Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-24 ,.,. ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT April 17, 2002 NOTICE OF MEETING ph•M: 17141982.2411 BOARD OF DIRECTORS -a: (7141982U355 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT wwur.sual nu11npa 7 P.O. Bar 8128127 WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2002 — 7:00 P.M. Fountain Velleg M 92728-8127 .enact add.: 10e44 Ellis Avenue DISTRICT'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Member A....is. The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation 0 District will be held at the above location, time and date. crtlaa Anaheim Brea Buena Perk Cypress Fguneam Velleg Fullerton B rd Secret Gartlen Grave HunrJngtan Beech n La Peon e Palma Las rt Be. e Newport range Tentatively - Scheduled Upcoming Meetings Orange 9 Placentia Se1E rth A. Seal Beach S amen ivaun wue Pant OMTS COMMITTEE -Wednesday, May 1,2002 at 5:00 p.m. Yorba Line County of orange PDC COMMITTEE -Thursday, May 2, 2002 at 5:00 p.m. Sunni.., Distract FAHR COMMITTEE -Wednesday, May 8,2002 at 5:00 p.m. Caere More JOINT GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT Moray Oty SYSTEM COOPERATIVE COMMITTEE - Monday, May 13, 2002 at 5:30 p.m.@OCWD water DI•erivn lrvina Rai TENTATIVE SPECIAL BOARD MEETING -Wednesday, May 15,2002 at 6:00 p.m. STEERING COMMITTEE -Wednesday. May 22,2002 at 5:00 p.m. TENTATIVE SPECIAL BOARD MEETING -Wednesday,June 19,2002 at 6:00 p.m. To maintain worlticless 1aa0erahip in waseeweter and water resource management. a i BOARD MEETING DATES Month Board Meeting May May 22, 2002 June June 26, 2002 July 'July 17, 2002 August August 28, 2002 September September 25, 2002 October October 23, 2002 November November 20 2002 December 'December 18, 2002 January January 22, 2003 February February 26, 2003 March March 26, 2003 April April 23, 2003 'Meetings are being held on the third Wednesday of the month NeadWatat\wp.dtatadmintBsWgenda@002 Mee0ng NOEmatMN4.2.dm ROLL CALL BOARD OF DIRECTORS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT MEETING DATE: Aoril24. 2002 TIME: 7:00 p.m. (MURPHY)........................ ALVAREZ......................y/ �� — (SIMONIAN) .................... ANDERSON................... _� �G — (FLORY) .......................... BANKHEAD................... �l�c — — (LARSON) ....................... BOYD............................ . ✓ — (MILLER).......................... BRADY ......................... ✓ — (BOARDMAN) ................. COOK, DEBBIE.............. ✓ y — (CRANDALL).................... COOK, LAURANN.......... — (SHAWVER) .................... DONAHUE....................._a ✓ — (UNDERHILL)................... ECKENRODE................. �✓ — (SCHAFER)...................... FERRYMAN................... JG ✓ — (DUVALL).........................I&ctLtX8@N................... �� — (DEBOLT)......................... JEMPSA...................... (WORLEY)........................ KAWASHIMA............... _ c ✓ — (SMITH)............................ KROM........................ �L ✓ — (BROADWATER) ............. LEYES..........................�G (DALY).............................. MC CRACKEN............... — (CHRISTY) ....................... MC GUIGAN.................. . / — (SIMONOFF).................... MOORE........................ JC ✓ — (EPPERSON) ................... NEUGEBAUER.............. _ ✓ — (FRESCHI) ....................... PATTERSON................. — (KEENAN) ........................ PIERCY........................ — ✓ — (ADAMS) ......................... RIDGEWAY..................._ L ✓ _ (DOW).............................. SIGLER......................... ✓ ✓ (SMITH, CHUCK)............. SILVA........................... _at C — (BLAKE)............................ WALKER........................ — STAFF: 1 Anderson ✓ N��.r � Ghirelli ✓ /'f Kyle ✓ Ludwin ✓ Mathews ✓ Miles Murphy Ooten Tomko Streed ✓ OTHERS: Woodruff Andrus Nixon 01/23/02 G:Wry.dtaladmin\BS\DIRECTOR\Dimctom Roll Call.doc a , U p April 24, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, D.Env. Director of Technical Services SUBJECT: ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT Attached is a copy of a report titled "The 20 Meter Study" prepared by the 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury. The report was released today by the Grand Jury. A copy of their press release and one prepared by Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is also attached. The Grand Jury report comments on how OCSD conveys research findings and study results to its staff, board of directors and the community at large. The 20-m study, conducted in 1996, has been a source of controversy because some activists claim OCSD purposefully withheld the information contained in the report. While a final report was not prepared at the time the study was completed, an internal investigation by OCSD staff indicates that the 20-m study results were made available in September 1997 to the regulatory agencies, scientists, and others interested in the District's monitoring program. Nevertheless, the Grand Jury's recommendations are good ones and staff will use the recommendations to Improve the way we communicate research results to the public. By law OCSD is required to respond to the Grand Jury's findings and recommendations within 90 days (or July 24, 2002). RPG:rm 424-02 Grand Jury Memo to Bd Dir Attachment ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT R IMMEDIATE RELEASE *APRIL 24, 2002 phone: Contact: (714)962-2411 Lisa Murphy fa.: Communications Manager [7143 962d356 714/593-7120 www.ocedcom 7141394-0734 cellular mailing address: P.O.Box 8127 Fauneam Valley.C 92728-0127 .arms.address: OCSD RESPONDS TO 2002 GRAND JURY REPORT ID Ellis Avenue Fountain Valle,M 9270e-701B FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA—The 2002 Grand Jury Report titled "The 20 Meter Study'focuses on Orange County Sanitation District and how information is ;.cies conveyed to its management, its board of directors and the community. • cities As required by law, the OCSD board of directors will provide responses to Anaheim findings 1-7 and recommendations 1-7 in the report, with an implementation Brea schedule. Buene Park Fauntai�p l/ahy "We have read the report and agree with all of the recommendations provided by Fulfgr m Garden Grata the Grand Jury," said Blake Anderson, general manager. "The recommendations Hundngton Baach boil down to improved timeliness and accessibility of our reports to the general Irvine Le Habra public. That is good government. We thank the Grand Jury for acknowledging Le Palma Los Alamims that 'OCSD recognizes the benefit of communicating with the public', as it is a Newport Beach high priority with this agency, and we will use the recommendations to improve Grange the way we disseminate research studies to the community." Placentia Santa Ana Seal Beach Stanton Specific to the 1996 20-meter study, conducted between September 26 and T et^ November 25, the information was the topic of OCSD's quarterly Ocean W1.Park Anrae Linda Monitoring Program Progress Review meeting held on September 3, 1997. County of orange Meeting invitees included: the federal EPA, California EPA, OC Health Care Agency, Regional Water Quality Control Board, a number of environmental sanitary Districts interests, college and university scientists, and consultants. While the results were discussed and available to the regulatory agencies at that time, the Grand Cu.. Mesa Jury is correct in concluding that a written analysis of the work was not published nnmwar�ryr fY � 9 Y � Water Districts until this year. Irvine Ranch Annually, OCSD completes $2.1 million in marine and shoreline monitoring, as part of its ocean release permit issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, when a need (more) To maintain worth-class leadership in wastewater and water resource management. recognized— either by the OCSD board, management or staff, or from regulators-- additional studies are completed. OCSD is currently in the process of identifying the best ways to share the studies with the board of directors and general public in the most easily accessible, reader-friendly and timely way. The 20-meter study report is available on the Web site at www.ocsd.com under the "What's New" section. A copy of the complete Grand Jury report can be found at www. occourts.org/gmdjury/gjreports.asp The Orange County Sanitation District is responsible for safely collecting, treating, and disposing wastewater. It is a special district, separate from the County of Orange or any city government, established under the State Health and Safety Code, to provide sewerage service to a speck geographic area. The Orange County Sanitation District is governed by a 25-member board of directors comprised of representatives of each local sewering agency or cities within our 470- square-mile service area. U .U . UKHNU JURY TEL :714-834-3320 Apr 24 '02 8: 17 No .009 P.02702 • ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST-SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA 92701.714/834-3320 FAX 714/834-5555 MEDIA RELEASE APRIL 24,2002 "The 20 METER Study" SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA. The 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury today released a report entitled,"The 20 METER Study% The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is one of the largest sanitation districts in the country. In 1996 OCSD completed an otLshore water-testing program referred to as 'The 20 METER Study." The results were not published for over five years. While maldng no comment on the validity or significance of the data, the OCSD needs to ensure that all relevant data are passed on to its Board of Directors,and the public in a timely manner. The entire report can be viewed on our web site:httn://www.occourts.ore/endiurv/eirCpgrts,351t. For additional information concerning the attached report,please contact Kcnda Marlin at(714) 834-3320. Very truly yours, 2001-2002 ORAN Y GRAND JURY ER:mlh Eric Ritchie,Foreman 0kt1!i11AL W aouA 9"er+M7 —COP4S Te : EHT' 14cc004 GF1 • � coREy To C� ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST-SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 •7141834.3320 FAX 714/834-5555 April 18,2002 Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Attention: Blake P. Anderson,General Manager Dear Mr. Anderson: Attached is a copy of the 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury report,"The 20 Meter Study". Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05(t), a copy of the report is being provided to you two working days prior to its public release.Please note that"No officer,agency,department,or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report."Emphasis added. (Public release date-April 24,2002). It is requested that you provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations of this report directed to your office in compliance with Penal Code 933.05(a)and(b),copy attached.For each Grand Jury recommendation,be sure to describe the implementation status,as well as provide a schedule for future implementation. It is requested that the response to the recommendations be mailed to Frederick P.Horn,Presiding Judge of the Superior Court,700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana,CA 92701,with a separate copy mailed to the Orange County Grand Jury,700 Civic Center Drive West,Santa Ana,CA 92701,no later than 90 days after the public release date,April 24,2002,in compliance with Penal Code 933, copy attached.The due date then is July 24,2002. Should additional time for responding to this report be necessary for further analysis,Penal Code 933.05(b)(3)permits an extension of time up to six months from the public release date. Such extensions should be advised in writing,with the information required in Penal Code 933.05(b)(3),to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with a separate copy of the request to the Grand Jury(address above). Very truly yours, 2001-2002 oRANGE�e�uNTYi.R JURY � ER:mlh Eric Ritchie,Foreman Attachments Grand Jury Report Penal Code 933,933.05 4 "The 20 METER Study" SUMMARY The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is one of the largest sanitation districts in the country. In 1996 OCSD completed an offshore water-testing program referred to as "The 20 Meter Study."The results were not published for over five years. While making no comment on the validity or significance of the data, the OCSD needs to ensure that all relevant data are passed on to its Board of Directors,and the public in a timely manner. PURPOSE The Grand Jury was informed that the results of a publicly funded study performed by OCSD have not been disseminated to the public in a timely manner; specifically"The 20 Meter Study." The purpose of this study is to determine how OCSD disseminates their research findings to the public and if OCSD accurately conveys research findings in a timely manner to its management, the Board of Directors and the public. BACKGROUND The OCSD is a public agency responsible for the treatment and disposal of sewage for northern Orange County, serving over 2.2 million people. It is the third largest treatment system west of the Mississippi. OCSD discharges a combination of primary and secondary treated sewage through a 120-inch outfall pipe into the ocean. Two hundred forty million gallons of sewage daily (or 88 billion gallons annually) are discharged through a series of openings in the outfall pipe onto the seabed at a distance of approximately four and one half miles from shore. The OCSD has an active ocean testing and monitoring program. The Clean Water Act of 1972 and 301(h)Permit The Clean Water Act of 1972, 33 U.S.C.A. Section 1251, et seq., was enacted to restore and maintain the integrity of the nation's waters and prohibits the discharge of any pollutant into navigable waters of the United States, except in compliance with the 1 4 provisions of the Act. The Act requires that all sewage discharged into the ocean be treated to secondary treatment standards. However, Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act allows site-specific requirements to be established for qualifying agencies to treat to less than full secondary standards. OCSD discharges a mixture of treated sewage; part is treated to primary treatment levels and part is treated to secondary treatment levels. It has been OCSD's practice to apply for a Section 301(h)permit(or waiver)of the Clean Water Act granted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); this permit has been granted. The State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is responsible for monitoring adherence to the conditions of the EPA permit. The permit is granted for five-year intervals. The current permit will be up for renewal in the year 2003. The decision to continue to request a Section 301(h) permit is a policy decision made by the OCSD Board of Directors and is not within the purview of the Grand Jury. The Sewage Plume The 240 million gallons of sewage dispersed daily form an underwater plume. This resultant plume of sewage is not stationary. It is dispersed by ocean currents that vary dependent upon many factors such as wind, tide,water temperature, and weather patterns which make it practically impossible to model accurately. Oversight The RWQCB exercises general oversight as the regulatory agency; however OCSD is essentially self-monitored and, with the exception of Clean Water Act and permit requirements, is free to decide what data or research to reveal to RWQCB and the public. Failure to disclose scientific data compromises the decision-making process. "The 20-Meter Study" In late 1996, OCSD undertook a study to obtain and test ocean water samples along a line of 20 meters in depth (or approximately 60 feet) to more accurately capture the 2 movement of the sewage plume at that moment in time. This study was paid for by OCSD, whose funds are derived in most part by rates passed on to users. The Grand Jury found no evidence that the results from this study were presented to the OCSD Board of Directors, the RWQCB, the Orange County Health Care Agency, or the public. Five years later, in early 2001, the results of`The 20 Meter Study"were revealed for the first time in a slide included in an OCSD presentation. This presentation was made at a conference attended by environmental activists, representatives from the Orange County Health Care Agency, and OCSD. In response to questions from the audience, OCSD stated that a report on "The 20 Meter Study" would be prepared. In August of 2001, OCSD committed to make the report available within the following thirty to sixty days. The Grand Jury reviewed OCSD Board of Directors minutes from late 1996 to mid 1998 and found no mention of the "20 Meter Study." A separate review of the minutes of the OCSD Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee for the same time period also found no mention of the "20 Meter Study." There was no evidence that the study was presented to OCSD Board of Directors. Furthermore, the RWQCB had no written record of receiving a report on the "20 Meter Study." The report was finally published at the end of March 2002. Dissemination of Information to the Public The OCSD recognizes the benefit of communicating with the public. It has hired communication staff and updated its website. The portion of the ocean monitoring program required under the permit is published on the website and is available in print or on compact disk. The results of other studies not required by the Clean Water Act permit are not included. Interviews with OCSD indicate that no written procedures currently exist to cover the preparation or dissemination of research studies. The OCSD maintains two servers. A server is a computer, usually on the World Wide Web,which provides information to a client, for example a desktop computer. The first is a web server for the OCSD web site (www.ocsd.com). The second is a file server that is 3 i a repository of research information. It is an unlisted repository used by OCSD researchers and staff to post and share study data, findings, and results. A file server gives a directory listing of files, but provides neither information on the content of the files nor any instructions on how to use the file server to acquire information. Furthermore, the existence of this file server is not widely publicized. The website makes no reference of it, nor provides access to it. METHOD OF STUDY The Grand Jury conducted interviews with administrative, technical, and operational staff of OCSD, a representative of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Orange County Health Care Agency, as well as university consultants, environmentalists, and concerned citizens. The Grand Jury has attended meetings at OCSD, including meetings of its Board of Directors, and toured the OCSD plant. The Grand Jury also reviewed published information from OCSD including its Strategic Plan, minutes of OCSD Board of Directors, and minutes of the OCSD Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee. FINDINGS Under California Penal Code Section 933 and Section 933.05, responses are required to all findings. The Orange County 2001-2002 Grand Jury arrived at seven findings: 1. Relevant data, including the "20 Meter Study" have not been released to the public in a timely manner. 2. Publicly funded studies are vital to ongoing research of water quality. 3. OCSD has not disclosed the existence of all publicly funded studies. 4. OCSD has no written procedure regarding the preparation of reports or the dissemination of study results. 5. The results of some OCSD studies have not been published. 6. There is no single listing available of approved OCSD study topics. 7. There is limited public access to unpublished OCSD research data. 4 427 GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS $933.06 1 933. Findings and recommeodalloue, copies of runt report; (1) The reeommendadon has been implemented, wide a comment of governing bodice, Ordure a®rats, or agency summary regarding the implemented action. heady, definitlm a) Each grand jury shall submit to the readies judge of the (2) The econmmendatian but not yet been implemented,but ( P ding ge will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for superior wort a final report of its findings and recommendations Implamenmtiom that pertain to county government manners during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be (3) The recommeadatiovrequires further analysis, with an submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court a any erpinnenon and the scope and parameters of an analysis or time during the term of servla of a grand jury. A final report may, and a timefiame far the matter to be prepared for may be submitted for comment to responsible officers,agencies, discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department or departments,including the county board of supervisors,when being investigated or reviewed,including the governing body of applicable,upon fading of the presidiugjudge than the report is the public agency when applicable. This timehame shall not is compliance with this title. For 45 days after the and of the erred sm months from the daze of publication of the grand jury term, the fimperson and his or her designers shall, upon O`Poct ,stainable vatic,be available to clarify the recommendations of (4).The recommendation will not be implemented because it the repom is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation (b) One copy of each final report,togetherwith the rcepoams therefor. thereto,found to be in compliance with this tide shall be placed (c) However,if a fording or recommendation of the grand jury, on file with the county clerk and remain on me in the office of addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or the county deck. The county dark shall immediately forward a department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or we copy of the report and the responses to the State Archivist department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if who shall retain that report and all responses in perpetuity. requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of (c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel report on the operations of any public agency subject to in matters over which it has some decisionmaking authority. The reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency response of the elected agency or department head shall address shall comment in the presidingjudge of the superior court on the all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the haragenryordepactment. consul of the governing body,and every aimed county officer (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to or agency head for which the grand jury has resporeati lly come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and pursuant to Seetion 914.1 shall comment within 60 days in the dsasssmg the findings of the grand jury report that rdazes to presiding judge of the superior court,with an iimernition copy rhas person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the sent to the head of supervisors,on the finding and recantation, findings prior to their release. datum pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that (a) During an imestigatlom the grand jury shall meet with the officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and =him of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and the roues4 either on its own determination or upon request of the recommendations All of these comments and reports sisal forepersan of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior would be detrimental. now who impaneled the gaud jury. A copy of all responses to (f) A grad jury shall provide to the Offered agency a copy of Used jury reports shall be placed on me with the Oak of the the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or public agency and the office of the courtly deck,or the mayor entity two working days prior to its public release and after the when applicable,and shall remain on file in those offices. One approval of the presiding judge. No officer,agency,department, copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand of the report prior to the public release of the flow report. jury,where it shag be maintained for a W.of five years (Added by s=1994 c 117p (SB.1457), § 1. Amended by (d) As used in this section 'agency"includes a department. Sraec1997,c 443(AB.829),§ SJ (Added by Smte1961, a 1284, p. 306/, § 1. Amended by Smts1963, a 674 p. 1674 § 1; Smn1974, a 393,p. 977, § 6; 1 933.06 Vewnciesomgrandjury; reportsubmittedbyummi• Sm[s1974 a 1396,p.3054,§ 3; Sma.1977,c 107,p.539.§6; momsmteof remaintngjamrs; conditions Sras1977, e. 187.p. 709, 1 1; Saus.1980, a 343,p. 1499 1 1; (a) Notwithstanding Sections 916 and 940,in a county having Smm.1981,a 20%A.1124§ 1; Sinn 1982,e. 140&p.=1 5Stat a population of 20,0W or less,a Wad report maybe adopted and 694 191: t 21b § 1, 1297, ; 3, duly 1z 1985; Sam(AB.87, ), submitted pursuant to Section 933 with the concurrence of at 690,p 1; 199A. 8, a .B.1 §5; Sratt1997, c 443(A8.829), least 10 grand jurors if all of the following conditions are me 4 4; Smu199$c)30(A.R1907/,§ 2) S (1) The grand jury consisting of 19 persons has been impan- Hespomev la findings tied pursuant to law,and the membership is reduced from 19 to (a) For purposes of subdivision(b)of Section 933,as to each fewer than 12- grand jury fading,the responding person or entity shall indicate (2) The vacancies have not been filled pursuant to Section One of the following 908.1 within 30 days from the time that the clerk of the superior (1) The respondent agrees with the finding wort is given written notice that the vaeaary has occurted (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or pertiaOY with the (3) A find report his not been submitted by the grand jury fading, a whicir eau the mpome shall specify the portion of pursuant to Section 933. the finding than is disputed and shall mGude an explanatim of We (b) Notwithstanding Section 933, an responsible oars, 064 W poses agencies,or departments shall be requited to comment oar a final (b) For purposes of subtlivision(b)o[Scom m 933,as to each report submitted pursuant to this section, (Addedfy Smtsl994, grand jury rewmmendation, the responding person or entity c f085(SB.1465),§ 1. Amended by Smrc2001,c 854(SB.205), shall report one of the following actions I .. 140.) � dal 49 t7 p A April 24, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors / FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, D.Env� Director of Technical Services SUBJECT: 2001 ONSHORE INVESTIGATION REPORT Attached is the executive summary of the 2001 Onshore Investigation. This executive summary presents an overview of the program tasks and Orange County Sanitation District's recommendations based on the results of recent investigations. Discussion of this report, along with the ocean and shoreline monitoring completed during the summer of 2001 will occur at the special board meeting on Wednesday, May 15 at 6:00 p.m. As you will recall, during the summer of 2001, high bacteria concentrations continued in the near shore waters off Huntington Beach. In addition to the ocean and shoreline sampling, Orange County Sanitation District's Source Control Division conducted an investigation to determine if any onshore sources could be responsible. A project task list was developed to investigate potential discharges that may impact bacteria levels in the surf zone. Detailed task descriptions,findings, and recommendations are described in the body of this report. RPG:rm 4-24-02land study2 Attachment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is the regional wastewater treatment agency serving 2.2 million residents. To discharge a blend of primary and secondary treated wastewater to the Pack Ocean through a 5-mile outfall, OCSD has been granted a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The permit establishes bacteriological limits based on the California Ocean Plan and the RWQCB Santa Ana Region Basin Plan, for the surfzone and the recreational waters of the Pacific Ocean within the jurisdiction of the State of California (3-mile limit). In accordance with this permit, OCSD performs beach sampling for three indicator bacteria: total colifonms, fecal coliforms, and enterococci. OCSD's monitoring data is also used by the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA), which has the responsibility to post or close beaches when health standards are exceeded. In July 1999, the OCHCA closed a portion of Huntington State Beach due to elevated levels of the three indicator bacteria, which presented a fingerprint indicative of sewage contamination. Closures continued throughout the summer, affecting up to 6 of the 8 miles of state and city beaches in Huntington Beach. The last section of beach was reopened in early September 1999. Several weeks before the beach closure in July 1999, OCSD's surfzone monitoring identified bacteria levels that, although within acceptable limits, were above normal. Consequently, water quality was tested along a transact (picket line) approximately one mile offshore to determine whether OCSD's ocean discharge may be moving onshore. The results of those tests were negative. Subsequent to the beach closure, OCSD initiated further onshore investigations to identify the sources of the bacterial contamination. This is documented in the "Final Report—Huntington Beach Closure Investigation, Phase 1, December 1999." 2001 ONSHORE INVESTIGATION During the summer of 2001, high bacteria concentrations continued in the nearshore waters off Huntington Beach, and OCSD's Source Control Division conducted an investigation to determine if any onshore sources could be responsible. This Executive Summary presents an overview of the program tasks and OCSD's recommendations based on the results of recent investigations. Project Tasks and Recommendations A project task list was developed to investigate potential discharges that may impact bacteria levels in the surf zone. Detailed task descriptions, findings, and recommendations are described in the body of this report. Where tasks overlapped, some recommendations have been combined under the heading of another task. Beach Restrooms The purpose of this task was to test the sewer lines serving the Huntington State Beach restrooms for leaks to determine whether the restrooms contribute to groundwater contamination and, ultimately, to contamination of the surfzone. The tested sewers are located south of Pacific Coast Highway between Magnolia and Newland Streets in the City of Huntington Beach. The sewers were evaluated in August 2001 using hydrostatic, air pressure, and dye testing methods. The methods used were dependent on the condition, position, and design of cleanouts and manholes serving the restrooms. Dye testing was conducted when the results of other test methods indicated a possible leak. The results of the hydrostatic tests indicated leaks, of varying magnitude, in the following areas: 1. The sewer line, which is relatively short, from the Lifeguard Headquarters lost 6 gallons. 2. The sewer line between restrooms 9 and 10 lost 180 gallons. 3. The sewer line serving restrooms 7 and 8 did not hold air pressure and lost most of the water injected. When the plug was removed, the pipe was not full at the lower end, indicating water loss. The results of the dye testing indicate that the tracer dye and lithium chloride traveled from the restroom 8 sewer line to the shoreline. Therefore, staff believes it is very likely that bacteria made its way to the surfzone due to one or more leaks in the restroom 8 sewer, and possibly from other leaking restrooms. The California State Parks Department has indicated that the existing sewer line serving restroom 8 will be abandoned and connected directly to the OCSD Coast Trunk Sewer to prevent surfzone contamination. RecommendaBon Based on the findings that the restroom 8 sewer is leaking and sewage is appearing in the surfzone, it was recommended that California State Parks abandon the sewer between restrooms 7 and 8 and connect restroom 8 directly to the OCSD Coast Trunk Sewer. State Parks was advised to hydrostatic test their restroom sewers periodically to ensure integrity. In addition, due to the leakage findings in the Lifeguard Headquarters line and in restrooms 9 and 10, further investigation and follow-up corrective measures are highly recommended. AES Power Plant The purpose of this task was to evaluate the possibility that surface runoff contaminated with bacteria may be entering the AES Power Plant (AES) from a tributary storm drain and passing through to the AES ocean outfall. In addition, the AES sanitary sewer, which is adjacent to the storm drain, was evaluated, and numerous samples were taken in the vicinity of AES to determine other potential sources. The mixing box at AES was a critical location, since it is used by AES for NPDES sampling and reporting. AES mixing box monitoring data showed that samples from the surface were generally higher in bacteria than samples taken 20 feet below the surface. While some of the mixing box samples were high in bacteria counts, samples taken at the same time near the AES ocean discharge pipe did not show high bacteria counts. Staff could not explain this discrepancy. Conductivity readings in the mixing box indicated that a layer of fresh water near the surface overlays the seawater. AES periodically adds chlorine to its effluent. Several samples were analyzed for chlorine residual to determine whether chlorine had an effect on bacteria levels in the mixing box. The results of residual chlorine analysis were inconclusive. Connected to the AES mixing box is a large storm drain that serves an area west and north of AES, including runoff from the adjacent RVArailer park. During high tide, the water level in the mixing box is above the stone drain connection; therefore, the potential exists for contaminated water in the storm drain to enter the mixing box. However, it seems unlikely that this source could substantially influence the entire AES effluent discharge during dry weather conditions. Pressure testing determined that the AES sanitary sewer line is not leaking and was not contributing to the bacteria in the mixing box. .Recommendation Based on the results of high bacteria levels in the samples collected from the AES mixing box, it is highly recommended that the control authority further investigate and follow up with corrective measures. It is suggested that a comprehensive bacteria monitoring investigation be implemented on both the influent and effluent at AES to explain the existence of high bacteria levels in the mixing box. Ocean Dye Testing OCSD assisted researchers from the University of Southern California (USC) Sea Grant program to evaluate dye dispersion and water movement near OCSD's Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N. From July 19 through 21, 2001, three dye-test experiments were conducted near AES around the cooling water intake and discharge ports, which lie about 1200 feet offshore of Huntington State Beach between OCSD Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N. Fluorescent dye was used to observe water movement by tracking dye concentration over time. Dye concentration was measured using a fluorometer that detects fluorescent emission from the dye at a specific wavelength. By evaluating water movement, researchers can further postulate the effects of discharge from the AES outfall and its impact on bacteria concentrations near the surfzone. During the dye release next to shoreline, the water movement seemed predominantly downcoast with some movement upcoast. When released next to the AES outfall buoys, the dye seemed to spread in an almost circular pattern around the end of the AES pipes. When the dye was released inside the AES outfall, the dye spread evenly in a circular pattern, then spread into an oblong shape into two distinct sections parallel to the shore. The majority of the dye was observed further upcoast than downcoast of the AES pipes, while there was little evidence of dye near the shore directly over the AES pipes. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Flood Control Channels The purpose of this task was to identify all observed discharges to the project area's five flood control channels, which are the Talbert, Huntington Beach, Santa Ana River, Greenville/ Banning, and Fairview channels. Samples, photos, and instrument readings were collected. In general, no major source of bacterial contamination was found in any of the channels. Recommendation It is recommended that a more extensive sampling program be developed to characterize the water in each channel during an extended duration to reveal more information concerning bacteria counts. Surface Discharges and Unknown Connections to the Storm Drain System All facilities in the project area were inspected, with the primary purpose of identifying surface discharges and any unknown connections to the storm drain system. The following three areas of contaminated surface discharge were identified: 1. The source of the standing water on Edison Avenue behind AES was identified as frequent discharge from the AES facility, resulting from periodic washing at a pad inside the AES plant. However, even though the flow originated from AES, it is not certain that the bacteria on Edison Avenue originated entirely at AES. 2. High bacterial counts were found in at least two areas of standing surface water in the salt marsh near Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard. Inspectors discovered a large leak in an Orange County Public Facilities Resources Department (OCPFRD) sluice gate on the adjacent Huntington Beach channel. Samples from the area showed bacterial contamination. 3. A small stream of polluted surface water seeps directly into the Huntington Beach channel at the east discharge pipe from the mobile home park. The design and condition of the underground wet wells that collect surface drainage both from the RV park and the mobile home park are unknown. A concern is that a single spill of a RV holding tank could be the "seed" of continuous bacterial contamination to the Huntington Beach channel. Surface drainage from the Huntington-by-Ihe-Sea RV Park has a high potential to contaminate the surface water. Any spills that occur when the sewer hoses from individual RVs are connected or removed will be ultimately washed to the surface runoff system and discharged to the Huntington Beach channel. There is a lack of information about the existing sewer lines serving both the mobile home and RV park in the area. Recommendation A thorough review and dye testing of the sewers in the mobile home park area should be done to ascertain the actual connection points and drainage patterns. The standard washing procedure at the Huntington-by-the-Sea RV Park should be modified to send all routine normal surface water runoff to the sewer during dry weather. It is also recommended that OCHCA and the City of Huntington Beach be notified for further action regarding sewage solids on the grating at the Huntington-by-the-Sea Mobile Home Estates. The continual flooding of the marsh near Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard with water from the Huntington Beach channel had saturated the area completely. This precluded identifying other sources of contamination during this study and cast doubt on previous sample results. The damaged sluice gate was subsequently repaired, allowing the marsh to dry so the source of any future ponding of surface water could be identified. Monitoring Wells Along the State Beach OCSD took readings on groundwater levels in the project area, specifically on the tidal effects for monitoring wells (MM 1 through 5 , which were placed for the 1999 study in the vicinity of the California State Beach south of Pack Coast Highway between Magnolia and Newland Streets. Readings were collected from July 14 through July 21 at most high and low tide apexes. as found in a 2001 southern California tide tables booklet. There are four tidal events per day:two low tides and two high tides. According to the Converse Report dated October 6, 1999, MW-1 and MW-2 were dug to a depth of approximately 50 feet and straddle the AES pipes in the State Beach parking lot. MW-3, MW-4, and MW-5 were dug to a depth of approximately 30 feet and are located in the State Beach parking lot to the southeast of MW-1 and MW-2. The information collected for this task showed the well casings are still intact and there is some tidal influence on the nearshore groundwater. The difference between most concurrent low and high tide marks of the groundwater levels was about one inch. Some readings even showed a "reverse" in movement where low tide levels were "higher"than the high tide levels. For unknown reasons, it appears the change in elevation levels for unrelated tidal apexes at each well site was most pronounced at MW-1, the westernmost well site. Recommendadon No further action is recommended. Urban Runoff Diversions Urban runoff has been identified as one major source of coastal contamination, and is the most difficult to control. It comes from a variety of sources such as roadways, parking lots, construction sites, agriculture, parks, and private yards. Everything that is released to the surface of an urban environment can make its way to storm drains and channels that eventually end up at the shore. In an effort to reduce the impact of urban runoff on Orange County's beaches, OCSD has been coordinating with local agencies since late 1999 to successfully treat and dispose of dry-weather urban runoff from inland and coastal cities. OCSD has been receiving and treating an average flow of approximately 2 million gallons per day of dry- weather urban runoff from eleven diverted storm drains owned by the City of Huntington Beach, City Newport Beach, and three diverted flood control channels owned by OCPFRD. Three additional diversions in Corona Del Mar and Crystal Cove are scheduled to come on-line in the near future, which will increase the daily urban runoff flow to about 3 million gallons per day. The additional small drainage sources that discharge directly to the beaches and harbors are so numerous that it is impractical to divert all of them to the sewer system. Recommendation OCSD will continue to work with the local agencies to develop and implement a practical, long-term policy to divert urban runoff to the sewer system during the dry-weather season. Beach Observations The objective of this task was to determine conditions that may contribute to bacterial contamination in the area. It was found that beach attendance in the City of Huntington Beach was fairly stable. More dead seals were being washed onto the beach than previously thought, although they did not appear to increase the bacteria counts in the surfzone because of how they were disposed by beach officials. However, the storm drain that discharges onto the beach just north of the Huntington Beach pier around 6"' Street has high bacteria counts. In addition, based on land observations and conversations with individuals in the area, there are differences in the appearance of the ocean between OCSD Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N as compared to other areas. One difference was noted when a diver was asked for impressions of the work performed earlier off the boat at 9N. The diver commented that moorings had anaerobic bacterial growth. This diver had only observed this growth once before, while working in waters off the Tijuana coast. Recommendation it is recommended the dry-weather flow from the 60 Street storm drain be diverted to the sewer system. it is also recommended that a study be conducted to explain the differences in the visible ocean characteristics between stations 6N and 9N. Wastehauler Activity Wastehauler activity in the project area was reviewed to provide information and determine whether illicit dumping of septage is occurring in areas tributary to the project area. Staff reviewed OCSD records and found that wastehauler discharges to OCSD's disposal station have decreased over the past two years. Each wastehauler discharge record was reviewed, and OCSD found that most wastehaulers have decreased their discharges, while only a few have increased. OCSD contacted OCHCA to review their records, but they had no personnel assigned to wastehaulers at that time. However, during this investigation, no illegal wastehauler activity was observed. Recommendation Based on the review of OCSD wastehauler activity, it is recommended that increased oversight of wastehauler activities be conducted. Data shows that wastehauler activity has declined and that possible illegal dumping could be occurring. Coast Trunk Review Samples were taken from dewatering wells around OCSD's Coast Trunk when sewer connections were being made near Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard. The bacteria results were negative. Subsequent discussions with the OCSD Engineering Department indicated that any leaks from the deeper portions of the Coast Trunk would be improbable because the pressure from the surrounding groundwater would be greater than the pressure inside the pipe. Infiltration is more likely than exfiltration. A videotape was reviewed of the siphon when the flow was bypassed during construction of the new siphon in 1999 and no infiltration was noted, even though the depth of the siphon was approximately 30 to 40 feet, which is much lower than the existing water table. Therefore, no further investigation was conducted. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Area Around the 21-Inch Huntington Beach Purchase Sewer The condition of the 21-inch Huntington Beach Purchase Sewer (HBPS) was evaluated, along with the area surrounding the trailer park on Newland Street across from AES. This area is bordered by Pacific Coast Highway to the south, the Huntington Beach channel to the north, Newland Street to the east, and Beach Boulevard to the west. The results of some surface water samples taken near the HBPS and the salt marsh showed high coliform bacteria counts in at least two areas. Recommendation Documents describing previous inspections as well as the staffs recent observations indicate that the HBPS from Beach Boulevard to Newland Street should be investigated further for possible corrosion and/or leakage. The HBPS is not in good shape and repairs should be made promptly. It is recommended that OCSD abandon the 21'sewer in the salt marsh and slip-line the portion of the 21'sewer from the west side of the hailer park to Newland Street. Huntington Beach Treatment Plant(Abandoned) The Huntington Beach Treatment Plant (HBTP)was originally constructed in 1935 at the corner of Newland Street and what is now Edison Street. The trickling filter effluent was drained by pipe into the then-existing Huntington Beach channel, which at that time flowed south on the west side of Newland Street. A 1935 drawing also denotes a small 'existing treatment plant"at the comer of Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. None of the information reviewed leads OCSD to believe there is a potential for bacteria contribution from the abandoned plant to the Huntington Beach shoreline. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Huntington Beach Storm Drains This effort consisted of evaluating the storm drains in the City of Huntington Beach that may have runoff to beach areas. Of the storm drains investigated in this study area, the outfall from the three 30-inch storm drains immediately north of the Huntington Beach pier consistently showed high fecal bacteria counts. Daily restroom washdown, dumpster drippings, and the pier area packing lot drains feed into lines that flow to a set of clarifiers and eventually discharge to the three 30-inch outfall system. Based on OCSD sampling data, all of these flows showed very high fecal bacteria counts. It can not be demonstrated that these storm drains are causing the contamination detected at OCSD surfzone monitoring sites north of the Huntington Beach pier. There could also be contributions from the hundreds of birds observed along sections of the surfzone north and south of the pier. The results of samples collected show that urban runoff to the beach in this area has the potential to be contaminated with fecal bacteria and total coliforms. Recommendation Changing some maintenance practices and implementing best management practices could help to reduce the amount of contamination to the area north of the Huntington Beach Pier where the outfell from the three 304nch storm drains is located. The puddle that accumulates in front of the outfall from the three 30-inch storm drains near a Street should not be allowed to accumulate. Sample results show this to be high in fecal bacteria. As indicated previously, the 61°Street storm drain dry-weather flow should be diverted to the sewer to eliminate the high bacteria counts in this area. All outdoor showers on the beaches should be evaluated and possibly banned and drained to the sewer, assuming sand can be prevented from entering the sewer. Water reuse/reclamation studies show that shower wastewater typically is high in fecal coliform. The reslroom stalls and surrounding Floor should be washed down and drain to the sewer. The trash dumpsters should not be parked over the storm drain. Drippings from them may contain fecal bacteria from diapers, dog waste, etc. Santa Ana River Mouth High bacteria counts have been observed around the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) bridge where it crosses over the Santa Ana River in Newport Beach. It appears that high bacteria counts obtained from sample points downstream of the PCH bridge, especially at low river flow and low tide, could originate from birds roosting and nesting under the PCH bridge. There is a sandbar that forms just upstream of the bridge that birds visit during low tide, and this may also contribute to the contamination. The evidence pointing to bacteria from birds is shown by the low E. coli bacteria counts in samples taken from upstream sample points at essentially the same time samples were collected downstream of the PCH bridge. The magazine 'Public Works" states in its October 2001 issue, Areas under bridges have been documented to significantly exceed contact recreation criteria. A nearby study found bird droppings to be the source of bacteria where no other sources are noted and where downstream FC values were lower." Samples were also collected of the discharge from a storm drain serving Seashore Drive in West Newport Beach. Bacteria concentrations were consistently high. At low tide and low river flow, the storm drain discharge flows to the location near a fixed sampling station located on the PCH bridge. There also could be an occasional contaminated slug from the Newport Slough, but results from this sampling project did not support this scenario. Recommendation It is recommended that netting or some other physical barrier be installed to prevent birds from roosting under the PCH bridge. This may result in less bacterial contamination to the mouth of the Santa Ana River. The installation of a barrier and the subsequent bacterial testing of the same sample sites may indicate the effectiveness of this relatively Inexpensive fix. Samples taken of the Seashore Drive effluent to the Santa Ana River also show contamination that should be eliminated. One controllable element to the make- up of the runoff from the Seashore Drive storm drain is the outdoor shower located at Seashore Drive and Orange Street. Water reclamation programs and studies have found that shower water contains high levels of fecal bacteria. Berming and draining the shower to the sewer would help eliminate that source of contamination. As mentioned earlier, this should actually be considered for all outdoor beach showers. Sewedng the runoff from the Seashore Drive storm �I drain during dry-weather conditions could be a primary consideration, since the discharge volume is relatively low and the bacteria concentrations are high. It is also suggested that increased actions to control dogs and the loitering or camping"of homeless people around the mouth of the river may help decrease those potential sources of bacterial contamination. Newport Slough/Trailer Park Based on sample results from OCHCA, the Newport Slough near Pack Coast Highway and the Santa Ana River are, at times, a contaminated body of water. Sewer problems are known to exist at the trailer park, so the integrity of the sewer system ringing the slough may be in question. The groundwater and soil conditions are very corrosive in this area, and the sewer system is at least 30 to 40 years old, possibly older in some sections. The trailer park falls under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Housing and Community Development (SDHCD). The sewer system lies on private property located in the city of Newport Beach and discharges to a city line. Recommendation It is recommended that SDHCD and the City of Newport Beach follow up on investigating and correcting any sewer problems that might be contributing to the contamination of the slough. Balboa Boulevard Sewer in Newport Beach A side investigation determined that seawater is apparently infiltrating the Balboa Boulevard sewer in Newport Beach. High conductivity readings in the sewer were observed at high tides, and low conductivity readings were observed during low tides. Recommendation It is recommended that consideration be given to TV or hydrostatic testing of all .sewer lines in Newport Beach around 130 and 18" Streets to determine if any cracks are causing infiltration or exfiltretion to the OCSD trunk sewer. Additional conductivity monitoring and sampling should also be done to verify previous findings in the Balboa Trunk Sewer. Atlanta Pump Station and Huntington Beach Channel The pump station at Atlanta and Beach Boulevard and the Huntington Beach channel was investigated. Although the discharge from the Atlanta Pump Station was only sampled once, it shows a contribution of high fecal coliforms and bacteria counts. Samples taken from the Hilton construction dewatering and the channel downstream of the Atlanta Pump Station did not show high fecal bacteria, so the source of the bacteria in the discharge from the pump station is most likely from urban runoff. There is an area located on the east side of the AES Power Plant adjacent to the Huntington Beach channel known as the "Homeless Man's Trench" that has standing water. The water is from a flap gate on the channel that is jammed open because of debris. When the tide rises, water comes through the flap gate and accumulates. Samples of this area show periodically high levels of bacteria. Recommendation As a result of high bacteria levels at the "Homeless Man's Trench," which is water accumulated east of AES near the Huntington Beach channel, it is recommended that an investigation be conducted to identify and eliminate the source of the bacteria in this area. Bird Observations Observations were made of the beach area between OCSD Monitoring Station 6N and 12N. During the summer, groups of 400 or more seagulls were noted at various areas, both in the surfzone and on the beach. What effect they have on surfzone bacteria is unknown. The seagulls appear to be attracted to trash and litter, where they can obtain a meal with very little effort. Overnight observations indicate the majority of these birds spend the night hours either floating in large groups just beyond the surfzone or feeding on the shore. Recommendation It is suggested that a pilot study be done to determine the impact of bird droppings on bacteria readings in the surtzone. / ROLL CALL BOARD OF DIRECTORS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT MEETING DATE: Aoril24. 2002 TIME: 7:00 p.m. (MURPHY)........................ ALVAREZ...................... ✓ SIMONIAN (FLORY) .......................... BANKHEAD................... ✓ ✓ (LARSON) ....................... BOYD............................ r� (MILLER).......................... BRADY ........................ ✓ (BOARDMAN) ................. COOK, DEBBIE.............. ✓ �G (CRANDALL).................... COOK, LAURANN.......... (SHAWVER) .................... DONAHUE.......................C�' a-- — (UNDERHILL)................... ECKENRODE................. ✓ �G — (SCHAFER)...................... FERRYMAN................... ✓ ✓ — (DUVALL).........................5>1JLL+xS9N:—.............. — (DEBOLT)......................... JEMPSA...................... _✓ _ I/ _ (WORLEY)........................ KAWASHIMA............... — (SMITH)............................ KROM........................ ✓ i — (BROADWATER)............. LEYES.......................... . DALY (CHRISTY) ....................... MC GUIGAN.................. ✓ �G — (SIMONOFF).................... MOORE........................ 1G — (EPPERSON)................... NEUGEBAUER.............. (FRESCHI) ....................... PATTERSON................. ✓ Ili F�l (KEENAN)........................ PIERCY........................ � �L — (ADAMS) ......................... RIDGEWAY................... ✓ (DOW).............................. SIGLER......................... (SMITH, CHUCK)............. SILVA........................ -7:2M — (BLAKE)............................ WALKER....................... / ✓— STAFF: lyf & t Anderson Ghirelli / a t emu^• Kyle ✓ /� /J zt� Ludwin aF Mathews Miles Murphy Ooten Tomko pi , SVeed OTHERS: 4, r L Qlr� Woodruff l ( i l^ Andrus Nixon 01/23/02 G.Iwp.dtaWtlminSSOIRECTORIDirectm Roll Call.dm REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board on speck 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: C/'/ 4' or_ AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) / / /—��d L� HOME ADDRESS: /7 f6 l (number/street) (city/zip c/o/de) TELEPHONE: REPRESENTING: �E'I (self/name of organization) REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 speck item is taken for discussion. Remarks will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to theBoard Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution.ti DATE: l z ` AGENDA ITEM NO. I C . . . . . . . . . . . . .J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAME: (please print) �)n [pe, ���\/(�, � ' HOME ADDRESS: ��I Z/L' Y_ u''l/ 4 (number/street) (city1zip-6de) ? ,J �] _ TELEPHONE: , 6 Z. —L/ / G Z7 7 r� REPRESENTING: (self/name of organization) L,,,- REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: �—��" �' AGENDA ITEM NO. stil.J oLf/ ` Jr L. — NAME: (please print) LiWj-e 1,�/l'in/c so- HOME ADDRESS: L [ - A� G (numb��er///str/eet) (city/zip code)) TELEPHONE: �lLf_ % 7C4 — Ll-7 REPRESENTING: (self/name of rganization) REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: AGENDA ITEM NO. . . . . . . . c. . . . . . . . . . -.-/.�. . n. !. . .�.�.]�. NAME: (please print) ^J� � ��l "� 1d2AICC, HOME ADDRESS: (number/s (city/ap codpe)(�G / TELEPHONE: J, ( l — �(/�jP,^�l �^� Jam0/(nY�� REPRESENTING: G6 r )CX (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: 14 "Z �L AGENDA ITEM NO. ewe L CA. NAME: (please print) + + RO S HOME ADDRESS: d-O Vr'401"I S (number/street) 1 . 13 e(k C 107 t t) (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: ( �— q 3 !S� ( 3 -7k� REPRESENTING: �a- ( t (self/nam f organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Boa)rd Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: t//) ) U AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) /E /0i ll���wu o•� / HOME ADDRESS: (number/street) (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: / �` V ) 7 REPRESENTING: (self/name of organization) VZ REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. ���� q�{� DATE: AGENDA ITEM NO. '---" 1 NAME: (please print) 6- 4 Ile, e,jy IVI It, (.TILY HOME ADDRESS: // i 41 (number/street) (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: —y�-- REPRESENTING: D rt�n y y�l (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. / A DATE: 4 Q-2-tq AGENDA ITEM NO. l� u4 C- NAME: (please print) HOME ADDRESS: (number/street) (ci zip code) TELEPHONE: 6-3 ,4/1 2- Z2 REPRESENTING: Su✓1(-XU &— (self/name of organization) / / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: C. ` 2'i' r�2 AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) HOME ADDRESS: (.)AA Q 1 (number/street) 1oS CA qo( 2G (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: REPRESENTING: 5 ``f r, C �of Fy�. tic+Zt�D 1 (self/name of organization) REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) HOME ADDRESS: (numbor/street)) (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: REPRESENTING: (self/name of organization) REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 speck item is taken for discussion. Remarks will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. 1 DATE: AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) HOME ADDRESS: (number/street) (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: REPRESENTING: L U (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 speck item is taken for discussion. Remarks will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: ��7 r AGENDA ITEM NO. . . . . . . . . . . .Ap. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAME: (please print) bA' rt LB,cI�tiJ'T HOME ADDRESS: ) rJ30i Z3 J;k'Oh AN (number/street) H ,6 a 2c ,e'9 (city/zip code) ,J TELEPHONE: f q( - I �7 -go REPRESENTING: H 6T (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: Z O'y AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) :�D fi A) lVe L9e9 HOME ADDRESS: 2070/ /old-e'z (number/ street) (city/zip co/de) 4 TELEPHONE: � 6 37✓ Lfl Yi`riL.C��I REPRESENTING: /,9© � (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: Z- AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) rrrrr en HOME ADDRESS: 76 !n;� (number/street) PA (city/zip code) / TELEPHONE: (7,"y) REPRESENTING: � 91g.rr-k r (self/name of organization) REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) HOMEADDRESS: (number/street) d (cit&ip code) TELEPHONE: REPRESENTING: (self/name of o(ganization) REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS v All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the uB{.oard Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: I'Z�'OZ AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) HOME ADDRESS: (numbe street) (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: REPRESENTING: (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board on speck 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: 1 —� AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) HOME ADDRESS: D� ✓ /D LCGi O C� (number/s'ICt�� TELEPHONE: 1/q(city/rzinp[/code) t5c� G REPRESENTING: O 0& (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: ' i 6 Z- AGENDA ITEM NO. �IL / �SAIUVTl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAME: (please print) HOME ADDRESS: 70L (number/street) a ��6��9 Dtc han SZLzS (city/zip code) TELEPHONE: �&j 67 REPRESENTING: 06& (self/name of organization) REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 Rem is taken for discussion. Remarks will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. (Y A t IVo // DATE: I v ` - AGENDA ITEM NO. NAME: (please print) r // /` b �. Fu RAM ADDRESS: ( � 1C l 9dU9X lf (LL- WIVE (number/street) /ivy 71A( Y� (city/zip code TELEPHONE: 1 -7 -7 1 � yoo REPRESENTING: (self/name of organization) / REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 Rem is taken for discussion. Remarks will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: C��2 if` 9Z AGENDA ITEM NO. YOUD/l C Co lk O-�4� NAME: (please print) J ry j Vi iU VASC a' HOMEADDRESS: 212 r Jr/6 g—r (nufnber/street) � C� �P (city//Ap,code) '—t� TELEPHONE: REPRESENTING: 3106If/name of organization) V' REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS All persons wishing to address the Board 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 will be limited to three minutes. Any handouts (35 COPIES REQUIRED) must be given to the Board Secretary prior to the meeting for distribution. DATE: AGENDA ITEM NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAME: (please print) vG1� L7 HOME ADDRESS: 7 (city/zip code)—t ^ 0 U TELEPHONE: 4— 11 REPRESENTING: (self/name of organization) SIGN-IN SHEET ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (,i AZ BOARD MEETING NAME ORGANIZATION/FIRM leaseprint) leaseprint) 2 -1- o (p. Q� 2 - ,AAIfi �2D�1 a✓,� a Safi" a t il,ot cold , eon 0 s /l(Z 5ilq Q rde APET— !L Gi'Wi �t� �i,.'IJ v� dFr 3vunola�iJ�, AJ L F T T� a 0 dl f A72 iu C HAWRDTAV MINWWORMS IGWJN FORM.D SIGN-IN SHEET ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT BOARD MEETING NAME ORGANIZATION/FIRM leaseprint) leaseprint) l O w K- rcd Svo4foe C # ten � F.✓ be r I H1WP.DTA A0MIN\SS\FORMS\SIGN-IN FORM= April 24, 2002 To: Board of Directors, OCSD. Fm: Randy T. Fuhrman i l Re: Effects of Summary Cash Flow Projections (FYs 2002-2012) The fiscal situation over the next decade requires the Board to consider raising the user fees faster than is presently proposed ("ramp up" rates sooner). Fees will be over $I60/year by the end of this decade, or even $200/year depending on level of treatment, but are raised too slowly to keep up with the CIP projects and other expenses already approved. The lowest cost overall occurs if fees are raised sufficiently to build the projects previously approved without borrowing. To even keep the 50:50 borrow-to-pay ratio will require less borrowing and more pay than in the present projections. Increase the fees to the projected levels quicker so the overall cost to all users is less. Some specific concerns from the Projections are shown below. See other side for projection sheet, reference #s in ( )s. (9) O&M expenses - shows very little increase for disinfection or increase in secondary treatment to keep 50:50 blend going to the outfall (after GWRS). (18) Annual increases are very small and do NOT appear to keep up with costs. Fees increase by such an insignificant amount in the next five years, putting the District further and further behind fiscal conscientiousness. (11) The cost to payback loans (COP/bonds) increases to almost $100 Million/year, up from S40 Million/year. Property tax revenue goes from currently paying for these loans to paying less than half of the loan servicing costs. User fees will have to make up the shortfall. (4& 10) Ratios -- Compare CIP and COP until the borrowing stops in 2008-09. The borrow-to-pay ratio goes up 75:25, that is 3:1 not 1:1. If the payback is extended long enough without taking out new loans, then one can always "say" that the 50:50 ratio is met. *** Cumulatively the borrow-to-pay ratio exceeds the 50:50 since it is 67:33 or increases from 1:1 up to 2:1. (14) The only years where revenues exceed requirements are the years that borrowing occurs. Ex. 2002-03 shows $200M revenues over requirements, but borrowed $315M. Cumulatively shows a$45M excess, but have borrowed almost $900M to get there. (22) Over a BILLION dollars ofouislanding debt($1,129,626,000 in 2012). We will have to pay these bills for thirty years. And the fees still have to go up to $I60/year (or even $200/yr) with users, the businesses and residential customers, paying more because of the borrowing. Pay more of the building projects up front and borrow less. Attempt to hold to the 50:50 borrow-to-pay ratio by getting the fees increased faster, in a more reasonable timeframe. 4)302 1109 AM Orange County Sanitation District Summary Cash Flow Projections, Entire Collection System 50:50 Influent with GWRS and "Disinfection" PRllminery Prellminary PrNOninery Preliminary PmllmlNry ProlMinary PaMinlnery Preliminary Preliminary petarthlery 10Yem 5ffi a3--aD -03 03:N N-05 05.06 06-07 2LQA -09 0"0 10-11 11A2 L Ronan... 1 GenelM User Fees 22.884,0N 85.]5],000 94,133,000 103.466.000 113,765,000 125.042.000 136]95,00D 146.5N.000 148.406,000 149.928.000 1.181.352e03 2 PermBbd Use,Fees 6329 ON e.329.000 6.329,000 8,320,000 0,329,000 6,329.00D 6,329.000 e,329,000 6.329.N0 6,329000 83,290,000 > M earto Teeea 39153.NO 36,916,000 39694000 40.488,000 41.29e,000 42,134.NO 42,988,000 49,8N,UN N702,000 45,595.000 417.)83,000 4 New COP lesues 31500D000 340 000 NO 140.000.00D - 109000.000 - - 895.000.000 5 Interest Revenues ]I 088 NO 31 Ila NO 30746 NO 29522000 23656,000 23,734000 25.a3g.ON 26,359.000 28,151 28,010.00 260.285,000 6 COnn¢lion Fees 5824000 5412100 a824000 5.924NO 5.824.000 5,824,000 5,824,000 5,024,000 5.824,030 5.824,000 56.240,N0 2 One,Revenues 3015,No 432SO ON 66 2S9 ON 21459,000 26,659.000 10.459,OOD 18,659.00 16.859.ON 19.C59,No 16.859.000 225.090N0 0 Revenues $04.437 ON 211.263 ON 582995.NO 207,008000 352.531,000 221.512,000 3...11,ON N2,M.—O.. 25pR2900D 252.6114.000 ].1)1,320,000 Reeuinninnc 9 Opera Mum,Exp 96.851,001) 88.620.000 90,389000 92,159,000 93,928.e00 95,898,00 92.462,000 99,232.000 101.002,000 tax,na,NO 918.132,001) 10 Centel lmpewment Pm9mm 126.690,000 292]2],000 243,442,000 254.626.000 154,431.000 50.109.000 50.109.000 SD199000 50,109.000 50.109,000 1,342,152.000 11 COP Sella 80%4 N Yn 4D395ND 53,050.000 66.496.000 80,285.000 05.907.000 91.630,000 85.504.000 99614N0 99,1182.000 99,409,000 812.426,000 12 OM.Reaulreme ue 2.333.000 2.333.000 2333. 00 2.333.000 2.333,000 2.333.000 2.333,000 2333,000 3.]3],000 2.333.00D 23.330.000 13 R,.,. enM 2We.259.01") 408.328,000 402.665,000 429.433.000 336.50.000 230,229,000 245.493,000 251.493.000 253,318.000 254,822.000 3,128,040,000 14 Revenuemn1u0emenl. 198.170,000 (195,113.000) 180,320,000 (222.]45,000) 20,932,000 (11.262,000) 9D510ND (397ONO) (3•040000) (1,933,000) 45.260,000 0 A1c...W E F..., F 15 Beginning Of Yee, 437,757,000 05.935.00 440,922.001) 621,142.001) 39e.292,000 419.229,000 401402,001) 491,980,NO 486,010,000 484,920.00) 437.757.000 'V Is End Of Year 635,935,000 440,522.000 621,142.DN 395J92.ON 418.229.000 401.462.000 481.980.000 488,010.000 494.92aON 483.032,000 483.032.0) u . .. n n gesq)aPaer.. - :. 9Ai 2x1.0oD ..lJ..�8N : :.3e9.0321 ;; 402.4114.e45 zJd2 uet,5ii'.'.:736-B2B.4Ji nd,>f4J79�^-;.Jae,Nt,ua ::::Ja 9UJ!'!1•;:'.:4ik oq;ilb "dri4B' td. on anemia,Serves tine,Few 18 A,SFR Annual Uar Fee MIN >96A0 $105.0 $115,00 $12800 $138.0 31$DN $1605e $16228 $163.43 19 Pemenla9e Change 9.3896 9.71% 938% 9,52% 9.5694 0.52% 920% 2.05% IN% 070% 20 E9uivelenl penning Unie 890.I00 093.300 595.500 899.700 002,900 MAN 909,300 912,500 914,500 912]00 21 BFR Connecten Fee S1920 61.820 $1.020 $1.020 $1.620 $1820 $1,820 S1.BN VAN $1,820 22 Oulidentleg COP, 3624.925,000 5059.480.e110 S987.317N0 5965.204.000 31,083,015,000 S1.052.II7,000 31,129626,00 11.0111,180.000 51002,111.000 L.129,828.ON COP Re figs 23 Sr Lien Canni Min 1.25 2.54 231 229 1.43 144 1.32 145 1,49 1A9 161 25 Mdbovel Binds.1.25 2,54 2.31 2.29 1,43 144 137 1.45 1..9 149 151 Net Revenues fill re60e 402.58e.000 122.843.000 152.598,N0 114,929,00 123,03.000 125.814.000 135.544,000 148,285.000 149.269.000 149918,N0 1,Han a 7.5% - - - - - - - S,IleneeMa 40,305,000 53,OSO,ON 611.495,000 80,265,000 65.902,000 91839.000 95.584.000 99614000 99,N2.N0 99,409.000 G excel MaunV 1041rani 03 BudgefOi Ml 7 Caen Aviv 5O.N effluent GMS Pnese I All OW Caen Fb BOARD OF DIRECTORS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT DISTRICT'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 REGULAR MEETING April 24, 2002—7:00 P.M. RE: AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 Minute excerpts have been received as set forth below. Pursuant to Regular Agenda Item No. 3, it is appropriate to receive and file said excerpts: 3. Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts from the following re appointment of active and alternate Directors, as follows: ('Mayor) City/Aoenw Active Director Alternate Director Yorba Linda John M. Gullixson Michael Duvall G1wp.dta\agenda\Board Agendas\2002 Board AgendwW12302 supplement IAm v' Subject: Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) On Tuesday, April 24, 2002, and on a vote of 5-1, Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) moved out of the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee and on to the Appropriations Committee. The date of the next hearing is not yet posted, but will be heard prior to June 1. Appropriations Committee contact information: California State Assembly State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Committee Leadership: Darrell Steinberg (Chair), Patricia Bates (Vice Chair) Committee Members. Elaine Alquist, Dion Aroner, Roy Ashbum, Rebecca Cohn, Ellen Corbett, Lou Correa, Lynn Daucher, Manny Diaz, Marco Firebaugh, Jackie Goldberg,Abel Maldonado, Gloria Negrete McLeod, Robert Pacheco, Lou Papan, Fran Pavley, George Runner, Joseph Simitian, Carl Washington, Patricia Wiggins, Roderick Wright, Charlene Zettel. Consultants: Chief Consultant: Geoff Long. Principal Consultants: Steve Archibald, Joyce Iseri, Stephen Shea, Daniel Alvarez, Chuck Nicol. Consultant: Darci Sears. Secretary: Laura Lynn Gondek. In addition to mailing a letter or speaking with members of the Appropriations Committee, you may also want to communicate with the Orange County Caucus representing the OCSD service area. Assembly members Tom Harman, John Campbell, Bill Campbell, Lynn Daucher, Ken Maddox, Patricia Bates and Lou Correa Senators Joseph Dunn, Dick Ackerman, and Ross Johnson The attached information includes: • A sample letter in opposition to AB 1969 • A list of 11 talking points • Copies of letters and resolutions mailed to the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee opposing the bill. o OCSD, o Irvine Ranch Water District, o California Association of Sanitary Agencies, o City of La Habra, o City of Placentia o Christopher Prevail, Commissioner Garden Grove Sanitary District Advisory Commission Date s9 Darrell Steinberg Chairman Appropriations Committee State Capitol Building Sacramento,CA 95814 Subject: Oppose Assembly BM 1969(Maddox) (Organization/city) is writing in opposition to Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) requiring the Orange County Sanitation to immediately, move to full secondary treatment of its treated wastewater effluent without the financial,and facility planning necessary. The Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD)was created by the California Legislature for the specific purpose of managing wastewater. The board is comprised of 21 elected city officials, 1 elected county supervisor and 3 sanitary districts representing the views, concerns and interests of the 25 cities and 2.4 million people that comprise its service area. OCSD is currently undertaking an orderly and deliberative local government process to determine its future level of treatment. Public meetings, community presentations, fact sheets, mailers and a public advisory committee made up of local residents, businesses, environmental groups and others along with additional outreach tools are being utilized by the district to provide valuable input to the board of directors. In addition,the district is further regulated by the California Ocean Plan and overseen by the State Water Resources Control Board through a triennial review, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Coastal Commission,National Marine Fisheries Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. These agencies have expertise in wastewater management, environmental protection and public health and safety. (Organization/city) implores the committee not to circumvent the local governmental deliberative process. Do not unilaterally enforce a State mandate upon local government to decide this local issue. If adopted, a State Mandate would require the State fund a portion of the $400 million plus for implementation. The Orange County Sanitation District will decide the future level of treatment in June or July. The decision will be made by local government and community input after the scientific facts, funding, facility requirements and public comment are all complete. Allow the local governmental process to work. Sincerely, Too Eleven Reasons to Oppose the Maddox Bill: 1. The Clean Water Act was originally crafted by Congress (with two major amendments) with considerable thought behind it. It ought to be applied evenly across the Country, including here in OC 2. Our Board of Directors will make a deliberate determination about this important public policy decision and will make a decision that meets the needs of OC. For this reason, Sacramento has no reason to intervene in this matter. 3. Government must not succumb to the strongly held but not necessarily factually based opinions of a minority of people. Public policy ought to be based on facts, not opinion. 4. The California Ocean Plan has been adequately protecting public health and the environment for 30 years. It addresses wastewater quality in a number of ways. OC should look for guidance there, not to a bill that is piece meal and ad hoc. 5. The concerns raised by the public relate to disinfection practices, not whether we are full secondary or not. We will be disinfecting up summers end—maybe sooner. Allow the results of that work to be completed. 6. All government has a responsibility to spend the public's money wisely. It is unclear whether full secondary, per se,will be either effective or needed to adequately protect public health and the environment. Therefore, Maddox's early intervention with this bill is premature. Allow the research to speak to us first 7. The Maddox Bill adds no additional speed to the OCSD resolve. Now that OCSD has decided to fast track disinfection,there's nothing more that can be done. The interim disinfection work is moving forward as fast as it can,within the framework of CEOA. We have the money, the ability, and the plan to get this disinfection work done. 8. There is no urgency that requires an early Maddox Bill. The beaches of OC are generally meeting the AB 411 standards and there's no evidence linking elevated counts to OCSD. 9. The Maddox Bill adds nothing to long term planning or financing objectives of OCSD. Staff is now preparing two versions of the 02-03 FY budget in parallel to developing amendments to our facilities plan. This work is proceeding as quickly as possible. Once the OCSD considers treatment level options in June, it will direct staff to begin work to meet the objectives of its treatment level decision. There's nothing more that can be done about financial or facilities planning that is not already underway. 10.The Maddox Bill sets a horrible precedence in overturning the orderly process of government. Imagine If every special interest group had members of the stale legislature working to overtum the decision making authority of policy boards all over the State. 11.00SD was created by the state legislature for the express purpose of managing wastewater. Why then, is it necessary to create a bill that overrides the purpose of the OCSD board of directors? ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 0141 SM-24 1 April 18, 2002 w."neon,..: P.O.20.e4,8127 Valley. The Honorable Hannah-Beth Jackson Fou 92728.8127 Chair n nil,: Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee 108°4 alia A.. California State Assembly Fa noel* CA State Capitol Building 92MB-7018 P g Sacramento, CA 95814 Subject: Oppose Assembly Bill 1969(Maddox) Dear Ms. Jackson: • Orange County Sanitation District opposes Assembly Bill 1969. The bill is harmful to the orderly process of government and to the consistent application of the laws of ^"enem California and the United States as expressed in the California Ocean Plan and the e.ana P.n federal Clean Water Act. Lypma Famwin Valley F0.nwn Orange County Sanitation District maintains an extensive ocean monitoring program. Gerd°" 3' More than $2 million a year is invested to make sure the ocean remains safe and `°°`°"a°°`h healthy for the marine environment and for the public to use for recreation.The rvine Le Habca monitoring program is part of the ocean release permit issued jointly by the U.S. EPA La Pelme Los Alem and the State Water Resources Control Board. Orange County Sanitation District's inas NwPwn 9.ach permit is the only one with an extensive three-component monitoring program at this °ranee time. According to the EPA, the Orange County model is an excellent model and sa�aa,a they are considering incorporating it into the programs for the other 301(h) permit slat seam holders. sm= raT+n 011a Pan: 1. This bill sets a precedent by overturning the orderly process of local ".L'°da government decision making.The state legislature should not work to entnry w oelmse overturn the decision-making authority of local policy boards. The bill implies that the State Legislature has determined that the Orange County Sanitation Mniary DlttNeu District Board of Directors cannot be trusted to make a competent decision c°ew Mesa about level of treatment. Nrldn Dry w.nnn Din rims 2. The Clean Water Act was adopted by Congress after years of scientific research and study. It is uniformly applied across the country, including in bvm.Ranch Orange County. The Clean Water Act also specifically provides site-specific standards for certain qualifying coastal dischargers as a long-term alternative for water resource protection. The Orange County Sanitation District has consistently met those standards of EPA and the federal Clean Water Act. In 17 years of operating under the permit, Orange County Sanitation District has never been in violation of federal clean water standards and its permit. 'To P ecn Ma Public NO&M and Ma En mw nn MmWh&Callan°in M&ewewr Sysnams, Ms. Hannah Beth Jackson Page 2 April 18, 2002 3. The California Ocean Plan has worked well to address wastewater treatment agency releases and public health. It also incorporates standards for ocean protection from toxic materials significantly more stringent than federal requirements. 4. OCSD was created by the state legislature for the express purpose of managing wastewater.The Board of Directors has been effectively doing so for nearly 50 years. The United States EPA and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board have found this to be true as expressed in many ways including awards and continued findings of compliance. It is not necessary to create a bill that overrides the record of the OCSD Board of Directors to achieve the expectations of EPA and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. 5. The Orange County Sanitation District's Board of Directors will make a deliberate determination about the current Important public policy decision about the level of treatment and will make a decision by the end of this year that meets the needs of Orange County. We urge you to oppose AB 1969.Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of Orange County Sanitation District's the major concerns. 4�a� Blake P. Anderson General Manager BPA:jt C: Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors V 2D= IRMRAMMERDISTRICT April 18, 2002 Honorable Ken Maddox Assemblymember,6e District State Capitol-Room 4153 Sacramento,CA 95814 Subject: AB 1969(Maddox)Waste discharge requirements;waivers—OPPOSE Dear Assemblymember Maddox: On March 12,2002,Irvine Ranch Water District(IRWD)and the City of Irvine met in joint session and approved a resolution that agrees with your intent to increase the level of treatment of Orange County Sanitation District's(OCSD's)ocean discharges. However,we oppose Assembly Bill 1969. The full 25-member Board of Directors of OCSD,which serves 2.2 million customers over a 470-square-mile service area,will be considering the issue in late 2002. At that time,the Board will decide whether to pursue an extension of its waiver under Section 301(h)of the Clean Water Act,which allows it to continue discharging wastewater to the Pacific Ocean without treating all of it to the"secondary"level. If OCSD does decide to apply for a waiver,its application would then be considered by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and EPA for approval. While this process may be time consuming,it does provide appropriate technical and policy review. We submit that any legislation preempting local government decisions and the normal statutory process for review of 301(h)waiver applications is not necessary. That is why IRWD respectfully opposes AB 1969 at this time. Please feel free to contact Paul Jones, IRWD General Manger,at 949/453-5310,if you have any questions regarding our position. Yours very truly, Brian Brady President ce: Assemblymember Tom Hannan,Co-author Chair Hannah-Beth Jackson, Assembly ES &TM Committee Blake Anderson, OCSD,,, CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION o/ SANITATION AGENCIES (1 O 925 L Street,Suite 1400•Sacramento,CA 95814•TEL:(916)446.0388-FAX:(916)448.4808•www.ceceweb.org MICHAEL F.DLLLON Execualy Di.,.,D 1 bb''i't April 17,2002 ROBERTAL LARSON D,m .,nftcgal and The Honorable Ken Maddox Rn.)..,Aaairs Pr.ideru --- California State Assembly IF"M.MawANr State Capitol, Room#4153 5animy Di.nia N.,I Sacramento, CA 95814 of Marie Count, 53 F3 POvd Drive Gmcnbrac,CA 94904 SUBJECT: AB 1969(MADDOX1 RELATING TO ORANGE COUNTY T.](415)554-4316 Fax(415)554-7828 SANITATION DISTRICT—OPPOSE Smrcrary-Trrasurcr PAM dr.CAUSE Dear Assembly Member Maddox: Delu Diablo Sanuadon Di.... 2500 Pr.burg-Anrloch Hwy On behalf of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA),I regret to A.,J.h.CA 945N Tel(925)n84NO inform you that we must oppose your AB 1969,which would require the Orange Fax(925)n9a543 County Sanitation District(OCSD)to construct frill secondary treatment facilities. lu Vie.Pr idena CASA is a statewide organization of cities and special districts providing wastewater JOB4OMVA'Co Municipal on,�4N collection,treatment, disposal d water recycling services to millions of p an Y g U'diry Diarria Californians. 2nd Via Pmidcnr ROBPRTRElD AB 1969 would override,by legislative fiat,the existing regulatory approval process. W.rERT Sanimrion nutria of San.Gan Clean Water Act section 301(h)expressly provides that secondary treatment C...' requirements may be waived for ocean dischargers that can meet stringent criteria. In DrRECTORSATLARGE order to obtain a waiver, OCSD must implement a rigorous industrial pretreatment CHARLES MM program, demonstrate that its discharge complies with water quality standards,and Cenral tee...n show that fish and recreational uses are protected. The District implements an Sani.ry , CNAaco ITS CA4VVV extensive ocean monitoring program to ensure that water quality is not adversely Venmm Regional Saol.rion affected. OCSD's permit must be reviewed and approved by the Regional Water Di...ta Quality Control Board and the United States Environmental Protection Agency,after NORMANZ ECXENRODE consultation with the California Coastal Commission,the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Drange cannt,sani.d°" Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. These agencies have not et had . Dbrria ag Y JiErTNrSAAEL the opportunity to weigh-in on a renewal of OCSD's waiver. Yet, AB 1969 would alon.my Raginnd W.., nullify this regulatory process and mandate a particular treatment technology for a single discharger,despite the lack of credible data or information to justify such a MATrtEBeerrs mandate. Kennedy/lenW Con,ul.nu EP1CSAP1RSTEPN Federal Leglrbewi Adr-o.rc ENS R.oumm,Inc. I'4i Pennsylvania Ave.,N.W. 5ui.ti'_0 \Vaehinpon,D.C.''-0006 Td(20'-)466-3155 F.4X(202)466-3787 ,a,emmwuues.Com IM<mber Agenda lined on revenel The Honorable Ken Maddox W April 17,2002 Page 2 Moreover, AB 1969 would impose a significant unfunded mandate on OCSD's ratepayers. The cost to install full secondary treatment at OCSD's would be over $300 million dollars. OCSD would also consume significantly more energy to operate the plant. OCSD's Board of Directors is seeking public input on whether the District should change its approach to wastewater treatment. Residents of Orange County should have the opportunity to express their views on whether the District should move forward with full secondary treatment,despite the costs. AB 1969 would short-circuit that local process. AB 1969 is not the way to resolve water quality permitting issues. Individuals and entities are often dissatisfied with some aspect of the permitting process; AB 1969 would set a dangerous precedent by having the Legislature be the arbiter of these technical and scientific issues rather than making use of the mechanisms clearly established in the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act and Clean Water Act. For these reasons,CASA must oppose your AB 1969. Sincerely, ` R berm L.Larso�i cc: Tom Jones, SWRCB Blake Anderson, General Manager,OCSD • CITY OF v `PYMIJY Q' City of La Habra ADMINISTRATION BUII.DB A Caring Community" 201 E.t$Habra Boulev P.O.Box: La Habra.CA 9063340: Or6ce:(562) 905-9; Fm:(562)905-97 April 17, 2002 Honorable Norman Eckenrode, Chairman Orange County Sanitation District P.O. Box8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Chairman Eckenrode: This letter is to advise you and the Board of Directors that on April 15, 2002 the La Habra City Council took action to approve and adopt Resolution No. 4802 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA IN OPPOSITION TO AB 1969 (MADDOX) REGARDING WASTEWATER DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS. Enclosed is a certified copy of Resolution No.4802. Sincerely, Shane Apodaca City Clerk Enc. 1 Copy: Steve Anderson, Councilmember and OCSD Director 1 v RESOLUfIONNO. 4802 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA DECLARING ITS OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BILL 1969 (MADDOX) REGARDING WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS. Whereas, all of north and central Orange County's wastewater, or sewage, is received and processed by the Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD); and Whereas, the now-consolidated OCSD serves about 2.35 million people across 24 cities and 470 square miles in north and central Orange County, including the residents and businesses of La Habra; and Whereas, OCSD produces about 533 wet tons of wastewater biosolids each day and sends another 236 million gallons per day of effluent out a 5.1 mile ocean Outfall; and Whereas OCSD, like many sanitation agencies, has facilities to treat wastewater using the preliminary treatment and odor control,primary treatment,and secondary treatment; and Whereas, OCSD currently operates under a Section 301 (h) permit which waives the Federal Clean Water Act's full secondary treatment requirement; and said permit expires in June 2002;' and Whereas, ABI969 authored by Assembly Member Maddox, would require State and Regional Boards, including OCSD, to improve its level of treatment of wastewater to full secondary treatment; and Whereas,the OCSD claims the Maddox Bill is premature and there is no urgency behind the bill. The OCSD opposes AB 1969 based on the following: a The California Ocean Plan has been adequately protecting public health and the environment for 30 years. a The concerns raised by the public relate to disinfection practices, not whether or not OCSD operates under fiill secondary treatment. a Orange County beaches are generally meeting the AB 411 standards and there is no evidence linking elevated counts to its operation. a All government has a responsibility to spend taxpayer dollars prudently. It is unclear whether full secondary treatment will be either effective or needed to adequately protect public health and the environment, therefore early intervention with AB 1969 is premature. two c parkat McCSrydla ttAb g.and certaYMettMImaeoliegka 91tn®,and xrreet caDYNtlw anllkMMboFloa- kn f rr r�El h p�(�Ci CdS\LV1,-1 j03 lee-Alj city CierkMMe Glvof tw Habra Data V • AB 1969 would impose an unfunded mandate upon local jurisdictions. • OCSD already took action to fast track disinfection within the framework of CEQA. - .. OCSD has a plan in place, and the necessary funding and ability to accomplishment this goal. • AB 1969_adds nothing to the long term planning or financing objectives of the OCSD. • AB 1969 overrides the purpose'of the OCSD Board of Directors, which was created by the State Legislature for the express purpose of managing wastewater. Section 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the La Habra City Council hereby concurs with the reasoning of the Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors, and declares its opposition to AB 1969 (Maddox). The City Clerk is directed to mail a certified copy of this resolution to Assembly Member Maddox and the Orange County Sanitation Board of Directors. This resolution shall be entered into the official book of resolutions. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED,APPROVED AND AODPTED this 15s'day of April, 20 nian,Mayor Attest: Sharie L. Apodaca,/City Clerk 9h `II 6;Y r I se£ I w STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) - COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS. CITY OF LA HABRA ) I, Shane L.Apodaca, City Clerk for the City of La Habra, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and coned copy of Resolution No. 4802 introduced and adopted at-a' Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of La Habra held on the IS" day of April, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCII.MEMBERS: GARCIA,ESPINOZA, ANDERSON,RUSH, SIMONIAN NOES: COUNCII.MEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: -COUNCIIAIEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Witness my hand and the official seal of the City of La Habra this 16a day of April, 2002. Sharie L.Apodaca, ity Clerk I 3 Me Aw M..e fhe Chy GE/y Mayor VP �j Councllmambe : CHRISTOPHER A.LOWE Q y CONSTANCE UNDERHILL SCOTTNORIVIANP. Z ECKENRODE City OBERT fD'AM SOOTTP.ICKIDY NS ROBERT D'ANV1T0 JUDYA DICKINSON ne ALL AMEa1C1 GIT4 C91 East Chapman Avenue-P&.c files, Ca/ilom/a 95919 April 19, 2002 The Honorable Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee California State Assembly State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assemblymember Jackson: The City of Placentia is writing in opposition to Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) requiring the Orange County Sanitation District to immediately move to full secondary treatment of its treated wastewater effluent without the necessary financial and facility planning. The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) was created by the California Legislature for the specific purpose of managing wastewater. The Board is comprised of 21 elected city officials, 1 elected county supervisor and 3 sanitary districts representing the views, concerns, and interests of the 25 cities and 2.4 million people that comprise its service area. OCSD is currently undertaking an orderly and deliberative local government process to determine its future level of treatment. Public meetings, community presentations, fact sheets, mailers, and public advisory committee made up of local residents, businesses, environmental groups, and others along with additional outreach tools are being utilized by the District to provide valuable input to the Board of Directors. In addition, the District is further regulated by the California Ocean Plan and overseen by the State Water Resources Control Board through a triennial review, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Coastal Commission, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. These agencies have expertise in wastewater management, environmental protection, and public health and safety. CA ear. v The Honorable Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee April 19, 2002 Page Two The City of Placentia implores the committee not to circumvent the local governmental deliberative process. Do not unilaterally enforce a State mandate upon local government to decide this local issue. If adopted, a State Mandate would require the State fund a portion of the $400 million plus for implementation. The Orange County Sanitation District will decide the future level of treatment in June or July. The decision will be made by local government and community input after the scientific facts, funding, facility requirements, and public comments are all complete. Allow the local government process to work. Sincerely, N nn an ZZ t enrode, Councilmember NZEfId cc: Councilmembers Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager, Orange County Sanitation District E0 ZI Y..' 74 c r: m7 $:l\8111186 r1B6\:OIIObG011EBMB\CounP�Ed,enmEBKB18B9 Opp04(tlLCGC Christopher Prevatt s ~ 12152 Chapman Awnu003.0.0 nGm .CA 92UO#PH.714.290.4428♦Fx.]14.8N.82r0 X- Assemblywoman Hanna-Beth Jackson ° Chair Environmental Safety and Toxics Committee « • ' April 19,2002 ?- • AB 1969 - Maddox As a member of the Garden Grove Sanitary District Advisory Commission I believe that the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxics Committee take a position in opposition to AB 1969,Maddox. AB 1969 would require that the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) treat 100%of its effluent to the secondary treatment level. In effect, preventing OCSD from seeking a waiver under section 301h of the Clean Water Act as allowed by the Act. /✓. :;;. • ;��,;.� I believe that this legislation is unnecessary and counter to the concept of local control over local issues. AB 1969 would circumvent the authority of three government bodies, the OCSD, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control � '�, 4 • Board and the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, this legislation would create a state mandate costing state taxpayers over $400 million. In the face of a mounting multi-billion dollar projected budget shortfall, this legislation > [ is too costly and unnecessary. I believe that decisions regarding the application for a waiver under section 301h of the Clean Water Act are best left with the current regulatory bodies. This bill '.� sets a horrible precedence by overturning the orderly process of government. • Imagine if every special interest group had members of the state legislature working to overturn the decision-making authority of policy boards across the state. Sincerely, Christopher Prevatt Commissioner •,, ,:`' r -.j Garden Grove Sanitary District Advisory Commission � veww, , 0 Q C� p iM w April 24, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, D.Envo Director of Technical Services SUBJECT: 2001 ONSHORE INVESTIGATION REPORT Attached is the executive summary of the 2001 Onshore Investigation. This executive summary presents an overview of the program tasks and Orange County Sanitation District's recommendations based on the results of recent investigations. Discussion of this report, along with the ocean and shoreline monitoring completed during the summer of 2001 will occur at the special board meeting on Wednesday, May 15 at 6:00 p.m. As you will recall, during the summer of 2001, high bacteria concentrations continued in the near shore waters off Huntington Beach. In addition to the ocean and shoreline sampling, Orange County Sanitation District's Source Control Division conducted an investigation to determine if any onshore sources could be responsible. A project task list was developed to investigate potential discharges that may impact bacteria levels in the surf zone. Detailed task descriptions, findings, and recommendations are described in the body of this report. RPG:rm a2442land:wdy2 Attachment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is the regional wastewater treatment agency serving 2.2 million residents. To discharge a blend of primary and secondary treated wastewater to the Pack Ocean through a 5-mile outfall, OCSD has been granted a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The permit establishes bacteriological limits based on the California Ocean Plan and the RWQCB Santa Ana Region Basin Plan, for the surfzone and the recreational waters of the Pacific Ocean within the jurisdiction of the State of California (3-mile limit). In accordance with this permit, OCSD performs beach sampling for three indicator bacteria: total coliforms, fecal coliforms, and enterococci. OCSD's monitoring data is also used by the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA), which has the responsibility to post or close beaches when health standards are exceeded. In July 1999, the OCHCA closed a portion of Huntington State Beach due to elevated levels of the three indicator bacteria, which presented a fingerprint indicative of sewage contamination. Closures continued throughout the summer, affecting up to 6 of the 6 miles of state and city beaches in Huntington Beach. The last section of beach was reopened in early September 1999. Several weeks before the beach closure in July 1999, OCSD's surfzone monitoring identified bacteria levels that, although within acceptable limits, were above normal. Consequently, water quality was tested along a transact (picket line) approximately one mile offshore to determine whether OCSD's ocean discharge may be moving onshore. The results of those tests were negative. Subsequent to the beach closure, OCSD initiated further onshore investigations to identify the sources of the bacterial contamination. This is documented in the 'Final Report—Huntington Beach Closure Investigation, Phase 1, December 1999." a 2001 ONSHORE INVESTIGATION During the summer of 2001, high bacteria concentrations continued in the nearshore waters off Huntington Beach, and OCSD's Source Control Division conducted an investigation to determine if any onshore sources could be responsible. This Executive Summary presents an overview of the program tasks and OCSD's recommendations based on the results of recent investigations. Project Tasks and Recommendations A project task list was developed to investigate potential discharges that may impact bacteria levels in the surf zone. Detailed task descriptions, findings, and recommendations are described in the body of this report. Where tasks overlapped, some recommendations have been combined under the heading of another task. Beach Restrooms The purpose of this task was to test the sewer lines serving the Huntington State Beach restrooms for leaks to determine whether the restrooms contribute to groundwater contamination and, ultimately, to contamination of the surfzone. The tested sewers are located south of Pacific Coast Highway between Magnolia and Newland Streets in the City of Huntington Beach. The sewers were evaluated in August 2001 using hydrostatic, air pressure, and dye testing methods. The methods used were dependent on the condition, position, and design of cleanouts and manholes serving the restrooms. Dye testing was conducted when the results of other test methods indicated a possible leak. The results of the hydrostatic tests indicated leaks, of varying magnitude, in the following areas: 1. The sewer line, which is relatively short, from the Lifeguard Headquarters lost 6 gallons. 2. The sewer line between restrooms 9 and 10 lost 180 gallons. 3. The sewer line serving restrooms 7 and 8 did not hold air pressure and lost most of the water injected. When the plug was removed, the pipe was not full at the lower end, indicating water loss. The results of the dye testing indicate that the tracer dye and lithium chloride traveled from the restroom 8 sewer line to the shoreline. Therefore, staff believes it is very likely that bacteria made its way to the surfzone due to one or more leaks in the restroom 8 sewer, and possibly from other leaking restrooms. The California State Parks Department has indicated that the existing sewer line serving restroom 8 will be abandoned and connected directly to the OCSD Coast Trunk.Sewer to prevent surfzone contamination. Recommendation Based on the findings that the restroom 8 sewer is leaking and sewage is appearing in the surfzone, it was recommended that California State Parks abandon the sewer between restrooms 7 and 8 and connect restroom 8 directly to the OCSD Coast Trunk Sewer. State Parks was advised to hydrostatic test V their restroom sewers periodically to ensure integrity. In addition, due to the leakage findings in the Lifeguard Headquarters line and in restrooms 9 and 10, further investigation and follow-up corrective measures are highly recommended. AES Power Plant The purpose of this task was to evaluate the possibility that surface runoff contaminated with bacteria may be entering the AES Power Plant (AES) from a tributary storm drain and passing through to the AES ocean ouffall. In addition, the AES sanitary sewer, which is adjacent to the stone drain, was evaluated, and numerous samples were taken in the vicinity of AES to determine other potential sources. The mixing box at AES was a critical location, since it is used by AES for NPDES sampling and reporting. AES mixing box monitoring data showed that samples from the surface were generally higher in bacteria than samples taken 20 feet below the surface. While some of the mixing box samples were high in bacteria counts, samples taken at the same time near the AES ocean discharge pipe did not show high bacteria counts. Staff could not explain this discrepancy. Conductivity readings in the mixing box indicated that a layer of fresh water near the surface overlays the seawater. AES periodically adds chlorine to its effluent. Several samples were analyzed for chlorine residual to determine whether chlorine had an effect on bacteria levels in the mixing box. The results of residual chlorine analysis were inconclusive. Connected to the AES mixing box is a large stone drain that serves an area west and north of AES, including runoff from the adjacent RV/trailer park. During high tide, the water level in the mixing box is above the storm drain connection; therefore, the potential exists for contaminated water in the storm drain to enter the mixing box. However, it seems unlikely that this source could substantially influence the entire AES effluent discharge during dry weather conditions. Pressure testing determined that the AES sanitary sewer line is not leaking and was not contributing to the bacteria in the mixing box. .Recommendation Based on the results of high bacteria levels in the samples collected from the AES mixing box, it is highly recommended that the control authority further investigate and follow up with corrective measures. It is suggested that a comprehensive bacteria monitoring investigation be implemented on both the influent and effluent at AES to explain the existence of high bacteria levels in the mixing box. Ocean Dye Testing OCSD assisted researchers from the University of Southern California (USC) Sea Grant program to evaluate dye dispersion and water movement near OCSD's Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N. From July 19 through 21, 2001, three dye-test experiments were conducted near AES around the cooling water intake and discharge ports, which lie about 1200 feet offshore of Huntington State Beach between OCSD Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N. V Fluorescent dye was used to observe water movement by tracking dye concentration over time. Dye concentration was measured using a fluorometer that detects fluorescent emission from the dye at a specific wavelength. By evaluating water movement, researchers can further postulate the effects of discharge from the AES ouffall and its impact on bacteria concentrations near the surfzone. During the dye release next to shoreline, the water movement seemed predominantly downcoast with some movement upcoast. When released next to the AES outfall buoys, the dye seemed to spread in an almost circular pattern around the end of the AES pipes. When the dye was released inside the AES ouffall, the dye spread evenly in a circular pattern, then spread into an oblong shape into two distinct sections parallel to the shore. The majority of the dye was observed further upcoast than downcoast of the AES pipes, while there was little evidence of dye near the shore directly over the AES pipes. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Flood Control Channels The purpose of this task was to identify all observed discharges to the project area's five flood control channels, which are the Talbert, Huntington Beach, Santa Ana River, Greenville/ Banning, and Fairview channels. Samples, photos, and instrument readings were collected. In general, no major source of bacterial contamination was found in any of the channels. Recommendation It is recommended that a more extensive sampling program be developed to characterize the water in each channel during an extended duration to reveal more information concerning bacteria counts. Surface Discharges and Unknown Connections to the Storm Drain System All facilities in the project area were inspected, with the primary purpose of identifying surface discharges and any unknown connections to the storm drain system. The following three areas of contaminated surface discharge were identified: 1. The source of the standing water on Edison Avenue behind AES was identified as frequent discharge from the AES facility, resulting from periodic washing at a pad inside the AES plant. However, even though the flow originated from AES, it is not certain that the bacteria on Edison Avenue originated entirely at AES. 2. High bacterial counts were found in at least two areas of standing surface water in the salt marsh near Pack Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard. Inspectors discovered a large leak in an Orange County Public Facilities Resources Department (OCPFRD) sluice gate on the adjacent Huntington Beach channel. Samples from the area showed bacterial contamination. 3. A small stream of polluted surface water seeps directly into the Huntington Beach channel at the east discharge pipe from the mobile home park. The design and u condition of the underground wet wells that collect surface drainage both from the RV park and the mobile home park are unknown. A concern is that a single spill of a RV holding tank could be the "seed" of continuous bacterial contamination to the Huntington Beach channel. Surface drainage from the Huntington-by-the-Sea RV Park has a high potential to contaminate the surface water. Any spills that occur when the sewer hoses from individual RVs are connected or removed will be ultimately washed to the surface runoff system and discharged to the Huntington Beach channel. There is a lack of information about the existing sewer lines serving both the mobile home and RV park in the area. Recommendation A thorough review and dye testing of the sewers in the mobile home park area should be done to ascertain the actual connection points and drainage patterns. The standard washing procedure at the Huntington-by-the-Sea RV Park should be modified to send ail routine normal surface water runoff to the sewer during dry weather. It is also recommended that OCHCA and the City of Huntington Beach be notified for further action regarding sewage solids on the grating at the Huntington-by-the-Sea Mobile Home Estates. The continual flooding of the marsh near Pack Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard with water from the Huntington Beach channel had saturated the area completely. This precluded identifying other sources of contamination during this study and cast doubt on previous sample results. The damaged sluice gate was subsequently repaired, allowing the marsh to dry so the source of any future ponding of surface water could be identified. Monitoring Wells Along the State Beach OCSD took readings on groundwater levels in the project area, specifically on the tidal effects for monitoring wells (MW). 1 through 5 , which were placed for the 1999 study in the vicinity of the California State Beach south of Pacific Coast Highway between Magnolia and Newland Streets. Readings were collected from July 14 through July 21 at most high and low tide apexes. as found in a 2001 southern California tide tables booklet. There are four tidal events per day: two low tides and two high tides. According to the Converse Report dated October 6, 1999, MW-1 and MW-2 were dug to a depth of approximately 50 feet and straddle the AES pipes in the State Beach parking lot. MW-3, MW-4, and MW-5 were dug to a depth of approximately 30 feet and are located in the State Beach parking lot to the southeast of MW-1 and MW-2. The information collected for this task showed the well casings are still intact and there is some tidal influence on the nearshore groundwater. The difference between most concurrent low and high tide marks of the groundwater levels was about one inch. Some readings even showed a "reverse" in movement where low tide levels were "higher" than the high tide levels. For unknown reasons, it appears the change in elevation levels for unrelated tidal apexes at each well site was most pronounced at MW-1, the westernmost well site. a Recommendation No further action is recommended. Urban Runoff Diversions Urban runoff has been identified as one major source of coastal contamination, and is the most difficult to control. It comes from a variety of sources such as roadways, parking lots, construction sites, agriculture, parks, and private yards. Everything that is released to the surface of an urban environment can make its way to storm drains and channels that eventually end up at the shore. In an effort to reduce the impact of urban runoff on Orange County's beaches, OCSD has been coordinating with local agencies since late 1999 to successfully treat and dispose of dry-weather urban runoff from inland and coastal cities. OCSD has been receiving and treating an average flow of approximately 2 million gallons per day of dry- weather urban runoff from eleven diverted storm drains owned by the City of Huntington Beach, City Newport Beach, and three diverted flood control channels owned by OCPFRD. Three additional diversions in Corona Del Mar and Crystal Cove are scheduled to come on-line in the near future, which will increase the daily urban runoff flow to about 3 million gallons per day. The additional small drainage sources that discharge directly to the beaches and harbors are so numerous that it is impractical to divert all of them to the sewer system. Recommendation OCSD will continue to work with the local agencies to develop and implement a practical, long-term policy to divert urban runoff to the sewer system during the dry-weather season. Beach Observations The objective of this task was to determine conditions that may contribute to bacterial contamination in the area. It was found that beach attendance in the City of Huntington Beach was fairly stable. More dead seals were being washed onto the beach than previously thought, although they did not appear to increase the bacteria counts in the surfzone because of how they were disposed by beach officials. However, the storm drain that discharges onto the beach just north of the Huntington Beach pier around 6v Street has high bacteria counts. In addition, based on land observations and conversations with individuals in the area, there are drfferences in the appearance of the ocean between OCSD Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N as compared to other areas. One difference was noted when a diver was asked for impressions of the work performed earlier off the boat at 9N. The diver commented that moorings had anaerobic bacterial growth. This diver had only observed this growth once before, while working in waters off the Tijuana coast. t Recommendation It is recommended the dry-weather flow from the 60 Street storm drain be diverted to the sewer system. It is also recommended that a study be conducted to explain the differences in the visible ocean characteristics between stations 6N and 9N. Wastehauler Activity Wastehauler activity in the project area was reviewed to provide information and determine whether illicit dumping of septage is occurring in areas tributary to the project area. Staff reviewed OCSD records and found that wastehauler discharges to OCSD's disposal station have decreased over the past two years. Each wastehauler discharge record was reviewed, and OCSD found that most wastehaulers have decreased their discharges, while only a few have increased. OCSD contacted OCHCA to review their records, but they had no personnel assigned to wastehaulers at that time. However, during this investigation, no illegal wastehauler activity was observed. Recommendation Based on the review of OCSD wastehauler activity, it is recommended that increased oversight of wastehauler activities be conducted. Data shows that wastehauler activity has declined and that possible illegal dumping,could be occurring. Coast Trunk Review Samples were taken from dewatering wells around OCSD's Coast Trunk when sewer connections were being made near Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard. The bacteria results were negative. Subsequent discussions with the OCSD Engineering Department indicated that any leaks from the deeper portions of the Coast Trunk would be improbable because the pressure from the surrounding groundwater would be greater than the pressure inside the pipe. Infiltration is more likely than exfiltration. A videotape was reviewed of the siphon when the flow was bypassed during construction of the new siphon in 1999 and no infiltration was noted, even though the depth of the siphon was approximately 30 to 40 feet, which is much lower than the existing water table. Therefore, no further investigation was conducted. