HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-02-10 Board Packet (Part 1)OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
DISTRICT BOARDROOM
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY,CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY
June 2,2010
3:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1.ROLL CALL
2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4.PRESENTATION OF THE 2010 OTAY PHOTO CONTEST AWARDS (GRANGER)
5.APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 6,
2010
6.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO
SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S
JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
7.ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION,UNLESS A REQUEST IS
MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A PAR-
TICULAR ITEM:
a)ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.4157 AND NO.4158 IDENTIFYING THE GEN-
ERAL MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL TO COMMIT THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO FINANCIAL AND LEGAL OBLIGATIONS AS-
SOCIATED WITH THE POTENTIAL RECEIPT OF GRANTS UNDER THE
U.S.BUREAU OF RECLAMATION WATERSMART GRANT PROGRAM
b)REPORT ON DIRECTOR'S EXPENSES FOR THE 3rd QUARTER OF FIS-
CAL YEAR 2010
c)APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR AS-
NEEDED ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES WITH LEE &RO,INC.FOR
AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $175,000 DURING FISCAL YEARS 2011
AND 2012 (ENDING JUNE 30,2012)
1
d)APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR AS-
NEEDED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING SERVICES WITH MTGL,INC.
FOR AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $175,000 DURING FISCAL YEARS
2011 AND 2012 (ENDING JUNE 30,2012)
e)APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR AS-
NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES WITH ICF INTER-
NATIONAL FOR AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $375,000 DURING FIS-
CAL YEARS 2011,2012,AND 2013 (ENDING JUNE 30,2013)
ACTION ITEMS
8.FINANCE,ADMINISTRATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
a)AWARD A CONTRACT TO SAGE DESIGN,INC.IN THE AMOUNT OF
$161,119 PLUS APPLICABLE TAXES AND SHIPPING CHARGES FOR
FIRETIDE RADIOS AND RELATED HARDWARE TO COMPLETE THE
FY2010 OTAY WATER WIRELESS NETWORK PROJECT AND AWARD A
CONTRACT TO PRIME ELECTRIC IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED
$55,620 FOR INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL AND WIRELESS HARD-
WARE AT MULTIPLE SITES THROUGHOUT THE NORTH DISTRICT
(STEVENS)
9.ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a)CERTIFY THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR)
FOR THE DISTRICT'S OTAY MESA RECYCLED WATER SYSTEM CAPI-
TAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM R2087,R2077,R2058 PROJECT HAS
BEEN COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVI-
RONMENTAL QUALITY ACT,THE CURRENT STATE GUIDELINES AND
THE DISTRICT'S LOCAL GUIDELINES,AND THAT IT REFLECTS THE IN-
DEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF THE DISTRICT;FINDS THAT THE PO-
TENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT WILL BE
AVOIDED THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF FEASIBLE MITIGATION
MEASURES,AS SHOWN IN THE FEIR,AND THE MITIGATION,MONI-
TORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE FEIR;AND APPROVE
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS OF FACT
IN SUPPORT OF THE FEIR FOR THE PROJECT (COBURN-BOYD)
10.BOARD
a)DISCUSSION OF 2010 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
2
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
11.THESE ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIONAL PUR-
POSES ONLY.NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA
ITEMS.
a)PRESENTATION ON STATUS OF 3RD QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2010
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM [RIPPERGER]
REPORTS
12.GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
a)SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE
13.DIRECTORS'REPORTS/REQUESTS
14.PRESIDENT'S REPORT
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
15.CLOSED SESSION
a)CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -PENDING LITIGATION [GOV-
ERNMENT CODE §54956.9(a)]
(I)MULTIPLE CASES RELATED TO THE FENTON BUSINESS CEN-
TER AND FILED WITH THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO CONSOLIDATED UNDER CASE NO.37-2007-
00077024-CU-BC-SC
RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
16.REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION.THE BOARD MAY
ALSO TAKE ACTION ON ANY ITEMS POSTED IN CLOSED SESSION
17.ADJOURNMENT
3
All items appearing on this agenda,whether or not expressly listed for action,may be
deliberated and may be subject to action by the Board.
The Agenda,and any attachments containing written information,are available at the
District's website at www.otaywater.qov.Written changes to any items to be considered at
the open meeting,or to any attachments,will be posted on the District's website.Copies
of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by
contacting her at (619)670-2280.
If you have any disability which would require accommodation in order to enable you to
participate in this meeting,please call the District Secretary at (619)670-2280 at least 24
hours prior to the meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on May 28,2010,I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the
regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District,said time being at
least 72 hours in advance of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors (Government
Code Section §54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley,California on May 28,2010.
ry
4
AGENDA ITEM 5
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
January 6,2010
1.The meeting was called to order by President Croucher at 3:30 p.m.
2.ROLL CALL
Directors Present:Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
Staff Present:General Manager Mark Watton,Asst.GM Administration
and Finance German Alvarez,Asst.GM Engineering and
Water Operations Manny Magana,General Counsel Yuri
Calderon,Chief of Information Technology Geoff Stevens,
Chief Financial Officer Joe Beachem,Chief of Engineering
Rod Posada,Chief of Operations Pedro Porras,Chief of
Administration Rom Sarno,District Secretary Susan Cruz
and others per attached list.
3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4.ELECTION OF BOARD PRESIDENT
A motion was made by Director Lopez,seconded by Director Croucher and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to elect Director Bonilla as President.
5.ELECTION OF BOARD VICE PRESIDENT
A motion was made by Director Breitfelder,seconded by Director Croucher and
carried with the follOWing vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to elect Director Lopez as Vice President.
6.ELECTION OF BOARD TREASURER
1
A motion was made by Director Lopez,seconded by Director Bonilla and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to elect Director Croucher as Treasurer.
7.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Director Breitfelder,seconded by Director Croucher and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve the agenda.
8.RECESS FOR A PRESENTATION TO OUTGOING BOARD PRESIDENT AND
RECEPTION
The board recessed at 3:35 p.m.for a presentation to outgoing board president,
Director Croucher.
The board reconvened at 3:54 p.m.
9.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE
BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
No one wished to be heard.
10.RECESS OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING AND CONVENE A
MEETING OF THE OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION
The Otay Water District board meeting was recessed at 3:55 p.m.and a meeting
of the Otay Service Corporation board was convened.
11 .ROLL CALL
Directors Present:Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
12.ELECTION OF OFFICERS:PRESIDENT,VICE-PRESIDENT OR TREASURER
2
A motion was made by Director Croucher,seconded by Director Breitfelder and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to elect Director Bonilla as President,Director Lopez as Vice President and
Director Croucher as Treasurer.
13.APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS:EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER AND SECRETARY
A motion was made by Director Breitfelder,seconded by Director Croucher and
carried with .the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to elect General Manager Watton as Executive Director,Joe Beachem as Chief
Financial Officer and District Secretary Cruz as Secretary.
14.ADJOURN OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION BOARD MEETING AND
RECONVENE THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING
President Bonilla adjourned the Otay Service Corporation meeting at 3:58 p.m.
and reconvened the Otay Water District board meeting.
15.APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL BOARD MEETING OF AUGUST
5,2009
A motion was made by Director Croucher,seconded by Director Lopez and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve the minutes of the regular board meeting of August 5,2009.
CONSENT CALENDAR
16.ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION,UNLESS A REQUEST
IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
3
Director Breitfelder pulled item 18c,ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.521 TO INCLUDE
WATER CONSERVATION REQUIREMENTS WITHIN SECTIONS 9 AND 27 OF
THE DISTRICT'S CODE OF ORDINANCES,and 18i,APPROVE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE JOINT WATER AGENCIES PARTNERS
(SWEETWATER AUTHORITY,HELIX,AND PADRE DAM)FOR THE
PREPARATION OF A NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION
PLAN/HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN;AND INCREASING THE PROJECT
BUDGET BY $604,000 FOR A TOTAL BUDGET OF $830,000,for discussion.
Director Robak pulled item 18b,APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 7.2.6,
PURCHASES EXEMPT FROM COMPETITIVE PRICING;AND SECTION 7.2.8,
BOARD AUTHORIZED PURCHASES EXCEEDING THE GENERAL
MANAGER'S AUTHORITY;OF THE DISTRICTS PURCHASING MANUAL,for
discussion.
A motion was made by Director Croucher,seconded by Director Lopez and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve the following consent calendar items:
a)DECLARE EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES AS SURPLUS TO THE
DISTRICT'S NEEDS
d)APPROVE A SIX-MONTH BLANKET PURCHASE ORDER TO
BRENNTAG PACIFIC,INC.IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $175,000
FOR THE PURCHASE OF SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE
e)APPROVE A CONTRACT TO FRANK AND SON PAVING,INC.IN THE
AMOUNT OF $88,884 FOR ASPHALT PAVING SERVICES TO REPAIR
PAVEMENT DAMAGE CAUSED BY A RECYCLED WATER MAIN
BREAK ON RANCHO DEL REY PARKWAY,CHULA VISTA
f)APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO MIRAMAR
TRUCK CENTER IN THE AMOUNT OF $107,582.13 FOR THE
PURCHASE OF A TEN-WHEELER DUMP TRUCK
g)AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AEGIS
ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED
$300,000 FOR THE RECYLCED WATER PLAN CHECKING,RETROFIT,
AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR DEVELOPER PROJECTS DURING
FISCAL YEARS 2010,2011,AND 2012 (ENDING JUNE 30,2012)
4
h)AWARD AN AS-NEEDED TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES
CONTRACT TO DARNEll &ASSOCIATES IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-
EXCEED $175,000 DURING FISCAL YEARS 2010 AND 2011 (ENDING
JUNE 30,2011)
j)1st QUARTER FISCAL YEAR 2010 DIRECTORS EXPENSES UPDATE
k)APPROVE CREDIT CHANGE ORDER NO.1 TO THE EXISTING
CONTRACT WITH CCl CONTRACTING,INC.FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE 36-INCH PIPELINE PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF <$243,847>
I)APPROVE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS FOR THE CONVERSION
OF POTABLE TO RECYCLED WATER IRRIGATION SYSTEMS WITH
THREE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS:1)TAPESTRY &MOSIAC
($21,000);2)AGAVA &SEGUARO ($40,000);AND 3)ARISTATA
($20,000)
President Bonilla presented item 18c,18i and 18b for discussion:
c)ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.521 TO INCLUDE WATER CONSERVATION
REQUIREMENTS WITHIN SECTIONS 9 AND 27 OF THE DISTRICT'S
CODE OF ORDINANCES
Director Breitfelder indicated that the District had acted with the understanding
that there would be 100%offsets for Sycuan as a requirement for annexation into
Otay for services.He indicated that the requirement has been informal and he
felt that the District should be considering making the requirement more
concrete.He indicated that he felt the issue should be agendized in the near
future.General Manager Watton indicated that staff was planning on presenting
an item that would cover two areas:
•Annexations with large water needs that would require offsets.
•lands that are already within the District's service area,but have
increased their water needs beyond the District's Water Resources Master
Plan would require some offsets or charged a fee to acquire/develop the
offset water.
He indicated that staff is looking at various projects that could develop the offset
water resources (the recycled water conversion project and the well development
project in Rancho del Rey).This would require legal work to develop the fees
and assuring that there is a proper basis to support the proposed fees.It is
expected that this information could possibly be presented in two to three
months.Director Breitfelder indicated that he would like to point out that it may
be the will of the board to just focus on what goes beyond the Water Resources
Master Plan,but that may not be the rule.He indicated that when it comes to
new consumption,new consumption is new consumption.He stated that he did
5
not think that it matters to the public and he certainly does not see this as the
deciding factor.He indicated that he felt that staff should just be prepared to
have the information ready and available.Director Breitfelder inquired if there
are other retail agencies that are requiring 100%offsets.General Manager
Watton indicated that Olivenhain MWD is requiring offsets and some smaller
agencies are considering this requirement.
A motion was made by Director Croucher,seconded by Director Lopez and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs'recommendation.
i)APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE JOINT WATER AGENCIES
PARTNERS (SWEETWATER AUTHORITY,HELIX,AND PADRE DAM)
FOR THE PREPARATION OF A NATURAL COMMUNITY
CONSERVATION PLAN/HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN;AND
INCREASING THE PROJECT BUDGET BY $604,000 FOR A TOTAL
BUDGET OF $830,000
A motion was made by Director Breitfelder,seconded by Director Croucher that:
1.the District reimburse the other agencies for past expenses incurred per
the schedules provided by staff.
2.The District participate in future expenditures proportionately to complete
the project with the exception of legal fees to Best Best &Kreiger LLP.
3.Direct staff to communicate the District's position to the other participating
agencies.
Director Robak inquired about the background of the changes recommended by
Director Breitfelder.It was discussed that the District has gone through many
good times and some bad times and there were many agencies and private
entities throughout San Diego that supported the District in bad times and some
that did not.Best Best &Kreiger LLP was not supportive during a time when it
was needed and had spoken negatively about the District to other agencies.
During that time,they served as Counsel to the District.
General Manager Watton wished to clarify Director Breitfelder's motion and
indicated that his understanding of Director Breitfelder's motion was that it does
not change staffs'recommendation with regard to the proposed increase in the
project budget,etc.,but only addresses involvement and payment to Best Best &
Kreiger LLP.Director Breitfelder confirmed that that was correct.
Director Robak inquired if the District was joining the Joint Water Agencies
partners as it makes sense and the District would benefit financially.General
6
Manager Watton indicated that joining could have financial benefits,but the main
reason is the ability to pool the agencies'resources which,in whole,is greater
then its parts.The District will have more certainty with the regulatory agencies
by being a partner in the Joint Water Agencies.
There being no further comments,President Bonilla called for the vote.The
motion carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs'recommendation with a modification that the District would not
contribute to the future expenditures proportionately with regard to legal fees to
Best Best &Kreiger LLP.
b)APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 7.2.6,PURCHASES EXEMPT
FROM COMPETITIVE PRICING;AND SECTION 7.2.8,BOARD
AUTHORIZED PURCHASES EXCEEDING THE GENERAL MANAGER'S
AUTHORITY;OF THE DISTRICTS PURCHASING MANUAL
Director Robak inquired if the District has an agreement with a large fuel
company where the District bid's out its fuel contract.Purchasing Manager Steve
Dobrawa indicated that there are two provisions in the purchasing manual;1)the
competitive process;and 2)through the General Manager's Authority.He
indicated that fuel will not be exempt from the competitive process,staff is
requesting that the General Manager be allowed to exceed his authority of
$50,000,as defined in the District's Code of Ordinance,to authorize the
purchase of fuel.He indicated that fuel is a spot market commodity and the
distributor's price fluctuates on a daily basis.As such,fuel is generally priced at
the time of purchase.When the District purchases fuel,there is potential that it
will buy in excess of $50,000.Staff is recommending that fuel be included in the
list of purchases that exceed the General Manager's authority,but are authorized
by the board.It was indicated that this aligns the practice with the purchasing
manual.The board had also authorized the General Manager to purchase
meters in excess of his authority.It was indicated that any purchases that
exceed the General Manager's authority will be reported in the General
Manager's monthly report to the board (similar to change orders).
A motion was made by Director Croucher,seconded by Director Breitfelder,and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs'recommendation.
7
17.FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
a)APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH UTILITY COST MANAGEMENT FOR
THE REVIEW OF SDG&E RATES AND PAST INVOICES TO EVALUATE
FOR ERRORS IN RATE APPLICATION FOR POTENTIAL REFUNDS
AND FUTURE SAVINGS
Purchasing Manager Dobrawa indicated that Utility Cost Management (UCM)is
in the business of auditing utility bills,for a three year period,to identify any
inaccurate billing,misapplication of rates,miscalculation of invoicing,etc.If UCM
identifies any savings,their fee is 50%of the total savings for the three years of
billing and ongoing savings for three years.Special District's Association,
however,has negotiated a discount for its members of 42%of the total savings
they identify.Staff feels that their services will be a benefit as the District
currently has 91 gas/electric meters with annual billing of approximately $2.8
million.It is felt that there is a real potential for savings/refund.He noted that
UCM does not get paid unless they determine cost savings.
