The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About98.06-08-16 Item 6 Attachment - Proposed FY16-17.17-18 Budget ONLINE.pdf opBudgetd Aw R _` � ter.-. _ J ._�• `.� �� r Orange County Sanitation District, California FY 2016-17 & FY 2017-18 Proposed Budget O�Jaj,( S A N l rq r��2 C 9 C+ o � 90 C �2 TFOT��C� E ENv\Po�� MISSION STATEMENT "To protect public health and the environment by providing effective wastewater collection, treatment, and recycling." For Fiscal Years July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017 and July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Orange County Sanitation District Service Area and Treatment Plant Locations in Orange County, California LA HABRA BREA °rang`°o sY FULLER YORBA fuidomia LINOA nV5nd10f®" PLAC TIA LA B ENA P RK RE ANANEIM VILLA NTO PA LOS �—� A AMITOS gROE ORANGE ROSEAL V 1 BEACH IN SAN UNTA �' ANA USTIN - ALL P1 HUBTI GTOY / IRVINE COSTA MESA US�rs,°aT NEWPORT BEACH r. Service area boundary pmnw•a,ceii�e min Mg N — Sewer pipelines Lt S Reclamation Plant No.i(PI) N Treatment Plant No.2(P2) ° -� 0 Pump and lift stations oa°m ns.�u°mrcawr,namo,v° C unincorporated Orange Uunty(white areas) rsmemawam nmmse°v.m°nr. w.+ae:mmnrs m...d. R-a,.arva v mr3.•,g0°smsnua. nEv6Eo:W/AI< GFOA Budget Presentation Award (0 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Distinguished Budget Presentation Award PRESENTED TO Orange County Sanitation District California For the Biennium Beginning July 1,2014 �fifj-.roJ�arr.. The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the Orange County Sanitation District, California,for its biennial budget for the biennium beginning July 1,2014. In order to receive this award, a government unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and as a communication device. The award is valid for a period of two years only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to the program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Table of Contents Boardof Directors........................................................................................................................................................1 BoardCommittees.......................................................................................................................................................ii Orange County Sanitation District Organization Chart..............................................................................................III AdministrativeOfficials...............................................................................................................................................iv Reader's Guide to the Budget.....................................................................................................................................v General Manager's Budget Message........................................................................................................................vii CoreValues.................................................................................................................................................................x Section 1 —Executive Summary Executive Summary 1 Section 2- Introduction Financial Overview& Budgetary Issues........................................................................................................1 BusinessPlan..............................................................................................................................................15 Strategic Goals for Fiscal Years 2016-17 &2017-18..................................................................................28 OCSDLong-Term Planning.........................................................................................................................29 Background Information and Description of Services.................................................................................30 OrangeCounty at a Glance.........................................................................................................................31 Section 3-Policies, Systems and Processes FiscalPolicy...................................................................................................................................................1 GFOA Best Practices and Advisories............................................................................................................9 Overview of the Budget Process.................................................................................................................19 BudgetAssumptions....................................................................................................................................21 Accounting System and Budgetary Control.................................................................................................25 OCSDEnterprise Fund Chart......................................................................................................................26 RevenueSources........................................................................................................................................27 Section 4—District Summary FY 2016-17: Where the Money Comes From..............................................................................................................1 Wherethe Money Goes..........................................................................................................................1 Funding Sources by Category................................................................................................................2 FundingUses by Category.....................................................................................................................3 FY 2017-18: Where the Money Comes From..............................................................................................................5 Wherethe Money Goes..........................................................................................................................5 Funding Sources by Category................................................................................................................6 FundingUses by Category.....................................................................................................................7 BudgetResources.........................................................................................................................................8 Budget Resources by Revenue Area—FY 2016-17...................................................................................10 Budget Resources by Revenue Area—FY 2017-18...................................................................................12 ProjectedReserves.....................................................................................................................................14 Consolidated Cash Flow Projections...........................................................................................................16 Table of Contents Section 5—Operations Overview Operations Budget Overview.........................................................................................................................1 Operations Summary/Comparisons by Department......................................................................................3 Expenseby Category....................................................................................................................................4 Allocation to Individual Revenue Areas.........................................................................................................5 Net Operating Expense by Line Item ............................................................................................................6 Notes to Operations Summary......................................................................................................................8 Section 6-Operating Divisions GENERAL MANAGEMENT General Management Administration 1 BoardServices ..............................................................................................................................................5 PublicAffairs ....................................................................................................................................9 HUMAN RESOURCES Human Resources Administration...............................................................................................................13 Risk Management/Safety/Security.................................................. ..................................................17 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Administrative Services Administration.......................................................................................................21 FinancialManagement................................................................................................................................25 Contracts, Purchasing, and Materials Management...................................................................................29 Information Technology..........................................................................................................33 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Environmental Services Administration.......................................................................................................37 Environmental Compliance..........................................................................................................................41 Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring...............................................................................................................45 ENGINEERING EngineeringAdministration..........................................................................................................................49 Planning.......................................................................................................................................................53 ProjectManagement Office.........................................................................................................................57 Civil & Mechanical Engineering...................................................................................................................61 Electrical &Control Systems Engineering...................................................................................................65 OPERATIONS&MAINTENANCE Operations&Maintenance Administration..................................................................................................69 Collection Facilities Operations&Maintenance..........................................................................................73 Fleet Services 77 Operations-Plant No. 1 ..............................................................................................................................81 Operations-Plant No. 2..............................................................................................................................85 Maintenance- Plant No. 1 ...........................................................................................................................89 Maintenance- Plant No. 2...........................................................................................................................93 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Section 7-Self-Insurance Program Self-Insurance Program Overview.................................................................................................................1 Total Self-Insurance Program........................................................................................................................2 General Liability and Property Self-Insurance Program................................................................................3 Workers'Compensation Self-Insurance Program.........................................................................................4 Section 8-Capital Improvement Program Overview........................................................................................................................................................1 Diagram of Treatment Process......................................................................................................................3 ProjectSummary-FY 2016-17.....................................................................................................................4 Capital Improvement Expenditure Graphs by Process and Type- FY 2016-17...........................................5 ProjectSummary-FY 2017-18.....................................................................................................................6 Capital Improvement Expenditure Graphs by Process and Type-FY 2017-18...........................................7 Summary of Capital Requirements................................................................................................................8 CIPProject Detail Sheets............................................................................................................................12 Project Summary by Revenue Program Category-Collection System Projects........................................93 Project Summary by Revenue Program Category-Treatment& Disposal Projects..................................94 Summary by Project Status-Collection System Projects...........................................................................97 Summary by Project Status-Treatment&Disposal Projects.....................................................................98 Proposed Equipment Budget Summary- FY 2016-17............................................................................-102 Proposed Equipment Budget Detail- FY 2016-17..................................................................................-104 Proposed Equipment Budget Summary- FY 2017-18............................................................................-106 Proposed Equipment Budget Detail- FY 2017-18....................................................................................108 Section 9- Debt Service Debt Financing Program 1 Debt Service Requirements-Principal& Interest 6 Debt Service Requirements- Interest Payments 8 Debt Service Requirements- Principal Payments......................................................................................10 Section 10-Appendix Staffingby Department-Graph.....................................................................................................................1 Staffingby Category-Graph.........................................................................................................................1 Historical Staffing by Department-Graph.....................................................................................................2 Total Historical Staffing-Graph....................................................................................................................2 HistoricalStaffing Summary..........................................................................................................................3 HistoricalStaffing Detail ................................................................................................................................4 AppropriationsLimit.....................................................................................................................................15 BudgetGlossary..........................................................................................................................................16 MiscellaneousStatistics ..............................................................................................................................21 Service Area Population Information...........................................................................................................22 Index............................................................................................................................................................23 OCSD Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors AGENCY/CITIES ACTIVE DIRECTOR Anaheim Lucille Kring Brea Glenn Parker Buena Park Fred Smith Cypress Mariellen Yarc Fountain Valley Steve Nagel Fullerton Greg Sebourn Garden Grove Steve Jones Huntington Beach Jim Katapodis Irvine Steven Choi La Habra Tom Beamish La Palma Peter Kim Los Alamitos Richard Murphy Newport Beach Keith Curry Orange Teresa Smith Placentia Chad Wanke Santa Ana Sal Tinajero Seal Beach Ellery Deaton Stanton David Shawver Tustin John Nielsen Villa Park Greg Mills Sanitary Water Districts Costa Mesa Sanitary District(CMSD) James Ferryman Midway City Sanitary District(MCSD) Joy Neugebauer Irvine Ranch Water District(IRWD) John Withers Yorba Linda Water District(YLWD) Robert Kiley County Areas Member of the Board of Supervisors Michelle Steel 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Board Committees STEERING COMMITTEE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE John Nielsen, Board Chair John Withers, Chair(IRW D) Greg Sebourn Board Vice-Chair David Shawver,Vice-Chair(Stanton) John Withers, Chair, Operations Committee Tom Beamish (La Habra) Keith Curry, Chair,Administration Committee EIIery Deaton (Seal Beach) Lucille Kring, Member-At-Large Steve Jones(Garden Grove) David Shawver, Member-At-Large Robert Kiley(YLWD) Tom Beamish, Member-At-Large Richard Murphy(Los Alamitos) Steve Nagel (Fountain Valley) Fred Smith (Buena Park) ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Michelle Steel (Board of Supervisors) Keith Curry, Chair(Newport Beach) Chad Wanke(Placentia) Lucille Kring Vice-Chair(Anaheim) Mariellen Yarc(Cypress) Steven Choi (Irvine) John Nielsen, Board Chair(Tustin) James Ferryman (CMSD) Greg Sebourn, Board Vice-Chair(Fullerton) Jim Katapodis(Huntington Beach) Peter Kim (La Palma) Greg Mills (Villa Park) LEGISLATIVE AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE Joy Neugebauer(MCSD) Tom Beamish (La Habra) Glenn Parker(Brea) Peter Kim (La Palma) Teresa Smith (Orange) Robert Kiley(YLWD) Sal Tinajero(Santa Ana) Lucille Kring (Anaheim) John Nielsen, Board Chair(Tustin) John Nielsen, Board Chair(Tustin) Greg Sebourn, Board Vice-Chair(Fullerton) Greg Sebourn, Board Vice-Chair(Fullerton) John Withers(IRWD) District's Organizational Chart .. ' 9 General Management Atlminislrafion Boartl Services - Publlc o.os 14 Human Resources AdministrativelAdZistration nvironmental Engineering Operabons& AtlminisYrafian Seroces ees Administration Maintenance Administration Risk Management/ Financial Planning Safety/Security Management nvronmental Collectionompliance Project Fac IMes Contracts, Management OperatlonsPurchasing& aboratory & Office Maintenance Materials Ocean Monitoring Management C"I& Fleet Services Mechanical Information Eopreenng Plant No. 1 Technology LOperatms Electrical& Control Systems Plant No. 2 Engineering Operefions Plant No. 1 Maintenance Plant Na. 2 Maintenance lit 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Administrative Officials Departments General Manager James Herberg Assistant General Manager Robert Ghirelli Director of Engineering Robert Thompson Director of Environmental Services James Colston Director of Finance and Administrative Services Lorenzo Tyner Director of Human Resources Celia Chandler Director of Operations&Maintenance Edward Torres General Counsel Bradley Hogin iv Reader's Guide to the Budget Reader's Guide to the Budget • The Budget Process provides an overview of the budget development process and budget This guide is intended to help the reader calendar. understand what information is available in the budget and how it is organized. This budget • Budget Assumptions are decided on as a document is broken down into ten sections foundation for developing the budget, and they including a Budget Glossary and Index. The guide the District in determining the level of Administrative Services Department invites your wastewater treatment services that will be suggestions on ways to make the budget provided to the community. document more understandable. • Accounting Systems and Budgetary Control The General Manager's Budget Message and a provides an overview of the District's summary of the District's Core Values follow this accounting systems and the level at which guide. The General Managers budget message budgetary control is maintained. introduces the budget to the reader. Section 4-District Summary Following is an explanation of the major sections This summary section is a comprehensive of this budget: overview of the FY 2016-17&FY 2017-18 Budget with a focus on all consolidated District Section 1—Executive Summary funds. Included are tables and graphs for both The Executive Summary highlights critical issues revenues and expenses. and financial information regarding the District's FY 2016-17&FY 2017-18 Budget. Section 5—Operations Overview This section is a comprehensive overview of the Section 2—Introduction District's operating costs and related revenues for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18. The District's • Financial Overview and Budget Issues -This operations include collection,treatment, and section highlights the issues impacting the disposal activities. Tables are included for FY 2016-17&FY 2017-18 Budget. revenues and expenses to assist the reader in interpreting the data. Section 3—Policies and Practices Section 6—Operating Divisions • Fiscal Policies describe the District's financial This section includes operating programs for the goals along with policies addressing the District's basic organizational units which provide operating budget; revenues and expenses; collection and essential wastewater treatment service fees; capital improvement program; services to the community. Divisional budgets long-and short-term debt; reserves; are presented in the following format: investments; and accounting, auditing and financial reporting. • Organization Chart-An organization chart by position is provided for each division. • GFOA Recommended Practices lists all of the Accounting,Auditing,and Financial Reporting; • Authorized FTE Positions-The total number Cash Management; Governmental Budgeting of full-time equivalent positions assigned to and Fiscal Policy; Debt Management; and each division is included in this table. Retirement and Benefits Administration practices that are recommended by the • Staffing Trends-A multi-year staffing trend Government Finance Officers Association of chart is provided to show the changes that the United States and Canada. Included within have occurred in each division over time. this list of best financial practices for states and local governments is the District's status as to • Service Description -A description of the whether we are in compliance, in progress services or functions provided by each division. towards compliance, or whether the practice is applicable to this agency. • 2015.16 Performance Objectives-This section represents the objectives defined by the division for the previous fiscal year. v 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget • 2015.16 Performance Results-A summary of major accomplishments and objectives that Section 10—Appendix were actually met during the previous fiscal year. • Staffing -Includes charts of staffing by department and category, charts of the • 2016.17 &2017.18 Performance Objectives- historical staffing by department, a historical A list of projected goals to be accomplished summary and detail schedules of authorized during the 2016-17 and 2017-18 fiscal years. positions and full-time equivalent employees by department and by division. • Performance Measures-A listing of the measures that will be used to evaluate the • Appropriations Limit-The calculation of the success of the budgeted fiscal years. District's California Constitutional appropriation limit. • Budget Overview-This section provides an overview of changes from the FY 2015-16 Budget Glossary Budget to the FY 2016-17 &FY 2017-18 Budget. Additionally,the significant impacts of Miscellaneous Statistics budgetary changes are outlined along with dollar amounts. . Service Area Population Information • Expenses by Category-A chart comparing Index the FY 2014-15 actual expenses and the FY 2015-16 budgeted and projected expenses against the proposed budget for FY 2016-17& FY 2017-18. The percent change from the FY 2015-16 Budget compared to the FY 2016- 17 Budget is also included. • Expenditure Trends -This graph provides a multi-year historical trend of divisional expenses. Section 7-Self-Insurance Program This section presents an overview of the self- insurance program, including program descriptions and revenue and expense detail. Section 8- Capital Improvements This section of the budget gives an overview of the District's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), CIP project summaries, and detailed CIP project sheets. The project sheets outline project descriptions, project location, project type, projected costs, and funding sources. Section 9-Debt Financing Program This section describes the District's Debt Financing Program including a listing of the outstanding debt issues, a description of the purpose of each issue, a debt service retirement schedule, and Debt Service Requirements, including principal and interest, over the life of the outstanding debt issues. vi Orange County Sanitation District 108"Ellis Avenue,Fountain Valley,CA 92708 Anaheim 714.962.2411 • www.ocsewen;mm Brea Buena Park June 1, 2016 Fountain Valley Fullerton Honorable Chair and Board of Directors: Garden Grove Humington Beach I am pleased to submit the Orange County Sanitation District's (OCSD) Irvine Proposed Budget for fiscal year 2016-17 and 2017-18. This document lays out the framework for OCSD's activities during the next two years, and serves La Habra as a source of information for OCSD's Board of Directors, our ratepayers and La Palma our employees. This budget includes the operational, capital and debt LosAlamADs service expenditures necessary to cost-effectively support our mission and execute the Strategic Plan adopted by our Board of Directors in December Newport Beach 2015. Our work plan focuses on four distinct program areas: Orange Placentia • Expanded Water Recycling — In partnership with the Orange County Same Ana Water District (OCWD), our agency recycles enough water to supply the needs of 850,000 people. Recognizing the need for a reliable, San]Beach affordable and high quality water supply, our Board of Directors has Stanton set a goal of recycling 100 percent of our wastewater flows. We will Tustin be working with OCWD on the planning and design of the ultimate Mile Park expansion of the Groundwater Replenishment System over the next two years. Countyciforange costs�istrid Infrastructure Reliability and Operational Sustainability—We will Sanuarycontinue to improve our planned maintenance program to include civil MidwayCKY SanitaryUstrict assets in addition to electrical and mechanical systems. Our long term [wine Ranch facilities Master Plan will also be updated during the next two years WaterDistrid and will serve as a basis for our new rate structure that will take effect Yorba Linda n 2018. Recognizing the importance of resiliency in the event of a Water District disaster, we will complete our business continuity plan and establish offsite backup infrastructure. In fiscal year 2016-17, we will complete the transfer of local sewers in the Tustin area to a local provider, which will allow us to focus on regional services. Safety and Security—Capital projects, maintenance activities, and training to address safety in our workplace are included in our work plan. We are also enhancing our physical and electronic security > measures. M�P VII To protect public health and the environment by providing effective wastewater collection,treatment,and recycling. General Manager Letter June 1, 2016 Page 2 • Workforce Succession Planning—Recognizing the ongoing retirement wave, we will continue to invest in our employees focusing on planning, leadership training and improved recruitment strategies. I would like to take this opportunity to highlight some of the important revisions to next year's budget: • Departmental Restructuring—OCSD restructured its departments to strategically align our engineering, operating, and environmental functions to better meet the challenges of the future. The business units within the Facilities Support Services Department were merged into other departments. The Collections Operations and Maintenance and Fleet Services divisions were moved into the Operations and Maintenance Department. This change will allow for better coordination and standardization of our maintenance efforts for all of OCSD's infrastructure. The Source Control inspection team merged with the Pretreatment Compliance team in a newly created Environmental Services Department. This new department will lead OCSD's environmental and regulatory efforts and will also include the Environmental Sciences Laboratory, Ocean Monitoring, Compliance, Air Quality, and Biosolids Programs. The reorganization also consolidated project management functions in the Engineering Department to form an agency wide Project Management Office. These changes will allow us to more efficiently and effectively deliver service to internal and external customers. • Operating Expense Cost Containment— Despite inflationary increases on many external costs such as chemicals and utilities, we will minimize the impact on rate-payers by aggressively negotiating our contracts, ensuring a competitive bidding environment, prudently managing debt and implementing efficiencies. The 2016-17 Operating Budget represents only a 3.5 percent increase from the current year projected actuals. Operating efficiencies such as the reduction of long-term liabilities, operational improvements and general cost containment have allowed OCSD to reduce ongoing expenses and the need for additional resources. viii General Manager Letter June 1, 2016 Page 3 Reduction in Long-term Liabilities — Many government agencies are faced with growing long-term liabilities, particularly in the area of pensions. OCSD has been aggressive in reducing its liability and developed a plan to address this issue. By making advanced payments, as I have included in this budget, OCSD has eliminated its unfunded pension liability, saving tens of millions of dollars in premium payments. • Rate & Sewer Service Planning —Our current rate structure expires on June 30, 2018. During this budget period, we will establish and present to the board a sound financial plan in line with the goals of the agency. While addressing rising treatment and chemical costs, aging infrastructure, and increased regulatory requirements, this budget displays our commitment to efficiency as it includes only minimal staffing and operating cost increases; and rate increases averaging less than 2 percent per year. OCSD will continue to provide wastewater treatment, recycling, sewer and facilities maintenance, ocean monitoring and many other services while maintaining one of the lowest rates in the state. I believe this budget fully supports the goals included in the Orange County Sanitation District's Strategic Plan and positions us well to address challenges in the coming years. James D. Herberg General Manager Orange County Sanitation District ix 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT CORE VALUES MISSION STATEMENT The Mission Statement is the basic foundation that defines why the Orange County Sanitation District exists. "To protect public health and the environment by providing effective wastewater collection,treatment,and recycling." VISION STATEMENT The Vision Statement supports the Mission Statement by expressing a broad philosophy of what the Orange County Sanitation District strives to achieve now and in the future in the delivery of services to our customers, vendors, other agencies, the general public and each other. "ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT WILL BE A LEADER IN: • Providing reliable, responsive and affordable services in line with customer needs and expectations. • Protecting public health and the environment utilizing all practical and effective means for wastewater, energy, and solids resource recovery. • Continually seeking efficiencies to ensure that the public's money is wisely spent. • Communicating our mission and strategies with those we serve and all other stakeholders. • Partnering with others to benefit our customers, this region, and our industry. • Creating the best possible workforce in terms of safety, productivity, customer service, and training." Core Values The Core Values support the Mission and Vision Statements by expressing the values, beliefs, and philosophy that guides our daily actions.They help form the framework of our organization and reinforce our professional work ethic. • HONESTY,TRUST and RESPECT We aspire to the highest degree of integrity, honesty, trust,and respect in our interactions with each other, our suppliers, our customers, and our community. • TEAMWORK and PROBLEM SOLVING We strive to reach OCSD goals through cooperative efforts and collaboration with each other and our constituencies. We work to solve problems in a creative, cost-effective and safe manner, and we acknowledge team and individual efforts. • LEADERSHIP and COMMITMENT We lead by example, acknowledging the value of our resources and using them wisely and safely to achieve our objectives and goals. We are committed to act in the best interests of our employees, our organization, and our community. • LEARNING/TEACHING-Talents, Skills and Abilities We continuously develop ourselves, enhancing our talents, skills, and abilities, knowing that only through personal growth and development will we continue to progress as an agency and as individuals. • RECOGNITION/REWARDS We seek to recognize, acknowledge and reward contributions to OCSD by our many talented employees. x m x m ti N C m � ym _ m Oy ZC � g 3 D A C Executive Summary This FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 budget represents Cost to Collect. Treat, and Recycle a consolidation of two one-year proposed operating One Million Gallons and capital budgets. The District's FY 2016-17 $2,500 operating and capital improvement budget is proposed at $475.2 million, a 1.2 percent increase $2,00o $2,167 $2,219 over the prior year budget of $469.7 million. This $2,071 $2,099 overall increase is primarily attributable to an $1,937 increase of one-time reduction of long-term $1,500 obligations in the amount of$15 million mostly offset by decreases of $5.1 million in debt service, $1,000 $3.7 million in net CIP Outlay, and $3.0 million in 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 operating costs. Actual Actual Projected Budget Budget The proposed budget for FY 2016-17 includes the Budget Overview funding of $65 million of long-term obligations The agency's two treatment plants, located in consisting of the transfer of$40 million in local sewer Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach, process a reserves as part of the ownership transfer of combined 185 million gallons of wastewater each 174 miles of local sewers to a local sewer service day generated by approximately 2.6 million people in provider and the current unfunded accrued actuarial central and northwest Orange County. pension liability of$25 million. The FY 2016-17 proposed budget to operate, The District's FY 2017-18 operating and capital maintain and manage our sewage collection, improvement budget is proposed at $375.2 million, treatment and disposal system is $146.4 million, a an 8.5 percent decrease from the FY 2016-17 decrease of 2.0 percent, or $3.0 million, from the proposed budget after excluding the one-time long- prior year budget. term obligation reduction. This overall decrease is mostly comprised of a $33.4 million, or 19.5 percent Personnel costs are budgeted to decrease net decrease in cash outlays for construction $5.5 million, or 5.8 percent, primarily due to the projects and a $3.6 million, or 4.2 percent decrease decrease in budgeted retirement premiums of in debt service requirements. These decreases are $5.8 million or 34.5 percent. This expected slightly offset by a $3.6 million, or 2.5 percent decrease is due to the pay down of the District's increase in operating expense. The fluctuation in unfunded actuarial accrued pension liability of capital outlay requirements over the next two years is $125 million in FY 2014-15 and another $50 million attributable to the timing of the construction schedule in FY 2015-16. As a result of these pay downs, the on the implementation of the overall combined ten- District's employer premium retirement contribution year, $2.4 billion CIP. rate decreased 36.9 percent in the FY 2016-17 proposed budget over the prior year. This FY 2016-17 and 2017-18 budget continues to reflect the agency's ongoing efforts to streamline Overhead cost allocation out to the CIP has been operations. Staffing levels are being proposed at increased by$2.3 million, or 13.7 percent due to the 627.0 full time equivalent (FTE) positions, an proposed increase in CIP outlay over the previous increase of 3.0 FTE positions, or 0.5 percent over year. the 624.0 FTE staffing level that was approved for FY 2015-16. Somewhat offsetting these positive impacts on operating costs, repairs and maintenance costs are Additionally, service level increases in ocean proposed to increase $1.9 million or 15.4 percent. monitoring, discharge and treatment, water This increase is mostly attributable to increases in reclamation and conservation, urban runoff basic repairs and maintenance costs including the diversions, biosolids management, and CIP scheduling of one digester cleaning and one central expansion have resulted in a corresponding increase generation engine overhaul at an estimate of in cash flow requirements. Considering the CIP $1.3 million each. alone, the $190.3 million approved CIP outlay for FY 2016-17 is part of the $3.3 billion for active and Electrical power is proposed to increase $1.0 million, future projects identified within the recently or 15.9 percent, due to anticipated unit cost rate completed Annual CIP Validation Process. increases of 20 percent. Section 1 - Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Contractual services and professional services are power usage associated with the sludge dewatering proposed to increase $0.9 million, or 3.7 percent; and odor control facilities anticipated to be and $0.7 million, or 19.7 percent; respectively to operational in March 2017. support the new Civil Assets Maintenance Program for asset assessment, industrial cleanings and The cost per million gallons of wastewater treated, coatings, as well as specialized heating, ventilation an industry-wide performance measurement is and air conditioning (HVAC)support services. expected to increase in fiscal year 2016-17 to $2,167, a $122, or 6.0 percent increase over the Lastly, property and liability insurance premiums are prior year budget of$2,045, and an increase in fiscal proposed to increase $0.6 million, or 124.0 percent, year 2017-18 to $2,219, a $52, or 2.4 percent due to the drawdown of excess reserves in prior increase over the FY 2016-17 proposed budget. The years and to provide for a steady and predictable 6.0 percent increase in FY 2016-17 is primarily due cost going forward. to the projected decrease in wastewater flows through the treatment system from the FY 2015-16 The FY 2017-18 proposed operations budget is budget of 200 million gallons per day (MGD) to $149.9 million, an increase of $3.5 million, or 185 MGD projected for FY 2016-17, or a decrease of 2.4 percent over the FY 2016-17 proposed budget. 7.5 percent. Wastewater flows have an inverse relationship to the cost per million gallons; the lower Personnel costs are proposed to increase the flows, the higher the cost. Wastewater flows are $1.3 million, or 1.5 percent increase due primarily to expected to remain flat at 185 MGD in fiscal year a $0.8 million, or 1.2 percent increase in salaries. 2017-18. Group medical cost is increasing $497,400, or 5.1 percent. Staffing is being proposed to remain The District's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) unchanged from the 627.0 FTE positions proposed net cash flow budget for FY 2016-17 is for FY 2016-17. $171.3 million, an increase of$31.1 million from the prior year estimated total. The CIP cash flow budget Repairs and maintenance costs are being proposed for FY 2017-18 is $138.0 million, a decrease of to increase $1.9 million or 13.3 percent, primarily due $33.3 million from the FY 2016-17 proposed CIP to the scheduled overhaul of two central generation cash flow. This CIP two-year cash flow budget engines at Plant No. 2 for a total estimated cost of finances collection system,joint treatment works and $2.6 million. disposal system improvement projects. These CIP cash flows are attributable to the additional Utilities are proposed to increase $1.3 million, or infrastructure needs identified in the December 2009 14.8 percent in FY 2017-18. This increase is Master Plan and in the 2016 validation of the CIP. primarily due to expected increases in electricity FY 2016-17 Uses of Funds Source of Funds Isere# Ce Plfal �� Pre �Pa BMiu ." Facilide i -1_ // tl Obligegom - aaanotlon Operatlons pebr �� Fees Service I How Resources Are Used Section 1 - Page 2 Executive Summary District resources are used to fund the cost of providing wastewater collection, treatment and recycling service, including employees'salaries and benefits, debt service, capital improvements and the cost of self-insurance. Summary of Operating &Maintenance Expenses Collections,Treatment&Recycling Operations 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Actual Budget Proposed Proposed Salaries,Wages&Benefits $94,206,016 $94,802,400 $89,289,800 $90,617,400 Administrative Expenses 1,409,104 1,624,570 1,752,650 1,865,480 Printing&Publication 267,347 412,020 284,340 368,960 Training&Meetings 835,764 1,050,500 1,158,070 1,182,210 Operating Materials&Supplies 15,364,441 17,191,000 16,698,250 17,369,600 Contractual Services 22,183,465 23,938,480 24,831,420 22,648,530 Professional Services 3,168,796 3,476,580 4,160,830 4,162,000 Research&Monitoring 810,854 831,000 800,000 872,400 Repairs and Maintenance 11,649,253 12,362,440 14,265,930 16,160,160 Utilities 7,157,617 7,787,080 8,912,240 10,233,670 Other Materials,Supplies&Services 1,701,945 2,708,370 3,385,020 3,768,540 Cost Allocation-CIP (17,276,525) (16,877,500) (19,182,030) (19,394,560) Net Operating&Maintenance Expenses $141,478,077 $149,306,940 $146,356,520 $149,854,390 Facilities Planning In October 1999, the District adopted a new Facilities The December 2009 Master Plan reaffirmed the Strategic Plan to define the District's goals, need for the completion of three CIP projects totaling responsibilities, and requirements over the next $627 million to upgrade the District's treatment twenty years. It includes projections through the plants to meet secondary treatment standards. assumed 'build-out" of the District's service area to Implementation of secondary treatment standards the year 2050. This update to the 1989 30-year was completed, as scheduled, by December 31, "2020 Vision" Master Plan was necessary because 2012. many of the assumptions used then have now changed. Critical factors such as population growth, The FY 2016-17 proposed cash Flow budget of new construction, the volume of wastewater $190.3 million is part of the overall CIP budget of delivered to the plants and viable water conservation $3.3 billion for active and future projects identified and reclamation programs have been reevaluated. within the recently completed Annual CIP Validation Process. In June 2002, the District completed the Interim Strategic Plan Update which further updated these Wastewater Recycling critical factors and developed revised cost estimates In partnership with the Orange County Water District and user fee projections for upgrading the District's (OCWD), our agency recycles enough water to level of treatment to meet secondary standards. On supply the needs of 850,000 people. Recognizing July 17, 2002, after reviewing: (1) the Interim the need for a reliable, affordable and high quality Strategic Plan Update treatment alternatives, water supply,the District's Board of Directors has set (2) ocean monitoring data, (3) public input, a goal of recycling 100 percent of all wastewater (4) regulatory issues, and (5) financial flows. The District has committed 168,000 acre-feet considerations, the Board of Directors made the per year of secondary effluent to the OCWD's decision to upgrade our facilities to meet secondary Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) for treatment standards. replenishment of the Orange County Groundwater Section 1 - Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Basin. The District will be working with OCWD on and ideas from managers and supervisors. the planning and design of the ultimate expansion of In December 2015, the staff-generated ideas were the Groundwater Replenishment System over the presented to the Board of Directors during a next two years. workshop, where Board Members discussed and deliberated changes and additions to the plan. Sewer Service Fee Increases In March of 2013, the Board approved rate increases Driven by our Mission, Vision and Core Values, this for each year over the next five years. These Strategic Plan continues the District's aggressive increases are necessary for compliance with the efforts to meet the sanitation, health, and safety District's debt fiscal policy of balancing the funding of needs of the 2.6 million people we serve while new capital improvements with current revenues and protecting the environment where we live. existing debt, and to minimize the increase in rates over an extended period of time. Since implementation of the first strategic plan in 2007, 40 strategic goals has been established and The impact of this five-year sewer fee schedule has completed. In December 2015, the District updated increased the single family residence user fee rate, the Five-Year Strategic Plan and, as part of the on average, 2.9 percent a year from $294 in strategic planning process, reaffirmed the following FY 2012-13 to $339 in FY 2017-18. Following the goals: first two years of this rate plan, the Board of Directors approved a reduction of the rate increase • Odor Control Master Plan — Future process for the last three years of the plan, lowering the systems will produce the benefits intended. average of these increases from 2.4 percent to 1.6 percent, or to $327 in FY 2016-17 and $331 in • Future Biosolids Management Options — FY 2017-18. These rate increases by the District are Develop biosolid disposal options, including still well below the average annual sewer rate of third-party contracts and onsite capital facilities, $475 being charged throughout the State according for mid and long-term strategies. to the 2015 California Wastewater Charge Survey by the State Water Resources Control Board. Energy Efficiency — Research new energy efficiency and conversion technologies to Staffing maximize energy efficiency, reduce operating Authorized staffing levels are being proposed at costs,and minimize environmental impact. 627 FTE positions over the next two-fiscal years, three FTE positions higher than the approved Ownership Transfer of Local Sewers — staffing level for FY 2015-16. However, staffing is Complete the transfer of 174 miles of local still 51 FTE positions below the agency's all time sewers to a local sewer agency. high of 678 positions approved in FY 1995-96. • Future Water Recycling — Determine The District budgets staffing levels by FTE positions partnerships, needs, strategies, and the cost vs. in order to provide a realistic estimate of actual benefit of recycling of Plant No.2 effluent water. staffing levels since not all employees are full-time employees. The part-time positions are funded at Workforce Planning and Development — An 1,040 hours. Part-time employees receive a prorated ongoing workforce planning and development share of personnel benefits. The reductions from initiative to ensure that the District has the right fiscal year 1995-96 are a result of this agencys effort people with right skills and abilities, in the right in striving to provide wastewater treatment as place. efficiently and effectively as possible while lowering operational and maintenance costs to more This Strategic Plan continues to chart a focused closely match those agencies that are 'best in roadmap of success for the future of the District. It class'for wastewater treatment facilities. addresses critical operations and construction issues, financial and budgeting challenges, and Strategic Planning gives a clear and concise direction to staff, In December 2015, the Strategic Plan was updated ratepayers, regulatory agencies, and the general to cover a new five-year horizon. Following a similar public. process used in the prior year updates, the General Manager's Office initiated the planning effort with the Executive Management Team, then solicited input Section 1 - Page 4 Z 00 ti0 G C Z y N O Z Financial Overview & Budgetary Issues Financial Overview and Budgetary Issues Proposed Operating Budget The Operating program accounts for the costs to This section of the budget is a financial overview and operate, maintain, and manage the District's two an outline of issues affecting the development of the treatment plants, with a secondary treatment design budget,as listed below: capacity of 332 million gallons a day, and the 570 miles of collection systems. All the personnel • Proposed Consolidated Cash Flow Budget costs for the District are initially recorded as an • Proposed Operating Budget Operating cost. Costs chargeable to the capital • Proposed Capital Improvement Cash Outlay improvement program are allocated for the work • Debt Service Requirements done through a job cost system. These charges are • Sewer Service Fees&Property Tax Revenues shown as reductions in the line item Operating • Budget Highlights program budget. Costs remaining in the Operating • Reserves program are ultimately allocated to the two individual • Staffing revenue areas that make up the District, the • Business Plan Consolidated Revenue Area and Revenue Area 14, • OCSD Long-Term Planning Process based on flows. • OCSD Fiscal Policies Operational cost, comprised of collections, treatment • GFOA Best Practices and Advisories plant, and recycling operations and maintenance, and administration, are projected to come in under Proposed Consolidated Cash Flow Budget budget for FY 2015-16 Budget by $7.9 million, or The total proposed cash flow budget for FY 2016-17 5.3 percent. The FY 2016-17 Budget is being is $475.2 million, a 1.2 percent increase over the proposed with a decrease of $3.0 million or prior year total cash flow budget of $469.7 million. 2.0 percent from the prior year budget, and the The total proposed cash flow budget for FY 2017-18 FY 2017-18 Budget is being proposed with an is $375.2 million, a 21.0 percent decrease from the increase of $3.5 million, or 2.4 percent over the total proposed cash flow budget for FY 2016-17. FY 2016-17 Proposed Budget. The decrease in FY 2017-18 in comparison to the previous two years is due to the one-time reductions in long term obligations of$50 million in FY 2015-16 Operations BudgetCompadson and $65 million in FY 2016-17. Excluding this one- (in millions) time reduction of$65 million in FY 2016-17, the total $200 proposed cash flow budget in FY 2017-18 of $149.3 $141.4 $1464 $149.9 $375.2 is an 8.5 percent decrease from FY 2016-17. $150 The table below shows the comparisons of the $100 FY 2015-16 Budget, and the FY 2016-17 and $50 FY 2017-18 Proposed Budgets by major budget category. $g 1MIU •+5-0B ButlDe[ �+5-0B Proleiletl D+8-1]Pmroaetl •1]-0B Propaaetl Budget Compadson (in millions) Analysis on the year-to-year change is provided from three perspectives. First, the FY 2015-16 Budget is $W0 compared to the FY 2015-16 year-end projections. $169 t7$ 17 $+ss Secondly, the FY 2015-16 year-end projections are s+ae E+so g+y0 $143 compared to the FY 2016-17 Proposed Budget, and $100 a$ lastly, the FY 2016-17 Proposed Budget is compared to the FY 2017-18 Proposed Budget. $0 FY 2015.16 Operations— Budget vs. Protected Dpareluna Capi6l MpmremarAa Dm10whTIiaM As depicted by the chart above, operating expenses 1111s+ee,t•1 ne171mpwd on-+e mW a are projected to come in under the FY 2015-16 Budget by $7.9 million, or 5.3 percent. The major categories that comprised most of the underage include personnel cost, or salaries and benefits, and Section 2—Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget other operating costs, as well as the overage in the bargaining unit agreements as no salary adjustments costs being allocated out of the operating budget to have been included for periods beyond expiration of CIP. Somewhat offsetting these shortfalls includes current agreements. Adding to the salaries increase an overage in repairs and maintenance. is the addition of three new full time equivalent(FTE) staff positions bringing the proposed total FTE count Personnel costs are expected to come in under in FY 2016-17 and 17-18 to 627.0 FTE's. budget by$4.9 million, or 5.1 percent primarily due to the retirements of many long-term employees, as there were 28 retirees in FY 2015-16 and 23 retirees Full Time Equivalent(FTE) in FY 2014-15, and the time it has taken to refill Staff these vacant positions. As of March 31, 2016, there 15,00 were 53 vacant positions, or 8.5 percent of total GM 15.00 staffing. Human 27,00 Other operating costs are expected to come in under Resources 21,00 budget by $1.1 million, or 40.2 percent due primarily Administrative 9900 to the unneeded and unspent budgeted contingency Svcs. 99.00 and prior year re-appropriation funds totaling $0.9 million. Environmental 91sc as, 91,00 Increased cost allocation out to CIP is expected to enhance these operating savings by $1.4 million, or Engineering 116.00 116.00 8.5 percent due to the overall increase in CIP outlays. O8M 279.00 Won Repairs and maintenance costs are expected to 0 ion no 000 exceed budget by $1.1 million, or 8.6 percent as a result of Plant No. 2 Central Generation engine and digester C overhauls and Plant No. 1 primary clarifier •Fr 1647 .FY 174e effluent piping repairs. Total 927 FTE's Taal 927 FTE's FY 2015-16 Protected Operating Expense vs. FY 16-17 Proposed Operatina Budget Contractual services and professional services are The FY 2016-17 operating budget is proposed to increase $1.4 million, or 5.8 percent; a $5.0 million, or 3.5 percent increase over the and $1.1 million, or 37.1 percent; respectively due FY 2015-16 projected operating requirements. primarily to increasing support for the new Civil Increases in the proposed operating requirements Assets Maintenance Program for asset assessment, are primarily attributable to increases in contractual industrial cleanings and coatings, as well as services, professional services, and other operating specialized HVAC support services. costs. Repairs and maintenance costs are proposed to However, personnel costs are being proposed at a increase $0.8 million or 6.2 percent over the prior 0.7 percent, or $0.6 million decrease over the prior year projection. Major changes from year-to-year year projection. Retirement premiums are proposed are basically from the timing of when large facilities to decrease $4.6 million, or 29.6 percent over the are scheduled for maintenance. In FY 2016-17, one prior year projected as the District's required central generation engine is scheduled for overhaul employer contribution rate has been decreased by and one digester is scheduled for cleaning at an the Orange County Employees Retirement System estimate cost of$1.3 million each. from 20.75 percent in FY 2015-16 to 13.09 percent in FY 2016-17 as a result of the District paying down $50 million of its Unfunded FY 2017-18 Proposed Operations Budget vs. Actuarial Accrued Liability(UAAL)in FY 2015-16. FY 2016.17 Proposed Operations Budget In FY 2017-18, the second year of this two-year Mostly offsetting this $4.6 million savings in operating budget, staff is proposing a 2.4 percent, or retirement are a $3.7 million, or 5.9 percent increase $3.5 million increase over the FY 2016-17 proposed in salaries that are based primarily on existing operating requirements. Increases in the proposed Section 2-Page 2 Financial Overview & Budgetary Issues operating requirements are primarily attributable to plants, including the utility systems, administrative increases in personnel costs, repairs and facilities, and the ocean disposal system and the maintenance, and utilities. rehabilitation, replacement and expansion of the 570 miles of the collection system. Projects over Personnel costs are being proposed at a $35,000 require formal bidding per the California 1.5 percent, or $1.3 million increase in FY 2017-18 Public Works Construction Act, and any project over over the FY 2016-17 proposed budget. This $100,000 requires Board approval in accordance increase is mostly attributable to the increases in with the District's procurement ordinance. salaries, group medical insurance and retirement premiums based on existing bargaining unit The budget has been prepared under assumptions agreements as no salary adjustments have been included in the Facilities Master Plan adopted by the included for periods beyond expiration of current Board of Directors in December 2009 and in agreements. Staffing is being proposed to remain at accordance with the Board approved 2015 Five-Year the same level as in the prior year at 627.0 FTEs. Strategic Plan Update. Salaries are expected to increase by 1.2 percent, or $819,000, group medical insurance is proposed to The FY 2015-16 projected cash outlay for the CIP is increase 5.1 percent, or $497,000, and retirement expected to reach 74.7 percent of budget, or premiums are proposed to increase 0.8 percent, or $140.2 million. The FY 2016-17 proposed cash flow $84,000. budget of $190.3 million is part of the overall CIP budget of $3.3 billion for active and future projects Repairs and maintenance costs are being proposed identified within the recently completed Annual CIP to increase$1.9 million or 13.3 percent, primarily due Validation Process. to the scheduled overhaul of two central generation engines at Plant No. 2 for a total estimated cost of In December 2009, the District adopted a new $2.6 million. Facilities Master Plan to define District's goals, responsibilities, and requirements over the next Utilities are proposed to increase $1.3 million, or twenty years. It includes projections through the 14.8 percent in FY 2017-18. This increase is assumed "build-out" of the District's service area to primarily due to expected increases in electricity the year 2050. Critical factors such as population power usage associated with the sludge dewatering growth, new construction, the volume of wastewater and odor control facilities anticipated to be delivered to the plants, and viable water conservation operational in March 2017. and reclamation programs were reevaluated. The Asset Management Program within the $1903 CIP Engineering Planning Division continues to assess by Pro«:: the condition of the District's existing assets and ea018- Pv 2018-17 systems to ensure that these assets and systems can provide the necessary level of service. The Planning Division will continue to review and update ^aai°aoal the ongoing and future CIP to appropriately mans e lWrPvca cap, ty 9 9 9 TIM.. we the risks associated with asset or system failure. 17.1Y 215x This year several projects were delayed, consolidated and re-scoped to help ensure that the suPPon CIP is delivered in the most efficient way possible. $15.7 The Asset Management Program will continue these RaPL& °'sA efforts and will continue to define the future CIP Rabv.. project requirements not currently included on the $97.2 $1.1% CIP list but are anticipated within the long-term financial plan to ensure effective and efficient operations in the future. In conjunction with preparation for the FY 2016-18 Proposed Capital Improvement Cash Outlays Budget, District staff has developed and reviewed Proposed capital improvement outlays approximate with the Board of Directors a capital program to one-third of the overall proposed budget and provide deliver the levels of service desired by the Board of for the construction of facilities at the two treatment Directors. These levels of service and resulting Section 2—Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget capital projects are included in the District's Five- $27.6 million. The Collection System FY 2016-17 Year Strategic Plan. and FY 2017-18 proposed CIP cash flow budgets are $70.6 million and $42.5 million, respectively. In addition, District staff has reviewed each CIP These proposed improvements are needed in order project to ensure that the scope of the project was to keep the 570 miles of collection systems free from appropriate, and that the cost estimates were failure. Three large Collection System related accurate. The validated CIP includes 81 active and projects include the Rehabilitation of Western future capital projects with a 10-year outlay of Regional Sewers, the Newhope-Placentia Trunk $2.4 billion. Replacement, and the Gisler-Red Hill System Improvement project at Reach B with total project The proposed 2016-17 CIP budget is organized by costs of $217.1 million, $99.5 million, and treatment process. The funds requested for the $25.2 million; and FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 current cash flow budget total $190.3 million, an proposed cash outlays of $16.0 million and increase of 1.3 percent over last year's cash flow $6.4 million, $20.9 million and $14.2 million, and budget of$187.8 million. $12.0 million and $6.9 million, respectively. The Capital Improvement Program is described in more Joint Works, or Treatment Plant Construction, detail in Section 8 of this document. projected outlay for FY 2015-16 is expected to reach 74.7 percent of the annual CIP cash flow budget of Debt Service Requirements $187.8 million. The FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 The District's long-term debt fiscal policy restricts Joint Works proposed CIP cash flow budgets are long-term borrowing to capital improvements that $190.3 million and$153.0 million, respectively. cannot be financed from current revenue. Before any new debt is issued, the impact of debt service CIP Program Budget payments on total annual fixed costs will be (Net&Jolm works Equity hanahre) analyzed. (ie millions) $200 The District issued the $80.0 million Wastewater $1e9.1 $119.. Revenue Obligation, Series 2010A in May 2010 and $15B the $157.0 million Wastewater Revenue Obligation, *f� 9s10B Series 2010C in December 2010, both as "Build America Bonds" (BABE) fixed rate debt and the last $50of the "new' money debt issuances. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 created a J.m wane cai..r ne new financing product, BABs, for the municipal issuer. BABs are issued as higher interest taxable .1 sle Bud9.t el Ste Pried 01&17 Proroeed 111n-18Pm_Psed bonds; however, the U.S. Treasury provides a 35 percent subsidy on interest payments. The net Large treatment system projects include Sludge cost, after accounting for the 35 percent subsidy Dewatering & Odor Control at Plant No. 1 and Plant Payment, frequently results in lower net costs to the No. 2 with total proposed project budgets of issuer, specifically in the maturity years beyond ten $188.3 million and $90.5 million, respectively. years. Based on the market conditions at the time of Proposed cash outlays for these two projects in these issuances in comparing the back-loaded BABs FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 are $18.4 million and new money borrowing to a back-loaded tax-exempt $9.7 million and $23.5 million and $16.8 million, structure, Series 2010A resulted in present value respectively. Other treatment plant projects with savings to the District of $15.2 million, as the debt significant cash outlays over the next two years was issued at an all-in true interest cost of include Headworks Rehabilitation and Expansion at 3.68 percent; and Series 2010C resulted in present Plant No. 1 ($6.7 million and $7.6 million), the value savings to the District of $20.0 million, as the Headquarters Complex, Site Security, and Entrance debt was issued at an all-in true interest cost of Realignment Project at Plant No. 1 ($5.9 million and 4.11 percent. $11.0 million), and the Ocean Outfall System Rehabilitation ($4.6 million and$5.4 million). On March 1, 2013, the federal government implemented certain automatic spending cuts known The Collection System Capital Program projected as 'the sequester". As a result of the sequester, outlay for FY 2015-16 is expected to reach federal subsidy payments on BABs have been 55.4 percent of the annual cash flow estimate, or I reduced annually from a high of 8.7 percent for the Section 2-Page 4 Financial Overview & Budgetary Issues federal fiscal year ended September 30, 2013 to a includes 81 active and future capital projects with a low of 6.8 percent for the federal fiscal year ended 10-year outlay of$2.4 billion. September 30, 2016. In March 2013, following a Proposition 218 notice In March 2016, the District issued $145.9 million of process, the Board approved sewer rate increases Wastewater Refunding Revenue Obligations, Series for each year over the next five years averaging 2016A to refund $162.8 million of Certificates of approximately 2.9 percent a year. These increases Participation, Series 2009A at a net present value are necessary to provide needed capital savings of $18.8 million. As a result of having an improvements, to meet additional treatment and adequately funded reserves policy, experienced disinfection requirements, and to minimize future management, and prudent planning, the District was rate increases. again able to secure "AAA" credit rating from both The impact of this five-year sewer fee schedule has Fitch Ratings and Standard and Poor's on this latest debt issuance. increased the single family residence user fee rate, the underlying rate for all sewer service user fees, an This two-year budget proposes no additional new average of 2.9 percent a year from $294 in money debt issuances as the $2.4 billion in future FY 2012-13 to $339 in FY 2017-18. Following the replacement, rehabilitation, and refurbishment first two years of this rate plan, the Board of projects anticipated over the next ten years will be Directors approved a reduction of the rate increase adequately funded through current sewer service fee for the last three years of the plan, lowering the charges and existing reserves. The FY 2016-17 average of these increases from 2.4 percent to debt service requirements are proposed at 1.6 percent, or to $327 in FY 2016-17 and $331 in $86.7 million, an increase of $2.7 million, or FY 2017-18. 3.2 percent from FY 2015-16 projected. Total Debt Service requirements for the second year of this two- bsMpies co mr year budget will fall to$83.1 million, a $3.5 million or om m_=K.r,Die,e. 4.1 percent decrease. trvee R,nN WWII v a.ym Fresno The District's Debt Financing Program is described r„ ..,M o in more detail in Section 9 of this budget. unensanm,y DWI DWM 4o Ram.Ms.Dig. s.oamemo munry Sewer Service Fees aNm.o.Dnree. The Consolidated Revenue Area has an adopted �nga'mm,a coda Ran.Die. Sanitary Sewer Service Fee to provide funding for va.elo Sanitation DrsmcOt,dunDeyo operating the sewer systems in accordance with the yn r,andsco Clean Water Act and the District's Revenue $150 $2W $3W $60 $33D $,3D $IID Program. Revenue Area No. 14 is funded through user fee charges to the IRWD. Sewer service fees Even with these increases, the OCSD rates are still are set annually by the District after a review of well below the average annual sewer rate of $475 projected needs. being charged throughout the State according to the In the fall of 2007, District staff conducted strategic 2015 California Wastewater Charge Survey planning workshops with the Board of Directors to conducted by the State Water Resources Control Board. lay out a capital program to deliver the levels of service desired by the Board of Directors. These In FY 1997-98, the District's Rate Advisory levels of service and resulting capital projects are Committee, made up of elected city officials, included in the District's Five-Year Strategic Plan. community, business and industry leaders, and This effort was reinforced through the adoption of a District staff analyzed the District's rate structure to new Master Plan in December 2009, a planning determine whether user fees were equitable among effort to define the District's goals, responsibilities, residences and industry. In May of 1998, the Board and requirements over the next twenty years, and approved the proposed revisions to the Sewer includes projections through the assumed "build-out" Service User Fee rate structure that more equitably of the District's service area to the year 2050. charged consumers based on actual usage while Incorporating the 2009 Master Plan into the CIP remaining revenue neutral. Significant changes in validation update for FY 2016-17, the current CIP the rate structure included: Section 2—Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget • Non-residential user charge will be based upon payments that more closely matches property tax typical quantity and strength of discharge per revenues. 1,000 square feet. Property tax revenues have increased from • Fees for users who discharge high quantities or $75.1 million in FY 2013-14 to a projected high-strength waste, including former Class III $91.4 million in FY 2017-18, primarily due to the permiltees such as restaurants and rebound from the economic decline and the collapse Laundromats, will be based on the assumed flow in the housing and commercial property markets and strength per 1,000 square feet. beginning in 2008. Property tax revenues are now being projected to increase 5.0 percent a year • Discontinuation of the Class III permit process through FY 2017-18. because of the implementation of the expanded and more accurate rate structure. This resulted Any property tax revenue shortfalls in meeting debt in simplification of the billing and collection service obligations may require adjustments to user process for these two hundred users. fees, as making debt service payments are legally • The revised rate structure resulted in a greater mandated. number of decreases in charges (22,000) for Budget Highlights non-residential users than increases(13,000). This section briefly outlines the proposed major Overall, the total fees collected remained essentially changes in all departments and Revenue Areas over the next two years. All Joint Works Operations, or the same as those generated by the old structure. plant operating costs and collection system costs are Property Taxes consolidated into the individual department budgets P for better accountability and control. However, The District's share of the one percent ad valorem separate accounting is maintained between Joint property tax is dedicated for the payment of COP Works Operation activities (treatment and recycling debt service. The apportionment of the ad valorem operational costs) and collection operational tax is pursuant to the Revenue Program adopted in activities since each Revenue Area is directly April 1979 to comply with regulations of the responsible for their own collection operating costs. Environmental Protection Agency and the State The Joint Works Operation activities are allocated to Water Resources Control Board and in accordance the Revenue Areas based on their individual with COP documents and Board policy. contributions to the annual sewage flow. Likewise, the Joint Works Capital Improvements are allocated COP Funding Reaeimmenr•.•. to the Revenue Areas on a three-year average of Property Tax Funding Source sewage flows called the "joint works equity percentage", and each Revenue Area is responsible $gs,000,000 for their own collection system capital improvements. $35,000,000 xx $76,000,000 Details for each department ran be found in "Section $e5.000.000 6—Operations" of this document. Complete staffing $56,0oo,000 schedules are located in the Appendix. $as.000.000 $361000,000 General Manager's Office 125,000.000 • An amount equaling 0.5 percent of the Operating ars,000,oao materials and services budget is included within 2003 2010 eon the General Manager's Re-appropriation line t Property Taxes ■ - COP Service item for each of the next two fiscal years. Since the current year's budget lapses each year, re- appropriation of funds is needed to pay for Historically, the District's property tax revenues were goods or services ordered at the end of one at a higher level than necessary to support the budget year but not provided until the following District's debt service obligations. However, capital year. The General Manager reviews and improvement needs averaging $200.0 million a year approves all departmental re-appropriation over the last ten years has required new COP debt requests to ensure that prior year funding was issuances that have increased future debt service available and has not been spent. Section 2—Page 6 Financial Overview & Budgetary Issues • An amount equal to 0.85 percent of the • FY 2017-18 proposed CIP outlays of Operating materials and services budget is $153.0 million is a decrease of$37.3 million, or included within the General Managers 19.6 percent, from FY 2016-17 proposed contingency account for each of the next two budgeted CIP cash outlays. fiscal years. • A net decrease of 11.0 FTE beginning in Human Resources FY 2016-17. • A decrease in retirement costs of $1.0 million in Operations&Maintenance FY 2016-17 that is reflective of the pay down of the District's unfunded actuarial accrued liability FY 2016-17 increases over FY 2015-16 budget: pension liability in prior years. • An increase in odor control costs of$6.9 million. • An increase in property and general liability • An increase in contractual services of insurance premiums are anticipated to increase $2.3 million, which was partially mitigated by a $615,000 and $320,000 in FY 2016-17 and decrease of$401,000 in solids removal costs. FY 2017-18, respectively. • An increase in repair and maint. of$2.0 million. • No net change in FTE over the next two years. • An increase in electricity costs of$1.3 million. Administrative Services • A decrease in personnel costs due to the • A decrease in retirement costs of $808,000 in transfer of employees to the Environmental FY 2016-17 that is reflective of the pay down of Services department of$5.0 million. the District's unfunded actuarial accrued liability • A decrease in research and monitoring of pension liability in prior years. $745,000 as this service was transferred to the • An increase in service maintenance agreements Environmental Services department. of$552,000 in FY 2016-17. • A net decrease of 15.0 FTE beginning in • A combined increase in other professional FY 2016-17. services and printing services in FY 2017-18 for FY 2017-18 increases over FY 2016-17: the anticipated rate study and mailing of • An increase in electricity costs of$1.1 million. Proposition 218 notices for potential rate increases. • An increase in repairs and maintenance of • A net increase of 1.0 FTE beginning in FY 2016- $1.8 million. 17. • An increase in personnel costs of$602,000. • An increase in odor control costs of$565,000. Environmental Services• Anew department that is a conglomerate of • A decrease in solids removal of$3.3 million. divisions from previous departments with a total Individual Collection System budget of $17.2 million in FY 2016-17 and $17.6 million in FY 2017-18. Operating- reflects costs of operating and maintaining each Revenue Area's collection system, • This new department will begin with a total FTE utilities, and Directors' fees. Industrial/commercial count of 91.0 in FY 2016-17 that is comprised of monitoring costs reflecting the expense of enforcing FTE's from the previous Facilities Support the Uniform Use Ordinance and EPA's pre-treatment Services Department and from the Engineering standards are also included. The largest operating and Operation &Maintenance departments. cost is the Revenue Area's flow-based share of the Engineering Joint Works Operating expenses. • A decrease in retirement costs of$1.5 million in Capital Facilities- accounts for each Revenue Area's FY 2016-17 that is reflective of the pay down of share of the Joint Works Capital Improvement the District's unfunded actuarial accrued liability projects and for individual Revenue Area trunk sewer pension liability in prior years and the decrease or pump station projects. The entire collection in staffing. system has a sewer construction program Master • FY 2016-17 Proposed CIP outlays of Plan in progress as a result of the 1999 Strategic $190.3 million, an increase of 1.3 percent over Plan. Other line items in these funds are last years cash flow budget of$187.8 million. accumulated reserves for future capital improvements in accordance with Master Plans and Section 2—Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget federal and state requirements and annual purchase liability and for workers' compensation. These or sale of equity in the jointly-owned treatment works reserves are intended to work with purchased as provided for in the Joint Ownership, Operation, insurance policies, FEMA and State disaster and Construction Agreement. reimbursements. Based on the plant infrastructure replacement value, the level of this Debt Service/COP- accounts for the proceeds from reserve has been set to fund the District's non- and service of the Capital Improvement Program reimbursed costs, estimated to be$57 million. Certificates of Participation (COPS). The District's , Capital Replacement/Refurbishment Reserve will share of the one percent basic levy ad valorem property tax is dedicated to provide for COP principal be established to provide thirty percent of the and interest payments. See Section 9 for additional funding to replace or refurbish the current information on the District's debt financing program. collection, treatment and recycling facilities at the end of their useful economic lives. The current Reserves replacement value of these facilities is estimated In 1998, the District conducted an in-depth review of to be $6.2 billion. The initial reserve level had the agency's reserve policies. This review included a been established at $50 million, and is survey of the reserve policies of 23 other public augmented by interest earnings and a small agencies as a tool to assist in the evaluation of the portion of the annual sewer user fee, in order to underlying economic reasons supporting the meet projected needs through the year 2030. District's reserve policies. Based on this review, the Debt Service Reserve is required to be under the Directors approved the following reserve policies: control of a Trustee by the provisions of the • Cash Flow Reserve has been established at a certificate of participation (COP) issues. These level to fund operation, maintenance and reserve funds are not available for the general certificates of participation debt service expenses needs of the District and must be maintained at for the first half of the fiscal year. The first specified levels. installment of property tax revenues and sewer Rate Stabilization Reserve will be used to service user fees that is collected by the County accumulate all available funds exceeding the through the property tax bill is not available until targets for all other reserves. These funds will be late December each year. applied to future years' needs in order to maintain • Operatinc Continoencv Reserve has been rates or to moderate annual fluctuations. There is established to provide for non-recurring no established target for this reserve. expenditures that were not anticipated when the annual budget and sewer service fees were "fOi•laaw a.. considered and adopted. The level of this (In Millions) reserve will be established at an amount equal to ten percent of the annual operating budget. DemseMce • Capital Improvement Reserve has been Rama cash Flow& maintained to fund annual increments of the $+++s Dpe+aanc capital improvement program. The long-term costs �. goal is to fund one half of the capital improvement "Fall $+eee program from borrowing and the other half from $57.0 current revenues and reserves. With this program in mind, the target level of this reserve casts Dape.i Repi. has been established at one half of the average imps.