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Area Around the 21-Inch Huntington Beach Purchase Sewer The condition of the 21-inch Huntington Beach Purchase Sewer (HBPS) was evaluated, along with the area surrounding the trailer park on Newland Street across from AES. This area is bordered by Pack Coast Highway to the south, the Huntington Beach channel to the north, Newland Street to the east, and Beach Boulevard to the west. The results of some surface water samples taken near the HBPS and the salt marsh showed high coliform bacteria counts in at least two areas. e Recommendation Documents describing previous inspections as welt as the statFs recent observations indicate that the HBPS from Beach Boulevard to Newland Street should be investigated further for possible corrosion and/or leakage. The HBPS is not in good shape and repairs should be made promptly. it is recommended that OCSD abandon the 21"sewer in the salt marsh and slip-line the portion of the 21'sewer from the west side of the trailer park to Newland Street. Huntington Beach Treatment Plant(Abandoned) The Huntington Beach Treatment Plant (HBTP)was originally constructed in 1935 at the comer of Newland Street and what is now Edison Street. The trickling filter effluent was drained by pipe into the then-existing Huntington Beach channel, which at that time flowed south on the west side of Newland Street. A 1935 drawing also denotes a small .existing treatment plant" at the comer of Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. None of the information reviewed leads OCSD to believe there is a potential for bacteria contribution from the abandoned plant to the Huntington Beach shoreline. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Huntington Beach Storm Drains This effort consisted of evaluating the storm drains in the City of Huntington Beach that may have runoff to beach areas. Of the storm drains investigated in this study area, the outfall from the three 30-inch storm drains immediately north of the Huntington Beach pier consistently showed high fecal bacteria counts. Daily restroom washdown, dumpster drippings, and the pier area parking lot drains feed into lines that flow to a set of clarifiers and eventually discharge to the three 30-inch outfall system. Based on OCSD sampling data, all of these flows showed very high fecal bacteria counts. It can not be demonstrated that these storm drains are causing the contamination detected at OCSD surfzone monitoring sites north of the Huntington Beach pier. There could also be contributions from the hundreds of birds observed along sections of the surfzone north and south of the pier. The results of samples collected show that urban runoff to the beach in this area has the potential to be contaminated with fecal bacteria and total coliforms. Recommendation Changing some maintenance practices and implementing best management practices could help to reduce the amount of contamination to the area north of the Huntington Beach Pier where the outfall from the three 30-irch storm drains is located. The puddle that accumulates in front of the outfall from the three 30-inch storm drains near 6' Street should not be allowed to accumulate. Sample results show this to be high in fecal bacteria. As indicated previously, the 60 Street storm drain i dry-weather flow should be diverted to the sewer to eliminate the high bacteria counts in this area. All outdoor showers on the beaches should be evaluated and possibly bermed and drained to the sewer, assuming sand can be prevented from entering the sewer. Water reuse/reclamation studies show that shower wastewater typically is high in fecal coliform. The restroom stalls and surrounding floor should be washed down and drain to the sewer. The trash dumpsters should not be parked over the storm drain. Drippings from them may contain fecal bacteria from diapers, dog waste, etc. Santa Ana River Mouth High bacteria counts have been observed around the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) bridge where it crosses over the Santa Ana River in Newport Beach. It appears that high bacteria counts obtained from sample points downstream of the PCH bridge, especially at low river flow and low tide, could originate from birds roosting and nesting under the PCH bridge. There is a sandbar that forms just upstream of the bridge that birds visit during low tide, and this may also contribute to the contamination. The evidence pointing to bacteria from birds is shown by the low E. coli bacteria counts in samples taken from upstream sample points at essentially the same time samples were collected downstream of the PCH bridge. The magazine "Public Works", states in its October 2001 issue, Areas under bridges have been documented to significantly exceed contact recreation cderia. A nearby study found bird droppings to be the source of bacteria where no other sources are noted and where downstream FC values were lower. Samples were also collected of the discharge from a storm drain serving Seashore Drive in West Newport Beach. Bacteria concentrations were consistently high. At low tide and low river flow, the storm drain discharge flows to the location near a fixed sampling station located on the PCH bridge. There also could be an occasional contaminated slug from the Newport Slough, but results from this sampling project did not support this scenario. Recommendation It is recommended that netting or some other physical barrier be installed to prevent birds from roosting under the PCH bridge. This may result in less bacterial contamination to the mouth of the Santa Ana River. The installation of a barrier and the subsequent bacterial testing of the same sample sites may indicate the effectiveness of this relatively inexpensive fix. Samples taken of the Seashore Drive effluent to the Santa Ana River also show contamination that should be eliminated. One controllable element to the make- up of the runoff from the Seashore Drive storm drain is the outdoor shower located at Seashore Drive and Orange Street. Water reclamation programs and studies have found that shower water contains high levels of fecal bacteria. Berming and draining the shower to the sewer would help eliminate that source of contamination. As mentioned earlier, this should actually be considered for all outdoor beach showers. Sewering the runoff from the Seashore Drive storm 1 drain during dry-weather conditions could be a primary consideration, since the discharge volume is relatively low and the bacteria concentrations are high. It is also suggested that increased actions to control dogs and the loitering or "camping"of homeless people around the mouth of the river may help decrease those potential sources of bacterial contamination. Newport Slough/Trailer Park Based on sample results from OCHCA, the Newport Slough near Pacific Coast Highway and the Santa Ana River are, at times, a contaminated body of water. Sewer problems are known to exist at the trailer park, so the integrity of the sewer system ringing the slough may be in question. The groundwater and soil conditions are very corrosive in this area, and the sewer system is at least 30 to 40 years old, possibly older in some sections. The trailer park falls under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Housing and Community Development (SDHCD). The sewer system lies on private property located in the city of Newport Beach and discharges to a city line. Recommendation It is recommended that SDHCD and the City of Newport Beach follow up on investigating and correcting any sewer problems that might be contributing to the contamination of the slough. Balboa Boulevard Sewer in Newport Beach A side investigation determined that seawater is apparently infiltrating the Balboa Boulevard sewer in Newport Beach. High conductivity readings in the sewer were observed at high tides, and low conductivity readings were observed during low tides. Recommendation It is recommended that consideration be given to TV or hydrostatic testing of all .sewer lines in Newport Beach around 13`" and 180 Streets to determine if any cracks are causing infiltration or exrWration to the OCSD trunk sewer. Additional conductivity monitoring and sampling should also be done to verify previous findings in the Balboa Trunk Sewer. Atlanta Pump Station and Huntington Beach Channel The pump station at Atlanta and Beach Boulevard and the Huntington Beach channel was investigated. Although the discharge from the Atlanta Pump Station was only sampled once, it shows a contribution of high fecal colifonns and bacteria counts. Samples taken from the Hilton construction dewatering and the channel downstream of the Atlanta Pump Station did not show high fecal bacteria, so the source of the bacteria in the discharge from the pump station is most likely from urban runoff. There is an area located on the east side of the AES Power Plant adjacent to the Huntington Beach channel known as the "Homeless Man's Trench" that has standing water. The water is from a flap gate on the channel that is jammed open because of debris. When the tide rises, water comes through the flap gate and accumulates. Samples of this area show periodically high levels of bacteria. Recommendation As a result of high bacteria levels at the 'Homeless Man's Trench,' which is water accumulated east of AES near the Huntington Beach channel, it is recommended that an investigation be conducted to identify and eliminate the source of the bacteria in this area. Bird Observations Observations were made of the beach area between OCSD Monitoring Station 6N and 12N. During the summer, groups of 400 or more seagulls were noted at various areas, both in the surfzone and on the beach. What effect they have on surfzone bacteria is unknown. The seagulls appear to be attracted to trash and litter, where they can obtain a meal with very little effort. Overnight observations indicate the majority of these birds spend the night hours either floating in large groups just beyond the surfzone or feeding on the shore. Recommendation It is suggested that a pilot study be done to determine the impact of bird droppings on bacteria readings in the surfzone. Y JM r p J • r7 or C o r April 24, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, D.Env. Director of Technical Services SUBJECT: ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT Attached is a copy of a report titled "The 20 Meter Study' prepared by the 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury. The report was released today by the Grand Jury. A copy of their press release and one prepared by Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is also attached. The Grand Jury report comments on how OCSD conveys research findings and study results to its staff, board of directors and the community at large. The 20-m study, conducted in 1996, has been a source of controversy because some activists claim OCSD purposefully withheld the information contained in the report. While a final report was not prepared at the time the study was completed, an internal investigation by OCSD staff indicates that the 20-m study results were made available in September 1997 to the regulatory agencies, scientists, and others interested in the District's monitoring program. Nevertheless, the Grand Jury's recommendations are good ones and staff will use the recommendations to improve the way we communicate research results to the public. By law OCSD is required to respond to the Grand Jury's findings and recommendations within 90 days (or July 24, 2002). RPG:rm 4-24-02 Grand Jury Memo to Bd Dir Attachment P ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 0 R IMMEDIATE RELEASE 6APRIL24, 2002 ch,n,: Contact: (714)982-2411 Lisa Murphy nisi sez-0358 Communications Manager .,cad.. 714/593-7120 m.nine 714/394-0734 cellular aaarosP: P.O. Bar 8127 Snatch Valley,Ca 9272E-11127 street"O .A. .: OCSD RESPONDS TO 2002 GRAND JURY REPORT 10unt Ellis IT",ON Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA—The 2002 Grand Jury Report titled "The 20 Meter Study"focuses on Orange County Sanitation District and how information is Agencies conveyed to its management, its board of directors and the community. Cities As required by law, the OCSD board of directors will provide responses to ,1 cg hm findings 1-7 and recommendations 1-7 in the report, with an implementation are. schedule. auene Park F..ntsi�ey "We have read the report and agree with all of the recommendations provided by FWlertun Garden c,.,ra the Grand Jury," said Blake Anderson, general manager. "The recommendations H hdtrgtn Baas, boil down to improved timeliness and accessibility of our reports to the general IrNne La Habra public. That is good government. We thank the Grand Jury for acknowledging Las AI Palms, that 'OCSD recognizes the benefit of communicating with the public', as it is a Naapprt Beach high priority with this agency, and we will use the recommendations to improve Orange the way we disseminate research studies to the community." Patches A Seat Beach A. saa�'tan Specific to the 1996 20-meter study, conducted between September 26 and Tstin November 25, the information was the topic of OCSD's quarterly Ocean Villa Perk rorn.ands Monitoring Program Progress Review meeting held on September 3, 1997. coast.of Orange Meeting invitees included: the federal EPA, California EPA, OC Health Care Agency, Regional Water Quality Control Board, a number of environmental sanitary Districts interests, college and university scientists, and consultants. While the results were discussed and available to the regulatory agencies at that time, the Grand Ca c, Jury is correct in concluding that a written analysis of the work was not published Water Districts until this year. lmm,Ranch Annually, OCSD completes $2.1 million in marine and shoreline monitoring, as part of its ocean release permit issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, when a need (more) TO maintain world-class leadership in secteweter and water resource management, either by the OCSD board, management or staff, or from *recognized-- gulators— additional studies are completed. OCSD is currently in the process of identifying the best ways to share the studies with the board of directors and general public in the most easily accessible, reader-friendly and timely way. The 20-meter study report is available on the Web site at www,ocsd.com under the "What's New" section. A copy of the complete Grand Jury report can be found at www. occourts.org/grndjury/gjreports.asp The Orange County Sanitation District is responsible for safely collecting, treating, and disposing wastewater. It Is a special district, separate from the County of Orange or any city government, established under the State Health and Safety Code, to provide sewerage service to a specific geographic area. The Orange County Sanitation District is governed by a 25-member board of directors comprised of representatives of each local sewering agency or cities within our 470- square-mile service area. . _ . .,... aL • rt4-a54-6620 Apr 24 '02 8 : 17 No .009 P . 02i02 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST•SANTA ANA,CAtI W RNIA 92701•714/834-3320 FAX 7141834-SSSS MEDIA RELEASE APRs.24,2002 "The 20 METER Study" SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA. The 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury today released a report entitled,"The 20 METER Study". The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is one of the largest sanitation districts in the country. In 1996 OCSD completed an offshore water-testing program referred to as 'The 20 METER Study." The results were not published for over five years. while making no comment on the validity or significance of the data, the OCSD needs to ensure that all relevant data are passed on to its Board of Directors,and the public in a timely manner. The entire report can be viewed on our web site:htm://www.occourts.org/emdiurv/girpornasp. For additional information concerning the attached report,please contact Konda Marlin at(714) 834-3320. Very truly yours, 2001-2002?RAN Y GRAND JURY jl Mmlh Eric Ritchie,Foreman -02 G ,kC To 304ft, Sr�AYrwal —coP4s re : ErsT wcc+e+ai GK — Fqx cePHSre : woepMUM EUcfr4Wi ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST•SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA 92701 •714/834-3320 FAX 714/834-5555 April 18,2002 Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92708 Attention: Blake P. Anderson,General Manager Dear Mr. Anderson: Attached is a copy of the 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury report, "The 20 Meter Study". Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05(f), a copy of the report is being provided to you two working days prior to its public release. Please note that"No officer,agency,department,or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report."Emphasis added. (Public release date—April 24,2002). It is requested that you provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations of this report directed to your office in compliance with Penal Code 933.05(a)and(b),copy attached.For each Grand Jury recommendation,be sure to describe the implementation status,as well as provide a schedule for future implementation. It is requested that the response to the recommendations be mailed to Frederick P. Horn,Presiding Judge of the Superior Court,700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana,CA 92701,with a separate copy mailed to the Orange County Grand Jury,700 Civic Center Drive West,Santa Ana,CA 92701,no later than 90 days after the public release date,April 24,2002,in compliance with Penal Code 933,copy attached.The due date then is July 24,2002. Should additional time for responding to this report be necessary for further analysis,Penal Code 933.05(b)(3)permits an extension of time up to six months from the public release date. Such extensions should be advised in writing,with the information required in Penal Code 933.05(b)(3),to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with a separate copy of the request to the Grand Jury(address above). Very truly yours, ���_ 2001—2002 ORANGE,euuN r x vx�@ JURY J / �J ER:mlh Eric Ritchie, Foreman Attachments Grand Jury Report Penal Code 933, 933.05 "The 20 METER Study" SUMMARY The Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD) is one of the largest sanitation districts in the country. In 1996 OCSD completed an offshore water-testing program referred to as "The 20 Meter Study."The results were not published for over five years. While making no comment on the validity or significance of the data,the OCSD needs to ensure that all relevant data are passed on to its Board of Directors,and the public in a timely manner. PURPOSE The Grand Jury was informed that the results of a publicly funded study performed by OCSD have not been disseminated to the public in a timely manner; specifically"The 20 Meter Study." The purpose of this study is to determine how OCSD disseminates their research findings to the public and if OCSD accurately conveys research findings in a timely manner to its management,the Board of Directors and the public. BACKGROUND The OCSD is a public agency responsible for the treatment and disposal of sewage for northern Orange County, serving over 2.2 million people. It is the third largest treatment system west of the Mississippi. OCSD discharges a combination of primary and secondary treated sewage through a I20-inch outfall pipe into the ocean. Two hundred forty million gallons of sewage daily (or 88 billion gallons annually) are discharged through a series of openings in the outfall pipe onto the seabed at a distance of approximately four and one half miles from shore. The OCSD has an active ocean testing and monitoring program. The Clean Water Act of 1972 and 301(h) Permit The Clean Water Act of 1972, 33 U.S.C.A. Section 1251, et seq., was enacted to restore and maintain the integrity of the nation's waters and prohibits the discharge of any pollutant into navigable waters of the United States, except in compliance with the 1 provisions of the Act. The Act requires that all sewage discharged into the ocean be treated to secondary treatment standards. However, Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act allows site-specific requirements to be established for qualifying agencies to treat to less than full secondary standards. OCSD discharges a mixture of treated sewage; part is treated to primary treatment levels and part is treated to secondary treatment levels. It has been OCSD's practice to apply for a Section 301(h)permit (or waiver) of the Clean Water Act granted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); this permit has been granted. The State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is responsible for monitoring adherence to the conditions of the EPA permit. The permit is granted for five-year intervals. The current permit will be up for renewal in the year 2003. The decision to continue to request a Section 301(h) permit is a policy decision made by the OCSD Board of Directors and is not within the purview of the Grand Jury. The Sewage Plume The 240 million gallons of sewage dispersed daily form an underwater plume. This resultant plume of sewage is not stationary. It is dispersed by ocean currents that vary dependent upon many factors such as wind, tide, water temperature, and weather patterns which make it practically impossible to model accurately. Oversight The RWQCB exercises general oversight as the regulatory agency; however OCSD is essentially self-monitored and, with the exception of Clean Water Act and permit requirements, is free to decide what data or research to reveal to RWQCB and the public. Failure to disclose scientific data compromises the decision-making process. "The 20-Meter Study" In late 1996, OCSD undertook a study to obtain and test ocean water samples along a line of 20 meters in depth (or approximately 60 feet) to more accurately capture the 2 1 movement of the sewage plume at that moment in time. This study was paid for by OCSD, whose funds are derived in most part by rates passed on to users. The Grand Jury found no evidence that the results from this study were presented to the OCSD Board of Directors, the RWQCB, the Orange County Health Care Agency, or the public. Five years later, in early 2001, the results of"Me 20 Meter Study"were revealed for the first time in a slide included in an OCSD presentation. This presentation was made at a conference attended by environmental activists, representatives from the Orange County Health Care Agency, and OCSD. In response to questions from the audience, OCSD stated that a report on `The 20 Meter Study" would be prepared. In August of 2001, OCSD committed to make the report available within the following thirty to sixty days. The Grand Jury reviewed OCSD Board of Directors minutes from late 1996 to mid 1998 and found no mention of the "20 Meter Study." A separate review of the minutes of the OCSD Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee for the same time period also found no mention of the "20 Meter Study." There was no evidence that the study was presented to OCSD Board of Directors. Furthermore, the RWQCB had no written record of receiving a report on the "20 Meter Study." The report was finally published at the end of March 2002. Dissemination of Information to the Public The OCSD recognizes the benefit of communicating with the public. It has hired communication staff and updated its website. The portion of the ocean monitoring program required under the permit is published on the website and is available in print or on compact disk. The results of other studies not required by the Clean Water Act permit are not included. Interviews with OCSD indicate that no written procedures currently exist to cover the preparation or dissemination of research studies. The OCSD maintains two servers. A server is a computer, usually on the World Wide Web,which provides information to a client, for example a desktop computer. The first is a web server for the OCSD web site (www.ocsd.com). The second is a file server that is 3 ,r a repository of research information. It is an unlisted repository used by OCSD researchers and staff to post and share study data, findings, and results. A file server gives a directory listing of files, but provides neither information on the content of the files nor any instructions on how to use the file server to acquire information. Furthermore, the existence of this file server is not widely publicized. The website makes no reference of it,nor provides access to it. METHOD OF STUDY The Grand Jury conducted interviews with administrative, technical, and operational staff of OCSD, a representative of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Orange County Health Care Agency, as well as university consultants, environmentalists, and concerned citizens. The Grand Jury has attended meetings at OCSD, including meetings of its Board of Directors, and toured the OCSD plant. The Grand Jury also reviewed published information from OCSD including its Strategic Plan, minutes of OCSD Board of Directors, and minutes of the OCSD Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee. FINDINGS Under California Penal Code Section 933 and Section 933.05, responses are required to all findings. The Orange County 2001-2002 Grand Jury arrived at seven findings: 1. Relevant data, including the "20 Meter Study"have not been released to the public in a timely manner. 2. Publicly funded studies are vital to ongoing research of water quality. 3. OCSD has not disclosed the existence of all publicly funded studies. 4. OCSD has no written procedure regarding the preparation of reports or the dissemination of study results. 5. The results of some OCSD studies have not been published. 6. There is no single listing available of approved OCSD study topics. 7. There is limited public access to unpublished OCSD research data. 4 427 GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS $ 933.06 § 933. Findings and revommardstions; copies offned repart, (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a comment of governing badfes, declfve ofLcon,or agency summasympu1mg the implemented action: heads; definition (2) The recommendation has not yet bee.implemented,but (a) Each grand jury shad submit to the presiding judge of the will be implemented in the forum, with a timebzme, for superior court a final report ofin findings and recommendations implementation, that pertain to county government mate,during the fad or salmdar .Year. Find reports on any appropriate subject may be (3) Thee recommendations requires further amlysis, with an submitted m the presiding judge of the superior court a any explanation and the scope and permanents of an analysis or time during the term of service of a grand jury. A final report study, and a dureframe for the matter to be prepared for may be submitted for comment to responsible officers,agencies, discussion by the officer or head of the agency or departments: or departments,including the county board of supervisors,when being mvesugamd or renewed.including the governing body of applicable,upon finding of the presiding judge that the report is the public agency when applicable. This timehame sball not to compliance with this tide. For 45 days after the end of the emceed sit months from the dam of publication of the grand jury term, the foreperso, and his m her dmigoem shill, upon aPan reasonable notice,be available to clarify the recommendations of (4).The recommendation will not be implemented bemuse it the report. is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation (b) One copy of each find repork together with the responses therefor. Hamm,found to be in compliance with this title shall be placed (c) However,if a fording or recommendation of the grand jury an file with the county clerk and=am on fife in the athce of addresses budgetary or pers amel matters of a county agency or the county clerk. The county deck shall immediately forward a depznmevt headed by an elected officer, both the agency or one copy of the report and the responses an the State Archivist department head and the board of supelvimrs shad respond if who shall retain that report and all respomes in perpetuity. requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of (e) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a Foal supervisors shad address only thou budgetary or personnel report on the operations of any public agency subject to in matters over which it has some decisionmaking authority. The reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency response of the elected agency or department head shad address shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or findings and recommendations pertaining m matters under the hesagencyurdepanment. control of the governing body,and every elected county officer (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to or agency bead for which the grand jury has responsibility come before the grand jury for the purpose of rwdiog and pursuant to Section 914.1 shad comment within 60 days to the ding the findings of the grand jury report that relates to presiding judge of the superior mart,with an information copy that arson or entity in order to verity the accuracy of the sent to the board of supervisors,on the findings and recommen- findings prim to their relearn. datiom pertaining to matters order the consul of that merry Officer or agency head and my agency or agencies which that (e) During an investigation,the grandjury,shad meet with the officer or agency head supervises or controls, In any dry and subject of that investigation segad'mg the investigation, unless county, the mayor shall also comment an the findings andthe court,either on in own determination or upon request of the recommendations All of these comments and reports shad forepersav of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior would be detrimental. mart who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to (f) A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the the panic,of the grand jury report relating to that person or public agency and the office of the county disk or the mayor entity two working days prior m in public release,and after the wbev applicable,and shall remain on file in thou offices One approval otthe presidingjudge. No officer,agency,department, copy,shad be placed on file with the applicable grand jury foul or governing body of a public agency shall disclose arty contents sport by,and in the control of the currently impaneled grand of the report prim to the public releue of the find report. jury,where it shag be maintained for a minimum of fin years. Oddd by Sas,1994 a 1170 f&B..1457), 1 L Amended by (d) As used in this section"agency'includes a department. Sras.1997,a 443(AB.829),15.) (Added by Sfan1961, c 129 p. 3064, 1 L Amended by ScottIM a 674,A 1678, 1 t; Smn1974, a 394 A 977, 1 6; § 933.06. Va®ndes on grmdjury-, report submitted byuo ssi. Stass1974, c 1396,p.3054. 1 3; Ssarc1977,a. 107,pt 29 1 4' mayswmaformommi;jumrs; conditions Smtt1977,a 187,p. 709, 1 1; Smr.1980, a 544 Is, 1499, 1 1; (a) Notwithstanding Section 916 and 940,in a county having SrnnI981,a 20%p,I7241 I; Smn1982 c 144%p.5M 1 5; a population of 20,000 or less,a fund report may be adopted and Statt1945,a 221, 1 I,mgmry,e)f.Jay Iz 1985; Sma1%7,a submitted pant to Section 933 with the concucreme of at 69q 1 A 1998,Staft 2.3 a 1297, § 5; Sran.1997,a 443 fA.B.819), least 10 grand jurors if all of the following conditions are suer § a; Smtr.1994 a 230(A.x7907),4 2) 8 (1) The grand jury consisting of 19 persons has been impart. § 933.05. lfponses to 0,dhgs end pursuant to law,and the membership is reduced from 19 to (a) For purposes of subdivision(b)of Section 933,as to each fewer than 11 grand jury finding,the responding person or entity shad indicate (2) The vacancies have not been filled pursuant to Section one of the following: 908.1 within 30 days from the time that the clerk of the superior (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. court is given written notice that the vacancy has oamred. (2) The resPond.t disagrees wholly or pantady with the (3) A final report his not been submitted by the grand jury finding,m which nu the rwpome shall spedry the ponian of Pursuant to Section 933. the finding tha is dispmed and shall indude an explaantlon of (y) Notwithstanding Seniors 933, no mponsthle officers, the rcammtherefoe a encies,orde a final (b) For (b) gp parmeusettonta inequued tommmentav ,lg9A purposes en subdivision at Section Person as to with tt art subadnd S L A to this by Stu. 001,a 5 Slaalpp4, grand jury recommendation, the responding person ar entity c 4085(SB.1465),4 f. Amended by Statt2001,c 854(SB.105), shad report one at the following actioar. .. § 40.) ! April 2, 2002 Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District Post Office Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Subject: User Fees FY 2002-03 The Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD or the District) will experience a shortfall of over eight hundred million dollars ($800,000,000.00) in the next four years. The Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) already approved by this Board account for most of the increased spending. The shortfall comes because the revenue does not keep pace with the expenses. Proposal: Increase single family residence (SFR) user fees for FY 2002-03 from $80/year to $128/year. The shortfall in revenue compared to expenses from 2003-2006 is more than $800 million. This shortfall continues throughout the decade. Even in FY 2010 spending is over$250 million/year but income is just barely more than $200 million/year. Fees are going to almost double by the end of this decade, but the District will still have an annual deficit. Fees are scheduled to increase from$80/year to $150/year by 2010, or $200/year depending upon the treatment level. Combine this annual deficit with the huge building program debt and the District is placed in a tenuous financial situation. The OCSD must get ahead of this curve. We do not want to try to play catch up with revenues, especially since revenues will be less than expenses, even in 2010. One objective is to avoid large jumps in user fees. By starting with an increase of only $4/month now rather than waiting, the overall increases are less and there will not have to be a doubling of rates in the future. By paying more now, the rate of increases in the future will be less. Increase incrementally and reasonably by starting now, rather than waiting until the District is carrying a burdensomely high debt load. It is always cheaper in the long run to pay upfront for things rather than borrowing. By paying more of the CIP now, the District avoids paying as much interest since the debt will be less. If the Board moves, even slightly, to more of a pay-as-you-go policy rather than borrowing so much for the building projects, the District will save money for the rate payers in the long run. Also, the District will not have to dip into the reserves as much. FY2002-03 User Fee Proposal, page 2 The reserves can be maintained for emergencies and to ensure the District's credit rating remains high even while the District is spending large amounts for CIP. Huge building projects have been approved for construction in the near future. One example is the Groundwater Replenishment System(GWRS). Other projects on the table include the long term disinfection project and even a possible increase in treatment level. Operational costs will increase as these building projects come online. Short term disinfection operations will cost$10-12 million/year. This alone is a$10-12/year/SFR increase. The move from Class B 4 Class A biosolids will increase operating expenses. As options for biosolids become less available, the costs for those remaining will increase. If the District moves to more secondary treatment, fees will increase $5/year now to over$50/year by 2010 to cover the added costs. Even dry weather urban runoff diversion will cost something. There are many forward-looking projects that this Board of Directors has approved and will approve. They all take money. The users are presently underpaying for the service provided. OCSD users pay an extremely'low rate compared to other users for the services provided. The customers currently underpay for a world-class sanitation district. The current rates cannot support the high level of service or the improvements being made. By starting to pay more now, the increases will be less later on. For the OCSD to remain world-class, innovative, ahead-of-the-curve, and proactive in protecting public health and the environment, adequate financial resources must be provided. The Board of Directors and the OCSD must continue striving to maintain world-class leadership in wastewater and water resource management. Increase SFR user fees for fiscal year 2002-03 from $80/year to $128/year. This will allow the District to minimize the magnitude of the shortfall, avoid depleting reserves, keep overall costs down, decrease the amount of borrowing necessary, and continue improving and protecting the environment while responsibly providing excellent service to the users. Randy T. Fuhrman 16915 Roundhill Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92649 (714) 377-4487 v o De. a L q MEMORANDUM TO: BoEcean rs FROM: Limmunications Manager SUBJECT: uate elease Permlt/Treatment Level Issues DATE: April 24, 2002 This included information on public input is a supplement to the oral presentation you will receive at this evening's board meeting. 1. As you may recall in June 2001, a public opinion poll was completed by Probolsky and Associates on behalf of OCSD. A total of 1,500 OCSD service area voters were surveyed. The executive summary is attached. 2. During the February board committee meetings, you received input on the correspondence OCSD had received. To date, we have received phone calls, e-mails, letters, and hand delivered correspondence about the ocean release permit and our level of treatment. We have received form letters and postcards where people type their name and address at the bottom. These form letters and postcards are posted on the Surfrider Web site, Ocean Outfall Group's Web site and handed out by Earth Resource Foundation, in conjunction with Orange County Coast Keepers and the Ocean Outfall Group. As of the close of business on Tuesday, April 24, 2002, we have received correspondence from 399 people in the OCSD service area. All form letters indicate opposition to the waiver. Out of 399 letters and phone calls, 8 suggest the board should wait for the science prior to making a decision about the level of treatment. Two callers wanted to hold their input until they got accurate facts. The breakdown is as follows: Form postcards 155 Form letters 219 Non-form letters 22 Telephone messages 3 OCSD P.O.Box 8127 Fountain Valley,CA 9272MI27 (714)OU-2411 a These totals do not include correspondence we have received from outside of our service area, outside of California and outside of the United States. 3. To date, staff has provided 49 presentations to professional associations, civic and student groups, and homeowner associations. A total of 782 people attended those presentations. We have not received correspondence as a result of these presentations. 4. On April 5-7. 2002 a random survey of 650 OCSD service-area voters was conducted to ascertain their awareness of the issue and to solicit their views about the current wastewater treatment program, the potential for a full secondary treatment program and about the tradeoffs associated with these issues. Some of the key results are reported in the attached executive summary. ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT SURVEY JUNE 2001 PREPARED FOR BLAKE ANDERSON, GENERAL MANAGER SUBMITTED BY: � ROBOLSKY A S S O C I A T E S `• OPINION RESEARCH &STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS e Y II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overall public safety issues rank the highest according to the voters served by the OCSD. Education and schools are a close second. While district-wide environmental issues register with below 5%,there is a clear indication that voters in beach communities show greater concern over the environment and pollution than their neighbors. Orange County beaches get high marks with well over 50% giving positive ratings. Voters in the beach cities give an additional 10%boost to the excellent/good rating over their non-coastal neighbors. Voters in Huntington Beach,Newport Beach and Seal Beach give an overall positive rating of 67.1%,while the rest of the district's voters give the beaches 57.9%positives. The number one reason given for rating the beaches fair or poor is water quality and pollution. Beachgoers choose the beach they choose based overwhelmingly on its location. Some beachgoers say they avoid specific beaches. The number one reason they do so is water quality and pollution. This is amplified in beach communities with over 12% more likely to avoid a specific beach for this reason. Overcrowding is also a significant factor in why beachgoers choose to avoid specific beaches. Across the board, over 68% of respondents feel it is safe to go in the ocean. Beach community respondents are more likely to say they feel it is safe to go in the ocean. The vast majority of those who feel it is unsafe to go in the water cite water quality and pollution as their reason. Beach community respondents cite water quality and pollution as their reason over 10% more than others. More sewage overflows and spills are the cause of recent beach closures and postings according over 42% of district voters. Over 22%, site urban runoff as the culprit and just over 10% attribute the problem to treated sewage discharge. District respondents say that businesses especially, but also residents and government agencies share the majority of the blame for ocean pollution off the Orange County coast. Those surveyed were given a explanation of urban runoff and asked what they thought happened to the urban runoff. Over 70%believe that it drains to the ocean without any treatment. Orange County Sanitation District Survey Results Conducted by Probolsky&Associates June 2001 Page 2 of 20 9 When asked to choose between three statements about the subject of urban runoff,over 55% said they would be willing to pay to change things. Beach city voters say they are 5%more likely to pay to stop the untreated urban runoff than non-beach city voters. According to district voters,residents are the biggest cause of urban runoff. However, they say that businesses and government agencies share the blame,too. After hearing an explanation of current sewage treatment measures, over 60%feel that more needs to be done. After hearing about urban runoff and sewage treatment, respondents were asked if they felt safe from a health perspective to swim in the ocean,43%of respondents said yes and 45% said no. 10% wem unsure. We asked respondents if they believe urban runoff or treated sewage had more impact on beach closures. Of those choosing one or the other,they said two-to-one that urban runoff had a greater impact. However,nearly 64% said it was a combination of both. A majority of the voters said they would be willing to pay some extra amount of money every year to treat sewage more thoroughly. The district enjoys the confidence of a majority of the voters on the accuracy and honesty of the district's reporting results. Treating urban runoff at a price of$20 a year is agreeable to nearly 75% of the voters. Beach city voters are slightly more likely to agree to pay than those living on non-beach cities. District-wide,just over 50%of voters would not be willing to pay$75 annually to treat sewage more thoroughly. However, beach city voters are over 10% more likely to be willing to pay than non-beach city voters. Lowering the proposed cost to$50 annually attracts an additional 12% of supporting for advanced measures in sewage treatment. Orange County Sanitation District Survey Results Conducted by Probolsky&Associates June 2001 Page 3 of 20 Earth Resource Foundation / l In association with Surfrider Foundation J Orange County Coast Keepers OOG—Ocean Outfall Group 230 E. lT^Street#208 Costa Mesa,CA 92627 "No waiver please" "Do as a favor;get rid of the waiver" we want a Clean Oceanll To: Blake Anderson,General Manager Orange County Sanitation Dlsuict 10844 Ellie Ave Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 ATTN: Lisa Murphy,Communications Manager "Do us a favor,get lid of the waiver" Dear Mr.Anderson, I am writing to ask that you to"Do us a favor and get dd of the waiver". NI sew- age discharged into the ocean should be fully treated without a waiver from the 1972 Clean Water Act standards. I WANT A CLEAN AND SAFE OCEAN I Please pass this on to the Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors. Thank you, Print Name: Signature'. Address:^ _ . _. City: Stale., Zip Coda'. Additional Comments: Jensen, Lynn From: Murphy, Use Sent: Tuesday,April 09,2002 9:01 AM To: Jansen, Lynn Subject: FW:301 (h)Waiver Public Comments-Please Oppose the Waiver not in -----0r, `--, we<e-------- From: !.. Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 5:01 PM To: Lmurphyllocsd.com Subject: 301 (h) Waiver Public Comments - Please Oppose the Waiver Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors C/O Lisa Murphy, OCSD Communications Manager 10899 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA. 92708-7018 Re: 301 (h) Waiver Public Commenta-Please Oppose the Wavier Dear Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors, As a person who enjoys swimming in our oceans, I am writing to ask that you vote to oppose the extension and/or renewal of the fecal bacteria waiver (AKA 301 (h) wavier) that is now held and used by the Orange County Sanitation District. As you know, this waiver allows the sanitation district to discharge 120 million gallons a day of primary treated sewage, which contains fecal bacteria into the ocean off Huntington Beach. This sewage has been shown to make its way back towards the shoreline. I'm very upset that this sewage is not fully treated to the standards of the Clean Water Act, which require full secondary treatment. I am totally opposed to undertreated sewage being pumped into the ocean and potentially exposing me to. sewage products when I surf and recreate in the ocean. I am confident you are too. I support clean oceans across the country and the world. I request that you do too. With elections just around the corner, I am positive your constituents will be watching closely. You can do your part by opposing the Orange Sanitation District's request to renew their fecal bacteria waiver (301-(h) waiver) . Thank you for voting for a clean ocean and for opposing the waiver. Sincerely, 1 Preview your letter,print it out, hit the button to go back to edit Page 1 of 1 PRINT letter from LAWetlands.org 1 � ' Orange County Sanitation District 2- Board of Directors Chairman Eckenrode --T 10844 Ellis Ave. �— Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 Tele:(714)962-2411,FAX(714)962-3954 RE:Orange County:get rid of the 301(h)sewage waiver 04/05/2002 Dear Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors: Orange County Sanitation District has a waiver allowing it to avoid full secondary treatment of 240,000,000 gallons per day of wastewater.All other districts our sin have given up the waiver and gone to full secondary treatment. Secondary treatment removes 90%or more of live bacteria,virus and other pathogens. After this basic"big hump", further treatment to the potable level is cheaper and easier,making the outfall obsolete. Potable water is used at most of the 16,000 sewage treatment districts to refill wetlands and discharge into rivers and lakes. Even Los Angeles has done so,bringing their rivers back to life. More than 16,000 other sewage dischargers,even Los Angeles,have gone to full secondary treatment,the basic in sewage treatment standards. The conditions under which the "waiver"were granted include no harm to fisheries,recreation,or habitat. Yet we now have evidence that the sewage wastefield,even in high concentrations,intrudes close to shore. It's a lot easier to treat and properly dispose of solid waste materials--sludge and biosolids—on the land.Sludge should be treated on-site to the"A"level,and all operations should use air scrubbers. Current wastewater has concentrations of live bacteria of about 40,000,000 per 100 ml(about half a cup)and an unknown amount of virus. After initial diffusion of 190 to 1,the original 240 million gallons per day swells to over 35 billion gallons per day,and the concentration is still a public health menace. Evidence from Los Angeles,and elsewhere,suggests that full secondary treatment results in dramatic improvement in fisheries and Ocean quality. We should reclaim as much water and solids as possible from our sewage before it is dumped into the Ocean. We no longer can afford to treat the Ocean as a trash can. On Feb. 11,2002,and in tests done in 1996 and w early as 1987,evidence shows that the wastefield plume comes alarmingly close to shore. Sincerelvn (Signed Name: Address: City,Zip: Telephone: Emai i http://oak.he.net/cgi-bin/suid/—Ia/helpurix.pi 4/5/02 w 7 What You Can Do to xnvw.stop).,heWaiver_co.m 1 Call Blake Anderson, 714-593-7110 tell the Orange County Savings,District that you want OC to follow the lead of the Coastal Commission and give up our waiver.Ask why Orange County,believes that full secondary treatment is-unnecessary' although everyone else our size on the Coast thinks it's necessary. 2. Attend the 0051) Board of Directors meeting on Wednesday, APRIL 24, 2002 at 7:00 P.N. 903 c U Evclid Offramp j m ELLIS AVE Gaard Shack Netting 10e"0Y Ellis orange County Sanhatien Diof lef located ad 10844 Ellis in Fount®Valley.From the San Diego Fwy South,take the Euclid offramp.Go straight at the light into the Sanitation District,veer to the right,pill rap at the guard at.&,the guard will show you the way to the Meeting. 3. Write a letter from www.StopTheWaiver.com or just send this: Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors Chairman Eckcarode 10944 Ellis Ave.Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 Te1c:(714)962-2411,FAX(714)962.3954 RE:Orange County:Get rid of the 301(h)sewage waiver_/_/2002 Dcar Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors: Orange County Sanitation District has a waiver allowing it to avoid full secondary imatment of 240,000,000 gallons per day of wastewater.All other districts our size have given up the waiver and gone to full secondary treatment, which removes 90%or more of live bacteria,virus and other pathogens.The Coastal Commission has ruled this is the minimum treatment required by the Coastal Act. Sincerely, (Signed)_ Name: Phone/Email Address: _City,_. - ' Or mail to www.Stop-rhoWaiver.cren P.O. Box 2911, Seal Beach 90740 Presented to Orange County Board oJDirectors April 24, 2002 a 7 OCSD Telephone Survey The Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors will soon make a decision about whether to reapply for a federal permit to continue its current level of treatment or to apply for a permit to change its level of treatment. OCSO staff have been communicating this issue to the public and key community groups over the past several months to both educate the public about the choices facing OCSO and to solicit input on the decision. It was recently decided to conduct a random survey of 650 OCSD service-area voters to ascertain their awareness of the issue and to solicit their views about the current wastewater treatment program, the potential for a full secondary treatment program and about the tradeoffs associated with these issues. Some of the key results are reported below: • Wastewater-Treatment Awareness. Just 17% of the public indicated any open- ended awareness of the wastewater-treatment and ocean-release issue. After being prompted specifically with a summary of the current wastewater treatment system, 54% indicate some level of awareness of it. • Opinion without Information. Without additional information about the subject, 53% of those who claim awareness of the wastewater program indicate support for the current system and current level of treatment,while 27%oppose it and 20%are either undecided or have no opinion about this issue. • Opinions with Information. After hearing some of the key elements of the current program and current level of treatment, support increases to 72%,with 21%opposed and 7% undecided or having no option. • Key Information and Facts. A variety of important public education issues were Identified in the survey. Some examples of important facts to communicate to the public(and the level of support for the program based on this information)are as follows: • Water quality is tested constantly to ensure there is no impact on public health or the marine environment. 185% Support Program] • Before wastewater is released more than four miles offshore, 100% is treated onshore and all materials larger than a grain of sand are removed. [78% Support Program] • The program is conducted under the approval and oversight of the U.S. EPA and the State Water Resources Control Board. [74% Support Program] • Concern About Beach Closures/Cause of Closures. Not surprisingly, the public is quite concerned about recent beach closures (89% Extremely or Very Concerned). However,just four percent believe offshore releases of treated wastewater are the cause of these closures. • Treatment Trade-offs and Choices. Every OCSD Board decision about level of treatment involves tradeoffs and choices in terms of sewer service rates, air pollution, truck traffic and other issues. The survey Is extremely clear on this issue— rateoavers want OCSD to have clear and convincing scientific Proof that it is the Prerenredro Orange County Board of Directors April 24, 2002 v P cause of beach closures before it decides to chance the level of treatment or substantially increase sewer rates (84% chose this option rather than simply going to full secondary in hopes that it might help reduce closures). Questions about the survey should be directed to Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager 714/593-7120, Imurphy@ocsd.com. Orange County Sanitation District Telephone Survey 1j'�hl Presented by Porter Novelli OCSD Telephone Survey Background • Conducted by Voter / Consumer Research • Fielded April 5 — 7, 2002 • 650Interviews (500 Random, 150 Over sample) Job Ratings Excellent / Good Fair / Poor SARWQB 17% 16% OC Sups 25% 46% U.S. EPA 33% 43% OCSD 47% 25% Survey Question "How do you feel about taxes and fees for sewage treatment and garbage disposal?" • 2% Too Low • 31% Too High • 56% Just About Right 2 Unaided Awareness "Heard or read anything about local water quality issues?" • 17% Outfall Issue • 14% Urban Runoff Issues • 3% Beach Closure Issues • 66% Not Heard / Other / Don't Know MEWMMOMMMAIMPUM "OCSD treats wastewater that comes from homes and businesses in O.C. After it treats wastewater it releases it through a pipeline located on the ocean floor four and a half miles off the coast under the approval of the U.S. EPA and the State Water Quality Control Board. Were you aware of this issue before I read you this information?" • 54% Aware • 45% Not Aware 3 r Aware Opinion "And does this sound like something you would support or something that you would oppose?" • 53% Support • 27% Oppose • 21% Don't Know "When you think about the offshore release of treated wastewater, which one of the following is your primary concern?" • 2% Impact on fishing and watercraft • 4% Cost of program • 31% Impact on marine life • 50% Impact on beaches and public health • 13% No Concern I Don't Know 4 Opinion Based on Factual ^T� Information • 74% Support— Conducted under US EPA / State Water Resources Approval • 77% Support— Studies show more marine life around pipeline now than when program started • 78% Support— Before wastewater released, 100% treated to remove materials larger than a grain of sand • 85% Support— Water quality tested constantly to ensure no impact on public health or marine life Opinion Based on Informations "Based on the information you've just heard do you support the release of treated wastewater 4.5 miles offshore or do you oppose it?" • 72% Support • 21% Oppose • 7% Don't Know 5 Question on Beach Closures "Thinking about the issue of beach closures, how concerned are you personally about this issue?" • 47% Extremely Concerned • 42% Somewhat Concerned • 6% Somewhat Unconcerned • 4% Not Concerned <3 Question on Cause of Beach Closures "Which of the following do you think is the cause of closures?" • 26% Urban Runoff • 18% Outdated, leaking sewer pipes along beach • 4% Offshore releases of treated wastewater • 43% All of the above 6 Treatment Choices "Some people have suggested that the release of treated wastewater 4.5 miles offshore is the cause of recent beach closures. They have suggested that OCSD change the way it treats wastewater and go to a program called 'full secondary treatment' to reduce the chance it might be causing closures. I'd like to read you two options now facing OCSD and I'd like you to tell me which one you personally favor..." Treatment Choices Option 1: Go to new treatment program at a cost of about$400 million and increase residential sewer bills 50-100% because it might help reduce beach closures. Option 2: Conduct scientific studies to determine the cause of beach closures and then decide whether to change the current level of treatment or increase sewer bills. • 8% Option 1 • 84% Option 2 7 Opinion Based on Impacts of Full Secondary--- -­ • 73% Support— Reduce bacteria & viruses in wastewater released offshore • 68% Support— Fewer microscopic solid materials in treated wastewater • 57% Oppose — 3,000 additional truck trips yearly to haul additional solids • 72% Oppose — 50-100% Increase in sewer rates • 74% Oppose— 20+ tons of additional air pollutants from trucks Credible Source of Information on This ' Credible Not Credible OOG 8% 4% Surfrider Foundation 31% 14% OC Coastal Cities 38% 14% OCSD 67% 12% US EPA 72% 14% Scripps Institution 72% 2% of Oceanography 8 Agree / Disagree • 68% Agree — Don't mind paying higher bills if it means some improvement in the way wastewater is treated • 58% Agree — Experts at EPA and State Water Resources Board should decide if it's ok to released treated wastewater offshore — not local environmental groups • 93% Agree — Before OCSD raises my sewer rates 50-100% they better make sure they have sound scientific evidence that it's needed • Low Awareness • 2-1 Initial support • 4% Think offshore releases cause closures • 72% Support increases with education • 85% Support for "monitoring" and 74% Support "independent oversight" • 84% Choose "Scientific studies and proof of need" vs. 8% "Full secondary because it might help' 9 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Lisa Murphy Communications Manager =z<++ (714)593-7120 Phone -0a s (714) 394-0734 Cell www.ocsd.com 9« O v�iet n Survey Reveals Public Support for Offshore Releases of Treated 72"I+ Wastewater 'reef arbess: elis Aaw� an Vdlcj(Ol 92708-70+8 Residents Oppose Rate Hikes That Would Accompany Alternative Treatment Program .auee FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA — April 24, 2002 — The Orange County Sanitation District M today released results of a new telephone survey of service-area residents that 'a. ;Park ess showed strong public support for the continued release of treated wastewater four n vaiiey FiOe`On and one-half miles off the coast and strong opposition to the rate hikes that would V� Q n �h vNre accompany changes to the current level of treatment. '; to rghra s La i�r.e t t Paxh o-arge The random telephone survey of 650 residents in north and central Orange County riaenia ,•.' e d revealed a low open-ended awareness of the current wastewater-treatment Starxm T tin program (17% of the public) with initial support of 53% and opposition of 27%. Mila Park W W Ur After hearing more about the current program, support increased to 72% against ar: 21% opposition. OistrirYs (lsta Nesa ".Md. at -- more-- g Otse rigs �irHre rmr:ai w r 2-2.2.2 Residents surveyed indicated strong opposition to the rate hikes that would accompany a significant change in the current level of treatment. When asked if they would support a 50-100% hike in sewer rates to move to a "full secondary' level of treatment on the chance that it might reduce beach closures, 93% indicated that OCSD must have sound scientific evidence it was causing beach closures before significantly raising rates. "The Sanitation District faces a critical choice in the near future; said Norm Eckenrode, chairman of the 25-member OCSD Board of Directors. "Do we continue our current level of treatment or do we move to a system of 'full secondary'? If we move to full secondary, we will have to raise sewer rates as much as 100 percent. Today, the average resident pays$108 a year. Before we make a decision to double rates we want to be certain we've got scientific proof that a multi-million dollar change in level of treatment would make a substantial difference in ocean water quality. To date we haven't seen any such evidence. "It's clear from this survey that our ratepayers want the same kind of proof we're looking for before they'll accept the kind of rate hikes needed to fund a significant change in level of treatment.- --more-- 3.3.3-3 When asked to choose between 50-100% rate hikes to fund full secondary treatment or the need for additional scientific inquiries and studies to determine a cause of beach closures, ratepayers were clear — 84% want scientific evidence that this change is needed before they will accept such a dramatic increase. Only 8% supported the hike in the absence of scientific evidence on the cause of closures. For the past several months, proponents of full secondary treatment have been conducting a letter writing and e-mail campaign to urge OCSD to implement a change in treatment prior to the completion of scientific studies. Some 399 form letters have been received to date. "Like everyone, we're extremely concerned about the quality of ocean water," said Eckenrode. "We've been conducting ocean water quality tests under the guidance of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the past 25 years. The results of a $5.1 million water quality study are being Finalized right now to provide new information on this subject. We've asked independent experts at The Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the marine scientists from the U.S. Naval Academy to review the results and report on them to us. We're hopeful that these efforts will provide important new information about this issue." The OCSD telephone survey was fielded by Voter Consumer Research under the guidance of the Irvine office of Porter Novelli. The survey was fielded over the April 5 through 7 period and included a random sample of 500 service area residents with an 4444 additional 150 interviews conducted among residents of OCSD's coastal cities, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach and Newport Beach. The Orange County Sanitation District is responsible for safely collecting, treating, and disposing wastewater. It is a special district, separate from the County of Orange or any city government, established under the State Health and Safety Code, to provide sewerage service to a specific geographic area. The Orange County Sanitation District is governed by a 25-member board of directors comprised of representatives of each local sewering agency or cities within our 470-square-mile service area. STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, 1 hereby certify that the Notice and Agenda for the Regular Board Meeting of Orange County Sanitation I District to be held on Y 200Q,, was duly posted for public 1 inspection in the main lobby of the Districts' offices on Z , 200 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 200?. Penny M. Kyl Secretary Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District GAWP.DTMADMIMBSWORMS\AGENDA CERTIFICATION.000 i " ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT April 17, 2002 pMne: (714)962-2411 To the Chair and Members rnn' of the Board of Directors (714)962d 56 www.acui.mm Subject: Board Letter ,w.mng addles.: Pep B.8127 Fountain Valle,CA 9 2 7 26-8127 The following are items that you may find interesting. If you need additional .D.et.ddrw..; information on any of the items, please call me. 10644 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley.CA 9270BJ018 San Diego's Waiver Application: Coastal Commission Says "No". California Regional Water Quality Control Board Says "Yes" and EPA Says "Tentatively Manb Yes". Meanwhile,the Resource Secretary and Cal EPA Secretary ask Coastal Agencies 41 Commission to explain and lustily its action. Cities Last week, two California regulatory boards took completely contradictory positions Anaheim on the same matter. The California Coastal Commission voting 6-1, (with five Be Buena Pa.rt commissioners absence), found that San Diego's pending ocean discharge permit to cyPrew be inconsistent with the provisions of California's Coast Act. The California Regional FOY"L .1 Full ertonuon Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, voting 8-0 (with one seat unfilled), F 6ardan pave approved San Diego's pending ocean discharge permit. Several months ago,the H.ncngmn 6eacn Regional Administrator of the federal Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, wine Le Hanra issued a tentative decision of approval for San Diego. On April 16, California's two La Palm. highest ranking natural resource and environmental protection officials called the �.. Ne Lon Alamims Beach omm any g Commissions action"without legal basis". Orange Placenta Everyone watching San Diego's story should note that the California Coastal Santa Ana seal Beach Commission did two things that are not supported by the administrative record. First, s�^�^ in direct contraction to staffs recommendation that analyzed the technical and legal Tusun Vlla Perk fads of the matter, the CCC found the permit to be inconsistent. From what we have Y4 a bnde been able to gather, nothing in the administrative record provides scientific or legal County of orange support to the Commission's finding. For that reason, San Diego will undoubtedly pursue one of several avenues of appeal available to it, assuming they even have to. S.nitery Di.c,dct. It is very likely that the Commission itself will have to re-consider its action and reverse itself. The reason is because California Resources Secretary Mary Nichols Cue. M... and California Environmental Protection Secretary Winston Hickox have now written Midway or, the Commission to say that the finding is"without any legal basis" and that the action Water Districts is"clearly beyond the scope of the Commission's authority". rnne Rancn The Commission's second action has to do with us. Several members of the Commission opined in open session and as a matter of public record that the Orange County Sanitation District's future permit application should not be granted if it is based on Section 301(h)of the federal Clean Water Act. What is interesting about that is the Commissioners are apparently prejudging a possible future situation without the benefit of anything before them on the matter—with the possible exception of a few newspaper reports. We conclude they have no informed opinion T.maintain world-class I..da,h,m waslewater and water resource management. Members of the Board Page 2 April 17, 2002 on the matter because our ocean discharge permit will not be in front of them until next year and there is nothing for them to read and consider today. Any direct implications about San Diego's story that can be applied to Orange County's situation are speculative at best. So let me leave it at this: the Orange County Sanitation District is obligated to submit an application to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region and the federal Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, by the first week of December 2002. The California Coastal Commission will be asked some time later to make a finding with respect to the permit's consistency with the California Coastal Act. Whatever terms and conditions that are proposed in our permit application (be it Section 301(h)-based or not), I can assure you that it will be my intention, and that of my staff, that whatever we propose will be in full compliance with all applicable provisions of the federal Clean Water Act, the Califomia Ocean Plan, and the California Coast Act. That is my pledge to you. Northam California Cities Staking a Claim to "Area-af-Origin" Water In 1931, California enacted a law that restricted the ability of one entity to remove water from one drainage area and move it to another. This was a direct response to the City of Los Angeles Owens River Project that successfully moved water over two hundred miles from the eastern Sierras to the coastal plain of Southern California. It is hard today to fully appreciate what a significant engineering,financial, economic and political achievement that project has turned out to be. It forever changed the future of California. For Los Angeles' place in the world economy and a place to live and work, it was good news. For the environmental assets, communities and farming interests of the Owens River Valley that were dislocated and lost, it was bad news. And it was largely from the perspective of the Owens River Valley and the other agricultural communities of California that the 1931 Act was created. In the ensuing years, the Act has had limited impact on the California water picture—until most recently. The news is that Fairfield, Benicia, Vacaville and other communities will ask the California Water Resources Control Board to grant them access to water to which they believe they have superior rights and to limit the exportation of that water to other areas of California. They are asserting these superior rights based on the principle and the law of"area-of-origin". They believe that the water that naturally flows to them belongs to them. It is unclear whether these communities will be successful in their attempt to assert superior rights based on this principle. This is because agreement on the facts of the matter—does the water in question "naturally' flow to them or notes open to serious interpretive latitude. Proponents and opponents will ask, 'What degree of proximity must a person have to the water in question to assert that it is really theirs, based on this"area-of-origin"theory? Does Members of the Board Page 3 April 17, 2002 the water have to be under your feet or running in a stream at your front door to be yours? Or is it enough to simply be in the large-scale watershed through which the water runs to assert a superior right?" Look for years and years of administrative and legal wrangling before this is settled. But in the meantime,the point of sharing this story is to once again emphasize the long-term uncertainty that Southern California faces in successfully importing the majority of its water supply from watersheds that are great distances from it. I believe that we will fight and struggle with other competing interests for the water we Import from the Colorado River, the Bay-Delta,the Eastern Sierra, and newly suggested transfer points well into the foreseeable future. More than a hundred years ago, Mark Twain was right when he said: whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting. He'll be right a hundred years from now. It is for this reason that Southern California and Orange County must consider all policies, practices, and projects that promote water efficiency and water self-reliance. It is for this reason that projects like GW RS have such appeal and importance. It is for this reason that we, as policy makers and staff, must do everything we can within our power to make water reclamation and water conservation a long-term reality here in Orange County. We really have no other reliable choice. Inland Empire Composting Receives a Notice of Violation You may recall that in February the Sanitation District discontinued our serious due diligence efforts on the possibility of our purchase of a large site in Colton for the construction and operation of a state-of-the-art biosolids facility. Our dealings were with the Inland Empire Composting Company (IEC). IEC's existing operating permits allow it to recycle only green waste including lawn clippings and other yard waste, which it does under contracts with a majority of local cities in San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Recently, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWOCB) ordered IEC to stop accepting potentially dangerous material, i.e., wet paper pulp that could contaminate regional water supplies. The Environmental Health Division of the San Bernardino County Health Department has been conducting monthly inspections of IEC, but records going back five years indicate that the county has never cited IEC. These records show no problem with the composting process. IEC had proposed to partner with the District to develop a biosolids composting facility that would be called Inland Composting and Organic Recycling (ICOR), at a nearby site in the City of Colton. In spite of having a certified Environmental Impact Report and a Conditional Use Permit from the City of Colton, the recent Information regarding Improper operation have jeopardized the development of the proposed ICOR indoor biosolids composting plant in Colton. Following the decision to terminate payment of an "opportunity fee"to continue Its relationship with ICOR, staff Members of the Board Page 4 April 17, 2002 continued a low-level due diligence review of the ICOR project. The recent findings of the RW OCB investigation of the IEC facility raise serious doubts about the future of the ICOR project and our confidence in the project proponents. District staff has removed all proposed monies from the capital improvement budget for ICOR in anticipation that the District will not be participating as a partner or owner in ICOR. In the future, District's staff may propose that ICOR manage District's biosolids If ICOR develops its own compost facility and has exhibited a record of compliance with all applicable regulations. Board Committee Agendas with Agenda Reports are now available On-line New to Orange County Sanitation District's web site(www.00SD.coml is the ability to retrieve OMTS, FAHR, PDC, Steering, and Ad Hoc Committee meeting agendas with attached agenda reports. Simply click on the Board of Directors link and navigate to the Committee Meeting Agendas. Select the Committee package you would like to review and you will see the blue hyperlinked agenda reports. It's that easy) Now, anyone can go online to view the Committee packages, as well as the specified agenda reports (excluding some attachments). Blosolids and Manure Management in Western San Bernardino County About two years ago, the Inland Empire Utilities Agency(IEUA) began a comprehensive planning and analysis effort to review biosolids and manure management options for the Chino Basin portion of the watershed. It serves the western communities of San Bernardino County. Underlying this service area is the Chino Basin. The Chino Basin is one of the largest groundwater sources in Southern California. The area is also home to the largest concentration of dairies in the world consisting of over 400,000 cows and calves. IEUA's goal is to protect the region's groundwater while cost-effectively recycling organic waste into fertilizers and to produce energy. IEUA has developed a facility utilizing wastewater treatment anaerobic digester technology to treat manure and produce methane for energy production. IEUA is also co-composting manure with biosolids in order to create a product that can be marketed and thus removed from the watershed. Newport Beach Sewer Line Cleanings Determined to be Okav for Landfill Disposal The law firm of Rutan&Tucker has recently opined that Newport Beach's past practice of disposing of material removed from the City's sewer lines into the City's Corporation Yard (after dewatering and commingling this dewatered material with other dewatered material from City storm drain and beach cleaning operations at the Members of the Board Page 5 April 17,2002 City's Corporation Yard), Into the Frank R. Bowerman does not violate any statute or the regulations governing the operation of the landfill. The law firm based their opinion on their belief that"the material originating from the Utilities Department operations is classified properly as"dewatered sewage sludge"and that"the disposal of the "dewatered sewage sludge" in the Bowerman Landfill, are not prohibited by the terms of the permits governing the operation of the landfill." I bring this Information to your attention because you may remember the significant news coverage about this practice that appeared in the print media several weeks ago. Readers of those reports were left with the impression that Newport Beach's past practices were reckless at best and illegal at worst. There will be more news on this over time, I guess. The point we should all remember is to withhold our quick judgments and conclusions until all of the facts of any environmental policy question are known. California Department of Pesticide Regulation Acts to Protect Compost from Herbicide The law of unintended consequences strikes again: clopyralid-contaminated compost(residue from the herbicide clopyralid) has turned up in 75 of California's 100 composting sites threatening the rapidly growing composting industry and the waste recycling projects that depend on composting. Used to control broadleaf weeds (e.g., dandelions and thistles), clopyralid is a low-toxicity chemical that poses little hazard to people, animals, and most vegetation. However, research has shown that even low levels of clopyralid in compost can damage some vegetables such as potatoes, peppers, tomatoes and beans. Clopyralid has found its way into compost through the use of grass clippings, stable sweepings and manure as feedstocks for compost. If clopyralid contamination of compost persists, it could ruin the compost industry that helps to divert more than a quarter of California's waste stream away to landfills. This would trigger fines for cities and county governments for non-compliance with the 50%waste diversion requirements of AS 939. For the Sanitation District, composting with green waste feedstocks provides an important potential Class A biosolids management option for the District. As a result of these recent research findings, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) has begun action against the residential use of 15 herbicide products containing clopyralid, citing their potential hazard to compost. DPR has targeted products that are intended for use on residential lawns in California, since green waste from those areas is a common source of compost. DPR will take no action against clopyralid products intended for other areas, including farmland, Members of the Board Page 6 April 17, 2002 rangeland, and forests. This action should preserve composting as a viable green waste and biosolids recycling option. EPA's Office of Inspector General Releases Biosolids Land Application Status Report On March 28, 2002, EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) released a Status Report on land application of biosolids. The report was prepared in response to a series of allegations raised in March 2001 by the National W histleblower Center (NWC). According to the status report's Executive Summary, the allegations by the Center were based largely on issues raised by a single EPA research scientist. A previous audit by the DIG (March 2000)found "inadequacies" in EPA's management and enforcement of the biosolids program. The DIG Status Report addressed the following seven areas of concern. • The current status of EPA and State biosolids program staff: Some officials have expressed concerns that EPA is not dedicating sufficient staffing and financial resources to the program. • Delegation of the biosolids program to the states: The Clean Water Act gives EPA authority to delegate the biosolids program to States, but little progress has been made thus far. • The extent to which biosolids are land applied in seven states:There can be a wide variation in how States manage biosolids. For seven States from which DIG received information, the OIG noted significant differences in their sludge management practices. • The response to and tracking health complaints: The NWC sent DIG a list of 21 complaints related to sludge exposure and contended EPA failed to investigate any of the cases. Of the 21 cases, OIG determined that EPA and/or a State agency only investigated 14 • Risk assessment and pathogen testing concerns: Discussions about whether research is needed to address risk assessment uncertainties and pathogen issues regarding the safety of land application of biosolids have contributed to the controversy regarding biosolids. • EPA's relationship with a professional association: The NWC expressed concern about EPA's support of the Water Environment Federation, a professional association of the waste water treatment industry. • Public acceptance concerns: Despite Federal regulatory safeguards, public acceptance of land application of biosolids has been mixed and public scrutiny of the practice continues.There are public concerns regarding the impact of biosolids land application on health, quality of life, and natural resources. These concerns have led a number of counties and municipalities Members of the Board Page 7 April 17, 2002 to ban or restrict the land application of biosolids. Public perception regarding biosolids land application can have a significant impact on the implementation of the program. The OIG report summarizes the issues raised but does not include findings and recommendations and is neither an audit nor an evaluation. The OIG report presents no findings and no recommendations. An electronic copy of the report can be obtained from District's staff or found at the following web site: http,/Avww.epa.gov/olgeaith/eroom.htm So, what does Sanitation District staff think of the findings of the DIG report? To a large extent, the areas of concern relate to adequate oversight and regulation. We have long recognized the importance of insuring the proper operation of biosolids management practices. It is for this reason that: • We track and audit the practices of all of our contractors and, • With others around the country, have developed an"Environmental Management System"that is a comprehensive program of standard practices, independent auditing standards and open reporting requirements. District Awarded Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from Government Finance Officers Association Once again the District has been awarded the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award, which is the highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting and represents a significant achievement. The Government Finance Officers Association also presented a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Preparation to the individual designated as being primarily responsible for the agency achieving the award. This year the certificate is presented to Brad Cagle, Accounting Manager. Congratulations, Brad, for your leadership and hard work on the 2001-02 Budget. Sanitation District's Board of Directors to Receive Safety and Health Division Award from Its Own Staff As part of the District's ongoing efforts to provide every employee a safe workplace, the Board of Directors adopted a new version of the Injury and Illness and Prevention Program (IIPP)as required by Cal-OSHA. The new program was adopted at the February 27, 2002 Board meeting. The IIPP restates the District's ongoing commitment to safety and health and introduces several new safety and health policies and formalizes and reintroduces Members of the Board Page 8 April 17, 2002 several existing safety and health policies. One new program is a Rewards and Recognition Program to recognize individuals who go "above and beyond"their normal job duties to support the district's safety program and reward them for their effort. The Safety Division staff would like to recognize and reward you, our own Board of Directors,for your on-going support of the Safety and Health Program here at the district. In this spirit, we will be giving you each a Safety and Health Division award coffee mug at the April Board meeting. A New Face in the Communications Division Jennifer Cabral, public information specialist,joined the communications department on Monday, April 8. She is a recent graduate of California State University, Fullerton with a bachelors degree in Communications with an emphasis in public relations. She is responsible for the News Pipeline newsletter. Also, she will assist the communications team with external communications, including fact sheet writing, public outreach programs and event coordination. The ocean release issues speakers bureau continues to provide presentations to civic and community groups regarding OCSD treatment operations and compliance with the Clean Water Act. SARI Citizens Advisory Committee Activities The Santa Ana River Interceptor Citizens Advisory Committee met on Tuesday, April 9 for a project update. Information was shared about the maintenance project completed in November, the status of the alignment alternatives and the work of the expert review panel. The CAC was provided dates of the Joint Management Team meetings on April 16 and 30, where the expert panel review work will be shared with OCSD and Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority elected representatives and staff. Another CAC meeting will be scheduled after the Joint Management Team review, anticipated for mid May. When work is complete on the alternative review regular CAC meetings will be scheduled. Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) Assembly Ken Maddox's office has amended AB 1969 to make the bill specific to Orange County Sanitation District, rather than all California wastewater agencies operating under a 301(h) permit. Sanitation District staff, our consultants, CASA and Members of the Board Page 9 April 17, 2002 others are evaluating the bill. We believe that it is flawed on a number of grounds and it will be on that basis that we will make some of our comments. We oppose the bill. However, the State may establish itself as the primary grantor for new treatment facilities here. The Legislative Counsel says that, "the waste discharge requirements established by the bill for the district would impose a state-mandated local program" and that"the California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies...for certain costs mandated by the state" We will be certain to assertain what they really means. A letter to the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee opposing AB 1969 has been sent by Irvine Ranch Water District. There are additional letters of opposition being drafted by agencies, including the city of La Habra and the city of Placentia, and the California Association of Sanitary Agencies. The bill will be heard by the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee on Tuesday, April 23. Blake Anderson and Norm Eckenrode will testify before the committee in Sacramento. Community Outreach Activities: • OCSD Celebrates Earth Day 2002 Early in the morning of April 13, OCSD staff hosted an information booth at the City of Placentia's Earth Week Run. There were even a few celebrities in the crowd— Norman Eckenrode and Bill Mills! • Biosolids OCSD's b!osollds management staff is spreading the word about the basics of biosolids and OCSD's land application program at a Biosolids Earth Day Celebration on April 22, in the OCSD laboratory main entry from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. • May is Water Awareness Month Are you a survivor? OCSD's Wastewater Survivor obstacle course is. It was a big hit at last year's Children's Water Education Festival, so we are back, doing an encore performance on May 7-8 at Hidden Valley Park in Irvine. This interactive relay teaches kids about the vital role wastewater treatment plays In protecting our environment. • Save the Date- May 18 - OCSD Open House OCSD will be hosting an Open House on Saturday, May 18, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. in conjunction with the Orange County Water District and Metropolitan Water District of Orange County. Information booths, displays, activities and plant tours will provide opportunities for the public to learn more about the importance of Members of the Board Page 10 April 17, 2002 wastewater treatment Issues in Orange County. Plan on joining us for a round of Texas-style horseshoes! - Managing the Mean Meth Blues This may sound like a shameless promotion of the interests of one of my senior staff members. But this next piece Is here because it's a cool human Interest story and it promotes education. So here goes: Cheryl Ooten (wife of Bob) has written a book entitled Managing the Mean Math Blues. Due out in early June from Prentice Hall, the book encourages fearful and reluctant math students with study tips, test-taking strategies, and methods for changing negative thinking about math. Both a math teacher and psychotherapist, Cheryl has field-tested her ideas for over 25 years in the math classroom. On the math faculty of Santa Ana College, she has presented math anxiety and test-taking workshops for Santa Ana River Basin Section and the California Water Environment Association, as well as working with our own maintenance staff before they take state certification exams. The book Is written primarily for adult math students. It combines Cheryl's personal experience, Interviews with successful math students and tutors, non-math professionals, cognitive psychotherapy techniques, brain-friendly study strategies, and songs about math. Cheryl says that writing and publishing this book has helped her push past her own limits and she hopes it will help readers push past their own. Its amazing to me how often I see math anxiety get in the way of personal, educational and professional goals. Anything that can provide breakthrough on that Is Important. That Is something worth noting—and reporting. Odor Complaints I have attached a copy of the monthly odor complaints received by the Control Center. Published Articles of Interest I've included copies of articles from various sources that you may find interesting. I would appreciate your feedback on receiving these articles, as there have become so many recently that It is difficult to determine which ones are most informative to you. If you would like additional information on any of the above items, please call me. Members of the Board Page 11 April 17, 2002 Blake P. Anderson General Manager BPA:jt G\W RDTAUDMIMOMLLETTERS TO THE BOARMOM24W BOARD LETTEP DOC Attachments Los Angeles Times: 2 State Officials Blast Panel's Decision on San Diego Sewage Page 1 of 2 Coo .COR1. OPERA . . CALL 1-800-346-737r 1 - httn://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000027461a rlp 7.story THESTATE 2 State Officials Blast Panel's Decision on San Diego Sewage Environment: They say Coastal Commission overstepped its authority in rejecting the city's bid for waiver extension. ByTONYPERRY TIMES STAFF WRITER April 17 2002 SAN DIEGO --Two officials of the Davis administration Tuesday blasted as "without any legal basis" the decision of the state Coastal Commission last week to oppose the city's bid for an extension of a waiver from the federal Clean Water Act. San Diego Mayor Dick Murphy and other city officials have said the Coastal Commission's action, if not overturned,could force the city to spend billions of dollars installing needless upgrades to the treatment plants that pump partially treated sewage into the ocean. In a strongly worded letter,California Resources Secretary Mary Nichols and Environmental Protection Secretary Winston Hickox told commission members that their action was "clearly beyond the scope of the commission's authority and without any legal basis." The two suggested that San Diego be allowed to resubmit its application immediately so that the commission can reconsider its action.The commission's next meeting is in San Diego next month. Commission Chairwoman Sara Wan of Malibu said she had not read the letter and could not comment. Commissioner Shirley Dettloff, a strong opponent of the San Diego application, said she did not believe the commission had done anything wrong and that rejecting the San Diego waiver application was a step toward "ensuring clean water, which I thought was supposed to be our No. 1 priority." "We felt we made a very responsible decision," said Dettloff, a member of the Huntington Beach City Council. "We're only asking for secondary [treatment of sewage],which most districts already have." Officials in San Diego, where the Clean Water Act waiver has been an issue for two decades,were exultant at the Nichols-Hickox letter. "I used to serve on the Coastal Commission," said Councilman Byron Wear, "so I can safely say that this group seems to be out of touch with reality at times." http://www.latimes.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=la%2D000027461aprl7 4/17/2002 Los Angeles Times: 2 State Officials Blast Panel's Decision on San Diego Sewage Page 2 of 2 The controversy—with legal,political and environmental aspects—could foreshadow an even more contentious debate next year, when the Orange County Sanitation District is also expected to request an extension of its Clean Water Act waiver. With seven of its 12 members in attendance,the commission voted 6 to 1 at last week's meeting in Santa Barbara to reject San Diego's request to back its bid for another five-year waiver. Fortified with studies from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography,San Diego asserts that it deserves a waiver extension because sewage from its plants is not harming fish and other aquatic life. The Clean Water Act requires that sewage treatment operators send sewage through a secondary treatment.But it contains a provision for a waiver if a city can prove that its sewage is not harming the environment. The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,reviewing the same data provided to the Coastal Commission,has tentatively approved San Diego for a waiver extension.The Coastal Commission staff also recommended approval. By law,the commission can determine whether the city's waiver application is consistent with the Coastal Commission Act. In rejecting the San Diego application,the commission suggested it would reconsider if the city agreed to increase monitoring of the effects of its sewage outflow,reduce the amount of solid waste and make greater use of reclaimed water. But Nichols and Hickox said the commission has no authority to set conditions on waiver applications. The commission's action was roundly criticized by two Democratic lawmakers from San Diego,Rep. Bob Filner and Assemblyman Juan Vargas,both of whom have worked on the city's behalf to secure a waiver. Also last week,the Regional Water Quality Control Board endorsed the waiver application. Times staff writer Seems Mehta contributed to this report. If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at latimes.conVarchives. For information about reprinting this article, go to www.lats.com/riehts. httpJ/www.latimes.com/templates/niiselprintstory.ispOslug=la%2DO00027461aprl7 4/17/2002 With Growth, Northern Cities Stake a Claim to More Water Resources'Invoking requires builders of 500 or more harm Sierra lakes and trigger ex- fl1e70 -0year homes to prove they've got ad- plosive growth have challenged �eaT equate water supplies. That re� the decision in court. `area-of-0rigin'statutes gmremmt, which took effect in Areabfarig n laws date to 1931, January,will force many commum- only a few years after desperate Could shrink Southern ties to legally quantify their water Owens Valley farmers dynamited California's supplies. rights instead of simply assuming the Los Angeles aqueduct.Govem- the water will be there when it's merit engineers at the time were /� K needed. Applying for more water plotting to shift the flow of north- /t By NANCY VOGEL under the old area-efangin stal- era rivers south in schemes even "/^✓r,1�',' 7, UO;L 1DffiSfAFFtvRI1En utes might be the easiest way for more audacious than Los Angeles' some cities and counties to expand tapping of the Eastern Sierra. FAIRFIIIA. Calif.—Tbis city their supplies and justify growth. The 1931 law and several that to the east of San Francisco Bay is 'We're going to see more and followed decree that even though trying to cash in on a promise more petitions under these slat- huge quantities of water could be made a lifetime ago. uses, because the Sacramento pumped hundreds of miles from Invoking a 70-year-old law that River is over-appropnated and the California's major rivers,communi- was passed to keep one region from San Joaquin River is over-appro- ties new those rivers would get pn- drying up another, Fairfield and priated and people are running out ority m take more water when they two neighboring cities are seeking of water for growth; said Michael grew enough to need it rights to water that for decades has Jackson,a Plumis County attomey The law does not guarantee the been shipped south. Experts say for the Regional Council of Rural communities more water.They still their application could inspire oth- Counties. must apply to the state, show a ers in the north to do the same, Southern California water of& need for it and,if necessary,build a eventually shrinking Southern cals acknowledge that growth to system to capture and move the California's water supplies the north will cut into their sup, water—a proposition too expensive The Bay Area cities argue that plies—planners decades ago as- for many rural Northern California they have priority over Southern sunned as much—but nobody counties. The law simply gives California to take water from knows to what degree. these'amas of origin'the opportu- Barker Slough, which drams into The only recent application un- city to get higher standing in the Sacramento River.As justifies- der such statutes to reach a final terms of water rights that those lion, they point to a state law decision by the state water board cities and farms served by state passed not long after Los Angeles involved FJ Dorado County's re- and federal water projects. commandeered the water of the quest to take more water—enough The whole logic of the statute is Owens Valley and doomed its to supply nearly 90,000 people for a that,even though the water's been farms to dust and desolation. The year—from the American River exported to other areas for many law was designed to ensure that east of Sacramento. The board years,if the water is now needed to growth in cities and counties along granted the county the water last tite area of origin,it should be pos- major rivers would not be stymied year, with some conditions. Envy sible to recapture what's needed: by projects that diverted water ronmentalists concerned that the said Harrison"Rap'Dunning,a re- hundreds of miles away. increased diversion of water will tired UC Davis law professor. Fairfield. Berdcia and Vacaville have asked the state Water Re- sources Control Board to grant - them rights to enough water to -- supply 155,t100 people for a year— water that would otherwise be channeled to San Joaquin Valley ,�sarc•- � _ -,,+s- farms and Southland cities. - "We're growing, we need the _ - water and we don't have other sources: said Rick Wood, Fau- field's assistant director of pubic works. The cities' application is one of the first to push the boundaries of what are known es California's area of origin- laws. And it won't be the Iasi,many experts predict. ♦ t>m� These laws will get more atten- tion,some say,because little water A man fishes for trout in Sacramento River. Cities nearby are using is left for the taking and a new law an old law in an attempt to tap into more of the area's water. i IhTEGRITED SOLUTIONS ORGANICS MANAGEMENT, CLEAN I C LEAN WATER is a vital commod. vice area which includes the communities ity in the semiarid environment of Chino, Chino Hills, Fontana, Montclair, California's within the coastal plain of south- Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, and Upland. ern California. About two-thirds The service area also overlies the Chino Chino Basin of the water supply is imported Groundwater Basin. It owns a cocompost- from often great distances and at ing facility for dairy manure and biosolids Organics significant expense to support the and owns and operates four wastewater region'a industrial,agricultural and popula. treatment facilities. These facilities have Management lion base.This makes local ground and sur. a combined treatment capacity of 53 mil- face waters a vital resource that needs spe. lions gallon per day producing tertiary Strategy uses cial attention and protection. treated effluent and 180 wet tons/day of OJ , The Chino Groundwater Basin is one of Class B biosolids. creative ways to the largest sources of groundwater in south- Two years ago, the IEUA began a com- em California. The basin encompasses ap- prehensive planning and analysis effort to Pprotect its proximately 220 square miles of the upper review its management options.Out of this Santa Ana River watershed, offering the effort and through the assiptance of Tetra watershed while ability to store up to 500,000 acre feet ofwa. Tech ASL, IEUA's progrAm manager, a ter which is enough to virtually "drought plan was developed that was called the expanding proof" the region and reduce its reliance on Chino Basin Organics Management Strat- imported water during droughts. egy."-This strategy established a direction composting d The Chino Basin is also home to the to protect the water resources in the basin P g and concentration of dairies in the by pursuing comprehensive management digesting capacity 'world consisting of over 300 dairy farms system of the organic wastes produced in and over 400,000 cows, heifers and calves. the watershed including animal manures, for manure and These dairies produce over 1,000,000 tons biosolids, green wastes and food residuals. L of manure annually (based on 70 percent It also emphasized the production of re- biosolids. dry weight)with additional manure stock- newable energy through the anaerobic di- piles of over 2,000,000 tons on the ground. gestion of the abundant organic wastes in Over the years,agricultural runoff has im- the region. Rich Atwater pacted local groundwater reserves, result- ing in elevated levels of salts, dissolved A START WITH COCOMPOST and Paul Sellew solids and nitrates, making it unsuitable A number of additional key factors were for direct human consumption without fur- taken into consideration while developing ther treatment. In addition, the manure the overall program.The first of these was creates air quality concerns relating to the rapid urbanization of the region. Hous- dust, odor and volatile organic compounds ing developments were encroaching on the (VOC)emissions. existing cocomposting facility that was con- structed in 1995. Using outdoor turned CHINO BASIN ORGANICS windrow technology, the facility was de- signed to handle the IEUA's biosolids along Unmanaged, these organic wastes would with local dairy manure.The facility is joint- continue to degrade local ground and surface ly run by two operators, Synagro Technolo- waters.The need to protect the watershed's gies and Earthwise Organics. (See "Com- valuable waters and allow an important lo- poster Moves Nutrients, Organic Matter cal industry to remain vibrant has resulted From Generators To Users" in this issue.) in the need to develop creative ways of man- The operators are successfully composting aging the organic wastes.As the manager of and marketing up to 20 percent of locally this watershed,the Inland Empire Utilities generated dairy manure to agricultural op- Agency (IEUA) realized the importance of erations outside of the watershed.The facil. finding solutions to these issues. ity also composts and markets all of the The IEUA is a public water and wastew. IEUA produced biosolids.The concerns with star utility that supplies imported water the site centered on increasingly more strin- and recycled water and collects,treats and gent regulations and approaching develop- disposes of wastewater for six cities and ment in the direct vicinity of the composting two water districts. It is also responsible facility. The combination of these factors for water quality protection.Approximate. will result in having to relocate and upgrade ly 700,000 people reside in the agency's ser- the existing compost facility. 24 BmCYcLE FERRuuty 2002 WATER AND RENEWABLE ENERGY requirements.The ability to expand on this program and include additional local organ- ics such as manure, food and green waste was looked at as a very promising altema- Live to gain greater energy self-sufficiency while improving air and ground water qual- lewis'' Homes ( ity at the same time. A fourth factor was more restrictive reg- ulations and ordinances dealing with the beneficial reuse of biosolids in California. 1, The trend has been clearly toward Class A treatment with some counties attempting and some succeeding in installing outright bans on Class B land application.Further- more,the terms of California's AB 939 reg- ulations requiring 50 percent diversion of wastes from the landfill were further in- A second factor is the protection of The region is undergoing rapid centive.to recycle organic waste streams groundwater quality.The biggest concern is urbanization,with housing such as green and food wastes via compost- the dairy induatry's impact on groundwater developments encroaching on ing or digestion. quality. To mitigate this,there is a need to forms and IEUA's mcomposting A fifth factor is air pollution emissions export the organic matter, nitrates and facility• from the Chino dairies that are a significant salts present in the manure outside the wa- source ofdust,ammonia and VOC and diesel candied to be beneficially reused in agricul- resulting from trucking the material out of ture and minimize local groundwater im- the region. This is an important issue with pact. The population of dairy cows peaked regional air quality regulators due to the in the Chino Basin in the early 1990s.Since tremendous efforts to improve all of south- then there has been a small downward ern California's air quality. trend in cow population that is projected to continue through 2015. Nevertheless, the - POLICY OBJECTIVES projections developed for 2015 estimate ma- p plug-flow anaerobic digester After ideptifying the key factors,the next nure production at about 55 percent of cur- uiti,the mpaciy ro process step in the process was to establish policy rent levels. This is based on the premise 225 wit cons/day of dairy objectives outlining the major goals to be ac- that many of the current dairies will relo- manure is in the stun-up phase. complished. They are as follows: Produce cate to other regions of the state or country and Bell their Chino Basin farms to real es- tate developers. This trend is hard to pre- dict due to recent difficulties in finding oth- er regions that are welcoming new dairies, thereby slowing relocation efforts. There will be a continued need to haul the manure from the Basin or process the manure to y minimize any impact to the ground and sur. face waters. I� LONG TRACK RECORD IN ANAEROBIC DIGESTION A third factor is availability and cost ofen- ergy supplies. California recently under- went severe disruptions in its electrical en- ergy market resulting in rolling service blackouts and more recent price hikes.The IEUA has had a long track record in anaer- obic digestion of its biosolids at its waste- water treatment plants using the resulting methane to power cogeneration systems that offset about 60 percent of its electrical BioCycu YEisruMy 2002 25 Figure 1. Inland Empire Utilities eeaar • •AbP'!d.w Agency manure digestion facility ory M.. uws.a�n3t3mrws utwaa , —►nssvrl Iona Ts"�`t ,..wdeos1.yro•ouel1d) aawatt.M.. i �. asxna oro«ur / rxVt4 Nms.a,ow�ol Ow Conec4on I Svwvfti. M. G�Nitup. OI..IYr rvmarov, $Ma)3 ae. Gtl IlY Comporting 0 OxtiP - - faraetelgo.a.,nvn through anaerobic digestion enough opment ofpilot demonstration projects.The methane gas for 50 megawatts of clean,re- pilots will provide real world cost and oper- Stakeholders newable electric energy by 2006;Cost-effec- ating performance information that will be lively recycle organic wastes into fertilizer critical in building the full-scale facilities. involved in the products in environmentally safe enclosed Therewas also nor emphasis on development facilities for local use as a first priority,Re- of public and private partnerships recogniz- planning and duce air and water pollution; Implement ing the role that the private sector plays in strategies that minimize diesel truck trips; bringing technology, markets, capital and decision making and Accomplish the above goals in a manner expertise to the process.The end result is di- pLOC255 included that does not financially impact the Region- met water and air quality benefits through al Sewerage Program. accomplishment of these objectives. the surrounding A business plan was drafted outlining the Recognizing the need for public support p specific actions to be taken to accomplish the from all the stakeholders involved was an public, regulatory key policy objectives. The focus was on the early priority and taken very seriously. creation of regional "organic management These stakeholders included the surround- officials, elected centers." That would allow the region to ing public,regional and state regulatory of- achieve self-sufficiency in the management ficials,elected political representatives, an- representatives, of its organic residuals via composting and vironmental organizations and the IEUA's environmental anaerobic digestion, producing organic fer- own member communities. It was an impor- tilizer and renewable energy.An important tant priority to have these stakeholders pm- OI organizations and first step in the implementation of the buss- tiripate in the planning efforts and feel part g ness plan recommendations was the devel- ofthe decision making process. the IEUArs member 1)Air from the manure receiving and cake FINANCIAL SUPPORT communities. loading building is piped to a biofilter for Based on the magnitude of the problem, treatment. 2) Filtrate is dewatered using a the IEUA's ambitious plan has received sub - is 3)Gas collected from the digester is cleaned by a scrubber.4)Clean gas is stantial financial support from a variety of piped to a dryer for further conditioning. state and federal agencies. Initial funding 5)Electricity is generated on-site using was earmarked to develop the pilot demon- microturbines. stration projects. Sources of funding and r- 26 EmCvcu FEBN;.wv 20a2 amounts have been as follows: California complished through multiple public/pri- Energy Commission - $8.4 million plus re- vate partnerships between the dairy Indus- bates of$1.5 million for installation of elec- try,local cities,private firms(Synagro)and Over $20 million in trical generating equipment using renew- IEUA. In addition, the state and federal able methane gas as a fuel source; United agencies have been very supportive in en- funds for the States Department of Agriculture, Natural couraging the implementation of the pilot Resource Conservation Service - $4.9 mil- demonstration projects through financial organics lion, FY 2001,.