwdmal wcam.m ,.eam.. My comments concern the work at: My comments are: COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS W ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 103aa aLK aVFMIE June B, 1995 MINUS," Rax,ram vauay.rsuramaA ezaze-e,r. nm r�z�n MEMORANDUM TO: Don McIntyre General Manager THRU: Blake P. Anderson Assistant General Manager FROM: John D. Linder Director of Engineering RE: Request for Demolition Credit at 510 W. Chapman Avenue The purpose of this memorandum is to submit background regarding a request heard by the Boards of Directors at the May 24, 1995 regular Board meeting. The request was made by Jerome P. Greubel. The Sanitation Districts received a letter dated April 13, 1995 from Mr. Greubel requesting that the Sanitation Districts Capital Facilities Connection fee be waived for a property on Chapman Avenue. The letter explained that the property suffered a partial condemnation by the City of Orange around August 1990. By letter dated April 24, 1995, we responded to Mr. Greubel stating staff cannot waive the requirement for completing the start of new construction within two years of a demolition which is necessary to receive a demolition credit. The letter further stated that if a credit was requested, it should be addressed to the Board of Directors of CSD 2 and give specific reasons why new construction was not started within two years of the building's demolition. Mr. Greubel contacted Joe Rycraw and the undersigned after receipt of that letter and, in accordance with his request,we scheduled a time-extension to obtain the demolition credit for the May 24, 1995 Board meeting. Mr. Greubel was informed of this item via a letter dated May 3, 1995. Subsequently Tom Woodruff, General Counsel, by a memorandum dated May 17, 1995, fell that additional information originally requested was still needed and we informed Mr. Greubel that it would not be heard at the May 24 regular Board meeting. Mr. Greubel then appeared at the meeting to make a formal request. After the meeting, I spoke with Mr. Greubel. He indicated that he would furnish me with additional information regarding the request and the reasons why a demolition credit should be granted. To date, we have received nothing from Mr. Greubel. However, I had staff investigate the matter and here are the facts we discovered: 1. The property originally contained a walnut packing plant that was connected to the �„� sewer in 1912. Blake P. Anderson June 8, 1995 Page Two 2. The north portion of the property was condemned in 1990 for street right-of-way. At that time, the City of Orange offered to remodel the remaining portion of the building, or buy the entire site. The owner declined and the building was demolished. 3. Here, the facts are somewhat confusing. We have evidence from the City that the building was demolished by the owner in December 1988 and that could have occurred while negotiations were going on for the acquisition of the parcel. The plans for the road widening that the City used in the 1990 did not show the building. 4. It appears that Mr. Greubel purchased the property within the last two years. We say that because the ownership record in our file does not show Mr. Greubel as the owner. Mr. Greubel plans to develop a 2,000 sq. ft. 4-bay car wash, and he would then owe, under our ordinance, a Capital Facilities charge of$2,350, the minimum charge. As I stated, Mr. Greubel has furnished nothing in the way of information; we obtained these facts by visiting with the City of Orange and going through all records. The City adequately compensated the former owner for the site; we can see no reason why Mr. Greubel should be extended a demolition credit. The City staff concurs with our analysis. This information is being provided to Tom Woodruff. Tom will provide guidance as to an agenda item for the June 28 Board meeting. JDL:TMD:sI eng%Q2 1060995.ml c: Joe Rycraw Tom Dawes General Counsel June 20, 1995 MEMORANDUM TO: Donald F. McIntyre General Manager FROM: Edwin E. Hodges Director of Maintenance SUBJECT: June 28, 1995 Board Letter Item California Government Code Section 8574.20 deals with responding to Hazardous Material events. There are five levels of responders: First Responder Awareness Level, First Responder Operations Level, Hazardous Materials Technician Level, Hazardous Materials Specialist Level, and On-Scene Incident Commander. Currently, the Districts have personnel trained at the First Responder Awareness Level, First Responder Operations Level and On-Scene Incident Commander level. This past month, ten Districts personnel including the Directors of Engineering and Maintenance ` successfully completed the training at the On-Scene Incident Commander level. First responders at the awareness level are individuals who are likely to witness or discover a hazardous substance release. Although they are not expected to commence with defensive or offensive operations, these personnel are trained to report the incident to proper authorities, isolate the immediate site, deny entry to unauthorized persons and begin evacuation. First responders at the operations level are individuals who respond to the scene of emergencies that may involve hazardous materials. They are trained to respond in a defensive fashion without actually trying to stop releases within the"hot"zone. Their function is to contain the release from a safe distance, keep it from spreading, prevent exposures, implement the Incident Command System, summon a higher level of response when offensive operations are necessary, isolate the immediate site, deny entry to unauthorized persons, and evacuate the public. Incident Commanders will assume control of an incident beyond the first responder awareness level. Incident Commander duties include: all functions and roles listed for First Responder Awareness and First Responder Operations Levels, an understanding and ability to implement the Incident Command System, including the hazardous materials module, an understanding of the hazards and risks associated with employees working in chemical protective clothing, the knowledge and understanding of the importance of decontamination procedures, the ability to implement the Fire Service's Haz-Mat Emergency Response Plan, the knowledge of implementation procedures for the County Hazardous Materials Area Plan, and the knowledge of the State emergency response plan and of the Federal Regional Response Team. EEH:cm r AGENDA JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 - 7:30 P.M. j In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts'Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Boards f for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an j i emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the Districts subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a i supplemental agenda posted not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. I i .......................... (1) Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation (2) Roll call (3) 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) (4) Appointment of Chair pro tem, if necessary (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 Chair, 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). O6/28195 (6) The Joint Chair, 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 Chair, consideration of Resolutions or commendations, presentations and awards (b) Report of General Manager (c) 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 Chair. District 1 - May 24, 1995 regular District 2 - May 24. 1995 regular District 3 - May 24, 1995 regular District 5 - May 24, 1995 regular District 6 - May 24, 1995 regular District 7 - May 24, 1995 regular District 11 - May 24, 1995 regular District 13 - May 24, 1995 regular District 14 - May 24, 1995 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.) 05/31/95 14 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $1,404,438.38 $538,073.30 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 626,873.39 270,677.09 Joint Working Capital Fund - 226,361.10 196,842.70 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 15,309.90 19,976.94 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 5,032.64 DISTRICT NO, 2 - 11,241.23 52,026.71 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 182,577.61 230,137.88 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 6,901.50 4,458.23 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 0.00 3,402.12 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 8,659.04 4,464.37 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 53,020.33 20,464.11 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 186,212.03 17,295.25 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 2,739.48 2,061 .88 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 206.80 2,652.26 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 976.09 5,239.1 $2,725,516.88 $1 ,372,804.62 -2- 06/28/95 (9) CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS 9(a)THROUGH 9(n j All matters placed on the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered in the regular order !! of business. i I Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar shall, upon { recognition by the chair, slate their name, address and designate by letter the item to be 1 removed from the consent calendar. The Chair will determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. I 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 Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044, to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., for a total amount not to exceed $57,160.00, plus sales tax. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-56, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160, to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, for the discount price of $.0259/MMBTU, for a one year period beginning August 1, 1995 (Estimated annual cost not to exceed $900,000.00). (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-57, Supporting the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC); and appoint the Joint Chair as the primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as the alternate representative. (d) Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager, or his designee, 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and directing staff to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses Incurred. -3- 06/28/95 (9) DISTRICT 3- (CONSENT CALENDAR Continued) r (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file Summons 8 Complaint for Subrogation Recovery, 20th Century Insurance Company vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, at al., West Orange County Municipal Court Case No. 215248, relative to property damage sustained in connection with a Districts' vehicle, and authorize the District's General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the District. DISTRICT 5 (f) Consideration of the following actions re proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 5: (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-72-5, approving Agreement with the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, in connection with proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park Annexation, annexation of a 20-acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District. (2) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter dated May 22, 1995, from the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation requesting annexation of a 20-acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District, and consideration of Resolution No. 95.73-5, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 9- Crystal Cove State Park Annexation to county Sanitation District No. 5). END OF CONSENT CALENDAR (10) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any -4- O6/28/95 (11) ALL DISTRICTS Nominations for Joint Chair(Election to be held at regular July Board Meeting). (12) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Minutes of the Executive Committee (1) Receive and file draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 24, 1995. (2) Receive and file draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 1, 1995. (3) Receive and file draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 7, 1995. (4) Receive and file draft Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 14, 1995. (5) Receive and file draft Executive Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 21, 1995. (b) Consideration of the following actions recommended by said committees: (1) Consideration of motion authorizing the funding of$100,000.00 in the 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. (2) PDC95-21 Consideration of the following actions relative to Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2: (a) Verbal report of Director of Engineering (a) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (b) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-58, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2, to Margate Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$35,291,000.00. i -5- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 6] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 5) (b) (3) PDC95-22 Consideration of the following actions relative to the Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Planning, Design and Construction Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-59, approving Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for said services on an hourly- rate basis for labor plus overhead, subwnsultant fees and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $193,100.00. (4) OMTS95-029 Consideration of motion adopting a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts' owned and/or Operated Systems. (5) OMTS95-030 Consideration of the following actions relative to Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc. for environmental consulting services to assist staff on NPDES Permit activities; regulatory and legislative liaison activities; and for technical support for sludge management, air quality, reclamation and conservation issues and in connection with CEQA compliance for Master Plan projects, providing for a six-month extension of the agreement: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with K P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said services. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-60, approving Addendum No. 3 to said agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said services, providing for a six-month extension of said agreement, on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, plus direct expenses, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500.00. [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 7] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 6) (b) (6) OMTS95-033 Consideration of the following actions relative to agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Oulfall, Specification No. P-156R: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee certification of the negotiated fee with SAIC. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-61, approving agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, for the period July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, with option for two one-year extensions, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463.00. (7) OMTS95-035 Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in an amount not to exceed $250,000.00 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995-96, estimated as follows: Tyne of Fee Amount Annual Emissions $85,000.00 Operating Permits 50,000.00 CARS Emissions 20,000.00 Compliance Source Testing 20.000.00 Permit & Plan Applications 60,000.00 Miscellaneous 15,000.00 TOTAL $250.000.00 (8) Consideration of motion ratifying Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement with PaineWebber providing that if the Certificates of Participation are converted to a fixed rate of interest mode, "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable [remarketing agent's] fee". (9) FAHR95-26 Consideration of motion authorizing the Districts' Insurance Broker, Robert F. Driver Associates, to place All-Risk Property Insurance Coverage for 1995-96, as follows: -7- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 8] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 7) (b) (9) 1995-96 PROGRAM TERMS: All-Risk Insurance including earthquake and flood, personal property and business interruption. Total Asset Value $1,375,032,593 COVERAGE: All-Risk $200,000,000 Earthquake: CSDOC 30,000,000 DEDUCTIBLE: All Perils $25.000 Earthquake 5% Per Unit, $250,000 min. PREMIUM: '$1,358,000 'Plus taxes and fees of$33,456 (10) FAHR95-29 Consideration of the following actions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program: (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-75, approving Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company, to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-76, approving Professional Services Agreement with Mellon Trust Company, to serve as master custodial services bank, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in forth approved by General Counsel. (11) FAHR95-30 Consideration of motion approving the following revisions to MPRP (Management Performance Review Plan) Performance Incentive Values: (a) Effective July 1995, authorize funds totaling $173.000 beyond the 3.0% of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. (b) Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0% of payroll (totaling $453,000) for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst &Young. (c) Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program as recommended by Ernst &Young. -8- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 9] 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 8) (b) (12) EXEC95-01 Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated June 14, 1995 re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving, in concept, the consolidation of the Boards; and authorizing staff and General Counsel to proceed with additional studies. (13) EXEC95.03 Consideration of Resolution No. 95-62, amending Resolution No. 95.9, authorizing the General Manager to approve expenditure of funds up to $50,000.00 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements governed by Resolution No. 95-9. (14) Roll call vote motion approving proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets Funds, as follows: Fund Total Amount Joint Works Operating/Working Capital $ 54.380,000 Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 (15) Individual District Budgets: (a) Verbal report of General Manager/Director of Engineering re proposed fiscal year 1995-96 budgets (b) DISTRICT 1 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,809,000 Capital Facilities Fund 10,904,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 8,872,000 TOTAL $33.585.000 (c) DISTRICT 2 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $53.245.000 Capital Facilities Fund 60,455.000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 24,024,000 TOTAL S 137.724.000 -9- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 101 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 9) (b) (15) (d) DISTRICT 3 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $65,946,000 Capital Facilities Fund 61,204.000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 22,459,000 TOTAL $149,609,000 (e) DISTRICT 5 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,415,000 Capital Facilities Fund 14,361,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 5,674,000 TOTAL $33,450,000 (f) DISTRICT 6 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $12,073,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,473,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 2,964,000 TOTAL $22,510,000 (g) DISTRICT 7 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $21,726,000 Capital Facilities Fund 17,604,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 7,323,000 TOTAL $46,653,000 -10- [ITEM (12)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 11] "" 06/28/95 (12) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 10) (b) (15) (h) DISTRICT 11 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,801,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,920,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 5,054,000 Bond & Interest Fund- 1958 33 000 TOTAL $28,808,000 (i) DISTRICT 13 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $2,046,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,511,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 27,000 TOTAL $9,584,000 () DISTRICT 14 Roll call vote approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget in the following amounts: Operating Fund $3,521,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,601,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 158,000 TOTAL $13,280,000 (16) DISTRICTS 1. 2. 3, 5. 6. 7 & 11 (ONLY) Consideration of the following resolutions selecting the annual change in California per capita personal income as the cost-of-living adjustment factor, and establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for each District in accordance with the provisions of Division 9 of Title 1 of the California Government Code: DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. LIMITATION 1 95-63-1 $2,760,000 2 95-64-2 10,548,000 3 95-65-3 14.521.000 5 95-66-5 2.604.000 6 95-67-6 1,689,000 7 95-68-7 4,805,000 11 95-69-11 3,142,000 -11- 06/28/95 (13) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion delegating authority to the Planning, Design and Construction Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for actions required to solicit, negotiate, award and issue purchase orders to various vendors for Modifications to the Existing Interior Office Spaces in the Administration Building for the General Management Administration and Communication Offices (Specification No. E-256), in an amount not to exceed $165,250.00. (14) ALL DISTRICTS Update by Staff and Consultants concerning developments related to the County's Commingled Investment Pool. (15) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of the following actions relative to Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid): (a) Verbal report of Director of Engineering (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-70, approving Amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company, providing for time constraints and Surety's right to perform work. (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-71, receiving and fling bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), to Colich Brothers, Inc., dba Colich 8 Sons in the total amount of$298,700.00. (16) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of the following actions relative to introduction and adoption of proposed Ordinance No. 126, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early: (a) Verbal report of General Counsel (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated June 22, 1995. (c) Consideration of motion to read said Ordinance No. 126 by title only, and waive reading of entire ordinance (must be adopted by unanimous vote of Directors present). (d) Consideration of roll call vote motion adopting Ordinance No. 126, as an urgency measure to be effective immediately[requires four affirmative votes of Directors]. -12- 06/28/95 (17) DISTRICTS 13 & 14 Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed Ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: (a) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: (1) Consideration of motion to read Ordinance No. 1315 by title only and waive reading of said entire ordinance (must be adopted by unanimous vole of Directors present). (2) Consideration of motion adopting Ordinance No. 1315. (b) DISTRICT 14 Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: (1) Consideration of motion to read Ordinance No. 1407 by title only and waive reading of said entire ordinance (must be adopted by unanimous vote of Directors present). (2) Consideration of motion adopting Ordinance No. 1407. (18) ALL DISTRICTS I I CLOSED SESSION: During the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Boards,the Chair may convene the I Boards in closed session to consider matters of pending or potential litigation,or j i 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 ipending or potential litigation; (c)employment actions or negotiations with i employee representatives;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 Boards on any of these subjects,the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. (a) Convene in closed session, if necessary -13- [ITEM (18) CONTINUED ON PAGE 14] 06/28/95 (18) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 13) (b) (1) Confer with Districts' representatives (General Manager,General Cours Dnector of — Peraonnel and Director of Finance) concerning status of negotiations with employee group representatives on salaries, benefits and terns of employment, (a) Confidential Employees (2) Confer with Special Counsel David Griffin re status of litigation, County Sanitation District No. 3 v. United Technologies Corp., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 722816 (c) Reconvene in regular session (d) Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in dosed session (19) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (20) ALL DISTRICTS Matters which a Director would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting (21) ALL DISTRICTS Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report (22) DISTRICT 1 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (23) DISTRICT 1 — Consideration of motion to adjourn (24) DISTRICT 2 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (25) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn (26) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of the following actions relative to Los Alamitos County Water District's request for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3: (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file letters dated March 9, 1995 and June 8, 1995 from the Los Alamitos County Water District requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. (b) Verbal report of General Counsel (c) Presentation by Los Alamitos County Water District (d) Discussion (e) Consideration of motion denying request of Los Alamitos County Water District -or- (f) Consideration of motion approving request of Los Alamitos County Water District -14- 06/28/95 (27) DISTRICT 3 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (28) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to adjourn (29) DISTRICT 5 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (30) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn (31) DISTRICT6 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (32) DISTRICT6 Consideration of motion to adjourn (33) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of the following actions relative to Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24: (a) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (b) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specficalions for said project, making miscellaneous technical clarifications (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-74-7, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, to Callon Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$1,391,195.00. (34) DISTRICT 7 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (35) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn (36) DISTRICT 11 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (37) DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion to adjourn -15- 06/28/95 (38) DISTRICT 13 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (39) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of motion to adjourn (40) DISTRICT 14 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (41) DISTRICT 14 Consideration of motion to adjourn i NOTICE TO DIRECTORS: To place items on the agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Joint i Boards, Directors shall submit items to the Board Secretary not later than the close of business 14 days preceding the Joint Board meeting. The Board Secretary shall include on the agenda all items i submitted by Directors, the General Manager and General Counsel and all formal communications. Board Secretary: Penny Kyle (714) 962-2411, ext. 2026 Secretary: Patricia L. Jonk (714) 962-2411, ext. 2029 -16- aas i _ r COUNTY SANITATION u DISTRICTS NOS. 1 , 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 , 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES JOINT BOARD MEETING MAY 24, 1995 .✓ Np\SIWCTS pfo 5e `� "o G z � v a ww •.09 CJ p ��. - F�l�NG THE ENS\Pp� ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 u ROLL CALL s A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Dlstricte Noe. 1, 2, 3, 5, B, 7. 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, Was held on May 24, 1885. at 7:30 p.m., In the Districts'Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was celled and the Secretary reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5,6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 as follows: �ar/f ACTIVE ALTERNATE DIRECTORS DIRECTORS DISTRICT NO.l: v Pat McGuigan,Chair _ Ted R.Morena James M.Ferryman.Chair Pro tam _ Arthur Perry y Meek A.Murphy — Joanne Copnu �It Thomas R.Seltarelli Jim Pous g Royer Stanton Wiliam G.Steiner DISTRICT NO.2: ._ John Collins,Chair George Soon x Daniel T.Welch, CMir pro tam JPM M.Gullisson 1� Barry Dams Bob Bell g Burnie Dunlap Glenn Parker Norman Z.Eckenrode Carol Demos James H.Flora _L_ Stave Anderson 1_ Pat McGuigan Ted R.Moreno x Mark A.Murphy Joanna Coonte JL� Julie So Came Neray x_ Sheldon Singer George L.Zoltat y Royer Suntan _ Wiliam G.StNmr Bob Zemel Tom Dely DISTRICT NO.3: Sol A.Sooner, Chair He"M.Dotson �L Burnie Dunlap. Chair pro tam Glenn Parker Cealka Age Welter Bowman George Brown Frank Laeelo _a_ John Collins George Bob" James H.Flora 1 Sieve Anderson Don R.Griflin _ Pony MarsMll vicmr Wo ly Ralph Bauer is Welly Lim Eye G.Miner y Pat McGuigan Tad R.Morom Margie L.Nice Grace Epperson `y 3� Julia Sa Chris Noray Sheldon Singer George L.Zlakat j, Roger Stamen Wiliam G.Steiner 3 Charles Sylvia Reach WeN.Ime Bob Zemel Tom OSIsy DISTRICT NO.B: Joe Deasy,CMir Joe C.Cps.Jr. William G.SMner,Chair pro tam .L Boost Stanton Joan C.Ces,Jr. An Deasy DISTRICT NO.B: James M.Ferryman.Chair Arthur Petry Jan Deasy.CMIr pro tam John C.Cos,Jr. William G.Stainer y Royer Suntan DISTRICT NO.7: Barry Hammond,Chair Mika Want y Thomas R.Stearns,Chair pro tam it.Pone Joe Decay _ John C.Cos.Jr. James M.Ferryman Anne,Perry Pat McGuigan Tad R.Monet Mark A.Murphy Joanne Coon" W Iliam G.Steiner y Roger Stanton DISTRICT NO. 11: �{� veneer Leiarno,Choir Ralph Bauer Shirlsy Motion,Chair We tam Ralph Bauer Royer Stamen Wiliam G. Steiner DISTRICT NO. 13: x John M.Galilsso r.Chair Daniel T.Welch Bob Zemel,CMir pro tam Tom Daly * Mark A.Murphy Jeanne Coon" * Glenn Parker Burnie Dunlap W Illam G. SMiner Roper Stanton DISTRICT NO. 14: x Thomas R.Batteries,Chair Jim Pond Mark A.Murphy.Cher pro tam Jeanne C4pnD �k x Barry Hammond Mike Ward _ Wiliam G.Steiner Roger Stamen y. Peer A.Swan (MINI Miller .2. i 0 05/24/95 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager, Blake Anderson, v Assistant General Manager, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary, John Cattle, Gary Hasenstab, Irwin Haydock, Ed Hodges, Patricia Jonk, John Linder, Charles McGee, Pat McNally, Mike Moore, Bob Ooten, Misha Rozengurt, Gary Streed, Ed Torres OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Jamel Demir, Mary Lee, Phil Stone DISTRICT 1 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual Election of Chair and Chair Pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tern of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tern of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1. It was then moved: That Director Pal McGuigan be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director McGuigan as Chair. It was further moved: That Director James M. Ferryman be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Ferryman as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 2 This being the annual meeting at which elections V Annual election of Chair and Chair Pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair 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 Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Collins as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Daniel T. Welch be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Welch as Chair pro tem. -3- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 3 This being the annual meeting at which elections `..� Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tern of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. It was then moved: That Director Sal A. Sapien be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Sapien as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Burnie Dunlap be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Dunlap as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 5 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. S. It was then moved: That Director Jan Debay be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vole was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Debay as Chair. It was further moved: That Director William G. Steiner be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Steiner as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 6 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6. It was then moved: That Director James M. Ferryman be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Ferryman as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Jan Debay be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Debay as Chair pro tem. .�. -4- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 7 This being the annual meeting at which elections v Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tem are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tern of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7. It was then moved: That Director Barry Hammond be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vole was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Hammond as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Thomas R. Saltarelli be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Saltarelli as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 11 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair Pro tern are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11. It was then moved: That Director Victor Leipzig be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Leipzig as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Shirley Dettloff be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Dettloff as Chair pro tem. DISTRICT 13 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tern are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair 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 Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Gullixson as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Bob Zemel be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Zemel as Chair pro tem. �..� -5- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 14 This being the annual meeting at which elections Annual election of Chair and Chair pro tern are to be held for Chair and Chair pro tem of each of the Board of the Boards of Directors, the Secretary declared nominations in order for the offices of Chair and Chair pro tem of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14. It was then moved: That Director Thomas R. Saltarelli be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Saltarelli as Chair. It was further moved: That Director Mark A. Murphy be nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair pro tem. There being no other nominations, the vote was polled and the Secretary cast the unanimous ballot for Director Murphy as Chair pro tem. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chair recognized Mr. Jerry Grubel, a Recognition of Persons who wish to be property owner in the City of Orange and within heard on matters of general interest District No. 2. He requested a waiver of connection fees for a parcel at the comer of Pixley and Chapman Avenue because connection fees were apparently paid in 1914. The property was condemned and demolished in 1989 by the City of Orange for a street-widening project. Mr. Grubel is now in the process of rebuilding. However, the City will not issue the building permit until a new connection fee has been paid. General Counsel stated that he and the Director of Engineering were familiar with this issue and had been working on getting it resolved. Calculations are needed based on the ordinance in �.,.� effect and the square footage of the new project. In addition, the actual date of demolition is needed to determine if the applicant is late in his request for a waiving of fees which would violate the ordinance in effect. The ordinance provides that if someone wishes to come in and obtain a permit for a new facility, the application must be made within two years of the date of demolition of the old unit. Mr. Woodruff also stated that the Districts have had similar Issues previously. Fees are set forth in an ordinance and Districts' Staff and Directors do not have the authority to waive the ordinance. The ordinance would have to be amended to do so. The Districts do not have a variance procedure in their statutes and ordinances. The Joint Chair then suggested that Mr. Grubel meet with the Director of Engineering after the meeting to see if the issue could be resolved. -8- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chair advised the Directors that l� Report of the Joint Chair orientation meetings and plant tours were scheduled to be held on Saturday, June 3rd and June 17th. He encouraged all Directors to attend. Mr. Cox also commented that tours to observe off-shore testing facilities were being scheduled aboard the Districts' monitoring vessel, Enchanter. Any Directors interested were advised to contact the General Manager. Joint Chair Cox then announced the following tentatively scheduled upcoming meetings as follows: Planning, Design and Construction Committee-Thursday, June 1st, at 5:30 p.m. Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees- Following the July meeting of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee - Wednesday, June 7th, at 5:30 p.m. Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee-Wednesday, June 141h, at 5:30 p.m. Executive Committee - Wednesday, June 21 st, at 5:30 p.m. ALL DISTRICTS The General Manager commented on items that Report of the General Manager should not have been on the agenda as the items are less than $50,000 and need authorization only from the Planning, Design and Construction Committee. ALL DISTRICTS The General Counsel reported on the Association Report of the General Counsel of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) conference he recently attended, along with the General Manager and Assistant General Manager. He reported that the Clean Water Act would probably not be approved this year. DISTRICT 1 There being no corrections or amendments to the Aooroval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -7- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 3 There being no corrections or amendments to the u Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 6 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 7 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 11 There being no corrections or amendments to the Aooroval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. �...� DISTRICT 13 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held March 8, 1995, the special meetings held March 29, 1995 and April 12, 1995, and the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 14 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held March 8, 1995, the special meetings held March 29, 1995 and April 12, 1995, and the regular meeting held April 26, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -8- 05/24/95 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 exhibits "A", "B", "C", "O", "E"and"F" 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. o3roa�ss g wms�ss 041199s DISTRICT NO.13 - 0.00 O.OD 0.00 W.01 DISTRICT NO.14 - 227,6S4.01 2,575.00 347,572.25 5,826.77 DISTRICTS NOS.7&14 JOINT - 77�.94 01.17 fi�.10 691.17 4 265.17 231 � .Zis 05/03/95 0517 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $804,262.45 $449,899.42 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 405,563.40 471,447.11 Joint Working Capital Fund - 210,240.65 464,347.47 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 78,626.43 4,042.26 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 7,065.63 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 25,478.88 69,850.90 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 55,381.28 167,012.17 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 6,706.64 6,429.09 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 4,672.86 0.00 v DISTRICT NO. 7 - 7,420.18 17,345.53 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 42,016.27 5,164.82 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 101.37 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 119,681.33 2.180.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 3 & 11 JOINT - 2,500.00 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 0.00 2,637.94 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 210.71 3,161.28 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 19.79 26. 21.73 $1.769.947.87 $1,669,739.72 '9' 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to issue a Purchase order to Pioneer-Standard Electronics, Inc.. That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue a for the Purchase of Eight Celebris 590 purchase order to Pioneer-Standard Electronics, Desktop Computers, Specification Inc., In a total amount of$36,342.72, plus sales tax, No. E-255 for the Purchase of Eight Celebris 590 Desktop Computers, Specification No. E-255, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Multiple Awards Schedule Program of the Stale of California and State of California Contract No. 3-94-70-0037A. Director Mark A. Murphy requested that his abstention from voting on this Item be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive, file and approve staff Summary Financial Report for nine-month Period That the staff Summary Financial Report for the ending March 31, 1995 nine-month period ending March 31, 1995, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee That the draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held on April 26, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for That the draft minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Administrative Employees Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees meeting held on April 26, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Operations Maintenance and Technical That the draft minutes of the Operations, Services Committee Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting held on May 3, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. �" -10- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: V Receive and file draft minutes of the Planning. Design and Construction That the draft minutes of the Planning, Design and Committee Construction Committee meeting held on May 4, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Finance Administrative and Human That the draft minutes of the Finance, Resources Committee Administrative and Human Resources Committee meeting held on May 10, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Executive Committee That the draft minutes of the Executive Committee meeting held on May 17, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-023) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing a 1995 Summer Work Program That a 1995 Summer Work Program for painting and grounds maintenance and other miscellaneous work, be, and is hereby, authorized. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-024) Awardino Marine Monitoring Vessel for Moved, seconded and duly carried: Surveying Coastal Waters. Specification No. P-158. to Enchanter. Inc. That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-49, awarding contract for Marine Monitoring Vessel for Surveying Coastal Waters, Specification No. P-158, to Enchanter, Inc. for the period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996, for an annual amount not to exceed $100,800.00, with provisions for two one-year extensions. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -11- 05/24/95 �../ ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-025) Actions re Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey Authorizing the Districts' participation Moved, seconded and duly carried: in the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Proied (SMBRP) epidemiological That the Districts' participation in the Santa Monica survey Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey, be, and is hereby, authorized. Authorizing the General Manager Moved, seconded and duly carried: to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SMBRP That the General Manager be, and is hereby, and to enter into a contract with the authorized to enter into a Memorandum of State Water Resources Control Board Understanding (MOU)with SMBRP; and, (SWRCB) FURTHER MOVED: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a contract with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)to implement said MOU and to reimburse the Districts for an amount not to exceed$180,000.00 for costs associated with labor and materials to analyze virus samples and continue in-house efforts during this project period through a Specific Term Employment Agreement, in form approved by General Counsel. Authorizing the General Manager Moved, seconded and duly carried: to enter into a six-month Specific Term Employment Agreement for a That the General Manager be, and is hereby, Laboratory Analyst authorized to enter into a six-month Specific Tenn Employment Agreement for a Laboratory Analyst, at a rate not to exceed $25.00 per hour, for a total amount not to exceed $26,000.00. Authorizing the General Manager Moved, seconded and duly carried: to enter into additional contracts. as necessary, to implement the terms of That the General Manager be, and is hereby, the MOU authorized to enter into additional contracts, as necessary, with no increase in the authorized amount of$180,000.00 to implement the terms of the MOU. -12- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-16) Actions re Warehouse Building at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-35-2: Maintenance Building at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-35-3: Process Area Fire Protection. Sionane and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 2. Job No. P246: and Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2. Specification Nos. M-044 (Rebid) and M-044-1 Separating Specification No. M-044 Moved, seconded and duly carried: (Rebid) from balance of the project That Office Trailer Relocations at Plants Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), is hereby authorized to be separated from the balance of the project for Warehouse Building at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-35-2; Maintenance Building at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-35-3; and Process Area Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-46. Approving plans and specifications Moved, seconded and duly carried: re Specification No. M-044 (Rebid) That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 9550, approving plans and specifications for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-17) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 6 to the Plans and specifications for Job No. P1-38-2 That Change Order No. 6 to the plans and specifications for Priority Projects Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. 131-38-2, authorizing a net addition of$34,878.00 to the contract with Pascal & Ludwig Engineers for five items of additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (POC95-18) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Change Order No. 7 to the plans and specifications for Job No. P2-42-2 That Change Order No. 7 to the plans and specifications for Secondary Treatment Expansion at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-42-2, authorizing an addition of$31,673.00 to the contract with Margate Construction, Inc. for two items of additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. -13- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-19) Moved, seconded and duly carried: V►' Aoorovina Chanae Order No. 5 to the Plans and specifications for Job Nos. P1-36-1, That Change Order No. 5 to the plans and P1-38-1: P1-38.4: and P243-3 specifications for Electrification of Pump Drives at Treatment Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-1; Security and Landscaping Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P7-38-1; Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-384; and Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-43-3, authorizing a net addition of$40,069.00 to the contract with Advanco Constructors, Inc., Division of Zum Constructors, Inc., for 13 items of additional or deleted work, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-14) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Lee That the Planning, Design and Construction & Ro Consultina Engineers. Inc. re Job Committee certification of the final negotiated fee Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46 relative to Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Lee& Ro Consulting Engineers, Inc. for preparation of a project report, preliminary design, plans and specifications and providing construction support services relative to Process Area Fire Protection Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-38-5, and Process Area Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P246, providing for additional design services and construction support services, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95.51, approving `...� Addendum No. 2 to said agreement with Lee & Ro Consulting Engineers, Inc. for said additional services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $186,670.00, increasing the total authorized compensation from an amount not to exceed $523,640.00 to an amount not to exceed $710,310.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95.20) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 4 to the Professional Services Aareement with John That the Planning, Design and Construction Carollo Engineers re Job Nos. P1-36 and Committee certification of the final negotiated fee P242 relative to Addendum No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design and construction services, preparation of operations and maintenance manuals, and training services re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P11-36, and Secondary Treatment Expansion at Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-42, providing for additional construction support and programming of process control equipment and computers, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-52, approving Addendum No. 4 to said agreement with John Carollo Engineers for said additional services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses and fixed profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $750,215.00, increasing the total authorized compensation from an amount not to exceed $5,889,150.00 to an amount not to exceed $6,639,365.00. `►1 -14- 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS (FPC95-16) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approvina Final Draft Investment Policy Statement prepared by Chandler Liquid That the Final Draft Investment Policy Statement Asset Manaaement Inc. and Callan prepared by Chandler Liquid Asset Management, Associates Inc. and Callan Associates, Districts' investment advisors, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR95-24) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Extending Early Retirement Incentive Program Provisions for all eligible Districts' That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt employees Resolution No. 95-53, extending Early Retirement Incentive Program Provisions for all eligible Districts' employees. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS fFAHR95-25) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adopting Resolution Providing for Classification. Compensation and other That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Terms. Conditions. Rules and Regulations Resolution No. 95-54, Providing for Classification, of Employment of Districts' Employees. and Compensation and Other Terms, Conditions, Rules Repealing Resolution Nos. 79-20 and 79-21 and Regulations of Employment of Districts' Employees, and Repealing Resolution Nos. 79-20 and 79-21, as amended. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported that his office had Status Report re County's Commingled received invoices for services through March 1995 Investment Pool from the Districts' bankruptcy counsel, Bronson, Bronson and McKinnon. The gross charges were $238,704.00. From that sum, General Counsel has deducted $17,557.00, most of which should have been charged to the Investment Pool Committee and not the Districts. The total charges from General Counsels office were $74,153.00. General Counsel also reported that he sent a letter to Bronson, Bronson and McKinnon dated May 17, 1995, advising them that their services would only be needed on a specific requested issue basis. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Changing the Regular Joint Board meeting date due to the Thanksgiving holiday That the change in the Regular Joint Board meeting date from Wednesday, November 22, 1995 to Wednesday, November 15, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. due to the Thanksgiving Holiday, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Changina the Regular Joint Board meeting date due to the Christmas holiday That the change in the Regular Joint Board meeting date from Wednesday, December 27, 1995 to Wednesday, December 13, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. due to the Christmas Holiday, be, and is hereby, approved. 15 05/24/95 DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second readina of proposed Ordinance No. 125 That proposed Ordinance No. 125, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 125 by title only. DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adoptina Ordinance No. 125 roll call vole: AYES: Pat McGuigan, Chair, James M. Ferryman, Mark A. Murphy, Thomas R. Sallarelli NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 125, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. ``..� DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 219 That proposed Ordinance No, 219, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 219 by title only. "� -16- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following `../ Adootino Ordinance No. 219 roll call vote: AYES: John Collins, Chair, Steve Anderson, Barry Denes, Norman Z. Eckenrode, Pat McGuigan, Mark A. Murphy, Julie Be, Sheldon S, Singer, Daniel T. Welch, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Burnie Dunlap, Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 219, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of Proposed Ordinance No. 322 That proposed Ordinance No. 322, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 322 by title only. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adopting Ordinance No. 322 roll call vote: AYES: Sal A. Sapien, Chair, Steve Anderson, George Brown, John Collins, Don R. Griffin, Victor Leipzig, Wally Linn, Pat McGuigan, Margie L. Rice, Julie Be, Sheldon S. Singer, Charles E. Sylvia, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Cecilia L. Age, Burnie Dunlap, Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 322, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. -17- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second readina of proposed Ordinance No. 531 That proposed Ordinance No. 531, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 531 by title only. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adoatina Ordinance No. 531 roll call vote: AYES: Jan Debay, Chair, John C. Cox, Jr. NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: William G. Steiner That Ordinance No. 531, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. `.: DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of Proposed Ordinance No. 625 That proposed Ordinance No. 625, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 625 by title only. DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adootina Ordinance No. 625 roll call vote: AYES: James M. Ferryman, Chair, Jan Debay NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: William G. Steiner That Ordinance No. 625, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. � -18- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 732 That proposed Ordinance No. 732, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 732 by fitle only. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the Adopting Ordinance No. 732 following roll call vote: AYES: Barry Hammond, Chair, Jan Debay, James M. Ferryman, Pat McGuigan, Mark A. Murphy,Thomas R. Saltarelli NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: William G. Steiner That Ordinance No. 732, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of Proposed Ordinance No. 1121 That proposed Ordinance No. 1121, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 1121 by title onty. -19- 05/24/95 �.d DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the AdoWina Ordinance No. 1121 following roll call vote: AYES: Victor Leipzig, Chair, Shirley Dettloff NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Roger R. Stanton That Ordinance No. 1121, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICTS 13 & 14 Actions re first reading and public hearing of proposed ordinances Establishina Excess Capacity Charge Program Public hearino The Joint Chair announced that this was the time and place fixed by the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 13 and 14 for the public hearing on the following proposed Ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: .�. District Ordinance No. 13 1315 14 1407 Open Public Hearing The Chair declared the hearing open at 8:04 p.m. Verbal report of General Counsel General Counsel reported that the public hearing was continued to this date for Districts Nos. 13 and 14 due to a lack of a quorum at last month's meeting. The excess capacity charges are identical and structured the same as in the other Districts. Close hearino There being no public comments, the Chair declared the hearing closed at 8:05 p.m. "✓ -20- 05/24/95 DISTRICT 13 v Actions re first readino and introduction of Ordinance No. 1315 First readinc of proposed Ordinance Moved, seconded and duly carried by unanimous No 1315 vote: That proposed Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only and that reading of said ordinance in its entirety be waived. Following the reading of Ordinance No. 1315 by title only, it was moved, seconded and duly carried: That Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be introduced and passed to second reading and adoption on June 28, 1995. DISTRICT 14 Actions re first readino and introduction of proposed Ordinance No. 1407 First reading of proposed Moved, seconded and duly carried by unanimous Ordinance No. 1407 vote: �..� That proposed Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only and that reading of said ordinance in its entirety be waived. Following the reading of Ordinance No. 1407 by title only, it was moved, seconded and duly carried: That Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be introduced and passed to second reading and adoption on June 28, 1995. Director Roger R. Stanton arrived at 8:07 p.m. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported to the Directors the General Counsel's Comments Prior to Closed need for a closed session as authorized by Session Government Code Sections 54956.9 and 54957.6 to discuss and consider the items that are specified as Items 19(b)(3) and (5) on the published Agenda. No other items would be discussed or acted upon. _41_ ..� 05/24/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Convene in closed session Pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 and The Boards convened in closed session at 54957.6 8:06 p.m. pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 and 54957.6. Confidentis 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. No actions were taken re Agenda Items 19(b)(3) and (5). ALL DISTRICTS At 8:14 p.m., the Boards reconvened in regular Reconvene in regular session session. DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 P.M. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 P.M. �.,.� DISTRICT 3 Actions re Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R Approving Addendum No. 1 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications That Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R, changing the date for receipt of bids from April 11, 1995 to April 25, 1995, and making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. V -22- 05/24/95 Awardina Contract No 3-36R to Albert W. Moved, seconded and duly carried: Davies. Inc. That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-55-3, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Replacement of Westminster Avenue Force Main (First Unit) and New Westside Pump Station Force Main, Contract No. 3-36R, to Albert W. Davies, Inc. in the total amount of$3,760,000.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 P.M. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. -23- 05/24/95 `✓ DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approvina Chanae Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Contract No. 14-1-1A That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Baker-Gisler Interceptor, from Fairview Road to Plant No. 1, Contract No. 14-1-1 A, for an addition of$33,676.16 to the contract with Mladen Buntich Construction Co., Inc., for twelve items of additional work, and granting a time extension of two calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. ,,(,�filu Secretary of th oarKif Directors of County Sa ion Wricts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 "� -24- FUND NO 9199 - JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/07/95 PAGER COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY REPORT NUMBER AP43 CLAIMS PAID 03106195 POSTING DATE 03/08195 m SUMMARY AMOUNT x S p1 OPER FUND 1P p2 OPER FUND 23,340.18 02 CAP FAC FUND 359,084.39 "1 #3 OPER FUND 9 03 CAP FAC FUND 0.974.7 6 6 0.974.78 I 05 OPER fUN0 10.599.i8 p8 OPER FUND 271.79 p7 OPER FUND 4.02.22 07 CAP FAC FUND 280.00 411 OPER FUND 13.887.30 011 CAP FAC FUND r 019 OPER FUND 2.203.01 014 CAP FAC FUND p586 OPER FUND 3,339.80 $227,694.01 p887 OPER FUN 07914 0PER FUND 7,74894 7.748.94 JTOPERFUND 1,045,932.70 $235.442.95 CORF 245.680,50 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 15,187.62 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 243,761.50 $2.824.935.58 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 031IM5 PAGE 7 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 030V95 POSTING DATE 0302795 SUMMARY AMOUNT 02 OPER FUND $20D.00 42 CAP FAC FUND 19774.43 X 43 OPER FUND 31.003 67 x 93 CAP FAC FUND 0.525.90 45 OPER FUND 9.055,45 m 95 CAP FAC FUND 575.00 47 OPER FUND 1.707.35 1p 97 CAP FAC FUND 23.IWA I 411 OPER FUND 007.35 $14 CAP FAC FUND 2.575.00 $Z $75.UU 0596 CAP FAC FUND - - -- -------- 20,062.50 '691.17 4697 OPER FUND 453.60 07914 OPER FUND 691.1] JT OPER FUND 544,000.97 ALL66.17 CORP 464,079.43 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 30,723.70 JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL 435,300.29 $1.613.346.19 F(NONO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE MOMS PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAID04M0 S POSTINGDATEOMB5W5 WARRANT NO, VENDOR AMOUNT 144087 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $280.93 PARCEL SERVICES 1440M UNITED SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS $127.32 LAB SUPPLIES 144089 DATAVAULTSIUS SAFE DEPOSIT CO. $1,498.00 SAFE DEPOSIT BOX RENTAL I"D90 VWR SCIENTIFIC $1,356.44 LAB SUPPLIES 144091 VALLEY CRIES SUPPLY CO. $405.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144092 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $10,796.47 LAB EQUIPMENT 144NG VERTEX SYSTEMS $3.155.01 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT m 1440M CARL WARREN B CO. $494.99 INSURANCE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR y 144095 WAXIE $2.154.08 JANRORIAL SUPPLIES 144M WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $37.015.28 CAUSTIC SODA 8 HYPOCHLORIDE M.0.8.12-92 8 4-13-N 144097 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. 11873.95 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES y 144098 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL $71.882.37 TRICK PARTS 144099 WESTTECH $13.640.82 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1441M ROURKE.WOODRUFF B SPRADLIN $47,752.52 LEGAL SERVICES MO.2-MI12 144101 WOODWARD GOVERNOR CO. $3.138.00 MECHANICAL REPAIR$ 1M102 XEROX CORP. $11,333.88 COPIER LEASES 2,111,559.57 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $1,632,89 02 OPER FUND 5,324.87 /2 CAP FAC FUND 6B 646.75 /3 OPER FUND 29,984.95 03 CAP FAC FUND 10, 45.34 05OPER FUND 4.197.37 05 CAP FAC FUND 87,194.82 08 OPER FUND 48.00 47 OPER FUND 21,38871 07 CAP FAC FUND 9.376,83 611 OPER FUND 9.964.32 /11 PFAC FUND 114,46944 i140PER FUND 688.00 I $397r$72.25 014 CAR FAC FUND 348.BB4 25 6,659.10 0588OPER FUND 2,535.10 088T OPER FUND __ 3.134.87 $j54.231.35 /)8110PER FUND SWIG G JT OPER FUND 715,612.54 CORF 477.196.45 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 43,098.02 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 152.008.45 2,111,588.57 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 04/14/95 PAGE 7 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY REPORT NUMBER AP43 CLAIMS PAID 04/19/95 POSTING DATE 04/19/95 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $335.89 02 OPER FUND 1,557.95 ly a2 CAP FAC FUND 28,724.87 x a3 OPER FUND 14,659.33 H a3 CAP FAC FUND 149,052.93 W a5 OPER FUND 4,589.98 H a5 CAP FAC FUND 20.46 96 OPER FUND 238,02 C 07 OPER FUND 19,542.64 a7 CAP FAC FUND 32.16 all OPER FUND 4.159.91 all CAP FAC FUND 24.74 a13 OPER FUND 68.01 $ 68.01 014 CAP FAC FUND 5.828.77 5,826.77 a7814 OPER FUND 691.17 691.17 453.596.55 CORF 831,772.06 6 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 9.916.20 jkr585.95 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 306.703.56 1.831.524.42 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE WI/95 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBERAP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OSIM5 POSTING DATE 0510395 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 14"INI AG TECH COMPANY 72M.609.46 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M 0.10-9-91 14405 ASU $174.46 LAB SUPPLIES 14"M ATM M.INC. 5200.00 LAB SERVICES 144401 AT&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2.411.11 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144408 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $160A2 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144409 ACCURATE MEASUREMENT SYS. $24.961.26 COMMUNICATION SUPPLIES 44410 ACOPIAN CORP. $942.60 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144411 ADVANCED COOLING TECHNOLOGIES $113A4 ELECTRIC PARTS 144412 ADVANCO CONSTRUCTORS,INC. 693.025.D0 CONSTRUCTION P141-1 144413 AEROCHEM,INC. $3.356.64 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT [n 144414 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $18,037.20 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST,M.0.8-9419 Y 1p 15 ALLIED SUPPLY CO. $1,206.43 VALVE PARTS 1N416 AMERIDATA 61100,123 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 14M17 AMERICANWATERWORKS 581.90 MEMBERSHIP DUES H 14 18 AMICON,INC. 11750.90 LAB SUPPLIES 14 19 ANXTER-DISTRIBUTION $217.75 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 14 m ANTHONY PEST CONTROL 51B5.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144421 APPUED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $2.619.99 LAB SUPPLIES 1N 22 ARROWHEAD ELECTRIC CORP. $59.53 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144423 ARTS DISPOSAL SERVICE.INC. 5MAO WASTE REMOVAL 144424 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $65m WASTE OIL REMOVAL 1N 25 ASSOCIATED VACUUM TECH,INC. $252.38 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144426 ATKIWJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144427 AVNET COMPUTER 5162,027.99 COMPUTER EQUIPMENT M O 2- 95 14 28 AWARDS B TROPHIES $310.85 PLAQUES 14H29 SFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS 54.00 LAS SERVICES 144430 BKK LANDFILL $2.411.63 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.169-91 144431 BRW SAFETY&SUPPLY $146.43 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144432 BATTERY SPECIALTIES 5662.81 BATTERIES 144433 BAUER COMPRESSOR $137.39 COMPRESSOR PARTS W4M SAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. SI,500.57 LABSUPPLIES 14H35 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $388.76 LAB SUPPLIES 144436 J&H BERGE.INC. 5259.45 LAB SUPPLIES 14 37 SETATECHNOLOGIES $15229 INSTRUMENT PARTS 14443& BOLSA RADIATOR SERVICE $527.97 TRUCK REPAIRS 14439 BONA-RUES $97.33 TRUCK PARTS 144 10 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $971.30 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.O.12-&W 144441 BUDGET JANITORIAL 53,330.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 144442 BURNIE ENGINEERING CO. $04.84 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144 13 BUSH&ASSOCIATES.INC. $1.062.