Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-05-27 rc=_Ers•DATE: May 27, 1998 TIME:7:30 p.m. owmcrc: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 & 14 DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS ILUTA.............................MCRYMAN.................._aG IHOLMBERO .................... .......� JL IPEMYI21........................FERRVIMN ..................__�...[[[... IFLORYI...........................MNKHEAD...... ....... y/ —_ ICOONl21........................MURRN....................... IIEYESI...........................MOADWATER.............. L� V _ IPOTTSI...........................SALTARELU.................. IHASTING51.....................MOWN........................ J7SL JL ISTEINERI........................SRITLER....................... 1COOKI............................COLLM6....................... _L INOYESI..........................DERAY......................... i — DISTRICT2 IFRESCHII........................GENES.......................... _ IUNDERMILLI....................ECKENRODE..................� IHARWIfl .....................DETTLOFT..................... RI _ ICOONM........................MURY....................... IDOTSONI........................DONAHUE..................... g —_IHOLMBERG)....................ANDERSON..............._.. PPARKER.........................OUNLAP....................... y IFLORYI...........................BMKHEAD................... IUNDfRHILJ....................ECKENRODE.................. �L ILEYESI...........................MOADWATER..... ......... (PERRY...........................FERRYMAN.... ............... _ (COOK)............................COLLNS....................... MMNERI.... ..................GULUXSON.................. IFRESCHII........................DENIES.......................... ISAMILC.IrLfdN1.1.........MINES......................... i — IPARKER.........................DUNLAP.......................L IMOADWATER...............LEYES.......................... _`I — (WISHER).........................OULLIXSdF.................. IMAULLERI......................MARSHALL................... y ILUUI.............................MCGUNAN................... ILUTLI.............................MC GUpAN..................— i ISIEWERI........................SPDZER....................... IWALXEFO........................MINER BRADFOM......... JG IDALYI............................ZEMEL.......................... ICOONEM........................MURRIY.......................J� ✓ IDEBAYI..........................NMM........................— _ DISTRICT IEVANSI..........................RICE............................. i ........................MIN............................� IPOTTSI...........................SALTAINEW................. (WALKER)........................MINER BRM......... IHAMMONOI....................SIEA........................... . � _AA,i IHOLMBERGL...................A STEWERL.._....................SR ................. .....W —_1$PIRERI........................STEINER....................... IFLORYI...........................BANKHEAD................... —IL ICOUP..D$1.....................MOWN........................ IMARMANI.......................6ULWAN..................... — ICOOKI............................COLLINS NAHUE..................... IBATE51 ..........................SWAN.......................... IDORKER). .......................DUNAHUE..................._. IBATESI................... ........SYLVM........................PARKER). WNUP....................... IDALYI............................ZEMEL.......................... 4L — ................ CARR IMOADLLI.. P1/La^.......LBNES..........................= IMOAOWAIER............._ . LEYES. ................... _✓ IMAULLENI......................MARSHALL................... STAFF ILUT2........................... C ..................... I I.......................SR.......................9 ANDEM ON...................... DAHL IHARMANI.......................SULLIVAN.....................f` ............................ IBAlE51 SYLVA ✓ HODGES. t.v . LRM IDALYI............................ZEMEL.......................... KYLE................................ LUDWN ......................... DISTRICT MCNTYRE...................... L.AN, ./ ;orot'�AL��r"y INOVESI..........................OEBAY.........................� RETEN............................ CA& IDEBAYI.........................YID72�........................ — O TEHMAN...................... STREW CHMA .....................ISPGZER........................BIENER.......................� ...... DISTRICT a WHEATLEY......................TL (FERRY)..........................*STEPERINMAN..................... ................................. ISPF2E).........................STEINM....................... (NOYESI..........................OEBAV.........................i ...................................... DISTRICT 7 OTHERS IFOTTSI...........................SALTAREW.................. ✓ �������//µ��F�� IMAMMONDI....................SMEA............................ WOODRUFF........_........... 1/I/✓"�-�^. INOYESI..........................DESAY......................... ANDRUS.........................._ o IPERRYI...........................FEARYMAN................... MOM............................. _ ILUTO.............................MCGUIGAN...................JG LEE................................. IComu)........................NIURMHY....................... LINDSTROM....................._ ISFITIERI........................STENER.......................�G NIXON.............................__ MAW. DISTRICT 11 STONE............................� IHARIMNI.......................DETROFF.....................yG IHARMANI.......................SULUVAN......................I — ISTENERI........................SPMER....................... DISTRICT 13 IPARKERI.........................MUIR.............._....... ✓ _ IWISNERI........................OULLO(SON.................. I�. ISPMERI.......................STEMM....................... 7 — ICOONTZI.........................MIIRIFY........................ — IDALYI............................ZEMEL..........................�Z — DISTRICT 16 IHAMMONDI....................SHEA........................... _ IPOTTSI...........................SALTAREW.................. _ ICOONTZI........................MURP N....................... .. ISPITZERI........................STENER.......................� —_ IMILLERI..........................SWAN........................ .._ _ HAwF.Eta%wmin\M\DIRECTOR%Di a wm NO CeII.Eoc.M M122198 �rA - REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS ALL PERSONS WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARDS ON SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEMS OR MATTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST SHOULD COMPLETE AND SUBMIT THIS FORM TO THE BOARD SECRETARY PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE BOARD MEETING. AS DETERMINED BY THE CHAIRMAN, SPEAKERS MAY BE DEFERRED UNTIL THE SPECIFIC ITEM IS TAKEN FOR DISCUSSION. REMARKS MAY BE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES. DATE: - a'7 9 F AGENDA ITEM NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAME: (please print) W a. Lfn r ?' D r 0. kQ- HOME ADDRESS: 'tnle'o' (number/street) 94 (,t-)A- 6a 9a-�0s (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: C7/#, S L"ZZ 4 REPRESENTING: ce/' (self/name of organization) Sld, JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS Meebng Me To x.eas. srnNe AGENDA REPORT ItemNumE Iteltrmb County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Califomia � FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Enginee4Enneering Originator: Jim Harris, Principal Associate SUBJECT: CONTRACT AWARD FOR MISCELLANEOUS LIGHTING MODIFICATIONS, SMALL PROJECT NO. 19980015 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1) Approve the plans and specifications for Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications, Job No. 19980015, on file at the offices of the Board Secretary. 2) Receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation. 3) Authorize award of a contract for Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications, Job No. 19980015, to Power Distributors, Inc. providing for replacement of obsolete lighting fixtures, safety lighting to illuminate parking areas, plant entrance, and pedestrian access to the Operations Center, for a total amount of$67,500. SUMMARY The plans and specifications for this project Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications, Job No. 19980015, were bid on May 5, 1998. Six (6) bids were received ranging from a high of$80,711 to the low bid of$67,500 submitted by Power Distributors, Inc. The Director of Engineering recommends award of the low bid contract to Power Distributors, Inc. The engineers estimate was $95,000. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY See attached Budget Information Table BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: CORF, c-e-e) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION G NlybEaN9anGa pan Rgvn Boa IR 19pp0015053 6We R,.,,,. oaosse Page 1 These proposed lighting modifications are a combination of four small projects that were submitted to the Facilities Engineering Team by the District's Operation and Maintenance staff. These modifications will address concerns about safety, security, and provide savings by replacing older lighting fixtures with more efficient equipment. The four projects include: 1. Replace lighting at the Plant No. 1 Warehouse. The light fixtures in this area are approximately 20 years old. The currently installed fluorescent lights are not power efficient compared to lighting system available today. With the installation of new fixtures and high-pressure sodium lamps, the relative brightness of the building interior will increase and the cost to operate the lights will decrease by approximately 40%. 2. Human Resources North Parking Lot. This parking area is entered through a narrow roadway that has a blind corner that is difficult to maneuver. At night, there is not sufficient lighting available to safely drive in this area. This work will provide a new support, light and automatic photocell to illuminate the area only at night. 3. Plant No. 2 Entrance. Operations staff utilizes existing security cameras at night to monitor vehicles entering the plant. The current location of the camera and lights do not provide enough definition to clearly see into a vehicle to examine the occupants. The new lights will be positioned to allow better use of the security system, and are positioned to not impact the surrounding homes. 4. Plant No. 2 Operations Center Entrance. The stairway leading from the parking lot to the facility is not adequately illuminated and is a safety concern. New lights will be installed to focus onto the stairs and not impact the surrounding homes. ALTERNATIVES The contract must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder to accomplish the construction. The Districts' needs this project to become more power efficient, increase safety and security. CEQA FINDINGS Not.a "Project" as defined by CEQA Section 15378. No further action required. ATTACHMENTS Budget Information Table Bid Tabulation JRH:jee c mgmmiNg."m o.n r+eoomv"m eo.,mwA isaemis osnseaoo Rom, O=5M8 Page 2 � • • . .., vnurvrtiViH) ) 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 4 , 192!was duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the Districts' offices on IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of Penny Kyle, S et f each of the Boards of Directors bf ounty Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11. 13 & 14 of Orange County, California BSIFoemY M r Z' COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA May 20, 1998 Phone: p14)962241 1 To the Chair and Members of the Joint Boards of Directors mailing address: Fotmten vanes CCAA Subject: Board Letter �. sz7zsatz7 axe,address: t BBAA sus Avenue The following are items that you may find interesting. If you need additional Fourteen vane,ra information on any of the items, please call me. sz7waa1e Bankruptcy Update Member The Orange County Sanitation Districts' portion of the proceeds from the recent Agencies LeBoeuf Lamb-County of Orange proposed $45 million settlement has been • estimated to be $2.6 million. Along with the additional $10 million going directly to the cities North Orange County Community College District, this total settlement of$55 million Anaheim is the largest settlement against a law firth in US history, as far as the litigation team Brea is aware. Judge Taylor will presumably sign off on the agreement. Challenges are Buena Park possible. Merrill Lynch could, for instance, challenge the settlement on the grounds (.'.A that it isn't good faith by the signing parties and that it doesn't represent a fair share Fountain Valley Fuller. on the part of LeBoeuf Lamb in paying for the damages incurred by Orange County Huntington Beach and the investment pool agencies. The settlement includes a bar against further I abne actions against LeBoeuf Lamb which, of course, the insisted on. Looking La flabre g Y g La Palma downstream, Merrill Lynch may see this as a dangerous precedent that other parties Loa Alamiws could resort to in an attempt to limit their losses. We will have to wait and see. Newyorc Beach Orange Placentia The trial date for the County's lawsuit against Merrill Lynch is set for September 15 in Sarre Ana front of Judge Taylor. Merrill Lynch has asked for a change of venue to Arizona. Seal Beach Seenwn Taylor(and the County) will probably agree to Los Angeles with a jury pool drawn Toad, from Los Angeles County residents who have no financial stake in the outcome of the visa Park trial. Our litigation team is banking on Judge Taylor resisting an attempts to delay roVa Linda 9 9 9 Y 9 Y P Y the trial date. In other words, count on the September 15 start date. County of orange Howes our case? The litigation team believes that our rase is stronger today than sanita,v Districts when the County fled three years ago. It is rare for the plaintiffs attorney to favor his Coate Mass case more than the day he fled it because the holes and gaps normally start to show Barden trove over time. Not here. The discovery has gone very well because the files of Merrill Midway City Lynch and others have yielded gold. There's even more. Merrill Lynch has resisted Water oisuic,s releasing 191 files, arguing attomey-client privilege. A referee is reviewing the files for Judge Taylor. A determination on this additional material is scheduled soon. wine Parch A Retrospective of the Orange County Bankruptcy The Public Policy Institute of Califomia has published a book entitled, When Government Fails: The Orange County Bankruptcy. Written by Mark Baldassare, a Senior Fellow of the PPIC, the book outlines the factors that led to the bankruptcy and A Public Marewater add Environmental Management Agency Committed to Protecting the Environment Since 7954 v Members of the Boards of Directors Page 2 May 20, 1998 provides 10 policy recommendations that may help prevent future financial crises. A research brief that provides an overview of the book is attached. Ordering information for the book can be found at the end of the brief. Ocean Discharge Permit Renewal The Ocean Discharge Permit renewal was signed on May 6 by the U.S. EPA and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The new permit allows OCSD to continue discharging wastewater at current treatment levels but with additional guidelines for improved monitoring. A copy of the U.S. EPA news release is attached. If you would like a copy of the permit and monitoring program, Fact Sheet, Response to Comments, copies of the written comments to the EPA or the Waiver Leger, please let me know and we will make this available to you. Bob Ooten Elected Vice President of CWEA Bob Oaten, Director of Maintenance and Operations, was recently elected Vice President of the California Water Environment Association. This means he will ascend to the Presidency in 2000. Bob has made valuable contributions through his long-term commitment to this association as well as to OCSD and sanitary engineering. We are proud of Bob's accomplishments and deserved recognition. Resignation of Chris Dahl, Information Technology Chris will be relocating to San Francisco in the near future and has tendered his resignation, effective mid-June after he has assisted us in selecting a successor. Chris is leaving due to his wife accepting a new position with the Treasurer's Office of the Regents of the University of California System. Chris will have no problem securing a good position because of his experience and considerable skill. Our best wishes go with him. Blake Anderson Accepted at the John F. Kennedy School of Govemment Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager, will be gone during most of the month of June to attend the John F. Kennedy School of Government, which is associated with Harvard University in Cambridge, MA. The three-week course, entitled "Senior Executives in State and Local Government" is an intensive public management program for executives and elected officials in state, local or regional government. The interactive curriculum focuses on sharpening participants' analytical and strategic problem-solving skills which are required for major policy and institutional changes. I Members of the Boards of Directors Page 3 May 20, 1998 have asked Blake to attend the course because of his importance to the future of our organization. Conaratulations to Nancy Wheatley Nancy Wheatley has been offered a position as Senior Vice President for Safety and the Environment at Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines. She expects to be at the Districts until mid-June, and then relocate to Miami Beach, Florida. This is an interesting and exciting opportunity for Nancy. However, she has expressed that it will never replace the people, programs and accomplishments at the Districts. We will be sorry to see her go and wish her continued success in her new career path. USDA Revises Proposed Rule on Organic Standards In December 1997, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) published proposed standards for organically grown foods. USDA did not lake a position on certain "controversial" issues, including the use of biosolids, choosing instead to ask for public comments. As a result of the 200,000 comments the USDA received, fundamental revisions to the proposed standards, including the prohibition of the use of biosolids on "organically grown crops, will be made. The Districts believe that the proposed standards do not provide a scientific basis for the exclusion of biosolids and will perpetuate the stereotype regarding the superior safety of organically grown foods. The public perceives foods labeled as "organic"to be safer regardless of the fact that the proposed standards are merely a marketing ploy with little scientific principle. The only good news to report is that in the press release announcing the organic standards revisions, USDA Secretary Dan Glickman recognized biosolids as"being safe and having an important role in agriculture." Attached for your review are the Districts' comments on USDA's proposed standards in the April 30 letter. Governor's Press Release on Budget Revisions dated May 11, 1998 Attached is a copy of a Press Release from Governor Wilson's office dated May 11 which announces changes in the budget to create funds for several natural resources projects including Flood control, Headwaters Forest, deferred maintenance for the state's park system and improving air quality. With this budget revision, Governor Wilson has indicated his commitment to fund $104.4 million for the Santa Ana Mainstem (Orange, Riverside & San Bernardino counties). I am advising we revisit our previous discussion of what can be done to ensure the money stays in the Members of the Boards of Directors Page 4 May 20, 1998 budget and what short- and long-term consequences it has for the Santa Ana Watershed Group's projects. Biosolids Thickening and Dewaterino Automation Award I am pleased to announce that the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) has selected the proposal "Optimizing Biosolids Thickening and Dewatering Operations Through Automation"for an award of$248,456 in research funding. The proposal was submitted jointly by the Districts, Carollo Engineering, and three other wastewater agencies. The purpose of the project is to assess viable automation technologies for thickening and dewatering wastewater residuals and biosolids. The other participants in this project include the Central Contra Costa Sanitation District, Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District and the Vallejo Sanitary Flood Control District. This two-year project comprises adapting existing research on automated biosolids thickening, dewatering, instrumentation, and process control to full-scale, long-temr operational tests on various automation packages. The field research segment of this project will be conducted at the Plant 2 dewatering facility and at the Central Contra Costa Sanitation District. Our agency will benefit by sharing the cost of developing automation suitable for application at the Districts, which will lead to minimally attended or unattended operations. The Districts will contribute $175,000 in matching funds, labor, or materials toward the effort. Districts Receive Two AMSA Awards The Districts was honored last week with two achievement awards from the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) during their annual meeting in Washington, D.C. The 1998 President's Award for Individual Achievement was presented to Ed Tortes of O&M's Air Quality and Special Projects Division for leading AMSA's effort in negotiating with the EPA on the development of Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards for publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). When finalized later this year, these standards will help control air toxic emissions from POTWs. The Districts also received the 1998 AMSA National Achievement Award for Excellence in Public Service for our efforts in the investigation of elevated coliform bacteria levels at Bolsa Chica State Beach. Through our surfzone-monitoring program, we had detected elevated, but not dangerous, bacteria levels at Bolas Chica State Beach in May 1995. While the contamination was not due to our offshore discharge of treated effluent, we led the subsequent investigation and problem-solving efforts. After months of work, we determined the sewer collection system from the state-owned restrooms was the source of bacteria and, with Nancy Wheatley's assistance, were able to ensure that state funds were dedicated to repair the leaking sewer lines. Members of the Boards of Directors Page 5 May 20, 1998 Seinfeld and the Districts "Big Flush" The distance between the Districts and Hollywood got shorter last week when the Orange County Newschannel (OCN) came on site to learn how we were preparing for the "big flush" everyone was predicting immediately after the last episode of Seinfeld. (The media was speculating viewers would wait until after Seinfeld signed-off to use the restroom for fear of missing a single minute of the popular TV show). Nick Arhontes of our Collection Facilities Maintenance Division was interviewed on- camera. The resulting OCN story combined Nick's explanation of our collection, treatment and outfall system with well-known "Seinfeld-isms" including "yadda yadda yadda.' By the way, we did experience an increase in influent that evening of approximately 3 million gallons. Plant 2 Maintenance Buildina Open House Please mark your calendars for Wednesday, June 17, as you are cordially invited to join staff at the open house celebrating the completion of the new Plant 2 Maintenance Building. We are just beginning to formulate plans for the open house and will tell you more about the upcoming event at the June committee meetings. Bring Your Daughter to Work Day The third annual Bring Your Daughter to Work Day was celebrated at the Districts on Thursday, April 23, with more than 70 parents and girls participating. Tours of the plant and of the shop areas highlighted the day. This was the first time the shops were included in the Daughters Day tour, and the employees in these areas did a wonderful job explaining their responsibilities and how they contribute to the success of the agency. As is now Districts' tradition, the morning's festivities concluded with ice cream sundaes in the Board Room and a group photo in front of the Administration Building. Bring Your Daughter to Work Day is a nationwide program to make girls more aware of the career opportunities available to them. To give boys an equal opportunity, we will hold Bring Your Son to Work Day in August. The Districts on the Internet The Communications Department is currently compiling information for the Districts' Internet website and would like your input. In addition to general information about the agency, including our service area, average daily Flows, governance structure, and the names of our Board members and the cities or agencies you represent, what other types of information would you like to see published? Please contact Michelle Tuchman, 593-7120, with your suggestions. An Internet website is part of our Members of the Boards of Directors Page 6 May 20, 1998 external communications program and will be up and running by the end of the first quarter of fiscal 1998-99. Pipeline Wins First Place Award We are proud to announce that The News Pipeline received the first place award in the internal newsletter category in a statewide competition sponsored by the California Association of Public Information Officials (CAPIO). Judges cited Pipeline for its content, writing, design and use of in-house technology to produce a cost- efficient publication that helps meet the information needs of our employees. CAPIO, whose members represent hundreds of cities and public agencies throughout the state, is affiliated with the League of California Cities and is headquartered in Sacramento. New Guide for Wastewater Compliance The Technical Assistance Center recently published the fourth of its informational brochures for new and existing businesses in Orange County, titled "New Business? Old Business? Wastewater Compliance". This brochure, which was designed by Graphic Services, provides general information on common compliance practices and solutions that apply to most industrial wastewater treatment facilities. A copy of the brochure is enclosed for your review. Memorandum of Understanding between CSDOC and SCAQMD on CenGen Station We have received the MOU from SCAQMD on the CenGen station that allows us to operate all engines at both plants during excess power demands resulting from emergency situations. Although it is highly unlikely that all engines will need to be operated except during peak wastewater flow during storms, this MOU covers us for other kinds of emergency situations such as utility power outage, earthquake or fire. In the MOU, CSDOC is required to notify SCAQMD within 8 hours from the start of the 3r° engine at Plant No. 1 and the Vh engine at Plant No. 2, submit appropriate records and make all efforts to avoid exceeding permitted monthly emission limits during the month the emergency occurred. Staff has prepared a Compliance Procedural Form to help field staff comply with the notification requirement to SCAQMD. Members of the Boards of Directors Page 7 May 20, 1998 Plant No. 2 Odor Complaint Report dated May 12, 1998 Plant No. 2 Control Center received a complaint from a resident regarding foul odors on her street during the morning of and the week prior to May 12. Aker touring the area, Operators determined the odor was similar to that emitted by our scrubbers. They treated the problem by increasing the level of bleach in the scrubbers making the slight chemical odor disappear. CWEA Manual of Good Practice for Land Application of Biosolids The California Water Environment Association (CWEA) recently completed a Manual of Good Practice for Land Application of Siosolids. Layne Baroldi of the Districts' Environmental Compliance and Monitoring Division served on the steering committee for developing this excellent resource document. As stated in the manual, "the purpose of this document is to establish a standard of excellence when applying biosolids to agricultural land. Issues addressed include nuisance abatement, good neighbor relationships, and shared responsibilities among all parties with the goal of enhancing biosolids recycling. The objectives are to: • Promote responsible and informed biosolids management and public acceptance of biosolids recycling. • Recommend good management practices for agricultural land application of biosolids to ensure the safe and beneficial use of biosolids. • Encourage statewide uniformity in the application of these practices." If you would like additional information on any of the above items, please call me. Donald F. McIntyre General Manager DFM:jt HAWRE)TAADMIMGM UMLLETTERS TO THE SOARD198'D5279e.000 Attachments: Research brief on When Government Fails: The Orange County Bankruptcy U.S.EPA News Release April 30, 1998 letter to Eileen S. Stommes, USDA Newspaper Articles Wastewater Compliance Guide R Y" The Orange County Bankruptcy: Who's Next? On December 6, 1994,Orange County became die able to invest as he did—had it not been for the fiscal auturt- largest municipality in U.S.history to declare bankruptcy: ity in the ante that began with Proposition 13. That citizen The county treasurer had lost$1.7 billion of taxpayers initiative,and several subsequent initiatives,severely limited money through investments in risky Wall Street securities. the ability of local governments to raise tax revenue. Accustomed to the"New York"model of fiscal stress in older Recognizing the extreme fiscal pressure these initiatives cities with an eroding tax base,the political and fimncial placed on runty governments,the state loosened its munici- communities were shocked. Here was a large,growing sub- pal investment rules—allowing treasurers, for the first time, urban area,with a reputation for affluence and conservatism, w use Bob Citron's kind of strategy. amassing a huge public debt through highly risky specula- tion in the financial market and then refusing to honor in In 1994,the Orange County investment pool had about debt. Shocked as they were,most observers wrote this off as $7.6 billion in deposit from the runty government and a fluke,caused by an underqualified county treasurer in a almost 200 local public agencies(cities,school districts,and stranger-than-usual California county. It may have been a special districts). Borrowing$2 for every$1 on deposit, nasty surprise for Wall Street,they claimed,but not some- Citron increased the size of the investment pool ro$20.6 bil- thing that could happen again—even in Orange County. Bon. In essence,as the WaUStrret jmrna/nored,he was "borrowing shot to go long"and investing the dollars;in In When Cosmrmmt Fait: The Orange County exotic securities whose yields were inversely related to inter- Banknipty,PPIC Senior Fellow Mark Baldassare presents est rates. Unfortunately,also in 1994,the Federal Reserve compelling evidence to the contrary. In this hook,jointly Board began and kept on raising interest rates,and Citron published by PPIC and the University of Cakfsmia Press, kept buying in the hope they would decline. For reasons Baldassare provides the first comprehensive account of the Char Baldassare explains in detail,almost no one was paying events that led to the bankruptcy,how the bankruptcy attention to what the treasurer was doing and even fewer unfolded,and how it was resolved. Orange County may undernood it—until the auditors informed the Board of have provided sufficiently dramatic warning of the danger Supervisors,in November 1994,that he had lost nearly$1.7 of Trcasumr Bob Citron's kind of investment strategy w billion. deter others from following the same path. However,as Baldassare demonstrates,the conditions and resulting imper- The Enabfiing Conditions arm that drove the runty to gamble with public funds retrain. As the fervor for smaller government,tax limits, How did it happen? Why wasn't anyone watching or and local autonomy grows and spreads,many more mania- questioning the treasurer's activities? Was it just a fluke? Are palities may find the specter of financial collapse looming— the runry's lawsuits against various Wall Street firms and especially when the economy takes in next downturn. institutions justified? Could it happen again? Many people believe that the treasurer and his dealings The Trail Betstwen Proposition 13 and the with Wall Strett constitute the necessary and sufficient con- Bankruptry ditions for what happened and that,absent a Bob Citron,it The immediate ease of the bankruptcy was Citoris couldn't happen in their backyards. However,Bildassate's mismanagement of the Orange County investment pool. anddefi outcomes mes counterreconstructi t and lief.anal Hsis of theisituation,tree events. However,he would not have been driven to strive for such and outcomes ranter that belief. He identifies three try factors high rates of return on the pool—nor would he have been in the Orange County context and in the sate that created the necessary conditions for the bankruptcy and the Startgovernmem should dor,4 monitor the fora!candi- nature of the-retxrvery. Citron was not the cause of the fora ofiu localgonernnema, rather than wait fortmous prob- a bankruptcy-,he was the catalyst that made those three neces- lrnu to surface. The stale controller collects budget data sary conditions sufficient. from county governments and presents them in an annual What makes the Orange County bankruptcy significant report. These darn should be systematically analyzed to beyond the borders of the county is that rhea conditions determine which counties show abnormal patterns of rev- exist, to a greater or lesser degree,in counties across cite Hues or expenditures legs focal distress. State leaders state and nation. Baldassare identifies rhea conditions as should discuss ss fad problems an and mluuons with local ofB- politirat fmgmentation, voter durr set,and focal auneria t The vials before the situation reaches crisis stage. book traces how these three conditions operated before,dur- Loral offtciah sbould be wary about citixens'pramru to ing,and after the bankruptcy. It also suggests how they con- implement fatal policies that are popular in the short run but tine m jeopardne Orange Counry's fururo- even as the fcnanri dly aluamous over rime. Disrmstful voters believe Cali(omia economy has rebounded and the county itself is there is considerable wane in government bureaucracy and experiencing unprecedented growth and voter optimism. that municipalities should be able to cat taxes without doing harm to loci services. Lod official[need to do a better job Lessons Learned of educating voters about revenues and expenditures. State government should also now that there arc no checks and Having made a compelling case for the potential threat balances against citizen initiatives that can have disastrous to loci governments inherent in these conditions,the book effects on county services. Perhaps legislative review and goes on to present 10 policy recommendations that may gubernatorial approval should be required for voter- help prevent,or at lean ameliorate,future county crises. approved initiatives on taxes and spending. Four of the more pressing reforms point to a basic reasrruc- tuning of government. State and Local Government Relations Loralgoaevnmrntr need to maintain high standards for fu- Mutt Change cal ovenight and acrvunrabiGry. As noted in the state audi- rofs report following the bankruptcy,a number of steps Implicit in the above recommendation is the need tokr should be taken to ensure that local funds are kept safe and reform stare and loci government relations. County gov- liquid. These include having the Board of Supervisors emmena are charged with the task of providing many cru- cial loci services. Yet Proposition 13 and its progeny have approve the counry's investment fund policies,appointing an independent advisory committee to oversee investment severely limited their ability to raise revenues to provide decisions, requiring more frequent and detailed investment these services. The counties ability to cope (and to some reports horn the county treasurer,and establishing stricter went that of other loci is likely to be further governments) rs. Local eroded as the federal government devolves more responsibli- rules for sdecting brokers and investment advisoofficials should adjust government structures tomake sure ty for programs like welfare to the stattiand the sue to they have the proper financial controls in place a[all times. the counties. In both uses,the funds passed on with the responsibility are likely to be inadequate. State and loci fis- The Start ofQfijorma should revise the law gouermng the d reform ran provide greater certainty about who will pay structure"fin courant. The bankruptcy pointed out an for services and how they will be delivered ro the public in important deficiency in the large counties that operate the most efficient and effective manner. The Orange under general law. They lack strong leadership,and this carr County bankruptcy, Baldassare notes,should have served as hurt their efforts to rope with emergencies. Suburban a wake-up ell. Yet,there has been no ammingfil rem uc- metropolitan regions would be better served if they had a taring in rate and loci government relations,and the mayor elected countywide and highly visible m the people. potential for another county fist disaster remains very real. Their government structure would also be improved by hav- ing a chief executive officer with authority over the budget and personnel in all county departments. Thu reearrh b efproetda on oarreuw ofa book hyMark BAUswer,When Government Fails: The Orange Counry .Bankruptcy. The book,pabliJsdjoier- ly by der Public Pahry hummer of QhJ5roia add. U orrmy of Crtif.Pray, u auatlabk in baokwn or may he ordered by*ar(800-7774726)er thmugb she 1st i..urprea do). 77m Public Policy Imdaae of Cabfomia u a p... wnprofir og caw on drd ud to irdepr aim ew pormon reeardr on eronanw.wr.4 mrdpohriod.dmraffise 4,ht o ofCzhfomlaru. PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA 500 Washington Steer,Suite 800•San Frandsen,California 94111 Telephone (415)2914400•Fan (415)2914401 ir"Ppic.org•w .ppicorg 05/06/98 WED 13:15 IAd 1 415 744 1873 EPA a9 WOO anew a United states Regional Administrator Region 9 Env'aonmenlal Protection 75 Hawthorne Street Arizona.California Agency San Francisco, CA 941053901 Hawaii, Nevada Pacific Islands �. Environmental N&EPA News FOR iMMFDiATF RFLRASF- May 6, 1998 Contact: Dave Schmidt, U. S.EPA (415)744-1578 U.S. EPA,STATE RENEW ORANGE COUNTY SEWAGE PERMIT (San Francisco)—The U. S.Environmental Protection Agency(U.S. EPA)and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board today renewed Orange County's secondary treatment waiver, allowing the county's sanitation districts to continue discharging wastewater at current treatment levels, but with additional guidelines to ensure ocean water protection. Since 1985, Orange County has operated under a wastewater treatment permit and waiver from advanced sewage treatmenfmquirements. In today's action,U.S. EPA and the Regional Board approved a new permit with specific wastewater discharge limits and improved monitoring. "We have developed new monitoring requirements which will yield a better understanding of what's happening in the marine environment and mom stringent limits on what can be discharged," said Felicia Marcus,U.S. EPA regional administrator. "Orange County will also be collecting data on bacteria in marine waters to ensure we can protect recreational uses. Our limits will also encourage a much higher treatment level and increased wastewater reclamation by Orange County over the nett few years." "The Regional Board is very pleased with the level of protection for public health and water quality that will be provided by this peral said Regional Board Executive Officer Gerard Thibeault "In addition, the added flexibility built into the monitoring program for the permit will allow for program adjustments to accommodate demonstrated scientific or water quality needs." Under the terms of the permit,Orange County will continue its current level of advanced primary and partial secondary sewage treatment, with effluent discharged via an outfall pipe terminating about 4.5 miles offshore from the mouth of the Santa Ana River,at a depth of about 195 feet. U. S. EPA's analyses of the scientific data gathered by the Districts over more than a decade confirm that the discharge has had no detrimental effect on the ocean environment -more- rdmai rv, R"Mni Pope. 05/06/98 WEO 13:16 FAX 1 415 744 1671 EPA H9 Wtl0 WJ uuz a Z The permit renewal includes effluent limitations for oil and grease,solids, organic materials, turbidity,pH,acute toxicity and other toxic pollutants. It also contains a monitoring program designed to evaluate the impact of the wastewater discharge on the ocean environment, demonstrate compliance with applicable water quality standards,and measure toxic substances in the discharge. The permit;including the variance from secondary sewage treatment requirements,is renewable every five years. OPIIRUL FUIC14 pd% FAX TRANSMITTAL •awwE � r. Frta E ZG if L 9.FVF4.n[y� FI r Fn1 Fu• NSX r5ED01 ]-TJf6 6pBB-1% aFlE14LL SEINICES� INSTMTIQV v " COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA April 30, 1998 Pl� r141 8622411 Eileen S. Stommes mM edm - Deputy Administrator P.O.am,8127 UDSA-AMS-TM-NOP Fa veliey,ca .82nM127 Docket#TMD-94-00-2 maecadmeea, Room 4007-S, Ag Stop 0275 10e44 Ehs arenas P.O. Box 96456 r'an7o a Washington, D.C. 20090-6456 SUBJECT: USDA National Organic Program Proposed Rule (62 FIR 65850) Membm The County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (Districts) respectfully submits the following comments on the National Organic Program proposed rule. The Districts is a large publicly owned treatment works (POTW) facility Anabelm that serves 2.2 million Orange County residents by treating 250 million &sane irk gallons of wastewater per day. The Districts utilizes various physical and Go. natural processes in the treatment of the wastewater and residuals. The faantam WHey Fallarton Districts utilizes the natural process of anaerobic digestion to stabilize sewage '"Ni ngwn eaaeb sludge and create biosolids. Biosolids are the natural, primarily organic solid e: by-product of the wastewater treatment processes that can be safely La Pe recycled. Biosolids are made of primarily organic matter and nutrients such Los Alemima IVawPart eaagn as nitrogen, phosphorus, zinc, calcium, magnesium and iron. Orange Preatm. Same Me The Districts strongly encourage the inclusion of biosolids as a permitted SBesw� organic soil conditioner and soil amendment. The Organic Foods Production rasa. Act of 1990 defines a synthetic substance to be "a substance that is Wla Perk mrba undo formulated or manufactured by a chemical process or by a process that Coamy m orange chemically changes a substance extracted from naturally occurring plant, animal, or mineral sources, except that such term shall not apply to sense y aaa substances created by naturally occurring biological processes." According to this definition biosolids are not a synthetic substance. The wastewater c°' G1 treatment process does not"chemical) thane or"chemical) alter" save. W. Y 9 Y Mldwoy G4 biosolids. The National Organics Standards Board considers non-synthetic We r Dian= substances that have been treated, but not chemically altered with a synthetic substance, to remain non-synthetic under the definition given in the Act. As myna °och such, the addition of small amount of process control chemicals in wastewater treatment would not make biosolids "synthetic." A Public Wasraweter and Enlronmennl Management Agency Committed to Prt ding the Envlronmant Since 1954 Eileen S. Stommes Page 2 of 3 April 30, 1998 The Districts believe that the proposed rule does not provide a scientific basis for the exclusion of biosolids from organically grown crops. As currently drafted, the proposed rule serves to perpetuate the stereotype regarding the superior safety of organically grown foods, and it represents a food safety marketing ploy with little scientific principle. The public perceives foods labeled as "organic"to be safer regardless of the fact that the regulation that governs their method of production is not risk-based. As a result of its decades-long risk assessment of biosolids, U.S. EPA concluded that recycling biosolids to land was a safe and an environmentally responsible solution when used in accordance with regulations found in 40 CFR Part 503. No documented negative human health impacts have been experienced when biosolids have been land applied under good management practices. The science based approach for biosolids management used in developing 40 CFR Part 503 could serve as a model for policy and regulation in other areas of agricultural production and food safety. The Districts understands that the purpose of the proposed rule is to establish national standards to govem the marketing of organically produced products and to assure consumers that organically produced products meet a consistent standard. The Districts believes that to achieve these goals the proposed regulation should be developed using scientiflcelly-based criteria, which are relevant to the safety of the material similar to that used by EPA in the development of 40 CFR Part 503. The USDA, EPA, Food and Drug Administration, and National Research Council have declared that the use of biosolids is safe and acceptable in the production of food crops. The USDA issued a policy statement as far back as 1981 that endorses the use of biosolids for the production of fruits and vegetables. The Districts is confident that biosolids would meet scientifically based criteria proposed by the USDA to ensure the safety of organically produced foods, if developed. The use of products that have not been subjected to similar risk assessment, such as raw manures, on organically grown foods may pose a safety risk. The Districts share USDA's concern for public health and food safety. The Districts recommend that the USDA utilize risk assessments and scientific considerations, similar to those used in the study of biosolids, in the creation and development of the National Organic Program proposed rule. The Eileen S. Stommes Page 3 of 3 April 30, 1998 Districts appreciate the opportunity to participate in the USDA rulemaking process. If you have any questions or would like further information, please contact me at(714) 593-7400. Thank you for your careful consideration of these comments. AA �W Nancy J. Whea ey Director of Technical Services NJW/LB:mcm H:WOP.DTA%TSMWV 3AROLDILIREADUM114LTR.DOC c: B.P. Anderson M.D. Moore L.T. Baroldi ECM File �X66C/f] American Society of Civil Engineers (�1QiZ, /99 v ASCE Gives Poor Grades to Nation 's Infrastructure ASCE has given the nation's inbasuacnue an average grade of D and says in substandard condition,and we will it will take more that$1 trillion—and a new publicrrivete partnership— face gridlock at our airports by 2004,it to fix the longmeglected problems last month in Washington,D.C.,at a is fah to say our infrastructure is in p- televised press conference held during r Policy Week officials of the pretty bad shape.And without seri- Sudety released m the public i6'1998 Report Card for America's Infm- ous help.it's not going m get anyhea strucmae;which gives lever grades for the condition of the nation's pub ter;said, E President Luther W. G F —� he infrastructure and environment The worst marks went to schools, Grsef. (ASCE's grades were deter. which received a failing grade,while a C,the highest grade given,went to mined by a panel of civil engineer masstraosiLHaallouswas mdroadsgota D'anddrinldngwamrmd experts who evaluated each cate- dams rated a D. Wastewater was given a D'- and a C went to bridges, gory on the basis of its condition solid wave and aviation and performance,need versus ra P "When people die each yearfrom drmldngandaminated tapwater.our parity.and need versus funding. 1. school buildings are literally crumbling,more than half of ourroadways are The report comes le years after -the National Council on Public Works Improvement graded the condition of the U.S.infrastructure,giving it an overall grade of C.) ASCE examined essentially the same categories the council did in 1988 and added a category for school buildings.The Society cautioned against directly comparing its grades with the counm'I's,but stated the overall condition of the infrastructure had not improved over the past decade and in some areas had worsened.President Greet said,"It is the job ofAmerira's civil engineers to design,build and maintain a safe and ef- fective infrastructure system and clean up the environment We are doing _ the best we can,with the minimal msourtcs we have.But let's be honest you can't just put a Band-Aid on a gaping wound and expect it to nuke a difference" To repair and renew the mtrastrucnue in meet growing needs will take a least$13 billion in capital investment over a fivayesr period,rice said in its report a he Society based the estimate on recent federal gov- entreat reports.)The report card and the$13 o ion needs assessment come as Congress is considering the 1999 budget,and what to do with an expected budget surplus. '"Die Clinton administration's budget for fiscal 1999 is disappointing," said Gme4"especially coming from a president who campaigned on infra- structure iodayul6aebfi0 the evyaro praudbr dmpareldp and hab tarpon of renewal.We support a balanced budget and want to see Amer- ica's economy grow. But a crumbling infrastructure can't support a tar anovotten ten FnyWhdands®a from Ohba Bur tedahaLmrenedlatn healthy economy.And,d we want more and bigger budget surpluses in fv o/Boston svfi reme,m.oecconve hiseas,anborene scdMork endues lad per note years,we must invest now in the intrastruchrre renewal that win pohlaz we the norm rather than he etaoan on the hennc&W*W over door, make that possible." rate he drys downtown.Bur that's nor the o*Boston youk findd ftu erne city Some of the investment needs it progea is ASCE are already But,being catm.su su of the rnnv inremadg and pmpressive dvilanPneednp brhdnwla forded through federal.state and Lod programs and user fees But citing im the country the W'M'MWn"kas Boston the(pdBR site V A 'S anhall current poor conditions as evidence,ASCE says Investment levels are mnental.Mork you,rabnaam for Oct 18 1 and Pon ro saahl sa sovery's dearly inadequate.Me federal government continues to shift the fhl n penwrehe'mfor 1998 To hewn so:rw M,patprydatl krtlarreetng,laem haw dal burden to the statm yet voters have been reluctant to support new wensak Bomewn,per.cvinvel enderdvrecNrel toural the dry,OrWOVT hory taxes or bond issues to build desperately needed community schcols or to newore these ticky roundabours, check our Boston on4ine at water treatment plants,"said Graet mmlrlarshdarlM'Fkosavl.noNphrrolrT�srcLcmvNbt+rywewsHtler.hml.For While rice blamed much of the nation's infrastructure,problems on mare khlanaton on he coax mnvemen asaff,,®a BM5482M AsccE. Society Estimates Cost of Report Card Gets Fast Results $1 Trillion to Fix What's Respanse to ,scE'a report card on America's inIn stwclme was Wrong with Infrastructure swift and favorable. At the Washington. D.C.. press conference. US. Representative Tom Petri IH-Wei was effusive in his praise Irorri awia r im the Society,commending it for pasting public awareness of the need for intruding the nations infrastructure.(Petri chairs the But, limited funding d all levels of goner sal it ado cited other committee on surface transtiommion of the House Transportation faders.' a continue to merely patch up outdated and fist,- end Infrastructure Committee.)Alruaft sigisbtors ere mentioning merited transportation systems instead of lnveeUeg in pew tact n in speeches about the need for bolstenng school constructiop. nologies,establishing better lurks between laaditional trans Represented.James S. Cathedral, wpm is an Honorary Fellow of Wrtaaon and mass transit and encouraging new behaviors.We rust.retuned to the Breda given aviation in a maiden,ho smanded, alw focus efforts on'endopthe-pipe'solutions--duetting up even going to the Society's Web site to download source doete hazardous wane ahes It has contaminated our envvmunml— mends.And Senator Card Moseley-Braun is mpeeted to retain a instead of redudng It the scene.'Grad said, streamlue d version of the report card when she begins debate on To address same of those issue.the Sociess research ma school construction bill making its wary tlsough Congress. arut the Cml Ed unceirhg Rwrch Foundation(ctnta1,has art Media attention, too, was wkewit a and immediate. In addF unbound plans to develop a new partnership among induawy, tion to television coverage on c-swat, the press conference at- gnvvnmemt and the odemic community.to be aged the Part treated a variety of other media,among them cars.m,Rsda,Gan reship for the Advaomrrert of hihastrurnue and Its Renewal nett News Service. State News Service, Bloomberg Business (RAM).SIM an proposal form rail is designed to accekrne beds, News, ENR, Investor's Business Daily, Detroit News and the structure repewal and make it o era surabluuble,aaording W Chadesmn Wsrand Copier.As a fulbwup.Rec Radio ran a lengthy ci'Cammt mhastnrane research and development forms inten new on the subject with President lab Grand add Executive Di and,®teal compared with other industries.On goal is to help pact.Jim Daub on us weekend heal finer show.And Davis took a consolidate atM ebmn ine R&D efforts to of icieady move new satellite television tour to piece him live on morning N news pro- LLrheobgies and maoevlsinp, .We,,M seek to remove gams around the country, barriers to innovation .,.m.rw. that have stymied each Aall saw YGi Kw efforts.'said ma Presi dent Haney Bernstein. Giving our Grads,. as¢ Pnsrdanr lurnm W Gne/ corers the pass ro a.Wun harden ewer obes"bas doi do Scenery,upon ad m D.S.n/nstrucaure. SCE jl T a. Yi i alada Evwm.At the Nelrorof Press flub in Nbshrgron.D.C.Isst mprrll.45[E'a debtor card was downward p modua and B.fs, Congressman Boehlert Is Named ASCE Honorary Fellow U.&Represenwrve Sherwood L Boehlert(R-N.Y)has been elected an Honorary Fe➢ow of as¢,which is the Society's highest honor for nonmembers,as¢recognized Boehlert for his dimm uishe i service to the U.S. House of Repreentatives as a laden in embomnenfal.public works,transportation and science bsue He chubs the subcommittee en water renounces and the envvovmmL under the House Transpor dam and Infra- structure,Coammuc,' •Cooeresran Boehlert has been a steadfast defender of the nation's environmental infrastructure and a strong advocate for the envu-mmweL America's dva er wens have been proud to work with him to achieve ckmer air and water,and a better habim for fish and wildlife throughout the ration;said ascc president Luther Graec who gave the award to Boehlert during a Capitol Hill Club luncheon in his a .yam. ' honor.Mending the ceremony were AKE leaders and members of the Sodetys national policy committees.who were in the atior's dial for ass annual Policy Week. The Honorary Fellow distinction recog. vizes individuals who have demonstrated achievement and high standards of conduct and have benefited humanity through out- standing support for and eegwati hg.'I am truly honored by this prestigious award, _ which mpre ows yeah of engagement and hard work with asce,'said Boehlert. To- gether we are improving our nation's infm strucuue and bringing a leaner and safer er, vbommeot W tuoue gencatiow.' US. waprvantaBvw gMrwad gaahhart.right,6rwnara rha Boehlert has represented central New gaN norwrrrrrs6ar alaeMan AgfF H^^ww1 figow.Res oomr York State m Congress some 19M.He serve turner W Groat does lire bvays n U His owamo ,dung on the House subcommittee on basic research as¢a A%cY Week n W.PwWn 0G and on the intelligence subcommittee. He earned a bachelor of adena degree in public relations from Utim College of Syracuse University in 196L asca has elected 19 Honorary Fellows since the title was established in 1986,George M.White,who was then Architect of the Capitol,was the first to be so named.Among others who share the distinction with Boehlert are Senator John Warta.the bane senator George F Brown,the former congmanown W-0.F. Clinger and Norman Y.Mines.and the president of the RuLppmes.Mde V.Ramos. Sampling from the Report Card Here are several samplings from the recently issued'1998 Repon Card for America's Infrastructure" hum both ends of the spectrum and somewhere in between.The report was released byascc in March: More 7rmsit—C.7Menty percent of buses.23%of roil mhkks and 38%of rural and specialized w- ; hlcle,are in deficient condition.Some 21%of rail bark requmas imprmewrL And 48%of ra0 mainte, was buildings,6$%of rail yards and 46%of signals and communimtiow eouipment are to fair or poor condition.Investment needed W nuinbin conditions is S39 bl ion It would take up to S72 billion to in� prweconditims. Dams—D.Thee are 2.100 regulated dams considered unsafe.Every state has at least one high f hazard dam,which upon failure would muse significant loss of life and property.There have been more then 200 documented dam failures across the nation over the past few yeas.It would cost about $1 billion to rebabdivue documented unsafe dams Sd.Is -F.OmMhird of a8 at hurls need utensive repair or replacement.Nearly tiro of schools have at least one major building problem.and more than half have inadequate environmental condi cons Some 46%Iack basic wiring to support comW ter syverns It will cost about$112 billion to minor renovate and modernire U.S.schools.Another S60 billion in new construction is needed to acoomvn date the 3 rtution new students a wrted over the nor decade. How to Get Your Own Report Card Members with saesb ns sWeb ane(wwOaaa.org/gavvpub/machmll onvastthe eketo learn note about the SocleW5 pew roar me report cud(with pea release,iemrc bncb on each of the 10 cutegpka evduau d and pepucd r ..dm from Pr rodent lather Grad Fsecarute Director 1. Davis and Cear President Harvey eamtan included). Alan, a videotape of the prey conference that took place at)he National Press Club in Washington. D.C.. on March 5 is available in its entirety (/8 minutes) from csrm.tel.80012T7 2698. It may be easier to obtain the hpe through GSem 5 Web site al—..esp..nrg. (y0 order you will iced the pro Paft Iaq IwaJwL With Me Mt.Howe h Me bane, .. Mess grain's m number,101847.) .nKGYf Nays hmraMunIM M is m,cobs M of A*,,N aM h Vob&Wnm.D.C.fir Abu,EMs h owW Aw Ms 5'aoaWS na6M - co"on"aaa fwmm our.a rom Va.on.1.1 uaus -N U60,aaA aRONO'10 r4Yla NNI.of Cg dMSi.A dm sFOAM Rn n hOr an,RatlanFastt( Tarr.FY.O1V,{fed/GoW.Bab Pawattlaa DiwarJ Da. OCREGISTER.COM: Crime& Courts: Page 1 of 2 crime'- courts SEMONS M""KE"'"CE- Home Page m AutoAccess , acregr stetr prom ocregiste�.com Lawsuit targets rights to rare albino snake COURTS: A Mission Viejo man finds himself in the coils of a breach-of-contract suit over the anaconda. April 15, 1998 By JOHN McDONALD The Orange County Register A custody dispute over a rare albino anaconda snake is the focus of a breach-of-contract lawsuit filed Tuesday in Orange County Superior Court. In July 1997, a contract was drawn up between a Mission Viejo chemical engineer and a Pennsylvania man, giving each a 50-50 ownership share in "a certain albino Eunectes muvinus," according to the lawsuit. Mark Leshock of Pennsylvania seeks $25,000 in damages and a court order barring Louis R. Sangermano, of Mission Viejo, from selling the snake or any of its offspring. Leshock contends that Sangermano has refused to share money obtained by advertising the snake or from its offspring and has denied that any contract exists. "Its the only (snake) of its kind in captivity," said Craig Tauchman, a serpent expert at Prehistoric Pets in Fountain Valley. "They are usually green with black spots for camouflage. An albino is yellow and would never survive in the wild." Tauchman said that such snakes are also called great water boas. With normal coloring, the snakes are believed to 4/15/98 5:13:04 PM OCREGISTER.COM: Crime& Courts: Page 2 of 2 grow to be about 30 feet long, but Tauchman said the largest he has ever owned was about 20 feet. The snake in question is about 4 feet long and was born about a year ago in Suriname. Sangermano won a $788,000 judgment against the County Sanitation Districts last year after he was fired as laboratory director because of sexual-harassment allegations. He had alleged that he was fired in retaliation for assisting the District Attorney's Office in its investigation of a fatal sewer explosion. #1 newspape r in Orange County,Caltlamia 9_Th Coed co the Orange County Register Please send comments to ocrepislernslink.heetlom.mm 4/15/98 5:13:04 PM Dairy Fauns Linked to O.C. Water Woes Page I of 4 News GO Site lntlen GO r ORANGE COUNTY NEWS HELP`0 You'llmake more of it if you-. Chaos-b-k.W. USIIES , 00 IMOKU I wt lbursday,April Dairy Farms Linked to O.C. Water Woes By SHELBYGRAD, Times Slof Writer LENSps year's heavy rains have sent a stew of cow waste,hay M�nd dirt gushing from Inland Empire dairy farms down RELATED a Santa Ana River and into Orange County's aquifers, o.c.SECTIONS heightening concerns about the quality of local ground water in the long term. MAIN PAGE The brown,murky runoff contains high levels of nitrates, toxic substances that in large enough amounts can be NEWS BY dangerous. Officials emphasized that, while there is no COKINIUNITY immediate threat to public health, nitrates in heavy SPORTS concentrations can harm newborns and have been linked to miscarriages and other health problems. PREY SPORTS The dairy runoff,along with treated waste water that is dumped into the river from Riverside and other communities BUSINESS to the north, flows down the Santa Ana River through the LIFE&STYLE Pmdo Dam and into Anaheim,where some of it seeps into Orange County's vast ground water supply. CALENDAR Over the past 30 years,nitrate levels found in ground water pumped from North County wells along the river have more CALENDAR than tripled. Though the levels remain within federal health WEEKEND standards,officials said the trend is alarming and could spread HOME DESIGN to other wells unless the problem is addressed. The Orange County Water District blames nitrate-laden COMMENTARY dairy runoff for killing thousands of trout and bass last month at an Anaheim fishing lake after a heavy rainstorm. T.V.TB.gS "It's a emerging problem,' said Jim Van Ham, associate general manager of the water district. "The area upstream on the river is the largest concentration of dairy farms in the country.Consider that one cow is the biological equivalent of eight humans. That's the equivalent of 2.5 million people in an area that is essentially uosewered." Water officials, farmers and upstream communities are working to address the problem using old-fashioned flood-control techniques and ecological innovation. The Orange County Water District last year converted several miles of open space north of the Prado Dam into lush wetlands of 50 shallow ponds. The district now diverts about half of the river's flow through the marsh,which naturally removes most of the nitrates. 4/16/98 10:58:15 AM Dairy Farms Linked to O.C. Water Woes Page 2 of 4 Measures Discussed to Stop Runoff Riverside County farmers and water agencies,meanwhile, are discussing a new and expensive flood control system that would prevent storm runoff generated in urban areas from flowing into the dairy farms and polluting the river. "We are all trying hard,but it's going to cost a lot of money," said Corona-area farmer Geoffrey Vanden Heuvel. "For a long time,water quality really wasn't an issue up here. Now it is. We all recognize the importance of clean water." The stakes also are high for Orange County residents and businesses,who get more than half of their water from local wells. Federal drinking water standards allow a maximum of 10 milligrams of nitrates per liter of water.Nitrate levels in North County production wells near the Santa Ana River have climbed from practically zero in 1962 to as high as 8 milligrams per liter in 1997. Water from those wells is diluted with water from other areas,making the final product that comes out of the tap low in nitrates. "It's manageable now. But if you look 50 years down the road,our concern is the problem will spread to other areas in the ground water basin,"Van Haun said. Nitrates are created from human and animal wastes.The most serious health problem attributed to the substance is "blue baby" syndrome,a potentially fatal oxygen deprivation in infants younger than 6 months. In parts of Corona and Norco,runoff has seeped into aquifers and forced officials to close ground water wells, because the nitrate levels exceeded federal standards. And the problem is spreading.Nearly half of the water in the Inland Empire's subterranean basins could be undrinkable by 2015 because of pollution,according to a study prepared by the Santa Ana River Watershed Project Authority. Officials blame the situation in part on the urbanization of the Inland Empire,which sends increasing amounts of runoff and treated waste water into the river.Another factor is the gradual migration of dairy farmers from La Palma, Cerritos and Los Alamitos to the undeveloped flatlands north of Corona "The dairies have been around the Corona area for only about 30 years or so," said Richard Smith, acting general manager of the Santa Ana River Watershed Project Authority. "They got pushed out of that [western Orange County] area by development;now they are here." Dairy farming is a wet and muddy business because under federal agriculture laws,the cows must be washed regularly. When farmers first moved to the area in the 1960s,much of the runoff simply flowed into the Santa Ana River. In recent years,as a growing number of dairy farms increased the pollution,new laws have required more extensive irrigation to keep the dirty water out of the river. Farmers have erected dikes,berms and lagoons that usually prevent the dairy waste from reaching the river and connecting 4/16/98 10:58:15 AM Dairy Fawns Linked to O.C. Water Woes Page 3 of 4 streams. Too Much Rain Overwhelms Defenses During rains,however,urban runoff from the north flows onto the farms,mixing with the dairy water and overwhelming the protections. Making matters worse,this year's El Niflo storms have damaged the irrigation systems on some farms. "That storm water is so powerful h just breaks through our defenses," said Bob Feenstra, general manager of the local Milk Producers Council. "Our facilities can't hold the water." The nitrate levels are highest north of the Prado Dam as the runoff hits the river.By the time it reaches Orange County,the water has been diluted somewhat with large amounts of storm nmoff and rain water. Feenstra and others say the recent rains have focused more attention on the need for better flood control in southern Riverside and San Bernardino counties,where most of the dairy farms are located. Officials are seeking state and federal funding to construct curbs and gutters along some local roads to prevent urban nmoff from flooding farms. There has also been talk of trying to increase the capacity of upstream storm drains and even building a water treatment plant if money can be secured. The Orange County Water District,however,already has found success with a natural water purification system that is winning national recognition. Worried about the rising nitrate levels in some Orange County wells,the district built a 400-acre marsh behind Prado Dam. Completed last year,it has vegetation such as duckweed, cattail and bulrush,and is surrounded by a wall of willow trees. About half the water flowing down the Santa Ana River is diverted into the wetlands, where the pond plants absorb nitrates and bacteria convert some of them into hamaless nitrogen gas. Preliminary projections indicate that the wetlands have reduced nitrates by at least 15%to 20%. As much as 60 million gallons of water flows through the wetlands daily. The water district estimates that the marshes can remove as much as a ton of nitrates a day. The system is far less costly than building a water treatment plant,they add. M � 4 Nitrate Problem Dairy runoff, along with treated waste water from Riverside and other communities,is dumping nitrates into the Santa Ana River.The river,which flows through wetlands,past the Prado Dam and into Anaheim,is a main replenisher of Orange County's ground water basin,or aquifer. A closer look at the path: 1. Dairy farms: Highest concentration of dairy cows in the U.S. 2. Wetlands: Up to 50%of the Santa Ana River diverted 4/16/98 10:58:15 AM Dairy Farms Linked to O.C. Water Woes Page 4 of 4 through wetlands,which naturally wash nitrates from water into soil,grasses;balance of water flows downstream 3. Aquifers: River water diverted into holding ponds,where it percolates into aquifer,raising ground water levels 4.North County ground water wells: High levels of nitrates found;water heavily diluted with nitrate-free water before introduced into public water system,so tap water contains low levels of nitrates sss About Nitrates Nitrates come from human and animal wastes,typically septic tanks or agricultural runoff and fertilizers. Other facts: * Nitrates are associated with"blue baby" syndrome and miscarriages,because high levels can cut off oxygen flow in the body * High nitrate levels trigger eutrophication,algae blooms so dense that oxygen levels drop to zero new the bottom of lakes and rivers;may cause massive fish kills * Federal clean drinking-water standards allow up to 10 milligrams of nitrates per liter,water in the Anaheim wells measures between 1 and 9 milligrams Source: Orange County Water District and Times reports Researched by SHELBY GRAD/Los Angeles Times ISeatch the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories.You will not ch�k for stories,only to retrieve one. Copyright Los Angeles Times News GO Sile Intlex GO 4/16/98 10:58:15 AM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 1 of 3 . iCt'dP�t1��6�$� sEcnox�s�® MARKETPILACE iL Homo Pa a ��AutoAccess , '...TNcregiStSYaEGYSIFa: i1.—T.T m Otl'E'JISiI'�6C011l Reclaimed water to create o„„;era GD°°" algae, foes say Q&A: The 752-acre open-water estuary is valuable as a preserve. April 18, 1998 By BRADY RHOADES y The Orange County Register Irvine Ranch Water District on Friday got the go-ahead to pump reclaimed water into the San Diego Creek, which feeds Newport's Upper Bay. Following are some answers to questions on the issue. Q. What did the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board do Friday? A. The board, which regulates waste discharges for all feeders of the Santa Ana River, voted 5-0, with one abstention, to approve Irvine Ranch Water District's permit to pump up to 5 million gallons of reclaimed water daily into the San Diego Creek from October.through March. Q. What does the board's action mean for Newport's Upper Bay ? A. It depends. Irvine Ranch Water District representatives concede that in the winter they will be pumping nitrogen and other harmful nutrients into the creek, which feeds the bay. But in the summer they will "treat," or lower nitrogen levels, in the creek water. The overall result? Lower levels of harmful nutrients in the bay. Environmentalists from Defend the Bay disagree. They say pumping "treated sewage" into the creek will create more algae in the bay, threatening its 4/20/98 9:09:09 AM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 3 of 3 decision? A. Members of Defend the Bay say an appeal is in the works. e1 nempaper inpOmnge�Ciouunnty,California 1. 19l �L1 , Copyright 1998 The Omnge County Register Please mm commehts to ov isteralink.finedom.com 4/20/98 9:09:09 AM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 1 of 2 community Home Page m 1A - 'I-L oeregistmCom Water 'store' is all about Outside Omnga County Obituaries conservation CITIES: The La Habra outlet will offer lessons in saving water and a toilet trade-in program. May 1, 1998 By ERIC CARPENTER The Orange County Register LA HABRA—Orange County residents might stop wasting millions of gallons of water each day if they only knew how to conserve better. That's the theory behind the Orange County Water Efficiency Store, which opens today in La Habra. The store, at 901 E. Lambert Road, was developed by CTSI Corp. of Tustin in cooperation with the Municipal Water District of Orange County. The agency subsidizes some of the costs of operating the store, which is billed as the first of its kind in the state. Though called a "store," it is more of an educational outlet where residents can learn about products that will help them conserve water in the bathroom, laundry room and yard. "Even after a season of heavy rains, there is no less need for water conservation," said Clive Plumb, program manager for CTSI. "We hope to show people how to conserve and (in the process) save on their water bills." Through the Orange County Water Efficiency Program, residents who visit the store can —for $40 —trade their toilets for ultra low-flush toilets, which can save up to 5 gallons per flush. 5/1/98 11:28:57 AM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 2 of 2 ' In the past few years, low-flush toilets have been re-engineered to be as effective as traditional "water-wasting" toilets, said Steve Hedges, water-conservation specialist for the water district. The toilet trade-in program is open to anyone who can show—by bringing in their water bill —that they live in Orange County. The store is open Thursdays through Saturdays through Sept. 26. If the program proves successful, it might be expanded elsewhere in the county, Plumb said. f1 nmwpaW InOnotp County.Cdfamh �..,. .�Jw'«i CoPM I The 0lanae coumy R.epYbr PI...BeM oomnrenI.ro oa2120 IMk.keeEom.com 5/1/98 11:28:57 AM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 1 of 2 SEtl10Ns a JUt1MT Aa--- COntr�eRn�t�y Home Page miL AutoAaess TIE OaANGE CW NiY eEGISTA ocregistercom Ouhide Ognge-County Tips on water conservation May 1, 1998 The Water Efficiency Store, which opens today in La Habra, will showcase methods for conserving water in and around the house. Water-conservation experts wam that seasons of heavy rain are often followed by drought conditions. They offer these tips to save water: • In the shower: Replace old shower heads with high-pressure heads that increase water pressure but use less water. Cut back on shower times. • Around the house: Check all faucets for leaks. Sometimes stopping the leak is as simple as replacing a rubber washer. Even a small drip can waste up to 10 gallons per day. While brushing your teeth or shaving, turn the water off when it is not being used. • Toilets: Replace old toilets with ultra low-flush toilets. Many older-model toilets use five to seven gallons per flush. The low-flush toilets use 1.6 gallons per flush, which means the average household could save as much as 40,000 gallons of water each year. Fix toilets that leak. • In the yard: Water grass and shrubs sparingly. To test whether a lawn needs water, step on it. If it springs back, no water is needed. In shrub areas, check the saturation of the soil by digging down 2 to 3 inches. If moist, no water is needed. • Watering the lawn: Water the lawn in the early-morning hours two days per week for five to six minutes each time. Shrub areas should be 5/1/98 11:27:51 AM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 2 of 2 watered once a week for nine minutes. If it has rained during the week, no water is needed. Fix broken sprinkler heads and adjust spray patterns so as not to overwater any particular area. • More information: Want to save water while caring for your yard? Call the Municipal Water District of Orange County's hot line: (800) 822-0006. at rreaspaper In OrangeCounty,Calromis •• 4KgWiV, ' Copyright co nsne The Orange County Register Please send comments is omegiele�link.hee0om.com 5/1/98 11:27:51 AM Spitzer Tries to Avoid Hard Landing Over Airp... Page I of 4 News GO Sae Ietlex GO E=rTVM_!1TT2 ORANGE COUNTY NEWS HELP You'll make more of it if you... Ch°°T°bwk" b.1-FF INES 'BOORS. P B OF 1 � Friday, ay 1, 1998 Spitzer Tries to Avoid Hard Landing Over Airport Issue .Politics: Weighing a ran for Assembly,supervisor eases his opposition to proposed El Toro project. By LORBNZd MUNOZ Times Staff Writer Range County Supervisor Todd Spitzer,who once firmly pp xi., an airport at El Toro,has softened his position RELATED recently as he has quietly told Republican Party leaders O.C.SECTIONS he is considering running for higher office in a pro-airport district. MAIN PAGE In the last month, Spitzer has met with Assemblyman Dick Ackerman(R-Fullerton)and several GOP leaders to lay out NEWS BY his plan to run for Ackerman's seat in the Legislature in 2000. OMZ`—OM RITY Ackerman acknowledged that he discussed such plans with SPORTS Spitzer but would not elaborate. Other knowledgeable GOP party sources said Ackerman has agreed to support Spitzer as a PREP SPORTS replacement for his pro-airport district, and the supervisor has pledged to back Ackerman in a state Senate race. BUSINESS As word of Spitzer's exploration of higher office and LIFE&STYLE shifting stance toward the airport has spread through GOP ranks, some South County anti-airport activists are worried CALENDAR that they have lost a key ally on the Board of Supervisors, which has moved the airport plans along mostly on 3-2 votes. CALENDAR Thursday, Spitzer confirmed that he had discussed running WEEKEND for Ackerman's seat with the assemblyman, but said that"right HOME DESIGN now" he is not planning to seek the seat. He did not rule out running for higher office one day. He said he is still opposed COMMENTARY to an airport at El Toro Marine Air Station,which is being turned over to the county in 1999. T.V.TIMES In fact, Spitzer said in a telephone interview from Washington, he was in the nation's capital to seek federal support for the so-called Millennium Plan, which calls for residential,business and commercial development instead of an airport at the 4,700-acre El Toro site. "If the majority of the board votes for an airport, I have an obligation to South County to do Todd Spitzer what I can to mitigate the impacts of an airport. That does not mean I am pro-airport," he said. Yet,the revelation of his behind-the-scenes talks with GOP leaders and Ackerman comes at a time when even Spitzer's public opposition to the airport appears to have eased. When he was elected 18 months ago, he flatly said: "I will 5/1/98 7:47:48 AM Spitzer Tries to Avoid Hard Landing Over A'up... Page 2 of 4 not support" an airport at El Toro. But last week at a public meeting packed with pro-airport residents, Spitzer blamed the media for mischaracterizing him as anti-airport. In an interview before the meeting,he said: "I have a very open mind to listen. . . and make the best decision I can. "It's a very different climate now"than when he fast took office, Spitzer said. Numerous GOP party leaders believe Spitzer's anti-airport stance will hurt him if he were to run for office in a pro-airport district. Dale Dykema and Doy Henley, chairman and president,respectively,of the parry's influential Lincoln Club, said it will be difficult for Spitzer to oppose the airport and win election in Ackerman's district According to interviews with Ackerman and several party leaders,the 37-year-old supervisor had been looking ahead to the state Senate seat that John Lewis must vacate in 2000 because of term limits.Lewis'district,like Spitzer's supervisor district, is split among those who support and oppose an airport. But in meetings with Ackerman in Sacramento, Spitzer learned that Ackerman is planning to run for Lewis' seat. So Spitzer altered his plans,Ackerman said. "The last time we spoke he mentioned he was interested in my seat," Ackerman said. "He inquired if other people had expressed an interest in this seat." Winning Ackerman's seat would likely require the support of pro-airport officials who dominate that district, elected officials say. "The Republican hierarchy[here] is solidly for the airport," Fullerton Councilwoman Jan M. Flory said. "Even though this is not a passionate issue for the average Joe,if the Republican stalwarts oppose him,that will hurt him." Added Buena Park Councilman Art Brown: "It's important for him to start taking into consideration the constituents in the northern part of his district" Spitzer's district is tricky when it comes to the El Toro airport issue.It stretches from such pro-airport North County cities as Fullerton and Yorba Linda to such South County anti-airport bastions as Mission Viejo and Lake Forest. Those opposed to the airport face a difficult challenge and are counting on the support of Spitzer and fellow anti-airport Supervisor Tom Wilson. "People are worrying about what is going on.They are saying,'Is he with us?Do we have a chance?"' said Leonard Kranser,who authors the anti-airport Web site. Over the last month,he said, many residents have registered their concerns about Spitzer on the site. Only a few weeks ago,Wilson was summoned to a meeting with South County anti-airport leaders to ensure his loyalty. It was that brand of loyalty that endeared Spitzer to anti-airport voters when he ran for supervisor two years ago. "You deserve to know where I stand on vital Mission Viejo issues," reads the letter from Spitzer that was mailed to South 5/1/98 7:47:48 AM Spitzer Tries to Avoid Hard Landing Over Airp... Page 3 of 4 County voters in October 1996. "I oppose building an airport or a jail in South County." Starting several months ago, Spitzer toned down his fiery anti-airport rhetoric and began to be more conciliatory. He declared it was the planning process he objected to,not necessarily the concept of an airport. At one point,he met with Newport Beach mayor and airport supporter Thomas C. Edwards and seemed to express neutrality. "He said Tom,I am not against an airport necessarily,"' said Edwards. "He has always said,'I want to make the process work properly.' He has positioned himself very well." Last month,he told a group of 300 Tustin and Santa Ana residents that"if its going to be an airport,then do it right." At last week's board meeting, Spitzer was publicly berated by his North County constituents for not towing the pro-airport line. At that meeting,Spitzer hinted at compromise,saying that perhaps South County officials should try to negotiate an airport plan they could accept. "Maybe it's time to come to the table and discuss the issues of noise and the environment," he told the audience. Spitzer said Thursday that he was simply trying to patch things up between the two factions. "I am very concerned about this entire county deteriorating over one issue," he said. "I've reached out to many elected officials. I don't want to have a war. I think we need to have a dialogue." Many anti-airport activists,like Bill Koggerman, chairman of Taxpayers for Responsible Planning,remain solidly behind the supervisor. "I am not concerned about Todd Spitzer," Koggerman said, "because I think he has a brilliant mind,he is a fair man and he understands clearly that the nonaviation plan produces the best jobs." Mission Viejo Mayor Susan Withrow—who opposes any airport plan,ran against Spitzer in the primary and backed him when he faced Assemblyman Mickey Conroy in the runoff--pledged her support for Spitzer,too. "South County was a big factor in his victory margin," Withrow said. "A lot of things may be going through his mind right now,but I think he is going to make the right choice." But others are not so sure,saying that politics may determine where Spitzer ultimately stands. "His ambition exceeds his work product," said John M. Gullixson, a Yorba Linda councilman. "I think he was taking a politically expedient position,which was anti-airport.He seems to be extremely adept at playing politics." Times staff writer Peter Warren contributed to this report. ♦ it All Over the Map Third District Supervisor Todd Spitzer plans to run for 5/1/98 7:47:48 AM Spitzer Tries to Avoid Hard Landing Over Airp... Page 4 of 4 72nd Assembly District--the only district in which all cities support El Toro Airport--in 2000. The onetime airport foe would replace Dick Ackerman(R-Fullerton),who plans to seek the state Senate seat for the 33rd District. Districts 72nd Assembly: All cities supported Measure A,the 1994 initiative paving the way for an airport 3rd Supervisorial: Cities equally divided into pro- and anti-airport factions Changing Views Spitzees stance on El Toro has shifted over time. Here is what he has said about the issue: October 1996: "You deserve to know where I stand on vital Mission Viejo issues. I oppose building an airport or a jail in South County." (From Spitzer campaign literature) November 1996: "The El Toro Airport would have a devastating effect on residents in the southern part of the county. I will not support it." April 1998: "Do my constituents want me to my,'No airport-over my dead body' or Negotiate the least impacting airport' or'An airport at all costs'?I have a very open mind to listen ... and make the best decision I can." Sources: Times reports Search the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories.You will not he c arge to look for stories,only to retrieve one. Copyright Los Angeles Times News GO Site Intlaz GO 5/l/98 7:47:48 AM OCREGISTERCOM: Community: Page 1 of 2 C®i11119&BBtai sEcnoa9-- - NNOairRACE���Home Page m AutoAaeas , �ORAN�[:OIIa1T y ' � x;� rOCI'�IS�1'WIII` _ _ Water 'store' is all about _ conservation CITIES: The La Habra outlet will offer lessons in saving water and a toilet trade-in program. May 1, 1996 By ERIC CARPENTER The Orange County Register LA HABRA—Orange County residents might stop wasting millions of gallons of water each day if they only knew how to conserve better. That's the theory behind the Orange County Water Efficiency Store, which opens today in La Habra. The store, at 901 E. Lambert Road, was developed by CTSI Corp. of Tustin in cooperation with the Municipal Water District of Orange County. The agency subsidizes some of the costs of operating the store, which is billed as the first of its kind in the state. Though called a "store," it is more of an educational outlet where residents can learn about products that will help them conserve water in the bathroom, laundry room and yard. "Even after a season of heavy rains, there is no less need for water conservation," said Clive Plumb, program manager for CTSI. "We hope to show people how to conserve and(in the process) save on their water bills." Through the Orange County Water Efficiency Program,residents who visit the store can—for $40—trade their toilets for ultra low-flush toilets, which can save up to 5 gallons per flush. 5/1/98 2:13:36 PM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 2 of 2 In the past few years, low-flush toilets have been re-engineered to be as effective as traditional "water-wasting" toilets, said Steve Hedges, water-conservation specialist for the water district. The toilet trade-in program is open to anyone who can show—by bringing in their water bill—that they live in Orange County. The store is open Thursdays through Saturdays through Sept. 26. If the program proves successful, it might be expanded elsewhere in the county, Plumb said. p1 newspaper in Orange C�.ouen.t�y,Calaomia ,VeP .� .. R Copyright 1998 The Orange County Register Please nand cortunehts to oeegisterdglinkaeedom.mm 5/1/98 2:13:36 PM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 1 of 2 community MAMEETRACE- --- Home Page m AutoAccess acm9R[gl rlc mA - Olfl91Sl�6WIII R Outside Orange Ccunfy_,, Tips on water uneWdi•;_ conservation May 1, 1998 The Water Efficiency Store, which opens today in La Habra, will showcase methods for conserving water in and around the house. Water-conservation experts warn that seasons of heavy rain are often followed by drought conditions. They offer these tips to save water: • In the shower: Replace old shower heads with high-pressure heads that increase water pressure but use less water. Cut back on shower times. • Around the house: Check all faucets for leaks. Sometimes stopping the leak is as simple as replacing a rubber washer. Even a small drip can waste up to 10 gallons per day. While brushing your teeth or shaving, turn the water off when it is not being used. • Toilets: Replace old toilets with ultra low-flush toilets. Many older-model toilets use five to seven gallons per flush. The low-flush toilets use 1.6 gallons per flush, which means the average household could save as much as 40,000 gallons of water each year. Fix toilets that leak. • In the yard: Water grass and shrubs sparingly. To test whether a lawn needs water, step on it. If it springs back, no water is needed. In shrub areas, check the saturation of the soil by digging down 2 to 3 inches. If moist, no water is needed. • Watering the lawn: Water the lawn in the early-moming hours two days per week for five to six minutes each time. Shrub areas should be 5/1/98 2:12:55 PM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 2 of 2 t watered once a week for nine minutes. If it has rained during the week, no water is needed. Fix broken sprinkler heads and adjust spray pattems so as not to overwater any particular area. More information: Want to save water while caring for your yard? Call the Municipal Water District of Orange County's hot line: (800) 822-0006. pt newspaper inpPOmnge County,Calibmla Copyright 1998The Orange Count'Register Please sane comnnemen6 to aaegLaterlitlink.heetlem.com 5/1/98 2:12:55 PM • Spanish Spill Sets Off'Chain of Toxicity' Page I of 4 News GO Site Index GO = ITY(V7171 FRONT PAGE HELP") THE FIRING LINE Q Monday, May 4, 1998 Spanish Spill Sets Off'Chain of Toxicity' .Environment: Workers race to pick up poisoned animals before feeding birds do. By RICHARD BOUDREAUX, Times SiaffWriter R(TJ�ILLAFRANCO DEL GUADALQUIVIR, Spain--As torks, egrets and herons swoop low over glassy etiands stretching as far as the eye can see,Jose Antonio Ramos and his fishing buddy Pedro Reyes are at the Guadiamar River by daybreak. It would be an idyllic outing but for the carnage at their feet. Wearing gas masks and yellow rubber gloves,the two men walk upstream along the muddy bank, gathering the carcasses of fish,crabs, frogs and eels still dying from a 9-day-old toxic spill that threatens Europe's largest nature reserve. Hours after the rupture of a mining company reservoir sent a wall of metal-tainted liquids into the river April 25, Spanish engineers built sand-and-dirt dikes to divert the flow around the 185,000-acre Donana National Park, a mecca for bird-watchers from around the world. Now,hundreds of park workers and volunteers have been mobilized to a second line of defense here on the sanctuary's outskirts.Their task is to scoop up dead creatures from the blackened river valley before the birds do. The frantic effort has jolted Spain from what environmentalists call official laxity in dealing with threats to nature.As a belated, full-blown cleanup began Sunday,the ecological crisis was being described as the country's worst because it could spell incalculable losses not only to farmland and human health but to thousands of species of migratory birds. Nearly 7 million cubic yards of waste water rushed through a 50-yard breach in a collapsing reservoir wall, enough to fill more than 1,500 Olympic-size swimming pools. That made it one of the largest toxic spills from any mining reservoir in recent years. Spanish government officials say a 7-ton layer of toxic mud now covers 9,000 acres of rural land, including rice paddies, cotton fields, olive orchards and cattle pastures. They estimate commercial losses this year alone at$10 million,spread mainly among 2,000 small farmers in one of Spain's poorest regions. "The polluted water has been more or less controlled, but 5/4/98 1:58:17 PM Spanish Spill Sets Off'Chain of Toxicity' Page 2 of 4 now there is a natural channel of toxicity into the national park through the birds themselves," said Alejandro Sanchez, director of the Spanish Ornithology Society. "They are being attracted to the new mud with all its dead fish and frogs and crabs," he explained. "Yet each one of these is a piece of poison. A chain of toxicity will build up in the park. It's very likely that many species will be affected in the next week or two." Working in paws from dawn to dusk,the masked men of the marshes clear as much of the contaminated 25-mile stretch as they can each day. The area,just west of Seville in southwestern Spain,echoes with shotgun fire as the cleanup crews try to scare buds away from the poisoned fish. So far,the workers have collected 20 tons of carcasses,but new ones turn up daily. Ramos wields an aluminum butterfly net that has been stripped of its netting and part of its hoop so that it resembles a small pitchfork with one prong. Spiking each dead creature like a piece of trash,he lifts it into a black plastic garbage bag held by his companion—a grim ritual punctuated by grim jokes. Every 15 minutes or so,when the bag is full, Reyes ties it shut,deposits it along the river road for pickup and tears a new one from a roll tucked in his rubber overalls. Most of the carcasses lie in a 15-foot strip along the bank,where the toxic flood is receding,but Ramos wades in occasionally to retrieve a fish floating belly up. "Nothing lives long in that water," grumbles Ramos, a 42-year-old forester and goatherd who wonders what good he's doing.Tracks in the mud show that a heron has beaten him to this particular stretch and devoured most of a dead carp. "I haven't found a dead bird yet," he says, "but that may be just a matter of tune." In fact, environmental workers say they have picked up several dead birds and recovered 715 eggs from 23 nests abandoned along the poisoned riverbank. On Saturday, a cleanup worker found a coot stuck in fouled mud,laid him gently in an open garbage bag and stood on the river road begging a ride to any shelter that could save the bird. . . w Toxins passed from fish to birds are not the only hazard. Unknown quantities of poison have filtered into the ground and might be seeping via subterranean streams into the park's subsoil, environmentalists say. Meanwhile,the diversion of the polluted Guadiamar deprives the park's delicate marshes, forests and sand dunes of their main water supply. Also,specialists warn that an unchecked flow of toxins—lead,zinc,arsenic,cyanide and other heavy metals from the mine reservoir—could make its way from the soil into crops, contaminating the food chain and raising the risk of cancer and neurological diseases. "The repercussions of this spill will last for eternity over thousands of hectares," said Angel Martin Munico,president 5/4/98 1:58:17 PM Spanish Spill Sets Off'Chain of Toxicity' Page 3 of 4 of Spain's Royal Academy of Exact,Physical and Natural Sciences. The disaster came suddenly. Boliden Ltd.,the Canadian-Swedish company that owns the mine,has claimed that a"seismic shift" caused the reservoir wall's sudden collapse, although a local geological institute said it recorded no earth movements. The company has agreed to pay for the cleanup and compensate farmers for their losses—a figure that may be determined in court. Demonized along with the company, Spanish authorities have been criticized at every turn for their handling of the mess. Spanish newspapers question why toxic waste is stored so close to a nature preserve and why nothing was fixed after a fired Boliden engineer reported fissures and toxic leaks in the reservoir wall three years ago. "Compared with the rest of Western Europe, Spain has been slow to industrialize and slow to value its environment," said Juan Lopez, a Spanish agronomist who works for Greenpeace. "This reservoir was built in the late 1970s, when people's political awareness was very low.Even today, Spain is not so crowded and has a lot of nice wildemess.Until this spill,there was no sense of alarm about losing any of it." For five days after the spill,the conservative federal government in Madrid and the Socialist regional authority in Seville quarreled over who was to blame and what to do about it.At one point, regional authorities refused to help when a makeshift federal dike set up to divert the poisoned Guadiamar into the larger Guadalquivir River and out to sea collapsed. Under sharp public criticism,the two sides stopped feuding and launched a joint cleanup Sunday,sending 25 earthmovers and trucks to start clearing away contaminated mud. Less than a week after declaring the national park safe, Spanish Environment Minister Isabel Tocino was calling the spill"an ecological catastrophe of historic proportions." The problems seem endless. About 100 environmentalists in Sanlucar de Barrameda held a rally Sunday to protest plans to store some of the toxic mud in an exhausted Boliden mine there,maintaining that the place is too leaky. Other critics say the cleanup seems disorganized and doubt it will be finished before aut u in rains spread the toxins. As the sun rose higher along the Guadiamar River on Saturday,so did the stench from Pedro Reyes'garbage bag and the irritation in his voice. Despite the gas mask,Reyes gets sick to his stomach carrying all those dead fish and contemplating their demise. "Look,many kinds of animals kill other animals—but only for survival,not for the sake of harming them,"the 28-yearold rice farmer said. "Why are human beings the only species that carries out mass murders like this?" JSeercb the archives of the Los Angeles Than for similar stories.You will not charg to ook for stories,only to retrieve one. Copyright 1.os Angeles Times 5/4/98 1:58:17 PM Spanish Spill Sets Off'Chain of Toxicity' Page 4 of 4 News GO Sfle Indent GO 5/4/98 1:58:17 PM Los Angeles Times Archives & Professional Res... Page 1 of 4 AMhim GO site 1.d" GO ARCNIV65 - s _, ek Sunday, May 3, 1998 Home Edition Section: PART A Page: A-3 California and the West; CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS /GOVERNOR and U.S. SENATE; Politicians Wade Into Water Issue; Because of the political risk involved, candidates have been reluctant to confront the subject. But some are trying to end the north-south feud.; By: TONY PERRY TIMES STAFF WRITER Slowly,tentatively, like a small bud sprouting from scorched earth,water is emerging as an issue in the races for California governor and U.S. senator. This is no small matter. Since the regional bloodiest that was the 1982 ballot proposition over the Peripheral Canal, candidates have largely avoided the subject—despite the fact that the state lives constantly with the specter of crippling shortages. "Only when the planets align in a very special way do candidates talk about water," Stephen Hall,executive director of the Assn.of California Water Agencies (ACWA),said with a sigh. Unlike opposing crime or high taxes,taking a stand on water carries political risk. Go on the stump and say farmers should use less water,and you can figure on agribusiness money flowing to your opponents. Talk kindly about agriculture and you have the environmental movement on your neck. Dams have their supporters and their detractors. And,of course,the Peripheral Canal—"the open channel isolated facility" in its latest incarnation-is the mother of all north-south disputes in California. The past six govemors—two Democrats and four Republicans—have seen a need for a canal looping around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to bring more Sacramento River water to Southern California.Political forces in Northern California have repeatedly blocked the project,making it political poison even to suggest. But now the state's water needs have become so pressing and so undeniable that even office-seekers trying to be all things to all voters can no longer hide in the bull rushes. U.S. