AGENDA
BOARD OF DIRECTORS ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
DISTRICT’S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708
REGULAR MEETING
March 26, 2003 – 7:00 P.M.
In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the District’s Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary.
In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Board for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an emergency item, or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the District subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date.
All current agendas and meeting minutes are also available via Orange County Sanitation’s Internet site located at www.ocsd.com. Upon entering the District’s web site, please navigate to the Board of Directors section.
1. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance
2. Roll Call
3. Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts of member agencies relating to appointment of Directors, if any. (See listing in Board Meeting folders)
4. Appointment of Chair pro tem, if necessary
5. Public Comments: All persons wishing to address the Board on specific agenda items or matters of general interest should do so at this time. As determined by the Chair, speakers may be deferred until the specific item is taken for discussion and remarks may be limited to three minutes.
Matters of interest addressed by a member of the public and not listed on this agenda cannot have action taken by the Board of Directors except as authorized by Section 54954.2(b).
03/26/03 Page 2
6. The Chair, General Manager and General Counsel present verbal reports on miscellaneous matters of general interest to the Directors. These reports are for information only and require no action by the Directors.
a. Report of Chair; consideration of Resolutions or commendations, presentations and awards b. Report of General Manager 1. 30/30 Monthly Update c. Report of General Counsel
7. If no corrections or amendments are made, the minutes for the meeting held on February 26, 2003 will be deemed approved as mailed and be so ordered by the Chair.
8. Ratifying payment of claims of the District, by roll call vote, as follows:
ALL DISTRICTS 02/15/03 02/28/03 Totals $10,205,613.94 $5,326,021.63
DIRECTORS: Pursuant to Government Code Section 84308, you are required to disclose any campaign contribution greater than $250 received in the past twelve months from any party to a contract involving OCSD. Further, you may not participate in the decision making process to award a contract to such party. For reference, you are directed to the Register of Warrants as to all current contractors/vendors with OCSD. For the specifics of Government Code Section 84308, please see your Director’s Handbook or call the office of General Counsel.
CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters placed on the Consent Calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the Consent Calendar by a Director, staff member or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the Consent Calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the Consent Calendar shall be considered in the regular order of business.
Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the Consent Calendar shall, upon recognition by the Chair, state their name, address and designate by number the item to be removed from the Consent Calendar.
The Chair will determine if any items are to be deleted from the Consent Calendar.
9. Consideration of motion to approve all agenda items appearing on the Consent Calendar not specifically removed from same, as follows:
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
10. Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any.
03/26/03 Page 3
NON-CONSENT CALENDAR
11. a. Verbal report by Chair of Steering Committee re March 26, 2003 meeting.
b. DRAFT STEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES – NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on February 26, 2003 to be filed.
c. Review and consideration of agenda items considered by the Steering Committee re the March 26, 2003 meeting.
12. a. Verbal report by Chair of Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee re March 5, 2003 meeting.
b. DRAFT OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES – NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on February 5, 2003 to be filed.
c. Receive and file Phase II Biotrickling Filter for Odor Control Demonstration Project Final Report, prepared by University of California, Riverside dated February 2003.
d. Receive and file In-plant Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Impact Study, prepared by Brown and Caldwell, dated November 2002.
e. Authorize the General Manager to finalize negotiations and subsequently award a consultant services agreement with Partners Consulting Services, Inc. for Financial Information System Technical Support, Specification No. S-2002-110BD, in an amount not to exceed $180,000, for the period April 1, 2003 through March 31, 2004 with the option of four additional one year renewals.
f. (1) Establish a budget of $230,000 for Treatment Plant No. 2 North and South Scrubber Complex Caustic Tank Replacement providing for the purchase of tanks, associated materials and necessary equipment for the emergency installation of chemical storage tanks; and,
(2) Ratify use of General Manager’s emergency purchasing authority, Resolution No. OCSD 99-23, for Purchase Order No. 37161 issued to Xerxes Corporation for Fiberglass Reinforced Caustic Storage Tanks, Specification No. E-2003-130, for an amount not to exceed $67,000; and,
(3) Ratify use of General Manager’s emergency purchasing authority, Resolution No. OCSD 99-23, for Purchase Order No. 37246 issued to Jamison Engineering for North and South Scrubber Complex Caustic Tank and Piping Replacement, Specification No. S-2003-131, for an amount not to exceed $89,689.
03/26/03 Page 4
13. a. Verbal report by Chair of Planning, Design and Construction Committee re March 6, 2003 meeting.
b. DRAFT PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE MINUTES – NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 6, 2003 to be filed.
c. (1) Ratify Change Order No. 1 to Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61, with Manuel Brothers, Inc., authorizing an addition of $57,085, increasing the total contract amount to $300,585; and (2) Accept Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61, as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement.
d. Approve Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation for the Abandonment of Airbase Trunk Sewers, and Construction of Watson Avenue Sewer and California Street Sewer, Contract No. 6-13, for additional design engineering services, for an additional amount of $10,890, increasing the total amount not to exceed $142,677.
e. Approve Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Malcolm Pirnie for Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79, providing for additional engineering services for an amount of $192,829, increasing the total amount not to exceed $446,064.
14. a. Verbal report by Chair of Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee re March 12, 2003 meeting.
b. DRAFT FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MINUTES – NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 12, 2003 to be filed.
c. Receive and file Treasurer’s Report for the month of February 2003.
d. Adopt Resolution No. OCSD 03-06, Adopting Policies and Procedures for District’s Records Management Program, Records Retention, and Destruction of Obsolete Records, and Repealing Resolution No. OCSD 02-02.
e. (1) Approve an increase to the Temporary Employment Services contract for an additional $500,000, increasing the total authorized amount from $1,000,000 to an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 for the remainder of FY 02/03; and,
(2) Approve an increase to the Temporary Employment Services contract from $1,000,000 to an amount not to exceed $1,750,000 for FY 03/04.
03/26/03 Page 5
15. a. Verbal report by Vice Chair of Joint Groundwater Replenishment System Cooperative Committee re March 10, 2003 meeting.
b. DRAFT JOINT GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM COOPERATIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES – NO ACTION REQUIRED (Information only): The Chair will order the draft Joint Groundwater Replenishment System Cooperative Committee Minutes for the meeting held on February 10, 2003 to be filed.
16. (1) Approve Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 to the plans and specifications for Trickling Filter Rehabilitation and New Clarifiers, Job No. P1-76;
(2) Receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation; and
(3) Award a contract to J. R. Filanc Construction Company, Inc., for Trickling Filter Rehabilitation and New Clarifiers, Job No. P1-76, for an amount not to exceed $33,037,000.
17. (1) Approve plans and specifications for Drain System for North Pacific Coast Highway Force Main, Contract No. 5-56, on file at the office of the Board Secretary;
(2) Approve Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications;
(3) Receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation; and
(4) Award a contract to Ken Thompson, Inc., for Drain System for North Pacific Coast Highway Force Main, Contract No. 5-56, for an amount not to exceed $133,050.
18. Approve a license agreement with SWEPI LP to authorize entrance on SWEPI LP’s property for design and environmental study purposes related to Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer & Pump Station Abandonment, Contract No. 2-24-1, at no cost to the District, in a form approved by General Counsel.
19. Actions re approval of the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for Rehabilitation of Edinger Pump Station, Contract No. 11-28; Rehabilitation of A Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-52; and Replacement of Bitter Point Pump Station, Contract No. 5-49:
1) Verbal report by Staff;
2) Receive and file Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, prepared by Environmental Science Associates, dated January 23, 2003; and,
03/26/03 Page 6
3) Adopt Resolution No. OCSD 03-07, Making Certain Findings Relating to Less Than Significant Environmental Effects Identified in the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rehabilitation of Edinger Pump Station, Contract No. 11-28; Rehabilitation of A Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-52; and Replacement of Bitter Point Pump Station; Contract No. 5-49; Approving Mitigation Measures and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; Adopting the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and Authorizing the Filing of a Notice of Determination re said project.
20. Verbal report re the Joint Management Committee activities for the SARI Relocation Project, Contract No. 2-41:
a. Report of General Manager b. Report of Director of Engineering c. Report of General Counsel d. Receive and file General Counsel’s Memorandum dated March 19, 2003; correspondence from SAWPA dated January 23, 2003 and March 18, 2003; and correspondence from Orange County Sanitation District dated December 3, 2002 and March 6, 2003.
21.
CLOSED SESSION: During the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Board, the Chair may convene the Board in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate negotiations, pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.8, 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6, as noted.
Reports relating to (a) purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or potential litigation; (c) employment actions or negotiations with employee representatives; or which are exempt from public disclosure under the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Board during a permitted closed session and are not available for public inspection. At such time as the Board takes final action on any of these subjects, the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information.
a. Convene in closed session, if necessary
1. Confer with General Counsel re anticipated litigation, one (1) potential case. (Government Code Section 54956.9(c))
b. Reconvene in regular session
c. Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session
22. Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report.
03/26/03 Page 7
23. Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any
24. Future Meeting Date: The next Board of Directors regular meeting is scheduled for April 23, 2003, at 7:00 p.m.
25. Adjournments
NOTICE TO DIRECTORS: To place items on the agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, items shall be submitted to the Board Secretary no later than the close of business 14 days preceding the Board meeting. The Board Secretary shall include on the agenda all items submitted by Directors, the General Manager and General Counsel and all formal communications.
General Manager Blake Anderson (714) 593-7110 [email protected] Board Secretary Penny Kyle (714) 593-7130 [email protected] Director/Engineering David Ludwin (714) 593-7300 [email protected] Director/Finance/Treasurer Gary Streed (714) 593-7550 [email protected] Director/Human Resources Lisa Tomko (714) 593-7145 [email protected] Director/Information Technology Patrick Miles (714) 593-7280 [email protected] Director/Operations & Maintenance Bob Ooten (714) 593-7020 [email protected] Director/Technical Services Bob Ghirelli (714) 593-7400 [email protected] Administrative Services Mgr. Greg Mathews (714) 593-7104 [email protected] Communications Services Mgr. Carol Beekman (714) 593-7120 [email protected] General Counsel Thomas L. Woodruff (714) 564-2605 [email protected]
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Board Secretary’s office at (714) 593-7130 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to allow the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agendas\2003 Board Agendas\032603 agenda.doc
Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. BOARD OF DIRECTORS 3/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT 8 Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Lenora Crane, Executive Assistant
SUBJECT: PAYMENT OF CLAIMS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Ratify Payment of Claims of the District by Roll Call Vote.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 84308, you are required to disclose any campaign contribution greater than $250 received in the past twelve months from any party to a contract involving the Orange County Sanitation District. Further, you may not participate in the decision making process to award a contract to such party.
For reference, you are directed to the Register of Warrants as to all current contractors/vendors with the District.
For the specifics of Government Code Section 84308, please see your Director’s Handbook or call the office of General Counsel.
SUMMARY
See attached listing.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copies of Claims Paid reports from 02/01/03 – 02/15/03 and 02/16/03 – 02/28/03
Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
Accounts Payable - Warrants 50577 Blue Cross of California$ 273,608.50 Medical Insurance Premium 50578 Orange County Sanitation District 537,430.06 Payroll EFT Reimbursement 50579 Southern California Edison 68,677.59 Power 50580 Air & W aste Management Assoc. 1,290.00 Air Quality Meeting Registration 50581 Airgas Safety 225.65 Safety Supplies & Equipm ent 50582 American Airlines 4,803.00 Travel Services 50583 AT&T Universal Biller 2,483.12 Telephone Service 50584 American Telephone & Telegraph Corp. 85.41 Telephone Service 50585 Court Order 626.20 W age Garnishm ent 50586 Capital Appraisal Service 90.00 Vehicle Accident Claim Appraisal Service 50587 Court Order 150.00 W age Garnishm ent 50588 Consumers Pipe & Supply Co. 513.15 Plum bing Supplies 50589 Court Trustee 69.12 W age Garnishm ent 50590 CW EA 2002 Annual Conference 1,220.00 O & M Training Registration - California W ater Environm ent Association 50591 CW EA Specialty Conference 926.00 Technical Services Meeting Registration 50592 Diamond H Recognition 136.02 Em ployee Service Awards 50593 Document Control Solutions, Inc. 3,044.93 Software 50594 DIRECTV 675.00 Subscription 50595 Employee Benefits Specialists, Inc. 8,305.01 Reimbursed Prepaid Employee Medical & Dependent Care 50596 Eric Klein 10,900.00 EMT Retreat - Strategic Planning, Communications & Negotiations Training 50597 Court Order 525.00 W age Garnishm ent 50598 FileNET Corporation 1,862.49 Software Maintenance Contract Tax 50599 Five Star Metals, Inc. 657.76 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50600 Franchise Tax Board 337.20 W age Garnishm ent 50601 City of Fullerton 91.71 W ater Use 50602 GE Supply 14,744.54 (1) Relay Output Board & (1) Interface Board 50603 Government Finance Officers Association 420.00 Mem bership 50604 Ascom Hasler Mailing Systems 2,551.50 Software Maintenance - Mail Manager Intellitouch System 50605 City of Huntington Beach 30.84 W ater Use 50606 Internal Revenue Service 150.00 W age Garnishm ent 50607 Intl. Union of Oper. Eng. AFL-CIO Local 501 3,249.75 Dues Deduction 50608 J & B Auto Parts 666.86 Auto Parts & Supplies 50609 J.D. Edwards So. Calif. Users Group 300.00 Mem bership 50610 Lucci's 14.85 Meeting Expense 50611 McMaster-Carr Supply Co. 99.47 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50612 M idway M fg & M achining Co. 1,676.00 Pum p Repairs 50613 Motion Industries 641.84 Pum p Supplies 50614 National Bond & Trust 1,769.02 U.S. Savings Bonds Payroll Deductions 50615 Nextel Communications 3,492.95 Cellular Phones & Air Tim e 50616 OCBC: Orange County Business Council 360.00 Engineering Training Registration 50617 OCEA 524.61 Dues Deduction 50618 Court Order 40.00 W age Garnishm ent 50619 Partners Consulting Services 13,080.00 FIS On-Site Support - One W orld XE Migration Project 50620 Court Order 296.00 W age Garnishm ent 50621 Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc. 493.56 Em ployee Legal Service Insurance Prem ium 50622 Projects Partners 3,275.22 Tem porary Em ploym ent Services 50623 Reliastar Bankers Security Life Ins. 9,507.48 Em ployee Life Ins. Prem ium , Short-Term Disability & Cancer Ins. Payroll Deductions
Page 1 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50624 RPM Electric Motors 333.87 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50625 Shamrock Supply Co., Inc. 1,425.30 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50626 Shureluck Sales & Engineering 368.14 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50627 Smardan Supply Company/Orange Coast 291.80 Plum bing Supplies 50628 Court Order 721.50 W age Garnishment 50629 Thompson Industrial Supply, Inc. 2,473.06 Mechanical Supplies 50630 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1,700.00 Tem porary Access Survey License - 2-24-1 50631 Union Bank of California 4,566.13 Banking Services 50632 United W ay 205.00 Em ployee Contributions 50633 Verizon California 815.83 Telephone Services 50634 Vision Service Plan-(CA) 8,740.32 Vision Service Prem ium 50635 W astewater Technology Trainers 715.00 O & M Training Registration 50636 Court Order 108.00 W age Garnishment 50637 W EF 134.00 Membership - W ater Environment Federation 50638 W QI (W ater Quality, Inc.) 350.00 O & M Training Registration 50639 Xerox Corporation 4,174.70 Copier Lease & Office Supplies 50640 Gary P. Conklin 1,299.95 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50641 Marcus D. Dubois 814.94 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50642 Vladimir A. Kogan 270.23 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50643 John D. Linder 180.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50644 Chris Maher 182.92 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50645 Patrick W . McNelly 298.15 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50646 Mark Mutz 250.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50647 Julian F. Sabri 197.34 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50648 Mark S. W ilson 250.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50649 Ferguson, Victor 1,703.86 Employee Computer Loan Program 50650 Harris, Randy 605.55 Employee Computer Loan Program 50651 Sabri, Julian & Fry's Electronics 3,000.00 Employee Computer Loan Program 50652 SARBS-CW EA 20.00 O & M Training Registration 50653 Susan Zamudio 82.04 User Fee Refund Regarding Septic Tanks 50654 American Express 25,406.07 Purchasing Card Program , Misc. Supplies & Services 50655 American Machinery & Blade, Inc. 69,574.18 (1) Hydraulic Four-Roll, Double Initial, Pinch Plate Bending Machine 50656 Brown and Caldwell 112,233.67 Prof. Servs. 1-98, & Needs Assessment Study, O & M Manuals & SOP Development 50657 Carollo Engineers 321,947.09 Professional Services P1-60, P2-60 & Microfiltration Demo. Project 50658 Carollo Engineers 318,724.13 Engineering Services P2-66 50659 Cooper Energy Services 53,378.76 Engine Supplies 50660 CH2M Hill 157,535.35 Professional Services J-40-6 & J-40-7 50661 Graybar 26,406.59 Software Upgrade & (10) Enclosures & Panels 50662 Hill Brothers 26,739.82 Chemicals - Odor & Corrosion Control - Newport Trunkline 50663 IPMC c/o Parsons 354,531.00 Professional Services - Project Management Program 50664 Kaiser Foundation Health Plan 42,422.69 Medical Insurance Prem ium 50665 Kemiron Pacific, Inc. 129,072.33 Ferric Chloride MO 9-27-95 50666 Kforce Professional Staffing 39,771.18 Tem porary Em ploym ent Services 50667 Lee & Ro, Inc. 34,259.23 Professional Services P2-47-3 50668 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 160,453.25 Professional Services I-10 50669 Municipal W ater Dist. of Orange County 32,947.31 W ater Use Efficiency Program MO 9-22-99 50670 Voided Check - - 50671 Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. 32,136.01 Engineering Services J-35-1
Page 2 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50672 Pioneer Americas, Inc. 113,191.71 Sodium Hypochlorite 50673 Projects Partners 62,742.51 Tem porary Em ploym ent Services 50674 So. Cal. Gas Company 30,871.42 Natural Gas 50675 South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. 38,170.12 Annual Emission, Operation & Misc. Fees 50676 SPEC Services, Inc. 46,369.22 Engineering Services J-33-1 & P1-89 50677 Tule Ranch 173,026.23 Residuals Removal MO 3-29-95 50678 U.S. Metro Group, Inc. 36,064.00 Janitorial & Floor Maintenance at Plants 1 & 2 50679 U.S. Peroxide 136,494.18 Hydrogen Peroxide 50680 W ater 3 Engineering, Inc. 31,037.51 Engineering Service J-67 50681 Green Giant Landscape, Inc. 70,668.00 Construction P2-84 50682 J.F. Shea Construction, Inc. 145,718.53 Construction J-35-1 50683 Margate Construction, Inc. 2,720,990.00 Construction P1-37 50684 Oved Dagan Construction Co. 95,358.72 Construction J-90 50685 Steve P. Rados, Inc. 827,714.70 Construction I-2-4 50686 Union Bank of California 91,968.30 Construction I-2-4, Retention 50687 Orange County Sanitation District 25,356.49 W orker's Com p. Reim b. 50688 Air Products & Chemicals 25,758.02 O & M Agreement Oxy Gen Sys MO 8-8-89 50689 AccuStandard, Inc. 176.85 Lab Supplies 50690 Adamson Industries 1,289.77 Lab Parts & Supplies 50691 Great American Printing Co. 172.40 Printing 50692 Advanced Engine Technology Corporation 920.00 Professional Services - Engine Support 50693 Airborne Express 20.17 Air Freight 50694 Airgas - W est 790.90 Lab Parts & Supplies 50695 Airgas Safety 3,726.96 Safety Supplies 50696 Alhambra Foundry Co., Ltd. 4,460.86 Manhole Fram es & Covers 50697 All American Asphalt 17,550.00 Manhole Grade Adjustments - City of Cypress 50698 Applied Industrial Technology 628.38 Mechanical Supplies 50699 Aspen Publishers, Inc. 157.28 Publication 50700 Atlantis Pool Care 250.00 Service Agreem ent - Adm in. Bldg. Atrium 50701 ACS Hydraulics, Inc. 715.64 Hydraulic Motor 50702 AKM Consulting Engineers 23,681.60 Professional Services 7-36, 7-39, 7-41 - Trunk Sewer Improvements 50703 American Telephone & Telegraph Corp. 107.21 Telephone Service 50704 AVO International 3,790.00 O & M Meeting Registration 50705 AW SI 196.00 Department of Transportation Training Program 50706 Baker Tanks 8,898.89 Rental Equipm ent - Tanks & Fence Berm s 50707 Ballantyne, Inc. 3,480.00 Tem porary Em ploym ent Services 50708 Basic Chemical Solutions 4,274.13 Sodium Bisulfite 50709 Battery Specialties 2,439.74 Batteries 50710 Bio-Rad Lab 158.14 Lab Parts & Supplies 50711 Black & Veatch Corporation 16,647.85 Engineering Services P2-85 50712 Boyle Engineering Corporation 13,841.28 Engineering Services 6-13 50713 Brenntag W est, Inc. 313.48 Janitorial Supplies 50714 Bush & Associates, Inc. 6,550.00 Surveying Services MO 6-25-97 50715 Business Objects Americas 13,563.99 Software Maintenance - Business Objects 50716 BC W ire Rope & Rigging 306.22 Mechanical Parts, Supplies & Service 50717 C.S.U.F. Foundation 10,031.25 Membership - Center for Demographic Research 50718 C-Temp, Inc. 1,246.44 Engine Parts & Supplies 50719 Cal Protection 56.03 Service Agreem ent - Halon Fire System at Plt. 2 Control Center
Page 3 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50720 California Barricade Rentals 575.00 Barricade Rentals 50721 Caltrol, Inc. 149.31 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50722 Cambridge Isotope Labs 1,400.66 Lab Parts & Supplies 50723 Cayman Chemical Company 742.00 Lab Parts & Supplies 50724 Cell2Cell 235.62 Com m unication Equipm ent 50725 Certified Truck Bodies 7,773.04 (10) Powder-Coated, 2-Drawer, Flip-Lid Truck Tool Boxes 50726 Charles P. Crowley Co. 3,063.51 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50727 Charts, Inc. 276.87 Charts 50728 Con-W ay W estern Express 940.51 Freight Charges 50729 Consolidated Elect. Distributors, Inc. 4,049.16 Electrical Supplies 50730 Consumers Pipe & Supply Co. 3,531.29 Plum bing Supplies 50731 Corporate Express 4,326.89 Office Supplies 50732 Counterpart Enterprises, Inc. 1,229.32 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50733 County of Orange - Auditor Controller 10,125.00 Underground Storage Tank, Hazardous Material, & State Fees 50734 County W holesale Electric Co. 467.46 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50735 Culligan of Orange County 35.00 Maint. Agreem ent - Cen Gen W ater Softener System 50736 CAPIO 175.00 Mem bership - California Association of Public Info. Officials 50737 CGvL Engineers 3,905.26 Professional Services P1-94 50738 Ciba Specialty Chemicals Corporation 14,885.87 Cationic Polym er 50739 CPI International 1,089.73 Lab Parts & Supplies 50740 County Sanitation District No. 70 4,760.00 Olfactometry Lab Expense 50741 CW EA 285.00 Source Control Meeting Registration 50742 CW EA Membership 276.00 Mem bership - Calif. W ater Environm ent Assoc. 50743 Dapper Tire Co. 353.69 Truck Tires 50744 David's Tree Service 400.00 Tree Maint. Service 50745 Del Mar Analytical 4,538.00 Biosolids Analysis 50746 Delafield Corp. 1,397.96 Hose Assem bly 50747 Dell Direct Sales, L.P. 1,832.83 (5) Dell AXIMs and (2) DVD Rom Drives 50748 Dick Munns Co. 110.00 Calibrate Meter 50749 Dunn-Edwards Corporation 200.87 Paint Supplies 50750 E. Sam Jones Distributors, Inc. 869.93 Electrical Supplies 50751 Ecology Control Industries 1,088.00 Hazardous W aste Disposal 50752 Element K Journals 67.00 Publication 50753 Elliott Bay Design Group 364.28 Naval Architecture Marine Engineering Services 50754 Environmental & Occupational Risk Mgmt. 2,250.00 Professional Services - Inspection of Operations Center Basement W all Cavities 50755 Environmental Science Associates 11,690.43 Professional Services J-87 50756 Pacific States Chemical, Inc. 1,676.31 Chem icals 50757 Excel Door & Gate Company, Inc. 1,659.00 Door Repair - Bldg. C Roll-Up Doors 50758 ENS Resources, Inc. 15,102.16 Professional Services - Legislative Advocate 50759 FedEx Corporation 364.86 Air Freight 50760 First American Real Estate Solutions 174.50 Orange County Property Information 50761 Fisher Scientific Company, L.L.C. 15,908.81 Lab Parts & Supplies 50762 Flo - Systems, Inc. 36.33 Pum p Supplies 50763 Fluid Dynamics 12,971.80 Polymer Dilution & Feed System & Meters 50764 Foodcraft Coffee & Refreshment Services 326.06 Meeting Supplies 50765 Fountain Valley Camera 14.17 Photo Supplies 50766 Fry's Electronics 833.65 Com puter Supplies 50767 Full Spectrum Analytics 1,121.74 Instrument Repairs
Page 4 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50768 GE Supply 106.79 Electric Parts 50769 Garland Manufacturing Co. 1,787.66 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50770 Garratt-Callahan Company 1,101.75 Chem icals 50771 Getinge Castle 70.89 Lab Supplies 50772 Glass Tech Supplies, Inc. 693.91 Lab Parts & Supplies 50773 W W Grainger, Inc. 1,200.40 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50774 Great W estern Sanitary Supplies 480.36 Janitorial Supplies 50775 Haaker Equipment Company 1,832.69 Truck Parts & Service 50776 Hach c/o Ponton Industries 1,670.47 Lab Parts & Supplies 50777 American Sigma, Inc. 128.00 Instrument Repairs & Calibration 50778 Harrington Industrial Plastics, Inc. 1,487.27 Plum bing Supplies 50779 Ascom Hasler Mailing Systems 575.00 Software Maintenance - Mail Manager Intellitouch System 50780 Hatch & Kirk, Inc. 4,365.35 Engine Generator Control Supplies 50781 Henry Company - Sealants Division 159.03 Sealant 50782 Hilti, Inc. 5,727.65 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50783 Home Depot 364.54 Misc. Repair & Maintenance Material 50784 Hopkins Technical Products 7,812.42 Pum p & Pum p Supplies 50785 Horizon Technology 617.95 Lab Parts & Supplies 50786 HI Standard Automotive 472.46 Autom otive Parts & Supplies 50787 Imaging Express 199.93 Printer Maintenance 50788 Imperial Flange & Fitting Co., Inc. 767.18 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50789 Industrial Distribution Group 595.85 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50790 Inorganic Ventures, Inc. 211.93 Lab Supplies 50791 Interstate Battery Systems 497.30 Batteries 50792 Intratek Computer, Inc. 4,487.73 Software - Cisco Secure 50793 Invensys Systems, Inc. 3,241.11 Instrument Supplies 50794 Iron Mountain 150.00 Bid Document Storage Fees - J-39 & P1-37 50795 IBM Corp. 15,750.00 Prof. Services - Network Upgrade & Design Consulting 50796 J.G. Tucker and Son, Inc. 3,827.47 Instrument Parts, Supplies & Yearly Inspection & Certification of Tri-Pod W inch 50797 Jay's Catering 602.42 Meeting Expenses 50798 Johnson Bearing 4,800.00 Cleaning Solvent 50799 Johnstone Supply 1,040.43 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50800 Kars Advance Materials, Inc. 7,682.50 Eng. Services - Cen Gen Engine No. 3 50801 KL&P Marketing 749.15 Safety Incentive Item s 50802 L & N Uniform Supply Co. 1,833.89 Logo Printing/Embroidery Services 50803 Lab Support 601.75 Tem porary Em ploym ent Services 50804 Labware, Inc. 1,500.00 Lab Training Registration 50805 Lexis Nexis Matthew Bender 311.37 Publication 50806 Lucci's 201.12 Meeting Expense 50807 LINJER 4,565.18 Professional Service - DART MO 9-22-99 50808 M. J. Schiff & Associates, Inc. 12,332.60 Professional Services - Corrosion Study 50809 Management Technologies 659.59 Project Management Office Training Registration 50810 Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, L.L.P. 5,000.00 Strategic Planning & Advocacy 50811 MarVac Electronics 19.24 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50812 Matt Chlor, Inc. 961.00 Valves 50813 Mc Junkin Corp--Ontario Branch 2,819.47 Valves 50814 McMaster-Carr Supply Co. 2,503.41 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50815 Mec Analytical System 6,559.00 Lab Analysis - Core Ocean Monitoring
