HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-16-10 EO&WR Committee PacketOTAYWATER DISTRICT
ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS &WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
and
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY,CALIFORNIA
Board Room
THURSDAY
September 16,2010
4:00 P.M.
This is a District Committee meeting.This meeting is being posted as a special meeting
in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2)in the event that
a quorum of the Board is present.Items will be deliberated,however,no formal board actions
will be taken at this meeting.The committee makes recommendations
to the full board for its consideration and formal action.
AGENDA
1.ROLL CALL
2.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO
SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JU-
RISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
DISCUSSION ITEMS
3.REVIEW OF THE RESULTS OF THE 2010 EMPLOYEE SURVEY
(WILLIAMSON)[15 minutes]
4.APPROVE THE ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND)
FOR THE SAN MIGUEL REGIONAL TRAINING FACILITY PROJECT
(COBURN-BOYD)[5 minutes]
5.APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO.1 TO THE CONTRACT WITH MWH FOR THE
RALPH W.CHAPMAN WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY UPGRADE PROJECT
(COBURN-BOYD)[5 minutes]
6.REPORT ON THE FISCAL YEAR-END 2010 STRATEGIC PLAN AND
PERFORMANCE MEASURES (STEVENS)[10 minutes]
7.SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE (WATTON)[10 minutes]
8.ADJOURNMENT
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING:
Jose Lopez,Chair
Gary Croucher
All items appearing on this agenda,whether or not expressly listed for action,may be delib-
erated and may be subject to action by the Board
The Agenda,and any attachments containing written information,are available at the Dis-
trict's website at www.otavwater.gov.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 that would require accommodation in order to enable you to partici-
pate in this meeting,please call the District Secretary at 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to
I the meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on September 10,2010 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
24 hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section
§54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley,California on September 10,2010.
2
AGENDA ITEM 3
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITTED BY:
Regular Board \A;.!
Kelli Williamso~W
MEETING DATE:
W.O.lG.F.I\O:
October 6,2010
DIV.NO:All
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:
fHumanResourcesManager.I .",,,,i r./....
Rom Sarno,Chief of Administrativ~~ices
German A~ssistant General Manager,Finance and
Administration
Present Results of the 2010 Employee Survey
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
This is an informational item.No action is required.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE.
To present the results of the 2010 Employee Survey.
ANALYSIS:
As a part of the District's Strategic Plan,the District worked with
Rea &Parker to develop and implement a scientifically reliable and
repeatable Employee Survey Program in 2008.This year,Human
Resources staff worked with Rea &Parker to make minor edits and
refine some questions based on feedback from the 2008 survey.
The survey was administered the end of June 2010.Employees each
received an email from the General Manager with an overview of the
survey,followed-up by an email from Rea &Parker Research with
individual login information.Employees entered data directly to a
private,secure server only accessible by Rea &Parker Research.Of
the 160 employees,151 completed the survey,or 94%of the
employees,which is a very high participation rate.
As summarized in the report by Rea &Parker Research.."The
fundamental conclusion to be drawn from the 2010 Employee
satisfaction survey is that Otay Water District employees were very
satisfied with their employment when the survey was initially
conducted in 2008 apd are presently even more satisfied"Rea &
Parker Research will present highlights of the findings in a
presentation format (Attachment B)A summary of the results can be
found in the Otay Water District 2010 Employee Satisfaction Survey
(Attachment C)
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost of the Employee Survey was $15,000 and was budgeted.
STRATEGIC GOAL.
FY06-08,4.5.2.1 -"Establish a Repeatable Employee Survey Program"
LEGAL IMPACT:
Attachment A -Committee Report
Attachment B -PowerPoint Presentation
Attachment C -Otay Water District 2010 Employee Satisfaction Survey
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
ATTACHMENT A
Present Results of the 2010 Employee Survey
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,Administration and Communications Committee and the
Engineering and Water Operations Committee met on September 16,
2010 to receive this informational report from Rea &Parker
summarizing the results of the 2010 Employee Satisfaction
Survey.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for board approval.This
report will be sent to the Board as a committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the committee prior to presentation to the full board.
»---I---I»o
Is:mz
--I
(lJ
Methodology
+.Online survey -June 29,2010
II Taken at Otay Water District offices
•107 questions
-49 agreement/disagreement
-49 importance
- 4 satisfaction
- 5 general/demographic
II E-mail notices and reminders from GM on June 23 and
Rea &Parker Research on June 28
II 134 out of 160 employees participated by July 1
tJ Additional time (July 8)provided for those away or
otherwise unable to participate -two follow up e-mails
from Rea &Parker Research
•Total participants =151/160 (94 percent)2
Participants
~.I,...69 percent male (2008 =70 percent)
--r;-Median age =45.5 (2008 =44.5)
.•Median length of service =6.45 years (2008 =6.00 years)
-11 percent 20 or more years (2008 =12 percent)
- 3 percent in first year (2008 =5 percent)
•Department
-Operations =39 percent (2008 =38 percent)
-Administrative Services/GM/IT =25 percent
(2008=23 percent)
-Finance =23 percent (2008=24 percent)
-Engineering =13 percent (2008=15 percent)
•Position type
-Non-management (including crew leader)=79 percent
(2008 =78 percent)
-Supervisor/Manager =7 percent
(2008 =8 percent)
-Management/Department Chief =14 percent
(2008 =14 percent)
Key Findings
-+·The level of satisfaction among employees
with their being employed by the Otay
Water District is ~.
•2008 was excellent ----------2010 even greater
extent
•Employees rate their satisfaction with
being an employee of the Otay Water
District at a mean rating of 5.95 on a scale
of 1 =Highly Dissatisfied to 7 =Highly
Satisfied.
Key Findings (cant)
+ ·In comparable public employee surveys,50
percent to 85 percent of employees have
demonstrated satisfaction levels above the
midpoint on their respective satisfaction
scales.
•Mean satisfaction ratings in these other
studies have ranged between 3.7 and 5.7
(on 1-7 scales or scales adjusted to equate
to 1-7).
•Employee satisfaction demonstrated in this
survey by Otay Water District employees is
at the very highest level.6
• A remarkable percentage of employees
(96 percent)stated that they would
recommend the Otay Water District as a
place of employment.
•This represents an increase of 6 percent
in the level of satisfaction over the
employees in the 2008 survey where 90
percent made this recommendation
Key Findings
+
7=Highly Satisfied
6
5
4
3
2
1=Highly Dissatisfied
Overall Satisfaction as Employee ofOtayWate.rDistrict
(Mean 2010 rating =5.95 Mean 2008 rating =5.45)
,.•2008 &12010 I
30%
32"k
41%
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%4'0%45%8
ReconmlendOtay Water District as.Placeof Employmen.t
2010
0%
No,4%
NO,10%
20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
Yes,96%
Yes,90%
90%'100%
Key Findings (cant)
+.The survey contained eight subsections that
identified and categorized 49 employment-
related characteristics.Each of the eight
category related means is averaged to produce
an overall agreement mean of 5.80,which is
higher than the mean in 2008 of 5.54 .
•The overall proportion of employees on all 49
characteristics who rank the District as above
the midpoint (5,6,or 7)is 5 out of 6 (83
percent).In 2008,this percentage of 5-7
responses was 76 percent.
10
Key Findings (cant)
+•Largest increases in satisfaction
-Communications
-Morale
-Compensation and Benefits
-Opportunities for Professional Growth
-Workplace and Resources
11
Survey Categories Agreement Means (Part 1)
Scale:1=Highly Disagree••.7=Highly Agree (Overallmean =5.80)
i12010 .2008
Workplace and Resources Opportunities for Professional
Growth
Compensation·and Benefits ManagementlSupervision 12
7.00
6.00
4.00
3;00 1
2.00
1.00
Survey Categories.Agreement Means (Part 2)
Scale:1=Highly Disagree...7=Highly Agree (Overall mean =5.80)
I .2010.2008 I
En¢>yeelnteraction Feedback and E~loyee Evaluation Morale Conm.mications
14
Key Findings (cant)
+.Importance of each category also increased
from 2008 but far less than satisfaction.
•The difference between the overall mean
Importance and overall mean Agreement is
.68 rating points in 2010.
•In 2008,the comparable difference in rating
points between overall agreement and overall
importance was .89.
•This indicates that the gap between
Agreement and Importance has shrunk from
2008 to 2010.
Survey Categories Importance Means (Part 1)
Scale:1=Very Unimportanl••7=Very Important (Overall mean =6.48)
I 02010 .2008 I
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Workplace and Resources Opportunities for Professional
Growth
6.65
Compensation and Benefits Management/Supervision 15
Survey Categories Importance Meal1s (Pad 2)
Scale:1=VeryUiiiltlportanL••7=Very Important (Overall mean =6.48)
I 02010-.2008 I
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
tOO
EJ11)loyee Interaction Feedback and ErT1>16yee 'EvalUation Morale Corrmunications
Key Findings (cant)
~+
. •Strongest correlations between
individual characteristics and overall
satisfaction
-Morale -individual and departmental
-Employees'contributions are valued
-District balances work and personal life
-Management team
•Provides effective leadership
•Makes informed decisions
17
18
Key Fi nd ings (cant)
...1--;.The core characteristics that make the
Otay Water District an excellent place to
work are:
•The District promotes safety in the workplace
•All necessary resources and equipment are
available to do a good job.