$5million, FY 2002; South grant assistance and fast-tracking regula- Coast Air Quality Management District - tory approvals.In December,2001,USEPA management Six Capstone Micro turbines plus installa- Region IX awarded IEUA an environmen- Strata have been tion costs;and United States Department of tal award for the Organics Management strategy Energy- $2.5 million for renewable energy Strategy.Through our Peer Review Panels raised through state through anaerobic digestion. and evaluation of the pilot demonstration Fundraising is ongoing and additional projects, we hope that the experience and federal capital will be required to continue learned in the Chino Basin can be success- progress on implementation of the business fully applied to similar organic waste man- agencies and the plan concepts. agement situations in other parts of the PILOT DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS—UPDATES United States. IIIregionrs air quality The IEUA has ambitious plans to build Rich Atwater is CEO and general manager of management and operate multiple pilot demonstration the Inland Empire Utilities Agency in Chino, district. projects showcasing a combination of California. Pau/Sellem is execunue president unique composting,anaerobic digestion and and manager of Synagro Technologies renewable energy technologies. The status Agribusiness Services Group based in Hous- of the current pilot projects are as follows: ton, Texas. Mix fresh dairy manure with municipal biosolids and anaerobically digest the mix- ture at thermophilic temperatures at one of the IEUA'e regional weetewter treatment PRIVATE-PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP facilities. TheheIEUA digester has been retrofitted and is in start-up; Demonstrate BUILDS DIGESTER PROJECT a United States based mesophilic anaerobic digestion technology on dairy manure. A team led by Synagro was selected and can- structed a plug-Flow digester reactor in URRENTLY in start-up opera- cubic feet/day of biogas.The dewa- three months.The facility is completed and toons, a manure digestion facili- tering system uses-a combination of in start-up (see sidebar); Demonstrate ty in Chino, California is owned a screw press and a centrifuge.The anaerobic digestion of cow manure using by the Inland Empire Utilities Agen- process operates atmesophilictem- covered lagoon technology. Doug Williams cy (IEUA). The project represents a peratures and is designed to accept from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo is leading public-private partnership with manures at varying solids content. the design effort and the facility is project- IEUA, the Milk Producers Council The process was designed by ed to be completed and operational in 2002; and Synagro's Agribusiness Ser- AnAerobics Wastewater Treatment and Construct an enclosed composting fa- vices Group which is serving as gen- Company;Capstone Turbine Corpo- cility to process biosolids, green waste and eral contractor/operator. The Milk ration supplied the microturbines. cow manure demonstrating the use of in- Producers Council (MPC) was , The biogas produced in the di- door aerated static pile composting followed formed by dairymen in the Chino gester will be used to generate elec- by biofiltration for odor control. It is cur- Basin Dairy District and is increas- tricity on-site with the remaining rently in the design phase and scheduled to ingly active in resolving water quali- binges delivered to an IEUA drinking be constructed in 2002. Based on the suc- ty, waste disposal and air quality water filtration plant to help power cess of this pilot program,it is the intent to problems in the Chino dairy region. Waukesha generators that produce build a number of full-scale enclosed corn- Approximately two-thirds of the the complete electrical require- post facilities. dairymen/operators in the region are ments of the facility. Digested ma- MPC members. nure will be dewatered on site IMPACT ON WASTE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS The plug-flow digester reactor has and transported to the cocompost- The development of the Chino Basin Or- a capacity of 225 wet tons/day of ing facility and converted into high ganics Management Strategy has been ac- dairy manure, generating 210,000 quality compost. 3 4 BIaCYCLE FEBmu"V 2002 27 Den: Aydl 16,2002 On tps County SanlWW District Monthly Log of Odor Complaints-2002 MRNa.l—_______________________________________________________________ Jen { Fb { Mar { A r { Ma { mium " uiu, ,, mmmm Dp { Ina rro ]i5 Iq Y1 B are w qmi na�w rd•I: o o t PU1NT ND.2 Jen { Fab { Mar Apt 11 May If Jun If Jut 11 Aun {I Sep If Od { Nov 11 Da If R m a3 m tin Iro 0 no ant14 m w•� rma ToIBI: 0 0 0 0 CeTbetldl8vebme yy������yi�����yy�������������__�������������yy������y���__�� Jan Fb Mar p A r 1 Ma i Jun Jul Au Se Oct 1 Nov ! DBo vl• L1 • 2a VIB 'LI ZB 98 =ro va no x 1a8 2m • ans lab no TA M all• lap no 2n3 2L M no la• no =3 m 9a1i RE Ep WpLY WeW TW TW TWTtl TW TWWI.:M a TOW T b W RIONWdA p1euM.d1alom0dor Complaint L.coAs GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 180 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60501 312/977-9700• Fax: 312/977.4806 February 13, 2002 PRESS RELEASE For Further Information Contact Stephen J.Gauthier(312)977-9700 +ww«««rww««««««p«w«««««««««««««««««+wr«w«+w++««rr«a«r«+r«+r«+++rr«+w«+++rr+«ww«wrw+ Chicago--The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) is pleased to announce that Orange County Sanitation District,California has received the GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for its budget. The award represents a significant achievement by the entity. It reflects the commitment of the governing body and staff to meeting the highest principles of governmental budgeting. In order to receive the budget award, the entity had to satisfy nationally recognized guidelines for effective budget presentation. These guidelines are designed to assess how well an entitys budget serves as: ■ a policy document ■ a financial plan ■ an operations guide ■ a communications device Budget documents must be rated"proficient" in all four categories to receive the award. When a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award is granted to an entity, a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Presentation is also presented to the individual or department designated as being primarily responsible for its having achieved the award. This has been presented to Bradley H. Cagle,Accounting Manager. Since the inception of the GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program in 1984, approximately 800 entities have received the Award. Award recipients have pioneered efforts to improve the quality of budgeting and provide an excellent example for other governments throughoutNorth America. The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit professional association serving 13,000 government finance professionals throughout North America The GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program is the only national awards program in governmental budgeting. WASHINGTON OFFICE 1750 K Street. N.W., Suits 350.Washington, DC 20006 202/429-2750•Fax: 202/429-2755 ® CALIFORNIA'S BALANCE OF PAYMENTS WITH THE FEDERAL TREASURY FY 1981-2000 "CALIFORNL4 TAXPAYERS PAID ARECORD$29 BILLION WINDFALL TO WASHINGTON IN 2000,AGAINBREAXING THE STATE'S OWN DEFICIT ® RECORD AND ENDURING 14THSTRAIGHT YEAR AS A DONOR STATE" APRIL 2002 In fiscal year 2000, California's"trade deficit"with the federal goverment worsened for the sixth year in a row. The state's taxpayers endured thew 14th consecutive year of sending more money in taxes to Washington than were received back in federal government expenditures in the state. Californians have subsidized the rest of the nation for nearly a decade and a half,and the trend is growing. CALIFORNIA BALANCE OF Calffomia's Balance of Payments PAYMENTS wm reaem cewaecn rr,se+soro In 2000, Californians sent nearly$30 $10 L �T — billion more to Washington in federal taxes $0 r•111 i a�n than the state received back in federal spending.This$29.3 billion total was an all- g($10) --+-- I' time record for any state,surpassing the 4 ^- -r-�-� previous mark-also set by California in r($20) -�--r 1999--of$23.1 billion.The state's exchange ($30) with Washington was thus more than$6 +w+ +ev ,ems rea ,eec 101 ,ern,eas billion further into the red than just one year It has been many years since the °pn'"°"Y01e"ie°O'°""'"�h"OitloY01"10101'"° heyday of California's federal spending surpluses.The defense buildup during Ronald Reagan's first Presidential term in the early 1980s; kept California's federal balance of payments in the black for six straight years,peaking at$6.8 billion surplus in fiscal 1984. As defense procurement began to decline in the mid 1980s,however, California's federal funding advantage waned.The state's balance shifted from the black into the red in 1987,and it has remained there ever since. By 1990,California's losses over just four years had already erased the inflows won throughout the early 1980s. From 1981 to 1996,federal spending in California exceeded taxes paid by$26.9 billion-a sizeable surplus. From 1987 to 1990,however,California taxpayers sent $30.2 billion more to Washington than came back in spending. By focal year 2000,the 14-year combined tally had grown to$175 billion,and the trend shows no signs of abating in the foreseeable future. In the early 1990s,the balance figure dipped from a nearly$15 billion loss in 1991 to just The California Institute for Federal Policy Research,419 New Jersey Avenue SE,Washington,DC 20003 Plane: 202-546-3700 Fax:202-546-2390 ransdellQacalinsLorg httpJ/www.calinsLorg a$5 billion shortfall in 1994.But the retreat Celaomisnc'Retom on Tea Inveahnent was short-lived,and deficits have charged Fed.bw6V$Par Tax$FY 1981-2000 forward at a steady clip ever since,rising an $vls average of$4 billion per year for the past six $1.10 __------------ years. $1 M This taxing-versus-spending imbalance b100 means that every individual California man, woman, and child paid$864 more in federal so.9s taxes last year than he or she received in f090 federal funds and services. Pm differently, soar California receives only 88 cents in federal services for every dollar sent to Washington— m 1e81 191$1985 19117 1948 1w1 tw$19115181071999 a decline from 90 cents in 1999 and the lowest return in at least 20 years. California is not the worst off among the states.According to the Washington D.C.- based,non-partisan Tax Foundation,California ranks 40th among all states in balance of payments.The biggest winner,New Mexico,ranked first with a balance of$2.03 in return for every dollar paid to Washington,while Connecticut tanked 50th,receiving just 62 cents for each dollar paid The balance of payments figure is calculated by comparing federal spending attributable to each state(excluding unallocable costs such as overseas defense operations and interest on the national debt)against federal tax and fee revenue dollars collected by state.The tax burden figure is then adjusted to provide an "apples-to-apples"comparison between the two numbers.' COMPONENTS OF THE DEFICIT: CALIFORNIA'S SHARE OF THE U.S. POPULATION,FEDERAL TAX BURDEN,AND FEDERAL EXPENDITURES Two primary factors comprise the balance of payments: taxes and spending. For fairness and fair-share assessment purposes,we also include the state's share of the U.S.population as an illustrative benchmark In 1999,California housed 12.0%of the nation's residents,but it paid 12.6%of federal taxes and received back just 11.1%of federal payments and expenditures. Population: With 12%of the U.S.population,California is home to nearly one in eight Americans.According to the Census Bureau,this figure remained relatively stable throughout the 1990s—a marked contrast with the 1990s,during which California's share of the national population rose steadily from 10.5%in 1981 to 12.0%in 1990. Some charge that the Census Bureau's counting techniques underestimate California's population and thus its share of the ' The federal government generally operates in surplus or deficit in any given year,so national totals for expenditures and tax burden never match. Thus,we adjust each year's tax burden figure to equalize it with spending,thereby deducing California's fair share of any surplus or deficit and creating a balance. In fact,without that adjustment,California's raw balance of payments figure would have been far more stark.The unadjusted balance of payments figures for 2000 had California a donor state to the tune of$77.7 billion.Since there was a budget surplus that year,however,the adjustment recognizes that even the average state also paid somewhat more in taxes than it received in spending. Calllomia's Balance ojPayments with the Federal Treasury,FY 1981-1000 Page 2 national total. Taxes: California's share of the nation's $2 trillion tax burden increased to 12.80/a in fiscal year 2000,rising from 12.6%in 1999 and 12.1%in 1995. The state's increasing share of the nation's federal tax burden is due in part to a rebounding economy in California relative to other states. The share remains below the California Share of U.S. Tax Burden, peak in 1991,when California Po ulation & Fed. S endln FY1981-2000 shouldered 13.4%of the nation's ,a.fi„-�--- . '--, - - � federal tax burden. Between 1991 11A , . ,, ti and 1995,a debilitating recession— ,ta considerably worse in California than . in other states--served to reduce the relative share of federal contributions u from our state's taxpayers.Yet despite its greater misery,the state T roswar it), �li TW ,an tae°� remained a donor state with respect 1. 'm° 1. L. 1°°° 1BB' '°°0 to the rest of the country throughout Fe°�hcn —ve°revnanca rwr°pueem the 1990s;recession. °.,.,...W..�M...m.,....e nm,ew As has been true for more than half a century,California's$253 billion contribution to the federal treasury in 2000 was by far the largest raw total of federal tax dollars of any state,well above both New York's$159 billion and Texas's$137 billion,according to the Tax Foundation. Federal Spending: California's share of total federal spending receipts declined to I LOOK in 2000--a steady decline from 11.1%in 1999,and from 11.6%in 1996.r And these late-1990s levels remain well below the 12%level at which California's federal receipts had hovered for the preceding seven years. In the early 1980s,federal spending in California leapt from 12%in 1981 to 13%in 1994,propelled largely by military procurement contracts won by California's aerospace industry,before settling back to the 12%mark in 1988. Spending in California remained at 12%of the U.S.total until 1994 when the current decline began. Federal spending totals are comprised of expenditures in various categories.In accounting for federal dollar flows,the Census Bureau divides spending into five components: Procurement; Grants to States and Local Governments(mostly formula grants); Salaries and Wages;and Direct Payments to Individuals. California's 2000 share of federal spending on procurement(which r To assess federal spending,we use the Census Bureau's annual Consolidated Federal Funds Report,but we alter their U.S.total figures by backing out funds not spent in states or D.C.,such as spending in Puerto Rico and the territories,as well as so-called undistributed funds(those appropriated but not spent).For example,of the nation's$1.63 trillion defined by Census as spent in 2000,$20.1 billion was undistributed and$13.7 billion was spent in territories.Thus,we set the U.S.total spending figure at $1.60 trillion,and California's percentage share is calculated to be slightly higher.While our report shows California's share of total spending as 11%,the Census report's figure is 10.7%. The impact is most pronounced in the procurement category,which accounts for$16.5 billion of the nation's undistributed spending,where our analytical method gives California 13.1%of procurement funds,while the Census Bureau report sets the state's sham at 12.1%. California's Balanre of Payments with the Fedeml Treasury,FY 1981-2000 Page 3 includes defense and other contract Federal Spending in California vs U.S. spending)declined sharply from 13.6% FY 2000—figures in billions to 13.1% in 1999,a big drop compared to the prior 0.2% fall in the prior year, but still not as drastic as the 1998-1999 freefall from 15.2%to 13.8%. `""°""'"'D"n""' ue'a,,.d«..•nm+: Californians'share of all U.S. direct +a. payments to individuals(which includes massive outlays for Social Security and medicare payments)recovered slightly, u•w.dRmm.+•,w�+v, wioun+.vw rising from 10.2%in 1999 to 10.4% in NOTE.US.,y[.[, C,�VB�CRu,n Bnw.F!�[I ECwOgn q4m, N f,°�Y FUW R 2000,but the long term trend is LTSIS.CWaN[I[MMJ[+pF[p,FIVdry Re.evN,AbS[61)W,w.w.[[fy.gp downward, from 10.5% in 1998 and 10.8%in 1997.The state's share of all federal salaries and wages continued its downward march, decreasing from 10.3%in 1999 to just 9.9%in 2000. Meanwhile,California's share of federal formula and categorical grants to state and local governments dropped as quickly as it had risen the prior year--after jumping upward significantly from 12.1%to 12.6% in 1999, formula grant funds in 2000 fell back down to 11.9% of the U.S.total,the lowest level in seven years. Parallel analysis of the same data in a slightly different fashion shows that, in FY 2000,the federal government spent$5,187 per capita in California,while it spent$5,819 per capita nationwide, more than an 11%discrepancy. It is important to remember that federal tax burden figures for each year largely reflect the economic condition of the prior year--i.e., in 2000,California taxpayers filed taxes on their 1999 earnings. The federal income tax system causes states,such as California,which have an above average income level to pay more in taxes than the average state,despite the fact that vastly higher housing prices and other costs of living mean that the average Californian may actually have considerably less disposable income than the average resident of a lower-taxed state. An annual salary of$60,000 in Arkansas or South Dakota affords a vastly different buying power and standard of living compared to the same California %share of DOD Procurement salary in Santa Clara or Orange Counties, Funds versus Population, FY 1901-2000 yet federal income tax ndes treat them a _ identically. 30 � +e PROCUREMENT a ,e In FY 2000,total federal spending '* „ nationwide on procurement rose 8.5%, 12 from$190 billion to $206 billion.In ,o California,the rise was barely half as e : _ deism•M+ strong with procurement spending rising U.n 1.I,,.,ow 4.5%,from$25.8 billion to$26.9 billion. awngme w+w..mww[,a FMetl Ptlq ReuuN,A?°I+„w,. This follows a smaller decline for the °""°""eve"°'"O Fa4en1ui0a Rapo''19CtluiBuaxi prior year, when the U.S. rose 3.4% and California's Balance of Payments with the Federal Treasury,FY 1981-2000 Page 4 California 1.7%,which in turn came on the heels of an actual decline for the two prior years. Over the last fifteen years,no single category of federal spending in Cahf imia has experienced a more precipitous decline than procurement. In 1998, federal procurement expenditures in California declined to thew lowest level since 1981 in current-dollar terms,and the last two years' slight uptick does not repair the situation.The figures would be far more stark if inflation were taken into account. After adjusting for inflation, California's procurement awards are now less than half of their 1985 levels. Overall procurement expenditures by the Department of Defense, which spends nearly two of every three federal procurement dollars,accounts for much of the decline. California's share of total U.S. procurement expenditures(defense and non-defense)held nearly steady at the 18% mark for a decade,declined to about 15% for 1995-97, and dropped to its 13.1% low point over the last three years. California's share of procurement spending for national defense was once as high as 23%, a level reached in 1994. Falling below the 15%mark for the first time in memory during FY 2000, the state's share of 14.6%culminated a three year,short term drop and perpetuated a long term backslide which has continued for more than a decade and a half. FORMULA GRANTS Formula grants spending in the state dropped sharply from 1999 to 2000, Calif. Share of Federal Formula Grants but much of the decline is attributable to a vs. U.S. Population, FY 1981-2000 correction of the prior years aberrant rise. ,j, For the most par,California's share of rz . federal grants to state and local - governments has remained stable at roughly 12% for six consecutive years. In a +� 1999,grants funding had risen significantly to 12.6%after remaining stable at roughly 12%for four consecutive years. In 2000,the share fell to 11.9%. °S L re The bulk of these grant funds a so...r.as�..a....arm a•..,.per a em,n.caio...,m�. distributed to states by congressionally °r.aaerme.axati...m..wr.°..ivaly w.�_zm'Nb>lw designed formulas.The formulas are sometimes based at least partially on population and income data gathered during the decennial census,and,therefore,many of these data are significantly outdated by the time the next decennial census is conducted. The California Congressional delegation has fought for years to correct this funding lag. Roughly 60%of the$304 billion in U.S. grants funding was distributed pursuant to four programs: Medicaid,highway grants, welfare, and Title I education grants. In the single largest federal formula program,Medicaid,California's share was 10.6%in FY 2001. The state received $14.1 billion of the$132.7 billion distributed nationwide. While the state's share represents a slight increase over the roughly 10%share the state received during the preceding decade, California's share of Medicaid funding has long been artificially reduced by the inappropriate use of a per capita income factor,which shifts funds to other states. California's Balance of Payments with the Federal Treasury,FY 1981-1000 Page 5 California also is perennially a donor state with regard to the federal highway trust fimd. For many years,California has received back less in mad pmjects than it has put into the fund in gasoline taxes.In 2001,California received$215 billion in highway planning and construction funds out of the$27.6 billion distributed nationwide,or 8.1%of the U.S.total.However,the negative overall transportation fiord expenditure share is somewhat softened when transit funds are calculated in the mix. California received$995 million or 24.3%of the total$4.1 billion distributed nationally under federal urbanized area transit formula grants. When federal welfare reform was enacted in 1996,California housed 21.7%of the nation's adult welfare recipients,and therefore the state has continued to receive the lion's share of the nation's welfare program.Thus,even though nationwide totals for highway programs are larger than for welfare—$27.6 billion in 2001 for highways versus$16.6 billion for welfare—California actually received far mom in federal welfare payments($3.73 billion)than in payments under the highway program($2.25 billion).In FY 2001,California received 22.7%of federal welfare spending under TANF,the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. In FY 2001,the Title I program,the federal government's largest K-12 education grant, sent slightly more than$1 billion(or 12.4%)of its $8.1 billion basic and concentration grant funding to California The 12A%figure continues a gradual rise in the state's share from an 11% average over the preceding decade,a rise attributable in part to the California Congressional delegation's efforts to counteract usage of outdated census data.Nevertheless,California houses more than 15%of the nation's children living in poverty,but outdated poverty data usage and unfavorable formula factors conspire to sharply reduce the state's share of Title I dollars. DHtECT PAYMENTS To INMVIDUALS Nationwide,direct payments to individuals from the federal government continued to grow strongly,rising from$260 billion in 1981 to$913 billion in 1999. Last year alone,direct payments nationwide rose from$845 billion to$913 billion.The$94.9 billion received by Californians in 2000 is more than triple the$26 billion received in 1981.Roughly half of direct payments come in the form of social security checks,while another 20%are medicare payments. Total payments to Californians rose from$86.2 billion in FY 1999 to$94.9 billion in 2000. The sharp rise comes in pan as a correction from the prior year, during which direct payment figures unchatactenstically declined—the only time over the past two decades to see a contraction in payments.Californians' share of direct payment dollars remained relatively constant throughout the early and mid-1990s,roughly tracking California's share of the nation's older population.Through the last three years, however,that sham declined from 10.8%in 1997,to 10.5%in 1998,and 10.2%in 1999,before rebounding to 10.4%in 2000. WITHIN CALIFORNIA California's 15 largest counties house 81%of the state's population and a proportionate share of most federal spending categories,though they account for nearly 92%of the state's procurement receipts.Not surprisingly, federal receipts vary greatly from county to county. While Los Angeles County's$46.9 billion in federal receipts is nearly 20%of the state total,per capita federal spending in Los Angeles county($4,930)is below both the average for both the state ($5,189)and the nation($5,817). California's Balance of Payments with the Federal Treasury,FY 1981-20M Page 6 Per capita federal receipts in the Federal Spending Per OaFib in largest counties ranged from a high of Celit°mi°'°as largest caimtlec $9,642 in Sacramento County to a low of $3,369 in Orange County. (Because of its °°^^' - state government presence,more than$6 �^' —! - billion in formula grant spending was aw - attributed to Sacramento County,thus _ artificially inflating its total.)Other ..our, counties with relatively high per capita receipts included San Francisco,at$7,928, - and San Diego, at$6,749. San Francisco's u�: high receipts are likely attributable to as SM 34.000 N..= a ..= a11,.000 federal grants receipts and federal wages, sp°n°gum Pram both of which are more than double the state and national averages. In San Diego,high receipts are associated with strong procurement receipts and with very strong military related-salaries and wages.In addition to Orange County, relatively low per capita federal receipts were logged in the Counties of Riverside($3,646),San Bernardino($3,724),Contra Costa($3,817), San Joaquin($3,955),Ventura($3,955),Fresno ($4,268), and San Mateo ($4,417). OTHER FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO THE STATE'S SHORTFALL Several factors contribute to the state's taxes-versus-spending disparity. First,happily, California remains a relatively prosperous state.Despite a debilitating economic downturn early in the last decade,the likes of which had not gripped the state for more than half a century,incomes of California's residents remain above the national average.Thus,the state's residents pay relatively more in federal income taxes. Second, California is a relatively young state and thus has fewer residents receiving payments under Social Security and Medicare,an increasingly large slice of the federal budget pie. In 2000, 10.6%of Californians were age 65 or older,compared to 12.4%of all U.S. residents. A third key factor in California's ongoing funding disparity is continued slippage in federal procurement spending,to some extent total spending but primarily the state's share thereof. Defense contract spending fell from$123 billion in 1991 to$108 billion in 1998,even before accounting for inflation,yet it returned to the$123 billion level in 2000. California's defense procurement funding,on the other hand,has been faster to fall and slower to recover—falling from$23.6 billion in 1991 to$17.3 billion in 1998,yet climbing back only as far as$17.9 billion in 2000.While the early 1980s saw nearly one-fourth of defense contract dollars spent in California,the state's 2000 share fell to 14.6%,the lowest level on record. Despite the state's taxes-versus-spending disparity,opportunistic legislators from other states continue to view California as a drain on the federal treasury and as a competitor for the federal dollars they covet.If that perception were ever valid,it certainly is no longer. As has been the case for more than a decade,California subsidizes the rest of the nation at unrivaled levels. Sources:Federal Expenditures by Stale forFY 1981-2000, U.S.Census Bureau, Washington,DC;Federal Tax Burden by State.2000, The Tax Foundation, Washington,DC;California Institute staffresearch and analysis. Caltfomia's Balance of Payments with the Federal Treasury,FY 1981-2000 Page 7 Federal Spending, Tax and Population Figures for U.S, and California U.S.Totals: Tot.U.S.pmoap US CATobI YEAR US-btel USymcur US-gmts US gas USdrecl UBathx US ptpn I"Burden Tan Bunten Bel of Profs 1981 672338 119297 94802 921M 259520 6541 229542 581595 2634 848 1982 613658 135412 88267 971N 286070 6773 M1822 697472 2577 67M 1983 67WW 142088 92286 102131 310105 20379 233806 580619 2483 17606 1984 706451 160160 98744 108649 324300 16519 235847 645043 2735 14210 1985 761642 169W9 100528 114721 365987 24375 237950 709400 2951 11631 1986 802M 186497 108OU 119645 WM45 25614 240162 744578 3100 8848 1087 819155 104005 104005 125896 38W73 32998 242321 830538 3427 5653 1988 849492 164648 109835 133341 4a4396 37270 244634 884384 W17 -10637 1989 9W1W 162590 117831 141919 4489W 37030 246820 963378 3903 .16411 199D 970415 165781 128947 145012 493266 35797 246710 9W473 4019 .16367 1991 1W2541 183538 1493DS 155341 W7344 37010 262177 1026910 4072 -9417 1992 1156038 1751U 17VW 16UN 607M 393V 255M 109276 4153 29 1993 1224690 176340 191029 16SD36 645979 400 257908 1130180 4W2 3036 1904 128093 174293 209328 ISMS 691114 47119 260341 1230933 4728 1725 1995 1326292 IT7760 224316 165724 711645 46840 MV55 1319WO 6020 -7266 1998 135935D 1S0909 220637 167291 743038 46748 2 84 1423169 6365 -17679 1997 1416142 172078 224375 163630 7758N 67415 267833 IM934 58W 41354 1998 1442765 183572 264466 165737 82MM 10 259727 IM9252 6263 .50356 INS 1495961 189853 288303 172788 W976 0 272172 1792675 6587 .600681 20DO 1603365 206114 304202 179M 913226 0 01422 1962491 7045 .77730 Callfomla CNs Fed per cap CACA Adjusted YEAR CAAotal CA-prmir C"mla CAmages CAdtrecl CAoffm CA popn Tan Burden Tan Buden Bat of Pinta 1981 69416 21647 10008 11074 25746 940 24216 6800 2832 1937 1982 77501 27521 016 12048 28M 893 24698 70717 2863 4868 law on" 30856 9207 12791 31252 2268 25367 66768 2711 6301 1954 91713 34178 9709 13461 32694 1581 25547 77503 2999 W32 1985 97814 36208 10589 14431 35382 2225 26444 W183 3259 5284 1986 100860 35228 11291 15052 36850 M28 27108 92012 3395 102 1987 1007M 32212 11006 15508 39261 2769 2T781 104606 3765 -2420 INS 1023M 29467 11676 16380 41941 2913 29468 113203 3976 -6.373 Iwo 100639 29465 11936 17604 467M 2916 29218 125050 4250 -8847 199D 115am 295W 13932 17746 51448 3117 29760 132189 4442 .12544 1991 127684 32101 INN MIS M31 3649 303W 137101 4513 -14174 102 139695 SM3 19738 18988 W16 380D 30867 139me 4525 -12729 1993 147351 314M 21635 19239 70952 '4058 31211 144328 4624 .9033 1994 156391 30416 26219 18830 75465 4460 31431 153666 4889 5011 low 1625M 28537 26934 18376 75818 4868 31589 159800 5059 -8149 1996 157446 27724 26413 18035 80432 4839 31878 176125 5494 -9826 1907 180574 28247 27014 17587 Now 6936 3226E 192228 5957 -14309 IBM 161571 25365 32090 17344 86771 1 32667 211927 U67 .19433 INS 4166050 25795 36370 17733 86152 0 33145 MMI 6841 -231W 2000 175751 26965 36M 17835 94881 0 33672 253481 7484 -29256 Ca0lmnla Percaplto CA Rehm YEAR Total Procultnl Grants Wpm Dir Polls Offer Popufn Tm Burdlen Bel of polls pertax$ 1981 121 18.1 10.6 120 9.9 14A 10.5 11.8 80 $1.03 1982 12.6 20.3 10.2 12.4 9.9 102 10.7 11.6 197 $1.07 1983 12.8 21.7 10.0 12.5 9.5 11.1 10.8 11A we $1.00 1984 13.0 21.3 10.1 12A 10.1 9.6 11.0 12.0 MI $1.09 1085 12.8 I&S 10.5 12.6 102 9.1 11.1 12.1 200 $1.06 low 12.6 18.9 10.4 12.6 10.2 8.7 11.3 12.4 60 $1.02 1987 12.3 18.3 10.6 12.3 10.3 8.4 11.6 12.6 57 $0.98 1988 12.1 17.9 10.6 12.3 10.4 7.5 11.6 12.8 -224 $0.94 1980 12-0 1&1 10.1 12A 10.4 7.9 11.8 13.0 -303 $DA3 199D 11.9 17.8 10.8 122 10.4 8.7 12.0 132 -421 $0.91 1991 12.0 17.6 11.3 11.9 10.5 9.6 12.0 13.4 467 $0.90 1992 12.1 18.6 112 11.6 10.7 9.6 12.1 132 -412 $0.91 1993 12.0 17.9 11.3 11.7 11.0 8.9 12.1 12.8 -289 $0.94 1994 12.1 17.6 12.5 112 10.9 9.5 12.1 12.5 -169 $0.97 1095 11.5 14.0 12.0 11.1 10.7 10A 12.0 12.1 -268 $0.96 low 11.8 15.3 12.0 10.8 10.8 10A 12.0 12.3 .308 $0.94 1097 11.4 15.2 12.0 10.7 10.8 10.3 12.1 12A - 13 $0,93 INS 11.2 13.5 12.1 10.5 10.5 10.0 12.1 12.6 595 $0.91 1999 11.1 13.6 125 10.3 10.2 0.0 122 12.6 -609 $0.90 200D 11.0 1&1 11.9 9.9 10.4 120 12.8 584 $0.88 (Note:"edjustW the lax buNen figure ma9m actual da fdmal spending fi8m for balance mladatm)Nm: Figwmnotdjustdfarinihoian. Totals figmm in mgliom. To We exclude undimribuW fimda. Sources: Federel Expmdituresby SWefm Hgl-99,Cemm Bm %Sm.AbmanofB U.S.,91-99U.S.Cmam Burem;BdgmloforrmfimfmO Smtm for IT 1991-2W 1,Offioe ofMgmt&BdgcS State Census Data Center,Uifmnie DrymanemafFimnm;Tex Foundation;CalifOmia Im000ro. CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of SANITATION AGENCIES 925 L Street,Suite 1400•Sacramento,CA 95814•TEL:(916)446-0388—FAX(916)448-4808•w .casaweb.wg pa Via Electronic Mail April S,2002 MEMORANDUM TO: CASA Member Agencies CASA State Legislative Committee CASA Attorneys Committee FROM: Mike Dillon&Bobbi Larson SUBEICT: LEGISLATIVE UPDATE The purpose of this memorandum is to provide you with an update regarding the status of important CASA legislative efforts. I. MANDATORY MINIMUM PENALTY REFORM LEGISLATION SCHEDULED FOR FIRST HEARING APRIL 16,2002 The mandatory minimum penalty reform legislation co-sponsored by CASA and the League of California Cities will be heard in the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee on Tuesday,April 16,2002. AB 2351 by Assembly Member Joe Canciamilla seeks to revise the penalty law to exempt certain violations from penalties and to restore some discretion to the regional water quality control boards in determining the appropriate amount of penalties. CASA and the League have held several meetings with environmental groups, the State Water Resources Control Board, and other interested patties in an effort to identify and respond to any concerns about the bill as introduced. Assembly Member Canciamilla is considering amending the bill prior to the hearing in order to respond to some of the issues that have been raised. Key provisions of AB 2351 include: (1) Exempt from mandatory minimum penalties violations that occur due to start- up of new or refurbished treatment. (2) Specify that violations resulting from a single operational upset are to be considered a single violation,rather than multiple violations,even if the upset last for more than one day (3) Expand the opportunity to direct penalties to Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) up to the full amount of the penalty, with the discharger's concurrence. (4) Allow a regional board to waive or reduce MMPs if the board makes specific findings. 1 The most controversial provision of the bill is the amendments that would allow the regional board to waive or reduce penalties. Many thanks to those agencies that have sent support letters. Additional letters of support am still needed. Letters supporting AB 2351 should be sent to your Assembly Member, with copies to Assembly Member Canciamilla and CASA, as soon as possible. H. CASA-SPONSORED LEGISLATION DEALING WITH PERMIT STAYS ADVANCES CASA is also sponsoring SB 1599 by Senator Chuck Poochigian, which would require the State Water Resources Control Board(SWRCB)to act on requests for stays filed in conjunction with permit appeals within 45 days. The bill was approved by the Senate Environmental Quality Committee on a 7-0 vote and now goes to the Senate Appropriations Committee. CASA asked the Senator to introduce the bill in response to the increasing number of permit appeals. As the discharge permits issued to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs)by the regional boards become increasingly controversial, a significant number of permits are being appealed to the SWRCB by the discharger or another interested party. These permits often contain effluent and receiving water limitations that the petitioner contends are illegal and inappropriate.These limitations become enforceable as of the effective date of the permit. Because the Water Code currently contains no time frame within which the SWRCB must act upon a petition to stay implementation of challenged permit requirements,publicly-owned treatment works(POTWs)wishing to avoid violations and penalties arising from challenged permit provisions must bypass the SWRCB and file an action in Superior Court to obtain a stay. SB 1599 is supported by the League of California Cities, the California Building Industry Association and several individual agencies. There is no opposition to the bill,though the SWRCB has indicated that the 45-day time frame may be insufficient for the Board to notice the required hearing for granting a stay. CASA and the author expect to have additional discussions with the SWRCB,which may lead to refinement of the measure. III. SWRCB PERMIT FEES LIKELY TO INCREASE; CASA IS ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN THE DEBATE With the State facing a serious budget crisis,Senate and Assembly Budget subcommittees have begun discussions regarding increasing water quality permit fees to support the SWRCB's core regulatory program. Though the subcommittees have not settled on specific trailer bill language,every indication is that the fees will increase significantly—the real question is"how much"? The Governor proposed increasing the cap from the current$10,000 per permit to$20,000; AB 2938 by Assembly Member Joe Simitian calls for increasing the statutory cap to$25,000. There are rumors that others would like to see the cap significantly increased, along the lines of$75,000, and CASA has made it very clear that while our agencies are willing to help close the General Fund gap by shouldering a greater fee burden, we would vigorously oppose a 750%increase in permit fees. 2 A fee subcommittee of CASA members has been convened to review competing proposals and assist in establishing CASA's position. CASA staff have appeared at both subcommittee hearings and have expressed a willingness to go along with an increase in the fee cap to$20,000 to $25,000, provided that the Legislature also addresses existing inequities in the.fee schedule and broadens the base of fee payers so that POTWs are not being asked to pay more than their"fair share." Specifically, CASA has recommended that any fee legislation do all of the following: (1) Eliminate the existing dairy exemption. (Water Code section 132600).) Dairies should pay their fair share of the SWRCB's program costs, as determined by regulation. (2) Require municipal stormwater co-pemrittees to pay a reasonable fee, in addition to the fee paid by the regional permit holder. (3) Require that dischargers who receive waivers in lieu of waste discharge requirements pay the costs of processing and approving those waivers. From this point on, the SWRCB fee increase is likely to move forward on a fast track. CASA continues to meet with the key players in the Legislature,the Legislative Analyst's Office, and the administration in order to advance our position. IV. CASA SUPPORTS BROWN ACT REVISIONS TO PROTECT POTW SECURITY CASA is supporting several bills that would amend the Brown Act to address security- related issues. AB 2645 (Aanestad), sponsored by the Association of California Water Agencies, would permit public agencies to hold closed sessions with law enforcement officials and private security-consultants to discuss threats to the safety and delivery of essential public services,including wastewater treatment. CASA is working with ACWA on an amendment that would also exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Act drawings,plans,or other identifying documents depicting or describing facilities used for the delivery of essential public services,including wastewater treatment, or security studies or reports concerning those facilities or services,where the public agency determines that disclosure would present a threat to, or undermine its ability to protect, the security of the public or the facilities or services. CASA is also supporting AB 1945 (Simitian),which would prohibit the disclosure of confidential information revealed or discussed in a closed session without the governing board's authorization. SB 1643 (Johnson)would amend the provisions governing emergency meetings to provide that where one hour's notice to interested persons is not possible, notice may be provided at the same time that the members of the legislative body are notified of the emergency meeting. cc: CASA Executive Board Yvonne Hunter, League of CA Cities 3 hc Oran a County Sanitation Districts 1 a F 2 ' I le Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page# Date h Subject Orange County Register I -1 I 7C1_ 7 c�z flan � bin o I The .goal is.clear. Kill the- germs that stew in millions of gallons of wastewater primped into the ocean daily. - But in coming weeks, orange County SanVation Dis- trict officials will try to answer wieaCil a seemingly simple quest oa How? District officials think they have the a short-term blanket �g t leastxiu se bleacn kill the hyo bingo �ce Feb- ruary dis- Erma dean triENVIRONMENT' have been searfficials g�raahlc Sanitation District will Ming to on l�to begin using either somtrontodisiafecting240mil- bleaohorhydrogen lion gallons of sewer wam that Peroxide to treat Sew- is pumped 4 lt2 miles offshore age um into the every day through an under g pumped ground pipe. On Feb. 11,rasa, ocean. - . suremems showed a 45-footdeep bacterial plume i aYj AIY.oW - coming-withma half-mile of The Huntington Beath Wave Newport Beach Bt on March 27, the districts board,made up of city officials from ammtd the county, agreed to use,a disinfectam to clean the sewage and imple- ment a plan within 90 days. Hwtmi Beach Mayor Deb- bie Cook was the only member opposed to the idea Sctenhsts .have theorized. that the beach closures in the late 1990s - caused by high bacteria counts-were caused Please see SEWAGE/Page 10 rt � Orange County Sanitation Districts �J� Newspaper Clippings 2 Name of Paper Section Page # Date Subject Orange County Register � " �j�-LOGG�U SEWAGE peroxide and vinegar,to clean the water.The district would be W the fast sewage agency in the Z From page 1 nation to use the mixture. Peracetic acid is a highly ex- by the sewer water drifting in- plosive chemical used in hospi- land However,the cause of the tals to clean surgical instru- closures have not yet been de- ments. It is also biodegradable termined. and produces no toxic byprod- The use of disinfectant is a ucts, according to U.S. Envi- short-term sohttion that may be ronmental Protection Agency used up to five years,said Lisa documents. Murphy, district spokes- In coming weeks,district of- woman, ficials will test the acid on The disinfectants would be sewer water that travels used at both the Fountain Val- through_ one of the smaller ley headquar- pipes at the ters at Euclid Fountain Val- Street and the ley headquar- Huntington tem. Enip- Beach plant at neers will Brookhurst monitor bac- Street teria levels to "We hope to determine disinfect all how quickly the wastewa- the acid kills ter that leaves the bacteria our Plants' Two munic- Murphy said ipal waste-wa- "We needed ! ter plants in an emergency "' SEA CH` - Canada have an."Pl � � . used pera- DistrictIct en COSTA' CetiC acid anG gin-- orgp cessfully for rally sug two years to gested using clean sewage, bleach to kill Huntington Beach and the mix- the bacteria- v[ant,22212 tore is widely Brookhurst Street it's 99.9-per- �- used in Eu- cent effec- The view rope, accord- tive, d=Z ing to a report officials said The plan was to by McGill University, Canada, use 25,000 gallons of bleach a being reviewed by Orange day. But district officials said County Sanitation District engi- they are hesitant to use bleach neers. because it creates [mdc by- The cast to use the peroxide - products-which can harm ma- mixture is expected to be the rive life,environmentalists say same as using bleach,about$11 -and requires a dechlorination million. o agent to offset the toxicity. Loral environmentalists, The bleach, diluted to five however,say the district needs parts chlorine to 1 million parts to come up with a long-term fix o water,will kill virtually all bac- for the problem,now. E teria in the water. "Bleach isn't ringing well The district is now operating with the public._peracetic acid under a controversial exemp- has its drawback" said Joey $ tion that allows it to remove Racano, local environmental bacteria from only half of the activist who said he'll only be sewage it treats. happy if the district fully treats ' fast week, engineers intro- its wastewater. "The cat's out duced an idea to use peracetic of the bag...As long as we have 3 acid, a mixture of hydrogen a low level of treatment,no one � VU +-0� n, .tOrange Coun ' to�n pus'�n�cs f 3 Newspaper Clippings 3 Name of Paper Section Page# Date Subject Orange County Register L"I V w I UI ��Qr,7.r. Cleaning up the bacteria Orange County Sanitation District officials in coming weeks will choose either bleach or a hydrogen mixture to disinfect nearly 240 million gallons of wastewater pumped into the ocean daily.In February,measurements showed a 45-footdeep bacterial plume nearly half a mile from Newport Beach The process may be used at both the Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley plants. ®Underground pumps ®Incoming carry water wastewater Debris. ®Final treatment: upwards to begin from homes from gravitational flow. and screens This primary treated water businesses trucked to mixes with the secondary ® Chemical added to landfill. Solid treated water and is sent out water to control odor. waste to the ocean through an trucked to underground tube called the Kern and ocean auball pipe. Kings ntles I Prefimi Waste water through har - traDand remove I Heavy item such as coffee grounds and sand ) are separated and sent to a landfill. ® Primary treatment: - Solids and liquids are separated er has not been fully in a giant chamber.Heavy,mids swill remain in water and is that sinkto the bottom and light a ocean.District officials recently imaterial that floats to the top twoitleas to kill the bacteria use bleach are collected.The heated water secondary treatment - or hydrogen mixture.Both would be added at is then separated.half is sent to Microorganisms consume the end of the process to kill the bacteria that another treatment building, the remaining organic solids remain in the water The use of bleach requires while the other half is sent into and are then sent to a the addiion of a dechlormation agent to neutralize the ocean. settling basin where the its effect before it's sent into the ocean.The - microorganisms sable out. hydrogen mixture is biodegradable and does not have any known toxic byproducts. Source.Orange county Sanitation Distritl The View What's your view?E-mail your is safe." "I think the solution is to deal thoughts about the Sanitation District officials say, once a with the bacteria without chem- Dismct's secondary aaxhnent short-term solution is found, icals,"said John Scott,a neigh- proposal to FWdew®ocregister. they will focus more on a borhood activist who lives near corn or fax(714)825-04M. long-term solution that could- the Huntington Beach plant. include using ultraviolet fight "There may be no live bacteria,our ozone with ultraviolet light but well be swimming in some- Contact Chad at(714)445-6692 to kill the germs. thing else." or jchaftctegister.com ,�, vw - yvieAA-D D� 2- Orange County Sanitation Districts Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page # Date (.c.:hGt Su Ject Orange County Register y /t CIJDOU 0(p 02 oc� d D 4-11 -e e10 What do you do when you do_ the do? DANGER: The View staff has conducted a comparison study, deciding chemicals. I poured bleach and once and for all,which is the better cleaner.bleach or a mixture of hy- water together. Then, I poured dcogen peroxide and vinegar. The test was prompted by the Sanitation the peroxide and vinegar. District's plan to disinfect millions of gallons of sewage a day with one Now, the U.S.Environmental of these fluids The View has carefully selected reporter and clean-wa- protection Agency reported ter adn"n Jimmy Chai to conduct the study using unscientific methods and bad humor.Similar famous comparison studies that have been that mixing hydrogen peroxide performed:Pepsi vs. Coke,K us. Mao Mary Ann vs. Ginger.Shall we and vinegar ss highly explosive. begin? But,I've watched my fair share of Bill Nye,the Science Guy(no et me introduce myself. relation to me). I'm professor Jimmy The next step was to figure Chai,D.D.S.,MD.,Ph.D. out what to clean.This is where and J.D.S. ... I think the controversy really begins. The Grange County Santa- The suggestions started poor- tion District has decided to use ing in:use my underwear after bleach or a hydrogen peroxide being edited, wash my r , mixture to kill all the bacteria Jimmy GFxai clean my fishless aquarium. that is found in the millions of THE SCIENCE GUY One person suggested cleaning gallons of water that is pumped dentures. So, I called the Foun- into the ocean daily. the Orange County Register. tam Valley office of Dr. Peter Although they have not de- I set out to obtain the in, Hagan, DDS. A lady picked up cided which chemical to use, gtedsents that would put my the phone district officials have been rush- project in motion: bleach, hy- "Do you have any dentures I ing to find a solution after a drogen peroxide and vinegar. could clean?"I asked. 45-foot-deep pile of ick was I went where any good scien- "Are you serious?" she said. found a half mile from the New. list would go to find the biggest "Is this a joke?" port Beach coast. stash of chemicals this side of I was committed to my news On Tuesday,I decided to lend China-Rite Aid on Brookhurst room experiment because I be- them my expertise by helping Street They stock about a down lievesewage is a serious bud- them make a choice. different types of bleach prod- ness. After being rejected by I set up an intricate high-tech ucts and about a million differ- several dentist offices, I came laboratory in a highly restricted ent types of wines.Needless to up with a brilliant plan:use my and fully guarded area known say,I found what I needed scientific concoction to clean as the Fountain Valley bureau of I went to the"rob"to mix my our news bureau toilets. - VV- r-0 n+CL-c.h V Gu U cam/ V I CtAJ Orange County Sanitation Disltricts Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page # Date ppbjeet Orange County Register c y-If LQ(f�r--) hC�+ a� OC-) J oy 3 3 { n x D The . n 9heFOUllla;II1�'l�ff. O fht - TOUIIi ffi `'LBn'-= 3 Fountp Valley. _ z rld WpM_5� I Photo by JIMMY CHAI/Science Guy Sharni product endmsanerd by The V~..Reporter Jimmy Alai and his petrified fish,Skippy,above,have wkred the Sanitation Dates bacteria problem After all, this is where the itation district where it would Sanitation District's problems mix with sewer water and la all start. bacteria I have solved the San- I poured the bleach in first, nation District's beach bacteria wrote down what happened and dilemma! then Bushed the toilet. My re- I would be doing my part for port on the first test shows as society.Imagine everyone poat. follows:nothing happened ing a bottle of chlorine or perox- Then, I poured the peroxide ide mixture down their drains.I mixture and followed the same world lead the fight against bac- procedure.Again,nothing. teria But then it hit me:When the Even though the results toilers Bush, the chemicals showed nothing,the experiment would go through to the san- was not a waste. ru- rOvnttu n ya( t L,(-4-1 ill Orange County Sanitation Districts Newspaper Clippings Name of Paper Section Page# Dat S bject Orange County Register I �0 l reu��rr�- The Mailbox 5etondm water L06e Osage ggunty, San charged into ecreaEnnal swim treatment - wgtdanotApaee wwm,, mutr�l�eeaass m rhe-seputveaa Patricia Wiggins (DSanta didn't Gave an ovantfell d Basin:tiaelly bft-g pg the I.os Rosa)has authored AB2924 to.. Inland cities are Angeles river hadk to life. ,. ro4WtPd d- Blindly discharging the I OPPOSE one crazy idea; the lteattibt 6aly to the'"second- age into the Santa Monica Brry importation of massive. aF level, but to the potable- would probably still be going amotmts of Northern Catifor- Jeebel,, since they release-into on,if LA.had not wisely given. A cis water for the alleged pm- creeks and lakes. up its sewage waiver. pose of "meeting.San Diego's Ius Angeles, among many In the case of San Diego,the water crisis., others, does this by discharg- secondary water, can be What she mightnotyet know ing the secondary treated into heated further to the'te darf is the great welling of support settling ponds (non-swimmer" level,and used for agricunmgl, down here in SoCal because ble);after time,and some heal- park, FV✓Y, and perhaps even this crazy scheme is tied to the tog plants,have their way,the for eventual use as swm�;�P renewal of the sewage waivers water a"potable",equivalent to or drinking water. for OC and San Diego. tertiary standards, and is die - Doug Korthof Jensen, Lynn From: Wassgren,Sonja Sent: Thursday,April 11,2002 8:08 AM To: Ocean Discharge Permit Team; EMT; 130-Communications Services Subject: News Articles HUNTINGTON BEACH Back to the beach A new study finds the plume of partially treated sewage dumped 4 1/2 miles off Huntington comes back toward the beach. By Danette Goulet April112002 " Debate rages on this week over the travels of the enormous plume of partially treated sewage pumped 4 1/2 miles off Huntington Beach each day. At the center of the renewed controversy is a new study that found the sewage does head back toward shore and may be a major contributor to the high bacteria levels that closed miles of Surf City beaches in 1999 and 2000. Orange County Sanitation District officials continue to deny this possibility, citing their own ongoing study as proof. The latest research,conducted by UC Irvine and Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, debunks the long-held theory that the sewage plume is trapped far beneath the ocean's surface by warm water, study participants say. "What our paper says is the internal tides are causing this cold water to mix across the shelf toward the beach and that cold water is reaching the surf zone,"said Brett Sanders, a UCI researcher and coauthor of the study. "So the cold water isn't trapped in Huntington Beach deep in the ocean, it spills up into the surf zone." The shelf is the gradual slope of the ocean floor that extends beyond the outfall pipe to where the ocean floor drops suddenly from 60 meters to depths of 120 meters. "Just because you see cold water at the beach, it doesn't mean there's sewage at the beach-- it tells us cold water isn't trapped and so sewage isn't trapped,"he said. While there was not evidence to prove that the sewage plume reaches the beach,the data does show that it comes more than half way back to shore, Sanders said. "We've observed the plume moving back, about four miles back toward shore," he said. The study,conducted independently of the sanitation district,was done using information gathered by the district in November and May of 2000. And that's a problem,sanitation district officials argue. t "We have a study done using the same data and we do not see the cross shelf transport the way UCI does," said Lisa Murphy, spokeswoman for the sanitation district. "The report we did using the same data is pan of the . ocean monitoring work that is currently being evaluated by an independent panel of experts." The sanitation district study, which will be released in May, also includes additional data, Murphy said. It uses the same data used by Scripps and UCI researchers,she said, but also contains bacteria information and the results of ocean testing done in May through September 2001. Sanders agreed that more study needed to be done to get a complete picture, but new information would not negate the current data. "This is their data-- they collected it," he said. This new study, which was released on the American Chemical Societys Environmental Science and Technologyjoumal Web site, gives many yet another reason to fight the sanitation district's request to extend the waiver that allows it to dump partially treated sewage. The district currently holds a waiver that allows it to dump sewage treated to less than the full secondary level required by the Clean Water Act of 1972. That waiver expires at the beginning of next year. This new study has already had an impact on city leaders and coastal commissioners. The California Coastal Commission overwhelmingly voted not to grant San Diego an extension on a similar waiver. "The commission decided that San Diego needed to come up to full secondary," said commissioner Shirley Dettloff, who is also on the Huntington Beach City Council. "I didn't quote the study, ijust suggested to the commission that we are getting additional information in Orange County and we are finding things we thought were fact, we're finding that with additional studies and changes in conditions, that those facts may not be reality and the basis for making a decision on the waiver will be impacted by the new evidence." a DANETTE GOULET is the city editor. She can be reached at (714) 965-7170 or by e-mail at danette.goulet@lalimes.com . HUNTINGTON BEACH Editor's Notebook -- Danette Goulet A new place for Ron Davis By Danette Goulet April 11 2002 If you've been missing the instigating ways of our old friend Ron Davis,pine no more. He can now be found each week on HBTV 3. 2 His new show"Perspective," which airs weekly, is the culmination of five years of battling. Throughout that time,Davis has complained about the"sub-par"programming on the city station, which he now describes as "cutting edge for government access" with the addition of his show. For years he made it his business to be the bane of station director Rich Barnard's existence,until the station agreed to tape a pilot of his idea. He scoffed at programming that he felt offered a one-sided view of issues and pleaded with them to step it up and make waves.His idea was to have a debate,rather than a discussion, of city issues. "This is what I've always argued-- (HBTV3 has) got to present both sides or go back to to just airing council meetings,"Davis said. There are two formats to the show Davis produces and hosts. On a week that there is a council meeting the show covers the hot topics from the meeting. He takes the attitude that no one watched the meeting and explains what happened and debates with a guest council's decisions.The next week the show will cover one major topic and invite guests from opposing camps to debate the issue on air. The idea is to have lively debate sans politicos,he said. He's done two shows on the invocation issue,inviting clergy and taking the anti-invocation stance himself. This week if you tune in to channel 3 at 7 p.m.you can see activist Joey Racano go head-to-head with Blake Anderson of the orange County Sanitation District. It's a "real wrestling match" Davis tells us. I think Davis has really found his niche. If being a lawyer didn't provide enough of an arena for battle--now he's got a foram and an audience. • DANETTE GOULET is the city editor. She can be reached at(714)965-7170 or by e-mail at danette.goulet@latimes.com . HUNTINGTON BEACH EDITORIAL A clean future for our beaches April 112002 It was a bad week for our beaches. On Tuesday, the Orange County Health Care Agency closed the beach around Magnolia Street after an unknown quantity of sewage spilled from possible cracks,breaks or a separations in sewage lines from the nearby lifeguard headquarters and restrooms. The area will remain closed until the source of the contamination is removed and water-quality testing meets standards. Perhaps more far-reaching and more troubling,new research surfaced suggesting that the partially treated sewage that is pumped off Huntington is surfacing back near shore. It could very well be the cause of 3 much of the cities water-quality problems, including the summer-long closure in 1999. The latest research,conducted by UC Irvine and Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, clearly debunks the long-held theory that the sewage plume is trapped beneath the ocean's surface by warm water, study participants say. It is compelling evidence that a waiver the district has,which allows for the release of the partially treated sewage,needs to be revoked.Huntington is at the front of the effort to make certain the exemption is not renewed when it expires next year.That effort,with or without this additional reminder,must continue. And with other cities jumping aboard, it seems increasingly likely that the waiver soon will be history. Still,Orange County Sanitation District officials disagree with the findings,vehemently. They question how this new study,based on the same data the district has used, could come to an opposite conclusion. They also plan to release another study in May,which will include additional information they say supports their findings that the treated sewage is not a potential hazard. That study will have to contain significant and nearly irrefutable evidence to outweigh the UCI and Scripps findings,not to mention the yellow warning ribbons now stretched across our beach. Coastal panel backs unnecessary upgrade April 11,2002 The California Coastal Commission's failure to consider the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting San Diego's current sewage treatment system is really appalling. Equally appalling, some environmentalists obviously haven't listened to Scripps Institution of Oceanography scientists,who have studied San Diego's sewage treatment system for more than a decade,making tens of thousands of dives on the sewage outfall and kelp beds off Point Loma Along with the city's ocean experts,they have found absolutely no environmental damage. Accprding to extensive ocean testing, San Diego's sewage discharge is 100 percent in compliance with state and federal standards. Despite that convincing evidence,Bruce Reznik of San Diego BayKeeper and Marco Gonzalez of the Surfrider Foundation applauded the Coastal Commission's rejection of San Diego's federally approved waiver of secondary sewage treatment mandates. San Diego's Point Loma plant treats sewage to advanced primary standards,which is environmentally fine for our deep ocean outfall and the ocean currents off our coast. The Coastal Commission's demand that San Diego commit to continual improvements in its sewage treatment over the life of the next five•year waiver, and presumably the five-year waiver after that,means the city would eventually have to build a new secondary treatment plant,at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. The claim by Reznik that it would cost only$400,000 is a fantasy. Besides,there's no scientific evidence to back up those who say secondary treatment would benefit the ocean environment.They cannot refine the work done by Scripps researchers Paul Dayton and the late Mia Tegner,who proved that San Diego's sewage system is environmentally safe.Some don't understand the difference between the cities sewage treatment system and its sewage collection system. If San Diego is forced to upgrade its treatment system,the money will come directly from funds earmarked for fixing its leaky sewage pipes.Last fall,the City Council passed a 33.5 percent sewage fee increase in order to spend$100 million a year replacing old pipes. That money could be drained away if the city is forced to pay for unneeded sewage treatment upgrades. The result?More sewage spills. The California Coastal Commission should understand that its far more important to spend public dollars 4 stopping sewage spills and containing urban runoff than upgrading sewage plants that don't need upgrading. Yesterday,the state Regional Water Quality Control Board, flying in the face of the state Coastal Commission's action, approved San Diego's waiver permit.The board required only a minor improvement in the advanced primary treatment standard,an improvement the city already has attained. The regional board understands science.The Coastal Commission and some others are more interested in environmental politics than in environmental science. We urge everybody in San Diego to present a united from to convince the Coastal Commission to relent. 5 Customers question rising rates for sewer service Page 1 of 2 I Home Top Nation 8 Local S,ports Business Accent Health 8 Home 8 Special Gottin0 News World po Fitness Garden Show Features Food Away Comi OCla ss,hrd ads Wednesday,Apm 17,2002 LOCAL O Nowspaper ads Customers question rising rates for �— O Local coupons sewer service ° ODaily deals 0 Buy our photos The planned jump this year in O.C. is to $87.50 from � — — Q CoVisit $80. District cites higher Costs, aging facilities. 0 Email I April 17, 2002 iwm By JOEL ZLOTNIK The Orange County Register Graduate from the most orestlalous A planned increase for sewer rates by the Orange County Sanitation evening Bachelor District has James Atkinson of Tustin scratching his head. It's only a program in Orange on few dollars, but he said it's the same story every year and he thinks it stinks. What too-rated business school Notices have been mailed to 400,000 customers that bills may jump graduates the most nearly 9.5 percent, from$80 annually now to$87.50 on property-tax MBA's in Orange bills coming in October. �CoounyCoun 4 WfEiYI� I went back out curiosity see what the[rend was . and it's about a 10 percentt increase every tki year," said Anson, a a retired Rockwell analyst. "Eight or 10 bucks doesn't seem like much. But when you look at the rate of increase,it's outrageous." Ftl ee. � In 1996, Atkinson's bill was$50. It has crept up at least 9 percent to every year, he said. P1 OHIO "I see my rates going up and I don't understand why," he said. Anaheim Councilwoman Shirley McCracken, a district board member, said it's a challenge to balance rising costs without passing too much to the customers. More on myOC District officials said the increase is necessary to pay for higher •Buy sell research ears utility costs, more stringent treatment and fixing aging infrastructure. FBnd�ma The district estimates it will need about$1.3 billion in capital •Hoyle shoshimas improvements during the next decade. About$176 million is •OC Community Information budgeted for next year for such things as replacing pum stations. •Boom, Officials note that the state average for sewer service is$220 a year. •HS soods slats •Blocks McCracken said the district,serving 2.2 million people, has heard from hundreds of customers about the increase. http://www.ocregister.conulocal/rate00417cci.shtnil 4/17/2002 Customers question rising rates for sewer service Page 2 of 2 ® "The responses seem to be more questions than necessarily opposition, and hopefully we'll be able to answer as many questions California Lottery as we can," McCracken said A public meeting about the rates is set for 7 p.m. May 22 at the district, 10844 Ellis Ave. in Fountain Valley.The board is expected to vote June 26. Rate increase planned Sewer rates for Orange County Sanitation District customers could be going up.Letters went out last week to customers about he proposed increase. me Oran \I A public meeting to discuss the rates is set for May 22. S La Nee9E - 1 - , p I rm ocsnaie8cene I yoc BUiw - PAby �. :^ tYPFFSS ID11 S Q 0 10 Annual suer suelR cis for - " . per reea00e aret.Rates tor — *POP gz••a3.elWepnw u4 Sholk-fas0f residential rate tld9hmlly residential rate per unW 'W'99 'WOO WOO 'OF02 '021 W99 '99-'DO'WOI '01-'OZ'W(13 y-- q $IIl1D9-SreaO. seD.00- rso _Fsre? Fnm 3se,co_ .; 125 2 74.00 7000 38.00 -60.00 111 5T.80.5390.54.60__56.00.Gl 7SP7100 78DO 90.00 8730 5M 53.90 5e.60 56JDO GLL9 5 BeLO 9675 IA00 BODO f730 59.15 6773 59L0 56.00 6L2W '6 79a0 B2D0 7e.00 e0.00 BrSD 5530 5L40 5460 5600 61.20 7 60.00 6500 r0.00 80.00 H130 Q00 /620 SUO 5600 H.a 11 A0.00 90.00 7a00 80.00 030 SG00 63a0 50.60 SLOD 61D 0--- id 10100 he.00 8100 Hl50 -- A ---- ---- 613 71 hMd'eetlty bythe brine Ranrt Water OishiR__.._.________......------ sou¢Oragefamry Sarutation D'Mrirr The Register http://www.ocregister.comAocal/rateOO417cci.shtrnl 4/17/2002 Watershed may become model -- OCR April 13,2002 A three-county effort to improve the ecology of the Santa Ana River may serve as a model for a statewide program to safeguard rivers and streams,environmental officials said Friday. The state Resources Agency released a report on 10 river-drainage systems,known as watersheds, across the state, including the Santa Ana River watershed. Agencies in Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties have been cooperating to remove an invasive, non-native reed called arundo and improve water quality and supply. That effort may act as a template, along with others,to create a statewide program that provides funding, reduces redundancy and improves monitoring of projects,state officials said. -Pet Brennan (714)796-7865 Restrooms testing OK in Huntington water contamination April 14,2002 By DANIELLE HERUBIN The Orange County Register Preliminary tests show that beach bathrooms are not the likely cause of bacterial contamination of Huntington State Beach waters. Monica Mazur, a spokeswoman for the Orange County Health Care Agency, said Saturday that testing will continue Monday, but it appears the three public restrooms on the beach near Magnolia Street are not causing the problem. Mazur said she was disappointed there is still no clear answer. "We've been looking at this problem since 1999, trying to eliminate different things such as runoff,the sewer lines -we're still looking at offshore sources -so far nothing definite has come to light," Mazur said. S.D. urged to request new vote on sewage - San Diego Union Tribune Local coastal panel member is hopeful By Terry Rodgers STAFF W RITER April 13,2002 A local representative to the state Coastal Commission yesterday urged San Diego to request a new vote from the coastal agency,which denied its sewage discharge permit earlier this week. This definitely needs some reconsideration by the commission,'said Patrick Kruer,one of two San Diego-area representatives on the 12-member state coastal panel. On Monday,with five commissioners absent, including Kruer,the commission voted 6-1 against San Diego's request to continue treating its sewage to a less-stringent standard than most U.S. sewage agencies. 'I'm sell in shock and surprised by this particular vote,'Kruer said. He left Mondays meeting to catch a flight before the commission voted on San Diego's permit,thinking approval was secure even without his vote. Commission insiders believe the city could swing enough votes to win approval if all twelve commissioners are present.Only one of Gov.Gray Davis'four appointees was present at Mondays meeting in Santa Barbara. The commission's ruling forced the Metropolitan Wastewater Department into crisis mode over how to meet the demands for improved treatment but maintain enough capacity to accommodate growth. San Diego, which discharges an average of 175 million gallons per day of treated sewage from 8s Point Loma treatment plant, presented the commission volumes of documents showing the effluent is not harming the environment. But a majority of commissioners indicated they simply didn't believe the evidence gleaned from ocean monitoring reports.They urged San Diego to upgrade its treatment, improve the ocean monitoring system and make a better effort to use more of the 18.5 million gallons per day of reclaimed water that now gets dumped into the ocean. Metro Wastewater,which handles sewage for San Diego and 15 other agencies and cities in the region, operates under a federal waiver that allows it to use advanced primary treatment rather than the secondary method used by the vast majority of the nation's 16,000 sewage agencies. Kruer said he believes the commission's ruling,which went against the recommendation of its own staff, was erroneous. Some observers, including Kruer,believe the commission may have been concerned about setting a precedent for a more controversial waiver from secondary treatment that is up for renewal next year for the Orange County Sanitation District. "I think some of the commissioners were trying to send a message to Orange County, and that disappoints me,"Kruer said. But commission Insiders say the undercurrents that prompted the commission's unexpected vote against San Diego's waiver are more complex. Members of the commission are far more passionate about clean-water issues than past commissions. They're willing to be mavericks and push the boundaries of the commission's authority.They were especially bothered that San Diego-a big metropolitan region that brags about its quality of life-was attempting to reset the clock and obtain a limit on mass emissions of 15,000 tons per year that was the same maximum set in 1995. So,they decided to push the envelope. The commission's ruling, which the San Diego City Council may appeal to the U.S. secretary of commerce,triggered an avalanche of criticism. On Friday,Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego,joined the chorus of critics and demanded that the commission rescind its vote or taco a lawsuit that he'd be willing to file himself. Vargas contended the commission violated state law, which forbids the coastal agency from Issuing a ruling that conflicts with the state Regional Water Quality Control Board. On Wednesday, the water quality board unanimously approved a new sewage discharge permit for San Diego that renews the secondary treatment exemption but tightens the limit on annual mass emissions. However,the permit approved by the regional board contains a legal flaw. Officials with the federal Environmental Protection Agency yesterday confirmed that the agency,which has the final say on the waiver,cannot approve San Diego's permit as amended by the regional board if it fails to mandate a reduction in mass pollutants over the five-year term. That must be resolved before the EPA can issue the waiver. By Leslie Wolf Branscomb UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER April15,2002 San Diego and Orange County are the largest communities in the nation that don't treat their sewage to the standard required by the U.S. Clean Water Act. San Diego's waiver that exempts the region was threatened last week when the state Coastal Commission opposed its renewal. And many believe Orange County's waiver will not be renewed next year. But the two communities'situations differ substantially. In Orange County,studies have found that sewage from the treatment plant outfall may be washing up on beaches, and opposition to the waiver is growing.In San Diego,political support for the waiver remains solid,and scientists have testified that no harm has come to the ocean from the city's method of sewage treatment Among other major West Coast cities,Los Angeles and San Francisco once sought waivers, too. But both learned that the process can be protracted,expensive and highly politicized. When the Clean Water Act was enacted 30 years ago,much of it was aimed at cleaning up the nation's streams,rivers and bays where cities dumped raw sewage and industrial waste. However,sewage agencies that discharge directly into the ocean- where the vastness of the receiving water theoretically dilutes the effects of the waste water-are now allowed to obtain waivers that permit them to treat sewage to a lesser standard than the so-called secondary treatment required by the Clean Water Act. Of 16,000 sewage treatment plants nationwide,36 have waivers from the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,and seven are pending renewal. The Orange County Sanitation District and the San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department are by far the largest agencies with waivers.Most are held by tiny cities and towns in Maine, Alaska and Puerto Rico. In California,the only other cities with waivers are Morro Bay and Goleta. San Diego's Metropolitan Wastewater Department,which serves 1.97 million residents of the city of San Diego and 15 other cities and water districts, sought to have its waiver renewed last week. But the Coastal Commission and the state Regional Water Quality Control Board,which both have a say,took opposing actions. The Coastal Commission said the city has not done a sufficient job to improve its treatment process to deserve the waiver.The control board offered conditional approval if the city agrees to improve the quality of water it discharges into the ocean. David Schlesinger,former head of San Diego's waste-water department,is adamant the city doesn't need secondary treatment because the existing method of advanced primary treatment is environmentally sound. "The city has consistently shown, scientifically,that they're in compliance with the California State Ocean Plan," Schlesinger said,referring to testimony given during a lawsuit filed in the late 1980s that took eight years to resolve. During the trial,the late Roger Revelle,director emeritus of Scripps Institution of Oceanography, joined some of his colleagues in pronouncing that secondary treatment would make no difference in ocean water quality off of San Diego. He testified that there had been some changes in the types of sea-floor organisms found near the sewage outfall,but he doubted the changes were harmful. The city finally obtained its waiver in 1995.The lawsuit, filed by the EPA because of San Diego's failure to comply with the Clean Water Act, was settled the following year with the city's promise to improve its treatment system. Currently, sewage treated at the city's Point Loma waste-water treatment plant is very close to meeting the Clean Water Act standard requiring removal of 85 percent to 90 percent of solids, though it falls short of the requirement for removal of oxygen-depleting organic material, said Alan Langworthy, the city's deputy director of environmental monitoring. Langworthy said the treated effluent coming out of the plant meets state standards for bacteria levels and has even more stringent control of toxics than would be required by secondary treatment standards. To convert to secondary treatment would require taking half of the dozen 240-foot-long sedimentation tanks-called "clarifiers" - at the Point Loma plant and turning them into biological tanks, where bacteria would eat away at the solids in the waste water. But that would cut the treatment plant's capacity in half: Currently,the Point Loma plant processes about 175 million gallons of sewage a day. It has a capacity to treat 240 million gallons daily. If that capacity is halved, the city would not be able to treat its current level of sewage much less handle the additional sewage generated by the region's projected population growth,city officials say. Ultimately,more secondary sewage treatment plants would have to be built in other areas of the city, said Metro Wastewater Director Scott Tulloch. Tulloch estimates it would cost$1.7 billion to$2 billion to make the conversion to secondary treatment. (A decade ago the cost was estimated at$3 billion,but many improvements have since been made to San Diego's sewage system.) When the Clean Water Act was first enacted,federal construction grants were awarded to help cities comply. But that money is no longer available,Tulloch said. "It would be a tremendous hardship on the ratepayers," he said. "We believe it would mean at least a 35 percent increase in rates." Schlesinger maintains that one of the reasons secondary treatment isn't necessary here is that the sewage outfall off Point Loma is 4.5 miles offshore and 320 feet deep,one of the deepest in the country. Orange County, however, is in a different situation, with its outfall only 190 feet deep.Recent studies indicate that treated sewage from that outfall may be washing ashore and causing beach closures. There, a movement to switch to secondary treatment is gaining momentum. Seven of the 25 cities and water agencies that belong to the Orange County Sanitation District have vowed to fight renewal of the district's waiver. The Orange County district processes 240 million gallons of sewage a day from 2.2 million residents of north and central Orange County and already treats half its sewage to the secondary standard,said district spokeswoman Lisa Murphy. Converting to full secondary would cost an estimated$400 million, which would mean an annual rate hike of$60 to$80 per household,Murphy said. Over the next few months the sanitation district board members will review environmental reports and consider the available technology and the cost,Murphy said. They will vote in June on whether to continue to seek a waiver when the district's ocean discharge permit comes up for renewal in 2003. Bill Keaney,manager of San Francisco's Water Pollution Control Division,said the city originally sought a waiver,but it became a"bureaucratic nightmare'of time,money and countless consultants. "We eventually concluded that the waiver wasn't going to do us much good," Keaney said. "It would have to be renewed every five years, and it was a pretty good bet that somewhere down the road there would be a movement against it, so we voluntarily withdrew our waiver request." The city had three waste-water treatment plants, one was converted to secondary treatment in 1982,he said. Another secondary treatment plant was built in 1993,and together they treat about 84 million gallons a day. The cost was about$1.5 billion,and about half of that was paid by federal construction grants and by the state,he said. The city of Los Angeles failed in its attempt to obtain a waiver, when its application was denied by the EPA in 1985. A spill of partially treated sewage and concerns about the city's practice of disposing of sewage sludge in the ocean caused a public outcry around the same time. The EPA had also sued Los Angeles for failing to comply with the Clean Water Act.The 1987 lawsuit settlement required the city to convert to secondary treatment and stop dumping up to 200 tons of sludge a day into the ocean. It took Los Angeles 10 years to reach full secondary treatment,and the conversion was finished in late 1998,just weeks ahead of the EPA's deadline,said Jim Langley, assistant director of waste water. The conversion cost$1.6 billion.Between $30 million to$60 million was paid for by federal construction grants,Langley said,just as the grant money was about to run out. Leslie Branscomb: (619)498-6630; leslie.branscomb@uniontrib.com<MAU-TO:leslie.branscomb@uniontrib.com> AGENDA BOARD OF DIRECTORS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT DISTRICT'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 www.ocsd.com REGULAR MEETING April 24, 2002 — 7:00 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 District's Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Board 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 District 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. All current agendas and meeting minutes are also available via Orange County Sanitation District's Internet site located at www.ocsd.com. Upon entering the District's web site, please navigate to the Board of Directors section. 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. (See listing in Board Meeting folders) 4. Appointment of Chair pro tem, if necessary 5. Public Comments: All persons wishing to address the Board 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 three minutes. Matters of interest addressed by a member of the public and not listed on this agenda cannot have action taken by the Board of Directors except as authorized by Section 54954.2(b). 04/24/02 Page 2 6. The 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 Chair, consideration of resolutions or commendations, presentations and awards b. Report of General Manager C. Report of General Counsel 7. If no corrections or amendments are made, the minutes for the regular meeting held on March 27, 2002 will be deemed approved as mailed and be so ordered by the Chair. 8. Ratifying payment of claims of the District, by roll call vote, as follows: ALL DISTRICTS 03/15/02 03/31/02 Totals $8,467,954.20 $7.119,974.40 CONSENT CALENDAR All matters placed on the Consent Calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular Rem is requested to be removed from the Consent Calendar by a Director or staff member, 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. The Chair will determine if any items are to be deleted from the Consent Calendar. 9. Consideration of motion to approve all agenda items appearing on the Consent Calendar not specifically removed from same, as follows: a. (1) Receive and file petition from John Homuth requesting annexation of 2.226 acres to the District in the vicinity of Meads Drive and Hillside Drive in an unincorporated area of Orange County; and (2)Adopt Resolution No. OCSD 02-07, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (Proposed Annexation No. OCSD-7-Hormuth Annexation). b. (1)Approve a Grant of Easement, Right of Entry, Maintenance and Indemnity Agreement with the City of Costa Mesa in a form approved by General Counsel at no cost to the District; and (2)Approve a Grant of Easement Agreement with the Newport-Mesa Unified School District, with the District paying the fees over a 5-year period oft$5,252.57 per year for a total cost of$26,262.85, in a form approved by General Counsel. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 10. Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, If any. 04/24/02 Page 3 NON-CONSENT CALENDAR 11. a. Verbal report by Chair of Steering Committee re April 24, 2002 meeting. b. DRAFT STEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES—NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only):The Chair will order the draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 27, 2002 to be filed. C. Review and consideration of agenda items considered by the Steering Committee re the April 24, 2002 meeting. 12. a. Verbal report by Chair of Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee re the April 3, 2002 meeting. b. DRAFT OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES—NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 3, 2002 to be filed. C. Approve Professional Services Agreement with m2t technologies to provide professional services for the evaluation of alternatives for Plant No. 2 Oxygen Plant Replacemenl/ Rehabilitation Assessment, Job No. SP-72,for an amount not to exceed $97,000. d. Authorize the General Manager to issue Purchase Agreements with Pro Pipe Professional Pipe Services, Innerline Engineering, and National Plant Services for Sewer Line Video Inspection Services, Specification No. 5-2002-81, for a combined annual total amount not to exceed $400,000,with four one-year renewable options. e. (1)Award a consulting services contract to Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group, Inc. for professional consulting services for development of Asset Management Program, Job No. SP-68,for a total amount not to exceed $455,957; and, (2)approve out-of-country travel for two employees to Australia/New Zealand for the purpose of site visits to five public agencies that have successfully implemented advanced asset management programs. f. (1) Establish Cisco Equipment as the District's standard networking equipment; and (2)award a purchase contract to IKON Office Solutions for Purchase of CISCO Equipment, Specification No. E-2002-86, to provide infrastructure networking equipment and maintenance contract, in an amount not to exceed $799,247. 04/24/02 Page 4 g. (1)Authorize development of a Fats, Oil and Grease (FOG)Program in accordance with the provisions of California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Order No. 01-99, General Discharge Requirements for Sewage Collection Agencies; (2) Establish a new budget of$150,000 for development of the FOG Program; (3)Authorize staff to develop a funding program with the County of Orange and cities within the District's jurisdiction for development of the FOG Program; and (4)Approve a sole source consultant agreement with Environmental Engineering and Construction, Inc. to conduct a study for Phase I of the FOG Program for an amount not to exceed $268,000 h. (1)Authorize the General Manager to exercise informal bidding procedures and sole-source procedures, as applicable,for the award of contracts for the Ocean Outfall Bacteria Reduction Program, Job No. J-87; (2)Authorize the General Manager to purchase and award sole-source contracts, as applicable,for materials and equipment, and/or services, including tanks, pumps, Flow meters, and certain electrical and instrumentation devices for testing,feasibility and planning study purposes, as identified by the District's consultants,for use in the Ocean Outfall Bacteria Reduction Program, Job No. J-87, in an amount not to exceed $600,000; and, (3) Increase the sole-source authorization limits for the General Manager to $200,000 for said purchases. 13. a. Verbal report by Chair of Planning, Design and Construction Committee re the April 4, 2002 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 on April 4, 2002 to be filed. C. (1)Approve a budget amendment of$200,605 for Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, Job No.J-71-1 and J-71-2, for a total budget of $1,290,605; (2) Ratify Change Order No. 2 to Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2,with Margate Construction, Inc. authorizing an addition of$150,582, and a time extension of 168 calendar days, increasing the total contract amount to $883,249;and (3)Accept Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2,as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement. d. (1) Reject bid received March 27, 2001 from Margate Construction, Inc. for Natural Gas Line Replacement at Plant No. 1, Job No. SP2000.22, due to the single bid exceeding the Engineer's Estimate; and (2)Award a construction contract to Atlas-Allied, Inc.for Natural Gas Line Replacement at Plant No. 1, Job No. SP2000-22(Rebid), in an amount not to exceed $184,887. e. Approve a sole source purchase order to AT&T Wireless for phone service related to Long Term Flow Monitoring Program,Job No. J-73-2, in an amount not to exceed $165,000. 04/24/02 Page 5 f. Approve a budget amendment of$168,000 for Facilities Modifications for Odor Control, Job No. J-71-3, for a total project budget of$2,900,000. g. Authorize the General Manager to negotiate a purchase order for procurement of services with Power& Compression Systems for Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79, for an amount not to exceed $1,500.000. h. Establish a budget of$1,982,000 for the Engineering Trailer Complex at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-90. 14. a. Verbal report by Chair of Finance,Administration and Human Resources Committee re the April 10, 2002 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 April 10, 2002 to be filed. C. Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of March 2002. d. Approve SAFETY-POL-103, 105, 111, 112 and 403, as provided for in Resolution No. OCSD 02-5, regarding the District's Injury and Illness Prevention Program Policy. 15. a. Verbal report by Vice Chair of Joint Groundwater Replenishment System Cooperative Committee re April 22, 2002 meeting. b. DRAFT JOINT GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM COOPERATIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES—NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Joint Groundwater Replenishment System Cooperative Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 11. 2002 to be filed. C. (1)Approve Trojan Technologies as the ultraviolet light(UV) equipment manufacturer for the Groundwater Replenishment System based on lowest calculated present worth life cycle cost of$20,253,000, and a total capital cost of $9,749,405, plus tax; (2)Approve a Pre-Selection Agreement between Orange County Water District(OCWD) and Trojan Technologies to provide engineering details for the equipment design in the total amount of$250,000 to be equally shared between OCWD and Orange County Sanitation District; (3)Grant authority to the Board of Directors of OCWD to assign the value of the ultraviolet light equipment to the contract to install the permanent UV system at a total estimated capital cost of$8,649,563, plus tax. 04/24/02 Page 6 16. CLOSED SESSION: During the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Board,the Chair may convene the Board in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate negotiations, pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.8, 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 Board during a permitted closed session and are not available for public inspection. At such time as the Board takes final action 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 re anticipated litigation, one potential case. (Government Code Section 54956.9(c)). b. Reconvene in regular session C. Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session 17. Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report 18. Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any 19. Future Meeting Date: The next Board of Directors special meeting is scheduled for May 15, 2002, at 6:00 p.m. 20. Adjournment NOTICE TO DIRECTORS: To place items on the agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors shall submit items to the Board Secretary no later than the close of business 14 days preceding the 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 714 962-2411, ext. 7130 G:\wp.dta\agenda\aoard Agendas\2002 Board Agendas\042402 agenda.dw 1 P Orange County Sanitation District MINUTES BOARD MEETING MARCH 27, 2002 �oJN� 3AA11TgT�oy c � m O y Fcr'y� EN��QO ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 Minutes for Board Meeting e Page 2 03/27/02 ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on March 27, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., in the District's Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present as follows: ACTIVE DIRECTORS ALTERNATE DIRECTORS X Norman Z. Ec kenrode, Chair Constance Underhill X Shirley McCracken, Vice Chair Tom Daly X Mike Alvarez Mark A. Murphy X Steve Anderson Steve Simonian X Don Bankhead Jan Flory X Shawn Boyd John Larson X Brian Brady Darryl Miller X Debbie Cook Connie Boardman X Laurann Cook Larry Crandall X Brian Donahue David Shawver X James M. Ferryman Arlene Schafer John M. Gullixson X Michael Duvall X Alice B. Jempsa Arthur DeBolt X Tony Kawashima Tracy Worley Beth Krom X Greg Smith X Mark Leyes Bruce Broadwater X Pat McGuigan Alberta Christy X Roy Moore Marty Simonoff X Joy Neugebauer Grace Epperson X Russell Patterson Richard A. Freschi X Anna L. Piercy Tim Keenan X Tod Ridgeway Gary Adams X Jerry Sigler Jim Dow X Jim Silva Chuck Smith X Paul Walker Kenneth Blake STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Blake P.Anderson, General Manager, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary; Bob Ghirelli; Dave Ludwin; Greg Mathews; Patrick Miles; Lisa Murphy; Bob Ooten; Gary Streed; Lisa Tomko; Jim Benzie; Dennis May;Juanita Skillman; Ingrid Hellebrand; Sonja Wassgren; Jim Herberg; Mark Esquer, Ryal Wheeler; Fred O'Brien; Simon Watson; Mahin Talebi; Brian Bingman; Catherine Biele OTHERS PRESENT:Thomas Nixon, General Counsel; Irwin Haydock; Jan Vandersloot; Larry Porter, Randy Fuhrman; Joey Racano; Dennis Baker; Doug Korthof; Eileen Murphy; Bill Butler, Les Jones; Greg Jewell; Charles T. Montoya; Marc Samulewicz;Wes Lewison; Colleen T. Minutes for Board Meeting Page 3 03/27/02 e Roque; Don Sloven; Sima Vajdan; Carl Neuhausen; George Carlson; Art Perry; Rocky Zoetec; Dean Albright; Ron Pins; Steve Ray; Mehmet Kitis; Kimo Look; Ben Wilson; Fred Soronshian PUBLIC COMMENTS The following persons spoke about ocean discharge issues and expressed their opposition to the waiver. Doug Korthoff; Steve Ray; Joey Racano; Dennis Baker, Larry Porter, Colleen Roque; Irwin Haydock; Dean Albright; Greg Jewell;Wes Lewison; Marc Samulewicz; Eileen Murphy. Charles Montoya of Pioneer America, the District's current chemical supplier, spoke in support of the District's proposal to disinfect the effluent with bleach. Randy Fuhnnan requested the Directors to consider different alternatives other than bleach as a permanent solution of disinfection. RESOLUTIONS OF COMMENDATION MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: That the Board of Directors adopt a Resolution of Commendation expressing appreciation to James (Jim) Benzie, Source Control Supervisor,for his contribution and dedication to 40 years of public service upon his retirement from the District. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: That the Board of Directors adopt a Resolution of Commendation expressing appreciation to Dennis May, Principal Engineering Associate, for his contribution and dedication to 36 years of public service upon his retirement from the District. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: That the Board of Directors adopt a Resolution of Commendation expressing appreciation to Ronald (Ron) Parker, Project Specialist, for his contribution and dedication to 32 years of public service upon his retirement from the District. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: That the Board of Directors adopt a Resolution of Commendation expressing appreciation to Bill Mills, General Manager of the Orange County Water District,for his contribution and dedication to public service upon his retirement from the Water District. REPORT OF THE CHAIR Chair Eckenrode reviewed the calendar for the working committees for the month of April. REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER Blake Anderson, General Manager, reported on Assembly Bill 1892, authored by Tom Harman, which give the District the ability to help manage urban runoff in Orange County. He reviewed the progress made to date with flow diversion with the City of Huntington Beach and the County. Minutes for Board Meeting Page 4 e 03/27/02 Since then beach sampling data indicates a 50%decrease in beach contamination, and the District is receiving approximately 2 million gallons of dry weather runoff on dry weather days. With the Harman Bill in place, staff envisions: (1)Continuing dry weather diversions at those locations where water quality and environmental standards are being impacted with no other practical solution available; (2) Participating in planning and evaluation studies with the County and stakeholder cities to identify problems, setting priorities and developing technical approaches to solve those problems; (3)Emphasize opportunities to use treatment and impound alternatives other than diversions; and (4)Developlfund a grant program similar to the cooperative projects program currently in place,which would be a matching grant program for those projects that meet certain qualifications. Mr. Anderson reported staff has been successful in enlisting Assemblyman Harman to get the permissive language to do this. The Bill left Committee the prior week with a unanimous 11-0 vote, and it is expected that as the Bill moves on to the floor of the Assembly and the Senate over the next few weeks,that it would be approved. There was opposition registered by Friends of Harbors, Beaches, and Parks. They see a correlation between opposition to the waiver and what the District is trying to do with urban runoff. The legislative analyst did address the issue at length for the Committee and stated, "It wasn't clear how authorizing OCSD to develop and operate urban runoff treatment facilities has any bearing one way or the other on the ongoing controversy over the 301(h)waiver. It could be argued that being able to treat urban runoff, even to the currently permissible levels,would still be considerably better for the environment than doing nothing." Mr. Anderson further stated that under Proposition 218, the District would be able to pass on user fees to recover the costs of facilities for diversions. Mr. Anderson then updated the Directors on the Bill authored by Ken Maddox, that would prevent the District from applying for an additional 301(h)waiver and would require OCSD to move to full secondary treatment. Staff is rewriting the Bill to accomplish what they had originally intended. The Bill, as currently written, also applies to facilities in Goleta, San Diego and Morro Bay. It is staffs understanding that the Bill will be rewritten to apply only to OCSD. If the State decides to inject itself into this issue, Mr.Anderson will be seeking approval to go to Sacramento to look for$400 million to come along with that Bill. The Bill was discussed in the Steering Committee and staff will work with Assemblyman Maddox's office to try to persuade him to drop his Bill. It was then reported that staff hopes to move up the time for a tentative board decision on level of treatment to the May and June time frame . The five areas of concern that will be provided to the Board and the public are treatment technology, ocean science,financial implications, regulatory setting, and public input. Mr. Anderson reported that two budgets are being prepared. Budget A incorporates no change in the treatment process. Budget B will identify the incremental costs for disinfection and the incremental costs for additional secondary treatment. A permit application will need to be submitted to the EPA in December 2002 regardless of what the District is applying for. REPORT OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL Assistant General Counsel Tom Nixon indicated there would be a need for closed session. Minutes for Board Meeting Page 5 r 03/27/02 APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chair ordered that the minutes of the regular meeting held February 27, 2002 be deemed approved, as mailed. RATIFICATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Ratify payment of claims set forth on exhibits "A" and "B", attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS 02/15/02 02/28/02 Totals $6.133,057.04 $4,246,859.77 Director Mark Leyes abstained. Director Tony Kawashima abstained on Warrant No. 42028, and Director Russ Patterson abstained on Warrant No. 42070. CONSENT CALENDAR 9. a. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve sewer easement agreement with Armstrong Ranch co-owners for the Armstrong Ranch development in the city of Santa Ana, at no cost to the District, in a form approved by General Counsel. b. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve a second time extension of six months for Cooperative Projects Program Contract No. CP-0005, with the City of Huntington Beach. NON-CONSENT CALENDAR 11, DRAFT STEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Director Eckenrode, Chair of the Steering Committee, re the March 27, 2002 meeting. The Chair then ordered the draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on February 27, 2002 to be fled. d. DRAFT URBAN RUNOFF AD HOC COMMITTEE MINUTES: The Chair ordered the draft Urban Runoff Ad Hoc Committee Minutes for the meeting held on February 28, 2002 to be filed. 12. DRAFT OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Director McGuigan, Chair of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee, re the March 6, 2002 meeting. Minutes for Board Meeting Page 6 r 03/27/02 The Chair then ordered the draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 6, 2002 to be filed. C. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: (1)Authorize the General Manager to issue a request for proposals to qualified Ocean Monitoring Vessel Builders/Designers for Purchase of Ocean Monitoring Vessel, Specification No. V-2001-43BD; and (2)Authorize award of Purchase of Ocean Monitoring Vessel, Specification No.V-2001-43BD, to the lowest responsive bidder in an amount not to exceed $1,300,000. Director Debbie Cook opposed. d. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve an agreement with M.J. Schiff and Associates, Inc. for the development of a Corrosion Management Program, Specification No. S-2002-80131), providing for consulting services for a study of the District's two treatment plants, interplant pipelines, and collections systems, and to establish the requirements for the implementation of a comprehensive management program,for an amount not to exceed $145,000. 13. DRAFT PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Director Anderson, Chair of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee, re the March 7, 2002 meeting. The Chair then ordered the draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 7, 2002 to be filed. C. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: (1) Ratify Change Order No. 2 to Ocean Outfall Flowmeter Replacement at Plant No. 2, Job No. J-66,with Urbantec Engineers, Inc., authorizing an addition of$175,769 and a time extension of 75 calendar days, Increasing the contract amount to $1,119,D77; and (2) Approve a budget amendment Increase of$240,077 for Ocean Outtall Flowmeter Replacement at Plant No. 2,Job No. J-66,for a total project budget of $1,739,077. d. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: (1) Ratify Change Order No. 1 to Santa Ana River Interceptor Emergency Maintenance and Repairs, Contract No. 2-41-2, with Jamison Engineering Contractors, Inc., for an Adjustment of Engineer's Quantities, authorizing a deduction of$45,566, and a time extension of 45 calendar days, decreasing the total contract amount to$404,434; and (2)Accept Santa Ana River Interceptor Emergency Maintenance and Repairs, Contract No. 2-41-2, as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement. e. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Accept Clarifiers P &Q Retaining Walls at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000.60, with Castillo Western Industrial Constructors as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement. Minutes for Board Meeting Page 7 v 03/27/02 f. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED:Approve Memorandum of Understanding with Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority for Santa Ana River Interceptor Relocation and Protection, Contract No. 2-41, establishing the terms of interagency coordination and interim reimbursement of expenses in connection with the protection, repairs, and maintenance of the Santa Ana River Interceptor, in a form approved by General Counsel. g. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve a budget amendment of $247,610 for Interim Strategic Plan Update, Job No. J-40-8,for a total project budget of$687,610; and (2)Approve Addendum No.1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Camp Dresser and McKee for additional engineering services for Interim Strategic Plan Update, Job No. J-40-8,for an additional amount of$247,610, increasing the total amount not to exceed $597,340. h. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: (1)Approve a budget amendment of$139,170 for Supplement No. 1 to the 1999 Strategic Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report, Job No. J-40-5,for a total project budget of $287,170; and (2)Approve Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Environmental Science Associates for additional environmental services for Supplement No. 1 to the 1999 Strategic Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report,Job No. J-40-5,for an additional amount of $116,170, increasing the total amount not to exceed $194,000. i. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve Addendum No. 8 to the Professional Services Agreement with Carotid, Engineers for Investigation and Repair of Ocean Outfalls, Job No. J-39, providing for additional engineering services in the amount of$652,137 for a total amount not to exceed $1,619,118. j. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: (1)Approve Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Lee & Ro, Inc.for Replacement of the Bitter Point Pump Station, Contract No. 5-49; Replacement of the Rocky Point Pump Station, Contract No. 5-50; Rehabilitation of the W Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-51; and Rehabilitation of the"A" Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-52, providing for additional engineering services for an additional amount of$495,247, increasing the total amount not to exceed $1,645,048; (2)Approve a budget amendment increase of$1,322,000 for Replacement of the Bitter Point Pump Station, Contract No. 5-49,for a total project budget of$4,882,000; (3) Approve a budget amendment increase of$1,376,000 for Replacement of the Rocky Point Pump Station, Contract No. 5-50, for a total project budget of $5.775,000; (4)Approve a budget amendment increase of$1,877,000 for Rehabilitation of the 10 Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-51,for a total project budget of$4,493,000; and (5)Approve a budget amendment increase of $1,748,000 for Rehabilitation of the"A" Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-52, for a total project budget of$4,596,000. k. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve a budget amendment increase of$2,118,000 for the Warner Avenue Relief Sewer, Contract No. 11-22, for a total project budget of$7,016,000. Minutes for Board Meeting i Page 8 03/27/02 I. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Motion was amended to approve Professional Services Agreement with Project Partners, Inc. to provide project engineering and project management consulting services for the District's Capital Improvement Program,for an estimated amount not to exceed $600.000 for the first year, with a not-to-exceed CPI annual escalation fee,for a contract period effective March 27, 2002 through May 30, 2008. M. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED:Approve Professional Services Agreement with CH2M Hill, Inc. for engineering services for the Effluent Pathogen Reduction Evaluation Study, Job No. J-40-6,for an amount not to exceed $134.858. 14. DRAFT FINANCE,ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MINUTES: A verbal report was presented by Director Brady, Chair of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee, re the March 13, 2002 meeting. The Chair ordered the draft Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 13, 2002 to be filed. C. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of February 2002. d. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Reallocate $60,700 from the Central Training budget to the Tuition Reimbursement budget, increasing funding from $74,300 to$135,000 for Fiscal Year 0"2. 15. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Rafify use of General Manager's emergency purchasing authority, Resolution No. OCSD 99-23,for Emergency Repair of the No. 3 Central Generation Engine at Plant No. 1,for Purchase Order Nos. 31480 and 31939 issued to Cooper Energy Services for a combined total of$115,882.59, plus a 10% contingency for freight and any unforeseen work that may be required to complete the repair, for a total amount not to exceed $127,500.00. 16. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve sewer service and connection agreement with Irvine Ranch Water District for connection of El Morro Elementary School that is currently located outside of the Orange County Sanitation District boundaries, in a form approved by General Counsel. 17. Blake Anderson, General Manager, reported that last month the concept of disinfection was brought before the Board of Directors. The Board authorized staff to move forward with some of the conceptual work and preliminary studies, and authorized expenditures up to$200,000 so that momentum would be maintained. A more detailed report was requested by the Board of Directors, as well as the results of the so-called 1996 20-meter study. Minutes for Board Meeting Page 9 03/27/02 Bob Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services, reported that although the report, dated March 2002, deals with the1996 and 1997 data. The information developed out of these studies was reported to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and EPA in 1996 and 1997 as part of discussions staff had with those agencies when the results were prepared, but a formal report was never written. He then provided a brief overview of the data contained within the report. The studies indicated the plume comes into the 20-meter depth contour at detectable levels. There were several instances where bacteria were found associated with the plume at the 60-meter depth,which is about two miles offshore of Huntington Beach at the same time that bacteria were detected at the beach. The purpose of the study was to gain a better understanding of compliance issues in order to ensure the District was complying with state water quality standards, which applies up to three miles offshore. As a result of the findings in this report,a change was made by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) to their Basin Plan to interpret the recreational zone as the top 10 feet of water, which is consistent with the way the other Regional Water Quality Control Boards and the State interpret the recreational zone. Bob Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance, gave a brief report on the District's treatment facilities, what it accomplishes, and reported on microflltration research,one of the treatment technologies being considered for long-term use. Mark Esquer, Process Engineering Manager,then reported on the reasons to use bleach followed by dechlorination as the currently preferred alternative for short-term disinfection. He also reported on other methods to disinfect, such as ultraviolet light, ozone, and peracetic acid. He also briefly reviewed the environmental review process required for this project. A mitigated negative declaration statement should be sufficient for the short-term project. Staff anticipates the statement should be sent out in mid-April for public review. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: (1) Receive and file the OCSD Engineering report on Short-Tenn Ocean Outfall Bacteria Reduction Evaluation dated March 20, 2002; (2) Receive and File report entitled,Analysis and Interoretation of Fall 1996 and Summer 1997 Water Quality Data, dated March 2002; and (3) Designate the use of chemical bleach and sodium bisulfite (dechlorination as a mitigation measure)as the Preferred Alternative for further detailed evaluation. Director Debbie Cook opposed. 18. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Award a sole source Professional Services Agreement to Black&Veatch Corporation for professional services for Short-Tenn Ouffall Bacteria Reduction,Job No.J-87,for an amount not to exceed $447,920. Directors Don Bankhead and Debbie Cook opposed. Minutes for Board Meeting Page 10 ' 03/27/02 19. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Approve an increase to the Temporary Employment Services budget allocation of$300,000, raising the total budgeted amount from$1,000,000 to$1,300,000 for the remainder of FY 01-02. 20. DRAFT JOINT GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM COOPERATIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES:The Chair ordered the Joint Groundwater Replenishment System Cooperative Committee Minutes for the meetings held on February 11. 2002 and February 25, 2002 to be filed. C. Item removed. 21. CONVENE IN CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9:The Board convened in closed session at 9:55 p.m., pursuant to Govemment Code Section 54956.9,to discuss Agenda Item No. 21 (a)(1). Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Board of Directors have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.2, and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. No reportable action was taken re Agenda Item No. 21(a)(1). RECONVENE IN REGULAR SESSION:At 10:00 p.m.,the Board reconvened in regular session. ADJOURNMENT: The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 10:01 p.m. r . Secretary o t e Board of D,f ctors of Orange County Sanitation District GAwp.dtaladr inSSw9nutw\012302 draft mint .dw Claims Paid From 02/01/02 to 02JI5102 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Desoriptlon Accounts Payable-Warrants 42011 Orange County Sanitation District $ 473,587.56 Payroll EFT Reimbursement 42012 Pacific Investment Management Co. 148,981.00 Investment Management Service Res.95-97 42013 Southern California Edison 68.335.44 Power 42014 Airgas Safety 5.686.31 Safely Supplies&Equipment 42015 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 2.631.60 Long Distance Telephone Service 42018 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. BD.25 Telephone Service 42017 AT&T Wireless Services-Ainime 3,870.88 Cellular Telephone Service 42018 Court Order 626.20 Wage Garnishment 42019 California Municipal Treasurers Assoc. 130.00 Publication 42020 City of Villa Park 10,000.00 Cooperative Project J-73 42021 Court Order 150.00 Wage Garnishment 42022 Consolidated Elect.Distributors,Inc. 457.29 Electrical Supplies 42023 Consulfing-Specifying Engineer 21.00 Publication 42024 Consumers Pipe&Supply Co. 530.87 Mechanical Pants&Supplies 42025 CWEA 43.00 Membership-Celitomia Water Environment Association 42026 Norman Eckenrode 941.47 Meetingrragning Expense Reimbursement 42027 Court Order 525.00 Wage Garnishment 42028 First American Title Company 15,000.00 Escrow Fees-ICOR Project 42029 Friend of the Court 339.50 Wage Garnishment 42030 City of Fullerton 64.31 Water Use 42031 City of Huntington Beach 42.84 Water Use 42032 Industrial Threaded Products,Inc. 97.70 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42033 Ing.Union of Oper.Eng.AFL-CIO Local 501 2.552.04 Dues Deduction 42034 McMaster-Can Supply Co. 2,264.21 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42035 Mellon Trust 18.530.08 Investment Custodian Bank 42036 Midway Mfg.&Machining Co. 4,851.35 Mechanical Pans,Supplies&Repairs 42037 New Horizons 10,60.00 (5)User Licenses-Microsoft Windows Technical Training 42038 Newport Dunes Waterfront Resort 5,000.00 Construction 5.46 42039 Ninyo&Moore Corporate Accounting 2,461.50 Professional Services-Materials Testing MO 6-24-98 42D40 Orange County Marshal 45.00 Wage Garnishment 42041 OCEA 45&80 Dues Deduction 42042 Pacific Bell 44.06 Telephone Services 42043 Court Order 40.00 Wage Garnishment 42044 Court Order 296.00 Wage Garnishment 42045 Peace Officers Council of CA 9D9.00 Dues Deduction 42046 Shamrock Supply Co.,Inc. 42.30 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42047 Shureluck Sales&Engineering 687.37 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42048 Soundan Supply Company 195.40 Plumbing Supplies 42049 Court Order 721.50 Wage Garnishment 42050 Summit Steel 35228 Metal 42051 Textile Engineering Associates 2.042.00 Mechanical Maintenance Training 42D52 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. 970.59 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42053 Tule RanchlMagan Farms 17,253.63 Residuals Removal MO 3-29-95 42054 U.S Postal Service 5,DD0.00 Postage 42055 The Unisource Corporation 628.94 Office Supplies EXHIBIT A Page I of 7 Claims Paid From 02101/02 to 02/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42056 United Way 305.00 Employee Contributions 42057 Verizon California 808.26 Telephone Services 42058 Kimberly C.Christensen 1,136.53 Mesting/Treining Expense Reimbursement 42059 Robed P.Ghirelli 686.32 Meeting/Raining Expense Reimbursement 42060 Terry W.Kris 455.67 Meeling/Traming Expense Reimbursement 42061 Chandra R.Mantecen 284.65 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 42062 Canh C.Nguyen 8115.53 MeelingrTraining Expense Reimbursement 42063 American Express 26.446.38 Purchasing Card Program,Misc.Supplies&Services 42064 ADS Environmental Services,Inc. 491-904.53 Professional Services J-73-2 42065 Brown&Caldwell 164,952.99 Engineering Services P7-37 42066 Carollo Engineers 348.104.82 Professional Services P2.60&P2-66 42067 City of La Habra 402,013.00 Construction-Cooperative Projects J-73 42068 Flour Entcrpr5es.Inc 90.576.00 Professional Services J-84 42069 Harbour Engineering Group 29.802.52 Pump Supplies 42070 Jana Contracting Corp. 35.692.52 Construction-Emergency Sevrer Main Repairs-Euclid&Imperial 42071 Kaiser Foundation Health Plan 34,094.93 Medical Insurance Premium 42072 Kemiron Pack,Inc. 81,449.45 Ferric Chloride MO 9-27-95 42073 Mike Pitch&Sons 222,409.89 Construction-Force Main Repairs at Bitter Point Pump Station 42074 R.Fox Construction,Inc. 26,552.29 Construction-Natural Gas Line Replacement 42075 South Coast Environmental Co. 30,451.95 Can Gen Emissions Testing Service 42076 SCAP 25,000.00 Professional Services-Compost Emissions Testing 42077 Tula RanctVMagan Farms 119,160.07 Residuals Removal MO 3.29-95 42078 Vulcan Performance Chemicals 81.598.33 Hydrogen Peroxide Specification No:C-044 42079 The Yakima Company 56,116.15 Residuals Removal MO 3.22-00 42080 Adams/Mallory Construction Co.,Inc. 132,050.17 Construction J-80 42081 J W Contracting Corporation 239,749.00 Construction P2-60 42082 Margate Constmciton,Inc 816,918.00 Consauclion Pl-37&P2-39 42083 Southern Contracting Company 37,868.00 Construction J-33-1-A 42084 Union Bank of California 26,639.00 Construction P2-60,Retention 42085 Orange County Sanitation District 32,342.25 Worker's Comp.Reimb. 42086 A-Plus Systems 8,044.80 Notices&Ads 42087 Acre Machinery,Inc. 1,644.13 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42088 Advanced Cooling Technologies 328.26 Electrical Parts&Supplies 42089 Agilent Technologies,Inc. 575.55 lab Parts&Supplies 42090 Air Products&Chemicals 20.02 Lab Parts&Supplies 42091 Airborne Express 75.48 Air Freight 42092 Alfa-Laval,Inc. 5,854.07 Mechanical Pads&Supplies 42093 All American Asphalt 900.00 Manhole Grading-Sunkist St.,Anaheim 42094 Allied Industries 103.96 Lab Parts&Supplies 42095 Alta-Robbins,Inc. 338.22 Instrument Supplies 42096 Anthony Past Control, Inc. 400.00 Service Agreement-Pest Control 42097 Appleone Employment Service 1,289.62 Temporary Employment Services 42098 Aquatic Bioassay And Consulting Labs. Inc. 1,325.00 Toxicity Testing 42099 Pagenet 2,697.53 Pagers,Service&Ah-lime 42100 Arthur Andersen,L.L.P. 13.480.00 Professional Consulting Services-Inland Composting&Organic Recycling 42101 Asbury Environmental Services 122.50 Waste Oil Removal Page 2 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/01/02 to 02/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42102 Aspen Publishers, Inc. 179.43 Publication 42103 AMSA 475.00 Mechanical Maintenance Meeting Registration 42104 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 47.31 Telephone Service 42105 AWSI 236.00 Department of Transportation Training Program 42106 Battery Specialties 458.56 Batteries 42107 BloMereux Vilek,Inc. 568.67 Lab Supplies 42108 Songame Communications,Ltd. 7925 Publication 42109 Marc or Darlene Bossu 81.67 Sewer Service Fee Refund Re Septic Tanks 42110 Boyle Engineering Corporation 2,305.50 Legal Services-Crow Winthrop Development 42111 Buena Park Lumber&Hardware 326.16 Lumber 42112 Bush&Associates,Inc. 3,340.00 Surveying Services MO 6-25.97 42113 BED(Incorporated 129.40 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42114 BOC Edwards 112.88 Lab Supplies 42115 O.S.U.F.Foundation 9,787.50 Membership-Center for Demographic Research 42116 Califomla Safety Services Group 805.00 O&M Training Registration 42117 Cameron Welding Supply 46.47 Welding Supplies 42118 Cando Engineers 16,611.99 Engineering Services Pl-71 42119 Ralph Chavez 1,123.03 Sewer Service Fee Refund Re Septic Tanks 42120 Coast Rubber Stamp Mfg. 47.41 Office Supplies 42121 Coast Transmission 432.71 Auto Repair 42122 Cole-Pamser Instrument Co. 198.60 Lab Supplies 42123 Computational Systems,Inc. 4,535.00 Maintenance Agreement-Machinery Analyzer 42124 The Conference Group,Inc. 775.00 Lab Meeting Registration 42125 Consolidated Elect Distributors, Inc. 85.39 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42126 Corporate Express Imaging 1,182.37 Computer Supplies 42127 Corporate Express 1,676.75 Office Supplies 42128 Corporate Image Maintenance,Inc, 14,452.00 Custodial Services Spec.No.9899-09 42129 Counterpart Enterprises,Inc. 535.29 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42130 County of Orange-Auditor Controller 1,162.02 Maim.Agreement-Repairs/Installaton of Base,Handheld&Vehicle Radios 42131 County Wholesale Electric Co. 1,529.34 Ins.Parts&Supplies 42132 CW EA 625.D0 O&M Meeting Registration 42133 CWFA Membership 388.00 Membership-Calif.Water Environment Assoc. 42134 CW EA-SARBS,Inc. 45.D0 O&M Meetng U penes-Re Technical Tour 42135 CWEA-TCP 66.00 Membership-COIL Water Environment Assoc. 42136 Dal Mar Analytical 772.00 Blosolids Analysis 42137 Dell Direct Sales L.P. 8.774.09 (1)Phaser Printer 42138 DeZudk c/o Mlsco/SouthWest 7,524.00 Valves 42139 DeZudk/SPX Valves&Controls 2,289.69 Valves 42140 Gres Domoff 1.123.03 User Fee Refund Regarding Septic Tanks 42141 Dunn-Edwards Corporation 400.51 Paint Supplies 42142 E.Sam Jones Distributors,Inc. 1,236.31 Electrical Supplies 42143 Elsevier Science 1,003.00 Publication 42144 Enchanter, Ina 6,400.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5-24-95 42145 ESSCO: EngIneering Sales Service 1,771.96 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42146 FedEx Corporation 176.89 Air Freight 42147 Filter Supply Company 2,533.76 Filters Page 3 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/01/02 to 02/15102 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42148 Fisher Scientific Company,L.L.C. 1,492.27 Lob Parts&Supplies 42149 Cristina Fisher 703.55 User Fee Refund Regarding Septic Tanks 42150 Five Star Metals, Inc. 639.28 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 42151 Flo-Systems, Inc. 188.50 Freight 42152 Fluid Dynamics 321.25 Primary Process Equipment Rental 42153 Foodcre8 Coffee&Refreshment Services 583.04 Meeting Supplies 42154 Fountain Valley Camera 32.21 Photo Supplies 42155 Franklin Covey 342.00 Office Supplies 42156 Fh(s Electronics 1,062.78 Computer Supplies 42157 Fult Spectrum Analytics,Inc. 500.00 Lab Instrument Service 42158 Garrett-Callahan Company 5.491.21 Chemicals 42169 George Yardley Co. 2.104.62 Instrument Supplies 42160 Gierikh-Mitchell,Inc. 1.135.69 Belt Filter Press Supplies 42161 Gold Systems,Inc. 9.401.25 Professional Services-Data Migration&STORET Interface Application 42162 W W Grainger, Inc. 59.87 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42103 Great Westem Sanitary Supplies 50.81 Janitorial Supplies 42164 GE Supply 6,611.91 Relay Output Board 42165 Hampton Tedder Technical Services 2,663.75 Electrical Parts&Supplies 42166 Herb's Blackforest Bakery&Deli 86.80 Meeting Expenses 42167 HIII Brothers 3,941.03 Chemicals for Odor Control Testing at Sunflower Interceptor Sewer-7-21 42168 Holmes&Narver. Inc. 5,775.85 Engineering Services PI-44&P2-53 42169 Home Depot 212.75 Small Hardware 42170 Hub Auto Supply 291.48 Truck Pans 8 Supplies 42171 Huntington Beach Chrysler Jeep 2,112.88 Vehicle Repairs 42172 HI Standard Automotive 1,290.18 Automotive Supplies&Installation 42173 I.D.Industries,Inc. 350.65 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42174 Ideal Electric Comparry 4.950.35 Electrical Parts,Supplies&Equipment 42175 Imaging Express 320.72 Printer Maintenance 42176 Industrial Distribution Group 5,665.74 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42177 Infinity Technology USA 3,604.35 Computer Supplies 42178 Inorganic Ventures,Inc. 243.14 Lab Supplies 42179 lam,Inc. 785.80 Lab Supplies 42180 J&L Industrial Supply 1,469.52 Mechanical Parts,Supplies&Tools 42181 J.O.Tucker and Son,Inc. 2,489.53 Lab Parts&Supplies 42182 Jack Higgins 3,500.00 Professional Services-Hiring&Interviewing Workshops Dec.2001&Jan.2002 42183 Jamison Engineering Contractors,Inc. 10,674.27 Construction-East Interplant Meter&Easement at Pit.2 42184 Jays Catering 794.65 Meeting Expenses 42185 John Wiley&Sons, Inc. 357.11 Publication 42186 John's Phllly,Grille 86.76 Engineering Meeting Expense Re Contract 2-41 42187 Johnson&Associates,L.L.C. 1,446.22 Professional Services-Compensation&Classification Study 42188 Johnstone Supply 70.00 Electrical Supplies 42189 Kensington Electronics 1,062.01 Electrical Supplies 42190 Lab Support 3,065.38 Temporary Employment Services 42191 Labeltronix 683.60 Office Supplies 42192 Liberty Environmental 1,032.87 Lab Parts&Supplies 42193 Lindsay Engineering Services 6.953.75 Professional Services-Vibration Monitoring Page 4 of 7 a Claims Paid From 02/01/02 to 02/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42194 Los Angeles County 1,038.50 Sewer Service Conn.Agreement MO 9/23198 42195 Lucci's 105.00 Meeting Expense 42196 M.J.Schiff&Associates,Inc. 8,425A1 Professional Services-Corrosion Study 42197 Maintenance Products,Inc. 2.073.11 Mechanical Supplies 42198 Maintenance Technology Corp. 1.850.54 Mechanical Supplies 42199 Manleys Boiler Repair Company,Inc. 1.850.00 Boiler Repairs&Maintenance Services 42200 Matt Chlor,Inc. 4,288.75 Valves 42201 Mafthew Bender&Co.,Inc. 339.76 Publication 42202 The McGraw-Hill Companies 98.15 Publication 42203 McMaster-Care Supply Co. 455.91 Plumbing Pans&Supplies 42204 Mao Analytical System 1.465.00 Professional Services-Toxicity Analysis 42205 Mechanical Onves Co 121.33 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42206 Milliromcs cro RMB Engmeenng 1.090.25 Electrical Supplies 42207 Minlronics.Inc. 311.25 Electrical Supplies 42200 Mission Uniform Service 4.181.91 Uniform Rentals 42209 Mobile Mim,L.L.C. 79.74 Storage Bins Rental 42210 Morton Salt 543.61 Salt for Water Softener Systems 42211 Myers Power Products,Inc. 84.13 Electrical Supplies 42212 MAACO Auto Painting&Bodyworks 733.08 Vehicle Painting 42213 MARMAC Field Services,Inc. 12.730.41 Professional Services P7-92 42214 MBC Applied Environmental Sciences 1,420.00 Ocean Monitoring 42215 National Microcomp Services 1,212.40 Service Agreement-Plant Automation 42216 National Seminars Group 395.00 O&M Training Registration 42217 National Water Research Institute 10,000.00 Membership 42218 NetVelsant of Southern California 2.198.10 Safety&Security System Supplies 42219 Nickey Petroleum Co.,Inc. 998.33 LubricanUDiesel Fuel 42220 Nimp&Moore Corporate Accounting 13,530.50 Professional Services-Materials Testing MO 6.24-98 42221 Northern Tool&Equipment Company,Inc. 3,799.99 Portable Lift 42222 NCG Porter Novell! 7,590.85 Prof.Services-Public Relations 42223 O.C.Windustrial Co. 515.06 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 42224 Office Depot Business Services Div. 3.721.21 Office Supplies 42225 OneSource Distributors,Inc. 2,297.49 Electrical Parts&Supplies 42226 Orange Fluid System Tech.,Inc. 93925 Fittings 42227 Oxygen Service Company 1,633.26 Specialty Gases 42228 OCB Reprographics 28.03 Printing Service-MO1/26/00 42229 P.L.Hawn Company, Inc. 1,110.30 A/C Filters 42230 Pacific Mechanical Supply 31521 Pump Supplies 42231 Pacific Parts&Controls 147A9 Electrical Supplies 42232 Paul Pitt 254.30 Eng.Sew.-Tech.Ting.&Sampling Pmtocal for AS Plant Selector Tech.Study 42233 Pioneer Amedcas,Inc. 22,537.61 Sodium Hypochlorite&Bleach 42234 Polydyne,Inc. 4,336.46 Cationic Polymer 13-11-92 42235 Hach do Ponton Industries 198.56 Inst.Parts&Supplies 42236 Precision Industries 546.43 Mechanical Supplies 42237 Nancy Price 902.73 User Fee Refund Re Septic Tanks 42238 Prudential Insurance Company of America 2,490.55 Employee Long-Term Care Insurance 42239 PCS Express 220.00 Courier Service Page 5 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/01/02 to 02/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42240 R.W.Bede 493.86 Professional Services P1-90 42241 Radius Maps 575.00 Address Maps,Listings&Labels Re Project J-77 42242 Raney Industries 14.900.00 (3)Stub Flanges,Flex Connections&Mach.Services 42243 Registrar,Air&Waste Management Assoc. 570.00 Air Quality Meeting Registration 42244 Rol,Rooter 250.00 Sewer Lateral Cleaning 42245 Ryan Herco Products Corp. 2,176.52 Pump Supplies 42246 RM Controls 48.18 Instrument Supplies 42247 RMS Engineering&Design,Inc, 9,087.00 Engineering Services-Tenant Improvements to Fleet Services 42248 RPM Elecbc Motors 2,406,84 Motor Repairs 42249 Saddle Island Institute 7,000.00 O&M Training Registration 42250 Safety-lacen 121.75 Hazardous Waste Service Agreement 42251 Safetycare,Inc. 237.05 Safety Video 42252 Schneider Electric 684.90 Inst.Pans&Supplies 42253 Schvdng America,Inc. 512-45 Pump Supplies 42254 Smaman Supply Comparry/Orainge Coast 212.95 Plumbig Supplies 42255 Charles Smith 1.225.45 User Fee Refund Re Septic Tanks 42256 So.Cal.Gas Company 6,097.82 Natural Gas 42257 Sou0rem California Edison 1,951.63 Power 42258 Southland Construction 4,095.00 Construction-Patio Upgrades at Pit. 1 42269 State Board of Equalization 153.00 Hazardous Waste Fee 42260 Sloven Enterprises,Inc. 1.642.37 Stationery&Office Supplies 42261 Sunset Industrial Pans 610.53 Mechanical Supplies 42262 Super Power Products 775.80 Janitorial Supplies 42263 Bernard Swift 1,123.03 User Fee Refund Re Septic Tanks 42264 BARBS 760.00 Information Technology Training Registration 42265 SCP Science 273.00 Lab Supplies 42266 SPACE 1,495.00 Lab Training Registration-Special Programs and Continuing Ed 42257 Tekdraulirs,Inc. 1.514.21 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 4226E George Temple 1,123.03 User Fee Refund Re Septic Tanks 42269 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. 4,891.10 Mechanical Supplies 42270 Thyssenl(rupp Elevator 1,280.00 Elevator Maintenance 42271 Daily Pilot 50.00 Notices&Ads 42272 Tropical Plaza Nursery,Inc. 8.449.00 Contract Groundskeeping MO 5.11-94 42273 Truck&Auto Supply,Ix. 429.68 Truck Supplies 42274 Teksystems 5,746.00 Temporary Employment Service 42275 U.S.Filter Corporation 1,262.75 Service Agreement-Lab Water Purification System 42276 The Umsource Corporafion 272-31 Office Supplies 42277 United Parcel Service 88.27 Parcel Services 42278 Valley Cities Supply Company 2,542A5 Plumbing Supplies 42279 The Vantage Group,L.L.C. 3.120.00 Temporary Employment Service 42280 Veriteor 27.88 Consultant Mileage Reimbursement 42281 Ver run California 2,284.72 Telephone Services 42282 VWR Scientific Products Corporation 4,700A7 Lab Parts&Supplies 42283 The Wackenhut Corporation 11,760.98 Security Guards 42284 Waste Markets Corp. 9,464.56 Main.Agreement-Gm&Screenings Removal&Digester Bed Marl.Removal 42285 Water Systems Cleaning Co. 24.765.00 Maintenance Services-Scrubber Towers G,J&Q Page 6 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/01/02 to 02/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42286 Water 3 Engineering, Inc. 170.00 08 M Meeting Registration 42287 Waste Sanitary Supply 674.36 Janitorial Supplies 42288 IMRI 7,050.00 Temporary Employment Service 42289 WS Atkins Water 20,000.00 Consulting Agreement-Testing of Improved Ultrasonic Sludge Treatment Equip. 42290 Xerox Corporation 13,902.26 Copier 8 Fax Leases 42291 Zee Medical 369A3 First Aid Supplies 42292 California Bank 8 Trust 4,208.00 Construction J-33.1A,Retention 42293 Castillo Western Industrial Constructors 4,591.30 Construction-Clarifiers P&0 Retaining Walls at Pit.2 42294 R.Fox Construction,Inc. 22,406.00 Construction-Air Compressor Upgrades at Pit, 1 42295 City of Westminster 643.38 (6)Automatic Water Meter Readers 42290 Orange County Sanitation District 1,510.39 Petty Cash Reimb. 42297 Ronald C.Cortez 6 Fry's Electronics 2,988.73 Employee Computer Loan Program Total Accoums Payable-Warrants $ 4,942,129.03 Payroll Disbursements 25767-25597 Employee Paychecks $ 172,052.46 Biweekly Payro0 02/06/02 25898-25899 Interim Paychecks 3,560.62 Termination Paychecks 69503-69961 Direct Deposit Statements 764,388.14 Biweekly Payroll 02/06/02 Total Payroll Disbursements $ 940,001.22 Wire Transfer Payments Chase Bank of Texas $ 37,404.06 January Interest Payment on Series 1993 Certificates of Participation Chase Manhattan Bank 77,347.93 Commitment Fee on Series 2000 Certl0cates of Participation-11/1101-OWI IO2 Societe Generale,N.Y. Brunch 55,552.19 Commission for Standby Letter of Credit on Seder 1993 Certificates of Participation Lloyd's TSB Bank 80,022.61 Commission for Standby Letter of Credit on Series 1992 Refunded Certificates of Participation Total Wire Transfer Payments $ 250.926.79 Total Claims Paid 02/01102-02115/02 $ 6,133,057.04 Page 7 of 7 Claims Paid From 0246102 to 02/28/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description Accounts Payable-Warrants 42298 ASAP Software Express $ 137.094.76 Microsoft Licensing Agreement for 650 Computers 42299 Orange County Sanitation District 482,782.81 Payroll EFT Reimbursement 42300 Palnewebber Incorporated 32,575.01 COP Remarketing Agreement 42301 Soulhem California Edison 54,822.28 Power 42302 The Lewis Group 25,888.49 Consulting Service-Capital Project Management Process 42303 U.S.Peroxide 43,104.72 Pmf.Services-Collection Sys.Odor 8 Corrosion Chemical Add.Demo.Study 42304 Alrgas Safety 1,400.57 Safety Supplies 42W5 Allied Packing 8 Rubber,Inc. 84.82 Mechanical Supplies 42306 Appleone Employment Service 2,514.71 Temporary Employment Services 42307 American Telephone 8 Telegraph Corp. 149.83 Telephone Service 42308 Court Order 62520 Wage Garnishment 42309 Court Omer 150.00 Wage Gamishment 42310 Consolidated Elect.Distributors,Inc. 122.03 Electrical Supplies 42311 Consumers Pipe 8 Supply Co. 237.56 Plumbing Supplies 42312 Converse Consultants 440.00 Geolechniaal Services 546 42313 Cornerstone Management Consulting 750.00 Consulting Services-EMT Management Training 42314 Court Omer 525.00 Wage Garnishment 42315 Friend of the Court 33950 Wage Garnishment 42316 The Holman Group 717.10 Employee Assistance Program Premium 42317 Industrial Metal Supply 2,D44.06 Metal 42318 Intl.Union of Oper.Eng.AFL-CIO Local 501 2,564.94 Dues Deducllon 42319 Invensys Systems,Inc. 109.20 Instrument Supplies 42320 Irvine Ranch Water District 33.18 Water Use 42321 IDMS:Imaging Document Mgmt.Solutions 9,577.65 Conrad Services-Scan 8 Index Engineering documents for EDIdS System(J-25-1) 42322 Kevin Omech 2,058.00 Prof.Services-Analysis for Physical Oceanographic Date J-85 42323 Midway Mfg.8 Machining Co. 1,670.12 Mechanical Pens 8 Supplies 42324 City of Newport Beach 30.44 Water Use 42325 Orange County Marshal 45.00 Wage Garnishment 42326 Orange Fluid System Tech.,Inc. 585.03 Fillings 42327 OCFA 471.36 Dues Deduction 42328 Pacific Bell 14.34 Telephone Services 42329 Court Omer 40.00 Wage Garnishment 42330 Court Omer 296.00 Wage Garnishment 42331 Peace Officers Council of CA 036.00 Dues Deduction 42332 Pre-Paid Legal Services,Inc, 1,04650 Employee Legal Service Insurance Premium 42333 Primary Sources 268.75 Office Furniture 42334 Projects Partners 21,73520 Temporary Employment Services 42335 Ramce Specially Products 148.41 ON 8 Grease 42336 R.A.Reed Electric 3.789.27 Motor Overhaul 42337 Reliastar Bankers Security Life Ins. 8=38 Life Insurance Premium 42338 Shureluck Sales 8 Engineering 242.34 Mechanical Parts 3 Supplies 42339 Sm rdan Supply Company/Orange Coast 545.81 Plumbing Supplies 42340 Court Omer 721.50 Wage Garnishment 42341 So.Cal.Gas Company 10,742.37 Natural Gas 42342 SAWPA 3.000.00 Prof.Services-Santa Ana River Watershed Group 42343 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. 960.73 Mechanical Supplies EXHIBIT B Page 1 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/16/02 to 02/28/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42344 Teksystems 4.798.00 Temporary Employment Services 42345 United Way 306.00 Employee Contributions 42348 The Vantage Gmup,L.L.C. 11,6(10.00 Temporary Employment Service 42347 Venzon California 4,383.56 Telephone Services 42348 20021&HW-CWEA,Inc. 2,100.00 Source Control Meeting Registration 42349 Robert Ootan 481.94 Meeeng/rmini g Expense Reimbursement 42350 City of Huntington Beach 2.020.00 Permit Fee-J-77 42351 Black&Veatch Corporation 100,237.65 Engineering Services P146-2,P1-76 42352 Brown&Caldwell 92.699.76 Engineering ServWes 241 &J-25.6 42353 BP Energy Company 122.561.91 Natural Gas 42354 Della Dental 52.281.37 Denial Insurance Plan 42355 Kemeon Pacific.Inc. 110.847.47 Ferric Chloride MO 9-27-95 42356 Mike Pdich&Sons 52.289.41 Consln ction-Force Main Repairs at Bider Point Pump Station 42357 Municipal Water Dist of Orange County 37.046.25 Water Use Efficiency Program MO 9.22-99 42358 Oracle Corp 31.102.03 Software Maintenance Agreement 42359 Orange County Water District 55,725.36 GAP Water Use MO 10-23-96 42360 PioneerAmericas,Inc. 37,599.06 Sodium Hypochlodle&Bleach 42361 Science Applications Ing..Corp. 161,616.42 Ocean Monitoring MO 641-94 42362 Southern Calif Coastal Water Research 35,000.00 Prof.Services-Plume Mapping(J-85) 42363 The Lewis Group 25,832.39 Consulting Services-Capital Project Management Process 42364 Tula RandVMagan Farms 116.547.84 Residuals Removal MO 3-29.95 42365 Water Environment Research Foundation 71.760.00 Research Subscription 42366 Adams/Mallory Construction Co.,Inc. 125,172.80 Construction J-80 42367 Ken Thompson,Inc. 312,091.00 Construction 5.46 42368 A=tite Fasteners,Inc. 93.99 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42368 Acre Machinery,Inc. 799.25 Mechanical Pens&Supplies 42370 Eurotherm Controls.Inc. 4.769.75 Inst.Parts&Supplies 42371 Great American Printing Co. 829.65 Stationery&ORce Supplies 42372 Aearo Company 1,824.00 Safety Supplies 42373 Air Liquids America Corp. 419.12 Specialty Gasses 42374 Air-Sea Forwarders,Inc. 700.50 Shipping&Handling-Zander Foam Media 42375 Alrbome Express 14.43 Ad Freight 42376 Aigas Safety 2,546.02 Safety Supplies 42377 Alfa-Laval,Inc. 322.80 Electrical Parts&Supplies 42378 Appleone Employment Service 5,031.69 Temporary Employment Services 42379 Aquatic Bloassry And Consulting Labs.Inc. 150.00 Toxicity Testing 42380 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 685.72 Telephone Service 42381 Amedcen Telephone&Telegraph Corp, 100.98 Telephone Service 42382 Bar Tech Telecom,incorporated 6.839.85 Telephone Equipment&Supplies 42383 Basler Electric Company,Department 590 3.792.15 Electrical Supplies 42384 Battery Specialties 346.95 Batteries 42365 Bio&ledeux Vitek,Inc. 5.184.54 Lab Repairs&Maintenance Services 42306 Bongarde Communications,Ltd. 15.00 Subscription 42387 Borihwlck,Guy,Bettenhausen 4,768.18 Professional Services P2-84 42388 Burke Engineering Co. 963.05 Electrical Supplies 42389 Bush&Associates,Inc. 1.176.00 Surveying Services MO 6-25.97 42390 California Coastal Coalition 1,000.00 Membership Page 2 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/16/02 to 02/28IO2 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Osaeriptlon 42391 California Municipal Treasurers Assoc. 120.00 Membership 42392 Southern California Marine Institute 1,880.00 Ocean Monitoring Vessel Support 42393 Callan Associates,Inc. 3,550.00 Investment Advisor 42394 Cambridge Isotope Labs 1,344.50 Lab Parts&Supplies 42395 Cad Warren&Co. 448.58 Insurance Claims Administrator 42396 Carollo Engineers 1.781.29 Engineering Services-Biosalids Management Options 42397 Ceriified Labs 250.62 Lab Supplies 42398 Charles P.Crowley Co. 5,776.39 Instrument Paris&Supplies 42399 Copelco Capital.Inc. 2.97 Copier Lease 42400 Cole-Parmer lnsbumem Co. 133.31 Lab Supplies 42401 Compressor Components Of California 4,842.69 Mechanical Parts,Supplies&Repairs 42402 Computer Protection Technology,Inc. 11.994.48 Computer Maim.Agreement 42403 Consolidated Elect.Distributors,Inc. 3,082.48 Electrical Park&Supplies 42404 Cooper Energy Services 127.69 Engine Supplies 42405 Corporate Express 1,109.18 Office Supplies 42406 Corporate Image Maintenance,Inc. 12.00 Custodial Services Spec.No.9899-09 42407 Cost Containment Solutions 6,482.00 Worker's Comp.Services 42408 County Wholesale Electric Co. 807.85 Electrical Pans&Supplies 42409 CASA 80.00 Compliance Meeting Registration 42410 CEM Corporation 801.12 Lab Supplies 42411 CMTA Division IX 40.00 Accounting Meeting Registration 42412 CR&R,Inc. 6,948.65 Container Rentals 42413 CWEA 1,176.00 O&M Meeting Registration 42414 CWEA 2002 Annual Conference 1,210.00 O&M Meeting Registratlon-Calif.Water Environment Assoc. 42415 CWEA Membership 22A.00 Membership-Calif.Water Environment Assoc. 42416 DevW's Tree Service 7,075.00 Tree Mand.Service 42417 Del Mar Analytical 1,337.00 Biosollda Analysis 42418 Delta Packaging Products,Inc. 113.46 Lab Supplies 42419 Diamond H Recognition 2,202.73 Employee Service Awards 42420 Dionex Corporation 12.161.33 Lab Park&Supplies 42421 Dunn-Edwards Corporation 53.88 Point Supplies 42422 DIRECTV 10.00 Subscription Remaining Balance 42423 E.Sam Jones Distributors,Inc. 49324 Electrical Supplies 42424 Ecology Control Industries, 2,006.10 Hazardous Waste Disposal 42425 Eden Equipment Company 1,944.33 Mechanical Park&Supplies 42426 Eldridge Products 745.08 Instrument Supplies&Mont 42427 Electra-Bond,Inc. 147.08 Repairss&Maintenance Services 42426 Electno-Test,Inc. 3,061.50 Electrical Acceptance Testing for Capital Projects 42428 Elliott Bay Design Group 6,146.80 Prof.Services-Preliminary Design&Cost Analyses for Ocean Monitoring Vessel 42430 Enchanter,Ina 3,200.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5-24-95 42431 Environmental Resource Asacdetlan/ERA 1.098.00 Lab Pads&Supplies 42432 EquipCo 92.25 Instrument Malnt. 42433 Ewing Irrigation Industrial 620.36 Plumbing Parts&Supplies 42434 Express Office Environment 465.65 Minor Office Equipment&Fixtures 42435 ENS Resources,Inc. 4,020.24 Professional Services-Legislative Advocate 42436 Facilities Engineering 3,650.00 Labor,Equipment,Materials Testing&Certification 42437 FedEx Corporation 215.67 Air Freight Page 3 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/16/02 to 02/28/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42438 First American Real Estate Solutions 684.90 Orange County Property Information 42439 Fisher Scientific Company,L.L.C. 8,8%.49 Lob Parts&Supplies 42440 Flo-Systems,Inc. 384.37 Pump&Pump Supplies 42441 Foodorsft Coffee&Refreshment Services 99.00 Meeting Supplies 42442 Foss Environmental 5,857.50 Caustic Tank Cleaning 42443 Franklin Covey 357.47 Office Supplies 42444 Frys Electronics 173.25 Computer Supplies 42445 GE Supply 932.57 Pump Timer 42446 Ganahl Lumber Company 730.47 Lumber/Hammue 42447 Gamst-Callahan Company 5,274.40 (4)Conductivity Sensors&Chemicals 42448 Gestech 1,925.95 Specialty Gases 42449 Gemini Associates,Inc. 2,146.40 Fiber Optic Cable 42450 General Petroleum 9,709.22 Unleaded Gasoline 42451 George T.Hall 280.15 Instrument Supplies 42452 George Yardley Co. 298.47 Lab Supplies 42453 Gledich-Mitchell,Inc. 6,945.44 Belt Filter Press Supplies 42454 Gold Systems,Inc. 10,378.78 Prof.Services-Date Migration&STORET Interface Application 42455 W W Grainger,Inc. 157.18 Electrical Parts&Supplies 42456 Great Western Sanitary Supplies 89.99 Janitorial Supplies 42457 Edwards Systems Technology 5.919.00 Service Agreement-Fire Alarm System 42458 American Sigma,Inc. 7.196.16 Pump Tubing 42459 Harbour Engineering Group 10.731.90 (3)Impellers 42460 Harold Primmse Ice 55.50 lee For Samples 42461 Hamington Industrial Plastlm,Inc. 711.14 Laminates/Plastics 42462 Herb's Blackforest Bakery 8 Deli 209.50 Meeting Expenses 42463 Home Depot 426.60 Smell Hardware 42464 Hopkins Technical Products 557.20 Pump Supplies 42465 City of Huntington Beach 18,775.85 Water Use 42488 Imaging Express 225.62 Printer Maintenance 42467 Indoff,Inc. 8,771.87 Lockers for Auto Shop 42468 Industrial Distribution Group 858.93 Mechanical Pads,Supplies&Tools 42469 Industrial Plastic Supply,Inc. 668.78 Plastic 42470 IMlnity Technology USA 322.87 Computer Supplies 42471 Ircrgonic Vemures,Inc. 437.97 Lab Pads&Supplies 42472 Intergraph Corporation 12,048.88 Software Maim.Agreement 42473 Intretek Computer,Inc 252.28 Server Upgrade Support 42474 Invensys Systems,Inc. 451.82 Imaument Supplies 42475 Icon Mountain Off-Site Date Protection 215.00 OBaile Back-Up Tape Storage for NT Server 42476 Irvine Ranch Water District 21.02 Water Use 42477 J.G.Tucker and Son,Inc. 2,333.45 Specialty Gases 42478 Jam Electronics 244.05 Electrical Pads&Supplies 42479 Jamison Engineering Contractors,Inc. 24,075.05 Construction 2-41.Water Line&Street Repairs 42480 Jaya Catering 83521 Meeting Expenses 42481 Johnstone Supply 604.39 Electrical Supplies 42482 Karen Monaco&Associates 10.335.00 FIS Support Services 42483 Kent Automotive 87.05 Automotive Supplies 42484 KL&P Marketing 1,000.92 Safety Incentive Items Page 4 of Claims Paid From 02/16/02 to 02/28/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42485 Lab Support 4,918.25 Temporary Employment Services 42486 Lew/Crandall 3.640.25 Prof.Services-Materials Testing,Inspection&Geolechnical Services 42487 LeMotle Company 73.58 Chemicals 42488 L9emm-Safety,Inc. 856.61 Instrument Parts&Supplies 42488 Urjjer Company do Gerald Jones 8.501.35 Professional Service-DART MO 9.22-99 42490 Luccl's 86.25 Meeting Expense 42491 M.J.SCMB&Associates,Inc. 2,115.50 Professlonal Services-Corrosion Study 42492 Mag-Trol Long Beach,Inc. 251.07 Electrical Supplies 42493 Manleys Boller Repair Company.Inc. 7,559.60 Boiler Testing&Repairs 42494 Mali CMor,Inc. 5.058.37 Valves 42495 MCMasler-Carr Supply Co 157.23 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 42496 Measurement Variables.Inc 774.73 (1)Refrigerated Compressed Air Dryer 42497 Media Resudannn Syclems.Inc 150.00 Mechanical Maintenance Services-Sandblast Belt Press Parts 42498 Medlin Controls Co 3.463.62 Instrument Supplies 42499 Michael Tumipseed&Associates 3.000.00 Professional Service-Tule Rands&Yakima Sites Study 42500 Midway Mfg&Machining Co. 6,842.20 Mechanical Pads,Supplies&Repaid; 42501 Millironica do RMB Engineering 1.141.00 (1)Hydroranger 42502 Mission Uniform Service 3.994.07 Uniform Rentals 42503 Moreland&Associates 275.00 Accounting Training Registration 42504 Mykrolis Corporation 4.035.81 Lab Pads&Supplies 42505 MCRTechnologies,Inc. 456.50 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 42506 KIDS Consulting 6,930.00 Prof.Services-Surveying Various Locations 42507 MISCO Southwest 172.55 Instrument Pads&Supplies 42WB National Plant Services,Inc. 3,290.00 Vacuum Truck Services 42509 Business Training&Development Services 4,550.00 On-Site'Powerful Listening Skills'Seminar 42510 National Water Research Institute 255.00 Air Quality Meeting Registration 42511 Network Associates 2,430.00 Software Maint.Agreement 42512 New Horizons CLC of Santa Ana 1,850.00 O&M Training Registration 42513 Cilyof Newport Beach 61.98 Water Use 42514 Nimyo&Moore Corporate Accounting 1,0D5.00 Professional Services-Materials Testing MO 6-24.98 42615 The Norm Companies 152.00 Mall Delivery Service 42516 Office Depot Business Services Div. 781.19 Office Supplies 42517 Orange County Hose Company 4,147.30 Hoses 42518 Ortiz Fire Protection 2,655.00 Service Agreement-Only.Testing/Certification of Fire Sprinkler Sys.at Pits.1 &2 42519 Oxygen Service Company 1,913.77 Specialty Gases 42520 OCB Reprographics $47.19 Priming Service-MO 1/26100 42521 P.L.Hewn Company,Inc. 813.60 Filters 42522 Padfic Bell 877.68 Telephone Services 42523 Pacific Bell Internet Services 324.00 Internet Service 42524 Parts Unlimited 30.64 Truck Supplies 42526 The Perkin Elmer Corp. 1,391.34 Lab Pads&Supplies 42526 Poydyne,Inc 24.843.37 Cationic Polymer MO 3.11-92 42527 Hach do Pardon Industries 676.89 Instrument Parts&Supplies 42528 Power Pumps,Inc. 152.83 Pump Supplies 42529 Process Equipment Company 441.76 Pump Supplies 42530 PCS Express 124.70 Courier Service 42531 R.L.Abbott&Associates 4,000.00 Kern County Blosolids Consulting Services Page 5 of 7 Claims Paid From 02/16/02 to 02/28/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42532 Randolph Austin Co. 657.53 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42533 Rolls-Royce Energy Systems,Inc 2,641.39 Electrical Pane&Supplies 42534 Royce Multimedia,Inc. 300.89 Video Services 42535 Ryan Herco Products Corp. 3,908.35 Pump Supplies 42536 RS Hughes Co,Inc. 60.27 Paint Supplies 42537 Safety Info.Inc. 195.00 Subscription 42538 Safety-Kleen 12,679.18 Hazardous Waste Service Agreement 42539 SchvAng America,Inc. 649.20 Pump Supplies 42540 Scab Specialty Gases, Inc. 276.88 Lab Parts&Supplies 42541 Seaventures 5,250.00 Ocean Monitoring Vessel 42642 Second-Sun 16.49 Light Fixtures 42543 Shamrock Supply Co..Inc. 59.01 Sealant 42644 Shureluck Sales&Engineering 3,050.12 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42545 Supako,Inc. 3,564.36 Lab Pars&Supplies 42546 Smarean Supply Company/Orange Coast 536.89 Plumbing Supplies 42547 SOBChoice 4,559.60 Software 42548 South Coast Environmental Co. 377.50 Can Gen Emissions Testing Service 42549 Sparklells 1,930.07 Drinking Water/Coder Rentals 42550 Sparing Inst.cdo Patten Corporate 4.065.87 Instrument Supplies 42551 Saata International,Inc. 505.40 Chemicals 42552 StudioVisla 3.000.00 Computer Consulting Service-Internet Meint. 42553 Sunset Industrial Parts 4,387.23 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42554 Synagro Technologies,Inc. 5,815.19 Residuals Removal MO 3-29-95 42655 SARBS 190.00 Engineering Training Registration 42656 SARBS-CWFA 170.00 O&M Meeting Registration 42557 SARBS-CW EA 20.00 Membership&O&M Meeting Registration 42558 SPEC Services,Inc. 19,014.18 Engineering Services J-33.1 42559 Severn Trent Laboratories. Inc. 4,978.00 Lab Analytical Service 42560 Taylor-Dunn 416.91 Electric Can Parts 42661 Techno Coatings 3,715.00 Painting Services-Fuzzy Filter PVC Piping 42562 Tetra Tech.Inc. 4,840.50 Professional Service-Ocean Monitoring Program 42563 Textile Engineering Assoclales 1,244.62 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42564 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. 2.798.92 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 42565 Tons Lock&Safe Service&Sales 230.43 Locks&Keys 42566 Tram Consulting Engineers 12,718.00 Engineering Services 5-46 42567 The Trans Company 21.02 Electrical Pans&Supplies 425% Tropical Plaza Nursery,Inc. 99.12 Contract Groundskeeping MO 5-11-94 42559 Truck&Auto Supply,Inc. 136.70 Truk Supplies 42570 Truesdell Laboratories,Inc 50.00 Lab Services 42571 Teksyslems 6.254.00 Temporary Employment Services 42572 U.S.Filler Corporation 1.262.75 Service Agreement-Lab Purigption System 42573 Ultra Scientific 172.50 Lab Parts&Supplies 42574 United Parcel Service 652.10 Parcel Services 42575 Naval Post Graduate School 22,256.81 Prof.Services J-85 42576 Unocal 76 10.88 Fuel for Vehicles 42577 Vapex,Inc. 7.618.17 Maintenance of(16)Sentinel Units 42578 Vented 2AW.00 SoBWare Maintenance Page 6 of 7 - Claims Paid From 02/16/02 to 02/28/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42579 Vedzon California 80.75 Telephone Services 42580 Vertex,Inc. 943.89 Software Maintenance 42581 Village Nurseries 26.35 Landscaping Supplies 42582 Vision Service Plan-)CA) 7.468.56 Vision Service Premium 42583 VWR Scientific Products Corporation 3.572.91 Lab Paris B Supplies 42584 The Wackenhut Corporation 8,838.82 Security Guards 42585 Waste Markets Corp. 22.257.85 Meint.Agreement-Grit&Screenings Removal&Digester Bed Merl.Removal 42586 Wende Sanitary Supply 368.62 Janitorial Supplies 42587 IMRI 8,380.OD Temporary Employment Services 42588 West Coast Safety Supply Co. 2,069.88 Safety Supplies 42589 Westport Aparalus DBA Breaker Supply 3,663.50 Electrical Paris B Supplies 42590 WEF-Registration Dept, 1,725.00 our Quality Meeting Registration 42591 WEF 260.00 Membership-Water Environment Federation 42592 Xerox Corporation 4,105.32 Copier Leases 42593 The Vakime Company 24,321.37 Residuals Removal MO 3-22-00 42594 Patrick S.Carnahan 578.59 Mestingri'mining Expense Reimbursement 42595 Frank Chavez 567.80 Meeting/rialning Expense Reimbursement 42596 Norman Eckenmde 429.57 Meeting/training Expense Reimbursement 42597 Julle A.Matsumoto 493.96 Mesting/rreining Expense Reimbursement 42598 James W.Made 435.52 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 42599 Jame W.Silva 494.91 Meeling/Tralning Expense Reimbursement 42800 Robert J.Taylor 623.35 Meel ng/rmining Expense Reimbursement 42801 Karen A.Tumbaugh 312.24 Meeting/rralning Expense Reimbursement 42e02 Michael D.White 593.90 MealingRmining Expense Reimbursement 42603 John Myer&Dell Computer Corp. 3,OOO.00 Employee Computer Lose Program 42604 Orange County Sanitation District 1,122.82 Petty Cash Relmb. 42605 PMlip Cordova and Frye Electronics 2,700.00 Employee Computer Loan Program 42606 Tare Day-Hill and Best Buy 1,913.31 Employee Computer Loan Program Total Accounts Payable-Warrants $ 3,103,130.31 Payroll Dlabureementa 25900.26011 Employee Paychecks It 160,106.57 BWeekly Payroll 02/20/02 26012-26030 Interim Paychecks 5.721.89 BOP Payment OCERS&Insurance Reimbursements 69962-70419 Direct Deposit Statements 779,999.03 BNreekly Payroll 02/20/02 Total Payroll Disbursements $ 953,827.49 Who Transfer Payments State Street Bank&Trust Co.of CA 189,901.97 February Interest Payment on Series 2000 A&B Certificates of Participation Total Wire Transfer Payments $ 189,901.97 Total Claims Paid 02/16/02-02128102 $ 4,248,859.77 Page 7 of 7 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Maeang Date To so.of Dlr. 04/24/02 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number e Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Lenora Crane, Executive Assistant SUBJECT: PAYMENT OF CLAIMS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Ratify Payment of Claims of the District by Roll Call Vote. SUMMARY See attached listing. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A 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 N/A ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS Copies of Claims Paid reports from 03/01/02—03/15/02 and 03/16/02—03/31/02 G9wp.dtaXaganda\Board Agenda Reports\2002 Board Agenda ReportM0402Btem a.ClalmsPaid.doc Claims Paid From O3/01102 to 03/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description Accounts Payable-Warrants 42607 Orange County Sanitation District $ 485.866.54 Payroll EFT Reimbursement 42608 Southern California Edison 61,625.11 Power 42609 Woodruff,Spradlin&Smart 82,574.21 Legal Services MO7-26-95 42610 Airges Safety 3,183.36 Safety Supplies 42611 American Society For Microbiology 113.00 Membership 42612 Arthur Andersen,L.L.P. 21.380.00 Professional Services-Inland Composting&Organic Recycling 42613 Atlantis Pool Care 1.390.00 Service Agreement-Admin.Bldg.Atrium 42614 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 3.354.23 Long Distance Telephone Service 42615 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 76.73 Telephone Service 42616 AT&T Wireless Services-Airtime 4,282.35 Cellular Telephone Service 42617 Bentley Systems.Inc. 5,387.50 Software Maintenance Agreement 42618 Court Order 707.94 Wage Garnishment 42619 Court Order 150.00 Wage Garnishment 42620 County of Orange(PFRD Geomatics) 1,928.47 Parcel Maps 42621 Voided Check - - 42622 David's Tree Service 2,150.00 Tree Mainl.Service 42623 Employment Development Dept. 1,003.00 State Unemployment Tax 42624 Court Order 525.00 Wage Garnishment 42625 Government Finance Officers Association 420.00 Membership 42626 GE Supply 6,611.91 Relay Output Board Exchange 42627 City of Huntington Beach 18.21 Water Use 42628 Industrial Meted Supply 2,948.97 Metal 42629 Ing.Union of Oper.Eng.AFL-CIO Local 501 2,566.35 Dues Deduction 42630 Irvine Ranch Water District 9.00 Water Ilse 42631 James F.McConnell 1,625.00 MeetingRraining Expense Reimbursement 42632 Debra Lakin 527.49 Meeting(Traming Expense Reimbursement 42633 MarVac Electronics 18.56 Electrical Paris&Supplies 42634 McMaster-Can Supply Co. 2017.74 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 42635 Midway Mfg&Machining Co. 12,2G1.83 (50)Sweep Arm Clevises&Collars for Primary Been&Repairs&Maint.Services Q635 Court Order 339.50 Wage Garnishment 42637 Moodys Investors Service 5,000.00 COP Rating Maintenance Fees 42638 Orange County Marshal 45.00 Wage Garnishment 42639 OCB Reprographics 13,316.28 Printing Service-MO 1126/00 42640 OCEA 452.86 Dues Deduction 42641 Pacific Bell 34.81 Telephone Services 42842 Court Oder 40.00 Wage Garnishment 42643 Court Oder 296.00 Wage Garnishment 42644 Peace Officera Council of CA 936.00 Dues Deduction 42645 Petra Environmental Division 500.00 Prof.Services-Inspection&Recommendation Re Leased Site Gadield/Ward 42646 Public Resources Advisory Group 16,493.38 Financial Advisory Services J-40.3 42647 Ragan Communications,Inc. 99.00 Communications Meeting Registration-Teleseminar 42648 Rellastar 10,444.70 Employee Life Insurance Premium 42649 Rulen&Tucker L.L.P. 4.957.70 Legal Services-Crow-Winthrop Development 42650 Shureluck Sales&Engineering 4,310.88 Mechanical Parts 8 Supplies 42651 Court Oder 721.50 Wage Garnishment Page 1 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 03/01/02 to 03(15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42652 South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. 598.92 Permit Fees-Annual Emissions,Operating&Misc. 42653 Southern California Water 62.32 Water Use 42654 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. 6,135.75 Mechanical Supplies 42655 U.S Postal Service 5,000.00 Postage 42656 United Way 305.00 Employee Contributions 42657 Verizon California 2,051.68 Telephone Services 42658 David Woodland 1.123.03 User Fee Refund Regarding Seplic Tanks 42659 Michael C.Bock 336.05 Meeting/Traming Expense Reimbursement 42660 Bradley H.Cagle 637.54 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 42661 Danny L.Dillon 740.94 MeetingrTraining Expense Reimbursement 42662 Tod E.Haynes 340.00 MeetingrTraining Expense Reimbursement 42663 Emest N.Yeboah 838.39 Meeting/Traming Expense Reimbursement 42664 Allen Dumlao and Dell Computer Corp. 2,707.02 Employee Computer Loan Program 42665 County of Orange 43.00 Annexation Fee 42666 Voided Check - 42667 CW EA 2002 Annual Conference 4,210.00 O&M Meeting&Training Registration-Calif.Water Envimn.Assoc. 42668 Local Agency Formation Commission 1,150.00 Annexation Fee 42669 State Board of Equalization 300.00 Annexation Fee 42670 Advanced Engine Technology Corporation 29,057.36 Prof.Services- Can.Gen Cam FeAures&Fuel Mixing System Evaluation 42671 Air Products&Chemicals 26,052.81 O&M Agreement Oxy Gen Sys MO 8-8-89 42672 Applied Ocean Sciences 30,076.00 Prof.Services-HIS Shoreline Contamination Investigation 42673 ADS Environmental Services,Inc. 568.678.46 Professional Services J-73-2 42674 AKM Consulting Engineers 44,776.18 Professional Services 7.36,7.39,7.41 -Trunk Sewer Improvements 42675 Black&Veatch Corporation 2110,891.51 Engineering Services PI-46.2,P2-55&J-77 42676 Blue Cross,of California 226,474.92 Medical Insurance Premium 42677 Brown&Caldwell 31,331.63 Engineering Services 1.98 42678 Carollo Engineers 515,168.12 Professional Services P2.60,P2.66&Micro filtration Damn Study 42679 Dell Direct Sales L.P. 82,930.34 (25)Computers 42680 J R Fdanc Construction 39,683.00 Construction P2-66-1 &Retrofit Scrubbers G,J&1 42681 Kaiser Foundation Health Plan 33.587.92 Medical Insurance Premium 42682 Kemkon PacBic,Inc. 72,866.48 Ferric Chloride MO 9-27-95 42683 Lee&Ro,Inc. 92,008.43 Engineering Services 5.49,5.50,5-51,5.52&P7-93 42657 Martin Luther Hospital 45,057.31 Reconciliation User Fee Refund 42685 Mike Pdich&Sons 447,838.75 Construction-Force Main Repairs at Bitter Point Pump Station 42686 Network Catalyst,Inc. 25=.81 Computer Software User License 42687 NelVen and of Southern California 31,326,78 Prev.Maint.-Access Control Sys.&CCTV Sys.,Install Card Readers Pit.2 Co.Gen. 42658 Pioneer Americas,Inc. 34,953.17 Caustic Soda&Bleach 42689 Polydyne,Inc. 28,780.44 Cationlc Polymer MO 3-11-92 42690 Projects Partners 42,429.78 Temporary Employment Services 42691 South Coast Environmental Co. 42,935.40 Can Gen Emissions Testing Service 42692 Suncllpse,Inc./Conu Kraft 27,618.34 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42693 Synagro Technologies,Inc. 111,310.21 Residuals Removal MO 3-29-95 42694 Tule Ranch/Magan Farms 106,825,21 Residuals Removal MO3-29.95 42695 Vulcan Performance Chemicals 68,035.49 Hydrogen Peroxide Specification No:C-044 42696 West American Rubber Company 28,836.45 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42697 The Yakima Company 46,216,97 Residuals Removal MO3-22-00 Page 2 of EXHIBITA - Claims Paid From 03/01/02 to 03ffl%W Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42698 J W Contracting Corporation 176,128.00 Construction P2-60 42699 Margate Construction,Inc. 2,357,948,00 Construction P7-37,P239,J-71-7 42700 Mike PrIlch&Sons 156,190.55 Construction-Juncture Structure Upgrade 42701 R.Fox Construction,Inc. 40.564.00 Construction-Air Compressor Upgrades at Pit.1 42702 Southern Contracting Company 72,346.00 Construction J33-1A 42703 i2 Technologies 2,06&15 Software Maintenance Agreement 42704 Great American Printing Go. 105.76 Stationery&Office Supplies 42705 Agilem Technologies,Inc. 421.62 Lab Pads&Supplies 42706 Airbome Express 45.80 Air Freight 42707 Align Safety 379.96 Safety Supplies 42708 All American Asphalt 17,064.00 Construction-Manhole Rapalre In Fountain Valley 42709 Allied Electronics,Inc. 90,17 Electrical Supplies 42710 American Airlines 4,828.00 Travel Services 42711 American Chemical Society 119.00 Membership 42712 American Society of Civil Engineers 30.00 Publication 42713 Anthony Pest Control,Inc. 1.285.00 Service Agreement-Pest Control 42714 Aquatic Bioassay And Consulting Labs,Inc. 1,050.00 Toxicity Testing 42715 Arch Wireless 2.278.44 Pagers,Service&Amme 42716 Armor Vac Sweeping Service 1,195.00 Vacuum Truck Services 42717 PFE International,Inc. 221.00 Malnt.Agreement-Mail Center Manager 4018 Atlantis Pool Care 500.00 Service Agreement-Admin.Bldg.Atrium 42719 Automatic Timing&Controls 1,322.84 Printer Repairs&Supplies 42720 Awards&Trophies By Bea 52.03 Plaques 42721 AAAS 120.00 Membership-American Assoc.for the Advancement of Science 42722 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 17.11 Telephone Service 42723 AT&T Wireless Services-Airtime 63.21 Cellular Telephone Service 42724 AT&T Wireless Services 2,504.31 Wireless Phone Service 42725 AWSI 166.00 Department of Transportation Training Program 42726 Battery Specialties 507.12 Batteries 4270 Betz Houston Co. 6.811.46 Reconciliation User Fee Refund!Program 42728 BloMerieux Vitek,Inc. 569.81 Lab Supplies 42729 Bloomberg,L.P. 5,301.30 Financing Monitoring MO 4-14-93 42730 Borthwick,Guy,Bettenhausen 5,791.02 Professional Services P2-84 42731 Buena Park Lumber&Hardware 1.982.06 LumbevHardware 42732 Bush&Associates,Inc. 8,206.00 Surveying Services MO 6-25.97 42733 California Barricade Rentals 760.00 Workslte Safety Protection Barricades 42734 Cambridge Integrated Services Group,Inc. 2.083.33 Professional Services-Workers'Compensation Claims 42735 Camill Farr Sales 973.42 Air Punflere 42738 Camilo Engineers 2,000.00 Prof.Services-Tech.Specs.Re Mach.Equipment-Digestion&Dewatering at Pit. 1 42737 Center for Creative Growth 1.250.00 Prof.Services-O&M Executive Management Coaching 42738 Chapman Hospital 3,705.22 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42739 City Lights Design Alliance 2,944.29 Professional Services 5,50 42740 Columbia West Anaheim Medical Center 15,445.48 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42741 Communications Performance Group,Inc. 3,268.40 Professional Services-Hazardous Energy Control Procedures 42742 Consumers Pipe&Supply Co. 470.78 Plumbing Supplies 42743 Cooper Energy Systems 84.45 Mechanical Parts&Supplies Page 3 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 03/01/02 to 03/15/02 Warrant f40. Vendor Amount Description 42744 Conventions Management Consulting 1,500.00 Consulting Services-Management Training 42745 Corporate Express Imaging 1,964.46 Computer Supplies 42746 Corporate Express 281.25 Office Supplies 42747 Counterpart Enterprises,Inc. 3,506.25 Mechanical Pans 8 Supplies 42748 County of Orange-Auditor Controller 1,433.19 Sewer Service Fee Administration 42749 Culligan of Orange County 35.00 Maint.Agreement-Can Gen Water SoBner System 42760 CALPERLA 390.00 Membership 42751 CASA 1,800.00 Admin.8 Compliance Meeting Registration 42752 CRG Marine Laboratories,Inc. 6,075.00 Lab Analysis 42753 CWEA-SSCSC 180.00 O B M Training Registration,Calif.Water Environment Association 42754 CWEA Membership 140.00 Membership-Calif.Water Environment Assoc. 42765 Dapper Tire Co. 587.95 Truck Tires 42756 David's Tree Service 3,500.00 Tree Maint.Service 42757 Del Mar Analytical 1,692.00 Biosolids Analysis 42758 Dezurik do O'Conrcr Sales,Inc. 2,156.74 Mechanical Parts 8 Supplies Q759 Diehl,Evans 8 Co.,L.L.P. 900.00 Prof.Sam.-Presentation to FAHR Comm.Re Prospective Auditing Services 42760 Document Control Solutions.Inc. 5,830.69 Inventory File Conversion Services 42761 Dunn-Edwards Corporation 217.66 Paint Supplies 42762 E.Sam Jones Distributors,Inc. 1,573.16 Electrical Supplies 42763 Electra-Bond 147.08 Repairs 8 Maintenance Materials 42764 Elecro Numerics,Inc. 1,682.36 Electrical Parts 8 Supplies 42765 Elecbo-Teat,Inc. 2,640.00 Maintenance Services-Portable Generators at Pit.2 42766 Enchanter.Inc. 4,000.00 Ocean Monftonng MO 5.24-95 42767 Environmental Resource Association 1,186.80 Lab Parts 8 Supplies 42768 Eric Mein 8,000.00 Professional Services-EMT Retreat 42769 Euromenn Group Companies 702.02 Electrical Pans 8 Supplies 42770 Exeoufive Portraits 199.15 Professional Services-Photography 42771 EPC:Electrical Power 8 Controls,Inc. 650.52 Electrical Pans 8 Supplies 42772 ESSCO: Engineering Sales Service 603.64 Mechanical Parts 8 Supplies 42773 FedEx Corporation 76.92 Air Freight 42774 Filter Supply Company 104.37 Fillers 42775 Fisher Scientific Company,L.L.C. 10,296.32 Lab Pans 8 Supplies 42776 Flat and Vertical,Inc. 704.50 Concrete Cutting 42771 Flexible Metal Hose Manufacturing 4,588.28 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42778 Foodcraft Coffee 8 Refreshment Services 303.64 Meeting Supplies 42779 Fountain Valley Camera 16.32 Photo Supplies 42780 Fountain Valley Chevron Auto Wash 482.44 Truck Wash Tickets 42781 Franklin Covey 98.06 Offloe Supplies 42782 Fys Electronics 3.363.21 Computer Supplies 42783 Ganahl Lumber Company 430.35 Lumber/Hardware 42784 Goldenwest Fence Company 23.188.62 Chain Link Fencing-J-36 42705 Goldenwest Window Service 2,462.00 Window Cleaning Service-Spec.4990015 42786 Goodway Technologies Corp 317.00 Inst.Parts 8 Supplies 42787 W W Grainger,Inc. 1.376.71 Mechanical Pads 8 Supplies 42788 Grating Pacific,Inc. 2,543.97 Fiberglass Grating 42789 GMF Sound,Inc. 425.19 Audio System Maint.-Tour Bus Page 4 of EXHIBITA Claims Paid From 03101/02 to 03VISM Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42790 American Sigma,Inc. 650.34 Lab Parts&Supplies 42791 Harold Primrose Ica 37.00 Ice For Samples 42792 HaMngton Industrial Plastics,Inc. 2,408,14 Plumbing Supplies 42793 Hatch&Kirk,Inc. 177.08 Engine Generator Control Supplies 42794 Herb's Blecklorest Bakery&Dell 307.50 Meeting Expenses 42795 HIM,Inc. 75.64 Mechanical Pane&Supplies 42796 Hoerbiger Service,Inc. 202.19 Compressor Pans 42797 Home Depot 10.60 Small Hardware 42798 HI Standard Automotive 113.95 Automotive Supplies 42799 Imaging Express 107.19 Printer Maintenance 42000 Industrial Dlaldbullan Group 982.07 Mechanical Para&Supplies 42801 Industrial Metal Supply 1,565.73 Metal,Piping&Tubing 42802 Industrial Threaded Producis,Inc. 0.724.00 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42803 Infinity Technology USA 443.82 Computer Supplies 42804 Insurance Educational Association 136.00 Safety&Emergency Response Training Registration 42805 Ionics Instrument Business Group 996.32 Lab Parts&Supplies 42806 Iron Mountain OII-Site Data Protection 240.00 08eite Back-Up Tape Storage for NT Sarver 42807 IBM Corp. 530.37 IBM AS/400 Lease 42808 J&L Industrial Supply 566.81 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42809 J.G.Tucker and Son,Inc. 4.870.48 Instrument Supplies 42810 Jamison Engineering Contractors,Inc. 6.223.89 Installation&Maintenance of Gas Flaps for Collection System 42811 Jana Contracting Corp. 5.215.60 Construction-Sewer Lateral Repairs 42812 Jays Catering 1.192.61 Meeting Expenses 42813 Jefferson Smurfit Corp. 21.857.45 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42814 Jensen Instrument Co. 1,051.34 Inst.Parts&Supplies 42815 Joe Rhodes Maintenance Services,Inc. 1,756.42 Maintenance Agreement-OCSD Fuel Management System 42816 John Wiley&Some,Inc. 211.00 Publication 42817 Johnstone Supply 56.84 Electrical Supplies 42818 Jonathan Manufacturing Corp. 16.788.74 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42819 JAMS/ENDISPUTE 626.00 Legal Services-Tran vs.Kovacs 42820 Keiser Rolimet 12,368.08 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42921 Kam Advance Materials,Inc. 4,710.50 Prof.Services-Waterline Pipe Failure at Pit.i Activated Sludge Facility 42822 Klee Associates,Inc. 335.00 Subscription 42M KL&P Marketing 2,305.72 Safety Incentive Items 42824 Launderiand 252.19 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42825 Law/Crandall 8.797.82 Professional Services-Sail Testing P-192 42826 Lawyers Title Company 8,640.00 Real Property Title Report-5.50 42827 La Mode Chemical Products 153.87 Lab Pars&Supplies 42828 Lindsay Engineering Services 4,000.00 Engr.Services-Vibration Monitoring of Gutted Equipment 42828 Linter Company c/o Gerald Jones 4,326.94 Professional Service-DART MO 9122.99 42830 Uniform Center 266.08 OCSD Logo Patches for Personnel Night Jackets 42831 Lorman Education Services 259.00 Safety&Emergency Response Meeting Registration 42832 Los Alamitos General Hospital 8,072.63 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42833 Luod's 131.25 Meeting Expense 42834 Mamcc International 1,422.30 Janitorial Supplies 42835 MarVac Electronics 26.33 Electrical Parts&Supplies Page 5 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 03/01/02 to 03/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42936 McMaster-Can Supply Co. 173.89 Mechanical Pads 8 Supplies 42837 Measurement Control Systems.Inc. 805.75 Mechanical Parts,Supplies 8 Repairs 42638 Mechanical Seal Repair,Inc. 1.539.53 Pump Seal 42839 Media Clips,Inc. 73.00 Notices 8 Ads 42840 Medlin Controls Co. 141.38 Instrument Supplies 42841 Michael Tumipseed 8 Associates 3,000.00 Professional Service-Tule Ranch 8 Yakima Sites Study 42842 Midway Mfg 8 Machining Co. 3,970.00 Mechanical Pans,Supplies 8 Repairs 42843 Milbank West,Inc. 20,352.92 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42844 Mission Uniform Service 4,655.26 Uniform Rentals 42845 National Mioneo mp Services 1.212.40 Service Agreement-Plant Automation 42846 National Research Council Canada 326.34 Lab Parts 8 Supplies 42847 National Water Research Institute 255.00 Air Quality Meeting Registration 42848 Neal Supply Co. 538.59 Plumbing Supplies 42849 NelManage,Inc. 1,939.50 Software MainL Agreement 42850 Nickey Petroleum Co..Inc. 14.500.81 Lubricant/Diesel Fuel 42851 Northwest Hydraulic Consultants,Inc. 568.06 Professional Services 5.49 42852 NWRI National Water Research Institute 4.354.75 OCSD 1/3 Contribution-Video Conferencing at OCWD B MWDOC Board Rm. 42853 Office Depot Business Services Div. 1,396.22 Office Supplies 42854 OneSource Distributor,Inc. 75.38 Electrical Parts 8 Supplies 42855 Oxygen Service Company 157.90 Specialty Oases 42866 OCB Reprographics 1.042.63 Printing Service-MO 1/ S= 42857 OCE-USA.Inc. 251.00 Computer Equipment Mainl. 42858 P.L.Hawn Company,Inc. 31.68 Filter 42859 Pacific Bell Internet Services 324.00 Internet Service 42860 Parker Supply Company 998.54 Mechanical Paris B Supplies 42861 Petition Resources,Inc. 380.00 Partition Moving Services-Finance Dept. 42862 Peedess Wiping Materials Co. 984.75 Janitorial Supplies 42863 Piston Corp.a2 24,165.16 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42864 Pont Supply 4120 Safety Supplies 42865 Power Design 2,171.73 Electrical Supplies 428M Power Lift Corporation 466.46 Fork Lift Repair 42867 Power Systems Testing Company 1.975.00 O B M Training Registration 42868 Praxair,Inc. 21.19 Lab Supplies 42869 Primary Source 6,776.61 Office Furniture 42870 Protech Petroleum Services,Inc. 3.770.00 Maim.Agreement-Underground Storage Tanks Inspection 8 Certification 42871 Putzmeisler 174.17 Pump Maintenance 42872 PCS Express 110.00 Courier Service 42873 Duality Aluminum Forge 1,162.73 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42874 COS,L.L.C. 294.49 Investment Management Program Service 42875 R 8 R Instrumentation,Inc. 3.309.32 Instrument Supplies 42876 R.L.Abbott 8 Associates 4,000.00 Kem County Blosolids Consulfing Services 42877 Rainbow Disposal Co. 4.579.40 Trash Removal 42878 Realty Associates Fund IV,L.P. 13,625.72 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42879 R.A.Reed Electric 4,043.65 Motor Overhaul 42880 Robert F.Driver Assoc., Inc. 3,128.00 Crime Insurance 42881 Royce Multimedia,Inc. 73.25 Video Services Page 6 of 8 EXHIBIT A- Claims Paid From 03/01/02 to 03/15/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42BB2 Ryan Hema Products Corp. 760.77 Pump Supplies 42883 RPM Electdc Mown 206.80 Motor 42884 Schneider Electric 219.35 Instrument Repels 42886 Schwing America,Inc. 903.67 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42886 Sears Industrial Sales 1,063,98 Mechanical Supplies 42887 Shamrock Supply Co.,Inc. 323A7 Tools 42888 Shureluck Sales&Engineering 1,182.49 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 42889 Supelco,Inc. 1,627.58 Lab Pens&Supplies 42890 Sk111Path Seminars 199.00 Source Control Meeting Registration 42891 Smardan Supply Company 57.97 Plumbing Supplies 42892 So.Cal.Gas Company 13,582.20 Natural Gas 42893 Southern California Edison 7.322.23 Power 42894 Spectrum Video,Inc. 1,200.00 Software 42895 Summit Steel 786.12 Metal 42896 Sunset Industrial Pads 426.15 Mechanical Supplies 42897 Super Power Products 307.90 Janitorial Supplies 42898 SARBS 475.00 Planning Meeting Registration 42889 SCTNA 100.00 Membership 42900 Severn Trent Laborawdes,Inc. 2,756.00 Lab Analytical Service 42901 Terminix International Co.82474 175.00 Peal Control 42902 Thermoo Systems,Inc. 8.009.64 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42903 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. 1,515.17 Mechanical Party&Supplies 42904 Time Warner Communication 40.47 Cable Services 42905 Deily Pilot 381.26 Notices&Ads 42906 Tony's Lock&Sale Service&Sales 22.63 Locks&Keys 42907 Toro Aire,Inc. 91.59 Electrical Pens&Supplies 42908 Triple A Contained; 265.21 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 429D9 Tropical Plaza Numery,Inc. 11,054.18 Contract Groumiskeepmg MC 5-11-94 42910 Truck&Auto Supply,Inc. 788.62 Truck Supplies 42911 Truesdell Laboratories,Inc. 50.00 Lab Services 42012 TCH Associates,Inc. 585.07 Lab Supplies 42913 U.S.Filter Corporation 1.262.75 Service Agreement-Lab Purification System 42914 Unistrul Los Angeles 882.82 Mechanical Pads,Supplies&Repairs 42015 United Parcel Service 190.82 Parcel Services 42916 Universal Clroub,Inc. 869.04 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42917 Unocal 76 22.49 Fuel for Vehicles 42918 UC Regents-CPER 195.00 Subscription 42919 Veloo Instruments Co.,Inc. 65.84 Lab Pens&Supplies 42920 Velenlec International Corp. 4,546.17 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 42921 Valley Cities Supply Company 323.25 Mechanical Pam&Supplies 42922 Valley Splicing Co. 1.250.00 Mechanical Paris&Supplies 42923 The Ventage Group,L.L.C. 20,880.00 Temporary Employment Service 42924 Vapex,Inc. 2,329.51 Maintenance Services-16 Sentinel Units 42925 Vedtecl 1.000.00 Maintenance Agreement for Flrewall Server 42926 Vedzon California 99.28 Telephone Services 42927 Verne's Plumbing 2,676.00 Testing&Cerlillcatwn of Backllow Devices at Pit$.1&2 and Pump Stations Page 7 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 03/01/02 to 03/16/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42928 Vortex Industries,Inc. 475.95 Door Repair 42929 V W R Scientific Products Corporation 2.542.82 Lab Paris 8 Supplies 42930 The Wackenhut Corporation 7,55.9.94 Security Guards 42931 Waco Filter 71.53 Filter 42932 Wally Machinery and Tool Supply,Inc. 257.89 Tools 42933 Winds Sanitary Supply 234.35 Janitorial Supplies 42934 West Coast Safety Supply Co. 1,828.81 Repairs 8 Maintenance Materials 42935 Westport Aparetus DBA Breaker Supply 216.50 Electrical Parts 8 Supplies 42936 WEF 275.00 Membership-Water Environment Federation 42937 WOI 1,100.00 O B M Training Registration 42938 Xerox Corporation 12,271.51 Copier 8 Fax Leases 42939 200218HW-CWEA,Inc. 320.00 Compliance Meeting Registration 42940 California Bank 8 Trust 8,038.00 Construction J-33-1A,Retention 42941 MVP Commercial,Inc. 6,493.00 Construction-Tenant Improvements to Fleet Services 42942 Punchlist Contractors 17.685.00 Construction-Purchasing Division Conference Room at Pit. 1 42943 Union Bank of California 19,570.00 Construction P2.60,Retention 42944 Jeanie M.Fields 143.88 Mesting/Daining Expense Reimbursement 42M Douglas M.Stewart 439.66 Meeting/Fralnirg Expense Reimbursement 42946 County of Orange-Auditor Controller 705.00 Sewer Service Fee Administration 42947 Eric Klein 8,250.00 Professional Services-EMT Retreat 4290 Orange County Sanitation District 16,339.96 Worker's Comp.Reimit. 42949 Orange County Sanitation District 506.99 Pelt'Cash Reimb. 42950 OCARMA CRM Workshop 125.Og Administration Meeting Registration 42951 Verizon California 80.74 Telephone Services Total Accounts Payable-Warrants $ 7.346.933.96 Payroll Disbursements 26031 -26031 Interim Paycheck $ 4,480.57 Termination Paycheck 26032-26140 Employee Paychecks 160,207.95 Biweekly Payroll 03A)6/02 26141 -26141 Interim Paycheck 8,763.77 Termination Paycheck 70420-70878 Direct Deposit Statements 783,447.05 Biweekly Payroll 03/06/02 Total Payroll Disbursements $ 956,899.34 Wire Transfer Payments Chase Bank of Texas,National Assoc. $ 126.135.99 Societe Generale Swap Payment on 1993 Certificates of Participation Chase Bank of Texas,National Assoc. 37,984.91 February Interest Payment on Sens 1993 Certificates of Participation Total Wire Transfer Payments $ 164.120.90 Total Claims Paid 03/01/02-03/15/02 $ 8,467,954.20 Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT R- Claims Paid From 03/16/02 to 03/31/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Deseriptlon Accounts Payable-Warrants 42952 American Express $ 35.936.20 Purchasing Card Program,Mac Supplies&Services 42953 Orange County Sanitation District 475,775.31 Payroll EFT Reimbursement 42954 Orange County Water District 1,104,276.51 GWRS Joint Project J36 42955 Aagas Safety 5,483.39 Safety Supplies 42956 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 45.65 Telephone Service 42957 Court Order 626.20 Wage Garnishment 42968 Court Order 150.00 Wage Garnishment 42959 Consolidated Elect.Distributors,Inc. 1,862.54 Electrical Supplies 42960 Consumers Pipe&Supply Co. 2,728.82 Plumbing Supplies 42961 Court Order 525.00 Wage Garnishment 42962 ESRI,Inc. 1,200.00 Engineering Training Registration 42963 Intl.Union of Oper.Eng.AFL-CIO Local 501 2,580.65 Dues Deduction 42964 Invaders Systems,Inc. 1,251.97 Instrument Supplies 42965 Kevin Orzech 4,446.28 Professional Services J-85 42966 League Of CA Cities 1,750.00 Admin Meeting Registration 42967 MarVac Electwlm 57.70 Electrical Parts&Supplies 42968 McMaster-Carr Supply Co. 415.10 Mechanical Pads&Supplies 42969 Court Order 339.50 Wage Garnishment 42970 Orange County Marshal 45.00 Wage Garnishment 42971 Orange Fluid System Tech.,Inc. 799.13 Finings 42972 OCDM Marketing 50.50 Bulk Postage-Rate Notices 42973 OCEA 480.61 Dues Deduction 42974 Pacific Bell 12.66 Telephone Services 42975 COIm Order 40.OD Wage Garnishment 42976 Court Order 206.00 Wage Garnishment 42977 Peace Officers Council of CA 927.00 Dues Deduction 42978 Presskits 1,524.88 Printing 42979 Scott Specialty Grates.Inc. 766.25 Electrical Paris&Supplies 42980 Shamrock Supply Co.,Inc. 8,829.66 Instruments,Parts&Supplies 42981 Court Order 721.50 Wage Garnishment 429112 So.Cal.Gas Company 18.75 Natural Gas 42983 Southern California Edison 2,056.81 Power 42984 Southern California Gas Co. 20,283.00 Natural Gas 42985 Thompson Industrial Supply.Inc. 2,747.74 Mechanical Pads It Supplies 42986 United Way 305.00 Employee Contributions 42987 Vedzon California 4,072.48 Telephone Services 42988 Westbay Solutions Group 2,000.00 Accounting It Operations Training Registration 42989 Frank Chavez 1,230.10 Maeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 42990 David D.Halverson 414.33 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 42991 Deirdre E.Hunter 217.20 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 42992 Julie A Matsumoto 101.03 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 42993 George L.Robertson 131.66 Meeting raining Expense Reimbursement 42994 Robed J.Thiede 346.14 MeetingRreining Expense Reimbursement 42995 Air Products&Chemicals 25,039.17 O&M Agreement Oxy Gen Sys MO 8.8-89 42996 Black&Veatch Corporation 558,229.72 Engineering Services P1-76&J-77 Page 1 of 8 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 03/16/02 to 03(31/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 42997 Boyle Engineering Corporation 26,11U.50 Engineering Services 2-31 &6-13 42998 BP Energy Company 107,351.22 Natural Gas 42999 Cardlo Engineers 99.367.71 Professional Services J-25-4,J-39&Disinfection&Microfillration Studies 43000 County Wholesale Electric Co. 42,320.76 Electronic Modules&Electrical Parts&Supplies 43001 CGvL Engineers 40,347.97 Professional Services P2-82 43002 CH2M Hill 29,416.84 Professional Services J-71-7 43003 Delta Dermal 52,188.71 Dental Insurance Plan 43004 Health Science Associates 30,584.50 Professional Services-Asbestos Study 43005 Kemiron Pacific,Inc. 162,040.82 Ferric Chloride MO 9.27-95 43006 Mike Pdich&Sons 89,057.11 Construction-Force Main Repairs at Bitter Point Pump Station 43007 Municipal Water Dist.of Orange County 42.170.62 Water Use Efficiency Program MO 9-22-99 43008 Painewebber Incorporated 39,538.36 COP Remarketing Agreement 43009 Parsons Engineering Science,Inc. 170.737.40 Engineering Services J42&J-35.2 43010 Pioneer Americas,Inc. 37.864.93 Sodium Hypochlorite 43011 Plas-Tanks Industries,Inc. 40,243.70 (1)Fiberglass Reinforced Caustic Storage Tank 43012 Science Applications Intl.,Corp. 79,462.30 Ocean Monitoring MO 6-8-94 43013 Southern California Edison 58.494.53 Power 43014 Synagro Technologies,Inc. 316,177.76 Residuals Removal MO 3.29-95 43015 Textile Engineering Associates 33,480.00 Bell Press Supplies 43016 Tran Consulting Engineers 88,986.00 Engineering Services 5d6,7-21 &1-17 43017 Tule Ranch 169,701.38 Permit Fees&Residuals Removal MO 3-29-95 43018 Woodruff,Spradlin&Smart 95,261.64 Legal Services MO7.26-95 43019 The Yakima Company 63224.45 Residuals Removal MO 3-22-00 43020 Ken Thompson,Inc. 686,518.00 Construction 5-46 43021 A-1 Enterprises,Inc. 545.00 Fence Repairs 43022 Abalix Environmental Corp. 220.89 Hardware 43023 Absolute Standards,Inc. 125.00 Lab Pans&Supplies 43024 AccaStandard,Inc. 1268.85 Lab Pans&Supplies 43025 Great American Printing Co. 1,393.33 Stationery&Office Supplies 43026 Advanced Engine Technology Corporation 2,504.12 Inst.Pans&Repairs 43027 Aearo Company 1,072.50 Safety Supplies 43028 Air Liquids America Corp. 1,233.99 Specialty Gasses 43029 Airborne Express 45.96 Air Freight 43030 American Seals West 32.40 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 43031 Analysts,Inc. 2.040.50 Testing Kits 43032 Aquarium of the Pacific 23.90 Reimbursable Employee Activity Expense 43033 Aquadc Tearing Laboratories 12,800.00 Toxicity&Disinfection Program Testing 43034 Ark Conatmctton Company 12,000.00 Construction-Installation of Doorway in Admin Bldg. 43035 Asbury Environmental Services 100.00 Waste Oil Removal 43036 Automatic Timing&Controls 88.38 Printer Repairs 43037 Avoids&Trophies By Bea 34.91 Plaques 43MS AIHce American Industrial Hygiene Confer 1,750.00 Human Resources Training Registration 43039 ABBE American Soc.of Safety Engineers 1,175.00 Human Resources Training Registration&Membership 43040 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 656.51 Telephone Service 43041 American Telephone&Telegraph Corp. 261.30 Telephone Service 43042 AT&T Wireless Services 1,356.82 Wireless Telephone Services Page 2 of 8 EXHIBIT 8 ' Claims Paid From 03/16/02 to 03/31/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 43043 AVID International 12,100.00 Professional Services-On-Site Training 43044 Battery Specialties 906.39 Batteries 43045 Camel Financial,Inc.do Bearing Metal 585.80 Metal Supplies 43046 Bell Pipe 8 Supply Co. 46.56 Piping Supplies 43047 Boot Barn 186.29 Reimbursable Safety Sloes 43048 Brown 8 Caldwell 18,411.94 Professional Services-Waste Discharge Requirementa/CMOM Program Support 43049 Bush 6 Associates,Inc. 3,928.00 Surveying Services MO 6.25-97 43050 BMW Construction Corp. 1.733.30 Acoustic Enclosure for Ultrasonic Teal Unit 43051 California Automatic Gale 993.72 Service Agreement 43052 Cambridge Integrated Services Group,Inc 2,093.33 Professional Services-Workers'Compensation Claims 43053 Cameron Welding Supply 589.73 Electrical Pans 8 Supplies 43054 Camfil Fart Sales 110.48 Mechanical Pans 6 Supplies 43055 Career Track 129.00 Lab Training Registration 43056 Carollo Engineers 1,781.29 Professional Services-Biosolids Management Options 43057 Copeloo Capital,Inc. 1,282.20 Copier Lease 43058 City of Fountain Valley 16,570.80 Water Use 43059 Communications Supply Corp. 180.99 Electrical Paris 6 Supplies 43060 Consolidated Elect,Distributors,Inc. 1,572.96 Electrical Pans 8 Supplies 43061 Consumers Pipe B Supply Co. 1,693.19 Plumbing Supplies 43062 Cooper Energy Services 1,028.26 Engine Supplies 43063 Corporate Express Imaging 441.49 Computer Supplies 43064 Corporate Express 4,875.05 Office Supplies 43065 Corporate Image Maintenance,Inc. 1,873.00 Custodial Services Spec.No.9899.09 43066 Counterpart Enterprises,Inc. 225.47 Mechanical Parts 8 Supplies 43087 County of Orange 100.00 Encroachment Permit-Bushard Trunk Sewer 43068 County of Orange(PFRD Geomatim) 2,373.60 Parcel Maps 43069 County of Orange,Auditor Controller 140.00 Maint.Agreement-Repaininstall.of Base,Handheld 8 Vehicle Radios 43070 County W Orange,Auditor Controller 6.198.00 Sewer Spill Clean-Up Assistance at PCH 43071 Crane America Services,Inc. 3,422.16 Crane Services 43072 Culligan of Orange County 35.00 Maint.Agreement-Can Gan Water Balmer System 43073 Cyclus Envirosystems,Inc. 11,755.64 Professional Services-Anmdc Gas Flotation Process 43074 CA Emissions Program 5.40 Emissions Testing 43075 CEPA Company 225.00 Lab Equipment Maint.Service 43076 CISCO Systems 852.00 Software Malm.Agreement 43077 CRBR,Inc. 10,942.92 Container Rentals 43078 CWEA 2002 Annual Conference 435.00 06 M Meeting Registration-California Water Environment Association 43079 David W ilson's Ford of Orange 17,707.80 (1)2002 Ford Ranger Pickup Truck 43080 David's Tree Service 2.010.00 Tree Maim.Service 43081 Del Mar Analytical 1,245.00 Blosolids Analysis 43082 Dell Direct Sales L.P. 1,616.25 (50)Ergonomic Keyboards 43083 Dunn-Edwards Corporation 501.39 Pain Supplies 43004 Dynamic Graphics Magazine 52.80 Subscriplion 43085 E.Sam Jones Distributors,Inc. 61.72 Electrical Supplies 43086 Enchanter,Inc. 2.400.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5-24-95 43087 Equipco Sales 8 Service 251.36 Incl.Repairs,Maint.8 Paris 43008 Eurothemi Controls do Golden Slate Cant 3.447.42 that.Pans,Supplies and Software Page 3 of 8 EXHIBIT 8 Claims Paid From 03M6102 to 03/31/02 Wartam No. Vendor Amount Description 43089 Eurotherm Group Companies 3,815.47 Instrument Party&Supplies 43090 ESRI,Inc. 9,431.25 Software,Server Make.&Support 43091 F.H.Pumps 483.14 Pump Supplies 43092 FedEx Corporation 272.17 Air Freight 43093 Filler Supply Company 39.59 Filters 43094 Fisher Scientific Company,L.L.C. 15.241.48 Lab Parts&Supplies 43095 Flexicraft Industries 4,021.23 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 43096 Flo-Systems.Inc. 670.09 Pump Supplies 43097 Fountain Valley Camara 27.90 Photo Supplies 43098 Fountain Valley Chevron Auto Wash 526.44 Truck Wash Tickets 43099 Franklin Covey 321.58 Office Supplies 43100 Frys Electronics 561.79 Computer Supplies 43101 City of Fullerton 57.56 Water Use 43102 Ganahl Lumber Company 88.31 Lumberkiardware 43103 Gamaa-Callahan Company 199.34 (t)Model 5018 Bypass Feeder 43104 General Petroleum 11,577.05 Unleaded Gasoline 43105 George Buslamante 6.579.35 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 43106 George T.Hell 1,880.83 Imt.Parts&Supplies 43107 Gierl'ch-Mitchell,Inc. 8,018.76 Bell Filter Press Supplies 43108 Gold Systems.Inc. 3,618.75 Professional Services-Data Migration&STORET Interface Application 43109 W W Grainger,Inc. 740.71 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 43110 Great Western Sanitary Supplies 295.21 Janitorial Supplies 43111 GE Muffin,Inc. 425.00 Electrical Equipment Repair 43112 Harper&Associates Engineering,Inc. 2,917.50 Engineering Services-Concrete Corrosion in Pit.2 Headworks Facility 43113 Herb's Blackforest Bakery&Deli 63.25 Meeting Expenses 43114 Hil9,Inc. 98.06 Bakery 43115 Home Depot 467.12 Small Hardware 43116 City of Huntington Beach 18,775.80 Water Use 43117 I.D.Industries,Inc. 374.04 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 43118 Idexx 1,342.57 Lab Parts&Supplies 43119 Imaging Express 741.88 Printer Maintenance 43120 Imaging Plus,Inc. 1.897.61 Priming Service 43121 Industrial Distribution Group 1,190.46 Paint Supplies 43122 Industrial Metal Supply 469.70 Metal 43123 Industrial Threaded Products,Inc. 31.98 Faelerrers 43124 Infinity Technology USA 374.32 Computer Supplies 43126 Innerline Engineering 6,567.50 Professional Services-CCTV Videoing of Trunklines 43126 Intergraph Corporation 745.00 Engineering Meeting Registration 43127 Intretek Computer,Inc. 1,600.34 Network&Server Maintenance 43128 Invensys Systems,Inc. 1,817.83 Instrument Supplies 43129 Ionics Instrument Business Group 504.39 Lab Pans&Supplies 43130 Irvine Ranch Water District 58.00 Water Use 43131 IBM Corp. 1,844.72 IBM AS1400 Lease&Support 43132 IDMS:Imaging Document Mgmt.Solutions 6,564.35 Contract SerNces J-25-1 43133 J&L Industrial Supply 604.55 Mechanical Parts&Supplies 43134 J.G.Tucker and Son,Inc. 1,719.77 Instrument Supplies Page 4 of EXHIBIT , Claim Paid From 03/16/02 to 03/31/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 43135 James Carver,CHMIA Treasurer 300.00 Source Control Meeting Registration 43136 Jamison Engineering Contractors,Inc. 16,689.88 Construction-Miller-Holder Trunklble Insp.,Waterline Repairs,Easement Repairs 43137 Jaye Catering 761.29 Mewing Expenses 43138 Jensen Instrument Co. 1,229.21 Repairs&Maintenance Supplies 43139 Johnson&Associates,L.L.C. 11,015.04 Professional Services-Compensation&Clasalllostlon Study 43140 Johnstone Supply 28.95 Electrical Supplies 43141 JPC Construction 1.925.00 Construction-Install Window in Human Resources Building 43142 JWC Environmental 9,897.92 Modify/Upgrade Muffin Monster 43143 K.P.Lindstrom,Inc. 3,039.00 Environmental Consulting Services MO 12-9.90 43144 Kings County Tax Collector 15,140.66 Property Taxes 43145 Lexis-NeAs 91.62 Books&Publications 43146 Lindsay Engineering Services 1,938.88 Professional Services-2-Day Training Course on Letter Alignment 43147 Linter Company c/o Gerald Jones 4,352.58 Professional Service-DART MO 9-22-99 43148 Liquid Handling Systems 1,558.68 Pumping Supplies 43149 Long Beech Line-X 397.00 Truck Bed Costing 43150 Luccrs 81.25 Mewing Expense 43161 LA Chemical 15,772.97 Caustic Soda 43152 Mankys Boiler Repair Company,Inc. 7,672.71 Boiler Repalm&Testing 43153 MarVac Electronics 30.41 Electrical Pans&Supplies 43154 McJunkin Corporation 79.87 Plumbing Supplies 43155 McMaster-Cart Supply Co. 1,638.03 Mechanical Pans&Supplies 43156 Media Clips,Inc. 192.03 Notices It Ads 43167 The Penn Air Group 21,000.00 Service Agreement-HVAC Duct Cleaning 43158 Michael Tum pseed&Associates 3,000.00 Professional Service-Tule Ranch&Vakima Sites Study 43159 Midway Mfg&Machining Co. 4,576.00 Pump,Supplies and Pump Repairs 43160 Miami 1,205.24 Instrument Supplies 43161 Mission Uniform Service 4.805.23 Uniform Rentals 43162 MotoPhoto 11.27 Photographic Services 43163 MSA c/o Mag Systems 244.15 Instrument Pans&Supplies 43164 UC Regents 387.08 Lab Analyses 43165 National Plant Services,Inc. 3,300.00 Vacuum Truck Services 43166 Neal Supply Co. 289.20 Plumbing Supplies 43167 NetVensant of Southern California 5,701.39 Human Resources Security System Improvements 43168 Nickey Petroleum Co.,Inc. 1.784.53 Lubricant/Diesel Fuel 43169 Ninyo&Moore Corporate Accounting 5,456.25 Professional Services-Materials Testing MO 6.24.98 43170 The Norco Companies 156.00 Mail Delivery Service 43171 Nu-Way Lever Engraving 91.45 Asset Tags 43172 Office Depot Business Services Div. 2,605.28 Office Supplies 43173 OhmarVVEGA Corp. 990.00 Safety Training Registration 43174 Claim Electrles Corp. 1,542.00 Electrical Pans&Supplies 43175 OneSouroe Distributors,Inc. 1,339.98 Ins.Parts,Supplies&Repairs 43176 Optio Software 2,700.00 Software Maintenance 43177 Orange Coast Petroleum Equipment,Inc. 802.74 Fuel Pump Equipment 43178 Orange Fluid System Tech.,Inc. 200.66 Lab Parts&Supplies 43179 Oxygen Service Company 9,006.32 Specialty Gases 43180 OCB Reprographics 2,529.26 Priming Service-MO 1/26/00 Page 5 of 8 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 03118M2 to 03131/02 WartsM No. Vendor Amount _Description 43181 OCE-USA,Inc. 261.00 Computer Equipment Mainl. 43182 P.L.Hawn Company,Inc. 560.55 Electrical Supplies 43183 Pacific Bell 925.17 Telephone Services 43184 Pacific Mechanical Supply 212.45 Plumbing Supplies 43185 Pacific Paris 8 Controls 5.612.09 Electrical Supplies 43186 Parker Supply Company 2.791.33 Mechanical Parts B Supplies 43187 Parkhouss Tire Co. 1.350.83 Tires 43188 Perms Pure,Inc. 3.333.43 Filter 43189 Plumbing 6 Industrial Supply 171.32 Water Heater 43190 Polydyne,Inc. 24,364.35 Cationic Polymer M03-11-92 43191 Postmaster 750.00 Post Office Box Rental 43192 Power Measurement Limited 200.00 Instrument Repairs 43193 Process Equipment Company 3,286.22 Pump Pane 6 Supplies 43194 Holtman Southwest Corporation 15,435.74 CON Sewerlins Inspection-Revenue Area 7 43195 Protech Petroleum Services,Inc. 218.47 Mechanical Repairs 8 Maintenance Sewes 43196 Public Resources Advisory Group 10.675.00 Financial Advisory Services 43197 PCS Express 110.00 Courier Service 43198 R b R Instrumentation,Inc. 472.76 Instrument Pans 6 Supplies 43199 Regents of Univ.of California 1,451.88 Professional Services J-85 43200 Reliesiar Bankers Security Life Ins. 8502.38 Life Insurance Premium 43201 Restek Corp 248.50 tab Parts 8 Supplies 43202 Rosemount/Undoc 564.50 Instrument Supplies 43203 Rutland Tool&Supply 557.05 Mechanical Parts 8 Supplies 43204 Ryan Herco Products Corp. 1.013.11 Pump Supplies 43205 RBF Engineers 19,201.98 Engineering Services 2.24-1 43206 RJN Group.Inc. 10,750.00 CMMS Consulting Services 43207 RPM Electric Motors 164.86 Electrical Pans 8 Supplies 43208 Safety-Kleen 420.16 Safety Paris Cleaning Service 43209 Sarlonus Corporation 474.87 Lab Equimem Service 43210 Sayboll,L.P. 1.100.00 Air Analysis 43211 Schwing America,Inc. 1.042.31 Pump Parts 8 Supplies 43212 Cory of Seal Beach 79.93 Water Use 43213 Seers Industrial Sales 662.69 Mechanical Supplies 43214 Shureluck Sales 6 Engineering 2.505.22 Mechanical Parts 8 Supplies 43215 Supelco,Inc. 114.67 Lab Supplies 43216 Smaroan Supply Company/Orange Coast 317.84 Plumbing Supplies 43217 So.Calif.Gas Company 1,336.87 Natural Gas 43218 SoftCholce 4,703.29 Software 43219 South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. 502.55 Permit Fees-Annual Emissions,Operation 8 Misc.Fees 43220 Southern California Edison 24.87 Power 43221 Specialized Powder Coating 300.00 Powder Coating of Tool Box Brackets 43222 Skate International,Inc. 505.46 Chemicals 43223 Suncor Stainless,Inc. 178.18 Lab Supplies 43224 Sunset Industrial Pans 935.98 Mechanical Paris 6 Supplies 43225 SAW PA 3,000.00 Prof.Services-Santa Ana River Watershed Group 43226 STL Sacramento 920.00 lab Analytical Service Page 6 of 8 EXHIBIT B �- Claims Paid From 03/16/02 to 03/31/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 43227 T 6 C Industrial Controls.Inc. 1,050.66 Electrical Supplies 43228 Teohni-Tod,Inc. 49.48 Electrical Supplies 43229 Teledyne Analytical 186.35 Instrument Paris 6 Supplies 43230 Tana Tech.Inc. 11.031.39 Professional Services-Ocean Monitoring 6 Contract No. 11-22 43231 Thompson Industrial Supply,Inc. 613.35 Mechanical Pans S Supplies 43232 ThyssenKrupp Elevator 1,280.00 Elevator Maintenance 43233 Time Warner Communication 90.44 Cable Services 43234 Tonys Lock a Safe Service 8 Sales 516.80 Locks 8 Keys 43235 Top Hat Productions 245.56 Meeting Expenses 43236 Traffic Control Servloe,Inc. 6,459.61 Traffic Safety Equipment Rental 43237 The Training Clinic 699.00 Human Resources Training Registration 43238 Tropical Plaza Nursery,Ix. 350.00 Contract Groundskeeping M05-11-94 43239 Truck 6 Ado Supply,Inc. 24.36 Truck Supplies 43240 Ultra Scientific SO." Lab Supplies 43241 The Unisource Corporation 94.23 Office Supplies 43242 United Asset Coverage,Inc. 22,011.33 Phone System Melnt. 43243 United Parcel Service 711.71 Parcel Services 43244 Naval Poet Graduate School 13,984.95 Professional Services J-85 43245 UC Regents 495.00 Human Resources Training Registration 43246 UCI Regents 6,981.63 Professional Services J45 43247 Valco Instruments Co.,Im. 455.24 Lab Supplies 43248 Varian,Inc. 1,380.54 Lab Supplies 43249 Verizon California 1,246.05 Telephone Services 43250 Veme's Plumbing 775.00 Plumbing Equipment Service 43251 Village Nurseries 2,340.00 Landscaping Supplies 43252 Vision Service Plan-(CA) 7,439.04 Vision Service Premium 43253 Vortex Industries,Inc. 1,872.55 Door Repair 43254 Vulcan Performance Chemicals 24,076.69 Hydrogen Peroxide Specification No:C-044 43255 VWR Scientific Products Corporation 4,897.91 Lab Supplies 43256 The Wackenhut Corporation 4,141.47 Security Guards 43257 Welly Machinery and Tool Supply,Inc. 287.46 Mechanical Parts 8 Supplies 43256 Water 3 Engineering,Inc. 3.028.43 Engineering Service J-67 43259 Waters Corporation 117.68 Lab Supplies 43260 Wattle Sanitary Supply 889.06 Janitorial Supplies 43261 Wells Supply Company 80.82 Mechanical Paris 8 Supplies 43262 West Group 127.00 Subscription 43263 West-Lite Supply Company,Inc. 929.46 Electrical Supplies 43264 Wilhelm Electric Co.,Inc. 11,143.00 Construction J-77 43265 Wilson Supply,Inc. 1.658.00 Electrical Paris 8 Supplies 43266 W iteg Scientific 381.43 Lab Supplies 43267 W EF 201.00 Membership-Water Environment Federation 43268 INS Atkins Water 18,266.70 Prof.Sam.-Ultrasonic Treatmt.of Digester Sludge S Anaerobic Baffled Reactor Devi. 43269 Xerox Corporation 8.060.65 Copier 8 Fez Leases 43270 Vokogam Corp.of America 6.211.33 Instruments,Parts 8 Supplies 43271 Zumar Industries 146.28 Directional Signs 43272 Lisa Aroeteguy 109.16 MeetlnlyTralning Expense Reimbursement Page 7 of 8 EXHIBIT S Claims Paid From 03/16/02 to 03/31/02 Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description 43273 Shebbir S.Basrei 1,250.01 Meeting/1'raining Expense Reimbursement 43274 Skip E.Berner 514.36 Meeting?raming Expense Reimbursement 43275 Thomas M.Blends 302.10 Meetingffraining Expense Reimbursement 43276 Pongsakdi Cady 345.44 MaeOng?ralning Expense Reimbursement 43277 Randy E.Harris 107.61 Meeling/Training Expense Reimbursement 43278 Kathleen T.Millea 926.65 Masling?raining Expense Reimbursement 43279 John W.Swindler 513.79 Mesting7raining Expense Reimbursement 43280 Robed C.Thompson 188.71 Meeting raining Expense Reimbursement 43281 Lauds S.Bluestein 495.75 Vehicle Damage Claim 43282 CSMFO 100.00 Accounting Meeting Registration 43283 Orange County Sanitation District 693,07 Petry Cash Reimb, Total Accounts Payable-Warrants $ 5,643,929.25 Payroll Disbursements 26142-26275 Employee Paychecks $ 177.154.98 Biweekly Payroll 03/20/02 26276-26284 Interim Paychecks 108,355.50 Termination Paychecks 8 Adjustments 70879-713" Direct Deposit Statements 813,69650 Biweekly Payroll 03/20/02 Total Payroll Disbursements $ 1,099,106.98 Wire Transfer Payments State Street Bank 8 Trust Co.of CA $ 376.938.17 March Interest Paymant an Series A 8 B Certificates of Padicipeson Total Wire Transfer Payments $ 376,938.17 Total Claims Paid 03/16/02-OW31/02 $ 7.119,974A0 Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT B �" BOARD OF DIRECTORS MeetlngDae 7o 24/02lr. 9/d.of AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item (a) 9(u Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Bob Chenowith, Principal Engineering Associate SUBJECT: PROPOSED ANNEXATION NO. OCSD-7 - HORMUTH ANNEXATION GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1) Receive and file petition from John Hormuth requesting annexation of 2.226 acres to the District in the vicinity of Meads Drive and Hillside Drive in an unincorporated area of Orange County; and (2)Adopt Resolution No. OCSD 02-07, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex-said territory to the District (Proposed Annexation No. OCSD-7- Hormuth Annexation). SUMMARY • OCSD received a request from John Hormuth to annex 2.226 acres to OCSD. This property will be annexed into Revenue Area 7. • Mr. Hormuth's property is located within the boundaries of the City of Orange, but outside the boundaries of OCSD and needs to be annexed. • The City of Orange issued Mr. Hormuth a sewer connection permit without verifying OCSD annexation status. Mr. Hormuth completed connection of his private residence to the local sewer and abandonment of his septic tank without OCSD annexation. • OCSD sent a letter to Mr. Hormuth on June 7, 2001 informing him of the requirement for OCSD annexation and payment of all fees. Mr. Hormuth has recently paid all applicable connection and annexation fees to OCSD. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY This annexation is in accordance with the terms of the negotiated agreement with the County of Orange regarding A.B.8 Tax Exchange for annexing properties, Board approved and effective March 14, 1989. Under this Tax Exchange, OCSD does not receive a percentage of the basic levy, and instead, collects a higher annexation fee. r The fee of$9,587 includes the following: , LAFCO Processing Fee ($1,100 fee paid directly to LAFCO by homeowner) $ 0 Additional LAFCO Processing Fee (current difference for 2001 fees) 50 OCSD Processing Fee 500 State Board of Equalization Processing Fee 350 CA Environmental Quality Act Filing Fee 43 Annexation Acreage Fee 8 644 TOTAL ANNEXATION AND SEWER CONNECTION FEE $ 9,587 BUDGET IMPACT ❑ 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 Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) staff has instituted a procedure with the City of Orange to preclude them from issuing connection permits without checking for OCSD annexation status and payment of OCSD fees. ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS Notice of Exemption will be filed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Exhibit A Legal Description 2. Exhibit B Map RLC:jo:sa G:k p.dla�agenda\Bpard Agenda Report5X2002 Board Agenda Report WQZdtem 9)a).HamNh AnnezabonAm ,u„x e 1 Page 2 BLOCKS 6053 Sol ; MODULES 16.16 g6,9B`J• EXHIB`I'T 11All ANNEXATION NO. 0CSD•7 HORMUTH ANNEXATION DA99-10 TO ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 1 Parcel 2 and Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 91-135 as shown on a map recorded in Book 2 269. Pages 30 and 31 of Parcel Maps. Records of Orange County, said parcels being in the 3 City of Orange, Stale of California and being more particularly described as follows: 4 BEGINNING at an angle point In the existing boundary of the Orange County Sanitation 5 District as established by *Annexation No. 130-Chartier Annex (to Sanitation District 07), 6 said angle point being at the Northwesterly terminus of Ihal certain course shown as North 7 BO°24'02' West, 380.42 feel on the Northerly line of said annexation; 8 THENCE along said existing boundary North 35- 40' 21' West, 29.38 feel to the 9 Northwesterly comer of Parcel 2 of said Parcel Map No. 91.135; 10 THENCE leaving said existing Sanitation District boundary and following along the 11 boundary of said Parcels 2 and 3 of said Parcel Map the following courses; 12 THENCE North 54° 19-39- E"I, 20.00 feel; 13 THENCE South 35'40'21- East, 25.00 feet; 14 THENCE North 49' 28'OB' East, 190.05 lest; 15 THENCE North 8V 59 04- East, 18118 feet; 16 THENCE Norlh So-50'51-East, 73.13 lest la a point on the existing Sanitation Olid let 17 boundary as shown an Annexation No. SSRldgetine/Lazy G Annex. (to Sanilation 117), sed 1 B point being North 03° 09' 04- East, 390.98 feet of an angle point being the Southerly 19 lerminus of that certain course described as 'North 03° 1V 00' West, 640.50 teal' in said 20 annexation ; 21 THENCE along said boundary South 039 09 04' East. 325.61 lest to the Northeasterly 22 corner of Annexation No. 130-Char ter Annex (to Saniaton District 07); 23 THENCE along the boundary of said Annexation South 86- SC 56' West, 101.62 feel 24 and along the boundary of said Annexation North 600 24' 02- Weal. 380.42 feet to the 25 P0INT0FSEGINNWG: 26 The above described Parcel of land contains 2.20 acres, more or leas. 27 Attached and made a part o1 is a map designated as Exhibit'B'. 28 0�l/ FEB9tOYv. 30 EORGE B.,H. R.� �0P66Ba_ GEORES BACH, R.G.E. 11092 31 EXPIRES:13/1402001) Na itW2 32 f 13P 13'/Mao f NA r 33 34 FOPCAUFO 35 THIS PROPOSAL DOES MEET THE APPROVAL OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SURVEY DIVISION. 36 4 b 37 DAY ff THI9�DAY 0Pt.[eMcnsus2 1999 38 xs m 39 JO CANAS, COUNTY SURVEYOR f F�.wwo1 f 40 41 42 5953 BLOCKS ULE 15.1 95.9 EXHIBIT ° B" MODULES 15.16 S5,68 ANNEXATION NO. OCSD-7 HORMUTH ANNEXATION DA99-10 ¢ TO ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT W ep) 3aN1•.A 92 ro "a P• P 5lertP"li+ L�ali"'' w — �....WAY. WF.... xwwele �G + i N.Ib���BT3.lb f 10 • Le 44 A.P. NUMBER 31114361.49 .0 Pr \ A.P. NUMBER 3FFMI48 a 40, bab ," R I P •l• \ 1Y' P�IARNFNAhAA P SBE•6YSew �• War. fiO q,W -`n4AilFA W.V \ \ 013Y. M ` \` 1 pnvNtf• EXISTING BOUNDARY ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT ..................I......... ANNEXATION BOUNDARY BCA ."i, ANNEXATION TO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. PREPARED BY: IAVB" ABSTRACT CONSULTING 18512 YORBA LINDA BLVD. SUITE 512 Y�xe AWE q' YORBA LINDA. CA. 92886 PHONE:(714)7014820•FAX:I714)781-0236 • �y.•pbl SEOBSEM HI RC E. 11°P1 E%PIPE&IyINNp 1AA 11m THIS ♦ BP iB14l�^ ♦ ON DOES MEETEAPPOVAL OFTNEORANGE fAUN WMEY OIVIbIgI. 'a7A CIVIL P?V -rµ Y OFd dC�J- . ISBB \L"DPCALI'- N WW. c SURVEYOR Meeting Date To4/ed. D BOARD OF DIRECTORS zaioorzir. AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item 9Numbu (b)b) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Larry Rein, Contract Project Manager SUBJECT: ABANDONMENT OF AIRBASE TRUNK SEWER, WATSON AND CALIFORNIA SEWERS, CONTRACT NO. 6-13 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1) Approve a Grant of Easement, Right of Entry, Maintenance and Indemnity Agreement with the City of Costa Mesa in a form approved by General Counsel at no cost to District; and (2) Approve a Grant of Easement Agreement with the Newport- Mesa Unified School District, with the District paying the fees over a 5-year period of $5,252.57 per year for a total cost of$26,262.85, in a form approved by General Counsel. SUMMARY • This project will abandon two of the oldest Orange County Sanitation District (District) sewers in Costa Mesa. The sewers were constructed in the 1940s and are deteriorated to a condition where they cannot be maintained. • The Airbase Trunk Sewers are no longer needed as trunk sewers since the construction of the Fairview Trunk Sewer and the Gisler-Baker Trunk Sewers. • In order to abandon the sewers, a smaller sewer needs to be constructed to replace the local service provided by the Airbase Trunk Sewers. This agreement will provide the easements needed for the local sewer. • The agreement with City of Costa Mesa also quitclaims a portion of the Airbase Trunk Sewer that is no longer needed. See attached map for clarification. • At completion of the project, the local sewers and easements will be assigned to Costa Mesa Sanitary District. • When the sewers are transferred to Costa Mesa Sanitary District, Newport-Mesa Unified School District will incur Costa Mesa Sanitary District sewer fees that are not currently assessed. Therefore, in compensation for these costs and the easement rights, District will pay the fees for five years at $5,252.57 per year, for a total of $26,262.85. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY The agreement with Newport-Mesa Unified School District will cost the District $26,262.85. The agreement with the City of Costa Mesa is a no cost agreement. See the attached Budget Information Table for project summary. Page 1 w BUDGETIMPACT This agreement has no impact on the Budget. ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item FY 2001-02, Section 8, Page 32: Capital Improvement Program, Collections Facilities, Abandonment of AB Trunk, Watson and Cal. Sewers, Contract No. 06-13) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Contract No. 6-13 is to be split into three Capital Improvement Projects (CIP). There are three separate segments of the Airbase Trunk Sewers that are being abandoned along with three separate means of constructing replacement sewers to provide local service once the sewers are abandoned. Since each of these segments has separate timing considerations, the project is being divided into three capital budgets (Contract Nos. 6-13-1, 6-13-2, and 6-13-3)for construction purposes, the design work has been done under Contract No. 6-13. A budget for Contract No. 6-13-2 will be established in May 2002, so this project can proceed first. The other two project budgets will be established in FY2002/03. This easement agreement is needed for Contract No. 6-13-2 ALTERNATIVES No alternatives were considered. If the Airbase Trunk Sewers are not abandoned, major rehabilitation work and periodic maintenance will be required. The sewers are unneeded for Orange County Sanitation District purposes. CEQA FINDINGS This project is covered in the previously approved 1989 Master Plan/EIR. The final EIR was approved July 19, 1989 and the Notice of Determination was filed July 20, 1989. ATTACHMENTS 1. Budget Information Table 2. Area Maps LR:sa:jo GAwpAtatagenda0oard Agenda Reportat2002 Board Agenda Reponet0402Wem 9(b).r,13.dop Page 2 sa Nn oa�alvj j A1NnO❑ 3`JNVa❑ -- I � _' �y�. 1 Z __ aO Nol�N��aV ma a _ II - in i i i ao;daaaa;uj gegaa Q ai�aa ' 1e . ;ua p L . ] a - esaWe;so3 ;o6;I:) o; 4uawase3 ,,.' w�e�� ;mp 7 uopuegy -♦ esaw e;soo 1SVOa $ONva❑ ;o Apo _ any swvov ' _ ~- mac .. -!� ` •• � .,1� +... . Abandon 33" & 18" VCPs. Connect CMSD sewer to existing 33"VCP Abandon 30" VCP. Remove portions of 18" VCP. Abandon ' remainder of 18" VCP. Construct new 8" VCP & Baker-Gisler Interceptor connect CMSD sewer to it Abandon Obtain Easement Proposed Sewer Fairview � � Rehabilitate 1 �'% • relief DRAFT MINUTES OF STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, March 27, 2002 A meeting of the Steering Committee of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on Wednesday, March 27,2002 at 5 p.m., in the District's Administrative Office. (1) The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS: OTHERS PRESENT: Directors Present: Thomas Nixon, Counsel Norm Eckenrode, Chair Ryal Wheeler Shirley McCracken, Vice Chair Jan Vandersloot Pat McGuigan, Chairman, OMTS Committee Doug Korthof Steve Anderson, PDC Committee Randy Fuhrman Brian Brady, Chairman, FAHR Committee Larry Porter Directors Absent: STAFF PRESENT: Jim Silva, County Supervisor Blake Anderson, General Manager Bob Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Bob Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager Wendy Sevenandt, Project Manager Mark Esquer, O&M Engineering Manager Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS Jan Vandersloot and Doug Korthof expressed opposition to the District's EPA-issued ocean discharge permit that meets the requirements of Section 301(h)of the Clean Water Act. Randy Fuhrman commended the Board for considering disinfection and requested that when the interim disinfection facilities are replaced with permanent facilities, ultraviolet treatment be considered rather than puffing additional chemicals into the water. (4) RECEIVE. FILE AND APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of the February 27, 2002 Steering Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Steering Committee Page 2 March 27,2002 (5) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Committee Chair Eckenrode reported that there are still a couple of openings for the CASA conference in May. (6) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER A. Communications Plan—One Year Later No discussion because this was covered at the three operating committee meetings this month. B. Status of Disinfection and Microfiltration Studies This item is also scheduled for discussion and consideration at tonight's Board meeting. Bob Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance, reported that selection of a consultant for long-term disinfection studies and facilities will also be considered. He brought a small microfiltration unit to the meeting and explained how it worked. Treatment removal rates were presented for primary, secondary and microfiltration processes. Microfiltration provides the greatest removal rates. The District has completed three research projects on this process, and at the next OMTS Committee meeting the members will be asked to hold a future meeting at Plant 2 for a site visit to the microfiltration and other research sites. Mark Esquer reviewed the presentation he would be making at the Board meeting on Ocean Outfall Bacteria Reduction Efforts underway in support of the recommendation to designate the use of bleach with sodium bisulfite (dechlorination as a mitigation measure) as the Preferred Alternative and to continue to fast track the project. The goals are to maintain continued compliance with Assembly Bill 411 (Recreational Bathing Water Standards)at the ouffall to eliminate any possibility that release of treated wastewater is adversely affecting the surfzone. He discussed the short- (interim period)and long-tens (3—5 years plus) schedules. He discussed the short- term activities and consultant activities and resources, as well as the required level of environmental review. To meet the schedule it will be necessary to pre-purchase some equipment and issue sole-source conracts. Staff is recommending that a CEOA-based Mitigated Negative Declaration be prepared and presented to the Board in June for adoption. C. Update on Sewer Service and Connection Agreement for El Morro School David Ludwin reported that the two-party agreement between IRWD and the District will be considered at tonight's Board meeting. IRWD will act as the local sewering agency and collect fees on our behalf. D. AS 1892 (Harman) OCSD Urban Runoff and AS 1969 (Maddox) amending Water Code) General Manager Anderson provided an update on AS 1892 that would change the District's charter. It passed through the Local Government Committee on an 11-0 Minutes of the Steering Committee Page 3 March 27, 2002 vote. This would allow participation in the urban runoff program and give us the authority to raise user fees to cover the expenses. Other funding alternatives are also available and will be considered by the Ad Hoc Committee when it next meets. AB 1969 is being amended by the author. AB 1969 would change the process and requirements of the Ocean Plan, the Cologne-Porter Act and the federal Clean Water Act, and essentially hijack the responsibility for oversight of the Sanitation District's decision-making responsibilities away from the Board of Directors and to the state. Mr. Anderson stated that if the bill passes then it would be essentially a state- mandated effort and state funding will be requested for$400 million. This is an important governance question that should concern everyone. (7) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL Counsel Tom Nixon reported that there was a need to add an item of anticipated litigation to the closed session agenda. This need was identified only this morning, subsequent to the posting of the agenda and there is a need to take immediate action on the matter. It was moved, seconded and unanimously approved adding the item to the closed session agenda based on the information provided. (8) DISCUSSION ITEMS(Items A-D) A. Proposed Calendar for consideration of Level of Treatment and Permit Application Decision General Manager Anderson reported that the decision process has five major components: 1)technical information and alternatives; 2)financial issues,which will be addressed by prepared two budgets; 3)ocean monitoring work; 4) regulatory climate; and 5) public input It is anticipated that at the June Board meeting all of the information could be forwarded to the Board to make the decision on level of treatment and begin the public input process. B. MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED TO: Authorize the General Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the agreement with US Bureau of Reclamation for the Southern California Water Recycling Projects Initiative providing for an additional two years in the amount of$38,182 Wendy Sevenandt, Project Manager, explained this regional project that was evaluating what can be done with recycling projects. Additional work has been identified and additional funding is required. Because the additional costs are within the General Manager's delegation of authority,this item does not need Board approval. C. The Agenda Items scheduled to be reviewed by the Board's working committees in April were reviewed. D. The agenda items scheduled to be presented to the Board at tonight's meeting (March 27, 2002)were reviewed. Minutes of the Steering Committee Page 4 March 27, 2002 (9) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY Larry Porter requested that staff prepare a diagram of the proposed bleach process at Plant 2, showing how and where the flow will be dosed. Director Pat McGuigan complimented Bob Ghlrelli on his appearance on KOCE. (10) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were none. (11) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND/OR STAFF REPORT There were none. (12) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Steering Committee meeting is scheduled for April 24, 2002 at 5 p.m. The next Board Meeting is scheduled for April 24, 2002 at 7 p.m. (13) CLOSED SESSION The Committee convened at 6:17 p.m. in Closed Session, pursuant to Section 54956.9,to discuss one item of existing litigation and to discuss the anticipated litigation item added to the closed session agenda. Minutes of the Closed Session are on file with the Board Secretary. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Steering Committee have been prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 549572, and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. A report of the recommended actions will be publicly reported at the time the approved actions become final re Agenda Item 13(a)(1). No action was taken re Agenda Item 13(a)(2). At 6:45 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. (14) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 6:47 p.m. Submitted by: JpWTappan ring Committee Secretary ¢xro.me�.wummmvicemmma.mw.,mvmw,n scMnw�eoc Draft MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE Orange County Sanitation District WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3, 2002 —5 P.M. A meeting of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on April 3, 2002, in the District's Administrative Office. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: Directors Present: Staff Present: Pat McGuigan, Chair Blake Anderson, General Manager James M. Ferryman, Vice Chair Robert Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services Norm Eckenrode, Board Chair Patrick Miles, Director of Information Technology Shirley McCracken, Board Vice Chair Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager Don Bankhead Mark Esquer, Process Engineering Manager Tony Kawashima Simon Watson Anna Piercy Mark Kawamolo Tod Ridgeway Rich Castillon, IT Manager Paul Walker Rob Thompson, Process Controls Manager Adriana Renescu, Engineering Supervisor Directors Absent: Doug Stewart, Project Manager Greg Mathews, Assistant to the General Manager Debbie Cook Penny Kyle, Committee Secretary Others: Randy Fuhrman Jan Vandersloot Joey Racano Doug Korthoff Larry Porter Nancy Wheatley Stephanie Berger (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 2 April 3, 2002 (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS Randy Fuhrman, Doug Korthoff, Joey Racano, Larry Porter and Jan Vandersloot and Stephanie Berger addressed the Committee about ocean discharge issues and increasing user rates. (4) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR The Committee Chair had no report. (5) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER In response to public comments, Blake Anderson reported that the District, as previously announced in the last year, would summarize all comments received on the 301(h)waiver at the June Board meeting. With regard to the suggestion of increasing user rates more quickly over time, Mr. Anderson stated that Gary Streed, Director of Finance,would provide an early analysis of that idea. Comments were also made questioning the intent of the 301(h)waiver, as originally issued by Congress in 1977. Mr. Anderson reported that Congress' intent was not to give short-tens delays or temporary permits to permittees, but to address site-specific conditions of deep ocean dischargers. He invited the public present to review the record. Mr. Anderson then reported he had received complaints by employees regarding the aggressiveness of one protestor's approach to employees' cars as they drive through the front entrance to the plant in the morning. He has personally requested that person to stop to apparently no avail. He also advised that the Fountain Valley Police Department had been notified of public safety concerns, as the intersection at that time of the day is extremely busy. (6) CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS It was requested that Item 6(e) be pulled for discussion. a. The minutes of the March 6, 2002 Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting was approved as drafted and ordered filed. b. OMTS02-18 Receive and file Technical Services Monthly Report, which focuses on regulatory, biosolids and performance measures for the Technical Services Department. C. OMTS02-19 Receive and file Operations & Maintenance Monthly Report,which focuses on compliance,financial data and performance measures for Operations and Maintenance Department. d. OMTS02-20 Receive and file Information Technology Quarterly Report,which focuses on current performance trends and key technology business applications. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 3 April 3, 2002 f. OMTS02-22 Recommend to the Board of Directors to approve Professional Services Agreement with m2t technologies to provide professional services for the evaluation of alternatives for Plant No. 2 Oxygen Plant Replacement/ Rehabilitation Assessment, Job No. SP-72,for an amount not to exceed $97,000. Motion: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended actions for items specified as 6(a) through (d), and (f) under Consent Calendar. e. OMTS02-21 Mark Esquer, Process Engineering Manager, requested the motion be amended with regard to the terms of contract. Recommend to the Board of Directors to authorize the General Manager to issue Purchase Agreements with Pro Pipe Professional Pipe Services, Innedine Engineering, and National Plant Services for Sewer Line Video Inspection Services, Specification No. S-2002-81,for a combined annual total amount not to exceed $400,000,with four one-year renewable options. Motion: It was moved, seconded and duty carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. (7) ACTION ITEMS a. OMTS02-23 Doug Stewart, Project Manager, responded to Directors'questions about the need for the development of an asset management program, and explained the advancement of Australia and New Zealand in this area. Directors entered into discussion and questioned the need to award a consulting services contract prior to staffs trip to Australia/New Zealand. Consultants from Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group answered questions regarding their staffs intemational expertise on asset management programs and the scope of work the consultant would be performing. A motion was then made and seconded to approve out-of-country travel for two employees to Australia/New Zealand for the purpose of site visits to five public agencies that have successfully implemented advanced asset management programs, and to have staff come back to report what the plan can do for the District above what is already being done. Directors further discussed the need to award the consultant services contract concurrent with the authorization of staffs site visits out of the country. A substitute motion was then made to recommend to the Board of Directors to (1)award a consulting services contract to Parsons Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 4 April 3, 2002 Infrastructure and Technology Group, Inc. for professional consulting services for development of Asset Management Program, Job No. SP-68, for a total amount not to exceed $455,957; and, (2)approve out-of- country travel for two employees to Australia/New Zealand for the purpose of site visits to five public agencies that have successfulty implemented advanced asset management programs. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors by a vote of 6 ayes and 3 nays. Directors also requested that a presentation be given to the Board of Directors at the April 24' meeting. Directors Tod Ridgeway and Paul Walker left the meeting room during consideration of Item 7(b). b. OMTS02-24 Recommend to the Board of Directors to (1) Establish Cisco Equipment as the District's standard networking equipment; and (2)award a purchase contract to IKON Office Solutions for Purchase of CISCO Equipment, Specification No. E-2002-86, to provide infrastructure networking equipment and maintenance contract, in an amount not to exceed $799,247. Rich Castilian, IT Manager, gave a brief report on the District's outdated networking equipment and responded to Directors' questions with regard to redundant systems. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. Directors Tod Ridgeway and Paul Walker returned to the meeting. C. OMTS02-25 Recommend to the Board of Directors to(1)Authorize development of a Fats, Oil and Grease (FOG) Program in accordance with the provisions of California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Order No. 01-99, General Discharge Requirements for Sewage Collection Agencies; (2) Establish a new budget of$150,000 for development of the FOG Program; (3)Authorize staff to develop a funding program with the County of Orange and cities within the District's jurisdiction for development of the FOG Program; and (4)Approve a sole source consultant agreement with Environmental Engineering and Construction, Inc. to conduct a study for Phase I of the FOG Program for an amount not to exceed $268,000 Addana Renescu, Source Control Supervisor, gave a brief verbal report of the overall FOG program. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. 1 Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 5 April 3, 2002 d. OMTS02-28 Mark Esquer, Process Engineering Manager, reported that staff is considering an additional chemical, peracetic acid, as an option to be used in conjunction with the disinfection project This chemical will be included in the environmental statement, which will go out for public review shortly. He then requested the motion to be amended as follows: Recommend to the Board of Directors to (1)Authorize the General Manager to exercise informal bidding procedures and sole-source procedures, as applicable, for the award of contracts for the Ocean Ouffall Bacteria Reduction Program, Job No. J-87; (2)Authorize the General Manager to pre-purchase and award sole-source contracts, as applicable,for materials, equipment, and/or services, including tanks, pumps,flow meters, and certain electrical and instrumentation devices for testing and advanced planning purposes, as identified by District's consultants,for use in the Ocean Ouffall Bacteria Reduction Program, Job No. J-87, in an amount not to exceed $600,000; and, (3) Increase the sole-source authorization limits for the General Manager to$200,000 for said purchases. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. (8) INFORMATIONAL ITEMS a. OMTS02-26 Ocean Discharge Issues Update The Director of Technical Services, Bob Ghirelli, reported that a report had been released that day, as referenced to by one of the public comment speakers. This study came out of University of California Irvine Environmental Engineering Department that looked at whether the District's plume comes to shore or not. The researchers took some of District's data and did an evaluation,which they concluded in their report that the District's plume comes to the shore. Staff has not yet had the opportunity yet to review the report. An early draft of this report was reviewed by staff several months ago and staff provided extensive comments to UCI; however, it has not yet been determined if any of those comments were incorporated into the report. This report did not include any of the 2001 summer months' data. b. OMTS02-27 FY 2001/02 Operational Research Program and Status Mark Esquer reported that staff is conducting various operational research studies. The microfiltration research has proven that the microfilters are very effective in removing solids, bacteria and viruses. Because of that, staff has determined it to be feasible to look at microfiltration as an option to secondary treatment. This method is proving to be a viable alternative to secondary treatment. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 6 April 3, 2002 (9) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY The Director of Information Technology had no report (10) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE The Director of Operations and Maintenance was not present. (11) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES The Director of Technical Services had no report. (12) REPORT OF COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER The Communications Manager had no report. (13) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel was not in attendance. (14) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY There were none (15) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none. (16) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING The next Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee meeting is scheduled for May 1, 2002 at 5 p.m. (17) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (18) ADJOURNMENT Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Page 7 April 3, 2002 The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Submitted by: I,It I A / Penny M. Kyl Operations, MaintenanceInd Technical Services Committee Secretary G1wp.dtMagenda\0MTS=2\2002 OMTS Minut"W30602 minutes.dw OMTS COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd 011Dir. 04/03/02 04/24/02 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Rem Number OMT502-22 12(c) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Robert Oaten, Director of Operations and Maintenance Originator: Shabbir Basra!, Engineer SUBJECT: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PLANT NO. 2 OXYGEN PLANT REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION ASSESSMENT, CAPITAL PROJECT NO. SP-72. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve Professional Services Agreement with m2t technologies to provide professional services for the evaluation of alternatives for Plant No. 2 Oxygen Plant Replacement/Rehabilitation Assessment, Job No. SP-72, for an amount not to exceed $97,000. SUMMARY • The existing cryogenic oxygen generation facility, which provides oxygen to Plant No. 2 aeration basins, was installed in the early eighties and is showing age- related problems. • The intent of this project is to evaluate the option of rehabilitating the existing oxygen generation system and compare against other pure oxygen generation technologies such as vacuum or pressure-swing adsorption and to identify the most appropriate option for the District. • Currently, the cryogenic plant is being operated and maintained under a 15-year contract by Air Products and Chemicals, Inc (APCI). This contract expires in February 2005. • The proposed work includes establishing a project approach, preliminary design, budget and a project schedule to implement the recommended option before the expiration of the current contract with APCI. • This capital project study SP-72, was budgeted and approved by the Board. • Requests for proposals were sent to five consulting firms. Two firms submitted proposals: Black and Veatch, and m2t technologies. • Staff recommends approval of the PSA with m2t technologies for a total amount not to exceed $97,000. PROJECTICONTRACT COST SUMMARY The engineering services will not exceed $97,000. The total project budget is $110,000 for Capital Project SP-72. There is sufficient funding for the PSA agreement. BUDGETIMPACT ® This Item has been budgeted. (Line item: 2001-02 Budget Section 8, page 70 Project No. SP-72) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Pure oxygen is required for the Plant No. 2 activated sludge secondary treatment process. The oxygen activated sludge secondary treatment system consists of eight, covered oxygen dissolution basins where pure oxygen is introduced instead of air for biological treatment of the wastewater entering the process. The existing oxygen generation system consists of two 72.5 tons per day APCI designed cryogenic-type plants. These plants are designed to produce a gaseous oxygen product at a purity of 95% oxygen or higher. These generators were installed in the early eighties and are showing.age related problems. Only one of the two cryogenic plants is currently working and is being operated at a turned-down capacity of 4045 tons per day to meet the oxygen requirements of the secondary treatment process. The second plant is mothballed. The plants lack adequate automation, making the task to control its output to meet the diumal changes of the oxygen demands of the system, impossible. Additionally, the production efficiency of the plant has suffered over the past few years due to several factors including cooling water fouling, limitation in the ability to turndown the main air compressor and a potentially undersized main condenser hydrocarbon gel trap. Currently, the cryogenic plant is being operated and maintained under a 15-year contract by Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (APCI),the original equipment manufacturer. This contract expires in February 2005. The intent of this project is to evaluate the option of rehabilitating the existing system and compare that against other pure oxygen generation technologies such as vacuum or pressure swing adsorption and identify the most appropriate option for the District. Additionally, this project shall establish a project approach, preliminary design, budget and a project schedule in order G 1,dta11od., 'd A,.Repro 002 Mo ,GA,1U ReporlsN<OZ,IIgn V(g)m211eenticyei.dm Re„.,d: Y M Page 2 v to implement the recommended option before the expiration of the operating contract with APCI. Staff received proposals from two firms on March 12, 2002: Black and Veatch and m2t technologies. Brown and Caldwell, Montgomery Watson Harza, and CH2M Hill declined to submit. A panel of four District Staff members reviewed and ranked the proposals on March 18, 2002. M2t technologies was ranked higher by the panel based upon its extensive experience and capabilities in designing, constructing, operating, and evaluating oxygen supply systems. Each of the m2t technologies' project team member offers 30 plus years experience in the high purity oxygen marketplace. A summary of the selection panel proposal evaluation score is attached. The fee proposals ranged from $97,000 to $149,000. Staff recommends approval of the Professional Services Agreement with m2t technologies for an amount not to exceed $97,000. The final report from the consultant is expected to be completed by July 2002. ALTERNATIVES Do not rehabilitate/replace the existing cryogenic oxygen generation system. This would compromise the continuous availability of oxygen for the secondary process. CEQA FINDINGS This project is exempt from CEQA per Sections 15301 (k)and15306. ATTACHMENTS Staff Evaluation of Proposals. cw .dM%gawmeoam ngane �a Wngma rtoauueaM2 1210.E tauwaan dx Re,; WW2 Page 3 -< PLANT NO. 2 OXYGEN PLANT REPLACEMENTIREHABILITATION ASSESSMENT CAPITAL PROJECT SP-72 Consultant Proposal Evaluation Summary Total Evaluation Score m2t technologies Black & Veatch Reviewer A 425 360 Reviewer B 420 405 Reviewer C 355 345 Reviewer D 340 345 TOTAL 1540 1455 AVERAGE 385 364 OMTS COMMITTEE Meetlng Date TO Bd.orD r. 713/02 09/29/02 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number oWS02-21 12(d) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Robert J. Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance Originator. Nick Arhontes, Manager Collection Facilities O & M SUBJECT: AWARD OF CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION INSPECTION SERVICES SPECIFICATION NO. S-2002-81-BD GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Authorize the General Manager to issue Purchase Agreements with Pro Pipe Professional Pipe Services, Inneriine Engineering, and National Plant Services for Sewer Line Video Inspection Services, Specification No. S-2002-81, for a combined annual total amount not to exceed $400,000, with four one-year renewable options. SUMMARY • Staff recommends the District have all sewer lines inspected with video equipment for condition assessment purposes over the next six years to better plan and schedule repair and rehabilitation needs. • The maintenance budget, approved in the FY 2001102 Budget, allows for this activity, and has an amount of$86,000 remaining for this Fiscal Year. For FY 02/03, the budget is $393,200. • The Purchase Agreement deliverables include preparation of sewer videotapes, CD-ROMs, inspection reports, and electronic data files for the District to be added to the District Computerized Maintenance Management System. • Requests for proposals were sent to seven firms. Four teams submitted proposals: Pro Pipe Professional Pipe Services, Inneriine Engineering (teamed with Affordable Pipeline Inspection Company), California Pipeline Inspection, Inc., and National Plant Services. Downstream Services and Kenny Manta declined to propose. • A team of District staff, including engineers, collections, construction management, and programming and database staff reviewed, evaluated, and ranked the proposals. • Staff recommends multiple service providers to provide inspection for local sewers, laterals, trunk lines and interceptor sewers. The firms recommended are Pro Pipe Professional Pipe Services, Inneriine Engineering, and National Plant Services, for a total amount not to exceed $400,000. The Agreements will each be for a one-year period with a one-year renewable option. Staff received, in the proposals, data from each contractor for the cost per foot for each size of pipe to c be inspected. Award of each segment of work authorized by staff will be determined based on the cost data supplied by the service providers. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY The CCTV Inspection Services agreement will not exceed $400,000 annually. This level of funding is based on the proposed Budget. BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted at$86,000 (2001-02 Budget Section 6,page 68 Professional and Contractual Services). ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The District operates over 650 miles of various size gravity pipelines, which collect and convey the sewage flows to the treatment plants. The District desires to have the complete system inspected and recorded, and electronic data files available within a six-year period and reoccur thereafter on an as yet to be determined frequency. The need for inspection of the system comes from the findings that many sewers have never been inspected, concern over the condition of the pipes, development of the pending Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Capacity, Management, Operations, and Maintenance (CMOM) regulations requiring evaluation of existing facilities, and the Regional Board's upcoming Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR). In the past, CCTV work has been done as needed, mainly for follow-up activities. Videotapes and reports have been stored in the engineering library, when possible. Because a record keeping system for the tapes and reports has not been well defined, the tapes are difficult to locate and, 9 found, the viewer must search hours of video tape for possibly only several observations and/or defects. With the existing system, it is often easier and less expensive to re-inspect a pipe than it is to locate and review any existing tape. District staff has been developing a Scope of Work for over a year that includes procedure and equipment requirements, defect/observation identification and coding based on emerging National Standards, and data management. This system will provide current pipe inspection data in an easy to track and manageable format. The District also desires to have several firms available that can meet the new data acquisition and management, at fixed pricing, in order to expedite CCTV work.Work is currently performed less efficiently. Gt,dlaYgaw'8oard ngenaa flcwu�2 B W nperw Feports`oaoSnan 12td13erer lme Mde s<„xd: M" Page 2 Y Requests for proposals were sent to seven firms. Staff received proposals from four firms on February 28, 2002: Pro Pipe Professional Pipe Services, Innedine Engineering (teamed with Affordable Pipeline Inspection Company), California Pipeline Inspection, Inc., and National Plant Services. Downstream Services and Kenny Manta declined to propose. A team of District staff, including engineers, collections, construction management, and programming and database staff reviewed, evaluated, and ranked the proposals. Staff reviewed and ranked the proposals on March 11, 2002. Staff recommends approval of the Purchase Agreements with three of the firms: Pro Pipe Professional Pipe Services, Innedine Engineering, and National Plant Services for a total amount not to exceed $400,000 per year. This allows the District more flexibility since there is currently no staff or equipment to perform this work. Innerline Engineering and National Plant Services were ranked the highest technically by the proposal review team (within 1 point out of a possible average 200 points). Both teams have a good understanding of the work and included detailed approaches for performing the work. They included acceptable samples of video recordings in their proposals. Both firms are recommended as Service Providers. However, National Plant Services listed some Exceptions to the Contractual Requirements that will need to be negotiated prior to entering an Agreement. Additionally, Pro-Pipe appears capable of performing the work as requested, although their sample materials were substandard, they are included in the recommendation as an alternate service provider. District staff has favorable experience with the three recommended firms. ALTERNATIVES Do not issue the Agreements to these firms, and continue to perform the work on an as needed basis. This would add time to the overall schedule of completion of having all the sewers CCTV inspected, due to time required for preparing and revising contracts. This is also less efficient for District staff. CEQA FINDINGS This inspection work is exempt from CEQA. ATTACHMENTS Staff Evaluation of Proposals. G:Mry.LIeN0en4v1BmN A....Rep[M1e1=W2 A.n "PegMeWlON.12101S rUroMU .d. A"W: TIM Page 3 TABLE 1.0 SPECIFICATION NO. S-2002-81-BD STAFF EVALUATION OF PROPOSAL FOR CCTV SERVICES FIRM CPI PRO PIPE INNERLINE NIPS Reviewer 1 144 165 160 167 Reviewer 2 138 120 136 143 Reviewer 3 118 128 144 135 Reviewer 4 131 139 162 152 Reviewer 5 150 157 173 173 Total Score 1000 Points Max. 681 1 709 1 775 1 770 Average Score 200 Points Max.) 136 142 155 154 OA Ranking 4 3 1 2 G:Owp.dMe m\820\henn\wp\ccNspeclstaff evalAsleval } OMTS COMMITTEE Meetlng Date To BA. 4/3/02 4/24/02 or Dlr. AGENDA REPORT Item Number 1te 12(el r 12(e)OMi502-23 Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Blake Anderson, General Manager Greg Mathews, Assistant to the General Manager Originator: Doug Stewart, Project Manager SUBJECT: ASSET MANAGEMENT, JOB NO. SP-68 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1) Award a consulting services agreement to Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group, Inc. for professional consulting services for development of an Asset Management Program, Job No. SP-68, for a total amount not to exceed $455,957; and 2) Approve out-of-country travel, in support of developing the Strategic Plan,for two employees to Australia/New Zealand for the purpose of site visits to five public agencies that have successfully implemented advanced asset management programs. SUMMARY • Asset management is managing infrastructure assets to minimize the total cost of owning and operating them while continuously delivering the service levels customers desire. • Asset management has been the legislated standard of practice in Australia and New Zealand for almost a decade..Several years ago, District staff recognized the need for implementing a more rigorous process to attain better stewardship of the District's assets throughout their life cycle. Many other public agencies in the U.S. are now becoming increasingly aware of the importance of developing a life-cycle approach to maintaining and protecting infrastructure assets, however none have progressed to the point of having implemented an agency-wide program. • A request for proposals, developed by an inter-departmental team, was issued in November 2001 for consulting services to assist OCSD staff in preparing a strategic plan for an asset management program. Seven proposals were received, the proposals were reviewed, evaluated and ranked by a five-member team and the top three firms were interviewed. Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group were selected as the top ranked firm. A final scope of work and fee estimate was negotiated with Parsons. • Staff recommends that the Board approve out-of-country travel, in support of developing the Strategic Plan, by two District employees to Australia/New Zealand for the purpose of site visits to five (5) public agencies that have implemented advanced asset management programs. Contacts will also be made to establish future relationships with these agencies for the purpose of collaboration and benchmarking. Funds for this trip are included in the project budget. • Staff recommends that Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group, Inc. be awarded a Professional Services Agreement for the Development of a Strategic Plan for Asset Management, Job No. SP-68,for a total fee not to exceed $455,957. Scheduled completion date is January 2003. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY The total current fiscal year budget for SP-68 is$870,000. The SP-68 budget is being divided into two projects: SP-68 will remain with $691,800 for asset management and SP-68-1 will have a budget of$178,200 for a managed maintenance program. A revised budget for SP-68 has been submitted through the standard budget process to increase the SP-68 budget to $1,027.000 in FY 02I03. There are sufficient funds in the current year budget to award this contract to Parsons for$455,957. Please refer to attached Budget Information Table. Travel expenses for two District employees are estimated to be approximately$3800 each, including travel, lodging, meals, and local transportation. The funds for this travel are budgeted in the staff costs for this project. An itinerary is planned to include site visits with five agencies in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia and Auckland, New Zealand. 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) A revised project budget has been submitted in the annual budget process for SP-68. Please refer to attached budget information table. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A number of forces are driving OCSD and other government agencies to adopt more stringent business practices, many of which are used in the private sector. These forces include: • Regulatory demands such as pending EPA sanitary sewer Capacity, Maintenance, Operations, and Management (CMOM) regulations,focusing on reducing sewer overflows by implementing improved programs. • A growing recognition in the wastewater industry of the impact of deferred maintenance on the long term viability of the public infrastructure. • On a national level, ratepayer and governing Board pressure to improve level of service while reducing operating costs. • An increased recognition at the State and Federal government level of the need to establish sustainable infrastructure policies tied to approval for future funding requests. The Water Investment Act of 2002 (SB 1961 —Jeffers (1)VT), as introduced, requires that an asset G W.y McUpwMepm,<Apes FepansV W3 Bovd Apcb Pepwub,olnwn,21a1w�wq�Ea R-.m. WWI Page 2 management program be in place to be eligible for federally financed State Revolving Fund Loans. • Governmental accounting standards changes (GASB 34) requiring increased transparency by government agencies on the true asset conditions, cost of delivering services, including preservation of capital assets. To improve business practices, the entire organization must increase attention to its ongoing: • Strategic thinking and planning as it relates to facility financing, planning, design, construction, and O&M. • Informed decision making. • More efficient joint use of capital and operating funds. • The relationship between initial asset cost and long term asset costs and performance. • Management of exposure to risk. The use of information produced from a properly designed and implemented Asset Management Program is the key to bringing utilities'actions in line with sound business practices. An effective Asset Management Program results in more efficient capital program outlays; reduced asset frfe-cycle cost; increased asset performance and reliability;and refined financial planning. In order to be effective, the information produced by the Asset Management Program must be communicated and used throughout the organization to make informed decisions regarding asset preservation and replacement. AMSA, in its 2002 report entitled "Managing Public Infrastructure Assets to Minimize Cost and Maximize Performance"promulgates this definition of asset management. "Asset management is managing infrastructure assets to minimize the total cost of owning and operating them while continuously delivering the service levels customers' desire." AMSA also states that, "The majority of water and wastewater utility managers throughout North America understand the concept of asset management; however, it is rarely implemented with the rigor necessary to succeed.....Amedran best practice (in the public sector) has not yet embraced the total life- cycle cost approach to asset management" The asset management approach proposed in our effort is to emulate the Australia/New Zealand approach to asset management,the proven world leaders in asset management, and adapt this proven approach to fit our specific agency. Asset Management programs are a legislated requirement in New Zealand and were widely implemented in Australia as a competitive strategy when the water and wastewater industries were privatized. In Australia, water and wastewater utilities are wholly owned by the state government but are otherwise operated as private enterprises, earning returns on assets and paying taxes. Asset Management(minimizing the total fife-cycle cost of owning and operating assets) is the core of the Australian/New Zealand approach to operating their wastewater utilities. Several initial steps have been taken by OCSD in the past several years to move us toward implementing an effective asset management program: • DART (O&M Reinvention)-This project has focused on changing the business and work practices to make the divisions more effective and efficient. A structure has been developed to document and capture all asset information including asset description, financial data, work history, parts lists, and task analysis. Methods have been established to perform cost G',AWE aw"L NAgm Re� B AO ftO WCOVI l3lelAsseU4KM.Ccc R... MOWf Page benefit analysis for the repair or replacement of inoperative equipment. Warehousing, purchasing and accounting practices have been modified to effectively support a planned maintenance environment. The project has resulted in better decision making and cost effective maintenance and operations. The next step is to develop an organizational Asset Management program to incorporate the full life cycle of the equipment and not just the maintenance and operations of the facilities. • J42 -This project has identified, tagged, and produced Process and Instrumentation Diagrams and Loop drawings for all the major equipment within the two plants. The drawings are all available on-line for easy access by all OCSD staff. • Trunk sewer mapping project—OCSD is in the process of developing computerized maps of all of OCSD's collections'facilities. • CMMS. • Engineering Department's Reorganization, including developing a Planning Division. • Development of GIS architecture, standards, and strategy. • Preliminary RWQCB WDR and EPA CMOM compliance strategies. In the first half of 2001, OCSD staff participated in an inter-agency benchmarking study, sanctioned by all of the agencies'General Managers, to determine best practices for an asset management program. Participating agencies were King County Department of Natural Resources (Seattle), City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services, Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District, Central Contra Costa Sanitation District, and the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation. A questionnaire was developed to determine each agencies current status with respect to employing asset management techniques, responses were tabulated, a two-day workshop was held in June to discuss the survey results and develop group recommendations, and a technical memorandum was produced. The report concludes, "An Asset Management Program must become the cornerstone of how participating agencies conduct business. The program must be comprehensive and management driven, and resonate throughout the organization. Developing asset management programs must be viewed as a long-tern effort whose end result is a model for making optimal business decisions." In the second half of 2001, an inter-departmental Asset Management team developed the scope of work for this proposed effort. This scopeof work provides for the following: • A strategic level review of current OCSD asset management(AM) practices • A defined scope and set of assumptions for a basic and advanced AM program • An assessment and gap analysis relative to the desired AM programs • A strategic plan for the effective deployment of the AM programs • A scope of work for the development of a subsequent implementation plan • Specific training for staff in state-of-the-art asset management techniques The major goals of the Strategic Plan are to: • Document a shared vision for the desired agency-wide AM program G by ft%gMa•enla Age Repaa+=!Boma PgnW eepwbWosuwntt�el/we�Mnmmarc Hama1 e 1 Page 4 • Identify desired outcomes-quantitative and qualitative • Provide the business (financial) case to gain support and approval for further development of the AM program • Develop a gap analysis and needs assessment between the existing state of AM and the desired program • Develop strategies and recommendations for the effective deployment of the desired AM program • Identify the structure, accountability, and staff responsibilities for implementation The Asset Management Team decided to develop a strategic plan first, rather than proceed directly to implementation steps, so that sufficient education and buy-in from all of the affected departments could be obtained and that the Board could be Informed of the intended program. Implementation will be expedited with a sufficiently detailed vision (strategic plan) and education (buy in)of all of the affected organizational units. A request for proposals was sent to seven consulting firms, who had all expressed an interest in this work, in November 2001. Proposals were received in January 2002 and consultant selection was complete in February 2002. A staff evaluation of the proposals is attached as Attachment 2 to this agenda report. Staff recommends that Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group, Inc. be awarded a Professional Services Agreement for the Development of a Strategic Plan for Asset Management,Job No. SP-55, for a total fee not to exceed $455,957. Staff also recommends that the Board approve out-of-country travel by two District employees to Australia/New Zealand for the purpose of site visits to five (5)public agencies that have Implemented advanced asset management programs. Contacts will also be made to establish future relationships with these agencies for the purpose of collaboration and benchmarking. Funds for this trip are included in the project budget. ALTERNATIVES Do not proceed with implementing a structured and shared best-practice Asset Management Program at OCSD. CEQA FINDINGS Not applicable ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Evaluation of Proposals 2. Budget Information Table G:w.y.au�n Reom. =m niAQ +�010Sllem izlnnuWgma R.WW: v ' Page 5 ASSET MANAGEMENT JOB NO.SP-68 Staff Evaluation of Proposals The following consulting fines received a Request for Proposals: • Black &Veatch • Parsons • Brown and Caldwell • Westin • CH2M-HILL • Carollo Engineers • Strategic Asset Management, Inc. The request for proposals was mailed to all seven firms on November 26, 2001. Seven responsive proposals were received on January 18, 2002 On February 5, 2002 a sub- committee of the OCSD's Asset Management Team met to review the written proposals. All seven firms' proposals were individually ranked and the top three firms were invited to the interview process, which was held on February 13, 2002. The review panel consisted of five members, comprised of staff from the Administration,Operations and Maintenance, Finance, Engineering, and Information Technology departments. Each proposal was graded from 1 to 10 (10 being best) in each of the five categories listed below: 1. Qualifications of the firm 2. Staffing and Project Organization 3. Workplan 4. Completeness of response 5. Interview After conducting the interviews,the top three firths were again individually ranked by each OCSD project team member. The following summarizes the ranking results for the three firms: 1. Parsons 1337 Points 2. Brown and Caldwell 1283 Points 3. CH2M-Hil1 1070 Points The following is a summary of how the evaluation team collectively viewed the top ranked consultant: Parsons Parsons presented a very strong team of professionals, each with spec expertise in asset management. Roger Byrne, with GHD, has been involved with over 100 asset management implementations in New Zealand and Australia. GHD is committed to an asset life cycle approach to asset management. Roger Byrne is a specialist in employing advanced asset management techniques in wastewater agencies like OCSD. Bill Kennedy, project manager for this work, brings a lot of relevant agency experience from his planning work at San Diego. Lynn Norton is very strong on experience with strategic planning and strategic plan development in the wastewater industry. Peter Lewis is proposed as the workshop facilitator. He has OCSD workshop experience from the J42 project. Duncan Rose, Parsons' National Asset Management Technical Director, has a significant role in the project,as well. �:�•D meYpmEa+mvenamm e¢•gls�B Ap newK`mo 12(.)� d. ae.,sa+: eaaw+ Page 6 Parsons team has specific JDE (One World)experience and integrating JDE into Asset Management Programs. Parson's team has the necessary experience and tools to do this project and is approaching the project as a collaborative effort with OCSD staff. Parsons is committed to provide the necessary training to OCSD at the project outset to ensure a well informed and knowledgeable staff input to the process. Parsons presented an outstanding presentation of their project approach and team qualifications in the interview process, which caused the majority of the review panel to rate them as the best firm for this work. Fee Proposals After completing the interview process and finalizing the consultant rankings, the sealed fee proposals submitted by the three interviewed fines, were opened. The top ranked consultant, Parsons, submitted the highest fee proposal for the requested Scope of Work. Over the next week, staff negotiated with Parsons to reduce the man-hour estimate and fee schedule, while keeping the same scope of work for the project. All of the required elements of the scope of work will be produced, but with a lower than proposed level of effort from Parsons' team. One software application proposed by Parsons in the proposal will be deferred to the next phase of the project, developing implementation plans based on the approved strategic plan. A reduced man-hour estimate of 2979 hours and a fee of$455,957 were negotiated. Staff recommends Parsons be awarded the Professional Services Agreement for the Development of a Strategic Plan for Asset Management, Job No. SP-68, for a total fee not to exceed $455,957. GMq.CIeNpeMa�9oa,0 PpuW aeNM1ipt02 BmN Agn,M IVepa'Is`OWNIam 131e1/�+enbgm Yx rtea.m:aamoi Page 7 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Strategic Plan for Asset Management SP• 68 Protect Development >< $ $ Studies/Permlllin $ $ - $ Consultant PSA $ 350,000 $ 360,000 $ 106 000 $ 466 000 $ $:... 466,000. $ 456,000 $ 0% Design Staff $ 341.800 $ 341800 $ 58200, $ 400000 $ 341800 $ 68200 $ 400,000 $ 40,000 10% Construction Contract $ $ Construction Administration $ + $ Construction ^ Inspection $ $ Contingency $ 171000 $ 171.000 'I $ Reimbursable Costs $ $ TOTAL s 691,800 $ 691,800 It335,200 $ 1,027,000 $ 341,800 $ 614,200 $ 856,000 $ 40,000 5% ' SP-68 Budget from FY 01/02 will be split in FY 02/03. Original FY 01/02 Budget$870,000, SP-68 reduced to 691.800. New SP,48x ldyldgell"7"00. Budget amendment shown here Is Included In FY 02/03 budget. F.Re WIX179a OMTS COMMITTEE Neeang bate To Be.of Dir. 04/03/02 Z4/02 AGENDA REPORT Run NumW 1eiNii°ef oarrso2-24 um Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Patrick Miles, Director of Information Technology Originator: Richard Castillon, Division Manager SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF CISCO SYSTEMS NETWORKING EQUIPMENT GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1) Establish Cisco Equipment as the District's standard networking equipment; and (2) award a purchase contract to IKON Office Solutions for Purchase of CISCO Equipment, Specification No. E-2002-86 to provide infrastructure networking equipment and maintenance contract, in an amount not to exceed $799,247. SUMMARY • The network infrastructure is the system that allows all of the computing devices (PCs, printers, database/e-mail servers and plant process control systems)to communicate with each other. • The current network infrastructure is built on outdated equipment, lacks support from the hardware and software vendor, and is not capable of expanding to meet the current requirements of OCSD. This equipment has been in service for nearly five years and has reached its operating life expectancy. • Since the current networking equipment is no longer supported by the manufacturer, OCSD can not procure any maintenance contracts or new parts to replace failed parts. We must search for parts on the "used market" and these parts are not necessarily reliable. • OCSD has recently experienced several network component failures. These failures have resulted in complete or partial network outages. Based on the similarities of the particular hardware failures, we predict that these failures and resulting outages will occur at a more frequent rate. • A complete internal needs assessment was accomplished to determine the requirements of all OCSD divisions. This resulted in a system design that includes redundancy and failover protection at a network's central (core) level. • The existing equipment is to be replaced by equipment manufactured by Cisco systems. OCSD staff will perform all maintenance work in concert with a selected contractor who will advise staff on installation strategies and problems/issues as they arise. r • OCSD has selected to sole-source Cisco Systems equipment for the following reasons: • Cisco is the leading networking equipment tier one vendor in the world. This gives OCSD a high comfort level that this manufacturer will provide support to this equipment for the period we own and operate this equipment. • Cisco offers single vendor solutions that span the networking needs of our entire enterprise including the office network, the process network, and the pump station network • Cisco is the industry leader on the standardization of protocols and security • Cisco solutions are open in nature allowing for greater interoperability with other products and a greater pool of outside resources • The Executive Management Team has evaluated the results of the needs assessment and recommends this specific solution. BUDGETIMPACT O 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) ALTERNATIVES Design and build a completely redundanttfailover system at a substantially increased price. CEQA FINDINGS Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS Executive Summary G:M .M%09 `HME AQ�Pyb11%S Gow Agy Rlgpb11103•U1113�p8.tll.lk< w. W"i Page 2 D Orange County Sanitation District Network Backbone Upgrade Project Executive Summary Final Report January 2002 Ronald E. Ruprecht - Independent Consultant Scott Dr unmond-OCSD Bob Dumiry-OCSD Rich Castillon-OCSD Orange County Sanitation District Network Backbone Upgrade Project FINAL REPORT Executive Summary n .............................................................................................................................I ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT.......................................................................1 NETWORK BACKBONE UPGRADE PROJECT..................................................................................I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................3 RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................................................4 OTHER ASSESSMENT CONSIDERATIONS...........................................................................................4 RESULTS..........................................................................................................................................5 MOST CRITICAL APPLICATIONS.......................................................................................................5 IMPACT.............................................................................................................................................6 PLANS FOR FUTURE EXPANSION......................................................................................................6 Page 2 of 7 Needs Assessment Report.doc Orange County Sanitation District Network Backbone Upgrade Project FINAL REPORT Executive Summary Executive Summary Background During November and December of 2001 a needs assessment was conducted with each department within the district to determine their network infrastructure requirements. The network infrastructure is the system that allows all of the computing devices (PC's, printers,database servers,e-mail servers,and plant automation systems)at the Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD)to communicate with each other. This networking environment is built on outdated equipment,lacks support from the hardware and software vendor and is not capable of expanding to meet the future requirements of Orange County Sanitation District. The Information Technology(IT)department has therefore initiated a network backbone upgrade project to replace the current network infrastructure. Each department interviewed was asked to identify their most critical applications and help to define qualitatively and quantitatively the impact to their business should the network fail. They were also asked to identify any future needs and/or plans for expansion of their current systems. Several network failure scenarios were used to determine impact: • Less than four hours of downtime for their department. • Greater than four hours of downtime for their department. • Less than four hours of down time for a system wide outage. • Greater than four hours of down time for a system wide outage. Three possible designs are proposed: Page 3 of 7 Needs Assessment Report.doc Orange County Sanitation District Network Backbone Upgrade Project FINAL REPORT Executive Summary , Recommendations The purpose of this assessment is to match the uptime,capacity, and future expansion needs of OCSD with one of three possible designs as identified below(No redundancy, partial redundancy, and full redundancy). Each increment allows for greater reliability, capacity,performance, and the ability to meet future requirements: • Option A(no redundancy) -If a critical component fails,it requires a technician to restore service. This typically results in greater than 4 hours of down time for a component failure.This is the equivalent to the existing network environment. • Option B (partial redundancy) -This design provides redundancy at the back-end of the system to help avoid a system wide outage. If a critical back-end component fails,there is another in-place that takes over automatically and prevents a system wide outage. If a front-end component fails,the affected area (typically a department,or geographical location such as a building or floor within a building)will be down for up to 4 hours. • Option C(full redundancy)-This design provides redundancy for all critical network components. If a network component fails,either at the back-end,or at an individual department,there is another in-place that takes over automatically and prevents an outage. This design also allows for network upgrades with no or minimal downtime. Troubleshooting problems is also more efficient, and results in fewer dismptions under this design (Suspected bad components can be swapped out without downtime). Other Assessment considerations • Percentage increase in speed from now to future upgrade:The current network utilizes an asynchronous transfer mode(ATM)infrastructure that runs at 155 megabits per second.The new system will run at a much faster capacity hitting speeds of one Gigabit. This is six times our current capacity. Page 4 of 7 Needs Assessment Report.doc Orange County Sanitation District Network Backbone Upgrade Project FINAL REPORT Executive Summary • GIG Ethernet vs.ATM or other technology: The new Gigabit Ethernet standard has permitted Ethernet to become a very cost effective,high-speed and reliable LAN technology.This technology is accepted as the means to meet current and future demands. We began by evaluating the top three vendors and found that Gigabit Ethernet was the long-term strategy for cost and interoperability. • Videoconference: When using applications such as video,which are sensitive to loss and delay.Quality of Service tools are required to manage these buffers to minimize loss, delay, and delay variation. Segmenting, and producing a quality output can control the quality of video. • Security: This system allows for integrated security,which prevents most attacks from successfully affecting valuable network resources.The attacks that succeed in penetrating the first line of defense must be contained to minimize their effect on the network.However,in being secure,the network must continue to provide critical services.Proper network security and good network functionality can be provided at the same time. Along with a stable, structured environment from one vendor. Results Most Critical Applications The most critical applications identified were(fisted in chronological order,not criticality): • Process Control System Human Machine Interface • Computerized Maintenance Management System(CMMS) • Electronic Document Management System(EDMS) • Financial Information System(FIS) • Laboratory Information Management Systems(LIMS) • Electronic Mail (E-mail) • The network connected Xerox machine in the administrative office. Page 5 of 7 Needs Assessment Report.doc Orange County Sanitation District Network Backbone Upgrade Project FINAL REPORT Executive Summary All departments agreed that the general Microsoft Office applications such as e-mail, Word, and Excel are critical to their everyday operations,while some departments are more reliant on Office than others. Internet access was also identified by many departments,but was convincingly argued as a legitimate business requirement for only two departments: O&M,and Communications. Impact Qualitatively a network failure would result in increased labor effort in several departments, and significant unproductive labor in all others. This includes OCSD staff, and contract labor. The increased labor effort is due to the need for manual monitoring, and intervention of plant systems during any outage. Most departments also have several critical,periodic time windows during which a network outage would cause significant impact to their operations, and could in the most severe cases of bad timing,result in non- compliance fines. Quantitatively,a network failure in any one department is detailed in the main section of this report. However, a failure of the network backbone would affect all departments, and result in the following approximate costs: • Formula(half the five year staffing plan x average burden rate) • 1-4 hours of down time—$22,500- $90,000/Hour >4 hours of down time—$90,000>/Hour Plans for Future Expansion Everyone interviewed agreed that increased treatment at either or both plants will result in significant increases in the quantity of network dependant equipment, a requirement for increased monitoring capabilities,and a greater dependence on technology to help offset the requirements for additional staff. Page 6 of 7 Needs Assessment Report.doc Orange County Sanitation District Network Backbone Upgrade Project FINAL REPORT Executive Summary Regardless of the possibility of increased treatment, all those interviewed expressed that their departments rely more and more on technology to improve performance, communications, reduce staffing requirements,and maintenance costs. This perpetually increasing reliance on technology is further compounded by any possible future treatment increase. Conclusion: After analyzing the Needs Assessment Study,the Information Technology Department has recommended Option B (partial redundancy) as the best fit for the agency. Each department expressed their current and future needs as well as explicit concerns. All three options were discussed in the Executive Management Team meeting. The Executive Management Team supports Information Technology's recommendation. ,e 7 of 7 Needs Assessment Report.doc OMITS COMMITTEE MeetlngOate To ad.ofDir. 4/3/02 04/24/02 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Ibam Number oMrso2-s I2(g) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, D.Env., Director of Technical Services Originator. Adrian Renescu, Engineering Supervisor SUBJECT: FATS, OIL AND GREASE (FOG)CONTROL PROGRAM GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1)Authorize development of a Fats, Oil and Grease(FOG)Program in accordance with the provisions of California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Order No. 01-99, General Discharge Requirements for Sewage Collection Agencies; (2) Establish a new budget of$150,000 for development of the FOG Program; (3)Authorize staff to develop a funding program with the County of Orange and cities within the District's jurisdiction for development of the FOG Program; and (4)Approve a sole source consultant agreement with Environmental Engineering and Construction, Inc. to conduct a study for Phase I of the FOG Program for an amount not to exceed $268.000. SUMMARY • To address countywide sewer system overflow(SSO)incidents, the California Regional Water Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) is in the process of issuing Order No. 01-99, General Waste Discharge Requirements, requiring Orange County cities and wastewater treatment agencies to monitor and control SSOs.The Order names the District as a co-permittee and as the lead to"facilitate regional compliance with the Order. As part of the Order, cities and wastewater agencies are required to develop a FOG control plan by September 30, 2004. To enable the development of a FOG control program that is practical, equitable and implementable, staff proposes to conduct a study to evaluate FOG control technologies, practices and programs and establish the technical, administrative and ordinance building blocks of a control program. The District estimates that the total cost for FY02/03 to develop and conduct the study for its area of responsibility is $150,000. • The co-permittees have determined that the interests of the county would be best met by conducting a countywide, comprehensive FOG control study that provides a consistent, practical and equitable approach throughout Orange County. In addition, the countywide study managed centrally by the District will result in significant cost savings to the county. The expected cost of this consolidated approach is $300,000 for FY02/03,which represents a significant cost saving to the county versus the cumulative cost of$3-4 million if ko-pernittees conducted program development individually. • To meet the September 2004 deadline, schedule and resource requirements and constraints, the District's Source Control Division proposes to obtain on a sole source basis the services of Environmental Engineering and Contracting, Inc. (EEC) to conduct a two- phase study. Based on the EEC proposal, the cost for Phase I of the study is$268,000. Phase I will be started May/June 2002 and will be completed during FY 02/03. G uvp wa a�nge,Wa Rervtr W2 Bova ynm IieportsnaoNum 12W)FW B mE �.;ua.2 W Page 1 • Therefore, the District proposes to (1)facilitate and manage the countywide study; (2) budget$150,000 for FY02/03; (3)contract EEC on a sole source basis to perform the Phase I of the study for a cost not to exceed $268,000; and (4)jointly fund the total cost of the study with cities and wastewater agencies through a memorandum of understanding or other forth of understanding. The County of Orange has to date pledged $50,000 towards funding the study, and the Costa Mesa Sanitary District has budgeted $17,000 to be paid to the District upon invoicing. PROJECTICONTRACT COST SUMMARY The consultant(EEC) provided a solicited proposal for Phase I as follows: • $118,000 for Task 1 • $120,000-150,000 for Task 2, depending on the findings of Task 1 The total consultant fee will not exceed $268,000 for Phase I of the study. Staff estimates that the total cost of the work will not exceed $300,000 for FY02103. The District proposes to budget $150,000,which represents its initial cost to the District to meet the requirements of the Order. The grease control program has not been budgeted for the current FY02103. 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 Background From January 2000 through August 2001, there were approximately 250 sewer system overflows (SSOs), of which almost 75% were from sewer collection systems owned by cities and local wastewater agencies. During this same period, there were 31 beach closures due to SSOs, of which 17 were from systems owned by cities and wastewater agencies. The most prevalent cause of the SSOs is grease accumulation in the small to medium sewer lines. These sewer lines are owned and operated by cities and local wastewater agencies, with the exception of unincorporated areas and cities that have agreements with the District such as Tustin and the Irvine business center, which are currently under the District's jurisdiction. The 2000/O1 Orange County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) investigated SSOs and published its findings in April 2001 in a report entitled, Sewage Spills, Beach Closures-Trouble in Paradise. The Grand Jury identified as the main cause of SSOs sewer pipes clogged with grease from restaurants and high-density residential areas (e.g., apartment complexes). The Grand Jury also suggested that a regional coalition be formed to resolve the SSOs and develop a regional, consolidated approach to controlling grease. More recently,to address regional SSOs, the California Regional Water Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) is finalizing Tentative Order No. 01-99, General Waste Discharge Requirements, requiring Orange County cities and agencies to develop and implement a plan to monitor and control SSOs. In part, the Order requires the permittees to develop and submit to the RWQCB plans to implement a"Fats, Oils, GM.yeuapeW.ao.a Agn Mgv61 earnaymm Repabnaxv n1ry91r ftoW ,UDC peteW: Page 2 and Grease (FOG) Control Program," by September 30, 2004. The Order names the District a co-permittee and the lead to"facilitate regional compliance"with the Order. To meet the Order requirements as a co-permittee, the District needs to conduct a study to develop a FOG control program for its area of jurisdiction. The District estimates that the total cost for FY02/03 to conduct the study is $150,000. The co-permittees—cities, local wastewater agencies,the District and County of Orange—have formed a steering committee and have determined that the interests of the region would be best met by a consolidated approach that includes conducting a comprehensive FOG control study to develop program and ordinance building blocks to enable co-pernittees to Institute site specific programs that are practical, equitable and address local conditions. The following summarizes the advantages of a countywide approach vs. individual development of a study and program: Issue District Responds Alone Regional Approach Impact Distrid's jurisdiction only Countywide Coordination required District's staff County, cities, agencies Costs $160,000 (FY 02/03) $300,000(FY 02103) Funding source District's budget All parties Approaches Address only District's Develop building blocks that can concerns be selected by participants Length of time required -1 year -1 year Resources required Significant Shared Long-term or secondary Potentially extensive and Minimal, will be studied and impacts to the District's uncontrolled addressed during the program facilities Final District cost $150,000 Maximum $100,000, as low as $50,000 Countywide FOG Control Study The FOG Control Program study will take place in two phases. Phase I will develops grease control building blocks based on a thorough evaluation of technologies and current state and national programs. Phase II will include field testing of a select group of non-validated technologies/practices identified for further study based on the testing protocol and plan developed in Phase I. Phase I will have two tasks. The deliverables of Task 1 will include: • Evaluation of local conditions • Evaluation of components of existing regional and national FOG control programs • Assessment of effective source control measures and list of technology and procedures applicable to Orange County • Identification of technologies for further study in Phase II • FOG control program building blocks c 1W t.�•yen. Ayen.FegM.lMy4,yn tryyl FOG Rop,.m.E. n... WW2 Page 3 Task 2 deliverables will include: ~• • Grease control technologies matrix with applicability, benefits, costs, etc. • FOG ordinance building blocks • Study protocol for testing the short list of non-validated technology/practices and a field- testing plan • Recommendation of an information management system • Proposal and recommendation for Phase II of the study with a cost estimate To meet the September 2004 deadline, schedule and resource requirements and constraints, the District's Source Control Division proposes to contract the services of EEC to conduct the study. The total cost for Phase I, as proposed by EEC is$268,000. Task 1 of Phase 1 proposed cost is$118,000, and Task 2 cost is expected to be $120,000-150,000, the actual amount of Task 2 dependent on the results of Task 1. The District proposes to award Phase I of the FOG control study to EEC on a sole source basis because EEC is knowledgeable in both the pretreatment and source control programs, is well- acquainted with the District's needs and requirements, and is experienced in conducting the required scientific evaluations and policy development Furthermore, the consultant is knowledgeable about the issue and formulated the approach proposed to provide a cohesive and comprehensive countywide solution to FOG control. Retaining EEC's services also addresses the resource and schedule constraints and would use already developed expertise and information. Because of work already started, EEC is willing to begin work FY to meet schedule, and receive payment from the FY 02103 budget. Budget and Funding The District considered a number of options to achieve the most effective and practical mechanism to meet the Order requirements and address schedule and resource. Based on these considerations, the District determined that the interests of the county and resources would be used at their most effective if(1)the District budgets $150,000 for FY02/03, which is the cost to the District as a co-pernittee; (2)obtains the services of EEC on a sole source basis to perform the Phase I study with an immediate start date, and (3)develops fund sharing memorandum of understandings with co-pernittees to jointly cover at a minimum the portion of the budget that is above District's cost as a co-pernittee (estimated at$150,000). Go-funding will be based on an equitable formula, accounting for area and population,to be developed by the County of Orange. This funding approach would mean that the final cost to the District for Phase I of the study would be no higher than $150,000 and as low as $50,000 for FY02/03. The County of Orange has to date pledged $50,000 towards funding the study, and the Costa Mesa Sanitation District has budgeted $17,000 to be paid to the District upon invoicing. ALTERNATIVES 1. Staff has evaluated, as an akemate to conducting a countywide study, developing a grease control plan for the areas of its jurisdiction alone (Tustin, Irvine business center and unincorporated areas), and not take the lead of the regional study. Under this alternate, the District would develop and conduct a modified FOG Control Program and study that would consist of a modified Phase I of the study. It is estimated that the cost to the District for FY02/03 would be$150,000. For this alternate, the District proposes to contract the services of EEC on a sole source basis. This alternate approach however, would not meet the Order's requirement of a lead facilitating regional compliance with the Order. The cost to the region under this alternate would be $3-5 million. G.M .dWaq elBaeU Age PeWm1M03 NqulaW10D1bm 12191FGG RoyMrtCx � .MW2 Page 4 2. The District estimates that, if it did not use the services of a consultant to conduct the countywide study, it would require the equivalent of three FTEs to perform the study on a timely schedule and meet the deadlines. The cost to the District including the three FTEs is estimated at about $368,000. In addition, these resources do not exist at the present time. Obtaining these resources would require at a minimum three months and several months of training following hire. Therefore, schedule could not be met. CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS Summary Staff Report G)+N LI¢`dB^✓h P Wpans B PpaWa RWttbfOMun 12W).FM ft am A,„x,, WW2 Page 5 March 2002 FOG PROGRAM SUMMARY REPORT BACKGROUND Beach closures in Orange County have become a major issue of concern. One reason for the closures is water contamination from sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). From January 2000 through August 2001, there were approximately 250 SSOs, of which almost 75%were from collection systems owned by cities and local wastewater agencies. During this same period, there were 31 beach closures due to SSOs, of which 17 were from systems owned by the cities and wastewater agencies. In 1997, the District began conducting annual surveys of the cities and agencies about the operation and maintenance of the local sewers. The data identified the cause of the majority of the reported SSOs as grease accumulation in the small to medium sewer lines. These lines are part of the collection systems owned and operated by the cities and agencies. The exceptions to this are the collection systems in the unincorporated areas and the Tustin and Irvine business centers, which are under the District's jurisdiction. The 2000-2001 Orange County Grand Jury(Grand Jury) investigated SSOs and published its findings in April 2001 in a report entitled, Sewage Spills, Beach Closures—Trouble in Paradise. The Grand Jury surveyed the 35 wastewater agencies with jurisdiction in Orange County and identified sewer pipes clogged with grease from restaurants and high-density residential areas (e.g., apartment complexes) as the main cause of sewer overflows. Sources of Grease Fats, oils, and grease (FOG)of animal and vegetable origin are present in or as common food items, such as meats, cooking oil, lard, and butter. The major sources of large volumes of FOG to the sewer are commercial food processing facilities (e.g., restaurants, fast food outlets, and markets) and high-density residential areas (e.g., apartment complexes). The FOG is discharged to the sewer during clean-up from food preparation, ware washing, and floor and equipment cleaning. As the wastewater flows through the sewers, it cools and the FOG deposits and accumulates in the pipes and pump stations, forming blockages that eventually result in backups and SSOs. The frequency of blockages is unpredictable because the rate of deposit and accumulation depends on many factors, such as the frequency and volume of FOG discharges and the flow rate, slope of lines, accumulated matter, and low points in the sewer. Grease Control Practices and Programs Historically, "dealing with grease' meant liquefying the FOG and flushing it out of the private line to the cities' and county's sewer lines, thus moving the problem away from the private property. Common techniques employed for preventing blockages of private lines include using lots of hot water, degreasers, detergents, stronger chemicals (typically sulfuric acid or sodium hydroxide), or bacterial agents (e.g., enzymes). Occasionally, however, commercial facilities would implement measures to reduce the FOG discharge to the sewer to avoid the costs associated with backups and cleaning. Some restaurants, particularly ones that are part of a chain, practice "grease recycling," where cooking oil is collected by a recycler for processing into Page 1 of 8 animal feed, tallow, and other products. However, recyclers typically collect only "high quality" grease (e.g., used cooking oil), because the grease from grease interceptors contains decaying food solids and has a high water content. (In come communities, a recent use of cooking oil has been to produce biodiesel, an alternative to petrochemical gas.) When direct grease discharge controls are applied, the de facto control for commercial facilities is the installation of grease interceptors or traps. (Although the terms are used interchangeably, they are different devices. For simplicity, the term"GIs"will be used throughout this report.) However, installation of a GI has not been an effective solution to the problem because of inadequate design, lack of maintenance, and improper operation. Many cities and agencies nationwide have made efforts to address the problem of FOG discharges, but the actions are typically based on "what everyone else is doing" and, at times, anecdotal information. To date, there have been few detailed, scientific investigations into source control and treatment methods for FOG. U.S. EPA and the Water Environment Federation (WEF) have jointly developed a couple of training courses regarding the issue, but these have been more a compilation of shared wisdom and anecdotes than a systematic, scientific evaluation of the programs, and have tended to ignore long-tern or secondary effects. In Orange County, traditionally, grease discharge control consisted of requiring GIs through a local ordinance, sometimes by reference to the Plumbing Code. However, except for this provision, there has been no administrative mechanism in place to control or enforce proper design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the GIs. In its findings on Orange County, the Grand Jury recommended "regular review of restaurant grease trapslinterceptors maintenance logs by the OCHCA [Orange County Health Care Agency] and routine inspection of these devices by wastewater collection and/or treatment agencies staff within their respective jurisdictions to assure proper emptying and cleaning frequency of these devices." Without adherence to the proper operation and maintenance schedules, facilities will have spent significant sums of money and still continue to discharge uncontrolled amounts of FOG to the sewer. Given the large number of restaurants in Orange County, the implementation, administration, monitoring, and enforcement of a FOG control program requires resources, both in staff and budget, that are not available at this time. In Orange County, there are an estimated 6,800 restaurants. In comparison, the City of Los Angeles has over 10,000 food service establishments, and to implement its program of requiring GIs and inspecting annually, the City has hired 39 new staff members, of whom 20 are inspectors who inspect but do not always sample. Sampling at each source would require even more resources, including laboratory personnel to analyze the samples. Therefore, because of the high cost and the staffing and resources requirements of such a program, cities and agencies have postponed taking action. Cognizant of the SSO issues, some agencies have employed some form of preventive measures, such as targeting hot-spots, to address the FOG-related SSOs. Historically, rather than controlling the problem at the source, where it is the easiest and cheapest, agencies spend more effort, time, and money targeting hot-spots by performing maintenance as frequently as monthly to prevent SSOs. Recognizing the fragmented approach in the region, the Grand Jury made the following recommendations: "All Orange County wastewater collection and/or treatment agencies form a coalition for the purpose of formulating a standardized grease discharge ordinance for use by all affected wastewater collection and/or treatment agencies. This ordinance should carry enough Page 2 of 8 enforcement power to effectively prevent cooking grease from being discharged by restaurants and should include a vigorous inspection schedule, maintenance criteria and clearly defined enforcement procedures and sanctions where violations are noted." Grease Control Programs Several agencies and cities have instituted varied programs to control FOG discharges: • San Diego, City of Los Angeles, and Laguna Beach require GIs. • Pacific Grove is aggressively pushing education and best management practices (BMPs). • The City of Brea is using a biological additive. • Oxnard implemented an innovative program, whereby the city became a grease wastehauler. While the benchmarks cited by existing programs typically indicate success, the long-term results of the implementation and enforcement of these programs are generally unproven or qualitative. Also, although a reduction in SSOs is commonly used as a gauge, it is not always a true indicator because it does not account for more frequent maintenance of lines, increased sewering capacity, changes in food establishments, etc., which mitigate SSOs, even though GIs failed. In the rush to implement some type of control measure, the long-term and secondary effects of implementing the program were not thoroughly considered. Implementation of even a 'common sense" program would produce some immediate benefit, but the long-term and secondary effects may ultimately force the program to be reconsidered. For example, although installation of GIs is a common practice, the City of Laguna Beach recently reversed its requirement for existing restaurants to install GIs. Oxnard reportedly will soon terminate its grease hauling program. In a similar manner, introducing chemical or biological additives may help resolve the FOG issue, but this approach may cause additional issues to be addressed in the future. For example, wastewater treatment agencies may have to employ more expensive treatment to remove the additives to protect the receiving treatment plants and to enable compliant ocean discharge and water recycling options. Because of these unresolved complex issues, there appears to be a general reluctance by agencies and cities to fully address the problem. Among various factors for this reluctance are the requirement to devote a significant amount of resources, time, and money to understand the problems associated with controlling FOG; to develop practical, affordable solutions; and to implement the program. Further complications include a perceived resistance from the commercial sector, numerous unvalidated technologies, a current lack of inexpensive disposal options, legal issues, and a lack of the resources necessary to evaluate new technologies. REGULATORY STATUS AND REQUIREMENTS In Orange County, the issue is a high priority because of the numerous beach closures, SSOs, and the findings of the Grand Jury. In addition, the Orange County agencies and cities are facing a short deadline to address the problem of FOG-related SSOs from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB). The RWQCB is finalizing Tentative Order No. 01-99, General Waste Discharge Requirements, to require Orange County agencies and cities (as co-permittees) to develop and implement a plan to monitor and control SSOs. As part of the plan, permittees must develop a plan to implement a "Fats, Oils, and Page 3 of 8 Grease Control Program' by June 15, 2002, and begin implementing the program by September 30, 2004. In its findings, RWQCB has found that many of the SSOs are preventable if proper proactive source control measures and routine O&M on the sewer systems are performed. In the most recent draft of the order, the District is named as the lead for a steering committee to'to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Order." COUNTYWIDE STRATEGY To address this requirement, the District and co-permittees—cities, wastewater agencies, and County of Orange—have formed a steering committee dedicated to the issue of developing FOG control programs. The co-permittees determined that the interests of the county would be best served if countywide resources and knowledge were consolidated to develop the building blocks for specific programs that would address local conditions yet provide a consistent and equitable countywide approach. To that end, the co-permittees assessed that the greatest benefit in cost, use of resources, and meeting goals would be obtained from conducting a consolidated, comprehensive FOG control study that would establish a matrix of existing technologies and develop model FOG control and ordinance building blocks that the permittees can adopt and implement. The study is a comprehensive, scientific evaluation of data, technologies, and practices. FOG CONTROL STUDY The overall objective of the proposed FOG control study is to provide the tools to comply with the RWQCB's forthcoming requirements to effectively control FOG discharges. The study will evaluate alternative technologies, disposal options, and existing local and national BMPs and best available, affordable technologies (BAATs). The results of the study will be FOG control and ordinance building blocks that the cities and agencies can adopt to establish FOG control programs that are tailored for the local conditions. Scope and Deliverables To develop the building blocks for effective FOG control applicable to conditions in Orange County, a comprehensive, scientific evaluation is required because of the complexity of the issue and because the long-term and secondary effects are either poorly documented or have not been evaluated. To meet the requirements and schedule imposed by the Order, the District proposes a two-phased approach for the study. Phase I includes data collection and evaluation, devising a testing protocoVplan, and developing FOG control and ordinance building blocks. Phase I is expected to take almost one year, but at the end of this phase, the building blocks for instituting a FOG control program will be available. Phase I is further subdivided into two tasks, as outlined below: • Task 1 o Identification of the existing local conditions and review of existing local and national FOG control programs o Identification and review of effective source control measures and development of a list of validated (scientifically tested) technology and procedures applicable to Orange County Page 4 of 8 o Identification of nonvalidated technologies for further study in Phase II o Development of FOG control building blocks • Task 2 o Development of a technology matrix of BMPs/BAATs with applicability, benefits, costs, etc. o Development of FOG ordinance building blocks o Devising a study protocol for testing the short list of nonvalidated technology/practices and a field-testing plan o Recommendation for an information management system o Proposal and recommendation for Phase II of the study with a cost estimate Phase II would include field testing of a select group of nonvalidated technologies/practices identified for further study based on the testing protocol and plan developed in Phase I. Study Schedule The Order requires that the co-permittees develop and submit for approval a grease control plan by September 2004. To meet this schedule, the co-permittees must have the tools and building blocks developed by the study no later than one year prior to the deadline, September 2003. By that time, Phase 11 should have yielded, if not complete results, at least an indication, of which field tests are providing useful results. Therefore, Phase 1, which determines the scope and purpose of Phase 11, must be completed no later than January 2003. Consequently, Phase I must be started immediately and completed in less than one year. Attachment I provides the proposed schedule for Phase I, which will start in April/May 2002 and end in January 2003. Tasks 1 and 2 will overlap to provide results and deliverables in the most practical and expeditious way. Resources and Budget Impact For the development of Phase I of the FOG Control Program, the District's staff estimates that it would require greater than 6,000 man-hours, which translates, effectively, into three additional full time employees (FTE) to the existing staffing level. In addition, current staff members do not have the required level of expertise or experience to carry out such an extensive and in-depth evaluation. The additional staff members would either have to receive intensive training, which would add to the budget impact, or new staff would have to be hired with specific qualifications for FOG control. Either action would prevent the District from starting the program in a timely manner that would produce meaningful results and still meet the RWQCB's 2004 deadline. Further, conducting Phase I would incur additional costs, conservatively estimated at $50,000. Therefore, the budget impact is estimated to be at least$368,000 per year, not including the costs associated with training staff. Based on the considerations above, staff concludes that it is more cost-effective and practical to retain the services of a consultant to develop the FOG control building blocks. The District solicited a proposal from Environmental Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (EEC), and obtained the following costs: • Phase 1, Task 1 — $118,000 . • Phase I, Task 2 — $120,000 to $150,000 Page 5 of 8 Staff estimates that the total cost to retain the services of the consultant to conduct Phase I of the program, including the cost to manage the study, is about$300,000. Therefore, by retaining the services of an experienced consultant, the District can save more than $68,000 for the duration of the Phase I. Table 1 summarizes the comparison between using the services of a consultant and using Source Control staff. Table 1 Issue Source Control Staff Consultant Use of current staff No Yes Add FTEs Yes No Expertise No Yes Training of staff Yes No Condition at end of Reassign staff. Services terminated. No program Continuing cost. further or reduced budget impact. Cost for Phase 1 >$368,000 $300,000 Therefore, to gain these savings and to meet the forthcoming deadlines imposed by RWQCB, staff proposes to contract EEC on a sole source basis for the development of the study. The District recommends that this contract be awarded sole source because EEC is knowledgeable in both the pretreatment and source control programs, is well acquainted with the District's needs and requirements, and is experienced in conducting the required scientific evaluations and policy development. Furthermore, the consultant is knowledgeable about the issue and formulated the approach in cooperation with the cities to provide a cohesive and comprehensive countywide solution to FOG control. Also, on its own initiative, EEC has proposed a mechanism to resolve FOG issues in a scientific manner, while still obtaining sound, reasoned decisions in time for the agencies and cities to meet the RWQCB deadline. Advantages and Benefits of the FOG Control Program To prevent FOG-related SSOs to the greatest extent practical and to meet the forthcoming requirements and deadlines imposed by the RWQCB, the District, agencies, and cities will have to take immediate action. Rather than individually working on the issues on a hit-or-miss basis, all the agencies and cities would benefit from a collaborative effort performed by an objective third-party to develop the basic building blocks and tools. The effort is also expected to reduce the time and money that individual cities and agencies would spend to meet the imposed deadlines. Further, some of the cost would be recouped because better FOG control would result in less sewer line maintenance and fewer responses to FOG-related SSOs. Benefits to the Agencies and Cities At the end of the program, agencies and cities will have a set of objective, validated options from which to choose. Each city and agency can select from among the validated options to develop a FOG control program and ordinance that best meets the need of its area. Page 6 of 8 If the study were carried out individually by cities and agencies, they would have to each develop their own resources and budgets. It is estimated that, to perform the same study, the cost to individual cities would be $100,000 or more, resulting in $3 to 4 million total cost to the county. A common, comprehensive study would result in an average cost of$300.000 to the region, representing significant cost savings. Benefits to the District The District ultimately receives everything that is discharged to the sewer. Of particular concern are the various chemical additives used to dissolve and control grease. Compounds in these additives can ultimately affect the District's ability to reuse biosolids and recycle water, and, in sufficient concentration, can affect waste water treatment systems and ocean discharge. A countywide evaluation and application of the results would ensure that the District's and, consequently, the region's issues are addressed while impact on the District's operations and obligations under its Ocean Discharge permit are identified and avoided or resolved. Alternate Approaches The District has considered two basic alternatives to address a FOG Control Program and its obligations: • Alternative A—The District addresses the development of a FOG control program for areas under its responsibility (unincorporated areas and cities that have agreements with the District). • Alternative B—The District facilitates a regional response by taking the lead in conducting the comprehensive FOG Control Program study. Table 2 lists the advantages and disadvantages to each of the above alternatives. Table 2 Alternative 1 District Responds Alternative 2 Issue Alone Regional Approach Impact District's jurisdiction only Counlywide Coordination required District's staff County,cities, agencies Costs $150,000(FY 02/03) $300,000(FY 02103) Funding source District's budget All parties Approaches Address only District's Develop building blocks that can be concerns selected by participants Length of time required -1 year -1 year Resources required Significant Shared Long-term or secondary impacts Potentially extensive and Minimal,will be studied and to the District's facilities uncontrolled addressed during the program Final District cost $150,000 Maximum$100,000, as low as $50.000 Page 7 of 8 0 In addition,Alternate 2 meets the requirement of the Order that the District would be the lead to facilitate compliance with the Order. The stakeholders also determined that the most efficient and beneficial strategy for the region is to conduct the study as a group, with the District being the contract manager and administrator. A countywide study managed by the District and conducted for the whole region will result in significant cost savings to the cities and local wastewater agencies, and also would reduce the cost the District would spend if it had conducted the study on its own as a co-permittee. CONCLUSIONS • The occurrence of FOG-related SSOs is typically preventable with the appropriate source control measures and proper operation and maintenance of the control devices and sewer lines. • Dealing with FOG is much easier and cheaper at the source rather than in the sewer system. • RWQCB will soon require all Orange County cities and agencies to develop and implement a FOG Control Program by September 30, 2004. • The amount of resources required to develop a FOG Control Program and then to implement it individually by the cities and agencies would be overwhelming. • The Grand Jury has recommended that cities and agencies form a coalition to develop a standardized FOG ordinance. • The District has an interest in facilitating the development of a FOG Control Program and ordinance. • All agencies and cities can benefit from the regional approach to the issue. RECOMMENDATIONS • Conduct a comprehensive, countywide study to develop the building blocks for a FOG control program and ordinance. • Engage a consultant to conduct the study. • Retain the services of EEC on a sole-source basis to conduct Phase I for a cost not to exceed $268,000. • Budget$150,000 for FY 02/03 for Phase I to meet the Order schedule and develop a fund- sharing memorandum of understanding with co-perrnittees to jointly cover the cost of the study. The funding formula will be based on area and population. Page 8 of 8 ATTACHMENTI PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE FOR FOG PROGRAM STUDY, PHASE I Preliminary Project Schedule Grease Control Study•Phase I February 18,2002 m amar um ra m arm xw nx pmm •nm m Ttlk NYM .1 »I N. Yq Styx YM w NC m xm Iw Vlx WI ass I,wx ,6Hx nno „MI Isn ,Inas, ,b 1 .1 , Pkesel a Task 1-Oaks Gethenng and Oman OOMrol Plan Volumai e Summadxadon d Local CaMOion e CM,x tedmlbn d Lmal BMPA T. I I I I a Ch... aban of NMIwI BMPIBaST. Ia List Proven aMPIBMTs I T BMPMMT Cale,areal May Lkt i e 0m11Grema Cantrd Plw B G,.Cmad Plan-Peer Renew M.san, ,p p,ene DemM PIan,Vdumal am ' 1 Ix Task 2-Te.Brg Plan and FOG Ordinance Bupolnp Blacks DexMPmenl Is BMPIBMT VeMw end Pmaum MW 1. SWMeNizetl DeMbeee end GlS FommlRx M ommesiM 1 Im Orel1 FOG Ordinuae BUlMap Bloda r� 1 16 BMPIBMT Skxly Pfin, ti BMP/BMT FleId Te.dn Plan Is Dup Phase ll Acdon Pan and cost Eslimaa la gelion Pan eM FOG OMnenp5leednOCanMkea Ranw Maelap 1 j xv Gmue Cmmd Pion WOMehop xl WarksxmP Su.,Hansa am♦ ma.acemB a Tr O P,rym aamW WLMW9e RSMuo PgP.,a nsks,, ^G r Mann, ♦ PSMwTew o RWMwknskp.Q••••••••.••• F.tlemeln.b , 14q+ OMTS COMMITTEE MWIngOate To 12W. oarosjoz oa�zaroz AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number oMrsoz-zs I2(h) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Robert J. Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance Originator: Mark Esquer, Division 820 Manager SUBJECT: PURCHASE EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS FOR OCEAN OUTFALL BACTERIA REDUCTION,TESTING, FEASIBILITY STUDIES AND PLANNING, JOB NO. J-87 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1)Authorize the General Manager to exercise informal bidding procedures and sole- source procedures, as applicable, for the award of contracts for the Ocean Outfall Bacteria Reduction Program, Job No. J-87; (2)Authorize the General Manager to purchase and award sole-source contracts, as applicable, for materials and equipment, and/or services, including tanks, pumps,flow meters, and certain electrical and instrumentation devices for testing, feasibility and planning study purposes, as identified by the District's consultants, for use in the Ocean Outfall Bacteria Reduction Program, Job No. J-87, in an amount not to exceed $600,000; and (3) Increase the sole-source authorization limits for the General Manager to $200,000 for said purchases. SUMMARY • Staff is requesting authorization to procure the equipment and materials as recommended by the District's consultant for the purposes of testing and advanced planning. • The proposed short-tens ocean ouffall bacteria reduction work comprises peracetic acid or chemical bleach (a chlorine-type solution) and sodium bisulfite (de- chlorination) chemical addition facilities. The new facilities would be used for a 3 to 5-year period or until a long-term alternative is implemented. • Staff is proposing to informally bid or sole-source said purchases in order to meet the tight deadlines. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY The short-term ocean outfall bacteria reduction concept was not budgeted. A proposed budget is being developed as part of the upcoming fiscal year budget. Due to delays in some capital improvement projects and the associated capital outlay, there is sufficient funding to cover the cost of the services, materials, and goods during the current year. Therefore, a capital budget amendment would not be required to complete this work or cover costs this fiscal year. A detailed breakdown of the budget estimate for the bleach with de-chlorination alternative is as follows: Phase Description Amount $ 1. Development 15,000 2. Studies 80,000 3. Detailed Concepts and Drawings 450,000 4. Construction Contract 2,400,000 5. Construction Admin. 75,000 6. Construction Inspection 25,000 7. Ocean Monitoring 500,000 8. Record Drawings I ,000 9. Contingency 430,000 Total 4,000,000 BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. (Line item: I ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ® This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION None ALTERNATIVES Do not pre-purchase equipment and materials. CEQA FINDINGS Recommended action consists of testing studies and planning efforts,which are exempt from CEQA. ATTACHMENTS None c wq.�ry.w neovu�zwz eaaa,bma r.�nawozie, izmi+er aoc e v 1 Page 2 i DRAFT MINUTES OF PLANNING- DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTIO COMMITTEE MEETING Orange County Sanitation District Thursday, April 4, 2002, at 5 p.m. A meeting of the Planning, Design, and Construction Committee of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on Thursday, March 7, 2002, at 5 p.m., in the District's Administrative Office. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: PDC COMMITTEE MEMBERS: STAFF PRESENT: Directors Present: Blake Anderson, General Manager Steve Anderson, Chair David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Russell Patterson, Vice Chair John Linder, Construction Manager Laurann Cook Jim Herberg, Interim Engineering Manager Alice Jempsa Matt Smith, Engineering Supervisor Jerry Sigler Chuck Winsor, Engineering Supervisor Greg Smith, Alternate for Beth Krom Larry Gibson, Engineering Supervisor Norm Eckenrode, Board Chair Andrei loan, Project Manager Shirley McCracken, Board Vice Chair Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary Directors Absent: Mike Alvarez OTHERS PRESENT: Beth Krom Sejal Patel, Project Engineer Doug Konhof Linda Nichols Randy Furhman Bill Tappan Dennis Keepers (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM It was not necessary to appoint a Chair pro tem. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS Doug Konhoff spoke against the 301(h)waiver and the negative impacts of disinfection. Linda Nichols spoke against allowing treatment of urban runoff. Randy Furhman asked the directors to consider a step-up rate increase proposal for user fees. (4) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Committee Chair Steve Anderson did not make a report. PDC Committee Minutes Page 2 April 4, 2002 (5) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER General Manager Blake Anderson addressed Mr. Fuhrman's proposal, stating that it is worthy of consideration. Director of Finance Gary Streed will be providing analysis of the proposal at the FAHR Committee On April 10. Mr.Anderson also reported that consideration is being given to obtaining state and federal funds, especially if AS 1969 (Maddox) is passed. He also stated that some of the information presented by Doug Korthof in his remarks against using disinfection is untrue. He said that there would be no residual chlorine in the discharge because we would dechlorinate. The UCI report that was discussed in the paper today described the possibility of cross-shelf transport. The results are being evaluated by the District staff. He assured the directors that staff is considering everything and will bring it to them in May and June. Director Norm Eckenrode has suggested placing a marker 1-1/2 miles offshore to demonstrate how far the plume lies off the beach. Director Shirley McCracken mentioned that if the fees are increased as proposed for single family residences, it will also mean that fees for commercial and industrial users must be increased as the directors have adopted a fair share policy. Director Anderson asked staff to report on what can be done to increase secondary treatment now. (6) REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING Director of Engineering David Ludwin did not make a report. (7) REPORT OF THE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager, provided an update on (8) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel was not present. (9) CONSENT CALENDAR (Items a-h) a. RECEIVE. FILE, AND APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Receive,file, and approve draft minutes of the March 7,2002 Planning, Design, and Construction Committee meeting. Directors Norm Eckenrode and Debbie Cook and Alternate Director Greg Smith abstained. b. CHANGE ORDER REPORTS Attached are the Monthly and Quarterly Change Order Reports and the Report of Construction Contracts with Potential Change Orders over Five Percent (5%). This is an PDC Committee Minutes Page 3 April 4, 2002 information only item. Action on change orders that require PDC Committee or Board approval will be taken separately. There is one change order this month for PDC Committee approval. C. PSA AND ADDENDA REPORT Attached are the PSA and Addenda Report. This is an information only item. Action on PSAs and Addenda that require PDC Committee or Board approval will be taken separately. There were no PSAs and one Addendum approved by the General Manager from February 21 through March 21, 2002. d. FACILITIES ENGINEERING CONSULTANT ACTIVITY REPORT Attached is the Facilities Engineering Consultant Activity Report This is an information only item. e. QUARTERLY CONTRACT STAFFING ASSIGNMENTS REPORT Attached is the Quarterly Contract Staffing Assignments Report. This is an information only item. I. SANTA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR RELOCATION AND PROTECTION STATUS REPORT Attached is the Santa Ana River Interceptor(SARI) Relocation and Protection Status Report. This is an information only item. There was also a discussion on the Expanded Alternatives Study and the five-member Expert Panel Workshop that evaluated and ranked the 20 alternatives and the cost estimates. The recommendations are focused on the three ahematives north of the river, similar to the originally selected Alternative D. It is anticipated that agreement with SAWPA will be reached at the April 30 JMC meeting. SAW PA General Manager Joe Grindstaff has indicated that he will be working with the County of Orange in an attempt to have it reimburse SAW PA for the $3 million for recent repairs to the SARI line in the fiver. The outreach activities with the property owners in the area were outlined. g. QUARTERLY GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM (GWRS) STATUS REPORT Attached is the Quarterly Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) Status Report. This is an information only item. h. PDCO2-22 Recommend to the Board of Directors to(1) Approve a budget amendment of $200,605 for Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications,Job No.J-71-1 and J-71-2, for a total budget of$1,290,605; (2) Ratify Change Order No.2 to Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications,Job No.J-71-1 and J-71.2, with Margate Construction, Inc. authorizing an addition of$150,582, and a time extension of 168 calendar days, increasing the total contract amount to $883,249; and (3)Accept Distribution and Junction Box PDC Committee Minutes Page 4 April 4, 2002 Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2, as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Motion: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended actions for items specified as 10(a)through () under Consent Calendar. (10) ACTION ITEMS(Items a-e) a. PDCO2.23 Recommend to the Board of Directors to (1) Reject bid received March 27, 2001 from Margate Construction, Inc. for Natural Gas Line Replacement at Plant No. 1,Job No. SP2000-22,due to the single bid exceeding the Engineer's Estimate;and (2)Award a construction contract to Atlas-Allied, Inc. for Natural Gas Line Replacement at Plant No. 1, Job No. SP2000-22 (REBID), in an amount not to exceed $184,887. b. PDCO2-24 Recommend to the Board of Directors to approve a sole source purchase order to AT&T Wireless for phone service related to Long Tenn Flow Monitoring Program,Job No.J-73-2, in an amount not to exceed $165,000. C. PDCO2-25 Recommend to the Board of Directors to approve a budget amendment of $168,000 for Facilities Modifications for Odor Control, Job No. J-71-3, for a total project budget of$2,900,000. d. PDCO2-26 Recommend to the Board of Directors to authorize the General Manager to negotiate a purchase order for procurement of services with Power& Compression Systems for Central Generation Automation, Job No.J-79, for an amount not to exceed$1,500,000. e. PDCO2-27 MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: Recommend to the Board of Directors to establish a budget of$1,982,OD0 for the Engineering Trailer Complex at Plant No. 1,Job No.J-90. David Ludwin reported on the need for additional space to house the consulting program management employees (up to 20 per year) (see Item 11 following), as well as space to hold the existing 30+construction management employees because that trailer complex needs to be moved by April 2003 to make room for treatment facilities. However, these trailers, which have been in use since 1988, are in very bad condition and cannot be moved because of dry rot. The reorganization and restructuring of the Engineering Department will result in another 20+project people moving to the new trailer complex so that they can all be co-located. He outlined the pros and cons of three attemate locations considered within the treatment plant, as well as an off-site location. Staff will be getting the necessary permits from Fountain Valley for this temporary office complex. While the costs are expensive, there is no other y PDC Committee Minutes Page 5 April 4, 2002 option that can provide the needed space by the fall of this year. The trailers will also be used when divisions have to be temporarily relocated during the remodel of the administration building. At the and of the 3-4 years that the trailers will be in used,they will be sold. (11) INFORMATIONAL ITEM (Item a) a. P00O2-28 Program Management Consultant David Ludwin introduced the concept of providing necessary staffing recourses for the CIP through a program management consultant. The 20-year CIP projection indicates an increase of$200 million within the next ten years without secondary treatment. The current staffing in the Engineering Department cannot handle the anticipated work. It was originally envisioned that the increased staffing needs would be provided by hiring limited term employees. However, there has always been a problem procuring the right disciplines when they are needed, and a recent legal opinion has also limited the term of this class of employee to three years. Any longer than that and they must be considered permanent employees. Mr. Ludwin then presented a PowerPoint presentation on how the program management consultant would interface with current staff. The selected firm would not be able to work on any of the design or construction projects. A five-year contract term for an amount not to exceed$15 million will be negotiated. Each year the staffing needs and the rates would be negotiated. The selected consulting fine will be responsible for providing staff that meet the qualifications of the District. An RFP is being prepared and a recommendation will be presented to the PDC Committee and the Board in August. (12) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (13) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY There were none. (14) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING Director Alice Jempsa expressed her concern after reading the article on the health of streams and the impacts of discharges on the groundwater. She felt that this was a water district responsibility. Blake Anderson stated that he would talk with the directors of the Water District and bring back information on the issue. (15) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none. I PDC Committee Minutes Page 6 April4, 2002 (16) FUTURE MEETINGS DATES The next Planning, Design, and Construction Committee Meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 2, 2002 at 5 p.m. (17) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Submitted by: V J Tappan D Committee Secretary flMn.OiaYpaNe`MICYWTJ6nuusNN104 pUFf POCMww.Lrc PDCCOMMIfTEE Meetlr5 W To ad.aw. oa/oa�oz 04/24/02 AGENDA REPORT I em 02-22 Item N3(c) am Num I Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator. Sid Kirk, Project Specialist SUBJECT: DISTRIBUTION AND JUNCTION BOX ODOR CONTROL MODIFICATIONS, JOB NO. J-71-1 and J-71-2 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1)Approve a budget amendment of$200,605 for Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2,for a total budget of$1,290,605; (2) Ratify Change Order No. 2 to Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2, with Margate Construction, Inc. authorizing an addition of$150,582, and a time extension of 168 calendar days, increasing the total contract amount to $883,249; and (3)Accept Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2, as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement. SUMMARY Background • Job No. J-71-1, Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, includes additions to the foul air(FA) ducts at the Metering and Diversion Structure at the Headworks and the Eastside Primary Basin and new fiberglass reinforced plastic ( FRP) gratings to replace the old gratings at the Eastside Primary Basin at Plant No. 1. • Job No. J-71-2, Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications, includes installation of new fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) gratings and new foul air duct systems at Distribution Boxes B and C, Junction Structure 1, Junction Structure 2, (east and west)and Junction Structure 3, at Plant No. 2. • The new FRP gratings were needed to contain gasses and odors that previously vented into the atmosphere through inefficient wooden covers. These gasses and odors are being drawn off through the new foul air duct systems and into the scrubbers for cleansing. • CGvL Engineers prepared the plans and specifications and the contract was awarded to Margate Construction, Inc. on December 20, 2000. • Change Order No. 2 includes three items of added work to the contract. Items 1 and 2 are changed conditions due to undisclosed utilities and Item 3 is due to deterioration of the concrete surfaces exposed to gas in the interior of Distribution Box B that was more extensive than originally observed. There is a 168 calendar day time extension associated with this change order. Contract Schedule Contract Start Date February 12, 2001 Original Contract Completion Date August 15, 2001 Total Number of Change Orders to Date 2 Current Contract Completion Date February 21, 2002 Actual Completion Date February 21, 2002 Days Subject to Liquidated Damages 0 Change Order No. 2 Content Item Description Amount Days Type No. 1 Relocate and/or move undisclosed $ 8,346 12 Changed utilities Conditions 2 Perform detailed attachment to existing 3,291 6 Changed 54-inch concrete encasement Conditions 3 Repair deteriorated concrete surfaces to 138,945 150 Changed the interior of Distribution Box B Conditions Total Change Order No. 2 $ 150,582 168 Job Completion This project is complete and ready for closeout. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Original Contract Price $ 693,000.00 Previously Authorized Changes $ 39,667.00 This Change Order(CO No. 2, Add) $ 150,582.00 Change Orders to Date $ 190,249.00 Percent Increase to Date 27.45% Final Contract Price $ 883,249.00 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) c:w.yeubpeeslBe•Cnpwm neo•naaoz eum•pam rtro�swoznun,Ncl.t�,.,eoc Page 2 Additional budget is required to provide funds for this construction contract change order and additional staff costs. Item 3 required significant additional Engineering staff costs to implement the change and Operations staff cost was required to divert and bypass flows during the work at Plant No. 2. Additional Engineering costs were also incurred at Plant No. 1. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION None ALTERNATIVES None CEQA FINDINGS None ATTACHMENTS 1. Budget Information Table 2. Change Order Status Report 3. Change Order No. 2 o:,xyem�ee,ema nperim n�viczam e®b npmm�*maoTn.n,a�cls],-,ax w.r.m: vxia, Page 3 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications Job No. J-71-1 ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECT/TASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED -AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED BUDGET 13VOGET 'INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%) Project Development $ 4.000 $ 100 $ 100 $ 100 $ 100 $ 12 12% Studies/Permitting $ 1,000 $ 4,100 1 $ 4,100 $ 4.100 $ 4,100 $ 4,073 99% Consultant PSA $ 23.000 $ 41,000 $ 41,000 $ 41,000 $ 41,000 $ 41.000 100% Design Staff $ 10,000 $ 34,197 $ 34,197 $ 34,197 $ 34.197 $ 34.197 100% Construction Contract $ 220,000 $ 131.980 $ 131.980 k. $ 131.980 $ 131,980 $ 131.980 100% Construction ,s Administration $ 18,000 $ 29,000 $ 35,000 $ 64,000 $ 29,000 $ 35,000 $ 64.000 $ 59,795 93% Construction Inspection $ 20,000 $ 55,000 $ (15.000) $ 40,000 $ 55,000 $ 15,000) $ 40.000 $ 38,153 95% IY ' Contingency $ 88,000 $ 4,623 $ (4,623) $ PROJECT TOTAL $ 384.000 $ 300.000 $ 15.377 $ 315,377 $ 295,377 $ 20,000 $ 315.377 $ 309.210 98% Reimbursable Costs PROJECT NET $ 384.000 $ 300,000 $ 15,377 $ 315,377 5,','. $ 295.377 $ 20.000 1 $ 315,377 $ 309.210 1 987% h%"dlaleng\rmms\budget table Form Revised Od 4.2000 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Distribution and Junction Box Odor Control Modifications Job No. J-71-2 ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECT?ASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%) Project Development $ - $ Studies/Permitting $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2.000 $ 1.820. 91% Consultant PSA $ 25,000 $ 31,960 $ 31,960 $ 31,960 $ 31,960 $ 31.960 100% Design Staff $ 32,000 $ 19,000 $ 19.000 $ 19.000 $ 19,000 $ 18,817 99% Construction Contract $ 577,000 $ 600.686 $ 150.582 $ 751.268 $ 600,686 $ 150,582 $ 751.268 $ 600,064 80% Construction Administration $ 33.000 $ 33,000 $ 97,000 $ 130,000 $ 33.000 $ 97,000 $ 130,000 $ 111,567 86% Construction Inspection $ 57.000 $ 41.000 $ 41.000 $ 41,000 $ 41,000 $ 40,501 99% Contingency $ 66,000 $ 62.354 $ (62.354) $ $ - PROJECT TOTAL $ 790,000 $ 790,000 $ 185.228 $ 975,228 $ 727,646 $ 247.582 $ 975.228 $ 804,729 83% Reimbursable Costs PROJECT NET $ 790.000 $ 790.000 $ 185.228 1 $ 975.228 11 $ 727,646 $ 247,582 1 $ 975,228 $ 804.729 1 8371b in v,,dtabn9%fanas%bWW1 table Form Revised W.4,2000 CHANGE ORDER STATUS REPORT DIST. AND JUNCTION BOX ODOR CONTROO MODIFICATIONS Contract No. J-71-1/J-71-2 APPROVAL CONTRACT CONTRACT COST PERCENTAGE AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZED ITEM DATE COST TO DATE INCREASE TIME TIME TO DATE (DAYS) (DAYS) CONTRACT 2112/01 $693,000 $693,000 185 185 CO NO. 1 8/22/01 $39,667 $732,667 i 5.72 22 207 CO NO. 2 Pending $150,582 $883,249 27.45% 168 375 GWota*ngyobscontmct 71-1 Mngsta2.As Page 1 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 108" ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Margate Construction, Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: April 24, 2002 Job: Distribution and Junction Box, Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2 Amount of this Change Order(Add) $150.582.00 In accordance with contract provisions,the following changes In the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. Job No. J-71-2 ITEM 1 —RELOCATE UTILITIES, REMOVE ABANDONED UTILITIES AND CONCRETE SLURRY BACKFILL The item will compensate the Contractor for relocating utilities, removing abandoned utilities and removing interfering concrete and slurry backfill from around Foul Air duct connection points. These details were not shown on the plans nor mentioned in the specifications and were not part of the original contract. This work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2.b) of the General Provisions. (Reference FCO J712-1) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $ 8,346.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 12 Calendar Days ITEM 2—PERFORM DETAILED TIE-IN TO EXISTING CONCRETE ENCASEMENT This item will compensate the Contractor for making tie-in of the new concrete wail into existing and undisclosed concrete encasement around the 54-inch RCP at Junction Box 1. The additional work included supplying and placing dowels and L type waterstop. This work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10-6(B)2.b) of the General Provisions. (Reference FCO J712.2). ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $ 3,291.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 6 Calendar Days ITEM 3— REHABILITATION OF INTERIOR CONCRETE SURFACES OF DISTRIBUTION BOX B This item compensates the Contractor to repair deteriorated concrete wall surfaces of individual basins by water blasting the surface, rebuilding the wall face and installing arrow lock vinyl liners. The existing walkway was removed and replaced with a newly cast concrete walkway with arrow lock liner. The center well of the box was repaired by applying several layers of a high tech coating. All of this work required coordination with Operations and Maintenance to by pass flows for access to perform the Page 2 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 108" ELLIS AVENUE,P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor. Maroate Construction, Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: April 24. 2002 Job: Distribution and Junction Box. Odor Control Modifications. Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2 work and much of the work could only be performed at night. In addition, barriers were installed on top of new FRP grating around the basin gates of Distribution Box B and C to close off gaps where odors could vent from the structures. The work was accomplished by Contractor's force account pursuant to Section 10.6(B)2.b of the General Provisions. (Reference FCO J712-8) ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $138,945.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 150 Calendar Days TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $150,587 00 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER: 168 Calendar Days Page 3 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 108"ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Margate Construction, Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: Aoril 24, 2002 Job: Distribution and Junction Box, Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2 The additional work contained within this change order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original contract and any extensions to the contact time made by this and all previously issued change orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that a time extension of 168 days is required for this change order, and that no direct, indirect, incidental or consequential costs, expenses, losses or damages have been or will be incurred by this Contractor, except as expressly granted and approved by this change order. SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date: February 12, 2001 Original Contract Time: 185 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: August 15, 2001 Time Extension this C.O.: 168 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 190 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: 375 Calendar Days Revised Final Completion Due Date: February 21, 2002 Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: N/A Actual Final Completion Date: February 21, 2002 Original Contract Price $ 693,000.00 Prev. Authorized Changes $ 39,667.00 This Change (Add) (Deduct) $ 150,582.00 Amended Contract Price $ 883,249.00 i i Page 4 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 10944 ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor. Margate Construction Inc. C.O. No.: Two (2) Date: April 24, 2002 Job: Distribution and Junction Box, Odor Control Modifications, Job No. J-71-1 and J-71-2 Board Authorization Date: April 24,2002 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Recommended by: Construction Manager Date Approved by Director of Engineering Date Accepted by: MARGATE CONSTRUCTION. INC. Contractor Date PDC COMMITTEE Meang Date To ad.of Dir. 04/04/02 04,24/02 AGENDA REPORT 1enNinnbu tanNiniou vDco2-23 txm Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David A. Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator. Jim Harris, Principal Engineering Associate SUBJECT: NATURAL GAS LINE REPLACEMENT AT PLANT NO. 1, JOB NO. SP2000-22 (REBID) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1) Reject bid received March 27, 2001 from Margate Construction, Inc. for Natural Gas Line Replacement at Plant No. 1, Job No. SP2000-22, due to the single bid exceeding the Engineers Estimate; and (2)Award a construction contract to Atlas-Allied, Inc. for Natural Gas Line Replacement at Plant No. 1, Job No. SP2000-22 (REBID), in an amount not to exceed $184, 887. SUMMARY • The original Engineering Estimate for the project was $111,000. Margate Construction, Inc. submitted the only bid on March 27, 2001 for an amount of $239,000. Proposed cost of construction was considerably over the estimate. • The Design Engineer, RW Beck,was asked to review their Engineers Estimate considering the bids received. RW Beck re-affirmed their Engineers Estimate Of$111,000. • Staff proceeded with re-bidding the project due to the single bid received, which exceeded the Engineers Estimate. • Staff again bid the project on June 26, 2001 and received only one bid from Atlas- Allied, Inc. for an amount of$184,887, again over the estimate. • Staff questioned and reviewed the Engineers Estimate. Based upon estimated quantities, Staff determined the cost to construct should be increased to $200,000. The original Engineers Estimate did not include all quantities of valves and valve vaults, and under-estimated the cost per linear foot of pipe installed. • Considerable delay occurred in resolving this project due to possible new construction occurring in the same areas that the proposed gas line is routed. Staff delayed finishing this work until more definitive information was developed on the conflicting projects. The conflicts are now resolved and this work can now continue. • In discussions with Atlas-Allied, Inc., the company agrees to honor their original bid, even though they are not obligated to do so since more than 90 days has passed since their bid date. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY The Budget shall be modified to include the new estimate to construct of$200,000. BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Facilities Engineering, Plant 1) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) No authorization of funds is being requested at this time. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Natural Gas Line Replacement at Plant No. 1, Job No. SP2000-22, will replace the gas piping currently installed serving both personnel and process uses. The natural gas is used for water heating, air conditioning, and as pilot gas for the digester gas flares. Existing piping is located both underground and in tunnels. Piping located underground was installed in the 1960s. The piping in tunnels was installed in the early 1990s. Recently, underground piping failures required the replacement of sections around the Administration Building and outside the Laboratory. It is reasonable to expect additional failures will be found in the very near future. The piping located in tunnels does not comply with current National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 820 standards due to the use of screwed fittings. The NFPA standards require welded fittings only. The Orange County Sanitation District adopted NFPA 820 as a standard subsequent to the installation of the gas lines in the tunnels. RW Beck designed the project. The work replaces the underground piping with polyethylene pipe, adds additional isolation valves, and automatic earthquake shut-off devices at each building. The piping located in tunnels will be replaced with welded black steel pipe. Both meet NFPA guidelines and building codes. The Delegation of Authority assigns the approval of an original construction contract agreement, not exceeding $200,000 to the Planning, Design, and Construction Committee. Staff recommends the award of a construction contract to Atlas-Allied, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $184,887. ALTERNATIVES Reject all bids and re-advertise the project. This rebid would be the third time. Page 2 CEQA FINDINGS The project is a direct replacement, and is therefore categorically exempt from CEQA. A Notice of Exemption for the Facilities Engineering Projects was filed on November 20, 2000. ATTACHMENTS 1. Budget Information Table 2. Bid Summary 3. Bid Tabulation JRH:sa:jo:sa GAwpAtMagendaSoard Agenda Reponst2002 Board Agenda Repori5t0602dtem 13(d).SP2000-22.da ate: e100+ Page 3 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE NATURAL GAS LINE REPLACEMENT AT PLANT NO. 1 JOB NO. SP2000-22 (REBID) ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED tPROPOSED -• FU,NDS ,' ,, THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTINATED- PI20JECTRA3'ISP s q ;BUbGET REVISEq AUTHORIZED -AUTHORIZATIONS= ' `SOTAC' EXPE�LDITURE E P,.�ADEb. , �BUDGET.D BUDGET,��- INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE :REQUEST, AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%): Project Development $ $ Studies/Permitting $ $ Consultant PSA $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 29,000 97% Design Staff $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 6,000 80% Construction Contract $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 25,000 $ 225,000 $ 40,000 $ 185,000 $ 225,000 $ 39,000 17% Construction Administration $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 10,000 $ 15,000 $ 25,000 $ 10,000 40% Construction inspection $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 6,000 $ 9,000 $ 15,000 $ 6,000 40% Contingency $ 56,000 $ 56,000 $ 25,000 $ 31,000 $ PROJECT TOTAL 1 $ 336,000 $ 336,000 1 $ 336,000 $ 96,000 $ 209,000 $ 305,000 $ 92,000 30% Reimbursable Costs PROJECT NET $ 336.000 1 $ 336.000 $ - 1 $ 336,000 1. 1 $ 96,000 1 $ 209.000 $ 305,000 $ 92,000 30% 003731873 PDC COMMITTEE MeedWDzre Tosd.ofDir. 414102 4/24102 AGENDA REPORT 1B1N1in" °OiN be PDON 74 13(e) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineedng Originator. Jim Herberg, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: LONG TERM FLOW MONITORING PROGRAM, JOB NO. J-73-2 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve a Sole Source Purchase Order to AT&T Wireless for phone service related to Long Term Flow Monitoring Program, Job No. J-73-2, in an amount not to exceed $165,000. SUMMARY • The Orange County Sanitation District (District) is beginning a comprehensive program to reduce wet weather flows caused by rain dependent infiltration and inflow (1/1) as part of the implementation of District's Strategic Plan. One of the key elements of this effort is a Long Tenn Flow Monitoring Program, Job No. J-73-2. • The Long Tenn Flow Monitoring Program consists of locating flow meters throughout the District to monitor flows on a continuous basis for a period of five years. A total of 150 locations will be monitored during the first two years and 75 locations during years three through five. • A Professional Services Agreement (PSA)was awarded to ADS Environmental Services by the Board on October 10, 2000, to perform the flow monitoring activities. • Wastewater flow data will be transmitted from the flow meters to an ADS Environmental Services central computer system at a remote location via wireless telecommunications. This is less expensive than traditional phone service and will be less disruptive to the community during installation. • At this time, AT&T Wireless is the only telecommunications company that can provide the required service at all of the meter locations within Orange County. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY See the attached Budget Information Table. Approval is being requested for a Sole Source Purchase Order in an amount not to exceed $165,000. BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Section 8—Page 155) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) r A transfer of$165,000 from the Contingency line to the Construction Contract line is being requested. The overall budget total remains unchanged. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION There are four major elements of the Orange County Sanitation District's (District) campaign to reduce rainfall dependent infiltration and inflow(1/1): Cooperative Projects Program; Long Tenn Flow Monitoring Program; District's ongoing sewer and pump station flow monitoring program; and the District's collection system CIP. These programs benefit each other in terms of shared data and are, therefore, integrally linked to meet the District's needs. The purpose of the Long Tenn Flow Monitoring Program is to address rain dependent 1/1 from a District-wide perspective over a five year period. The proposed program is designed to identify major sources of 1/1 in the District' s trunk sewer and the local agencies tributary sewers. The data collected from this program will be compared with more detailed local agency flow monitoring data that is collected as part of their Master Plans. These Master Plans are funded through the Cooperative Projects Program. Based on this information, the District, in conjunction with local agencies, will develop and implement a strategy for reducing 1/1. Since the inception of the Long Term Flow Monitoring Program, ADS Environmental Services has developed a wireless telecommunications system for use with their flow monitoring equipment. This new system will allow them to transmit flow monitoring data via the Internet to both the District and local agencies on a nearly real-time basis. This technology has an added benefit of minimizing community disruptions during installation of the flow monitoring equipment. At this time, AT&T Wireless is the only telecommunications company that provides the required wireless service in Orange County. The District will be able to set up an arrangement with AT&T Wireless to obtain government rates and volume discounts for use of their service. In addition, AT&T Wireless will waive the activation fees for service at each location. ALTERNATIVES Do not approve this Purchase Order. Not approving the Purchase Order will mean that the District will have to make arrangements with a local phone company to provide traditional phone service to the flow meters. This will delay the project for several months and will be more costly in the long run in terms of capital cost(i.e., installation of conduit in streets) and monthly fees. In addition, the disruption to the local agencies will be significant. CEOA FINDINGS This project is categorically exempt. ATTACHMENTS Budget Information Table PK:jo G.A dw,IIW s do WNepmsV Bova Ap ReCW Mtm I]e)A-112ax RMw WWI Page 2 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Long-Term Flow Monitoring Program Job No. J-73-2 ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECT/TASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%) Project Development $ 42,000 $ 42000 5 42,000 $ 42,000 S 35795 85% Studies/Pennitting $ 6,DD0 $ 6.000 $ 6.000 $ 6,0D0 $ 414 7% Consultant PSA I $ $ Design Staff $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,DD0 $ 35.000 $ 26,308 75% Construction Contract $ 6,222,400 $ 165.000 $ 6,387400 $ 6,222,400 $ 165,000 $ 6.387,400 $ 1,239,433 19% Construction Administration $ 163,000 $ 163,000 $ 162.000 $ 162,000 0% Construction Inspection $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80.000 $ 80.000 0% Conlin enty It 526.000 $ 165,000) $ 361.000 $ PROJECT TOTAL $ - $ 7.074.400 $ 7,074,400 $ $ 6,547.400 $ 165,000 $ 6.712.400 $ 1.301,950 19% s Reimbursable Costs I I ' PROJECT NET 1 $ - $ 7,074.400 1 $ -1 $ 7,074,400 $ 6,547400 $ 165.000 1 $ 6,712.400 1$ 1.301.950 19% c:TaeNeWPgJ.73.2 Buagertewe 3-6-02•bininnft PDC COMMITTEE Meebng Date To Bd.of Dir. 04/04/02 04/24/02 AGENDA REPORT nemNumbu Item Number PDCO2-2S tstn Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Dennis May, Project Manager SUBJECT: FACILITIES MODIFICATIONS FOR ODOR CONTROL, JOB NO. J-71-3 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve a budget amendment of$168,000 for Facilities Modifications for Odor Control, Job No. J-71-3, for a total project budget of$2,900,000. SUMMARY • In July 2000, the Orange County Sanitation District (District) issued a Professional Services Agreement (PSA)to Black &Veatch Corporation to provide engineering services for Facilities Modifications for Odor Control, Job No. J-71-3. • This project makes improvements to eliminate odor sources at both plants to minimize odor complaints from our neighbors. These improvements include better foul air treatment for the Waste Hauler Dump Station, solids dewatering buildings at Plant No. 1, and junction structures at Plant No. 2. • In June 2001, the Board approved Addendum No. 2, which added instrument and control elements such as: process and instrumentation diagrams, control logic diagrams, development of an equipment instrument database, and conduit and cable schedules to meet the current design standards. This additional work was required to support the automation of the treatment plants for unattended operation and to support ongoing preventative maintenance. • This project design is complete and is scheduled for public bidding in May 2002. A budget amendment is being requested at this time because the latest Engineer's Estimate is greater than the previous construction budget, requiring Board approval prior to advertising for public bids. • This budget amendment of$168,000 is needed to cover additional construction costs for landscaping, electrical and control system upgrades, and structural coatings. These items are discussed in detail in the Additional Information section of this report. Page 1 PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Refer to the attached Budget Information Table. Authorization of $94,000 of Contingency budget is being requested. BUDGET IMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. (Line item: section 8 page 8) ® This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) The Construction Contract budget is being increased by$262,000. Authorization of$94,000 of Contingency budget is being requested, for an overall budget increase of$168,000. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The additional construction improvements are broken down as follows: Wastehauler Station During design of the Waste Hauler Dump Station biofilter, it was determined that landscaping would be required to hide it from view from the Plant No. 1 main entrance. Additional instrumentation was added to monitor flushing of the Waste Hauler Station at the Guard Shack at Plant No. 1. Plant No. 1 Dewatering The order control improvements at Plant No. 1 dewatering will require additional airflow control dampeners, supports, and control system improvements to allow the foul air collection system to function properly. Primary Distribution Structure W This structure is over 40 years old and is used to direct wastewater flows to primary treatment at Plant No. 1. During the design, the structure was inspected to determine the extent of repairs needed to the structure prior to fitting it with foul air capture equipment. Upon inspection, it was found that a structural coating system would need to be applied and that modifications to the foul air cover and ductwork would also be needed. ALTERNATIVES Reduce the scope of improvements. This option would make the new biofilter at the Waste Hauler Dump Station clearly visible from the Plant No. 1 main Page 2 entrance, resulting in instrumentation and control system integration problems, and would not provide an adequate structional repair at Primary Distribution. CEQA FINDINGS This Project is included in the Districts 1999 Strategic Plan EIR certified by the Board of Directors on October 27, 1999. A Notice of Determination was filed on October 29, 1999. ATTACHMENTS Budget Information Table DLM:sa GA".du� gmd \Bwrd Agenda Rep MUW2 BoW Agemda Rqp 'DIO2Ut 13(f)J-71-3.do Page 3 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE FACILITIES MODIFICATIONS FOR ODOR CONTROL JOB NO. J-71-3 ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECTfTASK AUTHORIZED PROJECj' BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED BUDGET. BUDS CREASE BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%) Project Development $ 25,000 $ 14,000 $ 14,000 $ 14,000 $ 14,000 $ 14,000 100% Studies/Permitting $ 4,000 1 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 1 100% Consultant PSA $ 314,000 $ 587,000 $ 587.000 $ 572.868 $ 572,868 $ 385,347 67% Design Staff $ 142,000 $ 142,000 $ 142,000 $ 142,000 $ 128,362 90% Construction Contract $ 900.000 $ 1.500.000 $ 262,000 $ 1,762,000 Construction Administration $ 157.000 $ 114,000 $ 114,000 Construction Inspection $ 101,000 $ 101,000 Contingency $ 270,000 $ (94,000) $ 176.000 $ - PROJECT TOTAL $ 1,396.000 $ 2.732,000 $ 168,000 $ 2,900.000 $ 732.868 $ - $ 732.868 $ 531.709 1 73% Reimbursable Costs PROJECT NET 1 $ 1,396,000 $ 2.732.000 $ 168,000 $ 2,900.000 1 $ 732,868 $ - $ 732.868 $ 531,709 1 73% EDMS/Doc ClaWClassrtemplale)Job Bu0908u49e1 Intormalion Tabla(0037179D9) 1 PDC COMMITTEE Meeting Dace To Bd of Dir. t 4/4/02 4lt4M AGENDA REPORT awn Niiib 1ben1N" voc07-76 13(a) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator. Jim Hams, Project Manager SUBJECT: CENTRAL GENERATION AUTOMATION, JOB NO. J-79 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Authorize the General Manager to negotiate a purchase order for procurement of services with Power& Compression Systems for Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79, for an amount not to exceed $1,500,000. SUMMARY • The Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79, replaces the original engine/generator and auxiliary systems computer monitoring and control systems originally installed in 1990, under the Central Generation Facilities at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Job Nos. J-19-1 and J-19-2. • The monitoring systems control engine operating parameters; monitor engine functions; control auxiliary systems; and reports to the plant wide monitoring computer system. • The systems that were originally installed do not meet the Orange County Sanitation District (District) minimum requirements for computer hardware and software developed subsequent to the original installation. The original supplier no longer supports the equipment. District staff cannot obtain spare parts or programming assistance, causing decreased reliability and availability of this critical equipment. • The proposal work is a direct upgrade of existing equipment. A conventional engineering design consultant is not needed. Typically, an engineering consultant will document the facility instrumentation systems and specify a number of systems that could be put into place. This historical process can be modified due to the District having in place: 1. As-Built Documentation: Staff intends to use the as-built documentation provided by the Reinvention Project, Job No. J-42. The documentation includes Process Instrumentation and Diagrams, Loop Diagrams, and other related information required for upgrading the systems. 2. Standardization of Computer Hardware& Software: The District Process Integration and Controls Staff developed standards for the type of hardware required, software types, and programming templates. Using Page 1 these standards eliminates the needs for"Classical Detailed Design" by a consultant. 1 3. Cost Savings: Staff estimates a total project cost savings of approximately $200,000 and a reduced project schedule by one year. • The proposed contractor has successfully completed similar upgrades to engine generator systems by the same supplier. The project manager for Power& Compression Systems has over 30 years experience, and worked on the Central Generation Engine-Generators for Cooper-Bessemer Industries, the original equipment supplier. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY At this time, authorization to negotiate a contractor cost is being requested. No authorization to spend funds is requested at this time. If an acceptable scope, budget, and schedule is negotiated, the request for awarding a construction contract shall be brought back to the Planning, Design, and Construction Committee. BUDGETIMPACT ® This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Section e, Page 95) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Strategic Plan and operations requirements recommend replacing the Central Generation Facilities Engine Generators and auxiliary systems computer monitoring and control systems. This 12-year-old technology can no longer be supported and has reached the end of its useful mechanical life. The computer monitoring systems are expensive to keep on line and require extensive servicing by both software and hardware technicians. Staff has integrated five separate and distinct systems using "black boxes" and special programming to allow remote monitoring of system performance. "Black boxes" translate one programming language into another. This project eliminates the use of specialized computer systems and integrates the facilities using existing Orange County Sanitation District standards for hardware, software, and installation methods. This project is providing an opportunity to more effectively operate and maintain the facilities by redirecting Staff to perform more maintenance related tasks and relieves them from continuously monitoring the facilities operation. The recommended improvements upgrade the computer hardware and software to District standards, and eliminates specialized equipment and programming supplied with the original facilities installation. Page 2 i The Central Generation (CenGen) Facilities provides electrical power, hot water, and chilled water for Orange County Sanitation District(District) use. The engine/generators utilize the biogas produced in the wastewater process as the primary fuel source. Natural gas is used as a supplemental fuel source. The maximum permitted power output for the two plants are 17.5 megawatts. Hot water is reclaimed from the engine cooling water systems and from the engine exhaust. Chilled water is produced from the recovered heat through adsorption chillers. Adsorption chillers take the heat from the engine exhaust, and through chemical reaction produces chilled water. Nearly 100 % of the waste heat produced by the engines is recovered for process heating and cooling. The CenGen Facilities construction occurred from 1989 through 1991. The engine/generators were purchased from Cooper-Bessemer Industries (Cooper) under Contract No. J-19A. The associated scope of supply included the engines, generators, heat recovery equipment, and auxiliary equipment including a propriety computer monitoring system. The specialty computer monitoring system utilizes a unique and one of a kind programming language developed by Cooper. Rolls Royce recently bought the Cooper division that supplied the original engine-generator and controls. District staff received notice that the equipment would no longer be serviced or have spare parts available due to the company acquisition. This project eliminates several "islands of automation" that cannot be supported or is expensive to operate and maintain. The general work for the Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79 includes: Replaces the on engine computer monitoring and control system and panels (9 total) Replaces the supervisory monitoring computer(2 total). • Replaces the auxiliary equipment monitoring and control computer(4 total). Specific requirements include: • Meet with District staff and review or develop new engine, steam and auxiliary control philosophies. • Construction and installation of all new equipment to District standards. • Integrate the existing engine and auxiliary instrumentation into the new computers. • Develop engine and auxiliary software programming and visual graphics to district standards • Provide all necessary engineering drawings and testing. • Provide all miscellaneous equipment and installation materials (excluding owner supplied programmable logic controllers and related Modicon equipment) Page 3 Staff recommends not using the traditional method of selecting a design consultant to prepare plans and specifications for this particular project. There is not any civil or mechanical work associated with this project. The work upgrades the existing computer monitoring systems, without adding any additional facilities. Staff proposes using the information already developed by the J-42 Reinvention Project as the basis of design. The as-built information reliably detailed the existing installation wiring, instrumentation, and processes. Also, standards for computer equipment and construction requirements shall be used and enforced during the life of the project. The proposed contractor, Power& Compression Systems (P&CS) is actually a partnership between three specialty companies. P&CS provide the professional engineering and construction management services. The second company is PC-IC that is providing the computer programming and graphics services, and Cavagnaro's Electric, provide the electrical contractor or installation services. These groups of companies provide unique and specialized services in that the replacement of engine control systems is complex and can directly effect engine performance, emissions, and reliability. A brief resume of each firth includes: Power & Compression Systems is owned by Mr. Tony Giampaolo. He has over 30 years experience in the selection, installation, commissioning, operation, and maintenance of engines and control systems. Earlier, Mr. Giampaolo worked for Cooper-Bessemer Industries as an engineer, and worked on the district's engines at the factory. Today, he specializes in custom control designs for unique applications such as cogeneration and combined cycle plants, parallel operation of reciprocating engines. He has numerous articles published for Oil and Gas Journal, Diesel & Gas Turbine Worldwide, and Western Energy Magazines. He has written the engineering textbook"The Gas Turbine Handbook: Principles and Practices". He is also a part-time instructor for the California State University system. PC-IC is owned by Mr. Paul Crossman. He has over 20 years experience with process control, automation, and telemetry. He has managed SCADA systems, including supervisor of maintenance database, repair, replacement, and upgrade. His company has provided the design and programming for Co-Generation Facilities, bulk truck loading systems, and various other complex computer programming and control systems. He provides technical training classes and automation computer programming. Cavagnaro's Electric is owned by Mr. David Cavagnaro. He has 20 years experience as an electric contractor providing extensive installations for Pismo Beach Water Systems, and various energy related companies in the Central Valley of California. This firm is one of the few Underwriters Laboratory (UL) certified control panel builders in California. Page 4 y Staff held several informal meetings with these companies which, introduced documentation related to Orange County Sanitation District (District) established standards. Discussions included District requirements concerning programming, installation, hardware, and services related with this work. Staff confirmed that the work provided by these companies at other installations met the needs of the owner, and upgrades were completed on time and within budget. No other company known to Staff has this level of experience and proven track record. There are several points in the planned project development that requires Board approval. These future agenda requests include: • Board approval of a contract with CG&S. • Board approval for the purchase of district supplied Modicon equipment with an estimated value of$300,000. • Any changes to the project in the form of Change Order requests similar to any construction project. Staff recommends pursuing an agreement with Power& Compression Systems, to negotiate the contract for installation and programming associated with the Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79. If an agreement can be reached, the proposed contract award shall be brought to the Planning, Design, and Construction Committee for award. ALTERNATIVES The alternative will be to develop the project following the established guidelines. This option increases job cost by $200,000 and adds an additional 12 months to the schedule. CEQA FINDINGS The Automation of Central Generation was included in the 1999 Strategic Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). ATTACHMENTS N/A JRH:sa G1wp.dta�ageada\eoard Agenda Reports\2002 Board Agenda Repods\0402\Item 13(g).JJ9.doc Page 5 PDC COMMITTEE Meer iz Tosa.oroo-. oa/oC/az 04/24/02 AGENDA REPORT Nurnber HeniNumOef Orange County Sanitation Disbtrt FROM: David A. Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator. Sejal Patel, Project Manager SUBJECT: ENGINEERING TRAILER COMPLEX AT PLANT NO. 1, JOB NO. J-90 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Establish a budget of$1,982,000 for the Engineering Trailer Complex at Plant No. 1, Job No. J-90. SUMMARY • The existing Plant No. 1 Construction Management Trailer Complex must be moved to make room for the construction of Job No. P1-76, Trickling Filter Rehabilitation and New Clarifiers. This trailer complex is rundown and not suitable to relocate in another area. • Space will also be provided for the proposed program management consultants who will soon be retained as the Orange County Sanitation District's (District) Capital Improvement Program (CIP) ramps up. • The complex will allow the co-location of engineers, project managers, construction managers, and their support staff. This will pull staff together for the proposed Engineering and Construction Division and Project Management Office. Bringing all the staff together is necessary to facilitate team building, collaboration, efficiency, communication, reporting, and supervision. • This project provides an Engineering Trailer Complex located on the comer of Ward and Garfield,formally known as the "space leasing area". • The complex will provide 12 doublewide modular trailers with 48 offices, 20 cubicles, two printer/Xerox rooms, three conference rooms, and a storage/filing area for 70 employees. • The budget estimate is based on the recently received bids for the Groundwater Replenishment System trailers complex ($730,000, for modular offices for 38 people). • Three other trailer alternatives have been considered. All of the alternatives' locations were near the existing Administration Building. Staffs first choice would be to locate the trailer complex near the Administration Building; however, there is not enough space for the required number of trailers. In addition to not providing sufficient office space, they require the destruction of many trees, severely worsen parking problems, and create interference with traffic flow and operations of other divisions. Page 1 • An off-site office-leasing alternative was also considered and found to be non- desirable based on the cost (higher than the recommended alternative) and concerns regarding safety, security, network capabilities, proximity, and efficiency. • Conceptual design is underway to remodel the existing Administration Building and to add additional office space to accommodate the Information Technology Department currently located in temporary trailers and Engineering staff currently located in field trailers. Once completed, in three to four years, the Engineering staff can be relocated to the new Administration Building complex and the temporary trailers can be disposed of. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Staff is requesting that a project budget for this job totaling $1,982,000 be established. This cost represents less than 0.2% of the current Capital Improvement Program of$1.5 billion. The attached Budget Information Table indicates authorization of$62,000 for staff time to complete an in-house design. 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) This is a new project, and therefore, a budget does not currently exist. Staff is requesting a total of$1,982,000 from the Orange County Sanitation District's (District) Capital Improvement Reserve Funds. This budget request authorizes $62,000 for design staff time. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The District's Capital Improvement Program shows a substantial increase in the number of projects that the Engineering Department will deliver over the next five to ten years. To facilitate that effort, the Engineering Department has been restructured and reorganized and plans to increase its staffing levels through a Program Management Consulting (PMC)firm. The PMC will provide approximately 20 new staff, including Project Managers and Construction Inspectors, will be retained during the next twelve months. There is not enough space to accommodate these new employees within the department. This project will also pull staff together for the proposed Engineering and Construction Division and Project Management Office. The existing Construction Management trailers must be demolished before March 2003. Construction of Job No. P1-76, Trickling Filter Rehabilitation and New Clarifiers necessitates removal of these trailers to install underground utilities. Therefore, Construction Management staff needs a new office facility. Page 2 ALTERNATIVES One alternative is not to proceed with this project. This alternative is not recommended because it will have several impacts: • Construction Management staff will not have offices starting March 2003. • The newly structured Engineering Divisions will remain in separate locations. CEQA FINDINGS The CEQA requirements for this project are being determined. It is likely that a Notice of Exemption will be filed. ATTACHMENTS Budget Information Table SP:jo:sa G1wp.dta\agendaSwrd Agenda Reports\2002 Beard Agenda Reports\0QZItern 13(h).J-90.doc Page 3 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE ENGINEERING TRAILER COMPLEX JOB NO. J-90 ORIGINAL, CURRENT PROPOSED >PROPOSED 'FUNDS THIS - PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECTlTASK AUTHORIZED PROJECTI BUDGET . ''-REVISED - AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION , TOTAL EXPENDITURE E�IPENDEO BUDGET BUDGET ' INCREASE �` BUDGET -TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO'DATE TO bATE(Ye) Project Development $ 12.000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 12.000 Studies/Permitting $ 5.000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Design Staff $ 45,000 $ 45.000 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 Consultant PSA Construction Contract $ 1.675.000 $ 1.675,000 Construction Administration $ 44,000 $ 44,000 Construction Inspection $ 33.0001 $ 33.000 ConOn en $ 168,000 $ 168,000 TOTAL $ - $ - $ 1,982,000 $ 1,982,000 $ 62,000 $ 62,000 G'. rpAtaWM7201paleki-90 Fsgimermp Trailer C plexyl9D Be49el TMe.xlslDisldM l ti Draft MINUTES OF FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING Orange County Sanitation District Wednesday,April 10,2002, 5:00 p.m. A meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on April 10, 2002, at 5:00 p.m., in the Districts Administrative Office. (1) The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: FAHR COMMITTEE MEMBERS: STAFF PRESENT: Directors Present: Blake Anderson, General Manager Brian Brady, Chair Gary Streed, Director of Finance Shawn Boyd, Vice Chair Lisa Tomko, Director of Human Resources Brian Donahue Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager Mark Leyes Mike White, Controller Roy Moore Greg Mathews,Assistant to the General Grace Epperson Manager John M. Gullixson Jeff Reed, Human Resources Manager James W. Silva Penny Kyle, Committee Secretary Norm Eckenrode, Board Chair Shirley McCracken, Board Vice Chair OTHERS PRESENT: Directors Absent: Tom Nixon, General Counsel Don Hughes None Toby Weissert Randy Fuhrman Doug Korthof (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS Randy Fuhrman and Doug Korthoff addressed the Committee about ocean discharge issues and increasing user rates. l Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting ' Page 2 April 10, 2002 (4) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR The Committee Chair had no report. (5) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager, Blake Anderson, reported that the California Coastal Commission voted 6-1 to deny consistency for San Diego's application for a 301(h)waiver, despite tentative decisions of approval by the EPA and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and a recommendation of approval from the Coastal Commission's staff. At this time the technical basis for denial of consistency by the commission is unclear. Mr.Anderson also reported that the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board had unanimously approved San Diego's application for a 301(h)waiver. Mr.Anderson further stated that recently the California Coastal Commission opined that the other three waivers held in California: Goleta, Morro Bay, and OCSD,should also be denied consistency. Nothing has been submitted to the Commission yet for the determination to be made. Members of the commission are of the opinion that the commission will not approve these waivers for consistency,which opens the door for prejudiced opinion by the commission. It was suggested that General Counsel obtain copies of the minutes and draft correspondence to the commission regarding District concerns. General Counsel Tom Nixon suggested the information should be collected and held until the appropriate time before approaching the commission. Mr.Anderson reported on the Maddox Bill,which is under revision by the author to direct that full secondary treatment apply only to the Sanitation District. The bill could move out of committee with a majority vole. A draft letter is being formulated and will be available for Orange County cities to utilize in sending their opposition to the bill to the State. It was reported that SAWPA has now approved paying 76% of the cost of the temporary repairs made to the SARI line. SAWPA has also agreed to pay 50% of the engineering work for the long- term fix that has been billed since November 1,2001. However, invoices prior to that date remain unpaid,which exceed $2 million, and staff believes SAWPA should pay 76% of these costs as well. Staff continues to negotiate with SAWPA but if not successful soon, the matter will need to be turned over to General Counsel. SAWPA has also asked Joe Grindstaff, SAWPA General Manager,to possibly start negotiations for the outright purchase of the SARI line north of the SAVI Ranch to the county line. This would require OCSD to build a parallel line to take the two smaller connections from the city of Yorba Linda westerly on La Palma Avenue until it intercepts the SARI line in order to remove sewage from Orange County from the SARI line within the river. An agreement would also need to be established with SAWPA that would allow the District to close the main shutoff valve within the SAVI Ranch area at the District's discretion if there was a threat or failure in the SARI line. (6) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE The Director of Finance, Gary Streed, reported that the long-term and short-term portfolios performed better than the benchmarks. He stated that the suggestions made by Randy Fuhrnan under public comments would be discussed under Item 11(b). Mr. $treed also discussed changes to begin taking place on the monthly reports for the certificates of participation. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 3 April 10, 2002 (7) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES The Director of Human Resources had no report. (8) REPORT OF THE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager, introduced Jennifer Cabral, the District's public information specialist. Ms. Murphy also reported she has been in communication with staff at Irvine Ranch Water District with regard to the Maddox Bill, who also has a letter that is being drafted. Staff continues to speak with various cities on the 301(h)penult. Staff recently met with the Citizens Advisory Group in Yorba Linda regarding the SARI line to update them on the alternatives review and the completed SARI line maintenance project. (9) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel had no report. (10) CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS Item 10(a)was pulled by Chair Brady to be considered at the May 8, 2002 Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee meeting. b. FAHR02-29: Receive and file Treasurers Report for the month of February 2002. C. FAHR02-30: Receive and file Certificate of Participation (COP) Monthly Report. d. FAHR02-31: Receive and file Employment Status Report as of March 25, 2002. e. FAHR02-32: Receive and file OSHA Incidence Rates and Workers' Compensation Claims and Costs Report. Motion: It was moved,seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended actions for items specified as 10(b)through (a)under Consent Calendar. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR (11) ACTION ITEMS a. FAHR02-33: Recommend to the Board of Directors to approve SAFETY-POL-103, 105, 111, 112 and 403, as provided for in Resolution No. OCSD 02-5, regarding the District's Injury and Illness Prevention Program Policy. Jeff Reed, Human Resources Manager, reported that over the next few months the Board of Directors would need to adopt various policies,when written,with regard to the District's Injury and Illness Prevention Program. Motion: It was moved,seconded and duly carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 4 Apri110,2002 b. FAHR02-34 Recommend to the Board of Directors to approve the sanitary sewer service charges for 2002-03,continuing to collect said charges as a separate line item on the County property tax bill, and adjusting the Class I, Class II and Special Purpose Discharge Permit User rates to reflect the adopted sanitary sewer service charge component rates. Gary Streed, Director of Finance, stated there would be an action item at the Board meeting in May. There is a 45-day notification requirement prior to adopting increased rates. Approximately 400,000 notices were recently mailed to property owners. Motion: It was moved, seconded and duty carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. Directors Gullixson and Leyes opposed. C. FAHR02-35 Recommend to the Board of Directors to adopt Resolution No. OCSD 02- _, directing the County Tax Collector-Treasurer to include sanitary sewer service charges on the 2002-03 property tax bill. Motion: It was moved, seconded and duly carried to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. (12) INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATIONS a. FAHR02-36 2002-03 Joint Operating Budget Update Mike White, Controller, referred to handouts provided to the Directors and reviewed the main driving factors of the proposed budgets. He reported that three budgets are being proposed for the Directors'consideration,which are based on the level of treatment the District determines is appropriate. (13) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY There were none. (14) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none (15) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next FAHR Committee meeting is scheduled for May 8, 2002 at 5 p.m. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 5 April 10, 2002 (16) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (17) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 6:19 p.m. Submitted by: Penny M. FAHR Committee Seciry G\w .dw�genda\FAHR\FAHR2002\2002 Mlnules\00ID02 FAHR MinOes.doc FAHR COMMITTEE Hq`joo2� raa4ozc AGENDA REPORT Item Number ItM NurnWr _ FAHR02-29 14 c Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Michael White, Controller SUBJECT: TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2O02 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of March 2002. SUMMARY Pacific Investment Management Co. (PIMCO), serves as the District's professional external money manager, and Mellon Trust serves as the District's third-party custodian bank for the investment program. Some funds are also deposited in the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund for liquidity. The District's Investment Policy, adopted by the Board, 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-Tenn Operating Monies" portfolios. The District's external money manager is operating in compliance with the requirements of the District's Investment Policy. The District's portfolio contains no reverse repurchase agreements. As shown on page 2 of the attached PIMCO's Performance Monitoring and Reporting Report, the District is a holding a United Airlines (UAL)Asset Backed Security that carried an acceptable credit rating at the time of purchase. Since that time, the rating from Moody's has fallen twice, first from A3 to BA1, and then to BA3. Also, the security rating from Standard & Poors fell once from A-to BBB. Although these ratings are less than what is required at the time of purchase, PIMCO believes, based on the financial strength of UAL and the underlying collateral of the security, that the District would suffer an unwarranted loss if this security was sold. The District's investment policy does not require any action because of"credit watch" notices or the decline in credit standing. PIMCO will continue to monitor the credit very closely. Historical cost and current market values are shown as estimated by both PIMCO and Mellon Trust. The District's portfolios are priced to market("mark-to-market") as of the last day of each reporting period. The slight differences in value are related to minor variations in pricing assumptions by the valuation sources at the estimate date. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY None. G'W OWN a�dAp IW RprM5 2Board Ag RquISDrOSJ 14(c)IREABRRr.dcc Page t BUDGET IMPACT ❑ 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 Schedules are attached summarizing the detail for both the short-term and long-term investment portfolios for the reporting period. In addition, a consolidated report of posted investment portfolio transactions for the month 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 District's custodian bank, is the source for these reports. Transactions that were pending settlement at month end may not be reflected. Also provided is a summary of investment balances and transactions within the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund for the month of March 2002. These reports accurately reflect all District investments and are in compliance with California Government Code Section 53646 and the District's Investment Policy. Sufficient liquidity and anticipated revenues are available to meet budgeted expenditures for the next six months. The table below details the book balances of the District's funds at month-end. A graphical representation of month-end balances is shown by the attached bar chart. Book Balances Estimated Funds/Accounts March 31,2D02 Yield(%) State of Callf. LAIF $ 18,799,348 (1) Union Bank Checking Account 450,689 N/A Union Bank overnight Repurchase Agreement 2,985,000 1.1 PIMCO—Short-term Portfolio 43,141,425 4.4 PIMCO-Long-term Portfolio 351.728.203 4.6 Debt Service Reserves w/rmstees 36,163,004 4.2 Petty Cash 5,000 N/A TOTAL SaR7 077 sso (1) Unavailable as of the date of this report. ATTACHMENTS 1. Monthly Investment Reports 2. Monthly Transaction Report MKIC G i,eeeve,R&WQWI-0 TRF SR"NIM We Page 2 11 111 111 ' I' " ' 11,111���� IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII Illllllllt iliiiiiin • 11 1 1 1 off EM \\\ \\® \o\\ \\\ \\\\■ 1 1/1 1 1 1 r�-c�'� •-vrr crvv� ��w-� -•"�"•'•'• •-•-r�-� !����•���� li���i���i li�i�i�iS �i�i�i�iO !•�i�i�i�i !i�i�i�i�� Boost ', 11 111 11 1 ■i!•i•�•!•!-i ��i�i�i- ������i��-�i�i�!�i�!_!�•ii•!•i_ �%�����■ i•••♦ ♦•••• ••••� 11 1 11 1 1 1 ■Wi i-!i�i��ii�� !••S��i_!!•!•i i•!_IOOi�O�_!4!•�•!•!■ 1 111 1 1 1 ■yi•*•iii_ iiii�i !ii���i�i_���ii�i�1-li�i�iii_����������■ � w.••.w� .tea.• -�.•nne • 1 � 1 1 - 1 1 - • 1 1 >, MBank Orange County Sanitation District Investment Transactions and Balances in the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund March 2002 Par Value Book Value Market Value Rate Yield Balance January 1,2002 $25,699,348 $25,699,348 $25,699,348 (1) (1) Deposits: 321/02 6.500,000 6,500.000 6,500,000 (1) (1) Withdrawals: 03/06/02 (1,500.000) (1,500,000) (1,500,000) (1) (1) 03/13/02 (6,300,000) (6,300,000) (6,300,000) (1) (1) 03/20/02 (2,100,000) (2,100,000) (2,100,000) (1) (1) _ 0327/02 (3,500,000) (3,500,000) (3,500,000) (1) (1) Balance January 31,2002 $18,799,348 $18,799,148 $18,799,348 (1) (1) (1}The March 2002 Rate and Yield were not available as of the date of this report. MONTHLY REPORT ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING& REPORTING ((or the month ended 31 March 2002) Page 1 of 2 Liquid Operating Monies(603) 15.1.1 PORTFOLIO COST AND MARKET VALUE Current Market Value Estimate: • PIMCO $43,608,378 • Mellon $43,598,935 Historical Cost: • PIMCO $43,903,624 • Mellon $43,903,231 15.1.2 MODIFIED DURATION Of Portfolio: 0.27 Of Index: 0.20 15.1.3 I%INTEREST RATE CHANGE Dollar Impact ainAoss of 1%Chen e: $117 743 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: 63% 15.1.6 PORTFOLIO QUALITY Average Portfolio Credit Quality: "AA+" 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 Total Rate of Return(°/a)by Portfolio Index Period: 1 Month: 0.16 0,15 3 Months: 0.53 0.44 12 Months: 3.84 3.11 Year-to-Date: 0.53 0.44 Commentary Interestrotes at he short-end of the yield tune imovased duringthe month(3-monh TAil s rose to 3 bssis points to 1.780/6),or did longer maturitim(30-yes Treasuries rose 38 beds poinito 5.80°6). 10 The Liquid portfolio outperformed he benchmuk by I bssis point dunngthe monk,and by9 bssis points yautodate. PONCO's emphssison higher yieldingsecuridmsuch m commerelel paperandshutt4e m notes enhancedrea ms,while a slightly longa4w4ndex duration detracted from returns;in March- MONTHLY REPORT ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT INVESTMENTMANAGEMENTPROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING& REPORTING (for the month ended 31 March 2002) Page 2 of 2 Compliance Issues: None. Split Rated Securities Still in Compliance: • $85,000 par of Ford Motor Credit note (345397RS4)6.55%coupon,9/10/2002 maturity, representing 0.2%of the portfolio holdings- this security was downgraded on 10/16/2001 by S&P from A to BBB+; the issue now carries a Moody's rating of A3 after a further downgrade (from A2)on 1/16/2002. OCSD's guidelines require a minimum rating of A3 by Moody's or A-by S&P,with at least a BBB rating in the event of a split rating. c:ipmar�mnmwnxinm„yxy„iw¢wroa�mnrcm MONTHLY REPORT ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING& REPORTING ((or the month ended 31 March 2002) Page I oft Long-Tenn Operating Monies(203) 15.1.1 PORTFOLIO COST AND MARKET VALUE Current Market Value Estimate: PIMCO $355,764,138 • Mellon $355,712,264 Historical Cost: • PIMCO $352,991,398 • Mellon $352,993,929 15.1.2 MODIFIED DURATION Of Portfolio: 2.10 Of Index: 2.46 15.1.3 1%INTEREST RATE CHANGE Dollar Impact aintloss of 1%change: $7 506 623 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: 36% 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" No' 15.1.9 PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE Total Rate of Return(%)by Portfolio Index Period: -0.76 -I.01 1 Month:3 Months: 0.43 -0.11 12 Months: 4.91 5.52 Year-to-Date: 0.43 -0.II • Threeononth yields increased duringthe month(90day T-Bills rase 3 basis points to 1.78%)u did longer metwilies(5-year Tn wnsu Notesmse 65 buts points to 4.84%). • The Lung-Term portfolio oulperfarmed the benchmark by 25 basis points for the month,andby 54 buts points for the year-t"Me. • Puinmingthe patfdio with below-index duration by PIMCO was prelim for performance as yields rose across all maturities. • Cum positimingwas slightly positive for performance,and a below-Lndexexpmtue m immediate melurhtesconhibutedlo returns as iatetmedialeyidds rose the most. • A<Treened.lagged the breeder mariret,an underweight allocation was posidw. • Holdings of mmtpgebaclxd securities improved perfarmuw as mortgages were the but performing bond segment for the momh. M underweight allocation to the eorporales detracted goon returns as;this solar oulperfomted Tretsudes. MONTHLY REPORT ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING& REPORTING (/or the month ended 31 March 2002) Page 2 of 2 -Compliance Issues: $1,600,000 par of United Airlines Pass-Through 2001-I-C(909317BC2),6.831%coupon,9/I/2008 maturity,representing 0.4%of the portfolio holdings-this security was purchased on 8/10/2001;it was subsequently downgraded by Moody's from A3 to BA I (on 9/182001)and S&P from A-to BBB(on 9/20/2001). The security was further downgraded by Moody's from BAl to BA3 on 12212001. The District's investment policy requires a minimum rating of A3 by Moody's or A-by S&P,with at least a BBB rating in the event of a split. With respect to the UAL holding,PIMCO's recommendation for the issue has not changed. In their opinion,the spread,collateral,and issuer liquidity all point to continuing to hold the security. The following points provide basis for their recommendation: •foremost,PIMCO doesn't believe that UAL is going bankrupt. Almost all major US airlines have sufficient liquidity and unencumbered assets to survive today's bleak industry conditions. UAL is the second largest carrier in the world,and we believe that the company(and the industry)will survive. •secondly,the collateral is good(very young planes,medium to high aircraft diversification,loan-to-value ratio is 60-75%,etc.). •PIMCO believes liquidation values,even under the most onerous assumptions,are much higher than reflected in current market prices. Current pricing levels overstate the risks. •If the security was sold at the lowest price currently available(67.15 per IDC),the portfolio would realize a loss of$525,600(approximately 15 basis points given the total portfolio value). However,as detailed above,PIMCO believes the fair market value of the issue is much higher than currently reflected in the market. This is a conservative loss estimate. PIMCO will continue to monitor the credit very closely. If anything changes that would prompt them to revise their recommendation on the inclusion of the security within the portfolio,they will let us know to take appropriate action. Split Rated Securities Still In Compliance: •$6,000,000 par of Daimler Chrysler securities(I7120QE8 and 233835AM9),with$4,500,000 maturing on December 2002 and the remaining$1.5 million maturing on August 2002,represents 1.7%of the portfolio holdings. The securities were downgraded on 10/312001 by S&P from A-to BBB+; the securities now carry a Moody's rating of A3. OCSD's guidelines require a minimum rating of A3 by Moody's or A-by S&P,with at least a BBB rating in the event of a split rating. •$9,000,000 par of Ford Motor Credit securities(345397GV9,345397RV7,345397513,345397SR5),maturing at various dates in 2003,2004,and 2005, represents 2.6%of the portfolio holdings. The securities were downgraded on 1 011 62 0 0 1 by S&P from A to BBB+;the securities now carry a Moody's rating of A3 after a further downgrade(from A2)on 1/162002. OCSD's guidelines require a minimum rating of A3 by Moody's or A-by S&P,with at least a BBB rating in the event of a split rating. •$11,750,000 par of General Motors Acceptance Corp securities(370425QV 5,37042WE80,37042 WZKO),maturing in 2003,represents 3.3%of the portfolio holdings. The securities were downgraded on 10/162001 by S&P from A to BBB+;the securities continue to carry a Moody's rating of A2. OCSD's guidelines require a minimum rating of A3 by Moody's or A-by S&P,with at least a BBB rating in the event of a split rating. 6:Iwp.draV7n12201wh11elTressury M9WkL- p800-02-03.RPT.doc a Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGEa I NET ASSET SECTOR SUMMARY BASE: USD OCSF0751JI02 31-MAR-2002 FINAL WUlD OPER-PIMCO %OF UNREALIZED PORTFOLIO DISTRIBUTION COST MARKET VALUE TOTAL GAINILOSS CASH&CASH EQUIVALENTS UNITED STATES COMMERCIAL PAPER-DISCOUNT 6,302,506.33 6,302,%6.33 14.46% 0.00 U.S.GOVERNMENTS-LESS THN IYR 549,582.04 549,935.94 1.26% 253.90 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE-LESS 7,183,268.03 7,183,269.03 16.48% 0.00 FNMA ISSUES-LESS THAN IYR 1,856,184.53 1,856,194.53 4.26% 0.00 FED HM LOAN BNK-LESS THAN IYR 1,196,964.45 1,196,864.45 2.75% 0.00 MUTUAL FUNDS 1,882,699.39 1,882,699.39 4.32% 0.00 TOTAL UNITED STATES 18,971,103.76 18,971,357.66 43.51% 253.90 TOTAL CASH&CASH EQUIVALENTS 18,971,103.76 18,97057.66 43.51% 29390 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES UNITED STATES U.S.GOVERNMENTS 9,677,909.25 9,603,279.00 22.03% -74,631.25 U.S.AGENCIES 1,562,136.19 1,551,267.25 3.56% -10.968.94 OTHER GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS 49,953.13 49,992.00 0.11% 38.87 BANKING&FINANCE 8,191,048.44 8,042,207.18 18.45% -148,841.26 INDUSTRIAL 3,272,067.00 3,231,092.45 7.41% 40,974.55 UTILITY-ELECTRIC 948,274.40 929,705.80 2.13% -18,568.60 UTILITY-GAS 773,227.50 762,525.00 1.75% -10,702.50 TOTAL UNITED STATES 24,474,615.91 24,170,067.68 55.44% -304,548.23 TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 24,474,615.91 24,170,067.68 55.44% -M,54833 OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS PAYABLES/RECEIVABLES 457,511.30 457,511.30 1.05% 0.00 TOTAL 457511.30 457,511.30 1.05% 0.00 TOTAL OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS 457,51130 457,51130 1.05% 0.00 NET PORTFOLIO ASSETS 43903,210.97 43,598036.64 100.00% -304,294.33 09-Ap,2002 9.45:23 Executive Workbeech Q Mellon Trust-Sam Ie Report PAGE I BASE: USD NET ASSET SECTOR SUMMARY OCSF07522202 31-MAR-2002 FINAL LONG TERMOPER-PIMCO %OF UNREALIZED PORTFOLIO DISTRIBUTION COST MARKET VALUE TOTAL GAIN/LOSS CASH&CASH EQUIVALENTS ' CASH 47,145.28 47,145.28 -0.01% 0.00 RECEIVABLES 5,989,108.25 5,999,109.25 1.68% 0.00 PAYA13LES 48,238,093.75 48,238,093.75 -13.56% 0.00 TOTAL 42,296,130.78 42,296,130.78 -11.891y. 0.00 UNITED STATES - FEDERAL HONE LOAN MORTGAGE-LESS 67,986,248.89 67,986,248.89 19.11% 0.00 MUTUALFUNDS 858;764.47 858,764.47 0.24% 0.00 TOTAL UNITED STATES 68,845,013.36 68,845,013.36 19.35% 0.00 TOTAL CASH&CASH EQUIVALENTS 26,548,882.58 26,548,882.58 7.46% 0.00 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES UNITED STATES U.S.GOVERNMENTS 84,909,026.51 83,653,853.99 23.52% -1,255,172.52 INFLATION INDEXED SECURITIES 29,171,113.29 32,603,225.12 9.17% 3,432,111.83 U.S.AGENCIES 78,562,307.30 78,896,263.66 22.18% 333,956.36 GNMA SINGLE FAMILY POOLS 6,466,007.93 6,607,630.70 1.86% 141,622.72 GNMA MULTI FAMILY POOLS 7,905,549.79 8,021,215.08 2.25% 115,665.29 FHLMC POOLS 2,963,935.19 2,950,947.12 0.83% -12,989.07 FHLMC MULTICLASS 3,970,553.08 3,960,118.92 1.11% -10,434.16 FNMA POOLS 5,958,750.00 5,955,937.80 1.67% .2,812.20 COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGATI 5,454,157.08 5,230,336.50 1.47% -223,820.58 ABS:CAR LOAN 513,906.25 509,685.00 0.14% -4,221.25 BANKING&FINANCE 39,180,009.50 39,301,700.00 11.05% 121,690.50 INDUSTRIAL 27,986,405.00 27,951,572.00 7.86% -34,833.00 UTILITY-ELECTRIC 14,622,010.00 14,716,585.00 4.141/6 94,575.00 UTILITY-GAS 7,300,000.00 7,300,000.00 2.05% 0.00 UTILITY-TELEPHONE 7,497,255.00 7,520,250.00 2.11% 22,995.00 TOTAL UNITED STATES 322,460,995.97 325,179,320.99 91.42% 2,718,334.92 TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 322,460,985.97 325,179,320.99 91.42% 2,718,334.92 09-Apr-2001 9:47.54 ErecutNe Wwkbmch Q Mellon Trust-Sample Re rt PAGE 2 BASE U9D NET ASSET SECTOR SUMMARY OCSF07522202 31-MAR-2002 FINAL LONG TERMOPER-PTMCO %OF UNREALIZED PORTFOLIO DISTRIBUTION COST MARKET VALUE TOTAL GAIN/LOSS OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS PAYABLESIRECEIVABLES 3,984,060.55 3,984,060.55 1.12% 0.00 TOTAL 3,984,060.55 3,984,060.55 1.12% 0.00 TOTAL OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS 3,994,060.55 3,994,060.55 1.12% 0.00 NET PORTFOLIO ASSETS 352,993,929.10 355,712,264.02 100.00% 2,71V34.92 09-Apr-2002 9:47..-54 areculwe Wmkh n h . YLDANAL YIEID ANALYSIS PAGE t 1 005703511102 2002/03/31 RVN DATE 04/04/02 DISTRICTt LIQUID OPMATIM ROE TIM t 10.51.10 PAR VALVE YEN AT CORRBRT MOODY MARMT TOTAL COST/ 8 TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOR YIELD B-P PRICE NARNRT VALUE B TOTAL ----------------- ---------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ---------- CABS A CASE EQOIVALERTE 350,000.00 STUDENT LN MARR8TIM0 ABBE .000 1.961 P-1 100.000 349,366.10 1.86 96383TM3 VAN AT 06/20/2002 DD 12/20/01 A-1+ 350,000.00 .S1 200,000.00 ETODENT LM MIN ANBN moon ERE .000 1.083 P-1 99.918 199,B35.96 1.05 86387MS VAR. AT 07/10/2002 DO O1/17/02 A-1+ 199,835.94 .66 1,882,699.36 DREYFUS TREASURY CASE SORT .000 1.373 AM 100.000 1,092,690.38 9.92 996005262 AAA 1,882,698.36 6.36 4,262,000.00 FEDERAL SOM LN MTO CORP DISC 1.353 .000 P-1 99.801 6,253,505.60 22.62 313397VAS MAT 04/02/2002 A-3+ 4,253,505.60 9.86 200,000.00 FEDERAL MAN CR OR CONE SYSTEM 1.792 .000 P-1 99.9U1 199,801.11 1.05 313313M MT 04/03/2001 A-1+ 199,001.11 .66 200,000.00 FEDERAL ROM LN BE CONS DISC N 1.792 .000 P-1 99.816 199,751.39 1.05 313385WO MT 04/00/2002 A-1+ 199,751.39 .66 1,500,000.00 SHERICAN BE CR CP DISC I.798 .000 11.552 1,493,287.50 3.83 025SIMR9 04/25/2002 1,493,287.50 3.66 1,700,000.00 MACH 6 INC DISC 1.906 .000 99.755 1,695,035.00 0.93 58933GE07 O3/08/2002 1,695,035.00 3.93 2,000,000.00 FEDERAL ROM IN MG COM DISC 1.805 .000 P-1 99.730 1,994,600.00 10.51 313397MI MT 05/14/2002 A-1+ 1,994,600.00 6.62 628,009.00 COCA COLA CO DISC 1.007 .000 P-1 99.600 $25,409.00 3.29 19121ER02 OS/26/2002 625,488.00 1.65 500,000.00 PEDBRAL EOM LN M CONE DISC 1.926 .000 P-1 99.283 490,913.06 2.62 313385M9 MT 05/01/2002 A-1+ 498,913.06 1.16 1,500,000.00 xm F FO008 In DISC 1.826 .000 99.773 1,496,587.50 3.00 5001M1DS9 04/26/2002 1,496,597.50 3.63 55,000.00 FEDERAL ROM LM MTO CORD DISC 1.063 .000 P-1 99.311 54,621.26 .28 313397"1 MT 04/25/2002 A-1+ 54,621.26 .13 605,000.00 FBD EOM LN M1O COUP DIM ST6 1.962 .000 P-1 99.338 680,I60.06 3.58 3133972DO MT O7/08/2002 A-1+ 680060.06 1.59 YLDRNRL YIELD ADALYOIS PAGE t 2 O OM7521102 2002/03/31 ROE DATE 04/04/02 DI80RIM, LIQUID OPERATION ROD TIES t 10.51.10 PAR VALUE I= AT CURRENT ROOM NARMT TOTAL COOT/ 8 TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOR YIELD B-P PRIM RARMT VALUE 8 TMAL ----------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ---------- 1,972,000.00 FEDERAL Mm NTO "SO DISCOUNT 2.073 .000 P-1 99.155 1,056,104.53 9.7E 313509MS RAT O9/14/2002 A-1+ 1,856,184.53 4.30 500,000.00 MMRAL Now LN M CORD DISC N 2.09E .000 P-1 99.640 498,200.00 2.62 3133851M2 RAT 05/16/2002 A-14 490,200.00 1.15 1,000,000.00 DECIDE DICKINSON! DISC 2.119 .000 P-1 99.131 991,308.33 5.22 075068MI 04/25/2002 991,308.33 2.30 __�__ -- ----------------- ___------ TOTAL 1.CABS 6 CASE BUD 430 .370 18,971,103.76 100.00 18,971,357.66 43.94 FIRED INCRR SECURITIES 125,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL RID ABBE HEN .000 2.100 AAA 100.046 124,960.94 .51 3136POTN6 VRA RT 02/21/2003 DO 09/21/01 AAA 125,057.50 .29 400,000.00 LEMRA ENDS DUN #TR 00343 .000 2.623 A2 100.156 400,988.00 1.65 52517PQG9 VAR RT 07/15/2002 DD 07/12/99 A 400,624.00 .93 50,000.00 STUDENT I.N N YTIM ME" an .000 1.914 AAA 99.984 49,953.13 .20 86387TM3 VAR RT O0/15/2002 DO 02/21/02 AAA 49,992.00 .12 3,400,000.00 MMRAL NAIL NTN AEON ME 1.640 6.554 AAA 100.547 3,459,370.00 14.14 31364CH79 6.590% 05/22/2002 DO 05/21/97 AAA 3,410,598.00 7.92 200,000.00 IEDBRAL EONS IN NTG CRAP DEM 1.908 5.479 AAA 100.375 201,814.00 .93 3134A3M8 5.500E 05/15/2002 DD 05/14/99 AAA 200,750.00 .47 30,000.00 "OEM SONR IN ME CORE BD 1.949 5.636 AM 100.422 30,409.90 .12 3133MVT8 5.660% 05/21/2002 DD OS/21/99 AAA 30,126.60 .07 50,UOO.00 MDERAL DOER I.D BR CURB DUR 1.963 5.704 ARA 100.797 50,834.50 .20 3133H8XL3 5.830% 06/14/2002 DD O6/14/99 AAA 50,398.50 .12 200,000.00 PED PARE CR BE CORE BYE NOW 2.118 4.772 AAA 101.016 203,994.00 .93 31331RD44 4.8201 10/07/2002 DD 10/07/90 AAA 202,032.00 .47 900,000.00 VIROIRIA BLOC 6 PNR 18T 6 REP 2.329 7.298 A2 101.055 927,981.00 3.76 927004CD4 7.375% 07/01/2002 DD 07/14/92 A 909,495.00 2.11 YLDMAL YIELD AKRLYSIS PAGE e 3 OCSF0I511102 2002/03/31 ROE DATE , 04/04/02 DISTRICT, LIQUID OPERATING RUN TIM t 10.51.10 PM VALUE - YTM AT CURRENT MOODY NARRET TOTAL COST/ 8 TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION NOOK YIELD S-P PRICE RAREST VALUE 1 TOTAL _________________ _____________________________ _______ _______ _______ ________ ____------ __________ 6,000,000.00 U 6 TREASURY NOT68 2.522 6.063 AM 103.0I8 6,219,531.25 25.58 912827J98 06.250E 02/15/2003 DD 02/15/93 AAA 6,194,600.00 14.34 25,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL HIS USE MIN 2.529 6.652 AAA LOO.729 25,647.23 .10 31364C092 6.700% 06/04/2002 DD 06/04/97 AM 25,179.75 .06 80,000.00 FEDERAL SAIL NTO ASSN SEE 2.562 2.234 AAA 99.825 79,B00.00 .33 3136F1AM0 2.270% 12/27/2002 DO 12/27/01 AAA 79,060.00 .19 50,000.00 FEDERAL SOME IS WE CORE BDS 2.538 6.275 AM 100.312 50,932.50 .20 3133MA2E1 6.295E 04/25/2002 DD 10/25/99 AM 30,156.00 .12 250,000.00 DONALOSON LUFRIN 4TR 00039E 2.614 6.066 AA3 102.968 257,995.00 1.06 25766CM6 7.070% 12/13/2002 DD 12/13/99 M- 257,420.00 .60 193,000.00 PITHEY HOVER CR COST ET 2.723 8.452 AA3 104.123 203,794.49 .83 724477M0 8.000% 02/15/2003 DD D2/12/91 M 200,957.39 .47 20,000.00 FRDBRAL NONE IS BE CORE BDS 2.726 5.432 AAA 100.328 20,302.40 .08 3133NFRB2 5.450E OS/10/2002 DD 05/10/99 AM 20,065.60 .05 20,000.00 FEDERAL NONE I RTI4 COUP DEB 2.730 6.816 ANN 100.203 20,402.20 .OB 3134AIMO 6.830E 04/16/2002 DD 04/16/97 AAA 20,040.60 .05 25,000.00 FEDERAL NONE IN BE COSS BDS 2.032 6.B23 AM 100.030 25,468.DC .1D 3133MOSK5 6.825E 04/04/2002 DD 04/04/97 AAA 25,007.50 .06 555,000.00 HOUSEHOLD FIN CORP HT 2.765 6.659 A2 100.615 568,435.40 2.31 441812M9 6.700% 06/15/2002 DD 06/08/95 A 558,413.25 1.29 150,000.00 MENIM LYNCB 3.103 6.659 M3 103.245 155,247.00 .64 59018BEP9 6.8751 03/01/2003 M- 154,867.50 .36 545,000.00 McMILL LYNCH&CO MTR 4TR 00012 3.141 7.155 M3 101.334 SS8,122.50 2.2E 59018YM3 3.250% 07/26/2002 DD 07/26/00 M- 552,270.30 1.28 200,000.00 DEAN WITTER DISCOVER 6 CO 3.144 6.659 M3 103.245 206,866.00 .95 24240VACS 6.875% 03/01/2003 M- 206,490.00 .48 200,000.00 MAL MART Sm"S INC MI 3.155 6.913 M2 100.910 206,194.00 .83 931142303 6.815E 08/01/2002 DD 08/01/00 M 201,820.00 .43 145,000.00 DONALDSOS LUPKIF JEKMTT 3.162 5.875 M3 100.000 147,009.70 .59 253661M1 5.8351 04/01/2002 DD 03/23/99 A- 145,000.00 .34 TEMPEL YIELD ARALYSIS PARR t 4 DCBF07511102 2002/03/31 RUR DATE t 04/04/02 DISTRICTS LIQUID OPERATING RUR TIM t 10.51.10 PM VALUE YTN AT CURRENT EOODY RABBET TOTAL COST/ 8 TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOR YIELD S-P PRICE MARKET VALUE A TOTAL ----------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ---------- 325,000.00 EN RICAN MY PIN HER /TR 00324 3.278 6.493 Al 100.972 333,050.25 1.35 02635PPR9 6.550% 06/24/2002 DD 06/24/99 A+ 327,834.00 .76 575,000.00 PSILIP EORRIS COB BE 3.342 7.017 A2 101.535 592,927.30 2.41 718154M 7.12SB 08/15/2002 DD 08/15/92 A- 583,926.25 1.35 500,000.00 FEDERAL RUE: LE BE CORE BDS 3.630 4.499 AAA 100.030 502,690.00 2.06 3133RE6R7 4.500E 04/04/2002 DD 04/04/01 AAA 500,150.00 1.16 20,000.00 NIAGARA (WORM PNR CORP ST 3.723 5.914 BRA2 101.054 20,293.40 .08 653522CQ3 5.875E 09/01/2002 DD 09/01/54 A+ 20,210.00 .05 1,100,000.00 FIRST UN CORP SUB RT 3.801 8.014 A2 101.387 1,139,714.00 4.61 337358AR7 9.125% 06/24/2002 DD 06/24/92 A- 3,115,257.00 2.59 605,000.00 CIT GROUP SIDES INC 3.006 6.383 A2 99.869 619,520.00 2.49 125569DPS 6.375% 00/01/2002 DD 07/28/97 A- 604,207.45 1.40 200,000.00 FRDRRAL RAIL ETO RUSH ME 3.809 6.165 ARE. 101.156 204,606.00 .03 31364C3N6 6.240% 07/29/2002 DD 07/29/97 AAA 202,312.00 .47 600,000.00 BEAR STBARNB COB RTN 1 M00405 3.B53 5.690 A2 101.050 620,968.00 2.50 073928SN4 5.7504 08/12/2002 DD 02/12/01 A 606,300.00 1.42 165,000.00 RORGAN STANLEY DEAR HITTER 4.042 6.290 RA3 101.221 169,652.05 .69 617446CQO 6.3756 09/01/2002 DD 07/28/97 RA- 167,014.65 .39 20,000.00 FEDERAL ROVE LN BR CURB BDS 4.273 5.091 AAA 100.656 20,272.60 .08 3133E9386 5.9209 06/14/2002 DD 06/14/99 AAA 20,131.20 .05 1,180,000.00 WELLS FARM 6 CO SUB HT 4.295 8.317 AA3 100.690 1,224,286.70 4.91 949740W5 8.375% 05/15/2002 DD 05/26/52 A 1,188,236.40 2.75 05,000.00 FORD ETR CR CO RTS 4.319 6.493 A3 100.979 06,759.50 .3S 345397RS4 6.5501 09/10/2002 DD 09/10/97 888+ 03,747.15 .20 1,200,000.00 GOLDEN NEST FINL COUP DEL SOR 4.332 0.358 A2 100.203 1,237,614.00 4.97 381317AF3 8.3758 04/15/2002 DD 04/30/92 A- 1,202,436.00 2.79 $0,000.00 CRABR RANRAT2AN COMP RBN am 4.309 0.583 Al 100.491 61,645.80 .24 1616IABB7 8.625% 05/01/2002 DD 05/01/92 A+ 60,294.60 .14 750,000.00 PUBLIC 8VC ELSC CAS /TR 00000 4.398 7.072 A3 101.670 773,227.50 3.15 74456QA69 7.900% 09/06/2002 DD 05/06/00 A- 762,525.00 1.77 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PADS 5 WOM7511102 2002/03/31 RUN DATR 1 04/04/02 DISTRICTI LIQUID OPERATING RUN TINS t 10.51.10 PAR VALUE YIN AT CURMIT NODDY MAE3ST TOTAL COST/ 4 TYPE SECURITY ID BECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOR YIELD S-P PRICE MUST VALUE 4 TOTAL 51,000.00 MRIDIAR BMCORP INC BUR DEB 4.410 7.748 A2 101.434 52,596.30 .21 589580AB5 7.075% 07/15/2002 DD 07/15/92 A- 51,833.34 .12 155,000.00 BANK ONS CORP NT 4.527 6.318 AA3 101.293 157,743.75 .64 D6423MC7 6.4001 00/01/2002 DD 07/22/99 A 157,004.15 .36 500.D00.00 GTE CORD mm TE 00001 4.609 6.472 A2 101.355 508)080.00 2.09 36232HAA4 6.560% 08/14/2002 DD 00/14/97 A 506.775.00 1.17 1,015,000.00 NRSTINGBOUEE SLEC CORD NT 4.673 8.282 A3 101.120 1,051,302.70 4.24 960402APD 8.375% 06/15/2002 DD 06/15/92 A- 1,026,449.20 2.38 900,000.00 T63AC0 CAP INC NTH =57 5.026 7.676 Al 101.358 023,563.00 3.77 BB160I.CJ3 7.7801 07/01/02 DD 06/30/92 AI 912,222.00 2.11 _____ _______ ____--_ ______ TOTAL ?IUD INCOM SECURITIES 2.454 6.305 24.474.Q3.91 100.OD 24,170,067.60 56.0E TOTAL 2.215 4.922 43,445,719.67 100.00 43,141,425.34 300.00 YLDARAL YIELD ANALYSIS PASS 1 6 OCSF07522202 2002/03/31 RON DATE , 04/04/02 DISTRICT' 1,0110-TERM OPERATING RUN TINE 1 10.51.10 PAN VALUE ITS AT CURRENT ROODY MEANT TOTAL COST/ B up6 SECURITY ID BRCURITY DESCRIPTION NOON YIELD S-P PRICE MEANT VALUE 4 TOTAL _________________ ------- ------- ------- -------- _________- CASE 6 CABS EQUIVALENTS 68,OOO,OOO.00 FEDERAL NONE LN ST7 COMP DISC .000 .000 P-1 99.900 67,966,240.89 90.75 313397U82 ME 04/01/2002 A-1+ 67,906,249.89 17.25 850,764.47 DRRYFUS TREASURY CASH RGHT .000 1.773 RRA 100.000 858,764.47 1.24 996085247 AAA 858,764.47 .22 ------- _-_--�_ _________________ --------- TOTAL CASH 6 CASH EQUIVALENTS .000 .011 6B,845,013.36 100.00 68,045,013.36 17.47 PIANO INCURS SECURITIES 6,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PON TOM BE MG .000 6.044 AAA 99.266 51938,750.00 1.03 OIF060451 6.000E 05/01/2017 DO 05/02/01 AAA 5,955,937.00 1.51 10,000,000.00 COMMIT TO FOR FM A BY HT0 .000 6.197 AAA 96.928 9,037,500.00 2.97 OIF060642 6.000% 04/01/2032 DO 04/01/02 AAA 9,682,812.50 2.46 10,500,000.00 COMMIT TD FOR RNRA OF ME .000 6.524 AAA 15.625 10,450,701.25 3.21 OIN062649 6.5001 04/15/2032 DO 04/01/02 AAA 10,460,625.00 2.65 14,000,000.00 COMMIT TO FOR OEM By HIS .000 7.606 AAA 105.155 14,602,500.00 4.52 OLM0B0641 0.0006 04/15/2032 DO 04/01/02 AAA 14,721,700.00 3.74 7,500,000.00 REBROS6R BUSCH CON INC HT .000 6.698 Al 100.772 7,646,250.00 2.32 035229AY9 6.150% 06/01/200S DD 06/05/15 A+ 7,557,90O.DO 1.92 900,000.00 OEM STEARNS HER / IN 00459 .000 2.299 A2 100.046 099,406.00 .27 073928VC4 PLTG RT 12/01/2003 DD O8/17/01 A 900,414.00 .23 1,200,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR SAMA II JSSOS .000 7.239 AAA 103.609 1,238,250.00 .38 218072643 7.5001 04/20/2032 DO 04/O1/02 BAR 1,243,312.56 .32 4,500,000.00 DAIRLER CHRYBLBR RA CORD BE .000 2.760 A3 100.000 4,491,345.00 1.38 233835AN9 FLTO AT 12/16/2002 DO 12/15/00 A+ 4,500,000.00 1.14 $39,472.93 DISTRIBPIION FIRL 99-1 CL A4 .000 5.697 102.510 857,049.40 .20 2547SMOG 5.040E 10/15/2011 DO 03/1B/99 860,610.96 .22 469,177.60 FBI= GROUP 104-0353 .000 7.336 AAA 102.230 401,033.65 .14 3128DSRA2 7.500E 10/O1/2004 DO 03/01/99 AAA 479,640.26 .12 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAD t 3 MBF07522202 2002/03/31 RON DATE , 04/04/02 DISTRICT, LONG-TERN (INTENTION ROD TIRE , 10.51.10 PM VALUE YTN AT CURRENT MOODY RAREST TOTAL COST/ 8 TYPE 8ECO1ITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOS YIELD 8-P PRICE HAUNT VALOR B TOTRL ----------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ ---------- 7,500,000.00 FEDERAL ED= W M CONE BONS .000 6.669 AM 106.044 7,997,625.00 2.46 3133MM7 7.125% 02/15/2005 DD 02/08/00 AAA 8,013,300.00 2.03 158,493.05 PXLHC GROUP /78-6064 .000 6.215 AAA 102.156 154,633.70 .04 31348SNA3 6.384E 01/01/2028 DD 12/01/97 AAA 161,914.25 .04 21,350,000.00 PBOBRAL NAIL STO MEN DEW .000 5.221 AAA 100.562 11,521,271.50 3.50 31359NOX2 5.250E 06/15/2006 DD 06/22/01 AAA 11,413,787.00 2.90 667,720.96 DM II POOL 40000395 .000 5.456 AAA 100.813 651,669.74 .20 36225CNN4 VAR RT 04/20/2030 DO 04/02/00 AAA 673,149.53 .13 5,731,189.82 DNA II POOL 406040M .000 5.456 AAA 100.013 5,672,902.42 1.33 3622SCN28 6.500E 05/20/2030 DO 05/01/00 AAA 5,377,784.39 1.43 4,000,000.00 DDERAi, USE ACCBP NTN 40D6I5 .000 2.239 A2 98.6E3 3,998,440.00 1.21 37042MOO PLTN RT 00/04/2003 DD 08/03/01 BBB+ 3,947,400.00 1.00 4,000,000.00 NABISCO INC HIS .000 6.046 A2 101.304 4,001,440.00 1.24 629523CM VAR RT 02/01/2033 DD 01/22/98 A 4,052,160.00 1.03 5,000,000.00 PEILIP NORRIS COB INC STS .000 7.106 A2 105.545 5,263,000.00 1.12 710154CBB 7.5001 04/01/2004 DO 04/01/97 A- 5,231,250.00 1.34 500,000.00 PURIM AUTO TR 99-3 CL A-4 .000 6.308 AAA 101.937 513,906.25 .15 14046RYW6 6.430E 03/08/2004 DO 06/21/99 509,605.00 .13 4,029,964.01 SM GTD DID PARTS 2001-20C 1 .000 6.333 AAA 100.050 4,029,964.01 1.23 83162CWO 6.340% 03/01/2021 AM 4*031F978.99 1.02 2,991,103.6E SM GTD PARM CITE ODIC-PS 01 .000 6.527 AAA 101.730 2,997,107.68 .93 831641DD4 6.640% 02/10/2011 UP 02/21/01 3,048,957.64 .11 1,600,000.00 UNITED AIRLA PABSTEO 01-1 C .000 8.275 M3 02.548 1,600,000.00 .40 909317=2 6.831E 09/01/2008 DD 08/22/01 A- 1,320,766.00 .34 6,154,960.00 OS TUMMY INFLATION INDEX NT ADS 3.733 AM 103.812 6,261,165.72 1.96 9126274Y5 3.835E 01/15/2009 DD 01/15/99 AM 6,389,403.26 1.62 74,500,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES .000 6.316 AM 106.E75 00,979,062.50 24.4E 9128226D9 06.750% OS/IS/2005 DD 05/15/00 AAA 79,621,875.00 20.21 3,500,000.00 VIRGINIA. ELSC 6 PM 01 SER A .000 5.755 A3 99.915 3,487,680.00 1.07 927804BRO 5.350% 03/31/2006 DD 03/27/01 A- 3,497,025.00 .09 YLDANAL HIM ANALYSIe PAGE e OCSPO7522202 2002/03/31 RUN DATE 04/04/02 DISTRICT, 2003-TERN OPERATING RUN TINE t 10.51.10 PAR VALUE FIN AT CURRENT MOODY MAA33T TOTAL COST/ 8 TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION RODE YIRLD S-P PRICE NAMET VALUE 6 TOTAL _________________ _____________________________ _______ _______ _______ ________ __________ 25,707,560.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDBY UT 3.917 3.310 AAA 101.969 22,909,927.57 0.06 9126272N3 3.375E 01/15/2007 DD 01/15/97 AAA 26,213,741.86 6.65 1,400,000.00 SEARS; ROEEOCE Am" CORP MTN 5.261 6.359 A3 202.043 1,430,920.00 .44 81240WN6 6.540% 02/20/2003 DO 02/20/97 A- 1,439,802.00 .37 3,950,000.00 OMAC STU 5.752 2.050 A2 99.066 3,918,768.50 1.19 37042SOVS VAR AT 00/18/2003 DD 09/17/98 A 3,973,607.00 .98 3,000,000.00 BEARS R06BUCE ACCBP CORP STE 5.949 6.554 A3 101.156 3,073,170.00 .93 81240QJAI 6.630% 07/09/2002 DD 07/09/97 A- 3,034,600.00 .77 2,000,000.00 SENSORS IR UP CORP GLOBAL HT 5.801 2.009 Al 99.573 1,992,800.00 .61 06636SDN4 PLTG AT OS/11/2003 DD 05/11/98 AA- 11991,460.00 .51 15,500,000.00 PEDERAL NATL ME ASSN DOES 5.967 6.661 AAA 106.969 16,154,410.00 5.09 31359NPB1 7.225% 02/15/2005 DD 02/14/00 AAA 16,580,195.00 4.21 7,500,000.00 BBLL60UTR TLLBCONMUNICATIONS 6.010 5.904 AEI 100.270 7,497,255.00 2.31 075067MS VAR AT 06/15/2002 DD 06/15/98 AAA 7,520,250.00 1.91 3,000,000.00 BALTIMORB SAS 6 EI43C CO 6.011 6.614 A2 202.062 3,038,250.00 .94 059165DN7 6.7506 22/15/2002 DD 12/20/00 A+ 3,061,860.00 .70 1,500,000.00 CBRYSLBR PINL LLC ME 4TA00615 6.154 2.049 A3 99.640 1,499,415.00 .45 171200EDO 9LTO AT 00/OB/2002 DD 04/OB/98 A 1,494,600.00 .3B 3,000,000.00 CONSOLIDATED EDISON N Y WAS 6.271 2.040 Al 100.024 2,994,300.00 .92 209111CU5 VAR RT 06/15/2002 DD 06/20/97 A+ 3,000,720.00 .76 3,900,000.00 DEDERAL STAN ACCEF FrE 00562 6.303 2.067 A2 99.156 3,793,950.00 1.15 37042MKO PLIG AT 02/14/2003 DD 02/14/00 BBB+ 3,767,928.00 .96 1,961,513.50 FBLNC MULTICLASS ME PER 83 A 6.316 5.155 AAA 96.782 1,969,665.08 .SB 3133=295 VAR AT 08/15/2032 DD 12/01/97 AAA 1,904,199.92 .48 1,589,575.07 GNMA DID RBMIC TR 2000-9 PE 6.320 2.30B ARK 100.489 1,509,575.07 .49 383784N29 VAR AT 02/16/2030 AAA 1,597,348.09 .41 2,000,000.00 BEAR STEARNS COS INC 6.330 6.559 A2 102.927 2,031,960.00 .63 073902ANI 6.750% 04/15/2003 A 2,058,540.00 .52 3,000,000.00 FORD ME CR CO GLOBAL 2.ANDMARE 6.350 2.217 A3 98.343 3,000,000.00 .90 3453976R5 PLIG AT 03/17/2003 DD 03116100 A 2,950,290.00 .75 TLOWAL YIELD MA1,28I8 PAGE 9 O BF07522202 2002/03/31 RO11 DATE 04/04/02 DISTRICT, LORD-TTOW OMRATIBO RM TIM , 10.51.10 PAR VALOR YTR AT CORR66T RGODY MMET TOT9G. COBS/ 1 TYPE SECURITY ID MCTRITY OMCRIPTIOR DDOR TIELD B-P PRICE MMET VALUE 9 TOTM ---------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------------ -----_---_ 2,000,000.00 9ORD RTR M CO GLOBAL =5 6.351 2.047 A3 98.578 1,992,580.00 .60 345391RVY =TG RT 02/13/2003 OD 02/13/00 A 3,971,560.OD .50 21,136.37 GRRA POOL /0500917 6.399 6.159 AAA 97.438 20,063.05 .00 36210SPA0 6.000E 04/15/2029 DD 04/01/99 AAA 20,594.26 .01 96,613.75 GRM POOL #0506636 6.399 6.136 AAA 97.157 63,231.02 .D1 3621UYT90 6.000E 04/15/2029 DO 04/01/99 AM 64,719.92 .02 849,709.61 GRM POOL #0503399 6.309 6.138 AAA 97.438 005,611.00 .25 36210WSS 6.000E 03/15/2029 M 03/01/99 MA 826,965.67 .21 25,935.90 CIUM POOL 10499153 6.389 6.158 MA 97.438 24,618.03 .00 3621000BS 6.000E 02/15/2029 OD 02/01/99 MA 25,271.42 .01 9,580.79 GRM POOL 10496294 6.390 6.250 AAA 97.563 9,094.27 .00 36210R351 6.000% 01/15/2029 DD 02/02/99 AM 9,347.31 .00 817,311.20 DIVA POOL /0496461 6.390 6.150 AAA 97.563 775,807.10 .24 36210HQN4 6.000E O1/15/2029 DD O1/01/99 AAA 797,393.33 .20 230,021.06 MM POOL #0491103 6.390 6.150 AAA 97.563 219,099.6B .06 36210nY4 6.000% 01/15/2029 DO 01/01/99 AM 225,195.95 .06 20,096.29 GRRA POOL #0406720 6.390 6.106 AM 97.157 19,056.28 .DO 36210AMS 6.000% 12/25/2028 DO 12/01/98 AAA 19,515.24 .00 41,152.12 GPM POOL #0497343 6.390 6.150 AAA 97.563 39,062.37 .01 36210RP45 6.000E 12/15/2028 DD 12/01/98 AM 40,149.24 .01 40,434.79 GRRA P08L #0469688 6.391 6.176 AAA 97.157 3B,381.47 .01 36209EA0.8 6.000E 11/15/2029 DD 11/01/90 AM 39,285.23 .01 51,423.96 GSM POOL #0467279 6.391 6.150 AAA 91.563 40,810.70 .01 36209CCQ7 6.000% 10/15/2028 DD 10/01/99 AM 50,168.81 .01 76,131.09 GRM POOL /0457814 CM 6.106 AAA 97.157 72,265.92 .02 362080SB3 6.000E 10/15/2028 DO 10/01/90 AAA 73,967.46 .02 685,665.49 GPM POOL /0467266 6.391 6.150 AM 91.563 650,846.55 .20 36209CCY2 6.D008 10/15/2028 DO 10/01/99 AAA 660,955.02 .17 826,470.25 GEM POOL #0465555 6.292 6.176 AAA 97.157 784,500.66 .24 36209AE49 6.000E 09/15/2029 DO 09/01/98 AAA 002,981.47 .20 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 10 MSF07522202 2002/03/31 RON DATE 04/04/02 DISTRICTI LONG-TERN OPERATING RUN TINS 10.51.10 PAR VALGB YTR AT CORRENT NODDY GARRET TOTAL COST/ 6 TYPE SECGRITY ID SECGRITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD S-P PRICE RARRBT VALVE 8 TOTAL _____________________________ _______ _______ _______ ________ _______-_ 32,372.05 GNRA POOL #0493452 6.392 6.150 AAA 97.563 30,728.14 .00 36209RSV3 6.000% 09/15/2028 DD 09/01/90 AAA 31,583.14 .01 840,706.97 GNRA POOL #0465546 6.392 6.176 AAA 97.157 805,608.57 .25 36209AET3 6.000% DB/IS/2028 DD 09/01/98 AAA 824,578.23 .21 706,257.71 GNRA POOL #0462339 6.392 6.150 AAA 97.563 746,330.57 .23 36209DBQO 6.000% 09/15/2028 DD 08/01/99 ARA 767,096.61 .19 41,241.99 GRRA POOL #0438057 6.393 6.150 AAA 97.563 39,147.68 .01 36207PTN9 6.000% 05/15/2028 DD OS/01/98 AAA 40,236.92 .01 37,374.05 ONNA POOL #0469330 6.393 6.176 AAA 97.157 35,476.14 .01 36209DEF4 6.000% 05/15/2028 DD 05/01/99 AAA 36,311.51 .01 2,000,000.00 PRLNC RULTICLASS CTF T11 A6 6.496 6.323 AAA 102.796 2,000,008.00 .63 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2019 AAA 2,055,920.00 .52 2,717,002.99 FELRC RGLTICLASS CTP SIR 1620E 6.499 6.553 AAA 91.563 2,560,862.94 J6 3133T17A4 6.000E 11/15/2023 DD 11/01/93 AAA 2,487,755.76 .63 1,000,000.00 asI,m p BB SLOGS MR 6.625 2.058 AA 100.109 1,000,000.00 .30 7954SEMS VAR RT 04/28/2003 DD 04/28/00 AA- 1,001,090.00 .25 2,292,428.94 FIRM GROUP IGS-0476 6.628 6.949 AAA 100.740 2,328,247.B4 .71 3128DD055 7.000E 02/01/2003 DD 02/01/98 AAA 2,309,392.61 .59 944,226.90 mm II POOL 1080088H 6.705 6.269 AAA 101.688 964,081.87 .29 36225CC20 7.375E 06/20/2027 DD 06/01/97 AAA 960,165.45 .24 2,000,000.00 HARSH A RCLEHNAN COB INC SR NT 6.717 6.340 A2 104.409 1,992,280.00 .64 571748AB8 6.625E 06/15/2004 DD 06/14/99 AA- 2,089,780.00 .53 3,000,000.00 FORD NTR CR CO GLOBAL LANDMAX 6.739 6.641 A3 100.888 2,995,080.00 .93 345397SS3 6.700E 07/16/2004 DD 07/16/99 BBB+ 3,026,640.00 .77 2,500,000.00 COUNTRYWIDE GORE Us INC NT 6.666 6.559 A3 104.433 2,498,400.00 .90 22237UAB8 6.850E 06/25/2004 DD 06/24/99 A 2,610,825.00 .66 7,300,000.00 OREM INC HER NT 6.960 2.450 A2 100.000 1,300,000.00 2.24 68268OW2 FLTG RT 04/24/2002 DD 04/24/00 A 7,300,000.00 1.85 596,142.14 GNNA II POOL #0080023 6.992 6.473 AAA 102.344 606,015.76 .10 36225CAE9 VAR RT 12/20/2026 DD 12/01/96 AAA 610,115.71 .15 YLUABAL YIRLD Al1ALY818 PAOR 11 OCBF07522202 2002/03/31 RUR DATE 04/04/02 DISTRICT, IOBO-TMB OPBRATIRO RDB TIM 10.51.10 PLR VA TIN AT CORBRBT ROODS MAMT TOTAL COAT/ 4 TYPE A8CMW ID BRCMITY DRBCRIPTIOR BOOR YIRLD 8-P PR2CR M URT VA 4 TOTAL ----------------- ----------------------------- ------- ------- ------ ------- ----------- ---------- 7,000,000.00 OLD RRRT M BIB 8B 00001 7.084 2.615 AA3 99.796 7,000,000.00 2.14 67902RM6 VM RT 11/01/2005 OD 04/28/00 A+ 6,985,720.00 1.77 2,100,000.00 PRMML BAIL RTO ABM MM 7.113 6.329 AM 104.672 2,030,133.00 .67 31359MRY5 6.625% 09/15/2005 DD 09/01/91 AAA 2,198,112.00 .56 2,000,000.00 I&M 1gW I= CO DM 7.512 8.132 BM3 100.032 2,151,250.00 .62 542671CT7 8.2004 03/15/2023 DD 03/29/93 A- 2,016,640.00 .51 809,337.36 O ISTOB8 SVCRO CORD PM 495-7 7.564 7.505 AAA 99.000 797,513.43 .24 398104AR4 7.4301 06/01/2003 M 02/29/00 AM 001,243.99 .20 1,000,000.00 YORD INTOR CR CO UT 7.592 6.766 A3 99.769 965,170.00 .30 345397OV9 6.7501 05/15/200S BBB+ 997,690.00 .25 961,006.98 RI@/ROP10W PAIM $000-11150 7.684 7.673 AAA 97.750 940,235.11 .28 302998OR3 7.500% 12/01/2030 DD 10/21/99 AAA 939,304.32 .24 3,000,000.00 PACIPIC*M MCD R 4TR 00115 7.709 6.974 A2 104.678 2,950,530.00 .96 695122RU5 7.300% 20/22/2004 DD 10/22/92 A 3,140,340.00 .90 1,600,000.00 AL48TATR CORD SR BT 7.967 7.309 Al 107.741 2,594,032.00 .53 020002ALS 7.9759 05/01/2005 DD OS/01/00 A+ 1,723,856.00 .44 ________ _______ ----------------- _________ TOTAL PIMD IRCOIR BRCMITIM 1.473 5.675 322,460,985.97 100.00 325,179,320.89 82.53 ------- ------- ----------------- --------- TOTAL 1.461 5.629 391,305,099.33 100.00 394,024,334.25 100.00 Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE. I PORTFOLIO DETAIL oc9G000/0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY m TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS PURCHASES CASH&CASH EQUIVALENTS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 492,698.95 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-Mu-2002 492.698.95 996DS5247 01-My-2002 492.699.95 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 492,698.95 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-Mu-2002 492,698.95 9%085247 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 01-My-2002 O.OD LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,646,472.46 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-Mu-2002 -1,646,472.46 996085247 01-Mu-2002 1,646,472.46 B 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,646,472.46 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-My-2002 -1,646,472.46 996085247 01-Mu-2002 0.00 PC 01-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,200,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 01-Mu-2002 -1,189,848.00 313589895 MAT091142002 05-Mu-2002 1,199,848.00 B MORGAN STANLEY&CO INC,NY 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,200,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 01-Mu-2002 -1,199,848.00 313589B85 MATOB/14/2D02 05-Mu-2002 0.00 PC MORGAN STANLEY&CO INC,NY 05-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Apr-1001 9:40.40 E*ems1w Wo kbexh Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 2 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCsGwI0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR - TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,674.89 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 05-Mar-2002 -6,674.89 996085247 05-Mar-2002 6,674.89 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,674.89 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 05-Mar-2002 -6,674.89 996085247 05-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 05-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 628,000.00 COCA COLA CO DISC 05-Mar-2002 -625,488.00 19121EEQ2 05242002 05-Mar-2002 625.488.00 B MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 628,000.00 COCA COLA CO DISC 05-Mar-2002 -625,498.00 19121EEQ2 05242002 05-Mar-2002 0.00 FC MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER 05-Mer-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS DISC 05-Mar-2002 498,200.00 313385WW2 MAT 05/162002 05-Mar-2002 498,200.00 B MORGAN STANLEY&CO INC,NY 0.00 LIQUID OPEK-PIMCO 500,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS DISC 05-Mar-2002 -498,200.00 313385WW2 MAT05/162002 05-Mar-2002 0.00 FC MORGAN STANLEY&CO INC,NY 05-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,67%17 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 08-MU-2002 -2,679.17 996085247 08-Mar-2002 2,679.17 B 0.00 09-Aprv3002 9:40:40 Erecuriw WJrkbexh " Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE 3 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS000010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCS&CONSOLIDATED SHAAESTAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,679.17 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 08-Mu-2002 -2,679.17 996085247 08-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 08-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-P1MCO 510,663.75 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 11-Mu-2002 -510,663.75 996085247 11-Mu-2002 510,663.75 B 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 510,663.75 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 11-Mu-2002 -510,663.75 996085247 1I-Mar-2002 0.00 FC II-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 67,600,000.00 LEHMAN CAT REPO 11-Mar-2002 -67,600,000.00 9939OF304 01.720%03/122002 DO 03111/ 11-Mu-2002 67,600,000.00 B LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC.NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 67,600,000.00 LEHMAN CAT REPO 11-Mu-2002 -67,600,000.00 9939OF304 01.720%03/122002 DO 03/11/ 11-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 11-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 3,412.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 12-Mu-2002 -3,412.50 996085247 12-Mu-2002 3,412.50 B 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 3,412.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 12-Mu-2002 -3,412.50 996085247 12-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 12-MN-2002 0.00 09-Aprv2002 9:40:40 &ecu/ice Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 4 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINRASS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,229.78 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 12-Mu-2002 -3,229.79 996095247 12-Mu-2002 3,229.78 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,229.78 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 12-Mu-2002 -3,229.78 996085247 12-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 12-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 67,600,000.00 LERMAN GSl REPO 12-Mu-2002 67,600,000.00 9939OG260 01.710%03/132002 DO 03/121 12-Mu-2002 67,600,000.00 B LEHMAN DOW SECS INC,NY 0.00 LIQUID OPER-P1MCO 1,500,000.00 KRAFT FOODS INC DISC 12-Mu-2002 -1,496,597.50 5007MIDS9 04262002 12-My-2002 1,496,587.50 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,500,000.00 KRAFT FOODS INC DISC 12-Mu-2002 -1,496,587.50 5007MIDS9 04262002 12-Mu-2002 0.00 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 12-Mw-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 67,600,000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 12-Mu-2002 67,600,000.00 993900260 01.710%03/132002 DO 03/121 12-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOUT SECS INC,NY 12-Mu-2002 0.00 LONGTERM OPER-PIMCO 67,667,273.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 13-Mu-2002 -67,667,273.50 996085247 13-Mu-2002 67,667,273.50 B 0.00 09-Apr-I002 9:40.40 E'ecwiw Workbench ' Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE.' 5 PORTFOLIO DETAIL Ocsc00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAE41LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 67,667,273.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 13-Mu-2002 -67,667,273.50 996085247 13-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 13-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 685,000.00 FED HOME IN MTG CORP DISC NT 13-Mar-2002 -680,740.06 313397ZBO MAT 07/082002 1 14-Mu-2002 680,740.06 B LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 685,000.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC NT 13-Mu-2002 -680,740.06 313397ZBO MAT 07/082002 14-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 14-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 200,000.00 FEDERAL FARM CR BE CONS SYST 13-Mu-2002 -199,801.11 313313VBI MAT 04/03/2001 14-Mu-2002 199,801.11 B SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 200,000.00 FEDERAL FARM CR BK CONS SYST 13-Mu-2002 -199,801.11 313313VBI MAT 04/032001 14-Mu-2002 0.00 FC SALOMON BROS MG NEW YORK 14-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 200,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS DISC 13-Mu-2002 -199.751.39 313385VGS MAT 04/092002 14-Mu-2002 199,751.39 B SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 200.000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS DISC 13-Mu-2002 -199,751.39 313385VG8 MAT 04/08/2002 14-Mu-2002 0.00 FC SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 14-Mar-2002 0.00 094p,2002 9:40.40 Exerutire Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 6 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESMAR TRADE DATU AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATEI COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 14-Mar-2002 41,000,000.00 993901512 01.7709403/152002 DD 03/141 14-Mar-2002 41,000,000.00 B LEHMAN GOUT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 14-Mar-2002 41,000,000.00 99390/512 01.770%03/152002 DO 03/14/ 14-Mar-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 14-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 754,818.13 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 15-Mar-2002 -754,818.13 996085247 15-Mar-2002 754,818.13 B 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 754,818.13 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 15-Mar-2002 -754,918.13 996095247 15-Mar-2002 0.00 PC 15-My-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 237,328.44 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT I5-MW-2002 -237,328.44 996095247 15-Mar-2002 237,328.44 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 237,328.44 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 15-Mu-2002 -237,328.44 996095247 15-Mar-2002 0.00 PC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,40D,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 15-Mar-2002 41,400,000.00 99390/900 01.830%03/182002 DD 03/15/ 15-Mar-2002 41,400,000.00 B LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9.40:40 Eredriw Workbench " Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 7 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOL/DATED SHARES/PAR - TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,400,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 15-Mar-2002 .41,400,000.00 99390/900 01.830%0311 6 2 0 0 2 DID 03/151 15-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,511,151.11 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 18-Mar-2002 -41,511,151.11 996085247 18-Mar-2002 41,511,151.11 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,511,151.11 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT IS-Mar-2002 41,511,151.11 996085247 1 8-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 1 B-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 10000.00 STUDENT LN MKTG ASSN SHORT T IS-Mar-2002 -919,906.25 86387THL5 VAR RT 07/182002 DO 01/17/ 19-Mar-2002 99,906.25 B DAM RAUSCHER MC,MINN 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 100,000.00 STUDENT LN MKTG ASSN SHORT T 18-Mar-2002 -302.23 86387THL5 VAR RT 07/182002DD01/17/ 19-Mar-2002 0.00 IB 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 100,000.00 STUDENT LN MKTG ASSN SHORT T 18-Mar-2002 -100,208.48 86387THL5 VAR RT 07/182002DD01/17/ 19-Mar-2002 0.00 FC DAM RAUSCHER INC,MINN 19-Ma 2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 672,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 19-Mar-2002 -666,336.53 313589B85 MAT 08/14/2002 19-Mar-2002 666,336.53 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9:40:40 Eeeeuere Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE 8 PORTFOLIO DETAIL Ocsc000/0000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESMAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 672,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 19-Mar-2002 -666,336.53 313589B85 MAT08/14/2002 19-Mar-2002 0.00 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 19-My-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 FEDERAL HOME IN BK CONS DISC 19-Mar-2002 498,913.06 313385WF9 MAT 05/01/2002 19-Mm-2002 499,913.06 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 FEDERAL HOME IN BK CONS DISC 19-Mar-2002 498,913.06 313385WF9 MAT05101/2002 19-Mu-2002 0.00 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 19-MU-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 307,324.99 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 20-10 -2002 307,324.99 996085247 20-My-2002 307,324.919 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 307,324.99 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 20-MU-2002 -307,324.99 996085247 20-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 20-Ma-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,700,000.00 MERCK&INC DISC 20-Mu-2002 -1,695,835.00 58933SF97 05/082002 20-Mu-2002 1,695,835.00 B GOLDMAN SACHS&CO,NY 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,70000.00 MERCK&INC DISC 20-Mar-2002 -1,695,935.00 58933SE97 05/082002 20-Met-2002 0.00 FC GOLDMAN SACHS&CO,NY 20-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apn2002 9:40.40 Executive wd kb..h ' Q Mellon TTDst- Sample Report PAGE..- 9 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 21-Mu-2002 -1,994,600.00 313397WUI MAT 05/142002 21-Mu-2002 1,994,600.00 B LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTO CORP DIS 21-My-2002 -1,994,600.00 313397WUI MAT 051M002 21-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 68,000,000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 25-Mu-2002 -68,000,000.00 99390SO74 01.730%03262002 DD 0325/ 25-Mu-2002 68,000,000.00 B LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 68,000,000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 25-My-2002 -68,000,000.00 99390S074 01.730%0326/2002 DD 0325/ 25-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 25-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 25,676.25 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 26-Mu-2002 -25,676.25 996085247 26-Mu-2002 25,676.25 B 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 25,676.25 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 26-Mu-1002 -25,676.25 996085247 26-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 26-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 60,966.28 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 26-Mu-2002 -60,966.28 996085247 26-Mu-2002 60,966.28 B 0.00 09-Apr-1001 9.40.40 Esecu/"Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 10 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCEG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESMAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 60,966.28 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 26-Mar-2002 -60,966.28 996095247 26-Mu-2002 0.00 PC 26-My-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 68,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 26-Me-2002 -68,000,000.00 9939OSS01 01.730%03/27/2002 DO 03/26/ 26-Mu-2002 68,000,000.00 B LEHMAN GOUT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 69,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 26-Mu-2002 -68,000,000.00 99390S801 01.730%03/27/2002 DO 03/26/ 26-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOUT SECS INC,NY 26-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,267.78 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 27-Mu-2002 3,267.78 996085247 27-Mu-2002 3.267.78 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,267.78 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 27-Mu-2002 -3.267.79 996095247 27-Mu-2002 0.00 PC 27-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 68,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 27-Me 2002 -68,000,000.00 9939OU749 01.710%03/28/2002 DO 0327/ 27-Mu-2002 69,000,000.00 B LEHMAN DOW SECS rNC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 69,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 27-Ma-2002 -68,000,000.00 9939OU749 01.710%03282002 DO 03271 27-Mu-2002 0.00 PC LEHMAN GOUT SECS INC,NY 27-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Aprv2002 9:40:40 E:eculhe Wb kbewh- Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 11 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 16,981.11 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 28-Mar-2002 -16,981.11 996085247 28-Mar-2002 16.981.11 B 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 16,981.11 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 28-Mu-2002 -16,981.11 996085247 28-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 28-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 18,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 28-Mar-2002 -17,996,360.00 313397UZ2 MAT 04/012002 28-Mu-2002 17,996,360.00 B HSBC SECS INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 18,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 28-Mar-2002 -17,996,360.00 313397UZ2 MAT 04/01/2002 28.Mu-2002 0.00 FC HSBC SECS INC,NEW YORK 28-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 28-Mu-2002 49,989,888.89 313397UZ2 MAT 04/012002 28-Mar-2002 49,999,888.89 B HSBC SECS INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 28-Mu-2002 .49,989,898.89 313397UZ2 MAT 04/012002 28-Mu-2002 0.00 FC HSBC SECS INC,NEW YORK 28-Mar-2002 0.00 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 10,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 01-Feb-2002 -9,809,375.00 0IF060634 6.000%03/012032 DD 03/01/ 13-Mu-2002 0.00 FC GOLDMAN SACHS&CO,NY 13-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9.40:40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE, 12 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 14,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 06-Feb-2002 -14,783.125.00 OIN0O0633 8.000%03/15M32 DD 03/011 21-Mar-2002 0.00 FC SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,200,000.00 COMMIT TO FUR GNMA II IUMBOS 13-Feb-2002 -1248.000.00 21H072635 7.500%03120/2032 DO 03/011 21-Marv2002 0.00 FC SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,000,000.00 COMMIT TO FUR GNMA I SF MTG 14-F64002 -7,087,500.00 OIN062631 6.500%03/15/2032 DD 03/01/ 21-My-2002 0.00 FC BEAR STEARNS&CO MC,NY 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,500,000.00 COMMIT TO FUR GNMA I SF MTG 14-1`eb-2002 -3,543,750.00 OIN062631 6.500%03/15/2032 DD 031011 21-Me-2002 0.00 FC SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 21-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 193,000.00 PITNEY BOWES CR CORP NT 04-Mu-2002 -203,794.49 724477AK0 8.800%021152003 DO 02112/9 07-Mu-2002 203,794.49 B ADVEST CO,HARTFORD 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 193,000.00 PITNEY BOWES CR CORP NT 04-Mu-2002 -1,037.91 724477AK0 8.900%02/152003 DO 02112/9 07-Ma-2002 0.00 IB 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 193,000.00 PITNEY BOWES CR CORP NT 04-Mm-2002 -204,932.40 724477AK0 8.800%02/152003 DO 02/1219 07-MU-2002 0.00 FC ADVEST CO,HARTFORD 07-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Aprv2002 9.40.40 &emim Wo,Oewh Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE.. 13 PORTFOLIO DETAIL Ocsc000/0000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSDCONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY m TRANSACTION DESCRRTION/ SETTL DATE/ COSII TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINdASS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 10,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 06-Mm2002 -9,837,500.00 0IF060642 6.000%04/012032 DD 04/011 ll-APr2002 9,937,500.00 B GOLDMAN SACHS&CO,NY 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 150,000.00 MERRILL LYNCH 14-Mar-2002 -155,247.00 590188EP9 6.875%03/012003 19-Mm-2002 155,247.00 B CHASE SECURITIES,NEW YORK 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 150,000.00 MERRILL LYNCH 14-Mm-2002 -515.63 590188EP9 6.875%03/012003 19-MM-2002 0.00 IB 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 150,000.00 MERRILL LYNCH 14-Mar-2002 -155,762.63 590188EP9 6.875%03/012003 19-Mu-2002 0.00 FC CHASE SECURMES,NEW YORK 19-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 250,000.00 DONALDSON LUFKIN 4TR 00039E 15-My-2002 -257,995.00 25766CBQ6 7.070%12/132002 DO 12/13/9 20-MW-2002 257,995.00 B CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 250,000.00 DONALDSON LUFKIN 4TR 00039E 15-Ma 2002 4,762.43 25766CBQ6 7.070%12/132002 DD 12113/9 20-1,1ao-2002 0.00 IF 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 250,000.00 DONALDSON LUFKIN 4TR 00039E 15-Ma 2002 -262,757.43 25766CBQ6 7.070%12/132002 DO 12113/9 20-Mu-2002 0.00 FC CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON C 20-My-2002 0.00 09-Aprv2002 9:40.40 Execwive Workbench Q Mellon Trast-Sample Report PAGE: /4 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY H) TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-P1MCO 3,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 15-Mu-2002 -3,479,218.75 0IM62649 6.500Ye04/15/2032 DO 04/01/ 1B-Apr-2002 3,479,218.75 B SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 15-My-2002 -6,971,562.50 OIN062649 6.500%04/15/2032 DO 04/0V 18-Apr-2002 6,971,562.50 B BEAR STEARNS&CO INC,NY 0.00 LONGTERM OPER-PIMCO 14,0D0,0D0.D0 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 15-Mu-2002 -14,682,500.00 OIN080641 8.000%04/152032 DO 04/011 18-Apr-2002 14,682,500.00 B SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,200,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA 11 JUMBOS 15-Mu-2002 -1,238,350.OD 21HO72643 7.500%04202032 DO 04/01/ 18-Apr-2002 1,239,250.00 B SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 50,000.00 STUDENT LN MRKTING ASSN ST 4 18-Mu-2002 49,953.13 86387THM3 VAR RT 08/152002DD0221/ 19-Mu-2002 49,953.13 B DAIN RAUSCHER INC,MINN 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 50,000.00 STUDENT LN MRKTING ASSN STN 18-My-2002 -66.16 86387THM3 VAR RT 0 911 52 0 0 2 DO 02/21/ 19-My-2002 0.00 IB 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 50,000.00 STUDENT LN MRKTING ASSN SIN I8-Mu-2002 -50,019.29 86387THM3 VAR RT 08/152002 DD 0221/ 19-Mu-2002 0.00 FC DAIN RAUSCHER INC,MINN 19-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apn2002 9.40:40 Exeeulm Wnrkbemh ' Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PACE, /5 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 GTE CORP MTN TR 00001 19-Mu-2002 -508,080.00 36232HAA4 6.560%09/142002 DO 08/1419 22-Mu-2002 508,080.00 B ADVEST CO,HARTFORD 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 GTE CORP MTN TR 00001 19-Mu-2002 4,646.67 36232HAA4 6.560%08/14/2002 DO 09/1419 22-Mu-2002 0.00 IB 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 GTE CORP MTN TR 00001 19-Mu-2002 -512,726.67 36232HAA4 6.560%0811412002 DO M1419 22-Mu-2002 0.00 PC ADVESTCO,RARTFORD 22-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 900,000.00 TEXACO CAP INC MTN TR57 19-Mu-2002 -913,563.00 88168LC73 7.780%07/01/02 DD 06/30/92 22-Mu-2002 913,563.00 B BANC OF AMERICA SEC LLC,CHA 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 900,000.00 TEXACO CAP INC MTN TR57 19-Mu-2002 -30,536.50 88168LC13 7.780%07/01/02 DO 06/30/92 22-Mu-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 900,000.00 TEXACO CAP INC MTN TR57 19-Mu-2002 -944,099.50 88168LC73 7.780%07/01/02 DO 06/30/92 22-Mu-2002 0.00 PC BANC OF AMERICA SEC LLC,CHA 22-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 200,000.00 DEAN WITTER DISCOVER&CO 19-Mu-2002 -206,866.00 24240VAC5 6.875%031012003 22-Mu-2002 206,866.00 B BANC OF AMERICA SEC LLC,CHA 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9.40.40 Exemlfw Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 16 PORTFOLIO DETAIL Ocscoml0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY m TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2DO,000.00 DEAN WITTER DISCOVER&CO 19-Mar-2002 -802.08 24240VAC5 6.875%03/012003 22-Mm-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 200,D00.00 DEAN WITTER DISCOVER&CO 19-Mu-2002 ,207,668.08 24240VAC5 6.875%03/012003 22-Mar-2002 0.00 FC BANC OF AMERICA SEC LLC,CHA 22-My-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,000,000.00 COMMIT TO FUR FNMA SF MTG 19-Mar-2002 -5,958,750.00 0IF060451 6.000%05/012017 DO 05/01/ 16-May-2002 5,958,750.00 B SK OF AMER NATL TR&SVGS CT O.DD LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 20-Mar-2002 -2,064,218.75 912827/78 D6.250-A 02/152003 DO 021151 21-Mar-2D02 2,064,218.75 B CHASE SECURITIES,NEW YORK 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 20-Mar-2002 -11,740.33 912827/78 06.250%021152003 DD 021151 21-Mar-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 U S TREASURY NOTES 20-Mar-2002 -2,075,959.08 912827J78 06.250%021152003 DO 021151 21-Mer-2002 0.00 PC CHASE SECURITIES,NEW YORK 21-Mar-2002 0.00 PAY UPS FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 09.Apr-2002 9.40:40 Fzecutim Wdrkbench " Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE. 17 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 13,517.29 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF SER 162 01-Mar-2002 -13,517.29 3133Tl7A4 6.0009/611/15/2023 DO 11/0119 01-Mu-2002 13,517.29 PU 0.00 LONGTERM OPER-PIMCO 13,517.29 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF SER 162 01-My-2002 -13,517.29 3133T17A4 6.000%11/152023 DO 11/0119 01-My-2002 0.00 FC 19-My-2002 0.00 SALES CASH&CASH EQUIVALENTS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1,913,536.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 05-Mar-2002 1,913,536.00 996085247 05-Mar-2002 -1,913,536.00 S 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1,913,536.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 05-My-2002 1,913,536.00 996095247 05-Mv-2002 0.00 FC 05-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -204,932.40 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 07-My-2002 204,832.40 996085247 07-My-2002 -204,832.40 S 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -204,932.40 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 07-Mar-2002 204,932.40 996095247 07-My-2002 0.00 FC 07-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9:40:40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE 18 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE✓ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,600,000.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 11-Mu-2002 67,600,000.00 996085247 11-Mar-2002 -67,600,000.00 S 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,600,000.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT I I-Mar-2002 67,600,000.00 996085247 1l-Mu-2002 0.00 PC 11-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,600,000.00 LEHMAN CAT 2 REPO 12-M.-2002 67,600,000.00 99390F304 01.720%03/122002 DD 031111 12-Mar-2002 .67,600,000.00 S LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,600,000.00 LEHMANCAT2REPO 12-My-2002 3,229.78 9939OF304 01.720%03/12/2002 DD 03/11/ 12-Mar-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,600,000.00 LEHMAN CAT 2 REPO 12-Mu-2002 67,603,229.78 9939OF304 01,720%03/12/2002 DD 03/11/ 12-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 12-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO .67,600,000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 13-Mat-2002 67,600,000.00 993900260 01.710%03/13/2002 DO 03/12/ 13-Mar-2002 -67,600,000.00 S LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,600,000.00 LEHMAN GSl REPO 13-Mar-2002 3,211.00 9939OG260 01.7101/603/132002 DO 03/121 13-Mar-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 09-Aprv2002 9:40.40 aewiw Wdrkb..ch ' Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE 19 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINMOSS LONGTERM OPER-PIMCO -67,600,000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 13-Mar-2002 67,603,211.00 9939OG260 01.710%03/132002 DD 03112J 13-Mar-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 13-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -223,292.56 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 14-Mar-2002 223,292.56 996085247 14-Mu-2002 -223,292.56 S 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -223,292.56 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 14-Mu-2002 223,292.56 996095247 14-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 14-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -41,000,000.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 14-My-2002 41,000,000.00 996095247 14-Mu-2002 41,000,000.00 S 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,000,000.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 14-Mar-2002 41,000,000.00 996085247 14-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 14-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 15-My-2002 41,000,000.00 9939OJ512 01.770%03/152002 DO 03/14/ 15-Mu-2002 41,000,000.00 S LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 15-Mu-2002 2,015.83 9939DJ512 01.770%0311512002 DO 03/14/ 15-Mu-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 09-AP 2002 9:40:40 Fxe du Wo kbewh Q Mellon Trust-Saro le Report PAGE: 20 PORTFOLIO DETAIL ocsc000l0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSACONSOUDATFA SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -41,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 15-MU-2002 41,002,015.83 9939DJ512 01.770%0 311 512 00 2 DO 03/141 15-Mer2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,400,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 18-Mu-2002 41,400,000.00 99390J900 01.830%03/19/2002 DO 03/15/ 19-Mer2002 41,400,000.00 S LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC.NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,400,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO I8-Mer2002 6,313.50 9939OJ900 01.830%03/19/2002 DD 03/15/ 18-My-2002 0.00 15 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 41,400,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 18-Mu-2002 41,406,313.50 9939OJ900 01.830%03/18/2002 DO 03115/ 18-Mar-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY I8-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -185,939.74 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 19-Mu-2002 185,839.74 996085247 19-Mu-2002 -195,839.74 S 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -185,839.74 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 19-My-2002 185,839.74 996085247 19-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 19-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -259,592.43 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 20-Mu-2002 258,592.43 996085247 20-My-2002 -258,592.43 S 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9.40.40 &s .li.Wbrkbnmh " Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE 2/ PORTFOLIO DETAIL XS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002 -31-M4,R-2002 XSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY m TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE! COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -258,592.43 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 20-Mm-2002 258,592.43 996085247 20-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 20-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -233,121.09 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 21-Mar-2002 233,121.09 996085247 21-Mar-2002 -233,121.09 S 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -233,121.09 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 21-Me-2002 233.121.09 996095247 21-Mw-2002 0.00 FC 21-My-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -757,172.21 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 21-Mar-2002 757,172.21 996085247 21-Mu-2002 -757,172.21 S 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -757,172.21 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 21-Mu-2002 757,172.21 996085247 21-M.