Page 5 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50816 Medlin Controls Co. 1,415.63 Instrument Supplies 50817 Milltronics c/o RMB Engineering 192.01 Electrical Supplies 50818 Mission Uniform Service 3,129.23 Uniform Rentals 50819 MSA c/o Mag Systems 411.49 Instrument Supplies 50820 N. Glantz & Son 455.00 Reflective Sheeting 50821 National Technology Transfer, Inc. 12,323.34 Safety Training Registration - National Electric Code Training 50822 NetVersant of Southern California 7,918.31 Access Control System Maintenance 50823 Nickey Petroleum Co., Inc. 179.17 Grease 50824 Nu-W ay Laser Engraving 103.55 Steel Tags 50825 NRG Energy, Inc. 1,508.04 Explosion Relief Valves 50826 Office Depot Business Services Div. 1,472.25 Office Supplies 50827 Olympus America, Inc. 8,000.76 Mechanical Repairs 50828 Omega Industrial Supply, Inc. 570.40 Janitorial Supplies 50829 OneSource Distributors, Inc. 69.94 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50830 Orange County Hose Company 183.61 Hose Supplies 50831 Orange Fluid System Technologies, Inc. 738.91 Valves 50832 Ortiz Fire Protection 2,655.00 Maintenance, Testing & Certification of Fire Sprinkler System s at Plts. 1 & 2 50833 Oxygen Service Company 3,252.22 Specialty Gases 50834 OCB Reprographics 1,901.98 Printing Service - MO 1/26/00 50835 OI Analytical 520.89 Lab Parts & Supplies 50836 P.L. Hawn Company, Inc. 932.74 Electrical Supplies 50837 Pace Analytic Services 1,550.00 High Resolution Analysis of Effluent & Biosolids 50838 Pacific Bell 34.81 Telephone Services 50839 Pacific Bell/W orldCom 119.98 Telephone Services 50840 Pacific Mechanical Supply 701.62 Plum bing Supplies 50841 Pacific Parts & Controls 726.80 Electrical Parts & Repairs 50842 Pacific W est Printing & Promotions 405.64 Rideshare Program Promotional Coffee Mugs w/Logo 50843 Panametrics 641.00 Calibrate Portable Flow Meter 50844 Parker Motion & Controls Sales 61.11 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50845 Parker Supply Company 1,799.62 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50846 Partners Consulting Services 8,460.00 FIS On-Site Support - One W orld XE Migration Project 50847 Parts Unlimited 18.86 Truck Supplies 50848 Peace Officers Council of CA 1,332.00 Dues Deduction 50849 PenValve 648.66 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50850 The Perkin Elmer Corp. 15,514.07 Lab Instrum ent Software/Hardware 50851 Power Electro Supply Co., Inc. 175.49 Electrical Supplies 50852 Power Systems Testing 500.00 Electrical Equipm ent Testing Services 50853 Powerflo Products, Inc. 588.00 Pum p & Pum p Supplies 50854 Public Resources Advisory Group 2,187.50 Financial Advisory Services 50855 Pumping Solutions, Inc. 3,771.25 Pum ps 50856 Pump Engineering &/or QAir California 394.99 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50857 Quality Building Supply 210.55 Hardscape Supplies 50858 R. L. Abbott & Associates 3,000.00 Kern County Biosolids Consulting Services 50859 Randolph Austin Co. 661.11 Tubing 50860 Red W ing Shoes 307.74 Reimbursable Safety Shoes 50861 Regents of Univ. of California 12,066.29 Professional Services J-85 50862 Retrofit Parts & Components, Inc. 378.22 Valve 50863 Rockwell Engineering & Equipment Co. 7,477.85 Chopper Pump
Page 6 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50864 RPM Electric Motors 6,535.18 Motors 50865 RS Hughes Co, Inc. 295.00 Paint Supplies 50866 Schwing America, Inc. 846.02 Pump Supplies 50867 Scott Specialty Gases, Inc. 46.53 Freight 50868 Shureluck Sales & Engineering 590.99 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50869 SkillPath On-Site 5,100.00 On-Site Training 50870 Smardan Supply Company/Orange Coast 117.53 Plum bing Supplies 50871 Smith-Emery Company 4,639.50 Professional Services P1-37 & 7-41 50872 Snap On Industrial 157.32 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50873 Snap-On Tools 300.14 Tools 50874 SoftView Computer Products 1,126.08 Misc. Office Supplies & Fixtures 50875 Southern California Air Cond. Dist. 1,106.58 Electrical Supplies 50876 Southern California Edison 9,547.32 Power 50877 Sparkletts 1,462.28 Drinking W ater/Cooler Rentals 50878 Specialized Powder Coating 352.00 Powder Coating of Tool Box Brackets 50879 Standard Industrial Corp. 104.09 Publication 50880 Sterling Fluid Systems (USA), Inc. 1,833.61 Pump 50881 Summit Steel 283.39 Metal 50882 Sunset Industrial Parts 597.18 Mechanical Supplies 50883 Systime Computer Corp. 5,800.00 Professional Services - J D Edwards One W orld XE Implementation 50884 South Coast Environmental Co. 1,528.39 Cen Gen Em issions Testing Service 50885 SCP Science 314.00 Lab Parts & Supplies 50886 Solar Turbines, Inc. 761.00 Solar Turbine Controls Repair 50887 SPX Valves & Control 1,178.47 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50888 Tamara Block 327.75 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 50889 Taylor-Dunn 290.65 Electric Cart Parts 50890 Thermo Electron Spectroscopy 310.07 Lab Parts & Supplies 50891 Osprey Marine Management 1,050.00 Lab Analyses 50892 Thompson Industrial Supply, Inc. 4,938.38 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50893 Daily Pilot 50.00 Notices & Ads 50894 Tony's Lock & Safe Service & Sales 75.47 Locks & Keys 50895 The Trane Company 450.42 Electrical Parts & Supplies 50896 Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. 320.00 Contract Groundskeeping MO 5-11-94 50897 Truck & Auto Supply, Inc. 1,517.67 Autom otive Supplies 50898 Teksystems 3,280.00 Tem porary Em ploym ent Services 50899 US Filter Corporation 1,499.00 Service Agreement - Lab Purification System 50900 Ultra Scientific 558.95 Lab Parts & Supplies 50901 United Parcel Service 35.50 Parcel Services 50902 United Rentals, Inc. 120.12 Pallet Jack Rental 50903 Defense Finance and Accounting 8,253.47 Professional Services J-85 - Naval Post Graduate School 50904 Univar USA 527.98 Chlorine 50905 UC Regents 595.00 Hum an Resources Training Registration 50906 U-Line 597.94 Office Supplies 50907 The Vantage Group, L.L.C. 10,908.00 Tem porary Em ploym ent Service 50908 Vapex, Inc. 9,589.48 Instrum ent Parts & Supplies 50909 Verizon California 5,368.47 Telephone Services 50910 Verne's Plumbing 75.00 Service Contract - Testing & Cert. Backflow Devices at Plts. 1 & 2 & Pum p Sta. 50911 VW R Scientific Products Corporation 4,419.07 Lab Parts & Supplies
Page 7 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/01/03 to 02/15/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50912 The W ackenhut Corporation 15,275.95 Security Guards 50913 W aco Filter 1,007.61 Filtration System Supplies 50914 W ally Machinery and Tool Supply, Inc. 1,603.21 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50915 W eber Scientific 1,358.79 Lab Supplies 50916 W EF 288.00 Mem bership - W ater Environm ent Federation 50917 Xerox Corporation 14,207.33 Fax & Copier Leases 50918 YSI Massachusetts 1,670.58 Temperature Probe & Cable 50919 California Bank & Trust 1,713.00 Construction J-33-1A, Retention 50920 Southern Contracting Company 15,423.00 Construction J-33-1A 50921 Robert M. Bell 368.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50922 Pongsakdi Cady 368.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50923 Mike J. Herrera 125.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50924 Linda Losurdo 219.73 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50925 David A. Ludwin 405.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50926 Patrick B. Miles 368.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50927 Matthew P. Smith 164.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50928 John W . Swindler 368.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50929 Aquarium of the Pacific 72.75 Reim bursable Em ployee Activity Expense 50930 County of Orange 86.00 Annexation Fee 50931 Orange County Sanitation District 749.83 Petty Cash Reim b. 50932 Robertson, Dana R. 1,233.71 User Fee Refund Regarding Septic Tanks 50933 Robert J. Thiede 368.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50934 Orange County W ater District 571,902.69 GAP W ater Use & Joint GW RS Project J-36 Total Accounts Payable - W arrants $ 8,857,444.71
Payroll Disbursements 29041 - 29160 Employee Paychecks$ 152,766.05 Biweekly Payroll 02/05/03 29161 - 29162 Interim Paychecks 2,647.51 Adjustments 81656 - 82141 Direct Deposit Statements 822,626.41 Biweekly Payroll 02/05/03 Total Payroll Disbursem ents $ 978,039.97
Wire Transfer Payments Chase Bank of Texas, National Association 31,915.74 January Interest Payment on 1993 Certificates of Participation Chase Bank of Texas, National Association 130,874.37 Societe Generale January Swap Payment on 1993 Certificates of Participation Chase Manhattan Bank, New York 75,575.23 Commitment Fee on Series 2000 Certificates of Participation 11/01/02 to 01/31/03 Societe Generale, New York 55,055.52 Standby Letter of Credit on Series 1993 Certificates of Participation Lloyds TSB Bank plc 76,708.40 Standby Letter of Credit 1990-1992 Refunded COPs Total Wire Transfer Payments $ 370,129.26
Total Claims Paid 02/01/03 - 02/15/03 $ 10,205,613.94
Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT A Claims Paid From 02/16/03 to 02/28/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
Accounts Payable - Warrants 50935 Orange County Sanitation District$ 561,351.11 Payroll EFT Reimbursement 50936 Systime Computer Corp 66,500.00 Professional Services - J D Edwards One W orld XE Implementation 50937 AT & T W ireless Services - Airtime 58.06 Cellular Telephone Service 50938 Court Order 626.20 W age Garnishment 50939 Court Order 150.00 W age Garnishment 50940 Consumers Pipe & Supply Co. 44.09 Plumbing Supplies 50941 Court Trustee 69.12 W age Garnishment 50942 CW EA Specialty Conference 181.00 Compliance Meeting Registration 50943 Electra-Bond, Inc. 23,424.85 Recoating & Machine W ork on Belt, Loading & Driver Rollers 50944 Employee Benefits Specialists, Inc. 7,705.39 Reimbursed Prepaid Employee Medical & Dependent Care 50945 Court Order 525.00 W age Garnishment 50946 Franchise Tax Board 488.89 W age Garnishment 50947 Industrial Threaded Products, Inc. 164.05 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50948 Internal Revenue Service 150.00 W age Garnishment 50949 Intl. Union of Oper. Eng. AFL-CIO Local 501 3,251.52 Dues Deduction 50950 Irvine Ranch W ater District 58.87 W ater Use 50951 Matthew Bender & Co., Inc. 51.84 Publication 50952 McMaster-Carr Supply Co. 805.38 Meters 50953 National Bond & Trust 1,795.94 U.S. Savings Bonds Payroll Deductions 50954 OCEA 524.61 Dues Deduction 50955 Pacific Bell 27.15 Telephone Services 50956 Court Order 40.00 W age Garnishment 50957 Court Order 296.00 W age Garnishment 50958 Peace Officers Council of CA 1,404.00 Dues Deduction 50959 Smardan Supply Company/Orange Coast 14.18 Plumbing Supplies 50960 Court Order 721.50 W age Garnishment 50961 Southern California Edison 5,629.71 Power 50962 Summit Steel 376.62 Metal 50963 Thompson Industrial Supply, Inc. 6,504.74 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 50964 U.S Postal Service(AMS-TMS) 5,000.00 Postage 50965 United W ay 205.00 Employee Contributions 50966 Verizon California 465.16 Telephone Services 50967 Court Order 108.00 W age Garnishment 50968 Evangelista, Jerry 1,890.99 Employee Computer Loan Program 50969 Deirdre E. Hunter 104.74 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50970 Jeffrey T. Reed 1,214.42 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50971 Lisa L. Tomko 1,001.26 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50972 Edward M. Torres 751.11 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50973 Ernest N. Yeboah 183.90 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 50974 JPC Construction 9,804.70 Construction - Enclose Plt. 2 Dewatering Facility with Screening 50975 Air Products & Chemicals 25,758.02 O & M Agreement Oxy Gen Sys MO 8-8-89 50976 Blue Cross of California 277,266.59 Medical Insurance Premium 50977 Coral Energy Resources, L.P. 79,164.63 Natural Gas 50978 Ciba Specialty Chemicals Corporation 43,627.55 Cationic Polymer 50979 Delta Dental 50,517.56 Dental Insurance Plan 50980 Dynamic Fabrication, Inc. 33,187.00 (1) Set of Augers 50981 Jamison Engineering Contractors, Inc. 72,752.20 Construction - High-Pressure Digester Gas Pipeline Repairs & 11-23-1
Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 02/16/03 to 02/28/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
50982 Kemiron Pacific, Inc. 133,049.09 Ferric Chloride MO 9-27-95 50983 Orange County W ater District 493,963.90 GAP W ater Use & GW RS Joint Project J-36 50984 Pacific Investment Management Co. 138,506.00 Investment Management Service Res. 95-97 50985 Painewebber Incorporated 31,409.06 COP Remarketing Agreement 50986 Pioneer Americas, Inc. 188,859.14 Sodium Hypochlorite 50987 Science Applications Intl., Corp. 191,633.85 Ocean Monitoring MO 6-8-94 50988 Southern California Edison 60,615.22 Power 50989 The Lewis Group 25,650.00 Consulting Service - Capital Project Management Process 50990 Trusecure Corporation 33,995.00 Site Secure Service 50991 Tule Ranch/Magan Farms 159,170.66 Residuals Removal MO 3-29-95 50992 Steve P Rados, Inc. 708,512.40 Construction I-2-4 50993 Union Bank of California 78,723.60 Construction I-2-4, Retention 50994 Precision Industrial Tooling Co., Inc. 93,656.30 Mechanical Equipment - Variable Speed Lathes, Table Saws, Drill Press 50995 Adamson Industries 773.86 Lab Supplies 50996 Agilent Technologies, Inc. 769.33 Lab Parts & Supplies 50997 Airgas - W est 9.40 Dem urrage 50998 Airgas Safety 977.10 Safety Supplies 50999 Allied Electronics, Inc. 239.58 Electrical Supplies 51000 Alta-Robbins, Inc. 103.00 Instrum ent Supplies 51001 American Society of Safety Engineers 140.00 Mem bership 51002 Aquarium Doctor 239.45 Human Resources Aquarium Service 51003 Arch W ireless 1,125.50 Pagers, Service & Airtime 51004 Argos Technologies, Inc. 153.54 Lab Parts & Supplies 51005 Associated Readymix Concrete 262.91 Concrete 51006 Association of Energy Engineers 145.00 O & M Meeting Registration 51007 Atlantis Pool Care 250.00 Service Agreem ent - Adm in. Bldg. Atrium 51008 Awards & Trophies Company 44.07 Plaques 51009 ACS Hydraulics, Inc. 1,997.27 Pum p 51010 American Telephone & Telegraph Corp. 268.28 Telephone Service 51011 AT&T W ireless Services 118.48 W ireless Phone Services 51012 Battery Specialties 145.85 Batteries 51013 BioMerieux Vitek, Inc. 1,027.75 Lab Supplies 51014 Brinderson Corporation 7,192.00 Professional Services P1-95 51015 Burke Engineering Co. 423.90 Motor 51016 BC W ire Rope & Rigging 32.33 Mechanical Parts, Supplies & Service 51017 C-Temp, Inc. 399.79 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51018 California Automatic Gate 1,270.00 Automatic Gate Repairs at Plt. 2 51019 California Municipal Treasurers Assoc. 120.00 Mem bership 51020 Catapult Systems Corporation 1,316.92 Software/Hardware 51021 Certified Truck Bodies 484.88 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51022 Coast Rubber Stamp, Mfg. 87.61 Office Supplies 51023 Cole-Parmer Instrument Co. 213.72 Lab Parts & Supplies 51024 Communications Supply Corp. 14,736.79 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51025 Consolidated Elect. Distributors, Inc. 1,675.68 Electrical Supplies 51026 Consumers Pipe & Supply Co. 2,852.60 Plum bing Supplies 51027 Control Factors - Seattle, Inc. 994.80 Filter Elem ents 51028 Control Technologies 9,492.78 Mechanical Parts, Supplies & Equipment 51029 Cooper Energy Services 3,637.87 Engine Supplies
Page 2 of 7 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 02/16/03 to 02/28/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
51030 Cooper Energy Services 2,380.00 O & M Training Registration 51031 Corporate Express Imaging 5,301.33 Com puter Supplies 51032 Corporate Express 8,267.21 Office Supplies 51033 Cost Containment Solutions 3,770.55 W orker's Com p. Services 51034 County W holesale Electric Co. 905.41 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51035 CMAA 225.00 Engineering & Construction Management Training Registration 51036 CR&R, Inc. 3,207.89 Container Rentals 51037 CW EA 823.45 Source Control Meeting Registration & Publication 51038 CW EA 2002 Annual Conference 2,005.00 O & M Meeting Registration - California W ater Environment Association 51039 CW EA Membership 92.00 Membership - Calif. W ater Environment Assoc. 51040 Del Mar Analytical 204.00 Biosolids Analysis 51041 Detection Instruments Corporation 308.88 Ins. Parts & Supplies 51042 Dionex Corporation 2,810.60 Lab Parts & Supplies 51043 E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company 2,950.00 Painting Maint. Services MO 4-22-98 51044 E. Sam Jones Distributors, Inc. 135.77 Electrical Supplies 51045 Edinger Medical Group, Inc. 265.00 Medical Screening 51046 Electro-Test, Inc. 7,603.44 Electrical Supplies 51047 Elliott Bay Design Group 152.53 Professional Services - Evaluation of Responses to RFP 51048 Employee Benefits Specialists, Inc. 637.30 Reimbursed Prepaid Employee Medical & Dependent Care 51049 Enchanter, Inc. 9,900.00 Ocean Monitoring MO 5-24-95 51050 Environmental & Occupational Risk Mgmt 900.00 Professional Services - Inspection of O & M Control Ctr. Basement W all Cavities 51051 Environmental Engineering & Contracting 20,000.00 Industrial W astewater Treatment Operator Program Training 51052 Environmental Resource Association/ERA 4,625.14 Lab Parts & Supplies 51053 Envirowin Software, Inc. 407.00 Software 51054 ESRI, Inc. 3,200.00 Engineering Training Registration 51055 FedEx Corporation 243.29 Air Freight 51056 Filarsky & W att, L.L.P. 1,045.00 Prof. Services - Labor Negotiations Services with OCSD's Bargaining Groups 51057 Filter Supply Company 3,016.70 Filters 51058 Fisher Scientific Company, L.L.C. 3,422.54 Lab Parts & Supplies 51059 Foodcraft Coffee & Refreshment Services 60.00 Meeting Supplies 51060 Franklin Covey 423.86 Office Supplies 51061 FST Sand and Gravel, Inc. 342.11 Road Base Materials 51062 Garland Manufacturing Co. 1,714.38 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51063 Garratt-Callahan Company 7,078.69 Chem icals 51064 George Yardley Co. 646.34 Solenoid Valves 51065 Gerhardt's, Inc. 7,909.93 Copper Spark Plugs 51066 Gierlich-Mitchell, Inc. 87.92 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51067 Goldenwest Fence Company 465.00 Main Street Pum p Station - Fence Repairs 51068 W W Grainger, Inc. 3,526.69 Safety Signs & Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51069 Graybar 5,766.13 Hardware/Software & Electrical Supplies 51070 Haaker Equipment Company 1,695.62 Autom otive Parts & Repairs 51071 Hach c/o Ponton Industries 2,130.32 Instrum ent Parts & Supplies 51072 American Sigma, Inc. 1,666.83 Lab Parts & Supplies 51073 Harold Primrose Ice 74.00 Ice For Sam ples 51074 Harrington Industrial Plastics, Inc. 39.32 Plum bing Supplies 51075 Hasco Oil Co., Inc. 218.24 Grease 51076 Hello Direct, Inc. 996.46 Telephone Headsets & Supplies 51077 Hilti, Inc. 5,939.08 Mechanical Parts & Supplies
Page 3 of 7 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 02/16/03 to 02/28/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
51078 The Holman Group 1,704.24 Employee Assistance Program Premium 51079 Home Depot 210.91 Misc. Repair & Maintenance Material 51080 Hopkins Technical Products 3,221.29 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51081 Horizon Technology 836.00 Lab Parts & Supplies 51082 Hub Auto Supply 309.14 Vehicle Parts & Supplies 51083 City of Huntington Beach 15,530.18 W ater Use 51084 HCS Cutler 1,532.77 Mechanical Supplies, Tools & Ladders 51085 Imaging Express 228.04 Toner Cartridges 51086 Industrial Distribution Group 2,102.12 Mechanical Parts, Supplies & Tools 51087 Industrial Filter Manufacturers, Inc. 2,479.04 Filters 51088 IBM 405.00 Software Support IBM AS400 51089 Interstate Battery Systems 778.18 Batteries 51090 Invensys Systems, Inc. 1,830.85 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51091 Irvine Technology Corporation 13,360.00 Temporary Employment Services 51092 Jay's Catering 1,030.45 Meeting Expenses 51093 Johnstone Supply 381.74 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51094 JPR Systems, Inc. 2,091.38 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51095 J2 Printing Services 156.24 Printing 51096 Kaman Industrial Technologies 2,652.44 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51097 Keith Boger 1,335.00 O & M Training Registration 51098 Kett US 6,465.00 Equipment Rental 51099 Lab Safety Supply, Inc. 867.07 Instrument Parts & Supplies 51100 Lexis-Nexis 48.66 Books & Publications 51101 Lord & Sons, Inc. 517.20 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51102 Lucci's 494.04 Meeting Expense 51103 Lytle Screen Printing 511.81 Printing - OCSD New Board Orientation Tote Bags 51104 Manley's Boiler, Inc. 830.00 Boiler Emissions Testing 51105 MarVac Electronics 26.83 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51106 Matt Chlor, Inc. 5,058.98 Valves 51107 McBain Instruments 570.00 Lab Maintenance - (12) Microscopes 51108 McKenna Engineering & Equipment Co., Inc. 168.25 Filters 51109 McMaster-Carr Supply Co. 2,613.12 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51110 Mec Analytical System 1,465.00 Toxicity Analysis 51111 Media Resurfacing Systems, Inc. 2,000.00 Belt Press Maintenance 51112 Medlin Controls Co. 91.99 Instrument Supplies 51113 Michael Turnipseed & Associates 1,562.50 Professional Service - Tule Ranch & Yakima Sites Study 51114 Mission Uniform Service 5,183.92 Uniform Rentals 51115 Mykrolis Corporation 1,195.00 Calibration Service - (2) Mass Flow Controllers 51116 Nahabit & Associates, Inc. 885.00 Purchasing Training Registration 51117 National Technology Transfer, Inc. 11,125.34 Human Resources Safety Training - Electrical Code 51118 NetVersant of Southern California 595.00 Human Resources Security System Improvements 51119 City of Newport Beach 11.87 W ater Use 51120 Nickey Petroleum Co., Inc. 1,596.31 Turbine & Machine Oil 51121 The Norco Companies 165.00 Mail Delivery Service 51122 Nu-W ay Laser Engraving 46.00 Steel Tags 51123 NAS Associates, Inc. 1,673.60 Toxicity Analysis 51124 NCG Porter Novelli, Inc. 9,844.64 Professional Services - Public Relations 51125 Office Depot Business Services Div. 1,229.03 Office Supplies
Page 4 of 7 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 02/16/03 to 02/28/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
51126 OneSource Distributors, Inc. 902.77 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51127 Orange County Business Council 650.00 Communications Meeting Registration 51128 Orange Fluid System Technologies, Inc. 57.15 Plum bing Supplies 51129 Oxford University Press 74.79 Publication 51130 Oxygen Service Company 2,231.89 Specialty Gases 51131 OCB Reprographics 4,238.44 Printing Service - MO 1/26/00 51132 P.L. Hawn Company, Inc. 114.34 Electrical Supplies 51133 Pace Analytic Services 975.00 High Resolution Analysis of Effluent & Biosolids 51134 Pacific Bell 1,181.59 Telephone Services 51135 Pacific Bell Internet Services 328.86 Internet Service 51136 Pacific Mechanical Supply 684.15 Plum bing Supplies 51137 Parsons Infrastructure & Tech. Group 19,900.29 Professional Services - Asset Management Program 51138 Partners Consulting Services 14,280.00 FIS On-Site Support - One W orld XE Migration Project 51139 Parts Unlimited 49.23 Autom otive Parts & Supplies 51140 Perma Pure, Inc. 219.10 Filter 51141 Postmaster General 150.00 Postal Perm it Renewal Fee 51142 Power Electro Supply Co., Inc. 80.93 Electrical Supplies 51143 Professional Publications, Inc. 246.97 Publication 51144 Progressive Business Publications 230.00 Publication 51145 Projects Partners 12,227.65 Temporary Employment Services 51146 PC Mall Gov. Inc. 323.25 Labeler 51147 PCS Express 110.00 Courier Service 51148 PDSA, Inc. 1,500.00 Software 51149 PR W eek 128.00 Publication 51150 PSI 6,238.73 Hot & Cold Pressure W asher 51151 Pump Engineering &/or QAir California 175.17 Pum p Supplies 51152 R. W . Beck 4,099.28 Professional Services P1-90 51153 R. L. Abbott & Associates 3,000.00 Kern County Biosolids Consulting Services 51154 Raney Industries 825.00 Contract Service - Belt Press Equipment Modification 51155 Rayne W ater Systems OOB'D 12/31/02 1,395.64 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 51156 Reliastar 9,316.95 Employee Medical Health Premium 51157 Retrofit Parts & Components, Inc. 1,276.51 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51158 Rutan & Tucker, L.L.P. 5,332.03 Legal Services - Crow-W inthrop Development 51159 RPM Electric Motors 1,974.78 Motors, Parts & Repair Service 51160 Sartorius Corporation 131.17 Lab Parts & Supplies 51161 Schwing America, Inc. 1,595.59 Motor 51162 Seaventures 5,250.00 Ocean Monitoring Vessel 51163 Sehi Computer Products, Inc. 6,058.34 Laser Printer/Copier 51164 Seton Name Plate Corp 112.23 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51165 Shepard Brothers, Inc. 927.40 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 51166 Shureluck Sales & Engineering 810.56 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51167 Supelco, Inc. 793.76 Lab Parts & Supplies 51168 Skalar, Inc. 172.58 Lab Parts & Supplies 51169 Skylights Unlimited 1,625.00 Skylights Replacement & Removal 51170 Southern California Edison 26.81 Power 51171 Southern Counties Oil Co. 5,611.11 Diesel Fuel 51172 Spex Certiprep, Inc. 383.61 Lab Parts & Supplies 51173 Sterling Art 221.88 Stationery & Office Supplies
Page 5 of 7 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 02/16/03 to 02/28/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
51174 Steven Enterprises, Inc. 276.76 Stationery & Office Supplies 51175 Strata International, Inc. 505.46 Chemicals 51176 Summit Steel 1,362.30 Metal 51177 Sunset Ford 1,548.38 Vehicle Repairs - V-478 51178 Sunset Industrial Parts 3,989.95 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51179 Super Chem Corporation 672.42 Cleaner/Degreaser 51180 Symcas-TSG 1,384.18 SCADA System, VAX Maintenance 51181 SPX Valves & Control 2,895.03 Valves 51182 The Orange County Register 4,580.36 Notices & Ads 51183 The Tin Bender 309.24 Fiberglass Duct Liner 51184 Thompson Industrial Supply, Inc. 272.67 Mechanical Supplies 51185 Daily Pilot 250.00 Notices & Ads 51186 Tony's Lock & Safe Service & Sales 27.21 Locks & Keys 51187 Total Safety, Inc. 313.40 Mechanical Parts, Supplies & Repair 51188 Transcat 790.51 Mechanical & Electrical Supplies 51189 Trench Shoring Company 737.01 Trench Jacks 51190 Tri-State Pump 330.00 Pump Supplies 51191 Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. 9,219.09 Contract Groundskeeping MO 5-11-94 51192 Truck & Auto Supply, Inc. 669.05 Automotive Supplies 51193 TCH Associates, Inc. 1,919.22 Lab Supplies 51194 U.S. Metro Group, Inc. 24,785.00 Janitorial & Floor Maintenance at Plants 1 & 2 51195 Ultra Scientific 675.48 Lab Parts & Supplies 51196 United Parcel Service 1,377.26 Parcel Services 51197 US Equipment Co., Inc. 233.68 Hoses 51198 US Filter/Stranco 1,232.29 Mechanical Parts & Supplies 51199 Vallen Safety Supply Company 129.30 Safety Supplies 51200 Vapex, Inc. 636.00 Pumps 51201 Verizon California 590.74 Telephone Services 51202 Verne's Plumbing 460.00 Backflow Device Replacement 51203 Vertex, Inc. 1,845.76 Software 51204 Vision Service Plan-(CA) 8,807.04 Vision Service Premium 51205 VW R Scientific Products Corporation 2,676.89 Lab Parts & Supplies 51206 The W ackenhut Corporation 19,820.15 Security Guards 51207 W aters Corporation 1,930.95 Lab Parts & Supplies 51208 W axie Sanitary Supply 195.55 Janitorial Supplies 51209 W estport Aparatus DBA Breaker Supply 492.42 Electrical Parts & Supplies 51210 W iteg Scientific 161.63 Lab Parts & Supplies 51211 W EF 134.00 Membership - W ater Environment Federation 51212 W S Atkins W ater 6,000.00 Professional Services - Digester Evaluation Flow Studies 51213 Xerox Corporation 7,038.09 Fax/Copier Leases & Supplies 51214 XESystems, Inc. 302.50 Xerox Synergix Maintenance Service 51215 Yokogawa Corp. of America 386.41 Instrument Supplies 51216 Richard A. Castillon 201.12 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 51217 Robert P. Ghirelli 358.34 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 51218 Victoria L. Henn 200.00 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 51219 Vladimir A. Kogan 443.06 Meeting/Training Expense Reimbursement 51220 Charles D. McGee 150.00 Membership 51221 Merrill F. Seiler 133.00 Membership
Page 6 of 7 EXHIBIT B Claims Paid From 02/16/03 to 02/28/03
Warrant No. Vendor Amount Description
51222 County of Orange - Auditor Controller 750.00 Sewer Service Fee Adm inistration 51223 Orange County Sanitation District 865.20 Petty Cash Reim b. 51224 Unocal Corporation - OOB'D 1/2/03 5,797.38 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 51225 W illam ette Industries, Inc. 6,225.84 Reconciliation User Fee Refund Program 51226 County of Orange - Auditor Controller 210.00 Sewer Service Fee Adm inistration 51227 County of Orange - Auditor Controller 45.00 Sewer Service Fee Adm inistration Total Accounts Payable - Warrants $ 4,161,591.88
Payroll Disbursements 29163 - 29263 Employee Paychecks$ 156,684.67 Biweekly Payroll 02/19/03 82142 - 82624 Direct Deposit Statements 873,739.32 Biweekly Payroll 02/19/03 Total Payroll Disbursements $ 1,030,423.99
Wire Transfer Payments State Street Bank & Trust 134,005.76 February Interest Payment on Series 2000 A & B Certificates of Participation Total Wire Transfer Payments $ 134,005.76 Total Claims Paid 02/16/03 - 02/28/03 $ 5,326,021.63
Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT B Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. OMTS COMMITTEE 3/5/03 3/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT OMTS03-10 12(c) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Bob Ooten, Director of Operations & Maintenance Originator: Ed Torres, Air Quality & Special Projects Manager
SUBJECT: BIOTRICKLING FILTER FOR ODOR CONTROL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT: PHASE II FINAL REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file Final Report, Phase II Biotrickling Filter for Odor Control Demonstration Project, prepared by University of California, Riverside dated February 2003.