•Employees consider the benefit package to be
good as well as competitive with other
organizations.
•The financial stability of the District is cited as
one of its strongest characteristics.
19
Key Findings (cant)
+•The core characteristics that make the
Otay Water District an excellent place to
work are (continued):
•Supervisors and managers are rated highly:
•They are open to work-related concerns
•They treat employees with respect
•Each Department works well as a team.
•Employees understand their work goals and
objectives and further understand the
relationship between their work and the
success of the District.
20
Key Findings (cant)
+.Continued enhancement in the following
areas that already exhibit high levels of
employee satisfaction may yield even
further increases in employee
satisfaction:
•recognition of employees for a job well-done,
•an increased sense of job security,and
•communication within the District,especially in
the manner in which employees can better
understand the District decision-making
process.
Conclusion
.c~-_._+
. •The Otay Water District is clearly
fulfilling its responsibilities as an
employer to an outstandingly
,high degree.
21
•OTAYWATERDISTRICT
REA&
PARKER
RESEARCH
ATTACHMENT C
Otay Water District
2010 Employee
Satisfaction Survey
Prepared for
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
Prepared by
Rea &Parker Research
P.O.Box 421079
San Diego,California 92142
858-279-5070
www.rea-parker.com
August,2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
Methodology
Employee General InformationlDemographics
Survey Findings
Overall Satisfaction
Agreement and Importance That the District
Exhibits Certain Employment-Related
Characteristics
Correlations:Characteristics Agreements
and Overall Satisfaction
Satisfaction/Importance Quadrant Analysis
Appendix:
Survey Instrument
Page
iii
1
1
4
7
7
9
13
13
16
Otay Water District
20I0 Employee Survey Report
ii Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
OTAY WATER DISTRICT:2010 EMPLOYEE SURVEY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The fundamental conclusion to be drawn from the 2010 Employee satisfaction survey is that Otay
Water District employees were very satisfied with their employment when the survey was
initially conducted in 2008 and are presently even more satisfied.The level of satisfaction
demonstrated by employees of the District is superior.The Otay Water District is clearly
fulfilling its responsibilities as an employer to an outstandingly high degree.
•Employees rate their satisfaction with being an employee of the Otay Water
District at a mean rating of 5.95 on a scale of 1 =Highly Dissatisfied to 7 =
Highly Satisfied.
•Nearly three-fourths (73 percent)of employees rate their employment at 6 or 7
(indicative ofa great deal of satisfaction)and 9 out of 10 (87 percent)rate their
satisfaction at 5,6,7-all scores above the scale midpoint.
•These data represent an increase in the overall level of satisfaction from the
2008 employee survey where the mean rating was 5.45 and 53 percent of
employees rated their employment at 6 or 7.
•In comparable public employee surveys,a range of 50 percent to 85 percent of
employees has demonstrated satisfaction levels above the midpoint on their
respective satisfaction scales.Further,mean satisfaction ratings in these other
studies have ranged between 3.7 and 5.7 (on 1-7 scales or scales adjusted to
equate to 1-7).By all reasonable measures,the employee satisfaction
demonstrated in this survey by Otay Water District employees is at the very
highest level.
• A remarkable percentage of employees (96 percent)stated that they would
recommend the Otay Water District as a place of employment.This represents
an increase of 6 percent in the level of satisfaction over the employees in the
2008 survey where 90 percent made this recommendation.
•The survey contained eight subsections that identified and categorized 49
employment-related characteristics.Each of the eight category related means is
averaged to produce an overall agreement mean of5.80,which is higher than the
mean in 2008 of 5.54.
•Among all 49 questions,the proportion of employees on all questions who rank
the District as above the midpoint (5,6,or 7)is 5 out of6 (83 percent).In 2008,
this percentage of5-7 responses was 76 percent.
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
111 Rea &Parker Research
August.2010
•The core characteristics that make the Otay Water District an excellent place to
work are:
•The District promotes safety and all necessary resources and
equipment are available to do a good job.
•Employees consider the benefit package to be good as well as
competitive with other organizations.
•Supervisors and managers are rated highly because they are open to
work-related concerns.Moreover,supervisors treat employees with
respect and each Department works as a team.
•Employees understand their work goals and objectives and further
understand the relationship between their work and the success ofthe
District.
•The financial stability of the District IS cited as one of its strongest
characteristics.
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
iv Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
2010 EMPLOYEE SURVEY
INTRODUCTION
The Otay Water District requested that a consultant conduct an employee survey to assess various
characteristics of job satisfaction among the 160 employees who work for the District.Rea &
Parker Research was selected to be the consultant that would draft,conduct,and analyze a web-
based Internet survey.This survey was developed and conducted so that the 2008 employee
survey,also prepared and administered by Rea &Parker Research,could be used as a basis for
comparisons in employee attitudes and behavior.Also,future employee surveys will be
developed to ensure that longitudinal trends can be identified.
Section A ofthe survey (included in the appendix)contains 49 questions requesting employees to
indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed that certain positive employment
characteristics were provided and exhibited by the Otay Water District.Another 49 questions
inquired as to the importance or lack ofimportance that the employees attached to each of these
characteristics.Section B set forth 4 satisfaction based questions,and Section C contained 5
general information/demographic questions for a total of 107 questions in the survey.
Methodology
Although much of the survey remained as it had been designed in 2008,telephone conferences
were conducted with Otay Water District management and staff in order to refine the survey so
that it would,even better than in 2008,achieve the goals and objectives of finding out key
satisfaction and importance opinions ofthe employees and be replicable for future tracking.
Two e-mails were sent to each employee--the first from the Otay Water District General
Manager on Wednesday,June 23,2010,as follows:
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
All District Employees
Mark Watton,General Manager
June 23,2010
Employee Survey
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
In our continuing commitment to create and maintain a professional work
enviromnent for employees,the District is asking you to participate in an
employee survey.
The survey is designed to provide you with an opportunity to voice your opinions
and observations about working at the District.Your participation m this survey
is very important in helping the District in its continumg efforts to understand
your perspective on work-related issues and to support and improve your
experience as an employee of the District.
Within a few days,you will receive another e-mail directly from the researchers
-Rea &Parker Research.This second e-mail will provide a unique user name
and password that will enable you to access the survey on line.
There are no right or wrong answers,so just let us know what you think.All
answers will be strictly anonymous and responses will be summarized when
reported.Your individual responses will go directly to the Rea &Parker
Research website and not be individually traceable or identifiable.The District
will not be able to view individual results.The District will only receive
information summarized by Rea and Parker Research.
Please look for the survey link in your e-mail.The District has set aside time
for you to complete the survey on Tuesday,June 29,2010.The survey should
take approximately 20-30 minutes to complete and we ask that you complete the
survey during the beginning of your work shift on Tuesday.All employees who
have workstations,please complete the survey at your workstation.There are
computers located in the Operations Crew Room for employees that do not have
a workstation.
If you have any questions regarding this employee survey,you may contact
Human Resources or Rea and Parker at rparker@rea-parker.com or
lrea@mail.sdsu.edu or at 858-279-5070.
Thank you in advance for your time and contribution,
Mark Watton
After working hours in the evening of Monday,June 28,20 I0,the following e-mail went out to
all employees from Rea &Parker Research.This e-mail provided the link that had an embedded
unique user name and password (for each employee)that would allow them to access the survey
on Tuesday,June 29.
Dear--------
A few days ago,the District notified you bye-mail that it is conducting an
employee survey.As an employee ofthe Otay Water District,your participation
in this survey is very important in helping the District in its continuing efforts to
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
2 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
understand your perspective on work-related issues and to support and improve
your experiences as an employee.
When you are ready to begin the survey,which is expected to take approximately
15 minutes,please click on the link below.Each employee has his or her own
distinct and unique link.Upon clicking the link,the survey will be accessible to
you and you will be able to complete it and submit it to our confidential server.
Survey link:http://web2.flagshipresearch.com/sw/wchost.asp?st=rp10094
&id=1061&pw=41 S7ZT
If you have any questions,please e-mail meatrparker@rea-parker.com
Thank you in advance for your participation.
Sincerely,
Richard Parker,Ph.D.
President,Rea &Parker Research
P.O.Box 421079
San Diego,CA 92142-1079
858-279-5070
Each employee was able to use his or her own work computer or was provided one for use by the
Otay Water District to access the website and complete the survey.Only 2 employees had
difficulty accessing the website.They were able to call Rea &Parker Research during the survey
and obtain help.
Of the 160 employees,134 completed the survey by Thursday,July 1.Some employees were
away on vacation and others did not complete the survey for reasons known only to them,so,for
one additional week,the website was left open for those who did not complete their survey to do
so.Once submitted as final,surveys were no longer accessible to employees and were sent
immediately to a secure server maintained by Rea &Parker Research,which was not accessible
by anyone at the Otay Water District.
Follow-up e-mails on Friday,July 2 and Tuesday,July 6 went to those employees who had yet to
complete the survey.During that extended period another 17 employees submitted their surveys,
resulting in 151 completed surveys (94 percent)and leaving 9 not completed.