President Bonilla indicated that the District's Finance,Administration and
Communications Committee reviewed this item and the thrust of this action is to
determine if the District could get additional energy cost savings without cost to
the District.He indicated that he wished that this item be presented as an action
item as he wanted the board to be aware of it.
It was discussed that the Public Utilities Commission limits reviews to three years
and is the reason UCM reviews only three years.The District checked UCM's
references and all are positive.Sweetwater Authority had received $80,000 in
refunds for an incorrect rate application.It was noted that there has been no
problems in collecting from the utilities and that they have been very responsive.
A motion was made by Director Breitfelder,seconded by Director Lopez,and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs'recommendation.
b)ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.522 REVISING THE DISTRICTS WATER
SHORTAGE RESPONSE PROGRAM AS CONTAINED WITHIN
SECTION 39 OF THE DISTRICTS CODE OF ORDINANCES
Water Conservation Manager William Granger indicated that much has
happened since the board adopted Section 39 of the District's Code of
Ordinances.In the last nineteen months the region has declared a Level I and II
water shortage alert.The District and two other agencies have remained at a
8
Level I water shortage alert.Given that the District did not need to declare a
Level II alert,staff wished to add some additional flexibility to the language within
Section 39.Language was added that would allow the board to hold off in
activating drought pricing.Depending on the severity of the Level II alert,the
board may not feel that it is necessary as the District may only need customers to
reduce their water use by 11 %versus 20%.Also,there is language that allows
the District to not adopt all Level I provisions though a Level II alert is declared.
Other changes include some clean up language that allows the General Manager
to continue the irrigation schedule at three days a week with a cut back in the fall
during a Level II alert instead of posting a watering schedule.Staff is also
proposing that the word drought be replaced with water supply shortage which
staff feels is more appropriate for the current situation and what is expected in
the future.Proposed Section 39 indicates that if a level three alert is declared,
car washing would be restricted to no more than once a week.Some practices
would be in effect at all times,including not washing down paved surfaces at
anytime,not allowing excessive water waste from inefficient irrigation,and
repairing known leaks within 48 hours,which would allow the District to stay in
compliance with the CA Urban Water Council's water waste prevention best
practice which is a foundational/mandatory BMP.He noted that there are a few
other minor changes which are outlined and highlighted within the strike-thru
version of the staff report.
Director Breitfelder indicated that he had spoken to Conservation Manager
Granger briefly about the items that are always in effect,even in times of no
shortages,and in particular,not allowing washing down of paved surfaces at any
time.He inquired if there was any aspect to not washing down paved surfaces
that makes it more compelling to include as a mandate.Conservation Manager
Granger indicated that if there is a sanitation,health or safety reason for washing
down a paved surface,it would not be considered a violation.The mandates are
driven by the CA Urban Water Council's BMP.If the District's ordinances are not
in compliance with the BMP,it affects the District's ability to pursue grants
outside of conservation such as recycling grant money,etc.Director Breitfelder
indicated that in extraordinary times that require extraordinary measures,
customers understand that they should utilize water wisely.He stated that he did
not favor measures that are in the "nanny"realm,especially in times of non-
shortage.He indicated that he would favor deleting this item.
Director Breitfelder made a motion to accept staffs recommendation with the
exception Section 39.03.e.1 as proposed in Attachment C (page 3)to staff's
report regarding the prohibition of washing down paved surfaces.Director
Croucher proposed an amendment to the motion to revise the language in
Section 39.03.e.1 to indicate "encourage"the no washing down of paved
surfaces.Director Breitfelder accepted the amendment and Director Croucher
seconded the motion.The motion carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
9
It was discussed that staff would review with the CA Urban Water Council if the
proposed change to the language would affect the District's ability to pursue
grants.If it does impact the District's ability to pursue grants,staff will bring this
item back to the board for further revision.
c)APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT WITH
WESTIN ENGINEERING FOR $110,000,INCREASING ITS AMOUNT
FROM $224,280 TO $334,280 AND INCREASING ITS SCOPE TO
INCLUDE THE ASSET MANAGEMENT DATA COLLECTION EFFORT;
AND AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND
ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH SPATIAL WAVE FOR $80,000 TO
COVER THE COST OF SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND
MODIFICATION TO THE FIELD MAPPLET APPLICATION AND
RELATED SOFTWARE TO ACCOMMODATE ASSET MANAGEMENT
PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS
Chief of Information Technology Geoff Stevens indicated that the Asset
Management Program was started a year ago and during this last year the
District has gained some momentum.He indicated that the book value of the
District's assets is approximately $551 million and the replacement value is
approximately $750 million.He noted,however,that the replacement value is
not exactly known as replacement occurs over a long period of time,at the end of
the life cycle of an asset,which is not exactly determinable.He indicated that the
District is doing an excellent job in maintaining its current assets which has been
demonstrated,for example,with the recent vibration test for facilities.He
indicated that there is not a problem with the District's current business practice
in how it maintains assets.However,keeping track of the District's assets and
identifying the best way to maintain assets can be enhanced through
computerized tasks to track assets and determine when they should be serviced
or replaced.The District has about 250,000 individual assets in the ground
which breaks down into approximately 300 different types of assets.The Asset
Management project will collect information about the District's assets and make
it available through a computerized interface.It will be utilized to track District
assets (asset inventory),the work practices used to maintain assets and the
timing of the maintenance/replacement of the assets.
Staff is requesting that the board increase the Westin Engineering contract to
allow them to continue capturing the Best Management Practices
recommendations of the types of information that should be collected about
assets and to approve a contract with Spatial Wave to customize the interface to
the District's Tough Book computers utilized by the field staff.
Chief of Information Technology Stevens indicated that asset management is
emerging as a core discipline that is being incorporated into day-to-day business
practices.It is the missing link between connecting performance management
(how we are doing on a day-to-day basis)and modifying the day-to-day practices
that support preservation of the District's assets.He indicated that 75%of what
the District does is maintain its assets and facilities.
10
He indicated that this is a multi-year project and the first step was a pilot
program.The District is about three quarters of the way through the pilot
program and once the pilot is complete,staff will utilize what they have learned
from the pilot to determine how to collect asset data,what information was
missing,etc.Staff will also assess the condition and the criticality of assets,then
modify maintenance procedures so that resources are directed towards those
items that require attention now.This is a long term discipline and will not be
completed overnight and is a collective effort across the District (enterprise
effort).
Staff will be bringing this project back to report to the board what staff has
learned and request the next piece of resource required to continue the project.
The requested funding is to complete the pilot,determine how the pilot can be
expanded to the District as a whole,and the development of software to support
the business process for asset management.
President Bonilla indicated that the District's Finance,Administration and
Communications Committee reviewed this item and supports the Asset
Management Project as it is important for the District to maintain its assets to
extend their life.He indicated that it would be a tremendous liability for the
District not to have the Asset Management System.
Director Robak indicated that the District has an Asset Management Plan in
place now.He inquired how this project differs from how the District does
business now.Chief of Information Technology Stevens indicated that the
project would enhance what we do now.The District will collect more information
and utilize the information to modify what we will be doing in the future.The
information collected,for example,will help the District determine which facilities
are requiring more maintenance.This will provide a flag that the District needs to
focus some resources on these assets to assure that they are maintained so they
do not break down sooner than its anticipated life or have impact to the system if
the asset go down.The Asset Management system will take what we do now
and make it more precise and adding data behind what we do to support the
District's decision making processes so it is less ad hoclintuitive and more driven
by solid planning through information.It was discussed that it would improve
efficiency and provide foresight on what needs to done for a smoother running
operation.
A motion was made by Director Robak,seconded by Director Lopez,and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs'recommendation.
11
18.ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a)APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH TRAN
CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR THE SEWER SYSTEM INSPECTION
AND ASSESSMENT PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED
$560,025 DURING FISCAL YEARS 2010,2011,2012 AND 2013
(ENDING JUNE 30,2013)
Associate Civil Engineer Bob Kennedy indicated that the Board had approved the
Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP)on July 1,2009 and the plan requires
that the District identify and prioritize system deficiencies.This requires the
services of a professional engineering firm to assist with the field evaluation of
the District's existing sewer system.He indicated that a portion of the District's
sewer system was inspected by RBF Consulting in fiscal year 2009.To
complete the inspection of the remaining sewer system and to reduce costs,an
RFP was issued soliciting costs for a four year inspection program and divided
the remaining uninspected sewer system into specific geographic areas.
Tran Consulting Engineers received the highest overall score.Proposals were
evaluated by staff in accordance with District Policy 21.The District has no past
experience with Tran Consulting Engineers,however,when their references
were checked they were found to be a highly rated company.Staff is
recommending that the District award the Sanitary Sewer CCTV Inspection
Condition Assessment Project to Tran Consulting Engineers inan amount not-to-
exceed $560,025 for fiscal years 2010 to 2013.
Director Croucher indicated that the Engineering,Operations and Water
Resources Committee reviewed this item and appreciated that staff was able to
reduce the cost from $3.50/foot to $1.41/foot for the inspection and condition
assessment of the sewer system.The committee also inquired why staff was
proposing a four year versus five year contract.It was indicated that staff wished
the sewer inspection project to be completed in four years.
Director Robak inquired why the evaluation scores were so different for RBF
Consulting and Tran Consulting Engineers compared to the other four firms who
submitted a proposal.Associate Civil Engineer Kennedy indicated that RBF
Consulting and Tran Consulting Engineers specialize in sewer inspections and
are very ideal for the project.Tran Consulting Engineers'business is focused
only on sewer inspections and they have multi-million dollar contracts doing
inspections work.They are well mobilized and have two video inspections teams
ready to work on the project immediately if needed.Trans Consulting Engineers
would not only view the video they take of the District's sewer system,but will
also provide an engineering assessment of each individual line and manhole.
They look at each individual foot and determine a rating system.The District
utilizes the rating system for future CIP projects and for sewer improvements
required through the inspection.It was noted that the videos will be integrated
into the Asset Management System and each sewer line's video can be viewed
from the system.
12
A motion was made by Director Croucher,seconded by Director Robak,and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs'recommendation.
b)AWARD A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT TO
AECOM FOR THE RANCHO DEL REV GROUNDWATER WELL
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,561,625
Engineering Manager Jim Peasley indicated that the purpose of the Rancho del
Rey Groundwater Well Development Project is to develop a local independent
local water supply in the Rancho del Rey area.It will take approximately six
months to complete this effort following completion of California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA)documentation which is planned to be presented to the
Board in March 2010.Staff had selected AECOM for two primary reasons:1)
they comply with all the requirement in the RFP;and 2)staff believes that there
are significant cost savings identified by AECOM that may possibly drop the cost
of the project below the requested $1,561,625.The actual savings is not yet
known,but staff will present the information to the board once the cost savings
occurs.
It was discussed that the property where the well will be developed was acquired
by the District in 1995.The cost of treating the well water at that time (1995)
exceeded the cost of imported water by a large sum.Today the cost of imported
water versus the treatment of well water is very similar and staff felt it was time to
re-evaluate the well.It was noted,however,that it is difficult to project what a
well will produce.The District could utilize information from the existing well,but
it comes to a point in time when you will need to actually drill and find out how
much the well will produce.Staff is predicting approximately 400 gallons per
minute (GPM)or more.
Mr.Michael Welch,the District's Consulting Engineer for the well project,
indicated that AECOM was also selected as they have local groundwater
development experience not only in this basin,but on the very site of the
proposed project.The overall idea behind the RFP was to make sure that we
were very conservative in establishing a well depth,diameter and facilities that
should provide a minimum of 400 GPM.It was made very clear to all the firms
solicited to submit a proposal that the RFP was a competition of ideas to
increase the yield of the well and reduce the cost of the construction of the well
(who has the best ideas to provide the greatest value to the District).There is a
well on the site and water will be yielded from the well,however,it is not certain
how much water will be yielded.The water yielded from the well will be included
In the District's offset program for future annexations.
13
There was a concern that the District would be making a large investment into
this project without being certain what results it would yield.It was indicated that
the District has studied the potential of the well and solicited expert advise,but at
some point,a decision needs to be made to drill to know what will be yielded
from the well.McMillan had utilized the well water for construction when the
Rancho del Rey area was being developed,so it is certain that there is water.To
identify how much water can be yielded,the District will need to drill.It was
further indicated that the aquifer is a large confined aquifer deep underground
that has been studied and extensively documented to cover a very wide area
(many square miles)and that it has a significant degree of thickness.The
possibility of missing the aquifer when drilling is almost impossible.Another
question that will be answered by drilling is the quality of water that will be
yielded from the well.The overall economics of this project may be,in part,
dependent on the quality of water.The less salt in the water the less treatment it
will require and a greater value can be achieved from the wells production.
It was discussed that the National City wells owned by Sweetwater Authority pull
from this same formation and staff had acquired the board's authorization for a
partnership with Sweetwater Authority to explore the same formation along the
Sweetwater River between Interstates 805 and 5.Staff is confident the well will
produce water,it is identifying the quantity and quality that will be yielded that is
in question.Once the quantity and quality is known,staff will analyze the per
acre foot cost to produce water from the well.At this point,based on the
findings,staff could stop moving forward with the well.However,staff feels that it
is unlikely as the cost has been estimated based on prior studies and it is felt that
the cost will be competitive.
A motion was made by Director Croucher,seconded by Director Lopez,and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla,Breitfelder,Croucher,Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs'recommendation.
19.BOARD
a)DISCUSSION OF 2009 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
Director Croucher noted that he will be out of the country on April 7,2010.It was
discussed that as Director Croucher will be the only Director unable to attend the April 7
board meeting and the District would still have a quorum,the District will go forward with
the meeting as scheduled.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
14
20.THESE ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIONAL
PURPOSES ONLY.NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING
AGENDA ITEMS.
a)INFORMATIONAL REPORT ON A NEWLY IMPLEMENTED
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM THAT EVALUATES THE
CONDITION OF EQUIPMENT TO AVOID FAILURES (ANDERSON)
Chief of Operations Pedro Porras indicated that the District has 75 pump stations
throughout the District for the potable system.Staff implemented a new vibration
testing program to evaluate the condition of pumping equipment through the
detection of defects in pump and motor bearings,etc.to avoid failures.The
District contracted Predictive Maintenance Solutions (PDMS)to evaluate the 30
oldest District pumps and motors.The results were very good with only three
pieces of equipment requiring minor attention (not requiring immediate repairs).
Mr.Steve Matthews of PDMS complimented staff on how well the District's
pumps and motors are maintained and indicated in his report to the District that
"generally when organizations start a new vibration analysis program,the initial
report often contains a relatively high percentage of machines that require
immediate attention."Chief of Operations Porras indicated that the compliments
should go to the staff of the Pump and Electric Division and noted that the District
has already responded to the results of the analysis and will handle the repairs
through the District's preventative maintenance cycle.
b)FISCAL YEAR 2010 FIRST QUARTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM UPDATE REPORT (RIPPERGER)
Engineering Manager Ron Ripperger presented the first quarter CIP update in
which he highlighted the status of CIP expenditures,significant issues and
progress milestones on major projects.
He noted that the Fiscal Year 2010 CIP consists of 87 projects totaling $37.3
million.He indicated that the District's CIP is broken down into four categories:
•Capital Facility Projects
•Replacement/Renewal
•Capital Purchases
•Developer Reimbursements
TOTAL:
$28.73 million
$6.72 million
$1.83 million
$0.00 million
$37.30 million
He stated that overall expenditures through the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2010
totaled approximately $5.3 million,which is approximately 14%of the District's
fiscal year budget.He noted that construction change orders were at -.52%
overall.
He presented a slide depicting a map showing the District's major CIP projects,
their status and their location within the District's service area.He stated,of the
eleven projects depicted,one is in the planning stage,two are in design,seven
15
are in construction and one has been completed and in use.He reviewed the
status of the District's flagship projects which included the 36-inch Pipeline from
FCF No.14,1296-3 Reservoir,850-4 Reservoir,1485-1 Pump Station
Replacement and 450-1 Reservoir Disinfection Facility.