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt is pressuring California to use water more wisely or fare cutbacks from the Colorado River. Pollution,flooding and siltation are so severe in the delta that they threaten to strangle the state's economic recovery. The business community is demanding action. Gubernatorial and Senate candidates have been traipsing to ACWA(pronounced 5/4/98 3:49:38 PM Los Angeles Times Archives&Professional Res... Page 2 of 4 "aqua")conventions to talk and listen on the subject of a canal and related issues such as water conservation,water transfers and water rights. Before he announced his candidacy for governor, one of businessman AI Checchi's first moves was to attend an ACWA confab. Checchi has since come under the tutelage of state Sen. Jim Costa, chairman of the Senate Water and Agriculture Committee. To get Costa's endorsement, Checchi convinced the Fresno Democrat that he is open-minded on matters important to the Central Valley—expanded reservoirs and new sources of water,measures many Democrats and environmentalists oppose. In November,Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren addressed AC WA with the most detailed speech from a would-be governor in decades.Lungren praised fellow Republican Gov. Pete Wilson and seemed to promise that anyone who likes Wilson on water—agriculture and business interests do; some environmentalists and Northern Californians do not—will like Lungren. "I don't intend to run for governor and hide from one of the major issues our state faces," said Lungren,who faces only token opposition for the GOP nomination. The League of Conservation Voters quizzed all three major Democratic candidates—Lt. Gov. Gray Davis and Rep.Jane Hannan,in addition to Checchi--on water issues before endorsing Davis last week. (Lungren declined to participate.) Sam Schuchat,the group's executive director, said the three Democrats were reluctant to commit themselves on the canal issue until officials in the state and federal project called Called decide between a canal and two more modest alternatives as the best way to "save"the delta "They are all waiting to see what Called comes up with and see which way the wind is blowing," Schuchat said. By fall,Called officials are to decide which alternative to recommend to Wilson and Babbitt. Asked by The Times about water,Harman seemed to be inching toward opposition to a canal. "I opposed the Peripheral Canal in the 198ft and without more compelling evidence,I see no reason to support it now," she said. Davis wants more reclamation of agricultural runoff,more transfer agreements between water-rich agricultural districts and thirsty cities,and possible tax breaks for farmers installing water-efficient irrigation. If Davis is cautious on the canal,his experience in Fresno could be the reason. Speaking to the editorial board of the Fresno Bee,Davis expressed the annoyance at Northern California that many Southern California legislators feel but few express publicly. Believing he was speaking off the record,Davis said: "It's the Northerners. The Northemers—off the record The Northerners believe it rains on them,so it's their water. And the only way we get it is by threatening to all move up there." The paper printed the remarks and scolded: "Given the dependence of our region on agriculture and thus water,Davis'remarks won't likely play well in the vote-rich valley or Northern California" State Treasurer Matt Fong,fighting an uphill battle for the GOP nomination for 5/4/98 3:49:39 PM Los Angeles Times Archives& Professional Res... Page 3 of 4 Senate,will travel to Monterey this week to deliver a keynote address to an ACWA convention. Fong is expected to tell conventioneers that both of the state's main water sources—the delta and the Colorado River—have serious problems and that California has not had sustained leadership on water issues since the Peripheral Canal fight. If a canal is the solution endorsed by Calfed officials, it is worth fighting for even if it means a confrontation with some segments of the environmental movement,Fong will say. Fong's main rival,Darrell Issa,has said he likes the idea of a north-south canal and that pressure should be brought on Northern California to drop its knee-jerk cooperation. "You can only take brackish water so long," Issa said. (Boosters say a canal would allow the State Water Project to get cleaner water from north of the delta) "We've been neglecting our water infrastructure since Pat Brown," said Issa, invoking the memory of the Democratic governor hailed as the father of the State Water Project. Probably the most significant sign that water politics are a-changin' in California, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is running for reelection,says she wants to wait until the canal idea is studied further before taking a stand. For 10 years,Boxer represented a congressional district in Marin and San Francisco where more than 90%of the voters were against the Peripheral Canal,with Boxer leading the charge. Now she's willing to consider a canal—as long as environmental safeguards are in place. "We've got to come together on this issue of water,"Boxer said, "or the state is finished" One reason Boxer is able to even consider a canal is that the one envisioned by the Calfed proposal is half the size of the colossal canal proposed in 1982. That one was derided by opponents as big enough to suck the Sacramento River dry. This time, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California,which would be the major beneficiary of a canal, is considering a voluntary assurance to limit its take from the State Water Project. The MWD's goal is to reduce the fear of Southern California among Northern California voters. In 1982, 36 counties in Northern California voted 90%or more against the canal. By talking about water,the current crop of candidates is in the California tradition that preceded the 1982 Peripheral Canal debacle. "Water used to be at the center of gubernatorial and senatorial campaigns in California," dating to the early 1900s, said Steve Erie,professor of political science at UC San Diego. "But once water became an issue fraught with political fissures and regional conflict,politicians started to shy away." Wilson is to address the ACWA convention this week and stress the need for more discussion on how to meet the water needs of a growing state. 5/4/98 3:49:39 PM Los Angeles Times Archives&Professional Res... Page 4 of 4 . Wilson is trying to break the impasse between San Diego and MWD over the use of the Colorado Aqueduct to bring Imperial Valley water to San Diego. He overturned a ruling that threatened to force Los Angeles to reduce its take of water from the Owens Valley.And he is preparing a billion-dollar water bond,possibly for the November ballot. "Water is the future," said Rich Golb,executive director of the Northern California Water Assn. Descriptors: DAVIS,GRAY;LUNGREN,DANIEL I.HARMAN,JANE; CHECCHI,ALFRED A;FONG.MATTAEW(IQP); CALIFORNIA— CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS— 1998;CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR; CALIFORNIA—ELECTIONS— 1998;POLITICAL CANDIDATES;POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS;WATER—CALIFORNI4; Copyright(c) 199E 75mes Mirror Company Note:May not be reproduced or retransmitted without permission.To talk to our permissions department,call:(900)LATIMES,on 74564. If you have a question about your account,check here or message web.billing(a)latimes.wm.If you have other questions,check Help. The Las Angeles Times archives are stored on a SAVE(tm)newspaper library system from MediaStream,Inc., a Knight-Ridder Inc. company. Archives GO Site lntlez GO 5/4/98 3:49:39 PM 6 „`mcV `Y ,l,yuoE �n c -c� mYa m P3o3¢EooEEYd = o o �_ E` = Q F 6 � � Vvv3H� 01mm o W C m[:�yW ® O 3mbC m a ,mCt= 0°3 .Y. m Y E— E oYc— t yTd a $.t Y` y m „ Emum3mc d Gm9S9 'ms == T6 REPAIRS: Bankruptcy forced 4 e v dr O.C. to delay maintenance OOCH Vm �6 Cy ymC—� ° Y 9Cr%lmr_'` b VTgdO FROM t get the ticket becomes... That message has been drivenFThe VERAL pROJEGTS home in the pat few years as theEED ATTENTION county has had to make emer- H m >s range Caumy aegh¢r cou d repave that Probably could have been prevented byer the bankruptcy hit m d c o keeping up routine maintenance, 6, 1994. the cash- yer Nr Ed a ;e =m= m awarding to a county report. ped county was forced t-- 0 5 c$— Instances included jail escala. t back on maintenance, mc e c 'm=u Y 0 ym =o m tors that cost S350,000 to fix, theepairs were made only Ec.c c n.. E m o m a main chiller at Orange County mergency basis.In 1993- a Harbor Municipal Court costing 94.the county spent S24 mf(- Y c u a,-.E mu $156,000 to repair, and 19 pumps lion on maintaining its build. throughout the county that even- ings,which are valued at an mally had to be replaced for a estimated Sl billion. But m " total of $140,000. since then. the county has — L) —° By far the biggest backlog spent only about$18 million "� maintenance headache is the a year.Just to catch up,the 3 u d o.—ca W 30-year-old central courthouse county needs to spend an ad- - O Y o o.z° d d >; building, which the cowry esti- ditional S41 million over the mates will take ext seven years. repairs. e ma n in n problem is the The largest problem is at m,z building's crumbling heating, Central Orange County Mu- m E c w ..E 3$ e a-cunditioag and ventilation nicipal Court,where the air. E: E ff E a� system. conditioning and heating Supervisors also will be asked system needs to be replaced, = m y a^m . .° today to approve spending along with other problems. Y ye million over the nett four The repair cost of the Cw- 3 m = 2 c years to move the county closer ltralion Court alone is 536.9 mil- m _E nr m E¢'c=_' tAmeNjcwn with Disability Aciance with t, h Here are some other ma- ll a ° m or ADA. jar problem buildings and The 8-year-old federal law casts: y is-a E gave state and local govern-. ►909 N. Main St. (proba. o meats until 1995 to make all their tion headquarters), S900,000 y e c o g m q=°o a caybuildings accessible to the PhYsi- ►West court, 5458,000 ll hondica Agency, P Health Care In January the county was $411,000 E 5 m `m c m +". wed under the ADA by a wheel- ► p mo SSE mE—' m chair-bound p professor whapmahefts pro- of Aecords.5409,000 Manchester office build. 0n d hibited from serving an a court ing, M000 C �.,Tc'c'e jury because not all parts of the ►Central jail, S200,000 G a1 o g_ m m q central courthouse are handicap ►North court, S191,000 p c m accessible. ►Central utilities facility, rn o c °m m aR a The ► county has a long list of $160,000 IL: >n a a Ec a.`. d ADA projects slated wwty ld f ►County operations cen- 6 c m` 3 m buildings in the next four years, Z o N z` including nearly 53.8 million for ter, f149,000 o ¢ = s c`'—o' m nen fiscal year. ►South wort, S143,000 c =" i; = m Again, the most troublesome ►Aa8 of Administration, Z — i�„ H 5 edifice is the cemral courthouse, $1w Can y�j � e � r 5 Y�� — � which cowry o[fionls estimate ►Centel garage,5175,000 wlli need S31 million in'hendi• ►All others, $643,000 o, `o = cap-accessibility work over the fm 99 m r < P e 3 H next four years to bring it up to s01M1°'rn°"�t°""h' Orange County Sanitation Districts Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page # Date Subject Orange County Register o A1n .nal NEWS 18 "You can ace there is a siguifi- "if compliance with current EPAcant problem out there," EPA regulations is inadequate, than ■ wastewater management direr- that is what needs to be focused for Michael Cook told the House on before any new regulatory Agriculture Committee. "Seri- schemes are pursued," said ous water quality problems per- Combest, chairman of the Agri- Farms country." a st throughout the country culture Committee's livestock Cook's comments underscored ed subcommittee. the EPA's proposed regulations Opponents of large, confined on big livestock feeding opera- livestock farms, Combest said, pollute noes,which confine thousands of cope also use the EPA rules to animaleina small space anm d pro- appeal to the "emotional and duce huge aounts of waste.The economic issues"that have aris- rules ace the first step of several en as smaller operations dwindle as EPA updates the Clean Water across the country. Act. "•I fear an ill-conceived and rivets Current federal tides, Cookdeal misguided regulatory attempt said, "are not adequate m deal targeted at large factory-typehitmany with the modern industry" n- operations will family hit many which the average number of an- medium-sized family livestock imps per farm has doubled and operations," he said. ENVIRONMENT' Agri- sometimes tripled in cattle, Cook assured Agriculture Culture 16 responsible hog,chickens and turkeys since Committee members that the percent of wa- About 2D percent of waterway EPA intends to focus only on the for 70 ]le largest farms and those with bad tema pollution, the pollution was ate that livestock track records. Working with the y' )� waste in 72 states s that looked at Agriculture Department, the agency says. specific , t m be on voluntary co - he sacc sectors of culture, he said. Although waste epids pharce technical and financial By Qf tSON 6T AND9 sometimes occur, most of the as and research,he said, The Associated Oren problem stemsfrom its use as But'Rep. George Miller, D- WASHINGTON— fertilizer on crops. Martioez, said farmers must be Agriculture The largest livestock opera- held accountable for problems is the biggest polluter of Amen- [ions are subject to EPA rules, ca's rivers and streams, fouling but most of the estimated 450,000 ceased by livestock waste down- more than 173,'"miles ofwater- answer[o atute regpators,some stream such as unnatural growth ways with chemicals, erosion tougher than others. The EPA of algae and other organisms, and animal waste runoff,federal says one standard is needed to fish kills and nondriakable wa- envvonmental officials said revert companies from seeking ter. Wednesday. P We need to protect privacy Farming is responsible for 70 out lax states and to keep areas and preserve a cooperative rela- sP° equal economically. tionship with farmers as much as percent of waterway pollution, Some in Congress are skepti- outstripping sewage treatment �.Rep.Larry Combest,R-Tex- possible, but cooperation is a plants, urban storm sewers and two-way street," he said. pollution deposited from the air, as, said the proposal "runs according to the Environmental counter" to a longtime federal Protection Agency. The prob- effort to have farmers co mply lems blamed on farming incldde voluntarily with environmental ntal those that harm aquatic life or guidelines and allow states to en- restrict human use of rivers and force their own rules. streams. OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 1 on 2 c®rolrolliroi SEC11M —'. -- pa- Homa Pege m' Auta4ccess , J-, r�eounce carxrrevasha 'D"atilde0�. Ride-sharing regulations dishearten companies BUSINESS: Employers say car-pool standards will be more paperwork, more time and more money. April 14, 1998 BY JENIFER B. McKIM The Orange County Register Leona Lukaszewicz, an adminstrator at an Irvine electronics company, dedicates hours of her time to promoting ride-sharing. Yet, she was disheartened to hear that her company, Liebert Corp., is one of some 2,600 mid-size businesses in the region that might be once again subject to ridesharing regulations in June. This means more paperwork, more time and more money for the company with 240 employees. Local businesses are just learning that a respite from car-pooling regulations for companies with 100 to 249 employees will most likely end. This comes after the South Coast Air Quality Management District said a voluntary program had failed to work as well as regulations. Few are expected to be happy. "I don't think there is a company out there that is in favor of regulation," said Steve McCaughey, executive director of Spectrumotion, a private transportation-management association in Irvine. 4/14/98 2:27:37 PM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 2 of 2 The study showed that ridesharing among companies remained basically stable. But a reduction in other direct emission strategies, including scrapping old cars and fees, failed to keep emission reductions at target levels. Car pool advocates were quick to point out that the study was not a blanket condemnation of voluntary rideshare programs. "The fact that ride-sharing managed to hold its ground even when employers were no longer required to offer programs speaks volumes about the importance of alternative transportation strategies in the region," said Jim Sims, director of the Southern California Rideshare. The standards are targeted at businesses, not individuals. Lukaszewicz said the company already provides a ride home for those with an emergency and information on car-pooling. Mandates would force her to track all her work and carry out time-intensive surveys. 01 newspaper in Orange County,Callomia 1 . V p K r. Copyright 1998 The Onenge County Reglater Please Wind comments to oaegisterftlink.treedom.mm 4/14/98 2:27:37 PM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Pagel of 2 community _ . �eoxaaea I AAt � — - ierourmaccrsru 3� 1, ocregtregistercom Pumping treated water to ob�ie0County bay OKd ENVIRONMENT: Opponents fear the effect of reclaimed water on Newport's Upper Bay. April 18, 1998 .� By BRADY RHOADES The Orange County Register Irvine Ranch Water District got the OK Friday to pump up to 5 million gallons of reclaimed water daily into San Diego Creek, which feeds Newport Beach's Upper Bay. Pumping could begin Oct. 1. Environmentalists from Defend the Bay said they will appeal Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board's decision. "We're talking about taking treated sewage out of the toilets of Irvine and putting it into our bay," said Bob Caustin, director of Defend the Bay. Members of Defend the Bay say reclaimed water is filled with nitrogen and phosphorous, which promotes algae growth in the 752-acre bay, the largest open water estuary in Southern California. Irvine Ranch officials say their plan will benefit the bay. The plan calls for pumping 3.2 million gallons of reclaimed water into the San Diego Creek daily from October through March. Much of the creek water is then treated at the company's plant and returned back to the channel in the summer months. The process actually decreases nitrogen levels in the bay, they say. 4/20/98 9:01:01 AM OCREGISTER.COM: Community: Page 2 of "The ecosystem will be stronger in the long run," said Ken Thompson, director of water quality for Irvine Ranch. The debate started in 1996, when Irvine Ranch's permit to pump reclaimed water into San Diego Creek was approved. Members of Defend the Bay appealed the decision and a Superior Court judge ruled in their favor, saying it must be shown that the water project benefits the bay. "The board (detailed in its report Friday) that the project would provide benefit to the bay," said Joanne Schneider, environmental program manager for the Water Quality Control Board. Ct newspawr it inpOninge Canty,California nco The Orange County Register PleaseeCopyrightsend comments to ocreg¢teKdlink.treeeom.com 4/20/98 9:01:01 AM Orange County Sanitation Districts Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page # Date Subject Los Angeles Times �,� i8 Waste Water Discharge at Bay Affirmed ■ Environment Judge now must review plan to release millions of gallons into Upper Newport By DBBORAH SMOCH noes stets waRea A Permit allowing the dis- charge of millions of gallons of Upper reclaimed water daily into Newport Bay was readopted Fri- day by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board as enviromnematiats vowed to con- tinue figbtmg the controversial plan. Those supporting the project were pleased by the board's 5 to 1 vote favoring the Plan which is still subject to review by a Su- perior court judge. Irvine Reach View District's proposal is, to pump highly treated mummpal waste water into the fragile es- tuary,considered one 01 the most Important environmental habi- late in Southern Call]0� IC's a ,We strongly believe great program.We really do.It's Ione of those win•win situations; said Sen Thompson the district's dueetor of water quality- The project could actually enhance the quality the bay's reducing b f water y15 tons a year.the amount of nitrogen Rowing into the bay from Serf Diego Creek. districtamcuisfifty. But critics disagree' co out- ing that reclai grOwth and med waterhe' Pleaeuaa W WATE&86 WATER Newport Bay Proposal Disputed continued from B1 in winter months,up to 5 million reaffirmed its earker vote after the the ecologically fragile estuary gallons daily of highly treated district provided more information that is home to rare birds and fish sewage water would be flushed about how the bay could be im- and is also a popular haven for through a system of duck ponds proved by the program. A key bicyciists andjoggem. leading to San Diego Creek and factor in the debate is a state policy Those supporting the reclaimed• Upper Newport Hey. During the barring new discharges of muniei- water plan have no regard for the summer, the district would divert pal waste water into estuaries un- bays recreational value, said Bob more Ulan 3 million gallons of leas they can be shown to enhance Causdn, director of Defend the water daily from the creek through the area. Bay,which opposes the plain the ponds,removing nitrates so as The evidence supports the find- ""To them, it's a sewer outfaR, to reduce the amount going into ing that the water district's plan and I'm not going to stop lighting." the bay during the warmer months "would result to a decrease.albeit a Caustm said. "We're going to ap- when algae growth prospers. small one, in the nitrogen content peal it, and we have a better case Defend the Bey,an environmen- in the bay.' according to a staff than we did last time." talst group founded to oppose the report to the board. . The group will take its case to discharge, won a victory against Supporters of Defend the Bay the state Water Resources Control the project when Orange County continued to question the validity Board, just as it did after the Superior Court Judge Robert E of that research at Friaay'e meet- original permit approval in 1996, Thomas agreed with their coin- ing m Corona Caustin said.In that case,the state plaint that the district did not related issue, the hoard board stood by the regional board's sufficiently prove that the re- In a decision to move forward with the claimed water would not harm the adopted standards known 0"total bay discharge. bay. t opimum daily loads" for the The water district has said its Thomas's ruling forced the board amount of nutrients and sediments plan could save money as it en- toreconadertheissue. that can enter the bay and San hances the bay. With Friday's vote, the board Diego Creek. Orange County Sanitation Districts Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page # Date Subject Orange County Register rszb �� Phoenix teen lauded for water e -crusade a , HONORS: She is the said officials of the Goldman En- vironmentalU.S. recipient Foundation, which only P sponsors the prizes.Each winner among the six winners gets $100,000. - •iJ ' Of the Goldman Envi- Johnson was 9 when her sister 9 died. She discovered that many iy5 ►+ `" ronmental Prize. in the neighborhood had lost ' By JAMES 0.CLIFFORD loved ones to strange illnesses. -�,�"' �� tL J She went on to found the environ- mental organization and battled SAN FRANCISCO — A Phoe- an ENSCO hazardous-waste in- nix teen-ager who started a chil. cinerator and dump planned for dren's crusade against pollution Arizona. The plans were after her her sister's death was celed in 1991 after extensive MIDIAEL MA[OWSan Francisco Chronicle linked to contaminated water .news coverage. HONOREES: From left,the 1998 Goldman Environmental Prize was among Mondays winners of The other five winners were winners are Atherton Martin, Hirofumi Yamashita, Ko the Goldman Environmental ry Johnson, Prize. Berlin KuwarU'wa of Colombia; Berita KuwarU'wa,Sven 'Bobby' Peek and Anna Giordano, shown Kory Johnson,19,was cited for Anna Giordano, who has fought Sunday in San Francisco. foundin Children for Safe En- poaching of raptors and storks in g Sicily; Hirofumi Yamashita, a In accepting the award, John- drill for oil in the remote forests vironment, which now has 359 protector of Isahaya Bay's wet- son lashed Out at"environmental of northeastern Colombia. me mberi, st of the riv lung- peek, innds Japan a t v;istven "Bobby" racism," which she said "is all The U'wa announced last year working for around the world." _areas. clean air in South Durban,South they will commit suicide by leap- Johnson's sister died in19B9at Africa; and Atherton Martin, "'We need to take action and we ing off al,400.foo[cliff if the drill- 16 from heart problems that who led a successful fight to stop all need to do it now." she said. ing proceeds. were"likely to have been caused a large copper mine from being Barites,KuwarU'wa,a leader of "The U'wa territory is sa- by contaminated well water her built in Dominica in the Caribbe- the U'wa tribe, is fighting Occi- cred," he said. "The U'wa cul- ;mother drank while pregnant," an. dental Petroleum Co.'s plans to ture has no price." Orange County Sanitation Districts W Ti me R -2a Newspaper Clippings y_a41 g Water Rights Could Be Issue City Water Sources On average,41%of L.A.'s water goes to the Son Fernando ValleyThat Sinks L.A. Valley Secession from thThee Angeles -- Water and Power gets water from the[,oe Angeles Aqueduct,local ground water In Government:Control original Pueblo de Los Angeles by pump Its supplies all the way from and the Metropolitan Water the king of Spain. And It Is one of the Colorado River, while much of District—which draws from and management of the the peculiarities of water law that the DWP water rune downhill from the Sacramento Delta and Pfedous resource Could such ancient claims still carry the Eastern Sierra, Colorado River. weight. Still another option is that the The OWP'e sources: prove complex enough to If the DWP were asked to supply Valley could go shopping for an- scuttle the San the new city with water, that other supplier, much as San Diego proposed would run into its own troubles. has done in contracting to buy Fernando breakaway. The DWP was established by the water from the Imper al Valley, w.te,d Angeles city of Los Angeles for one pur- But even with a willing buyer and 15 Aqueduct By JIM NEWTON Pose: to supply the residents and seller, that city's deal is expensive 65% husinessee of Los Angeles with TIMPS STAPP WRITER water.If the Valley leaves,the Los end been if cultt thle.at Closing a M1v0 urking beneath the rhetoric Angeles City Charter prevents the has boen so recently that Gov.Pale 20% Labout San Fernando Valley DWP from selling the new city Wilson has recency intervened In an attempt to settle the dispute. secession is a cold fact: At- water. _ cording to many experts,It the area Presumably, state law would Adding to the Irony N the fact leaves Los Angeles,it goes without then take force, and Valley resi- that much of the Valley was origi. wa,e°d Angeles Its water rights,and without water, dents would argue that they are nally annexed into Las Angeles 18% Aqueduct the Valley Is just another patch of entitled to equal treatment, even precisely because of the water. dusty savannah dotted with bunch though the city they would be That was in the early 1900s,when grasp, leaving is the one that went out an aggressive civic elite in Los MW:D That does not mean the Valley and secured that water at consid- Angeles secretly bought up water 12% would dry up and blow away.But it erable expense and controversy. i rights in the Owens Valley and does suggest that the new city and There are, In theory,other pos- built an aqueduct to bring that the one it would be leaving would Bible suppliers, The Valley could water hundreds of miles south. Ground Los be Intertwined in an enormously huy its water tram Ne Metropall- When that water was first se- wale, Angeles complex division of meta,.and that tan Water District, the mammoth cured, the Valley was not part of 17% Aqueduct the Valley would probably remain agency that supplies most of the the city.It was annexed n after. 77X goo regent on Los Angeles for its region. That reinforces the argument of MWO survival. But independence would come at a Recession opponents who pay that 0% The stakes of the water Issue are steep price. MWD water is much the Valley's right to the water so profound that tap Los Angeles more expensive than DWP water, began when it joined Los Angeles ewvdit"a0^°i°'"iX°r`""•°i0R^' ofaclale have already begun Ines- mainly because the MWD has to and would end It It left. ageing the ImpItcauons of San Fernando Valley secession, and some have tentatively concluded that the resulting as would be ao complicated that it would effee- lively squelch secession. "This,"said one top city official, "is by far the most complicated Saltarelli to Succeed Thomas as Mayor Page 1 of 1 Newc GO Sae IMe[ GO ORANGE COUNTY NEws HELP SURETRADECOM e e may, Apnl Z�I99g CENTRAL I TUSTIN Saltarelli to Succeed Thomas as Mayor By JOHN POPE PREY STORY uncilman Thomas R. Saltarelli was chosen NEXT STORY ©�mammously by his colleagues Monday to serve as mayor for 1998, succeeding Jeffery M. Thomas in the post. RELATED Saltarelli,a real estate attorney,was first elected to the O.C.SECTIONS council in 1992 and served a previous tens as mayor from April 1994 to April 1995. MAIN PAGE Sallarelli said the upcoming closure of the Tustin Marine NEWS BY Corps Air Facility and a new library will be among his COM&MRIIY priorities. "We're finally back into aggressively moving forward with SPORTS the base closure process,and that presents many opportunities and problems for us to deal with," he said. PREP SPORTS "But we're optimistic that we'll have a great project when it BUSINESS is all completed." The city plans to convert the Marine base property, which LIFE&STYLE is scheduled to close next year, into a mixture of housing, commercial businesses, a school and parks. CALENDAR The mayors job,which mostly consists of overseeing City CALENDAR Council meetings and representing the city at public functions, WEEKEND rotates annually among the five council members. Councilwoman Tracy Wills Worley was chosen as mayor HOME DESIGN pro tem at Monday's meeting. COMMENTARY Ljtt h the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories.You will T.V.TIMES not c arge to ook for stories,only to retrieve one. Copyright Los Angeles Times News O Sile Inoea 60 4/22/98 12:52:54 PM Water Officials Discuss Dispute Page 1 of I Neva GO Site Indez GO 191111MYRRITM STATE & LOCAL. HELP You91 make more of It N you— MOUSINES0108 � 010 �• trol Wednesday, April , 1998 Water Officials Discuss Dispute From a Times Staff Writer PREY STORY CRAMENTO—Feuding water officials from San Diego NEXT STORY Mmarry and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California were brought together for six hours Tuesday in the office of Gov.Pete Wilson to air their grievances and explain their clashing points of view. Sean Walsh,the govemor's spokesman, said more meetings will be scheduled in an effort to resolve a dispute that is blocking consummation of a historic water transfer agreement. "We're treating this similar to dealing with a peace treaty in a diplomatic mission," Walsh said. At issue is a proposed agreement whereby the MWD would allow use of its 242-mile Colorado Aqueduct to bring a portion of the Imperial Irrigation District's share of the Colorado River to San Diego. After months of negotiations between the two agencies, Wilson summoned officials from both sides to a meeting with his chief of staff,George Dunn,and state water director,David Kennedy. Dunn and Kennedy will meet with each side privately before scheduling another joint meeting. Although the two sides remain far apart on issues of price, storage and control,they agreed Tuesday on one point: a mutual gag order in which only the govemoes office would discuss the meeting. San Diego says the transfer would help break its historic dependence on the MWD.The MWD says San Diego is threatening the regional approach to water that has served Southern California well. ISearch the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories.You will not c wged to ook for stories,only to retrieve one. Copyright Los Angeles Tines News Go Site Indez GO 4/22/98 1:04:58 PM Orange County Sanitation Districts Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page # Date Subject Los Angeles Times 0. 10 to y�d�kjg l�KI .At SP4-1r� Spain's Claim About Spill Is Disputed : From Timm Wire Services HUELVA, Spain—Environ- mental groups Sunday dis. puted claims by Spain's govern. ment that millions of gallons of toxic liquid that spilled when a mining dam ruptured were blocked from reaching one of Europe's most prized nature reserves. Environment Minister Isabel Tocino declared Donana National Park in southwestern Spain safe after louring it Sunday. " • '!'t .ry I t "Fortunately. Donana has been �'� •� :y d _ `Y:°`;� 1„ i saved."Tccino told national radio. - -a-+' "The contaminated waters will not ,� reach the wetlands because all the 's+ ' systems that were put in place �t2 worked." ...�:.rsrlla.LL •,;y+'i. But the environmental group ..: Greenpeace said it was premature to call the emergency over. It r.;,'Vr -' '•. �?'- ,.- •--.rct•�'^":!! - �rsww....w+ ••.—..- claimed that hastily constructed smeuua rua dikes had not prevented the spill from contaminating the 185,00D. Mine officials survey the damage after a dike gave way, spilling toxic liquid into Spain's Guadlamar River. acre reserve. which is mostly marshland. The Nature Defense Assn. de- It was not immediately known build sand and earthen dikes along About 6 million migratory birds scribed the spill as one of Europe's how much of the toxic liquid,which the park's edge after the reservoir flock each year to Donanos sale worst and said a.25-mile stretch of contained residues of cadmium, at the Canadian-owned Iron pyrite marshes. which are also home to the Guadiamar River also was zinc and other metals.spilled from mine. 35 miles north of Donana, lynx.otter.eagle and other endan- contaminated. The river runs next the reservoir. broke Its banks and poured into the gered species. to the park. On Saturday, workers rushed to river. I seclion I Page #- Date Subject Los Angeles Times L2n y� S Supplying Water NEWSAMY=SM to the Valley Unsurprisingly, not everyone Calernme, erecutive di- Des netbW6 ie rdmPle when rlt BCOmeB to Cspute is water. rector of the Lon Anodes Jncol Other experts dispute that thew, was Formation r comment the Valley does that strip Its Thu da ,but be for comment the Valley aces ran side Los Thursday,human recently bid the 1 Angeles—whatever whatever its borders—of Metro Investment e newsletter,Report. a local th water fight They argue that public 1the r gionosat that ell- the DWP might continue to supply rater— i tiding the cegton's water would I Valley residents with their weter— notkill secession, in part because state law would not the water won bought and laid allow the department to turn Its for by the city of lee Angeles—and back on existing customers just butt the San Feraaado Valley put bemuse they live to a breakaway ' of the city of Ins Angeles'."he told area , - that publication 1 taut under- Under that approach, Valley stand why a subdivision of the city residents would continue receiving would have any impact on Water water. but Los Angeles, not the imam." - I new, city, would own the water ' But within City Hal,some of- supply and the new municipality dais all-but chortle over the corn- would have to contract with Los pkcatmons that they believe. the Angelestogetitsehore_. - water Lamm will emeet for seers- I That is the opinion a[-David sionlats. Hotdtkim, an assistant city attar- . 'rm sure they will be horrified neywhorecentlymudiedthegnes- to learn that they may be able to lion at the request of Mayor Rich. take the land but to take the and Rtordan's office water,they'll need to come back to "While the city of Iqa Anodes. ue"City Coandlwotnan Huth Gal may not be divested of its owner- enter, whose committee overeeea Ship interests in water obtained via the city-Department of Water and the Lae Angeles Aqueduct. the Powa,mid of secession advocates. � Department of Water and Power es Despite courtcse over the years may be required to continue to that have reinforced I.ce Angeles' provide water to muting custem- righm to its water,.some of those em, including those who may se- I j who have tolled far a study of cede from the dry of Los Anodes" secession argue that the city would Hotckkim coaduded in anopWon not retain its water rights in the dated Feb. 5 and obeA_tits, eMtofamumcipeldivarce. week by The Tkues. lc lein,�;Bt. "It ta our opinion that the water Pravlotm attempts m etinllenge rights Should be divided" said Jeff Inn Anodes' water rights have Brain, president of Valley Vote. .fefied um"Alit® noted ta tits:Opin- "racy ehouldbe dhvidedpmt like the restd the assets and liabilities of the 80, the new Valley city would city." sot even necessarily own the wa- Brain and others believe that the ter beneath its own Streets because new city should get its proportional the rights to it were granted to the - abared the water rights.With that, _ I• the Valley city could then decide to _. .. ram its own water system. COLUMN ONE: State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up... Page I of b News GO Site Ind.. GO FRONT PAGE NELP� Yodll make more of it R you._ fch.W.boeke W oslx eunxs �n©a 90 rail Tuesday, April , 1998 COLUMN ONE State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act .Much of the 55 billion pounds of cow manure each year ends up in our waterways. Laws have demanded'zero tolerance,'but only now are farmers addressing the problem. By MARLA CONE, Timer Emfromnenral lvrito im_031SCALON,Calif.—Louie Pratt can stand on any comer,gaze out on the horizon in any direction and see cows. They are everywhere,but more important, so is thew most abundant byproduct. Not milk. Manure. In California, the nation's largest milk producer,cows spew as much waste as every man,woman and child.But unlike the massive network for purifying human sewage, there are no toilets,no sewers,no treatment plants for fart animals. Each day,when Pratt climbs into his truck to inspect the Central - Valley's dairy farms, cows have excreted another 80 million pounds for him to watch over. And to his dismay,much of it winds up in California's water. On a recent spring day in San Joaquin County, Pratt watched a herd wallowing up to their bellies in their own urine, manure and mud. Thick brown sludge flowed from the farm into a roadside creek. "This," Pratt grumbled, "is a filthy mess." Indeed,the handling of California's voluminous cow manure—more than 55 billion pounds a year—is naught with environmental problems. In the Central Valley,dairy cows, largely concentrated between Sacramento and Tulare,are blamed for poisoning hundreds of square miles of underground water, rivers and streams,according to a 1996 State Water Resources Control Board report. Dairies in San Bernardino and Riverside counties have helped cause massive water problems there,which now threaten drinking supplies downstream in Orange County. In recent years, farts have replaced factories as the main threat to the nation's waterways. Agriculture—crops and livestock—is the No. 1 source of water pollution in the United States,according to the EPA's 1994 National Water Quality Inventory. After a quarter of a century of neglecting clean water laws, California and federal officials have stepped up efforts to make cows—and the farmers who raise them—environmentally friendly. A new clean water task force has cracked down on Central Valley dairies, beefing up inspections and prosecuting farmers. Last month,the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,facing a growing national threat from cows,pigs and poultry,unveiled plans to 4/28/99 10:33:55 AM COLUMN ONE: State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up... Page 2 of regulate more than 6,000 large livestock farms as if they were factories. Over the past decade,many dairies have turned into "factory faints"—mega-milking operations with thousands of cows apiece. With more animals squeezed onto less acreage, the threat to the nation's waterways has magnified. "It's not the bucolic farm where they're driving cows out to pasture anymore," said Daniel Meer,the EPA's regional water quality compliance chief. "It's a big business,and they're generating a lot of waste. In California, when you look at the scope of the problem, it's pretty sobering." State and federal inspectors suspect that a majority of California's 2,400 dairies are illegally allowing manure to pollute water. Even with the new emphasis on enforcement,they say the chances of a farmer violating the law are high and of getting caught slim. Last month, an Oakdale dairyman was sentenced to 90 days in jail and given a$100,000 fine for spilling cow feces and urine into streams 10 times over four years. Another,near Modesto, was fined$50,000 in November because so much manure ran off his fields onto a highway that the local school refused to run buses there and the postal service threatened to stop delivering mail. "Some individual farmers are thumbing their nose at us," said Assistant U.S.Arty.Richard Cutler, who heads a state and federal law enforcement task force aimed at Central Valley dairies. "It's comparable to 30 years ago when the majority of[manufacturing] industry was blatantly discharging into the waters of the United States." Law Wants 'Zero Discharge' Since the early 1970s,farmers have been prohibited by law from letting even a drop of manure flow off their land, except during severe storms. "Zero discharge" is the mandate of the U.S. Clean Water Act and California laws. But while enforcement of the laws has been strict for other industries, in agriculture it has been lax for more than two decades. Until this year,the state water quality board had only one inspector—Louie Pratt—for the 1,000 dairy farms from Orland, north of Sacramento,to Fresno,and none for the 600 dairies between Fresno and Bakersfield.Now there are four,and the board is seeking funds in next year's budget to add four more to keep an eye on the Central Valley's ubiquitous cows. Home to 1.3 million milk cows, California produces one of every five gallons of milk consumed in the United States. Each animal excretes 120 pounds of waste a day—equivalent to the sewage of two dozen people. "Environmental stewardship has to be a priority.The modem dairyman has to know that," said Gary Conover of Western United Dairymen,a lobbying group for the industry. But,he added,the laws' bans on pollution are so stringent that it is hard for dairies to comply, especially during winters when rain turns manure into runoff. For dairymen, living with manure is a fact of life. They scrape it, drain it, pump it into ponds,pile it up in 10-foot-tall heaps, spray it onto fields. Coping with the mess is a dirty and grueling job. Many dairies wind up with too much manure and not enough land to spread it on. They load their crops with so much waste that it's beyond fertilization—it's dumping. The manure, washing off their farms,gushes 4/28/98 10:33:55 AM COLUMN ONE: State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up... Page 3 of jp into creeks that empty into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the sprawling estuary for rare fish and birds. Also,when corrals aren't scraped of the thick layer of muck,or when ponds for storing liquid manure are too small or poorly engineered, the sludge seeps into the soil and pollutes aquifers that supply drinking water. Clean Farms Increase Profits Animal waste can be just as dangerous as chemicals dumped by a factory.Nitrates and coliform bacteria render ground water unsafe to drink. Minuscule amounts of ammonia kill fish and other aquatic life. Nitrogen and phosphorous--called nutrients—spur algae blooms and deplete oxygen in water,smothering fish. But,experts say,cows do not have to harm the environment. If a farts is designed and run properly, manure can be rendered harmless. When John Duarte built a dairy in Elk Grove,south of Sacramento,he included a waste system that keeps his cows clean. Instead of pooling at their feet,excrement drains from the stalls into a central alley and is pumped into an expansive settling pond.Then it is sprayed onto his oat and corn fields. A roof over the stalls keeps rain out to reduce runoff. "This is what a dairy should look like," said Pratt of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. "Design,construction and management make or break a dairy." A dairy worker since he emigrated from Portugal at 13,Duarte said it bothers him when others are careless with manure. All dairymen get the same government-fixed price for their milk--about$1 per gallon--but many aren't paying for the hardware and labor to control waste. Managing manure is a big,costly job,Duarte says, but it keeps his farm legal.And,he says, it actually increases his profits. Clean cows are happy cows, and happy cows produce more milk. He estimates that production is up 40%because his cows aren't slopping around in their own waste on rainy days. Duarte keeps his herd small--300 milking cows—so manure doesn't overload his 80 acres. Some of his colleagues have cow-to-crop ratios two or three times higher,which boosts their profits but makes it more likely that waste flows into waterways. Nine years ago,when he built a$35,000 waste pond,fellow dairymen wondered why.Now,with the government cracking down,they are seeking his advice. Yet,many dairy farmers are unwilling to spend the time or money or are reluctant to modernize practices that have been handed down for generations. "Some people are trying to do the right thing,but some clearly are not," said Meer of the EPA. "Industry claims it's a small percentage that are the [violators],but based on what I see, I don't agree." Pratt,who has monitored livestock farms in the northern half of the Central Valley for 14 years,said, "Judging from my experience,I'd say probably 80%have some impacts on surface water or ground water." Many of the dairies are concentrated near the Merced, San Joaquin and Tuolumne rivers. From Fresno to Kern County,where inspections began in January, more than half of the 50 farms inspected had problems that threaten ground water, said Lonnie Wass, a water board senior engineer. Under its new national strategy, EPA officials for the first time will 4/28/98 10:33:55 AM COLUMN ONE: State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up... Page 4 of inspect large livestock farms. Fames with more than 700 cows, 2,500 hogs or 100,000 chickens will be regulated just like chemical plants,oil refineries and others that discharge into waterways. Under pressure and fearing prosecution, the dairy industry is trying to clean up its act. Some farmers are going to school,enrolling in a new course at UC Davis to learn skills for handling manure.Leaders in the politically powerful industry are seeking government funds to upgrade dairies and get technical help.The chairs of the Legislature's two agriculture committees have urged environmental agencies to educate—rather than prosecute--dairymen Conover of Western United Dairymen said the industry had been unaware of the scope of its environmental problems until recently because the government had neglected it for decades. Solutions,he said,will take time,money and education. "If the state and federal government are serious about assisting us, we can do it," he said. More Cows but Fewer Dairies California dairies earned nearly$4 billion last year—double the earnings of the state's citrus groves. But farmers say profit margins are small and installing waste systems can lead to serious debt. A waste pond and pumps cost a medium-sized dairy$0,000 to$82,500, according to a General Accounting Office report. Some farms might not be able to fix their problems with drains, pumps and ponds. For some, it may take fewer animals. Because California has more cows but fewer dairies than a decade ago,a dairy farmer may have to shrink his herd,which cuts into milk - profits,or buy more cropland for spreading the waste at several thousand dollars an acre. Some are saddled with so much manure that they might have to haul it to other farms or find ways to sell it as fertilizer. "If you fail to keep a proper ratio between your[waste] and your cropland,you won't meet the stringent requirements of environmental laws," Conover said. "That's the jeopardy that some dairymen have been placed in." Nationally, the growth of"factory farms" from the consolidation of the livestock industry has led to widely publicized environmental problems along the East Coast. Massive fish kills and toxic algae in North Carolina and the Chesapeake Bay,among other places, have been blamed on pigs and poultry. California occasionally has fish die offs traced to livestock waste, including one this month in Westport Drain,which empties into the San Joaquin River. In most cases,however,the creeks are so polluted with manure that the fish vanished many years ago. Creeks that empty into the Tuolumne and San Joaquin rivers frequently contain 200 times more ammonia than the poisonous level for fish. "There's no way fish can survive in that kind of environment," Pratt said. Water quality officials suspect that dairy manure is one of the sources of pollution that has depleted the delta's fisheries, since the creeks are vital spawning and feeding grounds. "You can't have a healthy population of fish in the rivers unless you 4/28198 10:33:55 AM COLUMN ONE: State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up... Page 5 of'/, have healthy tributaries," Pratt said. "You give them clean water and the fish will come." In the United States, almost 135,000 miles of rivers--22% of the waters studied--are "impaired" by agricultural pollution, which means that aquatic life is unhealthy or fishing and swimming are restricted, the EPA report says. In California, agriculture has impaired more than 4,000 miles of rivers and streams,including at least 56 miles blamed on dairy farms. Ground water—a precious resource in a state facing chronic water shortages--has been rendered undrinkable in the Central Valley and Southern California. More than 10,000 square miles of aquifers in California are polluted with nitrates--and state officials say that agriculture, including cows,is the major source. In tests of wells at 13 dairy farms in the Central Valley, all had excessive nitrates, Pratt said. One had 17 times more than what is considered safe. Nitrates are dangerous to infants because they can cause blue baby syndrome, an oxygen-depleting disease. At many farms, cows drinking the water abort their calves, and farmers have to dig deeper and deeper wells to find water safe enough to drink. Farmer Sentenced for Pollution The Central Valley only has to look to Southern California to see what fate could await its valuable underground water supply. In San Bernardino and Riverside counties, water in more than half of the Chino Basin, which stretches 245 square miles, is too contaminated with nitrates for people to drink. Dairies in the Chino area deserve much of the blame,regional water quality officials say, although old citrus groves and modem municipal sewage plants also contribute nitrates. Decontaminating the water will cost millions of dollars. "It's too late here for prevention," said Kurt Berchtold,assistant executive officer of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. "We're talking about huge amounts of water that are not usable as drinking water without treatment, and it's likely to get worse before it gets better." This year has been especially bad because heavy rains have sent Chino's cow waste flowing down the Santa Ana River and into the aquifer that supplies half of Orange County's drinking water. The Chino dairies are the most regulated in the state,perhaps the nation. Routine inspections have been conducted since mounds of manure washed into residential neighborhoods during a severe flood in 1969. Many of the farms have moved or closed because of the high cost of running an environmentally sound dairy in Southern California. In the rest of California,however,manure problems have drawn scant attention--until prosecutors took aim at Pete Hettinga. Last month,Hettinga,who runs a large dairy in Oakdale, near Stockton, became the first dairyman in the state to receive a jail sentence for polluting water. Accepting a plea bargain for 10 misdemeanors, Hettinga will serve 45 weekends in jail and 90 days in home confinement. He must spend$100,000 to buy more cropland and make other water quality improvements at his fart. Industry leaders call the jail sentence extreme because there was no 4/28/98 10:33:55 AM COLUMN ONE: State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up... Page 6 of 8 , evidence that fish were harmed. "We do think it's absolutely proper that [Hettinga]return his property to a ratio of animals and cropland that provides environmental stewardship,"Conover said. "Our only concern was the jail time. You have criminals in society perpetrating more heinous crimes,and here's a minor violation of a Clean Water Act." Conover,however,acknowledges that the jail sentence "has absolutely encouraged the industry to sit up and say we apparently have a problem." Now the industry faces the challenge of fixing dairies without putting them out of business. "This problem took decades to develop," Meer said, "and it's not something that's going to be solved very quickly. There's going to have to be some pretty creative strategies." rrr Dairy's Downside California is the nation's largest milk producer,generating about 21%of the nation's supply.The industry also generates 55 billion pounds of manure yearly,much of which flows into waterways and poses an environmental threat. • rr Milk Manure Milk cows (pounds) Annual Sales (pounds) 1987 1,061,000 17.9 billion $2.1 billion 46.4 billion 1996 1,64,000 25.9 billion $3.7 billion 55.5 billion • r • Milk Production Possible runoff: When too much manure is applied to crops, the excess flows off the farm as pollution. Each cow per day: 120 lbs. Manure, 70 lbs. Milk, 270 lbs. Feed and Water Corrals: When corrals aren't cleaned often, waste seeps into aquifers that provide drinking water. . . r Possible runoff: When ponds for storing liquid manure are poorly designed, it runs off the farm and pollutes creeks and rivers. Researched by MARLA CONE /Los Angeles Times Sources: Califomia Dept. of Food and Agriculture and California Milk Advisory Board bSeareh the archives of the Los Angeles Tines for similar stories.You will not be charge to 00 or stories,only to retrieve one. Copyright Los Angeles Times 4/28/98 10:33:55 AM l Dairy's Downside California is the nation's largest milk producer,generating about 21% s r . of the nation's supply.The industry also generates 55 billion pounds of manure yearly,much of which flows into waterways and poses an 120 The environmental threat. MANURE MILK MANURE MILK COWS (pounds) ANNUAL SALES (pounds) 701bs. Mill( 1557 S,l'/61.000 17.9 billion E2.1 billion 46.4 billion 2701ba. ]S% 1,264,000 25.9 billion E3.7 billion 55.5 billion 3 FEED qNp WA r r r Possible runoff �� 1 A Manure When too much used as INve tap manure Is applied fertilizer California to crops,the CROPS- counties: excess fiows off the farm as STANISLAUS pollution. _ MANURE STORAOEs &1N BERNARDINO MANURE DITCH MERGED TULARE RIVERSIDE DAIRY BARN r 1- rj4 Possible r s wx'S�y'�:.. ( When ponds for Poasl storing liquid Corrals manure are Wien wrmis aren't cleaietl poorly designed, often,waste seeps into It runs off the aquifers Nat provide farm end pollutes Drinking wale[ �f`'1 �� sweuas W rumncas./Inansin irm P"'r..`+4_rt_,�. . Saruc Gami MPWradl atllpbaur etl C/Nwur WM bAaYevY 'tii'Y. i COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES JOINT BOARD MEETING APRIL 22, 1998 SNICTS 0f099? c z z s u a �F��N0�7HE EN \P0� ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 Minutes for Joint Board Meeting t' 04/22/98 Page 2 of 8 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 held on March 25, 1998, at 7:30 p.m., in the Districts'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, 6, 7, 11, and 14 as follows: ACTIVE DIRECTORS ALTERNATE DIRECTORS DISTRICT I A I Pat McGui an Chair Thomas E. Lutz NO.1 1 X I James M. Ferryman, Chair pro tern I Arthur Perry X I Mark A Murphy Joanne Coomz X I Thomas R. Saharelli I Jim Potts A I Todd S hzer I I William G.Steiner DISTRICT X Norman Z. Eckenrode,Chair Michael L. Maenzweiler NO.2 X Mark A. Murphy,Chair pro tem Joanne Coontz X Steve Anderson John Holmberg A Don Bankhead Jan Flory X Bruce A. Broadwater Mark Le es X John Collins Laurann Cook X Barry Denes Richard A Freschi X Bumie Dunlap Glenn Parker A John Gullixson Gene Wisner A Pat McGui an Thomas E.Lutz A Todd S hzer1 William G. Steiner A I Bob Zemel Tom Dal DISTRICT X Margie L. Rice Chair James V. Evans NO. 3 X Eva Miner-Bradford Chair pro tem Paul F.Walker X Steve Anderson John Holmberg A Don Bankhead Jan Flory X George Brown Marilyn Bruce Hastings X John Collins Laurann Cook X Brian Donahue Harry M. Dotson X Burnie Dunlap Glenn Parker Mary Ann Jones X Tim Keenan MZemel as Bruce A.Broadwater rshall Jack Mauller ui an Thomas E. Lutz lzer William G.Steiner llivan Tom Harman . S is Ronald Bales el Tom Dal DISTRICT Jan Deba Chair X Tom W.Thomson NO.5 Jahn E. No es Chair ro ter X Tom W.Thomson A I William G. Steiner I Todd Spitzer DISTRICT X James M.Fe an Chair Arthur Perry NO.6 A William G. Steiner.Chair pro ter I I Todd Spitzer Jan Debay I X I Tom W.Thomson Minutes for Joint Board Meeting 04/22/98 Q Page 3 of 8 ACTIVE DIRECTORS ALTERNATE DIRECTORS DISTRICT X Thomas R. Sakareili Chair Jim Potts NO.7 Christina Shea Chair Protem X Barry Hammond Jan Debay X Tom W.Thomson X James M.Ferryman Arthur Peny A Pat McGuigan Thomas E. Lutz X Mark A. Murphy Joanne Coontz A William G.Steiner Todd Spitzer DISTRICT X I ShirleyDettloff,Chair Tom Hannan NO. 11 X Dave Sullivan, Chair ro tern Tom Hannan A Todd S itzerI William G.Steiner DISTRICT X Burnie Dunla Chair Glenn Parker NO. 13 A John Gull'urson Gene Wisner X I Mark A.Murphy Joanne Coontz A I William G.Steiner I Todd Spitzer A I Bob Zemel I Tom Dal DISTRICT Christina Shea Chair X Barry Hammond NO. 14 X Thomas R. Sahamili Chair ro tern Jim Potts X Mark A.Mu h Joanne Coontz A I William G.Steiner I Todd Spitzer Peer A. Swan X I Darryl Miller STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager, Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary; Chris Dahl; Ed Hodges;John Linder,, Lisa Lorey; David Ludwin; Greg Mathews; Mike Petennan; Gary Streed; Michelle Tuchman; Nancy Wheatley; Ryal Wheeler OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Woodruff, General Counsel; Mary Lee DISTRICT 5 The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California on April 22, 1998 at 7:30 p.m., adjourned for lack of a quorum. DISTRICT 13 The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 of Orange County, California on April 22, 1998 at 7:30 p.m., adjourned for lack of a quorum. Minutes for Joint Board Meeting 04/22/98 Page 4 of 8 DISTRICT 3 MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts from the City of Seal Beach re election of mayors and appointment of alternate Directors, as follows: ('Mayor) Active Director Alternate Director George Brown Marilyn Bruce Hastings' DISTRICT 3 MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Receive and file letter from the City of Cypress re appointment of Tim Keenan as Alternate Director for Mary Ann Jones for the meeting of April 22, 1998 only. DISTRICTS 5. 6& 7 MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Receive and file letter from the City of Newport Beach re appointment of Tom W. Thomson as Alternate Director for Jan Debay and John E. Noyes for the meeting of April 22, 1998 only. REPORT OF JOINT CHAIR The Joint Chairman reminded Directors that a workshop is scheduled for May 9" to discuss the status of the Strategic Plan including cooperative projects, proposed rate structure impacts, and an update on groundwater replenishment system activities. Joint Chairman Collins also reported that the Board of Supervisors did not receive any protests against the consolidation of the Districts at their April 10 hearing, and ordered the Clerk of the Board to file a resolution with LAFCO supporting the Districts' consolidation. This was the last major step in the process. A special Board meeting will take place on Wednesday, July 1, to adopt rules of procedure, and the regular Board meeting has been moved to Wednesday, July 29. He also reminded Directors that effective with the July 1e1 special meeting, all Board meetings will start at 6:30 p.m. The Joint Chair then introduced Stan Sprague, General Manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) who gave a presentation on the CALFED Bay-Delta Program. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (All Districts) There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 25, 1998, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Tim Keenan abstained. Minutes for Joint Board Meeting 04/22/98 f Page 5 of 8 RATIFICATION OF PAYMENT OF JOINT AND INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT CLAIMS (All Districts) MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Ratify 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: ALL DISTRICTS 2/0 04/98 02/18/98 Joint Operating Fund $1,384,473.22 $1,848,475.73 Capital Outlay Revolving fund 234,297.75 306,098.54 Seff-Funded Insurance Funds 0.00 21,016.69 District No. 1 28,438.12 1,838.45 District No. 2 13,707.68 0.00 District No. 3 468,301.13 3,500.03 District No. 5 4,461.73 0.00 District No.6 0.00 0.00 District No. 7 48,727.20 0.00 District No. 11 1,628.89 0.00 District No. 13 0.00 0.00 District No. 14 0.00 0.00 TOTALS $2.184.035.72 S2 180 9Z7.44 Director Mark Leyes abstained. CONSENT CALENDAR DISTRICT 2 9. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Adopt Resolution No. 98-09-2, ordering Annexation No. 78—Joujon-Rouche Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 2, .608 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Mohler Drive in the City of Anaheim. DISTRICT 3 10. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Adopt Resolution No. 98-10-3, approving Utility Agreement No. 12UT-476 with CalTrans for reimbursement of design management, construction management, inspection and associated District costs for Modifications to Portions of Magnolia Relief Trunk and Orangethorpe Relief Trunk for I-5 Widening, (Segment E-2), Contract No. 3-37. NON-CONSENT CALENDAR 12.b. DRAFT STEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Joint Chair John Collins, Chair of Steering Committee re the April 22. 1998 combined meeting of Steering Committee and Ad Hoc Committee re Strategic Plan. The Chair then ordered the draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 25, 1998 to be filed. Minutes for Joint Board Meeting 04/22/98 Page 6 of 8 13.c. DRAFT AD HOC COMMITTEE RE STRATEGIC PLAN MINUTES: The Chair ordered the draft Ad Hoc Committee re Strategic Plan Minutes for the meeting held on March 19, 1998 to be filed. 14.b. DRAFT OPERATIONS. MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Director Jim Ferryman, Vice Chair of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee, re the April 1, 1998 meeting, summarizing the actions taken and referring to the draft minutes of the meeting. The Vice Chair then ordered the draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 1, 1998 to be filed. 14.c. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Authorize staff to enter into a Lease Agreement (Specification No. P-180)with Village Nurseries for 15 acres of land at the northern part of Plant No. 2 for a period of ten years. 14.d. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED:Approve agreement with E. I. Dupont de Nemours and Company for a 10-year program to provide Maintenance Painting Services at the treatment plants for an amount not to exceed $833,713.00 for the first year, cancelable at any time. 14.e. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Authorize a Temporary Discharge Agreement with Irvine Ranch Water District for the discharge of groundwater from the Irvine Community Development Company during the one-year dewatedng construction for Peters Canyon Wash Channel Improvement 14.f. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Award a 68-month professional services contract to Science Applications International Corporation to conduct the core monitoring portion of the Districts' newly issued ocean monitoring program (Specification No. P-179); and approve the proposed foxed-price amount of$984,638.00 for the first 20-month program segment 15.a. DRAFT PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Director Burnie Dunlap, Chair of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee, re the April 2, 1998 meeting, summarizing the actions taken and referring to the draft minutes of the meeting. The Chair then ordered the draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 2, 1998 to be filed. 15.c. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Adopt Resolution No. 98-11, Amending Section 9 of Resolution No. 97-37, authorizing the General Manager to approve construction change orders that include time extensions. Minutes for Joint Board Meeting 04/22/98 Page 7 of 8 15.d MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Direct staff to discontinue working on the 66 kV Substation at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-52. 15.e. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve increase in authorized funds for Ocean Outfall Reliability Upgrades, Job No. J-34-1 and Phase 2 Site and Security Improvements at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-35-5, in the amount of$1,104,106.00 for Job No. J-34.1,for a total project total of$8.259,106.00 and in the amount of$229,632.00 for Job No. P2-35.5, for a total project total of$1,455,632.00, to cover all previous and anticipated costs required to complete construction. 151 DISTRICT 3 Ratify Change Order No. 3 to Magnolia Relief Trunk Sewer, Westminster Avenue to Trask Avenue, Contract No. 3-35R-1 with Mike Priich&Sons authorizing an addition of $318,486.00 to the contract, and 67 calendar days; ratify Change Order No. 4 authorizing a deduction from the contract of$72,750.00; approve an increase to the budget in the amount of$258,479.00; and accept contract as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approve Final Closeout Agreement 16.b. DRAFT FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Director George Brown, Chair of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Minutes, re the April 8,1998 meeting, summarizing the actions taken and referring to the draft minutes of the meeting. The Chair then ordered the draft Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 8, 1998 to be filed. 16.c. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of March 1998. 16.d. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Adopt Resolution No. 98-08, repealing Resolution No. 95-81 re Amended Deferred Compensation Program for Executive Management Group Employees and Management, Professional &Supervisory Employees, and amending Resolution No. 96-36 amending the Districts' Human Resources Policies and Procedures Manual providing for repeal of the Deferred Compensation Program. Director Dave Sullivan opposed. Director John Collins abstained. Minutes for Joint Board Meeting 04/22/98 Page 8 of 8 17. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Authorize staff to solicit bids and award purchase orders for the following in regards to Miscellaneous Repairs to the 120-Inch Ocean Outfall, Job No. J-39, for a total amount not to exceed $200,000.00: a. Fabrication of hardware for permanently securing the 120-inch outfall end gate at an estimated cost of$100,000.00. b. Diving services to install the hardware at an estimated cost of$100,000.00. ALL DISTRICTS 21. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Find that the following matter arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda pursuant to authority of Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(2); receive and file Summons and Cross-Complaint, David Deese v. Orange County Sanitation, Mahin Talebi and Tadeo Vitko, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 786591, in connection with a civil enforcement proceeding for violation of hazardous substance and materials laws; and authorize the Districts' General Counsel to appear and defend the interests of the Districts. ADJOURNMENTS (All Districts): The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Secretary of the ards of Dire rs of County Sanitatio istricts Nos , 2, 3, 6, 7, 11 & 14 HAwp.dta\ 9ende\1998 Jolt Board MlnoftO4729B.doc County Sannatlnn Districts Of Orange County Chums Paid OW04/98 Cheri No. Vendor Amount Description 9288 Doll Marketing L.P. $72,057.68 Cornputers 9289 Delta Dental $38,331.76 Dental Insurance Plan 9290 Edison Co. $54.523.92 Power 9291 Grayest Electric Company $30.100.55 Electrical Cabinet 9292 GST,Inc.I Iii City $80.422.90 Computer Hardware 9293 Kemimn Paeft Inc. $112.891.55 Fannie Clords NO 9.27-95 9294 Metra Health Acrd Financial $390.073.60 Mottled Insurance Premium 9295 Mladen Burtch Constructed Co $465.256.70 Construction 3-383,2-R-97 9296 Orange County Water District E36,065.78 Consulting Services 9297 Pacific Pad.and Controls,Inc. $25.197.32 Instrument Paris 9298 Padtimre of Ca $36,998.94 Medlad Insurance Premium 9299 Pima Gm Systems Inc $104.834.33 Residuals Removal MO 3-29.95 9300 Science Applications Intl.,Cc $39,366.13 Oman Monitoring M06-8-94 9301 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 547,141.80 Construction 7-7-1 9302 Tula Ranch/r&agan Farms $58,610.65 Residuals Removal 9303 Woodruff.Spredlin&Smart $71.535.10 Legal Services M0 7.26.95 9304 A&A DebuMng and Tumbling $69.75 Reconciliation User Refund 9305 American Telephone&Telegraph-Megamm $2,427.73 Long Distance Telephone Services 9306 American Telephone&Telegraph-Cellular CR&R $4.90 Long Distance Telephone Services 9307 American Telephone&Telegraph-Cellular CR&R $804.83 Long Distance Telephone Services +� 9308 A-PI..Syatema 5810.16 Notices&Ads 9309 Accident Photo Pak 52,370.50 Risk Management Photo Supplies 9310 Advanced Manufacturing Institute $3.576.00 Training Registration rt 9311 Alhambra Foundry Co.,Ltd. 514,869.50 Manhole Frames&Covers 9312 Allied Supply Co. $407.85 Mechanical Pad. I 9313 American Aldmas $3,218.81 Travel Sand. ^' 9314 American Society for Microbiology $330.00 Conference Registration 9316 Analysis,Inc. $1,657.79 Testing Kits 9316 Anthony Pest Control,Inc. $395.00 Service Agreement 9317 Applmne Employment Service $10,755.72 Temporary Employment Services 9310 Applied Industrial Technology 54,052.99 Pump Para 0319 Ari's Disposal Service,Inc. 5620.80 Toxic Waste Removal 932D Awards&Trophies By Bea $76.71 Plaques 9321 Accu Standard $266.99 Lab Supplies 9322 ASL Consulting Engineers $3.757.00 Consulting Services 9323 AWSI $159.00 D.O.T.Training Program 9324 Both"Povflon $218.93 Reconciliation User Refund 9325 Bell Oil Company $358.44 Reconciliation User Refund 9326 Banana Blueprint,Inc. $3,603.89 Printing MO 11-7-94 9327 Bank of Amerm S3D4.18 Banking Services 9328 Battery Specialties $340.21 Batteries 9329 Beach Paving Inc. $1.235.00 Asphalt Repair 9330 Bell Pipe&Supply Co. $507.06 Plumbing Supplies 9331 Blair-Mahn Co.,Inc. $407.30 Valve Manifolds 9332 Thomas M.Blanda $815.11 Training Expense Relmb. 9333 Boeing North American $1,432.55 Reconciliation User Refund 9334 Boyle Engineering Corporation $5.146.19 Engineering Services 7-7-1 9335 Brown And Caldwell $831.40 Engineering Services Rae 93-101 9336 Budget Janitorial,Inc. $4,545.00 Janitorial Services M01-12-94 County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid ONNU98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9337 Bureau Of Business Practice $276.32 Publication 9338 Burlington Engineering,Inc. $184.36 Permit Refund 9339 Burrows Ind./Mmulemen $1,669.82 Reconciliation User Refund 9340 Bl Technologies $832.13 Reconciliation User Refund 9341 C.G.McArthur Enterprises,Inc. $96.00 Newport Split Claim 9342 California Environmental Controls $651,25 Mechanical Parts 9343 Cale Cement $176.44 Photographic Supplies 9344 Contra Corporation $22,153.23 Fiber Optic Cable 9345 Care Enterprises West $483,63 Reconciliation User Refund 9348 Cerullo Engineers $477.75 Engineering Services 9347 Century Paint $587.75 Paint Supplies 9348 Charles P.Crowley Co. $1,276,80 Instrument Parts 9349 City of Fountain Valley $11.625.84 Water Use 9350 City of Huntington Beach $10.941.98 Water Use 9351 The City Associates,Inc. $562.50 Hearing Officer Services 9352 Cole-Parmer Instrument Company $388.40 Lab Supplies 9353 Communication Briefings $79A9 Subscription 9354 Communications Performance Group $18.833,00 Professional Services 9355 Compucem $11,077,20 Service Agreement 9356 Consolidated Electrical Distributors $7.253.57 Electric Pods 9357 Consolidated Plastics Company $54.99 Plumbing Supplies 9358 Converse Consultants $6,656.40 Engineering Services P2465 9359 Cook Brothers $2,094.66 Pump Pans N 9360 Cooper Energy Services $2.700.00 Engine Pads rr 9361 Comics Cartel,Inc. $1.432 00 Copier Lease 9362 County of Orange $630.00 Permit Fees N 9363 County Wholesale Electric Co. $72.84 Electric Parts 9364 Creel Coatings 82 $841.53 Reconciliation User Refund 9365 Cenus Corporation $402.90 Fiber Optic Cable 9366 CS Company $1,758.09 Plumbing Supplies 9367 CWEA 1998 SRSS $50.00 Training Registration 9368 Dance Metal Surfacing $1,096.96 Reconciliation User Refund 9369 Del Mar Analytical $2,358.00 Blosolids Analysis 9370 DCI $1.195.00 Training Registration 9371 Eastown Canter $216.75 Reconciliation User Refund 9372 Edinger Medical Group,Inc. $1,130.00 Medical Screening 9373 Edwards Systems Technology $1,462.50 Service Agreement 9374 Electra Bond,Inc. $3,717.38 Equipment Repair 9375 Enchanter,Inc. $4,900.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5.24-95 9376 Environmental Resources Association $1,342.00 lab Services 9377 Etex Company $602.37 Valves 9378 ENS Resources Inc. $2,053.33 Professional Services 9379 ESP Industries $387.67 Mechanical Supplies 9380 Federal Express $30.25 Air Freight 9381 Fibenron $290.36 Fiber Optic Cable 9382 Fisher Scientific $2.693.73 Lab Supplies 9383 Flo-Systems,Inc. $1,103.75 Pump Pens 9384 Flomex Products,Inc. $1,371.56 Valve Parts 9385 Fluld Tech.A Div.of FLW Inc. $503.78 Instrument Supplies County Sanna0on Districts Of Orange County b Claims Paid 02M"B Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9386 Forts Benefits Insurance Company $17.939.19 Disability Insurance Premium 9387 Fountain Valley Camera $38.31 Photo Supplies 9388 Fountain Valley Florist $53.88 Flowers-Benevolence 9389 Fountain Valley Paints,Inc. $13.31 Paint Supplies 93M Fountain Valley Rancho Auto Wash $210.50 Tmtlr Wash Tickets 9391 The Foxboro Company $10.43 Freight 9392 Franklin Covey $1.395.18 Office Supplies 9393 Franklin Quest $16.63 Office Supplies 9394 Franklin Quest Co $86.06 Office Supplies 9395 Franklin Quest Co. $179.15 Office Supplies 9396 Fry's Electronics $1,851.77 Electronic B Computer Supplies 9397 FLW,Inc. $50.00 Training Registration 9398 The Gas Company $8,694.64 Natural Gas 9399 Gales Fiberglass Installers $1,357.75 Unistiut installation 9400 G.E.Supply Company $1,211.35 Electric Parts 9401 General Oceanks Inc $797.62 Lab Services 9402 GTE Califomla $2.000.69 Telephone Services 9403 George Yardley Co. $231.49 Lab Supplies 9404 Goings Castle $256.56 Repair Kils 9405 Giedich-Mitchell,Inc. $4,432.57 Pump Paris 906 Glen and Pam Hubbard $3,415.88 Spill Claim 57f' 9407 Goldenwest Wndow Service $1.658.00 W elm Claiming Service 9408 WAN Grainger Inc. $80.81 Compressor Parts 9409 Graphic Distributors $181.02 Photographic Supplies 9410 Great American Printing Cc $236.54 Printing 7 9411 Groat Western Sanitary Supplies $389.97 Janitorial Supplies w 902 Gmth Corpodation $8,783.66 Flame Amster 9413 Hacker Equipment Company $110.32 Truck Parts 9414 Hach Company $96.12 Lab Supplies 9415 Harrington Industrial Plastics $329.51 Plumbing Supplies 9416 P.L,Hawn $341.50 Electric Supplies 9417 HoeMiger Service Inc $120.86 Compressor Pads Nis Home Depot $332.62 Small Hardware 9419 Hub Auto Supply $142.30 Track Parts 9420 HB Digital Ads 8 HB Blueprint $316.79 Printing 9421 HWA Sales,Inc. $3,255.69 Electrical Pads 9422 Imperial Plating $309.54 Reconciliation User Refund 9423 Industrial Threaded Products $2.218.14 Connectors 9424 Inland Empire Equipment,Inc $233.93 Truck Parts 9425 Interstate Battery Systems $2,116.68 Batteries 9426 Irvine Ranch Water Districts $49.46 Water Use 9427 Ism,Inc $173.09 Instrument Supplies 9428 IPCO Safety-Ca $2,071.83 Safety Supplies 9429 J.G.Tucker and Son,Inc. $1,653.62 Instrument Supplies 9430 James M.Evans $645.40 Professional Services 9431 Jay's Catering $565.32 Directors'Meeling Expense 9432 Jim's Suspension Service $265.00 Truck Repairs 9433 Johnstone Supply $708.81 Electric Paris 9434 Keith D Slohenbach,PH.D. $1,050.00 Ocean Monitoring County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 02/04/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9435 Kelly Paper $696.94 Paper 9436 Kirk Express - $105.01 Paper 9437 Knox Industrial Supplies $4.549.55 Teals 9438 Kwmont Realty Corp. $160.00 Publication 9439 L.A.Cellular Telephone Company $2,212.97 Cellular Telephone Service 9440 Lab Support $6,461.09 Temporary Employment Services 9441 LaserAll Corporation $4,963.24 Printer Maintenance 9442 Laundry World Ina $107.43 Reconciliation User Refund 9d43 Law/Crandall $344.72 Soil Testing 7.13-94 9444 LaMothe Company $164.51 Chemicals 9445 League Of California Cities $30.00 Meeting Registration 9446 Lewco Electric Co. $54.00 Truck Parts 9447 Llebed,Cassidy&Frierson $1.595.00 Membership 9448 Lgemm-Safety,lno. $2.430.98 Safety Supplies 9449 LNP Engineering Plastics,Inc. $1.405.79 Reconciliation User Refund 9450 Madrid Motel $350.95 Reconciliation User Refund 9451 Mar Vac Electronics $178.41 Instrument Supplies 9452 Me Junkin Carp $3,952.50 Plumbing Supplies 9453 McMaster-Can Supply Cm $242.52 Tools 9454 Medlin Controls Co. $583.15 Instrument Supplies 1.1 9455 Mlaosoft Corporation $3,390.00 Computer Equipment 9456 Midway Mfg 8 Machining Co $7.310.00 Mechanical Repairs 9457 Mission AbmsWe Supplies $56.20 Safety Supplies N. 9458 Mission Uniform Service $2,949.93 Uniform Renlals rr 9459 Monarch Precision Debumng Co $284.14 Reconciliation User Refund 9460 Monitor Labs Inc $6,516.72 Instrument ✓' 9461 Motorola $2,255.28 Instrument Supplies N62 MotcPholo $64.41 Photographic Supplies 9463 MD Pharmaceutical,Inc. $21.809.89 Reconciliation User Refund M64 MPS Photographic Services,Inc. $19.94 Photographic Services 9465 National Canter Workshop $139.00 Workshop Registration 9466 National Notary Association $168.00 Notary Package 9467 National Plant Services,Inc. $3.850.00 Vacuum Truck Services 9468 National Technical Information $172.00 Publications 9469 National Technology Transfer $1.190.00 Training Registration 9470 Neozyme International $278.77 Chemicals 9471 Network Solutions Group $4.800.00 Consulting Services 9472 Newark Electronics $2.133.51 Instrument Parts 9473 Nicholas Chevrolet $523.50 Truck Repairs 9474 Nickey Petroleum Co Inc $2.890.43 Lubricants/Diesel Fuel 9475 The Norco Companies $125.60 Mail Delivery Service 9476 Names Restaurant 5273.98 Reconciliation User Refund 9477 Novalynx System Inc $1,325.00 Equipment Repair 9478 Office Depot Business SeMcss $1.825.95 Office Supplies 9479 Office Pavillion $41.48 Office Furniture Repairs 9480 Olsten SlafSng Service,Ina $528.00 Temporary Employment Services 9481 Omni Metal Finishing $3,535.00 Reconciliation User Refund 9482 Oracle Corporation $3,232.50 Software 9483 Orange County Red Cross $52.00 Safety Training County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County •. Claims Paid 02/04/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9484 Orange County Wholesale Electric $6.307.27 Instrument Supplies 9485 Orange Valve&Filling Company $827.24 FlBings 9486 Pacific Bell $1.292.25 Telephone Services 9487 Pacific Mechanical Supply $5.280.77 Plumbing Supplies 9468 Pacific Paris&Controls $381.67 Instrument Supplies 9489 Wineries Verne Parts $155.63 Pump Parts 9490 Pallets&Accessories $3,335,94 Pallets 9491 Parker Hannifin Corporation $476.26 Safety Supplies 9492 Parker Harmon Corporation $5.43 Freight 9493 Parts Unlimited $664.67 Truck Parts 9494 Plan Bak $222.63 Safety Supplies 9495 Plantation Restaurant $228.34 Reconciliation User Refund 9496 Plagel Oil Company $153.22 Reconciliation User Refund N97 Power Electra Supply Co.,Inc. $446.88 Electric Supplies 9498 Precision Industries $1,098.53 Silicone Adhesive 9499 Primrose Ice $98.00 Ice For Samples 9500 Pryor Resources,Inc. $475.00 Training Registration 9501 Puhmalsler,Inc. $779.17 Pump Parts 9502 Regan Communications,Inc $119.00 Subscription 9503 Rairm Instrument Co.,Inc. $293.80 Trash Removal 95M Relphs Grocery Co.023 $149.47 Reconciliation User Refund 9505 Rehoslar $8.418.00 Life Insurance Premium 9506 Reliestar Bankers Security Life $4.824.28 LBe Insurance Premium 9507 Remedy $16.142.13 Temporary Employment Services 9508 Addana Renesco $305.19 Meeting Expense Relmb. Y 9509 RlNara Motel $430.18 Recondlletiun User Refund Ln 9510 Robedo's Auto Trim Shop $678.49 Electric Carts Repair 9511 Rosemount Analytical Inc $456.27 Instrument Supplies 9512 RPM Electric Motors $3,468.01 Electric Motor Paris 9513 Sella Fe Pacific Pipeline $520.07 Recencillatlon User Refund 9514 Scott Specialty Ganes Inc. $2,677.69 Specialty Gages 9515 Scott,Rellly&Whitehead $725.46 Legal Services-Personnel Issues 9516 Second-Sun $459.55 Batteries 9517 Serpenfix Corporation $8,401.91 Conveyor Parts 9518 Seven-Eleven(7/11)Motel&RV $711.88 Reconciliation User Refund 9519 Shamrock Supply Co.,Inc. $375.51 Tools 9520 Shureluck Sales&Engineering $3,125.04 Tools/Hardware 9521 Smith Pipe&Supply Inc. $72.89 Plumbing Supplies 9522 South Coast Water $65.00 Lab Supplies 9523 Southwest Foods/Claim Jumper $233.19 Reconciliation User Refund 9524 Spading Instrument Co.,Inc. $250.00 Molar 9525 Spectrum Yams,Inc. $238.27 Reconciliation User Refund 9526 Speedy Circuits $293.79 Reconciliation User Refund 9527 Sprint $37.20 Long Distance Telephone Services 9526 St.Edna Subacute&Rehabilitation $2,332.83 Reconciliation User Refund 9529 Slate Street Bank and Trust Co $4.662.46 COP Trustee Services 9530 Steven Enterprises,Inc $917.60 Copier Supplies 9531 Sunset Ford $62.26 Truck Paris 9532 Super Chem Corporation $336.78 Chemicals County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 02/O4MB Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9533 SARBS-PDC $875.00 Training Registration 9534 TechSmith Corporation S21D7.95 Softmm Agreement 9535 The Kiplinger Washington Letter $130.00 Subscription 9538 Time Warner Communications $45.47 Cable Services 9537 Tony's Lock&Safe Service $34.34 Locks&Keys 9538 Trans $1.057.94 Motor 9539 Tmpi ana Inn 92,918.60 Reconciliation User Refund 9540 Truck&Auto Supply,Inc. 5484.93 Truck Pads 9541 Truck Paris Supply&etc. $76.46 Truck Paris 9542 Ultra Scientific $502.00 Lab Supplies 9543 United Education Centers,Inc 5485.00 Training Supplies 9544 United Parcel Service $814.36 Parcel Services 9545 Universal Circuits.Inc. $918.98 Reconcifiatien User Refund 9546 Val Circuits 05 $1.973.98 Reconciliation User Refund 9547 Valley Cities Supply Company $893.50 Plumbing Supplies 9548 Valor Auto Glass $192.62 Truck Paris 9549 VWR Scientific Products 56,318.81 Lab Supplies 9550 Warehouse Restaurant $495.90 Reconciliation User Refund 9551 Warner Conte,Associates $851.47 Reconciliation User Refund 9552 Waste Markets $10,437.73 Residuals Removal MO3-27-96 9553 Western City Magulne $63.00 Subscription 9554 Western Stales Chemical 5440.23 CausOc Suda Mo 8-23.95 5; 9555 981&NWCWEA,Inc. $225.00 Training Registration 9556 Blake Anderson $63.16 Cellular Telephone Servlco Rebob. rt � 9557 Donald F.McIntyre E87.52 Cellular Telephone Service Reimb. I 9558 Michael D.Moore 5247.16 Meeting Expense Reimb. o' 9559 Camlyn L.Thompson 5388.51 Training Registration 9560 Michelle Tuchman $105.00 Meeting Expanse Reimb. 9561 County Sanitation District of $1.007.86 Petty Cash Relmb. 9562 Nylon Computer&Philip Cordova $1.477.03 Employee Computer Loan Program 9563 Rellastar 571,732.92 Life Insurance Premium Total Claims Paid OVD4198 $2.184.035.72 County Sanitation Dislricts Of Orange County Clalms Paid 0MV98 Summary Amount District No. 1 $28,438.12 Mtrid No.2 $13,707.68 DIsMct No.3 8468,301.13 District No.5 $4.451.73 DISMd No.7 $48,727.20 District No.11 $1,628.89 CORF $234.297.75 Joint Operation $1.384,473.22 $2.184,035.72 �r M v J County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 021I W98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9579 Advance Consbuctore Inc $603,213.10 Construction J341,P2-36-5 9580 Atlas-Allied,Inc $46,800.00 Construction P246-2 9581 ADS Environmental Services,Inc. $118.524.00 Professional Services 9582 Barclays Bank PLC $93.820.10 LOC Fees 9583 Camp Dresser 8 McKee Inc $93.058.00 Engineering Services 14(M,J40.2 9584 Giarich-0AHchell,Inc $37,432.00 Pump Parts 9585 James Media 8 Co. $37.372.50 Data Integration Project 9586 Lee&Re Inc $48,427.93 Engineering Services J47 9587 Margate Construction Inc. $508,081.34 Construction P140-2,P247-2 9586 Orange County Water District $44.390.40 GAP Water Use MO 10-23-96 9589 Facture of Ca $37,018.98 Medical Insurance Premium 9590 Pima Gro Systems Inc $109,467.26 Residuals Removal MO 3.29-95 9591 Power Generation Consulting $28,672.00 Consulting Services 9592 Tule Ranch/Magan Farms $56.522.20 Residuals Removal 9593 Amedcen Telephone B Telegraph-Cellular CRBR $2.79 Long Distance Telephone Services 9594 Appleone Employment Service $2,429.49 Temporary Employment Services 9585 Asbury Environmental Services $35.00 Waste Oil Removal 9596 AlkinlJones Computer Services $321.30 Service Agreement 9597 Bar Tech Telecom,Inc. $1.225.00 Telephone Installation 9598 Boll Delivery $196.00 Freight 9599 Brown And Caldwell $3.340.29 Engineering Services P2J5-5,P2-35-3 NCOBudington Safety Laboratory of Ca.,Inc. $207.00 Safety Testing 9601 Connell Corp. $1,217.24 Service Agreement t" 9502 Cad Warren 8 Co. $1,742.96 Insurance Claims Administrator 9603 Cannot $20.00 Computer Services 9604 Chapman Counseling $6,300.00 Employee Training 9605 Chrome Crankshaft Co. $50D.00 Pump Pads 9606 City of Seal Beach $165.56 Water Use 9607 Clayton Group Services,Inc, $10,763.18 Professional Services 9608 Connell GM Pads $232.62 Truck Paris 9609 Corporate Express $4,539.75 Office Supplies 9610 Costa Mesa Auto Supply $237.74 Truck Parts 9611 County of Orange $870.00 Permits 9612 County Sanitation Districts of OC 521,016.69 Worker's Comp.Rome. 9613 Culligan Water Conditioning $28.00 Soft Water Service 9614 Slate of California Department of Agriculture $19.00 Publication 9615 CWFA 1998 SRSS $365.00 Training Registration 9616 Deily Pilot $268.75 Notices 8 Ads 9617 Duthie Generator Service,Inc. $6,300.00 Equipment Rental 9618 Eagle Distribution $144.53 Electric Cad Parts 9619 Edge Training Systems,Inc $695.00 Training Materials 9620 Edison Co. $6.616.14 Power 9621 Enchanter,Inc. $2,100.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5.24-95 9622 Enterprise Technologies $3.068.80 Professional Services 9623 ESP Industries $251.28 Mechanical Supplies 9624 Fairbanks Scales,Inc. $517.66 Service Agreement 9625 Federal Express $103.00 Air Freight 9625 Flo-Systems,Inc. $517.49 Pump Pads 9627 Fountain Valley Camara $23.36 Photo Supplies County Sanitation Dlstdds Of Orange County Claims Paid 02/1B/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9628 The Foxboro Company $2,236.74 Instrument Supplies 9629 Franklin Covey $171.51 Officer Supplies 9630 Frys Electronics $5,929.82 Electronic B Computer Supplies 9631 City of Fullerton $37.65 Water Use 9532 Ganahl Lumber Company $199.74 Lumber/Hardware 9533 Gartner Group Inc. $125.00 Meeting Registration 9634 The Gas Company $5,385.14 Natural Gas 9835 GTE California $1.135.69 Telephone Services 9636 Goveming $16.00 Subscription 9837 WW Grainger Inc $85.91 Compressor Pads 9638 GBC(General Binding Corp) $460.00 Maintenance Agreement 9639 Hatch 8 Kirk Inc $2,374.43 Truck Parts 9640 Haulaway Storage Containers $406.00 Container Rentals 9641 Hoerbiger Service Inc $660.17 Compressor Pads 9642 Home Depot 562.55 Small Hardware 9643 HI Standard Automotive $418.02 Tmtlk Pads 9844 Imaging Plus, Inc $3,163.03 Office Supplies 9645 Irvine Ranch Water Districts $2.90 Water Use 9646 Jamison Engineering.Inc. $2,185.56 Construction Services 9647 Jay's Catering $420.68 Directors'Meeling Expense (+/ 9648 Johnstone Supply $59.47 Electric Parts 9649 Kato Engineering $4.030.24 Engineering Services 9650 Kelly Paper $406.22 Paper 9651 Kamiron Pacific,Inc. $17.245.89 Ferric Clodde NO 9-27-95 9552 Knowledge Point $7,762.48 OnSBe Training m 9553 Knox Industrial Supplies $4.11 Tonle ^� 9654 L 8 N UnBpnn Supply Co. $1,838.45 Recendliation User Refund 9655 Lewellyn Technology,Inc. $1,298.00 Training Registration 9656 LexteNeAs $2,263.57 Subscription 9657 Limbo Vision $150.00 Photogrephlo Services 9658 Lend Fleming Architects,Inc $11.052.89 Architectural Services 9659 Mar Vac Electronics $116.64 Instrument Supplies 9660 Mesa Energy Systems,Inc. $826.50 Equipment Repair 9661 Mission Uniform Service $1.831.40 Uniform Rentals 9662 National Microcomp Services $1,685.00 Service Agreement 9663 National Notary Association $175.10 Publication 9664 National Technology Transfer $3,940.00 Training Registration 9665 Netilnk Ltd. $1,623.64 Communications Equipment 9666 Orange County Forum $25.00 Meeting Registration 9667 Orange Valve B Fitting Company $170,57 Filings 9668 Ortiz Fire Protection $735.00 Service Agreement 9669 Oxygen Service Company $890.64 Specially Gases 9670 Pacific Ball $28.13 Telephone Services 9671 Paternal $1,026.87 Rental Equipment 9672 Pitney Bowes $2,062.99 Maintenance Agreement 9673 Rainbow Disposal Co..Inc. $2.160.05 Trash Removal 9674 Red Wing Shoes $357.72 Reimbursable Safety Shoes 9675 Remedy $7,722.61 Temporary Employment Services 9676 Rulan B Tucker Attorneys at Law $1,044.00 Legal Services County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 021IW98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9677 Skillisam Seminars $534.00 Training Registration 9678 SmBh-Emery Company $9,842.00 Sail Testing MO 7-13-94 9679 Southern California Edison $14,450.01 Power 9660 Sparkle8s $5.441.03 Drinking Water/Cooler Rentals 9681 SARBS-POC $250.00 Training Registration 9682 SCAOMD Subscription Services $12,165.00 Emissions Fee 9683 The Holman Group $772.48 EAP Premium 9684 Truck&Auto Supply,Inc. $268.30 Truck Paris 9685 Michelle Tuchman $48.25 Cellular Telephone Service Reimb. 96M UC Regents $350.00 Meeting Expense Reimb. 9687 US FlllerlPotymetdcs,Inc. $2,526.60 Lab Supplies 9688 The Vantage Group $14.740.00 Consulting Services 9689 Vendor,Inc. $3.500.03 Reconciliation User Refund 9690 Vision Service Plan-(CA) $7.761.60 Vision Service Premium 9691 The Wackenhut Corporation $19,816.32 Security Guards 9692 The Wail Street Journal $180.56 Subscription 9693 Wayne Electric $880.34 Electric Pads 9694 Western States Chemical Inc. $19,891.56 Caustic Soda NO 8.23-95 9695 William Hamilton 8 Associates $810.00 Professional Services 9696 Xerox Corporation $10.324.97 Copier Leases 9697 Kevin L.Haddon $435.55 Meeting Expense Rehab. 9698 Donald F.McIntyre $640.98 Meeting Expense Reimb. 9699 Edward M.Torres $228.11 Meeting Expense Reimb. H. 9700 Steven W.Evans $1,702.08 Employee Computer Loan Program 9701 Nylon Computer and Larry Wilke $1,289.T7 Employee Computer Loan Program m 9702 SCAOMD $16,884.77 Emissions Fee w Total Claims Paid 02A8198 $2,180,927.44 Summary Amount District No.1 $1,838.45 District No.3 53,500.03 CORP $306,096.54 Sell Insurance Funds $21.016.69 Joint Operations $1,848,475.73 $2,180.927.44 AGENDA 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 MAY 27, 1998-7:30 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 than 72 hours prior to the 11 meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public I41 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 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 Districts subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. 1. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts of member agencies relating to appointment of Directors, if any. 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). 05/27/98 Page 2 of 7 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 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 April 22 1998 District 2 April 22 1998 District 3 April 22 1998 District 5 March 25 1998 District 6 April 22 1998 District 7 April 22 1998 District 11 Aril 22 1998 District 13 March 25 1998 District 14 Aril 22 1998 8. Ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts, by roll call vote, 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) ALL DISTRICTS 03/04/98 0311a198 Joint Operating Fund $2,184,493.81 $1,935,376.24 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund 508,092.69 280.429.66 Self-Funded Insurance Funds 2,083.33 2,083.33 District No. 1 0.00 0.00 District No. 2 173,986.57 2,074.36 District No. 3 0.00 0.00 District No. 5 404.25 2,843.00 District No.8 0.00 0.00 District No. 7 956.39 5,542.53 District No. 11 0.00 0.00 District No. 13 0.00 0.00 District No. 14 0.00 0.00 TOTALS $2 870 017 04 5222U42,12 05/27/98 Page 3 of 7 CONSENT CALENDAR (ITEM NO. 9) All matters placed on the Consent Calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the Consent Calendar by a Director, staff member or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the Consent Calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar, All items removed from the Consent Calendar shall be considered in the regular order of business. Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the Consent Calendar shall, upon recognition by the Chair, state their name, address and designate by number the item to be removed from the Consent Calendar. i The Chair will determine U any items are to be deleted from the Consent Calendar. Consideration of motion to approve all agenda items appearing on the Consent Calendar not specifically removed from same, as follows: ALL DISTRICTS 9. 1) Approve the plans and specifications on file at the offices of the Board Secretary; 2) Receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation; and 3) Award a contract to Power Distributors, Inc. for Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications, Job No. 19980015, for an amount not to exceed $67,500.00 END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 10. Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any. 05/27/98 Page 4 of 7 NON-CONSENT CALENDAR 11. a. Verbal report by Chair of Steering Committee re May 27, 1998. b. DRAFT JOINT STEERING/AD HOC COMMITTEE MINUTES— NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Joint Steering/Ad Hoc Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 22, 1998 to be fled. C. Approve out-of-country travel by the Districts' General Manager to attend an international conference co-sponsored by The Water Environment Federation, July 7, 1998 through July 10, 1998, being held in Cambridge, England. 12. a. Verbal report by Chair of Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee re May 8, 1998 meeting. b. DRAFT OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES—NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chairwill order the draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 8, 1998 to be filed. C. Authorize the formation of the Guidance Committee to develop a Districts-wide Collection System Management Program to include, but not be limited to, model ordinances for future action. d. Approve Professional Services Agreement with James Martin+ Cc for the design and construction of the first phase of the Data Integration (Job No. 5400200), for an amount not to exceed $1,210,000.00. 13. a. Verbal report by Chair of Planning, Design and Construction Committee re May 7, 1998 meeting. b. DRAFT PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE MINUTES—NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held May 7, 1998 to be filed. C. Approve Professional Services Agreement for Plant Automation & Reinvention, Phase 1, Job No. J42, with Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. providing for plant documentation and reinvention for$4,383,400.00. 05/27/98 Page 5 of 7 ALL DISTRICTS—(Continued from page 4) 13. d. 1) Approve Addendum No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement with Black&Veatch providing for additional design and construction support services for Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-46, and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-55, for an additional amount of $238,700.00, increasing the total contract amount not to exceed $912,215.00; and 2) authorize a budget revision to increase the project budget for Chemical Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P146-2, by $1,043,050.00 to a total amount of $4,003,050.00. e. Approve Professional Service Agreements with Cathcart Garcia von Langan Engineers; HDR Engineers, Inc.; Krieger&Stewart, Inc.; Lee & Ro, Inc.; MacDonald-Stephen Engineers, Inc.; and Tran Consulting Engineers for professional engineering services related to small projects for the Facilities Engineering Consulting Services, for an amount not to exceed $160,000 each, for a total of$960,000.00. 14. a. Verbal report by Chair of Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee re May 13, 1998 meeting. b. DRAFT FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MINUTES—NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on May 13, 1998 to be riled. C. Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of April 1998. d. Receive and file Quarterly Investment Management Program Report for the period January 1, 1998 through March 31, 1998. e. Adopt Resolution No. 98-12, delegating authorizing the Districts'General Manager to establish policies and procedures for delegation of his authority, and repealing Resolution No. 95-62. f. Adopt Resolution No. 98-13, adopting the Wastewater Agency Response Network 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement and the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement; and authorize the General Manager to approve future mutual aid agreements and amendments in a form approved by General Counsel. g. Adopt revised Sewer Service User Fee structure. expanding the number of non-residential categories, and basing rates on average quantity and strength of discharge per category. h. Receive and file 1997-98 Third Quarter Financial and Operational Report for the period ending March 31, 1998. 05/27/98 Page 6 of 7 ALL DISTRICTS 15. Approve Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Black& Veatch providing for a reallocation of funds for Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-46, and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-55. DISTRICT 5 16. 1) Rescind Board action taken on January 28, 1998 awarding a contract for Beautfication of Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5.33-1 to Jerrold Corporation due to inability to meet District's insurance requirements; 2) Declare the second low bid, submitted by Southland Construction Company, as non-responsive due to inability to meet District's insurance requirements; and, 3) Authorize award of the contract to the third low bidder, Veme's Plumbing, Inc. in the total amount of$36,700.00. 17. ALL DISTRICTS 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 Boards in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate negotiations, pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54955.8, 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6, as noted. Reports relating to (a) purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or potential litigation; (c) employment actions or negotiations with 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 the Boards take final actions on any of these subjects, the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. a. Convene in closed session, if necessary 1. Confer with General Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation, one potential matter (Government Code Section 54956.9[b][1]). 2. Confer with General Counsel re status of litigation, David Ellstrom v. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 778093 (Government Code Section 54956.9[a]). b. Reconvene in regular session C. Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session 18. Matters that a Director would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting 19. Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report 05/27/98 Page 7 of 7 20. Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any 21. Adjournments NOTICE TO DIRECTORS; To place items on the agenda for the Regular.Meeting of the Joint Boards, Directors shall submit items to the Board Secretary no later than the close of business 14 days preceding the Joint Board meeting. The Board Secretary shall include on the agenda all items submitted by Directors, the General Manager and General Counsel and all formal communications. Board Secretary: Penny Kyle (714) 593-7130 or (714) 062-2411, ext. 7130 H:\wp.dta\admin\BSWgenda\052798.dx JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS Me ng Dare T)L ea, _ ao !P AGENDA REPORT Rem Number Hen Number County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Ross H. Tipps, Senior Accounting Clerk SUBJECT: PAYMENT OF CLAIMS OF THE JOINT AND INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Ratify Payment of Claims of the Joint and Individual Districts by Roll Call Vote. (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). Staff recommends ratification of payment of claims in accordance with the attached check listing. SUMMARY See attached check listing. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGETIMPACT ® This Rem has been budgeted. (Line item: N/A) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This Rem has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION N/A ALTERNATIVES N/A H W9a•'1 MM✓ Fum.Eol Page 1 CEOA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS Copies of Claims Paid reports from 03/04/98 and 03/18/98. N bp.WNn�Wdgpe4pvds Rs{ F—W Re,..,.. uses Page 2 County Sanitation Dismcts Of Orange Count' - Claims Paid 03/04/98 Chock No. Vendor Amount Description 9759 Tula,RanchlMegan Farms $76,783.17 Residuals Removal 9760 Centrepointe Commercial Interiors $54,685.29 Office Fumltum 9761 Communications Performance Group.Inc. $28,570.00 Profesalanal Services 9762 Cooper Cameron Corporation $89,759.02 Engine Parts 9763 Dell Marketing L.P. $26,073.74 Computers 9764 Delta Dental $38,364.59 Dental Insurance Plan 9765 Duke Energy Trading&Marketing $147,623.20 Natural Gas 9766 Kemlmn Pacific,Inc, $55,910.23 Feelc Chloride MO 9-27-95 9767 Metre Health $130,555.98 Medical Insurance Premium 9768 Mla fen Buntich Construction Cc $278.328.50 Construction 3J8-3,2R-97 9769 Nat West Markets $67,237.39 COP Interest Draw Fees 977a Network Catalyst $26.738.10 Consulting Services 9771 Pacific Pads and Controls,Inc. $28,616.23 Instrument Pads 9772 PaineWebber Incorporated $60,186.57 COP Remarketing Agreement 9773 Polydyne,Inc. $25,755.40 Cationic Polymer MO 3.11-92 9774 Sahara NOV $72,562.00 Natural Gas Dryer 9775 Science Applications Ing.,Co $77,424.88 Ocean Monitoring NO 68-94 9776 Tropical Plaza Nursery,Inc. $39.473.54 Contract Groundskeeping MO 5-11-94 9777 Vulcan Chemical Technologies $87,711.06 Hydrogen Peroxide Spec8lcation No,C-044 9778 Woodruff,Spredlin&Smart $92,398.78 Legal Services MO 7-26-95 9779 A-Plus Systems $697.62 Notices&Ads 9780 Abeaco $501.54 Tools 9781 AccuSlanderd 5649.05 Lab Supplies 9782 Aldca Systems,Inc. $15,314.28 Tube Cable 9783 Air Llqulde America Corporation $3.147.18 Specialty Gasses 978E Air Products and Chemicals,Inc. $22,500.00 O&M Agreement Cary Gen.Sysl.NO 8d-89 9785 Allied Parking&Rubber Inc, $923.65 Gaskets 9786 Alta-Robbins,Inc. $346.14 Instrument Supplies 9787 American Digital Technologies $22,351.23 Consulting Services 9788 American Meint.Management Institute $1.680.00 Training Registration 97a9 American Society for Quality $44.25 Publication 9790 Anchor Paving $2.000.00 Rake Manholes 9791 Anthony Past Control,Inc. $215.00 Service Agreement 9792 Appleone Employment Service $2,402.58 Temporary Employment Services 9793 Applied Industrial Technology $375.42 Pump Parts 97M Ashme $a5.00 Membership 9795 Authur D.Guy 111 $340.00 Professional Services 9796 ADI Control Techniques Drives $245.78 Pump Paris 9797 Air&Waste Management Assoc $1.120.00 Meeting Registration 9798 American Seals West $843.46 Pump Pane 9799 ASL Consulting Engineers $2,843.00 Consulting Services 9800 AWSI $790.00 D.O.T.Training Program 9801 Bailey Fischer&Pouter Company $2.091.90 Chlorination Supplies 9802 Banana Blueprint,Inc, $10,510.99 Printing MO 11-7-94 9803 Bar Tech Telecom,Inc. $15,686.81 Telephone Installation Sa04 Brumes Noble Books $1.465.43 Publications 9805 Battery Specialties $274.44 Batteries 9805 Bio Gro Divislon $9.295.79 Residuals Removal MO 4-2695 9807 BIN-B-Gone $306.38 Safety Supplies County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 03MX138 Cheek No. Vendor Amount Description 9808 Bishop Company $213.88 Tool 9609 Black&Veatch $8.840.00 Engineering Services 9810 Black Box Corporation $788.35 Computer Parts 9811 Boot Barn $53.77 Reimbursable Safety Shoes 9812 Boyle Engineering Corporation $8,603.67 Engineering Services 338 9813 Burlington Safety Laboratory $171.69 Safety Testing 9814 Bush&Associates Inc $196.00 Surveying Services MO 63-94 9815 Ben Franklin Crafts $117.97 Award 9816 BNI Building News $187.32 Publications 9817 C.P.I. $1,834.75 Lab Supplies 9818 Cal Glass,Imo. $693.92 Lab Supplies 9819 Calif Dept Of Transportation $56.00 Publication 9820 California Automatic Gate $118.21 Service Agreement 9821 Cambridge University Press $75.85 Publications 9822 Carollo Engineers $16,506.01 Engineering Services 9823 Century Safety $742.85 Safety Supplies 9824 Collect $20.00 Computer Services 9825 Chapman Counseling $4,200.00 Employee Training 9826 Chem43ry Of Huntington Beach $890.00 Janitorial Services 9827 City of Huntington Beach $26.91 Water Use 9828 Coastal Conservancy $18.00 Subscription 9829 Cole-Pamrer Instrument Company $362.71 Lab Supplies 9830 Composting Council $10.00 Publication 9831 Compressor Components Of California $1,538.13 Pump Paris 9832 Compuserve Incorporated $1,229.00 Computer Services 9833 Computers America,Ina $1,647.85 Computer Supplies 9834 Connell GM Paris $15.05 Truck Parts 9835 Consolidated Electrical Distributors $10.328.94 Electric Parts 9836 Consolidated Reprographics $304.14 Printing Services 9837 Consumers Pipe&Supply Co $2,824.31 Plumbing Supplies 9838 Converse Consultants $6,891.40 Consulting Services MO 8.11-93 9839 Corporate Express $2,038.44 Ofece Supplies 9640 County of Orange $685.00 Administrative Fees 9841 County Wholesale Electric Co. $518.49 Electric Parts 9842 Crane Pro Services $2,391.50 Crane Parts g843 Culligan Water Conditioning $28,00 Soft Water Service 9844 CASA $10,000.00 Conference Registration 9845 CC]Technologies $9,995.00 Work Station Installation 9846 CDS/Nedco $225.13 Lab Supplies 9847 CEM Corporation $549.75 Lab Supplies 9848 CRC Press,Inc. $603.97 Lab Supplies 9849 CRG Marine Laboratories,Inc $2,660.00 Soils Testing 9850 CS Company $1,428.77 Plumbing Supplies 9851 Dal Mar Analytical $2,244.00 Blosolids Analysis 9852 Dell Computer Corp.&Douglas Cook $2,890.86 Employee Computer Loan Program 9853 De2urcJk $5,916.69 Valves 9854 Dtsc Manufacturing $1,913.32 Reconciliation User Refund 9855 Disc Manufacturing Inc $161.04 Reconciliation User Refund 9856 Dover Elevator Company $1B0.00 Elevator Maintenance County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 03/00/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9857 Dunn-Edwards Corporation $2,745.82 Point Supplies 9858 Duthie Generator Service,Inc. $6.300.00 Rental Equipment 9859 Digital Consulting Services $3,717.38 Office Equipment 9860 DGA Consultants,Inc. $2,59D.00 Surveying Services MO 6-8-94 9861 Edinger Medical Group,Inc. $370.00 Medical Screening 9862 Edwards High Vacuum International $97.54 Lab Supplies 9863 Electrical South $651.89 Equipment Repair 9864 Enchanter,Inc. $2,a00.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5-24-95 9865 Enterprise Technologies $6,160.75 Consulting Services 9866 Environmental Resources Associates $940.80 Lab Services 9867 Environmental Science Association $13,879.34 Professional Services 9868 Executive Program 366.77 Publications 9869 ENS Resources,Inc. $2,220.30 Professional Services 9870 ESP Industries,Inc. $1,315.63 Mechanical Supplies 9871 Federal Express Corp., $424.25 Air Freight 9872 Flburtron $290.58 Fiber Optic Cable 9873 Filler Supply Company $271.44 Filters 9874 Fisher Scientific $1,263.96 Lab Supplies 9875 Flo-Systems,Inc. $398.05 Pump Part 9876 Fortis Benefits Insurance Company $17,877.70 Deabilty,Insurance Premium 9877 Fountain Valley Camara $47.40 Photo Supplies 9878 Fountain Valley Rancho Auto Wash $216.00 Truck Wash Tickets 9879 The Foxboro Company $1,640.05 Instrument Supplies 9880 Franklin Covey $334.35 Office Supplies 9881 Fr"Electronics $1.111.36 Electronic B Computer Supplies 9882 Fume Company $565.08 Cable 9883 G.E.Supply Company $3.800.34 Electric Parts 9884 Ganahl Lumber Company $496.45 Lumbar/Hardware 9805 Garmft-Callahan Company $5,055.68 Chemicals 9886 The Gas Company $11,738.96 Natural Gas 9887 Gates Fiberglass Installors $8.979.12 UntsIM Installation 9888 GTE California $5,528.03 Telephone Services 9889 Getinge Castle $936.00 Lab Supplies 9890 Glarich-Mitchell,Inc. $1,547.92 Pump Pads 9891 WW Grainger Inc. $3.263.03 Compressor Parts 9892 Graphic Distributors $50.64 Photographic Supplies 9893 Graeeby STl $8,690.52 Engine Pads 9894 Gmybar Electric Company $9.452.07 Computer Hardware 9895 Great American Printing Co $630.03 Printing 9896 Edwards Systems Technology $517.20 Safety Equipment 9897 GST,Inc./Micro City $497.97 Office Supplies 9898 Hach Company $1.718.52 Lab Supplies 9899 Herrington Industrial Plastics $1,425.32 Plumbing Supplies 99M Hatch 8 Kirk Inc. $1,478.31 Truck Parts 9901 Haulaway Storage Containers $1,575A0 Container Rentals 9902 Flannels One $2,336.66 Consulting Services 9903 HIM Inc $3.267.26 Tools 9904 Hoerblger Service Inc $2.072.09 Compressor Pens 9905 Home Depot 5905.83 Small Hardware County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Pad 03/04/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9905 Hub Auto Supply $457.52 Truck Parts 9907 HyClone Laboratories $732.17 Lab Supplies 9908 HI Standard Automotive $737.33 Truck Parts 9909 Idexx $2,010.77 Lab Supplies 9910 Impulse $316.47 Mechanical Parts 9911 Industrial Threaded Products $168.44 Connectors 9912 Information Resources $200.00 Personnel Services 9913 Inorganic Ventures,Inc. $87.25 Lab Supplies 9914 Inside EPA $1,550.00 Subscription 9915 Interstate Battery Systems $328.32 Batteries 9916 Irvine Ranch Water Districts $50.10 Water Use 9917 Ism,Inc $629.79 Instrument 9918 IPCO Safety-Ca $10,165.71 Safety Supplies 9919 J.D.Edwards World Solutions $12,830.00 Software License Fees MO7-2a96 9920 James N.Darlington $7,000.00 Consulting Services 9921 Jays Catering 5521.95 Directors'Meeting Expense 9922 K.P.Lindstrom $8.475.07 Emir.Consulting Services MO 12-9-90 9923 Keiser Foundation Health Plan 322,208.95 Medical Insurance Premium 9924 Kimmede Bros.,Inc $79.31 Mechanical Pads 9925 Knox Industrial Supplies $2.460.82 Tools 9926 L.A.Cellular Telephone Company $2,210.18 Cellular Telephone Service 9927 Lab Support E5,166.75 Temporary Employment Services 9926 Legi-Tech $3,620.00 Computer Services 9929 LffecumSafoty,Inc. $3.022.76 Safety Supplies 9930 M.E.Canfield Co. $800.00 Training Registration 9931 Maintenance Technology Corp. 3353.50 Mechanical Parts 9932 Mar Vac Elemonim $89.79 InsWrront Supplies 9933 No Junkin Corp $1,132.64 Plumbing Supplies 9934 Medlin Controls Co. $1.197.79 Instrument Supplies 9935 Mellon Trust $15,698.43 Investment Custodian Bank 9936 MicroAge Computer $13.837.72 Software 9937 Midway Mfg S Machining Co. 3T25.00 Mechanical Repairs 9935 Mission Abrasive Supplies $472.83 Safety Supplies 9939 Mission Uniform Service $3,229,39 Uniform Rentals 9940 Mobile Modular Management Corp $603.40 Office Trailer Lease 9941 Montgomery Watson $2.002.00 Air Taxis Project MO 12-12-90 9942 Moody's Investor's Service $5.000.00 COP Rating Services 9943 Moreland&Associates $9.527.76 Auditing Services MO 341-95 9944 Morton $549.63 Salt 9945 Motion Industries $67.12 Pump Parts 9946 MoloPhoto $5.35 Photographic Services 9947 MJ Schiff&Associates,Inc $2,443.79 Professional Services 9948 MPS Photographic Services,Inc $36.10 Photographic Services 9949 MSI Metal Supply Inc $1,431.89 Metal 9950 National Plant Services,Inc. $1,687.50 Vacuum Truck Services 9951 Neal Supply Cc $230.62 Plumbing Supplies 9932 New Hor¢ons Computer Looming 52.897.00 Software Training Classes 9953 Norms Rehlgeretion $126.46 Equipment Repair 9954 Office Depol Business Services $1,019.36 Office Supplies County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County ' Claims Paid 03/04/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 9955 Olsten Staffing Service,Inc, $2,464.00 Temporary Employment Services 9956 Orange County Business Council $125.OD Meeting Registration 9957 Orange County Red Cross $1,6%,67 Safety Training 9958 Orange County Wholesale Electric $711.04 Instrument Supplies 9959 Orange Valve B Fitting Company $1.041.46 Fillings 9960 Oxygen Servlce Company $75.20 Specialty Gases 9961 P.L.Hawn Company,Inc. $642.61 Electric Supplies 9962 Pacific Ball $1.259.79 Internet Services 9963 Pacific Ball $1991 Telephone Services 9964 Pacific Investment Management $5,602.00 Investment Management Services 9965 Pacific Mechanical Supply $11,152.40 Plumbing Supplies 9956 Peney Bowes $789.D0 Postage Machine Service Agreement 9%7 Power Design $2,040.95 Electrical Repalm 9968 Pres-Tech $295.32 Mechanical Parts 9959 Presidium Inc $2.083.33 Workers Comp Claims Admin. 9970 Progcammefs ParadUe,Inc. $399.95 Software 9971 Putrmeister,Inc. $1,778.79 Pump Parts 9972 Quanta"Environmental Services $I,DD0.00 Analytical Services 9973 Quill Corp $493.41 Office Supplies W74 R 8 R Instrumentation,Ina $1,D99.54 Electric Pads 9975 PosWme Systems Corporation E276.25 Consulting Services 9976 Retests, $21,642.20 Life Insurance Pmmium 9977 Reliastar Bankers Security Life $4,824.26 Life Insurance Premium 9978 Remedy $4.823.57 Temporary Employment Services 9979 Roma Sales Company,Inc. $253.21 Sensor 9980 RM Corrode $419.23 Office Equipment W81 RPM Electric Motors $11.189.85 Elechre Motor Pars 9982 Sasy-Kleen $153.50 Equipment Service 9983 Santa Ana Electric Motors $1,297.42 Electric Parts 9984 Sans Fe Industrial Plastics $8911.71 Plumbing Supplies 9985 Sanctus Corporation $778.00 Lab Supplies 9986 Scott,Reilly B Whitehead $725.45 Legal Services-Personnel Issues W87 Seam $1,714.61 Tools 9988 SecendSm $1,215.47 Light Fixtures 9989 Shureluck Sales 8 Engineering $2.791.42 Tools/Hardware 9990 Siemon,Larsen&Marsh 54,000.00 Legal Services 9991 Sigma-Aldrich,Inc. $94IIA3 Lab Supplies 9992 Southwest Scientific Inc. $639.28 Meter 9993 Spas Ceriprep Inc. $420.12 Lab Supplies 9994 Springer-Vedag New York.Inc. $94.54 Publication 9995 Strata International,Inc. $1,855.03 Chemicals 9996 Summit Steel $1,126.98 Metal 9997 Superior Fence $1,975.00 Chalnlink Fence 999a Symms,Inc SBD0.00 Professional Services 9999 SCAP $60D.00 Air Quality Program 10000 Teledyne Eletronic Tech. $164.27 Instrument Pars 1D001 The Holman Group $772.48 EAP Premium Jan 98 10002 Thermo Separation Products $174.45 Lab Supplies 10003 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. $1.048.97 Mechanical Pars County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 031N198 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 10004 Than Power,Inc. $9,750.00 Service Agreement 10005 Than Power, Inc $4,035.00 Service Agreement loam Toshiba International Corporation $1,022.36 Instrument Parts 10007 Truck&Auto Supply,Inc. $140.49 Truck Pads 10008 Truesdell Lationdones,Inc. $823.00 Lab Services 10009 Tuthill Corp $15.099.51 Mechanical Supplies 10010 Thorpe Insulation $105.15 Mechanical Supplies 10011 Ultra Scientific $642.00 Lab Supplies 10012 The Unisource Corporation $689.61 Office Supplies 10013 United States Safe Deposit $94.00 Otfsite Back-Up Tape Storage 10014 UC Regents $530.00 Training Registration 10015 Valley Cities Supply Company $2,536.69 Plumbing Supplies 10016 Van Waters 8 Rogers $3.702.64 Chemicals 10017 Varian Chromatography Systems $1.042.84 Electrical Pads 10018 Vortex IrMuslnes,Inc. $1.123.51 Building Repairs 10019 VWR Scientific Products $11.776.87 Lab Supplies 10020 The Wackenhut Corporation $9.933.43 Security Guards 10021 Waste Markets $10.563.84 Residuals Removal MO 3-27-96 10022 Water Education Foundation $150.00 Meeting Registration 10023 Waters Corporation $3,996.17 Service Agreement 10024 WateReuse Association $1,450.00 Membership 10025 Nancy J.Wheatley $775.60 Meeting Expense Reimb. 10026 Xerox Corporation $1,224.68 Copier Leases 10027 Vale University Press $29.50 Publication 10028 YTG Computer Inc.8 Rase Marsala $2,245.00 Employee Computer Loan Program 10029 3D Instruments,Inc. $943.89 Instrument Parts 10030 Nicholas J.Amontes $555.20 Meeting Expense Reimb. 10031 Donald F.McIntyre $731.82 Meeting Expanse Reimb. 10032 Michael D.Moore $785.06 Meeting Expense Reimb. 10033 Chung M.Nguyen $112.60 Training Expense Reimb. 10034 Ouynh D.Nguyen $247.40 Training Expense Reimb. 10035 Robert Ccten $530.65 Meeting Expense Reimb. 10036 David Rodriguez $118.36 Publication Expanse Reimb. 10037 John W.Swindler $912.64 Training Expense Reimb. 10038 Nancy J.Wheatley $478.69 Meeting Expense Reimb. 10039 Alas Cartsan $150.00 Training Expense Reimb. 10040 County Sanitation District of OC $1,705.59 Petty Cash Reimb. 10041 Cdstopher D.Dahl $325.00 Training Registration Total Claims Paid 03fW98 $2,228,348.12 County Sanitation Disttlgs Of Omnge County ' Claims Paid 03/04/98 Summary Amount District No.2 $2.074.36 District No.5 $2,843.00 District No.7 $5.542.63 CORF $280,429.66 Self Insurance Funds $2.083.33 Joint Operations $1,935,376.24 $2,228,349.12 County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 03118198 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 10064 Advanm Constructors Inc. $187,366.20 Construction J-34-1,P2S5.5 10065 Atias-Allied,Inc $54,220.00 Construction P246-2 10066 Air Products&Chemicals $45,243.43 O&M Agreement Oxy Gen.Syst.MO 8b69 10067 Boyle Engineering Corporation $31.258.79 Engineering Services 7-23 1006E Camp Dresser&McKee Inc. $56,836.00 Engineering Services J40-1,J40.2 10069 Covello Engineers $59.848.14 Engineering Services 10070 Duke Energy Trading&Marketing $63.649.60 Natural Gas 10071 J.D.Edwards World Solutions $102.915.58 Software License Fees MO 7-24-96 10072 Kembon Pecic,Inc. $162,628.18 Ferric Chloride MO 9-27-95 10073 MacDonald-Stephens Engineers $154.477.57 Engineering Services 2.37 10074 Orange County Water District $38.380.00 GAP Water Use M010-23-96 10075 PaciBcere of Ca $37,169.83 PaciBCare March Premium 10076 Pima Gro Systems Inc $140,000.84 Residuals Removal MO 3-29-95 10077 Science Appllcallons Intl.,Cc $151.364.61 Ocean Monitoring MO 64k94 10078 Southern California Edison $46.029.74 Power 1U079 Tule Ranch/Magan Farms $59.078.16 Residuals Removal 10080 Woodruff,Spradlin&Smart $76,293.53 Legal Payment 10081 Margate Construction Inc. $557,567.52 Construction PI-36.2 10082 American Telephone&Telegraph-Megamm $3.245.65 Long Distance Telephone Services 10083 American Telephone&Telegraph-Cellular CR&R $25.80 Lang Distance Telephone Services loom American Telephone&Telegraph-Megamm $804.83 Long Distance Telephone Services 10085 A-Plus Systems $570.78 Notices&Ads 10086 Abrasive Engineering Tool&Equipment $39.66 Hardware 10087 Advanm Comstmclors,Inc. $13,700.00 Construction Services 10088 Allied Supply Co. $4,116.26 Plumbing Supplies 10089 American Abloes $6,032.00 Travel Services 10090 American Training Resources,Inc. $862.00 Training Materials 10091 Blake Anderson $121.43 Telephone Expense Retmb. 10092 Angel Scientific Products,Inc $976.75 Lab Supplies 10093 Appleone Employment Service $4.241.84 Temporary Employment Services 10094 Applied Industrial Technology $51.72 Pump Pads 10095 Asbury Environmental Services $345.00 Waste Oil Removal 10096 ABM Business Machines,Inc. $126.72 Office Supplies 10097 Advanced Engine Tech Corp. $4.275.00 Engine Testing J-19 10098 American Seals West $487.03 Gaskets 10099 ARK Technologies $680.00 Data Processing 10100 Banana Blueprint,Inc. $3,968.98 Printing MO 11.7-94 10101 Battery Specialties $1,124.36 Batteries 10102 Black Box Corporation $1,340.64 Computer Parts 10103 Blueoul Extinguisher Co. $160.78 Service Agreement 10104 Bloomberg L.P. $4,994.21 Financial Monitoring MO 4-14-93 10105 Budget Janitorial,Inc. $3.925.00 Janitorial Services MO 1-12-94 10106 Cold Municipal Statistics $425.00 CAFR Debt Statement 10107 Calif Municipal Treasures Assoc. $100.00 Membership 10108 CaBrol,Inc. $1,984.37 Hardware 10109 Cad R.Nelsen,P.E. $200.00 Eng.Consulting 10110 Cad Warren&Co. $956.52 Insurance Claims Administrator 10111 Catapult Inc. $3,000.00 OnSite Training 10112 Centrep4inle Commercial Interiors $1.277.19 Office Furniture County Sanitation Districts Of Orange Count' Claims Paid 03118/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 10113 Chutes P.Crowley Co. $252.28 Instrument Parts 10114 City of Huntington Beach $11.081.27 Water Use 10115 City of Irvine $2,242.00 Connection Fee Refund 10116 Coast Rubber Stamp,Mfg. $72.11 Office Supplies 10117 Colo-Parmer Instrument Company $205.10 Lab Supplies 10118 Collins B Aikman Flooroovetng $4,482.77 Carpet 10119 Compressor Components Of Cold. $9.908.94 Pump Pats 10120 Consolidated Electrical Distribulon $4,321.86 Electric Pars 10121 Consumers Pipe&Supply Co $101.02 Plumbing Supplies 10122 Converse Consultants $14,166.30 Consulting Services NO 8-11-93 10123 Copelca Capital,Inc. $1,432.00 Copier Lease 10124 Corporate Express $1,724.36 Office Supplies 10125 Coss Mesa Auto Supply $195.34 Truck Pats 10126 County of Orange $510.00 Administrative Fees 10127 County Sanitation Districts of OC $I%DS4.07 Wcrkoes Comp Reimb. 10128 County Wholesale Electric Co. $453.09 Eledre Pent 10129 CA-NV Section,AW WA $260.00 Conference Registration 10130 CMS,Inc. $143.92 Investigation Service 10131 CS Company $6,323.63 Plumbing Supplies 10132 CWEA 1998 Conference $1.375.00 Conference Registration 10133 Data Clean Corporation $495.00 Servlce Contact 10134 David E.Libet,Ph.D. $1,000.00 Management Training 10135 Dell Marketing L.P. $8.203.02 Computes 10136 DeFesko Corporation $660.00 Gage 10137 De2uick $858.65 Valves 10138 Dover Elevator Company $3.238.50 Elevator Maintenance 10139 DGA Consultants,Inc $1,995.00 Surveying Services MO 64494 10140 Edinger Medical Group,Inc. $175.00 Medical Screening 10141 Edison Co. $7.974.09 Power 10142 Edwards High Vacuum International $907.36 Lab Supplies 10143 Electra Bond,Inc. $1.961(1 Mechanical Supplies 101" Elsevier Sdence $783.00 Subscription 10145 Enterprise Technologies $15.769.45 Consulting Services 10146 Environmental Resources Assoc. $1,062.20 Lab Services 10147 Expetan $235.84 Orange County Property Information 10148 ENS Resources, Inc. $2,648.02 Professional Services 10149 ESP Industries,Inc. $3.283.56 Mechanical Supplies 10150 Federal Express Corp., $122.70 Air Freight 10161 Fibetron $728.01 Fiber Optic Cable 10152 Fisher Sdenlltic $905.17 Lob Supplies 10153 Flo-System,Inc. $16.904.71 Pump Parts 10154 Fluke Electronics Corp. $282.60 Electric Pats 10155 Forme Scientific, Inc. $637.45 Lab Supplies 10156 Chuck M.Forman $288.71 Training Expanse Reimb. 10157 Fomedad Company $152.36 Plumbing Supplies 10158 Fountain Valley Camera $3.49 Photo Supplies 10159 The Fo)d)om Company $4.561.55 Instrument Supplies 10160 Franklin Covey $855.11 Office Supplies 10161 Furon Company $602.16 Cable County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 03/18/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 10162 FLW,Inc. $141.16 Lab Senices 10163 G.E.Supply Company 5400.83 Electric Parts 10164 GanaOLallahan Company $349.11 Chemicals 10165 Gartner Group Inc. $1,295.00 Conference Registration 10166 The Gas Company $18,833.35 Natural Gas 10167 Gales Fiberglass Installers $24.998.75 Construction Services 10168 General Oceonlcs Inc $132.27 Lab Services 10169 Barest Petroleum $7,435.44 Unleaded Gasoline 10170 GTE California $8,365.47 Telephone Services 10171 George Yardley Co. $438.29 Lab Supplies HH72 Oledlch-MItchell,Inc. $12.029.92 Pump Pads 10173 Goldemvest Whom Service $1,658.00 Window Cleaning Service 10174 Bessie M.Gomez 5326.86 Medical Claim 10175 Gm,emmenl Finance Officers Assoc. $400.00 Membership 10176 Gmemment InstBu es Inc. $237.00 Publications 10177 W W Grainger Inc $6,331.33 Compressor Paris 10178 Grasaby STI $2,305.94 Engine Pads 10179 Greybar Electric Company $19,621.33 Electric Pads 10180 Great American Printing Co $944.82 Printing 10181 Edwards Systems Technology $255.00 Equipment Repair 10182 GST,Inc.f Miw City $10.672.22 Office Supplies 10183 Haaker Equipment Company 5504.39 Truck Pads t0184 Hach Company $98.98 Lab Supplies 10185 Harbour Engineering Group $1,228.35 Mechanics[Pads 10180 Harcourt Brace 8 Co. $67.02 Publication 10187 Harrington Industrial Plastics $1,975.61 Plumbing Supplies 10186 Haulaway Storage Containers $93.00 Container Rentals 10109 Heat Technology Products $178.51 Mechanical Pads 10190 Heffs Sladdorest Bakery 8 Deli $147.00 Directors'Meelirg Expense 10191 Hill[Inc $2,784.45 Tools 10192 Hoerbiger Service Inc $1.979.31 Compressor Pans 10193 Home Depot $405.01 Small Hardware 10194 Hordes Instruments Inc $1,295.88 Electric Parts 10195 Hub Auto Supply $142.12 Truk Pads 10198 City Of Huntington Beach $228.00 Permit Fee 10197 Idexx $6,742.12 Lab Supplies 10198 Imaging Plus,Inc. $622.76 office Supplies 10199 Industrial Threaded Products $3,449.35 Connectors 10200 Inorganic Ventures,Inc. $461.87 Lab Supplies 10201 Institute for Research 8 Technology $0.000.00 IRTA Grant 10202 IBM Corporation-Way $9,239.41 Service Contract 10203 Irvine Ranch Water Districts $2.90 Water Use 10204 Isco,Inc $420.23 Instrument 10205 IPCO Safety-Ca $4,968.07 Safety Supplies 10206 J 8 W Scientific $918.01 Lab Supplies 10207 Jemtesn Engineering,Inc. $8,137.78 Construction Servicas 10208 Jets Catering $980.98 Directors'Meeting Expense 10209 Johnson Yokogswa Corp. $40.41 Instrument Supplies 10210 Johnstone Supply $573.52 Electric Pads County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County - Claims Palo 03/18/98 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 10211 Kaiser Foundation Health Plan $22,448.03 Medlcal Insurance Premium 10212 Keith D Sloizeobac h,PH.D..P. $1,575,00 Ocean Monitoring 10213 Kelar Corp $600.00 Training Materials 10214 Kelly Paper $72241 Paper 10215 Knox Industrial Supplies $8,839 94 Tools 10216 Lab Safety Supply,lnc. $142,47 Safety Supplies 10217 Lab Supped $2,510.75 Temporary Employment Services 10218 Lab Systems $2,07294 Consulting Services 10219 Laramy Products Co.,Inc. $2,200.00 Compressor Pads 10220 Lee 8 Ro Inc $2.2,022.46 Engineedng Services 10221 Liberty Technologies,Inc. $7,300.00 Software 10222 Life Technologies $70.56 Lab Supplies 10223 LBecomSalery, Inc. $750.37 Batteries 10224 Liquid Handling Systems $4,367.16 Mechanical Pads 10225 Maintenance Superintendents Assoc. $70.00 Membership 10226 Maintenance Technology Corp. $331.32 Welding Supplies 102.27 Manleys Bolter Repair Company $1,428.28 Mechanical Parts 10228 Mar Vac Electronics =91.23 Instrument Supplies 10229 Mc Junkm Carp $2,726.08 Plumbing Supplies 10230 Donald F.McIntyre $73.51 Telephone Expense Relmb, 10231 Md4aster-Carr Supply Co. $117.51 Tools 10232 Medlin Controls Co. $1.021.33 Instrument Supplies 10233 Midway Mfg&Machining Cc $8.168.75 Mechanical Repairs 10234 Mission Abrasive Supplies $4.532.38 Tools B Supplies 10235 Mission Uniform Service $4.099.19 Uniform Rentals 10236 Mobile Modular Management Corp. $882.00 Office Trailer Leas. 10237 Michael D.Moore $988.47 Annual Leadership Retreat 10238 Moreland 8 Associates $3,970.00 Auditing Services MO 3-8-95 10239 Morgan Company $148.70 Tools 10240 MotoPhoto $13.23 Photographic Services 10241 MPS Photographic Services,Inc $73.95 Photographic Services 10242 Mine Safety Appliances Company $10.42 Lab Supplies 10243 National Midocomp Services $1.685.00 Service Agreement 102" National Plant Services,Inc. $2,512.50 Vacuum Truck Services 10245 National Research Council Canada $158.55 Publication 10246 National Technology Transfer $232.00 Training Registration 10247 Neal Supply Cc $3.056.98 Plumbing Supplies 10248 Network Catalyst $18,385.99 Software 10249 New Horizons Computer Learning $1,042.91 Software Training Classes 10250 City of Newport Beach $145.35 Water Use 10251 Nickey Petroleum Co Inc $781.75 Lubricant l Closer Fuel 10252 The Norco Companies $103.80 Mail Delivery Service 10253 Norma Refrigeration $126.46 Electric Parts 10254 Occupational Vision Services $801.90 Safety Glasses 10256 Office Depot Business Services $3,158.58 Office Supplies 10256 Office Pavilion $437.04 Office Furniture Repairs 10257 Olsten Staffing Service,Inc. $704.00 Temporary Employment Services 10258 Orange County Foram $30.W Luncheon Registration 10259 Orange County Pump Co. 5270.00 Pump Parts County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 03/18198 Chetlk No. Vendor Amount Description 10260 Orange County Red Cross $162.00 Safety Training 10261 Orange County Report $450.00 Subscription 10252 Orange County Wholesale Electric $713.07 Instrument Supplies 10283 Orange Valve 8 Filling Company $589.25 Fittings 10264 Oxygen Service Company $6.205.23 Specialty Gases 10255 OI Analytical $63.31 Lab Supplies 10206 P.L.Hawn Company,Inc. $3.435.62 Electric Supplies 10257 Pacific Bell $56.07 Telephone Services 10258 Pacific Mechanical Supply $128.56 Plumbing Supplies 10289 Pacific Paris and Controls,Inc. $1.490.21 Instrument Pads 10270 Pacific Sales $201.49 Microwave Oven 10271 Padre Janitorial Supplies $667.62 Janitorial Supplies 10272 Pagenst $1,294.24 Rental Equipment 10273 Parts Unlimited $720.05 Truck Parts 10274 Paulus Engineering,Inc. $19.509.00 Engineering Services 10275 Peak Measurement $310.00 Instrument Supplies 10276 Performance Distributing.Inc $316.79 Baftenes 10277 Paton Animal Supplies $104.61 Lab Supplies 10278 Pkware,Inc. $606.W Software 10279 Postmaster $450.00 Post Office Box Rental 10280 Pawer Design $2.538.00 Electrical Repairs 10281 Power Elektru Supply Co..Inc. $169.72 Electric Supplies 10282 Power Generation Consulting $22.500.00 Overhaul Generators 10283 Power Systems Testing Company $2,870.33 Electric Supplies 10284 Precision Backhoe $1.270.00 Equipment Rental 10285 Premier Fastener Company $812.97 Tools 10286 Presidium Inc $2,083.33 Workers Comp Claims Admin. 10287 Primrose Ice $96.00 Ice For Samples 10288 Professional Procurement Seminars $490.00 Seminar Registration 10289 Rainbow Disposal Co.,Inc. $2,180.05 Trash Removal 10290 Ralnin Instrument Co.,Inc. $157.40 Lab Supplies 10291 Red Wing Shoes $122.92 Reimbursable Safety Shoes 10292 Remedy $7.896.90 Temporary Employment Services 10293 Reynolds 8 Reynolds $342.48 Publications 102" Rhine Air,Inc $3,154.51 Mechanical Parts 10295 RyteM.Inc. $2.580.00 Professional Services 10296 RJN Group.Inc. $6.246.25 CMS Consulting Services 10297 RPM Electric Motors $8.298.76 Electric Motor Paris 10298 Saida Fe Industrial Products $116.74 Plumbing Supplies 10299 Scutt Specialty Gases Inc. $702.96 specialty case, 10300 S.R.Reilly 8 Whitehead $793.25 Legal Services-Personnel Issues 10301 Seagate Software $21.742.40 Software 10302 Second-Sun $10.210.79 Light Fixtures; 10303 Sensorex $176.65 Electric Pads 103N Shamrock Supply Co., Inc. $89.95 Tools 10305 Shuraluck Sales 8 Engineering $3,174.23 Tools/Hardware 10306 Sigma-Aldrioh,Inc. $885.86 Lab Supplies 10307 Skater,Inc. $218.W Pump Pads 10308 Smith Pipe$Supply Inc. 1134.84 Plumbing Supplies County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County - Claims Paid 03H 8198 Check No. Vendor Amount Description 10309 Snap-On Inmrpamled $313.91 Tools 10310 South Coast Air Duality Mgmt. $4,976.80 Permit Fees 10311 South Coast Water $160.00 Lab Supplies 10312 Southern California Trans Service $204.04 Electric Parts 10313 Southern California Water $71.02 Water Use 10314 Southwest Scientific Inc. $1,070.56 Meter 10315 Sparkle8s $1,608.76 Drinking Water/Cooler Rentals 10316 Spax Ceriprep Inc, $890.75 Lab Supplies 10317 Sprint $31.40 Long Distance Telephone Services 10318 Stuteflel $330.00 Maintenance Contract 10319 Sterling Art $102.91 Art Supplies 10320 Strata International,Inc. $956.39 Chemicals 10321 Summit Sleet $776.83 Metal 10322 Sunset Ford $429.17 Truck Parts 10323 Swains Electric Motor Service $770.15 Pump 10324 Symoss,Inc. $3.400.00 Consulting Service; 10325 Taylor-Dunn $2,667.22 Electric Cart Paris 10325 Technomlc Publishing Company $222.53 Maintenance 10327 Teledyne Electronic Tech. $164.45 Instrument Paris 10328 The Register $1.484.25 Notices 8 Ads 10329 Theodore Robbins Ford $03.31 Vehicle Rental-Summer Program 10330 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. $10.922.79 Mechanical Parts 10331 Time Motion Tools $378.07 Tools 10332 Tme Warder Communications $40.21 Cable Services 10333 Tony's Lock 8 Safe Servce $568.74 Lacks 8 Keys 10334 Toshiba international Corporation $39.29 Instrument Supplies 10335 Transact $1,282.74 Instrument Supplies 10336 Tri Service $431.72 Plumbing Supplies 10337 Triad Personnel Services,Inc. $6,700.00 Temporary Employment Semites 10338 Tropical Plaza Nursery,Inc. $3,973.84 Contract Groundskeeping MO 5-11-94 10339 Truesdell Laboratories,Inc, $80.00 Lab Services 10340 Tustin Dodge $322.94 Truck Paris 10341 TCH Associates,Inc. $897.61 Lab Supplies 10342 The Unisource Corporation $6,703.67 Office Supplies 10343 United Parcel Service $530.04 Parcel Services lou'l University,of Southern Callomia $442.50 Publications 10345 Urban Water Institute,Inc. $175.00 UWI Spring Conference 10346 Valco Instruments Co.Inc. $454.76 Lab Supplies 10347 Valley Cities Supply Company $164.08 Plumbing Supplies 10345 Vapex Inc. $3.696.00 Monitors 1 D349 Varian $263.55 Lab Supplies 10350 Varian Chromatography Systems $272.46 Lab Supplies 10351 Veme's Plumbing $2.630.00 Plumbing Supplies 10352 Village Nurseries $364.94 Landscaping Supplies 10353 Vision Service Plan{CA) $7.776.30 Vision Service Premium 10354 Vortex IndusMes,Inc. $7.489.40 Building Repairs 10355 Vulcan Chemical Technologies $13,596.06 Hydrogen Peroxide Specification No,C-044 10356 VWR Scientific Products $12,415.53 Lab Supplies 10357 Waste Markets $17,628.44 Residuals Removal MO 3.27-96 County Sanitation Districts Of Orange County Claims Paid 03118M Check No. Vendor Amount Descriptloo 10358 Waterfront Hilton $555.00 Training Registration 10359 Wayne Electric $1,895.46 Electrical Supplies 10360 West-Lite Supply Company.,Inc $215.29 Electric Supplies 10351 Western Slates Chemical Inc. $6.953.56 Caustic Soda MO 8-2M5 10362 White Cap Industries $358.02 Sealant 10363 Woodward-Clyde Consultants $1.985.00 Consulting Services 10364 Xerox Corporation $20,042.76 Copier Leases 10365 2ymark Corporation $436.00 Lab Equipment 10366 Blake Anderson $751.93 Expense Reimb. 10367 Apogee Computer Tech.8 Cud V.Shelp $2,829.51 Employee Computer Loan Program 10368 Jeffrey Brown 1203.98 HWEA Conference 214-2098 10369 Peter H.Brown $2,392.39 Employee Computer Loan Program 10370 Lynda F.Heller $225.88 Training Expense Remd. 10371 Linda Losund0 $107.72 Expense Reimb. 10372 Stuart D.Severn $965.93 Training Expense Reimb. 10373 Edward M.Torres $1,211.82 Meeting Expense Reimb. 10374 Gary L.Welman $657.21 Training Expense Reimb. 10375 County Sanitation District of GC $876.28 Pally Cash Reimb. 10376 Kenneth L.Ramey 5275.43 Expense Rehnb. 10377 Allied Supply Co. $5,150.13 Mechanical Parts 10378 Carelo Engineers $714.75 Engineering Services 10379 Contractors Equipment Co $506.50 Equipment Repair 10380 Enchanter,Inc. $2.800.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5-24-95 10381 FNs Electronic 8 Richard Tyler $1.600.00 Employee Computer Loan Program 10382 OI Analytical $1,840.75 Lab Supplies 10383 Sigma-Aldrich,Inc. 54,130.85 Lab Supplies 103M Southern Celffomle Attorney Service $90.00 Legal Document 10385 Sprint $31.55 Long Distance Telephone Services 10386 Fry's Electronics $1,570.87 Electronic 8 Computer Supplies Total Claim.Paid 03/1898 $2,870,017.04 Summary Amount District No.2 $173,986.57 District No.5 $404.25 District No.7 $956.39 CORF $508.092.69 Self Insurance Funds $2,083.33 Joint Operations $2,164,493.81 $2,870,017.04 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS Ong Date TO Gas. 5/27/98 AGENDA REPORT own Numlw I It&VMW County Sanitation Distr cts of Orange County,California FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineer Originator. Jim Harris, Principal Engineering Associate SUBJECT: CONTRACT AWARD FOR MISCELLANEOUS LIGHTING MODIFICATIONS, SMALL PROJECT NO. 19980015 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1) Approve the plans and specifications for Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications, Job No. 19980015, on file at the offices of the Board Secretary, 2) Receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation. 3) Authorize award of a contract for Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications, Job No. 19980015, to Power Distributors, Inc. providing for replacement of obsolete lighting fixtures, safety lighting to illuminate parking areas, plant entrance, and pedestrian access to the Operations Center, for a total amount of$67,500. SUMMARY The plans and specifications for this project Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications, Job No. 19980015, were bid on May 5, 1998. Six (6) bids were received ranging from a high of$80,711 to the low bid of$67,000 submitted by Power Distributors, Inc. The Director of Engineering recommends award of the low bid contract to Power Distributors, Inc. The engineers estimate was $95,000. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY See attached Budget Information Table BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: CORE, C-8-e) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION G:NtgloEWendaD ftRepa ant4 ri [R 1B38C015a'iVNd= R—..d. oimvee Page 1 Y These proposed lighting modifications are a combination of four small projects that were submitted to the Facilities Engineering Team by the District's Operation and Maintenance staff. These modifications will address concerns about safety, security, and provide savings by replacing older lighting fixtures with more efficient equipment. The four projects include: 1. Replace lighting at the Plant No. 1 Warehouse. The light fixtures in this area are approximately 20 years old. The currently installed fluorescent lights are not power efficient compared to lighting system available today. With the installation of new fixtures and high-pressure sodium lamps, the relative brightness of the building interior will increase and the cost to operate the lights will decrease by approximately 40%. 2. Human Resources North Parking Lot. This parking area is entered through a narrow roadway that has a blind comer that is difficult to maneuver. At night, there is not sufficient lighting available to safely drive in this area. This work will provide a new support, light and automatic photocell to illuminate the area only at night. 3. Plant No. 2 Entrance. Operations staff utilizes existing security cameras at night to monitor vehicles entering the plant. The current location of the camera and lights do not provide enough definition to clearly see into a vehicle to examine the occupants. The new lights will be positioned to allow better use of the security system, and are positioned to not impact the surrounding homes. 4. Plant No. 2 Operations Center Entrance. The stairway leading from the parking lot to the facility is not adequately illuminated and is a safety concern. New lights will be installed to focus onto the stairs and not impact the surrounding homes. ALTERNATIVES The contract must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder to accomplish the construction. The Districts' needs this project to become more power efficient, increase safety and security. CEQA FINDINGS Not a "Project" as defined by CEQA Section 15378. No further action required. ATTACHMENTS Budget Information Table Bid Tabulation JRH:jee c MgbW M9enea bad F.WRVam�iIIXUA IRKO' ,s OS]]BBUs qMx, Page 2 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Miscellaneous Lighting Modifications JOB NO. 19980015 THIS REQUEST ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECTRASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED BUDGET TOTAL EXPENDITURE COMPLETE BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE INCREASE AUTHORIZATION AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%) Project Management E 2,000 S 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 E 1,000 50% Des' n $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 17,200 $ 17,200 $ 17,200 SS% Canstructicn E 95,000 $ 95,000 S 67,500 S 67,500 E 0% Canst. Manage t $ 5,000 f 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 f 0% TOTAL $ 122,000 E 122,000 S is 19,200 f - E 72,500 E 91,700 $ 18,200 15% M t'^C elaWeg¢ngVams0udget table as ' D , n ro May 5, 1998 11:00 a.m. BID TABULATION Job No. 19980015 PROJECT TITLE MISCELLANEOUS LIGHTING PROJECTS ENGINEERS ESTIMATE 9$ 5,000 BUDGET AMOUNT: $95,000 TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID 1 Power Distributors. Inc. $67.500.00 2 National Electrical Contractors. Inc. $69,434.00 3 Building Eperav Consultants $71,640.00 4. West Star Construction$74,00000 5. Anderson 8 Howard Electric. Inc$79,256.00 6. Shasta Electric. LP $80,711.00 7. $ 8. $ 9. $ 10. $ I have reviewed the proposals submitted for the s' v roject and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. I, therefore, recommend award to Power DisrADadvid uto , InWLud, amount of $67,500.00 as the lowest and best bid. A. in, P.E Director of Engineering JRH:jee Hiwp.dta`ergZM-PROJECTSW SMALL PROJECTS'SP9a00151980015 Bid Tab am N �l y County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O.Box 8127 a 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE COMBINED STEERING AND AD HOC COMMITTEES Wednesday, April 22, 1998 at 5:30 p.m. A meeting of the Steering Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee re Strategic Plan of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on Wednesday, April 22, 1998, at the Districts'Administrative Office. ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: OTHERS PRESENT: STEERING COMMITTEE Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel PRESENT: Thomas M. Dawes, Consultant John J. Collins, Joint Chairman Ryal Wheeler George Brown, Chair, FAHR Burnie Dunlap, Chair, PDC STAFF PRESENT: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager AD HOC COMMITTEE Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General PRESENT: Manager John J. Collins, Joint Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary George Brown, Chair, FAHR Michelle Tuchman, Director of Shirley Dettloff, Chair, District 11 Communications David Ludwin, Director of Engineering ABSENT: Jim Herberg, Planning Supervisor Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Nancy Wheatley, Director of Technical Chairman Services Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMTS Greg Mathews, Senior Administrative Bill Steiner, Director/Supervisor Analyst Jan Debay, Chair, District 5 APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments by any member of the public. Minutes of the Joint SteeringlAd Hoc Committees Meeting Page 2 April 22, 1998 RECEIVE, FILE AND APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The draft minutes of the March 25, 1998 meeting of the Steering Committee were approved as mailed. REPORT OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN Joint Chairman Collins did not make a report. REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER General Manager Don McIntyre stated that there were five additional discussion items not listed on the agenda. 1. An anonymous letter was sent to Huntington Beach's Environmental Board that made allegations that the Districts is not dealing with an increase in toxics, such as heavy metals, in effluent and biosolids, because of a decrease in the number of inspectors. Technical Services Director Nancy Wheatley addressed the allegations, and while most of the information in the letter is taken from our Annual Report, the conclusions are misleading. There is no cause for concern at this time, although some of the numbers are increasing because flows are increasing. She indicated that there are currently 11 inspectors, and they are doing an excellent job of monitoring our permiltees. In fact, mass and concentrations have been reduced as a result of an aggressive source control program. There have been no calls from any agency listed as receiving copies, nor from the press. Director Dettloff suggested contacting Peter Vanek directly to see he or if any member of the Environmental Board had concerns. Ms. Wheatley indicated that she would follow up. 2. As a member of the Orange County Business Council (OCBC), staff was offered the opportunity to join a delegation of leaders to visit with the leadership in the state government and discuss issues of importance to the County. There were over 50 representatives from Orange County, including Nancy Wheatley. Ms. Wheatley reported on the activities and meetings that were held for delegates. Staff then asked for direction regarding promoting the activities of the OCBC. After discussion, it was determined that the Directors should be addressed only when issues that affect the Districts occur. 3. Greg Mathews described a problem that arose after a bid opening and how staff handled it. Consequently, new formal protest procedures and a better bid review process are being developed. 4. Blake Anderson discussed a June ballot measure, Proposition 224, and the impacts on the Districts should the voters approve it. It would require that if state funds are involved, the low bid would have to be sent to the State Controller's office to see if state engineers could do the design cheaper. The Committee directed staff to present the information at the three working committee meetings in May to educate the Directors on potential impacts on all governmental entities. y Minutes of the Joint Steering/Ad Hoc Committees Meeting Page 3 April 22, 1998 5. The PDC Committee's recommendation to re-bid the design of Job No. J42 was discussed. David Ludwin, Director of Engineering, explained that additional information has been received that, if known at the time of the PDC Committee meeting, might have resulted in a recommendation to award a contract. This was a low bid from Parsons. After discussion, staff was directed to return the item to the PDC Committee for further consideration, and that representatives from both consulting firths be invited to attend the meeting. This action is different from that taken at the last PDC Committee meeting, which was to tighten the specifications and rebid. REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel Tom Woodruff reported that PennWilson has settled and the lawsuit will be dismissed. DISCUSSION ITEMS Steering Committee Discussion Items: 1. Proposed Changes to July Working Committees Meeting Schedule The Steering Committee approved changes to the July meeting dates for the working committees as follows: OMTS: from July 1 to July 8 PDC:' from July 2 to July 9 FAHR: from July 8 to July 15 2. Request for Fee Refund from the City of Garden Grove Nancy Wheatley discussed the letter request and explained how staff previously handled these issues. However, the ordinance does not allow Class III permit exemptions to cities. Policy needs to be developed that cleady slates when exemptions are allowed. The Steering Committee directed staff to submit the issue to the FAHR Committee with a detailed staff report on the policy, not the Citys request. 3. Review Agenda Items Scheduled to be Presented to Working Committees in May The Steering Committee reviewed the items that are scheduled for review and added two information items to all agendas; the budget and work plan overviews and a discussion of the impacts on the Districts if Proposition 224, which is on the June ballot, is passed. APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS AD HOC COMMITTEE The minutes of the March 19, 1998 Ad Hoc Committee meeting were approved as drafted. REPORT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE RE STRATEGIC PLAN CHAIRMAN Chairman Brown did not make a report. Minutes of the Joint Steering/Ad Hoc Committees Meeting � Page 4 April 22, 1998 Ad Hoc Committee re Strategic Plan Discussion items: 1. Discussion on Issues Raised by City of Garden Grove in April 6, 1998 Letter Don McIntyre reported that he talked with Garden Grove's City Manager about their concerns. There will be a 112 day meeting scheduled with all city engineers and public works directors at the end of July to discuss our strategic plan's possible impacts on the cities. 2. Review Strategic Plan calendar of events for April, May, and June Jim Herberg reviewed the calendar of events for the next quarter with the members. There were no changes and the meetings will be scheduled. CLOSED SESSION The General Manager's performance evaluation, scheduled to be considered during the closed session, was deferred. OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY Don McIntyre reported that the cost per million gallons is$450.15; the benchmark is $481. MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING No matters were identified. CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Steering Committee meeting is scheduled for May 27, 1998 at 5:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Submitted by: an Tappan, Steering Co mitt,, Secretary 'Mq.NlyanJaISIEEflMG COMMIIlEEt99NPTOC7R9 Mlnulea.Os STEERING COMMITTEE Meeting Date Ten aas. 5/n/9e s/27/se AGENDA REPORT Item Nu2mber IN Nu`mbrr County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager SUBJECT: TRAVEL APPROVAL FOR WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDERATION CONFERENCE AT CHURCHILL COLLEGE, UK GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve out-of-country travel by the Districts' General Manager to attend an international conference co-sponsored by The Water Environment Federation, July 7, 1998 through July 10, 1998, being held in Cambridge, England. SUMMARY This important international conference has been brought to our attention by the Water Environment Federation (WEF), one of the sponsoring agencies of this conference. "The Political and public demand for a dean environment is matched by concern about the costs incurred and the subsequent rate increases." This quote from the program outline suggests it would be appropriate for this agency to be represented at what appears to be a cutting edge program for innovation in such areas as: disinfection, biological wastewater treatment, and processing and reuse of solids from wastewater treatment. It includes economic innovations, changing technologies for primary, secondary treatment, and tertiary treatment, new disinfection technology and solids processing. Since out of country travel requires Board authorization, it is important that the Steering Committee be informed and supportive of this proposal. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY The conference cost is estimated to be approximately $2,000 including registration, housing costs and travel and would require my absence from the Districts from July 6- 10, 1998. Blake would be acting General Manager during this period. BUDGETIMPACT , ® This item was not anticipated during FY 98-99 budget preparation. If the existing travel budget cannot absorb the cost the General Manager's contingency will be used. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION N/A ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS Conference Overview jt \YMaWbtMp.EdYpsMISfEEMIN4 CgAMIIlEflB9V.1AV\WEF VI(CeM)9!A0.M1c a,,,,,.. 1rs Page 2 05/13/98 12:57 FAX: (703) BB4-2400 Water Environ. Federation PG 2 A Major Conference in Cambridge University, Churchill College, UK Treatment innovation for the next century INNOVATION 2000 on 7-10 July, 1998 Organised by The European Water Pollution Control Association The Water Environment Federation The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management and supported by Anglian Water 05/13/98 12:57 FAX: (703) 684-2400 Water Environ. Federation PG 8 i TREATMENT INNOVATION FOR THE NEXT CENTURY: INNOVATION 2000 Cambridge University Churchill College, United Kingdom July 7-10, 1998 A conference organized by the European Water Pollution Control Association (EWPCA) and the Water Environment Federation (WEF) in conjunction with the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) and supported by Anglian Water. CIWEM is a member of both WEF and the EWPCA The political and public demand for a clean environment is matched by concern about the costs incurred and the subsequent rate increases. When other industries are faced with demands for better products and services at lower costs, they respond with Innovation— and that Is what we must do for our customers In the water Industry. This conference draws on the broad perspective of water cycle management and will be held in the beautiful and historical city of Cambridge, England. The conference will cover innovations in the following areas: Rewards BreakMmuohs-In Support of Innovation Primary. Secondary Tteabneltt moral footprint In such areas as d(alnfection, Wologira( ledvd(ogiesfor mnoval of suspended sobds,and wwftwatar treatment and processing and reuse rarbonaceoim and nibopenous Wodrarniral of solids fmm ww tewnter 0"In nent oxygen demand Ecagmlcs of Innovation Aft d Is essenbal and Ternary TrestmW - preparation of effluents for why it pays dyed or Whed reuse Preftinm Trmtment fieadworks design for DWn%cdon TechnoloW - d ernicW, membrane, sueening and for odw wnbDl end W Sotide Pmoomina - phys", chemical and biologril processnW methods pmmodng recovery of material and energy values The conference will offer two alternative styles of sessions: traditional podium presentations; and interactive sessions with short presentations followed by discussions. The traditional podium sessions will cover specific technical topics, while the interactive sessions will cover broader cross-disciplinary issues Including those that are management oriented. _1 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California P.O. Box 8127 a 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY. MAY 6. 1998-5:30 P.M. 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, Califomia was held on May 6, 1998, at the Districts'Administrative Office. ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: Present Staff Present: Pat McGuigan, Chair Don McIntyre, General Manager John Collins, Joint Chair Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Steve Anderson Chris Dahl, Director of Information Technology Don Bankhead Ed Hodges, Director of General Services Administration James M. Ferryman, Vice Chair Bob Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance Margie L. Rice Nancy J. Wheatley, Director of Technical Services Charles E. Sylvia Mike Moore, ECM Manager John Swindler, Database Support Group Manager Absent: Jerry Jones, O & M Maintenance Manager Adhana Renescu, Source Control Supervisor John E. Noyes Pat Magnante, Committee Secretary Dave Sullivan Doug Cook, Chief Operator Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair Rob Thompson, Plant Automation Manager Others Present: Representatives from: Carollo (1) James Martin + Company (1) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 2 May 6, 1998 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments by any member of the public. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the April 1, 1998 Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting were approved as drafted. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Director McGuigan reported on the following items: • Chris Dahl, Director of Information Technology, has submitted his resignation and will be leaving the Districts. He will stay through the first week of June to assist in hiring his replacement. Blake Anderson thanked Chris for his efforts and accomplishments. Chris stated that Rob Thompson will be the interim I/T Manager. • NPDES Permit - Nancy Wheatley discussed details regarding the new permit which was received in-house on May 6. Copies of the permit and EPA's press release were distributed. • There will be a workshop on Saturday, May 9, 1998. REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER Don McIntyre requested a show of hands for those who will be attending the Workshop on Saturday, May 9, 1998. REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER Blake Anderson reported on the following items: • NPDES Permit-The permit has been received. Thanks to Nancy for her efforts. • CWEA's Election of Officers-Congratulations to Bob Ooten who was elected Vice President of CWEA the week before last, This is a major accomplishment. Bob will ascend the chairs and will become CWEA President in the year 2000 to usher in the new millennium. This is important to Bob, who has been working on the State scene on a number of Committees on clean water through the Association, and it is also important to this agency because it shows the kind of leadership and commitment that we provide on a State-wide basis. Congratulations to Bob on a major achievement. • Water Pollution in the Santa Ana River(Prado Dam area)- During the February and March storms there was a considerable amount of flooding in the Chino area just upstream from Prado Dam where there is a large concentration of dairy cows. In that small area of less than 50 square miles, about one-quarter of the dairy production for the State of California comes Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 3 May 6, 1996 out of that area. A large amount of manure and urine goes onto the and is only partially abated. During the storms, much of that manure found its way into the Santa Ana River. A fish kill occurred in OCWDs Warner basin which was likely caused by the nutrients from that manure. Last week, an Emergency Appropriation was approved in Washington, D.C. We are attempting to obtain a $5 million dollar Federal grant for next fiscal to get manure out of our water supply. • Proposition 224- Requires that all State agencies, all agencies that require State funds, and all agencies that have projects that interface with State holdings to pass their professional services agreements through the Controller's Office prior to award of a contract for his determination if State workers can do the job for less cost. An information sheet was provided that was prepared by our General Counsel. Don McIntyre commented on the Watershed and future pollution problems as follows: We are going to the Steering Committee this month with a white paper prepared by Nancy and Blake having to do with establishing a better working relationship with SAWPA. We have had an official request from their Board that they be represented on this Board. We do have an agreement with them that they can purchase up to 30 mgd of capacity. They are currently using about 9 mgd. We need to establish a closer working relationship if we are going to solve this very complex problem. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (Hodges) No report was given. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY(Dahl) No report was given. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (Ooten) Bob Ooten reported on the following items: • The new Maintenance Building at Plant No. 2 is nearly complete and will be occupied very soon. A tour of the facility will be provided during an upcoming OMTS meeting. O&M Monthly Report Operations & Maintenance Monthly Report: A report for the month of February is submitted to the OMTS Committee for review. This report focuses on compliance, safety, financial data and performance measures for O & M and is intended to provide Committee members with information on a timely basis. A response to Director McGuigan's question about the Total Injury Frequency Rate (TIFR) calculation was provided. Further clarification of the calculation method will be provided in next month's report. A motion was made and seconded to receive and file the OMTS Monthly Report. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 4 May 6, 1998 REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES No report was provided. Adriana Renescu handed out a new brochure entitled, "Wastewater Compliance" prior to her agenda report presentation. REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel was not present. DISCUSSION ITEWSI 1. OMTS98-019 COLLECTION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MODEL. Motion: Motioned and seconded to approve the concept. The specific makeup of the Guidance Committee to be determined. Director Collins recommended that the Agenda Report be changed as follows: The word "directed"to be replaced with "oversee". 2. OMTS98-020 DATA INTEGRATION Motion: Moved, seconded and unanimously carried to approve a Professional Services Consultant Agreement with James Martin +Co. For the design and construction of the first phase of the Data Integration (Job#5400200), for an amount not to exceed $1,200.000.00. Director Collins requested changes to the Budget Information Table contained on page 3 of the report and a definition of the potential savings. CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. OTHER BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS IF ANY No other business. ` Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 5 May 6, 1998 MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting is scheduled for June 3, 1998 at the Districts'Administrative Offices. ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Submitted by: Patricia J. Ma me Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Secretary KV4RDWOMAIDWAGNANTOOMrS_C-IWAY98WM 0598.WPD OMTS COMMITTEE taeedngUa� T°'r eas' 5/6/98 5/27/98 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Ism Number County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: Nancy J. Wheatley, Director of Technical Services Originator: Adriana Renescu, Source Control Nick Arhontes, Mgr. Collection Facilities 08M SUBJECT: Collection System Management Program GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Authorize the formation of the Guidance Committee to develop a Districts-wide Collection System Management Program, to include, but not be limited to, model ordinances for future action. SUMMARY To develop the Districts-wide program and model ordinances, staff recommends and asks for authorization to form a core, partnership team to oversee the development of a Districts-wide, regional Collection System Management Program, including model ordinances; also identify and address local issues on a region-wide cooperative basis. The issues of concern in a regional collection system management program are spills, or sanitary sewer overflows (SSO), inflow and infiltration, odor, grease management, reconstruction and rehabilitation improvements to the collection system and maintenance. The goal of the team, the Guidance Committee, is to maintain a partnership of stakeholders and meet the goals of the Districts' NPDES permit and its requirement; as well as address trends in the EPA program and regulations and overall watershed management goals. The Committee will be made up of Districts' Directors, representatives of cities in the Districts' area, Districts' staff, EPA, and RWQCB. See additional information below PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A HAwp.dtaXW359(hbecemaWg"da Ordinances - Page 1 BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION For the past two years, US EPA has been reviewing regulatory oversight of small collection systems, which are not regulated either by federal or state permits, and which discharge to regional wastewater treatment agencies. Based on this review, it is apparent that better management of the small collection systems and consistent performance is needed. Regional agencies, such as the Districts, are in a position to take leadership in the management of the small systems, and to develop best management practices and strategies for the region. In view of the conditions presented above, the Districts proceeded to evaluate a mechanism to develop model ordinances that are regionally consistent and address regional issues. The model ordinances would form the basis of a consistent, regional collection system management program. Because of the region-wide impact of such model ordinances, and because a regionally consistent program would significantly improve the collection system performance, the Districts initiated plans to work in partnership with the cities and form a team of stakeholders to develop model ordinances. To date, the following actions have taken place: 1. On February 26, 1997, the Districts' FAHR Committee directed Maintenance and Operations Division staff to develop a uniform, Districts- wide grease mitigation ordinance in cooperation with the cities and the Districts' Source Control Division. The purpose of the ordinance is to control the discharge of grease to the collection system, and prevent small collection lines blockage and spills. 2. Collections Facilities and Source Control staff conducted meetings with all cities and agencies in the Districts'jurisdiction to assess local needs and status of collection systems maintenance programs. Hftw .At XW359ftem"\Agentla Ord,nanms Page 2 W 3. Staff made presentations to the Board committees—OMTS, FAHR and PDC—to inform the Directors of the proposed program and model ordinances, and obtain their assistance and cooperation in proceeding with the program. Following these activities, and based on the discussion with cities and the comments provided by the members of the various Board committees, staff plans to proceed with a regional, Districts-wide Collections System Management Program. To develop this program on a regional basis, and to address and incorporate local issues, the Districts recommends to form a core team of partners to develop the program. As noted in the summary, the core team, and the Guidance Committee, will be made up of Districts' Directors, representatives of cities within Districts' area, Districts' staff, EPA, and RWQCB. Staff recommends that the Guidance Committee consist of 7-10 members. The Guidance Committee will appoint specific tasks groups to analyze and recommend items and actions for adoption by the Committee. The Task Groups appointed by the Committee will work on issues as identified by the Committee. The Task Group would exist only to work on definite issues, and convene only if specifically directed by the Guidance Committee. The task group may include business or other public members depending on the specific issue. ALTERNATIVES No action CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS N/A H AWP.dWVsl359O%beW=1Agenda Ordinances Page 3 f OMTS COMMITTEE MeebngDate To121 as 5/6/3998 5/ ]/1998 AGENDA REPORT Item Number It7�umyer County Sanitation D'utricts of Orange County, California d FROM: Chris Dahl, Director Information Technology Originator: John Swindler, Information Technology Supervisor SUBJECT: PHASE I OF THE DATA INTEGRATION JOB 5400200: DATA WAREHOUSING PROJECT GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve a Professional Services Agreement with James Martin + Co for the design and construction of the first phase of the Data Integration (Job# 5400200), for an amount not to exceed $1,210,000. SUMMARY There is a strategic need to share information across the Business Units at the Districts. This is outlined in the Districts' Strategic Information Plan and underscored by the requirements generated by the DART initiative. Better information will drive better decision making. The Staff is recommending that Data Warehouse techniques be used to address the decision support needs of the Districts. The request is for a Professional Services Consultant Agreement for$1,210,000 which represents approximately 28% of the budgeted project. To complete this phase of the project will require an additional $662,000 in technology products and Districts staff time, totaling approximately 43% of the project's budget. Significant cost savings can be obtained by supporting Asset Management and Treat Wastewater programs. The investment payback time for the components in this request is estimated at 15 months from the time of their completion and availability. The time to complete the components in this request is estimated at 11 to 12 months. In addition, data warehousing is an integral part of the Integration Recommendation developed to support the Operations and Maintenance Reinvention Plan. PpriyE Y 14 Page 1 t PROJECT COST SUMMARY Professional Services Consultant Agreement: $1,210,000 Hardware/Software Costs: $562,000 Internal Staff Costs: $100,000 Total: BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: CORF Section 8, Page 7, Line E-3-b)) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) This is an ongoing project in the construction/implementation phase. The project draws on the Data Integration budget item 5400200. (See Table on Page 3) Page 2 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE DATA INTEGRATION JOB NO. 5400200 THIS REQUEST ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECTITASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED BUDGET TOTAL EXPENDITUR COMPLETE BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE INCREASE AUTHORIZATION AUTHORIZATION E TO DATE TO DATE(%) Professional Services Agreements S3.264.000 S3.264.000 S - $ S - $ - S 1.210.0013 S 1,210,000 S 0% Other Professional Service. $40o000 $400.000 $400,000 S 400.000 S 86,435 22% Technoogy Products S470.ODD $470.000 $ - $ $470,000 S - S - S 470,D00 Staff $200,000 $200.000 $ - $ S 200.000 f - S - S 200A0o f 0% TOTAL $4.334.000 34.3XIM10 $ - S S 1 170 0001 S - S 1,210.000 $ 2.280.000 S /08.181 2% ' Outside services in constructing the business case and developing a prototype NrvIxE OS'18NB Page 3 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Background: The data warehouse project is a result of the Districts' Strategic Information Plan developed in the 1996-1997 fiscal year. That plan indicates that the Staff requires better access to information. A large amount of staff time is spent on researching and gathering data. The recommendations in the Strategic Information Plan specifically call for the sharing of data across the Business Units at the Districts and the leveraging of data warehouse technology to achieve those goals. In the 1997 — 1998 fiscal year it has become more apparent that information must flow horizontally across the Districts to support the Reinvention process. This is hampered by the natural implementation of operational systems along organizational boundaries. This will be solved partly with integration and partly with data warehouse decision support. • An example of integration at the Districts would be the sharing of data between the Lab system (LIMS) and the Source Control system in order for Source Control to track the lab results of their permit holders. This is integration because the systems are passing current data. • An example of decision support data warehousing at the Districts would be the capturing of maintenance records from the Maintenance system (CMMS) and the related materials costs from the Finance system (FIS) for assets over an extended period of time. This is decision support because it would use a separate system to track trends in historic data. Definition: A data warehouse reorganizes data from the Districts' operational computer systems to provide analytical information about subjects, even if those subjects cross organizational boundaries. This is different from other forms of integration because the data is: 1. Integrated: found in one cohesive database. 2. Time Relevant: related to time to illustrate trends. 3. Subject Oriented: focused on subjects important to the Districts regardless of the organizational structure at the Districts. 4. Non-Volatile: not changed as new data updates the data warehouse. nwna: av+area Page 4 Y Project Scope: The first phase of the Data Integration Project consists of constructing a data warehouse specifically designed to address the decision support needs of Plant Wastewater Treatment and Plant Asset Management. • The scope of the services agreement is defined as follows: 1. Asset Management Decision Support:........................ $440,000 • to directly support the Asset Management requirements of the Maintenance Reinvention Recommendations. 2. Wastewater Treatment Decision Support:.................... $440,000 • to integrate data from CRISP, LIMS, FIS, and log sheets in order to provide trend information for subjects related to the Treatment Plant. 3. Enterprise Wide Data Warehouse:............................. $330,000 • to introduce the appropriate technology to support the entire Districts data warehouse plan for future growth. Sub Total: • The hardware and software products (approved in the capital budget) to support the Data Warehouse are estimated to cost: ................ $562,000 • The use of Districts' Staff(approved in the capital budget) is estimated at:................................................................................. $100,000 Total: Significant Impacts: The advantage of using a data warehouse /decision support approach to certain types of integration is that the Staff can use trend data that is focused on a subject area to see the true performance of the subject (i.e. problems, costs, improvements). The benefit of seeing the true performance of a subject area is that strategic decisions can be made that save both money and time. A Business Case was developed to identify the return on investments for the Asset Management and Wastewater Treatment components of this project. The Business Case was not included as an attachment to this Agenda Report because of its size, but can be made available upon request. Rov,wE'. 0S1998 Page 5 d Asset Management is the tracking of assets and their cost of operation over time (component 1 of this project). It is a key concept in the Maintenance Reinvention plan and is a required component of the Integration Recommendation that supports the Reinvention plan. The substantial business justifications for the Asset Management component of the system include cost savings in the following areas: • Eliminate ineffectual manual research of process flow information to determine maintenance requirements. • Produce maintenance cost savings by moving from a "calendar" interval based maintenance to an actual usage/need based maintenance. • Save the costs of unneeded maintenance on equipment with unexpected low usage. • Save the investment in fixed assets by triggering timely preventative maintenance on unexpected high usage equipment. • Validate or tune optimal calendarfinterval based maintenance where actual usage is very close to expected planned usage. • Save near-end-of-life high maintenance costs by projecting optimal fixed asset replacement schedules. An average of 60% of the maintenance costs are incurred in the last 2 years. A majority of these cost will be saved by using the DW to determine the replacement schedules. • Save cost by negotiating more cost effective capital expenditure contracts by scheduling predictive replacement. Provide engineering and contractors lead time to more cost effectively planning capital replacements, retrofits and capital upgrades. • Save the costs of down-time, emergency fixes and potential permit violations due to equipment malfunctions. • Enable maintenance and scheduling management to work smarter in utilizing the labor, materials and equipment. Long term, the business can only be effectively supported by an optimal down-sized labor force if the labor is tasked with a right-sized work load. Empowered by the DW analysis and planning tools, management can reduce labor, materials and equipment costs while confidently meeting maintenance requirements. NeW W. OS'1M Page 6 d Wastewater Treatment (component 2 of this project) benefits from decision support by showing trends in the performance of the plant. The business justifications for the Wastewater Treatment component of the system are substantiated and include cost savings in the following areas: • Optimize the entire treatment process by closely tracking, trending and benchmarking the efficiencies within each plant process and the over- all cost efficiency of the entire plant. • Enable a reduced labor force to "work smarter" with timely, accurate, accessible, integrated information which provides knowledge for timely tactical adjustments to the treatment process. • Accurately track, measure and benchmark cost benefits in plant process or chemical use adjustments. • Enable management to "work smarter"with historical trend analysis and costing analysis providing strategic knowledge for medium to long term tuning of the entire plant process which will lead to more cost effective contracts for materials and capital projects. • Save chemical cost by reduced usage through discovery of efficiencies and the narrowing of tolerances. • Save chemical costs by improving delivery schedules, improved tracking of actual deliveries and actual quantities delivered by vendors and by using this knowledge as leverage to improve vendor contracts. • Reduce or eliminate duplicate data entry of lab samples, plant process information and other key data. • Reduce manual integration and reporting of lab and operational information. • Empower a more productive workforce with a DW providing the business knowledge base and a tool for analysis, reporting and decision support. fle�IwO'. pyl&'88 Page 7 Enterprise Wide Data Warehouse, the third component of this project, is strategic and not directly linked to user benefits. The Enterprise Wide Data Warehouse component is the introduction of the necessary architecture to ensure that the overall Data Warehouse system can achieve its goals from a technology standpoint. The main technology goals that must be supported are: • Ensure that the volume of data can be accommodated. • Provide acceptable response time for the users. • Support the Districts' user tools. • Support the diverse inquiries necessary for trend analysis. • Provide integration between subject components. Payback for this project comes from action taken on the information the Data Warehouse provides. The Data Warehouse supports the Districts' three-part DART plan: 1. Maintenance Management /Asset Management. 2. Plant Automation /Treatment Optimization. 3. Technical Cross Training. The Data Warehouse directly supports savings in the first two areas. Maintenance savings are estimated at $800,000 annually. The estimated savings will be achieved by reducing repair maintenance material usage through timely replacement of capital equipment ($220,000), and staffing reductions due to improved productivity through the implementation of planning and scheduling and asset management ($580,000). Further savings are estimated at $700,000 annually in operations tuning using the data warehouse to increase revenue in electricity sales ($170,000), reduce data entry labor by several personnel ($150,000), increase solids cake dryness by 1% ($180,000) and reduce chemicals by $200,000. With a total of$1,500,000 annual savings and a total project cost of$1,872,000, the project has a 15 month return on investment, starting from the completion of Phase 1 (this calculation is based on today's dollars). The Phase 1 project plan shows a completion time of 11 to 12 months. Rs , OL W Page 8 Evaluation and Selection Process: The Staff entered into a selection process that included the research and selection of five possible vendors. Each vendor was invited to make an open presentation about their data warehouse expertise and successes. After reviewing all the materials, the Staff forwarded copies of the Districts' Strategic Information Plan to the vendors. Based on the information in the Strategic Information Plan, each of the vendors returned to make a more detailed presentation about their approach to the Districts' unique data warehousing requirements. From these meetings, the Staff developed a scope for an initial data warehouse pilot and made a request for proposal to the vendors. The superior response was James Martin + Co's. Their approach was based on a proven methodology and was the only approach that included both a technology component and a return on investment business case. As a result, James Martin + Co's proposal was selected for this project. James Martin + Co. was engaged to develop a Business Case for the Data Warehouse. James Martin + Co. was able to complete the Business Case and in the process gain valuable knowledge about the Districts' business. Further, James Martin + Co. was able to prove the data warehouse concept by creating a working prototype using real data from the Districts' operational computer systems. This prototype is a subset of the Wastewater Treatment Decision Support component proposed as part 3 of the scope of this project. Therefore, the Staff believes that James Martin + Co. has developed skills that significantly increase their ability to provide this service. Further, independent industry experts such as the Gartner Group rate James Martin + Cc the highest in the Data Warehousing Field. James Martin + Co. has data warehouse expertise in their local office in Costa Mesa available to work at the Districts. Page 9 6 ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve a Professional Services Agreement with James Martin + Co for the design and construction of the first phase of the Data Integration (Job # 5400200), for an amount not to exceed $1,210,000. Recommended 2. Do Not Approve a Professional Services Agreement for this project and maintain the current level of data integration. This option will result in lost opportunities to leverage Information Technology and the inability to support the information requirements of the DART initiative. The first specific impact is the inability to execute the Integration Recommendation required to support the Maintenance Reinvention Plan. Further, the opportunity to realize the return on investment outlined in the Business Case would be lost. CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS NONE Re WIM Page 10 \ti County Sanitation Distric V of Orange County,Califon P.O.Box 8127. 10844 Ellis Avant Fountain Valley,CA 92728-812 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, May 7. 1998, at 5:30 p.m. A 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 May 7, 1998, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts'Administrative Office. ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present as follows: Present: Staff Present: Burnie Dunlap, Chair Don McIntyre, General Manager John Collins, Joint Chair Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Shirley Dettloff, Vice Chair David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Tim Keenan John Linder, Construction Manager Patsy Marshall Doug Stewart, Engineering Manager Eva Miner-Bradford Bob Dolan, Dir. of Operations & Maintenance Christina Shea Rob Thompson, Plant Automation Manager Todd Spitzer Chuck Winsor, Engineering Supervisor Doug Cook, Chief Operator Absent Jon Thomsic, Senior Engineer Dennis May, Principal Engineering Associate Brian Donahue Jim Harris, Principal Engineering Associate Mary Ann Jones Coring Chaudhry, Management Analyst Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair Ryal Wheeler, Foreman Bob Zemel Gail Cain, Executive Assistant Others: John Cavanaugh, General Counsel Dennis Kasper, Parsons Eric Mischa, Parsons Mo Hayes, Parsons Allan Udin, Parsons M. Steve Ro, Lee & Ro, Inc. John Dettle, DGA Consultants, Inc. Greg Kahlen, DGA Consultants, Inc. Mary Lee, Carollo Engineers APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. Minutes of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Page 2 May 7, 1998 PUBLIC COMMENTS Allan Udin from Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. asked to address the Committee regarding Item No. 1, PDC98-11A. The Chair asked if the Committee could listen to some reports before addressing that item, and Mr. Udin agreed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved, seconded, and duty carried, with abstentions from John Collins, Christina Shea, and Tim Keenan, to clarify the minutes of the April 2, 1998 Planning, Design, and Construction Committee Meeting regarding Action Item No. 3, PDC98-11. Wording has been added to the minutes to confirm that the PDC Committee rejected the recommendation to award a Professional Services Agreement. The PDC Committee did not reject the proposals. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR The Committee Chair explained that the item regarding J42, Plant Automation and Reinvention, was on the agenda again. It was first presented at the April PDC Committee Meeting. At that meeting, the Committee gave direction to staff to reissue the Request for Proposal for the project. After that meeting, a letter was received from Parsons dated April 21, 1998, with information that was presented at the Steering Committee in April. The Steering Committee did not make a recommendation or decision, but advised that based upon that letter that the Districts had received, the PDC Committee had the opportunity to consider that information. It has been agendized as Action Item No. 1, PDC98-11A. REPORT OF THE JOINT CHAIR The Joint Chair had no report. REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager advised that there would be a workshop regarding the Strategic Plan on Saturday morning, May 9, 1998, REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER The Assistant General Manager announced that Bob Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance, has been elected the Vice President of the California Water Environment Association (CWEA), a statewide organization of clean water officials and professionals. Bob has worked on many committees statewide, as well as the local section on dean water. Minutes of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Page 3 May 7, 1998 The long awaited Ocean Discharge Permit is signed, sealed and delivered, and in our possession. It took eight years and nine months for the permit to be issued. It is jointly issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the State of California, issued in full accordance with the Clean Water Act. It gives us the flexibility to move forward with water reclamation with the Orange County Water District, while fully protecting the ocean. It has an Ocean Monitoring Program associated with it that is flexible enough that we can change the emphasis of the program over the years so we thoroughly understand the impact of our ocean discharge, and can react accordingly. The Assistant General Manager discussed Proposition 224, which is on the June ballot. He advised there was a handout of the memo from General Counsel regarding the proposition. The proposition suggests that any state agency, any agency that receives state funds, or any agency that interfaces with a program or facility that is owned or operated (or would be owned or operated by the state in the future), must go through an analysis by the State Controller's Office. This analysis would be made with respect to securing engineering contract design services. For the Districts, we expect to have some level of state funding apply to the reclamation project. Therefore, this project would have to go through an analysis by the Controller's office to compare engineering costs. We also have a rehabilitation project on the books in the Santa Ana River, which would also be affected. We certainly think that Proposition 224 needs to be looked at very carefully, and certainly from an engineering point of view here at the agency, we think it is a mistake. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING The Director of Engineering had no report. REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel had no report. CHANGE ORDER REPORTS Information Only Item. The Director of Engineering reviewed the report of Construction Contracts with Potential Change Orders Over Five Percent(5%). ACTION ITEMS (Item Nos. 1-4) 1. PDC98-11A: Approve Professional Services Agreement for Plant Automation & Reinvention, Phase 1, Job No. J-42, with Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. for$4,383,400. Allan Udin, Senior Vice President of Parsons Engineering Science, Inc., addressed the Committee to present their offer to provide all of the services outlined in the original Request for Proposal (RFP) Scope of Work for Project J-42, as further clarified and defined during the negotiations with staff, at the originally proposed price of$4,383,400. e Minutes of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Page 4 May 7, 1998 In response to an inquiry from Burnie Dunlap, Chair of the PDC Committee, David Ludwin, Director of Engineering, indicated that both Bill Gabris, Director of Southern California Operations for Westin Engineering, who addressed the Committee on April 2, and Dennis Gaushell, President of Westin Engineering, were made aware of the May 7 PDC Committee Meeting. No representative from Westin was in attendance. David Ludwin indicated that although staff was directed at the April 2, 1998 PDC Committee Meeting to reissue the RFP, this item was being brought back to the Committee for consideration because of the updated offer by Parsons to perform the clarified and defined Scope of Work at the original proposed price as presented by Allan Udin. John Cavanaugh, of General Counsel's Office, in response to a question posed by Joint Chair Collins as to the legal implications of the action being considered by the Committee, indicated that there is no legal basis to disqualify Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. based on the action taken at the April 2, 1998 PDC Committee Meeting, and that the Committee can take action on staffs recommendation. MOTION: After discussion, it was moved, seconded, and duly carried to recommend approval. 2. PDC98.16: Award a Professional Services Agreement with Hilbert&Associates, Inc. for detailed construction design services for the High Pressure Compressed Air System at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-61, for an amount not to exceed $34,990. MOTION: It was moved, seconded, and duly carried to approve this item. 3. PDC98-17: 1) Approve Addendum No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement with Black &Veatch for Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1 (Job No. P1-46), and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2 (P2-55), for an additional amount of$238,700, increasing the total not to exceed amount to $912,215; and 2)Authorize a budget revision to increase the project budget for P1 46-2 (Chemical Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1) by$1,043,050 from $2,960,000 to $4,003,050. MOTION: It was moved, seconded, and duly carried to recommend approval. 4. PDC98-18: Approve Professional Service Agreements with Cahtcart Garcia von Langan Engineers; HDR Engineers, Inc.; Krieger& Stewart, Inc.; Lee & Ro, Inc.; MacDonald-Stephen Engineers, Inc.; and Tran Consulting Engineers for professional engineering services related to small projects for the Facilities Engineering Consulting Services, for an amount not to exceed $160,000 each, for a total of$960,000. MOTION: It was moved, seconded, and duly carried to recommend approval. Minutes of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee Page 5 May 7, 1998 MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING Director Eva Miner-Bradford requested that staff place on a future Agenda an item discussing consultants' overhead costs. It was advised that item would be on the June Agenda. CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Planning, Design, and Construction Committee Meeting is scheduled for Thursday, June 4, 1998, ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Submitted by: ail Cain Planning, Design, and Construction Committee Secretary H%WP or NG7�x VAnw.v ooc PDC COMMITTEE Me¢UngDa T003L 05/07/98 Bs/D/98 AGENDA REPORT 'MPDC9&11Ar 1Oe "G"v County Sanitation Districts of Orange County'California FROM: David A. Ludwin, Director of Engines Originator: Jonathan K Thomsic, PlAutomation/Instrumentation SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement for Plant Automation & Reinvention Project, Job Number J-42 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve Professional Services Agreement for Plant Automation & Reinvention, Phase 1, Job No. J-42, with Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. for$4,383,400. SUMMARY The J-42, Plant Automation and Reinvention Project, will 1) develop documentation of existing conditions regarding automation and controls, 2) provide a workshop format for the reinvention of plant operation and automation, and 3) develop and implement plant automation to an optimum level. Through this project, the operation and maintenance of the Districts' two treatment plants will be reinvented to: • Provide Operations with data that is currently not available, which will allow optimal process control and operation. • Provide Maintenance with information to better manage and maintain plant equipment and controls. • Reduce operating costs through more efficient chemical usage and reduced staffing levels by application of automation and centralized monitoring and control. • Provide for a more efficient and cost-effective design process because of the development of accurate and up-to-date information of existing conditions. A more in-depth and detailed description of the project and its justification were presented in the PDC98-11 Agenda Report presented to the PDC Committee on April 2, 1998 (attached). G NIglpp enW Dnll Rvp WD 4$OWIM Rm 1b Page 1 r A Scope of Work was developed by a team of District staff to define the requirements of , the project. In September 1997, 18 engineering firms were invited to submit their qualifications to perform the requested work. Six of the firms were subsequently found to have the experience and qualifications to be able to perform the requested work to the satisfaction of the Districts. They were invited to submit a proposal to present their detailed understanding and approach to completing the work with an estimate of the manhours and cost. Four teams headed by Parsons Engineering Science, Westin Engineering, Montgomery Watson, and Malcolm Pirnie submitted proposals. All four teams were subsequently interviewed by a staff selection team made up of eight individuals from Operations, Maintenance, Plant Automation, and Engineering. The evaluation of qualifications resulted in Westin receiving 656 points, and Parsons 655 points, out of a possible 800. Montgomery Watson and Malcolm Pirnie received lesser ratings of 614 and 584 points, respectively. These results indicated that both Parsons and Westin were equally well qualified to perform the requested work. The review of the detailed proposals resulted in a tie between Parsons and Westin as to the selection team's consensus choice even though there was a large difference in the manhour effort being proposed. Westin estimated 93,893 manhours to accomplish the work whereas Parsons proposed to do the work for an estimated 47,269 manhours. All four teams were interviewed by the staff selection committee and both Parsons and Westin were judged to be nearly equal in their abilities. Both Montgomery Watson and Malcolm Pimie were removed from further consideration after the interviews. Based on the proposals and interviews, Westin's approach to the field documentation and as- builting effort made them the consensus first choice of the selection team. A series of three negotiation sessions with Westin was conducted to clarify the Scope of Work and their approach to the project. In each meeting, requests were made of Westin to reduce the proposed cost, since the large price differential of$2,358,747 between Westin's proposed fee of $6,742,122 and Parson's proposed fee of$4,383,375, could not be justified. There was no reduction of proposed fee by Westin without a reduction in Scope, and staff could not justify the price differential; therefore, negotiations were terminated with Westin and staff began discussions with Parsons to clarify the Scope of Work and their approach to the project. During the negotiation sessions with Parsons, staff determined that additional effort would be required to assure that the field documentation methods and procedures would meet the Districts' standards and obtain the 100% accuracy required by the Districts. As a result, the Scope was clarified and the fee proposed by Parsons was increased by $1.4 million. Also included in Parson's final negotiated fee was approximately $435,000 for additional out-of-scope items that included the use of a professional facilitator for the reinvention workshops, field tagging of equipment, and development of an intranet for internal communications. These tasks were identified as desirable by staff during the course of discussions with both Westin and Parsons. c rvv�nM= aa a.n a.wrmwocu+a osmm arc Page 2 tl 1 The recommendation to award a Professional Services Agreement with Parsons at the negotiated fee of $6.118,499 for the clarified Scope of Work (which included the out of scope items) was presented to the PDC Committee on April 2, 1998. At that time, Westin addressed the PDC Committee protesting the award of the PSA to Parsons. See attached letter dated April 1, 1998 from Westin. The PDC Committee, in consideration of all the information presented to them, felt that the fee increase necessary to perform the clarified Scope of Work by Parsons was excessive and directed staff to reissue a Request for Proposal to the four firms found qualified and interviewed for the project. In consideration of the concerns raised by the PDC Committee, Parsons has subsequently agreed to perform the originally requested Scope of Work, as clamed during the negotiation sessions, at no increase in the original proposed fee of $4,383,400, as outlined in their letter dated April 21, 1998 (attached). Those items of work that were identified as beyond the Scope of Work have been deleted from the proposed PSA. They will continue to be evaluated by staff as to their need and priority for implementation. It is General Counsel's opinion that there is no legal basis that would deem the Parsons' proposal to be legally disqualified from consideration by the Board of Directors (memorandum attached). PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Original Budget $25,760,000 Previously Authorized 0 This Authorization 6,683,400 Addenda to Date 0 Percent Change 0% Amended PSA Price $4,383,400 See attached Budget Information Table. BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line Rem: c.a.d.) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) c�,yiowiueMv oan rs<�mwocv-az wmoaa: Ra,,,,.. „� Page 3 a ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Refer to the PDC98-11 Agenda Report presented to the PDC Committee on April 2, 1998 for detailed information. ALTERNATIVES CEQA FINDINGS This project is exempt from CEQA requirements per CEQA Section 15262, ATTACHMENTS 1. Budget Information Table 2. Westin Letter Dated April 1, 1998 3. Parsons Letter Dated April 21, 1998 4. General Counsel Memorandum Dated April 29, 1998 5. PDC98-11 Agenda Report Dated April 2, 1998 JKT:gc G neb W M1°9 vMe Drab Re W r¢NCCV J]USQlB9.Eac Rms 1/ Page 4 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Project Title: Plant Reinvention / Automation Project Job No.: J-42 G 8W f3 o � G Staff,All Phases N/A $ 7,754,105 S 7,754,105 S - $ 2.300,000 $ 2,300,000 $ 166,000 2% As-Builtin , Ph 1 N/A $ 4,383,400 S 4,383,400 $ S 4,383.400 $ 4,383,400 E 0% Pre-design, Ph 2 N/A $ 240.000 S 240,000 S - $ - $ - $ 0% Design, Ph 3 N/A $ 2,065,281 S 2,065,281 S - $ . $ - $ 0% Construction, Ph 4 N/A $ 11,317.214 $ 11,317,214 S - $ - S - I E 0% TOTAL $ 25.760,000 $25.760,000 $ - S 25,760.000 S - $ 6,683,400 $ 6,683,400 $ 166,000 1% c M1pbG.Mp.nO.D,.n RewNVDLV.12 M7W erc n..-..e 1rs Page 5 i Westin EnginChambers Road, Inc 2512 Chambers Roatl,Suite 201 Tustin,California 92780 (714)838.3620 Fax(714)838-0853 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County I April 1998 10844 Ellis avenue Fountain Valley,California 92708.7018 Attn: Mr.David Ludwin P.E.;Director of Engineering Subject: Protest of Proposed Contract Award of J-42 Plant Reinvention Project to Parsons The purpose of this letter is to inform you of Westin's protest of the award to Parsons of the J-42 Plant Reinvention Project.We are protesting the Districts' selection methodology based on the fact that the evaluation and selection process has been flawed. The evaluation criteria have been applied arbitrarily and capriciously to eliminate from negotiations the recommended consultant,Westin,by comparing Westin's price to the price of a non-compliant offering,Parsons',with the argument that the price difference could not be justified to the Board.This imposes a different selection criterion than the Districts had stated in the RFP. Changing the selection criteria after the proposals had been submitted arbitrarily excluded the very competitor who had adhered most scrupulously to the stated evaluation criteria,and who had provided the most compliant offering,Westin. Compounding this irregularity,after the Districts learned that Persons' original proposal was not compliant,the Districts allowed Parsons to increase its proposed scope of work to become compliant,and at the same time to increase its price. By the time these changes were factored in,Parsons' price became comparable to or greater than Westin's for the same scope of work. This clearly indicates that the discontinuation of negotiations with Westin was an error. Still,the Districts have not resumed those negotiations. The following are the particular,relevant facts: 1. The Districts discontinued negotiations with Westin based upon a price comparison with Parsons non RFP compliant bid. 2. Persons was allowed to increase their bid price by over$1.7 million or almost 40%to be RFP compliant. 