Data was then taken from the website and loaded into SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences)for analysis.The report that follows details the results and findings of this analytical
process.
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
3 Rea &Parker Research
AIIgllsl,2010
Employee General Information/Demographics
Charts 1-5 depict certain demographic characteristics of Otay Water District employees who
responded to the survey (151 out of 160).These employee characteristics are consistent with
those of the 2008 employee survey.Responding employees of the District are 69 percent male
(Chart 1).
The median age of employees is 45.5 (Chart 2),and they have worked for the Otay Water
District for a median of 6.45 years,with 11 percent having worked at the District for 20 or more
years and 3 percent presently in their first year ofemployment (Chart 3).
Operations is the largest department (39 percent)followed by Finance (23 percent}-Chart 4,
and almost three-fourths of employees (79 percent)are non-management employees,including
crew leaders (Chart 5).
Chart 1
Employee Gender
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
4 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Chart 2
Employee Age
(2010median age =45.5 2008 median age =44.5)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%0%J,!:;......"""'""......~'___:.._.___._=__/
Chart 3
Employee Length of Service with Otay Water District
2010 median length =6.45 years 2008 median length =6.00 years
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
5 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Operations,39%
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
Chart 4
Department of Employment
Finance.23%
ChartS
Position Type
Management!
Department
Chief/AG'-1'14%,
6
Administrative
Services/General
Manager/Information
Technology,25%
Engineering,13%
Non-Management
Employee (incl Crew
l.eader),79%
Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
SURVEY FINDINGS
Overall Satisfaction
It is very clear that employees of the Otay Water District are quite satisfied with their
employment.Chart 6 shows that employees rate their satisfaction with being an employee of the
Otay Water District at a mean rating of 5.95 on a scale of 1 =Highly Dissatisfied to 7 =Highly
Satisfied.Almost 3 out of4 employees (73 percent)rate their employment at 6 or 7 (indicative of
a great deal of satisfaction).Almost 9 out of 10 employees (87 percent)rate the District at 5,6,
or 7--above the midpomt of the scale.This represents a substantial increase in the overall level of
satisfaction from the 2008 employee survey where the mean rating was 5.45 and 53 percent of
employees-a full 20 percent less-rated their employment satisfaction at 6 or 7.
7=Highly Satisfied
6
5
4
3
2
1=Highly Dissatisfied
Chart 6
Overall Satisfaction as Employee of Otay Water District
(Mean 2010 rating =5.95 Mean 2008 rating =5.45)
.2008 1]2010
41%....---....---~
0%5%10%15%.20%25%30%35%40%45%
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
7 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
These findings further represent a particularly high level ofsatisfaction compared to public sector
employees who have participated in employee satisfaction surveys that have been conducted by
or are known to Rea &Parker Research.In these comparable public employee surveys,a range
of50 percent to 85 percent of employees demonstrated satisfaction levels above the midpoint on
their respective satisfaction scales.Further,mean satisfaction ratings in these other studies have
ranged between 3.7 and 5.7 (on 1-7 scales or scales adjusted to equate to 1-7).By all reasonable
measures,the employee satisfaction demonstrated in this survey by Otay Water District
employees is at the very highest level.
In the current survey,employees state overwhelmingly (96 percent)that they would recommend
the Otay Water District as a place of employment.This percentage of employees who would
recommend the District as a place of employment represents an increase of 6 percent over the
employees in the 2008 survey where 90 percent made this recommendation.This is a remarkably
high percentage representing 144 ofthe 150 respondents to this question on the survey-Chart 7.
Chart 7
Recommend Otay Water District as Place of Employment
2010
2008 ,
Yes,96%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
8 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
\
In 2008,the survey that is attached in the Appendix was first administered to Qtay Water District
employees.The report of the findings from that survey included detailed,question-by-question
analysis in order to identify specific opportunities for improving satisfaction,which was also very
high in 2008.The Otay Water District has been overwhelmingly successful in this regard,
achieving the results described above of96 percent recommending the District as a place to work,
scoring almost 6.0 on a 1-7 scale for employee satisfaction,and having 3 out of4 employees (20
percent increase from 2008)rate their satisfaction at 6 or 7,when a 4 is the scale midpoint.
As such,this report need not delve into the survey question-by-question-everything is very
highly regarded,with the lowest average satisfaction remarkably being 5.25.That said,to detail
the survey results one question at a time would be counter-productive and,with such detail,likely
cause the overall finding of great satisfaction to become obscured by the minutia.This report,
therefore,will deviate from the format of the 2008 report and discuss the findings much more
broadly.
Agreement and Importance That the District Exhibits
Certain Employment-Related Characteristics
The survey contains several subsections,eight of which identified and categorized 49 positive
employment-related characteristics and sought employee indications of the extent to which the
employees agreed or disagreed that the Otay Water District exhibited these characteristics and
how important these characteristics were to them as employees.Response categories were
offered by the employees on a l-to-7 scale,with 1 being Highly Disagree and 7 being Highly
Agree that the Otay Water District demonstrates these beneficial employment characteristics and
with 1 being Very Unimportant and 7 being Very Important in terms of rating the importance of
these characteristics.
These eight categories ofquestions are as follows:
•Workplace and Resources
•Opportunities for Professional Growth
•Compensation and Benefits
•Management/Supervision
•Employee Interaction
•Feedback and Employee Evaluation
•Morale
•Communications
Otay Water District
20I0 Employee Survey Report
9 Rea &Parker Research
August.2010
The technical appendix to this report contains the full distribution of responses to all 49 of these
questions;however,for purposes of this report's analytical text,the mean rating on the 1-7 scale
and the percentage of respondents indicating substantial agreement and importance (ratings of 5,
6 or 7)will be used to convey the findings.
Charts 8A and 8B serve as a compilation and summary of the agreement data from the survey.
Each of the eight category related means is averaged to produce an overall agreement mean of
5.80,which is higher than the mean in 2008 of 5.54.Among all 49 questions,the proportion of
employees on all questions who rank the District as above the midpoint (5,6,or 7)in agreement
that the District does a good job ofproviding these work-related characteristics is 5 out of 6 (83
percent).In 2008,this percentage of5-7 responses was 76 percent.
Chart8A
Survey Categories Agreement Means (Part 1)
Scale:1=Highly Disagree...7=Highly Agree (Overall mean"5.80)I III 2010 .2008 I
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00-!A·miiliiiiiiiiiiiitii
Workplace and Resources Opportunities for
Professional Growth
Compensation and
Benefits
ManagementlSup$rvision
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
10 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Chart8B
SurvC!y Categories Agreement Means (Part 2)
Scale:1..Highly Disagree...7=Highly Agree (Overall mean =5.80)
ID2010 .2008
Employee Interaction Feedback and Employee
Evaluation
Morale Communications
Charts 9A and 9B portray the mean ratings for each category regarding Importance.In all cases,
mean Importance is greater than mean Agreement.The average of the eight categorical
Importance means is an overall mean of 6.48-essentially the same as the 2008 mean of6.47.
The difference between the overall mean Importance and overall mean Agreement is .68 rating
points.In 2008,the comparable difference in rating points between overall agreement and overall
importance was .89.This implies that the gap between Agreement and Importance has shrunk
from 2008 to 2010.Furthermore,for each category,the difference between Agreement and
Importance means has declined from 2008 to 2010.This indicates that employees feel that the
gap is shrinking between the agreement or satisfaction they have with broad areas of job
satisfaction and the importance that employees attach to these categories.That is,Importance and
Agreement are converging at a very high level.
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
11 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Management/SupervisionCompensationanl;l
Benefits
Workplace and Resb~Jc!!s Opportunitiesfor
Professional Growth
2.00
Chart 9A
Survey Categories In1portance Means (Part 1)
Scale:1 =Very Unimportant,••r =Very Important (Overall mean =6.48)
1:12010.2008
4.00
7.00
3.00
6.00
5.00
1.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Chart 98
Survey Categories Importance Means (Part 2)
Scale:1=Very Unimportant•••7 =Very Important (Overall mean =6.48)
\:12010 .2008
Employee Interaction Feedback and Employee
Evaluation
Morale Communications
Dtay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
12 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Correlations:Characteristic Agreements and Overall Satisfaction
Pearson's r measures of association are used here to measure the relationship between the
employees'level of agreement with the various characteristics and their level of overall
satisfaction.High values of Pearson's r are indicative of strong relationships between the
variables.In the situation at hand,high values of Pearson's r represent a greater association
between the various levels of agreement and overall satisfaction.The Pearson's r values for all
49 associations are statistically significant.Among these relationships between overall
satisfaction and the characteristics of agreement,there are 10 such relationships that can be
categorized at or very near what is accepted as a very strong relationship (r 2:.6)and they are
shown in Table 1.Enhancement of the characteristics in Table 1 can be expected to lead to
continued increases in overall employee satisfaction.
~m~ti
M Morale is Good
De artment Morale is Good
M Contributions are Valued
District Balances Work and Personal Life
Management Team Provides Effective
Leadershi
Management Team Makes Informed
Decisions
M Work is Rewardin
SupervisorlManager Provides Constructive
Feedback
Encouraged to Communicate Openly about
Work-Related Issues
SupervisorlManager Good Work Habits/Sets
Exam Ie
.614
.596
.576
.572
.571
Satisfaction/Importance Quadrant Analysis
Levels ofagreement can be mapped on charts with importance such that agreement is graphically
measured against how important an issue tends to be.In Quadrant Analysis,high agreement and
high importance represent characteristics that are indicative of what makes the Otay Water
District a good place ofemployment.