Engineering Manager Ripperger presented slides which provide the status of the
various consultant contracts for planning,design,public services,
construction/inspection and environmental.He also presented slides providing a
listing of all CIP projects planned for Fiscal Year 2010 and the status of each.
c)INFORMATIONAL REPORT ON THE STATUS OF THE 36-INCH
PIPELINE PROJECT (RIPPERGER)
Engineering Manager Ripperger introduced Mr.Bryan lusky,an owner of CCl
Contracting,Inc.,who is the project manager on the 36-inch pipeline project.He
provided an update on the progress of the project and indicated that the board
had awarded the construction contract for the pipeline project to CCl Contracting
on June 3,2009.The project is a key component of the County Water
Authority's East County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program.It
consists of the installation of approximately 5 miles of 36-inch pipe within Rancho
San Diego and the City of EI Cajon and the replacement of a small portion of 8-
inch and 12-inch pipe within Jamacha Road for the recycled system.The
construction contract for this project is for approximately $16 million.The project
required two critical permits:1)Allowing CCl to work during the day time from
CalTrans;and 2)a ''Take Permit"that will allow the District to continue
construction of the pipeline through February 15 in the Cuyamaca College area.
Acquiring the permit that allows the District to work in the day time is an
enormous benefit to the project as there was concern of disturbing the
community at night with construction noise.The "Take Permit"was also
important as it allows the District to construct the pipeline project near an
endangered species habitat.
He indicated that the 8-inch and 12-inch pipelines are complete with the
exception of tying them into the District's existing system.It is expected that they
will be tied into the system in February or March 2010.The plan to date is to
complete all work around Cuyamaca College by February 15 and tying the 36-
inch pipe into the system in June/July 2010.He presented slides showing the
project pipe alignment.The project is anticipated to be completed in August
2010.
Communications Officer Armando Buelna provided the board an update on the
status of communications with the public on the project.He indicated that staff
and the District's public relations consultant,Marston and Marston,developed a
Public Outreach Plan for the project prior to construction commencing.Staff has
been implementing the program in the last six to eight months and,thus far,it
has been successful.The District has met with Cuyamaca College,Water
Conservation Garden,Child Care Center,community HOA's,schools,etc.to
16
assure that the community is not surprised by the construction and meetings
have gone very well.
He stated that one recent success with the public outreach program was an
inquiry from Channel 10 reporter,Joe Little,who also happens to be a customer
of the Otay Water District.Mr.Little had read a small article that was published
in the District's customer newsletter and called the District about doing a story on
the 36-inch Pipeline Project.As construction was just about to commence on
Jamacha Road,staff felt that it would be an excellent opportunity to advise the
community of the construction activity for the 36-inch Pipeline Project and inform
them of the overall importance of the East County Regional Treated Water
Improvement Program to the broader area.Otay along with the County Water
Authority and Helix participated in the television report.The television report was
played for the members of the board.Much of the information in Mr.Little's
report came directly out of the District's press releases and fact sheets.
As the project moves towards EI Cajon,the District will host an open house for
the residents and will contact them months prior to construction to hear their
concerns.
It was discussed the recent earthquake did not impact District installations or
facilities.
REPORTS
21.GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
General Manager Watton commended staff who worked on the Salvation Army's
Adopt a Family program and other charities during the holidays.He thanked
everyone who participated and provided support.
He indicated that the annual employee recognition luncheon is scheduled on
Wednesday,January 27,at 1:00 p.m.at the Steele Canyon Golf Course.
He also noted that the District participated in the annual Fall WaterSmart
Gardening Festival hosted by the Water Conservations Garden.He stated that
attendance of the festival was about the same,however the Water Conservation
Garden raised 50%more funding through this event than last year.He stated
that plans are still moving forward to identify the Water Conservation Garden as
a 501(c)3 organization and making it more self-supporting with an independent
governance board.The Garden also plans to hire a professional fundraiser.
He stated that the Chula Vista City Council approved a revised Landscape Water
Conservation Ordinance which will apply to all new developments.Staff has
been working with the City very closely on the new ordinance.It has been an
excellent collaboration and Developers are also in support of the new ordinance.
General Manager Watton indicated that a new directive has been issued by the
State requiring that urban per capita water use be reduced by 20%by 2020.He
17
indicated that it appears the District has already met this goal.Staff anticipates
going forward that there will be more conservation.He noted that water sales
are below budget by 8%(down from 13%).This is a level that staff feels
confident in being able to work through in the budget.Staff will keep the board
apprised of the budgets status as we get further into the fiscal year.
He indicated that staff is currently evaluating the charge for water deliveries to
Mexico via the delivery agreement under the treaty with Mexico.Staff expects to
bring the results of the evaluation at the February committee meetings.
He stated that staff is evaluating the cost of banking services and how current
banking services and cost compare to other banking institutions.Information
regarding the outcome of the comparison will be presented to the board following
the evaluation.
He also shared that the District will be awarded $2 million more in grants this
fiscal year from the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation than had been anticipated.
Congressman Filner has been very helpful in acquiring the appropriation from the
Federal Government which is split between the agencies in our region.He
indicated that as the other agencies are not performing,the monies have been
awarded to the District.The District has a fixed amount that it can collect on a
grant,however,the District will be able to collect the grant monies more qUickly.
Overall the District will collect approximately $12 million.
He indicated that the treatment plant received a surprise inspection visit from
Cal-OSHA and received a compliment from the inspector,Mr.Mike Doering.Mr.
Doering sent an email to staff indicating,"My first impression of your operation
(not having looked at all the documents yet)is that old phrase 'clean as a
whistle.'I commend you guys for all that you are doing to prevent a mishap and
you are doing so without just blindly switching to hypochlorite,which has its own
set of problems.There are some documentary hurdles that one must climb over
to be in compliance with PSM and RMP,but once that is achieved and adequate
precautions are taken,the use of chlorine can continue without incident.Again,
what you have in place at your plant is very impressive."This really commends
the District's staff,from the line staff at the treatment plant to the managers and
supervisors,and the technology the District has in place.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE:
Director Croucher indicated that the County Water Authority (CWA)is still
focused on new sources such as the Carlsbad desalination project (which is
moving forward),the conservation of the Bay Delta,etc.The newest issue
developing at CWA is the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA)litigation
matter.General Manager Watton indicated that there are 31 contracts within the
QSA agreement.Thirteen of the contracts were litigated in a Sacramento court
to prove their validity and the judge had ruled against CWA (this is a tentative
ruling at this time).CWA feels that the Judge is fundamentally wrong in his ruling
as the assertions that he quoted from areas of the constitution is not relevant to
this issue.CWA will be appealing the matter and it is expected that the ruling will
18
be "stayed"and the water will still flow per the QSA agreement.He will keep the
board informed on this issue.
He also noted that he provided information concerning the consumption of each
agency as they compare to their CWA allocations.All agencies are doing well
against their allocations.A powerpoint is also included which provides an
outlook for the water supply in FYs 2011 through 2013.He noted that in FYs
2011 and 2012 that our region is a little exposed to supply issues,but in FY 2013
the QSA water supply will be increased and the water supply picture will improve
for CWA.It is felt that we will be fine,but must keep on track with the
conservation that we are all doing.
22.DIRECTORS'REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Breitfelder indicated that he regrets that he was unable to attend the
employee holiday dinner due to.illness.He reported that the Conservation Action
Committee did not meet during the holidays,but discussions at the last meeting
shifted to promoting the model ordinance to the various municipalities and
appropriate government agencies.The County and the City of San Diego are
very close to adopting the new model ordinance.He stated that the Council of
Water Utilities and the Water Agencies Association are continuing discussion on
merging the two associations and are formalizing the merger through a vote of
their membership.
Director Croucher indicated that he had the opportunity to see CCl working on
the 36-inch Pipeline Project and had shared with both General Manager Watton
and Engineering Manager Ron Ripperger how well the project was going and
how well CCl was representing the District in terms of their very minimal
disruption to traffic within the area during construction and keeping the
construction sites very neat.He thanked staff and CCl for the good work.
Director lopez indicated that he also apologizes for not being able to attend the
employee holiday dinner due to a family event.He reported that he did have the
opportunity to participate in the City of Chula Vista's holiday parade on behalf of
the District.He also commended District employees,Lincoln Anderson and
Vince Brown,for their participation and work on the parade.He stated he was
also pleasantly surprised to see a number of Otay employees and their families
in attendance of the parade.
Director Robak indicated that in November 2009 he had an opportunity to attend
a statewide presentation on the new regulations concerning recycled water at
Irvine Ranch Water District.He had an opportunity to speak with many who he
has not seen in the last year and it was a productive meeting.He also attended
the ACWA conference held in San Diego in early December 2009.He stated
that there was a lot of good content and Governor Schwarzenegger spoke on the
water bond.He also had an opportunity to speak with Mr.Tim Quinn,Executive
Director of ACWA.He indicated that the Water Conservation Garden also held
an evening event prior to the holidays and it was very well attended.He
indicated that he was very pleased to see the success of the event.He also
19
shared information with the Water Conservation Garden staff members some
grant opportunities that they may have interest in pursing.He also attended the
employee holiday dinner and it was also well attended and he had a very nice
time.He wished everyone a Happy New Year.
23.PRESIDENT'S REPORT
President Bonilla indicated that he and staff have been meeting with the group
involved in the Rosarito Desalination Project.He indicated that there are still
issues to be worked through,but the project is moving forward and progressing
well.He indicated that he also attended the employee holiday dinner and that he
too had a good time and he felt it was a very good event.He wished everyone a
Happy New and that he was looking forward to a tough,but productive year.He
stated that indicators suggest that this year will be more challenging than last
year.He indicated that he,however,believes that the District is in a position to
withstand the struggles that this year will bring.He stated that he was very
gratefUl to Director Croucher for the two years he served as president.He stated
that he did an excellent job during these tough times and he is happy to be
associated with him and the rest of the board.
24.ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board,President Bonilla adjourned
the meeting at 5:55 p.m.
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
20
AGENDA ITEM 7a
STAFF REPORT
All
and
DIV.NO.
June 2,2010
W.O.lG.F.NO:
MEETING DATE:
William E.Granger,WaterWb ~~::s:::::~o:h:::a::rAdministratiVe serVic~
German Alv~r~,~~ssistant General Mana;::~Finance
Administra~
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!. GM):
TYPE MEETING:Regular Board
SUBMITTED BY:
SUBJECT:ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.4157 AND 4158 AS REQUIRED TO RECEIVE THE
U.S.BUREAU OF RECLAMATION'S WATERSMART GRANT FUNDING
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution No.4157 and No.4158 in order
for the District to be considered for Watersmart grant funding
from the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see "Attachment A".
PURPOSE:
To adopt Resolution No.4157 and No.4158 as required by the
U.S.Bureau of Reclamation in order to be considered for grant
funding.
ANALYSIS:
The U.S.Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation)released a Funding
Opportunity Announcement in March of 2010,making up to
$10,000,000 in funding available to irrigation and water
districts throughout the Western and Midwestern United States.
Applications were due on May 4,2010 and Reclamation required
that resolutions be adopted by the District's Board of Directors
no later than 30 days after the application deadline,or by June
3rd •
The District submitted two grant proposals to Reclamation asking
for up to $229,375 in funding over two years.The first
proposal is titled the "Otay Watersmart Residential Landscape
Conversion Project",which is referenced within Resolution No.
4157.The second was titled "Otay Commercial,Industrial and
Institutional Water and Energy Efficiency Project,referenced in
Resolution No.4158.
Otay Watersmart Residential Landscape Conversion Project:The
District is asking for $129,375 over two years.Reclamation
funding would be used to increase the District's incentive from
$1 to $1.50 per square foot of turfgrass replaced with water
wise plants.It is anticipated that 60,000 square feet of
turfgrass in front yards of single family homes will be replaced
through this program in the first year.In addition,
Reclamation funding will be used to augment the current $200
rebate available toward the installation of smart irrigation
controllers.Up to an additional $200 will be available for
homeowners who hire a licensed landscape contractor to install
and program their controller and up to $100 will be available to
improve a site's irrigation water efficiency.Residential
landscapes will be inspected by District staff and minimum
irrigation efficiency will be required before the customer is
eligible to receive the full smart controller rebate.
If approved,the District would administer all of the
residential landscape efficiency programs,which would include
the $3 per rotating nozzle rebate and the $200 smart controller,
both currently funded and administered by Metropolitan's
consultant under the So Cal Water Smart Rebate Program.
Currently,the District provides $120 of the $200 residential
smart controller rebate.On a related note,the District will
enter into an agreement with the Water Authority and MET to be
able to receive reimbursement for the smart controller and
rotating nozzle rebates fronted by the District.
Otay Commercial,Industrial and Institutional Water and Energy
Efficiency Project:
The District is asking for $100,000 over two years as referenced
in Resolution No.4158.If funded by Reclamation,the District
would double the available funding of commercial process
improvements currently funded through our pilot Commercial
process improvement program.District staff will administer the
program and conduct pre and post retrofit evaluations.The
District's commercial,institutional and industrial customers
would be eligible to receive up to $50,000 in total,paid in two
installments,based upon the water saved in Hundred Cubic Feet
(HCF)multiplied by $6/HCF over the process life (5 year
minimum).Examples of process improvements include installation
of an ozone treatment of laundry rinse water,and recycling car
wash reverse osmosis water for on-site irrigation.
If funded,these two grants will also help the District meet its
2020 gallon per capita per day targets as required by SB 7 X7
legislation (20%by 2020),signed into law by the Governor in
November of 2009.The Otay Watersmart residential grant is
expected to save 24.44 acre feet a year or 171 acre feet over
the seven year life of the measures,whereas the commercial
water efficiency grant is anticipated to save 21.5 acre feet a
year or 150 acre feet over the seven year expected life of the
measures.The District expects to learn by late summer whether
these two grant applications are awarded.
FISCAL IMPACT
Both the extra expense and the extra revenue for the first year
of both grant applications are in the District's FY 2011 budget.
If funded by Reclamation,both the extra expense and revenue
would also be included in the FY 2012 budget.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Pursuing this funding is consistent with our "total water saved"
performance measure (1.3.102)which is a measure of the water
saved through our conservation programs In FY 2011,our goal is
to increase our water saving efforts by another 135 acre-feet.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Not applicable.
General Manager
Attachments:Attachment A -Committee Action
Attachment B -Resolution 4157
Attachment C -Resolution 4158
ATTACHMENT A
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.4157 AND 4158 AS REQUIRED TO RECEIVE
SUBJECTIPROJECT:THE U.S.BUREAU OF RECLAMATION'S WATERSMART GRANT FUNDING
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,Administration and Communications Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on May 19,2010 and the
following comments were made:
•The District has submitted two WaterSMART grant proposals
totaling $229,375 (for funding in the next two fiscal
years)to the United States Bureau of Reclamation.
•It was discussed that the deadline for the submittal of
the grant applications was May 4.Staff had submitted
the District's application on April 30th.In order for
the District to be considered for the grants,the
District must adopt resolutions of support no later than
30 days after the application deadline or by June 3rd •
•The first resolution is for the Otay WaterSmart
Residential Landscape Program.Staff is requesting 37%
of the funding for this program from the Bureau of
Reclamation.If the District is successful in acquiring
the funding,it would increase the District's incentive
from $1 to $1.50 per square foot of front lawn turf grass
that is replaced by water wise plants.The funding would
also be used to augment the smart controller rebate
program.Currently,the District provides a $120 rebate
and funding from the grant would provide an additional
rebate of up to $200 to customers who hire a licensed
landscape contractor to install their controller and up
to $100 will be available for improving their landscapes
irrigation efficiency.The District would administer all
residential landscape efficiency programs and acquire
reimbursement from Metropolitan Water District for the
funding they provide for these programs through San Diego
County Water Authority.
•The second resolution is for the Commercial Process
Improvement Program which is currently a pilot program in
this years budget and has also been included in next
year's budget.The District is applying for a $100,000
grant over a two year period which will provide 42%of
the funding for the program.If successful in acquiring
this grant,it would double funding available for this
program.This program is available to commercial,
industrial and institutional businesses who have
identified a process improvement plan that will provide
water savings.The program will be administered by the
District.
•Savings from the two programs would equal 46 acre feet a
year.The District will be notified at the end of June
or early July if it is successful in acquiring the
grants.The District has budgeted for the extra expense
and revenue in the FY 2011 budget and,as it is a two
year request,the program would be included in the FY
2012 budget as well.
•It was noted that the grants are "matching funds"grants
and the more the District contributes,the more likely it
will get funded.Also,as they are matching funds
grants,as was noted earlier,the District has included
funding in the FY 2011 budget for the additional expenses
for the residential and commercial conservation programs
in anticipation of receiving the grants.If the grants
are not received,then the District's bUdget will be a
little high in FY 2011.