3. Westin has not been allowed to respond to the scope of work negotiated with Parsons. During the negotiations between the Districts and Westin,the primary focus was on the comparative total labor hours and costs between Westin and the other bidders,but primarily in comparison to Parson low bid of$4.4 million. Westin was led to believe that its price would have to be reduced in the range of $2 million in order to be close to the Parsons bid since the Districts stated that it would not be able to justify a $2 million plus price disparity to the Board.During the contract negotiations, Westin presented a number of cost reduction ideas in the range of$0.6 million for project management,the reinvention workshops, and the as-builting. However,since the total reductions left Westin's bid significantly above Parsons original and invalidated bid,negotiations with Westin were discontinued and Westin was not allowed to submit a final revised price. The Districts also rejected Westin's written request to resume contract negotiations. Westin was also told by the Districts that the hours(and costs)of Parsons,Malcolm Pirnie, Montgomery Watson were"clustered",and the we scope of work and costs had to be this range.Westin argued,to no avail,that none of the other three firms had bid to the required scope of work and assumptions in the RFP. An Employee Owned Company Offices Worldwide County Sanitation Districts of Orange County I April 1998 ° Mr.David Ludwin P.E.;Director of Engineering Page 2 Following the cessation of contract negotiations with Westin,Westin confirmed that the labor hours and costing proposed by Malcolm Pimie and Montgomery Watson were indeed based on assumptions that provided significantly less than the requirements in the RFP.During the Districts' negotiations with Parsons,the Districts discovered that the Parsons' proposal was also based on non RFP compliant assumptions of a limited field verification effort and an incomplete scope of work. Since exact quantities, and the requirement of 100%accuracy was explicitly stated in the RFP,the Parsons bid was clearly non- responsive and should have been rejected at that point.Instead the Districts allowed Parsons to increase their bid by$1.7 million or almost 40%.In addition,the cessation of negotiations with Westin was allowed to stand even though that previous decision was based on now confirmed information that Parsons' original bid was non compliant. By allowing Parsons to increase their original bid price to correct their non compliant bid,the Districts effectively penalized Westin,the most careful and diligent bidder, who played by the mles,and found itself to have relied on those rules to its detriment. Although the final contract value with Parsons includes three additional work scope items,the affect of this additional scope on Westin's bid was less than 3%. Based on a review of the discussion in the PDC Committee Agenda Report concerning the subject"Professional Services Agreement for Plant automation &Reinvention Project,Job Number J42"Westin understands that the final scope of work for the J-42 project was expanded from the original scope stated in the RFP to include the following major items: 1. Include a professional facilitator to assist with the reinvention workshops. 2. Establish a J-42 project intranet for all project documents and reports 3. Apply bar code tags(an asset tag and a process tag)to each of approximately 25,000 instruments and pieces of field equipment.Coordinate tags with the District's CMMS. During the contract negotiations between Westin and the Districts,our response to these additional scope items was as follows: 1. Westin's proposal already included the services of a facilitator for the reinvention workshops. 2. We agree to establish a J-42 project intranet at no additional cost. 3. The labor hours and cost estimate for applying bar code tags to each of the approximately 25,000 instruments and pieces of equipment was estimated to be$187,000. Based on the above,Westin is submitting a revised price quotation for the J42 Plant Reinvention Project in the amount of$6,096,311 million. Res crively submitted, William cabris Director,Southern California Operations Westin Engineering cc: Mr.Blake Anderson Mr.Bumie Dunlap; PDC Chair Mr.John Collins; PDC Joint Chair Mr. Michael Harrison ESQ PARSONS ' Parsons Engineering Science,Ina•A Unit of Persona Infrastructure a Technology Group Inc. 100 West Walnut Street•Pasadena.California 91124•(626)440.4000•Fen:(626)440-6200 April 21, 1998 RECEIVED ENGINEERING DEPA"ENT APR 9 1998 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County COUNTY SANITATION 10844 Ellis Avenue DISTRICTS OF Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 ORANGE COUNTY Attention: I& David Ludwin,P.E., Director of Engineering Subject: Plant Reinvention Project, Job No. J-42 Dear Mr.Ludwin: Parsons was extremely disappointed to learn of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee's recommended cancellation of this procurement in response to an April la letter and April 2' remarks from Westin characterizing Parsons' proposal and the selection process for the Plant Reinvention Project. Parsons disagrees with characterizations in the Westin letter as noted in our April le letter to Westin. The incorrect and unfounded position in the Westin letter should not provide a basis to deny award of the contract to Parsons under this procurement or lead to re-competition. The procurement process, including the subsequent negotiations, was fair and equitable, and there should be no basis for vitiation of a re-competition. Parsons is fully qualified to perform the requisite services and we understand that the factor which precipitated the Committee's action is the adjustment in the price for the base services which resulted from our good faith negotiation process. Therefore, and in consideration of our desire to best serve the Districts and participate in this challenging project, Parsons will provide all the RFP base services clarified with staff during the negotiations for our original price of S4,383,400.00 This offer is made in the interest of preserving this contract award to Parsons without further procurement costs. This offer is not applicable in the event the procurement is re- competed. While Parsons maintains that its previous negotiated price was fair and reasonable, this offer is presented to preserve this award and for the best interests of the project. This action would allow the process to proceed expeditiously and at considerable savings to the Districts and maintain the integrity of the Districts procurement process. Page 2 04/21/98 Mr. David Ludwin In summary, we believe the Districts will benefit from this offer in at least the following respects: 1. The most advantageous cost for the project. 2. NI[mimum delay for implementation of the Plant Reinvention Project, resulting in the savings of hundreds of thousands of dollars. 3. Savings in both time and cost of your staff in a potential re-procurement process. 4. Preservation of the integrity of the Districts' procurement process. We are prepared to execute a contract immediately for this project and are eager to demonstrate to the Districts the exemplary quality of service we can provide. We are available to discuss this at your convenience. Sincerely, 57 P SONS FJVGI�NNEEIRIIN'G/SEN -OCE. INC. Allan L. Udin Senior Vice President vee�avnrrmamrsawc PDC COMMITTEE Me ng Dam Ton WS. 04/as/98 O•I f12/99 AGENDA REPORT mm I roan Poanna County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineer in Originator. Jonathan K. Thomsic, Plant Automation/Instrumentation SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement for Plant Automation & Reinvention Project, Job Number J-42 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve Professional Services Agreement for Plant Automation & Reinvention, Phase 1, Job No. J-42 with Parsons Environmental Services for $6,118,499.00. SUMMARY J-42 is the Plant Reinvention and Automation Project that will increase plant automation to an optimum level. It is a capital project that will implement physical changes to the plant process control systems and equipment to support both Operations and Maintenance reinvention. J-42 will also provide control systems information essential for both short term and long term planning. The first two phases of J-42 are designed to identify, qualify and prioritize reinvention construction projects through a cost/benefit analysis. Although there is insufficient specific information on costs and savings at this time, the following estimates of cost savings and benefits have been developed. The treatment plants can be more productively operated through automation of the treatment plants. Six years after project completion J42 will reach the break even point, then realize savings estimated at approximately $3,380,000 per year with savings increases during the subsequent years. The main measurable cost reduction is from FTE reduction, estimated to be eighteen FTE's at the conclusion of the project. In addition, this project provides several other benefits: 1. This project will provide Maintenance with the information required to better manage plant assets. 2. Operations will obtain the information required to understand, control and optimize the wastewater process. 3. J-42 will provide the data to assist the DART team "bottom up" plant reinvention. 4. J-42 provides the vehicle for gathering and organizing essential records on the existing plant infrastructure. 5. The project will lead to reduction in the plant operating and maintenance costs: a) Reduced chemical usage. b) More efficient operation. c) Better decision-making. s,esxe...ss m•�.W ws a conm�cm,+aao.ay,...c.our�a p.u.n.omaa.mc q,,,,a VIM Page 1 d) Enhanced plant safety. e) Increased plant reliability. 6. The project will reduce design and construction costs for plant modifications, since better as-built information will be available. J-42 will be implemented in four phases over the next five years. Phase 1 will: • Field verify and document the existing plant automation and control systems. • Develop and implement an Electronic Document Management system to organize and manage project information. • Use a workshop setting to review each process area and develop solid reinvention recommendations for changes and upgrades to the plants. This PSA includes all Phase 1 activities for a total cost of$6,118,499. Phase 1 is fully described in the Contract Scope of Work. Phase 2 is the pre-design phase and will create a list of construction projects that are proved beneficial and are Board approved; Phase 2 will include: • Refine, prioritize and cost-justify Phase 1 recommendations. • Unify and coordinate recommendations into an overall plan. • Generate design Request for Proposal. Phase 3 will consist of design for the cost-effective projects identified in Phase 2. Phase 4 will consist of construction projects for the process areas. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Original Budget $25,760,000 Previously Authorized 0 This Authorization 8,481,499 Addenda to Date 0 Percent Change 0% Amended PSA Price $6,118,499 BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: C.a.d.) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ,Ym,uau,�.p aav UCSS6 CCNT CTN+�pewnu' 2yw R•�.6x H. Page 2 The budget category for this project is plant reinvention. See the attached BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE for detailed budget information. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Plant Reinvention and Automation Project is structured to identify and implement plant automation upgrades and process improvements that make sense when the benefits are compared to the cost. Different elements of J-42 will 1) collect accurate information about the existing plant control systems, 2) make available the information to ail interested personnel, 3) bring together plant technicians with consultant experts in a series of workshops to brainstorm plant improvements, 4) analyze, cost justify and prioritize a project list for the process improvements and automation projects, 5) submit projects to the Board for design approval, 6) complete the design work, and 7) build the automation enhancements and treatment plant control system upgrades. J-42 is a capital project that will implement physical changes to the plant process and control systems to support Operations and Maintenance reinvention. Approximately one-third of the J-42 budget will provide new information about the treatment process that is essential for short term and long term planning of the plant control systems. Engineers cannot accurately, effectively or efficiently plan, design or build without complete, accurate information. In the past comprehensive, automation drawings were not developed; thus, Engineering has neither a comprehensive set of drawings depicting the overall control system workings nor detail drawings showing how and where control elements are interconnected. Phase 1 of J-42 will create a type of documentation never before available to District engineers, the baseline drawing set Baseline drawings will provide complete and accurate information that will change over the years as the facilities are modified. The remaining two-thirds of the J-42 budget will be used for design and construction of automation and process improvement projects identified and developed in Phases 2, 3 and 4. Expenditures for capital improvements will result in tangible reductions in cost that are to be determined and that are the result of real improvements in process control or increased plant automation. Project Benefits The May 1996 EMA Competitiveness Assessment Report indicates significant savings can be realized by automating plant processes to streamline operations and free up Operations personnel for other work. J-42 will provide improvements with cost reduction in five of six areas mentioned in the EMA report. We estimate that savings of $3,380,000 per year (measured during the fifth year after project completion) will result directly or indirectly from J-42 projects (see Savings Table in the attachments for further information). The Districts are doing this project for several productivity reasons: The Districts will experience an FTE reduction due to the automation of many portions of the plant. Preliminary estimates by Operations indicate that a reduction of eighteen FTE's is possible. The truck solids handling facility that is now in design is 1Kwva1Yq.N 08SICONIMI.TSWI'bnlYyMmrW,3ldaMf flepv,O9.ux R....P WIM Page 3 an example of how automation reduces FTE's. This is a truck loading facility that is not automated and so must have an operator in attendance four days a week during the truck loading process. By automating the truck loading process, no operator need attend the loading process other than for unusual or emergency conditions. • The project will provide Maintenance with the information they require for proper asset management. There are devices available that allow Maintenance to monitor equipment. For example, vibration monitors can be installed that allow Maintenance to predict pump failures before they happen. This will allow Maintenance to fine tune their preventive maintenance program to prevent failures. J-42 will connect existing monitors to the control system and install new monitors where they are required for proper asset management. • All instruments and process equipment will be uniquely tagged. The nameplate/process information will be entered into the existing Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) thereby allowing tracking of each component's maintenance history. As an example of how this will be used; if a particular motor has a history of failure, it may be discarded and replaced rather than repaired. • Operations will obtain real-time information (as it is running) required to manage, optimize and control the wastewater process. Many operating parameters are not monitored at this time. Many chemical feed systems, diversion gates, motor speeds, etc. are not automatically controlled — Operations sets the rate and lets them run. This results in less effective and efficient control with chemical delivery rates set above optimum to guarantee that no statutory violations occur. J-42 will install automatic controls so that just the right amount of chemical is delivered, or just the right amount of wastewater is diverted, or just the right temperatures are maintained for the optimal_ treatment of the wastewater. • Operations will use the consolidated control systems documentation to train operators on the process. Operators now receive training on individual processes from the O&M manuals. The O&M manuals are an excellent source of individual process area information but do not contain overall systems information. J-42 will provide current, comprehensive overall drawings that will fill this gap. • J-42 will provide the data to assist the DART team's plant reinvention. Through a series of workshops and with the use of the newly developed process and control documentation, the DARTS Treatment Plant Improvement Teams will be able to assist in the reinvention and help make recommendations for automation improvements. The project consultant will provide invaluable expertise and an outside point-of-view that, when coupled with our technicians'familiarity with the plants, will optimize process control. • Currently we do not have any consolidated document that shows how the plants work. Limited information is scattered over many construction drawings and other information is missing. There are incomplete and unorganized sets of wiring diagrams. There are no drawings that depict the internal workings of the process controllers. J-42 will gather and organize the information and essential records on the existing plant infrastructure and convert them into an electronic format that is rvaaenuvairoaiw•gWS 6 COMPACiSWtmna�wmeuaWf MWa MweMS.We Page organized and easy to use. J-42 will also create a change management tool so that Engineering will be able to maintain drawings into the future. • J-42 will double the number of monitored process points. Better information leads to better decision-making and better control system strategy. • Due to a lack of complete documentation it is not always clear what will happen during abnormal operating conditions. J-42 will provide plant documentation that will enhance plant safety. Plant safety will also increase because the automated processes will have predefined failure states so that if a failure occurs, the results will be more predictable. • The design phase will build in redundancy and back-up controls so that a failure in the primary control system will cause an alarm and will also activate the back-up controls. Repairs will be made at the convenience of the maintenance group and will not be rushed into place. Control system reliability will subsequently increase as a result of the J-42 improvements. • Currently we direct each design consultant and every contractor to do a thorough site investigation as part of their contract. Staff can not currently supply supporting automation documentation because there are no accurate drawings. This project will reduce design and construction costs for plant automation modifications since we will have accurate drawings available to support the work. An estimate of the reduction in design costs is approximately $900,000 per year ($60,000,000/year construction costs x 1% control system design cost x 150% premium due to poor documentation). The project is divided into four phases to allow a systematic approach to developing information needed in subsequent phases. Since there is much that we do not have documented about the existing facilities relative to control and automation, and we do not know the full scope of the changes that might be implemented; we would not be able to put together a design contract scope of work that would be comprehensive and accurate. By breaking the project into phases, we can develop baseline information and then put together subsequent cost-justified designs and construction contracts. In Phase 1 we will document existing plant control system condition, build an electronic document control system and identify potential automation projects. In Phase 2 we will further refine the automation projects list and eliminate the projects that do not meet our costfbenefrt criteria. Phase 3 is the design phase and Phase 4 is the construction phase. Proposed Schedule Following is a preliminary schedule for J-42 activities: n 21n ma's WM 6 CONTWaCT�anuign �RapmO9M aana„ wla Page 5 J<2 PmJeet Schedule ' 1999 19" 2000 2001 2002 UM Phase 1 Documentation EDMS Workshops Phase 2 Prelim Eng.Report Phase 3 Design Phase 4 COnsWlylon The starting date and duration of the Phase 3 and 4 work is somewhat indeterminate, as we do not know the magnitude or quantity of the projects that will be identified for construction. Consultant Selection Procedure The May, 1996 EMA Competitiveness Assessment Report first suggested the Districts "Implement a program to reengineer maintenance and operations philosophy and procedures." and "Develop an Automation Plan for the treatment plants and collection system, based on a redefined philosophy of operation" In January 1997 a committee of division managers convened in order to lay the foundations of the project and outline the scope of work. By August 1997 the committee had reached agreement on the current methodology for proceeding with the project. Eighteen firms were invited in September 1997 to submit a list of their qualifications to perform the documentation and reinvention. Six firms were short-listed and invited to submit proposals. Four firths submitted proposals and were selected for oral interviews. The proposal reviews and interviews were conducted by a team of District staff that included representatives from Engineering, Operations, Maintenance, Plant Automation Group and Management. Two firths, Westin Engineering and Parsons Engineering Sciences were determined to be nearly equal in capability, with Westin being the consensus first choice. Montgomery Watson and Malcolm Pimie did not demonstrate the ability to perform the work to our satisfaction and were not considered further. It was the consensus of the review team that Westin Engineering seemed to have a better approach to assure an accurate field verification and documentation effort; although their proposed man hour estimate and fee was substantially greater than Parsons. 1Ybm 1wn68W�0898 CCN MCTIIIJ oy6enn,vnW2�R%,I W.C% Rw :: SI M Page 6 Westin had a proposed fee of$6.4 million and Parsons a proposed fee of$4.4 million. ' Through a series of negotiation sessions with Westin, scope and approach were clarified and unknowns were identified. Staff was unable to negotiate any reduction in Westin's proposed fee for the agreed upon scope and staff could not justify the apparent differential cost of approximately 2 million dollars between them and Parsons. As a result, negotiations with Westin were terminated and staff began discussions with Parsons. It should be noted that additional effort was identified as a result of the proposals and interviews, and would have added to the base proposed fee of$6.4 million by Westin. During the negotiations with Parsons it was discovered that their proposal assumed a limited field verification effort that was deemed inadequate for our needs. After clarifying our requirements and including additional work identified during the proposal evaluation, the negotiations were successfully concluded at a final cost of$6,118,499. The revised scope and fee will assure the level of accuracy we will require for a thorough field verification and documentation effort and was substantially less than the proposed fee submitted by Westin. It also includes the additional scope that was identified during the proposal reviews and interviews that would have had to be added to Westin's contract, increasing their proposed cost. See attached REVIEWER COMMENTS for additional information on the selection process and reviewer reasons for their selections. ALTERNATIVES No Action—The NO ACTION alternative will: • Continue the present practice of poor plant documentation for the control system. This will result in continuing higher design costs, reduced safety, reduced reliability, higher maintenance and repair costs, and higher training costs. • Prevent the identification of cost-effective process improvements. This will result in continuing higher chemical costs and continuing process inefficiencies. • Prevent the implementation of coordinated, advanced automation. This will result in continuing lowered utilization of operating personnel; expedited operation will not be possible. CEQA FINDINGS This project is exempt from CEQA requirements per CEQA Section 15262. ryppibau\tiy w�08S 6 CONT CTSU+SNVEpevnu,m 2(po-W ReM49 Ea •,,,,a y\. Page 7 ATTACHMENTS BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE SAVINGS TABLE SOQ, PROPOSAL, ORAL INTERVIEW and FINAL SELECTION SCORES REVIEWER COMMENTS PHASE 1 TO 4 DETAILS \Ymr�I�aur 08S 6 COM CTNyM.W,xm 2�Re ,me RAMC. y,� Page 8 BUDGET INFORMATION Project ReinventionAutomation Job �• �+9 �'^Il��t}I Ya�i'���(f J ' 4°•(1� 4Sea � �� � �l rT is T �y ':•ri ® 240,000 M 240000 $ X. 'r � - % 1,53 Contingency ITOTAL 61 111 760.000 11' Yir'a $ 25.760,000 � ___ .. 8,418,499 166,000 SAVINGS TABLE The Savings Table below is an estimate of the savings that may be obtained from the automation activities of J-42. Year Cost Reduce design $$ Reduce FTE Reduce chem Year Total CUMULATIVE usage TOTALS: Year -$2,826,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$2,826,000 Year -$8,485,000 $460,000 $0 $0 $0 -$10,861,000 Year -$6,390,000 $900,000 $300.000 $258,000 -$4,932,000 -$15,793,000 Year4 -$4,757,000 $900.000 $540,000 $430,000 -$2,887,000 -$18,680,000 Years -$3,302,000 $900,000 $540.000 $602,000 -$1,260,000 419,940,000 Year -$60,000 $900.000 $840,000 $774.000 $2,454,000 -$17,486,000 Year 7 -$60,000 $900,000 $1,080,000 $860,000 $2,780,000 -$14,706,000 Year 8 -$60,000 $900,000 $1.320,000 $860,000 $3,020,000 -$11,686,000 Year 9 -$60,000 $900,000 $1,440,000 $860,000 $3,140,000 -$8,546,000 Year 10 -$60,000 $900,000 $1,560,000 $860,000 $3,260,000 -$5,286,000 Year11 -$60,000 $900,000 $1,680,000 $860,000 $3,380,000 -$1,906,000 Year 12 -$60,000 $900,000 $1,800,000 $860,000 $3.500,000 $1,594,000 Year 13 $60,000 $900,000 $1,800,000 $860,000 $3,500,000 $5,094,000 TOTALS: -$26,240,000 $10,350,000 $12,900.000 $8,084,000 $5,094,000 $5.094,000 Eighteen Operator FTE reductions are projected as a result of J42 Automation and Reinvention activities. Additional savings accrue after year 7 because an increase In flows will not require an increase in staff. �ghvWelelMy dSl OBS a CONTMCTW4+ dp89e xmwx Aipem Reponos.eoc '' a viasa 'I 110 SOQ, PROPOSAL, ORAL INTERVIEW and FINAL SELECTION SCORES Following is the Districts rating of the Statement of Qualifications (SOO) that were submitted by responding firms. Westin and Parsons earned the best scores. parsons Westir_ 100 092 81 100 75 81 85 91 74 91 90 76 67 68 68 71 584 614 655 656 Ranking 4 3 2 1 No. t Ratings 1 2 3 5 Remove High/Low 438 465 498 499 Modified Ranking 4 3 2 1 Raw Average 73.0 76.8 81.9 82.0 Ranking 4 3 2 1 Evaluators ranking of the written proposals only. Parsons and Westin scored the same number of points. O SM NK/N -M o 2 3 4 1 3 3 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 3 2 1 4 4 3 2 1 M 4 ®RaWRInking 38 39 20 20 Ranking 3 4 1 (tie) 1 (tie) 1MNVWu,M1p WrgVOBS 6 COHiIUCiSVIPNvay�YnY,mVJ1/pwn PNaIW.fa Page 11 Final ranking placed Westin first, Parsons second. ^ F.INAI}R4NKING on arsons YVestln• _ x' H 4 3 2 p 4 3 2 F 4 3 2 4 3 2 Raw Ranking 36 27 17 10 Ranking 4 3 2 ,r.m, ,.n.o euw.ioesacorrzancrs.=uo.cy.+.^.'o^w:"o"°'"•°°"`.'°°` Page 12 n.wn v,ese REVIEWER COMMENTS Following are unedited comments from the reviewers. This information was compiled after the final oral presentations and discussion. Reviewer 1 1 felt that all Consultants were well qualified for this project.Westin replaced Parsons as my first choice because of their as-built presentation (which represents 75% of the project effort) coupled with stated reduction in as-built hours estimate. The Westin/Mangan as-built presentation was superior because they demonstrated a level of detail that confirmed they have done this before; they have developed all of the flow- chart procedures necessary for a 100% accurate walk-down; and they are best able to estimate the extent of the effort required to document our plant. I have personal knowledge that Westin experts will do an exceptional job in the EDMS portion of the project. Parsons is my close second choice. Parsons showed superior abilities in reinvention and in walk-down abilities but was somewhat weak in EDMS. The Montgomery-Watson proposal was non-responsive with eleven exceptions to the scope of work and thirteen items that we did not ask for. Malcolm-Pimie met the scope of work but only minimally. Reviewer 2 My first choice was Westin for the following reasons. First, Mangan presented the most Professional approach to the documentation product. They have developed standards and presented their approach in the most convincing manner. They had the best method of achieving 100% accuracy that the scope requested. Second, I liked their idea concerning the Client advocate and believe they picked the right person to do the job. They had operations experience on the team with JCE who also has operations experience as a new part of their business. I believe the 0 and M staff will work with the JCE team, which is critical because the DART Members choice to cooperate and share their knowledge is key to this projects success. My second choice was Parsons. My major concern is that they are large and will "do it to us, rather than working with the staff. What I liked about them was their experience in a documentation project like this. They did note that they had major problems on the Alaskan project and did not convince me that they had corrected their approach. They do provide a fresh approach to reinvention. They have the potential to be cost effective based on hours. Brown was a weak spot for the other two teams. Brown was not convincing to me, or not nearly as much as Mangan. JMM's project manger was tentative. He did not seem prepared. Malcolm Pimie proposed to expand the scope of reengineering. They called Tom A. Mr. reinvention but I did not here enough good ideas about how to automate the plant from his presentation rv.mna.un.o 04�095•CONTWT6WNuvJFr M+ �MNL RTps,W.es Page 13 Reviewer 3 , 1. Parsons • Their As-Built Project Engineer, Norm Morishige, has relevant experience and will be very hands-on. • Their approach to EDMS database integration sounds good. Their Integrated DataBase (IDB) effort would be step on the path toward the integration of other databases. However, if we proceed with Parsons, we must further investigate the EDMS implementation capabilities of CH2M Hill and Strategic Frameworks. • Their number of hours is nearly half that of Westin — a significant cost savings for the Districts. 2. Westin • In their proposal, the EDMS setup (task 7) is listed with a duration of only one day, with only 438 hours dedicated throughout the life of the project. They were unable to explain why their EDMS hours were so low. The level of effort they will put into this portion is suspect. The I.T. Department cannot assume this task. • They sent a Chief Engineer to address the database integration, but he did not really know much about it. Their I.T. person did not attend the presentation. If we proceed with Westin, we must further investigate their EDMS implementation capabilities. • Although Mr. Mangan presented the As-Builting portion well, he is not listed as part of the project team (he will not be a hands-on participant), and I don't know the capabilities of Joe Boyles. • Considering past experience at the Districts, I am concerned about Alan Came as a Project Manager. 3. Montgomery Watson (not a viable alternative) • Bentley Systems had an excellent demonstration, but this proprietary object- oriented technology may not be the right choice for the Districts. • They were unable to explain why their EDMS hours were so high. • They did not show competence or emphasis on the As-Builting portion. 4. Malcolm Pimie (not a viable alternative) • Their plan to install an "interim solution"for EDMS, then replace it later, is a poor approach. Their assertion, that"open architecture" would make this painless, shows that they cannot be taken seriously. • Their Integrated Access System (IAS) was presented, but is actually a red herring. It is not included in their proposal and I do not believe that they have the ability to deliver such a system. The intranet interface they presented is also not part of their proposal. • They did not show competence or emphasis on the As-Builting portion. Reviewer 4 hYntl.Y11 =. VOR56 CONTRncT51F,IbiurCys,wNignVy]IgwN RaKn03 eX R.,,..,.wlv Page 14 Westin best as-building set-up, Carollo knows the plants, Bob Gilette is a good facilitator. Need to see more on the re-invention side and software like the Bentley Systems software. Parsons best apparent grounding in reality, ($), suspect they are the least costly, liked their project approach. Not much there on the re-invention side and thought Lee & Roe was weak as a walkdown group. M.Watson liked their re-invention stuff, they and M.Pimie were the best from that standpoint and I'd like to introduce Bentley Sys. to Westin because I very much like the software package the have. Don't think Sachs Electric is up to the as-building job. M.Pimie best of the best in the re-invention set-up, liked their 4 phases for the re- invention, and did a good job of linking the whole agency into the process, which we will someday have to do ourselves. Did not like Brown Automation as an as-built group. Reviewer 5 1. Parsons I liked the overall as-builting approach and the fact it was proven on previous jobs. • I liked the project management tools and controls together with a flat organization chart. I liked the planning they want to put in place to force discipline in maintaining our as-builts. • 1 liked the fact that their entire staff is local. • I liked how documents were created in the EDMS environment, with the use of an integrating database. • I liked the plan for specialist in I&C and Process engineering to come up with initial reinvention ideas before the first workshop. This will stimulate DART thinking. • I liked the demonstrated familiarity with intelligent P&ID's, logics, loops and datasheets. • I liked the low man hour estimate. • 1 do not feel comfortable with the proposed I&C optimization staff, better staff are available. • I do not feel comfortable with CH2MHill as the database integrator. 2. Westin • I liked Mangan's overall as-builting approach and the fact it was proven on previous jobs, but it is costly. • I liked how documents were created in the EDMS environment from the beginning. • I liked the familiarity with P&D's, logics, loops and datasheets. • I liked the use of a professional facilitator. • I liked the client advocate idea, but the proposed individual is based in Northern California. M�.rw,nl.aNpVOBSf CO/RMCTSV+Sm✓aP '�r•'au/I'V•W AN��+C A.,•..m w. Page 15 • I do not feel comfortable with the project management approach. This team consists of three independent and strong management structures, under a weak overall manager. • I do not feel comfortable with the non-local staff content. Many key people are from Northern California or Detroit. • I do not feel comfortable turning over the reinvention evaluation and engineering assistance to Carollo Engineers who did most of our existing plant design. Carollo Engineers has tended to be defensive in the past. Defensiveness stifles creativity. • The network evaluations were not included as a part of phase 1. (Neither were the man hour estimates). • I do not feel comfortable with 20% of the hours as non-value added (overhead/management). 3. Montgomery Watson • I liked the proposed facilitation method. • They seemed well qualified for the reinvention. • I liked the local staffing. • I did not feel comfortable with Brown Automation's as-builting approach. No procedures were present, on questioning them I am convinced the overall approach had not been thought through. Since this is 75% of the work, this is a fatal flaw. • They rewrote the scope of work and added many unnecessary "nice to have" features. 4. Malcolm Pimie • I think they totally missed the mark and should in no way be considered. The as- built procedures were not thought through and the IT piece was terrible. The reinvention piece at best was unremarkable. In summation, my number one choice was Parsons, my number two choice was Westin. I believe either company can do the job. But Parsons' man hour estimate is much lower and the technical/management proposal is marginally better. Reviewer 6 Westin/Mangan/Carrollo: I believe Westin et al has the most thought through and comprehensive approach to the as-built process of all the teams. I liked the presentation by Bill Gabris and Dick Mangan. Top notch proposal and presentation. This is the majority of the work in phase I. I thought that their client advocate approach was excellent, both with Bob Gillette as client advocate and Marilyn Snider as the facilitator. I believe this team has the best chance of making the workshop process a success. W. 121w wr UOBs n CONL CiSVylm•u� t=UJ]/q n•om •..,.., ,, •„ Page 16 I think the EDMS portion of their proposal is weak. This needs further discussion with them during negotiations. Hours on this proposal are high compared to others. Needs further development during negotiations as to specific assumptions in their proposal vs. Districts scope of work. This comment can be made for all the firms. Overall, the Westin team is my first choice and is way ahead of the rest of the pack. Reviewer? 1. Westin 2. Parsons 3. Montgomery Watson 4. Malcolm Pimie 1. Both Parsons and Westin appeared to have the best grasp of the scope of work, especially the Westin proposal. The issues were clearly identified and acknowledged. 2. The Westin proposal included information regarding the as-builting portion of the work that was important, including standards development and maintenance of the drawings at the completion of the project. Parsons also included information regarding their methodology on as-builting which appeared to be more fundamentally sound than either Malcolm-Pimie or Montgomery Watson. 3. Both Westin and Parsons appear to have assembled a team that has the capable resources in order to complete the tasks outline in the RFP. The teams assembled by Montgomery and Malcolm-Pimie seem less capable, especially in the as- builting and database areas. The inclusion of the "client advocate" with an operations background in the Westin team structure I thought was and idea that addressed the reinvention process particularly well. 4. Montgomery seems to have reworked the scope to reflect the services they can provide rather than the services we requested them to provide. While interesting, it seems to substitute style for substance. 5. Both Montgomery and Malcolm use the same company for as builting. This is not a problem, however the company chosen doesn't appear to have the resources effectively perform the work, nor do they provide the level of detail in the as- builting methodology to allow one to feel confident in their proposed performance. Reviewer 8 Westin (Mangan in particular) presented a systematic approach to P&ID data collection and retrieval systems. Parsons needs to articulate their position on this better. Their \Ymwu`�v.Av+p40B56CO"fxnCTSl�Haep�rnutmWl Ha�Rey 43.avc Page 17 presentation on how they would handle the P&ID section of the contract was weak in comparison to Mangan. I am confident that Parsons would do a fine job overall for us. They have the resources and the technical ability to give us a first rate product Reviewer 9 WESTIN Westin had the best overall project team and approach. Westin is a fine that specializes in Instrumentation & Controls and Electronic Document Management Systems engineering and consulting. Their proposed Project Manager is experienced in I & C projects, including projects with CSDOC. Mangan is a fine that specializes in as- builting of I & C and electrical as well as electrical and I & C engineering. They are a known quantity to CSDOC, having done high quality work for us. Carollo is a design firm that is very familiar with Districts' projects and plant designs. This may be a downside to their approach, since Carollo may be too close to the plant designs to get "outside of the box"for reinvention. Their approach to the EDMS integration needs to be further clarified to assure it meets the needs of CSDOC. Their manhour estimate is high compared to the other three firms. This needs to be clarified and an acceptable level of effort for the proposed scope of work. The Westin team can get this project done to our satisfaction. PARSONS Parsons has a good team and approach. They would be doing the as-builting task with their staff who has experience with a large as-builting project, i.e. Aleyeska Pipeline in Alaska. They indicated they had stumbled in that project but had learned some valuable lessons, but they did not elaborate on those lessons. Their PM is a civil engineer; not an I & C engineer which may be a negative. Their presentation lacked any depth in the area of reinvention; although the proposed team is qualified. MW MW presented many added scope items that were not requested in the RFP. They did not present their approach to the as-builting in enough detail to get comfortable with either their approach or the final deliverables. Their presentation did not reflect a true understanding of the requested work. The Bentley Software for intelligent P & Us they demonstrated was well received and could be considered for our application. I would not select MW for the project. MP MP did not offer a very strong team. I did not have an acceptable level of comfort with their proposed Project Manager. He did not show any real understanding of the work and in my opinion would not be dynamic enough to get this project completed satisfactorily. They spent too much time discussing EDMS open architecture which was �1"a OU 6 COIrtMCTsw9eewy�TgMMMKSYIi.,dc Iw„ W" Page 18 not requested, nor needed for this project, and spent very little time explaining their approach to the as-built task. In my opinion, they did not demonstrate that they could accomplish this project. Bn4MY1Vp.�BS 6 COMAVLT�T➢utl_ VNit/0��MwwiW.b 8,,,,,8 ww.. Page 19 PHASE 1 TO 4 DETAIL Following is a more detailed description of the work to be performed during phases 1to4: Phase 1 work Teams will visit each instrument, control panel, and equipment item in order to document actual field conditions. Each item will be tagged with a number and bar code. Instrument information such as the manufacturer, model, the current calibration, etc will be documented for addition to the maintenance database. Terminal blocks, field wiring, marshalling cabinets, etc will also be documented. Abandoned and/or unused cable, equipment, instruments will be identified for removal. Information about the PLC control computers will be identified and documented. Information required for the drawings, such as process pipe sizes, flow direction, installed instruments will be collected and documented. Intelligent drawings will be created and will be both intemally linked and externally linked to the Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) and the Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). Several types of drawings will be created: • Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs) symbolically show the process and associated instruments. These drawings are useful for describing the process as a whole and for understanding how the process is monitored and controlled. • Loop Drawings show the physical layout of all instruments and control circuits. These drawings are useful for troubleshooting and repair(Maintenance), and for development of the control strategies (Operations). • Control Logic Diagrams (CLDs) are symbolic drawings of the hard- and soft-control logic used to regulate the processes. These drawings are useful for understanding normal and abnormal operating control and are used by Operations. • Instrument Data Sheets are information sheets tailored to each type of instrument, which provide necessary instrument information. • Mechanical Data Sheets are information sheets tailored to each type of equipment, which provide necessary equipment information. "Hot links" or Hyperlinks will allow the technicians viewing the drawings to jump to related documents such as the loop drawing, Instrument Data Sheets, maintenance system information or repair manuals. Operations and Maintenance personnel will be trained on reading drawings and the drawings will be used in the future for training O&M personnel. P&ID drawings are used throughout industry to illustrate process workings. This project will provide training to Districts personnel on reading P&ID drawings and in using the drawings for everyday work. P&ID drawings are the best vehicle available for training new Operations and Maintenance personnel on the intricacies of the process. \M,M` 1u �UDBS 6 COMMCi�a"n -, �p�tl"Pemt03.Cx B"„„ col, Page 20 Some processes are so complex that they cannot be understood without reference to accurate P&IDs, ILDs and CLDs. Examples are oxygen generation, power generators, gas compressors, and digester control. Accurate ILDs are absolutely essential for troubleshooting, modifying and updating control circuits. Without accurate diagrams the technicians must work blindly and slowly in order to prevent mistakes. The Electronic Document Management System will allow universal access to documentation that is now scattered throughout the facilities. The EDMS will allow 'dissemination with control" of documentation and updates that is not now possible. The Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) will allow universal access, with control, to control system documents. Workflow will be controlled; document locations will be controlled; archiving will be controlled. Documents will be accessible from any computer attached to the Districts' Intranet via Microsoft Explorer. A workshop setting will be used to review each process area and develop solid recommendations for changes and upgrades to the plants. Information gathering and documentation is 75% of Phase 1 of this project but has little immediate payback. The information that is gathered will be used to reinvent the treatment plants. The Consultant will analyze the existing control system functionality using the as-built documents. Experts with extensive knowledge of wastewater treatment process and operations will conduct this work. The control objectives for the processes will be identified along with the adequacy of the existing control systems to optimize plant cost/performance. Recommendations to be included in the report will consider. • Alternative operational philosophies • Experiences gained at other treatment plants • Additional instrumentation and controls • Modifications to existing equipment • Deficiencies • Compatibility with the Districts' standardization objectives • High maintenance control systems. Reinvention for each of the eight Process Areas will culminate in a three day workshop. The Districts DART team recommendations will be investigated and integrated into the Consultants report.A "Fatal Flaw" approach will be used to identify non-practical alternatives; all remaining alternatives will be ranked by practicality, cost effectiveness, reliability and compatibility with existing systems. Phase 2 work At the conclusion of Workshop 1 for each process area we will have (for the first time) a rough list of the plant changes that we may want to make. We will then contract with a consultant to refine, prioritize and cost-justify the change list. The workshop environment will again be used to bring consultant and District personnel together for final decisions and discussions. Extensive changes will be scheduled for many plant areas; the changes to one area will affect other areas of the plant. It is essential that the changes be master planned and coordinated in order to prevent conflict and receive the most "bang for the buck". Design Request for Proposals (RFP) will result from the rvm,wnwp.wbpW856 CONiPACTSy�SDuep�rn,mW]IprW NmN3.mc Page 21 Phase 2 work. There will be a single RFP created for each process area for each plant. This will keep the designs consistent from plant to plant and result in the lowest possible I design cost. The Board will review the RFPs' prior to release to ascertain the costlbeneft ratio and project payback. Phase 3 work Phase 3 will consist of the normal design process for each of the eight process areas of each plant. The design Consultants may or may not be the same firm that does the Phase 1 or 2 work. We estimate that between two and three million dollars will be spent on design; also, we know that design costs will be reduced as a percentage of construction costs from prior years because we will have accurate documentation of the existing facilities in place. The design documents will be delivered so that they will be easily integrated into our document control system. Phase 4 work Phase 4 will consist of our normal construction process. We estimate that twelve million dollars will be available for automation improvements. Automation projects will not occur equally in all process areas as some process areas have already been automated and some process areas are scheduled to be automated during the next two years. Significant progress towards optimizing the process and reducing the operations personnel count will occur in five years as a result of the J-42 effort. Page 22 PDC COMMITTEE MeetingDele ToJb8ds. 5-7-98 527-98 AGENDA REPORT IIem Number Ile Nu he voc98-v County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineer Wnenng Originator: Dennis May, Principal E Associate SUBJECT: CHEMICAL FACILITY MODIFICATIONS AT PLANT NO. 1, JOB NO. P1-46-2 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1). Approve Addendum No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement with Black&Veatch for Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1 (Job No. P1-46) and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2 (P2-55), for an additional amount of$238,700 increasing the total not to exceed amount to $912,215.00. 2). Authorize a budget revision to increase the project budget for P146-2 (Chemical Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1) by $1,043,050 from $2,960,000 to $4,003,050. SUMMARY The Plant No. 2 portion of this project (P2-55) is under construction and will be completed by the end of this fiscal year. Construction for the wastehauler portion of this project (13146-1) was completed in December 1993. The chemical facilities for Plant No. 1 (P146-2) have been on hold since July 1997 because of staffing levels and workflow. The scope for P146-2 has been expanded to include enhanced construction support and electrical and instrumentation/controls design revisions. The enhanced construction support will include review of all contractor submittals, better coverage for construction meetings, allowance for change order design, and record drawing preparation. The electrical and instrumentation/controls design revision will automate these new chemical facilities. An addendum to the existing Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Black&Veatch is required for this additional work. An increase in the P1-46-2 project budget from $2,960,000 to $4,003,050 is also requested. This budget increase is needed to fund the higher construction cost due to automation being added, to expand the scope of the PSA described above for additional design and construction support services, and to cover the c�VIOW y de Dmn Rep ftT 14&2 Aigd n .;.red. „sue Page 1 T revised overhead cost allocation and the new standard contingency. Please see the Additional Information section for details regarding the budget increase request. Sole sourcing of the chemical pumps on this project is required to insure that the 35 pumps to be installed on this job will match the approximately 64 existing ProMment chemical metering pumps at Plant Nos. 1 and 2. This sole source requirement is in conformance with the Public Contracts Code Section 3400 and has been approved by General Counsel. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY See Attached PSA Status Report BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. ® This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds (Line item:A.7.c. ) ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) This proposed agenda item will increase the P1-46-2 Project Budget by $1,043,050. See Attached Budget Information Table ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Job No. P1-46, Chemical and Wastehauler Modifications at Plant No. 1 and Job No. P2-55, Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, provide for replacement of chlorine odor control and disinfection facilities with hydrogen peroxide and bleach, improvements to the wastehauler dump facilities, and improvements to the plant water system at Plant No. 2. The plant water system is improved because higher quality secondary effluent is routed to the Plant Water Pump Station wet well rather than the blend of primary and secondary that is now used. In April 1993, the Boards approved a Professional Services Agreement with Black&Veatch to prepare design reports, plans, specifications and provide limited construction support services for P1-46 & P2-55. Addendum No. 1 was approved in September 1994 to allow for redesign to more efficiently use bleach at Plant No. 2. Addendum No. 2 was approved in March 1995 to provide for additional design services to design ten separate site-specific chemical storage and feed facilities (four at Plant No. 1 and six at Plant No. 2). Addendum No. 3 was approved in August 1996 to transfer funds from the wastehauler element of G:WRIDIIA p Idl DnM1 lie NftV�14&2 AIR 4w R-. 1. Page 2 this project to the Plant No. 1 Chemical Facilities. Addendum No. 4 is proposed to provide additional design services for automation of the Plant No. 1 chemical facilities and enhanced construction support during construction. See Attached PSA Status Report The Plant No. 2 portion of this project (P2-55) is under construction and will be completed by the end of this fiscal year. Construction for the wastehauler portion of this project (P1-46-1) was completed in December 1993. The chemical facilities for Plant No. 1 (P1-46-2) have been on hold since July 1997 because of staffing levels and workflow. The design phase was completed prior to the delay. The design called for the chemical feed pumps to be manually controlled by adjusting the pump stroke length and speed. Operational status was to be monitored locally. The original design also provided a new programmable logic controller(PLC) at each of the four chemical facilities, with provisions for future remote operation, which would be addressed as part of the plant reinvention project (J-42). Since the original design was completed, staff has determined that full automation of the chemical facilities would enhance chemical management and contribute to overall treatment process performance. As discussed below: • This additional work will ensure that the new chemical facilities are constructed in accordance with the Districts' Supervising Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) and automation standards. This means that the Districts will have consistency in the PLC and Graphical User Interface (GUI) programming. Costs associated with programming, troubleshooting, training, and data management will be kept to a minimum. • Incorporating this project into the SCADA system will allow the Districts to track and trend equipment run-time and performance will provide the analysis for replacement and repair of equipment, and ultimately the ability to plan and fund this work in advance. • The ability to inventory chemicals will assist in the ordering of more chemicals, and allow operations to optimize the amount of chemical stored on-site by reducing the amount of degradation. The automation will also provide accurate budget data for the planning process and for the decision- makers. • This work will increase the level of safety in the handling and storing of chemicals. The ability to monitor and alarm variables such as chemical temperature and tank pressure from the Control Center will help ensure timely response to potential emergencies. GMIp1oEeNgmOaD ft FepwkWGPF1463 NR.Cec R„ 1, Page 3 a f • The ability to control, monitor, and alarm chemical feed to the process has been estimated to reduce chemical-use by 10-20%. With Plant No. 1 hydrogen peroxide and bleach FY1998-99 budget projected to be 160,000 gallons each, a 10% reduction in chemical-use equates to an annual savings of approximately $50,000. • This work will allow Operations to modify its function from one of manual adjustment and routine physical observation to automatic control and process evaluation. This will help the Districts realize the goal to work "smarter not harder." Revision of the electrical and instrumentation/control design to include automation will be done as part of proposed Addendum No. 4 for$127,162 ($90,798 for design and $36,364 for construction support). Automation of this project will increase the construction cost by $450,000. Additionally, staff has requested that the consultant provide a higher level of involvement during the construction phase of this project. This greater involvement will free Districts Engineering and Construction staff for other duties. The additional cost for these services is $111,538 (part of Addendum No.4). Staff costs have been increased to cover the re-allocation of overhead to the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund (CORF). No additional staff time has been added for the proposed changes to this project. The increase for overhead is $180,350. The proposed added costs are summarized on the attached budget table. A sole source procurement of the chemical metering pumps on this project is desirable to match existing equipment and provide lower maintenance costs. The Districts now has 64 of these ProMinent pumps in service for metering ferric chloride, ferrous chloride, bleach and hydrogen peroxide. This project will install 35 new metering pumps for bleach and hydrogen peroxide. Using the same model pump reduces the need for spare part warehousing and maintenance training. This pump is preferred because it requires much less preventative maintenance and has significant safety features not found on similar pumps. ProMinent pumps were installed on Job No. P2-55, Chemical and Facility Modifications, after the original vendor proposed by the contractor was unable to satisfy contract requirements. To insure the lowest possible pricing for the pumps, the Purchasing Department will negotiate and enter into a pricing agreement with ProMinent for a future purchase by the contractor. This pre-negotiated price will be included in the bid documents prior to advertising for bid and the bidders will be held to the negotiated costs. RN 1� Page 4 Y ALTERNATIVES Delay Project and wait for J-42 to be completed. The temporary chemical facilities are reaching the end of their useful life and JA2 will take about 3 years to complete. Build project without automation and add later. Retrofitting automation will increase construction cost and delay benefits of automation. CEQA FINDINGS This project is exempt from CEQA requirements. A Notice of Exemption was fled on April 30,1993. This project is exempt, because it is repairs and modifications of existing facilities. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Professional Services Agreement Status Report 2. Budget Information Table 3. Proposal letter from Black & Veatch dated April 6,1998 DLM:DLM:jam:jee c a ft Remft o lm2 Aia R,,,m_ 1rs Page 5 Professional Services Agreement Status Report Job No. P1-46/P2-55 Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1 and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2 Total Project Budget: $2,960,000 Consultant: Black and Veatch Start Date of Project: July-13-93 Date Addendum Description cost Accumulated costs 7-13-93 Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at $379,715 $379,715 Original PSA Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-46, and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-55. 9-14-94 1 Provided bleach transfer to North Scrubber $11,100 $390,815 Complex to allow turnover of bleach at Plant No. 2. 4-26-95 2 Expanded scope from 4 to 10 chemical stations $282,700 $673,515 (Plants 1 &2) 8-28-96 3 Separation of Plants 1 & 2 jobs, revision to controls None $673,515 Plant No. 2, and delayed schedule. Proposed Automation of the Plant No. 1 chemical facility and $236,700 $912,215 4 enhanced construction support for the Plant No.1 work. \\raoonbata1\wp.ota\engVOSS&CONTRACT&1P1I8-21PSA Status Report P1462.0oc 04/21/98 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Chemical Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1 JOB NO. P7-46-2 . - - ' 7tY1�1t1:+61u"e t �.tip`• ar�'' ,fs>~iu ��ak�i{': °t'4iy ai+ a „4r N+ : 61UJNAL CURRENT lffROPOiiEbC R PRb F�,D FUNDS 1ry�i 0 - iifiS r M a 4 YfQI ECfYFA8R Al1Tl{bFEIY PROBECr h T dUDdET EIfu I\OTNbED eUDCi +'y.,'� 1 1 { y j y zBi1DdEYY°� HUbOEf INCREASE)gF,,BU n Design Consultant $ 200.000 $ 338.434 It 238,700 $ 577.134 .:,� It 338.434 $ 238.700 $ 238,700 $ 577.134 $ 308.034 91% ti. Construction 1 $ 968,500 $ 2.037.163 1 $ 450,000 $ 2,487,163 $ 2.037,163 $ 450,000 $ - I $ 2,487,163 $ 0% Staff $ 56.500 $ 411,883 $ 180,350 $ 592,233 ylyi $ 411,883 $ 180.350 $ 180,350 $ 592,233 $ 173,869 42% Contingency $ - $ 172,520 $ 174.000 $ 346.520 !'? $ 172,520 $ 174,000 $ - $ 346,520 $ 0% TOTAL $ 1,720.141 $ 2,960.000 $ 1,043,050 $ 4,003,050 "? $ 2,960,000 $ 1.043,050 $ 419.050 $ 4,003.050 $ 481,903 16% Of the$308,034 expended to date for the design consultant approximately$133,361 was spent fora study of the existing wastehauler dump station and design of replacement facilities, construction of which was completed in 1995. Of the$173,869 expended to date for Staff approximately$70,000 was spent for a study of the existing wastehauler dump station and design of replacement facilities,construction of which was completed in 1995. H:1gp %enayaMBmnuaaewld62Ludanlel.an BLACK &VEATCH — — 6 Vmwm.Suac 315,Imp,Col�bmm 97718-3317,(71 a)753-050D for VIA)/53•1252 - .— County Sanitation Districts of Orange County B&V Project 24349 P146-2,Chemical Gacility,Modifications at Plant No. 1 B&V File B April6. 1998 Mr.David A. Ludwin,Y.E. Director of Engineering County Sanitation Districts of Orange County F.O.Box 8127 Fountain Valley,California 92728-8127 Subject: Request for Addendum to Agreement Dear Mr.Ludwin: to=puma to your letter dated February 26, 1998, and requests from Districts'staff at our meeting on March 10, 1998,we are pleased to submit this estimate of the level of effort associated with enhanced construction support and electrical and inslrumentation1controls design revisions for the Chemical Facilities Modifications at Plant No. 1,Job No. PI46-Z for your review and consideration. Briefly, the expanded scope of work includes completion of the following tasks, each of which is described more fully in Attaclunent A: 1. Provide shop drawing reviews and respond to Contractor requests for information; 2 Attend weekly construction meetings,including specific discipline personnel,as required; 3.' Include an allowance for design and conduction support for Districts' staff, not-to-exceed 40 hours; 4, Prepare record drawings to reflect the actual construction. Prepam a written report on the completeness of the plans marked-up by the Contractor and Districts inspection staff at the 25, 50,75,and 100 percent completion levels:and 5. Revise the construction documents to include automation of the chemical facilities, provide associated construction phase support,and address equipment optimization issues. The estimated fee for this work is shown oA Attachment B,which presents a breakdown of the hours and budget for the existing construction phase services,addendum,and revised total budget. We estimate that the design tasks can be completed for the Districts'review within three months following our receipt of yom authorization to Proceed- Automation of the chemical fadlities providing flow-pacing of chemicals would enhance chemical management and contribute to overall treatment process performance. We estimate that the proposed automation improvements will increase the construction cost of the project by nearly$OS million. We appreciate the opportunity to continue to be of service to the Districts and look forward to working with your staff towards a successful completion of this project If you have any questions regarding this proposal,we would be pleased to discuss them with you. Very tidy yours, Debra L Burris,P.G Enclosures 24Mx ATTACIIMY'NT A 5 COUNTY SANITA7TON DISTRICIS OF ORANGE COUNTY Chemical Facilities Modifications at Plant No. I Job No.P1-06-2 PROPOSED ADDENDUM NO.4 SCOPE OF WORK This scope of work covers cuhanced construction phase services and electrical inttrumentati00%onlmis design revisions for the Chemical Facilities Modifications at Plant No. 1. 'Me first four tasks are related to enhanced construction phase services.The fifth task relates to revisions to the completed construction documents to include automation of the chemical facilities. With regard to construction phase services for the present design,the existing scope of work includes reviewing selected, generally more complex shop drawings, responding to Ceatraclor requests for information, attending limited meetings, assisting during startup, revising existing operation and maintenance manuals,and conducting training sessions. These services are to be performed at the request and direction of Districts' staff as support services. The Districts are presently seeking a higher level of involvement from the design consultant during the construction phase of this project. The scope of work for these enhanced corulruction phase services is defined below in Tasks 1 through 4. With regard to automation of the chemical facilities,final construction documents were completed in 1997,with the controls designed on the same basis as those for Job No.P2-55. The present design calls for the chemical feed pumps to be manually controlled by adjusting the pump stroke length and speed Operational status is monitored by a new local programmable logic controller(PLC)at each chemical feed station. The present design includes provisions for future remote operation that would be added later as part Of the total plant automation system project. Since that time, Districts' staff have proposed that the automation component related to the improvements be included with the installation of the new chemical storage and feed facilities and that existing PLCs be used. The intent is dial fell automation of the chemical facilities would eahance chemical management and contribute to the overall treatment Process performance. The scope of work for these revisions to the electrical and instrumentation/controls design is defined below in Task 5. 1. Provide shop drawing and Contractor request for information reviews. Shop drawing review comments shall include a copy of the specification for the submitted equipment highlighted to indicate each component of the submittal has beea justified with the specifications All submittals will be reviewed by the consultant including items covered only by the Districts' standard specifications. 2. Attend weekly construction meetings. Allow for one extra person of a specific discipline to also attend the weekly construction meetings,as required Attendance by a civil engineer at up to 52 meetings is included rover the estimated duration of the construction contract Attendance by a specific discipline engineer at up to 52 meetings is included 3. Provide an allowance for design and construction support for Districts staff, not-to-exceed 40 hours. 4. Prepare record drawings. Consultant shall revise the construction plans to reflect the actual construction. The Districts shall provide the Consultant with all appropriately marked-up plans, surveys,photographs,and other records that indicate the as-built conditions. During construction, the Consultant shall inspect the marked up sets of plans maintained by the Contractor and the IIHOla9 Districts inspection staff and prepare a writtQl report on the completeness of the marked-up plans P based on the information provided to the Consultant by the Districts,at the 25,50,75,and 100 penzat complete levek. The revisions an the record drawings will not be as formal as that done for the contract documents in that changes will not be clouded and deletion of inappropriate details is amptablc.Rccord drawings will be provided in AutoCAD on CD-ROM as well as one set of mylurs. 5. Revise the clectrical and instrumentation/controls design to include automation of the chemical facilities. Prepare revised construction drawings and technical specifications. Conduct field inspections and data reconnaissance. Develop control block logic. Estimate construction cents. Provide construction phase services for the automation component. warn n Attachment B County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 06-Apr-99 Chemical Facilities Modifications at Plant No. 1 - Black&Veatch Jab No. P148.2 _Summary of Estimated Manhours & Fee Ealedn—iB Budget Total Budget A anaumN�d a� Task Description Labor Fee Labor Fee Leber Fee (houre) _ _ is) (tours) (fl (hours) ($) 1 Shop drawing and RFI reviews 208' 521.440 720 $57.600 462 $38.160 2 Construction meetings 12' S9B0 425 $34,240 416 $33,280 3 O&M Manuel revisions 64 $5,120 64. $5,120 0 $0 4 ,Startup assistance&trelning 16 $1,200 le, $1.280 0 s0 5 lAutometlon 0 s0. 1,258' $113.120 1.250 $113,120 6 Record drawings&reports 0, $o 384 $30,720. 384' 330,720' 7 General support allowance 0. $0 40 $3.200 40 $3200 _ subtotal 300 $28,800 2,910 $246.280 _ 2.560 _ _$216.480 i Expenses $2,182 924,402' $22,220 TOTAL _ ' f39,9e2`_ I _ $209.082 f23B,700 041081981243491amendi mli4 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Jot No.P141d,CMmkal Fadlity Modification tat Pie nt No..1 Sum_ mary,of Estimated Manhours&Cost for Automation Task u - en Yp e• W p0 9M Task Casovion -Farms, Proec Pclacl ed umu Charge/QC; Manager Engineer . EnitVaor EMIn er TeChn'elan Clerical Tohl Letpr i Expense. Total 1. m mes • a m ra on it—���e 17. W: -- 2. Field lnepeglerydele mconnslessnm 18 1a 32 60P404 B. .Proper•lesadcel>ped2ullpne e' 4 6 04. a. 92 98,640 4. O."lop npal tons,Is& 6 4 4D 40 40' 132 $10,840 6. Pmps,a eneheeMp drawln8e 20 4 1D0 269. 901 470. $43,220 a.'Eallmete mru0udlon meta {, a' 8• 20: 11,920 7. !Pmekla mnstmollon pheeeaorvkae 16 40. a0� 160. 40! 40 0761 $32.760 S. Xqut menl opOmllellon amlyale 6 4 40 4 44 90: $6.240, 914.021 0481a16624049lmdoc02.wk4 PDCCOMMITTEE M ngMe ToxBds. May 7, 1998 May 17,1998 AGENDA REPORT HemNum IIe NumEe PDC48 i County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineer Originator: Jim Harris, Principal Engineering Associate SUBJECT: Approve Professional Service Agreements for Facilities Engineering Consulting Services. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve Separate Professional Service Agreements with Cathcart Garcia von Langan Engineers, HDR Engineers,lnc., Krieger & Stewart,lnc. Lee & Ro, Inc., MacDonald-Stephen,Engineers, Inc., and Tran Consulting Engineers for professional engineering services related to small projects for the Facilities Engineering Consulting Services, for an amount not to exceed $160,000.00 each, for a total of $960,000.00. SUMMARY The Director of Engineering has been delegated the authority to solicit professional engineering services to expedite the designs related to small capital projects (Resolution 97-37). A "small capital project" was defined in the resolution as a "replacement or repairs project related to plant safety, reliability and efficiency enhancements where professional consulting services are estimated to be in an amount not to exceed $50,000.00 for each project". The resolution also limited the number of consulting engineers to 5-10 and a maximum of$200,000.00 each. Under the direction of the Director of Engineering, a Scope of Work (SOW) was developed and a Request for Proposal was solicited from twenty-seven engineering consulting firms. Twenty- one proposals were returned for review and six were selected by staff for consideration by the Boards of Directors. Each engineering firm will receive a Professional Services Agreement to provide engineering studies, construction design services, and construction support services on an as-needed basis in an amount not to exceed $160,000.00. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY See attached Budget Information Table. G�RepvbV'IX.WR�G ELTS0.UM. R,,,,,.. 1446 Page 1 r f BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: CORF A-7e, 9-7d) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) The preliminary development of this project includes staff costs that are available through the existing small project allowance in the 97-98 Budget. The work provided by consultants will be funded in the 98-99 Budget ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Facilities Engineering Team (formerly the Small Projects Group) is tasked with developing small capital projects from inception through design and construction. A"small capital project" was defined as a"replacement or repairs project related to plant safety, reliability and efficiency enhancements where professional consulting services are estimated to be in an amount not to exceed $50,000.00 for each project". Most small projects originate in the Operations and Maintenance Department. Due to the high backlog of small projects, the Directors agreed that a program was needed to be developed that would allow the Districts Engineering Department to have multiple professional engineering firms under a yearly Professional Services Agreement. By having engineering consultants under contract, on an as-needed basis, would allow the designs of the small projects to be completed in a more efficient manner. This anticipated savings would result in not expanding staffing levels in the Engineering Department to handle the excessive amount of work that has been identified, and would streamline the acquisition of outside services needed to complete the small projects needing detailed designs. In December 1997, the Director of Engineering was delegated the authority to solicit professional engineering services to expedite the designs related to small capital projects (Resolution 97-37). This resolution limited the number of consulting firms that could be put under contract (5-10), and the budget for each fiscal year (not to exceed $1,000,000.00). The selection of the consulting engineering firms, described below, fall into the authority allow by the Boards of Directors. Under the direction of the Director of Engineering, a Scope of Work(SOW)was developed and a Request for Proposal was solicited from twenty-seven engineering consulting firms. Twenty-one proposals were returned for review and six were selected by staff for consideration by the Boards of Directors. The consulting engineering firms were requested to specifically submit information GNmblaNp pall Ra��R SMALL PRWECi50.`OM.Ex Rm. 1NS8 Page 2 i needed to ascertain the abilities of each firm when related to the design of smaller projects. The criteria used for this selection include: Location where the designs would be completed. Project Manager and their qualifications. The consulting firm's qualifications related to completing small projects. Demonstrate a plan to complete small project designs in a timely and efficient manner. Provide details on the frm's Quality Assurance Program. Favorable fee schedule. Staff has determined that a total of six consulting firms adequately answered the above questions and is proposing that Professional Services Agreements be awarded to each. These selected firms include: Cathcart Garcia von Langan Engineers HDR Engineers, Incorporated Krieger & Stewart, Incorporated Lee & Ro, Incorporated MacDonald-Stephen, Engineers, Incorporated Tran Consulting Engineers The authorized amounts of each Professional Services Agreement will not exceed $160,000. The Facilities Engineering Team (FET) will direct the work of each consultant. As each individual small project is developed, the FET will define the scope of work and produce a Task Order that will be submitted to a minimum of two consultants. The consultants will propose a method and fee required to complete the Task Order. The fee will be based upon the schedule of values included in the Professional Services Agreement. The fee limit for each Task Order is $50,000.00 as required by Resolution No. 97-37, and will be approved by the Director of Engineering. If a consulting fee is determined to be over $50,000.00, then the proposed work will be brought to the Boards of Directors for approval. The construction of all small projects will follow the established Policies and Procedures for the acquisition of contracting services. The FET will provide to the PDC Committee a summary of the work authorized through the Professional Services Agreement on a Quarterly basis. This report will provide information related to the use of these consultants, tasks issued, fee spent, and remaining funds available for the design of Small Projects. G"IaE Wwp O ft Rg ftW MR SMALL WEC M798.EIX Rw „vRa Page 3 r ALTERNATIVES The Boards may decline to award these Professional Services Agreements. The result will be a delay in the completion of each small project by approximately 3 months which, will impact the backlog of projects and require Districts Staff to prepare separate Agenda Items for each small project that requires outside professional services. CEQA FINDINGS None. Each individual project will be subject to CEQA review. ATTACHMENTS Budget Information Table JRH:jee W rCYw1MMaNMO�M�MII R�FbMONJII MIIiLL PRQIECfB OIOAI,tlw Page 4 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE FACILITIES ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES THIS REQUEST ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECTITASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED BUDGET TOTAL EXPENDITURE COMPLETE BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE INCREASE AUTHORIZATION AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATEJ%) Cons Wham E 1.000.000 E %0,CW 5 5 96Q000 E 960,000 $ 0% TOTAL E 1,000.000 E - 5 - E 960 D00 E - E - Is 960,000 I S 860,000 I S 0% Hkw bta4 ge,gVo—Weah BWgel Table PI]C aS County Sanitation DisNcts of Orange County,California P.O.Box 8127.108"Ellis Avenue `I Fountain Valley,CA 02728ZI27 f Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Wednesday, May 13. 1998. 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 Wednesday, May 13, 1998, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative Offices. ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: Committee Directors Present: Staff Present: George Brown, Chair Don McIntyre, General Manager John J. Collins, Joint Chair Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Jan Debay Gary Slreed, Director of Finance Barry Denes Chris Dahl, Director of Information Technology Norman Z. Eckenrode Mike Peternan, Director of Human Resources John M. Gullixson Bob Dolan, Director of Operations & Maintenance Mark Leyes Michelle Tuchman, Director of Communications Thomas R. Saltarelli Nancy Wheatley, Director of Technical Services William G. Steiner Greg Mathews, Principal Administrative Analyst Mike White, Controller Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Committee Directors Absent : Terri Josway, Safety& Emergency Response Manager Mare Dubois, Contracts/Purchasing Manager Mark A. Murphy Dan Tunnicliff, Engineer Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair Ed Torres, O&M Air Quality/Special Projects Manager Ryal Wheeler, Foreman Use Lorey, Human Resources Manager Other Directors Present: Lenore Crane, Committee Secretary None Others Present: Tom Woodruff, General Counsel Patti Gorcxyca, Public Financial Management, Inc. Toby Weissert, Carollo Engineers Stephen Sheldon, Sheldon &Associates Adam Probolsky, Adam D. Probolsky&Associates APPOINTMENT OF A CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. Minutes of Finance. Admin. and Human Resources Committee r Page 2 May 13, 1998 v PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments were made. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the April 8, 1998, meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee were approved as drafted. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR The Chair requested that Item No. 13 on the Agenda be presented out of order, since legal representatives of the Revenue Enhancement Group, Stephen Sheldon and Adam Probolsky, were present to speak on their behalf. There was no opposition to changing the order of the Agenda. REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager had no report. REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER Assistant General Manager Blake Anderson had no report. A two-page memorandum from General Counsel dated April 16, 1998, regarding the possible impacts of Proposition 224 - Design and Engineering Services, was distributed to the Directors prior to the meeting for their information. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE The Director of Finance had no report. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES The Director of Human Resources had no report. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS The Director of Communications had no report. REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel had no report. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 3 May 13, 1998 i CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS It -51 1. FAHR98-33: RECEIVE AND FILE TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 1998, AND FORWARD TO THE JOINT BOARDS: The Treasurer's Report was handed out at the FAHR Committee meeting in accordance with the Board-approved Investment Policy, and in conformance to the Government Code requirement to have monthly reports reviewed within 30 days of month end. 2. FAHR98-34: Receive and file Certificates Of Participation (COP) Report. 3. FAHR98-35: Receive and file Employment Status Report 4. FAHR98-36: Receive and file Quarterly Investment Management Program Report for the Period January 1, 1998 through March 31, 1998. 5. FAHR98-37: Approve changes and additions to Human Resources Policies and Procedures as authorized by Resolution No. 97-36. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended actions for items specified as 1 through 5 under Consent Calendar. ACTION ITEMS(Nos. 6- 13) The Chair requested staff to present Item No. 13 first out of Agenda order. 13. FAHR98-32A: Sewer Service User Fee Rebates 8 Refunds: Consider revisions to the ordinance that defines rebates and refunds and their respective years of eligibility. This action is related to threatened litigation to be discussed in closed session. Mr. Streed gave a verbal report based on the information contained in the agenda materials. Stephen Sheldon and Adam Probolsky, were present on behalf of their dient, the Revenue Enhancement Group. Mr. Sheldon addressed the Committee delineating his client's justifications for protesting the existing ordinance. He complimented staff for being progressive in creating new user fee categories which will equalize who pays and how much they pay. Referencing the new categories, he fell they will have a natural grandfathering effect on the refund process by the end of the 4th year. If the Districts revert back to the 4- year statute of limitations, it will allow a natural progression over a period of time and result in a diminished number of refunds. In conclusion, Mr. Sheldon requested that this item be brought to the Joint Boards for their consideration ACTION: Based on the threatened litigation, the Committee Chair advised that no action would be taken at this time, since this item is scheduled for discussion during the Closed Session. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 4 May 13, 1998 6. FAHR98-38: Adopt Resolution No. 98-XX, authorizing the General Manager to establish and implement policies and procedures to delegate to staff authority for. (1) Signature authority to initiate contracts or purchase orders to acquire 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) Meeting and training policies and expenditures. During discussion on this matter, the Committee inquired about the number of times the General Manager has had to approve purchases over $50,000 in the past. Mr. McIntyre reported that his approval is given about six times a year, per event. MOTION: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Joint Boards Adopt Resolution No. 98-XX. Additional stipulations were: 1. That revisions be made to the language on page 3 of the Agenda Report, Additional Information, paragraph 2, item c, to read, 'The General Manager will have authority to approve previously budgeted items funds to $100,000." 2. That revisions be made to the language on page 4 of the Agenda Report, paragraph 5 to change the term "budgeted item"to a general term such as "funds." 3. A report, similar to the reports currently being prepared for change orders, is to be prepared periodically for purchases over$50,000 approved by the General Manager. 7. FAHR98-39: Authorize staff to develop policies and procedure; bring those policies and procedures back to the FAHR Committee for approval; and to enter into a standard agreement with the State of California and the Rocky Mountain BankCard System for participation in the CAL-Card procurement system. MOTION: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended action. B. FAHR9840: Adopt Resolution No. 98-XX, which adopts the Wastewater Agency Response Network 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement and the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement, in addition, authorizes the General Manager to approve future mutual aid agreements and amendments in a form approved by General Counsel. MOTION: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend that the Joint Boards Adopt Resolution No. 98-XX. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 5 May 13, 1998 9. FAHR98-41: Capital Replacement Reserves Policy: (1) Receive and file Systems Replacement Needs Analysis. (2) Incorporate a Capital Facilities Replacement Reserve into the Districts' Accumulated Funds and Reserves Policy. Mr. Streed clarified that the recommended action is to establish a Capital Replacement Reserve of$50 million; increases to the fund are to come from user fees and; fund about 30% of the rehabilitation and replacement needs from that fund over time. Director Leyes inquired if the scenarios illustrated require user fee increases of$1.25 to fund the replacement reserve. Mr. Streed advised that the Districts have adopted fee schedules which project user fees for the next 5 to 10 years. Those fees will not be exceeded as a result of this action. MOTION: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended action as long as user fees are not increased to fund the Capital Facilities Replacement Reserve. 10. FAHR98-42: Accumulated Reserves Policy: (1) Receive and file Reserves Study Report. (2) Adopt revised Accumulated Reserves Policy. During discussion on this matter, the Committee requested that revisions be made to the language on page 15 of the Public Financial Management Reserves Study, paragraph 2, last sentence, "In addition to the$41 M, Districts' staff detAnniaed recommends setting aside the entire . . ." MOTION: It was moved, seconded, and carried with one opposing vote, to approve the recommended action. 11. FAHR98-43: Adopt revised Sewer Service User Fee structure expanding the number of Non-Residential categories, and basing rates on average quantity and strength of discharge per category. During discussion, Mr. Streed advised that the new user fee structure will increase rates for multi-family units and some non-residential users. There will also be an increase in the number of non-residential user categories from one to twenty-three. Rates for all non- residential users are currently based on 71.5% of the single-family residential rates per 1,000 square feet. Some of the non-residential users also pay source control fees associated with their Class I or Class II Permits. By increasing the number of categories from one to twenty-three, it allows for a more equitable fee structure. The increase in categories may also allow for future reductions in single-family residential fees, which may in turn result in reductions for all users, since all fees are based on a percentage of the single- family residential rates. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 6 May 13, 1998 General Counsel Tom Woodruff described the legal steps that will be taken in order for the Districts to be in compliance with provisions of Proposition 218. He advised that on May 27th each District will have an opportunity to informally approve the fee structure. Under Prop 218, a 45-day advanced written notice must be given to all property owners for whom the fees will be increased. This notice will be mailed on June 1, 1998 via First Class Mail. On July 1, 1998, the Board of the new agency will be asked to adopt an Emergency Ordinance, to be effective immediately, setting forth all of the fees within the report. Immediately following will be an introduction of the same Ordinance during the normal course of business, with a first reading at the July 1 Special Meeting, and a second reading at the next Regular Board Meeting of July 22. This will be more than 45 days after the notice has been mailed. The proposed Ordinance will become effective 30 days thereafter. MOTION: It was moved, seconded and carried to recommend that the Joint Boards, approve staffs recommendation, with Directors Denes, Leyes and Gullixson opposing the motion. 12. FAHR98-44: Review and approve the 1997-98 Third Quarter Financial and Operational Report for the Period ended March 31, 1998, and forward to the Joint Boards. During discussion on this matter, the Committee requested that staff include an Executive Summary in future quarterly reports. MOTION: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended action. INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATIONS There were none. (Note. Item No. 13 was moved to the first item.) 14. CLOSED SESSION The Chair reported the need for a closed session, as authorized by Government Code Section 54957.6, to discuss and consider the item specified under"Closed Session" as Item 14(a) and 14(b) on the published Agenda. The Committee convened in closed session at 7:15 p.m. At 7:45 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Committee have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 549057.2, and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Meetings. MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING None. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 7 May 13, 1998 MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT None. FUTURE MEETING DATES The next Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 10, 1998, at 5:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:46 p.m. Submitted LfY d ( ,,b(y,:, ,lam &&Ix .' Leno a Crane Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Secretary H:\WP.DTATINQ10\CRANETAHRTAHR9 Y MMIN.00C I FAHR COMMITTEE Meetlng pate To7L eds. 05/13/9a 05/2498 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number 1 iy.c. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Steve Kozak, Financial Manager SUBJECT: TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 1998 (FAHR98-33) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of April 1998. SUMMARY Pacific Investment Management Co. (PIMCO), has served as the Districts' professional external money manager, and Mellon Trust as the Districts' third- party custodian, since September 1995. The Districts' Investment Policy, adopted by the Joint Boards, includes reporting requirements as listed down the left most column of the attached PIMCO Monthly Report for the "Liquid Operating Monies" and for the "Long-Term Operating Monies." The Districts' external money manager is operating in compliance with the requirements of the Districts' Investment Policy. The Districts' portfolio contains no reverse repurchase agreements. Historical cost and the current market ("mark-to-market") values are shown as estimated by both PIMCO and Mellon Trust. The slight differences are caused by differing assumptions regarding marketability at the estimate date. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY None. BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) %V d.W.WlM ftft Ift.-TAHWAHRBT .a1 HRa Md. Rwu 1N11M Page 1 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Schedules are attached summarizing the detail for both the short-term and long- term investment portfolios. In addition, a consolidated report of posted investment portfolio transactions for the month of April 1998 is attached. The attached yield analysis report is presented as a monitoring and reporting enhancement. In this report, yield calculations based on book values and market values are shown for individual holdings, as well as for each portfolio. Mellon Trust, the Districts' custodian bank, is the source for these reports. Transactions that were pending settlement at month end may not be reflected. The Districts' investments are in compliance with the Districts' adopted Investment Policy, and the California Government Code. In addition, sufficient funds are available for the Districts to meet its operating expenditure requirements for the next six months. During the month of April, the Districts received approximately$26.3 million through the Orange County Tax Collector's tax apportionment cycle. The funds were deposited in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), and with Union Bank. The funds at Union Bank are invested in an overnight repurchase agreement until they are needed to meet cash flow requirements. The table below details the book balances of the Districts' funds at month-end. A graphical representation of month-end balances is shown by the attached bar chart. Book Balances Estimated Funds/Accounts April 30. 1998 Yield(%) State of Calif. LAIF $19,930,132 5.7 Union Bank Checking Account 162,087 5.0 Union Bank Overnight Repurchase Agreement 6,106,000 5.1 PIMCO-Short-tens Portfolio 17,860,579 5.3 PIMCO-Long-tens Portfolio 302,352,780 5A District 11 GO Bond Fund 921 5,703 5.7 Debt service Reserves Q Trustees 32,676,339 6.2 Petty Cash 4,400 — Deferred compensation 11,955.717 1.6-16.8 TOTAL $ 913 OS�7t7 ALTERNATIVES None. CEQA FINDINGS - None. e�w dnmMU1 r. FAHRTAHRg WaffAHRs5 da Rmxo. 101119> Page 2 e 0 ATTACHMENTS 1. Monthly Investment Reports 2. Monthly Transaction Reports GGS:SKIc k1w ftftVlQc STAHMFAHR80 YTAHRB&33.Ex �. 1w7w Page 3 ReportPrepared by Finance, 5/11/98, 1:35 PM iMonthly Treasurers Districts' Fund Balances $400,000.00, ifnuun •:❖:•:� ❖:❖:� r:❖:❖: ❖:❖3 �:❖:❖: �:•:❖3: ..... ,.... ..... >.... ..... ..... ,.... ,.... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... -'-' ...... .......... ....� �.00❖. ..... Debt Service Reserves 0 LAW M Deferred Compensation C3 aBank Bond Fund MONTHLY REPORT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING & REPORTING (for the month ending 30 April 1998) Liquid Operating Monies 15.1.1 PORTFOLIO COST AND MARKET VALUE Current Market Value Estimate: pI�1 $17861,089 Mello $17:860,579 Historical Cost: • PIMCO $17,856,582 Mellon $17,856,581 15.1.2 MODIFIED DURATION Of Portfolio: 0.18 Oflndex: 0.20 15.1.3 1%INTEREST RATE CHANGE Dollar Impact(gain/loss)of 1%Change: $32,265 (0.180%) 15.1.4 REVERSE REPOS %of Portfolio in Reverse Repos: (see attached schedule) 0% 15.1.5 PORTFOLIO MATURITY %of Portfolio Maturing within 90 days: 81% 15.1.6 PORTFOLIO QUALITY Average Portfolio Credit Quality: "AAA" 15.1.7 SECURITIES BELOW "A" RATING %of Portfolio Below"A": 00/0 15.1.8 INVESTMENT POLICY COMPLIANCE "In Compliance" Yes 15.1.9 PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE Portfolio Total Rate of Return(%): 1 Month: 0.46 3 Months: 1.33 12 Months: 5.61 Year-to-Date: 1.79 Index Total Rate of Return(°/u): I Month: 0.42 MONTHLY REPORT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING & REPORTING (for the month ending 30 April 1998) Long Term Operating Monies 15.1.1 PORTFOLIO COST AND MARKET VALUE Current Market Value Estimate: $g33 1177 Mlon $302,352,780 Historical Cost: PIMCO $302,801,307 Mellon $302,843,643 15.1.2 MODIFIED DURATION Of Portfolio: 2.52 Of Index: 2.31 15.1.3 1% INTEREST RATE CHANGE Dollar Impact(gain/loss)of 1%Change: $7,752,070 15.1.4 REVERSE REPOS %of Portfolio in Reverse Repos: (see attached schedule) 0% 15.1.5 PORTFOLIO MATURITY %of Portfolio Maturing within 90 days: NA 15.1.6 PORTFOLIO QUALITY Average Portfolio Credit Quality: "AAA° 15.1.7 SECURITIES BELOW "A" RATING %of Portfolio Below"A": 0% 15.1.8 INVESTMENT POLICY COMPLIANCE "In Compliance" Yes 15.1.9 PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE Portfolio Total Rate of Return: (%) 1 Month: 0.53 3 Months: 1.03 12 Months: 8.53 Year-to-Date: 2.15 Index Total Rate of Return: (°/") 1 Month: 0.48 )WM4 . YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 1 OCSF07SI1102 1998/04/30 RUN DATE 05/07/98 ORANGE CTY LIQUID OPERATING RUN TIME 14.21.05 PAR VALUE YIN AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ 7. TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE 2 TOTAL ----------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ---------- CASH 8 CASK EQUIVALENTS 234,216.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- .000 3.750 100.000 234,216.00 1.61 999495906 PUBLIC II 234,216.00 1.31 2,500,000.00 FED HOME IN HID CORP DISC HIS 5.446 .000 P-1 99.160 2,479,000.00 17.12 313397YGD HAT 06/19/1998 2,479,000.00 13.88 3,100,000.00 FEDERAL MAIL "TO ASSN DISC 5.448 .000 P-1 98.760 3,061,347.% 21.15 313589ML3 HAT OS/06/1998 31061,547.% 17.14 2,400,000.00 FEDERAL NONE IN BK DISC 5.457 .000 P-1 98.950 2,374,800.00 16.40 313385XZ4 MAT 06/12/1998 2,374,800.00 13.30 150,000.00 FED HOME IN KID CORP DISC NTS 5.463 .000 P-1 99.577 149,365.33 1.03 313397NY3 HAT 05/18/2990 149,365.33 .84 3,000,000.00 FED FARM CA BK CONS DISC HIS 5.474 .000 P-1 98.650 21959.500.00 20.44 5133132JO HUT 07/15/1998 2,959,500.00 16.57 751,000.00 FED HOME IN MG CORP DISC HIS 5.480 .000 P-1 98.901 742,746.09 5.13 313397YV7 HAT 07/02/1998 742,746.09 4.16 800,000.00 NATIONAL RURAL DISC 5.534 .000 P-1 99.026 792,206.22 5.47 63743DFR7 06/25/1998 792,206.22 4.44 800,060.00 WC DISC 5.542 .000 P-1 99.055 792,436.00 5.47 37042EFH9 06/17/1998 792,436.00 4.44 800,000.00 FORD MR CR CO DISC 5.561 .000 P-1 98.719 789,752.00 5.45 34539UGF3 07/15/1998 789,752.00 4.42 100,000.00 FEDERAL MAIL MID ASSN DISC 5.668 .000 P-1 97.214 97,214.39 .67 513589YOZ HAT 06/19/1998 97,214.39 .54 -------- ------- ----------------- --------- TOTAL CASH K CASK EQUIVALENTS 5.326 .093 14,472,783.97 100.00 14,472,783.97 81.04 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 3,400,000.00 U S TREASURY MOTES 5.404 4.767 AAA 99."1 3,383,796.08 100.00 912827M66 04.750% 10/31/1998 OD 11/01/93 3,587,794.00 18.97 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 2 OCSF07511102 1998/04/30 RUN DATE : 05/07/98 ORANGE CTY LIQUID OPERATING RIM TIME : 14.21.05 PAR VALUE YTN AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ 2 TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION ROOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE 2 TOTAL TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 5.404 4.767 3,583,796.88 100.00 3,587,794.00 18.97 ________ _______ _________________ _________ TOTAL 5.329 .241 17,856,580.85 100.00 17,860,577.97 100.00 YLOANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PACE : 3 OMF07SZ2202 1998/04/30 RIM DATE : 05/07/98 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERN OPERATING RIM TINE : 14.21.05 PAR VALUE YTH AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ Y. TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOO( YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE V. TOTAL ----------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ---------- CASH R CASH EQUIVALENTS 829,337.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- .000 3.750 200.000 829,337.00 5.78 99%95906 PUBLIC II 829,557.00 .22 23,300,000.00 BANKERS TRUST CO INSTL C/O 5.994 5.%9 100.013 13,4%,275.00 94.21 0663JOKU7 05.950% 06/19/1998 DO 06/29/97 13,301,708.56 3.54 -------- ------- ----------------- --------- TOTAL CASH 1 CASH EQUIVALENTS 5.338 5.708 24,323,612.00 100.00 14,331,045.56 3.76 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 3,500,000.00 CHRYSLER FIN NTN .000 5.804 A2 100.046 3,496,635.00 .95 17120QESD FLTG RT 08/08/2002 DD 04/08/98 5,502,610.00 .92 517,792.59 FNKA POOL /0065581 .000 6.073 AAA 100.500 521,514.23 .14 3136MM7 6.391% 08/01/2028 DO 09/01/88 520,561.55 .14 4,000,000.00 FORD NTR CR NFN TRANCNE 0TR 96 .000 5.390 Al 100.184 3,970,480.00 1.09 345402DZ1 FLTG/RT 11/09/2998 GO 11/08/93 4,007,360.00 1.05 7,100,000.00 FORD ROTOR CR NTN TR 6 00177 .000 5.516 Al 99.718 6,999,748.00 1.92 345402HJ3 VAR/RT 03/50/1999 DO 03/30/94 7,079,978.00 1.86 5,000,000.00 HELLER FINL INC SR NT .000 6.166 A3 100.356 2,999,310.00 .81 423328AZ6 FLTG RT 04/27/1999 OD 04/27/94 3,030,680.00 .79 4,000,000.00 HELLER FINL HTH .000 5.907 A3 100.000 4,000,000.00 1.08 42333H.M3 FLTG RT 06/01/2000 OD 04/07/98 4,000,000.00 I.05 7,075,810.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 3.654 3.667 AAA 98.844 7,066,788.65 1.90 9128273AS 3.6252 07/15/2002 DO 07/15/97 6,9",013." 