-,nem Fans annual cash outlay of the capital improvement "a97.1 n program through the year 2020. Levels higher and lower than the target can be expected while the long-term financing and capital improvement Total Real-097.9 programs are being finalized. Proceeds from any debt issuance targeted for construction are also The FY 2015-16 total projected year-end reserve is included in this reserve until spent. $597.9 million, $78.3 million greater than the • Catastrophic Loss. or Self-Insurance Reserves FY 2015-16 reserve requirement of $519.6 million. has been maintained for property damage including fire, flood and earthquake, for general Section 2—Page 8 Financial Overview & Budgetary Issues The excess reserve buildup is due to the timing of the actual CIP outlays. As previously noted, the The District budgets staffing levels by FTE in order to projected CIP outlay for FY 2015-16 is only provide a realistic estimate of actual staffing levels $140.2 million, or 74.7 percent of the total capital since not all employees are full-time employees. outlay cash flow budget of $187.8 million. The part-time positions are funded at 1,040 hours In addition, $200 million of the previous overall per year. Part-time employees receive a prorated projected outlays through fiscal year 2017-18 have share of personnel benefits. now been pushed out into future years. The staffing reductions from 1995-96 are a result of As a result of the CIP program being rescheduled this agency's effort in striving to provide wastewater out into future years and the receipt of unexpected treatment as efficiently and effectively as possible one-time revenues, the proposed budget for while lowering operational and maintenance costs to FY 2016-17 includes the funding of $65 million of more closely match those agencies that are "best in long-term obligations consisting of the current class' for wastewater treatment facilities. However, unfunded accrued actuarial pension liability of as the result of new initiatives in the areas of water $25 million and the transfer of S40 million in local reclamation and conservation, and the expansion of sewer reserves as part of the ownership transfer of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the existing 174 miles of local sewers to a local sewer service staffing plan was no longer sufficient to meet the provider,the East Orange County Water District. District's needs. proposed Reserves pn`MllionsI Authorized FTE Staffing 645 Debt servo teen no. 640 Res $1 W.3 SOPeraung Continpenry Re=a +Siva s 635 sables m Res $szo 630 Ceplbl Rep,. CapitalReserve Impm,emm,l 625 $64 Resew $156 620 Total Rewrves-Ill 615 Following the funding of $65 million of long-term 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 1415 IS-16 16-17 17-18 obligations and the funding of the FY 2016-17 spending plan, total year end reserves are projected to fall to $558.2 million at June 30, 2017, within The Appendices within Section 10 provide a Staffing $36.0 million of the consolidated reserve policy of History Summary (by Department and Division) and $522.2 million. Detail (by position title within each Department and Collectively, these individual reserve requirements Division). average$600 million a year over the current ten-year Business Plan cash flow forecast, approximately nine percent of The District began development of a comprehensive OCSD's total$6.2 billion in assets. annual Business Plan that was first included within the FY 2005-06 Budget document, and has been Staffing Levels updated in every biennium budget since, including Authorized staffing levels are being proposed at this update following the Board acceptance of the 627 FTE positions over the next two-fiscal years, Five-Year Strategic Plan in December 2015. This three FTE positions higher than the approved Business Plan includes the funding resources staffing level for FY 2015-16. However, staffing is necessary to support the Board approved strategic still 51 FTE positions below the agency's all time goals including providing exceptional customer high of 678 positions approved in FY 1995-96. service, protecting public health, stakeholder Section 2—Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget understanding and support, and organizational month. The Interim Strategic Plan Update also effectiveness. Also included in this updated provides an operations and financial plan including a business plan is the business planning process and review of our collection, treatment and recycling the current and projected key performance indicators facilities, and a study of our ocean outfall system. (levels of service). The following topics are included within the FY 2016-18 Business Plan: In December 2009, the District adopted a new Facilities Master Plan to define the capital projects • Strategic Goals needed to meet the agency's level of service • Levels of Service requirements over the next twenty years. It includes • Performance Indicators and Results projections through the assumed "build-ouP of the • Two-Year Staffing Plan District's service area to the year 2050. Critical • Updated Financial Model factors such as population growth, new construction, • Risk Assessment& Mitigation Analysis the volume of wastewater delivered to the plants and • Updated Asset Management Plan viable water conservation and reclamation programs were reevaluated. A more detailed description of the FY 2016-17 The budget has been prepared under assumptions Business Plan is provided within Section 2—Page 15 included in the Facilities Master Plan adopted by the through Page 27. Board of Directors in December 2009 and in OCSD Long-Term Planning accordance with the Board approved 2015 Five-Year The District's current efforts in regard to long-term Strategic Plan Update. planning include the December 2009 Master Plan, The FY 2015-16 projected cash outlay for the CIP is which focuses on the District's long-term capital ed to reach 74.7 percent of budget, or improvement facilities and rehabilitation projects that expected million. The FY 2016-17 proposed rash flow will needed annually out to the year 2030, and re- budget of $190.3 million is part of the overall CIP organizing the operations of the District in order for budget of $3.3 billion for active and future projects this agency to maintain "best in-class" wastewater identified within the recently completed Annual CIP treatment facilities. Validation Process. CIP Strategic Planning In conjunction with preparation for the FY 2016-18 In October 1999 the District completed its CIP Budget, District staff has developed and reviewed Strategic Plan, an update of the 1989 30-year"2020 with the Board of Directors a capital program to Vision' Master Plan. Many of the assumptions used deliver the levels of service desired by the Board of projected develop the original plan, such as inflation,fbll the Directors. These levels of service and resulting projected service population, the level at building capital projects are included in the District's Five- activity, and the volume t wastewater treated, were Year Strategic Plan. Five- quite different from what was assumed nearly ten years earlier. If the assumptions of the Master Plan In addition, District staff has reviewed each CIP were not updated, the District could be constructing project to ensure that the scope of the project was unnecessary facilities and charging higher fees than appropriate, and that the cost estimates were would be needed. accurate. The validated CIP includes 81 active and In addition to updating the population and flow future capital projects with a 10-year outlay of assumptions, the Strategic Plan provides for an $2.4 billion. operations and financial plan and includes a review Over the next ten years, the CIP rash flow needs, of the collection, treatment and recycling facilities, including rehabilitation and replacement projects, will and ocean ouffalls. approximate $2.4 billion, or annual average outlays In June 2002, a new, or interim, CIP Strategic Plan of$240.0 million. Update was completed that revised many of the Five-Year Strategic Plan assumptions used to develop our previous planning In November 2007, the Board of Directors adopted a documents, including population and land-use new comprehensive strategic plan to steer the projections,the level of building activity in our service District's efforts and engage the organization to area and the volume of wastewater to be treated.This information was needed for the Board's envision service levels and operational needs for the consideration of secondary treatment the following Section 2—Page 10 Financial Overview & Budgetary Issues next five years. This strategic plan has been organic matter (solids) to produce biosolids. reviewed and updated each year since. Biosolids can be recycled through composting or fertilizing farm fields (non-food crops via land In December 2015, the Strategic Plan was updated application) or disposed in a landfill for methane gas to cover a new five-year horizon. Following a similar recovery. The District's goal is to ensure that process used in the prior year updates, the General biosolids management strategies align with existing Manager's Office initiated the planning effort with the market conditions and continue a sustainable, Executive Management Team, then solicited input reliable, and economical biosolids management and ideas from managers and supervisors. The program that provides environmentally sound resulting staff-generated ideas were presented to the practices and meets the stringent federal, state, and Board of Directors during a workshop, where Board local regulatory requirements. Members discussed and deliberated changes and additions to the plan. The District's biosolids averaged about 756 tons per day ("tpd") in FY 2014-15, with an average cost per Driven by our Mission, Vision and Core Values, this ton of $62.38 for managing at offsite locations, as Strategic Plan continues the District's aggressive described in the table below.The FY 2016-17 budget efforts to meet the sanitation, health, and safety for biosolids management is $17.2 million, with a needs of the more than 2.6 million people we serve decrease of 19.2 percent anticipated in FY 2017-18 while protecting the environment where we live. to $13.9 million due to the completion of the $188 million Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control Since implementation of the first comprehensive facility that is projected to come online in March strategic plan in 2007, 40 strategic goals has been 2017. This facility will reduce the water content established and completed. In December 2015, the contained within the solids that will reduce hauling District updated the Five-Year Strategic Plan and, as costs. The District's biosolids tonnage will begin part of the strategic planning process, reaffirmed the trending down as new solids management facilities following goals: complete construction. • Completion of the Odor Control Master Plan; • IRWD is constructing solids processing facilities and will slop sending their solids to the District • Development of Future Biosolids Manage- by the end of 2018. ment Options; . Plant No. 1 centrifuges are currently under • Research new energy efficiency and construction and anticipated to start creating conversion technologies; drier solids and reducing hauling costs by mid- 2017. • Complete the transfer of 174 miles of local . Plant No. 2 centrifuges will begin operating by sewers to a local agency; early 2019. • Determine partnerships, needs, strategies, benefits and costs associated with recycling The District currently manages its biosolids as of Plant No. 2 effluent water; and follows: • Workforce planning and development to Tons Per Day& ensure that the right people with the right Avg.Cost I Ton skills and abilities, are in the right place, at Contractor Location Product (April 20161 the right time. Synagro Kern County, CA Compost 250 tpd-$74.67 This Strategic Plan continues to chart a focused Synagro La Paz Compost 70 tpd- $59.95 roadmap of success for the future of the District. County,Az It addresses critical operations and construction Tula Ranch Yuma Land 350 tpd-$54.50 issues, financial and budgeting challenges, and County,Az application gives a clear and concise direction to staff, O.C.Waste& Orange Local 70 tpd- $41.19 ratepayers, regulatory agencies, and the general Recycling County,CA Landfill public. Inland Empire Rancho Regional Cucamonga, Compost 35 tpd-$56.00 Biosolids Management Composting CA As a resource recovered through the wastewater treatment process, the District treats nutrient-rich, Section 2-Page 11 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget The District's contractors provide back-up biosolids exceeds four MOD calculated on a monthly average. management capacity in California and Arizona that For the first 12 years of the Urban Runoff Program, include composting, land application, and landfill. the average monthly flow averages remained less Together, these options have the additional available than the four MOD threshold thus avoiding user fee capacity to manage more than ten times the costs being assessed to the diversion permittees. District's daily biosolids production to ensure In 2012, OCSD received a number of diversion sustainable, consistent, and reliable operations. proposals to deal with bacteria and selenium loading to the upper Newport Bay. The discharge from the The District anticipates issuing a new compost additional proposed diversions combined with the contract in 2016 as the current Synagro contract existing diversion flows would eventually exceed the expires in December 2016. In 2015, the District four MOD fee threshold. On June 12, 2013, the began a project (PS15-01) to develop a Biosolids Board adopted Resolution No. 13-09 expanding the Master Plan (Plan). This Plan will meet one of the waiver of fees or charges on the treatment of dry goals in the District's Five-Year Strategic Plan, which weather urban runoff from four MOD to ten MOD. is to recommend future biosolids management According to the Board, the change was necessary options and capital facilities improvements for a not only to protect the County's coastal resources, 20-year planning period. The Plan will identify offsite but also to provide an economic benefit to the local biosolids management alternatives for the District to economy by helping to keep our beaches open. generate biosolids product that meet a sustainable biosolids beneficial reuse market. In addition, the The Dry Weather Urban Runoff Program is Plan will include an evaluation of the existing District administered by the District's Environmental solids handling facilities, study solids treatment Compliance Division, which issues a discharge alternatives, and make recommendations for future permit for each of the diversion structures. The capital facilities improvements. permit functions as a control mechanism that specifically prohibits storm runoff and authorizes In 2000, the District started using a management discharge only during periods of dry weather. The system to run its biosolids program, for which it was permit also establishes specific discharge limits, certified in 2003 by the National Biosolids constituent monitoring, and flow metering Partnership. Certification requires regular third-party requirements. In addition, the District conducts audits and a robust internal management system quarterly sampling and analysis of the urban runoff based on the ISO 14001 Environmental discharges to ensure discharge limit compliance with Management System standard. In late 2015, the the various regulated constituents. District transitioned its biosolids management system to an internal standard, as outside There are currently 19 active urban runoff diversion certification is not required for the District's biosolids structures, three owned and operated by the County program. The District's internal standard is intended of Orange, 11 owned and operated by the City of to maintain sound practices while allowing the Huntington Beach, two owned and operated by the District to streamline areas to increase efficiency and City of Newport Beach, two owned and operated by redirect staff resources. The District is committed to the IRW D, and one owned and operated by PH a diverse biosolids program to help ensure a Finance (present owner of the Pelican Point Resort). sustainable, reliable, and economical program In 2015, the City of Newport Beach added their pursuant to an adopted Biosolids Policy. second diversion on Big Canyon Creek, an upper Newport Bay tributary. IRWD is currently Urban Runoff constructing a pipeline to divert the Peters Canyon Recognizing that County beaches were being Wash, the biggest contributor of selenium in the San affected by pollution carried by urban runoff, the Diego Creek watershed in dry weather. The Board of Directors adopted a number of resolutions diversion of the Peters Canyon Wash is expected to agreeing to accept dry weather urban runoff into the be completed in 2016. The City of Santa Ana is sewer system. In June 2002, Assembly Bill 1892 proposing three additional urban runoff diversions to amended the District's charter to formally allow the deal with bacteria and selenium loading to the diversion and management of dry weather urban Newport Back Bay Watershed: the Delhi, Santa Fe runoff flows. Resolution No. 01-07, adopted and Lane flood control channels. The total flow for March 28, 2001, declared that the District will initially the proposed urban runoff diversions could result in waive fees and charges associated with authorized an additional three MOD of urban runoff discharge to discharges of dry weather urban runoff to the sewer the sewer. system until the total volume of all runoff discharges Section 2—Page 12 Financial Overview & Budgetary Issues Since 1999, the District has treated a total of The GWRS Final Expansion will be funded solely by 8.5 billion gallons of dry-weather urban runoff that the OCWD. The District will supply Plant No. 2 would otherwise have been discharged into the secondary effluent to support the GWRS Final ocean with no treatment. During fiscal year 2015, Expansion. The District does not anticipate the daily average urban runoff flow ranged between dedicating capital funding for the GWRS Final 0.36 and 1.33 MGD with a cumulative total diversion Expansion. of 307 million gallons for this period. At the existing operations and maintenance cost per million gallons Fiscal Policies of $1,697 and $1,738 for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015- Included within Section 3 — Pages 1 through 8 is a 16, respectively, the District's cost for treating the listing of the District's Board Adopted Fiscal Policies. urban runoff discharge for this period is estimated at $568,005. The diversion flows temporarily These fiscal policies were established for the decreased in the second half of 2015, perhaps due purpose of: to the drought, but they are expected to increase . sustaining a financially viable Sanitation again in the second half of 2016 when the Peters District; Canyon Diversion begins. . having the flexibility to adapt to local and regional economic changes; and Groundwater Replenishment System . maintaining and enhancing sound fiscal The District has taken a multi-jurisdictional approach condition of the District. to planning for capital facilities because many of the methods for reducing or managing flows involve other jurisdictions. One such project is the Included within the District's fiscal policies are Groundwater Replenishment System (the"GWRS"). specific polices for Budgeting, Revenues, Expenses, Capital Improvements, Vehicles, Short-term Debt, In March 2001, the District entered into an Long-term Debt, Reserves, Investment, and agreement with the Orange County Water District Accounting,Auditing and Financial Reporting. (OCWD) to design and construct Phase I of the GWRS. The capital cost of this Phase was shared GFOA Best Practices and Advisories equally (50% shares) by each agency. The GWRS Included in the budget within Section 3 — Pages 9 is a joint effort by the two agencies to provide through 17 is a listing of accounting, auditing, reclaimed water for replenishment of the Orange financial reporting, cash management, budgetary County Groundwater Basin and to augment the and fiscal policy, debt management, retirement and seawater intrusion barrier. The GWRS became benefit administration, and economic development operational in January of 2008 with a production and compliance planning practices recommended by target of 70,000 acre-feet per year of potable water. the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. Included within this list The GWRS Initial Expansion, funded solely by of best financial practices for state and local OCWD, broke ground in January 2012 to increase governments is the District's status as to whether we potable water production to approximately 103,000 are in compliance or in progress towards acre-feet per year. The GWRS Initial Expansion was compliance, or whether the practice is applicable to completed in June 2015, resulting in purifying this agency. Out of the 154 practices identified, the 100 percent of the treated wastewater from the District is in compliance with 103, 43 are not District's Fountain Valley Plant No. 1. considered applicable to the District, and we are in the process of complying with the remaining eight. In April 2015, the District and the OCWD approved a $2 million joint study to explore the possibility of using flows from the District's Plant No. 2,which may require additional infrastructure and treatment. The study is identifying an implementation plan to convey secondary effluent from the District's Plant No. 2 using new and existing infrastructure to support the GWRS Final Expansion. The District and OCWD will finalize the results of the study in July 2016. Board approval for the implementation plan is required before the GWRS Final Expansion can proceed. Section 2—Page 13 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 2—Page 14 Business Plan The District's Business Plan is intended to be an concise direction from the Board of Directors to overarching plan based on sound decision making staff, ratepayers, regulatory agencies, and the that provides direction on the work that the District general public. will take on during the next two-year budget cycle and what will be deferred. This Business Plan is the The Business Plan development process started underlying foundation for the development of the with the goals and direction identified within the District's Budget. Strategic Plan. Staff from across the agency further defined these goals in terms of level of service, During the process of developing the Business business risk exposure, capital and operational Plan, the District's Executive Management Team costs,staffing,and long-term financial impacts. The reviewed the proposed work for the upcoming year, Business Plan identifies the required resources and balanced it with the staffing and funding resources prioritizes projects and goals, with needed and either approved the plan or made recommendations for which goals should go reductions. Reductions in work or resource forward for inclusion in the District budget, and commitment for the coming year will be considered which should be deferred or dropped from in light of the Level of Service that the agency is consideration. committed to and appropriate levels of risk. Strategic Goals Updates to the Business Plan are performed on an Over the next two years, the District will begin and on-going basis, to be developed ahead of the bi- complete many activities central to the goals of the annual budgeting process, and has a five-year organization. In December 2015, the District horizon. updated the Five-Year Strategic Plan and, as part of the strategic planning process, reaffirmed the Each year, it is staffs intent to build upon the following goals: foundation of the previous Business Plan and to make each succeeding one more detailed and . Completion of the Odor Control Master comprehensive. Elements included in the Business Plan; Plan for this two-year budget includes: (1) the Business Planning Process; (2) Strategic Goals, • Development of Future Biosolids Manage- including the timeframe, milestones, and resources ment Options; required for the completion of each step; . Research new energy efficiency and (3) performance results pertaining to the Current conversion technologies; and Projected Key Performance Indicators(Level of Services); (4) business accountability performance • Complete the transfer of 174 miles of local objectives and measures, that are aligned with the sewers to a local agency; updated Five-Year Strategic Plan (these are . Determine partnerships, needs, strategies, detailed for each division within the departments in benefits and costs associated with Section 6 of this document); (5) Two-Year Staffing recycling of Plant No. 2 effluent water; and Plan; (6) Financial Model Update; (7) Risk Assessment& Mitigation Analysis; and (8)2015-17 • Workforce planning and development to Asset Management Plan Update. ensure that the right people with the right skills and abilities, are in the right place, at Business Plan Process the right time. The framework for the Business Plan is developed as part of the process of updating the Five-Year Resources have been reallocated from lower Strategic Plan. The process for updating the priority activities within the organization to support Strategic Plan requires the assistance from all these strategic goals. levels of the organization,and includes updating the Mission Statement, Vision Statement and Core Staff will report quarterly to the General Manager on Values; and addresses the major objectives and the progress of each goal. critical challenges facing the District now,in the next five-years,and further into the future. This Strategic Level of Service Plan also lays down the foundation for the In 2005, the Orange County Sanitation District first development of the Business Plan as it addresses developed a summary of the District's present and critical operations and construction issues,financial future Levels of Service requirements as part of its and budgeting challenges, and gives a clear and I Asset Management Program. These Levels of Section 2—Page 15 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Services were further developed with the Business This analysis included identification and Plan along with measurable outcomes, or key development of over 100 business units in the performance indicators, that the District is District with discreet duties and responsibilities. committed to meeting. This Business Plan documents that the Levels of Service provided by Based on the needs of the agency over time, the the District will increase significantly, requiring total FTE requirement has declined steadily from $2.4 billion in identifiable capital improvements and 644 authorized FTEs in FY 2006-07 to the proposed millions in increased maintenance and operations staffing of 627 FTEs over the next two fiscal years. costs over the next ten years. Staffing levels are proposed at minimum levels that are necessary to support the operation and No modifications were made to the District's Level maintenance of newly constructed secondary of Service as a result of the December 2015 Five- treatment facilities in an efficient manner to meet all Year Strategic Plan update. Levels of service have compliance requirements. been identified for the following goals: Staff has focused on the reallocation of existing • Providing Exceptional Customer Service. resources in order to balance the needs within the • Protecting the Public Health and the business units of this agency to ensure that core Environment. business operations are met, levels of service are • Managing and Protecting the Public's Funds. maintained, and that strategic initiative elements • Stakeholder Understanding and Support. are accomplished. • Organizational Effectiveness. The proposed two-year staffing plan contains a These existing Levels of Service targets,along with significant level of analysis on how existing maintaining the existing performance levels, require resources can be utilized in consideration of the a series of annual rate increases and borrowing to increased demands placed on this agency by ensure that the District maintains the reserves and secondary treatment standards and in support of debt coverage ratios that are included in the the $2.4 billion capital improvement program over Business Principle Key Performance Indicators. the next ten years without increasing staffing levels. The District's present and projected Levels of A detailed breakdown on the proposed reallocation Service are shown within this section on page 26 of FTEs can be found within the Appendix section and 27. of this budget. Staffing Plan Financial Model Update A comprehensive review was completed on the The District's most recent regional rate study was District's staffing levels for the next two fiscal years. completed in January 2013 by Carollo Engineers. This undertaking began with a review of the The purpose of the study was to update sewer District's vision, mission, goals and objectives as service rates and to equitably distribute costs part of the development of the Five-Year Strategic among utility customers and to support the District's Plan. regional rate structure over a five-year period from FY 2013-14 through FY 2017-18. Previously, the Authorized FTE Staffing District had completed regional rate studies in 2008, 2006, 2002 and 1999. The following two drivers 650 644 necessitated that a rate study be completed in 2013, and be incorporated into the Business Plan: 637 1. The Necessity of Updating the Regional Sewer Service Fee and the Net Cost of 625 Service Methodology for Industrial Rates - 627 The District provides regional sewage collection, treatment, and disposal services to approximately 550,000 customers located in 600 central and northwest Orange County and collects fees for these services through a 2006-07 2011-12 2016-17 special assessment on the Orange County property tax bill. In addition, the District also Section 2—Page 16 Business Plan maintains, repairs, and replaces the local by the change in the Engineering News Record sewers for approximately 17,000 of the above Construction Cost(ENR) Index annually. 550,000. High strength dischargers, or industrial customers, pay sewer fees based In December of 2009, the 2009 Facilities Master upon a net cost of service. A rate study was Plan was adopted,and because,the CFCC fees are required to determine the equitable rates for based upon the most recently completed capital these three types of users. strategic plan, staff was directed to perform a new rate study on CFCCs in 2010. 2. Five-Year Proposition 218 Notice - The District's last California Proposition 218 Notice It was determined, as a result of the new Master notifying rate payers of potential sewer rate Plan,that future build-out is now projected to be less increases over the past five-years had expired than what was anticipated in the previous master and a new 5-year Proposition 218 Notice plan. In addition,the District has experienced a shift approved by the Board and the justification of in its customer base resulting in an increase in the new sewer service fee rates over the next residential versus non-residential customers. Staff five years needed to be supported by an believes the shift has occurred due to recent updated sewer rate study. annexations that were primarily residential and new residential construction that was completed in In their Financial Model Update Report for the recent years. The shift towards residential has District issued in January of 2013, Carollo resulted in a decrease to the residential CFCCs and Engineers recommended that the District: an increase to the non-residential CFCCs. e Based on current operational and capital project Based on the CFCC rate study in 2010, CFCC and assumptions, implement annual increases of Supplemental CFCC fees were established in 4.8%, 2.6%, 2.5%, and 2.4%, respectively, over FY 2012-13 that have been adjusted by the ENR a five-year period ending in FY 2017-18 annually since, and are as follows for FY 2016-17: (Following the first two years of this rate plan,the Board of Directors approved a reduction of the CFCC Rates rate increase for the last three years of the plan, Residential Commercial/ lowering the average of these increases from CFCC Industrial CFCC 2.4 percentto 1.6 percent,or to$327 in FY 2016- unit Cost-FY 2015-16 $3,588 $1,862 17 and $331 in FY 2017-18). Unit Cost-FY 2016-17 $3,710 $1,925 e Increase to the unit Costs to high strength %Increase 3.4% 3.4% discharges for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18, as follows: Supplemental CFCC Rates Industrial Discharge Sewer Rates $/1,000 $r lies $/His $/1,000 $/Ibs 6/Ibs gallons B.O.D. S.S. alg Ions B.O.D. T.S.S. Unit Cost-FY 2015-16 $1.802 $0.38638 $0.20720 Unit Cost-FY 2016-17 $1.3611 $0.6470 $0.6882 Unit Cost-FY 2016-17 $1.863 $0.39952 $0.21425 Unit Cost-FY 2017-18 $1.3776 $0.6548 $0.6965 %Increase 3.4% 3.4% 3.4% %Increase 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% All recommendations from the January 2013 Risk Assessment Analysis Financial Model Update Report were approved by Many leading organizations are formally applying the Board to ensure that the funding required for the risk management processes to identify and manage additional capacity projects required for new users risks across many aspects of their business. The would be available at the time of construction. formalization of risk management processes is a logical step towards increased accountability and Capital facilities Capacity charges(CFCC)and local transparency placed on the Board and District sewer service fees are based on the Financial management. Model Update Report from April 2008 that increases the CFCC and the supplemental CFCC Section 2—Page 17 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Risk assessment and mitigation includes the in the lowest responsible lifecycle cost. The District following steps: installs, operates, maintains, refurbishes and disposes of assets with lifecycles measured from • Identify and assess strategic and organization- years to decades, so an approach which balances wide risks facing the District and develop a high long, medium and short-term needs is necessary. level risk register; Asset management has evolved into a • Identify mitigation measures that the District comprehensive decision-making framework that currently has in place; encompasses engineering planning, design and construction of quality facilities, optimized • Propose additional mitigation measures that the operation, proper maintenance, and planned District considers appropriate to manage; and refurbishment and disposal that will meet the District's changing needs. This coordinated • Develop an action plan of responsibilities and decision making process will allow the District to timeframes for follow-up. consistently meet mandated levels of service to the rate payers at the lowest lifecycle cost. The Risk Register is a compilation of the various risks facing the Orange County Sanitation District, The District's Asset Management Plan focuses on as seen and described annually by District the long-term modeling of systems to ensure the managers and senior management. Business Risk proper rate structure is in place to support is defined as a threat that an event, action or sustainable operations and to prioritize condition inaction, will adversely affect the District's ability to assessment studies based on service life and achieve its business objectives and execute its service conditions. These are important starting strategies successfully. The District first created the points and have yielded tangible benefits in reduced Risk Register in 2006 and subsequently updated it risk levels and an improved capital planning at least bi-annually through 2015. approach.The results of the long-term modeling are completely dependent on the data quality of the The Risk Register Update in 2015 identified top databases supplying information to the TeamPlan risks: (1) liquefaction from an earthquake that may Software.Staff continues to improve the data quality cause pipeline damage or other system failures and of the source systems to improve the accuracy of (2) the ability to attract future qualified employees the long-term model. The implementation of the following the retirement of existing employees. Maximo Computer Maintenance Management Managers and executive management continue to System (CMMS) is an example of an effort to review these issues and various ways to address improve OCSD's Asset Register. CMMS those that might impact OCSD. Technicians and the Asset Engineers continue to work to update the database information including installation date, asset cost, condition and criticality Asset Management in the new system. In December 2002 the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Board adopted their "Asset Management Strategic Plan and Framework While the TeamPlan Software projects future Analysis" (Strategic Plan). The Strategic Plan renewal cash flow requirements in the long-term, defined Asset Management for OCSD as; .'to create OCSD has been striving to more accurately identify and acquire, maintain, rehabilitate, replace and medium to short-term capital cash flow augment these valuable wastewater assets in the requirements. Specifically, the Engineering most cost effective (lowest life cycle cost) Planning Division has been working on developing sustainable manner at the level of service required a medium to long-term (up to 20-year) Capital by present and future generations of regulators and Improvement Program (CIP) by creating specific customers at an acceptable level of risk." project plans for the refurbishment, rehabilitation or replacement for each asset area. The District is committed to providing services for its This medium-tens management is important for rate payers to reliably meet our regulatory mandates and levels of service approved by the several reasons. By moving away from narrowly Board of Directors, and will provide these services focused projects to solve individual problems, to using sustainable engineering principles that result more comprehensive projects refurbishing entire Section 2—Page 18 Business Plan processes, OCSD benefits by having less consider the different ages of assets being operational disruption and more efficient project maintained. delivery, better cash flow estimation, and better operations and maintenance decision-making Asset Valuation framework. This is a huge undertaking based on The replacement valuation for all of OCSD's assets the number of asset and facilities, but over time the has been updated. The table below presents the undefined future rehabilitation capital estimates current replacement and depreciated values of within the 20-year window are expected to be OCSD's assets. The replacement value represents drastically reduced and replaced by more specific the cost in December 2009 dollars to completely estimated capital needs. rebuild all the assets to a new condition. The depreciated value is the book value of the assets Complementing the medium-temt planning are the based on their age, which is a prediction of their short-term efforts to coordinate maintenance current condition. actions that can reduce risks, actively defer the larger refurbishment projects, and reduce asset consumption rates to minimize the need for Valuation Plants Collection Total replacement of structures and conveyance systems when projects are executed. The Planning Division Replacement $3.11 $3.09 $6.20 asset engineers are constantly reviewing their area Value(in billions) scopes of work,utilizing their criticality and condition information and engineering judgment, to Identify Depreciated Value $1.88 $1.88 $3.76 opportunities for operational adjustments or (in billions) maintenance activities that cost effectively extend the life of key assets which may allow for deferral of the larger overall project. This may be a targeted The 2012 replacement value is estimated to be equipment replacement or pipeline repair that is $6.20 billion. In 1998 the prediction was more urgent than the need of the overall facility. $2.03 billion,which was based on original purchase These engineers may also identify opportunities to cost. It is projected that the replacement value will reduce asset consumption through coating increase by approximately $7.1 billion when all of systems, atmosphere improvements or small the existing three billion dollar CIP has been structure repairs before major damage is done. captured in the District's database. The major These actions can drastically reduce the cost of reasons for this increase are all the new assets future projects by preventing the need to demolish added to the asset register and the increased and replace entire structures. replacement costs due to now having to performing construction in a more urbanized Orange County The District is committed to continuous than in the past. improvement of the process by which it manages Planned CIP Outlays the assets and facilities that are required to reliably The chart on the following page shows the 20-year deliver its level of service commitments. The CIP outlay which includes current and predicted additional resources and individual accountability future Capital Improvement Program projects. for specific areas has improved,and will continue to improve our capital planning, project packaging, project execution and delivery, plant operability and maintenance planning. The average age and value of the assets OCSD owns is increasing steadily over time, the latent asset replacement obligation is rising, and as a consequence, OCSD needs to plan for decreased capital projects for expansion and increased renewal expenditures in the future relative to past expenditure levels. Additional focus will need to be given to ensuring that appropriate operation and maintenance strategies are being applied that Section 2—Page 19 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 20 YEAR CIP OUTLAY $400 $350 $300 o $250 ' $200 n $150 I I $$0 Fiscal Year ■BUDGETED CIP ■FUTURE CIP REHABILITATION OR REPLACEMENT Infrastructure Asset Management established levels of service to ensure compliance With the completion of the $537 million full with our Sewer System Management Plan,reducing secondary treatment expansion program, our spills, increasing reliability and safety, and ensuring capital improvement and maintenance programs that our facilities are managed, operated and are now more focused on maintaining our maintained to minimize overall life cycle costs and Infrastructure to ensure that our mission is delivered need for repairs. The cleaning frequencies are reliably and that our facilities are managed in a way based on data from pipe inspections, closed-circuit that minimizes overall life cycle costs. television (CCTV) work, historical records, and industry best practices. The planned activities help Below is a status of the fiscal year 2015-16 extend the useful life of the assets and minimize infrastructure maintenance activities and planned nuisance odors. activities for fiscal year 2016-17. Maintenance activity tracking will change during the Collection System: 2016-17 fiscal year to reflect various changes and OCSD's collection system consists of 570 miles of best practices within our system. In addition, the sewers broken down by approximately 170 miles of Area 7 local sewers are tentatively scheduled for large regional sewers currently not on a cleaning transfer starting August 2016. The Area 7 local schedule due to their size, 230 miles of regional sewer data will be excluded from the metrics values. sewers on a cleaning schedule and 170 miles of During fiscal year 2015-16 the following local sewers in Area 7 scheduled to be transferred maintenance activities were completed: to the East Orange County Water District in August 2016; and 15 pump stations and three metering . Cleaned 41 miles of regional sewer lines. locations that must be maintained, repaired, and , Completed rapid manhole inspection of 860 upgraded to maintain wastewater service and to regional manholes. convey sewage to our treatment facilities. Typical collection system maintenance activities consist of: • Completed 2,900 inspections of 15 pump televising, inspecting, and cleaning sewer lines; stations and 3 metering facilities. operating, maintaining and cleaning pump stations . Completed 57 facility safety inspections. with associated facilities; and chemical conditioning , Completed 56 pump station wet well and 12 of the sewage to reduce corrosion and control Plant No.2 headwork cleanings. odors. Maintenance activities are based on Section 2—Page 20 Business Plan • Completed 296 pump station preventative pump Placentia Trunk Replacement (Project No. 2-72) cleanings. which is taking place in the cities of Fullerton and • Completed 487 pump station mechanical Anaheim.Seven miles of sewer along State College preventative maintenance tasks. Boulevard, from Yorba Linda Boulevard to Orangewood Avenue, will be upsized to handle the • Cleaned 70 trouble spots and 346 inverted flow necessary to allow the abandonment of the siphons. Yorba Linda Pump Station which has reached the • Cleaned 94 miles of local sewer pipelines. end of its useful life.After analyzing the system, it is • Repaired 2,380 feet of local sewer lines. not practical to update the facility due to the high costs of rehabilitation and the limitation to utilize the • Completed 260 miles of pipeline video flow for reclamation. Currently, flow is diverted into inspections. the Santa Ana River line instead of the Newhope- • Completed 213 manhole video inspections. Placentia line due to the existing insufficient • 1,277 dry tons of caustic soda slug dosed. capacity, thus preventing the use of flow for the • 2,450 dry tons of magnesium hydroxide Groundwater Replenishment System. The project continuously dosed. will also include modifications to existing diversion structures to add flexibility to the collection system • 4,000 dry tons of ferrous chloride continuously to divert other reclaimable flow. This project also dosed. provides adequate capacity for future development, • 180,000 gallons of calcium nitrate continuously minimizing the risk of sewer spills in the future. dosed. Construction efforts started in May 2016 and the first phase of the project is scheduled to be Total costs:$6,792,304 completed by fall 2017. The project has a current The following activities and goals are planned for budget of$99 million. fiscal year 2016-17: Another large scale project is the Rehabilitation of • Clean 60 miles of regional sewer lines on a the Western Regional Sewers (Project No. 3-64) cleaning schedule. which covers approximately 17 miles of sewers in the cities of Anaheim, Buena Park, Cypress, La • CCTV video inspection of 500 regional system Palma, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach and manholes. unincorporated areas of the County of Orange • CCTV video inspection of 80 miles of regional referred to as Rossmoor. This large project is sewer pipeline. required to rehabilitate or replace pipes that were • Complete at least 95% of scheduled pump installed 45 to 55 years ago. The sewers have station preventative maintenance work. multiple deficiencies which have allowed the • Clean 95% of trouble spot and scheduled intrusion of ground water primarily at the joints, but inverted siphon work. also sporadically along the pipe segments. In some cases, hard calcium deposits have developed, • Manage odor control chemical expenditures to making the pipe difficult to clean, and may, over between 95-102%of budget. time, impede the wastewater flow. Portions of the Estimated total costs: $8,864,300 project will be relined and others will be replaced with larger diameter pipelines. Also, over 150 manholes will be replaced. In addition,the Westside Collection System Capital Improvement Projects Pump Station will undergo some improvements,the The District's collections projects go through an aging pump station needs a new welwell and odor intensive planning and design process to ensure all control measures. This project budget is elements of the project are thoroughly assessed. $217 million. These projects typically renew or replace aging pipelines and pump stations, upgrade facilities to At the southern edge of the previously mentioned meet current codes and standards, and in some project, the Seal Beach Pump Station (Project No. instances increase flow capacity due to growth in 3-62) also needs to be rehabilitated to properly localized portion of our service area. support the western region of our service area. Not We are currently planning and executing a only are the electrical and safety codes significantly comprehensive program to renew our collection different from when the station was first constructed system. One of the larger projects is the Newhope- I in the early 1970s, but many of the electrical, mechanical, and control system components are Section 2—Page 21 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget becoming obsolete, so long-term maintenance is no Reclamation Plant No. 1: longer an option. The two force mains downstream Flow from Reclamation Plant No. 1 is delivered to of the pump station will also need to be addressed. the Orange County Water District (OCWD) for One force main will be replaced and the other recycling via the Ground Water Replenishment rehabilitated to properly support the updated facility. System (GW RS). During 2015 the expanded plant Odor control facilities will be added to reduce came on line, with capacity to deliver an additional system corrosion and minimize public impacts.This 30 million gallons per day for a total of 130 million project is currently in the design phase with gallons per day. construction anticipated for 2018. The budget for this project is$61 million. During FY 2015-16 more than 4,200 Preventative Maintenance Activities were performed at In the cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine, we Plant No. 1. In addition to these routine activities, have the Gisler-Red Hill Trunk Improvements thefollowing maintenance and repair activities were (Project No. 7-37) which is rehabilitating or completed during the year: replacing aging parallel sewer lines. The current pipes, which run along Red Hill Avenue between • Completed the arc flash evaluation project to McGaw Street and Mitchell Avenue, are not large ensure the safety of workers servicing electrical enough to handle the high flows associated with wet equipment. weather events which create the risk of spills. The . Continued assessment and evaluation of proper manholes are also deteriorated and corroded and settings of protective relays to ensure the safety must also be replaced or rehabilitated to avoid of workers servicing electrical equipment failure.The two-mile project has a current budget of $25 million and began construction in May 2016. • Initiated steps to replace the foul air scrubber atmospheric analyzer units that monitor In Newport Beach, we have developed a compliance with South Coast Air Quality comprehensive program to coordinate the various Management District (SCAQMD) requirements projects scheduled to take place in the city in the and feed chemicals into the scrubbers including next few years.We recently completed construction completing a service contract to optimize of the Newport Force Main Rehabilitation Project installation and purchasing analyzer units. (No.5-60),which rehabilitated and replaced parallel Rebuilt one of the four Steve Anderson Lift pipes in Pacific Coast Highway between Dover Station pumps that transfer flow tributary to Drive and just west of Superior Avenue.The project Treatment Plant No. 2 into Reclamation was sequenced in two phases to minimize public Plant No. 1. impacts by avoiding construction in the busy summer months. The 50-year steel pressurized • Completed major service on four of nine blowers mains were in poor condition and one of the that provide oxygen to the microorganisms in the pipelines was undersized to convey predicted wet secondary treatment process. weather flows. Now completed, the system should provide another 50 years of service.The project had Replacement of the control system for emergency a budget of$64 million. back-up power generators that service our activated sludge secondary treatment facilities, originally Also in the City of Newport Beach and in portions of planned for fiscal year 2015-16, was made part of Costa Mesa, we have the District 6 Trunk Sewer the Headworks Rehabilitation Capital Improvement Relief Project (No. 6-17). This project is replacing Project scheduled for construction in 2020. the sewer that extends from Pomona Avenue to Additionally, replacement of outdated atmospheric Newport Boulevard ending near Pacific Coast monitoring equipment in the digesters and central Highway. These improvements will increase generation facility areas originally scheduled for this capacity to properly handle the projected increase year was deferred to fiscal year 2016-17 due to in flow from planned developments. These changing priorities. improvements will extend the life of the sewer by 30 Total costs: $3,827,885 years. Once the project is completed, the risk of sewer spills during dry weather events and common During fiscal year 2016-17 there are more than wet weather events will significantly diminish. The 4,900 preventative maintenance activities that are current budget for the project is$8 million. scheduled to be completed at Plant No.1. This includes typical time or cycle based maintenance Section 2—Page 22 Business Plan tasks such as adjustments and mechanical grit basins, the primary influent channels, the alignments, cleaning and tightening of electrical headworks odor control scrubbers, and electrical equipment, calibration of sensors and meters, power distribution and control systems.This project changing of lubricants and filters, exercising will also replace the emergency pumping capacity equipment, rebuilds and regulatory testing. In that has been provided by the original headworks addition, staff will be utilizing predictive pumping system dating back to the 1950s. The total technologies such as vibration analysis to measure budgeted cost for this project is$275 million. imbalance in rotating equipment, thermography to measure excessive heat, oil analysis to predict While the Sanitation District generally has adequate failure of lubricants, and ultrasonic to detect leaks hydraulic treatment capacity, additional solids as well as deterioration and short-circuiting in handling capacity is needed. The Sludge electrical equipment. Other major planned activities Dewatering and Odor Control Project (No. P1-101) for fiscal year 2016-17 at Reclamation Plant No. 1 is necessary to support the need for more capacity include: to thicken and dewater sludge due to the conversion • Completion of the arc flash and protecflve relay to full secondary treatment as well as increased flow work, including labeling of assets and acting on to support the expansion of the GWRS.The 40-year recommendations from the evaluation old system has reached the end of its useful life and completed last year, to ensure the safety of as such will be replaced with a new and improved workers servicing electrical equipment. facility that will increase cake dryness which will reduce biosolids management cost. This will in turn • Replacement of eight foul air scrubber improve sludge thickening to optimize the use of atmospheric analyzer units that monitor existing digesters thus eliminating the need to compliance with South Coast Air Quality construct new digesters. The project will also help Management District (SCAQMD) requirements us meet our level of service goal by reducing odors. and feed chemicals into the scrubbers. The project budget is$188 million. • Major overhaul of one Central Generation (Ceri Engine. A project closely tied to the solids dewatering facility • Overhaul of one cake conveyor and one belt is the Digester Rehabilitation (Project No. P7-100) press for biosolids dewatering. which is rehabilitating 12 digesters. The project will • Major service on two blowers that service the refurbish aged storage tanks, as well as handle the A81 secondary treatment facility. increased volume of solids more efficiently and with • Replacement of the vane bushings on three of greater reliability. The sludge pumping, heating, the AS1 blowers. structural, mechanical, and electrical and control systems will all be rehabilitated which will increase • Servicing of emergency generators to ensure the quality of the sludge production. By continuity of operations. rehabilitating our existing digesters we reduce the • Replacement of 23 outdated atmospheric risk of failure and extend the life of the assets, monitoring equipment in the digester facility minimizing future expenditures. The total project areas. budget is$67 million. Total estimated costs:$5,105,970 Treatment Plant No.2: Reclamation Plant No. 1 CIP: All flows entering Treatment Plant No. 2 are treated These projects are intended to rehabilitate or to full secondary standards and then discharged reconstruct major components of our treatment four miles offshore through our ocean discharge process to ensure compliance with regulatory outfall. During fiscal year 2015-16 the number of permits, enhance water recycling and safety. process units in service at Treatment Plant No. 2 was reduced as additional flow was diverted to One of the largest projects currently being designed Reclamation Plant No. 1 in support of the expanded is the Headwork Rehabilitation at Plant No. 1 GWRS. Average flow treated at Plant No. 2 was (Project No. P1-105).The facility is almost 30 years 65 million gallons per day. In addition to more than old, so a comprehensive refurbishment is required 3,600 preventative maintenance activities in order to extend the life of the facility. The project completed during fiscal year 2015-16, the following will rehabilitate systems including the metering and major activities were also completed at Treatment diversion structure, the bar screen building, the bin Plant No. 2 during the year: loading building,the main sewage pump station,the • Completed the arc flash evaluation project to Section 2—Page 23 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget ensure the safety of workers servicing electrical activities at Treatment Plant No. 2 for fiscal year equipment. 2016-17 include: • Continued assessment and evaluation of • Completion of the are flash and protective relay proper settings of protective relays to ensure work, including labeling of assets and acting on the safety of workers servicing electrical recommendations from the evaluation equipment. completed last year, to ensure the safety of • Completed major overhaul on one of five central workers servicing electrical equipment. generation engines that supply two-thirds of the • Replacement of foul air scrubber atmospheric power for the treatment plant. analyzer units that monitor compliance with • Overhauled two of the three gas compressors South Coast Air Quality Management District that provide digester gas to the central (SCAQMD) requirements and feed chemicals generation facilityfor producing electrical power into the scrubbers as required. and heat. • Clean and replace mechanical equipment on two • Initiated steps to replace the foul air scrubber digesters to improve mixing and detention time atmospheric analyzer units that monitor to ensure best possible reclamation of the biosolids. compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) requirements Replacement of five outdated atmospheric and feed chemicals into the scrubbers including monitoring equipment in the digesters facility completing a service contract to optimize areas,as required, and complete replacement in installation and purchasing analyzer units. the central generation facility areas. • Cleaned and replaced mechanical equipment Total estimated costs: $4,291,204 on two digesters to improve mixing and detention time to ensure best possible Treatment Plant No. 2 CIP Projects: reclamation of the biosolids. The Primary Treatment Rehabilitation Project (P2- • Removed debris from the by-pass flap gate 98) will rehabilitate the primary clarifiers, influent discharge point into the Santa Ana River to pipes, construct new primary effluent pipes, and ensure availability of this discharge in the event rehabilitate and upgrade the odor control systems. of an emergency. These facilities date back to the late 1950s and are in need of seismic and condition based upgrades. Replacement of outdated atmospheric monitoring By replacing old structures and installing new equipment in the digesters and central generation systems, we will improve the resiliency of our facility areas originally scheduled for this year was infrastructure and thus improve our ability to provide deferred to fiscal year 2016-17 due to changing service. This is anticipated to be a very long priorities. duration project because the need to maintain Total costs: $5,124,823 treatment operations during the project. The total project budget is$428 million. During fiscal year 2016-17 there are more than Treating 100 percent of our influent to full secondary 4,300 preventative maintenance activities that are treatment standards means there are more solids to scheduled to be completed at Plant No. 2. This manage which has generated several projects to includes typical time or cycle based maintenance address that need. A few are currently underway tasks such as adjustments and mechanical such as the Solids Thickening and Processing alignments, cleaning and tightening of electrical Upgrades (Project No. P2-89) which will be equipment, calibration of sensors and meters, completed at the end of the year. The Sludge changing of lubricants and filters, exercising Dewatering and Odor Control project (No. P2-92) equipment, rebuilds and regulatory testing. In has started construction to replace the current belt addition, staff will be utilizing predictive press dewatering system with a centrifuge technologies such as vibration analysis to measure dewatering facilitythat will remove a greater amount imbalance in rotating equipment, thermography to of water from the sludge resulting in reduced measure excessive heat, and oil analysis to predict disposal costs for the Sanitation District. This failure of lubricants. In addition to planned $90preventative maintenance, other major planned 201 million project will be in construction through 018. Section 2—Page 24 Business Plan As we make improvements throughout the plant, it is imperative we pay attention to our ocean outfall systems. Many components of the system such as the pipeline assets have already been addressed, so now we turn our attention to the pumping systems. Project No. J-117, the Ocean Outfall System Rehabilitation, will refurbish the Ocean Outfall Booster Station. This includes rehabilitation of the mechanical, electrical, and civil systems which will extend the life of the facility and increase the efficiency of the system. In addition, a low flow pump station will be added due to our increased water recycling rates, which will reduce our outfall flows below the capacity of the current very large pumps.The budget for this project is$88 million. As part of the long-term CIP planning efforts, several studies are currently underway evaluating various areas of the plants and the collection system to determine their condition, and identify deficiencies or improvements needed. These studies include the Primary Treatment Area Study and the Bay Bridge Pump Station Relocation Study to help identify how to best address and manage the improvements for these two important components of our system. We also have studies focusing on topics such as: Effluent Reuse,which coincides with Board of Directors strategic goal for future water recycling; the Odor Control Master Plan, which will help identify areas of improvement to better define our level of service; and the Biosolids Master Plan. As these studies evolve, projects will be refined or created to improve our systems. Section 2—Page 25 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget FY 14-15 Level of Service Results Target Protecting Public Health Protecting public health and the environment utilizing all practical and effective means for wastewater,energy,and solids resource recovery. Accept dry weather runoff diversion flows without imposing fees. 1.4 MGD Up to 10 MGD Air emissions health risk to community and employees, per one 9 <10 million people(for each treatment plant). Notices of violation (NOV)with air, land,and water permits 0 0 Respond to collection system spills within 1 hour 100% 100% Sanitary sewer spills per 100 miles 1.2 <2.1 Contain sanitary sewer spills within 5 hours 100% 100% Meet secondary treatment standards BOD 4.8 mg/L BOD 25 mg/L TSS 5.7 mg/L TSS 30 mg/L Frequency of unplanned use of emergency one-mile(78-inch 0 0 diameter)outfall(per year during dry weather). Tons of biosolids to landfill through 2017 Peak Production period. 60 100 Compliance with core industrial pretreatment requirements 100% 100% Stakeholder Understanding and Support Communicating the District's mission and strategies with those we serve and all other stakeholders. Meet GWRS specification requirements for Plant No. 1 secondary 2.7 NTU 5 NTU effluent Provide specification effluent available to the Groundwater 100% 100% Replenishment System to maximize production of purified water. Managing and Protecting the Public Funds Continually seeking efficiencies to ensure that the public's money is wisely spent. Annual user fees sufficient to cover all O&M Requirements 100% 100% Actual collection,treatment, and disposal costs per million gallons 3%under < 10%of budget Maintain AAA Bond Rating 100% 100% Section 2—Page 26 Business Plan FY 14.25 level of Service Results Target Providing Exceptional Customer Service Providing reliable,responsive and affordable services in line with customer needs and expectations. Treatment plants odor complaint response within 1 hour. 100% 100% Collection system odor complaint response within 1 working day. 98% 100% Number of odor complaints: • Reclamation Plant No. 1 8 0 • Treatment Plant No. 2 9 0 • Collection System 27 12 *Under normal operating conditions Respond to public complaints or inquiries regarding construction projects 100% 100% within 1 day. New construction permits processed within 1 working day. 100% 100% Respond to all biosolids contractor violations within a week of violation 100% 100% notice. Organizational Effectiveness Creating the best possible workforce in terms of safety,productivity,customer service,and training. Employee injury incident rate—per 100 employees 1.7 <3.3 Industry Average Meet mandatory OSHA training requirements 100% >95% Hours worked since last lost work day 430,000 >1,000,000 Achieve annual agency target of days away from work, days of restricted 0.8 <2.5 work activity,or job transferred as a result of a work-related injury or illness Training hours per employee 45.23 45 per year Section 2—Page 27 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Strategic Goals for FY 2016-17 & FY 2017-18 Goals Strategic Importance Desired Outcome Next Steps 1. Develop Biosolids Contract to dispose of Develop a mid and long- Study available bio- Management one-half of total Bio- term strategy for bio- solids disposal options Options solids expires in 2016. solids disposal prior to and identify practical the expiration of current and reasonable contracts. alternatives. 2. Update Odor Master Results of process per- Limiting offsite odor Reassess whether Plan formance and new odor impacts in an efficient dilution to threshold is measurement technolo- and cost effective the most appropriate gies compel the review manner. measurement system. of current standards. 3. Review the Utilize- The District is a signifi- Maximize energy Search for research lion of Renewable cant consumer of ener- efficiency and conver- opportunities to improve Energy in Waste- gy and seeks to mini- sion from organic sludge conversion of organic water Manage- mize energy usage and to electricity, gas, and sludge to energy and to ment maximize the conver- useful heat. optimize process and son of sludge to energy. hauling energy. 4. Development Future Water demand in ser- Develop a plan for the Create an evaluation Water Recycling vice area is projected to best utilization of Plant methodology to weigh Options increase 16 percent by No. 2 effluent water the benefit, cost, and 2035. About one-half of currently discharged out risk of each treatment District treated waste- to the ocean. and utilization alterna- water is lost to ocean live for Plant No. 2 disposal. effluent. 5. Transfer of Local District's core business Obtain Board support The Board and the Sewers to is wastewater treatment for transferring the Orange County Local Member Cities and disposal, and main- ownership of all local Agency Commission and Sewer taining sewer pipes of sewers to the member has approved transfer Agencies the regional collection cities and sewer of 174 miles of local system. agencies. sewers to the East Orange County Water District effective 811/16. 6. Workforce Planning Ensure that the right Integrate W FPD efforts Develop and implement &Development people with the right to ensure workforce workforce plans that (W FPD) skills and abilities, are in capabilities match work ensure critical work is the right place, at the required to meet the performed, identify new right time. mission and levels of ways to perform work, service. and meet future workforce needs. Section 2-Page 28 Long-Term Planning OCSD Long-Term Planning Type of Planning Description of Process Budget Impacts Process Update of the Maintaining a rolling 5- In November 2007,the The levels of service Five-Year year comprehensive stra- District's Board approved identified within the 2015 Strategic Plan tegic plan that addresses a 5-Year Strategic Plan Strategic Plan Update the sanitation health and that updated the District's were the foundation for safety needs of the 2.6 Mission,Vision, Levels of the development of this million people we serve. Services, and Business two-year budget. Plan. Also included are the strategic objectives listed below. This plan is now updated annually. Plan for Capital Plan, design, and build In December 2009, the The 2016 CIP Validation, Improvements capital improvement Board approved a new based on the 2009 out to 2050 projects(CIP)out to 2050 Master Plan that lays out Master Plan, includes an to meet the regulatory, a capital program to del- overall CIP budget of environmental, health, and iver and maintain the $3.3 billion for active and safely needs of a growing levels of service desired future. population. by the Board of Directors. Biosolids Aggressively pursue The study of biosolids Biosolids production will Management biosolid disposal alterna- optons will include offsite decrease by one-third tives following the an onsite facilities, and when IRWD discontinues expiration of the 2016-17 new and established sending us biosolids and disposal contract. technologies. centrifuges come online. Odor Control Direct sufficient resources Design all new processes Implement odor control and investigate new so that odors remain projects at Plant No. 1 technologies to effectively within 10 dilutions to (trickling filters)and Plant deal with odor issues. threshold (DfT), or within No. 20(solids loading treatment plant facilities)by 2018. boundaries. Air Emissions Apply sufficient resources Catalytic converters are Cengen Emissions Control to meet regulatory being installed on power Control,a$24 million requirements related to air generation engines which project that will be emissions. will significantly lower completed in FY 2016-17, emissions addresses the new air toxic emission standards. Groundwater Continue partnership with Maximize the use of The District will evaluate Replenishment the Orange County Water treated effluent for water the feasibility of providing System District(OCW D)in support recycling to defer the additional effluent to the (GWRS) of the GWRS. need for second ocean GWRS from effluent outfall currently being discharged to the ocean from Plant No. 2. Section 2—Page 29 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Background Information and Description of Protection Agency and the South Coast Air Quality Services: Management District(SCAQMD). The Orange County Sanitation District (the The District operates under an ocean discharge "District") is a public agency that operates one of permit issued by the USEPA and the Santa Ana the largest wastewater facilities in the United States Regional Water Quality Control Board. This permit of America. Originally formed in 1954 pursuant to was last issued in July 2012 and is noticed for re- the joint powers provision under the County adoption on December 15, 2017. To maintain the Sanitation District Act of the California Health and District's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Safety Code, the District then consisted of System (NPDES) operating permit, the District's independent special districts responsible for plants must meet strict conditions setjointly by the wastewater collection within their own geographical USEPA and the CRWQCB. boundaries.These districts were co-participants in a Joint Agreement to provide for the joint The District maintains and operates a large system construction, ownership, and operation of the of trunk sewers and pumping stations in addition to District's Joint Facilities for the treatment and the two modem treatment plants. The plants use recycling of wastewater. chemical, physical and biological processes to produce a high-quality effluent. Chemicals used On July 1, 1998,the nine individual existing districts are either environmentally neutral or biodegradable. requested to be consolidated into one district by resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the The treated effluent from the Huntington Beach County of Orange and special legislation. plant is pumped through a five-mile, 10-foot diameter ocean ouffall pipe. The outfall has a one- The District is governed by a Board of Directors mile long diffuser section that discharges treated made up of mayors or members of city councils, water through more than 500 portholes four miles directors of independent special districts, and one off shore. member from the County Board of Supervisors. A variety of board committees, made up of In January2008,the Orange County Water District members of the Board of Directors,considertopics (OCWD)and the District completed Phase I of the for action by the Board and make Groundwater Replenishment System,ajoint project recommendations to the Board. by the two agencies to provide reclaimed water for percolation into the groundwater basin from most of The District is responsible for collecting, treating, the secondary effluent pumped from the Fountain and safely disposing of approximately 185 million Valley plant,or approximately 92,300 acre-feet per gallons of wastewater each day for an area year. covering 479 square miles in metropolitan (central and northwestern) Orange County. The District's In January 2012,the OCWD completed Phase II of service area includes approximately 2.6 million the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) residents and businesses, or approximately that provided an additional 33,000 acre-feet per 81 percent of the County's total population. year of reclaimed water;resulting in the purification of 100 percent of the treated wastewater produced Professional staff of 627 full-time equivalent at the Fountain Valley plant. employees supports the District's around-the-clock operation. Staff is organized into six departments, including the General Manager's Office, Human Resources, Administration, Environmental Services, Engineering, and Operations and Maintenance. As working environmentalists,the District's staff is regulated by many agencies, including the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA), the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB), the California Integrated Waste Management Board, the California Environmental Section 2-Page 30 Orange County at a Glance Community Profile of the County of Orange in terms of output, the recession lasted only two The County of Orange is bordered on the north by years. Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties, on the east by Riverside County,on the southeast by San However,the same cannot be said for employment Diego County, and on the west and southwest by as the Great Recession had a devastating impact the Pacific Ocean. Approximately 42 miles of on payroll jobs in California. In Orange County, ocean shoreline provide many beaches, marinas employment decreased by 173,000 on a seasonally and other recreational areas for use by residents adjusted basis as employment declined to and visitors. 