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
13 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
The core characteristics that make the Otay Water District an excellent place to work are largely
unchanged over the last survey period.Specifically,employees are appreciative that the District
promotes safety and that all necessary resources and equipment are available to do a good job.
Employees consider the benefit package good as well as competitive with other organizations
Supervisors and managers who directly supervise employees are rated highly because they are
open to work-related concerns.Moreover,supervisors treat employees with respect and each
Department works well as a team.Employees largely understand work goals and objectives and
they understand the relationship between their work and the success of the District.Employees
also volunteered through open-ended responses that the financial stability ofthe District was one
ofits strongest features.
Continued improvement in the following areas that already exhibit high levels of employee
satisfaction may yield further increases in employee satisfaction:recognition for a job well-done,
a sense ofjob security,and communication within the District,especially in the manner in which
employees can better understand decision-making and leadership.
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
14 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
APPENDIX
15 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Section A
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
EMPLOYEE SURVEY
Employee Work Satisfaction Issues
For each statement below,please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement on a scale
of 1 to 7,where 1 is highly disagree and 7 is highly agree.Then,indicate how important each
issue is to you.Again,use a scale from 1 to 7,where 1 is very unimportant and 7 is very
important.
1.Workplace and Resources
a.The District promotes safety in the workplace.
Highly Highly C Very Very
Disagree Agl'ee 1<;'<'Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
b.I have all the resources and equipment necessary to perform my job well.
Highly Highly ..Very Very
Disagree Agree /Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7 "1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
c.I have the information to do my job effectively.
Highly Highly ..•....Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
d.I have adequate time to complete my work.
Highly Highly '.......Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 :<1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
e.I have appropriate authority to do my job.
Highly Highly i·.··Very Very
Disaaree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 ,..y'1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
16 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
f.The District promotes healthy lifestyle choices.
Highly Highly ...Very Very
Disagree Aaree iT Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 ,\>1 I 2 I 3 I ,t I 5 I 6 I 7
2.Opportunities for Professional Growth
a.My job provides opportunities to advance my skills and abilities.
Highly Highly .....Very Very
Disa,gree Agree >.../Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I ,t I 5 I 6 I 7
b.My work is rewarding.
Highly Highly ..Very Very
Disa"ree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I ry I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I 4,I 5 I 6 I 7~
c.I receive the training I need to do my job well.
Highly Highly Very Very
Disa"ree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 ....1 I 2 I 3 14 I 5 I 6 I 7
d.I have opportunities to be innovative in carrying out my job.
Highly Highly ,Very Very
Disa,gree Agree I·····Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I it I 5 I 6 I 7 I·,1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
e.I am afforded the opportunity to receive the training I need to advance within the
District.
Highly Highly Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7 ••••1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
3.Compensation and Benefits
a.I am fairly paid for the work I do.
Highly Highly >,Very Very
Disagree A,gree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
17 Rea &Parker Research
August.2010
b.I feel that the pay I receive is competitive with similar jobs in similar organizations
in the area.
Highly Highly Uli';,"';Very Very
Disagree Agree Ii Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 ,X;/,.1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7
c.The benefit package provided by the District is good.
Highly Highly II>'"Very Very
Disagree Agree /i Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 i.i,1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
d.I feel that the benefit package provided by the District is competitive with
benefits provided by
similar organizations in the area.
Highly Highly i;'{Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 Y'"1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
e.I understand my benefit plans.
Highly Highly I·>.y,Very Very
Disagree Agree "Y.Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I i1 I 5 I 6 I 7
4.Management/Supervision
For questions 4a and 4h,the "management team"refers to the team of supervisors,
managers and Senior Management••
a.I feel that the management team makes informed decisions.
Highly Highly ......,Very Very
Disagree Agree I.e Unirnportant ImlJortant
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I{'···'·1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7
b.The management team demonstrates effective leadership skills.
Highly Highly 1/····",Very Very
Disagree Agree 1<<Unimportant ImlJortant
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 '<'.,1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7
For questions 4c through 4g and Sections 6 amI 8,please consiller your supervisor to he
that person to whom you directly report and conducts your performance review.
c.lVIy supervisor/manager provides me an opportunity to express my thoughts and
concerns.
Highly Highly ;.,.,.Very Very
Disagree Agree 1<;<Unimportant ImlJortant
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1<.···'1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
Otay Water District
20I0 Employee Survey Report
18 Rea &Parker Research
August.2010
d.My supervisor/manager treats me with respect.
Highly Highly I>Very Very
Disagree A"ree '"Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 1 5 I 6 I 7
,
1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7I,
e.My supervisor/manager encourages me to learn new skills.
Highly Highly 'ii'Very Very
Disagree Agree >Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4,I 5 I 6 I 7 I,1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
f.My supervisor/manager has good work habits and sets a good example.
Highly Highly I'Very Very
Disa"ree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7 ,:,1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
g.My supervisor/manager emphasizes strong customer service on a regular basis.
Highly Highly Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7 >1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
5.Employee Interaction
a.The employees in my department work well as a team.
Highly Highly Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I,
,
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
b.Employees in the District are generally supportive of each other.
Highly Highly ,i Very Very
Disagree A"ree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I;;;1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7
c.Employees in my department share relevant work-related information.
Highly Highly I"Very Very
Disa"ree Agree ,Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
d.Employees in my department are held accountable for their work.
Highly Highly Very Very
DisaO'ree Agree ",Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
19 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
e.My ideas and opinions are taken into consideration at work.
Highly HighlY/i;:>;;'Very Very
I--':'D"'is:;.:a"'ac;.;re:..re--=-__T""":::--_.,--:-__.___=_----rA-',g~,r-ee-_.___=_-__i<:/...l(;:'.1-.:;U..:;n;:.:.im:,:jlpt;,;'o;.:.r;.:ta::.:;n:::.t_-,--__..--__--,-_......:.:Im;:.:.lpr,:.;(o;:.:r..::ta:::n::;t-,.__-1
1 12 13 14,15 16 17<)1 12 13 14 15 16 17
6.Fee(lhack and Employee Evaluation
NOTE:Question 6b has a "Not Applicahle"option for those respondents to this
survey who are new to the District and have not received a performance evaluation.
a.I receive constructive feedback from my supervisor/manager that helps me
improve my performance.
Highly Highly ii:;,Very Very
Disagree Agree I·.;c\.,;,,;Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 1 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 1 2 1 3 1 ,t I 5 I 6 1 7
b.Overall my employee performance evaluation is fair.
Highly Highly ...,....Very Very
Disaaree Aaree ....,...,Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 1 4 I 5 1 6 1 7 1 NA 1 1 2 I 3 I 4 1 5 I 6 1 7 INA
c I am recognized by my supervisor/manager when I do a good job.
Highly Highly .....Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 1 5 I 6 I 7 ...,....1 I 2 I 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7
d.I understand how my work contributes to the success of the District.
Highly Highly '.<Very Very
Disagree Agree .'Unimportant Important
1 1 2 I 3 1 4 I 5 1 6 I 7 .,......1 1 2 I 3 1 4 I 5 1 6 I 7
7.Morale
a.Morale in my department is generally good.
Highly Highly ..,....,Very Very
Disagree Agree .Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 1 2 1 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
b.My morale at work is generally good.
Highly Highly >.Very Very
Disaaree Agree Unimportant Important
1 1 2 I 3 I 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 I'1 1 2 I 3 I '.1 5 1 6 1 7
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
20 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
c.I feel that the contributions I make are valued.
...
Highly Highly .'.,.....•.Very Very
Disagree Aaree '.Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I··.··',·1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
d.The District has practices that are supportive of balancing work and personal life.
Highly Highly i.Very Very
Disagree Agree ....\Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7 ."',1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
e.I feel that I have job security.
Highly Highly "·'i·Very Very
Disagree Aaree .,.....Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 15 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
f.I am optimistic about my future success with the District.
Highly Highly Very Very
Disagree Agree "i'··Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 I 3 I '1 I 5 I 6 I 7
8.Communication:
NOTE:Questions 8h,8i,and 8j have a "Don't Know"option for those l'espondents
to this survey who are new to the District and do not know the answer to any or all
of those questions.
a.My supervisor/manager does a good job ofsharing information with department
employees.
Highly Highly Very Very
Disagree Agree '.Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 .\.1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
b.I understand my work goals and objectives.
Highly Highly Very Very
Disagree Agree I"Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 ......1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
c.I am encouraged to provide input regarding work-related matters.
Highly Highly ..<,'.'Very Very
Disagree Agree I Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 ....1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
21 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
d.I am encouraged to communicate openly.
Highly Highly
12;c,gi Very Very
Disaaree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1,<)·.·.··.··1 1 2 1 3 1 4 I 5 I 6 1 7
e.I feel comfortable sharing my honest opinion about work-related matters with my
supel'visor/manager.
