Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1999-04-14
MINUTES OF FINANCE. ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING Orange County Sanitation District Wednesday, April 14, 1999, 5:00 p.m. A meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on April 14, 1999 at 5:00 p.m., in the District's Administrative Office. (1) The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: FAHR COMMITTEE MEMBERS: STAFF PRESENT: Directors Present: Thomas Saltarelli, Chair Mark Leyes, Vice Chair Shawn Boyd James W. Silva Jan Debay, Board Chair Peer Swan, Board Vice Chair John J. Collins, Past Board Chair Directors Absent: John M. Gullixson Shirley McCracken Mark A. Murphy (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. Don McIntyre, General Manager Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager Mike Peterman, Director of Human Resources Gary Streed, Director of Finance Michelle Tuchman, Director of Communications Patrick Miles, Director of Information Technology Bob Ooten, Director of Operations & Maintenance Lisa Tomko, Human Resources Manager Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Greg Mathews, Assistant to the General Manager Mike White, Controller Dawn McKinley, Senior Human Resources Analyst Rob Thompson, Plant Automation Manager Penny Kyle, Committee Secretary Ryal Wheeler, Maintenance & Operations Foreman OTHERS PRESENT: Terry Andrus, Assistant General Counsel Toby Weissert, Carollo Engineers OCSD • P.O. Box 8127 • Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 • (714) 962-2411 Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page2 April 14, 1999 (4) RECEIVE, FILE AND APPROVE DRAFT MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the minutes of the March 10, 1999, Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee as drafted. (5) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Chairman Saltarelli commented on the workshop held on April 10, 1999. All but nine Directors attended the workshop. (6) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER General Manager Don McIntyre had no report. (7) REPORT OF ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER Assistant General Manager Blake Anderson briefly reported on an item that would be placed on the April 28th Board agenda regarding a possible purchase of Tule Ranch/Magan Ranch site in Kern County to be used as a biosolids land application site. (8) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Mr. Streed advised that several reports were placed before the Directors just prior to the meeting. • The Treasurer's Report for March was placed before the Committee prior to the meeting in accordance with the Investment Policy and Government Code requirements. • Revised agenda verbiage for the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority item • Equity Adjustment Report • Staff Report on the Y2K Contingency Plan • Cl P Budget List • Revised Connection Fee Workshop slides (9) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES The Director of Human Resources Mike Peterman had no report. (10) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS Director of Communications Michelle Tuchman reported that new security measures have been installed throughout the plant. To help protect employees, the District is keeping the front gates closed during the day except between 6:00 a.m. -8:00 a.m and during the lunch hour. Anyone needing to get into the facility will be stopped by the Security Guard and asked to sign in the log book. During Committee and Board meetings the gate will be opened. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 3 April 14, 1999 A trip is being planned to go to Chino Basin on May 15th• Also, the second annual Legislator's Day is scheduled to be held on June 25th• This will be a morning program, and the topics will be watershed management and the groundwater replenishment program. Ms. Tuchman also reported that she was assisting in the coordination of interviews for our staff and staff of Orange County Water District with a reporter from Comcast Cable. OCN's Prime Story did a segment on groundwater replenishment on April 1st• She further reported that staff believes ABC's 20/20 program may be working on a story on biosolids handling nationwide. (11) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL Assistant General Counsel had no report. (12) CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS (Items A-F) A. FAHR99-18: 8. FAHR99-19: C. FAHR99-20: D. FAHR99-21: E. FAHR99-22: F. FAHR99-23: Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of March 1999: The Treasurer's Report was handed out at the FAHR Committee meeting in accordance with the Board-approved Investment Policy, and in conformance to the Government Code requirement to have monthly reports reviewed within 30 days of month end. Receive and file Certificates of Participation (COP) Monthly Report. Receive and file Employment Status Report as of March 25, 1999. Approve changes and additions to Human Resources Policies and Procedures as authorized by Resolution No. 98-33. Receive and file report of General Manager-approved purchases in amounts exceeding $50,000 in accordance with Board purchasing policy. Renew the District's Excess Worker's Compensation Insurance Program for the three-year period May 1, 1999 to May 1, 2022, with a rate guarantee of $0.612 per $100 of annual payroll for each fiscal year. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any. There were none. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended actions for items specified as 12(A) through 12(F) under Consent Calendar. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 4 April 14, 1999 (13) ACTION ITEMS (Items A-E) A. FAHR99-24: (1) Require SAWPA to pay the O&M charges for 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 in accordance with the 1996 Agreement; and, (2) Authorize staff to negotiate an agreement with SAWPA to include a) the amounts already paid by SAWPA to the District for a currently unneeded 1110th of 1 mgd of additional capacity be accepted as payment in full for the 1996-97 and 1997-98 charges; b) that SAWPA's treatment and disposal capacity be reduced to 9 mgd; and, c) that the 1998-99 charges be collected over a reasonable period of time. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the amended motion as follows: (1) Require SAWPA (Santa Ana Regional Watershed Project Authority) to pay the O&M charges for 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 in accordance with the 1996 Agreement; and (2) Authorize staff to negotiate an agreement with SAWPA to structure a payment plan for the charges it owes the District which may include: a) crediting against the amount owed, amounts already paid by SAWPA to the District for a currently unneeded 1110th of 1 mgd of additional treatment and disposal capacity, thus reducing SAWPA's capacity to 9 mgd; b) collecting the amount owed over time; and c) relating the payment of the amount owed to parallel discussions on SAWPA prepaying for 3 mgd of anticipated capacity needs to accommodate future brine discharges from new groundwater treatment projects. B. FAHR99-25: (1) Approve FGIC proposal for 20 basis points annual commitment fee for the Standby Bond Purchase Agreement for the Series "C" COPs, effective May 1, 1999 through September 1, 2002; and (2) Authorize the Director of Finance to execute an Amendment to the Standby Bond Purchase Agreement for the revised annual commitment fee of 20 basis points for the Series "C" COPs, for the period May 1, 1999 to September 1, 2002. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation. C. FAHR99-26: Authorize the General Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Commercial Resources Tax Group, Inc., to review sewer service fees and Assessor's data for a total fee not to exceed $1 million. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation. D. FAHR99-27: Approve Equity Adjustment Policy dated July 1, 1999. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation. E. FAHR99-28: Approve a compensation package for District staff to support Year 2000 contingency plan execution (during New Year's Eve weekend 2000) comprised of: (a) $250 for all onsite standby staff; (b) $250 for all on-call standby staff; (c) $250 for all normally scheduled support staff; (d) Time and a half overtime for all hours worked between 6:00 p.m. December 31, 1999 and 6:00 a.m. January 3, 2000; and (e) District supplied food and beverage for the required weekend duration, for an estimated cost of $1,400. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 5 April 14, 1999 (14) INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION a. Park Place Area Service Transfer Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager, gave a slide presentation regarding the various solutions and impacts for this issue. The Committee is scheduled to consider an action item at the May meeting. b. Preliminary Budget Status Report Mike White, Controller, gave a brief report on the status of the1999/2000 budget. (15) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY There was no other business discussed. (16) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none. (17) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were none. (18) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next FAHR Committee meeting is scheduled for May 12, 1999 at 5:00 p.m. (19) CLOSED SESSION The Chair reported to the Committee the need for a Closed Session, as authorized by Government Code Sections 54957.6, to discuss and consider the item that is specified as Item 19(A)(1) on the published Agenda. The Committee convened in closed session at 7:32 p.m. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 54957 .2, and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. No reportable action was taken re Agenda Item 19 (A)(1). At approximately 7:37 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 6 April 14, 1999 (20) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at approximately 7:37 p.m. Submitted by: 4 Penny M. le FAHR Committee Se ROLL CALL FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 14. 1999 Time: 5:00 p.m. Adjourn: ?.'3 7) c: COMMITTEE MEMBERS THOMAS R. SALTARELLI (Chair) •...••...........•..•••......••••••....••.•...•.. MARK LEYES (Vice Chair) .......................................................... .. SHAWN BOYD ........................................................... _ ................... . JOHN M. GULLIXSON ................................................................. .. SHIRLEY MC CRACKEN ............................................................. .. MARK A. MURPHY ...................................................................... .. JAMES W. SILVA .......................................................................... . JAN DEBAY (Board Chair) ........................................................... . PEER SWAN (Board Vice Chair) ................................................. .. JOHN J. COLLINS (Past Board Chair) ......................................... . OTHERS ~ ~M WOOD~ ~unsel ............................................. .. STAFF DON MCINTYRE, General Manager ................................................ ~ BLAKE ANDERSON, Assistant General Manager .......................... --1.L..- ED HODGES, Director of General Services Administration ........... -==- DAVID LUDWIN, Director of Engineering ....................................... ~ BOB OOTEN, Director of Operations & Maintenance..................... ,__....-, MIKE PETERMAN, Director of Human Resources .......................... ~ GARY STREED, Director of Finance............................................... ✓ MICHELLE TUCHMAN, Director of Communications ..................... ~ PATRICK MILES, Director of Information Technology ................... ~ ROBERT GHIRELLI, Director of Technical Services ...................... -==.. STEVE KOZAK, Financial Manager ................................................ v MIKE WHITE, Controller.................................................................. __lL_ GREG MATHEWS, Assistant to the General Manager .................... ~ LISA TOMKO, Human Resources Manager.................................... ✓ PENNY KYLE, Committee Secretary ............................................... ~ ~~ 'ffe-1¼'!'; firl--\J/1,fi,,,~ Debra Lecuna PrJ ~~ ' /J~ezd-i;.;}A~~ Orange County Sanitation District Ait 'l/;l(/tlf ~ " Proposed FY 1999-00 Capital Improvement Program Budget Project Id Project Title New Projects: P1-76 Rehabilitate 4 Trickling Filters P1-77 5 Trickling Filter Clarifiers P1-75 Headworks Pumping (44 mgd) at Plant No. 1 (Phase 1) 2-52 Euclid Relief Improvements -Reach "A" 7-41 Gisler-Redhill/North Trunk Improvements 2-54 Upper Newhope-Placentia Trunk Manhole Rehabilitation 2-21-1 Carbon Canyon Dam Interceptor Parallel Sewer 2-50 Atwood Subtrunk Improvements 7-36 Gisler-Redhill Trunk Improvements, Reach "A" 7-39 Orange Trunk Improvements Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 1 Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 3 Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 2 Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 5 Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 6 Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 7 Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 11 Miscellaneous Capital Improvements -Revenue Area 14 FP2-1 3 Grit Chambers at Plant No. 2 FP1-5 Three Grit Tanks FP1-6 Three Grit Tanks FP1-7 Ten Primary Clarifiers FP2-6 Disinfection facilites (25 MGD) FP1-1 2 New Barscreens at Plant No. 1 Headworks FP1-2 Headworks Pumping (44 mgd) at Plant No. 1 (Phase 2) FP1-3 Headworks Pumping (44 mgd) at Plant No. 1 (Phase 3) FP1-4 Headworks Pumping (44 mgd) at Plant 1 (Phase 4) FP1-12 5 Cake Storage Hoppers at Plant ~o. 1 FP1-13 1 Cake Storage Hopper at Plant No. 1 FP2-4 2 Cake Storage Hoppers (Rehabilitation) at Plant No. 2 FP2-5 2 Cake Storage Hoppers at Plant No. 2 FP1-8 Two New Digesters at Plant No. 1 FP1-9 Four New Digesters at Plant No. 1 FP1-10 Seven Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. 1 FP1-11 Two Belt Filter Presses at Plant No. FP1-14 Filtrate Clarifier at Plant No. 1 4/14/99 1:38 PM BHC Projects by Status Resp. Dept Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Eng Page 1 of 6 Project Phase Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Est. Accum. Cost@ 6/30/99 14,625 Fy 1999-00 Budget 19,040 19,040 1,700 350,697 263,559 211,065 365,831 55,180 1,364 5,455 5,455 5,455 1,364 5,455 5,455 545 Total Project Budget 9,500,000 11,500,000 5,309,720 12,213,000 5,704,117 1,746,000 5,008,847 1,890,057 4,025,710 3,942,458 500,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 500,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 200,000 4,650,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 60,000,000 4,380,000 312,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 39,000,000 7,800,000 8,000,000 16,400,000 14,600,000 29,200,000 17,500,000 5,000,000 1,320,000 CIP Summary -FAHR by Status EF Score 129 113 58 110 110 80 58 110 110 110 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 103 87 75 21 7 21 51 51 37 75 61 82 75 52 24 81 67 28 Orange County Sanitation District Proposed FY 1999-00 Capital Improvement Program Budget Projects by Status Est. Accum. Total Project Resp. Project Cost@ Fy 1999-00 Project EF Id Project Title Dept Phase 6/30/99 Budget Budget Score New Projects (continued): FP2-2 Two New Digesters at Plant No, 2 Eng Planning 15,400,000 21 FP2-3 One New Digester at Plant No. 2 Eng Planning 7,700,000 67 FP2-7 Filtrate Clarifier at Plant No. 2 Eng Planning 2,102,000 28 3-49 West Side Relief Interceptor/ Los Alamitos Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Planning 662,000 58 2-53 Euclid Relief Improvements -Reach "B" Eng Planning 5,210,000 82 3-42 Westside Relief Interceptor Parallel Eng Planning 4,650,000 82 11-25 Edinger/Balsa Chica Trunk Improvements Eng Planning 782,000 82 2-55 Lower Newhope-Placentia Trunk Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Planning 2,222,000 52 2-57 South Anaheim Interceptor Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Planning 1,270,000 66 7-42 Lower Gisler-Redhill Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Planning 754,000 66 7-43 Upper Gisler-Redhill Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Planning 166,000 66 11-26 Coast Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Eng Planning 1,984,000 37 2-58 Santa Ana River Relief Sewer, Reach B, Contract 2-58 Eng Planning 12,975,000 136 2-49 Taft Branch Improvements Eng Planning 2,309,000 103 2-51 Lower Santa Ana River Interceptor Improvements Eng Planning 19,617,000 82 7-37 Gisler-Redhill Trunk Improvements, Reach "B" Eng Planning 5,049,000 103 7-38 Tustin Trunk Improvements Eng Planning 2,598,000 103 2-56 Santa Ana River Interceptor Mnahole Rehabilitation Eng Planning 662,000 39 5-47 Balboa Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Eng Planning 3,968,000 72 7-44 Campus Drive Subtrunk Improvements Eng Planning 1,481,818 96 7-40 West Trunk Improvements Eng Planning 277,000 82 3-45 Trask Branch of the Hoover-Western Subtrunk Eng Planning 542,000 82 1-20 Greenville-Sullivan MH Rehabilitation Eng Planning 873,000 66 1-21 Raitt Street MH Rehabilitation Eng Planning 754,000 86 1-22 Lower Main-Broadway MH Rehabilitation Eng Planning 35,000 86 SSO Training Facility GSA Planning 20,400 63,800 26 Replacement of lnterplant Fiber Optics IT Planning 75,000 75,350 498,500 85 Windows 2000 Operating _System \,)pgrade Pilot IT Planning 154,940 154,940 18 Treatment Plant SCADA Communications Upgrade to Ethernet Study IT Planning 147,224 161,947 60 Pumpstation SCADA Communications Study IT Planning 215,113 236,624 147 P2-80 Primary Treatment Rehabilitation/Refurbishment Eng Planning 9,618,000 45 J-71 Odor Control Processes Rehabilitation/Refurbishment Eng Planning 90,000 5,337,000 47 J.59 Foster Outfall Pumping Station Rehabilitation & Refurbishment Eng Planning 148,000 28,200,000 96 Utilities Rehabilitation and Refurbishment Eng Planning 13,000 1,000,000 27 Dewatering Belt Press Rebuild O&M Planning 173,844 526,800 36 P1-78 Miscellaneous Odor Control Projects Eng Planning 23,500 1,182,209 1,452,916 20 411419_9 1 :38 PM BHC Page 2 of 6 CIP Summary • FAHR by Status ,, Orange County Sanitation District Proposed FY 1999-00 Capital Improvement Program Budget Projects by Status Est. Accum. Total Project Resp. Project Cost@ Fy 1999-00 Project EF Id Project Title Dept Phase 6/30/99 Budget Budget Score New Projects {continued}: P2-83 Miscellaneous Odor Control Projects Eng Planning 23,500 1,187,186 2,205,004 20 Div. 880 Special Projects for FY 1999-2000 O&M Planning 1,367,630 1,367,630 194 P1-73 Digestion & Dewatering Rehabilitation/Refurbishment Eng Planning 9,800,000 60 P1-74 Plant Utilities Rehabilitation/Refurbishment Eng Planning 500,000 27 P1-71 Headworks Rehabilitation/Refurbishment Eng Planning 3,000,000 45 J-69 Building and Administrative Area Rehabilitation/Refurbishment Eng Planning 1,455,000 40 P2 Digestion & Dewatering Rehabilitation/Refurbishment Eng Planning 7,800,000 36 Biosolids Class A Siting Assessment TS Planning 110,000 110,000 27 Watershed Consultant Services TS Planning 136,400 150,040 Biosolids Management Site Acquisition TS Planning 45,500 50,050 Portable Storage Building TS Planning 9,500 9,500 20 J-60-1 Collection Facilties Depot Eng Design 9,813 1,524,265 1,534,078 60 5-46 Replacement of Back Bay Trunk Sewer Eng Design 2,600 950,402 8,093,760 126 Emulsion Polymer Make-down unit upgrade Eng Design 100,000 Effluent Sampler Improvements Eng Design 100,000 LCI Surge Suppressor Replacement O&M Design 33,400 33,400 45 Rehabilitation of Main Sewage Pump Motors O&M Design 208,960 208,960 45 Cen-Gen Air Compressor Controller Upgrade O&M Design 22,800 25,080 45 Ocean Monitoring DataBase -Phase 1 TS Desig0ii 70,070 P1-69 Grit Chamber Modifications Eng Constr./lmplem. 34,000 107,800 141,800 47 G-1, G-2 Conveyor Belt Rehabilitation O&M Constr./lmplem. 38,000 41,800 45 Headworks #2 Main Sewage Pump Improvements and Overhaul O&M Constr./lmplem. 168,000 200,200 45 Rehabilitate D&E Clarifier Sweep Arms O&M Constr./lmplem. 62,000 68,200 18 Demolition of Biofiltration Pilot Test Facility O&M Constr./lmplem. 25,102 25,102 5 Shelving/Archiving F&A Constr./lm plem 30,000 30,000 30 Office Equipment TS Constr./lmplem. 7,500 7,500 35 Ocean Monitoring DataBase -Phase II TS Constr./lmplem. 45,500 50,050 Total New Projects 183,038 9,616,682 481,672,478 Revised Projects: J-40-3 Strategic Plan, Phase 3, Treatment, Reuse, and Disposal Facilities Eng Planning 1,971,087 222,640 2,193,727 35 J-40-4 CEQA, Public Participation for Phase 3 of Strategic Plan Eng Planning 710,619 409,530 1,120,149 59 FE-J Facilities Engineering Projects Eng Planning 1,000,000 20,000,000 97 FE-P2 Facilities Engineering Projects, Plant 2 Eng Planning 1,000,000 20,000,000 91 FE-P1 Facilities Engineering Projects, Plant 1 Eng Planning 1,000,000 20,000,000 97 P1-62 Sunnower Drive Replacement Eng Planning 17,600 389,751 407,351 86 J-72 Water Conservation GSA Planning 200,000 384,000 5,000,000 12 4/14/99 1:38 PM BHC Page 3 of 6 CIP Summary· FAHR by Status , Orange County Sanitation District Proposed FY 1999-00 Capital Improvement Program Budget Projects by Status Est. Accum. Total Project Resp. Project Cost@ Fy 1999-00 Project EF Id Project Title Dept Phase 6/30/99 Budget Budget Score Revised Projects {continued}: J-73 Cooperative Projects, lnnow/lnfiltration Reduction GSA Planning 3,487,400 150,010,000 12 P2-74 Secondary Plant Rehabilitation at Plant 2 Eng Planning 7,460,986 65 J-33-3 Power Monitoring and Control Systems Eng Planning 817,589 4,047,316 72 11-22 Warner Avenue Relief Sewer Eng Planning 446,012 4,027,684 103 1-2-4 Bushard Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Eng Planning 22,800 20,400 32,712,001 51 7-21 Sunnower Interceptor Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Planning 25,075 188,625 5,412,747 80 2-41 Santa Ana River Interceptor Realignment and Protection, Contract 2-41 Eng Planning 908,194 416,792 31,438,366 76 2-31 Santa Ana River Interceptor Relief Sewer, Reach A, Contract 2-31 Eng Planning 64,000 210,600 11,853,570 150 7-14-3 Racquel Hill Pump Station Abandonment Eng Planning 204,644 204,644 44 5-43 Improvements To Big Canyon Trunk Sewer Eng Planning 2,182,000 171 7-14-4 Covey Lane Pump Station Abandonment Eng Planning 400,000 66 2-46 Newhope-Placentia Trunk Replacement Eng Planning 12,745,000 96 2-47 Cypress Avenue Trunk Replacement Eng Planning 3,380,000 96 6-13 Abandonment of Air Base Trunk Sewers and Watson and California Sewer Eng Planning 93,537 2,354,385 73 J-65 Tunnel Lighting and Monitoring Rehabilitation Eng Design 312,380 459,472 40 J-62 Modifications to Existing Mechanical Systems Eng Design 182,134 382,375 2,694,155 126 P2-79 Gas Compressor Redundancy Eng Design 60,537 439,223 499,760 59 J-31-4 Secondary Treatment Monitoring & Control Systems Upgrade Eng Design 430,100 33,994 4,316,000 113 J-61 Information Technology Trailers Eng Design 27,155 369,947 397,102 33 J-39 Investigation and Repair of Ocean Outfalls Eng Design 1,039,154 235,446 1,274,600 110 P1-37 Primary Clarifiers 16-31 and Related Facilities Eng Design 892,750 2,440,000 75,450,094 180 J-25-1 Computerized Facility, Records and Drawing System Eng Design 863,794 1,860,410 4,956,345 71 J-44 Revision of General Provisions and Standard Specificiations Eng Design 177,500 262,240 439,740 16 P2-60 Solids Storage and Truck Loading Facility at Plant No. 2 Eng Design 725,000 4,481,540 18,324,920 105 J-33-1 Standby Power and Reliability Modifications Eng Design 1,540,568 4,049,695 17,370,096 144 J-25-4 Electrical Power System Studies Eng Design 962,100 717,426 3,215,534 161 J-35 Area Classification Studies for Plants No. 1 and 2 Eng Design 679,700 465,300 1,145,000 140 2-24-1 Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer and P.ump Station Abandonment Eng Design 65,026 1,253,265 2,684,917 114 2-37 Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract 2-37 Eng Design 871,377 624,611 26,345,217 214 7-27 Tustin Airbase Facilities (Armstrong Subtrunk Sewer) Eng Design 231,664 375 9,654,400 110 J-55 Tunnel Structural Integrity and Cover Repair Eng Constr./lmplem. 47,500 378,840 426,340 72 P1-44-4 Seismic Retrofit of Four Structures Eng Constr./lm plem. 394,330 934,670 1,329,000 115 J-63 Improvements to Central Generation Starting Air System Eng Constr,/lmplem. 18,000 122,694 140,694 70 J-52 Grit Auger Replacement Eng Constr./lmplem. 136,450 1,073,585 1,210,035 102 J-60 Chlorine Building Mechanical Equipment Demolition Eng Constr./lmplem. 35,579 175,081 210,660 67 P1-46-2 Chemical Facility Modifications at Plant No. 1, P1-46-2 Eng Constr./lmplem. 622,851 2,531,610 4,235,323 38 .4114/99 1 :38 PM BHC Page 4 of 6 CIP Summary· FAHR by Status , Orange County Sanitation District Proposed FY 1999-00 Capital Improvement Program Budget Projects by Status Est. Accum. Total Project Resp. Project Cost@ Fy 1999-00 Project EF Id Project Title Dept Phase 6/30/99 Budget Budget Score Revised Projects (continued): P2-65 Warehouse at Plant No. 2 Eng Constr./lmplem. 737,010 657,550 1,597,960 28 P2-39 Rehabilitation of Digesters at Plant No. 2 Eng Constr./lmplem. 1,246,990 6,432,164 22,056,473 36 P1-40-1 Electrical Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades Eng Constr./lmplem. 365,802 57,070 442,672 20 P2-47-1 Modifications to Electrical and Control Systems at Plant 2 Eng Constr./lmplem. 969,271 1,546,806 2,687,947 58 2-34R Euclid Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Constr,/lmplem. 708,720 1,255,988 1,964,708 106 11-23 Huntington Beach Sewer and Abandonment Eng Constr./lmplem. 92,500 446,160 536,660 63 3-35R Rehabilitation of the Magnolia Trunk Sewer Eng Constr./lmplem. 1,223,055 3,427,442 10,352,000 94 5-41-1 Relocation of Lido Pump Station Eng Constr./lmplem. 3,062,534 332,617 3,395,151 59 6-12 Fairview Relief Sewer Eng Constr.llmplem. 2,735,902 858,949 3,594,851 30 3-36-1 Miller-Holder Trunk Sewer System, Reach 1 Eng Constr./lmplem. 475,822 4,761,617 11,536,560 134 Financial Information System IT Constr./lmplem. 2,250,000 509,760 2,958,000 35 Voice-Data Building Rewiring IT Constr./lmplem. 471,080 142,120 680,080 18 Security System Improvements IT Constr,/lmplem. 692,800 405,800 1,332,800 20 Smal/ Capital Equipment Replacement Project O&M Constr./lmplem. 80,000 160,001 240,001 45 Total Revised Projects 29,147,667 54,556,757 577,109,413 Continuing Projects: J-36 Groundwater Replenishment System Eng Planning 1,275,000 2,767,417 121,924,701 95 J-67 Peak Flow Management Eng Planning 57,662 3,640,000 103 J-25-5 Electrical Power System Single-line Diagrams Eng Planning 26,000 12,870 3,367,500 72 7-32 Gisler-Red Hill Trunk Relocation, Contract 7-32 Eng Planning 4,649 129,894 5,906,519 103 1-17 Santa Ana Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Eng Planning 22,800 17,000 7,494,010 45 2-42 Abandonment of Yorba Linda Pump Station, Contract No. 2-42 Eng Planning 280,000 66 Warehouse Barcoding Evaluation F&A Planning 101,250 111,980 46 Trunk Sewer Mapping Project GSA Planning 147,500 268,100 415,600 8 SP-01 Document Management IT Planning 181,555 264,861 800,000 32 SP-03 Strategic Information Architecture (SIA) IT Planning 232,083 376,704 724,000 42 SP-15 Geographic Information System IT Planning 400,573 187,571 874,000 44 P2-66 Headworks Improvements at Plant_ No. 2 Eng Design 39 ,519 513,802 14,708,000 95 J-66 Outfall Flow Meter Replacement Eng Design 71 ,550 852,450 924,000 156 J-42 Plant Reinvention/ Automation Project Eng Design 1,613,628 5,485,605 25,760,400 104 7-23-1 College Ave. Pump Station Parallel Force Main Eng Design 93,200 1,751,200 110 Intranet Application Development IT Design 40,495 56,111 235,600 24 SP-36 Automation Report Publishing IT Design 53,996 47,951 195,000 52 SP-02 Data Integration IT Design 1,186,527 1,251,169 4,334,000 132 P2-76 Digester Gas Flare Control System Upgrade O&M Design 154,000 27 J-49 Confined Space Personnel Retrieval System Eng Constr./lmplem. 70,100 292,636 423,020 70 4/14/99 1 :38 PM BHC Page 5 of 6 CIP Summary -FAHR by Status ;-Orange County Sanitation District Proposed FY 1999-00 Capital Improvement Program Budget Projects by Status Est. Accum. Total Project Resp. Project Cost@ Fy 1999-00 Project EF Id Project Title Dept Phase 6/30/99 Budget Budget Score Continuing Projects (continued): P1-36-2 Secondary Treatment Improvements at Plant No. 1 Eng Constr./lmplem. 40,112,820 687,180 40,800,000 54 J-57 Fire Alarm and Security System Upgrades Eng Constr./lmplem. 577,726 49,274 627,000 67 P2-61 High Pressure Compressed Air System at Plant No. 2 Eng Constr./lmplem. 71,400 488,600 560,000 45 J-47 Cable Tray Improvements at Plants 1 & 2 Eng Constr./lmplem. 253,989 999,681 12,750,000 54 11-17-3 Goldenwest Trunk Sewer Replacement Eng Constr./lmplem. 268,061 2,579,307 3,920,400 110 11-20 Heil Avenue Interceptor Eng Constr./lmplem 255,100 2,565,782 4,072,900 110 3-9-1 Mods. to Magnolia Relief Sewer in Western Ave. at the Fullerton Creek Channel Eng Constr./lmplem. 136,343 75,957 212,300 23 7-28 RA-6 "B" Street and Mitchell Ave. Sewer Replacement Eng Constr./lmplem. 59,636 357,728 417,364 80 3-11R Seal Beach Blvd. Interceptor Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation Eng Constr./lmplem. 240.552 219,472 460,024 94 SP-30 High Rate Digester Mix Pumps Mechanical Seals GSA Constr./lmplem. 92,000 425,000 517,000 36 5403200 Field Fiber Optic Upgrades IT Constr./lmplem. 147,900 512,100 660,000 99 5403100 Standardizing Plant 1 and 2 Field Fiber Optic Terminal Junction Facilities IT Constr./lmplem. 56,130 324,700 99 Internet E-mail Browsing (Website) IT Constr./lmplem. 122,164 147,134 382,240 40 Network Backbone Upgrade Continuation IT Constr./lmplem. 294,948 625,245 1,439,040 42 Network Test Facility IT Constr./lmplem. 93,189 31,811 125,000 18 SP-04 CMMS Programming IT Constr./lmplem. 218,863 188,657 490,000 120 SP-13 Source Control Programming IT Constr./lmplem. 312,434 191,166 576,000 107 Primary Effluent Pumping Automation IT Constr./lmplem. 158,773 171,829 95 SP-21 DAFT Hardware and Software Upgrade and SCADA Integration IT Constr./lmplem. 70,440 99,600 180,000 86 5401000 Year 2000 Date Compliance Project IT Constr./lmplem. 2,100,000 1,365,375 3,465,375 251 Belt Press Automation O&M Constr./lmplem. 2,000 175,000 24 J-64 Modifications to Central Generation Wasteheat Boilers Eng Constr./lmplem. 5,000 195,000 200,000 18 SP-37 Dewatering Belt Press Rebuild O&M Constr./lmplem. 107,200 252,320 825,000 77 DAF Surface Skimmer Support Rail Replacement O&M. Constr./lmplem. 65,000 65,000 36 SP-32 Headworks Main Sewer Pump Improvements and Overhaul O&M Constr./lmplem. 83,500 216,500 300,000 45 SP-36 Sludge Grinder Replacement O&M Constr./lmplem. 168,500 55,500 224,000 41 CGS Engines Air Emission Monitoring System O&M Constr./lmplem. 132,600 431,640 564,240 142 Scrubber Chemical Feed System _Modifications Eng Constr./lmplem. 366,000 446,160 812,160 108 Total Continuing Projects 51,807,670 26,117,034 269,340,102 Total Proposed FY 1999-00 CIP 81,138,375 90,290,472 1,328,121,993 4114/99 1:38 PM BHC Page 6 of 6 CIP Summary· FAHR by Status Streed, Gary From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Importance: Gary, Anderson, Blake Wednesday, April 14, 1999 4:05 PM Streed, Gary Crane, Lenora item 13 (a) High A~ ord-~ ~ 2t/- rf r1ff 11ct,lZ4~ Here's that substitute language for the agenda item tonight. I suggest the complete substitute language be provided to FAHR when the time is right. 1. Require SAWPA to pay the O&M charges for 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 in accordance with the 1996 Agreement. 2. Authorize staff to negotiate an agreement with SAWPA to structure a payment plan for the charges it owes the Sanitation District which may include: a) crediting against the amount owed, amounts already paid by SAWPA to the District for a currently unneeded 1/10th of 1 MGD of additional treatment and disposal capacity, thus reducing SAWPA's capacity to 9 MGD; b) collecting the amount owed over time, and; c) relating the p_ayment of the amount owed to parallel discussions on SAWPA prepaying for 3 MGD of anticipated capacity needs to accommodate future brine discharges from new groundwater treatment projects 1 STATE OF CPiLIFORNIA) , ) SS. COLIN~ OF ORANGE ) Purs~ant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, I hereby certify that the Notice and the Agenda for the Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee meeting to be held on ~L/ . 199.f., was duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the District's offices on Md e 199f_. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand this day of 0/w-f ,1991._. H:\WP .DT A \ADMIN\85\FORMS\AGENDA CERTIFICATION-FAHR COMMITTEE.DOC DISTRIBUTION FAHR COMMITTEE MEETING PACKAGE Full Agenda Package 45 Committee 13 & Mailing List Donald F. McIntyre 1 Blake P. Anderson 1 (3-hole punched) Dan Dillon 1 Marc Dubois 1 Jeff Esber 1 Ed Hodges 1 Steve Kozak 1 Penny Kyle 2 David Ludwin 1 Greg Mathews 1 Partick Miles 1 Bob Ooten 1 Mike Peterman 1 Gary Streed 1 Michelle Tuchman 1 (3-hole punched) Robert Ghirelli 1 Terri Josway 1 Dan Tunnicliff (H.R.) 1 Mike White 1 (3-hole punched) Cagle, Brad 1 Lisa Tomko 1 Bob Geggie 1 Jim Herberg 1 Patricia Jonk 1 Lenora Crane 1 File 1 Extras 5 (for meeting hand-out, if necessary) Notices and Agenda Onll£ 12 Posting 1 J~nTup~n 1 Anna Ubaldini 1 Frankie Woodside 1 Patricia Magnante 1 Janet Gray 1 Security 1 Extras 5 (for meeting hand-out, if necessary) Ron Zenk, Dist. 14 Treasurer's Report Only C H:\WP.DTA\ADMIN\BS\AGENDA\FAHR\DISTRIBUTIONLISTFAHR.DOC phone: (714) 962-2411 mailing address: P.O. Box B127 Fountain Valley, CA 9272B-8127 street address: 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 Member Agencies • Cities Anaheim Brea Buena Park Cypress Fountain Valley Fullerton Garden Grove Huntington Beach Irvine La Habra La Pe/ma Los Alamitos Newport Beach Orange Placentia Santa Ana Seal Beach Stanton Tustin Villa Park Yorba Linda County of Orange Sanitary Districts Costa Mesa Midway City Water Districts Irvine Ranch •RANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NOTICE OF MEETING FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT WEDNESDAY, APRIL 14, 1999 -5:00 P.M. DISTRICT'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 A regular meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District, will be held at the above location, date and time. "To Protect the Public Health and the Environment through Excellence in Wastewater Systems" "'"'•'-"''"' ~ .. , .~ . ~-., j!-'---:ct'l i";, ~¢:.~~~-· .__ t-~~~~-) ~ --~.!i ~1 ~...... .,~· ''l••1:1••-:{.._-i:'· FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING DATES FAHR Committee Meeting Dates April 14, 1999 May 12, 1999 June 9, 1999 July 14, 1999 None Scheduled September 8, 1999 October 13, 1999 November 10, 1999 December 8, 1999 None Scheduled February 9, 2000 March 8, 2000 Board Meeting Dates April 28, 1999 May 26, 1999 June 23, 1999 July 21, 1999 August 25, 1999 September 22, 1999 October 27, 1999 November 17, 1999 December 15, 1999 January 26, 2000 February 23, 2000 March 22, 2000 ROLL CALL FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 14. 1999 Time: 5:00 p.m. Adjourn: ____ _ COMMITTEE MEMBERS THOMAS R. SALTARELLI (Chair) ................................................ . MARK LEYES (Vice Chair) ........................................................... . SHAWN BOYD .............................................................................. . JOHN M. GULLIXSON .................................................................. . SHIRLEY MC CRACKEN .............................................................. . MARK A. MURPHY ••••••..••••..••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••....••••••••••••• JAMES W. SILVA .......................................................................... . JAN DEBAY (Board Chair) ........................................................... . PEER SWAN (Board Vice Chair) .................................................. . JOHN J. COLLINS (Past Board Chair) ........................................ .. OTHERS TOM WOODRUFF, General Counsel .............................................. . STAFF DON MCINTYRE, General Manager ............................................... . BLAKE ANDERSON, Assistant General Manager ......................... . ED HODGES, Director of General Services Administration ••••••••••• DAVID LUDWIN, Director of Engineering ..................................... .. BOB OOTEN, Director of Operations & Maintenance •••••••••••••••••.•.. MIKE PETERMAN, Director of Human Resources ........................ .. GARY STREED, Director of Finance .............................................. . MICHELLE TUCHMAN, Director of Communications .................... . PATRICK MILES, Director of Information Technology •.•••...••.•••••••• ROBERT GHIRELLI, Director of Technical Services ..................... . STEVE KOZAK, Financial Manager ............................................... . MIKE WHITE, Controller ................................................................. . GREG MATHEWS, Assistant to the General Manager ................... . LISA TOMKO, Human Resources Manager ................................... . PENNY KYLE, Committee Secretary .............................................. . c: Debra Lecuna AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE ..,.n,~,,~,,~ f~ ?-, t: ~ ... ::,,.-. ~ii·:::. !:: ~.. -.. "'-"!'~------:. r · , ____ . . Wt ·wf=: -~~ ~/-~ .... ~ .. ,-...; ~~ ,-a. ~~"f-' "'~·-•.1•,; FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT WEDNESDAY, APRIL 14, 1999, AT 5:00 P.M. ADMJNISTRA TIVE OFFICE 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the District's Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the Office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Committee for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted in the manner as above, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. (1) ROLL CALL (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM, IF NECESSARY (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS All persons wishing to address the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee on specific agenda items or matters of general interest should do so at this time. As determined by the Chair, speakers may be deferred until the specific item is taken for discussion and remarks may be limited to five minutes. Matters of interest addressed by a member of the public and not listed on this agenda cannot have action taken by the Committee except as authorized by Section 54954.2(b). April 14, 1999 (4) APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Approve draft minutes of the March 10, 1999, Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee meeting. (5) REPORT OF COMMITT~E CHAIR (6) REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER (7) REPORT OF ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (8) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE (9) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES (10) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS (11) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL (12) CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS (a-f) Consideration of motion to approve all agenda items appearing on the Consent Calendar not specifically removed from same, as follows: All matters placed on the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or furttier explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered in the regular order of business. Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar shall, upon recognition by the chair, state their name, address and designate by number the item to be removed from the consent calendar. The Chair will determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. a. FAHR99-18: Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of March 1999: The Treasurer's Report will be handed out at the FAHR Committee meeting in accordance with the Board-approved Investment Policy, and in conformance to the Government Code requirement to have monthly reports reviewed within 30 days of month end. 2 b. FAHR99-19: c. FAHR99-20: d. FAHR99-21: e. FAHR99-22: f. FAHR99-23: April 14, 1999 Receive and file Certificates of Participation (COP) Monthly Report. Receive and file Employment Status Report as of March 25, 1999. Approve changes and additions to Human Resources Policies and Procedures as authorized by Resolution No. 98-33. Receive and file report of General Manager-approved purchases in amounts exceeding $50,000 in accordance with Board purchasing policy. Renew the District's Excess Worker's Compensation Insurance Program for the three-year period May 1, 1999 to May 1, 2022, with a rate guarantee of $0.612 per $100 of annual payroll for each fiscal year. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any. (13) ACTION ITEMS (a-e) a. FAHR99-24: b. FAHR99-25: c. FAHR99-26: (1) Require SAWPA to pay the O&M charges for 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 in accordance with the 1996 Agreement; and, (2) Authorize staff to negotiate an agr:eement with SAWPA to include a) the amounts already paid by SAWPA to the District for a currently unneeded 1110th of 1 mgd of additional capacity be accepted as payment in full for the 1996-97 and 1997-98 charges; b) that SAWPA's treatment and disposal capacity be reduced to 9 mgd; and, c) that the 1998-99 charges be collected over a reasonable period of time. (Gary Streed -15 minutes) (1) Approve FGIC proposal for 20 basis points annual commitment fee for the Standby Bond Purchase Agreement for the Series "C" COPs, effective May 1, 1999 through September 1, 2002; and (2) Authorize the Director of Finance to execute an Amendment to the Standby Bond Purchase Agreement for the revised annual commitment fee of 20 basis points for the Series "C" COPs, for the period May 1, 1999 to September 1, 2002. (Steve Kozak -10 minutes) Authorize the General Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Commercial Resources Tax Group, Inc., to review sewer service fees and Assessor's data for a total fee not to exceed $1 million. (Gary Streed -10 minutes) 3 d. FAHR99-27: e. FAHR99-28: Approve Equity Adjustment Policy dated July 1, 1999. (Mike Peterman -10 minutes) Approve Y2K Contingency Planning Strategy -Staffing (Note: Report will follow under separate cover) (Patrick Miles -10 minutes) (14) INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATIONS (a-b) a. Park Place Area Service Transfer (Gary Streed -10 minutes) b. Preliminary Budget Status Report (Mike White -10 minutes) April 14, 1999 (15) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY (16) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING (17) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT (18) FUTURE MEETING DATES The next Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting is scheduled for May 12, 1999, at 5:00 p.m. (19) CLOSED SESSION During the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Committee, the Chair may convene the Committee in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate negotiations, pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.8, 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6, as noted. Reports relating to (a) purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or potential litigation; (c) employee actions or negotiations with employee representatives; or which are exempt from public disclosure under the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Committee during a permitted closed session and are hot available for public inspection. At such time as final actions are taken by the Committee on any of these subjects, the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. A. Convene in closed session. 4 April 14, 1999 1. Confer with District's Negotiator re pending MOU Labor Negotiations with S&PMT Group, Government Code Section 54957.6. 2. Reconvene in regular session. 3. Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session. (20) ADJOURNMENT Notice To Committee Members: For any questions on the agenda or to place any items on the agenda, Committee members should contact the Committee Chair or Secretary ten days in advance of the Committee meeting. Committee Chair: Committee Secretary: Thomas Saltarelli Penny Kyle 5 (949) 833-9200 (714) 593-7130 April 14, 1999 Information 1998-99 Third-Quarter Financial & Operational Report Action Quarterly Investment Management Report Information Consider Preliminary 1999-2000 User Fees Information Consider 1999-2000 Connection Fees Action Adjustment to Standby Pay Action Data Warehousing Demonstration Information Consolidated Purchasing & Delegation of Authority Policy Action Consider 1999-2000 Budgets Action Consider Final 1999-2000 User Fees Action General Manager's Quarterly Purchasing Report Information Renewal of All-Risk Property Insurance Action Annual Review of Investment Policy Action CSDOC e P.O. Box 8127 e Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 e (714) 962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF FINANCE. ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING Orange County Sanitation District Wednesday, March 10, 1999, 5:00 p.m. A meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on March 10, 1999 at 5:00 p.m., in the District's Administrative Office. (1) The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: FAHR COMMITTEE MEMBERS: OTHERS PRESENT: Directors Present: Thomas Saltarelli, Chair Mark Leyes, Vice Chair Shawn Boyd John M. Gullixson Mark A. Murphy Peer Swan, Board Vice Chair John J. Collins, Past Board Chair Jan Debay, Board Chair Directors Absent: Shirley McCracken (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. Terry Andrus, General Counsel Stephen Sheldon, Sheldon & Associates Adam Probolsky, Adam D. Probolsky & Associates Toby Weissert, Carollo Engineers STAFF PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Mike Peterman, Director of Human Resources Gary Streed, Director of Finance Michelle Tuchman, Director of Communications Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Greg Mathews, Assistant to the General Manager Mike White, Controller Jon Thomsic, Senior Engineer Lenora Crane, Committee Secretary OCSD • P.O. Box 8127 • Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 • (714) 962-2411 Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 2 March 10, 1999 (4) RECEIVE, FILE AND APPROVE DRAFT MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the minutes of the February 10, 1999, Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee as drafted. (5) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR • Chair Saltarelli reminded the Committee that a FAHR Committee Workshop is scheduled for April 10, 1999, at 9:00 p.m., and that all Directors are being invited. • The next regular FAHR meeting is scheduled for April 14, 1999, at 5:00 p.m. • There will be a closed session tonight regarding the status of labor negotiations with the Supervisory and Professional Employees. (6) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER General Manager Don McIntyre reported that Supervisor Jim Silva will be on the Board and will be a member of the FAHR Committee beginning in April. (7) REPORT O'f ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER Assistant General Manager Blake Anderson updated the Committee on his trip to Washington, D.C. last week. He advised that he, and representatives of the Municipal Water District of Orange County and the Orange County Water District, met with politicians from Orange County regarding the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) project, and their continued interest in receiving funding of $20 million from the Bureau of Reclamation to help support the cost. They also met with some Watershed members from Riverside and San Bernardino County to discuss watershed issues such as flood control and manure management. (8) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Mr. Streed advised that several reports were placed before the Directors just prior to the meeting. • The Treasurer's Report for February was placed before the Committee prior to the meeting in accordance with the Investment Policy and Government Code requirements. • A copy of a letter sent to Director Mccraken, in response to some questions that the City of Anaheim staff had regarding connection fees, was also distributed to the Committee. Most of the City's questions could probably have been answered if they had access to the Carollo report which was sent along with the letter. Mr. Streed noted that the questions from the City were well drafted. • A one-page rating summary for item 13(b) was also placed before the Committee. • Another hand-out will also be distributed which responds to questions raised at the Committee's February meeting regarding Capital Project cost allocations. • Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 3 March 10, 1999 • Mr. Streed announced that Board Secretary Penny Kyle will be taking over the FAHR Committee Secretary responsibilities, due to a change in procedures. Penny will be preparing the Agenda and taking the minutes possibly as ear1y as next month. • General Manager Don McIntyre further advised the Committee that Penny will be taking over the responsibilities of all three Committees. (9) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES The Director of Human Resources Mike Peterman had no report. (10) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS • Director of Communications Michelle Tuchman reported that staff developed a new Earthquake Preparedness brochure on personal wastewater management, and worked with the Orange County Health Care Agency in compiling the material to make sure it met their specifications and concerns. The Health Care Agency will also be distributing the brochure. Copies are being sent to the cities, and will also be included in the packets we hand out at the Orange County Fair. • The information contained in another brochure distributed to the Directors in their Board packets last month was received from an outside agency. Staff edited the material and designed the brochure. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Pollution Prevention, was so pleased with the brochure that they have asked if they can use it. (11) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel Terry Andrus had no report. (12) CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS (Items A-C) A. FAHR99-12: Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of February 1999: The Treasurer's Report was handed out at the FAHR Committee meeting in accordance with the Board-approved Investment Policy, and in conformance to the Government Code requirement to have monthly reports reviewed within 30 days of month end. B. FAHR99-13: Receive and file Certificates of Participation (COP) Monthly Report. C. FAHR99-14: Receive and file Employment Status Report as of February 25, 1999. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any. There were none. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 4 March 10, 1999 Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the recommended actions for items specified as 12(A) through 12(C) under Consent Calendar. (13) ACTION ITEMS (Items A-C) A. FAHR99-15: 1) Approve Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Makesense, Inc., for utility and telecommunications auditing services; and 2) Approve such services on a contingency fee basis that are calculated as: a) 50% fee for all recovered overcharges and, b) the equivalent of twelve (12) months savings for all implemented cost reduction strategies. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation. The Committee further directed staff to attempt to negotiate the fee downward. 8. FAHR99-16: Approve Professional Services Agreement (PSA) for a consultant to review sewer service fees and Assessor's data, and authorize the General Manager to enter into a contingency fee agreement for services for a period of 12 months. Mr. Streed reviewed the results of the interview panels for the Committee. A lengthy discussion took place regarding whether or not the successful bidder should perform a one or four-year collection effort, whether to use the new rate structure or the old one if a four-year effort is selected, and the fees that the two bidders will charge for a one- year effort. The Committee was unable to agree on awarding the project to either bidder because one of the bidding firms had not included a firm price in their proposal for a one-year effort. Several motions were made, amended and withdrawn. The final approved motion follows: Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried, with one No vote, to direct staff to contact both bidders requesting that they submit a best and final proposal, with qualifications, on a one-year basis. This item is to be brought back to the Committee next month with a staff recommendation. C. FAHR99-17: Receive and file the preliminary FY 1999-00 Capital Improvement Program Budget. Director Swan requested that staff identify any projects that are brand new so that a distinction can be made, since there are some in design and under construction. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to approve statrs recommendation. (14) INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION A. Plant Reinvention and Automation Project Status Report. Engineering Director David Ludwin introduced Jon Thomsic, Senior Engineer, who gave a presentation on the status of Job No. J-42, Plant Reinvention and Automation Project. Minutes of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting Page 5 March 10, 1999 (15) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY There was no other business discussed. (16) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none. (17) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were none. (18) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next FAHR Committee meeting is scheduled for April 14, 1999 at 5:00 p.m. (19) CLOSED SESSION The Chair reported to the Committee the need for a Closed Session, as authorized by Government Code Sections 54957.6, to discuss and consider the item that is specified as Item 19(A)(1) on the published Agenda. The Committee convened in closed session at 6:50 p.m. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.2, and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. No reportable action was taken re Agenda Item 19 (A)(1). At approximately 8:05 p.m., the Committee reconvened in regular session. (20) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at approximately 8:10 p.m. Submitted by: ~~ FAHR Committee Secretary H:\wp.dlaVin\210\ctane\FAHR\Fehr99\Mar\03-99MIN.doc 1" i - J FAHR CO,MMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. 04/14/99 N/R AGE NDA REPORT Item Number Item Number 12 (b) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Steve Kozak, Financial Manager SUBJECT: CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (COP) MONTHLY REPORT- MARCH 1999 (FAHR99-19) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Receive and file Certificates of Participation (COP) Monthly Report for the month of March 1999. SUMMARY Since June 1995, the daily rate COP program remarketing agents have been PaineWebber for the Series "A" and the 1993 Refunding COPs, and J.P. Morgan for the Series "C" COPs. Most fixed rate Series "8" COPs have been refunded and the 1992 Refunding COPs have always been remarketed by PaineWebber in a weekly mode. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY None. BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. l:gJ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION For the month of March 1999, graphical and tabular reports are attached. The first graph entitled, "OCSD COP Rate History Report," shows the variable interest rates on each of the daily rate COPs since the last report, and the effective fixed rate for the two refunding issues which are covered by an interest rate exchange agreement commonly called a "swap." \lradon\data1\wp.dta\fin\210\crane\FAHRIFahr991AprlFAHR99-19.doc Revised: 1/5/98 Page 1 The second bar chart entitled, "Comparative Daily COP Rate History Report," shows the performance of the District's Daily Rate COPs as compared to a composite index rate, which represents the average rate of six similar variable rate daily reset borrowings. The third bar chart entitled, "COP Rate History, Comparison of Highest & Lowest Rates," compares the performance (monthly average interest rate) of the District's Daily Rate COPs with the highest and lowest monthly average rates from among six similar variable rate daily reset COPs. The table entitled, "Daily COP Rate Comparisons," shows the monthly variable interest rate performance of the District's Daily Rate COPs as compared to the composite index. Estimated annual interest payments calculated for a standard $100 million par amount, are also shown. Variable rales historically rise at the end of each calendar quarter, and especially at year-end, because of business taxes and statements. The rates decline to prior levels immediately in the following month. Staff maintains continuous rate monitoring and ongoing dialog with the remarketing agents to keep the Committee fully informed about developments in the program as they occur and at each meeting. ALTERNATIVES None. CEQA FINDINGS None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Graph -Comparative Daily COP Rate History Report 2. Graph -OCSD COP Daily R~te History Report 3. Graph -COP Rate History, Comparison of Highest & Lowest 4. Tabular-Daily COP Rate Comparison GGS:SK:lc \\radonldata1 'wp.dtalfin\21 OlcranelFAHR\Fahr99\ApJ\FAHR99-19.doc Revised: 1/5/98 Page2 Prepared by Finance, 4/5/99, 3:15 PM COMPARATIVE DAILY COP RATE HISTORY REPORT MARCH, 1999 6.00...--____'.==================!...._- 5.00 -1-------------------------------------------1 4.00 -~ 0 -~ 3.00 ~ 2.00 1.00 0.00 DATE co co co co co co co co co O> O> 0) O> 0) 0) O> 0) O> 0) 0) O> O> O> 0) ..: ~ C: '3 ci C: 0~ > <i C: ~~ ..: C. (II ::I ~ Q) 0 Q) (II Q) (II <( :E -, -, en 0 z 0 -, LL :E IIOCSD •COMPOSITE INDEX G :\excel .dta\fin\2220\geggi\Finance\dallycopintrate .xis -t ~ G) "'tJ f C ii! "C ,. DI CD --1 RATE(%) ii! ~ c.. m ICT DI '< :ii 0 -~ w .. OI a, 'Tl J :, ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DI J I\) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _CD ttS 08-Apr-98 ~ ~ (C (0 ~ 22-Apr-98 _co s· ~ DI ~ J ~ 0 ;; 06-May-98 )> )> 3: -I m 20-May-98 :::c en -I ~ 03-Jun-98 I -.c:::,,..__1 .,.. ,. I I 0 17-Jun-98 + l>4ICl * • I I 0 en 01-Jul-98 + ~I * • I I C 15-Jul-98 t I .... * • I I 0 29-Jul-98 + I I 1-c:6 * I • I I 0 -a ++ 12-Aug-98 -C > 26-Aug-98 -)>"ti s: r-(5!?. >-< :::::, 09-Sep-98 (/)CD ~~ ~~ B>(D 23-Sep-98 C' C' (D :::c -I -, 07-Oct-98 .. m ~ 21-Oct-98 t I I ~I I * I • IICD::C CD - ++ 04-Nov-98 en CD -I Cl>'-18-Nov-98 0 oi:J 0, ~ Os:;: 02-Dec-98 go crl9 :::c ~m 16-Dec-98 Ill::, m 30-Dec-98 + I I I ~ * I • I I .,, 13-Jan-99 + I I ----:,.1 I * I • I I 0 :::c 27-Jan-99 ' I '_, I I _L I .L I • -I 10-Feb-99 24-Feb-99 10-Mar-99 24-Mar-99 -~ -w I-~ COP RATE HISTORY COMPARISON OF HIGHEST & LOWEST RATES 3.20 ,-----------______..'.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---------~ 3.10 -+------------1& 3.00 2.90 2.80 2.70 2.60 2.50 2.40 2.30 2.20 I r:::"":, HIGH LOW IL.l:H/SCE BTnRWD l!I Highest rate G:\excel.dta\fin\2220¼Jeggl\Flnance\RATEHIST _HILO _bargraph • OCSD/J.P. Morgan ILEH/SCE SBIIRWD • OCSD/PaineWebber lffi1"1SCE E:'.RWD C:I Lowest rate ::::::::: .·.·.·.·. lllllll!l ···•····· : :::::: i\f Prepared by Finance, 4/5/99, 3:14 PM Prepared by Finance, 4/5/99, 2:58 PM Apr-98 May-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 Sep-98 Oct-98 Nov-98 Oec-98 Jan-99 Feb-99 Mar-99 AVERAGE DAILY COP RATE COMPARISONS(%) APRIL, 1998 -MARCH, 1999 OCSD $100M $98.SM $46M Series"A" Series"C" Series 93 Ref PaineWebber J.P. Morgan PaineWebber 3.52 3.59 3.52 3.56 3.60 3.56 3.28 3.30 3.28 2.80 2.86 2.80 2.43 2.44 2.43 3.27 3.33 3.27 3.06 3.00 3.06 2.94 2.91 2.94 3.11 3.07 3.11 2.84 2.87 2.84 2.30 2.28 2.30 2.72 2.66 2.72 2.99% 2.99% 2.99% ESTIMATED ANNUAL INTEREST PAYMENTS PER $100M PAR AMOUNT $ 2,985,833 $ 2,992,500 $ 2,985,833 * FOOTNOTE Composite index consists of the following COP transactions: . IRWD, Series 86, $60M, Smith Barney • IRWD, Series 93 "A" Refunding, $87.6M, Bankers Trust . IRWO, Series 93 "B" Refunding, $41.8M, J.P. Morgan . IRWD, Series 95 Refunding, $117.8M, PaineWebber Composite Index* 3.55 3.57 3.27 2.79 2.40 3.24 3.02 2.96 3.09 2.87 2.32 2.70 2.98% $ 2,981,667 • Western Riverside Co. Reg. Wastewater Auth., Series 96, $25.4M, PaineWebber • Orange Co., Irvine Coast Asst. Dist. 88-1, $94.SM, J.P. Morgan . SCE, $192M, Lehman G:\excel.dta\fin\2220\geggi\Finance\COPdaily$rate comparison FAHR COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Mike Peterman, Director of Human Resources Originator: Patty Steeves, Human Resources Analyst Meeting Date 4/14/99 ~tern Number 12 (c} SUBJECT: EMPLOYMENT STATUS REPORT AS OF MARCH 25, 1999 (FAHR99-20) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Receive and file the Employment Status Report. SUMMARY Total FTE headcount at the District as of March 25, 1999 was 514.75. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Not applicable. BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. ~ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION To Bd. of Dir. Item Number The District had a full-time equivalent (FTE) headcount of 514. 75 as of March 25, 1999. The actual number of employees was 525. The annual turnover rate is 5.2%. There were two new employees hired in March 1999: • Two Principal Financial Analysts (Accounting) H:lwp.dtallin\21 0'crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-20.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page 1 ALTERNATIVES Not applicable. CEQA FINDINGS Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS 1. March 25, 1999 Employment Status Report. 2. Performance compared to 5-Year Staffing Plan. H:\wp.dtaVin1210'<:ranelFAHRIFahr99\Apr\FAHR99-20.doc R9\llsed: 8/20/98 Page2 Performance to 5-Year Staffing Plan 570 560 ,~------. --- 550 --------------------------- . .... ... .... . -...... .... 540 Ir .---~ .... <.:::..: .... -. -.... --... 530 . .... ... .... . -. 520 I ....... 510 500 I I • FTE Headcount -•• • -5 Year Staffing Plan I 490 J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J I FY 97-98 I I FY 98-99 I Employment Status Report 110 -General Management Admln 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 4.50 4.50 0.50 Total General Mana ement 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 4.50 4.50 0.50 210-Finance Administration 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 220 -Accounting 17.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.50 16.00 14.50 0.50 230 -Purchasing & Warehousing 14.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 0.50 Total Finance 35.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.50 35.00 33.50 1.00 310 -Communications 8.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 9.75 9.75 9.75 1.00 Total Communications 8.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 9.75 9.75 9.75 1.00 410 -General Services Admin 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 0.00 420 -Collection Facilities Mtce 17.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.50 18.50 18.50 1.00 430 -Plant Maintenance 32.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.50 28.50 27.50 -4.00 Total General Services 55.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.00 53.00 52.00 -3.00 510-Human Resources Admin 5.00 0.50 0.75 0.00 0.00 6.75 6.75 6.50 0.50 520 -Education & Training 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 0.00 530 -Safety & Emergency Response 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 1.50 Total Human Resources 13.00 0.50 0.76 0.00 0.00 16.25 15.75 14.5 2.00 610 -Technical Services Adm in 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 620 -Environmental Compliance & Mo 17.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.50 18.50 18.50 0.50 630 -Environmental Laboratory 28.00 2.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.00 29.00 28.00 -1.50 640 -Source Control 34.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 35.75 34.75 33.75 1.00 Total Technical Services 81.00 2.50 0.75 0.00 2.00 87.25 86.25 84.25 0.00 710-Engineering Administration 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 720 -Planning & Design Engineering 27.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.50 31.50 31.50 31 .50 2.25 730 -Construction Management 35.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 37.50 37.50 37.50 1.75 Total En ineerin 65.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.50 72.00 72.00 72.00 4.00 810-0 & M Administration 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 820 -0 & M Process Support 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 9.25 8.25 8.25 0.25 830 -Plant 1 Operations 32.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 1.00 840 -Plant 2 Operations 41.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.00 37.00 37.00 -4.00 850 -Mechanical Mtce 45.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.50 47.50 45.50 2.00 860 -Electrical & Instrumentation Mtce 57.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.50 56.50 56.50 0.00 870 -Cogeneration 10.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 2.00 880 -Air Quality & Special Projects 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 -2.00 Total O erations & Maintenance 204.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 1.50 206.25 204.25 -0.75 910 -IT Admin 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 920 -IT User Support 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 2.00 930 -IT Network Support 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 0.00 940 -IT Programming 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 1.00 950 -Plant A.utomation 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 1.00 27.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.00 33.00 5.00 g:\excet<lo'h\510\Steeves\EMPDIV9tr99 ' ., V FAH R COMM ITTEE AGE NDA REPO.RT Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Mike Peterman, Director of Human Resources Originator: Lisa Tomko, Manager, Human Resources SUBJECT: CHANGES AND ADDITIONS TO HUMAN RESOURCES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AS AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION 98-33 (FAHR99-21) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Meeting Date 4/14/99 Item Number 12 (d) Approve the attached changes and additions to the existing Human Resources policies and procedures manual. SUMMARY Human Resources policies and procedures are amended two times each calendar year. The attached policies are routine updates to maintain consistent language with the Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) or to explain procedures more clearly. Copies of all policies affected are attached. Additional language is highlighted in gray; deleted language is lined through. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY None BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. ~ Not applicable (information item) H:lwp.dtalfin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-21.doc Revised: 1/5/98 Page 1 To Jt. Bds. Item Number ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Policy Number And Subj ect B30.00 -Harassment Policy C150.00-Deferred Compensation C170.00 -Californja Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate Pay. ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS NIA ATTACHMENTS 1. Policy 830.00 2. Policy C150.00 From To The Sexual Harassment This policy has been Policy. completely redone as the Harassment Policy. Clearer definitions and examples of prohibited behavior have been added. The former matching and Section 7.1 struck due to non-matching deferred the Ventura Decision and compensation program. the deferred compensation percentages being rolled into base salary in April, 1998. No policy in effect. Adopt new policy. Harassment Policy Deferred Compensation Reason For Change 1'998 Supreme Court rulings made significant changes in the harassment area. Our policy is being updated to reflect those cnanges. To update the policy in accordance with Resolution 98-08. To establish uniform guidelines and procedures for California Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate oav. 3. Policy C170.00 California Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate Pay H:lwp.dta\fin\210-.,rane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-21.doc Revised: 115198 Page2 \ . ~ Orange County Policy Number: 830.00 Sanitation District Effective Date: April 28, 1999 Subject: SEXUAL HARASSMENT Supersedes: October 22, 1997 POLICY Approved by: 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of tl=lis policy is to establish uniform guidelines and prosodures for maintaining a work environment that is free fFOm smcual harassment. U is the policy of the Orange County Sanitation District to provide a working environment for all employees which is free of harassment and discriminatory intimidation whether based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin, disability, veteran status, marital status, exercise of rights relating to family care leave, or any other legall~ Rrotected basis. 1.2 All District employees are expected to support and comply with this policy. Any supervisor or manager observing or knowing of a harassing situation shall take. immediate action to stop it. Supervisory and management personnel who receive reports of harassment are expected to consider all such complaints seriously and take immediate steps to implement this policy in accordance with the provisions contained herein. 2.0 ORGANIZATIONAL UNITS AFFECTED 2.1 This policy applies to all employees regardless of their organizational unit. Additionally, all persons who perform any services for the District, regardless of their employment status, are covered by this policy. 3.0 DEFINITIONS 3.1 Harassment for the purposes of this policy, includes verbal, physical or visual conduct that is so severe and pervasive that it creates a hostile or abusive working environment, and interferes with an employee's ability to do his or her job. Examples of Prohib.ited Behavior: • Verbal conduct such as epithets, demeaning comments of a personal nature, derogatory jokes, slurs, yelling, screaming, intimidation or threats. • Physical contact such as assault, unwanted touching, blocking normal movement, pushing or interfering with work because of sex, race or any other protected basis. • Retaliation for having reported or threatened to report harassment. Page 1 3.1.1 Sexual fa1.«OFs. Unwanted smc:ual ad1.«ances which condition an employment benefit upon exchange of sexual fa>.•oFs. a.1 .2 Hostile worl< en1.«ironment. Sexually based •.•erbal, physical or visual conduct of such a nature and intensity that it oreates an intimidating, hostile or oflensi•.•e wOFking em•imnment. Conductthat may result in a hostile woFk environment includes, but is not limited to, the following: a.1.2.1 Sein1al epithets, jokes, derogatory comments or sh,1rs; 3.1.2.2 Assault, impeding OF blooking mo1.«eFRent, or any physical interierenoe with normal woFk or FRovement when directed at an indi•.«idual on tho basis of sex; 3.1.2.a Sexual cartoons, drawin!iJS, photographs or derogatory posters. 3.2 Sexual Harassment may involve the behavior of a person of either sex against a person of the opposite or same sex, and occurs when such behavior constitutes unwelcome sexual advances, unwelcome requests for sexual favors, and other unwelcome verbal, physical, or visual behavior of a sexual nature where: • Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment; • Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting the individual's welfare; or • Such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with an individual's welfare or work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, pffensive, or demeaning work environment. Examples of Prohibited Behavior: Prohibited acts that constitute sexual harassment may take a variety of forms. Examples of the kinds of conduct that may constitute sexual harassment include, but are not limited to: • Unwelcome sexual propositions, invitations, solicitations, flirtations and gestures. • Threats or insinuations that a person's employment, wages, promotional opportunities, or other conditions of employment may be adversely affected by not submitting .to sexual advances. • Unwelcome verbal expressions of a sexual nature, including graphic sexual commentaries about a person's body, dress, appearance or sexual activities; the unwelcome use of sexually degrading language, jokes or innuendoes; unwelcome suggestive or insulting sounds or whistles. • Sexually suggestive objects, pictures, videotapes, audio recordings or literature placed in the work area which may embarrass or offend individJ,Jals. • Unwelcome touching,• patting or pinching. Page2 ' . • Consensual sexual relationships where such relationships lead to favoritism of a subordinate employee with whom the superior is sexually involved and where the conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with another individual's welfare or work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, offensive, or demeaning work environment. 4.0 POLICY 4.1 The Orange County Sanitation District will not tolerate any form of harassment and is committed to providing a work environment that is free from unlawful discrimination. 4.2 The District will take allegations of harassment seriously and will respond promptly to complaints of harassment. Where it is determined that inappropriate conduct has occurred, the District will act immediately to eliminate the conduct and impose such corrective action as is necessary, including disciplinary action where appropriate. · 5.0 PROCEDURE 5.1 Any employee who believes that he or she has been the victim of harassment prohibited by this policy~ must immediately report the matter, verbally or in writing, to his or her supervisor or manager, or to any other supervisor or manager, including the General Manager, or to the Human Resources Department. All reported inoidents of harassment will be promptly and thoroughly in¥estigated, and appropriate oorreoti>te aotion will be taken. 5.2 Upon receipt of the complaint, the District will promptly investigate the allegation in a fair and expeditious manner. The investigation will be conducted in such a way as to maintain confidentiality to the extent practicable under the circumstances and permissible under the law. If it is determined that unlawful harassment has occurred, appropriate corrective action will be taken. 5.3 It is important to be aware that under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"), employees may be held personally liable for any acts of unlawful harassment. 6.0 EXCEPTIONS 7.0 PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS 7 .1 Post in offices. 8.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS Page3 i) Orange County Policy Number: C150.00 Sanitation District Effective Date: April 28, 1999 Subject: DEFERRED COMPENSATION Supersedes: October 22, 1997 Approved by: 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of this policy is to establish uniform guidelines and procedures for Deferred Compensation. 2.0 ORGANIZATIONAL UNITS AFFECTED 2.1 Deferred Compensation is available to all employees in accordance with the provisions of this policy, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations, and District's Board Resolution Nos. 95 80 and 95 81 98-08 and as each may be amended from time to time. 3.0 DEFINITIONS Deferred Compensation is that portion of an employee's wages that has been deferred from paying income tax in the year in which it is earned and put into a Deferred Compensation investment account. 4.0 POLICY 4.1 The District's Deferred Compensation Plan allows full-time employees to def er income tax liability on a portion of their wages until such time as those funds are withdrawn from the fund because of death, disability, retirement, hardship or termination of employment with the District in accordance with the fallowing procedures, provisions, conditions, and District's Board Resolution 95 80 and 95 81 ~a~o.a as amended from time to time. 5.0 PROCEDURE 5.1 Employees may participate in the District's Deferred Compensation Plan and program, approved separately by the Board of Directors, and amended from time to time, subject to all requirements for participation established by the District. 6.0 EXCEPTIONS 7.0 PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS 7.1 The previsions of the Plan differ according to job classification, and any Districts' contributions towards the employee's account are considered as part of the employee's total oompensation. The following table shows the Districts' oontribution to an employee's deferred oompensation aosount, in both matohing and non matching funds, as these relate to employee oategories: Page 1 . ,..,,. . .. \ " OistriGts I CeRt:ribution Employee Category Non Exempt Professional Supen,cisors and Division Managers Department Head Gen. Mgr. and Asst. Gen. Mgr. Matehing Not /1.pplieablo 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 0 fi,Jon matehing Not /\pplioable 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% $7,500 The minimum deposit per pay period is $25, and the total annual maximum deposit is $7,500 or 26 pereent of an employee's gross salary, whiohe•1er is less, in aeeordanee ',Yith IRS regulations and the Distriets' Boards Joint Resolution Nos. 95 80 and 95 81. 8.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS 8.1 United States Government Internal Revenue Code. 8.2 District's Boards Joint Resolution Nos. 96 80 and 95 81 98-08 Page2 ~ Orange County Policy Number: C170.00 Sanitation District Effective Date: April 28, 1999 Subject: California Wastewater Supersedes: N/A Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate Pay. Approved by: 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 To establish uniform guidelines and procedures for California Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate pay. 2.0 ORGANIZATIONAL UNITS AFFECTED 2.1 This policy applies to all employees in the Operations Division who have obtained a California Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate and who perform duties involving the operation and control of wastewater through the treatment plant. 3.0 DEFINITIONS 4.0 POLICY 4.1 It is the policy of the District to compensate employees in the Operations Division who perform duties involving the operation and control of wastewater through the treatment plant for the obtainment of a California Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate. 5.0 PROCEDURE 5.1 Employees who perform duties involving the operation and control of wastewater through the treatment plant are eligible to receive a quarter of a 5.5% step increase, or a 1.375% increase, upon obtainment of a California Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate. 5.2 Employees who fail to maintain their Grade V Certificate will lose the Grade V Certificate pay. 6.0 EXCEPTIONS 6.1 Employees in classifications with a minimum qualification of California Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator's Grade V Certificate are not entitled to the Grade V Certificate pay. 7.0 PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS 8.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS H:\WP.DTA\HR\OPEN\HR POLICIES\UPDATED TO WORD\C170.DOC Page 1 FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. 4/14/99 N/A AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number 12 (e) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Marc D. Dubois, Contracts/Purchasing Manager SUBJECT: GENERAL MANAGER APPROVED PURCHASES (FAHR99-22) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Receive and file report of General Manager approved purchases in amounts exceeding $50,000 in accordance with Board purchasing policies. SUMMARY In May 1998, the FAHR Committee and the Board approved changes to the staff purchasing authority. One of the changes was to increase the dollar threshold before Board authority was required for purchases of goods or services, excluding public works purchases, to $100,000. When approving this change, the Committee asked for periodic reports showing purchases approved by the General Manager for amounts between $50,000 and $100,000. Subsequent to receiving the initial report, the Committee requested that future reports be placed on the Consent Calendar. Vendor Name Amount Description/Discussion Communications $50,000.00 Professional Services Agreement for Performance Group, Inc. Y2K AssessmenUDevelopment TPC Training System $75,867.18 DART Technical Training Program National Technology $63,640.00 DART Technical Training Program Transfer, Inc. Technology Integration Group $59,884.00 Networking Equipment Network Catalyst, Inc. $64,182.00 Networking Equipment The Vantage Group, L.L.C. $95,400.00 Oracle Programming and Analysis Water Environment Research $69,000.00 Utility Subscription Program -Annual Foundation Research Commitment Section 10 of Resolution 98-21, the District's Purchasing and Contracts Award Resolution, authorizes the Contracts/Purchasing Manager to purchase items that have "appropriate budgetary approval." During the budget adoption process, the lists of Document in Document2 Revised: 8/20/98 Page 1 these items were highlighted for the Directors. For these reasons, purchases that fell into these categories are not included in this report. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY NIA BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. · [gl Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NIA ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS NIA ATTACHMENTS None. Document In Docurnenl2 Revised: 8l20/98 Page2 FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. 04/14/99 04/14/99 AGENDA _REPORT Item Number Item Number 12 (f) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Steve Kozak, Financial Manager SUBJECT: RENEWAL OF THE DISTRICT'S WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE PROGRAM FOR THE PERIOD MAY 1, 1999 TO MAY 1, 2002 (FAHR99-23) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Renew the District's Excess Worker's Compensation Insurance Program for the three- year period May 1, 1999 to May 1, 2002, with a rate guarantee of $0.612 per $100 of annual payroll for each fiscal year. SUMMARY The CAMEX program was established in 1994 to provide local government agencies greater access to lower cost Excess Worker's Compensation insurance protection. The District obtained Excess Worker's Compensation insurance coverage for the first time through CAMEX in May 1994. At present, the District is in the third year of a three-year commitment to the CAMEX program approved by the Board in May 1996. The premium cost for FY 1998-99 was $21,719, which was based on a rate of $0. 72 per $100 of payroll. It should be noted that this rate reflected a 5% reduction from the District's rate for FY 1997-98 ($0. 76 per $100 payroll). Approval of this agenda item would continue the District's Excess Worker's Compensation insurance coverage through the CAMEX program for an additional three- year period, with a rate guarantee for each annual premium renewal for the next three years of $0.612 per $100 of payroll. This represents a 15% reduction in the District's current rate. Based on estimated and annual payroll figures, the premium costs for FY 1999-2000 would not exceed $20,100. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A \\radon\data1 lwp,dta\fin\21 Ckrane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-23.doc Revised: B/20/98 Page 1 BUDGET IMPACT 121 This item has been budgeted. . (Line item: Worker's Comp SFI, line 12) D This item ha·s been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. D Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CAMEX Worker's Compensation Coverage The District has maintained a self-insurance fund for primary worker's compensation coverage since 1979. The reserve balance in the Worker's Compensation Self- Insurance Fund was $659,609 at the start of FY 1998-99. Above the $250,000 self-insurance deductible (per occurrence), excess worker's compensation insurance coverage augments the District's self-insurance fund by providing an additional layer of protection up to the statutory limit set by the State of California, at cost effective premium costs. The CAMEX program also provides the Distliict with a $5 milli.on coverage limit for Employer's Liability insurance (per occurrence). In 1998, this portion of the CAMEX program coverage was enhanced from a previous $1 million limit.1 The CAMEX program is being underwritten by Reliance National Insurance Company. With more than .$1 .25 billion in reserves, Reliance is rated "A-"/Pooled/FSC XIII (Excellent) by AM. Best Company (the insurance industry rating agency), for its overall ability to meet its obligatiohs to policyholders. Renewal for FY 1999-2000 through 2001-2002 Two important advantages of a multi-year renewal of the District's participation in the CAMEX Excess Worker's Compensation insurance program include stable coverage up to statutory limits, and a rate guarantee. Thus, the District's premium costs are controlled while obtaining maximum coverage levels for the next three fiscal years. The attached letter from Robert F. Driver Associates, the District's Broker of Record, summarizes coverage and cost information for the proposed Excess Worker's Compensation insurance renewal. Staff recommends the renewal of the District's Excess Worker's Compensation Insurance Program for the three-year period May 1, 1999 to May 1, 2002. The coverage is provided through the California Municipal Excess Worker's Compensation Program (CAMEX). 1 Employer's Liability insurance provides coverage for the District against common law bodily injury liability not covered by worker's compensation laws. llradon\data1';Np.dtalfin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-23.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page2 ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS 1 . Robert F. Driver letter \lradonldata1 lwp.dtalfin\21 0lcrane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-23.doc Revised: 6120/98 Page 3 ROBERT F. DRIVER ASSOCIATES a Division of Robert F. Driver Co., Inc. ASSOCIATES' Founded on knowledge, integrity and sen-ice. April 2, 1 999 Mr. Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 / . Re: Renewal of Excess Workers' Compensation Insurance Period: May 1, 1999 -May 1, 2002 Dear Steve: In accordance with the May 1, 1999 renewal of the California Municipal Excess Workers' Compensation (CAMEX) Insurance Program, we undertook an extensive and aggressive marketing effort in order to negotiate a competitive program from several alternative insurers. We have now successfully concluded those negotiations with Reliance National Insurance Company (A. M. Best Rating A-, Excellent, Pooled, Financial Size Category 13) on a three-year rate guarantee basis of $.0612 generating an annual premium of $20,100, an approximate fifteen percent reduction from expiring rates. Coverage will continue to be offered at a statutory limit of liability subject to a $250,000 self insured retention. Our summary of insurance detailing specific terms and conditions will follow under separate cover. We are confident that this joint purchase program remains an effective vehicle in competitively accessing the marketplace and maintaining both coverage and rate stability on a long-term basis. Sincerely, ROBERT F. DRIVER ASSOCIATES ~~~~_) Donald H. McLean First Vice President DHM:rp Newport Beach I 4041 MacArthur Blvd .. #300. P.O. Box 6450. Ncirport Brnch. California 92658-6450 • (949) 756-0271 • F(n (9~9) 756-2713 ulrplwordUtrkozakJ-3 I.doc Lie# 0C36861 • 11·11·w.1fdri1•cr.com Sa11 Diego Esco11dido Sacra memo Fresno FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. 4/14/98 4/28/99 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number 13 (a) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary G. Streed, Director of Finance SUBJECT: SAWPA OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CHARGES (FAHR99-24) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1. Require SAWPA to pay the O&M charges for 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 in accordance with the 1996 Agreement. 