1,356,000 in March 2010 from a peak level of 1,529,000, or a decline of 11.3 percent. It wasn't The climate in the County is mild,with an average until the statistics released by EDD in September rainfall of 13 inches. The mean temperature 2015 that showed payroll employment in California ranges from a minimum of 48 degrees to a as being only 20,000 above the employment peak maximum of 76 degrees. before the beginning of the recession. The County has become a tourist center in With a pickup in job growth, unemployment rates Southern California byoffering a broad spectrum of gradually declined in California and across the state recreational opportunities that is enhanced by the over the 2011-15 period. In September 2015, mild climate. Along the shoreline are five state Orange County had the third lowest rate among the beaches and parks, five municipal beaches and ten largest metropolitan areas of the state at five county beaches. There are two small-craft 4.0 percent. docking facilities in Newport Harbor,one located in Sunset Beach and another in Dana Point. Job creation is obviously the primary factor in lowering unemployment rates but the rates have Other major recreational and tourist facilities also declined because of the decreasing laborforce include Disneyland, California Adventure, Knott's participation rate, at a high of 66.1 percent in Berry Farm and Soak City, Mission San Juan September 2008 to only 62.4 percent in September Capistrano, the Anaheim Convention Center, and 2015. the Art Colony at Laguna Beach with its annual art festival. Also located within the County is Anaheim Overall, Chapman forecasts a job growth gain of Stadium, home of the Los Angeles Angels of 2.5 percent in Orange County for 2016. Anaheim of Major League Baseball,and the Honda Center,home of the Anaheim Ducks of the National According to Chapman, the devaluation of the Hockey League. Chinese yuan and weakness in the currencies of Mexico,Canada,and Japan are making Califomia's Economic Outlook merchandise more expensive. In aggregate, According to the California Employment Chapman projects total merchandise exports in Development Department (EDD), Orange County California to gain 1.5 percent in 2016 following their generated an increase of approximately 3.1 percent estimate of a decline of about 2.0 percent in 2015. in payroll jobs from April 2015 to April 2016. During this same time period, unemployment in Orange Based on the current levels of permit activity, County decreased to 3.9 percent from 4.3 percent Chapman's forecast shows a leveling off of total while the unemployment in California as a whole building permit valuations. Following the Great decreased to 5.3 percent from 6.5 percent. Recession, these valuations increased annually from 16.3 percent in 2011,to 11.4 percent in 2012, According to Chapman University's December 47.7 percent in 2013, 11.0 in 2014,and 9.1 percent 2016 Economic Forecast,the Great Recession that in 2015 to a projected decline of 1.1 percent in started in December 2007 and officially ended in 2016. June 2009, reduced California's real gross domestic product(GDP)from $1.99 billion in 2008 On a more positive outlook, Chapman forecasts to $1.92 billion in 2009, a decline of 3.9 percent. personnel income in Orange County to grow Real GDP recovered in 2011, reaching 5.2 percent in 2016 while the consumer price index $2.03 billion,thus surpassing its previous peak and to remain relatively low in comparison at showed steady growth over the 2012-14 period. So 2.0 percent. Section 2-Page 31 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 2— Page 32 0 r n Ny m A 1k ti y OA 2 w � n m 41 Fiscal Policy In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments General Financial Goals To maintain a financially viable Sanitation District that can maintain an appropriate level of wastewater treatment services. ✓ To maintain financial Flexibility by adapting to local and regional economic changes. ✓ To maintain and enhance the sound fiscal condition of the District. ✓ To ensure that the value added by every program and activity within the District is proportional to its cost; and to eliminate those programs and activities that do not contribute to the District's mission. ✓ To provide training opportunities to the greatest extent possible for available jobs within the organization for those employees working in programs or activities that have been reduced or eliminated. ✓ To provide employees with cross-training opportunities in order to achieve multi-tasking capabilities. ✓ Operating Budget Policies The District will adopt a balanced budget by June 30 of each year. ✓ The budget will be used as a fiscal control device as well as a financial plan. ✓ Budget preparation and monitoring will be performed by each division within the District,the organizational level of accountability and control. ✓ The Director of Finance&Administrative Service will prepare a budget calendar no later than January of each year. ✓ An annual operating budget will be developed by conservatively projecting revenues and expenditures for the current and forthcoming fiscal years. ✓ During the annual budget development process, the existing programs will be thoroughly examined to assure removal or reduction of any services or programs that could be eliminated or reduced in cost. ✓ Current operating revenues will be sufficient to support current operating expenditures. ✓ Section 3-Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments Annual budgets including reserves will provide for adequate design, construction, maintenance and replacement of District capital facilities and equipment. ✓ The District will maintain all physical assets at a level adequate to protect the District's capital investment and to minimize future maintenance and replacement costs. ✓ The District will project equipment replacement and maintenance needs for the next five years and will update this projection each year. From this projection a maintenance and replacement schedule will be developed and followed. ✓ The District will avoid budgetary and accounting procedures that balance the current budget at the expense of future budgets. ✓ The District will forecast its expenditures and revenues for each of the next five years and will update this forecast at least annually. ✓ Revenue Policies Because revenues are sensitive to both local and regional economic conditions, revenue estimates adopted by the Board of Directors must be conservative. ✓ Staff will estimate annual revenues by an objective, analytical process that utilizes trend,judgmental, and statistical analysis as appropriate. ✓ Ad valorem property tax revenues of the District will be dedicated to debt service. ✓ Sewer Service User Fees will be projected for each of the next ten years and this projection will be updated annually. ✓ Expenditure Policies The District will maintain a level of expenditures that provides for the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the community. ✓ The District will set fees and user charges at a level that fully supports the total direct and indirect costs of operations, capital improvements, and debt service requirements not covered by reserves. ✓ Section 3-Page 2 Fiscal Policy In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments Capital Improvement Budget Policies The District will make all capital improvements in accordance with an adopted and funded capital improvement program. The adopted capital improvement program will be based on need. ✓ The District will develop an annual five-year plan for capital Master Plan improvements, including design, development, projects needs implementation, and operating and maintenance costs. ✓ through 2050. All capital improvement projects approved in the annual operating budget are approved at the budgeted amounts through the completion of the project. The Board of Directors approves both the individual project total budget and the projected cash outlays for all capital improvement projects for the current fiscal year. ✓ Staff will identify the estimated costs, potential funding sources and project schedule for each capital project proposal before it is submitted to the Board of Directors for approval. ✓ Staff will identify the estimated on-going future Operating and Included in Maintenance costs, as well as staffing requirements upon Asset completion for each capital project proposal before it is Management. submitted to the Board of Directors for approval. ✓ The District will use intergovernmental assistance and other outside resources whenever possible to fund capital improvements providing that these improvements are consistent with the Capital Improvement Plan and the District's priorities, and that the future operating and maintenance costs of these improvements have been ✓ included in the budget. Staff will coordinate development of the capital improvement budget with the development of the operating budget. All operations and maintenance resources required to implement the CIP have been considered and appropriately reflected in the operating budget for the year the CIP is to be implemented. ✓ Cost tracking for components of the capital improvement program will be updated quarterly to ensure project completion against budget and established time lines. ✓ Section 3-Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments Asset Management Policy In order to provide for the systematic planning, acquisition, deployment, utilization control, and decommissioning of capital assets, the following policies have been established: • The condition, performance, utilization, and cost of assets will be recorded down to the maintenance managed item ✓ component level. • A detailed, planned maintenance program is in place to ensure that the assets,facilities and systems perform to their design criteria and meet their design lives. ✓ • A system is in place to blend planned and unplanned activity to optimize the cost against the asset performance requirements. ✓ • Reliability Centered Maintenance techniques will be used to optimize the maintenance plans and to identify any ✓ design alterations that are economically justified. • Current levels of asset management service in terms of Completed for quantity and quality of service including condition, critical and high function/size/type, regulatory requirements, reliability, and value assets. repair response times have been determined and documented. • The full economic cost is charged on all asset management activities. ✓ • Asset Management maintains appropriate pricing and funding strategies that match the needs of the business to ✓ ensure sustainability. • Asset Management considers the real growth of the District's service area and the way in which demands for service will change in the future, including population, unit demand, demographics, changing customer expectations, ✓ and changing regulatory requirements. • Monitoring and reporting is performed on the condition, Service levels are performance and functionality of the District's assets reported quarterly against prescribed service levels and regulatory ✓ through the requirements. Strategic Plan reporting. • A condition/function index is linked with customer Completed expectations at a cost that customers are willing to pay. ✓ through the budget process. • Future level of service options available and their associated costs are constantly analyzed. ✓ Section 3-Page 4 Fiscal Policy In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments • An assessment of the relative risks, costs and benefits is derived for all investments in capital works, maintenance, ✓ and operations. • Individual asset management decisions are made only when the cost of all programs has been analyzed and the funding needs of the whole organization is known together ✓ with the knowledge of its impact on rates. • Necessary renewal programs to sustain the existing levels of service and condition of assets, as identified through the best appropriate process, is approved ahead of new ✓ capital works and services. • New capital assets for new works and services are approved only with the commitment of the recurrent (operations and maintenance)funding necessary to ✓ sustain the new works and services. • The financial, social, and environmental aspects of asset management will be reported on bi-annually. ✓ Vehicle Replacement Policy In order to provide safe, reliable transportation appropriate to the work to be performed,the following policies have been established: • The newest vehicles will be used for those purposes requiring the highest annual mileage. ✓ • Vehicles may be replaced when they are 12 years old or have accumulated 120,000 miles. ✓ • A vehicle may be replaced in advance of the above criteria if it can be reallocated to a low mileage use between the plants. ✓ • Electric carts are to be utilized for in-plant use only. ✓ • When available, CNG vehicles or bi-fuel vehicles are to be utilized within the County(pump station runs,source control inspections, etc). ✓ • When available, CNG vehicles or bi-fuel vehicles are to be utilized to travel outside of Orange County(e.g., Environmental Compliance Monitoring of biosolids application sites, etc). ✓ Section 3-Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments Short-Term Debt Policies The District may use short-term debt to cover temporary or emergency cash flow shortages. All short-term borrowing will be subject to Board approval by resolution. ✓ The District may utilize Board approved intra-agency loans rather than outside debt instruments to meet short-term cash needs. Intra-agency loans will be permitted only if an analysis of the affected Revenue Areas indicates funds are available and the use of these funds will not impact current operations. The principal,along with interest at the prevailing rate as established by the District's Treasurer,will be paid to the lending Revenue Area. ✓ Long-Term Debt Policies Proceeds from long-term debt will not be used for current on- going operations. ✓ Before any new debt is issued, the impact of debt service payments on total annual fixed costs will be analyzed. ✓ Develop and maintain a board adopted debt policy. ✓ Accumulated Funds &Reserve Policies A cash flow reserve will be established to fund operations, maintenance, and certificates of participation expenses for the first half of the fiscal year, prior to the receipt of the first installment of the property tax allocation and the sewer service user fees which are collected as a separate line item on the property tax bill. The level of this reserve will be established as the sum of an amount equal to six months operations and maintenance expenses and the total of the annual debt(COP)service payments due in August each year. ✓ An operating contingency reserve will be established to provide for non-recurring expenditures that were not anticipated when the annual budget and sewer service fees were considered and adopted. The level of this reserve will be established at an amount equal to ten percent of the annual operating budget. ✓ Section 3-Page 6 Fiscal Policy In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments A capital improvement reserve will be maintained to fund annual increments of the capital improvement program. The long-term target is for one half of the capital improvement program to be funded from borrowing and for one half to be funded from current revenues and reserves. With this program in mind,the target level of this reserve has been established at one half of the average annual capital improvement program through the year 2020. Levels higher and lower than the target can be expected while the long-term financing and capital improvement programs are being finalized. ✓ A renewal/replacement reserve will be maintained to fund the District's renewal, rehabilitation and replacement requirement costs associated with the District's existing capital plant and collection system over the next twenty years. The reserve was initially set at$50 million in 1998-99 and is annually augmented by interest earnings and a small portion of the annual sewer user fees in order to meet projected needs through the year 2030. ✓ Catastrophic loss, or self-insurance, reserves will be maintained for property damage including fire, flood, and earthquake;for general liability; and for workers' compensation. These reserves are intended to work with purchased insurance policies, FEMA disaster reimbursements, and State disaster reimbursements. Based on the current infrastructure value of$1.3 billion, the reserve level has been set to fund the District's non-reimbursed costs, estimated to be$57 million. ✓ Investment Policies The District's Treasurer will annually submit an investment policy to the Board of Directors for review and adoption. ✓ The investment policy will emphasize safety and liquidity before yield. ✓ Accounting,Auditing, and Financial Reporting The District's accounting and financial reporting systems will be maintained in conformance with generally accepted accounting principles and standards promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. ✓ A capital asset system will be maintained to identify all District assets,their condition, historical cost, replacement value, and useful life. ✓ Section 3-Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget In Fiscal Policy Statement Completed Progress Comments Quarterly financial reports will be submitted to the Board of Directors and will be made available to the public. ✓ Full disclosure will be provided in the general financial statements and bond representations. ✓ The District will maintain a good credit rating in the financial The District's community. ✓ AAA rating was reaffirmed with the$146 million 2016A Revenue Refunding debt issuance. An annual audit will be performed by an independent public accounting firm with the subsequent issue of an official Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, including an audit opinion and a management letter. ✓ Section 3-Page 8 GFOA Best Practices and Advisories Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Accounting.Auditing, and Financial Reportina Recommended Practices Governmental Accounting,Auditing, and Financial Reporting Practice ✓ Prepare Popular Reports ✓ Not being considered at this time due to other communication efforts. Appropriate Levels of Working Capital Working Capital of the District in Enterprise Funds ✓ shall be greater than 45 days worth of annual operating expenses Audit Procurement ✓ Use the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report to Meet SEC Requirements for Periodic Disclosure ✓ Establish Appropriate Capitalization Thresholds for Tangible Capital ✓ Assets Internal Audit Function Established ✓ Administrative Committee directs Internal Audits Audit Committees ✓ Administrative Committee serves as an audit committee. The Need for Periodic Inventories of Capitalized Tangible Assets ✓ Application of Full-Cost Accounting to OCSD does not provide solid Municipal Solid Waste Management waste services. Activities ✓ Present Securities Lending OCSD does not have Securities Transactions in Financial Statements ✓ Lending Activities Technology Disaster Recovery Managed by Information Planning ✓ Technology Division Present Budget to Actual Not required for audited Comparisons Within the Basic ✓ financial statement reports of Financial Statements Enterprise Funds.Budget/actual comparisons are included within unaudited quarterly financial reports. Use Websites to Improve Access to Budget Documents and Financial Reports ✓ Use of Trend Data and Comparative Data for Financial Analysis ✓ Section 3—Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Appropriate Level of Unrestricted OCSD only has Proprietary Fund Balance in the General Fund ✓ Fund Types-established a formal policy on the level of unrestricted net assets Document Accounting Policies and Procedures ✓ Establish the Estimated Useful Lives of Capital Assets ✓ Improve the Effectiveness of Fund Accounting ✓ Enhance Management Involvement with Internal Control ✓ Including Management's Discussion and Analysis in Departmental Reports ✓ Auditor Association with Financial Statements Included in Offering Statements or Posted on Websites ✓ Ensuring Control over Noncapitalized Items ✓ Considerations on Using the Modified OCSD depreciates all capital Approach to Account for assets; OCSD has no Infrastructure Assets ✓ governmental fund types Mitigating the negative effects of Statement on Auditing Standards No.112 ✓ Encouraging and facilitating the reporting of fraud and questionable accounting and auditing practices ✓ Ensuring adequate documentation of costs to support claims for disaster recovery assistance ✓ Improving the timeliness of financial reports ✓ Web Site Presentation of Official Managed by Information Financial Documents ✓ Technology Division Treasury and Investment Management Recommended Practices Collateralizalion of Public Deposits ✓ Government Relationships with Securities Dealers ✓ Using Mutual Funds for Cash Management Purposes ✓ Section 3—Page 10 GFOA Best Practices and Advisories Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Debt Service Payment Settlement Procedures ✓ Adopt a comprehensive written ✓ Investment Policy and review and update policies, if necessary on an annual basis Use of Derivatives and Structured Investment Policy does not Investment by State and Local allow Derivative Investments Governments for Non-Pension Fund Investment Portfolios ✓ Use of Derivatives and Structured Investment Policy does not Investment by State and Local allow Derivative Investments Governments for Cash Operating and Reverse Portfolios ✓ Security Lending Programs for Non- Pension Fund Portfolios ✓ Diversification of Investments in a Portfolio ✓ Managing Market Risk in Investment Managed by Chandler Asset Portfolios ✓ Management Electronic Payment Systems ✓ Procurement of Banking Services ✓ Purchasing Card Programs ✓ Acceptance of Payment Cards and Selection of Payment Card Service Providers ✓ Frequency of Purchased Securities Valuation in Repurchase Agreements ✓ Selection of Investment Advisors for Non-Pension Fund Investment Portfolios ✓ Utilize independent Third-Party Custodians to safeguard District investments and protect against safekeeping/custodial risks. ✓ Mark-to-Market Reporting Practices ✓ Establish Policy for Repurchase Agreements and Reverse ✓ Repurchase Agreements Section 3—Page 11 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Use of Lockbox Services ✓ OCSD does not have sufficient cash related transactions to use Lockbox services. The majority of revenues are collected on the property tax roll. Commercial Paper ✓ Use of Cash Flow Forecasts in Operations ✓ Bank Account Fraud Prevention ✓ Use of Local Government Investment ✓ Pools Revenue Control and Management Policy ✓ Payment Consolidation Services ✓ Using Electronic Signatures ✓ Using Remote Deposit Capture ✓ Budoetina and Fiscal Policy Recommended Practices Economic Development Incentives ✓ Use of Performance Measurement for Decision Making ✓ Providing a Concise Summary of the Budget ✓ Establishing of Government Charges and Fees ✓ Recommended Budget Practices of the National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting(NACSLB) ✓ Financial Forecasting in the Budget Preparation Process ✓ Relationships Between Budgetary and Financial Statement Information ✓ Use of Financial Status in the Budgeting Process ✓ Adoption of Financial Policies ✓ Appropriate Level of Unreserved OCSD only has Proprietary Fund Balance in the General Fund ✓ Fund Types-established a formal policy on the level of unrestricted net assets Section 3—Page 12 GFOA Best Practices and Advisories Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Include Sustainability in Public Finance Practices ✓ Establish Strategic Plans ✓ Measuring the Cost of Government Services ✓ Using Websites to Improve Access to Budget Documents and Financial Reports ✓ Business Preparedness and Continuity Guidelines ✓ Statistical/Supplemental Section of the Budget Document ✓ Budgeting for Results and Outcomes ✓ Present Capital Budget in Operating Budget Document ✓ Present Departmental Section in the Operating Budget Document ✓ Alternative Service Delivery: Shared Services ✓ Long-Tenn Financial Planning ✓ Comprehensive Risk Management Program ✓ Public Participation in Planning, Budgeting,and Performance Management ✓ Inflationary Indices in Budgeting ✓ Key Issues in Succession Planning ✓ Expand and align ongoing succession planning as part of OCSD's workforce planning and development efforts to ensure continuity and consistency of service delivery. Managing the Salary and Wage Budgeting Process ✓ Managed Competition as a Service ✓ Delivery Option Debt Management Recommended Practices Select and Manage the Method of Sale of State and Local Government ✓ Bonds Section 3—Page 13 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Analyzing and Issuing Refunding ✓ At the outset of evaluating the Bonds issuance of bonds,solicit the advice of bond counsel and financial advisor in order to outline key legal and financial issues. Debt Management Policy ✓ Board approved Debt Policy completed in 2001-02. Investment of Bond Proceeds ✓ Included in Trustee Documents Use of Debt-Related Derivatives No Derivative Products Products and Development of Derivatives Policy ✓ Maintain an Investor Relations Program ✓ Payment of the Expense Component Establish at the beginning of the of Underwriters'Discount ✓ bond negotiation process what expenses will be directly paid by the issuer or as part of the underwriter spread. Issuer's role in Secondary Market Meet qualifications of arbitrage Securitization of Tax-Exempt Obligations ✓ Evaluate the Use of Pension OCSD does not manage Obligation Bonds ✓ pension fund Evaluating the Sale and Securitization of Property Tax Liens ✓ Use Variable Rate Debt Instruments ✓ Issuers Role in Selection of Underwriter's Counsel ✓ Issuing Taxable Debt by U.S.State OCSD does not plan to issue and Local Governments ✓ taxable debt outside of the Build America Bonds program Select Bond Counsel ✓ Price Bonds in a Negotiated Sale ✓ Underwriter Disclaimers in Official Statements ✓ Use a Web Site for Disclosure ✓ Tax Increment Financing as a Fiscal Tool ✓ Section 3—Page 14 GFOA Best Practices and Advisories Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Caution in Regard to OPEB Bonds ✓ Pay-As-You-Go funding,no plan on issuing bond Public-Private Partnerships for Economic Development ✓ Role of the Finance Officer in Privatization ✓ Selecting Financial Advisors ✓ Selecting Underwriters for Negotiated Bond Sales ✓ Understanding Your Continuing Disclosure Responsibilities ✓ Managing Build America and Other ✓ Develop procedures for Subsidy Bonds managing post-sale considerations and responsibilities while the bonds remain outstanding. Retirement and Benefits Administration Recommended Practices Public Employee Retirement System Managed by OCERS Investments ✓ Preparing an Effective Summary Plan Managed by OCERS Description ✓ Retirement and Financial Planning Managed by OCERS Services ✓ Directed Brokerage Programs ✓ OCERS manages all"soft dollar transactions A Policy for Retirement Plan Design Option ✓ Asset Allocation—Guidance for Managed by OCERS Defined Benefit Plans ✓ Asset Allocation-Guidance for OCERS is a defined benefit Defined Contribution Plans ✓ plan. Alternative Investment Policy for Managed by OCERS Public Employee Retirement Systems ✓ (PERS) Pension Investment Policy ✓ Managed by OCERS Selection of Investment Advisors for Managed by OCERS Pension Fund Assets ✓ Section 3—Page 15 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Brokerage Window Options for Managed by OCERS Defined Contribution Retirement ✓ Plans Framework for Understanding Managed by OCERS Pension Fund Risk ✓ Investment Policies Governing Assets Managed by the plan sponsors in a Deferred Compensation Plan ✓ Health Care Cost Containment ✓ Evaluating Use of Early Retirement Incentives ✓ Deferred Refirement Option Plans (DROPS) ✓ A Policy to Participate in Securities Managed by OCERS Litigation Class Actions ✓ Ensuring the Sustainability of Other Pay-As-You-Go funding Postemployment Benefits ✓ Design Elements of Defined Benefit Managed by OCERS Retirement Plans ✓ Design Elements of Defined Contribution Plans as the Primary Retirement Plan ✓ Design Elements of Hybrid Retirement Plans ✓ Monitoring and Disclosure of Fees for Defined Contribution Plans ✓ Prefunding OPEB Obligation ✓ Pay-As-You-Go funding Establishing and Administering an Pay-As-You-Go funding OPEB trust ✓ Commission Recapture Program ✓ Communicating Health-Care Benefits to Employees and Retirees ✓ Participant Education-Guidance for Defined Contribution Plans ✓ Strategic Health-Care Plan Design ✓ Governance of Public Employee Managed by OCERS Retirement System ✓ Sustainable Funding Practices of ✓ Defined Benefit Pension Plans Section 3—Page 16 GFOA Best Practices and Advisories Compliance Not In GFOA Recommended Practice Met Applicable Progress Comments Responsible Management and Design Practices for Defined Benefit Pension Plans ✓ Design and Implement Sustainable Pension Benefit Tiers ✓ Develop a Review Process for Implementing National Health-Care Reform(COBRA) ✓ Economic Development and Capital Planning Multi-Year Capital Planning ✓ The Role of the Finance Officer in Economic Development ✓ Capital Project Monitoring and Reporting ✓ Capital Asset Assessment, Establish a system for Maintenance, and Replacement ✓ assessing District assets and Policy plan and budget for any capital maintenance and replacement needs. The Role of Master Plans in Capital Improvement Planning ✓ Analyzing the Cost of Economic Development Projects ✓ Building Resiliency into Capital Establish resiliency into the Planning ✓ capital planning process to produce a sustainable community and mitigate the effects of disasters. Incorporating a Capital Project Budget in the Budget Process ✓ Developing an Economic No Incentive Policy established Development Incentive Policy ✓ Monitoring Economic Development Performance ✓ Balancing the Costs and Benefits of Economic Development Projects ✓ Incorporating Environmentally Responsible Practices in the Capital Improvement Program ✓ Section 3—Page 17 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 3—Page 18 Overview of the Budget Process f � Issuance of Budget Financial Review Training and Instructions of Performance District's Budget Administration of Development Finance/Policy in Budget 1 � � r Compilation/Analysis Executive Board of District's Requests Enactment by Financial/Planning I General Manager's Consideration of Budget Review and Preparation by Districts Board of Executive Budget and Committee Budget Process: . Preparation/Planning-takes place from January Ten years ago,the District prepared its first complete through March. budget document covering two years instead of one. Integration-runs from March through May. The next year a smaller budget update documenlwas Passage-adoption of the budget usually occurs prepared to summarize revisions to the second year in June of each year. of the previously adopted two-year budget period. . Execution-starts from the first day of the budget This two-year cycle approach to budget preparation year, July 1, through the entire budget year and is expected to continue for the indefinite future. beyond into November with the presentation of This change has not caused any modification to the the annual audit report. previously established stages of the annual budget Key dates in this 2016 budget cycle are: process except with regard to the level of detail which Budget Kick-off Meeting -January 20 is provided. The timing of all stages of the budget Department Budget Submissions - February 18 process remains consistent from year to year. In the Preliminary Budget Review - March 7-16 second year of a two-year cycle, however, the focus General Manager Budget Review - March 17-22 is on any changes that need to be made to the Presentation to Board Committees -June 1 &8 upcoming years budget relative to what was Public Hearing &Board Adoption -June 22 previously submitted,reviewed,and approved for that budget during the prior year. Team Approach The District's annual budget preparation process As identified by one of the fiscal policies, the budget begins in January of each year and concludes in June preparation process originates at the division level, upon its adoption. However, the entire budget the organizational level of accountability and control. process extends beyond one year and overlaps with Budget coordinators are established to represent the preceding budget and the subsequent budget. As each operating division. A comprehensive budget shown in the chart above, the budget process manual is prepared and used as the training manual consists of four major parts. These parts occur at during a training session with the budget various stages throughout the year as follows: coordinators. Section 3—Page 19 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget After the initial divisional budgets are prepared, Administrative policies provide guidelines on budget budget review sessions are scheduled for each transfers and the authorization necessary to division with the General Manager. It is during these implement transfers. Generally, there are two types sessions that all proposed staffing levels, programs, of budget transfers: and line item expenses are justified. Next senior management representatives from each department 1. Budget Adjustment analyze opportunities for consolidating programs and eliminating unnecessary requests. Guidance is also This is a transfer which does not change the total sought and utilized from District's committees on appropriated amount and does not require Board various issues that affect budget development. action. Depending on the budget category affected by the transfer, approval may be granted at the The Process General Manager or Department Head level as follows: The budget preparation process begins in January with the distribution of the budget manual, budget Department Heads have discretion to reapportion preparation training, and issuance of personnel funds between certain line items within a division but budget and justification forms, and equipment budget may not exceed total appropriated amounts for each fors to all of the Divisions. department. They also may transfer staff across divisional lines within their department. The General In March, the Administrative Services Department Manager and Board of Directors must approve develops divisional level budgets based on the additional capital outlay items. Funds appropriated request fors received from the various divisions. for salaries and benefits may not be expended for any These divisional budgets are then reviewed in mid- other purpose unless approved by the Board. The March by the General Manager along with the General Manager may transfer operating funds within Department and Divisional managers for each and between divisions and departments. The program request and for new, additional, or reduced General Manager may also transfer staff positions services, positions, and capital outlay. between departments. The Capital Improvement Program requests are 2. Budget Amendment: prepared from October through March and are reviewed by Engineering and Department and This is an adjustment to the total appropriated Divisional managers prior to being submitted to the amount, which was not included in the original General Manager for review and evaluation as part of budget. These supplemental appropriations require the budget process. formal action by the Board of Directors. Types of modifications can be categorized as follows: In determining recommended allocation levels, the General Manager takes into consideration the Prior year reserves or fund balances may be projected amount of available resources, direction appropriated to fund items not previously provided by the Directors,the District's fiscal policies, included in the adopted budget. and how to best provide the most cost-effective and efficient service levels to the public. After a final Reserves/fund balances exceeding minimum review of the operating budgets by the General amounts required by fiscal policy may be Manager, the proposed annual budgets are finalized appropriated if it is determined to be in the best in late May and then distributed to the Directors for interest of the District. Directors may also consideration. appropriate reserves in case of emergencies or unusual circumstances. The General Manager presents the proposed budget to the various Directors'Committees for deliberations Transfers between Revenue Areas require formal throughout the month of June. The proposed budget action by the Board of Directors. is scheduled for adoption,along with any revisions by Unexpended appropriations automatically lapse at the Board,at the Board of Directors meeting in June. the end of the fiscal year and are included in the Level of Control and Amendments to the Budget ending fund balances. Budgetary control, the level at which expenses cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount, is exercised at the individual Department level. Section 3—Page 20 Budget Assumptions 2016.18 Proposed Budget Assumptions FY 2016-17 income from annexation fees is anticipated. Economic Assumptions • Property tax revenues are preliminarily • Inflation for Orange County in FY 2016-17 is estimated to increase by approximately five projected to be 2.0 percent based on the 2016 percent from FY 2015-16 to$92,953,000. projected percentage change in consumer price A two percent annual increase in Assessed index obtained from the December 20 Value is authorized by the state constitution and Economic and Business Review report prepareedd is included in the increases noted above. The fa 2 Chapman University. A 2. percent inflation additional increase in assessed value is from factor will also be used for FY 017-18. authorized increases to market value when property is sold at a higher value. Revenue Assumptions • Earnings on the investment of the District's • Based upon the revised Sewer Service Fee operating cash and reserves will be budgeted at Rate Schedule approved by the Board in May 1.0 percent of the average cash and investment 2015, the single-family residence (SFR) rate will balance projected for the fiscal year. increase by 1.6 percent to$327 in FY 2016-17. • No additional debt issuance is scheduled for • Note that each $1 increase in the SFR rate FY 2016-17. generates approximately$900,000 per year. • The capital facilities capacity charge (CFCC)fee Operating Assumptions captures only those infrastructure costs that Operating expenses are expected to relate to additional capacity. The CFCC fee will . approximate the adopted FY 201 exp exp budget of increase for FY 2016-17 by the increase in the Engineering-News Record construction cost $149 million. index. Other infrastructure costs such as Average daily flows are projected at 185 mgd for improved treatment, rehabilitation, FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18. This projection refurbishment, and replacement, will be supported through user fees. reflects an expectation that increased economic activity and urban runoff will be more than offset • Given the Facilities Master Plan adopted in by effects of conservation and minimal rainfall, December 2009, a rate study was completed in resulting in an overall decrease in the average January 2013 to ensure that the CFCC fee daily flow. The FY 2016-17 flow projection of methodology remains equitable and to confirm 185 mgd reflects no change from the actual for that an appropriate share of system costs would the first five months of the current year and is be recovered from new development. 2 mgd below the final actual flow for FY 2014- 15. • Revenues will be budgeted to reflect little growth in Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) connections Employee/Staffing Assumptions that have remained flat over the past five years. • Staffing level is expected to remain flat. No • Permit user rates for flow, Biochemical Oxygen additional positions are anticipated. The total Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids FY 2015-16 authorized staffing level is 624.00 (TSS)will follow the most recent Rate Study. FTEs, excluding Management Discretion positions. • Annexation fees capture both the net current assets and the equivalent property tax • Vacant positions as of 12/31/15 are budgeted at allocations totaling$4,235 per acre. 50 percent of step 1 for the remainder of FY 2015-16 and at 100 percent of step 2 for • Annexable property in the District's service area FY 2016-17. sphere is minimal; consequently, no Section 3—Page 21 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget • New positions will be projected at 100 percent of step 1 for FY 2016-17. • An amount equal to 0.85 percent of the Operating materials and services budget will be • A 5.0 percent vacancy factor on authorized the General Manager's contingency budget. positions has been budgeted for FY 2016-17. These funds will be allocated to appropriate line The actual vacancy factor for 2014-15 was items during the year after requests and 6.3 percent. This vacancy factor accounts for justifications for unanticipated needs are time spent for recruitment and turnover. approved by the General Manager. • The Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) Resource needs for strategic initiatives will be for the OCEA, the Local 501, and the Supervisor included in the budget. and Professional (SPMT) groups expire on June 30, 2016. Pending the completion of the negotiation process, no salary adjustments will Capital Improvement Program Assumptions be included in the budget for COLA for periods The FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 cash flow beyond the expiration of the current MOUs. • budget, based on the most current Validated • Retirement costs for employees enrolled in Capital Improvement Program (CIP), is the OCERS Plans G and H are estimated at a rate target. of 16.59 percent of the employee's base salary The baseline CIP cash Flow is $128 million for for 5 percent i and 2 2-16. T, down from • FY 2016-17 and $115 million for FY 2017-18. 24.25 percent in FY 2015-16. The rates for Plans G and H include the District's pickup of • Continual evaluation of the CIP by the Asset 3.5 percent of employees' required Management Team may result in deferral or contributions. Employees enrolled in OCERS reduction of some projects and a resultant Plan B are estimated at a rate of 10.99 percent increase in O&M repair costs for materials and of the employee's base salary for FY2016-17 services, if the net cash flow impact is a and FY 2017-18, down from 18.39 percent in decrease. FY 2015-16. All employees hired on or after January 1, 2013 are enrolled in OCERS Plan U The FY 2016-17 and 2017-18 CIP budget will and are estimated at a rate of 9.69 percent for only increase for critical projects which were not FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18, down from 17.52 percent in FY 2015-16. Interns are not previously identified in the Strategic Plan enrolled in OCERS so their retirement benefits Update. are calculated at 6.2 percent(FICA rate). For the first five months of FY2015-16, • Other employee benefits and insurances will be $56.9 million of the $$175.0 million CIP budget, budgeted to increase in FY 2016-17 and approximately 32.5 percent, was expended. FY 2017-18 by moderate but yet to be determined amounts. Debt Financing . The District will issue new debt in the form of Materials, Supplies, & Services Assumptions Certificates of Participation (COP) as needed to • The proposed operating budget will continue to fund the CIP and to maintain reserves. reflect an emphasis on safety, security, and . No additional debt issuance is scheduled for maintenance of plant assets and infrastructure. FY2016-17 and FY 2017-18. • An amount equal to half of one percent of the . Debt will only be used for CIP and capital Operating materials and services budget will be expenses, not for operating expenses. a contingency for prior year re-appropriations. Since the current year's budget lapses on June . Capital financing plans no longer include future 30, a contingency is needed in the succeeding borrowings over the next ten years as the budget year for goods or services ordered at the approved user fee schedule is considered end of one budget year but not delivered until sufficient. the following year. Section 3—Page 22 Budget Assumptions • Borrowing is proposed only for facilities which do has been estimated to be as high as not add capacity and that are funded by all users $1.3 billion. The level of this reserve has for replacement, rehabilitation, and improved been set at $57 million should such a treatment. catastrophic event occur. This reserve amount will assist the District with any short- term funding needs until Federal and State Reserve Assumptions assistance becomes available. The existing reserve policy is summarized as ► Accumulated capital funds will be set aside follows: for certain specific, short-term capital ► A cash flow reserve will be established to improvements as the need and availability fund operations, maintenance and arise. certificates of participation expenses for the ► A capital replacement/renewal reserve first half of the fiscal year, prior to receipt of policy has been established to provide thirty the first installment of the property tax percent of the funding to replace or refurbish allocation and sewer service user fees which the current collection, treatment and are collected as a separate line item on the disposal facilities at the end of their useful property tax bill. The level of this reserve economic lives. will be established as the sum of an amount equal to six months operations and Based on the FY 2011-12 Asset maintenance expenses and the total of the Management Plan, the current replacement annual debt (COP) service payments due in value of these facilities is estimated to be August each year. $3.14 billion for the collection facilities and $3.12 billion for the treatment and disposal ► An operating contingency reserve will be facilities. The initial reserve level has been established to provide for non-recurring established at $50 million, which will be expenditures that were not anticipated when augmented by interest earnings and a small the annual budget and sewer service fees portion of the annual sewer user fee, in were considered and adopted. The level of order to meet projected needs through the this reserve will be established at an amount year 2030. equal to ten percent of the annual operating budget. ► Provisions of the various certificates of participation (COP) issues require debt ► A capital improvement reserve will be service reserves to be under the control of maintained to fund annual increments of the the Trustee for that issue. These reserve capital improvement program. The long- funds are not available for the general needs term target is for one half of the capital of the District and must be maintained at improvement program to be funded from specified levels. The current level of borrowing and for one half to be funded from required COP service reserves is projected current revenues and reserves. With this to be$209.9 million. program in mind, the target level of this reserve has been established at one-half of ► Accumulated funds exceeding the levels the average annual capital improvement specified by District policy will be maintained program over the next ten years. in a rate stabilization fund. These funds will be applied to future years' needs in order to ► Catastrophic loss, or self-insurance, maintain rates or to moderate annual reserves will be maintained for property fluctuations. There is no established target damage including fire,flood and earthquake, for this reserve. for general liability and for workers' compensation. These reserves are intended to work with purchased insurance policies, Miscellaneous FEMA disaster reimbursements and State disaster reimbursements. The potential The budget document will be in a bi-annual infrastructure loss from a major earthquake, format with two, one-year budgets presented of which the District currently has limited for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18. outside insurance coverage of $25 million, Section 3—Page 23 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget • The budget worksheets for operating costs will contain one column for FY 2016-17 and one column for 2017-18. The column will represent all collection, treatment, and disposal/reuse costs. Section 3—Page 24 Accounting System & Budgetary Control Accounting System and Budgetary Control Fund Accounting &Proprietary Funds Internal Controls The accounts of the District are organized within one The District is responsible for establishing and Enterprise Fund, a Proprietary Fund Type. The maintaining an internal control structure designed to District's Enterprise Fund is comprised of two ensure that the assets of the government are Revenue Areas which are identified as Revenue Area protected from loss, theft, or misuse and to ensure 14 and the Consolidated Revenue Area (Revenue that adequate accounting data are compiled to allow Area 15). Each Revenue Area includes a share of for the preparation of financial statements in capital outlay activities, self-insurance activities, debt conformity with generally accepted accounting service activities, and operating activities. These principles. The internal control structure is designed activities are allocated to each Revenue Area based to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance on sewage flows, location, or level of participation in that these objectives are met. The concept of specific programs. reasonable assurance recognizes that the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations derived and that the valuation of costs and benefits that are financed and operated in a manner similar to requires estimates and judgments by management. a private business enterprise, where the costs (expenses, including depreciation)of providing goods Budgetary Control or services to the general public on a continuing basis are financed or recovered through user charges. Budgetary controls are maintained to ensure compliance with legal provisions embodied in the annual appropriated budget approved by the Board of Basis of Accounting Directors. The budgetary level of control,the level at which operating expenses cannot legally exceed the Basis of accounting refers to the point at which appropriated amount, is exercised at the department revenues and expenses are recognized in the level. accounts and reported in the financial statements. Enterprise funds are accounted for on the flow of economic resources measurement focus and use the accrual basis of accounting. In an enterprise fund, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Budgetary Basis of Accounting The operating budget for the Enterprise Fund is adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Except as noted in the following paragraph, the basis of accounting and the budgetary basis of accounting are the same. Budgeted amounts are as originally adopted and as further amended by Board action of the District. Although the District does budget for capital improvement projects, the related capital outlays are recorded as increases in Property, Plant, and Equipment on the balance sheet of the Enterprise Fund. Similarly,the District budgets for the retirement of debt. However,the principal payments on debt are recorded as reductions in the current portion of long- term debt on the balance sheet of the Enterprise Fund. Section 3—Page 25 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget OCSD Enterprise Fund Consolidated Revenue Revenue Area Area 15 14 Each Revenue Area Self. Debt Capital -----: is comprised of Operating, Insurance Operating Service Outlay p p g' Debt Service, Capital, and --- Self-Insurance components. Share of Direct Direct Share of Joint Works Revenues Capital Joint Capital Operating &Expenses Outlay Outlay Joint Works Net Operating Expenses and Joint Capital Joint Works Joint Capital outlays are allocated to Net Operating p ______+ each Revenue Area's Expense Outlay Operating and Capital Outlay components, ___• respectively, based on sewage flows. Section 3- Page 26 Revenue Sources Revenue Sources This decrease is mostly offset by the expected increase of $4.1 million in property tax revenue as The District has a variety of revenue sources property tax revenues are estimated to increase available for operating and capital expenses. The 5.0 percent over the prior year as property assessed major revenue sources are as follows: valuations continue to rebound from the previous market downturn. • Property Taxes • User Fees In FY 2017-18, revenues are being proposed at • Industrial Waste Permit User Fees $446.4 million, an increase of $10.9 million, or • Interest Earnings 2.5 percent over the prior year. This increase is • Debt Proceeds primarily attributable to the 1.2 percent increase in user fees that is expected to generate an additional These sources have generally accounted for 90 percent or more of the total revenue to the District. generate million. Property tax revenue is expected to generate an additional increase of $4.4 million, or The following graph summarizes revenues from all another projected increase of 5.0 percent over the sources for the District as a whole over the past two prior year. fiscal years, the current year, and through the Property Taxes following two proposed budget years: The County is permitted by State law(Proposition 13) Total Revenues to levy taxes at one percent of full market value (at Five Year Trend time of purchase) and can increase the assessed tin millions) value no more than two percent per year.The District receives a share of this basic levy proportionate to the $$ss amount that was received in the 1976 to 1978 period less $3.5 million, the amount that represents the $sss 10 - Soya $436.5 $a3s.s aa4a.4 State's permanent annual diversion from special I E43s ------------------------------- ................................................. districts to school districts that began in 1992-93. Property Taxes $300 Five Year Trend (in millions) $zoo $1ss E1pp $90 75.1 As.e $e2s $azp $e1.a Actual Actual 2e15-1e 2e10.b 2ii'su Actual Actual Pmj¢de,l Proposed PropeaM Seo Total revenues increased from $406.4 million in ps FY 2013-14 to $423.4 million in FY 2014-15, or $17.0 million. This increase was due mostly to: $20 (1)the$7.8 million increase in capital facility capacity $0 charges due to the rebound from the recent economic 2013.14 2014.15 2015.16 201e.17 21317.18 recession and the increased activity in construction Actual Actual Projected Proposed Proposes as total nonresidential permit valuations in Orange County increased 26.5 percent in calendar year 2014 The District's annual share of the one percent ad over the prior year; (2) an increase of $7.2 million in valorem property tax levy is first dedicated for the IRWD assessments; and (3) a $4.8 million, or payment of COP debt service. The apportionment of 6.4 percent increase in property tax revenues as total the ad valorem tax is pursuant to the Revenue assessed property valuations increased the same Program adopted in April 1979 to comply with 6.4 percent over the prior year. regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Water Resources Control Board, and in In FY 2016-17, revenues are being proposed at accordance with COP documents and Board policy. $435.5 million, a decrease of $1.0 million, or 0.2 percent over the prior year. This decrease is As shown in the graph above, property tax revenues primarily attributable to the $5.1 million decrease in increased from a low in FY 2013-14 of$75.1 million intra-district equity sale/purchase between the to a projected $91.4 million in FY 2017-18, primarily Consolidated Revenue Areas and Revenue Area 14. due to the rebound from the economic decline and the collapse in the housing and commercial property Section 3 -Page 27 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget markets beginning in 2008. Property tax revenues layout a capital program to deliver the levels of are now being projected to increase 5.0 percent a service desired by the Board of Directors. These yearthrough FY 2017-18. levels of service and resulting capital projects are included in the District's 5-year Strategic Plan that Historically the District's property tax revenues were were most recently updated in December 2015. The at a higher level than necessary to support the original effort was reinforced through the adoption of District's debt service obligations. However, capital a new Master Plan in December 2009, a planning improvement requirements averaging $200.0 million effort to define the District's goals, responsibilities, a year overthe last ten years have required new COP and requirements over the next 20 years, and debt issuances that have increased future debt includes projections through the assumed "build-out" service payments that more closely matches property of the District's service area to the year 2050. tax revenues. Incorporating the 2009 Master Plan into the CIP validation update for FY 2015-16, the current CIP COP Funding Requirements vs. includes 81 projects totaling outlays of $2.4 billion Property Tax Funding source over the next ten years. In March of 2013,the Board approved rate increases $95,000.000 for each year over the next five years. These $85,000.000 increases are necessary for compliance with the $75,000,000 District's debt fiscal policy of balancing the funding of $65,000,000 new capital improvements with current revenues and existing debt, and to minimize the increase in rates $55,000,000 over an extended period of time. $45,000,000 $35,000,000 The impact of this five-year sewer fee schedule $25,000,000 increased the single family residence user fee rate, the underlying rate for all sewer service user fees, an g1s,o0o,00o average of 2.9 percent a year from $294 in zao3 zotn zon 9 P y FY 2012-13 to$339 in FY 2017-18. Following the first Property Taxes — —•COP service two years of this rate plan, the Board of Directors approved a reduction of the rate increase for the last three years of the plan, lowering the average of these User Fees increases from 2.4 percent to 1.6 percent, or to User fees are ongoing fees for service paid by $327 in FY 2016-17 and$331 in FY 2017-18. These customers connected to the sewer system. rate increases by the District are still well below the A property owner,or user,does not pay user fees until average annual sewer rate of $475 being charged connected to the sewer system and receiving throughout the State according to the 2015 California services. Once connected, a user is responsible for Wastewater Charge Survey conducted by the State their share of the system's costs, both fixed and Water Resources Control Board. variable, in proportion to the user's demand on the Net User Fees system. (in millions) In addition, the Consolidated Revenue Area charges $400 industrial and commercial user fees to customers discharging high-strength or high-volume wastes into $300 $274.7 $267.4 $288.4 $286.6 $291.1 the sewer systems. Revenue Area No. 14 need's are funded by IRWD. Previously the District had been able to avoid or minimize user fee increases by 8200 reducing operational costs through reorganizing and streamlining District operations. As a result of the 8100 capital improvement program expansion and the rehabilitation and refurbishment of existing facilities, $0 annual increases in user fees are required. 2013.14 2014-15 2015.16 2016-17 2017-18 Actual Actual Projected Proposed Proposed In 2007, District staff first conducted strategic planning workshops with the Board of Directors to Section 3-Page 28 Revenue Sources Although there was a rate increase of 2.6 percent in Interest earnings fluctuate from year to year based on FY 2014-15 over the prior year, user fees declined the timing of CIP outlays and debt issuances, which $7.3 million as shown in the Net User Fees chart impact the available balance in reserves for investing, above. This decrease was due to rebates provided to and in the rise and fall of fixed-income investment commercial property users of $9.4 million, a market yields. 35 percent increase over the prior year. Rebates jumped as a result of lower commercial sewer flows The District's investment policy is structured due to the past economic recession and increased conservatively towards liquidity to avoid having to sell water conversation efforts. investments at a loss and having unrealized losses become realized losses. Total return on investments Likewise, there is a rate increase scheduled for the were 1.1 percent in FY 2013-14 and 0.8 percent in proposed FY 2016-17 budget of 1.6 percent over the FY 2014-15. However, interest earnings were higher prior year,however,userfees are projected to decline in FY 2014-15 due to larger investment balances. $1.8 million. This decline is due to the Orange County Local Agency Formation Committee's approval to The District is proposing an interest earnings rate of transfer OCSD owned local sewer lines located in the 1.5 percent in both FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 to City of Tustin, along with the associated OCSD generate earnings of$8.6 million and $8.8 million, on current annual user fees of approximately$7 million annual average investment portfolio projections, with and capital sewer replacement reserves of fiscal year end balances of $558.1 million and approximately$40 million,to the East Orange County $629.3 million in FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18, Water District. This transfer takes OCSD out of the respectively. local sewer maintenance, repair, and replacement business as it's the mission of OCSD to maintain only Debt Proceeds regional sewer trunk line collection systems. Over the next ten years, the District is projecting an additional $2.4 billion in future treatment plant and Interest Earnings collection system capital refurbishments. In order to Interest earnings are generated from the investment minimize annual sewer rate increases in the long- of accumulated reserves consisting of a cash term, all of these refurbishments are being proposed flow/contingency, a capital improvement, a capital to be funded from user fees with no issuances of new replacement/refurbishment, and a self-insurance money debt issuances. reserve, all projected to total $597.9 million at July 1, 2016. Teeter Plan In June 1993, the County of Orange adopted the The District's reserves are invested in accordance Teeter Plan pursuant to Sections 4701 through 4717 with the District's investment policy and the State of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. The Government Code through an outside money Teeter Plan is an alternative method of distribution of manager,and an independent custodian bank. revenues from the secured property tax roll to local participating agencies. Interest Earnings (in millions) The District participates in the Teeter Plan program $15 and receives its full share of property tax and user fees from the secured roll, whether or not these taxes and user fees have been collected. The Teeter Plan $a 6 provides the District with stable and timely cash flow 1 Ee.s without the collection risk. The County, in exchange $6-8 37.1 for assuming the collection risk, receives the delinquent taxes and user fees, penalties and interest for the defaulted properties when paid. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the District $e - received $362,927,000 in tax and user fees from the 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-16 County,or 99.99 percent of the total tax and user fee Actual Actual Projected Proposed Proposed levy. Section 3 - Page 29 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 3 - Page 30 O 1 y A A y H y OC 2 3 A � n .a K Where the Money Comes From — FY 2016-17 Capital Improvement Self-Insurance Reserve Revenues $260.492,400 $2.336,100 252% 0.2% Property Texes $87,017,000 8.4% Cash Inb adistriot Transfers Flow/Contingency $3,400,000 Reserve 0.3% $168,788,050 Interest&Misc 16.4% $10,866,000 1.1 Debt Service Fees Reserve $331,838,690 $111,605,000 32.1% Self-Insurance 10.8% Reserve $57,000,000 5.5% FY 2016-17 Total Funding Sources -$1,033,343,240 Where the Money Goes — FY 2016-17 Self-Insurance Program $2,480,000 Joint Capital Operations 0.2% $107,732,000 $146,356,520 10.4% DisMct Capital Intradistrict Transfers 14.2% - $63,658,000 $3,400,000 6.2% 0.3% Long Tenn Liability Debt Service Reduction $86,664,000 $65,000,000 8.4% 6.3% Cash Flow/Contingency Capital Improvement Reserve Reserve $174,478,000 $219,409,720 16.9% 21.2% Self-Insunmw Debt Service Reserve Reserve $57,000,000 $107.265,000 5.5% 10.4% FY 2016.17 Total Funding Uses -$1,033,343,240 Section 4—Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Funding Sources by Category FY 2016-17 Consolidated Revenue Revenue Total Area Area 14 Sources Beginning Reserves $ 607,060,110 $ (9,174,660) $ 597,885,450 Services Fees 14,475,870 17,308.820 31,784,690 User Fees 286,554,000 - 286,554,000 Capital Facilities Capacity Charge 13,500,000 - 13,500,000 Capacity Rights - - - Debt Proceeds - - - Property Tames 84,436,000 2,581.000 87,017,000 Intradistrict Transfers 3,400,000 - 3,400,000 Insurance In-Lieu Premiums 2,279,100 57,000 2,336,100 Interestand Other Revenue 10,763,000 103,000 10,866.000 Total Sources $ 1,022,468,080 S 10.875,160 $ 1,033,343,240 Section 4—Page 2 Funding Uses by Category Funding Uses by Category FY 2016-17 Consolidated Revenue Revenue Total Area Area 14 Uses Directors'Fees $ 146,500 $ 6,100 $ 152,600 Salaries &Benefits 81,324.600 7.812,600 89,137,200 Administrative Expenses 1,599,040 153,610 1,752,650 Printing&Publications 259.420 24,920 284,340 Training&Meetings 1,056,570 101,500 1,158,070 Operating Materials and Supplies 15,234.700 1,463,550 16,698,250 Contractual Expenses 22,655,020 2,176,400 24,831,420 Professional Expenses 3,796.150 364,680 4,160,830 Research&Monitoring 729,880 70,120 800,000 Repairs &Maintenance 13,015,570 1,250,360 14,265,930 Utilities 8,131,110 781,130 8,912,240 Self-Insurance Requirements 2,419,480 60,520 2,480,000 Other Materials,Supplies,&Services 3,088,330 296,690 3,385,020 Cost Allocation (17,508,060) (1,673,970) (19,182,030) Joint Works Capital Improvement Program 104,963,000 2,769,000 107,732,000 Collection System Capital ImprovementProg. 63,558,000 - 63,558,000 Debt Service 86,664,000 - 86,664,000 Long Term Debt Reduction 62,809,000 2.191,000 65,000,000 Intradistrict Transfers - 3,400,000 3,400,000 Joint Equity Sale to IRWD Subtotal 453,942,310 21,248,210 475,190,520 Ending Reserves 568,525,770 (10.373,050) 558,152,720 Total Uses $ 1,022,468.080 $10,875,160 $ 1,033,343,240 Section 4—Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 4— Page 4 Where the Money Comes From — FY 2017-18 Cash Flow/Contingency Reserve $174,478,000 17.3% Capital Improvement Reserve $219,409,720 21.8% Debt Service Reserve Self-Insurance $107,265,000 Revenues 10.7 $2,580,000 0.3% Self-Insurance Property Taxes Reserve $91,368,000 $5 5.7% 0 5.7% 9.1 Intradistdct Transfers $1,700,000 0.2% Interest&Misc Fees $11,168,000 $339,571,010 1.1% 33.8% FY 2017.18 Total Funding Sources -$1,004,539,730 Where the Money Goes — FY 2017-18 Self-Insurance Program $2,580,000 0.2% Joint Capital Operations $99,769,000 $149.854,390 9S% District Capital 14.9% $38,220,000 3.8% Debt SerWce IntradistrictTransfers $83,1 19,000 $1,700,000 8.3% 0.2% Cash Flow/Contingency Capital Improvement Reserve Reserve $173,031,000 $296,029,340 17.2% 29.5% Debt Service Reserve Self-Insurance $103,237,000 Reserve 10.3% $57,000,000 5.7% FY 2017-18 Total Funding Uses -$1,004,539,730 Section 4—Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Funding Sources by Category FY 2017-18 Consolidated Revenue Revenue Total Area Area 14 Sources Beginning Reserves $ 568,525,770 $(10,373,050) $ 558,152,720 Services Fees 14,742.700 15,580.310 30,323,010 User Fees 291,158,000 - 291,158,000 Capital Facilities Capacity Charge 18,090,000 - 18,090,000 Capacity Rights - - - Debt Proceeds - - - Property Tames 88,910,000 2,458.000 91,368,000 Intradistrict Transfers 1,700,000 - 1,700,000 Insurance In-Lieu Premiums 2,517,050 62,950 2,580,000 Interestand Other Revenue 11,082,000 86,000 11,168.000 Total Sources $ 996,725,520 5 7.814,210 $ 1,004,539,730 Section 4—Page 6 Funding Uses by Category Funding Uses by Category FY 2017-18 Consolidated Revenue Revenue Total Area Area 14 Uses Directors'Fees $ 146.500 $ 6,100 $ 152,600 Salaries &Benefits 83,250,160 7.214,640 90,464,800 Administrative Eq)enses 1,716,710 148,770 1,865,480 Printing&Publications 339,540 29,420 368,960 Training&Meetings 1,087.930 94,280 1,182,210 Operating Materials and Supplies 15,984,360 1,385,240 17,369,600 Contractual EVenses 20,842,290 1,806,240 22,648,530 Professional E�yenses 3,830,080 331,920 4,162,000 Research&Monitoring 802,830 69,570 872,400 Repairs &Maintenance 14,871,370 1,288,790 16,160,160 Utilities 9,417,530 816,140 10,233,670 Self-Insurance Requirements 2,517,050 62,950 2,580,000 Other Materials,Supplies,&SeMces 3,468,000 300,540 3,768,540 Cost Allocation (17,853,920) (1,540,640) (19,394,560) Joint Works Capital lmprovementProgram 97,205,000 2.564,000 99,769,000 Collection System Capital Improvement Prog. 38,220,000 - 38,220,000 Debt Serace 83,119,000 - 83,119,000 Long Term Debt Reduction - - - Intradistrict Transfers - 1.700,000 1,700,000 Joint Equity Sale to IRWD Subtotal 358,964,430 16,277,960 375,242,390 Ending Reserves 637,761,090 (8,463,750) 629,297,340 Total Uses $ 996,725,520 $ 7,814,210 $1,004,539,730 Section 4—Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget ACTUAL APPROVED PROJECTED PROPOSED PROPOSED DESCRIPTION OR ACCOUNT TITLE 2014-15 2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 BEGINNING ACCUMULATED FUNDS $ 713,695.240 $ 626.917,530 $ 587,971,180 $ 597,885,450 $ 558,152,720 OPERATING REVENUES General Sewer Service User Fees 267,421,492 294,182,000 288,440,000 286,554,000 291,158,000 Permitted User Fees 14,587,191 13,555,000 11,100,000 11,272,000 11,410,000 IRWD Assessments 17,682,964 11,450,570 14,346,000 12,827,690 11,951,010 SAWPA Assessments 2,760,099 2,690,000 3,359,000 3,283,000 3,415,000 Interest 8,110,687 6,064,000 7,125,000 8,606,000 8,840,000 Miscellaneous Receipts 2,812,547 2,059,000 2,933,000 2,260,000 2,328,000 Operating Revenue Subtotal 313,374,980 330,000,570 327,303,000 324,&02,690 329,102,010 NON-OPERATING REVENUES Property Tax Allocation 71,463,088 78,827,000 73,131,000 76,788,000 80,627,550 Redevelopment Agency Pass Thor 8,456,401 9,700,000 9,742,000 10,229,000 10,740,450 Subtotal-Taxes 79,919,489 88,527,000 82,873,000 87,017,000 91,368,000 Capital Facilities Capacity Charge 20,242,080 11,000,000 13,259,000 13,500,000 18,090,000 Sale of Capacity Rights,SAWPA&SSBSD Capital Assessment(I RWD) 3,202,027 2,293,000 2,552,000 4,402,000 3,547,000 Non-Operating Revenue Subtotal 103,363,596 101.820,000 98,684,000 104,919,000 113.005,000 INTRADISTRICT REVENUES Annual lntradistrict Joint Equity PurchaselSale 5,386,575 1,000,000 8,500,000 3,400,000 1,700,000 FINANCING REVENUES Sale of Certificates of Participation Financing Revenues Subtotal SELF INSURANCE REVENUES Workers'Comp SFI 764.117 1,483,700 1,488,980 1,206,300 1,130,000 General Liability SFI 505,770 516,000 515,800 1,129,800 1,450,000 Subtotal-SeB Insurance 1,269,887 1,999,700 2,004,780 2,336,100 2,580,000 Total Revenues 423,395,038 434,820,270 436,491,780 435,457,790 446,387,010 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING $ 1,137,090,278 $ 1,061,737,800 $ 1,024,462,960 $1,033,343,240 $ 1,004,539,730 Section 4—Page 8 Budget Resources ACTUAL APPROVED PROJECTED PROPOSED PROPOSED DESCRIPTION OR ACCOUNT TITLE 2014-15 2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 OPERATING REQUIREMENTS Diroctora'Fees S 161,259 $ 142,700 $ 152,600 $ 152,600 $ 152,600 Salaries&Benefits 94,044,757 94,659,700 89,780,880 89,137,200 90,464,800 Administrative Expense 1,409,104 1,624,570 1,511,070 1,752,650 1,865,480 Printing&Publications 267,347 412,020 251,600 284,340 368,960 Training&Meetings 835,764 1.050,500 850,870 1,158,070 1,182,210 Operating Materials&Supplies 15,364,441 17,191,000 16,424,170 16,698,250 17,369,600 Contractual Expense 22,183,465 23,938,480 23,461,780 24,831,420 22,648,530 Professional Expense 3,168,796 3,476,580 3,01 4,160,830 4,162,000 Research&Monitoring 810,854 831,000 720,000 800,000 872,400 Repairs&Maintenance 11,649,253 12,362,440 13,427,200 14,265,930 16,160,160 Utilities 7,157.617 7.787,080 8,468,730 8,912,240 10,233,670 Other Materials,Supplies,&Seroces 1,701.945 2,708,370 1,620,250 3,385,020 3,768,540 Cost Allocation (17,276,525) (16,877,500) (18,307,870) (19,182,030) (19,394,560) Subtotal-Operating 141,478,077 149,306,940 141,395,360 146,356,520 149,854,390 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Joint Works Capital Improvements 130,465.143 132.051,000 112,650,900 107,732,000 99,769,000 Collection System Capital Improvements 49,594,857 42,170,000 27,571,600 63S58,000 38,220,000 Annual lntradistrict Joint Equity Funchal 5,386,575 1,000,000 8,500,000 3,400,000 1,700,000 Subtotal-Capital Improvements 185,446,575 176,021,000 148,722,500 174,690,000 139,689,000 FINANCING REQUIREMENTS Certificate of Participation Service 94,999,290 91,777,000 83,950,050 86,664,000 83,119,000 Long Tenn Debt Reduction 125,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 1 65,000,000 Subtotal-Financing Req 219,999.290 141,777,000 133,950,050 151,664,000 83.119,000 SELF INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Workers'Comp SFI 1,012,673 955,000 1,128,500 1,090,000 1,130,000 General Liability SFI 1,182.483 1.657,700 1,381,100 1,390,000 1,450,000 Subtotal-Sett Insurance 2,195,156 2,612,700 2,509,600 2,480,000 2,580,000 TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 549,119,098 469,717,640 426,577,510 475,190,520 375,242,390 REVENUES EXCEEDING REQUIREMENTS 125,724,060 37,165,890 9,914,270 39,732,730 71,144,620 ENDING ACCUM FUNDS&RESERVES $ 587,971,180 1 $ 592,020,160 $ 597,885,450 $ 558,152,720 1 $ 629,297,340 Section 4—Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget BUDGET RESOURCES BY REVENUIEAREA- FY 16-17 Consolidated DESCRIPTION OR AOCOLR rr TITLE Revenue Area Rev Area 14 Total Proposed Proposed Proposed BEGINNING ACCUMULATED FUNDS $ 607,060,110 $ 9,174,660 $ 597,885,450 ORATING REVENUES General Sewer Service User Fees 286,554,000 286,554,000 Permitted User Fees 11.272,000 - 11.272,000 0&M Joint Operating Assessment Service Fees (IRWD) 2,440,180 2,440,180 O&M Collection System Assessment Service Fees (IRWD) - 1.297,510 1.297,510 0&M Sludge Deposal Assessment Service Fees (IRWD) 9,090,000 9,090,000 SAWPA Assessments 3.203,870 79,130 3.283,000 Interest 8,694,000 (88,000) 8,606,000 Mscellaneous Receipts 2,069,000 191,000 2.260,000 Operating Revenue Subtotal 311,792,870 13,009,820 324,802,690 NON-OPERATING REVENUES Property Tax Allocation 74,510,000 2,278,000 76,788,000 Redevelopment Agency Pass Thru 9.926,000 303,000 10.229,000 Subtotal-Taxes 84,436,000 2,581,000 87,017,000 Capital Facilities Capacity Charge 13.500,000 - 13.500,000 Sale of Capacity Rghts,SAWPA&SSBSD Capital Assessment(IRVVD) 4.402,000 4.402,000 Non-Operating Revenue Subtotal 97,936,000 6,983,000 104,919,000 INTRADISTRICT REVENUES Annual Intradistrict Joint Equity Purchase/Sale 3,400,000 3,400,000 FINANCING REVBJUES Sale of Certificates of Participation Intradistrict Loans,Advances&Repayments Financing Revenues Subtotal SELF INSURANCE REVB416 Workers'Comp SIR 1,176,870 29,430 1,206,300 General Liability SFI 1.102,230 27,570 1.129,800 Subtotal-Self Insurance 2,279,100 57,000 2,336,100 Total Revenues 415,407,970 20,049,820 435,457,790 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING $ 1,022,468,080 $ 10,875,160 $ 1,033,343,240 Section 4—Page 10 Budget Resources Consolidated DESCRIPTION OR ACCOUNT TITLE Revenue Area Rev Area 14 Total Proposed Proposed Proposed OPERATING REQUIREe£NTS Directors'Fees $ 146,500 $ 6,100 $ 152,600 Salaries&Benefits 81,324,600 7,812,600 89,137,200 Administrative Expense 1,599,040 153,610 1,752,650 Printing&Publications 259,420 24,920 284,340 Training&Meetings 1,056,570 101,500 1,158,070 Operating Materials and Supplies 15,234,700 1,463,550 16,698,250 Contractual Expense 22,655,020 2,176,400 24,831,420 Professional Expense 3,796,150 364,680 4,160,830 Research&Monitoring 729,880 70,120 800,000 Repairs &Maintenance 13,015,570 1,250,360 14,265,930 Utilities 8,131,110 781,130 8,912,240 Other Materials, Supplies,&Services 3,088,330 296,690 3,385,020 Cost Allocation (17,508,060) (1,673,970) (19,182,030) Subtotal-Operating 133,528,830 12,827,690 146,356,520 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Joint Works Capital Improvements 104,963,000 2,769,000 107,732,000 Collection System Capital lnprovements 63,558,000 - 63,558,000 Annual Intradistrict Joint Equity Purchase/Sale 3,400,000 3,400,000 Subtotal-Capital Improvements 168,521,000 6,169,000 174,690,000 FINANC 4G REQUIREMINB Certificate of Participation Service 86,664,000 86,664,000 Long Term Debt Reduction 62,809,000 1 2,191,000 65,000,000 Subtotal-Financing Requirements 149,473,000 2,191,000 151,664,000 SE-F INSURANCE REQUREMEIB Workers'Comp SFI 1,063,400 26,600 1,090,000 General Liability SFI 1,356,080 33,920 1,390,000 Subtotal- Self Insurance 2,419,480 60,520 2,480,000 OTHER CASH OUTLAYS Joint Equity Sale to IRWD Subtotal-Other Cash Outlays TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 453,942,310 21,248,210 475,190,520 REVENUES E)(C®ING REQUIREMENTS 38,534,340 1,198,390) 39,732,730 ENDING ACCUMULATED FUNDS&RESERVES $ 568,525,770 $ 10,373,050 $ 558,152,720 Section 4—Page 11 2016-17 IS, 2017-18 Budget BUDGET RESOURCES BY REV ENUEAREA-FY 17-18 Consolidated DESCRIPTION OR ACCOUNT TITLE Revenue Area Rev Area 14 Total Proposed Proposed Proposed BEGINNING ACCUMULATED FUNDS $ 568,525,770 $ 10,373,050 $ 558,152,720 OPERATING REVENUES General Sewer Service User Fees 291,158,000 291,158,000 Permitted User Fees 11,410,000 - 11,410,000 0&M Joint Operating Assessment Service Fees(IRWD) - 2,513,150 2,513,150 0&M Collection System Assessment Service Fees (IRWD) - 1.357,860 1,357,860 0&M Sludge Disposal Assessment Service Fees (IRWD) - 8,080,000 8,080,000 SAWPA Assessments 3,332,700 82,300 3,415,000 Interest 8,956,000 (116,000) 8,840,000 Miscellaneous Receipts 2,126,000 202,000 2,328,000 Operating Revenue Subtotal 316,982,700 12,119,310 329,102,010 NON-OPERATING REVIUES Property Tax Allocation 78,458,550 2,169,000 80,627,550 Redevelopment Agency Pass Thru 10,451,450 289,000 10,740,450 Subtotal-Taxes 88,910,000 2,458,000 91,368,000 Capital Facilities Capacity Charge 18.090.000 - 18,090,000 Sale of Capacity Rights,SAWPA&SSBSD Capital Assessment(IRWD) 3,547,000 3,547,000 Non-Operating Revenue Subtotal 107,000,000 6,005,000 113,005,000 INTRADISTRIGT REVENUES Annual lntradlstrict Joint Equity Purchase/Sale 1,700,000 1,700,000 FINANCING REVENUES Sale of Certificates of Participation - - - Intradistrict Loans,Advances &Repayments Financing Revenues Subtotal SELF INSURANCE REVENUES Workers'Conp SFI 1.102.430 27,570 1,130,000 General Liability SIR 1,414,620 35,380 1,450,000 Subtota45elf Insurance 2,517,050 62,960 2,580,000 Total Revenues 428,199,750 18,187,260 446,387,010 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING $ 996,725,520 $ 7,814.210 $ 1,004,539.730 Section 4—Page 12 Budget Resources Consolidated DESCRIPTION OR ACCOUNT TIRE Revenue Area Rev Area 14 Total Proposed Proposed Proposed OPERATING REQUIREfvEN S Directors'Fees $ 146,500 $ 6,100 $ 152.600 Salaries&Benefits 83,250,160 7,214,640 90,464,800 Adninistra0ve Expense 1,716,710 148,770 1,865,480 Printing&Publications 339,540 29,420 368,960 Training&Meetings 1,087,930 94,280 1,182,210 Operating Materials and Supplies 15,984,360 1,385,240 17,369,600 Contractual Expense 20,842,290 1,806,240 22,648.530 Professional Expense 3,830,080 331,920 4,162,000 Research&Mnn@oring 802,830 69,570 872,400 Repairs&Maintenance 14,871,370 1,288,790 16,160,160 Utilities 9,417,530 816.140 10,233,670 Other Materials, Supplies,&Services 3,468,000 300,540 3,768,540 Cost Allocation (17,853,920) (1,540,640) (19.394.560) Subtotal-Operating 137,903,380 11,951,010 149,854,390 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Joint Works Capital Improvements 97,205,000 2,564,000 99,769,000 Collection System Capital Improvements 38,220,000 - 38,220,000 Annual Intradistrict Joint Equity Purchase/Sale 1,700,000 1,700.000 Subtotalk Capital Improvements 135,425,000 4,264,000 139,689,000 FINANCING REQUIREIVENTS Certificate of Participation Service 83,119,000 83,119,000 SubtotalkFinancing Req 83,119,000 83,119,000 SELF INSURANCE REQUREMMINTS Workers'Comp SFI 1,102,430 27,570 1,130,000 General Liability SR 1,414,620 35,380 1,450,000 SubtotalkSeff Insurance 2,517,050 62,950 2,580,000 OTFER CASH OUTLAYS Joint Equity Sale to FWD - - - Subtotal-Other Cash Outlays TOTAL REQUIRHvtNTS 358,964,430 16,277,960 375,242,390 REVENUES EXCEEDING REQUIREMENTS 69,235,320 1,909,300 71,144,620 EPDING ACCUMULATED FUNDS&RESERVES $ 637,761,090 $ 8,463,750 $ 629,297,340 Section 4—Page 13 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Projected Reserves at June 30, 2016, 2017 and 2018 Projected Proposed Proposed 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 6/30/2018 Cash Flow Requirements Operating Expenses $ 70,698,000 $ 73,178,000 $ 74,927,000 COP Payments 83,950,050 86,664,000 83,119,000 Operating Contingencies 14,140,000 14,636,000 14,985,000 Capital Improvement Program 197,081,400 154,730,720 230,056,340 Catastrophe & Self Insurance 57,000 000 57,000 000 57 000 000 Subtotal 422,869,450 386,208,720 460,087,340 Capital Replacement& Refurbishment 63,411,000 64,679,000 65,973,000 COP Service Required Reserves 111,605,000 107,265,000 103,237,000 Total $597,885,450 $558,152,720 $629,297.340 Accumulated Funds and Reserves Policy A cash flow reserve will be established to fund Levels higher and lower than the target can be operations, maintenance and certificate of expected while the long term financing and capital participations expenses for the first half of the fiscal improvement programs are being finalized. year, prior to the receipt of the first installment of the property tax allocation and the sewer service user A catastrophic loss or self-insurance reserve has fees which are collected as a separate line item on been established to fund potential losses from the property tax bill. The level of this reserve will be property damage, including fire, Flood and established as the sum of an amount equal to six earthquake; general liability; and for workers' months operations and maintenance expenses and compensation. These reserves are intended to the total of the annual debt (COP) service payments supplement purchased insurance policies, FEMA due in August each year. disaster reimbursements and State disaster reimbursements. The potential infrastructure loss An operating contingency reserve will be established from a major earthquake has been estimated at to provide for non-recurring expenditures that were $495 million. The level of this reserve has been set not anticipated when the annual budget and sewer to fund the Districrs non-reimbursed costs,estimated service fees were evaluated and adopted. The level to be$57 million. of this reserve will be established at an amount equal to ten percent of the annual operating budget. A capital replacement/renewal reserve policy has been established to provide thirty percent of the A capital improvement reserve will be maintained to funding to replace or refurbish the current collection, fund annual increments of the capital improvement treatment and disposal facilities at the end of their program. The long-term target is for one half of the useful economic lives. The current replacement capital improvement program to be funded from value of these facilities is estimated to be borrowing and for one half to be funded from current $6.2 billion. The initial reserve level was established revenues and reserves. With this program in mind, at $50 million, which will be augmented by interest the target level of this reserve has been established earnings and a small portion of the annual sewer user at one half of the average annual capital improvement fee, in order to meet projected needs over the next program over the next ten years. 20 years. Section 4—Page 14 Projected Reserves Ending Reserves (in millions) $800 $713.7 $700 $629.3 $600 $588.0 $597.9 $556.2 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 Actual Actual Projected Proposed Proposed Provisions of the various Certificate of Participation (COP) issues require debt service reserves to be under the control of the Trustee for that issue. These reserve funds are not available for the general needs of the District and must be maintained at specified levels. Accumulated funds exceeding the levels specified by District policy will be maintained in a rate stabilization fund. These funds will be applied to future years' needs in order to maintain rates or to moderate annual fluctuations. There is no established target for this group. Section 4—Page 15 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Orange County Sanitation District Consolidated Cash Flow Projections Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Ref Description 16-17 17-18 18.19 19.20 20421 21-22 Revenues: 1 General User Fees $ 286,554,000 $ 291,158,000 $ 297,643,000 $ 305,095,000 $ 312,588,000 $ 321 2 Permitted User Fees 11,272,000 11,410,000 11,617,000 11,859,000 12,100,000 12,341,000 3 IRWDAswssments 17,229,690 15,498,010 11,6B9,500 10,261,490 11,296,590 10,939,300 4 SAWPA Assessments 3.283,000 3,415,000 3,552,000 3,61 3,842,0W 3,996,000 5 Properly Taxes(Flat in shod term) 87.017,000 91,368,000 95,936,000 100,733,0W 105,770,000 111,059,000 6 Nev,COP Issues - - - - - - 7 Interest Revenues B,606,000 8,840,000 12,904,000 16,682,000 16,454,000 16,358,000 8 Capital Facilities Capacity Charges 13,500,000 18,090,000 9,513,000 9,981,000 10,474,000 10,986,000 9 Other Revenues 7,996,100 6,608,000 4,967,000 5,028,000 5,090,000 5,153,000 10 Revenues 435,457,790 446,387,010 447,821,500 463,333,490 477,614,590 490,956,300 Requirements: 11 Oper B Mire Evp(5.0%yr) 146,356,520 149,854,390 155,849,000 162,083,000 168,566,000 175,309,000 12 Capital Improvement Program(CIP) 190,322,000 153,037,000 175,511,000 222,002,000 244,127,000 212,661,000 13 Less:CIP Savings B Defenals (19,032,000) (15,3M 000) (17,551,000) (17,760,001 (14,648,000) (6,380,000) 14 Repl,Rehab 8 Point, - 256,000 5,181,000 10,108,000 17,743,000 19,395,000 15 COP Service(5.0%,30 yad 86,664,000 83,119,000 81,550,000 81,041.000 81,042.000 73,351,000 16 Reduction of Long-Term Liabilites 65,000,000 - - - - - 17 Other Requirements 5,880,000 4,280,000 2,580,000 2,580,000 2,580,000 2,581 18 Requirements 475,190,520 375,242,390 W3,120,000 460,056,000 499,410,000 476,916,000 19 Revenues-Requirements (39,732,730) 71,14g620 M,701,500 3,279,490 (21,795,410) 14,040,300 Accumulated Funds: 20 Beginning of Year 597,885,450 558,152,720 629,297,340 673,998,840 677,278,330 655,482,920 21 End of Year $ 558,152,720 $ 629,297,340 $ 673,998,840 $ 677,278,330 $ 655,482,920 $ 669,523,220 22 Consolidated Reserve Policy $ 522,181,000 $ 518,000,000 $ 517,365,000 $ 517,847,000 $ 518,848,000 $ 512,937,000 23 over(Under)Reserve Policy' $ 35,971,720 $ 111,291 $ 156,633,840 $ 1591 $ 136,634,920 $ 156,586,220 Sewer Service User Fees: 24 Avg SFR Annual User Fee $327.00 $331.00 $337.00 $344.00 $351.00 $358.00 25 Percentage Change 1.55% 1.22% 1.81% 2.08% 2.03% 1.99% 26 Equivalent Dwelling Units 922,183 924,950 927,725 930,508 933,300 936,100 27 SFR Connection Fee $3,926 S4,107 $4,296 $4,494 $4,701 $4,917 28 Outstandino COPS $1,072,648,000 $1,032,373,000 $992.541,000 $951,592,000 $908,960,000 $872,295,000 Reserve Policy 29 50%NeM Year Operating $ 73,178,000 $ 74,927,000 IS 77,925,000 IS 81,042,000 $ 84,283,000 $ 87,655,000 30 10%Next Year Operating 14,636,000 14,985,000 15,595,000 16,208,000 16,857,000 17,531,000 31 101 Next Year AUG COP Svc. 85,664,000 83,119,000 81,550,000 81,041,000 81,042,000 731 32 50%average temyear CIP Bal. 118,759,000 118,759,000 118759,000 118,759,000 118,759,M 118,759,M 33 DSR@10%Outstanding COPS 107,265,000 103,237,000 99,254,000 95,159,000 90,896,000 87,230,000 34 SFI@$57mm INPUT 57,000,000 57,000,000 57,000,000 57,000,0W 57,000,000 57,000,000 35 Rapt B Refurt,@ 2%1yr 64,679,000 65,973,000 67,292,000 68,638,00 70,011,000 71,411,000 36 'Reserve Reduction onacemdmo,am Saari aHm,,WMadi(total rcecnca) 37 Total $ 522,181,000 $ 518,000,000 $ 517,365,000 $ 517,847,000 $ 518,848,000 $ 512,937,000 COP Ratios 38 Sr Lien Coverage,Min 115 3.18 3,35 3,46 3.59 368 4AS Section 4—Page 16 Cash Flow Projection Orange County Sanitation District Consolidated Cash Flow Projections Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary 10-Year Ref Description 22-23 23.24 24.25 25.26 Total Revenues: 1 General User Fees $ 327,701,000 $ 33Q263,000 $ 343,929,000 $ 352,585,000 $3,173,640,000 2 Permitted User Fees 12,583,000 12,859,000 13,101,000 13,377,000 122,519,000 3 IRWDAssessments 12,664,910 14421,750 14,187,150 13,510,430 131,698,820 4 SAWPA Assessments 4,156,000 4,322,000 4,495,000 4,675,000 39,430,000 5 Properly Taxes lFlat in short term) 116,612,000 122,443,000 128,565,000 134,993,000 1,094,496,000 6 New COP Issues - - - - - 7 Interest Revenues 16,081,000 14,542,000 12,605,000 11,834,000 134,906,000 8 Capital Facilities Capacity Charges 11,524,000 12,093,000 9,220,000 9,675,000 115,056,000 9 Other Revenues 5,217,000 5,283,000 5,352,000 5,421,000 56,115,100 10 Revenues 506,538,910 522,226,750 531,454,150 546,070,430 4,867,860,920 Requirements: 11 Open A Mice Exp(5.0%yr) 182.321,000 189,614,000 197,199,000 205,087,000 1,732.238,910 12 Capital Improvement Program(CIP) 233,257,000 244,876,000 243,803,000 197,278,000 2,116,874,000 13 Less:CIP Savings A Deferrals (6,g98,Won (4,898,000) (4,876,000) (4,876,000) (112,323,000) 14 Repl,Rehab A Refub 58,518 Wo 104857,000 88,146,000 66,429,000 370,633,000 15 COP service(5.0%,30 yed 73,344.000 73,347,000 73,340,000 73,350.000 780,148,000 16 Reduction of Long-Term Liabilttes - - - - 65.000,000 17 Other Requirements 2,580,000 2,580,000 2,580,000 2,580,000 30,800,000 18 Requirements 543,022,000 610,376,000 600,192,000 539,848,000 4,983,370,910 19 Revenues-Requirements (36,483,090) (88,149,250) (68,737,850) 6,222,430 (115,509,990) Accumulated Funds: 20 Beginning of Year 669,523,220 633,040,130 544,890,880 476,153,030 597,885,450 21 End of Year $ 633,040,130 $ 544,890,880 $ 476,153,030 $ 482,375,460 $ 482,375,460 22 Consolidated Reserve Policy $ 514754,000 $ 516,640,000 $ 478,566,000 $ 480,583,000 $ 480,583,000 23 Mar(Under)Reserve Policy- $ 118,286,130 $ 28,250,880 $ 2,412,970 $ 1,792,460 $ 1,792,460 Sewer Service User Fees: 24 Avg SFR Annual User Fee $365.00 $373.00 $380.00 $388.00 25 Percentage Change 1.96% 2.19% 1.BB% 2.11% 26 Equivalent Dwelling Units 938,908 941,725 944,550 947,384 27 SFR Connection Fee $5,143 $5,380 $5,627 $5,886 28 Outstanding COPS $834,188,000 $794,702,000 $753,654,000 $711,227.000 Reserve Policy 29 50%Ned Year Operating $ 91,161,000 $ 94,807,000 $ 98,600,000 $ 102,544,000 30 10%Ned Year Operating 18,232,000 18,961,000 19,720,000 20,509,000 31 100%Ned Year AUG COP Svc. 73,344,000 73,347,000 73,340,000 73,350,000 32 50%average ten-year CIP Sal. 118,759,000 118759,000 118759,000 118,759.000 33 DSR@10%Outstanding COPS 83,419,000 79,470,000 75,365,000 71,123,000 34 SFI@S57mm INPUT 57,000,000 57,000,000 57,000,000 57,000,000 35 Rep]A Refurb @ 2%lyr 72,839,000 74,296,000 75,782,000 77,298,000 36 'Reserve Reduction (40,000,000) (40,000,000) 37 Total $ 514754,000 $ 516,640,000 $ 478,566,000 $ 480,583,000 COP Ratios 38 Sr Lien Coverge,Min 1.25 426 4.37 4.43 4.52 Section 4—Page 17 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 4— Page 18 0 v m a D 00 � 0 00 Z < N m a m Operations Budget Overview OPERATING REQUIREMENTS Operating Chemicals: Chemicals are used for disinfection,coagulation, and odor control programs. The net operating requirements budget finances the administrative, operations and maintenance, and Coagulants: Coagulant chemicals are used to program costs for collecting,treating,and recycling of enhance primary treatment solids removal,solids wastewater. The departmental budgets are all dewatering, waste solids thickening, and to completely funded by the operating fund. The net control hydrogen sulfide in the digesters. operating budgetfor FY 2016-17 is$146.4 million and for FY 2017-18 is$149.9 million. Ferric chloride is an iron salt which is used with anionic polymer to increase the solids removal Following are descriptions of the major factors that efficiencies in the primary treatment process comprise the operating budget: and to control hydrogen sulfide levels in the Regulatory Requirements: Many of the District's digester gas as required by AQMD Rule 431.1. activities are either required or regulated by Cationic polymer is added to digested sludge environmental permits issued by federal, state, and prior to dewatering to improve the sludge and local regulatory authorities. These authorities water separation process. Cationic polymer is regulate effluent quality, air emissions, greenhouse also added to the waste activated sludge gases, stormwater quality, biosolids and hazardous dissolved air flotation thickeners to thicken the waste management, as well as extensive monitoring solids before digestion. of all media. New and developing regulations also drive future capital and operating expenses. Odor Control: Under septic or anaerobic conditions, sulfate-reducing bacteria can flourish Urban Runoff Program: The Urban Runoff program resulting in the accumulation of sulfides in the was established to protect and improve the regional liquid phase. One of the sulfide forms present is water quality of Orange County's coastal watershed hydrogen sulfide (112S). When released to the by accepting dry weather urban runoff into the vapor phase, this creates the potential for both District's sewerage system. This program addresses odor and corrosion problems in the collection the public health and environmental impacts system. associated with the urban runoff discharge that cannot be economically or practically controlled by • Sodium hydroxide is added in "shock doses'to alternative means. The Environmental Compliance the sewers trunkline for sulfide control. Sodium Division administers the program through a permitting hydroxide is added over a period of 30 to 45 and monitoring program to regulate the quantity and minutes at sufficient dosages to elevate the pH quality of urban runoff that is discharged into the level between 12.0 to 14.0. The high pH slug District's sewerage system. temporarily inactivates sulfate reducing Fats, 011s, and Grease (FOG) Control Program: bacteria and greatly reduces hydrogen sulfide generation. The FOG Control Program was established to respond to the CRWQCB, Santa Ana Region's The largest costs for collection system odor General Waste Discharge Requirements (Order No. control are for ferrous chloride, magnesium R8-2002-0014), to control sanitary sewer overflows hydroxide and calcium nitrate. These costs (SSOs). This order was subsequently superseded by cover continuous treatment for odor control the SWRCB's Statewide General Waste Discharge within four trunk lines. The contractor(s) Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems (Order provide(s) leased equipment and on-going No. 2006-0003-DWQ) adopted May 2, 2006, which labor for services such as maintenance,remote added a statewide SSO monitoring and reporting monitoring of the chemical feed rates, component to the original requirements.The District's optimization,and field sampling. Environmental Compliance Division facilitated the regional efforts to develop FOG Control Programs and has a program for the District to regulate the quantity and quality of FOG-laden wastewater that is discharged into the District's sewerage system. Section 5—Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Residuals Management: These costs are for hauling and beneficial reuse or landfill disposal of wastewater solids recovered during the treatment process. Solids treated through the digesters, called biosolids or treated sewage sludge, can be recycled offsite via composting (about 50 percent) or land application on farm fields (about 40 percent) or sent to a landfill.Approximately 10 percent of the District's biosolids are disposed in an Orange County landfill with methane recovery (energy production). Most of the District's residuals management costs are for hauling 30-40 truckloads of biosolids offsite every day. A smaller component of residuals management cost is grit and screenings waste that must be disposed of at a landfill. Repairs and Maintenance: Preventive maintenance and repair activities throughout the District's expanded and upgraded treatment facilities and collection system continue to keep this budgetary category at a significant amount. This category includes contracted services, materials and supplies, and outsourced service agreements. Utilities: The cost for utilities is a significant component of the operating budget. The largest utility cost incurred by the District is the electricity that is purchased to supplement generated power to operate the plant processes. The central generation facilities produce approximately 70 percent of the electricity used for running the plants. In FY 2005-06, the central generation production was reduced in order to meet new air emission limits. Following the completion of the installation of emission control systems on the engines, the central generation facilities production can be increased. Section 5—Page 2 Operations Summary Proposed Budget Comparisons by Department 2015-16 Budget Budget Revised 2015-16 2016-17 Percent 2017-18 Percent Department and Division Budget Projected Proposed Change Proposed Change General Manager's Office General Management Admn $ 2,W.170 $ 1,920,090 $ 2,954,220 0.58% $ 2,943,720 -0.69% Board Services 488,410 476,650 633,540 29.71% 649,640 2.54% Public Affairs 1,155.85D 1,042,360 1,010,100 -12.61% 1,037,500 271% Departrranl subtotal 4,591,430 3,439,100 4,607,860 0.36% 4,630,860 0.50% Human Resources Department Human Resources 4,730,000 3SW,420 3,918.890 -17.15% 3,945,130 0.67% f55k Menagerrent 3,578,55D 3,042,320 4,079,050 13.99% 4,473,650 967% Departrrenl subtotal 8,308,640 6,8]2,]40 ],99],940 -3.74% 8,418,780 5.26% Administrative Services Department Administrative Services Made 610,710 585,510 590.830 -3.26% 599,230 1.42% Rnancis Mani,inna[ 3,629,380 3,689,610 3,410,810 -6.02% 4,101,990 20.26% Contracts,Purch,&Materials M3m 4,386,540 4,232,730 4,169,220 1.95% 4,250,520 1.95% Ydornatcn Technology 10,189,160 10,170,720 10,267,510 0.77% 10,435,640 1y64% Department subtotal 18,816,790 18,678,570 18,4 ,370 -2.01% 19,387,380 5.15% Facilitlas Support So rvica s Dapartm ant Facilities Support Services Admn 822,330 911,240 - -100.00% - 0.00% Fleet Servces 2,083,620 2,167,200 - -100.00% - 0.00% Facilities Engineering&Repair Services 2.842,880 2.184.900 - -100.00% - 0.00% NPOES Source Inspection 2,404,160 2,304,200 - -100.00% - 0.00% Odor&Corrosion Control 8,096,320 7.031,630 - -100.00% - 0.00% Collection Facilities O&M 4,095,100 3,747,930 -100.00% 0.00% Department subtotal 20,344,410 18,947,100 -100.00% 0.00% Environmental Services Department Environnantal services Admn - - M,250 100,00% 864,100 3.08% Environmental Carpliance - - 8,563,220 100.00% 8,691,900 1.50% Laboratory&Ocean Monitoring - - ].]58,150 100.00% 8.019.270 323% Departnerd subtotal 17,169,620 0.00% 17,575,270 2.36% Engineering Department Engineering Adrian 406,860 471,160 399,390 -1.84% 400,590 0.30% Ranning 3.200,230 3.236,200 3,252,440 1.63% 3.178.770 -2.27% Reject Management Office 3,493,120 2,551,040 2,693,360 -22.90% 2,745,120 1.92% Civil&Mechanical Engineering 9,576,040 9,495,310 8,407,280 -12.21% 8,538,340 1.56% Bectrical&Control Systerm Engineering - - 4,610,980 100.00% 4,639,220 0.61% Environn intal Coupliance 6,222,510 6,420.330 -100.00% 0.00% DepartneM subtotal 22,898760 M,174,040 19,363,450 -15.44% 19,502,040 0.72% Operations&Maintenance Dept. O&M Adrmstration 884,100 858,800 685,600 -22.45% 698,450 1.87% Collection Facilities O&M - - 12,900,210 100.00% 13,643,740 5.76% Fleet Services - - 2,051,320 100.00% 2,076,050 1.21% Rent No.l Operations 29.091,695 31,695,020 29,104,240 OD4% 27,890,810 -4.17% Rant W.2 Orprrations 23,277,850 21,687,060 21,3 ,450 -8.21% 20,524,050 -3.94% Rant No.l Maintenance 19,291,815 16,549,260 20,499,680 6.26% 20,244,060 -1.25% Rant W.2 Maintenance 10,624,840 10,648,440 11,353,810 6.86% 14,657,460 29.10% Envisonriantal Lab/Ocean Monitoring 8,055,110 7,953,100 -100.00% 0.00% Department subtotal 91,225,410 89,591,680 97.961.310 7.38% 99734.620 1.81% Lase: Cost Allocelion (16,877,500) (18,30),8]0) (19,182,030) 13.65% (19,3"'stio) 1.117. Net Operating Requirements $149,306,940 $141,395,360 $146,356,520 -1.98% $149,854,390 2,39% Section 5-Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Proposed Budget Expense by Category 2015-16 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016-17 201748 Description Actual Budget Projected Proposed Proposed Salaries,Wages&Benefits $ 94,206,016 $ 94,802,400 $ 89,933,480 $ 89,289,800 $ 90,617,400 Administrative Expenses 1,409,104 1,624,570 1,511,070 1,752,650 1,865,480 Printing& Publication 267,347 412,020 251,600 284,340 368,960 Training& Meetings 835,764 1,050,500 850,870 1,158,070 1,182,210 Operating Materials &Supplies 15,364,441 17,191,000 16,424,170 16,698,250 17,369,600 Contractual Sences 22,183,465 23,938,480 23,461,780 24,831,420 22,648,530 Professional Services 3,168,796 3,476,580 3,034,080 4,160,830 4,162,000 Research B Monitonng 810,854 831,000 720,000 800,000 872,400 Repairs& Maintenance 11,649,253 12,362,440 13,427,200 14,265,930 16,160,160 Utilities 7,157,617 7,787,080 8,468,730 8,912,240 10,233,670 Other Materials, Supplies, and Svc. 1,701,945 2,708,370 1,620,250 3,385,020 3,768,540 Cost Allocation (17,276,525) (16,877,500) (18,307,870) (19,182,030) (19,394,560) Net Operating Requirements $141,478,077 $149,306,940 $141,395,360 $146,356,520 $149,854,390 Cost to Collect/Treat 1 Million Gallons $ 2,070.97 $ 2,045.30 $ 2,099.42 $ 2,167.44 $ 2,219.24 Flow, Million Gallons 68,315 73,000 67,350 67,525 67,525 Flow Per Day, MGD 187.17 200,00 184.52 185,00 185.00 Section 5— Page 4 Operations Summary Proposed Budget Allocation to Individual Revenue Areas Total Gallonage Flows, Million Gallons per Year(MG) Revenue 2015-16 Projected 2016-17 2017-18 Area Projected Increase Budgeted Percent Budgeted Percent No. Flow (MG) (MG) Flow (MG) of Total Flow (MG) of Total Consolidated 65,707 188 65,895 97.59% 65,915 97.62% 14 1,643 (13) 1,630 2.41% 1,610 2.38% TOTALS 67,350 175 67,525 100.00% 67,525 100.00% Average Daily Gallonage Flows, Million Gallons per Day(MGD) Revenue 2015-16 Projected 2016-17 2017-18 Area Projected Increase Budgeted Percent Budgeted Percent No. Flow (MGD) (MGD) Flow (MGD) of Total Flow (MGD) of Total Consolidated 180 1 181 97.84% 181 97.84% 14 5 (1) 4 2.16% 4 2.16% TOTALS 185 0 185 100.00% 185 100.00% FY 2016.17 Estimated Allocation of Total Costs to Revenue Areas Revenue Treatment Area Collection &Disposal Total Total No. Costs Costs Costs CosVMG Consolidated $22,997,590 $ 110,531,240 $ 133,528,830 $ 2,026.39 14-O&M 1,297,510 2,440,180 3,737,690 2,293.06 14-Sludge 9,090,000 9,090,000 5,576.69 TOTALS $24,295,100 $ 122,061,420 $ 146,356,520 $ 2,167.44 FY 2017-18 Estimated Allocation of Total Costs to Revenue Areas Revenue Treatment Area Collection &Disposal Total Total No. Costs Costs Costs Cosl/MG Consolidated $24,067,140 $ 113,836,240 $ 137,903,380 $ 2,092.14 14-O&M 1,357,860 2,513,150 3,871,010 2,404.35 14-Sludge 8,080,000 8,080,000 5,018.63 TOTALS $25,425,000 $ 124,429,390 $ 149,854,390 $ 2,219.24 Section 5— Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Proposed Budget Net Operating Expense by Line Item Adjusted %Budget %Butlget 201415 Budget 2015-16 2016-17 Change 201748 Change Description Actual 2015-16 Projected Proposed to 15-16 Proposed to 16-17 Salaries.Waaes&Benefits Salaries&Wades Salaries&Wages $ 62,415,718 $ 66,276,100 $ 63,091,000 $ 66,833,000 0.84% $ 61 1.22% Empli Benefits Retirement 21,635.953 16.726,300 15,544,300 10,00,600 -34.53% 11,034,900 0.77% Group Insurances 8,816,678 9,766,200 9,243,600 9,725.700 -OA1% 10,223,100 5.11% Tuition&Certificate Reimb 172,185 154,500 172,200 175,600 13.61 179,100 1.99% Edu.degrees,Cert.