Highly Highly 'c'eX Very Very
Disagree Agreec..··/i Unimportant Important1--:'-1=:':'T-:-12 --'-::-13---.-:-14----rl-=5--,:-1"';6-'----r1-=7----fl·••·Y!<·./+-~1-...,1-2---'-~1-3---r1-4-,--'-1-5--'+1-6-'--"""'-17---1
f.I receive timely responses from my supervisor/manager to issues that are most
important to me.
Highly Highly C·c.'./Very Very
Disagree Aaree I··••·.y Unimportant Important
1 1 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 1 6 I 7 Ii,.}1 1 2 I 3 1 4 1 5 16 I 7
g.I am afforded an opportunity to participate in goal setting for my department.
Highly Highly I c Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 1 6 I 7 I·.....1 1 2 I 3 1 4 1 5 I 6 1 7
h.Communication is effective within the District.
Highly Highly /.Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I DK .c 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 1 DK
1.Employee information meetings are helpful to keep me informed about District
matters.
Highly Highly
••••••••••••••••
Very Very
Disagree Agree Unimportant Important
1 1 2 1 3 I 4 1 5 I 6 I 7 I DK ..i'1 I 2 1 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 1 7 I DK
J.The Employee PIPELINE Newsletter is a valuable form ofcommunication.
Highly Highly .F Very Very
Disagree Agree <,Unimportant Important
1 1 2 1 3 I 4 1 5 I 6 I 7 1 DK ····i··1 1 2 1 3 I 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 DK
k.The District does a good job in sharing information with its employees about the
District.
Highly Highly <,Very Very
Disagree Agree I··Unimportant Important
1 1 2 1 3 I 4 1 5 I 6 I 7 1 I 2 1 3 I 4 1 5 1 6 I 7
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
22 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
Section B Ovel'all Employee Satisfaction
9.Overall,how satisfied are you as an employee ofthe District?
Highly
Dissatisfied
I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5
Highly
Satisfied
I 6 I 7
10.What is the best example ofsomething that is going well at the District?
n.What would be the one thing that could be improved at the District?
12.Would you recommend the District as a place ofemployment?
1.Yes 2.No
Section C General Information
Please provide the following information as it relates to you.This information is used for
data comparison purposes only.
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
23 Rea &ParkerResearch
August,2010
13.Department within the Otay Water District
1.Administrative Services/General Manager/Information Technology
2.Engineering
3.Finance ,p'
4.Operations
14.Length of service with Otay Water District
1.0 to 1 year
2.1 year to 3 years
3.3 years to 5 years
4.5 years to 10 years
5.10 years to 15 years
6.15 years to 20 years
7.20 years or more
15.Position Type
1.Non-supervisory employee,including crew leader
2.Supervisor
3.Manager/Department Chief/AGM/GM
16.Age
1.Under 25
2.25 and under 30
3.30 and under 35
4.35 and under 40
5.4·0 and under 45
6.45 and under 50
7.50 and under 55
8.55 and over
17.Gender
1.Female
2.Male
Otay Water District
2010 Employee Survey Report
24 Rea &Parker Research
August,2010
AGENDA ITEM 4
STAFF REPORT
P2466-ON.NO.5
001101
PROJECT:
MEETING DATE:October 6,2plO
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM)
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
TYPE MEETING:Regular Board
SUBMITTED BY:Lisa Coburn-Boyd 0(tJ-t:>
Environmental Compliance
Specialist
Ron Ripperger ~
Engineering Manager
Rod posada~o~
Chief,Engineering
Manny Maga~~
Assistant General\;anager,Engineering and Operations
SUBJECT:Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the San
Miguel Regional Training Facility
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District)Board of Directors (Board)
approves the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)for
the San Miguel Regional Training Facility Project (see Exhibit A for
project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board approval for the adoption of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the San Miguel Regional Training Facility Project.
ANALYSIS:
The project is a Regional Emergency Services Training Center (RESTC)
established in partnership with the District,the San Miguel
Consolidated Fire District (Fire District)and the Heartland Training
Facility Authority (HTFA).The RESTC will be located on a 3.5-acre
site at the District's Regulatory Site.A long-term lease and Joint
Use Agreement between the District and the Fire District for the
RESTC site were approved by the District's Board on December 5,2007.
This site will be co-used and co-habitated by the District.
The intent of the RESTC is to provide emergency services training to
fire and public utilities entities to meet modern-day'_training
standards and requirements.As shown in the propose~site plan
(Exhibit B),this facility would provide a variety of training props
including a pre-engineered five-story training tower prop;a
simulated hazardous materials prop;search and rescue props including
trench rescue,confined space rescue,and Rescue Systems 1 and 2
certified site props;overpass bridge simulation;vehicle extrication
area;water recovery system;fire attack and control simulations;
rappelling;row-construction prop;and a propane driven fire
simulation system.The site would also include one portable office
building,two portable classrooms;and one pre-engineered apparatus
and equipment storage building with bathroom/shower facilities.The
facility would be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)compliant.
The RESTC's facility and operational requirements would be met by
extending the electrical conveyances,water lines,sewer lines,and
storm drains that exist on-site.The facility would also serve as an
alternative Emergency Operation Center.
ICF International was issued a Task Order to prepare the Initial
Study and MND for the project under their As-needed Environmental
Services contract with the District.Based on the findings of these
documents,and with proper mitigation measures taken,as outlined in
the draft MND (See Attachment B),the project will not have a
significant effect on the environment.The Initial Study and Draft
MND were submitted for a 3D-day review period on August 18,2010.
The findings and mitigation measures will be finalized and the Final
MND will be available after the public review period is complete and
any changes are made based on comments received during this period.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the District's Mission Statement,"To provide
the best quality of water and wastewater services to the customers of
Otay Water District,in a professional,effective,and efficient
manner."This project fulfills the District's strategic goal to
"Identify District required training and identifies resources for
desired training."
LEGAL IMPACT:
No legal impact is anticipated.However,in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act process,the Final MND will have
the normal 3D-day legal challenge period once the Notice of
Determination (NOD)is recorded with the County of San Diego.The
2
NOD will be recorded within five (5)working days after Board
adoption of the MND.
P,\WORKING\CIP P2466 Regional Training Facility\Staff Reports\BD 10-06-10,Staff Report,SMRTF MND Adoption,(LCB-RR).doc
LCBjRR·jf
Attachments:Attachment A
Attachment B -Draft MND
Exhibit A Location Map/Site Plan
Exhibit B -Site Plan
3
ATTACHMENT A
[suBjE·CT/PROJECT:··rAdoptio;;:···oi···aM~Ctigat ed Nega t·i;e·····iiecia::r:;;;:·tio;;:·-io·;::···ihe san······'
P2466-001101 !Miguel Regional Training Facility
I ",",.",,.""",1".
COMMITTEE ACTION:
."","",",.",,.",""",.,,',",.,, ,,1•..•....1
The Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on September 16,2010.
The Committee supported Staff's recommendation.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for Board approval.This
report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board.
ATTACHMENT 8
Draft MND
CD Attached
P2466
DISTRICT
FACILITY
REGULA TORY SITE
BOUNDARY
i-It
1 ,
_+-------,REGIONAL TRAINING
\FACILITY SITE
GTAY WATER
SAN MIGUEL REGIONAL TRAINING
SITE PLAN
VICINITY MAP
IMPERIAL
BEACH
to-
(/)a.
a.....
EXHIBIT A
FIRST RESPONDER
TRAINING AREA
{ROOFl
~
RESERVE
APPARATUS
BUILDING
::
CLASSROOM
BLDG.
TRENCH
RESCUE
PROP
TRAINING
TOWER
~FLAMABLE
c::::aUQUID PROP
VEHICLE
EXTRACTION
AREA
o
OCOVERED
BLEACHERS
OVERP ASS--lll----
BRIDGE
SIMULATION
GTAY WA TER DISTRICT
SAN MIGUEL REGIONAL TRAINING FACILITY
SITE PLAN
CIP #P2466
EXHIBI T "B"
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Project No.:"'P24te (p
Document Description:a+~ror+tOy'":the a..J.e.FQ"r]"f:±be qlflL-
.:far -the.~aa tp3uef "F\~iC>'"fla-(,rainindrae;I:.,P'1J'e.cl
't l:s 1/10Dat~7~~('~,"8~Sign ure
Author:
Printed Name
QA Reviewer:~~
~f.~I l-Vf::ILMA;-r!
Pnnted ame
Manager:
Signature
Printed Name
The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the
signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended information;
being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors;accurately presenting calculated values
and numerical references;and being internally consistent,legible and uniform in its presentation style.
AGENDA ITEM 5
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING:Regular Board MEETING DATE:October 6,2010
5DIV.
NO.
R2096-
001102
PROJECT/
SUB-PROJECT:
APPROVED BY:
(Asst.GM):
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
SUBMITTED BY~Lisa Coburn-Boyd C;[CfJ
Environmental Compliance
Specialist
Ron Ripperger ~
Engineering Manager
Rod Posada ~~~.
Chief,Engineering
Manny Magafia~~
Assistant General M~nager,Engineering and Operations
SUBJECT:Change Order No.1 to the Contract with Montgomery Watson
Harza for the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility
Upgrade Project
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District)Board of Directors
(Board)approves Change Order No.1 to the existing contract
with Montgomery Watson Harza (MWH)for the Ralph W.Chapman
Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF)Upgrade Project,in an amount
not-to-exceed $83,301,(see Exhibit A for project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to execute
Change Order No.1 (see Exhibit B)in an amount not to exceed
$83,301 to the contract with MWH for the RWCWRF Upgrade Project.
