Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-23-19 EO&WR Committee PacketOTAY WATER DISTRICT ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS & WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING and SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA Board Room FRIDAY August 23, 2019 12:00 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.ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4370 FOR THE ANNEXATION OF THE PROPERTY OF THE AUDAY A. SALEM SEWER ANNEXATION, 10610 SNYDER ROAD, LA MESA, CA 91941, APN 497-011-37-00, TO THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AND TO IM- PROVEMENT DISTRICT 18 (MARTIN) [5 minutes] 4.APPROVE AN INCREASE TO THE OVERALL BUDGET OF CIP S2024 IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $450,000 (FROM $10,530,000 TO $10,980,000) AND APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 6 TO THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CON- TRACT WITH WEIR CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO- EXCEED $289,908.63 FOR THE CAMPO ROAD SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT (MARTIN) [5 minutes] 5.AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR AS-NEEDED ELECTRI- CAL ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES WITH MORAES, PHAM AND AS- SOCIATES IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $175,000 DURING FISCAL YEARS 2020-2022 (ENDING JUNE 30, 2022) (CAMERON) [5 minutes] 2 6. AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO MURRAYSMITH, INCOR- PORATED FOR AS-NEEDED PLAN CHECK SERVICES FOR DEVELOPER POTA- BLE AND RECYCLED WATER PROJECTS IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $175,000 FOR A PERIOD OF THREE (3) FISCAL YEARS (FY 2020, FY 2021, AND FY 2022) WITH A CONTRACTUAL END DATE OF JUNE 30, 2022 (DiPIETRO) 7. APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL (PHG) RE- PORT TO TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION IN REDUCING THE LEVELS OF THE FIVE CONSTITUENTS LISTED IN THE REPORT TO LEVELS AT OR BELOW THE PHGs (VACLAVEK) [5 minutes] 8. FOURTH QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2019 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM REPORT (MARTIN) [5 minutes] 9. YEAR-END REPORT ON THE DISTRICT’S FISCAL YEARS 2019-2022 STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 (SEGURA) [5 minutes] 10. ADJOURNMENT BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING: Tim Smith, 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.otaywater.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 the meeting. Certification of Posting I certify that on August 16, 2019 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the reg- ular 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 August 16, 2019. /s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 4, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Assistant Chief of Engineering PROJECT: ANX- 18-001 DIV. NO. 5 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4370 for the Auday A. Salem Sewer Annexation, 10610 Snyder Road, La Mesa, CA 91941, APN 497-011-37-00, to the Otay Water District and to Improvement District 18 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) adopt Resolution No. 4370 (Attachment B) for the annexation of the property of Auday A. Salem, 10610 Snyder Road, La Mesa, CA 91941, APN 497-011-37-00, to the Otay Water District (“District”) and to Improvement District 18. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: The purpose of the proposed annexation of the property of the Auday A. Salem (“Property Owner”), 10610 Snyder Road, La Mesa, CA 91941, APN 497-011-37-00, to the District and to Improvement District 18 is to make sewer service available to a parcel owned by the Property Owner. ANALYSIS: A written request and Petition signed by the Property Owner has been received for annexation of APN 497-011-37-00 into Improvement District No. 18 for sewer service. The total acreage to be annexed is 1.493 acres. The property currently has a septic system that is approximately sixty-one years old. The Property Owner requests to be AGENDA ITEM 3 2 connected to the District’s sewer system prior to failure of the property’s septic system. The parcel is currently outside the District's sphere of influence as well as the District’s Sewer Improvement District No. 18, as shown in Exhibit A. Therefore, annexation of this property to the District, and to Improvement District No. 18 is required for sewer service. At the August 5, 2019 meeting of the San Diego County’s Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”), LAFCO approved a change of organization to annex APN 497-011-37-00 into the District. It is recommended that the District Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. 4370 (Attachment B), annexing the property of the Auday A. Salem located at 10610 Snyder Road, La Mesa, CA 91941, APN 497-011-37-00 to the District and to Improvement District 18. The property receives water from the Helix Water District. The District’s sewer facilities are located adjacent to the property. This annexation will not create an island. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The property owner will pay the District’s annexation processing fee, sewer annexation fees (current fee is $1,159.20 per EDU), and sewer capacity fees for parcels located outside the sewer ID (current fee is $5,822.68) in effect at the time the sewer service is provided, and any additional fees including the availability fee, as established in the attached Resolution No. 4370. STRATEGIC GOAL: Adoption of Resolution No. 4370 supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsible manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices." LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:jf P:\Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\2019\BD 09-04-19_Salem-Snyder Annexation\BD 09-04-19_Salem Sewer Annexation Staff Report.docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B - Resolution No. 4370 - Exhibit A – Description - Exhibit B – Map Exhibit A – Location Map ATTACHMENT A PERMIT NO.: ANX-18-001 Adopt Resolution No. 4370 for the Auday A. Salem Sewer Annexation, 10610 Snyder Road, La Mesa, CA 91941, APN 497-011-37-00, to the Otay Water District and to Improvement District 18 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on August 23, 2019. 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 B Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 4370 RESOLUTION FOR ANNEXATION TO THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 18 OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED AS THE "AUDAY A. SALEM SEWER ANNEXATION” (DIV. NO. 5) WHEREAS, a letter has been submitted by Auday A. Salem, the Property Owner and party that has an interest in the land described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto, for annexation of said land to the Otay Water District Sewer Improvement District No. 18 (“ID 18”) pursuant to California Water Code Section 72670 et seq.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 72680.1 of said Water Code, the Otay Water District (“District”) Board of Directors (“Board”) may proceed and act thereon without notice and hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINDS, RESOLVES, ORDERS, AND DETERMINES as follows: 1. A depiction of the area proposed to be annexed, and the boundaries of ID 18 following the annexation, is set forth on a map filed with the Secretary of the District, which map shall govern for all details as to the area proposed to be annexed. 2. The purpose of the proposed annexation is to make sewer service available to the area to be annexed, which availability constitutes a benefit to said area. 3. The Board finds and determines that the area proposed to be annexed to ID 18 will be benefited by such annexation and that the property currently within ID 18 will also be benefited and not injured by such annexation because after the annexation a larger tax base will be available to finance the sewer facilities and improvements of ID 18. Page 2 of 3 4. The Board of Directors hereby declares that the annexa- tion of said property is subject to the Property Owner complying with the following terms and conditions: (a) The petitioners for said annexation shall pay to the District the following: (1) The annexation processing fee at the time of application; (2) A sewer annexation fee per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (“EDU”) to be collected at the time of connection to the District sewer system; (3) Yearly assessment fees will be collected through the County Tax Assessor’s office in the amount of $30.00 per acre for APN 497-011- 37-00; (4) In the event that sewer service is to be provided, Petitioners shall pay all applicable fees per EDU at the time the sewer connection is purchased; and (5)Payment by the Property Owner of APN 497- 011-37-00 of all other applicable local or state agency fees or charges. (b) The property to be annexed shall be subject to taxation after annexation thereof for the purposes of the ID 18, including the payment of principal and interest on bonds and other obligations of the ID 18, authorized and outstanding at the time of Page 3 of 3 annexation, the same as if the annexed property had always been a part of the ID 18. 5. The Board hereby declares the property described in Exhibit "A" shall be considered annexed to ID 18 upon passage of this Resolution. 6. The Board of Directors further finds and determines that there are no exchanges of property tax revenues to be made pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 95 et seq., as a result of such annexation. 7. The annexation of APN 497-011-37-00 to the District is hereby designated as the “AUDAY A. SALEM SEWER ANNEXATION.” 8. Pursuant to Section 57202(a) of the Government Code, the effective date of the AUDAY A. SALEM SEWER ANNEXATION shall be the date this Resolution is adopted by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District. 9. The General Manager of the District and the Secretary of the District, or their respective designees, are hereby ordered to take all actions required to complete this annexation. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 4th day of September, 2019. President ATTEST: __________________________________ District Secretary ilÌ{ ù OF fHE COIJN|I OFSAN UEEO HA,]X IHE CITY æ lcltY r t POR. E 1/2 AF NW 1/4 oF NE 1/4 rO LA MESA, LEMON GROVE AND SPRING VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT PER DEED REC. 3-29-1939 tN BK. 892, Pc. 279 0.R 75.t5 o @ t- L{ !- S.¡\tÞso = ]ftil Ex. EASEMENT(S) N 7217'38" E 36.79' I ANNEXATION BOUNDARY APN: 497-O11-37 t.493 AC. sEc_ 22, T. 16S..R. 1W S.B.M. 2t7. a{oÉo- EXHTBIT ',9,, LEGEND -r PROP]SED WATER D\STR\CT BOUNDARYP.O.B. POINT OF BEGINNING(R) MDTAL BilRtNc DISCUIMER: ''FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY- THIS DESCRIPTION OFUND IS NOT A LEOAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AS ÐENNEÐIN THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND MAY NOT BE USED ASTHE BASIS FOR AN OFFER FOR SALE OF IAND DESCRIBED." PoR. E 1/2 OF NW 1/4 aF NE 1/4 sEC. 22, T- 16 S.. R. 1 W Øs 8912'10" E @ APN: 4s7-oy-1 2 103.08',â (n N'LY LINE OF HINDMAN'S LAND frt APN:497-Ar-28 S'LY LINE OF BUTST LAND -\.- POR. W 1/2 OF NW 1/4 Ar NE 1/4sic. 22,T. 16 S.. R. 1 W. S.B.M. APN: 497-O11-17 APN: 497-O11-16 APN: 497-011-15 S.B.M .s N 8854',29" W tg. @ \SOUTH LINE OF THE NW{ or rHr NE +, sEC. 22 ,18 N ì sl/v coR. 0F tHE E I 0F THE NW f OF THE NE I SrC. ZZ g0' 4a' o'g0' SCALE: 1" = 80' o CAL T 1 à Alta Lar¿d Sumetítnag5t7 6ROSSM0MT SUUUî DR. " "u MESA, A 9194t PH0NE // FAX: (619) 713-2582 t7-J600 ANEX pUr.DW6 J.N. t7-J600 1AtE: 0s/02/g SAI.E}¡-SYNDER ROAí C}IANGE OF ORGAI{IZARON AiINÐ(AI0N N0. C0l9-02; DAlg-OZ; SAtg-OZ rN TlE E I 0F THE NW I Or rHr NE I oF SECTION 22, T. 16 S., R. 1 W., S.B.M. OTAY WATER DISTRICT ANNEXATION OF APN 497-011-37-00 TO THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AND TO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 18LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A ANX-18-001 F \\O w d - f p 1 \ E N G R P L A N \ P u b l i c - s \ S T A F F R E P O R T S \ 2 0 1 9 \ P l a c e - H o l d e r _ S a l em - S n y d e r A n n e x a t i o n \ B e r n a r d o E x h i b i t A \ E x h i b i t A - 1 0 6 1 0 S n y d e r R d . m x d "LS R$ !\ VICINITY MAP DIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ÃÅ54PROJECT SITE ÃÅ125 ÃÅ94 ÃÅ905 §¨¦805 FNTS PROJECT SITE ALZEDA DRSNYDER RD DISTRICT SEWER DISTRICT BOUNDARY 016080 FeetCRESTLAND DR STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 4, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Assistant Chief of Engineering PROJECT: S2024-001103 DIV. NO. 5 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Approval to Increase the Overall Budget for CIP S2024 in an amount not-to-exceed $450,000.00 and Approval of Change Order No. 6 in an amount not-to-exceed $289,908.63 to the Construction Contract with Wier Construction Corporation for the Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board): 1. Approve to increase the CIP S2024 budget (Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project) in an amount not-to-exceed $450,000.00 (from $10,530,000.00 to $10,980,000.00). 2. Approve Change Order No. 6 to the existing construction contract with Wier Construction Corporation (Wier Construction) in an amount not-to-exceed $289,908.63 for the Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To increase the overall CIP S2024 project budget in an amount not-to- exceed $450,000.00 and to obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to execute Change Order No. 6 in an amount not-to-exceed $289,908.63 to the construction contract with Wier Construction for the Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project. AGENDA ITEM 4 2 ANALYSIS: The District’s Campo Road Sewer Replacement project is replacing an existing 10-inch sewer pipeline, located within and south of Campo Road between Avocado Boulevard and Singer Lane, which is undersized to handle current sewer flows. To accommodate current and future flows, approximately 7,420 linear feet of 15-inch gravity sewer main will be installed to replace the existing 9,225 feet of 10-inch sewer main. The eastern terminus of the new 15-inch sewer main will be located at the intersection of Avocado Boulevard/Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center driveway. The new main’s western terminus will be located in the Rancho San Diego Towne Center where it will connect to the existing 27-inch sewer main within the shopping center’s parking lot. Sewer laterals stemming from the existing pipe will be reconnected to the proposed new pipeline. The majority of the pipeline was installed with open trench construction except in two (2) locations where horizontal auger boring was used for crossing Campo Road. These two (2) locations are Campo Road east of Via Mercado, and at the intersection of Campo Road/Jamacha Boulevard. The existing sewer will be abandoned in place with the exception of a 210-feet long section of aboveground pipeline and seven (7) supporting pillars that will be removed. At the May 3, 2017 Board Meeting, the Board awarded a construction contract in the amount of $7,816,645.95 to Wier Construction. Since the award of the construction contract, there have been five (5) Change Orders approved for the contract. Change Order No. 1, which totaled $74,266.00, compensated the contractor for a realignment of the planned sewer main due to a utility conflict. This Change Order also increased the quantity for rock removal and disposal due to rock encountered on the Project and provided for additional Class 2 base due to field conditions at the Rancho San Diego Town Center parking lot. Lastly, this Change Order issued a credit for modifications to traffic control requirements. In total, Change Order No. 1 added forty-six (46) days to the contract as a result of the added work. Change Order No. 2 provided for modifications to the planned grade of the jack and bore pipe at the Campo Road West Bore crossing, which is located east of Via Mercado. This change also included the removal of the internal beading, which is generated during the field construction of the fusible pipe. This was a no-cost change and did not include adjustments to contract time. Board approved Change order No. 3, which totaled $156,192.12, compensated the contractor for realignment of the East Bore launch pit due to a communications utility conflict with the shoring limits 3 indicated on the contract plans. This Change Order also included addressing other unmarked utilities found to be in conflict with the planned sewer installation. Lastly, Change Order No. 3 increased bid item quantity for rock removal and disposal due to rock encountered on the Project. Change Order No. 3 added twenty-nine (29) days to the contract as a result of the added work. Board approved Change order No. 4, which totaled $70,970.00, compensated the contractor for removal and disposal of unmarked utilities; removal and replacement of a Caltrans fiber optic traffic signal interconnection not shown on the plans; and additional trench excavation and backfill associated with field conditions. Change Order No. 4 added fifty-three (53) additional days to the contract. Board approved Change Order No. 5, was for a contractor requested change to the horizontal and vertical alignment of the planned East Bore sewer main located at the intersection of Jamacha Boulevard and Campo Road. This change also included the removal of the internal beading, which is generated during the field construction of the fusible pipe. This was a no-cost change and did not include adjustments to contract time. Change Order No. 6 (Exhibit B), which is the subject of this staff report includes the following eight (8) items: 1. Repair of an unmarked irrigation main line and irrigation controller wiring within the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center. 