1.83 LDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE i 4 CSF0752ZZ02 1998/04/30 RUN DATE s 05/07/98 RANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING RUN TIME : 14.21.05 PAR VALUE YTH AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ X TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE X TOTAL 10,218,000.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 3.754 3.483 AAA 96.906 9,938,810.47 2.69 9128272M3 3.375% O1/15/2007 OD 01/15/97 9,901,655.08 2.60 16,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.549 6.832 AAA 109.781 17,807,253.22 4.78 912827586 07.S00% B2/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 17,564,960.00 4.60 15,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.562 5.064 AAA 100.187 13,045,217.19 4.09 912827Z70 05.875% 10/31/1998 DD 10/31/96 15,028,050.00 3.94 6,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.594 5.621 AAA 100.078 6,002,612.41 1.63 9228273RI 05.625X 12/31/1999 DO 12/31/97 6,004,680.00 1.57 16,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.668 5.733 AAA 100.297 16,030,100.89 4.36 912827V66 05.750X 10/31/2000 DO 10/31/95 16,047,520.00 4.21 27,400,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.683 7.089 AAA 105.797 29,146,743.53 7.89 912827025 07.SCOX 11/15/2001 DO 11/15/91 28,988,578.00 7.60 16,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.702 5.623 AAA 100.031 1519821500.00 4.35 9128273K6 05.625X 10/31/1999 OD 10/31/97 16,004,960.00 4.19 52,800,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.726 6.764 AAA 101.641 55,795,781.63 14.61 912827R20 06.875% 08/31/1999 UD 08/31/94 53,666,448.00 14.06 28,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.783 6.314 AAA 102.953 28,836,638.31 7.84 9128272N1 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO 06/02/97 28,826,840.00 7.55 3,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.798 6.411 AAA 103.344 3,613,203.13 .98 912827MO 06.625% 04/30/2002 GO 04/30/97 3,617,040.00 .95 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 5.814 6.120 AAA 102.125 2,541,015.62 .69 912827395 06.250% 08/31/2002 DO 09/02/97 2,553,125.00 .67 2,000,000.00 U S TREASURY BONDS 5.857 6.696 AAA 130.672 2,663,639.50 .71 912B10DY1 OB.750X 05/15/2017 DO 05/15/87 2,613,440.00 .68 3,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MG ASSN MTN 5.871 5.873 AM 100.125 5.000,781.25 1.36 31364FFM8 5.880X 11/03/1999 DO 12/03/97 5,0060250.00 1.31 6,000,000.DO XATIONSBANX CHARLOTTE N C NTN 5.882 5.862 AA2 99.796 5,996,400.00 1.63 63858JDE6 5.850% 04/07/2000 DO 04/07/98 5,987,760.00 1.57 3,358,178.48 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-D CL A 5.957 5.896 AAA 100.064 3,351,226.01 .91 161614AEZ 5.900% 11/15/2001 00 11/15/95 3,360,327.71 .88 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 5 OMFO7522202 1993/04/30 RUN DATE : 05/07/98 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING ROM TIME : 14.21.05 PAR VALUE YIN AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ 7. TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE 2 TOTAL ----------------- ----------------------------- ---'--- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ---------- 890,621.43 FMMA POOL 00313783 6.093 6.211 AAA 100.500 897,022.77 .24 31374GRC3 6.1427. 05/01/2036 OD 10/01/97 895,074.54 .23 998,743.48 FNMA POOL 00313371 6.142 6.163 AAA 100.500 110051921.95 .27 31374GCG0 6.194Y. 08/01/2029 DO O1/01/97 1,003,737.20 .26 966,554.18 FNMA POOL 40313600 6.144 6.206 AAA 100.500 973,5U1.29 .26 31374GKM8 6.2212 05/01/20U DD 06/01/97 971,386.95 .25 442,776.08 FMLA POOL 202MS75 6.149 6.168 AAA 100.500 W51958.54 .12 31376Q6LB 6.1992 03/01/20IS DD 09/01/93 444,989.96 .12 238,518.32 FUN.A POOL /0313769 6.157 6.175 AAA 100.500 240,232.67 .06 31374SQWO 6.2062 05/01/20U DO 09/01/97 239,710.91 .06 683,428.90 FMNA POOL 00339016 6.ISO 6.176 AAA 100.500 688,341.04 .18 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DD 03/01/96 686,846.04 .18 5,000,000.00 U S TREASURY BONDS 6.162 8.946 AAA 124.359 6,233,593.75 1.69 912810DE5 11.1257. 08/15/2003 OD 07/05/83 6,217,950.00 1.63 446,726.88 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 6.200 6.176 AAA 100.390 A46,726.87 .12 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DO 05/15/96 448,471.04 .12 2,170,564.45 COMTIMORTGAGE HONE EQ 96-4 A3 6.213 6.184 AAA 100.095 2,165,901.13 .59 2307SWDH8 6.190I 10/IS/2011 DD 11/23/96 2,172,629.53 .57 5,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 6.277 6.130 AAA 101.955 4,994,531.25 1.18 9IW272LS 06.2502 OU28/2002 DU OV28/97 5,097,650.00 1.34 4,500,000.00 FEDERAL TAIL MTG ASSN NTH 6.291 6.150 AAA 101.297 4,488,705.00 1.24 31364CKV5 6.230I 03/01/2002 DD 03/03/97 4,558,365.00 1.19 4,835,969.00 FMLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 6.516 6.511 AAA 100.203 4,841,258.34 1.31 3133TCE95 6.3247. 06/15/2032 4,845,786.02 1.27 4,500,000.00 CATERPILLAR FINL HIM TR00389 6.322 5.783 A2 99.955 4,466,745.00 1.22 14912LSE2 8.7807. 07/15/1998 DD 12/15/95 4,497,975.00 1.18 5,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROS HLDGS MTH 600196 6.364 6.578 BAA1 101.093 5,039,450.00 1.37 52517PJ 6.6507.. IV0812000 OD 11/08/96 S,OSA,650.00 1.32 1,305,000.00 BEAR STEARNS COS INC SR HTS 6.425 6.646 A2 101.570 1,317,619.55 .36 OT5902AN8 6.750% 05/01/2001 DO 09/26/96 1,325,488.50 .35 YLDAIAIL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE x 6 OW07522202 1998/04/30 RUN DATE : 05/07/98 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING RUN TIME : 14.22.05 PAR VALUE VM AT CURRENT RUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ 2 TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOO! YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE 7. TOTAL _________________ _____________________________ _______ _______ _______ ________ ------------ __-__--___ 2,000,000.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF T11 A6 6.4% 6.543 AAA 99.341 21000,808.00 .S4 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2018 1,986,617.00 .52 1,000,000.00 CHRYSLER FINL MM TR R 00335 6.514 6.255 A3 100.072 993,160.00 .27 171200PY1 6.2602 07/20/1998 DO 07/18/95 1,000,720.00 .26 3,700,ODO.00 GENERAL MTRS ACCEP M H TR00324 6.532 8.237 A3 101.678 31911,640.00 1.02 37042RPM8 8.375% OV03/1999 DO 0/05/95 3,762,OB6.00 .99 5,500,000.00 COMMIT TO MR FHLMC GOLD 6.561 6.562 AAA 99.062 5,458,320.31 1.46 999ACA709 6.500% 05/IS12028 5,448,410.00 1.43 8,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG AM MM 6.577 6.469 AAA 102.406 8,012,576.00 2.0 31364CBD9 6.6252 04/18/2001 DO 04/28/96 8,192,480.00 2.15 9,OOO,000.00 PHILIP MORRIS COS NT 6.593 8.814 A2 104.949 9,903,780.00 2.57 718154BB2 9.250% 02/15/2000 9,445,410.00 2.48 18,535,%2.26 FHLMC GROUP SG5-0476 6.628 6.903 AAA 101.406 18,825,566.36 5.11 3128DD0SS 7.000% 02/O1/2003 DO 02/O1/98 18,796,557.61 4.93 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MG ASSN MIN 6.636 5.703 AAA 98.891 9,595,750.00 2.69 31364BNF3 5.640% 02/20/2001 DO OV20/96 91889,100.00 2.59 3,000,000.00 G M A C MED TERM NTS 6.660 8.276 A3 104.214 3,n7,D70.00 .85 37042RK04 8.6257. 1/10/2000 DO 1/10/95 3,126,420.00 .82 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP BEDS 6.713 6.016 M0. 99.562 41851,562.50 1.35 31MAONN8 5.9902 03/06/2001 DO 03/06/96 4,978,100.00 1.3D 5,262,477.76 SMKA II POOL 008008BM 6.828 6.861 AAA 102.031 5,377,5%.47 1.46 362MC20 7.000% 06/20/2027 OD 06/01/97 5,369,358.68 1.41 2,053.639.00 GKKA II POOL 00008684 6.865 6.849 AAA 102.203 2,087,973.28 .57 36202KUH6 7.0007. 08/20/20M DO 08/01/95 2,098,880.67 .55 2,750,000.O0 COMMIT TO MR FHLMC GOLD 6.866 6.963 AAA 100.531 2,764,609.37 .75 999ACS714 7.000% 07/15/2028 2,764,609.37 .72 3,587,079.35 SHMA II POOL /0080025 6.869 6.855 AAA 102.109 3,646,49D.36 .99 36225CA29 7.0002 12/20/2026 DO 12/O1/96 3,662,730.85 .96 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY BONDS 6.906 8.341 AAA 158.859 4,029,030.31 1.08 912810DU4 13.2507. 05/15/2014 DO 05/15/84 3,971,475.00 1.04 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PACE : 7 OCSF07522202 1998/04/30 RUN DATE OS/07/98 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING RUN TINE : 14.a.05 PAR VALUE YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ 2 TYPE SECURITY IO SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOR YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE I TOTAL ----------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ----____-_ -------- ------- ----------------- --------- TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 5.115 6.208 367,737,818.95 100.00 367,239,522.B5 96.24 ________ _______ ----------------- --------- TOTAL 5.114 6.207 382,061,430.95 100.00 381,570,568.41 100.00 OCSF075222 MELLON TRUST LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO PORTFOLIO SUMMARY BY SECTOR BASE: a USD 30-APR-1998 HB1100 4 OF UNREALIZED ESTIMATED CURR PORTFOLIO DISTRIBUTION COST MARKET VALUE TOTAL GAIN/LOSS ANNUAL INCOME YIELD ------------------------------ ------------------ ------------------ -------- ----------------- ---------------- ------- CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS CASH 0.19 0.19 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAYABLES -81,988,628.41 -81,908,628.41 -26.69% 0.00 0.00 0.00 CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT - DOME 13,494,275.00 13,501,708.56 4.40% 7,433.56 803,250.00 5.95 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS 829,337.00 929,337.00 0.27% 0.00 31,100.14 3.75 __________________ __________________ ________ _________________ ________________ ------- TOTAL CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS -67,665,016.22 -67,657,582.66 -22.03% 7,433.56 834,350.14 -1.23 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES U.S. GOVERNMENTS 223,727,359.96 223,098,384.72 72.63% -628,975.14 14,108,230.61 6.32 U.S. AGENCIES 42,945,226.31 43,620,809.37 14.20% 675,583.06 2,710,350.00 6.21 GNMA MULTI FAMILY POOLS 11,112,058.11 11,130,970.20 3.62% 18,912.09 763,223.72 6.86 FHLMC POOLS 18,825,566.36 18,796,557.61 6.12% -29,008.75 1,297,515.96 6.90 FHLMC MULTICLASS 6,842,146.34 6,832,603.02 2.22% -9,543.32 435,826.68 6.38 FNMA POOLS 4,772,492.49 4,762,127.15 1.551 -30,365.34 293,119.57 6.16 COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGA 2,165,901.13 2,172,629.53 0.714 6,728.40 134,357.94 6.19 ASSET BACKED SECURITIES 446,726.87 448,471.04 0.15% 1,744.17 27,697.07 6.18 BANKING z FINANCE 49,771,483.36 49,715,055.21 16.19% -56,428.15 3,092,688.78 6.22 INDUSTRIAL 9,903,780.00 9,445,410.00 3.08% -458,370.00 832,500.00 8.81 __________________ __________________ ________ _________________ ________________ _______ TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 370,512,740.83 370,023,017.85 120.461 -489,722.98 23,695,510.33 6.40 OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS PAYABLES/RECEIVABLES 4,798,595.38 4,798,595.38 1.564 0.00 0.00 0.00 __________________ __________________ ________ _________________ ________________ _______ TOTAL OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS 4,798,595.38 4,798,595.38 1.564 0.00 0.00 0.00 ====---eves------- ------------------ -------- ----------------- -------------- ------- NET PORTFOLIO ASSETS 307,646,319.99 307,164,030.57 100.00% -482,289.42 24,529,860.47 7.99 Page 1 OCSF075111 MELLON TRUST LIQUID OPER-PIMCO PORTFOLIO SUMMARY BY SECTOR BASE: USD 30-APR-1998 HB1300 4 OF UNREALIZED ESTIMATED CURB PORTFOLIO DISTRIBUTION COST MARKET VALUE TOTAL GAIN/LOSS ANNUAL INCOME YIELD ______________________________ __________________ __________________ ________ _________________ ________________ ------- CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS CASH 0.55 0.55 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 COMMERCIAL PAPER - DISCOUNT 2,374,394.22 2,374,394.22 13.25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE -LE 3,371,111.42 3,371,111.42 18.81% 0.00 0.00 0.00 FNMA ISSUES - LESS INN 1YR 3,158,762.33 3,158,762.33 17.62% 0.00 0.00 0.00 FED HM LOAN BNK - LESS INN 1YR 2,374,800.00 2,374,800.00 13.25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK - LES 2,959,500.00 2,959,500.00 16.51% 0.00 0.00 0.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS 234,216.00 234,216.00 1.31% 0.00 8,783.10 3.75 __________________ __________________ ________ _________________ ________________ _______ TOTAL CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS 14,472,784.52 14,472,784.52 80.74% 0.00 8,783.10 0.06 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES U.S. GOVERNMENTS 3,383,796.88 3,387,794.00 18.90% 3,997.12 161,500.00 4.77 __________________ __________________ ________ _________________ ________________ _______ TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 3,383,796.08 3,387,794.00 18.90% 3,997.12 161,500.00 4.77 OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS PAYABLES/RECEIVABLES 64,056.84 64,056.84 0.36% 0.00 0.00 0.00 __________________ __________________ ________ _________________ ________________ _______ TOTAL OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS 64,056.84 64,056.84 0.36% 0.00 0.00 0.00 vOe NET PORTFOLIO ASSETS ma 17,920,638.24 17,924,635.36 100 00% 3,997.12 170,283.10 0.95 Page 1 e OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CORR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENT TRANSACTIONS U.S. DOLLAR OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 15-APR-1998 -66.00 -66.00 0.000000 NA9123459 BULK FEES (22) ----------- -66.00 0.00 0.000000 CW ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEE 23-APR-1998 -3.00 -3.00 0.000000 NA9123459 993480022 ----------- -3.00 0.00 0.000000 CW ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 10-APR-1998 -3.00 -3.00 0.000000 912927R20 U S TREASURY NOTES ----------- -3.00 0.00 0.000000 CW 06.875% 08/31/1999 DO 08/31/94 ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 09-APR-1998 -3.00 -3.00 0.000000 912827S86 U S TREASURY NOTES ----------- -3.00 0.00 0.000000 CW 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 09-APR-1998 -3.00 -3.00 0.000000 912827S86 U S TREASURY NOTES ----------- -3.00 0.00 0.000000 CW 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 30-APR-1998 -3.00 -3.00 0.000000 912827S86 U S TREASURY NOTES ----------- -3.00 0.00 0.000000 CW 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 03-APR-1990 -3.00 -3.00 0.000000 912827V66 U S TREASURY NOTES ----------- -3.00 0.00 0.000000 CW 05.750% 10/31/2000 DO 10/31/95 ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 PURCHASES U.S. DOLLAR CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 1 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ IRV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 3,300,000.00 AMERITECH CORP DISC 13-APR-1998 -3,284,399.25 -3,284,399.25 99.527250 02680KEE4 05/14/1998 13-APR-1998 3,284,399.25 3,284,399.25 99.527250 B LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMOO 3,300,000.00 AMERITECH CORP DISC 13-APR-1998 -3,284,399.25 -3,284,399.25 99.527250 02680KEE4 05/14/1998 13-APR-1998 -3,284,399.25 0.00 99.527250 FC LEHMAN COML PAPER INC (LGSI( , 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 400,000.00 BELLSOUTH TELECOM DISC 03-APR-1998 -399,755.56 -399,755.56 99.938890 07815XD77 04/07/1998 03-APR-1998 399,755.56 399,755.56 99.938890 B GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 400,000.00 BELLSOUTH TELECOM DISC 03-APR-1998 -399,755.56 -399,755.56 99.938890 07815KD77 04/07/1998 03-APR-1998 -399,755.56 0.00 99.938890 FC GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY 03-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 FED FARM CR BK CONS DISC NTS 16-APR-1998 -2,959,500.00 -2,959,500.00 98.650000 313313ZJO MAT 07/15/1998 16-APR-1998 2,959,500.00 2,959,500.00 98.650000 B MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER SM ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 FED FARM CR BK CONS DISC NTS 16-APR-1998 -2,959,500.00 -2,959,500.00 98.650000 313313ZJO MAT 07/15/1998 16-APR-1998 -2,959,500.00 0.00 98.650000 FC MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER SM 16-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,400,000.00 FEDERAL HOME IN BK DISC 03-APR-1998 -2,374,800.00 -2,374,800.00 98.950000 313385XZ4 MAT 06/12/1998 03-APR-1998 2,374,800.00 2,374,800.00 98.950000 B MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER SM ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,400,000.00 FEDERAL HOME IN SK DISC 03-APR-1998 -2,374,800.00 -2,374,800.00 98.950000 313385XZ4 MAT O6/12/1998 03-APR-1998 -2,374,800.00 0.00 90.950000 FC MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER SM 03-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 2 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST , CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE:•USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LASS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 150,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC NTS 20-APR-1998 -149,365.33 -149,365.33 99.576886 313397WY3 HAT 05/18/1998 20-APR-1998 149,365.33 149,365.33 99.576986 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON CDR ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 150,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC NTS 20-APR-1998 -149,365.33 -149,365.33 99.576986 313397WY3 HAT 05/18/1998 20-APR-1998 -149,365.33 0.00 99.576986 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COB 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC NTS 24-APR-1998 -2,479,000.00 -2,479,000.00 99.160000 313397YGO HAT 06/19/1998 24-APR-1998 2,479,000.00 2,479,000.00 99.160000 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC NTS 24-APR-1998 -2,479,000.00 -2,479,000.00 99.160000 313397YGO HAT O6/19/1998 24-APR-1998 -2,479,000.00 0.00 99.160000 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON CDR 24-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 751,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC NTS 20-APR-1998 -742,746.09 -742,746.09 98.900944 313397YV7 MAT 07/02/1998 20-APR-1998 742,746.09 742,746.09 98.900944 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 751,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC HIS 20-APR-1998 -742,746.09 -742,746.09 98.900944 313397YV7 MAT 07/02/1998 20-APR-1998 -742,746.09 0.00 98.900944 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON CDR 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 FORD MTR CA CO DISC 22-APR-1998 -789,752.00 -789,752.00 98.719000 34539UGF3 07/15/1998 22-APR-1998 709,752.00 789,752.00 98.719000 B CITIBANK/CP/IPA, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 FORD MTR CA CO DISC 22-APR-1998 -789,752.00 -789,752.00 98.719000 34539UGF3 07/15/1998 22-APR-1998 -799,752.00 0.00 98.719000 PC CITIBANK/CP/IPA, NEW YORK 22-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Pape 3 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC O1-APR-1998 -799,006.00 -799,008.00 99.876000 36959JD91 04/09/1998 01-APR-1998 799,006.00 799,008.00 99.876000 B CITIBANK/CP/IPA, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 800,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC O1-APR-1998 -799,008.00 -799,008.00 99.876000 36959JD91 04/09/1998 01-APR-1998 -799,008.00 0.00 99.876000 PC CITIBANK/CP/IPA, NEW YORK O1-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMOO 800,000.00 GMAC DISC 16-APR-1998 -792,436.00 -792,436.00 99.054500 37042EFH9 06/17/1998 16-APR-1998 792,436.00 792,436.00 99.054500 B CHEMICAL SK COMMERCIAL PAPER/I ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 GMAC DISC 16-APR-1998 -792,436.00 -792,436.00 99.054500 37042EFH9 06/17/1998 16-APR-1998 -792,436.00 0.00 99.054500 PC CHEMICAL BK COMMERCIAL PAPER/I 16-APR-1990 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 700,000.00 IBM DISC 17-APR-1998 -699,366.50 -699,366.50 99.909500 44922BDP0 04/23/2998 17-APR-1998 699,366.50 699,366.50 99.909500 B BANKERS TRUST CO/COMMERCIAL PA ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 700,000.00 IBM DISC 17-APR-1990 -699,366.50 -699,366.50 99.909500 449225DP0 04/23/1998 17-APR-1998 -699,366.50 0.00 99.909500 PC BANKERS TRUST CO/COMMERCIAL PA 17-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 NATIONAL RURAL DISC 22-APR-1990 -792,206.22 -792,206.22 99.025777 63743DFR7 06/25/1998 22-APR-1990 792,206.22 792,206.22 99.025777 B MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER SM ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 900,000.00 NATIONAL RURAL DISC 22-APR-1998 -792,206.22 -792,206.22 99.025777 63743DFR7 06/25/1998 22-APR-1998 -792,206.22 0.00 99.025777 PC MERRILL LYNCH GOVT SECS/MONEY 22-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 Page 4 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TH100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 SARA LEE CORP DISC 02-APR-1998 -799,141.33 -799,141.33 99.892666 80311BD99 04/09/1998 02-APR-1999 799,141.33 799,141.33 99.892666 B GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERN OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 SARA LEE CORP DISC 02-APR-1998 -799,141.33 -799,141.33 99.892666 9031IDD99 04/09/1990 02-APR-1998 -799,141.33 0.00 99.892666 PC GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY 02-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERN OPER-PINCO 700,000.00 GOLDMAN SACHS LP REPO 20-APR-1998 -700,000.00 -700,000.00 100.000000 993480022 05.450% 04/23/1990 DO 04/20/98 20-APR-1998 700,000.00 700,000.00 100.000000 B GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 700,000.00 GOLDMAN SACHS LP REPO 20-APR-1998 -100,000.00 -700,000.00 100.000000 9934SQ022 05.4501 04/23/1999 DO 04/20/98 20-APR-1998 -700,000.00 0.00 100.000000 FC GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 35,340.03 BSDT-LATE MONEY DEP ACCT 15-APR-1990 -35,340.03 -35,340.03 1.000000 996007094 VAR AT DO O6/26/1997 15-APR-1996 35,340.03 35,340.03 1.000000 B 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PINCO 413.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 01-APR-1998 -413.00 -413.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II O1-APR-1998 413.00 413.00 1.000000 B O1-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,400,000.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 03-APR-1998 -2,400,000.00 -2,400,000.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 03-APR-1998 2,400,000.00 2,400,000.00 1.000000 B 03-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,778,181.00 BRUT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 07-APR-1998 -1,778,191.00 -2,770,181.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 07-APR-1998 1,778,181.00 1,778,181.00 1.000000 Page 5 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ B 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 467,440.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 10-APR-1998 -467,440.00 -467,440.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 10-APR-1999 467,440.00 467,440.00 1.000000 B 10-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,402,735.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 15-APR-1998 -1,401,735.00 -1,401,735.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 15-APR-1998 1,401,735.00 1,401,735.00 1.000000 B 15-APR-1990 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMOO 48,064.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 16-APR-1998 -48,064.00 -49,064.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 16-APR-1998 49,064.00 48,064.00 1.000000 e 16-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 35,340.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 16-APR-1998 -35,340.00 -35,340.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 16-APR-1998 35,340.00 35,340.00 1.000000 B 16-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERN OPER-PIMCO 333,950.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 20-APR-1998 -333,950.00 -333,950.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 20-APR-1998 333,950.00 333,950.00 1.000000 B 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 10,042.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 22-APR-1998 -18,042.00 -18,042.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 22-APR-1998 18,042.00 10,042.00 1.000000 B 22-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 21,000.00 SHUT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 24-APR-1998 -21,000.00 -21,000.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 24-APR-1998 21,000.00 21,000.00 1.000000 B 24-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 152,943.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 27-APR-1998 -152,943.00 -152,943.00 1.000000 Page 6 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST - CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE .GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 999495906 PUBLIC II 27-APR-1998 152,943.00 152,943.00 1.000000 B 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 80,018.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 30-APR-1998 -80,018.00 -80,018.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC LI 30-APR-1998 80,018.00 80,018.00 1.000000 B 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 313,315.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 30-APR-1998 -313,315.00 -313,315.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 30-APR-1998 313,315.00 313,315.00 1.000000 B 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,500,000.00 CHRYSLER FIN MTN 03-APR-1998 -3,498,635.00 -3,498,635.00 99.961000 171200E80 FLTG AT 08/08/2002 DO 04/08/96 08-APR-1998 3,498, 635.00 3,498,635.00 99.961000 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON CDR ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,500,000.00 CHRYSLER FIN MTN 03-APR-1998 -3,498,635.00 -3,498,635.00 99.961000 17120QESO FLTG RT 08/08/2002 DO 04/08/98 08-APR-1998 -3,498,635.00 0.00 99.961000 PC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COR 08-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 257,624.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DS-8101 27-JAN-1998 -259,556.18 -259,556.18 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 259,556.18 259,556.18 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO - 257,624.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8301 27-JAN-1998 -601.12 -601.12 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/D1/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 257,624.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 27-JAN-1998 -260,157.30 -260,157.30 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -260,157.30 0.00 100.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 7 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1999 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 255,079.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DB-8101 27-JAN-1998 -256,992.09 -256,992.09 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.00OB 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 256,992.09 256,992.09 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 255,079.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 27-JAN-1998 -595.18 -595.18 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000OD0000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 255,079.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 27-JAN-1998 -257,587.27 -257,507.27 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -257,587.27 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 336,161.00 FHLMC GROUP 9DB-8101 27-JAN-1998 -338,682.21 -338,682.21 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 338,682.21 338,682.21 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 336,161.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 27-JAN-1998 -784.30 -784.38 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 336,161.00 FHLMC GROUP IDB-8101 27-JAN-1998 -339,466.59 -339,466.59 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -339,466.59 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 246,578.00 FHLMC GROUP ADB-8101 27-JAN-1998 -248,427.34 -248,427.34 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 248,427.34 248,427.34 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 246,578.00 FHLMC GROUP *D8-8101 27-JAN-1998 -575.35 -575.35 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.0009 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 8 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 RASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ RASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 246,579.00 FHLMC GROUP 08-8101 27-JAN-1998 -249,002.69 -249,002.69 100.750000 3129FYAA3 1.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 -249,002.69 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1990 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 269,359.00 FHLMC GROUP /DB-8101 27-JAN-1996 -271,379.19 -271,319.19 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2029 DO 04/O1/98 13-APR-1996 271,379.19 271,319.19 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 269,359.00 FHLMC GROUP /D8-8101 27-JAN-1996 -629.50 -628.50 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 269,359.00 FHLMC GROUP /D8-8101 27-JAN-1999 -272,007.69 -272,007.69 100.750000 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -272,007.69 0.00 100.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 477,414.00 FHLMC GROUP IDB-8233 27-JAN-1998 -480,994.61 -480,994.61 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 480,994.61 480,994.61 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 2.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 477,414.00 FHLMC GROUP /D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -1,113.97 -1,113.97 100.750000 312OFYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 2.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 477,414.00 FHLMC GROUP /D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -482,106.58 -482,100.58 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -482,106.58 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 474,286.00 FHLMC GROUP IDB-8233 27-JAN-1998 -477,043.15 -477,843.15 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.0001 04/01/2029 DO 04/02/98 13-APR-1998 477,043.15 477,843.15 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 Page 9 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: OSO O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SNARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LASS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 474,286.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -1,106.67 -1,106.67 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 474,286.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -478,949.82 -478,949.82 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000► 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -478,949.82 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 464,702.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -468,187.27 -468,187.27 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 469,187.27 468,187.27 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 464,702.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -1,084.30 -1,084.30 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 464,702.00 FHLMC GROUP IDS-8233 27-JAN-1998 -469,271.57 -469,271.57 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -469,271.57 0.00 100.750000 FC SALONON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 455,956.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -459,375.67 -459,375.67 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 459,375.67 459,375.67 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 455,956.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -1,063.90 -1,063.90 100.750000 312OFYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 455,956.00 FHIMC GROUP /D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -460,439.57 -460,439.57 100.750000 312OFYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -460,439.57 0.00 100.750000 Page 10 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ IRV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 492,852.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -496,548.39 -496,548.39 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.0001 04/01/2028 DO U4/01/98 13-APR-1998 496,548.39 496,548.39 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERN OPER-PIMCO 492,852.00 FHLMC GROUP 108-8233 27-JAN-1998 -1,149.99 -1,149.99 100.750000 3126FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PINCO 492,852.00 FHLMC GROUP 1D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -497,698.38 -497,698.38 100.750000 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 -497,698.38 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 484,656.00 FHLMC GROUP #D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -488,290.92 -488,290.92 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 488,290.92 488,290.92 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PINCO 484,656.00 FHLMC GROUP IDS-8233 27-JAN-1998 -1,130.86 -1,130.86 100.750000 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERN OPER-PINCO 484,656.00 FHLMC GROUP 6D8-8233 27-JAN-1998 -489,421.78 -489,421.78 100.750000 312OFYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -489,421.78 0.00 100.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PINCO 247,500.00 FHLMC GROUP #D8-8473 27-JAN-1998 -249,356.25 -249,356.25 100.750000 3128FYMW2 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/96 13-APR-1998 249,356.25 249,356.25 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 247,500.00 FHLMC GROUP IDS-8473 27-JAN-1998 -577.50 -577.50 100.750000 Page 11 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ ______________________________________________________________ __________________ ____________________ __-_____ 3128FYMW2 7.000% 04/01/2020 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 247,500.00 FHLMC GROUP IDS-8473 27-JAN-1998 -249,933.75 -249,933.75 100.750000 3128FYMW2 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -249,933.75 0.00 100.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 254,962.00 FHLMC GROUP IDS-8537 27-JAN-1998 -256,874.22 -256,874.22 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 256,874.22 256,874.22 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 254,962.00 FHLMC GROUP $D8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -594.91 -594.91 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 254,962.00 FHLMC GROUP 8D8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -257,469.13 -257,469.13 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -257,469.13 0.00 100.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 270,726.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -272,756.45 -272,756.45 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 272,756.45 272,756.45 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 270,726.00 FHLMC GROUP 8D8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -631.69 -631.69 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 270,726.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -273,388.14 -273,388.14 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -273,388.14 0.00 100.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 12 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: -ONO 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE %RATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 264,685.00 FHLMC GROUP BD8-8537 27-JAN-1999 -266,670.14 -266,670.14 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 266,670.14 266,670.14 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 264,685.00 FHLMC GROUP BDB-8537 27-JAN-1998 -617.60 -617.60 100.750000 312BFYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 264,685.00 FHLMC GROUP I06-8537 27-JAN-1999 -267,287.74 -267,207.74 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/9B 13-APR-1998 -267,287.74 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 334,238.00 FHLMC GROUP ID8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -336,744.79 -336,744.79 100.750000 31281'YPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/90 13-APR-1998 336,744.79 336,744.79 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 334,238.00 FHLMC GROUP ID8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -779.89 -779.89 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.0001 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 334,238.00 FHLMC GROUP ADO-8537 27-JAN-1998 -337,524.68 -337,524.68 100.750000 3129FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2020 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1990 -337,524.69 0.00 200.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 259,536.00 FHLMC GROUP ID8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -261,482.52 -261,482.52 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 261,482.52 261,482.52 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 259,536.00 FHLMC GROUP ID8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -605.58 -605.58 100.750000 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 13 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 259,536.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8537 27-JAN-1998 -262,088.10 -262,088.10 100.750000 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -262,088.10 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, MEN YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 245,808.00 FHLMC GROUP ADB-8538 27-JAN-1998 -247,651.56 -247,651.56 100.750000 3129FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 247,651.56 247,651.56 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 245,808.00 FHLMC GROUP 0 DO-8538 27-JAN-1998 -573.55 -573.55 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 245,808.00 FHLMC GROUP ADB-8538 27-JAN-1998 -248,225.11 -248,225.11 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -248,225.11 0.00 100.750000 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-2998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 319,601.00 FHLMC GROUP ADS-8538 27-JAN-1998 -321,998.01 -321,998.01 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 321,998.01 321,990.01 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 319,601.00 FHLMC GROUP ADB-8538 27-JAN-1998 -745.74 -745.74 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPEA-PIMCO 319,601.00 FHLMC GROUP ADB-8538 27-JAN-1998 -322,743.75 -322,743.75 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -322,743.75 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 250,570.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8538 27-JAN-1998 -252,449.28 -252,449.28 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 252,449.28 252,449.28 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 14 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST ., CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BABE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 250,570.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8538 21-JAN-1998 -584.66 -584.66 100.150000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 250,570.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8538 27-JAN-1998 -253,033.94 -253,033.94 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -253,033.94 0.00 100.750D00 FC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 260,635.00 FHLMC GROUP BDB-8538 27-JAN-1990 -262,589.76 -262,589.76 100.750000 312BFYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-2998 262,589.76 262,589.76 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 260,635.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DB-8538 27-JAN-1998 -608.15 -608.15 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 260,635.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DB-8538 27-JAN-1998 -263,197.91 -263,197.91 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -263,197.91 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 254,572.00 FHLMC GROUP 8D8-8538 27-JAN-1998 -256,481.29 -256,481.29 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 256,481.29 256,481.29 100.750000 B SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 254,572.00 FHLMC GROUP BD8-8538 27-JAN-1998 -594.00 -594.00 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.750000 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 254,572.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DS-8538 27-JAN-1999 -257,075.29 -257,075.29 100.750000 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/02/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -257,075.29 0.00 100.750000 PC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 Page 15 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,835,969.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 11-MAR-1998 -4,841,259.34 -4,841,259.34 100.109375 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 23-APR-1998 4,841,258.34 4,841,258.34 100.109375 B BEAR STEARNS a CO INC, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,935,969.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 11-MAR-1998 -18,742.60 -18,742.60 100.109375 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.109375 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,935,969.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 11-MAR-1998 -4,860,000.94 -4,860,000.94 100.109375 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 23-APR-1998 -4,860,000.94 0.00 100.109375 PC BEAR STEARNS 6 CO INC, NY 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF T11 A6 15-APR-1998 -2,000,888.00 -2,000,889.00 100.044400 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2018 29-APR-1998 2,000,888.00 2,000,888.00 100.044400 B MELLON BANK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF Tll A6 15-APR-1998 -10,111.11 -10,111.11 100.044400 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2018 29-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.044400 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 l.0Do000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF T11 A6 15-APR-1998 -2,010,999.11 -2,010,999.11 100.044400 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2028 29-APR-1998 -2,010,999.11 0.00 100.044400 PC MELLON FINANCIAL MKTS INC, PGH 29-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,DDO,000.00 HELLER FINL MTN 02-APR-1998 -4,000,000.00 -4,000,000.00 100.000000 42333HJN3 FLTG RT 06/01/2000 DO 04/07/98 07-APR-1998 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 100.000000 B LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,000,000.00 HELLER FINL MTN 02-APR-1998 -4,000,000.00 -4,000,000.00 100.000000 42333HJN3 FLTG RT 06/01/2000 DO 04/07/98 07-APR-1998 -4,000,000.00 0.00 100.000000 Pa0e 16 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST ., CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC, NY 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 6,000,000.00 NATIONSBANK CHARLOTTE N C MTN 02-APR-1998 -5,996,400.00 -5,996,400.00 99.940000 63858JDE6 5.850% 04/07/2000 DO 04/07/98 07-APR-1998 5,996,400.00 5,996,400.00 99.940000 B CHASE SECURITIES, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,000,000.00 NATIONSBANK CHARLOTTE N C MTN 02-APR-1998 -5,996,400.00 -5,996,400.00 99.940000 63858JDE6 5.850► 04/07/2000 DO 04/07/98 07-APR-1998 -5,996,400.00 0.00 99.940000 FC CHASE SECURITIES, NEW YORK 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 29,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 08-APR-1998 -29,507,471.00 -29,507,471.00 101.749900 912827R20 06.075% 08/31/1999 DO OB/31/94 08-MAY-1998 29,507,471.00 29,507,471.00 101.749900 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COR ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 29,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 08-APR-1998 -373,828.13 -373,828.13 101.749900 912827R20 06.875% 08/31/1999 DO 08/31/94 08-14AY-1998 0.00 0.00 101.749900 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 06-APR-1998 -8,089,779.70 -8,069,779.70 110.810900 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 08-MAY-1998 8,089,779.70 8,089,779.70 110.819900 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES O6-APR-1990 -124,019.34 -124,019.34 110.819900 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 08-MAY-1998 0.00 0.00 110.818900 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 07-APR-1998 -3,652,918.50 -3,652,918.50 110.694500 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 08-MAY-1998 3,652,918.50 3,652,918.50 110.694500 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON CDR ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 07-APR-1998 -56,063.54 -56,063.54 110.694500 Page 17 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 912827SB6 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 08-MAY-1998 0.00 0.00 110.694500 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 28-APR-1998 -1,307,059.20 -1,307,059.20 108.921600 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DD 02/15/95 12-JUN-1998 1,307,059.20 1,307,059.20 108.921600 B BANK OF NEW YORK TORONTO DOMIN ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 28-APR-1998 -29,088.40 -29,088.40 108.921600 912827586 07.5001 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 12-JUN-1998 0.00 0.00 108.921600 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,100,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 31-MAR-1998 10,124,108.70 10,124,109.70 100.238700 912827V66 05.750% 10/31/2000 DD 10/31/95 08-MAY-1998 -10,124,108.70 -10,124,108.70 100.238700 BC MORGAN STANLEY 6 CO INC, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,100,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 31-MAR-1998 12,625.00 12,625.00 100.238700 912827V66 05.750% 10/31/2000 DO 10/31/95 00-MAY-1998 0.00 0.00 100.239700 IBC ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 20,800,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 13-MAR-1998 -21,988,892.34 -21,988,092.34 103.394400 9128272W1 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO O6/02/97 09-APR-1998 -21,988,892.34 0.00 103.394400 PC BANK OF NEW YORK TORONTO DOMIN 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,800,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 18-MAR-1998 -1,904,125.11 -1,904,125.11 103.463300 9128272W1 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO O6/02/97 09-APR-1998 -1,904,125.11 0.00 103.463300 FC BANK OF NEW YORK TORONTO DOMIN 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 19-MAR-1998 -3,383,162.51 -3,393,162.51 103.402400 9128272WI 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO 06/02/97 09-APR-1998 -3,383,162.51 0.00 103.402400 PC MORGAN STANLEY 6 CO INC, NY 09-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 18 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1999 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 17,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 -17,658,259.60 -17,658,259.60 102.664300 9128272WI 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO O6/02/97 12-JUN-1998 17,658,259.60 17,658,259.60 102.664300 B CARROLL MC ENTEE 6 MCGINLEY, N ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 17,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 -36,655.74 -36,655.74 102.664300 9128272N1 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO O6/02/97 12-JUN-1998 0.00 0.00 102.664300 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 29-APR-1998 -2,541,015.62 -2,541,015.62 101.640625 9128273G5 06.250% 08/31/2002 DO 09/02/97 30-APR-1999 2,541,015.62 2,541,015.62 101.640625 B LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 29-APR-1990 -25,900.13 -25,900.13 101.640625 9128273G5 06.250% 08/31/2002 DO 09/02/97 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.640625 IB ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 29-APR-1998 -2,566,915.75 -2,566,915.75 101.640625 9128273G5 06.250% 08/31/2002 DO 09/02/97 30-APR-1998 -2,566,915.75 0.00 101.640625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 16,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 29-APR-1998 -15,982,500.00 -15,982,500.00 99.890625 9128273K6 05.625% 10/31/1999 DD 10/31/97 30-APR-1998 15,982,500.00 15,982,500.00 99.990625 B LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 16,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 29-APR-1998 -15,982,500.00 -15,982,500.00 99.890625 9128273K6 05.625% 10/31/1999 DO 10/31/97 30-APR-1998 -15,982,500.00 0.00 99.890625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 03-MAR-1998 -2,538,458.22 -2,538,458.22 100.000000 9128273RI 05.625% 12/31/1999 DO 12/31/97 09-APR-1998 -2,538,458.22 0.00 100.000000 FC MORGAN STANLEY 6 CO INC, NY 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 19 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE EARTH/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 03-MAR-1998 2,500,000.00 2,500,000.00 100.000000 9128273R1 05.625% 12/31/1999 DO 12/31/97 09-APR-1998 -2,500,000.00 -2,500,000.00 100.000000 BC MORGAN STANLEY 6 CO INC, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 03-MAR-1998 38,458.22 38,458.22 100.000000 9128273R1 05.625% 12/31/1999 DO 12/31/97 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.000000 IBC ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 03-MAR-1998 2,538,458.22 2,538,458.22 100.000000 9128273RI 05.625% 12/31/1999 DO 12/31/97 09-APR-1998 2,538,458.22 0.00 100.000000 FCC MORGAN STANLEY 6 CO INC, NY 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 03-MAR-1998 -2,538,308.22 -2,538,308.22 99.994000 9128273R1 05.625% 12/31/1999 DO 12/31/97 09-APR-1998 -2,538,308.22 0.00 99.994000 PC MORGAN STANLEY 4 CO INC, NY 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FHLMC GOLD 27-JAN-1998 7,304,375.00 7,304,375.00 100.750000 999ACE925 7.000% 05/15/2028 13-APR-1998 -7,304,375.00 -7,304,375.00 100.750000 BC SALOMON BROS INC, NEW YORK ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 PAY UPS U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 13,090.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NY 15-JAN-1998 -13,090.00 -13,090.00 100.000000 9128273AB 3.625% 07/15/2002 DO 07/15/97 15-JAN-1998 13,090.00 13,090.00 100.000000 PU ----------- 0.00 O.OD 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 13,090.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 15-JAN-1998 -13,090.00 -13,090.00 100.000000 9128273AS 3.625% 07/15/2002 DO 07/15/97 15-JAN-1998 -13,090.00 0.00 100.000000 PC 30-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 SALES U.S. DOLLAR CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 20 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LASS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ -3,300,000.00 AMERITECH CORP DISC 23-APR-1998 3,294,399.25 3,284,399.25 99.527250 ' 0268OKEE4 05/14/1998 23-APR-1998 -3,294,399.25 -3,284,399.25 99.527250 S GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -3,300,000.00 AMERITECH CORP DISC 23-APR-1998 5,013.25 5,013.25 99.527250 0268OKEE4 05/14/1998 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 99.527250 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -3,300,000.00 AMERITECH CORP DISC 23-APR-1998 3,289,412.50 3,289,412.50 99.527250 0268OKEE4 05/14/1998 23-APR-1998 3,289,412.50 0.00 99.527250 FC GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -900,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 07-APR-1998 799,008.00 799,008.00 99.676000 36959JD91 04/09/1996 07-APR-1998 -799,008.00 -799,008.00 99.876000 S GOLDMAN SACHS 4 CO, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -800,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 07-APR-1990 744.44 744.44 99.876000 36959JD91 04/09/1998 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 99.876000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -900,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 07-APR-1998 799,752.44 799,752.44 99.876000 36959JD91 04/09/1998 07-APR-1998 799,752.44 0.00 99.876000 PC GOLDMAN SACHS 4 CO, NY 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -800,000.00 SARA LEE CORP DISC 07-APR-1998 799,141.33 799,142.33 99.892666 80311BD99 04/09/1990 07-APR-1998 -799,141.33 -799,141.33 99.892666 S MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER SM ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -800,000.00 SARA LEE CORP DISC 07-APR-1998 611.11 611.11 99.892666 80311BD99 04/09/1998 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 99.892666 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 21 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-199B TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CORA GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -800,000.00 SARA LEE CORP DISC 07-APR-1998 799,752.44 799,752.44 99.892666 80311BD99 04/09/1999 07-APR-1998 799,752.44 0.00 99.892666 FC MERRILL LYNCH GOVT SECS/MONEY 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -700,000.00 GOLDMAN SACHS LP REPO 23-APR-1998 700,000.00 700,000.00 100.000000 993480022 05.450% 04/23/1998 DO 04/20/98 23-APR-199B -700,000.00 -700,000.00 100.000000 S GOLDMAN SACHS 4 CO, NY ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -700,000.00 GOLDMAN SACHS LP REPO 23-APR-1998 317.92 317.92 100.000000 993480022 05.450E 04/23/1998 DO 04/20/98 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 100.000000 Is ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -700,000.00 GOLDMAN SACHS LP REPO 23-APR-1998 700,317.92 700,317.92 100.000000 993480022 05.450% 04/23/1998 DO 04/20/98 23-APR-1998 700,317.92 0.00 100.000000 FC GOLDMAN SACHS 6 CO, NY 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -35,340.03 BSDT-LATE MONEY DEP ACCT 16-APR-1998 35,340.03 35,340.03 1.000000 996087094 VAR RT DO O6/26/1997 16-APR-1998 -35,340.03 -35,340.03 1.000000 S 16-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -379,397.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 01-APR-1999 379,397.00 379,397.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II O1-APR-1999 -379,397.00 -379,397.00 1.000000 S O1-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -799,142.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 02-APR-1998 799,142.00 799,142.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 02-APR-1998 -799,142.00 -799,142.00 1.000000 S 02-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -399,758.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 03-APR-1998 399,758.00 399,758.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC 11 03-APR-1998 -399,758.00 -399,758.00 1.000000 S 03-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 22 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDDC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -2,374,600.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 06-APR-1998 2,374,800.00 2,374,800.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 06-APR-1998 -2,374,800.00 -2,374,800.00 1.000000 S 06-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,405,778.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 08-APR-1998 1,405,778.00 1,405,778.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 09-APR-1998 -1,405,778.00 -1,405,778.00 1.000000 S 08-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -530,535.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 09-APR-1998 530,535.00 530,535.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 09-APR-1998 -530,535.00 -530,535.00 1.000000 S 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -322,020.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 13-APR-1998 322,020.00 322,020.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 13-APR-1998 -322,020.00 -322,020.00 1.000000 S 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -699,367.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 17-APR-1998 699,367.00 699,367.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 17-APR-1998 -699,367.00 -699,367.00 1.000000 S 17-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -92,112.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 20-APR-1998 92,112.00 92,112.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 20-APR-1998 -92,112.00 -92,112.00 1.000000 S 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 2.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -170,274.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 23-APR-1998 170,274.00 170,274.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 23-APR-1998 -170,274.00 -170,274.00 1.000000 S 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -693,725.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 29-APR-1998 683,725.00 683,725.00 1.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 29-APR-1998 -683,725.00 -683,725.00 1.000000 S 29-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 Page 23 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE %RATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 0.00 U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -336,161.00 FHLMC GROUP BDB-8101 18-MAR-1998 340,835.74 340,835.74 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/O1/98 13-APR-1998 -338,682.21 -338,682.21 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 2,153.53 2,153.53 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -336,161.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 794.38 784.38 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -336,161.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 341,620.12 341,620.12 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 341,620.12 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -269,359.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DS-8101 18-MAR-1998 273,104.77 273,104.77 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2029 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -271,379.19 -271,379.19 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,725.58 1,725.58 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -269,359.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1990 628.50 628.50 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -269,359.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 273,733.27 273,733.27 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 273,733.27 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -255,079.00 FHLMC GROUP YD8-8101 18-MAR-1998 258,626.19 258,626.19 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -256,992.09 -256,992.09 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,634.10 1,634.10 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -255,079.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DB-8101 18-MAR-1998 595.18 595.18 101.390625 Page 24 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST -1 CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURE GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -255,079.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 259,221.37 259,221.31 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 259,221.37 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -257,624.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 261,206.58 261,206.58 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -259,556.18 -259,556.19 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,650.40 1,650.40 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -257,624.00 FHLMC GROUP IDS-8101 10-MAR-1998 601.12 601.12 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -257,624.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 261,807.70 261,807.70 201.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 261,807.70 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -246,578.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 250,006.98 250,006.98 101,390625 3128PYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -248,427.34 -248,427.34 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,579.64 1,579.64 1.000000000 0.00 DOME TERM OPER-PIMCO -246,578.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 575.35 575.35 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 Is ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -246,578.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8101 18-MAR-1998 250,582.33 250,582.33 101.390625 3128FYAA3 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 250,582.33 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1990 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 25 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-199B TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ -474,286.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 18-MAR-1998 480,881.54 400,081.54 101.390625 312OFYEEI 7.ODD4 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -477,843.15 -477,943.15 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 3,038.39 3,038.39 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -474,286.00 FHLMC GROUP OD8-B233 18-MAR-1998 1,106.67 1,106.67 101.390625 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -474,286.00 FHLMC GROUP 08-8233 18-MAR-1998 481,988.21 481,988.21 101.390625 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 481,988.21 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -464,702.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DB-8233 18-MAR-1998 471,164.26 471,164.26 101.390625 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -468,107.27 -468,187.27 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 2,976.99 2,976.99 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -464,702.00 FHLMC GROUP BD8-8233 18-MAR-1998 1,084.30 1,084.30 101.390625 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -464,702.00 FHLMC GROUP 8D8-8233 18-MAR-1998 472,248.56 472,248.56 101.390625 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 472,248.56 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -455,956.00 FHLMC GROUP RD8-8233 18-MAR-1998 462,296.64 462,296.64 101.390625 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -459,375.67 -459,375.67 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 2,920.97 2,920.97 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -455,956.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 18-MAR-1998 1,063.90 1,063.90 101.390625 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 26 OCS0000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -455,956.00 FHLMC GROUP ADS-8233 18-MAR-1998 463,360.54 463,360.54 101.390625 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 463,360.54 0.00 101.390625 PC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -492,852.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8233 18-MAR-1998 499,705.72 499,705.72 101.390625 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-199B -496,540.39 -496,548.39 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 3,157.33 3,157.33 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -492,852.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8233 18-14AR-1998 1,149.99 1,149.99 101.390625 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -492,852.00 FHLMC GROUP ADB-8233 18-MAR-1998 500,855.71 500,855.71 101.390625 312OFYEEI 7.0009 04/02/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 500,855.71 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -484,656.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 18-MAR-1998 491,395.75 491,395.75 101.390625 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -488,290.92 -408,290.92 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 3,104.83 3,104.83 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -484,656.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8233 18-MAR-1998 2,130.86 1,130.86 101.390625 3128FYCEL 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 Is ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -484,656.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8233 18-KAR-1998 492,526.61 492,526.61 101.390625 312OFYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/90 13-APR-1998 492,526.61 0.00 101.390625 PC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -477,414.00 FHLMC GROUP AD8-8233 18-MAR-1998 484,053.04 484,053.04 101.390625 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/02/2028 DO 04/01/90 13-APR-1998 -480,994.61 -480,994.61 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 3,058.43 3,058.43 1.000000000 0.00 Page 27 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TH100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE %RATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -477,414.00 FHLMC GROUP YD8-8233 18-MAR-1998 1,113.97 1,113.97 101.390625 3128FYEEI 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -477,414.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8233 18-MAR-1998 485,167.01 485,167.01 101.390625 3128FYEE1 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 485,167.01 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -247,500.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8473 18-MAR-1998 250,941.80 250,941.60 101.390625 3128FYMN2 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -249,356.25 -249,356.25 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,585.55 1,585.55 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -247,500.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8473 18-MAR-1998 577.50 577.50 101.390625 3128FYMW2 7.000% 04/01/2029 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -247,500.00 FHLMC GROUP 8D8-8473 18-MAR-199B 251,519.30 251,519.30 101.390625 3128FYMN2 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 251,519.30 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -259,536.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8537 18-MAR-1998 263,145.17 263,145.17 101.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -261,482.52 -261,482.52 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,662.65 1,662.65 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -259,536.00 FHLMC GROUP 8DB-8537 18-MAR-1998 605.58 605.58 101.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -259,536.00 FHLMC GROUP 8D8-8537 18-MAR-1998 263,750.75 263,750.75 201.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 263,750.75 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 Page 28 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: •USD O1-APR-1999 - 30-APR-1998 TH100 BASE AMOUNT/ SNARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -254,962.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8537 18-MAR-1998 258,507.57 259,507.57 101.390625 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -256,874.22 -256,874.22 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,633.35 1,633.35 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -254,962.00 FHLMC GROUP /D8-8537 18-MAR-1998 594.91 594.91 101.390625 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2029 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -254,962.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8537 18-MAR-1998 259,102.48 259,102.48 101.390625 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2029 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 259,102.46 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -270,726.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8537 18-MAR-1998 274,490.79 274,490.70 101.390625 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -272,756.45 -272,756.45 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,734.33 1,734.33 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -270,726.00 FHLMC GROUP 4DB-8537 18-MAR-1998 631.69 631.69 101.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 I5 ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -270,726.00 FHLMC GROUP fD8-8537 18-MAR-1998 275,122.47 275,122.47 101.390625 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 275,122.47 0.00 101.390625 PC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -264,685.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8537 18-MAR-1998 268,365.78 268,365.78 101.390625 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2020 DO 04/O1/98 13-APR-1999 -266,670.14 -266,670.14 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,695.64 1,695.64 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -264,685.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8537 18-MAR-1999 617.60 617.60 101.390625 3128FYPW9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/99 13-APR-1990 0.00 0.00 101.390625 Page 29 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/EASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -264,685.00 FHLMC GROUP BDB-8537 18-MAR-1998 268,983.38 268,983.38 101.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 268,983.38 0.00 101.390625 PC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -334,238.00 FHLMC GROUP BDB-8537 18-MAR-1998 338,886.00 338,886.00 101.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -336,744.79 -336,744.79 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 2,141.21 2,141.21 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -334,238.00 FHLMC GROUP BDB-8537 18-MAR-1998 779.89 779.89 201.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 Is ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -334,238.00 FHLMC GROUP BD8-8537 18-MAR-1998 339,665.99 339,665.89 101.390625 3128FYPN9 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 339,665.89 0.00 101.390625 PC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -254,572.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 258,112.14 258,112.14 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -256,481.29 -256,481.29 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,630.85 1,630.95 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -254,572.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 594.00 594.00 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/99 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -254,572.00 FHLMC GROUP BD8-8538 18-MAR-1998 258,706.14 258,706.14 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.00D4 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 258,706.14 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -250,570.00 FHLMC GROUP BDB-8538 18-MAR-1998 254,054.49 254,054.49 101.390625 Page 30 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST . CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2029 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -252,449.2B -252,449.28 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,605.21 1,605.21 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -250,570.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 584.66 584.66 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -250,570.00 FHLMC GROUP 08-8538 18-MAR-2998 254,639.15 254,639.15 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 254,639.15 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -245,808.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 249,226.27 249,226.27 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1990 -247,651.56 -247,651.56 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,574.71 1,574.71 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -245,808.00 FHLMC GROUP ADO-8538 19-MAR-1998 573.55 573.55 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000► 04/02/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -245,808.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D0-8538 18-14AR-1998 249,799.82 249,799.82 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/9B 13-APR-1998 249,799.82 0.00 101.390625 PC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -260,635.00 FHLMC GROUP 8D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 264,259.46 264,259.46 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DD 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -262,589.76 -262,589.76 201.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 1,669.70 1,669.70 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -260,635.00 FHLMC GROUP 4D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 608.15 608.15 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 O.DO 0.00 102.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 31 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ -260,635.00 FHLMC GROUP #D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 264,867.61 264,867.61 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 264,867.61 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -319,601.00 FHLMC GROUP IDB-8538 18-MAR-1998 324,045.45 324,045.45 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 -321,998.01 -321,998.01 101.390625 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- 2,047.44 2,047.44 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -319,601.00 FHLMC GROUP #D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 745.74 745.74 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.390625 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -319,601.00 FHLMC GROUP #D8-8538 18-MAR-1998 324,791.19 324,791.19 101.390625 3128FYPX7 7.000% 04/01/2028 DO 04/01/98 13-APR-2998 324,791,19 0.00 101.390625 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -29,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 08-APR-1998 29,534,687.50 29,534,687.50 101.B43750 912827R20 06.875% 08/31/1999 DO 08/31/94 09-APR-1998 -29,595,000.34 -29,595,000.34 101.843750 S CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COB ----------- -60,312.84 -60,312.84 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -29,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 08-APR-1998 216,711.96 216,711.96 101.843750 912827R20 06.875% 08/31/1999 DO 08/31/94 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 101.843750 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -29,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 08-APR-1998 29,751,399.46 29,751,399.46 101.843750 912827R20 06.875% 08/31/1999 DO 08/31/94 09-APR-2998 29,751,399.46 0.00 101.843750 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON CDR 09-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERN OPER-PIMCO -7,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 06-APR-1998 8,098,437.50 8,098,437.50 110.937500 912827586 07.500% D2/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 07-APR-1998 -8,150,553.30 -8,150,553.30 110.937500 S CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COB ----------- -52,115.80 -52,115.90 1.000000000 0.00 Page 32 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST -• CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SNARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LASS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -1,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES O6-APR-1998 77,133.98 77,133.98 110.937500 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DD 02/15/95 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 110.937500 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES O6-APR-1998 8,175,571.48 8,175,571.48 110.937500 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 07-APR-1998 8,175,571.48 0.00 110.937500 PC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COR 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -3,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 07-APR-1998 3,656,812.50 3,656,812.50 110.812500 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 08-APR-1998 -3,679,097.31 -3,679,097.31 110.812500 S CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON CDR ----------- -22,284.81 -22,284.81 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TEAM OPER-PINCO -3,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 07-APR-1998 35,552.49 35,552.49 110.812500 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 08-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 110.612500 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PINCO -3,300,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 07-APR-1998 3,692,364.99 3,692,364.99 110.812500 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 08-APR-1998 3,692,364.99 0.00 110.812500 PC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON COB 08-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 28-APR-1998 1,309,125.00 1,309,125.00 109.093750 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 29-APR-1998 -1,337,853.57 -1,337,853.57 109.093750 S BANK OF NEW YORK TORONTO DOMIN ----------- -28,728.57 -28,726.57 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -1,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 28-APR-1998 18,149.17 18,149.17 109.093750 912627586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 29-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 109.093750 Is ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 28-APR-1998 1,327,274.17 1,327,274.17 109.093750 912827586 07.500% 02/15/2005 DO 02/15/95 29-APR-1998 1,327,274.17 0.00 109.093750 PC BANK OF NEW YORK TORONTO DOMIN 29-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 33 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -17,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 17,673,000.00 17,673,000.00 202.750000 9128272W1 06.5008 05/31/2002 DO 06/02/97 30-APR-1998 -17,802,603.13 -17,802,603.13 102.750000 S CARROLL MC ENTEE 6 MCGINLEY, N ----------- -129,603.13 -129,603.13 1.000000000 O.OD LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -17,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 463,785.71 463,785.71 102.750000 9128272W1 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO 06/02/97 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 102.750000 IS ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PINCO -17,200,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 18,136,785.71 18,136,785.71 102.750000 9128272WI 06.500% 05/31/2002 DO 06/02/97 30-APR-1998 18,136,785.71 0.00 102.750000 FC CARROLL MC ENTEE i MCGINLEY, N 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUN FHLMC GOLD 18-MAR-1998 -7,350,820.31 -7,350,820.31 101.390625 999ACE925 7.000% 05/15/2028 13-APR-1998 7,307,490.24 7,307,490.24 101.390625 SC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ ----------- -43,330.07 -43,330.07 1.000000000 0.00 PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -269,945.73 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-B CL A 15-APR-1998 269,945.73 269,945.73 100.000000 161614AE2 5.900% 11/15/2001 DO 11/15/95 15-APR-1998 -269,386.86 -269,386.86 100.000000 PD ----------- 558.87 558.87 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -269,945.73 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-B CL A 15-APR-1998 269,945.73 269,945,73 100.000000 161614AE2 5.900% 11/15/2001 DD 11/15/95 15-APR-1998 269,945.73 0.00 100.000000 FC 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -433,017.99 CONTIMORTGAGE HOME EQ 96-4 A3 01-APR-1998 433,017.99 433,017.99 100.000000 21075NDKS 6.190% 10/15/2011 DD 11/23/96 01-APR-1998 -432,087.68 -432,087.68 100.000000 PD ----------- 930.31 930.31 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -433,017.99 CONTIMORTGAGE HOME EQ 96-4 A3 01-APR-1998 433,017.99 433,017.99 100.000000 Page 34 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SNARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE KRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 21075NDK8 6.190% 10/15/2011 DD 11/23/96 01-APR-1998 433,017.99 0.00 100.000000 FC 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -556,198.71 FNLMC GROUP 4G5-0476 01-APR-1998 556,198.71 556,199.71 100.000000 312ODD055 7.000% 02/01/2003 DO 02/01/90 01-APR-1998 -564,889.32 -564,BB9.32 100.000000 PD ----------- -8,690.61 -8,690.61 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -556,198.71 FBLMC GROUP 4G5-0476 01-APR-1998 556,198.71 556,198.71 100.000000 3128DDQ55 7.000% 02/01/2003 DO 02/01/98 01-APR-1998 556,198.71 0.00 100.000000 PC 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 2.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,172.73 FNMA POOL #0065581 01-APR-1998 10,171.73 10,171.73 100.000000 31362M2N7 6.3911 08/01/2028 DO 09/01/88 01-APR-1998 -10,244.84 -10,244.64 100.000000 PD ----------- -73.11 -73.11 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 10,171.73 FNMA POOL #0065581 01-APR-1998 -10,171.73 -10,171.73 100.000000 31362M2N7 6.391% 08/01/2028 DO 09/01/88 01-APR-1990 10,244.84 10,244.84 100.000000 PDC ----------- 73.11 73.11 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERN OPER-PIMCO -10,171.73 FNMA POOL 40065581 01-APR-1998 10,171.73 10,171.73 100.000000 31362M2N7 6.391% 08/01/2028 DD 09/01/88 01-APR-1998 -10,244.84 -10,244.84 100.000000 PD ----------- -73.11 -73.11 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,171.73 FNMA POOL #0065591 01-APR-1998 10,171.73 10,171.73 100.000000 31362M2N7 6.3911 08/01/2028 DO 09/01/88 01-APR-1998 10,171.73 0.00 100.000000 PC 27-APR-1990 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -5,992.60 FNMA POOL #0239575 01-APR-1998 5,992.60 5,992.60 100.000000 31370Q61.8 6.199% 03/01/2033 DO 09/01/93 01-APR-1998 -6,035.67 -6,035.67 100.000000 PD ----------- -43.07 -43.07 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 35 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE; USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SNARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATP./ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ -5,992.60 FNMA POOL /0238575 01-APR-1998 5,992.60 5,992.60 100.000000 3137006LO 6.199% 03/01/2033 DD 09/01/93 01-APR-1998 5,992.60 0.00 100.000000 PC 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -18,341.93 FNMA POOL #0313371 01-APR-1998 18,341.93 16,341.93 100.000000 31374GCGO 6.194% 08/01/2029 DO 01/01/97 01-APR-1999 -18,473.76 -18,473.76 100.000000 PD ----------- -131.83 -131.83 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,341.93 FNMA POOL #0313371 01-APR-1998 18,341.93 18,341.93 100.000000 31374GCGO 6.194% 08/01/2029 DD 01/01/97 01-APR-1998 18,341.93 0.00 100.000000 FC 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,220.66 FNMA POOL #0313600 01-APR-1999 14,220.66 14,220.66 100.000000 31374GKMS 6.210% 05/01/2036 DO 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 -14,322.87 -14,322.87 100.000000 PD ----------- -102.21 -102.21 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 14,220.66 FNMA POOL ►0313600 O1-APR-1998 -14,220.66 -14,220.66 100.000000 31374GKM8 6.210% 05/01/2036 DD 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 14,322.87 14,322.87 100.000000 PDC ----------- 102.21 102.21 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,225.91 FNMA POOL 10313600 01-APR-1998 14,225.91 14,225.91 100.000000 31374GKMO 6.210% 05/01/2036 DD 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 -14,328.16 -14,328.16 100.000000 PD ----------- -102.25 -102.25 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 14,225.91 FNMA POOL #0313600 01-APR-1998 -14,225.91 -14,225.91 100.000000 31374GKM8 6.210% 05/01/2036 DD 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 14,328.16 14,328.16 100.000000 PDC ----------- 102.25 102.25 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,220.66 FNMA POOL #0313600 01-APR-1998 14,220.66 14,220.66 100.000000 31374GKMS 6.221% 05/01/2036 DD 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 -14,322.87 -14,322.87 100.000000 PD ----------- -102.21 -102.21 1.000000000 0.00 Page 36 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: ,USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1999 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LASS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE ERATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 14,220.66 FNMA POOL 10313600 01-APR-1998 -14,220.66 -14,220.66 100.000000 31374GKM8 6.221% 05/01/2036 DD 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 14,322.87 14,322.87 100.000000 PDC ----------- 102.21 102.21 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,220.66 FNMA POOL #0313600 01-APR-1998 14,220.66 14,220.66 100.000000 31374GKHO 6.2211 05/01/2036 DO O6/01/97 01-APR-1998 -14,322.07 -14,322.87 100.000000 PD ----------- -102.21 -102.21 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,220.66 FNMA POOL 40313600 01-APR-1990 14,220.66 14,220.66 100.000000 31314GKKS 6.2211 05/01/2036 DO 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 14,220.66 0.00 100.000000 PC 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -4,379.26 FNMA POOL #0313769 01-APR-1998 4,379.26 4,379.26 100.000000 31374GQWO 6.206% 05/01/2036 DD 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 -4,410.74 -4,410.74 100.000000 PD ----------- -31.48 -31.48 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 4,379.26 FNMA POOL #0313769 01-APR-1998 -4,379.26 -4,379.26 100.000000 31374GON0 6.206% 05/01/2036 DO 09/O1/97 01-APR-1998 4,410.74 4,410.74 100.000000 PDC ----------- 31.48 31.48' 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -4,379.26 FNMA POOL /0313769 01-APR-1998 4,379.26 4,379.26 100.000000 31374GQN0 6.2061 05/01/2036 DD 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 -4,410.74 -4,410.74 100.000000 PD ----------- -31.48 -31.48 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,379.26 FNMA POOL #0313769 01-APR-1998 -4,379.26 -4,379.26 100.000000 31374GON0 6.206% 05/01/2036 DO 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 4,410.74 4,410.74 100.000000 PDC ----------- 31.48 31.48 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -4,379.26 FNMA POOL #0313769 01-APR-1998 4,379.26 4,379.26 100.000000 31374GONO 6.2061 05/01/2036 DD 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 -4,410.74 -4,410.74 100.000000 PD ----------- -31.48 -31.48 1.000000000 0.00 Page 37 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,379.26 FNMA POOL 40313769 01-APR-1998 -4,379.26 -4,379.26 100.000000 31374GON0 6.206% 05/01/2036 DO 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 4,410.74 4,410.74 100.000000 PDC ----------- 31.48 31.48 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -4,384.38 FNMA POOL 40313769 01-APR-1998 4,384.38 4,384.38 100.000000 31374GQWO 6.206% 05/01/2036 DO 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 -4,415.89 -4,415.89 100.000000 PD ----------- -31.51 -31.51 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,394.38 FNMA POOL #0313769 01-APR-1998 -4,384.38 -4,384.38 100.000000 31374GQN0 6.206% 05/01/2036 DD 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 4,415.89 4,415.89 ' 100.000000 PDC ----------- 31.51 31.51 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -4,384.38 FNMA POOL #0313769 01-APR-1998 4,384.38 4,384.38 100.000000 31374GOW0 6.206% 05/01/2036 DO 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 -4,415.89 -4,415.89 100.000000 PD ----------- -31.51 -31.51 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -4,384.38 FNMA POOL #0313769 01-APR-1998 4,384.38 4,384.38 100.000000 31374GON0 6.206% 05/01/2036 DO 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 4,384.38 0.00 100.000000 PC 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -18,306.66 FNMA POOL 40313763 01-APR-1998 18,306.66 18,306.66 100.000000 31374GRC3 6.142% 05/01/2036 DO 10/01/97 01-APR-1998 -19,438.24 -18,438.24 100.000000 PD ----------- -131.58 -131.58 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -18,306.66 FNMA POOL 40313783 01-APR-1998 18,306.66 18,306.66 100.000000 31374GRC3 6.142% 05/01/2036 DD 10/01/97 01-APR-1998 18,306.66 0.00 100.000000 PC 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -12,4B9.84 FNMA POOL 40339016 01-APR-1998 12,489.84 12,489.84 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DO 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 -12,579.61 -12,579.61 100.000000 PD ----------- -89.77 -89.77 1.000000000 Page 39 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TH100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LASS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LASS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PINCO 12,489.04 FMMA POOL #0339016 01-APR-1998 -12,489.84 -12,489.84 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DO 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 12,519.61 12,579.61 100.000000 PDC ----------- 89.77 89.77 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -12,499.04 FNMA POOL #0339016 01-APR-1998 12,469.84 12,489.84 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DO 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 -12,579.61 -12,579.61 100.000000 PD ----------- -09.77 -89.77 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12,489.84 FNMA POOL #0339016 01-APR-1998 -12,489.64 -12,489.94 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DO 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 12,579.61 12,579.61 100.000000 PDC ----------- 89.77 89.77 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO -12,489.84 FNMA POOL #0339016 01-APR-1999 12,489.84 12,489.84 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DO 03/01/96 01-APR-1999 -12,579.61 -12,579.61 100.000000 PD ----------- -89.77 -89.77 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12,489.94 FNMA POOL #0339016 01-APR-1998 -12,489.84 -12,489.84 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DD 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 12,579.61 12,579.61 100.000000 PDC ----------- 99.77 09.77 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -12,489.84 FNMA POOL #0339016 01-APR-1998 12,499.84 12,489.84 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DD 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 -12,579.61 -12,579.61 100.000000 PD ----------- -89.77 -99.71 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO -12,489.84 FNMA POOL #0339016 01-APR-1998 12,489.84 12,489.84 100.000000 31375MSD6 6.207% 11/01/2035 DO 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 12,469.84 0.00 100.000000 FC 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -32,861.22 FIFTH THIRD BE AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-APR-1998 32,861.22 32,861.22 100.000000 31677F.AA4 6.2004 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-APR-1998 -32,662.22 -32,861.22 100.000000 Page 39 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/RASE BASE: USD 01-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1996 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE %RATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ PD ----------- 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -32,861.22 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CIA 15-APR-1999 32,861.22 32,661.22 100.000000 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-APR-1998 32,861.22 0.00 100.000000 PC 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.D00000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -165,960.16 GNMA II POOL 00008664 01-APR-1998 165,960.16 165,960.16 100.00DODD 36202KUH6 7.000% 08/20/2025 DO 08/01/95 01-APR-1998 -168,734.81 -168,734.81 100.000000 PD ----------- -2,774.65 -2,774.65 1.000OODD00 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -165,960.16 GNMA II POOL #0008684 01-APR-1998 165,960.16 165,960.16 100.000000 36202KUH6 7.000% 09/20/2025 DD 08/01/95 01-APR-1999 165,960.16 0.00 100.000000 PC 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -281,844.45 GNMA II POOL 10080023 01-APR-1998 281,844.45 281,844.45 100.000000 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD 12/01/96 01-APR-1998 -286,512.50 -286,512.50 100.000000 PD ----------- -4,668.05 -4,668.05 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 281,844.45 GNMA II POOL #0080023 01-APR-1998 -281,844.45 -281,844.45 100.000000 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DO 12/01/96 01-APR-1998 286,512.50 286,512.50 100.000000 PDC ----------- 4,668.05 4,668.05 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -281,848.40 GNMA II POOL #0080023 01-APR-1998 281,848.40 281,848.40 100.000000 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD 12/01/96 01-APR-1998 -286,516.51 -286,516.51 100.000000 PD ----------- -4,668.11 -4,668.11 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 281,848.40 GNMA II POOL #0080023 01-APR-1998 -281,848.40 -281,848.40 100.000000 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DO 12/01/96 01-APR-1998 286,516.51 286,516.51 100.000000 PDC ----------- 4,668.11 4,669.11 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -281,950.65 GNMA II POOL #0080023 01-APR-1998 281,850.65 281,850.65 100.000000 Page 40 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDDC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE KRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 36225CAE9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DO 12/01/96 01-APR-1998 -286,518.80 -286,519.80 100.000000 PD ----------- -4,668.15 -4,668.15 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -281,850.65 GNMA II POOL 00080023 01-APR-1998 281,850.65 281,850.65 100.000000 36225CAE9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DO 12/01/96 01-APR-1998 201,850.65 0.00 100.000000 FC 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -253,446.45 GNMA II POOL 4080088M O1-APR-1998 253,446.45 253,446.45 100.000000 36225CC20 7.000% 06/20/2027 DO 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 -258,990.59 -258,990.59 100.000000 PD ----------- -5,544.14 -5,544.14 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -253,446.45 GNMA II POOL 4080088M O1-APR-1998 253,446.45 253,446.45 100.000000 36225CC20 7.000% 06/20/2027 DO 06/01/97 01-APR-1998 253,446.45 0.00 100.000000 FC 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 MATURITIES U.S. DOLLAR CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -400,000.00 BELLSOUTH TELECOM DISC 07-APR-1998 399,755.56 399,755.56 100.000000 07815KD77 04/07/1999 07-APR-1999 -399,755.56 -399,755.56 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -3,000,000.00 FED FARM CR BK CONS DISC NTS 16-APR-1998 2,961,801.67 2,961,801.67 100.000000 313313VOO HAT 04/16/1999 16-APR-1998 -2,961,801.67 -2,961,801.67 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 16-APR-1990 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -2,400,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS DISC 03-APR-1998 2,378,640.00 2,378,640.00 100.000000 313385VB9 MAT 04/03/1998 03-APR-1998 -2,378,640.00 -2,378,640.00 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 03-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -900,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC NTS 20-APR-1998 796,944.44 796,944.44 100.000000 313397VU2 MAT 04/20/1998 20-APR-1998 -796,944.44 -796,944.44 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 41 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -2,500,000.00 FEDERAL HOME IN MTG CORP DISC 24-APR-1998 2,477,596.64 2,477,596.64 100.000000 313397VY4 MAT 04/24/1998 24-APR-1998 -2,477,596.64 -2,477,596.64 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 24-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -800,000.00 FORD MTR CA CO DISC 22-APR-1998 794,938.67 794,838.67 100.000000 34539UDN9 04/22/1998 22-APR-1998 -794,838.67 -794,838.67 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 22-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -800,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 22-APR-1998 789,826.67 789,826.67 100.000000 36959JDN0 04/22/1998 22-APR-1998 -789,826.67 -789,826.67 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 22-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -700,000.00 IBM DISC 23-APR-1998 699,366.50 699,366.50 100.000000 44922BDP0 04/23/1998 23-APR-1998 -699,366.50 -699,366.50 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 23-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -800,000.00 NATIONAL RURAL DISC 16-APR-1998 793,690.67 793,690.67 100.000000 63743DDG3 04/16/1998 16-APR-1999 -793,690.67 -793,690.67 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 16-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,900,000.00 CHRYSLER FINL MTN TR 6 00306 13-APR-1998 2,900,000.00 2,900,000.00 100.00000D 17120QNT4 7.270% 04/13/1998 DO 04/13/95 13-APR-1998 -2,952,096.00 -2,952,896.00 100.000000 MT BOND MATURITY 13-APR-1998 -52,896.00 -52,896.00 1.000000000 0.00 INTEREST U.S. DOLLAR LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 400,000.00 BELLSOUTH TELECOM DISC 07-APR-1998 244.44 244.44 0.000000 07815KD77 04/07/1998 07-APR-1998 244.44 0.00 0.000000 IT 07-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 42 OCS0000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE %RATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 4,500,000.00 CATERPILLAR FINL MTNS TR00389 01-APR-1998 130,050.00 130,050.00 0.000000 14912LSE2 8.780% 07/15/1998 DO 12/15/95 01-APR-1998 130,050.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 01-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 269,945.73 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-B CL A 15-APR-1999 17,838.27 17,830.27 0.000000 161614AE2 5.900% 11/15/2001 DO 11/15/95 15-APR-1999 17,838.27 0.00 0.000000 IT 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,900,000.00 CHRYSLER FINL MTN TR 4 00306 13-APR-1998 16,397.89 16,397.89 0.000000 17120QNT4 7.270% 04/13/1998 DO 04/13/95 13-APR-1998 16,397.89 0.00 0.000000 IT 13-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMOO 433,017.99 CONTIMORTGAGE HOME EO 96-4 A3 15-APR-1998 13,430.14 13,430.24 0.000000 21075WDKB 6.190% 10/15/2011 DO 11/23/96 01-APR-1998 13,430.14 0.00 0.000000 IT 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 556,198.71 FHLMC GROUP 4GS-0476 15-APR-1998 111,370.82 111,370.82 0.000000 3128DDOSS 7.000% 02/01/2003 DO 02/01/98 01-APR-1998 111,370.82 0.00 0.000000 IT 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 FED FARM CA BK CONS DISC HIS 16-APR-1998 38,198.33 38,198.33 0.000000 313313VOO MAT 04/16/1998 16-APR-1998 38,198.33 0.00 0.000000 IT 16-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PINCO 2,400,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS DISC 03-APR-1998 21,360.00 21,360.00 0.000000 313385VE9 MAT 04/03/1998 03-APR-1998 21,360.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 03-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC HIS 20-APR-1998 3,055.56 3,055.56 0.000000 313397VU2 MAT 04/20/1998 20-APR-1999 3,055.56 0.00 0.000000 IT 20-APR-2998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 43 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 10,171.73 FNMA POOL #0065581 27-APR-1998 2,733.53 2,733.53 0.000000 31362M2N7 6.391% 08/01/2026 DO 09/01/88 01-APR-1998 2,733.53 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 8,000,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN MTN 20-APR-1998 265,000.00 265,000.00 0.000000 31364CBD9 6.625% 04/18/2001 DO 04/18/96 18-APR-1998 265,000.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 5,992.60 FNMA POOL #0238575 27-APR-1998 2,318.26 2,318.26 0.000000 3137006LO 6.199% 03/01/2033 DO 09/01/93 01-APR-1998 2,318.26 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 18,341.93 FNMA POOL #0313371 27-APR-1998 5,269.35 5,269.35 0.000000 31374GCG0 6.194% O9/01/2029 DO O1/01/97 01-APR-1998 5,269.35 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 14,220.66 FNMA POOL 00313600 27-APR-1998 5,084.51 5,084.51 0.000000 31374GKMB 6.221% 05/01/2036 DO O6/01/97 01-APR-1999 5,084.51 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,384.38 FNMA POOL #0313769 27-APR-1998 1,253.11 1,253.11 0.000000 31374GOND 6.206% 05/01/2036 DO 09/01/97 01-APR-1998 1,253.11 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 18,306.66 FNMA POOL #0313783 27-APR-1998 4,710.52 4,710.52 0.000000 31374GRC3 6.142% 05/01/2036 DO 10/01/97 01-APR-1998 4,710.52 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12,499.84 FNMA POOL *0339016 27-APR-1998 3,603.11 3,603.11 0.000000 31375MS06 6.207% 11/01/2035 DO 03/01/96 01-APR-1998 3,603.11 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 44 OCSG000300 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURB GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 32,861.22 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-APR-1998 2,477.87 2,477.87 0.000000 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DO 03/15/96 15-APR-1998 2,477.87 0.00 0.000000 IT 15-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 165,960.16 GNMA II POOL #0008684 20-APR-1998 12,947.66 12,947.66 0.000000 36202KUH6 7.000% 08/20/2025 DO 08/01/95 01-APR-1998 12,947.66 0.00 0.000000 IT 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 281,850.65 GNMA II POOL #0080023 20-APR-1998 22,568.76 22,568.76 0.000000 36225CAE9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DO 12/01/96 01-APR-1998 22,568.76 0.00 0.000000 IT 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 253,446.45 GNMA II POOL 1080088M 20-APR-1998 32,176.22 32,176.22 0.000000 36225CC20 7.000% 06/20/2027 DO O6/01/97 01-APR-1998 32,176.22 0.00 0.000000 IT 20-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 G M A C MED TERM NTS O1-APR-1998 129,375.00 129,375.00 0.000000 37042RKQ4 8.625% 1/10/2000 DO 1/10/95 01-APR-1998 129,375.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 01-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 TANG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,700,000.00 GENERAL MTRS ACCEP MTN TR00324 01-APR-1998 154,937.50 154,937.50 0.000000 37042RPMO 8.375% 02/03/1999 DO 0/03/95 01-APR-1998 154,937.50 0.00 0.000000 IT O1-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 HELLER FINL INC SR NT 27-APR-1998 44,062.50 44,062.50 0.000000 423328AZ6 FLTG AT 04/27/1999 DO 04/27/94 27-APR-1998 44,062.50 0.00 0.000000 IT 27-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 800,000.00 NATIONAL RURAL DISC 16-APR-1998 6,309.33 6,309.33 0.000000 63743DDG3 04/16/1998 16-APR-1998 6,309.33 0.00 0.000000 IT 16-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 Page 45 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TN100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 3,400,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 80,750.00 80,750.00 0.000000 912827M66 04.7506 10/31/1998 DO 11/01/93 30-APR-1998 80,750.