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6 M 144441 CADIRECTION $269.38 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144445 CALTROL,INC. $784.57 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144448 CALFON CONSTRUCTION 585.00 PIAN&SPEC.REFUND 14 11 CALIF ASSOC.OF SAW.AGENCIES $8,000.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES M 0.1-11-95 144448 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $115.00 SERVICEAGREEMENT 144449 CANUS CORPORATION 551,200.65 FIBER OPTIC CABLE FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE SHAIS PAGE2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05103MB POSTING DATE OSI03195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144450 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $13.094.26 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI.38 A OCEAN OUTFALL 144451 CENTURY PAINT $215.86 PAINTSUPPLIES 144452 CENTURY SAFETY INST.B SUPPLY $1,243.99 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144453 CERFNET $66.84 COMPUTER SERVICES 144454 CHANDLER LIQUID ASSET MGMT. $6,400.00 INVESTMENT CONSULTANT M.O.2.6.95 14440 CHEM SERVICE,INC. $132.69 LAB SUPPLIES 144456 CHEMWEST,INC. $418.27 PUMP PARTS 144457 CLONTECH LABORATORIES,INC. $148.36 LAB SUPPLIES 144458 COUCH AND SONS $1,147.50 CONSTRUCTION 2-6R1 m 144459 COUCH&SONS $30,657.94 CONSTRUCTION 11-17-1 >4 144460 COMPUSERVE $286.43 COMPUTER SERVICES 144461 CON WAY WESTERN EXPRESS $60,47 FREIGHT CHARGES 1444W CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C 53,862.40 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.8-11.93 i.y 144463 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $327.73 INSTRUMENT PARTS H 1444" COORDINATED EQUIP CO.,INC. $175.00 MECHANICAL PART 144466 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $235.27 TRUCK PARTS 144466 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $214.66 ELECTRIC PARTS ^� 144457 CA DEPT,OF HEALTH SERVICES $3.493.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144468 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF. 556,281.47 DENTAL INSURANCE PLAN MO.I-12-94 144469 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. 59,091.90 SERVICE AGREEMENTS 1"470 DISCO PRINT COMPANY S64A8 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144471 COVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $940.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 144472 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $379.05 PAINTSUPPLIES 1"473 E.C.S. $167.00 PUBLICATION 144474 EASTMAN,INC. $1,005.96 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144475 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,920.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6.1692 144476 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $750.60 LAB SERVICES 144477 ERNST 6 YOUNG $17.6110.00 REVIEW OF FINANCE DEPT.M.O.9-14-94 14A478 EXXON CO. $8.637.56 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144479 FLUID TECH.SALES $413.67 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 14480 FMC CORP. $34,170.96 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9.14-N 14N81 FST SAND AND GRAVEL.INC. $266.25 ROAD BASE MATERIALS 144402 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $335.00 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9.91 144483 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $529.75 AIR FREIGHT 1444M FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $289.79 US SUPPLIES 144485 FLOSYSTEMS,INC. $188.33 PUMP PARTS 144466 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $22.02 PHOTO SUPPLIES IM467 CST,INC. $4,681.17 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144488 GTE TELEPHONE OPERATIONS $300.00 TELEPHONE CABLE SERVICES 14N69 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE 51,730.21 INSTRUMENT PARTS lww GIERLICH-MITCHELL.INC. $2,98IA5 PUMP PARTS IM91 GA INDUSTRIES,INC. $1,539.00 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144492 GRAHAM COMPANY $400.00 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144493 ODA CONSULTANTS $5.500.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.64414 144494 DAVID M.GRIFFITH B ASSOC, $1,1011.27 PROF.SERVICES-EXEC.SEARCH IM95 HARBOUR ENGINEERING $10,30.56 PUMP PARTS C FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5MI95 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAID05X13/95 POSTING DATE 05103M5 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144496 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $1.217.09 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144497 PL RILWN CO,INC. $32.054.66 INSTRUMENTS/INSTRUMENT PARTS M.0.3-10-93 144498 HEWLETTPACKARD $72.20 LAB SUPPLIES 1"499 HIBINO USA,INC. S20,257.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1"500 HOME DEPOT $203.90 SMALL HARDWARE 1"501 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $1,280.19 PAINT SUPPLIES 144502 HYCLONE LABORATORIES,INC. $378.54 LAB SUPPLIES 1"503 IPCO SAFETY $539.45 SAFETY SUPPLIES 1445N IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL 588,543.21 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.0.11-1692 1N505 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $269.19 CONNECTORS P4 1445M INGERSOL-RAND EQUIP.CORP. 11103.91 COMPRESSOR PARTS x 144507 INTERMOUNTAIN SCIENTIFIC CORP. $227.59 LAB SUPPLIES S 144SDB INVITROGEN CORP. $299.76 LAB SUPPLIES 1N509 J2 PRIN71NO SERVICES $1,184.78 PRINTING '-' 10510 JAMISON ENGINEERING $548.10 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES `j 144511 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $156.13 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES m 144512 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. S332.47 INSTRUMENT PARTS 14451I JOHNSON CONTROLS,INC. $219.79 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES w 144514 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $395.18 ELECTRIC PARTS 144515 THE KEITH COMPANIES $246.10 ENGINEERING SERVICES 136R 1p518 KING BEARING,INC. $304.99 MACHINE SUPPLIES 144517 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $1,238.01 TOOLSISAFETY SUPPLIES 14451E LADDER MAN.INC. $90.00 TOOLS 1"519 LAKEWOOD INSTRUMENTS $4,116.22 MECHANICAL PARTS 1"520 LEARN KEY $5415 TRAINING VIDEO 144521 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $9.738.43 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIR.M.0.12-9-90 144522 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $970.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10-92 1"523 MPS $204.88 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 1"524 MACOMCO $577.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144525 MAINTENANCE PRODUCTS,INC. $654.52 MECHANICAL PARTS 1"526 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $604.21 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1"527 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $485.03 GAUGES 144528 NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFO SVC. 5250.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 1"529 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES $236.51 HARDWARE 144530 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.202.73 UNIFORM RENTALS 144531 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $139.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 144532 MLADEN BUNTICH CONSTRUCTION $108.107.57 CONSTRUCTION 14-1-IA 1N533 MOTELS$1256.14 $1.933.18 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144534 NAT WEST MARKETS S750.00 INTEREST DRAW FEES 1"535 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES $2,500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 1"535 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $140.70 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 144537 NETWORK GENERAL $6,000.00 COMPUTER NETWORK CONSULTING 1"538 NEUTRON $10,405.45 ANIONIC POLYMERMOA-10-94 1N539 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $545.76 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1"540 NORMS REFIG.R ICE EQUIP. 528.81 ELECTRIC PARTS 144541 OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $1,317.02 SAFETY GLASSES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 511M PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 050N95 POSTING DATE 0ME195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144542 OLYMPIC CREATIONS $851.22 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144543 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $187.55 TRUCK PARTS 144544 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL $2,900.04 CHEMICALS 144545 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $9,684.81 ELECTRIC PARTS 144546 ORANGE VALVE B FITTING CO. $540.52 FRTINGS 144547 OXYGEN SERVICE $3.194.66 SPECIALTY GASES 144548 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $15,520.66 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 144549 PGC SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION $721A8 LAB SUPPLIES 144550 PSI $237.74 HARDWARE 1"551 PACIFIC PARTS $30,904.72 OFFICE EQUIPMENT m 144552 PAGENET $1,009.32 RENTAL EQUIPMENT >4 1"553 PARAGON CABLE $38.78 CABLE SERVICES 5 1"564 PARALLAX EDUCATION $7,236.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION ^^ 1N555 PARKHOUSE TIRE CO. $334.76 TIRES H 144556 PERMA SEAL $546.02 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES ri 144557 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $3,146.86 REIMBURSE PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL Ly 144558 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $109,220.93 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.Ob8-91 I 144659 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS 56,D29A3 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 144560 PITNEY BOWES $302.88 POSTAGE MACHINE SERVICE AGREEMENT 144551 POLY CAL PLASTICS,INC. $205.55 MECHANICAL PARTS 1N1562 POLYPURE,INC. $18.223.21 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3-11-92 1"563 POWER DESIGN $29,395.28 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1"554 POWER SYSTEMS $1,310.58 TRUCK PARTS 1"565 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND, $2,128.00 SOIL TESTING 144565 PUBLIC FINANCIAL MGMT.,INC. $10,278.79 FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.64-94 144557 PRYOR REPORT $".00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144686 RAHN INDUSTRIES $347.03 ELECTRIC PARTS 144569 REDWINGSHOES $493.93 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 1"570 THE REGISTER 5676.60 NOVICES&ADS 144571 REMEDY TEMP $4.063.21 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL SERVICES 144572 RICOH ELECTRONICS,INC. $17.745.19 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144573 RODNEY-HUNT CO. $563.88 MECHANICAL PARTS 1"574 DR.ROOTER SERVICE 6250.00 PLUMBING SERVICES 144575 SANTA ANA ELECTRIC MOTORS $3,464.54 ELECTRIC PARTS 144576 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $221.86 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"577 SANWA BANK $4,997.48 CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 1F14A 1"578 DOUG SARVIS $750.00 CPRIFIRST AID TRAINING 1M579 R.CRAM SCOTT&ASSOC. $6,137.52 LEGAL SERVICES-PERSONNEL ISSUES 144580 SERPENTIX CONVEYOR CORP. $3,123.12 MECHANICAL PARTS 1445B1 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $121.16 TOOLS 144582 LAWRENCE SHAPIRO.MD $136.80 MEDICAL CLAIM 144583 SHURELUCK SALES $1.333.09 TOOLSIHARDWARE 144584 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $8.430.77 DIESEL/UNLEADED FUEL 144585 SPEX INDUSTRIES,INC. 5336.22 LAB SUPPLIES 1"585 STRATAGENE 5790.77 LAB SUPPLIES 144587 SUPELOO,INC. $88.24 LAB SUPPLIES C FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE S/I/M5 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OSAWS POSTING DATE OS/O MS WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT I44588 TEKMAR COMPANY $161.64 LAB SUPPLIES 144589 CHARLES E.THOMAS $102.18 TRUCK PARTS 144590 THOMAS BROS MAPS $3.798.19 PRIMING 144591 THOMAS FISH CO. $585.25 LAB SUPPLIES 144592 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES &I,197.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.64F94 144593 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $279.03 TRUCK PARTS 1"594 TRUESDAIL LABS $20.159.60 LAB SERVICES 144595 U.S.AUTO GLASS CENTERS $150.86 TRUCK PARTS 144596 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $507.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144597 UNISOURCEWOR BUTLER PAPER $337.37 OFFICE SUPPLIES to 144598 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $237.08 PARCEL SERVICES K 144599 VWR SCIENTIFIC $2,996.34 LAB SUPPLIES 2 144600 VAUN CORPORATION $278.55 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 144601 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $2,830.07 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144602 VANIER BUSINESS FORMS $1.114.71 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144603 VERTEX COMPUTER CABLE PRODUCTS $397.33 OFFICE EQUIPMENT Iy 1446M CARL WARREN&CO. $300.00 INSURANCE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR I 1"605 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL FED. $101.25 PUBLICATION 144606 WATERS CORPORATION $92.28 LAB SUPPLIES 144607 WATERUSE MEMBERSHIP $275.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 144608 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $45.384.01 CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.O.8-12-92&4-13.94 144609 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $254.73 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144610 CITY OF WESTMINSTER $4.201.25 MANHOLE ADJUSTING 14461t WIRTH GAS EQUIPMENT CO. $4,799.87 INSTRUMENT 144612 ROURKE.WOODRUFF&SPRADLIN $66,253.92 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.2-19.92 144613 XEROX CORP. $12,006.27 COPIER LEASES 1"614 GEORGE YARDLEY CO. $683.77 HAROWARE 1M615 JOHNSON YOKOGAWA CORP. $360.04 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 144616 RICHARD YOUNG PRODUCTS $146.98 TRAINING VIDEO 1"617 ARAMARK SERVICES.INC. $17.44 OPERATING SUPPLIES 144618 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. 6298.19 TELEPHONE SERVICES 1"619 MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS $72,616.44 REMARKETING AGREEMENT 144620 PACIFIC BELL $1.215.62 TELEPHONE SERVICES 144621 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLICSUPPLY $3.90 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144622 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. 634,523.16 POWER 1"623 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $61,516.49 NATURAL GAS 1,769,947.87 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE VMS PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/03M5 POSTING DATE O5M3/95 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $7,055.63 02 OPER FUND 21,549.38 02 CAP FAC FUND 3,929.50 03 OPER FUND 38,055.61 03 CAP FAC FUND 17,315.67 05 OPER FUND 6.706.64 06 OPER FUND 4,672.86 1y 97 OPEN FUND 7,420.18 pq 011 OPER FUND 10,899.98 5 011 CAP FAC FUND 31,116.31 0130PER FUND 101.37 m '+ 014 0PER FUND 1,014.28 014 CAP FAC FUND 118,637.05 M 03811OPER FUND 2,500A0 0887 OPER FUND 210.71 a 07414 OPER FUND 19.79 JT OPER FUND 804,262.46 CORF 405,583.40 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 78,626.43 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 210,240.65 1,769,947.87 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/12M5 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0W17MS POSTING DATE OS117/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 144652 AG TECH COMPANY $33,357.67 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 144653 ATM AA,INC. 57,680.00 LAB SERVICES 1446M AT&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2,558.66 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144655 A T&T-MEGACOM SERVICE f967.80 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144656 AT&T-FAXR40DEM SERVICE $22.89 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 144657 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $36.074.40 O&M AGREEMENT OKY GEN.SYST.M.O.B-94I9 14465E AMERICAN PROTECTIVE SER.,INC. f1,007.29 SECURITY SUPPLIES 144659 AMERICAN SIGIAA $1.528.10 SAMPLER PARTS P1 144660 ANGEL SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS,INC. $520.17 LAB SUPPLIES X 144651 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $675.02 LAB SERVICES S 144662 ABC LABORATORIES 5470.00 LAB SERVICES 144663 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $35.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 144664 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $5.314.79 PAYROLL SERVICES 144%5 SFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS f11.00 WASTE DISPOSAL +f 1446M BKK LANDFILL $2.630.16 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M,O.10- 91 144667 GRW SAFETY&SUPPLY f836.38 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144660 BAUER COMPRESSOR $68.71 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144569 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $427.35 LAB SUPPLIES 144670 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $252.15 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 1"671 SERENDSEN FLUID POWER f444.99 ENGINE PARTS 144672 BETA TECHNOLOGY.INC. $26.69 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144673 BID VENTURES,INC. $237.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144674 BOOT BARN $101.73 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 144675 BORIAND INTERNATIONAL 11354.64 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 144676 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $36.291.61 ENGINEERING SERVICES 7-7-1&P141 1446" BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $40,363.08 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.0.1244N 144678 BUDGET JANITORIAL 54,320.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES 1"679 BURLINGTON SAFETY LAB,INC. $175.50 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144880 TOM BYER ROOFING SERVICE,INC. $1.588.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 144681 CEPA $1,030.50 LAB SUPPLIES 144682 CS COMPANY 54,714.33 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"683 CALTROL,INC. $1,914.85 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144684 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $600.42 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144685 CASHCO,INC. f7383 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144686 CERFNET 548.31 COMPUTER SERVICES 144687 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA f274 70 VALVE PARTS 144688 CONNEL GM PARTS I DIV. $48.04 TRUCK PARTS 144689 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $822.45 CONSULTING SERVICES W0.8-11-93 1446M COOPER CAMERON CORP. f634.77 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144691 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY 5243.39 TRUCK PARTS 144692 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES 5647.4E COMPRESSOR PARTS 144693 COUNTY CLERK $38.00 JOB NO.7-24 EXEMPRON FEE 144694 COUNTY CLERK $38.00 ANNEXATION FILING FEE 14460 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC f3,371.16 ELECTRIC PARTS - 144696 STATE OF CALIFORNIA SB.B/L00 STATE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE 144697 DE GULLE&SONS GLASS CO. $1.171.64 GLASS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE WIMS PAGE2 REPORTNUMBERAP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAIDOW17M5 POSTING DATE 0WIV95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 1M698 DELL MARKETING L.P. E2,972.98 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1M699 DEZURICKANDIORCSCO. E1,0".44 VALVES 1M700 LASCLEAR $88.13 LAB SUPPLIES 1M701 DICKSONS $1,827.M AIR CONDITIONER 1447M DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $2.50.37 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 144703 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $235.W PAINT SUPPLIES 144T04 OVALS SALES 551.90 FITTINGS 144705 EASTMAN,INC. $429.15 OFFICE SUPPLIES m 1M706 ECOANALYSIS,INC. $1,320.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 24 1M707 EL-COM HARDWARE $312.70 ENGINE PARTS S 1M708 JIM ELO $377.19 LIABILITY CLAIM J-CSD-95-L-7 m 1M709 EMERGENCY NOW NETWORK $3.815.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES I-I 1M71 ENCHANTER,INC. f3, 0.50 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6-10A2 1M711 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. E75750.50 LAB SERVICES ,q 1M712 E%IDE ELECTRONICS E742.65 INSTRUMENT PARTS I IM713 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE S9,220AO RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.ID-9-91 ^� 1M714 FILTERLINE CORP. $185.83 FILTERS 1M716 FISCHER 6 PORTER CO. S:491.75 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1"716 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. E1,273.98 LAB SUPPLIES 1M717 CLIFFORD A.FORKERT $2,716.55 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6 U 144718 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY E1,965.00 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DISCLAIMER 1M719 DST,INC. $11.473.55 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1M720 GANAHL LUMBER CO. E96A9 LUMBERIHARDWARE 1M721 GATES FIBERGLASS INSTALLERS $965.50 FIBERGLASS REPAIRS 1M722 GENERAL TELEPHONE 00. $996.98 TELEPHONE SERVICES 1M723 GIERLICH-MITCHELL,INC. $1.092.59 PUMP PARTS 1M724 GLOBAL NETWORKIJOHN NAISBITTS $195.00 SUBSCRIPTION 1M725 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS E4,490.49 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 1,4726 GRASSY S.T.I. S3,3ALM ENGINE PARTS 1M727 DGA CONSULTANTS $1,46D.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0641-94 144728 DAVID R.GRIFFIN $27,071.0 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.O.13,1494 1M729 HB TYPE 6 GRAPHICS $10.78 PRINTING 1M730 HACH COMPANY $TbK.36 LAB SUPPLIES 144731 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $421.46 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1M732 HATCH S KIRK.INC. $2,611.93 ENGINE PARTS 1M7M HAULAWAY CONTAINERS S550.0D CONTAINER RENTALS 1M734 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2.083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 44735 HOLMES B NARVER,INC. $66.959.77 ENGINEERING SERVICES 2-14-R-2 1M736 HOME DEPOT S229.70 HARDWARE 1M737 RS HUGHES CO,INC. E122.56 PAINT SUPPLIES 1M738 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH $14,330.25 WATER USE 1M739 HUNTS FINAL PHASE $1.350.00 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 1M740 IPCO SAFETY $2.045.63 SAFETY SUPPLIES 1M741 IMPERIALWESTCHEMICAL $54,215.06 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11.18-92 1M742 INDUSTRIAL FILTER MFG. $2,922.9D FILTER W743 INDUSTRIAL POWER SYSTEMS $171.00 INSTRUMENT PARTS i` FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/12J95 PAGE REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/17/95 POSTING DATE OU17M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 1M7M INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $896.15 CONNECTORS 144745 INTERMOUNTAIN SCIENTIFIC CORP. $562.47 LAB SUPPLIES 144746 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $656.68 BATTERIES 144747 IRVINE PHOTO GRAPHICS $88.36 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 1M746 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $39.59 WATER USE 1M749 JAMISON ENGINEERING $27,607.23 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 1447M GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $234.36 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144751 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $1,997.10 GAUGE c4 144752 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $1,166.13 ELECTRIC PARTS >e 1M753 KARS'ADVANCED MATERIALS,INC. $2.497.00 MACHINE TESTING 5 1M754 KING BEARING,INC. $3,718.29 MACHINE SUPPLIES Ly 144755 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $3.623.52 TOOLS r+ 144756 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $597.55 CONNECTION FEE REFUND r6 144757 LAIDLAW ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $429.W WASTE DISPOSAL DRUMS .,1 144758 DAVID 0.L'ANGELLE,PH.D. $4,358,M TRAINING SYSTEMS IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE 144759 LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT L.LAVOIE 5627.40 LEGAL SERVICES-NITZEN �+ 144760 LEE&RO CONSULTING ENGR. $30,498.93 ENGINEERING SERVICES P1461&2 1M761 CHARLES P.CROWLEY CO. $764.38 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1M762 LEHMAN BROTHERS,INC. $246.50 REMARKETING AGREEMENT 1M763 LEWCO ELECTRIC $592.63 TRUCK PARTS 1447" LOCAL AGENCY $5M.00 ANNEXATION FEES 144765 MAGNETROL 5458.26 ENGINE PARTS 1M7W MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $327.729.00 CONSTRUCTION P242.2 1M767 MAVERICK,INC. $5,340.00 CRANE INSPECTION 144768 MCKENNA ENGR.&EQUIP. $5.829.83 PUMP PARTS 144759 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $5W.66 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1M770 MICROBIAL INSIGHTS,INC. $600.00 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.11-18-92 144771 MICROSICS CORPORATION $1,404.97 CHEMICALS 144772 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $1,725.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 144773 MILLTRONICS $1.930.03 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1M774 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.961.14 UNIFORM RENTALS 1M775 MORELAND&ASSOCIATES $4W.25 FINANCIAL AUDIT SERVICES 1M776 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $270.05 FITTINGS 1M777 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $311.01 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 144778 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $1.82372 MECHANICAL PARTS 1M779 NEUTRON $3,455.42 ANIONIC POLYMER M.01.11)-94 1M7B0 NEOTRONICS $215.30 INSTRUMENT PARTS 1M781 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $56.92 WATER USE 1M782 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL $9,684.10 DISABILITY INSURANCE 144783 OI CORPORATION $314.79 LAB SUPPLIES 144784 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $142.73 TRUCK PARTS 144785 ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS JOURNAL $79.00 SUBSCRIPTION 144786 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMICAL CO. $2,152.57 CHEMICALS 144787 ORANGECOUNTYWHOLESALE 54,314.83 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 144788 ORANGE COURIER $511.50 COURIER SERVICES 1M789 ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $1,473.56 FITTINGS FUNDNO 91" - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 5112I95 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP03 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05117MS POSTING DATE 05117/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 100790 PARASITOLOGY RESEARCH LABS $125.00 LAB SUPPLIES 1"791 PSSI $1.500,00 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 1"792 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $90.90 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"793 PACIFIC PARTS $8,225.99 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1 0780 PACIFIC BELL $136.76 TELEPHONE SERVICES 100795 PADRE JANITORIAL SUPPLY $484.65 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 10796 PALMIERI.TYLER.WIENER, $980.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6.12.91 1"797 PARKHOUSE TIRE CO. $360.98 TIRES 104798 PASCAL AND LUDWIG $13,023.00 CONSTRUCTION P243 m 1"799 PASCAL B LUDWIG $6,376.50 CONSTRUCTION P142 S 100800 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS B0,5111.07 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL �+ 100B01 PIERCE CHEMICAL COMPANY $102.00 LAB SUPPLIES 100802 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $106.026.01 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O."-91 y 100803 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS f03,516.57 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 10B00 PLAN OLYMETHOLD CS.IN f262.75 OFFICE FURNITURE t00B05 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.73 LAB SUPPLIES p 100807 POWER SYSTEMS INC. $1$701.36 CATIONIC POLYMER M O.I-11-92 t0aB07 POWER SYSTEMS f701.S8 ENGINEERING PARTS 1NB08 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $175.00 ICE I"m PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $368.00 SOIL TESTING 100610 PRYOR REPORT $79.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1"811 RJN COMPUTER SERVICES,INC. $7,723.76 COMPUTER SERVICES 1"512 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $3.033.65 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS 10813 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1.715.43 TRASH REMOVAL 100810 THE REGISTER 3652.OD NOTICES B ADS 100815 REMEDY TEMP $3,594.40 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL 104816 ROYCE PRODUCTIONS $323.25 PUBLICATIONS 1"517 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 5526.12 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 10AB18 SARTORIUS CORP. 5082.39 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 100818 DOUG SARVIS $1.125.00 CPIVFIRST AID TRAINING 1"820 SCHWINGAMERICA 53.230.51 PUMP PARTS 100821 CITY OF SEAL BEACH $M.00 ENGINEERING INSPECTION-3W 104822 SHURELUCK SALES $4.300.69 TOOLSINARDWARE 1"823 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC 5550.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 104820 SOCOASTAIROUALITY S4,109.25 PERMIT FEES 100825 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY $12,810.00 CLEAN AIR ACT FEE 10826 SO CALIF.COSTAL WATER $299,700.OD ANNUAL SCCWRPA FEES M.O2.9.90 100627 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. 562,675.08 POWER 100828 SO.CAL GAS.CO. $9.307.07 NATURAL GAS 1NB29 $O.CALIF.WATER CO. $77.52 WATER USE I"S30 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $10.573.03 DIESEIAINLEADED FUEL 1"831 SOUVENIR PHOTO $107.Q PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 1"832 SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER $70.25 DRINKING WATERICOOLER RENTALS 1"03 SPECIAL PLASTICS SYSTEMS,INC. $2.638.80 MECHANICAL PARTS 1N830 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION $200.00 ANNEXATION FEE 1"835 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 5200.00 ANNEXATION FEE C FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5112195 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAR)05H7195 POSTING DATE 057178Y4 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144836 SUNCUPSE,INC. $720.33 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 144537 SUNSET FORD $517.90 TRUCK PARTS 144838 SUPELCO.INC. $Iu.60 IAS SUPPLIES 144839 SUPER CHEM CORP. $414.62 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144840 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG.COMPANY $1.112.52 ELECTRIC CART PARTS 144841 TEKTRONIX,INC. $305.55 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144M THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 6987.56 MECHANICAL PARTS 144843 TOKIO MARINE&FIRE $954.34 LIABILITY CLAIM 3-CSD-96-L-6 1448" TOWS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $103.09 LOCKS&KEYS % 1M845 TRAVELEXECUWES $1.667.19 TRAVEL SERVICES M.0.64594 S 144846 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. &981.00 TRUCK PARTS I"S07 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,749.56 LAB SERVICES 144808 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $233.35 INS71RUMENTPARTS H 1M809 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $59T00 LAB SUPPLIES „1 144850 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $116.24 PARCEL SERVICES 144851 DATAVAULTIUS SAFE DEPOSIT CO. $238.00 DATA STORAGE I^ 144852 VAUN CORPORATION $450.35 MECHANICAL PARTS 144853 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $318.51 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144854 VORTEX INDUSTRIES $849.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 144655 WATERS CORPORATION $37.33 LAB SUPPLIES 144858 WECO INDUSTRIES,INC. 67,W7.64 MECHANICAL PARTS 144857 WGRA WORKSHOPS 9345.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 144858 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $37,735.71 CAUSTIC SODA&XYPOCHLORIDE M.0.8.12A2&4-1344 144859 WEST-UTE SUPPLY CO. $192.44 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144860 WITEG $716A7 LAB SUPPLIES 144861 XEROX CORP. $9,922.22 COPIER LEASES 144862 ZYMARK CORP. S265AS LAB SUPPLIES 144863 DAVID R GRIFFIN 675.=.00 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.09-14-94 $1.669,739.72 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING OATE S 12M5 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/17/95 POSTING DATE 05/17/95 SUMMARY AMOUNT 82 OPER FUND 2.891.13 42 CAP FAC FUND 86,959.77 93 OPER FUND 53.695.14 83 CAP FAC FUND 113,316.03 05 CRIER FUND 0,429.09 87 OPER FUND 5.852.54 [n 87 CAP FAC FUND 11,492.69 K 611 OPER FUND 4.796.82 5 011 CAP FAC FUND 388.00 914 CAP FAC FUND 2,18BW 0586 OPER FUND 2,637.94 H 9687 0PER FUND 3,161.28 M 97814 OPER FUND 6,22t.73 I JT OPER FUND 449,899.42 CORF 477,447.11 SELF4'UNDED INSURANCE FUND 4.042.26 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 464,347.47 1,689,739.72 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (8): Consideration of roll call vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts (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). Summary See attached listing of claim payments. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of payment of claims listing. nwrooaesncasosoe FUND NO SIN - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 526195 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0513195 POSTING DATE 0513195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 1M883 AS TECH COMPANY $150.024.31 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.OAD-9-91 144864 A-Z LOGIC SYSTEMS $197.71 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 1M885 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $1,274.99 MECHANICAL PARTS 144886 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSOC. $695.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144887 AMERICAN DIVERSIFIED SILVER $1.485.67 REFUND ECSA DEPOSIT 1M888 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE $1.899.00 TRAINING MATERIALS 144589 ANAHEIM SEWER CONSTRUCTION S3.WO.00 EMERGENCY SEWER REPAIRS 1M890 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $20.87 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144891 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $465.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT W892 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $2,478.01 NOTICES 8 ADS 1M893 APPLIED SIOSYSTEMS,INC. E2,476.86 LAB SUPPLIES 1M894 ABC LABORATORIES $2.560.00 LAB SERVICES 1N895 ATKIWJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144896 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $574.93 FITTINGS 144897 AWARDS B TROPHIES $26.36 PLAQUES 1M898 BKK LANDFILL $2.376.39 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9-91 1M899 BANANA BLUEPRINT $9.600.54 PRINTING M.O.11-07-94 144900 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $274.43 BATTERIES 1M901 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. 54,313.52 LAB SUPPLIES IM902 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $83,84 LAB SUPPLIES 144903 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. $255.27 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1M904 J 8 H BERGE.INC. E79.33 LAB SUPPLIES 1M905 A BIEDERMAN.INC. $164.79 MECHANICAL PARTS 144906 BISHOP COMPANY $33020 TOOLS 144907 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $33.840.51 ENGINEERING SERVICES P141 1M9DB BRENNER-FIEDLER&ASSOC.,INC. $592.30 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1M909 MARK E.BRIGHTLY $3,2W.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 1M910 BRONSON.BRONSON B MCKINNON $64.889.71 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.O.12-8-94 1M911 BUSH S ASSOCIATES,INC. $678.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6- 94 144912 CN2M HILL $68.365.85 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-31 144913 C.L.TECHNOLOGY $720.00 GAS ANALYSIS SERVICES 144914 CS COMPANY $4,464.38 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144915 CALFON CONSTRUCTION $78,231.40 CONSTRUCTION 3.38-2 1M916 CALTROL,INC. $498.24 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 144917 CALTEX PLASTICS,INC. $346.40 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES W918 CANUS CORPORATION $26.581.95 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 144919 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. $45.18 REGULATOR 1M920 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $7.645.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES M.O.3.8-95 144921 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $431.613.92 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI.38,PI-36 1M922 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION S3,2M.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 1M923 CENTRAL VALLEY WASTEWATER MGRS $100.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1M924 CETAC TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $264.M LAB SUPPLIES 144926 M.C.KENNICUTT $1,671.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144926 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $1,460.00 PUMP PARTS 1M927 COASTAL CHLORINATION $1,008.00 WATER LINE DISINFECTION 1"928 COASTALMOTION $1,332.00 MEMBERSHIP FEES FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126/95 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/3IN5 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144929 COLD SAWS OF AMERICA.INC. $88.76 WELDING PARTS 144930 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $242,58 LAB SUPPLIES 1M931 COUCH AND SONS $66,991,00 CONSTRUCTION M.O.2A-95 1"932 COUCH&SONS $5Q262.06 CONSTRUCTION 11-17.1 144933 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $2.467.48 PUMP REPAIRS 144934 CONNEL GM PARTS/DIV. $139.57 TRUCK PARTS 1"935 CONSOLIDATED FREIGHIWAYS $2,335.81 FREIGHT 144936 CONSUMER PIPE $61.20 MECHANICAL PARTS 144937 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. S456.66 TOOLS 144938 CONTROL DESIGN SUPPLY $332.87 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 1M939 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $241 29 TRUCK PARTS 1M940 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $1,049.35 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1M941 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $2.572.78 ELECTRIC PARTS 1M942 DAILY PILOT $102.00 NOTICES&ADS 144943 HSK/DECKER $2.951.74 GAUGES 1M9M DELTA POINT,INC. $61,32 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144945 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $13.945.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1"948 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $3,533,57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 1M947 DNERSIFIED BIOTECH,INC. $33.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144948 ESP NORTH $395.18 TOOLS 144949 EASTMAN.INC. $6,513.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1M950 ECOANALYSIS,INC. $1,320.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 144951 EDWARDS DIV.OF GS BLDG SYS. $535.49 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144952 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6.10.92 1M953 ENVIROGEN,INC. $1.569.00 PILOT PROJ.EQUIPMENT-SIOTRICKLING FILTER 144954 FMC CORP. SM,153.90 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9.14-94 144955 MARSHALL FAIRRES $28.08 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144956 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $1,820.00 RESIDUALS REMOVALM0. 10-9-91 144957 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $836.80 AIR FREIGHT 144958 FIRST COMPANY WOR NORTHERN DIST. $155.41 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144959 FISCHER&PORTER CO. $38.12 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 144960 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1,174.38 LAB SUPPLIES 1M961 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $290.60 LAB SUPPLIES 144952 FLICKINGER CO. $1.309.16 PLUMBING PARTS 144963 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $147.76 PHOTO SUPPLIES 144964 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $216.59 PAINT SUPPLIES 144965 FREEDOM IMAGING $70.72 SERVICE AGREEMENT 1M966 CITY OF FULLERTON $900.00 WATER USE 144967 EST,INC. $3,608.94 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144968 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $824.95 LUMBER/HARDWARE 1M969 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $182.10 CHEMICALS 144970 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $290.00 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 1M971 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $6,558.26 TELEPHONE SERVICES 1M972 GIERUCH-MITCHELL,INC. $4.403.65 PUMP PARTS 1M973 N.GLANTZ&SON,INC. $189.10 PAINT SUPPLIES 144974 GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES,INC. $47.M PUBLICATION FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5IM195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID O5131195 POSTING DATE 05131/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144975 VAN GRAINGER,INC. $612.59 ELECTRIC PARTS 144976 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $45.38 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 144977 GRASSY S.T.I. $4.225.82 ENGINE PARTS 144978 DGACONSULTANTS $8.060.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.".94 144979 HACH COMPANY $300.93 LAB SUPPLIES 144980 HARBOUR ENGINEERING $13,687A2 PUMP PARTS 144981 FRED A HARPER $1,100.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144982 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $820.10 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144983 HATCH&KIRK,INC. $1.924.40 ENGINE PARTS 144984 PL HAWN CO,INC. $146.09 FILTERS 1"965 HILTI,INC. $1,029.94 TOOLS 1"986 HOME DEPOT $209.43 HARDWARE 144987 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $51177 PAINT SUPPLIES 144968 ORANGE COUNTY FED.CREDIT UNION $680,00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144989 IBGIMICROSE MASTER,INC. $14,38kW DIGESTER CLEANING 144990 IDEXX $777.07 LAB SUPPLIES 144991 IPCO SAFETY $3,353.58 SAFETY SUPPLIES 144992 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $57,726.07 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11.18-92 1"993 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $28.56 CONNECTORS 144994 ISI INFORTEXT $1,593.54 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144995 INORGANIC VENTURES,INC. $735,51 LAB SUPPLIES 144996 J2 PRINTING SERVICES $50&35 PRINTING 144997 J.D.I.TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $2.613.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144998 JAMISON ENGINEERING $24,434.83 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 144999 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $887.69 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145000 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $55.34 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145001 JOHNSON CONTROLS,INC. $686.63 ELECTRIC PARTS 145002 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $131.15 ELECTRIC PARTS 145003 THE KEITH COMPANIES $234.70 ENGINEERING SERVICES 3-36R 145004 KING BEARING,INC. $556.65 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145005 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $2.420.99 HARDWARE 145006 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $388.75 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICES 146007 LAUNDROMAT 345.85 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 1450DS LAWICRANDAL.INC. $6.242.50 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.7-13.94 145009 LIMITORQUE CORP. $2,241.17 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 146010 LOCALAGENCY $450.00 LAFCO FEES 146011 MPS $15.30 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 145012 MACOMCO $577.20 SERMCEAGREEMENT 145013 MAG-TROL,INC. $68.47 ELECTRIC PARTS 145014 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $199.17 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145015 MCKENNA ENGR.&EQUIP. $142.01 PUMP PARTS 145018 MECHANICAL DRIVES CO. $248.18 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145017 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $3,496.27 GAUGES 145018 MICRO MOTION $522.25 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145019 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $6,363.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 145020 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRIES. $85.00 OFFICE REPAIRS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 526/95 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05731195 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145021 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.347.85 UNIFORM RENTALS 146022 MLADEN BUNTICH CONSTRUCTION $61.772.98 CONSTRUCTION 1414A 145023 MONITOR LABS $91.90 FITTINGS 145024 MONITOR PUBLISHING CO. $213.75 SUBSCRIPTION 145025 MONTGOMERY WATSON $1,664.12 AIR TOXICS PROJECT M..12-12-90 145026 MORTON SALT $500.52 SALT 145027 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $359.32 FITTINGS 145028 MOTOROLA.INC. $513.95 COMMUNICATIONS SUPPLIES 145029 NASCO $308.76 LAB SUPPLIES 145030 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES,INC. $9,500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 145031 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $1,282.81 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145032 NEUTRON $1.742.36 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8-10.94 145033 CUMMINS CAL PAC/ONAN $45.23 ELECTRIC PARTS 1450M OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $161.13 SAFETY GLASSES 145035 ON TECHNOLOGY $106.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145036 ORANGE COUNTY FARM SUPPLY $1.529.71 CHEMICALS 145037 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $8,508.12 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145038 ORANGE COURIER $151.05 COURIER SERVICES 145039 ORANGE VALVE B FITTING CO. $707.65 FITTINGS 14504D OXYGEN SERVICE $3,563.04 SPECIALTY GASES 145041 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $9.091.19 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145042 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $66.955.00 GAP WATER USE M.O.6-9.93 14MM3 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $2.338.20 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1450" PACIFIC PARTS $13,994.14 INSTRUMENT PARTSIOFFICE EQUIPMENT 145045 PACIFIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT,INC. $314.93 PUMP PARTS 145046 PACIFIC BELL $1,247.70 TELEPHONE SERVICES /45047 PACIFIC LAND DEVELOPMENT $2.232.50 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145048 PACIFIC WATER CONDITIONING CO. $590.00 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 145049 PAGENET $1,043.49 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 145050 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 145051 PARALLAX EDUCATION $4,740.89 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145052 PARKER DIVING SERVICE $34.895.00 OCEAN OUTFALL REPAIRS NL0.4-26.95 145053 PARTS UNLIMITED $773.91 TRUCK PARTS 1450M COUNTY SANTATION DISTRICTS $3.524.89 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL 145055 PHARMACIA BIOTECH,INC. $460.49 LAB REPAIRS 145055 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $104.515.60 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.54-91 145057 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $36.337.67 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145058 PLAINS TRUEVALUE HARDWARE $19.37 HARDWARE 145059 POLYPURE,INC. $15,874.42 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3-11-92 145060 POSTAGE BY PHONE $5,000.00 POSTAGE 145061 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $96.00 ICE 145062 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $779.00 SOIL TESTING 145063 PROMINENT FLUID CONTROL $799.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 145084 QUALITY BUILDING SUPPLY $167A4 BUILDING SUPPLIES 145065 RJN COMPUTER SERVICES,INC. $995.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1450SS RB R INSTRUMENTS $569.76 INSTRUMENT PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5I46105 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OM1195 POSTING DATE 0501195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 14SW7 REBIS $11.693.82 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145DSB REISH MARINE STUDIES,INC. $580.00 OCEAN MONITORING 14%69 REMEDYTEMP $1.511.80 TEMPORARY SERVICES 145070 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $1,991.63 VALVES 145071 ROBINSON FERTILIZER $1.411.31 CHEMICALS 145072 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL,INC. $114.56 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145073 RYAN-NERCO $574.34 METAL 145074 SARRS-PDC $1,800.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145075 SANWA BANK $113.595.17 CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 14-1-1-A 145076 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTL 5553.703.96 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6.&94 145077 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $1.764.04 SPECIALTY GASES 145078 SEA-BIRD ELECTRONICS.INC. $345.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145079 SEA COAST DESIGNS $144.60 OFFICE REPAIRS 145080 SEARS ROEBUCK 8 CO. $359SO REFRIGERATOR 145081 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $478,41 HARDWARE 145082 SHURELUCK SALES $4,701.82 TOOLSIKARDWARE 145063 M.LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS 8 ASSN. $487.00 SUBSCRIPTION 14SD54 SO COAST AIR QUALITY $3.481.80 PERMIT FEES 145085 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY $60.00 PERMIT FEES 145088 SOUTH COAST WATER $140.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145087 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16,114.10 POWER 145088 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $56.274.83 NATURAL GAS 146089 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $28.015A4 DIESELIUNLEADED FUEL 145090 SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER $2,653.63 DRINKING WATERICOOLER RENTALS 146091 WESTALLOY,INC. $236.16 WELDING SUPPLIES 145092 SPECTRUM CHEMICAL $166.71 LAB SUPPLIES 14W93 SPEX INDUSTRIES.INC. $2,455.45 LAB SUPPLIES 1450Bd SQUARE DICRISP AUTOMATION SYST. $96,883.03 SOFTWARE LICENSE M.O.7-13.94 145M STERLING ART $138.10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145098 SUMMIT STEEL $1,900.45 METAL 145097 SUNSET INDUSTRIAL PARTS $186.73 PUMP PARTS 145098 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $11.84 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 145099 SUPER CHEM CORP. $406.82 CHEMICALS 145100 TCH ASSOCIATES $491.91 LAB SUPPLIES 145101 THERMO JARRELL ASH CORP. $1,308.72 LAB SUPPLIES 145102 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $322.42 MECHANICAL PARTS 146103 TOLEDO SCALE CORP. $1.049.81 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 1451M TONY'S LOCK B SAFE SERVICE $651.95 LOCKS 8 KEYS 145105 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $999.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.6-8-94 1451M TREBOR ELECTRONICS $569.48 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145107 TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY.INC. $3,456.84 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.O.5-11.94 145106 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,OB4.25 LAB SERVICES 145109 JG TUCKER B SON,INC. $814.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145110 TUSTIN DODGE $38.19 TRUCK PARTS 145111 TUTHILL CORPORATION $16.941.62 MECHANICAL PARTS 145112 URISA $90.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE W6195 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05131/95 POSTING DATE 05131/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR 145113 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $318.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145114 UNISOURCE81OR BUTLER PAPER 8844.13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 146115 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 8614.87 PARCEL SERVICES 145116 VWR SCIENTIFIC $743.65 LAB SUPPLIES 145117 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. 8883.57 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145118 VERNE'S PLUMBING $3,002.30 PLUMBING SERVICES 145119 VERTEX SYSTEMS $1.252.71 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT 145120 VILLAGE NURSERIES $297.67 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 145121 CARL WARREN&CO. $185.21 LIAB.CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 145122 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL FED. $261.50 PUBLICATIONS 145123 WAXIE $475.39 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145124 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $30,558.59 CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.0.8-12-92 8 4-13.94 145125 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $732.36 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145125 WITEG $172.40 LAB SUPPLIES 145127 ROURKE,WOODRUFF&SPRADLIN $55.221.05 LEGAL SERVICES M.0.2-19-92 145126 WORDPERFECT $195.00 PUBLICATION 146129 XEROX CORP. $1,060.70 COPIER LEASES 145130 RICHARD B.EDGAR $200.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 2,725,516.88 SUMMARY AMOUNT 02 OPER FUND 10,452.23 02 CAP FAC FUND 779.00 R3 OPER FUND 8,193.31 03 CAP FAC FUND 174,354.30 05 OPER FUND 6.901.50 07 OPER FUND 4,048.75 07 CAP FAC FUND 4,610.29 011 OPER FUND 2.018.34 011 CAP FAC FUND 51,001.99 014 OPER FUND 46A0 014 CAP FAC FUND 186,164.03 05&6 OPER FUND 126.97 05&6 CAP FAC FUND 2.612.51 06&7 OPER FUND 2D8.80 67&14 OPER FUND 976.09 JT OPER FUND 1.404.430.38 CORF 628,873.39 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 15,309.90 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 226.361.10 (� 2.725.510.98 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6/09/95 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID W14/95 POSTING DATE W14195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 145157 AA EQUIPMENT $861.27 PUMP 145158 AG TECH COMPANY $88,274.21 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 145159 A T&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2.39&92 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145160 AT&T-MEGACOMSERVICE $958.94 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145161 AT&T-FAX SERVICE $1.041.42 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145162 ADAMS PRECISION INSTRUMENTATION $142.77 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145163 ADVANCED MFG.INSTITUTE $795.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145164 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS,INC. $36,074.40 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.8-9-89 145165 ALLIED ELECTRONICS $139.00 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145165 AMERIDATA $4,518.70 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145167 AMERICAN SIGMA $434.79 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145168 AMSCO $406.07 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145169 BLAKE P.ANDERSON $79.97 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145170 APCO VALVE&PRIMER CORP. $3,825.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145171 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $6,330.25 NOTICES&ADS 145172 ACS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) $3,M.50 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145173 ABC LABORATORIES $235.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145174 ARIZONA INSTRUMENT $175.37 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145175 ARTS DISPOSAL SERVICE,INC. $282.20 RECYCLABLE MATERIALS REMOVAL 145176 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $3.408.41 PAYROLL SERVICES 146177 AWARDS&TROPHIES $412.29 PLAQUES 145178 BKK LANDFILL $2,793.36 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 145179 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $1.161.68 BATTERIES 146180 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $3.193.37 LAB SUPPLIES 145181 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES.INC. $210.80 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 145182 J&H BERGE.INC. $79.64 LAB SUPPLIES 145183 BETA TECHNOLOGY,INC. $53.64 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145184 BID TECH NET,INC. $3.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 146185 BUCK&VEATCH $52.844.67 ENGINEERING SERVICES P145 146186 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $25,885.40 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.O.1241-94 145187 SNIBOOKS $153.64 BOOKS 146188 BURKE ENGINEERING CO. $946.05 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145189 CEM CORPORATION $272A3 LAB SUPPLIES 145190 CEPA $2,142.06 LAB SUPPLIES 146191 C.P.I. $755.87 LAB SUPPLIES 145192 CPRA REGISTRAR $1.012.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 145193 1995 CONFERENCE,CWPCA.INC. $190.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 145194 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $530.10 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145195 CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE $108.30 PUBLICATION 145195 CANUS CORPORATION $39,793.64 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 145197 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. $136.86 REGULATOR 146198 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $6.752.44 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI-43,P1 J8 M199 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION $142.58 ELECTRIC PARTS 1452M CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $150.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 145201 CHEMWEST,INC. S414.08 PUMP PARTS 145202 CLARK CONSULTANTS $390.00 ELECTRICAL CONSULTING FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CMMS PAID 08/14/95 POSTING DATE O5114195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145203 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $75.51 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145204 COLICH AND SONS $26,033,22 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 3.36 145205 COMPUSERVE $282,39 COMPUTER SERVICES 145208 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO. $323,35 TOOLS 145207 CONSTRUCTION FABRICATORS,INC. $1,644.70 MECHANICAL PARTS 145206 CONSUMER PIPE $954.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145209 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $345,79 ELECTRIC PARTS 145210 CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT CO. $158.23 FITTINGS 145211 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $2.73244 ENGINE PARTS 145212 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $30605 TRUCK PARTS 145213 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $1,368,76 ELECTRIC PARTS 145214 DAILY PILOT $96.00 NOTICES 8 ADS 145215 DATASTORM $153.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145215 DAVIS INSTRUMENTS $506.95 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145217 HSK/DECKER $1.324.75 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145218 DEZURICKAND/ORCSCO. $10.033.69 VALVES 145219 THE DICKSON COMPANY $106.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 145220 SYCON CORP. $1,198.29 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145221 DIPPER DAN $60.00 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS 145222 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $1.858.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 146223 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $699.10 PAINT SUPPLIES 145224 E.C.S. $26T00 PUBLICATION 145225 ESP NORTH $690.44 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 145226 EASTMAN,INC. $2,960.14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145227 ECOANALYSIS,INC. $5,220.50 CONSULTING SERVICES 145228 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-1Q92 145229 ENSYS,INC. $325A8 LAB SUPPLIES 145230 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $1.096.50 LAB SERVICES 146231 EQUESTRIAN FORGE $1,096.56 PLAQUES 145232 FMC CORP. $33.588.35 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9-14-94 145233 FST SAND AND GRAVEL,INC. $249.00 ROAD BASE MATERIALS 145234 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $3,677.50 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.D. 10.9.91 145235 FIRST COMPANYWOR NORTHERN DIST. $195.61 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145236 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1,935.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145237 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $1,271.78 LABSUPPLIES 145236 FLICKINGER CO. $3,534.20 VALVES 145239 CUFFORD A.FORKERT $2.6M.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.64-94 145240 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $91.68 PHOTO SUPPLIES 145241 CT'OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $11.276.60 WATER USE 145242 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $193.61 PAINT SUPPLIES 145243 THE FOXBORO CO. 54,749.01 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145244 CITY OF FULLERTON $139.23 WATER USE 145245 GST,INC. $629.94 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145246 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $884.15 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145247 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $216.30 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145240 GRAHAM MANUFACTURING CO. $111.79 PUMP PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID O04195 POSTING DATE W14195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145249 GRASBYS.T.I. $324.65 ENGINE PARTS 145250 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $294.18 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1452SI GREAT LAKES INSTRUMENTS,INC. $22,691.32 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145252 DGA CONSULTANTS $2.730.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6-5-94 145253 DAVID R.GRIFFIN S164,306.85 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.O.9-W94 1452M HACH COMPANY $2,003.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145255 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $1,403.82 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145256 HATCH 8 KIRK,INC. $575.07 TRUCK PARTS 145257 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $1,925.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 145258 PL HAWN CO.INC. $8.809.39 INSTRUMENTPARTS 145259 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2.083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 145260 HOLMES 8 NARVER,INC. $33.323.52 ENGINEERING SERVICES P1d4 145261 HOME DEPOT $263.11 HARDWARE 145262 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $1,018.50 PAINT SUPPLIES 145263 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH $19.66 WATER USE 1452M IPCO SAFETY $1,992.49 SAFETY SUPPLIES 145255 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $110.690.27 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11-18-92 145266 IMPULSE ENTERPRISE $404.99 LAB SUPPLIES 145267 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $1,400.73 CONNECTORS 145265 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $703.62 BATTERIES 145269 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $45.13 WATERUSE 145270 J2 PRINTING SERVICES $602.04 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145271 AT COMPUTER SOURCE,INC. $818.90 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145272 JAMISON ENGINEERING $8.830.33 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 145273 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $233.47 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145274 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $1.997.07 GAUGE 145275 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $410.06 PAINT SUPPLIES 145276 KALUEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $62.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES 146277 KEYE PRODUCTIVITY CENTER $139.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145278 KING BEARING,INC. $1.515.84 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145279 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $1.752.34 TOOLS 145280 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $57.59 SERVICEAGREEMENT 145281 LATRONICS $2.527.07 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 145282 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $1.475.64 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIR.M.O.12-9�90 146283 SOHO-LYNCH CORP. $135.61 JANITORIAL SERVICES 145284 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $974.10 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-10-92 145285 MAGNETEK $5.830.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145286 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $103,477.00 CONSTRUCTION P242-2 145287 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $638.06 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145288 MATT-CHLOR,INC. $1.815.69 VALVE PARTS 145289 MAVERIK.INC. $2,887.28 CRANE REPAIRS 145290 CHUCK MCRANEY $511.14 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145291 MEDLIN CONTROLS,INC. 53,825.84 INSTRUMENTPARTS 145292 METRA CORPORATION $1.205.40 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145293 MICROSOFT PRESS $169.57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE , 145294 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES $996b9 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES FUNDING 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6MI95 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OB114195 POSTING DATE=14195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145295 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.182,67 UNIFORM RENTALS 145296 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $1.214.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 145297 MONITOR LABS $1,616.86 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145298 NASCO $617,60 LAB SUPPLIES 145299 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $70.35 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 146300 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $57A7 PUBLICATION 145301 NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP $594.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145302 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $7.386.05 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145303 NEUTRON $8,693.11 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.S-I4N 145304 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTER $60000 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145305 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $225.43 LAB SUPPLIES 145306 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $5.29 WATER USE 145307 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL $35000 NEW HEALTH ACCOUNT 1453M OI CORPORATION $6 00 LAB SUPPLIES 145309 THE OHMART CORP. $554.41 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145310 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $135.79 TRUCK PARTS 145311 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $2,787.54 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145312 ORANGE VALVE&FTTTING CO. $1,178.93 FITTINGS 145313 OXYGEN SERVICE $2,207.26 SPECIALTY GASES 145314 COUNTY OF ORANGE $5,682,71 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145315 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $17,543,61 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145316 COUNTY OF ORANGE $104,00 PERMIT FEES 145317 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $16,175.44 GAP WATER USE M.O.6.9-93 145310 COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH CARE 51,215.00 SEWAGE SPILL REIMBURSEMENT 145319 P&D ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $1.336.91 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY 145320 PSOC(POOL SUPPLY OF GO) $79.24 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145321 PACIFIC PARTS $8,843.39 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145322 PACIFIC BELL $75.74 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145323 PAINE WEBBER $28,144.69 COP REMARKET FEES 145324 PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $40.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6.12-91 145325 FARMHOUSE TIRE CO. $909.24 TIRES 145326 PASCAL&LUDWIG $8,753.50 CONSTRUCTION P142 145327 PERFORMANCE TRAINING ASSOC. $590.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145328 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $3.085.69 LAB SUPPLIES 145329 PERVO PAINT $148.48 PAINT SUPPLIES 145330 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $5,228.54 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL 145331 PIERCE COMPANIES $398.98 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145332 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $5,572.03 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145333 POLY FABRICS $2,068.80 PVC LINER 145334 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.75 LAB SUPPLIES 145335 POLYPURE,INC. $28,547.43 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3-11-92 145336 POWER SYSTEMS $47.45 ENGINE PARTS 145337 PRITCHETT AND ASSOCIATES,INC. $201.50 PUBLICATION 145338 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. $2.128.00 SOIL TESTING 145339 PUBLIC FINANCIAL MGMT.,INC. $13.895.10 FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.6-8.94 145M RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $4,852.64 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6/09/95 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID O6114195 POSTING DATE 06/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145MI R&R INSTRUMENTS $52.08 ELECTRIC PARTS 145342 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1,715.43 TRASH REMOVAL 145343 REGISTRAR,A&WMA $750.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 1453" REMEDYTEMP $3,899.56 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL SERVICES 145345 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY 53.719.87 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145346 RENOLD.INC. $0.19 MECHANICAL PARTS 145341 HOWARD RIDLEY CO. 38,9W.00 BUILDING REPAIRS 145348 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $12.139.24 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145349 MILTON RIVERA $13,844.