&Lic. 307,821 303,300 308,800 314,600 373% 314,600 0.W% Uniknn Rental 51,949 47,400 53,200 53,200 12.24% 53,200 0.00% Workers'Compensatlpn 755,000 1,478700 1,479.580 1,196,300 -19.10% 1,120,000 -6.38% Unemployment Insurance 11,204 9,200 2,900 2,900 -68.481/6 2,900 0.00% EMT Supplemental Benefits 39,506 40,700 37.900 37,900 ESo% 37.900 0.00% Salinas,Wages,&Benefits 94,206,016 94,802,400 89,933,480 89289,800 5.81% 90,617,400 1.49% Materials SuapHas.&Services Administrathe Expenses Memberships 512,145 597,840 506,290 586,050 -1.97% W8,320 0.39% Office Exp-Supplies 51,095 68,600 60,330 62,870 -8.35% 59,420 -5.49% Postage 391 39,970 40,550 41,040 2.68% 310,520 656.63% Books&Publications 27,648 38,400 35.430 50,970 32.73% 42,020 -17.56% Forms 2,013 910 910 1,300 42.86% 550 57.69% Small Computer Items 61 734,000 734,000 750,000 2.18% 750,000 0.W% Mina Furniture&Fixtures 148,885 144,850 133,560 260,420 79.79% 114,00 55.97% Printing&Publication Repro-In-House 224,553 W9,6W 212.150 243,690 4pL08% 244,460 0.32% Printing-Outsider 21,510 22,4S0 20,110 20,750 -7.57% 103,W0 3W.67% Notices&Ad. 21,179 19,620 19,290 19,850 1.17% 21,390 7.76% Photo Processing 105 270 50 50 51A8% 50 0.00% Meetings&Training Meetings 128,715 212,620 156,250 208,310 -2.03% 219,610 5.42% Training 707,049 837,880 694,620 949,760 13.35% 962,600 1,35% Operating Materials&Supplies Chem.Coagulants 5,902,654 6,012,000 6,001 5,126,550 -1473% 5,397,W0 5.28% Odor Control 7,042,603 8,043,200 7,461,W0 8,157,Wo 1.42% 8,722,300 6.93% Disinfection 278,015 154,000 180,560 170,500 1071% 181,300 6.33% Chemicals-Cogan Op. 2Q926 502,000 437,000 472,000 5.98% 477,000 1.W% Miscellaneous Chemicals 5,515 45,00 2,300 - We - Na Gas,Diesel,&Oil 525,853 705,970 592,100 632,790 -10.37% 647,690 2.35% Tools 318,565 351,400 385.500 691.950 96.91% 561,350 -18,87% Safety Equipment/tods 455,769 09,350 513.140 587,560 25.19% 505,690 -13.0% Solq Paint,Janitor Supplies 83,209 88,320 811 82,390 571% 84,950 3.11% Lab Chemicals&Supplies 5791 647,160 579,620 Igi -7.08% 612,160 1.80% Misc.Operating Supplies 146,002 155,800 177,430 171.850 10.30% 176,160 2,51% Property Tax Fees 1W 16,800 3,300 4,000 -76.19% 4,000 0.W% Contractual Siamese Solids Removal 17,210,567 17,607,000 17,666,680 17,206,000 -2.28% 13,950,W0 -18.92% Other Waste Disp. 1,071,673 91 787.890 88&400 5.02% SM.= 5.39% Groundskeeping 149,37 174,M 174,000 129,720 -25.45% 129,720 0.00% Janitorial 491,152 478,340 478,340 345,700 -2Z73% 345,700 0.W% Outside Lab SaMces 167,271 280,500 240,000 275,000 -1.96% 320,Wo 16.36% Oxygen Plant Oper 493,780 274,200 358,000 406,000 48.07% 426,000 4.93% County SeMce Fee 601 706,950 6711 671,700 4.99% 717,600 6.83% Temporary Seances 358,949 462,Z80 470,0130 814,400 76.13% 1,0132,4o0 30.45% Security SeNces 390,549 582,00o 410,W0 660,Wo 13.40% 720,W0 9.011 Other 1,247,224 2,429,890 2,000,W0 3,435,Wl) 41.43% 4,042,590 17.64% Section 5-Page 6 Operations Summary Proposed Budget Net Operating Expense by Line Item (Continued) %Budget %Budget 2014-15 Budget 2015-16 2016-17 Change 201748 Change Description Actual 2015.16 Projected Proposed to 15-16 Proposed to 16-17 Professional Senlces Legal 1,791,715 948,200 1,369,890 1,363,500 43.80% 1,064,000 -21.97% Audit&Accounting 207,673 211,250 217,990 270,7DO 28.14% 369,300 32.73% Engineering 112,224 720,000 244,100 743,000 3.19% 1.018,000 37.01% Entiro Scientific Consult 169,830 105,000 101,000 125,000 19.05% 125,800 0.64% Software Prgm Consult 252,834 308,000 254.000 410,000 33.12% 380,000 .7.32% Adwcacy Efforts 177,878 247,000 247.000 176,000 -28.74% 176,000 0.00% Industrial Hygiene Sws 120,394 100,000 100,000 50,000 -50.00% 50,000 0.00% Labor Negotiation Sw 34,455 60,01)0 20,000 80,000 33.33% 20,000 -75.00% Other 301,793 777,130 480,100 942,630 21.30% 968,900 2.79% Research&Monnonna Enron. Monitoring 315,922 345,000 235,000 305,000 .11.59% 352,200 15.48% Air Quality Monitoring 94,932 85,000 85,000 95,000 11.76% 95,200 0.21% Research 400,000 401,000 400,000 400,000 -0.25% 425,000 6.25% Repairs&Maintenance Materials&Senices 9,923,998 10,364,180 10,928.640 11,453,670 10.51% 12.594,400 9.87% Seruce Mairrt.Agreements 1,725,265 1,998,260 2,498,560 2,812,260 40.74% 3,575,760 27.15% U Telephone i Telephone 317,477 324,160 350,000 418,240 4.50% 418,370 0.71% Diesel For Generators 66,699 00,000 93,000 19,000 -23.50% 28,000 1.71% Natural Gas 566,699 500,000 493,000 519,000 3.90% 526,500 16.42% Power 5,721,449 6,558,420 6.631,990 ],651,000 15.58% 8,526,500 11.51% Water 536,820 558,420 631,990 651,000 7fi.58% 660,800 1.51% Other Operating Costs Outside Equip Rental 133,724 105,970 43,100 139,600 31.74% 151,600 8.60% Insurance Premiums 31,884 32,000 32.000 32,000 0.00% 32,000 0.00% Prop&Gen Llab Insurance 500,000 496,000 496,000 1,111,100 124.01% 1,431,300 28.92% Freight 69,230 69,070 79,990 70,030 1.39% 69,560 -0.67% Misc.Operating Expense 176,603 289,820 192.280 162,310 44.00% 168,160 3.60% Regulatory Operating Fees 725,461 708,000 708,000 715,900 1.12% 730,080 1.98% Contingency - 552,000 - 639,500 15.85% 659,500 3.13% Prior year reappropnation - 352,200 - 376,200 6.81% 387,900 3.11% Loss on obsolete inventory 433 3,380 2,000 2,300 -31.95% 2,300 0.00% Other Non-Oper Expense 64,610 99,930 66,880 136,080 36,18% 136,140 0.04% Materials,Supplies,&Sauces 64,548,586 71,382,040 69,769,750 76,248,750 6.82% 78,631,550 3.13% Total Operating Requirements 158,754,602 166,184,440 159,703.230 165,538,550 -0.39% 169.248,950 2.24% Less: Cost Allocation (17,276,525) (16,877,500) (18,307,870) (19,182,030) 13.65% (19,394,560) 1,11% Net Operating Requirements $141,478,077 $149,306,940 $141,395.360 $146,356,520 -198% $149,854,390 2.39% CoAW Collect.Treat,& Dispose of 1 Million Gallons $ 2,070.97 $ 2,045.30 $ 2,099.42 $ 2,167.44 $ 2,219.24 Flow,Million Gallons 68,315 73,000 67,350 67,525 67,525 Flow Per Day, MGD 187.17 200.00 184.52 185.00 185.00 Section 5— Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget NOTES TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2016.17 and budget of$314,600 for FY 2016-17 and 2017-18 is 2017.18 OPERATIONS BUDGET based on estimated employee participation. Salaries, Wages &Benefits Uniforms - This budget projection is for uniforms Salaries& Wages-The proposed budget is set at provided to field and lab employees in accordance 627.0 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions for FY with employee MOU's. 2016-17 and 2017-18. Provision has been made in the proposed salaries for FY 2016-17 in order to Workers' Compensation - This item is used to comply with the terms of those current MOU's maintain the level of accumulated reserves for which extend through that fiscal year. Pending workers' compensation self-insurance. The completion of the negotiation process, no salary amount recommended is$1,196,300 for FY 2016- adjustments have been included for periods 17 and $1,120,000 for FY 2017-18. The total beyond the expiration of current MOU's. estimated expenditures for the workers' compensation program are set forth in detail in the Retirement - The District's employees are Self-Insurance section. members of the Orange County Employees' Retirement System. Employees participate in one Unemployment Insurance-The District is on an of three plans depending on hire date, Plan G/H actual claims paid basis, which has historically (older), Plan B, or Plan U (newer, with a lower resulted in an overall lower cost because of retirement benefit). The employer's required favorable claims history. This appropriation is contribution rate for Plan G/H has been decreased proposed at a level consistent with the prior year's from 20.75 percent to 13.09 percent, Plan B has actual costs. been decreased from 18.39 percent to Memberships - The District has memberships in 10.99 percent, and Plan U has been decreased agencies such as the National Association of Clean from 17.52 percent to 9.69 percent in FY 2016-17. Water Agencies (NACWA), the National Water In addition, for Plan G/H the District pays Research Institute (NWRI), the Water Emergency 3.5 percent on behalf of each employee. Response Organization of Orange County(W EROC), Group Insurance - This includes the District's the Water Environment Research Foundation share of employees' medical and dental insurance (W ERF),the Information Technology Approval Group plans, and life and disability insurance premiums. (ITAG), the California Association of Sanitation It also includes the other post-employment benefits Agencies (CASA), the Southern California Alliance of that the District is obligated to pay for retirees.The Publicly Owned Treatment Works (SCAP), and the FY 2016-17 budget includes an estimated Center for Demographic Research 5.0 percent increase for medical insurance, Administrative Expenses -These accounts include followed by a 6.0 percent increase in FY 2017-18. supplies, postage, technical journals and The FY 2016-17 and 2017-18 budgets include publications,forms,small office equipment,and small estimated annual increases for vision, life, and computer items. The small equipment and computer disability insurance of 3.0 percent, 10.0 percent, items cost less than $5,000 per item and exclude and 6.0 percent, respectively. There is no change items that are capitalized. for dental insurance in the FY 2016-17 and 2017- 18 budgets. Printing and Publication -The budget provides for Tuition & Certification Reimbursements - To in-house and outside reproduction costs and reflects encourage the self-development and training of an expanded management information system and employees, the District has a tuition and administrative requirements as well as a continuing employees, reimbursement program. This demand by the public and regulatory agencies for certiappropriation is set at reimbursement 00 for program. 201 This information. This group of accounts also includes and $17ation for FYa $178. costs for photo processing, advertisements, and notices. Development Pay-To further promote employee Training&Meetings-Board member and staff travel efforts that increase job knowledge, skills, and has been significantly reduced in recent years. This abilities, the District has established this new category includes meetings of professional societies; benefit for employees obtaining educational ongoing technical training and materials for staff; degrees and job-related certificates/ licenses. The training for computerized plant monitoring and control systems and other"high tech"equipment, processes Section 5—Page 8 Notes to Operations Summary and systems;and training to allow for an adaptive and required, to ensure that no residual chlorine is flexible work force. The District continues to place an discharged into the ocean. Sodium bisulfite usage emphasis on safety, technical, leadership and decreased with the decrease in effluent management training. The training budget has held disinfection bleach during FY 2015-16. That is constant between 1.6 percent and 1.8 percent of anticipated to remain the same during fiscal years budgeted, regular salaries. 2016-17 and 2017-18. Operating Materials 8 Supplies Gasoline, Oil and Fuel-This group of accounts Chemical Coagulants -Chemical coagulants are includes gasoline, oil, and diesel fuel required to used to enhance the primary treatment process by operate stationary treatment plant equipment as increasing the solids removal efficiencies and are well as approximately 300 pieces of major mobile used to control hydrogen sulfide levels in the equipment such as cars, trucks, cranes, and digester gas. generators. Also included in this group of accounts is the cost of fuel for the compressed The anionic polymer budget for FY 2016-17 is natural gas station. The cost of the natural gas is $387,000 with FY 2017-18 increasing to $398,000 recovered by selling the compressed natural gas because of a 3 percent anticipated inflation rate as vehicle fuel to outside users. The budgets for increase. The cationic polymer budgets are this group of items are expected to remain $2,010,000 for FY 2016-17 and $2,160,000 in relatively the same for the next two fiscal years. FY 2017-18.The projected ferric chloride budget for FY 2016-17 is $2,730,000 and $2,839,000 in Other Operating Supplies - This group of FY2017-18,a 4 percent increase due to anticipated accounts is for miscellaneous items such as changes in unit rates. scrubber acids, activated carbon, solvents, cleaners, hardware, janitorial supplies, tools, Odor Control Chemicals - The District uses safety equipment, laboratory supplies, etc., that hydrogen peroxide, sodium hydroxide (caustic are required to operate and maintain existing and soda), and bleach as the primary odor control expanding facilities. This group of accounts is chemicals within the treatment plants; muriatic acid expected to remain relatively the same during is an odor control chemical used for cleaning the fiscal years 2016-17 and 2017-18. scrubbers. The treatment plant odor control chemicals budgets reflect a $477,000 increase Contractual Services-The major component of this from FY 2015-16 due to increased odor category is biosolids removal and transportation complaints, CIP projects, and unit rate increases, costs. Contracts have been executed with firms for with a decrease of$20,000 in FY 2017-18. agricultural reuse of residual solids, composting, and a landfill site for biosolids disposal. A total of Ferrous chloride, magnesium hydroxide, calcium $17,206,000 has been budgeted for solids and other nitrate, and caustic soda are the primary odor waste removal and transportation in FY 2016-17 and control chemicals used within the collection $13,950,000 in FY 2017-18. system. The FY 2016-17 budgets for these chemicals reflect a $363,000 decrease from This category also includes appropriations for FY 2015-16 primarily due to discontinuing ferrous groundskeeping services,janitorial services, security chloride use at IRWD dosing site,with an increase services, county service fees,temporary help to level of $585,000 in FY 2017-18 because of estimated out periodic increases in staff workload, long-term unit rate increases and the planned addition of a leaves, and position vacancies, outside laboratory new dosing site on the Euclid trunk sewer. services, manhole rehabilitation, CCTV services, Disinfection Chemicals - Sodium Hypochlorite industrial and line cleaning services. (Bleach)—With the cessation of the disinfection of Professional Services - Includes General Counsel, water discharged to the ocean, the remaining special labor counsel, engineering, advocacy efforts, treatment plant bleach usage is for the disinfection audit and accounting services, software program of plant water and odor control. It is anticipated consulting, and other technical consulting services. that the District treatment plant bleach budgets will be $167,000 in FY 2016-17 and $177,000 in Research and Monitoring-Overall this category of FY 2017-18. costs is expected to decrease approximately$31,000 in FY 2016-17 and then increase by $72,000 the Sodium Bisulfite — Sodium bisulfite is used for following fiscal year. The costs in this category dechlorination of outfall effluent at Plant No. 2, if consist of contract services to carry out the extensive Section 5—Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget ocean monitoring program required by EPA Region plants and support buildings estimated IX under the provisions of the District's NPDES consumption and resulting costs for electrical permit; air quality monitoring costs; the District's energy purchased from Southern California contribution to the Southern California Coastal Water Edison for the 2016-17 fiscal year are $6,113,000 Research Project(SCCWRP)being conducted under and the pump stations budget for the same period a joint powers agreement with other Southern is$610,000. Other support buildings power costs California municipal dischargers; and also provides are $601,000, completing the total estimated for operational and ocean research and evaluation to power costs for FY 2016-17. An increase of develop optimum operating parameters in the $1.2 million in FY 2017-18 is primarily due to treatment plants. increase power usage associated with the sludge dewatering and odor control facilities anticipated to Repairs and Maintenance - Approximately be operational in March 2017. 85 percent of these budgets support the maintenance of the collection system and the treatment plants. Other Materials, Supplies, and Services These line items also reflect base budgets for Insurance Premiums-Other than approximately equipment maintenance. Out-sourced annual service $32,000 budgeted each year in the operating contracts and maintenance agreements are also section to insure the District's ocean vessel, the included. The FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 budgets cost for general liability and property insurance include maintenance costs totaling $14.3 million and premiums is budgeted entirely within the Self- $16.2 million, respectively. Further, Information Insurance section. Technology has a repairs and maintenance budget of $2.0 million and $2.1 million for each of the next two Property & General Liability In-Lieu Insurance fiscal years, respectively,that will provide services for Premium -This item is used to maintain the level the computer systems located throughout the of accumulated reserves for property and general collection facilities, treatment plants, and liability self-insurance. The amount recommended administration areas. is $1,111,100 for FY 2016-17 and $1,431,300 for FY 2017-18. The total estimated expenditures for O&M contracted materials and services for the insurance program are set forth in detail in the FY 2016-17 include: Central Generation engine Self-Insurance section. overhaul, digester cleaning, carbon media replacement, electrical protective relay maintenance, Other Operating & Non-Operating Expenses - belt press overhaul, interplant line inspection and Expenses not chargeable elsewhere, such as maintenance, emergency generator maintenance, annual regulatory fees assessed by the SCAQMD and other maintenance services and operating and CRWQCB, freight and other miscellaneous materials, including street overlays/ manhole cover items are recorded within these groups of raisings and replacements, and warehouse stock. accounts. Utilities - The cost for utilities is a significant Cost Allocation - This represents direct labor and component of the operating budget. In FY2016-17, benefit charge outs and materials, supplies and the overall cost for utilities is anticipated to increase services cost allocation to the capital project where by $1.1 million from the FY 2015-16 budget, with the related work was performed. another increase of$1.3 million in FY 2017-18. Net Operating Requirements - This line item Natural Gas - Natural gas is purchased to represents the net salary,wages, benefits, materials, supplement the digester gas that is used to run the supplies, and services related to operating costs for central generation facilities. The total collection, treatment, and disposal activities, after FY 2016-17 natural gas budget is $519,000, an charge backs to CIP. increase of$19,000 from last fiscal year.A natural gas budget increase of $109,000 in FY 2017-18 reflects an anticipated higher unit cost for gas. Electricity - Electricity is the largest utility cost incurred by the District. Approximately 85 percent of purchased electricity is used to run the plant processes; the remaining power is used for the support building and pump stations.The treatment Section 5—Page 10 O m m z N � m _ ci z ti N O 2C m N O z N General Management Administration 110 BOARD OF DIRECTORS GENERAL MANAGER ASSISTANT MANAGER PRINCIPAL GENERAL STAFF ANALYST RECORDS SECRETARY TO MANAGEMENT THE GENERAL SPECIALIST MANAGER Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017.18 Authorized FTE Positions 6 Executive Managers 2.0 4_5_ _5-5 Supervisors/ Professionals 3.0 3 i Total 5.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6- Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the General Management Administration Division is to work with the Board to establish standards, policies and procedures, and the overall goals and Strategic Plan of the agency.The Division reports the District's progress in meeting the established goals to support the District's mission,and provides general oversight of the District's operations.The General Manager reports directly to the Board of Directors and provides general oversight to all District operations, interagency relations, legislative activities, communications, and the Strategic Plan.The Assistant General Manager directly oversees the Public Affairs Division and Board Services Division. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Ensure that the Board approved Strategic Plan is ♦ The Update to the Strategic Plan was adopted by implemented. the Board of Directors in December 2015. ♦ Ensure the District does not exceed 624 FTEs by ♦ Actual FTE count of 573.25 as of December 2015. the end of Fiscal Year 2015-16. ♦ Deliver a minimum of 90%of each fiscal years ♦ 80%of Fiscal Year 2015-16 CIP budget estimated CIP budget. for delivery. ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96%to ♦ At mid-year 55%of the approved budget's operating 100%of the approved budget. expenditures were expended. ♦ Ensure OCSD's total recordable injury rate is ♦ OCSD's total recordable injury rate was 2.6 and below industry average of 4.6. below industry average as of December 2015. 2016-17&2017.18 Performance Objectives ♦ Ensure that the Board approved Strategic Plan is implemented. ♦ Respond to 90%of public records requests within 7 business days. ♦ Conduct an annual destruction day with District wide participation. ♦ Contribute to employee development through the BLAST program by providing quality leadership development training, materials, classes and presentations by reaching at least 70% of OCSD staff. Performance Measures Summary 2014.15 2015.16 2016.17 2017.18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Strategic Plan 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Implementation ♦ Public Records N/A 90% 90% 90% In-house standard Responses ♦ Annual Destruction Day N/A 100% 100% 100% In-house standard ♦ BLAST Program reach 86% 76% 70% 70% In-house standard Section 6- Page 2 General Management Administration Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the General Management Administration Division reflect increase of 1 and a decrease of 1%over the prior year, respectively. The increase is primarily due to an increase in legal services and an increase in the General Manager's contingency and the contingency for reappropriations, which are set at 0.85% and 0.5% of the District's overall non-salary related operating budget, respectively. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 2,947,170 Salaries for Position Changer Transfer of Positions fronv(to)Other DiNsions (113,500) New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments (61,600) Change in OCERS retirement costs (82,700) Change in group insurance costs (31,200) Other benefit cost adjustments (5,100) Other Cost Adjustments Increase in memberships 59,110 Increase in temporary services 31,500 Increase in legal services 100,000 Increase in software program consulting 40,000 Decrease in other professional services (15,000) Decrease in electricity costs (14,000) Increase in General Manager's contingency I reappropriations 111,500 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services (1,960) 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements E 2,964220 Changes in Personnel Expenses. Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, lea%payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 10,100 Change in OCERS retirement costs 1,100 Change in group insurance costs 3,200 Other benefit cost adjustments (600) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in meetings 10,000 Increase in other professional sendces 9,000 Decrease in legal seNces (100,000) Increase in electricity costs 15,000 Increase in General Managers contingency I reappropriations 31,700 Aggregate change in Other Categories. Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services - 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements E 2,943,720 Section 6- Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 201415 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 1,232,613 $ 1,425,400 $ 1,211,900 $ 1,131,300 (20.63%) $ 1,145,100 1.22% Supplies 187,403 223,430 193,380 273,550 22.43% 283,550 3.66% Professional&Contractual SeNces 117,103 254,500 391,000 413,900 62.63% 322,900 (21.99%) Research&Monitoring - - - - - Repairs &Maintenance - - - - - lHilities 110,824 136,000 116,000 122,000 (10.29%) 137,000 12.30% Other 10,734 907 840 7 810 1,023,470 12.74% 1,05 5,170 3.10% Total $ 1,658,677 $ 2,947,170 $ 1,920,090 $ 2,964,220 0.58% $ 2,943,720 (0.69%) Expenditure Trends $2,947,170 $2,964,220 $2,943,720 2,160,147 $2,092,422 $1,658,677 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6- Page 4 Board Services 120 ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER CLERK OFTHE BOARD OFFICE PROGRAM DEPUTY CLERK ASSISTANT ASSISTANT (2) OF THE BOARD Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Supervisors/ Professionals 2.00 /s-5 4 Administrative/Clerical 3.00 Total 5.00 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6- Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Board Services Division is to provide exceptional customer service and support to the Board of Directors,district staff and the general public through the Clerk of the Board's Office. The Clerk of the Board's office promotes public trust and ensures transparency by: accurately recording and preserving the legislative actions of the District;safeguarding the vital,historic and permanent records of the District as their official custodian;preparing and publishing agendas and notices in accordance with legal requirements; acting as fling officer for Statement of Economic Interest flings; receiving and processing summons and complaints fled against the District; and maintaining rosters of the Board of Directors, appointed committees and historical events. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results • Mail Board agenda packages six calendar days prior to ♦ Achieved 100%success rate. Board meeting, 100%of the time, unless otherwise authorized by the General Manager. ♦ Maintain accurate records of official actions taken by the ♦ Achieved 100%success rate. Board of Directors. ♦ Post annotated agendas on website by 5:00 p.m.the ♦ Achieved 100%success rate. following day. 2016-17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Mail Board Agenda packages six calendar days prior to Board meeting, 100% of the time, unless otherwise authorized by the General Manager. ♦ Maintain accurate records of official actions taken by the Board of Directors and post those actions on website by 5:00 p.m.the day following a meeting. ♦ Respond to all Board of Directors, staff and public inquiries in a satisfactory time frame providing excellent internal and external customer service. ♦ Maintain Legal compliance with various federal, state and local laws(Brown Act, Political Reform Act,etc.) ♦ Maintain District Transparency Certificate of Excellence (SDLF) Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Board Agenda Packages 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard ♦ Maintain&post accurate 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Records of Board Actions ♦ Respond to all Inquiries in 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard satisfactory time frame • Maintain Legal Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard ♦ Maintain District 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Transparency Certificate Section 6- Page 6 Board Services Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-16 budgets for the Board Services Division reflect an increase of 30%and an increase of 3%over the prior year, respectively. The increase is primarily due to the transfer of one FTE position and adjustments to salaries and benefits. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 488,410 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other Divisions 46,200 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 66,900 Change in OCERS retirement costs (3,970) Change in group insurance costs 15,400 Other benefit cost adjustments (2,000) Other Cost Adjustments Decrease in meetings (11,350) Increase in legal services 10,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 3,950 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 633,540 Changes in Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 11,600 Change in OCERS retirement costs 1,000 Change in group insurance costs 4,100 Other benefit cost adjustments (600) Other Cost Adjustments Decrease in training (2,300) Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 2,300 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 649,640 Section 6- Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 396,982 $ 368.370 $ 368,000 $ 510,900 38.69% $ 527,000 3.15% Supplies 8,913 38,460 17,590 32.540 (15.39%) 32,540 0.00% Professional&Contractual Services 214,656 80,000 90,980 90,000 12.50% 90,000 0.00% Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance 795 1,500 - - (100.00%) _ - Utilities - - - - - Other 80 80 too 25.00% 100 0.00% Total 1 $ 621,346 $ 488,410 $ 476,650 1 $ 633,5401 29.71% 1 $ 649,640 2.54% Expenditure Trends 623,312 $625,550 $621,346 $488 410 $633,540 $649,640 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6- Page 8 Public Affairs 140 ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER PUBLIC AFFAIRS SUPERVISOR SENIOR PUBLIC PU BL IC AFFAI RS AFFAIRS SPECIALIST SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATIVE GRAPHICS ASSISTANT COORDINATOR Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Supervisors/ Professionals 3.0 6 Administrative & Clerical 2.0 4 5-5— s 3 Total 5.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6- Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The Public Affairs Division provides services and implements programs to meet the communications and legislative needs of both internal and external audiences for the Orange County Sanitation District. The division plans and implements media relations, website content, community relations, community education and outreach, employee newsletter, intranet development, corporate identity program, collateral material and graphics development, presentation development, crisis communications and legislative affairs. The goal is to create a total communications program that promotes clear and transparent communications with all designated audiences and to promote the understanding of OCSD's mission to protect the environment. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Provide services and implement ♦ Produced and circulated daily articles on MyOCSD,weekly programs that meet the communications blurbs on 3 Things to Know email, monthly news in Digester, needs of OCSD's internal audiences. and bi-monthly stories in Pipeline. ♦ Coordinated employee events including holiday luncheons, Take Your Kid to Work Day, and Honor Walk event. ♦ Provide services and implement ♦ Hosted 3,000 people that toured Plant No. 1, staff programs that meet the communications participated in 20 speaking engagements, staffed a booth at needs of OCSD's external audiences. 16 community events and 6 career fairs. ♦ Collaborated with OCWD to expand tour program and offer joint GWRS tours. ♦ Daily participation on social media sites ♦ Created protocol to handle odor complaints from the community. ♦ Support General Manager activities and ♦ Prepared key messages and talking points for Board Chair provide information on current issues to and General Manager. Board of Directors. ♦ Prepared/presented reports on division efforts to OCSD Legislative and Public Affairs Committee. 2016-17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Provide services and implement programs that meet the communications needs of OCSD's internal audiences by producing a minimum of 70 internal communication pieces. ♦ Provide services and implement programs that meet communications needs of OCSD's external audiences by reaching a minimum of 3,000 people. ♦ Support General Manager activities and provide information to Board of Directors through the General Manager's monthly report and the new Board member orientation. Performance Measures Summary 2014.15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Internal Services& Programs Completed On Target Per Plan Per Plan In-house standard ♦ External Services& Programs Completed On Target Per Plan Per Plan In-house standard ♦ Board of Directors&GM Support Completed On Target Per Plan Per Plan In-house standard Section 6-Page 10 Public Affairs Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Public Affairs Division reflect a decrease of 13%and an increase of 3%from the prior year, respectively. The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in advocacy efforts. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 1,155,850 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(lo)Other Divisions - New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 5,900 Change in OCERS retirement costs (30,100) Change in group insurance costs (600) Other benefit cost adjustments - Other Cost Adjustments Decrease in training (9,830) Decrease in advocacy eifods (66,000) Decrease in other professional services (5,000) Decrease in miscellaneous operating supplies expense (33,800) Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and seNces (6,320) 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 1,010,100 Changes in Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 14,900 Change in OCERS retirement costs 1,900 Change in group insurance costs 4,100 Other benefit cost adjustments (600) Other Cost Adjustments Increase in other professional seNces 5,000 Increase in miscellaneous operating supplies expense 5.000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and seNces (2,900) 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Re uirements $ 1,037,500 Section 6-Page 11 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 532,211 $ 668,700 $ 619.600 $ 643,900 (3.71%) $ 664,200 3,15% Supplies 47,627 65,650 56,760 49,500 (24.60%) 46,600 (5.86%) Professional&Contractual Services 3,326 296,000 296,000 225,000 (23.99%) 230,000 2.22% Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance 52 - - - - - - lltilities - - - - - Other 80,964 125,500 70,000 91,700 (26.93%) 96,700 5.45% Total $ 654,180 $ 1,155,850 $ 1,042,360 $ 1,010,100 (12.61%) $ 1,037,500 2.71% Expenditure Trends $1,155,850 $1,010,100 $1,037,500 $814,777 $621,539 $664,180 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 12 Human Resources Administration 160 GENERAL MANAGER DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESW RCES HUMAN HUMAN RESOURCES RESOURCES SUPERVISOR MANAGER PRINCIPAL HUMAN SENIOR HUMAN PRINCIPAL HUMAN RESOURCES RESOURCES RESOURCES ANALYST(2) ANALYST(3) ANALYST HUMAN HUMAN SENIOR HUMAN RESOURCES RESOURCES RESOURCES ANALYST(3) ASSISTANT ANALYST PROGRAM HUMAN ASSISTANT RESOURCES ANALYST Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017.18 Authorized FTE Positions Executive Manager 1.0 Manager 1.0 Supervisors/ Professionals 12.0 76�18�16 1616i6 Administrative/Clerical 2.0 Total 16.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 13 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Human Resources Administration Division is to work with employees and management to ensure an effective and productive employment relationship. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Support departments in the development of multi-year ♦ Implemented. Workforce planning requirements. ♦ Support departments in the development of a multi-year ♦ Implemented. Workforce development plan. ♦ Continuous Leadership Development through June 2015. ♦ Implemented. ♦ Meet the training level of service of 45 hours per employee. ♦ Estimated at 45 hours per employee. ♦ Manage the department's budget to within 96%to 100% of ♦ Estimated to slay within budget. the approved budget. ♦ Implement a comprehensive employee relations and labor ♦ Implemented. relations training program by the end of fiscal year 2015-16. 2014-15 &2015-16 Performance Objectives ♦ Continue with development and implementation of effective workforce planning/development and succession planning strategies. ♦ Update and implement recruitment plan to reduce vacancies by 6/30/17. ♦ Continuous leadership development. ♦ Review all training requirements and meet the training level of service of 45 hours per employee. ♦ Manage the department's budget to within 96%to 100% of the approved budget. ♦ Complete labor negotiations with all bargaining units by 12/31/16. ♦ Report Classification &Compensation study results by July 2016. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015.16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Workforce Planning/ Sustain Sustain Sustain Sustain OCSD Strategic Plan Workforce Development ♦ Reduce Vacancies Sustain Sustain Sustain Sustain OCSD Strategic Plan ♦ Continuous Leadership Sustain Sustain Sustain Sustain OCSD Strategic Plan Development ♦ Training Level of Service Sustain In Progress Sustain Sustain Level of Service ♦ Manage Budget 97% 90% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Approved Labor Contracts N/A N/A Implement Sustain HR Work Plan ♦ Approved Classifications& N/A N/A Implement Sustain HR Work Plan Compensation Plan Section 6-Page 14 Human Resources Administration Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Human Resources Administration Division reflect a decrease of 17% and an increase of 1%over the prior year, respectively. The decrease is primarily due to reductions in budgeted retirement costs. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 4,730,090 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other Divisions 121,200 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) (26,600) Change in retirement costs (934,300) Change in group insurance costs 13,200 Other benefit cost adjustments 16,500 Other Cost Adjustments increase in training 8,400 Decrease in temporary services (10,400) Decrease in other contractual seMces (17,000) Decrease in legal services (8,800) Increase in labor negotiation services 20,000 Decrease in other professional seMces (20,100) Increase in service maintenance agreements 25,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and seMces 1,700 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 3,918,890 Changes in Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 27,100 Change in retirement costs 3,800 Change in group insurance costs 12,800 Other benefit cost adjustments 1,600 Other Cog Adjustments. Increase in training 30,000 Increase in temporary seMces 10,400 Decrease in labor negotiation services (60,000) Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 540 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 3,945,130 Section 6-Page 15 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 201546 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016-17 Budget 201748 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 3,345,017 $ 3,796,100 $ 2,992,510 $ 2,986,100 (21.34%) $ 3,031,400 1.52% Supplies 104,626 125,850 90,010 135,270 7.49% 165,810 22.58% Professional&Contractual Services 718,293 737,300 706,900 701,000 (4.92%) 651,400 (7.08%) Research&Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance - - - 25,000 - 25,000 0.00% Utilities - - - - - Other 27,490 70,840 41,000 71,520 0.96% 71,520 0.00% Total $ 4,195,426 $ 4,730,090 $ 3,830,420 $ 3,918,890 (17.15%) $ 3,945,130 0.67% Expenditure Trends $4,268,675 $4,195,426 $44,730,090 $3,880,954 $3,918,890 $3,945,130 2 13 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 16 Risk Management/Safety/Security 161 HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER SECURITY& PRINCIPAL EMERGENCY FINANCIAL SAFETY&HEALTH OCCUPATONAL ] PLANNING ANALYST SUPERVISOR HEALTH NURSE SPECIALIST SENIOR SAFETY& SAFETY&HEALTH HEALTH SPECIALIST REPRESENTATIVE (2) SAFETY&HEALTH ADMINISTRATIVE REPRESENTATIVE(3) ASSISTANT Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017.18 Authorized FTE Positions 1z�tt�1z�11 »—tt Supervisors/ Professionals 10.0 Administrative & Clerical 1.0 Total 11.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 ton 2018 Section 6-Page 17 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Risk Management/Safety/Security Division is to identify potential risk to the organization and provide solutions for mitigation or reduce the risk to acceptable levels. Through this process the Risk Management Division will create a safe, healthy, and secure environment for District staff, contractors,and visitors. It will partner with management and employees to take ownership of identifying risk and controlling the risk within their sphere of control. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Safety Compliance Training ♦ Completed. ♦ Develop JSA's Planned ♦ Ongoing. ♦ Contractor Safety Analysis ♦ Ongoing. ♦ Third Party Safety Audit ♦ Completed. ♦ Revise Claim Procedure ♦ Ongoing. 2016-17&2017.18 Performance Objectives ♦ Ensure 100%of Safety Compliance Training is completed. ♦ Develop JSA's for high risk work activities. ♦ Contractor Safety Analysis to reduce injuries and accidents. ♦ Third Party Safety Audit of Safety Program to ensure compliance ♦ Implement Security Recommendations from security consultant. ♦ Implement Leading Safety Indicators to reduce injuries to employees. ♦ Revise Risk Register with newly identified risks. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Safety Compliance Training 96% 95% 100% 100% OCSD Strategic Plan ♦ Develop JSA's Ongoing Ongoing Planned Planned OSHA Requirement ♦ Contractor Safety Initiative N/A N/A Planned Planned Uniform Bid Evaluation ♦ Third Party VPP Feasibility 100% Complete N/A Planned GM Strategic Plan Audit ♦ Security Recommendations Ongoing Ongoing Planned Planned DHS Recommendations ♦ Implement Leading Safety N/A N/A Planned Planned Continuous Safety Indicator Improvement ♦ Revise Risk Register Complete Complete Planned Planned GM Strategic Plan Section 6-Page 18 Risk Management/Safety/Security Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Risk Management/Safety/Security Division reflect an increase of 14 and 10%from the prior year, respectively. These changes are primarily due to adjustments to the property and general liability insurance in-lieu premiums. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 3,578,550 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other DMsions (121,200) New or(decreased)FTE Changes In Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related, lease payoffs, wcancy, etc.) (10,900) Change in OCERS retirement costs (107.400) Change in group insurance costs (17,400) Other benefit cost adjustments 2,900 Other Cog Adjustments: Increase in minor furniture&fixtures 20,000 Increase in training 52,810 Increase in safety equipment and tools 45,000 Increase in security senlces 78,000 Decrease in audit&accounting (7,000) Decrease in industnal hygiene services (50,000) Increase in property/general liability insurance in-lieu premium 615,100 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 590 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 4,079,050 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, lea%payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 20.100 Change in OCERS retirement costs 1,900 Change in group insurance costs 8,800 Other benefit cost adjustments (1,400) Other Cog Adjustments: Increase in training 20,000 Decrease in safety equipment and tools (45,000) Increase in security seMces 60,000 Increase in audit&accounting 10,000 Increase in property/general liability insurance in-lieu premium 320,200 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services - 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 4,473,650 Section 6-Page 19 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016-17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 1,507,784 $ 1,677,500 $ 1,309,270 $ 1,423,500 (15.14%) $ 1,452,900 2,07% Supplies 434,650 420,260 431,210 547.100 30.18% 522,100 (4.57%) Professional&Contractual Services 813,431 918,500 731,490 921,000 0.27% 991,000 7.60% Research&Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance 1,155 3,550 3,050 3,050 (14.08%) 3,050 0.00% Lhilities - - - - - Other 583044 558740 567,300 1,184400 111.98% 1504600 27.03% Total $ 3,340,064 $ 3,578,550 $ 3,042,320 $ 4,079,050 13.99% $ 4,473,650 9.67% Expenditure Trends $4,079,050 $4,473,650 3,639,330 $3,701,686 $3,340,064 $3,578,550 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 20 Administrative Services Administration 210 GENERAL MANAGER DIRECTOR OF EXECUTIVE FINANCE & ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL ANALYST Staffing Trends 2016.17 & 2017.18 Authorized FTE Positions Executive Manager 1.0 Supervisors / Professionals 1.0 i Administrative /Clerical 1.0 33--1 --�333 Total 3.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 ton 2018 Section 6-Page 21 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Administrative Services Administration Division is to oversee the functions of the Financial Management, Contracts, Purchasing,& Materials Management, Information Technology, and Risk Management Divisions. This oversight includes both day-to-day operations and strategic planning. The division is the departmental liaison with Executive Management, the Administration Committee,the Board of Directors, and other departments of the District. 2015.16 Performance Measures 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Submittal of annual sewer service fees (SSF)within • Submittal completed in time for placement on property parcel database to the County by secured property tax bills. August 10'h. ♦ All Treasury investments will be in compliance with ♦ All Treasury investments in compliance 100%of the State Government Code 100%of the time. the time. ♦ Sustain succession management and leadership ♦ All identified staff have been trained through the academy programs. leadership academy; proposed succession management programs for Professional and Administrative Employees drafted and presented. ♦ Coordinate and uphold solicitation schedules in ♦ Solicitation schedules upheld at 100%completion. support of planned projects and emergency procurements. 2016-17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Submit annual sewer service fees (SSF)within property parcel database to the County by August 10th. ♦ Comply with the California Slate Government Code 100%of the time with all treasury investments. ♦ Coordinate and uphold solicitation schedules in support of planned projects and emergency procurements. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Submit SSF to the County Yes Expected Expected Expected In-house by August IO' standard ♦ Investment Compliance Yes Yes Expected Expected In-house standard ♦ Uphold Solicitation 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house Schedules standard Section 6 -Page 22 Administrative Services Administration Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Administrative Services Administration Division reflect a decrease of 3%and an increase of 1% over the prior year, respectively. The decrease is primarily due to the reduction in retirement costs. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 610,710 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions froni Other Divisions - New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 26,300 Change in OCERS retirement costs (39,600) Change in group insurance costs - Otherbeneftcostadjustments (15,800) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in legal services 9,300 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services (80) 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 590,830 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 5,800 Change in OCERS retirement costs 500 Change in group insurance costs 2,400 Other benefit cost adjustments (300) Other Cost Adjustments: No other cost changes Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services - 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Require ents $ 599,230 Section 6-Page 23 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 657,354 $ 604,100 $ 567.600 $ 575,000 (4.82%) $ 583.400 1.46% Supplies 758 850 850 770 (9.41%) 770 0.00% Professional&Contractual Services 9,263 5,700 17,000 15,000 163.16% 15,000 0.00% Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance - - - - - - - Utilities - - - - - Other 392 60 60 60 0.00% 60 0.00% Total $ 657,767 $ 610,710 1 $ 585,5101 $ 590,830 (3.26%) $ 599,230 Expenditure Trends 622,137 $627,694 $667,767 $610,710 $590,830 $599,230 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 24 Financial Management 220 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE& ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CONTROLLER WManagennent SENIOR ACCOUNTING ACCOUNTING ACCOUNTANT- SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- Debt Financial Operations/ Managerrent Reporting Planning FF pRINCIPAL PRINCIPAL SENIOR - ACCOUNTANT- ce ACCOUNTANT- ACCOUNTANT- Construction m General Ledger Payroll Accounting& Budget STAFF PAYROLL ANALYST- ACCOUNTANT- TECHNICIAN(2)- ACCOUNTANT- SewerService General Ledger Payroll Construction Fee Program Accounting ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT II (2)- ACCOUNTING Amounts ASSISTANT II (3)- Receivable& Amounts Payable Pernit Program Staffing Trends 2016-17 & 2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.0 181815�19-19-19 Supervisors/ Professionals 11.0 Administrative & Clerical 7.0 Total 19.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 25 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Financial Management Division is to maintain financial oversight and administration of all District funds and accounts. The Financial Management Division is responsible for administering the treasury management and debt financing programs, the processing of cash receipts, accounts payable, accounts receivable, user fees, and payroll, accounting for fixed assets, and coordinating the capital and operating budget process throughout the District. The annual audit required by law and all financial reporting required of special districts by the State of California is coordinated and administered through this division. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Issue monthly financial reports within 10 working days ♦ Goal was achieved. of the following month for 83%of the year. ♦ No more than 30 invoices for payment shall be ♦ No more than 30 invoices for payment were outstanding longer than 30 days during the outstanding longer than 30 days during the completion of any one accounts payable cycle 90%of completion of any one accounts payable cycle 100% the time. of the time. ♦ All sewer service fee rebate requests will be ♦ The economic downturn has resulted in more than a processed within 90 days 90%of the time. doubling of claims submitted since FY 2010-11. As a result,claims were not processed within 90 days. ♦ Payroll processing will be completed on time 100%of ♦ Payroll was processed with an error-free rate of the time and error free>99.5%of the Ume. 99.9%on a bi-weekly and interim basis. ♦ All debt service payments will be paid electronically, ♦ All debt service payments were paid electronically, on the actual due dates, and error free 100%of the on the actual due dates,and error free 100%of the time. time. ♦ All treasury investments will be in compliance with the ♦ All treasury investments were in compliance with the California State Government Code 100%of the time. California State Government Code 100%of the time. 2016-17 8 2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Issue monthly financial reports within 10 working days of the following month for 83% of the year. ♦ No more than 30 invoices for payment shall be outstanding longer than 30 days during the completion of any one accounts payable cycle 90%of the time. ♦ The current backlog of rebate claims will be processed resulting in all claims being processed within 90 days of receipt. ♦ Payroll processing will be completed on time 100%of the time and error free>99.5%of the time. ♦ All debt service payments will be paid electronically, on the actual due dates, and error free 100%of the time. ♦ All treasury investments will be in compliance with the California State Government Code 100% of the time. Performance Measures Summary 2014.15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Financial Reports Issuance 83% 83% 83% 83% In-house standard Standard ♦ Accounts Payable Standard 100% 100% 90% 90% In-house standard ♦ Sewer Service Refund 90 Day 0% 0% 90% 90% In-house standard Standard ♦ Payroll Error Free Standard 99.7% 99.8% 99.5% 99.5% In-house standard ♦ Debt Service Payment Standard 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard ♦ Investment Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Section 6-Page 26 Financial Management Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Financial Management Division reflects a decrease of 6% and an increase of 20%over the prior year, respectively. The decrease in 2016-17 is primarily due to the reduction in retirement costs.The 2017-18 increase is primarily due to postage, printing, and county service fees for Proposition 218 notices, and other professional services for a sewer service fee rate study. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 3,629,380 SaleNes for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other DiNsions - New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, lease payofie,wcancy, etc.) 5,000 Change in OCERS retirement costs (138,100) Change in group insurance costs (2,800) Other benefit cost adjustments (8,700) Other Cost Adjustments Decrease in county service fee (35,250) Decrease in audit and accounting services (16,550) Decrease in other professional seMces (17,100) Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services (5,070) 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 3,410,810 Changes to Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, lease payoffs, sacancy, etc.) 22,200 Change in OCERS retirement costs 3,000 Change in group insurance costs 15,100 Other benefit cost adjustments (2,400) Other Cost Adjustments Increase in postage 268,930 Increase in outside printing services 82,300 Increase in county service fee 45,900 Increase in audit and accounting serNces 18,600 Increase in other professional services 217,900 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change In other materials, supplies, and serdces 19,650 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 4,101,990 Section 6-Page 27 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 2,730,185 $ 2,649,700 $ 2,717,000 $ 2,505,100 (5.46%) $ 2,543,000 1.51% Supplies 23,917 38,430 41,110 40,930 6,51% 394,710 864.35% Professional&Contractual Services 825,426 940,870 930,840 864,400 (8.13%) 1,163,900 34.65% Research&Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs& Maintenance 105 - 60 - - - - Utilities - - - - - Other 1,275 380 600 380 0.00% 380 0.00% Total $ 3,580,906 1 $ 3,629,380 $ 3,689,610 1 $ 3,410,810 1 (6.02%)l $ 4,101,990 20.26% Expenditure Trends $3,637,058 $3,468,950 $3,580,908 $3,629,380 $3,410,810 $4,101,990 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 28 Contracts, Purchasing, & Materials Management 230 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE &ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CONTRACTS& PURCHASING MANAGER CONTRACTS PURCHASING MATERIALS SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR CONTROL SUPERVISOR PRINCIPAL SENIOR BUYER(2) LEAD CONTRACTS STOREKEEPER(2) ADMINISTRATOR(2) SENIOR BUYER(3) SENIOR CONTRACTS STOREKEEPER(3) ADMINISTRATOR(3) CONTRACTS CONTRACTS/ ADMINISTRATOR(3) PURCHASING STOREKEEPER(5) ASSISTANT(2) CONTRACTS/ PURCHASING ASSISTANT(3) Staffing Trends 2016-17 & 2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.00 zs7]-31-3z az 3z az Supervisors/ Professionals 16.00 Administrative & Clerical 15.00 Total 32.00 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 29 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The Contracts, Purchasing and Materials Management Division's goal is to provide equipment, services and information with the commitment to achieving the highest ethical, economic and progressive contracts and purchasing standards possible. The division is responsible for contract administration and procurement for all District departments. The District's warehouses receive, inventory and distribute supplies, materials and equipment to all departments in addition to inventory control analysis and surplus disposition. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Continue the cycle count program and maintain a ♦ Cycle count program temporarily suspended due to 97% accuracy rate or better. ERP change ♦ Obtain the 2015"Achievement of Excellence in ♦ AEP award received. Procurement" (AEP)award by meeting all National requirements. ♦ Successfully reorganize Plant 1 and Plant 2 ♦ Completed warehouse inventories to accommodate staffing relocation. ♦ Successfully complete the new Purchasing ♦ Completed Ordinance and General Manager's Policies& Procedures and have Ordinance approved by Committees and Board. ♦ Successfully implement two high-level service- ♦ Completed. based contracts to substantially increase cost savings through economies of scale. 2016-17&2017.18 Performance Objectives ♦ Re-implement the warehouse inventory cycle count program and maintain a 97% accuracy rate or better. ♦ Obtain the 2016"Achievement of Excellence in Procurement" (AEP)award by meeting all National requirements. ♦ Successfully implement a bin reorganization for Materials staff to ensure continuity and efficiency. ♦ Successfully implement a new surplus ordinance. ♦ Successfully implement two high-volume inventory commodity contracts to maximize savings and performance. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016.17 2017.18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Cycle Count 97% 97% 97% 97% APICS standard ♦ AEP Award Obtained Obtain Obtain Obtain NPI, NAPM, NIGP, & CAPPO standards ♦ Materials Reorganization N/A In Progress In Progress In Progress Best Practices ♦ Surplus Ordinance N/A N/A In Progress In Progress Legal Requirement ♦ Commodity Contracts N/A N/A 1 1 Chemical Shortages Section 6 -Page 30 Contracts, Purchasing, & Materials Management Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Contracts, Purchasing,& Materials Management Division reflect a decrease of 5%and an increase of 2%over the prior year, respectively. These changes are primarily due to the reduction in retirement costs. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 4,386,540 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other Divisions New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 5,100 Change in OCERS retirement costs (225,200) Change in group insurance costs (4,700) Other benefit cost adjustments (15,300) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in training and meetings 6,300 Decrease in temporary services (20,000) Increase in audit and accounting services 25,000 Increase in repairs&maintenance 8,600 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services 2,880 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 4,169,220 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 41,800 Change in OCERS retirement costs 4,900 Change in group insurance costs 25,500 Other benefit cost adjustments (3,900) Other Cost Adjustments: Decrease in administrative expense (7,000) Increase in temporary services 20,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services - 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 4,250,520 Section 6-Page 31 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 201rW Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015.16 2016-17 Budget 2017.18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 4,204,953 $ 4,154,700 $ 4,027,000 $ 3,914,600 (5.78%) $ 3,982,900 1,74% Supplies 43,563 48,800 42,530 55,980 14.71% 48,980 (12,50%) Professional&Contractual Senlces 106,491 120,000 85,000 120,000 0.00% 140,000 16,67% Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs& Maintenance (16,985) 1,400 200 10,000 614.29% 10,000 0.00% Utilities - - - - - Other 68,451 61,640 78,000 68,640 11.36% 68,640 0.00% Total $ 4,406,473 $ 4,386,540 $ 4,232,730 1 $ 4,169,220 1 (4.95%)l $ 4,250,520 Expenditure Trends 3,997,205 $4,202,549 $4,406,473 $4,386,540 $4,169,220 $4,250,520 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 32 Information Technology 250 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE& ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS& OPERATIONS MANAGER SENIOR PRINCIPAL INFORMATION INFORMATION ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANT ANALYST(3) ANALYST(2) INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY MANAGER SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR PRINCIPAL SENIOR PRINCIPAL SENIOR PRINCIPAL SENIOR INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY ANALYST(2) ANALYST(4) ANALYST ANALYST ANALYST ANALYST(2) INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION DATA TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY TECHOLOGY MANAGEMENT ANALYSTIII ANALYSTII ANALYST 111(4) ANALYST II(2) ANALVSTIII TECH 11(7) STAFF INFORMATION INFORMATION ANALYST TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY DATA TECH II TECHI MANAGEMENT TECH 1(4) PROGRAM ASSISTANT Staffing Trends 2016-17 & 2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 2.0 48-47-45-44-45-45 Supervisors/ Professionals 28.0 Technical Staff 13.0 Administrative/Clerical 2.0 Total 45.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 33 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The Information Technology Division provides support to the users of District's information technology related assets and services, as well as developing and implementing technology solutions that best meet the needs of the District.The Division procures and manages computer hardware/software and provides end user support with a Service Desk that performs computer and telecommunications installations, moves, and changes.The Division is also responsible for the design, installation, maintenance,troubleshooting, and upgrades of all networking infrastructure components and back-end computer system,wireless connectivity, plant ratio/public address, fire/security, reprographics, and mailroom services.Additionally,this Division works closely with every department and division in developing an understanding of the organization's software application and information requirements and providing systems analysis and design, customer computer programming, system implementation and integration, and database/data warehousing availability and support. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Implement IT Disaster Recovery objectives (P2 ♦ 55%complete.Acquired equipment and and 3rd site). configuration underway. Need to design a redundant Internet connection with separate ISPs at P1 and P2. ♦ Implement additional Pump Station Multiprotocol ♦ Complete. All 14 Pump Stations now are Label Switching (MPLS)solutions. connected with MPLS solutions. ♦ Upgrade the District's OCERS programs and data ♦ Complete. Developed the internal programs to interfaces to meet OCERS new Vitech Systems extract and format the data. OCERS V3 PASS live. Group's V3 system requirements. ♦ Implement commercial off the shelf software for ♦ 95% complete. System went live on 1/1 812 0 1 6. Source Controls Pretreatment Program needs. Addressing final system acceptance issues. 2016-17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Replace obsolete computing equipment. ♦ Critical system availability. ♦ Replace CIP Management System. ♦ Maintain a Safety Scorecard above 90%for overall. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Replace Obsolete 30%of total 38%of total 25%of total 25%of total Rotate Every 4 Computers computers computers computers computers Years ♦ Critical Systems 90% 95% >90% >90% Minimum Business Availability Impact ♦ Replace CIP 5% 10% 100% 100% Improve Business Management System Processes ♦ Safety Scorecard 95% 100% >90% >90% District Goal Section 6-Page 34 Information Technology Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Information Technology Division reflect an increase of 1%and an increase of 2%over the prior year, respectively. The increase is primarily due to increases in repairs& maintenance and service maintenance agreements.The increase is partially offset by the reduction in retirement costs and decreases in in-house reproduction services and other professional services. 2015.16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 10,189,160 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions fromi(to)Other Divisions New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 30.300 Change in OCERS retirement costs (372,400) Change in group insurance costs (6,000) Other benefit cost adjustments (63,600) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in small computer items 16,000 Decrease in in-house reproduction services (122,000) Decrease in training (24,790) Decrease in temporary services (10,000) Increase in software program consulting 48,000 Decrease in other professional services (150,000) Increase in repairs&maintenance services and materials 127,260 Increase in service maintenance agreements 552.000 Increase in telephone 15,000 Increase in outside equipment rental 38,070 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services 510 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements b 10,267,510 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 50,700 Change in OCERS retirement costs 4,800 Change in group insurance costs 34,900 Other benefit cost adjustments (5,400) Other Cost Adjustments: Decrease in software program consulting (30,000) Increase in service maintenance agreements 100,000 Increase in outside equipment rental 12,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services 1,130 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 10,435,640 Section 6-Page 35 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015•16 Operating Expenses 2014.15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 6,971,512 $ 6,780,400 $ 6,512,400 $ 6,368,700 (6.07%) $ 6,453,700 1.33% Supplies 928,881 1,266,280 1,056,630 1,136,280 (10.27%) 1,137,410 0.10% Professional&Contractual Serdces 277,661 402,000 244,070 290,000 (27-86%) 260,000 (10.34%) Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance 1,357,930 1,352,740 2,006,000 2,032,000 5021% 2,132,000 4.92% Utilities 315,172 385,000 350,000 400,000 3.90% 400,000 0.00% Other 1,669 2,740 1,620 40,530 1379.20% 52,530 29.61% Total $ 9,852,825 1 $10,189,160 $10,170,720 $10,267,510 1 0.77% 1 $10,435,640 L64% Expenditure Trends 9,418,952 $9,171,469 $9,852,825 $10,189,160 $10,267,510 $10,435,640 2013 2014 2025 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 36 Environmental Services Administration 610 GENERAL MANAGER DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES EEXECUTIVE ASSISTANT Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Executive Manager 1.00 Administrative/Clerical 1.00 Total 2-00 / 2 2 o o o o 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 37 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The Environmental Services Administration Division provides leadership, support and oversight of the Environmental Services Department staff who are responsible for managing all of OCSD's environmental monitoring, regulatory, compliance and reporting elements.The Division's key role is to ensure the sanitation district meets the requirements of federal, state and local regulations for treated sewage discharge into the ocean, water recycling, air emissions, industrial waste, sewer system operations, land use controls and biosolids and stormwater management. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ N/A— New division effective FY 2016-17 ♦ N/A 2016.17&2017.18 Performance Objectives ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96%to 100%of the approved budget. ♦ Ensure that reporting divisions achieve 90% of individual performance objectives. ♦ Ensure all environmental compliance reporting requirements are met on or before required submission dale 100% of the time. ♦ Conduct audits of all major environmental permits at least once every 3 years. Performance Measures Summary 2014.15 2015.16 2016.17 2017.18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Manage Budget N/A N/A 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Department Performance N/A N/A >_90% >_90% In-house standard Objectives ♦ Compliance Reporting N/A N/A 100% 100% In-house standard Requirements ♦ Audit Environmental Permits N/A N/A 100% 100% In-house standard Every 3 Years Section 6 -Page 38 Environmental Services Administration Budget Overview The FY 2016-17 budget for the newly created Environmental Services Administration Division is$838,250. The major cost items included in this budget are two FTE positions reallocated from other divisions,as well as costs for research and monitoring. The FY 2017-18 budget reflects an increase of 3% primarily due to an increase in research and monitoring costs. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ Salaries for Posidon Changes, Transfer of Positions froni Other DiNsions 269,000 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses, Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related, lame payoffs,vacancy. etc.) 53,900 Change in OCERS retirement costs 44,900 Change in group insurance costs 32,800 Other benefit cost adjustments 23,900 Other Cost Adjusfinents: Increase in training&meetings 7,350 Increase in research&monitoring 400,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies,and sendces 6,400 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 838,250 Changes in Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, letae payoffs,�cancy, etc.) - Change in OCERS retirement costs (100) Change in group insurance costs 1,500 Other benefit cost adjustments (200) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in research&monitoring 25,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies,and salutes (350) 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Reguirements $ 864,100 Section 6-Page 39 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ - $ - $ - $ 424,500 - $ 425,700 0.28% Supplies - - - 10,750 - 10,400 (3.26%) Professional&Contractual Services - - - 2,000 - 2,000 0.00% Research& Monitoring - - - 400,000 - 425,000 6.25% Repairs&Maintenance - - - - - - - Utilities - - - - - Other - - 1,000 1,000 0.00% Total I $ - Is -Is - $ 838,250 - Is 864,100 Expenditure Trends $838,250 $864,100 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 40 Environmental Compliance 620 DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE- REGULATORV AFFAIRS MANAGER ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ASSISTANT ASSISTANT SOURCE CONTROL SUPERVISOR ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL (NPDES SOURCE SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR INSPECTION) PRINCIPAL LEAD SOURCE SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL ENGINEER SENIOR REGULATORY SPECIALIST INSPECTOR (3) ENGINEER SPECIALIST SOURCE SOURCE REGULATORY ENGINEER REGULATORY CONTROL CONTROL SPECIALIST (2) SPECIALIST(2) INSPECTOR II(7) INSPECTOR 1 (2) ENVIRONMENTALPRINCIPAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSOCIATE ASSOCIATE TECHNICIAN(3) ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER(3) ENGINEER SPECIALIST(2) PROGRAM SENIOR PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL TAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST SPECIALIST(0.5) PROGRAM SENIOR ASSISTANT(3) ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST(3.5) 2016-17 &2017.18 Authorized FTE Positions Staffing Trends Manager 1.0 Supervisors/ Professionals 26.0 47-47 Technical Staff 13.0 / Administrative/Clerical 7.0 Total 47.0 0-0-0-0 2013 2014 2015 2016 ton 2018 Section 6-Page 41 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The Environmental Compliance Division fulfills regulatory requirements with proper biosolids management, air quality controls,federal pretreatment regulations, stormwater guidelines, non-industrial source control, and water reclamation and reuse. This is done in the most cost effective, practical, and beneficial manner that meets regulatory requirements, protects the Sanitation District's assets,employees, and ocean discharge. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Meet 100%of regulatory deadlines for required ♦ To date 100%compliance. compliance reports and permit applications. ♦ Maintain Environmental Compliance Awareness ♦ Completed. Program(ECAP)for all existing program areas. ♦ Develop and maintain regulatory tracking mechanism ♦ Completed. covering all media. ♦ Maintain Certified Environmental Management System ♦ Successfully completed recertification via a 10-year audit for Biosolids. of the program. ♦ Issue and renew 100%of the industrial wastewater ♦ Staff issued and renewed 100%of the industrial permits prior to the expiration date. wastewater permits prior to the expiration dates. ♦ Continue to implement the fats,oil&grease(FOG) ♦ Staff implements the fats,oil&grease(FOG)control control program and strategies on a regional basis in program in conformance with the Wastewater conformance with the Wastewater Discharge Discharged Requirements Order for local sewers only Requirements Order. (Tustin, North Tustin). 2016-17 &2017-18 Performance Objectives • Meet 100%of regulatory deadlines for required compliance reports and permit applications. ♦ Maintain ECAP for all existing program areas. Report 100%past deadlines to Director monthly. • Implement new Local Limits and Prohibitions into all permits by June 2018. ♦ Issue and renew 100%of the industrial wastewater permits prior to the expiration date. • Complete all assigned inspections and monitoring of Class I industrial permit holders. ♦ Continue to implement the fats,oil&grease(FOG)control program and strategies on a regional basis in conformance with the Wastewater Discharge Requirements Order. ♦ Complete 100%of Safety Scorecard requirements each quarter. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Meet 100%of Regulatory N/A 100% 100% 100% Permit Requirement Deadlines(Permits) ♦ ECAP Implementation N/A 100% 100% 100% Regulatory Requirement ♦ Implement New Local Limits and N/A N/A Local Ordinance Federal Pretreatment Ordinance Update Limits Requirement ♦ Industrial Permit Issuance/Renewal 100% 100% 100% 100% Federal Rule and Permit Requirement ♦ Inspections/Monitoring N/A N/A 100% 100% Federal Rule and Permit Requirement ♦ Fats, Oil&Grease Program 100% 100% 100% 100% Permit Requirement ♦ Safety Scorecard N/A N/A 100% 100% In-house Standard Section 6-Page 42 Environmental Compliance Budget Overview The FY 2016-17 budget for the newly created Environmental Compliance Division is$8,563,220.This new division is a consolidation of the previous NPDES Source Inspection and Environmental Compliance divisions. The major cost items included in this budget are 47 FTE positions reallocated from other divisions, as well as costs for regulatory operating fees, legal services and other professional services. The FY 2017-18 budget reflects an increase of 2% over the prior year. The increase is primarily due to increases in salaries and benefits, auditing and accounting services, and other professional services, partially offset by a decrease in legal services. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ Salaries for Position Changes Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other Melons 4,774,200 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes In Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 399,500 Change in OCERS retirement costs 744,500 Change in group insurance costs 731,500 Other benefit cost adjustments 296,700 Other CostAdjustments: Increase in administrative expense 13,830 Increase in training&meetings 52,220 Increase in tools 25,200 Increase in lab chemicals&supplies 27,500 Increase in outside lab sermces 18,000 Increase in temporary serNces 30,000 Increase In legal seroces 300,000 Increase in auditing and accounting serNcas 65,000 Increase in mmuc scientific consulting services 85,000 Increase in advocacy efforts 26,000 Increase in other professional seMces 170,000 Increase in air quality monitoring 85,000 Increase in regulatory operating fees 708,900 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change In other materials,supplies, and seMces 10,170 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 8,563,220 Changes In Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, leave payoffs,wcancy, etc.) 38,300 Change in OCERS retirement costs 4,000 Change in group insurance costs 36,900 Other benefit cost adjustments (5,700) Other Cost Adjustments Decrease in legal services (150,000) Increase in auditing and accounting services 100,000 increase in other professional sersices 90,000 Increase in regulatory operating fees 14,180 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials,supplies, and services 1,000 2017.18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 8,691,900 Section 6-Page 43 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016-17 Budget 201748 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ - $ - $ - $ 6,946,400 - $ 7,019,900 1.06% Supplies - - - 126,950 127,950 0.79% Professional&Contractual SeNces - - - 694,000 734,000 5.76% Research&Monitoring - - - 85,000 - 85,000 0,00% Repairs& Maintenance - - - - - - - Utilities - - - - - Other 710,870 725,050 1.99% To[al $ - $ - $ - $ 8,563,220 - $ 8,691,900 1.50% Expenditure Trends $8,563,220 $8,691,900 0 1 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 44 Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring 630 A R OFNTALESNTAL OMERADMINSTRATIVE ASSISTANT LABORATORY LABORATORY SUPERVISOR— SUPERVISOR— ;SEN10tR Analytical Chemistry Microbic ogy& General Chemistry PRINCIPAL PRINCIPAL LABORATORY LABORATORYNTISTANALYST(3) ANALYST(3) SENIOR SENIOR PRINCIPAL SENIOR LABORATORY LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYST(6) ANALYST(4) SPECIALIST(2) SPECIALIST(6) ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY BOAT ENVIRONMEMAL SPECIALIST ANALYST CAPTAIN SPECIALIST LABORATORY LABORATORY ANALYST(2) ASSISTANT(3) Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.0 Supervisors/ Professionals 37.0 Technical Staff 3.0 41-41-41 41_4z 42 Administrative/Clerical 1.0 L Total 42.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 ton 2018 Section 6 -Page 45 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring Division is to perform sampling, monitoring, analysis, evaluation and recommendations for collection system, treatment processes, air samples, coastal water quality, marine sediments and the fish populations within the influence of OCSD's wastewater discharge and comparison sites to evaluate and address related issues of concern to the District in order to protect and preserve the environment and public health. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Meet or surpass efficiency improvement as ♦ Surpassed all established comparison laboratory measured by internal standards and industry benchmarks and internal standards. benchmarking with other laboratories. ♦ Successful performance on proficiency test ♦ Met all proficiency test standards 100%on first standards 100%correctly on first attempt. attempt. Internal audits provided positive feedback for each section. ♦ Manage division controllable costs to 98%to ♦ Division budget was 100.55%of projection. 102%of projection. ♦ Support of GWRS, special projects and routine ♦ All requests for OCSD assistance to support GWRS monitoring requirements. and special projects were met and performance feedback was excellent. ♦ Meet all NPDES Permit compliance standards, ♦ No permit deficiencies were found this year and all Strategic Initiatives and Strategic Process proposed Strategic Project Studies were completed Studies to advance OCSD's Mission. on schedule. 2016-17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Continued efficiency improvement as measured by internal standards and industry benchmarking with other laboratories. ♦ Successful performance on proficiency test standards 100% correctly in no more than two attempts and achieve no less than 95% correct results on the first attempt. ♦ Manage division controllable costs to within 5%of projection. ♦ Support of GWRS, special projects and routine monitoring requirements. ♦ Meet all NPDES Permit compliance standards, Strategic Initiatives and Strategic Process Studies to advance OCSD's Mission. ♦ Complete 100%of Safety Scorecard requirements each quarter. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Laboratory Productivity 100°% 100% 100% 100°% Internal and external benchmark comparison. ♦ Laboratory Standards 100% 100% 100% 100% Blind check standards. ♦ Budget 95.66% 5100% 5100% 5100% Percent of budget spent ♦ Support GWRS 100% 100% 100% 100% Percent of requested work completed ♦ Permit Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% Compliance measure ♦ Safety Scorecard 98.5% 100°% 100% 100% In-house standard Section 6 -Page 46 Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring Budget Overview The FY 2016-17 budget for the Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring Division is$7,768,150. Prior to FY 2016-17, this division was a part of the Operations and Maintenance Department.The major cost items included in this budget are salaries and benefits for 42 FTE positions, as well as costs for lab chemicals and supplies, electricity, research and monitoring, repairs and maintenance, and outside lab services. The FY 2017-18 budget reflects an increase of 3%over the prior year primarily due to increases in salaries and benefits, electricity costs, research and monitoring, and outside lab services. 2015.16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ salaries for Position Changan Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other DiNsions 4,207,100 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses., Other net salary adjustments(MOUtelated, leave payoRs,vacancy, etc.) 185,000 Change in OCERS retirement costs 644,300 Change in group insurance costs 650,400 Other benefit cost adjustments 181,400 Other Cost Adjustments- Increase in administrative expense 16,300 Increase in training&meetings 37.650 Increase in diesel fuel 25,000 Increase in safety eguipment/tools 17.500 Increase in lab chemicals and supplies 525,000 Increase in outside lab services 145,000 Increase in enwo scientific consulting services 40,000 Increase in research&monitoring 315,000 Increase in repairs and maintenance 255,000 Increase in electricity costs 448,000 Increase in insurance premiums 32,000 Increase in miscellaneous operating expenses 30,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 13,500 2016.17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 7,768,150 Changes In Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 41,200 Change in OCERS retirement costs 4,200 Change in group insurance costs 33,200 Other benefit cost adjustments (5,100) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in lab chemicals and supplies 10.500 Increase in outside lab serdces 45,000 Increase in research&monitoring 47.400 Increase in repairs and maintenance 15,000 Increase in electricity costs 56,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 3.720 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 8,019,270 Section 6-Page 47 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 201rW Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 6,326,007 $ 6,085,000 $ 6,221,700 $ 5,868,200 (3.56%) $ 5,941,700 1.25% Supplies 610,189 706,360 619,150 630,450 (10.75%) 643,180 2.02% Professional&Contractual SeMces 125,083 230,000 186,000 185,000 (19.57%) 230,800 24.76% Research&Monitoring 315,633 345,000 235,000 315,000 (8.70%) 362,400 15.05% Repairs&Maintenance 213,965 210,000 205,000 255,000 21.43% 270,000 5.88% Utilities 393,685 406,000 425,000 448,000 10.34% 504,000 12.50% Other 51,283 72,750 61,250 66,500 18`�%) 67,190 1.04% Total $ 8,035,845 $ 8,055,110 $ 7,953,100 $ 7,766,150 (3.56%) $ 8,019,270 3,23% Expenditure Trends 7,748,744 $7,766,250 $8,035,845 $8,055,110 $7,768,150 $8,019,270 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 48 Engineering Administration 710 GENERAL MANAGER DIRECTOR OF ENGINEER NO EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Executive Manager 1.0 Administrative/Clerical 1.0 Total 2.0 2-2-2-2-2-2 i 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 49 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Engineering Administration Division is to deliver world class engineered projects through skilled staff, technical excellence, proactive project planning, effective project delivery, effective communication, and critical thinking. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Expend 90 to 100%of project annual CIP cash ♦ Projected at 78.3%. flow. ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to ♦ Projected to be< 100%. 100%of approved budget. ♦ Ensure that reporting divisions achieve 90%of ♦ Reporting divisions estimate achieving 90%of individual performance objectives. performance measures. 2016.17&2017.18 Performance Objectives ♦ Expend 90 to 100%of project annual CIP cash flow. ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96%to 100%of the approved budget. ♦ Ensure that reporting divisions achieve 90%of individual performance objectives. ♦ Prepare and maintain a 20-year District-wide capital plan coordinating research, condition assessment, regulatory requirements, changing levels of service, and projected capacity requirements. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Manage Project Annual Cash 105% 78% 90% 90% In-house standard Flows(CIP), Min 90-100% ♦ Manage Budget 96-100% 28% 90% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Ensure Reporting Divisions 83% 90%min 90% min 90% min In-house standard Achieve Performance Measures, Min 90% ♦ Prepare& Maintain 20-Year Yes Yes Yes Yes In-house standard District-Wide Capital Plan Section 6 - Page 50 Engineering Administration Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Engineering Administration Division reflect a decrease of 2%and an increase of 0.3% over the prior year, respectively. There are no significant changes affecting the budget for this division. 2015.16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 406,860 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other Divisions - New or(decreased)FfE - Changes in Personnel Expenses Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related, leaee payoffs,vacancy, etc.) 2,400 Change in OCERS retirement costs (18,400) Change in group insurance costs (200) Other benefit cost adjustments (1,500) Other Cost Adjushnenti: Increase in legal services 10,000 Aggregate change In Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 230 2016.17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 399,390 Changes in Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) - Change in OCERS retirement costs (100) Change In group Insurance costs 1,500 Other benefit cost adjustments (200) Other Cost Adjustments: No other significant cost changes Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services - 2017.18Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 400,590 Section 6-Page 51 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 201r•16 Operating Expenses 2014.15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 675,558 $ 399,700 $ 464,000 $ 382.000 (4.43%) $ 383,200 0.31% Supplies 3,512 7,120 7,120 7,350 3.23% 7,350 0.00% Professional&Contractual SeMces - - - 10,000 - 10,000 0.00% Research&Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance - - - - - - - Utilities - - - - - - - Olher 40 40 40 0.00% 40 0.00% Total 1 $ 679,070 1 $ 406,8601 $ 471,160 $ 399,390 (1.84%) $ 400,590 Expenditure Trends $679,070 $491,999 $406,860 $399,390 $400,590 $404,075 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 52 Planning 740 DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING ADMINISTRATIVE ENGINEERING ASSISTANT MANAGER ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SENIOR SENIOR PRINCIPAL ENGINEER(2) ENGINEER FINANCIAL ANALYST PRINCIPAL ENGINEER(2) ENGINEER STAFF ANALYST ASSOCIATE ENGINEERING ENGINEER(2) ASSOCIATE Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.0 Supervisors/ Professionals 12.0 Administrative/Clerical 2.0 15�18�1]�151515 Total 15-0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 53 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Planning Division is to provide a comprehensive Capital Improvement Program for the District considering projected capacity requirements, condition of current asset, projected regulatory and level of service changes, and research or business opportunities. The Division is also responsible for water resources management, California Environmental Quality Act preparation and review,annexations, connection permitting, easements, and interagency agreements. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Ensure that expenditures are managed to within 96 ♦ Projected to be 90-100%. to 100% of approved budget. ♦ Process 95%of connection permit applications ♦ Greater than 95%of connection permits were within one day of complete application submittal. issued within one day. ♦ Facilitate the District-wide project clearinghouse. ♦ Clearinghouse meets biweekly to disposition all necessary capital &maintenance repair work. ♦ Prepare and maintain a 20-year District-wide capital ♦ The research program&condition assessment is plan coordinating research,condition assessment, refocused to support future major projects.The regulatory requirements, changing levels of service, CIP program has been filled in for eight years, and projected capacity requirements. building to 20 years. ♦ Response to 100%of environmental ♦ 100%of environmental correspondence was correspondence within 45 days. responded to within 45 days. 2016-17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96%to 100%of the approved budget. ♦ Process 95%of connection permit applications within one day of complete application submittal. ♦ Facilitate the District-wide project clearinghouse to properly disposition maintenance, repair, replacement and capital expansion work into projects. Meet regularly and clearly assign tasks. ♦ Prepare and maintain a 20-year District-wide capital plan coordinating research, condition assessment, regulatory requirements, changing levels of service, and projected capacity requirements. ♦ Response to 100%of environmental correspondence within 45 days. ♦ Complete comprehensive Facilities Master Plan. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Manage Budget 67% 75% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Process Connection Permits 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Within One Day ♦ Facilitate Project Clearinghouse Yes Yes Yes Yes In-house standard ♦ Prepare and Maintain a 20-Year Yes Yes Yes Yes In-house standard District-Wide Capital Plan ♦ CEQA Correspondence 100% 100% 100% 100% CEQA requirement ♦ Master Plan N/A N/A Yes Yes In-house standard Section 6-Page 54 Planning Budget Overview The FY 2016-17 6 2017-18 budgets for the Planning Division reflect an increase of 2%and a decrease of 2 over the prior year, respectively. The increase is primarily due to salary and benefits adjustments and an increase in legal services. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 3,200,230 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other Divisions 131,400 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 59,500 Change in OCERS retirement costs (119,200) Change in group insurance costs 14,700 Other benefit cost adjustments (7,100) Other Cost Adjustments: Decrease in memberships (90,650) Decrease in meetings (7,000) Increase in temporary services 30,000 Increase in other contractual services 25,000 Increase in legal services 50,000 Decrease in engineering services (35,000) Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services 560 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 3,252,440 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 11,400 Change in OCERS retirement costs 1,000 Change in group insurance costs 12,500 Other benefit cost adjustments (1,900) Other Cost Adjustments: Decrease in training (1,680) Decrease in temporary services (30,000) Decrease in other contractual services (25,000) Decrease in legal services (50,000) Increase in engineering services 10,000 Aggregate change In Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services 10 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 3,178,770 Section 6-Page 55 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015 i6 Operating Expenses 2014.15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 2,567,040 $ 2,646,600 $ 2,823,100 $ 2,725,900 3.00% $ 2,748,900 0.84% Supplies 293,568 351,310 261,410 255,740 (2720%) 254,070 (0.65%) Professional&Contractual Serdces 66,305 200,000 151,100 270,000 35.00% 175,000 (35.19%) Research&Monitoring - - - - - - Repairs& Maintenance 52 - - - - - - Utilities - - - - - - - Other 1,024 2,320 590 800 152 800 0.00% Total $ 2,927,989 $ 3,200,230 $ 3,236,200 $ 3,252,440 TRIP! $ 3,178,770 Expenditure Trends $3,373,390 $2 927 989 $3,200,230 $3,252,440 $3,178,770 2,983,641 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 56 Project Management Office 750 DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING ENGINEERING MANAGER PRINCIPAL CIP PROJECT PROJECT MANAGER(8) CONTROLS ANALYST 2!s- PRINCIPALSTAFF ANALYST(2) ENGINEERING ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT II ASSISTANT OFFICE ASSISTANT Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.00 Supervisors/ Professionals 13.00 Administrative/Clerical 3.00 10-20 20 20�11 17 Total 17-00 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2016 Section 6 - Page 57 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Project Management Office(PMO) Division is to be responsible for managing the design and construction of new collection and treatment and disposal facilities plus the rehabilitation of older facilities to ensure the safe, cost effective transport, and treatment of influentleffiuent. This division is responsible for the delivery of capital projects from the preliminary design stages through closeout of construction. The PMO provides standards, processes, and methodologies to improve project quality, cost and timeliness. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Ensure that the division's expenditures are managed • Projected to be 90-100% to 90-100% of the proposed budget. ♦ Expend 90 to 100%of project annual CIP cash flow. ♦ Projected at 78.3% ♦ Maintain or improve non-construction costs at 35% ♦ 35.1%for all closed, active and future projects or less. ♦ Develop Program Risk Register to improve risk ♦ Not developed tracking, consistency,and transparency. ♦ Review CIP performance and reporting metrics to ♦ New metrics developed—Combined Advertising align with program needs and goals. Variance and Combined Completion Variances characterize the dollar weighted schedule impact for design and construction projects respectively. ♦ Develop plan for Admin Facility implementation. ♦ Project P1-128 was approved by the Board in October. The RFP for design was advertised in December 2015 2016-17 8 2017.18 Performance Objectives ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100% of approved budget. ♦ Expend 85%-105% of budgeted CIP expenditures for projects managed by Divisions 740 and 750. ♦ Manage non-construction costs for active projects to less than 37.5%of construction costs. ♦ Maintain a Combined Advertising Variance of less than 30 days. ♦ Maintain a Combined Completion Variance of less than 120 days. Performance Measures Summary 2014.15 2015.16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Manage Division Budget 79% 41% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Expend 85-105%of 105% 78.3% 85-105% 85-105% In-house standard Project Expenditures ♦ Manage Non- N/A 37.0% <37.5% <37.5% In-house standard Construction Costs ♦ Combined Advertising N/A 13 <30 <30 In-house standard Variance of< 30 days ♦ Combined Completion N/A 137 <120 <120 In-house standard Variance of< 120 days Section 6 -Page 58 Project Management Office Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Project Management Office Division reflect a decrease of 23%and an increase of 2%over the prior year, respectively. The decrease is primarily due to the transfer of three FTE positions to other divisions and the reduction in retirement costs. 2015.16 Adjusted Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 3,493,120 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions fromi(to)Other Divisions (472,000) New or(decreased)FTE 108,100 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) (100,100) Change in OCERS retirement costs (273,430) Change in group insurance costs (51,400) Other benefit cost adjustments (16.400) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in memberships 3,280 Increase in training&meeting 2,160 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services 30 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 2,693,360 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments(MOU-related,leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 35,900 Change in OCERS retirement costs 3,800 Change in group insurance costs 13,800 Other benefit cost adjustments (2,000) Other Cost Adjustments: No other significant cost changes Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and services 260 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Re uirements $ 2,745,120 Section 6-Page 59 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014.15 Revised 2015.16 2011W Budget 2017.18 Budget BY Categoy Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 3,471:921 $ 3,454,030 $ 2,535,200 $ 2,648,800 (23.31%) $ 2,700,300 1.94% Supplies 20,780 38,520 15,300 44,020 14.28% 44,280 0.59% Professional&Contractual Senices 9,055 - - _ Research& Monitoring - Repairs&Maintenance Utilities _ 495 5701 540 540 (5.26%) 540 0.00% Total $ 3,509,251 $ 3,493,120 $ 2,551,040 $ 2,693,360 (22.90%) $ 2,745,120 1.92% Expenditure Trends 3,390,908 $3,347,210 $3,509,251 $3,493,120 $2,693,360 $2,745,220 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 60 Civil & Mechanical Engineering 760 DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING ENGIIEERING MANAfiER 9ENIOR STAFF ANKYST(R) ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTOR CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- INSPECTION INSPECTON Comimdim DWI Civil D.,mM.0 Civil C.I.. RiI Con.rudicn Hit SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- Ma�emenl C.1ctims Plank &Pump SNIGm &Collections P.. COWNIa SENIIXt SENIOR SENIOR SENIOR SENIIXi SENIOR SENIOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER ENGINEER(5) ENGINEER ENGINEER I2) CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIX2 INSPECTOR(3) INSPECTOR(1) ADMINISTRATIVE CONSTRUCTON CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANT ENGINEER ENGINEER(0) ENGINEER�<) ENGINEER pj INSPECTOR(3) INSPECTOR G) A350CNTE ENGINEERING COST PIANNER/ ENGINEER(2) ASSOCATE ESTIM4TIX1 SCHEDULER ASSISTANT ASSOCIATE ENGINEERING ENGINEER ENGINEER ASSSTANT 11)2) ENGINEERING ASSISTANT II ENGINEERING ASSISTANT I AOMNISTRATIVE A556TANT Staffing Trends 2016-17 & 2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.0 5 �5I-5 53-53 Supervisors / Professionals 35.0 Administrative/Clerical 17.0 Total 53.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 ton 2018 Section 6 - Page 61 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the division is to provide civil/mechanical engineering and construction management services for OCSD divisions and for project support to ensure OCSD projects are designed to meet stakeholder needs, comply with applicable codes and standards,are safely constructed and are fully inspected while minimizing impacts to operations, maintenance, local agencies and the public. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Ensure the division's expenditures are managed ♦ Expected to be 98-100% to 98-100% of proposed budget. ♦ Reduce program change order performance ♦ 3.7%as of Dec. 31 data towards Change Order Management Plan goal of 5%. ♦ Significant updates to maintain Engineering ♦ Over 20 policies&procedures updated Standards and policies&procedures. ♦ No sewer spills on CIP collections projects. ♦ No spills ♦ Division Injury Incident Rate< 2.9 to support ♦ 0, no injuries OCSD goal of<4.6. ♦ Implement CIP with no CaIOSHA Reportable ♦ 4 reportable incidents Contractor incidents. 2016.17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of approved budget. ♦ Reduce program change order performance towards Change Order Management Plan goal of 5%. ♦ Respond to public complaints or inquiries regarding construction projects within 1 day. ♦ No sewer spills on CIP collections projects. ♦ Division Injury Incident Rate<2.9 to support OCSD goal of<4.4. ♦ Develop and implement a plan of continuous improvement incorporating lessons learned from executed projects. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Manage Division Budget 98.55% 90-100% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Change Order Rate 3.62% 3.7% <5% <5% In-house standard ♦ Respond to Public 1 day 1 day 1 day 1 day In-house standard ♦ No Sewer Spills 2 0 0 0 In-house standard ♦ Injury Incident Rate<2.8 0 0 <2.9 <2.9 In-house standard ♦ Continuous N/A N/A Develop Implement In-house standard Improvement Plan Section 6 -Page 62 Civil & Mechanical Engineering Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Civil & Mechanical Engineering Division reflect a decrease of 12 and an increase of 2%over the prior year, respectively.The decrease is primarily due to the transfer of six FTE positions to other divisions and the reduction in retirement costs. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 9,576,040 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions fromi(to)Other Divisions (687,200) New or(decreased)FTE 152,400 Changes in Personnel Expenses Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 50,800 Change in OCERS retirement costs (571,800) Change in group insurance costs (71,400) Other benefit cost adjustments (58,900) Other Cost Adjustments Increase in training&meetings 8,540 Increase In legal seMces 10,000 Aggregate change in Other Categodes Aggregate change In other materials, supplies,and seMces (1,200) 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 8,407,280 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payofs, vacancy, etc.) 85,100 Change in OCERS retirement costs 8,600 Change in group insurance costs 43,200 Other benefit cost adjustments (6,500) Other Coat Adjushneats No other significant cost changes Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies,and services 660 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 8,538,340 Section 6 - Page 63 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016-17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 8,926,893 $ 9,511,100 $ 9,430,600 $ 8,325,000 (12.47%) $ 8,455,400 1,57% Supplies 55,370 61,920 51,740 67,800 9.50% 68,410 0.90% Pmtessional&Contractual SeNces 29,031 - 8,500 10,000 10,000 0.00% Research&Monitoring - - - - Repairs&Maintenance 1,044 - 2,000 2,000 - 2,000 0.00% Utilities - - - - - - - Other 1,479 3,020 2,470 2,480 (17."1 2,530 2.02% Total $ 9,013,817 $ 9,57Q040 $ 9,495,310 $ 8,407,280 (12.21%) $ 8,538,340 1.56% Expenditure Trends $8599522 $8,603,263 $9,013,817 59,576,040 $8,407,280 $8,538,340 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 64 Electrical & Control Systems Engineering 770 DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING ENGINEERING MANAGER ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SENIOR SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- CONSTRUCTION Elec/11% PCI INSPECTION SUPERVISOR-Elea SENIOR SENIOR SENIOR ENGINEER(4) ENGINEER(2) CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR(2) PRINCIPAL CONSTRUCTIONENGINEER(3) INFO TECH ANALYST(4) INSPECTOR(4) ENGINEER SENIOR INFO TECH ANALYST (3) INFORMATION TECH ANALYST III INFORMATION TECH ANALYST II Staffing Trends 2016-17 & 2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.0 Supervisors/ Professionals 22.0 Administrative/Clerical 6.0 2929 Total 29.0 ° ° 00 2013 2614 2015 2016 2017 2016 Section 6 -Page 65 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Electrical and Instrumentation Engineering Division is to provide electrical and control system designs which are reliable, maintainable, and operable at optimum lifecycle costs in accordance with Engineering Standards and codes. The Division ensures that projects are properly and safely constructed and executed in accordance with the contract documents with minimal impact to operations, maintenance, local agencies, and the public. The Division also provides process control SCADA system hardware, software and data network support for collections and treatment plant processes that are highly reliable, safe, secure, online, and available to monitor, record, control, and operate our facilities. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ N/A—New division effective FY 2016-17 ♦ N/A 2016.17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of approved budget. ♦ Reduce program change order performance towards Change Order Management Plan goal of 5%. ♦ Assure all mission critical real-time SCADA systems are online and available greater than 99.9% (8hr/year of unplanned downtime). ♦ SCADA system programming is complete and bench tested prior to functional acceptance testing. ♦ New electrical equipment is properly modeled in the power systems software and equipment is properly configured and tested prior to energization. ♦ No sewer spills on CIP collections projects. ♦ Division Injury Incident Rate <2.9 to support OCSD goal of<4.4. ♦ Develop and implement a plan of continuous improvement incorporating lessons learned from executed projects. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016.17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Manage Division Budget N/A N/A 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Change Order Rate N/A 3.7% <5% <5% In-house standard ♦ SCADA system availability N/A 99.9% 99.9% 99.9% In-house standard (less planned downtime) ♦ SCADA system N/A 100% >98% >98% In-house standard programming complete ♦ New Electrical Equipment N/A N/A >98% >98% In-house standard Configured and Tested ♦ No Sewer Spills N/A 0 0 0 In-house standard ♦ Injury Incident Rate <2.8 N/A N/A <2.9 <2.9 In-house standard ♦ Continuous Improvement N/A N/A Develop Implement In-house standard Plan Section 6 - Page 66 Electrical & Control Systems Engineering Budget Overview The FY 2016-17 budget for the newly created Electrical&Control Systems Engineering Division is$4,610,980. The major cost items included in this budget are 29 FTE positions transferred from other divisions, as well as costs for software program consulting. The FY 2017-18 budget reflects an increase of 1% over the prior year. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions fromi(to)Other Divisions 3,036,800 New or(decreased)FTE 105,500 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 172,700 Change in OCERS retirement costs 472,800 Change in group insurance costs 411,200 Other benefit cost adjustments 60,300 Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in training& meetings 93,130 Increase in tools expense 37,500 Increase in engineering senAces 50,000 Increase in software program consulting 160,000 Aggregate change In Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and servces 11,050 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 4,610,980 Changes In Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoff, vacancy, etc.) 27,300 Change in OCERS retirement costs 2,400 Change in gmup insurance costs 20,600 Other benefit cost adjustments (3,200) Other Cost Adjustments: Decrease in training&meetings (7,810) Decrease in tools expense (36,000) Increase in engineering services 25,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services (50) 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 4,639,220 Section 6-Page 67 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016.17 Budget 2017.18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ - $ - $ - $ 4,259,300 - $ 4,306,400 1.11% Supplies - - - 141,180 - 97,320 (31.07%) Professional&Contractual Serdces - - - 210,000 - 235,000 11.90% Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance - - - - - - - Utilities - - - - - - - Olher - 500 - 500 0.00% Total $ -Is -Is - $ 4,610,9801 1 $ 4,639,220 Expenditure Trends $4,610,980 $4,639,220 --------------- 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 68 Operations and Maintenance Administration 810 GENERAL MANAGER DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS& MAINTENANCE SENIOR STAFF ANALYST(2) Staffing Trends 2016-17 & 2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Executive Manager 1.00 Supervisors/ Professionals 2.00 3�2_2�33 Total 3-00 ' T 1 1 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 69 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Operations and Maintenance Administration Division is to provide leadership and support, as well as management oversight and development of the department. Ratepayer owned facilities and assets managed by the O&M Divisions have a replacement value that exceeds$6.5 billion. The Director,as a member of the Executive Management Team, provides counsel and expertise in developing the necessary strategies to maintain alignment with the District's Strategic Plan, levels of service, and annual divisional work plans. The Director and staff also proactively network with the OCSD membercities,sewering agencies and regional regulators on operational issues. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Achieve 100%compliance with water, solids,air, ♦ Achieved 100%compliance through March 2016. and energy permits. ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to ♦ Project to expend 96-100%of approved budget by 100%of approved budget. June 2016. ♦ Achieve a compliance level of 90 to 100%of the ♦ Achieved all levels of service above 90%through levels of service targets. March 2016 with the exception of odor complaints. ♦ Complete an implementation plan with a ♦ Completed; ocean outfall disinfection has ceased. recommendation to the Board of Directors by the end of Fiscal Year 2014-15 regarding ceasing the ocean ouffall disinfection program 2016-17 &2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Achieve 100% compliance with water,solids, air, and energy permits. ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of approved budget. ♦ Achieve a compliance level of 90 to 100%of the levels of service targets. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Compliance with 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Permits ♦ Manage Budget 99% 96-100% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Levels of Service >90% > 90% > 90% >90% In-house standard Compliance Section 6 - Page 70 Operations and Maintenance Administration Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Operations& Maintenance Administration Division reflect a decrease of 22%and an increase of 2%over the prior year, respectively. The decrease is primarily due to the transfer of costs for research services to the new created Environmental Services Administration Division. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 884,100 Salaries for Posldon Changes: Transfer of Positions froni Other Divisions 84,400 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments (MOU+elaled, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 90,200 Change in OCERS retirement costs (10,200) Change in group insurance costs 19,700 Other benefit cost adjustments - Ofher Cost Adjustments: Increase in other professional services 17,340 Decrease in research services (400,000) Aggregate change In Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 60 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 685,600 Changes in Personnel Expenses: Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 9,500 Change in OCERS retirement costs 800 Change in group insurance costs 2,400 Other benefit cost adjustments (300) Other Coal Adjustments: No other significant cost changes Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and seMces 450 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 698,450 Section 6 - Page 71 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015•16 Operating Expenses 2014.15 Revised 2015.16 2016-17 Budget 2017.18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 341,496 $ 472,400 $ 449,500 $ 656,500 38.97% $ 668,900 1,89% Supplies 7,502 10,610 8,230 10,640 0.28% 10,740 0,94% Professional 8 Contractual Services - 500 500 17,840 3468.00% 18,180 1.91% Research 8 Monitoring 400,000 400,000 400,000 - (100.00%) - - Repairs 8 Maintenance - - 20 - - - - Utilities - - - - - - - Olher 1,170 590 550 620 5.08% 630 1.61% Total $ 750,168 $ 884,100 $ 858,800 1 $ 685,600 1 (22.45%)l $ 698,4501 1.87% Expenditure Trends 1,075,000 5884,100 $717,667 $750,168 $685,600 $698,450 2013 2024 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 72 Collections Facilities Operations and Maintenance 820 DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS& MAINTENANCE ENGINEERING MANAGER ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ASSITANT ASSISTANT MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR (COLLECTIONS O&M) (COLLECTIONS O&M) LEAD LEAD MECHANIC(2) MECHANIC(S) SENIOR SENIOR MECHANIC(4) MECHANIC(4) MECHANIC(2) MECHANIC(6) Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Manager 1.0 Supervisors/ Professionals 2.0 Operations & Maintenance 21.0 Administrative/Clerical 2.0 2626 0 0 0 0 Total 26.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 73 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Collections Facilities Operations&Maintenance Division is to provide support and services which preserve the integrity and reliability of the District's infrastructure. The Pipeline and Pump Station teams operate and maintain the sewer systems and auxiliary facilities to protect public health and the environment and to achieve regulatory compliance. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Keep sewer spills to fewer than 13 per year. ♦ 3 spills. ♦ Achieve levels of service for response to sewer ♦ 100%. system spills within one hour and full containment within five hours. ♦ Manage expenditures to within 98 to 100%of the ♦ 93% projected. approved budget. ♦ Achieve 100%compliance with the safety ♦ 100%. scorecard. 2016-17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Achieve levels of service for keeping the number of sewer spills less than 13 per year based on the industry average of 2.1 per 100 miles of sewer. ♦ Achieve levels of service response to sewer spills within one hour and full containment within five hours. ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100% of approved budget. ♦ Achieve 100%compliance with the safety scorecard. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015.16 2016.17 2017.18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Spill Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% Levels of Service ♦ Response and 100% 100% 100% 100% Levels of Service Containment Compliance ♦ Manage Budget 99.74% 96-100% 96-100% 96-100% In house standard ♦ Compliance with the 93% 93% 96-100% 96-100% In house standard Safety Scorecard Section 6-Page 74 Collections Facilities Operations and Maintenance Budget Overview The FY 2016-17 budget for the newly created Collections Facilities Operations and Maintenance Division is $12,900,210. The major cost items included in this budget are 26 FTE positions reallocated from other divisions, as well as Costs for odor control, repairs and maintenance, electricity, and other contractual services to support inspection and maintenance of the collection system. The FY 2017-18 budget reflects an increase of 5%over the prior year. The increase is primarily due to increases in odor control costs. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions fronv(lo)Other Divisions 2,156,900 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Persxame/Expenses, Other net salary adjustments (MOU-relateq lease payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 157,500 Change in OCERS retirement costs 336,200 Change in group insurance costs 396,700 Other benefit cost adjustments 113,200 Other Cost Adjustments, Increase in administrative expense 13,700 Increase in training&meetings 28,010 Increase in odor control costs 6,375,300 Increase in tools 33,000 Increase In safety equipment and tools 53,000 Increase in solvents, paint&janitorial supplies 14,000 Increase in miscellaneous operating supplies 14,000 Increase in other contractual serNces 1,854,600 Increase in audit&accounting services 40,000 Increase In other professional serNces 22,400 Increase in repairs and maintenance 655,000 Increase in electricity costs 610,000 Increase in water costs 15,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 11,700 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 12,900,210 Changes in Personnel Expenses, Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, leave payoffs,sacancy,etc.) 17,900 Change in OCERS retirement costs 1,600 Change in group insurance costs 20,500 Other benefit cost adjustments (3,200) Other Cost Atl/ustmsvi Increase in training&meetings 20,760 Increase in odor control costs 585,000 Increase in other coritractual serNces 125,090 Decrease in audit&accounting sentces (40,000) Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 15,880 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 13,643,740 Section 6 -Page 75 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017.18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel S - $ - $ - $ 3,160,500 - $ 3,197,300 1,16% Supplies - - - 6,541,290 - 7,150,630 9,32% Professional&Contractual SeMces - - - 1,917,000 - 2,002,590 4.46% Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance - - - 655,000 - 661,000 0.92% Utilities - - - 625,000 - 630,800 0.93% Other - - 1,420 - 1,420 0.00% Total I $ -Is - $ - $12,900,210 - $13,643,740 Expenditure Trends $12,900,210 $13,643,740 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 76 Fleet Services 822 ENGINEERING MANAGER MAINTENANCE LEAD SUPERVISOR (FLE ET SERVICES) AUTOMOTVE/ EQUIPMENT AUTOMOTIVE/ MECHANIC HEAW EQUIP. CRANE HEAVY EQUIP. TECHNICIAN (3) OPERATOR(2) ASSISTANT Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Supervisors/ Professionals 1.0 Operations& Maintenance 7.0 8-8- 0 _9- 08 Total 8-0 2013 2014 2015 2016 ton 2018 Section 6 - Page 77 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Fleet Services Division is to provide our customers with high quality, dependable, cost effective and efficient services. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015-16 Performance Results ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96-100% of ♦ 99.6% projected the approved budget ♦ Achieve 100% compliance with state emissions ♦ In compliance regulations on all mobile vehicle and equipment. ♦ Fleet Services in-house survey published with results ♦ Fleet achieved 97%satisfactory rating achieving 80% or above satisfaction ratings. ♦ Achieve 100%compliance with the safely scorecard. ♦ In compliance 2016-17 & 2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of the approved budget. ♦ Achieve 100%compliance with state emissions regulations on all mobile vehicle and equipment. ♦ Fleet Services in-house survey published with results achieving 80%at or above satisfaction ratings. ♦ Achieve 100%compliance with the safety scorecard. Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Manage Budget 104% 96-100% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Vehicle& Equipment 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Compliance ♦ In-house Survey > 80% > 97% > 80% >80% In-house standard ♦ Safely Scorecard 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Compliance Section 6 -Page 78 Fleet Services Budget Overview The FY 2016-17 budget for the Fleet Services Division is$2,051,320. Prior to FY 2016-17,this division was apart of the Facilities Support Services Department.The major cost items included in this budget are salaries and benefits for eight FTE positions, as well as costs for repairs and maintenance, vehicle fuel&lubricants, compressed natural gas, and outside equipment rental. The FY 2017-18 budget reflects an increase of 1%over the prior year. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ Salaries for PosiXon Changes Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other DiNsions 677,800 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes In Personnel Expenses Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related, lease payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 72,100 Change in OCERS retirement costs 113,000 Change in group insurance costs 122.500 Other benefit cost adjustments 64,200 OMsr Cost Adjusfinents- Increase in training& meetings 11,400 Increase in vehicle fuel&lubricants 275.000 Increase in diesel fuel 8,000 Increase in oil&grease 10.000 Increase in compressed natural gas 125,000 Increase in tools 42,000 Increase in safety equipment/tools 6.000 Increase In repairs and maintenance 410,000 Increase in outside equipment rental 100,000 Aggregate change in Other Ca/egones Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and senlces 14,320 2016.17 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 2,051,320 Changes In Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, lease payoffs, vacancy, etc.) - Change in OCERS retirement costs (100) Change in group insurance costs 6,200 Other benefit cost adjustments (1,000) Other Cost Adjustments,, Increase in vehicle fuel and lubricants 5,5W Increase in compressed natural gas 5,000 Increase in repairs and maintenance 8,500 Aggregate change in Other Categones, Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and seMces 630 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 2,076,050 Section 6-Page 79 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015.16 2016-17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 1,171,772 $ 1,146,500 $ 1,152,600 $ 1,049,600 (8.45%) $ 1,054,700 0.49% Supplies 396,473 546,330 471,600 489,660 (10.37%) 500,690 2.25% Professional&Contractual Services - 1,000 - - (100.00%) - - Research&Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance 389,154 383,210 500,000 410,000 6.99% 418,500 2.07% Utilities - - - - - - - Other 132,670 6,580 43,000 lozoti0 1451.06% 102,160 0,10% Total $ 2,090,069 $ 2,083,620 $ 2,167,200 1 $ 2,051,320 1 (1.55%) $ 2,076,050 1.21% Expenditure Trends 1,823,607 $1,905,338 $2,090,069 $2,083,620 $2,051,320 $2,076,050 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 -Page 80 Operations - Plant No. 1 830 DIRECTOROF OPERATIONS& MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS MANAGER CHIEF PLANT O&M PROCESS SUPPORT OPERATOR ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR- Process SENIOR SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ENGINEER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANT SPECIALIST(2) ENGINEER(2) SCIENTIST ASSISTANT F ASSOCIATE ENGINEER ENGINEER(2) ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICIAN FRONT SIDE BACKSIDE DAYSHIFTI FRONT SIDE BACKSIDE NIGHTSHIFT NIGHTSHIFT PROCESS DAYSHIFT DAYSHIFT OPERATIONS OPERATIONS IP�NTOPER NS OPERATIONS OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR R(2) SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SENIOR PL4NT SENIOR PL4NT M I NT E NT OPERATOR 12) OPERATOR 121 (3) (4) (4) PL4NT PLANT ANT OPERATOR I4) OPERATOR 141 R(3) (4) (4) POWER PLANT POWER PLANT ER NT NT OPERATOR II OPERATOR II ER II II CH CH 2016-17 & 2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Staffing Trends Manager 1.00 Supervisors/ Professionals 17.00 /69—�62 62 Operations& Maintenance 42.00 54-54—� Technical Staff 1.00 Administrative/Clerical 1.00 Total 62.00 2013 2014 2015 2016 ton 2016 Section 6-Page 81 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Plant No. 1 Operations Division is to safely, reliably, and cost effectively operate the plant to meet all regulatory requirements for the land, air, and water environments of Orange County and the 2.6 million residents we serve. 2015-16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Achieve 100% permit compliance. ♦ 100% NPDES compliance. ♦ Maintain 30-day geometric mean for fecal colifonn ♦ Bleach discontinued as of March 18, 2015. Fecal at the final sampler at or below 50,000 MPN. coliform limits are no longer an operational goal. ♦ Maintain overtime as less than 5%of the total ♦ Overtime has consistently been held below 5%of hours worked. total hours worked. ♦ Maintain a safety scorecard above 90% overall. ♦ The average scorecard value through December 2015 is 100%. ♦ Manage expenditures to within 96%to 100%of ♦ Projected 96%to 100%of budget will be approved budget. expended. 2016-17 S 2017.18 Performance Objectives ♦ Achieve 100% permit compliance. ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 6%of the total hours worked. ♦ Maintain a safety scorecard above 90% overall. ♦ Manage expenditures to within 96%to 100%of approved budget. Performance Measures Summary 2014.15 2015.16 2016.17 2017.18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Permit Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% Permit Requirement ♦ Overtime 4% 55% s5% s5% In-house standard ♦ Safety Scorecard 99°% a 90% x 90°% z 90% In-house standard ♦ Manage Budget 104% z 96% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard Section 6 - Page 82 Operations - Plant No. 1 Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Plant No. 1 Operations Division reflect an increase of 0.04% and a decrease of 4% over the prior year, respectively. Significant changes for 2016-17 include cost increases for electricity, odor control, and solids removal,offset by the transfer of costs for seven FTE positions to other divisions.The 2017-18 budget reflects a significant decrease primarily due to the anticipated pricing decrease for solids removal services. 2015-16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 29,091,695 Salaries for Position Changes Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other DeAsions (948,1 DO) New or(decreased)FTE - Changes In Personnel Expenses Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, lease payoffs,vacancy, etc.) (24,400) Change in OCERS retirement costs (736,000) Change in group insurance costs (94,000) Other benefit cost adjustments 5,100 Other Cost Adjushnents Decrease in training& meetings (72,595) Decrease in chemical coagulants (310,090) Increase in odor control chemicals 372,300 Increase in disinfection chemicals 29,500 Increase in safety equipment/tools 22,600 Increase in solids removal costs 317,000 Decrease in other waste disposal costs (64,000) Increase in outside laboratory seMces 40,000 Increase in other contractual seraces 25,000 Decrease in professional seMces (41,050) Increase in senice maintenance agreements 48,800 Increase in electricity costs 1,362,000 Increase in water costs 77,000 Aggregate change In Other Categories: Aggregate change In other materials, supplies, and seMces 3,480 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 29,104,240 Changes In Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, lease payoffs, vacancy,etc.) 114,000 Change in OCERS retirement costs 12,200 Change in group insurance costs 51,300 Other benefit cost adjustments (7,800) Other Cost Adjushnents Decrease in administmtiw expense (49,080) Increase in chemical coagulants 229,090 Decrease in solids removal costs (2,368,200) Increase in other waste disposal costs 32,000 Decrease in professional seMces (60,000) Increase in natural gas costs 77,000 Increase in electricity costs 739,500 Increase in water costs 9,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services 7,560 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 27,890,810 Section 6-Page 83 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 201445 Revised 2015-16 2016-17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 8,382,997 $10,590,000 $10,619,200 $ 8,792,600 (16.97%) $ 8,962,300 1.93% Supplies 4,902,523 5,445,105 5,897,380 5,508,910 1.17% 5,696,980 3.41% Professional&Contractual SerHces 10,466,197 9,188,000 10,366,790 9,464,950 3.01% 7,068,750 (25.32%) Research&Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance 20,041 99,470 94,470 135,000 35.72% 135,000 0.00% Utilities 3,577,248 3,764,000 4,913,600 5,201,000 38.18% 6,026,500 15.87% Other 3,935 5,120 3,580 1,780 (65.23%) 1,280 (28.09%) Total $27352941 $29,091,695 $31,895,020 $29,104,240 0.04% $27,890,810 4.17% Expenditure Trends $24,777,163 $27,352,941 $29,091,695 $29,104,240 $27,890,810 $24,946,824 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6-Page 84 Operations - Plant No. 2 840 OPERATIONS MANAGER CHIEF PLANT OPERATOR ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAM ASSISTANT ASSISTANT FRONT SIDE BACKSIDE DAYSHIFT/ FRONT SIDE BACKSIDE NIGHTSHIFT NIGHTSHIFT PROCESS DAYSHIFT DAYSHIFT OPERATIONS OPERATIONS OPERATIONS OPERATIONS OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR(2) SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SENIOR PLANT SENIOR PLANT LEAD PLANT SENIOR PLANT SENIOR PLANT OPERATOR(2) OPERATOR(2) OPERATOR(6) OPERATOR(3) OPERATOR(3) PLANT PLANT SENIOR PLANT PLANT PLANT OPERATOR(4) OPERATOR(4) OPERATOR(4) OPERATOR(5) OPERATOR(5) POWER PLANT POW ER PLANT POWER PLANT POWER PLANT OPERATORII OPERATOR II OPERATORII OPERATORII Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017.18 Authorized FTE Positions ss� Supervisors/ Professionals 7.0 41�48_47� so—so Operations & Maintenance 41.0 Administrative/Clerical 2.0 Total 50.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2016 Section 6 -Page 85 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Plant No. 2 Operations Division is to safely, reliably, and cost effectively operate the plant to meet all regulatory requirements for the land, air, and water environments of Orange County and the 2.6 million residents we serve. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Achieve 100% permit compliance. ♦ 100% NPDES compliance. ♦ Maintain 30-day geometric mean for fecal colifonn at ♦ Bleach discontinued as of March 18, 2015. Fecal the final sampler at or below 50,000 MPN. coliform limits are no longer an operational goal. ♦ Maintain overtime as less than 5%of the total hours ♦ Overtime has consistently been held below 6% of worked. total hours worked. ♦ Maintain a safety scorecard above 90% overall. ♦ The average scorecard value through December 2015 is 99.9%. ♦ Manage expenditures to within 96%to 100%of ♦ Projected 96%to 100%of budget will be approved budget. expended. 2016-17 & 2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Achieve 100% permit compliance. ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 6% of the total hours worked. ♦ Maintain a safety scorecard above 90% overall. ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of approved budget. Performance Measures Summary 2014.15 2015.16 2016.17 2017.18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Permit Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% Permit Requirement ♦ Overtime 6% <6% <6% <6% In-house standard ♦ Safety Scorecard 100% a 90% x 90% z 90% In-house standard ♦ Manage Budget 83% i 96% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard Section 6 - Page 86 Operations - Plant No. 2 Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Plant No. 2 Operations Division reflect a decrease of 8%and a decrease of 4% over the prior year, respectively. The decrease is primarily due to the transfer of five FTE positions to other divisions and decreases in the costs for chemical coagulants, solids removal, and electricity. The budget for 2017-18 reflects a significant decrease primarily due to the anticipated pricing decrease for solids removal services. 2015.16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 23,277,850 Salaries for Posidon Changes: Transfer of Positions finor o)Other DlNslons (392,600) New or(decreased)FTE - Changes In Personnel Expanses Other net salary adjustments(MOU-related, lean;payofs, vacancy, etc.) (48,900) Change in OCERS retirement costs (W,500) Change in group insurance costs (97,900) Other benefit cost adjustments (54,100) Other Cost Adjustments Increase in administrative expense 27,320 Decrease in chemical coagulants (575,360) Increase in odor control chemicals 104,500 Decrease in chemicals for cogen operations (16,200) Decrease in miscellaneous chemicals (45,000) Decrease in solids removal costs (518,000) Increase in other waste disposal 27,000 Increase in oxygen plant operations 131,800 Increase in professional saNces 85,750 Increase in repairs and maintenance 119,710 Increase In natural gas costs 21,000 Decrease in electricity costs (250,000) Increase in water costs 20,000 Aggregate change In Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and sendces (3,920) 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 21,366,450 Changes in Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments (MOU-related, lease payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 18,100 Change in OCERS retirement costs 1,900 Change in group insurance costs 38,200 Other benefit cost adjustments (6,000) Other Cost Adjustments Decrease in administrative expense (25,560) Increase In chemical coagulants 41,360 Decrease in odor control chemicals (20,000) Decrease in solids removal costs (887,500) Increase in other waste disposal 15,000 Increase in oxygen plant operations 20,000 Decrease in professional services (60,000) Decrease in repairs and maintenance services (399,800) Increase in natural gas costs 32,000 Increase in electricity costs 387,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and seNces 2,900 2017-18 Proposed Budget-Total O eratin Requirements 8 20524050 Section 6 - Page 87 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015-16 Operating Expenses 2014-15 Revised 2015-16 2016-17 Budget 201748 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ 7,016,968 $ 7,954,800 $ 7,640,000 $ 6,914,800 (13.07%) $ 6,967,000 0.75% Supplies 2,768,897 2,946,320 2,791,600 2,438,620 (17.23%) 2,437,300 (0.05%) Professional&Contractual Serdces 8,094,134 9,446,200 8,604,420 9,172,750 (2.89%) 8,260,250 (9.95%) Research&Monitoring - - - - - Repairs& Maintenance 469,995 620,290 619,000 740,000 19.30% 340,200 (54.03%) Utilities 1,749,653 2,307,000 2,029,740 2,098,000 (9.06%) 2,517,000 19.97% Other 2195 3,240 2,300 2,280 (29.63%) 2,301 Total $20,101,842 $23,277,850 $21,fi87,060 $21,366,450 (8.21%) $20,524,050 Expenditure Trends $21,092,356 $20,101,842 $23,277,850 $21,366,450 $20,524,050 20,662,902 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 88 Maintenance — Plant No. 1 870 DIRECTOR OP oPErwTlonsa MANTENANCE POMINISTRAI NE MNNIENPNCE ASSISTAN! MNNGER M1411N1ENANCE MANTENPNCE MNTENPNCE MAINENPNCE MANTENANCE M1WNTMMCE MAIMENANCE ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR- $UPERVISCA- SUPERN$CR- SUPERVSOR- 'PEWI$LA- SUPS Eci- SUFERVSOR- SUPERVISOR- Metl�enlcel Merltankal Iilation E.Mfel RebuW CMI FaiIXpe Rebblllry aM CNIV Manageoml Melt MCFl.Repair LEAD IEAD LE INST. LE4D SENIIXI IEAD FACIlRE3 MAINTENANCE MECIMNC MECH9NC TECH. ELECIRICK MECWINIC I3) WCI3KER SPECIPLST IS) SENICft TEW.(2) ENGSil IS) SENIOR SENIpi cen ELECIRICiI WF1llER/ FACILITIES EIECTRICPI WORIQW MAINTPLPNNEW MECH4NC I0) MECWINIC IB) TEW TECH.II ISj FABPoCATCA IS) BUILDER(2) WHEWLER(4) ENGINEER IC) ELECIRICK FACIl1TIE3 MECH9NC INST.TECH.I1151 TEOLI M4CHINIST WORImi/ ASSOtlATE PAINTER ENGINEER(R) MANTENPNCE INST TECH.I(S) RE . WIXL(ER(2) MAINT.T T TECH.(S) EIECTRICPI TECX.II(2) Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions 81�85-85 Manager 1.0 Supervisors/ Professionals 23.0 Operations& Maintenance 60.0 Administrative/Clerical 1.0 Total 85.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 89 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Plant No. 1 Maintenance Division is to protect public health and the environment by providing reliable power distribution,electrical and instrument maintenance, civil facilities and grounds maintenance, and mechanical maintenance to the treatment plant. The division's professional, highly skilled staff use best practices and technology to provide Plant Operations and District staff with electrical power, control systems, environmental controls that are safe and on-line, mechanical and facilities support to ensure and restore reliability, and administer the Civil Assets Maintenance Program (CAMP). 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 5% of the total hours ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 5.5%of the total worked. hours worked. • Maintain a calendar yearly safety scorecard rating ♦ Maintained a calendar yearly safety scorecard above 90%. rating of 97%. ♦ Maintain 100%records compliance for Volatile ♦ Maintain 100% records compliance for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC's). Organic Compounds(VOCs). ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 97%of 100%of approved budget. approved budget. ♦ Maintain electrical power availability at the • Maintain electrical power availability at the distribution level greater than 99.9% (8 hr/yr of distribution level greater than 99.9% unplanned outage). ♦ Maintain all three supervisory control and data • Maintain all three supervisory control and data acquisition system servers above 99.9%(8 hr/yr of acquisition system servers above 99.9 unplanned downtime). ♦ Restrict the wasting of digester gas by flaring to ♦ Restrict the wasting of digester gas by flaring to less than 2%. less than 2%. 2016.17&2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 5% of the total hours worked. ♦ Maintain a total work order backlog of no greater than 6 weeks. ♦ Maintain a calendar yearly safety scorecard rating above 90%. ♦ Maintain 100%records compliance for Volatile Organic Compounds(VOC's) ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of the approved budget. ♦ Maintain electrical power availability at the distribution level greater than 99.9% (8hr/yr of unplanned outage). Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017.18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Overtime < 5% 3.5% <5% < 5% In-house standard based on industry standards ♦ Work Order Backlog N/A N/A <6 weeks < 6 weeks In-house standard ♦ Safety Scorecard 97% 95% >90% >90% In-house standard ♦ VOC Record 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Compliance ♦ Manage Budget 99% 100% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Power Availability 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Section 6-Page 90 Maintenance — Plant No. 1 Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Plant No. 1 Maintenance Division reflect an increase of 6% and a decrease of 1%from the prior year, respectively. The increase is primarily due to the transfer of four FTE positions from other divisions and increases in the costs for tools,temporary services, other contractual services, and professional services. 2015.16 Adjusted Bud et-TotsIOperating Requirements $ 19,291,815 Satanes for Postion Changes: Transfer of Positions from/(to)Other DiNsions 295,900 New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments(MOU+elated,leave payoffs,vacancy, etc.) 53,800 Change in OCERS retirement costs (536,400) Change in group insurance costs 38,400 Other benefit cost adjustments (115,300) Other Cost Adjustments: Increase in minor furniture&fixtures 68,000 Increase in training&meetings 67,355 Increase in tools 178,550 Increase in safety equipment and tools 33,000 Decrease in solids removal costs (200,000) Decrease in groundskeeping (43,680) Decrease in janitorial services (104,350) Increase in temporary sernces 537,400 Increase in other contractual services 575,880 Increase in professional services 293,910 Increase in repairs and maintenance 170,090 Decrease in outside equipment rental (100,520) Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and seodces (4,170) 2016-17 Proposed Bud et-Total Operating Reg uirements $ 20,499,680 Changes in Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, lean payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 129,900 Change in OCERS retirement costs 12,400 Change in group insurance costs 67,100 Other benefit cost adjustments (10,400) Other Cost Adjustments Decrease in minor furniture&fixtures (65,000) Decrease in training&meetings (42,950) Decrease in tools (65,020) Decrease in safety equipment and tools (29,740) Increase in temporary seances 238,000 Increase in other contractual seMces 490,000 Increase in professional services 93,210 Decrease in repairs and maintenance (1,317,500) Increase in service maintenance agreements 250,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories: Aggregate change in other materials,supplies,and sermons (5,620) 2017.18 Proposed Bud et-Total Operating Reg uirements $ 20,244,060 Section 6-Page 91 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 2015.16 Operating Expenses 2014.15 Revised 2015.16 2016.17 Budget 2017-18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ - $11,395,000 $10,387,400 $11,131,400 (2.31%) $11,330.400 1.79% Supplies - 465,035 446,180 829,860 78.45% 621,460 (25.11%) Professional&Contractual Services - 2,038,170 983,050 3,077,710 51.00% 3,898,920 26,68% Research&Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs&Maintenance - 5,272,890 4,714,310 5,440,690 3.18% 4,373,190 (19.62%) Utilities - 12,080 10,000 12,080 0.00% 12,080 0.00% Other 108,640 8,320 "0'0)1 8,010 0.88% Total $ - $19,291,815 1 $16,549,2601 $20,499,680 1 6.25% $20,244,060 Expenditure Trends $19,291,815 $20,499,680 $20,244,060 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 92 Maintenance — Plant No. 2 880 MAINTENANCE MANAGER MAINTENANCE SUPERIMENCEM MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- SUPERVISOR- FacilOiea Mechanical Mechanical Instrumentation Electrical LEAD FACILITIES LEAD LEAD INST. LEAD WORKER MECHANIC LEAD MECHANIC TECH (2) ELECTRICAL TECH.(2) FACILITIES SENIOR SENIOR I ELECTRCAL WORKER/ MECHANIC(T) MECHANC(7) INST.TECH. II(6) TECH.I (6) PAINTER FACILITIES ELECTRICAL WORKER/ MECHANIC MAINTENANCE TECH.I BUILDER WORKER MAINTENANCE WORKER Staffing Trends 2016-17 &2017-18 Authorized FTE Positions Supervisors/ Professionals 6.0 46-45-45 Operations & Maintenance 39.0 Total 45.0 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2016 Section 6 -Page 93 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Service Description The mission of the Plant No. 2 Maintenance Division is to protect public health and the environment by providing reliable power distribution,electrical and instrument maintenance, civil facilities and grounds maintenance, and mechanical maintenance to the treatment plant and associated pump stations in outer lying service areas.The division's professional, highly skilled staff use best practices and technology to provide Collections, Plant Operations, and District staff with electrical power, control systems, environmental controls that are safe and on- line, and mechanical and facilities support to ensure and restore reliability. 2015.16 Performance Objectives 2015.16 Performance Results ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 5% of the total hours ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 5.5%of the total worked. hours worked. ♦ Maintain a calendar yearly safety scorecard rating ♦ Maintained a calendar yearly safety scorecard above 90%. rating of 97%. ♦ Maintain 100%records compliance for Volatile Organic ♦ Maintain 100%records compliance for Volatile Compounds(VOC's). Organic Compounds (VOCs). ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 97°% approved budget. of approved budget. ♦ Maintain electrical power availability at the distribution • Maintain electrical power availability at the level greater than 99.9% (8 hr/yr of unplanned outage). distribution level greater than 99.9% ♦ Maintain all three supervisory control and data ♦ Maintain all three supervisory control and data acquisition system servers above 99.9%(8 hr/yr of acquisition system servers above 99.9 unplanned downtime). ♦ Restrict the wasting of digester gas by flaring to less • Restrict the wasting of digester gas by flaring to than 2%. less than 2%. 2016-17 &2017-18 Performance Objectives ♦ Maintain overtime at less than 5°% of the total hours worked. ♦ Maintain a total work order backlog of no greater than 6 weeks. ♦ Maintain a calendar year safety scorecard above 90%. ♦ Maintain 100%records compliance for Volatile Organic Compounds(VOC's). ♦ Manage operating expenditures to within 96 to 100%of the approved budget. ♦ Maintain electrical power availability at the distribution level greater than 99.9% (8 hr/yr of unplanned outage). Performance Measures Summary 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Justification Actual Projected Proposed Proposed ♦ Overtime < 5% 5.5% < 5% <5% In-house standard based on industry standards ♦ Work Order Backlog N/A N/A <6 weeks <6 weeks In-house standard ♦ Safety Scorecard 97% 98% >90% > 90% In-house standard ♦ VOC Record Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard ♦ Manage Budget 99% 100% 96-100% 96-100% In-house standard ♦ Power Availability 100% 100% 100% 100% In-house standard Section 6-Page 94 Maintenance — Plant No. 2 Budget Overview The FY 2016-17&2017-18 budgets for the Plant No. 2 Maintenance Division reflect an increase of 7% and an increase of 29%from the prior year, respectively. The 2016-17 increase is primarily due to increases in the costs for tools, repairs and maintenance, and service maintenance agreements. The 2017-18 increase is primarily due to increases in repairs and maintenance for the scheduled overhaul of two Ceri engines. 2015.16 Adjusted Budget-Total O eratin Requirements $ 10,624,840 Salaries for Position Changes: Transfer of Positions homi(to)Other Divisions - New or(decreased)FTE - Changes in Personnel Expenses: Other net salary adjustments (MOU-related, leave payoffs,vacancy,etc.) 34,800 Change in OCERS retirement costs (286,500) Change in group insumm a costs 7,700 Other benefit cost adjustments 52,300 Other CostAdjustments Decrease in training&meetings (17,190) Increase in tools 120,250 Decrease in janitorial costs (28,290) Increase in professional services 19,280 Increase in repairs and maintenance 665,810 Increase in service maintenance agreements 156,990 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and seMces 3,820 2016-17 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 11,353,810 Changes In Personnel Expenses Net salary adjustments(MOU-related, leave payoffs, vacancy, etc.) 85,800 Change in OCERS retirement costs 8,800 Change in group insurance costs 37,600 Other benefit cost adjustments (5,700) Other CostAdjustments Decrease in tools (33,000) Decrease in professional services (20,680) Increase in repairs and maintenance 2.832,030 Increase in service maintenance agreements 400,000 Aggregate change in Other Categories Aggregate change in other materials, supplies, and services (1,200) 2017.18 Proposed Budget-Total Operating Requirements $ 14,657,460 Section 6 - Page 95 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget 201r•16 Operating Expenses 2014.15 Revised 201r.16 2016.17 Budget 2017.18 Budget By Category Actual Budget Projected Proposed %Change Proposed %Change Personnel $ - $ 6,136,900 $ 5,365,400 $ 5,945,200 (3.12%) $ 6.071,700 2.13% Supplies - 404,570 397,980 518,170 28.08% 483,020 (6,78%) Professional&Contractual Serdces - 329,510 264,600 320,700 (2.67%) 300,840 (6.19%) Research& Monitoring - - - - - - - Repairs& Maintenance - 3,735,390 4,609,050 4,558,190 22.03% 7,790,220 70.91% Utilities - 12,080 6,040 6,160 (49.01%) 6,290 2.11% Other 6,390 5,370 5,390 (15.65%) 5,390 0.00% Total $ - 1 $10,624,8401 $10,648,440 $11,353,810 6.86% 1 $14,657,4601 29.10% Expenditure Trends $14,657,460 $10,624,840 $11,353,810 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Section 6 - Page 96 N m r T mZ N 1 '0 O 0 Z P 3 .00 r �i c 3A TM z i o "' z Self-Insurance Program Overview SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE PLANS In order to maintain the reserve balance of $2 million for the Workers' Compensation The District is partially self-insured for general liability program, appropriations for in-lieu premiums and workers' compensation. The General Liability charged to operating divisions are recommended and Property program and the Workers' at $1,196,300 and $1,120,000 for FY 2016-17 Compensation program have been in existence since and FY 2017-18, respectively. 1979. The annual in-lieu premiums and charges to the Revenue Areas or Operating Divisions are the revenue sources within these programs. Expenses primarily consist of claim settlements, legal fees and excess loss insurance premiums. Ending Reserve Balances are projected at$57,000,000 in FY 2016-17 and in FY 2017-18. General Liability and Property • The District's current outside excess general liability insurance coverage is $40 million per occurrence with an annual aggregate limit and with a self-insured retention of$500,000. • The District's current property insurance coverage is $1 billion for perils of fire and $300 million for perils of flood, subject to a self- insured retention of $250,000. The District is partially self-insured for earthquake, but does carry $25 million in coverage on seven key structures with a $5 million deductible. The District also has a$50 million sublimit for builder's risk under the property insurance program to ensure upcoming construction projects are adequately covered. • In order to maintain a reserve balance of $55 million for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 for the Property and General Liability program, appropriations for in-lieu premiums charged to the Revenue Areas are recommended at $1,111,100 and $1,431,300 for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18, respectively. Workers'Compensaflon • The District's current excess workers' compensation coverage has unlimited statutory coverage per occurrence and $4 million employers liability per employee with a self- insured retention of $1 million per person per occurrence. Section 7-Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Total of the Self-Insurance Programs 2014-15 2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 DESCRIPTION ORACCOUNTTITLE Actuals Budget Projected Proposed Proposed Beginning Reserves $ 58,574,044 $ 57,613,000 $ 57,648,775 $ 57,143,900 $ 57,000,000 Revenues In-Lieu Premiums 1,255,000 1,974,700 1,974,700 2,307,400 2,551,300 Miscellaneous Other Revenue 9,391 5,000 24,580 10,000 10,000 Service Department Allocation 5,496 20,000 5,500 18,700 18,700 Total Revenues 1,269,887 1,999,700 2,004,780 2,336,100 2,580,000 Expenses Benefits/Claims 631,661 600,000 700,000 700,000 720,000 Contractual Services 200 - Legal Services 178,671 180,000 397,800 300,000 310,000 Professional Services 60,425 77,500 57,000 60,000 60,000 Subtotal 870,757 857,700 1,154,800 1,060,000 1,090,000 Policy Premium Expense 1,324,399 1,755,000 1,354,800 1,420,000 1,490,000 Total Expenses 2,195,156 2,612,700 2,509,600 2,480,000 2,580,000 Excess Revenue(Expenses) (925,269) (613,000) (504,820) (143,900) - Ending Reserves $ 57,648,775 $ 57,000,000 $ 57,143,955 $ 57,000,000 $ 57,000,000 Section 7- Page 2 Self-Insurance Program General Liability and Property Self-Insurance Program 2014-15 2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 DESCRIPTION ORACCOUNTTITLE Actuals Budget Projected Proposed Proposed Beginning Reserves $ 56,802,224 $ 56,141,700 $ 56,125,511 $ 55,260,200 $ 55,000,000 Revenues In-Lieu Premiums 500,000 496,000 496,000 1,111,100 1,431,300 Miscellaneous Other Revenue 274 14,300 Service Department Allocation 5,496 20,000 5,500 18,700 18,700 Total Revenues 505,770 516,000 515,800 1,129,800 1,450,000 Expenses Benefits/Claims 28,272 75,000 24,200 40,000 40,000 Contractual Services 200 - Legal Services 52,339 50,000 196,400 130,000 130,000 Professional Services 2,500 - Subtotal 80,611 127,700 220,600 170,000 170,000 Policy Premium Expense 1,101,872 1,530,000 1,160,500 1,220,000 1,280,000 Total Expenses 1,182,483 1,657,700 1,381,100 1,390,000 1,450,000 Excess Revenue(Expenses) (676,713) (1,141,700) (865,300) (260,200) Ending Reserves $ 56,125,511 $ 55,000,000 $ 55,260,211 $ 55,000,000 $ 55,000,000 Section 7-Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance Program 2014-15 2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 DESCRIPTION OR ACCOUNT TITLE Actuals Budget Projected Proposed Proposed Beginning Reserves $ 1,771,820 $ 1,471,300 $ 1,523,264 $ 1,883,700 $ 2,000,000 Revenues In-Lieu Premiums 755,000 1,478,700 1,478,700 1,196,300 1,120,000 Miscellaneous Other Revenue 9,117 5,000 10,280 10,000 10,000 Transfer In - - - - - Service Department Allocation - - - - - Total Revenues 764,117 1,483,700 1,488,980 1,206,300 1,130,000 Expenses Benefits/Claims 603,389 525,000 675,800 660,000 680,000 Contractual Services - - - - - Legal Services 126,332 130,000 201,400 170,000 180,000 Professional Services 60,425 75,000 57,000 60,000 60,000 Subtotal 790,146 730,000 934,200 890,000 920,000 Policy Premium Expense 222,527 225,000 194,300 200,000 210,000 Total Expenses 1,012,673 955,000 1,128,500 1,090,000 1,130,000 Excess Revenue(Expenses) (248,556) 528,700 360,480 116,30 1 - Ending Reserves $ 1,523,264 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,883,744 $ 2,0 '000 $ 2,000,000 Section 7- Page 4 y 4! � m - f� 3 ZA 0 °D m 3 m z 4! Capital Improvement Program Overview CIP BUDGET REQUEST SUMMARY assessed to confirm the budgetary requirements.The validated CIP includes 81 active and future capital Each year, the Board of Directors, through their projects with a 10-year expenditure of$2.4 billion. committee process,reviews and approves the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) prepared by staff for The proposed 2016-17 CIP budget is organized by both sewage collection system projects (collections) treatment process. The funds requested for the and the joint works treatment and disposal system current CIP budget total $190.3 million, which is part projects. of an overall total CIP budget of$3.3 billion for active and future projects. Many of the District's projects take several years to complete the planning,design and construction cycle. Following is a table of the FY 2016-17 proposed CIP The budget for a construction project covers the life budget, by project phase, in millions: of the project. This budget is reevaluated each year for the purpose of managing annual cash flows. 2016-17 Thus, many of the projects in the CIP Budget for CIP 2016-18 are continuing projects that were approved Project Status Budget in prior years. Planning $ 11.0 The Asset Management Program within the Planning Design 52.3 Division continues assessing the condition of the Construction 127.0 District's existing assets and systems to ensure that Total Gross CIP Budget 190.3 these assets and systems can provide the necessary Less: Savings and Deferrals (19.0) level of service. The Planning Division will continue CIP Net of Savings/Deferrals $ 171.3 to review and update the ongoing and future CIP to appropriately manage the risks associated with asset There are currently 11 projects in the Planning Phase or system failure. This year several projects were with proposed capital outlay spending in 2016-17. delayed, consolidated and rescoped to help ensure Two of the larger 2016-17 cash flow projects in the that the CIP is delivered in the most efficient way Planning Phase are the Process SCADA possible. The Asset Management Program will Replacement Study and the Biosolids Master Plan, continue these efforts and will continue to define the which is one of the planning studies within the Master future CIP project requirements not currently included Studies Program. The current year projected on the CIP list but are anticipated within the long-term expenditures for these two projects are $1.3 million financial plan to ensure effective and efficient and $2.9 million, respectively. operations in the future. Four new projects are proposed for addition to the There are currently 39 projects in the Design Phase with proposed capital outlay spending in 2016-17. 