SUMMARY
• The District’s odor control facilities were installed in the mid 1980’s. The Odor Control Master Plan recently completed by CH2M Hill recommends replacement of our single stage chemical odor control scrubbers with 2-stage scrubbers which include biotrickling filters. The 2-stage scrubbers will enable the District to reliably prevent nuisance odors from leaving our treatment plant boundaries. Due to our successful biotrickling filter research, Staff is recommending that biotrickling filter technology play a prominent role in our future odor control strategies.
• In June 2001, the Board authorized an agreement with University of California, Riverside to assist District’s staff researching biotrickling filter odor scrubber technology. To evaluate the technology, staff proposed to retrofit an existing chemical odor scrubber at Plant No. 1 to a biotrickling filter, and evaluate the treatment performance, process reliability, and obtain capital and operating cost data associated with treatment of hydrogen sulfide, odors and volatile organic compounds.
• Biotrickling filters remove odors using microorganisms that live on the packing media without the use of chemicals required by the Districts present scrubber technology. One part of the research was to develop faster treatment technology for biotrickling filters to make them competitive with traditional chemical scrubbers. Biological treatment systems typically require 20 to 60 seconds of treatment time versus 2 seconds for chemical scrubbers, thus requiring much larger land space for treatment.
1 • A key to the research was the use of an innovative foam packing material used in the scrubber conversion. This foam packing, along with optimum environmental conditions for the microorganisms have enabled the biotrickling filters to treat the odors at 2 seconds treatment time, which is the same as chemical scrubbers. The 2-second treatment time is the key to reducing this technologies capital cost.
• The Phase II biotrickling filter for odor control research was completed in October 2002. The final report describes the scrubber conversion process; treatment performance and contain conclusions and recommendations. Key conclusions and recommendations from this research are listed below:
Major Report Conclusions:
1) Biotrickling filters can reliably remove hydrogen sulfide at equal or better performance than traditional chemical scrubbers. 2) Biotrickling filters can also remove other pollutants of concern including odors, volatile organic compounds and hazardous air pollutants. Further study of conditions that would improve odor removal is needed. 3) Conversion of a chemical scrubber to a biotrickling filter is cost effective. In- house conversion cost for scrubber 10 at Plant 1 was $21,000. Conversion costs using an outside contractor is estimated not to exceed $50,000. 4) Estimated annual savings cost in chemicals and O&M labor and material ranges from $40,000 to $70,000 for each conversion, which would equate to a payback period of approximately 1 year.
WHAT’S NEXT
• At their October 2002 Meeting, the Board approved an agreement with University of California, Riverside to conduct a Phase III Biotrickling Filter Demonstration Study to address the recommendations contained in the Phase II Report.
The major features of the Phase III Biotrickling Filter Research are:
1) Further study environmental conditions that would improve removal of odors, and the effect of these conditions on hydrogen sulfide removal. 2) Evaluate the performance and pressure loss using a structured foam packing to reduce energy requirements due to higher than expected pressure losses through the biotrickling filter. Three (3) additional chemical scrubbers will be retrofitted to biotrickling filters using the structured foam packing.
• The results of this research are being used as a basis for odor control for the Plant No. 2 Headwork project (P2-66) and several scrubber complex rehabilitation projects that will begin over the next 2 years.
2 • Biotrickling filters will likely be applied to foul air streams with high H2S concentrations and/or with principally organic based odors coming from solids treatment processes.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
No new authorization of expenditures is being requested at this time. A summary of the project budget is listed below:
Project Description Budget Phase I: Pilot-Scale Study $ 25,000 Phase II: Demonstration-Scale Study $450,000 Phase III: Demonstration-Scale Study $285,000 Total Project Cost $735,000
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Board approved budget on 10/23/02.) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Due to the excellent treatment performance and chemical savings resulting from the conversion of Plant No. 1 scrubber 10 to a biotrickling filter, staff retrofitted four (4) additional Plant No. 2 scrubbers to biotrickling filters. UC Riverside assisted staff in evaluating the treatment performance and reliability of these four additional biotrickling filters. Costs for the conversions are included in the Phase II: Demonstration-Scale Study budget.
The Biotrickling Filter for Odor Control Demonstration Project: Phase II Final Report is on file with the Board Secretary. An Executive Summary of the Report is included as an attachment to this Agenda Report.
ALTERNATIVES
None
CEQA FINDINGS
None
ATTACHMENT
Final Report: Biotrickling Filter Demonstration Project – Phase II Executive Summary
3
Final Report Executive Summary
Phase II Biotrickling Filter for Odor Control Demonstration Project
February 2003
Prepared by Marc A. Deshusses and David Gabriel Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering University of California, Riverside
for Orange County Sanitation District
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) previously funded a study at UC Riverside to evaluate the feasibility of converting selected chemical scrubbers at OCSD to biological trickling filters. The results were very promising, and suggested that a number of scrubbers at either Plant 1 or Plant 2 could possibly be converted with significant cost and health and safety savings. Thus the objectives of Phase II were:
1. To refine the scrubber conversion procedure and costs to convert a scrubber. 2. To develop a monitoring protocol and apply it towards the evaluation of the biotrickling filter. This includes extended monitoring over time, and under a wide range of operating conditions. 3. To perform a detailed cost-benefit analysis of the converted scrubbers and to the extent possible to other scrubbers at OCSD. 4. To write a report with the findings and recommendations.
As the work progressed, 4 more scrubber were converted by OCSD personnel and additional objectives were identified which included:
5. Perform selected analyses on scrubbers I, Q, G, and J that were converted at Plant 2. 6. Perform selected experiments to understand the limits and performance of the biotrickling filters.
Overall, the project was extremely successful. The focus of the monitoring efforts was on biotrickling filter 10 which successfully treated 10,000 cfm of foul air for over 18 months keeping the original gas contact time of the scrubber of 1.6-2.3 seconds. Typical results are shown in Figures 1 through 4. Reclaimed water was used as nutrient source for the process and for maintaining the pH in the biotrickling filter between 1.5 and 2.2. Under these conditions, the biotrickling filter was able to successfully treat H2S at rates comparable to those of chemical scrubbers. H2S removal in biotrickling filter 10 was in excess of 98% for inlet H2S concentrations as high as 30 to 50 ppmv. This corresponds to volumetric elimination rates of H2S of 95 to 105 g -3 -1 H2S m h . The performance of biotrickling filter I at Plant 2 was also very high.
Simultaneously to H2S treatment, removal of 30-70% of odors, reduced sulfur compounds (RSCs), ammonia and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and air toxics present in traces in the foul air was also observed (see Table 1).
H2S treatment performance in biotrickling filters 10 and I was exceptionally high compared with other biofilters or biotrickling filters removing low concentration of H2S, even at higher gas contact times. We determined that a combination of high pollutant mass transfer rate due to the special packing support that was used and optimum operating conditions (nutrient, pH, CO2) was responsible for the unprecedented performance.
100 100 Removal Efficiency 90
80 10 Inlet 70 ) v
60 Recycle pH
1 50
Outlet 40 Liquid recycle pH S removal efficiency (%) S concentration (ppm S concentration 2 2 H H 30 0.1 20
10
0.01 0 01234 Time (d)
Figure 1. Typical H2S removal in biotrickling filter 10. Time zero corresponds to 12:00 AM on September 5, 2001. Note the log scale for H2S concentration. Also, non-detect (ND) by VAPEX is shown as 0.01 ppmv.
100 9 Remova Inlet 8
7 10 6
5 1 4 pH
H2S (ppm) H2S Outlet Removal (%) Removal 3 0.1 2 pH 1
0.01 0 07/19/01 09/07/01 10/27/01 12/16/01 Time (date)
Figure 2. Long-term performance of biotrickling filter 10. H2S removal efficiency, pH, inlet and outlet concentrations are shown. High pH events are either experiments or control system upsets.
220 100 200 80
) 180 60 -1
h 40 -3 160
Removal (%) 20 S m 2 140 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 120 -3 -1 H2S load (g H2S m h ) 100
80
60
Elimination capacity H (g 40
20
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 H S load (g H S m-3 h-1) 2 2
Figure 3. Elimination capacity of H2S (= (concentration in-out)×air flow/bed volume) and removal efficiency versus inlet load (inset) in the biotrickling filter. Data include more than 8 months of continuous operation. -3 -1 Loadings above 110 g H2S m h were achieved by spiking the inlet air with H2S from a compressed gas cylinder.
Inlet Outlet Removal Efficiency 200 100
175 90 Removal 80 150 70 125 60 100 Inlet 50
75 40 30 50 S concentration (ppm) concentration S 2
20 (%) efficiency Removal H Outlet 25 10 0 0 6-6-02 6-7-02 6-8-02 6-9-02 6-10-02 6-11-02 6-12-02 Time (date )
Figure 4. 6 days of typical H2S removal in biotrickling filter I.
Table 1 Inlet concentrations and removal efficiencies of odor, VOCs and RSCs from biotrickling filter 10. Data are mean ± standard deviation, n=21 for RSCs and n=9 for odor panels and are representative from about 8 months of operation at gas contact times between 1.6 and 3.4 seconds. D/T = dilution-to-threshold as measured by standard odor panel. Inlet Removal Compound concentration, ppbv efficiency, % Carbonyl sulfide 67.2 ± 7.7 44 ± 11 Methyl mercaptan 192.5 ± 34.1 67 ± 11 Carbon disulfide 70.3 ± 20.5 35 ± 5 Methylene chloride 132 36 Chloroform 326 30 Benzene 147 32 TCE 16 46 PCE 224 28 Toluene 753 29 Ethyl benzene 148 41 p and m-xylene 480 41 o-xylene 110 44 Odor 1980 ± 480 D/T 65 ±21
From the 18 month study, the following conclusions could be made.
1. The conversion of a chemical scrubber to a biotrickling filter is a relatively simple procedure. The costs associated with the conversion are mostly (~50%) associated with the purchase and shipping of the new packing that needs to be installed. For scrubber 10, the total estimated cost (i.e., parts and personnel) for the conversion by in-house personnel was about $21,000. The estimated cost of the conversion if performed by an outside contractor was about $50,000.
2. The scrubbers converted to biotrickling filters exhibited H2S removal performance largely exceeding the predictions of Phase I. Sustained removal of H2S with over 95% efficiency was achieved most of the time for biotrickling filter 10 at Plant 1, while biotrickling filter I at Plant 2, exposed to higher H2S concentrations, exhibited high rate of H2S degradation but partial removal. -3 -1 Biotrickling filter 10 had a maximum H2S elimination capacity of about 105 g m h , while biotrickling filter I achieved elimination capacities over 250 g m-3 h-1 without reaching its maximum limit. These are truly unprecedented performances. We determined that the very high air velocity in the biotrickling filter contributed to high external H2S mass transfer coefficients, thereby allowing such high H2S removal rates to be achieved.
3. Stable and sustained H2S removal was obtained at operating pHs of 1.8 to 2.2. Treatment at neutral pH was attempted but failed. However, the results were considered to be inconclusive, as the experiment was possibly affected by the excess free chlorine fed to the biotrickling filter during neutral pH operation. 4. Biotrickling filter 10 was subject to intense monitoring which revealed that it always met the AQMD discharge requirement (<1 ppm H2S averaged over 24 h).
5. Removal of VOCs, RSCs and odors other than H2S was not the primary objective of this phase of the study. Still, extended monitoring showed that these contaminants existed in traces (ppb levels) and that their removal ranged from about 30-70%, and was very variable. Removal of RSCs required about 2 months of acclimation. 6. The biotrickling filter exhibited a larger pressure drop (5-10” water column) than the former scrubbers. This is clearly because the new packing has a larger surface area, but is possibly also increased by packing compaction at the bottom of the bed. Testing structured foam is recommended.
1. The five biotrickling filters had less than 10 system upsets in 18 months of operation. In two or three instances, biotrickling filter 10 or I lost its H2S removal efficiency. The most likely explanation was that over chlorinated plant water was fed and deactivated the biotrickling filter process culture. Another instance could be traced to acidic foam carryover from another scrubber. Thus, upsets were always due to a reason exterior to the biotrickling filtration process itself, suggesting that the process is stable and very reliable. 2. The biotrickling filters required little maintenance (although maintenance efforts were not quantitatively monitored). Their control was simple, and the biotrickling filter did not need any nutrients or chemicals other than plant water. This all contributes to a very positive cost-benefit outcome. 3. The biotrickling filter responded rapidly to changing conditions. Also, no marked effect on the performance could be found after periods of up to 48 hours’ starvation. 4. A detailed cost-benefit analysis of converting scrubber 10 to a biotrickling filter revealed that conversion resulted in substantial savings. When compared directly to the parallel scrubber (scrubber 9), the savings amounted to $14,000 per year, mostly from reduced chemicals use. Since the biotrickling filter outperformed the chemical scrubber, the cost-benefit analysis also considered the expense associated with the post-treatment of the untreated fraction of H2S from the chemical scrubber 9. Another scenario considered the benefit of having biotrickling filter 10 over having no roughing treatment. In all these cases, total savings ranged from $40,000 to $70,000 per year. The benefits of not having chemicals on-site were not included, but are significant from a health and safety perspective. Overall, the cost-benefit analysis indicates that converting scrubbers is a highly beneficial innovation.
The study led to the following general recommendations.
1. Since biotrickling filtration proved very effective, reliable, and economically favorable, further conversions should be considered. In particular scrubbers 9 and H appear to be very good candidates. Also, biotrickling filters should be included in future odor control plans. 2. Operation of the biotrickling filters at pH lower than 1.5-1.8 is not recommended, since low pH can possibly damage the packing over time. 3. Low trickling rates are recommended as excess watering increases pressure drop and may affect removal. 4. Future biotrickling filters should include some system to neutralize chlorine in plant water prior to feeding to the biotrickling filter or an alarm if excessive levels are seen in plant water.
Further, for Phase III, the recommendations are:
5. Future conversion(s) should focus on testing a structured foam (i.e., cut-to-shape), as it may result in lower pressure drops and possibly even higher pollutant elimination capacities. 6. Another experiment at neutral pH should be conducted, with a chlorine neutralizer on the plant water feed. 7. The study of the effect of air residence time on RSCs, VOCs, and odor removal should be conducted over an extended period of time, so that multiple sampling over time under a wide range of conditions can be accomplished. 8. Phase III should focus on the many issues associated with residual odor as these are key for the implementation of biotrickling filters for second stage treatment.
Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. OMTS COMMITTEE 03/05/03 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT OMTS03-11 12(d) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Robert J. Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance Originator: Barbara Collins, Principal Analyst
SUBJECT: IN-PLANT FATS, OILS, AND GREASE (FOG) IMPACT REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the In–Plant Fats, Oils and Grease Impact Study prepared by Brown and Caldwell dated November 2002.
SUMMARY
• In April 2002, the California Regional Water Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) issued Order No. R8-2002-0014 General Waste Discharge Requirements, requiring Orange County cities and wastewater treatment agencies to monitor and control sanitary sewer overflows (SSO’s) in response to a Grand Jury Report of April 2001 that stated that fats, oils, and grease were major contributors to SSO’s. The Order named the District as a co-permittee with member cities and as the lead to “facilitate regional compliance” with the Order.
• In response to this order, the District and cities in the service area initiated the FOG Control Program which can eventually reduce the amount of fats, oils, and grease discharged into the sewers that substantially increase the FOG’s hauled as septage to the District’s Reclamation Plant No. 1.
• The FOG Program will develop options for removal of grease from the collection system which may include requiring restaurants to use grease interceptors that are drained by septage haulers and brought to the District as septage.
• The purpose of this report is to study and estimate the impact on the impact on the District’s treatment plant of a potential increase in septage haulers from the present 40 trucks per day up to to160 trucks per day at peak. The septage trucks discharge fats, oils and greases at a waste hauler station located at Reclamation Plant No. 1.
• In June 2002, the District Board authorized OCSD to hire a consultant to determine the potential impacts on the treatment plant. The evaluation of alternatives included impacts to plant operations, maintenance, staffing, traffic, economics (capital costs) and the environment.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 12(d).FOG Report.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1 • As part of the Order, cities and wastewater agencies will develop a FOG control plan by conducting a study to evaluate FOG control technologies, practices and programs.
• The In-Plant FOG Impact Study identifies alternative disposal and recycling options for handling FOG in the future and assesses in-plant impacts of receiving greater quantities of FOG.
• The seven alternatives developed by Brown and Caldwell for treating or disposing of FOG at the District are:
- Alternative 1 - Continue the present practice of the onsite digestion of the fats, oils and greases with the sewer sludge.
A. Continue the Current Operation – Process the increased fats, oils and grease received from septage (waste haulers) along with wastewater solids.
B. Modified Liquid Receiving – Construct a new septage (Waste hauler) station with a solid/grit removal dewatering system to remove the expected increased gritty material with the increased fats, oils and grease material to be processed.
C. Modified Liquid Receiving and Thickening – Construct a new receiving station (Alt. 1 B) with heated sludge blending tank to receive all the increased septage and all the process solids prior to digestion.
D. Dedicated Digestion – Pump all fats, oils and greases directly into a digester dedicated to treat only the fats, oils and greases. (This has been successfully piloted at the District.)
- Alternative 2 - Offsite treatment of the fats, oils and greases at a rendering facility)
- Alternative 3 - Offsite recycling of the fats, oils and greases to produce a clean burning biofuel.
- Alternative 4 - Offsite disposal of the fats, oils and greases at a Landfill.
• The alternatives were ranked based on various treatment plant impacts. The ranking results concluded that Alternative 3 is the best which is to recycle the fats, oils and greases and produce clean burning fuel. (This alternative is the only alternative with zero costs to the District.)
• The risk associated with Alternative 3 depends upon developmental technology.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 12(d).FOG Report.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2 • The Consultant recommends that a dedicated digester for fats, oils and greases be implemented until pilot testing and market analysis of Alternative 3 is completed.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
NA
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The report is on file and available through the Board Secretary’s office.
ALTERNATIVES
NA
CEQA FINDINGS
NA
ATTACHMENTS
NA
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 12(d).FOG Report.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 3 Orange County Sanitation District
In-Plant FOG Impact Study
Prepared by: November 2002
16735 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92606-4953
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...... 1 Problem Overview ...... 1 Project Objectives ...... 1 BACKGROUND...... 1 FOG Composition, Sources, and Chemical Characteristics...... 1 Method for Conducting Study ...... 3 Related Studies...... 4 FOG Best Management Practices Study...... 4 Advanced Digestion Study...... 4 Project Limitations and Assumptions...... 4 FOG Quantities and Treatment...... 4 FOG REMOVAL PRACTICES...... 5 Current FOG Quantities...... 5 Current FOG Process Description...... 6 In-Plant FOG Impacts and Mitigation Measures...... 7 In-Plant FOG Impacts ...... 7 In-Plant FOG Impact Mitigation...... 8 Future FOG Collection Practices ...... 8 DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES ...... 8 Alternative 1A – Base Case (Status Quo) ...... 10 Alternative 1B-D – On-site Treatment Using Anaerobic Digestion...... 10 Alternate 1B – Modified FOG Receiving and Digestion ...... 11 Alternate 1C – Modified FOG Receiving, Thickening and Digestion ...... 15 Alternate 1D – Dedicated Digestion ...... 16 Alternative 2 – Off-site Treatment at a Grease Rendering Facility ...... 17 Alternative 3 – Off-site Recycling as a Bio-fuel...... 17 Alternative 4 – Landfill Disposal ...... 18 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES...... 19 Alternative 1A – Base Case (Status Quo) ...... 19 Alternative 1B-D – On-site Treatment Using Anaerobic Digestion...... 19 Alternative 2 – Off-site Recycling at a Grease Rendering Facility...... 20 Alternative 3 – Off-site Recycling as a Bio-fuel...... 20 Alternative 4 – Off-site Disposal of FOG at a Landfill ...... 20 Comparison of Alternatives...... 20 Evaluation Criteria Weighting...... 20 Non-Monetary Comparison...... 21 Capital Cost Comparison ...... 22 RECOMMENDATIONS...... 25 REFERENCES...... 25
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 CONTENTS (continued) ii
TABLES
No. Page
Table 1 OCSD FOG Hauler Sample Summary ...... 3 Table 2. FOG Collection Companies ...... 6 Table 3. Evaluation of Alternatives...... 22 Table 4. Comparison of Alternate Impacts...... 23 Table 5. Alternative Capital Costs ...... 24
FIGURES
No. Page
There are three other figures in the report that need to be labeled and included in this table of figures:
Figure 1. Typical Grease Trap...... 2 Figure 2. Alternative 1A – Base Case (Status Quo)...... 9 Figure 3a. Packaged FOG Receiving System...... 11 Figure 3. Alternative 1B – Combined Digestion with Primary Sludge or WAS ...... 12 Figure 4. Alternative 1C – Combined Digestion FOG, Primary Sludge & WAS with Preheating ...... 13 Figure 5. Alternative 1D – Dedicated Digestion...... 14 Figure 6. Heated Sludge Blending Tank Schematic ...... 15 Figure 7. Advanced Digestion Schematic...... 16 Figure 8. Evaluation Criteria Matrix...... 21
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002
INTRODUCTION
Problem Overview
The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) serves the northwest and central regions of Orange County, treating wastewater from 21 different cities and 3 special districts that have a combined population of approximately 2.4 million. Flows treated by the two OCSD wastewater treatment plants, Plant 1 and Plant 2, come from sources including residential, commercial, recreational and industrial users. As the OCSD sewer collection system has grown, there has been an increasing awareness of the impact that fats, oils and grease (FOG) have on the proper operation of the collection system. FOG builds up in layers in the gravity sewers and collects in manholes. This has the effect of reducing available sewer capacity, and can ultimately result in blocked lines causing sewage system overflows (SSOs). For this reason, the OCSD is developing a plan to reduce the amount of FOG discharged into the sewage collection system.