2. Sealing of the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center using Guard Top seal in lieu of the planned slurry seal as requested by the shopping center management. 3. Deletion of the planned slurry seal bid item work in the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center. 4. Installation of temporary striping along Campo Road to open the lanes to traffic. 5. Reimbursement to the District for costs associated with the District’s response to a contractor caused sewer spill. 6. Removal and disposal of rock encountered within the planned sewer excavation. This item includes an adjustment for rock encountered beyond 200% of the bid allowance item. 7. Additional days due to rock removal and disposal work. 8. Additional days to allow planned contract work to be completed outside the environmentally restricted bird breeding season. In total, the cost associated with the items in Change Order No. 6 is $289,908.63. Time impacts associated with this change are also provided in Exhibit B. In total, the one hundred and seven (107) additional days added to the contract will result in a revised total contract duration of 865 calendar days. 4 As of August 1, 2019, the Campo Road Sewer project is approximately 91% complete. It is anticipated that additional Change Orders for unforeseen items may occur during the completion of the remaining 9% of the construction contract work. The budget increase of $450,000.00 is requested to fund Change Order No. 6, provide for Project support including construction management and inspection, and reestablish a project contingency in anticipation of unforeseen items. If additional unforeseen items are encountered that result in a Change Order, staff will bring the Change Order forward for Board approval. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The Fiscal Year 2020 budget for CIP S2024 is $10,530,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, including this contract Change Order, are $10,977,284. See Attachment B for budget detail. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that if the budget increase is approved by $450,000.00 (from $10,530,000.00 to $10,980,000.00), the budget for CIP S2024 is sufficient to support the Project. The Finance Department has determined that, under the current rate model, 50% of the funding is available from the Betterment ID 18 fund and 50% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund for CIP S2024. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsible manner” and the District’s Vision, “To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:jf P:\WORKING\CIP S2024 Campo Road Sewer Replacement\Staff Reports\BD 09-04-19\BD 09-04-19, Staff Report Campo Road Sewer Replacement - CO No. 6.docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – S2024 Budget Detail Exhibit A – Project Location Map Exhibit B – Change Order No. 6 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2024-001103 Approval to Increase the Overall Budget for CIP S2024 in an amount not-to-exceed $450,000.00 and Approval of Change Order No. 6 in an amount not-to-exceed $289,908.63 to the Construction Contract with Wier Construction Corporation for the Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 23, 2019. 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 B – S2024 Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2024-001103 Approval to Increase the Overall Budget for CIP S2024 in an amount not-to-exceed $450,000.00 and Approval of Change Order No. 6 in an amount not-to-exceed $289,908.63 to the Construction Contract with Wier Construction Corporation for the Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project 8/7/2019 Budget 10,530,000 Planning Consultant Contracts 20,020 20,020 - 20,020 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 2,139 2,139 - 2,139 HELIX ENVIRONMNTL PLANNING INC Regulatory Agency Fees 2,260 2,260 - 2,260 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 894 894 - 894 STATE WATER RESOURCES 132 132 - 132 US BANK Service Contracts 43 43 - 43 EAST COUNTY GAZETTE 162 162 - 162 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT Standard Salaries 149,717 149,717 - 149,717 Total Planning 175,367 175,367 - 175,367 Design 001102 Consultant Contracts 9,315 9,315 - 9,315 WATER SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 4,025 4,025 - 4,025 MICHAEL D KEAGY REAL ESTATE 3,508 3,508 - 3,508 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND 691,074 691,074 - 691,074 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 735 735 - 735 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC Professional Legal Fees 182 182 - 182 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF 1,910 1,910 - 1,910 ARTIANO SHINOFF Regulatory Agency Fees 956 956 - 956 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Service Contracts 158 158 - 158 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 62 62 - 62 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION Settlements 190,000 190,000 - 190,000 VESTAR CALIFORNIA XVII LLC 144,950 144,950 - 144,950 GRI-REGENCY LLC Standard Salaries 299,842 299,842 - 299,842 Total Design 1,346,718 1,346,718 - 1,346,718 Construction Construction Contracts 405,904 363,196 42,708 405,904 WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK 7,712,170 6,900,718 811,452 7,712,170 WIER CONSTRUCTION CORP 289,909 - 289,909 289,909 Change Order No. 6 1,272 1,272 - 1,272 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC. Consultant Contracts 8,444 8,444 - 8,444 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 17,400 17,400 - 17,400 ALYSON CONSULTING 8,112 8,112 - 8,112 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES 116,461 91,858 24,602 116,461 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 12,258 12,258 - 12,258 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND 450,000 388,769 61,231 450,000 VALLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT Regulatory Agency Fees 20,000 8,961 11,039 20,000 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 20,000 19,034 966 20,000 CALTRANS PERMIT FEE Service Contracts 3,270 3,270 - 3,270 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC Standard Salaries 315,000 287,477 27,523 315,000 75,000 - 75,000 75,000 Contingency Total Construction 9,455,200 8,110,769 1,344,430 9,455,200 Grand Total 10,977,284 9,632,854 1,344,430 10,977,284 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District S2024-Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost SKYLINEWESLEYANCHURCH ?Ë AV O C A D O B L V D FURY LANE JAMA C H A B L V D JAMAC H A R D CUYAMACACOLLEGE C A M P O R D C A M P O R D ?Ë PROJECTALIGNMENT OWDREGULATORYSITE Ralph W. ChapmanWater ReclamationFacility SINGER L N RANCHOSAN DIEGOVILLAGE RANCHOSAN DIEGOTOWNECENTER Existing 10-inchGravity Sewer tobe Replaced VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTS DIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ?ò Aä;&s ?p ?Ë !\ OTAY WATER DISTRICTCAMPO ROAD SEWER MAIN REPLACEMENTLOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A CIP S2024 0 1,000500 Feet F F P: \ W O R K I N G \ C I P S 2 0 2 4 C a m p o R o a d S e w e r R e p l a c e m e n t \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ E x h i b i t A , L o c a t i o n M a p , O c t 2 0 1 5 . m x d Legend Proposed 15-Inch Sewer Main Alignment Existing 10-inch Gravity Sewer to be Replaced Existing Sewer Mains Description Increase Decrease Time Item No. 1 – Unmarked irrigation repair at Sta. 10+24 9RFI #70). PCO #11 $5,020.65 0 Item No. 2 – Resurface the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center Parking Lot with Guard Top Sealer in lieu of slurry seal. PCO #16 $25,109.71 0 Item No. 3 – Decrease Bid Item #29-Parking Lot Slurry Seal & Restriping by 61,650 SF @ $0.55/SF for a total of $33,907.50. PCO #16 $33,907.50 0 Item No. 4– Install temporary striping along Campo Road. PCO #17 $9,420.70 0 Item No. 5 – District reimbursement for contractor caused sewer spill on 3/12/19 at MH #342-112. PCO #19 $12,470.93 0 Item No. 6 – Rock Removal & Disposal. Revise Unit Price to $539.52 for all rock encountered beyond 200% of Bid Item #43-Rock Removal & Disposal. 550 CY @ $539.52. $296,736.00 0 Item No. 7 - Delays due to rock encountered per Bid Item #43-Rock Removal and Disposal. $0.00 15 Item No. 8 – Additional days for work outside of environmental breeding season. $0.00 92 Subtotal Amount: $336,287.06 <$46,378.43> 107 Total Net Change Order Amount: $289,908.63 Revisions to: BID SCHEDULE Item # Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount 29 Parking Lot Slurry Seal & Restriping 16,400 SF $0.55 $9,020.00 Reason: Item No. 1: The contractor encountered an unmarked irrigation line at Sta. 10+24 (RFI #70) that required repair. See PCO #11 for more information. Zero (0) days were added for this work. Item No. 2: The Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center property manager requested the District to use Guard Top Sealer instead of Slurry Seal for the final parking lot resurfacing to match the existing surface of the adjacent, undisturbed parking lot. See PCO #16 for details. Zero (0) days were added for this work. Item No. 3: The remainder of this bid item will not be used due to the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center request to utilize Guard Top Sealer In lieu of Slurry Seal per PCO #16. Zero (0) days were added for this work. Item No. 4: The project’s environmental permit does not allow the contractor to complete the final paving on Campo Road due to the environmental restrictions for the Gnatcatcher and Least Bell’s Vireo breeding season. The District directed the removal of the temporary traffic control measures and placement of temporary striping to allow full access to the existing traffic lanes until the permanent paving can be completed after the breeding season ends on September 15, 2019. See PCO #17 for details. Zero (0) days were added for this work. Item No. 5: On 3/12/19, a spill occurred from MH #342-112 due to contractor generated debris that entered and blocked the sewer system during work on MH #342-142. The costs to the District for responding and clearing the debris was documented and are being deducted as part of this change order. See PCO #19 for details. Zero (0) days were added for this work. Item No. 6: The bid quantity for Bid Item #43-Rock Removal and Excavation exceeded 200% of the bid quantity. Per Specification Section 1010-1.4, the contractor is entitled to a revised unit price for those quantities in excess of the 200%. The revised unit price was agreed to be $539.52/CY. An estimated quantity of 550 CY is allocated for this change. See PCO #20 for details. Days associated with this change are addressed in Item No. 8 of this Change Order. Contact/P.O. Change Order No. 6 Page 2 of 3 Item No. 7: The contractor was delayed ten (15) days due to rock encountered per Bid Item #43-Rock Removal and on the following dates: 6/14/19, 6/18/19, 6/20/19, 6/24/19, 6/26/19, 6/28/19, 7/2/19, 7/3/19, 7/9/19, 7/11/19, 7/23/19, 7/28/19, 7/30/19, 7/31/19, 8/4/19. Item No. 8: Additional time is provided to the contractor to allow the contract work to be completed outside the environmentally restricted bird breeding seasons. It is mutually agreed by the Contractor and the District that there is no additional costs and no claims associated with this adjustment of contract time. Contact/P.O. Change Order No. 6 Page 3 of 3 CIP S2024 - Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project Project: S2024 Consultant/Contractor:Wier Construction Corporation Subproject: 001103 APPROVED C.O. AMOUNT BY DATE DESCRIPTION TYPE C.O. 1 $74,266.00 GM 1/12/2018 Utility Conflict per RFI #10 and PCO #1A, Traffic control credit per RFI #4 and PCO #2. Base material at RSD Towne Center parking lot. Rock removal and disposal increase in quantity. Add 46 days. Contractor 2 $0.00 RP 4/5/2018 Revise sewer slope between MH #7 and MH# 8 to a minimum of 1%.Contractor 3 $156,192.12 Board 11/8/2018 East Bore Pit Realignment PCO #3, Cut and Cap Irrigation PCO #5, Sewer Main Realignment MH #18A to MH 17A PCO #7, Remove abandoned utilities PCO #8, Repair Offset Pipe at MH #20 PCO #9, and Increase Bid Item No. 43 Rock Removal and Disposal. Contractor 4 $70,970.00 Board 5/2/2019 Unmarked 24-inch storm drain, abandoned storm drain along SR 94, Increased excavation due to existing sewer alignment, removal and replacement of Caltrans traffic signal interconnect conduit and fiber optic cable, weather days. Contractor 5 $0.00 Board 5/2/2019 No cost/time contractor requested change to revise the horizontal and vertical alignment for the sewer main between MH 12A and MH 14 due to East Pit Jack and Bore. Contractor 6 $289,908.63 Board Rock removal and disposal in excess of 200% of bid allowance item, temporary striping along Campo Road, Guard Top pavement seal in lieu of slurry seal at RSD Village Shopping Center, Credit of District costs associated with sewer spill, unmarked irrigation repair at RSD Village Shopping Center, time adjustments for rock impacts and work outside of environmental breeding season. Contractor 7 8 9 10 Total C.O.'s To Date: $591,336.75 7.6% Original Contract Amount:$7,816,645.95 Current Contract Amount:$8,407,982.70 Month Net C.O.$ Limit Authorization Absolute C.O.$ C.O. % 8/19 $289,908.63 $2,000 Insp $289,908.63 3.7% $10,000 PM/Sr. Engr. 0.0% $20,000 DivM 0.0% $25,000 Chief 0.0% $75,000 GM 0.0% >$75000 Board 0.0% CHANGE ORDER LOG P:\WORKING\CIP S2024 Campo Road Sewer Replacement\Construction\Change Orders\S2024_COLOG_190807 1 8/7/2019 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 4, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Cameron Associate Civil Engineer PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Bob Kennedy, Engineering Manager Dan Martin, Assistant Chief, Engineering Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award a Professional Services Contract for As-Needed Electrical Engineering Consulting Services to Moraes, Pham & Associates for Fiscal Years 2020-2022 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award a professional service contracts for As-Needed Electrical Engineering Consulting Services and to authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with Moraes, Pham & Associates (Moraes/Pham) in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000 during Fiscal Years 2020-2022 (ending June 30, 2022). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a professional services contract for As-Needed Electrical Engineering Consulting Services with Moraes/Pham in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000 for Fiscal Years 2020-2022. AGENDA ITEM 5 2 ANALYSIS: The District will require the services of a professional electrical engineering consultant on an as-needed basis in support of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects for Fiscal Years 2020-2022. It is more efficient and cost effective to issue as-needed contracts for electrical engineering services, which will provide the District with the ability to obtain consulting services in a timely and efficient manner. This concept has also been used in the past for other disciplines, such as construction management, geotechnical, engineering design, and environmental services. The District staff will identify tasks and request a cost proposal from the consultant during the contract period. The consultant will prepare a detailed scope of work, schedule, and fee for each task order. 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 potentially require electrical engineering services for Fiscal Years 2020-2022, and estimated costs, are listed below: CIP DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST P2174 1090-1 Pump Station Replacement $35,000 P2630 624-3 Reservoir Automation of Chemical Feed System $35,000 P2639 Vista Diego Hydropneumatic Pump Station Replacement $50,000 P2658 832-1 Pump Station Modifications $20,000 P2663 Potable Water Pressure Vessel Program $15,000 TOTAL: $155,000 Staff believes that a $175,000 cap on the As-Needed Electrical Engineering Consulting Services contract is adequate, while still providing a buffer for any unforeseen tasks. Fees for professional services will be charged to the CIP projects. The As-Needed Electrical Engineering Services contract does not commit the District to any expenditure until a task order is approved to perform the work. The District does not guarantee work to the consultant, nor does the District guarantee to the consultant that it will expend all the funds authorized by the contract on professional services. 