2016-2018 budget to rehabilitate the Gisler-Red Hill The two largest projects in the Design Phase are the Interceptor, relocate the Banning Gate at Plant No. 2, Rehabilitation of Western Regional Sewers and the reduce odor at various Newport Beach pump stations, Headworks Rehabilitation and Expansion at and evaluate the steps necessary to replace District's Plant No. 1 with projected current year expenditures process SCADA system.These CIP projects increase of$16.0 million and $6.7 million, respectively. the amount of the CIP by $15.9 million. However, these projects will be funded from OCSD's existing There are currently 31 projects in the Construction budget and will not impact OCSD user rates. Phase with proposed capital outlay spending in 2016- In conjunction with preparation of the 2016-18 17. The two most significant projects in the Budget, District staff have developed and reviewed, construction phase are the Sludge Dewatering and with the Board of Directors, a capital program to Odor Control at Plant 2 and the Newhope- deliver the levels of service included in the District's Placentia Trunk Replacement with projected Five-year Strategic Plan. $2 2016-17 expenditures of $23.5 million and $20.9 million, respectively. District staff has also validated all active and future Standard contingency factors have been applied to CIP projects to ensure that the project scopes of work improve cost estimates. The rates of 30, 20, and 10 and cost estimates were accurate. Through the percent have been applied respectively to the validation process, each project's schedule, staff estimates made during the project development, resources, total project cost, cash flow and risks are Section 8—Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget design,and construction project phases. This reflects Approximately 130 MGD of secondary effluent from standard practice for estimating construction project Reclamation Plant No. 1 is sent to the Orange County costs. Water District (OCWD) for recycling in its two treatment processes. Following within this section are individual capital improvement project detail sheets that have been The first is OCWD's Groundwater Replenishment provided as a brief overview of each project, the System (GWRS). The GWRS is the largest water budget for the next five years, and the budget for the purification project of its kind in the world and its total project. construction was funded jointly by OCW D and OCSD. At 100 million gallons per day, the GWRS generates Each project went through an extensive validation enough pure water to meet the needs of 850,000 and prioritization process. Projects have been people. prioritized based on risk exposure. Projects that would presents higher risk or disproportionally higher The second is OCWD's Green Acres Project (GAP) future cost if they were delayed are given a higher which is a water recycling effort that provides priority. reclaimed water for landscape irrigation at parks, schools and golf courses as well as for industrial The Treatment Process: uses,such as carpet dying.The total annual demand for GAP water is about four million gallons per day. The Treatment Process Diagram on the following page illustrates the stages of wastewater treatment in relation to the flow of wastewater through the treatment process. The icons in the legend are shown as graphics in the individual CIP Detail Sheets to give the reader insight about where a project correlates to the treatment process. OCSD's system includes approximately 570 miles of sewers that convey wastewater generated within the Sanitation District's boundaries to the Sanitation District's two wastewater treatment plants, Reclamation Plant No. 1 located in the City of Fountain Valley,and Treatment Plant No.2located in the City of Huntington Beach. Influent wastewater undergoes Preliminary Treatment upon entry to the treatment plants where it is filtered through bar screens, and grit and debris are removed. It then flows to Primary Treatment, which consists of large settling basins where solids are settled out, enhanced by the addition of chemicals, and sent to Solids Processing. The wastewater then flows to Secondary Treatment, which is a biological process using either the trickling filter or activated sludge process. Solids removed in Secondary Treatment are also sent to digestion. Methane gas generated during the natural decomposition of the solids in the digesters fuels the Central Power Generation System producing enough electricity to meet two-thirds of the power needed to run both treatment plants. Solids are then dewatered to a 20 percent solids consistency, called biosolids, and recycled via direct land application or composting. Section 8- Page 2 Overview Treatment Process Diagram omreil Systems Blend and Purl Collections Headworks Primary Secondary Pipe Oudall f Treatment Treatment I€2 in9 Aerating; Senling n Basin . ...... ...... Reclamation Incoming Wastewater sea WWrner from Homes and UW.0 °nwom Businesses oc wae o"kn Hewn em cam Electricity Meat ] Utility Land Systems Dewatering - Application o, , Composting i r Solids Handling & Digestion Budget Legend Ocean Outfall Solids Handling Systems & Digestion Collections ® I Strategic & Others Facilities ri1 Master Planning Equipment Primary Treatment ®i Support Facilities 4 Headworks ® Process Related Utility Systems Special Projects O' Information Secondary Treatment Water Management Management Systems Projects Section 8 - Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Summary FY 2016-17 Replacement/ Improved Additional Total Item Rehabilitation Treatment Capacity Support Budget Collections Facilities $ 39.478,050 $ 2.526,349 $ 28,401,641 $ 214,440 $ 70,620,480 Solids Handling&Digestion 17,004,761 20,272,827 13,608,533 - 50,886,121 Support Facilities 10,626,100 1,910,375 - 11,690,725 24,227,200 Utility Systems 1,482.836 692.372 22,531 - 2,197.739 Liquid Treatment: Ocean Ouffall Systems 10,251,220 - - - 10,251,220 Headworks 7,981,622 1,968,387 - - 9,950,009 Primary Treatment 1,857,441 216.293 - - 2,073,734 Secondary Treatment 723,670 - - - 723,670 Liquid Treatment Total 20,813,953 2,184,680 - - 22,998,633 Other: Strategic&Master Planning 2,444.528 1,527.831 611,132 1,527.831 6.111,322 Information Management Systems 3,780,245 - 636,054 1,285,649 5,701,948 Equipment 920,695 920,695 920,695 920,695 3,682.780 Research - 846,653 574,540 42,659 1,463,852 Process Related Special Pojects 704,960 585,791 - - 1,290,751 Water Management Projects - 1,104,241 - - 1,104,241 Others 6,080 6,082 6,082 6,082 24,326 Other Total 7,856,508 4,991,293 2,748,503 3,782,916 19,379,220 Grand Total $ 97,262,208 $ 32,577,896 $ 44,781,208 $ 15,688,081 $ 190,309,393 Section 8- Page 4 Summary of Capital Requirements - FY 2016-17 Solids Hall 8 Digestion $50, M 207% Other $19.4M 10.2% Liquid Treatment $23.OM 12.1% Suppon Facilities $24 2M 127% Utility Systems $2.2M .2% Collections Facilities $70.8M 37.1 % Total FY 2016-17 Capital Improvement Outlays by Process -$190.3 Million Replacement/Rehabilation $972M 51.1 % Improved Treatment Support $32SM $15.7M 17A % 8.3% qftOoAdditional Capacity $44SM 23.5% Total FY 2016-17 Capital Improvement Outlays by Type -$190.3 Million Section 8- Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Summary FY 2017-18 Replacement/ Improved Additional Total Item Rehabilitation Treatment Capacity Support Budget Collections Facilities $ 21,689,502 $ 1,494,271 $ 18,728,912 $ 564,146 $ 42,466,831 Solids Handling 8 Digestion 9,957,099 10,610,149 8,972,165 - 29,539,413 Support Facilities 13,496,988 2,212.479 - 14,739,270 30,448,737 Utility Systems 9,103.264 - - - 9,103.264 Liquid Treatment: Headworks 6,819,623 761,582 - - 7,581,205 Primary Treatment 5,674.086 750,624 - - 6,424.710 Ocean Ouaall Systems 6,124,276 - - - 6,124,276 Secondary Treatment 1,916.293 - - - 1,916.293 Liquid Treatment Total 20,534,278 1,512,206 - - 22.046,484 Other: Strategic B Master Planning 3,393.525 2,120.954 848,382 2,120.954 8,483,815 Information Management Systems 4,618,013 - 672,946 2,102,664 7,393,623 Research - 856.729 847,546 16,526 1,719.801 Equipment 251,075 251,075 251,075 251,075 1,004,300 Process Related Special Projects 710.073 27,982 - - 738.055 Others 6,889 6,889 6,889 61,945 82,612 Water Management Projects - - - -Other Total 8,979,575 3,263,629 2,626,838 4,552,164 19,422,206 Grand Total $ 83,760,706 $ 19,082,734 $ 30,327,915 $ 19,855,580 $ 153,026,935 Section 8- Page 6 Summary of Capital Requirements - FY 2017-18 Support Facilities $30.4M 198% Solids Handling 8 Digestion Utility Systems $29.SM $9.1m 19.3% 5.9% Omer Collections Facilities 519 5M S42 BM 12]% 278% Liqui4Treaumnt 14.4% Total FY 2017-18 Capital Improvement Outlays by Process -$153.0 Million Replacement/Rehabl latlon $83.7M 54.7% Support $191 13.0% Improved Treatment Additional Capacity $19.1M $30.3M 125% 19.8% Total FY 2017-18 Capital Improvement Outlays by Type -$153.0 Million Section 8- Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Summary of Capital Requirement-Collection System Improvement Projects Project Total Eat Coal 2016-17 201748 Project Phase Project to Can, CaM1gew Career. Future Budget Number 711116 Budget WM116 Budget Budget Budget arms Collections Fadlhies Rat&Bnmd Street Sayer Rehab&E%krston 1.101 Planning $ 13.61$ 259,066$ 2N,379$ 1MAOT$ 12974,148 Reviutl Sarta Me Tank Sawa Rehab 1-17 ConstAmpl. 6,W4,00D 6,899,881 74,119 Reword Edinger Bolas Cars Tank Irl 11-25 Plmning 5.1591000 5159,000 Furore Edinger Pump Slal Rehab 1133 Planning B,M,Ow 8,80,000 F.W. Slater Avenue Pump Station Rehab ibN Plmnlag 9,729,000 9,729,000 Future SARI Re-Nignment 241 CmolAmpl. 11,4N,000 10,N1]29 Sti DaNnuing SARI Rock Sarbil¢em Removal 2414 Design 3,743,000 413,055 312,9n 681,137 2135,881 Reweed Taft Branch Sevin Relief 249 Planning 1,9CLOW 12,092 1,915,908 Fumn Neyhope-Placentia Tank Grace Separation Real. M5 Carl 5.739,000 4,073,525 991520 719,339 11,615 Revisal Newfiope-Placentia Tank Raid. 2-72 ConstAr 1. 99,475,00 7,233,074 20,943,945 14,157,441 9140,540 Rewoed Vorba Linda Pump Slal Abardonmert 2.73 Planning 7,053,000 12G583 6,932,417 Future Lakevkw Grade Separation Pmlect 2-75 ConolAmpl. 330,00D 126,26D 154,706 49oao Cap0nuing Tustin Rose OCTA Grace Separation 2.76 Cmai WOOD 514,683 71,317 Cormaing Beach Trund ft lnkrcsptor Sewer Relief %0 Planning 118,678,00 118,678,000 Fuun Seal Beach Pump Station Rehab 3E2 Design 60.8401000 2.229,79 5.961 2.4&3A5a 50,182,164 Revised Rehab of Western Regional Sewers 3434 Design 21I,069,00D 1,9N,740 16,010,059 6,380,601 192,1`35,600 Rewoed Nemot Force Main Rehab 5E0 Couri. 61 57.961 6.0N,569 Continuing Crystal Cove Pump Sation Rehab 566 Planning 10,8u,o0D 10,882,000 F.W. Bay Bridge Pump Station Real. SET Planning 5400G000 4,291,175 49,708,825 Future barefoot Basch Pump Stations Ocor Control Imps 568 Planning 4,06Q00D 67,533 3,998,467 Nay Dii 6 Tank Sayer Relief 617 Design 7,965,000 1.351Z90 4.M,818 1.976,316 14,076 Revised Southeast Costa Was Tank Sewer 619 Design 29,650,000 1,9g3,1N 876,199 1b1 26,153,97 Reword Giskr-Red Hill System lmp. Rai W Coari. 25.213,000 6.24901a 11P51,092 6.902,874 109221 Revised Sphering Submank Sewer Relief 730 Planning 16,95$o0D 16,952,000 F.W. MaWlhur Pump Sla0on Rehab ➢E3 Planning 8.762,000 19,682 8,616,316 Future Mein Street Pump Station Rehab 734 Planning 39,219,00 39,219,000 F.W. Giskr Red-Hill Interceptor Rehab ➢E5 Planning 5,486,000 1NI611 1301529 5,244,960 New Faciliges Engineering Program-Collections WE WLLECT ConstAmpl. 12,192,00D 107,153 1A29,603 3,310,756 1,344,408 Nary Bay Bridge Pump Station&Face Main Rem.Study SP-178 Planning 725,000 351,970 3611019 12,011 Cormaing Collections Fadlitec Total Budget 8.50,3 1,000 102,518,4041 70,620,480 42,49,831 634.717,285 Section 8-Page 8 Summary of Capital Requirements Summary of Capital Requirement-Treatment System Improvement Projects Project Total Eat Coal 2016-17 201748 Project Ph.. Project to Oak Cali Lastelow, Future Budget Number 711116 Budget WMI16 Budget Budget Budget Status Headvrohks Headworks Rehah&External at Pl P1-105 Days, 274,841,000 2,746,223 6,705,300 7,569,665 257,819,723 Revised Trunk Line Odor Conlml limper. Pt-123 ComaUmpl, Ism,000 6,0421840 3.24 ,621 11,53E Reused Headwork¢Total 284,140p00 8,789,063 919501009 7,91,205 252A19,n3 Primary Treatment Primary Clarifier B Trickling FiBcr Oda Control at Pl P1-114 Planning 94,228,000 95,767 389,521 0742,712 Coal P1 Primary Treatment Upgrades P1-124 CourtAmpl. 9,146.000 8,89.129 293,871 Revisal Primary Cal Russ&Imar.at P1 P1-126 Planning 158,332,000 476555 19,855,445 Future ASke Primary Gall Real.st P2 P2-98 Design 428.254,000 1,150.178 1.654.096 5.558.634 419871.M Revisal PrinaeryTrabnmrt Total 619,970,000 10,002,307 2,023,734 61 671p89,249 Secondary Treatment Activated Sludge Aeration Basin Deck Repair at P2 P2-118 Design 2,331,000 al 295,085 1.871,165 99600 Reuced Oxygen Plant Demolition at P2 SP-129 CmslAmpl. 3,441,000 2,970,288 428,585 45,127 Reused SecondaryTroessuar Total SnSo00 3,035,4y1 723,070 1,910,293 99,600 Solids Handling&Digagon D'gater Rehab at an Pi-ix Co rtAmpl. 66.654000 58.489,818 4.754.023 2.557,779 841.380 Revised Sludge Dewalentg&Nor Conlml at Pit P1-101 CoalAmpl. 108,320,000 149,080,414 18,460,389 9,725,351 12,053,U6 Rewaad SWitle Thickening B Processing Upgrades P2A9 ConalAmpl. 51.150.000 46.636,451 4.203.003 305546 Continuing Disposer Radial Rehab at P2 P2411-1 Planning 49,o0,000 152,363 151,385 48916,251 Future Sludge Dewaterii,&Nor Control at P2 P2-92 CmalAmpl. 90.47.000 27.990.292 23.40,706 16.789.351 22233,651 Hsi Solids Handling&Digadon Total 445,825,000 381,354,338 50,818,121 20,11 13 &4,045.128 Ocean OuHall Systems Final Effluent Sampler&Buildup Area Upgrades d110 CorlAmpl. 16,411,000 10.133,199 5.N,416 675,385 Reuad Ocean Outlall System Rehab J117 Design 87,603,000 4,438,00 4,648,804 5,448,891 73,147,305 Revised Ocean call S,k.Total 104,094,000 14,571,199 10,251,220 6,124,276 73.147,305 U4lly Systems Creagan Cooling Water System RepL Project d109 Con dear 1. 11,471,000 11,471.000 cons ing Cengen Emissions Ni Protect 1111 CmelAmpl. 23,020,000 23,127,628 692,372 Revise UPS System Upgrades d121 Planning 6,08T,000 8,087,000 Future Dgester Gas Faalitlas Rehab flu Planning 0I,997,000 33$017 361,387 8T,203,596 Revise Natural Gas Pipelines Real,at P1&P2 d127 Planning 1,310.000 33.573 53.873 1,222,95 CmNnuing Electrical Power Diantabon System Imp, 1g0 Planning 34,isdo0 34008,000 Future Plant Water System Rehab at Pt Pt-112 ConslAmpl. 6,19.000 6,145,355 11,61 lowest Central Demerol.,Rehab at Pl P1-127 Planning 13,151,000 73,151,000 Future Section 8-Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Summary of Capital Requirement-Treatment System Improvement Projects Protect Total Eat Coat Hill 201748 Project PorousProject to Dan, Carl Cerebral al Future Bud Number 711116 Budget MW116 Budget Budget Budget Sam. Utility Systems Plant Water System Rehab at P2 P2-101 ConAllmPl. 3.701.000 3.702.116 1.884 Revised Consolidated Damolceon B U011ty Imp.al P2 P2-110 Deaign 38,460000 2,688,994 1,081,18T 8,658,005 26,001,814 Revised Central Genert Rehab at P2 P2-119 Planning 95.9118000 95906,000 Future Plant Air System Master Plan SP-148 Planning 225,000 179,939 45061 Revised Utility Sahara Tool 384,802,000 47,321,032 2,197,739 9,10,264 326,139,945 Process Related Special Projects Safely wr Program M26 Design 9,702,000 163,089 7D1,960 710,073 8,103,878 Reacted Odor Control Maslen Plan SN166 Running 119W,OW 1,31 59,791 2,982 Revised Proua6 Related Sh ial Projects Tool 11,652,000 1,519,316 1,290,751 MASS 8,103,678 Informs llon Management Systems P...Control Systems Upgrades 1120 Planning 102,399,00g 102,399,000 Future Programmable Control Panel Upgrades M25 ConslAmpl. 2,283,000 2.208.355 74.645 Psi Informallon Technology Caplhl Platinum NEW-IT Conatdmpl. 10,0 oon, 502,307 1,291 8,199,763 N. Parer Monitoring B Control Systems at P2 P2-107 Design 31,in.000 1,217,451 2,590,934 2,580,842 27733.r33 Revised EAM Software B Process lmplemenla0on SP-100 ConstAmpl. 7,500,000 4,851,098 471,4F 627,109 1,510,326 Revised PDS2D Software Reel. SP-103 ConalAmpl. 526000 359,190 98.061 67,749 Concerning Geogmphlc Ireforma0on System SN15 Constdmpl. 4,568,000 2,250,165 616,415 614,082 1,087,308 Revised Proceas Cori Syatems Upgrades Study SP-196 Normal 3.551.000 1.348.089 2.205.911 New Informallon Management Systems Tool 164,912,000 10,808,259 5,301,949 7,BW,023 140,000,170 Strategic 3 Maser Planning Planning homes Pmgram el Planning 23.65$000 1212,460 6.1111322 8.483,815 9Aa,383 New Climate Change Impact Study SP-152 Planning 590 OW 590W0 Full Strategic S Means Planning Tool 24,M,000 1,211,/00 6,111,322 8A03,815 all Water Management Projects Effluent Raul Study SP-173 Planning 3.2W,000 2.145)59 1.101,241 Concerning Water Management Projecb Total 3,250,000 2.115759 1.11 Research Research Pmgram WRESEARCN Pho ning 8.MUW 1.149,080 1.695.092 5,655,828 New Fuel C61 Demo SP-12504 Planning 135000 109,173 16.644 9,183 Revisad SCCWRP NuNent Cycling Sarn ing SP-12515 Planning KOW 36,015 42,659 1515N Canunuing AquaCdbx Evalualkn Design SP-12S17 Planning 586000 M531 255d69 Revised Research Toth 9,318,000 478,519 1AS3,652 1,719,801 5,651 Support FacilMae Paul Engineering Program-Plant WFE PLANT CoalAmpl. 43.326000 5.796203 12.735,831 14.749,859 10043,107 New Section 8-Page 10 Summary of Capital Requirements Summary of Capital Requirement-Treatment System Improvement Projects P,ml Total Eat.Cost 2016-17 201T48 Project Pesma Project to Cuts CalCases. Future Budget Number Mini Budget UM116 Budget Budget Budget But.. Support FacilNa Operators&Maintenance Capital Program M-SWCAP CmatAmpl. 15.622o00 40359 1,711.019 3,172087 1008.06 New Tito 24 Access Compliance B Building Rehab Project P1-115 CmntAmpl. 17,500,000 11,783,642 3,816,143 1,Sta,ou 345,193 Revised Headquadem Complex,Site&Samort,&Entrance P1-128 Design 179,067,000 536761 5.951A10 10.9MA74 161 gd3.355 ReviseN Realignment Program Site B Seamy lmpr.at P2 P2-96 ConstAmPl. 252,000 231,908 12797 7,295 Crnunuing Support FacilMa ToWl 25;375,000 18,388,873 24,221,200 30,448,237 182,710,190 other Banning Gate Rebcation d Grading at P2 P2-120 Planning 2,812,OW SS,O% 2756,944 Nan Capital Improvement Program Mgmt.Bervices SP-195 Design 300,000 T.808 24326 27556 240,310 Continuing DMen Total 3.112,000 2,8p8 24328 82,612 2.997,M4 Total Treatment and Disposal Projects 2.386,907,000 399,7ll,390 116,006,133 109,555,804 1,761,822,673 Total Collections Facilities 050,321,000 102,516,404 70,620,480 42,466,831 634,717,285 Capital Equipment Purchases 16,000,000 3,275,000 3,682,780 1,004,300 3,037,920 Total Capital Improvement Program Budget E3,253,228,000 E505,513,T94 E190,309,393 $153,026,935 32,404,3R,870 Section 8-Page 11 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Raitt&Bristol Street Sewer Rehab&Extension - 1.101 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will replace 2,360 linear feet 21-inch City of Santa Ana sewer with 24owf Sanitation District's sewer line and a parallel 8-inch City of Santa Ana sewer line too allow for redirecting all house lateral connections.The sewer line is located along Myrtle Street, between Raiff and Bristol Streets in the City of Santa Ana.The project also includes rehabilitating 910 feet of 18-inch VCP,7,075 feet of 21-inch VCP,and 2,570 feet of 24-inch VCP pipe and associated manholes in Bristol Street and Raitt Street. Collections Facilities Justification This project was identified in the 2006 Strategic Plan Update and is needed to eliminate bottlenecks and avoid a potential spill. This project will also rehabilitate aging infrastructure. The project budget has been increased from$5,319,000 to$13,622,000. The projects construction cost is$7,791,961. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 201849 201940 202041 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 255,153 155,839 410,992 Prelim Design 40,682 120,320 72,757 233,759 Design 3,610 304,871 675,104 422,583 1,406,168 Construction 303 1.651,793 7.386,881 9,038,977 Commissioning 155,843 155,843 Close-out 38,960 38,960 Contingency 7,858 64,087 159,618 243,827 340,570 1,521,343 21337,301 I 259,066 204,379 184,407 537,244 918,931 2.414,946 9.103,027 13,622,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 12 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Santa Ana Trunk Sewer Rehab - 1-17 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will rehabilitate the existing Santa Ana Trunksewer from the Sanitation District's Reclamation Plant 1 to Bristol Street in the Cities of Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa and Santa Ana. The project reviewed the condition of 17,500 feet of 42 inch and 48 inch unlined concrete pipe and manholes. The condition assessment concluded only the most severely corroded manholes,22 in total, need to be rehabilitated with a protective liner or replaced. Similar to the manholes,only the most corroded pipe reach,approximately 1,000 feet,will be relined at this time. Collections Facilities Justification The sewer was originally constructed in 1955,and the estimated life of this type of pipe is 40 to 50 years.During routine cleaning of the sewer,it has been noted that the manholes are deteriorating due to corrosive sewer gases. These manholes were not originally constructed with protective linings. The project will repair the most severely corroded manholes to minimize the risks from potential failures. During pipeline inspection,pipeline conng confirmed the rehabilitation of the pipeline can be deferred at least 10 years. Deferring the lining of the pipeline until it is needed will minimize the life cycle cost of maintaining the sewer. The project budget has been decreased from$7,676,000 to$6,974,000. The projects construction cost is$2,865,024. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 180,066 180,066 Prelim Design 2,045,229 2,045,229 Design 784,507 784,507 Construc0on 3,620,481 3,620,481 Commissioning 274 274 Close-out 72,921 37,500 110,421 Contingency 196,405 36,619 233,024 Total 6,899,881 74,119 6 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 13 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Edinger Boise Chios Trunk Impr. - 11.25 Project Category Collections Facilities Project status: Future Description The scope of this project includes increasing the size of located i. Bois KhiosfeetStreet a Edinger Boise Chica Trunk from 12-inch to 15-inches. The project is located in Boise Chios Street from Robinwood Drive, north to Boise Avenue in the City of Huntington Beach. Collections Facilities Justification The need for this project was identified in the 2006 Strategic Plan Update. These improvements will accommodate changing flow patterns due to planned development strategies,economic influences,and potential wet weather surcharges. The project's construction cost is$3,008,349. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To. 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019-20 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 60,200 60,200 Prelim Design 90,303 90,303 Design 541,474 541,474 Construc0on 3,489,657 3,489,657 Commissioning 60,108 60,108 Close-out 15,004 15,004 Contingency 902,2&t 902,254 5,159,000 5,159,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 14 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Edinger Pump Station Rehab - 1133 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description The purpose of the Edinger Pump Station Rehabilitation Project is to execute the conceptual design plan that is currently being developed as a result of the study by the same name.This project will rehabilitate the Edinger Pump Station to improve the condition of the structures and the mechanical piping and support systems. The electrical and controls system will also be updated. Collections Facilities Justification Edinger Pump Station was originally constructed in 1968. Although the pumps have recently been replaced,the control systems are rapidly becoming obsolete and the facility is relatively dangerous to access. The electrical system does not comply with current codes. The projecCs construction cost is$4,800,244. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 96,000 96,000 Prelim Design 38,966 105,028 143,994 Design 1,103,997 1,103,997 Construction 5,904,239 5,904,239 Commissioning 95,987 95,987 Close-out 96,000 96,000 Contingency 18,321 1,421,462 1,439,783 153,287 8,726,713 8,880,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 15 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name 8.Number I Slater Avenue Pump Station Rehab - 11.34 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description The purpose of the Slater Avenue Pump Station Rehabilitation Project is to execute the conceptual design plan that was developed as a result of the study by the same name.This project will rehabilitate the existing Slater Avenue Pump Station to meet current building,electrical and safety codes,and OCSD design standards. The pump station will also need to be seismically retrofitted and have a roof replacement. In addition to the improvements to the pump station, both force mains currently serving this pump station and the gravity system in close proximity of the pump station will be rehabilitated. Collections Facilities Justification Slater Avenue Pump Station was constructed in the late 1990s and needs rehabilitation to maintain the pump station's reliability in the coming decades. The electrical system does not meet current building code requirements. The ductile iron force mains,one of which was constructed with the original Slater Avenue Pump Station,are aging and need to be rehabilitated. The projects construction cost is$5,258,997. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 201930 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 105,200 105,200 Prelim Design 19,336 138,360 157,696 Design 1,209,399 1,209,399 Construc0on 6,468,494 6,468,494 Commissioning 105,103 105,103 Close-out 105,107 105,107 Contingency 5,963 1,572,044 1,578,007 130,499 9,598,501 9,729,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 16 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I SARI Re-Alignment - 2-41 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Continuing Description This project provides for the protection and relocation of the Santa Ana River Interceptor(SARI), currently located within the floodplain of the Santa Ana River between Weir Canyon Road and the County line.This project is intended to protect approximately 4 miles of pipeline and manholes from failure due to high storm water releases from Prado Dam in major Flood events. The most recent United States Army Corps of Engineers(USACE)study of the project was completed in October 2005. The current budget only reflects funds necessary for OCSD support of the project. Collections Facilities Justification The existing pipeline has been subjected to continued scour of overlying soil and sediments since it was constructed in the mid 1970's. Hydraulic analyses of the river after the Prado Dam improvements are completed indicated that the pipeline could be washed away during dam releases above 5,000 cubic feet per second.The Prado Dam improvements will allow for releases of up to 30,000 cubic feel per second. If this pipeline reach from Weir Canyon Road to the Orange/San Bernardino County line is not relocated or protected prior to the completion of the Prado Dam improvements,then the line could fail during a flood event. The construction of this project has been completed. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 202031 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 183,657 183,657 Prelim Design 2,326,837 2,326,837 Design 6,257,957 6,257,957 ConsWclion 1,449,510 1,449,510 Commissioning 278,106 278,106 Close-out 79,975 31,233 111,20E Contingency 265,687 531,038 796,725 Total 10,941.729 562,271 11,404,00 Reimbursable Costs: 4.943,876 Section 8-Page 17 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I SARI Rock Stabilizers Removal - 241-8 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will remove and dispose of all rip rap rocks protecting the abandoned segment ofthe Santa Ana River Interceptor(SARI)line within the Santa Ana River between SAVI Ranch and the Green River Golf Course in Yorba Linda.The rock to be removed was installed under emergency authorization to temporarily protect the SARI line since 2005. Collections Facilities Justification This is a condition of the emergency permits issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers over the years for temporarily protecting the SARI line. The project budget has been increased from$3,092,000 to$3,743,000. The project's construction cost is$1,800,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 130,793 130,793 Prelim Design 238.151 51,490 289,641 Design 10,190 186,317 130,M 327,184 Construction 3,801 651,762 1,747,354 2,402,917 Commissioning Close-out 52,399 52,399 Contingency 30,119 75,120 98,698 270,222 65,906 540,065 413.055 312,927 881,137 2,069,975 65,906 Reimbursable Costs: 45,696 Section 8-Page 18 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Taft Branch Sewer Relief - 2-49 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description The purpose of this project is to increase the capacity of a portion of the Taff Branch regional sewer. in The project includes replacing approximately 9,500 feet of 12-inch to 18-inch pipe with iSinch to 24-inch diameter pipe along both Taft and Meats Avenues in the City of Orange. Collections Facilities Justification This project was identified in the 2006 Strategic Plan Update. These improvements will accommodate changing flow patterns due to planned development strategies,economic influences,and potential wet weather surcharges. The project's construction cost is$1,115,711. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 9,395 22,300 31,695 Prelim Design 33,499 33,499 Design 2,697 202,705 205,402 Construction 1,294,205 1,294,205 Commissioning 22,398 22,398 Close-out 5,600 5,600 Contingency 335,201 335,201 12,092 1 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 19 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Newhope-Placentia Trunk Grade Separation Repl. - 2.65 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will replace a section of the College Boulevard evard between Placentia Trunk and Wastewater Disposal Company Sewers in Slate College Boulevard behveen Orangethorpe and Commonwealth. The project is being done with the City of Fullerton as part of a railroad grade separation project. Collections Facilities Justification The existing sewers need to be relocated to accommodate the undergrounding of State College Boulevard below the railroad tracks at the intersection of Valencia Drive and State College Boulevard. These improvements will also accommodate the projected increases in flow for this section of sewer from planned developments and growth and be designed to convey potential wet weather surcharges. The project is anticipated to be constructed by the City of Fullerton's contractor performing the roadwork under the railroad. The original project and budget were to upsize a large stretch of sewer that will be hydraulically deficient. The remaining portion of the sewer upsizing was re-budgeted under a new CIP project. The project budget has been decreased from$5,966,000 to$5,739,000. The project's construction cost is$3,458,514. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 103,062 103,062 Prelim Design 64,933 64,933 Design 311,952 311,952 Construction 3,424,261 387,111 59,124 3,870,496 Commissioning Close-out 9,726 5,924 15,650 Contingency 169,318 54],409 650,489 5,691 1,3]2,907 4.073,5261 934,520 719,339 11,615 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 20 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Newhope-Placentia Trunk Rapt. - 2-72 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will increase the size of Orangewood Avenu feet a the Newhope r will ntiammod sewer from Yorba Linda Boulevard to Orangewood Avenue. The upsized sewer will accommodate Flows from the newly abandoned Yorba Linda Pump Station and the newly interconnected Atwood Sub- trunk. The scope also includes upsizing approximately 3,500 feet of the Rolling Hill Subtrunk,and abandoning any remaining portion of the wastewater disposal company sewer alignment not used for the new pipeline. Collections Facilities Justification This section of the Newhope-Placentia Trunk Sewer was originally constructed in 1961. These improvements will accommodate the projected flow increases due to the abandonment of the aging Yorba Linda Pump Station,increase capacity in a short portion of the Rolling Hills Sub-tmnk that is undersized when burdened by 2030 wet weather flows,and increase operational flexibility of the collection system. The project budget has been decreased from$104,890,000 to$99,475,000. The project's construction cost is$66,726,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 132,601 132,601 Prelim Design 4,089,814 1,050,186 5,140,000 Design 2,658,356 1,997,723 643,367 5,299,446 Construction 122.816 16,461,592 11,092,046 15,592,566 15,911,139 15,280,336 2.116,869 76,577,364 Commissioning Close-out 54,011 77,582 65,729 61,343 26,016 284,681 Contingency 229,486 1,434,444 2,368,017 1,270,568 2,208,383 3,172,189 1,357,820 12,040,907 7,233,074 20,943,945 14,157,441 16,940,716 18,185,251 18,513,868 3,500,7051 99,475,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 21 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Yorba Linda Pump Station Abandonment - 2.73 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description This project will abandon the Vorba Linda Pump Station and downstream force main. Gravity sewers located in Vorba Linda Boulevard will also be reconfigured ed to to improve access to the facilities for maintenance. Flows which are currently being pumped by the Vorba Linda Pump Station east �i will be conveyed by gravity through the newly upsized Newhope-Placentia Trunk located in State College Boulevard to the west. Collections Facilities Justification The Vorba Linda Pump Station was built, in part,to convey Flow away from undersized gravity sewers located in State College Boulevard. Land development in the vicinity necessitates the upsizing of the same gravity sewers and the project to do so is currently in design. When complete the pump station will no longer be needed. Also,the pump station is rapidly aging and does not meet current electrical and safety codes. Costly rehabilitation would be necessary for the pump station to remain in service. The project budget has been increased from$4,158,000 to$7,053,000. The project's construction cost is$3,812,369. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 76,246 76,246 Prelim Design 31,680 82,700 114,380 Design 182,270 650,589 43,982 876,841 Construction 2,551,867 2,137,345 4,689,212 Commissioning 11,011 65,240 76,251 Close-out 76,250 76,250 Contingency 12,657 66,757 143,555 230,425 690,426 1,143,820 120,583 331,727 794,144 2,837,2851 2,969,261 7,053,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 22 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Lakeview Grade Separation Project - 2-75 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Continuing Description This project will provide construction costs and staff support costs for the realignment of an r trunkline as pan of Orange County Transit Authority's(OCTA)Grade Separation Project near the the intersection of Lakeview and Orangethorpe Avenues. Collections Facilities Justification The Orange County Transportation Authority(OCTA)will construct a vehicle overpass at the intersection of Lakeview and Orangethorpe Avenues,along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad track. An OCSD trunkline will need to be relocated as part of the project. The design of relocating OCSD's trunkline is complete and was paid for by OCTA. The project's construction cost is$71,733. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design Construc0on 70,331 76,538 146,869 Commissioning 26,568 26,568 Close-out 173 8,797 8,970 Contingency 29,361 77,995 40,237 147,593 126.260 154,706 49,034 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 23 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Tustin Rose OCTA Grade Separation - 2-76 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Continuing Description This project will provide construction costs and staff support costs for the realignment of an OCSD trunkline as pan of Orange County Transit Authority's(OCTA)Grade Separation Project at the intersection of Tustin Avenue/Rose Drive and Orangethorpe Avenue. Collections Facilities Justification The Orange County Transportation Authority(OCTA)will construct a vehicle overpass at the intersection of Tustin Avenue/Rose Drive and Orangethorpe Avenue,along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad track. An OCSD trunkline will need to be relocated as part of the project. The design of relocating OCSD's trunkline is complete and was paid for by OCTA. The projects construction cost is$300,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design Construc0on 415.729 415,729 Commissioning 25,060 25,060 Close-out 2.377 6,594 8,971 Contingency 71,517 64,723 136,240 514.683 71,317 586,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 24 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Beach Trunk/Knott Interceptor Sewer Relief - 3-60 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description The purpose of this project is increase the capacity of numerous OCSD regional sewers located in the City of Buena Park. The project consists of the following potential capacity improvements projects: 1)upsize 11,100 feet of 39 to 45-inch pipe along Knott Avenue from Orangelhorpe Avenue to Artesia Boulevard,East to Kingman, and North to Dobbs Avenue,and 2)upsize 9,800 feet of 24 to 36-inch along Knott Avenue from Sth Street north to Artesia Boulevard and then east to Dale Street. Collections Facilities Justification The need for this project was identified in the 2006 Strategic Plan Update. These improvements will accommodate changing flow patterns due to planned development strategies, economic influences,and potential wet weather surcharges. The project's construction cost is$73,169,950. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 321,900 321,900 Prelim Design 1,097,498 1,097,498 Design 10,243,904 10,243,904 Construc0on 84,145,352 84,145,352 Commissioning 731,698 731,698 Close-out 186,600 186,600 Contingency 21,951,048 21,951,048 118,678,)00 118,678,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 25 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Seal Beach Pump Station Rehab - 3-62 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will rehabilitate the existing Seal Beach Pump Station and Force Main system to meet current building, rand safety codes,and OCSD design standards. The existing facilities will either be restoredored o or reconstructed and additional facilities will be constructed to contain on-site emergency power generation and odor control facilities. Collections Facilities Justification The Seal Beach Pump Station was originally constructed in 1972.The pumping systems are aging,regularly clog,and have control systems that are rapidly becoming obsolete,all require additional attention from maintenance staff. The existing pumping station does not comply with current electrical and safety codes. One of the force mains is in danger of failing and cannot be placed into operation,thus leaving no redundancy. The project budget has been decreased from$62,041,000 to$60,840,000. The project's construction cost is$35,002,000. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 199,668 199,668 Prelim Design 1,839,677 2,274,964 4,114,641 Design 5,320 3,073,378 1,367,910 4,446,608 Consauc0on 77 152,031 13,467,935 17,627,241 11,060,463 42,307,747 Commissioning 236,555 432,626 162,818 831,999 Close-out 144,7851 144,785 Contingency 185,015 616,284 943,512 1,285,587 2,404,066 2,795,332 564,756 8,794,552 2.229,757 5,964,626 2,463,453 14,990,077 20,463,933 14,163,398 564,756 60,840,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 26 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Rehab of Western Regional Sewers - 3-64 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description The project will replace or rehabilitate a significant portion of the sewers and manholes locatedin Revenue Area 3. The extent of the rehabilitation effort includes Orange Western Sub-Trunk; 3-6 (13,940 feet),the Los Alamitos Sub-Trunk;3-8(34,620 feet),and the Westside Relief Interceptor pipeline; 3-21-1 (32,100 feet)and the Seal Beach Boulevard Interceptor;3-11 (5,530 feet). Two of the sewers are located in the cities of Los Alamitos and Cypress in the public rights of way of Seal Beal Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Cerritos Avenue,Oak Street, Bloomfield Street, and Denni Street. The third sewer is located in the cities of Cypress,Anaheim,and Buena Park in the public rights of way of Orange and Western Avenues. The final segment is located in the City of Seal Beach.The portion of the project to be replaced with larger pipes include 14,540 feet of Los Alamitos Sub- Trunk and 15,160 feet of the West Side Relief Interceptor. Additional components of the project also include the replacement of the wet well, rehabilitation of the force main and the replacement of Collections the odor control equipment at the West Side Pump Station. Facilities Justification Most of the sewers were originally constructed in late 1950's and eady 1960's.The estimated life of this type of pipe is 40 to 50 years.During routine cleaning of the sewer, it has been noted that the sewer liner had significant defects and the joints are allowing significant amounts of groundwater into the sewers. The area has a high groundwater level that can contribute to the formation of sink holes if sediments are allowed to continue to be washed into the sewer through the failed joints and cracks. Upsizing the Westside Relief Interceptor will provide capacity for future Flows projected from redevelopment and infll in the City of Cypress. The project budget has been increased from$125,000,000 to$217,069,000. The projects construction cost is$139,000,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019-20 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 441,003 441,003 Prelim Design 1,207,486 12,744,024 86,265 14,037,775 Design 9,152 2,079,449 4,325,921 1,023,460 7,437,982 Consauc0on 10,702,358 27,632,655 28,235,029 93,228,284 159,798,326 Commissioning 49,998 49,998 Close-out 553,360 553,360 Contingency 277,099 1,194,586 1,968,415 2,523,727 2,445,239 3,463,398 22,878,092 3Q750,556 1.934,7401 16,018,059 6,380,601 14,249,545 30,077,894 31,698,427 116,709,734 217,069,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 27 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name 8.Number I Newport Force Main Rehab - 5-60 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Continuing Description This project will rehabilitate approximately 28,000 feet of the Newport Force Main system located on Pacific Coast Highway in Newport Beach between the Biller Point Pump Station and Dover Drive.The force main system consists of two parallel, interconnected pipelines,varying in size from 22 to 36 inches. More than half of the force main system will be rehabilitated rather than replaced to minimize impacts to the community, businesses,tourism and the environment. Collections Facilities Justification The force main system has reached the end of its useful life. Rehabilitation and replacement is necessary because the force main system is more than 50 years old and has experienced multiple structural failures due to corrosion since 1984. The project's construction cost is$42,786,580. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 1,224,529 1,224,529 Prelim Design 2,364,482 2,364,4a2 Design 1,625,645 1,625,645 Consauc0un 48,649,999 1,166,866 49,816,865 Commissioning 428,286 12,558 "0'8" Close-out 308.557 134,260 442,817 Contingency 3,363,932 4,720,885 8,084,817 Total 57,965.431 6,034,569 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 28 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Crystal Cove Pump Station Rehab - 5-66 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description The purpose of the Crystal Cove Pump on Rehabilitation Project is to execute the conceptual design plan that was developed as a result of the study 6y the same name.This project will rehabilitate the existing Crystal Cove Pump Station to maintain compliance with electrical and safety codes,and to restore the condition of the aging facility. The project also consists of rehabilitating the two 8-inch ductile iron force mains and constructing access manholes to facilitate future condition assessments. The existing gravity system in the vicinity of the pump station, located in Pacific Coast Highway, will also be rehabilitated. Collections Facilities Justification The Pump Station was originally constructed in 1995 and needs rehabilitation to maintain the pump station's reliability in the coming decades.The electrical system does not meet current code requirements. The control system is out of date and does not meet OCSD standards. The force mains are not currently protected from corrosion. The project budget has been increased from$10,514,000 to$10,882,000. The projects construction cost is$5,882,431. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Pmj Dev 117,648 117,648 Prelim Design 176,452 176,452 Design 1,352,973 1,352,973 Construc0on 7,235,395 7,235,395 Commissioning 117,654 117,654 Close-out 117,645 117,645 Contingency 1,764,233 1,764,233 10,882,000 10,882,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 29 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Bay Bridge Pump Station Repl. - 5-67 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description This project will reconstruct the existing Bay Bridge Pump Station to meet current building, electrical,and safety codes and OCSD design standards. The pump station capacity will increase from a 16 MGD station to a 18.5 MGD station. The Bay Bridge Pump Station associated force mains will also be replaced and the size of the force mains will increase.The force mains to be replaced extend from Bay Bridge Pump Station to a valve box on the west side of Upper Newport Bay. Collections Facilities Justification The Bay Bridge Pump Station was originally constructed in 1966.The pumping systems are aging, and have control systems that are rapidly becoming obsolete,all require additional attention from maintenance staff.Also,the existing pumping station does not comply with current electrical and safety codes. The Bay Bridge Pump Station associated force mains will increase in size as part of this project.This will allow OCSD to operate fully on one force main(and keep one as backup).Current operation requires both force mains be in operation. The project budget has been increased from$51,010,000 to$54,000,000. The project's construction cost is$26,511,465. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 388,341 141,894 530,235 Prelim Design 221,487 573,851 795,338 Design 3,800,000 310,877 2,476,585 3,310,166 9,897,628 Consbuc0on 32,609,108 32,609,108 Commissioning 530,232 530,232 Close-out 530,230 530,230 Contingency 102,834 218,462 473,961 680,568 7,631,404 9,107,229 4,291,175 581,843 1,358,689 3,157,153 44,611,140 54,000,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 30 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Newport Beach Pump Stations Odor Control Impr. - 5-68 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: New Description This project will address the ventilation issues that causes odorants to migrate to unwanted areas at the Newport Beach collections system pump stations. It will also provide odor control at selected pump stations and gravity lines in the Newport Beach collections system. Collections Facilities Justification The migration of corrosive hydrogen sulfide from pump stations'wet wells into electrical rooms not only can cause additional public odor complaints, but can cause pump failures that can lead to sewage spills and compliance violations. The project's construction cost is$2,197,909. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 43,957 43,957 Prelim Design 14,428 50,822 686 65,936 Design 38,926 213,634 224,391 28,571 505,522 Consauc0on 14,595 2,688,839 2,703,434 Commissioning 43,957 43,957 Close-out 43,958 43,958 Contingency 9,148 28,662 55,723 82,661 483,042 659,236 67,533 118,410 270,043 321,6471 3,288,367 4,066,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 31 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I District 6 Trunk Sewer Relief - 6-17 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project is to increase the capacity,rehabilitate and performaccess improvements for the District 6 Trunk sewer.The existing 3,700 feet of 12-inch through h 18-inch pipeline runs west of Pomona,southerly to 16th Street,to Newport Boulevard, and southerly along Newport Boulevard towards Coast Highway in the Cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. Portions of the sewer that are not being increased in size are being rehabilitated so the life of this sewer will be extended by 30 years. Combined into this work are Maintenance access improvements for OCSD personnel. Collections Facilities Justification The need for this project was identified in the January 2006 Draft Strategic Plan Update. Based on current flow projections and hydraulic modeling,this project is needed to reduce the potential for surcharging and sewer spills due to projected increase in flow from planned developments and growth. Investigations during preliminary design also revealed the that segments not being up- sized, required rehabilitation and maintenance access improvements. The project budget has been increased from$7,795,000 to$7,965,000. The project's construction cost is$4,327,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201930 20204!1 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 70,429 70,429 Prelim Design 442.229 442,229 Design 798,006 19,153 817,159 Construction 329 4,317,886 1,536,996 5,855,211 Commissioning 7,234 42,938 50,172 Close-out 63,463 63,463 Contingency 33,563 243,841 374,857 14,076 666,337 1.351,7901 4,623,818 1,975,316 14,076 7 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 32 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Southwest Costa Mesa Trunk Sewer - 6-19 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will design and construct a new gravity sewer system for the southwest portion of Costa Mesa and a portion of Newport Beach along the 191h Street Alignment across the Santa Ana River to Plant No.2. The project will allow the Costa Mesa Sanitary District to abandon up to six pump stations, the one pump station for the City of Newport Beach and one private pump station. Collections Facilities Justification Pump stations in the project area operated by the Costa Mesa Sanitary District and by the City of Newport are outdated and in need of major rehabilitation and/or replacement. The project will allow all but one of these pump station to be abandoned,which will benefit the region by providing more efficient and reliable wastewater conveyance in the area,and will reducing the potential for spills and odors associated with wastewater pumping. The project budget has been increased from$14,993,000 to$29,650,000. The pnoecPs construction cost is$16,610,766. This project will increase operational budgets by$90,000 annually. The new sewer will require annual cleaning and inspection. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 201849 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Day 1,577,527 50,533 1,628,060 Prelim Design 268.728 624,031 468,204 264,643 93,386 1,718,992 Design 39,827 598,780 1,111,44E 701,145 2,451,198 Construction 19,573,839 19,573,839 Commissioning 169 193,784 193,953 Close-out 325,691 325,697 Contingency 66,933 201,635 198,756 215,812 273,699 306,561 2,494,871 3,758,267 Total 1,953,184 876,199 666,960 480,455 965,865 1,418,007 23,289,330 29,650,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 33 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Gisler-Red Hill System Impr.-Reach B - 7.37 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project will replace ll section of the existing sewer and rehabilitate other reaches in the Gisler- Redhill System. This will include installing larger diameter pipelines, providing interties,new diversion settings,sliplining and relining manholes.The project includes repairs of up to 13,200 feet along Redhill Avenue in the Cities of Santa Ana,Tustin and Irvine. Collections Facilities Justification This section of the Gisler-Redhill System was originally built in the 1960's. Based on hydraulic analysis and condition assessments of the pipes, a new replacement section of pipeline and rehabilitation of other sections are needed.To accommodate near-tens future flows the project will also reset several diversions to accommodate new flows. The project budget has been decreased from$28,143,000 to$25,213,000. The project's construction cost is$16,157,966. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 15,006 15,006 Prelim Design 293,306 293,306 Design 3,056,850 3,056,850 Consauc0on 2,725,802 10,987,429 5,517,443 19,230,674 Commissioning 207 207 Close-out 134,739 20,553 155,292 Contingency 157,842 964,463 1,250,692 88,668 2,461,665 6.249,0131 11,951,892 6,902,874 109,227 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 34 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Browning Subtrunk Sewer Relief - 7-60 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description The purpose of -tthe Browning project consists Sewer Relief Project is to increase the capacity of the Browning Sub-trunk. The project along 4Bro Browning Avenue approximately hell A feet of existing pipeline to a 1010 18-inch pipeline located along Browning Avenue from Mitchell Avenue to Rainbow Drive, in the City of Tustin and unincorporated county. Collections Facilities Justification The need for this project was identified in the 2006 Strategic Plan Update. These improvements will accommodate changing flow patterns due to planned development strategies,economic influences,and potential wet weather surcharges. The project's construction cost is$9,884,569. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 197,700 197,700 Prelim Design 296,494 296,494 Design 1,779,098 1,779,098 Constructor, 11,466,080 11,466,080 Commissioning 197,596 197,596 Close-out 49,400 49,400 Contingency 2,965,630 2,965,630 16,952,000 16,952,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 35 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I MacArthur Pump Station Rehab - 7-63 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description This project will rehabilitate the existing MacArthur Pump Station,force main and upstream gravity system pipeline and manholes(approximately 2,000 linear feet of 8-inch pipe and eight manholes). The existing station is located in the vicinity of John Wayne Airport in the City of Newport Beach. The work includes bringing the pump station into compliance with the latest applicable electrical and safety codes and replacing maintenance-intensive pumps. 700 feet of the nearby Von Kaman Trunk Sewer(located in Campus Drive north of the pump station)will also be upsized as part of this project. The sewer,which is a 12-inch vitrified clay pipe(VCP),will be upsized to 15-inch in diameter. Collections Facilities Justification The MacArthur Pump Station was originally built in 1960.The pump station is aging and requires increased effort to adequately maintain,does not comply with current electrical and safety codes,and needs to be upgraded to reliably serve the cities of Irvine and Newport Beach. The age and condition of the force main indicates that it needs to be replaced and the condition of the upstream sewers indicates that rehabilitation is necessary in the near future. The capacity project for the Von Karmen Trunk Sewer was identified in 2006 Strategic Plan Update. The projects construction cost is$4,736,194. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 201849 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 94,700 94,700 Prelim Design 31,924 87,573 22,610 142,107 Design 533,599 551,734 3,851 1,089,184 Construc0on 5,825,592 5,825,592 Commissioning 94,709 94,709 Close-out 94,703 94,703 Contingency 19,058 58,303 114,131 165,821 1,063,692 1,421,005 145,682 145,876 670,340 717,5551 7,082,547 8,762,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 36 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Main Street Pump Station Rehab - 7-64 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Future Description The purpose of the Main Street Pump Station Rehabilitation Project is to execute the conceptual design plan that was developed as a result of the study by the same name.This project will rehabilitate the existing Main Street Pump Station to meet current building,electrical and safety codes. The pump station will need to be seismically retrofitted and have a roof replacement. In addition to the pump station,two of three force mains will be rehabilitated and access manholes constructed for future condition assessments and the third force main will be completely reconstructed as part of this project. The condition of gravity system components in close proximity to the pump station such as a reinforced concrete pipe and access manholes will be assessed and the facilities rehabilitated as needed. Collections Facilities Justification Main Street pump station was constructed in 1987 and needs rehabilitation to maintain the pump station's reliability in the coming decades. Two of the force mains that serve this facility are ductile iron pipe and have been operating without corrosion protection. The project budget has been increased from$37,952,000 to$39,219,000. The projecfs construction cost is$21,199,322. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Day 423,983 423,983 Prelim Design 635,978 635,978 Design 4,875,842 4,875,842 Construction 26,075,172 26,075,172 Commissioning 423,990 423,990 Close-out 423,987 423,987 Contingency 6,360,048 6,360,048 39,219,000 39,219,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 37 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Gisler Red-Hill Interceptor Rehab - 7-65 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: New Description The purpose of this project is determine the condition of and rehabilitate the Gisler Redhill Interceptor. The facilities consists of approx. 38 manholes, 12,500 feet of 33-inch VCP,and 2,175 feet of 30-inch VCP. Collections Facilities Justification The condition of Gisler Redhill Interceptor upstream of College Avenue pump station is of concern. Condition assessments completed in 2007 and again in 2015 indicate that the condition of the piping is worsening. Camera video of the manholes indicate liner failures and corrosion from the cover to the base in the majority of the structures. The projects construction cost is$3,198,548. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 201849 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 63,968 63,968 Prelim Design 25,079 69,637 1,241 95,957 Design 24,871 316,085 234,783 575,739 Consbuc0on 340,071 1,476,195 1,894,047 3,710,313 Commissioning 26,069 37,906 63,975 Close-out 15,990 15,990 ConfingencY 13,464 44,021 83,946 122,212 178,241 518,174 960,058 102,511 138,529 401,272 697,066 1,680,505 2,466,11; Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 38 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Facilities Engineering Program-Collections - M-FE-COLLECT Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: New Description This budget provides funds for miscellaneous collection facilities small capital projects. ,r small capital project is defined as a miscellaneous capital improvement related to plant safely,reliability, or improvements where the professional design consulting services are less than$200,000. This project is an annual budget for numerous small collection facilities projects. This system results in a stream-lined process for the procurement and execution of engineering and contractor services for smaller, but vital projects. Collections Facilities Justification The Collection Facilities Engineering project allows smaller capital projects to extend the life of the existing treatment works and extend the time between major rehabilitations. These smaller, high priority projects are individually tracked within the larger budget for procurement of engineering and contractor services as needed to maintain reliable operations. The projects construction cost is$1,759,164. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 69,093 525,250 735,092 1,329,435 Consauc0on 29,294 477,134 1,434,418 727,158 74,904 2,742,908 Commissioning Close-out Contingency 8,766 427,219 1,141,246 1,657,846 2,224,064 2,660,516 8,119,657 1071531 1,429,603 3,310,756 2,385,004 2,298,968 2,660,516 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 39 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Bay Bridge Pump Station&Force Main Repl.Study - SP-178 Project Category Collections Facilities Project Status: Continuing Description This project will investigate opportunities to replace and relocate the Bay Bridge Pump Station and replace the forcemains under the Newport Bay Channel.The pump station and forcemains are aging and undersized.This project will also investigate operation, maintenance,and code compliance issues associated with the Bay Bridge Pump Station and the force mains leaving the station.This includes CECA requirements,odor control needs,equipment inspection,hydraulic capacities, National Fire Protection Association(NFPA)compliance,and Occupational Safety 8 Health Administration(OSHA)requirements. Collections Facilities Justification This project will provide needed recommendations and direction for future Project No.5-67, Bay Bridge Pumping Station Upgrade and Rehabilitation. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Pmj Dev 278,888 184,404 12,011 475,303 Prelim Design Design 11,748 39,318 51,066 Consauc0on Commissioning Close-out Contingency 61,334 137,297 198,831 351 9701 361,019 12,011 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 40 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Headworks Rehab&Expansion at P1 - P1-105 Project Category Headworks Project Status: Revised Description This project will rehabilitate and upgrade facilities at the Plant 1 Headworks. Facilities to be rehabilitated include the Metering and Diversion Structure,the Bar Screen Building, Loading Building,the Main Sewage Pump Station,the Grit Basins,the Primary In0uent channels, the Headworks Odor Control Scrubbers,and electrical power distribution and control systems. The / project will also include demolition of the original Headworks No. 1 facilities and the unused (()) Chlorine Building pumps. Headworks Justification The purpose of the work is to rehabilitate the Plant 1 headworks area in order to increase the life of critical assets,improve services of other areas in the plant,and meet level of service goals. The project budget has been increased from$235,273,000 to$274,841,000. The project's construction cost is$166,000,000. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 152,473 152,473 Prelim Design 2,358,366 4,542,111 302,642 7,203,119 Design 27 1,455,915 5,985,235 7,158,511 579,524 15,179,212 Construc0on 16,752,206 24,217,564 164,828,140 205,797,910 Commissioning 444,482 3,818,051 4,262,533 Close-out 36 744887 744,917 Contingency 235,321 707,362 1,281,789 1,567,638 1,705,385 1,810,812 34,192,529 41,500,838 2,746,223 6,705,388 7,569,666 8,726,149 19,037,115 26,472,858 203,583,6011 274,941,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 41 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Trunk Line Odor Control Impr. - Pl-123 Project Category Headworks Project Status: Revised Description Scrubbers 9 and 10,which are part of Plant No. 1 Headworks odor control system,will be replaced with new biological scrubbers. The new scrubbers will treat air from Steve Anderson Lift Station (SALS),Waste Hauler Station,Sunflower Pump Station and M&D Structure. The treated air will then continue to existing Chemical Scrubbers 1 through 4 for further treatment. The second part of / the scope of work is to eliminate odors upstream of the three siphons along the Baker-Gisler (()) Interceptor and Santa Ana Trunk sewers by implementing airjumper improvements. Headworks Justification The concept evaluation study for Project J-71-8 indicated an imbalance of airflow between existing Scrubbers 9 and 10 causing poor performance of the scrubbers. The carbon units of the SALS odor control system and the packaged biofilter at the Waste Hauler Station have both been operating inefficiently. Replacing the existing Scrubbers9 and 10 will improve the overall efficiency of the Headworks facilities'odor control system. The project budget has been decreased from$11,170,OOOto$9,299,000. The projects construction cost is$5,372,609. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design 568.151 568,151 Design 929,312 929,312 Consauc0on 4,304,612 2,578,407 6,883,019 Commissioning 32,644 138,031 170,675 Close-out 156,914 4,042 160,956 Contingency 208,121 371,269 7,497 586,887 6,042,840 3,244,621 11,539 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 42 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Primary Clarifier&Trickling Filter Odor Control at Pi - P1-114 Project Category Primary Treatment Project Status: Continuing Description O O This project will provide odor control modifications necessary to meet the Board required level of 000000 service,as determined by the 2016 Odor Control Master Plan (SP-166 outcomes),for the Plant No. 00000000 1 Primary Basins and the Trickling Fillers. This includes replacement of the air scrubbing system 000000000 and related equipment. 000000000 00000000 00000 O 000 Primary Treatment Justification The current odor control facilities are at the end of their useful life and cannot meet the Board approved level of service for odors. Also,the cable trays were installed prior to 1987 and do not comply with the current National Electrical Code. The projects construction cost is$56,576,524. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019-20 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 58,674 76,727 135,401 Prelim Design 40,257 116,604 54,137 210,998 Design 2,445,076 4,126,277 637,357 7,208,710 Consauc0on 64,927,921 64,927,921 Commissioning 4,040,997 4,040,997 Close-out 731,507 731,507 Contingency 37,093 272,537 504,203 884,529 1,199,171 14,074,939 16,972,472 95,767 389,527 620,807 3,383,742 5,325,4481 a4,412,715 94,228,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 43 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I P1 Primary Treatment Upgrades - P1-124 Project Category Primary Treatment Project Status: Revised Description O O This project will upgrade the sludge pumping system for Primary Clarifiers(PC)16-31 at 000000 Reclamation Plant No. 1,and will resolve various operation, maintenance,corrosion,and safety 00000000 issues throughout this facility. 000000000 000000000 00000000 00000 O 000 Primary Treatment Justification This project will allow the rectangular primary clarifiers to handle increase in solids loading to Plant No. 1,and future flows through the plant to support the future expansion of GWRS. Also,recent investigations uncovered corrosion,safety,operational,and maintenance issues which need to be addressed at the rectangular primary clarifiers. The project budget has been decreased from$10,317,000 to$9,146,000. The projects construction cost is$5,594,695. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 16,506 16,506 Prelim Design 270.241 270,241 Design 682,544 682,544 Consauc0on 7,280,434 7,280,434 Commissioning 140,397 140,397 Close-out 62,1961 77,6151 139,811 Contingency 399,810 216,256 616,066 8,852,129 293,871 9 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 44 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Primary Clarifiers Repl.s&Impr.at P1 - P1-126 Project Category Primary Treatment Project Status: Future Description O O This project will rehabilitate or replace the Plant No. 1 Primary Clarifiers 3,4,&5 System which 00000 O includes all primary influent and effluent lines,distribution boxes,junction boxes,the Primary 000000 O O Effluent Pump Station,structural,mechanical,and electrical systems affiliated with Primary 000000000 Clarifiers 3,4,&5.This project will demolish Primary Clarifiers 1U. 000000000 00000000 00000 O 000 Primary Treatment Justification The project is needed due to the age and condition of the Primary Clarifiers(PCs)3,4,&5 System. PCs 3&4 were constructed in 1956 and are the oldest primary clarifiers at Plant No. 1.They share a common sludge and scum pumping facility located between them. PC 5 was constructed in 1963. Many of the PC 3-5 System components are showing significant deterioration.To continue to operate the PC 35 system for the next 50 years will require the entire system be rehabilitated or replaced. PCs 1-2 were constructed in 1986 to replace the two original clarifiers.These primary clarifiers are currently used only during extreme flow events.They share a common sludge and scum pumping facility at the southwest end of PCs 1-2 that also serves PC 5. PCs 1-2 shall be demolished to make space for other future processes. The project budget has been increased from$122,649,000 to$158,332,000. The projecfs construction cost is$95,065,590. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Pmj Dev 227,587 227,587 Prelim Design 62,342 169,184 123,060 354,586 Design 25,478 1,150,575 6,348,622 4,588,224 12,112,899 ConsWc0or, 109,098,414 109,098,414 Commissioning 6,790,049 6,790,049 Close-out 1,229,007 1,229,007 Contingency 161,148 417,215 778,965 1,262,897 25.899,233 28.519,458 476,555 586,399 2,052,600 7,611,5191 147,604,927 158,332,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 45 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Aside Primary Clarifiers Repl.at P2 - P2-98 Project Category Primary Treatment Project Status: Revised Description O O The primary treatment facilities at Plant No.2 consist of fourteen circular clarifiers which are 000000 supported by influent piping,influent distribution structures,effluent piping and sludge pumping 00000000 units.The clarifers are covered with geodesic domes which collect foul air from the clarifiers for 000000000 conveyance and treatment at two foul air scrubbing complexes.The first phase of the project will 000000000 replace the four clarifiers on side"A",provide a new Power Building to serve the entire primary system and install an electrical distribution system to Side"A".The project will also construct a new 00000000 central odor scrubbing system for the primary treatment system and will provide air foul ducting to 00000 O Side W.The second phase of the project will rehabilitate the ten remaining clarifiers on sides"B" O O O and"C",along with associated facilities. Primary Treatment Justification The primary treatment facilities were built between 1960 and 1985.The facilities are subject to varying deterioration due to corrosion and are in need of rehabilitation or replacement based on physical condition, level of performance and age.The four clarifiers on Side"A"were built between 1960 and 1965 on a foundation which is subject to liquefaction in a seismic event.The existing Power Building"A"was constructed in the late 1950s, is located in a low drainage area which is subject to flooding and the electrical equipment does not meet current codes requirements.The existing odor treatment equipment has exceeded its expected service life,is subject to frequent failures,and is the subject of District study to upgrade the Odor Scrubbing Systems at Plant 2. The project budget has been increased from$156,029,000 to$221,500,000. The project's construction cost is$269,188,182. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019420 201 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 706,748 125,612 832,360 Prelim Design 270.472 1,140,544 3,851,499 144,784 293,553 5,700,852 Design 548,909 4,354,727 4,165,828 970,317 16,101,338 26,141,119 Construction 6,882,187 303,360,668 310,242,855 Commissioning 15,235,564 15,235,564 Close-out 2,785,910 2,785,910 Confingency 172,958 543,552 1,158,226 1,427,821 1,808,641 2,229,480 59,984,662 67,325,340 1.150,1781 1,684,096 5,558,634 5,927,332 5,974,469 10,081,9841 397,887,307 428,264,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 46 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Activated Sludge Aeration Basin Deck Repair at P2 - P2-118 Project Category Secondary Treatment Project Status: Revised Description The purpose of the project is to rehabilitate the concrete deck at the oxygen activated sludge 000 000 000 basins at Plant No.2 in order to increase the life of its critical assets and to address safely issues associated with oxygen seepage from cracks in the deck. This project will focus on repair of full penetration cracks and surface spalling on the top deck of the basins. 000 000 000 000 000 000 Secondary Treatment Justification The deck of the aeration basins has incurred cracking over time,many of which go through the entire slab potentially exposing the rebar to corrosion and causing leakage of oxygen. The leaking oxygen imposes a safety concern because of the potential for it to accumulate in confined areas potentially creating an oxygen-enriched environment.Additionally,there are large areas of surface spalling where the top layer of reinforcement is exposed, causing corrosion of the metal. This project will rehabilitate or restore the reinforcement as needed and replace the spelled concrete with an epoxy-based mortar to cover and protect the reinforcement from being compromised further. The project budget has been decreased from$6,659,000 to$2,331,000. The projects construction cost is$900,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dew 22,842 22,842 Prelim Design 38,848 62,999 101,847 Design 184,394 188,596 372,990 Consruc0on 1,278,822 1,278,822 Commissioning 53,303 53,303 Close-out 46,172 4,817 50,989 Contingency 3,459 47,692 304,273 94,783 450,207 651491 295,085 1,871,166 99,600 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 47 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Oxygen Plant Demolition at P2 - SP-129 Project Category Secondary Treatment Project Status: Revised Description This project removes the existing abandoned cryogenic facility, compressors and associated 000 000 000 equipment which, prior to decommissioning in October 2012 was operated and maintained by Air Products and Chemicals. The assets are owned by OCSD. 000 000 000 000 000 000 Secondary Treatment Justification As a cost savings measure,Operations now purchases liquid oxygen rather than using the aging cryogenic facility to generate high purity oxygen. The project budget has been decreased from$4,051,000 to$3,444,000. The projecPs construction cost is$1,543,205. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 16,776 16,776 Prelim Design 128.380 128,380 Design 461,037 461,037 Construc0on 2,190,379 2,190,379 Commissioning 3,513 3,513 Close-out 30,457 249,405 29,748 309,610 Contingency 139,746 179,180 15,379 334,305 wililb,970,2881 428,585 45,127 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 48 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Digester Rehab at Pi - Pi-100 Project Category Solids Handling&Digestion Project Status: Revised Description The project rehabilitates Digesters No. 5 through No. 16 at Plant No. 1 to replace aging equipment and improve solids handling capacity. The equipment rehabilitation includes sludge pumping, heating,structural systems,mechanical systems,electrical and control systems. ti Solids Handling & Digestion Justification This project is being built in conjunction with Project Pi-101 to treat increased solids due to secondary expansion at Plant No. 1, efficiently use existing digesters'capacity,increase reliability,and improve quality of sludge production. Scope of work includes removal of sludge accumulated in digesters, replacing aging mechanical/electrical equipment,and structural rehabilitation of digesters 5-16 that were built during the years of 1959-1993. The project budget has been increased from$64,902,000 to$66,650,000. The project's construction cost is$38,555,003. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 217,569 217,569 Prelim Design 3,082,231 3,082,231 Design 3,603,031 3,603,031 Consauc0on 48,498,902 2,254,323 523,615 51,276,840 Commissioning 2,325,099 441,721 44,002 2,810,822 Close-out 52,706 161,555 6,399 220,660 Contingency 707,281 2,057,979 1,838,607 834,981 5,438,848 Total 58,486.818 4,754,023 2,567,779 941,380 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 49 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Sludge Dewalering&Odor Control at Pi - Pi-101 Project Category Solids Handling&Digestion Project Status: Revised Description This project constructs primary sludge thickening facilities to improve solids handling capacity, replace sludge dewatering facilities with aging equipment and reduce biosolids handling and disposal, rehabilitate solids handling odor control equipment for aging equipment,and temporarily expand sludge dewatering facilities to accommodate temporary construction needs. ti Solids Handling & Digestion Justification This project is necessary to support the need for more capacity to thicken and dewater sludge due to conversion of Plant No. 1 to full secondary treatment and increased flows to support expansion of the GWR System.The existing sludge dewatering facilities that were built in the late 1970's have reached the end of useful life and are in need of replacement.This project will increase cake dryness which will reduce biosolids management costs;improve sludge thickening to optimize use of existing digesters while eliminating construction of new digesters and improve site constraints at Plant No. 1 by building compact solids treatment facilities and facilitate future expansion. The project budget has been increased from$171,978,000 to$188,328,000. The project's construction cost is$127,668,668. This project will decrease operational budgets by$3,600,000 annually. Sludge hauling and disposal costs will drop because there will be less moisture in the sludge. This operational savings factors in the additional energy and chemical costs associated with operating centrifuges. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Pmject Data Budget Pmj Dev 329,977 329,9T Prelim Design 6,894,055 6,894,055 Design 11,393,374 11,393,374 ConsWclion 128,460.747 14,639,634 6,184,656 354,583 149,639,620 Commissioning 370,146 1,998,940 1,314,208 3,683,294 Close-out 22,6581 47,9311 28,9881 598,2141 622 698,413 Contingency 617,457 1,773,884 2,197,499 9,928,703 1,171,724 15,689,267 Total 148,088.414 18,460,389 9,725,351 10,881,500 1,172,346 Reimbursable Costs: INA Section 8-Page 50 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Solids Thickening&Processing Upgrades - P2-89 Project Category Solids Handling&Digestion Project Status: Continuing Description This project will rehabilitate and upgrade the four existing Dissolved Air Flotation Thickeners (DAFTs)to treat the Activated Sludge Plant solids and the solids from the Trickling Filter/Solids Contactor(TF/SC)process.This project will also convert two holding digesters into working digesters to accommodate the increased production of sludge coming from the new secondary TF/SC process. ti Solids Handling & Digestion Justification This project is required to rehabilitate aging sludge thickening equipment,and to improve thickening capacity reliability related to the solids generated by the Trickling Filter/Solids Contact facility. The projects construction cost is$29,312,724. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 181,772 181,772 Prelim Design 3,460,820 3,460,820 Design 5,749,912 5,749,912 Consauc0on 35,737,855 2,416,448 38,154,303 Commissioning 691,132 118,453 809,585 Close-out 254.807 315,451 19,179 589,437 Contingency 560,153 1,357,651 286,367 2,204,171 Total 46,636,451 4,208,003 305,546 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 51 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Digester Facilities Rehab at P2 - P2-91.1 Project Category Solids Handling&Digestion Project Status: Future Description This project will rehabilitate Plant 2 Digester P through T.The extend of rehabilitation will include mechanical equipment and piping including sludge mixing system,sludge recirculation and heating system, hot water system,and axillary equipment;digester cleaning and fixing concrete structure damages found,miscellaneous safety item,and related electrical and instrumentation works. ti Solids Handling & Digestion Justification Based on Planning study SP-186 findings,the decision was made that all Plant 2 digesters will be replaced with new digesters due to condition of the digesters,and liquefaction and seismic risks.The Biosolids Master Plan(with FY 15/16 start date)will evaluate the replacement options. It will take about 10-15 years to finish the design and construction of the new digesters in a phased manner. In order to keep all the existing digesters online until they are replaced,this project will rehabilitate some of the digesters to extend their useful lives. The project budget has been increased from$47,600,000 to$49,220,000. The projecPs construction cost is$29,460,998. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 149,732 70,529 220,261 Prelim Design 13,061 61,899 34,930 109,890 Design 2,358 1,106,106 1,897,750 749,941 3,756,155 Construction 273 33,809,791 33,810,064 Commissioning 2,104,248 2,104,248 Close-out 380,870 380,870 Contingency 67,796 190,773 448,435 631,548 7,499,960 8,838,512 Total 152.363 151,386 252,672 1,589,471 2,529,298 44,544,810 49,220,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 52 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Sludge Dewalering&Odor Control at P2 - P2-92 Project Category Solids Handling&Digestion Project Status: Revised Description This project constructs facilities to reduce biosolids handling and disposal costs, replace aging sludge dewatering facilities,and provides associated odor control facilities. The project will also demolish the existing Bell Press Dewatedng Building,and two unused sludge cake storage silos. This budget also includes the P2-92A Track Loading Bay Odor Control project,the construction of which will be separately from P2-92. ti Solids Handling & Digestion Justification This project will replace the dewatering facilities that have reached the end of their service life. Based on the Long Range Biosolids Master Plan,a newer dewatering technology,centrifuges,will be utilized to reduce the amount of water in the biosolids hauled offsite to reduce biosolids management disposal costs. The project budget has been increased from$86,500,000 to$90,477,000. The projecPs construction cost is$53,835,000. This project will decrease operational budgets by$1,300,000 annually. Sludge hauling and disposal costs will drop because there will be less moisture in the sludge. This operational savings factors in the additional energy and chemical costs associated with operating centrifuges. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To. 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019-20 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 587,514 587,514 Prelim Design 2,788,301 2,788,301 Design 7,002,817 7,002,817 Construc0on 17,205,861 22,504,880 15,548,028 10,865,723 4,835,107 140,040 71,099,639 Commissioning 58,313 568,298 762,527 20,373 1,409,511 Close-out 592,942 592,942 Contingency 405,798 958,826 1,183,010 1,414,601 1,712,947 1,280,910 40,183 6,996,275 Total 27,990.292 23,463,706 16,789,351 12,948,622 7,310,581 2,034,265 40,183 90,477,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 53 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Final Effluent Sampler&Building Area Upgrades - J-110 Project Category Ocean Ouffall Systems Project Status: Revised Description This project will renovate,replace,or demolish facilities surrounding the final effluent sampler trailer. This includes replacement of the final effluent sampler pumping and sampling systems and sampling trailer with a new building,the removal of the adjacent unused buildings,removal and replacement of gas lines,rehabilitation of the short ocean outfall system,drainage and storm drain improvements,and landscaping and irrigation along the east plant perimeter. Ocean Outfall Systems Justification These facilities need significant renovations due to age and exposure to ocean air. Several repairs and upgrades have been attempted to correct deficient sampling equipment. Similarly,a number of repairs have been made to existing structures. Those past projects have extended the life of the equipment and structures,however,those past repairs are also at the end of their useful lives. Thus,the buildings,gas lines,and equipment need large-scale renovations and replacement. Project No. P2-96 was bid with J-110. The management and construction costs are included in the J-110 budget for ease of OCSD project management since it was a small percentage of the overall construction cost for the two projects. The project budget has been increased from$15,973,000 to$16,411,000. The projects construction cost is$9,716,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202041 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Pmj Dev 101,240 101,240 Prelim Design 1,420,752 1,420,752 Design 1,396,388 1,396,388 Construc0on 7,057,401 4,798,322 274,102 12,129,825 Commissioning 147,278 147,278 Close-out 6 128,274 114,867 243,147 Contingency 157,411 528,542 286,416 972,369 Total 10,133,199 5,602,416 675,385 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 54 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Ocean Outfall System Rehab - J-117 Project Category Ocean Outfall Systems Project Status: Revised Description This project will rehabilitate the mechanical,electrical, and civil systems at the Ocean Outfall Booster Station at Plant 2 which is the primary pumping station for the discharge of secondary effluent to the ocean outfall system. This project also includes replacement of portions of the Ocean Ouffall Booster Station pumping systems with a low flaw pump station to more efficiently pump dry weather flow. Related facilities between Plant 1 and Plant 2 are also included in this project including rehabilitation of the 120"and 84"pipelines and replacement of the fiber optic cable. 