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 145350 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL,INC. $114.56 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145351 SAFETY CARE,INC. $193.96 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 145352 SANCON ENGINEERING,INC. $16,987.32 ENGINEERING SERVICES 145353 R CRAIG SCOTT&ASSOC. $10.231.28 LEGAL SERVICES,PERSONNEL 145354 CITY OF SEAL BEACH $362.30 WATER USE 145355 SEIKO INSTRUMENTS $76.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145356 SHUREWCK SALES $8,532.04 TOOLSIHARDWARE 146357 SIGMA CHEMICAL CO. $36.69 LAB SUPPLIES 145358 SIMON&SCHUSTER $84.86 PUBLICATION 145359 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $401.50 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 145360 SMITH-EMERY CO. $475.00 SOIL TESTING M.O.7-13-94 145361 SOUTH COAST WATER $375.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145362 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON CO. $60,58217 POWER 145353 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16,933.94 POWER 145364 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $4.005.99 NATURAL GAS 145365 SOUTH PACIFIC MARBLE&TILE $1,426.16 GROUNDSKEEPING SUPPLIES 145366 SOUTHWEST SCIENTIFIC $927.81 LAB SUPPLIES 146367 SPECIAL PLASTIC SYSTEMS,INC. $946.92 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145368 STERLING ART $50A4 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145369 SUMMIT STEEL $2,175.69 METAL 145370 SUNSETFORD $273.21 TRUCKPARTS 145371 TAYLOR INDUSTRIAL SOFTWARE $150.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145372 TONY'S LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $593.48 LOCKS&KEYS 145373 TOSHIBA INTERNATIONAL $76.26 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145374 SO CALIF TRANE SERVICE $4.384.14 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145375 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $2,628.60 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.6-8-94 145376 TRIBEST VISUAL DISPLAY $446.00 PROJECTOR SCREEN REPAIR 145377 TRUCK PARTS SUPPLY $310.74 TRUCK PARTS 145373 TRUESDAIL LABS $4,732.98 LAB SERVICES 145379 JG TUCKER&SON.INC. $Z122.99 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145350 UNISOURCE&ROR BUTLER PAPER $395.30 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145381 DATAVAULTAIS SAFE DEPOSIT CORP. $104.00 SAFE DEPOSIT BOX 145382 VWR SCIENTIFIC $860.67 LAB SUPPLIES 145383 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $718.95 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145384 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $2,647.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145355 VERNE'S PLUMBING $430.00 PLUMBING SERVICES 145386 VILLAGE NURSERIES $113.41 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06/14/95 POSTING DATE 0fi114195 WARRANTNO. VENDOR 145387 WATER ENVIRONMENT FED. $187.25 LAB SUPPLIES 145388 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $57,869.12 CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.0.B-12-92&4.13-94 145389 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $439.73 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145390 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL $243.52 TRUCK PARTS 145391 XEROX CORP. $11,428.57 COPIER LEASES 1,372,804.62 SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 CONSTR.FUND $5.032.64 #2 0RER FUND 2,983.38 #2 CAP FAC FUND 38.396.73 #2 CONSTR.FUND 10.646.60 #3 OPER FUND 30.421.69 #3 CAP FAC FUND 109.620.35 #3 CONSTR.FUND 10,095.84 #5 OPER FUND 3.462.41 95 CONSTR.FUND 995.82 #6 OPER FUND 1,430.33 #6 CAP FAC FUND 1,700.00 #6 CONSTR.FUND 271.79 #7 OPER FUND 3.556.93 07 CAP FAC FUND 142.53 #7 CONSTR.FUND 764.86 #11 OPER FUND 17.986.99 #11 CAP FAC FUND 2.139.98 #11 CONSTR.FUND 337.14 #14 OPER FUND 17,295.25 05&6 DEER FUND 2.081.88 #8&7 OPER FUND 2,652.26 #7&14 OPER FUND 5,239.14 JT OPER FUND 538,073.30 CORE 270.677.09 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 19,976.94 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 196.842.70 1.372.804.62 a JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(a): consideration of motion to award purchase order for Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044, to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., for the amount not to exceed $57,160.00, plus sales tax. Summary A temporary bleach disinfection system is proposed to replace the existing chlorine emergency outfall disinfection system. The temporary unit is required because the existing system does not have adequate capacity to disinfect treated wastewater as required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. Implementation of the temporary facility will eliminate the need to develop a Risk v Management Prevention Plan which is required by November 1995 at an estimated cost of $100,000.00. The cost for the temporary facilities will be offset by reducing the $75,000.00 per year maintenance expenditures. Installing temporary units will also eliminate a hazardous chemical from the treatment facility, thus improving worker and public safety. Sealed bids, for one-year rental period, with an alternate bid for direct purchase, were received from two (2) prequali ied suppliers. Only one company bid on the rental period, whereas both companies bid on the direct purchase alternate bid. On the direct purchase alternative, the low bid of $57,160.00, was submitted by Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., and the high bid of $69,900.00 was submitted by Arden Industries. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends award of a purchase order to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc.,the lowest responsible bidder, for the purchase of the temporary emergency outfall disinfection system in the amount of $57,160.00, plus applicable sales tax. Fiwwww�mwrnoass COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS + April 14, 1995 0 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA tp8aa EW 6 sVBAIE MEMORANDUM eo.BD%6+a, n+naszza++ TO: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager FROM: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager SUBJECT: Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System Specification No. R-044 Sealed bids were opened May 9, 1995, for the Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044. Tabulation of bids is as follows: Twelve-month Direct Purchase Firm Rental Period (Alternate) Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc. Pittsburgh, PA $60,960.00 $57,160.00 Arden Industries Rancho Cordova, CA No-Bid $69,900.00 Sealed bids, for one-year rental period, with an alternate bid for direct purchase, were received from two (2) prequalified suppliers. Only one company bid on the rental period, whereas both companies bid on the direct purchase alternate bid. On the direct purchase alternative, the low bid of $57,160.00, was submitted by Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., and the high bid of $69,900.00 was submitted by Arden Industries. Staff recommends award of a purchase order to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., low bidder, for their alternate bid of direct purchase of the temporary emergency outtall disinfection system in the amount of $57,160.00, plus applicable sales tax. Katherine Yarosh Senior Buyer WeAereby,yoncur whit."foregoing recommarKWM: i Ted Moffman, Pur asing Me ger aryector of ,G. St, ad, Robert J. Ooten Dirsince Assistant Director of Operations COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS r April 14, 1995 01 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10E44 EWE AVENUE MEMORANDUM Go.BOX B127 FDUWAIN VAUSY,CGUFeM11A 8272E-8127 0141EE2-2411 TO: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager FROM: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager ` SUBJECT: Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System - Specification No. R-044 Sealed bids were opened May 9, 1995, for the Rental or Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044. Tabulation of bids is as follows: Twelve-month Direct Purchase Firm Rental Period (Alternate) Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc. Pittsburgh, PA $60,960.00 $57.160.00 Arden Industries Rancho Cordova, CA No-Bid $69,900.00 Sealed bids, for one-year rental period, with an alternate bid for direct purchase, were received from two (2) prequalified suppliers. Only one company bid on the rental period, whereas both companies bid on the direct purchase alternate bid. On the direct purchase alternative, the low, bid of $57.160.00, was submitted by Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., and the high bid of $69,900.00 was submitted by Arden Industries. Staff recommends award of a purchase order to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., low bidder, for their alternate bid of direct purchase of the temporary emergency outfall disinfection system in the amount of $57,160.00, plus applicable sales tax. )i L�L..1-4J 7a)C]Jl Katherine— Yarosh r Senior Buyer We hereby,yoncur wkh ))e foregoing recommendation: TedHoffman,' Pur asing Ma } &. �.✓ ry G. Str ed, Robert J. Ooten Director of nance Assistant Director of Operations i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(b): consideration of Resolution No. 95-56 authorizing staff to procure natural gas from a private manufacturer and award a contract for the purchase of natural gas to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation,for a discount price of$0.0259/MMBTU below monthly National Gas Intelligence Index price, for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Anticipated annual savings of between $100,000.00 and $200,000.00, for the estimated monthly natural gas use of 34,000 MMBTU. Summary The Districts use natural gas to supplement digester gas in the Central Generation facilities. Natural gas has typically been purchased from Southern California Gas Company (the Gas Company). Due to the de-regulation of the natural gas industry, natural gas is now available on the market for less than it is available through the Gas Company. In order to take advantage of the savings, staff solicited bids from private .. suppliers for the purchase of natural gas. Staff estimated consumption is 34,000 MMBTU (Million British Thermal Units) of natural gas per month. Refer to the attached staff report for additional detail. Sealed bids were received on May 23, 1995, for the supply of natural gas for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Three bids were received. The low bid was a discounted price of $0.0259/MMBTU below the monthly Natural Gas Intelligence Index (NGI) price and the high bid was a zero-dollar discount price from the NGI price. The low bid price averaged 20% below the unit price paid to the Gas Company during the 1994 calendar year. Based on a monthly anticipated usage of 34,000 MMBTU and fluctuations in market price, the Districts will spend between$800,000.00 to$900,000.00 annually for Central Generation fuel (natural gas). Natural gas used for building heating, hot water, or other domestic plant uses has not been de-regulated and the Districts will still purchase natural gas from the Gas Company for those uses. Staff Recommendation Staff requests authorization to purchase Central Generation natural gas from a private supplier during the one-year contract period beginning August 1, 1995. In addition, staff recommends the Districts award the natural gas contract to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, the lowest responsible bidder, for the purchase of natural gas at the discounted unit price of$0.0259/MMBTU below the Natural Gas Intelligence Index pricing, for a one-year period. MWPOC4YIELMT PRIW.% _ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS �. W ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA June 7, 1995 10em ELLS AWNUE PO BOX 8127 FOUNTNN VALLEY.G FOAMA 92129�9127 En.n 9923Ai1 STAFF REPORT Award Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160 The Districts purchase natural gas for plant uses and as a supplement to digester gas as fuel for the Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 Central Generation facilities. Central Generation produces electricity for the Districts' treatment plants. The utilization of natural gas offsets the purchase of electricity from Southern California Edison. Staff estimates a savings of $6,000,000.00 annually with the operation of the Central Generation facility. In addition, staff estimated that the annual consumption for Plant No. 1 (CG1) and Plant No. 2 (CG2) Central Generation facilities is 360,000 million and 48,000 million British Thermal Units (MMBTU) respectively. In 1991, the California Public Utilities Consumption (CPUC) de-regulated the natural gas industry. This decision by the CPUC allowed private marketers to provide natural gas service to California customers, rather than the Southern California Gas Company (the Gas Company). Districts' staff studied the alternative of purchasing natural gas from a private marketer and concluded that natural gas could be procured from a private marketer at a lower cost without compromising service or product quality. Because the CPUC has not de-regulated natural gas for building heating, hot water, or domestic uses of less than 250,000 themes per year, some natural gas will be purchased from the Gas Company for those purposes at a cost of approximately $200,000.00. The Districts have traditionally purchased natural gas for the Central Generation facilities from the Gas Company. The Gas Company purchases gas from fields in Utah, Texas and other locations, transports it to Southern California, and then distributes the gas to its customers. The Gas Company has long-term contracts with the various gas fields which locks in higher unit priced fuel. The higher cost for natural gas is passed to the customer. Gas marketers, on the other hand, purchase natural gas from the gas field offering the lowest gas prices and can offer the customer a lower priced gas than the Gas Company. The Gas Company will continue to transport the gas from the California border to the customer's site, irrespective of who the supplier of gas is. The Districts will have a contract with the Gas Company to pay for the cost of natural gas transportation. The Districts opened bids on May 23, 1995, for the purchase of approximately 30,000 MMBTU/month and 4,000 MMBTU/month for CG1 and CG2 respectively, for a one- year period beginning August 1, 1995. The low bidder, Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, proposes to supply natural gas at a dry unit cost per MMBTU at a proposed discount of $0.0259 from the specified monthly value as indicated in the appropriate Natural Gas Intelligence Price Index (NGI). The NGI is a monthly publication that publishes the average price of gas during each monthly period. The unit price of gas fluctuates from day to day, and the NGI summarizes the average monthly unit price. The discounted price of $0.0259 when applied to the 1994 NGI r average translates into natural gas cost of $1.815/MMBTU for that 1994 calendar year. This cost represents approximately a 20% decrease from the 1994 Gas Company average border price of $2.338/MMBTU. As an example, the Districts purchased 404,868 MMBTU of natural gas during the 1994 calendar year. Had the Districts purchased fuel from the lowest bidder, we would have paid $735,000.00, plus gas transportation charges. The Districts actually paid $946,000.00, plus transportation charges during 1994. This difference in cost represents a savings of about $200,000.00 a year from the Gas Company prices. Staff anticipates that the Districts may save as much as$150,000.00 during the contract period,depending on fluctuations in gas market prices. The Districts received sealed bids on May 23, 1995, for the supply of natural gas for a one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Three bids where received. The low bid was a discount price of$0.0259/MMBTU below the NGI and the high bid was a zero discount from the NGI. The low bid price averaged approximately 20% below the price currently paid to the Gas Company. Based on usage of 34,000 MMBTU of fuel/month, it is anticipated that the Districts will spend between $800,000.00 to $900,000.00 for the one year period. As a point of information, the Districts will still be paying an estimated $250,000.00 in transportation charges to the Gas Company for conveying the gas from the California border to our gas meter and we will be purchasing approximately $200,000.00 of fuel from the Gas Company for building heating and hot water. The estimated total fuel costs for the twelve month period is $1,300,000.00. The Districts will be entering into a transportation contract with the Gas Company in order to transport the fuel from the California border to our facility. The cost associated with transporting natural gas must be paid regardless of who supplies the fuel. Staff Recommendation Staff is requesting authorization to purchase natural gas from a private marketer rather than the Gas Company during the contract period indicated. In "addition, staff recommends that the Districts award the natural gas contract to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, the lowest responsible bidder, for the purchase of natural gas at the discounted unit price of $0.0259/MMBTU below the Natural Gas Index listed price, for a one-year period. MAE:FD:ct BASPHP-160.GAS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS y of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA April 14, 1995 iOW ELLIE AVENUE AD.Box E127 MEMORANDUM NTNNTAIN VALLEY.uuroFNIA e272e.8127 o+<i EEa-a4n TO: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager FROM: Ted Hoffman, Purchasing Manager SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF NATURAL GAS SPECIFICATION NO. P-160 Sealed bids were opened May 23, 1995, for the Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160, for a one year period August 1, 1995. Tabulation of bids is as follows: PROPOSED DISCOUNT COMPANY FACTOR Amoco Energy Trading Corporation $0.0259 Newport Beach, CA Enron Capital & Trade Resources $0.01 Long Beach, CA Broad Street Oil & Gas $0.0 Pismo Beach, CA Staff recommends a contract be awarded to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, for the purchase of natural gas, for a discount price of$0.0259IMMBTU below monthly National Gas Intelligence Index price, fora one-year period beginning August 1, 1995. Anticipated annual savings are between$100,000.00 and $200,000.00, for the estimated monthly natural gas use of 34,000 MMBTU. Provisions are in the specifications for four consecutive one-year contract extension periods. k OJD-u,2:.'11.L. yan Katherine Yarash Senior Buyer We.h§reby concur with the foregoing recommendation: Ted Hoffman, PUT asing Ma ary G. Stre Robert J. Ooten Director of Finance Assistant Director of Operations JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(C): Consideration of Resolution No. 95-57, Supporting the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC); and appoint the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as the altemate representative. Summary On April 20, 1995, Regional Advisory and Planning Committee (RAPC) members approved a proposed RAPC reconfiguration that increases the membership from 14 to 21. The purpose of the reconfiguration is to strengthen Orange County's collective voice in regional issues, particularly concerning the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and air quality matters. While the new RAPC structure was approved by the County and League of Cities, they have requested that the new configuration be endorsed by all agency participants since RAPC's actions are only advisory to the jurisdictionstagencies RAPC represents. `...� Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of the resolution regarding reconfiguration of RAPC, as identified in Attachment A, and the appointment of the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as an alternate representative for RAPC. O&K COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ea .1 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 109 ELLIS AVENUE PO.8OX2127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728.8129 47M852-2411 June 15, 1995 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item (9)(c): Consideration of motion to approve the resolution Supporting the reconfiguration of the Regional Advisory and Planning Committee (RAPC) as identified in Attachment A and appoint the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as an alternate representative for RAPC. Background The Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC) was organized as an advisory body in 1991, by the Board of Supervisors and the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities. RAPC is comprised of elected officials representing the interests of cities, Orange County, the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and the `.d County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. RAPC has provided policy-level guidance and advice to its members on a range of regional issues of mutual interest. These issues have focused on the development of a countywide strategy for the 1991 and 1994 Air Quality Management Plan updates, development of the Measure M Growth Management Component Implementation Manual, and approval of related Growth Management Area boundaries. More recently, RAPC has been given the role of coordinating input and making recommendations to the cities, Orange County and affected special districts and agencies on the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG's) proposed Regional Comprehensive Plan. During the last several months, discussions have occurred among RAPC members regarding how Orange County should continue to accomplish regional planning in general, with specific emphasis on the future role of RAPC. At a meeting on March 17, 1994, RAPC members provided direction to staff to begin exploring this issue and suggested that the Executive Steering Committee (ESC) should undertake these discussions. RAPC members indicated that the focus of these activities should be on how best to continue to provide positive Orange County input to SCAG and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on air quality issues within the region. The members also suggested that an examination be made as to how Orange County should be involved in other regional matters as well. On April 20, 1995, RAPC members approved a proposed reconfiguration to increase the RAPC membership from 14 to 21 as identified below. The purpose of the reconfiguration is to strengthen Orange County's collective voice in regional issues, particularly as they pertain to SCAG and air quality matters. r Existing RAPC 1 Board of Supervisors representative 10 City representatives (one from each Supervisorial District, three Division ESC officers, one large cities representative, one small cities representative) 1 OCTA representative 1 TCA representative 1 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County representative 14 Total Proposed RAPC 11 SCAG Orange County representatives 1 SCAG Board of Supervisor representative 1 Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Governing Board representative (from Cities) 1 AQMD Governing Board representative (from County) 3 Orange County Division League of Cities ESC Officers 1 OCTA representative 1 TCA representative 1 Special Districts representative 1 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County representative 21 Total RAPC Functions Listed below are the draft RAPC functions that will be included in the new proposed reconfiguration bylaws. As you may conclude from reviewing this information, RAPC provides an avenue for the Districts and other Orange County government agencies to have a mechanism to influence the development of controversial and complex regional issues that affect us by uniting through RAPC. a 'w �..✓ Functions 1. Provide a cooperative, coordinated and cost-effective process for its member agencies and interested parties in the development of countywide strategies that address, in general, regional activities that impact or potentially could impact Orange County interests. These activities include: (1) continued development and implementation of air quality management strategies, and (2) subregional review of various regional activities performed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), including SCAG's proposed Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. 2. Provide non-binding policy recommendations and advisory positions on regional activities for transmittal to and consideration by individual member agencies. 3. Exchange information among members pertaining to regional activities and/or activities/issues which could impact members. 4. Serve as a forum for discussion and debate regarding transportation- related and non-transportation subregional activities and governance. 5. Identify and study additional regional issues as requested by members/member agencies and make commensurate advisory recommendations. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of the resolution regarding reconfiguration of RAPC, as identified in Attachment A, and the appointment of the Joint Chair as the Districts' primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as an alternate for RAPC. LKH:dk Ref#540073.rp a W+ RESOLUTION NO. SUPPORTING THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL ADVISORY AND PLANNING COUNCIL (RAPC) 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 SUPPORTING THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL ADVISORY AND PLANNING COUNCIL (RAPC) FOR CONTINUED STUDY AND POLICY ADVICE ON REGIONAL ISSUES. WHEREAS, the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC) has met since 1991 to develop consensus and provide policy guidance to Orange County jurisdictions and agencies on regional issues; and, WHEREAS, RAPC's major accomplishments include developing strategies for the `..� 1991 and 1994 Air Quality Management Plan updates, development of the Measure M Growth Management Component Implementation Manual and approval of Growth Management Area boundaries, and providing Orange County subregional input to SCAG in its preparation of a proposed Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 1994, RAPC members directed staff to examine avenues for continued cost effective coordination on regional issues; and, WHEREAS, on April 20, 1995, RAPC approved a proposed RAPC reconfiguration that will allow elected officials who work closest on these matters to be more directly involved in the development of subregional strategies and responses to local, regional, state and federal mandates and requirements; and, ATTACHMENT A i WHEREAS, the proposed RAPC membership would include the following: 11 Orange County Cities delegates to SCAG's Regional Council 1 Orange County Board of Supervisors representative to SCAG's Regional Council 1 Orange County Cities representative to AQMD Governing Board 1 Orange County Board of Supervisors representative to AQMD Governing Board 3 League of Cities Executive Steering Committee Officers 1 OCTA elected representative 1 TCA elected representative 1 Special Districts representative 1 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County elected representative 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 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County endorses the proposed reconfiguration of the Regional Advisory and Planning Council. Section 2. That the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County appoints John C. Cox as its primary representative and Peer A. Swan as an alternate for RAPC until otherwise determined by this body. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(d): Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager, or his designee, 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and directing staff to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. Summary 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 1995-96. Included in the 1995-96 budget is the amount of$647,500 for training, meetings and travel. 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. Recommendation Staff recommends approval. ososo JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (9)(d): Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager, or his designee, 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and directing staff to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. Summary 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 1995-95. Included in the 1995-96 budget is the amount of$647,500 for training, meetings and travel. 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. Recommendation Staff recommends approval. `d OFa9D JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT 3 Agenda Item (9)(e): Consideration of motion to receive and file Summons &Complaints for Subrogation Recovery, 20th Century Insurance Company vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, at al., West Orange County Municipal Court Case No. 215248, relative to property damage sustained in connection with a Districts' vehicle, and authorize Districts' General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the Districts. Summary See attached memorandum dated June 21, 1995 from General Counsel. u Recommendation Staff recommends to receive and file Summons &Complaints from attorneys for 20th Century Insurance Company, and refer to Districts' General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the Districts. \.d 0699E JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT 5 Agenda Item (9)(1): Consideration of Resolutions approving Annexation Agreement with the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation re Annexation/Connection fees for the twenty acre site described by the agreement and known as the "historical district" of the Crystal Cove State Park, in a form acceptable by General Counsel, and authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District(proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park to County Sanitation District No. 5.) Summary In August 1993, the Directors approved a license and reimbursement agreement with Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) and the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation (State) for construction, reimbursement and ownership of sewer facilities to serve the Crystal Cove State Park. These facilities are built with the exception of the future local sewer facilities in and around the"historical district" of Crystal Cove State Park. County Sanitation District No. 5 (CSD 5) has never annexed the 20 acres which surround the"historic district"which includes the old cottages right on the beach. To provide sewer service to this portion of the State Park, it is necessary for the State to request and pay for the annexation to District 5 of these 20 acres. This is proposed as Annexation No. 9 to CSD 5. The annexation agreement provides for the State to pay for a CSD 5 annexation processing fee, a LAFCO processing fee, a State Board of Equalization processing fee, an annexation acreage fee, a connection permit fee and a CEOA documentary handling fee within sixty(60)days of the execution of the agreement and notification by COS 5 to the State. The District received a request dated May 22, 1995 from the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation to annex the said 20.0 acres of territory to the District. This annexation is in accordance with a 1984 property tax agreement with the County of Orange. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the agreement, in a form acceptable to the General Counsel, and recommends approval of initiating proceedings for said Annexation No. 9. � roar JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING U JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (11): Nominations for Joint Chair Summary As provided in the Joint Boards'Rules of Procedures, nominations for the Joint Chair are made at the regular June meeting and the election takes place at the July regular meeting. Nominations and election of the Vice Joint Chair will be conducted at the July regular meeting. For new Directors' information, we have included below an excerpt from the current Rules of Procedures for meetings relative to the election of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization. "H. Chair and Vice Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization. "A Joint Chair and Vice Chair 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 Chair 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 stating their qualifications for the office of Joint Chair. 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 and election for Vice Joint Chair shall be made at the regular Board meeting in July of each year and shall be made immediately following the election of the Joint Chair. "The Joint Chair and Vice Chair shall serve at the pleasure of a majority of the Districts. In the event the office of Chair becomes vacant due to resignation or retirement of the incumbent prior to the expiration of the regular tern,the Vice Joint Chair shall automatically succeed to the office of the Joint Chair and shall continue to serve through the remainder of the regularterm unless sooner removed by action of a majority of the Districts. In the event the office of Vice Joint Chair becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the regular term, 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." 'Subject to the provisions of serving at the pleasure of a majority of the Districts,the Joint Chair shall not serve more than two consecutive one-year terms for which he/she has been elected to the office of Joint Chair.' Recommendation Staff has no recommendation. osii JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING v AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (12)(a): Minutes of the Executive Committee Summary (1) Receive and file draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 24, 1995. (2) Receive and file draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 1, 1995. (3) Receive and file draft Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 7, 1995. (4) Receive and file draft Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June 14, 1995. (5) Receive and file draft Executive Committee Minutes for the meeting held on June21, 1995. Summary See attached minutes. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors Receive and file minutes listed above. J 1WPpJf.16^AOBSDlf]A. i County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O. Box 8127 • 10544 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE May 24, 1995 -5:30 p.m. A meeting of the Steering Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held Wednesday, May 24, 1995, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative office- (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: STEERING COMMITTEE: OTHERS PRESENT: Present Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Chair .. Jahn J. Collins, Chair, PDC Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMITS George Brown, Chair, FAHR STAFF PRESENT: Absent: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Roger Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR Jean Tappan, Secretary (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments by any member of the public. (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES `.✓ The minutes of the April 26, 1995 Steering Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 2 May 24, 1995 (5) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR. GENERAL MANAGER AND GENERAL COUNSEL The General Manager reported on information on the Clean Water Act he received while at the AMSA Conference in Washington, DC. It appears that while AMSA supported the Act, there are portions of it that could negatively affect the Districts. We will continue to work with AMSA to try to clear up some of the misunderstandings. (6) STEERING COMMITTEE DISCUSSION ITEMS (a) Recruitments. The Districts are currently recruiting for four positions—Assistant General Manager- Administration, Technical Services Director, Laboratory Manager, and Director of Engineering. The AGM position closes May 26 and it looks like there will be close to 75 applications. David Griffin Assoc. reports that there are some very strong candidates. Three candidates are being interviewed May 25 for the Director of Technical Services position. The interview team will consist of Don McIntyre, Blake Anderson, Bob Murray (David Griffin Assoc.) and Margie Nellor. Dennis Smith of Thev Smith Group, a Human Resources specialist firm, will test the applicants on their perception of the job and the existing department managers will also interview the candidates. The three candidates for the Lab Manager position will be interviewed after the Director of Technical Services is on the job and can be part of the interview team. The Director of Engineering position has been advertised and staff will be doing the recruiting. (b) Budget. The draft budgets will not be mailed with the agenda packages for the PDC Committee, but rather will be presented at the meeting. The revised budget process has taken more time than in the past, but the result will be a much easier to understand document. The major change is in training. The General Manager stated that he believes this is essential. There is $500,000 allocated for training and $134,000 for travel and meetings. This total is about 2% of the total payroll, the industry average. All personnel will be involved. Another consideration is tuition reimbursement. Director Swan indicated that written goals and objectives should be included stating what is the intent and what is to be accomplished. This is included. Training may be considered a requirement for promotion. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 3 May 24, 1995 The effects of reorganization on the personnel budget were discussed. Div. 2150, Management, will add a Communications Division. This group will be responsible for all internal and external communications, including the office aides, and the receptionist. ° Human Resources will separate Safely and Health from Training and make them separate divisions. Finance will break out Information Services as a separate Department under the AGM for Administration and give it Department Head Status. Plant Automation will be left in Information Services for now, though it may be returned to Engineering, depending on several factors, including the qualifications of the new Director of Engineering. Information Services will be broken into two sections; hardware and software. Maintenance and Operations will be separated, each with department status. The security function is going to be privatized. Technical Services is combining the Air Quality, Conservation, Recycle and Reclamation, and Compliance into one division, the Environmental Services ..✓ ° Division. The Microbacteria Lab has been eliminated, reducing the lab personnel from 54 to 47. There will also be a Planning section in Engineering. Director Swan asked about a tracking section, or contracts administration group. This is being included. Blake Anderson explained some of the problems with the Engineering Department and indicated that the new Director of Engineering will have to make them the major effort. The net increase in the Personnel Budget will be 6 authorized positions, or 7.5%. The total actual positions will increase from 600 to 660. This increase is a result of trying to put in place all of Ernst & Young's recommendations and filling many vacancies. The Capital Budget was discussed. The booklet has been prepared and there will be summary of the projects presented at the meetings. (c) Consolidation. The Committee was advised that at the June Board Meeting, Joseph Martin of the Los Alamitos County Water District, would be addressing the District No. 3 Board seeking representation and a seat on the Board. His agency provides sewerage services to the City of Los Alamitos. Tom Woodruff discussed the background and stated that District ,� No. 3 would have to be reorganized and restructured to accommodate this request. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 4 lr May 24, 1995 The idea of one super District with one member from each agency was discussed. The financial ramifications of combining the nine Districts into one must be detailed. The General Manager indicated that this is a governance issue, not a money issue. Staff will report in June on this issue. (d) Privatization. There was a discussion on the privatization of Santa Margarita Water District and the effects it could have on the Districts. The General Manager and Assistant General Manager have had discussions on this as well. The benchmark goal is the cost per million gallons for treatment. that cost now is just over$500 per million gallons. There are other things being considered to reduce expenses, including having SCE take over the operation of Central Power Generation and selling the power. Everything is being considered to meet our goal. (g) Deferred Compensation. The first increment of the money has been received from the County. The General Manager would like to bring this issue to the Executive Committee because it is a policy decision, not a finance decision. Staff was directed to prepare a couple of options. (f) Bankruptcy. Blake Anderson reported on the current status. On Friday, May 19, $295,000,000 was received. The remaining funds due will be in "good as gold" recovery notes due on June 5, and $44 million in claims. Measure R was discussed. County staff asked the OCIP Committee for support. At this time, the County has a deficit of$1.7 billion and Measure R appears to be the only way the County anticipates making up the majority of it. In the event Measure R fails, the County will not have a second chance. All bond holders may be asked to forgive the 11 cents. Blake requested direction about supporting Measure R. The Boards originally supported Blake in his efforts to collect 100 cents on the dollar, and he was directed by the judge that appointed him to the OCIP to use his best judgment on behalf of the Districts, and the interests of all the special districts in representing them. Now some of the cities, and the Directors of the Districts, are opposing the sales tax. The Committee directed Blake to do what he considered proper. The Committee and the General Manager indicated that they would support Blake. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting .. Page 5 May 24, 1995 (7) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (8) OTHER BUSINESS No other business was discussed. (9) MATTERS TO BE REPORTED AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were no matters to be reported. (10) MATTERS ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT ..✓ There were no matters for a future agenda. (11) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting will be at the call of the Joint Chair. (12) ADJOURNMENT The Steering Committee adjourned at approximately 7:20 p.m. Submitted by: e e n Tappan, St#erfhg Committee Secretary j:M9tlx'@mktrummMe,%D12fi%.min County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O.Box 8127.10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728.8127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE Thursday, June 1. 1995 at 5:30 P.m. A regular meeting of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, and 14 of Orange County, California was held on Thursday, June 1, 1995, at the Districts' Administrative Office. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was taken and a quorum declared present, as follows: PLANNING. DESIGN AND OTHERS PRESENT: CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE: Mary Lee, John Carollo Engineers John Collins, Chair Bill Knopf, John Carollo Engineers John Cox, Joint Chair `.� Shirley Dettloff Barry Hammond STAFF PRESENT: Margie Rice Don McIntyre, General Manager Sheldon Singer, Vice Chair Blake Anderson, Assistant General Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair Manager Charles Sylvia John Linder, Director of Engineering Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance ABSENT: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Don Griffin Mark Esquer, Operations Engineer Bob Zemel Jeff Shubik, Project Manager Paul Mitchell, Project Manager Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 2 June 1, 1995 (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM The Vice Chair was in attendance, therefore, there was no need for a Chair pro tem. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments received. (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF April 6. 1995 MEETING The minutes of the May 4, Planning, Design and Construction Committee were approved as written. (6) REPORTS OF COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR There was no report made by the Committee Chair. (b) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager apologized for the confusion regarding the Ad Hoc Committee meeting, but wanted all committee members to be in attendance and thus reported that the Ad Hoc Committee meeting will be held after next month's Planning, Design and Construction Committee meeting on Thursday, July 6, 1995. There will be a report sent out to the Ad Hoc Committee members before that meeting so they can be familiar with the subject matter. (c) REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING The Director of Engineering introduced Staff that were present and Mary Lee and Bill Knopf from John Carollo Engineers. (d) REPORT OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL There was no report made by the General Counsel. `..� Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 3 June 1, 1995 (6) STAFF OVERVIEW OF DISTRICTS' PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES (a) Status Report on Planning. Design and Construction Projects The Director of Engineering discussed the concept of Partnering and gave a verbal report on it. Partnering is the contracting of trust and cooperation between people or parties entering into a contract, especially construction contracts. Job No. P1-36-2 is targeted as the project to be used. A Facilitator, with wastewater experience, will be hired to lead the "team' consisting of contractor, owner, subcontractors, representatives from Operations and Maintenance and Engineering staff. Because of the size of this project (P1-36-2, Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1), it was determined that it would serve not only as a good test project but that it would be a way of getting an improved project. The General Manager stated that he had been to a meeting where the concept was discussed and that he thought it was a good idea. ... Chair Collins stated that he would like for the Committee to encourage this test case opportunity and to complete a procedure book for future reference. The Director of Engineering stated that there would be an agenda done for all meetings which will take place off site. (b) Status Report on Budget re Operational and Capital Issues The General Manager thanked the Director of Finance and his staff for their hard work on the budget and gave a brief overview of the new format. He went over the operational part of the budget and noted each part and its importance in the overall clarity of the budget picture and discussed how each department's expenses were broken down individually. The committee then had a question and answer period. One question brought up by a committee member was in regard to the lease on the storage facility at the comer of Garfield and Ward. The Director of Finance reported that it was presently on a 15-year lease and the Districts receive $50,000. per year. The Assistant General Manager discussed the capital part of the budget, section by section, and gave a brief synopsis on each. Questions were asked by the Committee Chair and Committee members and answered by the General Manager, the Assistant General Manager and the Director of Finance. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting , Page 4 June 1, 1995 Due to the fact that the budget was presented to the Committee the evening of the meeting, there was no action taken on the budget at this time. (c) Status Report on Process Area Fire Protection. Signage, and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plants 1 and 2. Job Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46 The Assistant General Manager presented a report regarding the status of the Process Area Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications Systems at Plant No. 1 and 2. He discussed how the Districts' fire protection and emergency response facilities must grow as our plants expand and how we must use City water, not secondary or reclaimed water for these systems. It was moved, seconded and passed that the Planning, Design and Construction Committee reaffirm its position that Job Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46 are critical to the operation and maintenance of the treatment plants due to safety concerns. ..J (d) Status Report on Delegation of Authority The General Manager presented the report on the Delegation of Authority to the Committee. After discussion, it was decided that there needed to be some changes, clarifications and modifications to the document. It was moved, seconded and passed to approve the concept with suggested changes made. (a) Status Report on Orange County Water Reclamation Project The Assistant General Manager gave the Committee the status report on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. The study identifies the preliminary technical, financial and siting issues associated with the project which could be built in phases over the next thirty years and reclaim up to 100 million gallons per day. It was moved, seconded and passed to receive and file the Staff Report dated June 1, 1995. (7) OLD BUSINESS None to report. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 5 June 1, 1995 (8) ACTIONS REPUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS (a) Monthly Change Order Report by Director of Engineering The Director of Engineering discussed the Monthly Change Order report on items approved by General Manager in accordance with Resolution No. 95-9. It was moved, seconded and passed to receive and file the Monthly Change Order Report. (b) Action Items PDC95.21: Consideration of the following actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2: (1) Recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and 2 to the Plans and Specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. (2) Receive and file bid tabulation, and recommend to award contract to Margate Construction Inc., in the amount of$35,291,000. It was moved, seconded and passed to recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and 2 to the Plans and Specifications of Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2, for clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues, and to receive and file bid tabulation and recommend award of contract to Margate Construction Inc., in the amount of$35,291,000. (9) ADDENDA TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS There were no addenda to Professional Services Agreements (10) NEW PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS PDC95-22: Consideration of the following actions relative to Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2: Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 6 , June 1, 1995 (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of a Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers, providing for design and construction support services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, direct expenses, subconsultants, and fixed profit, in an amount not to exceed $193,100. Jeff Shubik gave a presentation on the Main Sewer Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No J-33-2 and staff recommendation on the award of a Professional Services Agreement. It was moved, seconded and passed to receive and file Planning, Design and Construction Committee certification, proposals and award of Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers re Main Sewer Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2-for an amount not to exceed $193,100.00. (11) CONSIDERATION OF NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS There were no new or miscellaneous items discussed. (12) CLOSED SESSION The Chair determined that there was no need for a Closed Session. (13) OTHER BUSINESS. IF ANY No other business was discussed. (14) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING v There were no matters discussed. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 7 June 1, 1995 (15) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT There were no matters discussed. (16) NEXT MEETING (a) Executive Committee Meeting -Wednesday, June 21, 1995 at 5:30 p.m. (b) Joint Boards of Directors Meeting -Wednesday, June 28, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. (c) Planning, Design and Construction Committee -Thursday, July 6, 1995 at 5:30 p.m. (d) Ad Hoc Committee -Thursday, July 6, 1995 following the PDC Committee Meeting. (17) ADJOURNMENT 4.. The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Linda lb. Himenes Planning, Desig and Construction Committee Secretary wPdwIpdc95 Ju yMI95.min County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O. Box 8127 • 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone:(714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 7. 1995 - 5:30 PM A meeting of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on June 7, 1995, at 5:30 P.M. at the Districts' Administrative offices. (1) ROLLCALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present as follows: Committee Directors Present: Staff Present: Pat McGuigan, Chair Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Gary Hasenstab, Director of Human Resources Barry Denes Irwin Haydock, Compliance Manager Norman Z. Eckenrode Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance James M. Ferryman John Linder, Director of Engineering `.r Mark A. Murphy Don McIntyre, General Manager Julie Be Hai Nguyen, Environmental Specialist I Sal Sapien Bob Ooten, Director of Operations Peer Swan George Robertson, Principal Environmental Specialist Michael Rozengurt, Associate Engineer III Gary Streed, Director of Finance Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Committee Directors Absent: Others Present: Victor Leipzig, Vice Chair John Collins, PDC Chair Bernard Halmos, Fountain Valley Fire Chief Dr. Andrew Lissner, SAIC Ron Pitman, Brown and Caldwell (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN PRO TEM. IF NECESSARY No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 2 of 6 June 7, 1995 (4) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF OPERATIONS, DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Director Pat McGuigan, Committee Chair, welcomed Director John Collins, Planning and Design Committee Chair and Bernard Heimos, Fountain Valley Fire Chief to the meeting. (b) REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER Don McIntyre briefly mentioned the plant tours being given for the Directors and encouraged any Directors who wish to come for the June 17 tour to do so. (c) REPORT OF ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF OPERATIONS Blake Anderson brought the Committee up-to-date with the ongoing bankruptcy situation. (d) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE Ed Hodges reported that the Techite Pipe case is winding down. (e) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL No report was given. (5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 3. 1995 There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held on May 3, 1995, it was moved, seconded and carried that said minutes be deemed approved as mailed. (6) OLD BUSINESS OMTS95.04a: Consideration of motion to authorize the Engineering Department to proceed with the Process Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Job Nos. `..� Pt-38-5 and P2.46 - Reference PDC(6)(c) - Blake Anderson Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance .. and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 3 of 6 June 7, 1995 Blake Anderson gave a brief but detailed presentation on the necessity of this project. After some discussion, it was moved seconded and carried to authorize the Engineering Department to proceed with the Process Fire Protection, Signage and Water Distribution System Modifications at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Job Nos. P1-38-5 and P2-46. (7) NEW BUSINESS Consideration of the following for review or action was made out of order: OMTS9"26: PDC(6)(b) Overview of the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 1995- 96 - Don McIntyre and staff Don McIntyre gave an overview of the proposed budget and the philosophy behind its new look and content. Gary Streed walked the Committee through the layout and pointed out staffs intent for the "eyes to match the stomachs." Blake Anderson presented the Joint Capital Improvement section of the budget for the . , coming year and how it fits in the plan for the next ten years. Gary Streed and his key staff members were praised for their immense efforts in the production of the budget book. OMTS95-027: PDC(6)(d) Consideration of Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Approve Expenditure of Funds up to $50,000 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9 - Don McIntyre and staff Don McIntyre gave a brief presentation on the Delegation of Authority and the intent, by implementation of the document, to put responsibility at the lowest possible level. There was a change noted (in gray) on Page 4, Item I(E), first line of the first paragraph: "The General Manager, Assistant General Managers, Department Directors and Division Managers will receive monthly cumulative updated reports from the Finance Department on all major contracts, services and .✓ purchase orders." Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 4 of 6 June 7, 1995 Blake Anderson also noted the following change on Page 8, Item III(C) as suggested by Tom Woodruff, General Counsel: "All hiring and promotions will adhere to all recruitment and hiring policies of the Human Resources Department, Board of Directors, resolutions and Memoranda of Understandings, and require the co-signatures of the Director of Human Resources and the Department Head,:with a statement affirming that the policies have been followed." With the noted changes, it was moved, seconded and carried to approve this item to be sent to the Executive Committee and the Joints Boards. OMTS95-028: PDC(6)(e) Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project It was moved, seconded and carried to recommend to the Executive Committee and the Joint Boards the adoption of this policy. OMTS95-029: Consideration of a Motion for the Adoption of a Policy for the U Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems - Ed Hodges Ed Hodges gave a presentation on the Districts' current practice for the control and containment of spills. After some discussion, it was moved seconded and carried to recommend the adoption of this policy to the Executive Committee and the Joint Boards. In conjunction with the decision to carry this item forward, the Committee asked that Ed Hodges inform all the City Managers in our Districts of our policy and make a presentation of the policy available to them. OMTS95-030: Consideration of Addendum No. 3 to Professional Services agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. For Environmental Consulting Services - Ed Torres After a brief discussion, it was moved, seconded and carried to approve staff s recommendations. OMTS95-031: Consideration of an OMITS Committee Request for Information on the Required and Elective Elements of the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP) - Irwin Haydock A brief presentation by Irvin Haydock, Compliance Manager, was given In response to a request for information by the OMTS Committee. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance .d and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 5 of 6 June 7, 1995 The Committee requested that this item be readdressed at a future meeting. OMTS95-032: Consideration of Executive Committee's Request for Staff Response to Kinnetic Laboratories' Allegations Concerning the Consultant Selection Process for the Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program - Ed Torres A brief presentation was given by Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services, in response to a request by the OMTS Committee for a response by staff to the allegations of Kinnetic Laboratories. OMTS95-033: Consideration of Resolution No. 95-033, awarding the contract for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Ouffall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997 for a cost not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one- year renewals - George Robertson George Robertson, Principal Environmental Specialist in the Compliance Division, gave a brief presentation. After some discussion, a vote was taken of how many Committee members were in favor of supporting staffs recommendation. All members were in favor with the exception of Peer Swan who wished to abstain. OMTS95-034: Consideration of a Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Issue a Purchase Order to the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) for the period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 - Ed Torres It was moved, seconded and carried to approve staffs recommendations. OMTS95-035: Consideration of Motion Authorizing Staff to Issue a Purchase Order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995- 96 - Ed Torres It was moved, seconded and carried to approve staffs recommendations. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 6 of 6 June 7, 1995 (8) CLOSED SESSION The Chair declared there were no items for closed session. (9) OTHER BUSINESS. IF ANY Staff is to look into the free training that FEMA offers . (10) MATTERS ON WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING 1. The Committee requested that Information on the Required and Elective Elements of the Districts' Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP), item OMTS95-031, be readdressed at a future meeting. 2. Staff is to provide to the Committee, at the next meeting, information of the Clean Water Act going to Congress. 3. Staff is to report on the Districts' safety and security situation at the July OMITS Committee meeting. 4. Staff is to look into worse-case scenarios and the planning needed, once the Districts get their feet more firmly on the ground and recover from the bankruptcy situation. (11) MATTERS A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT None. (12) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING DATES AND ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS From now on, the Committee meeting calendar will be kept as a one-year calendar and will be brought up-to-date for the next meeting. (13) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 8:15 P.M. /cm R:\W PDOCM10�EH10MTSWINUTES.95t.W PD County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California t P.O.Box 8127.108"Ellis Avenue j Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714(862-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Wednesday, June 14, 1995. 5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on June 14, 1995 at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative offices. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: Committee Directors Present: Staff Present: John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chairman Don McIntyre, General Manager George Brown, Chairman Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Jan Debay Gary$treed, Director of Finance Burnie Dunlap Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance John M. Gullixson Bob Oaten, Director of Operations Wally Linn Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Thomas Sallareili John Linder, Director of Engineering Roger R. Stanton, Vice Chairman Mike White, Controller William G. Steiner Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Peer Swan Others Present Committee Directors Absent: Tom Woodruff, General Counsel James H. Flora (2) APPOINTMENT OF A CHAIRMAN PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments were made. (4) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER. ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER(S). DIRECTOR OF FINANCEITREASURER, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND GENERAL COUNSEL �..✓ (a) Report of the Committee Chair George Brown, Chairman, reported that a change to current remarketing Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 2 June 14, 1995 agreements was requested by one of the parties to the previously authorized reassignments. A vote was taken to add consideration of this change to the agenda, and to take action as a part of the Report of General Counsel. (b) Report of the General Manager General Manager Don McIntyre, reminded the Committee of the Directors' orientation and tour to be conducted Saturday, June 17, 1995. (c) Report of Assistant General Manager(s) Assistant General Manager Blake Anderson updated the Committee on recent events regarding the resolution of the County bankruptcy and the potential impact on the Districts and a quick settlement. (d) Report of the Finance Director/Treasurer Finance DirectorfFreasurer Gary G. Streed reviewed the report included with the agenda package and updated the Committee on the status of the Orange County Investment Pool and the Districts' self-managed bank and investment accounts. The December 6, 1994 reserves receivable from the County will be reported as a long-term receivable and not as an investment in the future. (a) Report of the Director of Human Resources None. (f) Report of General Counsel Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, gave a status report on previous action taken by the FAHR Committee and Joint Boards relative to changing the Remarketing Agents on all three of our current outstanding financing programs. He advised that the Series A and C have been fully completed, with all documents executed. The Agreements and documents relating to 1993 Series Refunding are complete and approved by all parties, however Societe Generale would like clarification on a provision relating to obligation to pay the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement. It was moved, seconded and duly carried to accept the requested amendment of Societe Generale to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement that provides that if the Certificates are converted :J to a fixed mode "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable fee." Minutes of Finance. Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 3 June 14, 1995 �...' (5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the draft minutes of the May 10, 1995, meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee. (6) Consideration of motion recommending approval of the proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets and forwarding them to the Executive Committee as follows: Joint Works OperatinarNorking Capital $54,380.000 Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance 307.000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272.000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolvina 33,530,000 After discussion on this item, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Executive Committee approve the proposed Joint Works Operating, Joint Works Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets for 1995-96. (7) Consideration of Planning. Design and Construction Committee recommendation PDC(6)(d): and Operations. Maintenance and Technical Services Committee recommendation OMTS95-027 Re: Consideration of Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Approve Expenditure of Funds up to $50,000 for Contracts. Services and Purchase Orders. Excludina Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law and Professional Services Aareements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9 After discussion on this item, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Executive Committee recommend the Boards of Directors: Authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to $50,000 for contracts, services and purchase orders, excluding public works contracts governed by State law, and professional services agreement governed by Board Resolution 95-9. (6) OLD BUSINESS FAHR95-25 Classification. Compensation. and Other Terms, Conditions. Rules and Regulations of Employment After discussion on this matter, staff was directed to return this item, including examples and amounts, for future consideration. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 4 June 14, 1995 FAHR95-26 Consideration of Motion for Renewal of All-Risk Insurance (including Fire. Flood and Earthquake Coverage)for FY 995-96 After discussion on this matter, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend the Executive Committee approve renewal of the Districts' All-Risk insurance program including earthquake, flood, personal property and business interruption, in the amounts of$200 million All-Risk, and $30 million earthquake with deductibles of$25,000 for all perils except earthquake and 5% per unit ($250,000 min.) for earthquake, for a total premium not to exceed $1.4 million. FAHR95-29 Consideration of Motions to Select External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program After discussion on this matter, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend the Executive Committee: 1. Select the firm of Pacific Management Investment Company to serve as the Districts' external money manager, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. 