3 The District solicited electrical engineering consulting services by placing an advertisement on the Otay Water District’s website and using BidSync, the District’s online bid solicitation website, on May 2, 2019. The advertisement was also placed in the Daily Transcript. Seven (7) firms submitted a Letter of Interest and a Statement of Qualifications. The Request for Proposal (RFP) was sent to all seven (7) firms resulting in four (4) proposals received on June 6, 2019. They are as follows: • BSE Engineering (San Diego, CA) • Engineering Partners, Inc (San Diego, CA) • Linkture Consulting Engineers (Los Angeles, CA) • Moraes, Pham & Associates (Carlsbad, CA) Firms that submitted Letters of Interest (LOI), but did not propose, were Elen Consulting, Hazen and Sawyer, and Kewo Engineering Corporation. In accordance with the District’s Policy 21, five (5) staff members evaluated and scored the four (4) proposals. Moraes/Pham received the highest scores based on their experience, understanding of the scope of work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and their composite hourly rate. Moraes/Pham have provided similar services to other local agencies, and are readily available to provide the services required. A summary of the complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B. Moraes/Pham submitted the Company Background Questionnaire, as required by the RFP, and staff did not find any significant issues. In addition, staff checked their references and performed an internet search on the company. Staff found the references to be excellent and did not find any outstanding issues with the internet search. Staff is selecting one consultant for this service because the electrical portions are too small compared to the overall associated CIP projects. Also, it is easier work with one consultant that is familiar with the electrical components that are preferred by District staff. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The funds for these contracts will be expended on a variety of projects, as previously noted above. These contracts are for as- needed professional services based on the District's need and schedule, and expenditures will not be made until a task order is 4 approved by the District for the consultant's services on a specific CIP project. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that the budgets will be sufficient to support the professional as-needed consulting services required for the CIP projects noted above. The Finance Department has determined that the funds to cover these contracts will be available as budgeted for these projects. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsible manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices." GRANTS/LOANS: Not applicable. LEGAL IMPACT: None. KC/BK:jf P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Electrical\FY 2020-2022\Staff Report\BD_09-04-2019_Staff Report_Award of As-Needed Electrical Engineering Services (KC-BK).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Summary of Proposal Rankings ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Various Award a Professional Services Contract for As-Needed Electrical Engineering Consulting Services to Moraes, Pham & Associates for Fiscal Years 2020-2022 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 23, 2019. 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. Qualifications of Team Responsiveness and Project Understanding Technical and Management Approach INDIVIDUAL SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN AVERAGE SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN Proposed Rates* Consultant's Commitment to DBE TOTAL SCORE 30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 Poor/Good/ Excellent Bob Kennedy 27 23 27 77 Brandon DiPietro 27 20 25 72 Don Anderson 25 23 25 73 Kevin Cameron 27 23 27 77 Michael Kerr 25 22 24 71 Bob Kennedy 24 19 24 67 Brandon DiPietro 24 21 23 68 Don Anderson 25 20 20 65 Kevin Cameron 24 21 24 69 Michael Kerr 22 23 21 66 Bob Kennedy 25 20 24 69 Brandon DiPietro 25 21 24 70 Don Anderson 20 20 25 65 Kevin Cameron 25 21 24 70 Michael Kerr 25 20 21 66 Bob Kennedy 27 22 27 76 Brandon DiPietro 28 25 28 81 Don Anderson 25 25 25 75 Kevin Cameron 29 23 28 80 Michael Kerr 26 23 26 75 Firm BSE EPI Linkture Moraes/Pham Fee $895 $835 $843 $860 Score 1 15 13 9 Notes: 1. Review Panel does not see or consider proposed fee when scoring other categories. The proposed fee is scored by Engineering staff, who are not on the Review Panel. 2. The fees were evaluated by comparing rates for six (6) positions. The sum of these rates are noted in the above table. 74 RATES SCORING CHART Engineering Partners, Inc. (EPI) 67 15 82 81 77 9 86Moraes, Pham & Associates EXCELLENTY BSE Engineering, Inc.75 WRITTEN Y MAXIMUM POINTS 1 Y Y ATTACHMENT BSUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS As-Needed Electrical Engineering Consulting Services Linkture Consulting Engineers, Inc 68 13 REFERENCES \\owd-fp1\ENGRPLAN\WORKING\As Needed Services\Electrical\FY 2020-2022\Staff Report\Summary of Proposal Rankings.xls STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 4, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Brandon DiPietro Field Services Manager PROJECT NO./ SUBPROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Dan Martin, Assistant Chief of Engineering Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award of Professional Services Contract for As-Needed Plan Check Services for Developer Potable and Recycled Water Projects for Fiscal Years 2020, 2021, and 2022 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award a Professional Services contract for As-Needed Plan Check Services for Developer Potable and Recycled Water Projects to Murraysmith, Incorporated (Murraysmith) and authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with Murraysmith in an amount not-to- exceed $175,000, for a period of three (3) fiscal years (FY 2020, FY 2021, and FY 2022). The contractual end date will be June 30, 2022. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a Professional Services contract for As-Needed Plan Check Services for Developer Potable and Recycled Water Projects with Murraysmith in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000, for a period of three (3) fiscal years (FY 2020, FY 2021, and FY 2022). The contractual end date will be June 30, 2022. AGENDA ITEM 6 2 ANALYSIS: The District will require the As-Needed services of a consulting firm to provide professional services in support of developer projects. The Consultant assists the Public Services Division of the Engineering Department in processing and performing plan check review for developer potable and recycled projects. The Plan Checking services require the consultant to be a Registered Civil Engineer (Project Manager) familiar with the District’s procedures. The Project Manager will provide quality control for all plan reviews. A Project Engineer will provide approximately twenty (20) hours on average of plan review service per set of plans. Services the consultant will perform are as follows: perform plan review activities necessary to evaluate general compliance with District, WAS, DEH, and DDW standards as required for each plan received. The consultant will coordinate approval with District, DEH, DDW, and developers, as required. The consultant will deliver reviewed recycled water plan(s) to DEH for their evaluation and approval. It is anticipated that the Consultant will review approximately sixty (60) projects or more. Over the same period, staff estimates the cost to perform this responsibility will not exceed $175,000. Since these services are As-Needed, driven by development, and completely funded by developer deposits, the full amount of this contract may not be expended. On June 6, 2019, the District solicited for As-Needed Plan Check Services for Developer Potable and Recycled Water Projects by placing an advertisement on the District’s website, BidSnyc, and the San Diego Daily Transcript. Nine (9) firms submitted a letter of interest and a statement of qualifications. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for As-Needed Plan Check Services for Developer Potable and Recycled Water Projects was sent to the nine (9) firms resulting in two (2) proposals received by Friday, July 19, 2019, from the following firms:  AEGIS Engineering Management of San Diego, CA  Murraysmith Incorporated of San Diego, CA The seven (7) firms that chose not to propose are Brady and Associates, Wood Rodgers Inc., ERSC Inc., Hunsaker and Associates, NV5, Jensen Hughes Engineering, and Michael Baker International. Of the two (2) proposals received, both were found to be responsive with respect to the District’s requirements. The remaining seven (7) declined to propose due to various reasons including expressing difficulty with finding capacity to accommodate additional work. 3 In accordance with the District’s Policy 21, staff evaluated and scored the written proposals of the two (2) firms on Wednesday, August 6, 2019. The District has chosen to utilize one consultant for this contract due to the volume of plan checks expected. Murraysmith received the highest score for their services based on their experience, understanding of the scope of work, and proposed method to accomplish the work. Though the composite rate was higher, the District expects to realize efficiencies in reduced consultant and District staff time in the processing of plan checks through the use of technology. Murraysmith was the most qualified with the best overall rating or ranking. A summary of the complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B. Murraysmith submitted the Company Background Questionnaire, as required by the RFP, and staff did not find any significant issues. Staff checked their references and performed an internet search on the company. Staff found the references to be excellent and did not find any outstanding issues with the internet search. Murraysmith’s project manager listed in the proposal has vast plan checking and project management experience. Staff estimated that an average of $2,500 will be needed per project to perform the plan check review services. The District recuperates these funds by billing directly to the developer. The District has historically utilized professional As-Needed services to support the delivery of private potable and recycled water projects that are part of a development. The use of the As- Needed services is directly tied to the rate of development, which is influenced by the economy. As-Needed services are flexible and only used as development is initiated. As a result, the use of As-Needed services in support of developer projects has been a useful tool that can flex with the economic swings that may occur over time. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Plan check, inspection, and project management services are an on- going effort provided by the District’s Public Services Division in support of developer projects. This particular expense is completely funded by developer deposits and does not affect the District’s operating budget. 4 STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsible manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices." GRANTS/LOANS: Not applicable. LEGAL IMPACT: None. BD/DM:jf P:\Public-s\RFPs\Plan Check Services FY 2020-2022\Staff Report\Staff Report As-Needed Plan Check Services for Developer Potable and Recycled Water Projects (BD-DM).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Summary of Proposal Rankings ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Various Award of Professional Services Contract for As-Needed Plan Check Services for Developer Potable and Recycled Water Projects for Fiscal Years 2020, 2021, and 2022 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 23, 2019. 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. Qualifications of Staff Understanding of Scope, Schedule and Resources Soundness and Viability of Proposed Project Plan INDIVIDUAL SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN AVERAGE SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN Proposed Rates* Consultant's Commitment to DBE TOTAL WRITTEN 30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 Poor/Good/ Excellent Dan Martin 23 19 23 65 Brandon 23 20 22 65 Jonathan Chambers 23 19 22 64 Juan Tamayo 25 20 20 65 Kent Payne 24 22 22 68 Dan Martin 29 24 29 82 Brandon 30 24 30 84 Jonathan Chambers 28 24 28 80 Juan Tamayo 28 24 28 80 Kent Payne 28 23 28 79 Firm Fee Score Notes: 1. Review Panel does not see or consider proposed fee when scoring other categories. The proposed fee is scored by Engineering staff, who is not on the Review Panel. 2. The fees were evaluated by comparing rates for five (5) positions. The sum of these rates are noted in the above table. N 82 RATES SCORING CHART Aegis $101.70 15 Murray Smith $147.56 1 MURRAYSMITH Excellent ATTACHMENT B REFERENCES 65 WRITTEN 80 81 1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS As-Needed Plan Check Services - Fiscal Years 2020 - 2022 MAXIMUM POINTS 15AEGIS ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT Y P:\Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\2019\BD 09-04-19 Plan Checking\Attachment B - Summary of Proposal Rankings.xls STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 4, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Jake Vaclavek, System Operations Manager PROJECT: DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Jose Martinez, Assistant Chief of Water Operations Pedro Porras, Chief, Water Operations Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Approval of Public Health Goal Report Recommendations GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) approve the recommendations in the Public Health Goal (PHG) Report to take no further action in reducing the levels of the five constituents listed in the report to levels at or below the PHGs. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To present the July 1, 2019 PHG Report to the Board and to obtain approval for the recommendation that no action be taken to reduce the levels of the five constituents listed in the report to the PHG or below. The Board meeting will also meet the requirement to have a public hearing to accept and respond to public comment. ANALYSIS: California Health and Safety Code §116470 specifies that larger water utilities (>10,000 service connections) prepare a special report every three years to July 1 if their water quality measurements have exceeded any Public Health Goals (PHGs). PHGs are non-enforceable goals established by the Cal-EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The law also requires that where OEHHA has not adopted a PHG for a AGENDA ITEM 7 2 constituent, the water suppliers are to use the Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Only constituents which have a California primary drinking water standard and for which either a PHG or MCLG has been set are to be addressed. PHGs are based solely on public health risk considerations. None of the practical risk-management factors that are considered by the USEPA or the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in setting Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) are considered in setting the PHGs. These factors include analytical detection capability, available treatment technology, benefits and costs. The PHGs are not enforceable and are not required to be met by any public water system. MCLGs are the federal equivalent to the state’s PHGs. If a constituent was detected in the District’s distribution system or in the treated water the District purchases from other agencies, between 2016 and 2018, at a level exceeding an applicable PHG or MCLG, the PHG report provides the information required by the regulation. Included is the numerical public health risk associated with the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) and the PHG or MCLG, the category or type of risk to health that could be associated with each constituent, the best treatment technology available that could be used to reduce the constituent level, and an estimate of the cost to install that treatment if it is appropriate and feasible. The purpose of the report is to provide customers with information on health-related contaminants detected in the water supply, even when detected below the enforceable MCLs, so customers are aware of whatever risks might be posed by the presence of these contaminants. MCLs are set at very conservative levels that provide very low to negligible risk and are considered the regulatory definition of what is safe. PHGs and MCLGs are set at the theoretical level where there is no health risk. MCLGs are set at zero for many contaminants, such as radiologicals and carcinogens, even though it is understood that zero is an unattainable goal and cannot be measured analytically. Most PHGs and MCLGs are set far below the required Detection Levels for Reporting (DLR) which is the minimum level that SWRCB has determined can be accurately reported. Below is a table summarizing the five constituents detected above the PHG or MCLG in calendar years 2016, 2017, and/or 2018. More detail for each is provided in the PHG Report (please see Attachment B). 