Project Objectives
This project addresses conditions for renewal of OCSD’s Waste Discharge Permit order Number R8-2002-0014 issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, (RWQCB). The objectives of this project are to evaluate disposal options for fats, oil and grease (FOG) generated in the sewer system service area and assess in-plant impacts of these disposal options. Disposal options considered include use of existing anaerobic digestion and other off-site recycling methods.
Brown and Caldwell has been retained as a part of its WDR support contract, to (1) develop a plan to evaluate the feasibility of digesting FOG in existing anaerobic digesters and (2) assess alternate methods of recycling FOG, grease rendering and other disposal alternatives, including land filling, etc, within current codes and permit requirements. The purpose of this study is to identify alternative disposal and recycling options for handling FOG in the future and assess in-plant impacts of receiving greater quantities of FOG.
BACKGROUND
FOG Composition, Sources, and Chemical Characteristics
FOG present in wastewater is composed of animal fats, vegetable fats, and food solids of varying densities, and water and petroleum based oils and grease. Food based fats and grease are commonly discharged from restaurants and other food preparation facilities. Two common discharges of this type of FOG are in the form of waste cooking oil and grease trap waste. Petroleum-based oils and grease are typically discharged by businesses such as automotive repair facilities, gas stations and car washes. Petroleum-based FOG is relatively simple to regulate and control through industrial discharge and pretreatment permits. Food-based FOG is more difficult to control because of the large number of restaurants and fast food establishments. The focus of this report evaluates the
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 2
impact of the FOG that would be controlled under new BMPs from restaurants and other food establishments.
Fats, whether food-based or petroleum-based, can be saturated or unsaturated and can be in either liquid or solid form. Because FOG is composed of materials of varying densities, generally less dense than water, it separates easily into several layers floating on the water when placed in a quiescent vessel like a grease trap or a grease interceptor (See Figure 1). Because of this natural tendency to float, when combined with other solids such as primary solids or waste activated sludge, FOG can provide an adhering effect that will capture these solids and float them as well. Until the density of the combined grease and solids is equal to or greater than water, this combined mass will float. This effect is like a reverse shear floc process which is used in water treatment – in a DAF the floc matrix moves upward and collects (or shears) particles, incorporating air and solids in a matrix This adhering effect can be beneficial to the DAF thickening process.
Figure 1. Typical Grease Trap
FOG from animal fats contains esters (compounds of alcohol) or glycerol (glycerin) and lipids (phospholipids). Phospholipids have long nonpolar “tails” and a small highly polar “head”. Although FOG molecules contain both polar and nonpolar components they are generally considered to be polar. FOG that is petroleum-based is nonpolar in nature. Lipids, including phospholipids, are generally defined by biochemists as compounds that, upon hydrolysis (addition of water), will produce fatty acids. FOG fatty acids are generally longer chain molecules. In an anaerobic environment, these longer chain fatty acids are metabolized by hydrogen-producing acetogenic bacteria. Acid-loving (acetogenic, acetophilic) bacteria consume long chain fatty acids to produce Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA), commonly acetate. Methanogens, in turn consume VFAs to produce methane, etc., resulting in the formation of hydrogen, acetate, formate and carbon dioxide. One of the important end products from metabolism of these products is methane
To verify chemical characteristics of FOG being hauled to the Plant 1 dumping station, samples were collected on three separate days from randomly selected FOG haulers. Results of this sampling are summarized in Table 1
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 3
Table 1 – OCSD FOG Hauler Sample Summary
Sample Date Chromium mg/la TS % VS % PH June 10, 2002 0.49 Data? 6.2 6.85 June 12, 2002 0.69 6.06 6.85 June 13, 2002 0.37 6.77 5.48 Average 0.52 6.34 6.39 a Chromium was recommended by OCSD source control staff as an indicator for heavy metals. Chromium is not an element that is found commonly in wastewater, which make it a good indicator.
Method for Conducting Study
Brown and Caldwell collected and reviewed data in order to develop alternatives for handling FOG and assessing in-plant impacts of FOG treated on-site. Information sources include:
OCSD staff and plant data
Brown and Caldwell archives and other related literature (see references for other related literature used in preparation of this report)
Statement from commercial recyclers, rendering and landfill disposal companies
FOG samples collected from random FOG haulers and analyzed for volatile solids, total suspended solids, pH and total chromium (as an indicator for heavy metals). Future samples may want to be analyzed for copper since copper sulfate, when found in septic tanks, is commonly seen as an indicator of a mixed load.
A kick-off meeting was held in June 2002 to define some of the process issues related to on-site treatment of FOG and establish evaluation criteria. This meeting also served as a brain storming session to begin to develop alternatives. Dedicated anaerobic digestion was introduced as an alternative by OCSD staff as a result of bench scale testing that had been performed many years before. Alternatives have been developed for both on-site and off-site disposal options. These alternatives address the issues noted in the Waste Discharge Permit renewal requirements.
Capital cost estimates have been prepared for each alternative for economic comparison. A non-economic comparison of each alternative has been made based on criteria established at the kick off meeting held with OCSD staff. These criteria included: Operational/process impacts, maintenance task impacts, staffing impacts, traffic impacts, economic/lifecycle impacts and environmental impacts. A workshop was held on October 9, 2002 with OCSD staff to determine which impacts hold greater weight, then rank each alternative by evaluating them and summing the weighted values for each evaluation criteria. When OCSD confirms selection of a preferred alternative an implementation schedule will be developed.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 4
Related Studies
Orange County FOG Control Study. A parallel study is being conducted by another engineering firm under contract to the OCSD by Environmental Engineering and Contracting, Inc. to investigate ways FOG can be controlled at the source and keep FOG from entering the collection system. They will be developing Best Management Practices (BMPs) and evaluating chemicals or other materials that break down FOG, as well as other new technologies. Phase 1 of this investigation is scheduled for completion by February 2003 with a subsequent Phase 2 study dependant on the results of Phase 1. To mitigate SSO’s and other operational challenges, it is important that a comprehensive pretreatment ordinance, enforcement and grease trap sizing be implemented. Future FOG quantities collected and disposed of at the Plant No. 1 will likely increase as a result of implementing any new ordinances.
Advanced Digestion Study. Brown and Caldwell recently prepared a report for OCSD that evaluated alternative advanced anaerobic digestions methods. That report has been used for background data relative to digester performance, digester capacity and future digester expansion needs. To simplify digester feeding and provide homogeneous solids loading to the digesters, Brown and Caldwell proposed a heated solids blending tank that would blend primary solids and thickened waste activated sludge. One of the alternative advanced digestion processes recommended was a series thermophilic/mesophilic arrangement. This blending tank would also serve as a "wet well" to feed the digesters and provide a place for heat recovery from the thermophilic phase of digestion prior to the mesophilic phase. The thermophilic phase operates at approximately 135 ° F and the mesophilic phase operates at approximately 95 ° F. To cool the sludge going from the thermophilic digester to the mesophilic digester, sludge cooling heat exchangers would recapture heat energy. Since the recommendations of the Advanced Digestion Study have not been adopted yet by the OCSD, it is assumed that the current mesophilic mode of digestion will continue for several more years.
Project Limitations and Assumptions
FOG Quantities and Treatment. The OCSD Strategic Plan written in 1999 only addressed FOG that enters the plant under normal flow via the collection system. This present study supplements the 1999 plan to address process and other impacts on the treatment plants as a result of FOG quantities diverted from entering the collection system and discharged directly at the treatment facility. The future FOG load being diverted from the collection system could vary from 45,000 to 180,000 gallons a day or 30 to 120 trucks per day assuming an average truck size of 1,500 gallons. This estimate assumes FOG is collected from approximately 7500 restaurants with 750-gallon FOG interceptors pumped out from 2 to 12 times per year. Typically restaurants will have their interceptors pumped out when business is slow or when they are closed. This could result in peak FOG flows which are considerably higher than average, and occurring on Mondays or Tuesdays when some restaurant are closed.
The BMP study is intended to reduce FOG flow entering the sewer collection system through the use of FOG interceptors, use of chemicals or enzymes to break down FOG or other FOG reduction methods. Recommendations from that study will be given to OCSD and contributing
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 5
agencies to pass ordinances to control the discharge of FOG to the collection system. Installation of FOG interceptors and periodic inspection of these interceptors will ensure that they are being properly maintained and pumped out. This in-plant FOG impact study assumes that future FOG ordinances would be passed requiring FOG interceptors and FOG being hauled to the OCSD dumping station. This would result in the greatest impact to the plant site. Since the BMP study will not be completed until the beginning of 2003, no estimate is available currently for future FOG quantities in the collection system. A gross estimate of increased FOG quantities could be assumed to be parallel to the projected wastewater flow growth rate of 4% used in the OCSD Strategic Plan. Increase future FOG quantities being hauled is assumed to be a direct result of number of restaurants in business and improved compliance and enforcement of any FOG ordinance issued as a result of the BMP study. The on-going BMP study will include projections of FOG quantities diverted from the sewer system as a result of implementing various BMP plans When a more accurate estimate of FOG delivered to the treatment facility is available, the number used in this study will need to be revised. Future FOG quantities play a small part in development of treatment and disposal alternatives. Future FOG quantities only factor in to the assessment of in-plant impacts on various processes that may be called upon to treat the FOG. Alternatives utilizing existing anaerobic digestion capacity will not be impacted because there is substantial excess digester capacity and FOG quantities are small in relation to projected future sludge flows. As noted above, depending on how well the BMP plan is implemented and enforced, truck traffic both inside and outside the plant could be significantly impacted. Since Plant No. 1 has the facility to received trucked FOG, on-site treatment of FOG will be limited to Plant 1 where the FOG haulers currently discharge their loads with the exception of Alternative 1A that continues current disposal practices.
FOG REMOVAL PRACTICES
Current FOG Quantities
Currently, several FOG haulers throughout the OCSD collect FOG from existing grease traps. OCSD Operations staff reported that most FOG collected is not mixed with other liquid waste such as septage, however, some mixed loads do come in from time to time. Companies that collect and are permitted to discharge FOG are listed in Table 2. Some of these FOG haulers also handle septage.
Typically, FOG hauler trucks have a capacity of approximately 1,500 gallons as regulated by CalTrans and local road weight limits. Plant 1 typically receives 27 trucks a day or approximately 40,000 gallons per day. As noted in this table, two of the permitted FOG haulers are also FOG processors (rendering companies).
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 6
Table 2. FOG Collection Companies
Permit Number Waste Hauler 2 Orange County Septic 5 Inland Pumping 29 Minuteman Pumping 34 The FOG Company/Baker Commodities (Rendering company) 52 Primer Processors 92 Ryker Commodities 117 Darling International (Rendering company)
Current FOG Process Description
Liquid waste (septage) and FOG are presently disposed of at a dumping station located at the north end of Plant 1 adjacent to the Ellis Avenue entrance. Haulers enter the plant at this location, drop off a copy of their manifest outside the plant gate, then proceed to the dumping station. The dumping station can accommodate two trucks at a time in two separate waste hookups. Each waste hookup has a solid metal cover over a 4-inch quick connect fitting. When a haulers arrive at the dump station, they connect one end of their discharge hose to their truck and the other end to the quick-connect fitting at the dump station and finally open their discharge valve allowing the load to flow by gravity. All trucks are equipped with reversible pumps that can vacuum the waste from grease traps and pressurize the tank to discharge faster or discharge into a receiving tank.
Operations staff reported that an occasional load of spoiled olive oil is received from a local olive processing facility. The haul truck's reversible pump can be used to discharge this spoiled olive oil directly into a digester through a pipe fitting on the cleaning hatch on the side of the digester.
FOG-laden wastewater is typically discharged from the haul truck at the dumping station and flows to the influent diversion structure by gravity. City water is used to flush the solids along the line, similar to flushing a toilet. At the diversion structure, the FOG is diverted to Plant 2. Operations staff reported that there is sufficient flow in the trunk line to Plant 2 to prevent FOG from coating this line. Figure 2 shows a schematic of current base case FOG treatment practices.
At the diversion structure the discharged FOG combines with other wastewater flow and proceeds through the normal treatment process at Plant 2. Some FOG has a tendency to form grease balls and chunks that are removed mechanically at the barscreens or manually removed at the aerated grit tanks. After screening and degritting at the headworks, floatable material is removed in the primary sedimentation tanks by the scum collection system. The collected scum consists of the FOG that was dumped by the FOG haulers as well as FOG transported to the plant from the wastewater collection system. The scum is periodically pumped and combined with primary sludge. This mixture then flows to the anaerobic digesters. Grease present in the scum/primary sludge has a tendency to coat the primary sludge lines. Consequently constrictions in the pipe results in higher head loss, which reduces flow to the digesters. To alleviate this problem, parallel bypass piping has been provided to allow for periodic steam cleaning of the primary sludge line.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 7
Operations staff indicated that gas production at the digesters increases somewhat when FOG, mixed in with the primary sludge, reaches the digesters, although no specific data was provided. The City of Oxnard which uses similar methods for receiving FOG has cited a figure of approximately an additional 50 cubic feet of methane gas per 1,400-gallon truckload of FOG. Unless a digester is well mixed and has a way of removing surface floating material, digesters have a tendency to form mats at the top from a combination of hair, rags and scum. Operations staff reported that there is not a noticeable problem with matting in the anaerobic digesters. This would imply that the existing digesters have adequate mixing or good scum removal or both and are suitable for treating FOG discharged at the treatment plant.
In-Plant FOG Impacts and Mitigation Measures
In-Plant FOG Impacts. Depending on how and where FOG enters the treatment system, there can be greater or lesser degrees of impacts on the plant process operation and maintenance. FOG that enters the treatment system at the head of the plant would have the greatest impact effecting each process it goes through. Because of its natural tendency to float, FOG would separate easily in aerated grit tanks and primary sedimentation tanks. Grease balls that form in these locations may need to be manually removed when surface skimming equipment isn’t provided such as aerated grit chambers. Primary scum troughs and scum pumping pits can also become clogged with grease as well.
Just as FOG can plate gravity sewer lines in the collection system, FOG can also coat and clog conveyance pumping systems and the plant piping. This can result in more frequent maintenance of sludge pumps and piping to remove FOG plated on equipment. Typically, lines that convey FOG are small in size (4 to 6 inches) and are routed behind larger piping. This arrangement makes these lines less accessible for cleaning and could result in less frequent maintenance. The number of joints, bends and elevation changes of lines conveying FOG can also have a negative effect on FOG accumulation. Joints and fittings are generally grooved and gasketed which provide an ideal for grease to get “caught on”. When the ultimate treatment process to handle FOG is anaerobic digestion, the distance between the point of application and the digesters is also a contributing factor to plating FOG on pipelines.
Odors can also be a major consideration, especially in Southern California where warmer temperature prevails. The greatest odor problems will occur during cleaning operations because these lines and equipment are generally inside buildings or pipe tunnels that need to be properly ventilated.
Implementation of a BMP program to reduce the amount of FOG entering the collection system may increase the quantity of FOG being collected and hauled to Plant No. 1. As mentioned earlier, this could result in over 100 trucks per day delivering FOG to the dumping station or other discharge point. Traffic both on and off site could be significantly impacted by the increased number of trucks.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 8
In-Plant FOG Impact Mitigation. There are several ways to mitigate the impacts described above. Selection of the discharge point for FOG is an important factor to consider when developing alternatives for treating FOG on-site. As noted above, FOG that is discharged at the head of the plant would have the greatest impacts on the treatment system. To avoid clogging primary scum collection and pumping systems, changes to increase the capacity of tipping troughs and surface sprays may be needed. Hot water sprays may also be advisable.
As with thickened sludge lines, glass-lined steel piping has proven to be the most resistant to accumulations. Making individual pieces of pipe as long as possible to reduce joints would lessen the sites that grease could be caught on. Providing dedicated steam lines for cleaning is advisable as well as placing cleanouts in places that are easily accessible would facilitate more efficient maintenance. Reducing the distance between the application point and the digesters will reduce the possibility of FOG plating.
To maintain the “food product” classification of FOG, it should be kept separate from other waste streams (septage, primary sedimentation and secondary clarifier scum lines, grit and screening wash water lines). The sole purpose of doing this would be to allow the plant the option of contracting with a rendering contractor to remove it and allow them to recycle or treat it. The cost of this “insurance” would be a “rock solid” way to ensure the plant’s ability to handle a wide array of possibilities. The surest way to reduce the amount of odors is to keep the FOG contained, have direct connection to odor collection equipment where FOG is discharged and arrange for portable odor control facilities during maintenance activities. Traffic impacts could be mitigated by having a separate entrance dedicated for FOG deliveries only. The entrance could also be equipped with a card reader to control access and document loads as they enter the plant site. Careful consideration of other traffic patterns on the plant site as well as truck staging will reduce the impact of increased truck traffic.
Future FOG Collection Practices
As noted earlier, the OCSD is in the process of developing a BMP program to reduce the amount of FOG being discharged into the sewer collection system in an effort to reduce sewer system overflows (SSO)s. This program may result in an increased amount of FOG diverted from the collection system and disposed of at the OCSD treatment facility.
DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
Processing and disposal alternatives for FOG received directly at the OCSD treatment plants are developed and discussed below. Impacts associated with their implementation are addressed in a subsequent section of this report. Each alternative assumes compliance with new FOG ordinances passed as a result of the BMP study. OCSD source control staff indicated that any alternative that brings FOG on site must include a card access system for plant entry control and load documentation. A separate gate for FOG haulers may also be considered. Alternatives that have been developed include:
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002
Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 10
1A. Base case – status quo (continue current practices of receiving FOG and disposal) 1B - D. On-site treatment using anaerobic digestion 2. Off-site recycling at a grease rendering facility 3. Off-site recycling as a bio-fuel 4. Off-site landfill disposal
Alternative 1A – Base Case (Status Quo)
This alternative would continue receiving FOG at the existing dumping station, removing FOG and scum at the primary sedimentation tanks, pump it to the digesters with the primary sludge and anaerobically digesting it. Divert other waste oils, such as waste olive oil or cooking oil, directly to a digester (partial implementation of Alternative 1D).
New glass lined piping is recommended to replace existing primary sludge piping. As noted in the mitigation measures discussed earlier upgrades to the scum collection system may be required to reduce expected increased maintenance. The plant would also continue their maintenance procedure of switching to a parallel primary sludge line while the other line is steamed cleaned. Increased maintenance of these sludge pipes is expected with the increased FOG quantities delivered to the site. Some change to traffic control or receiving schedules may be needed to accommodate increased truck traffic on City streets.
Alternative 1B-D – On-site Treatment Using Anaerobic Digestion
These alternatives would modify the current processing of FOG in the anaerobic digesters and assumes that the existing digesters are adequate to handle FOG without modifications. Possible variations of this alternative would include:
1B Modified FOG Receiving and Digestion (See Figure 3 for schematic) - Receive FOG at a new dumping station located closer to the digesters, pumping it to the digesters after the digester heat exchanger followed by anaerobic digestion. Injection at this point would liquefy the grease solids and reduce the possibility of fouling the heat exchangers. Locating a dedicated dumping station closer to the digesters would reduce the plating of FOG on the sludge feed lines.
1C Modified FOG Receiving, WAS thickening and Digestion (See Figure 4 for schematic) - Receive FOG at a new dumping station closer to the digesters, pumping it to the DAF thickener afterthickening followed by anaerobic digestion.
1D Dedicated Digestion (see Figure 5 for schematic) - Pumping FOG directly into a dedicated digester followed by anaerobic digestion.
A discussion of each variation is further described below.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 11
Alternate 1B – Modified FOG Receiving and Digestion. This alternative would involve the following new structures and equipment:
1. New receiving station with coarse solid/grit removal and FOG pumping located along the East Perimeter road north of Secondary Clarifier 2. Figure 3a shows a typical FOG pretreatment system.
Figure 3a. Packaged FOG Receiving System
Note: The FOG receiving system shown above may be equipped with an automated logging system to keep track of loads and haulers for billing purposes. Grit, rocks and other material would be scrolled up an inclined screening channel and dewatered prior to dumping in a roll off container. The new receiving station could be covered with foul air withdrawal and treatment to reduce odor control needs.
2. Glass lined ductile iron FOG distribution piping to existing digesters in existing pipe trenches.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002
Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 15
Alternate 1C – Modified FOG Receiving, Thickening and Digestion. This alternative would involve the following new structures and equipment:
1. New receiving station with coarse solid/grit removal, odor control and FOG pumping located along the East Perimeter road south of Secondary Clarifier 2 adjacent to the DAFs.
2. Heated sludge blending tank (heat to approximately 85 ° F) to receive raw Primary sludge, thickened WAS and FOG. Figure 6 shows a heated sludge blending schematic.
3. Glass lined ductile iron FOG piping to new heated blending tank, blended sludge pumps and piping to digesters.
Heated Blending tank Anaerobic Digester
Primary sludge, thickened WAS Blended solids and and FOG @ 76 deg F FOG @ 85 deg F
85 deg F 95 deg F
Heat Exchanger Heat Exchanger
Note: Temperatures shown to represent the concept of raw sludge preheating. Actual temperatures may vary.
Figure 6. Heated Sludge Blending Tank Schematic
The heated sludge blending structure will contain one shell and tube heat exchanger, centrifugal sludge pumps and sludge grinders (if chopper pumps are not used for raw solids circulation). This heated sludge blending tank would add a small amount to the heat load for mesophilic digestion due to some heat losses at the blending tank. The heat load at the digesters would be less because the incoming sludge would be preheated prior to digestion. If advanced digestion is implemented in the future, it could be used as a part of heat recovery following thermophilic digestion. Figure 7 shows a possible advanced digestion schematic.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 16
Heated Blending tank Thermophilic Mesophilic Anaerobic Digester Anaerobic Digester
Primary sludge, thickened WAS Blended solids and and FOG @ 76 deg F FOG @ 85 deg F
85 deg F 135 deg F
Sludge to Sludge Hot Water Heat Exchanger Heat Exchanger
135 deg F
95 deg F
Note: Temperatures shown to represent the concept of raw sludge preheating. Actual temperatures may vary.
Figure 7. Advanced Digestion Schematic
Alternate 1D – Dedicated Digestion. This alternative would involve using Digester 7 for dedicated anaerobic digestion. Digesters 5 and 6 are currently used for sludge holding prior to dewatering and Digester 8 currently doesn’t have adequate automation to make it suitable for this alternative. Operations staff indicated that a bench scale pilot test of this alternative was performed about 20 years ago, but no data was kept from that test. This pilot test was fed exclusively from scum box material. They stated that it took about 2 weeks for the process to be established, but solids destruction and gas production continued thereafter. Once the culture was established digestion became rapid. About 65% of volatile solids in raw sludge digestion is converted to gas. Because of the high level of volatile solids destroyed, very little sludge production is expected. However, there is no empirical data to support this assumption. Before this alternative would be implemented, it would be wise to conduct this pilot test again using samples taken from FOG haulers to determine process performance and other design considerations.
FOG could be pumped directly into the existing digester via a nozzle connection located on the removable access hatch located near ground level or injected downstream of the existing heat exchanger. Operations staff stated that waste olive oil had been received in this manner in the past. It would be preferable to inject the FOG downstream of the heat exchanger to ensure the FOG is in liquid form when it enters the digester. No modifications to the existing digester are anticipated, however some paving and drainage modifications may be necessary to facilitate increased traffic flow in the area and capture possible liquid spills. Injection downstream of the heat exchanger would require some piping modifications to the sludge recirculation piping.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 17
Alternative 2 – Off-site Treatment at a Grease Rendering Facility
FOG rendering is a process that converts animal processing wastes, including bone and fat, into usable products such as soap, cosmetics and animal feed. FOG collected from grease traps may also be recycled in this manner as a raw feed material. As noted earlier, Baker Commodities, one of the FOG haulers listed in Table 3, is one of the largest rendering facility operators in the Los Angeles area. Baker Commodities and Darling International indicated that there may not be sufficient capacity at their facility to handle all the FOG and that the tipping fee would be between 11 and 15 cents a gallon.
An article published by the Farm Bureau Federation dated December 20, 20001 described the crisis that faced the agriculture industry as a fallout of the national energy crisis. Rendering facilities use natural gas to heat slaughterhouse byproducts to separate the solids, liquids and fat. Skyrocketing gas and electricity prices could make the rendering business economically unfeasible or they will have to pass on these increased operating costs to their customers. One solution to this crisis could be using yellow grease, as a bio-fuel to run the boilers at the plant.
If OCSD chose this alternative, they may be forced to raise their dumping fee to offset the cost of disposal in this manner. Currently OCSD charges FOG haulers 3.5 cents a gallon to discharge at the treatment plant. Adding the cost of the rendering plant tipping fee of up to 15 cents per gallon would increase the cost of dumping at the treatment facility to 500% of the current cost. These costs may vary significantly due to changes in the market, making cost control for this alternative difficult to predict. This may have an adverse effect on the FOG haulers and may discourage collection of grease trap wastes.
Implementation of this alternative would involve constructing a storage tank at the plant to allow rendering companies to withdraw FOG waste for subsequent hauling to the rendering facility. If the rendering facility will not provide FOG waste pickup, OCSD would either have to contract this hauling operation to another FOG hauler or enter the hauling business at additional expense. Because there would be no reduction in liquid volume the amount of truck traffic to and from the site would double.
Alternative 3 – Off-site Recycling as a Bio-fuel
In response to the worldwide energy crisis, to reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign fuels, and to promote a cleaner environment, the US government has provided incentives for development of other clean renewable fuel sources. One product that has emerged in the last decade is clean-burning bio-fuel called bio-diesel, produced from recycled vegetable oils.
Bio-diesel has physical and chemical properties very similar to petroleum diesel. However, because it is non-toxic, biodegradable and essentially free of sulfur and carcinogenic benzene, it produces a significantly improved emissions profile. In addition, the additional oxygen in bio-diesel improves
1 Souza, Christine, “High energy prices send dairy industry into tailspin”, California Farm Bureau Federation Ag Alert, www.cfbf.com/agalert/1996-00/2000/aa-1220g.htm, December 20, 2000
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 18
combustion and makes for a significantly cleaner burn. Bio-diesel is a very effective fuel additive mixing readily with petroleum diesel. In a 20% blend with diesel, emissions are significantly reduced. Pacific Biodiesel located in Hawaii has reported using 100% biodiesel with no reduction in engine performance. No engine modifications are needed to burn bio-diesel. Bio-diesel also has improved lubricity reducing maintenance of injectors and injector pumps. When compared to diesel fuel, bio-diesel may produce the following results (results are based on side by side diesel locomotive engine test):
Reduce NOx by 5 to 14 percent,
Lower particulates up to 65 percent, virtually eliminating black smoke
Improve fuel efficiency by 5 to 13 percent.
The same additive in gasoline can improve fuel efficiency and reduce NOx by proportionate amounts while reducing CO & HC by 60 to 70 percent.