2. Select Mellon Trust Company as master custodial services bank, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. (9) NEW BUSINESS FAHR95-30 Consideration of Motion to Make Revisions to MPRP (Management Performance Review Plan) Performance Incentive Values After discussion on this matter, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Executive Committee approve the following multi-phased approach, in order to realize the initial objectives of the MPRP program to provide an incentive for consistent meritorious performance: 1. Effective in July 1995, authorize funds totaling $173,000 beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. Payments will be made in 1995-96. 2. Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll (totaling $453,000)for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst &Young. This fund would be distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1) as in the past, and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund which would Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 5 June 14, 1995 `J be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. Payments would be made in 1996-97. 3. Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program, and particularly the review process as recommended by Ernst&Young. (10) CLOSED SESSION The Chairman reported to the Committee the need for a Closed Session as authorized by Government Code Section 54957.6 to discuss and consider the item that is specified as Item 10 on the published Agenda. The Committee convened in closed session at 7:45 p.m. At 8:00 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommendations of the Management Staff contained in the report of June 14, 1995, relating to changes in job titles for certain confidential employees, the dissolution of the confidential employees bargaining unit, and the designation of certain job classifications as confidential employees. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Committee 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. (11) OTHER BUSINESS, IF ANY None. (12) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING None. (13) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT None. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 6 June 14, 1995 (14) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING DATES AND ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS Committee Chairman George Brown requested the Committee refer to the calendar of future meetings on the back of the Notice of Meeting and reminded the Directors that the next Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, July 12, 1995. He recommended the Committee also review the list of future meeting topics. The Committee will not meet in August, November and December 1995, as no Executive Committee meetings are scheduled, and no FAHR Committee recommendation could be carried to the respective Joint Board meetings. (15) ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. GGS:Ic J:\W POOL VIMCRPNtIFPC Mfp\FPCBSVANIfIESYFNIRR.85 I County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California V P.O. Box 8127 a 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-0127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE June 21, 1995 - 5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Executive Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on Wednesday, June 21, 1995, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative offices. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: OTHERS PRESENT: Present: Director George Brown, FAHR Chair Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Chair Jeff Cross, Exec. Dir., SCCWRP Pal McGuigan, Chair, District 1 and OMTS Chair STAFF PRESENT: John J. Collins, Chair, District 2 and PDC Chair Don McIntyre, General Manager Sal A Sapien, Chair, District 3 Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Jan Debay, Chair, District 5 Gary Hasenstab, Director of Personnel Barry Hammond, Chair, District 7 Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance Victor Leipzig, Chair, District 11 John Linder, Director of Engineering Roger Stanton, County Supervisor Bob Ooten, Director of Operations William Steiner, County Supervisor Ed Torres, Director of Technical Services Don R. Griffin, Past Joint Chair Gary Streed, Director of Finance Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary Absent: Irwin Haydock, Compliance Manager George Robertson, Sr. Environmental Specialist James Ferryman, Chair, District 6 Michael Rozengurt, Associate Engineer Thomas Saltarelli, Chair, District 14 Mike Moore, Project Specialist (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments by any member of the public. L r Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 2 of 7 June 21, 1995 (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the May 17, 1995, Executive Committee meeting were approved as revised. (5) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER. AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR The Committee had no report. (b) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager asked to delay his report until Supervisor Stanton arrived. At that time he reported on meetings he has had with County of Orange staff, including Mr. Popejoy and Sheriff Gates as well as Supervisor Stanton, on the possibility of the Districts acquiring the landfills. After a discussion on liability, staff was directed to continue to study the possibility of operating, or acquiring and operating, the solid waste landfills and report back to the Executive Committee at the July 26, 1995 meeting. (c) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel reported on the results of the Techite Pipe (CSD No. 3 v. United Technologies Corp.) trial. The jury awarded District No. 3 over $6.4 million. It is expected that the case will be appealed. (6) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held May 24, 1995. (7) (a) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting held June 1, 1995. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to concur in the recommended actions of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting held June 1, 1995, as follows: Item (6)(e) Consideration of motion authorizing staff support and funding in the amount of$100,000 as proposed in the 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. « Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 3 of 7 June 21, 1995 PDC95-21 Consideration of the following actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2: (1) Consideration of motion approving Addenda 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. (2) Consideration of a resolution receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P2-36-2, to Margate Construction, Inc., in the total amount of$35,291,000. PDC95-22 Consideration of the following actions relative to Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2: (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the PDC Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of a Professional Services Agreement to John Cardillo Engineers, providing for design and construction support services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, direct expenses, subconsullanls, and fixed profit, in an amount not to exceed $193,100. (8) (a) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting held June 7, 1995. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to concur in the recommended actions of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting held June 7, 1995, as follows: OMTS95-029 Consideration of motion to adopt a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems. OMTS95-030 Consideration of the following actions re Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc., "` providing for Environmental Consulting Services: Minutes of the Executive Committee a Page 4 of 7 June21, 1995 (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said additional services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc., providing for an extension of services for a six-month period beginning July 1, 1995, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of $295,500. OMTS95-032 Consideration of Executive Committee's request for Staff response to Kinnetic Laboratories' allegations concerning the Consultant Selection Process for the Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program. There was a verbal report by Jeff Cross, Executive Director of SCCWRP, member of review panel. After discussion, staff was directed to forward recommendations to reject bids to the Board for consideration from now on. OMTS95-033 Consideration of the following actions re Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Ouffall, Specification No. P-156R, providing for Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program, (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Science Application International Corporation for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution recommending award of a Professional Services Contract to to Science Application International Corporation, for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals. OMTS95-035 Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for payment of various FY 1995-96 fees required by SCAQMD rules and regulations. Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 5 of 7 June 21, 1995 (9) (a) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to receive and file draft minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting held June 14, 1995. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried to concur in the recommended actions of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting held June 14, 1995, as follows: Item 4(f): Recommend approving an amendment of the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement with Societe Generale that provides that if the Certificates are converted to a fixed mode, .at the direction of the Bank. the Bank will Pay the reasonable fee." FAHR95-26: Consideration of motion approving Renewal of All-Risk Insurance (including Fire, Flood and Earthquake Coverage) for FY 1995-96, for a total premium not to exceed $1.4 million. FAHR95-29: Consideration of the following motions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program: (1) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to negotiate a professional services agreement with Pacific Management Investment Company to serve as the Districts' external money manager. (2) Consideration of motion authorizing staff to negotiate a professional services agreement with Mellon Trust Company as master custodial services bank. FAHR95-30: Consideration of motion to make the following revisions to Management Performance Review Plan (MPRP) Performance Incentive Values: (1) Effective in July 1995, authorize funds totaling $173.000 beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. Payments will be made in 1995-96. (2) Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll (totaling $453,000) for implementation in July �.d 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst & Young. This fund would be t Minutes of the Executive Committee , Page 6 of 7 June 21, 1995 distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1) as in the past, and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund which would be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. Payments would be made in 1996-97. (3) Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program, and particularly the review process as recommended by Ernst & Young. (10) (a) EXEC95-01 A motion was made, seconded and carried to receive and file General Counsel Memorandum dated June 14, 1995, re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving in concept the consolidation of the Boards, and authorizing staff and General Counsel to proceed with additional studies and report back to the Executive Committee. (b) A motion was made, seconded and duly carried recommending that the Boards of Directors authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to $50,000 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, excluding Public Works Contracts governed by state law and Professional Services Agreements governed by Board Resolution No. 95-9. (c) A motion was made, seconded and carried recommending approval of the proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets and forwarding them to the Boards of Directors, as follows: Joint Works Operating/Working Capital $54,380,000 Worker's Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 U Minutes of the Executive Committee Page 7 of 7 June 21, 1995 (11) CLOSED SESSION The Chair reported to the Committee the need for a Closed Session as authorized by Government Code Section 54957.6 to discuss and consider the item that is specified as Item 11(b)(1) on the published Agenda. The Committee convened in Closed Session at 7:15 p.m. At 7:17 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommendations of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee contained in the Confidential report of June 20, 1995, relating to changes in job titles for certain confidential employees, the dissolution of the confidential employees bargaining unit and the designation of certain job classifications confidential employees. Confidential minutes of the Closed Session held by the Committee have been prepared in accordance with California Goernment Code Section 54957.2 and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. (12) OTHER BUSINESS d.✓ There was no other business. (13) MATTERS TO BE REPORTED ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were no matters to be reported on at a subsequent meeting. (14) MATTERS ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT. There were no matters for a future agenda. (15) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING The next Executive Committee meeting is scheduled for July 19, 1995. (16) ADJOURNMENT The Executive Committee adjourned at approximately 7:18 p.m. Submitted by: Jean Tappan, Secretary J\WGDJQGMEMELlIlIN85`M11 Pv.MIN `f i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (12)(b)(1): Consideration of motion authorizing the funding of$100,000.00 in the 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project. Summary Personnel at the Sanitation Districts and Orange County Water District have prepared a feasibility study evaluation for a large-scale water reclamation project that will produce recycled water primarily for groundwater recharge. The study identified the preliminary technical, financial and siting issues associated with the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR), which could be built in phases over the 6ext thirty years and reclaim up to 100 million gallons per day of water. Continued study funding in the amount of$100,000 for fiscal year 1995-96 has been requested in the 1995-96 CORF Budget. A staff report dated June 21, 1995 is attached. OMTS and PDC Recommendation This project was reviewed at the June 1, 1995 PDC Committee meeting (Item No. 6[ej) and at the June 7, 1995 OMTS meeting (Item No. 95-028). Both Committees recommended continuing funding in the amount of$100,000 in fiscal year 1995-96. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors Authorize staff support and funding in the amount of$100,000 as proposed in the FY 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the OCR Project. J1WPWQOMh MUNB HMEC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR JUNE 21 , 1995 PDC Item (6)(e): Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Summary Personnel at the Sanitation Districts and Orange County Water District have prepared a feasibility study evaluation for a large-scale water reclamation project that will produce recycled water primarily for groundwater recharge. The study identified the preliminary technical, financial and siting issues associated with the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR), which could be built in phases over the next thirty years and reclaim up to 100 million gallons per day of water. Continued study funding in the amount of$100,000 for fiscal year 1995-96 has been requested in the 1995-96 CORF Budget. A staff report dated June 21, 1995 is attached. OMTS and PDC Recommendation This project was reviewed at the June 1, 1995 PDC Committee meeting (Item No. 6[e]) and at the June 7, 1995 OMTS meeting (Item No. 95-028). Both Committees recommended continuing funding in the amount of$100,000 in fiscal year 1995-96. Proposed Executive Committee Recommendations Authorize staff support and funding in the amount of$100,000 as proposed in the FY 1995-96 CORF budget for continuing studies on the OCR Project. wpdw1pdc95yun1a109e.w COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS N M ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA ,Tune 21, 1995 1BBEAEwsAVEMUE P.O.BOX B127 '✓ Po WMY VALLEY,MIFQRMA92P2B.8127 O1.1M.N11 STAFF REPORT Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project The long-term need for added water sources is well documented. The need for reclamation as a water source is based on a predicted increase in water demand, and the absence of future large scale, new water development projects. In fact, it is difficult to see how future southland water needs will be met without water reclamation. Water reclamation is not inexpensive due to the treatment costs required to meet the Department of Health Services' standard and distribution system costs. This has often been the case for newer water supply projects. Some may remember that the State Water Project, which now provides a high percentage of the south's water, was criticized because of its projected high costs—a cost that presently is a bargain. Personnel at the County Sanitation Districts (CSDOC) and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) completed a feasibility study in March 1995 on a large-scale water reclamation project entitled the"Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR Project)'. (Executive Summary attached and full report available from Tom Dawes, (714) 962-2411, extension 5060). For many years, CSDOC and OCWD have cooperated to develop water reclamation projects. Water Factory 21 produces high quality water used to maintain a groundwater barrier against seawater intrusion. The Green Acres Project provides a reclaimed water source for landscape irrigation in coastal areas. Over the last five years, CSDOC and OCWD have jointly studied the development of water reclamation plants at several sites. These studies have shown that while everyone, to varying degrees, supports water reclamation, nobody wants the plant nearby and the cost of producing reclaimed water from wastewater is high (approximately $1200/acre foot (AF). The OCR Project is different from many other water reclamation projects in two ways: first, the water will be treated at the CSDOC/OCWD sites in Fountain Valley where acceptance of the project should not be a problem, and second, most of the water will be spread in OCWD's existing recharge basins in Anaheim, eliminating the need for a separate distribution system. In the feasibility study, the Project was evaluated in three phases with Phase I planned as a demonstration project that will produce 50,000 acre feet (AF) of reclaimed water after the year 2000 and Phases II and III, an additional 25,000 AF of reclaimed water years 2010 and 2020, respectively. Phases, I, II, and III, . w will result in development of 50 million gallons per day (mgd), 75 mgd and 100 mgd advanced water treatment facilities, respectively. ..� Proiect Description The Sanitation Districts will provide secondary treated wastewater and OCWD will provide tertiary treatment, which will remove nitrogen, salts and organic and disinfect the water. The tertiary treat effluent, which meets drinking water standards, will be pumped from the proposed treatment site in Fountain Valley to existing spreading basins north of the intersections of 91 and 57 freeways in Anaheim. At that location, the water will be settled for groundwater recharge. In order to support the project, significant capital investments and long-term operating commitments must be made in wastewater treatment facilities, water treatment facilities, pumping plants and pipelines, plus operational and maintenance costs. The project would be built in phases with the first phase on-line as soon as the year 2000. Proiect Costs The feasibility report presents capital and operations maintenance cost estimates of the project by phase for both wastewater treatment (costs to produce and pump tertiary treated water). Under the existing terms of CSDOC's waiver from the full secondary treatment requirements under Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act, secondary treatment water used for reclamation must be replaced by new secondary facilities. A future "wild card" that could significantly decrease the wastewater treatment portion cost L of the project is a further relaxant of our secondary treatment obligation required under a revised Clean Water Act. The cost of additional secondary facilities, plus solids handling and biosolids disposal costs, add to the project's costs. Metropolitan Water District's (MIND) commodity rate for non-interruptible service is $426/AF and OCWD's groundwater replenishment cost is $85/AF (fiscal 1995-96). MWD projects increases in the commodity rate, plus the addition of 'readiness to serve' and new 'demand' charges which result in higher water costs. These costs, which may total about $772/AF by the year 2005, may be compared to the estimated cost of OCR Project water, which follows: ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS(s Millions) Reclaimed Water PhaseNear Produced (AFY) Wastewater Reclaimed Water Total 112000 50,000 $17.7 51783 - $193.9 II/2010 75,000 47.9 49.0 96.9 111/2020 100,000 70.4 -527 123.1 $413.9 4 ESTIMATED ANNUAL COSTS I$/AF) AMORTIZED DEBT OPERATION&MAINTENANCE COST Phase Wastewater Reclaimed Water Wastewater Reclaimed Water Total 1 . $28. $369 196 $371 $964 II 68. 367 231 472 1138 111 106 424 237 623 1390 The project costs will be offset in part by MWD's local projects programs which currently reimburses $154/AF. The table shows that the cost of Phase I reclaimed water could be comparable to the projected cost of MWD water in 2005 ($964/AF - $154/AF = $810/AF vs. projected MWD charges of$772/AF). The sharing of capital, operations and maintenance costs between CSDOC and OCWD, as well as funding sources, has not been completed. Future Events Staff has requested a $100,000 allocation in the fiscal 1995-96 CORF budget to provide continued support for the project. The funds would be used to hire consultants for environmental and design analyses. Contracts are currently planned to be awarded by OCWD with CSDOC paying fifty percent of the consultant charges. (It is expected that the contracts will require more than $100,000 as a fifty percent share, with additional funding required in fiscal 1996-97). pdc95Vur� iD6e.sr ORANGE COUNTYREGIONAL RECLAMATION • March 1995 Final Feasibility Study Report Executive Su=ary :� IQfti�T �i ,t. 4•. , AGE )P'es Orange a�• 0 County . •n Districts of Orange b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .J In response to projections of future droughts and water shortages, local water agencies, including the Orange County Water District (OCWD), have been evaluating alternatives for increasing local water supplies. The Metropolitan Water District (MWD), the imported water agency serving about 5,200 square miles of Southern California, estimates that the region needs to develop 1.1 million acre-feet of new supplies during a drought condition in the year 2000 (MWD, 1994). This report briefly examines the water supply alternatives in the region and focusses on the preliminary technical and economical issues for OCWD and its reclamation partner, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) in evaluating a large-scale reclamation project that will produce recycled water primarily for groundwater recharge. Historically, OCWD and CSDOC have been proponents of reclaimed water as exhibited by the successful operation of Water Factory 21 and the Green Acres Project. In 1991, OCWD coordinated with CSDOC to complete a District-Wide Water Reclamation/Reuse Master Plan that identified the area's potential for nonpotable recycled water use. This report concluded that three satellite reclaimed water treatment plants and over 70 miles of distribution pipeline would be required to serve about 25,000 acre-feet per year (afy) of reclaimed water to landscape irrigation and industrial customers. The cost associated with this plan was estimated at over$500 million(OCWD, 1991). Another costly alternative for new local water is ocean desalination. MWD is currently developing a small ocean desalination demonstration project in Huntington Beach that will test the potential of multi-effect distillation in producing water at a cost of about $700/af, not including the distribution costs. In contrast, current technologies offer desalinated seawater at a cost of$1,300 to $2,000/af(California Coastal Commission, 1993). At this time, these two local water supplies(nonpotable recycled water and desalinated seawater) are very costly and unattractive alternatives for OCWD. In attempting to develop a new, cost-effective, reliable local water supply, OCWD and CSDOC arejointly evaluating the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project (OCR Project). This feasibility study report was developed to identify and discuss the preliminary technical, financial and other issues associated with the OCR Project. This project is being evaluated in three phases with Phase I being planned as a demonstration project that will produce 50,000 acre-feet per year (afy) of reclaimed water by the year 2000 and Phases II and III, an additional 25,000 afy of reclaimed water by the years 2010 and 2020, respectively. Phases 1, II and III will result in development of 50 million gallons per day (mgd), 75 mgd and 100 mgd advanced water treatment facilities, respectively. The OCR Project water will be primarily dedicated to groundwater recharge at OCWD's existing recharge facilities in the City of Anaheim(See FIGURE ES-1). ES-1 `.+ '0 `..' PIPELINE ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 1 Yorba Linda arm+wir r. -.�, ... OCWD ------- RECHARGE FACILITIES `-- PIPELINE Anahelln - ALIGNMENT s ALTERNATIVE is 2 -- ..... . ... r 5, .,�..... .... i Garden :Grove a: :... �Cm. PROPOSED DELIVERY:... PIPELINE ALIGNMENT 0 ..... ......... :a' a_ Santa Ana $: .. ...-C:.... OCWD/CSDOC Faun rj valley pC TREATMENT FACILITIES ---•• -• '••- Costa Mdso D:\\alanninp\n•Dutt.dwp FIGURE ES-1 �I 0 12000 ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL tp WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT \� Scale In Feet PROJECT FACILITIES MAP +r.+..:.i 'omwaoue'rrm• Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Feasibility Study Report. OCWD and CSDOC, 1995 Consistent with its commitment to improving and promoting new water treatment - technologies, OCWD envisions that Phase I of the OCR Project will incorporate various emerging advanced water treatment technologies, such as microfiltration(MF) and ultrafiltration. These new membrane technologies offer potential for improved pretreatment for the reverse osmosis (RO)process. As part of Phase 1, different RO units may also be evaluated for both treatment reliability and cost effectiveness. Manufacturers are currently developing new RO units that would require less operating pressure while maintaining their superior treatment capabilities. OCWD is currently building a 500 gallon-per-minute(gpm) microfiltration/reverse osmosis demonstration project that will provide much needed reliability and cost data for varying process train alternatives and each unit process. The 500 gpm MF system is currently on-line while the RO unit is on order. The data developed from the 500 gpm MF/RO demonstration project and Phase I of the OCR Project will likely provide widespread benefits to the water industry by evaluating the reliability of emerging advanced water treatment technologies. Both of these demonstration efforts represent unique endeavors that have potential to change the course of the water industry. For the purpose of this report, Phase I of the OCR Project is currently being considered with MF as a pretreatment process for RO and RO membranes of the thin film composite low pressure-high rejection type. Based on the quality of the secondary effluent from CSDOC, three treatment train alternatives are discussed in this report. Two alternatives assume receipt of nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent that would allow partial bypass of the RO process. The third alterative assumes receipt of conventional secondary effluent that would depend on additional RO treatment for adequate nitrogen removal. The treatment facilities for this project will be accommodated on existing properties in the City of Fountain Valley owned by OCWD and CSDOC. From the treatment site, the OCR Project water will be delivered via a pipeline proposed to be located within the Santa Ana River right-of-way to OCWD's existing recharge facilities located in Anaheim. The groundwater basin will serve as both a storage reservoir and distribution system for this project. By using the OCR Project water to increase the overall yield of the Orange County groundwater basin, all communities with access to the basin will be able to increase their respective local production levels. To optimize the use of the OCR Project water, injection wells may be incorporated into the project. Implementation of this project will allow the northern and central Orange County area to increase its local water supplies, alleviate the effects of dry years, and reduce its reliance on imported water sources. According to a recent study developed by OCWD and the Municipal Water District of Orange County, the OCWD service area will achieve nearly 100 percent (water)reliability when the OCR Project comes on-line(MWDOC/OCWD, 1993). Compared to other areas of Southern California, the residences and businesses in ES-3 the OCWD area will have access to very reliable water supplies that are less susceptible to `...� droughts. The OCR Project water is envisioned to be primarily dedicated for groundwater replenishment, with access given to interested industrial and irrigation customers located near the project's delivery pipeline. In addition to improved water reliability and efficiency, the OCR Project also offers water quality benefits. The current recharge supplies for the Orange County groundwater basin are upstream treated wastewater discharges, storm flows, and MWD imported supplies (primarily Colorado River Water). In terms of total dissolved solids, total organic carbon and turbidity, the OCR Project water is expected to be of better or equal quality than the existing recharge supplies. Thus, implementation of the OCR Project will likely result in an improvement in groundwater quality. Based on the two preferred treatment trains presented in FIGURES ES-2 and ES-3, the capital cost in 1995 dollars associated with Phase I of the OCR Project is estimated at $167.3 to $176.2 million. (Refer to TABLE ES-1). The project's estimated operations and maintenance costs are presented in TABLE ES-2. Because the OCR Project is being evaluated to include emerging technologies and maximize OCWD's current recharge capabilities and it is not going to require any purchases of land, the project is expected to produce water at a competitive rate. Compared to imported water supplies, ocean desalination and nonpotable recycled water, the unit costs of producing the OCR Project are competitive(See FIGURE ES4). The added advantage provided by the OCR Project as compared to imported water is increased reliability from developing a drought-proof �"✓ supply. The capital costs in 1995 dollars of CSDOC's wastewater treatment and support facilities that are associated with the OCR Project is estimated at $136.0 million for Preferred Alternative I which requires nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent and reduces CSDOC's wastewater treatment capacity for Phase I of the OCR Project. The cost for the wastewater facilities are estimated at$12.7 to $17.7 million for Preferred Alternatives 1 and 2, respectively. The wastewater treatment costs and corresponding operations and maintenance costs for Preferred Alternative 1 are presented in TABLE ES-3. Preferred Alternative 2 requires the same wastewater facility modifications for Phase III and does not require any wastewater facility modifications for Phase 11. As part of the planning process for the OCR Project, OCWD is currently coordinating with the regulatory and scientific communities on a three-year effort to conduct the Santa Ana River Water Quality and Health Study. This effort, which is currently in the middle of its first year, aims to develop water quality data that will assist the regulatory community in evaluating the OCR Project. Preliminary analysis indicate that the water quality objectives for Phase I of the OCR Project are consistent with the proposed groundwater recharge guidelines that have been proposed by the Department of Health ES-4 CSDOC Plant No. 1 OCR Project AWT Processes Backwash CSDOC Plant Water No. t Primary ' Effluent Brine CSDOC : ii —W? Outlall 's ; Pump Station Activated 66 Sludge H Microfiltration 14-0 Reverse Osmosis DisWection Primary `� Conveyance Effluent Product Water Pipeline to 32% Primary Pump Station Anaheim Pump Station Disinfection Forebay, Activated Sludge Recharge with Nitrificatiord Facilities Denitrification FIGURE ES-2 OCR PROJECT PHASE I Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Feasibility TREATMENT PROCESS AND Study Report, OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. FLOW TRAIN-PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 41 CSOOC Plant No.1 Treatment OCR Project AWT Processes Backwash Water 10 CSDOC Plant No. 1 I Rom►CSDOC Ocean Outfall 71% �lJ Primary Treatment i f I Reverse f Pump Osmosis Product Water Pipeline to Activated Station Microfiltration 129-/. __I* Primary Pump Station Anaheim Forebay Sludge p Disinfection Recharge Facilities Disinfection FIGURE ES-3 OCR PROJECT PHASE I Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project Feasibility Study TREATMENT PROCESS AND Report, OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. FLOW TRAIN - PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE #2 TABLE ES-3 SUMMARY OF CSDOC WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES COST ESTIMATE' PHASE ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED CAPITAL ANNUAL O&M COSTS TOTAL UNIT COST COST CONSTRUCTION ($Million) ANNUAL ($!Million Gallonsy ($Million) COST' COST ($ MiOion/Vr) ($MillionfVr) 1 17.7 1.4 9.8 11.2 116 II 47.9 4.1 17.3 21 A 183 III 70.4 6 23.7 1 29.7 1 226 TOTAL: 136.0 — 23.7 1 - I - 'Includes all emu associated with providing niMfled/deninlfied secondary effluent W-femdAlternative IJ. 2Annud capital recovery bated on 15 years amortisation @ 7M intenel. 'S/million gallant of inafed wastewater. Orange County Regional WaterRedamaaon profect Feasibility Study Report,OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. ES-10 Services (DHS) and are scheduled for adoption in 1995. DHS recently used these proposed guidelines to issue a permit for the West Coast Barrier Project, a recycled water injection project sponsored by the West Basin Municipal Water District. OCWD staff discussed with DHS staff in December 1994 the option of issuing a conditional approval for Phase I of the OCR Project as a demonstration project that falls within the proposed groundwater recharge guidelines. OCWD hopes to receive DHS' response to this request in early 1995. At that time, DHS will define the preliminary dilution water and water quality strategy for the OCR Project. Completion of this feasibility study represents the first formal step undertaken by OCWD and CSDOC in amlyzing the viability of the OCR Project. The next steps include continuance of the water quality and health study, evaluation and testing of the MP/RO demonstration project, other RO pretreatment processes, and different RO units, implementation of a community involvement program, development of the required environmental documentation, and examination of various preliminary design issues. "' ES-11 TABLE ES-1 SUMMARY OF RECLAIMED WATER CAPITAL COST .. ESTIMATES FOR OCR PROJECT PROJECTPHASE PROJECTED ESTIMATED RECLAIMED WATER CAPITAL COST PRODUCED(Am) (s I,1 ()N) In DOLLARS Phase I-Yr 2000 50,000 Alternative 1* 176.2 Alternative 2** 167.3 Phase H-Yr 2010 75,000 Alternative 1 * 49.0 Altemative 2•* 56.7 Phase HI-Yr 2020 100,000 Altemative 1* 52.7 Altemative 2** 47A TOTAL Altemadve 1* 277.9 Alternative 2** 27IA * Alternative 1 - Ninified/cImAdfied secondary effluent provided. *' Altetnanve 2 - No a itrified/deninified se=dary effluent provided. Omnge County Regional WaterReclamadon Project Feasibility Study Report, OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. ES-7 TABLE ES-2 SUMMARY OF RECLAIMED WATER ANNUAL O & M COST ESTIMATES FOR OCR PROJECT PROJECT PHASE PROJECTED ESTIMATED RECLAIMED WATER ANNUAL PRODUCED(APT) O&M COST a 1nm.D onrccnx> 995 OI.IARS Phase 1-Yr 2000 50,000 Alternative 1• 15.1 Altemative 2•• 14.9 Phase H-Yr 2010 75,000 Altemative 1 • 22.1 Ahemative 2 •• 22.7 Phase HI-Yr 2020 100,000 Altemative 1• 29.5 Alternative 2•• 30.8 �"'� • Altmaiive I - Nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent provided. •• Alternative 2 -. No nitrified/denitrified secondary effluent provided. Orange County Regional WaterReclamadon Project Fearibiliy Study Report,OCWD and CSDOC, 1995. ..: ES-8 $1,300 to $2,000 Unit Cost($per acre-foot) "'-- 1200 Cost of new production walls Range of Costs 1000 Energy cost for pumping ($58/af) B00 $630 to $654 sog $574 7 M 400 Production i Costs a $562 to$586 200 ul 0 OCR Project Phase P MWD Imported Weler° Ocean Desalinatlorn Nonpotable Recycled Water OCR Project water production cost based on using thin film composite low pressun -high rejection RO membranes and receipt of Metropolitan's local projects program incentive of$154/af. FIGURE ES4 •Metropolitan Water District's Imported water rate In the year2000, Including the commodity rate for noninterruptible service and the readiness to serve charge(does not Include the new demand charge). UNIT COST COMPARISON OF OCR Range of Costs for ocean desalination is$1,300 to$2,000(California Coastal Commission, 1993.) PROJECT WATER, IMPORTED (Watereuse Association of California, 1992.) WATER,OCEAN DESALINATION AND NONPOTABLE RECYCLED Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project, OCWD and CSDOC, 119995 WATER �. JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(2): (PDC96-21) Consideration of Actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2. Summary Job No. Pt-36-1 is the final of four construction contracts that will improve the ability of existing secondary treatment facilities to treat primary effluent. The work associated with this construction includes a completely new upgraded aeration system,three new dissolved air flotation tanks(DAF)and systems, upgrade three existing DAF,improved waste activated sludge and return activated sludge systems, rehabilitate wasting secondary clarifiers,construct ten new secondary clarifier, miscellaneous auriliary systems,and construct a new Orange County Water District Pump Station.These upgrades will allow the Districts to treat 80 million gallons per day of primary effluent through the facility. The plans and specifications were modified through two addenda that provided a simpler schedule of prices,provided better details of items to be constructed,and other miscellaneous issues. Staff Recommendation A. That the PDC Committee recommend approval of Addenda Nos. 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications of said project,clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. B. That the PDC Committee receive,file bid tabulation,and recommend award of contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1,Job No. P1-36-2,to Margate Construction, Inc.in the amount of$35,291,000. Recommendation to the Executive Committee Consideration of the following actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1,Job No. P1-36-2: (1) Consideration of motions approving Addenda 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. (2) Consideration of a resolution receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No.1,Job No. P1-36-2,to Margate Construction,Inc.,in the total amount of$35,291,000. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the PDC Committee. J 1WPOLPGMIE]IEL1UnB5W1]eLEC COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS �'. M ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA IOW ELLIS AVENUE June 1, 1995 Ro.SOX nn FOVMNNVALLEY,L WORW 82)211-912) 17141352.2411 STAFF REPORT PDC95-21: Consideration of Motion Approving the Following Actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2 Summary In October 1989, the Directors awarded a Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers for the preparation of plans and specifications for design and construction support services related to the expansion and improvements to the existing secondary treatment facilities at both wastewater treatment plants. The design has resulted in a total of four different construction contracts which expand the secondary treatment facility capacity from 46 million gallons per day (mgd) to 80 mgd at Plant No. 1 and from 75 mgd to 90 mgd at Plant No. 2. This overall design and construction effort includes extensive structural and mechanical modifications to existing facilities, expansion of secondary treatment capacity and design of various miscellaneous support facilities. The design will also provide for the removal of 16 internal combustion engines which cannot be operated because of restrictions of the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Permit to Operate. The three Central Power Generation engines at Plant No. 1 and Plant No. 2 are replacing these engines. The design and construction effort has required four Amendments to the original Professional Services Agreement with Carollo. These Board authorized items have raised the total cost for the design and construction support effort from $4,997,841.00 to a not-to-exceed cost of$6,639,365. This project will expand the secondary treatment capability to 80 mgd as noted above, and will include the construction of ten new secondary clarifiers, expanded return activated sludge and waste activated sludge pumping capability, three new Dissolved Air Flow Thickener Tanks and systems, rehabilitation of the existing secondary clarifiers, rehabilitation of the existing aeration basins with completely new air supply and diffusion systems, and automation to operate the facility from a remote location. Engineer's estimate for this construction work was $42,300,000. The bids reflect the very competitive construction market in Southern California where we currently have many good contractors competing for few large construction projects. Our engineer's estimate is based on what we refer to as a normal economy. The low `.� bidder, Margate Construction, Inc. has an ongoing contract at Plant No. 2 which may have had some influence on the low bid in that the contractor's mobilization and project staffing costs may be lower than other bidders. U A summary of the submitted construction bids is attached. There were two addenda associated with the bidding of the work. Addendum No. 1 included modifications to simplify the bid form, extend the amount of days the price will be good until the Board awards this work, clarifying various mechanical specifications, and addressing potential contractor issues. Addendum No. 2 better defined mechanical equipment and addressed potential contractor issues. Staff Recommendation A. That the Joint Boards of Directors recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. B. That the Joint Boards of Directors receive and file bid tabulation, and recommendation to award contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2 to Margate Construction, Inc., in the amount of $35,291,000. Recommendation to the Executive Committee A. That the Executive Committee recommend approval of Addenda No. 1 and No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said project, clarifying and simplifying miscellaneous issues. B. That the Executive Committee receive and file bid tabulation, and recommendation to award contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2 to Margate Construction, Inc. in the amount of $35,291.000. pdcM5 unW95-21.sr y COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS r AI ORANGE COUNTY, CAOFORNIA Ip ELLIS AVENUE RO.8OX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 927MRI1 7 ",A)9522.11 May 16, 1995 11:00 a.m. 2 Addenda R I D TA Rill A T I n N Job No. P7-36-2 PROJECT TITLE: Secondary Tmatmant ImprCv,,mAme at Plant NO t PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction Of haw far'rr'pA to enhance Aecondary♦rAatmAnt dArman and retrn£t avict'ng_aq ipmpnt and s=Ecturag ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: 947 Inn 00n BUDGET AMOUNT: S42 mnlinn TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- Margate Construction, Inc. 35,291,000.00 2. Kiewit Pacific 37,210,188.00 3. J. R. Flanc Construction Co. Inc. 37 575,000.00 4. Dillingham Construction 38,816,000.00 5. Ray Wilson Company 38,915,358.00 6. Advance Constructors, Inc. 38,979,108.00 7. M. A. Mortenson Company 39,205,332.00 8. Tutor-Saliba-Scott - Joint Venture 40,427,000.00 9. 10. 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 Margate Construction in the bid amount of $35,291,000.00 as the lowest and best bid. Oh n D. Linder Director of Engineering JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(3): PDCSS-22 Consideration of motion approving the following actions re Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2 Summary This project provides redundancy and reliability improvements at Headworks No.2,at Plant No. 1 by Installing Main Sewage Pump No. 3 electric motor drive. Major project elements include installation of the new electrical motor drive,solid state motor controller,and respective modifications to the plant electrical distribution system. Recent intense rainstorms produced the highest flows ever treated throughout the plant. The key to keeping our treatment plants operating and to avoid pollution during natural or man-made emergency situations is system reliability and redundancy. This specific enhancement of system reliability and redundancy at Plant No. 1 was recommended by John Carollo Engineers in the report entitled, Evaluation V►� of Hydraulic Reliability and Standby Power Requirements,Job Nos.J-33 and J34, 1994. Thinking about future rainstorm conditions,staff believes that the Districts should proceed with implementation of this recommendation without further delay. Staff believes that further delays in the installation of Drive No.3 may jeopardize Plant No. 1 reliability during emergency situations. The Districts staff solicited and evaluated Consultants'proposals to provide engineering design services for the project. See the attached matrix of proposal and evaluation results. Staff Recommendation That the PDC Committee receive and file Committee Certification, proposals,and recommendation to award Professional Services Agreement for Main Sewage Pump(MSP) No.3 Drive at Headworks No.2 at Plant No. 1,Job No.J-33-2,to a consultant selected by the Committee. PDC Committee Recommendation to the Executive Committee Consideration of the following actions relative to Main Sewage Pump(MSP) No.3 Drive at Headworks No.2 at Plant No. 1,Job No.J-33-2: (1) Consideration of motion to receive,file and approve the PDC Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with John Carollo Engineers for said services. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of a Professional Services Agreement to John Carollo Engineers,providing for design and construction support services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead,direct expenses,subconsultants,and fixed profit,in an amount not to exceed$193,100. 5.,,�,i Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the PDC Committee. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA o. n•N P.O.BOX 8127.FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 9272M127 10044 ELLIS,FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 82708.7018 °h�hce c°u� (714)02-2411 June 1,199$ Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 108" Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers in Connection with Main Sewage Pump(MSP) No.3 Drive at Headworks No.2 at Plant No. 1,Job No.J-33-2 In accordance with the Districts'procedures for selection of professional engineering services,the Planning, Design and Construction Committee has negotiated the following fee with John Carollo Engineers for the preparation of construction plans and specifications,and design documentation and supporting materials, Operations and Maintenance Manual update, and construction support and training services in connection with Job No.J-33-2,on an hourly-rate basis including labor plus overhead, plus subconsultants fees, and V.✓ other direct costs and fixed profit,in an amount not to exceed$193,100. Engineering Services, direct labor at hourly rates plus overhead at 164%,not to exceed $147,800, Subconsultants Fees,not to exceed $ 12,500. Other Direct Costs $ 18,000. Fixed Profit $ 14,800. TOTAL CONTRACT, not to exceed 5193.100 The Planning,Design and Construction 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. /s/ John Collins /s/Sheldon Singer Chairman Vice Chairman PDC Committee PDC Committee /a/John D.Linder John D. Linder Director of Engineering eng433-2%c-psn.nr JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS `d REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 21 , 1995 Item (12)(b)(4): OMTS9"29: Consideration of motion adopting a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems Summary Since January 1990, the Districts have reported a total of 71 spills to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). These 71 spills resulted in a total of 1.56 million gallons of untreated wastewater being released on the streets of Orange County. Although as an overall percentage of total wastewater treated during this same time period, this represents a small fraction (0.00043%), increasing pressure is being placed upon us by the RWQCB to contain spills and return them to the system. Staff believes that it would be prudent for the Districts to adopt a policy directing staff how to deal with the containment of spills in the future. To that end, the Maintenance department has prepared a spill containment policy,for the Directors' consideration, that deals with how to handle spills. Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance,will be presenting this policy. Budget Considerations Staff believes that this policy will have no fiscal impact. Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending adoption of the attached policy. OMTS Committee Recommendation to the Executive Committee The OMTS Committee is recommending adoption of the attached policy. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee recommends adoption of the attached policy. JAWS GMLX UN95WIQB4.EC COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS M ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA May 30, 1995 10B"E11I9 AVENUE Y V.o.Box B127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CAUFOANIA 927284127 Tl141SS2.2411 STAFF REPORT OMTS9"29: Consideration of a Motion for the Adoption of a Policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts-owned and/or Operated Systems Over the past five years, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (Districts) have reported 71 sewage spills that have occurred in the Districts' system, to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). A summary of these spills by year is as follows: TOTAL ESTIMATED YEAR TOTAL# GALLONS SPILLED 1990 11 86,000 1991 14 1,181,050 1992 15 66,845 1993 13 9,474 1994 10 12,025 1995 8 206,992 71 1,562,386 The causes of these spills were: grease- 12; roots- 9; vandalism - 3; rocks - 3; contractor caused-9; heavy rains-7; Districts caused- 1; unknown causes-22; Techite pipe-5. The Districts currently report all spills. The State Water Code Section 13271 requires notification and reporting on spills of 1,000 gallons or more. The RWQCB would like to see us develop a policy to contain spills, as much as possible, and return them to our system. Staff has been testing containment products for the past few months that are commercially available. These products include sandbags, absorbent materials and rubber sheeting. Staff believes that, whenever feasible, the responsible thing to do would be to contain spills and keep them from entering the waterways. To that end, staff has prepared the following policy. We have trialed this policy for the last five months and find it to be the most workable for our field crews. We also follow the directions of local fire and law enforcement staff with regard to containing sewage on city streets. We are following current EPA activities in formatting a new policy regarding Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO) and will keep the Committee appraised of developments. This policy is being submitted for your guidance and information. Staff welcomes any comments or questions that the Directors might have on the policy or how to improve it. It is `.� staffs opinion that the member cities and local agencies will be affected by the outcomes of this policy. K OMTS95-029 Page 2 of 3 May 30, 1995 POLICY PURPOSE The purpose of the spill response policy of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County(Districts) is to, whenever possible, protect public health and the environment by taking the steps necessary to prohibit untreated wastewater from entering the public waterways. Implementation of this policy will vary dependent upon whether the spill occurs on public or private property. Both scenarios are described below. IMPLEMENTATION GENERAL Staff shall, upon arrival at a spill, protect the public storm drain system, as much as is reasonably possible, by placing a containment barrier at the inlet of the storm drain system. Also whenever possible, runoff wastewater shall be pumped back into the local sewer or vacuumed up. Disinfectant shall generally not be applied to any water that would get into the storm drain or would make its way into a public waterway. PUBLIC PROPERTY AND DISTRICTS'EASEMENTS: �..✓ If, upon request, the Districts'staff responds to a spill in a city-owned system, they will assist the city crews, if requested, in resolving the problem. Responsibility for formal notification and spill reporting shall be with the City. PRIVATE PROPERTY., It is the responsibility of the properly owner to relieve any stoppage in a private facility and contain any spill, and all cleanup. Districts'staff, if requested to respond, will coordinate with the property owner for the removal of all materials that may cause a blockage to any of the City owned or Districts'facilities downstream. Districts'staff will not direct the work activities of the owner or their contractors. Responsibility for formal notification and spill reporting shall be with the property owner. RECORD KEEPING AND REPORTING: A Collection System Problem Report form and sketch of the spill area shall be completed by Districts'staff and shall contain the contact person's name and phone number for future use. All time and equipment used shall be charged to the appropriate "Miscellaneous Indirect Trunk Maintenance"work order number for possible back-charge use. V OMTS95-029 Page 3 of 3 May 30, 1995 PHASE-IN: Discussion, procurement of materials and staff training shall take place, as soon as practical, after this policy is approved. This policy shall be revised as it becomes necessary and in conjunction with subsequent changes in public law or issues affecting the Districts'NPDES Permit, Recommended: Ken Ramey, Maintenance Manager, Collection Facilities Date Approved: Edwin E. Hodges, Director of Maintenance Date 4.✓ Edward M. Torres, Director of Technical Services Date Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Date Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager Date EEH:cm B19SOP9.SR JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(5): OMTS95-030 Consideration of Addendum No. 3 to Professional Services Agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services. Summary In October 1990, the Directors approved a two-year professional services agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. in the amount of$164,000 to provide technical support services in a number of areas including the ocean discharge permit renewal, ocean monitoring program,water reclamation,water conservation, biosolids, legislative and regulatory reviews,environmental impact reports and facilities planning. The agreement was amended in December 1992 for an additional two years, with a maximum amount not to exceed$295,500. The agreement was amended again in December 1994 for an additional six-month period with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Because the activities which the consultant supports are ongoing, consisting primarily of continued support in evaluation and assembly of ocean monitoring data and discussions with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)and California Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB) regarding our permit renewal and 301(h)waiver application, staff is recommending that the agreement be extended for an additional six-month period beginning July 1, 1995 with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Staff feels that the approximate$50,000 of unexpended funds remaining in this contract should be adequate to provide the services needed through the end of the year. A staff report regarding the proposed addendum to the professional services agreement is attached. Staff anticipates that a tentative decision on our application for permit renewal and our 301(h) waiver should be made by December 1995 and that permit negotiations will then begin. At that point, staff will recommend that the Districts'contract with KP. Lindstrom, Inc. be amended to address the new scope of services required to develop and negotiate a permit with EPA. OMTS Committee Recommendation The OMTS Committee recommends consideration of the following actions re Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc., providing for Environmental Consulting Services: (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc.for said additional services. y (2) Consideration of a resolution approving Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K P. Lindstrom, Inc., providing for an extension of services for a six-month period beginning July 1, 1995,with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the OMTS Committee. 110.P LCC�OW}lEN W'45NILHiEC _ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS Al ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA May 19, 1995 IDEAL Ews AVENUE vo.E0A e121 `V FOUMAIN VALLEY.CAU[ORMA 9272EA127 M.19E2.2A11 STAFF REPORT OMTS95-030: Addendum No. 3 to Professional Services Agreement with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services. Introduction Over the past several years, KP. Lindstrom, Inc. has assisted the Districts with many environmental issues including technical reports supporting our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit renewal and waiver for full secondary treatment (ocean waiver), preparation of environmental impact reports (EIRs) supporting master-planned documents; and other environmental technical support on an as-needed basis for such activities as water reclamation, conservation, biosolids management, ocean monitoring, air quality and legislative/regulatory reviews. K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. also provided extensive review of our 30-year master plan and accompanying EIR. Mr. Lindstrom, the President of KP. Lindstrom, Inc., is one of the country's acknowledged ocean waiver experts, and has been of significant assistance in our discussions with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding their V review of our permit renewal application and proposed marine monitoring program. In October 1990, the Directors approved a two-year professional services agreement with KP. Lindstrom, Inc. in the amount of$164,000 to provide the technical support services described above. The agreement was amended twice, once in December 1992 for an additional two years with a maximum amount not to exceed $295,500, and again in December 1994 for an additional six-month period with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Through May 1995, a total of $248,251.56 has been expended (94% of the total contract) as shown in Table 1. Table 1: Contract Status Original Addendum Addendum Expenditures Expense Agreement No.1 No.2 Revised Through Unencumbered Category W logo Doc 1992 Dec 1994 Total May 95 Funds Consultant $142,50000 $111,000.00 SO,W $253,500.00 E227,77250 $25,727W Sery ces' Direct E>mmises $12,000.00 $20,000.00 Saw $32,00000 $20,47906 $11,520.94 subconwllanls $10,o00o0 $0.00 som $10,001I som $10,01D0.00 Fans Total. $164,500.00 $131,000.00 $0.00 $295,500.00 5249,g51.56 $47,249./4 y 'CoimuAam services wneisl of tlirest tabor basetl on hourly mtee Including DroPo aM ovemeatl. OMTS95-030 Page 2 May 19, 1995 Recommendations Because the activities which the consultant supports are ongoing, consisting primarily of continued support in evaluation and assembly of ocean monitoring data and discussions with EPA and California Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding our permit renewal and 301(h) waiver application, staff is recommending that the agreement be extended for an additional six-month period beginning July 1, 1995 with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500. Staff anticipates that a tentative decision on our application for permit renewal and our 301(h) waiver should be made by December 1995 and that permit negotiations will begin. At that point, staff will recommend that the Districts' contract with K.P. Lindstrom, Inc. be amended to address the new scope of services required to develop and negotiate a permit with EPA. J:\W%T5MOPERCOMM"LSTMF.RPr V „1E COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS `f OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127.FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 ,y 10844 ELLIS.FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 04'40E COY„, (714)962-2411 June 7, 1995 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Ca 92708 Subject: Certification of Fee for Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with KP. Lindstrom, Inc. for Environmental Consulting Services In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering services, the Operation, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee (OMTS) has approved a six-month extension of the Professional Services Agreement with KP. -'u►� Lindstrom, Inc. providing for environmental consulting services in connection with ocean discharge permit renewal, ocean monitoring program, water reclamation, water conservation, biosolids, legislative and regulatory reviews, environmental impact reports and facilities planning. Addendum No. 3 provides for a six-month extension of said agreement on an hourly rate basis including labor plus overhead, plus subconsultants fees, and fixed profit, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of $295,500. Existing Change per Amended Agreement Addn. No. 3 Agreement Engineering Services Direct labor based on hourly rates including profit and $253,500 $0 $253,500 overhead. Direct Expenses $32,000 $0 $32,000 Subconsultants Fees, not to exceed $10,000 $0 $10,000 TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT, not to exceed $295,500 $0 $295,500 dad COUNTY SANITATION UISTIUCTSI .1 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 1O ELLSAVENUE P.O.BOX B127 FOUNTAIN VALI Y.CALIFORNIA 9212 QW 952-2A11 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County June 7, 1995 Page Two The OMTS Committee hereby certifies the above fee as reasonable for the services to be performed and that said fee will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. UDirector McGuigan /s/Director Leipzig Director Mc Guigan, Chair Director Leipzig, Vice Chair OMTS Committee OMTS Committee /s/Ed Torres Ed Torres Director of Technical Services OMTS Committee MHN:ahh REF# J:\3500\510033B.LTR v JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS ,~ REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(6): OMTS95-033 Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Science Application International Corporation in connection with Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-15611; and consideration of a resolution recommending awarding said contract to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997 for a cost not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals. Summary The Districts' mandated Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP) is designed to determine compliance with federal and state ocean requirements in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Districts' special National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit; this permit allows for less yr than full secondary treatment of our wastewater. This'waiver'from the requirement of going to full- secondary treatment is allowed under section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Our present OMP was implemented in 1985 when a jointly issued (by state and federal regulators) NPDES permit was given to the Districts. At that time, Science Application International Corporation (SAIC)was awarded an initial five-year contract as part of a competitive bidding process to conduct the program. The contract was annually extended from 1990 to 1994 while awaiting a decision from EPA on our 1989 application for a renewed ocean discharge permit and modified monitoring program. In June 1994, upon the approval of the one year extension of the contract for Year 10 of the OMP, the Boards of Directors directed staff to seek proposals for Year 11 of the program. This process was initiated in November 1994 and a status report was given to the OMITS Committee on January 4, 1995. Subsequently, staff has received two responses to our request for proposals (RFP) and has evaluated them in accordance with the Districts procedure for selecting professional services (Resolution No. 90-43). From that evaluation staff determined that: (1) SAIC was the most technically qualified firm, and (2) SAIC's cost proposal was the lowest of the two firms. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends awarding Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for the Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation fora 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals of this contract, the need of which will be determined by the issuance of a new five-year NPDES permit. Costs for these additional years, if needed, will be negotiated annually. 1 OMTS Committee Recommendation The OMTS Committee recommends the following actions by the Executive Committee: (1) Consideration of a motion to receive, file and approve the OMTS Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Science Application International Corporation for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R. (2) Consideration of a resolution approving the award of Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for the Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals of this contract. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the OMTS Committee. 4.d IMPCtt1GM,FX UNB IID EC L COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1p EWSnvEMNE PC Po 8127 �..� May25, 1995 EWNTNNVR Y.W6pPNtWJ 127 almm- ,, STAFF REPORT OMTS96-033: Consideration of Resolution No. 95-033, Awarding the contract for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20- month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997 for a cost not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals. Background In June 1994, for the first time in ten years, the Boards of Directors directed staff to seek proposals for the Districts' administratively extended permit and its mandated Year 11 Ocean Monitoring Program (OMP). The OMP, which is mandated by the Districts' National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, has been contracted to Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) since 1985 when the Districts received our present NPDES permit incorporating a waiver from full secondary treatment under section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). In 1985, we envisioned obtaining competitive proposals for the OMP contract every five years, in concert with the renewal of our NPDES permit and subsequent changes to the OMP. However, to date our permit has not been renewed, but has instead been administratively extended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)for the past five years while EPA makes a decision on the Districts' 1989 301(h) waiver reapplication. Due to the Districts' permit conditions not changing and our satisfaction with SAIC's work, the Boards decided to continue SAIC's contract on a year-by-year basis. Although a variety of integrated special projects have been important adjuncts to the Districts' base OMP over the past ten years, staff decided to focus on the basic, permit- required program elements in the request for proposals (RFPs) for the Year 11 OMP. This was done for two primary reasons: (1) to maximize the number of proposals from potential firms for a very specialized and highly technical program, and (2) to allow staff to better compare submitted proposals based on the Districts' OMP requirements. The proposal process was initiated in November 1994, when staff mailed RFP packages out to 27 prospective firms; from those 27 RFPs the Districts received a total of six responses, three of which were proposals. The three firms that provided proposals V.d OMTS95-033 Page 2 v May 25, 1995 were Brown and Caldwell (B&C), EcoAnalysis, Inc. (ECO) and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). After reviewing the three proposals and conducting site visits, staff determined that problems existed with some of the proposals received that precluded a final selection from being made. These problems included, but were not limited to: (1) assumptions made by firms in their proposals that were not acceptable to the Districts, and (2) incomplete responses to RFP requirements. Of the three proposals received, only SAIC fully addressed and met all of the stated requirements of the November 1994 RFP. However, staff felt that there existed potential ambiguities concerning minimum Districts' requirements (i.e., analytical methods, vessel requirements, quality assurance program) in the RFP that may have affected the content of the proposals. Therefore, rather than select SAIC outright, staff felt it was in the best interest of the Districts to send out a revised RFP that provided additional information on minimum OMP requirements and the required content of the proposals. This process would allow the firms to modify their original proposal in accordance with the Districts' needs. Subsequently, staff rejected all proposals and a revised RFP was prepared, advertised and delivered to B&C, ECO and SAIC on March 31, 1995. All three responded to the revised RFP; however only two submitted proposals. At the May 17, 1995 Executive Committee meeting, the Directors discussed a letter received from one of the three firms who proposed on the Year 11 OMP. The firm's letter stated their belief that they should have been awarded the contract and that the revised RFP released on March 31, 1995 unjustly excluded them from resubmitting a proposal. A separate staff report responding to these allegations has been prepared by staff and will be discussed. Discussion The two companies that submitted proposals were ECO and SAIC. Both companies proposed to act as the primary contractor of a "project team" consisting of specialty subcontracting firms and individuals. A selection committee made-up of Districts' staff was formed to conduct the technical review and evaluation of the submitted RFP proposals. Each proposal was evaluated based on the seven (7) criteria listed in Table 1. Table 1 OMTS95-033 .