Upon completion of the discussion the committee supported
staffs'recommendation and presentation to the full board on the
consent calendar.
Attachment B
RESOLUTION NO.4157
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT IDENTIFYING THE GENERAL
MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL TO COMMIT
OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO FINANCIAL AND LEGAL
OBLIGATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE POTENTIAL
RECEIPT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE UNDER THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR,
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION WaterSMART:WATER AND
ENERGY EFFICIENCY GRANTS FOR FY 2010 FOR THE
DISTRICT'S WATER SMART RESIDENTIAL
CONVERSION PROGRAM
WHEREAS,the Otay Water District (District)is a
public agency providing water,sewer,and recycled services
to a population of approximately 203,000 within
approximately 125 square miles of southeastern San Diego
County,including the communities of Spring Valley,La
Presa,Rancho San Diego,Jamul,eastern Chula Vista and
Otay Mesa;and
WHEREAS,the District's mission is to deliver safe,
reliable,and affordable water service;and
WHEREAS,there is increasing water resource challenges
across the nation and the conservation of water is needed
to meet the water supply needs of our region;and
WHEREAS,the President of the United States signed
into law The American Recovery and Investment Act of 2009
funding the United States Department of Interior,Bureau of
Reclamation Challenge Grant Program:WaterSMART:Water and
Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2010;and
1
WHEREAS,the District supports the submittal of an
application for financial assistance under the WaterSMART:
Water and Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2010;and
WHEREAS,the District identifies the General Manager
as the official with legal authority to enter into a
potential cooperative grant agreement to receive financial
assistance under the WaterSMART:Water and Energy
Efficiency Grants for FY 2010;and
WHEREAS,the District has approved in its FY 2011
budget the resources to provide for both the hours of in-
kind services as well as its share of the funding as
outlined in its submitted funding plan;and
WHEREAS,the District will work with the United States
Department of Interior,Bureau of Reclamation to meet
established deadlines for entering into a potential
cooperative grant agreement,and
WHEREAS,the grant funding will be used to enhance the
incentive rebates of the District's Residential Water
Conservation Programs and will also assist the District In
meeting its 2020 gallon per capita per day targets as
required by SB 7 X7 legislation (20%by 2020),signed into
law by the Governer of California in November 2009;and
WHEREAS,through the assistance of the grant it is
expected that the District will save,through the
2
residential conservation progam alone,approximately 24.44
acre feet a year or 171 acre feet over the seven year life
of the measure;and
NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED,
DETERMINED,AND ORDERED,by the Board of Directors of the
Otay Water District that 1)The General Manager is the
official with legal authority to enter into a potential
cooperative grant agreement for receipt of financial
assistance under the WaterSMART:Water and Energy
Efficiency Grants for FY 2010,2)It supports the submittal
of an application for financial assistance under the
WaterSMART:Water and Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2010,
3)The District has identified in its FY 2011 budget the
resources to provide the in-kind services and funding as
outlined in its funding plan,and 4)The District will work
with the United States Department of Interior,Bureau of
Reclamation to meet established deadlines for entering into
a potential cooperative grant agreement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the District Secretary is
hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this
resolution to the Bureau of Reclamation,Acquisition
Operations Group,Attn:Stephanie Bartlett,Mail Code:84-
27810,PO BOX 25007,Denver,CO 80225 forthwith.
3
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors
of Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 2nd
day of June,2010 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
4
Attachment C
RESOLUTION NO.4158
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT IDENTIFYING THE GENERAL
MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL TO COMMIT
OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO FINANCIAL AND LEGAL
OBLIGATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE POTENTIAL
RECEIPT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE UNDER THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR,
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION WATERSMART:WATER AND
ENERGY EFFICIENCY GRANTS FOR FY 2010 FOR THE
DISTRICT'S COMMERCIAL WATER CONSERVATION
PROGRAM
WHEREAS,the Otay Water District (District)is a
public agency providing water,sewer,and recycled services
to a population of approximately 203,000 within
approximately 125 square miles of southeastern San Diego
County,including the communities of Spring Valley,La
Presa,Rancho San Diego,Jamul,eastern Chula Vista and
Otay Mesa;and
WHEREAS,the District's mission is to deliver safe,
reliable,and affordable water service;and
WHEREAS,there is increasing water resource challenges
across the nation and the conservation of water is needed
to meet the water supply needs of our region;and
WHEREAS,the President of the United States signed
into law The American Recovery and Investment Act of 2009
funding the United States Department of Interior,Bureau of
Reclamation Challenge Grant Program:WaterSMART:Water and
Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2010;and
1
WHEREAS,the District supports the submittal of an
application for financial assistance under the WaterSMART:
Water and Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2010;and
WHEREAS,the District identifies the General Manager
as the official with legal authority to enter into a
potential cooperative grant agreement to receive financial
assistance under the WaterSMART:Water and Energy
Efficiency Grants for FY 2010;and
WHEREAS,the District has approved in its FY 2011
budget the resources to provide for both the hours of in-
kind services as well as its share of the funding as
outlined in its submitted funding plan;and
WHEREAS,the District will work with the United States
Department of Interior,Bureau of Reclamation to meet
established deadlines for entering into a potential
cooperative grant agreement,and
WHEREAS,the grant funding will be used to enhance
(double)the funding available for commercial process
improvements which is currently funded through the
District'pilot commercial process improvement program;and
will also assist the District in meeting its 2020 gallon
per capita per day targets as required by SB 7 X7
legislation (20%by 2020),signed into law by the Governer
of California in November 2009;and
2
WHEREAS,through the assistance of the grant it is
expected that the District will save,through the
commercial conservation program alone,approximately 21.5
acre feet a year or 150 acre feet over the seven year life
of the measure;and
NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED,
DETERMINED,AND ORDERED,by the Board of Directors of the
Otay Water District that 1)The General Manager is the
official with legal authority to enter into a potential
cooperative grant agreement for receipt of financial
assistance under the WaterSMART:Water and Energy
Efficiency Grants for FY 2010,2)It supports the submittal
of an application for financial assistance under the
WaterSMART:Water and Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2010,
3)The District has identified in its FY 2011 budget the
resources to provide the in-kind contributions and funding
as specified within its funding plan,and 4)The District
will work with the United States Department of Interior,
Bureau of Reclamation to meet established deadlines for
entering into a potential cooperative grant agreement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the District Secretary is
hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this
resolution to the Bureau of Reclamation,Acquisition
3
Operations Group,Attn:Stephanie Bartlett,Mail Code:84-
27810,PO BOX 25007,Denver,CO 80225 forthwith.
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors
of Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 2nd
day of June,2010 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
4
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 7b
TYPE MEETING:Regular Board
SUBMITIED BY:Sean Prendergast,i(J
MEETING DATE:
W.O.lG.F.NO:
June 2,2010
DIV.NO.All
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:
Payroll/AP sup~~
Joseph R.Beach,e ,'hief Financial Officer
Ge~varez,Assistant General Manager,Administration and
Finance
Director's Expenses for the 3rd Quarter of Fiscal Year 2010
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
This is an informational item only.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To inform the Board of the Director's expenses for the 3rd
quarter of Fiscal Year 2010
ANALYSIS:
The Director's expense information is being presented in order
to comply with State law.(See Attachment B for Summary and C-H
for Details.)
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Prudently manage District funds.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Compliance with State law.
Attachments:
A)Committee Action Form
B)Director's Expenses and per Diems
C-H)Director's Expenses Detail
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:Director's Expenses for the 3rd Quarter of Fiscal Year 2010
COMMITTEE ACTION:
This item was presented to the Finance,Administration and
Communications Committee at a meeting held on May 19,2010.The
expenses for each director from January 1,2010 thru March 31,
2010 was presented.It was indicated that the total expenditure
for the period was $3,773.20 and,thus far,for fiscal year
2010,the total expenditure was $13,465.80.It was noted that
the District has just received the March 2010 per diem requests
for Directors Lopez and Robak and staffs'report will be revised
to include their per diem requests for March 2010.Following
the discussion,the committee recommended that this item be
presented to the full board on the consent calendar.
C:\Documents and Settings\Seanp\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKC9\CommMtgDirExp060210.doc
General Manager
Attachments:
A)Committee Action Form
B)Director's Expenses and per Diems
C-H)Director's Expenses Detail
ATTACHMENT B
BOARD OF DIRECTORS'
EXPENSES AND PER-DIEMS
BOARD OF DIRECRORS'MEETING
JUNE 2,2010
Policy 8 requires that staff present the Expenses and
Per-Diems for the Board of Directors on a Quarterly
basis:
•Fiscal Year 2010,3rd Quarter.
•The expenses are shown in detail by Board
member,month and expense type.
•This presentation is in alphabetical order.
•This information was presented to the Finance,
Administration,and Communications Committee
on May 19,2010.
Board of Directors'Expenses and Per-Diems
Fiscal Year 2010 Quarter 3 (Jan 10-Mar 10)
•Director Bonilla
•Director Breitfelder
•Director Croucher
•Director Lopez
•Director Robak
•Total
$20.00
$1,627.70
$1,200.00
$760.00
$490.50
$4,098.20
Director Bonilla
Fiscal Year 2010 Quarter 3
Jan 10 Feb 10 Mar 10
Business Meetings 0.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Business 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Commuting 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2009 (Jul 09-Mar 10)
0,00 0,00
$0.00
$20.00
Director Bonilla does not request per diem reimbursements
Meetings Attended
Meetings Paid
Director Breitfelder
Fiscal Year 2010 Quarter 3
Jan 10 Feb 10 Mar 10
Business Meetings 0.00 25.00 25.00
Director's Fees 400.00 400.00 500.00
Mileage Business 40.00 61.50 78.50
Mileage Commuting 34.00 34.00 30.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2009 (Jul 09-Mar 10)
474,00 520,20 633,50
$1,627,70
$4,374,30
Meetings Attended 4 4 5
Meetings Paid 4 4 5
Director Croucher
Fiscal Year 2010 Quarter 3
Jan 10 Feb 10 Mar 10
Business Meetings 0.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 400.00 200.00 600.00
Mileage Business 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Commuting 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2009 (Jul 09-Mar 10)
400,00 200,00 600,00
$1,200,00
$3,300.00
Meetings Attended 5 2 6
Meetings Paid 4 2 6
Director Lopez
Fiscal Year 2010 Quarter 3
Jan 10 Feb 10 Mar 10
Business Meetings 0.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 300.00 200.00 200.00
Mileage Business 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Commuting 20.00 20.00 20.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2009 (Jul 09-Mar 10)
320,00 220,00 220,00
$760,00
$2,627,10
Meetings Attended 3 2 2
Meetings Paid 3 2 2
Director Robak
Fiscal Year 2010 Quarter 3
Jan 10 Feb 10 Mar 10
Business Meetings 20.00 25.00 0.00
Director's Fees 100.00 200.00 100.00
Mileage Business 3.00 33.50 3.00
Mileage Commuting 2.00 2.00 2.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2009 (Jul 09-Mar 10)
125.00 260.50 105.00
$490.50
$3,469.40
Meetings Attended 4 4 1
Meetings Paid 1 2 1
Board of Directors'Expenses and Per Diems
Fiscal Year 2010 to Date (Jul 09-Mar 10)
•Director Bonilla
•Director Breitfelder
•Director Croucher
•Director Lopez
•Director Robak
•Total
$20.00
$4,374.30
$3,300.00
$2,627.10
$3,469.40
$13,790.80
Board of Directors'Expenses and Per Diems
*Projected Fiscal Year 2010 (luI 09-lun 10)
•Director Bonilla
•Director Breitfelder
•Director Croucher
•Director Lopez
•Director Robak
•Total
$40.00
$5,832.00
$4,400.00
$3,502.00
$4,625.00
$18,399.00
•*Based on actual expenses through 3rd quarter
SECTIONC
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES -BOARD
July 1,2009 -March 31,2010
Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-l0 Feb-l0 Mar-l0 Apr-l0 May-l0 Jun-l0 Total
JAIME BONILLA (DETAILED INSECTION D):
5214 Businessmeetings $$$$20.00 $$$$$20.00
5281 Director's fees
5211 Mileage -Business
5211 Mileage -Commuting
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total $$$20.00 $$$$$$20.00
LARRYBREITFELDER (DETAILED INSECTION E):
5214 Business meetings $25.00 $25.00 $84.00 $25.00 $$25.00 25.00 $$$209.00
5281 Director's fees 600.00 300.00 500.00 500.00 200.00 400.00 400.00 500.00 3,400.00
5211 Mileage -Business 22.00 22.00 90.20 112.20 46.20 40.00 61.50 78.50 472.60
521l Mileage -Commuting 82.50 37.40 37.40 18.70 18.70 34.00 34.00 30.00 292.70
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total $704.50 $25.00 384.40 627.60 $714.90 $289.90 474.00 520.50 $633.50 $$$$4,374.30
GARY D.CROUCHER (DETAILED IN SECTION F):
5214 Businessmeetings $$$$$$$$$$
5281 Director's fees 500.00 300.00 600.00 500.00 200.00 400.00 200.00 600.00 3,300.00
5211 Mileage-Business
5211 Mileage-Commuting
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total 500.00 $300.00 $600.00 $500.00 $200.00 $400.00 $200.00 $600.00 $$$3,300.00
JOSELOPEZ (DETAILED IN SECTIONG):
5214 Business meetings $$$45.00 $$$$$$$$45.00
5281 Director's fees 300.00 500.00 300.00 400.00 100.00 100.00 300.00 200.00 200.00 2,400.00
5211 Mileage -Business 13.20 20.90 34.10
5211 Mileage -Commuting 22.00 33.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 148.00
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total $322.00 $546.20 311.00 476.90 $111.00 $100.00 320.00 220.00 220.00 $$2,627.10
MARKROBAK(DETAILEDIN SECTION H):
5214 Business meetings $20.00 $20.00 20.00 200.00 $640.00 20.00 $25.00 $$$$945.00
5281 Director's fees 200.00 300.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 500.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 2,000.00
5211 Mileage -Business 20.35 45.10 3.30 18.70 101.75 121.30 3.00 33.50 3.00 350.00
5211 Mileage -Commuting 2.20 4.40 2.20 4.40 2.20 2.00 2.00 2.00 21.40
5213 Seminars and conferences 50.00 15.00 88.00 153.00
5212 Travel
Total 242.55 $419.50 $240.50 $423.10 303.95 $1,349.30 125.00 $260.50 $105.00 $$$$3,469.40
TOTALS:
5214 Business meetings $20.00 $45.00 $45.00 $245.00 $104.00 $665.00 $20.00 $50.00 $25.00 $$$$1,219.00
5281 Director's fees 1,600.00 800.00 1,100.00 1,700.00 1,300.00 1,000.00 1,200.00 1,000.00 1,400.00 11,100.00
5211 Mileage -Business 42.35 58.30 25.30 129.80 213.95 167.50 43.00 95.00 81.50 856.70
5211 Mileage-Commuting 106.70 37.40 50.60 52.80 31.90 18.70 56.00 56.00 52.00 462.10
5213 Seminarsandconferences 50.00 15.00 88.00 153.00
5212 Travel
Total $1,769.05 $990.70 $1,235.90 $2,127.60 $1,649.85 $1,939.20 $1,319.00 $1,201.00 $1,558.50 $$$$13,790.80
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:BONILLA,JAIME ATTACHMENT D
11/19/2009 MEXICAN AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL $
ASSOCIATION EVENT
Account Name
Business meetings
Date Descriptions
SECTION 0
Amount
20.00
Mar 10AlBonilia J Page 2 of Pages 11
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:BREITFELDER,LARRY ATTACHMENT E
Account Name
Business meetings
Business meetings Total
Date
8/18/2009
9/15/2009
11/17/2009
11/19/2009
12/15/2009
2/16/2010
3/16/2010
Descriptions