2. Authorize staff to negotiate an agreement with SAWPA to include: ai the amounts a lready paid by SAWPA to the District for a currently unneeded 1/10t of 1 mgd of additional capacity be accepted as payment in full for the 1996-97 and 1997 -98 charges; b) that SAWPA's treatment and disposal capacity be reduced to 9 mgd; and, c) that the 1998-99 charges be collected over a reasonable period of time. SUMMARY Since 1972, the District has provided treatment and disposal services for some "non-reclaimable" wastewater from the Santa Ana Watershed Protection Agency (SAWPA). After 24 years, the Agreement was modified in 1996. Among the significant changes was the ability to purchase capacity in 1 mgd increments of average flow (vs. 5 mgd of peak flow capacity per the original agreement), and payment for O&M based upon sewage quantity and strength (vs. quantity only per the original agreement). Actual wastewater strength concentrations were agreed upon as the basis for our invoices to SAWPA for O&M charges, while examples were used in our 1996 Agreement (attached). When District staff prepared invoices for SAWPA's O&M charges for 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99, we estimated the wastewater strength to be equal to the examples shown in the 1996 agreement. The Agreement provides for estimated quarterly invoices and an adjustment to actual quantities and strength based upon samples and flowmeter readings, after the close of the fiscal year. Because the average wastewater from SAWPA contained more of both BOD and SS for each billing year, the total actual charges to treat the wastewater increased. Additional charges are estimated for 1998-99, because of a rate increase subsequent to the start of this year. If SAWPA's flow and strength remain constant for the rest of this year, a total estimated additional charge to SAWPA of $1,027,000 for the three years will be due. H:\wp.dtalagenda\FAHR\Fahr99\99ar\FAHR99-24.doc R.,.,;s.,c!: 8/20/98 Page 1 SAWPA has officially requested that "current OCSD O&M rates remain in effect until July 1, 1999, and that any adjustments related to the net underbilling be waived." SAWPA maintains that their existing user rates were adopted based upon the information that we provided them, that they have no funds budgeted for this payment, and that their member agencies cannot pass these late corrections on to their customers. This request covers a period of approximately 36 months ending in June 1999, including the current fiscal year and two prior years. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. ~ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION See attached Staff Report. ALTERNATIVES 1. Waive the O&M fee undercharge. 2. Collect the full amount through some negotiated time payment plan. CEQA FINDINGS NIA ATTACHMENTS 1 . Staff Report 2. Schedule of Charges and Adjustments 3. 1996 Agreement GGS:lc \\radonldata1\wp.dta\finl2101crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apf\FAHR99-24.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page2 (Revised) April 1, 1999 STAFF REPORT Santa Ana Watershed Project The District and SAWPA (Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority) have been working together on Santa Ana River water quality issues since 1972. SAWPA, District No. 2, and the Clean Water Grant Program built a large regional interceptor along the Santa Ana River for "non-reclaimable" wastewater from SAWPA's service area. The District has authorized SAWPA to purchase up to 30 mgd of capacity in our treatment and disposal facilities, to match their capacity in the interceptor (SARI). In 1996, a new agreement between SAWPA and the District was completed. Among the significant changes was the ability to purchase capacity in 1 mgd increments of average flow (vs. 5 mgd of peak flow capacity according to the original agreement), and payment for O&M based upon sewage quantity and strength. Prior to the new agreement, SAWPA had paid for O&M based upon a residential strength discharge with no fee adjustment for higher strengths. We also agreed to the provision that SAWPA could pay for capacity over time-taking up to 10 years to pay for a purchased increment of flow. During the agreement negotiation process, SAWPA provided us wastewater strength data of 320 mg/I of BOD and 270 mg/I of SS for 1995-96. These concentrations were used as illustrative examples in the agreement for calculating capacity charges. Subsequently, actual concentrations of 338 mg/I of BOD and 234 mg/I of SS were used for one capacity purchase while 403 mg/I of BOD and 277 mg/I of SS were used for another capacity increment in accordance with the 1996 agreement. Actual BOD and SS concentrations were also envisioned as the bases for our invoices to SAWPA for O&M charges. When District staff prepared invoices for SAWPA's O&M charges for 1996-97 and 1997-98, we used the example concentrations in the agreement for estimates, but we transposed the 1991-92 billing rate for BOD with the rate for SS. Section C4 of the Agreement provides for estimated quarterly billings and adjustments to actual after the close of the fiscal year. OCSD • P.O.Box 8127 • FountainValley,CA92728-8127 • (714) 962-2411 SAWPA Page 2 of 3 April 1 , 1999 Correcting the billing rates for BOD and SS would result in a $64,853 refund to SAWPA. However, because the average wastewater from SAWPA contained more of both BOD and SS for those previous billing years, the total actual cost to treat the wastewater increased. In fact, the total costs increased by 17%, or $656,363. The net effect of the two corrections results in an additional charge to SAWPA of $591,510. On January 12, 1999, we notified SAWPA of our billing error regarding rates for 1996-97 and 1997-98, and also notified them that their increased concentrations had resulted in an additional $591,510 charge through June 30, 1998. SAWPAwas advised that we would soon be issuing invoices to adjust the estimates to actual in accordance with the Agreement. We also had conversations with their Chief Financial Officer and their General Manager. On February 16, 1999, SAWPA officially requested that "current OCSD O&M rates remain in effect until July 1. 1999, and that any adjustments related to the net underbilling be waived." By "current," SAWPA means the rates originally billed. SAWPA maintains that their existing user rates were adopted based upon the information that we provided them, that they have no funds budgeted for this payment, and that their member agencies cannot pass these late corrections on to their customers. Their request covers a period of approximately 36 months ending in June 1999. SAWPA's request extends into the current fiscal year. Subsequent to the initial 1998-99 billing, the Board adopted new Class I user rates. The impact of these rates upon SAWPA, and all Class I users, was to decrease the flow charges and to increase the BOD and SS charges. Assuming the flow and concentrations for the previous 9 months remain constant for the year, the adjustment for 1998-99 will be an additional $435,500. The Agreement provides for this adjustment to actual flow and strength after the close of the close of the fiscal year. It is interesting to note that correcting only the rates would have resulted in a refund to SAWPA; it is the incorrect wastewater strength that has resulted in additional charges. Had SAWPA been billed based on the actual strength of their discharge, we would be processing a refund based upon the rates. The 1996 agreement is clear that O&M charges will be adjusted after the close of the year based upon actual wastewater strength. Incidentally, the correct sewage strength information is supposed to be supplied to us by SAWPA, in addition to that determined from our own sampling program, and so SAWPA did know, or could have known, that our estimated invoices were low and in their favor as we were using out of date concentrations. In fact, the Finance Director at SAWPA has said that their customers have been billed and have paid based upon actual concentrations. SAWPA Page 3 of 3 April 1 , 1999 Nonetheless, staff is mindful of the long-term water quality management relationship between the agencies: The recently opened sewage treatmenUwater reclamation plant in western Riverside has improved water quality in the Santa Ana River, reduced flow to our plants; and decimated SAWPA's financial reserves. SAWPA is also beginning to assume an important and appropriate leadership role in the management of dairy waste and Santa Ana River water quality. These relationships benefit all of Orange County. For all of these reasons, staff recommends that the additional SAWPA O&M charges for 1996-97 and 1997-98, caused by incorrect rates and outdated concentrations for BOD and SS, be collected, but collected over time and under terms negotiated between the two staffs of the agency, or by some other creative method. One possible partial solution, discussed with SAWPA management, involves another provision of the 1996 agreement. In accordance with the 1996 agreement, SAWPA made one of ten payments for an additional 1 mgd increment of capacity in 1997. Subsequent to the opening of the Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Authority Plant, and the resultant reduction in flow, SAWPA discontinued that purchase. (SAWPA's flow has declined from an average of 9.30 mgd in 1996-97 to 4.87 mgd this year.) The agreement provides that 75% of the capital portion paid can be applied to a future increment of capacity, if SAWPA elects to discontinue payments on a particular increment of purchased capacity. SAWPA has paid $758,373.00 as the first of 1 O installments for the capacity increment from 9 mgd to 1 O mgd. In essence, they have purchased 1/10th of 1 mgd of additional capacity-a capacity they simply don't need now and will not utilize again for several years. The payment was made on a level payment plan, and included $407,609 of interest and $350,744 of principal. SAWPA management has indicated they would be willing to relinquish their 75% credit toward a future purchase of capacity as payment in full for the undercharge. They owe us $591,51 O through June 30, 1998, and an additional estimated $435,500 for 1998-99. Staff recommends that the adjustment of estimated invoiced amounts to actual for 1996-97 and 1997-98, including the corrected rates for BOD and SS be offset by the unneeded .1 mgd capacity purchase and that SAWPA's capacity rights be reduced correspondingly to 9 mgd. Further, staff recommends that the estimated invoices for the final 6 months of 1998-99 be consistent with those for the first six months , and that the 1998-99 adjustment to actual quantities be made in 1999-2000. GGS:lc \\radon\data 1 \wp.dta\fin \21 O\crane\F AH R\F ahr99\Apr\SR FAH R99-24.doc Attachments: SAWPA letter dated 2-16-99 Agreement dated 7 -24-96 Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority February 16, 1999 Mr. Gary Streed Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis A venue Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018 Re: Class I User Rates and Charges Dear Gary: COMMISSION FOR THE PROJECT AUTHORITY CHINO BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT SAN BERNARDINO VALl.EY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT WESTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT This is in response to your memo dated January 12, 1999 subject as above, our subsequent telephone conversation, and related discussion between Joe Grindstaff and Blake Anderson. Several months ago, SA WP A requested confirmation of OCSD TSS and BOD billing rates. Initially, those rates were confirmed as correct. However recently, it has been determined that O&M billing rates and also concentration charges have been incorrectly billed from inception of the Agreement July 1, 1996. Normally, as called for in the Agreement, OCSD bills SA WP A quarterly using prior quarter actuals for billing purposes. Annual adjustm_ents are billed in the first quarter of the following fiscal year. These latest adjustments surfacing so late and falling outside normal billing procedures were not anticipated nor budgeted. As a practical matter, SA WP A, its member agencies and their customers have relied on OCSD rate information for budget and payment purposes. Neither SA WPA nor any of the affected agencies have funds in this years' budget to cover the adjustment. As an example, Western Municipal Water District (WM.WO) has indicated that it would not be feasible to pass through any amount of this adjustment. Rates and budgets have been set for fiscal year 1998/99. Rate Resolutions are in place. SA WP A recommends that current OCSD O&M rates remain in effect until July 1. 1999 and that any adjustments related to the net underbilling be waived. Thank you for your efforts in resolving this issue. Sincerely, Michael Wynn Chief Financial Officer cc: Mr. Blake Anderson, OCSD 11615 Sterling Avenue, Riverside, CA 92503 • (909) 785-5411 Administration FAX (909) 785-7076 • Planning FAX (909) 352-3422 3/31/99 6:09 PM SAWPA Flow Charges Analysis of Impact of Rate and Concentration Adjustments 1996-97-'_1997-98 and Est'd-1_998-99 Concentrations Quantities Rates Charges BOD ss Flow, mg BOD ss Flow BOD ss Flow BOD ss Total 1996-97 Billed Rates & Concentration 320 270 3,385.683 9,035.711 7,623.881 82.44 116.16 91.44 279,115.71 1,049,588.17 697,127.68 2,025,831.55 Rate Correction 3,385.683 82.44 91.44 116.16 (223,362.77) 188,462.34 (34,900.43) Concentration Adjust to Actual 300 341 3,385.683 8,470.979 9,628.679 82.44 91.44 116.16 (51,639.09) 232,877.37 181,238.29 Total Adjusted Charges 279,115.71 774,586.31 1,118,467.39 2,172,169.40 Adjustment (275,001 .86) 421,339.71 146,337.85 1997-98 Billed Rates & Concentration 320 270 2,905.739 7,754.836 6,543.143 82.44 116.16 91.44 239,549.12 900,801.78 598,305.00 1,738,655.90 Rate Correction 2,905.739 82.44 91.44 116.16 (191,699.55) 161,746.50 (29,953.05) Concentration Adjust to Actual 415 364 2,905.739 10,057.053 8,821.126 82.44 91.44 116.16 210,514.72 264,610.52 475,125.25 Total Adjusted Charges 239,549.12 919,61.6.95 1,024,662.02 2,183,828.10 Adjustment 18,815.17 426,357.02 445,172.19 Combined Adjustments Subtotal for Prior Years (256,186.69) 847,696.73 591,510.04 1998-99 -Estimated Flow Est'd Billed Rates & Concentration 320 270 1,550.250 4,137.307 3,490.853 82.44 116.16 91.44 127,802.61 480,589.60 319,203.59 927,595.81 Rate Correction 1,550.250 65.17 112.04 122.09 (26,772.82) (17,045.71) 106,994.64 63,176.12 Est'd Concent'n Adjust to Actual 431 404 1,550.250 5,572.436 5,223.350 65.17 112.04 122.09 -160,791.79 211 ,620.61 372,312.40 Est'd Total Adjusted Charges 101,029.79 624,335.69 637,718.84 1,363,084.32 Estimated Adjustment __{~6,772.82) 143,746.08 318,515.25 435.488.52 Total Estimated Adjustment __{26,772._!32) (112,440.60) 1,166,211.98 1,026,998.56 Comparative Charges Under 1972 Agreement 1996-97 3,385.683 547.27 1,852,885.85 1997-98 2,905.739 511.79 1,487,129.44 1998-99 Estimated 1,550.250 496.27 769,347.62 G:\excel.dta\fin\210\streed\old d copy\EXCELDTA\sawpa rate and cone adj WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into, to be effective the 24th day of July 1996, by and between COUNfY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (collectively "Districts"), each of which is a county sanitation district organized and existing pursuant to California Health & Safety Code section 4 700 et seq., and the SANT A ANA WATERSHED PROJECT AUTHORITY ("SAWPA"), a joint powers agency organized and existing pursuant to California Government Code section 6500 et seq. A. DEFINITIONS As used in this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meanings herein set forth: (1) "Adjusted Capital Facilities Connection Charge" ("Adjusted CFCC"): Shall mean District No. 2's charge for connection of a dwelling unit to District's sewerage system, less the component amount in this charge for construction and rehabilitation of District's collection facilities. Currently, the Capital Facilities Connection Charge is $2,350.00 and the Adjusted Capital Facilities Connection Charge is $1,690.00. (2) "Biochemical Oxygen Demand" ("BOD"): The measure of biodegradable organic material in Wastewater as represented by the quantity of oxygen utilized over a period of five days at 20 degrees centigrade and as determined by testing methods approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), as set forth in 40 CFR Part 136, or subsequent amendments thereto. (3) "Chino Basin Municipal Water District" ("CBMWD"): CBMWD is a municipal water district organized and existing pursuant to California Water Code section 71000 et seq. (4) "Class I User": Any user who discharges Wastewater that: (a) Is subject to Federal Categorical Pretreatment Standards; (b) averages 25,000 gallons per day or more of regulated process Wastewater; ( c) is determined by the Districts' General Manager to have a reasonable potential for adversely affecting the Districts' operations or for violating any pretreatment standard, local limit, or discharge requirement; or (d) may cause, as determined by the Districts' General Manager, pass through or interference with the Districts' sewerage facilities. WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 , July 11, 1996 (5) "Disposal Costs": An amount which includes all costs incurred, directly or indirectly, for treatment and disposal of Wastewater discharged from SA WP A's SARI Service Area to Districts' facilities. These costs shall be calculated in the same manner as Districts' charges for use for Class I Users less District No .. 2's (1) operations and.maintenance chatge for flow; and (2) debt service for flow;• BOD and Suspended Solids. The parties acknowledge that (1) the remaining BOD component of the Disposal Costs may ultimately be changed to a Chemical Oxygen Demand component; and (2) the Disposal Costs may be adjusted annually by the District No. 2 Board of Directors to reflect increases or decreases in the costs incurred by District No. 2. · (6) "Districts": Collectively, County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, which are parties to this Agreement and to the Joint Ownership Operation and Construction Agreement dated March 10, 1971, superseded by:.~ a revised Joint Agreement effective July 1, 1985 ("Joint Agreement"), and/or any amendmen~:::.: . or supplements thereto, and any Sanitation Districts that are formed after the effective date of-:-: this Agreement and which become a party to the Joint Agreement, or if an agency reorganization_ '. should occur, the successor agency/agencies to these County Sanitation Districts. Any aci, .... decision or forbearance by Districts shall be evidenced by action of a majority of the nine...:.:: Sanitation Districts. The term includes plural and/or possessive where appropriate. (7) "District No. 2": County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California, or if an agency reorganization should occur, the successor agency to District No. 2-: -~; ; (8) "Districts' Ordinance": The Districts' ordinance entitled "Wastewater Discharge Regulations", effective February 7, 1992, including any subsequent amendments~1.: thereof or successor ordinances thereto. . -_., (9) "Reclaimable Wastewater": Shall mean the liquid and solid waterborne wastes of such character as to permit satisfactory disposal, within the Santa Ana River.:. Watershed. (10) "MGD": Shall mean million gallons per 24 hour day. (11) "Monthly Average Flow": The average rate of Wastewater flow which passes through a flow meter during any calendar month, expressed in MGD. (12) "Person": Shall mean any individual, partnership, firm, association, corporation or public agency, including the State of California and the United States of America. (13) "Santa Ana River Interceptor" ("SARI"): The interceptor sewer of District No. 2, as shown on Exhibit "B" attached to the Waste Water Interceptor Capacity Agreement. (14) "Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA)": The agency which is responsible for developing and implementing long-range plans and projects for managing, preserving, and protecting the quality of water .supplies in the Santa Ana River Watershed. The WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 2 July 11, 1996 member agencies of SAWPA are presently CBMWD, Eastern Municipal Water District, Orange County Water District, San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, and Western Municipal Water District. (15) "SAWPA's SARI Service Area": The total area within the jurisdictional boundaries of SA WP A's member agencies, excluding any area within the County of Orange. (16) "Suspended Solids": Any insoluble material contained as a component of Wastewater and capable of separation from the liquid portion of the waste by filtration as determined by EPA approved testing methods. Suspended solids are sometimes denoted herein by "SS". (17) "Treatment and Disposal Right": A right of SAWPA to deliver (through the SARI to Districts' facilities) and an obligation of Districts to receive, treat and dispose of a stated flow of Wastewater, expressed in terms of Monthly Average Flow. (18) "Treatment and Disposal Right Charge" (hereinafter "Treatment Right Charge"): Shall mean the charge applicable_ to the purchase of a 1 MGD increment of the Treatment and Disposal Right. The Treatment Right Charge applicable upon execution of this Agreement shall be as follows: (Flow, gpd1)/399 gpd x Adjusted CFCC x 42 % + (BOD, lbs/day)/0.83 lbs/day x Adjusted CFCC x 26% + (SS, lbs/ day)/0. 83 lbs/ day x Adjusted CFCC x 32 % Current application of the Treatment Right Charge provides the following acquisition charge for 1 MGD increment of the Treatment and Disposal Right: Flow (1 mgd) - BOD (320 mg/L = 2,669 lbs/day) - SS (270 mg/L = 2,253 lbs/day) - TOTAL: $1,778,947.00 $1,412,961.00 $1,467,299.00 $4,659,207.00 The Treatment Right Charge formula may be periodically adjusted by District No. 2 to reflect (1) changes in the District No. 2 Capital Facilities Connection Charge; (2) adjustments in the allocations for District No. 2 costs for collection facilities; and (3) adjustments in the treatment cost allocations for Flow, BOD and Suspended Solids discharged from SAWPA's SARI Service Area to Districts' facilities; and (4) the actual BOD and Suspended Solids concentrations discharged from SA WP A's SARI Service Area to Districts' facilities, to appropriately reflect the Districts' treatment costs for these discharges. 1 gpd -gallons per day WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 3 July 11, 1996 (19) "Wastewater": Shall mean all liquid-canied wastes and wastewater of the community, and shall include all wastewater from any producing, manufacturing, processing, agricultural, or other similar operations. (20) "Waste Water Interceptor Capacity Agreement": An agreement between CBMWD and District No. 2 effective on April 12, 1972, and providing for the acquisition by CBMWD of a 30 MGD interceptor capacity right in the existing and expanded interceptor facilities of District No. 2. B. RECITALS 1. Districts are authorized by statute to contract with any district or governmental agency for the handling, treatment and/or disposal of Wastewater originating within or without their boundaries, if, in the judgment of the Districts' Boards of Directors, it is for the best interest of Districts to do so. 2. SA WP A is authorized by law to acquire, construct and operate facilities for the collection, treatment and disposal of sewage and Wastewater, and is authorized to join with one or more public agencies, private corporations, or other persons for the purpose of carrying out any of its powers. 3. On April 12, 1972, Districts and CBMWD entered into the Waste Water Treatment and Disposal Agr.eement (" 1972 Agreement") through which CBMWD acquired the right to acquire an ultimate Treatment and Disposal Right for 30 MGD of Wastewater flow to Districts' facilities. 4. On November 13, 1974, CBMWD assigned and transferred to SAWPA all of CBMWD's right, title and interest in the 1972 Agreement. To date, SA WPA has acquired a Treatment and Disposal Right of 8 MGD. 5. The parties acknowledge that this Agreement provides a right to have Wastewater flows, identified herein, treated and disposed of at Districts' facilities. As set forth in the definition of "Treatment and Disposal Right", the parties contemplate that delivery of Wastewater to Districts' treatment and disposal facilities will occur through the SARI. This Agreement does not, however, provide SA WP A with any capacity rights for discharge of Wastewater through the SARI. Except as set forth in Section 27 herein, capacity rights in the SARI are governed solely by the Waste Water Interceptor Capacity Agreement. 6. SAWPA, including the Orange County \\later District, and Districts are concerned with the continuing development of a regional water quality management program for SA WP A's SARI Service Area, consistent with Federal and State policies. The operation of the SARI for the disposal of Wastewater is a significant component of this program. WOODRUFF. SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 4 July 11, 1996 7. The parties acknowledge that the discharge of Reclaimable Wastewater to the SARI has occurred over time. It is the intent of the parties hereto that SA WP A will, in good faith, make all reasonable efforts to minimize Reclaimable Was_tewater discharges to the SARI. 8. It is in the best interests of Districts and SA WPA to enter into an agreement whereby Wastewater originating in SA WP A's SARI Service Area upstream from Districts may be disposed of through existing and expanded facilities of Districts. C.COVENANTS IN CONSIDERATION of the premises and of the covenants, rights and obligations herein, the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: 1. Treatment and Disposa1 Rieht. (a) Grant of Right. Districts hereby grant and convey to SA WPA a Treatment and Disposal Right, as hereinafter provided, effective at the times provided in subparagraphs (c) and (d) hereof. (b) Nature of Treatment and Disposal Rfaht. The right of SAWPA to deliver Wastewater under the Treatment and Disposal Right shall not be deemed a right to use any particular existing or expanded facility of Districts. Districts shall have sole discretion, as between Districts and SA WP A, with regard to the manner of treatment and disposal of such Wastewater. (c) Ouantitv of Treatment and Disposal Right. An ultimate Treatment and Disposal Right of 30 MGD Monthly Average Flow may be acquired by SAWPA in increments as herein specified. It is acknowledged that SA WP A has previously acquired a Treatment and Disposal Right of 8 MGD Monthly Average Flow. Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, SA WP A shall pay Districts, at the current Treatment Right Charge rate, for the acquisition of an additional Treatment and Disposal Right of 1 MGD. Upon payment of these funds to Districts, SA WP A shall have a total Treatment and Disposal Right of 9 MGD. (1) The Districts' acknowledge that their connection charges are presently the subject of an internal review which may lead to an adjustment of these connection charges. If an adjustment of Districts' connection charges occurs which would have resulted in a reduced charge for the initial Treatment and Disposal Right to be acquired by SA WPA pursuant to Section l(c), the Districts shall credit SAWPA for the difference in the actual and reduced charge and shall apply the difference against the then-current obligations of SA WP A to Districts under this Agreement. (d) Effective Date and Term of Right. The effective date of the acquisition of the subsequent increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Right acquired herein by SA WP A shall be upon final payment of the sum herein specified therefor. The Treatment and Disp·osal Right, including the existing right and any increased increment thereof, shall continue in effect WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_ 1 5 July 11, 1996 until April 12, 2046. The Parties acknowledge that it is possible that, within the term of this Agreement, consolidation or other fundamental changes may occur in the structural organization of Districts and/or SA WPA. It is the intent of the Parties that the rights and obligations of this contract will be binding on such changed organizations. It is contemplated that, at the end of the term of this Agreement, on April 12, 2046, SA WPA will, based upon the Districts' then current governance structure, join the Districts as a co-equal participant in the Districts' Joint Ownership Operation and Construction Agreement or any agreement which shall supersede or replace it. Negotiations to this end shall be undertaken in good faith during the 45th year (2041) of this Agreement. In consideration of the capital costs paid by SA WP A, there shall be no additional initial capital cost to SA WPA for such joinder. In the event the Parties are not able to negotiate appropriate joinder of SA WP A with the Districts on or before the end of the term of this Agreement and SA WP A's perpetual right is not otherwise confirmed by contract extension, for reasons other than the decision of SA WP A to abandon such right, the Districts shall repay to SA WP A an amount equal to the then current value of SA WP A's owned Treatment and Disposal Right in Districts' treatment and disposal system as defined by the formula in Definition (18) "Treatment Right Charge" at page 3 of this Agreement. 2. Capital Payments. In order to grant SA WP A a Treatment and Disposal Right, Districts have invested capital in treatment and ocean disposal facilities. In lieu of making its own capital investment in these physical facilities, SA WP A shall make the following payments for the Treatment and Disposal Right: (a) Capacity Increments. Additional Treatment and Disposal Rights may be acquired in increments of 1 MGD Monthly Average Flow. The purchase price therefor shall be payable as follows: (1) For Each 1 MGD Monthly Average Flow Increment: SAWPA shall pay a sum equal to Districts' then existing Treatment Right Charge for each 1 MGD Monthly Average Flow increment of the Treatment and Disposal Right. SA WP A shall acquire additional increments of the Treatment and Disposal Right as follows: (A) Whenever SAWPA's Monthly Average Flow discharged to Districts' facilities exceeds SA WP A's then existing Treatment and Disposal Right, SA WPA shall acquire sufficient additional increments of the Treatment and Disposal Right so that SA WP A's total Treatment and Disposal Right exceeds that Monthly Average Flow. (For example, assuming SA WPA's existing Treatment and Disposal Right is 8 MGD and the Monthly Average Flow from March I through March 31 is 10.001 MGD, SA WPA shall acquire three additional 1 MGD increments of the Treatment and Disposal Right). (2) SA WP A may elect to pay for an additional increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Rigbt over a 10 year period. If SA WPA so elects, the payments shall be made in 10 equal annual installments, which installments shall include a fixed rate of interest at the rate for ten-year United States Treasury Bills plus 1 % . This fixed rate of interest shall be determined by reference to the interest rate established at the auction of ten-year United States Treasury Bills occurring most recently b~fore SA WP A's exceedence of its Monthly Average WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 6 July 11, 1996 Flow. The first installment shall be prud within 45 days of the date of Districts' invoice to SA WP A. Each of the nine subsequent annual installments shall be paid no later than 45 days following the anniversary date of the exceedence. (A) If SA WPA elects to proceed by installment acquisition, Districts shall recalculate the payment amount due for each annual installment using the average BOD and Suspended Solids loadings for the one year period immediately preceding the date each installment payment is due. The interest rate on each installment shall remain at the rate originally fixed pursuant to Section 2(a)(2). No credit shall be provided to SAWPA on an installment acquisition for any adjustment of Districts' connection charges except as specified in Section l(c)(l). (B) Upon SAWPA's written notice received by Districts at least 15 days in advance of the anniversary date of the initial exceedence, SA WP A may discontinue the acquisition of the increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Right as of that anniversary date. An acquisition may not be discontinued at any time other than on an anniversary date. Upon discontinuance in accordance with this Section, SA WP A shall have no further obligation to pay Districts for additional installments for the affected increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Right and no further right to discharge in accordance therewith. (C) If, following discontinuance of the acqu1s1t1on of an increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Right, SA WP A acquires an additional increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Right pursuant to Sections 2(a)(l) or 2(a)(2), SA WPA shall receive a credit toward the acquisition cost of the additional increment(s). The credit shall be equal to 75 % of the amount, excluding interest, previously paid by SA WP A pursuant to Section 2(a)(2) toward the earlier acquisition of the discontinued increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Right. If the subsequent acquisition is an installment acquisition made pursuant to Section 2(a)(2), the credit shall be applied to the first installment(s) to be paid by SA WPA for the subsequent acquisition. The cost of the subsequent acquisition shall be at the Treatment Right Charge rate applicable at the time of the initial payment for the subsequent acquisition, plus interest as set forth in Section 2(a)(2). (3) Districts shall provide to SA WP A an invoice stating the amount due from SA WP A for the required capacity increment(s) and for any other amounts due pursuant to this Agreement. Failure to provide a timely invoice does not negate SA WPA's obligation to pay any amounts owed to the Districts. 3. Emergencv Discharge. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2(a)(l)(A), if due to an operational emergency SA WP A seeks to discharge in excess of its then-existing Treatment and Disposal Right, SA WP A may do so for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days, without incurring the obligation to acquire an additional increment(s) of the Treatment and Disposal Right, provided that SA WP A fully complies with the provisions of this Section and all other provisions of this Agreement. WOODRUFF. SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 7 July11,1996 (a) Prior to or by the next business day following the commencement of the emergency discharge, SA WPA shalJ provjde written notice to Districts identifying the (1) nature of the emergency requiring the excess discharge; (2) the anticipated duration of excess discharge; and (3) the name of the SA WPA employee whom the Districts may contact for further information. (b) The Districts may impose on SA WP A such conditions on the excess discharge as reasonably appropriate to protect the Districts' collection and treatment facilities. (c) In addition to the payment of Disposal Costs for the entire daily flow, SA WP A shall pay a surcharge on the flow exceeding SA WP A's then-existing Treatment and Disposal Right. The surcharge shall be calculated applying the same rate which the Districts are then applying to Districts' Class I Users for capacity purchases. (d) If, upon expiration of the ninety (90) day period, SAWPA's Monthly Average Flow continues to exceed SA WP A's then-existing Treatment and Disposal Right, SA WP A shall immediately acquire additional increments of the Treatment and Disposal Right sufficient to exceed SAWPA's Monthly Average Flow. (e) As used in this Section 3, "operational emergency" shall mean an equipment breakdown or other malfunction which necessitates SA WP A's discharge in excess of its then-existing Treatment and Disposal Right. 4. Payment of Disposal Costs. SA WP A shall pay Disposal Costs quarterly for the measured and sampled flow of Wastewater discharged from SA WP A's SARI Service Area to Districts' facilities. For purposes of such payment, the Districts will determine quarterly an estimate of projected Wastewater discharges to Districts in the succeeding calendar quarter, and shall invoice the Disposal Costs accordingly. Annual adjustments, based on actual flow, BOD and Suspended Solids shall be made by appropriate payment or refund after the close of each of Districts' fiscal years. Disposal Costs shall be calculated at the same rate for all Treatment and Disposal Rights, regardless of the acquisition date. 5. Quality Criteria. The quality of Wastewater discharged from SA WP A's SARI Service Area into the Districts' facilities shall comply with all prohibitions and limits on discharges and all other requirements set forth in the Districts' Ordinance, and any amendments thereof or successor ordinances thereto. Except as hereinafter set forth in this Section S(a), compliance by SA WPA with all discharge limits contained in Districts' Ordinance shall be measured at the Green River Metering Station near the _point of connection between SA WP A and Districts' facilities. Nothing herein shall alter the requirement that all users who discharge, directly or indirectly, to the SARI shall comply with all discharge limits at their original point of discharge to the sewerage system or that SA WP A, to ensure such compliance, is obligated to act in accordance with the 1991 Memorandum of Understanding between Districts and SA WPA, and any amendments thereof or successor Memorandum of Understanding thereto. WOODRUFF. SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 8 July11,1996 (a) The Parties hereto acknowledge that the Districts are not presently requiring SA WP A to meet any discharge limits measured in pounds per day, including but not limited to the BOD discharge limit which is set forth in Districts' Ordinance. Districts reserve the right to impose reasonable discharge limits measured in· pounds per day on SA WP A, measured at the location(s) acceptable to both Parties. (b) SA WP A shall, upon Districts' request, furnish and periodically update a list of all persons discharging Wastewater into SAWPA 's system, together with a statement of the approximate volume and quality of such discharges. It is not intended that this Agreement will furnish SA WP A a competitive advantage in the locatio.n of industrial plants within SAWPA's SARI Service Area or at a location tributary to the SARI. Accordingly, SAWPA shall not without prior written consent of Districts, make capacity in its system available to any person who was declined Wastewater service from Districts by reason of that person's inability to meet the Districts' Ordinance requirements, prohibitions or discharge limits. (c) A quality monitoring program for Wastewater discharged from SAWPA's SARI Service Area to Districts, which program is acceptable to all parties shall be established and maintained and all costs thereof shall be borne by SA WP A. (d) Should the EPA, California Environmental Protection Agency, Regional Water Quality Control Board or any other regulatory agency with authority over Districts lawfully direct that the Districts further regulate SAWPA's discharge and/or activities, SAWPA shall comply with such additional discharge limits and/or directives. (e) SA WPA shall not discharge or allow the discharge of any sludge to the SARI. (f) The Districts may authorize the discharge to the SARI of certain side stream flows from water treatment facilities located in SA WP A's SARI Service Area. No discharge of side stream flows shall commence unless SA WP A has first obtained written authorization, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, from Districts for the discharge, which authorization may contain conditions and requirements acceptable to both Parties. 6. Quality Violations. SA WP A shall comply with all requirements, prohibitions and discharge limits set forth in Districts' Ordinance. In the event the Wastewater delivered by SA WP A into the Districts' facilities fails to comply with the requirements, prohibitions or discharge limits of Districts' Ordinance, Districts reserve the right, upon twenty-four (24) hours' notice, to suspend all or part of SA WPA's use of the Districts' facilities and to suspend the exercise by SA WP A of all or part of its Treatment and Disposal Right until such time as the Wastewater complies with Districts' Ordinance. WOODRUFF. SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 9 July 11, 1996 (a) In the event that SA WPA fails to comply with any requirements set forth in Districts' Ordinance, including but not limited to all discharge prohibitions or limits, SA WP A shall be subject to enforcement actions pursuant to all applicable federal, state and local laws, including but not limited to California Government Code section 54739 et seq. and Districts' Ordinance, Article 6, Section 615, and any subsequent or successor section thereto. In addition, SA WPA shall pay to Districts all reasonable costs of any damage to Districts' facilities caused by the discharge of Wastewater from SAWPA's SARI Service Area to Districts' facilities. These costs shall include but not be limited to any costs of repair, investigation and Districts' administrative overhead. 7. Reclaimable Wastewater. SA WPA shall, in good faith, make reasonable efforts to minimize direct or indirect Reclaimable Wastewater discharges to the SARI, which discharges originate in SA WP A's SARI Service Area. 8. Metering. SA WP A shall pay all costs, including but not limited to, equipment costs, employee time and administrative overhead associated with maintaining, calibrating, reading, testing, repairing, adjusting and, if it becomes necessary, replacing the recording and totalizing flow meter at the Green River Metering Station. SA WP A shall also reimburse the Districts for all costs associated with the installation, maintenance and repair of electronic/ telemetry equipment which allows the Districts to monitor flow through the Green River Metering Station from other District facilities. Should the meter malfunction, flows shall be estimated using the average flows of the three previous months until such time as the meter is repaired. All repairs to the flow meter shall be accomplished by SA WPA within a reasonable time. 9. Assignment. This Agreement shall not be transferred or assigned by SA WP A without the prior written consent of Districts, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall prevent SA WPA from designating for, or allocating to, public agencies or other users within SA WP A's SARI Service Area upstream from Districts, a portion of the Treatment and Disposal Right provided for herein, so long as such action does not affect SA WP A's liabilities and obligations to Districts. SA WP A shall be the public entity having primary responsibility for regional reallocation, in the area upstream from Districts, of this Treatment and Disposal Right. 10. Fees/Charges. To the extent that Districts establish any fee for capital assessments or any other fees adopted pursuant to California Health and Safety Code section 5470 et seq., or other legislative authorization, which fees are not duplicative of the fees herein and which are applicable to dischargers within Districts' service area, SA WP A shall be obligated to pay such fees in the same manner as the dischargers within Districts' service area. For purposes of this section, the term "fees" shall be synonymous with "charges". 11. Protection of Districts Facilities. SA WP A acknowledges that Districts' policy provides for the Wastewater flow from SAWPA's SARI Service Area to be sent to Districts' Plant No. 2 treatment works in Huntington Beach due to the high levels of Total Dissolved Solids in the Wastewater and the discharge from the Stringfellow Treatment Facility. WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_ 1 10 July11,1996 Furthermore, SA WPA acknowledges that when water reclamation occurs at Districts' Plant No. 1, Districts cannot accept the wastewater discharge from the Stringfellow Treatment Facility at Plant No. 1. If Districts determine to repair or replace Districts' facilities or need to divert, on a temporary basis, the flow received from SA WPA's SARI Service Area to Districts' Plant No. 1, Districts shall provide written notice to SA WP A of this determination to divert to Plant No. 1 as soon as reasonably practicable. In accordance with this notice, SA WPA shall, at its sole expense, prevent the discharge of Wastewater to the SARI from the Stringfellow Treatment Facility, or such other source of Wastewater within SA WP A's SARI Service Area that Districts determine may adversely affect the operation of Districts' facilities during the diversion by Districts of SA WPA flow to Districts' Plant No. 1. Nothing in this Section 11 is intended to preclude the discharge from SA WP A's SARI Service Area of discharges consisting solely of other wastewater brines. While the parties are presently unable to predict events which may lead to diversions of the Wastewater flow from SA WP A's SARI Service Area to Districts' Plant No. 1, it is the parties' estimate that such diversions will not average more than ten (10) business days annually. During such diversions, the Districts will provide a temporary discharge location within the County of Orange for the discharge by SA WP A of the wastewater discharge from the Stringfellow Treatment Facility to Districts' facilities. 