92 Ocean Outfall Systems Justification The existing Ocean Outfall Booster Station facility is over 20 years old. A consultant was hired to perform an extensive evaluation of the existing mechanical and electrical equipment at the Ocean Outfall Booster Station as well as a hydraulic analysis of the projected dry weather daily flows. The conclusions were that the mechanical and electrical equipment are nearing the end of their useful lives and in need of replacement or rehabilitation and modifications to the pumping system were required to more efficiently pump dry weather flows. In addition,the pipelines between Plant 1 and Plant 2 were evaluated by the Engineering Department's corrosion staff and were determined to be in need of rehabilitation. The project budget has been increased from$76,000,000 to$87,683,000. The project's construction cost is$51,825,778. This project will decrease operational budgets by$1,000,000 annually. resulting from energy savings by using more appropriately sized pumps during non-storm periods. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 224,788 224,788 Prelim Design 2,900,979 919,510 3,820,489 Design 325,253 3,000,543 2,881,319 137,602 6,344,717 ConsWction 739.095 1,566,332 7,353,859 20,587,749 21,597,888 10,571,738 62,416,661 Commissioning 1,711,161 1,711,161 Close-out 19,344 57,593 53,634 77,892 208,463 Contingency 247,886 728,751 1,001,240 1,784,149 1,455,307 1,874,012 5,865,377 12,956,722 4,438,000 4,648,804 5,448,891 9,294,954 22,100,649 23,525,534 18,226,168 87,683,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 55 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Cengen Cooling Water System Repl.Project - J-109 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Continuing DescriptionIF This project will improve the efficiency of existing cooling system equipment at both plants. It will improve heat recovery from the Central Generation Engines and reduce water consumption by replacing the existing once-through cooling systems with a more efficient system Utility Systems Justification This project will substantially reduce the amount of water consumed by process equipment/systems,resulting in an estimated savings of$500,000 annually. The District currently buys OCWD reclaimed water to cool mechanical equipment. This water is expensive and contains chemicals that damage equipment. The contract is set to expire in 2012.This project will eliminate the need to purchase reclaimed water due to use of a closed loop system with cooling towers. The projects construction cost is$6,115,457. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 119,346 119,348 Prelim Design 1,130,934 1,130,934 Design 1,377,122 1,377,122 Consauc0on 8,305,206 8,305,206 Commissioning 167,472 167,472 Close-out 289.695 289,695 Contingency 87,223 87,223 Total 11,477,000 11," 00 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 56 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Cengen Emissions Control Project - J-111 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Revised Description AAI This project will install equipment at each plant to control the Central Generation emissions and comply with existing and proposed regulatory limits.The Central Generation System(CGS)engines provide both electricity and heat to our treatment plants and are permitted to operate by the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD). The project will also automate the operation of two steam absorption chillers and provide a steam converter at Plant 2 to reduce natural gas consumption required for digester heating. Utility Systems Justification The SCAQMD has amended an existing Rule 1110.2which requires significant reductions in common pollutants that have national ambient air quality standards.Also, OCSD is subject to an existing SCAQMD air toxic rule(Rule 1402)that requires significant reductions in emissions associated with health risks.This project will bring OCSD in compliance with the proposed and existing Rules for air emissions based on the results of the pilot testing conducted under Project No.J-79. The project will also allow OCSD to operate engines using natural gas,which will be used during peak power rate periods to reduce electrical costs. The project budget has been decreased from$24,950,000 to$23,820,000. The project's construction cost is$15,483,739. This project will increase operational budgets by$300,000 annually. However,this can be offset by reduced peak demand costs by the ability to generate power using natural gas during peak electric rate periods. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 221,077 221,077 Prelim Design 1,002,075 1,002,075 Design 1,827,488 1,827,488 Construc0on 19,086,806 19,086,806 Commissioning 508,356 508,356 Close-out 10,372 163,036 173,408 Contingency 471,454 529,336 1,000,790 Total 23,127.628 692,372 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 57 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name 8.Number I UPS System Upgrades - J-121 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Future Description This project will provide a regional uninterruptible power system(UPS)at Plant No. 1 in Power Building 8,a regional UPS in the northern portion of Plant No.2,and provide UPS power distribution and power distribution units(PDUs)to feed UPS loads from the regional UPS's installed by this project and regional UPS's installed by P1-101, P2-89 and P2-110.The regional UPSs will be industrial grade with lead acid batteries and will replace the smaller UPS units.This is described in detail as Option 5,from TM-9(Plant UPS Rehabilitation and Master Planning)of the Energy Master Plan which proposes replacing all existing UPS units with a limited number of larger units. Utility Systems Justification The existing UPS system includes units of various sizes,configurations, and capabilities.This system does not provide an ideal level of reliability or cost effective operation. Issues with the existing UPS system include failures without warning, use of maintenance free battery that last less than 5 years compared to 20 years for lead acid batteries, locations that are difficult to maintain,increased maintenance due to UPS quantity,and lack of standby diesel generator back up power to maintain UPS operation during an extended power outage. The project budget has been decreased from$8,393,000 to$8,087,000. The projects construction cost is$3,985,255. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Pmj Dev 98,493 98,493 Prelim Design 219,426 219,426 Design 1,026,199 1,026,199 Construc0on 5,317,382 5,317,382 Commissioning 150,312 150,312 Close-out 80,100 80,100 Contingency 1,195,088 1,195,088 8,087,000 8,087,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 58 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number Digester Gas Facilities Rehab - J-124 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Revised Description Plant 1 and Plant 2 have similar facilities to collect and pressurize digester gas for fueling the Central Generation Power Facilities.The facilities consist of low pressure gas collector piping and storage,gas compressors,gas dryers and a high pressure gas distribution piping.The project will modify the low pressure gas vent on the digesters, install new gas compressors and gas dryers and replace the high pressure flare system with a low pressure system.Sections of the gas piping need modification to control condensation and corrosion.The existing gas compressor buildings will be demolished and replaced at new locations at both plants. Utility Systems Justification The gas compressor system was installed in 1982 and the mechanical equipment has reached the end of its service life.The gas facilities are in need of upgrading to improve safety and to meet current and future requirements of the Air Quality Management District(AQMD)and the National fire Protection Association(NFPA). The project budget has been increased from$85,870,000 to$87,897,000. The projecrs construction cost is$53,362,643. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 155,406 155,406 Prelim Design 23,796 68,789 69,080 28,043 189,708 Design 13,800 2,344,367 3,763,222 406,380 6,527,769 Construc0on 60,741,867 60,741,867 Commissioning 3,679,678 3,679,678 Close-out 593,537 593,537 Contingency 139,015 292,598 603,247 830,304 1,076,867 13,067,0110 16,009,041 332,017 361,387 672,327 3,202,714 4,940,0891 78,488,466 87,897,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 59 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Natural Gas Pipelines Repl.at P1 &P2 - J-127 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Continuing Description AAI This project will rehabilitate the natural gas pipelines at Plants No 1 and 2.This includes the replacement of aging metallic pipelines and risers and upgrades to the cathodic protection systems. Utility Systems Justification Recent condition assessments of the natural gas piping have revealed that some of the metallic piping and risers have reached the end of their useful life and require replacement. The cathodic protection systems will also be upgraded to provide corrosion control of the buried metallic piping.This project will ensure safe, reliable operations of the natural gas systems. The projects construction cost is$640,918. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 1,470 1,470 Prelim Design 31,419 44,928 76,347 Design 6,447 120,397 109,363 1,596 237,803 Construction 285,328 556,960 a42,288 Commissioning 4,545 15,050 19,595 Close-out 25,947 25,947 Contingency 684 2,497 6,287 10,102 15,772 71,208 106,550 33,673 53,872 126,684 119,465 307,2411 669,165 1,310,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 60 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Electrical Power Distribution System Impr. - J-98 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Future Description This project provides various electrical distribution system improvements at Plant Nos. 1 and 2,as recommended by the J-25-4 project study,which are needed based on equipment condition and age,insufficient equipment ratings,grounding safety, non-compliance with the National Electrical Code(NEC)requirements,and electrical configuration reliability.This includes replacing delta-delta transformers with delta-Wye transformer,adding high resistance grounding to maintain plant operations and reduce the are flash levels,replacing electrical that is at the end of its useful life, modifying the electrical system configurations to improve reliability and support maintenance, replacing electrical cables and equipment that are not properly sized,and adding surge protection to protect equipment. Utility Systems Justification These improvements are required to improve electrical safety, reliability and protective device coordination and for compliance with NEC requirements. As the electrical systems at Plant 1 and 2 has aged and reliability and safety philosophy has improved, the existing electrical systems,which are not scheduled for rehabilitation in the near future,require improvements and replacement to maintain electrical system reliability and improved safety. The project budget has been decreased from$35,081,000 to$34,608,000. The project's construction cost is$18,608,097. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 201 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 377,799 377,799 Prelim Design 1,425,399 1,425,399 Design 2,574,924 2,574,924 ConsbuCllOn 24,096,259 24,096,259 Commissioning 397,120 397,120 Close-out 154,150 154,150 Contingency 5,582,349 5,582,349 34,608,000 34,608,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 61 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Plant Water System Rehab at P1 - P1-l12 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Revised Description AAI This project will rehabilitate or replace deteriorating plant water pipe that is in need of replacement due to corrosion. This includes the valves that have become unserviceable or have exceeded their useful lives. The project will need to install temporary measures to ensure that the treatment plant maintains continuous operations during the repairs. Utility Systems Justification O&M recently prepared an evaluation of the plant water systems for each plant in response to an increasing number of emergency repairs to the plant water systems. The resulting report identified the scope and magnitude of the needed repairs. These repairs were packaged into the projects for each plant. The project budget has been decreased from$8,000,000 to$6,157,000. The projects construction cost is$3,800,116. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201 201 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 135,760 135,760 Prelim Design 415.400 415,400 Design 900,660 900,660 ConsWclion 4,590,077 4,590,077 Commissioning Close-out 89.2051 1,2411 90,446 Contingency 14,253 10,404 24,657 6,145,355 11,645 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 62 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Central Generation Rehab at Pi - P1-127 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Future Description IF This project will rehabilitate the Can Gen facility equipment including the lube oil system,the engine jacket water loop,steam loop,hot water loop,waste/supplement heat system, chilled water loop, cooling water loop, HVAC system,starting air and instrumentation air systems,exhaust gas monitoring system,miscellaneous building improvements,and electrical equipment including the 12 KV feeders and switch gears. Utility Systems Justification Can Gen equipment had been rebuilt through regular maintenance program,or by CIP projects working in the area.There has not been a project just focusing on the condition assessment and rehabilitation of overall Can Gen facility equipment, particularly the equipment that are too large to be rebuilt through regular maintenance. The project budget has been increased from$35,647,000 to$73,151,000. The project's construction cost is$43,921,253. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Pmj Dev 105,148 105,148 Prelim Design 72,253 91,574 163,827 Design 5,596,253 5,596,253 Construc0on 50,404,559 50,404,559 Commissioning 3,137,087 3,137,087 Close-out 567,814 567,814 Contingency 140,466 13,035,846 13,176,312 317,8671 72,833,133 73,151,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 63 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Plant Water System Rehab at P2 - P2-101 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Revised Description AAI This project will rehabilitate or replace deteriorating plant water pipe that is in need of replacement due to corrosion. This includes the valves that have become unserviceable or have exceeded their useful lives. The project will need to install temporary measures to ensure that the treatment plant maintains continuous operations during the repairs. Utility Systems Justification O&M recently prepared an evaluation of the plant water systems for each plant in response to an increasing number of emergency repairs to the plant water systems. The resulting report identified the scope and magnitude of the needed repairs. These repairs were packaged into the projects for each plant The project budget has been decreased from$5,070,000 to$3,704,000. The projects construction cost is$2,333,590. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201 201 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 121,403 121,403 Prelim Design 374.535 374,535 Design 420,871 420,871 ConsWclion 2,691,822 2,691,822 Commissioning Close-out 84,492 84,492 ConOngencY 8,992 1,884 10,876 3.702,116 1,884 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 64 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Consolidated Demolition&Utility Impr. at P2 - P2-110 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Revised Description AAI This project will demolish Digesters A and B; Primary Clarifiers A, B and C;Air Compressor Building; Emergency Power Building,and several other facilities at the end of useful life. Several existing tunnels will be demolished and/or rehabilitated including new pipe supports,drainage improvements, structural repair, lighting improvements etc.The demolition site will receive extensive grading,drainage and paving improvements. Utility Systems Justification Most facilities are at the end of useful life or is not in use any longer. The project budget has been decreased from$43,984,000 to$38,460,000. The project's construction cost is$26,343,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 221,226 221,226 Prelim Design 1,473,583 1,473,583 Design 907,646 728,167 1,635,813 Construction 79,298 8,225,372 20,047,951 2,416,113 30,768,734 Commissioning Close-out 367,597 41,358 408,955 Contingency 86,538 273,722 462,633 1,143,255 1,742,796 242,744 3,951,688 2,688,994 1,081,187 8,688,005 21,191,206 4,526,506 284,102 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 65 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Central Generation Rehab at P2 - P2-119 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Future DescriptionIF This project will rehabilitate the Plant 2 Can Gen facility equipment including the tube oil system, the engine jacket water loop,steam loop, hot water loop,cooling water loop, HVAC system,starting air and instrumentation air systems,exhaust gas monitoring system, miscellaneous building improvements,and electrical equipment including 12 KV feeders and switchgears. Utility Systems Justification Can Gen equipment had been rebuilt through regular maintenance program,or by CIP projects working in the area.There has not been a project just focusing on the condition assessment and rehabilitation of overall Can Gen facility equipment, particularly the equipment that are too large to be rebuilt through regular maintenance. The project budget has been increased from$41,909,000 to$95,906,000. The project's construction cost is$57,583,506. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019-20 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 137,854 137,854 Prelim Design 94,727 120,059 214,786 Design 7,337,061 7,337,061 Construction 66,083,518 66,083,518 Commissioning 4,112,892 4,112,892 Close-out 744,450 744,450 Contingency 184,167 17,091,272 17,275,439 416,748 95,489,2521 95,9060 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 66 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Plant Air System Master Plan - SP-148 Project Category Utility Systems Project Status: Revised Description AAI This project will evaluate the Plant No. 1 and 2 Plant Air Systems for ultimate demands and capacity and include whether it is more reliable to operate as various islands or as a plant wide system served by a single location. Utility Systems Justification Many changes have occurred due to the declining condition of the existing systems and new demands from recent projects.Low air pressures and condensate have been noted at both plants. The project budget has been decreased from$340,000 to$225,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019-20 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 149,190 37,910 187,100 Prelim Design Design Construction Commissioning Close-out Contingency 30,749 7,151 37,900 179.939 45,067 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 67 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Safety Impr.Program - J-126 Project Category Process Related Special Projects Project Status: Revised Description Planning study SP-145-1 provided a facility-wide assessment of the significant structural safety issues(ladders,handrail,hatches,etc.)and identified over 1600 deficient safety items. About half of the safely items will be addressed by OCSD's Maintenance department while some lower priority items have been assigned to future CIP projects. This project will address the remaining items that are either high priority or cannot be assigned to a future CIP project. 6 Process Related Special Projects Justification OCSD facilities have been constructed with varying compliance with safety codes.While the safety issues created by the configurations may have a low probability of causing injury,the consequence could be high in terms of injury and OCSD liability. The cost to mitigate these structural issues after construction is high. Dealing with these issues on a case-by-case basis is not cost effective.OCSD would benefit greatly by having consistent facilities-wide structural safety standards. The project budget has been increased from$1,708,000 to$9,702,000. The project's construction cost is$5,400,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 123,810 123,810 Prelim Design 51,823 401,833 453,656 Design 900 226,213 411,159 30,636 668,908 Consauc0on 89,362 4,111,152 2,503,249 6,703,763 Commissioning Close-out 131,572 131,572 Contingency 6,556 76,914 209,552 457,107 688,927 181,235 1,620,291 1830891 704,960 710,073 4,598,895 3,323,748 181,235 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 68 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Odor Control Master Plan - SP-166 Project Category Process Related Special Projects Project Status: Revised Description This project is a strategic initiative on odor impacts at both plants. Phase I will repetitively collect the odor data from the different treatment processes and analyze them by chemical and sensory methods to determine the target odorants.Phase II will model the target odorants,determine the maximum allowed concentrations,and recommend foul air treatment systems and associated costs to meet a certain level of service.The Board will use the Odor Control Master Plan to decide on a particular level of service for odors. Process Related Special Projects Justification The 2005 odor model was based on sensory analyses which provides insufficient information to achieve effective foul air treatment at the sources.This study aims at providing sufficient information about the chemical compounds(odorants)causing odors at the different treatment processes in order to design treatment systems that meet an achievable level of service target for odors. The project budget has been increased from$1,900,000 to$1,950,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 202041 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Day 1,312,627 473,117 1,785,744 Prelim Design Design 976 976 Construction Commissioning Close-out Contingency 22,624 112,674 27,982 183,280 1.336,2271 585,791 27,982 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 69 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Process Control Systems Upgrades - J-120 Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: Future Description This project will upgrade the existing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition(SCADA)Systems a for the treatment plants and pump stations which includes Human Machine Interface(HMI) hardware and HMI software, Programmable Logic Controllers(PLCs),historian, import-export tools to align HMI servers, and security administrative requirements.These improvements will provide greater reliability and system continuity by replacing the existing obsolete HMI systems,databases I I I I I I I I 8 and software programs,to provide trending,diagnostic data,monitoring, control, automation and management information such as logistic information,detailed linked Standard Operating Procedures(SOPs),and expert-system troubleshooting guides.This project will consist of a pilot phase and an implementation phase.The pilot phase will test two HMI manufacturers under Information simulated conditions to evaluate ease of programming,configuration,performance,and features and will include the development of draft standards,database development and tools such as the Management Software Administrative Tool (SAT).The implementation phase will develop HMI and PLC programming standards,templates, programming methodologies,tools,and databases and will Systems develop standards for SCADA networking and PLC control panels.The implementation phase will provide a phased conversion of the SCADA system replacement for the treatment plants and pump stations to maintain process automation and regulatory compliance. Project also includes the replacement of the existing fiber optic system at Plant 1. Justification The existing HMI system consisting of the CRISP software and associated SCADA subsystems are obsolete.The CRISP software has a limited customer installed base and technical expertise for support and source code modifications will become scarce in the future. The CRISP HMI software in conjunction with the SCADA subsystems provides important data communications for treatment process and plant monitoring,control,automation,visualization,alarm handling and notification. The existing Quantum Pl that are currently being used throughout the treatment plants and pump stations are no longer being manufactured.The manufacturer has developed a family of replacement PLC processors and ancillary equipment with enhanced capabilities and security features.A replacement PLC processor system will be evaluated and selected to provide a long-term,20-year life. Reliability and maintainability of the SCADA systems is critical to maintaining regulatory compliance for both the collections system and the treatment plants.Many of the fiber optic cables at Plant 1 have reached the end of their useful life.Since the existing 62.5 micron fiber cables are no long manufactured,the entire fiber optic system needs to be replaced with 50 micron fibers to provide overall system compatibility. The project budget has been increased from$24,680,000 to$102,399,000. The project's construction cost is$40,631,874. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 97,273 97,273 Prelim Design 357,020 854,647 1,638,530 2,850,197 Design 4,652,815 4,652,815 Construc0on 79,376,465 79,376,465 Commissioning 2,839,960 2,839,960 Close-out 392,789 392,789 Contingency 93,653 192,274 11,903,574 12,189,501 547,946 1,046,9211 100,804,133 102,399,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 70 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Programmable Control Panel Upgrades - J-125 Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: Revised Description The project will upgrade programmable logic control(PLC)panels at both plants to be functional a with new Industrial Control System(ICS)Network being installed by the Information Technology Department. The project will install ten(10)new PLC panels(5 at Plant No.1 and 5 Plant No.2), add equipment to existing panels at both Plants No. 1 82,and installation of miscellaneous network components. illu II B Information Management Systems Justification ICS Network Installation and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System(SCADA)Security Upgrade Project(IT Project)is being completed by IT and requires these PLC upgrades for the PI-Cs to communicate through the ICS Network. This project will eliminate the dependency on the old Modbus Plus Network,and will increase level of security and reliability in SCADA communications. The project budget has been decreased from$3,177,000 to$2,283,000. The projects construction cost is$1,411,664. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To. 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019-20 202041 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 5,611 5,611 Consauc0on 2,036,917 2,036,917 Commissioning Close-out 72.721 26,354 99,075 Contingency 93,106 48,291 141,397 Total 2,208,355 74,645 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 71 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Information Technology Capital Program - M-MC-IT Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: New Description This project will provide for the replacement, rehabilitation and/or upgrade of various Information a technology assets that meet the criteria and justification for capital expenditure. illmn B Information Management Systems Justification These funds are needed in order to replace/rehabilitate/upgrade Information technology assets that are not included or identified in a capital improvement project. The project's construction cost is$5,000,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019-20 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 125,694 324,657 499,232 679,993 870,425 2,500,001 Consouc0on 251,382 649,308 998,463 1,359,985 1,740,860 4,999,998 Commissioning Close-out Contingency 125,231 323,965 497,855 677,416 875,534 2,500,001 502,307 1,297,930 1,995,550 2,717,394 3,486,819 10,000,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 72 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Power Monitoring&Control Systems at P2 - P2-107 Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: Revised Description This project will implement a power monitoring and control system at Plant No.2,similar to the O system installed under Project No.J-33-3 at Plant No. 1. Remote actuators and monitors will be provided for 12kV and 480V distribution switches to allow for operation from remote control panels which maintains a safe operating distance from live electrical panels to avoid arc Flash risks. The project will also provide a new industrial control system configured as three looped fiber optic I I I I I I I I B networks. Information Management Systems Justification With the improvements made under this project,staff will be able to respond quickly via remote control panels to perform normal power switching or switching as a result of a fault condition,allowing operators to maintain a safe operating distance from live electrical panels to avoid arc Flash risks. Improvements to the industrial control system will improve reliability by eliminating a potential single point of failure with the fiber optic network The project budget has been increased from$27,839,000 to$34,123,000. The projects construction cost is$17,554,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 100,241 100,241 Prelim Design 952.405 264,658 1,217,063 Design 12 1,976,229 858,357 2,834,598 Constructor, 1,147,495 7,676,620 7,517,681 6,548,174 22,889,970 Commissioning 96,907 192,663 439,598 431,308 1,160,476 Close-out 42,718 164,018 206,736 Contingency 67,885 350,047 574,990 722,981 1,124,439 1,553,733 1,319,840 5,713,915 1,217,451 2,590,934 2,580,842 8,592,264 9,081,718 8,575,933 1,483,858 34,123,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 73 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I BAN Software&Process Implementation - SP-100 Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: Revised Description This project will implement the IBM Maximo System in support of the Enterprise Asset Management a program. The system will replace the current Computerized Maintenance Management System. The system will manage asset data and asset activities throughout the asset lifecycle. illmn B Information Management Systems Justification The IBM Maximo System will provide the means to manage asset to achieve the highest return at low risk by improving asset usage and reducing cost. The system will also manage asset lifecycle, provide visibility into asset performance,streamline process by eliminating paper work order,and reduce maintenance cost. The system will be integrated with other District system (i.e. FIS, GIS,and Timecard). The projects construction cost is$210,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 201849 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 1,306,829 1,306,829 Prelim Design 424.675 28,345 28,238 28,237 28,346 537,841 Design 2,045,157 134,428 225,304 318,688 415,809 3,139,386 Consauc0on 767.249 143,350 208,858 182,180 126,275 1,427,912 Commissioning 235,966 56,688 56,471 56,472 56,688 462,285 Close-out 35,8461 35,846 Contingency 45,377 108,656 108,238 108,239 109,072 108,655 1,665 589,902 Total 4,861,098 471,467 627,109 693,816 736,190 108,655 1,665 7,500,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 74 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I PDS2D Software Rapt. - SP-103 Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: Continuing Description This project provides a replacement to the Process and Instrumentation Diagram(P&ID)software used at the Sanitation District,which will not be supported by the vendor,and will eventually become inoperable. The software provides for the electronic storage and updating of diagrams which document the configuration of critical processes and equipment at the Sanitation District. The scope includes finding the replacement software, implementing the new software,and I I 8 converting data to the new software. Information Management Systems Justification This software maintains the drawings which document the configuration of critical treatment processes and equipment. These drawings are needed for plant expansion,and are required by the EPA for plant maintenance. An electronic system of this nature is the only feasible system for this purpose. The software will eventually become obsolete and inoperable.A replacement is needed because no update to this software will be provided. The data must be converted to the new software format before the software becomes inoperable. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 356,642 86,814 56,545 500,001 Consauc0on Commissioning Close-out Contingency 2,548 11,247 11,204 24,999 359,igol 98,067 67,749 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 75 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Geographic Information System - SP-15 Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: Revised Description Geographic Information Systems(GIs)can be utilized at the District for any works project such as a collections,ocean monitoring,flow studies,rate structure studies,and construction. The GIs can be a planning tool for Asset Management,and a reporting tool for Permits and Sewer Shed Modeling. Other regional programs that would utilize the GIs are Bacteria Investigations,Air Quality,Special Purpose Discharge Permits, Connection Permits,and Source Control Permits. A I I I I I I I I B goal of the project is to enable Internet access to the District's GIs and Electronic Data Management System(EDMS)by consultants to collect data for projects and to check out and check in drawings. The public would also benefit through Internet access to reports and news about District's projects. Information Management Systems Justification There is a need and an opportunity for cost savings,spatial data control,and a reporting tool that can graphically display the District's data on maps via the Internet to reporting agencies,the public,and across the organization. The project budget has been increased from$4,460,000 to$4,568,000. The project's construction cost is$25,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019-20 202041 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 801,895 801,895 Prelim Design 121.040 121,040 Design 180,047 15,017 14,958 14,959 15,016 239,997 Construc0on 941.598 227,628 226,756 226,756 227,628 1,850,366 Commissioning 25,000 25,000 Close-out 24,4761 24,476 Contingency 156,108 373,800 372,368 372,368 230,581 1,505,225 2,250,165 616,445 614,082 614,083 473,225 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 76 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Process Control Systems Upgrades Study - SP-196 Project Category Information Management Systems Project Status: New Description This study will evaluate and identify suitable replacements for the existing Supervisory Control and a Data Acquisition(SCADA)Systems for the treatment plants and pump stations,which includes Human Machine Interface(HMI)hardware and HMI software, Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), Historian, import-export tools to align HMI servers,and security and administrative requirements for the Industral Control System(ICS)network.These improvements will provide I I I I I I I I B greater reliability and system continuity by replacing the existing obsolete HMI systems,databases and software programs,to provide trending,diagnostic data, monitoring,control,automation and management information such as logistic information,detailed linked Standard Operating Procedures(SOPS),and expert-system troubleshooting guides.This study will review the latest Information technology offerings, evaluate the existing process networks and hardwired network configuration and recommend changes,define system reliability, redundancy,performance and scan time Management requirements, identify software programming tools that need replacement,evaluate enterprise wide process data integration needs,evaluate and define requirements for current and future SCADA systems and ICS security requirements,define requirements for upgrading HMI and PLC hardware and software standards. Justification The existing HMI system consisting of the CRISP software and associated SCADA sub systems is obsolete. The CRISP software has a limited customer installed base and technical expertise for support and source code modifications will become scarce in the future. The CRISP HMI software in conjunction with the SCADA sub systems provides important data communications for treatment process and plant monitoring,control,automation,visualization,alarm handling and notification. The existing Quantum PLCs that are currently being used throughout the treatment plants and pump stations are no longer being manufactured.. The manufacturer has developed a family of replacement PLC processors and ancillary equipment with enhanced capabilities and security features.A new processor system will also be evaluated and selected to provide a long-term,20-year plus life. Reliability and maintainability of the SCADA systems is critical to maintaining regulatory compliance for both the collections system and the treatment plants. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 986,292 1,746,789 2,733,081 Prelim Design Design Construction Commissioning Close-out Contingency 361,797 459,122 820,919 1,348,089 2,205,911 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 77 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Planning Studies Program - M-STUDIES Project Category Strategic&Master Planning Project Status: New Description ' This budget provides funds for planning phase studies. This project acts as an annual budget necessary i for planning studies that have been identified the Asset Management Program as ,� I necessary in order to assess the condition and capacity of the District's existing assets and systems. Strategic & Master Planning Justification Planning studies provide comprehensive CIP planning for the District to meet anticipated capacity needs,manage risks associated with asset or system failure,take advantage of technology advancements,comply with regulatory changes,and meet strategic goals. The impacts to operational budgets have not yet been determined. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2019-19 201980 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 913,705 5,394,316 7,035,047 4,687,127 50g650 71,580 34,343 18,640,768 Prelim Design Design 7 7 Construction 1,178 1,178 Commissioning Close-out Contingency 297,591 717,006 1,448,768 1,662,256 560,888 315,363 8,176 5,010,048 1,212,480 6,111,322 8,483,815 6,349,383 1,065,538 386,943 42,519 23,652,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 78 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Climate Change Impact Study - SPA 52 Project Category Strategic&Master Planning Project Status: Future Description ' This study provides a site specific vulnerability analysis of potential impacts to OCSD facilities from global climate change in response to the Governor's Executive Order(EO)S-13-08. ,� I Environmental Services is actively pursuing a climate change strategy through its Environmental Footprint Strategic Initiative efforts and has completed detailed carbon footprint study. The next / step and the subject of the this study includes a site specific cific vulnerability analysis of potential climate change impacts to OCSD. Strategic & Master Planning Justification Global warming is predicted to lead to thermal expansion of sea water,along with partial melting of land-based glaciers and sea- ice,resulting in a rise of sea level.On November 14,2008,Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued an executive order directing state agencies to plan for sea level rise and climate impacts. The project budget has been increased from$400,000 to$590,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 2020-21 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 56,768 197,883 195,347 449,998 Prelim Design Design Construc0on Commissioning Close-out Contingency 11,095 58,426 70,481 140,002 67,863 256,309 265,828 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 79 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Effluent Reuse Study - SP-173 Project Category water Management Projects Project Status: Continuing Description This joint study with OCWD will identify opportunities for beneficial use of Plant No.2 effluent currently being discharged to the ocean. 0 Water Management Projects Justification The OCSD Strategic Plan identifies increases in reclamation as a strategic goal. This primarily includes diversions from Plant No. 2 to Plant No. 1 where the effluent is already being reused currently. This project will investigate additional options for reclamation of remaining flows at Plant No.2. The results of this study will be presented to the Board of Directors for consideration and potential incorporation into future strategic planning goals. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 2,047,695 908,978 2,956,673 Prelim Design Design 1,184 1,184 Construction 1,008 1,008 Commissioning Close-out Contingency 95,872 195,263 291,135 2.145,7591 1,104,241 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 80 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Research Program - M-RESEARCH Project Category Research Project Status: New Description This is a fund for operational research projects that have not yet been identified.As directed by OCSD management,an annual allocation will be made to fund research projects.The Research Strategic Plan identified projects and topics for research. Specific projects will be identified and developed to be funded from this budget. Research & Development Justification These funds will be used for various research projects designed to improve operational efficiency, reduce costs,improve safety,or fill important information gaps.The results will support O&M and provide information needed by Engineering for future planning and design work.The projects will be individually budgeted and tracked within the overall line item allocation. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 296,702 399,079 399,079 401,381 400,230 103,524 1,999,995 Prelim Design Design Construction Commissioning Close-out Contingency 852,378 1,296,013 1,296,012 1,305,983 1,300,998 448,621 6,500,005 1,149,080 1,695,092 1,695,091 1,707,364 1,701,228 552,1451 8,500,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 81 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Fuel Cell Demo - SP-125-04 Project Category Research Project Status: Revised Description OCSD is the host site for a public/private collaborative demonstration with the University of California, Irvine, U.S. Department of Energy,California Air Resources Board, South Coast Air Quality Management District,Air Products and Chemicals,and FuelCell Energy.A 300 kW fuel cell is installed at Plant No. 1 to use a portion of the treatment plant's digester gas to generate electricity for on-site use. In addition,hydrogen gas is produced and compressed for fueling vehicles at a publicly accessible fueling station as part of the California"Hydrogen Highway." Research & Development Justification This project is designed to demonstrate the tri-generation concept of fuel cell operation using a renewable fuel(digester gas).The elements of this project that are included under the general goal of"demonstrating the fuel cell power plant operation"include determining the amount of digester gas cleaning that is needed to make it a suitable fuel,documenting the operating efficiency of the power plant and its component processes,determining the maintenance requirements for the system,and verifying the expected lack of air pollutant emissions. The project budget has been increased from$105,923 to$135,000. This project will decrease operational budgets by$12,000 annually. The demolition of this facility will reduce staff time associated with the station,such as interface with other organizations and oversight of the agreements. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 20204H Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 613 613 Prelim Design Design 489 489 Consbuc0on 105.378 14,295 7,887 127,560 Commissioning 1,377 1,377 Close-out 335 335 Contingency 981 2,349 1,296 4,626 Total 109.173 16,644 9,183 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 82 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I SCCWRP Nutrient Cycling Sampling - SP-125-15 Project Category Research Project Status: Continuing Description The goal of this project is to understand the influence of effluent nitrogen on coastal waters and how the nature of this nitrogen affects the response of the biological community.The study objectives are: (1) Identify the relative contribution of different nitrogen sources that are being utilized by phytoplankton and bacteria in effluent impacted area(Orange County)as well as a minimally-impacted area in Oceanside(i.e.mostly natural nutrient sources; anthropogenic inputs minor);(2)Conduct process studies to determine key rates of primary production, respiration, nitrogen uptake and nitrification in effluent impacted(Orange County)and minimally-impacted (Oceanside)regions. Research & Development Justification Eutrophication of coastal waters is a global environmental issue,with demonstrated links between anthropogenic nutrient inputs and the global increase in frequency and occurrence of algal blooms.However,untangling the relative influence of natural versus anthropogenic nutrient sources on coastal waters has proved to be complex.Studies have indicated that anthropogenic nitrogen may be having a significant impact on the ecology of the ocean,but it has also demonstrated that we have an incomplete understanding of the fate and dynamics of nitrogen in urban coastal settings and a poor understanding of the seasonal and interannual variability in these dynamics. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-0E 2019-19 2019420 20204H Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 36,815 42,659 15,526 95,000 Construction Commissioning Close-out Contingency 368151 42,659 15,526 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 83 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I AquaCritox Evaluation/Design - SP-125-17 Project Category Research Project Status: Revised Description This project will conduct an engineering evaluation and produce a preliminary design package for a Supercritical Water Oxidation(SCWO)installation. SCWO(process trademark name:AquaCritox) accomplishes essentially complete oxidation of wastewater solids and other organic material, producing carbon dioxide, nitrogen,and process heat.This can be applied to primary or secondary solids and to other organic materials(e.g., pharmaceuticals and other Compounds of Emerging Concern). This project will include technical and economic evaluations of the feasible alternatives for an SCWO installation at OCSD,concluding with a preliminary design package for the recommended alternative that can be used to secure approval for a corresponding CIP design, construction,and testing project. Research & Development Justification SCWO could be used instead of anaerobic digestion, biogas cleaning/compression/storage, residual solids dewatering,and biosolids management activities. The early projections are an overall cost benefit if the system were to replace these processes. The goal of the study is to quantify the cost to construct operate the facility and determine any cost savings over existing processes. The project budget has been increased from$423,000 to$588,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 201930 202031 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 296,665 201,767 498,432 Prelim Design Design 60 60 Construction Commissioning Close-out Contingency 35,806 53,702 89,508 332.531 255,469 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 84 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Facilities Engineering Program-Plant - M-FE-PLANT Project Category Support Facilities Project Status: New Description This budget provides funds for miscellaneous Reclamation Plant No. 1 facilities small capital projects,Treatment Plant No.2 facilities small capital projects and joint small capital projects. A small capital project is defined as a miscellaneous capital improvement related to plant safely, e reliability,or improvements where the professional design consulting services are less than $200,000. This project acts as an annual budget placeholder for numerous small joint facilities projects. This system results in a fast-track process for the procurement and execution of engineering and contractor services for smaller, but vital projects. Support Facilities Justification The Plant Facilities Engineering project allows smaller capital projects to extend the life of the existing treatment works and the time between major rehabilitations. These smaller,high priority projects are individually tracked within the larger budget for procurement of engineering and contractor services as needed to maintain reliable operations. The projects construction cost is$14,069,063. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 2,157,889 959,860 730,667 3,848,416 Construction 2,745,943 7,550,664 6,737,170 17,033,777 Commissioning Close-out Contingency 892,371 4,225,307 7,282,022 4,437,964 2,451,460 3,153,683 22,442,80] 5,796,203 12,735,831 14,749,859 4,437,964 2,451,460 3,153,683 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 85 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Operations&Maintenance Capital Program - M-SM-CAP Project Category Support Facilities Project Status: New Description This project will provide for the replacement and rehabilitation of various plant processes and collection facilities as well as the replacement and or rehabilitation of facilities that meet the criteria for capital replacement. Support Facilities Justification These funds are needed in order to replace/rehabilitate equipment that is beyond economical repair or is at the end of its useful life or repair of facilities that are not included in a capital improvement project. It is also used to replace equipment when parts or services are no longer economically feasible. The projects construction cost is$8,000,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 2019-20 202081 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 9,305 333,775 616,571 919,495 1,130,160 3,009,305 Construc0on 31,054 1,176,487 2,080,982 3,050,342 3,751,892 28,180 10,118,937 Commissioning Close-out Contingency 200,757 474,534 773,185 1,045,282 2,493,758 403591 1,711,019 3,172,087 4,743,022 5,927,334 28,180 1 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 86 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Title 24 Access Compliance&Building Rehab Project - Pi-115 Project Category Support Facilities Project Status: Revised Description The project evaluated Title 24(Americans with Disabilities Act)upgrades and retrofits,code compliance and asset condition at the existing office facilities and grounds at Plant No. 1.The buildings studied in the Preliminary Design Report include:Administration, Human Resources, e Laboratory, Maintenance Facilities, Fleet Services, Purchasing,Warehouses, Purchasing Conference Room and office trailers and Demolition of Building H.The grounds modifications include changes to the parking areas,asphalt repair,drainage improvements, and accessibility improvements. The project costs developed for the Preliminary Design Report for the Laboratory,Administration Building, Purchasing,Human Resources Building, Fleet Services and supporting trailers were used for comparison to other options for housing the staff and laboratory including the construction of Support Facilities new facilities and/or repurposing the Laboratory. The options were considered in the Administrative Facilities Master Plan under this project budget. This project scope is revised to only include the rehabilitation of the Warehouse and Maintenance Facilities,demolition of Building H and area improvements adjacent to these buildings under Pl- 115A and rehabilitation of the Fleet Services compound under P1-115B. Justification State and federal law requires that OCSD ensure that these facilities can be accessible to individuals with disabilities. Roofing, lighting,some ventilation equipment,and other building features am at the end of their useful life and require replacement. Building H does not meet current building codes and needs to be demolished. An implementation plan for the construction of new facilities for the Administration Building,Laboratory, Fleet Services, Purchasing, Human Resources and office trailers was conducted under Project No. SP-194. The project budget has been increased from$17,161,000 to$17,509,000. The projects construction cost is$9,227,674. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Pmj Dev 86,853 86,853 Prelim Design 1,595,698 1,595,698 Design 2,008,621 482,918 145,864 2,637,403 Construction 7,600,815 2,865,003 1,228,467 193,165 11,887,450 Commissioning Close-out 44,990 107,728 90,296 69,366 312,380 Contingency 446,665 360,494 99,395 57,162 25,500 989,216 Total 11,783,642 3,816,143 1,564,022 319,693 25,500 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 87 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Headquarters Complex,Site&Security,&Entrance Realignment Program - Pi-128 Project Category Support Facilities Project Status: Revised Description This project is for the new Headquarters Complex to house administrative,engineering and laboratory staff along with associated site and utilities improvements, security improvements and entrance modifications at the south area of Plant 1.The work also includes demolition of Trailers A, B, E and F,the associated utilities and asphalt replacement in the south area, and the existing structure demolition and associated utilities and site demolition and improvements at the north area of Plant 1. An estimated total of 155,000 square feet of new facilities will be constructed. Over 550,000 square feel of site development will be required including security walls, security improvements, utility rerouting,ocean monitoring garage, parking and roadway improvements, storm-water drainage and grading,and landscaping. Support Facilities Justification The administrative,engineering and laboratory functions are located primarily at Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley. The Administration, Laboratory,Human Resources,and Purchasing buildings are aging,were not permitted when constructed and are in need of replacement. Also,approximately 130 staff are located in aging office trailers throughout Plant No. 1. OCSD has decided that the most cost effective solution is replacement of the aging buildings and trailers with new buildings that serve administrative,engineering,and laboratory functions. The project budget has been increased from$168,000,000 to$179,067,000. The project's construction cost is$112,000,000. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2018-19 201940 202031 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 82,376 82,376 Prelim Design 156.510 4,645,219 2,082,743 6,884,472 Design 2,006 3,175 6,611,470 4,142,391 10,759,042 Construction 7,474,178 39,701,529 52.038,511 26,325,885 125,540,103 Commissioning 1,192,239 2,228,979 852,396 4,273,614 Close-out 3,526,998 3,526,998 Contingency 295,869 1,303,016 2,261,261 3,207,439 4,283,995 6,048,863 10.599,952 28,000,395 5367611 5,951,410 10,955,474 14,824,008 45,177,763 60,316,3531 41,305,231 179,067,000 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 88 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Site&Security Impr.at P2 - P2-96 Project Category Support Facilities Project Status: Continuing Description This project will improve the beautification and visual screening of Plant No.2 from areas east of the Santa Ana River in Newport Beach and Costa Mesa(includes new vegetation,irrigation,and fencing ).This project will not include vegetation along the Santa Ana River levee due to Army Corp.of Engineer restrictions. 4i Support Facilities Justification The visual screening provided by this project is needed in order to mitigate the visual impacts of existing and future expansion at Plant No.2. This project will increase operational budgets by$1,000 annually. A slight increase in landscape maintenance and irrigation water may be necessary. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev 155,164 155,164 Prelim Design 46,486 46,486 Design 23,460 23,460 Construction 3,211 3,975 122 7,308 Commissioning Close-out Contingency 3,586 8,822 7,173 19,581 231 9081 12,797 7,295 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 89 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Project Name&Number I Banning Gate Relocation&Grading at P2 - P2-120 Project Category Others Project Status: New Description This project relocates the Plant No.2 vehicular gate near Banning Avenue to align with Banning *tv Avenue.This includes moving the gate and supporting infrastructure such to the wall,curb,gutter, and sidewalk. It will also re-grade the pavement in Plant No.2 in this area to improve drainage and storm water Dow. Others Justification This project is needed to improve traffic flow so that vehicles,in particular trucks, may exit left from the Banning Avenue gate. Currently,if vehicles need to drive to the south,they must exit to the north and perform a u-tum.Aligning the gate with the intersection should reduce unnecessary travel.The grading will reduce ponding that occurs during storm events. The projects construction cost is$1,385,492. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-18 2018-19 201980 202081 Thereafter Total Project Date Budget Proj Dev 34,244 34,244 Prelim Design 15,704 59,970 611 76,285 Design 25,075 180,920 147,713 3,064 356,772 Construc0on 13,993 1,834,624 1,848,617 Commissioning 52,252 52,252 Close-out 27,839 27,839 Contingency 5,108 15,829 30,132 44,374 320,548 415,991 55,056 100,874 211,663 206,0801 2,238,327 2,812,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 90 CIP Project Detail Sheets Project Name&Number I Capital Improvement Program Mgml.Services - SP-195 Project Category Others Project Status: Continuing Description Program management consulting services for the Capital Improvement Program not related on any *tw one specific project, but on the management of the projects as a whole. Includes consultingpractices services related to best practices in project and program management including risk analysis, benchmarking, analysis of key performance indicators(KPI),program metrics, and data analysis. May also include review of project controls including project budgeting,cash flow analysis and project scheduling. Others Justification Project facilitates continuous improvements to program management practices to maintain effectiveness in managing the Capital Improvement Program as business practices and the project makeup of the CIP evolves. This project will not have an impact on operational budgets. Budget Projections Budget Phase Cost To- 2016-2017 2017-19 2019-19 2019420 2020421 Thereafter Total Project Data Budget Proj Dev Prelim Design Design 4,014 10,010 9,970 9,971 14,338 18,591 37,111 104,005 Construction Commissioning Close-out Contingency 3,794 14,316 17,586 22,641 27,920 31,360 78,378 195,995 78081 24,326 27,556 32,612 42,258 49,951 115,4891 300,0 Reimbursable Costs: N/A Section 8-Page 91 Summary by Project Status This page was intentionally left blank Section 8— Page 92 Summary of Revenue Program Category Collection System Improvement Projects Pri Nam. Total Percentage Allocation Total Project Cost Budg.t Prolad qeW . AddaaM su{mn gNuel Imp. fiaddi nal suppM BWgd keae fromem ouratrw aedacemem Treatment capadry Collecgons Facilities Rald&Bhstd Street Sewer Rehab&Summer i 13.622,000 50% 50% $ 6,811,OW - $ 61811,000 Santa Are Trans Sewer Rehab 6,974,000 180% B,9T4,080 - - Edinger Bolas crime Trunk Int 5,1590E 1W% - - 5.1a9000 Edinger Pump Station Rehab 8.180,000 100% 8880.0100 - - Slaler pashas Pump Eaton Rehab Bm"Wo 1W% 9129EW -WI Re-Alignment 11,404,000 1W% 11,404.00 - - WI Rack Slabifders Removal 3,)43,00 1W% 3,743,0100 - - Tafl Branch Sewer Relied 119181000 IWa, - - 192800E Real-Placenta Trunk Gade Separation Roo 51739,000 50% 50% 2bell - 2,859,500 Nenfiope Pearls Trunk Rabb 99.47500E 100% - - 99,475.000 Yorde GMa Pump$taunt Abandonment 7.053,000 1W% 7,051 - - LikeNew Grade Reseal Primary 33800E IN% 33g000 - - Tustin Rom OCTA Grade Separation 58800E IN% 5$000 - - Beach TrunklHnoV lnumna lm Sarver Relief 118,678,000 1W% - - 118,678,000 Seal Beach Pump Status.Rehab W,848000 1W% 90,M0.000 - - Rehab d Western Paul Sawars 217.00000 10% 217069,000 - - Nesel Fort Main Rehab 64,000,000 IW% 641000,000 - - camel Care Pump Stefan Rehab 101882,000 1W% 10,692,00E - - Be,Bridge Pump Sla&n Rabb 54,000,000 IW% 54,Wy0W - - Newpoh Beetle Pomp Sladi Odor control lmpr. 4.063.000 100% - - - 4,085,000 oi9Md 6 Trunk Saner Roger 7,965.00E 50% On 3,981 3,962.50E - Sougrrv2sl came MesaTrunkSewer 29,650,000 10A - - 29.660,000 call Red Hill System lmpc-Reatll B 25,213,000 50% 56% 12,M,SW - 12,600,50E Browning SIAmunk Beaver Relief 16,952,00E IW% - - 18952,00E MCGMur Pump Station Rehab 8,762,0E 1W% 87820100 - - MainSheetPumpSteSanRehab 39.219000 100% 39,219.000 - - Older Rear-Hill lmanda rRehab SfDs000 1W% 5,489.000 - - Facilities Engineering%gram-IAllections A8503V,6000 76% 16% 15% 8,534AW 118281800 - 1,84680E Bay Bridge Pump Shoal&Fora Main Part Sudy 60% 16% 852,SW - 72,50E col¢tlom FadlNln Profxb Total W413,4W 5,011,30E M201,500 6600,60E Section 8-Page 93 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Treatment& Disposal Improvement Projects Proteot Name Total Pamanlage Allocation Total Praleal Net Budget Plateau ni ha sill lwl yppgl 12aM1tll ImR Adopted IsapM Budget ei Tnakwm c.pii, summonses rrWmaa commas, Headwa65 Rehab&FManson at Pl 274,841,000 50% 106 247,356.900 22,464,100 - Trunk Line Nor Central Imp. 9129m,00 80% 40% 5,A9p00 3,219,600 - Headwaks RroleM Total M.140000 252,936,300 31,201,700 FmgrammaLVe Central Panel Upgrades 2,213.000 1W% 2,281 - - process commol Spot Upgrades 102399,000 50% 50% 51,199.540 - - 5110,W0 Information Tamndoay Capital Program 10,00),W0 IW% - - - 10,0W,Wo process Coal SYatms Upgrades Study 355400 100% 3554.000 - - Geugrapbla lolarroon System 4,569A0 1W% - - - 4,553A00 EPM Rafters&process Implementation 2.500.00 50% 26% 25% 3750.000 - 1.875.000 1.876,000 PDS2D 9a1Rvam Reel. 525,0,30 WR; 50% 262,500 - - action Power Momhoag&Combat Shaul al n 34.123000 Bo% 20% 22290.4W - 8824,fi00 Informatlon Management Systems Protects Total 16419521000 BBH2,40o B,6W,600 62,905,000 Final Effluent Sampler&Buil Area Upgrades 16,411000 1W% 16411.000 - - Neon Wttall System Rehab 87,663000 100% 87,683,000 - - Owen Outlall Systems Prol Told 1W,OW000 Iodo8a.00o Banner,Gate Reimcation&Grodtrg at P2 2.812.000 1W% - - 2.812.000 Capital lmpmrement Program all Semcw 3W,000 25-A 25% 25% 25% 75,000 75,000 75,000 75000 Olhem Protects Talal 3,112,00; 71,a-F 71,00o TS,OW 2.887,000 P1 Prmary Treatment Upgrades 91146000 IN% 9,146,000 - - Pomery Ganfam Real,&Imps at Pl 158.332,000 1W% 158392.000 - - Primary carrier&Tasking Filter Nor Central sl Pt 94,228,030 56% 11 47,114,000 47,114,000 - ASke Pomery ClaM'ene Req.at P2 428.29000 Wri 10% 385437.0W 42826p00 - Primary Theabnsint Protests Total 689A10,000 6ogoss 09'ama 0 Nor Carl Masser Pon 1,9W,000 101 100.000 - Sahty tenor_Program 9.702000 1W% 9702000 - - process BolNed Spi Protect Projects Total 11,852000 0,702,000 1,950,0100 Fuel Call Damn 135,W0 10A 135.000 - SCCWRP Mutant Chi Sampling W1000 10% - - - 95,000 Actual DaluatloaiDesgn Win 10l - 608,000 - Section 8-Page 94 Summary of Revenue Program Category Treatment& Disposal Improvement Projects Projent Name Todd Parental Allocation Total Project Cost Budget limpet al W Mill Anti Real ImP additional auppM Budget Rand, nronownl cupxuN .,.—ant irestmem Gddida Retail POgmm 8.500.00 50% 50% 1'250.000 4,250.000 Radial Projeen Total g318,00 4,973,000 4,250,000 05,000 0,,em Plans canna ,n at P3 314N100 100% 3N4,fiW - - A lbdtetl Sludge Amaden Bash Deck Rather at P2 2X1,000 I60R 2,331,000 - - Secondary Treatment Projects Total S,T15p00 S,TIS,OW Solltls Thickerring&Processing Upgual 51150,000 50% 5" 2551 25.575,000 - Di ler Fadldges Radial P2 49,220000 1W% 49,22g050 - - Sludge Dewaterea&Wor CaMrol at P2 90.477,000 401. 20% 40% 36,190.840 18.095.400 36.190.800 contain Rehab at Pl 66,650,000 50% SN 31 - 33,325,00D Sludge Dewateriy&Wor Control at Pl Ida328000 in. 13% IN 3201 137,419,440 15832.000 Solids Handling&Digestion Protests TOW 415,825,600 118.3M,580 181,149,840 88,348,600 Manning Studies Progmm 23.652000 40% 25% IN 25% 9461 5,913.000 2,365,200 5,913 Wo Change Change lmpacl SLtly 650W0 IW% - 590,000 - Siegel&Muir Planning PrgMa Tend Vita 00 9A80,I0* Sab 2,365,2001 5,913,000 Untenanted&Maintenance Capnxl Program 15622,000 100% 15S22.000 - - Fall Engineering Proti-Plant 43,325,00 IN 15% 15% 30,M,500 6,I98}50 - 8,08,150 Sid&Sell Of at P2 262,000 100% - - - 262,000 HBaEquaMm Cwnplex,SO&Secunly,&Entrance 179,061,000 100% - - - 119,061,000 Realalnmenl Program Title 24 MOO Carl&Budldng Rehab Mgepl 11.509000 100% - - - 17,5000 Support FudlNse Projects Teal 251 45,949,500 11,498,750 203,326,150 Cannon Emissions ContM Pupal 23.820000 IW% - 23820.000 - UPS System Upgmtlea 8,067,000 M MPo Sol - 1,611A00 calendar Gas Fa6ilies Rehab 81.891000 140% 81891.040 - - Cahill coalq Water Sysem gall RAW 11Arwo IW% 11,41 - - Natural Gas Randall Rep.at Pit&P2 1.310.00 140% 1310.000 - - Electrical Penal carte On Syadm In, 31,806,000 IW% 3sal - - Plant Warder Syenm Rehab at P2 3.101,00 100% 3104.000 - - Consolidated Demean&Utility lrrgr.at P2 MA60,000 IW% 38,460,CW - - Plant Warder Syeam Rehab at Pl 6.167.00 140% 6,151.000 - - Section 8-Page 95 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Treatment& Disposal Improvement Projects Project Name Tell Percentage Allocation Ta l Project Cost Bull Project Pew M PEEYIaM al gNup,l lie Additional 9upPM Suds RRud Tnmlmenl GP., RgJecemenl Trestmem Gpedy, Central Garr latlOn Rated p Pl 73.151 WO 10% 73,15t,OW - - CenVal General ReFab M P1 951906000 IM 96AOS,OM - - Plant Nr Slattern Mailer PMn 225,00 50% 50% 11250 - 112,500 WINy Station Projects Total 314,802,000 39,252,100 23,820,000 1 1,729,900 Effluent Reuse Study 3R5),000 100% 3250,000 - Water Management Poi ProjnLia Total 3,29,000 429,000 Thal TrialmeM and mail Projects ZMAndi 1.651,918,29 3ist'da 690 19,IE9,300 280,126110 Total Collections Fecililiea 850.32100 W413A00 6,,811,300 291,201,500 5,8%Aoo Cephl land".Purchases 16,0Op00 4,00,00 AsNow AMMAN e,0O,O0 TAIM Col Improvement Pura— 33.29.22SOM 82,201,,361,6O 339,17e,8O 880160,80 5230,01,59 Section 8-Page 96 Summary by Project Status Collection System Improvement Projects - Budget by Project Status Project Toad New Continuing Revised Future Number Title Budget Project Project Project Project Collections Facilities 1-101 Raih B Brad Street Sewer Rehab B Extension S 13,622,000 $ 13,622,OOD 1-17 Saute Ana Trunk Sewer Rehab 6,974,000 6,974000 1125 Edinger Bolm Chica Tmnk lmpr 5,159,000 5,15%COo 11E3 Edinger Pump Slogan Rehab $880,000 8.884000 1134 Slater Avenue Pump Statical Rehab 9,729,000 9,729COo 241 SARI Ra-Niminont 11,404,000 11,404,000 241E SARI Rmk Stabilizers Removal 3,743,000 3,743COo 249 Tag Branch Sewer Relief 1,926,000 1.92$000 2E5 Nwvhope-Placentia Trunk Grade Separation Real. 5,739,000 5,739,OOD 2-72 NewhoPe-Plarmtla Trunk Rapl. 99475W0 99.475,000 2-73 Yuba Linda Pump Station Atsardonment 7,053,000 7,053,OOD 2-75 Lakeview Grade Sepamtion Project 3301000 3301000 2-76 Tustin Rose OCTA Grade Separation 586,W0 586,W0 3460 Beach TronMNn00 haenaptor Sewer Relief 116,676,000 118,679000 3E2 Seal Beach Pump Station Rehab m,04o,W0 fi0,840,DOD 3E4 Rehab of Western Reggnal$avrers 217,069,000 217,00000 Sbo Newport Force Main Rehab 64000,000 64000,000 5466 Crystal Cove Pump$m1 m Rehab 101882,000 10,882,000 5,67 Bay Bridge Pomp Station Real. 54000,000 54,000,OOD 5468 Newport Beach Pump Stdioce Odor Control Im, 4,066,000 4,066,000 6-17 District 6 Think Sewer Rai 7,965,000 7,965COo 6-19 Smthwasl Coda Mesa Tmnk Sewer 291650,000 2916R 000 7E7 Gisler-Red Hill System lmp.-ReachB 25,213,000 25,213,OOD 7E0 Browning Saudi Sewer Relief 161952,000 16,952,000 7E3 MacArthur Pump Station Rehab 8,762,000 8,762COo 7E4 Main Street Pump Stdion Rehab 39,219,000 39,219,000 7E5 Giskr Red-Hill Interceptor Rehab 5,486,000 5,486,000 MFE-COLLECT Facilities Engineering program-Collections 12,192,000 12,192,000 SP-178 Bay Bridge Pomp Station B Farce Main Real.Study 725,000 725,000 Collections Fail Tolal Budge OeaA31,000 21,744.000 77,045.1100 470,290.009 381,242.000 Section 8-Page 97 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Treatment& Disposal Projects -Budget by Project Status Project Toad New Continuing Revised Future Number Title Budget Project Project Project Project Headwork. PI-105 Headwords Rehab&Expanaicn at Pl 274,841,000 274,841,000 Pi-123 Tmnk Line Odor Natml In, 91299.000 9.299000 Headwork.Total Budget 284,140,000 z84140,000 Primary Treatment P1-124 P1 Primary Treatment Upgmdes 9,146,000 9,19 000 Pt-in Primary Clarifiers Real,&Impr.at P1 151 1W13N 000 P1-114 Primary Cis rifier&Trickling Filler Oda Control at Pi 94228,000 941228,000 P2-98 ASide Primary centers Rest.at P2 428,264,000 42&24000 Primary Treatment Total Budget 68M'Se0 0TN8,0H 437,410,000 158,332,000 Secondary Tnedment SP-129 Oxygen Plant Oeamilion at P2 3A4d,000 3,444,000 P2-118 Activated Slump Aeration Basin Deck Repair at P2 2,331,000 2.331,000 Secondary Treatment Total Budget %rS,000 5,775,000 Solids Handling&Digestion P289 Solids Thickening&Praeaaing Upgrades 51,150,000 51,150,000 P241-1 Dityl FaplNes Rehab at P2 4e220.1100 0,29000 P262 Sludge Neatening&Nor Carl at P2 90p77,000 90,4T1,000 Pt-100 Dgesher Rehab at Pl 66,650.1300 Now 000 P1-ID1 Sludge Dewatering&Nor control at Pl 188,328,000 18&328000 $Wide Handling&[Hesston Told Budget 45,825,000 51,150,000 3451455,000 4,22g000 Owen WNall Systems J-110 Final Ef0uent Sampler&Building Area Upgrades 16,411.1300 16,411,000 J-117 Noun cobalt System Rehab 87,683,000 87,683,000 [can Outten Stations Tonal Budget 104,094,01111 11 Nifty Systems J-111 Conger Emissions Caned Project 23,820.000 2318N 000 d121 UPS System Upgrades 8,087,000 8,087,000 J-124 Dityl Gas FedlNes Rehab 87,897.1300 87,897000 J-109 Cengen Cooling Water System Repl.Protect 11p77,000 11p77,000 Pt-112 Plant Water System Rehab at Pl 6,157.010 6.157,000 J-127 Natural Gas Pipelines Repl.at P1&P2 1,310,000 1,310,000 J-98 Eleceical Power Distribution System Impr. 34,608.1300 341808,000 Section 8-Page 98 Summary by Project Status Treatment & Disposal Projects - Budget by Project Status Project Total New Continuing Revised Future Number Title Budget Project Project Project Project Nifty Systems P2-119 Combat Geneation Rehab at P2 95.906.0% 95,900000 P2-110 Consolidated Centel&UJ1t,1m,at P2 36,460,000 DOW COD P2-101 Plant Water System ReM1ab at P2 3,704,000 3.I04COD P1-121 Central Genhatbn Rehab at all 73,151,000 73,151,COD SP-146 Plant Air System Master Plan 255,000 225,000 Utility systems Total Budget 384,802,OMO 12,787,400 160,269,100 211,79,000 Process Relew Special Projects SP-166 War Conlml Mash Plan 1,950,god 1,950,000 J-126 Safety Impr.Pmgram 9,702,000 UT9A0D Prunes Related Spcial Projects Total Budget 11,652,Ooo 11,69A00 Irdormation Management Systems J-125 Programmable ConOol Panel Upgrades 2,283,000 2,283,000 J-120 Process CmAnd 8yatetns Upgrades 102,399.OW 102,399,000 %MC4T Information Technology Capital Program 10,000,000 10,000,000 P2-107 Power Monitoring&Control Systems at P2 34,123.000 34,123,000 SP-196 Process Control Systems Upgrades Sandy 3,554,000 3,554,000 SP-15 Geogral bdomia.System 4,568.000 4560AOD SP-10D EAM Software B Emma,lmplementa6on T,500,000 7,500,000 SP-103 PDS21l Software Rapt 51 525.000 Informed.Management Systems Tool Budget 164,a9,0oo 12,5S4,OAo 95,00o U,94,M 19,30go00 Strategic&Master Planning SP-152 Climate Change Impact Sandy 590,000 590,W0 M-STUDIES Planning Swiss Pmgram 23,652,000 23,652,000 Strategic&Master Planning Tool Budget 24,242,4Ao 23,662,OW 500,000 Water Management Projects SP-173 Effluent Reuse Sandy 3250,000 3,250,000 Water Management Pmjeso Total Budget 3,250,OW 3,250,Oo0 Research SP-12504 Fuel Cell Demo 135,000 135,000 SP-125-15 SCCWRP Nument Cytling Sampling 95,000 95,000 SP-125,17 Aqual EvaluagonNesign WOW all WRESEARCH Research Program 6,500,000 6,500,000 Research Total Budget g.318,000 stia OW 95,ao0 723,o00 Section 8-Page 99 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Treatment& Disposal Projects -Budget by Project Status Project Total New Continuing Revised Future Number Title Budget Project Project Project Project Support Facllldes "Mi Oparetme&Maintenance Capital Pogrom 15,622.000 15,622.000 MFEPITNT Facili0es Engineering"man-Plant 43,U5,000 43,U5,000 P246 $Re&Security mpr.at P2 252.000 252,000 Pt-115 The 24 Access Compliance&Building Rehab Project 17,509,000 17,501 Pi-128 Headquarters Contsa,50e&Security,&Enimnce Realgnmenl Program 179,067,000 179,067,000 support Facilities,Total Budge 255,i15,000 58,947,000 MOM 196,576,000 Others, P2-120 Banning Gate Relocatjon&Grading at P2 2,812,000 2,812,000 SP-195 Cannot Improvement Program Mgmt Services Xo.oX Xo.oX Others Teal Budge 3,112,000 2,912,000 900,000 Total Treementand Disposal Projects 2,386,907,000 10,,465,000 162,581 1,581,562,000 522,293,000 Total Collections Facilities 80,321,000 21,71I,000 75,04500 470,290,000 281,242,000 Capital Equipment Purchases 16,00g000 1Bp00,000 Total Capital Improvement Program Budge $3,253.226,00 $129,100,000 $156,833,000 $2.084,852,000 8801 Section 8-Page 100 Summary by Project Status This page was intentionally left blank Section 8— Page 101 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Proposed Capital Equipment Budget 2016-17 Trucks& Machine Eq Comm Vehicles Other Mobile &Tools Equipment Department 09410000 Eq 09410001 09410002 09410003 Information Technology $ - $ - $ - $ - Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring - - -Fleet Services 1,778,500 349,700 - - Plant No. 1 Maintenance - - 43,800 - Plant No. 2 Maintenance - - 5,100 - Total Proposed Capital Equipment $ 1,778,500 $ 349,700 $ 48,900 $ Section 8- Page 102 Proposed Capital Equipment Budget Summary Proposed Capital Equipment Budget 2016-17 Instr/Test Safety& Office Fix& Computer 2016-17 Equipment Traffic Eq Eq Equipment Proposed Department 09410004 09410005 09410006 09410007 Budget Information Technology $ - $ - $ - $ 474,600 $ 474,600 Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring 751,100 - - - 751,100 Fleet Services - - - - 2,128,200 Plant No. 1 Maintenance 15,500 - - - 59,300 Plant No.2 Maintenance 18,900 - - - 24,000 Total Proposed Capital Equipment $ 785,500 $ - $ - $ 474,600 $3,437,200 Section 8—Page 103 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Proposed Capital Equipment Budget Detail Proposed Capital Equip. Division Equipment Type Budget 250-Information Technology Employee Development E-Learning Content for Div. 110 $ 20,000 FUJITSU Document Scanners for Div. 110 27,000 The Web QA-GovQA Public Records Management System for Div. 110 13,000 Video Upgrades in Conference Rooms 40,500 Disaster Recovery(DR)Infrastructure Hardware/Software 350,000 Chromatography Software for Div.630 12,000 AMS Suite:Machinery Health Manager Software for Div.870 6,000 Desktop Label Printer Kit for Div.880 6,100 Total 474,600 630 - Laboratory&Ocean Monitoring Gel Permeation Chromatography(GPC)Clean-up System 80,000 ICP-OESIICP-MS 550,000 Benchtop Balance Enclosure 12,000 Automated Refrigerated Sampler 23,000 Skalar Segmented Flow Upgrade 35,000 Laboratory Glassware Washer 14,000 Acoustic Releases 16,500 Environmental Chambers 20,600 Total 751,100 822 - Fleet Services Two(2)12-Passenger Vans-Replace V0535&V0583 82,100 Two(2)NEW 12-Passenger Vans 82,100 Two(2)NEW Pick-up Trucks-for reclassified positions in Div.760 42,000 Five(5)Electric Carts-Replace C0977,C1009,C1011,C1016,C1020 60,500 Six(6)Cargo Carts-Replace CO806,C0915,C0974,C0979,C0980,C0982 for Div.870 85,800 Seven(7)Electric Carts-Replace C0910,C0914,,C0916,C0918,C0929,C0931,C1060 for Div.880 73,200 Seven(7)Light Duty Service Trucks-Replace V0517,V0522,V0523 for Div.760,and V0515,V0516,V0518,&V0519 for Div.322,342,870&880. 297,700 NEW Electric Cart for Div.870 11,300 NEW Combo Truck/Recycler for Div.820 700,000 NEW Pick-up Truck-for Div.820 28,500 Two(2)Utility Bed Boxes for V0521 &V0549 for Div.870 9,800 Weld Truck-Replace V0373 for Div.870 58,300 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0381 for Div.870 37,300 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0389 49,700 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0403 for Div.870 29,700 Two(2)Electric Sedans-Replace V0412&V0413 for Div.870 64,800 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0423 for Div.250 41,600 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0425 for Div.830 29,700 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0434 for Div.840 29,700 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0439 for Div.870 41,600 Section 8- Page 104 Proposed Capital Equipment Budget Detail Proposed Capital Equipment Budget Detail Proposed Capital Equip. Division Equipment Type Budget 822 - Fleet Services-continued Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0448 $ 41,600 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0452 41,600 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0466 for Div.620 35,100 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0598 35,600 Heavy Duty Trailer-Replace E0903 for Div.820 31,500 Flatbed Trailer-Replace E0576 16,900 NEW Cargo Wagon Trailer-for Div.880 9,000 NEW Electric Scissor Lift for Plant No.1 20,800 One(1)NEW Trailer-for Div.870 19,500 Towable Air Compressor-Replace E0854 21,200 Total 2,128,200 870-Plant No. 1 Maintenance Industrial Oven 9,700 Press Brake Control System 17,600 Table Saw 5,100 Transformer Turns Ratio Tester 15,500 TU5 Beveling Tool 11,400 Total 59,300 880 - Plant No.2 Maintenance Motor Operated Limitorque Actuator Training Aid 9,600 Table Saw 5,100 Ultrasound Detection System 9,300 Total 24,000 Total Proposed 2016.17 Capital Equipment Budget $ 3,437,200 Section 8—Page 105 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Proposed Capital Equipment Budget 2017-18 Trucks& Machine Eq Comm Vehicles Other Mobile &Tools Equipment Department 09410000 Eq 09410001 09410002 09410003 Information Technology $ - $ - $ - $ - Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring - - - - Electrical&Control Systems Engineering Fleet Services 41,600 125,200 Plant No. 1 Maintenance - - 76,000 - Plant No. 2 Maintenance - - - - Total Proposed Capital Equipment $ 41,600 $ 125,200 $ 76,000 $ - Section 8- Page 106 Proposed Capital Equipment Budget Summary Proposed Capital Equipment Budget 2017-18 Instr/Test Safety& Office Fix& Computer 2017-18 Equipment Traffic Eq Eq Equipment Proposed Department 09410004 09410005 09410006 09410007 Budget Information Technology $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring 575,100 - - - 575,100 Electrical&Control Systems Engineering 85,400 85,400 Fleet Services 166,800 Plant No. 1 Maintenance - - - - 76,000 Plant No. 2 Maintenance 5,800 - - - 5,800 Total Proposed Capital Equipment $ 666,300 $ - $ - $ 100,000 $1,009,100 Section 8—Page 107 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Proposed Capital Equipment Budget Detail Proposed Capital Equip. Division Equipment Type Budget 250-Information Technology Disaster Recovery(DR)Infrastructure Support $ 100,000 Total 100,000 630 - Laboratory&Ocean Monitoring Automated Sample Extraction System 120,000 Digital Droplet PCR System 84,000 Automated Refrigerated Sampler 24,000 Acoustic Releases 16,500 Three(3)Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers(ADCP) 62,000 Telemetry Oceanographic Mooring 130,000 Seakeeper Vessel Stabilizing System 138,600 Total 575,100 770-Electrical&Control Systems Engineering Three(3)PLC Test Units 85,400 Total 85,400 822 - Fleet Services Four(4)Electric Carts-Replace C0942,C1119,C1120,C1121 48,400 Light Duty Service Truck-Replace V0427 41,600 Heavy Duty Trailer-Replace E0904 for Div.820 31,500 NEW Electric Scissor Lift for Plant No.2 20,800 Two(2)NEW Mobile Fueler Trailers 24,500 Total 166,800 870-Plant No. 1 Maintenance Dake Band Saw 35,400 Press Brake Power Back Gauge 32,500 TU3 Beveling Tool 8,100 Total 76,000 880 - Plant No.2 Maintenance HART Field Communicator 5,800 Total 51800 Total Proposed 2017-18 Capital Equipment Budget $ 1,009,100 Section 8- Page 108 0 ym m °y° y � O Z 0� D Debt Financing Program CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION through the assumed "build-out" of the Distric's DEBT FINANCING PROGRAM service area to the year 2050. Critical factors such as population growth, new construction, the volume A Ten-Year Financial Plan is maintained to establish of wastewater delivered to the plants and viable financing parameters regarding the issuance of debt, water conservation and reclamation programs have the levying of user charges and the funding level for been reevaluated. required reserves in accordance with the District's reserve policy. The Financial Plan is revised The incorporation of the 2009 Master Plan into the annually to reflect the most current cost and revenue CIP includes the addition of 65 new CIP projects figures resulting from capital program revisions and totaling $615.7 million through the year 2030. Also, operating changes. 