� Page 3 May 25, 1995 Evaluation Criteria Overall Responsiveness to RFP 5 Program Management 15 QA/QC Program 15 Field Sampling 10 Laboratory (Chemistry & Biology) 25 Data Handling & Reporting 5 Data Analysis & Report Writing 25 Overall Ranking 100 After the technical evaluation was completed, the sealed proposed cost-for-services that ECO and SAIC provided separately from their technical proposals were opened and compared with the average cost over the past five years for the mandated OMP contract (Figure 1). The Southern California Bight Pilot Project (SCBPP)was an alternative monitoring program required by EPA in Year 10 and is included in the baseline program costs for calculation of a 5-year average. Conclusion Based upon evaluation of the two proposals, the following conclusions can be made: 1. Of the two firms submitting proposals only SAIC's proposal was evaluated as qualified to meet all of the Districts' requirements for the Year 11 OMP. 2. SAIC had the highest technical ranking of the two firms. 3. SAIC's proposed cost-of-services was approximately $215,000 below the average cost the Districts had paid for similar services over the past 5 years (Figure 1). 4. SAIC proposed the lowest cost of the two firms as validated by the Districts' General Counsel. Staff Recommendation OMTS95-033 Page 4 ..J May 25, 1995 Based upon the conclusions stated above, staff recommends awarding the contract for Environmental Monitoring Professional Services Contract for the Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R, to Science Application International Corporation for a 20-month period from July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463 with an option for up to two (2) additional one-year renewals of this contract, the need of which will be determined by the issuance of a new five-year NPDES permit. Costs for these additional years, if needed, will be negotiated annually. GR:m m G1WPWQGMISfIFP2 51 ML $25W." 6-year average cost for base OMP($1,701,071) SAIC proposal \ cost($1,496,453) oo oo Ez.00 Ef 50o,000 0 E I a NV l C U E1 O 'Ooo f500,000 $0 19w91 1991-92 1992-93 IN 94 1994-95 1N9 w Contract Year OBase OMP Program Elements OSouthem California Blght Pllat Project Especial Studies USAIC Proposed Year 11 Cos1 Figure 1. CSDOC 1991-95 annual ocean monitoring costs compared to SAIC's proposed Year 11 (1995-96) cost. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127,FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 4 10844 ELLIS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714)962-2411 June 7, 1995 Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708-7081 Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Agreement with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for the Ocean Monitoring Program Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R In accordance with the Districts' procedures for selection of professional engineering and architectural services, the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee (OMTS) has negotiated the following fee with Science Applications International Corporation to perform services for Ocean Monitoring Program Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outfall, Specification No. P-156R 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 the period July 1995- February 1997 for a net amount not to exceed $1,486,463 as follows: Basic Program Tasks (Labor & Other Direct Costs for Tasks A-F) $1,327,676 Profit (Basic Program Tasks A-F) $93,501 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Analysis (Task G) $61,174 Profit (Quality Assurance/Quality Control Analysis Task G) $4,112 Year 11 Contract Amount $1,486,463 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICIFJ W ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 19944 ELLIS AVENUE vU Box 9127 ( � MUNENN VALLEY.CAUMMIA 92726 Boards of Directors 7141992.2411 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Page Two June 7, 1995 The OMTS 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/Director McGuigan /s/Director Leipzig Director McGuigan, Chair Director Leipzig, Vice Chair OMTS Committee OMTS Committee U /s/Ed Torres I Ed Torres Director of Technical Services OMTS Committee ET:ahh Ref# J:3500\510034.LTR JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item ( 1 2)(b)(7): OMTS95-035 Consideration of motion authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District ISCAQMD), in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995-96. Summary The California Clean Air Act (CAA) authorizes the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to assess and collect fees from public agencies for annual fees for emission of criteria pollutants, air toxics and ozone precursors; evaluating and issuing Permits to Construct and annual operating permits; compliance source testing reviewing; and permit/plan applications and other applicable requirements. SCAQMD did not propose across-the-board fee increases in fiscal year 1995-96. The small increase (510,000) in the proposed budget for the next fiscal year is due to the expected submittal of Federal Operating Permits (Title V of the CAA Amendments of 1990) for our facilities for approval by SCAQMD. Other expenses are expected to be lower than in the previous fiscal year due to a reduced number of permits and a greater emphasis on in-house compliance administration. The 1994-95 authorization was $240,000. The estimated fees payable to SCAQMD in fiscal year 1995-96 are as follows: Type of Fee Amount Annual Emissions $ 85,000 Annual Operating Permits 50,000 CARE Emissions 20,000 Compliance Source Testing 20,000 Permit & Plan Applications 60,000 Miscellaneous 15,000 Total: $250,000 Staff Recommendation Staff is requesting authorization to issue a blanket purchase order to SCAQMD, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 and to pay all applicable fees for the 1995-96 fiscal year in compliance with SCAOMD rules and regulations. OMTS Committee Recommendation to the Executive Committee The OMITS Committee recommends that staff be authorized to issue a blanket purchase order to SCAQMD, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 and to pay all applicable fees for the 1995-96 fiscal year in compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the OMTS Committee. JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(8): FAHR Item 41f) Consideration of motion ratifying Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement with PaineWebber providing that if the Certificates of Participation are converted to a fixed rate of interest mode, "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable (remarketing agent's) fee". Summary Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, will give a status report on previous action taken by the FAHR Committee and Joint Boards relative to changing the Remarketing Agents on all three of our current outstanding financing programs. The Series A and Series C have been fully completed, with all documents executed and in place. The Agreements and documents relating to 1993 Series Refunding are complete and approved by all parties, however Societe Generale would like clarification on a provision relating to obligation to pay the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends that the Executive Committee approve the requested amendment of Societe Generale to the 1993 Series Refunding Remarketing Agreement that provides that if the Certificates are converted to a fixed mode "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable (remarketing agent's) fee." Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. �� J.i�G9 12N i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(9): FAHR95-26 Consideration of Motion for Renewal of All-Risk Insurance (including Fire, Flood and Earthquake Coverage)for FY 1995-96 Summary At the Committee's May meeting, staff reported that the Districts' current All-Risk property insurance, including fire, flood and earthquake coverage expires at the end of June. Staff further reported that Robert F. Driver Associates, the Districts' broker of record, had made preliminary inquiries of the major All-Risk insurance carriers in anticipation of our renewal, and in view of current insurance market restrictions, presented two renewal options for consideration by the Districts: The Committee directed Robert F. Driver Associates to proceed to obtain sublimits of $30,000,000 to $35,000,000 of earthquake coverage at an estimated annual premium of .► approximately$1.3 to $1.4 million. The attached insurance renewal schedule presents summary information about the All- Risk insurance renewal efforts as of June 8, 1995. Our insurance broker has informed staff that final placement commitments with the carriers are expected by next week. The estimated premium cost for FY 1995-96 is $1,309,000. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends the Executive Committee approve renewal of the Districts' All-Risk insurance program including earthquake, flood, personal property and business interruption, in the amounts of$200 million All-Risk, and $30-35 million earthquake with deductibles of$25,000 for all perils except earthquake and 5% per unit ($250,000 min.) for earthquake, for a total premium not to exceed $1.4 million. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. xAw�UH Im w JuN ur '95 14 :41 No .026 F .01 5 • '�/'UG ROAERT F. DRIVL'_R ASSOCIATES l.'UMYI.RE(N.f(/kaNla'IflON0.5'IJfI'l('E n Dtwvw, oJRolm 11'. DrAwr Co.,N, ASSOCIATES June 7, 1995 Mr. Steve Kozak Financial Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County P. O. Sox 8127 Fountain Valley CA 92728-8127 Re: All Rick - 1995 Property Insurance Renewal Program for County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Dear Steve: Per our discussions, we outline a schedule of insurance companies with their respective participation within our proposed 1995 renewal program: Proposed Participation Laver L"jr Premium Comnenv Participation Premium $ 7,500,000 $ 525,000 Reliance S 3,000,000 $ 210,000 Primary Lexington $ 2,500,000 $ 175,000 (Including Pending $ 2,000,000 $ 140,000 Earthquake and Flood) S 2,500,000 $ 100,000 RLI $ 2,500,000 $ 100,000 Excess $ 7500,000 (Including Earthquake and Flood) 3636 8JN(1/5TREE7',.SUITE 230 NtN'r0RT BEACH.CAUFURN9A 91060-2619 (714) 756-0271 • TAX,714)756-2713 ,.U6Crti r . U�1Vcrt MJOUI 14-r�17-Li li )uN 07 '95 14 :41 No .026 F .02 p Mr. Steve Kozak June 7, 1995 Page 2 Participation Lever L,ay;r Premtum Company Participation Premium $ 10,000,000 S 300,000 Agricultural S 3,000,000 $ 90,000 Excess ($325,000?) Royal $ 2,500,000 $ 75,000 $ 10,000,000 Reliance S 2,000,000 $ 60,000 (Including Associated $ 1,000,000 $ 30,000 Earthquake Pending S 1,500,000 $ 45,000 and Flood) $ 5,000,000 S 125,000 Essex S 2,500,000 S 62500 Excess Pending S 2,500,000 $ 62,500 S 20,000,000 (Including Earthquake and Flood) S 5,000,000 $ 87,500 Pending Excess S 25,000,000 (Including Earthquake and Flood) $ 15,000,000 $ 90,000 Fireman's Fund $ 15,000,000 $ 90,000 Excess S 30,000,000 (Excluding Earthquake and Flood) $ 155,000,000 $ 81,500 Fireman'5 Fund $ 155,000,000 $ 81,500 Excess S 45,000,000 (Excluding Earthquake and Flood) Proposed Total Premium: S 1,309,000 i uacrti r ."mivcn HoJul IV; /14-f 3G-Lf1J JUN UI ,Vb 14 :41 Ne .U.' P.03 Mr. Steve Kozak June 7, 1995 Page 3 All carriers specifically identified in the schedule have offered quotations as speed and can bind coverage accordingly. We further specify as "pending" those layers of the program on which we continue to negotiate terms and conditions. Note that there are several insurers who have quoted a higher price to participate in the primary layer at an overall premium of $750,000, or $225,000 more than proposed. Note further that CNA has offered a quotation of $164,000 for their provision of $2,000,000 within the primary layer, and we may consider binding that coverage after binding Lexington and Reliance in order to avoid an overall $615,000 layer premium. In the meantime, we continue our dialogue with several other insurers to support the program costs as shown in the schedule. There may be some pressure from the participating carriers to increase the $10,000,000 excess of $10,000,000layer premium to $325,000 approximately. We anticipate Essex providing an additional $2,500,000 in the $5,000,000 excess of $20,000,000 layer and are .✓ hopeful that Westchester will offer coverage in the $5,000,000 excess $25,000,000 layer. We shall keep you apprised of our progress as we strive in this obviously chaotic market place to complete the program as outlined. Sincerely, ROBERT F. DRIVER ASSOCIATES Donald H. McLean First Vice President DHM:rw FAIIR95-26 r June 14, 1995 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CA $200 MILLION ALL RISK PROPERTY AND EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE PROGRAM FY 1995-96 CARRIER PARTICIPATION LIMITS LAYER PREMIUMS $7,500,000 PRIMARY LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING ED'&FLOOD) Reliance Ins. Co. $3,000,000 $210,000 Lexington Ins. Co. 2,500,000 175,000 Pending 2,000,000 140,000 $7,500,000 $525,000 $2,500,000 EXCESS OF$7,500,000(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ-&FLOOD) Reliance Ins. Co. $2,500,000 $100 000000 $2,500,000 $100,000 $10,000,000 EXCESS OF$10,000,000 LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ-& FLOOD) Agricultural Ins.Co. $3,000,000 $90.000 Royal Ins. Co. 2,500,000 75,000 Reliance Ins. Co. 2,000,000 60,000 �; Associated Ins.Co. 1,000,000 30,000 Pending _ 1,500,000 45500 $10,000,000 $300,000 $5,000,000 EXCESS OF$20,000,000 LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ-&FLOOD) Essex Insurance Co. $5.000.000 $125 000000 $5,000,000 $125,000 $5,000,000 EXCESS OF$25,000,000 LAYER(ALL RISK INCLUDING EQ.& FLOOD Westchester Fire Ins. Co. $5,000,000 $87500 (Pending) $5,000,000 $87,500 'Earthquake Sublimit Total . . ... . . . . . . .. . . . . .... $30,000,000 $15,000,000 EXCESS OF$30,000,000 LAYER(NO EARTHQUAKE) Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. $15,000,000 $90500 $15,000,000 $90,000 $156, 000,000 EXCESS OF$45,000,000 LAYER(NO EARTHQUAKE) Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. $155.000.000 $81500 $155,000,000 $81,500 TOTAL ALL RISK LIMITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . $200,000,000 TOTAL PREMIUM COSTS . . . . .. . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . .... . . . . . $1,309,000 a JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 ITEM (12)(b)(10): FAHR96-29: Consideration of the following actions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program: (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-75, approving Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company, to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-76, approving Professional Services Agreement with Mellon Trust Company, to serve as master custodial services bank, and authorize the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. Summary .,. Recommendations from the interview process conducted by the ad hoc Money Manager Selection Subcommittee were presented for consideration by the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee at their June 14, 1995 meeting. Also, results of the RFP process for master trust/custodial bank services were also presented for consideration by the Committee. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends that the Executive Committee: 1. Select the firm of Pacific Investment Management Company to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. 2. Select Mellon Trust Company as master custodial services bank, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. `'^� �vemoxiesenasm,za+o COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS •1 ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA June 14, 1995 1 B EWS AVENUE vo Boxn2v OIUBB2.2.1 STAFF REPORT FAHR95-29 Selection of External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program Summary A short-list of external money manager candidates, prepared by Callan Associates, Inc., the Districts' investment advisor, was presented to the FAHR Committee at your May meeting. At the May meeting, the Committee appointed a Money Manager Selection Subcommittee and instructed the Subcommittee to conduct interviews and return with selection recommendations for Committee and Board consideration at the June meetings. ... The Subcommittee interviewed the following finalist firms on May 22, 1995: • Chandler Liquid Asset Management, Inc., San Diego • Pacific Investment Management Company, Newport Beach • Payden & Rygel, Los Angeles • Scudder, Stevens & Clark, Inc., Los Angeles • Western Asset Management Company, Pasadena At the conclusion of the interviews, the Subcommittee determined that Pacific Investment Management Company (PIMCO) was the most qualified firm and should be recommended as money manager for the Districts' two portfolios (Liquid Operating Monies and Long-Term Operating Monies) on the condition that PIMCO reduce its annual fee proposal from 27 to 15 basis points. The Subcommittee also developed an alternative recommendation should PIMCO be unable to accommodate the Subcommittee's request. On May 23, 1995, PIMCO responded to the Districts with an offer of a 15 basis point fee per annum for management of the Districts' investments (see attached letter). FAHR95-29 - Section of Money Manager& Custodial Services Bank Page 2 June 14, 1995 Custodial Bank Services On June 2, 1995, the Districts released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Master Trust/Custodial Bank Services to five banks. The selected custodial bank will provide the Districts with custodial safekeeping for the Districts' securities, and will provide investment accounting and reporting services as an integral part of the Districts' investment program. This will include accounting of the principal and interest earnings amounts for each of the nine Districts. Proposals are due to the Districts on Monday, June 12, 1995, and will be evaluated by Callan Associates and staff. Results of the RFP process will be presented to the Committee at your meeting for selection of a custodial services bank. Performance Monitoring A comprehensive set of performance guidelines and ongoing monitoring is essential to the Districts' investment program. Section 15.2 of the Districts' Investment Policy Statement states, in part, that the Committee ". . . shall adopt guidelines for the ongoing review of duration, quality and liquidity of the Districts' portfolio." Staff is working with Callan Associates to develop the review guidelines required by Section 15.2 and to establish an ongoing investment performance monitoring and reporting program. Draft review guidelines and an outline of the monitoring system will be presented to the Committee at your July meeting. Staff Recommendations 1. Select the firm of Pacific Management Investment Company to serve as the Districts' external money manager, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. 2. Select a master custodial services bank, and authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. SK:lc J\NP000.IHdiAN1FVL,ARGU'p'S15�STAFFRGf,FP0.FFNIPBS�BA �_� PACIFIC INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT COMPANY May 23, 1995 Mr. Gary Streed Via Facsimile: (714) 962-3954 Director of Finance County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Mr. Streed: John Hague and I want to thank you and the other members of the Districts' Selection Committee for inviting Pacific Investment Management Company (PIMCO) to make a presentation yesterday. We are interested in this management assignment. The reasons go far beyond our respective geographical proximity and our desire to see assets under management grow. As a long-time Orange County-based money manager, we feel an obligation to help local agencies recover from the devastating losses they incurred in the collapse of the Orange County investment pool. The best way that we can do that is to offer our investment management `J expertise which is among the best to be found anywhere. The nature of the proposed assignment for the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, with its very restrictive investment guidelines and relatively short-term orientation, is significantly different from our other clients. This gives us some flexibility from a fee standpoint. If PIMCO is awarded the entire assignment, we are prepared to offer a 15 basis point fee per annum for the management of the assets. We have tried to be as accommodative as we possibly can in trying to meet the fee objectives of your committee. In addition, we can offer the following: A well-balanced, experienced, and specialized staff with continuity of key professionals. Full client servicing for your account. A willingness to innovate within a conservative framework, i.e., development of proprietary computer analytics to be able to breakdown complex securities and to understand their performance characteristics in different interest rate environments. A philosophy that gives weight to long-term trends which are fundamental indicators of change and important in identifying turning points in the bond market; by integrating a longer-term orientation with shorter-term cyclical factors, we have been able to avoid the �..✓ short-term aberrations that produce performance volatility. P.O. Box 9000 840 Newport Center onve Newport Beach. California 92658-9030 (714)640-3031 •FU(714) 720-1375 Page 2 - Continuation Our success in attracting and keeping clients has been largely based on our ability to generate consistent returns over the past twenty years. The strengths listed above have been the key factors behind this record. You can be assured that we will work hard to maintain our record of consistency if we are retained by the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. The other information that was requested at the meeting yesterday will be sent to you under separate cover today: PIMCO's Derivatives Policy statement, insurance coverages, and a copy of our annual bank custodian survey. Again, thank you very much for your interest in PIMCO. We look forward to hearing from you when you have made your final decision. In the meantime, please call me at 714f 45.5i4M we may provide further information or assistance. Very m�ily yours, Leland T. Scholey, CFA o�3 hn L. Hague Vice President Managing Director �..J cc: Bill Gross, Managing Director Brent Harris, Managing Director Bill Thompson, CEO & Managing Director V Cuutm SANrrATiON Dimas ul GRANGE COUNv. CAUFORNIA June 14, 1995 10B'00f16°�4" na WX e,n `/ rwxrax vu�v.cauroxwx ezne.e,2r maeersa, STAFF REPORT FAE R95-29 Selection of Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Program Summary On June 2, 1995, the Districts released a Request for Proposal (RFP)for Master Trust/Custodial Bank Services to five banks. The following banks submitted proposals to the Districts: o Mellon Trust Company o Northern Trust Company o State Street Bank& Trust Company The proposal evaluation panel determined that while each of the proposals meets the minimum qualifications of the RFP, several factors help to distinguish the overall features of one bank proposal from the other. These factors include: �,�✓ o Service Office Location o Qualifications of the Client Service Officer o Fees o Optional Services The attached Proposal Evaluation Sheet summarizes the three proposals. Based on the evaluation results of the panel, staff recommends selection of Mellon Trust Company to provide master mist/custody bank services for the Districts' investment program. Of the three banks, Mellon Trust was ranked in the top tier in a 1994 custodian bank survey. Mellon's accounting system is accessible through an on-line Windows product, and provides a wide range of accounting and performance reports to the client and the investment manager. Custom reports are also available. The Client Service Officer who would be responsible for day-today coordination of the Mellon team, is based in Mellon's San Francisco office, and has more than twenty years experience in the fields of employee trust and investment portfolio administration. Mellon's proposed fee schedule is in the mid-range of the three banks. Finally, Mellon offers training to client staff to familiarize them with Mellon systems and team members. Staff Recommendation Select Mellon Trust Company to serve as the Districts' master custodial services bank, and �,,.i authorize staff to negotiate a professional services agreement. FAHR95-29 June 14, 1995 PROPOSAL EVALUATION SHEET MASTER CUSTODIAL BANK SERVICES lnnB-Term Debt CIMnturrk cllmtuwly A UntlnB Asml Under Raft. Mm OBka S Mcfftnal Firm Malupement MO ". ISSP'F l bm, GualNkeepnn MpertlnB Sssbms Insumirm COsarepa F. C rmmls MEUM tM CI TgLLR+MO A-1 A• Sim Fln bcl bYeJM111n1Wl:MMIn M To $I"Fr,NG BVW .KQ\I Aemb OlralmplLp MUST 31PYGe Fu la sgMems;enMeesa (WIN00W$) SSOIA EPam cu • 21 m pSMmro mrb. EI dwip M 1MEIdE S .palq • I rmml mnuvemei] eddl.repnn. S]OM EBO gMA.ao1. . GneggmW o Auet AccwnX Trane desks. 9dm3 $yuN [_ O�q . %OTfty" . Il Bmlmld rer, e. 1.5bp .Cwlan Mm. SA,SW 3T.500 ftix fT,$EOlyr 9r,prm Ymr .-p ft 7w 000 31,= $5mv. m0 se SIZI Md, ft;BBB NIMFNPRN ]OBcI T24,no Cnkapl Bewnrylt M1m;lm 10 KlNrm Pob, VSW ftM .BNMu1 1.Obp INf/SF SOP F~758 AU M. Tn egglece:rmlme5 Cmeemrm s Bgtl awvb. p6bkb, SRWp ,Cmm M'" f),= slix .PMAM. 9 IB ebMeNrepW YOMEW 31,50w A] A. NpdumnN tlA. leppb. Etlhuled FlM Yor Ceq Jd;OaS SMMSFRFET f1AFUMer C." Ae] M Sn Fm Lw Jgro1 MW( 7,mt Mcwm, a Sim M.mA But 20bp 00en mpdp SANASMUST "PMdll FmgMfVBB ogsWlee;egdu]] (1 mH s) S Bm Bkkml pMmmrre gmmb. Cm vmrvmYle9 f4xM Bmn SeC.P.l, f10,OW s10,tlq SMZ pl nm M mwulwm4 ObTks. YAM S.UmdIN N.5W dml,l.m • It 8bngsd npwb. VW EAO . Mgie10ee WOO. � . wirshrq. repMle. 000 �.mow:eeeo�r..evxurmeossurwrmcwwevwert C 1 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(11 ): FAHR95-30 Consideration of motion approving revisions to MPRP (Management Performance Review Plan) Performance Incentive Values Summary In October of 1991,the Finance and Personnel Committee submitted a recommendation to the Joint Boards to modify the Management Performance Review Plan(MPRP)in an effort to resolve the salary topping-out problem,enable the Districts to recruit and retain competent management,supervisory and professional staff,and to allow for the reward of exemplary performance. This recommendation included provisions that established a program based more on private sector compensation practices that would increase the spread within the salary ranges from 30 to 40 percent in a phased effort over a three-year period,and established salary ranges to be affective in July of 1991, 1992 and 1993 based on market survey data used to determine the mid-point of the range rather than the tap. In the Intervening years since 1991,the amount of funding provided for the Merit Pool has been equal to the wage adjustments received by the groups represented by the Orange County Employees Association (OCEA)and Operating Engineers Local 501. The actual increases received by employees represented by OCEA and the Operating Engineers have actually exceeded increases received by employees under the MPRP program as the represented groups also receive adjustments under a traditional five-step program. Finance.Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation In order to realize the initial objectives of the MPRP program to provide an incentive for consistent meritorious performance,the following multi-phased approach is recommended: 1. Effective In July 1995,authorize funds totaling$173,000 beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring. Payments will be made in 1995-96. 2. Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll(totaling$453,000)for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance as recommended by Ernst&Young, This fund would be distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1)as in the past,and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund which would be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. Payments would be made in 1996-97. 3. Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers In proper administration of the program,and particularly the review process as recommended by Ernst&Young. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the FAHR Committee. t_J J.IYICWI]GM,ElfEL1111NB5NH]B11.EC L COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS M ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA V June 14, 1995 108AAEll.PVENDE E D 9D%a127 WYNTMN VALLEY.CALL 9RMA 92728.8127 01019622<t1 STAFF REPORT FAHR95-30 MPRP Performance Incentive Values Background In October of 1991, the Finance and Personnel Committee submitted a recommendation to the Joint Boards to modify the Management Performance Review Plan (MPRP) in an effort to resolve the salary topping-out problem, enable the Districts to recruit and retain competent management, supervisory and professional staff, and to allow for the reward of exemplary performance. This recommendation included provisions that established a program based more on private sector compensation practices that would increase the spread within the salary ranges from 30 to 40 percent in a phased effort over a three-year period, and established salary ranges to be effective in July of 1991, 1992 and 1993 based on market survey data used to determine the midpoint of the range rather than the top. In the intervening years since 1991, the amount of funding provided for the Merit Pool has been equal to the wage adjustments received by the groups represented by the Orange County Employees Association (OCEA) and Operating Engineers Local 501 as shown in Table 1 below. TABLET. Six Year History of SalaryIncreases OCEA AND OPERATING ENGINEERS Eft.Date Nov.'90 Nov.'91 Nov.'92 Nov.'93 Nov.'94 Nov.95 TOTAL AV Inc.% 5.0 5.5 5.5 -0- 3.0 3.0 22.0 3.67 PROFESSIONAL AND SUPERVISORY ER.Date JuL'91 Jul.92 JUL'93 Jul.94 JuL'95 Jul.'96 TOTAL AV Inc.% 6.2 &0 3.8 -0- 3.0 3.0 22.0 3.67 The fact that wage increases received by employees represented by OCEA and the Operating Engineers have actually exceeded increases received by employees under the MPRP program (due to the additional impact of step advances) does not support one of the original goals of the MPRP program to ". . . allow for the reward of exemplary performance." This, and other factors currently being addressed, has resulted in .. widespread employee dissatisfaction with the MPRP program as reported in the Ernst v FAHR95-30 - MPRP Performance Incentive Values Page 2 June 14, 1995 and Young audit of the Human Resource Department, and the observation that ". . . the MPRP does not 'incentivize' performance and therefore does not meet its stated goal of providing an incentive for consistent and meritorious performance." (see Attachment 2, an excerpt of Ernst and Young Report). Employees under the traditional five-step merit pay program receive 5.5 percent upon completion of probation as well as a 5.5 percent anniversary adjustment until they reach the fifth step, all in addition to the negotiated range adjustment. While it is true that these employees' performance must at least meet expectations to qualify for these adjustments, most easily meet that requirement. These considerations result in an employee reaching the fifth step in about three and one-half years, with annual increases of typically 8 to 11 percent. While the fifth step is targeted at the market rate for classifications in the five-step program, a perception of 8 to 11 percent annual wage increases is generated without reference to market position. This phenomenon has an important impact on satisfaction within the MPRP program. Employees in the MPRP program receive one wage adjustment each year, varying from zero to about ten percent and averaging the amounts shown in Table 1. Since the v middle of the range is targeted to market rates, and not the top step as with employees under the traditional five step merit pay program, the goal for employees whose performance at least meets expectations is to reach mid-point in approximately three to five years, which is normally when an employee becomes fully proficient in performing the essential duties of the job. This is not currently possible, since the average increases are equal to or less than the annual range adjustment, and thus there is no change in the relative position within the range. MPRP employees who supervise employees in the five step program face a unique problem in that their subordinates quickly reach step five of their range, which, because of range overlap and inability of the supervisor to advance into the MPRP range, results in an inappropriate differential between the employee and their supervisor. Recommendation In order to realize the initial objectives of the MPRP program in providing an incentive for consistent and meritorious performance, the merit pool fund must be established in an amount in excess of the cost-of-living and the range adjustment increases negotiated by OCEA and Operating Engineers Local 501, and the amount required to move an employee to mid-range in a three to five year period. Further, individual employees must achieve a salary range position that is commensurate with their level of experience, proficiency and performance, relationship to individuals in similar classifications, and ..✓ relationship to other positions within the organizational unit. a Y FAHR95-30 - MPRP Performance Incentive Values Page 3 June 14, 1995 Staff would propose a multi-phased approach in addressing this complex issue: 1. Effective in July of 1995, provide sufficient funds beyond the 3.0 percent of payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year (and included in the Professional and Supervisory MOU) to adjust the more critical range position issues. Staff recommends 2.0 percent of payroll ($173,000), to be funded through salary savings, in addition to the 3.0 percent now authorized. 2. Establish a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0 percent of payroll for implementation in July 1996. This fund would be distributed based on performance (see Attachment 1) as in the past, and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund established in the Professional and Supervisory MOU, which would be used to provide a cost-of-living adjustment to those employees whose performance at least met expectations. err' Staff recommends 5.0 percent of the 1995-96 payroll for this group, or $453,000, be funded in the 1996-97 budget. 3. Provide extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program, and particularly the review process. Cost is included within the training program and organization proposed in the 1995-96 budget. GH:lc k: RP MSR o w.wner o-o-e ATTACHMENT worms PROPOSED FY1995M MERIT MATRIX E-; P&�1FF#M AT 1ST O 2ND Q 3RD Q 4TH Q �o%-zs%) (25%-50% ' 51%-75%L (75%-100%) 10% 8% 7% 50A OUTSTANDING 80A 8% 5% 3% EXCEEDS 6 4% 3% 3% MEETS 0% 0% 0% O% NEEDSIMPROVEMENT 0 0% UNACCEPTABLE PAYOUT 4.91% County Sanitation MOM of Orange County Human Resources Review Action Plans 4. Improve quality of Findings the Management Performance Review as Managers and subordinates express concern that the MPRP does not"incentivize"performance and therefore does not meet its stated goal of providing"...an incentive for consistent and meritorious performance."The Program (MPRP) pool percentage is viewed as an entitlement at the low end of performance and is not viewed as significant enough to impact performance at the high end of performance.In addition,percentage spreads are not seen m large enough to differentiate top from bottom performers and thus arc not effective performance drivers ■ There is widespread employee dissatisfaction with the MPRP.Employees express in focus groups and inter- views inequity concerns relative to the step process,market rates and the stated intent of the program.We iden- tified that zero percent of employees were in the top salary quartile in the 1993 and 1994 performance years. Some portion of outstanding employees should reside in the top quartile to effectively Seward performance at Fiscal year 1993-94 reviews were completed haphazardly because they were not initially tied to a salary increase as Certain MPRP procedures have not been communicated since the roll-out of the revised program in 1991 e.g. pro-rated procedure for new hires.In addition,overall MPRP policies and procedures do not exist in any acces- sible format,though they are referenced to in the MOU at There has been no training on the MPRP since the revised program was rolled-out in 1991 as Comments to support review ratings generally reflect job responsibilities rather than performance outcomes. This pattern is seen at the lop levels also.Department Head reviews are typically narrative essays which do not reflect specific and measurable performance objectives at There is variability across the districts in the way managers are reviewing their subordinates. Reviews are not being calibrated across supervisors,making them invalid selection tools for promotions a ■ Though promotional postings indicate position requirements,guidelines for what individuals can do to achieve promotion are unclear %a 9 ■ See Appendix B for flowchart of the MPRP 0 N J ERNST&YOUNG UP 23 i County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Human Resources Review Solutions ■ Ensure reviews are completed and given annually for all exempt personnel regardless of monetary increase ■ Redesign process to allow employee input prior to finalization of review.Add self-appraisal worksheet to prompt dialogue during performance discussions ■ Increase emphasis on ongoing feedback ■ Develop instruction booklet for supervisors and employees including: • Program philosophy • Critical dates • Program design • Examples of specific and measurable performance objectives • Ratings definitions • Discussion of ratings errors ■ Provide supervisory training on the following: • Program design • How to write specific and measurable performance objectives • How to provide meaningful employee feedback • Mechanisms for ongoing feedback ■ Evaluate video training alternative for modelling performance feedback ■ Institute a quality control mechanism to monitor the consistency of ratings across supervisors and ensure that performance feedback is job-specific and outcome versus responsibility-based ■ Build accountability for quality and timeliness of MPRP feedback into managers' performance reviews ■ Utilize computerized tracking and reporting system to facilitate review issuance and compliance ''NST&YOUNGLLP - ( i 24m 4\ County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Human Resources Review at Place MPRP forms on disk to facilitate timely completion of reviews ■ Validate performance expectations against job descriptions ■ Establish linkage to promotions ■ Relate ratings definitions in performance dialogue to concrete examples of the performance results and behav- iors required to achieve various ratings so that employees know how to reach the next highest rating level ■ Include career planning component and link development plan to career planning to Recogniu constraints of union environment in development and implementation of action plan. Union mem- bership approval would be required for all substantive program changes i.e.,involving more than changes to administrative procedures. In instances where substantive changes are proposed,develop a plan to achieve union approval ■ Consider setting standard percentage increases by rating category and announcing the percentage ranges at the beginning of the performance year.The following is an example: 8- 10 percent Outstanding 6-8 percent Exceeds Expectations 4-6 percent Meets Expectations 2-4 percent Improvement Needed 0-2 percent Unacceptable In the above example,all employees rated outstanding could expect to receive the same percentage increase, which could range from 8 to 10 percent.In addition,consider making the percentage spread wide enough to differentially reward performance at the top and low ends.Although these changes could not be implemented until the 1997-8 fiscal year and would require passage by union membership,the proposed changes would motivate performance and thus achieve the stated goals of the MPRP Costs/Benefits Costs ■ Resources to develop instruction booklet and supervisory training course including possible video component. Cost estimate for footage and editing for a half hour training video is$3,000 to$5,000 `JERNST&YOUNG LIP 25 _ --I County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Human Resources Review ■ Staff time to deliver and undergo supervisory training related to the MPRP ■ Staff time to provide ongoing coaching and counselling,set goals,solicit employee input,monitor review qual- ity and negotiate substantive changes to the MPRP ■ Significant funding to allow the differential percentage spread necessary to motivate performance.This issue would need to be addressed by the Board Benefits ■ Enhanced performance motivation ■ Improved quality of reviews • Accuracy • Meaningfulness • Timeliness ■ Lessened legal risk through improved documentation ■ Valid selection tool ■ Reduced inequity concerns Implementatlon Framework Timeline: Six months Proposed Project Leader: Gary Hasenstab Proposed Team Members: General Manager Department Heads Chair of Union MPRP Review Committee Committee of Division Managers YST&YOUNGLLP f 6� JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING �.r AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(12): EXEC95-01 Consideration of motion receiving and filing General Counsel Memorandum dated June 14, 1995, re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving in concept the consolidation of the nine separate districts into a single County Sanitation District, and authorizing staff and General Counsel to proceed with additional studies to identify and evaluate the possible forms under which a single district can be organized. Summary At the direction of the Boards of Directors,staff and General Counsel were directed to prepare a comprehensive report addressing the issue of feasibility and desirability,of consolidating the nine independent Districts that presently exist into a single combined entity. Interim reports were provided to the Executive Committee in January and February(see attached). Attached is a Memorandum from General Counsel dated June 14, 1995 outlining the legal aspects of the issue,as well as an Executive Summary on the Consolidation of Districts and a General Outline for Consolidation of Districts(Cortese-Knox Act of 1985). There are no serious legal or financial impediments identified by staff regarding consolidation. The obvious advantage is having a single voting body making district-wide decisions, rather than the nine bodies now voting. For instance,in the case of selecting Option A or Option B on the Orange County bankruptcy,we were fortunate that the nine Boards voted in unison. Had the outcome been a split,then we would have faced the dilemma of having our Boards tatting somewhat adverse positions in our dealings with the County over the bankruptcy matters. Attached are two previous reports on this matter which should help provide background an previous issues that have been considered. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Executive Committee approve in conceptthe consolidation of the nine separate districts and that continued studies by staff and Counsel be authorized. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors Approve in concept the consolidation of the nine separate districts and authorize continued studies by staff and General Counsel. a:uwooaoavxacuuaeswnzen.Ec Executive Summary Consolidation of Districts A proposed consolidation of the County Sanitation Districts ("CSD") is considered a change of organization and is governed under the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act ("Act"), California Government Code Sections 56000, gt ems. which went into effect on January 1, 1986. The legal procedures for accomplishing such a change of organization is administered through the County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") and is conducted by the particular legislative body of the local agency proposing such a consolidation. However, under the Act, in the case of consolidation of Districts, the Board of Supervisors for the County of Orange is considered the conducting authority to conduct proceedings for any proposed consolidation of districts. LAFCO has the authority to initiate proposals for consolidation of districts; however, a proposal for consolidation may be submitted to LAFCO by the local agency through a resolution of application for the reorganization. Upon receipt of a resolution of application or petition for reorganization from CSD to LAFCO, LAFCO then has the option of either referring the proposed reorganization to a reorganization committee, or it may directly process the proposed reorganization in commission proceedings. As a general rule, at the conclusion of the LAFCO hearing on the proposed consolidation, the County Board of Supervisors usually will order the consolidation or reorganization without the necessity of an election. There are a number of steps and timelines required to be met during the reorganization process, the relevant of which are included in this outline. Upon the completion and existence of a change of organization such as a consolidation, a certificate of completion is executed for purposes of establishing the date of completion. Any action to challenge the validity of a completed consolidation must be brought pursuant to the validating statute found in the Califomia Code of Civil Procedure at Sections 860 at sea. NN400W 1 a 0 1 9 General Outline for Consolidation of Districts (Cortese-Knox Act of 1985) The Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act, California Government Code Sections 56000, es seq. went into effect on January 1, 1986. The Cortese-Knox Act unified into one statutory scheme into three major laws which governed local agency boundary changes. These laws were: The Knox-Nisbet Act of 1963, which established local agency formation commissions (LAFCOs) in each county, and gave them regulatory authority over local agency boundary changes; The District Reorganization Act of 1965, which combines separate laws governing special districts into a single statute; and The Municipal Organization Act of 1977, which consolidated the laws governing city incorporation and annexation. The basic impetus behind the Cortese-Knox Act was to unify the procedures for implementing any local government boundary changes. 1. "Change of organization" means any of the following: (f) A consolidation of cities or special districts. (§56021) 2. "Conducting authority" means the legislative body of an affected city, affected district, or affected county which is authorized by the commission to conduct proceedings for a change of organization or reorganization. Subject to compliance with any commission determination, the conducting authority for proceedings shall be determined as follows: d. The board of supervisors of the county in which the affected territory is located shall be the conducting authority and conduct proceedings for all of the following changes of organization or reorganization. (2) The consolidation of districts. (§56029) 3. "Consolidation" means the uniting or joining of two or more cities located in the same county into a single new successor city or two or more districts into a single new successor district. In the case of consolidation of special districts, all of those districts shall have been formed pursuant to the same principal act. (§56030) 2000.00004 14216 1 -1- 6114/95 y 4. No change of organization or reorganization, or any term or condition of a change of organization or reorganization, shall impair the rights of any bondholder or other creditor of any county, city or district. Nor shall any change of organization or reorganization, or any term or condition of a change of organization or reorganization, impair the contract rights, or contracts entered into by a public entity created by a joint exercise of powers agreement established pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with §54000) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code. Notwithstanding any provision of this division, or of any change of organization or reorganization, or any term or condition of a change of organization, each and every bondholder or other creditor may enforce all of his or her rights in the same manner, and to the same extent, as if the change of organization, reorganization, term, or condition had not been made. Those rights may also be enforced against agencies, and their respective officers, as follows: (f) Consolidation: against the consolidation successor city or district. (§56121) 5. The powers and duties of LAFCO include the following: (a) Initiate proposals for consolidation of districts. (§56375) 6. Proposed reorganizations may either be referred to a reorganization committee after a noticed, public hearing on the question of the committee referral, or may be processed in commission proceedings. (§56475, §56476) 7. Proceeding upon petition or application (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), upon the presentation of any petition or applications making a proposal for a reorganization, the commission may take proceedings pursuant to Part 3 (commencing with §56650) without referring the proposal to a reorganization committee, as provided in this part. 8. Reorganization Committees appointed persons and, duties are described at §56482 - §56495. The tasks of the reorganization committee include: (a) Preparing a summary of the "nature and extent of study of the committee;" (b) Preparing a plan of reorganization; and 2000-00004 14216 1 -26114/95 r (c) Recommending approval or disapproval of the reorganization plan. (§56496) 9. Reorganization committee approval of a plan must be made by vote of more than one-half (1/2) of the represented special districts on the committee. (§56497) 10. Commission reorganizations may be initiated by submission of a petition or a 'Resolution of Application" for the reorganization and a plan for service in the affected area (necessary for local agency resolutions of application ) in accordance with §56650 - §56706. 11. Initiation by petition or resolution Commission proceedings for a change of organization or a reorganization may be initiated by petition or by resolution of application in accordance with this chapter. (§56650) 12. Date proceedings initiated Commission proceedings shall be deemed initiated on the date a petition or resolution of application is accepted for filing and a certificate of filing is issued by the executive officer of the commission of the county in which the affected territory is located. (§56651) 13. Application form: contents Each application shall be in the form as the commission may prescribe and shall contain all of the following information: (a) A petition or resolution of application initiating the proposal. (b) A statement of the nature of each proposal. (c) A map and description, acceptable to the executive officer, of the boundaries of the subject territory for each proposed change of organization or reorganization. (d) Any data and information as may be required by any regulation of the commission. 2000-00004 14216 1 -3- 6114/95 (a) Any additional data and information, as may be required by the executive officer, pertaining to any of the matters or factors which may be considered by the commission. (f) The names of the officers or persons, not to exceed three in number, who are to be furnished with copies of the report by the executive officer and who are to be given mailed notice of the hearing. (§56652) 14. Plan for providing services: information included: (a) Whenever a local agency submits a resolution of application for a change of organization or reorganization pursuant to this part, the local agency shall submit with the resolution of application a plan for providing services within the affected territory. (b) The plan for providing services shall include all of the following information and any additional information required by the commission or the executive officer: (1) An enumeration and description of the services to be extended to the affected territory. �► (2) The level and range of those services. (3) An indication of when those services can feasibly be extended to the affected territory. (4) An indication of any improvement or upgrading of structures, roads, sewer or water facilities, or other conditions the local agency would impose or require within the affected territory if the change of organization or reorganization is completed. (5) Information with respect to how those services will be financed. (§56653) 15. A proposal for a change of organization or a reorganization may be made by petition The petition shall do all of the following: (a) State that the proposal is made pursuant to this part. 2000 00004 14216 1 -4- 6/14/95 (b) State the nature of the proposal and list all proposed changes of organization. U (c) Set forth a description of the boundaries of affected territory accompanied by a map showing the boundaries. (d) Set forth any proposed terms and conditions. (e) State the reason or reasons for the proposal. (f) State whether the petition is signed by registered voters or owners of land. (g) Designate not to exceed three persons as chief petitioners, setting forth their names and mailing addresses. (h) Request that proceedings be taken for the proposal pursuant to this part. (i) State whether the proposal is consistent with the sphere of influence of any affected city or affected district. (§56700) 16. Adoption: contents (a) A proposal for a change of organization or a reorganization may be made by the adoption of a resolution of application by the legislative body of an affected local agency. (b) At least 20 days before the adoption of the resolution, the legislative body may give mailed notice of its intention to adopt a resolution of application to the commission and to each interested agency and each subject agency. The notice shall generally describe the proposal and the affected territory. (c) Except for the provisions regarding signers and signatures, a resolution of application shall contain all of the matters specified for a petition in §56700 and shall be submitted with a plan for services prepared pursuant to §56653. (§56800) 2ooaa0004 142161 -5- 6/14/95 17. Reorganization proceedings (a) After completion of proceedings by the commission pursuant to Part 3 (commencing with §56650), proceedings for a change of organization or reorganization shall be taken pursuant to this part. (b) If a proposal is approved by the commission, with or without amendment, wholly, partially, or conditionally, the conducting authority shall conduct proceedings in accordance with this part. The proceedings shall be conducted and completed pursuant to those provisions which are applicable to the proposal and the territory contained in the proposal as, it is approved by the commission. If the commission approves the proposal with modifications or conditions, proceedings shall be conducted and completed in compliance with those modifications or conditions. (§57000) 18. Completion of proceedings: time limitations: extension of time If the conducting authority does not complete a proceeding within one year after the commission approves a proposal for that proceeding, the proceeding shall be deemed abandoned unless prior to the expiration of that year the commission authorizes an extension of time for that completion. The inability of the conducting authority to complete a proceeding because of the order or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction temporarily enjoining or restraining the proceedings shall not be deemed a failure of completion and the one-year period shall be tolled for the time that order or decree is in effect. (§57001) 19. Notice and date of hearing (a) Within 35 days following the adoption of the commission's resolution making determinations, the clerk of the conducting authority shall set the proposal for hearing and give notice of that hearing by mailing, publication, and posting, as provided in Chapter 4 (commencing with §56150) of Part 1. The date of that hearing shall not be less than 15 days, or more than 60 days, after the date the notice is given. (b) Where the proceeding is for the establishment of a district of limited powers as a subsidiary district of a city, upon the request of the affected district, the date of the hearing shall be at least 90 days, but no more than 135 days, from the date the notice is given. (§57002) 2o00-000a 14216_7 _6_ 6/14/95 20. Dissolutions incorporation formations disincorporations mergers establishments of subsidiary districts consolidations or any combination of U proposals actions by conducting authority (a) Where a change of organization consists of a dissolution, disincorporation, incorporation, establishment of a subsidiary district, consolidation, or merger, the conducting authority, not more than 30 days after the conclusion of the hearing, shall adopt a resolution making a finding regarding the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn, and take one of the following actions: (1) Terminate proceedings if a majority protest exists in accordance with §57078. (2) Order the change of organization subject to confirmation of the voters, or in the case of a landowner-voter district, subject to confirmation by the landowners, unless otherwise stated in the formation provisions of the enabling statute of the district. (3) Order the change of organization without election if it is a change of organization that meets the requirements of§57081, 57083 or 57087; otherwise, the conducting authority shall take the action specified in paragraph (2). (b) Where a reorganization consists of one or more dissolutions, incorporations, formations, disincorporations, mergers, establishments of subsidiary districts, consolidations, or any combination of those proposals, the conducting authority, not more than 30 days after the conclusion of the hearing, shall adopt a resolution regarding the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn and take one of the following actions: (1) Terminate proceedings if a majority protest exists in accordance with §57078. (2) Order the reorganization subject to confirmation of the voters, or in the case of landowner-voter districts, subject to confirmation by the landowners, unless otherwise stated in the formation provisions of the enabling statute of the district. U 200000004 14210 1 -7- 6/14/95 (3) Order the reorganization without election if it is a reorganization which meets the requirements of § 57081, 57083, 57087, or 57089; otherwise, the conducting authority shall take the action specified in paragraph (2). (§57077) 21. Consolidation or reorganization of districts into local agency public hearing: election, petition (a) If authorized by the commission pursuant to § 56839, the conducting authority shall conduct proceedings for the consolidation of districts or the reorganization of all or any part of those districts into a single local agency pursuant to this section. The conducting authority shall hold at least one noticed public hearing on the proposal within 30 days after approval of the application by the commission. After the conclusion of the hearing, the conducting authority shall order the consolidation or reorganization without an election, except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b). (b) An election shall only be held if the conducting authority finds either of the following: (1) In the case of inhabited territory, that the petition requesting that the proposal be submitted to confirmation by the voters has been signed by either of the following: (i) At least 25 percent of the number of landowners within the territory subject to the consolidation or reorganization who own at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the territory. (ii) At least 25 percent of the voters entitled to vote as a result of residing within, or owning land within, the territory. (2) In the case of the landowner-voter district, that the territory is uninhabited and a petition requesting that the proposal be submitted to confirmation by the voters has been signed by at least 25 percent of the number of landowners within the territory subject to the consolidation or reorganization, owning at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the territory. 2000-00004 _8_ 6/14/95 14216 1 i; a (c) The petition shall be filed with the conducting authority within 30 days after the public hearing required by subdivision (a) has been held. If U the petition has been filed, the conducting authority shall approve the proposal subject to confirmation by the voters of the district pursuant to § 57077 and 57103. (§57081) `.i 2000-00004 14216_1 -9- 6/14/95 Y._ ti EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR JANUARY 25, 1995 EXEC95-01 : Consideration of motion to receive and file initial staff report regarding consolidation of the nine separate districts;and direct staff to develop a comprehensive analysis of consolidation and report back to the Executive Committee at a future meeting. Summary When the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County were originally incorporated in 1954, they were organized into a number of separate districts that generally followed the drainage patterns of the county. This approach followed the original concept developed by the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts in the 1920's. When the Sanitation Districts were new and pushing new interceptor sewers into the existing and newly developing areas of their service areas, a localized approach made sense because sewer improvement bonds and the existing agreements between neighboring cities narrowed the focus of concern at that time. Every few years the question of consolidation is raised by the Joint Boards of Directors. In the interest of ease of administration, streamlining of board procedures, maintaining the "books" and reducing costs, consolidation makes sense. Our sewer system is well established. Today's focus is much more on the joint works facilities and the various regulatory issues surrounding them. On the other hand, subregional considerations of the separate boards and the problem of equitably commingling the reserves that have been accumulated over the years by each region must also be considered. At the Joint Boards meeting of January 11, 1995, the issue of consolidation was raised and staff was directed to evaluate it and report to the Executive Committee. The issues listed above and others will be analyzed by staff. Staff has compiled a list of the major issues it sees as relevant for analysis. A discussion outline (following) is provided for use by staff and the Executive Committee. The expected outcome of the discussion is to provide input and direction to staff on how to proceed on analyzing the question of consolidating the nine separate districts into one or more district. Staff Recommendation Consideration of motion to receive and file initial staff report regarding consolidation of the nine separate districts and direct staff to develop a comprehensive analysis of consolidation and report back to the Executive Committee at a future meeting. wpd=Vmbxmjan9 xe 14.a 6 Y) J • A a ... 4rF N�"c EXEC95-01 : Staff report regarding consolidation of the nine separate districts. Report to the Executive Committee County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Consolidation of Districts January 25, 1995 Report Contents • Background • Previous Consolidation Reports • Consolidation Issues • Policy Questions • Possible Next Steps � 3 r Orange County Sanitation Districts ffi Background • The 1947 Formation Report recommended creation of Districts based on geography, existing facilities, and to a lesser extent, political boundaries. • Each District originally financed its own trunk sewers and share joint works facilities capital and operating charges through property tax levy. After Proposition 13, each District received a share of basic levy based on previous percentage. • Over the years, many cost sharing agreements have resulted between Districts for construction and operation of collection facilities. Orange County.. Previous Consolidation Reports s • During 1981 -82 the Grand Jury commissioned Price Walterhouse to conduct a Study of Potential Restructuring on Special Districts in Orange County. • During July 1982 the Grand Jury issued a report which recommended that the Sanitation Board should formulate a policy to move toward consolidation of the then eight sanitation districts into one district and subsequently provide for Board membership based on a smaller group of elected representatives. • During February - August 1983, the Districts' Fiscal Policy and Reorganization Committees (Joint Committees) evaluated the Grand Jury recommendations and submitted findings and recommendations to the Executive Committee. • During February 1983, the Executive Committee voted that the Joint Boards immediately adopt a policy urging that each member agency limit the number of Directors representing the agency to one (reducing membership to 26). Oran"(nunty,5anitati C Previous Consolidation Reports (cont.) ,a.3•~ i • During February 23, 1983, Districts' General Counsel reported the following consolidation options: 1 . Make no change in the District organization. 2. Consolidate the present seven Districts into one single District. 3. Consolidate the present seven Districts into three Districts. 4. Retain the present organization with no consolidation, but by resolution, urge each member agency to limit the number of Directors representing that agency to one, regardless of the number of Districts included within each agency. 5. By District Resolution, limit the compensation payable per meeting to the equivalent of one Director per agency regardless of the number of Directors attending and the number of Districts represented. . .... Orange County Santtatiori°RWWI � _ . 6,.1 3. a Previous Consolidation Reports (cont.) • In April 1983, the Joint Boards of Directors adopted Resolution #83-84 urging each of its member agencies to have a single director represent all districts of which the agency is a member and approved in concept the consolidation of Districts into one. • On July 13, 1983, the Joint Boards reviewed several organizational alternatives including: ' , 1 . Consolidation into one District with establishment of an appropriate number of zones (co-terminus with existing District boundaries) for separate financing of specified O&M, capital or debt retirement activities. 2. Consolidation into one District with no zones. 3. Consolidation into three "super-districts" defined by recent engineering studies (District 1 , northern half of District 6 and District 7; Districts 2, 3 & 11 ; and District 5 and southern half of District 6). 