-2002 0.00 FC 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -2,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 21-Mu-2002 1,991,076.94 313589UV3 MAT 03/282002 22-Mu-2002 -1,991,076.94 S SMITH BARNEY INC,NEW YORK 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -2,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 21-Mar-2002 8,261.95 313589UV3 MAT03/292002 22-Mu-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 E:ecu m Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 22 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS000010000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -2,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 21-Mar-2002 1,999,338.89 313589UV3 MAT 03/29/2002 22-Mar-2002 0.00 PC SMITH BARNEY INC,NEW YORK 22-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1,649,494.25 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 22-Mar-2002 1,649,494.25 996085247 22-Mar-2002 -1,649,494.25 S 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1,649,494.25 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 22-Mar-2002 1,649,494.25 996085247 22-Mm-2002 0.00 PC 22-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,982,809.38 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 25-Mar-2002 67,982,809.38 996085247 25-Mar-2002 -67,982,809.38 S 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -67,982,809.38 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 25-Mar-2002 67,982,809.38 996085247 25-Mar-2002 0.00 PC 25-Ma 2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -68,000,000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 26-Mar-2002 68,000,000.00 99390SO74 01.730%03/26/2002 DO 03/251 26-Mar-2002 -68,000,000.00 S LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -68,000.000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 26-Mar-2002 3,267.78 99390SO74 01.730%03262002 DO 0325/ 26-Mar-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE, 23 PORTFOLIO DETAIL 7CS000010000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOL/DATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -68,000,000.00 LEHMAN GSI REPO 26-Mar-2002 68,003,267.78 99390SO74 01.7300/.03262002 DO 03251 26-Mar-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOUT SECS INC,NY 26-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -68,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 27-Mu-2002 68,000,000.00 9939OSS01 OL7301/603272002 DO 03261 27-Mu-2002 -68,000,000.00 S LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -68,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 27-Mu-2002 3,267.78 9939OS901 01.730%03272002 DO 031261 27-Mu-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -69,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 27-Mar-2002 68,003,267.78 9939OS801 01.730°/03272002 DD 03261 27-Mar-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 27-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -68,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 28-Mar-2002 68,000,000.00 9939OU749 01.710%03282002 DD 0327/ 28-Mar-2002 -68,000,000.00 S LEHMAN GOVT SECS INC,NY 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -68,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 28-Mar-2002 3,230.00 99390U749 01.710%03282002 DO 03271 28-Mar-2002 0.00 IS 0.00 LONGTERM OPER-PIMCO .68,000,000.00 LEHMAN BROTHERS REPO 28-Mu-2002 68,003,230.00 9939OU749 01.710%03282002 DO 0327/ 28-Mu-2002 0.00 FC LEHMAN GOUT SECS INC,NY 28-Mar-2002 0.00 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES -1 - ^ •^-•n Eremdw Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sam le Report PAGE 24 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OcsG00010000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOWDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 06-My-2002 9,973,437.50 OIF060634 6.000%03/012032 DO 03/01/ 13-Mu-2002 -9.809,375.00 S GOLDMAN SACHS&CO,NY 64,062.50 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 06-My-2002 9,873,437.50 OIF060634 6.000%03/012032 DO 03/01/ 13-Ma-2002 0.00 FC GOLDMAN SACHS&CO,NY 13-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -3,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 15-Mu-2002 3,491,386.72 OIN062631 6.500%03/152032 DO 03/01/ 21-Mu-2002 -3,543,750.00 S SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK -52,363.28 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -3,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA 1 SF MTG 15-My-2002 3.491.386.72 OIN062631 6.500%03/15/2032 DO 03/01/ 21-Mu-2002 0.00 FC SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 15-Mar-2002 14,701,093.75 OIN080633 9.000%03/152032 DO 03/01/ 21-Mu-2002 -14,783,125.00 S SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK -SZ031.25 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG I5-Mu-2002 14,701,093.75 OIN080633 8.000%03/15/2032 DO 03/011 21-Mu-2002 0.00 FC SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 15-Mu-2002 6,995,898.44 OIN062631 6.500%03/152032 DD 03/01/ 21-Mu-2002 -7,097,500.00 S BEAR STEARNS&CO INC,NY -91,601.56 09-AM-1001 9.40,40 Exmtive Wo kbnmh QMellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE. 25 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS000010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-COxsouDAATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA 1 SF WIG 15-Mar-2002 6,995,898.44 OIN062631 6.500'A 03/152032 DO 03/011 21-Mu-2002 0.00 FC BEAR STEARNS&CO INC,NY 21-My-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,200,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA II JUMBOS 15-Mar-2002 1,240,875.00 21HO72635 7.500°A 03/202032 DO 03/01/ 21-Mer-2002 -1,248,000.00 S SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 7,125.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,200,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA II JUMBOS 15-Mar-2002 1,240,875.00 21HO72635 7,500%03202032 DO 03/011 21-Mer-2002 0.00 PC SALOMON BROS INC,NEW YORK 21-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,000,000.00 COMMITTOPURFNMASFMTG 19-Mer-2D02 5,981,015.63 0IF060444 6.000%04/012017 DID 041011 16-Apr-2002 -6,070,312.50 S BK OF AMER NAIL TR&SVGS CT -89,296.87 PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 56,235.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 15-1)ee-2001 -56.235.50 3133TCE95 VARRT08/152032 15-Dec-2001 56,297.00 PDC 61.50 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 56,235.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 15-Dec-2001 -56,235.50 3133TCE95 VAR FIT OVI52032 15-Da-2001 0.00 FCC 22-Feb2002 0.00 09-Apr-1001 9.40.40 &emfiw Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Re ort PAGE. 26 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS000010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 57,699.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 15-Jan-2002 -57,698.50 3133TCE95 VAR RT 08/152032 15-Jan-2002 57.761.60 PDC 63.10 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -9,395.45 FHLMC GROUP#78-6064 01-Feb-2002 9,385.45 31348SWZ3 6.384%01/012028DD 12/01/ 01-F6-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -660.32 WMP/HUNTOON PAIGE#000-11150 01-Feb-2002 660.32 302998GE3 7.5001%12/012030 DO 1021/9 01-Feb-2002 0.00 FC 05-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -56,243.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS MTO SER E3 01-Feb-2002 56,243.50 3133TCE95 VAR RT 09/152032 DO 12/01/ 01-Feb-2002 -56,305.01 PD -61.51 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -56,243.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS MTG SER E3 01-Feb-2002 56,243.50 3133TCE95 VAR RT 08/152032 DO 12/01/ 01-Feb-2002 0.00 FC 28-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -100,561.48 SBA GTD DEV PARTN 2001-20C I 01-Mar-2002 100,561.48 83162CLJO 6.340%03/012021 01-Mu-2002 -100,561.48 PD 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -100,561.48 SBA GTD DEV PARTN 2001-20C 1 01-Mar-2002 100,561.48 83162CLJO 6.340%03/012021 01-Mar2002 0.00 FC 01-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Ap,2002 9:40.40 Eucaliw Wdrkbewh ' Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 27 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -189,421.01 FHLMC GROUP#05-0476 01-Mar-2002 189,421.01 3128DDQ55 7.000%02/01/2003 DD 02/01/ 01-Mar-2002 -192,380.71 PD -2,959.70 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -199,421.01 FHLMC GROUP#G5-0476 01-Mar-2002 189,421.01 3128DDQ55 7.000%02/01/2003 DD 02/011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -40,178.65 FHLMC GROUP#G4-0353 01-Mu-2002 40,178.65 3128DBMA2 7.5000/e10/01/2004 DD 03/01/ 01-Mar-2002 41,195.67 PD -1,017.02 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 40,178.65 FHLMC GROUP#04-0353 01-Mar-2002 40,179.65 3128DBMA2 7.500%10/01/2004 DO 03/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -690.92 GNMA POOL#0469688 01-Mar-2002 690.92 36209EXRB 6.000%11/15/2028DD1I/0l/ 01-Mar-2002 -655.83 PD 35.09 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -690.92 GNMA POOL#0469688 01-Mar-2002 690.92 36209EXRB 6.0000Y.I1/15/2028 DD 11/01/ 01-Maz-2002 0.00 FC 15-MU-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,034.67 GNMA POOL#0468339 01-Mar-2002 1,034.67 36209DHQO 6.000%08/15/2028 DD 08/01/ 01-Mar-2002 -982.13 PI) 52.54 09-Apr-2002 9:40:40 Ececuriw Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Re ort PAGE- 28 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAU41LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,034.67 GNMA POOL#0468339 01-Mar-2002 1,034.67 36209DHQO 6.0001A 0811512028 DO 08/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,500.27 GNMA PGOL#0465555 01-Mar-2002 1,500.27 36209AE49 6.000%09/152028 DO 09/011 01-Mar-2002 -1,424.08 PD 76.19 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,500.27 GNMA POOL#0465555 01-Mar-2002 1,500.27 36209AE48 6.000%09/152028DD09/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,520.01 ONMA POOL#0468330 01-Mar-2002 1,520.01 36209DHF4 6.000%05/152028 DD 05/01/ 01-Mu-2002 -1,442.82 PD 77.19 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,520.01 GNMA POOL#0468330 01-Mar-2002 1,520.01 36209DHF4 6.000%05/152028 DO 051011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,915.00 GNMA POOL#0467286 01-Mer-2002 2,915.00 36209CCX2 6.0001/.10/15/2028 DO 10/011 01-Mar-2002 -2,766.97 PD 148.03 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,915.00 GNMA P001,90467286 01-Mar-2002 2,915.00 36209CCX2 6.000°/10/152028 DO 10/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apr-1002 9:40.40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 19 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESWAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -79.22 GNMA POOLA0467279 01-Mu2002 79.22 36209CCQ7 6.000%10/152029 DO 10/01/ 01-Mu-2002 -75.20 PD CO2 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -79.22 GNMA POOL80467279 0I-Mu-2002 79.22 36209CCQ7 6.000%10/152028 DO 10/01/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -112.67 GNMA POOL60457814 01-Mu-2002 112.67 36208QSB3 6.000°h 10/152028 DD 10/Ol/ 01-Mu-2002 -106.95 PD 5.72 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -112.67 GNMA POOLM0457814 01-Mu-2002 112.67 36208QS83 6.000%10/152028 DO 10/01/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -50.53 GNMA POOL 90439057 01-Mu-2002 50.53 36207PTN9 6.000%05/152028 DO 051011 01-Mu-2002 -47.96 PD 2.57 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -50.53 GNMA POOL 80438037 01-Mu-2002 50.53 36207PTN9 6.0000/a 05/15/2028 DD 051011 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -54.96 GNMA POOL80497343 01-Mu-2002 54.96 362IONP45 6.000%12/152028 DO 12/011 01-Mu-2002 -52.17 PD 2.79 09-Apr-1002 9:40.40 Erecuttw Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE'' 30 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -54.96 GNMA POOL80497343 01-Mm-2002 54.% 36210NP45 6.000%12/152028 DD 12/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,682.20 GNMA POOL 90496461 01-Mar-2002 14,692.20 36210MQN4 6.000%01/15/1029 DO 011011 01-Mar-2002 -13,936.62 PD 745.59 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -14,682.20 GNMA POOL80496461 01-Mar-2002 14,692.20 3621OMQN4 6.000%Ot/152029DDOMI/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -11.15 GNMA POOL#0496284 01-Mm-2002 11.15 36210MY51 6.000%01/152029 DO 02/01/ 01-Mar-2002 -10.59 PD 0.57 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -11.15 GNMA POOL 00496284 01-Mar-2002 11.15 3621OW51 6.0000/.01/152029 DO 02/01/ 01-My-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -314.69 GNMA POOL80486720 01-Mar-2002 314.69 36210AVM6 6.000%12/152028 DO 12/011 01-Mar-2002 -298.71 PD 15.98 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -314.69 GNMA POOL#0486720 01-Mar-2002 314.69 36210AVM6 6.000%12/152028 DO 12J01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-MU-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9.40:40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 3/ PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -331.03 GNMA POOL#0491103 01-Mar-2002 331.03 36210FRY4 6.000%01/15/2029 DO 01/01/ 01-Mar-2002 -314.22 PD 16.81 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -331.03 GNMA POOL#0491103 01-Mar-2002 331.03 36210FRY4 6.000%0 1/1 512 02 9 DO 01/01/ 01-KIU-2002 0.00 PC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -44.31 GNMA POOL#0483452 01-Mu-2002 44.31 36209WBV3 6.000%09/15/2028 DO 09/01/ 01-Mar-2002 42.06 PD 2.25 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 44.31 GNMA POOL#0483452 01-Mar-2002 44.31 36209WBV3 6.0000/.09/15/2028 DO 09/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 PC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -31.39 ONMA POOL#0499153 01-Mar-2002 31.39 3621000E5 6.000%02/15/2029DD02J01/ 01-Mar-2002 -29.80 PD 1.59 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -31.39 GNMA POOL#0499153 01-Mar-2002 31.39 3621000E5 6.000-A 02n52029 DD 02/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 PC 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -539.53 GNMA POOL#0500917 01-Mar-2002 539.53 36210SPAO 6.0001/6 04/152029 DD 04/01/ 01-Mar-2002 -512.13 PD 27.40 09-Apr-1002 9:40.40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 32 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED S11ARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINfLOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -539.53 GNMA POOLN0500917 01-Mar-2002 539.53 36210SPA0 6.000%04/152029 DO 04/011 01-Mer-2002 0.00 PC 15-Mer-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,140.52 GNMA POOL#0503388 01-Mer-2002 7,140.52 36210VF55 6.000%03/152029 DD 03/01/ 01-Mer-2002 -6,777.92 PI) 362.60 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,140.52 GNMA POOL#0503388 01-Mar-2002 7,140.52 36210VF55 6.000%03/152029 DO 03/011 01-Mer-2002 0.00 PC 15-Mer-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -133.71 GNMA POOL#0506636 01-Mar-2002 133.71 36210YY90 6.000%04/152029DD04/01/ 01-Mer-2002 -126.92 PD 6.79 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -133.71 GNMA POOL#0506636 01-Mer-2002 133.71 36210YY90 6.000%04/15/2029DD04/01/ 01-Mer-2002 0.00 PC 15-Mer-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -17,763.50 GNMA 11 POOL 90080023 01-Mer-2002 17,763.50 36225CAZ9 VAR RT 12/20/2026 DD 12/0119 01-Mar-2002 -18,057.71 PD -294.21 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -17,763.50 GNMA 11 POOL#0080023 01-Mar-2002 17,763.50 36225CAZ9 VAR RT 12202026 DD 12101/9 01-Mar-2002 0.00 PC 20-Mer-2002 0.00 09-Apr2001 9:40:40 Executive Wmkbemh Q Mellon Trust-Sam le Report PAGE: 33 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,240.55 GNMA POOLN0465546 01-Mu-2002 1,240.55 36209AET3 6.000'/e08/IS/2028DD08/01/ 01-Mer-2002 -1,177.55 PD 63.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,240.55 GNMA POOL#0465546 01-Mer-2002 1,240.55 36209AET3 6.000%09/15/2028 DD 08/01/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 15-Mer-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -22,646.81 GNMA 11 POOL 0080395 01-Mu-2002 22,646.91 36225CNM4 VAR FIT 04/20/2030DD04/01/ 01-Mu-2002 -22,441.57 PD 205.24 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -22,646.81 GNMA 11 POOL#0080395 01-Mar-2002 22,646.91 36225CNM4 VAR RT 04/20/2030 DO 04/01/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 20-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,427.70 FHLMC GROUP N78-6064 01-Mar-2002 7,427.70 31348SWZ3 6.384%01/0 112 0 2 9 DO 12/011 01-Mu-2002 -7,246.65 PD 181.05 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -20,578.41 GNMA II POOL N080088M 01-Mu-2002 20,578.41 36225CC20 7.375%06/20/2027 DD 06/01/ 01-Mer-2002 -21,028.56 PD -450.15 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -20,578.41 GNMA II POOL N080088M 01-Mu-2002 20,578.41 36225CC20 7.375%06/20/2027 DO 06/01/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 20-Mu-2002 0.00 09-4prv2002 9.40.40 Execnliw Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sam le Report PAGE: 34 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS000010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESWAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -205,127.49 GNMA II POOL 80SO408X 01-Ma-2002 205,127.49 36225CN28 6.500%05202030 DO 051011 01-Mar-2002 -203,044.16 PD 2,083.33 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -205,127.49 GNMA II POOL 0080408X 01-Mm-2002 205.127.49 36225CN28 6.500%05202030 DD 05/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 20-Mm-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,337.86 GREYSTONE SVCNG CORP FHA 095 01-Mar-2002 1,337.86 398108AE4 7.4301/6 06/012003 DO 0229/0 01-Mar-2002 -1,318.31 PD 19.55 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,337.86 GREYSTONE SVCNG CORP FHA#95 01-MU-2002 1,337.96 398108AE4 7.430%06/012003 DO 0229/0 01-Mu-2002 0.00 FC 25-Ma-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -57,699.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS MTG SER E3 01-Mar-2002 57,698.50 3133TCE95 VAR RT 0811512032 DO 12/01/ 01-Mu-2002 -57,761.60 PD -63.10 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -57.698.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS MTG SER E3 01-Mu-2002 57,698.50 3133TCE95 VAR RT 08/152032 DD 121011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 28-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -664.92 WMP/HUNTOON PAIGE 8000-11150 01-Ma-2002 664.92 302998GE3 7.500%12/012030 DO 1021/9 01-Marv2002 -650.48 PD 14.44 09-Aprv2002 9:40.40 Executive W&fbmch - Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 35 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -90,800.93 DISTRIBUTION FINL 99-1 CL A4 15-Mu-2002 90,800.93 25475MAD6 5.840%10/15/2011 DD03/Ie/9 15-Mar-2002 -92,702.07 PD -1,901.14 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -90,800.93 DISTRIBUTION FINL 99-1 CL A4 15-Mu-2002 90,500.93 25475MAD6 5.840%10/15/2011 DD 03/19/9 15-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 15-MU-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -55,%3.43 GNMA GTD REMIC TR 2000-9 FH I&Mer-2002 55,963.43 3837114NX9 VAR RT 02/162030 16-Mar-2002 -55,963.43 PD 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -55,963.43 GNMA GTD REMIC TR 2000-9 FH 16-Mar-2002 55,963.43 3837H4NX9 VAR RT 02/162030 16-Mar-2002 0.00 FC 18-Mar-20D2 0.00 MATURITIES CASH&CASH EQUIVALENTS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 01-Mar-2002 999,949.44 313589TS2 MAT 03/012002 01-Mer-2002 -999,949.44 MT 01-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 400,000.00 STUDENT IN MARKETING ASSN DI 05-My-2002 399,632.67 863873TW5 MAT 03/05/2002 05-My-2002 -399,632.67 MT 05-Mer-2002 0.00 09-Apr-1001 9:40.40 Exem0w Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE. 36 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OGSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESMAR - TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -200,000.00 BECTON DICKINSON DISC 11-Mar-2002 196,628.99 07588SCB7 03/112002 II-Mar-2002 -196,628.89 MT I I-Mer2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1,500,000.00 KRAFT FOODS INC DISC 12-Mar-2002 1,499,035.83 50D7MICC5 03/122002 12-Mar-2002 -1,499,035.83 MT 12-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -857,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 14-Mar.2002 953.815.77 313397UF6 MAT 03/142001 14-Mar-2002 -853,815.77 MT 14-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1.700,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 20-Mar-2002 1,692,966,61 36959JCL5 03202002 20-Mar-2002 -1.692,866.61 MT 20-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -15,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 22-Mar-2002 14,888.97 313397UP4 MAT 03222002 22-Mar-2002 -14,889.97 MT 22-Mar-2002 0.00 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -500,000.00 BANK ONE CORP SUB 01-Mu-2002 500,000.00 06423AAAI 9.100%03/012002 DO 03/01/9 01-My-2002 -514,290.00 MT 01-Mar-2002 -14,280.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -115,000.00 DAIMLERCHRYSLER NA HLDG CORP 01-Mar-2002 115,000.00 233835AF4 7.125%03/012002 DO 03/15/0 01-Ma 2002 -116,769.95 MT 01-Mar-2002 -1,769.85 09-Apr-2002 9.40:40 Executive Wor�ench -' Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE 37 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -300,000.00 GMAC MN I I-Mu-2002 300,000.00 37042WWN7 5.910%03/11/2002 DD 03110/9 11-Mu-2002 -302,148.00 MT 11-Mu-2002 -2,148.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -675,000.00 BANKAMERICA CORP SUB NT 15-Mu-2002 675,000.00 066050BQ7 8.375%03/1512002 15-Mu-2002 -697,018.50 MT 15-Mar-2002 -22,018.50 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -50,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS BUS 15-Mu-2002 50,000.00 3133M9U67 6.2101Y.03/15/2002 DD 09/15/ 15-Mu-2002 -50,713.00 MT 15-Mar-2002 -713.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -1,245,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MN 19-14u-2002 1,245,000.00 31364CZH4 6.490°h03/192002 DD 03119/9 19-Mu-2002 -1,257,138.75 MT 19-Mu-2002 -12,138.75 LIQUID OPER-P1MCO -1,300,000.00 STUDENT LN MARKETING ASSN 21-Ma 2002 1,300,000.00 86387NG6 VAR RT 03212002 DD 0920/ 21-Mu-2002 -1,299,928.13 MT 21-Mu-2002 171.87 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -25,000.00 FEDERAL HOME IN BK CONS BD 26-Mu-2002 25,000.00 3133M8CL6 5.410%03262002 DO 0326/ 26-Mu-2002 -25,292.75 MT 26-Mu-2002 -292.75 CORPORATE ACTIONS 09-Ap,2002 9:40:40 Executive Wwkbeneh Q Mellon Trust- Sample Report PAGE: 38 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG000/0000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ - AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 52,440.00 REPS INFLATION ADJUSTMENT 29-Mu-2002 0.00 9128272M3 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX 29-Mar-2002 0.00 SO 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12,597.00 REPS INFLATION ADJUSTMENT 29-Mu-2002 0.00 9128274Y5 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX 29-Mar-2002 0.00 SD 0.00 INTEREST LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS MTG SER E3 15-Jan-2002 9,816.29 3133TCE95 VAR RT 08/152032 DO 12/01/ 0.00 CD 15-Jan-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS MTG SER E3 15-Feb-2002 9,128.64 3133TCE95 VAR RT 08/15/2032 DO 12/01/ 0.00 CD 15-Feb-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -56,235.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 22-Feb-2002 .9,824.29 3133TCE95 VAR RT 08/15/2032 15-Jen-2002 0.00 ITC 22-Feb-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 BSDT-LATE MONEY DEPOSIT ACCT 01-Mu-2002 0.48 996087094 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 01-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9:40:40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE, 39 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS000010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 PACIFICORP SECD MTN 8TR 0011 01-Mar-2002 109,500.00 69512EEU5 7.300%IO222004 DD 10/22/9 01-Mm-2002 0.00 IT 01-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,600,000.00 UNITED AIRLS PASSTHRU 01-IC 01-Mu-2002 57,380.40 9093176C2 6.931%09/0112008 DD 08rM. 01-My-2002 0.00 IT 01-My-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 20,000.00 NIAGARA MOHAWK PWR CORP ST 01-Mv-2002 587.50 653522CQ3 5.875%09/012002 DO 09/0119 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 01-Ma-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 115.000.00 DAIMLERCHRYSLER NA HLDG CORP 01-My-2002 4,096.88 233835AF4 7.125%03/012002 DO 0311510 01-Mur2002 0.00 1T 01-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-Mar-2002 92,304.80 996085247 01-My-2002 0.00 IT 01-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 BANK ONE CORP SUB 01-MU-2002 20,250.00 06423AAAI 8.100%03/012002 DO 03/01/9 01-Mur-2002 0.00 IT 01-Mu-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 0.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-Mu-2002 6,539.09 996095247 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 01-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Alp -2001 9:40:40 Executive Wwkb mh Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 40 PORTFOLIO DETAIL Ocsc000l0000 01-MAR-2002 -31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAINILOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO L000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISCOU 01-Mar-2002 50.56 313589TS2 MAT 03/01/2002 01-Mer-2002 0.00 IT 01-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 100,561.48 SBA GTD DEV PARTN 2001-20C 1 01-Mar-2002 132,951.79 93162CUO 6.340%03/012021 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 01-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 400,000.00 STUDENT LN MARKETING ASSN DI 05-Mer-200I 367.33 863873TWS MAT 03/052002 05-Mee-2002 0.00 IT 05-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 660.32 WMP/HUNTOON PAIGE#000-1 1150 05-MW-2002 6,014.57 302998GE3 7.500%12/012030 DD 102119 01-Feb-2002 0.00 IT 05-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 PREMIER AUTO TR 99-3 CL AA 08-Mer-2002 2,679.17 74046RFW6 6.430%03108120D4 DO 062119 O8-Mer-2002 0.00 IT 08-My-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 85,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO NTS 11-Mar-2002 2,783.75 345397RS4 6.550%09/102002 DO 09110/9 10-Mae-2002 0.00 IT ll-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 200,000.00 BECTON DICKINSON DISC 11-Mar-2002 3,371.11 07588SCB7 03/112002 11-Mer-2002 0.00 IT 11-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apr'-1001 9.40:40 Exomfim Workbench - Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 41 PORTFOLIO DETAIL Ocsaooal0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 300,000.00 GMAC MTN 11-Mar-2002 7,880.00 37042WWN7 5.910%03/11/2002 DD 03/10/9 11-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 11-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,500,000.00 KRAFT FOODS INC DISC 12-Mar-2002 964.17 5007M1CC5 03/122002 12-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 12-MU-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 857,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 14-Mu-2002 3,194.23 313397UF6 MAT 03/14/2001 14-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 14-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 675,000.00 BANKAMERICA CORP SUB NT 15-Mar-2002 28,265.63 066050BQ7 8.375%03/152002 15-Mer-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 50,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS BDS 15-Mar-2002 1,552.50 3133M9U67 6.2100Y6 03/152002 DO 09/15/ 15-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,100,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DEBS 15-Mar-2002 69,562.50 31359MEY5 6.625%0911 52 00 9 DO 0910119 15-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB 15-Mar-2002 82,000.00 542671CT7 8.2000Y 03/152023 DD 0329/9 15-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 09-4pr-1001 9.40:40 Eee=tlw Workbewh Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE: 42 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 CONSOLIDATED EDISON N Y DEBS 15-Mar-2002 14,475.00 209111CU5 VAR RT 06/15/2002 DD 0620/ 15-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 40,178.65 FHLMC GROUP#G4-0353 15-Mar-2002 3,183.49 3128DBMA2 7.5001%10/012004 DO 03/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 189,421.01 FHLMC GROUP#G5-0476 15-My-2002 14,477.46 3128DDQ55 7.000%02/01/2003 DD 021011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 50.53 GNMA POOL#0438057 15-Mu-2002 206.46 36207FTN9 6.000%0511512028 DD 051011 01-M.-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 112.67 GNMA POOL#0457814 15-Mar-2002 381.22 36208QSB3 6.000%10/152028 DD 10/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,500.27 GNMA POOL#0465555 15-Mar-2002 4,139.99 36209AE48 6.000%09/15/2028 DD 09/OI/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 79.22 GNMA POOL#0467279 15-Mar-2002 257.51 36209CCQ7 6.000%10/152028 DO 10/011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9:40:40 F..a a Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sem le Re rt PAGE: 43 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSGOOOIOOOO 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSO-CONSOLMATED SHARESMAR TRADE DATFI AMOUNT'/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,915.00 GNMA POOL80467286 15-Mu-2002 3,442.90 36209CCX2 6.000%10/152028 DO 10/01/ 01-Mu-20O2 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO I,520.01 GNMA POOL 80468330 IS-Mer-2002 194.47 36209DHF4 6.000%05/1517028 DO O51011 01-Mu-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONGTERM OPER-PIMCO 1,034.67 GNMA POOL 90469339 15-Mu-2002 3,936.46 36209DHQ0 6.000%08/15/2028 DD 08/011 01-Mu-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 690.92 GNMA POOL8046%88 15-Mu-2002 205.63 36209EXRB 6.000%11/152028 DD II/Ol/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 44.31 GNMA POOL80483452 15-Mu-2002 162.08 36209WBV3 6.000%09/152028 DO 09101/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 314.69 GNMA POOL80486720 15-Mu-2002 102.00 36210AVM6 6.000%I7JI512028 DO 12 II 01-Mu-2002 HO IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PRNCO 331.03 GNMA POOL80491103 15-Mu-2002 1,155.76 36210FRY4 6.000%0l/152029DD01/0l/ 01-Mu-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9.40.40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sam le Report PAGE..- 44 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 11.15 GNMA POOL#0496284 15-Mar-2002 47.96 36210MJ51 6.000%01/152029 DD 02/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0,00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 14,682.20 GNMA POOL#0496461 15-Mar-2002 4,159.97 36210MQN4 6.000%01/15/2029DD01/0l/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Maz-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 54.96 GNMA POOL#0497343 15-Mar-2002 206.04 36210NP45 6.000%1 211 5/2 0 2 9 DO 12/01/ 01-Maz-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 31.39 GNMA POOL#0499153 15-Maz-2002 129.84 3621000E5 6.000%02/152029 DO 02/011 01-Ma 2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 539.53 GNMA POOL#0500917 15-Mar-2002 108.39 36210SPAO 6.000%04/15/2029 DO 041011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,140.52 GNMA POOL#0503388 15-Mm-2002 4,279.25 36210VF55 6.000%03/15/2029DO03/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 133.71 GNMA POOL#0506636 15-Mar-2002 333.74 36210YY90 6.000%04/152029DD04/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9.40:40 EaecaOve Workbench Qij Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE.. 45 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCS0000/0000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOL/DATED SHARES/PAR - TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 9,385.45 FHLMC GROUP#78-6064 15-Mar-2002 930.17 31348SWZ3 6,384%01/012028 DO 12/01/ 01-Feb-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mu-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 90,800.93 DISTRIBUTION FINL 99-1 CL A4 15-Mar-2002 4,527.33 25475MAD6 5.8401/6 10/15/2011 DO 03/19/9 15-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,240.55 GNMA POOL80465546 15-Mar-2002 4,249.74 36209AET3 6.000%08/15/2028 DO 08/01/ 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 15-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,500,000.00 DAIMLER CHRYSLER NA CORP NT 18-Mar-2002 30,030.00 233835AM9 FLTG RT 12/16/2002 DD 121151 17-Mar-2002 0.00 IT I8-Mer-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,000,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO GLOBAL LANDMA I8-Mar-2002 15,621.67 345397SRS FLTG RT 03/17/2003 DO 03/16/ 17-Mar-2002 0.00 IT I8-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 55,963.43 GNMA GTD REMIC TR 2000-9 FH I8-Mar-2002 3,222.51 3837H4NX9 VAR RT 02/16/2030 16-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 18-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,245,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 19-Mar-2002 40,400.25 31364CZH4 6.4905A 03/192002 DD 03/19/9 19-Mu-2002 0.00 IT 19-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2001 9.40.40 Execuliw Wwkbeneh Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE.. 46 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOLIDATED SHARESIPAR TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY H) TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAIN/LOSS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 13,517.29 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF SER 162 19-Mar-2002 13,517.29 3133T17A4 6.000%11/15/2023 DO 1110119 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 19-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,500,000.00 CHRYSLER FINL LLC MTN M006 20-Mar-2002 2,321.67 17120QESO FLTG RT 08/082002 DO 04108/ 19-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 20-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,700,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 20-Mu-2002 7,133.39 36959JCL5 03/20/2002 20-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 20-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 17,763.50 GNMA 11 POOL 00080023 20-Mar-2002 3,389.27 36225CAZ9 VAR RT 12/20/2026 DO 12101/9 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 20-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 20,578.41 GNMA u POOL 4080088M 20-Mar-2002 5,125.53 36225CC20 Z375%06/20/2027 DO 061011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 20-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 22,646.81 GNMA II POOL 00080395 20-Ma 2002 3,164.19 36225CNM4 VAR RT 0420203O DD 04/011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 20-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 205,127.49 GNMA 11 POOL 8080408X 20-Mar-2002 27,208-12 36225CN28 6.500%05/202030 DO 051011 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 20-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9:40.40 Executive Workbench Q Mellon Trust-Sample Report PAGE 47 PORTFOLIO DETAIL OCSG00010000 01-MAR-2002-31-MAR-2002 OCSD-CONSOIJDATED SHAREWPAR - TRADE DATE/ AMOUNT/ SECURITY ID TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION/ SETTL DATE/ COST/ TRANSCODE BROKER COMPLDATE GAINILOSS LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,300,000.00 STUDENT LN MARKETING ASSN 21-My-2002 14,047.98 86387THG6 VAR RT 03/212002 DO 0920/ 21-Mar-2002 0.00 1T 21-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 15,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DIS 22-Mar-2002 111.13 313397UP4 MAT 03/222002 22-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 22-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF TI I A6 25-Mar-2002 10,833.33 3133TDPV2 6.500%09252018 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 25-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,337.96 GREYSTONE SVCNG CORP FHA 095 25-Mar-2002 5,019.43 398108AE4 7.430°h06/01/2003 DO 0229/0 01-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 25-Mar-2002 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 25,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS ED 26-Mar-2002 676.25 3133MSCL6 5.410%03262002 DO 031261 26-Mar-2002 0.00 IT 26-Mar-2002 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 SHORT TERM FDS INT ADJ 29-Mar-2002 -29.92 990000P14 NET OF OVERNIGHT INTEREST 29-Mar-2002 0.00 CW 29-Mar-2002 0.00 09-Apr-2002 9:40.40 Eremliw Workbench i FAHIR COMMITTEE g 14mvDa ad.ofDir. 04/10( te To 02 04/24/02 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number FMR02-33 14(d) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Lisa Tomko, Director of Human Resources Originator: Jeff Reed, Human Resources Manager SUBJECT: Additions to Safety Policies as Authorized by Resolution No. OCSD 02-5 GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve SAFETY-POL-103, 105, 111, 112 and 403, as provided for in Resolution No. OCSD 02-5, regarding the District's Injury and Illness Prevention Program Policy. SUMMARY Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 3203, and California Labor Code, Section 6401.7, require employers to establish, implement and maintain an effective injury prevention program. The District's written Injury and Illness Prevention (IIP) Program was approved in February 2002. The IIP Program provides that written safety and health policies, procedures and programs will be developed and maintained to ensure compliance with applicable Federal OSHA and Cal-OSHA requirements and to carryout effective accident prevention in the workplace, thereby reducing injury incidence rates. To ensure that the IIP Program is effectively implemented, various Safety Policies are being developed to address targeted compliance areas. The initial compliance areas identified for program development and policy implementation are indicated in the following policies: • SAFETY-POL-103 Safety Awareness For Everyone (SAFE) Bulletins • SAFETY-POL-105 Hazardous Energy Control • SAFETY-POL-111 Chemical Hygiene Plan • SAFETY-POL-112 Integrated Emergency Response Program • SAFETY-POL-403 Employee Access to Medical Records PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Not Applicable 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 Written safety compliance programs are detailed in specific Safety Policies, Procedures or Programs. The initial five policies being submitted for approval are the following: SAFETY-POL-103 Safety Awareness For Everyone (SAFE) Bulletins SAFE bulletins are bulletins issued on specific safety related items explaining how something should be done or how specific components of a safety program are to be implemented. SAFE Bulletins shall be considered policy for items not covered by specific policies. SAFETY-POL-105 Hazardous Energy Control This policy formalizes a safety program that has been in place since 1994. This program is mandated by Cal-OSHA. It includes the requirements for working on or around equipment that is energized or equipment that has the potential to contain residual energy. SAFETY-POL-111 Chemical Hygiene Plan This policy formalizes the Chemical Hygiene Plan used by the Environmental Sciences Laboratory since 1996. It is mandated by Cal-OSHA. This program includes the duties of the safety specialist, supervisor, and laboratory employees. SAFETY-POL-112 Integrated Emergency Response Program This policy formalizes the Integrated Emergency Response Program, which has been in place for the last six years. This program is mandated by Cal-OSHA, in addition to other regulatory agencies. The plan is divided into three (3) volumes. Volume I, Emergency Preparedness, contains plans for preparing for an emergency. Volume II, Emergency Procedures, contains plans and procedures to be implemented in response to an emergency. Volume III, which is under development, includes organizational recovery plans. SAFETY-POL-403 Employee Access to Medical Records This program is mandated by Cal-OSHA. It formalizes procedures for granting employees access to their occupational medical and exposure. This program includes procedures on how employees may request their records and what they are allowed access to. Also included are the timeframes for compliance with requests. ALTERNATIVES Not Applicable cw.v.wYOM�> a�pvk�Fm��3mxeum ApaW RepmfDldNwm l�le).&MWaWa eoc w W o 2 Page 2 i CEQA FINDINGS Not Applicable ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 - SAFETY-POL-103 Safety Awareness For Everyone (SAFE) Bulletins Attachment 2 - SAFETY-POL-105 Hazardous Energy Control Attachment 3 - SAFETY-POL-111 Chemical Hygiene Plan Attachment 4 - SAFETY-POL-112 Integrated Emergency Response Program Attachment 5 - SAFETY-POL-403 Employee Access to Medical Records (Iewp.euNpeMeBme Apenm PepMe1'W3gp a Apenee Rep�141el.sei d..eec Page 3 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Safety Division SAFETY-POL-103 Safety Awareness For Everyone (SAFE) Bulletins APPROVALS Approved by: Date: Director of Human Resources Approved by: Date: Manager,Human Resources Approved by: Date: Safety Supervisor PROCEDURE REVISION HISTORY Rev. Date Approval 0 This document is controlled when viewed online. When downloaded and printed, this document becomes UNCONTROLLED, and users should check the Safety Division public folder to ensure that they have the latest version. SAFE Bulletins SAFELY-POL-103 Contents 1. Purpose................................................................................................3 2. Definitions ...........................................................................................3 3. Requirements......................................................................................3 3.1 Bulletin Development.........................................................................................4 3.1.1 Administration..........................................................................................5 4. References...........................................................................................5 5. Attachments ........................................................................................5 Rev.o Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 2 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-103 safe bulle6ns.doc Number: SAFETY-POL-103 Orange County Sanitation District Revision Number: 0 Safety Awareness For Everyone (SAFE) Date: April 24, 2002 Bulletins Approved by: Lisa Tomko 1 . Purpose Safety Awareness For Everyone (SAFE) bulletins are bulletins issued on specific safety related items explaining how something should be done or how specific components of a safety program are to be implemented. SAFE Bulletins shall be considered District policy for items not covered by specific policies. 2. Definitions None 3. Requirements 1. A listing of SAFE Bulletins may be found in SAFE Bulletin Number 000. 2. SAFE Bulletins shall be reviewed at least every three (3) years. 3. SAFE Bulletins more than three (3) years old shall not be considered District policy. 4. SAFE Bulletins shall be developed: A. To highlight specific areas of an existing Safety Policy B. To clarify the requirements of an existing Safety Policy or Procedure. C. To act as a Safety policy provided: (1) The SAFE Bulletin is only about one topic, and; (2) There is not an existing District policy that should cover the information. Rev.A Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date February 28, 2002 3 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety,policies-sops-forms\f'inal-safety policies\safety-pol-103 safe bulletins.doc SAFE Bulletins SAFETY-1201_403 D. As a clarification to a Cal-OSHA standard or best industry practice 3.1 Bulletin Development 1. SAFE Bulletins shall be developed using one or more of the following reference materials: A. Cal-OSHA standards and guidance documents B. The California Labor Code C. Federal OSHA standards and guidance documents D. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) guidance documents E. Local laws and regulations F. Cal-EPA and Federal EPA laws, regulations and guidance documents G. Consensus standards, including but not limited to: (1) The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (2) The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) (3) American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) 2. SAFE Bulletins shall be no more than 2 pages in length. 3. SAFE Bulletins should answer the question, "how do I comply with..." or "what the requirement really means is..." 4. Multiple SAFE Bulletins may address different aspects of the same topic. 5. SAFE Bulletins shall identify the applicable regulation or policy in the bulletin. 6. SAFE Bulletins shall be approved by Safety Division Management. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 4 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documenls\safety policies-sops-forms\final -safety policies\safety-pol-103 safe bulletins.doc SAFE Bulletins SAFETY-POL-103 3.1.1 Administration 1. The Safety Division shall be responsible for the development and issuance of SAFE Bulletins. The Safety Division shall ensure SAFE Bulletins are reviewed, revised or retracted at least every three years. 4. References Title 8 California Code of Regulations, §3203. Injury and Illness Prevention Program California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Division 1, Department of Industrial Relations California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5 Hazardous Waste Management SAFETY-POL-101, Injury and Illness Prevention Program SAFETY-SOP-000.1, Control of Polices, Procedures, Programs 5. Attachments None Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 5 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-poi-103 safe bulletins.doc ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Safety Division SAFETY-POL-105 Hazardous Energy Control APPROVALS Approved by: Date: Director of Human Resources Approved by: Date: Manager,Human Resources Approved by: Date: Safety Supervisor PROCEDURE REVISION HISTORY Rev. Date Approval 0 This document is controlled when viewed in the NTGLOBAUSafety directory. Men downloaded and printed, this document becomes UNCONTROLLED, and users should check the NTGLOBAUSafety directory to ensure that they have the latest version. Hazardous Energy Control SAFETY-110 05 Contents 1. Purpose................................................................................................3 2. Definitions ...........................................................................................3 3. Requirements......................................................................................4 2. References...........................................................................................5 4. Attachments ........................................................................................5 Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date:April 24, 2002 2 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-105 hazardous energy control.doc Number: SAFETY-POL-705 Orange County Sanitation District Revision Number: 0 Hazardous Energy Control Date: April 24, 2002 Approved by: Lisa Tomko 1 . Purpose This Policy has been developed to ensure that employees ensure hazardous energy is controlled at the source (or sources) prior to performing any work on a piece of equipment or on a process. This policy also establishes the procedures and necessary training required to perform hazardous energy control. This policy applies to all district employees and contractors who may service energized equipment for any reason 2. Definitions Affected An employee who operates equipment that is being serviced Employee under lockout/tagout activities Authorized An employee who locks and tags out equipment in order to Employee perform servicing or maintenance on the equipment. Blind Flange A solid plate or cap installed in a pipe, line or duct to ensure absolute closure and to prevent passage of any material. Bleed To release or dissipate residual energy in a machine or equipment so that all energy is a reduced to zero energy state. Blocking Device A device that physically restrains, secures or prevents the falling or moving of machinery or equipment. Chaining A method of rendering machinery or equipment secure or inoperable. De-energize To remove, restrain or secure energy either supplied to or stored in machinery or equipment. Lockout The application of a lock or other mechanical arrangement which positively prevents the energization or release of hazardous Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 3 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-fo"Onal-safety policies\sefety-pol-105 hazardous energy control.doc Hazardous Energy Control SAFETY-POL-105 energy. Tagout A prominent warning device, printed in the OSHA approved "Danger" format, which alerts workers not to energize machinery or equipment. Zero Mechanical The mechanical state of a machine in which every power source State that can produce a machine member movement has been locked out or sealed off. This includes the following types of energy, radiation, electrical, gravity, pneumatic, thermal, chemical, mechanical and hydraulic. 3. Requirements The specific requirements of this Hazardous Energy Control Policy are found in SP-105 Hazardous Energy Control Programs. At a minimum, this program must include the following: 1. Identification of types of hazardous energy present. 2. Recognition of hazards present. 3. Coordination with the affected workforce. 4. Methods to control hazardous energy. A. Physical methods to control hazardous energy. B. Procedural methods to control hazardous energy. 5. Procedures for verifying zero energy state. 6. Procedures for group locks and tags. 7. Procedures for re-testing equipment after servicing. 8. Provisions for removal of locks and tags. 9. Communication regarding locks and tags between shifts. 10. Incorporation of State Water Resources Control Board provisions for hazardous energy control at wastewater treatment plants. Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date:April 24, 2002 4 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\Final-safety policies\safety-pol-105 hazardous energy control.doc Hazardous Energy Control SAFETY-POL-105 11. Training and communication of hazards 12. Provisions for contractors. 13. Annual review of the program by authorized persons. 2. References SAFETY-SP-105 Hazardous Energy Control 29 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910.147, The Control of Hazardous Energy Title 8, California Cade of Regulations, Section 3314 Cleaning, Repairing, Servicing and Adjusting Prime Movers, Machinery and Equipment Title 23, California Code of Regulations ,Chapter 26, Sections 3670-3718 4. Attachments None Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date:April 24,2002 5 of 5 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\6nal-safety policies\safety-pol-105 hazardous energy control.doc ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Safety Division SAFETY-POL-111 Chemical Hygiene Program APPROVALS Approved by: Date: Director of Human Resources Approved by: Date: Manager,Human Resources Approved by: Date: Safety Supervisor PROCEDURE REVISION HISTORY Rev. Date Approval 0 This document is controlled when viewed online. When downloaded and printed, this document becomes UNCONTROLLED, and users should check the Safety and Emergency Response public folder to ensure that they have the latest version. Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 Contents 1. Purpose................................................................................................3 2. Definitions ...........................................................................................3 3. Requirements......................................................................................I 3.1 General Requirements ......................................................................................7 3.2 Exposure Assessment and Medical Evaluation.................................................7 3.2.1 Exposure Assessments............................................................................8 3.2.2 Medical Evaluation...................................................................................8 3.3 Laboratory Safety Officer Duties .......................................................................9 3.3.1 Responsibilities of the Laboratory Safety Officer.....................................9 3.4 Laboratory Safety Committee............................................................................9 3.4.1 Make Up and Functions of the Laboratory Safety Committee................10 3.5 Training program.............................................................................................11 3.5.1 Initial Training program ..........................................................................11 3.5.2 Refresher/On Going Training program...................................................11 3.6 Program Administration and Review ...............................................................12 3.6.1 Program Administration and Review Process........................................12 4. References.........................................................................................12 5. Attachments ......................................................................................13 Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 2 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents5safety policies-sops-forms\final -safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Number: SAFETY-POL-111 Orange County Sanitation District Revision Number: 0 Chemical Hygiene Plan Date: April 24, 2002 Approved by: Lisa Tomko 1 . Purpose This Chemical Hygiene Plan defines the laboratory safety requirements for the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. The program is designed to protect district employees, contractors, volunteers and visitors from potentially unsafe conditions that may be encountered while present in a laboratory environment. 2. Definitions Action Level A concentration designated in Title 8 CCR for a specific substance, calculated as an eight- (8) hour time-weighted average, which initiates certain required activities such as exposure monitoring, training and medical surveillance. Carcinogen Any substance which meets one of the following criteria: (1) It is regulated by Cal/OSHA as a carcinogen; or(2) It is listed under the category, "known to be carcinogens," in the Annual Report on Carcinogens published by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) (1985 edition); or(3) It is listed under Group 1 ("carcinogenic to humans") by the International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs (IARC) (Volumes 1-48 and Supplements 1-8); or(4) It is listed in either Group 2A or 2B by IARC or under the category, "reasonably anticipated to be carcinogens" by NTP, and causes statistically significant tumor incidence in experimental animals in accordance with any of the following criteria: (A)After inhalation exposure of 6-7 hours per day, 5 days per week,for a significant portion of a lifetime to dosages of less than 10 mg/m3; (B)After repeated skin application of less than 300 mg/kg of body weight per week; or (C) After oral dosages of less than 50 mg/kg of body weight per day. Rev.A Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date 1/30101 3 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hn650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan sAmry.pOL-111 Combustible Any liquid having a flashpoint at or above 100" F (37.8° C), but Liquid below 200" F (93.3" C) except any mixture having components with flashpoints of 200" F (93.3" C), or higher, the total volume of which make up 99 percent or more of the total volume of the mixture Compressed Gas A Compressed gas is:. (1)A gas or mixture of gases having, in a container, an absolute pressure exceeding 40 psi at 70' F (21.1" C); or(2)A gas or mixture of gases having, in a container, an absolute pressure exceeding 104 psi at 130" F (54.4" C) regardless of the pressure at 70" F (21.1" C); or(3)A liquid having a vapor pressure exceeding 40 psi at 100" F (37.8° C) as determined by ASTM D-323-72. Cryogenic Liquid A liquid with a boiling point below minus 238 degrees Fahrenheit Explosive A chemical that causes a sudden, almost instantaneous release of pressure, gas, and heat when subjected to sudden shock, pressure, or high temperature Flammable Flammable. A chemical that falls into one of the following categories: (1) "Aerosol, flammable" means an aerosol that, when tested by the method described in 16 CFR 1500.45, yields a flame projection exceeding 18 inches at full valve opening, or a flashback (a flame extending back to the valve) at any degree of valve opening; 2) "Gas, flammable" means: (A)A gas that, at ambient temperature and pressure, forms a flammable mixture with air at a concentration of 13 percent by volume or less; or(B) A gas that, at ambient temperature and pressure, forms a range of flammable mixtures with air greater than 12 percent by volume, regardless of the lower explosive limit. (3) "Liquid, flammable" means any liquid having a flashpoint below 100" F (37.8" C), except any mixture having components with flashpoints of 100" F (37.8° C) or higher, the total of which make up 99 percent or more of the total volume of the mixture. (4) "Solid, flammable" means a solid, other than a blasting agent or explosive as defined in 29 CFR 1910.109(a), that is liable to cause fire through friction, absorption of moisture, spontaneous chemical change, or retained heat from manufacturing or processing, or which can be ignited readily and when ignited bums so vigorously and persistently as to create a serious hazard. A chemical shall be considered to be a flammable solid if, when tested by the method described in 16 CFR 1500.44, it Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 4 of 13 g:lwp.dta%hr%65Mshared documentslsafety policies-saps-fo"slfinal-safety polidesXsafety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 ignites and bums with a self-sustained flame at a rate greater than one-tenth of an inch per second along its major axis. Flashpoint The minimum temperature at which a liquid gives off a vapor in sufficient concentration to ignite Hazardous Hazardous chemical. A chemical for which there is statistically Chemical significant evidence based on at least one study conducted in accordance with established scientific principles that acute or chronic health effects may occur in exposed employees. The term "health hazard" includes chemicals which are carcinogens, toxic or highly toxic agents, reproductive toxins, irritants, corrosives, sensitizers, hepatotoxins, nephrotoxins, neurotoxins, agents which act on the hematopoietic systems, and agents which damage the lungs, skin, eyes, or mucous membranes Hazardous Waste any hazardous chemical that: Has been contaminated by use in a process or method; or has exceeded it's usable shelf Iffe or is no longer needed or is surplus or has spilled and is contaminated with material used to clean up or contain the spill. Laboratory The committee formed by the Environmental Sciences Safety Committee Laboratory to implement the Laboratory Safety and Chemical Hygiene Plan Laboratory A person designated by the district to provide technical guidance Safety Officer in the development and implementation of the Laboratory Safety and Chemical Hygiene Plan Laboratory The written program developed and implemented by the Safety Safety and Division and the Environmental Sciences Laboratory in order to Chemical define applicable procedures, equipment, personal protective Hygiene Plan equipment and work practices. Laboratory-Type Laboratory-type hood. A device located in a laboratory, enclosed Hood on five sides with a movable sash or fixed partial enclosure on the remaining side; constructed and maintained to draw air from the laboratory and to prevent or minimize the escape of air contaminants into the laboratory; and allows chemical manipulations to be conducted in the enclosure without insertion of any portion of the employee's body other than hands and arms. Material Safety A technical document or printed or electronic information Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 5 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety polides\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 Data Sheet comprised of a brief summary of relevant chemical, physical and toxicological data, procedures for safe handling, storage and use, and the implementation of emergency practices. Organic Peroxide An organic compound that contains the bivalent-oo-structure and which may be considered to be a structural derivative of hydrogen peroxide where one or both of the hydrogen atoms has been replaced by an organic radical. Oxidizer A chemical other than a blasting agent or explosive , that initiates or promotes combustion in other materials, thereby causing fire either of itself or through the release of oxygen or other gases Permissible Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL). The maximum permitted 8- Exposure Limit hour time-weighted average concentration of an airborne (PEL) contaminant. PELs are listed in 8 CCR 5155, Table AC-1, Permissible Exposure Limits. Additional PELs may be found in 8 CCR, Article 110, Regulated Carcinogens Physical Hazard A chemical for which there is scientifically valid evidence that it is a combustible liquid, a compressed gas, explosive, flammable, an organic peroxide, an oxidizer, pyrophoric, unstable (reactive) or water-reactive. Reproductive Chemicals which affect the reproductive capabilities including Toxins chromosomal damage (mutations) and effects on fetuses (teratogenesis). Threshold Limit The maximum recommended 8-hour time-weighted average Value (TLV) concentration of an airborne contaminant. TLVs are found in the most current edition of"Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents and Biological Exposure Indices, written by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), Cincinnati, OH. Unstable A chemical which is the pure state or as produced or (reactive) transported, will vigorously polymerize, decompose, condense, or will become self-reactive under conditions of shocks, pressure or temperature. Water-Reactive Water-reactive. A chemical that reacts with water to release a gas that is either flammable or presents a health hazard. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 6 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 3. Requirements The required elements listed below are the nine elements of a respiratory program required by the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal-OSHA). Specific detail of each element may be found in specific respiratory program standard operating procedures, where applicable. 3.1 General Requirements The Laboratory Safety and Chemical Hygiene Plan shall be made readily available to all personnel working in the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. The Laboratory Safety and Chemical Hygiene Plan is found in Appendix B of the Environmental Sciences Laboratory, Laboratory Operating Procedures Manual (LOPM). The manual includes the following requirements: 1. Control measures to reduce personal exposure to hazardous chemicals. 2. Fume hoods and other protective equipment. 3. Sources where employees can provide information and required training. 4. Medical surveillance requirements, including emergency procedures and consultation requirements. 5. Provisions for working with carcinogens, toxins and substances with high acute toxicity. 6. Exposure assessment requirements. 3.2 Exposure Assessment and Medical Evaluation Exposure assessments are required periodically to determine if laboratory personnel are exposed to levels of hazardous chemicals exceeding the action level, permissible exposure limit or threshold limit value. Medical evaluation will be conducted Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 7 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-Ill chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 based on exposure assessments in accordance with SAFETY- POL-401, Medical Examinations. 3.2.1 Exposure Assessments Exposure assessments shall be performed biennially, unless required more frequently by regulation. 1. Safety Division, in consultation with laboratory management shall determine which chemicals and employees shall be monitored. 2. Exposure assessments shall be representative of a work task with a specific chemical. 3. Employees shall be made aware of the results of all exposure assessments within 15 working days of the receipt of the results. 4. Results of exposure monitoring shall be used to: A. Determine engineering controls. B. Improve existing engineering controls C. Change processes to reduce potential exposures. D. Determine personal protective equipment needs E. Determine medical evaluation requirements F. Conduct chemical speck training. 3.2.2 Medical Evaluation 1. Medical evaluations shall be conducted under the following conditions: A. Exposure monitoring indicates airborne levels of hazardous chemicals are above the action level or PEL and medical evaluation is required by regulation or best industry practice. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 8 of 13 gAwp.dtalhr%650\shared domments\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policieslsafety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-P6L-111 B. The Laboratory Safety Committee, in consultation with the Management determines the need for medical evaluation based on best industry practice and the potential for exposure. 3.3 Laboratory Safety Officer Duties The Laboratory Safety Officer shall be the Safety Specialist, in the absence of a Safety Specialist, a Laboratory Safety Officer shall be chosen from among the senior Environmental Sciences Laboratory staff. The Supervisor of the Safety Division shall act as an advisor to the Laboratory Safety Committee until a Safety Specialist is available. 3.3.1 Responsibilities of the Laboratory Safety Officer 1. Advise the Laboratory Safety Committee about best laboratory practices. 2. Advise the laboratory about changes to safety and health regulations that may affect the operation of the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. 3. In consultation with Laboratory Management, determine exposure assessment strategies for hazardous chemicals. 4. Conduct periodic safety audits of laboratory facilities. 5. In consultation with Laboratory Management, determine training needs for laboratory personnel. 6. Determine other issues and implement recommendations to ensure the Environmental Sciences Laboratory is a safe workplace. 3.4 Laboratory Safety Committee The Laboratory Safety Committee shall establish safety-related goals and objectives for the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 9 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final -safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 3.4.1 Make Up and Functions of the Laboratory Safety Committee 1. The Laboratory Safety Committee shall be comprised of the following senior Environmental Sciences Laboratory personnel and one representative from the Safety Division. A. Laboratory Manager B. Laboratory Section Supervisors C. Scientists D. Principle Laboratory Research Analysts E. Laboratory Secretary F. Safety Specialist or Safety Supervisor 2. The committee shall meet at least quarterly and additionally as required. 3. The Laboratory Safety Committee shall perform the following tasks: A. Review laboratory procedures to ensure procedure speck safe work practices are written into the procedures as required. B. Review accidents and determine root causes and corrective actions for each accident. C. Review laboratory audit findings and corrective actions for each. D. Determine training needs for personnel working in the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. E. Review exposure monitoring data and determine what, if any actions are required to ensure employees are not exposed to harmful levels of potentially hazardous chemicals. F. Discuss other issues and implement recommendations to ensure the Environmental Sciences Laboratory is a safe workplace. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 10 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 3.5 Training program This section outlines the requirements the district has established to provide effective training to personnel who are to work in the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. 3.5.1 Initial Training program 1. The Safety Division shall establish an initial training class on laboratory safety for personnel assigned to work in the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. 2. Training shall be provided prior to the employee working in the laboratory. 3.5.2 Refresher/On Going Training program 1. Safety training shall be an on-going process in the laboratory. 2. Training topics shall reflect : A. New topics related to new hazards or previously unidentified hazards. B. Updates on district safety policies and procedures. C. Updates on State and Federal OSHA requirements. D. Updates in personal protective equipment. E. Other topics as deemed necessary by the Laboratory Safety Officer. 3. Other retraining shall be administered as required, and when the following situation(s) occur. A. Changes in the workplace or the equipmenttprocesses render previous training obsolete. B. If the employee cannot demonstrate knowledge or use Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 11 of 13 g:\wp.dts\hr\660\shared documents\safety policies-sops4brms\111nal-safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL411 any personal protective equipment. C. Any other situation arises in which retraining appears necessary to ensure safe work practices are followed. 3.6 Program Administration and Review The district has designated a program administrator who is qualified by appropriate training and experience to administer and oversee the respiratory protection program and conduct the required evaluations of program effectiveness. 3.6.1 Program Administration and Review Process The Chemical Hygiene Plan shall be managed and administered by the Safety Division. The Laboratory Safety Officer shall be the Safety Specialist. This Chemical Hygiene Plan shall be evaluated biennially to ensure that it is effective in protecting personnel working in the Environmental Sciences Laboratory. The Laboratory Safety Committee shall perform the review. 4. References SAFETY-POL-102, Personal Protective Equipment SAFETY-POL-401 Medical Examinations Appendix B of the Environmental Sciences Laboratory, Laboratory Operating Procedures Manual (LOPM). Title 8, California Code of Regulations Section 5191, Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in Laboratories. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 12 of 13 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-formsAnal-safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc Chemical Hygiene Plan SAFETY-POL-111 5. Attachments None Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 13 of 13 g:\wp.dte\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final -safety policies\safety-pol-111 chemical hygiene.doc ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Safety Division SAFETY-POL-112 Integrated Emergency Response Plan APPROVALS Approved by: Date: Director of Human Resources Approved by: Date: Manager,Human Resources Approved by: Date: Safety Supervisor PROCEDURE REVISION HISTORY Rev. Date Approval 0 This document is controlled when viewed in the NTGLOBAL/Safety directory. When downloaded and printed, this document becomes UNCONTROLLED, and users should check the NTGLOBALJSafety directory to ensure that they have the latest version. Integrated Emergency Response Plan SAFETY-POL-112 Contents 1. Purpose................................................................................................3 2. Definitions ...........................................................................................3 3. Requirements......................................................................................A 2. References............................................................................................5 4. Attachments........................................................................................6 Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is uncontrolled Date:April 24, 2002 2 of 6 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policieslsafety-pol-I12 ierp.doc Number: SAFETY-POL-112 Orange County Sanitation District Revision Number: 0 Integrated Emergency Response Plan Date: April 24, 2002 Approved by: Lisa Tomko 1. Purpose This Policy has been developed to ensure that the requirements of the District's Integrated Emergency Response Plan (IERP) (SAFETY-SP-112) are properly maintained. This policy also establishes the requirements, procedures and necessary training required for implementing the IERP and activating the Incident Command System (ICS). This policy applies to all district employees, contractors, visitors or regulatory personnel who may interface with the district during an emergency. 2. Definitions Activate To implement the Incident Command System as appropriate to the scope of an emergency. The district uses 3 levels of activation. Disaster A sudden calamitous emergency event causing great damage, loss or destruction. Emergency A condition of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property caused by such conditions as fire, flood, hazardous materials incident, storm, epidemic, civil unrest, drought, sudden and severe energy shortage, animal infestations or diseases, an earthquake (or prediction), or other conditions as determined by the General Manager of designee. Incident A nationally used, standardized on-scene emergency Command management system. System (ICS) Mutual Aid A voluntary provision of services and facilities provided by the district or another agency or city when existing district or agency resources prove to be inadequate. Standardized A system required by the California Government Code for Emergency managing responses to multi-agency and multi-jurisdictional Rev.A Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date 3 of 6 g:\wpAta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-112 ierp.doc Integrated Emergency Response Plan SAFETY-POL-112 Management emergencies System (SEMS) Unified A unified team effort that allows all agencies with responsibility Command for an incident to manage the incident by establishing a common set of incident objectives and strategies. 3. Requirements The specific requirements and procedures of this Integrated Emergency Response Policy are found in SAFETY-SP-112 Integrated Emergency Response Plan. At a minimum, this program must include the following: 1. Provisions for the plan administration, including but not limited to: A. Responsibilities for the plan B. Maintenance of the plan C. Training D. Documentation 2. Provisions for developing an Incident Command System for emergencies. 3. Provisions for training personnel on the plan. 4. Provisions for prevention planning 5. Provisions for developing an emergency medical plan. 6. Provisions for developing a media plan 7. Provisions for developing a finance plan 8. Provisions for developing mutual aid agreements 9. Provisions for developing a business emergency plan as required by the California Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.95. 10. Provisions for developing a spill prevention control and Rev.0 Hard Copy Is uncontrolled Date:April 24,2002 4 of 6 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents%safety policies-sops-formOnal-safety policies\safety-pol-112 ierp.doc Integrated Emergency Response Plan SAFETY-POL-112 countermeasure plan. 11. Provisions for developing emergency specific procedures. 12. Provisions for developing post emergency procedures. 2. Responsibilities 1. The responsibilities for the program administration and implementation are included in the plan. 3. References CCR Title 8, § 3220 Emergency Action Plan, § 3221 Fire Prevention Plan, § 5192 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response; CCR Title 19, § 2620 at seq. Health and Safety Code § 25500 at seq. Minimum Standards for Business, § 2400 at seq. Standardized Emergency Management Systems; Title 22, § 66265.30 through 37, Preparedness and Prevention Plan, § 66265.50 through 56, Contingency Plan and Emergency Procedures; 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 112, Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan. SAFETY-SP-112 Integrated Emergency Response Plan. Integrated Emergency Response Plan, Volume I, Emergency Preparedness. Integrated Emergency Response Plan, Volume ll, Emergency Procedures. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date: April 24, 2002 5 of 6 g:\wp,dta\hr\650Xshared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final -safety policies\safety-pol-112 ierp.doc Integrated Emergency Response Plan SAFETY-POL-112 4. Attachments None Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date:April 24, 2002 6 of 6 g:\wp.dta\hr%50\shared documents\safety policies-sops-fonns\final -safety policies\safety-pol-I12 ierp.doc ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Safety Division SAFETY-POL-403 Access to Employee Medical Records APPROVALS Approved by: Date: Director of Human Resources Approved by: Date: Manager,Human Resources Approved by: Date: Safety Supervisor PROCEDURE REVISION HISTORY Rev. Date Approval 0 This document is controlled when viewed online. When downloaded and printed, this document becomes UNCONTROLLED, and users should check the Safety Division public folder to ensure that they have the latest version. Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-M3 Contents 1. Purpose................................................................................................3 2. Definitions ...........................................................................................3 3. Requirements......................................................................................4 3.1 Program Responsibilities...................................................................................4 3.2 Employee Information........................................................................................4 3.3 Access to Records.............................................................................................5 3.3.1 Employee and Designated Representative Access .................................7 3.3.2 Division of Occupational Safety and Health Access.................................9 3.4 Preservation of Records..................................................................................11 3.5 Transfer of Records.........................................................................................12 3.6 Trade Secrets..................................................................................................13 4. References.........................................................................................18 5. Attachments ......................................................................................18 Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 2 of 18 gAwp.dta\hr\850\shared dowments\safety policies-sops-fors\final-safety policies\safety-poW05 access to employee medical records.doc Number: SAFETY-POL-403 Orange County Sanitation District Revision Number: 0 Access to Employee Medical Records Date: April 24, 2002 Approved by: Lisa Tomko 1 . Purpose The purpose of this policy is to provide employees and their designated representatives and authorized representatives of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) a right of access to relevant exposure and medical records. Access to medical records by employees, their representatives, and representatives of DOSH is necessary to yield both direct and indirect improvements In the detection, treatment, and prevention of occupational disease. The Safety Division is responsible forassuring compliance with this policy. 2. Definitions Access The right and opportunity to examine and copy Designated Any individual or organization to whom an employee gives Representative written authorization to exercise a right of access. A recognized or certified collective bargaining agent shall be treated automatically as a designated representative for the purpose of access to employee exposure records and analyses using exposure or medical records, but access to an employee's medical records requires the employee's written consent Employee A current employee, a former employee, or an employee being assigned or transferred to work where there will be exposure to toxic substances or harmful physical agents. For the purpose of this section, a deceased or legally incapacitated employee's legal representative may exercise all of the employee's rights under this section. Employee A record containing any of the following kinds of information Exposure Record concerning employee exposure to toxic substances or harmful physical agents Employee A record concerning the health status of an employee which is Medical Record made or maintained by a physician, nurse, or other health care Rev. A Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date 1130/O1 3 of 18 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final -safely policies\safety-poi405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-1201.403 Medical Record personnel, or technician. Employer A current employer, a former employer, or a successor employer Record Any item, collection, or grouping of information regardless of the form or process by which it is maintained (e.g., paper document, microfiche, microfilm, X-ray film, or automated data processing). Specific Written A written authorization from the employee. Consent 3. Requirements Access to medical records by employees,their representatives, and a representative of DOSH is necessary to yield both direct and indirect improvements in the detection, treatment, and prevention of occupational disease. 3.1 Program Responsibilities 1. The Safety Division shall be responsible maintaining employee exposure and medical records. 2. The Safety Division shall be responsible for administering all aspects of this program, except as noted. 3.2 Employee Information 1. Upon employment, and at least annually thereafter, the Safety Division shall inform current employees of the following: A. The existence, location, and availability of any records covered by this section; i. Kept in the Safety Division Office at Plant 1 ii. Available for review Monday-Friday 8 AM to 5 PM B. The person(s) responsible for maintaining and providing access to records: Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 4 of 18 g:\wp.dta\hr\850\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policieslsafety-pol405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 i. Karen Turnbaugh X 7151 ii. James Matte X 7155 iii. Jeff Reed X 7144 C. Each employee's rights of access to these records. 2. The Safety Division shall keep a copy of Title 8 CCR 3204 and its appendices and make copies readily available, upon request, to employees. The Safety Division shall also distribute to current employees any informational materials concerning this section which are made available to the district by the Chief of DOSH. 3.3 Access to Records 1. Written authorization shall containing the following: A. The name and signature of the employee authorizing the release of medical information; B. The date of the written authorization; C. The name of the individual or organization that is authorized to release the medical information; D. The name of the designated representative (individual or organization)that is authorized to receive the released information; E. A general description of the medical information that is authorized to be released; F. A general description of the purpose for release of the medical information; and G. A date or condition upon which the written authorization will expire (if less than one year). 2. Whenever an employee or designated representative requests access to a record, the Safety Division shall assure that access is provided in a reasonable time, place, and manner, but in no event later that fifteen (15)days after the Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 5 of 16 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\anal-safety policles\safety-pol405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 request for access is made. 3. Before the time for providing access has expired, the Safety Division after notice to the employee or designated representative may, by notification to be followed in writing, request an extension of time from DOSH. 4. The Safety Division may require of the requester only such information as should be readily known to the requester and which may be necessary to locate or identify the records being requested (e.g.,dates and locations where the employee worked during the time period in question). 5. Whenever an employee or designated representative requests a copy of a record, the Safety Division shall assure that : A. A copy of the record is provided without cost to the employee or designated representative; B. In the case of an original X-ray, the Safety Division may restrict access to on-site examination or make other suitable arrangements for the temporary loan of the X- ray. 6. Whenever a record has been provided previously without cost to an employee or designated representative, the district may charge reasonable, non-discriminatory administrative costs (i.e., search and copying expenses but not including overhead expenses)for additional copies of the record. C. EXCEPTIONS: i. The district shall not charge for an initial request for a copy of new information that has been added to a record, which was previously provided. ii. The district shall not charge for an initial request by a recognized or certified collective bargaining agent for a copy of an employee exposure record or an analysis using exposure or medical records. 7. Nothing in this policy is intended to preclude employees and collective bargaining agents from collectively bargaining to Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 6 of 18 g:\wpAta\hr\650\shered documents\safety policies-sops-fonnsAnal -safety policies\safety-pol405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 obtain access to information in addition to that available under this policy. 8. Whenever an employee requests access to a specific written consent submitted to the district, the Safety Division shall comply pursuant to the provisions for affording employee access to records as required by this policy and Cal-OSHA. 3.3.1 Employee and Designated Representative Access Employee Access 1. For employee exposure records, except as limited by Title 8 CCR, section 3204(f),the district shall, upon request, assure the access of each employee and designated representative to employee exposure records relevant to the employee. For the purpose of this section, exposure records relevant to the employee consist of: A. A record containing measurements or monitoring results of the amount of a toxic substance or harmful physical agent to which the employee is or has been exposed; B. In the absence of such directly relevant records, such records of other employees with past or present job duties or working conditions related to or similar to those of the employee to the extent necessary to reasonably indicate the amount and nature of the toxic substances or harmful physical agents to which the employee is or has been subjected; and C. Exposure records to the extent necessary to reasonably indicate the amount and nature of the toxic substance or harmful physical agent at workplaces or working conditions to which the employee is being assigned or transferred. Designated Representative Access 1. Requests by designated representatives for unconsented Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 7 of 18 g:\wp.dta\hn650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final -safety policiaMsafety-pol405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL403 access to employee exposure records shall be in writing and shall specify with reasonable particularity: A. The records requested to be disclosed; and B. The occupational health need for gaining access to these records. 2. For employee medical records, the district shall, upon request, assure the access of each employee to employee medical records of which the employee is the subject, except as provided in Tide 8 CCR section 32O4(e)(2)(B) 3. The district shall, upon request, assure the access of each designated representative to the employee medical records of any employee who has given the designated representative specific written consent. 4. Whenever access to employee medical records is requested in accordance with Title 8 CCR section 32O4(e)(2)(B)1 or a physician representing the district may recommend that the employee or designated representative: consult with the physician for the purposes of reviewing and discussing the records requested; accept a summary of material facts and opinions in lieu of the records requested; or accept release of the requested records only to a physician or other designated representative. 4. Whenever an employee requests access to his or her employee medical records and a physician representing the district believes that direct employee access to information contained in the records regarding a specific diagnosis of a terminal illness or a psychiatric condition could be detrimental to the employee's health, the district may deny the employee's request for direct access to this information only. The district shall inform the employee that access will only be provided to a designated representative of the employee having specific written consent. 5. Where a designated representative with specific written consent requests access to information withheld in accordance with Title 8 CCR section 32O4(e)(2)(B)4, the district shall assure the access of the designated representative to this information even when it is known that Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 8 of 18 g:\wp.dta\hn650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final -safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 the designated representative will give the information to the employee. 1. Designated 1. Requests by designated representatives for unconsented Representative access to employee exposure records shall be in writing and Access shall specify with reasonable particularity: A. The records requested to be disclosed; and B. The occupational health need for gaining access to these records. 2. For employee medical records, the district shall, upon request, assure the access of each employee to employee medical records of which the employee is the subject, except as provided in Title 8 CCR Section 3204(e)(2)(B). 3. The district shall, upon request, assure the access of each designated representative to the employee medical records of any employee who has given the designated representative specific written consent. 4. Whenever access to employee medical records is requested in accordance with Title 8 CCR Section 3204(e)(2)(B)1, a physician representing the district may recommend that the employee or designated representative: consult with the physician for the purposes of reviewing and discussing the records requested; accept a summary of material facts and opinions in lieu of the records requested; or accept release of the requested records only to a physician or other designated representative. 5. Whenever an employee requests access to his or her employee medical records and a physician representing the district believes that direct employee access to information contained in the records regarding a specific diagnosis of a terminal illness or a psychiatric condition could be detrimental to the employee's health, the district may deny the employee's request for direct access to this information only. The district shall inform the employee that access will only be provided to a designated representative of the employee having specific written consent. Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 9 of 16 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-formsViinal -safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 6. Where a designated representative with specific written consent requests access to information withheld in accordance with Title 6 CCR Section 3204(e)(2)(B)4, the district shall assure the access of the designated representative to this information even when it is known that the designated representative will give the information to the employee. Analyses Using 1. The district shall, upon request, assure the access of each Exposure or employee and designated representative to each analysis Medical Records using exposure or medical records concerning the employee's working conditions or workplace. 2. Whenever access is requested to an analysis which reports the contents of employee medical records by either direct identifier(name, address, social security number, payroll number, etc.) or by information which could reasonably be used under the circumstances indirectly to identify specific employees (exact age, height, weight, race, sex, date of initial employment, job title, etc.), the district shall assure that personal identifiers are removed before access is provided. If the district can demonstrate that removal of personal identifiers from an analysis is not feasible, access to the personally identifiable portions of the analysis need not be provided. 3.3.2 3.3.3 Division of Occupational Safety and Health Access 1. The district shall, upon request, and without derogation of any rights under the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of California or the California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973, Labor Code sections 6300 at seq., that the district chooses to exercise, assure the prompt access of representatives of the Chief of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) to employee exposure and medical records and to analyses using exposure or medical records. 2. Whenever DOSH seeks access to personally identifiable employee medical information by presenting to the district a Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Dale April 24, 2002 10 of 1a g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-formsVinal -safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY•POL-403 written access order,the district shall prominently post a copy of the written access order and its accompanying cover letter for at least fifteen (15)working days. 3.4 Preservation of Records 1. The medical record for each employee shall be preserved and maintained for at least the duration of employment plus thirty (30) years, except that the following types of records need not be retained for any specific period: A. Health insurance claims records maintained separately from the employer's medical program and its records; B. First aid records(not including medical histories) of one- time treatment and subsequent observation of minor scratches, cuts, bums, splinters, and the like which do not involve medical treatment, loss of consciousness, restriction of work or motion, or transfer to another job, If made on-site by a non-physician and if maintained separately from the employer's medical program and its records; and C. The medical records of employees who have worked for less than one (1) year for the district need not be retained beyond the term of employment if they are provided to the employee upon the termination of employment. 2. Each employee exposure record shall be preserved and maintained for at least thirty (30) years, except that: A. Background data to environmental (workplace) monitoring or measuring, such as laboratory reports and worksheets, need only be retained for one (1) year so long as the sampling results, the collection methodology (sampling plan), a description of the analytical and mathematical methods used, and a summary of other background data relevant to interpretation of the results are retained for at least thirty (30) years; B. Material safety data sheets shall be retained as Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 11 of 73 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-formMlinal-safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 necessary to comply with the provisions of Title 8 CCR Section 5194. Where material safety data sheets are destroyed, a record of the identity(chemical name if known) of the substance or agent, where it was used, and when it was used shall be retained for at least thirty years; C. Title 8 CCR Section 3204(c)(5)(D) records concerning the identity of a substance or agent need not be retained for any specified period as long as some record of the identity (chemical name if known) of the substance or agent, where it was used, and when it was used is retained for at least thirty years. D. Biological monitoring results designated as exposure records by specific occupational safety and health regulations shall be preserved and maintained as required by the specific regulation. 3. Each analysis using exposure or medical records shall be preserved and maintained for at least thirty (30) years. 4. The form of the record or process by which the district preserves a record s not mandated as long as the information contained in the record is preserved and retrievable, except that chest X-ray films shall be preserved in their original state. 3.5 Transfer of Records 1. If the district shall cease to do business, the district shall transfer all records subject to this section to the successor employer. The successor employer shall receive and maintain these records. 2. If the district is ceasing to do business and there is no successor employer to receive and maintain the records subject to this standard, the district shall notify affected employees of their rights of access to records at least three (3) months prior to the cessation of the districts business. 3. Whenever the district either is ceasing to do business and Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Dale April 24.2002 12 of 16 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 there is no successor employer to receive and maintain the records, or intends to dispose of any records required to be preserved for at least thirty (30)years, the district shall: A. Transfer the records to the Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) if so required by a specific occupational safety and health standard; or B. Notify the Director of NIOSH in writing of the impending disposal of records at least three (3) months prior to the disposal of the records. 4. Where the district regularly disposes of records required to be preserved for at least thirty (30) years, the district may, with at least three (3) month's notice, notify the Director of NIOSH on an annual basis of the records intended to be disposed of in the coming year. 3.6 Trade Secrets 1. Except as provided in Title 8 CCR Section 3204(f)(2), nothing in this section precludes the district from deleting from records requested by a health professional, an employee or designated representative any trade secret data which discloses manufacturing processes, or discloses the percentage of a chemical substance in a mixture, as long as the health professional, employee or designated representative is notified that such information has been deleted. 2. Whenever deletion of trade secret information substantially impairs evaluation of the place where or the time when exposure to a toxic substance or harmful physical agent occurred, the district shall provide alternative information which is sufficient to permit the requesting party to identify where and when exposure occurred. 3. The district may withhold the specific chemical identity, including the chemical name and other speck identification of a toxic substance from a disclosable record, provided that: Rev.0 Hard Copy Is uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 13 of 16 g:\wp.dta\hr\6501shared documents\safety policies-sops-formsVinal-safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFELY-POL-403 A. Evidence is included to support the claim that the information withheld is a trade secret; B. All other available information on the properties and effects of the toxic substance is disclosed; C. The district informs the requesting party that the specific chemical identity is being withheld as a trade secrete; and D. The specific chemical identity is made available to health professionals, employees and designated representatives in accordance with the specific applicable provisions of this subsection, Title 8 CCR section 32O4(f). 4. Where a treating physician or nurse determines that a medical emergency exists and the specific chemical identity of a toxic substance is necessary for emergency or first-aid treatment, the district shall immediately disclose the specific chemical identity of a trade secret chemical to the treating physician or nurse, regardless of the existence of a written statement of need or a confidentiality agreement. A. The district may require a written statement of need and confidentiality agreement, in accordance with the provisions of Title 8 CCR Section 32O4(f)(4) and (f)(5), as soon as circumstances permit. 5. In non-emergency situations, the district shall, upon request, disclose a specific chemical identity, otherwise permitted to be withheld under Title 8 CCR Section 32O4(f)(2), to a health professional, employee, or designated representative if. A. The request is in writing; B. The request describes with reasonable detail one or more of the following occupational health needs for the information: i.To assess the hazards of the chemicals to which employees will be exposed; ii. To conduct or assess sampling of the workplace Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 14 of 1S g:mwp.dtamhn650mshared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policiesmsafety-po1-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFE F POL 403 atmosphere to determine employee exposure levels; iii.To conduct pre-assignment or periodic medical surveillance of exposed employees; iv.To provide medical treatment to exposed employees; v. To select or assess appropriate personal protective equipment for exposed employees; vi. To design or assess engineering controls or other protective measures for exposed employees; and vii. To conduct studies to determine the health effects of exposure. 6. The request explains in detail why the disclosure of the specific chemical identity is essential and that in lieu thereof, the disclosure of the following information would not enable the health professional, employee or designated representative to provide the occupational health services described in Title 8 CCR Section 3204(f)(4)(B): A. The properties and effects of the chemical; B. Measures for controlling worker's exposure to the chemical; C. Methods of monitoring and analyzing worker's exposure to the chemical; and D. Methods of diagnosing and treating harmful exposures to the chemical. 7. The request includes a description of the procedures to be used to maintain the confidentiality of the disclosed information; and 8. The health professional, employee or designated representative and the district or contractor of the services of the health professional or designated representative agree in a written confidentiality agreement that the health professional, employee or designated representative will not use the trade secret information for any purpose other than the health needs(s) asserted and agree not to release the Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 15 of IS g:\wp.dta%hr16501shared documents%safety policies-sops-forms%final -safety policieslsafety-pol405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 , information under any circumstances other than to DOSH, as provided in Title 8 CCR Section 3204(f)(9), except as authorized by the terms of the agreement or by the district. 9. The confidentiality agreement authorized by Item 8 above A. May restrict the use of the information to the health purposes indicated in the written statement of need; B. May provide for appropriate legal remedies in the event of a breach of the agreement, including stipulation of a reasonable pre-estimate of likely damages; and C. May not include requirements for the posting of a penalty bond. 10. If the health professional, employee or designated representative receiving the trade secret information decides that there is a need to disclose it to DOSH, the district shall be informed by the health professional prior to, or at the same time as, such disclosure. 11. If the district denies a written request for disclosure of a speck chemical identity, the denial must: A. Be provided to the health professional, employee or designated representative within thirty (30) days of the request: B. Be in writing; C. Include evidence to support the claim that the specific chemical identity is a trade secret; D. State the specific reasons why the request is being denied; and E. Explain in detail how alternative information may satisfy the specific medical or occupational health need without revealing the specific chemical identity. 12. The health professional, employee or designated representative whose request for information is denied under Title 8 CCR Section 3204(f)(4) may refer the request and the written denial of the request to DOSH for Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 16 of 18 g:lwp.dta1hr16501shared documentslsafety policies-sops-formslfinal-safety policieslsafety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc a Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 consideration. 13. When a health professional, employee or designated representative refers a denial to DOSH under Title 8 CCR Section 3204(f)(9), DOSH shall consider the evidence to determine if. A. The district has supported the claim that the specific chemical identity is a trade secret; B. The health professional, employee or designated representative has supported the claim that there is a medical or occupational health need for the information; and C. The health professional, employee or designated representative has demonstrated adequate means to protect the confidentiality. 14. If DOSH determines that the specific chemical identity requested under Title 8 CCR Section 3204(f)(4) is not a bona fide trade secret, or that it is a trade secret but the requesting health professional, employee or designated representative has a legitimate medical or occupational health need for the information and has executed a written confidentiality agreement with adequate means for complying with the terms of such agreement, the district will be subject to citation by DOSH. 15. If the district demonstrates to DOSH that the execution of a confidentiality agreement would not provide sufficient protection against the potential harm from the unauthorized disclosure of a specific chemical identity trade secret, DOSH may issue such orders or impose such additional limitations or conditions upon the disclosure of the requested chemical information as may be appropriate to assure that the occupational health needs are met without an undue risk of harm to the district. 16. Notwithstanding the existence of a trade secret claim, and district shall, upon request, disclose to DOSH any information,which this section requires the district to make available. Where there is a trade secret claim, such claim shall be made no later than at the time the information is Rev. 0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24, 2002 17 of 18 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\0nal-safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc Access to Employee Medical Records SAFETY-POL-403 Ij ! provided to DOSH so that dutiable determinations of trade secret status can be made and the necessary protection can be implemented. 4. References The California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 Title 8 California Code of Regulations, §3203. Injury and Illness Prevention Program Title 8 California Code of Regulations, §3204. Access to Employee Exposure and Medical Records. California Labor Code, Sections 142.3 California Labor Code sections 6300 at seq. 5. Attachments NONE Rev.0 Hard Copy Is Uncontrolled Date April 24,2002 18 of 18 g:\wp.dta\hr\650\shared documents\safety policies-sops-forms\final-safety policies\safety-pol-405 access to employee medical records.doc r MINUTES OF MEETING OF JOINT GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM COOPERATIVE COMMITTEE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT AND ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT March 11, 2002, 5:30 p.m. A meeting of the Joint Cooperative Committee for the Groundwater Replenishment System was held in the Boardroom of the OCWD offices at 5:30 p.m. on March 11, 2002. Members of the Committee present were: OCSD Directors OCWD Directors Brian Donahue Iry Pickier, Chairman Russell Patterson Phil Anthony Steve Anderson, Alternate No. 1 Larry Kraemer Jr. Laurann Cook, Alternate No. 2 Kathryn Barr, Alternate No. 1 Staff and others in attendance were: OCSD OCWD Others Directors Directors: Bruce Chalmers, Dick Corneille Paul Walker Jan Debay —Camp Dresser& McKee Staff: Wes Bannister John Collins — City of Fountain Valley Blake Anderson Denis Bilodeau Abdul Rashidi—Montgomery Watson Harza David Ludwin Staff: Dennis MacLain — City of Huntington Beach Lisa Murphy Bill Mills Bob Finn — Brown & Caldwell Bob Ooten Debra Bums Richard Bell - IRW D Wendy Sevenandt Steve Conklin Annette McCluskey— NCG Porter Novell! Counsel: Joanne Daugherty Ernest Cirangle, Cristian Rayter- HOK Brad Hogin Tom Dawes Shivaji Deshmukh Bill Everest Jill Everhart John Kennedy Mike Markus Rafael Mujeriego Katherine O'Connor Mehul Patel Lily Pham Laura Thomas Counsel: Clark Ida CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of Meetinq Upon motion by Director Anderson seconded by Director Anthony and carried, the minutes of the Joint Cooperative Committee meeting held February 25, 2002 were approved as mailed. - 1 - I Joint GWR System Cooperative Committee Minutes 44 March 11,2002 MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 2. Plant Design Issues—Architectural Review Program Manager Tom Dawes reported that this item would be presented in a workshop format. He introduced Mr. Bruce Chalmers, Camp Dresser& McKee Inc., who gave an update and overview of the architectural design background; materials to be used on the exterior and design examples of the reverse osmosis and product water pump station buildings. Mr. Chalmers noted that the architectural drawings are 40% complete. Director Patterson requested that a cost comparison be developed on a per square foot basis to compare this architectural design to a concrete tilt-up building construction style. 3. Ultraviolet Eguioment Pre-Selection Mr. Dawes reported that two proposals had been received for the ultraviolet (UV) equipment pre-selection and that the lowest cost proposal, submitted by Trojan Technologies at$10,439,990.61, was approximately $175,000 higher than the original engineer's estimate, causing this action to be retumed to both Boards for approval. He reported that Trojan Technologies was the proposer with the lowest calculated present worth fife cycle cost and capital cost. He noted that the recommended action of the JCC and both Boards would include approving $250,000 of engineering services at this time and that the equipment procurement will be assigned to installation contracts in the future and would require subsequent JCC and Board approval. He noted that the UV lamps and power(at 6.5¢/kWh) are to be performance guaranteed and will reduce operations and maintenance costs by about$9 per acre-foot from that reported in the current O&M annual cost estimate. He reported that a UV demonstration process is needed and included in the proposal to satisfy the Department of Health Services requirements. Mehul Patel, OCWD Senior Engineer reported that the UV system, in conjunction with hydrogen peroxide, removes NDMA and bacteria, and that 1,4-dioxane can be removed at the same UV treatment level used to remove NDMA. He noted that Trojan Technologies is a Canadian based firm and that they have been using this technology for ten years and have more installations in North America than any other company. He reported that a similar smaller scale Trojan UV unit could be seen in La Puente and that a Trojan UV system of a different type than proposed for GWR System is on line at Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Upon motion by Director Anthony seconded by Director Donahue and carried, the Committee approved the following actions: A. Approve Addendums 1 and 2 providing a time extension and technical clarifications. B. Recommend that the Boards of Directors of OCWD and OCSD authorize OCWD to award a pre-selection agreement to Trojan Technologies for the - 2 - • Joint GWR System Cooperative Committee Minutes March 11, 2002 manufacture of ultraviolet light equipment for the Groundwater Replenishment System for the total capital cost of$9,749,405 plus tax, as follows: 1.) Authorize payment to Trojan Technologies for engineering details for the equipment design in the total amount of$250,000. 2.) Assign the value of the ultraviolet light equipment to a future contract to install the demonstration UV system at a total cost of $849,842, plus tax. 3.) Assign the value of the ultraviolet light equipment to the contract to install the permanent UV system at a total estimated capital cost of $8,649,563, plus tax. 4. Acquisition Of 18601 Newland Street For Barrier Wells Mr. Dawes reported that a purchase of an easement for a well site has been procured from Kato &Associates for$77,000 and recommended that the purchase agreement be forwarded to the OCWD board for approval. Upon motion by Director Donahue seconded by Director Anthony and carried, authorization was given to the OCWD General Manager to purchase the easement for Well Site-1-29 at 18601 Newland Street in Huntington Beach, CA from Kato & Associates in the amount of$77,000 plus escrow charges. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 5. Department of Health Services Approval— Source Flows from Santa Ana River Interceptor Mr. Dawes reported that the Department of Health Services (DHS) has expressed a concern regarding the use of the Santa Ana River Interceptor(SARI)flows for source water to the GWR System. He introduced Wendy Sevenandt, OCSD Project Manager, who reported that OCSD has an agreement and a Memorandum of Understanding with the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA)that sets capacity limits; fees to dispose of wastewater to the SARI for treatment at OCSD; discharge quality requirements; and permitting and reporting procedures for discharges permitted by SAWPA Into SARI. She reported that SAWPA issues these permits that include 33 direct connection permits, one of which is the Stringfellow Hazardous Waste Disposal Site; one truck disposal station; and to 24 industrial users permitted to haul wastewater to the disposal station. She reported that staff has held a workshop with DHS on March 5 to discuss the SARI issues and will meet again with DHS on March 19. She reported that OCSD is evaluating options to permanently divert SARI from reclamation for all phases of the GWR System. These options and costs will be brought to the JCC in the future. Blake Anderson, OCSD General Manager, stated that DHS thinks that SARI Is unique, but reported that it is not. He stated that the GWR System provides the advantage of using 100% reverse osmosis, microfiltration and ultraviolet light disinfection, which will - 3 - Joint GWR System Cooperative Committee Minutes ° March 11, 2002 be the safest system for water reclamation in California. He stated that OCSD has voluntarily accepted the Stringfellow discharge water through a SAWPA Agreement and if DHS will not approve the Stringfellow discharge into SARI, he will recommend that the State, which operates the Stringfellow facilities, take the Stringfellow discharges elsewhere. Mr. Dawes introduced visiting professor Dr. Rafael Mujeriego, PhD. from Barcelona, Spain who is working on source water and DHS issues. Mr. Dawes reported that the next DHS workshop will be held on March 19 from 1:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. in MWDOC's Conference Room 101. Director Pickier directed staff to give an update on DHS/source water issues as they develop. 