3 Constituent Units MCL PHG/MCLG DLR Levels Detected Arsenic ppb 10 0.004 2 ND - 3 Gross Alpha pCi/L 15 0 3 ND - 7 Gross Beta pCi/L 50 0 4 ND – 10 Uranium pCi/L 20 0.43 1 ND – 3 Bromate ppb 10 0.1 1 ND – 6 MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level PHG = Public Health Goal MCLG = Maximum Contaminant Level Goal DLR = Detection Limits for Reporting Levels Detected = Levels detected in water supplied to the District for 2016 through 2018. ND = Not Detected at or above the DLR This table shows that the PHG or MCLG for the constituents listed is lower than the DLR. This means that even if additional treatment is performed to reduce the levels of these constituents, the effectiveness of the treatment to reduce the levels to the PHG or MCLG cannot be accurately determined by analytical methods. The regulation also requires a preliminary cost estimate of using the Best Available Technology (BAT) for reducing the level of the constituents to below the PHGs. The BAT for the five constituents is reverse osmosis (RO). According to the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) cost estimates for a treatment BAT, would cost approximately $1.85 - $3.55 per 1000 gallons to further remove these constituents using RO treatment. The District’s average annual demand for the three year period was 9,230 million gallons per year. Therefore, RO treatment installed and operated by the District or the District’s water suppliers to meet the District’s water demands would cost from $17 to $33 million per year, which translates to an average monthly cost increase of $28.15 - $54.01 per District customer (using the January 2019 meter count of 50,551 meters). These estimates include all costs including capital, land, construction, engineering, planning, environmental, contingency and O&M costs for the life of the facilities. 4 Staff’s recommendation is that no action be taken for the District to install RO treatment or request suppliers to install RO treatment for the following reasons:  Water served by the District during this three year period met or exceeded all SWRCB and USEPA drinking water standards set to protect public health. SWRCB considers water that meets these standards as safe to drink.  To reduce the levels of the constituents identified in this report that are already significantly below the health- based MCLs established that already provide safe drinking water, costly treatment processes would be required, translating to an average monthly cost increase of $28.15 - $54.01 per District customer.  The effectiveness of the treatment processes to provide any significant reductions in constituent levels to the PHGs is difficult, if not impossible to determine since the analytical DLR is higher than the PHG.  The health protection benefits of these further hypothetical reductions are not at all clear and may not be quantifiable. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer None. STRATEGIC GOAL: To meet the District’s Mission of providing high quality and reliable water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective and efficient manner. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: Attachment A: Committee Action Attachment B: Otay Water District Public Health Goals Report on Water Quality ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Approval of Public Health Goal Report Recommendations COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on August XX, 2019, and the following comments were made: 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. OTAY WATER DISTRICT  Public Health Goals  Report on Water Quality  June 2019  ATTACHMENT B  2 OTAY WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT ON WATER QUALITY     SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION………………………………………...3  What Are Public Health Goals (PHGs)? ..................................................................................... 3  Reporting Requirements .......................................................................................................... 4  Water Quality Data Considered ............................................................................................... 4  Best Available Treatment Technology and Cost Estimates ........................................................ 5  SECTION 2: CONSTITUENTS DETECTED THAT EXCEED A PHG ................. 5  Arsenic .................................................................................................................... 5  Bromate .................................................................................................................. 6  Radiological:  Gross Alpha & Uranium ...................................................................................... 7  Radiological:  Gross Beta .......................................................................................................... 8  SECTION 3: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER ACTION ......................... 8         3 SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION   Background: California Health and Safety Code Health and Safety Code §116470 specifies that larger  (>10,000 service connections) water utilities prepare a special report by July 1, 2019 if  their water quality measurements have exceeded any Public Health Goals (PHGs).  PHGs  are non‐enforceable goals established by the Cal‐EPA’s Office of Environmental Health  Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The law also requires that where OEHHA has not adopted  a PHG for a constituent, the water suppliers are to use the Maximum Contaminant Level  Goals (MCLGs) adopted by United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).   Only constituents which have a California primary drinking water standard and for which  either a PHG or MCLG has been set are to be addressed.   The Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) formed a workgroup which  prepared guidelines for water utilities to use in preparing these required reports. The  ACWA guidelines were used in the preparation of our report.  The ACWA guidelines  included health risk information from OEHHA.  If a constituent was detected in the Otay Water District’s (District’s) distribution system  or in the treated water the District purchases from other agencies, between 2016 and  2018 at a level exceeding an applicable PHG or MCLG, this report provides the  information required by the law.  Included is the numerical public health risk associated  with the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) and the PHG or MCLG, the category or  type of risk to health that could be associated with each constituent, the best treatment  technology available that could be used to reduce the constituent level and an estimate  of the cost to install that treatment if it is appropriate and feasible.     What Are Public Health Goals (PHGs)?   PHGs are set by California OEHHA, which is part of Cal‐EPA and are based solely on  public health risk considerations.  None of the practical risk‐management factors that  are considered by the USEPA or the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in  setting drinking water standards (MCLs) are considered in setting the PHGs.  These  factors include analytical detection capability, available treatment technology, benefits  and costs.  The PHGs are not enforceable and are not required to be met by any public  water system.  MCLGs are the federal equivalent to the state’s PHGs.     4 Reporting Requirements:   The purpose of this report is to inform consumers of the District’s drinking water PHGs  that were exceeded during 2016, 2017 and 2018, pursuant to California Health and  Safety Code Section 116470(b).  In addition, this report provides information about the  cost of achieving a water quality level that does not exceed the PHGs.  For general  information about the quality of the water delivered by the District, please refer to the  Consumer Confidence Report, also known as the Annual Water Quality Report.  An  online version of these annual reports can be found at www.otaywater.gov.  Included in this report is information regarding the public health risk associated with the  MCL and the PHG, such as the possible type of health risk associated with each  constituent, the best available treatment technology that may reduce the constituent  level, and an estimate of the cost to install such treatment.    Water Quality Data Considered:     All of the water quality data collected by our water system between 2016 and 2018 for  purposes of determining compliance with drinking water standards was considered.   This data was summarized in our 2016, 2017, and 2018 Consumer Confidence Reports  which is made availible to all of our customers annually in June.   For each regulated contaminant, the CDPH establishes Detection Limits for the purposes  of Reporting (DLR).  DLRs are the minimum levels at which any analytical result must be  reported to the SWRCB.  Results indicated below the DLRs cannot be quantified with any  certainty.  In some cases, PHGs are set below the DLRs making them impossible to  achieve analytically.  Any contaminant reported below the DLR will be considered zero  for the purpose of this report, which is accepted by the SWRCB.             5 Best Available Treatment Technology and Cost Estimates:   Both the USEPA and SWRCB adopt what are known as Best Available Technologies  (BATs), which are the best methods of reducing contaminant levels to the MCL.  Costs  can be estimated for such technologies.  However, since many PHGs and MCLGs are set  much lower than the MCL, it is not always possible nor feasible to determine what  treatment is needed to further reduce a constituent downward to or near the PHG or  MCLG, many of which are set at zero.  Estimating the costs to reduce a constituent to  zero is difficult, if not impossible because it is not possible to verify by analytical means  that the level has been lowered to zero.  In some cases, installing treatment to try and  further reduce very low levels of one constituent may have adverse effects on other  aspects of water quality.    SECTION 2: CONSTITUENTS DETECTED THAT EXCEED A PHG   The following is a discussion of constituents that were detected in the District’s  distribution system, or one or more of our drinking water treated water sources at  levels above the PHG, or MCLG (if no PHG has been established).  Arsenic:   Arsenic is a naturally occurring element in the earth's crust and is very widely  distributed in the environment. All humans are exposed to microgram quantities of  arsenic (inorganic and organic) largely from food (25 to 50 μg/day) and to a lesser  degree from drinking water and air. In certain geographical areas, natural mineral  deposits may contain large quantities of arsenic and this may result in higher levels of  arsenic in water. Waste chemical disposal sites may also be a source of arsenic  contamination of water supplies. The main commercial use of arsenic in the U.S. is in  pesticides, herbicides and in wood preservatives. Misapplication or accidental spills of  these materials could result in contamination of nearby water supplies.  Arsenic does  not have a tendency to accumulate in the body at low environmental exposure levels.     6 Studies in humans have shown considerable individual variability in arsenic toxicity.  The  levels of arsenic that most people ingest in food and water (up to 50 μg/day) have not  usually been considered to be of health concern for non‐cancer effects.      The MCL for arsenic is 10 parts per billion (ppb), the PHG for arsenic is .004 ppb.  The  DLR, which is the lowest level that SWRCB has determined can be measured with  certainty, is 2 ppb. Arsenic levels in water that the District purchases from other  agencies from 2016 – 2018 averaged from <2 ppb – 3 ppb.  The health risk associated  with arsenic, and the reason that a drinking water standard was adopted for it, is that  people who drink water containing arsenic above the MCL of 10 ppb throughout their  lifetime could experience an increased risk of getting cancer. The PHG of .004 ppb is  estimated on a level that will result in not more than 1 additional cancer case in a  population of 1 million people who drink 2 liters of water daily for 70 years. The actual  cancer risk may be lower or zero.  Because the DLR for arsenic (2 ppb) is greater than  the PHG (.004 ppb), it would be difficult to assess the effectiveness of any treatment  technique on reaching the PHG level.    The BAT cited in literature to remove arsenic is RO. All costs including capital, land,  construction, engineering, planning, environmental, contingency and O&M costs are  included but only general assumptions can be made for these items.  According to the  ACWA cost estimates for a treatment technology BAT would cost approximately $1.85‐ $3.55 per 1000 gallons to treat arsenic using RO treatment.  The District’s average  annual demand for the three‐year period was 9,230 million gallons per year.  Therefore,  RO treatment installed and operated by the District’s water suppliers to meet the  District’s water demands would cost from $17 to $33 million per year, which translates  to an average monthly cost increase of $28.15 ‐ $54.01 per District customer.    Bromate: Bromate in water is formed when water containing naturally occurring bromide is  disinfected with ozone.  Bromate also has a long history of use as a food additive in  flour.      The MCL for bromate is 10 ppb, the PHG is 0.1 ppb based on a running annual average  (RAA).  The DLR is 1 ppb.  The RAA of bromate levels in water that the District purchases  from other agencies from 2016 – 2018 averaged from <1 ppb to 6 ppb.    The SWRCB and USEPA have determined that bromate is a health concern at certain  levels of exposure. The category of health risk associated with bromate, and the reason  that a drinking water standard was adopted for it, is that some people who drink water  containing bromate in excess of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of   7 getting cancer.  The PHG of 0.1 ppb is estimated on a level that will result in not more  than 1 additional cancer case in a population of 1 million people who drink 2 liters of  water daily for 70 years. The actual cancer risk may be lower or zero.  The SWRCB and  USEPA set the drinking water standard for bromate at 10 ppb to reduce the risk of  cancer or other adverse health effects.    One of the most effective treatment BATs for bromate reduction is RO. RO treatment  reduces the natural occurring bromide in source water, therefore reducing bromate  formation when ozone is applied. Because the DLR for bromate (1 ppb) is greater than  the PHG (0.1ppb), it would be difficult to assess the effectiveness of RO treatment on  reaching the PHG level.  According to ACWA cost estimates for a treatment, BAT would  cost approximately $1.85‐$3.55 per 1000 gallons to treat bromate using RO treatment.   The District’s average annual demands for the three‐year period were 9,230 million  gallons per year.  Therefore, RO treatment installed and operated by the District’s water  suppliers to meet the District’s water demands would cost from $17 to $33 million per  year, which translates to an average monthly cost increase of $28.15 ‐ $54.01 per  District customer.  Radiological: Gross Alpha & Uranium:   Gross alpha particle activity detections are typically due to uranium.  Uranium is a  naturally‐occurring radioactive element that is ubiquitous in the earth’s crust.  Uranium  is found in ground and surface waters due to its natural occurrence in geological  formations.  The requirement for radiological monitoring, including uranium, is four consecutive  quarters every four years.  The California MCL for uranium is 20 pCi/L.  Uranium levels in  water that the District purchases from other agencies from 2016 – 2018 averaged from  <1 pCi/L – 3 pCi/L.  The PHG for uranium is 0.43 pCi/L and the DLR is 1 pCi/L.  The numerical health risk for  uranium based on the California PHG is 1 x 10‐6.  This means one additional cancer case  per million population.  The health risk category for uranium is carcinogenicity.   Carcinogenic risk means capable of producing cancer.  The BAT cited in literature to remove gross alpha particle activity and uranium is reverse  osmosis. All costs including capital, land, construction, engineering, planning,  environmental, contingency and O&M costs are included but only general assumptions  can be made for these items.  According to ACWA cost estimates for a treatment BAT  would cost approximately $1.85‐$3.55 per 1000 gallons to treat Alpha and Uranium  using RO treatment.  The District’s average annual demands for the three‐year period  were 9,230 million gallons per year.  Therefore, RO treatment installed and operated by   8 the District’s water suppliers to meet the District’s water demands would cost from $17  to $33 million per year, which translates to an average monthly cost increase of $28.15 ‐  $54.01 per District customer.    Gross Beta:   Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit a form of radiation known as photons  and beta radiation. The MCL is 50 pCi/L and the DLR is 4 pCi/L.  There is no PHG for gross  beta particle activity and the MCLG is zero pCi/L.    