Two bio-diesel companies, American Bio-Fuels, LLC and Southern States Power Company, Inc., have expressed an initial interest in forming a partnership with OCSD to produce useful bio-diesel fuel that could be used in OCSD’s and other nearby cities’ fleet of diesel powered vehicles and stationary equipment. OCSD could reap the benefits of improved engine performance, reduced air emissions, reduced diesel consumption while doing its part in supporting this emerging technology.
Bio-diesel is produced predominantly from waste cooking oil. Since FOG collected from grease traps typically has a lower concentration of oil, this alternative would be most feasible if waste cooking oil could be collected separately. Currently Darling International has placed containers at a number of restaurants to collect waste cooking oil for their rendering process. The Biodiesel refiner could offer the same service to these businesses or form a partnership with the rendering company to obtain this oil. Such an arrangement would be of no economic benefit to the District. It would be more economical for the refiner to pick up waste oil at a central location such as one of the treatment plants, however this would involve another handling step for a liquid waste hauler. American Biodiesel is currently exploring opportunities in Mexico to operate a pilot facility to handle grease trap waste and would like to open discussions with the District to place a pilot facility at the plant site. Pilot testing of this process should confirm feasibility of producing yellow grease from grease trap waste within the next six months.
Other technologies are emerging to concentrate the yellow grease portion of FOG for use as a feed stock for the biodiesel refining process. A byproduct of this process is a dark glycerin that must still be landfilled. No commercial operations using this technology handling grease trap wastes are currently in business on the mainland.
Alternative 4 – Landfill Disposal
Landfill disposal could be done by combining solidified grease with grit and rags removed at the headworks at the County landfill disposal site. This alternative is less desirable than others because
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 19
it would be contrary to California’s regulations requiring diversion of recyclable wastes from landfills. Disposing of FOG at a landfill would require other recyclable solids to be diverted.
Implementation of this option would require the same structures and equipment as Alternative 2. This would require some form of FOG concentrator, such as a gravity settling tank or a DAF. Increased odor emissions would be expected as well as increased traffic.
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
In this section each of the alternatives listed above are further evaluated based on the following criteria established at the June 2002 kickoff meeting. A workshop was held in October 2002 with OCSD staff to rate the relative impacts listed below:
Operational impacts – Impact on treatment process unit operation and changes to Standard Operating Procedures
Maintenance task impacts – Impact on type and number of maintenance tasks in the treatment facility
Staffing impacts – Impact on staffing
Traffic impacts – Impact on facility vehicular traffic
Economic Impacts (treatment costs) – Impact on cost for treating FOG including revenue gained or lost by beneficial byproducts of FOG treatment (such as methane gas generation)
Environmental Impacts – Permitting and other impacts on the environment at the plant site and point of discharge in the form of increased odors, increased oils to the ocean, exhaust emissions from trucks, etc.
Alternative 1A – Base Case (Status Quo)
The impacts of continued operation of the facility as it currently exists is provided as a basis for comparison to the other alternatives. Impacts of maintaining the current mode of operation are well known. Weekly sludge line cleaning is done of the primary sludge lines and periodic manual removal of grease balls is done in the aerated grit chambers and bar screen influent channels. Increased FOG quantities will increase the frequency of maintenance already occurring and possibly require additional maintenance attention in the primary scum collection and pumping as well.
Alternative 1B-D – On-site Treatment Using Anaerobic Digestion
As described above, this alternative may be implemented in several different ways: each having its own impacts. Because the current practice of FOG treatment in the anaerobic digesters appears to
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 20
have no adverse process impact it’s assumed that any variation of this alternative would have no adverse digestion process impact either.
Alternative 2 – Off-site Recycling at a Grease Rendering Facility
This alternative would require additional equipment that would add complexity to the operation and maintenance of the plant. While removing FOG from the treatment system may have a beneficial impact on treatment process operation and maintenance, added tipping fees and costs due to loss of a valuable product, methane gas, may make this alternative less desirable. Traffic in the plant could be significantly increased. Because there would be no reduction in liquid volume, traffic to and from the site would double. Due to fluctuations in the market there could be significant economic risk associated with this alternative.
Alternative 3 – Off-site Recycling as a Bio-fuel
This alternative could require a process to separate useable yellow grease from the grease trap waste. One of the bio-diesel companies has expressed an interest in siting a pilot facility for removing yellow grease at one of the treatment plants. If the BMPs currently being developed encourage separation of waste cooking oil from the rest of the FOG this alternative would be more desirable. Implementation of a pilot study for yellow grease separation and market analysis would require approximately six months to complete.
Alternative 4 – Off-site Disposal of FOG at a Landfill
This alternative would require some additional facilities that would increase the complexity of the operation and maintenance of the treatment facility. Combining solidified or concentrated FOG with grit and screenings would add another handling step that would complicate the disposal process and increase the amount of residuals hauled off site. Meeting the “paint filter” test for landfill disposal may also be difficult to accomplish.
Table 4 provides a more detailed comparison of impacts of all four alternatives including the four variations of Alternative 1.
Comparison of Alternatives
Evaluation Criteria Weighting. To better define the relative importance of each criteria, a workshop was held on October 9, 2002 with operations, compliance and source control staff (See figure 8 for evaluation matrix). In order of perceived importance by OCSD staff the impact criteria rated as follows from least important to most important:
1. Economic Impact 2. Environmental Impact 3. Staffing Impact
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 21
4. Traffic Impact 5. Maintenance task Impact 6. Operations/process Impact
Equiv ABCDE F Score % 23332 A 11111 513.0% 2122 B 1 1 1 1 6 16.0% 132 C 2 1 1 9 24.0% 22 D 1 1 7 18.0% 2 E 1 11 29.0%
F 10 26.0%
In each box, provide a score for the pertinent criterion when compared directly to the TOTAL 38 100.0% corresponding criterion for that box. 0 = Insignificant; 1 = Equal Significance; 2 = Slightly More Important; 3 = Significantly More Important
Criteria Description A Operational/Process Impacts B Maintenance Task Impacts C Staffing Impacts D Traffic Impacts E Economic/Life cycle Impacts F Environmental Impacts
Figure 8. Evaluation Criteria Matrix
Non-Monetary Comparison. The alternatives developed for treatment and disposal of FOG were compared based on the impacts to the treatment facility as noted above. The impact criteria factors were rated on a scale of 5 to 1 for each alternative with 5 being the most desirable and 1 being the least desirable. The basis of the rating was degree to which the OCSDtreatment facility would be impacted. Table 3 shows a comparison of alternative factoring in the criteria weighting noted above.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 22
Table 3. Evaluation of Alternatives
Operational Maintenance Staffing Traffic Economic Environmental Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Total Ranking Criteria weighting 6 5 3 4 1 2 Alternative Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted 1A Base Case 2 12 2 10 3 9 3 12 4 4 3 6 53 5 (Status Quo) 1B On-site 4 24 4 20 4 12 2 8 4 4 5 10 78 2 digestion – Modified Liquid Receiving 1C On-site 3 18 3 15 3 9 2 8 3 3 4 8 61 4 digestion – Modified Liquid Receiving, Thickening 1D On-site 4 24 4 20 4 12 2 8 4 4 5 10 78 2 digestion – Dedicated digestion 2 Off-site 4 24 4 20 4 12 1 4 2 2 3 6 68 3 treatment – FOG rendering 3 Off-site 5 30 5 25 5 15 2 8 4 4 5 10 92 1 treatment – as Bio-fuel 4 Off-site 2 12 2 10 2 6 2 8 2 2 1 2 40 6 disposal - Landfill
Capital Cost Comparison. Estimated capital costs have been prepared for each alternative. Table 6 shows the estimated capital costs for implementing each alternative. Estimated construction cost are considered to be “Order of Magnitude” estimates. The American Association of Cost Engineers defines an Order of Magnitude cost estimate as having an accuracy of within +50% or –30%:
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 23
Table 4. Comparison of Alternate Impacts
Evaluation Criteria Alternative 1A Alternative 1B Alternative 1C Alternative 1D Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Status Quo – “Base Case” Modified FOG Receiving and Modified FOG Receiving, Dedicated Digestion Off-site Treatment at Rendering Off-site Recycling as Biodiesel Landfill Disposal Digestion Thickening and Digestion Facility Operations Impacts Operation of new odor control Operation of new screening, Operation of new screening, Operating dedicated digester Operation of new FOG storage No change to current operation. Change to current operation at receiving station degritting and pumping of FOG degritting and pumping of FOG could complicate process tank for pickup by rendering Operation of heated storage Operation of new odor control Change to digester operation operation. facility Pilot testing to confirm Operation of new odor control Change to digester feeding New blending process to Reduced digester capacity for Operation of new odor control separation of yellow grease Operation of grease operation operate future use facility from grease trap waste concentrator for solid option Reduced land for secondary Improved heat distribution and Increased risk from reduced Reduced land for secondary Additional handling to blend treatment solids feed to digesters redundancy. treat with grit and screenings Possible improved DAF More operator attention Reduced land for secondary performance from FOG New chemical addition to treat addition to solids feed digester for odor control Reduced land for secondary treat Maintenance Impacts Continued sludge line cleaning Reduced sludge line cleaning Reduced sludge line cleaning Reduced sludge line cleaning Reduced sludge line cleaning Reduced sludge line cleaning Reduced sludge line cleaning No change in primary scum Reduced primary scum Reduced primary scum Reduced primary scum Reduced primary scum Reduced primary scum Reduced primary scum Increased mechanical cleaning pumping pumping pumping pumping pumping pumping Maintenance of odor control Reduced mechanical cleaning Reduced mechanical cleaning Reduced mechanical cleaning Reduced mechanical cleaning Reduced mechanical cleaning Reduced mechanical cleaning New equipment to maintain New equipment to maintain for Additional digester to maintain New storage tank to maintain. Maintenance of new heated Additional screening and grit FOG receiving and blending storage removal tank Maintenance of grease concentrator for solid option Staffing Impacts Some staffing change to handle Possible increased security staff Possible increased security staff Possible increased security staff Some staffing change Some staffing change Some staffing change increased O&M for mechanical to monitor traffic through the to monitor traffic through the to monitor traffic through the anticipated anticipated anticipated for O&M of new cleaning and odor control plant plant plant Possible increased monitoring heated storage, odor control and Increase in O&M staffing to Increased O&M staff to operate Increased O&M staff to operate grease concentrator operate and maintain new and maintain new process and maintain digester currently equipment equipment out of service Traffic Impacts Increased on-site traffic Increased plant process traffic Increased plant process traffic Increased plant process traffic Increase to plant process traffic Possible increase to plant Increase to plant process traffic to new FOG dumping facility to new FOG dumping facility to new FOG dumping facility at due to pickup from rendering process traffic if transfer to a digester. facility. mobile storage is on site. Possible conflict with sludge hauling traffic Economic Impacts Slight reduced natural gas Reduced natural gas purchase Reduced natural gas purchase Reduced natural gas purchase Increased natural gas usage due Increased natural gas usage due Increased natural gas usage due purchase due to increased due to increased methane due to increased methane due to increased methane to loss of methane production to loss of methane production to loss of methane production methane production production production production Additional tipping fee Possible increase collection cost Additional tipping fee Moderate capital cost for Increased operating cost for Increased operating cost for Increased operating cost for Capital cost for new facilities for FOG haulers Increased energy for heated addition of odor control new FOG dumping equipment new FOG dumping and additional digester Cost controlled by market Reduced diesel purchase storage Capital cost for new facilities blending tank equipment Additional future digester Increased energy cost for heated replaced by biodiesel Capital cost for new facilities Capital cost for new facilities needed storage. Cost controlled by market Additional chemicals used for Improved fuel efficiency odor control in digester Reduced vehicle maintenance Environmental Impacts Increased sampling Increased sampling Increased sampling Increased truck emissions Increased truck emissions from Reduced particulate, NOx, CO Reduced beneficial use Increased truck emissions Increased truck emissions Increased truck emissions Better oil capture double trucking emissions diesel fleet vehicle Reduced landfill capacity Possible increased oil to ocean Better oil capture Better oil capture emissions for vehicles operating with biodiesel Green energy production
Final Ranking 6 3 5 2 4 1 7
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 24
Actual project costs from similar wastewater projects, budget prices obtained from vendors, and cost curve data have been used to complete this analysis. A list of general economic and process assumptions for the treatment and disposal options is provided below. These assumptions, which are consistent with the recent advanced digestion study, include:
Electrical and control costs are equal to 12 percent and 20 percent of mechanical and structural modifications respectively.
Capital Cost mark ups:
o Modification and coordination with existing facilities 10 percent o Contractor overhead and profit 15 percent o Permits, bonds, and insurance 2.5 percent o Estimator’s contingency 40 percent o Sales tax 7.75 percent o Engineering and administrative Costs 30 percent o Markup for piping materials and installation in 15 percent the existing tunnel systems at Plants 1 due to congestion.
Table 5. Alternative Capital Costs. (Millions)
Alternative Capital Cost Alternative 1A – Base Case (Status Quo) $ 5.7 Alternative 1B – Modified FOG receiving Option 1 – tie in FOG line at digesters $ 1.1 Option 2 – tie in FOG line at DAF feed $ 0.9 Alternative 1C – Modified FOG receiving, thickened sludge blending $ 4.6 Alternative 1D – Dedicated digestion (Includes future digester cost) $ 4.8 (Without future digester cost) $ .4 Alternative 2 – Off-site treatment at grease rendering facility $ 1.1 Alternative 3 – Off-site recycling as bio-fuel $ 0 Alternative 4 – Off-site disposal at landfill (solid disposal) $ 3.1
Detailed capital cost estimates for each alternative are included in Appendix A.
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 25
RECOMMENDATIONS
The seven alternatives developed for treating or disposing of FOG in the OCSD are:
Alternative 1 – Onsite Digestion
o Alternative 1A – Base Case (Status Quo) o Alternative 1B – Modified Liquid Receiving o Alternative 1C – Modified Liquid Receiving and Thickening o Alternative 1D – Dedicated Digestion Alternative 2 – Off-site treatment at a FOG rendering facility
Alternative 3 – Off-site recycling as bio-fuel
Alternative 4 – Off-site disposal at a landfill
The alternatives were ranked based on various impacts to the OCSD treatment facility. The ranking results indicate that Alternative 3 ranked the best, followed by Alternatives 1D and B. Although Alternative 3 ranked the highest, the risk associated with Alternative 3 depends heavily on a third party that currently is in the development stages.
Brown and Caldwell recommends that Alternate D be implemented until pilot testing and market analysis of Alternative 3 is completed. To verify performance and process design requirements for dedicated digestion, a pilot test using grease trap waste should be performed. To inject FOG downstream of the digester heat exchanger some minor piping changes would be necessary. Until this work can be completed, the OCSD can continue its current practice of receiving FOG, Alternative 1A.
REFERENCES
Ahring, Birgittek, Environmental Biotechnology Lecture Notes, Lecture 10, University of California, Los Angeles, Spring 1998
Brown and Caldwell, FOG BMP Manual for Oregon 2000, Association of Clean Water Agencies, www.orcawa.org
Brown and Caldwell, Grease Disposal Study for Wastewater Division, Department of Public Works, County of Hawaii, October 1998
Brown and Caldwell, City of Kissimmee – Expansion of South Bermuda WRF 2000 – Grease/Pumpout Receiving Station, May 2001
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002 Orange County Sanitation District In-Plant FOG Impact Study 26
Chapelle, F, Groundwater Microbiology and Geochemistry, 1993
Joyce, Charles, P.E., Brown and Caldwell, Grease Impact Assessment Rehabilitation Pilot Project County Sanitation District, Sacramento County, California, June 2000
Mehan, B, University Chemistry, 3rd Ed, Chapter 18, 1975
Metcalf & Eddy, Wastewater Engineering Treatment/Disposal/Reuse, 3rd Edition, 1991
OCSD, TPOD Annual report database, July 2000 to June 2001
Souza, Christine, “High energy prices send dairy industry into tailspin”, California Farm Bureau Federation Ag Alert, www.cfbf.com/agalert/1996-00/2000/aa-1220g.htm, December 20, 2000
Streitwieser, Introduction to Organic Chemistry, Chapters 19, 20, 28, and 29, 2nd edition, 1981
Van Opstal, B., M.E., P.E., Organic Resource Technologies Inc., et al, “Use of Fat, Oil and Grease Waste as an Agricultural Soil Conditioner”, WEF 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings, July 1998
p:\fonda\ocsd fog\ocsd in-plant fog impact study -final report (r1).doc November 2002
APPENDIX A
Alternative Capital Cost Estimates
OCSD Grease impact study Alternative capital cost estimates
Work Required quantity cost total Alternative 1 - On-site digestion Alternative 1A - Base Case (Status Quo) 0 $5,700,000 Glass lined DIP primary sludge piping - 6" (including demo) 10000 200 $2,000,000 Modify existing primary scum collection (allowance) $500,000 Subtotal $2,500,000 Modifiy and coordinate with existing $250,000 Controls $0 Electrical $0 Misc Contractor indirects $175,000 Subtotal $425,000 Contractor overhead $438,750 Permits, bonds and insurance $73,125 Estimator's contingency $1,170,000 Sales tax $226,688 Engineering and Administration $877,500 total $5,711,063 Rounded Estimate $5,700,000 Alternative 1B Modified Receiving Option 1A & B - tie in grease line at digesters $1,100,000 Grease receiving station - packaged system 2 $100,000 $200,000 Grease pumping - 300 gpm 2 $15,000 $30,000 Grease piping to digesters - 8" Glass lined 1000 $120 $120,000 Subtotal $350,000 Modifiy and coordinate with existing $35,000 Controls $35,000 Electrical $105,000 Misc Contractor indirects $24,500 Subtotal $199,500 Contractor overhead $82,425 Permits, bonds and insurance $13,738 Estimator's contingency $219,800 Sales tax $42,586 Engineering and Administration $164,850 total $1,072,899 Rounded Estimate $1,100,000 Option 2 - tie in grease line at DAF feed $900,000 Grease receiving station - packaged system 2 $100,000 $200,000 Grease pumping - 300 gpm 2 $15,000 $30,000 Grease piping to DAFs - 8" Glass lined 600 $120 $72,000 Subtotal $302,000 Modifiy and coordinate with existing $30,200 Controls $30,200 Electrical $90,600 Misc Contractor indirects $21,140 Subtotal $172,140 Contractor overhead $71,121 Permits, bonds and insurance $11,854 Estimator's contingency $189,656 Sales tax $36,746 Engineering and Administration $142,242 Total $925,758 Rounded Estimate $900,000 Alternative 1C Modified Receiving & Blending $4,600,000 Grease receiving station - packaged system 2 $100,000 $200,000 Grease pumping - 300 gpm 2 $15,000 $30,000 Heated blendign tank 1 $650,000 $650,000 Blended sludge heating and pumping equipment 1 $320,000 $320,000 Blended sludge & grease piping 1500 $200 $300,000 Subtotal $1,500,000 Modifiy and coordinate with existing $150,000 Controls $150,000 Electrical $450,000 Misc Contractor indirects $105,000 Subtotal $855,000 Contractor overhead $353,250 Permits, bonds and insurance $58,875 Estimator's contingency $942,000 Sales tax $182,513 Engineering and Administration $706,500 total $4,598,138 Rounded Estimate $4,600,000 Alternative 1D Dedicated Digestion W/replacement digester $400,000 w/o replacement digester $4,800,000 Modify existing recirculation piping 1 2000 $2,000 Asphalt paving - sq yds 2200 $50 $110,000 6 inch drain 200 $50 $10,000 6 inch concrete curb 140 $15 $2,100 Digester - 90 ft diameter* 1 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Subtotal $1,622,100 Modifiy and coordinate with existing $162,210 Controls $162,210 Electrical $486,630 Misc Contractor indirects $113,547 Subtotal $924,597 Contractor overhead $382,005 Permits, bonds and insurance $63,667 Estimator's contingency $1,018,679 Sales tax $197,369 Engineering and Administration $764,009 total $4,972,426 Rounded Estimate $4,800,000 * Digester included for capacity lost from dedicated digestion for grease Alternative 2 Off-site treatment at grease rendering $1,100,000 80,000 gal storage tank w/mixing pumps 1 $500,000 $500,000 Modifiy and coordinate with existing $50,000 Controls $0 Electrical $0 Misc Contractor indirects $35,000 Sutotal $85,000 Contractor overhead $87,750 Permits, bonds and insurance $14,625 Estimator's contingency $234,000 Sales tax $45,338 Engineering and Administration $175,500 Total $1,142,213 Rounded Estimate $1,100,000 Alternative 3 Off-site recycling as biofuel (waste oil only) $0 Alternative 4 Off-site disposal at Landfill Solid disposal $3,100,000 80,000 gal storage tank w/mixing pumps, FOG concentrator 1 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Modifiy and coordinate with existing $100,000 Controls $100,000 Electrical $300,000 Misc Contractor indirects $70,000 Sutotal $570,000 Contractor overhead $235,500 Permits, bonds and insurance $39,250 Estimator's contingency $628,000 Sales tax $121,675 Engineering and Administration $471,000 Total $3,065,425 Rounded Estimate $3,100,000 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. OMTS COMMITTEE 3/5/03 3/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT OMTS03-12 12(e) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Patrick Miles, Director of Information Technology Originator: Robert Thiede, Principal Analyst – Information Technology
SUBJECT: Agreement Providing Financial Information System (FIS) Technical Support - Specification Number S-2002-110BD
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Recommend to the Board of Directors to authorize the General Manager to finalize negotiations and subsequently award a consulting services contract with Partners Consulting Services, Inc. for Financial Information System Technical Support, Specification No. S-2002-110BD, in an amount not to exceed $180,000, for the period April 1, 2003 through March 31, 2004 with the option of four additional one year renewals.
SUMMARY
• The District’s FIS provides an integrated system for the input, processing and tracking of financial data. The system is used District-wide to provide processes such as; Financial Reporting, Employee Payroll, Requisitioning, Purchasing, Human Resources and Budgeting.
• Following the initial implementation of our FIS system in 1999 a need for outside advanced technical and functional support was identified and budgeted.
• The Board approved a one year sole source contract for these services in June 2000 and again in June 2001.
• In June 2002 a decision was made to bid out these services. To meet existing support needs, an interim agreement was issued to Partners Consulting for these services.
• A Request for Proposal to provide advanced technical help desk support was issued in October 2002.
• The Request for Proposal adhered to established formal bidding requirements with five respondents submitting proposals for this service.
• In January 2003, a five-member panel representing the Information Technology and Finance departments reviewed all proposals submitted and conducted interviews with the two most responsive respondents (Partners Consulting Services, Inc. and Systime). Partners Consulting Services, Inc. was selected as the best overall respondent.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
The service contract will not exceed $180,000 for the period April 1, 2003 through March 31, 2004. The total approved line item budget for this service for Fiscal Year 2002/2003 is $225,000 of which approximately $100,000 remains. A request for approval for $225,000 for these continued services will appear in the Fiscal Year 2003/20004 budget.
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line Item Expense Section 5 – Page 10 Professional Services – FIS Support) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
As previously mentioned, the need for advanced support was recognized from the time of the initial implementation. Initially, functional support (applications, approvals, reporting and output support) services were required on a five days per week basis.
The District also recognized the need to become more self reliant on supporting the FIS system. The trend toward self-supporting can be seen in the amount of outside services necessary. From the initial five days per week needed the agency was able to move to a four days per week schedule in calendar year 2000. In 2001 the number was reduced to three days per week. In 2002 while the number of days remained at three days per week, the scope of services provided grew to include on-site technical (hardware and configuration issues) support capabilities.
The current level of support will remain necessary for the next year. This is primarily due to the number of District resources required to complete the current migration to the enhanced JD Edwards OneWorld Xe (OWXe) product. The migration began in July 2002 and has a scheduled completion date in February 2004.
The amount requested for this agreement reflects meeting the estimated need of on-site support three days per week plus 2 additional days per month as needed.
At the completion of the migration project, support levels will be re-evaluated and identified to meet the ongoing needs of the agency.
The Bidding Process
The services specified on the RFP were to provide on site advanced JD Edwards World and OneWorld support as directed by the OCSD Project Manager. The services outlined included additional tasks and responsibilities related to the efforts to migrate the current FIS system to the OWXe version.
The request for proposal resulted in five viable responses. • The respondents’ proposals were then judged by a panel comprised of senior Information Technology and Finance staff and management. • The proposals were rated qualifications, staffing, project organization, completeness and feasibility of approach. Pricing was deliberately omitted during this process. • Once ranked, the panel met to discuss findings and reveal pricing. • Pricing was requested on a flat hourly rate. Responses ranged from $111.00 per hour to $168.00 per hour. The selected vendor’s (Partners Consulting) rate is $120.00 per hour • The panel interviewed the two companies rated the highest based on ranking and price. • After completing the interviews, the panel concluded that the proposal from Partners Consulting best met the needs of the District.
ALTERNATIVES
• Contract on a per incident arrangement. This would be more time consuming and costly. • Hire additional staff. At our current status, definitive long term needs cannot be assessed accurately.
CEQA FINDINGS
Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. OMTS COMMITTEE 03/05/03 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT OMTS03-13 12(f) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Robert J. Ooten, Director of Operations and Maintenance Originator: Michelle Hetherington, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2 NORTH AND SOUTH SCRUBBER COMPLEX CAUSTIC TANK REPLACEMENT(S)
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
1. Establish a budget of $230,000 for Treatment Plant No. 2 North and South Scrubber Complex Caustic Tank Replacement providing for the purchase of tanks, associated materials and necessary equipment for the emergency installation of chemical storage tanks; and,
2. Ratify use of General Manager’s emergency purchasing authority, Resolution No. OCSD 99-23, for Purchase Order No. 37161 issued to Xerxes Corporation for Fiberglass Reinforced Caustic Storage Tanks, Specification No. E-2003-130, for an amount not to exceed $67,000; and,
3. Ratify use of General Manager’s emergency purchasing authority, Resolution No. OCSD 99-23, for Purchase Order No. 37246 issued to Jamison Engineering for North and South Scrubber Complex Caustic Tank and Piping Replacement, Specification No. S-2003-131, for an amount not to exceed $89,689.
SUMMARY
• At the beginning of February 2003, staff discovered a leak in a chemical caustic soda storage tank at an odor scrubber complex at Treatment Plant No. 2. Staff carefully inspected the other caustic soda chemical storage tanks and found another tank with a similar leak. Staff contacted a fiberglass repair company that determined the tanks were not repairable because of their age and special construction (double wall and heating coils).
• Staff issued an emergency purchase order for the two chemical storage tanks due to the six to eight week lead time for tank delivery and urgent need to replace them to effectively add chemical to the system.
• It is requested that the General Manager be granted the authority to award a contract to expedite the chemical tank construction to get the chemical system operable as soon as possible.
• District staff has written a project scope, prepared sketches, and a specification to receive competitive quotes from three contractors for Spec. No. S-2003-131, the North and South Scrubber Complex Caustic Tank and Piping Replacement.
• To expedite the completion of the tank installation, District staff utilized the emergency bidding process and received competitive bids from three contractors:
¾ S. & S. Mechanical $136,883 ¾ Filanc $103,367 ¾ Jamison Engineering $ 89,689
• It is requested that the General Manager be granted the authority to award a contract to expedite the construction of the chemical tanks and the implementation of the system as soon as possible. District staff wrote a project scope, prepared sketches, and a specification to receive informal competitive quotes from three contractors for Spec. No. S-2003-131, the North and South Scrubber Complex Caustic Tank and Piping Replacement.