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS
MEXICAN AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL
ASSOCIATION EVENT
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
SECTION E
Amount
$25.00
25.00
25.00
39.00
20.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
209.00
Director's Fee 7/1/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
7/6/2009 CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
7/7/2009 INTRA SITE TOUR -DISTRICT FACILITY SITE 100.00
(1296-3 RESERVOIR)
7/10/2009 AD HOC LEGAL MATTERS COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
7/20/2009 GM REVIEW -AGENDA BRIEFING 100.00
7/27/2009 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER 100.00
RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
9/2/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
9/15/2009 CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
9/28/2009 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER 100.00
RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
10/5/2009 CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
10/7/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
10/15/2009 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER 100.00
RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
10/20/2009 COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES 100.00
10/21/2009 CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
11/3/2009 CADS BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
11/4/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
11/9/2009 CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
11/17/2009 COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES 100.00
Mar 1OAlBreitfelder L Page 3 ofPages 11
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:BREITFELDER,LARRY ATTACHMENT E
Account Name
Director's Fee Total
Date
11/19/2009
12/2/2009
12/15/2009
1/6/2010
1/11/2010
1/13/2010
1/19/2010
2/3/2010
2/10/2010
2/16/2010
2/19/2010
3/3/2010
3/8/2010
3/10/2010
3/16/2010
3/18/2010
Descriptions
CADS BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER
RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN COMMITTEE
MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE
MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN COMMITTEE
MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE
MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN COMMITTEE
MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE
MEETING
SECTION E
Amount
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
3,400.00
Mileage -Business 7/31/2009
9/28/2009
10/31/2009
11/30/2009
12/31/2009
1/31/2010
2/28/2010
3/31/2010
Mileage -Business Total
Mileage -Commutinl 7/31/2009
9/28/2009
10/31/2009
11/30/2009
12/31/2009
1/31/2010
2/28/2010
3/31/2010
Mileage -Commuting Total
Grand Total
MEETING -JULY 6,2009
MEETING -SEPT.15,2009
MEETING -OCT.5,20 &21,2009
MEETING -NOV.3,9,17&19,2009
MEETING -DEC.15,2009
MEETING -JAN.11 &13,2010
MEETING -FEB.10 &16 2010
MEETING -MARCH 8,10 &16,2010
MEETING -JULY 1,7,10,20 &27,2009
MEETING -SEPT.2 &28,2009
MEETING -OCT.7 &15,2009
MEETING -NOV.4,2009
MEETING -DEC.2,2009
MEETING -JAN.6 &19 2010
MEETING -FEB.3 &19 2010
MEETING -MARCH 3,8,10,16 &18,2010
22.00
22.00
90.20
112.20
46.20
40.00
61.50
78.50
472.60
82.50
37.40
37.40
18.70
18.70
34.00
34.00
30.00
292.70
$4,374.30
Mar 1OAlBreitfelder L Page 4 of Pages 11
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:CROUCHER,GARY ATTACHMENT F
SECTION F
Account Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee 7/1/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING $100.00
7/7/2009 INTRA SITE TOUR -DISTRICT FACILITY SITE 100.00
(1296-3 RESERVOIR)
7/10/2009 LEGAL AD HOC COMMITTEE 100.00
7/27/2009 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER 100.00
RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
7/30/2009 AGENDA REVIEW WITH GM AND COUNCIL 100.00
9/17/2009 GM REVIEW -AGENDA BRIEFING 100.00
9/28/2009 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER 100.00
RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
9/30/2009 WATER RATES AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
10/6/2009 GM -COMMITTEE AGENDA REVIEW 100.00
10/7/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
10/8/2009 OTAY WATER DISTRICT AUDIT REVIEW 100.00
10/14/2009 WATER CONSERVATION JPA MEETING 100.00
10/15/2009 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER 100.00
RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
10/30/2009 COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING WITH 100.00
GENERAL MANAGER
11/2/2009 MEETING WITH STAFF TO SIGN DOCUMENTS FOR 100.00
BOND REFINANCING CLOSING
11/3/2009 CADS BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
11/4/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
11/19/2009 SAN DIEGO CADS QUARTERLY MEETING 100.00
11/30/2009 COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING WITH 100.00
GENERAL MANAGER
Mar 1OAlCroucher G Page 5 of Pages 11
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
ATTACHMENT F
SECTION F
Amount
DIRECTOR'S NAME:CROUCHER,GARY
Account Name Date
12/2/2009
12/30/2009
1/6/2010
1/19/2010
1/21/2010
1/25/2010
2/3/2010
2/22/2010
3/3/2010
3/10/2010
3/22/2010
3/23/2010
3/30/2010
3/31/2010
Director's Fee Total
Grand Total
Descriptions
ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER
RESOURCES COMMIITEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CSDA BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER
RESOURCES COMMIITEE MEETING
LEGAL AD HOC COMMIITEE
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER
RESOURCES COMMIITEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION JPA MEETING
ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER
RESOURCES COMMIITEE MEETING
MEETING WITH LEGAL COUNCIL -DESALINATION
ISSUES
CSDA BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
LEGAL AD HOC COMMIITEE
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
$3,300.00
$3,300.00
Mar 1OAlCroucher G Page 6 of Pages 11
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:LOPEZ,JOSE ATTACHMENT G
SECTION G
Account Name Date Descriptions Amount
Business meetings 10/8/2009 WATER AGENCIES ASSOCIATION $45.00
Business meetings Total 45.00
Director's Fee 7/1/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
7/8/2009 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
7/22/2009 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
8/5/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
8/10/2009 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
8/24/2009 SPECIAL REGULAR BOARD MEETING 100.00
8/25/2009 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
8/31/2009 GM REVIEW -AGENDA BRIEFING 100.00
9/2/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
9/14/2009 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
9/28/2009 CHULA VISTA WATER TASK FORCE 100.00
10/7/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
10/14/2009 WATER CONSERVATION JPA MEETING 100.00
10/15/2009 WATER AGENCIES ASSOCIATION 100.00
10/19/2009 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
11/4/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
12/14/2009 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
1/6/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
1/21/2010 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER RESOURCES 100.00
COMMITTEE MEETING
1/25/2010 CHULA VISTA WATER TASK FORCE 100.00
2/3/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
2/22/2010 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER RESOURCES 100.00
COMMITTEE MEETING
3/3/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
3/22/2010 ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS AND WATER RESOURCES 100.00
COMMITTEE MEETING
Director's Fee Total 2,400.00
Mar 1OAlLopez J Page 7 of Pages 11
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:LOPEZ,JOSE
Account Name Date Descriptions
ATTACHMENT G
SECTION G
Amount
Mileage -Business 8/31/2009 MEETING -AUG.10,2009
10/15/2009 MEETING -OCT.15,2009
13.20
20.90
Mileage -Business Total
Mileage -Commuting 7/31/2009
8/31/2009
9/30/2009
10/7/2009
11/4/2009
1/31/2010
2/28/2010
3/31/2010
Mileage -Commuting Total
Grand Total
Mar 10AlLopez J
MEETING -JULY 1 &22,2009
MEETING -AUG.5,24,&25 2009
MEETING -SEPT.2,2009
MEETING -OCT.7,2009
MEETING -NOV.4,2009
MEETING -JAN.6 &21,2010
MEETING -FEB.03 &22,2010
MEETING -MARCH 3 &22,2010
Page 8 of Pages 11
34.10
22.00
33.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
148.00
$2,627.10
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:ROBAK,MARK
Account Name Date Descriptions
ATTACHMENT H
SECTION H
Amount
10/2/2009 SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
12/3/2009 SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY CHAMBER HOLIDAY MIXER
&OPEN HOUSE
12/4/2009 REGISTRATION ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
WATER AGENCIES DEC.1-4,2009
1/18/2010 SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
2/16/2010 COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
Business meetings Total
7/1/2009 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
Business meetings
Director's Fee
7/10/2009
8/7/2009
9/11/2009
7/9/2009
8/5/2009
8/19/2009
8/24/2009
9/2/2009
9/3/2009
10/7/2009
10/29/2009
11/4/2009
11/6/2009
12/10/2009
12/31/2009
THE CHAMBER SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY
SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
SAN VICENTE DAM RAISE CEREMONY
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
WATER REUSE SAN DIEGO CHAPTER MEETING
SPECIAL REGULAR BOARD MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
GM REVIEW -DISCUSSION OF GENERAL BUSINESS
GOALS &OBJECTIVES FOR NEW YEAR
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CELEBRATION OF LIFE -WATER CONSERVATION
GARDEN
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
WATER REUSE WORKSHOP IRVINE RANCH WATER
DISTRICT
WATER REUSE SAN DIEGO CHAPTER MEETING
AQUA BI-YEARLY CONVENTION IN SAN DIEGO DEC.1-
4,2009
$20.00
20.00
20.00
200.00
15.00
625.00
20.00
25.00
945.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
400.00
Mar 10AlRobak M Page 9 of Pages 11
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:ROBAK,MARK
Account Name Date
1/6/2010
2/3/2010
2/16/2010
3/3/2010
Descriptions
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ATTACHMENT H
SECTION H
Amount
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
Director's Fee Total
Mileage -Business 7/31/2009
8/31/2009
9/2/2009
10/31/2009
11/30/2009
12/31/2009
1/31/2010
2/28/2010
3/3/2010
MEETING -JULY 6 &31,2009
MEETING -AUG.5,19 &24 2009
MEETING -SEPTEMBER 2,2009
MEETING -OCT.7,15 &26 2009
MEETING -NOV.4 &6,2009
MEETING -DEC.1 - 4 &10,2009
PARKING -TOWN &COUNTRY CONVENTION CENTER
DEC.1-4,2009
MEETING -JAN.6,2010
MEETING -FEB.3 &16,2010
MEETING -MARCH 3,2010
2,000.00
20.35
45.10
3.30
18.70
101.75
80.30
41.00
3.00
33.50
3.00
Mileage -Business Total
Mileage -Commuting 7/31/2009
8/31/2009
9/2/2009
10/31/2009
11/30/2009
1/31/2010
2/28/2010
3/3/2010
Mileage -Commuting Total
Mar 10AlRobak M
MEETING -JULY 1,2009
MEETING -AUG.5 &24 2009
MEETING -SEPTEMBER 2,2009
MEETING -OCT.7 &29,2009
MEETING -NOV.4,2009
MEETING -JAN.6,2010
MEETING -FEB.3,2010
MEETING -MARCH 3,2010
Page 10 of Pages 11
350.00
2.20
4.40
2.20
4.40
2.20
2.00
2.00
2.00
21.40
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2009 THROUGH MARCH 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:ROBAK,MARK
Account Name Date Descriptions
ATTACHMENT H
SECTION H
Amount
Seminars and confere 8/21/2009 SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY -WATER CONSERVATION 50.00
POLITICS IN PARADISE
9/25/2009 THE RANCHO SAN DIEGO-JAMUL BREAKFAST 15.00
MEETING
12/1/2009 ACWA 2009 FALL CONFERENCE &EXHIBITION 73.00
REGISTRATION
12/11/2009 RANCHO SAN DIEGO-JAMUL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 15.00
Seminars and conferences Total
Grand Total
Mar 10AlRobak M Page 11 of Pages 11
153.00
$3,469.40
Printed Date:
5/21/201012:07 PM
/8/ODD·'2-1 ()i·5,;;20'10/
f{3/DUO.2-10/·5~//D~--'"
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
.-700·t)o
J~·/)OEXHIBITB
Pay To:Larry Breitfelder Period Covered:Jan 1 to Jan 31,2010
Employee Number:7013-----------From:1/1/10 To:1131110
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEtoOWD OTHER
OWD,oHOME LOCATIONS
OWDBoard
1.1/6/10 Meeting OWD Board Meeting 34
2.1/11/10 CAC Conservation Action Committee 40
WCG Board
3.1/13/10 Meeting Water Conservation Garden Board Meeting 40
FA&C
4.1/19/10 Committee OWD Finance,Admin &Communications Committee 34
5.
6.
7.
8.0-*
9.~~I 100-00X
10.j 4-=
400·00*/
11.
0-*
12.
\J,~:f 34-+
13.34-+
f 68-*
14.
68-x
15.O·50y
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
$400.00
Total Mileage Claimed:148
(Direct~~
Date:~I.&_.:..-/D__
J
~FOR OFFICE USE:T TAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$._
1<2:.i Pf'·1 3-1 ,..--.I ''"1
BcJt?O ~/(3/0 0 D ."Z-/o I .t>.;.J-~I V /
000·(13/I/O {).2-10/.:t;;L//(.):;;-
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
/T'OO·00
...~H'.OO
EYHIBITB
Pay To:Larry Breitfelder Period Covered:Feb 1 to Feb 28,2010
Employee Number:7013-----------From:2/1/10 To:2/28/10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOME to OWD OTHER
OWDtoHOME LOCATIONS
OWDBoard
1.2/3/10 Meeting OWD Board ofDirectors Meeting 34
WCGBoard
2.2/10/10 Meeting Water Conservation Garden Board Meeting 40
3.2/16/10 COWU Council ofWater Utilities 83
FA&C
4.2/19/10 Committee OWD Finance,Admin &Communications Committee 34
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.rr II 0-*
u.100-0Qxy
12.4-=:
400-00/
13.
14.0-*
15.",of 34-+
16.W 34-+
17.68-*
18.68-X
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
$400.00 0-50=/
34-00*
Total Mileage Claimed:191 miles
FOR OFFICE USE:T TAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$:...-._
~().....j Dn<.1'1'-'i'!....1
(Direc"for's Signature)
Date:3/tg/,0
J 7
Q~~b~~:
GM Reeeipt:----t--.-;;.~+.+-f_---------
OTAYWATERDISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
EXHIBITB
Pay To:Larry Breitfelder Period Covered:Mar 1-Mar 31,2010
Employee Number:7013
----------~-
From:3/1/10 To:3/31110
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEtoOWD OTHER
OWDtoHOME LOCATIONS
OWDBoard
l.3/3/10 Meeting OWD Board ofDirectors Meeting 30
2.3/8/10 CAC Conservation Action Committee 40
3.3/10/10 WCGBoard
Meeting Water Conservation Garden Board Meeting 34
4.3/16/10 COWU Council ofWater Utilities 83
5.3/18/10 OWDFA&C
Committee OWD Finance,Admin &Communications Committee 30
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Total Meeting PerDiem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:
$500.00
217 miles
(Direc~
Date:'5""',0 .201 0
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$__~_
,.-
MAR 15 20m
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
/11!;o-OO ~/10 a.-ooo~:2-10/r ~~o /v /
EXHIBITB
Pay To:Gary Croucher Period Covered:
Employee Number:7011------------From:01/01/10 To:01131/10
Date:pol""Z~to
mileso
$400
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:
IJA r
GM Received :-Il'~I-JdIfOll"""'-------------
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE I ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOME'oOWD OTHER
OWD'oHOME LOCATIONS
I 1 01/06 Board Regular Board Meeting
"~01/19 CSDA CSDA Board ofDirectors meeting
2
J 3 01/21 Committee Engineering and Operations Committee meeting
/4 01125 Committee Legal Ad Hoc Committee meeting
01/27 Recognition Employee Recognition lunch
.__.._-_._------.
0·*
~~0 0 *
100 0 x
4 0 =/
400-00*
I
'\/
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
IJt3 DOO'
(1 OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
EXHIBIT B
MAR 15 2010
Pay To:Gary Croucher Period Covered:
Employee Number:7011-----------From:02/01/10 To:02/28/10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEloOWD OTHER
OWDtoHOME LOCATIONS
I 02/03 Board Regular Board Meeting
1
/2 02/22 Committee Engineering and Operations Committee meeting
------------.._--.-._---
~vJ·l"fJ 0-*
JI'100-X
2-=.
200 -00*/'
GM Received:_~_
$200
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:o miles
Date:_3_"J_~_·_Go__ro _
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
Pay To:Gary Croucher
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
EXHIBIT B
Employee Number:7011------------From:03/01110 To:03/31110
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE 1 ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEtoOWD OTHER
OWDto HOME LOCATIONS
/03/03 Board Regular Board of Directors meeting
"1
.12 03110 JPA Water Conservation JPA Meeting1/
.;3 03/22 Committee Engineering and Operations Committee
/'
..;4 03/2.13 Legal Meeting with Legal Council-Desalination issues
"
v'VS 03/30 CSDA CSDA Board ofDirectors meeting
V 6 03131 Ad Hoc Legal Ad Hoc Committee meeting
$600
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:o miles
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECfORS
PER-DIEM AND Mfi.,EAGE CLAIM FORJ\rI
Pay To:Jose Lopez Period Covered:
Employee Number:7010----------From:01101110 To:01/31/10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE I ISSUES MILEAGE MThEAGE
1/DISCUSSED HOI,1EIQOWD OTItER
OWD1QHOME LOCATIONS
I 1.01106110 OWO Board Meeting 20
I 2-01/21110 OWD Eng &OPs Committee Meeting 20v~l~~'f~!J
('3.OWD CV Water Task Force 0
4.