6. Public Information and Education Update Lisa Murphy, OCSD Communications Manager, informed the Committee that an open house for neighbors will be held on Tuesday, March 12 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at OCWD. 7. Status Report Mr. Dawes reported on the following: - A presentation was given to the Fountain Valley Council on March 5. - A public meeting was held on February 25 with Santa Ana residents adjacent to the proposed detour of the bike trail needed in River View Golf Course. The residents who attended were not supportive. We are looking at alternatives. - Discussion of the County proposal to lease the three-acre site at the southwest comer of Garden Grove Boulevard and the Santa Ana River for a maintenance yard, but the lease amount was considered too high. - The O&M Agreement will be taken to the next JCC meeting on Monday, April 8. The Agreement will be mailed before the April 8 agenda to allow time for review. - Director Anthony received a full copy of the Report of Waste Discharge for WF-21 and interim WF-21 as requested. REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGERS OCWD General Manager William R. Mills Jr. announced that two deputy directors of the State Department of Water Resources will be touring the OCWD facilities this Friday, March 15. OCSD General Manager Blake Anderson gave a brief status report on the 301 (h) waiver. He reported that OCSD is evaluating water quality data, treatment alternatives, estimated costs, regulatory and permitting requirements, and public perception issues. -4 - Joint GWR System Cooperative Committee Minutes March 11, 2002 It is anticipated that the OCSD Board will consider this issue later this Spring. Director Anthony requested that periodic reports on this topic be given to the Committee. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. The next Joint Cooperative Committee meeting is scheduled for Monday, April 8 at 5:30 p.m. at the Orange County Water District Administrative Offices, 10500 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley. - 5 - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MmUng Date TO Bd.or Dir. 09/24/02 AGENDA REPORT Icem Number tcem Number 1ur Orange County Sanitation District FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Wendy Sevenandt, Project Manager SUBJECT: GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM, JOB NO, J-36, ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT EQUIPMENT PRE-SELECTION GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION (1)Approve Trojan Technologies as the ultraviolet light(UV)equipment manufacturer for the Groundwater Replenishment System based on lowest calculated present worth life cycle cost of $20,253,000, and a total capital cost of$9,749,405, plus tax; (2)Approve a Pre-Selection Agreement between Orange County Water District(OCWD) and Trojan Technologies to provide engineering details for the equipment design in the total amount of$250,000 to be equally shared between OCWD and Orange County Sanitation District; (3)Grant authority to the Board of Directors of OCWD to assign the value of the ultraviolet light equipment to the contract to install the demonstration UV system at a total cost of$849,842, plus tax; and (4) Grant authority to the Board of Directors of OCWD to assign the value of the ultraviolet light equipment to the contract to install the permanent UV system at a total estimated capital cost of$8,649,563, plus tax. SUMMARY • In March 2002, the General Manager recommended the actions as written above regarding the award of ultraviolet light(UV)disinfection equipment for the GWR System. • The Board of Directors deferred action back to staff to address a letter issued by Calgon Carbon Corporation dated March 1, 2002. • Staff has addressed the issues in a response letter dated April 8, 2002 to Calgon Carbon Corporation. • Staff recommends selecting Trojan Technologies as the UV equipment manufacturer for the GWR System. • Approval is requested to award a $250,000 contract to Trojan Technologies for engineering design documents at this time. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY See the attached Budget Information Table. The value of the agreement awarded with this action is $250,000 to be equally shared with OCWD in the amount of$125,000. The authorization of funds was made in October 2001 for the engineering documents only in the amount of$125,000. There is no increase in the cost for engineering documents. Authorization of expenditures for the equipment will be requested with the award of the construction contracts in the future. Although the proposal by Trojan Technologies was over the engineer's estimate, a budget increase is not requested at this time. Funds are existing in contingency for the increase over the engineer's estimate, but adjustments will not be requested until the construction contracts are awarded. FW. Wme Page 1 r BUDGET IMPACT T ® This item has been budgeted. (Line Rem: 2001-02 CIP Budget Sec. 8, page 152) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ❑ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION In October 2001, the Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD) Board of Directors authorized issuance of a Request for Proposals for the pre-selection of ultraviolet light equipment estimated at$10,250,000, and granted authority to the Orange County Water District(OCWD) Board of Directors to award a contract for equipment design in the amount of$250,000, also granted authority to the OCWD Board of Directors to assign the value of equipment to construction contracts for installation. The request for proposals was sent to four firms specializing in ultraviolet (UV)disinfection equipment and two proposals were received. Proposals were received from Calgon Carbon Corporation and Trojan Technologies on February 27, 2002. Both were over the engineer's estimate of$10,250,000 when tax is included in the total cost. This item was brought before the OCSD Board of Directors in March because the lowest proposed cost exceeded the engineer's estimate. Trojan Technologies proposes the lowest capital cost of$10,439,990.61 with tax included at 7.75%and the lowest calculated present worth life cycle cost of$20,253,000. With this approval, a contract in the amount of$250,000 will be awarded to Trojan Technologies for engineering design documents. The value of the UV disinfection equipment as proposed by Trojan Technologies will be assigned to the demonstration unit construction contractor and the permanent facilities construction contractor. These contracts are scheduled for bid and award in the Summer of 2002 and Spring of 2003. These installation contracts will be brought before the Joint Cooperative Committee and the OCSD and OCWD Board of Directors in accordance with the adopted procedures that will be in effect at that time. The Joint Cooperative Committee (JCC)approved the recommended action on March 11, 2002. Please refer to the attached March 11, 2002 JCC Agenda Item Submittal. Staff reported on the Calgon Carbon Corporation letter and response at the April 22, 2002 JCC meeting. ALTERNATIVES Alternatives to issuing a proposal for pre-selection of the equipment included pre-purchase of the equipment or preparing final designs for all equipment options. Pre-purchase of the equipment was not selected to reduce liability to the agencies and place liability for the equipment on the Contractor. With substantial differences in each equipment design, preparing final designs for each manufacturer was determined to be cost prohibitive. CEOA FINDINGS The OCSD and OCWD Boards of Directors certified the Environmental Impact Report for the Groundwater Replenishment System on March 24, 1999. Addendum No. 1 was approved on March 28, 2001, Addendum No. 2 was approved by OCSD on January 23,2002, and by OCWD on January 16, 2002. amsem:umne Page 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. Budget Information Table 2. March 11, 2002 Joint Cooperative Committee Agenda Item Submittal re: Ultraviolet Light Equipment Pre-selection. 3. Letter dated March 1, 2002 from Calgon Carbon Corporation. 4. Letter dated April 9, 2002 from OCW D to Calgon Carbon Corporation. JDH:jo:sa GAwp.dta\agenda%Board Agenda Reports\2002 Board Agenda Reports\040ZItem 15(c).GWRS W.doe Re W: a Page 3 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM JOB NO.J-36 1 'yy r ONGfNAL CURRENT r RGPOS P,ROPOSEO FUNDS T�iIS L ESJIMI),7F,P ES71, _ 0 ;hROIECT IYS t�{AUTHORIZE PROJEE� }',-,EIIOG � REVISED �"} U,THMt1YE TO I ORIT31TII J AU 0$�7100 E%eENDR`I1JZE EXPE .,. W ,. `-Z BUOOET ,BIIO iET€ Y111C �UDDETkq, ` EATE, ,7- Y:(UESTTF�DATE TO DA Project Development $ 700,000 It 4,000 $ 4000 '�.. It 4,000 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 100% SludleslPermini • 4.000000 $ 4.000,000 $ 1000.000 $ 4,OD0000 $ 4.000.000 100% Consultant PSA' $ 7,500,000 $ 18400000 $ 18400000 $ 18.158.334 $ 18.168.334 It 3,000,000 17% Desl n Staff $ 2.349,000 $ 1.349.000 3 1.349,000 $ 1.349 000 It 1.349.000 It 2,500.000 185% C nstNGlon Conrad-' $ 86,481,500 S 137,500,000 $ 137,500.000 $ 9,W,M $ 9,642,655 $ 0% Construction - Atlminis8alicn^' $ 2.653.900 $ 6.021,000 $ 6.021.000 It 5,496,519 $ 5,496,519 $ 0% Construction inspection $ 9,345,600 $ 326,000 $ 328000 It It - $ 0% Contingency g 12,895,000 $ 15100000 $ 15.100000 $ It - $ 0% PROJECT TOTAL $ 121.925.000 $ 182,700,000 $ - $ 182,700,000 ' $ 38.650.508 $ - $ 38,650,508 S 9,50g000 25% Reimbursable Costs $ - IS 28.000,000 $ 28.000.000 1 $ 2.112.500 PROJECT NET $ 121,925,000 1 $ 154,700,000 1$ - $ 154.700,000 $ 38,650.508 1 $ - $ 38,650,508 1 $ 7,391,500 19% Funds auhorzed to date includes multiple contracts issued under the terms of the Cooperative Agreement for Project Planning for the Groundwater Replenishment System with the Orange County Water District "Funds authorized to dale include Pipeline at Theo Lary Jai.SCE substation construction.temporary office fadlitieS,agreement and easements,production of MFM vendor design documents,and Owner Controlled Insurance Program. "'Funds authorized to data Include Construction Management Services awarded on February 27.2002 G1wp.dla'engUOBS&CONTRACTSU-36T,36 budget table 032702 Board.tlsl0&M&UV award OCSD Confidential O&M&UV award Page 1 Agenda Item #3 4 AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: March 11, 2002 Budgeted: Yes Funding Source: OCWD/OCSD/Grants To: Joint Groundwater Replenishment Program/Line Item No.: 501-4030-600.70-01 System Cooperative Committee Cost Estimate: N/A From: William R. Mills Jr. General Counsel Approval: N/A Blake Anderson Project Report Approved: Yes CEQACompliance: Yes Staff Contact: Tom Dawes Subject: ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT EQUIPMENT PRE-SELECTION SUMMARY Two proposals were received on February 27, 2002 to provide ultraviolet light (UV) equipment for the Groundwater Replenishment System. Proposals were received from Calgon Carbon Corporation and Trojan Technologies. Four firms including Wedeco- Ideal Horizons and Aquionics had been pre-qualified to provide the equipment. The proposal received from Trojan Technologies had the lowest calculated present worth life cycle cost. The Trojan Technologies proposal also had the lowest capital cost of the UV equipment. The proposed capital cost of the UV equipment at $9,749,405 plus tax or $10,439,990.61 including tax at 7.75%, is above the engineer's estimate of $10,250,000 (without the 15% contingency added). Based on the results of the present worth life cycle cost analysis, the recommended pre-selected UV equipment manufacturer is Trojan Technologies. The Trojan bid provides significant ongoing operations and maintenance savings compared to our estimates. RECOMMENDATION Agendize for March 20 OCW D Board meeting and for March 27 OCSD Board meeting. A. Approve Addendums 1 and 2 providing a time extension and technical clarifications. B. Recommend that the Boards of Directors of OCWD and OCSD authorize OCWD to award a pre-selection agreement to Trojan Technologies for the manufacture of ultraviolet light equipment for the Groundwater Replenishment System for the total capital cost of $9,749,405 plus tax as follows: 1.) Authorize payment to Trojan Technologies for engineering details for the equipment design in the total amount of $250,000. 2.) Assign the value of the ultraviolet light equipment to a future contract to install the demonstration UV system at a total cost of$849,842, plus tax. - 1 - Agenda Item #3 r 3.) Assign the value of the ultraviolet light equipment to the contract to install the permanent UV system at a total estimated capital cost of$8,649,563, plus tax. BACKGROUND On October 8, 2001 your Committee approved the use of a present worth life cycle cost analysis as the basis for pre-selection of the UV equipment manufacturer. In September, the Board of Directors of the OCSD authorized the award of this contract if at or below the Engineers Estimate of$10,250,000. The criteria used for the determination of the lowest present worth life-cycle cost included the capital cost of a demonstration UV system, capital cost of the permanent UV system, lamp replacement price, lamp life warranty period, and operational costs over a 25-year life. The operational costs included energy costs. An interest rate of 6% was used in the present worth calculation. The amount of energy necessary for operation of each manufacturer's system was to be guaranteed by the manufacturer in their proposal. A value of 6.5 cents per kWh was used for energy cost calculations. In addition, a payment of $250,000, MF system engineering costs, was included in the proposal determined by staff for all bidders. The demonstration UV system has a capacity of 5 mgd and will be installed near the time when the temporary MF system will be constructed. The demonstration UV system will be used to verify the performance of the UV manufacturer's design for NDMA destruction and disinfection efficiency prior to delivery of the full UV system. The Department of Health Services (DHS) requires that installed UV systems show proof of disinfection efficiency prior to the system being put into full operation. Testing the demonstration system allows the design team to have confidence in the UV manufacturers proposed design and meet DHS requirements. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS The engineers estimate for the capital cost of the equipment including the demonstration UV system, permanent UV system, $250,000 lump sum for engineering services, and sales tax was $10,250,000. (The original estimate was based on sales tax at 7.5%, it was bid at 7.75%. Depending on State of California finances, the sales tax rate may change before the equipment is delivered and payment is made.) The basis of pre-selection is the lowest present worth life-cycle cost. This type of present worth analysis includes all capital as well as O&M costs over the 25-year period chosen for the analysis. The Request for Proposal (RFP) and two addenda (attached) were sent to four pre- qualified UV equipment manufacturers. Two proposals were received on February 26, 2002, from Calgon Carbon Corporation and Trojan Technologies. The other two pre- qualified manufacturers, Wedeco-Ideal Horizons and Aquionics, did not submit a proposal for this project. The results of the proposals received were as follows: - 2 - Agenda Item #3 Table 1 UV Equipment Preselection Proposals Proposal Price Proposal Price Calculated MF Proposed for Capital Cost for Capital Cost Present of Equipment' of Equipment' Manufacturer Lamp type (not including (including sales Worth Life C sales tax tax 7.75% le Cost Trojan Low pressure- $9,749,405 $10,439,990.61 $20,253,000 Technologies high intensity Calgon Medium $12,087,235.38 $12,958,650.07 $22,648,000 Carbon Corp. pressure Includes lump sum cost of$250,000 for special engineering services. The proposal received from Trojan Technologies had the lowest calculated present worth life cycle cost. The Trojan Technologies proposal also had the lowest capital cost of the UV equipment. The proposed capital cost of the UV equipment was above the engineers estimate, $10,250,000, for both proposals (the Trojan proposal was below when tax is not included). Based on the results of the present worth life cycle cost analysis, the pre-selected UV equipment manufacturer should be Trojan Technologies. The UV equipment procurement will involve three separate contracts. The UV equipment procurement will include the following three contracts: 1. Demonstration and permanent UV system engineering (shop drawingstlayout preparation/control system design) 2. Demonstration UV system (5 mgd) 3. Permanent UV system (70 mgd which includes the 5 mgd demonstration system) The first contract is between OCWD and Trojan Technologies as the UV equipment manufacturer. The amount of this contract will be limited to $250,000. This contract enables the treatment plant design team to prepare the work required to design the facilities necessary for the selected UV system. The contract for the demonstration UV system will be assigned to the general contractor chosen to install the demonstration UV system at a value of $849,842 plus tax. The contract for the permanent UV system will be assigned to the AWT general contractor at a value of $8,649,563, plus tax. Table 2 summarizes the breakdown of the Trojan Technologies contract. Table 2 Breakdown of Trojan Technologies UV Proposal Contract Proposal Price not including sales tax Engineering services $250,000 Demonstration UV system equipment $849,842 Permanent UV system equipment $8,649,563 TOTAL $9,749,405 - 3 - Agenda Item #3 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE IMPLICATION The December 2000 project cost estimate of $352 million included estimated costs for the UV system power consumption and lamp replacement. The annual power estimate was $14/AF, but based on the Trojan proposal the actual cost would be $7.00/AF. This represents a project cost savings of $7.00/AF. Also, the annual lamp replacement cost estimate was $5.00/AF and the Trojan proposal provides a cost of $3.00/AF. This is a savings of$2.00/AF for a total savings of$9.00/AF. PRIOR COMMITTEE ACTIONS Discussed from time to time under the Project Development Phase, including July 30 and October 8, 2001. Attachments— RFP Addenda 1 and 2 - 4 - CALGON CALOON CARBON CORPORATION Orange County Water District March 1,2002 PO Box 8300 Fountain Valley,Ca 92728-8300 Attention: Mehul Patel; Project Manager Re: Calgon Carbon Corporation Proposal Review Dear Mr. Patel, On behalf of Calgon Carbon Corporation,I would like to thank Orange County in advance for the consideration of our technology. I trust that you found our response to the bid package both complete and in full compliance with the specifications. As a point of fact,Calgon Carbon Corporation has taken no exceptions to the bid. We respectfully request that the evaluation committee consider that the system proposed by Calgon Carbon Corporation is consistent with the Calgon Carbon Corporation UV systems currently in use at Orange County. This provides a number of benefits that are not explicitly accounted for in the bid evaluation.These points can be summarized as follows: Proven technology Calgon Carbon Corporation's UV technology for this application has been successfully demonstrated by Orange County. Our proposed system will meet or exceed all treatment objectives and regulatory requirements. By selection of our bid,Orange County will not have to address any potential non-compliance issues. Orange County can select Calgon Carbon Corporation's equipment with the confidence that the technology is proven and reliable. Operator Experience Pursuant to the point above,selection of the Calgon Carbon Corporation System ensures that Orange County is familiar and comfortable with the routine operation of the UV system and no additional expense will be required for the training of operators. Consistency of components Consistency in equipment supply permits Orange County to minimize spare parts purchasing and inventory. Due to increased volume,Calgon Carbon Corporation was able to offer Orange County attractive pricing for the supply of replacement lamps. Should Calgon Carbon Corporation's bid be selected,Orange County would be in the 1 position to order replacement lamps at the reduced price for all of its systems. The difference between the list price of our lamps and this discounted price represents a substantial operating cost savings on the systems currently installed. Specifically, Orange County could realize savings of S 1.7 Million on a NPV basis or S 134,550 per year. This major operation savings needs to be considered as an added economic benefit of selecting Calgon Carbon Corporation. Outside of the benefits provided to Orange County by selecting a similar system,there are also many other factors that need to be considered in awarding the contract for this project: Financial stability of Respondents This contract considers the life cycle costs of the UV system over twenty years. Certainly the financial stability of the selected vendor needs to be taken in to account when considering the long-tens partnership. We strongly urge Orange County to investigate and compare the financial strength and prospects for all bidders. Non-Compliance issues: As previously mentioned,Calgon Carbon Corporation submitted its bid with no exceptions to the bid specification. We would ask the evaluation committee to ensure that all bidders have met these criteria. We would specifically request that the evaluation committee review the following areas in detail: • Vessel design: The bid documents specify that the reactors have a design pressure of 100 psig. We can only assume that to comply with the specification, the lamps and the quartz sleeves must be installed in the reactor prior to testing. The Calgon vessel design pressure is in fact 100 psig with the lamps and quarts sleeves installed in the vessel. • PLC controls and Ethernet communication: We have noted that in past bid responses from one of our competitors, their design was based on utilizing a proprietary control card to accomplish equipment level controls. In the case of the Orange County bid,the most likely use of this technology would be to utilize the proprietary control card for floor level control. The system would then simply communicate status and set point information through a serial link back to the SCADA system. This would not meet the specification of requiring brand name PLC controls and Ethernet based communications to 1/0. • PLC selection: As a point of clarification,Orange County indicated in writing to Calgon Carbon Corporation that a GE Series 90/70 was a requirement of the bid. We did include the GE Series 90/70 in our scope of work. • Harmonic mitigation equipment: Calgon Carbon Corporation had questioned the requirement of the harmonic mitigation equipment. We did receive written confirmation of the requirement. Therefore, the harmonic mitigation equipment along with the dual feed automatic transfer switching,full structure switchgear with draw-out breakers, facilities equipment,power monitoring software and the short circuit study are included in our scope of work. 2 .y • SCADA System: Calgon Carbon Corporation has included a redundant server option for the GE Cimplicity Open Process SCADA system. • System Integrators: As a supplier of a complete system, which includes all integration, we would call into question our competitions' ability to meet the bid specification with respect to locally based System Integrators. Design Basis We have designed our system with the capability to perform with a water transmittance at 95°/aT. Based on initial information provided at the bid opening,we question the ability of the other bidders equipment to meet these criteria. We believe that this issue requires serious attention on the part of Orange County. Installation Costs Calgon Carbon Corporation system is designed to minimize installation costs. By providing a horizontal design in which all components are at floor level, it allows for easy and safe access by operation personnel as no platforms or ladders are necessary for maintenance. Also,by minimizing the number of lamps utilized(120 vs. thousands of lamps) minimal electrical installation is required in the form of terminations,conduit runs,and lamp installation. In summary,the reactor orientation and the reduced number of lamps required by Calgon Carbon Corporation's system,results in substantial installations savings to Orange County. Maintenance Costs Calgon Carbon Corporation system is designed to minimize maintenance costs. By utilizing only 120 lamps(only 50 in operation)vs. thousands of lamps,there is substantially less time spent replacing lamps. In addition,the recommended quarterly inspection and replacement of quartz sleeves becomes extremely labor intensive and costly when considering the amount of installed lamps. To summarize,we hope that you find these additional thoughts on the project helpful,not only in terms of potential future cost avoidance but in selecting the most qualified supplier. Calgon Carbon Corporation is a solid American company that has made significant environmental contributions to California's water issues. We are committed to the community of Orange County and believe,that as an engineering company, our proven NDMA technology will provide the best performance backed by a financially strong company. Best regards, Charles Drewry Regional Sales Manager CC: Bruce Chalmers,Bill Everest, David Murray 3 Groundwater �.� Replenishment System April 9, 2002 Mr. Charles Drewry Calgon Carbon Corporation, Inc. 2890 West Oasis Road Tucson, AZ 85742 Subject: UV Light Equipment Pre-selection Groundwater Replenishment System Dear Mr. Drewry: This letter is written in response to the letter received from Calgon Carbon Corporation, Inc. dated March 1, 2002 requesting the Orange County Water District to consider certain issues pertaining to the pre-selection of the subject equipment. Our responses are grouped in the following categories: • Consistency with current equipment • Technical and economic factors • Financial stability of respondents Consistency with Current Equipment: Your letter infers several benefits related to consistency between the existing and proposed Calgon equipment. However, the Calgon proposed equipment is of different size, orientation and style compared to the Calgon UV tower currently in operation at Water Factory 21. Technical and Economic Factors Your letter states that several factors are not included in the life-cycle cost (LCC) analysis used to select the UV equipment manufacturer. These include: 1) Operator training costs; 2) Replacement lamp discounts; 3) Technical design criteria; 4) Installation costs; 5) Maintenance costs; and 6) American-based company. Each of these items were considered when preparing the pre-selection documents, but did not warrant inclusion in the specific LCC analysis criteria. Operator training costs are a minor expense for either manufacturer. Replacement lamp costs were considered in the LCC analysis; the present worth (PW) of Calgon's lamp replacement costs were lower than Trojan's; however, the total PW cost (used for selection) for Calgon was $2.4 million higher than Trojan's (12% higher), considering all costs for power consumption, lamp replacement and ballast replacement. The technical design criteria issues listed in the letter (and labeled as "non-compliance issues") have been addressed in the Trojan proposal to OCWD's satisfaction. Installation costs, both electrical and structural costs, and maintenance costs are not significantly different between the manufacturers, and therefore were not included In the LCC analysis. Funding for the project from grants and loans are not affected by buying non-American products. A joint effort of the Orange County Water Diudu and the Orange County Sa ustion Nina (714) 378.3200 • Fax (714)378-3381 • 10500 ails Ayenue - Fountain Valley • California 92708 f Response to March 1, 2002 Calgon Letter LL Page 2 of 2 tl Financial Stability of Respondents In evaluating the proposals for responsiveness, consideration was given to the financial standing of both Trojan and Calgon. Although Trojan has incurred a net loss during the period 1999-2001, as stated in your letter, Calgon also incurred a net loss ($13,729,000) in 1999, according to the 2000 Annual Report included in your proposal. We also reviewed Trojan's first quarter 2002 report, which indicates the following: 1) small net loss ($0.02 per share); 2) expected second quarter revenue of $22 million; and 3) selection by City of Seattle of Trojan equipment for a 180 mgd drinking water disinfection system (largest in the world). Review of Trojan's second quarter results (period ending February 28, 2002) indicate a strong financial turnaround, based on the following: 1. Second quarter revenue of$22.7 million (52% increase), an annual equivalent of$91 million; 2. Second quarter net income of $1.1 million ($0.06 per share compared to a $0.05 per share loss last year); 3. Retirement of all short-term indebtedness; 4. Positive cash flow; and 5. Backlog exceeding$40 million (not including the GWR System project) In addition, Trojan has successfully met the performance bonding requirements delineated in the contract documents. We are satisfied with the financial viability of Trojan to successfully meet the project requirements. Based on the proposal evaluation stated in Article 18 of Section 00200 and in accordance with Section 00310 of the specifications, the recommendation of award will remain Trojan Technologies. Thank you for your time and effort in submitting a proposal for the Groundwater Replenishment System Ultraviolet Disinfection and Oxidation System. Sincerely,, William R. Everest, P.E. Associate General Manager Orange County Water District iro I Qo� PKGWR SnFew oesgnWftvckt(&tB2)kROWn.W Mar i C*.m(aMZAa cc: Thomas Dawes, OCWD Dave Ludwin, OCSD Clark Ide, OCWD Brad Hogin, OCSD Mehul Patel, OCWD Bruce Chalmers, CDM Wendy Sevenandt, OCSD Dave Murray, Brown and Caldwell Christian Williamson, Trojan Tech. Bob Finn, Brown and Caldwell BOARD OF DIRECTORS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT DISTRICT'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 REGULAR MEETING April 24, 2002—7:00 P.M. RE: AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 Minute excerpts have been received as set forth below. Pursuant to Regular Agenda Item No. 3, it is appropriate to receive and file said excerpts: 3. Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts from the following re appointment of active and alternate Directors, as follows: ('Mayor) City/Aaencv Active Director Alternate Director Yorba Linda John M. Gullixson Michael Duvall G:\wpAta\agenda\Board Agendas\2002 Board Agendas\012302 supplemental.doc i Subject: Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) On Tuesday,April 24,2002, and on a vote of 5-1, Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) moved out of the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee and on to the Appropriations Committee. The date of the next hearing is not yet posted, but will be heard prior to June 1. Appropriations Committee contact information: California State Assembly State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Committee Leadership: Darrell Steinberg (Chair), Patricia Bates(Vice Chair) Committee Members: Elaine Mquist, Dion Aroner, Roy Ashburn, Rebecca Cohn, Ellen Corbett, Lou Correa, Lynn Daucher, Manny Diaz, Marco Firebaugh, Jackie Goldberg,Abel Maldonado, Gloria Negrete McLeod, Robert Pacheco, Lou Papan, Fran Pavley, George Runner, Joseph Simitian, Carl Washington, Patricia Wiggins, Roderick Wright, Charlene Zettel. Consultants: Chief Consultant: Geoff Long. Principal Consultants: Steve Archibald, Joyce Ised, Stephen Shea, Daniel Alvarez, Chuck Nicol. Consultant: Darci Sears. Secretary: Laura Lynn Gondek. In addition to mailing a letter or speaking with members of the Appropriations Committee, you may also want to communicate with the Orange County Caucus representing the OCSD service area. Assembly members Tom Harman, John Campbell, Bill Campbell, Lynn Daucher, Ken Maddox, Patricia Bates and Lou Correa Senators Joseph Dunn, Dick Ackerman, and Ross Johnson The attached information includes: • A sample letter in opposition to AB 1969 • A list of 11 talking points • Copies of letters and resolutions mailed to the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee opposing the bill. o OCSD, • Irvine Ranch Water District, o California Association of Sanitary Agencies, o City of La Habra, p City of Placentia o Christopher Prevail, Commissioner Garden Grove Sanitary District Advisory Commission 1 Date Darrell Steinberg . Chairman Appropriations Committee State Capitol Building Sacramento,CA 95814 Subject: Oppose Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) (Organization/city) is writing in opposition to Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) requiring the Orange County Sanitation to immediately, move to full secondary treatment of its treated wastewater effluent without the financial,and facility planning necessary. The Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD)was created by the California Legislature for the specific purpose of managing wastewater. The board is comprised of 21 elected city officials, 1 elected county supervisor and 3 sanitary districts representing the views, concerns and interests of the 25 cities and 2.4 million people that comprise its service area. OCSD is currently undertaking an orderly and deliberative local government process to determine its future level of treatment. Public meetings, community presentations, fact sheets, mailers and a public advisory committee made up of local residents, businesses, environmental groups and others along with additional outreach tools are being utilized by the district to provide valuable input to the board of directors. In addition,the district is further regulated by the California Ocean Plan and overseen by the State Water Resources Control Board through a triennial review, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Coastal Commission,National Marine Fisheries Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. These agencies have expertise in wastewater management, environmental protection and public health and safety. (Organization/city) implores the committee not to circumvent the local governmental deliberative process. Do not unilaterally enforce a State mandate upon local government to decide this local issue. If adopted, a State Mandate would require the State fund a portion of the$400 million plus for implementation. The Orange County Sanitation District will decide the future level of treatment in June or July. The decision will be made by local government and community input after the scientific facts, funding, facility requirements and public comment are all complete. Allow the local governmental process to work. Sincerely, Top Eleven Reasons to Oppose the Maddox Bill: 1. The Clean Water Act was originally crafted by Congress (with two major amendments) with considerable thought behind it. It ought to be applied evenly across the Country, including here in OC 2. Our Board of Directors will make a deliberate determination about this important public policy decision and will make a decision that meets the needs of OC. For this reason, Sacramento has no reason to intervene in this matter. 3. Government must not succumb to the strongly held but not necessarily factually based opinions of a minority of people. Public policy ought to be based on facts, not opinion. 4. The California Ocean Plan has been adequately protecting public health and the environment for 30 years. It addresses wastewater quality in a number of ways. OC should look for guidance there, not to a bill that is piece meal and ad hoc. 5. The concerns raised by the public relate to disinfection practices, not whether we are full secondary or not. We will be disinfecting up summer's end—maybe sooner. Allow the results of that work to be completed. 6. All government has a responsibility to spend the public's money wisely. It is unclear whether full secondary, per se, will be either effective or needed to adequately protect public health and the environment. Therefore, Maddox's early intervention with this bill is premature. Allow the research to speak to us first. 7. The Maddox Bill adds no additional speed to the OCSD resolve. Now that OCSD has decided to fast track disinfection,there's nothing more that can be done. The interim disinfection work is moving forward as fast as it can, within the framework of CEOA. We have the money, the ability, and the plan to get this disinfection work done. B. There is no urgency that requires an early Maddox Bill. The beaches of OC are generally meeting the AB 411 standards and there's no evidence linking elevated counts to OCSD. 9. The Maddox Bill adds nothing to long term planning or financing objectives of OCSD. Staff is now preparing two versions of the 02-03 FY budget in parallel to developing amendments to our facilities plan. This work is proceeding as quickly as possible. Once the OCSD considers treatment level options in June, it will direct staff to begin work to meet the objectives of its treatment level decision. There's nothing more that can be done about financial or facilities planning that is not already underway. 10.The Maddox Bill sets a horrible precedence in overturning the orderly process of government. Imagine if every special interest group had members of the state legislature working to overturn the decision making authority of policy boards all over the State. 11.00SD was created by the state legislature for the express purpose of managing wastewater. Why then, is it necessary to create a bill that overrides the purpose of the OCSD board of directors? a ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT ,4)SU- n 411 April 18, 2002 m.18ne.ae,...: P.C.t e, Po°°teln vene y,z7c4. The Honorable Hannah-Beth Jackson S2728-e127 Chair ,�„[•m,,,,, Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee 108a4susA.an^a California State Assembly r"°i°°"vall F.G' State Capitol Pdot Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Subject: Oppose Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) A,aMimbia.° Dear Ms. Jackson: • Mi.. Orange County Sanitation District opposes Assembly Bill 1969. The bill is harmful to the orderly process of government and to the consistent application of the laws of California and the United States as expressed in the California Ocean Plan and the eae,a a NB federal Clean Water Act. Cypress F•unwin wallaF Orange County Sanitation District maintains an extensive ocean monitoring program. Fullerton More than $2 million a year is invested to make sure the ocean remains safe and Hurr6npmn Irmo bane healthy for the marine environment and for the public to use for recreation.The La Hehra monitoring program is part of the ocean release permit issued jointly by the U.S. EPA and the State Water Resources Control Board. Orange County Sanitation District's Loa Alemiros Nwpart Beach permit is the only one with an extensive three-component monitoring program at this time. According to the EPA, the Orange County model is an excellent model and P ecenue Sane one they are considering incorporating it into the programs for the other 301(h)permit s°•'a°•�' holders. sarc°n iVstin Vll°P•� 1. This bill sets a precedent by overturning the orderly process of local x,ro•U� . government decision making. The state legislature should not work to e...n .r o...0. overturn the decision-making authority of local policy boards. The bill implies that the State Legislature has determined that the Orange County Sanitation N.ruey oberla.. District Board of Directors cannot be trusted to make a competent decision c�Mesa about level of treatment. Ma w Gty r.°.r o1.eH.°. 2. The Clean Water Act was adopted by Congress after years of scientific research and study. It is uniformly applied across the country, including in Orange County. The Clean Water Act also specifically provides site-specific standards for certain qualifying coastal dischargers as a long-term alternative for water resource protection.The Orange County Sanitation District has consistently met those standards of EPA and the federal Clean Water Act. In 17 years of operating under the permit, Orange County Sanitation District has never been in violation of federal clean water standards and its permit. 'T•Fr W t Ne Pohlic Health entl the Environment mh wh& oa nce in Wesrowe[er Syetems' Ms. Hannah Beth Jackson Page 2 April 18, 2002 3. The California Ocean Plan has worked well to address wastewater treatment agency releases and public health. It also incorporates standards for ocean protection from toxic materials significantly more stringent than federal requirements. 4. OCSD was created by the state legislature for the express purpose of managing wastewater. The Board of Directors has been effectively doing so for nearly 50 years. The United States EPA and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board have found this to be true as expressed in many ways including awards and continued findings of compliance. It is not necessary to create a bill that overrides the record of the OCSO Board of Directors to achieve the expectations of EPA and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. 5. The Orange County Sanitation District's Board of Directors will make a deliberate determination about the current important public policy decision about the level of treatment and will make a decision by the end of this year that meets the needs of Orange County. We urge you to oppose AS 1969. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of Orange County Sanitation Districts the major concerns. A&�, Blake P. Anderson General Manager BPA:jt C: Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors U WERM Min IRTRI AACDWATERD S RICT 156005aW Cg mAce e•P.O Ba S]000•Wre,GJa a926f9 IXU• J9)A353V•www nb am April 18,2002 Honorable Ken Maddox Assemblymember,68'District State Capitol -Room 4153 Sacramento, CA 95814 Subject: AB 1969 (Maddox) Waste discharge requirements; waivers—OPPOSE Dear Assemblymember Maddox: On March 12,2002, Irvine Ranch Water District(IRWD) and the City of Irvine met in joint session and approved a resolution that agrees with your intent to increase the level of treatment of Orange County Sanitation District's(OCSD's)ocean discharges. However, we oppose Assembly Bill 1969. The full 25-member Board of Directors of OCSD, which serves 2.2 million customers over a 470-square-mile service area,will be considering the issue in late 2002. At that time,the Board will decide whether to pursue an extension of its waiver under Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act,which allows it to continue discharging wastewater to the Pacific Ocean without treating all of it to the"secondary" level. If OCSD does decide to apply for a waiver, its application would then be considered by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and EPA for approval. While this process may be time consuming, it does provide appropriate technical and policy review. We submit that any legislation preempting local government decisions and the normal statutory process for review of 301(h)waiver applications is not necessary. That is why IRWD respectfully opposes AB 1969 at this time. Please feel free to contact Paul Jones,IRWD General Manger,at 949/453-5310, if you have any questions regarding our position. Yours very truly, Brian Brady President cc: Assemblymember Tom Harman, Co-author Chair Hannah-Beth Jackson,Assembly ES &TM Committee Blake Anderson, OCSD,- CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of SANITATION AGENCIES o (1 O 926 L Street,Suite 1400•Sacramento,CA 96914•TEL:(916)446.0388—FAX:(916)448-4808•www.caaawebxrg MICHAEL I.DILLON Exn.dve Dina.,& 14*6, April 17, 2002 ROSERTAL LARSON ova.of L<gal and The Honorable Ken Maddox Reg Ivory Affairs r.niaen. -- California State Assembly JE4NM.MARIAM State Capitol,Room#4153 Sanicu,rDianiaN..I Sacramento, CA95814 of Mann C..' 53 E)Pond Drive Gmnb.e,CA 949M SUBJECT: AB 1969 (MADDOX)RELATING TO ORANGE COUNTY Td(415)5544316 1.(415)554.7828 SANITATION DISTRICT—OPPOSE Sn.e.,-Trmua, PAUL H.uuSEY Dear Assembly Member Maddox: Del.Diablo Saint...ion Di...ic, 2500 Pi,nbnrg-Ana«b Hwy On behalf of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies(CASA),I regret to Andc6,CA 94509 Td(925)n8.4640 inform you that we must oppose your AB 1969,which would require the Orange 1.(925)779-1543 County Sanitation District(OCSD)to construct full secondary treatment facilities. I a.via P.sldenr CASA is a statewide organization of cities and special districts providing wastewater JOLEMAN Eam aay M Municipal collection, treatment,disposal and water recycling services to millions of UdaigDistrict Californians. end v.Praidan, ROBERTRELD AB 1969 would override,by legislative fiat,the existing regulatory approval process. W.,VJ,Sani..ion Dionct of san.Clan Clean Water Act section 301(h)expressly provides that secondary treatment counn requirements may be waived for ocean dischargers that can meet stringent criteria. In DLRECTORSATLAROE order to obtain a waiver,OCSD must implement a rigorous industrial pretreatment CHARLESMM program, demonstrate that its discharge complies with water quality standards,and a Saniury Dania show that fish and recreational uses are protected. The District implements an CHARLOTTE CR4YEN extensive ocean monitoring program to ensure that water quality is not adversely vend..P"ianal sanin.i.n affected. OCSD's permit must be reviewed and approved by the Regional Water Diana Quality Control Board and the United States Environmental Protection Agency, after NORMANZ ECRPNRODE consultation with the California Coastal Commission,the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Orange co.nry sani.aum"Diada Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. These agencies have not yet had MTN1sRAEc the opportunity to weigh-in on a renewal of OCSD's waiver. Yet, AB 1969 would Mon cm Reglond Wne, nullify this regulatory process and mandate a particular treatment technology for a Polludon Con nul Agency single discharger,despite the lack of credible data or information to justify such a MA777EBBETTS mandate. Kennedy/Jenks Consulnna ERICSAPIRSTRIN icdcral Legisla.ive Admcace CNS Raouro..lnc. 1'47 Pennsylvania Ave.,N.W. Sui.4_'0 W.N.'un,D.C.200W Te1(202)466.3755 P.Ax 1202)466-3787 napfhsmuou.a.con IMnnber Agnniu Iinal on aever.el The Honorable Ken Maddox April17,2002 Paget Moreover,AB 1969 would impose a significant unfunded mandate on OCSD's ratepayers.The cost to install full secondary treatment at OCSD's would be over $300 million dollars. OCSD would also consume significantly more energy to operate the plant. OCSD's Board of Directors is seeking public input on whether the District should change its approach to wastewater treatment. Residents of Orange County should have the opportunity to express their views on whether the District should move forward with full secondary treatment,despite the costs. AB 1969 would short-circuit that local process. AB 1969 is not the way to resolve water quality permitting issues. Individuals and entities are often dissatisfied with some aspect of the permitting process; AB 1969 would set a dangerous precedent by having the Legislature be the arbiter of these technical and scientific issues rather than making use of the mechanisms clearly established in the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act and Clean Water Act. For these reasons, CASA must oppose your AB 1969. Sincerely, p "Roberta L. Larson cc: Tom Jones, SWRCB Blake Anderson, General Manager, OCSD Q' City of La Habra ADMINISTRATION BUII.DIN( A Caring Community" 201 E.La Habra Boulevar. va P.O.Box 33 La Habra,CA 90633-033- Office.(562) 905-9701 Fax:(562) 905-971! April 17, 2002 Honorable Norman Eckenrode, Chairman Orange County Sanitation District P.O.Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Dear Chairman Eckenrode: This letter is to advise you and the Board of Directors that on April 15, 2002 the La Habra City Council took action to approve and adopt Resolution No. 4802 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA IN OPPOSITION TO AB 1969 (MADDOX) REGARDING WASTEWATER DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS. Enclosed is a certified copy of Resolution No.4802. Sincerely, Shane Apodaca City Clerk Enc. 1 Copy: Steve Anderson, Councilmember and OCSD Director RESOLUTIONNO. 4802 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA DECLARING ITS OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BILL 1969 (MADDO)0 REGARDING WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS. Whereas, all of north and central Orange County's wastewater, or sewage, is received and processed by the Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD);and - Whereas, the now-consolidated OCSD serves about 2.35 million people across 24 cities and 470 square miles in north and central Orange County, including the residents and businesses of La Habra; and Whereas, OCSD produces about 533 wet tons of wastewater biosolids each day and sends another 236 million gallons per day of effluent out a 5.1 mile ocean Outfall; and Whereas OCSD, like many sanitation agencies, has facilities to treat wastewater using the preliminary treatment and odor control,primary treatment,and secondary treatment; and Whereas, OCSD currently operates under a Section 301 (h) permit which waives the Federal Clean Water Act's full secondary treatment requirement; and said permit expires in June 2002;' and Whereas, AB1969 authored by Assembly Member Maddox, would require State and Regional Boards, including OCSD, to improve its level of treatment of wastewater to full secondary treatment; and Whereas, the OCSD claims the Maddox Bill is premature and there is no urgency behind the bill. The OCSD opposes AB 1969 based on the following: a The California Ocean Plan has been adequately protecting public health and the environment for 30 years. a The concerns raised by the public relate to disinfection practices, not whether or not OCSD operates under full secondary treatment. a Orange County beaches are generally meeting the AB 411 standards and there is no evidence linking elevated counts to its operation. a All government has a responsibility to spend taxpayer dollars prudently. It is unclear whether full secondary treatment will be either effective or needed to adequately protect public health and the environment, therefore early intervention with AB 1969 is premature. I, rt7erk of the qry d to Hama,Halsor ,w*me we looagoh�a k a WY,um.and greet coat of the on taa In th%dita. Cav Clerk of the Citvof leHebra Dees ' a AB 1969 would impose an unfunded mandate upon local jurisdictions. a OCSD already took action to fast track disinfection within the framework of CEQA. OCSD has a plan in place, and the necessary funding and ability to accomplishment this goal. a AB 1969.adds nothing to the long term planning or financing objectives of the OCSD. a AB 1969 overrides the purpose'of the OCSD Board of Directors, which was created by the State Legislature for the express purpose of managing wastewater. Section 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED, that the La Habra City Council hereby concurs with the reasoning of the Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors, and declares its opposition to AB 1969 (Maddox). The City Clerk is directed to mail a certified copy of this resolution to Assembly Member Maddox and the Orange County Sanitation Board of Directors. This resolution shall be entered into the official book of resolutions. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED,APPROVED AND AODPTED this 15"day of April, 2 nian,Mayor Attest: 3L. P Sharie L. ApodacafCity Clerk 1 9h -.II tti 6 i `_. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS. CITY OF LA HABRA ) I, Sharie L. Apodaca, City Clerk for the City of La Habra, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct'copy of Resolution No. 4802 introduced and adopted at-a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of La Habra held on the 15" day of April, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: GARCIA,ESPINOZA,ANDERSON,RUSH, SIMONLAN NOES: COUNCIIAIEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCII.MEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCII.MEMBERS: NONE Witness my hand and the official seal of the City of La Habra this 16'h day of April,2002. Sharie L.Apodaca,/City Clerk I 3 The PeWe are MO City PCEN� Mayor Coundlmembem: CHRISTOPHER A.LOWS Q, CONSTANCE UNDERHILL NORMAN Z.ECKENRODE Chy Ad.01sfratm SCOTT P.BRADY ROBERT D'AMATO25 JUDY A.DICKINSON reea ALL eYEa1C1 CITr 40f East Chapman Awnue-Pfacen0a, CaMbrala 91870 April 19,2002 The Honorable Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee California State Assembly State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assemblymember Jackson: The City of Placentia is writing in opposition to Assembly Bill 1969 (Maddox) requiring the Orange County Sanitation District to immediately move to full secondary treatment of its treated wastewater effluent without the necessary financial and facility planning. The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) was created by the California Legislature for the specific purpose of managing wastewater. The Board is comprised of 21 elected city officials, 1 elected county supervisor and 3 sanitary districts representing the views, concerns, and interests of the 25 cities and 2.4 million people that comprise its service area. OCSD is currently undertaking an orderly and deliberative local government process to determine its future level of treatment. Public meetings, community presentations, fact sheets, mailers, and public advisory committee made up of local residents, businesses, environmental groups, and others along with additional outreach tools are being utilized by the District to provide valuable input to the Board of Directors. In addition, the District is further regulated by the California Ocean Plan and overseen by the State Water Resources Control Board through a triennial review, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Coastal Commission, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. These agencies have expertise in wastewater management, environmental protection, and public health and safety. C:Pa dea Pass, a The Honorable Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee April 19, 2002 Page Two The City of Placentia implores the committee not to circumvent the local governmental deliberative process. Do not unilaterally enforce a State mandate upon local government to decide this local issue. If adopted, a State Mandate would require the State fund a portion of the $400 million plus for implementation. The Orange County Sanitation District will decide the future level of treatment in June or July. The decision will be made by local government and community input after the scientific facts, funding, facility requirements, and public comments are all complete. Allow the local government process to work. Sincerely, None Z enrode, Councilmember NZF/jld cc: Councilmembers Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager, Orange County Sanitation District inn,_t ��rnnj EO :ZI y z� s:Uemie's FL'es�Coirespa,Menm\Countll�EckenmEeUB1888 OppoptiortEm Christopher Prevatt e 12182GMu ANm 00.Gm nGm .GA 82810.GH.r14.280.M28.FX714.M8270 S • .. i ClMegd®BM.(OT :.� >- . t • Assemblywoman Hanna-Beth Jackson Char Environmental Safety and Toxics Committee April 19, 2002 AB 1969 - Maddox ' F, As a member of the Garden Grove Sanitary District Advisory Commission I a, . • believe that the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxics Committee take a - position in opposition to AB 1969,Maddox. < . i AB 1969 would require that the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) treat 100% of its effluent to the secondary treatment level. In effect, preventing OCSD from seeking a waiver under section 301h of the Clean Water Act as allowed by the Act. I believe that this legislation is unnecessary and counter to the concept of local control over local issues. AB 1969 would circumvent the authority of three government bodies, the OCSD, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, this legislation would create a state mandate costing state taxpayers over $400 million. In the face of a mounting multi-billion dollar projected budget shortfall, this legislation " is too costly and unnecessary. I believe that decisions regarding the application for a waiver under section 301h :-•-" - -� of the Clean Water Act are best left with the current regulatory bodies. This bill sets a horrible precedence by overturning the orderly process of government. Imagine if every special interest group had members of the state legislature working to overtum the decision-making authority of policy boards across the S state. i Sincerely, ` - - Christopher Prevatt Commissioner Garden Grove Sanitary District Advisory Commission JNfI 841 t' 1 p b m April 24, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors / FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, D.Env � Director of Technical Services SUBJECT: 2001 ONSHORE INVESTIGATION REPORT Attached is the executive summary of the 2001 Onshore Investigation. This executive summary presents an overview of the program tasks and Orange County Sanitation District's recommendations based on the results of recent investigations. Discussion of this report, along with the ocean and shoreline monitoring completed during the summer of 2001 will occur at the special board meeting on Wednesday, May 15 at 6:00 p.m. As you will recall, during the summer of 2001, high bacteria concentrations continued in the near shore waters off Huntington Beach. In addition to the ocean and shoreline sampling, Orange County Sanitation District's Source Control Division conducted an investigation to determine if any onshore sources could be responsible. A project task list was developed to investigate potential discharges that may impact bacteria levels in the surf zone. Detailed task descriptions, findings, and recommendations are described in the body of this report. RPG:rm a24-02land sways Attachment 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is the regional wastewater treatment agency serving 2.2 million residents. To discharge a blend of primary and secondary treated wastewater to the Pack Ocean through a 5-mile outfall, OCSD has been granted a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The permit establishes bacteriological limits based on the California Ocean Plan and the RWQCB Santa Ana Region Basin Plan, for the surfzone and the recreational waters of the Pacific Ocean within the jurisdiction of the State of California (&mile limit). In accordance with this permit, OCSD performs beach sampling for three indicator bacteria: total coliforms, fecal coliforms, and enterococci. OCSD's monitoring data is also used by the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA), which has the responsibility to post or close beaches when health standards are exceeded. In July 1999, the OCHCA closed a portion of Huntington State Beach due to elevated levels of the three indicator bacteria, which presented a fingerprint indicative of sewage contamination. Closures continued throughout the summer, affecting up to 6 of the 8 miles of state and city beaches in Huntington Beach. The last section of beach was reopened in early September 1999. Several weeks before the beach closure in July 1999, OCSD's surfzone monitoring identified bacteria levels that, although within acceptable limits, were above normal. Consequently, water quality was tested along a transact (picket line) approximately one mile offshore to determine whether OCSD's ocean discharge may be moving onshore. The results of those tests were negative. Subsequent to the beach closure, OCSD initiated further onshore investigations to identify the sources of the bacterial contamination. This is documented in the "Final Report—Huntington Beach Closure Investigation, Phase 1, December 1999." 4 2001 ONSHORE INVESTIGATION During the summer of 2001, high bacteria concentrations continued in the nearshore waters off Huntington Beach, and OCSD's Source Control Division conducted an investigation to determine if any onshore sources could be responsible. This Executive Summary presents an overview of the program tasks and OCSD's recommendations based on the results of recent investigations. Project Tasks and Recommendations A project task list was developed to investigate potential discharges that may impact bacteria levels in the surf zone. Detailed task descriptions, findings, and recommendations are described in the body of this report. Where tasks overlapped, some recommendations have been combined under the heading of another task. Beach Restrooms The purpose of this task was to test the sewer lines serving the Huntington State Beach restrooms for leaks to determine whether the restrooms contribute to groundwater contamination and, ultimately, to contamination of the surfzone. The tested sewers are located south of Pacific Coast Highway between Magnolia and Newland Streets in the City of Huntington Beach. The sewers were evaluated in August 2001 using hydrostatic, air pressure, and dye testing methods. The methods used were dependent on the condition, position, and design of cleanouts and manholes serving the restrooms. Dye testing was conducted when the results of other test methods indicated a possible leak. The results of the hydrostatic tests indicated leaks, of varying magnitude, in the following areas: 1. The sewer line, which is relatively short, from the Lifeguard Headquarters lost 6 gallons. 2. The sewer line between restrooms 9 and 10 lost 180 gallons. 3. The sewer line serving restrooms 7 and 8 did not hold air pressure and lost most of the water injected. When the plug was removed, the pipe was not full at the lower end, indicating water loss. The results of the dye testing indicate that the tracer dye and lithium chloride traveled from the restroom 8 sewer line to the shoreline. Therefore, staff believes it is very likely that bacteria made its way to the surfzone due to one or more leaks in the restroom 8 sewer, and possibly from other leaking restrooms. The California State Parks Department has indicated that the existing sewer line serving restroom 8 will be abandoned and connected directly to the OCSD Coast Trunk.Sewer to prevent surfzone contamination. Recommendation Based on the findings that the restroom 8 sewer is leaking and sewage is appearing in the surtzone, it was recommended that California State Parks abandon the sewer between restrooms 7 and 8 and connect restroom 8 directly to the OCSD Coast Trunk Sewer. State Parks was advised to hydrostatic test V their restroom sewers periodically to ensure integrity. In addition, due to the leakage findings in the Lifeguard Headquarters line and in reshooms 9 and 10, further investigation and follow-up corrective measures are highly recommended. AES Power Plant The purpose of this task was to evaluate the possibility that surface runoff contaminated with bacteria may be entering the AES Power Plant (AES) from a tributary storm drain and passing through to the AES ocean outfall. In addition, the AES sanitary sewer, which is adjacent to the storm drain, was evaluated, and numerous samples were taken in the vicinity of AES to determine other potential sources. The mixing box at AES was a critical location, since it is used by AES for NPDES sampling and reporting. AES mixing box monitoring data showed that samples from the surface were generally higher in bacteria than samples taken 20 feet below the surface. While some of the mixing box samples were high in bacteria counts, samples taken at the same time near the AES ocean discharge pipe did not show high bacteria counts. Staff could not explain this discrepancy. Conductivity readings in the mixing box indicated that a layer of fresh water near the surface overlays the seawater. AES periodically adds chlorine to Its effluent. Several samples were analyzed for chlorine residual to determine whether chlorine had an effect on bacteria levels in the mixing box. The results of residual chlorine analysis were inconclusive. Connected to the AES mixing box is a large storm drain that serves an area west and north of AES, including runoff from the adjacent RV/trailer park. During high tide, the water level in the mixing box is above the stone drain connection; therefore, the potential exists for contaminated water in the storm drain to enter the mixing box. However, it seems unlikely that this source could substantially influence the entire AES effluent discharge during dry weather conditions. Pressure testing determined that the AES sanitary sewer line is not leaking and was not contributing to the bacteria in the mixing box. Recommendation Based on the results of high bacteria levels in the samples collected from the AES mixing box, H is highly recommended that the control authority further investigate and follow up with corrective measures. It is suggested that a comprehensive bacteria monitoring investigation be implemented on both the influent and effluent at AES to explain the existence of high bacteria levels in the mixing box. Ocean Dye Testing OCSD assisted researchers from the University of Southern California (USC) Sea Grant program to evaluate dye dispersion and water movement near OCSD's Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N. From July 19 through 21, 2001, three dye-test experiments were conducted near AES around the cooling water intake and discharge ports, which lie about 1200 feet offshore of Huntington State Beach between OCSD Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N. ti Fluorescent dye was used to observe water movement by tracking dye concentration over time. Dye concentration was measured using a fluorometer that detects fluorescent emission from the dye at a speck wavelength. By evaluating water movement, researchers can further postulate the effects of discharge from the AES outfall and its impact on bacteria concentrations near the surfzone. During the dye release next to shoreline, the water movement seemed predominantly downcoast with some movement upcoast. When released next to the AES outfall buoys, the dye seemed to spread in an almost circular pattern around the end of the AES pipes. When the dye was released inside the AES outfall, the dye spread evenly in a circular pattern, then spread into an oblong shape into two distinct sections parallel to the shore. The majority of the dye was observed further upcoast than downcoast of the AES pipes, while there was little evidence of dye near the shore directly over the AES pipes. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Flood Control Channels The purpose of this task was to identify all observed discharges to the project area's five flood control channels, which are the Talbert, Huntington Beach, Santa Ana River, Greenville/ Banning, and Fairview channels. Samples, photos, and instrument readings were collected. In general, no major source of bacterial contamination was found in any of the channels. Recommendation It is recommended that a more extensive sampling program be developed to characterize the water in each channel during an extended duration to reveal more information concerning bacteria counts. Surface Discharges and Unknown Connections to the Storm Drain System All facilities in the project area were inspected, with the primary purpose of identifying surface discharges and any unknown connections to the storm drain system. The following three areas of contaminated surface discharge were identified: 1. The source of the standing water on Edison Avenue behind AES was identified as frequent discharge from the AES facility, resulting from periodic washing at a pad inside the AES plant. However, even though the flow originated from AES, it is not certain that the bacteria on Edison Avenue originated entirely at AES. 2. High bacterial counts were found in at least two areas of standing surface water in the salt marsh near Pack Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard. Inspectors discovered a large leak in an Orange County Public Facilities Resources Department (OCPFRD) sluice gate on the adjacent Huntington Beach channel. Samples from the area showed bacterial contamination. 3. A small stream of polluted surface water seeps directly into the Huntington Beach channel at the east discharge pipe from the mobile home park. The design and condition of the underground wet wells that collect surface drainage both from the RV park and the mobile home park are unknown. A concern is that a single spill of a RV holding tank could be the "seed" of continuous bacterial contamination to the Huntington Beach channel. Surface drainage from the Huntington-by-the-Sea RV Park has a high potential to contaminate the surface water. Any spills that occur when the sewer hoses from individual RVs are connected or removed will be ultimately washed to the surface runoff system and discharged to the Huntington Beach channel. There is a lack of information about the existing sewer lines serving both the mobile home and RV pads in the area. Recommendation A thorough review and dye testing of the sewers in the mobile home park area should be done to ascertain the actual connection points and drainage patterns. The standard washing procedure at the Huntington-by-the-Sea RV Park should be modified to send all routine normal surface water runoff to the sewer during dry weather. It is also recommended that OCHCA and the City of Huntington Beach be noted for further action regarding sewage solids on the grating at the Huntington-by-the-Sea Mobile Home Estates. The continual flooding of the marsh near Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard with water from the Huntington Beach channel had saturated the area completely. This precluded identifying other soumes of contamination during this study and cast doubt on previous sample results. The damaged sluice gate was subsequently repaired, allowing the marsh to dry so the source of any future ponding of surface water could be identified. Monitoring Wells Along the State Beach OCSD took readings on groundwater levels in the project area, specifically on the tidal effects for monitoring wells (MM 1 through 5 , which were placed for the 1999 study in the vicinity of the California State Beach south of Pack Coast Highway between Magnolia and Newland Streets. Readings were collected from July 14 through July 21 at most high and low tide apexes. as found in a 2001 southern California tide tables booklet. There are four tidal events per day: two low tides and two high tides. According to the Converse Report dated October 6, 1999, MW-1 and MW-2 were dug to a depth of approximately 50 feet and straddle the AES pipes in the State Beach parking lot. MW-3, MW-4, and MW-5 were dug to a depth of approximately 30 feet and are located in the State Beach parking lot to the southeast of MW-1 and MW-2. The information collected for this task showed the well casings are still intact and there is some tidal influence on the nearshore groundwater. The difference between most concurrent low and high tide marks of the groundwater levels was about one inch. Some readings even showed a "reverse" in movement where low tide levels were "higher" than the high tide levels. For unknown reasons, it appears the change in elevation levels for unrelated tidal apexes at each well site was most pronounced at MW-1, the westernmost well site. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Urban Runoff Diversions Urban runoff has been identified as one major source of coastal contamination, and is the most difficult to control. It comes from a variety of sources such as roadways, parking lots, construction sites, agriculture, parks, and private yards. Everything that is released to the surface of an urban environment can make its way to stone drains and channels that eventually end up at the shore. In an effort to reduce the impact of urban runoff on Orange County's beaches, OCSD has been coordinating with local agencies since late 1999 to successfully treat and dispose of dry-weather urban runoff from inland and coastal cities. OCSD has been receiving and treating an average flow of approximately 2 million gallons per day of dry- weather urban runoff from eleven diverted storm drains owned by the City of Huntington Beach, City Newport Beach, and three diverted flood control channels owned by OCPFRD. Three additional diversions in Corona Del Mar and Crystal Cove are scheduled to come on-line in the near future, which will increase the daily urban runoff flow to about 3 million gallons per day. The additional small drainage sources that discharge directly to the beaches and harbors are so numerous that it is impractical to divert all of them to the sewer system. Recommendation OCSD will continue to work with the local agencies to develop and implement a practical, long-term policy to divert urban runoff to the sewer system during the dry-weather season. Beach Observations The objective of this task was to determine conditions that may contribute to bacterial contamination in the area. It was found that beach attendance in the City of Huntington Beach was fairly stable. More dead seals were being washed onto the beach than previously thought, although they did not appear to increase the bacteria counts in the surfzone because of how they were disposed by beach officials. However, the storm drain that discharges onto the beach just north of the Huntington Beach pier around 6" Street has high bacteria counts. In addition, based on land observations and conversations with individuals in the area, there are differences in the appearance of the ocean between OCSD Monitoring Stations 6N and 9N as compared to other areas. One difference was noted when a diver was asked for impressions of the work performed earlier off the boat at 9N. The diver commented that moorings had anaerobic bacterial growth. This diver had only observed this growth once before, while working in waters off the Tijuana coast. Recommendation It is recommended the dry-weather Bow from the 60 Street storm drain be diverted to the sewer system. It is also recommended that a study be conducted to explain the differences in the visible ocean characteristics between stations 61V and 9N. Wastehauler Activity Wastehauler activity in the project area was reviewed to provide information and determine whether illicit dumping of septage is occurring in areas tributary to the project area. Staff reviewed OCSD records and found that wastehauler discharges to OCSD's disposal station have decreased over the past two years. Each wastehauler discharge record was reviewed, and OCSD found that most wastehaulers have decreased their discharges, while only a few have increased. OCSD contacted OCHCA to review their records, but they had no personnel assigned to wastehaulers at that time. However, during this investigation, no illegal wastehauler activity was observed. Recommendation Based on the review of OCSD wastehauler activity, it is recommended that increased oversight of wastehauler activities be conducted. Data shows that wastehauler activity has declined and that possible illegal dumping could be occurring. Coast Trunk Review Samples were taken from dewatering wells around OCSD's Coast Trunk when sewer connections were being made near Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard. The bacteria results were negative. Subsequent discussions with the OCSD Engineering Department indicated that any leaks from the deeper portions of the Coast Trunk would be improbable because the pressure from the surrounding groundwater would be greater than the pressure inside the pipe. Infiltration is more likely than exfiltration. A videotape was reviewed of the siphon when the flow was bypassed during construction of the new siphon in 1999 and no infiltration was noted, even though the depth of the siphon was approximately 30 to 40 feel, which is much lower than the existing water table. Therefore, no further investigation was conducted. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Area Around the 21-Inch Huntington Beach Purchase Sewer The condition of the 21-inch Huntington Beach Purchase Sewer (HBPS) was evaluated, along with the area surrounding the trailer park on Newland Street across from AES. This area is bordered by Pacific Coast Highway to the south, the Huntington Beach channel to the north, Newland Street to the east, and Beach Boulevard to the west. The results of some surface water samples taken near the HBPS and the salt marsh showed high coliform bacteria counts in at least two areas. Recommendation Documents describing previous inspections as well as the staffs recent observations indicate that the HBPS from Beach Boulevard to Newland Street should be investigated further for possible corrosion and/or leakage. The HBPS is not in good shape and repairs should be made promptly. It is recommended that OCSD abandon the 21"sewer in the salt marsh and slip-line the portion of the 21"sewer from the west side of the trailer park to Newland Street. Huntington Beach Treatment Plant(Abandoned) The Huntington Beach Treatment Plant (HBTP)was originally constructed in 1935 at the corner of Newland Street and what is now Edison Street. The trickling filter effluent was drained by pipe into the then-existing Huntington Beach channel, which at that time flowed south on the west side of Newland Street. A 1935 drawing also denotes a small "existing treatment plant" at the comer of Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. None of the information reviewed leads OCSD to believe there is a potential for bacteria contribution from the abandoned plant to the Huntington Beach shoreline. Recommendation No further action is recommended. Huntington Beach Storm Drains This effort consisted of evaluating the storm drains in the City of Huntington Beach that may have runoff to beach areas. Of the storm drains investigated in this study area, the outfall from the three 30-inch storm drains immediately north of the Huntington Beach pier consistently showed high fecal bacteria counts. Daily restroom washdown, dumpster drippings, and the pier area parking lot drains feed into lines that flow to a set of clarifiers and eventually discharge to the three 30-inch outfall system. Based on OCSD sampling data, all of these flows showed very high fecal bacteria counts. It can not be demonstrated that these storm drains are causing the contamination detected at OCSD surfzone monitoring sites north of the Huntington Beach pier. There could also be contributions from the hundreds of birds observed along sections of the surfzone north and south of the pier. The results of samples collected show that urban runoff to the beach in this area has the potential to be contaminated with fecal bacteria and total coliforms. Recommendation Changing some maintenance practices and implementing best management practices could help to reduce the amount of contamination to the area north of the Huntington Beach Pier where the outfall from the three 30-inch storm drains is located. The puddle that accumulates in front of the outfall from the three 30-inch storm drains near 6" Street should not be allowed to accumulate. Sample results show this to be high in fecal bacteria. As indicated previously, the 61° Street storm drain dry-weather flow should be diverted to the sewer to eliminate the high bacteria counts in this area. All outdoor showers on the beaches should be evaluated and possibly bermed and drained to the sewer, assuming sand can be prevented from entering the sewer. Water reuse/reclamation studies show that shower wastewater typically is high in fecal coliform. The restroom stalls and surrounding floor should be washed down and drain to the sewer. The trash dumpsters should not be parked over the storm drain. Drippings from them may contain fecal bacteria from diapers, dog waste, etc. Santa Ana River Mouth High bacteria counts have been observed around the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) bridge where it crosses over the Santa Ana River in Newport Beach. It appears that high bacteria counts obtained from sample points downstream of the PCH bridge, especially at low river flow and low tide, could originate from birds roosting and nesting under the PCH bridge. There is a sandbar that forms just upstream of the bridge that birds visit during low tide, and this may also contribute to the contamination. The evidence pointing to bacteria from birds is shown by the low E. colt bacteria counts in samples taken from upstream sample points at essentially the same time samples were collected downstream of the PCH bridge. The magazine 'Public Works", states in its October 2001 issue, Areas under bridges have been documented to significantly exceed contact recreation criteria. A nearby study found bird droppings to be the source of bacteria where no other sources are noted and where downstream FC values were lower.' Samples were also collected of the discharge from a storm drain serving Seashore Drive in West Newport Beach. Bacteria concentrations were consistently high. At low tide and low river flow, the storm drain discharge flows to the location near a fixed sampling station located on the PCH bridge. There also could be an occasional contaminated slug from the Newport Slough, but results from this sampling project did not support this scenario. Recommendation It is recommended that netting or some other physical barrier be installed to prevent birds from roosting under the PCH bridge. This may result in less bacterial contamination to the mouth of the Santa Ana River. The installation of a barrier and the subsequent bacterial testing of the same sample sites may indicate the effectiveness of this relatively inexpensive fix. Samples taken of the Seashore Drive effluent to the Santa Ana River also show contamination that should be eliminated. One controllable element to the make- up of the runoff from the Seashore Drive storm drain is the outdoor shower located at Seashore Drive and Orange Street. Water reclamation programs and studies have found that shower water contains high levels of fecal bacteria. Berming and draining the shower to the sewer would help eliminate that source of contamination. As mentioned earlier, this should actually be considered for all outdoor beach showers. Sewering the runoff from the Seashore Drive storm drain during dry-weather conditions could be a primary consideration, since the discharge volume is relatively low and the bacteria concentrations are high. It is also suggested that increased actions to control dogs and the loitering or 'camping'of homeless people around the mouth of the river may help decrease those potential sources of bacterial contamination. Newport Slough/Trailer Park Based on sample results from OCHCA, the Newport Slough near Pack Coast Highway and the Santa Ana River are, at times, a contaminated body of water. Sewer problems are known to exist at the trailer park, so the integrity of the sewer system ringing the slough may be in question. The groundwater and soil conditions are very corrosive in this area, and the sewer system is at least 30 to 40 years old, possibly older in some sections. The trailer park falls under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Housing and Community Development (SDHCD). The sewer system lies on private property located in the city of Newport Beach and discharges to a city line. Recommendation It is recommended that SDHCD and the City or Newport Beach follow up on investigating and correcting any sewer problems that might be contributing to the contamination of the slough. Balboa Boulevard Sewer in Newport Beach A side investigation determined that seawater is apparently infiltrating the Balboa Boulevard sewer in Newport Beach. High conductivity readings in the sewer were observed at high tides, and low conductivity readings were observed during low tides. Recommendation It is recommended that consideration be given to TV or hydrostatic testing of all .sewer lines in Newport Beach around IP and 18' Streets to determine if any cracks are causing infiltration or ex(kration to the OCSD trunk sewer. Additional conductivity monitoring and sampling should also be done to verify previous findings in the Balboa Trunk Sewer. Atlanta Pump Station and Huntington Beach Channel The pump station at Atlanta and Beach Boulevard and the Huntington Beach channel was investigated. Although the discharge from the Atlanta Pump Station was only sampled once, it shows a contribution of high fecal colifonns and bacteria counts. Samples taken from the Hilton construction dewatering and the channel downstream of the Atlanta Pump Station did not show high fecal bacteria, so the source of the bacteria in the discharge from the pump station is most likely from urban runoff. There is an area located on the east side of the AES Power Plant adjacent to the Huntington Beach channel known as the 'Homeless Man's Trench" that has standing water. The water is from a flap gate on the channel that is jammed open because of debris. When the tide rises, water comes through the flap gate and accumulates. Samples of this area show periodically high levels of bacteria. Recommendation As a result of high bacteria levels at the 'Homeless Man's Trench,' which is water accumulated east of AES near the Huntington Beach channel, it is recommended that an investigation be conducted to identify and eliminate the source of the bacteda in this area. Bird Observations Observations were made of the beach area between OCSD Monitoring Station 6N and 12N. During the summer, groups of 400 or more seagulls were noted at various areas, both in the surfzone and on the beach. What effect they have on surfzone bacteria is unknown. The seagulls appear to be attracted to trash and litter, where they can obtain a meal with very little effort. Overnight observations indicate the majority of these birds spend the night hours either floating in large groups just beyond the surfzone or feeding on the shore. Recommendation It is suggested that a pilot study be done to determine the impact of bird droppings on bacteria readings in the surfzone. r 0 4 � C�p C> X April 24, 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Directors FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, D.Env. Director of Technical Services SUBJECT: ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT Attached is a copy of a report titled "The 20 Meter Study" prepared by the 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury. The report was released today by the Grand Jury. A copy of their press release and one prepared by Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is also attached. The Grand Jury report comments on how OCSD conveys research findings and study results to its staff, board of directors and the community at large. The 20-m study, conducted in 1996, has been a source of controversy because some activists claim OCSD purposefully withheld the information contained in the report. While a final report was not prepared at the time the study was completed, an internal investigation by OCSD staff indicates that the 20-m study results were made available in September 1997 to the regulatory agencies, scientists, and others interested in the District's monitoring program. Nevertheless, the Grand Jury's recommendations are good ones and staff will use the recommendations to improve the way we communicate research results to the public. By law OCSD is required to respond to the Grand Jury s findings and recommendations within 90 days (or July 24, 2002). RPG:rm 4-24-02 Grand Jury Memo to Bd Dr Attachment ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 0 R IMMEDIATE RELEASE APRIL 24, 2002 Phraa: Contact: (714)ae2-2411 Lisa Murphy tax: Communications Manager [714once m ae2oaa8 veew.oeee. m 7141593-7120 7141394-0734 cellular magi.,auarar: P.Q Box 8127 Fountain Valley.M 8272E-5127 a : 10B44 Ellie OCSD RESPONDS TO 2002 GRAND JURY REPORT Ellis Ace. Faurnein Valley.ls,Qk CA 92708-7018 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA—The 2002 Grand Jury Report titled "The 20 Meter Study"focuses on Orange County Sanitation District and how information is Member Agentin conveyed to its management, its board of directors and the community. Md.. As required by law, the OCSD board of directors will provide responses to Anaheim findings 1-7 and recommendations 1-7 in the report, with an implementation area schedule. Beene Park Gy,mr Faunaiay "We have read the report and agree with all of the recommendations provided by Fullerton GeMen gram the Grand Jury," said Blake Anderson, general manager. "The recommendations Huntlngan Beach boil down to improved timeliness and accessibility of our reports to the general Irene La Ranre public. That is good government. We thank the Grand Jury for acknowledging Le Palm. that 'OCSD recognizes the benefit of communicating with the public', as it is a L,a tt a a Beach We hlaP high priority with this agency, and we will use the recommendations to improve Orange the way we disseminate research studies to the community." Pittance Sane A. Beef Beach Beeman Specific to the 1996 20-meter study, conducted between September 26 and Taal^ November 25, the information was the topic of OCSD's quarterly Ocean Ville Park Varna Linda Monitoring Program Progress Review meeting held on September 3, 1997. County of orange Meeting invitees included: the federal EPA, California EPA, OC Health Care Agency, Regional Water Quality Control Board, a number of environmental sanitary Districts interests, college and university scientists, and consultants. While the results Coate Mesa were discussed and available to the regulatory agencies at that time, the Grand Mldwar v Jury is correct in concluding that a written analysis of the work was not published Water Districts until this year. Irvine Rench Annually, OCSD completes $2.1 million in marine and shoreline monitoring, as part of its ocean release permit issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, when a need (more) Te maintain warid claee lead ..h,in wastewater and wacer resource management. recognized-- either by the OCSD board, management or staff, or from regulators-- additional studies are completed. OCSD is currently in the process of identifying the best ways to share the studies with the board of directors and general public in the most easily accessible, reader-friendly and timely way. The 20-meter study report is available on the Web site at www.ocsd.com under the "What's New" section. A copy of the complete Grand Jury report can be found at www. occourts.org/grndjury/gjreports.asp The Orange County Sanitation District is responsible for safely collecting, treating, and disposing wastewater. It is a special district, separate from the County of Orange or any city government, established under the State Health and Safety Code, to provide sewerage service to a specific geographic area. The Orange County Sanitation District is governed by a 25-member board of directors comprised of representatives of each local sewering agency or cities within our 470- square-mile service area. _ _ . ..., . iLL • r14-U54-5520 Apr 24 '02 8: 17 No .009 P . 02/02 • ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST-SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA 92701•714/834-3320 FAX 714/834-SS55 Mrn1A RELEASE ApiuL 24,2002 "The 20 METER Study" SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA. The 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Ivry today released a report entitled,"The 20 METER Study". The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is one of the largest sanitation districts in the country. In 1996 OCSD completed an otPshore water-testing prograrn referred to as 'The 20 METER Study.' The results were not published for over five years. While making no comment on the validity or significance of the data, the OCSD needs to ensure that all relevant data are passed on to its Board of Directors,and the public in a timely manner. The=tire report taut be viewed on our web site:httn://www occourt_ ore/ W&Wrts asp. For additional information concerning the attached report,please contact Kcoda Marlin at(714) 834-3320. Very truly yours, 2001-2002 ORANGE;0 Y GRAND WRY ER:mlh Eric Ritchie,Foreman —ORt4�^'e� Zo �o{Obj S�•tT+t27 —coP4s re : EMT Nlll^4 Cm, — FAX toPfrSTe ; WrreDteu PF, ECK6�Q,i ( e ° — coRES To jSoNeo A.4 E+.04 PAS-s�4 —2 s e ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST•SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA 92701 •714/834-3320 FAX 714/834-5555 April 18,2002 Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Attention: Blake P.Anderson, General Manager Dear Mr.Anderson: Attached is a copy of the 2001-2002 Orange County Grand Jury report,"The 10 Meter Study". Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05(f),a copy of the report is being provided to you two working days prior to its public release. Please note that"No officer,agency,department,or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release ojthe final report."Emphasis added. (Public release date—April 24,2002). It is requested that you provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations of this report directed to your office in compliance with Penal Code 933.05(a)and(b),copy attached.For each Grand Jury recommendation,be sure to describe the implementation status,as well as provide a schedule for future implementation. It is requested that the response to the recommendations be mailed to Frederick P.Horn,Presiding Judge of the Superior Court,700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana,CA 92701,with a separate copy mailed to the Orange County Grand Jury,700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana,CA 92701,no later than 90 days after the public release date,April 24,2002,in compliance with Penal Code 933, copy attached.The due date then is July 24,2002. Should additional time for responding to this report be necessary for further analysis,Penal Code 933.05(b)(3)permits an extension of time up to six months from the public release date. Such extensions should be advised in writing, with the information required in Penal Code 933.05(b)(3),to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court,with a separate copy of the request to the Grand Jury(address above). Very truly yours, 2001—2002 ORANGEQQQ�UNTYY JURY ER:mlh Eric Ritchie,Foreman Attachments Grand Jury Report Penal Code 933, 933.05 0 "The 20 METER Study" SUMMARY The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is one of the largest sanitation districts in the country. In 1996 OCSD completed an offshore water-testing program referred to as "I'he 20 Meter Study."The results were not published for over five years. While malting no comment on the validity or significance of the data,the OCSD needs to ensure that all relevant data are passed on to its Board of Directors,and the public in a timely manner. PURPOSE The Grand Jury was informed that the results of a publicly funded study performed by OCSD have not been disseminated to the public in a timely manner; specifically"The 20 Meter Study." The purpose of this study is to determine how OCSD disseminates their research findings to the public and if OCSD accurately conveys research findings in a timely manner to its management,the Board of Directors and the public. BACKGROUND The OCSD is a public agency responsible for the treatment and disposal of sewage for northern Orange County, serving over 22 million people. It is the third largest treatment system west of the Mississippi. OCSD discharges a combination of primary and secondary treated sewage through a 120-inch outfall pipe into the ocean. Two hundred forty million gallons of sewage daily (or 88 billion gallons annually) are discharged through a series of openings in the outfall pipe onto the seabed at a distance of approximately four and one half miles from shore. The OCSD has an active ocean testing and monitoring program. The Clean Water Act of 1972 and 301(h)Permit The Clean Water Act of 1972, 33 U.S.C.A. Section 1251, et seq., was enacted to restore and maintain the integrity of the nation's waters and prohibits the discharge of any pollutant into navigable waters of the United States, except in compliance with the 1 9 provisions of the Act. The Act requires that all sewage discharged into the ocean be treated to secondary treatment standards. However, Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act allows site-specific requirements to be established for qualifying agencies to treat to less than full secondary standards. OCSD discharges a mixture of treated sewage; part is treated to primary treatment levels and part is treated to secondary treatment levels. It has been OCSD's practice to apply for a Section 301(h)permit (or waiver)of the Clean Water Act granted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); this permit has been granted. The State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is responsible for monitoring adherence to the conditions of the EPA permit. The permit is granted for five-year intervals. The current permit will be up for renewal in the year 2003. The decision to continue to request a Section 301(h) permit is a policy decision made by the OCSD Board of Directors and is not within the purview of the Grand Jury. The Sewage Plume The 240 million gallons of sewage dispersed daily form an underwater plume. This resultant plume of sewage is not stationary. It is dispersed by ocean currents that vary dependent upon many factors such as wind, tide, water temperature, and weather patterns which make it practically impossible to model accurately. Oversight The RWQCB exercises general oversight as the regulatory agency; however OCSD is essentially self-monitored and, with the exception of Clean Water Act and permit requirements, is free to decide what data or research to reveal to RWQCB and the public. Failure to disclose scientific data compromises the decision-making process. "The 20-Meter Study" In late 1996, OCSD undertook a study to obtain and test ocean water samples along a line of 20 meters in depth (or approximately 60 feet) to more accurately capture the 2 movement of the sewage plume at that moment in time. This study was paid for by OCSD, whose funds are derived in most part by rates passed on to users. The Grand Jury found no evidence that the results from this study were presented to the OCSD Board of Directors, the RWQCB,the Orange County Health Care Agency, or the public. Five years later, in early 2001, the results of"The 20 Meter Study"were revealed for the first time in a slide included in an OCSD presentation. This presentation was made at a conference attended by environmental activists, representatives from the Orange County Health Care Agency, and OCSD. In response to questions from the audience, OCSD stated that a report on "The 20 Meter Study" would be prepared. In August of 2001, OCSD committed to make the report available within the following thirty to sixty days. The Grand Jury reviewed OCSD Board of Directors minutes from late 1996 to mid 1998 and found no mention of the "20 Meter Study." A separate review of the minutes of the OCSD Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee for the same time period also found no mention of the "20 Meter Study." There was no evidence that the study was presented to OCSD Board of Directors. Furthermore, the RWQCB had no written record of receiving a report on the "20 Meter Study." The report was finally published at the end of March 2002. Dissemination of Information to the Public The OCSD recognizes the benefit of communicating with the public. It has hired communication staff and updated its website. The portion of the ocean monitoring program required under the permit is published on the website and is available in print or on compact disk. The results of other studies not required by the Clean Water Act permit are not included. Interviews with OCSD indicate that no written procedures currently exist to cover the preparation or dissemination of research studies. The OCSD maintains two servers. A server is a computer, usually on the World Wide Web,which provides information to a client,for example a desktop computer. The first is a web server for the OCSD web site (www.ocsd.com). The second is a file server that is 3 a repository of research information. It is an unlisted repository used by OCSD researchers and staff to post and share study data, findings, and results. A file server gives a directory listing of files, but provides neither information on the content of the files nor any instructions on how to use the file server to acquire information. Furthermore, the existence of this file server is not widely publicized. The website makes no reference of it, nor provides access to it. METHOD OF STUDY The Grand Jury conducted interviews with administrative, technical, and operational staff of OCSD, a representative of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Orange County Health Care Agency, as well as university consultants, environmentalists, and concerned citizens. The Grand Jury has attended meetings at OCSD, including meetings of its Board of Directors, and toured the OCSD plant. The Grand Jury also reviewed published information from OCSD including its Strategic Plan, minutes of OCSD Board of Directors, and minutes of the OCSD Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee. FINDINGS Under California Penal Code Section 933 and Section 933.05, responses are required to all findings. The Orange County 2001-2002 Grand Jury arrived at seven findings: I. Relevant data, including the"20 Meter Study"have not been released to the public in a timely manner. 2. Publicly funded studies are vital to ongoing research of water quality. 3. OCSD has not disclosed the existence of all publicly funded studies. 4. OCSD has no written procedure regarding the preparation of reports or the dissemination of study results. 5. The results of some OCSD studies have not been published. 6. There is no single listing available of approved OCSD study topics. 7. There is limited public access to unpublished OCSD research data. 4 427 GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS § 933.06 § 933. Findings and remmmmdatfomr, apnea of fowl report; (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a mmmmt of governing bodies, elective officers, or agency summaryregudiogthe implemeatedaction, hands; defending (2) The recommendation has not yet beea implemented,but (a) Each grand jury shill submit to the presiding judge of the win be implemented in the fume. with a timehisme for superior court a final report of it findings and ecommendmiom iapicummdose. that pertain to aunty government maven during the Fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be (3) lbe recommevdaioo requires funkier aaalpis, with an submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court at any explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or time during the term of service of a grand jury. A final report study, and a timefragage for the matter to be prepared for may be submitted for comment to responsible officers,agencies, discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department or departments,including the county board of supervisors,when being investigated or reviewed,including the governing body of applicable,upon finding of the presiding judge that the report is the public agency when applicable. this tieneframe shall not in compliance with this title.- For 45 days after the end of the ameed sec months from the date of publication of the grand jury term, the foreperson and his in her designers shag, upon 1Cport- nnsonable notice,be available to clarify the recommendations of (4).7be recommendation will not be implemented because it the report. is at warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation (b) One copy of each final report,together with the responses therefor. thereat,found to be in compliance with this title shall be placed (c) However,if a fording or recommendation of the grand jury on file with the county clerk and remain on file in the office of addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or the county clerk the county clerk shall immediately forward a department headed by an elected offcia, both the agency or vise copy of the report and the responses to the Slate Archivist department head and the baud of supervisors shag respond if who shag retain that report and all responses in perpenturty. requested by the grand jury,but the response of the board of (c) No later fl m 90 days after the grand jury submits;a final supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel report on the operations of any public agency subject to its matters over which it has some dedsionmaking authority. TLe reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency response of the elected agency or department head shall address shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior wort on the all aspen of the findings or recommendations affecting his or findings and recommcadanom pertaining to matters under the his agency or department. control of the governing body,and every elected county officer (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to or agency head far which the grand jury bar respoaibdity mine before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and personal to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the discussing the findings of the grand jury report that refaces to presiding judge of the superior mart,with an information copy (pat person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the ant to the board of superviwe on the findings and recommen- findings prior at their release. dadom pertaining to matters under the ante( of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that (e) During an investigation,the greadjury shall meet with the officer or agency had supervises at controls In any city and subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, roles county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and she cour%either an is own determination or upon request of the recommendations All of tine wmmenv and repass shall foreperwn of the grand jury, determines that such a memivg fanhwide be subrrdved at the presiding judge of the superior would be detrimental. wort who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all scapegoats to (f) A grad jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the dark of the the portion of the grand jury report relating to that paean or public agency and the offiw of the county dark.or the mayor entity two workhrg day.prim to its public release and after the when applicable,and shall remain on file in those offices. One approval of the limaiding fudge. No officer.agency,department, wpy,shell be placed an file with the applicable gland jury final or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents report by,and in the content of the currently impaneled grand of the report prior to the public release of the final report. jury,where it shag be maintained for a minimum of five years. (Added by Sma1996, a 1170 (SB.1457), § 1. Amended by (it) As used in this section"agency' includes a department Srale1997,c 443(AB.829),if 5.) (Added by Sma1961, c 1284, p. 3064, § 1. Amended by Sma1963, c 674,p. 1678, 11, Sma1974, a 393,p. 977, § 6; § 933.06. Vamndasongnidjurp repo"ro6miltedbyunamf- Sma1974, c 1396,p. 3054, § 3; Sugar 1977, a 107,p.339,§ 6; mom ate of remeinivgjvenn{ mnditlois StanlM,, c 187,p. 709, 1 1; Sma1980, v 544 p. 1499, 1 1; (a) Notwithstanding Sections 916 aid 940,in a county having Sma1981,a 203,P. 1126,§ l; Smu.199Z a 1408,A 5365.13; a population of 20,000 or less,a final report may be adopted and Shaft,1985, a 221, § 1, infester, 4..Iufy 12 1985, Same,1987, c submitted pursuant to Section 933 with the concurrenco of at 690, § 1; Sma198Q c 1297, § S; Sart1997, a 493 fA.d829), least 10 grand juror,if all of the following conditions arc suer. § 4; Sma1998,a 130(A.B1901).§ 2) (1) rs membership e grand jury consisting of 19 person has o 4 933.05. lfespomes te findings dad pursant to law,and the is reducedd from 19 19 to to (a) For purposes of subdivision(b)of Section 933,as to each fewer than 12. Wand jury finding,the responding person or enfiry shall indicate (2) The vacancies haw not been (tilled pursuant to Section One of the following: 9aBA within 30 days from the time that the clerk of the superior (1) The respondent ages with the finding. wort is given written notice that the vacancy has attuned. (2) The respondent disagrco wholly or partially with the (3) A fund report has not been submitted by the grand jury fading in which rate the respome"I specify the portion of panuaer to Section 933. the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of (b) Notwithstanding Section 933, no responsible, officers, the reasons,therefor. - agencies,ordepattmcnrs shall be required to comment on a final (b) For purpmm of subdivision(b)if Section 933,av a inch report submitted pursuant to this section, (Added by Staa1994, Find jury t,mmmmdation, the responding person or entity a 1085(SB.1465),if 1. AmeMedby Sma.2001,c.854(S.B.205), shall epon one of the following axiom: I .. 1 40.) April 2, 2002 Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District Post Office Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Subject: User Fees FY 2002-03 The Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD or the District) will experience a shortfall of over eight hundred million dollars ($800,000,000.00) in the next four years. The Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) already approved by this Board account for most of the increased spending. The shortfall comes because the revenue does not keep pace with the expenses. Proposal: Increase single family residence (SFR)user fees for FY 2002-03 from $80/year to $128/year. The shortfall in revenue compared to expenses from 2003-2006 is more than S800 million. This shortfall continues throughout the decade. Even in FY 2010 spending is over$250 million/year but income is just barely more than $200 million/year. Fees are going to almost double by the end of this decade, but the District will still have an annual deficit. Fees are scheduled to increase from $80/year to $150/year by 2010, or $200/year depending upon the treatment level. Combine this annual deficit with the huge building program debt and the District is placed in a tenuous financial situation. The OCSD must get ahead of this curve. We do not want to try to play catch up with revenues, especially since revenues will be less than expenses, even in 2010. One objective is to avoid large jumps in user fees. By starting with an increase of only $4/month now rather than waiting, the overall increases are less and there will not have to be a doubling of rates in the future. By paying more now, the rate of increases in the future will be less. Increase incrementally and reasonably by starting now, rather than waiting until the District is carrying a burdensomely high debt load. It is always cheaper in the long run to pay upfront for things rather than borrowing. By paying more of the CIP now, the District avoids paying as much interest since the debt will be less. If the Board moves, even slightly, to more of a pay-as-you-go policy rather than borrowing so much for the building projects, the District will save money for the rate payers in the long run. Also, the District will not have to dip into the reserves as much. FY2002-03 User Fee Proposal, page 2 The reserves can be maintained for emergencies and to ensure the District's credit rating remains high even while the District is spending large amounts for CIP. Huge building projects have been approved for construction in the near future. One example is the Groundwater Replenishment System(GWRS). Other projects on the table include the long term disinfection project and even'a possible increase in treatment level. Operational costs will increase as these building projects come online. Short term disinfection operations will cost $10-12 million/year. This alone is a $10-12/year/SFR increase. The move from Class B -) Class A biosolids will increase operating expenses. As options for biosolids become less available, the costs for those remaining will increase. If the District moves to more secondary treatment, fees will increase $5/year now to over$50/year by 2010 to cover the added costs. Even dry weather urban nmoff diversion will cost something. There are many forward-looking projects that this Board of Directors has approved and will approve. They all take money. The users are presently underpaying for the service provided. OCSD users pay an extremely low rate compared to other users for the services provided. The customers currently underpay for a world-class sanitation district. The current rates cannot support the high level of service or the improvements being made. By starting to pay more now, the increases will be less later on. For the OCSD to remain world-class, innovative, ahead-of-the-curve, and proactive in protecting public health and the environment, adequate financial resources must be provided. The Board of Directors and the OCSD must continue striving to maintain world-class leadership in wastewater and water resource management. Increase SFR user fees for fiscal year 2002-03 from $80/year to $128/year. This will allow the District to minimize the magnitude of the shortfall, avoid depleting reserves, keep overall costs down, decrease the amount of borrowing necessary, and continue improving and protecting the environment while responsibly providing excellent service to the users. 414 7,/`,� Randy T. Fuhrman 16915 Roundhill Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92649 (714) 377-4487