4. Retaining the existing organization structure of the (then) seven separate districts. Orange County Sanitation Districts a Previous Consolidation Reports (cont.) • In 1984 and 1985 Districts 13 and 14 were formed, adding new member agencies and additional Directors. • Several Committee members expressed concern that Directors' responsibilities to their constituencies would be impaired and local control of some Districts would be lost by consolidation and that some local needs might not be met on a timely basis as the project priority system would be determined by the majority of all Board Members. If consolidation were to take place, Committee members would favor the zone concept for financing certain activities. This would reduce the then estimated $85,000 annual savings of consolidating. • The Joint Boards did not arrive at a unanimous agreement. The consensus was that the Districts' operations are functionally consolidated, therefore no significant overall benefit would accrue by reorganizing into a single District. • The Joint Boards of Directors concurred with the recommendation of the Special Committee to Study Reorganization of the Sanitation Districts, the Fiscal Policy Committee and Executive Committee that the Districts retain their existing organizational structure. Orange County Sanitation Di Y Consolidation Issues Y`! Issue Implications Potential $ Impart Property tax revenues District 13 does not Possible user fee receive property tax decline for District 13. revenues. Other Districts, to some degree, receive different shares of basic levy. User fee revenues Potential for a level user Some Districts could fee throughout the entire realize user fee service area. reductions/gains. Finance Rating agencies would no No need for Mutual longer review District for Benefit Advances potential weak District. Agreement - potential for rating upgrade. Accounting No need for separate Independent auditor Districts accounting. and Districts' staff No need for numerous cost savings would accounting ledgers for be substantial. shared trunk sewers. Orange aunty Sanitarian Dintfict �� " r_r ..H i 4 Consolidation Issues (cont.) alb:; Issue Implications Potential $ Impart s E Contractual A consolidated District Legal and administrative would assume previous costs reduction. District' contracts. Legal Less inter-District Legal and administrative agreements. costs reduction. Regional services Sewer services would be Potential for higher cost provided on a system- localities to pay less than wide basis - no distinction share and vice versa. for operational costs by locality. Cash and reserves Cash and reserves levels Some Districts have by Districts would be gathered more/less cash dissolved. and reserves - some districts would gain or lose. Consolidation Issues (cont.) Issue Implications Potential $ Impart Board membership Board membership would Board compensation costs be decreased to an would decrease, as would amount to be determined. staff support costs. Capital financing Connection fees are Connection fees may need collected specific to to be tied to regional facility needs. collector sewer and pump station costs. Bonded debt The consolidated district Some districts have would assume the district incurred more/less debt debt obligations of each than others. Some districts District. would gain or lose. Engineering Limited or no impact on engineering decisions. Operation & No change. Maintenance Orange County Sanitation Districts District 14 (cont.) Issue Implications Potential $ Impart Administration Simplified Board Secretary, Districts' staff cost savings recordkeeping, budget may be substantial. preparation and procurement requirements. Other Other advantages and Potential cost reduction/ disadvantages to be gain to Districts depending identified. upon specific issue identified. Orange County Sanitation Distrl' 155 Y� Policy Questions 3 is 1 . Should Districts' staff prepare a more detailed Districts' consolidation/Board membership report entailing cost estimates for each identified consolidation issue and an implementation plan? 2. Are there other consolidation issues which should be included in the next phase study? Possible Next Steps • Direct staff to develop cost estimates associated with each of the y consolidation issues identified on this report, and by committee members, and submit the report first to the Finance and Personnel Committee at a future meeting. • Direct staff to evaluate several consolidation alternatives ranging from one "super" district to two or more districts. • Direct staff to develop a draft implementation plan detailing consolidation options, consolidation steps necessary by option, implementation time frames and costs by option, and Board membership and compensation issues. Orange County Sanitatiofi I7isY _ V JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 8, 1995 Agenda Item (12)(b)(10): EXEC95.01 Consideration of motion to receive and file Staff Report dated February 17, 1995 regarding Consolidation of Districts (copies enclosed in Directors' agenda packages). Summary At the January 25, 1995 Joint Boards of Directors meeting staff was directed to evaluate the consolidation of the nine separate districts and to develop a comprehensive analysis of consolidation and report back to the Executive Committee at future meetings. Recommendation �..d Receive and file Staff report dated February 17, 1995 regarding Consolidation of Districts. J\WPp00.9A4c9 12M af (13) Staff report #2 regarding consolidation of the nine separate Districts Report to the Executive Committee County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Consolidation of Districts E Cost Savings Report j f. February 17, 1995 Cost Savings Report Contents • Map of Districts' Boundaries • Consolidated Cost Savings • District's Current Cash Revenues • Connection Fee Issues • Class III Industrial/Commercial User Fee Issues • District-Specific Service Cost Issues • 1994-95 Projected Flow by District • Revenue Zones in Consolidated District Issues • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of July 1994 Cash Reserves • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of 1994-95 Operating Expenses Orange County Sanitation Districts t i � Cost Savings Report Contents (Cont.) • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: ZZ Comparison of Secured Property Taxes ° y � • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of User Fee per Parcel • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of Taxes Plus User Fees per Parcel • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Class III Industrial/Commercial User Fees • Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Fv Comparison of Long-Term Debt =' • Report Summary • Consolidation Study Report Schedule • Future Study Options Orange County Sanitation Districts a % Jo .. vim ; �!�► . �� f ,.a� old •Sit' a^ Consolidation Cost Savings Estimated Annual Cost Savings Accounting Costs Independent Auditor $ 12,0001 Accounting Staff 55,5002 Subtotal $ 67,500 Legal/Administration Costs ' Legal Services $ 5,0003 Districts' Administrative Staff 55,0004 Subtotal $ 60,000 Financing Costs l Reduction of Trustee Fees 16,5005 Total Estimated Savings $144,000 ' As estimated by KPMG Peat Marwick- prior Districts'independent auditor 2 Districts estimate based on reduction of 1,500 hours 3 Based on estimate provided by Rourke, Woodruff & Spradlin Districts' staff estimate based on one-half staff savings in Board secretary's office and one-half clerical staff savings 5 Based on estimates from Texas Commerce Bank Orange County Sanitation Districts District's Current Cash Reserves District 7/01/94 % Reserves Change Cities Special Districts Reserves' Per Parcel from Avg On Board On Board 1 30,301 6.9 842 39 Orange, Santa Ana,Tustin Costa Mesa Sanitary District 2 127,702 29.2 882 <1> Anaheim, Brea, Fountain Valley, Garden Grove Sanitary District Fullerton, LaHabra, Orange, Placentia, Santa Ana, Villa Park, Yorba Linda, 3 129,956 29.7 740 141 Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Midway City Sanitary District Cypress, Fountain Valley, Garden Grove Sanitary District Fullerton, Huntington Beach, La Habra, la La Palma, Los Alamitos, Santa Ana, Seal Beach, Stanton 5 27,210 6.2 1,307 <425> Newport Beach None 6 20,503 4.7 828 53 Newport Beach Costa Mesa Sanitary Distdct 7 52.280 12.0 1,267 <386> Irvine, Newport Beach, Orange, Costa Mesa Sanitary District Santa Ana, Tustin 8.3 11 36.442 999 <117> Huntington Beach None 13 10,834 2.5 1,311 <430> Anaheim, Brea, Orange, None Yorba Linda 14 2,169 �5 2M 626 Newport Reach, Tustin, Irvine Irvine Ranch Water District 437,397 100.0 081 'Thousands of dollars Orange County Sanitation Districts i .. Connection Fee Issues • Connection fees are currently charged on a flat fee basis per EDU District-wide (currently $2,350) • According to the Clean Water Act, connection fees must be tied to infrastructure costs and correlated to development ("fair share" rule) • Connection fees would remain on a flat fee basis under consolidation • Connection fees would become contributions to general capital improvement costs under a consolidated district, i.e. fees may be generated in one area and used in another Orange County Sanitation Districts Class III Industrial Waste User Fee Issues • Class III industrial/commercial user fees are general revenues to fund operating costs collected from commercial/industrial users with domestic strength waste • Class III industrial/commercial user fees range from $703 to $1 ,037 per million gallons depending upon the District, averaging $933 • Annual Class III industrial/commercial user fees range from $162 to $62,655 per year. The average annual fee is $3,415 • Some districts would experience increases/decreases in user fees, but the differential would not be major • Class III industrial/commercial user fees would become a flat rate in the future -- approximating today's average $933 per million gallons x Orange Cnunty Sanitation Districts ( 1 District-Specific Services Cost Issues • Each District has unique operating costs ♦ District 3 has sulfide control program ♦ District 5 has pumping stations ♦ District 7 has local collection • Each District has unique operating conditions within the District + Portions of Districts 2 & 3 adjacent to plant, portions 20 miles away ; ♦ Portions of District 5 flow are pumped, balance is gravity flow + + Portions of Ditricts 6 flow to Plant 1 , balance to Plant 2 i �j in thousands Orange County Sanitation Districts IT,", .;` 1994-95 Projected Flow By District 30,000 25,000 0 Z 3 0 20,000 0 J Q LL C7 J Z 15,000 O O _J H 10,000 Z 5,000 0 -1 1 . 01 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER Orange County Sanitation Districts i IL t t_ Revenue Zones in Consolidated District Issues to Revenue zones are currently authorized under the Sanitation District Act • Revenue zones would permit the creation of varying revenue and expenditure zones analogous to assessment Districts. Such zones could be drawn in any configuration in accordance with revenue requirements. • Revenue zones, could eliminate all of the accounting, legal/administrative and financing cost savings advantages identified with consolidation, (i.e. nine revenue zones would have costs approximately equivalent to nine districts) orange County Sanitation Districts9,i �, �s. Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of July 1994 Cash Reserves 1,400 1,200 J ¢U 1,000 a ¢ 800 w a w 600 ¢ rn 400 w 200 ILI 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER IN Separate Districts OConsolidated Orange County Sanitation'D�strtcts Separate • • • • Comparison of 1994-95 Operating Expenses 00 : i 44 Lu loo - m W Cc :0 0 IL .0 -- DISTRICT NUMBER Districts ■ Orsho Cww Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Secured Property Taxes 120 w w ¢ 100 Q a r 80 m X 60 H w 40 4 cc U 20 w m 0 - ItItit i i 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER 09 Separate Districts OConsolidated s k Y. Orange County Sanitation Districts Paroel$ whWn €Astrid$ 13 and 14 do not dde Property tax revenues tww - � l t Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Sewer Service User Fee Per Parcel A J 180 rWj 160 3 ¢ Q. 140 ¢ a w 120 w 100 ¢ 80 w e U) 60 a 40 7 Z 20 a 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER 09 Separate Districts ❑Consolidated � M Orange County Sanitation Districts Separate Districts vs. Consolidation: Comparison of Taxes Plus User Fees Per EDU 1ao � w 160 W 140 w n 120 U w 100 l€ 2 W 80 '' Q o fi0 N % 40 H 20 0 t fl4 i 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER ■9 Separate Districts OConsolidated 5�P orange County Sanitation DistfMS ` f Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Class III Industrial/Comm User Fees 1200 z 1000 J Q 0 Z 800 J J_ 600 Lu W IL w 400 U. J Q Z 200 z Q 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER IN Separate Districts OConsolidated 'e7 », a Sri- ram ri Orange County Sanitation Districts �„ 11a Separate Districts vs. Consolidation : Comparison of Long-Term Debt 1,600 1,400 w U 1,200 a w 1,000 a w 600 0 600 w t- O 400 z 0 -J 200 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 13 14 DISTRICT NUMBER ■9 Separate Districts ❑Consolidated Orang`County Sanitation D sttfCts Report Summary • The consolidation of Districts could achieve a levelling of revenues and expenditures by District • The implications of this levelling have been depicted by district • Cost savings up to $144,000 per year can be achieved from the various accounting, legal/administrative and financial savings so far identified • Connection fees will not be affected by consolidation • Total Class III industrial/commercial user fees will change insignificantly but, fees for a particular user may change up to 19% by consolidation • Revenue zones would reduce some or all cost savings since they would imply a new set of legal/administrative and financing requirements • Existing Districts have differing operating costs as indicated by the 94/95 budget and illustrated in this report Orange County Sanitation Districts -. Consolidation Study Report Schedule Concept Report/Board Direction January 25, 1995 Costs Savings Report February 22, 1995 LAFCO Process & Costs March 22, 1995 District 14 Implications March 22, 1995 Existing Debt and Grant Implications April 26, 1995 Board Composition May 24, 1995 Final Report to Executive Committee June 21 , 1995 Final Report to Joint Boards July 12, 1995 Orange County Sanitation Districts i Future Study Options 1 . Direct staff to proceed with further consolidation study efforts per the following consolidation study report schedule 2. Direct staff not to proceed further 3. Direct staff to proceed per other Board direction ,3 t 3 b Orange County Sanitation Districts ' Y ,s' ¢ y .y JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS �..� REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12)(b)(13): EXEC95-03: Consideration of Resolution No. 95-62, authorizing the General Manager to approve expenditure of funds up to $50,000.00 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements governed by Resolution No. 95-9. Summary Over the past two years,staff has been fine-tuning a procedure for delegating approval authority down into the organization. This delegated authority,through providing increased responsibility and ownership,will contribute to the improved efficiency and effectiveness of the Districts. The Planning, Design and Construction Committee met on June 1, 1995,and the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee met on June 7, 1995. Both Committees considered a motion to authorize the General Manager to approve expenditure of funds up to$50,000 for contracts, services and purchase orders,excluding public works contracts governed by state law,and professional services agreements governed by Board Resolution 95-9. By this action,the Directors can more efficiently utilize their time to review and make decisions on the more significant financial and policy issues affecting the Districts. The attached staff report identifies the delegation of authority hierarchy and procedures. PDC and OMTS Committees'Recommendations The Planning,Design and Construction Committee,and Operations,Maintenance and Technical Services Committee recommend that the Boards of Directors authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to$50,000 for contracts,services and purchase orders,excluding public works contracts governed by State law and professional services agreement governed by Board Resolution No.95-9. Finance. Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends that the Executive Committee recommend that the Boards of Directors authorize the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to$50,000 for contracts,services and purchase orders,excluding public works contracts governed by State law and professional services agreement governed by Board Resolution No.95-9. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the PDC,OMTS and FAHR Committees'recommendation and recommends approval by the Joint Boards of Directors. \� C61RB13 w RESOLUTION NO. 95-62 M DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE GENERAL MANAGER AND STAFF RE EXPENDITURE OF DISTRICTS' FUNDS AND �../ PERSONNEL ISSUES 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 DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE DISTRICTS' GENERAL MANAGER AND STAFF RELATING TO EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR CONTRACTS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF SERVICES, CONSTRUCTION, SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS; EMPLOYEE TIMEKEEPING RECORDS; EMPLOYEE HIRING, PROMOTION, PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND DISCIPLINE; AND TRAVEL AND TRAINING EXPENDITURES .............. WHEREAS, the General Manager has submitted comprehensive management reports to each of the standing Committees of the Boards of Directors, recommending increased responsibility throughout the various levels of the employee organization; and, WHEREAS,the standing Committees of the Boards of the Directors have determined that an effective, comprehensive organization needs an administrative structure with support procedures that are understood by the Directors, management and the Districts'employees to enable timely and responsive performance of duties; and, WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors have determined that a delegation of authority structure provides for better training of employees which will result in improved efficiency and effectiveness of `..ri the Districts' operations; and, WHEREAS, the standing Committees of the Boards of Directors have determined that four major areas for delegation of authority and responsibility, as recommended by the General Manager, should appropriately be delegated to the General Manager and Staff for implementation; and, WHEREAS, the four major areas consist of(1) the awarding of contracts or purchase orders to acquire non-professional services, supplies and materials, and for minor construction projects; (2)employee timekeeping records and overtime authorizations; (3) personnel issues relating to hiring, promotions, performance reviews and disciplinary action; and (4)travel and training policies and expenditures. 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 General Manager and Staff of the Districts are hereby delegated authority to perform the duties,functions and responsibilities for the Districts' operations, in accordance with the detailed specifications and limitations set forth on Exhibit°A', attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 28, 1995. dad ese L COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 4 ei ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1OEkU EW6 AVENUE PO.WX 2127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CAUFOXNIA 02728.8127 nlale62X11 June 1, 1995 Revised 6/8195 STAFF REPORT OMTS96-027: PDC(6)(d) Consideration of Motion to Authorize the General Manager to Approve Expenditure of Funds up to $50,000 for Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law and Professional Services Agreements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY INTRODUCTION An effective, comprehensive organization needs an administrative structure with support procedures that make sense, are well documented, are understood by the organization's employees, and that enable timely and responsive administrative acquisition of contracts and services. The organization should also appropriately delegate authority to those persons and units having responsibility for these activities. THE NEED FOR DELEGATED AUTHORITY In an effort to remove barriers that prevent us from performing our jobs at the highest level, a delegation of authority structure will appropriately train our employees and, through providing increased responsibility and ownership, will contribute to the improved efficiency and effectiveness of the Districts. A critical component of the delegation of authority structure is the budget process. The budget process is being improved so that: 1. appropriate and equitable resources are provided to all divisions during the budget development process; 2. an iterative and interactive exchange (including goal setting) is undertaken during the assembly of the budget that actually authorizes expenses when a line item is approved; eft✓ 3. a realistic budget is developed; N OMTS95-027 Page 2 of 11 ,. June 1, 1995 4. a process is established to manage emergency or unbudgeted items; 5. an ongoing auditing program is established to provide checks-and- balances; and 6. managers are held accountable for managing their budget. PROCEDURE FOR DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY GENERAL The attached Tables 1 through 4 list delegated signature authority for four areas: (1) contracts, services and purchase orders; (2) time cards and overtime; (3) hiring, promotions, reviews and disciplinary action; and (4) travel and training, respectively. Each table lists, in the lefthand columns, signature authority from the Boards of Directors down through section and/or shop foremen. Listed on the top row of each table are the functions/services that require signature approval. With the exception of hiring, promotion, review and disciplinary action, delegated authority for that functional management level will be elevated one level in the absence of respective authority. The General Manager (GM) will formally delegate his authority to one of the Assistant General Managers (AGM) in his absence. These procedures establish the framework and boundaries within which a delegatee can operate, and also provide management with a mechanism to evaluate implementation and hold the delegatee accountable for his/her actions. I. CONTRACTS, SERVICES AND PURCHASE ORDERS (Excluding Public Works Contracts Governed by State Law and Professional Services Agreements Governed by Board Resolution 95-9) The following signature authority will be used. The functional authority level listed describes the highest level of signature approval needed. Intermediate management approval between the initiator/requestor and listed approval level is also obtained. V OMTS95-027 Page 3 of 11 June 1, 1995 A. Budgeted Items 1. Items exceeding $50,000 require Boards of Directors approval. 2. Items $25,000 to $49,999 require GM or AGM approval. 3. Items $10,000 to $24,999 require Department Director approval. 4. Items $5,000 to $9,999 require Division Manager approval. 5. Items $1,000 to $4,999 require Section Supervisor approval. 6. Items less than $1,000 require Foreman approval. B. Unbudgeted Items �r For unbudgeted items, approval for the acquisition of goods or services will not occur unless a budgeted item of equal or greater value is given up. No net increase in the Districts' budget will occur as the result of an acquisition of an unbudgeted item. 1. Items exceeding $50,000 require Boards of Directors approval. 2. Items $10,000 to $49,999 require GM or AGM approval. 3. Items $5,000 to $9,999 require Department Director approval. 4. Items $1,000 to $4,999 require Division Manager approval. 5. Items less than $1,000 require Section Supervisor approval. C. Co-signatures In addition to the signature of the Delegated Authority: 1. To ensure that all policies and procedures governing purchase orders and contracts are followed, all contracts or purchase orders less than $50,000 will be signed by the Purchasing Manager. All contracts or purchase orders $50,000 and above will be signed by the Director of ..✓ Finance after Boards' approval. J OMTS95-027 Page 4 of 11 June 1, 1995 2. All purchases for computer hardware, software and communication equipment will be signed by the Information Technology Director or designee. D. Procedural Requirements All policies and procedures governing the procurement of services, equipment or supplies, will apply. These are the following, including updates as appropriate: 1. Resolution No. 9043 - Professional Services Contracts 2. Resolution No. 86-81 - Purchasing Resolution 3. Resolution No. 95-9 - Professional Services Contract/Change Order to Consultant Contracts 4. Petty Cash procedures. For unbudgeted items prior to the acquisition of goods or services that were not budgeted, either a budget transfer request form must be completed demonstrating that adequate funds are available to cover the acquisition, or the Boards of Directors must authorize a budget amendment, at which time the Rem being acquired would fall into the budgeted category. E. Reporting The General Manager, Assistant General Managers, Department Directors and Division Managers will receive monthly cumulative updated reports from the Finance Department on all major contracts, services and purchase orders. The Boards of Directors shall receive this report on a quarterly basis. The format, reporting amount and other details will be worked out by the Finance Department. This will include the following: • Authorizing Division • Contract/Purchase Order Amount • Previous Amount Authorized (If Applicable) • Brief Description of Service or Item • Term of Contract • Budgeted or Unbudgeted Item ,,, V 0MTS95-027 Page 5 of 11 June 1, 1995 The Finance Department may develop interim reports that do not contain all of the information listed above during the period that the Financial Management System is being developed. TABLE 1: Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders CONTRACTS, SERVICES AND PURCHASE ORDERS (EXCLUDING PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS GOVERNED BY STATE LAW AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS GOVERNED BY BOARD RESOLUTION 95-9) Non Budgeted Budgeted `...� Boards of Directors >50,000 >50,000 GM and AGM a25,ODD to z10,000 to 49,999 49,999 Department Directors 210,000 to a5,000 to 24,999 9,999 Division Managers 2:5,000 to al.000 to 9,999 4,999 Section Supervisors t1,000 to <1,000 4,999 Foreman <7,000 - II. TIME CARDS AND OVERTIME A. Procedure for Time Card Approval The direct supervisor can approve time cards and overtime requests/reports for employees reporting to him/her. 1. In the absence of the GM, AGMs can approve each others timecards, but not their own. D OMTS95-027 Page 6 of 11 .J June 1, 1995 2. In the absence of the AGM, the other AGM or the GM can approve time cards of Department Directors. 3. In the absence of the Department Director, the GM or AGM can approve time cards of Division Managers, within that department. 4. In the absence of Division Manager, the Department Director, AGM or GM can approve time cards of employees within that division. B. Overtime Approval 1. Department Directors approve all overtime requests that are exceptions to the Districts' policy on overtime request. 2. Division Managers or Section Supervisors can approve all other overtime requests that conform with Districts' policy. C. Reporting and Monitoring 1. The Department Directors and Division Managers receive a monthly summary of overtime requests including exceptions. 2. The GM and AGM receive a monthly summary on exceptions to overtime requests. 0 4 OMTS95-027 Page 7 of 11 June 1, 1995 TABLE 2: Time Cards and Overtime Requests/Reports Time Cards Overtime Requests Overtime Reports GM - Approve AGM and - Receive monthly Executive Assistant II Summary Reports of exceptions only - Approve Department - Receive monthly AGM Directors and Executive Summary Reports of Assistant II exceptions only Department Director - Approve Division - Approve exceptions to - Receive monthly Managers and Districts' policy Summary Reports with Executive Assistant I exceptions Division Manager - Approve Section - Approve when meeting - Receive monthly Supervisors and Districts' policy Summary Reports with Division Secretary exceptions Section Supervisor - Approve assigned staff - Approve when meeting or Equivalent Districts' policy III. HIRING, PROMOTIONS, REVIEWS AND DISCIPLINARY ACTION All hiring and promotions will be jointly signed by highest level of initiating management listed below and the Director of Human Resources. All initiating management levels below the highest level must also provide approval. A. Procedure for Hiring and Promoting 1. Unbudgeted hiring or promotions require approval of the Boards of Directors. 2. Ahead-of-schedule hiring or promotions require the approval of the GM or AGM. No net increase in the Districts' salary and wages budget will occur as a result of ahead-of-schedule hiring or promotions. 3. Budgeted hiring requires approval of the Department Director. ,,, 4. Budgeted promotions require approval of the Division Manager. o 9 OMTS95-027 Page 8 of 11 J June 1, 1995 B. Disciplinary Action 1. Terminations are finally approved by the GM or AGM after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that the policies have been followed. 2. Suspensions exceeding five working days are finally approved by the Department Director (or higher management level) after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that the policies have been followed. 3. Suspensions of five days or less are finally approved by the Division Manager (or higher management level) after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that the policies have been followed. 4. Written or verbal reprimands on employee performance are finally approved by Supervisors (or higher management level) after consultation with the Director of Human Resources to ensure that policies have been followed. C. Co-Signatures All hiring and promotions will adhere to all recruitment and hiring policies of the Human Resources Department; Boards of Directors; Resolutions and Memorandum of Understandings and require co-signatures of the delegated initiating management and the Director of Human Resources with a statement affirming that the policies have been followed. D. Reporting and Monitoring The GM, AGM and Department Director will receive monthly reports on all hiring, promotions and terminations. 4 OMTS95-027 Page 9 of 11 June 1, 1995 TABLE 3: Hiring, Promotions and Disciplinary Action Hires and Disciplinary Action Promotions Boards of Unbudgeted Directors Positions GM or AGM Budgeted but Approves (after consultation with Director Ahead of Schedule of Human Resources) terminations and receives report on all hiring, promotions and terminations. Department All budgeted and Approves (after consultation with Director Director Scheduled of Human Resources) suspensions exceeding five working days and receives report on all hiring, promotions and terminations. Division Manager Budgeted Approves (after consultation with Director Promotions of Human Resources) five-day-or-less suspensions and other disciplinary actions. Supervisorl Approves (after consultation with Director Foreman of Human Resources and Division Manager Manager)written and verbal reprimands. IV. TRAVEL AND TRAINING A. General 1. Travel or training exceeding $500 will be itemized, as well as possible, in the approved budget. It is recognized that some travel cannot be preplanned. 2. All out-of-country travel requires approval by the Boards of Directors. 3. All out-of-state travel requires approval by the GM or AGM. 4. Established approvals must be received prior to arrangements for travel ..d or training being made. OMTS95-027 Page 10 of 11 June 1, 1995 B. Budgeted (excluding labor hours) 1. Travel or training requests exceeding $2,000 will be approved by the GM or AGM. 2. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $2,000 and exceeding $1,000 will be approved by the Department Director. 3. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $1,000 will be approved by the Division Manager. C. Unbudgeted (excluding labor hours) 1. Travel or training requests exceeding $1,500 will be approved by the GM or AGM. 2. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $1,500 and exceeding $1,000 will be approved by the Department Director. 3. Travel or training requests less than or equal to $1,000 will be approved by the Division Manager. D. Policies and Procedures All policies and procedures governing travel and training such as the use of Districts' forms and justification, will be followed. E. Reporting and Monitoring The GM, AGM, Department Director and Division Manager will receive monthly reports from the Finance Department on all travel and training. The Finance Administration and Human Resources Committee (FAHR) will receive quarterly reports that include the following: • Requesting Division • Dollar Amount • Brief Description • Budgeted or Unbudgeted • Number of Days • Number of Attendees s OMTS95-027 Page 11 of 11 June 1, 1995 TABLE 4: Travel and Training Approve Travel and Trainino Budgeted Unbudeeted Boards of Directors Out of Country GM or AGM Out of State > $2,000 > $1,500 Department Director > $1,000 to$1,999 > $1,000 to$1,499 Division Manager 5$1,000 5$1.000 BPA/ET J:1wp13510 operoommldoramp.fah JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDAFOR JUNE 28, 1995 Item (12(b)(14): Consideration of motion recommending approval of the proposed 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets, as follows: Joint Works OperatingfWorking Capital $54,380,000 Worker's Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 Summary A proposed Budget for 1995-96 was mailed to the Committee members last week. In the meantime, it has been presented to the Planning and Design Committee and the Operations,Maintenance and Technical Services Committee for their review. If approved by the Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee,the proposed Budget for 1995-96 will be forwarded to the Executive Committee and to the �..✓ Joint Boards. In previous years,the Fiscal Policy Committee has approved the Joint Works Budgets in parts,then recommended the total Joint Works Operating,Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets to the Executive Committee. When the Joint Works Budgets were approved by the Joint Boards,they were included in the individual District's budgets which were considered in July. For 1995-96,the entire budget,including the individual Districts,is being presented for consideration in June. A further change is that each Standing Committee will have an opportunity to review the proposal. it remains the responsibility of the Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee to recommend approval of these Joint Works budgets. Finance Administration and Human Resources Committee Recommendation The Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee recommends approval of the proposed Joint Works Operating,Joint Works Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets for 1995-96. Executive Committee Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors The Executive Committee concurs with the recommendation of the PDC, OMTS and FAHR Committees. a�wwoc�cnn�xrcuusesa+�auec ' COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA June 14, 1995 10e4 ELUS AVENUE o0.eox 912, ECUNTAIN VALLEY.CAU10ANIA e2M.8127 QW 992.2An STAFF REPORT 1996-96 Budget Recommendations A proposed Budget for 1995-96 was mailed to the Committee members last week. In the meantime, it has been presented to the Planning and Design Committee and the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee for their review. If approved by the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee, the proposed Budget for 1995-96 will be forwarded to the Executive Committee and to the Joint Boards. In previous years, the Fiscal Policy Committee has approved the Joint Works Budgets in parts, then recommended the total Joint Works Operating, Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets to the Executive Committee. When the Joint Works Budgets were approved by the Joint Boards, they were included in the individual District's budgets which were considered the following month. For 1995-96, the entire budget, including the individual Districts, is being presented for considered in June. A further change is that each Standing Committee will have an opportunity to review the proposal. It remains the responsibility of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee to recommend approval of these Joint Works budgets. As staff has previously reported, the entire format of the budget document has been revised for 1995-96. It is our intent that this format will be more informative and useful for the Directors and others who use the document. Section 4, "Summary - Joint Operating," Section 7, "Self-Insurance Funds," and Section 8, "Joint Capital Improvement Program; are the three sections that contain the budgets the Committee has approved in the past. There is extensive text, and even pictures for the capital projects, in each of these sections. Two new sections have been added for further detail. Section 5, "Division Budgets," includes four pages for each division. These pages show the organizational structure, staffing trends, a service overview, an analysis of the budget changes and a Joint Works Operating expenditure trend. This new level of detail is intended to better explain what services are performed. Section 9, "Staffing," presents the authorized staffing levels for five years for each division by position title. A complete listing of the staffing changes can be found in Section 1 beginning on Page 14. 4.j 1995-96 Budget Recommendations Page 2 June 14, 1995 The Self-Insurance Fund budgets and overview are found in Section 7. The following table summarizes the total Joint Works budgets for operations, maintenance and capital improvements for the past two years and the proposals for 1995-96: Approved Approved Proposed 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 Joint Operating Fund $49,579,000 $49,542,000 $54,380,000 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund 70,032,000 67,805,000 33,530,000 Self-insurance Funds 4,138,000 904000000 1,016.000 Total $123.749.000 $118.251.000 $88.926.000 Percent Change from 1992-93 6(G 48%) 1(=0.64%) Percent Change from 1993-94 (4.44°h) 2{ 8.14%) Percent Change from 1994-95 24.80%) While this Committee has not been responsible for approving or reviewing the individual District budgets in the past, it is charged with the overall borrowing/financial plan. The proposed budget includes no COP issue for 1995-96, instead we are funding the reduced capital improvement program from reserves. Delaying borrowing until next year allows us to postpone user fee increases to repay the debt and avoid higher required revenue ratios. The effect on budgeted reserve levels is shown below: Approved Approved 1993-94 1994-95 1995.96 Beginning Reserves $420,284,000 $435,401,000 $332,850,000 Ending Reserves 434,900,000 493,145,000 314,166,000 Future projected borrowings can be seen in Section 3, Page 9, on line 69 of the All Districts Summary Cash Flow Statement, and Reserve balances are on the following page on lines 89 and 99. Staff will review the Joint Works and Self-Insurance Fund Budget recommendations and the rest of the document at the meeting. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed Joint Works Operating, Joint Works Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets for 1995-96. GGS:Ic J\WPDOL1FlMCgN1flFPC.Nrt4�FPL9A5T�F}Ai?.fPOBUDRE:.9i JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ., JUNE 28, 1995 ALL DISTRICTS Agenda Item (12)(b)(15): Consideration of motion recommending approval of the proposed FY 1996-96 Individual Districts' Budgets to the Joint Boards as follows: District No. 1 $33,585,000 District No. 2 $137,724,000 District No. 3 $149,609,000 District No. 5 $33,450,000 District No. 6 $22,510,000 District No. 7 $46,653,000 District No. 11 $28,808,000 District No. 13 $9,584,000 District No. 14 $13,280,000 Summal A proposed Budget for 1996-96 was mailed to various Committee members and has been presented to the Planning and Design Committee, the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee, the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee and the Executive Committee. The proposed Districts' Budgets for 1995-96 are now being presented to the Joint Boards. In previous years, the Fiscal Policy Committee has approved the Joint Works Budgets in parts, then recommended the total Joint Works Operating, Capital and Self-Insurance Fund Budgets to the Executive Committee. When the Joint Works Budgets were approved by the Joint Boards, they were included in the individual District's budgets which were considered in July. For 1995-96, the entire budget, including the individual Districts, is being presented for consideration in June. A further change is that each Standing Committee will have had an opportunity to review the proposal. The Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee recommended approval of these Joint Works budgets to the Executive Committee. Executive Committee Recommendation The Executive Committee recommends approval of the proposed Individual Districts' .r Budgets for 1995-96. O612B15 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICTS 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 11 (ONLY) Agenda Item (12)(b)(16): Consideration of the following resolutions selecting the annual change in California per capita personal income as the cost-of-living adjustment factor, and establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for each District in accordance with the provisions of Division 9 of Title 1 of the California Government Code: DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. LIMITATION 1 95-63-1 $2,760,000 2 95-64-2 10,548,000 3 95-65-3 14,521,000 5 9"6.5 2,604,000 6 95-67.6 1,689,000 7 95-68-7 4,805.000 11 95-69-11 3,142,000 Summary This routine annual action appearing in the agenda adopts resolutions for each of the Districts authorizing execution and filing of all documents necessary for state and federal construction grants and/or loan applications for 1995-96. Recommendation Staff recommends approval and adoption of above resolutions. err' RESOLUTION NO. 95- - ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 FOR THE DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE `.� WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. _OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995.96 FOR THE DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE ... . .. .... .... WHEREAS, Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California as proposed by the Initiative Measure approved by the people at the special statewide election held on November 6, 1979, provides that the total annual appropriations limit of each local government shall not exceed the appropriations limit of such entity for the prior year adjusted for changes in the cost of living and population except as otherwise specifically provided for in said Article; and, WHEREAS, the State Legislature added Division 9 (commencing with Section 7900) to Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California to implement Article XIII B of the California Constitution; and, WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the Government Code provides that each year the governing body of each local jurisdiction shall, by resolution, establish its appropriations limit for the following fiscal year pursuant to Article XIII B at a regularly-scheduled meeting or a noticed special meeting and that fifteen (15) days prior to such meeting, documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit shall be available to the public; and, WHEREAS, Section 7902 (a) of the Government Code sets forth the method for determining the appropriations limit for each local jurisdiction for the 1995-96 fiscal year, and, WHEREAS, the Board of Directors wishes to establish the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for the District. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER: Section 1: That it is hereby found and determined that the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County, California, for fiscal year 1995-96, was available to the public in the Finance Department of said District at least fifteen (15) days prior to this date. Section 2: The the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for County Sanitation District No. _ of Orange County, California, as established in accordance with Section 7902 (a) of the California Government Code is $ which sum is within the maximum authorized spending limitation for fiscal year 1995-96. Section 3: That the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No._of Orange County, California, has determined that the percent change in California per capita personal income from the preceding year would be the cost of living factor to be used in calculating the County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County, California's appropriations limit for the Fiscal Year 1995-96. Section 4: That the appropriations limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County California, as established in accordance with Section 7902(b) of the California Government Code is $ which sum is within the maximum authorized spending limitation for fiscal year 1995-96. Section 5: The determination of the appropriation limit is based upon the best and most complete information available at this time. The District reserves the right to review and re- establish a new and different limit in the event that it subsequently determines that a modification of the limitation amount is appropriate. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 26, 1995. JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (13): Consideration of motion delegating authority to the Planning, Design and Construction Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for actions required to solicit, negotiate, award and issue purchase orders to various vendors for Modifications to the Existing Interior Office Spaces in the Administration Building for the General Management Administration and Communication Offices (Specification No. E-256), in an amount not to exceed $165,250.00. Summary The PDC Committee is charged with the overseeing of the Districts' Planning, Design and Construction activities. The PDC Committee has further established an Ad Hoc Committee to study administration space utilization for current and immediate future staffing requirements. The Ad Hoc Committee is also looking into long-term administration space needs. One of the immediate administration space requirements concerns office modifications and reconfiguration for the two newly established Assistant General Manager positions and the added Administrative Secretarial staff which provides direct support to the two Assistant `..✓ General Managers, and the reorganized Communications Office. The office modifications need to be started by the end of July in order to provide adequate facilities for the above mentioned staff. By delegating authority to the PDC Committee for this work, a minimum of 60 days will be deleted from the solicitation, awarding and construction process. The work to be done will be performed in two steps covering a two or three week period. The first step will be the removal of the existing floor-to-ceiling partition walls. The partition walls will be reconfigured and remodeled to fit the new floor plan layout and to add glass where solid walls now stand . The second phase will be to remove the existing partitions and reconfigure it to fit the new floor plan layout. In addition to the wall and partition changes, the job will include installation of all electrical, communications, computers, and furniture necessary to support the staffing changes. This new office reconfiguration will utilize over seventy percent of the existing equipment and the Districts will need to order only thirty percent more equipment to finish the reconfiguration. The cost of the mentioned work is estimated to be $165,250.00. Recommendation to the Joint Boards of Directors That the Joint Boards of Directors recommend approval to delegate authority to the PDC Committee for required actions for modifications to the existing interior office spaces in the Administration Building. 0&73 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (15): PDC95-16 Consideration of the following actions relative to Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid) (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-70 approving Amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company providing for time constraints and the Surety's right to perform the work. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 95-71 receiving and Tiling bid tabulation and awarding contract for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), to Colich Brothers, Inc., dba Colich and Sons, in the total amount of$298,700. Summary In May, the Boards approved the plans and specifications for Office Trailer Relocation at Plant No. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid). In 1993 the project was bid and awarded, but the contractor defaulted. In 1994 the contractors surety, Frontier Pacific Insurance Company agreed to complete the work or accept our rebid and pay the new contract amount in excess of the original bid amount of$199,200. An amendment to the agreement with the surety has been prepared by the District's legal counsel. The amendment requires (1) receiving bids by June 30, 1995, and if problems arise rebid by August 31, 1995 or the surety will no longer be obligated. (2) Surety has an absolute right to perform the work if it desires, but must notify the Districts of its intent within 5 days of the bid date. (3) If surety elects to perform the work, construction must begin within 60 calendar days of the notification of its intention. The PDC and Executive Committees have recommended approval of the Amendment to the Settlement Agreement with surety. The amendment is attached to the agenda. On June 6, 1995, two bids were received for this project. The bids were $479,031.00 from Schuler Engineering Corporation and a low bid of$298,700.00 from Colich and Sons, Inc. The engineers estimate for the work was $350,000.00. The bid tabulation is attached to the agenda. Staff Recommendation A) Approve amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company. B)Award Office Trailer Relocation at Plant No. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid) to Colich and Sons, Inc. for their low bid amount of$298,700.00. June 6, 1995 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 'r .. 11:00 a.m. of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1 Addendum 19944 ELLIS AVENUE vo 8018127 BID TABULATION F...IN VALLEY.cAUEORNIA 92728.8127 nlm 962-2411 Specification No.M-044 (Rebid) PROJECT TITLE: Office Trailer Relocations at Plants Nos. 1 and 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Relocate Existing Trailers at Both Plants Nos. 1 and 2 Create a New Construction Management Complex at Plant No. 2. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: 5a3 0,000 BUDGET AMOUNT: $690.000 TOTAL = — CONTRACTOR BID 1. Colich Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons, Gardena, CA $298,700.00 2. Schuler Engineering Corporation, Riverside, CA $479,031.00 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 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 Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons in the bid amount of $298,700.00 as the lowest and best bid. John D. Linder Director of Engineering JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS MEETING REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (1 S): Consideration of motion to adopt Ordinance No. 126, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early. Summary The Boards of Directors on March 8, 1995 (for Maintenance Department employees) and May 24, 1995 for all other employees adopted Resolution Nos. 95-19 and 95-53, approving the early retirement incentive program. This provides two years additional service credit for those employees who retire before their scheduled time and do so during the period of March 1—June 30, 1995. The OCERS has advised that pursuant to Government Code Section 31641.04 the action of the Boards must be by ordinance and not resolution, as was done. General Counsel has prepared the ordinance for District 1 adoption as agent for all other Districts. The ordinance sets forth the necessary findings and, if enacted as an urgency measure, will become effective immediately. There are no changes from the actions taken previously by your Boards. This action is procedural only. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 126. Wl6 ORDINANCE NO. 126 ..� PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SERVICE CREDIT TO ELIGIBLE DISTRICTS' EMPLOYEES WHO RETIRE EARLY AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR AN EARLY RETIREMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM BY GRANTING ADDITIONAL SERVICE CREDIT TO ELIGIBLE DISTRICTS' EMPLOYEES AS AUTHORIZED BY THE COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT LAW OF 1937—GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 31641.04. WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 adopted Joint Resolution No. 95-19 and Joint Resolution No. 95-53, approving an Early Retirement Incentive Program for all eligible Districts' employees, as authorized by California Government Code Section 31641.04; and WHEREAS, the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, ..✓ 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 have determined that the manner of performing service, and the total cost savings of having higher compensated employees retire and lower compensated employees hired to replace the retirees exceeds the total actuarial cost of the additional service credit granted to those who retire under this program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Joint Ownership, Operation and Construction Agreement by and among County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14, District No. 1 is the appointed authorized agent to act for every other District. NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 does hereby ordain: Section I: All regular employees of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County who are eligible to participate as members and retire under the Orange County i Employees Retirement System are granted two (2) additional years of service credit for retirement benefit purposes, provided, they retire from regular employment of the Districts during the period of March 1, 1995 and June 30, 1995. Section II: The General Manager of the Districts is authorized to execute any and all contracts or other documents and to transfer all required funds in order to implement the authorized actions provided for herein. Section III: This ordinance is enacted as an urgency measure to preserve the public peace and welfare in that financial losses have been unexpectedly incurred during this fiscal year and savings of money through reduced employee compensation will partially offset said losses. Section IV: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. Introduced and adopted this 28th day of June, 1995, at a regular meeting of the Boards of Directors. ATTEST J:WPOOCXBSAG95%MORD V JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 Agenda Item (17): Consideration of the following actions relative to proposed ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program: District Ordinance No. 13 1315 14 1407 (a) Consideration of motion to read proposed Ordinances Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program by title only and waive reading of said entire ordinance.Public hearing (b) Consideration of motion adopting proposed Ordinances. Summary See attached memorandum dated March 22, 1995 from General Counsel. Staff Recommendations Staff recommends approval of proposed ordinances. has' osi> ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. _ OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING EXCESS CAPACITY CHARGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. _ of Orange County, California ("District") has heretofore adopted Ordinance No. _, an Ordinance Establishing Wastewater Discharge Regulations for Use of District Sewerage Facilities; and, WHEREAS, Section 309 of Ordinance No. _provides that the Board of Directors may determine the method for calculation of Excess Capacity Charges applicable to District users on a case-by-case basis; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to establish a standard, fair and equitable method for calculation of the Excess Capacity Charge for all users. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. _of Orange County, California does hereby find: A. That a comprehensive 30-year Master Plan of Capital Facilities entitled "Collection, Treatment and Disposal Facilities Master Plan- 1989", hereinafter the "Master Plan", which includes detailed financial and engineering reports, has been prepared, approved and adopted by the Board of Directors identifying the required future development of District and jointly-owned facilities, including the financial projections for providing sewer service to all properties within the District's service areas; and ✓ i B. That District Staff has prepared an analysis report of the proposed method for determination of Excess Capacity Charges; and C. That the financial and engineering reports of the Master Plan and the analysis report regarding Excess Capacity Charges have been made available to the public and have been subject to noticed public hearings, all in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 66016 and other provisions of law; and D. That the revenues, derived under the provisions of this Ordinance, from other public agencies for discharges from water or wastewater treatment facilities will be held in reserve and designated for possible future use in the construction of a separate ocean discharge outfall brine line, and revenues derived from other users will be used for construction of the sewage collection facilities, wastewater treatment and disposal facilities of the District, and E. That the users upon which the fees established by this Ordinance are levied, will discharge wastewater to the District's collection, treatment and disposal facilities, that the costs of construction of sewage collection facilities, wastewater treatment and disposal facilities has constantly increased due in part to increased regulatory requirements to upgrade the treatment process; and that said costs will exceed the amounts of any ad valorem tax revenues derived from these users; and F. That the fees imposed by authority of this Ordinance do not exceed the estimated amount required to provide the sewer service for which the fee is levied, as provided in Government Code Sections 66013 and 66016, and zoo 17 z 1..' eels-1 G. That the fees established by this Ordinance will not necessarily result 4./ in an expansion of facilities to provide for growth outside the existing service area. The establishment of these fees will not result in any specific project and will not result in a direct physical change or any reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the environment; and H. That the fees adopted by this Ordinance are established upon a rational basis between the fees charged each user and the facilities provided to each affected user by the District; and I. That the adoption of this Ordinance is statutorily exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act from further environmental assessment pursuant to the provisions of California Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8), and 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15273(a). NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. of Orange County, California, does hereby ORDAIN as follows: Section : Section 309 of Ordinance No. _ is hereby amended to read: Section 309. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to establish the method for calculation of fees payable by all applicants for a permit to connect to the District facilities for a new development or expansion of an existing development that expands operations, either of which require sewage, collection, treatment or disposal facilities capacity. Revenues derived under the provisions of this Ordinance from other public agencies for discharges from waste or wastewater treatment facilities shall be held in zoa 17 3 MIC i reserve and designated for possible future use in the construction of a separate ocean discharge outfall brine line, and revenues derived from other users shall be used for the construction of the sewage collection facilities, and wastewater treatment and disposal facilities of the District. Section 309.1, Method of Calculation. A The Excess Capacity Charge shall apply to any new connection or new user whose discharge is tributary to District's sewerage system and whose average daily loading to the sewerage system contains at least one of the following loadings: Parameter value Flow > 50,000 gallons per day Suspended Solids > 105 Ibs per day Biochemical Oxygen Demand > 105 Ibs per day B. As set forth in the Master Plan, the historical cost of District treatment ..: and collection facilities for Flow, Suspended Solids and Biochemical Oxygen Demand is as follows: Parameter Weighted - Percent (°kl Flow 58.38% Suspended Solids 18.66% Biochemical Oxygen Demand 22.96% C. The current Capital Facilities Connection Charge set forth in Article 7 of Ordinance No. _, also known as the Equivalent Dwelling Unit Rate, applicable to dwelling units is $2,350.00, and the charge applicable to other than dwelling buildings or z°000aon 4ti.,' e�ie i replacement buildings or additions or alterations to existing buildings is $470.00 per 1,000 e.: square feet of floor area, with a minimum charge of $2,350.00, based upon the District facility cost per dwelling unit existing in 1989, adjusted automatically for inflation in 1990 and 1991 pursuant to the Engineering News Report - Los Angeles Area (ENRLA) cost of construction index. Section 309.2. Effective July 1, 1995, the Excess Capacity Charge shall be calculated based on the following formula: Excess Capacity Charge = (Flow, gpd') /399 gpd x CFC' x 58% + (BOD, Ibs/d3) /0.83 Ibs/d x CFC x 19% + (SS, Ibs/d) 10.83 Ibs/d x CFC x 23% Section 309.3. The Excess Capacity Charge shall not apply to public sewering agencies located within District boundaries which agencies connect public collection sewers tributary to District facilities. Section 309.4. Within two years of commencement of discharge and upon review of actual discharge records every two years by District, if the actual loadings from a permitted facility are shown to exceed the loadings used to assess an Excess Capacity Charge by 25% for either Flow, Biochemical Oxygen Demand or Suspended Solids, then a supplemental 'Gallons per day 'Capital Facilities Charge as adopted by separate Ordinance of the District 'Pounds per day 158181 Excess Capacity Charge for the additional loadings will be assessed and collected using the prevailing Capital Facilities Charge. No adjustments will be made for actual use below that projected when the fee was calculated. Section 2: Severability. ff any provisions of this Ordinance or application to any person or circumstance are held invalid by order of court, the remainder of this Ordinance or the application of such provision to other persons or other circumstances shall not be affected. Section 3: Judicial Action to Challenge This Ordinance. Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or nullify this Ordinance shall be brought within 120 days of the effective date of the Ordinance. Section 4: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective July 1, 1995 Section 5: Certification. The Secretary of the Board shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the District as required by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held , 1995. 300DUW17 6 W18 1 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT NO. 3 Item NO. (26): Consideration of the following actions relative to Los Alamitos County Water District's request for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3: (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file letters dated March 9, 1995 and June 8, 1995 from the Los Alamitos County Water District requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. (b) Verbal report of General Counsel (c) Presentation by Los Alamitos County Water District (d) Discussion (e) Consideration of motion denying request of Los Alamitos County Water District or- (f) Consideration of motion approving request of Los Alamitos County Water District Summary We have received a request for representation on the District No. 3 Board of Directors from the Los Alamitos County Water District (copy attached). The General Manager has previously addressed this issue with Mr. Martin and a copy of his letter, which included an opinion by General Counsel, is also attached. Recommendation Information item only. wxe ■V���/ V�����/� WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM LL O s A L A M I T O S C O U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T March 9, 1995 Mr. John Cox, Joint Chairman County Sanitation Districts of Orange County PO Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Mr. Cox: The Los Alamitos County Water District is the sewage collection agency for Rossmoor, Los Alamitos and portions of Seal Beach. Our sewage is transported and treated by your District. We are interested in representation on your District's Board. We are requesting to address the Board. Please advise us of a convenient date when we can be on the Agenda. If you have any questions, please contact our General Manager, Sandra Montez at (310)431-2223. Thanks for your assistance in `✓ arranging for this Agenda item. Sincerely, ��aa os�Martin� President 3243 Katella Avenue • P.O. BOX542 a Los Alamitos, Californla90720 a 310431 -2223 -BOARD OF DIRECTORS- ARLYSS M BURKETT ART DE BOLT JOSEPH C MARTIN WILLIAM C POE JACK W. ROSENTHAL Legal Councit Rourke,Woodrufa SPradlin Engineer: Boyle Engineering Corp SJ \V M17= WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM L 0 8 A L A M I T O S C O U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T June 8, 1995 Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 Dear Mr. McIntyre: The Board of Directors of the Los Alamitos County Water District requests approval to address the Board of Directors of District No. 3, after your normal June 28, 1995, Board meeting. Because our District encompasses a portion of Orange County, City of Seal Beach, City of Cypress, and the whole of the City of Los Alamitos, we express interest in having a representative of the District sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. We look forward to confirmation of this request for our attendance. Sincerely, C �a�pC. Martin President 3243 Katella Avenue • P.O. Box 542 a Los Alamitos, California 90720 a 310 431-2223 BOARD OFD/RECTORS ARLYSS M. BURKETT ART DE BOLT JOSEPH C MARTIN WILLIAM C POE JACK W. ROSENTHAL Legal Counclk Rourke,Woodruff&Spradlin Engineer: Boyle Engineering Corp h�"YIT�i10h0+gt COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 9272E-8127 �j 10844 ELLIS. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 _'III "4hhcE cW (714)962-2411 April 4, 1995 Joseph C. Martin, President Los Alamitos County Water District 3243 Katella Avenue Post Office Box 542 Los Alamitos, CA 90720 Dear Mr. Martin: Thank you for your March 9, 1995 letter expressing interest in having a representative of your agency sit on the County Sanitation Districts' governing Board. Our General Counsel previously reviewed this subject and issued an opinion as evidenced in the enclosed copy of a memorandum dated November 2, 1993. County Sanitation District No. 3 was originally organized and is presently structured under Section 4730 of the Health & Safety Code of the County Sanitation District Act, and therefore membership is limited to representatives from each City and each Sanitary District within County Sanitation District No. 3 boundaries, together with the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors. The present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Board of Directors of District No. 3. If the Board of Directors of District No. 3 wants to consider reorganization, a Resolution of Intent must be adopted to establish the body in accordance with Section 4730.1. A time and place must be established to hear objections to the proposal and thereafter, the intent must be published and a hearing conducted. After the hearing, the Board may order the governing body (Joint Board of Directors) to be constituted in the reorganized manner. However, you should be aware that the County Sanitation Districts in the past year have made some major changes in the makeup of the Boards of Directors. In an attempt to reduce costs and streamline the Districts, the Directors recommended that each city have one representative for all Districts. Previously, every city within a district was represented. This resulted in as many as five directors from each city because there were five districts within a city's boundaries. Every city but two now has only one Board .. member and the number of Directors has been reduced from 42 to 30. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CAUFORNIA 108 <EWS AVENUE Joseph C. Martin r.0.BOX 0127 Page Two FOUNTAIN VALLEY.MFORNIA 02920 Aprll4, 1995 914102Qan If, after reading the above, you still wish to pursue representation on the County Sanitation District No. 3 Board, please give me a call and we can discuss it further. Sincerely, Donald F. Mclntyre� General Manager DFM:jt vmdw%gmWWO4O495.11 Enclosure c: General Counsel Directors, District No. 3 Cecilia L. Age, Cypress George Brown, Seal Beach John Collins, Fountain Valley Burnie Dunlap, Brea James Flora, La Habra Don R. Griffin, Buena Park Victor Leipzig, Huntington Beach Wally Linn, La Palma Pat McGuigan, Santa Ana Margie Rice, Midway City Sanitary Dist. Julie Sa, Fullerton Sal A. Sapien, Stanton Sheldon S. Singer, Garden Grove Sanitary Dist. Roger Stanton, Board of Supervisors Charles Sylvia, Los Alamitos Bob Zemel, Anaheim LEGEND• ELI City of Seal Beach ® Orange County (ROssmOO . ® City of Cypress - I ® City of Los Alamitos M ■ City Boundary ..... Y W W /� �nII1ILI�I v :ay 0 � • LI F::•• •. . c•Ct �7 \ iriTci: is "�'{•• has✓ JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 DISTRICT 7 Agenda Item (33): Consideration of Resolution No. 95-74-7, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, to Calfon Construction Inc., in the total amount of$1,391,195.00. Summary The Lemon heights Sewer, Contract Nos. 7-3 and 7-3A were constructed in 1962. The 1989 Master Plan recommended the 8-inch and 10-inch sewers to be replaced with 12-inch or 15- inch parallel and/or replacement sewers. Surcharges in the system during the 1993 and 1994 rainy seasons have forced this project to proceed ahead of the planned replacements. The Board approved a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in August 1993 for the preparation of a project report to study the effects of surcharging the system and revisions of the drainage boundaries due to the abandonment of some of the Sanitation Districts No. 7 (CSD 7) pump stations in the Tustin Hills area and for the preparation of subsequent plans and specifications for the parallel and replacement of portions of the Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22. The project report recommended to mitigate the high rain water infiltration by increasing the proposed sewer replacement sizes to 15 or 18-inches. Four residents have accepted the Districts offer to have their sewer laterals constructed under this contract and have signed reimbursement agreements for the costs, which were approved by the Board of Directors on April 26, 1995. The County of Orange has recently realigned and widened Newport Boulevard in the vicinity of the CSD 7, RA-14 Sewer and now there are two manholes located within the landscaped area. The Districts staff has prepared plans and obtained an Encroachment Permit from the County of Orange to construct truck landing pads and a driveway to reestablish access. The Districts staff has included this project with Contract No. 7-22 because considerable savings can be realized due to the close proximity of the work areas and the fact the truck landing pads could be constructed with excess materials from the sewer project. Staff Recommendation to Joint Board of Directors On May 23. 