ANALYSIS:
At the October 7,2009 Board Meeting,MWH was awarded a
professional engineering services contract for the RWCWRF
Upgrade Project.This project consists of the pre-design,
design,and construction phase engineering services for the
upgrade of the treatment plant.The specific elements of this
upgrade include the modification of the existing aeration basins
to achieve nitrification and de-nitrification,rehabilitation of
the blower system and associated aeration piping,~replacement of
the floating cover for the filter backwash storage reservoir/
and selected automation enhancements for the facility.The Pre-
Design Report has been completed and MWH is now in the design
phase of the project.
During the pre-design phase of the project,MWH conducted a
workshop on May 5,2010 for District staff to discuss the
different components of the project.During this workshop,
several important enhancements to the design scope were
explored.Specifically,staff requested that the following
items be added to the original scope of work via Change Order
No.1 to increase plant efficiency and productivity:1)Replace
the existing aeration diffuser system with a new panel type
aeration system,2)Add Return Activated Sludge (RAS)and Waste
Activated Sludge (WAS)pumping modifications to improve plant
process control and automation,and 3)Add seven (7)process
instruments that will further aid in the automation of the
treatment plant.Staff believes that it is prudent to include
these plant and process control enhancements at this time as
part of the upgrade project in an amount not-to-exceed $83,301.
FISCAL IMPACT:~~
The original MW co~$458,813 is currently funded from
CIP R2096.The total budget for CIP R2096/as approved in the
FY 2011 budget,is $2,500,000.Expenditures to date are
$270,590.Total commitments to date,including this Change
Order,are approximately $713,855.See Attachment B for budget
detail.
The Project Manager anticipates that the budget,based on the
attached financial analysis,will be sufficient to support this
project.
Finance has determined that funding for this project is
available from the Replacement Fund (100%).
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the District's Mission statement,"To
provide the best quality of water and wastewater services to the
customers of Otay Water District,in a professional,effective/
and efficient manner"and the District/s Strategic Goal,"To
satisfy current and future water needs for potable/recycled,
and wastewater services."
2
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
P:\NORKING\CIP R2096 -RvJCNRF Blmler System Rehab-Replace\Staff Report3\8D 10-06-10,Staff Report,Rt'Je-mF Upgrade Project Change
Order.doc
LCB/RR·jf
Attachments:Attachment A
Attachment B -Budget Detail
Exhibit A Project Location
Exhibit B -Change Order No.1
3
R20 96-0011 02
ATTACHMENT A
i Cha~g'~Order No.1 to the Cont r ac t~ithM;~'tg;m~'~y'w~t~o~
i Harza for the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling FacilityiUpgradeProject
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on September 16,2010.The Committee
supported Staff's recommendation.
NOTES:
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the Committee
moving the item forward for Board Approval.This report will be sent
to the Board as a Committee approved item,or modified to reflect any
discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to
presentation to the full Board.
ATTACHMENT B
SUBJECT:
R2096-001102
Change Order No.
Watson Harza for
Facility Upgrade
1 to the Contract with Montgomery
the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling
Project
OtayWater District
r2096 -RWCWRF -Upgrades and Modifications
Date Updated:August 31,2010
Budget Outstanding Projected FinalCommittedExpendituresCommitment&Cost Vendor/Comments
2,500,000 Forecast
Planning
Labor 48,482 48,482 48,482
Professional Legal Fees 603 603 ·603 GARCIA CALDERON &RUIZ LLP
Consultant Contracts 11,200 11,200 11,200 MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC
Consultant Contracts 458,813 98,850 359,963 458,813 MWH AMERICAS INC
83,301 83,301 83,301 C.O.#1 MWH AMERICAS INC
Consultant Contracts 678 678 -678 US BANK CORPORATE PAYMENT
Service Contracts 250 250 ·250 UNION TRIBUNE PUBLISHING CO
Service Contracts 68 68 -68 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
Service Contracts 10,860 10,860 ·10,860 E S BABCOCK &SONS INC
Total Planning 530,954 170.991 359,963 530,954
Design
Labor 14.oa3 14,083 14,083
Consultant Contracts 3,500 3,500 ·3,500 MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC
Total Design 17,583 17,583 ·17,583
Construction
Labor 55,080 55,080 55,080
Rents and Leases 5,557 5,557 ·5,557 EQUIPCO SALES &SERVICE
MWH AMERICAS,PENHALL,
Service Contracts 13,039 13,039 -13,039 SOUTHERN CAL TELECOM
Infrastructure Equipment &
Materials 434 434 -434 EQUIPCO SALES &SERVICE
Infrastructure Equipment &REXEL,CABLES PLUS,
Materials 7,907 7,907 -7,907 COMPUTER AIDED SOLUTIONS
Total Construction 82,016 82,016 -82,016
Grand Total 713,855 270,590 443,264 713,855
VICINITY MAP
boco
II
.....
Iii...J(3en
IMPERIAL
BEACH
/\~//\,~/\\;5~~'\'/~../~~
//\\~'r'V \~/\~/I
--\----.--~\\/~'r~'rGY-'r7 /;;)
'-/(Y (
~--~\\ 0 j
Co~0~~\/
~~
/
/r;y~&
~~~
---------r--'-~/~-----------
----i r \~--~)
I ,J '?I ~~~__~~
PROJECT
SITE
L~,BO~o~~\---"l'V
".-,
'"
aTAY WA TER DISTRICT
RWCWRF -UPGRADES AND MODIFICATIONS
CIP#R2096
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
2554 SW EETWATER SPRINGS BLVD.•SPRING VALLEY,CA.91978,(619)670 -2222
CONTRACT/P.O.CHANGE ORDER No.1
PROJECT/ITEM:Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility Upgrade Proje~t
CONTRACTORIVENDOR:MWH REF.CIP NO.:·R2096
APPROVED BY:General Manager REF.P.O.No:711767 REF.WO No.:N/A DATE:08/31/10
DESCRIPTION:
Provide design services and preparation of bid documents for the modifications to the RWCWRF
Upgrade project as detailed in the Attachment A,Additional Scope of Services,and Exhibit B,Budget
Breakdown Per Task dated August 31,2010.
REASON:
The modifications of the original design services were identified by MWH and District Staff as
enhancements that would increase the treatment plant efficiency and productivity.
CHANGE P.O.TO READ:
Revise Contract to add $83,301 for a total Contract amount of $542,114.00.
Completion date remains at 06/30/12.
ORIGINAL CONTRACT/P.O.AMOUNT:
ADJUSTED AMOUNT FROM PREVIOUS CHANGE:
TOTAL COST OF THIS CHANGE ORDER:
NEW CONTRACT/P.O.AMOUNT IS:
CONTRACT/P.O.TIME AFFECTED BY THIS CHANGE:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE:
REVISED CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE
$
$
$
$
458,813.00
458,813.00
83,301.00
542,114.00oDays
6/30/12
6/30/12
IT IS UNDERSTOOD WITH THE FOLLOWING APPROVALS,THAT THE CONTRACTORNENDOR IS AUTHORIZED AND DIRECTED TO MAKE THE HEREI N DESCRIBED
CHANGES.IT IS ALSO AGREED THAT THE TOTAL COST FOR THIS CHANGE ORDER CONSTITUTES FULLAND COMPLETE COMPENSATION FOR OBLIGATIONS
REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT/P.O.ALL OTHER PROVISIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONTRACT/P.O.REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.
STAFF APPROVALS:
PROJ.MGR.«,-M.e:.t;Dt-zM"Q~'ET-DATE:'VZ/ZPlc
D1V.MGR:~~DATE:9/t:/Z1)(I
CHIEF:DATE:,_---'-_
ASST.GEN.MANAGER:,_
DISTRICT APPROVAL:
DATE:_
GEN.MANAGER:_______DATE:_
COPIES:0 FILE (Orig.)0 CONTRACTORNENDOR 0 CHIEF-ENGR 0 CHIEF·FINANCE 0 AGM/ENG-OPSoENGR.MGR.0 INSPECTION 0 PROJ MGR 0 ENGR.SECRETARY 0 PURCHASING 0 ACCTS PAYABLE
C;\Documents and Settings\ldwitter\Local Settings\Temoorarv Internet Files\Content.OutlookIEVUOZ4Vx\Change Order#1 -RWCWRF Uogrude ProiecLdoc
CHANGE ORDER LOG
Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility Upgrade Project
ConsultanUContractor:MWH
Project:R2096
Subproject:001102
APPROVED
C.O.AMOUNT BY DATE DESCRIPTION TYPE C.O.
1 $83,301.00 Board 10/6/2010 Compensation for design of additional scope items.Owner
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Total C.O.'s To Date:
Original Contract Amount:
Current Contract Amount:
Change Order Breakdown for the Month:
Month Net C.O.$Limit Authorization
9/10 $83,310.00 $2,000 Insp
$10,000 PM/Sr.Engr.