12. Acts of God. Neither party hereto shall be liable for failure to comply with any term or condition of this Agreement by reason of flood, fire, earthquake or act of God; provided, that due diligence is exercised to repair or replace facilities damaged and to perform hereunder following such occurrence. Districts and SA WP A shall each pay their proportional share of the net cost of such replacement, based upon the capacity held and used by each at such time. 13. Arbitration. In the event of a dispute as to the construction, interpretation or implementation of this Agreement or any rights or obligations hereunder, the issues in dispute shall be submitted to arbitration. (California Code of Civil Procedure, Part 3, Title 9, §1280 et seq.) For such purpose, an agreed arbitrator shall be selected, or in the absence of agreement, each party shall select an arbitrator and those two arbitrators shall select a third. Discovery may be conducted in connection with the arbitration proceeding pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure, § 1283. 05. The arbitrator, or three arbitrators acting as a board, shall take such evidence and make such investigation as deemed appropriate and shall render a written decision on the matter in question. The arbitrator shall decide each and every dispute in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The arbitrator's decision and award shall be subject to judicial review for errors of fact or law in the Superior Court for the County of Orange, with a right of appeal from any judgment issued therein. 14. Attorney Fees. Each party will pay its own costs and attorney fees associated with any litigation or other proceeding concerning the provisions of this Agreement. 15. 1 ~72 Agreement. The 8 MGD Treatment and Disposal Right previously acquired by SA WPA pursuant to the 1972 Agreement shall, upon the effective date of this Agreement, be deemed to have been acquired by SA WP A pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. This present Agreement supersedes all terms and conditions of the 1972 Agreement between WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 , 1 Julyll.1996 CBMWD and Districts, the rights and obligations of which Agreement were assigned by CBMWD to SA WPA in 1974. The 1972 Agreement shall have no further effect as of the effective date of this Agreement. 16. Integration. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of the parties as to those matters contained herein. No prior or contemporaneous oral or written understandings shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered by this Agreement, except that nothing herein shall affect the terms of the April 1, 1991 Memorandum of Understanding between Districts and SA WP A. 17. Modifications. This Agreement shall not be changed, modified or supplemented except in a writing signed by the parties hereto. 18. No Waiver. No delay or omission in the exercise of any right or remedy available hereunder shall impair such right or remedy or be construed as a waiver. Any waiver of any default or condition hereunder must be in writing and shall not be construed as a waiver of any other default concerning the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 19. Headings. Headings of the Sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not be deemed to constitute a part hereof. 20. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, such provision shall be severable from the rest of this Agreement and the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired by such determination. 21. Notices. All notices and other communications given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered or mailed by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, and postage prepaid, addressed as follows: If to SAWPA: If to Districts: Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority Attention: General Manager 11615 Sterling Avenue Riverside, California 92503 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Attention: General Manager P. 0. Box 8127 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92728-8127 22. Interpretation of Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed as if prepared by all parties hereto. The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_ 1 12 July 1 1, 1996 23. Counterparts and Execution. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, and each of which shall be deemed an original Agreement, and all of which constitute one Agreement. 24. Limitation on Discharge. Except to the extent connections presently exist, SAWPA shall not allow, directly or indirectly, the discharge to the SARI of any Wastewater originating outside SA WP A's SARI Service Area, unless SA WPA first obtains Districts' written approval of such discharge. 25. Termination. The terms of this Agreement shall expire on April 12, 2046. 26. Third Party Beneficiaries. No benefit to any third party is intended by this Agreement. 27. SARJ Capacity Riehts. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to create any right of SA WPA to capacity in the SARI, nor any obligation of Districts to provide such capacity. Capacity rights for the SARI are set forth in the Waste Water Interceptor Capacity Agreement, except that the second sentence in Section 8 (pages 6-7) of that Agreement shall be amended to read as follows: "The flow level from SA WP A's SARI Service Area shall not exceed SA WP A's then-current Treatment and Disposal Right acquired pursuant to the 1996 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Agreement between SA WP A and the Districts and, in no event, shall exceed the capacity right acquired pursuant to this Waste Water Interceptor Capacity Agreement." 28. Stormwater Discharges. The parties hereto aclmowledge that the discharge of stormwater to the SARI is not authorized. SA WP A shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that neither public agencies nor private persons or entities discharge stormwater directly or indirectly to the SARI. 29. Interest. In the event that SAWPA fails to make payment within forty-five (45) days from the date of any of Districts' invoices, SAWPA shall, pursuant to California Health and Safety Code section 5473.10, pay interest at the rate of one and one half percent (1 ½ % ) per month on charges and fees owed to Districts or District No. 2. 30. Changes in Fees/Charges. The parties aclmowledge that Districts may adopt fundamental changes in the formulas used for assessing fees and charges to Districts' users. If such fundamental changes are adopted, the parties agree to negotiate in good faith to establish new equitable fees and charges applicable to the discharge from SA WP A's SARI Service Area to Districts' facilities. 31. Meet and Confer. The parties shall meet and confer within one (1) year following the effective date of this Agreement to determine whether the provisions of this Agreement are functioning as anticipated and to attempt, in good faith, to resolve any issues arising during the implementation of this Agreement. The parties may meet at any other time during the term of this Agreement toward the same end. WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 13 July 11, 1996 32. Notice Re Continuing Guaranty, On or before July 1 of each year during the term of this Agreement, SA WP A shall provide written notice to the Districts allocating among SAWPA's members the respective percentages of SAWPA's total liability to Districts for which each SA WPA member agency is guaranteeing payment pursuant to the attached Continuing Guaranty of Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Agreement. Each percentage allocated shall be deemed that member agency's pro rata share of SA WPA's financial obligations to the Districts during the immediately succeeding year (July 1 -June 30). In no event shall the combined percentages allocated in the written notice be less than 100% of SA WPA;s total liability to the Districts. SA WP A's timely delivery to the Districts of notice in compliance with this Section is a material term of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: THOMAS L. WOODRUFF, SANTA ANA WATERSHED PROJECT AUTHORITY By: ~~tt~ • COUNTY SANITATION District NO. 1 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, for itself and on behalf of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California Districts',.f ounsel ) ' .l ,, 1 ,!-.t~11· . WOODRUFF. SPRADLIN & SMART 32319_1 14 July 11, 1996 ') FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. 04/14/99 04/28/99 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary G. Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Steve Kozak, Financial Manager 13 (b) SUBJECT: REPORT AND ACTIONS ON CREDIT ENHANCEMENT FACILITIES FOR THE DISTRICT'S SERIES "A" AND "C" VARIABLE RATE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION LONG-TERM BORROWINGS (FAHR99-25) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve FGIC proposal for 20 basis points annual commitment fee for the Standby Bond Purchase Agreement for the Series "C" COPs, effective May 1, 1999 through September 1, 2002. 2. Authorize the Director of Finance to execute an Amendment to the Standby Bond Purchase Agreement for the revised annual commitment fee of 20 basis points for the Series "C" COPs, for the period May 1, 1999 to September 1, 2002. SUMMARY This agenda item reports on the results of initial efforts to develop and implement improvements to the existing credit enhancement facilities for District's variable rate Certificates of Participation (COPs) financing program. Approval of this item will generate approximately $500,000 in cost savings over the remaining term of the Agreement, approximately 3.3 years, from reduced commitment fees for the Standby Bond Purchase Agreement for the Series "C" COPs. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. ~ Not applicable (information item) \lradonldata1w,p.dta\fin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-25.doc RIIYised: 8/20198 Page 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Credit Enhancement Facilities In some municipal debt issues, such as the District's variable rate COPs, Letters of Credit (LOCs) and Standby Bond Purchase Agreements (Standby Agreements), are used in the financing structure as additional sources of security and/or liquidity. These LOCs and Standby Agreements are called credit enhancement facilities. In some cases, the financing structure can also include municipal bond insurance for additional security. Generally, variable rate bonds, such as the District's variable rate COPs, require credit enhancement facilities to increase and maintain the confidence of investors in the security of the bond issue. This makes an issue easier to sell and reduces the interest cost of the bonds. The banks which supply the LOCs or Standby Agreements, commit to make principal and interest payments on a bond issue in the event that the public agency issuer is unable to do so. Also, these facilities are used to provide liquidity for the retirement of bonds that are called for redemption. Fees are paid by the public agency which issues the bonds to the bank which provides the credit enhancement facility to maintain the LOCs and Standby Agreements. Such fees become part of the local agency's cost of ~arrowing over the life of the bond issue. Current District ·Credit Enhancements The table below provides a summary description of the current credit enhancement facilities for the District's variable rate COPs. The Series "A," "C," and 1993 Refunding COPs are daily COPs, while the 1992 Refunding is a weekly COP. The interest rates on the COPs vary, and are reset in either a "daily'' or a "weekly'' mode by the Remarketing Agent. COP DESCRIPTION CREDIT ENHANCEMENT Series "A" NatWest Irrevocable LOC Issued Dec 5, 1990 Expires: 13 Dec 2000 $87.2 M Fee: 30 bp/yr x LOC Stated Amt Series "C" FGIC-SPI Standby Bond Purchase Issued Sept 1 , 1992 Agreement $88.4M Expires: 1 Sept 2002 Fee: 37 bp/yr x Daily Average Amt of the Available Commitment 1992 Refunding (with Barclay's Standby Bond Purchase AIG Swap) Agreement Issued Dec 3, 1992 Expires: 28 Jan 2000 $144.5 M Fee: 25 bp/yr x Daily Average Amt 1993 Refunding (with SocGen Irrevocable LOC SocGen Swap) Expires: 16 Aug 2016 Issued Sept 21, 1993 Fee: 25 bp/yr x Maximum Amt to be Drawn $44.6 M \\radonldata1\wp.dtalfin\210~rane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-25.doc Revised: 8/20/98 BOND REMARKETING INSURANCE AGENT N/A PaineWebber FGIC J.P. Morgan AMBAC PaineWebber AMBAC PaineWebber Page2 Review Process Staff, in conjunction with remarketing agents, financial advisor, and bond counsel, developed and implemented a process to solicit proposals from banking institutions for substitution of the LOC for the Series "A" COPs, and the Standby Agreement for the Series "C" COPs. This first phase initiative was undertaken as discussed below. An analysis of the credit enhancement facilities for the 1992 and 1993 Refunding COPs was deferred due to the added complexities of the long-term SWAP, or Interest Exchange Agreements, associated with these financings. These issues will be reviewed in a second phase effort. National Westminster Bank (NatWest), the current provider of the LOC for the Series "A" COPs, informed the District that, under their strategic reorganization plan, the bank would be shedding their credit enhancement banking services, and would not renew the existing LOC with the District when it expires in December 2000. Comparisons of recent market pricing for Standby Agreement liquidity facilities showed that the 37 basis points fee for the Series "C" COPs could be reduced by as much as 15 to 20 basis points for the three-year period remaining on the existing Standby Agreement. A Request for Qualifications and Fee Quote was prepared and sent to ten banks which were pre-qualified from a master list of twenty-four banks. The banks were invited to propose on one or both of the COPs. Four banks submitted proposals to provide a substitute Standby Agreement for the Series "C" COPs, and one of the four also proposed on the substitute LOC for the Series "A" COPs. The provider of the existing Series "C" Standby Agreement, Financial Guaranty Insurance Corporation (FGIC), offered a substantial reduction in their current commitment fee (from 37 to 20 basis points), effective May 1, 1999, for the remaining term of the Agreement. The Agreement terminates on September 1, 2002. Findings, Series "A" LOC During the course of the RFQ process, we learned that banks who are active in providing credit enhancement facilities expressed confidence in proposing on the substitute standby bond purchase agreement for the Series "C" COPs, but desired more information about the District as a credit risk with respect to the LOC, the structure of the Series "A" COPs, and more time to analyze the information. The single bank proposal received for a substitute Series "A" LOC offered no improvements from the current provider. Thus, staff recommends that a comprehensive approach/marketing package be prepared for the Series "A" COPs for return to the banks to substitute the letter of credit prior to its December 2000 expiration date. For example, one approach would be to piggyback on the research, analysis, and financial planning efforts that will be necessary for the District to complete in preparation for the issuance of new long- term borrowings next year to fund the Strategic Plan Capital Improvement Program. \lradonldata1\wp.dtallin\210\crane\FAHRIFahr99\ApJ\FAHR99-25.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page 3 Findings. Series "C" Standby Agreement Each of the bank proposals for the Series "C" Standby Agreement was reviewed for financial, legal, and remarketing considerations. The summary table below provides a comparison of the five proposals that we received for Series "C." Based on the credit rating information supplied by the banks, the proposals from Commerzbank, KBC, and Morgan Guaranty were eliminated because the rating agencies have downgraded their ratings for each of the banks, and the resulting ratings are lower than the Aaa/AAA long-term rating of the current provider. A lowering of the credit rating for the Standby Agreement could impact the daily remarketing of the COPs by making them less desirable to investors when compared to higher rated investment alternatives. In turn, the District could pay higher interest rates on the COPs to compensate investors for their increased investment risk. The remaining proposals from FGIC and Bayerische Landesbank, both Aaa/AAA rated, were thoroughly reviewed and compared. Based on this review, staff recommends approval of the FGIC proposal, as implementation and cost savings would be immediate, straightforward, and would ensure continuity for the remarketing of the Series "C" COPs. The reduction of 17 basis points in FGIC's annual fee (from 37 to 20 basis points) would become effective immediately on May 1st. This would deliver savings for a full eight months in 1999, and a total of 3.33 years, to the regular expiration of the current Standby Agreement on September 1, 2002. A simple Amendment to the Standby Agreement, stipulating the reduced commitment fee of 20 basis poi nts, would be the only document to be executed. Thus, the District would immediately capture the savings generated by the reduced fee, and would not incur any legal costs from the bank, which would decrease savings to the District. Finally, notification to bondholders and the insurer would not be required, as the provider for the Standby Agreement would not change. Likewise, credit rating confirmations by the rating agencies would not be necessary. The District would accrue $100,184 of savings in 1999, and a total savings of $500,920 for the 3.33 years remaining for the current Agreement. Bayerische Landesbank The 3-year proposal from Bayerische Landesbank is also competitively priced at a 20 basis points reduction (from 37 to 17 basis points). However, a number of factors, including legal, timing, and costs, reduce the overall benefits to the District from this proposal. \\radonldata11wp.dtalfin\210'<:rane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR9&-25.doc Revised: 8120198 Page4 The bank has proposed a number of changes to be made to the Standby Agreement. Negotiations and document review by legal counsel of both parties would delay the effective date of the new Agreement beyond May 1st. The bank requires both domestic and foreign legal review. In addition, the bond covenants require that bondholders, the insurer, and the rating agencies be notified of the substitution of the liquidity provider. The rating agencies would conduct new credit rating confirmation reviews. Even with an aggressive and uninterrupted schedule, this process would require an estimated 30 to 60 days to complete. Bond counsel has advised the District of another legal matter. Specifically, the existing Standby Agreement is not entirely clear as to the District's ability to unilaterally terminate the Agreement, and the amount of termination fees that the District would be required to pay. With an effective date of July 1st for a substitute Standby Agreement, the District would accrue a $43,898 savings in 1999, and a total savings of $485,888 for an Agreement with a 3-year term. These figures are net of the legal fees that the District would pay to complete the transaction ($32,500 for bank legal counsel, and $12,000 for District legal counsel). Additional legal costs and termination fees associated with termination of the existing Agreement, would further reduce savings to the District. . FGIC BAYERISCHE COMMERZBANK KBC MORGAN LANDESBANK GUARANTY Credit Ratings Aaa/AAA Aaa/AAA Aa3/AA-Aa3/AA-Aa3/AA+ (Long-Term) Note: All Short- Term Ratings are P1/A1+ Annual Fees 20 bp 17 bp (3 Year Term) Bank Legal Costs None Domestic: $30,000 (Paid by OCSD) Foreign: $2,500 Bank Requires No Yes New Agreement Bondholder No Yes Notification Reauired Insurer Notification No Yes Reauired Rating No Yes Confirmation Required Savings Calculation $500,920 $485,888 \lradon\data1 \wp.dta\fin\21 O\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-25.doc Revised: B/20/98 Moody's downgrade Moody's downgrade Moody's downgrade to Aa3, June 98 to Aa3, July 98 to Aa2, April 1998; rating placed on review, Oct 98; rating downgrade to Aa3, Dec 98. S&P downgrade to AA+, March 98; negative outlook issued, Jan 99. 30 bp 25 bp 19 to 21.5 bp Domestic: $25,000 Domestic: $30,000 Domestic: $30,000 Foreign: $2,500 Foreign: $3,150 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Page 5 Conclusion This report briefly reviewed the process, analysis, and results of staff's review of the credit enhancement facilities for the District's Series "A" and "C" COPs. Staff recommends that the Finance, Administration & Human Resources Committee approve the proposal from FGIC for an annual commitment fee of 20 basis points for the Series "C" Standby Bond Purchase Agreement, effective May 1, 1999 through September 1, 2002. The reducti on from 37 to 20 basis points for this period will reduce our costs by an estimated $500,920. As a follow-up action, staff will work with bond counsel to develop an updated and clarified Standby Agreement for the Series "C" COPs, and have it ready for either the extension or substitution of the Agreement for the period after September 1, 2002. Also, staff will develop a revised action plan for remarketing and solicitation of a substitute Letter of Credit for the Series "A" COPs, and will review the credit enhancement facilities for the 1992 and 1993 Refunding COPs. ALTERNATIVES NIA CEQA FINDINGS NIA ATTACHMENTS None \lladonldata1\wp.dtalfin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR9S-25.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page6 .. FAHR COMM ITTEE Meeting Date · 04/14/99 AGENDA REPORT Item Number 13 (C) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance SUBJECT: SELECTION OF CONSUL TANT TO REVIEW UNASSESSED AND UNDER-ASSESSED SEWER SERVICE FEES (FAHR99-26) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION To Bel. of Dir. 04/28/99 Item Number Authorize the General Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Commercial Resources Tax Group, Inc., to review sewer service fees and Assessor's data for a total fee not to exceed $1 million. SUMMARY The Committee has previously approved an RFP and staff report regarding proposals for the review of the District's sewer service fee program. As reported last month, two of the four firms solicited submitted proposals. Because of uncertainties within the proposals, the Committee directed staff to obtain additional information. As a result of the subsequent request, one of the original proposers has withdrawn from further consideration. The remaining firm, Commercial Resources Tax Group, Inc., has submitted two proposals for consideration; a contingency proposal and a fixed fee proposal. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY The costs of the contingency proposal would be deducted from additional revenues developed. If there are no revenues, there would be no costs. The fixed fee proposal is for $1 million. This would be the equivalent of the contingency cost, if additional revenues of $2.9 million were identified. Additional services are included in the fixed fee proposal that make it very attractive. Again, funding can be expected from revenues raised. We are aware of 2,750 parcels with an improvement value, but no square feet, which are not currently billed. Approximately 1,000 of these are owned by governmental agencies. BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ~ This item has not been budgeted. D Not applicable (information item) \lnldonldata1 \wp.dtallin\21 O'crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-26.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Annual sewer service user fees are intended to be collected as a separate line item on the property tax bill for every parcel using the sewerage system. (Some significant users are also billed directly.) The fees are based upon the types of development and the Revenue Area being served. Currently there are rates for single-family residential users, multi-family residential users, and several categories of non-residential use. This proposed review is directed at the non-residential users only. Non-residential user fees are approximately $25 million this year. The sewer service user fee is based upon the flow and strength of wastewater for the several categories per 1,000 square feet of building. Flow and strength parameters are the result of a study that was part of the Strategic Plan effort and was adopted by the Board last year. The square footage and the type of commerce are carried on the Orange County Assessor's database. Because the District uses the Assessor's database in a manner and for a purpose for which it was not designed, the information obtained is not always appropriate. Two examples include ·instances where (1) there is no square feet of improvements kept in the database, thereby generating no fees; and (2) the property use category does not match the current use, which may generate a fee that is either too high or too low. While the exact magnitude of the unassessed or under-assessed properties is not known, we do know that many tax-exempt properties are not being charged user fees, that the tenant mix in some shopping centers is resulting in undercharges, and that some commercial developments are inappropriately categorized. The current sewer service user fee ordinance allows users to apply for an adjustment if they can prove that their sewerage system use is lower than the average for their category. Many of the adjustment requests have come through the firm that has proposed on our project. The knowledge they have gained from representing users and property owners will allow them to be productive on our behalf very quickly. Much of the database can be corrected prior to the 199Si-2000 billing. CommerGial Resources Tax Group, Inc. (CRTG), has proposed an alternative to their previous contingency fee proposal. In this proposal, they and the Distri'ct would essentially form a "partnership" and work together to correct or modify property use types via site visits and to adjust estimated flows and strengths. CRTG would provide a "finding of facts" letter for each parcel reviewed. This third-party finding could be used to answer any questions and satisfy complaints from the property owner. CRTG would share the results of their field work to help us establish more accurate flow coefficients and reduce future refund requests. CRTG has already identified approximately 1,300 parcels for immediate review. These are high volume water users such as manufacturing plants and shopping centers with \lradon\data1 'wp.dtalfin\21 OlcranelFAHR\Fahr99\AprlFAHR99-26.doc Revised: Bl20l98 Page2 multiple restaurants. By concentrating on the large users first, CRTG estimates that over half of the additional revenue sources could be identified prior to the next tax bills. CRTG has restated their original offer "to abandon the OCSD sewer service fee adjustment business," if they are awarded this project. ALTERNATIVES None. CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS 1 . Withdrawal Letter GGS:lc llradon\data1\wp.dlalfinl210'cranelFAHR\Fahr99\Apl\FAHR99-26.doc Revised: 8120198 Page3 l~l,Ji~tilii~llf~,~tai~~,a~.1.,tt.iiiill~t. April 1, 1999 Gary Streed Director of Finance Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis Ave. Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7108 Dear Gary Streed: Since we are in the business of direct assessment refunds and want to continue to represent parcel owners best interests we have made a decision to withdraw from any further consideration. Thank you for the opportunity. Sincerely, ~_,?"~ Robert Lockhart President RL:lk 801 EAST KATELLA AVENUE, SUITE 200, ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92805 (714) 939-2828 FAX (714) 634-1948 FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date 4114199 AGENDA -REPORT Item Number 13 (d) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Mike Peterman, Director of Human Resources Originator: Dawn McKinley, Senior Human Resources Analyst SUBJECT: IMPLEMENT EQUITY ADJUSTMENT POLICY (FAHR99-27) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve Equity Adjustment Policy dated July 1, 1999. SUMMARY On occasion, unusual salary disparities, or inequities, develop either between an employee and the external market or between two or more employees. Typically, equity adjustments are made for one of the following reasons: 1. Brternal Equity Adjustment: To adjust an employee's salary so that it corresponds to the prevailing rate in the external market. The very competitive field of Information Technology is one area in which inequities may occur. 2. Internal Equity Adjustment: To adjust an employee's salary so that it corresponds to the job's relative value to the organization. An adjustment may be made to correct an inequity that exists between a supervisor and his or her subordinates or between an employee and his or her peer(s). An adjustment may also be made to an employee's salary when an employee's level of contribution increases significantly as the result of an increase in responsibilities. It is recommended that the attached Equity Adjustment Policy be adopted to establish uniform guidelines and procedures for use in the distribution and administration of equity adjustments. In accordance with the attached policy, equity adjustment requests will be submitted through the budget process each year. In unusual circumstances, a request may be considered outside of the budget process. Requests made outside of the budget process will be evaluated and implemented once a year in November. Human Resources will review all equity adjustment requests. Those recommended for approval will be forwarded to the General Manager who will make the final determination on the adjustments. H:lwp.dta\agenda\FAHR\Fahr99\99ar\FAHR99-27.doc R8\lised:6120198 Page 1 To Bd. of Dir. - 4128/99 Item Number • • It is further recommended that the equity adjustment pool be set each year at .25% of total payroll. The actual fund amount will be approved annually by the Board of Directors during the budget approval process and will be placed in an equity adjustment fund in the General Manager's Office. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY No immediate cost will be associated with the implementation of this policy. The recommended equity adjustment pool amount of .25% of payroll would total $72,687 for fiscal year 1999/00. BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ~ This item has not been budgeted. D Not applicable (information item) The equity adjustment fund amount of $72,687 would be placed in the Joint Operating Budget for fiscal year 1999/00. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NIA ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS 1 . Equity Adjustment Policy \lradonldata1\wp.dta\fin\210'cranelFAHR\Fahr99\Apl\FAHR99-27.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page2 . .,, @ Orange County Policy Number: C20.10 Sanitation District Effective Date: July 1, 1999 Subject: Equity Adjustments Supersedes: N/A Approved by: 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of this policy is to establish unifonn guidelines and procedures for use in the distribution and administration of equity adjustments. 2.0 ORGANIZATIONAL UNITS AFFECTED 2.1 All full-time regular employees. 3.0 DEFINITIONS 3.1 Inequity -Unusual salary disparity either between an employee and the market or between two or more employees. 3.2 Peers -Employees in the same or comparable classifications perfonning similar or comparable job duties and responsibilities. The classifications have the same or comparable requirements for education, experience, knowledge, skills and abilities. 3.3 Competencies -The education, experience, responsibilities, knowledge, skills and abilities an employee possesses. The acquisition of new or different competencies that support the operational unit tend to broaden the scope of the job. 3.4 Market -Ten comparable California utilities. 3.5 Market Rate -The average salary being paid in the market for a given job. The District conducts a salary survey every two years to detennine market rates. 4.0 POLICY 4.1 It is District policy to correct pay inequities, in accordance with this policy, that can not be remedied with the annual merit review program. 4.2 All District employees may be eligible for equity adjustments. 5.0 EQUITY ADJUSTMENT CATEGORIES 5.1 External Equity Adiustment -An equity adjustment may be made to an employee's salary so that the salary corresponds to rates prevailing in the external market for an employee's job. This adjustment may be made to bring an employee's salary closer to the market rate for his or her position. 5.2 Internal Equity Adjustment -An adjustment may be made to an employee's salary so that the salary corresponds to the job's relative value to the organization. 5.2.1 Relationship to Subordinates -An equity adjustment may be made to correct an inequity that exists between a supervisor and his or her subordinate(s). 5.2.2 Relationship to Peers -An equity adjustment may be made to correct an inequity that exists between an employee and his or her peer(s). The adjustment would be required to create or reduce differential between employees with significant differences in contribution levels. 5.2.3 Individual Equity Adjustment -An adjustment may be made to an employee's salary so that the salary corresponds to the employee's competency level. The adjustment may be made when an employee's level of contribution increases significantly as the result of an increase in responsibilities. 6.0 PROCEDURES 6.1 Equity adjustment requests are submitted as Decision Packages during the normal budget process each year. 6.2 Each Decision Package must include justification for the equity adjustment request. Justification should include the employee's name; the Equity Adjustment Category; the employee(s) with whom the inequity exists, if applicable; the amount of equity adjustment required to correct the inequity; and, any other supporting information. 6.3 In unusual circumstances, a request may be considered outside of the budget process. Consideration is initiated by submitting a Justification Memo, outlining the information listed in Section 6.2 of this policy, to Human Resources. Equity adjustments recommended outside of the budget process will be considered once a year in November. The equity adjustment, if approved, will be funded by the General Manager's contingency fund. 6.4 Human Resources will review all equity adjustment requests to ensure compliance with the District's Salary Structure and Compensation Policy; to provide market or peer comparative data; to provide data for comparison across departments; and, to provide information and advice as requested. 6.5 If an equity adjustment has been approved, either through the budget process or outside of the budget process, Human Resources will process the equity adjustment increase by generating an Employee Status Change Form and obtaining the necessary signatures. 6.6 The General Manager will sign all Employee Status Change Forms. 6.7 Equity adjustment increases authorized in the budget process will be made effective at the start of the first pay period of the new fiscal year. All other adjustments will be made effective on the first day of the pay period in which the Employee Status Change Form is submitted to Payroll. 6.8 There shall be no right to an equity adjustment. Such adjustments shall be made at the sole discretion of the District and shall not be subject to the grievance procedure or to judicial review. 7.0 EXCEPTIONS 7 .1 Employees on Performance Improvement Plans (PIP's) are not eligible for equity adjustments. 8.0 PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS 9.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS FAHR COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Originator: Gary G. Streed, Director of Finance Meeting Date To Bd. o_f Dir. 04/14/99 N/A Item Number Item Number 14 (a) SUBJECT: TRANSFER ASSETS AND SERVICE RESPONSIBILITY FOR PARK PLACE AREA GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION This is an informational item and no action is required. Staff would appreciate guidance from the Committee regarding future negotiations and processes. SUMMARY The Park Place area being considered for transfer can be described as the area bounded by the 405 Freeway, Jamboree, Campus and Carlson in Irvine. It includes the former Fluor property. Because of disputes with the property owner, Crow-Winthrop, staff has been meeting with the property owner and the IRWD. A potential resolution to the disputes could be a transfer of service responsibility to the IRWD, and a transfer of assets from OCSD Revenue Area 7 to OCSD Revenue Area 14. The enclosed staff report, IRWD staff report and position paper, more clearly describe the process and the proposal. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY There would be no cost to OCSD. Costs of OCSD treatment and OCSD capacity purchases would be paid by IRWD. Property taxes currently allocated to OCSD Revenue Area 7 would be transferred to OCSD Revenue Area 14. Connection fees for future development will be foregone by OCSD, but paid to IRWD. The attached "Estimated Revenues From Area Tributary to Michelson Stn." summarizes the current and estimated future revenues. \lradonldata1\wp.dta\fin\210'crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\ParkPlaceAR,doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page 1 BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. ~ Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Please see attached staff report. ALTERNATIVES Retain the area in OCSD Revenue Area 7 and settle the disputes with the property owner. CEQA FINDINGS NIA ATTACHMENTS 1. OCSD Staff Report 2. IRWD Staff Report 3. Position Paper 4. Estimated Revenues From Area Tributary to Michelson Stn. \lradonldata1\wp.dta\fin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\ParkPlaceAR.doc: Revised: 6/20/98 Page2 April 14, 1999 STAFF REPORT Transfer of Park Place Service Area Background For several months, staff and a few Directors have been working to resolve an issue relating to the Park Place development. Park Place can generally be described as the old Fluor property between the 405 Freeway, Jamboree and Michelson. The developer, Crow-Winthrop, has complained that the former District No. 7 has improperly assigned a 1990 agreement to the Orange County Sanitation District. A potential solution has developed that includes the Irvine Ranch Water District as well as the property owner and the OCSD Revenue Areas 7 and 14. The solution requires the Park Place properties to be serviced by the IRWD, and to be transferred from OCSD Revenue Area 7 to OCSD Revenue Area 14. This concept has preliminary approval of the property owner and the staff of both IRWD and OCSD. The IRWD Finance and Personnel Committee reviewed the concept at their April 6, 1999 meeting. (The IRWD staff report is attached.) The OCSD Steering Committee has discussed the issue and referred it to the FAHR Committee. OCSD provides local sewer maintenance and service in this area, although the property is currently within the IRWD service area. A transfer to OCSD Revenue Area 14 would allow the IRWD to provide local sewer maintenance and service and would relieve OCSD, a regional service provider, from this non-core business responsibility. In fact, the current proposal includes additional properties in the same situation between Michelson, Campus, Jamboree and Carlson. The total area to be transferred, including Park Place, is approximately 184 acres. Sewage from the area currently flows by gravity to the OCSD Michelson Pump Station. This pump station was relocated at the property owner's request to be on the Park Place site in 1990. It is both above and below ground and occupies approximately 6,000 square feet. The site was selected by the property owner and deeded to OCSD as part of the relocation. (Exclusive of land, the pump station has a value of about $2 million. The original pump station was constructed and paid for by the original property owner.) Sewage from the Transfer of Park Place Service Area Page2 April 14, 1999 station is then pumped west on Michelson, north on Von Karman, west on Main, and then pumped again at the OCSD Main Street Pump Station. IRWD has a treatment plant, the Michelson Water Reclamation Plant (MWRP), within one mile of the Park Place properties. Pumping costs would be reduced if the distance and lift is reduced by pumping east on Michelson to the MWRP. Significant Issues with IRWD As a part of the solution process, staff of OCSD and IRWD developed a listing of 8 issues that needed to be resolved. Consensus was reached on most, but not all of these issues. The issues are discussed in the attached "Combined IRWD/OCSD Position Relative to the Transfer of Park Place," and may serve to summarize the process: 1. The area should be transferred administratively within OCSD from Revenue Area 7 to 14 by action of the OCSD Board of Directors. 2. All facilities and ownership equity currently attributable to, or used by, the property would be transferred from 7 to 14 by action of the OCSD Board of Directors. 3. OCSD Revenue Area 7 cash reserves attributable to these properties would be transferred from 7 to 14. OCSD and IRWD have different points of view on the amount. This is discussed below. 4. IRWD will purchase additional treatment plant and collection system capacities as needed in accordance with existing agreements between IRWD and OCSD. 5. IRWD will own and operate the new Michelson Sewer Lift Station (MSLS) as its sole owner. 6. IRWD may route flows from their MSLS to either their MWRP or to OCSD, depending on water reclamation needs, and in accordance with existing agreements between IRWD and OCSD. 7. Property tax revenue and associated COP service obligations related to the properties, will be transferred from 7 to 14. 8. In the future, OCSD will not levy any charges for service or connection directly against the property owner; all costs will be paid by IRWO to OCSD in accordance with existing agreements and in the same manner as all other properties in OCSD Revenue Area 14. Transfer of Park Place Service Area Page 3 April 14, 1999 These issues, and the current status of staff negotiations, are summarized in the enclosed "Combined IRWD/OCSD Positions Relative to the Transfer of the Park Place Development from OCSD to IRWD." There is general agreement on all of these issues except number 3. The OCSD staff analysis indicates there are no cash reserves to transfer. Connection fees of approximately $1.5 million have been received from the property owners in this area, in addition to the site for the pump station. The cost of the pump station alone is $1.95 million, excluding land. The value of the remainder of the collection, treatment and disposal facilities required for the daily flow of .165 mgd is approximately $775,000. Clearly more assets are used to provide service, and are proposed to be transferred, than have been paid for by the current users of the system. Annual sewer user fees and property taxes allocated to the OCSD are estimated to be $170,200. Pro rata collection system maintenance, the annual share of joint operating costs, the annual share of COP service, and the flow-based share of the OCSD capital improvement program have been $106,000. Special costs to operate and maintain the pump station have been approximately $36,000 per year. Annual revenues exceeding total annual costs have been appropriated toward the unpaid pump station construction costs. Clearly, no funds have accumulated to become 'a portion of the OCSD Revenue Area 7 cash reserves balance. In fact, the shortfall between use and payments was intended to be made up from the future connection fees collected from the adjacent properties that the station was designed to serve. Significant Issues Within OCSD At its simplest, this proposal is for a transfer of service responsibility and assets within Revenue Areas of the OCSD. It becomes more complicated when the Revenue Areas are considered independently. The Revenue Area 7 Perspective Area 7 owns facilities and real property that may be transferred to Area 14. The facilities have been paid for by all of the property owners, not only by the property in question. If these facilities are transferred to Area 14, the Area 7 property owners will not be reimbursed for the added costs that are specific to this property. This unreimbursed shortfall amounts to approximately $1,246,000. Transfer of Park Place Service Area Page4 April 14, 1999 The Revenue Area 14 Perspective The existing pump station is on the Park Place development. Area 7 owns the 6,000 square-foot site. When the pump station is demolished, the land will become surplus. If the facilities and land are transferred to Area 14, the proceeds of the sale of the land will go to Area 14. The property owner has claimed the parcel has a value of between $800,000 and $1 million. A new pump station is estimated to cost $2.2 million. Future capacity and facilities that will be required to serve new users are estimated to cost an additional $2.6 million. As Revenue Area 14's flow increase, their share of the OCSD reserves policy will also increase. Conclusion The tentative calendar developed by both staffs calls for a Board decision and agreement in May in order to complete the process ahead of the June 6 expiration of the Tolling Agreement with the owner of Park Place. Staff will present the progress to date and the outstanding issues at the Committee meeting for discussion and review, and will seek guidance toward resolution. The enclosed sheet of statistics may be useful in order to keep the pertinent dollar values in mind during discussions. GGS:lc \\radon\data 1 \wp.dta\fin\21 O\crane\F AH R\F ahr99\Apr\SR ParkPlace.doc Attachments COMBINED IRWD/OCSD POSITIONS RELATIVE TO THE TRANSFER OF THE PARKPLACE DEVELOPMENT FROM OCSD TO IRWD ISSUE I. The subject area should be transferred from Area 7 to Area 14 internally and outside any LAFCO process. 