• It is estimated that the facilities will be back online by end of May 2003.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
The capital budget being requested is $230,000. This budget amount includes two tanks, installation, staff resources and a contingency for unknowns. The cost of the tanks is $67,000, installation of the tanks and piping is approximately $90,000, staffing is estimated at $33,000, and a contingency of $40,000 for an estimated total of $230,000.
The cost of this replacement was not budgeted in the current fiscal year. However, the current outlay of funds will not exceed the capital budget. Therefore, there is adequate funding to cover this expenditure.
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted Not applicable (information item)
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 12(f).Caustic Tanks .doc Revised: 8/20/01 Page 2 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
None
ALTERNATIVES
Rent Temporary Tanks
Rental tanks are available but are not recommended because the cost is prohibitive and will exceed the cost of a new tank in 2 years, 4 months. In addition, caustic tanks require heat tracing to keep the chemical from crystallizing during the colder months. Heat tracing is unavailable with rental tanks and the rental tanks are not of equal quality to the new fiberglass tanks. Therefore, staff does not recommend this alternative.
Purchase chemical in tote bins
The cost of purchasing chemical in tote bins is 211 percent more than buying bulk chemical. In addition, tote bins are labor intensive to handle due to the need to change tanks throughout the day. This option also increases the risk of staff exposure to corrosive chemicals.
CEQA FINDINGS
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
None
MAE/MRH:ct/pjm
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 12(f).Caustic Tanks .doc Revised: 8/20/01 Page 3 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. PDC COMMITTEE 3/6/03 3/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT PDC03-10 13(c) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Umesh Murthy, Engineer
SUBJECT: FIBER OPTICS EXTENSION AT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. SP2000-61
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
(1) Ratify Change Order No. 1 to Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61, with Manuel Brothers, Inc., authorizing an addition of $57,085, increasing the total contract amount to $300,585; and (2) Accept Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61, as complete, authorizing execution of the Notice of Completion and approving the Final Closeout Agreement.
SUMMARY
• This project is an extension of the backbone fiber optic network cabling at Plant No. 2
• Tran Consulting Engineers prepared the plans and specifications and the contract was awarded to Manuel Brothers, Inc. on May 22, 2002.
• Item 1 of this Change Order includes costs to modify the duct bank depth to bypass undisclosed utilities and changed conditions.
Contract Schedule
Contract Start Date August 19, 2002 Original Contract Completion Date November 26, 2002 Total Number of Change Orders to Date 1 Current Contract Completion Date November 26, 2002 Actual Completion Date November 26, 2002 Days Subject to Liquidated Damages 0
Change Order No. 1 Content
Item Description Amount Days Type No. 1 Modify Duct Bank Cross Section $43,985 0 Changed Condition and Alignment 2 Provide Power to Remote I/O $13,100 0 Design Change Panels, Add Concrete Pedestals, and Upgrade Fittings Total Change Order No. 1 $57,085 0
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1
Job Completion
The project is now complete.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
Original Contract Price $243,500.00 Previously Authorized Changes $ 0.00 This Change (Add) (Deduct) $ 57,085.00 Change Orders to Date $ 57,085.00 Percentage Increase to Date 23.44% Amended Contract Price $300,585.00
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Section 8 - Page 139) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
Funds in the amount of $5,000 are reallocated from Design Staff to Construction Inspection for staff labor to complete the project. There is no change in the total project budget. Please refer to the Budget Information Table.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
None
ALTERNATIVES
None
CEQA FINDINGS
This project was not included in a previously approved Master Plan/EIR. This project is exempt per CEQA Guideline Section 15302 for Facilities Engineering Projects at Plant No. 2. A Notice of Exemption was filed on November 22, 2000.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Budget Information Table 2. Change Order Status Report 3. Change Order 4. Photo Description of Change Order No. 1, Item No. 1
UM:dm G:\ntglobal\Agenda Draft Reports\PDC\SP2000-61 AR CO#1 and COA 032603.doc
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE FIBER OPTICS EXTENSION AT PLANT NO. 2 JOB NO. SP2000-61
PROPOSED ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED BUDGET PROJECT/TASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT REVISED AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED INCREASE/ BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%) DECREASE
Project Development
Studies/Permitting
Consultant PSA $ 25,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 11,291 56%
Design Staff $ 5,000 $ 50,000 $ (5,000) $ 45,000 $ 50,000 $ (5,000) $ 45,000 $ 44,745 99%
Construction Contract $ 100,000 $ 325,000 $ 325,000 $ 243,500 $ 57,085 $ 300,585 $ 243,500 81% Construction Administration $ 5,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 7,000 88% Construction Inspection $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ - $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 4,000 80%
Contingency 0%
PROJECT TOTAL $ 135,000 $ 403,000 $ - $ 403,000 $ 321,500 $ 57,085 $ 378,585 $ 310,536 82%
Reimbursable Costs $ - $ - $ - $ - 0%
PROJECT NET $ 135,000 $ 403,000 $ - $ 403,000 $ 321,500 $ 57,085 $ 378,585 $ 310,536 82%
CHANGE ORDER STATUS REPORT
FIBER OPTICS EXTENSION AT PLANT NO. 2
JOB NO. SP2000-61
PERCENTAGE AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZED TIME APPROVAL CONTRACT CONTRACT COST ITEM INCREASE TIME TO DATE DATE COST TO DATE (CUMULATIVE) (DAYS) (DAYS)
CONTRACT 5/22/2002$ 243,500 $ 243,500 0.00% 100 100 CO NO. 1 Pending$ 57,085 $ 300,585 23.44% 0 100
Page 1 of 4
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127
CHANGE ORDER
Contractor: Manuel Brothers Inc. C.O. No.: One (1) Date: March 26, 2003 Job: Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61 Consultant: Tran Consulting Engineers
Amount of this Change Order (Add) (Deduct) $57,085.00
In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved.
ITEM 1 – MODIFY DUCT BANK CROSS SECTION AND ALIGNMENT
This item is for labor, material, and equipment to modify the duct bank cross section and associated work to bypass undisclosed utilities between the Secondary Clarifiers and Surge Towers 1 and 2. Work included the following:
A. The depth of the duct bank from station 00+00 to 02+30 was reduced from 21 inches (2x2 conduit layout) to 12 inches (4x1 conduit layout) to bypass existing piping. The duct bank reinforcement was modified to suit the new cross section. Additional potholing was required to locate utilities that were not shown on the contract drawings. Sprinkler piping along the modified duct bank alignment was also relocated. Cost of this Change is $28,185.00. B. Additional asphalt paving and base (approx. 700 sq. feet) was removed and replaced due to the increase in trench width. Cost of this change is $9,400.00. C. A pull box was added to accommodate for proper installation of fiber optics. Cost of this change is $6,400.00.
This work was not included the contract documents and was accomplished by the Contractor’s force account pursuant to Division 1, Section 48.B.2 of the General Requirements. Reference District’s Field Change Order No. 1 and Manuel Brothers Inc.’s Letter Dated January 6, 2003.
ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $43,985.00
TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days
Page 2 of 4
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127
CHANGE ORDER
Contractor: Manuel Brothers Inc. C.O. No.: One (1) Date: March 26, 2003 Job: Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61 Consultant: Tran Consulting Engineers
ITEM 2 – PROVIDE POWER TO REMOTE I/O PANELS, ADD CONCRETE PEDESTALS, AND UPGRADE FITTINGS
This item is for labor, material, and equipment for the following work:
A. Provide power to remote I/O panels - Power was provided to the remote I/O panels at Surge Towers 1 and 2 from the Sampler Building. Work included adding a 2-inch conduit and required wiring to the I/O panels from the breaker inside the Sampler Building. Cost of this Change is $5,200.00. B. Add concrete pedestals to remote I/O panels - Two concrete pedestals were added to the TDU units and remote I/O panels at Surge Towers 1 and 2. The pedestals were added to provide access to the units during inclement weather. Cost of this change is $4,500.00. C. PVC coated fittings – The fittings to conduit runs were upgraded from rigid galvanized to PVC coated rigid galvanized to meet District standards. Cost of this Change is $3,400.00.
This work was not included the contract documents and was accomplished by the Contractor’s force account pursuant to Division 1, Section 48.B.2 of the General Requirements. Reference District’s Field Change Order No. 1 and Manuel Brothers Inc.’s Letter Dated January 6, 2003.
ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $13,100.00
TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days
TOTAL ADDED COSTS THIS CHANGE ORDER: $57,085.00
TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER: 0 Calendar Days Page 3 of 4
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127
CHANGE ORDER
Contractor: Manuel Brothers Inc. C.O. No.: One (1) Date: March 26, 2003 Job: Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61 Consultant: Tran Consulting Engineers
The additional work contained within this Change Order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original Contract and any extensions to the Contract time made by this and all previously issued Change Orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that no extension of time is required for this Change Order, and no direct or indirect, incidental or consequential costs, expenses, losses or damages have been or will be incurred by Contractor, except as expressly granted and approved by this Change Order.
SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME
Original Contract Date: August 19, 2002 Original Contract Time: 100 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: November 26, 2002 Time Extension this C.O.: 0 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 0 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: N/A Revised Final Completion Due Date: N/A Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: 0 Calendar Days Actual Final Completion Date: November 26, 2002
Original Contract Price $ 243,500.00
Prev. Authorized Changes $ 0.00 This Change (Add) (Deduct) $ 57,085.00
Amended Contract Price $ 300,585.00
Page 4 of 4
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127
CHANGE ORDER
Contractor: Manuel Brothers Inc. C.O. No.: One (1) Date: March 26, 2003 Job: Fiber Optics Extension at Plant No. 2, Job No. SP2000-61 Consultant: Tran Consulting Engineers
Board Authorization Date: March 26, 2003
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Recommended by:
John Linder, P.E. Engineering and Construction Manager Date
Approved by:
David Ludwin P.E. Director of Engineering Date
Accepted by:
Manuel Brothers, Inc.
______Contractor Date
EDMS 003744417 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. PDC COMMITTEE 03/06/03 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT PDC03-11 13(d) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Larry Rein, Contract Project Manager
SUBJECT: ABANDONMENT OF AIRBASE TRUNK SEWERS, AND CONSTRUCTION OF WATSON AVENUE SEWER AND CALIFORNIA STREET SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 6-13
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Approve Addendum No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation for the Abandonment of Airbase Trunk Sewers, and Construction of Watson Avenue Sewer and California Street Sewer, Contract No. 6-13, for additional design engineering services, for an additional amount of $10,890, increasing the total amount not to exceed $142,677.
SUMMARY
• This project will abandon two of the oldest Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) sewers in Costa Mesa. The sewers were constructed in the 1940s and are deteriorated to a condition where they can not be maintained. • The Airbase Trunk Sewers are no longer needed as trunk sewers since the construction of the Fairview Trunk Sewer and the Gisler-Baker Trunk Sewer. • For purposes of coordinating this project with City of Costa Mesa Capital Improvements, the construction phase has been split into three sub-projects. One of these sub-projects is completed, 6-13-2, one will be completed this fall, 6-13-1, and the last one will be completed next spring, 6-13-3. • Separate CIP budgets were established for each sub-project to fund construction costs. The CIP Budget for this project was retained to fund engineering design and professional construction support costs only. • The sub-projects are within the City of Costa Mesa and the City requirements have changed. The City of Costa Mesa has requested modification be made to the contract document requirements for pavement replacement. • Additional engineering services are necessary to modify the contract documents to meet City of Costa Mesa requirements and to incorporate new OCSD requirements for storm water runoff control. • Additional engineering services are also necessary for construction support for the remaining two sub-projects.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
Authorization of $10,890 is being requested to fund Addendum No. 3. No increase in total project funds is required. See attached Budget Information Table.
Page 1
BUDGET IMPACT
This agreement has no impact on the Budget.
This item has been budgeted. (Line item FY 2002-03, Section 8, Page 32: Capital Improvement Program, Collections Facilities, Abandonment of AB Trunk, Watson and Cal. Sewers, Contract No. 06-13) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The construction of the Baker-Gisler Interceptor and the Fairview Trunk Sewer, in the 1990s, made it feasible to abandon the Airbase Trunk Sewers. The Airbase Trunk Sewers constructed circa 1940s, can no longer be maintained due to structural deterioration. Lack of maintenance is causing odor problems.
The design work began in 1994, but the work has been delayed due to various problems including the inability to coordinate the project with local street work. These problems have been resolved by time and by subdividing the work.
There are three separate segments of the Airbase Trunk Sewers that are being abandoned along with three separate means of constructing replacement sewers to provide local service once the sewers are abandoned. Since each of these segments has separate timing considerations, the project was divided into three capital budgets (Contract Nos. 6-13-1, 6-13-2, & 6-13-3) for construction purposes only. The design work and engineering support is under Contract No. 6-13.
One segment of the abandonment work has been completed, another segment will be completed this fall, and the final segment will be completed next spring. This addendum will enable us to provide the engineering support needed to stay on schedule.
ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives were considered. If the Airbase Trunk Sewers are not abandoned, they will require major rehabilitation work and will continue to require period maintenance. The sewers are not needed for Orange County Sanitation District purposes.
CEQA FINDINGS
The project is covered in the previously approved 1989 Master Plan/EIR. The final EIR was approved July 19, 1989 and the Notice of Determination was filed July 20, 1989.
ATTACHMENTS
Page 2 1. Budget Information Table 2. Professional Services Agreement Status Report 3. Proposal Letter and Fee
DAL:LR:jo G:\ntglobal\Agenda Draft Reports\PDC\6-13 AR 030603.doc
Page 3 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Abandonment of Airbase Trunk, Watson and California Sewers CONTRACT NO. 6-13
ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECT/TASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%)
Project Development $ 2,000 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ -
Studies/Permitting $ 7,000 $ - $ - $ - $ -
Consultant PSA $ 94,000 $ 163,000 $ 163,000 $ 131,787 $ 10,890 $ 142,677 $ 90,000 63%
Design Staff $ 84,000 $ 138,000 $ 138,000 $ 138,000 $ 138,000 $ 123,000 89%
Construction Contract $ 1,260,000 $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ - Construction Administration $ 185,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ - Construction Inspection $ 159,000 $ 11,000 $ 11,000 $ -
Contingency $ 385,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ -
PROJECT TOTAL $ 2,176,000 $ 384,000 $ - $ 384,000 $ 270,787 $ 10,890 $ 281,677 $ 213,000 76%
Reimbursable Costs
PROJECT NET $ 2,176,000 $ 384,000 $ - $ 384,000 $ 270,787 $ 10,890 $ 281,677 $ 213,000 76%
Professional Services Agreement Status Report
Abandonment of Airbase Trunk Sewer Watson and California Sewers
Contract No 6-13
Total Project Budget: $384,000 Consultant: Boyle Engineering Corporation Start Date of Project: May 1, 1994
Accumulated Date Addendum Description Cost Costs Design of new collector sewers in Watson Ave. & $57,585 Original 3/9/1994 California St. so sections of the Airbase Trunk PSA Sewer can be abandoned. $57,585 Revising and updating previously prepared $112,237 2/28/2001 1 contract documents to meet local agency standards and adding work on Arlington Drive $54,652 Modify and updating of specifications to current $131,787 12/04/2001 2 standards $19,550 Additional engineering services for contract $142,677 Pending 3 document modifications and construction support. $10,890
EDMS ID No 003745261 03/20/03 Revised 05/14/98 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. PDC COMMITTEE 3/6/03 3/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT PDC03-14 13(e) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Julian F. Sabri, Project Management Office
SUBJECT: Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement for Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Approve Addendum No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Malcolm Pirnie for Central Generation Automation, Job No. J-79, providing for additional engineering services for an amount of $192,829, increasing the total amount not to exceed $446,064.
SUMMARY
• Emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) from District’s Central Generation System (CGS) engines do not meet future South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) standards. • Malcolm Pirnie’s current scope of work includes performing all investigations, evaluations, and analyses required to make a recommendation for emission control on the Central Generation System engines. This work excludes any field testing. A report will be prepared documenting all the work performed and the basis for recommendations. For each facility option identified, the Consultant will evaluate the following: 1. Regulatory Requirements and Compliance 2. SCAQMD permit requirements and costs 3. Operations and maintenance impacts 4. Economic Evaluation 5. Location of new emission control 6. Tie-ins to electric, gas, water, and other utilities 7. Staffing levels 8. Automation levels and requirements 9. Continuous Emissions Monitoring • The Consultant will recommend the two most promising alternatives, and based on that recommendation will create a master plan for the implementation of the emission control system.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 13(e).Malcolm Pirnie.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1 • The SCAQMD compliance date to meet reduced NOx emissions is December 2004. The compliance date for reduced HAPS emissions has not been set, but will likely be sometime in 2006. • The original intent of the current PSA with Malcolm Pirnie was to complete the aforementioned master plan by June 2003, with any additional tasks to follow under a separate PSA. However, due to the SCAQMD compliance deadline of December 2004, Staff recommends proceeding immediately with NOx pilot testing as part of this PSA with the following justifications: o This pilot testing will be needed in order to provide the acceptable solution for the Central Generation System, and to comply with SCAQMD requirements. o The NOx testing will determine the cost, scope, and timing of implementing the proper solution. o This NOx pilot testing is a natural progression of the work that Malcolm Pirnie is performing as part of their original study tasks. The cost of the pilot testing could not have been determined until the subject matter experts began their investigation. • The requested increase reflects costs for NOx pilot testing only, as described under “Additional Information”. Pilot testing of one or more technologies to control HAPS will also be required in order to confirm their effectiveness in reducing emissions in this application. Staff will return to the Board for approval once these candidate HAPS technologies and costs have been defined. • Present construction cost is $1,500,000. This cost may have to be revised depending on this project’s findings. It is too early to determine the likelihood of a cost increase/decrease or the potential magnitude.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
The authorization is within the project’s budget for 2002/03. The total budget of $2,964,000 will not change. The requested action will increase the Consultant PSA authorization from $253,235 to $446,064 as shown in the attached Budget Information Table. The $192,829 increase to the Consultant PSA will come from project Contingency funds.
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Section 8, Page 97) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
No change to the project budget is requested. Please refer to the attached Budget Information Table.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 13(e).Malcolm Pirnie.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The proposed Addendum No. 1 includes the following tasks for a pilot test of NOx reduction technologies: 1. The Consultant will develop a test protocol and then design and provide test hardware for confirming the performance of the proposed emission reduction technology on a Plant No. 1 or Plant No. 2 engine.
2. The Consultant will oversee installation of the candidate technology on an engine at each facility. Installation of the technology will be completed by a separate contractor or District forces. The Consultant will then manage testing of the engine over the range of operation to confirm the effectiveness of the technology. The Consultant will modify the technology as required to meet the test objectives. A source testing firm will be retained to conduct emissions testing to verify that the new NOx emission standards can be met under the full range of engine operating conditions, and is included in Addendum No. 1.
3. The Consultant will reduce and evaluate the data. If the results are positive, the Consultant will refine the technology and recommend a final design approach for production hardware to be permanently installed on all engines.
ALTERNATIVES
Not proceeding with the field test. Without pilot testing it is not possible to verify effectiveness and cost of the candidate emissions reduction technology. If final hardware is installed and it does not result in the expected reductions, modification of the hardware will incur substantial costs, potentially delaying compliance with SCAQMD requirements by up to a year.
CEQA FINDINGS
The project prepares paper and electronic data and is categorically exempt from CEQA.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Budget Information Table 2. Professional Services Agreement Status Report 3. Malcolm Pirnie Letter Dated February 19, 2003
JB:jo G:\ntglobal\Agenda Draft Reports\PDC\J-79 Add-1 AR 020603.doc
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 13(e).Malcolm Pirnie.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 3 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE Central Generation Automation JOB NO. J-79 179235
ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECT/TASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%)
Project Development $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 17,000 21%
Studies/Permitting $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ 16,000 31%
Consultant PSA $ 253,235 $ 253,235 $ 192,829 $ 446,064 $ 253,235 $ 192,829 $ 446,064 $ -
Design Staff $ 83,000 $ 83,000 $ 83,000 $ 83,000 $ 83,000 $ -
Construction Contract $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 122,260 $ 122,260 $ 122,260 100% (*) Construction Administration $ 153,000 $ 153,000 $ 153,000 $ - $ - Construction Inspection $ 160,000 $ 160,000 $ 160,000 $ - $ -
Contingency $ 684,000 $ 684,000 $ (192,829) $ 491,171
PROJECT TOTAL $ 2,964,235 $ 2,964,235 $ - $ 2,964,235 $ 589,495 $ 192,829 $ 782,324 $ 155,260 20%
Reimbursable Costs $ - $ -
PROJECT NET $ 2,964,235 $ 2,964,235 $ - $ 2,964,235 $ 589,495 $ 192,829 $ 782,324 $ 155,260 20%
NOTES: (*) Replaced governors for Central Generation Engines (completed under a separate contract)
Professional Services Agreement Status Report
Central Generation Automation Job No. J-79
Total Project Budget: $ 2,964,000 Consultant: Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. Start Date of Project: 1/7/2003
Accumulated Date Addendum Description Cost Costs Original 11/7/2002 Emission Reduction Study $ 253,235 $ 253,235 PSA Addendum Pending Provide NOx Pilot Testing $ 192,829 $ 446,064 No. 1
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 13(e).2.doc 03/20/03 Revised 05/14/98 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. FAHR COMMITTEE 03/12/03 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT FAHR03-11 14(c) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Gary Streed, Director of Finance Originator: Michael White, Controller
SUBJECT: TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2003
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file Treasurer’s Report for the month of February 2003.
SUMMARY Pacific Investment Management Co. (PIMCO), serves as the District’s professional external money manager, and Mellon Trust serves as the District’s third-party custodian bank for the investment program. Some funds are also deposited in the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund for liquidity.
The District’s Investment Policy, adopted by the Board, includes reporting requirements as listed down the left most column of the attached PIMCO Monthly Report for the “Liquid Operating Monies” and for the “Long-Term Operating Monies” portfolios. The District’s external money manager is operating in compliance with the requirements of the District’s Investment Policy. The District’s portfolio contains no reverse repurchase agreements.
As shown on page 2 of the attached PIMCO’s Performance Monitoring and Reporting Report for of the Long-Term Operating Monies, there is an investment policy compliance issue pertaining to the holding of a security that had an acceptable rating at the time of purchase but have since fallen below the minimum rating allowed by the investment policy. The District’s investment policy requires a minimum rating of A3 by Moody’s or A- by S&P, with at least a BBB rating in the event of a split rating, at the time of purchase. The compliance issue pertains to the holding of a United Airlines (UAL) Asset Backed Security with a par value of $1.6 million, representing 0.5 percent of the portfolio holdings, whose rating from Moody’s has fallen several times, from A3 to BA1, then to BA3, and finally to B3. Likewise, the rating from Standard & Poor’s has also fallen several times, first from A- to BBB, then to BB, then to B+, and finally to B-. Although these ratings are less than what is required at the time of purchase, PIMCO believes, based on the financial strength of UAL and the underlying collateral of the security, that the District would suffer an unwarranted loss if this security was sold. The District’s investment policy does not require any action because of "credit watch" notices or the decline in credit standing. PIMCO will continue to monitor the credit very closely.
Historical cost and current market values are shown as estimated by both PIMCO and Mellon Trust. The District’s portfolios are priced to market (“mark-to-market”) as of the last day of each reporting period. The slight differences in value are related to minor variations in pricing assumptions by the valuation sources at the estimate date.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 14(c).Treasurer Rpt.doc Page 1
BUDGET IMPACT This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Schedules are attached summarizing the detail for both the short-term and long-term investment portfolios for the reporting period. In addition, a consolidated report of posted investment portfolio transactions for the month is attached. The attached yield analysis report is presented as a monitoring and reporting enhancement. In this report, yield calculations based on book values and market values are shown for individual holdings, as well as for each portfolio. Mellon Trust, the District’s custodian bank, is the source for these reports. Transactions that were pending settlement at month end may not be reflected. Also provided is a summary of monthly investment balances and transactions within the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF).
These reports accurately reflect all District investments and are in compliance with California Government Code Section 53646 and the District’s Investment Policy. Sufficient liquidity and anticipated revenues are available to meet budgeted expenditures for the next six months.
The following table details the book balances of the District’s investment accounts at month-end. A graphical representation of month-end balances is shown on the attached bar chart.
Book Balances Estimated Investment Accounts February 28, 2002 Yield (%)
State of Calif. LAIF $ 8,984,844 1.95 Union Bank Checking Account 1,482,212 1.19 PIMCO – Short-term Portfolio 64,024,663 1.61 PIMCO - Long-term Portfolio 321,784,096 2.43 Petty Cash 5,000 N/A
TOTAL $396,280,815 2.27
$34,705,244 4.34 Debt Service Reserves w/Trustees
ATTACHMENTS 1. Graph of Monthly Investment Balances by Type – Last Six Months 2. Investment Transactions and Balances in the State Local Agency Investment Fund 3. PIMCO Monthly Investment Recap & Yield Analysis Report 4. PIMCO Performance Monitoring Report – Liquid Operating Monies 5. PIMCO Performance Monitoring Report – Long-Term Operating Monies 6. Mellon Trust Net Asset Sector Summary – Liquid Operating Monies 7. Mellon Trust Net Asset Sector Summary – Long-Term Operating Monies 8. Mellon Trust Yield Analysis Report 9. Mellon Trust Portfolio Detail - Consolidated
MW
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 14(c).Treasurer Rpt.doc Page 2 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. FAHR COMMITTEE 03/12/03 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT FAHR03-16 14(d) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Juanita Skillman, CRM Records Manager
SUBJECT: UPDATE OF THE DISTRICT RECORDS MANAGEMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURES
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 03-06, Adopting Policies and Procedures for the District’s Records Management Program, Records Retention, and Destruction of Obsolete Records, and Repealing Resolution No. OCSD 02-02.
SUMMARY
The District’s Records Management Program, has been updated to better serve the operational needs of the District. This update will incorporate the Policy on Release and Reproduction of District Records into the Records Management Procedure Manual. It also adds two record series to the retention schedule: Series 245 – Public Comment Files, and Series 246 – IT Backup Tapes.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
N/A
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The District’s Records Management Program is a dynamic document and the attachment reflects proposed additions and/or changes in BOLD/ITALICS. These changes have been worked out and reviewed with and approved by General Counsel’s office.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 14(d).Records Management.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1
ALTERNATIVES
N/A
CEQA FINDINGS
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
Proposed Resolution
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 14(d).Records Management.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. OCSD 03-06
ADOPTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR DISTRICT’S RECORDS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, RECORDS RETENTION, AND DESTRUCTION OF OBSOLETE RECORDS
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT ADOPTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR DISTRICT’S RECORDS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, RECORDS RETENTION, AND DESTRUCTION OF OBSOLETE RECORDS, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. OCSD 02-02
WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish a policy to maintain a Records Management Program (“Program”) that provides for the identification, access, and protection of all records generated or received by the District; and
WHEREAS, said Program ensures that all District records are created, received, maintained, and destroyed in a cost-effective manner, in accordance with operating requirements for District business and applicable statutes and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of District is authorized, by the provisions of California Government Code Sections 60200 through 60204, inclusive to destroy records under certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable and appropriate to authorize the destruction of records on a routine basis that have been retained for a certain period of time, that are copies of originals on file with the District, or that have been preserved in conformance with all applicable statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of Orange County Sanitation District,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER:
Section 1: Adoption of Policy and Establishment of Program. The Board of Directors of District hereby adopts an addition to Section 300 of the Records Management Procedure Manual, set forth on Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2: Adoption of Records Retention Schedule. The Board of Directors of District hereby adopts changes to the Records Retention Schedule, set forth on Exhibit “B”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 3: Authorization for Destruction of Records. The destruction of certain records, papers, and documents is hereby authorized, pursuant to California Government Code Sections 60200 et seq., after such records have been retained for the minimum time set forth on the Records Retention Schedule.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 14(d).Records Management.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 3 Section 4: Destruction of Records After Preservation. Any record not expressly required by law to be filed and preserved, may be destroyed at any time after it is preserved in conformance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 60203.