5.
6.
7.~~ttJ 0·*
8)
9)>;:100·00x
3·:::
iO.300·00*/
it
i2~0·*
13;
'I/'f 20·+
14)20·+
15;f 40·*
16;40·x
17.O·50~/
18.20·00*
II;~
i
i!I
h
i'.h
.!
Total Meeting PerDiem:-=::.$3:.,:.0.::,.0 _
($100 permeeting),I,
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
H il 'j',AD -,7"';';r.1.'U IMl\.l nn ~
irector's Signature)
'3./6 '201'0Date:_-=--------
miles40TotalMileageClaimed:
GM Reciept:---;,....$AJ~~_~_.....:::~_
I
ne;vuu./b~O{/v·~r (/f --.../,L-(j t.(....//
()>!I!/Y-OtJ 0-"Z-/oj 5~-/I O.:J--
OTAY WATER DlSTRlCT
BOARD OF DmECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
oL--V{,,/.v u
02o.o ()
EXHIBITB
MAR]5 2010
Pay To:Jose Lopez Period Covered:
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE tISSUES Mll..EAGE l\Jm..EAGE
DISCUSSED HOME 10own 01HEIl
/OIVDIOHO~m lOCATIONS
V 1.02/03110 own Board Meeting 20
II
v'2.02/22110 own Eng &OPs Committee Meeting 20
3.---.
4.
5.:
6.
7.0-*~~/J8;
100-0QX9,..•..j ·2 -:::
Hi,200-00/'
n.
~~f 0-*12}
i3~20·+I
141 ~20-+
is,L~0-;1,:
16;40 -~<
IT 0-50=,
18]20 -00:\:1
Employee Number:7010----------
Total Meeting PerDiem:_'::.,:$2::=0.::,.0 _
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:40 miles------
GMReciept:~I
From:02/01110 To:02128110
rector's Signature)
'1:>1 Ie:,·~C)(0Date:_
II
I)1
(
'j
I
i
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
6 ao ~./6 rOt)o~2I CJ /~S;L~/tJ /
.L..Io~O -210/·~//O:;-/67 OTAYWATERDISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
;!-OO'~D
EXHmITBcat?·00
Pay To:Jose Lopez
Employee Number:7010----------
Period Covered:
From:03/01110 To:03/31/10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE 1 ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMBtoOWD amER
OWDtoHOMB LOCATIONS
J 1.03/03/10 own Board MeetinJ,1;20
II 2.03/22110 own Eng &OPs Committee Meeting 20
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.~y.I~'J 2-X
100·00;::
9.~~200-00V
10.
0-*u.I
12.20-00+
13;~t''20·00+
40·00*
14.i
"40 ·OOX I15.i,0-50~
1(j~20-00
17.
18.I I
Total Meeting Per Diem:_$.;...;2_00 _
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Oaimed:40 miles
GM Reciept:_Date:_
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,__-__
000
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
c2"{)()
MAR 15 2010
Pay To:Mark Robak Period Covered:
Employee Number:_7.:..;0;.;;1;.;;4..:.;01;:.;1;.;;0 _
3217 Fair Oaks Lane,Spring Valley,CA 91978
From:--:;..1-~1--=1.;:.0__To:1-30-10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEloOWD OTHER
OWDloHOME LOCATIONS;/
1 1-6 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
2 1-8 San Diego East County Monthly business/community forum -No 0 0
Chamber ofCommerce Charge
3 1-13 Lunch with Otay Board Informal discussion of issues -No 0 0
President Charge
4 1-27 Otay Employee Recognition Annual Recognition luncheon -No 0 0
Luncheon Charge
,
\yJ 7
0-*
laO-x IJ.F 1 -=
100-00/
-t/f 0-*
4-1'If 0-50=
2-00*1
Total Meeting Per Diem:$100 4 6 .r
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:10
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
~ceiJ?1 /I!A A ~
GM ~-bJ!L...::..tI~f/V_;l/...¥-{A)=-_
!
(Director's Signature)~
Date:_7_'_fr.:,_"_2_E:>_f_iO__~to.tV
~.V
fftjOOD·
OtJO·
Pay To:Mark Robak
/...£?~DV u·k-/0/...:704-0 /f:-//
/6 5'00 CJ·2-1 0 J..5,;J-I/0 d--
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
~(./~.{.,.o'(.../c!2.0-0
MAR 15 2010
Employee Number:--'-70""1:....;4...;..0....;21:..;0 _
3217 Fair Oaks Lane,Spring Valley,CA 91978
From:2-1-10 To:2-28-10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEtoOWD OTHER
OWDtoHOME LOCATIONS
I 1 2-3 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
2 2-15 Lunch with Otay Board Informal discussion of issues -No 0 0
President Charge
/3 2-16 Council ofWater Utilities Monthly meeting and installation ofnew 0 61
officers -(See Exhibit A -Agenda)
4 2-18 Rancho San Diego Jamul Monthly business/community forum -No 0 0
Chamber ofCommerce Charge
QrJ;I 0·*
100·)<
J;2'=::
200·OO~
0'*
.~"y 4·x
~0.50/
2·00*
Total Meeting Per Diem:$200 4 67
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:71
(Director's Signature)
7·/~·70(roDate:_
'1;"1l>'1AJn 7 "Ii'!i'r _,_HI!
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
Pay To:Mark Robak
185DDO.2-10/.5""'2-1 10 /
I (?~l..:>00 ~2-101.t?;2-/1(;)2-
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
Employee Number:_7;...;:0;..:;1...:..40:...:;3;..:;10"--_
3217 Fair Oaks Lane,Spring Valley,CA 91978
From:3-1-10 To:3-31-10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOME toOWD OTHEROWDtoHOMELOCATIONS
1 3-3 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
."
0-*
~~J 100·00 X11·::
100.00*/
0-*
~.,i l~-x
0-50:::
2-00:.\/
Total Meeting Per Diem:$100 4 6
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:10
.~IJA.~
GM ~I:--,-1 fW_cfX7b _
(Director's Signature)
Date:__5__1 _6_.2._D_f_O__
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
/
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING:Regular Board
SUBMITTED BY:Daniel Kay
Associate Civil Engineer
AGENDA ITEM 7c
MEETING June 2,2 °1 °DATE:
PROJECT/Various DIV.NO.ALL
SUBPROJECT:
Award of As-Neede ngineering Design Services Contract for
Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Asst.GM):
SUBJECT:
Ron Ripperger ~
Engineering Manager
Rod posada~~,)
Chief,Engineering
Manny Magan
Assistant Genera Engineering and Operations
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District)Board of Directors (Board)
authorizes the General Manager to enter into an Agreement for
Professional Services for As-Needed Engineering Design Services with
Lee &Ro,Inc.(Lee &Ro)for an amount not-to-exceed $175,000
during Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012 (ending June 30,2012).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into
a Professional Services Agreement with Lee &Ro in an amount not-to-
exceed $175,000 for Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012 (ending June 30,
2012).
ANALYSIS:
The District will require the professional services of an
engineering consultant in support of the District's CIP projects for
Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012.The As-Needed Engineering Design
Services contract will provide the District with the ability to
obtain consulting services in a timely and efficient manner and on
an as-needed basis.
The District will require the expertise of an engineering consultant
to provide civil engineering design for a variety of CIP projects.
The District incurs expenses in requesting,reviewing,and ranking
proposals,checking references,and preparing staff reports for
Committee and Board approval.The engineering design services,
individually,are small enough that preparation of formal proposals
by consultants becomes expensive and these costs are passed on to
the District.For these reasons,it is more efficient and cost
effective to issue a contract on an as-needed basis.This concept
has also been used in the past for other disciplines like
geotechnical,electrical,and environmental services.
The District will issue task orders to the Consultant for specific
projects during the contract period.The Consultant will then
prepare a detailed scope of work,schedule,and cost estimate for
each task order assigned under the contract.Upon written task
order authorization from the District,the Consultant shall then
proceed with the project as described in the scope of work.
The CIP projects that are estimated to require engineering design
services for Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012,at this time,are listed
below:
ESTIMATED
CIP DESCRIPTION COST
P2318 20-Inch,657 Zone,Summit Cross Tie $35,000
P2357 657-1/850-1 Pump Station Demolition $25,000
P2370 Dorchester Reservoir &Pump Station Demolition $25,000
P2504 Regulatory Site Access Road &Pipe Relocation $60,000
S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement -
Preliminary Design Report $10,000
S2025 Wieghorst Way Sewer Main Replacement -
Preliminary Design Report $10,000
Contingency $10,000
TOTAL:$175,000
The engineering design scopes for the above projects are estimated
from preliminary information and past projects.Therefore,staff
believes that a $175,000 cap on the As-Needed Engineering Design
Services contract is adequate.
The contract is not-to-exceed $175,000 for all task orders.Fees
for professional services will be charged to the CIP Projects for
which the engineering designs are performed.
2
This As-Needed Engineering Design Services contract does not commit
the District to any expenditure until a task order is approved to
perform work on a CIP Project.The District does not guarantee work
to the consultant,nor does the District guarantee to the consultant
that it will expend all of the funds authorized by the contract on
professional services.
The District solicited engineering design services by placing an
advertisement on the District's website,San Diego Union Tribune,
and the San Diego Daily Transcript on March 29,2010 Nineteen (19)
firms submitted a letter of interest and a statement of
qualifications.The Request for Proposal (RFP)for As-Needed Design
Services was sent to all nineteen (19)firms resulting in nine (9)
proposals received on April 22,2010.They are as follows:
•Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
•Nasland Engineering
•PBS&J
•Psomas
•Urban Logic Consultants
•J.C.Heden &Associates
•Kimley-Horn &Associates
•Lee &Ro
•Fakhoury Consulting Group
The ten (10)firms that chose not to propose are RBF,Vali Cooper &
Associates,AECOM,Rick Engineering,Harris &Associates,Fuscoe
Engineering,Algert Engineering,Cardno,Snipes-Dye Associates,
Poggemeyer Design Group.
In accordance with the District's Policy 21,staff evaluated and
scored all written proposals Lee &Ro received the highest score
for their services based on their experience,understanding of the
scope of work,proposed method to accomplish the work,and their
composite hourly rate.Lee &Ro was the most qualified consultant
with the best overall proposal.A summary of the complete
evaluation is shown in Attachment B.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The funds for this contract will be expended from the CIP projects
noted previously.This contract is for professional services based
on the District's need and schedule,and expenditures will not be
made until a task order is approved by the District for the
consultant's professional services on a specific CIP project.
3
Based on a review of the financial budget,the Project Manager has
determined that the budget will be sufficient to support the
professional services required for the ClP projects in the FY 2011
budget.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the District's Mission statement,liTo provide
the best quality of water and wastewater service to the customers of
the Otay Water District,in a professional,effective,and efficient
manner,"and the District's Strategic Goal,in planning for
infrastructure and supply to meet current and future potable water
demands.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Engineering Design\FY 20ll-20l2\Staff Report\BD 06-02 10,As-Needed Engineering Design
Services.doc
DK/RR/RP:jf
Attachments:Attachment A
Attachment B
DATEvNAME
QA/QC Approved:
~~\~
4
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECTIPROJECT:I Award of As-Needed Engineering Design Services Contract for
Various I Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012
.........................................................................1 .
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on May 20,2010 and the
following comments were made:
•Staff is requesting approval of an agreement for
Professional Services for As-Needed Engineering Design
Services with Lee &Ro,Inc.(Lee &Ro)in an amount not-
to-exceed $175,000 during Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012
(ending June 30,2012).
•It was indicated that in accordance with the District's
Policy 21,five staff members evaluated and scored all
written proposals.Staff stated that Lee &Ro received
the highest score and was the most qualified consultant
with the best overall proposal.A list of CIP projects
that will require engineering design services for FY 2011
and 2012 are listed on page 2 of the staff report.
•Staff indicated that Lee &Ro was instrumental with the
engineering design of several projects such as the 36-
Inch Pipeline,Jamacha Road Pipeline,30-Inch Recycled
Pipeline,and Otay Lakes Road Recycled Pipeline.
Following the discussion,the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
ATTACHMENT B
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS BY PANEL MEMBERS
Professional As-Needed Civil Engineering Design Services
WRITTEN
Understanding Soundness Consultant'sQualificationsofscope,and Viability of Composite commitmentofStaffschedule,Proposed Hourly Rate'to DBEresourcesProiectPlan
SCORE 20 20 25 35 YIN
TOTAL AVERAGE
SCORE SCORE
100
References
Poor/Good/Excellent
Danie/Kay 18 18 23 29 88
Kennedy I
Jenks
Consultants
Bob Kennedy ~__1_8__~18 21 29
J5!!':!iIlf_a.rneron 19 1_9__24 29
Jake Vac/ave~__~12 !_L ?~~(}__
Don Bienvenue 17 17 21 29
y
_8~
91----
84.._-----
84
87
_Qa.I1JI!!_~1_8____16 2_1____29
Nasland Bob Kennedy_-------!§__r--__1_6 ~~
Engineering Kevin Cameron 18 18 ~_~29
~ke Vac/avek 16 17 22 29
Don Bienvenue 17 18 21 29
y
84
81-------
~
--~
85
84
PBS&J
Psomas
___h_QanielKaL l~J~~!11 _
~~bnl5.fJ.nnedy _~1L.__.n __~•__~3.L__.
Kevin Cameron 18 _..19 ~__21-
Jake Vac/avek 16 19 22 31~---
Don Bienvenue 18 18 23 31
__Daniel Ka.y.f--j-~---_1_8 1£___]2__
f-El.o!:J_Kennedy ___n~_.--J-§-----r----?1 __I--~§__
__l5..e':dn..Qa.'!1_fJ.(()!2...__.1_~________!(}._.24__._.__~__
_J..a.ke Vaclavek .1?.1_7 2_2 26_
Don Bienvenue 18 18 24 26
y
y
c---lllJ.-
88".h._
91f-------
~---
90
84-_._--
~---
87--..,,-----
_8Q _
86
89
84
Daniel Kay __16 15 18 25
__!JOb Kennedy._-------!_13__~_16__~~_~_5_Urban Logic .-"--~--
Consultants Kevi'2_Qameron 1l3..__--I----l?----~Q ??_
Jake Vac/avek 14 15 20 25-.-._-----_-----_-----.---------__---__------,
Don Bienvenue 17 18 22 25
Danif)/~__.-..1.§._~l._r--1-~_~35.__
J.C.Heden &~ob KennedL __16 17 20 __~__
Associates Kevin Cameron 16 16 .12....-__~
_Jake Va.C!!~~_17 _~__~~_~__
Don Bienvenue 17 18 22 35
___.9.a._'2ieJ...I5Ex._____12 E ?Q .2L__
Kimley-Horn _BobKe!]l]~ciL ~.-~~--------~---~--
&Associates Kevin Cameron __1_6____17 21 28
Jake Vac/avek 15 15 19 28---------_.----------------
Don Bienvenue 18 16 22 28
y
y
y
74
77-------
76
74
82
----'!"L__
88
87e------
87----
92
81
85
82-----
77r--~--
84
77
88
82
Lee &Ro
__..!2a.l1il!!_~_____lE!.____.!_L_~3_0..__
_.Bob KenneqL 1_9 ..1g ~L~__._~Q _
Kevin Cameron 1_~19 24 30
Jake Vac/avek 15 __...1J._~.__.?1...-3_~
Don Bienvenue 19 19 23 30
y
c-__89 __
92f----
-~
~4__
91
90 Excellent
P:\WORKING\AsNeededSeNiee~\Eng!neeringDe:Ngn\FY 2011-2012\SeteclionProce~!o\RFPEvamtfoo_Design
SCORE
WRITTEN
Understanding Soundness Consultant'sQualificationsofscope,and Viability of Composite commitmentofStaffschedule,Proposed Hourly Rate'toOBEresourcesProiectPlan
20 20 25 35 YIN
TOTAL
SCORE
100
AVERAGE
SCORE
References
Poor/Good/Excellent
1-!.a.k~'!.aE.a'!..e.t5..