2. Capacity, real property, and facilities serving existing users in OCSD's joint works treatment facility, Von Kannan trunk sewer, Main Street sewer, Baker- Gisler sewer, etc. is transferred to Area 14 at no cost and added to Area 14 existing capacity therein. 3. OCSD reserve balance shares to be transferred to benefit Area 14. OCSD POSITION IRWD POSITION l. OCSD staff will prepare a l. IRWD concurs. description of the area to be transferred using Assessor's Parcel Numbers and city street names. The area is generally described as that bordered by Jamboree, Campus, Carlson, the 405 Freeway, Michelson and the San Diego Creek. This transfer is internal to the Sanitation District, with General Counsel's approval, and will not require review or approval by LAFCO. 2. OCSD will calculate the value 2. IRWD concurs. of"capacity purchased" by the transferred area through connection fees. The dollar value of OCSD's joint works treatment facilites "purchased" by connection fees will be added to the equity of Area 14 and deducted from Area 7. This will increase the "equity percentage" of 14, while decreasing the "equity percentage" of 7. No funds will change hands. Local collection facilities currently used will be re-recorded as Area 7 and Area 14 facilities with ownership shared on an incremental capacity basis. 3. Preliminary efforts indicate that the Park Place developement benefited from being a part of a larger area and that no excess or surplus funds were received. Any transfer of reserve funds from Area 7 would disadvantage Area 7. 3. Total OCSD reserve funds should be allocated prorata to the service capacity assigned to the development parcel. Failure to transfer reserve funds in an amount equivalent to the transferred capacity will exacerbate the current underfunding of Area 14's reserves. 4. Additional capacity for future use will be purchased by IR WO. 5. IRWD will own, operate, and maintain all local collection facilities including the Michelson Sewer Lift Station (MSLS). 6. IRWD may modify or relocate any facilities at its discretion. IR WO will route flows to their MWRP or the OCSO facilities at its sole discretion. 7. Property tax revenue will be transferred to IR WO per Revenue and Taxation Code. 8. The application of user fees, standby fees, or connection fees in the transferred area. whtppr.doc 4. The existing Agreement between OCSD and IR WO provides tenns for all capacity requirements. Flows into OCSO facilities from other than the MSLS will be estimated and added to the Area 14 flows for O&M and CORF funding calculations. 5. OCSD understands the intent of th is item to be all local facilities between the new MSLS and the IRWO MWRP. In the event flows are diverted directly to the OCSO Michelson Force Main from the IR WO MSLS, OCSO (Areas 7 and 14) will remain the owner/operator of all local facilities downstream of the MSLS. 6. The new facilities are the property of IR WD and IR WO may do whatever it likes with/to them. OCSO must be notified in advance of changes in flows from the new MSLS directly to OCSO facilities, except in the case of an emergency. 7. OCSO uses property tax revenues to make COP debt service payments. In transferring "purchased capacity" from Area 7 to Area 14, the COP's debt obligation for the transferred capacity will also shift from Area 7 to Area 14. Accordingly, property tax revenue generated from the transferred area will shift from Area 7 to Area 14. 8. OCSO will not levy any fees in the transferred area as it will provide no services directly to the area. IRWO may levy user fees, standby fees, or connection fees in the transferred area in its sole discretion 4. IRWO concurs. In the event any issues emerge that are not provided for in the current IR WO -OCSO agreements, the subject agreement will be amended to provide resolution to such identified issues. 5. IRWO concurs. 6. IR WO concurs. 7. IR WD concurs. 8. IR WO concurs. 4/6/99 Michelson Pump Station Service Area Statistics 2:34 PM Revised 1 Connection Fees: Square Ft $/1000 sf Fees 2 Paid prior to 1 /95 1,961,415 $ 300 $ 588,425 3 Paid 9/95 to 5/96 112,000 470 52,640 4 Sub Total, Park Place 2,073,415 $ 641,065 5 Value of pump stn site 1,000,000 CW estimate 6 Toscana Apartments 844,500 563 apts 7 Total consideration for facilities $ 2,485,565 8 "Capacity" Purchased 9 Assumed SFR Flow, 1989 Master Plan 399 gpd 10 SFR = 5,000 sq ft non residential 11 1,000 sq ft non residential = 79.80 gpd 12 Park Place Sq Ft 2,073,415 sq ft 13 Park Place "capacity" 165,459 gpd 14 Certificates of Participation Michelson Stn Dist? 15 Outstanding COP 6/30/98 $ 163,344 $ 26,345,790 16 Annual COP Service 1998-99 $ 12,239 $ 1,974,000 17 Annual Expenditures Michelson Stn Dist? 18 Flow in mgd 0.155 25.000 19 Percent of Total 0.62% 100.00% 20 Share of Joint Operating pro rata on flow $ 29,227 $ 4,714,000 21 Share of CORF, 1998-99, pro rata on flow 30,095 4,854,000 22 Dist 7 O&M pro rata on flow 9,331 1,505,000 23 Dist 7 Capital pro rata on flow 25,203 4,065,000 24 COP Service pro rata on flow 12,239 1,974,000 25 Total $ 106,094 $ 17,112,000 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 26 Annual Michelson Pmp Stn O&M History $ 32,005 $ 35,613 $ 41,550 27 Annual Revenues Park Place Toscana Total 28 Allocated Property Tax $ 115,000 $ 1,615 $ 116,615 29 User Fee 29,951 23,646 53,597 30 Total $ 144,951 $ 25,261 $ 170,212 31 Value of Facilitites Used Michelson Stn Dist? 32 Michelson Stn $ 1,950,061 $ 1,950,061 33 Dist 7 Collection System, pro rata on flow 269,037 43,393,035 34 Land, Trmt, Disp, G&A, CIP, pro rata on flow 513,021 82,745,382 35 Total $ 2,732,119 $ 128,088,478 36 Joint Equity Percentage Michelson Stn Rev Area 7 Rev Area 14 37 3 Yr Average Flow To 6/30/98, mg/year 60.225 8,664.000 2,915.000 38 Percent to District Total 0.06972% 10.02929% 3.37435% 39 Reallocate Park Place "Capacity" 8,603.775 2,975.225 40 Percent to District Total 0.00000% 9.95957% 3.44407% g:\excel.dta\fin\210\streed\cro wintrhop Michelson tax etc_summary (2) 4/6/99 24-Feb 8-Mar 9-Mar 15-Mar 16-Mar 22-Mar 22-Mar 22-Mar 22-Mar 24-Mar 25-Mar 29-Mar 6-Apr 14-Apr 14-Apr 28-Apr 1-May 4-May 12-May 13-May 24-May 1-Jun 6-Jun 10-Jun 14-Jun 14-Jun 23-Jun 23-Jun Revised 3/16/99 Preliminary Schedule for Transfer of Park Place From Revenue Area 7 to Revenue Area 14 OCSD Steering Committee very preliminary discussion IRWD staff talks to Bill Lane regarding connection fees, user fees and the future OCSD/Crow Winthrop tolling agreement expires, is extended to Jun 9, 1999 IRWD and OCSD staff "homework" done IRWD and OCSD staff meeting at 2 pm OCSD (John Collins and Don McIntyre) meeting with Bill Lane at 9:00 am IRWD and OCSD staff meeting at 3:30 pm to review issue paper. IRWD and OCSD staff "value-free", issue-oriented white paper is prepared IRWD Board considers white paper OCSD Steering Committee considers white paper Tolling Agreement is extended to 6/9/99 or later IRWD and OCSD staff meeting at 3:30 pm IRWD Finance Committee considers transfer of property Draft 1 of transfer agreement between IRWD and OCSD OCSD FAHR Committee considers transfer of property Draft 2 of transfer agreement between IRWD and OCSD Final draft of transfer agreement between IRWD and OCSD to General Counsel IRWD Finance Committee considers transfer agreement if available, or 5/13 OCSD FAHR Committee approves transfer agreement if available IRWD Water Reclamation Committee approves transfer agreement if available, or 5/4 IRWD and OCSD changes to final draft are included in transfer agreement by Counsel IRWD Finance Committee approves final transfer agreement, or 6/1 0 Extended tolling agreement expires IRWD Water Reclamation Committee approves final transfer agreement, or 6/1 IRWD and Crow Winthrop formally agree to transfer IRWD Board approves transfer agreement OCSD and Crow Winthrop agree to release of service and lawsuit OCSD Board approves transfer agreement g:\excel.dta\fin\21 0\streed\cro winthrop sched 2:46 PM .. IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT April 6, 1999 Prepared by: Dave Ferguson Submitted by: G. P. Heiertz Approved by: Paul Jones FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE TRANSFER OF PARK PLACE SEWER RESPONSIBILITIES FROM OCSD TO IRWD SUMMARY: Staff has entered into discussions with their counterparts at OCSD to identify what terms and conditions would need to be met to transfer the sewer service responsibilities for the Park Place development from OCSD to IR WD. That effort has culminated in a joint draft position paper that summarizes the significant deal points as well as the respective position of each agency in regards to those points (see Exhibit A attached). An agreement between IRWD and OCSD relative to the subject transfer is one of the two major pieces required to complete the transfer. The second element essential to the transaction will be an agreement between IR WD and Crow Winthrop that establishes the terms and conditions under which IR WD will provide sewer service to the Park Place development. Staff has entered into discussions with representatives of Crow Winthrop and does not anticipate any significant obstacles to reaching an understanding. BACKGROUND: OCSD has constructed a sewer lift station on the Park Place site that pumps sewage to OCSD's Area 7 collection, treatment, and disposal facilities. Flows from the pump station can also be diverted to MWRP. The developers of Park Place desire to have the pump station relocated since it conflicts with the proposed development of a new hotel. Relationships between OCSD and Crow Winthrop have been somewhat strained and there is currently litigation between the two relative to the provision of sewer service, including relocation of the pump station and future connection fees. That litigation is currently held in abeyance through a tolling agreement that originally would have expired in early March but has been extended to early June. Because IRWD has nearby sewer facilities (MWRP is within a mile of the Park Place development) and can also provide a site for the relocated pump station, there is an opportunity to resolve the current difficulties by transferring the sewer service obligation to IRWD. In defining the structure under which such a transfer could take place, both IR WD and OCSD intend to insure that the Park Place development pays its fair share and neither IRWD's customers or OCSD is in any way disadvantaged by such a transfer. Finance and Personnel Committee Meeting: Park Place Sewer Transfer April 6, 199 Page 2 of 2 To that end, Exhibit A summarizes the more important considerations between OCSD and IRWD when contemplating the transfer. On seven of the eight deal points described, OCSD and IR WD are in agreement. On the issue of reserves and how they should be allocated, there is a difference of opinion. OCSD maintains that the Park Place development underpaid and there are no reserve funds allocable to the property which should be transferred from Area 7 to Area 14. And, in fact, any transfer of reserve funds would further exacerbate the underfunding problem of Area 7. IRWD, on the other hand, has maintained that reserve funds are collected through connection fees assessed and ought to be allocated prorata according to the service capacity assigned to the development parcel. If this reserve fund transfer did not occur, it would add to the current underfunding of Area 14's reserves and would place an additional obligation on Area 14 to meet its reserve requirements. OCSD staff has estimated the reserve amount allocable to the Park Place development at approximately $2 million. Staff will review each of the remaining deal points on which agreement has been reached at the Committee meeting. FISCAL IMPACTS: There are no direct fiscal impacts to IRWD beyond the fees and charges that would apply to the Park Place development. This area will stand alone and pay fees according to benefits received. RECOMMENDATION: That the Finance and Personnel Committee approve the IR WD issue positions as described in the joint white paper, including IRWD's position on reserves, and authorize staff to proceed with an agreement based on these deal points. LIST OF EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT "A" -Combined IRWD/OCSD Positions Relative to the Transfer of the Park Place Development from OCSD to IR WD finprkpl.doc 4/7/99 Estimated Revenues From Area Tributary to Michelson Stn Preliminary Estimates One-time Connection Fees Current fee schedule To date Future est, at current schedule Total, current schedule Proposed fee schedule 1,485,565 6,582,229 8,067,794 To date 1,485,565 Future est, at proposed schedule 5,687,326 -----Total, proposed schedule 7,172,891 Annual User Fees Current development Residential Commercial Subtotal-existing Estimated Future development Residential Commercial Subtotal-future Total estd annual fees Annual Property Taxes Current development Current Park Place development Current Toscana development Subtotal-existing Estimated Future development Future Park Place development Future Toscana development Subtotal-future Total estd property taxes 23,646 29,951 53,597 94,500 35,687 130,187 183,784 115,000 1,615 116,615 139,366 pro rata comm+ $40MM hotel 4,050 2250 units at $100,000 each ------143,416 260,031 g:\excel.dta\fin\210\streed\cro win future fees dfm 3:18 PM FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date-ToJt. Bds. 04/1 4199 04/r28/99 AGENDA REPORT Item Number 1~m Number Orange County Sanitation District FROM: SUBJECT: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Steve Kozak, Financial Manager TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF March 1999 (FAHR99-18) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of March 1999. SUMMARY 12 (a) Pacific Investment Management Co. (PIMCO), serves as the District's professional external money manager, and Mellon Trust serves as the District's third-party custodian bank for the investment program. The District's Investment Policy, adopted by the Board, includes reporting requirements as listed down the left most column of the attached PIMCO Monthly Report for the "Liquid Operating Monies" and for the "Long-Term Operating Monies." The District's external money manager is operating in compliance with the requirements of the District's Investment Policy. The District's portfolio contains no reverse repurchase agreements. Historical cost and the current market ("mark-to-market") values are shown as estimated by both PIMCO and Mellon Trust. The slight differences are caused by differing assumptions regarding marketability at the estimate date. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY None. BUDGET IMPACT D This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. C8] Not applicable (information item) H:lwp.dtalfin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Apr\FAHR99-18.doc Revised: 10/17/97 Page 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Schedules are attached summarizing the detail for both the short-term and long-term investment portfolios. In addition, a consolidated report of posted investment portfolio transactions for the month of March 1999 is attached. The attached yield analysis report is presented as a monitoring and reporting enhancement. In this report, yield calculations based on book values and market values are shown for individual holdings, as well as for each portfolio. Mellon Trust, the District's custodian bank, is the source for these reports. Transactions that were pending settlement at month end may not be reflected. The District's investments are in compliance with the District's adopted Investment Policy, and the California Government Code. In addition, sufficient funds are available for the District to meet its operating expenditure requirements for the next six months. The table below details the book balances of the District's funds at month-end. A graphical representation of month-end balances is shown by the attached bar chart. State of Calif. LAIF Union Bank Checking Account Union Bank Overnight Repurchase Agreement PIMCO -Short-term Portfolio PIMCO -Long-term Portfolio District 11 GO Bond Fund 921 Debt Service Reserves @ Trustees Petty Cash TOTAL ALTERNATIVES None. CEQA FINDINGS None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Monthly Investment Reports 2. Monthly Transaction Reports GGS:SK:lc H:lwp.dta\fin\21 0'<:rane\FAHR\Fah!99\Apr\FAHR99-18.doc Revised: 10/17/97 $ 10,704,486 2,773,289 581,000 18,540,703 301,749,751 3,225 32,195,043 4,400 $366,551,897 5.5 3.7 5.0 4.3 5.2 6.0 Page2 Prepared by Finance, 4/13/99, 1 :50 PM Monthly Treasurer's Report District Fund Balances $400,000,000 ------------------------------------, $300,000,000 -- $200,000,000 -t--t..o.02,2xt---~Sc.r)O...&~.------tx:>O<>Ot-----0.,..9<",X,2C~>f-----------fWSm----r><XX>O~--I $100,000,000 1---th.,!x,Y)(1-------jbe.i6(X.'.'X!------t;?Q<F&?x1--,----&~~-~M----------t">06~------r:)(_ ?9_9<;?4-_j $0 I i'Y'YY':,AJ t'.YYYX>I VVVVV\I t'.YYYY'>f ix xx xx, YVVVV)d I Oct, 98 Nov, 98 Dec, 98 23 PIMCO -Long-term m Debt Service Reserves •BankAccts m Dist 11 GO Bond Fund G:\excel.dta\fin\2220\geggi\Finance\monthly treasurers report Jan, 99 Ill PIMCO -Short-term llLAIF Petty Cash Feb,99 Mar, 99 MONTHLY REPORT ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING & REPORTING (for the month ending 31 March 1999) Liquid Operating Monies (603) 15.1.1 PORTFOLIO COST AND MARKET VALUE Current Market Value Estimate: • [I~~i? • Historical Cost: • PIMCO • Mellon 15.1.2 MODIFIED DURATION Of Portfolio: Of Index: 15.1.3 1 % INTEREST RATE CHANGE Dollar Impact (gain/loss) of 1 % Change: 15.1.4 REVERSE REPOS % of Portfolio in Reverse Repos: (see attached schedule) 15.1.5 PORTFOLIO MATURITY % of Portfolio Maturing within 90 days: 15.1.6 PORTFOLIO QUALITY Average Portfolio Credit Quality: 15.1.7 SECURITIES BELOW "A" RATING % of Portfolio Below "A": 15.1.8 INVESTMENT POLICY COMPLIANCE "In Compliance" 15.1.9 PO~TFOLIO PERFORMANCE Total Rate of Return(%) by Period: 1 Month: 3 Months: 12 Months: Year-to-Date: H: \... \FINANCE\21 0\KOZAK\SAMPLELJQ0399.RPT $18,538,515 $18,540,703 $18,591,352 $18,591,338 0.35 0.20 $65,854 0% 62% "AA+" 0% Yes Portfolio Index 0.45 0.34 1.16 1.08 5.45 4.92 1.16 0.71 MONTHLY REPORT ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PIMCO'S PERFORMANCE MONITORING & REPORTING (for the month ending 31 March 1999) Long-Term Operating Monies (203) 15.1.1 PORTFOLIO COST AND MARKET VALUE Current Market Value Estimate: • Kl~~~ • Historical Cost: • PIMCO • Mellon 15.1.2 MODIFIED DURATION Of Portfolio: Of Index: 15.1.3 1%INTERESTRATECHANGE Dollar Impact (gain/loss) of 1 % Change: 15.1.4 REVERSE REPOS % of Portfolio in Reverse Repos: (see attached schedule) 15.1.5 PORTFOLIO MATURITY % of Portfolio Maturing within 90 days: 15.1.6 PORTFOLIO QUALITY Average Portfolio Credit Quality: 15.1.7 SECURITIES BELOW "A" RATING % of Portfolio Below "A": 15.1.8 INVESTMENT POLICY COMPLIANCE "In Compliance" 15.1.9 PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE Total Rate of Return(%) by Period: 1 Month: 3 Months: 12 Months: Year-to-Date: H: \... \FINANCE\21 0\KOZAK\SAMPLEL-T0399.RPT $303,128,952 $301,749,751 $303,455,457 $303,537,484 2.38 2.34 $7,277,097 0% 16% "AAA" 0% Yes Portfolio Index 0.73 0.82 0.43 (0.41) 6.81 6.44 0.43 0.41 DRAFT FILEC IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETA!W ORANGE COUNTY SANITl\TION DISTRIC'f APR 28 1999 llY ,,f.K.. , ·-=' MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE FINANCE. ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Orange County Sanitation District Saturday, April 10, 1999, 9:00 a.m. A meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on April 10, 1999 at 9:00 a.m., in the District's Administrative Office. (1) The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: FAHR COMMITTEE MEMBERS: OTHERS PRESENT: Directors Present: Thomas Saltarelli, Chair Mark Leyes, Vice Chair Shawn Boyd Shirley McCracken Mark A. Murphy Peer Swan, Board Vice Chair John J. Collins, Past Board Chair Jan Debay, Board Chair Directors Absent: John M. Gullixson James W. Silva Other Directors Present Steve Anderson Don Bankhead Lynn Daucher Norman Z. Eckenrode Jack Mauller Joy L. Neugebauer Charles E. Sylvia Tom Woodruff, General Counsel Toby Weissert, Carollo Engineers Steve McDonald, Carollo Engineers Doris Roush, City of Anaheim Del Boyer, City of Anaheim STAFF PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager Blake Anderson, Assistant General Manager David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Bob Ooten, Director of Operations & Maintenance Gary Streed, Director of Finance Robert Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services Michelle Tuchman, Director of Communications Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Mike White, Controller Jim Herberg, Engineering Supervisor OCSD • P.O. Box 8127 • Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 • (714) 962-2411 Minutes of Special Meeting of the FAHR Committee Page 2 April 10, 1999 (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. (4) ACTION ITEM a. FAHR99-09A: Develop a new comprehensive connection fee program and ordinance which contains the following elements: 1. Base fees will be determined by type of development and are calculated per 1,000 square feet for non-residential development and per unit for residential development; 2. Three categories of Commercial connection fees will be developed: low demand, average demand and high demand. 3. Significant Industrial Users (Class I Permittees) will be charged demand- based connection fees as a part of their on-going annual use charges, rather than only as a one-time up front charge. 4. Residential fees will be tiered based upon number of bedrooms and SFR or MFR development. 5. Connection fees will continue to be collected by local sewering agencies at the time the building permit is issued. 6. Credit for demolished structures will be granted only when the developer can prove that prior connection fees were paid, and credit will be provided only for the amount actually paid. 7. The new connection fee program should be reported to the RAC prior to final consideration by the Board. Discussion and Workshop District staff, and Steve McDonald of Carollo Engineers, conducted a FAHR Committee Workshop regarding connection fees which focused on the above elements. All Board Members were invited to attend. The purpose of the workshop was to provide the Directors with comprehensive information for future decision-making regarding the connection fee program. Minutes of Special Meeting of the FAHR Committee Page 3 April 10, 1999 Discussions included continuing to use the "capital investment equalization" method of fee calculation, assigning wet-weather facilities costs to appropriate users, developing tiered fees for residential connections, developing categories of fees for non-residential users, allowing significant industrial/commercial users to pay annually, considering a fee for regional governmental facilities, requiring a periodic review of the process, allowing the Board to grant exceptions and developing an implementation or phase-in plan. A copy of the revised presentation is attached. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to refer this item back to the FAHR Committee for further review at their May meeting, and recommendation to the Board of Directors. (5) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGEN0A ITEMS, IF ANY There was no other business discussed. (6) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none. (7) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were none. (8) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next regularly scheduled FAHR Committee meeting will be held on April 14, 1999 at 5:00 p.m. (9) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. Minutes of Special Meeting of the FAHR Committee Page 4 · April 10, 1999 (10) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at approximately 12:00 noon. \\radon\data1\wp.dtaVin\210\crana\FAHR\Fahr99\Workshop41099\Specia/4-10-99mins.doc ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Connection Fee Workshop April 10, 1999 -REVISED • Brief background review of financial rates and charges • Understand connection fee methodology • Discuss key issues / assumptions • Reach consensus on new connection fee policies 1 • Continue capital investment equalization method • Assign wet weather facility costs to residential development • Develop tiered fees for MFR and SFR based upon bedrooms • Develop low, average and high demand commercial fees • Allow SI Us to pay-as-they-use • Consider charge for regional governmental uses • Remove time limit for demolished facilities with proof of payment • Review fee and method routinely • Provide Board with authority for adjustments • Develop implementation or phase-in plan 2 Background Review Use of Funds Source of Funds • Operation and • Existing Users maintenance of existing facilities • Capital replacement • All Users and improvement of existing facilities • Capital construction • New Users to accommodate growth ( capacity) 3 $ 'E:. isting and New Users are G~ uped into 5 Categories for Rates d Charges User Sewer Service Connection Category Charge Fee Residential X X Commercial X X Industrial X X Local Gov't X State & Federal X X Connection Fees Reduce the vnthly Charge to Existing Users Connection Fee User Charge 4 at's Changed Froni the 0 Master Plan Item 2020 Plan Strategic Plan Planning Horizon 30 yrs 20 yrs CIP Budget $1 .48 billion $1.51 billion Projected Flow 399 MGD 352 MGD Flow per Household 399 gpd 260 gpd Number of Connections 1,000,000 1,354,000 Flow per 1,000 sq ft 80 gal 150 gal for Commercial Users (20%) (58%) Ti , l?. CIP Accounts/or $1.51 Billion iystem Improvements (Yr 2000-2020) Cooperative Projects $154,000,000 10% GWRS $120,650,000 --- 8% Support Facilities $13,560,000 1% Additional Capacity $513,575,000 34% Rehabilitation and Replacement $665,094,000 44% Improved Treatment $48,437,000 3% 5 ~ly Flow Contributions ...,, 1998 Number Daily Flow 2020 Number Avg of Units or (Gallons) Avg of Units or Property Use MGD 1,000 sq ft Per Unit MGD 1,000 sq ft Residential 123 474,000 260 144 555,500 Multi Family Res 43 238,000 182 50 274,000 Commercial 63 420,000 150 86 570,000 IRWD 7 32 SAWPA 9 30 Wet Weather 10 10 Avg MGD Total 255 352 Rate Advisory Committee (RAC) PJl4 rkshops Conducted Sept Oct 12 24 1996 Dec 12 0 ' Feb 20 © May Jun Jul 1 19 31 Sep Oct 17 9 ®®® ®® ' ' 1997 6 Agency Concord Agency Riverside OCSD (Existing) Sacramento Walnut Creek San Diego Los Angeles (County) San Jose Oakland Los Angeles (City) Phoenix San Francisco Sacramento San Diego Los Angeles (County) Oakland San Jose Los Angeles (City) n Connection Fee ($) $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 2684 812 390 D District 0 D Local Agency Connection Fee (Millions of Dollars) $n1 n $n2 n $3 n 12.5 I 1.8 I 1.5 I 1.2 Based on: 1 0.85 • Flow 150,000 gpd I 0.71 • BOD 1,090 mg/L I 0.71 • TSS 270 mg/L OCSD (Existing) tt------------, • 130,000 sq ft of 0.Q.61 _________ _. 1.5 improved building Riverside ~0.057 area Phoenix m o.o3o San Francisco 0 1_-_: _-~ Rescinded Excess Capacity Charge 7 Tndustrial Connection Fee Co r,parison for a Low Strength 'dustrial User Agency Connection Fee (Millions of Dollars) • ~ n ~ n ~ Concord San Diego Sacramento Los Angeles (County) Oakland San Jose Los Angeles (City) OCSD (Existing) Riverside Phoenix t:::=:::=::::=::::=::::=::::=::::::;-:'f 1.6 :========.:::::;---"'11.5 ____ ____,,11.0 :==-=--=---::...----'-'' o. 78 :::====::I 0.58 --~·1 0.58 ,_____.I 0.52 Iii.OJ{.:_:_:_~ 0.99 •0.057 •0.030 Based on: • Flow 150,000 gpd • BOD 350 mg/L • TSS 270 mg/L • 130,000 sq ft of improved building area San Francisco 0 ,_-_-_-..!_ Rescinded Excess Capacity Charge • "Pay for what you use" • Consider "pay as you go" • Consider tiered residential rates and fees • Reduce up-front costs 8 Connection Fee Methodology G iding Philosophy of Alternative Connection Fee Methods Method Guiding Philosophy Existing Method "All users past, present and future pay the same" Alternative "All users from now on pay the same" 9 E~ ·sting "Capital Investment E alization" Method I Replacement Valuel I Cost of Ne;i Lot Existing FacilitiesJ + L Facilities J Fee=-------------- [ Existing+ New] Connections * * Single Family Residential equivalents I "Buy-in" Cost 7 !Cost of New] Lot Existing Facilitie~ + L Facilities Fee=-------------- [connections ~ * Single Family Residential equivalents 10 "Buy-In" Cost is the Value xisting Facilities to Serve New Users Value of Facilities to Serve New Users $11 O Million Total Value of Existing Facilities $763 Million 'l5~J?Jtal Cost Items are Allocated to Ne Users Based on Connection eMethod Connection Fee Capital Cost Item Cost Method $ in Million CIE Alternative "Buy-in" Cost $ 110 ? Existing Facilities 763 ✓ Additional Capacity 514 ✓ ✓ GWR System 121 ✓ ? Cooperative Projects 154 ✓ ? Replacement / 727 ✓ Improvement* * Includes Support Facilities 11 Ex·sting Capital Investment E alization Fee Method $ in Millions Capital Cost Item 2020 Strategic Master Plan Plan Existing Facilities $ 777 $ 763 Additional Capacity 886 514 GWR System (Reclamation) 77 121 Cooperative Projects 154 Replacement / Improvement 519 727 Total Capital Requirements $2,259 $2,279 Number of Existing and New Users / EDUs 1,000,000 1,354,000 Average Cost Per EDU $2,260 $1,680 0,native Connection Fee Method $ in Millions Capital Cost Item Low Middle High "Buy-in" Cost -$ 110 $ 110 Additional Capacity $ 514 514 514 GWR System -121 121 Cooperative Projects --154 Improved Treatment --48 Total Capital Requirements $ 514 $ 745 $ 947 Number of New EDUs 442,000 442,000 442,000 Average Cost Per EDU $1,165 $1,690 $2,145 12 Discussion of Key Issues I Assumptions 0 Connection Fees for Government Agencies 0 How to Charge for New Non-Residential Connections 0 Tiered Residential Connection Fees 0 Impact of Wet Weather 0 Credit for Demolished Facilities 13 G'tJi ernmental Agencies - E isting • State and federal agencies included • Local agencies excluded • Schools • Cities • County • Revenue Area 13 is exception • Include state and federal agencies • Include regional or county facilities • Exclude local agencies • Schools • Cities • Charging local agencies is tax transfer • Not charging regional facilities burdens local ratepayer 14 Op ions Considered for ~ -Residential Connection Fees • Unimproved property acreage • Size of sewer lateral • 125± land use codes • Simplification to combine land use codes into similar flow and strength categories • Simplification to "high, average and low" commercial categories Recommended Approach for M -Residential Connection Fees Pays Unit Billing Component For Charge Method "Basic Fee" Average $ / 1000 One- Use sq ft Time Flow / Strength High $ for Annual Factor Demand Q, BOD, User Connection TSS Fee 15 A'dvantages of Recommended C nnection Fee Method • Fair to all users, who "pay for what they use" • Easy to understand, explain and administer • Conforms to RAC input to consider commercial I industry incentives by reducing up-front charges • Cash flow matches facilities need Ph e Average Commercial Co -nection Fee is Based on ~erage Usage Average Cost Categories Value of Facilities Equivalent Dwelling 260 gpd $1,680 Units (EDU) Average 150 gal/ Commercial 1,000 sq ft/ day $970 Usage (58%) (58%) 16 , t Weather Adjustment • Flows increase during wet weather • Inflow • Infiltration • Amount of increase is proportional to sewers • Residential laterals are 55°/o of sewer length • Local sewers are 40% of sewer length • Residential connection fees should pay for wet weather capacity L w_act of Wet Weather r.,ustment • Wet weather facilities are all flow related • Flow related facilities are $1.1 billion at 2020 • Wet weather facilities increase Single Family Residential (SFR) fees from $20 to $140 (to total of $1,700 to $1,820) • Non-Residential fee range decreases proportionately to $900 to $675 / 1,000 sq ft 17 Number of Relationships to 1 EDU Bedrooms SFR MFR 0 0.32 1 0.62 0.50 2 0.81 0.70 3 1.00 0.89 4 1.19 1.08 5+ 1.39 • One-time fees are based on estimates • Cash flow does not match production • Currently 800 significant industrial / commercial users (SIUs) • RAC and Business Council concerned • Reduction would reduce "move-in" costs 18 • SIU user fees based on actual use • Add connection fee component for above average demand • Allocate 2020 asset values to flow, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS) • Determine 2020 plant loading • Allocate unit cost for 30-year useful life • Assign time value to money Su mary of Proposed and Existing R 8idential Connection Fees User Category Single-Family Residential 5+ BDR House 4 BDR House 3 BDR House 2 BDR House 1 BDR House Multi-Family Residential 4+ BDR Apartment 3 BDR Apartment 2 BDR Apartment 1 BDR Apartment Studio Apartment Proposed $2,530 2,165 1,820 1,475 1,130 $1,965 1,620 1,275 910 580 Existing $2,360 $2,360 19 S mmary of Proposed and Existing Ni -Residential Connection Fees Proposed OCSD Typical Industrial I Base Rate Current Commercial User (1,000 sq ft) Rate Low Demand $ 110 $ 472 Average Demand 675 472 High Demand 1,600 472 'Summary of Proposed and Ex.sting Non-Residential vnnection Fees Low Demand Connections Nurseries Warehouses Parking Structures RV Storage Churches Truck Terminals RV Parks Lumber/ Construction Yards High Demand Connections Restaurants Supermarkets Car Washes Coin Laundry Amusement Parks Shopping Centers with Restaurants 20 S nmmary of Proposed and Existing M -Residential Connection Fees Significant Industrial I Daily Equiv to Commercial User Fee One-Time Flow Portion (gal I day) $ 0.00057 $ 3 BOD Portion (lb / day) 0.14461 811 SS Portion (lb / day) 0.16025 899 Example Over Time Base Annual Quantity Fee Fee@5% 30 Years 130,000 sq ft $87,750 $ 87,750 150,000 gal/ dy $ 26,200 786,000 1 , 090 mg / L BOD 64,000 1,920,000 270 mg IL SS 11,000 330,000 Total $87,750 $101,200 $3,123,750 Compare Flow & Strength Based $1,891,914 One-Time Fee 21 Cum arison of Existing and Proposed Cammercial Connection Fees $ 14,ooo ------=--13_8_00------1 A Proposed 13,000 13,600 ' Ll ® Existing One-Time 2,000 Connection Fee $ / 1,000 sq ft · 1,600 1,600 1,000 r026 675 472 1472 472 350 191 88 11° 34 0 Restaurant Car Wash Warehouse Office Bldg • Existing policy • Application within 2 years of demolition • Credit at current rates • Fee for additional demand • Alternative policies • Extend time period for application • Remove time limit • Require proof of prior payments • District has no records 22 • Continue capital investment equalization method • Assign wet weather facility costs to residential development • Develop tiered fees for MFR and SFR based upon bedrooms • Develop low, average and high demand commercial fees • Allow SIUs to pay-as-they-use • Consider charge for regional governmental uses • Remove time limit for demolished facilities with proof of payment • Review fee and method routinely • Provide Board with authority for adjustments • Develop implementation or phase-in plan 23 t Steps @ FAHR Committee May 12 @ Board Meeting May 26 @ Develop Implementation Plan May 26 @ New Connection Fees Effective ? Questions 24 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, I hereby certify that the Notice and the Agenda for the Finance, Administration and Human Resources meeting held on April 10, 1999, was duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the District's offices on April 2, 1999. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 10th day of April 1999. ch of the Board of Directors of Orange Posted: By: -~---· --~---' 1999,~.M. ~-~-- H:\wp,dta\fin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Workohop41099\CERTP004-10·99.doc DISTRIBUTION FAHR COMMITTEE MEETING PACKAGE Full Agenda Package 64 Committee 32 & Mailing List Donald F. McIntyre 1 Blake P. Anderson 1 (3-hole punched) Dan Dillon 1 Marc Dubois 1 Jeff Esber 1 Ed Hodges 1 Steve Kozak 1 Penny Kyle 2 David Ludwin 1 Greg Mathews 1 Partick Miles 1 Bob Ooten 1 Mike Peterman 1 Gary Streed 1 Michelle Tuchman 1 (3-hole punched) Robert Ghirelli 1 Terri Josway 1 Dan Tunnicliff (H.R.) 1 Mike White 1 (3-hole punched) Cagle, Brad 1 Lisa Tomko 1 Bob Geggie 1 Jim Herberg 1 Patricia Jank 1 Lenora Crane 1 File 1 Extras 4 Notices and Agenda 12 Posting 1 Jean Tappan (include Mins) 1 Anna Ubaldini 1 Frankie Woodside 1 Patricia Magnante 1 Janet Gray 1 Security 1 Extras 5 Ron Zenk, Dist. 14 Treasurer's Report Only C H:\WP.DTA\FIN\210\CRANE\FAHR\DISTRIBUTIONLISTFAHR.DOC April 2, 1999 MEMORANDUM TO: ALL DIRECTORS FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finan SUBJECT: FAHR Committee Workshop -Saturday, April 10, 1999, 9:00 a.m. There will be a FAHR Committee Workshop on Saturday, April 10, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. at the District's Administrative offices. Discussion will focus on connection fees. You and any of your staff members are invited to attend. Please notify the Board Secretary's office at (714) 593-7130 if you will or will not be able to attend, as well as the number of guests you will be bringing. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. GGS:lc H:\wp.dta \fin\21 0\crane\F AHR\F ahr99\Workshop41099\DI RM041099WS.doc OCSD e P.O. Box 8127 e Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 e (714) 962-2411 pluilie: 1714) 962-2411 m,11,no address: F!O, Bax 8127 R:,untaln Valley, CA 92728-8127 street: address: 1 0844 Bits Averu1s Fountain I/alley, GA 92701:l-7018 ~~mlier Agencies • Cities Anaheim Braa Buena Park {1ypfleSS FOun/JtJln VE1/ley Fullerton Garden Grove Hunt.inacon Beach /wine LB Habra LaPaflTIB Los Afamftos Newporc: Beach Orange Plar.entia Ss,its Ana Seal Beach Stanton Tustln VIiia Parle Yot·ba Linda County of Orange Sanitary Districts Costa Mesa Midway cir;y W_ater Districts /rlVfne Ranch •RANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT SA TU RDA Y, APRIL 10, 1999 • 9:00 A.M. DISTRICT'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 A special meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District, will be held at the above location, date and time. "To Protect the Public Health and the Environment through Excellence in Wastewater Systems" FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING DATES FAHR Committee Meeting Dates April 14, 1999 May 12, 1999 June 9, 1999 July 14, 1999 None Scheduled September 8, 1999 Oct~ber 13, 1999 November 10, 1999 December 8, 1999 None Scheduled February 9, 2000 March 8, 2000 Board Meeting Dates April 28, 1999 May 26, 1999 June 23, 1999 July 21, 1999 August 25, 1999 September 22, 1999 October 27, 1999 November 17, 1999 December 15, 1999 January 26, 2000 February 23, 2000 March 22, 2000 ROLL CALL FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 10, 1999 Time: 9:00 a.m. Adjourn: ____ _ COMMITTEE MEMBERS THOMAS R. SALTARELLI (Chair) ................................................ . MARK LEYES (Vice Chair) ........................................................... . SHAWN BOYD •.•••••••••••.....••.•••••••••••••••••••••.•.••..••••••••••••.••••••••••..••••• JOHN M. GULLIXSON ................................................................. .. SHIRLEY MC CRACKEN ............................................................. .. MARK A. MURPHY ....................................................................... . JAMES W. SILVA .......................................................................... . JAN DEBAY (Board Chair) .......................................................... .. PEER SWAN (Board Vice Chair) .................................................. . JOHN J. COLLINS (Past Board Chair) ......................................... . OTHERS TOM WOODRUFF, General Counsel .............................................. . STEVE MCDONALD, Carollo Engineers ......................................... __ TOBY WEISSERT, Carollo Engineers ............................................. __ STAFF DON MCINTYRE, General Manager .............................................. .. BLAKE ANDERSON, Assistant General Manager ........................ .. ED HODGES, Director of General Services Administration .......... . DAVID LUDWIN, Director of Engineering ..................................... .. BOB OOTEN, Director of Operations & Maintenance ................... .. MIKE PETERMAN, Director of Human Resources ........................ .. GARY STREED, Director of Finance ............................................. .. MICHELLE TUCHMAN, Director of Communications ................... .. PATRICK MILES, Director of Information Technology ................. .. ROBERT GHIRELLI, Director of Technical Services ..................... . STEVE KOZAK, Financial Manager ............................................... . MIKE WHITE, Controller ................................................................ .. GREG MATHEWS, Assistant to the General Manager .................. .. LISA TOMKO, Human Resources Manager .................................. .. PENNY KYLE, Committee Secretary ............................................. .. c: Debra Lecuna MEETING DATE: ROLL CALL BOARD OF DIRECTORS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT TIME: ------------- (SIMONIAN) .................... ANDERSON ................... _____ _ (FLORY) .......................... BANKHEAD ................... _______ _ (SNOW) ........................... BOYD ............................ _____ _ (COOK) ............................ COLLINS ....................... ___ _ (MOORE) ......................... DAUCHER. .................... ___ _ (THOMSON) .................... DEBAY .......................... __ _ (DOTSON) ....................... DONAHUE ..................... __ _ (UNDERHILL) ................... ECKENRODE ................. __ (PERRY) ........................... FERRYMAN ................... __ (GAROFALO) ................... GREEN ......................... __ (WISNER) ......................... GULLIXSON ................... __ (BROADWATER) ............. LEYES ........................... ___ _ (MARSHALL) .................... MAULLER. .................... __ _ (DALY) .............................. MCCRACKEN ............... ___ _ (LUTZ) .............................. MCGUIGAN .................. ___ _ (SPURGEON) ................... MURPHY ...................... _____ _ (EVANS) ........................... NEUGEBAUER. ............. ___ _ (FRESCH I) ....................... PATTERSON ................. _____ _ (KEENAN) ........................ PIERCY ........................ _____ _ (POTTS) ........................... SALTARELLI .................. _______ _ (SMITH, GREG) ............... SHEA ........................... _______ _ (SMITH, CHUCK) ............. SILVA ........................... _ __ _ __ _ (MILLER) .......................... SWAN ........................... ___ _ (BATES) ........................... SYLVIA ......................... ___ _ (BLAKE) ............................ WALKER. ...................... _____ _ STAFF: Anderson Ghirelli Hodges Kyle Ludwin McIntyre Miles Ooten Peterman Streed Tuchman OTHERS: Woodruff Andrus 03/24/99 H:\wp.dta\admin\BS\DIRECTOR\Directors Roll Call.doc AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING OF THE FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT SATURDAY, APRIL 10, 1999, AT 9:00 A.M. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 10844 Elhs Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the District's Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the Office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Committee for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted in the manner as above, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. (1) ROLL CALL (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM, IF NECESSARY (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS All persons wishing to address the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee on specific agenda items or matters of general interest should do so at this time. As determined by the Chair, speakers may be deferred until the specific item is taken for discussion and remarks may be limited to five minutes. Matters of interest addressed by a member of the public and not listed on this agenda cannot have action taken by the Committee except as authorized by Section 54954.2(b). (4) REPORT OF COMMITTEE CHAIR 2 April 10, 1999 (5) ACTION ITEMS a. FAHR99-09A: Develop a new comprehensive connection fee program and ordinance which contains the following elements: (6) (7) (8) (9) 1. Base fees will be determined by type of development and are calculated per 1,000 square feet for non-residential development and per unit for residential development; 2. Three categories of Commercial connection fees will be developed: low demand, average demand and high demand. 3. Significant Industrial Users (Class I Permittees) will be charged demand-based connection fees as a part of their on-going annual use charges, rather than only as a one-time up front charge. 4. Residential fees will be tiered based upon number of bedrooms and SFR or MFR development. 5. Connection fees will continue to be collected by local sewering agencies at the time the building permit is issued. 6. Credit for demolished structures will be granted only when the developer can prove that prior connection fees were paid, and credit will be provided only for the amount actually paid. 7. The new connection fee program should be reported to the RAC prior to final consideration by the Board. (Streed/McDonald -3 hours) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT FUTURE METING DATE& The next Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 14, 1999, at 5:00 p.m. 3 April 10, 1999 (10) CLOSED SESSION /Ouring the course of conducting the business set f~rth on this aci¢nda a·s a r~gul~r meeti'ng. ef the C~mmittee, tbe 1 )Chair may convene the Committee in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate negotiations, 1 jpending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.8, 54956.9, j \54957 or 54957.6, as noted. : _j i !Reports relating to (a) purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or potential litigation; (c) ! 1 employee actions or negotiations with employee representatives; or which are exempt from public disclosure under ! )the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Committee during a permitted closed session and are ! ! not available for public inspection. At such time as final actions are taken by the Committee on any of these . t ~ubje,cts, .the_ minut~s .will .reflE:Gi .~11 ,riiquir~q .c!isclo_s1,1,r~i:;. of .inform.ation ................ -...-....................... _ ........................................................... J a. Convene in closed session, if necessary. b. Reconvene in regular session. c. Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session. d. Report on discussion taken in closed session, as required. (11) ADJOURNMENT pk \\radon\data 1 \wp.dta\fin\21O\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Workshop41099\04-99Agenda.doc ;-••~••u•• ' -••ao-••••• .. +<"•·• .. .., ...... u.•u u,,., .• ,, . ..., '' .................. .., ................ • .. ~•~• ... •-••--u • .... ••·-••••H•NO> .... o ..... ',.,..,.. ... _,., • H•' •••••.1·"•...,• ''" ...,,,,,._, • ••·•·••••• ••• •• •• • ••' , .. ,r,,." ••••••-••••••••._.o,Uu•-•••••,..••-•••u •••--·•••-•••• .. u ••~HHH_,,_,,3 .\Notice To Committee Members: l j . ~ 1 For any questions on the agenda or to place any items on the agenda, Committee members should contact the Committee 1 ! Chair or Secretary ten days in advance of the Committee meeting. ! i Committee Chair: ! Committee Secretary: i Thomas Saltarelli Penny Kyle (949) 833-9200 (714) 593-7130 ~--•~----••-•·•-•--;-ooH•••--•-••Hn••-•un••-•-•••D ... ,..., ................... ,,, .. n n,o,,,_,,,, .. ,,,n,u-••• ........................... ,.-.... ,.•--n••n•'••••;••••• .... •-••-• .. n •-•• .... •nHHu•~•uu.••• .. n.•~·•·•~•••· .. •·H•• .. ••-•U~•M••M• ,uno.-•• .. ,..,...,.,. .• .,,,• FAHR COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bel. of Dir. 04/10/99 N/A AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number S(a) Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CONNECTION FEE CALCULATION METHODS AND POLICIES (FAHR99-09A) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION The General Manager recommends development of a new comprehensive connection fee program and ordinance which contains the following elements: 1. Base fees will be determined by type of development and are calculated per 1,000 square feet for non-residential development and per unit for residential development; 2. Three categories of Commercial connection fees will be developed: low demand, average demand and high demand. 3. Significant Industrial Users (Class I Permittees) will be charged demand- based connection fees as a part of their on-going annual use charges, rather than only as a one-time up front charge. 4. Residential fees will be tiered based upon number of bedrooms and SFR or MFR development. 5. Connection fees will continue to be collected by local sewering agencies at the time the building permit is issued. 6. Credit for demolished structures will be granted only when the developer can prove that prior connection fees were paid, and credit will be provided only for the amount actually paid. 7. The new connection fee program should be reported to the RAC prior to final consideration by the Board. SUMMARY Capital facilities connection fees, or connection fees for short, have been one-time fees collected in order to cover the costs of providing sewerage facilities to serve the property. Today, connection fees are collected for the District by member cities and H:\wp.dta\fin\21 Olcrane\F AHR\Fahr99\Wor1<shop41099\FAHR99--09e.doc Revised: 8/20/98 Page 1 Districts when building permits are issued. These fees were revisited as a part of the Rate Advisory Committee's (RAC) work for the Strategic Plan. The discussion and recommendations are in the enclosed "Determination of Financial Rates and Charges." The main connection fee discussion points can be found on pages 1-3, 4-7, 9-7 and A-18. The RAC did not develop a specific connection fee calculation method, but did give staff guidelines in several areas. The enclosed revised Staff Report summarizes the alternatives, the evaluations, and the recommendations. At the February FAHR Committee meeting, staff presented a proposal to change the calculation method for connection fees, to change what costs were included in connection fees, and to base the connection fees upon the new Strategic Plan capital improvement program. The Committee requested a workshop in order to devote more time to reviewing the changes. This workshop is for information and feedback. All of the Directors have been invited to attend. Staff and consultants will present the background, the recommended changes and the alternatives. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGET IMPACT ~ This item has been budgeted. D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. D Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION See enclosed Staff Report. ALTERNATIVES See enclosed Staff Report. CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Report 2. Carollo Engineers Report: "Determination of Financial Rates and Charges" GGS:lc H:lwp.dtalfin\210\crane\FAHR\Fahr99\Workshop41099\FAHR99--09a, doc Revised: B/20/98 Page2 ' (Revised) April 2, 1999 STAFF REPORT Connection Fee Alternatives Capital facilities connection fees, or connection fees for short, have been one-time fees collected in order to cover the costs of providing sewerage facilities to serve the property. Today, connection fees are collected for the District by member cities and Districts when building permits are issued. These fees were revisited as a part of the Rate Advisory Committee's (RAC) work for the Strategic Plan. The RAC did not develop a specific connection fee calculation method, but did give staff guidelines in several areas: • The existing calculation method should be changed. • There should be different residential fees to reflect different impacts. • The economic and social benefits of commercial/industrial development should be considered. • Collection methods besides "one-time, up-front" should be considered. • Costs of facilities related to wet-weather flows should be shared on the basis of wet- weather flow increases. • New users should pay for new capacity. Existing Program The existing method of calculation was developed as a part of the 1989 Master Plan, also called the 2020 VISION Master Plan. Future users are charged their share of all facilities, both existing and future, that will be in place in 2020 as if all facilities and all users came into the system on that date. This calculation method is sometimes called the "capital investment equalization method". If the value of all the facilities is projected to be $2,360,000,000, and the total number of users is projected to be 1,000,000, then the connection fee is $2,360. One of the most significant assumptions in 1989 was that the non-residential use factor is 20% of single-family residential use per 1,000 square feet of building. This results in a non-residential connection fee of $472 per 1,000 square feet in this example. This calculation method can also be described as "all users, past, present and future, pay the same." RAC Program The RAC recommended that capital costs be categorized and that different user types pay for different cost categories. Cost categories were developed for existing net assets, additional dry weather capacity, additional wet weather capacity, improved Connection Fee Alternatives Page 2 of 9 April 2, 1999 treatment and rehabilitation/reconstruction. The following table explains the allocation of these cost categories to user groups. Cost Category • Existing Assets Less Debt • Dry Weather Capacity • Wet Weather Capacity • Improved Treatment • Rehab/Reconstruction Allocation of Costs • Current users have paid for support facilities, etc; all new users will also pay a share • All new users will pay • New residential and new non- residential users will pay based upon comparative length of sewers within each group • Current and new users will pay • Current and new users will pay By omitting the existing assets from this calculation, this allocation method can be changed to one best described as, "all users from now on pay the same," and/or as, "future users will pay for future capacity." Significant Changes Several things have changed since the 1989 adoption of the "2020 VISION Master Plan" that impact the calculation of connection fees. The Strategic Plan proposed a capital improvement plan through 2020 that is approximately equal to the "2020 Vision" projects, but there are 10 fewer years in the planning horizon. The planned daily flow for a single-family residence, or an equivalent dwelling unit, has been reduced , based upon experience and metering, from 399 gallons to 260 gallons. The total average daily flow into the plants at 2020 has been reduced from 399,000,000 to 352,000,000. The total number of equivalent dwelling units that are projected to be connected in 2020 has increased from 1,000,000 to 1,354,000. The change that has the most impact on non- residential connection fees, though, is that the average daily flow per 1,000 square feet has been calculated at 150 gallons per day, rather than the 80 gallons per day that had been assumed historically. This change alone would result in a near doubling of the non-residential connection fee. Discussion Several methods of implementing the RAC recommendations were evaluated and the resulting rates were calculated. User Fee Basis -With the intention of developing consistency between the flow and strength basec::I user fee program and connection fees, fees were calculated based upon the flow,. BOD and SS assumptions used to determine user fees. (BOD, biochemical oxygen demand, and SS , microscopic su~pended solids, are common measurements of wastewater strength.) Estimated flows and strength were the result of surveys and Connection Fee Alternatives Page 3 of 9 April 2, 1999 studies performed by the Strategic Plan consultants. This resulted in 30 separate connection fees ranging from $79/1,000 sq. ft. for a drive-in theater, to $6,828/1,000 sq. ft. for a conventional car wash. High connection fees per 1,000 square feet for restaurants have been mitigated by some agencies by providing incentives. Restaurants that install grease traps and do not install garbage disposals have had the BOD and SS assumptions reduced by 50%. These incentives are certainly worth pursuing, and will be a part of future user fee discussions, where they may be more appropriate. To be effective, such a program must include some sort of monitoring or inspection by staff or by another agency. The highest rate calculated is for conventional car washes. A 25% reduction in assumed flow can be granted for a car wash that installs a water recycling system. This incentive is already a part of the user fee structure and program adopted last year. The general use of the property would need to be known at the time building permits are issued, in order to determine most accurately which of the 30 fees to use. However, cost categories are very broad and rates for most categories are similar, so this may not be a significant shortcoming. This option most closely matches the RAC presentation. Summary User Fee Basis -Connection fees were computed per 1,000 sq. ft. of development as above. Those uses with reasonably close fees were then combined and consolidated. The number of different fees was reduced from 30 to 15, and the range was from $80/1,000 sq. ft. to $6,800/1,000 sq. ft. This option is very close to the user fee basis for an individual property and should be easier to administer. Average Use Basis -Because city staff collect connection fees on our behalf and because the actual use of the property is often unknown, alternative connection fee calculation methods were evaluated. Since one of our goals was to develop a fee that reflected use, we considered whether the size of the connection, or the lateral, was a good indicator. While the exact use, or the strength of use, could not be determined, certainly the maximum use could. We discovered that there are generally only two sizes of commercial laterals, that they are determined principally by ease of cleaning, and that they are established by building codes. While these facts eliminated lateral size as a fee factor, they also supported a minimum number of fees because the maximum use from most developments would be approximately the same. Potential maximum use is the basis for our current connection fee structure and results in the same fee as average use. The average fee would be $654 per 1,000 sq. ft. of building interior. Variances between user fee based and average fees range from $575 below average to $6,174 above average. Master Plan Land Use Basis -The master plan or strategic plan process predicts future flows and future capacity requirements based upon land use. Cities and counties adopt land use plans for future developments within their spheres of influence. Each of these land uses is assigned a flow coefficient per acre. Following are the consultants' flow assumptions for the current Strategic Plan effort and the number of acres in each land use category at the theoretical service area build-out in 2118: Connection Fee Alternatives Page 4 of 9 April 2, 1999 Land Use Category 1 . Estate Residential 2. Low Density Residential 3. Medium Density Residential 4. Medium High Density Residential 5. Commercial/Office 6. Industrial 7. High Density lnd./Comm. 8. Institutional Gallons Per Acre/Day 727 1,488 3,451 7,516 2,262 3,167 5,429 2,715 Total Acres 27,238 76,345 19,909 3,754 19,851 18,886 5,952 9,617 Advantages of the land use method are: 1) the fee is based on the same flow projections as the Strategic Plan; 2) the actual property use does not need to be known when the connection permit is issued; 3) it is easy to administer; 4) the fee does vary to reflect different flow demands; 5) adjusting the connection fee for user BOD and SS differences may be of little real benefit as the actual influent concentrations at the headworks approximate residential strength and facilities are built to treat the average influent strength. A disadvantage of this method is that the fee is based upon average flow generated for acreage and does not change for the size of the building, or the actual type of use, so long as the land use category does not change. In total, this may be a minor issue, but connection fee variances for individual projects are significant. Fees resulting from the use of acreage and master planning flow coefficients are: Land Use Category Estate Residential Low density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium High Density Residential High Density Residential Commercial/Office Industrial Institutional High Density lnd./Comm. Proposed Basis Fee Per Acre $16,978 23,767 20,371 40,734 Fee Per Unit $3,187 1,814 1,754 1,754 1,647 Staff and consultants have reviewed and reconsidered each of the alternatives in the light of the comments by the FAHR Committee, the City of Anaheim and staff. A proposal was developed which takes the best from the various other alternatives and retains consistency with the current calculation method. Connection Fee Alternatives Page 5 of 9 April 2, 1999 The base fee is proposed to continue to be calculated on the "capital investment equalization method." Differences in non-residential use per 1,000 square feet will be accommodated in two ways: Rates will be adopted for very low uses such as warehouses and parking structures; and rates will be adopted for very high uses, such as restaurants and car washes. Significant Industrial/Commercial Users, those requiring Class I permits from our Source Control Division, will pay a capital charge on their quarterly invoices for their individual demand that exceeds the average allowed in the base connection fee. This proposal is easy for the local agencies to administer, recognizes that not all users place the same demand on the system, recognizes that the exact use of a property is often unknown when building permits are issued, acknowledges that the many users have similar demands, and reduces the significant up-front charges faced by a large user. Reduced Up-Front Payments Connection fees based upon flow and strength can be significant for certain users. The fee for a food processing plant that relocated to Orange County recently could have been $1.4 million based upon a projected ultimate flow of 150,000 gallons a day a combined 1,700 pounds of BOD and SS. Because of the amount of this fee, input from our member city and other legislators and the pending Strategic Plan, this fee was put aside by the Directors. One of the concerns expressed was that collecting such a significant fee in a lump sum before the business was producing placed a considerable cash flow burden on a new business. Another issue was what happened to the fees if the business failed or moved, since the business is not allowed to sell or move their right to use the system. A third concern dealt with the accuracy of the initial flow projections, subsequent increases and decreased in flows and the computation of connection fees in those instances. The current proposal is for these Significant Industrial/Commercial Users, SI Us or Class I Permitees, to pay a base connection fee per 1,000 square feet of building. This base fee will allow them to discharge an average quantity and strength of wastewater. For use above this, a fee per gallon or per pound would be added to their quarterly invoice for use, which will continue to be based upon actual flow and strength. In this way, accurate impacts and uses are established as the basis for the connection fee, cash flow matches production for the business, up-front costs are minimized, fees stop if the business moves or quits and increased use generates additional "connection fees". Tiered Residential Fees The RAC recommended that residential connection fees be tiered to reflect differing demands on the sewerage system. One of the best ways to predict sewer use is by the number of bedrooms because that correlates to the number of potential occupants. Additionally, adding a bedroom requires a building permit and would trigger additional Connection Fee Alternatives Page 6 of 9 April 2, 1999 connection fees. Consultants and staff analyzed census data and Assessor's Office data to determine the mix of bedrooms in the single-family residential (SFR) and multi- family residential (MFR) service area to determine the standard bedroom size for each, as well as the number of existing and projected units. The result of this analysis is shown below assuming that the MFR average daily flow is 70% of the SFR flow, the same assumption used in determining user fees. No. of Bedrooms 0 1 2 3 4 5 SFR Ratio .615 .808 1.000 1.192 1.385 MFR Ratio .451 .725 1.000 1.275 1.549 These ratios can be applied to any of the fee calculation options, and any residential land use category. Additional Alternative For the past several years, connection fees have been collected for the District by the city or sanitary district. Generally, the permit is issued by the Building Department and the local agency retains 5% of the connection fee. When a non-residential project is started before the actual tenant mix, or type of tenants, is known, such as in the case of a strip mall, an industrial park or a shopping center, two of our alternatives cannot be used. Additionally, if there is a significant change in the type of use after the connection fee is paid, we are not aware of it as there may be no building permit or additional square feet of building. A possible source of accurate use information is the Certificate of Occupancy process. It may be possible to move all, or a portion, of the connection fee collection to this process. Of course, arrangements will need to be made or negotiated with each of the agencies. This could possibly increase the amount of the connection fee, would definitely increase the impact on the collecting agencies and may not be acceptable to every agency. Credit for Demolished Structures For many years, the connection fee ordinance has allowed credit for structures demolished up to two years prior to issuance of new building permit. The credit is determined to be an amount equal to the current connection fee for the demolished structure. Thus, if 25 single-family homes were demolished and replaced with 75 single-family homes, the developer would only be required to purchase 50 new permits. This credit is allowed whether or not connection fees were ever paid, and regardless of the amount of connection fees actually paid. (In no event is a refund ever granted.) Connection Fee Alternatives Page 7 of 9 April 2, 1999 Recently, two separate developers have challenged the two-year period. The basic argument put forth by the lawyers for each of these developers is that the previous buildings paid for the capacity they used, either through connection fees or property taxes. Connection fees in this area, formerly District No. 2, were adopted in 1973 at $50 per 1,000 square feet. Prior to passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, each District also levied a separate property tax for capital improvements. The other view is that sewage treatment facilities are planned and constructed based upon flow trends and demands. When a building is demolished, flows decrease. After some reasonable period, planners need to be able to know that the flow decrease is "permanent," and that future capacity needs will be met through connection fees. At the present time, the District has a protest and a subsequent Tolling Agreement concerning a huge project in the City of Anaheim, contiguous to the Fullerton City line, where the former Northrup aerospace facilities were demolished and new industrial projects were constructed in place of the original buildings. The new builder has paid the entire fee but has protested it. Both parties have agreed to take no legal action to resolve this, pending the connection fee study and report that resulted from the RAC process and the Strategic Plan and the final adoption of a new comprehensive Connection Fee Ordinance by the District. It would appear that the Directors have four options: 1. Remove the two-year provision and provide, instead, that if the owner establishes proof of payment of a connection charge by the current or any prior owner of the property, then a credit for the amount paid would be allowed against the current charge. (Whether or not the current owner of the Northrup property can prove prior payments is not known. The District has no records as connection fees are paid at the local sewering agency.) 2. Remove the two-year provision and provide, instead, that any new replacement building would not be required to pay any capital facility charge so long as the new use was no more than the previous demand. (This would effectively negate the payment and Tolling Agreement for the Northrup property and would require the District to refund about $267,000 of the $556,000 paid, plus interest.) 3. Extend the time period to more than two years in which property owners must redevelop the property in order to receive a credit, because delays may be caused by the local permitting process, the economy, or other factors outside the control of the developer. 4. Maintain the two-year period on the basis that it is a reasonable time in which to have redevelopment undertaken. Connection Fee Alternatives Page 8 of 9 April 2, 1999 Reduced Fee for Low Income or Senior Citizen Developments From time to time, the Directors have been asked to consider reducing or waiving the connection fee for various projects deemed socially desirable. Most often these are projects for senior citizens or to provide low-cost housing. It has not been uncommon for various other agencies to waive their fees for these projects. Nonetheless, the Directors have not granted these requests in the past. One reason for this practice has been the connection fee ordinance itself, which contains no language authorizing reductions or waivers. General Counsel has consistently advised that a new or amended ordinance would be required. Another reason is that the single residential connection fee was based upon all residential uses and fees being equal. There could ultimately be a shortfall in connection fee receipts, if fees were reduced for individual projects without an increase for others. Finally, the previous philosophy of connection fees was that they were to pay for peak demand and that peak demand potential was not affected by age or income of occupants. In 1998, the Board of District No. 7 did allow one congregate care facility to be designated a "commercial" development and to pay the fee per 1,000 square feet, rather than the fee per unit for the 87 rooms. In part, this decision was based upon the inclusion of a recreation room, a small theater, a medical examination room, and a separate mail room in the facility. Sometimes there are also common dining areas in these facilities. This decision was project specific, based upon the plans, and did not alter policy. The Directors have considered, but rejected, a special fee for residential units of less than 750 square feet in the past. Adoption of such a fee would be one method of granting a reduced fee to these low income or senior citizen projects. If the Directors approve the tiered residential connection fee described above, the connection fee for a one-bedroom unit would already be one-half of the standard three-bedroom single- family rate, and a studio apartment would be about one-third. Perhaps, then, the tiered residential connection fee would also satisfy the demand for reduced fees for these types of developments. Governmental Uses Historically, local governmental agency buildings have not been charged a connection fee. (They do pay annual user fees.) These uses include public schools, city halls, fire stations, police stations, etc. Revenue Area 13 is an exception in which all of these uses are charged connection fees. This exception developed during the formation of then District No. 13 during the same time period as siting a new county jail in that area was being considered. State and federal buildings are charged for connection fees in all Revenue Areas. Connection Fee Alternatives Page 9 of 9 April 2, 1999 Recommendations Staff recommends the adoption of a new comprehensive connection fee ordinance which contains the following elements. 1. Base fees will be determined by type of development and are calculated per 1,000 square feet for non-residential development and per unit for residential development; 2. Three categories of Commercial connection fees will be developed: low demand, average demand and high demand. The attached Proposed OCSD Connection Fee Schedule shows the rates for each category and a comparison with other agencies. 3. Significant Industrial Users (Class I Permittees) will be charged demand-based connection fees as a part of their on-going annual use charges, rather than only as a one-time up-front charge. The attached Proposed OCSD Connection Fee Schedule shows the rates per gallon and per pound that would be charged for additional demand. 4. Residential fees will be tiered based upon number of bedrooms and SFR or MFR development. 5. Connection fees will continue to be collected by local sewering agencies at the time the building permit is issued. 6. Credit for demolished structures will be granted only when the developer can prove that prior connection fees were paid, and credit will be provided only for the amount actually paid. 7. The new connection fee program should be reported to the RAC prior to final consideration by the Board. GGS:lc \\radon\data 1 \wp.dta\fin\21 O\crane\FAHR\F ahr99\Workshop41099\FAHR99-09SR.doc 4/5/99 Proposed OCSD Connection Fee Schedule Proposed Description or Use Basis Base Rate Single Family, 3 bedroom Unit 1,680 Multi Family, 2 bedroom Unit 1,180 Low Demand 1000 sq ft 200 Average Demand 1000 sq ft 1,125 High Demand 1000 sq ft 2,210 Equiv To Significant Industrial/Commercial User Daill£ Fee One Time Flow Portion gal/day 0.00044 3 BOD Portion lb/day 0.11115 811 SS Portion lb/day 0.12317 899 Users that are required to obtain a permit from the Source Control Division, those with regulated or significant discharges would pay the daily fee as a part of their actual use charge which is caluclated each quarter. The charge would only apply to discharge above that allocated to the base rate connection fee. Currently the base use maximums are 25,000 gallons per day and 150 pounds each of BOD and SS. G:\excel.dta\fin\210\streed\old d copy\STRATPLN\conn fee sum4-5 OCSD Typical/Example Comparative Rates Current Sacramento LA County Cen Contra Rate Co San Dist City of LA San Dist Costa San -- 2,360 2,758 1,071 1,658 2,572 2,360 2,069 780 995 2,572 472 476 52 176 350 472 534 441 1,026 759 472 1,953 245 2,254 2,719 One Time Fee 5 262 3 7 764 188 143 156 427 171 225 204 2:34 PM Prop Type Calculated Whse Office Bldg Shop Ctr OCSF075111 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO PORTFOLIO DISTRIBUTION CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS COMMERCIAL PAPER -DISCOUNT FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE -LE FNMA ISSUES -LESS THN lYR MUTUAL FUNDS TOTAL CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS FIXED INCOME SECURITIES U.S. GOVERNMENTS U.S. AGENCIES BANKING & FINANCE INDUSTRIAL UTILITY -ELECTRIC TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS PAYABLES/RECEIVABLES TOTAL OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS NET PORTFOLIO ASSETS MELLON TRUST PORTFOLIO SUMMARY BY SECTOR 31-MAR-1999 COST 2,668,659.00 2,915,043.11 1,383,624.67 61,665.01 ------------ 7,028,991.79 3,325,265.63 3,699,104.60 2,257,722.00 863,753.00 1,416,501.00 ------------ 11,562,346.23 276,512.44 --~------ 276,512.44 MARKET VALUE 2,668,659.00 2,915,043.11 1,383,624.67 61,665.01 --·---------- 7,028,991.79 3,305,676.00 3,693,044.00 2,240,951.00 858,364.00 1,413,676.00 ------------ 11,511,711.00 276,512.44 ------~~ 276,512.44 % OF TOTAL 14.18% 15.49% 7.35% 0.33% ------ 37. 35% 17. 57% 19.63% 11. 91% 4.56% 7. 51% --·---- 61.18% 1. 47% 1. 47% UNREALIZED GAIN/LOSS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -19,589.63 -6,060.60 -16, 771. 00 -5,389.00 -2,825.00 ----------- -50, 635. 23 0.00 0.00 ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,859.47 -------- 2, 859. 47 210,375.00 178,895.00 187,625.00 60,562.50 105,700.00 -------- 743, 157 .50 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO HBll00 CURR YIELD 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.64 0.04 6.36 4.84 8.37 7.06 7.48 6.46 0.00 0.00 =-==--===-=~=.====== ==-=====·=-====---=---=-=-===-= =-==-====:::::===---·-=-=-=-===-:=.=-==-:-:;;;;-=.==·= =====.:::= 18,867,850.46 18,817,215.23 100.00% -50,635.23 746,016.97 3.96 Page 1 OCSF075222 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO PORTFOLIO DISTRIBUTION CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS RECEIVABLES PAYABLES COMMERCIAL PAPER -DISCOUNT MUTUAL FUNDS TOTAL CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS FIXED INCOME SECURITIES U.S. GOVERNMENTS U.S. AGENCIES GNMA SINGLE FAMILY POOLS GNMA MULTI FAMILY POOLS FHLMC POOLS FHLMC MULTICLASS ASSET BACKED SECURITIES OTHER GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS BANKING & FINANCE INDUSTRIAL UTILITY -TELEPHONE TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS PAYABLES/RECEIVABLES TOTAL OTHER PORTFOLIO ASSETS NET PORTFOLIO ASSETS MELLON TRUST PORTFOLIO SUMMARY BY SECTOR 31-MAR-1999 COST 78,889.50 -20,637,515.63 10,037,323.13 1,286,637.58 ---~-------- -9,234,665.42 130,351,625.60 53,431,156.99 16,394,921.88 4,988,112.16 12,505,575.15 6,840,444.97 194,153.08 4,332,878.61 61,198,338.32 15,037,689.00 7,497,255.00 -------------- 312,772,150.76 3,869,823.17 --·---------- 3,869, 823. l 7 307,407,308.51 MARKET VALUE 78,889.50 -20,637,515.63 10,037,323.13 1,286,637.58 ------------- -9,234,665.42 129,444,977.51 53,186,667.47 16,522,390.63 4,952,982.16 12,387,922.69 6,892,782.10 195,172.16 4,359,469.26 61,105,739.66 14,360,862.65 7,575,450.00 % OF TOTAL 0.03% -6.75% 3.28% 0.42% ------ -3. 02% 42.35% 17.40% 5.41% 1.62% 4.05% 2.26% 0.06% 1. 43% 19.99% 4.70% 2.48% 310,984,416.29 101.76% 3,869,823.17 1.27% 3,869,823.17 1. 27% 305,619,574.04 100.00% Page 1 UNREALIZED GAIN/LOSS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -906,648.09 -244,489.52 127,468.75 -35,130.00 -117,652.46 52,337.13 1,019.08 26,590.65 -92,598.66 -676,826.35 78,195.00 --~------- -1,787,734.47 0.00 0.00 -1,787,734.47 ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME 0.00 0.00 0.00 59,662.75 ~------- 59, 662. 75 8,203,010.63 3,307,363.98 1,057,500.00 338,805.26 861,922.72 431,710.09 12,037.49 250,487.38 3,722,012.74 1,162,527.00 450,000.00 ----------- 19,797,377.29 0.00 0.00 19,857,040.04 BASE: USD HBllOO CURR YIELD 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.64 -0.65 6.34 6.22 6.40 6.84 6.96 6.26 6.17 5.75 6.09 8.10 5.94 6.37 0.00 0.00 6.50 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 1 OCSF07511102 1999/03/31 RUN DATE 04/06/99 ORANGE CTY LIQUID OPERATING RUN TIME 10.05.56 = PAR VALUE YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ % TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE % TOTAL ----------------------------------------··------------------------·---------------- CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS 61,665.01 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT ,000 4.664 AAA 100.000 61,665.01 .87 996085247 61,665.01 .33 400,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC 4.766 .000 P-1 98.616 394,464.44 5.61 313396FT5 MAT 05/18/1999 394,464.44 2.13 2,550,000 .00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC 4. 775 .ooo P-1 98,846 2,520,578.67 35.85 313396FOO MAT 05/04/1999 2,520,578.67 13.59 900,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO DISC 4.834 .000 P-1 98.885 889,962.00 12.66 34539URM6 04/21/1999 889,962.00 4.80 900,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 4.860 .ooo P-1 98,760 888,840.00 12.64 36959JS53 05/05/1999 888,840.00 4.79 900,000.00 AMERICAN EX CR CP DISC 4,944 .ooo P-1 98.873 889,857.00 12.65 02581SR78 04/07/1999 889,857 .00 4,80 1,400,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISC 5.072 .000 P-1 98.830 1,383,624.67 19.68 313588GA7 MAT 05/25/1999 1,383,624.67 7.46 ---------------------------------------TOTAL CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS 4. 737 .081 7,028,991.79 100.00 7,028,991.79 37.90 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 3,700,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BK CONS BOS 4,860 4,844 MA 99.812 3,699,104.60 32.08 3133M7EW2 4.835% 01/28/2000 DD 01/28/99 3,693,044.00 19.92 500,000.00 DUKE ENERGY CORP 1ST & REF MTG 5.001 7,870 AA3 101.657 511,200.00 4.41 264399DB9 8,000% 11/01/1999 DD 11/01/94 508,285.00 2,74 500,000.00 CHRYSLER FINL CO LLC 5.119 12.724 Al 104,132 529,010.00 4.52 171205AT4 13,250% 10/15/1999 520,660.00 2,81 850,000.00 PHILLIP MORRIS CO INC NTS 5.258 7,055 A2 100,984 863,753.00 7.45 718154BX4 7.125% 12/01/1999 DD 12/01/92 858,364.00 4.63 900,000.00 GENERAL MTRS ACCEP CORP MTN 5.305 6.206 A2 100.714 909,657 .00 7.87 37042M7G2 6.250% 01/11/2000 DD 01/11/94 906,426 .00 4,89 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 2 OCSF0751l102 1999/03/31 RUN DATE 04/06/99 ORANGE CTY LIQUID OPERATING RUN TIME 10.05.56 ---= ---·====-====--=-=:::::=-= PAR VALUE YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ I TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE I TOTAL -------------------------------------------------------------------·---------------- 300,000.00 BEAR STEARN COS INC NTS 5.363 7,553 A2 100.955 303,930.00 2,63 073902AP3 7.6251 09/15/1999 DD 09/21/94 302,865.00 1.63 900,000.00 LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB· 5.419 7,257 BAA3 100.599 905,301.00 7 .86 542671CK6 7.3001 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 905,391.00 4.88 3,300,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES 5.585 6.364 AAA 100.172 3,325,265.63 28. 71 912827X72 06.3751 05/15/1999 DD 05/15/96 3,305,676.00 17.83 500,000.00 TRANSAMERICA FIN MTN tSBOOllO 5.653 8.268 A3 102.200 515,125.00 4.43 89350MEP1 8.4501 01/12/2000 DD 01/12/95 511,000.00 2.76 ~---------------------------------- TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 5.069 6.145 11,562,346.23 100.00 11,511,711.00 62.09 ------------------------------------ TOTAL 4.974 4.406 18,591,338.02 100.00 18,540,702.79 100.00 ==-====== YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 3 OCSF07522202 1999/03/31 RUN DATE 04/06/99 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING RUN TIME 10.05.56 ==~~..:=---====--===..:-..: PAR VALUE YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ % TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE % TOTAL ---------------------------------------------------------------------~ ---------·- CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS 1,286,637.58 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT .000 4.664 AAA 100.000 1,286,637.58 11.36 996085247 1,286,637.58 .40 300,000.00 DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 4.847 .ooo P-1 99.027 297,080.00 2.62 26354BT44 06/04/1999 297,080.00 .09 900,000.00 DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 4.855 .000 P-1 99.078 891,702.75 7.87 26354BSR4 05/25/1999 891,702.75 .28 1,200,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO DISC 4.863 .ooo P-1 99.529 7,166,120.00 63.28 34539URP9 04/23/1999 7,166,120.00 2.22 1,300,000.00 NATIONAL RURAL DISC 4.868 .ooo P-1 99.023 1,287,293.94 11.36 63743DTB7 06/11/1999 1,287,293.94 .40 400,000.00 IBM DISC 4.879 .000 P-1 98.782 395,126.44 3.48 45920ETR2 06/25/1999 395,126.44 .12 ------------------------------------------ TOTAL CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS 3.854 .967 11,323,960.71 100.00 11,323,960.71 3.51 FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 2,000,000.00 BANKERS TR NY CORP GLOBAL NT .000 5.974 A2 98.664 1,992,800.00 .63 066365DW4 FLTG RT 05/11/2003 DD 05/11/98 1,973,280.00 .61 3,500,000.00 CHRYSLER FIN MTN .000 5.802 Al 100.078 3,498,635.00 1.12 17120QE80 FLTG RT 08/08/2002 DD 04/08/98 3,502,730.00 1.09 2,000,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO TERM ENHANCED .000 5.116 Al 99.765 1,998,613.60 .64 345397SC8 FLTG RT 08/27/2006 DD 08/27/98 1,995,300.00 .62 3,950,000.00 GENERAL MTRS ACCEP CORP NTS .000 5.529 A2 99.607 3,918,768.50 1.26 370425QV5 FLTG RT 08/18/2003 DD 08/17/98 3,934,476.50 1.22 3,000,000.00 HELLER FINL INC SR NT .000 6.187 AJ 100.014 2,999,310.00 .96 423328AZ6 FLTG RT 04/27/1999 DD 04/27/94 3,000,420.00 .93 4,000,000.00 HELLER FINL MTN .000 5.221 A3 100.359 4,000,000.00 1.29 42333HJN3 FLTG RT 06/01/2000 DD 04/07/98 4,014,360.00 1.25 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 4 OCSF07522202 1999/03/31 RUN DATE 04/06/99 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING RUN TIME 10.05.56 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PAR VALUE YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ % TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE % TOTAL -----------------------------------~--------------------·--------------------~----- 4,000,000.00 HOUSEHOLD FIN CO MTN .000 5,941 A2 100.105 4,000,000.00 1.28 44181KZA5 FLTG RT 06/24/2003 DD 06/24/98 4,004,200.00 1.24 1,000,000.00 HOUSEHOLD FIN MTN SR #00570 .ooo 5.741 A2 100.041 999,188.90 ,32 44181KZT4 FLTG RT 08/01/2001 DD 09/04/98 l,000,410.00 .31 1,000,000.00 MORGAN ST DEAN WITTER SR NOTES .ooo 5,673 AA3 100,203 7,003,710.00 2.25 61745ELT6 FLTG RT 02/23/2000 DD 02/23/98 7,014,210.00 2.18 4,382,697.56 STUDENT LN MKTG ASSN 1997-1 Al .000 5.746 AAA 99.470 4,332,878.61 1.40 78442GAK2 VAR RT 10/25/2005 DD 03/20/97 4,359,469.26 1.35 7,180,600.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 3.699 3,649 AAA 99.344 7,157,443.77 2.29 9128273A8 3,625% 07/15/2002 DD 07/15/97 7,133,495.26 2.21 10,369,300.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 3,728 3.506 AAA 96.250 10,090,275.00 3.20 9128272M3 3.375% 01/15/2007 DD 01/15/97 9,980,451.25 3.10 0,500,ooo.oo US TREASURY NOTES 4,179 6.074 AAA 102.906 9,034,223.67 2.81 9128272G6 06,250% 01/31/2002 DD 01/31/97 8,747,010.00 2. 71 19,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 4.943 6.437 AAA 103.625 20,012,510.00 6.33 3l364CZY7 6.670% 03/27/2002 DD 03/27/97 19,688,750.00 6 .11 5,ooo,ooo.oo US TREASURY BONDS 5.234 9.080 AAA 122.516 6,233,593.75 1.96 912810DE5 11.125% 08/15/2003 DD 07/05/83 6,125,800.00 1.90 31,500,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES 5,294 6 .190 AAA 102.984 32,509,817.31 10.43 912827Z54 06.375% 09/30/2001 DD 09/30/96 32,439,960.00 10.06 11,100,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES 5,366 7.090 AAA 105,781 18,388,684.02 5.81 912827D25 07.500% 11/15/2001 DD 11/15/91 18,088,551.00 5.61 5,500,ooo.oo US TREASURY NOTES 5,402 6.050 AAA 103.312 5,677,682.23 1.82 9128273G5 06.250% 08/31/2002 DD 09/02/97 5,682,160.00 1.76 0,500,ooo.oo US TREASURY NOTES 5.533 6.360 AAA 104.172 8,865,156.26 2.84 9128272SO 06.625% 04/30/2002 DD 04/30/97 8,854,620.00 2.75 5,200,000.00 US TREASURY BONDS 5.617 9.391 AAA 126.453 6,698,250.00 2 .11 912810DGO 11,875% 11/15/2003 DD 10/05/83 6,575,556.00 2,04 1,500,000.00 ASSOCIATES CORP NA SR NTS 5.650 6.368 AA3 102 .077 1,543,215.00 .49 046003HY8 6,500% 07/15/2002 DD 07/11/97 1,531,155.00 .48 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 5 OCSF07522202 1999/03/31 RUN DATE 04/06/99 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING RUN TIME 10.05.56 PAR VALUE YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ % TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE % TOTAL -~--------------------------~---------------------·--------------------------------------- 1,000,000.00 HELLER FINANCIAL INC NTS 5.760 5.761 A3 99.802 999,730.00 .32 42333HKJ0 5.750% 09/25/2001 DD 09/25/98 998,020.00 .31 16,100,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES 5.783 6,258 AAA 103.859 16,581,067.03 5.37 9128272Wl 06,500% 05/31/2002 DD 06/02/97 16,721,299.00 5.19 2,005,000.00 SEARS ROEBUCK ACCEP CORP MTN 5.804 6,446 A2 101.453 2,060,739.00 .65 81240QGW6 6.540% 02/20/2003 DD 02/20/97 2,034,132.65 .63 5,ooo,ooo.oo US TREASURY NOTES 5.811 6.066 AAA 103.031 5,086,402.25 1.65 9128272L5 06,250% 02/28/2002 DD 02/28/97 5,151,550.00 1.60 3,000,000.00 SEARS ROEBUCK ACCEP CORP MTN 5.849 6,516 A2 101. 