Section 5: Destruction of Duplicates. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 60200, any duplicate record, paper, or document, the original or a permanent photographic copy of which is in the files of any office or Department of the District, may be destroyed after confirmation with the Records Manager that such original or permanent photographic copy remains on file in the District.
Section 6: Retention of Records Not Mentioned. All records, papers, and documents not mentioned in this Resolution shall be retained indefinitely.
Section 7: Resolution No. OCSD 02-02 is hereby repealed.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 26, 2003
______Chair
ATTEST:
______Board Secretary
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 14(d).Records Management.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 4 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. FAHR COMMITTEE 03/12/03 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT FAHR03-18 14(e) Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Lisa Tomko, Director of Human Resources Originator: Jeff Reed, Human Resources Manager
SUBJECT: TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve an increase to the Temporary Employment Services contract for an additional $500,000, increasing the total authorized amount from $1,000,000 to an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 for the remainder of FY02/03; and,
2. Approve an increase to the Temporary Employment Services contract from $1,000,000 to an amount not to exceed $1,750,000 for FY 03/04.
SUMMARY
The District contracts for temporary services to support both capital and non-capital projects. Temporary staffing has been utilized beyond projected levels for FY 02-03 as a result of an increase in capital improvement projects within the Information Technology (IT) Department. Temporary services charges associated with IT contract Programmers currently working on capital projects for the Technical Services and Engineering Departments through December 31, 2002 were $297,507. This amount equals 30% of FY 02-03 total temporary services charges of $978,415. This charge will create a budget shortfall to the authorized $1,000,000 Temporary Services purchase order (PO).
Additionally, temporary staffing funds were reduced during the first half of FY 02/03 by $225,000 due to the District’s commitment to the Disinfection Project. As of December 31, 2002, the temporary services allocated to the Disinfection Project reduced the total temporary services budget by 25%. District staff has determined the temporary services support for the Disinfection Project will be ongoing for approximately the next six (6) to nine (9) months. It is anticipated that the total cost to support the Disinfection Project with temporary services for this year will be approximately $450,000, or 50% of the total temporary services blanket PO. The unforeseen expense associated with the Disinfection Project impacted the amount originally budgeted for administrative temporary staffing and will contribute to the premature depletion of the original $1,000,000 authorized by the blanket PO.
Based on the IT Department’s temporary services contract worker usage in FY 01-02 and the reduction in the Engineering Department’s contract labor paid through the Temporary Services PO in FY 02-03, the $1,000,000 blanket PO was anticipated to be adequate to cover the non-capital temporary labor costs, which would remain relatively constant. However, as the IT department increased the number of projects and the Technical Services Department implemented the chlorine residual testing and
Page 1 monitoring for the Disinfection Project, it became apparent that the temporary services costs would exceed the forecasted and approved blanket PO amount. As of December 31, 2002, $732,000 had been spent for temporary labor. IT related capital projects and the Disinfection Project accounted for 52% of this expenditure. Therefore, a deficiency of $500,000 is anticipated based on the additional temporary services costs absorbed by the existing temporary services blanket PO. Aside from the capital projects and Disinfection Project, temporary resources will continue to be required to support Customer and Network Support, Process Control Integration, and administrative services.
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Board approved Temporary Employment Services Agenda Report (AR) dated June 26, 1999 estimated a maximum of $1,000,000 per year of expenditures for total temporary employment services for the District, which included capital as well as non- capital related temporary services. Projected costs for FY 02-03, which were provided as information only in the Board approved Temporary Employment Services AR dated May 24, 2002 were $3,870,000. Based on current projections, the District will need an additional $500,000 in temporary employment services for FY 02-03. This projection assumes the continued use of temporary staffing for the IT capital projects. The total amount for FY 02-03 of $1,500,000, or 39% of the projected $3,870,000, will provide for non-capital as well as IT capital related temporary services workers to be utilized during the remainder of FY 02-03.
On June 26, 1999, the Board approved a request for $1,000,000 in funding for temporary employment services, which included the IT capital improvement contract staff. Due to the fact that the staff recommendation did not forecast the use of the temporary services blanket PO for capital-related programs, the $1,000,000 did not accurately reflect the needs of the District. Therefore, a request for additional funding was presented to the Board on May 24, 2000 to cover the FY 00-01 deficiency for temporary services supporting the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). It was also intended to provide a forecast for additional funds for the following three years; however, the forecasted funds are subject to approval by the board when the budget for each of those three years is adopted each June.
The $297,507 cost of the IT supported capital-related temporary services is paid by the capital project budget. These costs do not impact the cost per million gallons of wastewater treated; however, these costs are booked against the $1,000,000 temporary services budget as a method of ensuring the appropriate use of temporary staffing.
Page 2 ALTERNATIVES
1) Do not authorize the increase and suspend the use of temporary services.
2) Hire full time regular employees on Limited Term Contracts to support a Division through a peak period. Limited term employees are regular full time employees placed on contracts with a specific end date. These employees, during the duration of their contracts, would be entitled to all benefits and provisions of regular full time employees.
CEQA FINDINGS
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
Temporary Service Totals FY02/03 (Total temporary services expenditures by agency against the PO through February 2003)
Page 3 Summary of Temporary Costs February
Totals by Department (Budget) Div. FY 01-02*** Jul-02 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Thru 6/30 YTD 120 $339.19 $3,078.00 $810.00 $2,440.13 $810.00 $653.07 $1,053.00 $567.00 $916.00 $10,666.39 230 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $396.00 $0.00 $0.00 $85.02 $0.00 $481.02 510 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $315.00 $2,249.44 $1,380.47 $3,944.91 530 $1,586.88 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,586.88 620 $2,030.00 $2,401.20 $1,856.00 $5,289.60 $2,784.00 $3,712.00 $4,268.80 $4,116.64 $1,385.28 $27,843.52 630 $5,306.46 $4,079.50 $3,272.75 $4,982.75 $3,358.25 $3,562.50 $5,756.00 $1,452.50 $3,963.25 $35,733.96 630D $0.00 $0.00 $23,594.80 $23,980.41 $35,915.13 $68,662.61 $47,118.05 $41,256.54 $35,596.92 $276,124.46 640 $4,831.74 $3,300.56 $1,772.63 $4,214.09 $1,853.11 $3,796.11 $5,786.59 $1,774.80 $2,760.80 $30,090.43 740 $1,763.16 $899.71 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,662.87 760 $13,148.54 $5,792.96 $0.00 $9,043.32 $8,505.92 $4,587.82 $4,490.77 $19,890.84 $0.00 $65,460.17 850 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,508.00 $1,451.45 $2,959.45 860 $593.78 $2,111.20 $1,008.48 $2,931.18 $1,922.70 $2,968.88 $4,995.25 $0.00 $0.00 $16,531.47 930 $1,693.00 $4,642.00 $13,718.00 $18,600.00 $10,381.00 $10,289.00 $28,031.84 $5,871.00 $27,639.00 $120,864.84 940 $0.00 $31,194.00 $43,600.00 $63,640.00 $17,940.00 $68,544.00 $72,589.00 $27,748.00 $58,210.00 $383,465.00 Totals $31,292.75 $57,499.13 $89,632.66 $135,121.48 $83,866.11 $166,775.99 $174,404.30 $106,519.78 $133,303.17 Total: $978,415.37
630D = Disinfection Staff Only ***FY 2001-02 services not timely invoiced and thus applied to the 2002-03 divisional budgets and CIP's, but not applied against 2002-03 Temporary Services P.O.
Totals by Agency (P.O.) Agency Jul-02 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Thru 6/30 YTD AppleOne $11,790.67 $5,447.11 $14,875.00 $7,369.81 $11,130.06 $16,103.64 $3,849.80 $5,128.25 $75,694.34 Ballantyne $13,746.00 $13,920.00 $17,748.00 $10,788.00 $11,136.00 $25,317.00 $3,480.00 $20,358.00 $116,493.00 Irvine Technology $0.00 $0.00 $25,040.00 $2,800.00 $16,000.00 $12,000.00 $13,360.00 $14,280.00 $83,480.00 Kforce $0.00 $23,594.80 $23,980.41 $35,915.13 $68,662.61 $47,118.05 $41,256.54 $35,596.92 $276,124.46 Lab Support $4,079.50 $3,272.75 $4,982.75 $3,358.25 $3,562.50 $5,756.00 $1,452.50 $3,963.25 $30,427.50 Project Partners $5,792.96 $0.00 $9,043.32 $8,505.92 $4,587.82 $4,490.77 $19,890.84 $0.00 $52,311.63 Remedy $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $396.00 $0.00 $315.00 $6,451.10 $2,765.75 $9,927.85 TekSystems $4,642.00 $13,718.00 $18,600.00 $10,381.00 $10,289.00 $28,031.84 $5,871.00 $27,639.00 $119,171.84 Vantage Group $17,448.00 $29,680.00 $20,852.00 $4,352.00 $41,408.00 $35,272.00 $10,908.00 $23,572.00 $183,492.00 Totals $57,499.13 $89,632.66 $135,121.48 $83,866.11 $166,775.99 $174,404.30 $106,519.78 $133,303.17 ** FY 02-03 P.O. Total: $947,122.62 FY 01-02 Carry Over: $31,292.75 Total Temp Expenses: $978,415.37
***This amount applied to the FY 02-03 $1,000,000 Temporary Services PO.
3/20/2003 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. BOARD OF DIRECTORS 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT 16 Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Brian Bingman, Project Manager
SUBJECT: TRICKLING FILTER REHABILITATION AND NEW CLARIFIERS, JOB NO. P1-76
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
(1) Approve Addenda Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 to the plans and specifications for Trickling Filter Rehabilitation and New Clarifiers, Job No. P1-76; (2) Receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation; and (3) Award a construction contract to J. R. Filanc Construction Company, Inc. for Trickling Filter Rehabilitation and New Clarifiers, Job No. P1-76, for an amount not to exceed $33,037,000.
SUMMARY
• Eight bids were received and ranged from $33,037,000 to $42,775,000.
• The Engineer’s Estimate is $39,145,000.
• Staff recommends the Trickling Filter Rehabilitation and New Clarifiers, Job No. P1-76, be awarded to the lowest responsive bidder, J.R. Filanc Construction Company, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $33,037,000.
• In November 2002, the PDC reviewed the project and the Board of Directors approved the Plans and Specifications and an increase to the construction contract budget to match the Engineer’s Estimate of $39,145,00.
• The construction contract will begin with the Notice to Proceed sometime in late May or early June 2002, and last for 1000 calendar days.
• The project is required to supply secondary effluent to GWR System, therefore it will need to be completed prior to the start up of GWR System in 2007.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
The total budget estimate for the Rehabilitation of Trickling Filters and New Clarifiers, Job No. P1-76, is $50,000,000. Authorization of $33,037,000 for the construction contract, $1,753,000 for construction administration, and $1,764,521 for construction inspection is being requested. An amount of $6,108,000 will be moved from the construction contract budget and into contingency to reflect the difference between the apparent low bid and the previously budgeted amount for construction contract. See attached Budget Information Table for more information. An Addendum to the PSA with Black & Veatch (the designer) to provide construction support services will be brought to the PDC and Board of Directors for approval in May, 2003.
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Section 8, Page 70) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The existing trickling filters and clarifiers at Plant No. 1 have reached the end of their useful lives. Three of the trickling filters and the remaining clarifier were constructed in 1964. The fourth trickling filter was constructed in 1974.
Black & Veatch Corporation (B&V) evaluated whether a complete rehabilitation of the existing facility or a new facility was more beneficial to the Orange County Sanitation District. A new facility was recommended at the conclusion of the evaluation and agreed upon by the Board of Directors on December 19, 2001. An addendum was added to B&V’s Professional Services Agreement for the design of a new trickling filter facility. The new facility includes the following items:
• Two new trickling filters which are 166 feet in diameter and will hold twenty feet of plastic filter media • Two new 175 foot diameter clarifiers • A new Power Building 8 • Two effluent lines, one to the Groundwater Replenishment System and one to the interplant line • Primary effluent design capacity of 30 million gallons per day • Design effluent quality of at least 20 mg/l for both Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Total Suspended Solids
ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives are proposed.
CEQA FINDINGS
This project is included in the previously approved 1999 Strategic Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The 1999 Strategic Plan EIR was certified on October 27, 1999, and the Notice of Determination was filed on October 29, 1999.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Budget Information Table 2. Bid Tabulation 3. Bid Summary
BEB:sa G:\ntglobal\Agenda Draft Reports\Joint Boards\P1-76 Trickling Filter Rehab 032603.doc
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. BOARD OF DIRECTORS 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT 17 Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Tod Haynes, Engineering Supervisor
SUBJECT: Drain System for North Pacific Coast Highway Force Main, Contract No. 5-56
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
(1) Approve plans and specifications for Drain System for North Pacific Coast Highway Force Main, Contract No. 5-56, on file at the office of the Board Secretary; (2) Approve Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications; (3) Receive and file bid tabulation and recommendation; and (4) Award a construction contract to Ken Thompson, Inc., for Drain System for North Pacific Coast Highway Force Main, Contract No. 5-56, for an amount not to exceed $133,050.
SUMMARY
• This project, located in the City of Newport Beach, will provide a drain to the North Pacific Coast Highway Force Main, Contract No. 5-56, replace two 36” valves in the force main, and replace an existing manual bleed valve with an automatic air release valve.
• Sealed bids were received on February 25, 2003. Summary information on the 5-56 budget and bids are as follows:
Project Budget: $159,091.00 Construction Budget: $ 140,000.00 Engineer’s Estimate: $155,000.00 Low Responsive Bid: $133,050.00 High Bid: $239,870.00 Number of Bids: 5
• The Director of Engineering recommends award of the construction contract to Ken Thompson, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $133,050.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
Authorization of $133,050 for the construction contract is being requested. This authorization is within the Facilities Engineering Projects - Collections budget. Please refer to the attached Budget Information Table for more information.
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 17.Contract 5-56.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1 BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. ( FY 2002/03: Section 8, Page 55 ) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
This contract will enable the Orange County Sanitation Districts to isolate portions of the North Pacific Coast Highway Force Main, Contract No. 5-56, to allow access for corrosion inspections and future maintenance in those sections of the force main.
ALTERNATIVES
None
CEQA FINDINGS
This project is not included in a previously approved Master Plan/EIR. The project is part of the Collections Facilities Engineering Projects and is categorically exempt per CEQA Guideline Sections 15301(b) Class 1 and 15302(c) Class 2. The Notice of Exemption was filed on March 10, 2003 with the County of Orange.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Budget Information Table 2. Bid Tabulation 3. Bid Summary
TH:lc:sa G:\ntglobal\Agenda Draft Reports\Joint Boards\5-56AR032603-Directly to Board.doc
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 17.Contract 5-56.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. BOARD OF DIRECTORS 3/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT 18 Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Larry Rein, Contract Project Manager
SUBJECT: Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer & Pump Station Abandonment, Contract No. 2-24-1
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Approve a license agreement with SWEPI LP to authorize entrance on SWEPI LP’s property for design and environmental study purposes related to Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer & Pump Station Abandonment, Contract No. 2-24-1, at not cost to the District, in a form approved by General Counsel.
SUMMARY
• Carbon Canyon Dam Sewer & Pump Station Abandonment, Contract No. 2-24-1, will replace a wastewater pump station with a gravity sewer. The existing wastewater pump station needs rehabilitation and is inadequate to handle future flows due to pending land development. Replacing the pump station with a sewer rather than improving it, will save capital costs and operation and maintenance costs. • The gravity sewer is proposed to be constructed in property that SWEPI LP owns and operates through its operating agent, Aera Energy LLC. • The Orange County Sanitation District’s (District) consultant, RBF Consulting, will need to enter SWEPI LP property for design purposes. Geotechnical boring will be done as well as environmental and land surveys. • SWEPI LP is willing to allow RBF Consulting to enter property provided District enters into an access agreement with SWEPI LP. The access agreement will require RBF Consulting to furnish proof of insurance to SWEPI LP, indemnify SWEPI LP for District and consultant actions, and allow SWEPI LP to participate in the preparation of and obtain copies of all reports generated by the surveys. • District staff and legal counsel are working with SWEPI LP to achieve an acceptable access license.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
The agreement will not have any effect on the project cost. SWEPI LP is proposing a no cost license. See attached budget information table.
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: FY 2002-03, Section 8, Page 13: Capital Improvement Program, Collections Facilities, Carbon Canyon Sewer and Pump Station Abandonment, Contract No. 2-24-1) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
RBF Consulting is proposing focused biological surveys that include surveying the SWEPI LP property. These biological surveys are dependent upon bird nesting seasons. The surveys need to begin this spring and extend through this summer. If the access license agreement is delayed, the project could be delayed by one year due to the delay in the focused biological surveys. Therefore, this agreement is being presented directly to the Board of Directors now.
ALTERNATIVES
N/A
CEQA FINDINGS
This project was included in the 1999 Strategic Plan Program EIR certified on October 27, 1999. A Notice of Determination was filed on October 29, 1999. The Design Consultant is providing additional CEQA analysis and a Supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration will be prepared as needed.
ATTACHMENTS
Budget Information Table
LR:sa:jo:sa G:\ntglobal\Agenda Draft Reports\Joint Boards\AR 2-24-1Aera Access Agreement.doc
Revised: 8/20/01 Page 2 BUDGET INFORMATION TABLE CARBON CANYON DAM SEWER AND PUMP STATION ABANDONMENT CONTRACT NO. 2-24-1
ORIGINAL CURRENT PROPOSED PROPOSED FUNDS THIS PROPOSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PROJECT/TASK AUTHORIZED PROJECT BUDGET REVISED AUTHORIZED AUTHORIZATION TOTAL EXPENDITURE EXPENDED BUDGET BUDGET INCREASE BUDGET TO DATE REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO DATE TO DATE(%)
Project Development $ 3,400 $ 12,000 $ - $ 12,000 $ 11,035 $ 11,035 $ 11,035 100%
Studies/Permitting $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 2,615 52%
Consultant PSA $ 50,000 $ 286,000 $ 286,000 $ 285,656 $ 285,656 $ 110,000 39%
Design Staff $ 280,300 $ 335,000 $ 335,000 $ 335,000 $ 335,000 $ 117,000 35%
Construction Contract $ 1,505,100 $ 2,200,000 $ 2,200,000 $ - Construction Administration $ 110,000 $ 171,000 $ 171,000 $ - Construction Inspection $ 234,400 $ 211,000 $ 211,000 $ -
Contingency $ 436,600 $ 364,000 $ 364,000 $ -
PROJECT TOTAL $ 2,619,800 $ 3,584,000 $ - $ 3,584,000 $ 636,691 $ - $ 636,691 $ 240,650 38%
Reimbursable Costs
PROJECT NET $ 2,619,800 $ 3,584,000 $ - $ 3,584,000 $ 636,691 $ - $ 636,691 $ 240,650 38%
EDMS ID 003746538 File Folder 2003-03
Form Revised Oct. 4, 2000 Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. BOARD OF DIRECTORS 3/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT 19 Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Originator: Angie Anderson, Senior Engineering Associate
SUBJECT: FINAL INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR CONTRACT NOS. 11-28, 5-52; AND 5-49
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Actions regarding approval of the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for Rehabilitation of Edinger Pump Station, Contract No. 11-28; Rehabilitation of A Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-52; and Replacement of Bitter Point Pump Station, Contract No. 5-49:
1) Verbal report by Staff;
2) Receive and file Final IS/MND, prepared by Environmental Science Associates dated January 23, 2003;
3) Adopt Resolution No. OCSD 03-07, Making Certain Findings Relating to Less Than Significant Environmental Effects Identified in the IS/MND for the Rehabilitation of Edinger Pump Station, Contract No. 11-28; Rehabilitation of A Street Pump Station, Contract No. 5-52; and Replacement of Bitter Point Pump Station; Contract No. 5- 49; Approving Mitigation Measures and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; Adopting the Final IS/MND; and Authorizing the Filing of a Notice of Determination re said project.
SUMMARY
• The Edinger and Bitter Point Pump Stations were identified in the Orange County Sanitation District's (District) 1999 Strategic Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) for capacity improvements. However, subsequent engineering assessment found that Edinger and Bitter Point Pump stations would require more extensive rehabilitation and/or replacement than previously identified. Moreover, the rehabilitation/replacement of A Street Pump Station was not identified by the PEIR.
• The Edinger Pump Station will require a below-grade structure to house new electrical and control equipment. The Bitter Point Pump Station will be replaced with a newly constructed above-grade pump station of increased capacity and installation of an onsite chemical dosing facility. The A Street Pump Station will require construction of a new station on an adjacent vacant lot, owned by the District. An IS/MND has been prepared to provide environmental review of the pump station
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1 projects as currently proposed in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act.
• To address the environmental impacts and mitigation measures for the Rehabilitation of Edinger and A Street Pump Stations, and Replacement of Bitter Point Pump Station, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), Orange County Sanitation District's (District) environmental consultant, has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND).
• The IS/MND was mailed to public agencies and other entities or individuals known to have an interest in the project. The IS/MND was circulated for a 30-day public review period, January 24, 2003 through February 24, 2003; the comment period closed February 24, 2003.
• An information item on the IS/MND for these projects (Figures 1-12) were presented at the March 6, 2003 Planning, Design and Construction Committee meeting.
• As of this writing, District staff has received eleven comment letters on the IS/MND. Copies of the comment letters are included in the attachments to this Agenda Report. The Sierra Club and Newport Shores Home Association have expressed concern regarding the adequacy of the IS/MND in addressing the potential environmental impacts from the Bitter Point Pump Station.
• The Sierra Club is requesting that a more detailed Environmental Impact Report be prepared to address: 1) potential impacts from an accidental spill of hydrogen peroxide and/or magnesium hydroxide on local wildlife and land adjacent to existing wetland; 2) potential impacts from property acquisition; small portion of site conflicts with ongoing efforts to establish an open space and wildlife preserve/park that encompass the entire Banning Ranch area; 3) need for 40 mgd pump station, if the residential and commercial component of the Banning Ranch development is not completed.
The proposed chemical storage facility was covered by a Supplemental Environmental Report Impact Report, prepared for the Collection System Odor and Corrosion Control Program (OCP) and certified by the Board of Directors in December, 2002. The proposed chemical facility at the Bitter Point site provides for a double walled tank and a concrete walled containment area to prevent any chemicals from running off site. Moreover, the pump station capacity is not significantly impacted by the proposed Banning Ranch development. The pump station has been sized primarily to accommodate upstream flows from Rocky Point, Bay Bridge and Lido Pump Stations. The Bitter Point Pump Station would be constructed to the proposed size with or without the Banning Ranch development.
• Everette Phillips of Newport Shores has expressed similar concerns regarding potential flooding and spills from chemicals associated with the
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2 Collection System Odor and Corrosion Control Program (OCP) portion of this Project to nearby wetland and storm canal. Additionally, Everette Phillips has provided recommendations for a "good neighbor policy" of adopting the nearby wetland and enhancing the area between Bitter Point and Newport Shores; (i.e. adding tidal gates in the river to reduce the restriction of tidal flow potentially posed by a separate District pipeline project or planting additional trees and landscape along District's Plant No. 2, to improve the view from Newport Shores). Although, the wetland recommendations are noteworthy, they are outside the jurisdiction of the District and not directly related to this project.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
N/A
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: Miscellaneous & Support Projects, Supplement No. 1 to the 1999 Strategic Plan EIR, Section 8 - Page 162) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
The source of funding for preparation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) is from Supplement No. 1 to the 1999 Strategic Plan Program Environmental Impact Report, Job No. J-40-5, for a total contract amount of $194,000 to Environmental Science Associates. Of the total contract amount, $80,000 is to be charged to various collections system projects, including Edinger, Bitter Point and A Street Pump Stations. A breakdown is included in the attached Budget Information Table for the pump station projects.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Edinger Pump Station: The existing Edinger Pump Station is located beneath the westbound lanes of Edinger Avenue, east of the intersection of Edinger Avenue and Graham Avenue in the City of Huntington Beach. The area to the south of the station is principally residential. The Westminster Flood Control Channel is located immediately north. Marina High School and Marina Park are opposite the channel. The area to the north and west of Graham consists of industrial properties.
The proposed project will increase the station's current capacity of 2.75 million gallons per day (mgd), to its year 2020 master planned capacity of 5.0 mgd.
The proposed project will rehabilitate the existing pump station and will construct a second below-grade structure adjacent to the existing pump station to house new electrical and control equipment.
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 3 Work will be sequenced so service to the surrounding residences and businesses is not interrupted.
A Street Pump Station: The existing A Street Pump Station is located beneath Balboa Boulevard at A Street, on the Balboa Peninsula in the City of Newport Beach. The area surrounding the station consists of residential properties and small retail establishments. The City's Peninsula Park and Balboa Pier are located one block away. The peninsula is surrounded by Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean.
The proposed station would be constructed on a 3700 square foot lot owned by the Orange County Sanitation District (District), located at 810 East Balboa Boulevard, on the northwest corner of Balboa Boulevard and A Street. The lot is currently occupied by a vacant restaurant that will be demolished to make room for the new station. The new station would replace the existing station and provide for:
• Construction of a below-grade wet well/pump room to house pumps matching the existing station’s pumping capacity. • Construction an above-grade electrical control building (approximately 15-feet by 33-feet and 20-feet tall), housing electrical and controls situated above the new pump room. • An architectural design of the electrical and control building with the surrounding setting, including an 8-foot tower atop the building similar to that of adjacent buildings. • Onsite District parking and service area; and electrical control building will encompass half the vacant lot area. • Public (City of Newport Beach) parking and landscaping on the remaining portion of the vacant lot; entrance to the new station and public parking would be from the alley along the north edge of the property, opposite and parallel to Balboa Boulevard. • Extension of upstream gravity sewers from the existing station to the new station and installation of new force mains to connect to the existing downstream force mains; the work will require trenching in Balboa Boulevard, the alley and within the boundaries of the lot.
The existing A Street Pump Station would be abandoned upon startup of the new pump station.
Bitter Point Pump Station: The existing Bitter Point Pump Station is located beneath the entrance from Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) to the Armstrong Petroleum oil field. The oil field and open space are located in an unincorporated portion of Orange County within the boundaries of the City of Newport Beach. The oil field is bounded by a storm drain and canal to the west, open space to the north and east, and PCH to the south. Small retail establishments and residential properties lay west of the storm drain. Residential properties lay south of PCH.
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 4 District staff proposes to purchase property from Armstrong Petroleum Corporation, et al, for a new 40-mgd pump station to replace the existing (5-mgd) Bitter Point Pump Station. The lot would be approximately 40 feet by 240 feet along PCH, immediately west of the existing station. The entrance to the new station would be off the entrance to the oil field. The exit would be located at the west end of the new station's site and traverse directly onto PCH.