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.DD0000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 5,900,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 169,625.00 169,625.00 0.000000 912827V66 05.750% 10/31/2000 DO 10/31/95 30-APR-1998 169,625.00 0.00 D.000000 IT 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 15,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 440,625.00 440,625.00 0.000000 912827Z70 05.975% 10/31/1999 DO 10/31/96 30-APR-1998 440,625.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -17,800.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 31-MAR-1998 -17,800.00 -17,800.00 0.000000 9128272M3 3.375% 01/15/2007 DO O1/15/97 15-JAN-1998 -17,000.00 0.00 0.000000 ITC 31-MAR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 31-MAR-1998 17,800.00 17,800.00 0.000000 9128272M3 3.375% 01/15/2007 DO O1/15/97 31-MAR-1998 17,800.00 0.00 0.000000 CD RECEIVED INTEREST 31-14AR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 MARCH 1998 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 30-APR-1998 115,937.50 115,937.50 0.000000 9128272SO 06.625% 04/30/2002 DO 04/30/97 30-APR-1998 115,937.50 0.00 0.000000 IT 30-APR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -12,390.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 31-MAR-1998 -12,390.00 -12,390.00 0.000000 9128273A8 3.625% 07/15/2002 DD 07/15/97 15-JAN-1998 -12,390.00 0.00 0.000000 ITC 31-MAR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 31-MAR-1998 12,390.00 12,390.00 0.000000 9128273A8 3.625% 07/15/2002 DO 07/15/97 31-MAR-1999 12,390.00 0.00 0.000000 Page 46 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS - LOCAL/BASE BASE: USD O1-APR-1998 - 30-APR-1998 TM100 BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURE GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- ------------------ CD RECEIVED INTEREST 31-MAR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 MARCH 1998 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 13,090.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 30-APR-1998 13,090.00 13,090.00 0.000000 9128273AO 3.6251 07/15/2002 DO 07/15/97 15-JAN-1998 13,090.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 0.00 SHORT TERM FDS INT ADJ 30-APR-1999 -731.96 -731.96 0.000000 990000PJ4 NET OF OVERNIGHT INTEREST 30-APR-1998 -731.96 0.00 0.000000 CN AND OVERDRAFT EXPENSES 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 SHORT TERM FOB INT ADJ 30-APR-1998 -239.93 -239.93 0.000000 990000PJ4 NET OF OVERNIGHT INTEREST 30-APR-1998 -239.93 0.00 0.000000 CN AND OVERDRAFT EXPENSES 30-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PINCO 0.00 BSDT-LATE MONEY DEP ACCT O1-APR-1998 0.06 0.06 0.000000 996087094 VAR AT DO O6/26/1997 01-APR-1998 0.06 0.00 0.000000 IT O1-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 0.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 01-APR-1998 412.27 412.27 0.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II O1-APR-1996 412.27 0.00 0.000000 IT O1-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 BSDT RESERVE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT- 01-APR-1998 5,248.21 5,248.21 0.000000 999495906 PUBLIC II 01-APR-1998 5,248.21 0.00 0.000000 IT O1-APR-1998 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 47 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED FIXED INCOME CHARACTERISTICS SUMMARY BASE: USD 30-APR-1998 XB650S 4 OF MARKET COST TERM OUR. YIELD BASE SECTOR COUPON TOTAL PRICE PRICE (YRS) (YRS) 4 MARKET VALUE BASE COST --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. GOVERNMENTS 6.628 60.65 104.3027 103.9916 3.54 2.91 5.57 226,486,179 227,111,157 U.S. AGENCIES 5.791 11.68 100.2946 98.7247 7.76 8.12 6.08 43,620,809 42,945,226 GNMA MULTI FAMILY POOLS 7.000 2.98 102.0891 101.9156 28.63 - - 11,130,970 11,112,058 FHLMC POOLS 7.000 5.03 101.4060 101.5625 4.76 2.39 6.32 18,796,558 18,825,566 FHLMC MULTICLASS 6.375 1.83 99.9523 100.0904 30.25 - - 6,832,603 6,842,146 FNMA POOLS 6.186 1.28 100.5000 100.7188 35.36 - - 4,762,127 4,772,492 COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIG 6.190 0.58 100.0951 99.7852 13.46 - - 2,172,630 2,165,901 ASSET BACKED SECURITIES 6.200 0.12 100.3904 100.0000 3.38 0.75 5.84 448,471 446,727 BANKING L FINANCE 6.262 13.31 100.5216 100.6233 1.70 1.62 5.93 49,715,055 49,771,403 INDUSTRIAL 9.250 2.53 104.9490 110.0420 1.80 1.67 6.28 9,445,410 9,903,780 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: 6.564 100.00 102.9783 102.7223 5.51 3.30 5.75 373,410,812 373,896,530 Page 1 FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date I TOn BdS. 05/13/98 05/27/98 AGENDA REPORT Item Numbe I I/�Nurybe County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California dd FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Steve Kozak, Financial Manager SUBJECT: QUARTERLY INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REPORT FOR THE PERIOD JANURY 1 THROUGH MARCH 31, 1998 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Management Program Report for the period January 1 through March 31, 1998. SUMMARY Section 15.0 of the Districts' Investment Policy includes monthly and quarterly reporting requirements for the Districts' two investment portfolios. These two funds, the "Liquid Operating Monies," and the"Long-Term Operating Monies," are managed by PIMCO, the Districts' external money manager. The ongoing monitoring of the Districts' investment program by staff and Callan Associates, the Districts' independent investment advisor, indicates that the Districts' investments are in compliance with the Districts' adopted Investment Policy and the California Government Code, and that overall performance has tracked with benchmark indices. In addition, sufficient funds are available for the Districts to meet its operating expenditure requirements for the next six months. The Districts' portfolios do not include any reverse repurchase agreements or derivative securities. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) H.M .ft'Fn�lftmn"1FAHWAHRfIAAIaffAMNB8.98,J¢ R~ 1� Page 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Performance Reports The Quarterly Strategy Review, prepared by PIMCO, and the Investment Measurement Review, prepared by Callan Associates, are attached for your reference. Also attached are two comparative bar charts which depict the sector diversification of the Districts' portfolios, as of December 31, 1997, and March 31, 1998. The Liquid Operating Monies portfolio, with an average maturity of less than 90 days, consists entirely of cash equivalent investments such as U.S. Treasuries, and corporate discount notes. Portfolio Performance Summary The following table presents a summary of the performance of the Districts' portfolios managed by PIMCO for the period January 1 through March 31, 1998. Portfolio Performance Summery Quarter Ended March 31,1998 Liquid Operating Monies(%) Long-Term Operating Monies(%) Total Rate of Return 3 Months 13 1.6 6 Months 2.8 3.6 9 Months 4.2 6.3 12 Months 5.7 9.0 Since Inception 30 Sept.95 5.6 69 Benchmark 3 Months 1.3 16 6 Months 26 34 9 MOMhs 3.9 5.8 12 Months 5.3 8.4 Since inception 30 Sept.95 5.3 6.6 Markel Value per PIMCO 31 Mar.98 E17.8101 $305.OM Average Quality 'AAA' Estimated Yield to Maturity 31 Mar.98 5.7% 5.8% Quarterly Depostts(withdrawals) Estimated Annual Income 90.9M $19.5 Market Recap The first quarter of 1998 opened strongly, with bond yields rallying as concerns about the Asian economic crisis brought continued investor movement toward the relative safety and quality of U.S. fixed income markets. However, as the quarter progressed, Asian stock markets rebounded; economic growth continued with benign inflation figures; home sales/mortgages showed a robust jump; and the market began to reverse itself. Yields on all but the benchmark 30-year Treasury declined over the quarter. H 1 .ern''anlalecransfAH66AHR98NMaffAHRWWA¢ 6aiwe 1,9„ Page 2 With continued low inflation, and with some expectation of slower economic growth ahead, short-term interest rates were left unchanged by the Federal Reserve in the first quarter, 1998. As depicted in the attached comparative graph of the"Historical Yield Curve," the quarter-end Treasury yield curve was steeper at the short end, with 3-month rates declining more than 20 basis points when compared to year-end, 1997 (5.12% vs. 5.34%). Intermediate yields (from 1 to 10 years) declined a more modest 8 to 9 basis points in the first quarter. As a result, relative returns were somewhat lower across the yield curve. For the Long-Term Operating Monies portfolio, PIMCO maintained a weighted maturity or duration, slightly above the duration index (2.4 vs. 2.3 years), emphasizing holdings in high-quality mortgage backed securities, corporate bonds, and U.S. Agency securities. These investments contributed incremental yield to the portfolio when compared to the all-Treasury benchmark yields. The portfolio performed at its benchmark (1.6%) for the first quarter. For the Liquid Operating Monies portfolio, PIMCO maintained a slightly below- index duration posture (72 vs. 90 days), while emphasizing U.S. Agency discount notes and high-quality corporate notes in the portfolio, which also performed at its benchmark (1.3%) for the first quarter. Portfolio Market Values Comparative marked-to-market quarter-end portfolio values are shown in the table below, and in the attached bar chart. Long-Term Liquid Operating Quarter Operating Monies Ending Monies(3M) PM) 31 Dec.96 14.4 311.5 31 Mar.97 4.5 313.2 30 June 97 17.1 321.3 30 Sept.97 17.4 298.5 31 Dec.97 17.6 301.1 31 Ma¢h97 17.8 306.0 ALTERNATIVES N/A H+.PabMm]1aanMc/JIMFaIa✓BeA1g1FNMMaLYm ate. uses Page 3 CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS 1. PIMCO Report 2. Callan Report 3. Three Comparative Bar Charts 4. Historical Yield Curve Graph SKIc H:M .ftfn13lP eWAMWAHgA81N fFAHPBB.IB.I R� 1158 Page 4 Prepared by Finance, 5/4/98, 10:05 AM CSDOC Investment Management Program Quarter End Portfolio Values (Marked-to-Market) $350,000,000 $300,000,000 iii 4i --- •��♦ ♦�� $250,000,000 ��• ��� iii •�• iii $200,000,000 iii iii •�• iii •�• iii •�� iii $150,000,000 iii iii iii iii •'• $100,000,000 iii •�• •�• •�� iii $50,000,000 ------------ $0 •�• •�• 31 Mar 97 30 Jun 97 30 Sep 97 31 Dec 97 31 Mar 98 O Liquid Operating Monies ff) Long-Term Operating LLHJ G:\excel.dta\fin\2220\geggi\FinanceVnvestmg mtprogram Prepared by Finance, 5/4/98, 10:33 AM CSDOC Liquid Operating Monies Portfolio Investment Diversification 100100 100 - 90 - 80 - -- 70 - 60 — ❑ 12/31/97 a) 50 9 3131 /98 a`) 40 a- 30 20 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Govt Mtg Corp Non US$ Other Net Cash Equivalent G:\excel.dta\fin\2220\geggi\Finance\Portfolio short term Prepared by Finance, 514/98, 10:29 AM CSDOC Long-Term Operating Monies Portfolio Investment Diversification 100 90 — -- 80 70 69 " st ❑ 12/31/97 60 50 ® 3/31/98 U 40 a 30 20 21 20 10 0 00 00 Govt Mtg Corp Non US$ Other Net Cash Equivalent G:\excel.dta\8n\2220\geggl\Finance\Portfollo long term graph •0 n Prepared by Finance, 4130/98, 3:59 PM HISTORICAL YIELD CURVE zo _... -- - - - -- - - — - - K s 5.6 6.0 N M V N n --o.-31-Dec-98 —a 31-Dec-97 t31-Mar-98 G:\excel.dta\fin\2220\gegg i\Finance\Hisloricalyieidcu Ne FAHRCOMMITTEE �ngoa� T°XM 05/13/98 05127f9B AGENDA REPORT tramN Mw l��yNumber e /y. P__ County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Originator: Ed Torres, Air Quality & Special Projects Manager SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 98-XX, DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE GENERAL MANAGER AND STAFF RE EXPENDITURE OF DISTRICTS FUNDS AND PERSONNEL ISSUES (FAHR98-38) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt Resolution No. 98-XX, authorizing the General Manager to establish and implement policies and procedures to delegate to staff authority for: (1) signature authority to initiate contracts or purchase orders to acquire 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) meeting and training policies and expenditures. SUMMARY The Joint Boards adopted Resolution No. 95-62 at their June 28, 1995 meeting. This resolution provided the General Manager and staff with delegated authority in the areas of contracts and purchases, meeting and training attendance, employee timekeeping and human relations issues related to hiring, firing and disciplinary actions. The resolution was very prescriptive on how the General Manager's authority could be delegated into the organization. With the Districts' ongoing reinvention efforts, the General Manager recognizes the need to further delegate his and Executive Management's authority down into the organization. Routine administrative approvals are continuing to be brought to both the General Manager and Executive Management staff. These requests require significant Executive Management time to review and understand the requests and most often result in delays waiting for the signatures to be obtained. Examples include training and meeting requests for commonly attended conferences (e.g., California Water Environment Federation, Tri-State Training Conference and Water Environment Federation Annual Conference), purchase orders for materials and equipment that are budgeted within the respective Divisions, and budgeted hiring and promotional documentation. rv.eewen.9.muxv,wv,,,.ru�mr,.wmaw.Y�.wa�x e� R.w.e. ,rsne Page 1 c In addition, recent changes proposed by the Districts' Assessment and Reinvention Team (DART) on how to improve maintenance planning and scheduling activities, will require that certain professional staff, maintenance foremen and maintenance supervisors be provided additional authority to procure parts and materials to ensure the timely, reliable and safe operation of the treatment plants. The existing delegation of authority provides maintenance foremen and supervisors with signature authority for purchases. DART's proposal recommends that their signature authority be slightly increased for purchases as well as extending delegated authority to a handful of professional staff that have been reassigned (from supervisory positions) to process areas within the treatment plants and are responsible for the day-to-day planning, scheduling and maintenance of these process areas. The General Manager believes that several benefits will be realized by a further delegation of some of his authority. These benefits include the following: 1. Reduced delays in obtaining materials and services due to fewer approvals being required. Currently, Operations and Maintenance staff have limited ability to procure materials and equipment required for the daily operation of the treatment plants. A minor request to purchase a valve, fitting or electronic component can result in hours or possibly days being spent to obtain the necessary supervisor and management approvals. With approximately 15-20 purchase requisitions per day being prepared by staff, the overall impact on productivity from these delays can be significant. 2. Cost savings associated with fewer staff reviewing and approving requisitions. Considerable time is being spent obtaining supervisory approval as well as the time spent by the supervisors reviewing these requests. This all costs money. Many of these approvals should more appropriately be handled at lower levels and can thus save money and allow supervisors to spend more time planning and managing their organizations. Remembering that the Purchasing Division acts as a significant "check and balance"to the process, the Board can remain confident that abuses and mistakes will be controlled by this third party oversight. In all cases, the General Manager continues to be fully responsible and accountable to the Board for these actions. 3. Improved response to short-term needs associated with operating or maintaining the facilities. Operating two large and complex treatment plants requires daily preventative and corrective maintenance. Parts are needed every day to ensure reliable operation. Oftentimes these parts are not stock items and must be procured outside. The ability to procure these parts as quickly and efficiently as possible is critical to safe and compliant operation of the two plants. With each additional approval signature that is required to procure the part, the return to service process 1Ntl WsW"G MnV1GYnneVAHWAHRBBJ 8e AHRB0.b.Ez R_. 1� Page 2 v is delayed and we increase the risk of treatment process upset and potential problems with regulatory compliance or safety. In conjunction with the proposed delegated authority, all affected staff will receive training on Districts' policy and procedures and implementation requirements prior to receiving the delegated authority. All relevant Districts policies and procedures will be followed. The General Manager will provide periodic reports to the FAHR Committee on purchases of services, supplies and materials between $50,000 and $100,000. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION At the October 1997 FAHR Committee meeting, staff recommended that the Committee approve a new resolution for delegating authority to the General Manager and staff. The Committee expressed some concern over staff s proposal in four main areas. These were: (1) interest in seeing a comparison of the current and proposed delegated authority levels; (2) whether Professional Services Agreements (PSA)for the Capital Improvement Projects were included in the delegated authority; (3) whether staff would receive delegated authority to expend "unbudgeted° funds; and (4) whether sufficient checks and balances would be established to ensure that abuse did not take place. A comparison of the proposed and current delegated authority is provided as an attachment. The main differences in the proposed delegated authority are that: a. Staff authority to expend unbudgeted funds has been deleted. b. All purchases by staff must be within the budgetary limits. c. The General Manager will have authority to approve purchases up to $100,000. d. The Department Heads and Division Managers are given greater authority to manage the budgets approved by the Board, and a limited number of professional staff in the maintenance divisions responsible for the treatment plants and collection systems will be given signature authority up to $2,000. \M!nNafalM9.�Cmt1Pm.MFPNRff1H!mBNaY��NF80.'E.Oi Page 3 4 Professional Services Agreements for Capital Improvement Projects are not included in this delegated authority. These "purchases" are governed by Resolution 97-27 which was considered and approved by the PDC Committee and the Joint Boards in December 1997. All current checks and balances will remain in place. This includes review of all proposed purchases by a Purchasing Division Buyer and Manager as well as the initiating Divisions management review of all purchases through our Financial Information System. In addition, all staff receiving delegated authority will be trained on the Districts polices and procedures before receiving the delegated authority In the October 1997 Delegation of Authority presentation to the FAHR Committee, it appeared to some Directors that staffs intention was to seek authorization to purchase goods or services beyond the budget appropriations previously set by the Joint Boards. This was clearly not the intention of the proposed changes. In the Delegation of Authority policy adopted by the Joint Boards at their June 28,1995 meeting, staff indicated that the approval for the acquisition of goods or services would not occur unless appropriations of equal or greater value are substituted. No net increase in the Districts' budget was to occur as the result of the acquisition of unbudgeted goods or services. In addition, the procedural requirements for purchasing an unbudgeted item required that 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 item being acquired would then fall into the budgeted category. To eliminate any confusion, staff is now proposing to delete any reference to approval authorities for the purchase of unbudgeted goods or services. The proposed policy dearly states that the approval for the acquisition of goods or services will not occur unless funds are budgeted covering the total cost of the requested items. The budget control for each department is at the division level. Therefore, in the case of a division that is insufficiently budgeted, appropriations of equal or greater value must be given up from another division or department, and that a budget transfer request form must be completed before the actual purchase can be made. ALTERNATIVES Not Applicable \YelmWcplYy.ppgn\21OoprMAXTANX6TMyFAXRB$9BMc Page 4 v CEQA FINDINGS Not Applicable ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 98-XX 2. Comparison of existing and proposed delegated authority levels �1Y .E V,IUIMMnH AHR AHR� RM FAiHRBB dw � 1, Page 5 - t RESOLUTION NO. 96-_ y 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 AUTHORIZING THE DISTRICTS'GENERAL MANAGER TO ESTABLISH POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR DELEGATION OF HIS AUTHORITY,AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO.95-62 ............... 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 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, 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 of the Districts is hereby authorized to establish and implement policies and procedures to delegate to staff authority for four major areas consisting of: (1) signature authority to initiate contracts or purchase orders to acquire services, supplies and materials; (2) employee timekeeping records and overtime authorizations; (3) personnel issues relating to hiring, promotions, performance reviews and disciplinary action; and (4) travel and training polices and expenditures. Section 2:That Resolution No. 95-62 is hereby repealed effective immediately. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held May 27, 1998. V COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED DELEGATED AUTHORITY CONTRACTS, SERVICES AND PURCHASE ORDERS Authority Level Existing Proposed Boards of Directors >$50,000 Budget Changes > $100,000 GM or AGM >$25,000 to 49,999 z$50,000 to 99.999 Department Heads >$10,000 to 24,999 z$25,000 to 49,000 Division Managers >$5,000 to 9.999 410,000 to 24,999 Section Supervisors >$1,000 to 4,999 z$5,000 to 9,999 Maintenance Foreman/Other 411,000 45,000 Professionals Maintenance/Other Professional Staff I - <$2,000 MEETINGS AND TRAINING Authority Level Existing Proposed Boards of Directors Out of Country Out of U.S&Canada Out of State or GM or AGM 42,000 -Not Required Department Director <$2,000 z$2,000 Division Managers <$1,000 <$2,000 Section Supervisors - <$500 All policies and procedures governing the procurement of services, equipment and supplies shall be adhered to. A Job Plan/Encumbrance document shall be approved by the appropriate authority level for all services and contracts Because meetings of national trade organizations are often held in Canada, Canada will be excluded from the definition of Out of Country. Supervisors must obtain certificate of completion in Back-to-Basics training before receiving delegated authority H1wp.dtaUn�2iO` mneTAHRfFAHR98N/ay�nel of Au wgWo.doc FAHR COMMITTEE xmRyoarc Toxa�. os/13ise os/zr/ae AGENDA REPORT IMM UMW I lb"b`" County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California FROM: Mike Peterman, Director of Human Resources Originator: Daniel Tunnicliff, Engineer SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 98-XX, ADOPTING THE WASTEWATER AGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK AND PUBLIC WORKS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS (FAHR98-40) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 98-XX, which adopts the Wastewater Agency Response Network 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement and the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement, in addition, authorizes the General Manager to approve future mutual aid agreements and amendments in a form approved by General Counsel. SUMMARY Emergency situations beyond the capabilities and resources of the Districts may occur requiring the combined resources and support of multiple government agencies within and outside Orange County. Mutual aid agreements can provide a mechanism for the Districts to obtain needed resources during an emergency. A mutual aid agreement provides a mechanism for the signatory parties impacted by an emergency to access personnel, equipment, and supplies from the non-impacted signatory parties for emergency response. A key aspect of providing mutual aid is that the signatory party provides only the resources it can spare without jeopardizing the safety of its own personnel or service area, or its own emergency response efforts. No signatory party receiving a mutual aid request is under any obligation to comply, nor will the party incur any liability for not complying. Mutual aid is voluntary. This Resolution adopts the Wastewater Agency Response Network 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement and the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement. The Wastewater Agency Response Network (WWARN)was created to provide a forum for the development of mutual aid agreements between wastewater agencies, both public and private, throughout the State of California. There are numerous wastewater agencies throughout California signatory to the W WARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement. The Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement was initiated to facilitate public works mutual aid throughout the State of California. There are approximately 145 government agencies, primarily cities, representing 17 counties signatory to the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement. Adoption of this Resolution would provide access to the wastewater treatment and/or collection agency resources of the WWARN Agreement and the public works resources of the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement. In addition, this Resolution authorizes the General Manager to approve future mutual aid agreements and amendments consistent with a form approved by General Counsel. H1 N n�TAHR AHR09lffAHRBW0 dd R....d 111.99 Page 1 PROJECTICONTRACT COST SUMMARY Costs are unknown and based upon use of mutual aid resources during an emergency ' response. BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ® This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item). As part of the WWARN and Public Works Mutual Aid Agreements, signatory parties receiving mutual aid agree to pay the costs and repairs, if applicable, for the personnel, equipment, and supplies utilized during an emergency. In addition, the signatory parties receiving mutual aid agree to hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the signatory parties providing assistance. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION N/A. ALTERNATIVES Adoption of Resolution No. 98-XX will provide a means for the Districts to access wastewater treatment and/or collection agency and public works resources during an emergency. By not adopting Resolution No 98-XX, the Districts will have to wait longer for resources to become available during emergencies, thereby hindering the Districts overall response and recovery capabilities. CEQA FINDINGS N/A. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 98-XX 2. WWARN Agreement 3. Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement DET:dt X Mp.EmY,nVlVm,wYNIMFNiPBSNq"FNIflBNO.EA fl.a..e. mwe Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. ADOPTING THE WASTEWATER AGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK AND PUBLIC WORKS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS 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, ADOPTING THE WASTEWATER AGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK AND PUBLIC WORKS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California ("Districts") acknowledge that there may be emergency situations which are beyond the capability of the services, personnel, equipment and facilities of Districts to manage, requiring the combined forces of multiple political subdivisions to respond; and WHEREAS, the California Office of Emergency Services ("OES"), the Department of Health Services ("DOHS"), the League of California Cities, the County Supervisors Association of California, the American Public Works Association, and the California Utilities Emergency Association ("CUEA") have expressed a mutual interest in the establishment of plans to facilitate and encourage public works and wastewater treatment and/or collection agency mutual aid agreements between political subdivisions and wastewater agencies; and WHEREAS, the Wastewater Agency Response Network ("WWARN") has been created to provide a forum for the development of mutual aid agreements between wastewater agencies in the State of California; and M92-300 60n2 t t WHEREAS, Districts, a wastewater treatment and/or collection agency, hereto have , determined that it would be in their best interests to enter into an agreement that implements those plans and sets forth procedures and responsibilities of the wastewater agencies whenever emergency personnel, equipment and facility assistance are provided from one wastewater agency to the other; and WHEREAS, the WWARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement sets forth the mutual covenants and agreements for wastewater agencies to provide mutual assistance to one another in times of emergency; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement is an additional vehicle for providing and receiving mutual aid in times of disaster and has been entered into by approximately 145 public agencies; and WHEREAS, no political subdivision or wastewater agency should be in a position of unreasonably using its own resources, facilities, or services providing such mutual aid; and WHEREAS, such agreements are in accord with the California Emergency Services Act set forth in Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 7 (Section 8550 et seq.) of the California Government Code and specifically with Articles 14 and 17 (Section 8630 et seq.) of the Act, and additionally, the WWARN agreement is in accord with the California Health and Safety Code Section 4742; and 209laao 99r2_1 2 r 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, California agree to become parties to the WWARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement and the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement. Section 2: That the General Manager take the steps necessary to effectuate these and future agreements, and to approve future mutual aid agreements and amendments consistent herewith in a form approved by General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held 1998. 2092-300 00n2 1 3 Wastewater Agency Response Network (WWARN) 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement Y WHEREAS,the California Office of Emergency Services (DES), the Department of Health Services (DOHS), and the California Utilities Emergency Association (CUEA) have expressed a mutual interest in the establishment of a plan to facilitate and encourage wastewater treatment and/or collection agency mutual aid agreements between wastewater agencies; and WHEREAS,the Wastewater Agency Response Network (WWARN) is created to provide a forum for the development of mutual aid agreements between wastewater agencies in the State of California; and WHEREAS, (name of agency), a wastewater treatment and/or collection agency hereto has determined that it would be in its best interests to enter into an agreement that implements that plan and sets forth procedures and the responsibilities of the wastewater agency whenever emergency personnel, equipment and facility assistance are provided from one wastewater agency to the other; and WHEREAS, the WWARN 1997 OMNIBUS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT sets forth the mutual covenants and agreements for wastewater agencies to provide mutual assistance to one another in times of emergency; and WHEREAS, no wastewater agency should be in a position of unreasonably using its own resources, facilities, or services providing such mutual aid; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of WWARN to renew this agreement and revise it as necessary and to annually publish a list of all wastewater agencies participating in this agreement; and WHEREAS, such an agreement is in accord with Health and Safety Code Section 4742 and the California Emergency Services Act set forth in Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 7 (Section 8550 et seq.) of the Government Code and specifically with Articles 14 and 17 (Section 8630 et seq.) of the Act. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the conditions and covenants contained herein, the (Agency) agrees to become a party to the WWARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement. Date: By: Title: Page 1 of 6 W WARN 1997 OMNIBUS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT ' Emergency Contact List W Agency Name: Orange County Sanitation District Address: 10844 Ellis Avenue CRY: Fountain Valley Zip Code: 92708 County: Orange Primary Emergency Contact: Name: Daniel Tunnicliff, P.E. Telephone: (714) 593-7154 Cell Phone: (714) 343-8199 Pager (714) 219-9511 Secondary Emergency Contact: Name: Terri Josway, C.S.P. Telephone: (714) 593-7150 Cell Phone: (714) 803-0670 Pager. (714) 967-1959 Emergency Operation Center: Name: Plant No. 1 (Primary) Telephone: (714) 593.7810 10844 Ellis Avenue 593-7811 Fountain Valley,CA 92708 593-7812 593.7813 Name: Plant No.2(Alternate) Telephone: (714) 593-7680 22212 Brookhurst Street 593-7681 Huntington Beach, CA 92646 593-7682 593-7683 Radio Frequency. 453.375(repeater tx) Call Sign: KTC872 458.375(repeater re) No. of Services: DES Region: 1 Other Information: Emergency Operations CenterstaNed during activation only. Page 2 of 6 n�6 Y WWARN 1997 OMNIBUS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT THIs AGREEMENT is made and entered into by those wastewater agencies who have adopted and signed this agreement to provide mutual assistance in times of emergency in accordance with the California Emergency Services Act and the California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement; and/or the California Health and Safety Code Section4742; and to provide reimbursement for equipment, supplies and personnel made available on an emergency basis. All of said wastewater agencies are herein referred to collectively as"the parties." In Consideration of the mutual Covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, the parties agree to provide mutual assistance to one another in times of emergency as follows: Article I - APPLICABILITY. This agreement is available to all wastewater agencies, public and private, in the State of California. Article II - ADMINISTRATION. The administration of the Wastewater Agency Response Network(WWARN) will be through Regional WWARN Steering Committees and a State WWARN Steering Committee. Both wastewater treatment and Collection agencies will be represented on each Regional Steering Committees. The Regional WWARN Steering Committee(s)will be established by representatives from the signatory agencies in that region. A chair will be elected and act as administrator for that region and represent the region on the State WWARN Steering Committee. Each Regional WWARN Steering Committee will sponsor an annual meeting for signatory agencies, maintain a data base of all wastewater agencies who have signed this agreement, and meet as a Committee to address Concems and procedures for requesting mutual aid in that region. The regions will be Comprised of one or more of the six DES regions. The State WWARN Steering Committee will include the chairs of the regional steering Committees, and a representative from the Department of Health Services(DOHS), California Utilities Emergency Association (CUEA), and the State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB). At a minimum, the State WWARN Steering Committee will issue a list of participating agencies and an update of the Emergency Equipment Data Base annually. Article III - DEFINITIONS: EMERGENCY. "Emergency" means a condition of disaster or calamity arising within the area of operation of the parties, caused by fire, flood, storm, earthquake, civil disturbance, or other Condition which is or is likely to be beyond the Control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of either party hereto and requires mutual assistance. DIS4STER SERVICE WORKER. As defined in the Government Code, Chapter 8, Division 4 of Title 1, section 3101, "Disaster service worker" includes all public employees and all volunteers in any disaster Council or emergency organization accredited by the Califomia Emergency Council. The term'public employees" include all persons employed by the state or any county, city, city and county, state agency, or special district, excluding aliens legally employed. LENDER. 'Lender' is a signatory agency(ies) rendering assistance under this Agreement BORROWER. "Borrower"is a signatory agency(ies) receiving assistance under this Agreement. Page 3 of 6 WWARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement Article IV - REQUESTS FORASSISTANCE. Requests for emergency assistance under this Agreement shall be directed to the appropriate designated contact(s)from the attached list of participating wastewater agencies. It is recommended that the Utilities Operation Center of the California Utilities Emergency Association (CUEA) be notified of mutual aid assistance activation under this Agreement CUEA operates the Utilities Branch of the State Office of Emergency Services. In this capacity, CUEA supports planning, response, and recovery for utilities' related emergencies. By notifying the Utilities Operation Center(UOC)of activation of this agreement during emergencies, CUEA can ensure maximum effectiveness in allocating resources to the highest priority needs as demanded in widespread emergencies. Additionally,CUEA will use the information received through the UOC to compile a historical database that can be used for pre-and post-emergency planning and training efforts in the future. The UOC can be reached at 916-262-1822. Article V - GENERAL NATURE OFASSISTANCE. Assistance will generally be In the form of resources, such as equipment, supplies, and personnel. Assistance shall be given only when LENDER determines that its own needs can be met while rendering assistance. The execution of this Agreement shall not create any duty to respond on the part of any party hereto. A potential LENDER shall not be held liable for failing to provide assistance. A potential LENDER has the absolute discretion to decline to provide any requested assistance. Resources are to be made available on a loan basis with reimbursement terms varying with the type of resource. Article VI - LOANS OF EouIPMENT.. Use of equipment, such as construction equipment, vehicles, tools, pumps and motors, shall be at LENDER'S current equipment rate and subject to the following conditions: (a) At the option of LENDER, loaned equipment may be loaned with an operator. (b) Loaned equipment shall be returned to LENDER within 24 hours after receipt of an oral or written request (c) BORROWER shall,at its own expense,supply all fuel, lubrication and maintenance for loaned equipment (d) LENDER'S cost related to the transportation, handling and loading/unloading of equipment shall be chargeable to BORROWER. (a) In the event loaned equipment is damaged while being dispatched to BORROWER, or while In the custody and use of BORROWER, BORROWER shall reimburse LENDER for the reasonable cost of repairing said damaged equipment. If the equipment cannot be repaired, then BORROWER shall reimburse LENDER for the cost of replacing such equipment with equipment which is of at least equal capability. If LENDER must lease a piece of equipment while LENDER'S equipment is being repaired or replaced, BORROWER shall reimburse LENDER for such lease costs. Article VII - EXCHANGE OF SUPPLIES. BORROWER shall reimburse LENDER in kind Or at actual replacement cost, plus handling charges,for use of expendable or nonreturnable supplies. Other supplies and reusable items which are returned to LENDER in a clean, damage-free condition shall not be charged to the BORROWER and no rental fee will be charged; otherwise, they shall be treated as expendable supplies. Article Vill - PERSONNEL. LENDER will make such employees as are willing to participate available to BORROWER at BORROWER'S expense equal to LENDER'S full Cost, i.e., equal to the employee's current salary or hourly wage plus fringe benefits and overhead, and consistent with LENDER'S personnel union contracts or other conditions of employment, including all direct and indirect costs associated with workers compensation claims. Costs to feed and house loaned personnel, if necessary, shall be chargeable to and paid by BORROWER. LENDER will not be liable for cessation Or slowdown Of work If LENDER'S employees decline or are reluctant to perform any assigned tasks if said employees judge such task to be unsafe. Page 4 of 6 W WARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement Article IX - L/AeILITYAND HOLD HARMLESS. Pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, BORROWER shall assume the defense of, fully indemnify and hold harmless LENDER, its Directors, Council Members or Supervisors, its officers and employees, from all claims, loss, damage, injury and liability of every kind, nature and description, directly or indirectly arising from the BORROWER'S work hereunder, including, but not limited to, negligent or wrongful use of equipment, supplies or personnel on loan to BORROWER, or faulty workmanship or other negligent acts, errors or omissions by BORROWER or by personnel on loan to BORROWER from the time assistance is requested and rendered until the assistance is returned to LENDER'S Control, portal to portal. Each party hereto shall give to the others prompt and timely written notice of any claim made or any suit instituted coming to its knowledge,which in any way, directly or indirectly, contingently or otherwise, affects or might affect them, and each shall have the right to participate in the defense of the same to the extent of its own interest Article X - L/Ae/LrFY FOR JOINING. In the event of a liability,claim, demand, action or proceeding, of whatever kind or nature arising out of the rendering of assistance through this mutual aid Agreement, the parties involved in rendering or receiving assistance agree to indemnify and hold harmless, to the fullest extent of the law,each signatory to this mutual aid Agreement,whose only involvement in the transaction or occurrence which is the subject of such claim, action, demand or other proceeding, is the execution and approval of this Agreement Such indemnification shall include indemnity for all claims, demands, liability,damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys'fees and other costs of defense,for personal injury and property damage. Article XI - WORKER'S COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE CLAIMS. Each Party to this agreement represents, warrants, convenants and agrees to and with the other parties that it now has in effect and will at all times while the party is a participant in WWARN and a party to this Agreement maintain in full force and effect policies of insurance or other coverage for worker's compensation risks arising out of its participation in WWARN and this Agreement, such coverage to be in accordance with the requirements of California Law. LENDER's employees, officers or agents, made available to BORROWER shall, except as otherwise provided under Labor Code sections 3600.2 through 3600.6, be considered to be the special employees of BORROWER and the general employees of LENDER(as defined in Insurance Code 11663)while engaged in carrying out duties, functions, or activities pursuant to the Agreement. Unless otherwise agreed upon in writing by the LENDER and the BORROWER, the BORROWER shall, pursuant to Labor Code Section 3602, secure worker's compensation benefits for the employees of the LENDER in addition to the employees of the BORROWER. The BORROWER shall also defend, indemnify and hold harmless the LENDER and the other parties to this Agreement from any and all liabilities arising out of or related to(the BORROWER'S obligations under this Article)despite the passive negligence of other member agencies, other than their sole and exclusive negligence. Article XII - MODIFICATIONS. No provision of this Agreement may be modified, altered or rescinded by individual parties to the Agreement. Modifications to this Agreement require a simple majority vote of signatory agencies to the Agreement within each region and unanimous agreement between the regions. The State Steering Committee will notify all parties of modifications to this Agreement in writing and those modificatons shall be effective upon 60 days written notice to the parties. Article XIII - REIMBURSEMENT. The BORROWER agrees to reimburse the LENDER within 60 days from receipt of an invoice for assistance provided under this Agreement. To the extent that the BORROWER seeks FEMA funding for any cost associated with assistance provided under this Agreement,the BORROWER may be required to have acceptable FEMA accounfing practices in place at the time of the need, and to the extent that the BORROWER seeks state funding for any cost associated with assistance provided under this Agreement,the BORROWER will be required to use the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). Page 5 of 6 WWARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement Article XIV - TERMINATION. This Agreement is not transferable or assignable, in whole or in part, and any party may terminate their participation in this Agreement at any time upon 60 days'written notice delivered or mailed to the appropriate W WARN regional chairman. Any outstanding obligations incurred by a party prior to the termination of the party's participation in the agreement will survive the termination until satisfied. Article XV - EFFECT. Agreement shall take effect for a new party immediately upon its execution by said party. Article XVI - PR/GR AGREEMENrs. To the extent that prior agreements between signatories to this Agreement are inconsistent with this Agreement,all prior agreements for mutual aid between the parties hereto are hereby superseded. Article XVII - ARBITRATION. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with provisions of California Code Civil Procedure Section 1280-1294.2, and judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator(s)may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Article XVIII - TORT CLAIMS. This Agreement in no way acts to abrogate or waive any immunity available under the Tort Claims Act. Page 6 of 6 W WARN 1997 Omnibus Mutual Aid Agreement PUBLIC WORKS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT --� This Mutual Aid Agreement ("Agreement°) is made and entered into by those parties who have adopted and signed this Agreement. WHEREAS, the California Office of Emergency Services, the League of California Cities, the County Supervisors Association of California, and the American Public Works Association have expressed a mutual interest in the establishment of a plan to facilitate and encourage public works mutual aid agreements between political subdivisions throughout California; and WHEREAS, the parties hereto have determined that it would be in their best interests to enter into an agreement that Implements that plan and sets forth procedures and the responsibilities of the parties whenever emergency personnel , equipment and facility assistance is provided from one party' s Public Works Department to the other; and WHEREAS, no party should be in a position of depleting unreasonably its own resources, facilities, or services providing such mutual aid; and WHEREAS, such an agreement is in accord with the California Emergency Services Act set forth in Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 7 (Section 8550 et seq.) of the Government Code and specifically with Article 14 (Section 8530 et seq.) of the Act. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONS AND COVENANTS CONTAINED HEREIN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. For this Agreement, the following terms shall be ascribed the following meanings: a. "Coordinator" shall mean the person designated by each party to act on behalf of that party on all matters relative to mutual aid, to include but not be limited to requests, responses, and reimbursement. b. "Local Emergency" shall mean the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons or property within the territorial limits of one of the parties caused by human or natural conditions such as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, wind, earthquake, explosion, transportation accident, hazard- ous material problem, tsunami , sudden or severe energy shortage, epidemic, riot or other occurrences, other than conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which occurrences, or the immediate threat thereof, are likely to be beyond the control of the personnel , equipment, or facilities of that party to this Agreement and which personnel , equipment or facilities of the other party are therefore desired to combat. c. An "Operational Area" for the coordination of public works mutual aid shall normally be a County and all the jurisdictions within the County that are parties to this Agreement. A different public works opera- tional area may be established by the parties in some unique cases. 2. Coordinators designated by each party shall be designated by Title, Name, Address and Phone Number, and if said Coordinator changes, the other parties of the Agreement shall be notified in writing as soon as practical after the appointment has been made through the Agreement Coordinator designated in Paragraph 18 hereinafter. 3. When a Local Emergency has been proclaimed by party's - governing body or authorized official , the Coordinator may request assistance. 4. When request for assistance is received, the assisting Coordinator shall promptly advise of the extent of response, provide whatever personnel , equipment, and/or facilities as can be provided without jeopardizing the safety of persons or property within their jurisdiction. No party receiving a request for assistance shall be under any obligation to provide assistance or incur any liability for not complying with the request. 5. When the assisting Coordinator's personnel , equipment, and/or facil- ities are no longer required or when assisting Coordinator advises that the resources are required within their own jurisdiction, the requesting Coordinator shall immediately arrange for the return of those resources. 6. Requesting party shall be responsible for the safekeeping of the resources provided by the assisting party. Requesting Coordinator shall remain in charge of the incident or occurrence and shall provide control and direction to the resources provided by the assisting party. The request may include for providing supervisory personnel to take direct charge of the resources under the general direction of the requesting Coordinator. Requesting Coordinator shall make arrange- ments for housing and feeding, assisting personnel , fueling, servicing, and repair of equipment if such support is requested by assisting Coordinator. Assisting party' s personnel shall not be deemed employees of requesting party and vice versa. 7. The requesting party agrees to pay all direct, indirect, administra- tive and contracted costs of assisting party incurred as a result of providing assistance pursuant to this Agreement, based upon standard rates applicable to assisting party' s internal operations. Payment shall be made within sixty (60) days after receipt of a detailed Invoice. Requesting party shall not assume any liability for the direct payment of any salary or wages to any officer or employee of assisting party. 8. Requesting party shall hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the assisting party, its officers, agents, and employees against all lia- bility, claims, losses, demands or actions for injury to, or death of, a person or persons, or damages to property arising out of, or alleged to arise out of or in consequence of, this Agreement provided such liability, claims, losses, demands, or actions are claimed to be due to the acts or omissions of the requesting party, its officers, agents, or employees, or employees of the assisting party working under the direction and control of the requesting party when the act or omission of such assisting party employee occurs or is alleged to occur within the scope of employment under the direction and control of the requesting party. 9. When mutual aid is provided, the requesting and assisting agencies, will keep account records of the personnel , equipment, and materials provided as required by Federal and State (NOAA) and FEMA guidelines to maximize the possibility of Federal and State disaster reimbursement. Each party shall have access to other party' s records for this purpose. ` 10. Agreement shall take effect immediately upon Its execution and shall remain In effect until terminated. 9 11. Any party may withdraw from agreement without cause upon delivery of sixty (60) days prior written notice to the Agreement Coordinator designated in Paragraph 18 hereinafter. 12. To the extent that they are inconsistent with this agreement all prior agreements for public works mutual aid between the parties hereto are hereby null and void. 13. Requests for mutual aid assistance under this Agreement when more than one County is impacted by a disaster, should be channeled through the appropriate Regional State Office of Emergency Services to ensure maximum effectiveness in allocating resources to the highest priority needs. 14. Requests for Public Works assistance from outside of an operational area should be channeled through the authorized emergency management organizations for the requesting and providing parties' operational areas. 15. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Rules of the American Arbitration Association and judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 16. This Agreement in no way acts to abrogate or waive any immunity available under the Tort Claims Act. 17. Initial signatories to this Agreement are: Los Angeles County Orange County 18. The County of Los Angeles shall act as the initial Agreement coordinator of this program for the purpose of: a. Receipt of new members to the Agreement. b. Maintaining a current list of signatory parties and representatives. c. Circulating annually a list of all parties and Representatives to all signatory parties. d. Arranging for amendments to agreement as may be necessary. The party acting as Agreement Coordinator may transfer these responsi- bilities to another party with the consent of that party and upon notification of the other parties to the Agreement. 19. All signatory parties agree'thlt any other qualified public agency or quasi public agency-may become a party to this agreement by executing a duplicate copy of this agreement and sending same to the Agreement Coordinator, Initially the County of Los Angeles, addressed as follows: The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works 900 South Fremont Avenue Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 Attention: Disaster Services Coordinator IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement by their duly authorized officers on the dates hereinafter indicated. ATTEST . `' u'st}A-. '� `(n Larry J. Monteilh ^•.' ' * OS ANGEELES COUNTY Executive Officer-Clerk off. ..�'-; the Board of Supervisors �'.°--e. .a! QC���FORNIP .. ... . . •,,,,y BY � �"'�• ✓'ter / DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 2 ATTEST SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF ORANGE COUNTY THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE.. CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD. '� .- By J c� .9�.. roc BYE �� i+_• �,�. LINDA D. RUTH aAN g !rci CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA APPROVED AS TO FORM : fla DeWitt W. Clinton BOARS pp �J P County Counsel :: BY�LD ' PRINCIP L DEPUTY c APPROVED AS TO FORM �>: ADRIAN KUYPER, COUNTY COUNSEL C=UTKOFm ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Deputy !� i I R-MCPW Y PUBLIC WORKS MUTUAL AID STATUS EXECUTION AGMT/RESOLUTION COUNTIES SIGNED RECEIVED REMARKS Glenn x X Imoerial X x Kern x x Los Angeles X x Marin X x Mono X X Orange x x Riverside X San Bernardino x x San Luis Obispo x x San W-co X x Santa Barbara X x Siskivou X x Solana X X Sutter X x Tehama X X Ventura x x TOTAL NUMBER OF COUNTIES SIG= 17 Cities - Los Angeles County Acoura Hills X x Alhambra X X Arcadia X X Artesia x x Avalon Azusa x x Baldwin Park x X Bell x X Bell Gardens X x Bellflower X x Beverly Hills X x Bradbury X x Burbank X X Calabasas Carson X x Cerritos X X Claremont X x Comerce X x Comet n X x Covina X X Cudahv X X Culver City X X Diamond Bar X x Downev X X Duarte X x E1 Monte X X E1 sesundo x x Gardena X x Glendale X x Glendora X X Hawaiian Gardens x % Hawthorne x X Hermosa Beach X - X Hidden Hills x x Huntington Park x x Industry X X Inglewood x x Irwindale x x La Canada-Flintridae X X La Habra Heights X X La Mirada X X La Puente X X La Verne X x Lakewood x X Lancaster X X Lawndale Lomita X X Long Beach X X Los Angeles X x Lvnwood X x Malibu x X Manhattan Beach X x Maywood X x Monrovia X X Montebello X X Monterey Park x X Nor+alk X x Palmdale X X Palos Verdes Estates X x Paramount X X Pasadena X X Pico Rivera x % Pomona X x Rancho Palos Verdes X X Redondo Beach X X Rolling Hills X X Rolling Hills Estates X x Rosemead X x San Dimas X X San Fernando X X San Gabriel x X San Marino X X Santa Clarita x x Santa Fe Springs X X San Monica X X Sierra Madre X Signal Hill South E1 Monte x x South Gate X X South Pasadena X X Tile City X X Torrance X x Vernon Walnut x x West Covina X x West Hollywood x x Westlake Village x x Whittier X X TOTAL NUMBER OF L.A. COUNTY CITIES SIGNED = 83 Cities - Glenn County Orange x x TOTAL NUMBER OF GLENN COUNTY CITIES SIGNED = 1 Cities - Kern Countv Taft X X TOTAL NUMBER OF KERN COUNTY CITIES SIGNED = 1 Cities - Orange County Anaheim X x Brea x x Buena Park x x Costa Mesa x x Cypress X x Dana Point X x Fountain Valley x x Fullerton Garden Grove x x Huntington Beach x x Irvine X x Laguna Beach X x Laguna Hills X x Laguna Niguel x x Lake Forest X x La Palma x x La Habra Los Alamitos x x Mission Viejo X x Newport Beach X X Orange x x Placentia x x San Juan Capistrano x x San Clemente X x Santa Ana X x Seal Beach X x Stanton X x Tustin x x Villa Park X X Westminster X x Yorba Linda X x TOTAL NUMBER OF ORANGE COUNTY CITIES SIGNED 29 cities - Riverside County Temecula x X TOTAL NUMBER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY CITIES SIGNED = 1 Cities - San Bernardino County Fontana x X Ontario X x TOTAL NUMBER OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CITIES SIGNED = 2 Cities - San Luis Obispo County Arrovo Grande R x Grover City X x Morro Bay X X Pismo Beach X x San Luis Obispo x x TOTAL NUMBER OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CITIES SIGNED = 5 Cities Santa Barbara County Lompoc X x Santa Maria X X TOTAL NUMBER OF SANTA BARBARA CITIES SIGNED - 2 Cities - Ventura County Camarillo X x Oiai X x Santa Paula x x TOTAL NUMBER OF VENTURA COUNTY CITIES SIGNED = 3 - Others San Gabriel Water Co. x X TOTAL NUMBER OF COUNTIES SIGNED - 17 TOTAL NUMBER OF CITIES SIGNED = 127 TOTAL NUMBER OF OTHERS SIGNED 1 GRAND TOTAL 145 FAHR COMMITTEE N°"°9 05/13/98 AGENDA REPORT 1 e Number I�ryNumbe 11 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California v FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance SUBJECT: SEWER SERVICE USER FEES (FAHR98-43) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt revised Sewer Service User Fee structure, expanding the number of non-residential categories, and basing rates on average quantity and strength of discharge per category. SUMMARY At the last several Committee meetings, the Directors discussed the proposed changes to the sewer service user fee structure based upon the Rate Advisory Committee (RAC) input to the Strategic Plan. TonighVs action will start the official procedures necessary to implement the revised and improved rate structure. The Districts voluntarily comply with the strict public notice requirements for rate increases. There will be a first and second reading of the Ordinance, there will be a mail-out to all property owners whose fee will increase, there will be a public workshop, and there will be a public hearing. If the recommended action is adopted after the public hearing, the new fees will be on the 1998-99 property tax bills. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ,VtlontleYlM9JhMM]t°a�MFN1mF�MflY8W.1�ANN06.tl trc Page 1 r ADDITIONAL INFORMATION At the March and April FAHR Committee meetings, the Directors reviewed the revised results of a proposed sewer service user fee structure. Staff reported that rates could be reduced for the Single-Family Residential (SFR) category in most Districts. This is a result of 1) changing the relationship between SFR flow and flow for Multi-Family Residential (MFR) units from 60% to 70% per unit, and 2) increasing the number of non-residential categories while basing their charges on average flow and strength per 1,000 square feet. Both changes bring the basic annual charges closer to actual use for all user categories. A feature of the Districts' revenue program, adopted in conformance with the Federal Clean Water Act, is the ability to issue permits to specific types of users. The Directors are well aware of the Class I and Class 11 permits issued to industrial and commercial users who discharge high quantities or high-strength waste. The Technical Services Department and Source Control Division have reported routinely to the Board of Directors. Another class of users, Class III, was also defined. These users essentially discharge residential or domestic strength waste, but in quantities greater than the average. This category of users was certainly necessary before sanitary sewer service fees were adopted in each District and was still needed when there was only one non-residential rate per 1,000 square feet. Today, there are approximately 200 Class III permittees, consisting of restaurants, laundromats, hotels/motels, postal offices, mobile home parks, etc. The total fees generated in 1996-97 for these users was nearly$600,000. This is an average of$3,000 per permit. There are at least four points of significance: 1. With the adoption of a revised rate structure, the fees for the types of users currently under Class III permit will increase per 1,000 square feet. 2. The average projected annual increase for a restaurant based on the new structure is just over $2,000 from the existing structure, but does not include Class II fees paid by some restaurants. 3. Previous discussions with the Committee that focused on the proposed rate increase for restaurants, did not include the Class III fees already paid. 4. There is no need to continue the Class III permit process after the expanded and more accurate rate structure is adopted. This will simplify the billing and payment process for these 200 users. Staff recommends creation of another non-residential user category to be called "Mixed Use." This category would be made up of users like shopping centers and strip malls whose use is significantly different from the average. The rates and fees would be calculated on the basis of the tenant mix within the center. 1Y danWamlM ftftVlPe TAHWAMRpBVA fAHXY09 a«.,d ,� Page a That is, the square footage and rate for each actual tenant would be added to compute the total charge. A center with more than one restaurant, or with a car wash, could fall into this category, for example. The proposed rate structure will result in a greater number of decreases in charges for non-residential user than increases, with decreased total charges for 22,000 non-residential users and increased total charges for 13,000 non- residential users. Rates are increased for multi-family residential units and decreased for single-family residences and mobile homes. Overall, the total fees collected in each District will remain essentially the same. A customized mailer for every property facing increased fees is being designed. This mailer will include the actual new fee for each parcel. Of course, it will also explain the need for the charges, the improved allocation of costs, and the Rate Advisory Committee process. Mailing only to properties with increasing total fees will reduce the requirements and cost significantly. Staff will be specially trained to answer inquiries regarding the charges. ALTERNATIVES N/A CEOA FINDINGS NIA ATTACHMENTS 1. Summary Comparison of Rate Structures 2. Property Use Category Proposal Comparison 3. Proposed Rate Structure 4. Proposed Ordinance GGS:Ic Ns]wiWbllp.®1MV10aMFAHPI«NflP&A4N��IIW4ltpx Page 3 5/4198 Page 1 Summary Comparison of Rate Structures Annual Sewer Service User Fees Total Revenue Estimates By Category Adopted Adjusted Dist Rate Rate Adopted Fee "Adiusted' Fee Increase(Decry No Parcels No Units No So Feet S F Residential District 1 91.36 87.50 2,479,810 2,375,037 (104,773) 27,143 District 73.00 71.00 8,459,640 8,227,868 (231,772) 115,885 District 75.00 71.50 11,393,018 10,861,343 (531,675) 151,907 District 96.75 84.50 1,409,788 1,231,288 (178,500) 14,571 District 78.00 71.00 1,495,303 1,361.109 (134,194) 19,171 District 55.00 51.25 1,863,084 1.736.055 (127,028) 33,874 District 11 70.00 70.00 2,177,709 2.177,709 (0) 31,110 District 13 100.00 100.00 665,230 665,230 (0) 6,652 Total SFR 29,943,582 28,635,639 (1,307,943) 400,314 M F Residential 60% a 70% District 1 54.82 61.25 931,132 1.030,951 99,820 3,758 15,045 District 43.80 49.70 2,820,610 3,142,467 321,857 11,653 59,471 District 3 45.00 50.05 3,258,202 3,628,468 370,266 10,439 69,650 District 58.05 59.15 556,025 578,901 22,876 3,411 8,195 District 46.80 49.70 857,395 918,577 61,182 2,894 17,540 District? 33.00 35.88 595,922 644,100 48,178 2,081 17,477 District 11 42.00 49.00 546,125 633,619 87.494 2,740 12,493 District 13 60.00 70.00 63,180 73,654 10,474 48 1,049 Total MFR 9,628,590 10,650,736 1,022,146 37,024 200,920 0.00 Commercial District 2,898,156 2,899,310 1,154 5,081 92,056,514 District 7,148,980 7,164,726 15,746 16,222 381,542,316 District 3 5,658,736 5,777,733 118,997 12,485 404,791,508 District 550,206 729,145 178,939 2,680 51,711,844 District 969,069 1,023,940 54,071 2,641 64,486,626 District 2.731,502 2,820,121 88,619 5,178 145,572,978 District 11 745,325 671,049 (74,277) 2,880 80,787,849 District 13 64,035 50,799 (13,236) 1,286 16,638,468 Total Commercial 20,766,809 21,136,823 370,014 48.453 1,237,588,103 use fee strucl2 atlj sfrAs 3:16 PM Summary 514198 Page 2 Summary Comparison of Rate Structures Annual Sewer Service User Fees Total Revenue Estimates By Category Adopted Adjusted Dist Rate Rate Adopted Fee "Adjusted" Fee Increase(Dec r1 No Parcels No Units No Sg Feet Grand Total District 1 6,309,098 6,305,299 (3,799) 35,982 15,045 92,056,514 District 18,429,229 18,535,060 105.831 143,760 59,471 381,542,316 District 3 20,309,956 20,267,544 (42,412) 174,831 69,650 404,791,508 District 5 2,516,019 2,539,334 23.315 20,662 8,195 51,711,844 District 3,322,567 3,303,626 (18,941) 24,706 17,540 64,486,626 District 5,190,508 5,200,276 9,768 41,133 17,477 145,572,978 District 11 3,469,159 3,482,377 13,217 36,730 12,493 80,787,849 District 13 792,445 789,683 (2,762) 7,986 1,049 16,638,468 Total 60,338,982 60,423,199 84,217 485,791 200,920 1,237,588,103 use fee strucM adj sfr.xls 3:16 PM SumrWryv a 514/98 Page 1 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Assessor Current%Of SFR Revised%Of SFR No.Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Per 1000 sf or unit Per 1000 sf or un8 Parmls From Adopted From Adopted Change 0 CONVERSION-CA,RURAL PC 100.0% 100% 247 $ 36,197 0% $ 147 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 0.0% 0% 9,565 - 0% - 2 ONE RESIDENCE 100.0% 100% 400.314 (1,307,943) 0% (3) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 60.0% 70% 6.361 177,321 17% 28 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 1D0.0% 100% 1,644 (78,875) 0% (48) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 0.0% W. 160 - 0% - 6 "HOUR"PARCEL 0.0% 0% 1 - 0% - 7 MOBILEHOME 60.0% 50% 8.723 (2,058) (17%) - 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 0.0% 0% 6 (75) 0% (13) 10 DUPLEX ONLY 60.0% 70% 5.405 31,238 17% 6 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 60.0% 70% 1,954 25,386 17% 13 12 04-UNITS ONLY 60.0% 70% 6,789 136,013 17% 20 13 5TO 16 UNITS 60.0% 70% 4,054 162.323 17% 40 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 60.0% 70% 580 48,385 17% 83 15 26-40 UNITS ONLY 60.0% 70% 369 60,307 17% 163 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 60.0% 70% 549 171,067 17% 312 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 60.0% 70% 426 291,129 17% 683 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FORMS 70.0% 100% 3,993 464.544 43% 116 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 100.0% 170% 45 (10,318) 70% (229) 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 71.5% 144% 8 660 101% 83 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 71.5% 41% 216 (67.626) (430/6) (313) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 71.5% 41% 535 (52,778) (43%) (99) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 71.5% 41% 364 (42,067) (43%) (116) 24 USED CAR LOT 71.5% 41% 109 (9,037) (43%) (83) 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDINGS 71.5% 53% 7 (678) (26%) (97) 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 71.5% 112% 13 11,431 67% 879 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 71.6% 796% 82 105,184 1013% 1,283 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 71.5% 151% 40 3,567 111% 89 32 CEMETERY&RELATED BUILDINGS 71.5% 101% 52 1,680 41% 32 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 71.5% 20% 768 (159,636) (72%) (208) 34 DORMITORY 71.5% 97% 12 4,212 36% 351 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 71.5% 144% 13 44,108 101% 3.393 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 71.5% 41% 309 (69,844) (43%) (194) use fee stn cU adJ sfr.:ls 3:17 PM EDU Factors April 514/98 Page 2 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Assessor Current% SFR Revised%Of SFR No.Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Per 1000 at or unit Per 1000 sf or unit Parcels From Adopted From Adopted Change 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 71.5% 51% 72 (11,177) 129%) (155) 38 FUNERAL HOME 71.5% 101% 19 2,085 41% 110 39 GOLF COURSE 71.5% 41% 132 (8,782) (43%) (67) 40 HEALTH CLUB 71.5% 29% 23 (19,695) (59%) (856) 42 HOSPITAL 71.5% 97% 54 38,819 36% 719 43 HOTEL 71.5% 97% 73 98,960 36% 1,356 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 71.5% 17% 5 - (76%) - 45 MARINAS 71.5% 53% 13 (1,348) (26%) (104) 47 SUPERMARKET 71.5% 151% 68 85,169 111% 1,252 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 71.5% 151% 134 21,476 111% 160 60 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 STORIES 71.5% 124% 883 172,421 73% 195 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 71.5% 124% 49 36,971 73% 765 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 71.5% 124% 7 3,043 73% 435 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 71.5% 124% 43 27,576 73% 641 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MEDICAL 71.5% 124% 24 1,504 73% 63 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 60.0% 50% 298 (177,483) (17%) (596) 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 71.5% 97% 396 144,557 36% 365 57 MOTORCYCLEISMALL VEHICLE BLDG 71.5% 41% 14 (550) (43%) (39) 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 71.5% 10% 41 (6,556) (86%) (160) 60 NURSING HOME 71.5% 102% 40 14,875 43% 372 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 71.5% 102% 69 49.107 43% 712 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURSING 71.5% 102% 15 1,054 43% 70 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 71.5% 97% 25 18,804 36% 752 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 71.5% 97% 13 21,547 36% 1.657 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STORIES 71.5% 82% 3,658 82,623 15% 23 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 71.5% 82% 134 15,415 15% 115 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 71.5% 82% 19 5,910 15% 311 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 71.5% 82% 179 48,254 15% 270 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFFICE 71.5% 82% 364 2,846 15% 8 71 PARKING GARAGE 71.5% 17% 46 (50,086) (76%) (1,089) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 71.5% 17% 579 (4,253) (76%) (7) 73 RECREATION 71.5% 144% 39 19,091 101% 490 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 71.5% 27% 13 (2,333) (62%) (179) use fee slruct2 adj sfcxls 3:17 PM EDU Factor:April 514/98 Page 3 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Assessor Current%Of SFR Revised%Of SFR No.Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Per 100D sf or unit Per 1000 at or unit Parcels From Adopted From Adopted Change 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 71.5% 300% 291 78.848 320% 271 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 71.5% 600% 520 533.926 739% 1,027 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 71.5% 600% 460 997,049 739% 2,167 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SF 71.5% 600% 6 9,732 739% 1,622 81 PRE-SCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CARE 71.5% 82% 136 3,824 15% 28 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 71.5% 82% 75 6.873 15% 92 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 71.5% 41% 543 (18,892) (43%) (35) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 71.5% 41% 0 - (43%) - 85 COMBIN:SERV STN/RESTAURANT 71.5% 100% 0 - 40% - 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATION/CONVIENCE 71.5% 41% 55 (1,821) (43%) (33) 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTER 71.5% 151% 462 396,736 111% 859 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER 71.5% 53% 516 (184,906) (26%) (358) 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 71.51/6 63% 288 (134,414) (26%) (467) 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 71.5% 138% 66 212,364 93% 3,217 92 SKATING RINKS 71.5% 112% 3 1,926 57% 642 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 71.5% 41% 19 (17,312) (43%) (911) 95 DISCOUNT STORE 71.5% 41% 62 (55,141) (43%) (889) 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 71.5% 41% 1,386 (181,331) (43%) (131) 97 STRIP STORE 71.5% 41% 1,199 (217,117) (43%) (181) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OTR 71.5% 82% 373 13,447 15% 36 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 71.5% 82% 20 805 15% 40 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 71.5% 10% 10 (893) (86%) (89) 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 71.5% 51% 27 (9,708) (29%) (360) 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STORAGE 71.5% 100% 7 1,105 40% 158 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 71.5% 100% 24 21.931 40% 914 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 71.5% 100% 18 12,123 40% 674 106 FACTORY 71.5% 100% 167 191,699 40% 1,148 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE TENANT 71.5% 100% 2,056 538,783 40% 262 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI TENANT 71.5% 100% 880 273,326 40% 311 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 71.5% 100% 32 18,624 40% - 582 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 71.5% 17% 3,430 (2,217,840) (76%) (647) 111 WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 71.5% 17% 1.808 (812,487) (76%) (449) 112 STEEL BUILDING 71.5% 17% 149 (55.808) (76%) (375) use fee stmcl2 ad)sfczls 3:17 PM EDU Factors April 514108 Page 4 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Asseswr Current% SFR Revised%Of SFR No.Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Per 1000 sf or unit Per 1000 sf or unit Parcels From Adopted From Adopts d Change 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 71.5% 17% 138 (108.204) (76%) (784) 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 71.5% 100% 362 222,309 40% 614 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 71.5% 17% 13 (98) (76%) (8) 116 TRUCK TERMINAL 71.5% 17% 24 (21,792) (76%) (908) 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANTIDEVELO 71.5% 82% 8,692 (45,195) 15% (7) 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 71.5% 100% 13 398 40% 31 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 71.5% 100% 85 1,230 40% 14 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALUE 0.D% 0% 1,117 (700) 0% (1) 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 0.0% 0% 351 (207) 0% (1) 124 OILIMINERAL RIGHTS 0.0% 0% 3 - 0% - 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0.0% 0% 0 - 0% - 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.D% 0% 0 - 0% - 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 0.0% 0% 0 - 0% - 668 UNASSIGNED VACANT 71.5% 0% 490 (47.687) (100%) (97) 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 71.5% 100% 161 64,988 40% 404 485,799$$ �4, 7 uss fee stmcl2 ed)ah.zis 3:17 PM EDU Factm April 5/4/98 Page 1 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Displayed In Order of Rate Factor Assessor Current%Of SFR Revised% SFR No.Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Per 1000 sf or unit Per 1000 sf or unit Parcels From Adopted From Adopted Change 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 0.0% 0% 9,565 - 0% - 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 0.0% 0% 160 - 0% - 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 0.0% 0% 1 - 0% - 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 0.0% 0% 6 (75) 0% (13) 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALUE 0.0% 0% 1,117 (708) 0% (1) 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 0.0% 0% 351 (207) 0% (1) 124 OIL/MINERAL RIGHTS 0.0% 0% 3 - 0% - 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0.0% 0% 0 - 0% - 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.0% 0% 0 - 0% - 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 0.0% 0% 0 - 0% - 666 UNASSIGNED VACANT 71.5% OMo 490 (47,587) (100%) (97) 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 71.5% 10% 41 (6,556) (86%) (160) 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 71.5% 10% 10 (893) (86%) (89) 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 71.5% 17% 5 - (76%) - 71 PARKING GARAGE 71.5% 17% 46 (50,086) (76%) (1,089) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 71.5% 17% 579 (4,253) (78%) (7) 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 71.5% 17% 3,430 (2,217,840) (76%) (647) 111 WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 71.5% 17% 1,808 (812,487) (76%) (449) 112 STEEL BUILDING 71.5% 17% 149 (55,808) (76%) (375) 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 71.5% 17% 138 (108,204) (76%) (784) 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 71.5% 17% 13 (98) (76%) (8) 116 TRUCK TERMINAL 71.5% 17% 24 (21,792) (78%) (908) 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 71.5% 20% 768 (159,636) (72%) (208) 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 71.5% 27% 13 (2,333) (62%) (179) 40 HEALTH CLUB 71.5% 29% 23 (19,695) (59%) (856) 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 71.5% 41% 216 (67,626) (43%) (313) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 71.5% 41% 535 (52,778) (43%) (99) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 71.5% 41% 364 (42,067) (43%) (116) 24 USED CAR LOT 71.5% 41% 109 (9,037) (43%) (83) 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 71.5% 41% 309 (59,844) (43%) (194) use fee struct2 ad)sfcsls 3:19 PM EDU Factors By Rate 5/4198 Page 2 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Displayed In Order of Rate Factor Assessor Current% SFR Revised% SFR No.Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Per 1000 at or unit Per 1000 sf or unit Parcels From Adopted From Adopted Chance 39 GOLF COURSE 71.5% 41% 132 (8,782) (43%) (67) 57 MOTORCYCLE/SMALL VEHICLE BLDG 71.5% 41% 14 (550) 143%) (39) 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 71.5% 41% 543 (18,892) (43%) (35) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 71.5% 41% 0 - (43%) - 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATION/CONVIENCE 71.5% 41% 55 (1,821) (43%) (33) 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 71.5% 41% 19 (17,312) (43%) (911) 95 DISCOUNT STORE 71.5% 41% 62 (55,141) (43%) (889) 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 71.5% 41% 1,386 (181.331) (43%) (131) 97 STRIP STORE 71.5% 41% 1,199 (217,117) (43%) (181) 7 MOBILEHOME 60.0% 50% 8.723 (2,058) (17%) - 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 60.0% 50% 298 (177.483) (17%) (596) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 71.5% 51% 72 (11,177) (290%) (155) 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 71.5% 51% 27 (9,708) (29%) (360) 28 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDINGS 71.5% 53% 7 (678) (26%) (97) 45 MARINAS 71.5% 53% 13 (1,348) (26%) (104) 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER 71.5% 53% 516 (184,906) (26%) (358) 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 71.5% 53% 288 (134,414) (26%) (467) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 60.0% 70% 8,361 177,321 17% 28 10 DUPLEX ONLY 60.0% 70% 5,405 31,238 17% 6 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 60.0% 70% 1,954 25,386 17% 13 12 04-UNITS ONLY 60.0% 70% 6.789 136,013 17% 20 13 5 TO 16 UNITS 60.0% 70% 4,054 162,323 17% 40 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 60.0% 70% 580 48,385 17% 83 15 26-40 UNITS ONLY 60.0% 70% 369 60,307 17% 183 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 60.0% 70% 549 171,067 17% 312 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 60.0% 70% 426 291.129 17% 683 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STORIES 71.5% 82% 3,658 82.823 15% 23 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 71.5% 82% 134 15.415 15% 115 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 71.5% 82% 19 5.910 15% 311 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 71.5% 82% 179 48,254 15% 270 use fee strucl2 adj str.xls 3:19 PM EDU Factors By Rate 5/4198 Page 3 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Displayed In Order of Rate Factor Assessor Current%Of SFR Revised%Of SFR No.Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Par 1000 sf or unit Per 1000 sf or unit Paroela From Adopted From Adopted Chance 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFFICE 71.5% 82% 364 2,846 16% 8 81 PRE-SCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CARE 71.5% 82% 136 3,824 15% 28 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 71.5% 82% 75 6.873 15% 92 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OTR 71.5% 82% 373 13,447 15% 36 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 71.5% 82% 20 805 15% 40 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANT/DEVELO 71.5% 82% 6,692 (45,195) 15% (7) 34 DORMITORY 71.5% 97% 12 4,212 36% 351 42 HOSPITAL 71.5% 97% 54 38,819 38% 719 43 HOTEL 71.5% 97% 73 98,960 36% 1.356 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 71.5% 97% 396 144,557 36% 365 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 71.5% 97% 25 18,804 36% 752 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 71.5% 97% 13 21,547 36% 1,657 0 CONVERSION-C/1,RURAL PC 100.0% 100% 247 $ 36,197 0% $ 147 2 ONE RESIDENCE 1D0.0% 100% 400,314 (1,307,943) 0% (3) 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 100.0% 100% 1,644 (78,875) 0% (48) 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FORMS 70.0% 100% 3,993 464,544 43% 116 85 COMBIN: SERV STN/RESTAURANT 71.5% 100% 0 - 40% - 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STORAGE 71.5% 100% 7 1,105 40% 158 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 71.5% 100% 24 21,931 40% 914 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 71.5% 100% 18 12,123 40% 874 106 FACTORY 71.5% 100% 167 191,699 40% 1,148 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE TENANT 71.5% 100% 2.056 538,783 40% 262 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI TENANT 71.5% 100% 880 273,326 40% 311 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 71.5% t00% 32 18,624 40% 582 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 71.5% 100% 362 222,309 40% 514 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 71.5% 100% 13 398 40% 31 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 71.5% 100% 85 1,230 40% 14 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 71.5% 100% 161 64,968 409(6 404 32 CEMETERY 8 RELATED BUILDINGS 71.5% 101% 52 1,680 41% 32 38 FUNERAL HOME 71.5% 101% 19 2,085 41% 110 me fee stn42 sot eh.xe 3:19 PM EDU Factors By Rate 5/4/98 Page 4 of 4 Annual Sewer Service Use Fee Property Use Category Proposal Comparison Displayed In Order of Rate Factor Assessor Current%Of SFR Revised%Of SFR No. Of Total$Change %Rate Chg Average$ Use Code Description Per 1000 sf or unit Per 1000 sf or unit Parcels From Adopts From Adopted Change 60 NURSING HOME 71.5% 102% 40 14.875 43% 372 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 71.5% 102% 89 49,107 43% 712 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURSING 71.5% 102% 15 1,054 43% 70 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 71.5% 112% 13 11,431 57% 879 92 SKATING RINKS 71.5% 112% 3 1,926 57% 642 50 SINGLE MEDICAL SLOGS TO 3 STORIES 71.5% 124% 883 172,421 73% 195 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 71.5% 124% 49 36,971 73% 755 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 71.5% 124% 7 3,043 73% 435 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 71.5% 124% 43 27,576 73% 641 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MEDICAL 71.5% 124% 24 1,504 73% 63 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 71.5% 138% 66 212,354 93% 3,217 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 71.5% 144% 8 680 101% 83 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 71.5% 144% 13 44,108 101% 3,393 73 RECREATION 71.5% 144% 39 19,091 101% 400 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 71.5% 151% 40 3,567 111% 89 47 SUPERMARKET 71.6% 151% 68 85.189 111% 1,252 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 71.5% 151% 134 21,478 111% 180 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTER 71.5% 151% 462 396.736 111% 859 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 100.0% 170% 45 (10,318) 70% (229) 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 71.5% 300% 291 78,848 320% 271 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 71.5% 600% 520 533,928 739% 1,027 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 71.6% 600% 460 997,049 739% 2,167 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SF 71.5% 600% 6 9,732 739% 1.822 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 71.5% 796% 82 105,184 1013% 1,283 485,791 $ 84,217 use fee*uct2 odl sfr.ds 3:19 PM EDU Factors By Rate 5/4/98 District 1 Structure Analysis Page 1 of 24 un 2m SFR Rt Fir Nw Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Change/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-CA,RURAL PC 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 17.239.79 21,854.79 4,615.00 22 209.77 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 87.50 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 691 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE $7.50 1.00 87.50 P 2,479,810.09 2.375.037.00 (104,773.09) 27,143 (3.86) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 87.50 0.70 81.25 B 86.588.30 115,456.26 28.867.95 925 31.21 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 87.50 1.00 87.50 S 1.335.11 0.00 (1,336.11) 264 (5.08) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 0.00 P 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 0.00 P 7 MOBILEHOME 87.50 0.50 43.75 S 4,056.68 3,237.50 (819.18) 694 (1.16) 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 0.00 P 10 DUPLEX ONLY 87.50 0.70 61.25 S 74.686.43 80,176.25 5,489.82 690 7.96 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 87.50 0.70 61.25 S 20245.72 22,050.00 1,804.28 130 13.88 12 04-UNITS ONLY 87.50 0.70 61.25 S 78.428.02 84,525.00 6.090.98 358 17.13 13 5 T016 UNITS 87.50 0.70 61.26 S 256.334.08 27305.00 17,330.92 539 32.15 /4 17 T025 UNITS 87.50 0.70 61.25 S 87,819.01 70,131.25 2,312.24 68 35.03 15 2640 UNITS ONLY 87.50 0.70 61.25 S 72,362.40 80,850.00 8.487.60 42 202.09 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 87.50 0.70 61.25 S 104.212.82 116.436.25 12,223.43 37 330.36 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 87.50 0.70 61.25 S 165.063.02 184,423.75 19,360.73 15 1,290.72 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FORMS 87.60 1.00 87.50 C 132.387.82 193,046.35 60,678.53 385 157.61 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 87.50 1.70 148.75 P 5,258.73 1,933.75 (3,324.98) 13 (255.77) 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 1.44 C 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 87.50 0.41 35.88 C 15.338.78 7,679.24 (7,759.52) 18 (431,08) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 87.50 0.41 35.88 C 25.172.78 13,747.55 (11.425.23) 111 (102,93) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 87.50 0.41 36.88 C 11.988.25 6,234.43 (5,733.82) 34 (188.84) 24 USED CAR LOT $7.50 0.41 35.88 S 1.033.54 0.00 (1,033.54) 8 (129.19) 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDINGS 0.53 C 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 1.12 C 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 87.50 7.98 696.50 C 1,095.52 11,681.70 10,588.18 6 1,704.36 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 87.60 1.51 132.13 C 328.02 663.53 335.61 4 83.88 32 CEMETERY&RELATED BUILDINGS 1.01 C 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 87.50 0.20 17.50 C 16,480.39 4.322.92 (12.157.47) 97 (128.33) 34 DORMITORY 87.50 0.97 84.88 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 1." C 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 87.50 0.41 35.88 C 14,422.77 7,921.31 (6,501.46) 19 (342.18) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 87.50 0.51 44.83 C 14.204.07 9,765.39 (4,528.08) 11 (411.70) 38 FUNERAL HOME 87.50 1.01 88.38 C 587.74 795.20 207.46 2 103.73 39 GOLF COURSE 0.41 C 40 HEALTH CLUB 87.50 0.29 25.38 C 622.17 241.70 (380.47) 1 (380.47) 42 HOSPITAL 87.50 0.97 84.88 C 10,272.40 13,347.70 3.075.30 3 1,025.10 43 HOTEL 87.50 0.97 $4.88 C 27,754.83 36,063.90 8.309.07 5 1,881.81 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 0.17 C 514/98 District 1 Structure Analysis Page 2 of 24 Un Dosc SFR Rt Ec& New Rte Beals Old Fee New Fe a Incr(Decrease) Pamels Change/Parcel 45 MARINAS 0.53 C 47 SUPERMARKET 87.50 1.51 132.13 C 7,523.08 15.217.23 7,694.15 7 1,099.16 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 87.60 1.51 132.13 C 4,432.80 8,926.37 4,493.57 20 224.68 50 SINGLE MEDICAL SLOGS TO 3 STORIES 87.60 1.24 108.50 C 37,631.30 62,W8.15 24,875.79 81 407.82 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 1.24 C 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 1.24 C 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 1.24 C 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MEDICAL 87.50 1.24 108.50 C 93.14 154.72 61.68 1 61.58 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 87.50 0.50 43.75 S 89,312.28 80,893.76 (8,418.53) 16 (526.16) 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 87.50 0.97 84.88 C 47,751.29 62,046.85 14,296.56 33 433.20 57 MOTORCYCLEISMALL VEHICLE BLDG 0.41 C 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 87.50 0.10 8.75 C 543.00 72.74 (470.26) 1 (470.26) 60 NURSING HOME 1.02 C 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 87.50 1.02 89.25 C 22.383.83 30,584.19 8,200.36 4 2,050.09 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURSING 87.50 1.02 89.25 C 474.35 648.13 173.78 2 86.89 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 87.50 0.97 84.88 C 2,406.90 3,127.66 720.60 4 180A5 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 87.50 0.97 84.88 C 3,703.64 4,812.41 1,108.77 1 1,108.77 65 SINGLE OFFICE SLOGS TO 3 STORIES 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 244,894.60 257.251.95 12,357.35 436 28.34 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 6.454.51 7.089.90 635.39 4 158.85 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 14,373.99 15.788.95 1,414.98 2 707.48 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 131,794.84 140,986.88 9,192.04 24 383.00 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFFICE 87.50 0.82 71.76 C 10,087.48 11,001.86 934.40 79 11.83 71 PARKING GARAGE 87.50 0.17 14.88 C 633.60 129.43 (504.17) 5 (100.83) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 87.50 0.17 14.88 C 1,142.44 200.16 (882.28) 129 (6.84) 73 RECREATION 87.50 1.44 126.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 0.27 C 76 RESTAURANT-TAKE OUT 87.50 3.00 262.50 C 4,416.81 16,470.56 12,D53.75 43 280.32 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 87.50 6.00 525.00 C 10.431.34 83,745.90 73.314.56 54 1.357.68 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 87.50 6.D0 525.00 C 9.514.66 70,328.60 66.811.94 32 2.087.87 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SF 87.50 6.00 625.00 C 125.28 1,008.95 881.67 1 881.67 81 PRESCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CARE 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 2,942.60 3,232.34 289.74 11 26.34 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 8.174.71 8,979.44 804.73 4 201.18 63 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 87.50 0.41 35.88 C 4,046.57 2,050.72 (1,995.85) 49 (40.73) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN:SERV STNIRESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATION/CONVIENCE 87.50 0.41 35.88 C 351.02 192.79 (158.23) 3 (52.74) 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTER 87.50 1.51 132.13 C 24,333.34 49.220.13 24,888.79 30 829.56 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER 87.50 0.53 48.38 C 48,196.20 34.217.76 (13,978.45) 19 (735.71) 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 87.50 0.53 46.38 C 22.859.04 16.075.57 (6,583.47) 25 (263.34) 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 87.50 1.38 120.75 C 33,090.09 62.279.23 28,589.14 8 3,573.64 514/98 District 1 Structure Analysis Page 3 of 24 vAe DOM FS R Rt Fctr New Rle Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Change/Parcel 92 SKATING RINKS 1.12 C ' 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 87.50 0.41 35.86 C 21,772.58 11,957.93 (9,814.65) 3 (3,271.65) 95 DISCOUNT STORE 87.50 0.41 35.98 C 4,778.08 1.403.54 (3,374.64) 3 (1,124.85) 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 87.50 0.41 35,88 C 70,264.53 37,973.19 (32.291.34) 228 (142.88) 97 STRIP STORE 87.50 0.41 35.88 C 33.267.82 18,265.04 (15,002.78) Be (174.45) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OTR 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 32.747.21 40,008.01 7,258.80 82 88.52 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 3.007.38 3,303.44 296.08 5 59.21 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 0.10 C 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 87.60 0.51 44.63 C 1,042.50 712.22 (330.29) 2 (165.14) 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STORAGE 1.00 C 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 1,270.27 1,701.81 431.34 1 431.34 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 87.50 1.00 87,50 C 652.46 740.08 187.02 2 93.81 106 FACTORY 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 108,679.65 139,896.58 31.216.93 22 1.418.06 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 362,968.03 408.676.18 103,SOB.13 408 253.94 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 196,624.17 247.368.28 50,744.10 146 347.56 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 12,072.58 18,171.93 4.099.37 2 2,049.68 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 87.50 0.17 14.88 C 441,639.85 96,061.75 (345,577.90) 455 (759.51) 111 WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 87.50 0.17 14.88 C 166,360.64 34,066.34 (122,304.30) 184 (ON 70) 112 STEEL BUILDING 87.50 0.17 14.88 C 4,348.12 970.28 (3,371.88) 18 (187.33) 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 87.60 0.17 14.88 C 13,696.72 3,119.09 (10.577.63) 18 (661.10) 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK $7.50 1.00 87.50 C 91.242.21 117,643.84 28.401.63 30 880.05 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 87.50 0.17 14.88 C 65.32 11.90 (53.42) 1 (53.42) 116 TRUCK TERMINAL $7.50 0.17 14.88 C 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANT/DEV 87.50 0.82 71.75 C 244.688.68 268.627.84 23,939.18 694 35.00 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALUE 87.50 0.00 0.00 C 91.36 0.00 (91.38) 105 (0.87) 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 87.50 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.D0 0.00 6 0.00 124 OILIMINERAL RIGHTS 87.50 O.W 0.00 C 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 87.50 0.00 O.OD C 125 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 87.60 0.00 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 87.50 0.00 0.00 C 668 UNASSIGNED VACANT 87.50 0.00 0.00 C 2.089.50 0,00 (2,089.50) 49 (42.64) $88 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 87.50 1.00 87.50 C 6,150.33 8,238.74 2.088.41 1 2,088.41 Dish -Totals 6,309,097.86 6,305,298.65 (3,799.21) 35,982 (0.11) 614/98 District 2 Structure Analysis Page 4 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Ectr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chanae(Parcel 0 CONVERSION-C/I,RURAL PC 71.0D 1.00 71.00 C 50,191.32 68,268.06 18,076.74 86 210.19 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 71.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,069 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE 71.00 1.00 71.00 P 8,459.639.53 8,227,867.66 (231,771.87) 115,885 (2.00) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 71.00 0.70 49.70 B 140,812.64 198,253.30 57,440.66 1,902 30.20 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 71.00 1.00 71.00 S 44,595.34 284.00 (44.311.34) 559 (79.27) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 71.