$20,000 DivM
$25,000 Chief
$35,000 AGM
$50,000 GM
>$50000 Board
H:\RWCWRF Upgrade Project_Change Order Log
$83,301.00
$458,813.00
$542,114.00
18.2%
C.O.%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
9/1/2010
August 31,2010
MWH
Attachment A
RWCWRF Upgrade Project
Additional Scope of Services
The below Scope Modifications cover design services (Task A.Project Management and
Administration;Task B.Preliminary Design and Task C.Final Design and Bid Document
Preparation)to be provided by MWH Americas,Inc.("MWH")to coincide with the
recommended project contained in the "Otay Water District,Ralph W.Chapman Water
Reclamation Facility Upgrade Project,Preliminary Design Report."
MWH shall perform additional services necessary to complete the design services as modified
below:
•Instead of re-using existing aeration diffuser system,a new aeration diffuser system -
Parkson HiOx®UltraFlex Aeration Panels (based on August 26,2010 meeting)will be
provided.MWH will coordinate with the District and aeration diffuser manufacturer to
determine the number and arrangement of the aeration diffuser panels.MWH will
provide additional mechanical drawings to show the new diffuser grid system (plans,
sections and details)and expand specification section on Control Strategies to include
the new diffuser system.The District will negotiate with the aeration diffuser
manufacturer -Parkson and provide MWH a description of the services and materials
that Parkson will be supplying,along with a quote.
•Instead of dividing each basin into one anoxic zone and one aerobic zone,each basin
will be divided into four zones:two anoxic,one future swing and one aerobic.
Additional compartments were dictated by kinetic requirements revealed by modeling
of the District's Nitrogen data.
•The existing influent weirs will be converted to V-notch weirs (total of 3).
•The design will provide variable frequency drive (VFD)and flow indicating transmitters
(FIT)for each RAS flow meter at the aeration basins (total of 3).Flow meters will be
added at the discharge of RAS pumps and piping will be modified to provide straight
pipe.
•The design will include replacement of the buried 18-inch header and 12-inch header
that transitions into 8-inch line to aeration basin for channel aeration.An additional
civil drawing will be necessary to illustrate the plan and section of the yard piping and
profile.
•The design will include air flow transmitters for grit chamber and channel aeration.Air
flow measurements will be sent to the SCADA system and be part of blowers control.
•The design will include a flow rate controller for the control of blower system.
•The design will include the following:
•New air flow monitoring system for Headworks -Grit Removal/Classifier
(requires some piping modification).
•VFD and controls of each existing RAS pump.
•RAS -Add a flow meter to each RAS pump discharge line.(Requires significant
piping modification)
•Secondary Clarifier Skimming Trough -Add an actuator to rotate trough as well
connect to SCADA.(Requires adding motorized actuators)
With no AS-BUILT P&IDs,the design will include re-construction of P&IDs only for any
affected areas as needed to facilitate this project only..-
•Electrical and Instrumentation design to support the equipment modifications listed in
this Attachment is included.
The Scope Modifications are based on the following assumptions:
1.The District will pressure test the existing 8-inch line to the grit chamber and the design
does not include modifications to the 8-inch line to the grit chamber.
2.Since original mylars are not available,the District will engage surveyor to perform
potholing and field surveys to locate surface and sub-surface features where the air
piping will be replaced.The District will provide MWH aerial photogrammetric survey
and digital topographic mapping data in Microstation V8 format.A final digital
topographic map (topo map)of the project site at a scale of one inch equals twenty feet
(1"=20'),with a contour interval of one (1)foot containing the specific ground shot
data and underground utility pothole data will be provided to MWH to proceed with the
design.The map accuracy will meet or exceed the specifications published in the US
Department of Transportation's Reference Guide Outline and National Mapping
Standards.Field data will be incorporated into a digital topographic mapping on which
the new air piping will be mapped and designed.Digital topographic mapping will be
provided to MWH.
3.The District will engage geotechnical subconsultant to perform subsurface exploration
where the new filter air scour blowers will be located,and provide MWH a geotechnical
report.
4.The District will engage a corrosion subconsultant to test the soil samples for soil
corrosivity and provide MWH recommendations for controlling corrosion of
underground air piping.
EXHIBIT B
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT -AMENDMENT No.1
BUDGET BREAKDOWN PER TASK
August 31 2010,
i I I IAmendedII
Contract Hours IHourlyRate Amended Contract Amended Contract
Task A.Project Management &Administration*
I
I
Total Hours byTask 136 hr i $23,574
I
Principal In Charge W.Moser 6 hr $245.00 $1,470.00
Project Manager J.Wojslaw 46 hr $205.00 $9,430.00
Supervising Professional P.Low 24 hr $155.00 $3,720.00
Senior Professional J.DeCarolis 28 hr $144.00 $4,032.00
Administrator N.Sampson 32 hr $87.00 $2,784.00
Direct Expenses
Subconsultants
I
$-
Mileage 1333 per mile $0.61 $806.47
Misc.Other Direct Costs $90.20
Associated Project Costs I $1,331.44
Task B.Preliminarybesign**
Total Hours by Task 528 hr $108,551
Principal In Charge W.Moser 4jhr '$245.00 $980.00
Project Manager J.Wojslaw 52 hr $205.00 $10,660.00
TAC R.Stephenson SO hr $205.00 $10,250.00
Principal Professional"V.Nevo 100 hr 1$202.00 $20,200.00
Principal Professional I M.Shahabi 10 hr !$188.00 $1,880.00
Supervising Professional ,P.Low 148 hr 1$155.00 $22,940.00
Senior Professional IJ.DeCarolis 164,hr $144.00 $23,616.00
Administrator IN.Sampson o hr 1$87.00 $-::
C--.__----
!Jirect Expenses !I
Subconsultants CPM Construction i $8,400.00 I
RBA I
Mileage o per mile $0.61 $-
Misc.Outside Reproduction $396.97
CADD 65 hr $18.43 $1,197.95
Associated Project Costs $5,169.12
I
Amended
Contract Hours Hourly Rate Amended Contract Amended Contract
Task C.Final Design and Bid Document Preparation I I I
I Total Hours by Task 1841.21 hr I $327,610--_..-
f
Iw.Moser ------olhr
i If---
1$Principal In Charge 245.00 $-I
Project Manager J.Wojslaw -~-44[hr 1$205.00 $9,020.00
TAC R.Stephenson.L.Yaussi,155 hr 1$205.00 $31,775.00
M.Fordham,S.Hinman.H.I
Durham I
Supervising Professional J.Loucks 12 hr 1$158.00 $1,896.00--
Principal Professional II Y.Nevo o hr $202.00 $-
Principal Professional I M.Shahabi,D.Wilcoxson,196 hr $188.00 $36,848.00
J.Mohr,B.Tai I
Supervising Professional ~Ip.Low,E.Pascua 247,hr $155.00 $38,285.00 I
Senior Professional J.DeCarolis,M.Ketabdar,562jhr 1$144.00 $80,928.00
SWilliams I I
Senior Designer Design Staff 625.2 hr i$144.00 $90,028.80
Administrator N.Sampson o hr $87.00 $-I
Direct Expenses
Subconsultants CPM Construction $14,000.00
Mileage 600 per mile $0.61 $363.00
Misc.Outside Reproduction 2236.3 cost $1,845.00 $2,459.90
CADD 216 hr $18.43 $3,980.88
Associated Project Costs $18,025.35
*Includes Project Management ofAdditional Scope.
**Additional hours are associated with developing new scope itemsto a level suitable for design (cales,layouts,etc.).These items were only identified in PDR but not developed yet.