The existing pump station would be abandoned upon startup of the new pump station. The new proposed pump station would consist of:
• A below-grade wet well/ pump room • An above-grade electrical control building (approximately 80-feet by 16-feet and 20-feet tall). • Replacement of an existing six-foot wall. The new wall will consist of several overlapping shorter walls varying in height (maximum height of 20-feet), length and depth to provide a three-dimension look for shielding the building. The new wall will occupy the same area as the existing wall situated within a Caltrans' 10-foot easement bordering PCH. • Native vegetation appropriate to the coastal area; taller trees will be placed behind the wall to further shield the pump station and oil field from sight. • A 4000-gallon, double-walled, enclosed chemical storage tank and dosing facility. The tank will store hydrogen peroxide or magnesium hydroxide to counter pipe corrosion and sewer odors. The tank (approximately 8-feet in diameter by 16-feet tall) and unloading station will be situated all within a secondary containment area of the pump station site. Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts of installing the chemical storage tank and facilities have been identified in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Effluent Pump Station Annex and Collection System Odor and Corrosion Control Program (SEIR EPSA-OCP), certified by the District in December 2002; mitigation measures contained in the SEIR EPSA-OCP that are applicable to this project will be implemented. • Extension of upstream sewers and downstream force mains to and from the existing station's current site; connections/extensions will be in the vicinity of the existing pump station and may extend into Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). Sanitary services to surrounding residences and businesses shall be maintained throughout construction of the new pump station.
As part of this work existing utilities serving the area will be rerouted/upgraded to accommodate the new pump station. The oil field operations and property owners' development offices in the vicinity may experience brief electrical power interruptions during Southern California Edison's transfer of power from existing overhead lines and transformers to the newly installed underground power lines and at grade transformers (storage capacity of the upstream sewage collection system is capable of handling the brief power outages to the existing pump station). Brief interruptions to potable water supply and gas production will also occur. Brief utility interruptions are anticipated to be no more than one half to two hours long. Utility coordination with these entities will be made to arrange the brief interruptions.
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 5
ALTERNATIVES
Provide short-term rehabilitation to Edinger, Bitter Point, and A Street Pump Stations. This alternative would be costly and will provide minimal benefit to Orange County Sanitation District facilities and would not address future flows or potential spills.
CEQA FINDINGS
An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration indicates that there are only a few potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Rehabilitation/Replacement of the Pump Station Projects. Mitigation measures have been proposed to minimize identified potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was also prepared to implement the mitigation measures.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Figures 1-12 2. Resolution No. OCSD 03-07 3. Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program - Attachment A 3. Comment Letters – Attachment B
AA:sa G:\ntglobal\Agenda Draft Reports\Joint Boards\J-40-5 AR for Edinger A St and Bitter Point 032603.doc
Revised: 8/10/98 Page 6 RESOLUTION NO. OCSD 03-07
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATING TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR REHABILITATION OF THE EDINGER PUMP STATION, REHABILITATION OF THE A STREET PUMP STATION, AND REPLACEMENT OF THE BITTER POINT PUMP STATION; APPROVING MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; ADOPTING THE FINAL INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR REHABILITATION OF THE EDINGER PUMP STATION, REHABILITATION OF THE A STREET PUMP STATION, AND REPLACEMENT OF THE BITTER POINT PUMP STATION; AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION RE SAID PROJECTS; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD or District) is presently considering the adoption of the Final Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration for Rehabilitation of the Edinger Pump Station, Rehabilitation of the A Street Pump Station, and Replacement of the Bitter Point Pump Station, (“Projects”); and
WHEREAS, the Edinger Pump Station is located in the City of Huntington Beach and will require rehabilitation and construction of a new below-grade structure. And, A Street and Bitter Point Pump Stations, located in the City of Newport Beach will require construction of two, above-grade pump stations at new locations to replace the existing structures; and
WHEREAS, District is the Lead Agency for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Projects, which are consistent with the 1999 Strategic Plan Program Environmental Impact Report and the Supplemental Environment Impact Report for the Effluent Pump Station Annex and Collection System Odor Control Program, dated November 2002, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (“CEQA”), the State of California CEQA Guidelines, and District’s CEQA procedures; and,
WHEREAS, to assess the Rehabilitation of the Edinger Pump Station, Rehabilitation of the A Street Pump Station, and Replacement of the Bitter Point Pump Station environmental impacts objectively, District prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration to assess the potentially-significant environmental impacts, mitigation measures, if any, and alternatives associated with the Projects; and,
1 WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15070, District staff determined that an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration resulted in a determination that there were only less than significant impacts associated with the proposed Projects if certain mitigation measures were implemented, therefore an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared; and,
WHEREAS, District has consulted with other public agencies and the general public, giving them an opportunity to comment on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, as required by CEQA; and,
WHEREAS, District has objectively evaluated, received, and filed comments from public agencies and persons who reviewed the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and,
WHEREAS, the comments and recommendations received on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, either in full or in summary, to significant environmental concerns raised in the review, have been included in the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and,
WHEREAS, District staff presented to the Board the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for review and consideration prior to the final approval of, and commitment to, the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rehabilitation of the Edinger Pump Station, Rehabilitation of the A Street Pump Station, and Replacement of the Bitter Point Pump Station; and,
WHEREAS, District has prepared a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, designed to ensure that the approved mitigation measures are implemented during the Projects’ design, construction, and operation.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of Orange County Sanitation District,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER:
Section 1: That changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Projects, before the proposed Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review, which avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects or substantially lessen the significant effects of the pump station "Projects" identified in the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Section 2: That there is no substantial evidence that the "Projects" will have a significant impact on the environment.
2 Section 3: That the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the District’s independent judgment and analysis.
Section 4: That the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the District’s decision is based are located at the Orange County Sanitation District, 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California, 92708. The Custodian of these documents and other materials is the Board Secretary.
Section 5: That the Board of Directors adopts the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Section 6: The District will implement the mitigation measures recommended in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration to reduce the significant impacts of the project to a less than significant level.
Section 7: The Board of Directors approves the mitigation measures, and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as described in Attachment A to ensure that all mitigation measures are implemented, and;
Section 8: The Board authorizes and directs the Board Secretary to file the Notice of Determination and any other documents in accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the District’s CEQA Procedures.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held March 26, 2003.
______CHAIR
ATTEST:
______BOARD SECRETARY
G:\wp.dta\admin\BS\Resolutions\2003\03-07.Final Study-Mitigated Negative Dec.doc
3 ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHAB. OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONSAND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE REHABILITATION OF THE EDINGER PUMP STATION
The proposed project consists of rehabilitation of the existing pump station, which involves construction of a new electrical/controls vault and replacement/modification of the existing pumps, piping, and electrical panels, and installation of a new pump. The proposed project, without mitigation, could create a number of potentially significant environmental effects that have been identified in the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, and have been taken into account in selecting the best methods for achieving the project’s objectives with minimal environmental impacts.
AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES Air Quality-1: Construction equipment will be shut off to reduce idling when not in direct use. Diesel engines, motors, or equipment shall be located as far away as possible from existing residential areas.
Air Quality-2: Stationary and mobile equipment shall be placed as far from residential areas as possible within the temporary construction easement and new station site.
Air Quality-3: The contractor shall notify residences within 300 feet of each construction site by posting notices along those streets of planned construction activities at least one week before the start of construction. Marina High School shall also be notified by letter at least two weeks prior to the start of construction. The notifications shall include a planned schedule and contact information.
A-1 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Maintain records of site inspection and OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications communications (i.e. public concerns, public notice mailing lists) for administrative record
CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES Cultural Resources-1: In the event historical or pre-historical cultural resources are discovered during excavation activities, all work in that area shall cease until a qualified archaeologist examines the resources and provides recommendations for further assessment of the site including collection and curation tasks.
Cultural Resources-2: In the event paleontological resources are discovered during excavation activities, all work in that area shall cease until a qualified paleontologist examines the resources and provides recommendations for further assessment of the site including collection and curation tasks.
Cultural Resources-3: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the Orange County Coroner would be notified immediately and construction activities shall be halted. If the remains are found to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission would be notified within 24 hours. Guidelines of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Monitor compliance with construction OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications contract specifications
A-2 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MITIGATION MEASURES Hazards and Hazardous Materials-1: All asbestos-containing building materials and lead-based paint will be removed and disposed of by a licensed abatement contractor in the manner required by law prior to demolition of the building. A California Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC) will perform abatement air monitoring during the removal process and certify that all materials have been removed.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials-2: If contaminated soils are encountered during excavation, construction activities will stop. The Regional Water Quality Control Board will be immediately notified. Excavation, disposal of excavated soils, dewatering, and backfilling will occur in compliance with hazardous waste management regulations, under the supervision of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Department of Toxic Substance Control, and County Health Care Agency as appropriate.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Monitor compliance with the approved OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications construction contract specifications
NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES Noise-1: Construction activities shall be performed in accordance with District and applicable City of Huntington noise standards.
Noise-2: All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling devices.
Noise-3: Communication with the local residents shall be maintained during construction including keeping them informed of the schedule, duration, and progress of the construction to minimize public concerns regarding noise levels.
A-3 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Maintain record of construction oversight for OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications administrative record
Maintain record of communication with local residents
TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURES Traffic-1: A traffic control plan will be prepared for the project. The plan will assign delivery truck routes, incorporate truck parking restrictions, and develop notification requirements to local businesses, emergency service providers, and public transportation (i.e. bus, bicycle, etc.) providers. Furthermore, dirt haul trucks and construction deliveries shall avoid peak traffic periods (7:00 – 9:00 am) and (4:00 – 6:00 pm) to the extent feasible.
Traffic-2: After construction hours end each day, trenching, and excavation would be covered with steel plates and construction vehicles removed from the street to restore parking.
Traffic-3: Short-term construction impacts and closures to locally designated trails and bikeways shall be mitigated with detours, signage, flagmen and reconstruction as appropriate. Regional riding and hiking trails and bikeways impacted by construction shall be restored to their original condition after project construction.
A-4 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Monitor compliance with construction OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications contract specifications
Maintain record of traffic control plan, permits, and inspection of pre and post- construction site
Review and approve Caltrans permit application
A-5 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE REHABILITATION OF THE A STREET PUMP STATION
The proposed project consists of replacement of the existing pump station, which involves demolition on an existing restaurant located on-site, construction of a new wet well/pump room, electrical control building, new force main, and extension of the existing upstream gravity sewer. The existing station will be decommissioned upon startup. The proposed project, without mitigation, could create a number of potentially significant environmental effects that have been identified in the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, and have been taken into account in selecting the best methods for achieving the project’s objectives with minimal environmental impacts.
AESTHETICS MITIGATION MEASURES Aesthetics-1: The architectural design and landscaping of the new A Street above grade facilities (electrical control building, landscaping, etc.) shall integrate with the surrounding area and comply with the City of Newport Beach’s redevelopment plans.
Aesthetics-2: Exterior lights for A Street pump station will be directed downward and oriented to ensure that no light source will be directly visible from any neighboring residential areas. Motion sensors will control the lights when the station is unmanned. The new lights would not conflict with surrounding land uses, nor add substantial light or glare to the area.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in design/construction contract Monitor compliance with design/construction OCSD Prior to final design and during specifications contract specifications. Maintain record of construction communicaton and pre and post-construction conditions for administrative record.
A-6 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES Air Quality-1: Construction equipment will be shut off to reduce idling when not in direct use. Diesel engines, motors, or equipment shall be located as far away as possible from existing residential areas.
Air Quality-2: Stationary and mobile equipment shall be placed as far from residential areas as possible within the temporary construction easement and new station site.
Air Quality-3: The contractor shall notify residences within 300 feet of each construction site by posting notices along those streets of planned construction activities at least one week before the start of construction. The notifications shall include a planned schedule and contact information.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Maintain record of site inspection and OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications communications (i.e. public concerns, public notice mailing lists) for administrative record
CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES Cultural Resources-1: In the event historical or pre-historical cultural resources are discovered during excavation activities, all work in that area shall cease until a qualified archaeologist examines the resources and provides recommendations for further assessment of the site including collection and curation tasks.
Cultural Resources-2: In the event paleontological resources are discovered during excavation activities, all work in that area shall cease until a qualified paleontologist examines the resources and provides recommendations for further assessment of the site including collection and curation tasks.
Cultural Resources-3: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the Orange County Coroner would be notified immediately and construction activities shall be halted. If the remains are found to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission would be notified within 24 hours. Guidelines of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains.
A-7 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
Cultural Resources-4: Prior to demolition, a Historic Building Survey will be conducted by a qualified architectural historian to determine whether the structure to be demolished on A Street possesses significant historic qualities. The District will implement recommendations of the survey report to ensure that impacts to significant historic resources are avoided.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Conduct Historic Building Survey prior to Monitor compliance with the approved OCSD Prior to and during construction demolition construction contract specifications
2. Include in construction contract specifications
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MITIGATION MEASURES Hazards and Hazardous Materials-1: All asbestos-containing building materials and lead-based paint will be removed and disposed of by a licensed abatement contractor in the manner required by law prior to demolition of the building. A California Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC) will perform abatement air monitoring during the removal process and certify that all materials have been removed. The demolition of the existing structure at A Street would be done in accordance to Newport Beach’s Waste Management Plan.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials-2: If contaminated soils are encountered during excavation, construction activities will stop. The Regional Water Quality Control Board will be immediately notified. Excavation, disposal of excavated soils, dewatering, and backfilling will occur in compliance with hazardous waste management regulations, under the supervision of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Department of Toxic Substance Control, and County Health Care Agency as appropriate.
A-8 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Conduct inspections for asbestos- Monitor compliance with the approved OCSD Prior to construction containing materials in the building to be construction contract specifications demolished at 810 East Balboa Blvd. Compliance with approved asbestos and lead 2. Prior to demolition, remove all asbestos- paint removal plans. Monitor removal process containing materials from building in and maintain record of inspection for accordance with applicable regulations. administrative record
NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES Noise-1: Construction activities shall be performed in accordance with District and applicable City of Newport Beach noise standards.
Noise-2: All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling devices.
Noise-3: Communication with the local residents shall be maintained during construction including keeping them informed of the schedule, duration, and progress of the construction to minimize public concerns regarding noise levels.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
2. Include in construction contract Maintain record of construction oversight and OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications communications (i.e. public concerns, public notice mailing lists) for administrative record
A-9 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
TRAFFICMITIGATION MEASURES Traffic-1: A traffic control plan will be prepared for the project. The plan will assign delivery truck routes, incorporate truck parking restrictions, and develop notification requirements to local businesses, emergency service providers, and public transportation (i.e. bus, bicycle, etc.) providers. Furthermore, dirt haul trucks and construction deliveries shall avoid peak traffic periods (7:00 – 9:00 am) and (4:00 – 6:00 pm) to the extent feasible.
Traffic-2: The District shall notify the City of Newport Beach, local residences, and businesses that parking may be impacted at least one week prior to trenching along East Balboa Boulevard.
Traffic-3: After construction hours end each day, trenching, and excavation would be covered with steel plates and construction vehicles removed from the street to restore parking.
Traffic-4: Short-term construction impacts and closures to locally designated trails and bikeways shall be mitigated with detours, signage, flagmen and reconstruction as appropriate. Regional riding and hiking trails and bikeways impacted by construction shall be restored to their original condition after project construction.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Monitor compliance with construction OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications contract specifications
Maintain record of traffic control plan, permits, and inspection of pre and post- construction site
Review and approve Caltrans permit application
A-10 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
The proposed project consists of replacement of the existing pump station, which involves construction of a new wet well/pump room, electrical control building, chemical dosing facility, new screening wall, new force main, and extension of the existing upstream gravity sewer. The existing station will be decommissioned upon startup. The proposed project, without mitigation, could create a number of potentially significant environmental effects that have been identified in the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, and have been taken into account in selecting the best methods for achieving the project’s objectives with minimal environmental impacts.
AESTHETICS MITIGATION MEASURES Aesthetics-1: The design and landscape of the new Bitter Point above grade facilities (electrical control building, wall, landscaping, etc.) shall meet the City’s goal of shielding the oilfield pumping units from sight while enhancing the visual character of the site. The landscaping shall incorporate low water-use plants.
Aesthetics-2: Exterior lights for Bitter Point pump station will be directed downward and oriented to ensure that no light source will be directly visible from any neighboring residential areas. Motion sensors will control the lights when the station is unmanned. The new lights would not conflict with surrounding land uses, nor add substantial light or glare to the area.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in design/construction contract Monitor compliance with design/construction OCSD Prior to final design and during specifications contract specifications. Maintain record of construction communication and pre and post-construction conditions for administrative record
A-11 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES Air Quality-1: Construction equipment will be shut off to reduce idling when not in direct use. Diesel engines, motors, or equipment shall be located as far away as possible from existing residential areas.
Air Quality-2: Stationary and mobile equipment shall be placed as far from residential areas as possible within the temporary construction easement and new station site.
Air Quality-3: The contractor shall notify residences within 300 feet of each construction site by posting notices along those streets of planned construction activities at least one week before the start of construction. West Newport Oil and Armstrong Petroleum Oilfield shall also be notified by letter at least two weeks prior to the start of construction. The notifications shall include a planned schedule and contact information.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Maintain record of site inspection and OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications maintain record of communications (i.e. public concerns, public notice mailing lists) for administrative record
CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES Cultural Resources-1: In the event historical or pre-historical cultural resources are discovered during excavation activities, all work in that area shall cease until a qualified archaeologist examines the resources and provides recommendations for further assessment of the site including collection and curation tasks.
Cultural Resources-2: In the event paleontological resources are discovered during excavation activities, all work in that area shall cease until a qualified paleontologist examines the resources and provides recommendations for further assessment of the site including collection and curation tasks.
A-12 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
Cultural Resources-3: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the Orange County Coroner would be notified immediately and construction activities shall be halted. If the remains are found to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission would be notified within 24 hours. Guidelines of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Monitor compliance with construction OCSD During construction specifications contract specifications
GEOLOGY AND SOILS MITIGATION MEASURES
Geology and Soils-1: Chemical storage tanks and appurtenant piping and connections will be designed to withstand ground shaking to avoid potential spills during a seismic event.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in design/construction contract Monitor compliance with design/construction OCSD Prior to approving final design and specifications contract specification construction
Maintain record of construction specifications, geotechnical evaluation, soil surveys and construction oversight for administrative record
A-13 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MITIGATION MEASURES Hazards and Hazardous Materials-1: The District will follow procedures to ensure proper handling and storage of hazardous materials and reduce the potential for spills at the Bitter Point pump station Collection System Odor and Corrosion Control Program (OCP) chemical storage site. At a minimum, the procedures will include the following:
− obtain a permit to store hazardous materials from the local fire department;
− provide notification of the chemical storage site location to the Orange County Health Care Agency;
− equip chemical delivery trucks with spill cleanup equipment adequate to contain and clean up any solid or liquid spill;
− equip chemical storage tanks with adequate secondary containment;
− chemical transport contractors will have adequate Spill Prevention Containment and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans in place covering the chemical storage site. The SPCC Plan will cover chemical transfer activities (including Department of Transportation (DOT) requirements), public notification and placarding requirements, secondary containment, emergency spill response actions, routine site access control, and site management and maintenance procedures. The contractor’s SPCC Plan would require approval by the District’s Safety Division.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials-2: The District shall require that all personnel working with hazardous chemicals have health and safety training. This is a legal OSHA requirement under the Worker Right to Know regulations in the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 29. The training shall include, at minimum, the proper use of safety equipment, hazard identifications, and proper handling and disposal of spilled hazardous materials.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials-3: Access to OCP chemical storage sites will be controlled to allow access only to authorized personnel.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials-4: All asbestos-containing building materials and lead-based paint will be removed and disposed of by a licensed abatement contractor in the manner required by law prior to demolition of the building. A California Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC) will perform abatement air monitoring during the removal process and certify that all materials have been removed.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials-5: If contaminated soils are encountered during excavation, construction activities will stop. The Regional Water Quality Control Board will be immediately notified. Excavation, disposal of excavated soils, dewatering, and backfilling will occur in compliance with hazardous waste
A-14 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
management regulations, under the supervision of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Department of Toxic Substance Control, and County Health Care Agency as appropriate.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Contractor's SPCC Plan to be approved by the OCSD Prior to installation/construction specifications District's Safety Division
2. Modify OCSD Spill Prevention Monitor compliance with the approved Containment Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan construction contract specifications, OCSD's Prior to and during installation/ SPCC and approved contractor SPCC Plan. construction 3. Notify Orange County Health Care Agency4.Obtain permit from fire departments Review final project design, monitor Prior to and during installation/ compliance with the approved construction construction 5. Retain a geotechnical consultant to conduct a contract specifications site assessment that will include soil borings to determine whether subsurface contamination exists. Geotechnical consultant shall prepare a Prior to approving final design and site assessment report summarizing findings construction and including recommended actions to be implemented during construction of the pump station to ensure worker safety and to protect the public and environment in compliance with hazardous waste management and hazardous waste site remediation regulations.
A-15 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
MINERAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES Mineral Resources-1: The District will coordinate electrical service interruptions with Armstrong Petroleum Corporation and West Newport Oil Company to minimize oil and gas production impacts.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
Include in construction contract specifications Coordinate communications with Armstrong OCSD Prior to construction Petroleum Corporation and West Newport Oil Company.
Maintain record of coordination efforts. Prior to and during construction
NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES Noise-1: Construction activities shall be performed in accordance with District and applicable County of Orange noise standards.
Noise-2: All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling devices.
Noise-3: Communication with the local residents shall be maintained during construction including keeping them informed of the schedule, duration, and progress of the construction to minimize public concerns regarding noise levels.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
3. Include in construction contract Maintain records of construction oversight OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications and communications ( i.e. public concerns, public notice mailing lists) for administrative record
A-16 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURES Traffic-1: A traffic control plan will be prepared for each project. The plan will assign delivery truck routes, incorporate truck parking restrictions, and develop notification requirements to local businesses, emergency service providers, and public transportation (i.e. bus, bicycle, etc.) providers. Furthermore, dirt haul trucks and construction deliveries shall avoid peak traffic periods (7:00 – 9:00 am) and (4:00 – 6:00 pm) to the extent feasible.
Traffic-2: After construction hours end each day, trenching, and excavation would be covered with steel plates and construction vehicles removed from the street to restore parking.
Traffic-3: Short-term construction impacts and closures to locally designated trails and bikeways shall be mitigated with detours, signage, flagmen and reconstruction as appropriate. Regional riding and hiking trails and bikeways impacted by construction shall be restored to their original condition after project construction.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Monitor compliance with construction OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications contract specifications
Maintain record of traffic control plan, permits, and inspection of pre and post- construction site
Review and approve Caltrans permit application
A-17 Environmental Science Associates ATTACHMENT A - MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM, MND FOR REHABILITATION OF EDINGER AND A ST. PUMP STATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF BITTER POINT PUMP STATION
UTILITIES MITIGATION MEASURES Utilities-1: Utility locations shall be verified through field surveys.
Utilities-2: Utility excavation or encroachment permits shall be obtained from the appropriate agencies, which will include measures to minimize utility disruption.
Utilities-3: Detailed specifications shall be prepared as part of the design plans to include procedures for the excavation, support, and fill or areas around utility cables and pipes. All affected utility services would be notified of the District’s construction plans and schedule. Arrangements shall be made with these entities regarding protection, relocation, or temporary disconnection of services.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE MONITORING AND REPORTING MONITORING MONITORING SCHEDULE ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY
1. Include in construction contract Monitor compliance with construction OCSD Prior to and during construction specifications contract specifications
Review and approve SCE permit application
A-18 Environmental Science Associates Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. BOARD OF DIRECTORS 03/26/03 Item Number Item Number AGENDA REPORT 20 Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel
SUBJECT: AGREEMENT WITH SAWPA RE WASTEWATER INTERCEPTOR CAPACITY AND SARI RELOCATION PROJECT, CONTRACT NO. 2-41
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Verbal report re the Joint Management Committee activities for the SARI Relocation Project, Contract No. 2-41:
a. Report of General Manager b. Report of Director of Engineering c. Report of General Counsel d. Receive and file General Counsel’s Memorandum dated March 19, 2003; correspondence from SAWPA dated January 23, 2003 and March 18, 2003; and correspondence from Orange County Sanitation District dated December 3, 2002 and March 6, 2003.
SUMMARY
Please refer to the attached memoranda from Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, and Dave Ludwin, Director of Engineering, dated March 19, 2003.
PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY
NA
BUDGET IMPACT
This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. This item has not been budgeted. Not applicable (information item)
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 20.SAWPA.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
ALTERNATIVES
NA
CEQA FINDINGS
NA
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memo from General Counsel dated March 19, 2003 2. Letter to SAWPA dated December 3, 2002 3. SAWPA dated January 23, 2003 4. Letter to SAWPA dated March 6, 2003 5. SAWPA dated March 18, 2003 6. Memo from Director of Engineering dated March 19, 2003
G:\wp.dta\agenda\Board Agenda Reports\2003 Board Agenda Reports\0303\Item 20.SAWPA.doc Revised: 8/10/98 Page 2 L AW O FFICES O F W OODRUFF , S PRADLIN & S MART A P ROFESSIONAL C ORPORATION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chair and Members of the Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: General Counsel DATE: March 19, 2003 RE: 1972 Wastewater Interceptor Capacity Agreement
As you are all well aware, an ongoing dispute has been in existence between Orange County Sanitation District (“OCSD”) and SAWPA for over two years, concerning the financial obligations to pay the costs of engineering and environmental studies, construction of a relocated line and administration.
We believe the issues are rather straight forward in that the 1972 Agreement establishes the respective rights and obligations of both agencies relative to the SARI line. Nonetheless, SAWPA has consistently objected to OCSD’s actions leading to a proposed protection of the presently endangered line. In furtherance of that, it has refused to pay the invoices submitted to it by OCSD, which now approach nearly $4 million.
The basic argument we have heard from SAWPA, is that they no longer like the 1972 Agreement, and consider it unfair and inequitable. We have responded by specifically directing SAWPA to give OCSD a proposal that would substantively change the cost allocation formula. [See letters: B. Anderson to J. Grindstaff dated December 3, 2002; SAWPA response of January 23, 2003; Chair McCracken’s answer dated March 6, 2003; and the latest SAWPA response of March 18, 2003.]
While OCSD now feels assured that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“COE”) and County of Orange Public Facilities and Resources Department (“PFRD”) are assuming full responsibility for the costs of the project, it is still necessary to resolve the dispute regarding non-payment of the costs incurred by OCSD. Very little progress has been achieved to date, because of SAWPA’s continued refusal to pay for District Staff time expended, which is the major portion of the outstanding amount.
I recommend that action be taken as rapidly as possible on the question of whether the 1972 Agreement should be amended. As long as that question remains unanswered, we can expect that SAWPA will refuse to pay the outstanding invoices.
Agenda Chair and Members of the Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District March 19, 2003 Page 2
We know of no reason why Blake Anderson’s meeting with the SAWPA Members’ Managers, in April, will have any impact on a SAWPA cost allocation proposed and thus, the request for another two month delay seems to be just that…another delay in payment.
THOMAS L. WOODRUFF GENERAL COUNSEL
TLW:jlo
cc: Mr. B.P. Anderson Mr. D.L. Ludwin Mr. G.G. Streed Thomas F. Nixon, Esq.
Agenda