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 47 0.00 6 "HOLD°PARCEL 0.00 P 7 MOBILEHOME 71.00 0.50 35.50 S 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,268 0.00 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 0.00 P 10 DUPLEX ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 101,927.72 113,862.70 11.934.98 1,170 10.20 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 71,582.91 80,514.00 8,931.09 548 16.30 12 04-UNITS ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 366,478.30 414,597.40 48,119.10 2.120 22.70 13 5 TO 16 UNITS 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 553,342.15 624,082.90 70,740.76 1.533 46.15 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 111.340.13 125,890.10 14,549.97 128 115.48 15 2640 UNITS ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 115,846.95 132,400.80 16,553.85 86 192.49 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 346.677.00 393,375.50 46,698.50 125 373.59 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 968.006.65 1,059,206.40 91,199.75 169 539.64 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FOR 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 293.427.90 428,545.00 135,117.10 882 153.19 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 71.00 1.70 120.70 P 918.87 1,207.00 288.13 10 28.81 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 71.00 1.44 102.24 C 373.59 731.73 358.14 3 119.38 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 41.366.07 22,832.89 (18,533.18) 68 (272.55) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 37,410.23 20,848.73 (16,561.50) 174 (95.18) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 30,786.83 17.119.79 (13,667.04) 118 (115.82) 24 USED CAR LOT 71.00 0.41 29.11 S 2,982.14 0.00 (2,982.14) 46 (64.83) 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDINGS 0.53 C 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 71.00 1.12 79.52 C 6,456.29 9,835.35 3,379.06 4 844.77 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 71.00 7.96 565.16 C 4,714.58 51,044.69 46,330.11 28 1,654.65 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 71.00 1.51 107.21 C 1,064.44 2,038.28 973.84 12 81.15 32 CEMETERY 8 RELATED BUILDING 71.00 1.01 71.71 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 0.00 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 71.00 0.20 14.20 C 75.798.07 18,338.92 (57.459.15) 265 (216.83) 34 DORMITORY 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 12,990.72 17,139.33 4,148.61 10 414.88 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 71.00 1.44 102.24 C 38,683.73 75,766.79 37,083.06 6 6,180.51 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 37.006.44 20.615.47 (16,390.97) 90 (182.12) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 71.00 0.51 36.21 C 8.336.25 5,770.43 (2,565.82) 26 (98.69) 38 FUNERAL HOME 71.00 1.01 71.71 C 1,878.24 2.58027 702.03 5 140.41 39 GOLF COURSE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 3,814.29 2,127.10 (1,687.19) 39 (43.26) 40 HEALTH CLUB 71.00 0.29 20.59 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 42 HOSPITAL 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 67,507.01 89,065.37 21,558.36 29 743.39 43 HOTEL 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 148.634.07 190,085.98 47,451.91 32 1,482.87 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 45 MARINAS 0.53 C 514/98 District 2 Structure Analysis Page 5 of 24 m Dose SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chance/Parcel 47 SUPERMARKET 71.00 1.51 107.21 C 22.820.38 46,869.32 24,048.94 19 1,265.73 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 71.00 1.51 107.21 C 4,486.46 9,179.86 4,693.40 36 130.37 50 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 ST 71.00 1.24 88.04 C 92,083.39 152,982.44 60.899.05 339 179.64 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 71.00 1.24 88.D4 C 5.620.34 9,479.27 3,858.93 9 428.77 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 71.D0 1.24 88.D4 C 3.298.97 6,564.04 2,205.07 4 586.27 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 71.D0 1.24 88.04 C 16.318.30 27,621.74 11,203.44 31 361.40 64 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MED 71.00 1.24 88.D4 C 1.400.30 2,361.86 961.55 15 64.10 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 71.00 0.50 35.50 S 367.992.30 303,525.00 (64,467.30) 103 (625.90) 66 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 220.507.74 290,927.47 70,419.73 162 434.69 57 MOTORCYCLE/SMALL VEHICLE B 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 418.27 233.26 (185.01) 4 (46.25) 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 71.00 0.10 7.10 C 3,814.19 515.91 (3,298.28) 19 (173.59) 60 NURSING HOME 71.00 1.02 72.42 C 14,556.27 20,194.90 6,638.63 22 256.30 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 71.00 1.02 72.42 C 49,501.50 68,676.39 19,174.89 25 767.00 82 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURS 71.00 1.02 72.42 C 1.284.58 1,782.18 497.60 4 124.40 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING71.00 0.97 08.87 C 24.088.24 31.780.82 7,692.58 8 961.57 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDIN 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 30.260.54 40.017.88 9,757.34 5 1.951.47 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STO 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 447.414.65 485,887.99 38,473.34 1,077 36.72 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 71.D0 0.82 58.22 C 61,426.01 68,336.37 6,910.36 56 123.40 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 17.087.24 19,057.85 1,970.61 7 281.52 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 71.D0 0.82 58.22 C 280.658.21 291,913.92 11.255.71 43 261.70 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFF 71I.DO 0.82 58.22 C 15.643.91 17,244.36 1,600.45 186 8.60 71 PARKING GARAGE 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 16,939.64 3,685.65 (12,253.89) 13 (942.61) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 1.376.55 318.30 (1,058.25) 160 (6.61) 73 RECREATION 71.00 1.44 102.24 C 13,119.81 25,698.80 12,576.99 15 838.47 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 71.00 0.27 19.17 C 1.337.08 491.04 (846.04) 9 (94.00) 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 71.00 3.00 213.00 C 7.784.89 30,812.16 23,027.28 78 295.22 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 71.00 6.00 426.00 C 23.198.40 189,372.76 166.174.36 165 1,OD7.12 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 71.00 6.00 426.00 C 44.877.94 364,313.92 319,635.98 136 2,367.67 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FIR 71.00 6.00 426.00 C 842.76 6,877.77 6,035.01 2 3,017.51 81 PRE-SCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CA 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 16,363.21 18,250.46 1,887.25 36 52.42 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 38.123.17 42,519.87 4,396.70 33 133.23 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 12.235.96 6,633.30 (5,602.86) 175 (32.02) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN:SERV STN/RESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATION/CONV 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 1,241.81 674.71 (507,10) 18 (31.51) 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTE 71.00 1.51 107.21 C 126,249.16 258,653.77 132,404.61 157 843.34 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CEN 71.00 0.53 37.63 C 163,834.43 118.105.48 (45,728.95) 164 (296.94) 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 71.00 0.63 37.63 C 202,227.18 145.782.08 (56.445.10) 131 (430.88) 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 71.00 1.38 97.98 C 77,770.89 128,491.85 50,720.96 32 1.585.03 92 SKATING RINKS 1.12 C 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 5.532.25 3.085.14 (2,447.11) 2 (1,223.56) 514M District 2 Structure Analysis Page 6 of 24 Use Dew SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chanae/Parcel 95 DISCOUNT STORE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 30,127.06 16,800.78 (13,326.28) 25 (533.05) 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 115,544.45 60.935.29 (54,609.16) 386 (141.47) 97 STRIP STORE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 143,977.98 80,170.54 (63,807.44) 338 (188.78) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OT 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 21,809.43 24,324.84 2,515.41 60 41.92 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 814.84 908.81 93.97 2 46.99 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 71.00 0.10 7.10 C 571.16 77.09 (493.47) 7 (70.50) 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 71.00 0.51 36.21 C 10,861.85 7,534.65 (3,327,20) 5 (665.44) 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STOR 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 945.60 1,286-17 340.57 1 340.57 1D4 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 10.265.42 13.962.58 3.697.16 12 308.10 1D5 COLD STORAGE PLANT 71.00 1.00 71.0D C 22.604.66 29.019.62 6,414.97 8 801.87 106 FACTORY 71.D0 1.00 71.00 C 250.572.77 339,151.03 88,578.26 98 9M.86 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 736,596.38 956,438.30 219,541.92 802 274.12 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 311,209.52 416,440.21 105.230.69 287 366.66 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 11,301.07 8.308.63 (2,992.44) 6 (498.74) 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 1,124,616.64 255,262.50 (869,354.14) 1,553 (559.79) 111 WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 444,684.95 100,779.60 (343,805.35) 704 (488.36) 112 STEEL BUILDING 71.00' 0.17 12.07 C 55,138.86 12,196.77 (42,942.D8) 79 (643.57) 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 30.157.43 6,972.73 (23,184.70) 40 (579.62) 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 322,852.21 411,416.96 $8.564.74 179 494.78 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORA 71.01) 0.17 1207 C 5220 8.11 (44.09) 6 (7.35) 116 TRUCK TERMINAL 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 11,378.26 2,630.96 (8,747.30) 15 (583AS) 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANT/D 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 114,925.08 41,196.47 (73,728.81) 2,224 (33.15) 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.D0 7 0.00 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 71.00 1.01) 71.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 35 0.00 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALU 71.00 0.00 0.00 C 219.00 0.00 (219.00) 440 (0.50) 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 71.00 0,00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 131 0.00 124 OILIMINERAL RIGHTS 71.00 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0.00 C 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 0.00 C 608 UNASSIGNED VACANT 71.00 0.00 0.0D C 6.516.37 0.00 (6,516.37) 229 (28.46) 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 71.011 1.00 71.00 C 74,458.62 91,123.46 16,664.84 41 406.46 Dist 2-Totals 18,429,229.01 18,535,060.48 105.831.47 143,760 0.74 514/98 District 3 Structure Analysis Page 7 0124 Use pggg SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decreasel Parcels Change/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-CA,RURAL PC 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 54,838.69 64,386.79 9,548.10 88 108.50 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 71.50 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.D0 2.111 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE 71.50 1.00 71.50 P 11,393,017.9510,861,343.35 (531,074.60) 151,907 (3.50) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 71.50 0.70 50.05 B 112,110.04 158,158.00 46.047.98 1,427 32.27 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 71.50 1.00 71.50 S 21,072.00 2,145.00 (18.927.00) 424 (44.64) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 71.50 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 0.00 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 0.00 P 7 MOSILEHOME 71.60 0.60 35.75 S 1,238.88 0.00 (1,238.88) 2.896 (0.43) 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 71.60 0.00 0.00 P 75.00 0.00 (75.00) 2 (37.50) 10 DUPLEX ONLY 71.60 0.70 50.05 S 72.502.66 78,878.80 6.376.14 $20 7.78 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 71.50 0.70 50.05 S 51.846.26 57,D57.D0 5.210.74 387 13.46 12 04-UNITS ONLY 71.50 0.70 50.05 S 422.871.46 469,068.60 46.197.14 2,398 19.26 13 6TO 16 UNITS 71.50 0.70 50.05 S 468,77503 519,218.70 50,443.07 1,246 40.48 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 71.50 0.70 50.D5 S 252,765.72 280,830.55 28.064.83 276 101.68 15 2640 UNITS ONLY 71.50 0.70 60.05 S 232,470.00 258,558.30 26,088.30 184 159.08 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 71.50 0.70 50.D5 S 763,110.00 848,747.90 86,637.90 269 318.36 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 71.50 0.70 50.D5 S 859,365.00 955,804.85 96,439.85 123 784.06 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FOR 71.60 1.00 71.50 C 313,946.98 423,699.28 109.752.30 9" 116.26 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 71.50 1.70 121.55 P 8,794.69 1.458.60 (7,336.09) 12 (611.34) 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 71.60 1.44 102.96 C 350.74 652.77 302.03 5 60.41 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 57.882.70 31,628.83 (25,233.87) 86 (305.04) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 36.832.62 19,865.95 (16.986.67) 167 (101.60) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 71.50 0A1 29.32 C 39,484.06 21,313.44 (18,170.62) 155 (117.23) 24 USED CAR LOT 71.50 0.41 29.32 S 4,429.68 0.00 (4,429.68) 46 (96.30) 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDIN 71.50 0.53 37.90 C 1,139.69 805.31 (334.38) 1 (334.38) 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 71.50 1.12 80.D8 C 14.882.45 22.222.44 7,339.99 8 917.50 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 71.50 7.96 669.14 C 2,374.98 24.561.81 22,186.83 26 853.34 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 71.50 1.51 107.97 C 639.60 1,287.70 648.10 13 49.85 32 CEMETERY 8 RELATED BUILDING 71.50 1.01 72.22 C 129.46 174.33 44.87 27 1.66 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 71.50 0.20 14.30 C 76,943.77 20,399.52 (56.644.25) 275 (205.62) 34 DORMITORY 0.97 C 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 71.50 1.44 102.96 C 6,642.55 10,832.73 6,190.18 4 1,297.65 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 42,693.53 23.337.23 (19,356.30) 106 (182.61) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 71.50 0.51 36.47 C 8,227.28 5.594.10 (2,633.18) 22 (110.69) 38 FUNERAL HOME 71.50 1.01 72.22 C 2,163.73 2,913.59 749.86 7 107.12 39 GOLF COURSE 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 5,496.58 3.004.52 (2,402.06) 32 (77.88) 40 HEALTH CLUB 71.60 0.29 20.74 C 16,291.49 6.298.80 (9,992.69) 7 (1,427.53) 42 HOSPITAL 71.50 0.97 69.36 C 40,163.45 51.939.96 11,776.61 13 905.89 43 HOTEL 71.50 0.97 69.36 C 53,193.83 68.791.01 16,697.18 12 1.299.76 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 71.50 0.17 12.10 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 0.00 45 MARINAS 0.53 C 5/4198 District 3 StnrcWra Ana"Is Page 8 or 24 um ping SFR Rt fgk New Rte Baele Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chance/Parcel 47 SUPERMARKET 71.50 1.51 107.97 C 41,810.02 84,169.84 42,359.82 29 1,460.68 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 71.50 1.51 107.97 C 9,048.46 18,126.89 9,078.43 56 162.11 50 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 ST 71.50 1.24 88.66 C 89.181.20 147.432.98 68,251.72 225 258.90 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 71.50 1.24 88.66 C 41,783.34 69,069.86 27,286.52 34 802.64 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 71.50 1.24 88.68 C 538.17 889.70 351.53 2 175.77 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 71.50 1.24 88.68 C 14,392.86 23,794.04 9,401.18 6 1.566.86 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MED 71.50 1.24 88.e6 C 673.03 1,112.68 439.85 6 73.28 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 71.60 0.50 35.75 S 357,057.55 28e,500.50 (70.557.05) 113 (624.40) 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 71.50 0.97 69.36 C 149,166.81 193,261.73 44,095.92 137 321.87 57 MOTORCYCLEISMALL VEHICLE B 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 690.85 481.65 (209.20) 7 (29.89) 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 71.50 0.10 7.15 C 856.72 108.34 (748.38) 8 (93.55) 60 NURSING HOME 71.50 1.02 72.93 C 19,289.16 26,230.88 6,941.72 12 578.48 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 71.50 1.02 72.93 C 44,238.90 60,159.45 15,920.55 25 636.82 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NUBS 71.50 1.02 72.93 C 468.44 657.46 191.02 6 31.84 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 71.50 0.97 69.36 C 35,437.69 46,828.54 10,390.85 13 799.30 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT SUILDIN 71.50 0.97 69.38 C 25,509.83 32,989.68 7,479.85 5 1,495.97 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STO 71.50 0.02 58.63 C 341,191.18 352.874.97 11,883.81 702 18.64 68 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 71.50 0.82 58.63 C 46,038.42 50,330.75 4,292.33 19 225.91 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 71.50 0.82 58.83 C 790.02 863.68 73.68 1 73.66 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 71.50 0.82 58.63 C 64,976.92 71.034.88 6,057.96 15 403.8e 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFF 71.60 0.82 58.83 C 6,582.21 6.885.62 303.41 75 4.05 71 PARKING GARAGE 71.50 0.17 12.18 C 16,093.66 3,647.56 (12,446.10) 6 (2,074.35) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 71.50 0.17 12.10 C 251.90 43.48 (208.42) 134 (1.56) 73 RECREATION 71.60 1.44 102.96 C 3,132.51 6,013.89 2,881.38 9 320.15 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 71.50 0.27 19.31 C 372.39 134.05 (238.34) 2 (119.17) 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 71.50 3.00 214.50 C 11,310.28 43.731.19 32.420.91 121 267.94 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 71.50 6.00 429.00 C 26,443.14 210,901.98 184,458.84 183 1.007.97 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 71.50 6.00 429.00 C 40,004.48 320,730.70 280.636.22 136 2.063.50 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FR 71.50 6.00 429.00 C 402.26 3,217.93 2,815.67 3 938.56 81 PRE-SCHOOLS, NURSERY OR CA 71.60 0.82 58.63 C 11,839.03 12,934.42 1,095.39 80 18.26 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 71.50 0.82 58.03 C 6.721.54 7,347.98 628.44 23 27.24 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 71.60 0.41 29.32 C 14,865.85 7,831.74 (7,034.11) 194 (36.26) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN:SERV STN/RESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATIONICONV 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 1,870.97 1,010.96 (860.01) 24 (35.83) 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTE 71.50 1.51 107.97 C 171,138.20 344.527.87 173,389.67 190 912.58 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CEN 71.50 0.53 37.90 C 281,970.24 201.377.16 (80.593.08) 221 (364,87) 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 71.50 0.53 37.90 C 142.485.55 100,680.57 (41.804.98) 62 (674.27) 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 71.60 1.38 98.67 C 114.063.59 209.839.12 96.785.53 19 5,041.34 92 SKATING RINKS 71.50 1.12 80.08 C 3,905.87 6,832.23 1,926.36 3 642.12 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 10,372.33 5,669.70 (4,702.63) 12 (391.89) 514M Dlst4ct 3 Stmdure Analysis Papa 9 ol24 Use Dew SFR Rt Fctr New IRtofigtil Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Channeftnoal 95 DISCOUNT STORE 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 48,580.12 19,521.21 (29,058.91) 22 (1,320.86) 98 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 111,569.71 59,206.04 (52.363.67) 415 (128.18) 97 STRIP STORE 71.50 0.41 29.32 C 217,676.80 119,185.41 (98,491.39) 554 (177.78) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OT 71.50 0.82 58.63 C 35,097.44 37,061.20 1,963.76 Be 29.75 99 STORE W1 OFFICE UPSTAIRS 71.50 0.82 58.63 C 3,209.95 3,509.24 299.29 7 42.76 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 71.50 0.10 7.15 C 460.84 61.44 (399.40) 3 (133.13) 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 71.50 0.51 36.47 C 8,460.22 5,745.64 (2,704.58) 6 (450.76) 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STOR 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 2,209.07 2.945.10 738.09 5 147.22 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 48.424.65 64,660.21 16.135.56 7 2.305.08 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 16,568.58 22,089.42 5,520.84 8 690.11 100 FACTORY 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 198.614.52 264,794.82 66.180.30 28 2,363.58 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 439.275.55 540,474.66 101,199.10 353 288.68 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 203,814.79 267,009.12 63.284.33 232 272.78 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 36,503.92 48,667.40 12.163.48 11 1,105.77 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 71.50 0.17 12.16 C 790,410.07 171,424.44 (618,985.63) 690 (897.08) 111 WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 71.50 0.17 12.16 C 212,881.99 46,818.02 (166,063.97) 314 (528.87) 112 STEEL BUILDING 71.50 0.17 12.16 C 7,859.36 1,781.32 (6,078.04) 35 (173.66) 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 71.50 0.17 12.16 C 63,289.25 11,831.93 (51,457.33) 49 (1,050.15) 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 161,D53.51 212,108.33 51,054.82 60 850.91 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORA 71.50 0.17 12.16 C 0.01) 0.00 0.00 6 0.00 116 TRUCK TERMINAL 71.50 0.17 12.16 C 16,551.43 3,751.31 (12,800.12) 8 (1,600.01) 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANTID 71.50 0.82 58.63 C 24.735.69 25,645.76 910.17 2.025 0.45 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 1,103.37 1,591.02 397.55 2 198.82 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 71.50 1.00 71.60 C 1,815.37 2.420.28 604.91 39 15.51 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALLI 71.50 0.00 0.D0 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 233 0.00 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 71.50 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 65 0.00 124 OIL/MINERAL RIGHTS 0.00 C . 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0.00 C 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 0.00 C 686 UNASSIGNED VACANT 71.50 0.00 0.00 C 18.357.21 0.00 (18,357.21) 128 (143.42) 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 71.50 1.00 71.50 C 56,567.21 81,993.91 25,425.70 45 565.04 Dist 3-Totals 20.309,955,6920.267,543.64 (42,412.05) 174,831 (0.24) 514M District 5 Structure Analysis Page 10 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chanye/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-C/I,RURAL PC 84.50 1.00 84.50 C 411.75 502.94 91.19 8 11.40 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 84.50 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 814 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE 84.50 1.00 84.50 P 1,409,788.00 1,231,287.53 (178,500.48) 14,571 (12.25) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 84.50 0.70 59.15 B 84,685.69 101.501.40 16,815.71 868 19.37 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 84.50 1.00 84.50 S 370.35 0.00 (370.35) 109 (3.40) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 84.50 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 23 0.00 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 0.00 P 7 MOBILEHOME 94.50 0.50 42.25 S 0.00 0.00 0.00 109 0.00 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 84.50 0.00 0.D0 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 10 DUPLEX ONLY 84.50 0.70 59.15 S 222,782.67 225.243.20 2,460.53 1,948 1.26 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 84.50 _ 0.70 59.15 S 30.626.37 31,053.75 427.38 177 2.41 12 04-UNITS ONLY 84.50 0.70 59.15 S 14.915.87 14,964.95 49.08 67 0.73 13 5 TO 16 UNITS 84.60 0.70 59.15 S 31,700.33 34,070.40 2.370.07 82 28.90 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 84.50 0.70 59.15 S 6,952.36 4.968.60 (1,983.76) 5 (396.75) 15 2640 UNITS ONLY 84.50 0.70 59.15 S 5,805.00 5,915.00 110.00 3 36.67 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 84.50 0.70 59.15 S 15,093.00 15,379.00 286.00 6 47.67 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 84.50 0.70 59.15 S 143,D93.25 145,804.75 2,711.50 13 208.58 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FOR 84.50 1.00 84.50 C 76,453.84 111,611.78 35,057.94 628 55.82 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 84.50 1.70 143.65 P 372.66 287.30 (85.36) 2 (42.68) 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 1.44 C 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 5.547.73 2,778.29 (2,769.44) 7 (395.63) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 151.78 76.01 (75.77) 1 (75.77) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 461.14 230.94 (230.20) 3 (76.73) 24 USED CAR LOT 84.50 0.41 34.65 S 362.42 0.00 (362.42) 3 (120.81) 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDINGS 0.53 C 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 1.12 C 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 84.50 7.96 672.62 C 913.93 8,885.98 7,972.05 2 3.986.03 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 84.50 1.51 127.60 C 991.41 1,828.56 837.15 1 837.15 32 CEMETERY 8 RELATED BUILDING 94.50 1.01 85.35 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 84.50 0.20 16.90 C 6,506.62 728.83 (5,777.79) 18 (361.11) 34 DORMITORY 0.97 C 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 84.50 1.44 121.68 C 1.918.90 3,375.18 1,45626 2 728.13 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 8,809.63 4,411.80 (4,397.73) 17 (258.69) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 84.50 0.51 43.10 C 1,291.92 804.80 (487.12) 3 (162.37) 38 FUNERAL HOME 1.01 C 39 GOLF COURSE 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 6,091.90 3,050.80 (3,041.10) 28 (108.61) 40 HEALTH CLUB 84.50 0.29 24.51 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 42 HOSPITAL 84.50 0.97 81.97 C 91.38 108.28 16.90 1 16.90 43 HOTEL 84.50 0.97 81.97 C 15.268.63 18.090.41 2,821.78 5 564.36 5/4/98 District 5 Structure Analysis Page 11 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chance/Parcel 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 0.17 C 45 MARINAS 84.50 0.53 44.79 C 3.474.83 2,249.51 (1,225.32) 8 (153.17) 47 SUPERMARKET 84.50 1.51 127.60 C 1.701.75 3.138.71 1,436.96 3 478.99 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 84.50 1.51 127.60 C 507.22 935.53 426.31 3 142.77 50 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 ST 84.50 1.24 104.78 C 1,071.03 1,622.20 551.17 2 275.59 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 1.24 C 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 1.24 C 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 84.50 1.24 104.78 C 5.640.66 8.543.34 2.902.68 2 1,451.34 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MEDICAL 1.24 C 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 84.50 0.50 42.25 S 39.183.75 28,518.75 (10,665.00) 6 (1,7T7.50) 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 84.50 0.97 81.97 C 4,771.52 5,653.37 881.85 8 110.23 57 MOTORCYCLEISMALL VEHICLE BLDG 0Ai C 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 84.50 0.10 8.45 C 110.68 13.52 (97.16) 1 (97.16) 60 NURSING HOME 1.02 C 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 1.02 C 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURSING 1.02 C 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STO 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 69.945.87 68.423.39 (1,522.48) 159 (9.58) 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 47,923.64 47,999.89 7625 12 6.35 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 1,216.39 1.218.33 1.94 1 1.94 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 21,373.89 20,373.96 (999.93) 6 (166.65) 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFF 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 395.63 373.47 (22.16) 5 (4.43) 71 PARKING GARAGE 84.50 0.17 14.37 C 695.25 144.37 (550.88) 2 (275.44) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 84.50 0.17 14.37 C 2,173.15 451.25 (1,721.90) 56 (30.75) 73 RECREATION 84.50 1.44 121.68 C 1,758.06 3.092.25 1,334.19 5 266.64 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 64.50 0.27 22.82 C 1,862.80 614.34 (1,248.46) 2 (624.23) 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 84.50 3.00 253.50 C 566.92 2,058A2 1.491.50 5 298.30 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 84.50 6.00 507.00 C 2.454.99 17,992.42 15,537.43 15 1,035.83 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 84.50 6.00 507.00 C 20,754.51 152,105.58 131,351.07 56 2,345.55 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SFR 6.00 C 81 PRESCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CA 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 287.65 288.11 0.46 1 0.46 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 94.50 0.82 69.29 C 3,410.02 3,415.44 5.42 2 2.71 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 1,159.56 546.91 (612.65) 14 (43.76) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN:SERV STN/RESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATIOWCONVIENCE 0.41 C 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTE 84.50 1.51 127.60 C 5,914.11 10,907.97 4,993.86 4 1,248.46 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CEN 84.50 0.53 44.79 C 19,324.63 12,510.20 (6,814.43) 12 (567.87) 514198 District 5 Structure Analysis Page 12 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chance/Parcel 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 0.53 C 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 84.50 1.38 116.61 C 32,429.56 54,663.39 22,233.83 5 4,446.77 92 SKATING RINKS 1.12 C 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 0.41 C 95 DISCOUNTSTORE 0.41 C 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 25.103.38 12.498.77 (12,604.61) 122 (103.32) 97 STRIP STORE 84.50 0.41 34.65 C 7,034.10 3,506.62 (3,528.48) 28 (126.02) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OT 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 38,728.56 38.730.13 1.57 114 0.01 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 488.27 489.05 0.78 1 0.78 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 0.10 C 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 84.50 0.51 43.10 C 1,007.39 627.55 (379.84) 3 (125.61) 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STORAGE 1.00 C 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 1.00 C 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 1.00 C 106 FACTORY 1.00 C 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 84.50 1.00 84.50 C 1,085.82 1,326.31 240.49 7 34.36 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 1.00 C 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 1.00 C 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 84.50 0.17 14.37 C 922.57 191.57 (731.00) 2 (365.50) III WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 0.17 C 112 STEEL BUILDING 0.17 C 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 0.17 C 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 1.00 C 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 0.17 C 116 TRUCK TERMINAL 0.17 C 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANT/D 84.50 0.82 69.29 C 17,038.60 17,085.64 27.14 301 0.09 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 1.00 C 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 84.50 1.00 84.50 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALU 84.50 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 82 0.00 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 84.50 0.00 0.00 C 206.91 0.00 (206.91) 48 (4.31) 124 OILIMINERAL RIGHTS 0.00 C 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0.00 C 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 0.00 C 666 UNASSIGNED VACANT 84.50 0.00 0.00 C 1,751.36 0.00 (1,751.36) 15 (116.76) 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 84.50 1.00 84.50 C 41,085.68 50,184.21 9,098.63 17 535.21 Dist 5-Totals 2,516,019.04 2,539,333.92 23,314.88 20,662 1.13 5/4198 District 6 Structure Analysis Page 13 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chance/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-CA,RURAL PC 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 3.719.45 4,735.20 1,015.75 12 84.65 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 71.0D 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 232 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE 71.00 1.00 71.00 P 1,495,303.11 1,361,109.06 (134,194.06) 19,171 (7.D0) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 71.00 0.70 49.70 B 71,073.95 88,615.10 17,541.15 740 23.70 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 71.00 1.00 71.00 S 717.58 71.00 (646.58) 70 (9.24) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 71.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 14 D.GO 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 0.00 P 7 MOBILEHOME 71.00 0.50 35.50 S 0.00 0.00 0.00 442 0.00 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 71.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 10 DUPLEX ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 31,545.36 33,050.50 1,506.14 332 4.53 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 52,526.17 55,614.30 3,088.13 368 8.39 12 04-UNITS ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 92.027.60 97,262.90 5.235,30 500 10.47 13 5TO 16 UNITS 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 123,025.84 127,579.90 4,554.06 288 15.81 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 54.795.49 57,950.20 3,164.71 57 55.35 15 2640 UNITS ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 40,575.60 43,089.90 2,514.30 29 86.70 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 71.00 0.70 49.70 S 83.116.80 88.267.20 5.150.40 30 171.68 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 71.00 0.70 49.70 5 307,990.90 327.075.70 19,084.90 23 829.78 18 - DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FOR 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 130,529.78 196,210.77 65,680.99 653 100.58 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 71.00 1.70 120.70 P 448.48 482.80 34.32 4 8.58 20 AMUSEMENTPARKS 1.44 C 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 19.885.22 10.379.43 (9,505.79) 25 (380.23) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 13,756.80 7,154.22 (6,602.58) 63 (104.80) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 5.192.74 2.696.52 (2,496.22) 30 (83.21) 24 USED CAR LOT 71.00 0.41 29.11 S 229.21 0.00 (229.21) 6 (38.20) 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDINGS 0.53 C 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 1.12 C 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 71.00 7.96 565.16 C 388.81 3.669.02 3,280.21 6 546.70 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 71.00 1.51 107.21 C 306.72 589.66 282.94 4 70.73 32 CEMETERY&RELATED BUILDING 71.00 1.01 71.71 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 71.00 0.20 14.20 C 10.996.60 2,798.47 (8,198.14) 44 (186.32) 34 DORMITORY 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 269.31 332.57 63.26 1 63.26 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 71.00 1.44 102.24 C 453.96 832.23 378.27 1 378.27 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 10,912.76 5,696.13 (5,216.63) 24 (217.36) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 71.00 0.51 36.21 C 731.98 475.26 (256.70) 4 (64.18) 38 FUNERAL HOME 71.00 1.01 71.71 C 582.89 749.51 166.62 2 83.31 39 GOLF COURSE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 2,792.16 1.457.42 (1,334.74) 12 (11113) 40 HEALTH CLUB 0.29 C 42 HOSPITAL 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 6,194.03 7.648.98 1,454.95 3 484.98 43 HOTEL 0.97 C 5/4/98 District 6 Structure Analysis Page 14 of 24 VM Dese SFR Rt Egk New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Change/Parcel 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 0.17 C 45 MARINAS 0.53 C 47 SUPERMARKET 71.00 1.51 107.21 C 5,608.82 10,739.33 5,130.51 6 855.09 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 71.00 1.61 107.21 C 1,435.58 2,759.80 1,324.22 8 165.53 50 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 ST 71.00 1.24 88.04 C 20,431.15 32,026.08 11,593.93 67 173.04 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 71.00 1.24 88.04 C 974.13 1,537.79 563.66 1 563.66 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 1.24 C 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 71.00 1.24 88.04 C 3,622.26 5,718.20 2,095.94 1 2.095.94 64 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MEDICAL 1.24 C 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 71.00 0.50 35.50 S 62,868.18 47,463.50 (15,404.68) 32 (481.40) 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 34.767.72 42,934.59 8,166.87 32 255.21 57 MOTORCYCLE/SMALL VEHICLE B 71.D0 0.41 29.11 C 325.69 170.00 (155.69) 3 (51.90) 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 71.00 0.10 7.10 C 1.453.56 183.80 (1,269.76) 8 (158.72) 60 NURSING HOME 71.00 1.02 72.42 C 5.892.47 7,651.68 1,759.21 4 439.80 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 71.00 1.02 72.42 C 11,378.70 14,775.85 3,397.15 9 377.46 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURS 71.00 1.02 72.42 C 278.93 408.74 129.81 2 64.90 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 61 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDIN 71.00 0.97 68.87 C 13,625.83 16,826.46 3,20D.63 2 1,600.31 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STO 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 86.844.64 76,898.26 (9,946.38) 121 (82.20) fib SMALL OFFICE CENTER 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 1,740.85 1,817.34 76.49 2 38.24 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 71.00 0.82 68.22 C 1,383.20 1,443.97 60.77 1 60.77 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 2,334.92 2,437.50 102.58 1 102.58 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFF 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 477.93 467.33 (10.60) 8 (1.32) 71 PARKING GARAGE 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 86.16 18.65 (67.51) 1 (67.51) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 0.00 0.D0 0.00 25 0.00 73 RECREATION 71.00 1.44 102.24 C 1.481.24 2.715.49 1.234.25 3 411.42 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 0.27 C 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 71.00 3.00 213.00 C 1,387.62 6,026.37 3.638.76 17 214.04 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 71.00 6.00 426.00 C 4,698.09 35,608.91 30.910.82 30 1.030.38 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 71.00 6.D0 426.00 C 5,196.99 39,698.09 34.501.10 21 1.642.91 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SFR 6.00 C 81 PRE-SCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CA 71.00 0.82 5822 C 2.004.65 2,092.78 88.13 13 6.78 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 15,255.03 15,891.44 638.41 6 105.07 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 2,983.17 1,506.44 (1,476.73) 28 (62.74) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN:SERV STN/RESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATION/CONV 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 90.57 47.27 (43.30) 3 (14.43) 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTE 71.00 1.51 107.21 C 10.338.62 19,874.70 9,536.08 16 596.00 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CEN 71.00 0.53 37.63 C 43,037.78 29,039.18 (13,998.60) 29 (482.71) 5/g19g District 6 Structure Analysis Page 15 of 24 um Desc SFR Fit Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease Pareals Change/Parcel 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 71.00 0.53 37.63 C 25.083.29 16,924.62 (8,158.67) 15 (543.91) 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 1.38 C 92 SKATING RINKS 1.12 C 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 0.41 C 95 DISCOUNT STORE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 6,907.28 3,606.30 (3,301.92) 3 (1,100.64) 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 31,030.33 16,151.42 (14.878.91) 120 (123.99) 97 STRIP STORE 71.00 0.41 29.11 C 35,515.25 18,537.96 (18,977.31) 83 (204.55) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OT 71.00 0.82 68.22 C 8.293.54 8,558.01 354.47 28 14.02 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 71.00 0.82 58.22 C 1,087.61 1,135.29 47.78 1 47.78 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 0.10 C 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 71.00 0.51 36.21 C 1,167.87 758.27 (499.60) 2 (204AQ 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STORAGE 1.00 C 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 1.00 C 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 1.00 C 106 FACTORY 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 11,323.18 11,522.95 199.76 5 39.96 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 60.728.13 76,000.81 15.272.68 108 144.08 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 94,086.04 118,722.37 24,636.33 103 239.19 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 25,935.48 5,609.17 (20.326.31) Be (298.92) III WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 33,740A7 7286.19 (26,454.28) 141 (187.62) 112 STEEL BUILDING 71.00 0.17 12.07 C 808.87 175.08 (633.81) 4 (158.45) 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 71,00 0.17 12.07 C 16,251.65 3.617.27 (12.734.38) 15 (80-96) 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 39,435.87 43,628.93 4,193.06 11 381.19 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 0.17 C 116 TRUCK TERMINAL 0.17 C 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANTID 71.00 0.82 5822 C 28,136.39 28,721.99 585.60 242 2.42 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 1,019.47 1.297.88 278.41 2 139.21 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALLI 71.00 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 54 0,00 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 71.00 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 124 OILIMINERAL RIGHTS 0.00 C 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0.00 C 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD-M 0.00 C 666 UNASSIGNED VACANT 71.00 0.00 0.00 C 1,923.11 0.00 (1,923.11) 9 (213.68) 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 71.00 1.00 71.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 Dist 6-Totals 3,322,567.40 3,303,626.04 (18,941.36) 24,706 (0.77) 514/98 District 7 Structure Analysis Page 16 o124 Use Dew SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chance/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-CA,RURAL PC 5125 1.00 51.25 C 5,979.15 7,791.33 1,812.18 16 113.26 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 51.26 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 852 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE 51.25 1.00 51.25 P 1,863,083.81 1,736.055.31 (127,028.50) 33,874 (3.75) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 51.25 0.70 35.88 B 12,437.54 17,722.25 5,284.71 228 23.18 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 51.25 1.00 51.25 S 11,612.44 0.00 (11,612.44) 144 (80.64) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 5125 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 33 0.00 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 51.25 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 7 MOBILEHOME 51.25 0.50 25.63 S 0.00 0.00 0.00 608 0.00 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 0.00 P 10 DUPLEX ONLY 51.25 0.70 35.88 S 17,869.07 19,300.75 1,431.68 274 5.23 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 51.25 0.70 35.88 S 8,173.00 8,825.25 652.25 84 7.76 12 04-UNITS ONLY 51.25 0.70 35.88 S 56,628.00 61,661.50 4,933.50 430 11.47 13 5TO 16 UNITS 51.25 0.70 35.88 S 37,680.64 42.655.30 4,974.74 109 45.64 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 51.26 0.70 35.88 S 12,654.53 13,058.50 403.97 19 21.26 15 26-40 UNITS ONLY 51.25 0.70 35.88 S 28,611.00 31,103.63 2,492.63 27 92.32 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 51.25 0.70 35.88 S 140,415.00 152,648.13 12,233.13 62 197.31 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 51.25 0.70 35.88 S 269,a41.00 297.224.38 27,383.38 62 441.67 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FOR 51.25 1.00 51.25 C 94,303.17 133,858.29 39,555.12 173 228.64 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 1.70 P 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 1.44 C 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 51.26 0.41 21.01 C 3,148.94 1,682.37 (1,466.57) 5 (293.31) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 1,166.60 621.70 (544.90) 7 (77.84) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 2,796.08 1,493.86 (1,302.22) 19 (68,54) 24 USED CAR LOT 0.41 S 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDIN 51.25 0.53 27.16 C 1.109.10 765.98 (343.12) 3 (114.37) 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 51.25 1.12 57.40 C 1,548.50 2,259.95 711.45 1 711.45 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 51.25 7.96 407.95 C 1,367.53 14,185.24 12,817.71 12 1,068.14 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 51.26 1.51 77.39 C 190.07 374.01 183.94 2 91.97 32 CEMETERY&RELATED BUILDING 51.25 1.01 51.76 C 5,173.73 6,809.20 1,635.47 14 116.82 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 51.25 0.20 10.25 C 17,228.36 4,490.00 (12,730.36) 47 (271.03) 34 DORMITORY 0.97 C 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 1.44 C 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 12,579.97 6,705.99 (5,873.98) 38 (154.58) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 51.25 0.51 26.14 C 1,998.78 1,328.33 (670.45) 5 (134.09) 38 FUNERAL HOME 51.25 1.01 51.76 C 484.81 638.08 153.27 2 76.63 39 GOLF COURSE 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 487.76 260.60 (227.16) 6 (37.86) 40 HEALTH CLUB 51.25 0.29 14.86 C 14,399.12 5,441.32 (8,957.80) 11 (814.35) 42 HOSPITAL 51.25 0.97 49.71 C 3,547.47 4,483.97 936.50 5 187.30 43 HOTEL 51.25 0.97 49.71 C 69,848.82 88.287.86 18,439.04 17 1,084.65 5/4198 District 7 Structure Analysis Page 17 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Egt New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Iner(Decrease) Parcels ChanaetParoel 44 LUMBERICONSTR MATL YARD 0.17 C 45 MARINAS 0.53 C 47 SUPERMARKET 51.25 1.51 T7.39 C 2,730.87 5,373.40 2,842.53 2 1,321.27 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 51.25 1.51 77.39 C 642.79 1,284.82 622.03 6 103.67 50 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 ST 51.25 1.24 63.55 C 22.095.68 34,638.37 12,542.69 175 71.67 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 51.25 1.24 63,55 C 7,463.40 12,059.50 4.596.10 4 1.149.03 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 5125 1.24 63.56 C 692.67 1,119.24 426.57 1 426.57 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 51.25 1.24 63.55 C 3,202.87 5,175.26 1,972.39 3 657.46 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MED 51.25 1.24 63.56 C 0.00 0.D0 0.00 1 0.00 65 MOBILE HOME PARK 51.25 0.50 25.63 S 17.194.27 26,291.25 9,096.98 16 568.56 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 51.25 0.97 49.71 C 17,384.79 21,974.17 4,589.38 15 305.96 57 MOTORCYCLEISMALL VEHICLE BLDG 0.41 C 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 51.25 0.10 5.13 C 537.16 70.00 (467.15) 3 (155.72) 60 NURSING HOME 51.25 1.02 52.28 C 1,626.84 2.162.30 535.46 2 267.73 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 51.25 1.02 52.28 C 7,335.22 9,749.55 2,414.33 6 402.39 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURS 61.25 1.02 52.28 C 187.17 248.78 61.61 1 61.61 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDG$TO 3 STO 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 495,298.11 523,417.00 28,118.89 1,087 25,87 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 49,968.38 53,392.51 3,424.13 41 83S2 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 18.897.72 20,192.68 1,294.96 6 215.83 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 462.668.31 464,506.32 21,918.01 88 249.07 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFF 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 611.65 651.93 40.28 11 3S6 71 PARKING GARAGE 51.25 0.17 8.71 C 30.843.47 6,579.85 (24,263.62) 19 (1,277D3) 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 51.25 0.17 8.71 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 61 0,00 73 RECREATION 61.25 1.44 73.80 C 374.81 703.31 328.50 4 82,13 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 027 C 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 51.25 3.00 163.76 C 1,660.02 6,471.18 4,811.16 22 218.69 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 51.26 8.00 307.50 C 8,01l 46.708.48 40,704.46 43 946.62 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 51.25 6.00 307.50 C 18,281.57 142.921.70 124,640.13 64 1.947.50 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SFR 6.00 C 81 PRESCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CA 61.25 0.82 42.03 C 2.007.67 2,145.17 137.60 9 15.29 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 5,889.41 6,292.99 403.58 7 57.65 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 61.25 0.41 21.01 C 2,583.50 1,351.57 (1,231.93) 55 (22.40) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN:SERV STNIRESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATIONICONV 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 355.48 138.08 (167.401' 6 (27.90) 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTE 5126 1.51 T7.39 C 32,759.79 64,480.07 31,700.28 50 634.01 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CEN 51.25 0.53 27.16 C 37,661.75 26,010.48 (11,651.27) 49 (237.78) 514198 District 7 Structure Analysis Page 18 of 24 Use Dew SFR Rl Fetr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Change/Parcel 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 51.25 0.53 27.16 C 35,21623 24.321.47 (10,894.76) 36 (302.63) 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 51.25 1.38 70.73 C 8.422.00 15.144.84 6,722.84 1 6.722.84 92 SKATING RINKS 1.12 C 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 346.10 164.91 (161.19) 1 (161.19) 95 DISCOUNT STORE 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 1.820.89 972.84 (848.05) 4 (212.01) 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 51.25 0.41 21.01 C 24,747.45 13,205.64 (11,541.91) 90 (128.24) 97 STRIP STORE 5125 0.41 21.01 C 17,367.42 9,278.67 (8,088.55) 50 (161.77) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LIV OT 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 3,181.45 3,399.53 218.08 12 18.17 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 276.29 295.23 18.94 1 18.94 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 0.10 C 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 51.25 0.51 26.14 C 7,621.62 5,085.11 (2,566.51) 9 (284.08) 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STORAGE 1.00 C 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 1.00 C 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 1.00 C 106 FACTORY 51.25 1.00 61.25 C 32,220.01 37.743.93 5.623.92 14 394.57 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 51.25 1.00 51.25 C 347,596.64 427,794.21 80.197.56 319 251.40 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 5125 1.00 51.26 C 65.085.64 83,D44.68 17,979.04 68 254.40 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 51.25 1.00 51.25 C 17.237.63 22.462.00 5,224.37 11 474.94 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 5125 0.17 8.71 C 285.136.58 81.462.74 (223,673.84) 405 (552.28) 111 WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 51.25 0.17 ail C 118.073.01 23,062.96 (95,010.05) 3D8 (308.47) 112 STEEL BUILDING 51.25 0.17 8.71 C 2,287.60 506.76 (1,780.84) 10 (178.08) 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 51.25 0.17 8.71 C 9,813.95 2,129.72 (7,484.23) 13 (575.71) 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 51.25 1.00 51.25 C 124,171.58 161,805.37 37.633.79 52 723.73 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 0.17 C 116 TRUCKTERMINAL 51.25 0.17 8.71 C 314.64 69.70 (244.94) 1 (244.94) 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANT/D 51.25 0.82 42.03 C 47.040.45 50,301.61 3,261.16 480 6.79 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 1.00 C 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 1.00 C 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALU 51.25 0.00 0.00 C 397.78 0.00 (397.78) 136 (2.92) 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 0.00 C 124 OIL/MINERAL RIGHTS 0.00 C 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EOUIPMENT 0.00 C 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 0.00 C 666 UNASSIGNED VACANT 5125 0.00 0.00 C 15,586.94 0.00 (15,588.94) 24 (649.46) 688 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 51.25 1.00 61.25 C 83,444.77 90,192411 6,748.11 41 164.59 Dist 7-Totals 5,190,507.94 5,200,276.02 9.768.08 41,133 0.24 514/98 District 11 Structure Analysis Page 19 of 24 YM Deae SFR Rt F1rjr_ New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Ohanne/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-CA,RURAL PC 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 2,003.72 3,641.61 1,037.89 15 69.19 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 70.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 909 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE 70.00 1.00 70.00 P 2,177,709.21 2.177.709.10 (0.11) 31,110 (0.00) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 70.00 0.70 49.00 B 18,227.33 23,520.00 5.292.67 286 19.90 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 70.00 1.00 70.00 S 1,671.95 0.00 (1,671.95) 69 (24.23) 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 70.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 0.00 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 0.00 P 7 MOBILEHOME 70.00 0.50 35.00 S 0.00 0.00 0.00 703 0.00 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 0.00 P 10 DUPLEX ONLY 70.00 0.70 49.00 S 14,276.93 16.317.00 2.040.07 173 11.79 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 70.00 0.70 49.00 S 32,WS.72 37.779.00 5.272.28 260 20.28 12 04-UNITS ONLY 70.00 0.70 49.00 S 152,978.00 178,360.00 25.382.00 918 27.65 13 5 TO 16 UNITS 70.00 0.70 49.00 S 76,192.85 88.102.00 11,909.15 257 46.34 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 70.00 0.70 49.00 8 25,948.93 27.832.00 1,883.07 31 60.74 15 26-40 UNITS ONLY 70.00 0.70 49.00 S 24,360.00 28.420.00 4,050.00 18 225.56 18 41-99 UNITS ONLY 70.00 0.70 49.00 S 46,788.00 54,588.00 7.798.00 18 433.22 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 70.00 0.70 49.00 S 163,174.00 178,703.00 25,629.00 18 1,418.28 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FOR 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 50,888.08 69,605.76 18,717.68 325 57.59 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 70.00 1.70 119.00 P 370.39 476.00 105.61 4 26.40 20 AMUSEMENTPARKS 1.44 C 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 3,193.71 1,825.64 (1,355.07) 7 (194.01) 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 1.409.58 808.31 (001.27) 12 (50.11) 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 1,094.37 627.65 (468.82) 5 (93.36) 24 USED CAR LOT 0.41 S 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDIN 70.00 0.53 37.10 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 28 BOWLING ALLEYS 1.12 C 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 70.00 7.95 567.20 C 207.55 2,218.21 2,010.68 2 1,005.33 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 70.00 1.51 105.70 C 274.46 579.66 305.20 4 76.30 32 CEMETERY 8 RELATED BUILDING 70.00 1.01 70.70 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 70.00 0.20 14.00 C 9.387.10 2,625.78 (6,761.32) 21 (321.97) 34 DORMITORY 0.97 C 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 1.44 C 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 4,938.57 2,831.94 (2,106.63) 15 (140.44) 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 70.00 0.51 35.70 C 120.97 86.29 (34.68) 1 (34.08) 38 FUNERAL HOME 70.00 1.01 70.70 C 257.45 363.68 10823 1 105.23 39 GOLF COURSE 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 11 0.00 40 HEALTH CLUB 70.00 0.29 20.30 C 612.41 248.39 (384.02) 2 (182.01) 42 HOSPITAL 0.97 C 43 HOTEL 70.00 0.07 67.90 C 17,781.01 24.122.49 6,341.48 2 3.170.74 514/98 District 11 Structure Analysis Page 20 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rl Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Ina(Decrease) Parcels Change/Parcel 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 0.17 C 45 MARINAS 70.00 0.53 37.10 C 439.23 316.43 (122.80) 5 (24.58) 47 SUPERMARKET 70.00 1.51 105.70 C 1,669.16 3,525.10 1,865.94 2 927.97 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 70.00 1.51 105.70 C 777.26 1,612.98 835.72 5 167.14 50 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 ST 70.00 1.24 86.80 C 5.096.23 8,801.52 3.705.29 14 264.66 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 70.00 1.24 86.80 C 906.70 1,572.47 665.77 1 665.77 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 1.24 C 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 1.24 C 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MED 70.00 1.24 86.80 C 56.40 97.82 41.42 1 41.42 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 70.00 0.50 35.00 S 68,402.44 41,335.00 (17.067.44) 12 (1,422.29) 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 70.00 0.97 67.90 C 5,910.01 8,017.84 2,107.83 9 234.20 57 MOTORCYCLEISMALL VEHICLE BLDG 0.41 C 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 70.00 0.10 7.00 C 238.63 33.38 (205.25) 1 (205.25) 60 NURSING HOME 1.02 C 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 1.02 C 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURSING 1.02 C 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STO 70.00 0.82 57.40 C 27,621.57 30,995.14 3,373.57 74 45.59 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 0.82 C 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 70.00 0.82 57.40 C 7.446.68 8,540.26 1.093.58 1 1.093.58 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 70.00 0.82 57.40 C 4,957.74 5,685.81 728.07 2 364.04 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFFICE 0.82 C 71 PARKING GARAGE 0.17 C 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 70.00 0.17 11.90 C 501.19 119.17 (382.02) 14 (27.29) 73 RECREATION 70.00 1.44 100.80 C 725.57 1,461.30 735.73 2 367.86 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 0.27 C 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 70.00 3.00 210.00 C 458.05 1,863.12 1.405.07 5 281.01 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 70.00 6.00 420.00 C 3,098.61 25,924.08 22,825.47 30 760.85 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 70.00 6.00 420.00 C 5,340.17 44,813.16 39,472.99 16 2.467.06 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SFR 6.00 C 81 PRE-SCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CA 70.00 0.82 57.40 C 2,217.64 2,543.34 325.70 6 54.28 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 0.82 C 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 2,086.66 1,149.09 (937.57) 28 (33.48) 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN: SERV STN/RESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATION/CONV 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 59.50 34.12 (26.38) 1 (25.38) 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTE 70.00 1.51 105.70 C 15,085.61 31,859.25 16.773.64 14 1,198A2 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CEN 70.00 0.53 37.10 C 37.962.65 28.140.20 (9,822.45) 29 (338.71) 5/4/98 District 11 Structure Analysis Page 21 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt E= New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chance/Parcel 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 70.00 0.53 37.10 C 40,687.02 30,159.67 (10,527.35) 13 (809.80) 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 70.00 1.38 90.60 C 8,928.26 17,228.32 8,302.08 1 8.302.06 92 SKATING RINKS 1.12 C 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 435.88 249.95 (185.93) 1 (185.93) 95 DISCOUNT STORE 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 7,531.34 2,299.87 (5,231.47) 5 (1,046.29) 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 7,082.65 4,040.99 (3,041.68) 27 (112.65) 97 STRIP STORE 70.00 0.41 28.70 C 26.303.30 15,081.99 (11,221.31) 60 (187.02) 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LN OT 70.00 0.82 57.40 C 7,896.43 8,821.69 1,125.26 13 86.56 99 STORE W/OFFICE UPSTAIRS 70.00 0.82 57.40 C 327.57 375.88 48.11 3 16.04 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 0.10 C 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 0.51 C 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STOR 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 72.07 100.80 28.73 1 28.73 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 4,180.76 5,847.24 1,666A8 4 416.62 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 1.00 C 106 FACTORY 1.00 C 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 49.390.99 67,813.83 18,422.84 61 302.01 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 41,481.79 52,933.16 11,451.37 44 260.26 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 1.00 C 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 70.00 0.17 11.90 C 155,598.40 36,426.03 (119,172.37) 224 (532.02) 111 WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 70.00 0.17 11.90 C 73,651.23 17.284.80 (56,366.43) 154 (366.02) 112 STEEL BUILDING 70.00 0.17 11.90 C 1,314.21 312.47 (1,001.74) 3 (333.81) 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 70.00 0.17 11.90 C 3,627.85 862.57 (2,765.28) 5 (553.06) 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 15,091.75 21,107.38 6,016.83 10 601.58 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 0.17 C 116 TRUCKTERMINAL 0.17 C 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANT/D 70.00 0.82 57.40 C 13.311.75 13,046.91 (264.84) 487 (0.54) 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 1.00 C 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 70.00 1.00 70.00 C 869.06 1,215.48 346.42 2 173.21 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALU 70.00 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 29 0.00 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 70.00 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 97 0.00 124 OIL/MINERAL RIGHTS 0.00 C 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0.00 C 126 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADD'M 0.00 C 686 UNASSIGNED VACANT 70.D0 0.00 0.00 C 1,161.36 0.00 (1,161.36) 10 (116.14) 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 70.00 1.D0 70.00 C 12,396.68 17,338.02 4,941.34 14 352.95 Dist 11 -Totals 3,469.159.34 3,482,376.83 13,217.49 36,730 0,36 1 5/4/98 District 13 Structure Analysis Page 22 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Change/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-C/I,RURAL PC 1.00 C 1 VACANT LAND PARCEL 100.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 887 0.00 2 ONE RESIDENCE 100.00 1.00 100.00 P 665,230.17 665,230.00 (0.17) 6,652 (0.00) 3 TWO OR MORE RESIDENCES 100.00 0.70 70.00 B 320.00 350.00 30.00 5 6.00 4 MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENT 100.00 1.00 100.00 S 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 0.00 5 COMMON AREA PARCEL 100.00 0.00 0.00 P 0.00 0.00 0.00 27 0.00 6 "HOLD"PARCEL 0.00 P 7 MOBILEHOME 100.00 0.50 50.00 S 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 8 EQUIVALENT TO VACANT 0.00 P 10 DUPLEX ONLY 0.70 S 11 TRIPLEX ONLY 0.70 S 12 04-UNITS ONLY 0.70 S 13 5TO 16 UNITS 0.70 S 14 17 TO 25 UNITS 0.70 S 15 2640 UNITS ONLY 0.70 S 16 41-99 UNITS ONLY 100.00 0.70 70.00 S 6.240.00 7.280.00 1,040.00 2 520.00 17 100 OR MORE UNITS 100.00 0.70 70.00 S 56,620.00 65,940.00 9,420.00 3 3,140.00 18 DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF FORM 100.00 1.00 100.00 C 100.00 83.90 (16.10) 3 (5.37) 19 SFR WITH 1 OR 2 RENTAL UNITS 1.70 P 20 AMUSEMENT PARKS 1.44 C 21 AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP 0.41 C 22 AUTO REPAIR SHOP 0.41 C 23 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 0.41 C 24 USED CAR LOT 0.41 S 26 AIRPORT AND RELATED BUILDINGS 0.53 C 28 BOWLINGALLEYS 1.12 C 29 CONVENTIONAL CAR WASH 7.96 C 30 COIN OPERATED CAR WASH 1.51 C 32 CEMETERY&RELATED BUILDINGS100.00 1.01 101.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 33 CHURCH BUILDINGS 100.00 0.20 20.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 34 DORMITORY 0.97 C 35 ENTERTAINMENT CENTER 1.44 C 36 FINANCIAL BUILDINGS 0.41 C 37 FRATERNAL BUILDINGS 0.51 C 38 FUNERAL HOME 1.01 C 39 GOLF COURSE 100.00 0.41 41.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 0.00 40 HEALTH CLUB 0.29 C 42 HOSPITAL 0.97 C 43 HOTEL 0.97 C 514198 District 13 Structure Analysis Page 23 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Ina(Decrease) Parcels Change/Parcel 0 CONVERSION-CA.RURAL PC 1.00 C 44 LUMBER/CONSTR MATL YARD 0.17 C 45 MARINAS 0.53 C 47 SUPERMARKET 1.51 C 48 CONVENIENCE MARKET 1.51 C 50 SINGLE MEDICAL BLDGS TO 3 STORIES 1.24 C 51 SMALL MEDICAL CENTER 1.24 C 52 MEDICAL CENTER COMPLEX 1.24 C 53 HIGH RISE MEDICAL 1.24 C 54 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO MEDICAL 1.24 C 55 MOBILE HOME PARK 0.50 S 56 MOTELS AND MOTOR HOTELS 0.97 C 57 MOTORCYCLE/SMALL VEHICLE BLDG 0.41 C 58 NURSERIES(PLANTS) 0.10 C 60 NURSING HOME 1.02 C 61 CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS 1.02 C 62 CONVERTED RES USED AS NURSING 1.02 C 63 LOW RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 64 HIGH RISE RETIREMENT BUILDING 0.97 C 65 SINGLE OFFICE BLDGS TO 3 STOR 100.00 0.82 8ZIX) C 578.86 663.87 85.01 2 42.51 66 SMALL OFFICE CENTER 0.82 C 67 OFFICE COMPLEX 0.82 C 68 HIGH RISE OFFICE 0.82 C 69 CONVERTED RESIDENCE TO OFFICE 0.82 C 71 PARKING GARAGE 0.17 C 72 PAVED PARKING LOT 0.17 C 73 RECREATION 1.44 C 74 RECREATION VEHICLE PARK 0.27 C 76 RESTAURANT-TAKEOUT 3.00 C 77 RESTAURANT-COFFEE SHOP 6.00 C 78 RESTAURANT-DINNER HOUSE 6.00 C 79 RESTAURANT-CONVERSION FROM SFR 8.D0 C 81 PRE-SCHOOLS,NURSERY OR CARE 0.82 C 82 PRIVATE SCHOOLS 0.82 C 83 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 84 MARINE SERVICE STATION 0.41 C 85 COMBIN:SERV STNIRESTAURANT 1.00 C 86 COMBIN:SERVICE STATION/CONVIENCE 0.41 C 88 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING CENTE 100.00 1.51 151.00 C 2,743.66 5,794.32 3,050.66 1 3,050.66 5/4198 District 13 Structure Analysis Page 24 of 24 Use Desc SFR Rt Fctr New Rte Basis Old Fee New Fee Incr(Decrease) Parcels Chancielloarcel 0 CONVERSION-CA,RURAL PC 1.00 C 89 NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENT 100.00 0.53 53.00 C 8,953,52 6,644.29 (2,319.23) 3 (773.08) 90 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER 100.00 0.53 53.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 0.00 91 REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER 1.38 C 92 SKATING RINKS 1.12 C 94 DEPARTMENT STORE 0.41 C 95 DISCOUNT STORE 0.41 C 96 UNATTACHED SINGLE STORE 0.41 C 97 STRIP STORE 0.41 C 98 STORE WITH OFFICES OR LTV QTR 0.82 C 99 STORE WI OFFICE UPSTAIRS 0.82 C 100 DRIVE-IN THEATER 0.10 C 101 UNATTACHED THEATER 0.51 C 103 CHEMICAL TANK AND BULK STORAGE 1.00 C 104 FOOD PROCESSING PLANT 1.00 C 105 COLD STORAGE PLANT 1.00 C 106 FACTORY 1.00 C 107 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-SINGLE 1.00 C 108 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-MULTI 1.00 C 109 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 10D.00 1.00 100.00 C 324.89 464.40 129.51 1 129.51 110 WAREHOUSE-SINGLE TENANT 100.01) 0.17 17.00 C 26,263.91 6,244.59 (20.019.32) 33 (606.65) Ill WAREHOUSE-MULTI TENANT 100.01) 0.17 17.00 C 3,266.46 774.27 (2,482.20) 3 (827,40) 112 STEEL BUILDING 0.17 C 113 MINI-WAREHOUSE 0.17 C 114 INDUSTRIAL PARK 100.00 1.00 100.00 C 21,187.42 29,632.90 8,445.48 20 422.27 115 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE 0.17 C 116 TRUCKTERMINAL 0.17 C 118 GOVERNMENTAL USE VACANTIDE 100.00 0.82 82.00 C 514.80 590.40 76.60 249 0.30 119 PUBLIC UTILITY 100.00 1.00 100.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 120 WATER MUTUAL OR COMPANY 100.00 1.00 10D.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 121 PARCEL OF MINIMAL OR NO VALLI 100.00 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 38 0.00 122 SUBSURFACE PARCELS 100.00 0.00 0.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 124 OILMIINERAL RIGHTS 0.00 C 125 MINERAL RIGHTS EQUIPMENT 0,00 C 128 VACANT COMMON AREA-IMP ALLOC 0.00 C 201 HOME OWNERS EXEMPTION ADUM 0,00 C 666 UNASSIGNED VACANT 100.00 0.00 0.00 C 201.55 0.00 (201.55) 26 (7.75) 888 CONVERSION-COMPOSITE PROP 100.00 1.00 100.00 C 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 Dist 13-Totals 792,445.24 789,682.95 (2,762.30) 7,986 (0.35) DRAFT ORDINANCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THIS MAILING, BUT WILL BE DISTRIBUTED AT THE MEETING FAHRCOMMMEE MCetlngDate T°x 05n3/98 AGENDA REPORT IDem 1umW INNMw County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California /1 FROM: Gary G. Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Michael D. White, Controller SUBJECT: THIRD QUARTER FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 (FAHR98-44) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Committee review, approve and forward the 1997-98 Third Quarter Financial and Operational Report to the Joint Boards. SUMMARY Attached in a separately bound document is the Districts' Third Quarter Financial and Operational Report for the period ended March 31, 1997. This report is a consolidation of both the financial and operational accomplishments of the Districts' through the third quarter of the 1997-98 fiscal year. Contained within the Mid-Year Financial Report are budget summary reviews of the Joint Operating &Working Capital Funds, the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund, individual Districts, and the self-insurance funds. Also contained within this report is the status of the divisional performance objectives and workplan milestones identified in the 1997-98 Approved Budget. As indicated within the Overview Section of this report, 71.35 percent, or $31,323,000 of the 1997-98 net joint operating budget of$43.9 million has been expended. Net costs have decreased 3.04 percent in comparison with the same period last year. The total cost per million gallons at March 31, 1998 is $450.15 based on flows of 69,582.75 million gallons. This is $41, or 8.3 percent below the revised budgeted cost per million gallons of$490.95. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A �o.ae„uwtuy.wxviorn..wnHAvnHAeaw.y�nHaasu.a� Page 1 BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) ATTACHMENTS 1. Districts' 1997-98 Third Quarter Financial and Operational Report for the period ended March 31, 1998. MW 1NEcn W M11 W p.EYNn1T VaAw1FAHMFAHRBNAry1FAMiBSN.E¢ a...w. , Page 2 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS M"Ung Dare ro n.ans. 5.27-9a AGENDA REPORT em Number IemN bey County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineeri Originator: Dennis May, Principal Engi eying Associate SUBJECT: CHEMICAL FACILITY MODIFICATIONS AT PLANTS NO. 1 & 2 JOB NOS. P1-46 & P2-55 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Agreement with Black & Veatch (PDC96-38) SUMMARY In August 1996, the PDC Committee recommended the approval of this Addendum to the Professional Services Agreement with Black & Veatch, re: Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-46, and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2- 55. This Addendum provided added engineering services in the amount of $36,310, which was offset by reallocation of funds within the PSA by a reduction of other requirements, resulting in zero change in the total compensation (See attached agenda report PDC96-38). This item was inadvertently not forwarded for full Board approval in August 1996. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY See attached PDC96-38. No net impact from Addendum No. 3 BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: A.7.c.) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION \VNnWeullwp.NaW q\]30.mayP1J6]MmaFRBB.ax n.+,w vvve Page 1 N/A ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS 1. Agenda report PDC96-38, dated August 1, 1996. 2. Excerpts from minutes for August 1, 1996 PDC Committee Meeting. \Yehnbelethy Elasp\]2pmq/pI J61tlm]Rfl9B Oc a.�,.a vs9e Page 2 Fo at - Originator ntten Report D - y ❑ Overheads Department Head Sign Off ❑ Slides David dwin ❑ Flip Charts Anticipated Time /do Nrn! PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE AGENDAFOR AUGUST 1, 1996 PDC96-38: Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 3 to the professional services agreement with Black & Veatch re Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P7-46, and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-55, providing increases and decreases in engineering services with no change in the total authorized compensation. Summary In April 1993, the Boards approved a professional services agreement with Black & Veatch of Irvine, California to prepare design reports, plans, specifications, and supply limited construction services for chemical, wastehauler and plant water system modifications. This project includes replacement of the chlorine odor control and disinfection facilities with hydrogen peroxide and bleach systems, improvements to the wastehauler dump facilities, and improvements to the plant water system to route secondary effluent to the Plant Water Pump Station at Plant No. 2. Two addenda have been previously authorized for this contract. Addendum No. 1 added $11,100 to the contract for redesign to allow more efficient use of bleach at Plant No. 2 and Addendum No. 2 added $282,700 for six additional chemical storage and feed facilities to provide more effective odor control capabilities at both plants. The total amended contract amount is $673,515. The Scope of Work for this project has changed due to several factors: 1. In December 1994, the entire project was placed on hold because of the bankruptcy. In March 1995 the Plant No. 2 elements were deemed a priority and restarted. Because of this, Jobs Nos. P146-2 & P2-55 had to be separated into two separate construction projects. 2. Since the design phase of the project began, the Districts has issued new electrical and instrumentation guidelines which must to be incorporated in the work for compatibility with related systems. 3. Because this work is now two separate jobs, additional meetings will be required to complete the design phase. 4. The Plant No. 1 design (which is approximately 90% complete) has been on hold nearly two years and some adjustment is due to compensate for cost increases and disruption of the design team. 5. The remaining work in the wastehauler element has been canceled because the interim facility constructed in December 1993 as part of this project is meeting the needs of the Districts and no additional modifications are required at this time. Black and Veatch has proposed that the extra work and compensation are essentially equal in cost to the deleted work and that no additional cost will be incurred, (see attached Black & Veatch letter dated 6-27-96). Budget Information Existing Change Per Amended Agreement Addendum Agreement ([net.Add.1&2) No.3 Direct labor at hourly rates plus $568,799 0 $568,799 overhead at 185% not to exceed Direct Expenses at cost $47,905 0 $47,905 j not to exceed Fixed Profit LUAU —k— $Sfi911 Total, not to exceed $673,515 0 $673,515 Total compensation allowed under this agreement shall not exceed $673,515 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the PDC Committee recommend to the Boards of Directors approval of Addendum No.3 to the professional services agreement with Black & Veatch re Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1, Job No. P146, and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-55; providing added engineering services in the amount of$36,310 which will be offset by reallocation of funds resulting in zero change in the total authorized compensation. DM:dI ' J1WPDocWocseWuo96.36. BLACK & VEATCH 6 Venture.Sun. 315.Irvin.,Cal,6mia 92718.3317,(71 d) 753-0500.Foe-(71 d) 753-1252 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County B&V Project 24349.311 P1-46, Chemical Facility and Wastehauler B&V File B Modifications at Plant No. 1 June 27, 1996 Mr. David A. Ludwin, P.E. Director of Engineering County Sanitation Districts of Orange County P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California 92728-8127 Subject: Addendum to Agreement Dear Mr. Ludwin: We are in receipt of your letters dated April 8 and 18, 1996, directing Black & Veatch to resume design work and submit a revised schedule for Job No. P146. In 1 response to your request, enclosed is a proposed schedule for completion of the design phase for your review. This letter also summarizes our request for an addendum to the professional services agreement for this project. As we have discussed, we believe that an adjustment is necessary due to: (1) separation of the P1.46 and P2-55 projects; (2) revised electrical(mstrumentation and controls (E/I&C) design parameters; (3) added coordination requirements; (4) delayed project schedule; and (5) revised wastehauler scope of work. Each of these reasons, along with the associated cost, is described below. 1. separation of Job Nos. P1-46 and P2-55 Job Nos. P146 and P2-55 were originally intended to be completed together as one project. Preliminary and final design of the chlorine relief elements proceeded in that manner through submittal of the 90 percent complete construction documents. In December 1994, the project was placed on hold. In March 1995, Black & Veatch was directed to resume work on Job No. P2-55. Design was completed last October, and construction is underway at Plant 2. Separation of the two jobs impacts preparation of the construction drawings and detailed specifications. This will cause Black & Veatch to incur additional costs beyond those anticipated in the original budget. Attachment 1-A compares the drawing lists for the combined and separated projects. As a combined project, there were 77 drawings. As two separate projects, 24349.c103 Page 2 Mr. David A Ludwin, P.E. B&V Project 24349.311 June 27, 1996 Job No. P2-55 has 55 drawings, and Job No. P1-46 is expected to have 40 drawings. While many of the drawings from the combined project will still be applicable to the separate jobs, it will be necessary to prepare specific details, drawing lists, references, and title blocks for each job. Detailed in Attachment 1-B, the effort involved in this task should be minimal, $3,200. In addition, it will be necessary to prepare a separate set of detailed specifications specifically for Job No. P1-46. While we anticipate that these detailed specifications will be similar to those produced for the chemical facilities in Job No. P2-55, significant effort will still be associated with modifying the detailed specifications to be job specific. We estimate that this task will cost $6,100 based on the breakdown shown on Attachment 1-C. In summary, the total additional cost of preparing two separate design packages is estimated at $9,300. 2. Revised Electrical/Instrumentation & Controls Design Parameters Since work began on this project, the Districts have issued new Electrical Design Guidelines, Programming Standards, and Hardware Specifications that will require revision of the EQ&C work done to date on Job No. P1-46. Additionally, the EII&C design, as it presently stands, was based on tying into existing programmable logic controllers (PI-Cs), rather than installing new ones. To make the P1-46 project compatible with the final P2-55 project which includes new PI-Cs, it will be necessary to revise the E/I&C design to install and program new PLCs and to incorporate the new guidelines, standards, and specifications. The estimated cost for making these revisions is $20,200, as shown on Attachment 2. 3. Added Coordination Requirements Because the two jobs were separated, additional coordination will be required to complete Job No. P1-46. We anticipate that six additional meetings will be required during the design phase. The cost for this coordination is estimated at $4,560 as itemized on Attachment 3. 4. Delayed Schedule The 90 percent complete submittal for Job No. P1-46 was in August 1994. Work on this portion of the project has been delayed for nearly two years. Based on the - Districts' estimate of the remaining design budget for this job, shown on Attachment 4, we estimate that Black & Veatch will incur approximately $2,250 of additional costs due to the deferred schedule. 24349<1.0 v Page 3 Mr. David A Ludwin, P.E. B&V Project 24349.311 June 27, 1996 5. Revised Wastehauler Scone of Work As indicated in your letters, the interim modifications to the wastehauler facility, which were completed over two years ago, have improved its operation so significantly that the proposed second phase modifications are no longer necessary. We are pleased that it has performed well. Correspondingly, the Districts initially reduced the scope of work for the wastehauler improvements to installation of an intercom. However, based on our recent discussions with Districts staff, it is our understanding that the intercom addition will now be completed by the Districts. We would request that the remaining wastehauler budget, which is $36,021 based on the Districts' staff project budget, be applied toward the additional cost for the chemical facilities described above. Summary To briefly summarize, we believe that the scope of work for this project has been revised because of the separation of Job Nos. P1-46 and P2-55, the revised E/I&C design parameters, and adjustment of the wastehauler improvements. Additional coordination will be required because of the separation. Furthermore, the project schedule has been delayed significantly. Black & Veatch estimates the total additional cost of these items at $36,310. As indicated above, the Districts' present budget for the wastehauler element shows a balance of $36,021. We would suggest that the balance of the remaining wastehauler budget be applied towards the additional cost for the chemical facilities. As indicated on Attachment 5, this essentially reduces the total additional cost to zero. We appreciate the opportunity to bring this to your attention. We would be pleased to discuss any aspect of this matter with you at your convenience. Very truly yours, BLACK & VEATCH (L , d. F)�,,..o_ Debra L Burris, P.E. Project Manager Enclosures cc: D. May / D. Argo 24349<.1.03 Proposed Design Schedule (Following Notice to Proceed) Job No. P1 46 Month t Month 2 Month 7 Month 4 Month 5 Task Name Complete Design Submtl 99% Documents i i Districts'Review Prepare Final Documents i Submit Final Documents I Task summery ^ Roued Up Pretties Project:Csooc.MPP prettiest Rolled Up Task - Date:512eme West" ♦ Reseed Up Mlaslane O BLACK & VEATCH Attachment 1-B Additional Cost for Separation of Drawings i Job No. P1-46 Basis: 40 drawings (see Attachment 1-A for list) 1 manhour per drawing Average engineer/drafter billing rate = $80/hr. Additional Cost = 40 drawings (1 hr per drawing) x $80/hr. Additional Cost = $3,200 ..J 24M9<ut 6MM v Attachment 1-C Additional Cost for Separation of Detailed Specifications Job No. P1416 Basis: 12 sections of detailed specifications (based on Job No. P2-55, excluding Section 66-3000) 4 engineering manhours per section (average) 2 cierical manhours per section (average) Average engineer billing rate = $95/hr. Average clerical billing rate = $45/hr. Miscellaneous expenses (computer charges, copies, etc.) @ approx. 8010 Additional Cost = 12 sections ((4 hrs per section) x ($95 per hr) + (2 hrs per section) x ($45 per hr)) x 1.08 Additional Cost = $6,100 2A3<9uv 6?IN6 Attachment 2 Additional Cost for Revised E(I&C Design Job No. PIA6 Basis: Average engineer billing rate = $95/hr Average drafter billing rate = $55/hr Average clerical billing rate = $45/hr WI&C Manhours labor Cost Expenses Total Engineering - 160 $15,200 100 $15,300 Drafting - 60 3,300 600 3,900 Word Processing-20 900 100 1,000 Totals $19,400 $800 $20,200 24349.ti 6 7196 0 Attachment 3 _ Additional Cost for Added Coordination Job No. P1.46 Basis: 6 additional meetings @ 4 hr. each (includes time for preparation, travel, meeting, and minutes production) 2 engineers per meeting Average engineer billing rate = $95/hr. Additional Cost = 6 meetings x 4 hrs per meeting x 2 engineers x $95/hr. Additional Cost = $400 N3A9<.m 6127196 y Attachment 4 Additional Cost for Schedule Delay Job No. P1-46 Basis: CSDOC Project Budget dated 3/22/96 Remaining Design Budget = $27,614.12 Inflation @ 4% per year from 1994 (2 years) Additional Cost = $27,614.12 x (1.04)2 - $27,614.12 Additional Cost = $2,250 U349.,t 6n7M Attachment 5 _ Summary of Additional Costs Job No. P146 Item Cost Separation of Jobs Drawings $3,200 Detailed Specifications 6,100 $9,300 E/I&C Revisions $20,200 Added Coordination 4,560 Schedule Delay 2,250 Total $36,310 Less Wastehauler Remaining Budget (36.021) Net Additional Cost $-0- 24Ji9cat, 6127M Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 6 August 1, 1996 (9) AhQFNDA TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS PDC Consideration of motion approving Addendum N o the ofessional services agreement with Lee & onsulting . eers, Inc. re: Modifications to Elec and Control S and Process Evaluations a nt No. 1, Job No. and Modificatio ctrical and Control Systems rocess Ev - ns at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-47-1, - i d engineering services for design changes for an at amount of$76,801, increasing the total authori ation to an amount not to exceed $1,247,9 The Engineenn ger gave a presentah his item. There were questions and discus the PDC Committee regar impact of this addendum on the ion costs. mmittee directed staff carry this item over to the ne Committee eting when additional capital cost information can be provi to the Committee rior to it votincLon this issue. 9 .38: Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 3 to the professional services agreement with Black &Veatch re Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifications at Plant No.1 Job No. 121-46, and Chemical and Plant Water Facility Modifications at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-55, providing increases and decreases in engineering services with no change in the total authorized compensation. The Engineering Manager explained this item. It was moved, second, and carried to recommend approval of this item. (10) -39: Consideration of motion authorizing the Ge nager to hire GE Electrical Distribution & Control-fo- wer Source eliability Evaluation, Job No. J-25 ,_ n amount not to ed $104,000; and to have t Boards ratify said action a gust 28, 1996 Joi ds meeting. The Engineering Mana i item. A revision to this Agenda Item was handed out to the Committe ace the one in their PDC Package. The motion was revised to i c of the PSA to $1 D4,000 and authorize staff to proceed pursuant lion 7 -81 ordinance. A handout was provided showi on 7 of the Reso owing the Chair to take appropriate emergenry situations. It wa d, seconded, and tamed to recommen val of this item. JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS — DISTRICT 5 Ong Dace Ton Bay. 8/27/98 5/27/98 AGENDA REPORT IDon Number neWba County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California FROM: David A. Ludwin, Director of Engineeri Originator: Bob Chenowith, Project Manager SUBJECT: BEAUTIFICATION OF BAY BRIDGE PUMP STATION, CONTRACT NO. 5-33-1 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1) Rescind District No. 5 Board action taken on January 28, 1998 awarding a contract for Beautification of Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33-1 to Jerrold Corporation due to inability to meet District's insurance requirements. 2) Declare the second low bid, submitted by Southland Construction Company, as non-responsive due to inability to meet District's insurance requirements. 3) Authorize award of the contract to the third low bidder, Verne's Plumbing, Inc. in the total amount of$36,700.00. SUMMARY The existing wood fencing along Pacific Coast Highway at Bay Bridge Pump Station, constructed in 1992 under Contract No. 5-33, has deteriorated from outside elements and is in need of replacement. Access to the pump station from Pacific Coast Highway is extremely difficult for District's maintenance personnel. The proposed plan will remove the old fence and install a new masonry block wall with stucco exterior to match existing pump station color and texture. This project will enhance the property and make the pump station blend in with the surrounding buildings. There will be three painted aluminum access gates. One will be for maintenance personnel access to check the pump station and the other two will be for maintenance trucks and equipment. Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications provided technical clarifications to the plans, including the limits of removal of existing facilities. Wu ft.mnnomw gwd,a.n xwo nl m.ans.v.t..627M da e..,..d daam Page 1 On January 13, 1998, ten bids were received for said contract. The bids are shown on the attached bid tabulation. The three lowest bids were $29,813.00 submitted by Jerrold Corporation, $30,000.00, submitted by Southland Construction, and $36,700.00 submitted by Verne's Plumbing, Inc. On January 28, 1998, the Directors awarded the contract to Jerrold Corporation. Subsequent to the award, during the submittal of bonds and insurance certificates, it was discovered that Jerrold Corporation could not provide insurance in accordance with District requirements. The second low bidder, Southland Construction Company also could not provide the required insurance. Therefore, the two lowest bidders have been declared non-responsive. Staff recommends award of contract to the third low bidder, Verne's Plumbing Inc., in the amount of$36,700.00. Verne's Plumbing meets the proper license and insurance requirements to do the project. BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: District 5 CIP, item 4) The Engineer's approved budget dated January 28, 1998 for construction of this project is 38,000.00. Please see attached Budget Information Table. CECIA FINDINGS Notice of Determination was filed July 20, 1989 under the Programmatic EIR for the 1989 Master Plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. Budget Information Table 2. Bid Tabulation and recommendation. RLC:jam:jee m..ewro+aeoe.nnama.a.n A�rom�am eo.m.u.ui drszea eon Page 2 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE BEAUTIFICATION OF BAY BRIDGE PUMP STATION, CONTRACT NO.5-33-1 1997-1998 FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECT/TASK APPROVED AUTHORIZED TO AUTHORIZED TOTAL EXPENDITURE TO COMPLETE TO BUDGET DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZED FUNDS DATE DATE(%) STAFF DESIGN $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 $ $ 6,500.00 $ 5,460.00 84% CONSTRUCTION $ 38,000.00 NA $ 36,700.00 $ 36,700.00 $ D% STAFF CONSTR. MGMT $ 10,500.00 1 $ 10,500.00 1 $ $ 10,500.00 1 $ 1,200.00 1 11% TOTAL $ 55,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 36,700.00 $ 53,700.00 1 $ 6,660.00 39% H:P p.dWeng�ng`V33-1 agendatbl.ds January 13, 1998 11:00 a.m. ADDENDA: BID TABULATION Contract No. 5-33-1 PROJECT TITLE: Beautification of Bay Bridge Pump Station PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5-33-1 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $38 000 BUDGET AMOUNT: $ TOTAL CONTRACTOR BID 1. JERROLD CORPORATION $29,813.00 2. SOUTHLAND CONSTRUCTION $30,000.00 3. VERNE'S PLUMBING $36,700.00 4. LLOYD ENGINEERING $37,885.00 5. UNITED BUILDERS $40,625.00 6. ATLAS-ALLIED $41,580.00 7. WAKEHAM-BAKER $45,045.00 8. ULTIMO CONSTRUCTION $58,421.00 9. LOS ANGELES ENGINEERING $61,800.00 10. AUSTIN COURT $62,499.77 1 have reviewed the proposals submitted for the above 'ect and find that the low bid is a responsible bid. 1, therefore, recommend award to JERROLD CO OR TION in the bid amount of $29,813.00 as the lowest and best bid. I David A. udwin, P.E. Director of Engineering H:%W P.DTAIENG\ENG78-33-11BIDTAB.M Y ATtnanCZa N:4 r K a: X + ,a .r Table of Contents Section1 - Overview........................................................................................................1 Financial Report - Section 2 - Joint Operating 8 Working Capital Budget Review .d Charts on the Gallonage Charge by Department..................................................1 Divisional Contributions to Gallonage Charge......................................................2 s Summary of Expenses by Major Category...........................................................A Summary of Expenses by Line Item .....................................................................5 Summary of Revenue by Line Item.......................................................................7 Comparisonof Expenses by Department.............................................................8 Chart of Staffing Trends........................................................................................9 Section 3 - Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Review Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Graphs by Type and Funding Source..................1 Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirement- Current Year.....................2 Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirement- Project Life.......................7 Section 4 - Budget Review by Districts Summary Budget Reviews -All Districts...............................................................1 District No. 1 Budget Review.................................................................................2 District No. 2 Budget Review.................................................................................3 DistrictNo. 3 Budget Review.................................................................................4 DistrictNo. 5 Budget Review.................................................................................5 District No. 6 Budget Review.................................................................................6 District No. 7 Budget Review.................................................................................7 District No. 11 Budget Review ..............................................................................8 District No. 13 Budget Review...............................................................................9 District No. 14 Budget Review.............................................................................10 Section 5 - Self Insurance Funds Budget Reviews Public Liability Fund Budget Review.....................................................................1 Workers' Compensation Budget Review...............................................................2 Operational Report Section 6 - Performance Objectives and Work Plans......................................................1 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L U L This Page Left Intentionally Blank. is u L U U u L Overview Comparison of Third Quarter Results with Year- End Actuals (Budget) Last Five Years 55000 525W 495.2e soi eo soz n 4"65 A 95 $W W MOO an 475 W 45000 42599 — 93-94 94-95 95% W97 97.98 _ 3N Year 3N Year 3rd Year 3rd Year 3N Annual QV end Qa end Qtr aead M Budget For comparative purposes, the budgeted and actual costs per million gallons for the _ past five years have been reduced proportionately to reflect the increase in overhead costs that would have been allocated out if the updated model we are now using had been previously implemented. As highlighted in the graph shown above, the cost per million gallons at the end of the third quarter as compared to year-end has remained consistent over the previous four years. The third quarter cost per million gallons, with the exception of 1995-96, has ranged from one to five percent below the final year-end costs. The cost comparison for 1997-98 also falls within this trend as staff projects the year-end cost per million gallons at approximately $486, an increase of$36 per million gallons. Section 2 - Page 1 provides a graphical comparison of each Department's contribution towards the gallonage charge through the third quarter, as budgeted for 1997-98, and as actually incurred through the third quarter of 1996-97. All three charts are quite similar showing little change between the prior year third quarter actual, current year budget and current third quarter actual. Section 1 - Page 3 1997-98 Third Quarter Report - For more detailed information, Section 2 - Page 2 and 3 provides for the divisional contributions to the gallonage charge through third quarter for the last five years, — Section 2 - Page 4 provides a summary of expenses by category through March 31, 1998 and 1997, Section 2 - Page 5 and 6 provides a summary of expenses by line item through March 31, 1998 and 1997, Section 2 - Page 7 provides a summary of Joint — Operating Revenues by line item through March 31, 1998, and 1997; Section 2 - Page 8 provides for a comparison of expenses by department for March 31, 1996, 1997, and 1998, Section 2 — Page 9 provides staffing trends over the last five years including total — authorized, actual staffing positions filled, and vacant staffing positions. Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Review: fco,o00,000 — uo,a00,a00 $4010001000 s30,aa0,000 — $20.000.000 $10,000,000 lit f0 3131198 Actual Projected 1997-98 Originally Estimated Capital Outlay- Capital Outlay- 1997-98 Capital $32,733,800 $49,334,000 Outlay-$54,540,000 At March 31, 1998, total Capital Outlay Revolving Fund (CORF) expenditures totaled — $32,733,800, as depicted by the chart above, or 60.0 percent of the original capital outlay estimate for 1997-98. Section 3 — Page 1 provides a graphical presentation on the dollar amount of capital expenditures incurred for each major type of capital improvement and a graphical presentation on each Districts' share of the total amount of joint works capital outlay — requirements incurred through March 31. Section 1 -Page 4 Overview Third Quarter Financial & Operational Report March 31, 1998 The Finance Department is pleased to present the 1997-98 third quarter comprehensive financial and operational report. This report consolidates the financial and operational accomplishments of the Districts with the intent of providing the Directors, staff, and the general public with a comprehensive overview of the financial condition of the Districts, report on the status of all capital projects in progress, and provide detailed analysis on the status of each Division's 1997-98 performance .. objectives as established in the 1997-98 adopted budget. A summary of the sections contained within this report is provided below. Joint Operating 8 Working Capital Budget Review: At March 31, 1998, 71.35 percent, or$31,323,000 of the 1997-98 revised net joint operating budget of$43.9 million has been expended. This is a net decrease in costs of 3.04 percent, or $980,000 from the same period last year. The total cost per million gallons at March 31, 1998 is $450.15 based on flows of 69,582.72 million gallons. This is $41, or 8.3 percent below the revised budgeted cost per million gallons of$490.95 while flows are four percent higher than budgeted. Both the net joint operating budget and the budgeted cost per million gallons were revised by the Steering Committee following the issuance of the first quarter report. In a subsequent report, it was shown that the budgeted cost per million gallons of$524.73 could now be reduced by $33.78 to $490.95 as result of the additional operational overhead costs that were being allocated out to either the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund or directly to the individual District Funds. This additional overhead allocation was the collective result of(1) benchmarking studies with other comparative agencies that identified costs that the Districts were including as part of the cost per million gallons calculation that other agencies were treating as overhead subject to allocation, and (2) the refinement of the Districts cost allocation plan as a result of the implementation of the new financial information system. Total budgeted net operating costs have been correspondingly reduced from $46,922,650 to $43,902,850 by $3,019,800, the increase in the amount of overhead expected to be allocated out to the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund and individual District Funds. Based on results through March 31, staff believes that the gallonage charge should come in under the $490 budget, or more closely approximate $486 at year end. The `y four percent excess in flows above budget should fall back some now that the "El Nino" storm season has past, and cost should end at or slightly below budget. .