Gross beta levels in water that the District purchases from other agencies from 2016 –  2018 averaged from <4 pCi/L – 10 pCi/L.  The SWRCB and USEPA, which set drinking  water standards, have determined that gross beta particle activity is a health concern at  certain levels of exposure. This radiological constituent is a naturally occurring  contaminant in some groundwater and surface water supplies. The category of health  risk associated with gross beta particle activity, and the reason that a drinking water  standard was adopted for it, is that some people who drink water containing beta and  photon emitters in excess of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of  getting cancer. The numerical health risk for the MCLG of zero pCi/L is zero. The SWRCB  and USEPA set the drinking water standard for gross beta particle activity at 50 pCi/L to  reduce the risk of cancer or other adverse health effects.    The BATs identified to treat gross beta particle activity are ion exchange and RO. The  most effective method to consistently remove beta and photon emitters to the MCLG is  to install RO treatment.  All costs including capital, land, construction, engineering,  planning, environmental, contingency and O&M costs are included but only general  assumptions can be made for these items.  According to ACWA cost estimates for a  treatment BAT would cost approximately $1.85‐$3.55 per 1000 gallons to treat gross  beta using RO treatment.  The District’s average annual demands for the three‐year  period were 9,230 million gallons per year.  Therefore, RO treatment installed and  operated by the District’s water suppliers to meet the District’s water demands would  cost from $17 to $33 million per year, which translates to an average monthly cost  increase of $28.15 ‐ $54.01 per District customer.    SECTION 3: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER ACTION   All water served by the District met all SWRCB and USEPA drinking water standards set  to protect public health during this three‐year period.  The SWRCB considers water that   9 meets all standards as safe to drink.  To further reduce the levels of the constituents  identified in this report that are already significantly below the health‐based MCLs  established to provide safe drinking water, additional costly treatment processes would  be required, translating to an average monthly cost increase of $28.15 ‐ $54.01 per  District customer.    The effectiveness of the treatment processes to provide any significant reductions in  constituent levels to the PHGs is difficult, if not impossible to determine since the  analytical DLR is much higher than the PHG in most cases. The health protection  benefits of these further hypothetical reductions are not at all clear and may not be  quantifiable.  Therefore, no further action is recommended.  STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 4, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Assistant Chief of Engineering PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item – Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2019 Capital Improvement Program Report GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To update the Board about the status of all CIP project expenditures and to highlight significant issues, progress, and milestones on major projects. ANALYSIS: To keep up with growth and to meet our ratepayers' expectations to adequately deliver safe, reliable, cost-effective, and quality water, each year the District staff prepares a Six-Year CIP Plan that identifies the District’s infrastructure needs. The CIP is comprised of four categories consisting of backbone capital facilities, replacement/renewal projects, capital purchases, and developer's reimbursement projects. AGENDA ITEM 8 2 The Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2019 update is intended to provide a detailed analysis of progress in completing these projects within the allotted time and budget of $24.52 million. Expenditures through the Fourth Quarter totaled approximately $25.72 million. Approximately 105% of the Fiscal Year 2019 expenditure budget was spent (see Attachment B). It is noted that the CIP project expenditures are within the approved CIP project budgets and funds have been redistributed from FY 2020 to FY 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer No fiscal impact as this is an informational item only. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide exceptional water and wastewater service to its customers, and to manage District resources in a transparent and fiscally responsible manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving measurable results, and continuously improving operational practices." LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:jf P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2019\Q4\Staff Report\BD 09-04-19 Staff Report Fourth Quarter FY 2019 CIP Report (DM-RP).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B - Fiscal Year 2019 Fourth Quarter CIP Expenditure Report Attachment C – Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: VARIOUS Informational Item – Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2019 Capital Improvement Program Report COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on August 23, 2019. 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. FISCAL YEAR 2019 4TH QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 6/30/2019) ($000) ATTACHMENT B 2019 06/30/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2019 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments CAPITAL FACILITY PROJECTS - P2040 Res - 1655-1 Reservoir 0.5 MG Cameron 5$ 64$ (59)$ 1280%3,400$ 597$ 2,803$ 18% Expenditures for this fiscal year are to update the Environmental documents. Expenses are within project budget. P2382 Safety and Security Improvements Payne 224 179 45 80%3,251 3,251 - 100%Project complete. Scheduled for CIP closure. P2405 PL - 624/340 PRS, Paseo Ranchero and Otay Valley Road Cameron 5 - 5 0%650 - 650 0% This project is tied to P2553 and is driven by the City of Chula Vista. Construction is scheduled for FY 2022. P2451 Otay Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection System Kennedy 10 3 7 30%3,975 3,823 152 96% EIR/EIS complete and Presidential permit issued. Continue meetings with DDW and AdR. P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations Marchioro 25 59 (34) 236%4,000 1,913 2,087 48% Schedule driven by Caltrans. Caltrans awarded construction contract FY 2019 Q4. Completion of construction anticipated for FY 2021. Project expenditures within approved project budget. P2460 I.D. 7 Trestle and Pipeline Demolition Beppler 20 5 15 25%600 10 590 2% Environmental surveys proposed to be performed in FY 2020 with demolition proposed for FY 2022. P2485 SCADA - Infrastructure and Communications Replacement Kerr 162 108 54 67%2,428 2,134 294 88% Expenditures on schedule in Q4 FY 2019. LTD balance will cover PLC's (facility-wide) in FY 2020-FY 2022. P2494 Multiple Species Conservation Plan Coburn-Boyd 50 18 32 36%1,000 928 72 93% The project is under review at USFWS and did not have any budget used in the last quarter of FY 2019. P2500 Padre Dam - Otay Interconnection Dehesa Valley Marchioro 5 - 5 0%140 - 140 0% Project is driven by Padre Dam pipeline extension to District boundary. Project closed for FY 2020. P2504 Regulatory Site Access Road and Pipeline Relocation Cameron 5 - 5 0%354 331 23 94%Project is driven by County Fire. P2516 PL - 12-Inch, 640 Zone, Jamacha Road - Darby/Osage Marchioro - - - 0%900 - 900 0% No expenditures in FY 2019. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2025. P2521 Large Meter Vault Upgrade Program Carey 25 22 3 88%620 328 292 53% Vault retrofits completed for this year, additional vaults will be completed in FY 2020. P2547 District Administration Vehicle Charging Stations Cameron 5 - 5 0%125 73 52 58%The project is complete and will be closed. P2553 Heritage Road Bridge Replacement and Utility Relocation Cameron 80 3 77 4%1,430 29 1,401 2% Project is driven by the City of Chula Vista's schedule for replacement, the City has delayed the design. The City provided design parameters to the District in June 2019. Design will begin in Q1 FY 2020. P2571 Datacenter Network- Data, Storage, and Infrastructure Enhancements Kerr 100 112 (12) 112%200 112 88 56% Remaining balance of $88K will be utilized for additional datacenter hardware in FY 2020. P2572 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Kerr - - - 0%500 - 500 0%No expenditures budgeted in FY 2019. This work will begin FY 2021. P2584 Res - 657-1 and 657-2 Reservoir Demolitions Marchioro - - - 0%1 - 1 0% No expenditures in FY 2019. These Reservoirs are scheduled to be removed at the end of their useful life. P2608 PL - 8-inch, 850 Zone, Coronado Ave, Chestnut/Apple Cameron 40 22 18 55%450 22 428 5% Work has begun on preliminary design report (PDR). The design consultant is 2 months behind schedule, but is working toward completing the PDR and 60% design in Q1 2020. P2611 Quarry Road Bridge Replacement and Utility Relocation Cameron 10 38 (28) 380%1,000 50 950 5% Project is driven by County's schedule for replacement. Design has begun in Q4. P2612 PL - 12-inch, 711 Zone, Pas de Luz/Telegraph Canyon Rd Cameron 10 40 (30) 400%500 41 459 8% Work has begun on preliminary design report (PDR). P2614 485-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron - - - 0%895 - 895 0%No expenditures in FY 2019. P2617 Lobby Security Enhancements Payne 145 55 90 38%150 56 94 37% Project is ahead of schedule; completion slated for mid-FY 2020. P2619 PS - Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station Redundancy Marchioro 200 299 (99) 150%1,800 397 1,403 22% A construction contract award to install redundant trailer completed FY 2019 Q4. Delivery of redundant trailer scheduled for FY 2020 Q3. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2020. P2623 Central Area to Otay Mesa Interconnection Pipelines Combination Air/Vacuum Valve Replacements Marchioro 130 113 17 87%270 213 57 79% Construction completed FY 2019 Q1. Project one year warranty inspection completed in FY 2019 Q4. P2630 624-3 Reservoir Automation of Chemical Feed System Cameron 5 - 5 0%385 - 385 0%Design for this project will begin in FY 2020. P2635 Vista Diego Hydropneumatic Tank Replacement Marchioro 10 1 9 10%400 1 399 0% No expenditures anticipated in FY 2019. Project closed for FY 2020 and scope transferred to new CIP P2663 created for FY 2020. P2636 980-2 PS Surge Tank Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 150 6 144 4%175 6 169 3%This project was cancelled and replaced with a new CIP next fiscal year. P2637 Survey Division Field GPS Equipment Replacement O'Donnell 35 35 - 100%35 35 - 100%Equipment purchased in FY 2019 Q1. FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2019\Q4\Expenditures\FY19 4th qtr exp-FINAL.xlsx Page 1 of 4 8/13/2019 FISCAL YEAR 2019 4TH QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 6/30/2019) ($000) ATTACHMENT B 2019 06/30/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2019 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 P2638 Buildings and Grounds Refurbishments Payne 57 10 47 18%114 10 104 9% Building exterior delayed to FY 2020 as spec is determined regarding painting vs no-paint existing stucco surfaces. Grounds projects continue. P2639 Vista Diego Hydropneumatic Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 5 - 5 0%175 - 175 0%No expenditures in FY 2019. Planning phase to begin FY 2020. P2640 Portable Trailer Mounted VFD Pumps Marchioro 30 56 (26) 187%400 56 344 14% Board award completed and purchase order issued FY 2019 Q4. Trailer delivery anticipated FY 2020 Q3. P2641 Rancho Jamul Hydropneumatic Tank Replacement Marchioro 1 1 - 100%300 1 299 0% No expenditures anticipated in FY 2019. Commencement of planning and design phase pending coordination with P2040 and P2640. P2642 Rancho Jamul Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 5 - 5 0%2,500 - 2,500 0%No expenditures in FY 2019. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2024. P2643 980-1 Pump Station Surge Tanks Replacement Marchioro - - - 0%350 - 350 0% No expenditures in FY 2019. Project closed for FY 2020 and scope transferred to new CIP P2663 created for FY 2020. P2644 803-1 Pump Station Surge Tank Replacement Marchioro - - - 0%350 - 350 0% No expenditures in FY 2019. Project closed for FY 2020 and scope transferred to new CIP P2663 created for FY 2020. P2645 Rolling Hills Hydropneumatic Tank Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 5 - 5 0%225 - 225 0%No expenditures in FY 2019. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2024. P2646 North District Area Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro - - - 0%800 - 800 0%No expenditures in FY 2019. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2024. P2647 Central Area Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro - - - 0%1,000 - 1,000 0% No expenditures in FY 2019. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2023. P2648 Otay Mesa Area Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro 40 31 9 78%400 31 369 8% Advanced planning work began FY 2019 Q3. Design scheduled for FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2021. P2649 HVAC Equipment Purchase Payne 21 10 11 48%130 10 120 8% Five year schedule; OPS scheduled for calendar 2019. R2110 RecPS - 944-1 Optimization and Pressure Zone Modifications Marchioro 25 10 15 40%200 148 52 74% Pressure reducing station work completed under budget FY 2019 Q1. Project closed out for FY 2020. R2116 RecPL - 14-Inch, 927 Zone, Force Main Improvements Marchioro 24 68 (44) 283%2,191 2,191 - 100% Construction completed FY 2018 Q3. Project one year warranty completed in FY 2019 Q3. Project budget adjusted for FY 2020. R2118 Steele Canyon Sewer PS Large Solids Handling Improvements Beppler 105 140 (35) 133%175 174 1 99% Construction completed in Q3. Screen modification by staff completed in Q4. R2120 RWCWRF Filtered Water Storage Tank Improvements Beppler 50 3 47 6%500 32 468 6%Project to be packaged with the coating of another storage tank scheduled for FY 2020. R2123 Repurpose Otay Mesa Recycled Water Lines Beppler 5 8 (3) 160%350 8 342 2% Review of system continued to be performed in FY 2019 Q4. R2125 RecPRS - 927/680 PRS Improvements, Otay Lakes Road Marchioro 45 20 25 44%200 23 177 12% Project scope revised as part of FY 2020 budget process. Design phase commenced FY 2019 Q4. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2021. R2146 Recycled Pipeline Cathodic Protection Improvements Marchioro 20 - 20 0%600 - 600 0% Planning phase postponed to begin FY 2020. Completion of construction anticipated FY 2022. R2149 680-1R PS Surge Tank Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 5 - 5 0%175 - 175 0%This project was cancelled and replaced with a new CIP next fiscal year. R2150 RWCWRF - Secondary Chlorine Analyzer and Feed System Beppler 40 53 (13) 133%55 53 2 96%Construction completed in FY 2019 Q3. S2012 San Diego County Sanitation District Outfall and RSD Outfall Replacement Beppler 50 - 50 0%1,800 1,111 689 62% County invoice received indicates no capital improvement reimbursements for this fiscal year. S2027 Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Beppler 5 1 4 20%3,500 3,050 450 87% Construction completed in 2019 Q1. Expect County to make final budget adjustment after warranty period is over in FY 2020 Q1. S2043 RWCWRF Sludge Handling System Beppler 5 14 (9) 280%51 54 (3) 106% Development of solids handling report began in FY 2019 Q4. Report to be completed in FY 2020 Q1. Budget expenditure reconciled with Board approval of FY 2020 project budget. S2047 Asset Management - Info Master Sewer Implementation Zhao 28 - 28 0%58 38 20 66% No expenditures in FY 2019. Project start has been moved to FY 2020. S2061 RWCWRF Aeration Controls Consolidation & Optimization Upgrades (S)Beppler 10 2 8 20%190 2 188 1% Scope of work and consultant outreach initiated in FY 2019 Q4. S2065 RWCWRF - TOC Monitor Beppler 30 23 7 77%30 23 7 77%Installation completed. S2067 RWCWRF Roofing Replacement and Natural Light Enhancement Payne 20 16 4 80%165 16 149 10% Consultant report is in; is above budget; adjustment to budget is being considered for next fiscal year. Total Capital Facility Projects Total:2,087 1,648 439 79%46,618 21,381 25,237 46% P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2019\Q4\Expenditures\FY19 4th qtr exp-FINAL.xlsx Page 2 of 4 8/13/2019 FISCAL YEAR 2019 4TH QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 6/30/2019) ($000) ATTACHMENT B 2019 06/30/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2019 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 REPLACEMENT/RENEWAL PROJECTS P2083 PS - 870-2 Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 7,900 8,171 (271) 103%18,950 14,529 4,421 77% Construction on track for completion in FY 2020 Q3. P2174 PS - 1090-1 Pump Station Replacement (400 gpm)Beppler 150 30 120 20%2,500 34 2,466 1% Design work performed in FY 2019 Q4. Design will continue through FY 2020 Q2. P2400 PL - 20-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 711 Zone, Otay Lakes Road - at Santa Paula Marchioro - - - 0%2,280 - 2,280 0% Project reviewed with hydraulic modeling in Q3 and found to be unnecessary. Project closed for FY 2020. P2507 East Palomar Street Utility Relocation Cameron 5 3 2 60%735 728 7 99% Partial reimbursement received. Caltrans working on final reimbursement payment. P2508 Pipeline Cathodic Protection Replacement Program Marchioro 542 486 56 90%1,250 1,209 41 97% Completion of construction anticipated FY 2020, Q1. P2529 711-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 12 (7) 240%820 815 5 99% Warranty repairs completed. Project will be closed. P2530 711-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 16 (11) 320%980 970 10 99%Warranty repairs completed. Project will be closed. P2531 944-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 9 (4) 180%345 331 14 96%Warranty repairs completed. Project will be closed. P2532 944-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 13 (8) 260%960 952 8 99% Warranty repairs completed. Project will be closed. P2533 1200-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 17 (12) 340%810 24 786 3% Budget for preliminary planning and in coordination with the Portable VFD Pump project (P2640). P2534 978-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 9 (4) 180%650 602 48 93%Construction completed FY 2018. Project is in the two year warranty period. P2535 458-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron 5 12 (7) 240%810 793 17 98% Warranty repairs completed. Project will be closed. P2539 South Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Utility Relocations Cameron 45 25 20 56%1,090 951 139 87% Project is driven by SANDAG. Expenditures within overall project budget. P2543 850-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 5 2 3 40%875 9 866 1%Budget for preliminary planning. P2544 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 5 21 (16) 420%980 841 139 86% Construction completed FY 2018. Project is in the two year warranty period. Project expenditures within approved project budget. P2545 980-1 Reservoir Interior Exterior Coating Cameron 5 20 (15) 400%1,215 1,208 7 99%Warranty repairs completed. Project will be closed. P2546 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 695 340 355 49%1,690 1,686 4 100% More work was completed in FY 2018 Q4 than anticipated. Expenditures within budget. Project accepted in November 2018 and is in the 2 year warranty period. P2555 Administration and Operations Parking Lot Improvements Cameron 25 279 (254) 1116%985 862 123 88% Phase II construction expenditures were expected to be completed in FY 2018, but the contractor was delayed by an unresponsive sub-contractor. Expenditures for FY 2019 will be over the Fiscal Year budget, but all expenditures will be within the approved CIP budget. P2557 520 Res Recirculation Pipeline Chemical Supply and Analyzer Feed Replacement Project Beppler 60 50 10 83%125 110 15 88%Project substantially completed in FY 2019 Q4. P2561 Res - 711-3 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 2,195 2,037 158 93%2,300 2,089 211 91% Completion of construction anticipated FY 2020, Q1. P2562 Res - 571-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 170 44 126 26%2,900 2,707 193 93% As part of the larger 870-2 Pump Station project, the 571-1 Reservoir was placed back into service April 2018. P2563 Res - 870-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 1 3 (2) 300%1,000 6 994 1% Replacement scheduled for FY 2022 to coincide with completion of new 870-2 Pump Station. Existing cover/liner materials analyzed by laboratory in FY 2017 suggested sufficient remaining life. P2565 803-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron 755 680 75 90%1,200 680 520 57%Construction is ongoing. Project is within budget. P2566 520-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron 10 - 10 0%1,500 - 1,500 0%This project will be closed.P2567 1004-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%905 - 905 0%No expenditures for FY 2019. P2573 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 803 Zone, Hillsdale Road Beppler 150 242 (92) 161%2,580 2,572 8 100% Construction completed in FY 2019 Q1. Warranty inspection performed in FY 2019 Q4. P2574 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 978 Zone, Vista Vereda Beppler 500 744 (244) 149%1,640 1,069 571 65% Construction in progress with completion estimated for FY 2020 Q2. P2578 PS - 711-2 (PS 711-1 Replacement and Expansion) - 14,000 gpm Marchioro - - - 0%10,000 - 10,000 0% Replacement scheduled for FY 2023-2024 to coincide with development of Villages 4, 8, 9, & 3. P2593 458-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%840 - 840 0%No expenditures for FY 2019. P2594 Large Meter Replacement Carey 95 111 (16) 117%625 453 172 72%Expenditures within overall budget. P2604 AMR Change Out Carey 1,800 2,201 (401) 122%6,290 4,396 1,894 70%Expenditures within overall budget. P2605 458/340 PRS Replacement, 1571 Melrose Ave Beppler 75 42 33 56%325 46 279 14% Planning and design on track for completion FY 2020 Q1. Construction scheduled for FY 2020. P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2019\Q4\Expenditures\FY19 4th qtr exp-FINAL.xlsx Page 3 of 4 8/13/2019 FISCAL YEAR 2019 4TH QUARTER REPORT (Expenditures through 6/30/2019) ($000) ATTACHMENT B 2019 06/30/19 CIP No.Description Project Manager FY 2019 Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Budget Expenses Balance Expense to Budget %Comments FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/19 P2607 Douglas Ave SWA and OWD Interconnection Upgrade Beppler 37 3 34 8%50 3 47 6% SWA design completion expected in FY 2020 Q1 with construction in FY 2020. P2609 PL - 8-inch, 1004 Zone, Eucalyptus St, Coronado/Date/La Mesa Cameron 10 40 (30) 400%540 40 500 7%Work has begun on preliminary design report. P2610 Valve Replacement Program - Phase 1 Cameron 95 2 93 2%275 22 253 8%Operations is taking the lead on this project. P2615 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 803 PZ, Vista Grande Beppler 20 20 - 100%1,200 20 1,180 2%PDR in progress during FY 2019 Q4. P2616 PL - 12-Inch Pipeline Replacement, 978 Zone, Pence Dr/Vista Sierra Dr Beppler 180 51 129 28%2,500 66 2,434 3%PDR in progress during FY 2019 Q4. P2625 PL - 12-inch, 978 Zone, Hidden Mesa Road Beppler 1,000 1,926 (926) 193%2,210 2,061 149 93% Construction in progress with completion estimated for FY 2020 Q2. P2627 458/340 PRS Replacement, 1505 Oleander Ave Beppler 75 66 9 88%325 66 259 20% Planning and design on track for completion FY 2020 Q1. Construction scheduled for FY 2020. P2631 1485-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%55 - 55 0%No expenditures in FY 2019. P2633 Otay Mesa Rd and Alta Rd Water Appurtenances Relocations Beppler 10 2 8 20%500 2 498 0% The District has shifted the required relocation to developers. This project will be closed. P2634 Rolling Hills Hydropneumatic Pump Station Jockey Pump Replacement Anderson 35 35 - 100%35 35 - 100%Project completed in FY 2019 Q2. P2651 Automatic Data Processing Koeppen 20 - 20 0%20 - 20 0%The project has been postponed indefinitely as ADP was not able to meet our requirements. R2121 Res - 944-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 1 1 - 100%1,400 19 1,381 1% Replacement scheduled for FY 2021 since dive inspection completed in FY 2016 suggested five years remaining life. R2139 RWCWRF - Filter Troughs Replacement Beppler 15 34 (19) 227%40 34 6 85%Construction completed during FY 2019 Q2. R2143 AMR Change Out Carey 165 145 20 88%525 250 275 48% All change-outs completed this year, additional change-outs will be done in FY 2020. R2145 RWCWRF - Filter Media and Nozzles Replacement Beppler 130 117 13 90%130 117 13 90%Construction completed in FY 2019 Q3. R2147 RWCWRF Fuel Lines Replacement Marchioro 150 186 (36) 124%225 186 39 83% Completion of construction anticipated FY 2020, Q1. R2148 Large Meter Replacement - Recycled Carey 8 - 8 0%58 - 58 0% Large meter change-outs completed for FY 2020, with the removal of Salt Creek's meter, recycle change-outs were not required, but expenditures will carry over to next year for other planned retrofits. R2151 RWCWRF - Bulk Chlorine Vapor Scrubber System Refurbishment Lintner 35 39 (4) 111%40 39 1 98%Project completed in FY 2019 Q3. S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Beppler 4,000 4,587 (587) 115%10,530 9,631 899 91% Construction expected to be substantially complete in FY 2020 Q2. S2044 Trenchless Sewer Rehabilitation Beppler 5 - 5 0%550 476 74 87%One year warranty was over in FY 2019 Q1. CIP to be closed. S2045 Fuerte Drive Sewer Relocation Beppler 10 18 (8) 180%370 278 92 75%Construction completed in FY 2019 Q1.S2046 RWCWRF - Aeration Panels Replacement Beppler 100 157 (57) 157%450 250 200 56%Construction completed in FY 2019 Q3. S2048 Hillsdale Road Sewer Repairs Beppler 10 78 (68) 780%720 692 28 96% Construction completed in FY 2019 Q1. Invoicing carried over from FY 2018. Warranty work performed in FY 2019 Q4. S2049 Calavo Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 2 Beppler 20 31 (11) 155%1,000 38 962 4%Planning work performed in FY 2019 Q4. S2050 Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 2 Beppler 20 7 13 35%1,300 7 1,293 1%Planning work performed in FY 2019 Q4. S2051 RWCWRF - Headworks Improvements Beppler 165 172 (7) 104%250 246 4 98%Construction completed in FY 2019 Q3.S2053 RWCWRF - Sedimentation Basins Weirs Replacement Beppler 5 51 (46) 1020%60 53 7 88%Construction completed during FY 2019 Q2. S2054 Calavo Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Beppler - - - 0%1,300 - 1,300 0%No action planned for this fiscal year. S2060 Steele Canyon Pump Station Replacement Beppler - - - 0%200 - 200 0%No action planned for this fiscal year. S2066 Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Beppler - - - 0%290 - 290 0%No action planned for this fiscal year. Total Replacement/Renewal Projects Total:21,544 23,387 (1,843) 109%97,303 55,303 42,000 57% CAPITAL PURCHASE PROJECTS P2282 Vehicle Capital Purchases Rahders 520 334 186 64%5,928 4,479 1,449 76% $115K moved to FY 2020 Q1. Two outstanding vehicles scheduled to be delivered in May are at winning bidders truck up fitters shop waiting completion. P2286 Field Equipment Capital Purchases Rahders 363 347 16 96%2,250 1,817 433 81%All purchases completed in FY 2019. Total Capital Purchase Projects Total:883 681 202 77%8,178 6,296 1,882 77% DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT PROJECTS P2595 PL - 16-inch, 624 Zone, Village 3N - Heritage Road, Main St/Energy Way Beppler 1 - 1 0%150 - 150 0%Project under construction. R2084 RecPL - 20-Inch, 680 Zone, Village 2 - Heritage/La Media Beppler 14 - 14 0%365 1 364 0%Project under construction. Total Developer Reimbursement Projects Total:15 - 15 0%515 1 514 0% 122 GRAND TOTAL 24,529$ 25,716$ (1,187)$ 105%152,614$ 82,981$ 69,633$ 54% P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2019\Q4\Expenditures\FY19 4th qtr exp-FINAL.xlsx Page 4 of 4 8/13/2019 Otay Water District Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2019 Fourth Quarter (through June 30, 2019) ATTACHMENT C 870-2 Pump Station – Engine No. 1 Delivery 6/19/2019 Background The approved CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2019 consists of 106 projects that total $24.5 million. These projects are broken down into four categories. 1.Capital Facilities $ 2.1 million 2.Replacement/Renewal $21.5 million 3.Capital Purchases $ 0.9 million 4.Developer Reimbursement $ 15.0 thousand Overall expenditures through the Fourth Quarter of Fiscal Year 2019 totaled $25.7 million, which is approximately 105% of the Fiscal Year budget. 2 Fiscal Year 2019 Fourth Quarter Update ($000) CIP CAT Description FY 2019 Budget FY 2019 Expenditures % FY 2019 Budget Spent Total Life-to-Date Budget Total Life-to-Date Expenditures % Life-to-Date Budget Spent 1 Capital Facilities $2,087 $1,648 79% $46,618 $21,381 46% 2 Replacement/ Renewal $21,544 $23,387 109% $97,303 $55,303 57% 3 Capital Purchases $883 $681 77% $8,178 $6,296 77% 4 Developer Reimbursement $15 $0 0% $515 $1 0% Total: $24,529 $25,716 105% $152,641 $82,981 54% 3 Fiscal Year 2019 Fourth Quarter CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures 4 $25,716,000 $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun FISCAL YEAR PERIOD IN MONTHS Budget Forecast Total Expenditures $24,529,000 5 CIP Projects in Construction 870-2 Pump Station Replacement Project (P2083/P2562) Replacement of existing 870 High Head and Low Head Pump Stations. Remove and Replace the existing 571-1 Reservoir liner and cover. $21.65M Budget Start: July 2017 Completion: December 2019 870-2 Pump Station Interior – Pump Room Division No. 2 Location: North East corner of Otay Mesa. Existing 571-1 Reservoir and High Head/Low Head Pump Station site. 6 6/06/2019 CIP Projects in Construction 803-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Project (P2565) Remove and replace existing interior and exterior coatings. Construct structural upgrades to increase the service life. $1.20M Budget Start: December 2018 Completion: August 2019 803-2 (2.0 MG) – Completed Floor Coating Division No. 5 Location: 803-2 Reservoir is located adjacent to Willow Glen Drive. 7 6/06/2019 CIP Projects in Construction 711-3 Floating Cover and Liner Replacement (P2561) Remove and replace existing floating cover and liner with new reinforced Chlorosulfonated Polyethylene (CSPE) geomembrane cover and liner. $2.3M Budget Start: August 2018 Completion: August 2019 711-3 (16.0 MG) – Reservoir Cover Inflated for Interior Cleaning Division No. 5 Location: 711-3 is located at the north end of Hunte Parkway in Chula Vista. 8 6/10/2019 CIP Projects in Construction Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project (S2024) Replace existing 10- inch sewer with 7,420 linear feet of new 15- inch sewer. Reconnection of sewer laterals. Night work. $10.10M Budget Start: July 2017 Estimated Completion: December 2019 Campo Road - Manhole 7 Sewer Main Excavation Division No. 5 Location: Campo Road (SR 94) between Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center and Rancho San Diego Towne Center. 9 6/13/2019 CIP Projects in Construction Pipeline Cathodic Protection Improvements Phase II (P2508) Installation of pipeline cathodic protection improvements at Willow Glen, Sweetwater Bridge, Proctor Valley Road, Salt Creek, and Interconnect Pipeline. $1.25M Budget Start: October 2018 Estimated Completion: August 2019 Sweetwater River Bridge Location – Drilling for Installation of New Anodes Division Nos. 1 - 3, & 5 Location: Various locations. 10 5/15/2019 CIP Projects in Construction RWCWRF Fuel System Improvements (R2147) Replace existing underground and building interior emergency generator diesel fuel piping. Replace return tank. $0.23M Budget Start: February 2019 Estimated Completion: August 2019 RWCWRF Fuel Lines – Installed and Painted Interior Fuel Lines Division No. 3 Location: RWCWRF - Singer Lane, Spring Valley. 11 4/30/2019 CIP Projects in Construction Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement (P2574/P2625) Replace existing waterlines. Construct 3,700 LF of new 12-inch waterline. Construct 400 LF of new 8-inch waterline. $3.17M Budget Start: December 2018 Estimated Completion: September 2019 Hidden Mesa Road – Final Trench Paving Division No. 5 Location: Hidden Mesa Road and Vista Vereda in El Cajon. 12 6/20/2019 Construction Contract Status 13 PROJECT TOTAL % S2045 Fuerte Drive Sewer Relocation Burtech Pipeline, Inc. $169,490 $193,690 $4,082 2.4% $179,572 $179,572 -7.3% 100.0%July 2018 P2573 S2048 Hillsdale Road 12-inch Waterline Replacement and Sewer Repairs *** TC Construction Company, Inc.$2,245,060 $2,396,060 $332,569 14.8% $2,591,949 $2,591,949 8.2% 100.0%July 2018 P2623 Interconnect AirVac Valve Replacement M-Rae Engineering Inc. $78,000 $83,000 $0 0.0% $79,310 $79,310 -4.4% 100.0%August 2018 P2555 OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements Ph. II - Pavement Restoration Frank and Son Paving, Inc.$152,646 $165,046 $11,448 7.5% $169,094 $169,094 2.5% 100.0% December 2018 P2546 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Simpson Sandblasting & Special Coating, Inc.$998,452 $1,146,327 $229,249 23.0% $1,375,576 $1,375,576 20.0% 100.0% September 2018 P2508 Pipeline CP Improvements - Phase II M-Rae Engineering Inc. $329,500 $347,000 $17,542 5.3% $350,661 $340,736 1.1% 97.2%August 2019 S2051/ R2118 RWCWRF Headworks Improvements and Steele Bridge Sewage PS Wet Well Improvements Tharsos Inc. $201,665 $223,490 $7,579 3.8% $217,685 $217,685 -2.6% 100.0%April 2019 CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT TOTAL EARNED TO DATE CIP NO. PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT W/ ALLOWANCES % CHANGE ORDERS W/ ALLOWANCE CREDIT** % COMPLETE EST. COMP. DATE NET CHANGE ORDERS LTD* Construction Contract Status 14 PROJECT TOTAL % FY 2019 CIP CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT TOTAL EARNED TO DATE CIP NO. PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT W/ ALLOWANCES % CHANGE ORDERS W/ ALLOWANCE CREDIT** % COMPLETE EST. COMP. DATE NET CHANGE ORDERS LTD* P2561 Reservoir 711-3 Floating Cover and Liner Replacement Layfield USA Corporation $1,947,000 $1,997,000 $0 0.0% $1,957,000 $1,822,250 -2.0% 93.1%August 2019 P2565 803-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Advanced Industrial Services Inc.