23 planned projects were revised resulting in an In December 2009, the District adopted a new additional $169.3 million through the year 2030. Facilities Master Plan to define the District's engineering goals, responsibilities, and requirements over the next twenty years. It includes projections Figure 1 Summary of certificates of Participation I Revenue Obligations and Notes Series 2007A Series 2007E Series 2008E Series 2009A Series 2010A Sexes Issue Name Refunding COPs COPS Refunding COPs COPS Taxable BABs Issue Date 0622-2007 12-20-2007 09-04-2008 04-23-2009 05-18-10 Original Par $95,180,000 $300,000,00D $27,800.000 $200,000,000 $80,000,000 Outstanding Par $91,885,000 $7,110,000 $8,815,000 $13,405,000 $80,000,000 Payment Date February 1 February 1 August 1 February l February 1 Use of Proceeds Advance Refund CurrentlFutum CIP Advance Refund Current/Future CIP CurrentlFutum CIP Lien or Tier Open Senior Open Senior Open Senior Open Senior Open Senior Interest Rate Mode Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Final Maturity Date 02-01-2030 024)1-2017 08-01-2016 02-01-2019 024)1-2040 Series 2010C Sexes 2011A Series 2012A Sexes 2012E Series 2014A Sense Issue Name Taxable BABs Refund Rev Oblig Refund Rev Oblig Refund Rev Oblig Refund Rev Oblig Issue Date 11-29-10 10-03-11 03-22-12 08-16-12 08-07-14 Original Par $157,000,000 $147,595,000 $100,645,000 $66,395.000 $85,090,000 Outstanding Par $157,000,000 $111,465,000 $100,645,000 $66,395,000 $85,090,000 Payment Date February 1 February 8 August 1 February 1 February 1 February 1 Use of Proceeds Cuffent/Future CIP Advance Refund Advance Refund Advance Refund Advance Refund Lien or Tier Open Senior Open Senior Open Senior Open Senior Open Senior Interest Rate Mode Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Final Maturity Date 02-01-2044 024)1-2026 02-01-2033 02-01-2026 024)1-2027 Series 2014B Series 2015A Series 2016A Series Issue Name Refunding LANs Refund Rev Oblig Refund Rev Oblig Issue Date 10-08-14 02-12-15 03-30-16 Original Par $120,850.000 $127,510,000 $145.880,000 Outstanding Par $120,850,000 $127,510,000 $145,880,000 Payment Date November 15 February 1 February 1 Use of Proceeds Current Refund Advance Refund Advance Refund Lien or Tier Open Senior Open Senior Open Senior Interest Rate Mode Fixed Fixed Fixed Final Maturity Date 11-162016 02-01-2037 02-01-2039 Section 9—Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget In conjunction with preparation for the 2016-18 Dedicated Fundino Source Budget, District staff has developed and reviewed In 1992 and 2004 the Board of Directors formalized with the Board of Directors a capital program to the dedication of certain funding sources. To assure deliver the levels of service included in the District's the continuation of favorable credit ratings, revenues 5-year Strategic Plan. were dedicated to debt service in the following order: District staff has also validated the active CIP 1. Ad valorem property taxes projects currently being executed to ensure that the 2. Sanitary sewer service charges active project scopes of work and cost estimates 3. Other revenues were accurate. The validated CIP includes 81 active and future capital projects with a 10-year This apportionment of the ad valorem tax was expenditure of$2.4 billion. consistent with and pursuant to the Revenue Program adopted in April 1979 to comply with The District embarked upon its Debt Financing and regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency Management Program, and specifically its Variable and the State Water Resources Control Board and and Fixed Rate Debt Program (the "Program"), in in accordance with COP documents and Board 1990 with the issuance of$100 million in Certificates policy. of Participation ("COP"), Capital Improvement Program, 1990 Series "A." The Program was Historically the District's property tax revenues were established to: at a higher level than necessary to support the District's debt service obligations. However, capital • Finance assets with long useful lives with long- improvement requirements averaging $200.0 million term debt; a year over the last ten years have required new • Achieve the lowest possible interest costs and COP debt issuances that have increased future debt highest investment returns, commensurate with service payments that more closely matches the appropriate risk; property tax revenues. • Recoup reserve moneys that had previously been spent. Establishment of Debt Policy In 2001, the District developed a written debt policy COPS are repayment obligations based on a lease for the following underlying reasons: or installment sale agreement. The COP structure • committing to long-term financial planning; was selected over other structures because COPs . promoting credit quality to rating agencies; are not viewed as debt by the State of California, as • rationalizing the decision making process; the purchaser does not actually receive a"bond,"but . enhancing the quality of decisions; and rather a share in an installment sale arrangement • promoting consistency and continuity. where the District serves as the purchaser. Accordingly, the District is not subject to the usual This Board adopted policy serves as the agency's State restrictions surrounding the issuance of debt. guide in the management of existing debt and in the COPS can be issued with fixed or variable interest issuance of future debt. rates. Debt As of July 1, 2016, the total outstanding COP indebtedness is$1.1 billion. The onlymy legal debt limits pertaining to the District egal Ratios are those that are provided within the existing COP indenture agreements requiring minimum coverage ratios of 1.25. The minimum coverage ratio is the ratio of net annual revenues available for debt service requirements to total annual debt service requirements for all senior lien COP debt. The coverage ratio for senior lien COP debt is proposed at 3.18 and 3.35 for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18, respectively. Section 9—Page 2 Debt Financing Program Build America Bonds Financings Future Financings The District issued the $80.0 million Wastewater As a result of having a prudent reserve policy, Revenue Obligation, Series 2010A in May 2010 and experienced management, and prudent planning, the $157.0 million Wastewater Revenue Obligations, the District has been able to secure "AAA" credit Series 2010C in November 2010 as "Build America ratings from both Fitch Ratings and Standard and Bonds" (BABE)fixed rate debt. Poors. The District's long-range financing plan is designed to maintain these high ratings. Over the The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of next 10 years, the District is projecting an additional 2009 created a new financing product, BABs, for the $2.4 billion in future treatment plant and collection municipal issuer. BABs are issued as higher interest system capital replacement, refurbishment, and taxable bonds; however, the U.S. Treasury provides rehabilitation improvements. In accordance with the a 35 percent subsidy on interest payments. The net District's long-term debt fiscal policy, the District will cost, after accounting for the 35 percent subsidy confine long-term borrowing to capital improvements payment, frequently results in lower net costs to the that cannot be financed from current revenue. issuer, specifically in the maturity years beyond ten Before any new debt is issued, the impact of debt years. service payments on total annual fixed costs will be On March 1, 2013, the federal government analyzed. implemented certain automatic spending cuts known The District's cash Flow forecast does not require as the sequester. As a result of the sequester, any new money debt issuances over the next ten federal subsidy payments on BABs have been years as all capital improvements planned over this reduced annually from a high of 8.7 percent for the time period primarily consist of replacement, federal fiscal year ended September 30, 2013 to a refurbishment, and rehabilitation of existing projects low of 6.8 percent for the federal fiscal year ended which are to be funded through existing reserves September 30, 2016. and current sewer charges. Aggregate Debt Service Structures $100mil $90mil $80mi1 - — — —,—,—, $70mi1 $60mi1 — $50mi1 - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — $30mi1 $30m1 $Omil l0 M O N O r0 W O N O tLl W O N Q m a a V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N •Existing Fixed Rate •2014B CANS assumed amortized over 15 years Section 9— Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Figure 2 Schedule of Future Certificates of Paltleloa0on Issues and CIP Cash Flows tin millions) 2016-17 2017-18 2018.19 2019.20 2020.21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 New COP Issues 6 0.0 6 0.0 6 0.0 $0.0 6 0.0 6 0.0 6 0.0 6 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 CIP Outlays $171.3 $138.0 $163.1 $214.4 $247.2 $225.7 $284.8 $344.8 $327.1 $258.8 Section 9— Page 4 Debt Financing Program This page was intentionally left blank. Section 9— Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Total Certificates of Participation / Revenue Obligations and Notes Debt Service Requirements Principal and Interest Combined Fiscal 2007A 2007B 2008B 2009A 2010A 2010C 2011A Year Refunding Acquisition/ Refunding Acquisition/ Build America Build America Refunding Of (Partial Construction (1993) Construction Bonds Bonds (Partial 2000 Payments 2003) Acq./ConsL Acq./Const. 82003) 2016-17 $ 4,373,278 $7,465,500 $8,947,225 $ 4,835,250 $ 2,897,639 $ 6,523,780 $ 19,909,725 2017-18 4,372,678 - - 4,922,750 2,897,639 6,523,780 24,832,350 2018-19 4,371,678 - - 4,924,500 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,348,350 2019-20 4,370,278 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,348,350 2020-21 8,863,478 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,348,350 2021-22 4,135,478 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 17,143,350 2022-23 4,134,138 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 17,093,600 2023-24 4,132,238 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 17,136,200 2024-25 4,134,768 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 17,088,450 2025-26 4,136,500 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 17,141,250 2026-27 23,397,500 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 2027-28 23,355,725 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 2028-29 23,316,150 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 2029-30 24,196,975 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 203031 - - - - 2,897,639 12,258,780 - 203132 - - - - 2,897,639 23,382,068 - 203233 - - - - 2,897,639 23,476,472 - 203334 - - - - 12,487,639 13,967,040 - 203435 - - - - 12,696,056 13,897,232 - 2035-36 - - - - 12,919,416 13,834,528 - 2036-37 - - - - 13,151,453 13,758,096 - 203738 - - - - 13,399,607 13,667,936 - 203839 - - - - 13,658,823 13,574,048 - 2039-40 - - - - 13,937,832 13,481,016 - 2040-41 - - - - - 22,698,216 - 2041-42 - - - - - 13,457,728 - 2042-43 - - - - - 10,305,640 - 2043-44 - - - - - 2,583,168 - Totals $141.290,858 $7,465,500 $8,947,225 $14,682,500 $141,510,688 $295,674,891 $140,389,975 Section 9— Page 6 Debt Financing Program Total Certificates of Participation I Revenue Obligations and Notes Debt Service Requirements Principal and Interest Combined Fiscal 2012A 2012B 2014A 2014B 2015A 2016A Total Year Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Payment Of (Remain (2000-A (Partial Notes (Partial (Partial Per Payments 2003) 8 200043) 2007B) (2013A) 20076) 2009A) Fiscal Year 2016-17 $ 3,735,900 $ 3,187,400 $ 4,254,500 $123,267,000 $ 6,375,500 $ 5,833,798 $ 201,606,495 2017-18 3,735,900 3,187,400 10,969,51)0 - 6,375,500 6,977,300 74,794,797 2018-19 3,735,900 23,107,400 10,963,750 - 6,375,500 6,977,300 73,225,797 2019-20 3,735,900 23,106,400 10,966,500 - 6,375,500 11,392,300 72,716,647 2020-21 3,735,900 18,535,650 11,046,500 - 6,375,500 11,391,550 72,718,347 2021-22 3,735,900 1,776,150 11,049,000 - 6,375,500 11,389,800 65,026,597 2022-23 3,735,900 1,821,150 11,046,750 - 6,375,500 11,391,550 65,020,007 2023-24 3,735,900 1,781,950 11,044,000 - 6,375,500 11,396,050 65,023,257 2024-25 3,735,900 1,818,050 11,049,750 - 6,375,500 11,392,550 65,016,387 2025-26 3,735,900 1,771,600 11,052,500 - 6,375,500 11,390,800 65,025,469 2026-27 3,735,900 - 11,051,250 - 6,375,500 11,390,050 65,371,619 2027-28 3,735,900 - - - 21,615,500 11,394,550 69,523,094 2028-29 3,735,900 - - - 21,658,500 11,388,300 69,520,269 2029-30 3,735,900 - - - 20,776,250 11,391,050 69,521,594 203031 32,725,900 - - - 10,228,000 11,411,550 69,521,869 2031-32 31,921,200 - - - 3,702,250 11,413,050 73,316,207 203233 44,304,000 - - - 3,702,250 11,415,550 85,795,911 2033-34 - - - - 20,882,250 11,408,050 58,744,979 2034-35 - - - - 20,883,250 11,415,050 58,891,588 2035-36 - - - - 20,881,250 11,409,800 59,044,994 2036-37 - - - - 20,879,250 11,411,800 59,200,599 2037-38 - - - - - 11,411,000 38,478,543 2038-39 - - - - - 11,414,000 38,646,871 2039-40 - - - - - - 27,418,848 2040-41 - - - - - - 22,698,216 2041-42 - - - - - - 13,457,728 2042-43 - - - - - - 10,305,640 2043-44 - - - - - - 2,583,168 Totals $161,253,700 $80,093,150 $114,494,000 $123,267,000 $235,339,250 $247,806,798 $1,712,215,534 Section 9— Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Certificates of Participation/Revenue Obligations and Notes Debt Service Requirements Annual Interest Payments Fiscal 2007A 2007E 2008B 2009A 2010A 2010C 2011A Year Refunding Acquisition/ Refunding Acquisition/ Build America Build America Refunding Of (Partial Construction (1993) Construction Bonds Bonds (Partial 2000 Payments 2003) Acq./Const. Acq./Const. &2003) 2016-17 $ 4,108,278 $ 355,500 $ 132,225 $ 585,250 $ 2,897,639 $ 6,523,780 $ 4,774,725 2017-18 4,097,678 - - 457,750 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,872,350 2018-19 4,086,678 - - 234,500 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,348,350 2019-20 4,075,278 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,348,350 2020-21 4,063,478 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,348,350 2021-22 3,865,478 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 3,348,350 2022-23 3,854,138 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 2,658,600 2023-24 3,842,238 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 2,081,200 2024-25 3,829,768 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 1,328,450 2025-26 3,816,500 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 816,250 2026-27 3,802,500 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 2027-28 2,920,725 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 2028-29 2,001,150 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 202930 1,041,975 - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 203031 - - - - 2,897,639 6,523,780 - 2031-32 - - - - 2,897,639 6,287,068 - 2032-33 - - - - 2,897,639 5,581,472 - 2033-34 - - - - 2,897,639 4,837,040 - 203435 - - - - 2,551,056 4,457,232 - 203536 - - - - 2,184,416 4,064,528 - 2036-37 - - - - 1,796,453 3,658,096 - 203738 - - - - 1,384,607 3,237,936 - 203839 - - - - 948,823 2,804,048 - 2039-40 - - - - 487,832 2,356,016 - 2040-41 - - - - - 1,893,216 - 2041-42 - - - - - 1,027,728 - 2042-43 - - - - - 510,640 - 2043-44 - - - - - 103,168 - Totals $49,405,858 $ 355,500 $ 132,225 $1,277,500 $ 61,510,688 $138,674,891 $28,924,975 Section 9— Page 8 Debt Financing Program Certificates of Participation/ Revenue Obligations and Notes Debt Service Requirements Annual Interest Payments Fiscal 2012A 2012B 2014A 2014B 2015A 2016A Total Year Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Interest Of (Remain (2000-A (Partial Notes (Partial (Partial Per Payments 2003) &2000-13) 2007B) (2013A) 200713) 2009A) Fiscal Year 2016-17 $ 3,735,900 $ 3,187,400 $ 4,254,500 $ 2,417,000 $ 6,375,500 $ 5,833,798 $ 45,181,495 2017-18 3,735,900 3,187,400 4,254,500 - 6,375,500 6,977,300 42,379,797 2018-19 3,735,900 3,187,400 3,918,750 - 6,375,500 6,977,300 41,285,797 2019-20 3,735,900 2,191,400 3,566,500 - 6,375,500 6,977,300 39,691,647 2020-21 3,735,900 1,145,650 3,196,500 - 6,375,500 6,756,550 38,043,347 2021-22 3,735,900 276,150 2,804,000 - 6,375,500 6,524,800 36,351,597 2022-23 3,735,900 216,150 2,391,750 - 6,375,500 6,281,550 34,935,007 2023-24 3,735,900 151,950 1,959,000 - 6,375,500 6,026,050 33,593,257 2024-25 3,735,900 103,050 1,504,750 - 6,375,500 5,757,550 32,056,387 2025-26 3,735,900 51,600 1,027,500 - 6,375,500 5,475,800 30,720,469 2026-27 3,735,900 - 526,250 - 6,375,500 5,180,050 29,041,619 2027-28 3,735,900 - - - 6,375,500 4,869,550 27,323,094 2028-29 3,735,900 - - - 5,613,500 4,543,300 25,315,269 2029-30 3,735,900 - - - 4,811,250 4,201,050 23,211,594 203031 3,735,900 - - - 4,013,000 3,841,550 21,011,869 2031-32 2,866,200 - - - 3,702,250 3,463,050 19,216,207 2032-33 1,704,000 - - - 3,702,250 3,065,550 16,950,911 2033-34 - - - - 3,702,250 2,648,050 14,084,979 2034-35 - - - - 2,843,250 2,210,050 12,061,588 2035-36 - - - - 1,941,250 1,749,800 9,939,994 2036-37 - - - - 994,250 1,266,800 7,715,599 2037-38 - - - - - 861,000 5,483,543 2038-39 - - - - - 439,000 4,191,871 2039-40 - - - - - - 2,843,848 2040-41 - - - - - - 1,893,216 2041-42 - - - - - - 1,027,728 2042-43 - - - - - - 510,640 2043-44 - - - - - - 103,168 Totals $60,608,700 $13,698,150 $29,404,000 $2,417,000 $107,829,250 $101,926,798 $596,165,534 Section 9— Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Certificates of Participation/Revenue Obligations and Notes Debt Service Requirements Annual Principal Payments Fiscal 2007A 2007B 2008B 2009A 2010A 2010C 2011A Year Refunding Acquisition/ Refunding Acquisition/ Build America Build America Refunding Of (Partial Construction (1993) Construction Bonds Bonds (Partial 2000 Payments 2003) Acq./Const. Acq./Const. &2003) 2016-17 $ 265,000 $7,110,000 $8,815,000 $ 4,250,000 $ - $ - $ 15,135,000 2017-18 275,000 - - 4,465,000 - - 20,960,000 2018-19 285,000 - - 4,690,000 - - - 2019-20 295,000 - - - - - - 2020-21 4,800,000 - - - - - - 2021-22 270,000 - - - - - 13,795,000 2022-23 280,000 - - - - - 14,435,000 2023-24 290,000 - - - - - 15,055,000 2024-25 305,000 - - - - - 15,760,000 2025-26 320,000 - - - - - 16,325,000 2026-27 19,595,000 - - - - - - 2027-28 20,435,000 - - - - - - 2028-29 21,315,000 - - - - - - 2029-30 23,155,000 - - - - - - 2030-31 - - - - - 5,735,000 - 2031-32 - - - - - 17,095,000 - 2032-33 - - - - - 17,895,000 - 2033-34 - - - - 9,590,000 9,130,000 - 2034-35 - - - - 10,145,000 9,440,000 - 2035-36 - - - - 10,735,000 9,770,000 - 2036-37 - - - - 11,355,000 10,100,000 - 2037-38 - - - - 12,015,000 10,430,000 - 2038-39 - - - - 12,710,000 10,770,000 - 2039-40 - - - - 13,450,000 11,125,000 - 2040,41 - - - - - 20,805,000 - 2041-42 - - - - - 12,430,000 - 2042-43 - - - - - 9,795,000 - 2043-44 - - - - - 2,480,000 - Totals $91,885,000 $7,110.000 $8,815,000 $13,405,000 $80,000,000 $157,000,000 $111,465,000 Section 9—Page 10 Debt Financing Program Certificates of Participation/Revenue Obligations and Notes Debt Service Requirements Annual Principal Payments Fiscal 2012A 2012B 2014A 2014B 2015A 2016A Total Year Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Refunding Principal Of (Remain (2000-A (Partial Notes (Partial (Partial Per Payments 2003) &2000-8) 20078) (2013A) 200713) 2009A) Fiscal Year 2016-17 $ - $ - $ - $120,850,000 $ - $ - $ 156,425,000 2017-18 - - 6,715,000 - - - 32,415,000 2018-19 - 19,920,000 7,045,000 - - - 31,940,000 2019-20 - 20,915,000 7,400,000 - - 4,415,000 33,025,000 2020-21 - 17,390,000 7,850,000 - - 4,635,000 34,675,000 2021-22 - 1,500,000 8,245,000 - - 4,865,000 28,675,000 2022-23 - 1,605,000 8,655,000 - - 5,110,000 30,085,000 2023-24 - 1,630,000 9,085,000 - - 5,370,000 31,430,000 2024-25 - 1,715,000 9,545,000 - - 5,635,000 32,960,000 2025-26 - 1,720,000 10,025,000 - - 5,915,000 34,305,000 2026-27 - - 10,525,000 - - 6,210,000 36,330,000 2027-28 - - - - 15,240,000 6,525,000 42,200,000 2028-29 - - - - 16,045,000 6,845,000 44,205,000 2029-30 - - - - 15,965,000 7,190,000 46,310,000 2030-31 28,990,000 - - - 6,215,000 7,570,000 48,510,000 2031-32 29,055,000 - - - - 7,950,000 54,100,000 2032-33 42,600,000 - - - - 8,350,000 68,845,000 2033-34 - - - - 17,180,000 8,760,000 44,660,000 2034-35 - - - - 18,040,000 9,205,000 46,830,000 2035-36 - - - - 18,940,000 9,660,000 49,105,000 2036-37 - - - - 19,885,000 10,145,000 51,485,000 2037-38 - - - - - 10,550,000 32,995,000 2038-39 - - - - - 10,975,000 34,455,000 2039-40 - - - - - - 24,575,000 2040-41 - - - - - - 20,805,000 2041-42 - - - - - - 12,430,000 204243 - - - - - - 9,795,000 2043-44 - - - - - - 2,480,000 Totals $100,645,000 $66,395,000 $85,090,000 $120,850,000 $127,510,000 $145,880,000 $1,116,050,000 Section 9—Page 11 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 9— Page 12 w D m � � m 0 z zo_ 8x Staffing Allocation Staffing by Department Total 627 FTE General Managers Ofice Operations& 15 FTE Maintenance Human Resources 279 FIFE 27 FTE Administrative Sevices Environmental 99 FIFE Engineering Services 116 FTE 91 FTE Staffing by Category Supervisory 10.2% Technical Servces a %Professional Adminatrative 35.6% 8.6% Division Management 22% Engineering 3.8% Executive Management Port Tirne 02% Operations& Maintenance 33.5% Section 10- Page 1 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Historical Staffing By Department 300 250 200 W 150 100 50 0 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Fiscal Year ■General M awgers Office •Human Resources •Adrmistrative Services •Facilities Support Services •Environmental Services •Engineering •Operations 8 M ainlenance Total Historical Staffing 650 640 630 627.00 627.00 624.00 624.00 624.00 620 610 2013-14 2014-15 201546 2016-17 2017-18 FiscalYear Section 10- Page 2 Staffing Allocation Authorized Authorized Proposed Authorized Proposed Department and Division Name FTEs FTEs FTEs FTEs FTEs 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 General Managers Office General Management Administration 4.D0 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 Board Services 5.D0 5.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Public Affairs 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Department Subtotal* 12.00 14.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 Human Resources Department Human Resources 18.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 Risk Management 11.0ol 11.00 11.00 Department Subtotal 18.00 16.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 Administrative Services Department Administrative Services 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Financial Management 18.00 18.D0 19.00 19.00 19.00 Contracts, Purchasing& Materials Management 31.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 Information Technology 47.00 45.00 44.00 45.00 45.00 Risk Management 11.00 12.00 Department Subtotal 110.00 111.00 98.00 99.00 99.00 Facilities Support Services Department Facilities Support Services Administration 3.00 3.00 4.00 - - Facilities Support 3.00 3.00 - - - Equipment Rebuild &DO 8.00 - - - Fleet Services 8.00 8.00 9.00 - - Facilities Engineering & Repair Services 11.D0 9.00 5.00 - - NPDES Source Inspection 16.00 16.00 16.00 - - Odor and Corrosion Control 6.D0 6.00 6.00 - - Collection Facilities Operations & Maintenance 23.00 23.00 1 23.00 Department Subtotal 78.00 76.00 63.00 Environmental Services Department Environmental Services Administration - - - 2.00 2.00 Environmental Compliance - - - 47.00 47.00 Laboratory & Ocean Monitoring 42.00 42.00 Department Subtotal 91.00 91.00 Engineering Department Engineering Administration 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Planning 18.00 17.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 Project Management Office 20.00 20.00 20.00 17.00 17.00 Civil & Mechanical Engineering 51.00 53.00 59.00 53.00 53.00 Electrical & Control Systems Engineering - - - 29.00 29.00 EmAronmental Compliance 32.00 31.00 31.00 Department Subtotal 123.00 123.00 127.00 116.00 116.00 Operations&Maintenance Department Operations & Maintenance Administration 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 Collection Facilities Operations & Maintenance - - - 26.00 26.00 Fleet Services - - - 8.00 8.00 Plant No. 1 Operations 54.00 54.00 69.00 62.00 62.00 Plant No. 2 Operations 48.00 47.00 54.00 50.00 50.D0 Building, Grounds. and Mechanical Maintenance 62.00 65.00 - - - Instrumentation & Electrical Maintenance 75.00 75.00 - - - Plant No. 1 Maintenance - - 82.00 85.00 85.00 Plant No. 2 Maintenance - - 46.00 45.00 45.00 Environmental Laboratory& Ocean Monitoring 41.00 41.00 41.00 Department Subtotal 283.00 284.00 294.00 279.00 279.00 Grand Total -All Departments" 824.00 824.00 824.00 827.00 627.00 Section 10-Page 3 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Authorized Authorized Proposed Authorized Proposed FrEs FfEs FfEs FfEs FIFs Division&Position 2013-14 2014 15 201516 2016-17 2017-18 General Manager's Office 110 General Management Administration General Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Assistant General Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 too 1.00 Public Affairs Manager - 1.00 1.00 - - Principal Staff Analyst 1.00 1.00 - Ioff 1.00 Records Management Specialist - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Staff Analyst - - 1.00 - - Secretaryto the General Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total General Management Administration' 4.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 120 Board Services Clerk of the Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Records Management Specialist 1.00 1.00 - - - Deputy Clerk oftheBoard - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adm inistrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 - - - Program Assistant 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Office Assistant 1.00 1.00 Total Board Services 5.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 140 Public Affairs Public Affairs Supervisor - - - 1.00 1.00 Principal Public Affairs Specialist - 1.00 1.00 - - SeniorPublicAffairsSpecialist 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Public Affairs Specialist - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Graphics Coordinator 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Public Affairs 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Total Office of the General Manager 12.00 14.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 Human Resources Department 160 Human Resources Director of Human Resources 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Human Resources Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Human Resources Supervisor - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Principal Human Resources Analyst 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Senior Human Resources Analyst 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Human Resources Analyst 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Executive Assistant 1.00 - - - - Human Resources Assistant 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Program Assistant 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Human Resources 18.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 161 Risk Management Safety&Health Supervisor - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Principal Financial Analyst - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Safety&Health Specialist - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Security&Emergency Planning Specialist - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Occupational Health Nurse - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Safety&Health Representative - - 2.00 2.00 2.00 Safety&Health Representative - - 3.00 3.00 3.00 Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Risk Management 11.00 1 11.00 11.00 Total Human Resources Department 18.00 18.00 27.00 1 27.00 27.00 Section 10- Page 4 Historical Staffing Detail Authorized Authodzed Proposed Authorized proposed Firs Fee FTtss Firs FTrs Division&Position 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Administrative Services Department 210 Administrative Services Director of Finance&Administrative Services/Treasurer 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Principal Financial Analyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Executive Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Accounting Assistant II 1.00 Total Finance Administration 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 1 3.00 220 Financial Management Controller 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Accounting Supervisor 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Principal Accountant 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 Senior Accountant 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Senior Staff Analyst - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Accoumant/Sta6 Analyst 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Payroll Technician 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Accounting Assistant ll 4.00 4.00 1 5.00 5.00 5.00 Total Financial Management 18.00 18.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 230 Contracts,Purchasing&Materials Management Contracts&Purchasing Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Contracts Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Principal Contracts Administrator 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Purchasing Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Materials Control Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Contracts Administrator 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Principal Buyer 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Contracts Administrator 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Senior Buyer 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Buyer 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Contracts/Purchasing Assistant 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Lead Storekeeper 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Senior Storekeeper 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Storekeeper 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Total Contacts,Purchasing&Materials Management 31.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 250 Information Technology Information Technology Systems&Operations Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Information Technology Manager 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Information Technology Su nerve or 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Principal Information Technology Analyst 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Principal Public A6airs Specialist 1.00 - - - - SeniorinformationTechnologyAnalysl 9.00 9.00 9.00 10.00 10.00 Information Technology Analyst 111 3.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Engineering Associate 1.00 - - - - Senior StattAnalyst - 1.00 - - - Data Management Technician 11 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 Information Technology Analyst ll 6.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Data Management Technician 1 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Sta6Analyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Information Technology Technician 11 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Information Technology Tech nicia in 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Program Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Information Technology 47.00 1 45.00 44.00 45.00 45.00 Section 10- Page 5 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Authorized Authorized Proposed Authorized Proposed FTEs FTFs FTEs FTFs FTEs Division&Position 2013-14 2014-15 201616 2016-17 2017-18 260 Risk Management Risk Manager - 1.00 - - - Safety&Health Supervisor 1.00 1.00 - - - Principal Financial Analyst 1.00 1.00 - - - Safety&HealthSpecialist 2.00 1.00 - - - Security&Emergency Planning Specialist 1.00 1.00 - - - Occupational Health Nurse 1.00 1.00 - - SeniorSafety&Health Representative 1.00 2.00 - - - Safety&Health Representative 3.00 3.00 - - - Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 Total Risk Management 11.00 12.00 Total Administrative Services Department 110.00 111.00 98.00 99.00 99.00 Facilities Support Services Department 310 Facilities Support Services Administration Direcmrof Facilities Support 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - PrincipalFinancialAnalyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - SeniorStafrAnalyst - - 1.00 - - Executive Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Facilities Support Services Administration 3.00 3.00 4.00 320 Facilities Support Facilities Manager 1.00 1.00 - - - SeniorStaBAnalyst 1.00 1.00 - - Office Assistant 1.00 1.00 Total Equipment/Rebuild 3.00 3.00 321 Equipment Rebuild(formerly part of division 320) Maintenance Supervisor 1.00 1.00 - - - Machinist 1.00 1.00 - -Senior Mechanic 3.00 3.00 - - - Welder/Fabricator 3.00 3.00 Total Equipment/Rebuild 8.00 8.00 322 Fleet Services(formerly part of division 320) Maintenance Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Lead Mechanic 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Automotive/Heavy Equipment Technician 3.00 3.00 3.00 - Mobile Crane Operator 2.00 2.00 2.00 - - AutomotivE/Heavy Equipment Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Office Assistant 1.00 Total Fleet Services 8.00 8.00 9.00 330 Facilities Engineering&Repair Services Engineering Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 -Senior Engineer 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Engineer 2.00 2.00 - -Associate Engineer 3.00 3.00 2.00 -Maintenance Specialist 2.00 - - -Engineering Associate 1.00 1.00 - - - Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Facilities Engineering 11.00 9.00 5.00 Section 10- Page 6 Historical Staffing Detail Authorized Authorized Proposed Authorized Proposed F7Es FTEs FTEs FTEs FTEs Division&Position 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 341 NPDFS Source Inspection Source Control Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - PrincipalEnvironmentalSpecialist 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - SeniorEnvironmentalSpecialist 1.00 1.00 - - - Lead Source Control Inspector - - 1.00 - - SourceConhrollnspectorll 9.00 8.00 7.00 - - SourceControllnspectorl - 1.00 2.00 -Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 -Environmental Technician 3.00 3.00 3.00 Total NPDES Source Inspection 16.00 16.00 16.00 342 Odor and Corrosion Control Engineering Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Associate Engineer 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - SeniorEnvironmentalSpecialist 2.00 2.00 2.00 - - EngineeringAssistantl 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Environmental Technician 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Odor&Corrosion Control 6.00 6.00 6.00 343 Collection Facilities Operations 8 Maintenance Maintenance Supervisor 2.00 2.00 2.00 - - Lead Mechanic 5.00 5.00 5.00 -Senior Mechanic 8.00 8.00 8.00 - - Mechanic 8.00 8.00 8.00 Total Collection Facilities O&M 23.00 23.00 23.00 Total Facilities Support Services Department 78.00 76.00 63.00 Envrionmental Services Department 610 Facilities Support Services Administration Director of Environmental Services - - - 1.00 1.00 Executive Assistant 1.00 1.00 Total Environmental Services Administration 2.00 2.00 620 Environmental Compliance Environmental Compl&Reg Affairs Manager - - - 1.00 1.00 Engineering Supervisor - - - 2.00 2.00 Environmental Supervisor - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Engineer - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Regulatory Specialist - - - 1.00 1.00 Engineer - - - 5.00 5.00 Source Control Supervisor - - - 1.00 1.00 Regulatory Specialist - - - 3.00 3.00 Associate Engineer - - - 4.00 4.00 Principal Environmental Specialist - - - 3.50 3.50 Lead Source Control Inspector - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Environmental Specialist - - - 4.50 4.50 Source Control Inspector ll - - - 7.00 7.00 Source Control Inspector l - - - 2.00 2.00 Administrative Assistant - - - 2.00 2.00 Environmental Technician - - - 3.00 3.00 Program Assistant - - - 4.00 4.00 Office Assistant 1.00 1.00 Total Environmental Compliance 47.00 47.00 Section 10- Page 7 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Authorized Authorized Proposed Authorized Roposed FTEs FTES FTES F-E3 FTES Division&Position 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 630 Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring Environmental Lab&Ocean Monitoring Manager - - - 1.00 1.00 Environmental Supervisor - - - 1.00 1.00 Laboratory Supervisor - - - 2.00 2.00 Senior Scientist - - - 3.00 3.00 Scientist - - - 1.00 1.00 Principal Environmental Specialist - - - 2.00 2.00 Principal Laboratory Analyst - - - 6.00 6.00 Senior Environmental Specialist - - - 6.00 6.00 Boat Captain - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Laboratory Analyst - - - 10.00 10.00 Environmental Specialist - - - 2.00 2.00 Laboratory Analyst - - - 3.00 3.00 Administrative Assistant - - - 1.00 1.00 LaboratoryAssistant 3.00 1 3.00 Total Laboratoryand Ocean Monitoring 42.00 42.00 Total Environmental Services Department 91.00 91.00 Engineering Department 710 Engineering Administration Director of Engineering 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 E ecu0ve Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Engineering Administration 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 740 Planning Engineering Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Engineering Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Senior Engineer 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Engineer 5.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 Principal Financial Analyst - - - 1.00 1.00 Principal Staff Analyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Associate Engineer 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Principal Environmental Specialist 1.00 - - - - Assistant Engineer 1.00 - -Engineering Associate - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior StaOAnalyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Administrative Assistant i 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Planning 18.00 17.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 Section 10- Page 8 Historical Staffing Detail Authored Authored Proposed Authored Proposed FTFs 7Es FTFs 7ES FTFs Division&Position 2018-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 750 Project Management Office Engineering Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Engineering Supervsor 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - ProjectControlsSuperoisor 1.00 - - - - CapitallmproeemenlPrognamProjeclManager 8.00 8.00 7.00 8.00 8.00 Senior Engineer - - 1.00 2.00 2.00 Principal Project Controls Analyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Engineer 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Principal SlaffAnalyst 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Cost Estimator 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Planner/Scheduler 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - SeniorStaOMalyst 2.00 1.00 1.00 - - EngineeringAssistantll - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Office Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Project Management Office 20.00 20.00 20.00 17.00 17.00 760 Civil&Mechanical Engineering Engineering Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Engineering Supervisor 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Senior ConsWction Inspection Supernsor 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Senior Engineer 8.00 8.00 9.00 7.00 7.00 Construction Inspection Supevsor 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Engineer 10.00 10.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 Associate Engineer 2.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Cost Estimator - - - 1.00 1.00 Planner/Scheduler - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Construction Inspector 7.00 7.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 Assistant Engineer 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Associate Engineer ll - - - - - Senior StaOAnalyst - 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Engineering Associate - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Construction Inspector 9.00 9.00 9.00 5.00 5.00 Associate Engineer l - - - - - Engineering Assistant ll 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Public Affairs Specialist - - - - - StaRAnalyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Administrative Assistant 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Engineering Assistant 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Program Assistant 1.00 1.00 Total Civil&Mechanical Engineering 51.00 53.00 59.00 53.00 53.00 770 Electrical&Control Systems Engineering Engineering Manager - - - 1.00 1.00 Engineering Supervisor - - - 2.00 2.00 Senior Construction lnsp Supv - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Engineer - - - 5.00 5.00 Principal Info Tech Analyst - - - 4.00 4.00 Engineer - - - 4.00 4.00 Senior Info Tech Analyst - - - 3.00 3.00 Information Tech Analyst 111 - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Construction Inspector - - - 2.00 2.00 Information Tech Analyst ll - - - 1.00 1.00 Construction Inspector - - - 4.00 4.00 Senior Engineer 1.00 Nu Total Electrical&Control Systems Engineering 29.00 29.00 Section 10- Page 9 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Authorized Authored Roposed Authorized Proposed FTEs FTEs FTE: FTEs FTEs Division&Position 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 790 Environmental Compliance Environmental Compl&Reg Affairs Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Engineering Supervisor 2.00 2.00 2.00 - - Environmental Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Public Affairs Manager 1.00 - - - - Senior Scientist 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Engineer 6.00 6.00 6.00 - - Regulatory Specialist 3.00 3.00 3.00 - - Associate Engineer 4.00 4.00 4.00 - - Associate Engineer III - - - - - Principal Environmental Specialist 2.50 2.50 2.50 - - Principal Laboratory Analyst - - - - - SeniorEnNronmentalSpecialist 4.50 4.50 4.50 - - Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Program Assistant 4.00 4.00 4.00 Office Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Intern Total Environmental Compliance 32.00 31.00 31.00 Total Engineering Department 123.00 123.00 127.00 116.00 116.00 Operations&Maintenance Department 810 Operations&Maintenance Administration Director of Operations&Maintenance 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Operations Manager 1.00 - - - - Senior StaffAnalyst 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Total Operations&Maintenance Administration 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 820 Collection Facilities Operations&Maintenance Engineering Manager - - - 1.00 1.00 Maintenance Supervisor - - - 2.00 2.00 Lead Mechanic - - - 5.00 5.00 Administrative Assistant - - - 1.00 1.00 Senior Mechanic - - - 8.00 8.00 Mechanic - - - 8.00 8.00 Office Assistant 1.00 1 1.00 Total Collection Facilities O&M 26.00 26.00 822 Fleet Services Maintenance Supervisor - - - 1.00 1.00 Lead Mechanic - - - 1.00 1.00 Automotive/Heavy Equipment Technician - - - 3.00 3.00 Mobile Crane Operator - - - 2.00 2.00 Automotive/Heavy Equipment Assistant 1.00 1.00 Total Fleet Services 8.00 8.00 Section 10-Page 10 Historical Staffing Detail Authorized Authored Roposed Authorized Proposed FIEs FTFs FTFs FIEs FTFs Division B Position 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 830 Plant No.1 Operations Engineering Manager 1.00 - - - - Operations Manager - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Engineering Supervisor 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Chief Plant Operator 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Engineer 2.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 Principal Information Technology Analyst - - 3.00 - - Engineer 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 Operations Supervisor 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Senior Information Technology Analyst - - 3.00 - - Maintenance Supervisor - - 1.00 - - Scientist 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Associate Engineer - - 1.00 2.00 2.00 Information Technology Analyst 111 - - 1.00 - - Assistant Engineer 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Environmental Specialist 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Information Technology Analyst ll - - 1.00 - - Lead Plant Operator 5.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Lead Power Plant Operator - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Power Plant Operator ll - - 4.00 4.00 4.00 Senior Plant Operator 15.00 14.00 14.00 15.00 15.00 Adm inistraliw Ass istanl 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Plant Operator 14.00 15.00 14.00 16.00 16.00 Environmental Technician - - - 1.00 1.00 Control Center Technician 2.00 1 2.00 1 2.00 2.00 1 2.00 Total Plant No.l Operations 54.00 54.00 69.00 62.00 62.00 840 Plant No.2 Operations Chief Plant Operator 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Operations Supervisor 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Lead Plant Operator 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 Power Plant Operator ll - - 4.00 4.00 4.00 Senior Plant Operator 14.00 14.00 15.00 14.00 14.00 Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Plant Operator 20.00 19.00 20.00 18.00 18.00 Control Center Technician 1.00 1.00 - - - Program Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Plant No.2 Operators 48.00 47.00 54.00 50.00 50.00 850 Building,Grounds,and Mechanical Maintenance Maintenance Manager 1.00 1.00 - - - Senior Engineer - 1.00 - - - Engineer 1.00 - - - - MaintenanceSupeMsor 6.00 6.00 - -Associate Engineer 1.00 1.00 - -Maintenance Specialist 5.00 8.00 - - - ReliabilityMaintenanceTechnician 4.00 4.00 - - - Lead Mechanic 4.00 4.00 - -Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 - -Senior Mechanic 29.00 29.00 - - - Lead Facilities Worker 1.00 1.00 - - - Facilities Worker/Builder 3.00 3.00 - - - Facilities Worker/Painter 2.00 2.00 - - - Mechanic 2.00 2.00 - - - Maintenance Worker 1 2.00 2.00 Total Building,Grounds,and Mechanical Maintenance 62.00 65.00 Section 10-Page 11 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Authoraed Authoraed Proposed Authoraed Proposed FfEs FfEs F1Es FfB F1Es Division&Position 2013-14 201415 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 860 Instrumentation&Electrical Maintenance Engineering Manager 1.00 1.00 - - - Engineering Supervisor 1.00 1.00 - -Senior Engineer 3.00 3.00 - - - PrincipallnformationTechnologyAnalysl 1.00 2.00 - - - Engineer 4.00 3.00 - - - Senior Information Technology Analyst 4.00 4.00 - - - MainlenanceSupeMsor 5.00 5.00 - - - InfornationTechnologyAnalystlll 2.00 1.00 - - - Information Technology Analyst ll - 1.00 - - - Lead Electrical Technician 5.00 5.00 - - - Lead Instrumentation Technician 3.00 3.00 - - - LeadPowerPlantOperator 1.00 1.00 - -Electrical Technician II 13.00 14.00 - - - Instrumentation Technician II 15.00 14.00 - - - PowerPlantOperatorll 8.00 8.00 - - - Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 - - PowerPlantOperatorl 1.00 1.00 - - - ElectricalTechnicianl 2.00 2.00 - - - InstrumentationTechnicianl 1.00 2.00 - - - Maintenance Worker 4.00 3.00 Total Instrumentation&Electrical Maintenance 75.00 75.00 870 Plant No.1 Maintenance Engineering Manager - - 1.00 - - Maintenance Manager - - - 1.00 1.00 Engineering Supervisor - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maintenance Superintendent - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Engineer - - 2.00 3.00 3.00 Engineer - - 3.00 4.00 4.00 Maintenance Supervisor - - 6.00 7.00 7.00 Associate Engineer - - 1.00 2.00 2.00 Maintenance Specialist - - 5.00 5.00 5.00 Lead Electrical Technician - - 3.00 3.00 3.00 Lead Instrumentation Technician - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maintenance Planner/Scheduler - - 3.00 4.00 4.00 Reliability Maintenance Technician - - 4.00 6.00 6.00 Electrical Technician 11 - - 7.00 7.00 7.00 Instrumentation Technician 11 - - 6.00 5.00 5.00 Lead Mechanic - - 2.00 2.00 2.00 Machinist - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Administrative Assistant - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Mechanic - - 17.00 17.00 17.00 Welder/Fabricator - - 3.00 3.00 3.00 Lead Facilities Worker - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Electrical Technician l - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Instrumentation Technician l - - 3.00 3.00 3.00 Facilities Worker/Builder - - 3.00 2.00 2.00 Facilities Worker/Painter - - 2.00 1.00 1.00 Mechanic - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maintenance Worker 3.00 2.00 2.00 Total Plant No.1 Maintenance 82.00 85.00 85.00 Section 10- Page 12 Historical Staffing Detail Authorized Authorized Proposed Authorized Proposed FrEs FrEs F-Es FrEs FrEs Division B Position 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 880 Plant No.2 Maintenance Maintenance Superintendent - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maintenance Supervisor - - 5.00 5.00 5.00 Lead Electrical Technician - - 2.00 2.00 2.00 Lead Instrumentation Technician - - 2.00 2.00 2.00 Electrical Technician II - - 6.00 6.00 6.00 Instrumentation Technician II - - 7.00 6.00 6.00 Lead Mechanic - - 2.00 2.00 2.00 Administrative Assistant - - 1.00 - - Senior Mechanic - - 15.00 14.00 14.00 Lead Facilities Worker - - - 1.00 1.00 Electrical Technician l - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Instrumentation Technician I - - 1.00 - - Facilities Worker/Builder - - - 1.00 1.00 Facilities Worker/Painter - - - 1.00 1.00 Mechanic - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maintenance Worker 2.00 2.00 1 2.00 Total Plant No.2 Maintenance 46.00 45.00 45.00 890 Environmental Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring Environmental Lab&Ocean Monitoring Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Environmental Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Laboratory Supervisor 2.00 2.00 2.00 - - Senior Scientst 3.00 3.00 3.00 - - Scientist 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - Principal Environmental Specialist 2.00 2.00 2.00 - - Principal Laboratory Analyst 6.00 6.00 6.00 - - SeniorEnvironmentalSpecialist 6.00 6.00 6.00 - - BoatCaptain 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - SeniorLabomtoryAnalyst 10.00 10.00 10.00 - - Environmental Specialist 1.00 1.00 1.00 -Laboratory Analyst 3.00 3.00 3.00 -Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 - LaboratoryAssistanl 1 3.00 1 3.00 1 Total Environmental Laboratoryand Ocean Monitoring 41.00 41.00 41.00 Total Operations&Maintenance Department 1 283.00 284.00 1 294.00 279.00 279.00 Grand Total,All Departments' 1 624.00 624.00 1 624.00 627.00 627.00 'FTE totals exclude Management Discretion positions that are authorized but used only on a temporary basis to facilitate the replacement of keypositions. There are a total of three f3)Management Discretion positions proposed for FY 2016-17 and 2017-18, however,total filledpositions hill not exceed 627 FTE,at anypoint in time. Section 10-Page 13 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget This page was intentionally left blank. Section 10 - Page 14 Appropriations Limit Appropriations Limit In certain situations, proceeds of taxes Article MIS of the California State Constitution, may be spent on emergencies without more commonly referred to as the Gann Initiative having to reduce the limit in future years. or Gann Limit,was adopted by California voters in 1980. The Gann Limit placed limits on the amount Each agency also conducts a review of of proceeds of taxes that state and local its Appropriations Limit during its annual governmental agencies can receive and financial audit. appropriate (authorize to spend)each year. The law requires a governing body to annually The limit is different for each agency and the limit adopt, by resolution, an appropriations limit for changes each year. The annual limit is based on the following year, along with a recorded vote the amount of tax proceeds that were authorized to regarding which of the annual adjustment factors be spent in fiscal year 1978-79 in each agency, have been selected. The Orange County modified for changes in inflation and population in Sanitation District's appropriations limit and each subsequent year. annual adjustment factors are adopted at the same meeting as the budget. The adjustment Proposition 111 was passed by the State's voters factors used for 2016-17 are the weighted in June 1990. This legislation made changes to the average change in city population and the manner in which the Appropriations Limit is to be change in state per capita personal income. calculated: The following table shows the annual The annual adjustment factors for inflation appropriations limit for each of the last two years and population have been changed. and the appropriations limit and the Instead of using the lesser of California per appropriations, or proceeds from taxes,for capita income,or U.S. CPI, each agency 2016-17. The increase in the limit is based upon may choose either the growth in the population changes ranging from 0.18%to 2.16 California per capita income, or the growth for major cities within the District as provided by in assessed valuation due to new non- the State Department of Finance and a per capita residential construction within the district. personal income change of 5.37% as provided by For population, instead of using only the the State Department of Finance. population growth of an agency, each agency may choose to use the population Annual Appropriation Limits: growth within its county. These are both 2014-15 $91,302,000 annual elections. 2015-16 $95,684,000 The revised annual adjustment factors will 2016-17 $101,767,000 be applied to the 1986-87 limit for most Proceeds of Taxes (Appropriations) agencies and each year in between in orderto calculate the 1990-91 limit. The 2016-17 $16,833,000 actual limits for the intervening years, however, are not affected. As a result of the July 1998 consolidation of the District, a single limit is presented in contrast to Expenditures for"qualified capital outlay", individual limits shown in years prior to 1998. which are capital assets with a value of Population changes for representative cities have more than$100,000 and an expected life continued to be used in order to ensure of 10 years or more, are excluded from the consistency and to eliminate significant limit. population growth in parts of the County outside of the District's service area. This method results An agency which exceeds the limit in any in a lower limit than using the County-wide one year may choose to not give a tax change. refund if they fall below the limit in the next fiscal year. They then have two more years to refund any remaining excess or to obtain a successful override vote. Section 10-Page 15 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Budget Glossary Biosolids: Treated sewage sludge that meets the USEPA Accounting System: pollutant and pathogen requirements for land The set of records and procedures which are used application as an agricultural soil conditioner or to record, classify, and report information on the surface disposal. financial status and operations of an entity. BLAST: Accrual Basis Accounting: A District program that stands for Building Leaders, Under this accounting method,transactions are Abilities and Skills for Tomorrow. The BLAST recognized when they occur, regardless of the program is an employee designed leadership timing of related cash receipts and disbursements. development program that aims to provide training and opportunities for staff at levels of the Administrative and Clerical., organization to develop themselves as leaders An employee group that provides administrative and clerical support. Budget Document: The official financial spending and resource plan Ad Valorem Taxes: submitted by the General Manager, adopted by the The District's allocated share of the property taxes Board of Directors,and made available to the public assessed by the County representing a 2% annual and other interested parties. increase in assessed values of property taxes. Budget Message: Annual Budget., A written explanation by the General Manager of the A budget applicable to a single fiscal year. proposed budget. The budget message explains principal budget and policy issues and presents an Appropriation Ordinance: overview of the General Manager's budget The official legal document approved by the recommendations. District's Board of Directors authorizing officials to obligate and expend resources. Budget Calendar: The schedule of key dates which the District follows Appropriation: in preparing and adopting the budget. An authorization made by the District's Board of Directors which permits officials to incur obligations Capital Facilities Capacity Charge: against and to make expenditures of governmental A one-time, nondiscriminatory charge imposed at resources. Operating appropriations are typically the time a building or structure is newly connected to granted for a one-year period. the District's system, directly or indirectly, or an existing structure or category of use is expanded or AQMD: increased. This charge is to pay for District facilities Air Quality Management District. See also in existence at the time the charge is imposed, or to SCAQMD. pay for new facilities to be constructed in the future, that are of benefit to the property being charged. Assessed Valuation: This charge does not apply to temporary facilities. The estimated value of real and personal property used by the Orange County Assessor as the basis Capital Improvement program: for levying property taxes. A plan over a period of five years setting forth each capital project, the amount to be expended in each Balanced Budget: year, and the method of financing capital A budget in which the sum of estimated net expenditures. revenues and appropriated fund balances is equal to appropriations. Capital Outlay., Cash outlays which result in the acquisition of or Biennial Budget: additions to capital assets. Examples include land, A budget applicable to two individual fiscal years. buildings, machinery, equipment, and other improvements. Section 10-Page 16 Budget Glossary Capital Assets: Decision Package: Assets of significant value which have a useful life of A standardized format whereby departments may several years. Examples are land, buildings, other request budgetary consideration for new programs, improvements, machinery, and equipment. positions, capital equipment, and position reclassification. Cash Basis Accounting: A basis of accounting under which transactions are Deficit., recognized only when cash is received or disbursed. The excess of an entity's liabilities over its assets. CCTV: Engineers: Closed-circuit television (CCTV),also known as A professional engineers/employee group. video surveillance, is technology often used by the OCSD to inspect and document the condition of Enterprise Fund: underground sewer lines. In governmental accounting, a fund that provides goods or services to the public for a fee that makes CEQA: the entity self-supporting. California Environmental Quality Act, is a statute that requires state and local agencies to identify the Executive Manager: significant environmental impacts of their actions The group of employees which head each and to avoid or mitigate those impacts, if feasible. department. Certificates of Participation(COPS): Expenditures/Expenses: A type of debt financing in which certificates are Where accounts are kept on the accrual basis of issued which represent an investor's participation in accounting, expenses are recognized when goods the stream of lease payments paid by the issuer. are received or services rendered. Where accounts COPS are secured by the lease payments. Voter are kept on a cash basis,expenditures are approval is not required prior to issuance. recognized only when the cash payments are made. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR), FEMA, The official financial report of a government. It Federal Emergency Management Agency. This includes an audit opinion as well as basic financial agency provides federal grant monies for disaster statements and supporting schedules necessary to relief. demonstrate compliance with legal and contractual Fiscal Year., requirements of the District. A 12-month period to which the annual operating budget applies and at the end of which a Contingency., government determines its financial position and A budgetary reserve set aside for emergencies or results of its operations. The District's fiscal year unforeseen expenditures not otherwise budgeted. runs from July 1 -June 30. Contingent Liabilities: Five-Year Financial Forecast: Items which may become liabilities of the District but Estimates of future revenues and expenditures to are undetermined at a given dale, such as pending help predict the future financial condition of the law suits, unsettled disputed claims, unfilled community. purchase orders, and uncompleted contracts. Contractual Services: FLSA: Personal services provided to the District from the The Fair Labor Standards Act sets minimum wage, private sector or other public agencies. overtime pay, equal pay, and Child Labor Standards to private and public sector employees. Enforcement CRWQCB: of the FLSA is assigned to the Department of Labor California Regional Water Quality Control Board. (DOL),Wage and Hour Division. Debt Service: Payment of interest and repayment of principal to holders of the District's debt instruments. Section 10-Page 17 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Full-Time Equivalents(FTE): GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation The amount of time a regular,full-time employee Award Program: normally works in a year. For example, a full-time The only national awards program in governmental employee (1 FTE) is budgeted to work 2,080 hours budgeting. It represents a significant per year,while a .5 FTE is budgeted to work 1,040 accomplishment in meeting the highest principles of hours per year. governmental budgeting and satisfying nationally recognized guidelines for effective budget Fund., presentation. An independent fiscal and accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts recording cash and/or Groundwater Replenishment System(GWRS): other resources together with all related liabilities, A joint project by the Orange County Water District obligations, reserves, and equities. (OCWD)and the District, the GW RS reclaims up to Fund Accounting., 100 million gallons a day of the District's secondary System used by nonprofit organizations, particularly effluent. GW RS is the world's largest water governments. Since there is no profit motive, purification system for indirect potable reuse. The accountability is measured instead of profitability. system takes highly treated wastewater that would The main purpose is stewardship of financial have previously been discharged into the Pacific resources received and expended in compliance Ocean and purifies it using a three-step advanced with legal requirements. treatment process consisting of microfiltration, reverse osmosis and ultraviolet light with hydrogen Fund Equity., peroxide.The process produces high-quality water The excess of an entity's assets over liabilities. that meets or exceeds all state and federal drinking water standards. General Obligation Bonds. Bonds for which the full faith and credit of the Improvements: insuring government are pledged for payment. Buildings, structures, or attachments to land such as Ad valorem property taxes are pledged to pay the sidewalks, trees, drives,tunnels,drains and sewers. bonds. A two-thirds voter approval is required prior to bond issuance. Interest: Revenue derived from the investment of idle cash Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and/or reserves. (GAAPJ' Intergovernmental Services: Uniform standards for financial accounting and Purchases from other governments of those reporting. They govern the form and content of the basic financial statements of an entity. specialized services typically performed by local governments. Government Finance Officers Association Intergovernmental Revenue: (GFOA): Revenue received from other governmental A nonprofit, professional association,serving over agencies and municipalities. 18,000 government finance professionals through the United States and Canada. IRWD: GFOA's Best Practices and Advisories: Irvine Ranch Water District is a California Special A listing of the Accounting,Auditing, and Financial District formed in 1961 and incorporated under the Reporting, Treasury and Investment Management, California water code. IRWD provides potable water, Budgeting and Fiscal Policy, Debt Management, sewer service and reclaimed (or recycled)water to Retirement and Benefits Administration, and its customers in Irvine and portions of Costa Mesa, Economic Development and Capital Planning Lake Forest, Newport Beach, Orange,Tustin and practices identified as contributing to improved unincorporated areas of Orange County. government management by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. Section 10-Page 18 Budget Glossary Levy: Other Revenues: (Verb)To impose taxes, special assessments,or Revenues from sources, other than those service charges for the support of governmental specifically identified, that are immaterial in amount activities. (Noun)The total amount of taxes, special and do not justify reporting as separate line items. assessments, or service charges imposed by a government levying property taxes. Other Charges: Expenditures that do not fit in other categories, are Long-Term Debt or Long-Term Liabilities: immaterial in amount, and do not justify reporting as Debt borrowed from a source outside the District separate line items. with a maturity of more than one year after the date of issuance. Performance Measure: Represents the objectives of each department along Maintenance Employees: with a target date for achieving the objective. An employee group of the District. Performance Results: Manager Employees: A summary of major accomplishments and The group of employees who assume management objectives that were met during the fiscal year. responsibilities for operating divisions. Permits: MGD: Revenues earned by the issuance of permits levied Million Gallons per Day is a measurement of water in accordance with the benefits conferred by the or wastewater flow. permit. NPDES(National Pollution Discharge Elimination Personnel: System): Salaries and benefits paid to the District's Permit system established by the U.S. employees. Included are items such as special duty Environmental Protection Agency to regulate pay, insurance, and retirement. discharge of treated sewage, storm water, and urban runoff. Personnel Benefits: Those benefits paid by the District as conditions of Object. employment. Examples include insurance and An expenditure classification which refers to the type retirement benefits. of item purchased or the service obtained. Examples include personnel, supplies, or contract Professional Employees: services. An employee group consisting of technical experts, analysts, and planners. OCWD: The Orange County Water District(OCWD)is a Program: California special district that manages the Organizational units directed to attain specific groundwater basin beneath central and northern purposes or objectives. Orange County, California. Reserve: DES: A term used to indicate that a portion of fund equity State Office of Emergency Services.This agency is restricted for a specific purpose. provides stale grant monies for disaster relief. Resources: Operating Engineers: Total dollars available for appropriations including An employee group of the District. estimated revenues and beginning fund equity. Operating Budget., Revenue Bonds: The operating budget is the primary means by which Bonds issued pledging future revenues such as most of the financing of acquisition,spending, and sewer charges to cover debt payments. A majority service delivery activities of a government are voter approval is required prior to bond issuance. controlled. Section 10-Page 19 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget Revenue Estimate: Strategic Plan: A formal estimate of how much revenue will be A planning effort to define the District's goals, earned from a specific revenue source for some responsibilities, and requirements over a specified future period,typically a fiscal year. future period. Key factors used in the planning effort include estimates for population growth, new Revenue: construction,the volume of wastewater delivered to Income received by the District to support the plants, and viable water conservation and wastewater treatment services. This income may be reclamation programs. in the form of property taxes,fees, user charges, grants, and interest. Supervisory Employees: An employee group whose members have Risk Register: responsibility for directing the work of line The Risk Register is a compilation of the various employees. risks facing the District, as seen by the District's management team. Supplemental Appropriation: An appropriation approved by the Directors after the Service Charges: initial budget is adopted. Charges for specific services rendered. Supplies: Service Description: An expenditure classification for articles and A description of the services or functions provided commodities purchased for consumption or resale. by each department or division. Examples include office and operating supplies,fuel, power, water, gas inventory, or small tools and SCADA (Supervisory Control And Data equipment. Acquisition): A system for remote monitoring and control that SWRCB: operates with coded signals over communication The California State Water Resources Control Board channels. (SWRCB) is one of six branches of the California Environmental Protection Agency. SCAQMD: The South Coast Air Quality Management District, Taxes: also using the acronym SCAQMD, formed in 1976, Compulsory charges levied by a government for the is the air pollution agency responsible for regulating purpose of financing services performed for the stationary sources of air pollution in the South Coast common benefit. Air Basin, in Southern California. Technical Services: Significant Changes: Support services to the District's wastewater This section provides an overview of the changes management program through environmental adopted in the budget. Additionally, the significant sampling, analysis and research, source control of impacts of budgetary changes are outlined (Budget industrial users,administration of compliance Impact)along with dollar amounts(Increase/ programs to meet federal, state and local Decrease). environmental standards; provides leadership and influence in the development and implementation of Strategic Goals: environmental policies, laws, and regulations. District-wide goals that demonstrate the District's long-term commitment to excellence and that establish the framework necessary to maintain the District's high level of service standards. Section 10-Page 20 Miscellaneous Statistics General Information Year of Formation................................................1948 Miles of Sewers..................................................570 miles Form of Government............County Sanitation District On-Plant Pump Station............................................2 Authority Section 4700 at.seq. Off-Plant Pump Stations................................................15 ...................................California Health&Safety Code Operating Authority...............RWOCB/NPDES Permit No. Service Area............................................479 sq.miles ............................................................CA0110604 Service Population...............Approximately 2.6 million ..........................Statewide WDR Order No.2006-0003 2015-16 Assessed Value........................$372.2 billion Authorized Staff(Full-Time Equivalent)..................627.00 Treatment Information Daily Influent Flow to Total Primary 2014-15 Influent BOD: Capacity Comparison (in MGD) Plant No. 1.........................300 milligrams per liter xTa Plant No. 2.........................260 milligrams per liter d0° 2014-15 Influent Suspended Solids: ann x5a Plant No. 1.........................357 milligrams per liter 15a 1u xoo 11 Plant No. 2.........................327 milligrams per liter 100 2014-15 Effluent BOD.........................9 milligrams per liter 2014-15 Effluent Suspended Solids....6 milligrams per liter Plane Plant T.UI 2014-15 Biosolids Produced&Reused ..275,968 wet tons 0201546 Eat.Influent OCapaciry-Primary Treatment Primary Treatment Capacity(includes standby): 2015-16 Estimated Average Daily Influent: Plant No. 1 .......................................208 MGD Plant No. 1..............................................117 MGD Plant No. 2.......................................168 MGD Plant No. 2................................................67 MGD TOTAL..............................376 MGD TOTAL.....................................184 MGD Secondary Treatment Capacity: 2015-16 Estimated Electricity Generated: Plant No. 1 .......................................182 MGD Plant No. 1....................................22,967,000 kwh Plant No. 2..................................... 150 MGD Plant No. 2................................... 28,968,000 kwh TOTAL..............................332 MGD TOTAL...........................51 935 000 kwh Legend: MGD-million gallons per day kwh-Movers per hour Financial Information 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Actual Pmjected Proposed Proposed Fees and Charges: One-Time 3-Bedroom Residence Connection $3,588.00 $3,588.00 $3,710.00 $3,710.00 Average Annual Single-Family Residence Fee $316 $322 $327 $331 Local SRF Fee $216 $216 $216 $108 District's Avg.Share of Ad Valorem Property Tax 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% Cost to Collect,Treat,&Dispose of One Million Gallons $2,070.97 $2,099.42 $2,167.44 $2,219.24 Summary of COP Issues: May 2007A Refunding $ 91,885,000 February 2012A Refunding 100,645,000 December 2007B New Money 7,110,000 August 2012B Refunding 66,395,000 September 2008B New Money 8,815.000 August 2014A Refunding 85,090,000 April 2009A New Money 13,405,000 October 2014B Refunding 120,850,000 May 2010A New Money 80,000.000 February 2015A Refunding 127,510,000 November 2010C New Money 157,000,000 March 201M Refunding 145,880,000 September 2011A Refunding 111,465,000 Total Outstanding COP Balance 711/16 1,116,050,000 Section 10-Page 21 2016-17 & 2017-18 Budget ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Estimated Population Served by the Orange County Sanitation District Population as of January 1, 2016 Anaheim 358,136 Brea 43,710 Buena Park 83,347 Costa Mesa 114,603 Cypress 49,743 Fountain Valley 56,714 Fullerton 142,457 Garden Grove 177,303 Huntington Beach 195,212 Irvine 258,386 La Habra 62,064 La Palma 16,057 Los Alamitos 11,738 Newport Beach 84,270 Orange 141,420 Placentia 52,263 Santa Ana 342,930 Seal Beach 25,078 Stanton 39,751 Tustin 82,717 Villa Park 5,948 Westminster 94,073 Yorba Linda 67,637 Subtotal Cities lri 2,505,557 Estimated Population Sened in Unincorporated Areas (2) 72,822 2,578,379 Data Source: (1)Demographic Research Unit, State of California Department of Finance (2)Center for Demographic Research, California State University, Fullerton. Section 10-Page 22 Index Index Accounting System and Budgetary Control...................................................................................Section 3, Page 25 AdministrativeOfficials..............................................................................................................................................iv Administrative Services Administration ..................................................................................Section 6, Pages 21-24 Appropriations Limit.....................................................................................................................Section 10, Page 15 Background Information and Description of Services...................................................................Section 2, Page 30 BoardCommittees......................................................................................................................................................ii Board of Directors i Board Services Section 6, Pages 5-8 Budget Assumptions...............................................................................................................Section 3, Pages 21-24 Budget Glossary...................................................................................................................Section 10, Pages 16-20 Budget Resources......................................................................................................................Section 4, Page 8-13 Business Plan.........................................................................................................................Section 2, Pages 15-27 Capital Equipment Budget Detail................................................................................Section 8, Pages 104-105, 108 Capital Equipment Budget Summary..................................................................Section 8, Pages 102-103, 106-107 Capital Improvement Expenditure Graphs Section 8, Pages 5, 7 Capital Improvement Program-Budget Summary Section 8, Pages 4, 6 Capital Improvement Program-Overview...................................................................................Section 8, Page 1-2 Capital Improvement Program-Project Detail Sheets...........................................................Section 8, Pages 12-91 Capital Improvement Program-Project Summary by Revenue Program.............................Section 8, Pages 93-96 Capital Improvement Program-Summary by Project Status ..............................................Section 8, Pages 97-100 Capital Improvement Program-Summary of Capital Requirements.......................................Section 8, Pages 8-11 Civil &Mechanical Engineering..............................................................................................Section 6, Pages 61-64 Collection Facilities Operations& Maintenance.....................................................................Section 6, Pages 73-77 Consolidated Cash Flow Projections......................................................................................Section 4, Pages 16-17 Contracts, Purchasing and Materials Management...............................................................Section 6, Pages 29-32 CoreValues................................................................................................................................................................x Debt Financing Program.............................................................................................................Section 9, Pages 1-4 Debt Service Requirements Schedule, Interest...........................................................................Section 9, Page 8-9 Debt Service Requirements Schedule, Principal......................................................................Section 9, Page 10-11 Debt Service Requirements Schedule, Principal& Interest.........................................................Section 9, Page 6-7 District Funding Sources by Category.......................................................................................Section 4, Pages 2, 6 District Funding Uses by Category Section 4, Pages 3, 7 DistricfsOrganizational Chart...................................................................................................................................III Electrical &Control Systems Engineering..............................................................................Section 6, Pages 65-68 Engineering Administration.....................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 49-52 Enterprise Funds Chart .................................................................................................................Section 3, Page 26 Environmental Compliance.....................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 41-44 Environmental Services Administration..................................................................................Section 6, Pages 37-40 Executive Summary......................................................................................................................Section 1, Page 1-4 Financial Management Section 6, Pages 25-28 Financial Overview&Budgetary Issues Section 2, Pages 1-13 FiscalPolicy................................................................................................................................Section 3, Pages 1-8 Fleet Services ........................................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 77-80 GFOA Best Practices and Advisories.......................................................................................Section 3, Pages 9-17 General Liability and Property Self-Insurance Program..................................................................Section 7, Page 3 Section 10-Page 23 Index Index (continued) General Management Administration Section 6, Pages 1-4 General Manager's Budget Message vii-ix Historical Staffing Chart.................................................................................................................Section 10, Page 2 Historical Staffing Detail (by Department by Position)..............................................................Section 10, Page 4-13 Historical Staffing Summary(by Department)...............................................................................Section 10, Page 3 Human Resources Administration..........................................................................................Section 6, Pages 13-16 Information Technology..........................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 33-36 Laboratory and Ocean Monitoring..........................................................................................Section 6, Pages 45-48 Levels of Service Target Levels Section 2, Pages 26-27 Long-Term Planning Table Section 2, Page 29 Maintenance-Plant No. 1 .......................................................................................................Section 6, Page 89-92 Maintenance-Plant No.2.......................................................................................................Section 6, Page 93-96 Miscellaneous Statistics ..............................................................................................................Section 10, Page 21 Notes to Operations Summary.................................................................................................Section 5, Pages 8-10 Operations- Plant No. 1 .........................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 81-84 Operations- Plant No.2.........................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 85-88 Operations Summary-Allocation to Individual Revenue Areas .....................................................Section 5, Page 5 Operations Summary-Comparisons by Department Section 5, Page 3 Operations Summary- Expense by Category Section 5, Page 4 Operations Summary- Expense by Line Item............................................................................Section 5, Pages 6-7 Operations Summary-Budget Overview...................................................................................Section 5, Pages 1-2 Operations&Maintenance Administration.............................................................................Section 6, Pages 69-72 Orange County at a Glance...........................................................................................................Section 2, Page 31 Overview of the Budget Process............................................................................................Section 3, Pages 19-20 Planning..................................................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 53-56 Population Information, Service Area..........................................................................................Section 10, Page 22 Project Management Office ...................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 57-60 Projected Reserves..................................................................................................................Section 4, Page 14-15 PublicAffairs.............................................................................................................................Section 6, Pages 9-12 Reader's Guide to the Budget................................................................................................................................v-vi Revenue Sources...................................................................................................................Section 3, Pages 27-29 Risk Management/Safety/Security.........................................................................................Section 6, Pages 17-20 Self-Insurance Program-Overview................................................................................................Section 7, Page 1 Staffing by Category Chart Section 10, Page 1 Staffing by Department Chart Section 10, Page 1 Strategic Goal Objectives Table....................................................................................................Section 2, Page 28 Summary of Outstanding Certificates of Participation.....................................................................Section 9, Page 1 Total of Self-Insurance Program......................................................................................................Section 7, Page 2 Treatment Process Diagram............................................................................................................Section 8, Page 3 Where the Money Comes From................................................................................................Section 4, Pages 1, 5 Where the Money Goes.............................................................................................................Section 4, Pages 1, 5 Workers' Compensation Self-Insurance Program Section 7, Page 4 Section 10-Page 24 4oPPVV SANIlgJ�NN 6 � O 1 O 4� EC SNO THE EqV\PPN ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 714.962.2411 www.ocsd.com