+ Section 1 -Page 1 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L L Some of the significant Joint Operating results as of March 31, 1998: • Salaries and Wages - Net Joint Operating Personnel Costs were at 49.61 percent of budget through mid-year while staffing was 21 full time equivalents, or four percent u below the total approved in the 1997-98 budget. Personnel costs increased in the third quarter over the second by $240,000, or 2.0 percent as 5 retiring employees received early retirement with associated accrual payoff. Excess annual vacation L and personal leave were also paid out in the third quarter. Cost savings associated with these early retirements will be realized in 1998-99. u • Rents and Leases —At the end of the third quarter, "Outside Equipment Rental" and "District Equipment Rental"totaled $323,000, or 147.83 percent of the combined L budget of$ 219,000. These costs increased significantly in the third quarter due to adjustments resulting from the completion and implementation of the Districts vehicle usage and charge out study. The results of this study accounted for a $173,000 adjustment in the third quarter. An increase of$210,000 was also recorded in the Revenue section for vehicle used in CORF and Distrcts. The budget for these charge outs will be adjusted appropriately within the 1998-99 budget. Ld • Repairs and Maintenance—Third quarter expenses for"Materials and Services" L totaled $2,209,000, or 86.85 percent of the $2,544,000 budgeted. This expense went up mainly within the second quarter as cost increased $1,063,000, or 41.78 percent of the total budget. Equipment failures are somewhat unpredictable and L were somewhat higher in the second quarter of the year than normal. However, staff expects this account to approximate budget by year-end. Operators and Maintenance staff are concentrating on predictive or scheduled maintenance in an L attept to reduce failures and cost in the future. • Environmental Monitoring - Environmental Monitoring increased $886,000 during L the third quarter to $1,488,000, or 84.38 percent of the budget. This increase is primarily due to the timing of payments made for ocean monitoring. This line item is expected to approximate budget at year-end. L.i V i LJ L L Section 1 - Page 2 Overview For more detailed information, Section 3 - Page 2 through 6 provides a summary of the Joint Works construction requirements of each project for the current year and Section 3— Page 7 through 12 provides a summary of the Joint Works construction — requirements of each project over the project life. Budget Review by Districts:At March 31, 1998, revenues of all Districts totaled $78.8 million, or 59.1 percent of budget. Other (User) Fees, the largest revenue source of the individual Districts budgeted at$71.3 million, are only at 45.7 percent of budget, or $32.6 million. There are two primary reasons for this short fall. The first reason is due to the $5.2 million in sewer user fees refunded to commercial users. These refunds, which in most cases go back four years, were provided to commercial users who provided documentation that their actual usage was less than what was calculated by the Districts' square footage formulas. The second reason is that the Districts do not receive their largest property tax and user fee allocation for the current fiscal year from the County until April. Likewise, no Sale of Capacity Rights, budgeted at $1.6 million, have been received because these revenues are also not due to the Districts until April Of 1998. Conversely, Connection Fees, budgeted at$5.9 million, are at 82.8 percent, or$4.9 million due to higher than expected building activity within the member cities. Interest& Miscellaneous Receipts are also high at 89.3 percent of budget, or$19.6 million because of both larger available cash balances and higher interest rate yields than was anticipated in the 1997-98 budget. Expenses and outlays of all Districts totaled $99.0 million, or 64.6 percent of budget at March 31, 1998. District Operating and Other Expenditures, budgeted at $9.1 million, are only at 56.9 percent of budget, primarily because of the majority of the line cleaning work to be done is scheduled for the fourth quarter of the fiscal year. District Trunk Sewer Construction costs, budgeted at$11.5 million, are only at 41.7 percent of budget, or 4.8 million, due to the prioritization of joint treatment works construction projects over individual District construction projects. Self-Insurance Funds Budget Reviews: The Districts are self-insured for Workers' Compensation, and for General Liability claims in excess of$25 million. Separate fund accounting is utilized for the recording of revenue and expenses incurred in managing these liability claims. The revenues to these funds represent individual District contributions based on Bows. Expenses to these funds include actual claims paid, claims administration, and excess loss policies. Section 1 - Page 5 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L L The Self-Insurance Fund revenues totaled $495,000, or 94.6 percent of budget at r March 31, while total expenses were also high at $877,000, or 110.3 percent of budget due to higher than expected claim losses from the Newport Bay spill. Operational Review.,The Operational Review section of this report (Section 6) U pertains to the status of Performance Objectives as of March 31, 1998. Performance Objectives were established for each Division within the Districts and u incorporated into the 1997-98 Adopted Budget. The adoption of these performance L measures allows for the progress of the Departments and Divisions to be measured, achievements recognized, and opportunities for improvement identified. As a tool to further define divisional performance objectives and to ensure success of the Districts' critical goals for 1997-98, workplans were also developed at the Divisional level. At March 31, 1998, 78 percent of the Districts performance objectives and 48 percent of the workplan milestones were on target for completion by year-end. L L L L I L L L L L Section 1 -Page 6 L J. O. & W. C. Budget Review Departmental Gallonage Charges For the Nine Months Ended Mach 31. 1998 JBM — Engineenng \q GSA 8% Flnence e% Comm % Inb Tech d% Ex. Mgmt 2% Tech Stcs HIR 16% 3% Departmental Gallonage Charges 1997-98 Budget Englneenng 1% 0Am G 5 A S0% 0% Finance T% Oom 1% ME Tech a% _ Exec Mgml IR 2% Tech Svcs 3% tE% Departmental Gallonage Charges For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992 Figineenng o 0 M fio% _ GSA 8% Finance T% Camas 1% _ IMO Teti 3% E r Mgm 2% Tech Svcs HM 16% 2 t Section 2 - Page 1 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L Divisional Contributions to Gallonage Charge j For The Nine Months Ended March 31, V 1994 1995 19% 1997 1997-% 1996 Actual Actual Actual Actual Annual Budged Actual Flow In Mllllon Gallon 61.816.77 67,006.31 66,075.42 67,139.36 89.425.01 69,582.72 General Manager 6.34 1113 8.48 11.85 10.43 9.59 Ir.l Boats Sevdary 0.73 0.58 - - - - Management Support 2.47 246 - - - - TOW Management 9.54 16.17 8.46 11.85 10.43 9.59 u oommuniratlona - - SA1 6.16 6.22 6.33 HR Adrnmistrdion 8.01 10.65 - - Human Resoumes - - 1.51 6.59 4.73 4.63 Safety&Emergency Restores - - 4.78 4.92 5.96 8.13 Education&Training - - 2.76 5.12 5.41 3.93 Total Human Resources 6.01 10.66 9.06 16.63 16.10 14.69 Finance Administration 15.55 lass 2D.09 18.52 17.96 16.23 Accounting li'm 6.75 9.29 10.25 10A6 10.01 Pmctteeing&Warehousing 6.55 5.77 6.47 &M 6.92 6A6 Total Finance 27.44 27.30 35.96 35.65 35.04 31.70 Yr1 General Services Adminidrdion 12.31 1212 5.61 6.38 3.95 4.36 collection Facilities Maintenance 2.40 240 1.66 1.38 2.85 1.80 Plead Facilities Maintenance 35.27 3242 %.34 38.36 37.87 35.96 Total General SerWces Adman 49.98 46.94 47.61 48.12 44.87 42.11 L End User Support - - 6.22 4.24 &W 6.87 Frog,Daurease&Netwodting - - 9.12 645 T98 7.13 Plard Automation - - - 3.33 4.78 3.82 L Total Intomstion Technology - - 16.34 14.02 19.06 17.82 OPne&Maintenance Admin 9.10 10.37 2.82 1.95 2.28 2.38 O&M Process Support - - 7.0 Tell 7.80 6.92 Plant No, 1 Operations - - 79.43 75.85 74s7 67.26 Pland No.2 Operations - - 124,16 1DD.93 99.19 93.84 V mechanical Maintenance 54.08 53.93 54.D4 4559 49.97 49.04 Electr.&Iretr Maintenance - - 41.87 41.74 49.m 48.62 ! Electical Maerasence 19.17 11121 - - - - L Irslrwnerdearon Meiltesnce 2483 26.81 - - - Central Generator, - - 24.06 25.78 29.24 28.56 Air Quality&Seel.Prgods - - 6.22 4A4 7.40 6.65 V Plant Operations 162,34 15a20 - Total Operations 20.32 29252 340.95 3113.97 320.09 303.86 u Continued � i V Section 2- Page 2 I p J. O. & W. C. Budget Review Divisional Contributions to Gallonage Charge For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 'tl 1994 1995 1996 1997 1997-98 1998 Actual Actual Actual Actual Annual Budget Actual continued: s Technical Servloes Administration 2.57 2.06 5.83 6.56 7.47 7.35 Compliance 34.30 - - - - - Cons,fled.Reuse 58.19 - - - -Air Quality 7.04 - - - - Environmental Mgmt - 103.92 40.18 41.39 41.45 36.86 r Environmental Sciences Laboratory 40.34 33.33 37.10 31.03 32.74 30.35 Source Control 7.99 9.11 3.41 4.13 3.83 4.68 Total Tech Services 150.43 148A2 86.52 83.11 85A9 79.44 r Engineering Administrz0on 0.25 0.67 0.02 0.01 - - Planning&Design(Design C 94-95) 0.61 1.84 1.10 1.08 0.93 1.21 ConOuclon Management 2.46 2.41 - 0.49 0.45 1.20 r Total Engineering 3.32 4.92 1.12 1.58 1.38 2.41 Total Expenses 518.04 517.01 $45.93 $18.99 538.48 506.95 Less Revenues (45.14) (43.97) (44.13) (37A2) (47.53) (5680) ri NetJOExpensss 472.90 473.04 501.80 481.17 490.95 450.15 r Yr r r sr Section 2- Page 3 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L L Summary of Expenses by Major Category For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 bell Exp. Exp. Ina. Inur, Percent Budget IDru )Lru (Door.) (Dec') Budget Remalning I 107-98 39198 313197 $ % Reellaed Budget Net Sound,Wages B Boneg6 24,354.900 18,381.862 18,01,981 (270,119) .146% 75.39% 5,993,039 L Onion Expo. 401,060 308,056 M.W1 )5,)25 325996 78.81% 93,024 Odor Coneol B Chen i®I Coagulants 4.579,910 3,244,408 2.795.9n 448,431 16.04% 70.84% 1,335,502 Contractual SeMces 6258,720 4,046,646 4,125.784 09,138) -Iom 64.60% 2212,014 L ptafesti9,W services 1,496.980 969.)8) 1206,725 (238,g38) -19.63% U.78% 527.193 L f:au'ryrrenl CNaigas 218,520 323,042 178.043 114.199 80.83% 147.83% (104,522) Remit&Main..Materals&SeMces 3,595.070 2.794.891 2006.688 )88,005 Xm r14% 800,379 ResealN B Monitonng 2453.000 1,858.951 1,934,368 (75.415) 4190% )5.]8% 594.049 u Training 881.560 81).553 394,453 2Zi,100 58.58% 71.BB% 244.007 j wities 3,162,950 22)O,AB 2.420.392 (149,613) 4.1C% 71.M 892,171 Ysl Ogrer Malenab,Supplies L' &Outside Services )]0160 478.958 918998 (43&.040) 47.))% 82.19% 291.202 Tool Joint Operating Eylenwns 48,152,850 352)4,)33 34,844,538 430,197 1.28% 73.28% 12,878.117 I j Rewnues&O(kets (l.MDOD) (3.952,18B) (2,539.23]) (1,412,932) 55.54% 92.99% (29),8311 IYeI, Net Join Opoidt,Expense 4 W2.850 31,322.566 32.305.299 (962,)35) 41.04% 71.K% 12,580.285 ( Gallonagep (MG) 8M252l 69.582]2 8).13938 2,443 364% T.81% 19,842 Gallonage Row(MGD) 245.02 253.95 245.03 t3.28 3.94% Gellonige Cnem.ne/MG) 4g095 450.15 481.t) 91.021 RAS% u L L L L U Section 2- Page 4 U J. O. & W. C. Budget Review Summary of Expenses by Line Item -� For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 % 0.avlsod Revlasd Expsma Expanse Expense Increase Increase Budget Tn. Thru Reme1nin9 Thru (Decrease) (Daeresee) Descdpllon 1997-98 3131M Ill Budget W311W 3 % Silarles,Wages& Ben.f is Solon&Wogea 30.822.400 23.549,882 76.40 7,272,716 23.701.589 (21/.Wn (0.89) Fxnploym Bene6W: Re6remerd 2,908,970 1,565,548 5&77 1.241.422 1,060.751 (285.203) (15.41) ,. Workers Comp 214,360 180,770 7S00 53,59D 153,600 7.170 4.67 Unemploymorn Ins 64,900 48,954 7235 17.946 46,364 Soo 127 Group lmurer 3,010,850 1.90.748 08.22 1.016.902 2,313,30D (319.552) (13,61) Undorm Rental 69,580 41,546 59.71 28,032 46.983 (5.435) (11.57) r. Total Benefits 0.166.460 3,808,568 61.76 2,357,8M 4,410.998 (802,430) (13.66) salerlss,Wallas&Bor is 38,988,880 27.358,250 73.98 9,630,610 28.172,587 (814.337) (209) _ salaries&Ben.aloe Nlorarl out W-C.,10st (12.833,980) (8,998,368) 71.21 (3,837,572) (9,540,6w) 544218 (5.70) Net J.O.Payroll 24,356,9D0 16,361,852 75.39 5.993,038 18,031,981 (270,119) (1.45) Mntl.Supply,&Services .. Gesoline,DiesN&Cil 103,460 124.036 84.11 69.424 145.953 (21.917) (15.02) Insurer 1,335.000 914.279 6849 420.721 OWNS (74.720) (7.56) Memberships 04.450 64.593 7&46 19,887 66,868 (2275) (3.40) Once Exp-supplbe 123.410 95,407 77.31 26,003 100,1m (4,773) (4.76) small Computer llama 131,830 121,755 9236 1D,W5 0.8% 67.&% 125.91 Other 119,120 71.132 69.71 47,938 63.431 7.701 12.14 Miror Furniture,Flaurm,etc 28,M 19,762 73.96 6.958 14,824 4.938 33.31 Opem6ng Supplies War Control 1,458.400 1.030,492 70.68 427,938 798,803 231.60 20.00 Sulfide Control 1,419,600 1.026.146 7228 303,454 486.554 559,592 119.94 Chemical Coagulants 1,354,280 696,01 WAS 457.979 1.315,783 (419.502) (31.00) Lab Chemicals&supplies 347,850 291.519 alas 58.131 214,837 M682 36.69 Toole 93.700 77,1a0 8237 16,520 67,178 10.002 14.89 Soh,Pounds.&Jan.supplies 113,660 48,605 4276 65.055 66,404 (19.799) (28.94) Other Operating Supplies 201,800 140,196 69.47 61,604 149,435 (9.240) (8.18) Contractual services Gmundekeepig&Janllonal I50000 97,304 64.87 52,696 49.605 47.60 98.16 Outside Lab Services 116,100 52,500 4&22 63.800 36.087 16.413 45.48 Solids Removal 3.984,500 2,979,588 75.16 Bso912 3,098.021 (118.433) (0.82) Other Moss Disposal 388,500 262,146 67,48 126.354 31,278 230,868 738.12 Oxygen Plant Open 400,000 197,500 49.38 202,500 356,863 (159.363) (44.68) Moir 1.239,620 457608 36.92 782012 553,930 (96,322) (17.39) d Continued: Section 2 - Page 5 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L Summary of Expenses by Line Item ' For The Nine Months Ended March 31,1998 % Revised Revised Expense Expense Expanse lmm ace Increase Budget Thns Thru Remaining Thin, (Deomaee) (Debansa) DESCRIPTION 199748 131M 3131M Budget 2f31197 3 % Caromed: Professional S.M. U Legal 450,000 305,738 67.94 144262 483,083 (1T7.345) (36.71) Audit tuumunting Gil 55,098 63.48 10,902 39.0515 16.043 41M Engineadrlg 340,480 225,ZB3 66.17 115,197 20.710 204,573 987.8032 u Other 640.500 383,668 59.90 255,8 Be3,BT7 (200.209) (4221) Printing 8 Publication Repr,>4M1ouse 222,800 157.773 70.81 65,027 187,979 (302M) (16.07) Pntrong-Outside 73,280 47.274 64.51 26,008 36,190 11,084 3D.63 V Photo Processing 25,900 8.468 3269 17,432 20.449 (11,931) (58.59) Notices&Ads 24,600 19,726 80.19 4,874 10.185 1.541 8.47 Rent 8 Lessee Outside Equip Rental 83.870 111,952 119.26 (18.082) e8.717 25,235 29.10 V District Equip Rental 124,650 211,090 169.35 (86.440) 92,125 118.964 129.13 Repair 8 Mailmenanoa Materials a Samosa 2,543.880 2209.276 Bass 334,604 1,544,608 BBOAS *.03 L Contain 1,051,190 SB5,415 5569 465,T75 46ZO78 123.337 26.69 Research 8 Monitoring Emrm Monitoring 1,763,000 1,487.646 84.38 275,354 1,551.933 (64,287) (4.14) i I Air Ouality Monrtonrg 40.000 4,888 1222 35,112 8.454 (3,596) (42.39) U Resee 650,000 366.417 56.37 283,583 373,949 (7,532) (2.01) Travel,Meetings 8 Training Meetings 194,400 167.208 86.01 27,192 123.761 43,447 M.11 Training 667,160 450,345 67.50 216,815 270,692 179,653 65.37 LJ LMIM s Diesel For GeneraMt 34,620 - - 34,620 - - WA I Poxer 970,OD0 730,956 75.35 239.044 741,858 (10,902) (1.47) Natral Gee 1,198,500 8511,41,10 71.M 343,060 1,057,071 (211.631) (19.83) Telephone 169250 135,041 79.79 34.209 92,826 4Z215 45.48 Water M. 549,342 N49 241.238 618,07 30.706 5.92 Other Expenses FreiBM 41.400 46,639 117.49 (7,239) 31,465 17.174 54.58 General S Satery 283.940 140,8.35 53.28 123.304 151,303 (10,667) 17.05) AOMD Operating Fees 142.000 100,716 70.93 41.284 0200 5.516 5.79 Other Non-Oper Expanse 60,990 13,403 21.98 47,557 33.567 (20,164) (60) Lail TOW Made.strap.B Sm,. 25.904,800 18.339.437 70.80 7,555,363 17,356.733 952,704 5.86 Alloo.OutTOCORFICIst (2,106,650) (1,428,566) 67.71 (680,254) (1,144.178) (28Z388) 24.8E , Net J.O.-Matla,Supp.B San. 23,797,950 16.912.871 71.07 6,855,079 16212,555 70D,316 4.32 I Total J.O.Requirement 46152,850 35.274.733 73.26 12,878,117 34,844.635 430,197 123 Lass: Revenue (4,250.000) (3.952.169) 92.99 (297,831) (2,595.740) (1,356029) 52.26 Coat Allocation II i -CORR Dist.B Other - - 55.503 (56,503) (100.00) L; Not Revenue (4,250.000) (3,95 569) 9299 (297,531) (2,538237) (1.41ZOW) 55.64 Not J.O.ExpenElM. 43.9112,8 (�1 31�2,564 71.35 12,SB0 W,301i.2961 (BB2,735) (3.04) V L u Section 2-Page 6 u J. O. & W. C. Budget Review Summary of Joint Operating Revenues by Line Item For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 r % REVISED ADJUSTED REV REV REV INCR INCR BUDGET THRU THRU REMAINING THRU (DECK) (DECR) _ DESCRIPTION 1997-98 MIMS =I= BUDGET N1M7 $ % _ IMm DIMS.Use 1.840.000 2053,872 111.90 (218,872) 385,230 1,073,642 108.97 WesteheWer 400,O00 272.730 68.18 127.270 283,158 9,574 am r Sludge Disposel 850000 742.322 87.33 107,678 551,331 190,991 34.64 Scree Bales 20,OW - - 20,000 238 (238) (100.00) Other Select 3,000 3,359 111.97 (359) 1.024 2,335 228.M Rerds&!- s 75,M e7,414 116.55 (12,414) 69,253 10,161 25.22 General Non Operating 60,000 - DOD W,000 15,871 (15,871) (10D.00) Vehlde&E9Jpmot 2W,OW 262,634 105.05 (12.634) 146.270 116.354 79.66 Ma11Ing Fee - - - 22D (220) (10D.00) Sampling Charges 282,000 219,061 77.68 62.939 212,426 6,895 3.12 Paver Sates 470,O00 305,T77 65.06 164.223 350.723 (44,946) (12.52) TOTALJO REVENUES 4,250,O00 3,952,169 92,99% 297,831 2,585.740 1,358,429 5226 r Section 2- Page 7 1997-98 Third Quarter Report Comparisons of Expenses by Department For The Nine Months Ended March 31, � I 1907.98 y 16g5a6 19 07 RevL YYrbD auaget% 0.parOnen[enE eNbbn A l Actual aw'd Ulna Ree11 1 Oewrel Bmnegen CuperSnem 551,W2 795.319 =,380 W.489 7159% C'anmun9atlom ]Skase 413,3n 555.890 371,178 as.nr% Numen Raolvwe Depemmenl Numen Remwwe mmil.ba6m 9E1053 M2.32B 4M,7Q M.M0 76.19% 1 Edt &Trap, 310,752 110,28E 5332W 428.w1 791M irl Sff"a ErnmpercY R.p In,3N1 30.500 4 ,970 223210 55.45% Ta l SW.145 1,115,128 1.439.950 I.W1,691 70.95% I ! FlMnw Dapenmem V Flrmiw Aanimmv5m 1,aM,4W 1243.180 1.605.890 1.129.34E 70.3314 Aac ro sim W eW441 908.610 es6.lm 76.60% %Wmbga Wua N 421.32E 455.152 618.860 360119T 61.0% i Ta l 2.333.(W 2,386.M 3.133,610 2=W 742 70.39% V G.I 9eMwe Agminlebeeon Geno,w we Aenmlae9Lbn 3M.927 42e,3M 351630 302,4W a5.52% COS .F 1%ec Melmenenw 106,126 82.499 251.570 1251170 49.17% Rem FeclRea Blammmea 2,385.11E 2,675,737 3.386.420 Z502271 73.E9% u T4 l 2836,171 3.OW,SB0 31904.6W 2,929,849 n.34% Inbrme6m TaM.Im EM Sulam 4M.536 2E4.M 562900 479.23e 64.95% Rrog,Da'abme a NeMa , SB3.M1 432,663 713.430 495.957 W.52% Rem WameSm 223.700 427.160 285,512 62.16% Te l W .W 941,508 1,7W,550 1239,M M.7 Opervtlam a BLMbiunw De, vffl O a M A4mir®tre5m 163,M1 131.174 203.980 165,639 E1.2M6 Oa M Rowef Suppw 517,586 SW257 W7,130 481,502 W.0796 Ram No l opere5me 5,1115,847 sm.619 B.M.340 4,M,187 70.E1% I ' Rem Ne.2 Opent. E,MB,494 e.M.301 B.Mm 6,=,1M 73.62% u M mlcel MaoEman<e 3.51E,650 3.W1,OM 4.mis.= 3,412,W6 76.36% fi3ea4ivalalm4rvmmbremM 2,M4.5E3 26025W 4.429a70 3.313.0M 7E.37% ar owm7 a Special PrGjWs 4 .716 2TE.0E0 601140 455.E25 W.W% j CmwlGaremSm 1.Sfi5,eW t.T30.= 2614.660 1,957.W 75M Lf Tp l 22161,US M4086;r 26.624.030 21,14.T.976 Tia % Temnk4llkrNws DBpeNnem Teraniml Serviwa AfimmlaSeam 32s,615 44G.715 8B7.e10 511,118 76.54% ' I Emmm�cMel Mmagmam 2.615.035 2,M,971 3,106,760 2,SM,M1 Sam y Emhmmmml sdeno_ry lab 2,414,345 2,0113,Ms 2,92e,140 2,111,W7 M.11% Scum Carlbd =10 MONS 342430 339A53 0.13% I 1 Te l 5,631.152 SM.800 7.645.140 5.527105 n.30% I 1 Englnearing peperm em LLII EAginmmg Aamino6a5m 1,435 522 - 101 - Ranrar,& a gn 71.906 72,M 83.320 94.425 101.33% 1 Cm0,s5m Wrag~ M 32.965 40.3m E3.4n 2W.T7% L; TMI ".427 loe.m 123,6W 167.9W 135.62% Lees Jarno,raeng R.... (2.971.955) (2.539.237) (4.250,000) (3.952.169) 92.9e% Net Jdn[Owre6ng 6xwneee 32.654.M 32.3W.299 43.9M.950 31.M.554 71.35% LI ' IL' Y Section 2 - Page 8 L' J. O. & W. C. Budget Review Staffing Trends Full Time Equivalents March 31, 1998 673 664 666 i � sa � 800 560 560 ~t. i � 500 N30IB1 8/lt195 600.98 63CS? 313196 ❑Actual ❑Vacant At March 31, 1998, the total head count was 550 employees, or a full time equivalency of 536. Section 2 - Page 9 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L L L L L L' L L L This Page Intentionally Left Blank. L L L L L lr L II L+ Section 2-Page 10 L CORF Review Capital Improvement Program — FY 1997-98 For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Equipment theme $1.2113.203 6% Plant 1 f9,806,210 90X PWM2 f8,{e8,190 28% Inbrplant and Joint Facilitlea 9peowl Project f8.11),681 f5.0)1,3e6 26% 16% Total Capital Improvement Expenditures - $32,733,800 District No.13 $356,798 1% District No.3 District No.2 $9,983.808 f9.535.356 31% 29% District No.6 f1,269.)12 4% Dlstrkl No.1Y Dletrkt No.6 $3.423,956 i1,316,899 e% 10% District No.) D lettict No.H District No.14 $3.003.236 $2.216.079 $1.603.957 9% )% 5% Total Capital Improvement Funding —$32,733,800 Section 3 - Page 1 1997-98 Third Quarter Report Ll Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Current year I i For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 L 1997-98 1997-9a 1897-98 1997-98 Actual Remaining Projected Estimated Outlay @ 3131/98 Outlay Outlay A. Hadirmation Rant I Now and Ormana Projects: 1. Headwork. b.M&D Simmons Concrete Rep.,Pi-56 50,000 97 49,903 100 YYY111 2.Primary Treatment a.Primary Treatment 72 MGD Expansion,P1-37 - 848 (848) 10,850 , b.Prim Clarifiers 3.4&5 Rehab. PI41 500,000 493,216 6,784 037.090 3.Secondary Treatment a.Secondary Treatment Expansion to 80 MGD,PI-36-2 11,900,000 6,039,017 5,060.983 11,000,000 Transfer to Line H Below (600,0001 - (600,000) - 1 d. Drain Modifications at Activated Sludge Rent,Pt-69 76,000 1,544 73,468 51,5441 5. Electrical Power Systems e. Emil. Facility Modifne&Safety Upgrades .PI40-1 375,000 37,798 337,202 77.800 Transfer to C,7,d (360,000) - (350,000) Transfer to Project Below (12,500) Alarm Beacon.for Venting of Ga.Holder 12,500 20.000 b. 12KV Distribution System for Support Facilities,P147 2,200,ODO 56.233 2.143,767 56.230 C. 66KV Substation Addition,P1-52 1,300,000 43.009 1,256,931 43,070 Transfer to C,1,d (800,000) (800,000) 444fft 6.Safety Improvements a.Fire Protection,Signs and Water Sys Mods.,P1-38-6 876,000 890,048 185,952 815,050 b. Seimic Ratrolit of Non-Structure Systems,P143 400,000 249,647 150,353 289.650 L c.Seismic Retrofit Suuctual Item., 1`74d1,2,3,4 1,600,000 157,489 1,342,511 1T7,490 7.Miscellaneous Projects a. Fac Modifne&Safety Upgrades,P1-4 2 800,000 799,949 51 B18, L 000 i b. Drainage Improv.At Plant 1, P140-3 - 7,086 17.086) 1$Ogo c.Chemical Facility Modifne, P148.2 - 26,515 (26,515) 1msm it.Admin. Bldg. Lobby Acoustical Impr.,PI-54 - 4,929 14,9291 14,930 e. Allowance for Planned Small Projects 700,000 342,652 357,348 66B,em hub-Total -fbcbmatlon Ram 19.026.000 9,750,137 9,275,863 14,739,884 B Rent 2 New and Ommlit,Met,,fthumu 1.Headworks a. Ram 2 influent Diversion.P2.66 150.000 14,512 135,488 24.510 It. Replacement of Hammon Influent Gets, P2-63 170,000 5,032 164,968 6,030 2.Primary Treatment b. Primary Clarifier Rehab. P248 2,500.000 1,759 427 740,573 2,459.430 II Transfer to Projects Below (53.360) - 153,300) - L&M Rim Sad Clarifiers Pump Room Equip Upgrade 20,810 1,479 19,331 1,480 N&O Prim Sad Clarifiers Pump Room Equip Upgrade 32,550 1,213 31,337 1,210 d. Drain Replacement at Primary Basins A,B, C, P2.67 30.000 952 29,048 950 4.Solid.Processing L a. Rehab 7 Digesters, P2-39 350,D00 22,617 327,383 72,820 b. TWAS Feed to Digesters F&G,P2-39-1 100,000 26,126 153,874 101,130 1 d.Scale Replacement at Dawatering Facility. P2-62 15,DDO - 15,000 - d.Rehabilitate Solid.Storage Equipment, P2-60 - Z70,000 5.Electrical Power Systems b. Electl Fac Modifne&Safety Upgrade., P247-1 200,000 151,999 48,G01 202,000 I 1 6.Safety Improvements L a. Fire Protection, Sign&Water Sys Modifne, P2-46 784,000 696,936 87.064 766,940 Transfer to Project Below 15,230) - (5,230) - RmI.Imed Water Extension to Hwks -C-,P246-2 5,230 139,076 (133,846) 189,OB0 b.Lends.. &Ime.At City Water Pump St.. P2-46-1 25,000 9,914 15,086 19.910 V Section 3-Page 2 W ® CORF Review Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Current Year r For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 1997-98 1997-98 1997-96 1997.98 Actual Remeining Projected Estimated Outlay @ 3131198 Gander Outlay R.Rant 2 New and German Motor probwdlCnnt 1- c. Fee Modifns&Safety Upgrades, P247.2 800.000 716,3410 83,660 780.000 d.Saimic Retrofit of Non-Structure Systems, P2.50 780.000 376,291 403.709 726,290 e. Seismic Retrofh, Structural home P2-63-2 300,000 583,097 (283,097) 783.100 f.Chemical and Rant Water Machine,P2.55 847,000 809,217 37,783 845,530 9.Reclaimed Water System Pint.2 20,000 - 20,000 - 7.Miscellaneous Rojecas b. Odor Control at Jacobs.and Distribution Bozos 8,000 C.Conveyor Soh Atari at Solids Storage 75,500 - 75,500 - ao d.All oweno&for Planed Small Projects 700,000 586,165 113,835 81&670 S.Support FecilMee and She Improvements a.Warehouse Building,P2-65 568.000 76,311 491,689 126.310 b.Maintenance Building. P2.35.3&-1 1,832,000 2,043,211 1211,2111 4,043.210 c. Phase II She&Security Imp., P2.35-5 600,000 364,097 235,903 5g&1r1U d. Operations Building,P2-23-5-1(Rebid No. 2) 10,000 15,007 (5.007) 15,010 Sub-Tate) -Treatment Rant 2 10.936,500 8,399,019 2,537,481 12,859,510 .,.a C,_Imp @I9mi&nd Jdnt FeC9blea 1. Support Facilities and She Improvements d. CNG Refueling Station, P7-51 200,000 977,012 (777,0121 997,D10 Transfer from A,S.c 500,000 - 800,000 - 2.Outfall&Booster Pump Stations a.Surge Tower Replacement,J-34-1 4,350,000 5,004.143 (654,1431 6.384,140 3.Information Management Systems r a. Computedzed Fee. Records and Dwg.Sys.J-25-1 205,000 71,868 133,132 131.870 4.Rants 1&2 Monitor/Control Sys - b.OOBS's Control System,J-31-2 5,000 6,575 (1,575) 6.600 C.Rent 1 Headwurks System,J-31-3 739,000 97,567 641,443 397.560 d. Secondary Control System Upgrade. Plant 2,J-314 600,000 114,509 485,491 114,510 e.Rent Reinvention/Automation Project,J-42 2,800,000 170,400 2,629,600 374.400 Transfer to Project Below (336,126) 1336,126) - r "C' Hwks Bemcreen&Miss Alerme 36,126 17,964 18,162 17.900 Automation of Solids Storage Fee. Pt-60 30.000 30,000 30,000 Solids Storage Fee. @Pit 2, P2-60 270,000 270,ODO I.Salida Storage Rehab and Automation,J40 650,000 69,385 580,615 245.390 d 5. Electrical Power Systems a. Gas Minting Systems Improvements,J-25-3.1 100,000 516 99,484 Z520 - - b. Electl. Power Systems Rehab. Studies J-25.2,3,4 1,200,000 311,382 8881618 350,380 C. Standby Power Reliability Margins.J-33.1 300.000 132,987 167,013 fazag0 d.MSP No. 3 at Headworks 2.J-33-2 100.000 555,205 (455,2051 621,210 6. Harmonic Filters Automation,J-48 50,000 - 50,000 - f.Power&Distribution Bldgs Ventilation,J-50 140.000 92 139,908 90 h.Improvements to Central Generation 100,000 - 100,000 - .a Transfer to Projects Below 162,705) - (52,7051 - _.. Entronlcs Hardware&Software Upgrade (Revision 1) 41,105 41,105 - 41,110 Pit 2 Con Gen Fiber Optic Addition 11,600 17,669 (610691 17.670 i.Cable Tray Improvements,J47 50,000 71,825 (21,8251 271,a30 6. Bushard Interplant Trunk Replacement - 7. Miscellaneous Safety Projects a.Ace. Platform to Con Gen Exhaust Piping,J-19.3.1 75,000 - 75,000 - r r Section 3- Page 3 we 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Current Year For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 see 1997-98 1997-98 1997-N 1997-98 Actual Remaining Projected Estimated Outlay @ 3/31198 Outlay Outlay C.lm milm and Joint Fadlhba(cem) c. Evaluation of Tunnels for Structural Integrity,J-55 30,000 I1 1 1 d.Transfer from A,6,a 6 E,3,f 507,000 - 507.000 - w Transfer to Project Below (507.000) (507,ODD) Fire Alarm 6 Security System Upgrade,J-57 507,000 109,035 397,985 179,090 S. Miscellaneous Projects I I b.New Grit Augers,J-52 L c. Chemical Flow Pacing for Primary Influent.J-53 100,000 283 99,717 slim a.Allowance for Planned Small Projects 600.000 169,978 430,022 201,980 9.Water Reclamation 500,000 - 500.000 Transfer to Line H Below (100,000) - (100,0001 - 61 Transfer to Projects Below (131,883) - (131.883) - Reclmation Rent No. 1 Water Quality Management Stud OCSDIOCWD Regional Water Reclamation Pit Study,J-3 131,883 131.883 - 25%88D 11. Rehab of Boles Chios State Beach Sewerage System,J4 600,G00 613 699,387 1,295553 Sub-Toml -Imerplent 9 Joint 14,671,000 8,071,986 6,599,014 12,312,003 Sub-Tcml - Major Projects 44,633,500 26.221,142 18,412,358 39,910,177 U 0.Firdldnaminur Special Pralecm 1.Master Planning a. Investigation and Rehab of Ocean oulfall,J-39 9D0,000 232,522 667,47e 432,520 L b.Mgmt.of Peak Hydraulic Discharge, J40.1 3001000 777,424 (477.424) S27.420 c. Deform. Of Fin Charges and Fee Schad..J-40�2 200,000 283,940 (83,940) 383,940 all. Treatment, Feuer,and Disposal Plan,J-40-3 500,000 606,881 (106,8 e 1 826,880 a. CEGA. Public Participation,J In 4 250,000 89,6]9 180,321 149,650 y 2. Miscellaneous Projects a. Area Classifications Studies,Plants 1 5 2,J-35-1 70,000 23,935 46.065 43,940 b. Revision of Standard Specifications,J44 100,000 17.703 82,297 427D0 c. Edison Envest Lighting Perrone,J45 382,000 365,912 16,088 366,910 L d. Evaluation of Existing Alum.Covers at Prim. Basins 50,000 50,000 Sub-Total-ligmeering Spacial Projects 2,752.000 2,377,986 374,004 3,073,MO 1 I E.0emml pan' es Administrator, L 3. Programing 8 Database Sys. (IT) a. Document Management 130,000 1.047 128,963 51.050 I b.Data Integration 700,000 91,163 608.847 341,150 Y91 Transfer to Projects Below (165,121) - (165,1211 - Network Integration Consulting 42,700 - 42,700 Network Interface Upgrade 49,808 - 49.808 - Fuel Mgmt System 60,000 249 59.751 25D Network System Integration 12,613 12,613 - 12eto c. Strategic Information Architecture 1SIA1 43O.00D 22 429,978 2D0,020 d.CMMS Programming 110.0013 80,649 29.351 19D,650 a. Intranet 44,000 21,872 22,128 4sOD0 f.Security System Improvements 256.OD0 82,553 172.447 255.000 Transfer to C,7,d (1157.0001 - 057.000) - g.Voice/Dam Building Rewiring 250,000 108,983 141,017 2SD,ODD V h. Network Backbone Upgrade Continuation 180,000 237.251 157,2611 237.290 i. Internet E-Mail/Browsing 44.000 35.672 8,328 4SeD0 j I-Year 2000 Dam Change 60.000 2.108 57,892 2.110 L 1. FIS/Oracle Gateway 128,000 74.344 53,650 74,340 Y4 Section 3-Pape 4 V .. CORF Review Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Current Year For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 - 1997-98 1997-98 1997-98 1997-90 Actual Remaining Projected r Estimated Outlay @ 3131198 Outlay Outlay E.General SeMena AdminhrretlenlCom.L m. Financial information System(IT) 400,000 719,747 (319,747) 801,768 n.Source Control Programming 150,0D0 62,150 87,850 e2150 p.Upgrade Phone System 38.000 49.845 111.845) 49,850 _- q.GIS 214.000 - 214,000 - 4.Rant Automation IITI a. Desktop Computer Standard 100,D00 72.144 27,856 100.000 b.Rant 2 Rom Water Programming Upgrade 110,000 63.738 46,262 03,740 c.Rant 2 City Water Programming Upgrade 70,000 - 70,000 7GOD0 d.Rent 1 City Water Programming Upgrade 50,0D0 - 50,000 5GOD0 a+ g.Rent 2 TWAS PLC Progmm/SCADA Upgrade 152,000 18,765 133.235 38,770 h. Ram 2 DAFT PLC Progmm/SCADA Upgrade 180,000 10,214 169,786 30,210 -- 1. Rant 1 &2 How Loop PLC Replacement 20 ,WO 8,548 191,452 8,55D Transfer to Project Below (200.000) - 1200,000) "O Entronics Upgrade at Plant 1 200,000 54,393 145,607 154,39D 6. Rant Facilities(GSA) c.Training/Meeting Room Fleet Service Facility,Plant 1 18,030 1,987 16,013 1,990 d.TrelninglMeeting Room Fabrication Shop Facility,Rent 1 18.000 2,373 15,627 Z370 r Sub-Total-Densest Services Administration 3,874,000 1,812.430 2,061,570 3,134.526 F.To hoicaLSenlcen 1. Phase II L.I.M.S. Implementation 130,000 141.803 (11,8031 141,800 2. NPDES Permit Support 50.542 (50.5421 50,5f0 - Sub-Total-Technical SeMeae 130 000 192.345 (62,3451 192,340 11.9natatlona,"aintonnnca 1. Operations Department Projects a. Upgrade to System for Emission Modeling Testing - 27,622 (27,6221 27,e2D b.Air Quality Database Development 35.000 31,808 3,192 35,0W rd c. Sulfur Monitoring for Combustion 331000 7.825 25,175 37,830 d.Central Generation Parametric Monitor Sys 85,000 20,241 04,759 35,240 I.Scrubber Chemical Food System Mod. 200,000 46,597 153,403 126,600 g.Anoxic Gas floatation Process Demonstration 125,000 145 124,855 150 h.Hydrolysis-thickening-floatation Demonstration 52,000 - 52,000 - 1.Urge Scale Mierofiltratlon Demonstration 59,000 19.899 39,101 38,400 J.Primary Effluent Finnegan 80,000 158.758 (76,7581 189,360 It.Processes to Achieve Class A Biosolide 40,000 - 40,000 36,000 r m. H2O2 Dosing Food Sensor for Influent Trunks 40,000 - 40,000 - _. Transfer to Project Below (39,205) - (39,205) - H2O2 Continuous MonkorlProtmetment Automation Stu 39,205 - 39,205 39.205 r, n.Turbidity Monkodng&Regulatory Equipment Fee. 50,000 - 50,000 SGODD p.Misc Optimization Studies& Improvements 140,000 44.222 95,778 44,220 - Transfer to Projects Below (138,795) - 1138,7951 - Pulse Pwr Enhancement of Solids Pro.(Part B)Eval 99,502 1.285 98,217 1.290 •+ somas Steam Static Mixer Teat 24,593 16.279 9,314 26,480 HTF Process Laboratory Testa 14,700 26,496 (11,796) 26,500 q. Mlseelaneous Reliability&Redund. Projects 50,000 18.960 31,040 18,980 Screenings Compactor Systems Intl.@ Plarts 1 & 2 - 137,241 (137,241) 137,240 r Pit 2 Anionic Polymer Automation - 66,545 466,545) 66,55D 2. Maintenance Department Projects c.Rent 2 MSP Vibration Monitor Upgrade 11,574 - 11,674 - r, I.Rebuild Samimis Conveyor at P2 Solids Station 92,426 - 92,426 - .,d Section 3-Page 5 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements—Current Year 1 ' For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 L 1997 98 1997-98 19 W-98 1997-98 Actual Ramaining projected EaOmatad Outlay @3131/98 ou0ev OWay be a._Ommnana$Maintamncalcnm.I: Transfer to Project Below (92,426) - 192,426) - A-Beh Rehab @ Plant 2 Solids Loading Storage Fac 92.426 - 92,42E 9Z,428 I h. Backup Cooling Water Modifne at Pt Can Gen 35,000 - 35,000 3&000 L Trickling Pihor ClerKier Mechanical Rehab Invest. 50.000 50.000 j. Weir Extensions at Temination Channel 30,000 37,167 (7,1871 37,170 1 Sub-Total-Operations&Malmenanc, 1,208,000 880,090 547,910 1,030.241 H.Eaulpmam it,,, 1.942,700 1,285.939 656,761 1,94Z700 Sub-Total-Joint Works Capital ReWhemems 54,540,200 32,549,942 21,990,258 49.334.274 Coin boon In Progress Completed At 6/30197 183,858 (183,8581 y Total Joint Works Capital ReWiremome 54,540,200 32,733,800 21,806,400 M,3U.274 LI L L L L L L L u I v L L Section 3-Pap 6 L CORF Review Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements- Project Life °d For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 current Total r Approved 6130197 year Projected Remaining Nelson Accumulated Projected Cestat Future - _ Budget coat cost mom Budget A Resignation Rem n New and OnsWno Rdemea er 1.Headwo lu; a.Replecemom of Ram 1 Row Matere, P1-55 375,000 - - - 375,000 b.M&D Structure Concrete Rep.,Pt-56 501000 - 100 100 49,900 c.Emergency Sewage Bypass System 1,992,000 - - - 1,992,000 r E.Hesdworks No. 1 Rebuild 14.950,000 - - - 14,960,000 e. Headworka No.2 lm mae Capacity 2,600,000 - - - 2,603,000 2. Nimary Treatmm r e.Pomery Treatment 72 MGD Expansion.Pt-37 38,450,000 269.113 login Z79,963 38,170,037 b.Rim clarifiers 3,4&5 Rehab. P1-41 1,845,000 615,507 07.690 1,303,197 541,603 72 Mgd Primary Treatment 32,500,000 - - - 32,5DO,000 3.SecoMary Treatment m, a.Secondary Treatmm Expansion to 80 MGD,P1-36-2 40,600,000 30,587,216 11.000,000 41,587,216 (987,216) Transfer to Project Below (165,000) - - - (165,000) _. Value Engineering for Seeondary Treatment,P1-36-2 165,000 21,389 - 21,389 143,611 It.40 Mid Oxygen Act'd Sludge&DAF's 65,463,000 - - - 65,463,000 c.40 Mgd Oxygen Act'd Sludge&DAF,2017 34.000,000 - - - 34,000.000 d.Drain Modifications at Activated Sludge Rent,P1-59 75,000 - 51.544 51,544 23,456 4.Solids Presenting a.get Presses(4 Lane) 14,300,000 - - - 14,300,000 ,,. b.Solids Storage(4 Rm) 10,140,000 - - - 10,140,000 c.Digesters: 2 @ 110'Diameter 9,100,000 - - - 9.100,000 - - d.Remove Trickling Flkers 1 &3 1,300,000 - - - 1,300,000 a.Remove Trickling Filters 2&4,2007 1,300,000 - - - 1,300,000 r f. 110'ft Diestere 18,2001000 - - - 18,200,000 g.4 Bet Presses 10,920,000 - - - 10,920,Ot10 -- 5. Elestdcal Power Systems e.Elactl.Facility Modifrs Is Safety Upgredet,P1-40-1 1,537,OW 162,023 77,890 239,823 1,297,177 `.I Transfer to C,7,d 135010001 - - - (350,ODD) Alarm Bascom for Venting of Gas Holder - - 20,OD0 20,000 (20,000) b. 12KV Distribution System for Support Facilities, Pt 47 4,800,000 255,832 56,230 312,082 4.487.938 c.86KV Substation Addition,P1-52 1,384,000 39,307 43,070 62,3T7 1,301.em d.12kv Electrical Power Distribution 2,450,000 - - - 2,450,000 e. 12 KV Power Distribution,2001-2012 1,099,000 - - - 1.099.000 f.Standby Power Generation,20D5 &2015 4,914,000 - - - 4,914.000 B.Safety ImProyerrenta a. Fire Rotaction,Signs and Water Sys Mode.,Pt-38-5 2,685,100 1.749,926 815,D50 2,564,976 120,124 _ b.Salado Retrain of N.,Stmmure Systems. P143 1,4461000 942,431 269,650 1.212,081 233,919 c. Seismic Retrofit Stuctual Items, PI i4-1,2,3,4 3,819,000 2,274,448 M.490 2.451.936 1.367,062 i d.Railings for Aeration Basins,P1-53 200,000 - - - 200,000 7.Miscellaneous Projects _ a.Fee Modifna&Safety Upgrades,P1-40.2 116861000 751,045 816,000 1.587,045 97,955 b.Drainage Mprov.At Nam 1.P1i0-3 220,000 - IZO90 12,090 207,910 J c. he Cmical Facility Modifies,P1d8.2 2,900,000 481,365 126,520 607,905 2,352,095 d.Admin.Bldg.Lobby Acoustical ImPr.,P1-54 125.000 - 14,930 14,930 110,070 e.Allowance for Planed Small Nojects 4,975,000 89,710 559.650 649,36D 4,325,640 J Sub-Total -Redematlon Nam 332,089,100 38,239,332 14,738,664 52.877,996 279,111,104 r m Section 3-Page 7 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Project Life For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 current Total Approved BMW year Projected Reapltity I j Potect Accumulated Projected Cost at FUBw U Budget Coot Coat MOM BmW B Ram 2 New and!Onenl.Maier Protests, 1.Headw.rks a.Plant 2 influent DIP2.66 2,400,000 - 24,510 24,510 2.37S. b.Replacement of Barecreen Influent Gets, P2.63 170,000 - 5,030 5,030 164,970 C.Headwo,ke 'C'Upgrades 2,500.000 - - - 2,500.000 2.Prime,Treatment I I e.primary Tmetmmd 24 MGD Expansion,P241 14.306,000 8,293 - 0.203 14.797,707Lj K.Primary Clarifier Rehab, P348 4,971.000 2,386.820 2,459,430 4.546,250 124,750 Transfer to Projects Below, (53,3801 - - (53,300) L&M Prim See Clarifiers Pump Room Equip Upgrade 20,810 - 1,480 1,480 19,33D N&0 Pnm Sed Clarifiers Pump Room Equip Unrede 32,550 - 1,210 1,210 31.340 c.Clarifier Efficiency Imprpyemems 1,700,000 - - - 1.700,00D d. Drain Replacement at Primary Basins A,8, C, P267 200,000 - 950 950 199,050 e.Replace Primary Bast.A, B, C 11,700.00D 11.M.000' 1 3.Sewntlary Treatment 1.6 e.Rehab Activated Sludge Rent Monte and Velying 111101000 - - - 1,110,DDO 4.Solids Processing a.Rehab 7 Digesters,P2-39 16,395,000 812,727 M.620 885,347 15,509,853I b.TWAS Feed to Digesters F&G, P2-39-1 180,000 - 101,130 101.130 78,870 c.Solids Serve.: 2 am. 5,200,OD0 - - - 5,2DD,000 it.Scab Replacement at Dawson,Fei ntry,P262 87,000 - - - 87,000 a.Addlo...1105 Fom Oi9ester 5,100,000 - - - 5,10g0DO d.Rehabilitate Solids Storage Equipment,P260 79,966 270,000 349.986 (MSAS8 S.Electrical Power Systems a.Digester Gea Compreeeor Redundancy,J-19.2.1 470.ODO - - - 470,000) b. Electi Fars Modify&Safety Upgrades.P2-47-1 3,975,000 261.448 202.000 44Ki. 4 3.511,554 c.Standby Power Generation 16,120,000 - - - 16,120,000 6.Safety Improvements ens Mr.protection,Sig.&Water By.Medical.P248 3,763.000 2.661.075 766,940 3,428,015 334,9551 T.mfsr to Project Below (177.6801 - - - (177,680L Reclaimed Water Extension to Hwks'C',P2.483 177.660 869 199.080 189,949 (12,289) b. Lendsc. & Img.At City Water Pump St..P2461 35.000 - 19.010 19,910 15,090 c.Fee Modif.&Safety Upgrades,P247-2 1,630,000 646,244 700.000 1,426.244 203.7" d.Seimic Retreat of Nor-Structure Systems,P2.50 1.080.000 617.551 728.291) 1,343.841 335.1 e.Seismic Retrofit,Stmctuirl Kama P2-53-2 3,955,000 3,580,S45 783.100 4,343,745 (386,745) 1.Chemical and Rant Water Modli s,P2-55 4,132,000 3,305,728 845.530 4.151,258 (19,2581 a.Reclaimed Water System PIm.2 3,335,000 - - - 3.335,000� 7.Miscellaneous Pmjeets U a.Air Compmssspre for Went Air System, P261 250,000 - - - 250,000 b.Oder Control st J..t.n and Distnbutien Boxes 500,000 - 8,000 8,D00 552,000i ..Conveyor Beft Aces.at Solids Storage 80,000 - - - BO,OOV d.Albwence for planned Small projects 5,146,000 267,110 618,670 1,085,780 4.560, S.Support Facilities and Site Improvements a.Warehouse Building. P2-65 1,179,000 - 128.310 126,310 1.052, b.Maintenance Building, P2-35-3 &-1 9,358,000 4,666,030 4.043,210 8,709,240 898, Transfer to Project Below 164,5441 - - - (64. Transformer upgrades at Operatm9 Camer 64,544 27,055 - 27.055 37,469 c.Ruse It Site&Security Imp., P2-35-5 1,226,000 806,013 599,100 1,405,113 (179,111 i d.Operation.Building,P2.23-5-111ebid W.21 3,015.000 3,517,256 15.010 3,532.266 8213! Sub-ToM -Treatment Plant 126,528.000 23,824,82E 12.859,510 38.484,330 90�04.9,68YYal L u Section 3- Page 8 L CORF Review Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Project Life For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1993 currant Total Approved 6/30)97 Your Projected Remaining Project Accumulated Projected Coat at Future Budget cast Coat 6/30198 Budget wo GJlnetpl.m end Jdm F,Mlklee 1.Supper,F.61Nae end Ske Improvements -_ e.Admininletration Parking Lot 222,500 - - - 222,500 b.Demolition or Rouse of Old Control Comer 200,000 - - - 200,000 r c.Demolition of Support BMg.@Plt2.J-27 215.000 109.504 - 109,504 105.496 d.CNG Refueling Station, PI-51 1,020,400 386.844 997,010 11382,854 (3B2,454) a.Open Bay Encloures at Pk 1 warehouse 90,000 - - - 90,000 2.Outfall &Boaster Pump Stanom a.Surge Tower Replacement,J.34-1 7,165,000 2.708,404 8,3B4,140 9,092,544 (1,937,544) b.Ounall Reliability&Pumping Annex DOSS'C'J-34 31,085,000 - - - 31,095,OO11 -' c.Eat&Rep!78'to Deep Water w/12W Ounell 16,120,000 - - - 16,120,OD0 3.Ini...tlon Management Systems a.Computerized Fec.Record;and Dwg.Sys.J-25-1 3,930,OD0 631,093 131,870 762.963 3.197,037 4.Plastic 111,2 Monitor/Control Sys Is.OOSS's Control System,J31-2 1,793,000 1,327,983 Q580 1,334,553 458,437 c.Nam 1 Headwodu System,J-31-3 1,313,760 3,196 397.560 400,758 913.004 d.Secondary Compel System Upgrade. Nam 2.J-314 1,739,000 37,081 114,510 151,591 1,557,409 _ e.Neat ReimemMn/Aummetbn Project,J42 25,760,000 63.671 374,41)() 438.071 25,321,929 Transfer to Project Below (36,1261 - - - (35,126) 'C'peaks Baeamam&Mi..Alarms 36,126 - 17,96) 17,980 18,155 r Automation of Solids Stange Facilby,P1-60 - - 30.000 W o0 (30000) f.Solids Stange Rehab and AutOmatian,J46 5,038,000 - 245.390 245,390 5.392.610 S.Menisci Power Systems r a.Gas Mining Systems Improvement.,J-253-1 470,000 - 2,520 2,520 467,460 It.Mood. Power Systems Rehab.Studies J-25-2.3,4 5,516,000 581.648 3 .w 932,028 4,682.972 c.Standby Power Reliability Modifne,J-33-1 15,391,000 903,280 182,990 1,086,270 14,303,730 d.MSP No. 3 at Headwork;2,J-33-2 1,1o%000 - 821,210 621,210 478,790 a.Harmonic Fkers Automation,J46 50,000 - - - 50,000 f. Power&Distribution edge Ventilation,J-50 140,000 - 90 90 139.910 9. Electrical Power Distention, 12kv 2,707,000 - - - 2,707,000 h. Improvements to Central Generation 680,000 - - - 680,000 vw Transfer to Projects Below (169,760) - - - (169.760) Steam System Must. 34,800 1,147 - 1,147 33,d53 - Battery Sys Aden at Central Generation 60,500 37,154 - 37.154 23,406 Emronice Hardware&Software Upgrade(Revision 11 83,000 16,739 41.110 57.849 5,151 Pk 2 Con Gen Fber Optic Addition 11,800 - 17,67) 17.670 (6,070) I.Cabe Troy Improvements.J47 2,760,000 11,541 271.830 M3,371 2.468,029 -- 6. Bushell label Trunk Replacement 26,100,000 - - - 26,100,OD0 7. Mbcellaneoue Safety Projects a.Ass.Platform to Co.Gen Esheun Piping,J49.3.1 75,000 - - - 75,OD0 b.Confined Space Personnel Removal System.J-49 300,001) - - - 300,000 c.Eaalumlon of Tunnels for Structural Invalidly,J-55 175,000 - 30,000 30,DDD 145,000 d.Transfer from A,S,e&E,3,f 507,000 - - - 50T OD0 eX Transfer to Project Below (507,000) - - - (507,000) _ Fire Alarm&Security System Upgrade,J-57 607,000 - 179,O90 17g,090 327,91D 8.Miecollonaous Projects vw a. In Rant Sampling System Medlin 70,000 - - - 70,ODD Transfer to Project Below 130,260) - - - (30,280) Feel Sampler System Upgrades 30,260 19,314 - 19.314 10948 `d Section 3-Page 9 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Project Life I ' For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 L Current Total I Approved B130/97 Year Projected Remaining if�lt Project Accumulated Projected Coat at Future affect Cost Coat 87J0196 Budget c lnt.rnlem era lalm FadOtlee can � b.Now Grit Aug.,.,}52 t 8m,0011 - - - 800,001) 1 c.Chemical Flow Pacing for Primary Influent,J-53 100,000 - 80280 80,280 19,720 1�1 d.AB&6 Flownu ter Bypass 30D,000 - - - 300,00D e.Allowance for Planned Small Projects 4,505.0D0 330,468 291,980 622448 3,682,552 l 9.Water Reclamation 116,000,000 - - - 116'"= Transfer to Projects Below (680,000) - - - (680,000) Pollination Plant No. 1 Warer Quality Management Stud 280.000 11693 - 1.60 278.307 OCSD/OCM Rational Water Reclamation Pit Study,J.3 400.000 207,364 356,890 aµ244 (64244) ; 10.Water Conservation 5.150,000 - - - 5,15o,000 IL 11. Rehab of Boise Chica State Beach Sewerage System.Ji 64,084 1206.553 1,340,637 (1,340,837) SUD-Total -ertefplam&Joim 279,166,660 7.431.208 12.312.003 19,743211 259,4123.449 1 Sub-Taal - Msbh Projects 737,783,760 69.295,368 39.910,1n 108205.645 628,578215 L D.E-9l=,r1ng ee.d. Pacts 1. Master Planning a. hyestigation em l Rehab of Oceen Outlell,J-39 1,439,600 482,695 432= 915215 04.385 1 b. Management of Peek Hydraulic Discharge,Jd l 1,837,000 1,607,821 627,420 2,435241 (798241) C.Determ. Of Fin Charges and Fee Schad.,Ji 2 481.000 3641615 393,940 748,555 (267,555) d.Treatment,Reuse and Disposal Plan,J 3 933,ODO 49.446 62SAN 876= 56,674 e.CEOA,Public Participation,J 404 411,000 38,872 149,680 186,352 224,µ8 2.Miscellaneous Projects a.Area Classifications Studies,Plants 1 &2,J-35-1 70,000 - 0,940 43J W 26,060 Is.Revision of Standard Spacificaaons,J-44 240,000 - 42.700 42.700 197,300 c.Edison Envaet Lighting Retrofit,J45 µ1.400 6,153 388,910 379,063 68,337 d.Evaluation of Existing Alum.Covers at Prim.Maine 50.001) 50,000 Sub-Total-EngMeerb,9 Special Prefects 5,703,000 2.547,402 3,073AW 5,621.= 01.608 E-General services Ad,nleisroul, i 1.General Services Administration a.GSA-MiscolBneous Small Projects 625,0DID - - 625,00a b.Tech Services Move 250,0010 - - - 250,000 2. End User Support(IT) a. Miecelmociis Smell Projects 21,000 - - 21,000 1Ydl 3. Programing&Database Sys. IITI e. Document Management 600,000 - 51.050 51,050 745.950 b.Data Integration 4,334,000 - 341.150 341,150 3,992.BW Transfer to Projects Below n62,508) - - - (152,508) Network Integration Consulting 42,700 24,673 - 2416M 18,027 Network Interface Upgrade "Age 43.379 - 43,379 6,429 Fuel MBmt System 50,000 44,946 250 45,196 14,804 j Network System Integration - 412,076 12,010 425,496 (425,466) II�tstslli c.Strategic Information Architecture ISIAi 724,000 - 2D0,020 200,020 523,960 d.CMMS Programming 179,000 - 190.650 190,650 (11,8a0) e.Iraranet 82.000 - 43.000 43,000 39.000 t . f.Security System Improvements 278.000 - 255,000 255,000 23,0to J Transfer to C,7,d (157,0001 - - - (167.000) g.Voictr/Data Building Rewiring 438,000 53,558 250,000 303,558 134,442 In. Network Backbone Upgrade Continuation 624,000 251,791 237260 489,051 134,949 1 1 I. Internet E-Meilfil owsing 70.000 - 43600 43,6DO 26,400 li j.Year 20M Data Change 213,000 - 2.110 2,110 210,800 k.W W W Server 161,000 - - - 161.000 I.FIS/Oraclo Gateway 400.000 - 74,340 74,340 325.660 m.Financial Information System(IT) 2,025,000 1,173,234 801,766 1,975,000 60,000 L Sectim13-Page 10 L CORF Review Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Project Life �- For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Current Total Approved 6/30/97 Your projected Remaining r Project Accumulated Projected Coatm Future Budget Cost Coat worse Budget E.Sianeml servicae Aamimetmuon ICem.L o.Data Extraction from Plum Control system 185,000 - - - 185'" r P.Upgrade Phone system e8,000 167,101 49,850 216.951 (148,951) _ a.GIs 383,000 - - - 30,M 4.Rem Automation Ica a.Desktop Computer Standard 862,000 - 100,000 100,000 76ZODO r b.Rent 2 Ram Water Programming Upgrade 110,000 - M740 63.740 48,280 _ c.Rent 2 City Water Programming Upgrade 70,000 - 70GW 70.000 - d.Rent 1 City Water Pragremmlrg Upgrade 50,000 - 50,01DO S0,000 - r e.Rent 2 Dsvratedng Control system Upgrade 700,000 - - - 700,000 I.Rem i Dewaterin9 Control System Upgrade 400,000 - - - 40D,000 _. 9.Rem 2 TWAS PLC Program/SCADA Upgrade 152,000 - 38,770 W.Tr0 113,230 h.Rant 2 DAFT PLC Program/SCADA Upgrade 180,000 - 30,210 30,210 149,790 I. Ram 1 &2 Ham Loop PLC Replacement 440,000 - 8,550 8,550 431.450 Transfer to Project Below 1200,000) - - - (200.000) Emronka Upgrade at R 154,39 Plant 1 200,000 - 154,390 0 45.610 J.Rent 1 &2 Primary Clarifier Rehab.SCADA Configuratia 85,000 - - - 85,ODD r k.Rent 1 Secondary Treatment SCADA 185,000 - - - 185.000 5.College.Facilities(GSA) a.Plant 2 Now 0&M Building Furniture 20,000 - - - 20,000 b.Arc Into Mapping 300.0DO - - - S00,000 S. Ram Facilities(GSA) a.Wee Furniture for Now 0&M Building 25,000 - - - 25,000 b.USrary System for New O&M Building 32,000 - - - 32,000 c.Training1se efing Room Fleet Service Facility,Rent 1 18,000 - 1,990 1,990 16,010 d.Tramm9/Maebrp Room Fabrication Shop Facility,Rent 1 18,000 - Z370 2,370 15,630 t. e.Dismcte'Training Resource Center 200,000 200,000 Sub-Tmal-GSA 15,788,000 2,171,558 3,134,826 5,306,354 10,459,616 F TmhMaal servhma 1. Phase II L.I.M.S.Impemematlan 505,000 197,027 141,800 338.827 166,173 2. NPDES Permit Support 150,000 578,951 M540 629,491 (479,491) Sub-Total-Technical Services 6551000 775.978 192,340 968,315 (313,318) 1. Operations Department Projects a.Upgrade to System for Emission Modeling Testing 40,000 333 27,620 27,953 12,047 b.Air Quality Dmabase Development 125,ODO 4,543 35,000 39,543 85,457 u e.Sulfur Manitame for Combustion 185,000 - 37,830 37,830 147,170 d. Central commotion Perememc Monitor Sys 454,500 3.519 36,,240 38,759 415.741 '- e.RoRBer/Biamaklng Fiber Demonstration 85,000 - - - 85.00D f.Scrubber Chemical Feed System Mod. 625,000 4,667 126,600 131,267 493,733 ,at g.Anoxic Gad Floatation Process Demonstration 125,000 - ISO 150 124.850 h./Iydralyele-Ihlcuming-floatation Demonstration 52,000 - - - szoo0 "'- I.large Scale Microfilannion Demonstration 591000 - 38 38,40,400 0 MBDO i.Primary Effluent Filtration 80.000 - 169,350 169,360 (69,380) it.Processes to Achieve Clew A Blosolide 901000 - X000 35.000 55,01DO 1.WAS Drying without Digestion 78.0DO - - - 76.000 -- m.R202 Doer Feed Sensor for Influent Trunks 40.000 - - - 40.000 Transfer to Praise[Below (39.205) - - - (39,205) du N202 Continuous Monhor/Pretreatmem Automation Stu 39,205 - 39,205 39,205 - n.Turbidity Monitoring&Regulatory Equipment Fac. 85,000 - 60,ODO 50,000 35,ODO -' o.Full-Scate Biosolids Reduction 1,500.000 - - - 1,500,0DO Section 3-Page 11 ae 1997-98 Third Quarter Report 6iJ Summary of Joint Works Construction Requirements-Project Life I I For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 ou n Total Apposed GIWI97 Year Projected Remalnin9 praises Assureaeted "acted Coddle Fublra auxigat Cost curt 6130/98 Budget G operations a Melreaa atcelcoml. p.Misc Optimization Studies&Improvements 430,000 - 44,220 44,220 385.780 Transfer to projects Below 1138,795) - - - 1138.795) Pulse Pwr Enhancemam of Solids Proc(Port 81 Eval 99,502 61,105 1.280 62.3% 37,107 Karel Steam Static Miser Tom 24,593 9,246 28,480 35,725 (11,132) i I HTF Process Laboradary Tests 14,700 7 26.500 26,507 WAIN) Jlii q.Miscellaneous RaRabilhs&Redund.Reject, 160,000 - IBM 18,960 131,040 Transfer to projects Below 1100,000) - - - (100,000) Energy Deregulation Study 57,268 539 - 539 56,720 I Screenings Compactor Systems Intl. @ Plante 1 &2 130.000 433 137,240 137,673 (7,6A) Il.li Pit 2 Anionic PoNmar Automation 96,600 - 66,550 66,550 mo50 2.Maintenance Depo mant projects a.Plant 2 Digester Gas Rare Control Sy,Upgrade 140,000 - - - 14g000 It,plant 2 Track Leading VPD Replacement 60,000 - - - S0,000 c.plant 2 MSP Vibrelion Monitor Upgrade 44,000 - - - 44.000 d.plane 1 Heedworks Scrubber Pump Modifns 30.0011 - - - 30.000 e.Bait Rena Drive Unit Replacement 20,000 - - - 2g0D0 f.Rebuild Samimia Conveyor a P2 Solids Station 97.000 - - - 97,000 Transfer to project Below 192.4261 - - - (02.420) A-Heft Rehab @plane 2 Solids Loodirq Storage Fee 92,426 - 92426 92.429 - g.Reconfigure Reclaimed Water Meter Station at P2 55,000 - - - 55,000 W,00 h.Backup Coolin,Water Modifns at P1 Can Gen 35,000 - 35,000 0 - I.Trickling Filler Clarifier Mechanical Rehab Invest. 50,000 - - - 50,001) j.Weir Extensions at Teminetion Channel 30AN 37.170 37.170 (7,170) Sub-Total-Opereemv&Melmenence 4,945.368 84.391 1,080241 1,164,632 3.780,735 j H.Equipment item, 24,442,700 2,147,162 1,942.700 4,089,862 20,352,838 L Sub-ToW-Joint Wake Capital lequbememe 789,295,828 77,021,859 49,334,274 126,356,133 662,939.695 Construction In program Completed At 6130197 84,493,479 84403,4M (B4,4B3,479) J Taal Joint Works Capital Requirements 789,295,828 161,516,338 4%334.274 210.849.612 578,446,216 L i V L Yrl II L I I LV Section 3-Page 12 L Budget Review by District `. All Districts Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Operating Budget Review low-So Year-To• Remaining Year-TO.Date ..v Brmget Date Baigat %Expended REVENUES: Tax Levy(No. 11 Band Fund Orgy) 10,00D 5,399 4,601 53.99% Tax PJIo®IiordSubverdio s(Shme of 1%) 30.342.000 19,779,952 10,562,048 65.19% Connection Fees 6,893,000 4,881,833 1,011,167 8284% IRWD Fees 2,300,000 1,725,000 575,000 75GID% Other Fees 71,278,000 32,576,246 38,701,754 45.70°% m Sale of Capacity Rights 1,574,500 - 1,574,500 - Interest&Misc.Receipts 21,956,M) 19,617,917 2,340,063 89.34% Other - 213,176 (213,176) - "' Total Revenues 133,355,500 78,799,523 54,555,077 59.091A OUTLAYS: ve Share of Joint Works Tmd.Plant 51,540.200 32,733,801 21.806,399 60.02% District Trunk Sever Castnction 11,480,500 4,789,841 6,690,659 41.72% COP/Band Retirement and Interest Expense 34,251,000 24,986,532 9,264.468 7295% — Share of Joint Wake Operating Expenses 43,902,850 31,322,564 12.580.266 71.35% District Operating&Other Etpendtures 9,121,700 5,186,264 3,935,436 56.86% Total Outlays 153,296,250 99,019,002 54,277,248 64.59% — Capital Facilities Budget Review — Balance Atl)unnems Transfer to Balance 7MI97 &Additions Fixed Assets 3131198 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: — Districts 1-14 Corstnx:tion in Progress 25.454.214 4.789,841 (179,503) 30,064.552 Share of Joint Works 74,857,231 32,733,800 (50,774) 107,540,257 Sub-Total 100.311.445 37,523.641 (230.277) 137,604,809 COMPLETED PROPERTY,PLANT&EQUIP: Lard and Property Rights 2,656,265 - 19,001 2,S75,288 ,y Collection Lines and Puny Stns. 292,316,954 - 153.803 292,470,757 Treatment Facilities 19,922 - 19,922 Disposal Facilities 101,528 - - 101,528 General Plain and Admin. Fadl. 880,037 - 5,695 885,732 rm Equity in Joint Treatment Facil. 6T7,236,205 (2,246,254) 50,775 975,040,727 Other Assets at Coat Less Amon. 133,381 (53.357) 1,003 81,077 — Sub-Total 973,344,293 (2,299,611) 230,2T7 971,274,959 Total Properly,Plant&Equipment&GIP 1,073,6W.738 35.224,030 - 1.108,879,758 ey Section 4-Page 1 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L District 1 -Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review L For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Operating Budget Review 1997.98 Yasr-To- Remaining Year-to-Da1e L.I audget owe Budget %Expended REVENUES: Budget Tax Levy(Bond Fud(s)Only) - - - - Tax AlbCatbrslSutrven8ms(Sham al%) 2,0001000 1,353,185 646,814 67.68% JJ1 Cmnecfim Fees 469,O0D 73,452 395,54E 15.8696 Other Foes 7,189,000 3,348,502 3,820,498 46.71% Sale of Capacity Rion, 146,000 - 148,OOD 4 , Ideresl&Misc.Receipts 941,OD0 075,257 65,733 93.01% u Other - 23,011 (23,011) - Total Revenues 10,727,000 5,673,418 5,053,582 52.0% L' OUTLAYS. Shoe of Joint Works Trmt. Rant 6,634,000 3,423.955 2,210,044 60.77% District Truck Sewer Constmchm 100,000 - 100,000 0.00% L COP/Bond ReBrer ast and Interest Expense 4,393,000 3,205,355 1,187,612 72.97% Share of Jont Works Operating Expenses 4.495.652 3,492,466 1,003186 77.69% District Operating&Other Exper Oures 576.750 442,420 133.330 78.84% � i Total Outlays 15,198,402 10,554,230 4.634.172 69.51% L Capital Facilides Budget Review Balance Adjuabnarrb Transfer to Balance 711197 &Addiflos Rued Assets 3131198 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 2.30 Memory Lane Interceptor 72 (72) - Sub-Total 72 - (72) - L Share of Jdnt Works 7.526,531 3,423,956 (5,310) 10,945,177 Sub-Total 7.526.603 3,423,956 (5,382) 10,945,177 1M COMPLETED PROPERTY, PLANT&EQUIP: Lend and Property Rights 81,398 - 81,398 Collection Unes and Ranp Sam. 6,902,929 - 72 6,903,001 Tr almmt Facilities - - - - Dnposal Facilities 11,593 - - 11,593 I f General Rand and ANn:n. Fadl. 58,241 - - 58,241 w Equity in Jdra Treatment Faci'.. 70,918,038 (234.957) 5,310 70,688,391 Clher Assets at Cost Less Amon. - - - - ± , Sub-Total 77,972,199 (234,957) 5,382 77,742,624 Ilrl Total Property,Place&Equipmerd&CIP 85,498,802 3,188,999 - 88,687,801 it u ii u Section 4-Page 2 L Budget Review by District District No.2-Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review — For The Nine Months Ended March 31,1998 Operatina Budget Review 1997-98 Year-To Remaining Year-TO-Date — Budget Data Budget %Expended REVENUES: Tax lsw(Bond Fund(s)Only) - - ,s, Tax Allocations/Subventions(Sham or l%) 9.430,000 6,050,838 3.379,162 64.17% Coramemn Fees 2,466,000 2,354,212 111,785 95.47% Other Fees 23,440,000 10,5115.320 12,854,680 45,16% Sale of Capacity Rights 566,600 - 586,500 - d Warren&Miac.Recap% 6,591.000 5,M,220 W780 89.91% Other - 52.346 (52.346) - Total Revenues 42,493SM 24,968,036 17,524.564 58.76% OUTLAYS: Share of Joint Wmka Trial.Plant 15.903.800 9,535.356 6,368,4 59.95% Diabid Trunk Sewer Comaugon 763,000 426,185 33e,B05 55.86% COP/Bond Retirement and Interest Experee 11,096,000 6,477,272 2,618,728 76.40% Sham of Joint Wbds Operating Egaeness 14,01a,180 9,957,443 4,080,737 71.03% Disidct Operating&Other Expenditures 2,551,400 1,394,127 1,157,273 54S4% Tafel Outlays 44,332,3110 29.790,393 14.541,987 6T20% — Capital Facilities Budget Review Balance Adjustments Transfer to Balance — 7/1197 &Addi6ana Hand Assets 3131MB CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 244SR2 BARI Manhole 426.340 63,405 488,751 2-7 Ahvood Subtrunk Modification 107,294 107,294 r 2-38 Olive Subhunk&SARI Creasing 13.625 13.625 2-37 Miscellaneous Improvements W Pump Stations 6,199 2T7,016 283.215 -- 2-39 SACSR Eeaemend Modification 16.197 1,074 17,271 SA River Trunk Flood Protection 35,224 35,224 — AgSll Drawings Coyote Canyon 15.763 15,763 _ 2.32 SAWPA Trunit Line Z954 (2,984) 0 2-33 Palm Ave.Purchase Agreement 2.761 (2,761) 0 ® Foul Air Bypass @ SARI 3,129 (3r129) 0 2-35 Euclid Trunk&Intemaptor 14.524 14.524 I5 Fwy widening Project - 58,598 58,598 2-40 Repl SARI Centel&Gate - 13,80B 13.608 241 SARI Realignment&Protection - 9,938 9.938 Miscellaneous Charges to Closed W.O. 1,923 2.558 (fin) 3,602 Sub-Tobd 644,969 428,195 (9,751) 1,061.413 Sham of Joint Works 21,862418 9,535.356 (14,794) 31,382,980 Sub-Total 22,507.387 9.961,551 (24.545) 32,444,393 COMPLETED PROPERTY,PLANT&EQUIP. m land and Property Rights 517,694 - - 517,694 Collection Unes and Pump Stuns. 96,894,898 - 5,759 96,900,857 Treatment Facilities - - - - r Disposal Fadhles 33.172 - - 33.172 General Plant and Admin.Facil. 215,420 - 3.129 218.549 Equity in Joint Treatment Feel. 197,206,D86 (654,338) 14.794 196,566,542 Other Assets M Coal Less Aliren. 19.216 (16,041) am 4,038 Sub-Total 294,896,486 (670,379) 24.545 294,240,652 Total Properly,Plant&Equipment&CIP 317,393,873 9,291,172 - 326,BB6,045 Section 4-Page 3 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L District No.3 -Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review 1 For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Operatlna Budget Rovlew 1997-98 Year-To- Remaining Year.To4lta Rudgn Date Budget %Expooded L REVENUES: Tax Levy(Sera Fund(.)Only) - - - - TaxAllocatungSubventions(Sham of l%) 10230000 6,704.681 3.525,119 65.54% Connection Fees 1,345,000 1.356,173 (11.173) 100.83% Other Fees 23,045,000 10.812,299 12,232,701 4fle2% Sete of Capacity Rl9hla 430,000 - 00.D00 - Interest&Misr.Recalpts 7,334,000 6.559,033 804,937 89.07% Other - 52,395 (52.395) - Total Revenues 42,414,000 25,484,781 18,929,219 60.09% OUTLAYS: LShare of Joint Works Trtd.Rent 10.051,100 9.953.809 6.867,291 59.96% Dmmd Trunk Saner Construoton 5,049,000 2,705,596 2,343,104 53.59% COP/Bond Retirement and Intemd Expense 11,394,000 7,698.228 3,695,T72 67.56% Share of Joint WOA.Operating Expenses 13,030.355 9,067.882 3.982.484 89.59% Darid Operating&Other Expendhums 2,181,200 1,002,023 1,179.177 45.90% r Total Outlets; 48,305,666 30457.835 17,847,828 63.05% I Canlfal Facilities Budget Review Balance A6jusmieits Tunnel Bianca 711197 &Additions Fixed Assets 31311118 i CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: L 3.25 Orange-Wentem SubTnnk Relief Sewer - - - - 11.17 Suter PIS Upgrade-3&11 1.374,847 - - 1.374.347 f 3-35 Tech3e Pipe Replaessmnt 2.121,200 7,3D8 - 2,128.506 336R Repl.Wastminder Ave.Farce Main. 4,400,305 - - 4,400.346 V 3371-5 widening Project 34,172 7,822 - 41.094 337-1 Magnolia Trunk Sewer lmpun imenla 5,651 23.798 29.449 338 MIIIeNldder Trunk Sewer Improvements 512.679 - - 512.679 f t 338-1 Improv.to Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer 84,619 182,796 - 287.415 �I 338-3 IMProv.to Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer 263,909 1,503,179 - 1,887,088 339 MIIlar4ldder E.M 8,752 - - 8.752 237 Mlacellareaua Improvememe to Pump Stations 10.540 - 10,540 u 335R.1 Meg Tmnk West 1,401,011 550,W5 2,251,316 38-1 Relocate Pollux,of Los Aiamiuxs Sewer 50,000 - 501000 3-9-1 Magnolia Relief ModB. - 13,203 13,203 J 1 340 Seel Bea&New Bype98 - 11,639 11,839 U Miscellaneous Charges to Closed W.O. 3,755 5.848 (3,548) 8,058 SUATaml 10.271.401 2,705,896 (3.548) 12,973,829 Share mf Joint WoAe 22,577A28 9,983,809 (15.489) 32,645.748 Sub-Total 32.648,907 12,659,705 (19,037) 45,519,575 COMPLETED PROPERTY,PLANTS EDUI P. I Lana and Property Rights 250.231 - - 200.231 u Collection Lines and Pump Sme. 83,322,566 - 1.386 63,323,952 Tmatmwnt Fadlit. 9,922 - - a.M j Dgunai Fadiltles 28,419 - - 23A19 Geneml Rent and Adnin. Feel. 317,991 - 2,162 320,153 Equity In Joint Treatment Facil. M11,fi89,211g (085,111) 15,489 205.919.067 Otiner Assets at Cod Less Anod - - - - ' j Su?Total 270,548,418 (05.111) 19,037 289,882.344 u Toll Property,Rant&Equipment&CIP 303,397,325 12,01 4,594 - 315,401,919 LI Section 4-Page 4 L Budget Review by District District#5- Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review m For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Operating Budget Review m 1997-98 Year To- Feminine Year-Te.0ata Budget Oats BW,mt %Expended REVENUES: Tax Levy(BOM Funds)Only) w Tex AllorallmuSubverons(SM.of l%) 2,550,0W 1,869,Ba3 881,017 W.45% Connection Fees 2 ,I,OW 529,432 (305.432) 236.35% Other Fees 2,730.000 1,185.462 1,564,538 42.69% Sale of Capacity Rates 56.00D - WOW - m Interest&Mi..Receipts 1,717,000 1,53&049 180.951 a9.46% Other - 10,a51 (loss) - Total Revenues 7,277,000 4,910.M 2,366.223 67.48% m OIRLAYS: Sham of Joint Vonks Tent Plant 2,138,000 1,289,712 848,288 60.32% Ds9loi T.k Sewm Cmmhucdon 698,000 553,853 1",147 79,35% .e COP/Bond Redeemed end lMemsl Expense 1,868,0W 1,529,706 3311= 81.89% Sham of Joint Mrks Opening Expenses 1,883,818 1,274,828 389,090 78.62% _ Donor Operating&Other Fspmxlkums 744,250 649,6M 99,580 87.2914 Total Outlays 7,112.168 5297,789 1,614,399 74.49% m laoltal Facilities Budget Review Balance Adjustments Tmimform Balance 711W &Additmes Fixer!Assets 301/98 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 535 So.Coast Trunk Sewer-Intl Phases 1&2 3,965 in (3,191) 907 SW Crystal Cave PIS 8,4T1 - (8477) - m S342 Baysida Dive Tmnk 109,689 109.689 2417 MIsm lonnue Improvements to Pump Stations 16,599 - 16.599 - Udo PIS#2 MSP Upgrade 5,381 - (5,381) - 511-1 lido Pump Station Reoratim 19.667 121.643 141.310 m 5.32 Bitter Pt It RorJy,Pt PIS Mine,5&6 514 - (514) - 537.3&4 PCH Gmvky S.Rehab 5&6 ma.873 13,555 - 8WAI 539 Siphon 5&6 16 - (16) - Say Bntl9e PIS LigMng 5&6 876 - - 876 `^ Bay Bridge P/S Pladorm 5&14 11,246 - 11.246 Batefpdnt P/S Fen Upgrade 5&6 2.881 2,161 Hydrogen Peroxide Teals 5&14 1,332 - - 1,332 m 511 Redca on&Mcd9.of Sawm-Newport BNd 8 PCH 5&8 2,879 201,676 204,455 5-33-1 Beautification of Say Sddge P/S - 10,015 10,015 5421RWDOCWD Interim - 204.089 204,069 Miswllaneom Chmgas to Closed WO. 2W 2,859 (120) 3,025 m SYtrTOMI T74,681 553.863 (17.699) 1,310.835 Sham of Joint Weft 2,849,4W 1,289,712 (2,001) 4.137.114 SutrTOMI 3,624,084 1,84.3,665 (19.700) SA17,949 �y COMPLETED PROPERTY,PLANr&EQUIP: Land and Property Rights 69,740 - - 69,740 -- Collection Linea aW Pump Sins. 34,173,313 - 17,699 34,191,012 TmsimaM Fadift. 7,347 - - 7,347 Deposal Facilities 7,115 - - 7,115 General Plats and Admin.Fact, 39,402 - - 39,402 Equay In Joint Treatment Feel. 26,705,898 (88,503) 2,001 28,619.394 Otler Paeans at Coll Lela Anwd. - - - - en SutrToial 81,002,813 (88,503) 19,700 80,939,010 Total Property,Plant&Equipment&CIP 84,8Wa97 1.756,062 - 8W,381,959 m Section 4-Page 5 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L District No.6-Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Oueratra Budoet Review 1997-92 rear-To- Rarelnlrlg Tear-To43ate Y Budget Date Budget %Expanded REVENUES: I Tm�levy(Bond Fund(s)Ody) - - rm/SiA - - I T.Alocno More L (Stam of l%) 1,162,000 749.976 412,024 64.54% CmreClon Fees 45,000 30,9N 14,066 68.76% Other Fees 3,408.000 1,997,169 1,S ell WAM Sele a Capaaly Righb 59,000 - 59,000 - L h1aeet&Wee.Rereipm 1u243,000 1,039,673 203,327 83.64% Other - 8.124 (8,124) - Toial R.... 6,OD7,OW 3,825,906 2.181,094 B AS% OUIlAVS' Stun of Jam w Trna Parr! 2,2V.lOD 1,315,899 931,201 53.5896 Dlprirt Trwk Sever Corotruction 479,500 27.781 451,719 5.79% COP63oM"rernerd and Imams Eepe se 1,25Q000 942.W3 313.037 75.08% L Shoe d Jdnt Wake Opere rg E 1,567.332 1,074,364 492,05 S8.55% Dd ld Operating&Other Expand.l. 216.200 156973 55.227 7294% Total OtMays 5,M 132 3,517,990 2,247.162 61.021A y Capital Facilities Budget Review Balance Adymtrnama Trareiorto Balance 71119T BAddieare Fixed Assets L31M L CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Realign Dover Trunk Sewer 3,559 - - 3,50) 14-1-1 A 8 B Gisler lni, 14-1-2 Baker Street 47,022 - (1,184) 45,838 L 6-12 Fsrn R91W 359,251 1I'M - 370,8W 613 Air Base Sewem ASendonmarn 58,527 19,229 - 74,755 2-37 Mlscolbneous l mprvvem to Pump Stations 930 - - 030 6M after R 6 Roily R IPS l mpmv.586 187 - (187) - 537-384 PCH Gravity Svr Rohn 5 8 6 2516,708 - - 2,516.708 639 Siphon 586 1 - (1) BBerpolm PB Fan Upgrade 5 86 950 - - 96D 5-41 Redcation a Mode.of Sewers-Na rt Blvd 8 PCH 5 S 6 5,522 - - 5,522 Mhc Chg.to Clmed Wak Order (273) - (12) (285) SuATotal 2m2 27,781 (1,384) - 3018,801 - ShareofJdiMWarke 3,321731 1,315,690 (2,041) 4,635,569 6W SuDTotal 6,314,135 1.343.680 (3,425) 7.654,300 COMPLETED PROPERTY,RANT 6 EOUIP: land artl Property Rona 562 - 582 V CdletSm lines and Pump Strn. 5,152390 - 1.371 5,153761 Treaenent Fadlli 2853 - - 2,653 Dlvpoed F.IrIies 7,394 - - 7,394 L Gererel More and Mrr n.Fadl. 113.749 - 12 113.761 Equhy In Joid Tm rl Feat 27,114.812 (90.299) 2,042 27.025,555 Olner Avila at Cost teas Amon - - - SuFToml 32391,560 (90.299) 3,425 32304,6W Total Property,Ran 8 Equlpnmin&CIP 38,705,695 1.253,381 - 39959,076 I� L Section 4- Page 6 L Budget Review by District District No. 7-Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review — For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Operating Budget Review 19ST-M Yam-To- Remaining Ymr4o-0ate `+ Budget Data Budget %Eipeelad REVENUES: Tax Levy(Bond Furd(s)Ody) - - - - Too,abw6onafSudren5ors(Shareofl%) 2,931,DD0 1,893,628 1.037,372 64AI% - Commodon Fees 504.000 (281,058) 785.058 -55.71% _. Other Fees 8.916.000 2.077,398 4,838,602 W.04% Sale of Capadty RiBNs 131,000 - 131.000 - - Interest&Misc.Retapts 1,879,000 1.723.347 155,653 91.72% OMer - 44,473 (44,473) - Total Revenues 12,381,ODD 5,457.790 0,903210 44.16% OUTLAYS: — Sham of Joint WeMS Tmrl.Plant 4,985,000 SODS. 36 1,gM.764 60.35% DmMd Trunk Sewer Consbucton 1.341,000 674,957 766,043 42.BB% COP Bond Retirement and Interest Expense 2,185,000 1,662,839 622.161 76.10% Sham of Joint Won®Operating Expenses 3,859,081 3.263.811 595,250 84.58% District Operetlng&Other ExpendNums 1.788,000 869,511 918,489 48.0% Total Outlays 14.158,061 9.379,354 4778.707 6625% ,r Capital Facilities Budget Review Salanee Adjustments Trans/or to Satanpa 711W &Additions Flxod Assets Y31I911 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: — 7-22 Pareeal B RepL Lemon Heights 2,093.247 - - 2.093.247 7-231 College Ave.PurhP Sln Repl Force Mains 24,570 34.487 - 59,057 7-24 Manhole Aamsl Madicatmns 15,121 - - 15.121 — 7-7-1 Main SL PrS Imp., 233,652 4M,872 - 713.724 2-37 Miscellaneous Improvements to Pump Stabore 18,599 - - 18,5a9 14-1.1 A&B Gisler Ind,14-1-2 Baker Street - Force Man D;sirids 6.7&14 M,126 - (2.690) 41.436 7-W-1&2 Pump Station Atandomrede 994,634 - (18,951) 975,683 7-16Lomon Heights Sewer - - - - TedRePipeRaplawmem 2,663 - - 2,663 _ 7-170range Park Puss Save Repl. 37,133 6,267 - 43,400 7-1-2 GtsarRenr Trunk Reloraton 98.093 - (98,093) - Harvard!Ave.Tnmk6ewer 3,074 - (3,074) - 7-26Sseer Mapping - 34277 M277 ry 7-25 Man Street Trunk Flay - 10.770 10,770 7-27Tustin Axrbne FaclRes - 9264 9284 M;sodlaneous Charges to Closed W.O. 2.348 - (2,348) - — S.RToml 3,587,4 574.95 60 7 (125,156) 4,017.261 Sham of Jdnt darks 6,707,688 3.006,236 (4,668) 9,711,256 Sub-Total 10,275,148 3.583.193 (129.824) 13,728,517 a COMPLETED PROPERTY,PLANT&EQUIP: Land and Pmperty Rights 1,559.61A - 19,001 1,578,655 Cdleotmn Lires and Pump Stir- 38,352,801 - 105,623 38,458,424 Tmatnem Facftes - - - - - Deposal FacliSes 10,782 - - 10,782 Geneal Plant and Pdmm.Facil. 97.805 - 392 95.197 Equity in Joint Tmamat FadL W268.321 (2W.432) 4.668 62.086,557 Other Assets at cast Less Arn t 114,165 (37,316) 140 76.939 .. Sub-TOW 102.403.528 (243,748) 129.824 102289,604 Total lomporty.Plant&Egdprem&GIP 112,678,676 3,339,445 - 116.018,121 Section 4-Page 7 1997-98 Third Quarter Report District No. 11 -Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review YJ For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Operatina Budget Review I I 1997-98 Year-To- Remaining Year4oMate �I Budget Data Budget %Expended REVENUES: Tax Levy(Bond Fund(s)Only) 10,000 5,399 4,601 53.9949 ICI Tax Allocations/Subventions(Share of 1%) 2,039,000 1,358,460 680,540 66.62% Connection Fees 448,000 540,668 (92,668) 120-68% Other Fees 3,656,000 2,171.876 1,464,124 59A1% Y Sale of Capacity Rights 98,000 - 98,DD0 - Interest 8 Misc. Receipts 1,319,000 1,117,486 201,612 84.72% I Other - 15,064 (15,064) - V Total Revenues 7.570,000 5,2 955 2,361,045 68.81% OUTLAYS: Share of Joint Works Trmt Plant 3,714,200 2.216.078 1,498,122 59.67% District Trunk Sewer Construction 1,203,000 501,049 701.951 41.65% COP/Bond Retirement and Interest Expense 1,887,000 1,352,899 524,101 72.23% 1 Share of Joint Works Operating Expenses %112,712 2,039,099 1,073,613 65.51% District Operating 8 Other Expenditures 750,900 SM.600 248.300 68.20% Total Outlays 10,697,812 6,651,725 4,046.087 62.18% r 1 Capital Facilities Budget Review IL/' Balance Adjustments Transfer to Balance 711197 8 Additions Fixed Assets 3/31198 V CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 11-17 Slater PIS Sewage Sys Impmv. 6.912,766 397,286 - 7,310,052 I ; 11-17-2 Goldenwst Trunk Sewer Improvements 44,394 8,426 - 52,820 L Huntington Beach Wetlands Visitor Center 1,425 - (1,425) - 2-37 Miscellaneous Improvements to Pump Stations 7.129 - - 7,129 11-18 District 11 Regional - 94,903 94,903 11-18.1 Abandonment of H.B. - 434 434 u Miscellaneous Charge to Closed W.O. 773 - - 773 Sub-Total 6,966,487 501.049 (1,425) 7.466,111 r Share of Joint Works 5,074,110 2216,078 (3,435) 7,286,753 Sub-Total 12,040.597 2,717,127 (4,860) 14,752,864 COMPLETED PROPERTY, PLANT 8 EQUIP: Y Land and Property Rights 146,986 - - 146.986 Collection Lines and Pump Stns. 19,048,602 - 1.425 19.050.027 ' Treatment Facilities - _ _ - L Disposal Facilities 3,053 - - 3.053 Goneral Plant and Admen. Facil. 30,682 - - 30,682 ) Equity in Joint Treatment Feed. 45S25,362 (152.069) 3,435 45,676,728 L Other Assets at Cost Less Amon. Sub-Total 65054,685 (152,069) 4,860 64.907,476 - Total Property,Plant 8 Equipment 8 CIP T7,095,282 2,565,05E - 79,660,340 u Section 4-Page 8 J Budget Review by District ,. District No. 13 -Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 ,r Operating Budget Review 1997-98 Year-To- Remaining Year-To-Date Budget Date Budget %Expended ^" REVENUES: Tax Levy(Bond Fund(s)Only) - - - - TaxAllorations/Subventions(Sham of l%) - - - - 278,00 Connection Fees 392,000 8 113,992 70.92% Other Fees 024.000 418,200 405,800 50.75% Sale of Capacity Rights 16,000 - 16,000 - Interest&Misc. Receipts 563.000 497,411 65,589 88.35% Other - 4.434 (4,434) - Total Revenues 1,795.000 1,195,053 596,947 66.74% OUTLAYS: Share of Joint Works Trmt.Plant 594,500 356,798 237,702 60.02% District Trunk Sewer Construction 147,000 - 147,000 0.00% COP/Bond Retirement and Interest Expense 19,000 15,552 3,418 82.01% Share of Joint Works Operating Expenses 482,931 350,813 132,118 72.64% District Operating&Other Expenditures 32,000 13.897 18,103 43.43% ® Total Outlays 1,276,431 737.090 08,341 57.79% Capital Facilities Budget Review ... Balance Adjustments Tranefer to Balance 711W &Additions Fixed Assets 3131198 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: r Share of Joint Works 787,648 356,798 (548) 1,123,898 SubTotal 767,648 356,798 (548) 1,123,898 '^ COMPLETED PROPERTY,PLANT&EQUIP: Land and Property Rights - - - - Collection Lines and Pump Sins. 2,887,356 - - 2.887,356 m Treatment Facilities - - - - Disposal Facilities - - - - General Plant and Admin.Facil. - - - - `, Equity in Joint Treatment Factl. 7,394,816 (24,479) 548 7.370.885 Other Assets at Cost Less Amon. - - - - SubbTotal 10,282,172 (24,479) 548 10,258,241 Total Property,Plant&Equipment&COP 11,049,820 332,319 - 11.382,139 m Section 4 -Page 9 1997-98 Third Quarter Report L District No. 14 -Operating and Capital Facilities Budget Review U For The Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Operating Budget Review 199748 Year-To- Remaining Year-to-Date L Budget Date Budget %Expended REVENUES: V Tax Levy(Bond Fund(s)Only) - - - - Tax Alloce0ons/SuWentions(Sham of l%) - - - - IRWD Feas 2,300,000 1,725,000 575,000 75.00% Other Fees _ _ _ _ u Sale of Capacity Rights 70,0D0 - 70.000 - Interest&Mise.Receipts 341,0D0 343,429 (2,429) 100.71% Other - 2.478 (2,478) - L Total Revenues 2.711,000 2,070,907 640,093 76.39% OUTLAYS: Share of hint Works Tart.Plant 2,672,500 1,603.957 1,066,543 60.02% L District Tnmk Seger Construction 1,700,D00 110 11699,890 0.01% COP/Bond Retirement and Interest Expense 163,000 91.655 61,345 59.91% Share of Joint Works Operating Expenses 1.672,698 60118M 970,540 47.94% District Operating&Other Expenditures 253,000 125.043 127,967 49.42% Total Outlays 6.451.198 2.622.623 3,628,575 40.65% I Capital Facilities Budget Review u Balance Adjustments Transfer to Balance 711197 &Additions Fixed Assets 3/31/98 u CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: 14-1-1 A&B Gisler Int., 14-1-2 Baker St. Force Main,Districts 6,7&14 21,3D4 110 (20,468) 1,036 U Main St. Pump Station Improvements,7-7-1 214,540 - - 214,540 Main St. Flume Flowmeter 40 - - 40 Bay Bridge P/S Ughtirg Improvements 5&14 46 - - 46 Hydrogen Peroxide Trials 5&14 70 - - 70 lei Bay Bridge Platfomn Addition (39) - (39) Bitterpoint PIS Fan Upgrade 5& 14 609 - - 609 Sub-Total 236,660 110 (20.468) 218,302 u Sham of Joint Works 4.170,276 1.603,957 (2,488) 6,771,745 Sub-Total 4.406.936 1.604,067 (22,956) 5.988,047 LI COMPLETED PROPERTY,PLANT&EQUIP: Land and Property Rights - - - - Collection Lines and Pump Strre. 25,582,099 - 2D,468 25,602,567 Treatment Facilities - - - - Disposal Facilities - - - _ General Plant and Admin. Facil. 6,747 - - 6,747 Equity in Joint Treatment Facil. 33,213.586 (110,066) 2,488 33,1DBOD8 Other Assets at Cost Less Amon. - - - - Sub-Total 58.802,432 (110.066) 22,956 58,715,322 Total Property,Plant&Equipment&CIP 63,209,368 1,494.001 - 64,703,309 L Section 4-Page 10 L� Self Insurance Review Public Liability Fund Budget Review For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Percent of Actual Budget Remaining Actual 1997-98 Through Through 1997.98 Through Increase — Budget 3131198 3131198 Budget 3131127 (Decrease) 1. Beginning Reserves• 2,643,750 2,494,793 3,074,185 (579.392) — Revenues 2. In-Lieu Premiums - - - - - r 3. Interest&Miscellaneous 133,000 95,335 71.68% 37,665 99,620 (4,285) 4. Reimbursements from Other Funds 120,000 214.194 178.50% (94,194) 112,111 102,0B3 e+ S. Total Revenues 253,000 309,529 122.34% (56,529) 211,731 97,798 Expenses 6. Salaries,Wages and Benefits 4,500 - 4.500 12,205 (12,205) ..� 7. BenefitslClaims 90.000 236,537 262.82% (146,537) 105.898 130,639 8. Contractual Services 6.000 5,578 111.52% (576) 4,682 894 9. Legal Services 300,000 285.968 95.32% 14,042 305,514 (19,556) 10. Professional Services 5.000 2.347 46.94% 2,653 7,103 (4,756) �- 11. Supplies&Other 500 9.816 1963.20% (9,316) 293 9,523 12. Sub-Total Expenses 405,000 540,234 2479.80% (135,234) 435,695 104,539 13. Excess Loss Policy 120,000 91,404 76.17% 28,596 92,603 (1,099) 14. Total Expenses 525,000 631,638 120.31% (106,638) 528,198 103.440 r 15. Excess Revenue(Expenses) (272,000) (322,109) 118042% 50,109 (316,467) (5,642) r 16. Ending Reserves* 2,371,750 2.172,684 91.61% 199,066 2,757.718 (585,034) — •Includes$687.300 long term receivable due from the County of Orange. Section 5-Page 1 r II 1997-98 Third Quarter Report �6.1 Worker's Compensation Fund Budget Review L'I For the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1998 Percent Actual of Budget Remaining Actual 1997.98 Through Through 1997-98 Through Increase Budget 3131/98 3131198 Budget 3131197 (Daeuva ) iw 1. Beginning Reserves- 719.850 665,621 800.939 (135,318) Revenues L 2. In-Lieu Premiums 225,000 160,770 71,45% 64.230 168,750 (7,980) 3. Interest&Miscellaneous 45.000 24.241 53.87% 20.759 26.571 (2,330) L 4. Total Revenues 270,000 185.011 68,52% 94.989 195,321 (10,310) I Expenses iu 5. Salaries,Wages and Benefits 6. Benefits/Claims 170,000 201,341 118.44% (31,341) 190.954 10.387 7. Contractual Services 25,000 18.760 75.00% 6.250 18,750 - L 8. Legal Services 5,000 8,807 172.14% (3,607) - 8,607 9. Professional Services 301000 - 30,000 19.559 (19.559) 10. Supplies&Other - 583 - (583) 4 579 , 11. Sub-Total Expenses 230,000 229,281 99.69% 719 229.267 14 r 12. Excess Loss Policy 40.000 15.892 39.73% 24,108 17,010 (1,118) II 13. Total Expenses 270.000 245.173 90.80% 24,827 246,277 (1,104) 4J 14. Excess Revenue(Expenses) - (80.162) 60.162 (50,956) (9XB) u 15. Ending Reserves' 719.850 605,459 84.11% 60,162 749,983 (144,524) I .I u -Includes$139,231 long term receivable due from the County of Orange. iL IF.1I W Section 5- Page 2 u Performance Objectives GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE General Management Administration (Division 110) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Ensure treatment cost does $490/MG $450/1VIG Cost below Gallonage charge due to not exceed target by end of increased flows and lower expenditures. fiscal year Ensure Districts meet 549 FTEs by end 536 FTEs A few positions remain to be filled;however, adopted five year staffing of fiscal year it is anticipated that we will be well under plan target by years end. Achieve Biochemical Oxygen 77%/67%TSS P1/P2 Plant 2 construction impacted removal Demand(BOD)and Total 73%TSS 54%/42%BOD P1/P2 figures. See operations section for further Suspended Solids(TSS) 49%BOD details. removals in primary treatmen process Maintain 100%Compliance 100% 100% Target met. with Permit Compliance Reduce Small Line Cleaning $0.2041near foot $0.278inear foot Cost includes televising of 10%of lines, costs through contracting which was not incorporated in original projection. Engineering Change Orders 5%or less of 2% Target met. no greater than target contract amount Ensure Districts 80% 78%Performance Performance objectives applicable through Performance Objectives Performance Objectives three quarters approach target benchmarks. and Workplan milestones Objectives 48%Workplan Workplan milestones were not accomplished met within targets 80%Workplan Milestones in many areas as re-engineering Milestones improvements in many administrative/operational areas,especially those related to DART,have been delayed. Districts-Wide Not Workplan Tasks Complete Behind Started Summary of Data Third Quarter 87 42 34 11 Workplan milestones were not accomplished in many areas as re-engineering improvements in many administrative/operational areas,especially those related to DART, have been delayed. It appears that based on aggressive downsizing this fiscal year,the existing staff is over-committed with originally planned workplan tasks. Section 6 - Page 1 1997-98 Third Quarter Report - FINANCE DEPARTMENT Finance Administration (Division 210) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance — Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Average Annualized Rate 6% 6.3% The portfolios (long/short term and cash flow of Return on Investments management)outperformed their respective benchmarks. Figures based on current yield calculations. Average Interest Rate 4% 2.81% 1%is equivalent to approximately$1.7M Paid on Certificate of annually in interest savings based on variable Participation (COP) rate COPS that are not protected by a long-term Borrowing interest rate exchange agreement. Remain at or under the $46.9 Million by $31.3 million through 9 Expenses are being controlled well. New cost net Joint Operating(J.O.) end of fiscal months(67%total) allocations models resulting from Financial .. year Information System and the Multi-agency benchmarking study have resulted in some$3M expenses transferred from the J.O.budget. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 7 2 4 1 Most milestones that are behind are related to new rates and fee structures,which has been postponed due to numerous circumstances. r r r Section 6 - Page 2 Performance Objectives FINANCE DEPARTMENT Accounting (Division 220) Performance Objective 1997-96 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Issue monthly financial 92% 11% Due to technical/administrative problems reports within 10 working incurred during JD Edwards Financial days Information System(FIS)cost allocation module implementation,development of reports for all months,excluding March, have been delayed. Problems are being addressed and on-time performance is expected by the fourth quarter. Develop FIS Training 90%trained by 100% The training program has been developed program year end and implemented and all"Train the Trainer"staff have been instructed. Take advantage of all trade 90%of time Implementation Stage Accounts Payable module has been _ discounts through timely Completed interfaced fully with Purchasing module. payment processing Trade discounts will be taken in the 4th Quarter. Identify 6,000 unclassified 90%+identified Research Stage Obtained CD-ROM listing of parcels and parcels currently Identifying those parcels categorized as"unidentified". Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 7 3 3 1 Delays due rate structure and parcel identification milestones being slightly behind schedule. Section 6- Page 3 1997-98 Third Quarter Report FINANCE DEPARTMENT _ Purchasing &Warehousing (Division 230) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Summary of Data -- Target Through 3rd Quarter Maintain cycle count 97%-Accuracy 97% 3rd Quarter cycle counting program met program Rating benchmark target. Establish Complete by Implementation Stage Due to planned delay in Financial contracts/purchasing"best- 1198 Information System implementation,this in-class"filing system has been delayed. The division has currently ordered the appropriate hardware/software due in mid-May. Revise asset tagging Complete by Implementation Stage This project is behind completion due to procedures 3/98 lack of staff resources in the Warehouse. Develop formal contract Complete by Complete This project is completed. terms and conditions 10197 Develop supplier"hot line" Complete by Testing Stage Direct-line phone system installed. 3/98 Prototype installed. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data _ 3 3 0 0 3rd Quarter tasks completed. Section 6 - Page 4 Performance Objectives COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT Communications (Division 310) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Agenda Package 6 day turnaround 89% Agenda turnaround was delayed in November Turnaround Time 100%of time 1997 due to pending information from General Counsel. Board Minute Preparation 10 day 78% Minute's turnaround was delayed in Turnaround Time turnaround December and February due to two-week 100%of time vacation of Board Secretary and/or EA. Employee Satisfaction 3.0 score 2.7 A 3.0 score indicates employees are reosiving Rating (Communications the'night amount'of information;less than Audit) this indicates'too little'while greater than this indicates*too much." Communications programs implemented within the last two years will continue with attempts to re- emphasize managemenNine face-to-face communications. Photocopying Services 91 96% Photocopying Services continues to receive Satisfaction outstanding reviews from the customer base (rating based on first six months). Graphics Services 95%+ 98% Graphics Services continues to receive Satisfaction outstanding reviews from the customer base (rating based on first six months). Visitor Tour Satisfaction 81 94% Our tour guide program incorporating other Rating Districts employees has met with success, especially as guides become more comfortable with their role. We continue to exceed the benchmark for satisfaction. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 6 6 0 0 All third quarter lasks completed to meet end of year Critical Goals. Section 6 - Page 5 1997-98 Third Quarter Report GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT (Divisions 410I420I430') Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance — Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Ensure small line contract $0.25 per linear $0.27 Cost was slightly exceeded; however,this cleaning costs do not foot cost includes televising of 10%of lines exceed target cleaned,which was not incorporated in original benchmark. Ensure wrench time for 80%+wrench time 85% Target met;however this is an estimate due to Collections Facilities data updating resulting from DOS to Windows Maintenance Division migration. (pump station and line cleaning)meets or exceeds target Ensure that collections 95%+spots 95% Target met;however this is an estimate due to trouble spots are cleaned on data updating resulting from DOS to Windows maintained on schedule schedule migration. _ Ensure wrench time for 70%+wrench time 74% Target met. Fleet Maintenance Division meets or exceeds target Ensure planned/preventive 75%Planned& 72%Preventive Research has indicated that all work going to maintenance to corrective Preventive 28%Corrective Re-build shop is classified as corrective maintenance ratios meets Maintenance maintenance. This work has been abstracted targets 25%Correc ive resulting in a more accurate PM/CM ratio. Maintenance Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data ` 2 2 0 0 3rd Quarter targets met. 'Note that GSA Administration, Facilities Maintenance and Collections Maintenance have been combined this quarter for reporting purposes. Section 6-Page 6 Performance Objectives INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT (Divisions 4 6 0147 014 9 0') Performance Objective 1997.98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Meet Capital Outlay 75%+ of time 89% Performance objective met. Revolving Fund(CORF) project milestones by due date Maintain Computer Network 97%+ 97.4% Target was met. "Up-time" Resolve Tier 1 help desk 80%+within 3 78% Performance is improving toward benchmark calls days target and is an improvement over 1st and 2nd Quarter objectives. Resolve Tier 2 help desk 80%+within 5 78% Target nearly met. calls days Maintain an average work 100%or less 185% This performance is largely due to being short- backlog of no greater than staffed one position during a large portion of 100%of staff time available the first half of the year. Additionally, backlogs occur until complete familiarity is gained with the new Help Desk software. This backlog, however, is an improvement over last quarter. Ensure 80% productive 80%+ 62% New help desk software impacted this time in Division 460 percentage. Improvement is expected in the 4th Quarter. Maintain Plant SCADA 99.5% 99.9% Target exceeded. Server"Up-time" Workplan Tasks Not _ Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 7 2 4 1 Projects largely delayed due to contractors,consultants,or expansion of .. work swpe. 'Note that both Information Technology divisions and Plant Automation division have been combined this quarter for reporting purposes. Section 6.Page 7 1997-98 Third Quarter Report HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT _. (Divisions 5101520') Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance — Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Number of Recruitment 48 days 56 This exceeded our benchmark due to the Days to hire exempt complex recruitment of a Senior Engineer position with specialization in process automation. (private sector=46 days) As recruitments decline due to downsizing, this measurement becomes less valuable. Percentage of supervisor 25% 23% Supervisor Compensation ratio remains salaries to total does not below target and private sector standard. r exceed 25% Target 1%lower than last quarter. (private sector=25%) HR Department managed 90-100%of 76%expended through This Is trending at approximately end-of- r within budget budget 9 months. year target. Achieve 5-year staffing plan 549 FTE's by 536 FTE's through This is well below our end-of-year target. It projections year's and quarter is expected the year will be completed with approximately this level of FTE's. *Ensure all training classes 70%(3.5 on 5 -70%(3.5 on 5 scale) Target has likely been met. New Training are cumulatively rated scale) Manager questions existing methodology "above average" for data collection and will revise the approach in the near term. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data Two objectives deferred due to delay in 4 2 0 2 cross-training program and budgetary constraints. r 'Note that Human Resources and Training Divisions have been combined for this quarters reporting purposes. r Section 6 -Page 8 Performance Objectives HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Safety& Emergency Response (Division 530) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Resolve Service Requests 90%of time 98% Customer Service remains a division within 3 work days priority. This also represents a significant improvement over last year's objective of a 75%15 day turnaround target. Ensure Injury Incidence is 7.6 incidence 9.8 The objective is below industry standards 45%below industry rate but above our internal benchmark. average Although 2nd and 3rd Quarter performance was very good,the nine-month results are impacted by higher than expected tat Quarter accidents. Lost Work Day Case 3.8 incidence 2.9 Target has been met and is significantly Incidence Rate 50%below rate lower than established benchmark. industry average Workers Compensation $403 $350 Although accidents were above the internal Cost Factor 30%below targets,the costs associated with claims industry average remains low. Staff work closely with the worker's compensation 3rd party administrator and the clinic to manage accident costs and return employees back to the job. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 0 0 0 0 n/a Section 6 - Page 9 1997-98 Third Quarter Report TECHNICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT _. Environmental Compliance and Monitoring (Division 620) Performance Objective 1997-96 Performance — Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Ensure compliance 5%or less non- 0% Target met;no non-compliance incidents. requirements are effectively compliance Incidents communicated result from ECM failure to communicate. Meet Regulatory Deadlines 100%Deadlines 100%/100% All regulatory deadlines met. and complete associated 95%Milestones project milestones Distribute high priority 95%Within 2 day -95+% All high priority legislation distributed within legislation information to turnaround targets. E-mail distribution has expedited appropriate staff process. Review biosolids 95%.of time -95+% Target met. documentation within 5 days Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 5 4 1 0 Awaiting final NPDES permit to complete update of policy and procedure manuals. r r Section 6-Page 10 Performance Objectives TECHNICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT Environmental Sciences Laboratory (Division 630) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Complete development of 4/98 Implementation Stage 75%of Project milestones are complete. task-based performance measures for laboratory Develop procedures for 6/98 Implementation Stage Each section of lab has identified measures measuring laboratory of quality. Project approximately 50% quality; publish report by complete. end of fiscal year Maintain monthly sample 90%-110%of 99.9% Performance target met. Data represents analyses within'productive' target samples only eight months as March data not range taken available during reporting period. Cross-train analyst staff to 90%of staff 92% Ahead of schedule. Target is to ensure that complete additional trained by end at minimum 3 analysts are cross-trained and functions FY 97/98 certified to perform one or more of the 65 laboratory analyses. _ Review laboratory in- 100% Budget Control Stage Through March,out-sourced laboratory costs source/out-source completion by have been reduced to 73%of last year's opportunities and control 6198 costs through the first nine months. out-sourced laboratory costs at 75%of FY 96/97 costs Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 2 0 2 0 Projects delayed and will be completed by end of year. Section 6- Page 11 1997-98 Third Quarter Report - TECHNICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT _ Source Control (Division 640) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance _ Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Develop Technical 90%of Implementation Stage 100%of project milestones completed. Assistance Center and milestones complete project-related completed milestones Maintain field inspection 2.5 monitoring 2.5 Inspection events met targeted goal. Note, productivity events/day however,that due to data collection methods data is for 1st and 2nd quarter. Conduct enforcement 100%of time 100% Enforcement actions meet targeted goal. actions within 30 days of non-compliance event — Issue industrial wastewater 100%of time 100% Permit renewals meet targeted goal. permits prior tc expiration Workplan Tasks Not — Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 3 3 0 0 3rd Quarter tasks completed. _ Section 6 - Page 12 Performance Objectives ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Engineering Planning & Design (Division 720) - Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Return construction 80%+ of time 89% Target met. submittals by identified due _ date Bid construction projects on 80%+of time 100% Five jobs in 3rd quarter were advertised and established Capital bid on(revised)schedule. Improvement Program schedule Meet design project 80%+of time 89% Fourteen of sixteen project milestones have milestones been met. Meet 90%of project Complete by 100% Based on revised Strategic Plan schedule, milestones for Strategic Plan 8/98 milestones have been met. Respond to environmental 100%of time 100% The Districts is typically allowed 3045 days correspondence within 30 to respond to inquiries. Our initial working days unless performance objective was 5-working days requesting agency requires which was far too aggressive. This has been more rapid response revised resulting in us meeting the target 100%of the time. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 4 3 1 0 Environmental Impact Report behind due to revised schedule. Section 6- Page 13 1997-98 Third Quarter Report ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Construction Management(Division 730) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Summary of Data Target Through 3rd Quarter Target Change Order costs 5% 2% Change order costs are always based on at no greater than 5%of the preceding four quarters. Targets have original contract amount been met and are well below FY 96/97 end (industry standard=7.25%) of year costs of 4.04 Achieve Beneficial 60%-within 90 67%-90 days Beneficial occupancy is always based on Occupancy in facilities days 33%-240 days the preceding four quarters. Three jobs within targets 40%-within 240 were completed. The target was met. �. days Conduct Quality Control 10%or less 10% Target has been met based on OC Inspections and average no inspections. more 10%comeclable deficiencies Workplan Tasks Not _ Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 0 0 0 0 N/A — Section 6- Page 14 Performance Objectives OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT O&M Administration (Division 810) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Ensure Operations $331/million $304/million gallons Performance objective met. treatment cost per million gallons treated treated gallons does not exceed target Ensure Total Injury 12.2 11.0 Target met. Frequency Rate 25%or (or lase) more below industry average Ensure Five-year staffing 220.25 FTEs by 223.25 FTEs End of 3rd Quarter FTE. It is anticipated plan figures are met end of year by year's and we will achieve the target. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 8 3 4 1 Tasks behind schedule generally include quality performance objectives and multi- agency benchmark reporting. Section 6 - Page 15 1997-98 Third Quarter Report OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT - Operations & Maintenance Processing Support (Divisions 8201870) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Ensure utility,chemical, 90%-100% 97% On target. biosolids and oxygen within budget (nine-month contracts are managed annualized) within budget Ensure Capital Outlay 801 of time -80% Project milestones met. Revolving Fund(CORF) project milestones are met Respond to trouble- 80%+ 100% Through nine months,response to such shooting and service requests has well exceeded the benchmark requests by established target. priority time frames 'Maintain therms/kWh at .111 therms/kWh .114 themrs/kWh- Within targeted parameters. Central Generation plants -Plant 1 Plant 1 (kilowatt hour)within .106 thermslkWh .110therns/kWh- targeted limits -Plant 2 Plant 2 'Maintain FERC efficiency 42%or greater 65% FERC efficiency is above regulatory permit at Central Generation requirements thus gaining favorable natural plants within targeted limits gas transmission rates. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 9 4 3 2 Task behind relate to benchmarking and DART efforts which are currently behind original schedules. *Note that both Process Support and CenGen divisions have been combined this quarter for reporting purposes. Section 6 -Page 16 C Performance Objectives OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT O&M Plant Operations(Divisions 8301840) Performance Objective 1997-98 Target Performance Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Achieve Total Suspended Solids(TSS) 73%>at Plant 1 77%Plant 1 Primary basins L and M were Removal Targets in Primary Treatment and Plant 2 67%Plant 2 taken out of service due to Process construction at Plant 2. This,in conjunction with wet weather flows lowered the Plant 2 TSS below targeted levels. Achieve Biochemical Oxygen Demand 50%>at Plant 1 54%Plant 1 See above. (BOD)Removal Targets in Primary and Plant 2 42%Plant 2 Treatment Process Ensure overtime hours as a proportion of 25%(1 hour 13.4%Plant 1 Overtime continues to be total leave hours taken does not exceed overtime per 4 16%Plant 2 aggressively managed. As a targets hours leave taken) result.targets have been well achieved. Ensure overtime cost per total salary cost 8%of total base 5% Plant 1 See above. does not exceed targets salary 5.2% Plant 2 Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data _ 6 1 4 1 DART team formations behind schedule in process area improvements. :� Section 6 - Page 17 1997-98 Third Quarter Report OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT O&M Maintenance Divisions (Divisions 8501860) Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Target Through 3rd Summary of Data Quarter Ensure 47.5%Wrench 47.5% 60% Continued tracking and refinement of Time in Mechanical productive time has improved accountability Maintenance Division and our wrench time component. Ensure 47.5%Wrench 47.5% 47% See above. Time in Electrical& Instrumentation Division Maintain appropriate 60%Preventive 59%Preventive preventive to corrective 40%Corrective 41%Corrective Near targeted benchmarks. maintenance ratios in the Mechanical Maintenance Division Maintain appropriate 60%Preventive 52%Preventive This process continues to be refined, preventive to corrective 40%Corrective 48%Corrective Additions to the low voltage equipment maintenance ratios in the database to accommodate preventive Electrical 8 Instrumentation maintenance tasks will improve this ratio. Division Ensure 72.5%Productive 72.5% 71% Data indicates that field staff are spending Field Time in Mechanical approximately 3 of 4 hours field hours Maintenance Division conducting wrench work,job related travel time or parts chasing,trouble-shooting, problem investigation, procedure development and database development and management. Performance target has been met. Ensure 72.5% Productive 72.5% 62% Refinements are still in progress. Field Time in Electrical8, Procedural improvements based on GEMS Instrumentation Division consulting report being examined. Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data — 9 1 6 2 DART and J42 activities delayea in some areas. Section 6- Page 18 ' Performance Objectives OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT Air Quality & Special Projects (Division 880) — Performance Objective 1997-98 Performance Through Target 3rd Quarter Summary of Data %Air Quality non- 0% 0% Performance objective is on target. compliance issues due to failure to communicate to field Operations Meet air quality regulatory 100%of time 100% Performance objective is on target. deadlines Complete approved 80%+projects 33%through nine months Projects are currently in progress and not research projects including completed yet completed. project planning,design and field investigation Workplan Tasks Not Third Quarter Complete Behind Started Summary of Data 5 3 2 0 Two research projects behind schedule. Section 6-Page 19 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT'S of Orange County, California (714) 962-2411 mailing address: RO. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California 92728-8127 street address: 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018 CSDOC3131198