Don Bienvenue
Fakhoury
Consulting
Group
_P~!!i.~/j<~__._.__.J~__.15 _.~._..~Q.._..33
..?ob..KfJ..n.n.~d.Y.....!§__.l§......?.Q.......__}.~.
KevitJ.._Ca_mero,!..__...1?_.fL_....-I---.--?.L-..~_.
____..1.L _~_15.._.._+--.__..?.~_.~~__
16 17 21 33
y
83
._...~5 ....
88....._-----
83
87
85
1.Hour/y Rate Ca/cu/alion Formula =35·(ConsultantRale -M/n.Rate)'/O
(Max.Rate·Min.Rate)
P;\WORKINGIA5Needed SeNieeslEngineerin;De:ign\FY20\1·201l\Selee!ionProcess\RFPEvaluation_Design
PM Signature:-"""i:=;;:r....;.;J_"""'-_~'I-_
QC:--""\-~=t~d-~=---"==---
AGENDA ITEM 7d
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE:June 2,2010TYPEMEETING:Regular Board
SUBMITTED BY:Daniel Kay 9 L
Associate Civil Engineer
Ron Ripperger MJV'
Engineering Manager
PROJECT/
SUBPROJECT:N/A DIV.NO.ALL
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:
Rod Posada~r<IdS~
Chief,Engineer~0
Manny Magan~~
Assistant General ~!ager,Engineering and Operations
Award of a Professional As-Needed Geotechnical Consulting
Services Contract for Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the otay Water District (District)Board of Directors
(Board)authorizes the General Manager to enter into an
agreement for Professional Services for As-Needed Geotechnical
Consulting Services with MTGL Inc.(MTGL)for an amount not-to-
exceed $175,000 during Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012 (ending June
30,2012).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter
into a Professional As-Needed Geotechnical Consulting Services
Agreement with MTGL in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000 for
Flscal Years 2011 and 2012 (ending June 30,2012)
ANALYSIS:
The District will require the services of a geotechnical
consultant to perform studies in support of the District's CIP
projects for Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012.The As-Needed
Geotechnical SerVlces contract will provide the District with
the ability to obtain consulting services in a timely and
efficient manner and on an as-needed basis.
The District will require the expertise of a geotechnical
consultant to conduct investigations for a variety of ClP
projects.The District incurs expenses in requesting,
reviewing,and ranking proposals,checking references,and
preparing staff reports for Committee and Board approval.The
investigations,individually,are small enough that preparation
of formal proposals by consultants becomes expensive and these
costs are passed on to the District.For these reasons,it is
more efficient and cost effective to issue a contract on an as-
needed basis.This concept has also been used in the past for
other disciplines like engineering design,electrical,and
environmental services.
The District will issue task orders to the Consultant for
specific projects during the contract period.The Consultant
will then prepare a detailed scope of work,schedule,and cost
estimate for each task order assigned under the contract.Upon
written task order authorization from the District,the
Consultant shall then proceed with the project as described in
the scope of work.
The ClP projects that are estimated to require geotechnical
investigations for Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012,at this time,are
listed below:
ESTIMATED
CIP DESCRIPTION COST
P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement $45,000
P2318 20-lnch,657 Zone,Summit Cross Tie $45,000
P2399 30-Inch,980 Zone,980 Reservoirs to $25,000HunteParkway
P2504 Regulatory Site Access Eoad &Pipeline $20,000Relocation
S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement $15,000
S2025 Wieghorst Way Sewer Main Replacement $15,000
Contingency $10,000
TOTAL:$175,000
The geotechnical scopes .for the above projects are estimated
from preliminary information and planning studies.The
geotechnical scopes of the projects may change during the design
phase,potentially increasing geotechnical study costs.
Similarly,industry-wide increases in the cost of performing
geotechnical investigations,such as fees for drilling and
excavation subcontractors,insurance,and regulatory compliance,
2
may also increase the cost of performing geotechnical studies.
Therefore,staff believes that a $175,000 cap on the As-Needed
Geotechnical Services contract is appropriate.
The contract is not-to-exceed $175,000 for all task orders.
Fees for professional services will be charged to the CIP
Projects for which the investigations are performed.
This As-Needed Geotechnical Services contract does not commit
the District to any expenditure until a task order is approved
to perform work on a CIP Project.The District does not
guarantee work to the consultant,nor does the District
guarantee to the consultant that it will expend all of the funds
authorized by the contract on professional services.
The District solicited geotechnical services by placing an
advertisement on the District's website,San Diego Union
Tribune,and the San Diego Daily Transcript on March 29,2010.
Seventeen (17)firms submitted a letter of interest and a
statement of qualifications.The Request for Proposal (RFP)for
As-Needed Geotechnical Services was sent to all seventeen (17)
firms resulting in sixteen (16)proposals received on April 22,
2010.They are as follows:
•Leighton Consulting Inc.
•AESCO
•Geo-Logic
•Helenschmidt
•Mactec
•GEl Consultants
•Geocon
•Allied Geotechnical Consultants
•Ninyo &Moore
•Christian Wheeler Engineering
•Southern California Soil &Testing
•United Inspection &Testing
•Hetherington Engineering
•MTGL
•Nova Engineering
•Koury Geotechnical Services
The one (1)firm that chose not to propose is Converse
Consultants.
In accordance with the District's Policy 21,staff evaluated and
scored all written proposals.MTGL received the highest score
3
for their services based on their experience,understanding of
the scope of work,proposed method to accomplish the work,and
their composite hourly rate.MTGL was the most qualified
consultant with the best overall proposal.A summary of the
complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The funds for this contract will be expended from the CIP
projects noted previously.This contract is for professional
services based on the District's need and schedule,and
expenditures will not be made until a task order is approved by
the District for the consultant's professional services on a
specific CIP project.
Based on a review of the financial budget,the Project Manager
has determined that the budget will be sufficient to support the
professional services required for the CIP projects in the
FY 2011 budget
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the District's Mission statement,liTo
provide the best quality of water and wastewater service to the
customers of the Otay Water District,in a professional,
effective,and efficient manner,"and the District's Strategic
Goal,in planning for infrastructure and supply to meet current
and future potable water demands.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Geotechnical\FY 2011-2012\Staff Report\BD 6-2-10,As-Needed
Geotechnical Services.doc
DK/RR/RP :j f
Attachments:Attachment A
Attachment B
6 \~'10Date:---'------1.0----;,---_
QA!QC An:?1 ~~
Name :_~.-::...-~---v;_
4
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:I Award of As-Needed Geotechnical Services Contract for
Various ,Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on May 20,2010 and the
following comments were made:
•Staff is requesting approval of an agreement for
Professional Services for As-Needed Geotechnical Services
with MTGL Inc.(MTGL)in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000
during Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012 (ending June 30,2012).
•Staff indicated that several District CIP projects will
require the expertise of a geotechnical consultant to
conduct reports,soil sampling,groundwater studies,etc.
Page 2 of the staff report provides a list of the CIP
projects that are anticipated to require geotechnical
services in FYs 2011 and 2012.
•It was indicated that a panel of five District staff
members evaluated and scored all written proposals.
Staff stated that MTGL received the highest score and was
the most qualified consultant with the best overall
proposal.
•Staff stated that MTGL has excellent references and is
currently contracting with CCL to conduct soil sampling
for the District's 36-Inch Pipeline project.
•The Committee inquired about the proposed cost/pricing
for geotechnical services and how it compared to what
staff had anticipated.Staff stated that although MTGL's
rates were lower than the other contractors,they were
still within the expected range of typical rates for
geotechnical services.
Following the discussion,the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
ATTACHMENT B
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS BY PANEL MEMBERS
Professional As-Needed Geotechnical Services
WRITTEN
:;~u 1<1:
Qualifications
ofStaff
20
Understanding Soundness
ofscope,and Viability of Composite
schedule,Proposed Hourly Rate1
resources Proiect Plan
20 25 35
Consultant's
commitment
to DBE
YIN
TOTAL
SCORE
100
AVERAGE
SCORE
References
Poor/Good/Excellent
~aJ'I~£/(3.L~I-~_1,-,6 1_7~~~_~
David Charles _!_5~1_4______1.!!2_6__Leighton
Consulting Inc.I B~ra:"'.n...don....._D...iP___'_ie...t~ro__I_~----'-18-----1_6 ~2_6__
Bernardo Separa 18 18 22 26
Frank Anderson 17 16 21 26
y
__..lL_
73
81
84
80
79
AESCO
Geo-Logic
Helenschmidt
Mactec
DanielKa¥..1~_14 16 30
David_QI]!l.~1_4___15_+__17 3_0__
..§3.r'!!'ErJ.f1_JJiPietro 1_8 ~_18.....~3_0 _
.Bernardo Separa ~1_8 _______.!.6 r--__~__1_~---
Frank Anderson 15 14 16 30
Daniel Kay r---------1~_~~__~_16 2_1 f---------_39 __
David C_I]a.rl!Jii..._r---J._6 ~1_5 _______.!.9_____~_
Brandon glfifJ.tro c----18_____19 2_2 3_0__
~a.rcf.~Separa r-__~1_8 _______.!.7 ~_30
Frank Anderson 17 16 19 30
I--_[)!Joiel Kay 16 11 2_1 --.--1§__~
r----'2-a.'1l(LCharles 1L 15 __~~1_8 2§_
r--E3-@_ncIonDiPietrC!_r---J_7_____17 ~L .2_5__
r--E3-fjrnardo Sf!fJ.ara._f---------~-__1JL ~~_____2_5 __
Frank Anderson 17 16 18 25
_~!1i~'-ISClL..__17_~1----.1_8___R.._28
~cI.c~!!arles .J.§.r-1_6 ~_1_9 ?~__
~[1c1C!nDiPietro __1_8 1_8__~~_23__28
Bernardo Separa 1_9~1_9 ~~--f_28
Frank Anderson 17 17 19 28
y
y
y
y
75
76
88
84C"-------
75
83f--------
80-----
89
~--
82
c----Z§l__~
-----.ZL_
80
84
76
86
_7'~__
87
79
84
79
85
___DanielKaL_----1L---f----!§---~____~_
_J2avid Cha0?~~-~~I__J§.-f_--~--r-~----
GEl Consultants BrandonDiPietro 18 18 22 25------------------------------f_--------------------f----------------
_§3ernarcjQ Separa.J.!!I_--19 __24---~r--.:!~-
Frank Anderson 17 18 22 25
y
79
~z~
83------
86------------
82
82
Geocon
Allied
Geotechnical
Engineers
_QEinielKa.L J.§"~-----.1L ?Q 3_3__
~QavidCh~.r'-e.~E ~~_1L______.:!.!3_3~_
Brandon DiPJ.etro ~!.9 2~3~__+--~~3~3~___j
_Bernardo _§.e.par.a....__19 18 ~1__-3...3---~1
Frank Anderson 17 16 20 33
Daniel_'5..a.y._~----.1§.--------1§~___19 26
_David Ch_aJj~~~_1_6 ~?0 J_6__
Brandon!:J.'E'ietro ~.....1L__~18 21 ?§._
BernardoSepara 1~_____19 23 .?_6 _
Frank Anderson 15 15 19 26
y
y
86---
87
93
___..J~
78------
~
87
75
89
80
P:\WORKING\AsNeeded5ervlces\Geotechnical\FY2011·2012\Selecl:ion Process\RFP Evaluation_Geotech,xls
WRlTIEN
Understanding Soundness Consultant'sQualificationsofscope,and Viabilityof Composite commitment TOTAL AVERAGE References
of Staff schedule,Proposed Hourly Rate1
to DBE SCORE SCORE
resources Proiect Plan
SCORE 20 20 25 35 YIN 100 PasslFall
DanielKay 17 16 23 25 81
David Charles 17 18 22 25 82
Ninyo &Moore Brandon DiPietro 18 19 22 25 Y 84 83
BernardoSepara 19 19 24 25 87
Frank Anderson 18 18 22 25 83
Daniel Kay 16 16 21 29 82--
Christian David Charles 15 16 20 29 80
Wheeler Brandon DiPietro 18 17 21 29 Y 85 84
Engineering Bernardo Seoara 18 19 23 29 89
Frank Anderson 17 17 21 29 84
DanielKay 17 18 23 30 ~
Southern David Charles 17 16 21 30 84
California Soils _Brandon DiPietro 18 19 22 30 Y 89 88
&Testing Bernardo Seoara 19 19.__24 30 92
.~-------...._---
Frank Anderson 18 18 22 30 88
Daniel Kay 16 16 20 27 79~-
United David Charles 15 15 19 27 76------._.._--_.._----------
Inspection &Brandon DiPietro 18 18 21 27 Y 84 80
Testing ---.-----_....----
Bernardo Separa 17 16 20 27 -_.I!Q.------_...._-------_.._---
Frank Anderson 15 17 21 27 80
Daniel Kav 15 16 19 27 77_--
Hetherington David Charles 14 14 18 _._-~--73---------------
Engineering Brandon DiPietro 17 17 20 27 Y 81 77--------------_..•
Bernardo Separa 18 16 20 27 81
Frank Anderson 14 15 19 27 75
_pi3.nielKaL_17 17 f--'--~---35 911------~~-------------------
DavidCharles 16 16 20 35 87-----...._-------------------------•••••0____--
MTGL Brandon DiPietro 19 19 22 35 Y 95 91 Excellent-----
BernClrdo SeRaJiL 1------19 ____:l_~23 35 95-----_.._-----~-----._---
Frank Anderson 16 18 20 35 89
Daniel Kay 18 17 23 31 89--_._--._----_..~._----------_.-
NOVA David Charles 16 16 ..-20 31 83
Engineering Brandon DiPietro 17 17 21 31 Y --~~.-85-_._---._-----
Bernardo Seoara I--.~17 22 31 88
Frank Anderson 15 16 20 31 82
Daniel Kay 16 15 18 29 78
Koury David Charles 15 16 19 29 79--Geotechnical Brandon DiPietro 18 16 20 29 Y 83 81
Services ---.
Bernardo Seoara 18 18 f--~--29 --~--.---------
Frank Anderson 16 17 20 29 82
I.Hourly Rale CalculationFormula =35·IConsuitantRate.Min.Ralej"IO
(Max.Rale·Min_Rale)
P:\WORKING\AsNeededSetvices\Geotechnical\FY2011-2012\5eIectionProcess\RFPEvalualion_Geotech
PM Signature:--JL::>..;.-t?t""
QC~fAiQ\
Engineering Manager:~,~
AGENDA ITEM 7e
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING:Regular Board MEETING DATE:June 2,2 010
SUBMITIED BY:Lisa Coburn-Boyd .5tc-s PROJECT:
Environmental Compliance
Specialist
Ron Ripperger ~
Engineering Manager
P1253-001000 DIV.NO.ALL
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Asst.GM):
SUBJECT:
Rod posada~~~
Chief,Engineering
Manny Maga~~~
Assistant Generaf1ranager,Engineering and Operations
Award of a ProfeSsional As-Needed Environmental Consulting
Services Contract for Fiscal Years 2011,2012,and 2013
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District)Board of Directors (Board)
authorizes the General Manager to enter into an agreement for
Professional Services for As-Needed Environmental Consulting Services
with ICF International for an amount not to exceed $375,000 during
Fiscal Years 2011,2012,and 2013 (ending June 30,2013).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a
Professional As-Needed Environmental Consulting Services Agreement
with ICF International in an amount not-to-exceed $375,000 for Fiscal
Years 2011,2012,and 2013 (ending June 30,2013).
ANALYSIS:
The District often requires the expertise of environmental
consultants for small tasks on its Capital Improvement and Operations
Projects.These tasks typically are valued between $1,000 and
$70,000 and,as such,they are small enough that formal proposals
from consultants are not cost-effective to process.Because of this,
the District began using an As-Needed Environmental Consultant during
Fiscal Year 2006 to perform such tasks.This has proven to be a very
effective and efficient way to address the environmental issues that
come up as projects develop.
The District will issue task orders to the As-Needed Environmental
Consultant for specific projects during the contract period.The
Consultant will then prepare a detailed scope of work,schedule,and
cost estimate for each task order assigned under the contract.Upon
written task order authorization from the District,the Consultant
shall then proceed with the project,as described in the Scope of
Work.