$737,690 $951,690 $0 0.0% $807,440 $503,740 -15.2% 62.4%August 2019 P2574/ P2625 Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement Cass-Arrieta Construction $2,718,239 $2,848,364 $0 0.0% $2,724,694 $2,355,513 -4.3% 86.5% September 2019 R2147 RWCWRF Fuel System Improvements Jauregui & Culver, Inc. $153,092 $158,092 $3,832 2.5% $156,924 $117,071 -0.7% 74.6%August 2019 S2024 Campo Road Sewer Replacement Project Wier Construction Corporation $7,623,146 $7,816,646 $301,428 4.0% $8,038,574 $7,263,674 2.8% 90.4% December 2019 P2083 P2562 870-2 Pump Station Replacement/ 571-1 Reservoir Liner and Cover Replacement Pacific Hydrotech Corporation $16,500,900 $16,925,900 $139,832 0.8% $16,714,153 $13,184,673 -1.3% 78.9% December 2019 TOTALS: $33,854,880 $35,252,305 $1,047,561 3.1%$35,362,632 $30,200,842 0.3% ***PROJECT DOES NOT INCLUDE $149,280 OF ADDITIONAL SCOPE FOR SDRMA FUNDED PAVEMENT, SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER REPAIRS ON HILLDALE ROAD **THIS CHANGE ORDER RATE INCLUDES THE CREDIT FOR UNUSED ALLOWANCES *NET CHANGE ORDERS DO NOT INCLUDE ALLOWANCE ITEM CREDITS. IT'S A TRUE CHANGE ORDER PERCENTAGE FOR THE PROJECT Consultant Contract Status 15 Consultant Contract Status 16 Consultant Contract Status 17 QUESTIONS?QUESTIONS? 18 1 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 4, 2019 PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL SUBMITTED BY: Adolfo Segura, Chief of Administrative Services APPROVED BY: Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: FY19 YEAR-END REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S FY19-22 STRATEGIC PLAN GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see “Attachment A”. PURPOSE: To provide a year-end report on the District’s FY19-22 Strategic Performance Plan for FY19. ANALYSIS: Summary The current Otay Water District Strategic Plan is a four-year plan ranging from the start of FY19 through the end of FY22. This report details the year-end results for the first year of our four-year plan. Objectives – Target 90% Strategic Plan objectives are designed to ensure the District is executing mission designed objectives and making the appropriate high- level changes necessary to guide the agency, meet new challenges, and positively adapt to change. FY19 year-end results are on target at 94%, with 34 of 36 active items completed or on schedule. One (1) objective is not on target, and one (1) objective is on hold. AGENDA ITEM 9 One (1) Objective Not on Target: 1.Customer Electronic Communication and Outreach - Due the previous supervisor retiring, the new supervisor and staff have not completed the following items: a.Evaluating process of recorded customer service calls b.Evaluating exit surveys c.Options for expanding text messages to customers Staff anticipates being back on track at the beginning of FY21. One (1) Objective on Hold: 1.Evaluate feasibility of incorporating electronic and hybrid vehicles into District fleet - Electric vehicle technology is advancing but has not yet achieved the economies necessary to make it feasible for District adoption. Staff will continue to monitor the sector. Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) – Target 75% KPI’s are designed to track the District’s day-to-day performance. These items measure the effectiveness and efficiency of essential operational services. The overall goal is that at least 75% of these KPI’s be rated “on target”. FY19 year-end results are above target at 83%, with 34 of 41 items achieving the desired level or better. KPI’s are based on established AWWA performance benchmarks. Six (6) measures are reported at year’s end: 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 ON SCHEDULE BEHIND ON HOLD NOT STARTED 34 1 1 13 On Schedule Behind On Hold Not Started 34 of 36 Active Objectives are On Target (94%) 3 •Water Debt Coverage •Reserve Level •Accounts Per FTE •Leak Detection Program •Injury Incident Rate •Enterprise Technology Services KPI’s Not on Target 1.CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget: Year-to-date CIP expenditures amounted to $25,716,000 vs. the budgeted amount of $24,529,000. More progress was made in FY19 than anticipated on the following projects: a.870-2 Pump Station b.Campo Road Sewer Replacement c.Hidden Mesa Water Main Replacement d.Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement 2.Overtime Percentage: Year-to-date expenditures amounted to $193,746 vs. the budgeted amount $149,900. Fourth quarter results were below target ($41,573 actuals vs. $42,300 budgeted); however, the year-to- date overtime variance was primarily driven by after-hour service calls between December 21st and December 31st. 3.Direct Cost of Treatment per MGD: The year-to-date result is $1,071.66 vs. the year-to-date target of $1,050.00. The target was not met due to the Treatment Plant shutdown for scheduled CIP maintenance on the Steele Canyon Lift Station and headworks 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 ON TARGET NOT ON TARGET 34 7 On Target Not on Target 34 of 41 Key Performance Indicators are On Target (83%) 4 improvements. This resulted in lower effluent production. In addition, there were also unscheduled repairs to the large drum screen during the 4th quarter. 4.Mark-out Accuracy: Year-to-date staff completed 4,175 mark-outs with 2 hits resulting in a 99.96% accuracy rate. In the 1st quarter, the District’s as-needed consultant missed marking a 2” water service lateral, and in the 4th quarter Man General Engineering Inc., hit an unmarked 2” air and vacuum valve lateral on Willow Glen. Both incidents resulted in no water loss and zero customers were impacted. 5.Sewer Overflow Rate: There were zero (0) overflows in the 4th quarter, however, the year-to-date target was not met due to one (1) sewer overflow in the 3rd quarter. This was caused by a contractor dropping pipe debris in a manhole. 6.Emergency Facility Power Testing: Year-to-date 34 out of 36 sites were tested. The last two portable pump tests were halted by Engineering due to structural concerns. Pumps will be retrofitted in the 1st quarter of FY20 and testing will resume for the locations missed. 7.Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning: Year-to-date 7 out of 8 sites were inspected and cleaned. There was an unexpected delay with the 711-3 cover and liner replacement. It is expected to be back on track by the 1st quarter in FY20. Next Steps Staff will continue to execute the plan’s objectives and key performance indicators and track emerging trends. Committee Reports – Slideshow The Strategic Plan results are presented to both the Finance & Administration, and the Engineering, Operations, & Water Resources Committee with a specific focus on the most relevant information for each Committee (see “Attachment B”). Strategic Plan is available on the Board VPN All of the Strategic Plan results and associated details are provided in a real-time, interactive web-based application available to the Board via secured remote access, VPN. The District Secretary can facilitate any password or access issues. 5 FISCAL IMPACT:Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Informational item only; no fiscal impact. STRATEGIC GOAL: Strategic Plan and Performance Measure reporting is a critical element in providing performance reporting to the Board and staff. LEGAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Committee Action Report Attachment B – PowerPoint Presentation 6 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: FY19 YEAR-END REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S FY19-22 STRATEGIC PLAN COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance & Administration, and Engineering, Operations & Water Resources Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 20 and 23, 2019, respectively. The Committees support presentation to the full Board for their consideration. 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. FY19 Year-End Report Otay Water District Strategic Plan Attachment B Strategies and objectives are actionable steps or plans designed to achieve the vision/mission of the organization. The Regulatory Site in Rancho San Diego includes four reservoirs, two pump stations, and disinfection facilities. 94% 34 Objectives TRENDS ON TARGET/COMPLETED TARGET 90% TOTAL OBJECTIVES 49 NOT ON TARGET OBJECTIVES ON HOLD 3% 1 Objective 3% 1 Objective 75% 85% 95% FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 COMPLETED10NOT STARTED 13 RESULT TARGET ACTIVE 36 ON TARGET| 24 Objectives 1. C01.1 Continue implementation of and enhance the District’s community and business outreach, media, and government relations programs. 2. C01.2 Ensure consistency of branding and representation across the District, using consistent logos, colors, messaging, communications tools, and other collaterals through enhancement of internal and external marketing materials. 3. C01.3 Evaluate and enhance the District’s water conservation programs. 4. C02.1 Assess communications tools. 5. F01.1 Recycled water long-term business plan. 6. F01.2 South District Potable Water Supply Alternatives to San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) Pipeline 4 Supply Interruption (catastrophic event). 7. F01.3 Treatment Plant long-term business plan (sewer portion). 8. F03.2 Evaluate, and if beneficial, implement Cloud payroll service. 9. F04.2 Enhancement of the AM Program. 10. F04.3 Financial activity-based cost cross-training. 11. F06.2 Review Deferred Compensation Program for reduced fees and streamlined approach and ensure program offerings are fully utilized. 12. I01.2 Explore web-based options for meter reading and backflow test entry. ON TARGET| 24 Objectives 13. I03.2 Implement Human Resource Information System (HRIS) in coordination with payroll conversion. 14. I05.1 Prioritize fourteen strategic project/initiatives, recently developed. 15. I06.2 Evaluate the use of Drone2Map technology for asset, field inspections, and condition assessment. 16. I07.1 Analyze electric energy-saving programs as they become available. 17. I07.2 Evaluate the effectiveness of various methods to reduce nitrification events. 18. I07.3 Evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the District’s valve exercise preventative maintenance including proposed recommendations. 19. I07.4 Evaluate the impacts as a result of recent and upcoming regulatory changes including, but not limited to, Air Pollution Control District (APCD), State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), etc. 20. I07.5 Establish an access and defensible space vegetation mitigation program with maintenance schedules for District remote facilities, access roads, and off-road appurtenances. 21. I08.1 Enhance Customer and Public Service security in public lobby areas. 22. I09.1 Automate confined space regulatory and work forms (electronic conversion), add confined space data layer in the District’s enterprise Geographic Information System (GIS) and use data to electronically automate the District’s confined space inventory. 23. I10.1 Certify at Industry State Level and under the Incident Command System, streamline chlorine gas and confined space rescue training, operations, response and areas of responsibility and convert to inventory lists and equipment logs to electronic form. 24. L01.1 Continue development of leadership and District-wide training programs. ON TARGET | 24 Objectives COMPLETED| 10 Objectives 1. F02.1 Conduct desalination (Rosarito) financial analysis. 2. F04.1 Enhancement of the framework for systematic development, validation, and implementation of new CIPs. 3. F04.4 In support of the Engineering Department, enhance financial impact forecasting and analysis of future CIPs. 4. F05.1 Optimize funding and liability schedule. 5. F06.1 Negotiate and implement new labor agreement. 6. I04.1 Adopt National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) cyber security framework and enhance disaster recovery planning. 7. I04.2 Advance business processes and operational efficiencies through effective implementation of information technology. 8. I04.3 Create framework to evaluate cost efficiency of new technology services and cloud vs. on-premise selection. 9. I04.4 Deploy next generation storage services and communication architecture. 10. I08.3 Streamline contract and purchase order (contract) management and lifecycle. 1.I02.1 Customer electronic communication and outreach. NOT ON TARGET | 1 Objectives 1.I08.2 Evaluate feasibility of incorporating electric and hybrid vehicles into District fleet. ON HOLD | 1 ACTIVE| 36 Objectives 1. C01.1 Continue implementation of and enhance the District’s community and business outreach, media, and government relations programs. 2. C01.2 Ensure consistency of branding and representation across the District, using consistent logos, colors, messaging, communications tools, and other collaterals through enhancement of internal and external marketing materials. 3. C01.3 Evaluate and enhance the District’s water conservation programs. 4. C02.1 Assess communications tools. 5. F01.1 Recycled water long-term business plan. 6. F01.2 South District Potable Water Supply Alternatives to San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) Pipeline 4 Supply Interruption (catastrophic event). 7. F01.3 Treatment Plant long-term business plan (sewer portion). 8. F02.1 Conduct desalination (Rosarito) financial analysis. 9. F03.2 Evaluate, and if beneficial, implement Cloud payroll service. 10. F04.1 Enhancement of the framework for systematic development, validation, and implementation of new CIPs. 11. F04.2 Enhancement of the AM Program. 12. F04.3 Financial activity-based cost cross-training. ACTIVE| 36 Objectives 13. F04.4 In support of the Engineering Department, enhance financial impact forecasting and analysis of future CIPs. 14. F05.1 Optimize funding and liability schedule. 15. F06.1 Negotiate and implement new labor agreement. 16. F06.2 Review Deferred Compensation Program for reduced fees and streamlined approach and ensure program offerings are fully utilized. 17. I01.2 Explore web-based options for meter reading and backflow test entry. 18. I02.1 Customer electronic communication and outreach. 19. I03.2 Implement Human Resource Information System (HRIS) in coordination with payroll conversion. 20. I04.1 Adopt National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) cyber security framework and enhance disaster recovery planning. 21. I04.2 Advance business processes and operational efficiencies through effective implementation of information technology. 22. I04.3 Create framework to evaluate cost efficiency of new technology services and cloud vs. on-premise selection. 23. I04.4 Deploy next generation storage services and communication architecture. ACTIVE | 36 Objectives 24. I05.1 Prioritize fourteen strategic project/initiatives, recently developed. 25. I06.2 Evaluate the use of Drone2Map technology for asset, field inspections, and condition assessment. 26. I07.1 Analyze electric energy-saving programs as they become available. 27. I07.2 Evaluate the effectiveness of various methods to reduce nitrification events. 28. I07.3 Evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the District’s valve exercise preventative maintenance including proposed recommendations. 29. I07.4 Evaluate the impacts as a result of recent and upcoming regulatory changes including, but not limited to, Air Pollution Control District (APCD), State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), etc. 30. I07.5 Establish an access and defensible space vegetation mitigation program with maintenance schedules for District remote facilities, access roads, and off-road appurtenances. 31. I08.1 Enhance Customer and Public Service security in public lobby areas. 32. I08.2 Evaluate feasibility of incorporating electric and hybrid vehicles into District fleet. 33. I08.3 Streamline contract and purchase order (contract) management and lifecycle. ACTIVE | 36 Objectives 34. I09.1 Automate confined space regulatory and work forms (electronic conversion), add confined space data layer in the District’s enterprise Geographic Information System (GIS) and use data to electronically automate the District’s confined space inventory. 