750 3,073,170.00 .98 81240QJA1 6.630% 07/09/2002 DD 07/09/97 3,052,500.00 .95 14,750,000,00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5.882 5.885 AAA 97.031 14,560,462.50 4.60 31364GLD9 5.710% 12/15/2008 DD 12/15/98 14,312,072.50 4.44 6,000,000.00 NATIONSBANK CHARLOTTE NC MTN 5.882 5.845 AAl 100.078 5,996,400.00 1.93 63858JDE6 5.850% 04/07/2000 DD 04/07/98 6,004,680.00 1.86 4,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 5.889 5.922 AAA 100.298 4,242,593.75 1.36 11F011644 5.940% 04/25/2029 4,242,593.75 1.32 982,126.95 FHLMC MULTICL MTG P/C 1574 E 5.912 5,880 100.343 980,745.83 .31 3133T02D5 5.900% 06/15/2017 985,495.65 .31 1,296,669.97 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-B CL A 5.957 5.891 AAA 100.158 1,293,985.47 .41 161614AE2 5.900% 11/15/2001 DD 11/15/95 1,298,718.71 .40 2,500,000.00 MERRILL LYNCH NOTES 5.995 6.273 AA3 101.629 2,526,725.00 .81 59018SXP4 6.375% 10/01/2001 DD 10/03/97 2,540,725.00 .79 1,500,000.00 BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS 6.010 5.940 AAA 101.006 7,497,255.00 2.43 079867AX5 6.000% 06/15/2002 DD 06/15/98 7,575,450.00 2.35 1,250,000.00 GENERAL MTRS ACCEP CORP NTS 6.032 6.929 A2 102.827 1,283,862.50 .41 370425QF0 7,125% 05/01/2001 DD 05/01/97 1,285,337.50 .40 1,000,000.00 GENERAL MTRS ACCEP CORP MTN 6.046 6.564 A2 102,078 1,018,520.00 .32 37042WGK1 6.700% 04/30/2001 DD 04/25/96 1,020,780.00 .32 2,000,000.00 BANKBOSTON CORP SR NTS 6.133 6,097 A2 100.466 1,999,600.00 .64 06605TAL6 6.125% 03/15/2002 DD 03/12/99 2,009,320.00 .62 YLDANAL YIELD ANALYSIS PAGE 6 OCSF07522202 1999/03/31 RUN DATE 04/06/99 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING RUN TIME 10.05.56 ----------------------------------------===-======---===----===----===========================-===-=--====--====---====------ PAR VALUE YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY MARKET TOTAL COST/ % TYPE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION BOOK YIELD RATING PRICE MARKET VALUE % TOTAL ----------------··---------~---------------------------------------------------------------- 194,153.09 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 6.200 6 .168 AAA 100.525 194,153.08 .06 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 195,172.16 .06 2,500,000.00 LEHMAN BROS HLDGS MTN TR 00252 6.232 6.365 BAAl 100.552 2,509,175.00 .80 52517PLM1 6.400% 08/30/2000 DD 09/26/97 2,513,800.00 .78 4,500,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 6.291 6.085 AAA 102.375 4,488,705.00 1.48 31364CXV5 6.230% 03/01/2002 DD 03/03/97 4,606,875.00 1.43 3,854,595.18 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 6.316 6.278 AAA 100.735 3,858,811.14 1.24 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 3,882,926.45 1.20 6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 6,317 6.175 AAA 97.172 6,009,765.63 1.95 OlN060643 6.000% 04/15/2029 6,073,250.00 1.88 2,000,000.00 BEAR STEARNS COS INC 6.330 6,623 A2 101.911 2,031,960.00 .65 073902AH1 6.750% 04/15/2003 2,038,220.00 .63 5,ooo,ooo.oo LEHMAN BROS HLDGS MTN #00196 6.364 6 .612 BAAl 100.578 5,039,450.00 1.61 52517PJD4 6.650% 11/08/2000 DD 11/08/96 5,028,900.00 1.56 1,305,000.00 BEAR STEARNS COS INC SR NTS 6.425 6.644 A2 101. 599 1,317,619.35 .42 073902AWB 6.750% 05/01/2001 DD 04/26/96 1,325,866.95 .41 10,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 6,478 6.532 AAA 99.516 10,385,156.25 3.36 01N062656 6.500% 05/15/2029 10,449,140.63 3.24 2,000,000.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF Tll A6 6.496 6.422 AAA 101.218 2,000,888.00 .65 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2018 2,024,360.00 .63 2,270,449.68 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF SER 1620Z 6.560 6.377 AAA 94.095 2,114,309.74 .68 3133T17A4 6.000% 11/15/2023 DD 11/01/93 2,136,376.22 .66 0,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 6.577 6.463 AAA 102.500 8,012,576.00 2.63 31364CBD9 6.625% 04/18/2001 DD 04/18/96 e,200,000.00 2.54 9,000,000.00 PHILIP MORRIS COS NT 6,593 8.976 A2 103.047 9,903,780.00 2.98 718154BB2 9.250% 02/15/2000 9,274,230.00 2.88 12,313,181.68 FHLMC GROUP JG5-0476 6,628 6.958 AAA 100.607 12,505,575.15 3.98 3128DDQ55 7.000% 02/01/2003 DD 02/01/98 12,387,922.69 3.84 3,000,000.00 G M A C MED TERM NTS 6 ,660 8.426 A2 102.361 3,227,070.00 .98 37042RKQ4 8.625% 1/10/2000 DD 1/10/95 3,070,830.00 .95 YLDANAL OCSF07522202 ORANGE CTY-LONG TERM OPERATING PAR VALUE SECURITY ID SECURITY DESCRIPTION ------------------------------- 2,892,484.15 GNMA II POOL t080088M 36225CC20 6.875% 06/20/2027 DD 06/01/97 1,999,242.45 GNMA II POOL #0080023 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD 12/01/96 2,500,000.00 US TREASURY BONDS 912810DJ4 13.250% 05/15/2014 DD 05/15/84 TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES TOTAL YIELD ANALYSIS 1999/03/31 YTM AT CURRENT QUALITY BOOK YIELD RATING 6.705 6,806 AAA 6.869 6.890 AAA 6.906 8.398 AAA --·--- 4.349 6 .147 ------- 4.347 6.126 MARKET PRICE 101,016 101. 594 157.781 PAGE RUN DATE RUN TIME TOTAL COST/ MARKET VALUE 2,955,757.25 2,921,871.79 2,032,354.91 2,031,110.37 4,029,030.31 3,944,525.00 ---------------312,772,150.76 310,984,416.29 -------------324,096,111.47 322,308,377.00 7 04/06/99 10.05.56 % TYPE % TOTAL .93 .91 .65 .63 1.26 1.22 ---------100.00 96.47 --------- 100.00 100.00 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER ------------------------------- RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENT TRANSACTIONS U.S. DOLLAR OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 313396BH5 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC CW MAT 02/01/1999 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO FED WIRE FEES EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 04-FEB-1999 23-MAR-1999 0.00 313396FDO cw FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC MAT 05/04/1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 26-MAR-1999 31361SQS8 FNMA POOL #0040065 -----------cw 5.830% 07/01/2016 DD 01/01/87 ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 26-MAR-1999 3136103L9 FNMA POOL #0046703 ----------~ cw 5.990% 03/01/2017 DD 04/01/87 ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 26-MAR-1999 31362EWJ1 FNMA POOL #0059149 -----------cw 6.130% 01/01/2018 DD 02/01/88 ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 26-MAR-1999 31362GM65 FNMA POOL #0060681 -----------cw 6.124% 03/01/2028 DD 04/01/88 ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 26-MAR-1999 31362JUM5 FNMA POOL #0062688 -----------cw 6.161% 05/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FED WIRE FEES 31362JUN3 FNMA POOL #0062689 26-MAR-1999 Page 1 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS -3.00 -3.00 0.00 -0.85 -0.85 0.00 -0.85 -0.85 0.00 -0.85 -0.85 0.00 -0.85 -0.85 0.00 -0.85 -0.85 0.00 -0.85 -0.85 0.00 -0.85 -0.85 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS -3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.85 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE Ol-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE cw 5.839% 06/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 ----------- U.S. DOLLAR SUB-ADV ADMINISTRATION FEE LIQUID OPER-PIMCO PURCHASES 0.00 FED HOME LN MTG CORP DISC 313396BH5 MAT 02/01/1999 ewe U.S. DOLLAR CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 900,000.00 DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 26354BSR4 05/25/1999 B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 900,000.00 DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 26354BSR4 05/25/1999 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 300,000.00 DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 26354BT44 06/04/1999 B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 300,000.00 DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 26354BT44 06/04/1999 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LIQUID OPER-PIMCO FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISC MAT 05/25/1999 01-FEB-1999 17-MAR-1999 17-MAR-1999 17-MAR-1999 17-MAR-1999 17-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 26-FEB-1999 26-FEB-1999 1,400,000.00 313588GA7 B MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER SM LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 1,400,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN DISC 313588GA7 MAT 05/25/1999 FC MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER 26-FEB-1999 26-FEB-1999 SM 26-FEB-1999 Page 2 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 0.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 -891,702.75 891,702.75 0.00 -891,702.75 -891,702.75 0.00 -297,080.00 297,080.00 0.00 -297,080.00 -297,080.00 0.00 -1,383,624.67 1,383,624.67 0.00 -1,383,624.67 -1,383,624.67 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -891,702.75 891,702.75 0.00 0.00 -891,702.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 -297,080.00 297,080.00 0.00 0.00 -297,080.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1,383,624.67 1,383,624.67 0.00 0.00 -1,383,624.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----------- 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 99.078083 99.078083 1.000000000 99.078083 99.078083 1.000000000 99.026666 99.026666 1.000000000 99.026666 99.026666 1.000000000 98.830333 98.830333 1.000000000 98.830333 98.830333 1.000000000 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,200,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO DISC 34539URP9 04/23/1999 B CITIBANK/CP/IPA, NEW YORK LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 7,200,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO DISC 34539URP9 04/23/1999 FC CITIBANK/CP/IPA, NEW YORK LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 700,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 36959JQW6 03/30/1999 B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 700,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 36959JQW6 03/30/1999 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 400,000.00 IBM DISC 45920ETR2 06/25/1999 B IBM CREDIT CORP LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 19-MAR-1999 19-MAR-1999 19-MAR-1999 19-MAR-1999 19-MAR-1999 02-MAR-1999 02-MAR-1999 02-MAR-1999 02-MAR-1999 02-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 400,000.00 IBM DISC 26-MAR-1999 45920ETR2 06/25/1999 26-MAR-1999 FC BANKERS TRUST CO/COMMERCIAL PA 26-MAR-1999 1,300,000.00 63743DTB7 B LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO NATIONAL RURAL DISC 06/11/1999 MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,300,000.00 NATIONAL RURAL DISC 63743DTB7 06/11/1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 FENNER SM ----------- FC MERRILL LYNCH GOVT SECS/MONEY 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 Page 3 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS -7,166,120.00 7,166,120.00 0.00 -7,166,120.00 -7,166,120.00 0.00 -697,337.67 697,337.67 0.00 -697,337.67 -697,337.67 0.00 -395,126.44 395,126.44 0.00 -395,126.44 -395,126.44 0.00 -1,287,293.94 1,287,293.94 0.00 -1,287,293.94 -1,287,293.94 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS -7,166,120.00 7,166,120.00 0.00 0.00 -7,166,120.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -697,337.67 697,337.67 0.00 0.00 -697,337.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 -395,126.44 395,126.44 0.00 0.00 -395,126.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1,287,293.94 1,287,293.94 0.00 0.00 -1,287,293.94 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 99.529444 99.529444 1.000000000 99.529444 99.529444 l.000000000 99. 619666 99. 619666 l.000000000 99.619666 99.619666 l.000000000 98. 781611 98. 781611 1.000000000 98. 781611 98.781611 1.000000000 99.022611 99. 022611 l.000000000 99.022611 99.022611 l.000000000 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE BASE: USO Ol-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 TMlOO BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ ---------------------------------~-------------------------------~---------------------------------------------------- 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 21,619.38 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-MAR-1999 -21,619.38 -21,619.38 1.000000 996085247 01-MAR-1999 21,619.38 21,619.38 1.000000 B -----------0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 21,619.38 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-MAR-1999 -21,619.38 -21,619.38 1.000000 996085247 01-MAR-1999 -21,619.38 0.00 1.000000 FC 01-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 524,663.24 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT Ol-MAR-1999 -524,663.24 -524,663.24 1.000000 996085247 01-MAR-1999 524,663.24 524,663.24 1. 000000 B ------------0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 524,663.24 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 01-MAR-1999 -524,663.24 -524,663.24 1.000000 996085247 01-MAR-1999 -524,663.24 0.00 1.000000 FC 01-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 11,437.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 15-MAR-1999 -11,437.50 -11,437.50 1.000000 996085247 15-MAR-1999 11,437.50 11,437.50 1. 000000 B ------------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 11,437.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 15-MAR-1999 -11,437.50 -11,437.50 1.000000 996085247 15-MAR-1999 -11,437.50 0.00 1.000000 FC 15-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,601,738.75 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 15-MAR-1999 -1,601,738.75 -1,601,738.75 1.000000 996085247 15-MAR-1999 1,601,738.75 1,601,738.75 1.000000 B -------------0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,601,738.75 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 15-MAR-1999 -1,601,738.75 -1,601,738.75 1.000000 996085247 15-MAR-1999 -1,601,738.75 0.00 1.000000 -- Page 4 OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE BASE: USO 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 TMlOO BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ --~-----------~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FC 15-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 915,237.48 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 22-MAR-1999 -915,237.48 -915,237.48 1.000000 996085247 22-MAR-1999 915,237.48 915,237.48 1.000000 B -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 915,237.48 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 22-MAR-1999 -915,237.48 -915,237.48 1.000000 996085247 22-MAR-1999 -915,237.48 0.00 1.000000 FC 22-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,053,433.99 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 24-MAR-1999 -2,053,433.99 -2,053,433.99 1.000000 996085247 24-MAR-1999 2,053,433.99 2,053,433.99 1. 000000 B -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,053,433.99 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 24-MAR-1999 -2,053,433.99 -2,053,433.99 1.000000 996085247 24-MAR-1999 -2,053,433.99 0.00 1. 000000 FC 24-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 633,650.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 29-MAR-1999 -633,650.00 -633,650.00 1.000000 996085247 29-MAR-1999 633,650.00 633,650.00 1.000000 B ---------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 633,650.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 29-MAR-1999 -633,650.00 -633,650.00 1. 000000 996085247 29-MAR-1999 -633,650.00 0.00 1.000000 FC 29-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,004,062.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 31-MAR-1999 -1,004,062.50 -1,004,062.50 1.000000 996085247 31-MAR-1999 1,004,062.50 1,004,062.50 1.000000 B -~---------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,004,062.50 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 31-MAR-1999 -1,004,062.50 -1,004,062.50 1.000000 Page 5 OCSGOOOlOO CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER --------- 996085247 FC U.S. DOLLAR FIXED 6,250,000.00 01N060627 FC INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 6.000% 02/15/2029 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY -6,250,000.00 01N060635 BC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 6.000% 03/15/2029 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 FCC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060643 6.000% 04/15/2029 B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY MELLON TRUST POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE ----------- 31-MAR-1999 31-MAR-1999 ll-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 04-MAR-1999 22-APR-1999 Page 6 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS ------------ -1,004,062.50 0.00 -6,154,296.88 -6,154,296.88 0.00 -6,195,312.50 -6,195,312.50 0.00 -6,195,312.50 6,195,312.50 0.00 -6,195,312.50 -6,195,312.50 0.00 6,195,312.50 -6,195,312.50 0.00 6,195,312.50 6,195,312.50 0.00 -6,009,765.63 6,009,765.63 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6,154,296.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6,195,312.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6,195,312.50 6,195,312.50 0.00 0.00 -6,195,312.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,195,312.50 -6,195,312.50 0.00 0.00 6,195,312.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6,009,765.63 6,009,765.63 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ---·-------- 1. 000000 l.000000000 98.468750 98 .468750 l.000000000 99 .125000 99.125000 1.000000000 99.125000 99.125000 1.000000000 99.125000 99.125000 1.000000000 99.125000 99.125000 1.000000000 99.125000 99.125000 1.000000000 96.156250 96 .156250 1.000000000 OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED MELLON TRUST POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE --------------------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6 .500% 02/15/2028 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2028 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062631 6.500% 03/15/2028 BC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 10,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062631 6.500% 03/15/2029 B LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 10,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062631 6.500% 03/15/2029 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ 2,000,000.00 06605TAL6 B 2,000,000.00 06605TAL6 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO BANKBOSTON CORP SR NTS 6.125% 03/15/2002 DD 03/12/99 CHASE SECURITIES, NEW YORK LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO BANKBOSTON CORP SR NTS 6.125% 03/15/2002 DD 03/12/99 CHASE SECURITIES, NEW YORK LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011628 6.150% 02/25/2029 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY 06-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 22-FEB-1999 06-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 28-JAN-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 09-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 09-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 06-JAN-1999 23-FEB-1999 26-FEB-1999 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS -4,543,593.75 -4,543,593.75 0.00 -6,058,125.00 -6,058,125.00 0.00 10,605,000.00 -10,605,000.00 0.00 Page 7 -10,605,000.00 10,605,000.00 0.00 -10,605,000.00 -10,605,000.00 0.00 -1,999,600.00 1,999,600.00 0.00 -1,999,600.00 -1,999,600.00 0.00 -2,007,500.00 -2,007,500.00 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS -4,543,593.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6,058,125.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,605,000.00 -10,605,000.00 0.00 0.00 -10,605,000.00 10,605,000.00 0.00 0.00 -10,605,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1,999,600.00 1,999,600.00 0.00 0.00 -1,999,600.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2,007,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100. 9687 50 100. 9687 50 1.000000000 100. 968750 100.968750 1.000000000 101.000000 101.000000 1.000000000 101.000000 101.000000 l.000000000 101.000000 101.000000 1.000000000 99.980000 99.980000 1.000000000 99.980000 99.980000 l.000000000 100.375000 100.375000 1.000000000 OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011628 6.150% 02/25/2029 FC BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 BC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 FC BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 B BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 BC BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011644 5.940% 04/25/2029 B PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC 2,230,000.00 11F011644 B -2,230,000.00 11F011644 BC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 5.940% 04/25/2029 BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 5.940% 04/25/2029 BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY MELLON TRUST POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 06-JAN-1999 23-FEB-1999 26-FEB-1999 04-FEB-1999 24-MAR-1999 11-FEB-1999 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 ll-FEB-1999 24-MAR-1999 11-FEB-1999 24-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 26-APR-1999 15-MAR-1999 26-APR-1999 15-MAR-1999 26-APR-1999 Page 8 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS -2,237,317.19 -2,237,317.19 0.00 2,010,625.00 -2,010,625.00 0.00 -2,242,892.19 -2,242,892.19 0.00 -2,242,892.19 2,242,892.19 0.00 2,242,892.19 -2,242,892.19 0.00 -2,005,625.00 2,005,625.00 0.00 -2,236,968.75 2,236,968.75 0.00 2,236,968.75 -2,236,968.75 0 .00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS -2,237,317.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,010,625.00 -2,010,625.00 0.00 0.00 -2,242,892.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2,242,892.19 2,242,892.19 0.00 0.00 2,242,892.19 -2,242,892.19 0.00 0.00 -2,005,625.00 2,005,625.00 0.00 0.00 -2,236,968.75 2,236,968.75 0.00 0.00 2,236,968.75 -2,236,968.75 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.328125 100.328125 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.578125 100.578125 l.000000000 100.578125 100.578125 1.000000000 100.578125 100.578125 1.000000000 100.281250 100.281250 l.000000000 100.312500 100.312500 1.000000000 100.312500 100.312500 1.000000000 MELLON TRUST OCSG000100 CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE Ol-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011644 5.940% 04/25/2029 15-MAR-1999 26-APR-1999 B BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 19,077.02 FNMA POOL #0040065 31361SQS8 5.830% 07/01/2016 DD B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 19,077.02 FNMA POOL #0040065 31361SQS8 5.830% 07/01/2016 DD IB LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 19,077.02 FNMA POOL #0040065 31361SQS8 5.830% 07/01/2016 DD FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 741,927.68 FNMA POOL #0046703 313610319 5.990% 03/01/2017 DD B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 741,927.68 FNMA POOL #0046703 313610319 5.990% 03/01/2017 DD IB LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 741,927.68 FNMA POOL #0046703 04-FEB-1999 01/01/87 24-MAR-1999 04-FEB-1999 01/01/87 24-MAR-1999 04-FEB-1999 01/01/87 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 04-FEB-1999 . 04/01/87 24-MAR-1999 04-FEB-1999 04/01/87 24-MAR-1999 313610319 5.990% 03/01/2017 DD FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY 04-FEB-1999 04/01/87 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 27,828.16 FNMA POOL #0059149 04-FEB-1999 31362EWJ1 6.130% 01/01/2018 DD 02/01/88 24-MAR-1999 Page 9 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS -2,236,968.75 2,236,968.75 0.00 -19,178.37 19,178.37 0.00 -71.91 0.00 0.00 -19,250.28 -19,250.28 0.00 -745,869.17 745,869.17 0.00 -2,796.66 0.00 0.00 -748,665.83 -748,665.83 0.00 -27,976.00 27,976.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 -2,236,968.75 2,236,968.75 0.00 0.00 -19,178.37 19,178.37 0.00 0.00 -71. 91 0.00 0.00 0.00 -19,250.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 -745,869.17 745,869.17 0.00 0.00 -2,796.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 -748,665.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 -27,976.00 27,976.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.312500 100.312500 l.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 l.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 l.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 l.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 l.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 27,828.16 FNMA POOL #0059149 04-FEB-1999 31362EWJ1 6.130% 01/01/2018 DD 02/01/88 24-MAR-1999 IB LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 27,828.16 FNMA POOL #0059149 04-FEB-1999 31362EWJ1 6.130% 01/01/2018 DD 02/01/88 24-MAR-1999 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY 24-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 230,245.08 FNMA POOL #0060681 04-FEB-1999 31362GM65 6.124% 03/01/2028 DD 04/01/88 24-MAR-1999 B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 230,245.08 FNMA POOL #0060681 04-FEB-1999 31362GM65 6.124% 03/01/2028 DD 04/01/88 24-MAR-1999 IB LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 230,245.08 FNMA POOL #0060681 04-FEB-1999 31362GM65 6.124% 03/01/2028 DD 04/01/88 24-MAR-1999 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY 24-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 226,408.26 FNMA POOL #0062688 04-FEB-1999 31362JUM5 6.161% 05/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 226,408.26 FNMA POOL #0062688 04-FEB-1999 31362JUM5 6.161% 05/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 IB ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 226,408.26 FNMA POOL #0062688 04-FEB-1999 Page 10 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 0.00 -104.90 0.00 0.00 -28,080.90 -28,080.90 0.00 -231,468.26 231,468.26 0.00 -868.63 0.00 0.00 -232,336.89 -232,336.89 0.00 -227, 611. 05 227,611.05 0.00 -854.16 0.00 0.00 -228,465.21 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 0.00 -104.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 -28,080.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 -231,468.26 231,468.26 0.00 0.00 -868.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 -232,336.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 -227,611.05 227,611.05 0.00 0.00 -854.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 -228,465.21 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----------- 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100. 531250 l.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 l.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 l.000000000 100.531250 OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 31362JUM5 6.161% 05/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY 24-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 754,515.68 FNMA POOL #0062689 31362JUN3 5.839% 06/01/2028 DD B GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY 04-FEB-1999 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 754,515.68 FNMA POOL #0062689 31362JUN3 5.839% 06/01/2028 DD IB 04-FEB-1999 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 754,515.68 31362JUN3 FC 900,000.00 542671CK6 B LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0062689 5.839% 06/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LIQUID OPER-PIMCO LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB 7.300% 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 900,000.00 LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB 542671CK6 7.300% 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 IB 900,000.00 542671CK6 FC 4,250,000.00 542671CK6 B LIQUID OPER-PIMCO LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB 7.300% 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LIQUID OPER-PIMCO LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB 7.300% 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 04-FEB-1999 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 11-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 11-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 11-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 ll-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 Page 11 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS ----------- -228,465.21 0.00 -758,524.04 758,524.04 0.00 -2,846.52 0.00 0.00 -761,370.56 -761,370.56 0.00 -905,301.00 905,301.00 0.00 -11,132.50 0.00 0.00 -916,433.50 -916,433.50 0.00 -4,275,032.50 4,275,032.50 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 0.00 0.00 -758,524.04 758,524.04 0.00 0.00 -2,846.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 -761,370.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 -905,301.00 905,301.00 0.00 0.00 -11,132.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 -916,433.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4,275,032.50 4,275,032.50 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----------- 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.531250 100.531250 1.000000000 100.589000 100.589000 1.000000000 100.589000 100.589000 1.000000000 100.589000 100.589000 1.000000000 100.589000 100.589000 1.000000000 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 4,250,000.00 LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB ll-MAR-1999 542671CK6 7.300% 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 16-MAR-1999 IB ----------- LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -4,250,000.00 LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB ll-MAR-1999 542671CK6 7.300% 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 16-MAR-1999 BC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY ----------- LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -4,250,000.00 LONG ISLAND LTG CO DEB ll-MAR-1999 542671CK6 7.300% 07/15/1999 DD 07/21/92 16-MAR-1999 IBC ----------- PAY UPS U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 11,295.73 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF SER 1620Z Ol-MAR-1999 3133Tl7A4 6.000% 11/15/2023 DD 11/01/93 Ol-MAR-1999 PU ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 11,295.73 3133T17A4 FC FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF SER 1620Z Ol-MAR-1999 6.000% 11/15/2023 DD 11/01/93 Ol-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 24,200.00 US TREASURY INFLATION 9128272M3 3.375% 01/15/2007 DD PU LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 24,200.00 US TREASURY INFLATION 9128272M3 3.375% 01/15/2007 DD FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 15-MAR-1999 INDEX NT 15-JAN-1999 01/15/97 15-JAN-1999 INDEX NT 15-JAN-1999 01/15/97 15-JAN-1999 31-MAR-1999 16,730.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 15-JAN-1999 9128273A8 3.625% 07/15/2002 DD 07/15/97 15-JAN-1999 PU Page 12 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS ---------- -52,570.14 0.00 0.00 4,275,032.50 -4,275,032.50 0.00 52,570 .14 0.00 0.00 -11,295.73 11,295.73 0.00 -11,295.73 -11,295. 73 0.00 -24,200.00 24,200.00 0.00 -24,200.00 -24,200.00 0.00 -16,730.00 16,730.00 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS ---------- -52,570.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,275,032.50 -4,275,032.50 0.00 0.00 52,570 .14 0 .00 0.00 0.00 -11,295.73 11,295.73 0.00 0.00 -11,295. 73 0.00 0.00 0.00 -24,200.00 24,200.00 0.00 0.00 -24,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -16,730.00 16,730.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----------- 100.589000 100.589000 1.000000000 100.589000 100.589000 1.000000000 100.589000 100.589000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 l.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SALES U.S. TRANS CODE BROKER LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 16,730.00 US TREASURY INFLATION 9128273A8 3.625% 07/15/2002 DD FC INDEX NT 15-JAN-1999 07/15/97 15-JAN-1999 31-MAR-1999 DOLLAR CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS -2,000,000.00 26354BRT1 s LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 04/27/1999 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,000,000.00 DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 26354BRT1 04/27/1999 IS -2,000,000.00 26354BRT1 FC -850,000.00 313396FDO s LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO DU PONT DE NEMOUR DISC 04/27/1999 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LIQUID OPER-PIMCO FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC MAT 05/04/1999 MORGAN JP SECS INC, NEW YORK LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -850,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC 313396FDO MAT 05/04/1999 IS -850,000.00 313396FDO FC LIQUID OPER-PIMCO FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC MAT 05/04/1999 MORGAN JP SECS INC, NEW YORK LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 Page 13 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS -16,730.00 -16,730.00 0.00 1,981,866.67 -1,981,866.67 0.00 5,738.89 0.00 0.00 1,987,605.56 1,987,605.56 0.00 840,192.89 -840,192.89 0.00 4,276.92 0.00 0.00 844,469.81 844,469.81 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 -16,730.00 0.00 0.00 O.QO 1,981,866.67 -1,981,866.67 0.00 0.00 5,738.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,987,605.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 840,192.89 -840,192.89 0.00 0.00 4,276.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 844,469.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.000000 100.000000 l.000000000 99.093333 99.093333 1.000000000 99.093333 99.093333 l.000000000 99.093333 99.093333 1.000000000 98.846222 98.846222 l.000000000 98.846222 98.846222 l.000000000 98.846222 98.846222 1.000000000 USO OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE BASE: USO Ol-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 TMlOO BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~---- -670,290.45 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 02-MAR-1999 670,290.45 670,290.45 1.000000 996085247 02-MAR-1999 -670,290.45 -670,290.45 1.000000 s -----~-----0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -670,290.45 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 02-MAR-1999 670,290.45 670,290.45 1.000000 996085247 02-MAR-1999 670,290.45 0.00 1.000000 FC 02-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -11,994.44 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 12-MAR-1999 11,994.44 11,994.44 1.000000 996085247 12-MAR-1999 -11,994.44 -11,994.44 1.000000 s -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -11,994.44 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 12-MAR-1999 11,994.44 11,994.44 1.000000 996085247 12-MAR-1999 11,994.44 0.00 1.000000 FC 12-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -71,963.69 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 16-MAR-1999 71,963.69 71,963.69 1.000000 996085247 16-MAR-1999 -71,963.69 -71,963.69 1.000000 s -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -71,963.69 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 16-MAR-1999 71,963. 69 71,963.69 1.000000 996085247 16-MAR-1999 71,963.69 0.00 1.000000 FC 16-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -877,879.82 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 17-MAR-1999 877,879.82 877,879.82 1.000000 996085247 17-MAR-1999 -877,879.82 -877,879.82 1.000000 s -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -877,879.82 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 17-MAR-1999 877,879.82 877,879.82 1.000000 996085247 17-MAR-1999 877,879.82 0.00 1.000000 FC 17-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 14 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE BASE: USO 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 TMlOO BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------~---------------------------------------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -822,385.70 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 19-MAR-1999 822,385.70 822,385.70 1.000000 996085247 19-MAR-1999 -822,385.70 -822,385.70 1.000000 s -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -822,385.70 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 19-MAR-1999 822,385.70 822,385.70 1.000000 996085247 19-MAR-1999 822,385.70 0.00 1.000000 FC 19-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -0.85 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 23-MAR-1999 0.85 0.85 1.000000 996085247 23-MAR-1999 -0.85 -0.85 1.000000 s -----------0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO -0.85 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 23-MAR-1999 0.85 0.85 1.000000 996085247 23-MAR-1999 0.85 0.00 1.000000 FC 23-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -670,029.24 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 23-MAR-1999 670,029.24 670,029.24 1.000000 996085247 23-MAR-1999 -670,029.24 -670,029.24 1.000000 s -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -670,029.24 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 23-MAR-1999 670,029.24 670,029.24 1.000000 996085247 23-MAR-1999 670,029.24 0.00 1.000000 FC 23-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,967,291.67 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 25-MAR-1999 1,967,291.67 1,967,291.67 1.000000 996085247 25-MAR-1999 -1,967,291.67 -1,967,291.67 1.000000 s -----------0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -1,967,291.67 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 25-MAR-1999 1,967,291.67 1,967,291.67 1.000000 996085247 25-MAR-1999 1,967,291.67 0.00 1.000000 FC 25-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 Page 15 OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -95,131.54 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 996085247 s LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -95,131.54 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 996085247 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -587,293.94 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 996085247 s LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -587,293.94 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 996085247 FC U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 S GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 SC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 MELLON TRUST POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 26-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 04-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 04-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 04-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 04-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 Page 16 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 95,131.54 -95,131.54 0.00 95,131.54 95,131.54 0.00 587,293.94 -587,293.94 0.00 587,293.94 587,293.94 0.00 6,015,136.75 -6,195,312.50 -180,175.75 6,015,136.75 6,015,136.75 0.00 -6,015,136.75 6,195,312.50 180,175.75 -6, 015, 136. 75 -6,015,136.75 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 95,131.54 -95,131.54 0.00 0.00 95,131.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 587,293.94 -587,293.94 0.00 0.00 587,293.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,015,136.75 -6,195,312.50 -180,175.75 0.00 6,015,136.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6, 015, 136. 75 6,195,312.50 180,175.75 0.00 -6,015,136.75 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 1.000000 1. 000000 l.000000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000000 1.000000 1.000000 l.000000000 1.000000 1.000000 l.000000000 96.242188 96.242188 1.000000000 96. 242188 96.242188 l.000000000 96.242188 96. 242188 1.000000000 96. 242188 96.242188 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER --------------- FCC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 S GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,250,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA SF MTG 01N060635 6.000% 03/15/2029 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 SC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 6,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 FCC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 SC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 FCC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -4,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -4,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE ------------ 23-MAR-1999 04-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 04-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 28-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 Page 17 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 0.00 6,015,136.75 -6,195,312.50 -180,175.75 6,015,136.75 6,015,136.75 0.00 -6,068,671.86 6,058,125.00 -10,546.86 -6,068,671.86 -6,068,671.86 0.00 -4,551,503.90 4,543,593.75 -7,910.15 -4,551,503.90 -4,551,503.90 0.00 4,551,503.91 -4,543,593.75 7,910.16 4,551,503.91 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 0.00 6,015,136.75 -6,195,312.50 -180,175.75 0.00 6,015,136.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6,068,671.86 6,058,125.00 -10,546.86 0.00 -6,068,671.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4,551,503.90 4,543,593.75 -7,910.15 0.00 -4,551,503.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,551,503.91 -4,543,593.75 7,910.16 0.00 4,551,503.91 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----·--·~--- 1.000000000 96. 242188 96.242188 1.000000000 96.242188 96.242188 1.000000000 101.144531 101.144531 1.000000000 101.144531 101.144531 1.000000000 101.144531 101.144531 1.000000000 101.144531 101.144531 1.000000000 101.144531 101.144531 1.000000000 101.144531 OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE Ol-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER ---------------------- 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -6,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062623 6.500% 02/15/2029 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062631 6.500% 03/15/2029 S LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -10,500,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR GNMA I SF MTG 01N062631 6.500% 03/15/2029 FC LEHMAN BROS INC, NJ LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011628 6.150% 02/25/2029 SC 2,230,000.00 11F011628 SC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 6.150% 02/25/2029 BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011628 6.150% 02/25/2029 S GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE ----------- 22-FEB-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 28-JAN-1999 22-FEB-1999 22-FEB-1999 25-FEB-1999 23-MAR-1999 25-FEB-1999 23-MAR-1999 23-MAR-1999 04-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 04-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 04-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS ----------- 4,551,503.91 0.00 6,068,671.88 -6,058,125.00 10,546.88 6,068,671.88 6,068,671.88 0.00 10,412,226.51 -10,605,000.00 -192,773.49 10,412,226.51 10,412,226.51 0.00 -2,012,343.76 2,007,005.76 -5,338.00 -2,244,634.38 2,237,811.43 -6,822.95 2,012,343.75 -2,007,005.76 5,337.99 Page 18 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,068,671.88 -6,058,125.00 10,546.88 0.00 6,068,671.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,412,226.51 -10,605,000.00 -192,773.49 0.00 10,412,226.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2,012,343.76 2,007,005.76 -5,338.00 0.00 -2,244,634.38 2,237,811.43 -6,822.95 0.00 2,012,343.75 -2,007,005.76 5,337.99 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----------- 101.144531 l.000000000 101.144531 101.144531 1.000000000 101.144531 101.144531 1.000000000 99.164062 99.164062 l.000000000 99.164062 99.164062 l.000000000 100.617188 100.617188 l.000000000 100.656250 100.656250 1.000000000 100.617158 100. 