The District has used an As-Needed Environmental Consultant for the
past five Fiscal Years and during this period,the costs for all
projects during any given fiscal year have averaged between $100,000
and $125,000.For example,the projects that are estimated to require
environmental services for Fiscal Year 2011 are listed below:
ESTIMATED
CIP DESCRIPTION COST
R2048 MND for Otay Mesa RW Distribution Pipelines $20,000
R2034 MND for 860-1 Reservoir $50,000
P2504 Reg.Site Access Rd.&Pipeline Relocation $10,000
Environmental Analysis
P2399 Environmental for 30-inch Pipeline,980 Res.$8,000
To Hunte Parkway
P1253 Annual Biological Report for the $6,000
Forcemain/AirVac HCP
P1253 Biological Surveys &Monitoring $20,000
TOTAL:$114,000
The current three-year As-Needed Environmental Consultant Services
contract will be complete and the entire budget expended at the end
of this fiscal year,June 30,2010.Therefore,the District issued
formal Requests for Proposal (RFP)to twenty (20)consulting firms on
March 25,2010 for Professional As-Needed Environmental Consulting
Services.On April 14,2010,eight (8)proposals were received from
the following firms:
•Chambers Group
•CRA
•ECORP Consulting
•Helix Environmental Planning
•ICF International
•PBS&J
•RECON
•Winzler &Kelly
Twelve (12)firms (ATC Associates,BRG,Encorp,ESI,Hargreave
Consulting,Hinshaw,Highfill,Patriot Environmental,RBF,Rincon
Consultants,Schneider Laboratories,and Stantec)chose not to
propose.
In accordance with the District's Policy 21,Staff evaluated and
scored all written proposals and interviewed the four top-rated firms
(Chambers Group,ECORP,Helix Environmental,and ICF International)
After holding the interviews,the panel completed the consultant
ranking process and concluded that ICF International was the most
qualified consultant.A summary of the complete evaluation is shown
in Attachment B.
This Professional As-Needed Environmental Consulting Services
Contract will be a three-year contract.The District will evaluate
the performance of the As-Needed Consultant at the end of each fiscal
year and has the option to terminate the agreement if it concludes
that the As-Needed Consultant has not performed effectively.If the
District is satisfied with the performance of the As-Needed
Consultant,the contract will continue through to the next fiscal
year.This As-Needed Environmental Services contract does not commit
the District to any expenditure until a task order is approved to
perform work.The District does not guarantee work to the As-needed
Consultant,nor does the District guarantee that it will utilize the
entire $375,000 budgeted for this contract.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The funds for this contract will be expended from the CIP projects
noted previously.This contract is for Professional As-Needed
Environmental Consulting Services based on the District's need and
schedule and does not commit the District to any expenditure until a
task order is approved for the as-needed consultant to perform work
on a specific project.
Based on a review of the financial budget,the Project Manager has
determined that the budget will be sufficient to support the
Professional As-Needed Consulting Services required for the CIP
projects in the FY 2011 budget.
3
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the District's Mission statement,"To provide
the best quality of water and wastewater service to the customers of
the Otay Water District,in a professional,effective,and efficient
manner,"as well as the District's strategic goal of,"Creating a
comprehensive environmental program that is proactive in response to
environmental compliance."
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
LC-B/RR/RP:jf
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Environmental\06-02-10 Board Staff Report_As-needed Environmental.doc
Attachments:Attachment A
Attachment B
QA/QC
NAME:
Approved:
C>Jl~DATE:
4
~\\'L.\'10
ATTACHMENT A
rSUB~~i;;~~~;o~CT:rAward of Profession~i As-Needed EnvironmentaiC~ns~iting'
!Services Contract (P1253)
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on May 20,2010 and the following
comments were made:
•Staff is requesting approval of an agreement for Professional
Services for As-Needed Environmental Consulting Services with
ICF International in an amount not-to-exceed $375,000 during
Fiscal Years 2011, 2012,and 2013 (ending June 30,2013).
•Staff indicated that the expertise of an environmental
consultant is needed for small tasks on the District's Capital
Improvement and Operations Projects.One example of the
consultant's task is to provide mitigated negative
declarations (MNDs)that are necessary for the construction of
pump stations and reservoirs,biological monitoring,or
pipeline repair projects.
•Staff stated that the District began using an as-needed
environmental consultant five years ago and it has proven to
be an efficient and effective way to address time-sensitive
environmental issues.
•The District issued an RFP to 20 consulting firms on March 25
and 8 proposals were received.Staff evaluated the proposals
and recommends that ICF International be awarded the as-needed
contract as the most qualified consultant.
•It was stated that ICF International's Senior Environmental
Planner Erin Schorr,and Biological Resources Manager Jim
Harry,were present to answer questions from the Committee and
staff.In addition,it was indicated that Ms.Schorr and Mr.
Harry completed the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
for the District's Otay Mesa Recycled Water System CIP Program
R2087,R2077,R2058 project.This item is pending
certification and is scheduled to be considered by the Board
on June 2,2010.
•The Committee inquired if ICF International is the current
contractor for as-needed environmental consulting services.
Staff stated yes and indicated that ICF International has
provided consistent and excellent services to the District.
Following the discussion,the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
6
Attachment B
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS BY PANEL MEMBERS
<PROFESSIONAL AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES>
(WRITTEN )ORAL"
Understandingof Soundness and TOTAL AVERAGE ReferencesQualificationsofViabilityofConsultant's AVERAGE Additional Presentation,Quality of SCORE SCOREscope,schedule,Proposed Fee commitment SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL creativity,insight Strength ofproject communication responsetoStaffresourcesProposedtoDBESCOREtoissuesmanagerskillsquestionsProjectPlan
ExcBllentl
SCORE 20 20 25 35 YIN 100 15 15 10 10 150 ""Good/
P<>nr
UsaCOburn-BoYd 16 16 19 35 86 12 10 7 6 121
Frank Anderson 17 15 19 35 86 11 11 7 7 122
Chambers Group DanielKav 17 17 20 35 Y 89 89 11 11 7 7 125 124
BOb KenneClv 18 17 22 35 92 11 11 6 6 126
Ron Ripperger 17 17 22 35 91 11 11 6 7 126
LisaCoburn-BoYd 14 14 16 32 76
FrankAnderson 17 15 20 32 84
CRA DanieJ Kay 16 15 17 32 Y 80 80
BobKennedv 14 14 17 32 77
RonRipperger 15 15 20 32 82
Usa Coburn-Sovd 18 17 22 34 91 12 9 6 6 124
FrankAnderson 17 16 21 34 88 12 11 6 6 123
CORP Consulting DanielKay 18 17 22 34 Y 91 89 10 10 6 6 123 122
BobKennedy 17 16 20 34 87 9 9 5 5 115
Ron Ripperger 16 17 21 34 88 11 11 6 7 123
Lisa Coburn-Boyd 18 18 23 33 92 13 14 9 8 136
FrankAMerson 17 17 21 33 88 12 12 8 8 128
Helix Daniel Kay 18 19 24 33 Y 94 92 12 13 9 8 136 134
Bob Kennedy 18 18 23 33 92 13 13 8 8 134
Ron Ripperger 18 19 24 33 94 13 14 9 8 138
Usa Coburn-Boyd 19 20 25 30 94 14 15 9 9 141
FrankAnderson 17 18 23 30 88 14 14 9 8 133
ICF DanielKav 18 20 24 30 Y 92 91 14 14 9 9 138 137 Excellent
Bob Kennedy 20 19 24 30 93 14 14 9 9 139
Ron Ripperger 18 19 23 30 90 13 14 9 8 134
Lisa Coburn-BoYd 17 18 22 28 85
FrankAMerson 18 18 22 28 86
PBS&J DanielKay 18 18 23 28 Y 87 85
BobKennedy 17 16 20 28 81
RonRipperger 17 17 23 28 85
Usa Coburn-Boyd 17 17 22 27 83
FrankAnderson 17 16 21 27 81
RECON DanielKay 17 18 22 27 Y 84 83
BobKennedv 18 18 23 27 86
RonRipperger 17 17 21 27 82
Lisa Cobum-BoYd 17 16 19 25 77
FrankAnderson 17 17 21 25 80Winzler&Kelly DanielKav 18 17 19 25 Y 79 78
BobKennedy 17 16 20 25 78
RonRipperger 16 17 20 25 78
1.Hourly Rate Calculation Formula =35 ..(ConsultantRate ..Min.Ratej"10
(Max.Rate ..Min.Rate)PM Signat:~;~-'aT
Engineering Manager:~~.c:-===
Date:5/Ik~IQ
Date:c;:.\\tj "0
Date:5/rz;,0
AGENDA ITEM 8a
STAFF REPORT
June 2,2010
DIV.NO.
Officer (CIO)
MEETING DATE:
W.O.lG.F.NO:
APPROVED BY:Manager,
(Ass!.GM):
Regular Board
Bill Je~ns,Information
Technology 0 er ions Manager
APPROVED BY:Geoff
(Chief)
SUBMITTED BY:
TYPE MEETING:
SUBJECT:Complete Wireless Project -North District
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board authorizes the General Manager to:
•Award a contract to Sage Design,Inc.in the amount of
$161,119 plus applicable taxes and shipping charges for
FireTide radios and related hardware to complete phase two
of the Otay Water Wireless Network Project.
•Award a contract to Prime Electric in an amount not to
exceed $55,620 for installation of electrical and wireless
hardware at multiple sites throughout the North District.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See "Attachment A".
PURPOSE:
To complete Otay Water District's Wireless Project,establishing
wireless network connections to strategic facilities in the
North District.
BACKGROUND:
This project will provide reliable and effective communications
capabilities to all our major facilities.The project is
phased.The first phase (FY2009 &FY2010)tested the
suitability and reliability of wireless technology to meet this
objective and is complete.This second phase implements this
technology to our facilities in the North District reservoirs
and pump stations.Future projects will expand the technology to
the South District reservoir and pump stations and will be
presented to the Board in FY2012.
This request for funds in this report will provide resources to
complete the FY2011 Wireless Project to the remaining critical
facilities in the North District.
Future plans (FY2012)call for connections to the remaining
pertinent sites in the North and South District,providing a
final wireless network with broadband connection to
approximately sixty (60)OWD facilities.
The District has a Capital Improvement Program (CIP)to cover
the costs for completing the FY2011 Otay Wireless Project.
The project consists of separate bids for hardware and services.
OWD requested three competitive bids for the hardware from
FireTide,Inc.,AES Global,Inc.($173,827)and Sage Design,
Inc.($161.118).For the services OWD received three
competitive bids from Ickler Electric Corporation ($64,900),
Five Star Electrical Contractors,Inc.($62,300)and Prime
Electrical Services,Inc.($55,620).We selected the lowest
bidders for the hardware (Sage Design,$161,118)and services
(Prime Electric $55,620).
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project will utilize funds from two CIPS.The hardware
will use CIP P2485 and will be purchased in FY2010.The
services will utilize CPI P2469 and will be purchased in FY2011.
The items referenced above request a total not to exceed
$216,739 plus applicable taxes and shipping with funds budgeted
from Capital Improvement Programs (CIP P2485 and CIP P2469).
These items are also specifically included in the existing
FY2010 Capital Budget and recommended FY2011 Capital Budgets.
The approved FY2010 budget is $265,000 for CIP P2485 (SCADA
Communications).Expenditures to date are $87,619.The
remaining balance for FY2010 is $177,381 of which not more than
$161,119 plus shipping and applicable taxes will be used in
these purchases.The proposed FY2011 budget for CIP P2469 is
$300,000,unchanged from FY2010 budget,and has no other
encumbrances.The Project Manager anticipates,based on
financial analysis,that the budget will be sufficient to
support this project.
Finance has determined that 100%of the funding for the hardware
component of this project (P2485)is available from the
Replacement Fund and that for the services component of this
project (P2469)I 60%of the funding is available from the
Replacement Fund and 40%from the Expansion fund.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
These items are in support of the District's Strategic Plan,
including the following strategic objectives:
•Develop and deploy the field wireless network for key
facilities.
•Optimize functionality,business continuity,bandwidth,
and use of SCADA.
•Optimize use of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)and
unified messaging.
•Evaluate implementing a fixed network Automated Meter
Reading.
•Develop optimized field work processing using integrated
technology.
•Update Security Assessment and implement Technology
Recommendations
LEGAL IMPACT:
None
~~
General Manager
Attachment A -Otay Water District Wireless Network Project
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:COMPLETE WIRELESS PROJECT -NORTH DISTRICT
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,Administration and Communications Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on May 19,2010 and the
following comments were made:
•This item is a request to approve the funds for hardware
and services to complete the installation of wireless
communications equipment to thirteen facilities within
the North District.
•This is the second of three phases for this project:
Phase I encompassed the testing of the technology,
proving the concept (if can achieve the appropriate
bandwidths and to test the architecture),and
installing the technology at both the Administrative
Building and Treatment Plant.
Phase II is
District to
facilities.
to install equipment in the North
provide wireless communications for
Phase III is to expand the technology to remaining
sites within the North and South Districts.
•It was indicated that the main issue in testing the
communications equipment is assuring reliability.Staff
met with several vendors to discuss this issue and to
enhance reliability,the design of the system includes
multiple paths to every site.If there is interference
or a frequency is down,the system will "hop"to the next
frequency (in essence,providing its own back up).
•The committee inquired if there are any FCC issues
concerning the bandwidths that the communications system
would utilize and if so,if the District's system is
vulnerable to interference.It was discussed that there
is a frequency (4.9)available for Public Service which
the District mayor may not need to utilize.The
District can apply for a license to utilize the
frequency.However,currently,the District does not
have a need to apply for the license as it is not
experiencing interference between any of the District's
sites utilizing the wireless service.The District's
system is designed as a point-to-point system (one
specific point to another specific point)and something
would need to come directly between one of the District's
sites.Should this occur,there is a back-up path in
place and the system would automatically "hop"to to one
of the three other frequencies available as back-up.
•It was discussed that the District utilizes encryption
protocols which does not allow the District's data to be
read as it is transmitted from site to site.The only
problem that may possibly occur is someone causing
interference in the frequency.However,it is very
unlikely that they would be able to come between our
sites as they sit 900 or 1200 feet above sea level.This
is a concern,but is not likely to occur.
•It was indicated that the communications equipment was
extensively tested and staff feels comfortable with the
reliability of the system.
•The committee inquired if staff looked at satellite and
Wi-Fi technology and indicated its concern that the
selected system may become outdated in a couple of years
and the District would need to invest additional funds to
update/upgrade the system.It was discussed that all
such equipment has a lifecycle,however,staff is
confident that this system will provide the needed
services over the normal lifecycle of such
technology/equipment.
•It was noted that should the wireless communications go
down at any of the facilities or the radios go down,
everything will operate in a fail safe mode until
personnel could go to the facilities and identify the
problem.This likely will not happen,but there are
redundancies built into the system.
•There was discussion regarding leasing versus buying the
communications equipment as leasing would provide the
flexibili ty to upgrade the equipment without having to
rebuy equipment.It was indicated that the District is
purchasing the equipment as it is not able to take
advantage of lease tax write-offs.It was further
discussed that if the equipment was leased,the District
would essentially be leasing the equipment to a zero
dollar residual and would also pay interest on the lease.
If the District wished to be able to return the
equipment,this ability will also be calculated into the
lease payment.
•The committee further inquired the reason alternative
technologies,such as satellite and Wi-Fi,were not
selected.It was indicated that the District wished to
put into place a network that had the appropriate
bandwith to meet current and future needs.The
recommended method is currently the only available way to
achieve the bandwidth (80 MG)required to support our
data load which will include video.Additionally,the
unit cost for the recommended communications system is 30
to 40 times more cost effective than satellite due to the
cost of establishing a path back to the satellite in the
required bandwidth.The recommended system is the most
cost effective means to meet the District's needs.
•Additionally,the hardware for the communications system
will remain intact and the software will be upgradable
for many years (new software and firmware will be added).
The District will be able to keep the existing physical
structures in place and continue to upgrade for many
years.Staff will provide a demonstration and graphics
of the equipment and how they work at the June 2 board
meeting.
Upon completion of the discussion the committee supported
staffs'recommendation and presentation to the full board as an
action item.