Task A +Task B +Task C (Amended)
Task A +Task B+Task C (Original)
Task A +Task B +Task C (Amendment Amount)
2,505 hours
2,036 hours
469 hours
$
$
$
459,735
376,434
83,301
Otay Water District
Ralph W.Chapman WRF Upgrade Project
Revised list of drawings
General
1 G-1 Cover Sheet
2 G-2 Location and Vicinity Maps;Drawing Index
3 G-3 General Notes,Abbreviations and Symbols
Civil
4 (-1 Grading Plan
5 C-2 Yard Piping Plan I
6 C-3 Piping Profiles I
7 -4 Yard Piping Plan II &Piping Profiles II
8 C-5 Civil Details I
Structural
9 GS-1 Structural Details
10 1S-1 Aeration Basin Baffles I
11 IS-2 Aeration Basin Baffles II
12 3S-1 Blower Building Modifications
13 3S-2 Air Scour Blower Foundation and Walls
Mechanical
14 GM-1 Piping Schedule
15 M-l Mechanical Details
16 M-2 Mechanical Details
17 1M-1 Aeration Basin Diffuser Demo
18 IM-2 Aeration Basin mixers &pumps -Plan
19 1M-3 Aeration Basin mixers &pumps -Sections
20 1M-4 Aeration Basin Air Piping-Plans &Sections
21 1M-5 Aeration Basin Grids -Plans
22 1M-6 Aeration Basin Grids -Sections
23 1M-7 Aeration Basin Grids -Details
24 3M-1 Blower Building -Plan
25 3M-2 Blower Building -Sections
26 3M-3 Air Scour Blower Plan &Sections
27 5M-1 RAS Pumps Discharge Flow Meters
2-&SM 2 VI/AS Booster PUR'l13 Plan &Sections
Legend
Black font =As proposed
FFOOOORed 01+OOOfont =New scope Page 1
Electrical
29 GE-l Electrical Symbols
30 GE-2 Electrical Notes and Abbreviations
31 GE-3 Electrical Details II
32 GE-4 Electrical Details II
33 E-1 Elecrtical Site Plan
34 E-2 Electrical Demolition drawing
35 E-3 Single Line Diagram
36 E-4 Control Schematics I
37 E-5 Control Schematics II
38 E-6 Conduit Development
39 E-7 Conduit and cable Schedule
40 E-8 Panalboard Schedule
41 lE-1 Aeration Basin Electrical Plan
42 3E-l Blower Bldg Electrical Plan
43 3E-2 Air Scour Electrical Plan
44 SE-1 RAS Pumps and WA~Booster Pump
45 7E-1 Grit Chamber Air Monitoring System and
Secondary Clarifier Skimming Trough
4e n:2 Diesel Tank Level Transmitter
Effluent Pump Pressure Transmitter
Instrumentation
47 GI-1lnstrumentation Sysmbols &Abbrevciations
48 GI-2 Instrumentation Details
49 GI-3 Network Block Diagram
50 11-1 P&ID I Aeration Basins
51 11-2 P&ID II Aeration Basins
52 31-1 P&ID III Aeration Blowers and RAS Pumps
53 31-2 P&ID IV Air Scour Blowers
§4 SI 1 P&:ID V RA~and WA~Pumps &:WAS Booster Pump
55 71-1 P&ID VI Grit Chamber Air Monitoring System and
Secondary Clarifier Skimming Trough
§9 71 2 P&:ID VII Diesel Tank Level Transmitter
Effluent Pump Pressure Transmitter
Number of Proposed DraWings
Number of New Drawings
Legend
Black font =As proposed
FFOOOORed 01+OOOfont =New scope
=42
=10
Page 2
Otay Water District
Ralph W.Chapman WRF Upgrade Project
Additional Specification Sections
Construction Specifications Institute (CSI)MF-2004
Section Title Comments
262923 Variable Frequency Drives VFD for RAS Pumps
409100 Process Control and Instrumentation Expanded section
409102 In-Line Liquid Flow Measuring RAS flow meter
409104 Gas Flow Measuring Air flow meters and transmitter
409106 Level Measuring Diesel tank
409108 Pressure Measuring Effluent Pump
409300 Control Strategies Expanded section
412011 Rotary Pipe Skimmer If skimmer is to be replaced.
412517 Diffusers,Fine Bubble,Fixed New aeration grid systems
431058 Corrosion Resistant Cast Iron Soil Pipe New Air Header.
(ASTM A 518jA 861,Modified)
432233 Progressing Cavity Pumps Wl'lS Booster Pump
433012 Valve and Gate Actuators Secondary Clarifier Skimming
Trough
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet·
Project No..1)2.054>
Document Description:St-~Fori fa-c Ba4.t"d a.pFt"qva,('f---
C hao,6'c:,..d e.c -#.,:to tpi-H '''S C-COO.trac:+f",~,"--:fh~""e~~_
1)WC.W l'l'F Up'3 raae..1?"1J~""e.C(...c.","-,-±_----------
5/1/10Dat~I~~-'73~Signature
Author:
QA Reviewer:
Printed Name
Date
Manager:
Tl.o tJ 121 t1fJ~6Lf/L/
Printed Name
The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the
signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended information;
being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors;accurately presenting calculated values
and numerical references;and being internally consistent,legible and uniform in its presentation style.
AGENDA ITEM 6
TYPE MEETING:Regular
SUBMITTED BY:Geoffrey
Informat'
Strategic Planning
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE:October 6,2010
W.O.lG.F.NO:DIV.NO.
and
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:
German Al~Assistant General Manager,Administration and
Finance
FY 2010 Strategic Plan and Performance Measures Report
GENERAI.MANAGER.'S .REC0MM:ENDAT:rON:
No recommendation.This is an informational item only.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To provide a fiscal year-end report on the District's Strategic
Performance Plan.
ANALYSIS:
The District has completed the second year of the Strategic Plan
for FY 2009 to FY 2011.Overall,results continue to be positive
with the District exceeding its target for both strategic plan
objectives (at least 90%complete or on track)and performance
measures (at least 75%on target).Detailed information on each
objective and measure is also available electronically on the
Board Extranet.Looking at these results in more detail:
Strategic Plan Objectives -Changing to Meet Future Needs
Strategic plan objectives are designed to ensure we are making the
appropriate high-level changes necessary to move the agency in the
planned direction to meet new challenges and opportunities.
Overall performance of strategic plan objectives is positive with
49 of 51 objectives (96%)complete,ahead,or on schedule and two
items behind schedule.Of the objectives that are behind,both
expect to be back on track by next quarter.Three items are not
scheduled to start and one items is on hold;therefore,these four
objectives have been excluded from the calculation.
Objectives:All Scorecard Areas
Detail
30 25~~~---------
10
5 2 --r--
1 0
0
Compl Ahead On Schd Behind Hold No Rpls Not Strt
55 Total
49/51 Objectives complete,ahead,or on schedule (96%).
Target is 90%.
Performance Measures -Monitoring Day-To-Day Performance
Performance measures are designed to track the day-to-day
performance of the District.Sometimes referred to as a "dash
board",these items attempt to measure the effectiveness and
efficiency of daily operations.The overall goal is that at least
75%of these measures be rated "on target"District results in
this area are also positive with 39 of 44 (89%)items achieving
the desired level or better.
Measures:All Scorecard Areas
25
5
Detail
~...__.__._--_._----
.-.."....~~----_.__.._--
Compl Ahead On Schd Behind Hold No Rpts Not Strt
44 Total
39/44 Measures on or ahead of schedule (89%).
Target is 75%.
Balanced Scorecard -External View
The Balanced Scorecard methodology is designed to ensure that a
company is performing consistently on a wide range of measures
necessary to ensure both short-term and long-term improvements.
From this perspective the results are also positive.In six of
the eight categories the District is on or ahead of schedule or
target.The areas where we are behind (Learning and Growth-
Objectives and Customer-Measures)should be back on track next
quarter.
Balanced Scorecard
FY 2010 •Qtr 4.All Departments
i.Objectives
L.._.~.__._..__
[
--._--
Customer
•ObjeCtiVes'",',Measures J
---~--~------
F.inandal~~~ure~.1 I LejlrningandGrowth
i Objectives.Measures I
L--~._...J
ri Business Processes I
i 'i Objectives.Measures IL .J
Green =meets or exceedsl Red =does not meet
Departmental Perspective -Internal View of Performance
The departmental perspective,that is breaking down performance
objectives and measures by the responsible internal departments,
is also positive.Most departments meet or exceed expectations in
both areas.The single objective that is behind for Finance will
be back on schedule by next quarter.
Department View
FY 2010 •Qtr 4 •All Scorecard Areas
2-Engineering Objectives Measures ~3-Finance Objectives Measures
4-Information Technology •Objectives Measures
S-Operations Objectives •Measures
Green =meets or exceeds!Red =does not meet
Next Steps
The District will begin developing the FY12-14 Strategic Plan in
the second quarter of FYll.
l!'J:$CA1'...IMPACT:
None at this time.
STRA'I:'EJ:;J:CGOJU,:
Strategl'cPlc3.r1 and Performance Measure reporting is a critical
element in providing performance reporting to the Board and
staff.
LE;GJU,J:~AC'l'.
N0)AQ
Gederal Mana~----------
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECTIPROJECT:FY 2010 Strategic Plan and Performance Measures Report
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Administration and Finance Committee and the Engineering and
Operations Committee met in September and reviewed this item.
Based upon this discussion the Committees recommend that the
Board receive the attached information.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for board approval.This
report will be sent to the Board as a committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the committee prior to presentation to the full board.
FY 2010 Year End
Strategic Plan Review
Board Committees
September 16th, 2010
Strategic / Business Planning Process
Objective Status Summary
49/51 Complete, Ahead, or On Schedule
Performance Measure Status Summary
88% Complete, Ahead, or On Schedule
Balanced Scorecard View
In 6 of 8 categories of our balanced scorecard, the District is on or
ahead of schedule or on target
Departmental View
Almost all departments meet or exceed the expectations
for objectives and performance measures.
Next Steps
Major plan revisions for FY 2012-2014
Themes of efficiency and effectiveness
Coordinated effort with asset management
Leverage existing system investments
already in place
Key Objective Achievements
Developed a comprehensive outreach plan for customers related
to the drought, recycled water, and water conservation.
Worked with Home Owners Associations to devise a transfer
program for users of potable water for irrigation to convert to
recycled.
Standards & Poor’s notified the District that it was upgrading the
District’s credit rating from AA- to AA.
218 process completed-notices were mailed out in October to all
Otay customers.
Successful implementation of SharePoint in Customer Service.
Moving forward with AWWA District-wide Self-Assessment
evaluation.
Operations coordinated with Customer Service (meter readers)
and IT to properly set up a recorded meter testing program.
Results Available On the Board Extranet!
www.otaywater.gov/extranet/login.aspx