617158 l.000000000 OCSG000100 CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER ~-------------------~--- -2,000,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011628 6.150% 02/25/2029 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011628 6.150% 02/25/2029 S BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA SF MTG 11F011628 6.150% 02/25/2029 FC BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY -2,000,000.00 11F011636 s -2,000,000.00 11F011636 FC 2,000,000.00 11F011636 SC 2,000,000.00 11F011636 FCC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 5.940% 03/25/2029 PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 5.940% 03/25/2029 PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 5.940% 03/25/2029 PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 5.940% 03/25/2029 PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 S BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY MELLON TRUST POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 0l-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE ----------- 04-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 26-FEB-1999 ll-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 ll-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 26-FEB-1999 12-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 Page 19 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS ------------ 2,012,343.75 2,012,343.75 0.00 2,244,634.38 -2,237,811.43 6,822.95 2,244,634.38 2,244,634.38 0.00 2,006,875.00 -2,011,119.24 -4,244.24 2,006,875.00 2,006,875.00 0.00 -2,006,875.00 2,011,119.24 4,244.24 -2,006,875.00 -2,006,875.00 0.00 2,238,101.17 -2,242,397.95 -4,296.78 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS ------------ 2,012,343.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,244,634.38 -2,237,811.43 6,822.95 0.00 2,244,634.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,006,875.00 -2,011,119.24 -4,244.24 0.00 2,006,875.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 -2,006,875.00 2,011,119.24 4,244.24 0.00 -2,006,875.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,238,101.17 -2,242,397.95 -4,296. 78 0.00 BASE: USD TMl00 LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----------- 100.617158 100.617158 1.000000000 100.656250 100.656250 1.000000000 100.656250 100.656250 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.363281 100.363281 1.000000000 MELLON TRUST OCSG000l00 CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VAL0E SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE -2,230,000.00 11F011636 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 5.940% 03/25/2029 BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 SC BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 FCC BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 S BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,230,000.00 COMMIT TO PUR FNMA 11TH 11F011636 5.940% 03/25/2029 FC BEAR STEARNS & CO INC, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 15-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 24-MAR-1999 -19,077.02 31361SQS8 s FNMA POOL #0040065 5.830% 07/01/2016 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES 12-MAR-1999 01/01/87 24-MAR-1999 INC ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -19,077.02 FNMA POOL #0040065 12-MAR-1999 31361SQS8 5.830% 07/01/2016 DD 01/01/87 24-MAR-1999 IS ----------- -19,077.02 31361SQS8 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0040065 5.830% 07/01/2016 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES 12-MAR-1999 01/01/87 24-MAR-1999 INC 24-MAR-1999 Page 20 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 2,238,101.17 2,238,101.17 0.00 -2,238,101.17 2,242,397.95 4,296.78 -2,238,101.17 -2,238,101.17 0.00 2,238,101.17 -2,242,892.19 -4,791.02 2,238,101.17 2,238,101.17 0.00 19,142.60 -19,178.37 -35.77 71. 91 0.00 0.00 19,214.51 19,214.51 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 2,238,101.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2,238,101.17 2,242,397.95 4,296.78 0.00 -2,238,101.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,238,101.17 -2,242,892.19 -4,791.02 0.00 2,238,101.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 19,142.60 -19,178.37 -35.77 0.00 71. 91 0.00 0.00 0.00 19,214.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMl00 LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.363281 100.363281 1.000000000 100.363281 100.363281 1.000000000 100.363281 100.363281 1.000000000 100.363281 100.363281 1.000000000 100.363281 100.363281 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER -741,927.68 3136103L9 s LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0046703 5.990% 03/01/2017 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 12-MAR-1999 04/01/87 24-MAR-1999 INC ----------- -741,927.68 FNMA POOL #0046703 12-MAR-1999 313610319 5.990% 03/01/2017 DD 04/01/87 24-MAR-1999 IS -741,927.68 3136103L9 FC -27,828.16 31362EWJ1 s LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0046703 5.990% 03/01/2017 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0059149 6.130% 01/01/2018 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12-MAR-1999 04/01/87 24-MAR-1999 INC 24-MAR-1999 12-MAR-1999 02/01/88 24-MAR-1999 INC ---------- -27,828.16 FNMA POOL #0059149 12-MAR-1999 31362EWJ1 6.130% 01/01/2018 DD 02/01/88 24-MAR-1999 IS ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -27,828.16 FNMA POOL #0059149 12-MAR-1999 31362EWJ1 6.130% 01/01/2018 DD 02/01/88 24-MAR-1999 FC PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC 24-MAR-1999 -230,245.08 31362GM65 s LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0060681 6.124% 03/01/2028 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO , 12-MAR-1999 04/01/88 24-MAR-1999 INC ----------- -230,245.08 FNMA POOL #0060681 12-MAR-1999 31362GM65 6.124% 03/01/2028 DD 04/01/88 24-MAR-1999 IS ----------- Page 21 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 744,478.06 -745,869.17 -1,391.11 2,796.66 0.00 0.00 747,274 .72 747,274.72 0.00 27,923.82 -27,976.00 -52.18 104.90 0.00 0.00 28,028.72 28,028.72 0.00 231,036.55 -231,468.26 -431.71 868.63 0.00 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 744,478.06 -745,869.17 -1,391.11 0.00 2,796.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 747,274.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 27,923.82 -27,976.00 -52.18 0.00 104.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 28,028.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 231,036.55 -231,468.26 -431. 71 0.00 868.63 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 l.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 l.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 l.000000000 100.343750 100. 34 37 5'0 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 l.000000000 OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE -230,245.08 31362GM65 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0060681 6.124% 03/01/2028 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12-MAR-1999 04/01/88 24-MAR-1999 INC . 24-MAR-1999 -226,408.26 FNMA POOL #0062688 12-MAR-1999 31362JUM5 6.161% 05/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 S PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -226,408.26 FNMA POOL #0062688 12-MAR-1999 31362JUM5 6.161% 05/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 IS -226,408.26 31362JUM5 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FNMA POOL #0062688 6.161% 05/01/2028 DD PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 12-MAR-1999 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 INC 24-MAR-1999 -754,515.68 FNMA POOL #0062689 12-MAR-1999 31362JUN3 5.839% 06/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 S PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -754,515.68 FNMA POOL #0062689 12-MAR-1999 31362JUN3 5.839% 06/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 IS ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -754,515.68 FNMA POOL #0062689 12-MAR-1999 31362JUN3 5.839% 06/01/2028 DD 06/01/88 24-MAR-1999 FC PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INC 24-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,100,000.00 FORD MOTOR CR MTN TR# 00177 16-MAR-1999 345402HJ3 VAR/RT 03/30/1999 DD 03/30/94 19-MAR-1999 Page 22 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 231,905.18 231,905.18 0.00 227,186.54 -227, 611. 05 -424.51 854.16 0.00 0.00 228,040.70 228,040.70 0.00 757,109.33 -758,524.04 -1,414.71 2,846.52 0.00 0.00 759,955.85 759,955.85 0.00 7,100,000.00 -6,999,748.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 231,905.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 227,186.54 -227, 611. 05 -424.51 0.00 854.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 228,040.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 757,109.33 -758,524.04 -1,414.71 0.00 2,846.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 759,955.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 7,100,000.00 -6,999,748.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.343750 100.343750 l.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 1.000000000 100.343750 100.343750 l.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE s GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,100,000.00 FORD MOTOR CR MTN TR# 00177 345402HJ3 VAR/RT 03/30/1999 DD 03/30/94 IS LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -7,100,000.00 FORD MOTOR CR MTN TR# 00177 345402HJ3 VAR/RT 03/30/1999 DD 03/30/94 FC GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, NY PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS U.S. DOLLAR FIXED INCOME SECURITIES LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 16-MAR-1999 19-MAR-1999 16-MAR-1999 19-MAR-1999 19-MAR-1999 -133,514.47 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-B CL A 15-MAR-1999 161614AE2 5.900% 11/15/2001 DD 11/15/95 15-MAR-1999 PD ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -133,514.47 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-B CL A 15-MAR-1999 161614AE2 5.900% 11/15/2001 DD 11/15/95 15-MAR-1999 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -755,011.97 FHLMC GROUP #G5-0476 3128DDQ55 7.000% 02/01/2003 DD PD LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -755,011.97 FHLMC GROUP #G5-0476 3128DDQ55 7.000% 02/01/2003 DD FC 15-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 02/01/98 01-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 02/01/98 01-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 73,140.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 01-FEB-1999 Ol-FEB-1999 PDC Page 23 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS --------- 100,252.00 69,152.05 0.00 0.00 7,169,152.05 7,169,152.05 0.00 133,514.47 -133,238.05 276.42 133,514.47 133,514.47 0.00 755,011.97 -766,809.03 -11,797.06 755,011.97 755,011.97 0.00 -73,140.00 73,220.00 80.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS ---------- 100,252.00 0.00 69,152.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 7,169,152.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 133,514.47 -133,238.05 276.42 0.00 133,514.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 755,011 .97 -766,809.03 -11,797 .06 0.00 755,011.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 -73,140.00 73,220.00 80.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ----------- 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 OCSG000100 MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER ----------------------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -73,140.07 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 PD LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -73,140.07 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -78,889.50 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 PD LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -46,096.20 FHLMC MULTICL MTG P/C 1574 E 3133T02D5 5.900% 06/15/2017 PD LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -46,096.20 FHLMC MULTICL MTG P/C 1574 E 3133T02D5 5.900% 06/15/2017 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 01-FEB-1999 01-FEB-1999 01-FEB-1999 01-FEB-1999 15-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 -173,641.54 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 PD ---------- -173, 641. 54 31677EAA4 FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 173,641.54 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 PDC ----------- Page 24 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 73,140.07 -73,220.07 -80.00 73,140.07 73,140.07 0.00 78,889.50 -78,975.79 -86.29 46,096.20 -46,031.38 64.82 46,096.20 46,096.20 0.00 173,641.54 -173,641.53 0.01 173,641.54 173,641.54 0.00 -173,641.54 173,641.53 -0.01 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 73,140.07 -73,220.07 -80.00 0.00 73,140.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 78,889.50 -78,975.79 -86.29 0.00 46,096.20 -46,031.38 64.82 0.00 46,096.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 173,641.54 -173,641.53 0.01 0.00 173,641.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 -173,641.54 173,641.53 -0.01 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 l.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 173,641.54 31677EAA4 FCC FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -17,364.15 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 PD ----------- LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -17,364.15 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 FC 22-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -72,725.90 GNMA II POOL #0080023 01-MAR-1999 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD 12/01/96 01-MAR-1999 PD LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 72,725.90 GNMA II POOL #0080023 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD PDC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -72,714.45 GNMA II POOL #0080023 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD PD LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -72,714.45 GNMA II POOL #0080023 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD FC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 01-MAR-1999 12/01/96 01-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 12/01/96 01-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 12/01/96 01-MAR-1999 22-MAR-1999 -155,629.47 GNMA II POOL #080088M Ol-MAR-1999 36225CC20 6.875% 06/20/2027 DD 06/01/97 01-MAR-1999 PD Page 25 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS -173, 641. 54 -173,641.54 0.00 17,364.15 -17,364.15 0.00 17,364.15 17,364.15 0.00 72,725.90 -73,930.42 -1,204.52 -72,725.90 73,930.42 1,204.52 72,714.45 -73,918.78 -1,204.33 72,714.45 72,714.45 0.00 155,629.47 -159,033.87 -3,404.40 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS -173,641.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,364.15 -17,364.15 0.00 0.00 17,364.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 72,725.90 -73,930.42 -1,204.52 0.00 -72,725.90 73,930.42 1,204.52 0.00 72,714.45 -73,918.78 -1,204.33 0.00 72,714.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 155,629.47 -159,033.87 -3,404.40 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 l.000000000 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -155,629.47 GNMA II POOL #080088M 01-MAR-1999 36225CC20 6.875% 06/20/2027 DD 06/01/97 01-MAR-1999 FC 22-MAR-1999 MATURITIES U.S. DOLLAR CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS -300,000.00 19121EQS5 MT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO COCA COLA CO DISC 03/26/1999 BOND MATURITY LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -300,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC 313396DB6 MAT 03/15/1999 MT BOND MATURITY -700,000.00 36959JQW6 MT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 03/30/1999 BOND MATURITY MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITY U.S. DOLLAR INTEREST -6,100.00 9128272M3 SW -4,200.00 9128273A8 SW U.S. DOLLAR LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO TO RECORD INFLATION ADJUSTMENT FOR 02/28/99 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 3.375% 01/15/2007 DD 01/15/97 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO TO RECORD INFLATION ADJUSTMENT FOR 02/28/99 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 3.625% 07/15/2002 DD 07/15/97 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 26-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 26-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 23-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 23-FEB-1999 300,000.00 BEAR STEARN COS INC NTS 15-MAR-1999 073902AP3 7.625% 09/15/1999 DD 09/21/94 15-MAR-1999 Page 26 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 155,629.47 155,629.47 0.00 298,790.00 -298,790.00 0.00 299,167.00 -299,167.00 0.00 697,337.67 -697,337.67 0.00 0.00 -5,935.47 -5,935.47 0.00 -4,186.42 -4,186.42 11,437.50 11,437.50 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 155,629.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 298,790.00 -298,790.00 0.00 0.00 299,167.00 -299,167.00 0.00 0.00 697,337.67 -697,337.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 -5,935.47 -5,935.47 0.00 0.00 -4,186.42 -4,186.42 0.00 11,437.50 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 l.000000000 100.000000 100.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE BASE: USO Ol-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 TMlOO BASE AMOUNT/ SHARES/PAR VALUE EFFECTIVE DATE/ LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ LOCAL PRICE/ SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ SETTLE DATE/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ BASE PRICE/ TRANS CODE BROKER COMPL DATE GAIN LOSS CURR GAIN LOSS BASE XRATE/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~---------------- IT 15-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0,.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 133,514.47 CHASE MANHATTAN GRAN 95-B CL A 15-MAR-1999 7,031.74 7,031.74 0.000000 161614AE2 5.900% 11/15/2001 DD 11/15/95 15-MAR-1999 7,031.74 0.00 0.000000 IT 15-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 3,500,000.00 CHRYSLER FIN MTN 17-MAR-1999 13,822.93 13,822.93 0.000000 17120QE80 FLTG RT 08/08/2002 DD 04/08/98 15-MAR-1999 13,822.93 0.00 0.000000 IT 17-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 300,000.00 COCA COLA CO DISC 26-MAR-1999 1,210.00 1,210.00 0.000000 19121EQS5 03/26/1999 26-MAR-1999 1,210.00 0.00 0.000000 IT 26-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 755,011.97 FHLMC GROUP JtG5-0476 15-MAR-1999 76,231.13 76,231.13 0.000000 3128DDQ55 7.000% 02/01/2003 DD 02/01/98 01-MAR-1999 76,231.13 0.00 0.000000 IT 15-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 73,140.07 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF E3 A 15-MAR-1999 20,637.81 20,637.81 0.000000 3133TCE95 6.324% 08/15/2032 01-FEB-1999 20,637.81 0.00 0.000000 IT 15-MAR-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO -2,000,000.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF Tll A6 25-FEB-1999 -10,833.33 -10,833.33 0.000000 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2018 25-JAN-1999 -10,833.33 0.00 0.000000 ITC 25-FEB-1999 0.00 0.00 l.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF Tll A6 25-FEB-1999 10,833.33 10,833.33 0.000000 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2018 25-FEB-1999 10,833.33 0.00 0.000000 CD INTEREST RECEIVED 25-FEB-1999 0.00 0.00 1.000000000 0.00 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF Tll A6 25-MAR-1999 10,833.33 10,833.33 0.000000 Page 27 MELLON TRUST OCSG000l00 CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE ---------------------- 3133TDPV2 6.500% 09/25/2018 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 46,096.20 FHLMC MULTICL MTG P/C 1574 E 3133T02D5 5.900% 06/15/2017 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO ----------- 25-JAN-1999 25-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 11,295.73 3133Tl 7A4 IT FHLMC MULTICLASS CTF SER 1620Z 15-MAR-1999 6.000% 11/15/2023 DD 11/01/93 01-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 300,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP DISC 313396DB6 MAT 03/15/1999 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 4,500,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 31364CXV5 6.230% 03/01/2002 DD 03/03/97 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 19,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 31364CZY7 6.670% 03/27/2002 DD 03/27/97 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 29-MAR-1999 27-MAR-1999 29-MAR-1999 173,641.54 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 IT 15-MAR-1999 -173, 641. 54 31677EAA4 ITC LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 15-MAR-1999 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 15-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Page 28 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS --------- 10,833.33 0.00 5,055.43 5,055.43 0.00 11,295.73 11,295.73 0.00 833.00 833.00 0.00 140,175.00 140,175.00 0.00 633,650.00 633,650.00 0.00 11,378.39 11,378.39 0.00 -11,378.39 -11,378.39 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,055.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 11,295.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 833.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 140,175.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 633,650.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11,378.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 -11,378.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: USD TMl00 LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ ---------~ 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 MELLON TRUST OCSGOOOlOO CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 17,364.15 FIFTH THIRD BK AUTO TR 96A CLA 22-MAR-1999 31677EAA4 6.200% 09/01/2001 DD 03/15/96 15-MAR-1999 IT 22-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 2,000,000.00 FORD MTR CR CO TERM ENHANCED 02-MAR-1999 345397SC8 FLTG RT 08/27/2006 DD 08/27/98 27-FEB-1999 IT 02-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 72,714.45 GNMA II POOL #0080023 22-MAR-1999 36225CAZ9 7.000% 12/20/2026 DD 12/01/96 01-MAR-1999 IT 22-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 155,629.47 GNMA II POOL #080088M 22-MAR-1999 36225CC20 6.875% 06/20/2027 DD 06/01/97 01-MAR-1999 IT 22-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 700,000.00 GENERAL ELEC CAP DISC 36959JQW6 03/30/1999 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 30-MAR-1999 4,000,000.00 HELLER FINL MTN 01-MAR-1999 42333HJN3 FLTG RT 06/01/2000 DD 04/07/98 01-MAR-1999 IT 01-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 1,000,000.00 HELLER FINANCIAL INC NTS 42333HKJO 5.750% 09/25/2001 DD 09/25/98 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 25-MAR-1999 25-MAR-1999 25-MAR-1999 4,000,000.00 HOUSEHOLD FIN CO MTN 24-MAR-1999 44181KZA5 FLTG RT 06/24/2003 DD 06/24/98 24-MAR-1999 IT 24-MAR-1999 Page 29 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS --------- 1, 092. 83 1,092.83 0.00 27,047.22 27,047.22 0.00 10,575.61 10,575.61 0.00 17,463.15 17,463.15 0.00 2,662.33 2,662.33 0.00 54,812.50 54,812.50 0.00 28,750.00 28,750.00 0.00 55,100.00 55,100.00 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS -------- 1,092.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 27,047.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,575.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,463.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,662.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 54,812.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 28,750.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55,100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ -~~~~-- 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 OCSGOOOlOO MELLON TRUST CS DOC-CONSOLIDATED POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 01-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 500,000.00 TRANSAMERICA FIN MTN #SBOOllO 89350MEP1 8.450% 01/12/2000 DD 01/12/95 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO Ol-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 31,500,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES 31-MAR-1999 912827Z54 06.375% 09/30/2001 DD 09/30/96 31-MAR-1999 IT 31-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 5,000,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES 9128272L5 06.250% 02/28/2002 DD IT Ol-MAR-1999 02/28/97 28-FEB-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 24,200.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 31-MAR-1999 9128272M3 3.375% 01/15/2007 DD 01/15/97 15-JAN-1999 IT 31-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 16,730.00 US TREASURY INFLATION INDEX NT 31-MAR-1999 9128273A8 3.625% 07/15/2002 DD 07/15/97 15-JAN-1999 IT 31-MAR-1999 LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 5,500,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES Ol-MAR-1999 9128273G5 06.250% 08/31/2002 DD 09/02/97 28-FEB-1999 IT Ol-MAR-1999 LIQUID OPER-PIMCO 0.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 996085247 IT LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 DREYFUS TREASURY CASH MGMT 996085247 IT Ol-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 Ol-MAR-1999 Page 30 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 21,125.00 21,125.00 0.00 1,004,062.50 1,004,062.50 0.00 156,250.00 156,250.00 0 .00 24,200.00 24,200.00 0.00 16,730.00 16,730.00 0.00 171,875.00 171,875.00 0.00 494.38 494.38 0.00 1,547.39 1,547.39 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 21,125.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,004,062.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 156,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16,730.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 171,875.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 494.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,547.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMlOO LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 l.000000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 OCSG000100 CSDOC-CONSOLIDATED SHARES/PAR VALUE SECURITY ID/ DESCRIPTION/ TRANS CODE BROKER LONG TERM OPER-PIMCO 0.00 BSDT-LATE MONEY DEP ACCT 996087094 VAR RT DD 06/26/1997 IT MELLON TRUST POSTED TRANSACTIONS -LOCAL/BASE 0l-MAR-1999 -31-MAR-1999 EFFECTIVE DATE/ SETTLE DATE/ COMPL DATE 01-MAR-1999 0l-MAR-1999 01-MAR-1999 Page 31 LOCAL AMOUNT/ COST/ GAIN LOSS 3.35 3.35 0.00 BASE AMOUNT/ COST/ INV GAIN LOSS/ CURR GAIN LOSS 3.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 BASE: USO TMl00 LOCAL PRICE/ BASE PRICE/ BASE XRATE/ 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000000 FAHR COMMITTEE (!r/l'l/t1? -P~ Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. 4/14/1999 4/28/99 1 AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Patrick B. Miles, Director of Information Technology~ SUBJECT: STAFF PAY PACKAGE TO SUPPORT YEAR 2000 CONTINGENCY EXECUTION CONSISTING OF: 1) $250 for all on-SITE standby staff, 2) $250 for all on-CALL (1 hour response) standby staff, 3) $250 for all normally scheduled support staff, 4) Time and a half overtime for all hours worked between 6:00 P.M. December 31, 1999 and 6:00 A.M. January 3, 2000, 5) District supplied food and beverages for the required weekend duration. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve a pay package for District staff to support Year 2000 contingency planning execution during New Year's Eve weekend 2000. SUMMARY Additional staff support will be required to minimize the risks posed by the Year 2000 (Y2K) date roll over. Many Y2K related dates have the possibility to cause computer difficulties in the day-to-day operation of the District, however the roll over to January 1, 2000 requires the most diligence to mitigate both internal systems and external service disruptions. Having additional staff on-site and on-call will cost effectively minimize the risk to public health and the environment. In order to support adequate staffing during the New Year's Eve weekend beginning December 31, 1999 and ending January 3, 2000, staff recommends the following premiums be offered to selected support staff: 1) $250 for all on-SITE standby staff, 2) $250 for all on-CALL (1 hour response) standby staff, 3) $250 for all normally scheduled support staff, 4) Time and a half overtime for all hours worked between 6:00 P.M. December 31, 1999 and 6:00 A.M. January 3, 2000, 5) District supplied food and beverages for the required weekend duration. The cash premium will help ensure a qualified pool of resources are available for the holiday weekend. The paid overtime is fair compensation and consistent with District policy for extraordinary services. The provided on-site food and beverages will allow staff to concentrate on the important work at hand. The call-in personnel serve two important functions. First, if things do go badly internally or externally for the District, added staff can be quickly brought in. Second, should prolonged problems occur, such C:ITEMPIFAHR Y2K 041499 staffing package.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1 as sustained power outages, staff will be available to relieve on-site standby personnel in the morning, if required. All employees receiving the cash premium will agree to abide by the District's existing Stand-by Pay policy and forgo any out of town travel plans over this "once-in-a-lifetime" holiday weekend. Proper staffing is an absolute requirement to minimize the risk to public health and the environment, and will support the safe operation of the District's assets during the New Year weekend. Staff recommend that these premiums be offered to ensure enough qualified personnel are available to mitigate any circumstances that might arise. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY NIA BUDGET IMPACT ~ This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Special projects 2q) D This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. D This item has not been budgeted. D Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The estimated staffing requirement is as follows: Staff Type Number of On-Site Number of On-Call Standby Staff Standby Staff Operations 6 5 Mainten·ance 18 5 Collections/GSA 11 6 IT 9 7 Other 5 3 Normally Scheduled Staff 13 Total 62 26 The estimated cost is as follows: Cash Incentives $22,000 Overtime Pay* 74,400 Food and Misc. 1,400 Total $97,800 * Assumes 12 Hours of work for On-Site standby staff at a fully burdened rate of $100/hr and no On-Call staff utilization. C:ITEMPIFAHR Y2K 041499 slalling package.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page2 ALTERNATIVES Reduce or eliminate the incentives, at the risk of diminishing the response capabilities of the District to unpredictable events. CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS None C:ITEMPIFAHR Y2K 041499 staffing package.doc Revised: 8/10198 Page3 Year 2000 Staff Compensation Policy Orange County Sanitation District • Obtain approval to provide District staff with a pay package to support Y2K contingency execution • Cash premiums = $ 22,000 • Total estimated costs = $ 97,800 • Y2K budgeted item 1 Staffing Challenges • The New Year 2000 falls over a weekend • Many staff members plan to take vacation • Employees may be concerned about leaving their families at a time of potential disruption • Delay in formalizing plan may increase risk • Proper staffing is required to minimize risk to public health and the environment t Practices GartnerGroup • Organizations should develop a compensation poJicy and do it now • Organizations must show they understand the disruption to employees' personal lives • Compensation must be "right the first time" • Anything less than 3x pay will be unacceptable • Some organizations are considering 4x pay 2 t Practices cont. U.S. Office of Personnel Mgmt. • Initiated Y2K Bonus Program -employees could receive up to 12% of salary • Employees were asked to manage their leave usage during December I January 2000 U.~. Department of Labor • Utilizes instant 11Good Job Awards" and other cash awards for Y2K performance r 2000 Weekend lf.fing Proposal #of Up-front Total Salary Staff Premium Premium Multiple EMT $0 $0 0 On-SITE 49 $250 $12,250 1.5x Standby Staff On-CALL 26 $250 $ 6,500 1.5x Standby Staff Scheduled 13 $250 $ 3,250 1.5x Staff Totals 88 $22,000 3 tnerGroup Comparison • District employee example: $28 x 1.5 = $42 x 12 hrs Plus cash premium Total $ 504 = 250 $ 754 • GartnerGroup Recommendation: $28 x 3 = $84 x 12 hrs $1,008 $28 x 4 = $112 x 12 hrs $1,344 (f Pay Comparison Salary Hourly Multiple Hours Premium Total Job Title Rate (1.5x) Worked Pay Pay On-Site Standby Employees Maintenance Manager $44.24 $ 66.36 12 $250 $1,046.32 Engineer 29.19 43.79 12 250 775.42 Instrumentation Tech II 26.80 40.20 12 260 732.40 Lab Analyst 22.24 33.36 12 250 650.32 Process Controls Mgr 44.72 67.08 12 250 1,055.01 IT Supervisor 39.54 59.31 12 250 961.74 Assoc Engineer 34.60 51.90 12 250 872.80 Project Specialist 29.38 44.07 12 250 778.80 Programmer Analyst 28.00 42.00 12 250 754.00 Scheduled Employees Operations Supervisor 33.02 49.53 12 250 844.36 Sr Plant Operator 25.90 38.85 12 250 716.20 4 ff Recommendation • Approve Y2K pay package for District staff as outlined below: $250 for standby support staff $ 18,750 $250 for scheduled support staff 3,250 Overtime pay (62staffworking12hrs@$100lhrJ 74,400 Food and miscellaneous costs 1,400 Total Estimated Cost $97,800 Questions 5 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Connection Fee Workshop April 10, 1999 -REVISED • Brief background review of financial rates and charges • Understand connection fee methodology • Discuss key issues / assumptions • Reach consensus on new connection fee policies 1 Decisions • Continue capital investment equalization method • Assign wet weather facility costs to residential development • Develop tiered fees for MFR and SFR based upon bedrooms • Develop low, average and high demand commercial fees • Allow SI Us to pay-as-they-use Decisions (cont'd) • Implement charge for regional governmental uses • Remove time limit for demolished facilities with proof of payment • Review fee and method routinely • Provide Board with authority for adjustments • Develop implementation or phase-in plan 2 Background Review Use of Funds Source of Funds • Operation and • Existing Users maintenance of existing facilities • Capital replacement • All Users and improvement of existing facilities • Capital construction • New Users to accommodate growth (capacity) 3 $ B:. isting and New Users are G~ uped into 5 Categories for Rates dCharges User Sewer Service Connection Category Charge Fee Residential X X Commercial X X Industrial X X Local Gov't X State & Federal X X Connection Fees Reduce the r,nthly Charge to Existing Users Connection Fee User Charge .. 4 What's Changed From the 2 0 Master Plan Item 2020 Plan Strategic Plan Planning Horizon 30 yrs 20 yrs CIP Budget $1 .48 billion $1.51 billion Projected Flow 399 MGD 352 MGD Flow per Household 399 gpd 260 gpd Number of Connections 1,000,000 1,354,000 Flow per 1,000 sq ft 80 gal 150 gal for Commercial Users (20%) (58%) Tlre..CIP Accounts/or $1.51 Billion iystem Improvements (Yr 2000-2020) Cooperative Projects $154,000,000 10% GWRS $120,650,000 8% Support Facilities $13,560,000 1% Additional Capacity $513,575,000 34% Rehabilitation and Replacement $665,094,000 44% Improved Treatment $48,437,000 3% 5 ~ly Flow Contributions .... 1998 Number Daily Flow 2020 Number Avg of Units or (Gallons) Avg of Units or Property Use MGD 1,000 sq ft Per Unit MGD 1,000 sq ft Residential 123 474,000 260 144 555,500 Multi Family Res 43 238,000 182 50 274,000 Commercial 63 420,000 150 86 570,000 IRWD 7 32 SAWPA 9 30 Wet Weather 10 10 Avg MGD Total 255 352 Rate Advisory Committee (RAC) rkshops Conducted Sept Oct Dec Feb May Jun Jul Sep Oct 12 24 12 20 1 19 31 17 9 ©® ® © ®®0 ®® ' ' ' ' ''' '' SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT 1996 1997 6 Connection Fee ($) Agency $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 Riverside OCSD (Existing) Sacramento Walnut Creek San Diego Los Angeles (County) San Jose Oakland Los Angeles (City) Phoenix San Francisco 0 ndustrial Connection Fee D District D Local Agency Co r,parison for a High Strength ~ustrial Us er Agency Concord Sacramento San Diego Los Angeles (County) Oakland San Jose Los Angeles (City) OCSD (Existing) Riverside Phoenix San Francisco Connection Fee (Millions of Dollars) n ~ n ~ n ~ f----------------"'.1 2.5 ::==============::,-~I 1.8 ::============,---I 1.5 :::=======::;;-__,I 1.2 t=====:::::::--::1 0.85 ---~I 0.71 ,__ __ ~I 0.71 I[ ll.-Q .. 61 _________ ~1.5 Q 0.057 ID0.030 Based on: • Flow 150,000 gpd • BOD 1,090 mg/L • TSS 270 mg/L • 130,000 sq ft of improved building area 0 •--_-_-.2 Rescinded Excess Capacity Charge 7 ndustrial Connection Fee Co parison for a Low Strength 'dustrial User Agency Connection Fee (Millions of Dollars) n $n1 n $n2 n $n3 Concord 11.6 San Diego I 1.5 Sacramento 11.0 Los Angeles (County) I 0.78 Based on: Oakland 10.58 • Flow 150,000 gpd San Jose I 0.58 • BOD 350 mg/L Los Angeles (City) 10.52 • TSS 270 mg/L OCSD (Existing) [Iif:.olt::: ~ o.ss • 130,000 sq ft of Riverside •0.057 improved building area Phoenix •0.030 San Francisco 0 •--_-_-.!. Rescinded Excess Capacity Charge lights of RAC Recommendations • "Pay for what you use" • Consider "pay as you go" • Consider tiered residential rates and fees • Reduce up-front costs 8 Connection Fee Methodology Gffiding Philosophy of Alternative Q . nection Fee Methods Method Guiding Philosophy Existing Method "All users past, present and future pay the same" Alternative "All users from now on pay the same" 9 Existing "Capital Investment E alization" Method I Replacement Valuel I Cost of Newl Lot Existing FacilitiesJ + L Facilities J Fee=--------------- [ Existing+ New] Connections * * Single Family Residential equivalents I "Buy-in" Cost 7 !Cost of New] Lot Existing Facilitie~ + L Facilities Fee=--------------- [connections ~ * Single Family Residential equivalents 10 "Buy-In" Cost is the Value xisting Facilities to Serve New Users Value of Facilities to Serve New Users $110 Million Total Value of Existing Facilities $763 Million apital Cost Items are Allocated to Ne Users Based on Connection : eMethod Connection Fee Capital Cost Item Cost Method $ in Million CIE Alternative "Buy-in" Cost $ 110 ? Existing Facilities 763 ✓ Additional Capacity 514 ✓ ✓ GWR System 121 ✓ ? Cooperative Projects 154 ✓ ? Replacement / 727 ✓ Improvement* * Includes Support Facilities 11 E~isting Capital Investment E alization Fee Method $ in Millions Capital Cost Item 2020 Strategic Master Plan Plan Existing Facilities $ 777 $ 763 Additional Capacity 886 514 GWR System (Reclamation) 77 121 Cooperative Projects 154 Replacement / Im rovement 519 727 Total Capital Requirements $2,259 $2,279 Number of Existing and New Users / EDUs 1,000,000 1,354,000 Average Cost Per EDU $2,260 $1,680 rnative Connection Fee Method $ in Millions Capital Cost Item Low Middle High "Buy-in" Cost $ 110 $ 110 Additional Capacity $ 514 514 514 GWR System 121 121 Cooperative Projects 154 Improved Treatment 48 Total Capital Requirements $ 514 $ 745 $ 947 Number of New EDUs 442,000 442,000 442,000 Average Cost Per EDU $1,165 $1,690 $2,145 12 Discussion of Key Issues I Assumptions 0 Connection Fees for Government Agencies 0 How to Charge for New Non-Residential Connections 0 Tiered Residential Connection Fees 0 Impact of Wet Weather 0 Credit for Demolished Facilities 13 • State and federal agencies included • Local agencies excluded • Schools • Cities • County • Revenue Area 13 is exception • Include state and federal agencies • Include regional or county facilities • Exclude local agencies • Schools • Cities • Charging local agencies is tax transfer • Not charging regional facilities burdens local ratepayer 14 , tions Considered for M -Residential Connection Fees • Unimproved property acreage • Size of sewer lateral • 125± land use codes • Simplification to combine land use codes into similar flow and strength categories • Simplification to "high, average and low" commercial categories Pays Unit Billing Component For Charge Method "Basic Fee" Average $ / 1000 One- Use sq ft Time Flow / Strength High $ for Annual Factor Demand Q, BOD, User Connection TSS Fee 15 A ~antages of Recommended C nection Fee Method • Fair to all users, who "pay for what they use" • Easy to understand, explain and administer • Conforms to RAC input to consider commercial / industry incentives by reducing up-front charges • Cash flow matches facilities need '-he Average Commercial Co nection Fee is Based on erage Usage Average Cost Categories Value of Facilities Equivalent Dwelling 260 gpd $1,680 Units (EDU) Average 150 gal/ Commercial 1,000 sq ft/ day $970 Usage (58%) (58%) 16 t Weather Adjustment • Flows increase during wet weather • Inflow • Infiltration • Amount of increase is proportional to sewers • Residential laterals are 55% of sewer length • Local sewers are 40% of sewer length • Residential connection fees should pay for wet weather capacity • Wet weather facilities are all flow related • Flow related facilities are $1.1 billion at2020 • Wet weather facilities increase Single Family Residential (SFR) fees from $20 to $140 (to total of $1,700 to $1,820) • Non-Residential fee range decreases proportionately to $900 to $675 / 1,000 sq ft 17 Number of Relationships to 1 EDU Bedrooms SFR MFR 0 0.32 1 0.62 0.50 2 0.81 0.70 3 1.00 0.89 4 1.19 1.08 5+ 1.39 • One-time fees are based on estimates • Cash flow does not match production • Currently 800 significant industrial / commercial users (SIUs) • RAC and Business Council concerned • Reduction would reduce "move-in" costs 18 • SIU user fees based on actual use • Add connection fee component for above average demand • Allocate 2020 asset values to flow, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS) • Determine 2020 plant loading • Allocate unit cost for 30-year useful life • Assign time value to money User Category Proposed Existing Single-Family Residential 5+ BDR House $2,530 4 BDR House 2,165 3 BDR House 1,820 $2,360 2 BDR House 1,475 1 BDR House 1,130 Multi-Family Residential 4+ BDR Apartment $1,965 3 BDR Apartment 1,620 2 BDR Apartment 1,275 $2,360 1 BDR Apartment 910 Studio Apartment 580 19 Summary of Proposed and Existing N -Residential Connection Fees Proposed OCSD Typical Industrial / Base Rate Current Commercial User (1,000 sq ft) Rate Low Demand $ 110 $ 472 Average Demand 675 472 High Demand 1,600 472 'Summary of Proposed and Ex· ting Non-Residential vnnection Fees Low Demand Connections Nurseries Warehouses Parking Structures RV Storage Churches Truck Terminals RV Parks Lumber/ Construction Yards High Demand Connections Restaurants Supermarkets Car Washes Coin Laundry Amusement Parks Shopping Centers with Restaurants 20 S mmary of Proposed and Existing Ni -Residential Connection Fees Significant Industrial/ Daily Equiv to Commercial User Fee One-Time Flow Portion (gal I day) $ 0.00057 $ 3 BOD Portion (lb / day) 0.14461 811 SS Portion (lb / day) 0.16025 899 Example Over Time Base Annual Quantity Fee Fee@5% 30 Years 130,000 sq ft $87,750 $ 87,750 150,000 gal/ dy $ 26,200 786,000 1 , 090 mg / L BOD 64,000 1,920,000 270 mg/ L SS 11,000 330,000 Total $87,750 $101,200 $3,123,750 Compare Flow & Strength Based $1,891,914 One-Time Fee 21 C m arison of Existing and Proposed C mercial Connection Fees $ 14,000 -,-----------,=--,-::--::-::-,:-----I 13,000 13,600 13,800 6. Proposed • Existing One-Time 2,000 Connection Fee $ / 1,000 sq ft 1,600 1,600 1,000 472 I;~o:s 1472 472 350 191 88 110 0 ...,__ ________ _.;;;;.;....::.::;..____-=:...;3;_;_4____, 472 Restaurant Car Wash Warehouse Office Bldg • Existing policy • Application within 2 years of demolition • Credit at current rates • Fee for additional demand • Alternative policies • Extend time period for application • Remove time limit • Require proof of prior payments • District has no records 22 T ommendations • Continue capital investment equalization method • Assign wet weather facility costs to residential development • Develop tiered fees for MFR and SFR based upon bedrooms • Develop low, average and high demand commercial fees • Allow SI Us to pay-as-they-use • Implement charge for regional governmental uses • Remove time limit for demolished facilities with proof of payment • Review fee and method routinely • Provide Board with authority for adjustments • Develop implementation or phase-in plan 23 t Steps Consensus Revisions @ FAHR Committee May 12 @ Board Meeting April 28 May26 @ Develop Implementation Plan @ New Connection Fees Effective Questions 24 DMcKlnloy .-.ully.hlatory Fiscal Year 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 Equity Adjustment History Equity $ $76,538 $26,066 $47,408 #of Recipiants 24 10 11 *Note: Exempt employees have been receiving equity adjustments for at least_ the past seven years. The first record Human Resources has of distributing equity adjustments is July 1992.