1995, eight bids were received from a high bid of$1,979,877.50 to a low bid of $1,391,195.00, submitted by Calfon Construction , Inc. Staff recommends award of said contract to Calfon Construction, Inc, for their low bid of$1,391,195.00. The Engineers estimate for the construction of said project was $1,672,475.00. 0633 t May 24, 1995 STAFF REPORT DISTRICT 7 Approve Plans and Specifications and any Subsequent Addenda Approve Reimbursement Agreements and Authorize General Manager to Award Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk. La Calina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22 and Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24. Summary The Lemon Heights Sewer, Contract Nos. 7-3 and 7-3A, was constructed circa 1962 to serve the area generally bounded by Newport Boulevard, La Calina Drive and Skyline Drive. The Districts' 1989 Master Plan found much of the Lemon Heights Sewer system hydraulically deficient, requiring parallel or replacement sewers to meet future needs. The 1989 Master Plan recommended the 8-or 10-inch sewers be relieved or replaced with 12- or 15-inch parallel and/or replacement sewers. Surcharges in the system, particularly in the 1992-93 and the 1993-94 rainy seasons, have forced this work ahead of planned schedules. High infiltration of rainwater occurred. Smoke tests performed on portions of the system found a few illegal yard drains connected to the sewer system. These connections have been corrected. The main problem is due to the location of the sewer in a low-lying area, which results in rainwater infiltration. In June 1993, the Directors authorized the Selection Committee to solicit proposals and negotiate a Professional Services Agreement for the preparation of plans and specifications for the Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22. In August 1993, the Directors approved a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation for design and construction services for Contract No. 7-22. The first phase of the design was to prepare a Project Report to review the hydraulic capacity findings of the 1989 Master Plan, incorporate changes in the drainage area boundaries, and to mitigate against high rainwater infiltration. The "bottom line" of the Project Report is an increase in the recommendation pipe sizes to 15 inches in the case where the original recommendation was 12 inches, and to 18 inches in those cases where the original recommendation was 15 inches. The increased sizes are not intended to increase sewage rapacity of the system but are only a design measure to mitigate the local rainwater infiltration problem and prevent possible sewage spills. In September 1994, the Districts approved a Reimbursement Agreement for the County of Orange Environmental Management Agency (EMA) to do a road resurfacing project on Skyline Drive and Arroyo Avenue, and an EMA road widening project that was to follow the Districts' project. The street widening work has been dropped, due to the County of Orange bankruptcy; `, but the County has requested the street resurfacing work be kept as a separate bid item. d Many of the residents along the alignment of this project are still using a septic tank sewage systems. As a public service to these residents, the Districts' staff surveyed the non-permitted residents to see if they wished the Districts to manage the construction of a sewer lateral to their property line, within the scope of this contract, under the terms of a Cost Reimbursement Agreement. Four residents have accepted the Districts offer and the signed Reimbursement Agreements have been obtained and approved by the Board of Directors on April 26, 1995. The County of Orange has recently realigned and widened Newport Boulevard in the vicinity of Cowan Heights Drive. The County Sanitation District No. 7 (CSD 7), RA-14 Sewer was located in the old alignment of Newport Boulevard and now has a portion of the sewer located within a landscaped area. Two manhole frame and covers are now located in a dirt area next to a bike path. The Districts staff has prepared plans and has obtained an Encroachment Permit from the County of Orange to construct truck landing pads and a driveway approach to re-establish access to the two manholes in the landscaped area. A Districts' maintenance vehicle will damage the landscaped area and have to back up a considerable distance, without these modifications. The Districts staff has included this project, estimated cost of$5,000.00, with Contract No. 7-22 because considerable savings cen be realized. The Contractor can literally use excess materials from Contract No. 7-22 to construct the two truck landing pads in Contract No. 7-24 and omit additional mobilization costs because of the close proximity of the two work areas. r. MAJOR COST TABLE DESCRIPTION: Current Current Current Expended To Date: Budget Consultants Construction Date(3)' Costs/ Contract Estimate Date Date (4)• 1 • DESIGN: CONST.: Consultant Cost $100,000 $82,880 WA $72,668 0 Design Staff Cost $42,000 $42,000 WA $17,433 WA Construction Contractor $1,550,000 $1.672,475 $1,391,195 0 0 Costs(5) Construction Staff $78,000 $78,000 $78.000 WA $23,729 Casts Agreement Costs WA FREE FREE FREE FREE Permit Costs(2) WA $300 WA $300 WA Total Costs: $1,770,000 $1,875,655 $1,469,195 $90,401 523,729 'NOTES: (1) Includes all appmsed changes N original PSA (2) Paid under'Design Stan CosP (3) Includes all approved changes to original budge! (4) Includes all approved changes b original corNacl (5) Jab Plan revision pending rar pt of Contractors bid On April 26, 1995, the Districts approved plans and specifications for said contract. On May 23, 1995 eight bids were received. The bids ranged from a high of$1,979,877.50 to a low of $1,391,195.00 submitted by Calfon Construction, Inc. The engineer's estimate was $1,672,475.00. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends award of the contract to Calfon Construction, Inc. for their low bid of $1,391,195.00. SR06-07% COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS May 24, 1995 Al ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 11:00 a.m. 2 Addendum 10844 Ews AVENUE R0.eox a127 / FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728.8127 BID TARIII ATION P1 41 9 9 2 2411 Contracts Nos. 7-22 & 7-24 PROJECT TITLE: Parauwl and Rwnlarwmont of Pnrtinne of I amnn Heights R ,htnmk gPwPr I a rnina nr"va♦n Newport Rn elwvard rnntrart No 7_99, and Manhnla Hpightc nr va rnntrart Nn 7_94 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Hill AVwnna, S F Skyl'na ni vp Arrnyn Avenue and Foothill Rn davard ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $1 R79 47R47s BUDGET AMOUNT: at ssn On TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID 1. Calfon Construction, Inc., Rialto, CA $1,391,195.00 2. C. K. Pump and Dewatering Corp., Long Beach, CA $1,472,173.60 �f 3. Albert W. Davies, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, CA $1,508,000.00 4. Southern California Underground Contractors, Inc., Brea, CA $1,541,895.00 5. Simich-Masanovich, A Joint Venture, Arcadia, CA $1,645,769.00 6. Fleming Engineering, Inc., Cerritos, CA $1,691,519.00 7. Mike Erlich & Sons, So. El Monte, CA $1,797,990.00 S. Colich & Sons, Gardena, CA $1,979,877.50w • Corrected Total have reviewed the proposals submitted for the above project and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. I, therefore, recommend award to Cation Construction, Inc., in the bid amount of $1,391,195.00 as the lowest and best bid. Jr Cam' der ohn D. Linder' Director of Engineering �Ea SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 -7:30 P.M. ._.................._............................................................--------------'-'...............................................................------ In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts'Administrative Offices not less f than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the i Committee for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted in the manner as above, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. ................_............._............................_............._............._........_........_..._..._........_...................................... ..... (19) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any: (a) Consideration of motion authorizing consideration of Item (19)(c) listed below which arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda and which requires action at this time pursuant to authority of Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(2). (b) Verbal report of General Counsel (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file Summons and Complaint for Unlawful Employment Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 748432, relative to alleged discrimination and personal injuries as a result of Ms. Kaye's termination as a probationary employee, and authorize the Districts' General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the District. JIWP�G9A5 W AWARD OF ARBITRATORS FEBRUARY 24. 1994 Cooper entitled to recover from Districts all costs for labor, parts and materials to commence and complete disassembly repairs and restoration of engines, as follows: Labor $1.324,039.00 Parts $ 263,852.00 Consultants $ 258,005.00 Expenses $ 175,709.00 Field Support $ 40.779.00 Contested Charges $ 36,000.00 $2,098,384.00 Districts entitled to recover from Brinderson all costs for labor, materials, overhead and consultants, as follows: Labor $ 200,388.01 Materials $ 166,033.01 Charles Evans $ 570,063.00 AETC $ 200,069.64 KARS' $ 200,343.92 Overhead $ 151,407.42 $1,488,305.00 Districts also entitled to recover from Brinderson the sum of $2,098,384.00, which the Districts paid to Cooper. SUMMARY Brinderson to Pay CSDOC $2,098,384.00 $1,488,305.00 Subtotal: $3,586,689.00 Interest on Award $ 160,233.25 Total: $3,746,922.25 Payment from Home $1,000,000.00 Payment from Industrial Indemnity $1,000,000.00 Brinderson Off-Set $ 946,726.48 Payment from Allianz $ 800,195.77 $3,746,922.25 Joint Works Operating Fund Budget Recommendations 1995-96 Detail (A) (a) (C) (D) (E) Budget Description or Aunt Title 1993-94 1994-95 1994-95 1995-98 Tergel Acluel Budget Projected Proposed Sawmi, SALARIES WAGES&BENEFITS 1. SALARIES&WAGES 28.692,732 30.755.000 29.100,000 32,283,000 1.375.000 2. RETIREMENT 1,779.W9 2,507,000 2.200.000 3,077.000 12.000 3. WORKERS COMP 225,000 225,000 225,000 226.000 0 4. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE 39.994 75.000 43.000 75.000 0 & GROUP INSURANCE 3,802.797 3.653.000 3.620." 4.207,000 90.000 6. UNIFORM RENTAL 64,024 100.000 70,000 100.000 10,000 7. TOTAL BENEFITS 5.911.114 S460.000 6.158,000 7.854,000 225,000 S. SALARIES.WAGES,&BENEFITS 34,603,846 37.218.000 35,258,000 39.967.000 1.800,000 9. DIRECT CHARGESCORFANST (6,059.829) (7,000.000) (6.000,0(10) (6.875,000) 0 10. COST ALLOCCORFANST (3.473.962) (3,400.000) (3,800,000) (4.425.01 0 11. W.O.SALARIES&BENEFITS (9,533,791) (10.400.000) (9,800.000) (11.300.000) 0 17 NET J.O.PAYROLL 25.070.055 26.818,000 25.458.000 28.667.000 1,600,000 MATERIALS.SUPPLIES.&SERVICES 13. GASOLINE,DIESEL&OIL 196,133 175.000 175.000 175,000 10.000 14. INSURANCE 1.169.100 1200,000 1.254.000 1.250.000 (100.000) 15. MEMBERSHIPS 54.259 58.000 55.000 58,000 0 OFFICE EXPENSE 16. OFFICE SUPPLIES 141,692 170.000 125.000 203.100 10,000 17. OFFICE AUTOMATION 145.620 150,000 100.000 167.500 0 18. OTHER OFFICE EXPENSES 136,582 115.000 100.000 102,300 0 OPERATING SUPPLIES 19. ODOR CONTROL CHEMICALS 1.366,269 1,460,000 1,036,000 2,103,S00 150,000 20. SULFIDE CONTROL CHEMICALS 908.852 1,120,000 1.640,000 1.715,000 0 21. CHEMICAL COAGULANTS 1,105.595 1,145.000 1,441,000 1,545,000 0 22. LAB CHEMICALS&SUPPLIES 639.576 525.000 44%" 509'M 40,000 23. TOOLS 92,60 112.000 80.000 125.400 2.000 24. SOLVENTS,PANTS.&JANITOR SUP 118,639 170.000 140.000 146,000 0 25. OTHER OPERATING SUPPLIES 218,100 200,000 200,000 207,500 0 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 26. GROUNDSKEEPING&JANITORIAL 235,052 250,000 150,000 213.000 0 27. OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES 95,008 85.000 50.000 150.000 15.000 28. SOLIDS REMOVAL 5.435.971 5525.600 5,700.000 5,425.000 0 29. OTHER WASTE DISPOSAL 110.583 100,000 70,000 140.000 0 30. OXYGEN PLANT OPER&MTCE 494,148 490.000 490,000 510,000 0 31. OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 409.529 375.000 500.000 831.500 13.000 Joint Works Operating Fund Budget Recommendations 1995-96 Detail Budget Da=Plion or nt Tiffe IN3-94 1994-95 1994-95 1995-M Target Atlual Budget Projeded Proposed Savings PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 32. LEGAL SERVICES 428,570 6M.000 720.000 fiW,000 0 33. AUDIT B ACCOUNTING 92,404 90,000 90,000 70,WO 15,000 N. ENGINEERING 7,003 64,000 50.000 289.000 109,000 35. OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 45,329 400,000 600,000 553.600 0 PRINTING 6 PUBLICATION 36, REPRODUCTION-IN-HOUSE 203.167 210.000 250,000 219,100 6.000 37. PRINTING OUTSIDE 46,044 %000 26.OW W,5D0 10,000 38. PHOTO PROCESSING 30,850 35.000 20.0011 32,70D 1,000 39. NOTICES BADS 25.278 35,000 30.000 29,500 0 RENTS 8 LEASES 40. OUTSIDE EQUIPMENT RENTAL 146,302 90.000 70,000 109,000 4,000 41. DISTRICT EQUIPMENT RENTAL 109.969 125.000 150,000 126,700 6,000 REPAIRS 8 MAINTENANCE 42. MATERIALS 2,659.435 3.200,000 3,000,= 3.375,900 150,000 43. SERVICE CONTRACTS 431,976 475,000 434,000 834,000 0 RESEARCH 8 MONITORING 44. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 1,645,664 2,400,000 2.270.000 2,375,000 0 45. AIR QUALITY MONITORING 47.265 20 ." 1M.000 165,W0 SO= 46. RESEARCH 384.150 450,000 4130,000 665,000 0 47. MEETINGS B TRAVEL 61.170 75.000 60,000 134,000 1,000 0. TECH,SAFETY 8 MGMT TRAINING 150.000 175.000 140,DD0 513.500 6,0DD 49. UNCOLLECTABLE ACCOUNTS (1,831) 25,0W 10,000 15,000 S,OW UTILITIES 50. DIESEL FOR EMERG GENERATORS 31.251 95.000 20,000 25.000 0 51. POWER 1,273,645 1 100,0D0 1,000,000 1,075.000 125,000 52. -NATURAL GAS 1.787229 2.030,000 1200,000 1,400,WD 150,000 0. TELEPHONE 139.141 140,DD0 100,000 125,5D0 15,000 54. WATER 673,885 550,000 994,000 750.OD0 50,000 OTHER EXPENSES 55. FREIGHT 72.810 75.WO W.000 79,700 14,OW 56. GENERAL 2M,922 300,000 2M.000 282,OD0 2.= 57. AOMO OPERATING FEES 260.034 225.000 200,0W 250,000 0 58. SAFETY SUPPLIES 200.000 3DO.000 200,000 257.WD 500 59. PRIOR YEARS EXPENSE (76.742) 25,000 180.000 20,0W 0 so. OTHER NON-OPERATING EXPENSE 71.962 60.000 70,000 94,500 0 61. TOTAL MATL,SUPPLIES,S SERVICES 24.190,276 27.024.000 26.417.000 29 M.000 889,500 62. COST ALLOCATION-CORF B OTHER (459,913) (60).000) (549.000) (470.M) 0 63. NET J.O.MAIL,SUPPLIES.B SEW 23.730,363 26.424.000 25.868,000 29,513,000 889.500 64. REVENUE (3,620.154) (3,7W,000) (3,675.000) (3.800,000) 0 65, NET J.O.EXPENDITURES 45.180,264 49.542,000 47.651,000 54,360.000 2.489.600 66 Flows in Million Gallons K322 85.756 88,430 86,688 86.688 67 Cost Permian Gallons 538 578 538 628 599 r JOINT CHAIRMAN'S REPORT JUNE 28, 1995 1) In the General Manager's Board Letter, you all have been invited to take a cruise on the Districts' ocean monitoring vessel, The Enchanter. There are two trips scheduled, Thursday, July 13th and Friday, July 28th, both in the morning between 8 and 11 a.m. This is an excellent opportunity to learn more about the Districts' marine monitoring program. If you would like to go on either of these boat trips, please call Jean Tappan in the General Manager's office. 2) Upcoming Meetings A. The Operations. Maintenance and Technical Services Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, July 5th at 5:30 pm. 1 B. The Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees is scheduled to meet Thursday July 6th. at 4:30 p.m., before the PDC Committee Meeting. C. The Operations. Maintenance and Technical Services Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday June 7th. at 5:30 p.m. C. The Planning. Design and Construction Committee is scheduled to meet on Thursday. July 6th. at 5:30 p.m. D. The Finance Administration and Human Resources Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday. July 12th. at 5:30 p.m. E. The Executive Committee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday July 19th at 5:30 p.m. 2 r , As a reminder, there are no Committee meetings scheduled for August. 3) Members of the Executive Committee should have received an announcement from CASA on the 40th Annual Work Conference in San Diego August 9th through 12th. If you plan to attend, please call Jean in the General Manager's office no later than July 12. 3 C MEETING DATE: Jun 28, 1995 TIME: 7:30 p.m. DISTRICTS:1 2,3. 6,S.1. 11, 138 14 DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS IMORENOI ..... ...... MC GUIGAN . . .. ... . ✓ _ ISOWMANI ........... BAGEAD ............. ff( ICOON ............ RERRFNY . . . .. . ... ✓ PASZLO. ............ BSDIYN ........... ICOONTZI ........... MUPPHV . .. ... . . . . (SCOTT) ............. CW NB ........ Imml ............ . . .. . . . . S ) ............. D ............... J", ISTEINEN ........... STMTON ....... .. MOST ............... DELAY ........... JG IBELUMUE ) ............. DENTS F ......... _ IBARKE ............. DUNLAP ......... DISTRICT. .. (PARKER ............ EMENR .......... IOULLIX ............ COLLMS .......... t IDOWNEV............. EERRYMANE ....... I — (MILLI%SON. ......... MIWIP ........... JG IKRRV)ANDER .A ....... FLPPYMAN ........ — IBARKERI ........... DENTS ............ t (M RSHALL) .......... PLORA .......... (DOWNE ........... DMILAP ENRODE ........ Z IMARSHA.. .......... GRBFM ON........... —_ IDOWNEVI .......... FLORA .ODE ........ IVAiLCHI ............. GULLIHAMM SON ........ (ANDENO). ......... ROM ............ MARCH ............. MMIG ..OND ...... (MORENOI........... MCOUIOAN ........ . IBAUERI . . ........... LOIN . ......... MORAY) ........... MURPHY .......... 'L IMINERI ............. NO . ........... _ INOPBVI ............ M .............. - IMOPENOI ............ MC OUIOAN........ . —_ RLAKETI............ BMOER ......... ICOONRI ............ MARINV .......... nt (STEINEM ........... GUNTON ....... IDUNLAry ............ NBNIRI........... IDALY) ............. 2EMEL ............ JL IEPPERSON)........... PILE ...... — DISTRICTS IPOTTSI ............. ........ (DOTSON) ........... SAM ........... I IDUTSONI ............ GAREN ........... —_ (PARKERI ......... DUNLAP.......... - - RIAKETI............. SINGER ........... IBOWMANI .......... AM .......... STEINER)............. STANTON ......... ILAQLOI ........... GROWN ......... ISTANTONI ........... STEINER .......... — ISCOTR ............ COLLMS .......... IMILLERI ............. SWAN ............ IANDERSONI ......... ROM ............ - - IWAHLSTROMI ........ SYLVIA ........... IMARSHALM ......... OPBFIN ......... IGULLI%SON1 .......... MRASW........... IBAUER) ............ ulna ........... JG IDALYI .............. ZEMEL ........... � — IMINER) ............ LIMN ............. Je — IMORENO.......... .. MCRSGAN ...... — (EPPERSONI.......... RICE .. ... STAFF OTHERS ...... INONBYI SA ANDERSON WOODRUFF HASENSTAB I DEMIR...... ISTEINEry ... .. .... bTANTON .......:: HONK . ... J/ KNOPF ... IWAHLSTROMI . . . .. .. SYLVIA ......... JONK ..... LEE...... IDALYI ZEMEL .......... KYLE ..... LMOSTROM LINDER .... J/ NIXON...... CM DISTRIKT6 MTYAE.. SHAW...... Imm ............ .. MMY. ........... � MCNELLY .. STONE .....� ISTANTOM ......... . STEINER........... DOTER ... ........ IDEBAYI ........... . COX ............. STREED ... jAC. .......... � DISTRICTS TOMES ... JL .......... _ (PERRY( RPRVfMN......... VINCENT... . .. .. . . . . . /�///}r�•(��/ (COX) .............. DEBAY............ WINSOR (STANTON) .......... STEINER........... DISMICT7(WARD) ......... .. . HAMMONO......... �j,(L`(w /• N. (WARD) ........... . HAMMOND. ....... _ ICOXI ............. . DEMY ............ `/`- (KRIM ........... . FERRYMAN......... '✓ /ALPA/f� /' k . (MORENOI ........ .. . MCGUIGAN ...... L ICOONTLI ........... MURRIV ........ ISTANTONI .......... SIEINER DISTRICT Iv, (BAUERI ............ LID DETTL ...... - __ (BAUERI ............ STANTONO ....... �: ISTEINERI ........... BTAN ......... DISTRICT 13 (WELCH( . .. ... . .. . .. OVLLIXSON ........ (DALY) . . . ... .. . . ZEMEL . . . . . . . . .. ICOONTZI . . . . .. . . . . . MUPPHY . . . . . . ...: ( . . . . .. . . . . AIRIER. . . . . . . .. _ (STANTON)STANTO . . . .. . . . . . STEINER. . . . . . . .. _ DISTRICT 14 IPOTTSI . . . . . . . . . . . . �YiLYMN►. . . ..... ICOONR) . . . . . . . . . . . MURPHY . . . . . ..... (WARD) . . . . . . . . . . . . HAMMOND . .. ...... Jge — ISTANTONI . . . . . . . . . . STEINER. ........:: DLI02 (MILLER) . . . . .. , . . . . . SWAN . ......... 051 2619S PUBLIC SIGN-IN SHEET COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY June 28 , 1995 BOARD MEETING NAME ORGANIZATION FIRM Please Print Please Print Pz-A ELE So L 1If 2 I C- 05120 c. 06/28/96 -JOINT BOARD MEETING #2 - Roll Call JC: I don't believe we have a Chair or Chair pro tem in District 14, 7 & 14, Jim, you can be Chair of both of them tonight. #6 - Report of Joint Chair JC: You'll notice in the General Managers board letter that all of you have been invited to take a cruise on the Districts' ocean motor vessel The Enchanter. Two scheduled trips, Thursday July 13 and Friday July 28 in the morning between 8 a.m. and 11 a.m. This is an opportunity that many of you have asked about participating in, so if you'd like to go, call Jean Tappan in the General Manager's office and let her know about that. Any other questions about this item? All right. Upcoming meetings: Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee -Wednesday, July 5, 5:30 p.m. Ad Hoc Committee on Space Utilization for Administrative Employees -Thursday, July 6, 4:30 p.m. before the Planning Committee meeting Planning, Design and Construction Committee -Thursday, July 6, 5:30 p.m Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee -Wednesday, July 12, 5:30 p.m. Executive Committee - Wednesday, July 19, 5:30 p.m Our next board meeting is scheduled for July 26, same time same place and my question about that is, it is the same time as the league meetings, some of the state league meeting in Monterey, so would you raise your hands of those who are going to the state league meeting and won't be here? Three, OK. We were just checking to see whether it was a problem, I don't think it's a big enough problem so we will hold the meeting the board meeting will be held on the 26th at 7:30 p.m. As a reminder, there are no Committee meetings scheduled for the month of August. There will be a board meeting in the month of August. Members of the executive committee should have received announcement from CASA about the annual work conference in San Diego August 9-12, and if any of you who are on the executive committee, you need to call Jean Tappan in the General Manager's office no later than July 12. It's important for many of you to know if you're not aware of it, this agency has been a major player in CASA for a number of years. Tom Woodruff will be president of the CASA board next year. Both staff and electeds have been involved in this program, electeds who have been the chairs of the various districts. I serve as chair of the directors committee and I'm on the planning committee and several other committees. Sal just got on the water committee and has been participating but other members of the board here who used to participate aren't here any longer. It's valuable to have you get involved especially if 1 you're going to be around for a while, Don Brickman has been involved in a number of committees up there and activities and does participate. We just wanted to call it to your attention if you aren't aware of it. It is not unlike,just to put it in reference, a league of cities kind of program which many of us have been involved and we get involved in state legislative issues and many regulatory issues that have an impact on this district. Any questions about that? Don, do you have anything to add? You've been a key player in this over the years. There are workshops that are quite informative about how different aspects of sanitation operations work and they are a useful point of view. Let's move then, do you have a General Manager's report at this time, or Counsel. TLW: There's two items of litigation. One is going to be in closed session with District 3, Chair Sapien has requested review of that. And there is a supplemental agenda an item, it's a receipt of a summons and complaint that needs to be added to the agenda. It came in after the agenda was posted and the answer is due prior to the next board meeting and I prefer questions or concerns about that matter addressed in closed session. I believe on item 14 about the bankruptcy and the County's Commingled Investment pool--the commingled investment pool committee had a meeting this morning and when we reached that point in the agenda for some questions, I'll have some comments. #7 - Minutes JC: I will deem those approved unless there are any objections. Seeing none, they are approved. #8 - Ratification of Claims JC: Item 8 is ratifying claims. Penny. #9 -Consent Calendar JC: Item 9A-9F I'll entertain a motion. Motion, second, any opposition. Consider that unanimous. #11 - nominations for joint chair JC: It's that time of year again. It seems like its gone so fast as you may recall we nominate the joint chair at this session and official elect himther at the next meeting in July and then we do the vice joint chair in the July meeting. So with that I open the nominations. George? George Brown: I nominate John Cox JC: Any other nominations. We always do this everytime. The nominations have to remain open until the next meeting in July so thank you very much for the intent and we'll deal with it then. 2 #12a and 12b 1-13 - minutes of executive committee JC: This is all the agenda items that have been through the 3 committees, Planning, Operations, Finance and typically we've found ourselves where we beat these to death in other meetings so what I'd like to do here is either have you pull one you want for discussion if there is any, or have a motion to move item a & bl-13. The reason is item 14 has to do with the budget but everything else has to do with contracts that have been through these committees. Is there any item that somebody would like to have pulled for discussion? I move the package, a motion for 12a, b1-13, second? Any opposition? All right. Yes. We've done it, is this too fast? Oh well that was the idea, it save you time here, Sal. That's unanimous, then. #12b(14) JC: It has to do with a roll call motion approving the budget and I think, Don, did you want to make a comment about this before we gel into it? As an overview, we have, in each of the committees, reviewed the budgets and gone through them one by one. The items that we did not deal with, summarized here are all the individual districts budgets, so I'm jumping to 15 aren't' I? DFM?: You have a handout tonight that's a one page piece of information that is additional to your budget itself and it really reflects some debate and discussion at several committee meetings where we wanted to focus really on our major benchmark for the next years' operation. You'll see from the back page lower right-hand $599 figure which is the estimated cost of treatment of a million gallons of wastewater for next year. That's up some from the current year. It is going to be the subject of a great deal of discussion by all hands. I'll be making a presentation to every employee in the district about the budget, be giving them a summary handout on the budget and we'll be focusing their attention on this item. It's the way that we can begin to talk about how each employee can contribute to keeping that cost down or even reducing it, and that is the whole purpose of bench marking--to compare your costs to established trends and so you'll be hearing a lot more about that through the year because we'll be spending a lot of time talking about it and hopefully at the end of the year we can come to you and say we beat that considerably because we have employees contributing to solutions about how to do that. The only area that, as John said, we've not spend a lot of time on are the districts budgets, which are item 15, so if you have any questions there Gary can help you with them. But we've certainly have spent a good deal of time at all the committees with the budget. JC: Any questions about the budget? Jan? DEBAY: (unintelligible) JC: Gary, could you answer that? STREED: 19 is the odor control chemicals, and the current year budget, we're talking 3 , about columns B & C, is that the one, or C & D, projected this year and proposed for next year. There are several chemicals involved in that and the price on each of those chemicals has gone up. In the case of the chemical we use the most for odor control is caustic soda right now. The last bid that we got just a month or so ago was a 50% increase in the unit cost on that chemical. We are saving money, and we are also exposed to far less of a risk and the chlorine is out of the budget at this point. Ed's group is spending quite a bit of time evaluating alternatives to using the chemicals that we use in biofiltralion and the biotrickling filter. We hope that we will not bridge (?) these expenses but that's rather bad luck on the bids on chemicals. The other one was 27? It might be best if I ask Ed Torres to respond. ED TORRES: Unfortunately I don't have that form in front of me. The question was the increase from last year to this year? I believe there are certain services that—I know there is some compounds that we felt we could do better in terms of contracting outside and I think basically there is some level of increased contracting outside over compared years. There are more activities going on inside. For example, we started up the air quality group where we're going to bring in a lot of services which normally would have been in the air quality division budget which has gone down. And there are certain types of analytical services that we are doing more outside than we have in the past. There is kind of a balance in bringing some sluff inside and other stuff outside. JC: Other questions? Yes Chuck. SYLVIA: (re approaches to presenting the budget) JC: I would entertain a motion for item 14 & 15, 14 being the Joint Works Budget in total form; individual budgets are identified here in item 15. Motion, second, any opposition? Oh we have to take them separately? I'm sorry. Let me start over. Let's just deal with 14. Motion, second on item 14, any opposition. Consider that unanimous UNKNOWN: As long as its unanimous, the roll call will reflect the full, that's why we're checking to see if there are any abstentions or... #12bl5 - individual district budgets District 1, Motion, second, consider. District 2, any opposition, unanimous. District 3, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 5, second, any opposition, consider that unanimous, District 6, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 7, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 11, any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 13 any opposition, consider that unanimous. District 14, any opposition, consider that unanimous. 4 #12b16 - resolutions on annual charae JC: Do we have a motion on districts 1-11, second. Those districts, we consider that unanimous if there is no opposition. #13 -delegate authority to PDC...Ad Hoc Committee re Space utilization JC: Any questions or discussion on this item? DFfN: A word of explanation: this is an unusual procedure only because we've had about 2 months delay in pulling this subcommittee together, so in order to not lose any more time with this, we'd like to have the approval of the joint board to delegate this decision to the PDC and to that subcommittee which will meet—its before the next meeting of the PDC and give them the authority to make these decisions. JC: I need a motion, second?Any opposition? Consider that unanimous. #14 - commingled investment pool JC: Tom brought that up. Any questions about that? Why measure R failed? TLW: Gary and I were at the meeting today, Blake was unable to be there, he's back in Washington. Gary went over, he may have his own thoughts and comments. It was basically a review of two or three things, one being of course a little bit of rehash that didn't require any action by the committee. Secondly, discussion relative to some outstanding issues one of which is the disbursement of the interest on the post-petition monies that were in the pool. In order to avoid delay in getting each of the agencies, this district, and all of the cities their checks, pursuant to the agreement, it was agreed that the post-petition interest that was earned on the fund would be set aside for a week or two or whatever because their was disagreement between the County's accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, and the pools accounting firm, Price Waterhouse. It's been going on for approximately two months since the agreement was negotiated. There is still dispute as to the numbers. There is a variance of$15 million. Arthur Andersen says it's $15 million less than Price Waterhouse. The committee today directed Pat Shay and the reps from Price Waterhouse to go to Arthur Andersen and make a demand for at least the uncontested amount and then we'll work around the difference so that money can at least be spun off back to each of our agencies. There is also some withheld monies from the Wall Street firms when they did liquidation they didn't send the check for a hundred cents on the dollar, they held money back—some people called it blackmail, others called it leverage, others called it good financing. Whatever, the...they're looking at seeing how much of that—one of those has been collected and those funds will likewise be dispersed. Perhaps the most important was discussion of Judge Ryan's ruling yesterday relative to the proposed roll over and the agreements related to it that were offered by the County. The investment pool had filed an opposition to the agreement on the basis that it was prejudicial to the rights of all of the poll participants, those rights being the ones that were set forth in the comprehensive settlement agreement. The effect of it was to place the claims of this agency and all of your agencies in a lower hierarchy and others would effectively have been able to move 5 ahead and so the protests and objection to the motion was lodged. It was first brought to Judge Ryan last Friday. He refused to approve—he effectively denied the motion but held it back until Tuesday, yesterday, and in the intervening 72 hours lots of people spend feverish amounts of energy and time and the agreement was restructured substantially. However, there was still a few or a couple of points that were unacceptable to the committee counsel and so the objection was still lodged in part. The Judge did approve the motion of the County yesterday, you probably all read that in the paper, in the revised form of the agreement. The committee this morning voted unanimously to direct its counsel to look at and report to the committee for final decision in a week the filing of the appeal of Judge Ryan's order for the same basic reason as the position of the districts and the cities has been prejudiced in terms of where we stood relative to the comprehensive settlement agreement. Gary, what else did they do? GARY: I don't think you missed a thing. JC: Questions. Jan (unintelligible) TLW: Well, Gary and Don can comment on that. But I think the last word from the committee has been that we don't have anything programmed for at least all of this fiscal year. GARY: We've not anything in the budget for 95-96, no borrowing budget. JC: Anything else? OK #15 - Office Trailer Relocations JC: John Linder, do you want to speak to this briefly, introduce it? LINDER: This is a project that was originally bid in 1993. The contractor went into default immediately after award and notice to proceed to the contract and its been some time. We've gone through a lot of gyrations trying to get this project underway again. The bonding company made arrangements with us through an agreement that they would pick up any costs over and above the original contract. The original contract amount was $199,200. The new bid was $298,700. So they're on the hook for about $100,000. We hope to get a check from them very soon for that. They'll be off the hook. We have a new bonding company with a new contractor, so if there are problems with that contractor, we'll face that at a later date. I don't think we'll have any problems. The action tonight is to approve those—the award to the contractor, Colich & Sons. There were two bidders, the other bidder was $350,000. JC: I'll entertain a motion for item#15b & c. Any opposition. We'll consider that unanimous. 6 #16 - Ordinance 126 JC: Tom, do you want to give a report on this? TLW: The Boards have previously acted on this issue and this relates to the early retirement program that was brought to you by the management and approved by committees and ultimately by your boards. All the documentation was submitted to the County. Our procedure here—the only ordinances we do and really are obligated to do are with respect to our fees, everything is done by resolution. And there is some disagreement was to whether ordinances have the same effect as resolutions. The county retirement system said well, their statute says they have to have it done by ordinance and it's simple enough to correct and re-do and that's all this ordinance does. There are no substantive changes whatsoever and what the boards previously approved and this is put on as agenda item solely to have it re-enacted in the form of an ordinance. I put it in because the Board has approved it to be effective for only those employees who retire between March 1, last past, and this weekend, June 30, and therefore I'd like the ordinance to be effective immediately and for that reason—any questions? JC: Ok, entertain a motion. Move the recommendation, do we have a second? TLW: The motion, first of all though, we do need is to read it by title and then secondly we will require for— I put in your memo by the way--this really is something that all the boards have done, but as you know under our joint agreement we have district No. 1 as your agent. I see no reason doing nine ordinances, bad enough we're doing one, but District 1 is the agent, is the enacting agency, but I would like to see and make sure that there is no other opposition. All the nine districts adopted a resolution unanimously to approve this, but I just point out the protocol and procedure that we're going through so it's a District 1 ordinance and we will require four votes. JC: But we can have a motion for items b, c and d, one motion? TLW: No, we can have a motion for b & c. District 1's motion. JC: OK. Move, motion, second, any opposition? Consider that unanimous. TLW: Motion to adopt it by District 1 JC: Any opposition. No it wasn't your motion. Let go to 13. #17 - Proposed Ordinances establishing excess capacity charge program Districts 13 & 14 JC: Has to do with Districts 13 and 14. These are ordinances establishing excess capacity charge program. This was before the Board last month. We did not have a quorum in Districts 13 and 14 and we couldn't pass it at that time. Two months ago, sorry. Motion on 17 a 1 and 2, second for District 13. Consider that unanimous. 7 District 14, any opposition? Consider that unanimous. Now before we go into closed session I'd like to take care of two other items. #33 -7-22 & 7-24 JC: This should be brief for District 7 and John, do you want to give a brief report on this? He tells me we can do it for District 7 we can dispose of it. LINDER: This project is about a 8,000 foot long line that we will put it that will replace some smaller older lines that are over capacity in the area in Tustin Hills and its starts from about Crawford Canyon and Newport, goes easterly and then south and ends up east of Newport on La Colina. The project was about $1.3 million was the low bid; our estimate was about $1.6, the high bid was about $1.9 1 think there we had about 12 bidders on that so our estimate was right in the middle of the pack. It's a good project, we don't see foresee any problems with it. JC: We could entertain a motion for 33a, b and c. have a motion, second? Any opposition. Consider that unanimous. #19 -supolemental agenda JC: We need to address--Tom, do you want to address the motion to bring this as an emergency item? TLW: Yes, we do need this--this is the item I mentioned in my report. Summons and complaint was brought in on the 22nd, served on the Districts, so it was after the agenda was prepared. The answer is required to be filed before your next board meeting so we do need to add it to the agenda under provisions of the Brown Act.\ JC: So I have a motion to consider, second, any opposition to that? OK. Item No. 19, Tom do you want to give us a report on that. TLW: Yes, this is a summons and complaint that has come in, it's an action claiming employment discrimination. I've reviewed it carefully and was aware of it from a long time back. There was a clerical employee, secretary, employed in the Board Secretary's office, and as with every employee of the Districts was probationary, and after about five weeks was terminated upon the determination of the Board Secretary and the Personnel office that the candidate or employee simply did not have the skills requisite for the position. The only wrinkle to it is the woman claims that it was because she was pregnant and that was why she was let go. We were aware of it, my office was aware of it from the outset. I've talked to everybody involved and I'm convinced that there is no valid basis for the action and we've made no progress in being able to reach any understanding with the claimant or her attorney. So it is recommended that the action to be received and filed and if there are any questions, I'd like to review in closed session, otherwise the actions on the agenda. JC: Motion, second, any opposition. That's unanimous. One other comment here from 8 Don. DFM: Peer brought to my attention that we've got probably a strange face on the—new face—that is not Bob Dolan with a new haircut—that's Mark Esquer who is here because Bob is on vacation. I wanted you all to know who he is, although some of you who took the tour recently heard him make an excellent presentation. JC: Welcome Mark. Thank you. With that, we will go into closed session. Just for everybody's awareness here, we do have one more item for District 3 but we're going to take that after closed session on Los Alamitos. We just have to get rid of this for a minute. #26 - Los Alamitos County Water District request for reoresentation on the Board of Directors of District 3 JC: Ok. Let's begin on item no. 26 for District 3, but all of you here are here to listen. (unknown DFM?) Mr. Chair, you have all been informed previously that Mr. Joseph Martin's interest in discussing with you representation on this board. We have been in communication with him over the last several months. He has discussed this with his board, some of whom I think are here, and they wanted to appear before you tonight and inform you of their interest. MR. Martin: Thank you. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much for allowing me to address you and thank you Chair and manager. My name is Joe Martin, and I'm a Director for the Los Alamitos County Water District. We're requesting District 3 to review and consider allowing Los Alamitos County Water District to have a seat on your board. The reason for this is: going by his—description of our district, Los Alamitos, by the way, I'm not long-winded. This isn't going to take very long. Los Alamitos County Water District was founded in 1952 to provide wastewater (sic) in the Los Alamitos area. At that time, Los Alamitos was unincorporated. Since that time, it is incorporated in '54 and '60 the water district added by annexation the Rossmoor residential area and the naval base. Today, the district services over 8,000 sewer connections and we have piping size in range from 8-18 inches in diameter. To give you a little idea (unintelligible, difficult to hear). So we're servicing Los Alamitos, Seal Beach and a portion of Orange County. When I made a comparison of another district that is similar to ours I go to Midway City. Midway City, according to the description from ISDOC (?) serves, let me read it. The District provides sanitary and refuse collection for 90 percent of the city of Westminster, and 25 percent of the city of Garden Grove and the unincorporated Midway City area, which is Orange County. So they are in two cities and the county, so they're very similar to us, but yet they have a director on your board, Midway City does, and so does Garden Grove. I received a letter from the Orange County Sanitation, your group, and my understanding from the letter was that the present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Boards of Directors of District 3. And that's what we're asking. Every year we send out an annual report to our constituents, we tell them what new projects are going on, what our budget is, but we have not heard from Orange County Sanitation, and if we were on 9 the Board, we could tell our constituents in our districts what upcoming projects are, where there are problems, what the budget is, if budgets up or budgets down, but people in the Orange County, especially in our district, since we send out this newsletter, would know what's going on currently. In summary, we feel we would like a representative on your board and we really think that's the way to go. Thank you very much. JC: Questions, Don? (could not hear)... Martin: We have, you have a person on the board from Cypress, Los Alamitos, and Seal Beach, but ... JC: Other questions, Sal? Sal: (Spoke about other Sanitary Districts that have been dissolved) Martin: All I can say is, the way Midway City is arranged, I feel it's only right that we be represented the same way. I can't tell you what's going to happen in the future. All know is right now, it's not equal. I'd like to introduce another director on our board, Art Debold. Art: If I could just answer a question regarding...that report has to do with whether multiple water or sanitary districts, serving the same community, in other words, not multiple cities within one water district, multiple districts within one community that those should be absorbed by that community and formed into one—not the other way around. We have downsized. We have one district serving 3 or 4 communities--- UNKNOWN (JC?): There are several issues thought relative to downsizing that's been put forth, and the one Sal's referring to is downsizing the membership. We have moved from over 42 members down to less than 30 and that's the direction we're hearing, taking away, not adding, and that's what he is referring to, our policy. That goes back to Don's question. Don why don't you stand up we have a few questions here. ?: (not clear) Martin: I saw a copy of the letter I received from Orange County Sanitation Districts and a copy went to Cypress, which means that they must be a board member and I saw a copy going to Garden Grove, and yet they're in the Midway District, so the district is overlapping there. JC: A question from George, well, I'm sorry, John, the question is why should we duplicate representatives. We already have reps from cities in your area; why should we also have a rep from the sanitation districts. That's not the case in other water districts. Maybe that a relationship of the representatives from your area, not necessarily being on the board. 10 (inaudible) Martin: Do we have to every time have an invitation to a person that's representing us to get any verbiage out of them. That's not fair. (inaudible) And by the way, this isn't just Los Alamitos, don't get me wrong. 49 percent is from the county, 49 percent of our systems— JC: We have a county representative. We have another question from Sheldon and then Pat. Singer. ..instead of going down... JC: Costa Mesa is another one, not the city. Pat? Pat: (inaudible) JC: I think that we're saying here is that your constituents are being represented by 4 or 5 people here in this room, same constituency. Martin: (inaudible) I think my concern here is...looking for options of how to control sewage treatment...we traveled around looking.....merge into other... JC: John? John Collins:( spoke re opening up communication, but that representation is OK) JC: In fact that's one of the challenges that all special districts is why is there this duplication, if there was one agency you wouldn't have this problem, and its one of the reasons we're trying to simplify this operation and the representation on this operation to make it more cost effective. So what you're proposing is contrary to the very direction that we, and many other people, have been trying to head and there's a real problem with this. This is a district 3 item, I think we've heard enough, do we have an action that we can take and I think there is no question that we can increase communications, you're always invited to attend all of our meetings if you want input, we can provide you on a regular basis with reports of what is going on relative to this district so you have the information to gather. And we have offers for participation at your meetings so I think we're trying everything we can. Motion? Any further discussion? Any opposition? Unanimous. Thank you and we're adjourned. 11 a COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 , 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES JOINT BOARD MEETING JUNE 28, 1995 �`oap\SZRICTS Of�9gG � G c�a a i09pl�cr/N�E ENS\PpP�A ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2.3, 5, 6, 7. 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, was hold on June 28, 1995, at 7:30 p.m.,in the Distrim' Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was called 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: y Pat McGuigan, Chair _ Tad R.Moreno y James M.Ferrymen,Chair pro tom _ Atthur Pent' y Mark A.Murphy _ Jgenne Copper _ Thomas R.SalGralli y Jr.Fork y Roger SMmon _ W Ilixm G.Stainer DISTRICT NO.2: y John Collins, Clair George Scon Daniel T.Welch. Clair pro learn y John M.Gulp ason y Berry Demo _ Bob Bell y Burma Dunlap _ Glenn Parker y Norman 2. Eckemode _ Carol Downey y James H.Flora _ Steve Anderson y Pat McGulgen _ Ted R.Me,em a Mark A. Murphy _ !Dana Connor y Julie Sa _ Chia Noun, y Sheldon Singer _ George L Zlekat y Roger Stanton William G.Steiner y Bob Zem u _ Tom Daly DISTRCT NO.3: _L Sal A.Search,Chair Harry M.coupon y Burnie Dunlap. Chair pro ter _ Glenn Parker 1 Coolie Age Walter Bowman y Gao,ge Brown _ Frank Laulo y John Collins _ George Scon y James H.Flora Slave Anderson 3 Don R.Griffin Patsy Marshall y Victor Leipaig _ Ralph Bauer y Wally Linn _ Eva G.Miner y Pat McGwpan _ Ted R.Marc. y Marpie L Nos _ Grace Epperson y Julie So Chris Noroy y Sheldon Sipper _ George L.Baker y Roger Stanton William G. Stainer _y Clones SYNM Rosen WahlMlam x Bob Zemel Tom Daly DISTRICT NO.5: y Jan CBhay.Chili, John C.Co.,Jr. y William G. Steiner,Clair pro tern Roger Stanton y John C. Car,Jr. — Jan Dehay DISTRICT NO.6: y James M.Penniman,Chair Arden Perry y Jan Deasy, Clair pro hem John C.Car.Jr. y William G.Siemer liogM SMmon DISTRICT NO.7: y Berry Hammond,Chair Mike Were _ Thomas R.Selurelli,Chair We tem y Jim Pons y Jan Deter _ John C.Co..Jr. y James M. FeaYman Anhui Perry y Pat McGuigan _ TO R.Mo era y Mark A.Murpy _ Joame Coonor y William G. Steiner _ Roper Science DISTRICT NO.11: y Vimpr Leipaig• Chair Ralph Bauer y Slid"Dettloff,Chir We ter _ Ralph Baum y Roger Stamon William G.Steiner DISTRICT NO. 13: y John M.Gullixeon, Chir Danel T.Welch x Bob Zemel,Chair pro hem Tom Daly y Mark A.Murphy Joanne Coomx Glenn Parker y Burme Dunlap y Wlliam G.Steiner _ Roper Suntan DISTRICT NO.14: _ Thames R.Shcueelli,Chair y Jim Potts '`slip/ y Mark A.Murphy.Chair pro tam Joanne Coon" y Barry HammaM _ Mike Ward y Willem G.Steiner Roger Suntan y her A. Swan Dactyl Mille, .2. 06/28/95 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary, Cathy Biele, Don Crapnell, Mark Esquer, Gary Hasenstab, Irwin Haydock, Steve Hovey, Ed Hodges, Patricia Jonk, John Linder, Pat McNally, Mike Moore, Rory Nelson, George Robertson, Misha Rozengurt, Gary Streed, Ed Torres, Chuck Winsor, Paula Zeller, OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Mr. Gold, Bill Knopf, Mary Lee, Andre Lissner, Joseph Martin, Mr. Rosenthal, Phil Stone DISTRICT 14 In the absence of Chair Thomas Saltarelli, Director Appointment of Chair pro tem Jim Potts was appointed Chair pro tern of District No. 14. ALL DISTRICTS The Joint Chair advised the Directors that they had Report of the Joint Chair been invited to lake a cruise on The Enchanter, the Districts' monitoring vessel, on July 13 or July 28. The Directors were requested to contact the General Manager's secretary if they were interested in participating. Joint Chair Cox then announced the following tentatively scheduled upcoming meetings as follows: Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee- Wednesday, July 5th, at 5:30 p.m. Ad Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study for Administrative Employees-Thursday, July 6th, at 4:30 p.m. Planning, Design and Construction Committee-Thursday, July 6th, at 5:30 p.m. Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee-Wednesday, July 12th, at 5:30 p.m. Executive Committee -Wednesday, July 19th, at 5:30 p.m. The League of California Cities meeting in Monterey conflicts with the regular July 26th Joint Board meeting. The Joint Chair polled the Directors by a show of hands which reflected three Directors were planning to attend the meeting in Monterey, thus the Joint Board meeting would not be rescheduled. Joint Chair Cox then stated that Executive Committee members should have received an announcement from CASA regarding the annual work conference in San Diego on August 9th through 121h. For those Directors not aware, he stated that the Districts have been a major player in CASA for a number of years and that Directors on the Executive Committee and Districts' staff have been involved in this program. He also mentioned that Tom Woodruff, -3- 06/28/95 �e.✓ General Counsel, would be president of CASA next year. Joint Chair Cox also reported that he currently serves as the Chair of the Directors' Committee, as well as sits on several other committees and Director Sal Sapien was recently appointed to the Water Committee. Many of the other Directors who participated in CASA are no longer Directors and Chair Cox stressed the importance of the Directors on the Executive Committee to get involved in CASA. DISTRICT 1 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 3 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995. the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 6 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 7 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 11 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 13 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -4- O6/28/95 DISTRICT 14 There being no corrections or amendments to the Approval of Minutes minutes of the regular meeting held May 24, 1995, the Chair 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 exhibits "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 1 60 /14/95 ALL DISTRICTS Joint Operating Fund - $1,404,438.38 $538,073.30 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 626,873.39 270,677.09 Joint Working Capital Fund - 226,361.10 196,842.70 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 15,309.90 19,976.94 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 5,032.64 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 11,241.23 52,026.71 DISTRICT NO, 3 - 182,577.61 230,137.88 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 6,901.50 4,458.23 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 0.00 3,402.12 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 8,659.04 4,464.37 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 53,020.33 20,464.11 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 186,212.03 17,295.25 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 2,739.48 2,061.88 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 206.80 2,652.26 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 976.0 9 5,239.1 4 S2,725.516.86 57.372.804.62 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase Order Contract for Rental or Purchase of Emergency That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to receive Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed and file bid tabulation and recommendation and System. Specification No. R-044, to award purchase order contract for Rental or Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc. Purchase of Emergency Disinfection Chemical Metering Pump Feed System, Specification No. R-044, to Prominent Fluid Controls, Inc., for a total amount not to exceed $57,160.00, plus sales tax. -5- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Awarding Purchase of Natural Gas. Specification No. P-160. to Amoco Enemy That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Trading Corporation Resolution No. 95-56, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Natural Gas, Specification No. P-160, to Amoco Energy Trading Corporation, for the discount price of$.0259/MMBTU, for a one year period beginning August 1, 1995. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Su000rtino the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Planning Council (RAPC) Resolution No. 95-57, Supporting the Reconfiguration of the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC); and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Joint Chair, be, and is hereby, appointed as the primary representative and Vice Joint Chair as the alternate representative. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing the General Manager to designate members of the Boards and/or That the General Manager, or his designee, be, staff to attend and Participate in and is hereby, authorized to designate members of various training Programs, meetings. the Boards and/or staff to attend and participate in hearings. conferences, facility inspections various training programs, meetings, hearings, y, and other functions 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 Environment 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 1995-96; and, FURTHER MOVED: That staff be, and is hereby, directed to provide the Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee with a quarterly review of training, meeting and travel expenses incurred. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Annual nominations for Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization The General Counsel briefly reviewed the provisions of the Districts' Rules of Procedure relating to nomination and election of the Joint Chair and Vice Joint Chair. This being the annual meeting fixed by the Boards at which nominations are to be made for the office of Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization, the Secretary then declared the nominations open. .. -6- 06/28/95 Director John C. Cox, Jr., was then nominated as a candidate for the office of Chair of the Joint 1.. 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 Chair will also be held at the regular July meeting. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee That the draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held on May 24, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Planning. Design and Construction That the draft minutes of the Planning, Design and Committee Construction Committee meeting held on June 1, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Operations. Maintenance and Technical That the draft minutes of the Operations, Services Committee Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting held on June 7, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Finance. Administrative and Human That the draft minutes of the Finance, Resources Committee Administrative and Human Resources Committee meeting held on June 14, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file draft minutes of the Executive Committee That the draft minutes of the Executive Committee meeting held on June 21, 1995, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing funding in the 1995-96 CORF Budget for continuing studies in the Orange That the funding of$100,000.00 in the 1995-96 County Regional Water Reclamation Project CORF budget for continuing studies on the Orange County Regional Water Reclamation Project, be, and is hereby, authorized. -7- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-21) Actions re Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1. Job No. Pt-36-2 Verbal report of Director of The Director of Engineering reported that this Enoineerino project was the final of four construction contracts that will improve the ability of existing secondary treatment facilities to treat primary effluent. Mr. Linder then stated that on May 16, 1995, eight bids were received for this project. The bids ranged from a high of$40,427,000.00 to a low of$35,291,000.00, submitted by Margate Construction, Inc., and recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder. The engineer's estimate was $42,300,000.00. Approving Addendum No. 1 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications for Job No. P1-36.2 That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36.2, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. AApprovino Addendum No. 2 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications for Job Not P1-36-2 That Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Awarding Job No. P1-36-2 to Moved, seconded and duly carried: Margate Construction, Inc. That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-58, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-2, to Margate Construction, Inc., in the total amount of$35,291,000.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC95-22) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of That the Planning, Design and Construction Job No. J-33-2 Committee certification of the final negotiated fee relative to the Professional Services Agreement with John Carollo Engineers for design of Main Sewage Pump (MSP) No. 3 Drive at Headworks No. 2 at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-33-2, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-59, approving said agreement with John Carollo Engineers for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $193,100.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -8- O6/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-029) Moved, seconded and duy carried; Adootina a policy for the Control and Containment of Spills in the Districts' owned That a policy for the Control and Containment of and/or Operated Systems Spills in the Districts' owned and/or Operated Systems, be, and is hereby, adopted. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-030) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K.P. That the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Lindstrom. Inc. for environmental consulting Services Committee certification of the final services negotiated fee relative to Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for environmental consulting services to assist staff on NPDES Permit activities; regulatory and legislative liaison activities; and for technical support for sludge management, air quality, reclamation and conservation issues and in connection with CEQA compliance for Master Plan projects, providing for a six-month extension of the agreement, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-60, approving Addendum No. 3 to said agreement with K. P. Lindstrom, Inc. for said services, providing for a six- month extension of said agreement, on an hourly-rate basis for labor including overhead, plus direct expenses, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, with no change in the total authorized maximum compensation of$295,500.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-033) Moved, seconded and duly canned: Approving agreement with SAIC for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Ouffall. That the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Specification No. P-156R Services Committee certification of the final negotiated fee relative to agreement with SAIC for Ocean Monitoring Contract Services for Districts' 120-inch Ocean Outall, Specification No. P-156R, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-61, approving agreement with SAIC for said services, for the period July 1, 1995 to February 28, 1997. with option for two one-year extensions, for an amount not to exceed $1,486,463.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-035) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management That staff be, and is hereby, authorized to issue a District P2-42 purchase order to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in an amount not to exceed $250,000.00 for payment of various fees required by SCAQMD regulations, payable during fiscal year 1995-96, estimated as follows: -9- O6/28/95 Tvoe of Fee Amount Annual Emissions $85,000.00 Operating Permits 50,000.00 CARB Emissions 20,000.00 Compliance Source Testing 20,000.00 Permit & Plan Applications 60,000.00 Miscellaneous 15,000.00 TOTAL $250.000.00 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duty carried: Ratifying Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series Refunding Agreement with That Amendment No. 1 to the 1993 Series PaineWebber Refunding Remarketing Agreement with PaineWebber providing that if the Certificates of Participation are converted to a fixed rate of interest mode, "at the direction of the Bank, the Bank will pay the reasonable[remarketing agent's]fee", be, and is hereby, rated. ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR95-261 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing Districts' Insurance Broker to place All-Risk Property Insurance Coverage That the Districts' Insurance Broker, Robert F. Driver Associates, be, and is hereby, authorized to place All-Risk Property Insurance Coverage for 1995-96, as follows: B'PA A TERMS: All-Risk Insurance including earthquake and flood, personal property and business interruption. Total Asset Value $1,375,032,593 COVERAGE: All-Risk $200,000,000 Earthquake: CSDOC 30,000,000 DEDUCTIBLE: All Perils $25,000 Earthquake 5% Per Unit, $250,000 min. PREMIUM: -$1,358,000 'Plus taxes and fees of$33,456 -10- O6/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR95-29) Actions re External Money Manager and Custodial Services Bank for the Districts' Investment Proaram Approving Professional Services Moved, seconded and duly carried: Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-75, approving Professional Services Agreement with Pacific Investment Management Company, to serve as the Districts' investment manager, and authorizing the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Approving Professional Services Moved, seconded and duly carried: Agreement with Mellon Trust Company That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-76, approving Professional Services Agreement with Mellon Trust Company, to serve as master custodial services bank, and authoring the General Manager to execute said agreement in form approved by General Counsel. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS fFAHR95-301 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Approving revisions to the Management Performance Review Plan (MPRP) That funds totaling $173,000 beyond the 3.0% of �..J Performance Incentive Values payroll Merit Pool Fund approved last year sufficient to address the more critical range position issues now occurring, be, and are hereby, authorized; and, FURTHER MOVED: That a Target Merit Pool Fund of 5.0% of payroll (totaling $453,000)for implementation in July 1996 sufficient to incentivize performance, as recommended by Ernst & Young, be, and is hereby, established; and, FURTHER MOVED: That provision of extensive training to all supervisors and managers in proper administration of the program as recommended by Ernst & Young, be, and is hereby, approved. ALL DISTRICTS (EXEC95-01) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum re Status Report on That the General Counsel's Memorandum dated Proposed Consolidation of Districts June 14, 1995 re Status Report on Proposed Consolidation of Districts, approving, in concept, the consolidation of the Boards, be, and is hereby, received and filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That staff and General Counsel, be, and are hereby, authorized to proceed with additional studies for said consolidation. -11- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS (EXEC95-03) Moved, seconded and duly carried: Authorizing the General Manager to approve expenditures of funds up to That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt $50,0000 for Contracts. Services and Resolution No. 95-62, amending Resolution Purchase Orders, Excluding Public Works No. 95-9, authorizing the General Manager to Contracts novemed by State Law, and approve expenditure of funds up to $50,000.00 for Professional Services Agreements Contracts, Services and Purchase Orders, governed by Resolution No. 95-9 Excluding Public Works Contracts governed by State Law, and Professional Services Agreements governed by Resolution No. 95-9. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS The General Manager referred the Directors to a Approving 1995-96 Joint Works Budgets one-page handout included in their meeting folders. Funds He referred to the$599 figure which is the estimated cost of treatment for a million gallons of wastewater for next year. Mr. McIntyre staled he would be making a presentation to every employee and provide them with a summary handout of the budget. Employees will be encouraged to talk and contribute to reducing and/or keeping this cost down. Directors then questioned the increased cost of odor control chemcals. The Director of Finance reported that there are several chemicals involved and the price on each of those chemicals has gone up. Currently caustic soda is the main chemical used for odor control. This chemical was recently rebid and the costs have increased 50% in the unit cost. Mr. Streed mentioned that the Districts are exposed to far less of a risk and the chlorine is out of the budget at this point. He \. V also mentioned that Technical Services is evaluating alternatives to the chemicals used in biofiltration and the biotrickling filter. It was then moved, seconded and duly carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: George Brown, John Collins, John C. Cox, Jr., Jan Debay, Barry Denes, Shirley Dettloff, Burnie Dunlap, Norman Z. Eckenrode, James M. Ferryman, James H. Flora, Don R. Griffin, John M. Gullixson, Barry Hammond, Victor Leipzig, Wally Linn, Pat McGuigan, Jim Potts, Margie L. Rice, Julie Be, Sal A. Sapien, Sheldon S. Singer, Roger R. Stanton, William G. Steiner, Peer A. Swan, Charles E. Sylvia, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSENT: Cecilia L. Age, Mark A. Murphy That the proposed Joint Operating Budget Funds of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 for the 1995-56 fiscal year, be, and are hereby, approved and adopted as follows: .. -12- O6/28/95 Fund Total Amount �.../ Joint Works OperatingfWorking Capital $ 54,380,000 Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance 307,000 Public Liability Self-Insurance 272,000 Dental Health Plan Trust Self-Insurance 437,000 Joint Works Capital Outlay Revolving 33,530,000 DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 fiscal year budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,809,000 Capital Facilities Fund 10,904.000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 8,872,000 TOTAL $33.585.000 DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving the 1995-96 budget rail vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: �....' Operating Fund $53,245,000 Capital Facilities Fund 60,455,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 24,024.000 TOTAL $137.724.000 DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving the 1995-96 Budoet rail vote: That the District's 1995.96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $65,946,000 Capital Facilities Fund 61,204,000 Construction Fund- 1990.92 22,459,000 TOTAL $149.609.000 ... -13- 06/28/95 DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered (led and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,415,000 Capital Facilities Fund 14.361,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 65. 74.000 TOTAL $33.450.000 DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $12,073,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7.473,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 92. 64,000 TOTAL $22.510.000 DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $21,726,000 Capital Facilities Fund 17,604,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 7,323,000 TOTAL $46.653.000 DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vole: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13.801,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,920,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 5,054,000 Bond & Interest Fund - 1958 33 000 TOTAL $28.806.000 a✓ -14- 06/28/95 DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll �..✓ Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $2,046,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,511.000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 27 000 TOTAL 9 5$ 84,000 DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $3,521,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,601,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 158,000 TOTAL $13.280.000 DISTRICTS 1. 2. 3. 5, 6. 7 & 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal Year 1995-96 That the following resolutions selecting the annual change in California per capita personal income as the cost-of-living adjustment factor, and establishing the annual Gann Appropriations Limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for each District in accordance with the provisions of Division 9 of Title 1 of the California Government Code, be, and are hereby, adopted by the respective Boards of Directors: DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. LIMITATION 1 95-63-1 $2,760,000 2 95-64-2 10.548,000 3 95-65-3 14,521,000 5 95-66-5 2,604,000 6 95-67-6 1,689,000 7 95-68-7 4,605,000 11 95-69-11 3,142,000 Said resolutions, by reference hereto, are hereby made a pan of these minutes. -15- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: �..' Delegating authority to the Plannina. Desian and Construction Committee and the Ad That the Planning, Design and Construction Hoc Committee re Space Utilization Study Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee re Space for actions re Modifications to the Existing Utilization Study, be, and are hereby, delegated Interior Office Spaces in the Administration authority to solicit, negotiate, award and issue Building for the General Management purchase orders to various vendors for Administration and Communication Offices Modifications to the Existing Interior Office Spaces (Specification No. E-256) in the Administration Building for the General Management Administration and Communication Offices (Specification No. E-256), in an amount not to exceed $165,250.00. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported that he and Gary Streed, Status report re County's Comminaled Director of Finance, had attended a meeting earlier Investment Pool that day with the Investment Pool Committee members. One of the issues discussed at the meeting was the disbursement of interest on the post- petition monies that were in the pool. In order to avoid delay in getting each of the agencies their checks, it was agreed that the post-petition interest that was earned on the fund would be set aside for a week or two because of a disagreement between the County's accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, and the Pool Commmittee's accounting firm, Price Waterhouse. There is a dispute as to the numbers, a variance of$15 million, with Arthur Andersen saying it is $15 million less than Price Waterhouse. The Pool Committee today directed Pat Shea and the representatives from Price Waterhouse to make a demand for the uncontested amount to Arthur `a..� Andersen and then work around the difference so that money can at least be distributed to each of the pool members. Mr. Woodruff staled there were also monies withheld by the Wall Street brokerage firms when they liquidated the pool assets. Those sums are being challenged and will hopefully be recovered later. Also discussed was Judge Ryan's ruling of the prior day relative to the proposed roll over of the bonded debt and the agreements related to it that were offered by the County. The investment pool had filed an opposition to the agreement on the basis that it was prejudicial to the rights of all of the pool participants, those rights being the ones that were set forth in the comprehensive settlement agreement. The effect of it was to place the claims of the pool participants in a lower hierarchy and others would have been able to move ahead, thus the protests and objection to the motion were lodged. The Judge did approve the motion of the County on June 27th in the revised form of the agreement. The Pool Committee this date voted unanimously to direct its counsel to consider and report to the Pool Committee for final decision in one week, of the filing of the appeal of Judge Ryan's order for the same basic reason, as the position of the Districts and the cities has been prejudiced because it is contrary to the terms of the comprehensive settlement agreement. -16- 06/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Action re Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos 1 and 2 Specification•No. M-044 (Rebid) Verbal Report of Director of The Director of Engineering reported that this Engineering project was originally bid and awarded in 1993, but the contractor defaulted. In 1994 the contractors surety, Frontier Pacific Insurance Company, agreed to complete the work or accept the Districts' rebid and pay the new contract amount in excess of the original bid amount of $199,200.00. Mr. Linder advised that on June 6, 1995, two bids were received for this project. The bids were for$479,031.00 and $298,700.00, the low bid submitted by Colich & Sons, Inc., and recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder. The engineers estimate for the work was$350.000.00. Approving Amendment to Settlement Moved, seconded and duly carried: Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95.70, approving Amendment to Settlement Agreement with Frontier Pacific Insurance Company, providing for time constraints and Surety's right to perform work. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Awarding Specification No. M4)44 Moved, seconded and duly carried: (Rebid). to Colich Brothers. Inc.. dba Colich &Sons That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 95-71, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Office Trailer Relocations at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Specification No. M-044 (Rebid), to Colich Brothers, Inc., dba Colich & Sons in the total amount of$298,700.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re adoption of Ordinance Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early Verbal Report of General Counsel General Counsel reported that the Boards had previously approved the Early Retirement Program for certain employees and all documentation has been submitted to the County. The County's retirement system requires this program to be approved by an ordinance adopted by the Boards of Directors. He further stated that there are no substantive changes in what was previously approved by the Boards of Directors. Mr. Woodruff then advised that only District No. 1 would be required to adopt the Ordinance as it would be acting as agent on behalf of the other Districts. -17- .✓ 06/28/95 Receive and file General Counsel's Moved, seconded and duly carried: Memorandum dated June 22, 1995 That General Counsel's Memorandum dated June 22, 1995, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. Reading of Proposed Ordinance Moved, seconded and duly carried by unanimous No. 126 vote: That proposed Ordinance No. 126, an Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible Districts' Employees Who Retire Early, be read by title only, and that reading of said Ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived. Adoption of Ordinance No. 126 Moved, seconded and duty carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Pat McGuigan, Chair, James M. Ferryman, Jim Potts, Roger R. Stanton NOES: None ABSENT: Mark A. Murphy That Ordinance No. 126, an Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, California, Providing Additional Service Credit to Eligible �. Districts' Employees Who Retire Early, be, and is hereby, adopted as an urgency measure to be effective immediately. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel reported to the Directors the need General Counsel's Comments Prior to for a closed session as authorized by Government Closed Session Code Sections 54956.9, 54957 and 54957.6 to discuss and consider the items that are specified as Items 18(b)(1) and (2) on the published Agenda. No other items would be discussed or acted upon. ALL DISTRICTS Moved, seconded and duly carried: Convene in closed session pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 and The Boards convened in closed session at 54957.6 8:12 p.m. pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 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. No action was taken re Agenda Item 18(b)(2). ALL DISTRICTS At 8:24 p.m., the Boards reconvened in regular Reconvene in regular session session. �.✓ -18- O6/28/95 ALL DISTRICTS Upon hearing a report of its management Termination of Confidential Employees Unit representatives, the Chair reported that during closed session the Boards of Directors acted to withdraw the formal recognition of the Confidential Unit of district employees and to terminate said unit. All employees that were previously in this recognized unit are transferred to either the management group or the recognized representative unit of District Administrative and Clerical Employees ("DACE"). These actions were approved following meet and confer sessions between Districts' management representatives and the Confidential Unit representatives which resulted in agreement to recommend the actions to the Boards. ALL DISTRICTS Actions re Supplemental Agenda Item relative to Summons and Complaint re Unlawful Employment Discrimination. Jane Kaye vs. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange County Superior Court, Case No, 748432 Authorizing consideration of Moved, seconded and unanimously carried, Supplemental Agenda Item relative to Summons and Complaint re That the Boards of Directors do hereby authorize Unlawful Employment consideration of supplemental agenda item relative Discrimination. Jane Kaye vs. to the Summons and Complaint for Unlawful County Sanitation Districts of Employment Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. County Orange County, Orange County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange Superior Court Case No. 748432 County Superior Court Case No. 748432, relative to �.►/ alleged discrimination and personal injuries as a result of Ms. Kaye's termination as a probationary employee, which was not posted 72 hours prior to the Board meeting date because the need to take said actions arose subsequent to the agenda being posted. Verbal report of General Counsel General Counsel reported that this Summons and Complaint claims employment discrimination. Claimant was employed in the Board Secretays office as a clerical staff employee and, as with every employee of the Districts, was in probationary status for the first six months. After approximately five weeks this employee was terminated. -19- O6/28/95 Receive and file Summons and Moved, seconded and duly carried: Complaint for Unlawful Employment Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. That the Summons and Complaint for Unlawful County Sanitation Districtsof Orange Discrimination, Jane Kaye vs. County Sanitation Counw, Orange County Superior Districts of Orange County, California, Orange Court Case No. 748432 County Superior Court, Case No. 748432, relative to alleged discrimination and personal injuries as a result of Ms. Kaye's termination as a probationary employee, 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 District. DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adiournmenl That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adjoumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. yd DISTRICT 5 Actions re proposed Annexation No. 9- Crvstal Cove State Park Annexation Approving Agreement with the State Moved, seconded and duly carried: of California, Department of Parks and Recreation That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-72-5, approving Agreement with the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, in connection with proposed Annexation No. 9-Crystal Cove State Park Annexation, annexation of a 20- acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. �,d -20- 06/28/95 Receive and (le request for Moved, seconded and duly carried: annexation and authorizina initiation of proceedings re or000sed That the letter dated May 22, 1995, from the State Annexation No. 9- Crystal Cove of California, Department of Parks and Recreation State Park Annexation requesting annexation of a 20-acre portion of Crystal Cove State Park known as the Historic District, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-73-5, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 9- Crystal Cove State Park Annexation to county Sanitation District No. 5). Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. 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 Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 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 Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Actions re Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24 Verbal report of Director of The Director of Engineering reported that this Engineering project is an 8,000 foot long line that will replace smaller, older lines that are over capacity in the Tustin Hills area. Mr. Linder then stated that on May 23, 1995, eight bids were received for this project. The bids ranged from a high of$1,979,877.50 to a low of$1,391,195.00, submitted by Calfon Construction, Inc., and recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder. The engineer's estimate for this project was $1,672,475.00. U -21- O6/28/95 Approving Addendum No. 1 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifications That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Approving Addendum No. 2 to the Moved, seconded and duly carried: plans and specifcations That Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Awarding Contract Nos. 7-22 and Moved, seconded and duly carried: 7-24 to Calfon Construction, Inc. That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 95-74-7, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard at Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, to Calfon Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$1,391,195.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1315 That proposed Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 1315 by title only. -22- O6/28/95 DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adopting Ordinance No. 1315 roll call vote: AYES: John M. Gullixson, Chair, Burnie Dunlap, William G. Steiner, Bob Zemel NOES: None ABSENT: Mark A. Murphy That Ordinance No. 1315, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Second reading of or000sed Ordinance No. 1407 That proposed Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be read by title only; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby, waived, whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No. 1407 by title only. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried by the following Adopting Ordinance No. 1407 roll call vote: AYES: Jim Potts, Chair pro tem, Barry Hammond, William G. Steiner, Peer A. Swan NOES: None ABSENT: Mark A. Murphy That Ordinance No. 1407, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 of Orange County, California, Establishing Excess Capacity Charge Program, be, and is hereby, adopted. DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation Distdct No. 14 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m. -23- 06/28/95 DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carded: �.d Receive and file Summons and Complaint for Subroaalion Recovery. 20th Century That the Summons and Complaint for Subrogation Insurance Company vs. County Sanitation Recovery, 20th Century Insurance Company vs. Districts of Oranae County, at al.. West County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, at al., Orange County Municipal Court, Case West Orange County Municipal Court Case No. 215248 No. 215248, relative to property damage sustained in connection with a Districts'vehicle, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the District's General Counsel, be, and is hereby, authorized to appear and defend the interests of the District. DISTRICT 3 Actions re Los Alamitos County Water Districts' request for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 Receive and file letters dated Moved, seconded and duly carried: March 9. 1995 and June 8. 1995 That letters dated March 9, 1995 and June 8, 1995 from the Los Alamitos County Water District requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. Presentation by Los Alamitos County The Joint Chair recognized Mr. Joseph Martin, Water District - Director of the Los Alamitos County Water District, who stated the Water District was requesting representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3. Mr. Martin stated the areas served by Los Alamitos County Water District are Los Alamitos, Seal Beach and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, providing service to approximately 8,000 sewer connections. In comparison, Midway City Sanitary District serves Westminster, 25% of Garden Grove and the unincorporated area of Midway City. However, Midway City Sanitary District has a representative on District No. 3, but Los Alamitos County Water District does not. He then referred to a letter he received from the Sanitation Districts which stated that the present organization could be revised to change the membership if approved by the Board of Directors of District No. 3. He further stated that every year the Water District sends out an annual report to their constituents, telling them what new projects are going on,what the budget is, but they don't hear from the Sanitation Districts. If the Water District was represented on the Board, they would be able to keep their constituents apprised of projects, problems, budgets, etc. It was then pointed out to Mr. Martin that currently District No. 3 has sixteen Directors, and the areas served by Los Alamitos County Water District has representation on District No. 3 from the cities and Board of Supervisors. Directors also pointed out that W _P4_ 06/28/95 back in 1982 a study done by the Grand Jury recommended only one representative from each agency on the Board to serve and that the Districts have been downsizing the representation on all Districts' Boards. Recently the total number of active Directors had been reduced to 30 Directors from 42 members. Mr. Martin then introduced Art Gold, a Director from the Water District. Mr. Gold stated that the Grand Jury report had to do with whether multiple water or sanitary districts were serving the same community, and that the Water District was serving four communities through one District. Directors pointed out that representation by the Water District would go against current Districts' policy in downsizing and that there should not be duplicate representation for the areas the Water District serves. A representative from each of the cities within their boundaries already has representation on the Board. The Joint Chair also stated that one of the challenges of all special districts is to eliminate duplication of efforts. Deriving request of Los Alamitos Moved, seconded and duly carried: County Water District That the request of Los Alamitos County Water District for representation on the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3, be, and is hereby, denied; and, FURTHER MOVED: That, as amended by Director Don R. Gruen, annual budgets and portions of the annual reports be forwarded to Los Alamitos County Water District, based upon their request, so that there is ongoing communication. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and duly carried: Adioumment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:47 p.m. Secretary of the and Directors of County Sam n i ncts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 1 , 13 and 14 �.d -25- FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126/95 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMSPAID05131/95 POSTING DATE 05/3l/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 144883 AS TECH COMPANY $150,024.31 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10.9-91 144854 A-Z LOGIC SYSTEMS $197.71 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 1"885 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $1.274.98 MECHANICAL PARTS 144886 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSOC. $695.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144887 AMERICAN DIVERSIFIED SILVER $1.485.61 REFUND ECSA DEPOSIT 144888 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE $1.899.00 TRAINING MATERIALS 144889 ANAHEIM SEWER CONSTRUCTION $3,000.00 EMERGENCY SEWER REPAIRS 144890 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $20.87 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144891 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $465.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144892 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $2,47801 NOTICES&ADS 144893 APPLIED BIOSYSTEMS,INC. $2,476.86 LAB SUPPLIES 1MB94 ABC LABORATORIES $2,560.00 LAB SERVICES 144895 ATKINIJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144896 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $574.93 FITTINGS 144897 AWARDS&TROPHIES $26.36 PLAQUES 1N898 BKK LANDFILL $2,376.39 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10$91 1N899 BANANA BLUEPRINT $9,600.54 PRINTING M.0.11-07-94 m 1"900 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $274.43 BATTERIES X 1"901 BAITER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $4.313.52 LAB SUPPLIES s 144902 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $83.84 LAB SUPPLIES 144903 BENZ ENGINEERING,INC. $255.27 COMPRESSOR PARTS 1"904 J&H BERGE.INC. $79.33 LAB SUPPLIES 144905 A BIEDERMAN,INC. $164.79 MECHANICAL PARTS n 144906 BISHOP COMPANY $330.20 TOOLS 144907 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $33.840.51 ENGINEERING SERVICES P141 ~ 144908 BRENNER-FIEDLER&ASSOC..INC. $592.30 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144909 MARK E.BRIGHTLY $3.200.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL W910 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $64,11N.71 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.0.124894 144911 BUSH&ASSOCIATES,INC. $678.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.6-0-94 144912 CH2M HILL $60,365.86 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-31 144913 C.L.TECHNOLOGY $720.00 GAS ANALYSIS SERVICES 144914 CS COMPANY $4,464.36 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1449i5 CALFON CONSTRUCTION $78,231.40 CONSTRUCTION 3.38-2 144916 CALTROL,INC. $498.24 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES W917 CALTEX PLASTICS,INC. $346.40 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144918 CANUS CORPORATION $26.581.95 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 144919 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. 545.18 REGULATOR 144920 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $7,645,00 ENGINEERING SERVICES M.0.3.8.95 144921 JOHN CARDLLO ENGINEERS $431,613.92 ENGINEERING SERVICES P138.P1-36 144922 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION $3.244,00 ELECTRIC PARTS 144923 CENTRAL VALLEY WASTEWATER MORS $100.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 144924 CETAC TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $264.54 LAB SUPPLIES 141925 M.C.KENNICUTT $1.671.00 LAB SUPPLIES 144926 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $1 460 00 PUMP PARTS 144927 COASTAL CHLORINATION $1,008.00 WATER LINE DISINFECTION 144928 COASTALMOTION $1.332.00 MEMBERSHIP FEES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126/95 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0513IMS POSTING GATE 05/31195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144929 COLD SAWS OF AMERICA.INC. $88,76 WELDING PARTS 144930 COLE-PALMER INSTRUMENT CO. $242.58 LAB SUPPLIES 144931 COUCH AND SONS $65.991.00 CONSTRUCTION M.O.2&95 1"932 COUCH&SONS $50,262.06 CONSTRUCTION 11-17-1 144933 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $2,467,48 PUMP REPAIRS 144934 CONNEL GM PARTS I DIV. $139.57 TRUCK PARTS 144935 CONSOLIDATED FREIGHTWAYS $2.335.81 FREIGHT 144936 CONSUMER PIPE $61.20 MECHANICAL PARTS 144937 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $456.66 TOOLS 1"938 CONTROL DESIGN SUPPLY $332.87 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 144939 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $241.29 TRUCK PARTS 144940 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $1,049.35 COMPRESSOR PARTS 144941 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $2,572.78 ELECTRIC PARTS 144942 DAILY PILOT $102.00 NOTICES&ADS 1"943 HSKIOECKER $2.951.74 GAUGES 144944 DELTA POINT,INC. $61.32 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144945 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $13,945.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES fTl 144946 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $3,533.57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE X 144947 DIVERSIFIED BIOTECH,INC. $33.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES i=+ 144948 ESP NORTH $396.18 TOOLS CO 144949 EASTMAN,INC. $6,613.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES 14495D ECOANALYSIS,INC. $1,320.00 CONSULTING SERVICES n 144951 EDWARDS DIV.OF GS BLDG SYS. $535.49 INSTRUMENT PARTS 144952 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6.10-92 N 1"953 ENVIROGEN,INC. $1.569.00 PILOT PROJ.EQUIPMENT-BIOTRICKLING FILTER 1"954 FMC CORP. $28.153.90 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9.14-94 144955 MARSHALL FAIRIES $26.08 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 1"956 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE IIIA20.00 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10.9-91 144957 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $636.80 AIR FREIGHT 144958 FIRST COMPANY WOR NORTHERN DIST. $156.41 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 144959 FISCHER&PORTER CO. $36.12 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 1N960 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 00. $1.174.38 LAB SUPPLIES 1"961 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $290.613 LAB SUPPLIES 144962 FLICKINGER CO. $1,309.16 PLUMBING PARTS 144963 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $147.76 PHOTO SUPPLIES 144964 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $216.59 PAINT SUPPLIES 144985 FREEDOM IMAGING $70.72 SERVICE AGREEMENT 144966 CT'OF FULLERTON $900.00 WATER USE 144967 GST,INC. $3,508.94 OFFICE SUPPLIES 144968 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $824.95 LUMBER91ARUWARE 144969 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $182.10 CHEMICALS 1N970 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $290.00 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 1"971 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $6.558.26 TELEPHONE SERVICES 144972 GIERUCH-MITCHELL,INC. $4.403.65 PUMP PARTS 4973 N.GLANTZ&SON,INC. $189,10 PAINT SUPPLIES 4974 GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES,INC. ( $47.00 PUBLICATION t. FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5126195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/3195 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 144975 VWY GRAINGER,INC. $612.59 ELECTRIC PARTS 144976 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $45.38 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 144977 GRASBY S.T.I. $0,225.82 ENGINE PARTS 144978 DGA CONSULTANTS $8,860.D0 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6.8-94 144979 HACH COMPANY $300.93 LAB SUPPLIES 140980 HARBOUR ENGINEERING $13,687.62 PUMP PARTS 144981 FREDA HARPER $1,100.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION 144982 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $820.10 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 144983 HATCH&KIRK,INC. $1.924.40 ENGINE PARTS 144954 PL HAWN CO,INC. $146.D9 FILTERS 144985 HILTI,INC. $1.029.94 TOOLS IU986 HOMEDEPOT $209.43 HARDWARE 144987 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $817.77 PAINT SUPPLIES 144988 ORANGE COUNTY FED.CREDIT UNION $680.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION W989 IBG/MICROBE MASTER,INC. $14,3MA3 DIGESTER CLEANING 144990 IDEXX $T77.07 LAB SUPPLIES 144991 IPCO SAFETY $3,353.58 SAFETY SUPPLIES m 1N992 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $57,728.07 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11.18-92 = 144993 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $28.56 CONNECTORS 144994 IS]INFORTEXT $1.593.54 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 144995 INORGANIC VENTURES,INC. $735.51 LAB SUPPLIES -I 1449M J2 PRINTING SERVICES $505.35 PRINTING 144997 J.D.I.TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $2.613.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES ]? 144998 JAMISON ENGINEERING $24.434.83 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES W W999 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $687.69 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145000 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $58.34 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145M JOHNSON CONTROLS,INC. $685.63 ELECTRIC PARTS 146002 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $131.15 ELECTRIC PARTS 145003 THE KEITH COMPANIES $234.70 ENGINEERING SERVICES 3.36R 145004 KING BEARING,INC. $556.65 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145005 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $2.420.99 HARDWARE 145006 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $388.75 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICES 145007 LAUNDROMAT $45.85 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145008 LAW/CRANDAL,INC. $5,242.50 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.7-13-94 145009 LIMITORQUE CORP. $2.241.17 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145010 LOCALAGENCY $450m LAFCO FEES 145011 MPS $15.30 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 146012 MACOMCO $577.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145013 MAG-TROL,INC. $66.47 ELECTRIC PARTS 145014 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $199.17 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145015 MCKENNA ENGR.&EQUIP. $142.01 PUMP PARTS 145016 MECHANICAL DRIVES CO. $248.18 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145017 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $3,496.27 GAUGES 145018 MICRO MOTION $522.25 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145019 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $6.363.00 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 145020 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL FIRES. $85.00 OFFICE REPAIRS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE SQ6195 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/3195 POSTING DATE 0501/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145021 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,347.85 UNIFORM RENTALS 145022 MLADEN BUNTICH CONSTRUCTION $61,772.98 CONSTRUCTION 741-IA 145023 MONITOR LABS $91.90 FITTINGS 145024 MONITOR PUBLISHING CO. 3213.75 SUBSCRIPTION 145025 MONTGOMERY WATSON $1.664.12 AIR TOXICS PROJECT M.12-12-90 145025 MORTON SALT $500.52 SALT 145027 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $359,32 FITTINGS 145020 MOTOROLA.INC. 5513.96 COMMUNICATIONS SUPPLIES 145029 NASCO $308.76 LAB SUPPLIES 145030 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES,INC. $9.500.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 145031 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $1.282.81 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145032 NEUTRON $1.742.35 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8-10-W 145033 CUMMINS CAL PAC/ONAN 545.23 ELECTRIC PARTS 145034 OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $161.13 SAFETY GLASSES 145035 ON TECHNOLOGY $105.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 14SOM ORANGE COUNTY FARM SUPPLY $1.529.71 CHEMICALS 145037 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $8.508.12 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES m 145035 ORANGE COURIER $151.05 COURIER SERVICES Z 14W39 ORANGE VALVE 8 FITTING CO. $707.65 FITRNGS 145040 OXYGEN SERVICE $3,553.04 SPECIALTY GASES 14SMI COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $9,091.19 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145042 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $66,955.00 GAP WATER USE M 0.6.9-93 745043 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $2,330.20 PLUMBING SUPPLIES ni 7450N PACIFIC PARTS S13.994.14 INSTRUMENT PARTSIOFFICE EQUIPMENT r 145045 PACIFIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT,INC. $314.93 PUMP PARTS 145046 PACIFIC BELL $1,247.70 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145047 PACIFIC LAND DEVELOPMENT $2.232.50 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145048 PACIFIC WATER CONDITIONING CO. 5598.00 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 145049 PAGENET $1,043.49 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 145050 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 145051 PARALLAX EDUCATION $4.740.89 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145052 PARKER DING SERVICE SM.895.00 OCEAN OUTFALL REPAIRS M.O.4-28-95 145053 PARTS UNLIMITED $773.91 TRUCK PARTS 145054 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $3,524.89 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL 145055 PRARMACIA BIOTECH.INC. $460.49 LAB REPAIRS 145055 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $104,515.60 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.54491 145057 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $36.337.61 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145058 PLAINS TRUEVALUE HARDWARE $19.37 HARDWARE 145059 POLYPURE,INC. $15,874.42 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3-11-92 145060 POSTAGE BY PHONE $5,000.00 POSTAGE 145MI HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $96.00 ICE 145M PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND. ST79.00 SOIL TESTING 145063 PROMINENT FLUID CONTROL $799.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 45054 QUALITY BUILDING SUPPLY E187,M BUILDING SUPPLIES C.15066 R&R INSTRUMENTS�CES,INC. ` $556 .78 INSTRUMENT ENT PINING A REGISTRATION ' FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 5/26195 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05/31/95 POSTING DATE 0513U95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145067 REBIS $11,693.82 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 146M REISH MARINE STUDIES,INC. $580.00 OCEAN MONITORING 145069 REMEDYTEMP $1,511.80 TEMPORARY SERVICES 145070 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $1.991.83 VALVES 145071 ROBINSON FERTILIZER $1.411.31 CHEMICALS 145072 ROSEMOUNTANALYTICAL,INC. $114.56 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145073 RYAN-NERCO $574.34 METAL 145074 SERBS-PDC $1,1K)BOD TRAINING REGISTRATION 145075 SANWA BANK $113,595.17 CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 14-1-1-A 145076 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTL 5553,703.98 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6-8-94 145077 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $1.784.04 SPECIALTY GASES 145078 SEA-BIRD ELECTRONICS,INC. $345.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145079 SEA COAST DESIGNS $144.60 OFFICE REPAIRS 145080 SEARS ROEBUCK&CO. $359.80 REFRIGERATOR 145081 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $478.41 HARDWARE 145082 SHURELUCK SALES $4.70142 TOOLSIHARDWARE 145083 M.LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS&ASSN. $487.00 SUBSCRIPTION X 145084 SO COAST AIR QUALITY $3.481.80 PERMIT FEES S 145085 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY $80.00 PERMIT FEES 145086 SOUTH COAST WATER $140A0 LAB SUPPLIES ED 145087 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16.114.10 POWER 1450BB SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $56,274.83 NATURAL GAS n 145089 SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. $28,015.M DIESELAINLEADEO FUEL I 145M SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER $2,663.63 DRINKING WATERICOOLER RENTALS Ul 1451191 WESTALLOY,INC. $236.18 WELDING SUPPLIES 145092 SPECTRUM CHEMICAL $166.71 LAB SUPPLIES 145093 SPEX INDUSTRIES,INC. $2.455.45 LAB SUPPLIES 1450M SQUARE DICRISP AUTOMATION SYST. $96,883.03 SOFTWARE LICENSE M.O.7-13.94 145095 STERLINGART $138A0 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145096 SUMMIT STEEL - $1,900.45 METAL 145097 SUNSET INDUSTRIAL PARTS $188.73 PUMP PARTS 145098 SUPERS ONE-HOUR PHOTO $11.64 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 14W99 SUPER CHEM CORP. $406.82 CHEMICALS 14510D TCH ASSOCIATES $491.91 LAB SUPPLIES 145101 THERMO JARRELL ASH CORP. $1.308.72 LAB SUPPLIES 145102 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $322.42 MECHANICAL PARTS 1451M TOLEDO SCALE CORP. $1.049.81 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145104 TONYS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $651.95 LOCKS&KEYS 145105 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $999.00 TRAVEL SERVICES M.O.6-" 145105 TREBOR ELECTRONICS $569.48 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145107 TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY,INC. $3.455.54 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.0.5-11-94 145105 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,064.25 LAB SERVICES 145109 JIG TUCKER&SON,INC. $814.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145110 TUSTIN DODGE $38.19 TRUCK PARTS 145111 TUTHILL CORPORATION $15,941.52 MECHANICAL PARTS 1451112 URISA $90.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 526/95 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 05MI195 POSTING DATE 05/31/95 WARRANTNO. VENDOR 145113 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $318.OD LAB SUPPLIES 145114 UNISOURCEWOR BUTLER PAPER $644.13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145115 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $814.87 PARCEL SERVICES 145116 VWR SCIENTIFIC $743.55 LAB SUPPLIES 145117 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $683.57 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145118 VERNE'S PLUMBING $3.002.30 PLUMBING SERVICES 145119 VERTEX SYSTEMS $1.252,71 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT 145120 VILLAGE NURSERIES $297,67 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 145121 CARL WARREN&CO. $186.21 LIAR.CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 145122 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL FED. $261.50 PUBLICATIONS 145123 WAXIE $475.39 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145124 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $30,558.W CAUSTIC SODA&HYPOCHLORIDE M.O.B.12-9284-13-94 145125 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $732.36 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 14512E WITEG $172.40 LAB SUPPLIES 145127 ROURKE,WOODRUFF&SPRADLIN $55.221.85 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.2-19-92 145128 WORDPERFECT $195.00 PUBLICATION 146129 XEROX CORP. $1,050.70 COPIER LEASES m 145130 RICHARD B.EDGAR $200.00 DEFERRED COMP DISTRIBUTION X 2 2,725,516.88 Cd n SUMMARY AMOUNT i #2 OPER FUND 10.462.23 02 CAP FAC FUND 779.00 #3 OPER FUND 8,193.31 03 CAP FAC FUND 174.384.30 #5 OPER FUND 6,901.50 07 OPER FUND 4.048.75 #7 CAP PAC FUND 4,610.29 #11 OPER FUND 2,018.34 #11 CAP FAC FUND 51,001.99 #14 OPER FUND 48.00 #14 CAP FAC FUND 186,184.03 #5&6 OPER FUND 126.97 #5&6 CAP FAC FUND 2.612.51 #6&7 OPER FUND 206.80 #7&14 OPER FUND 976.09 JT OPER FUND 1,404,435.38 CORF 626.873.39 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 15.309.90 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 226,361.10 2.726.616.68 . FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE SKIMS PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06/14/95 POSTING DATE 06/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 145157 AA EQUIPMENT $861.27 PUMP 145158 AG TECH COMPANY $88,274.21 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10-9-9/ 145159 AT&T-UNIPLAN SERVICE $2,398.92 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145160 AT&T-MEGACOMSERVICE $958.94 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145161 AT&T-FAX SERVICE $1,041.42 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 145162 ADAMS PRECISION INSTRUMENTATION $142.77 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145163 ADVANCED MFG.INSTITUTE $795.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145164 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS,INC. $36.074,40 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN,SYST.M.0.8-9-89 145165 ALLIED ELECTRONICS $139.00 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145168 AMERIDATA $4,518,70 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 145167 AMERICAN SIGMA S43 79 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145168 AMSCO $406,07 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145169 SLAKE P.ANDERSON $79.97 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145170 APCO VALVE&PRIMER CORP. $3.825.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 146171 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $6,330,25 NOTICES&ADS 145172 ACS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) S3,093.50 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 146173 ABC LABORATORIES $23500 SERVICE AGREEMENT X 145174 ARI20NA INSTRUMENT $175,37 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES = 145175 ARTS DISPOSAL SERVICE,INC. $282.20 RECYCLABLE MATERIALS REMOVAL 145170 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $3.408.41 PAYROLL SERVICES W 145177 AWARDS&TROPHIES $412.29 PLAQUES -1 145176 BKK LANDFILL $2.793.36 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MOOD-9-91 145179 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $1.161.68 BATTERIES �1 145180 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $3,193.37 LAB SUPPLIES 145101 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $270,80 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 145162 J&H BERGE.INC. $79.64 LAB SUPPLIES 145183 BETA TECHNOLOGY,INC. $53,64 INSTRUMENT REPAIRS 145184 910 TECH NET,INC. $3.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145185 BLACK&VEATCH $62,844.67 ENGINEERING SERVICES P146 145186 BRONSON,BRONSON&MCKINNON $25.885.40 LEGAL SERVICES-COUNTY BANKRUPTCY M.0.12.&94 145187 ONO BOOKS $153.64 BOOKS 145188 BURKE ENGINEERING CO. $946.05 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145189 CEM CORPORATION $272.13 LAB SUPPLIES 145190 CEPA $2,142.06 LAB SUPPLIES 146101 C.P.I. $755.87 LAB SUPPLIES 145122 CPRA REGISTRAR $1,012.00 WORKSHOP REGISTRATION 145193 1996 CONFERENCE,CWPCA,INC. $190.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 145194 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $536.10 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145195 CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE $108.36 PUBLICATION 145195 CANUS CORPORATION $39.793.64 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 145197 CAPITAL WESTWARD CORP. $136.66 REGULATOR 145198 JOHN CARDLLO ENGINEERS $6.752.44 ENGINEERING SERVICES P143,Pi-38 145199 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION $142.55 ELECTRIC PARTS 145200 CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $160.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 145201 CHEMWEST,INC. $414.08 PUMP PARTS 145202 CLARK CONSULTANTS $390.00 ELECTRICAL CONSULTING FUND NO 9199 - Jr DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6/09195 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 08/14/95 POSTING DATE 06/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145203 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $75,51 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145204 COLICH AND SONS $26,033.22 EMERGENCY REPAIRS 3-36 145205 COMPUSERVE $282,39 COMPUTER SERVICES 145206 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO. $323,35 TOOLS 145207 CONSTRUCTION FABRICATORS.INC. $1,644,70 MECHANICAL PARTS 145208 CONSUMER PIPE $95COI PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145209 CONTINENTAL AIR TOOLS INC. $34579 ELECTRIC PARTS 145210 CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT CO. $158.23 FITTINGS 145211 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $2.732.N ENGINE PARTS 145212 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $306.05 TRUCK PARTS 145213 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $1.368.76 ELECTRIC PARTS 145214 DAILY PILOT $98.OD NOTICES 5 ADS 145215 DATASTORM $153.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 146216 DAVIS INSTRUMENTS $506.95 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145217 HSK/DECKER $1,324.75 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145218 DEZURICK AND/OR CS CO. $10,033.89 VALVES 145219 THE DICKSON COMPANY 5108D0 ELECTRIC PARTS X 145220 SYCON CORP. $1,198.29 INSTRUMENT PARTS = 145221 DIPPER PAN $80.00 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS 145222 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $1,856.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE DO 145223 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $699.10 PAINT SUPPLIES 145224 E.C.S. $267.00 PUBLICATION 145225 ESP NORTH $690.44 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 145M EASTMAN.INC. $2.960.14 OFFICE SUPPLIES N 145227 ECOANALYSIS,INC. 55,220.50 CONSULTING SERVICES 145226 ENCHANTER,INC. $3.360.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6.10.92 1452.29 ENSYS,INC. $325.48 LAB SUPPLIES 145230 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $1,D96.50 LAB SERVICES 145231 EQUESTRIAN FORGE $1,098.56 PLAQUES 145232 FMC CORP. $33,588.35 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M.O.9-14-94 145233 FST SAND AND GRAVEL,INC. $249.58 ROAD BASE MATERIALS 145234 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $3,877,50 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9.91 145236 FIRST COMPANYWOR NORTHERN DIST. $195.61 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145236 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1.935.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145237 FISIONS INSTRUMENTS $1,271.78 LABSUPPUES M238 FLICKINGER CO. 53,534.20 VALVES 145239 CLIFFORD A.FORKERT $2,620.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6&94 145240 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $91.60 PHOTO SUPPLIES 146241 CRY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $11,276.60 WATER USE 145242 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $193.61 PAINT SUPPLIES 145243 THE FOXBORO CO. $4.749.01 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 1452" CITY OF FULLERTON $139.23 WATER USE 145245 GST,INC. 5829.94 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145246 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $884.15 INSTRUMENT PARTS '5247 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $216.36�5248 TELEPHONE GRAHAM MANUFACTURING CO. ( $111.79 PUMP PAR S SERVICES . FUND NO 9199 - IT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0511,U95 POSTING DATE 06114/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145249 GRASSY S.T.I. $324.65 ENGINE PARTS 145250 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $294.16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145251 GREAT LAKES INSTRUMENTS,INC. $22,691.32 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145262 DGA CONSULTANTS $2,730.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.6-8-94 145253 DAVID R.GRIFFIN $164,306.85 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.0.9-14-94 145254 HACH COMPANY $2,003.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145255 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $1.403.02 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145255 HATCH&KIRK,INC. $575.07 TRUCK PARTS 145257 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $1.925.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 145256 PL HAWN CO,INC. $8,089.39 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145259 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2,083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 145260 HOLMES&NARVER,INC. $33,323.52 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI-44 145281 HOME DEPOT $263.11 HARDWARE 145262 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $1.018.80 PAINT SUPPLIES 145263 CITY OF HUN INGTON BEACH $19.65 WATER USE 1452U IPCO SAFETY $1,992.49 SAFETY SUPPLIES T*1 145265 IMPERIAL WEST CHEMICAL $110,690.27 FERRIC CHLORIDE M.O.11-18-92 X 145266 IMPULSE ENTERPRISE $404.99 LAB SUPPLIES 2 145267 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $1.480.73 CONNECTORS 145268 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $703.62 BATTERIES 145269 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $45.13 WATER USE '-I 145270 J2 PRINTING SERVICES $602.04 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145271 AT COMPUTER SOURCE,INC. $818.90 COMPUTER SOFTWARE I 145M JAMISON ENGINEERING $8.630.33 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES W 145273 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY. $233.47 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 145274 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $1.997.07 GAUGE 145275 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $410.06 PAINT SUPPLIES 145276 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS 562.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145M KEYE PRODUCTIVITY CENTER $139.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145278 KING BEARING,INC. $1.515.84 MACHINE SUPPLIES 145279 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $1,752.34 TOOLS 145280 L A CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $57.59 SERVICE AGREEMENT 145281 LA TRONICS $2,527.67 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 145282 K.P.LINDSTROM,INC. $1.475.64 CONSULTING SERVICES-ENVIR.M.0.12-9.90 145283 SOHO-LYNCH CORP. $138.61 JANITORIAL SERVICES 145284 MBC APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL $974.10 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6.10-92 145285 MAGNETEK $5,11M.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT M286 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $103.477.00 CONSTRUCTION P2-42-2 145287 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS 5638.06 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145288 MATT-CHLOR,INC. $1,815.69 VALVE PARTS 145289 MAVERIK,INC. $2,887.28 CRANE REPAIRS 145290 CHUCK MCRANEY $511.14 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 145291 MEDLIN CONTROLS,INC. $3,825.84 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145292 METRA CORPORATION $1.205.40 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145293 MICROSOFT PRESS $169.57 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145294 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES $996.69 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 8/09/95 PAGE4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06/14/95 POSTING DATE D8/14/95 WARRANTNO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145295 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,182.67 UNIFORM RENTALS 145296 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $1.214.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 145297 MONITOR LABS $1.616.86 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145298 RASCO $617.60 LAB SUPPLIES 145299 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $70.35 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 145300 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL $67.17 PUBLICATION 145301 NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP $594.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145302 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $7.386.05 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145303 NEUTRON $8,693.11 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8.10.94 145304 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTER $BD0.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145305 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $226.43 LAB SUPPLIES 146M CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $5.29 WATER USE 145307 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL $350.00 NEW HEALTH ACCOUNT 145308 OI CORPORATION $6.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145309 THE OHMART CORP. $554.41 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145310 ORANGE COUNTY AUTO PARTS CO. $135.79 TRUCK PARTS m 145311 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $2,787.54 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES X 145312 ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $1,178.93 FITTINGS s 145313 OXYGEN SERVICE $2,207.26 SPECIALTY GASES 145314 COUNTY OF ORANGE $5,682.71 SERVICE AGREEMENT tu 145315 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $17,543.61 REIMBURSE WORKERS COMP 145316 COUNTY OF ORANGE $104.00 PERMIT FEES LA 145317 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $16,175.44 GAP WATER USE M.0.6.9.93 1 145318 COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH CARE $1,215.00 SEWAGE SPILL REIMBURSEMENT 146319 P&D ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $1,336.91 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY 145320 PSOC(POOL SUPPLY OF OC) $79.24 OPERATING SUPPLIES 145321 PACIFIC PARTS $8,8A13.39 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145322 PACIFIC BELL $75.74 TELEPHONE SERVICES 145323 PAINE WEBBER $28,144.69 COP REMARKET FEES 145324 PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $40.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6-12-91 145325 PARKHOUSE TIRE CO. $909.24 TIRES 145326 PASCAL&LUDWIG $8.753.50 CONSTRUCTION PIA2 145327 PERFORMANCE TRAINING ASSOC. $590.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 145320 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $3,085.69 LAB SUPPLIES 145329 PERVO PAINT $148.48 PAINT SUPPLIES 145330 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $5,228.54 REIMB.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL 145331 PIERCE COMPANIES 5398.98 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 145332 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $5.572.03 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145333 POLY FABRICS $2,068.80 PVC LINER 145334 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.76 LAB SUPPLIES 14SMS POLYPURE,INC. $28,647.43 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3.11.92 1453M POWER SYSTEMS $47.45 ENGINE PARTS 145337 PRITCHETT AND ASSOCIATES,INC. $201.W PUBLICATION +46338 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IND, $2,121,01 SOILTESTING C.45340 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS"INC. $$4,852.64 ELECTRIC LMOTOR PARTS SERVICES M.O. III- , FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 06114/95 POSTING DATE 08/14/95 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 145341 R&R INSTRUMENTS $82.08 ELECTRIC PARTS 145342 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $1.715.43 TRASH REMOVAL 145343 REGISTRAR,A&WMA $750.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 145344 REMEDY TEMP $3,899.58 TEMPORARY PERSONNEL SERVICES 145345 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY $3,779.87 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145346 RENOLD,INC. $95.19 MECHANICAL PARTS 145347 HOWARD RIDLEY CO. $6,900,00 BUILDING REPAIRS 145348 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $12,139.24 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145349 MILTON RIVERA $13,B44.00 DEFERRED COMP WITHDRAWAL 145350 ROSEMOUNT ANALYTICAL,INC. $114.55 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 145351 SAFETY CARE,INC. $193.95 SAFETY FILM RENTALS 146352 SARGON ENGINEERING,INC. $16,987.32 ENGINEERING SERVICES 145353 R.CRAIG SCOTT&ASSOC. $10,231.28 LEGAL SERVICES,PERSONNEL 145354 CITY OF SEAL BEACH $362.30 WATER USE 145355 SEIKO INSTRUMENTS $76.00 LAB SUPPLIES 145366 SHURELUCK SALES $8,532.04 TOOLS/HARDWARE 146357 SIGMA CHEMICAL CO. $3669 LAB SUPPLIES m 145358 SIMON&SCHUSTER $54.86 PUBLICATION X 145359 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $401.60 PRE.EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 2 745380 SMItt4EMERV CO. E175.00 SOIL TESTING M.0.7-17.94 145381 SOUTH COAST WATER $376.00 LAB SUPPLIES -1 145362 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON CO. $60.582.97 POWER 145383 SO CALIF.EDISON CO. $16.933.94 POWER �i 145364 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $4.005.99 NATURAL GAS L71 145365 SOUTH PACIFIC MARBLE&TILE $1.428.16 GROUNDSKEEPING SUPPLIES 145366 SOUTHWEST SCIENTIFIC $927.81 LAB SUPPLIES 145367 SPECIAL PLASTIC SYSTEMS.INC. $940.92 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145M STERLINGART $50.14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145369 SUMMIT STEEL $2,175.69 METAL 145370 SUNSET FORD $273.21 TRUCK PARTS 145371 TAYLOR INDUSTRIAL SOFTWARE $150.00 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 145372 TONYS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $593.48 LOCKS B KEYS 145373 TOSHIBA INTERNATIONAL $76.25 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145374 SO CALIF TRANE SERVICE $4.384.14 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145375 TRAVEL EXECUTIVES $2,628.80 TRAVEL SERVICES M.0.6.8-94 145376 TRIBEST VISUAL DISPLAY $446.00 PROJECTOR SCREEN REPAIR 145377 TRUCK PARTS SUPPLY $310.74 TRUCK PARTS 145378 TRUESDAIL LARS $4,732.95 LAB SERVICES 145379 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $2,122.99 INSTRUMENT PARTS 145350 UNISOURCE&IOR BUTLER PAPER $395.30 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145381 DATAVAULTAIS SAFE DEPOSIT CORP. $104.00 SAFE DEPOSIT BOX 145382 VWR SCIENTIFIC $560.67 LAB SUPPLIES 145383 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $718.96 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 145384 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $2,647.10 LAB SUPPLIES 145385 VERNE'S PLUMBING 5430.00 PLUMBING SERVICES 145386 VILLAGE NURSERIES $113.41 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 6109195 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID OW14195 POSTING DATE 06114M5 WARRANT NO. VENDOR 145387 WATER ENVIRONMENT FED. 8187.25 LAB SUPPLIES 145368 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $57.869.12 CAUSTIC SODA 8 HYPOCHLORIDE M.O.8-12-92 a 4-13-94 145389 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. 6439.73 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 145390 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL $243.52 TRUCK PARTS 145391 XEROX CORP. $11,428.57 COPIER LEASES 1,372.NM.62 SUMMARY AMOUNT N1 CONSTR.FUND $5.032.64 02 OPER FUND 2.983.35 92 CAP FAC FUND 38,396.73 N2 CONSTR.FUND 10,646.60 T N3 OPER FUND 30,421.69 X N3 CAP FAC FUND 189.620.35 ._. N3 CONSTR.FUND 10.095.54 W N5 OPER FUND 3.462.41 45 CONSTR.FUND 995.82 N6 OPER FUND 1,430.33 Ud N6 CAP FAC FUND 1,700.00 p� N6 CONSTR.FUND 271.79 07 OPER FUND 3,556.93 97 CAP FAG FUND 142.58 07 CONSTR.FUND 764.86 N11 OPER FUND 17,986.99 011 CAP FAC FUND 2.139.98 NH CONSTR.FUND 337.14 N14 OPER FUND 17,295.25 N586 OPER FUND 2,081.88 0687 OPER FUND 2,652.26 07814 OPER FUND 5.239.14 JT OPER FUND 538.073.30 CORE 270.677.09 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND 19.976.94 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL 198.842.10 1,312,804.02 EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11. 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A regular joint meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11. 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, was held at the hour of 7:30 p.m., June 28, 1995, at 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California. The Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. . .. ... ... . ...... . . DISTRICT 1 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Aoorovina 1995-96 fiscal Year budaet call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,809,000 Capital Facilities Fund 10,904,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 0,072.000 TOTAL $33.585.000 DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving the 1995-96 budget call vote: That the District's 1995.96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $53,245,000 Capital Facilities Fund 60,455,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 24,024,000 TOTAL 3137.724.000 DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approvina the 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $65,946,000 Capital Facilities Fund 61,204,000 Construction Fund - 1990-92 22,459,000 TOTAL 3149.609.000 DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,415,000 Capital Facilities Fund 14.361,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 5,674,000 TOTAL $33,450.000 DISTRICT 6 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $12,073,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,473,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 2,964,000 TOTAL $22.5N 00 DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budget call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $21,726,000 Capital Facilities Fund 17,604,000 Construction Fund- 1990.92 7,323,000 TOTAL $46.653.000 DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approvina 1995-96 Budaet call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $13,801,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,920,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 5,054,000 Bond & Interest Fund - 1958 33 000 TOTAL $28.808.000 1 DISTRICT 13 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budoet call vote: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $2,046,000 Capital Facilities Fund 7,511,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 27,000 TOTAL 59.584.000 DISTRICT 14 Moved, seconded and unanimously carried by roll Approving 1995-96 Budoet call vole: That the District's 1995-96 fiscal year budget be, and is hereby, received, ordered fled and approved in the following amounts: Operating Fund $3,521,000 Capital Facilities Fund 9,601,000 Construction Fund- 1990-92 0 0 TOTAL $13.280.000 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, PENNY KYLE, Secretary of each of 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 certify that the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of minute entries on the meeting of said Boards of Directors on the 28th day of June, 1995. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 28th day of June, 1995. Secretary of t s of Directors of County Sanit ' trots Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 41�01RMS9SF i STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, 1 hereby certify that the Notice and Agenda for the Regular Board Meeting of Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 held on r 19Qrwas//duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the Districts' offices on da 19�.T IN "WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3e*ay of 19Q� Penny Kyleklq6rjftary of each of the Boards of Direc1drs of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 & 14 of Orange County, California 651Fa 27A EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A regular joint meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, was held at the hour of 7:30 p.m., May 24, 1995, at 10644 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California. The Chair of the Joint Administrative Organization called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-025) Actions re Santa Monica Bay Restoration Proiect (SMBRP) eoiderniological survev Authorizing the Districts' participation in the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Districts' participation in the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) epidemiological survey, be, and is hereby, authorized. Authorizing the General Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SMBRP and to enter into a contract with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SMBRP; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a contract with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to implement said MOU, and to reimburse the Districts for an amount not to exceed $180,000.00 for costs associated with labor and materials to analyze virus samples and continue in-house efforts during this project period through a Specific Term Employment Agreement, in form approved by General Counsel. Authorizing the General Manager to enter into a six-month Specific Term Employment Agreement for a Laboratory Analyst Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into a six-month Specific Term Employment Agreement for a Laboratory Analyst, at a rate not to exceed $25.00 per hour, for a total amount not to exceed $26,000.00. Authorizing the General Manager to enter into additional contracts. as necessary to implement the terms of the MOU Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the General Manager, be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into additional contracts, as necessary, with no increase in the authorized amount of$180,000.00 to implement the terms of the MOU. STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, PENNY KYLE, Secretary of each of 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 certify that the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of minute entries on the meeting of said Boards of Directors on the 24th day of May, 1995. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of May, 1996. Secretary of tt Boar of Directors of County Sanita ion Di ricts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 J:\WP0001 STORMSl961 m0 96.1