35. I10.1 Certify at Industry State Level and under the Incident Command System, streamline chlorine gas and confined space rescue training, operations, response and areas of responsibility and convert to inventory lists and equipment logs to electronic form. 36. L01.1 Continue development of leadership and District-wide training programs. NOT STARTED | 13 Objectives 1. F02.2 In support of the Engineering Department, conduct recycled water and sewer business financial analysis. (FY20 Q1) 2. F03.1 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)/Customer Information System (CIS)/Customer Relationship Management (CRM) validation and replacement evaluation. (ERP -FY21 Q1) 3. F03.03 Evaluate enhancements to, or replacement, of the rate model program. (FY20 Q1) 4. F03.4 Implement Paperless Account Payable (AP) solution. (FY20 Q1) 5. I01.1Evaluation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) technology. (FY21 Q1) 6. I01.3 Optimize Global Positioning System (GPS) fleet assignment and routing operation. (FY20 Q1) 7. I02.2 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)/Customer Information System (CIS)/Customer Relationship Management (CRM) validation and replacement evaluation. (CIS/CRM -FY21 Q1) 8. I03.1 Evaluate on-boarding programs and implement, if determined necessary. (FY21 Q1) 9. I03.3 Pilot cloud-based human capital performance management system and implement, if determined necessary. (FY21 Q1) 10. I06.1 Deploy ArcGIS Pro for 3D Analysis. (FY21 Q1) 11. I06.3 Migrate Geographic Information System (GIS) data structure from geometric network to utility network. (FY21 Q1) 12. I06.4 Standardization of District asset data and collection process. (FY20 Q1) 13. L01.2 Review and enhance knowledge transfer process to ensure retention of District knowledge. (FY22 Q1) Key Performance Indicators show progress toward a desirable outcome and monitor operational performance 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 LEARNING AND GROWTH CUSTOMERTRENDS ON TARGET KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FINANCIAL TARGET INTERNAL BUSINESS PROCESSES 75% TOTAL KPIs 41 REPORTED QUARTERLY35 REPORTED ANNUALLY6 17% 7 KPIs NOT ON TARGET 83% 34 KPIs RESULT TARGET KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 1. C1.01 Answer Rate 2. C1.02 Technical Quality Complaint 3. C1.03 Potable Water Compliance Rate 4. F1.02 Construction Change Order Incidence 5. F1.03 O&M Cost Per Account 6. F1.04 Billing Accuracy 7. F1.06 Sewer Rate Ranking 8. F1.07 Water Rate Ranking 9. F1.08 Water Debt Coverage Ratio 10. F1.10 Reserve Level 11. F1.11 Accounts per Full-Time Employee (FTE) 12. F1.12 Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically ON TARGET | 34 13. F1.13 Distribution System Loss 14. F1.14 Planned Potable Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 15. F1.15 Planned Recycled Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 16. F1.16 Planned Wastewater Maintenance Ratio in $ 17. F1.18 Leak Detection Program 18. F1.19 Injury Incidence Rate 19. I1.01 Enterprise Technology Services Availability 20. I1.03 Project Closeout Time 21. I1.04 Annual Recycled Water Site Inspections 22. I1.05 Recycled Water Shutdown Testing 23. I1.06 Easement Evaluation and Field Inspection 24. I1.07 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Fleet Maintenance 25. I1.08 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Reclamation Plant KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 26. I1.09 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Pump/Electric Section 27. I1.10 System Valve Exercising Program 28. I1.11 Potable Water Distribution System Integrity 29. I1.12 Recycled Water System Integrity 30. I1.16 Main Flushing and Hydrant Maintenance 31. I1.17 Critical Valve Exercising 32. L1.01 Employee Voluntary Turnover Rate 33. L1.02 Training Hours per Employee 34. L1.03 Safety Training Program ON TARGET | 34 1.F1.01 CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget 2.F1.01 Overtime Percentage 3.F1.17 Direct Cost of Treatment per MGD 4.I1.02 Mark-out Accuracy 5.I1.13 Sewer Overflow Rate 6.I1.14 Emergency Facility Power Testing 7.I1.15 Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning NOT ON TARGET | 7 KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 1. C1.01 Answer Rate 2. C1.02 Technical Quality Complaint 3. C1.03 Potable Water Compliance Rate 4. F1.01 CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget 5. F1.02 Construction Change Order Incidence 6. F1.03 O&M Cost Per Account 7. F1.04 Billing Accuracy 8. F1.05 Overtime Percentage 9. F1.06 Sewer Rate Ranking 10. F1.07 Water Rate Ranking 11. F1.12 Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically 12. F1.13 Distribution System Loss QUARTERLY | 35 13. F1.14 Planned Potable Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 14. F1.15 Planned Recycled Water Maintenance Ratio in $ 15. F1.16 Planned Wastewater Maintenance Ratio in $ 16. F1.17 Direct Cost of Treatment per MGD 17. I1.02 Mark-out Accuracy 18. I1.03 Project Closeout Time 29. I1.04 Annual Recycled Water Site Inspections 20. I1.05 Recycled Water Shutdown Testing 21. I1.06 Easement Evaluation and Field Inspection 22. I1.07 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Fleet Maintenance 23. I1.08 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Reclamation Plant 24. I1.09 Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed –Pump/Electric Section KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 25. I1.10 System Valve Exercising Program 26. I1.11 Potable Water Distribution System Integrity 27. I1.12 Recycled Water System Integrity 28. I1.13 Sewer Overflow Rate 29. I1.14 Emergency Facility Power Testing 30. I1.15 Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning 31. I1.16 Main Flushing and Hydrant Maintenance 32. I1.17 Critical Valve Exercising 33. L1.01 Employee Voluntary Turnover Rate 34. L1.02 Training Hours per Employee 35. L1.03 Safety Training Program QUARTERLY | 35 1.F1.08 Water Debt Coverage 2.F1.10 Reserve Level 3.F1.11 Accounts Per FTE 4.F1.18 Leak Detection Program 5.F1.19 Injury Incidence Rate 6.I1.01 Enterprise Technology Services Availability ANNUAL | 6 KPI’s Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. 98.12%98.00% 98.38% 96% 97% 97% 98% 98% 99% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T C1.01 Answer Rate Target: 97% average answer rate per quarter annually. TARGET Calculation: YTD number of all calls answered/ YTD number of all calls received C1.02 Technical Quality Complaint (AWWA) Target & AWWA: No more than 7.1 complaints per 1000 customer accounts annually. 3.94 4.20 3.55 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET & AWWA BENCHMARK 75th Percentile for population served between 100,0001-500,000 (combined utilities). Calculation: YTD number of technical quality complaints per year/ YTD number of active customer accounts per reporting period) C1.03 Potable Water Compliance Rate (AWWA) Target & AWWA: 100% of all health related drinking water standards per quarter annually. 100%100%100% 90% 95% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET & AWWA BENCHMARK 75th Percentile for population served between 100,0001-500,000 (water). Calculation: Number of days the primary health regulations are met/Number of days in the reporting period F1.01 CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget Target: 95% of budget but not to exceed 100% annually. 109.1% 97.4% 104.8% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 115% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: YTD expenditures/Annual budget 870-2 Pump Station. F1.02 Construction Change Order Incidence Target: No more than 5% annually. 1.5%1.3% 3.1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: Total cost of Change Orders (not including allowances)/Total original construction contract amount (not including allowances) The District’s contractor, Pacific Hydrotech Corporation, working on the 870- 2 Pump Station Gallery concrete pour. F1.03 O&M Cost Per Account Target: Less than $571.00 per account annually. $517.00 $549.00 $548.00 $480 $500 $520 $540 $560 $580 $600 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T Target is based on Operating Budget. Calculation: YTD total operations O&M costs/Number of accounts District Staff performing maintenance work in Rancho San Diego Community F1.04 Billing Accuracy Target: 99.8% billing accuracy per quarter annually. 99.99%99.98%99.94% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100% 101% 2017 2018 2019 TARGET YE A R -EN D R E S U L T Calculation: YTD number of correct bills/YTD number of total of accurate bills F1.05 Overtime Percentage Target: Less than 100% of budgeted overtime per quarter annually. Target is based on Operating Budget and historical trends; FY19 Overtime Budget is $149,900. Calculation: YTD actual overtime costs (including comp time)/YTD budgeted overtime costs 118% 100% 129% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 115% 120% 125% 130% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET F1.06 Sewer Rate Ranking Target: Bottom 50th percentile for the 28 sewer service providers in San Diego. Otay ranks 3 out of 28 sewer service providers. Calculation: Ranking for the average monthly sewer bill. 5 6 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET F1.07 Water Rate Ranking Target: Bottom 50th percentile for the 22 member agencies in San Diego. Otay ranks 3 out of 22 member agencies. Calculation: Ranking for the average monthly water bill among CWA member agencies.11 3 3 0 5 10 15 20 2017 2018 2019 YT D R E S U L T TARGET 200%200% 165% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140% 150% 160% 170% 180% 190% 200% 210% 220% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T F1.08 Water Debt Coverage Ratio Target: 150% excluding growth revenue annually. Calculation: Qualified net operating revenues/Debt service requirements TARGET FY18 Target –168% F1.10 Reserve Level Target: No less than 85% annually. There are 7 reserve funds. Calculation: Number of reserve funds that meet or exceed fund target levels/Total number of reserve funds 85% 100%100% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET F1.11 Account Per Full-Time Employee (FTE) Target: 409 accounts per FTE annually. 406 426 410 400 405 410 415 420 425 430 435 440 445 450 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: Potable + Recycled + Sewer Accounts/Number of FTEs District Staff performing meter maintenance. F1.12 Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically Target: No less than 75% per quarter annually. 75.64%77.05%78.50% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: YTD number of customers paying bills electronically/Total number of customers F1.13 Distribution System Loss Target: Less than 5%of unaccounted water annually. Calculation: Volume purchased from CWA, City of San Diego & RWCTP Production –volume sold to customers + volume used by District/Volume purchased from CWA, City of San Diego & RWCTP Production 4.1% 3.3%3.6% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET F1.14 Planned Potable Water Maintenance Ratio in $ Target: 66% of all labor costs spent on preventative maintenance per quarter annually. Calculation: YTD PM + Daily Cost/YTD Total Potable Labor Cost 70%72%74% 50% 60% 70% 80% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET F1.15 Planned Recycled Water Maintenance Ratio in $ Target: 70% of all labor costs spent on preventative maintenance per quarter annually. Calculation: YTD PM + Daily Cost/YTD Total Potable Labor Cost 91% 74%74% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET F1.16 Planned Wastewater Maintenance Ratio in $ Target: 77% of all labor costs spent on preventative maintenance per quarter annually. 91% 82%84% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: YTD PM + Daily Cost/YTD Total Potable Labor Cost F1.17 Direct Cost of Treatment per MGD Target: No more than $1050 per MGD spent on wastewater treatment annually. $1,095.70 $1,165.82 $1,071.66 $950 $1,000 $1,050 $1,100 $1,150 $1,200 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: Total O&M costs directly attributable to sewer treatment/Total volume in MG for one quarter District staff checking the clarity and particulates of a final effluent sample. F1.18 Leak Detection Program Target: 20% of system surveyed for leaks annually. 20%20%20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: Miles of potable pipe surveyed/Total miles of potable pipe The District’s contractor lowering a See Snake to begin assessment on a 14” main above Sweetwater Lake. F1.19 Injury Incident Rate Target: No more than 6.8 injury incidents per 200,000 hours worked annually. Standard is based on Department of Labor average for like-size agencies. Calculation: Number of Injuries & illnesses x 200,000/Number of Employees x 2,000 hours worked 4.4 4.4 4.4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.01 Enterprise Technology Services Availability Target: No less than 99.5% availability annually. 99.5%99.5%99.5% 90% 91% 92% 93% 94% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: 3.6 hours of downtime per month/1.83 days downtime in a year I1.02 Mark-out Accuracy Target: 100% mark-out accuracy per quarter annually. 100.00%100.00%99.96% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: YTD number of mark-outs performed without an at-fault hit, which is damage to a District facility that results from a missing or erroneous mark-out/YTD total number of mark-outs District staff conducting a mark-out. I1.03 Project Closeout Time Target: 45 day average annually. 71.2 70.3 37.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: YTD number of days between NOSC and NOC for all construction projects within the quarter/YTD number of construction projects within the quarter Board Members at the 870-2 Pump Station project. I1.04 Annual Recycled Water Site Inspections Target: 100% of recycled sites inspected annually. 100.00%100.00%100.00% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100% 101% 102% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET There are 102 recycled water use sites scheduled for FY19. Calculation: Cumulative percentage of recycled water sites inspected per quarter of those required by DEH Developer Contractors installing a recycled main line for Solstice Park in the Millenia Development. I1.05 Recycled Water Shutdown Testing Target: 90% of recycled site shut down tests performed annually. There are 50 recycled water use sites scheduled for shutdown in FY19. Calculation: Cumulative percentage of recycled site shut down tests performed per year compared to those scheduled 90% 86% 100% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.06 Easement Evaluation and Field Inspection Target: 100% assigned easements, evaluated via desktop tools, and inspected annually. 100 easements were assigned for FY19. New KPI in FY19. Calculation: Number of easements evaluated and inspected/Total easements assigned for the period 129.00% 95% 100% 105% 110% 115% 120% 125% 130% 135% 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.07 Percent of PM’s Completed –Fleet Maintenance Target: 90% of scheduled preventative maintenance completed per quarter annually. Calculation: Number of PM’s completed for the quarter/Number of PM’s scheduled to be completed for the quarter. 100%100%99% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.08 Percent of PM’s Completed –Reclamation Plant 99%98%98% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Target: 90% of scheduled preventative maintenance completed each quarter annually. Calculation: Number of PM’s completed for the quarter/Number of PM’s scheduled to be completed for the quarter. Aerial view of the Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Plant. I1.09 Percent of PM’s Completed –Pump/Electric Section Target: 90% of scheduled preventative maintenance completed per quarter annually. 100%100%100% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: Number of PM’s completed for the quarter/Number of PM’s scheduled to be completed for the quarter. District Vehicle towing a genset. I1.10 System Valve Exercising Program Target: 3080 valves exercised annually. 3228 3405 3298 3,000 3,050 3,100 3,150 3,200 3,250 3,300 3,350 3,400 3,450 3,500 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: Total number of valves exercised per year. District Staff performing a valve exercise. I1.11 Potable Water Distribution System Integrity Target: No more than 16 leaks or breaks per 100 miles of distribution system annually. AWWA: 16.1 leaks and breaks per 100 miles of distribution system (50th percentile Potable Water System Integrity: Leaks and Breaks for population served between 100,001-500,000). Calculation: Annual total number of leaks + annual number of breaks/Total miles of distribution piping 10.28 9.50 8.44 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2017 2018 2019 AWWA BENCHMARK YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.12 Recycled Water System Integrity Target: No more than 6.6 leaks or breaks per 100 miles of recycled distribution system annually. Calculation: Number of leaks and breaks/Number of miles of recycled distribution system 0.90 2.67 4.45 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.13 Sewer Overflow Rate (AWWA) Target & AWWA: 0 overflows per quarter. 75th Percentile for Sewer Overflow rate for population served between 0-50,000 Calculation: Total number of sewer overflows during the reporting period/Total miles of pipe in the sewage collection system 0 0 1 0 1 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET & AWWA BENCHMARK I1.14 Emergency Facility Power Testing Target: Test 100% of all facilities scheduled per quarter to have all emergency facilities tested annually. There are 36 powered ready facilities. Calculation: Number of facilities tested/Total number of facilities 105%106% 94% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.15 Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning Target: 8 potable water storage tanks and/or reservoirs cleaned annually. Calculation: Total number of tanks cleaned and inspected annually. 8 8 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.16 Main Flushing and Hydrant Maintenance Target: 215 mains flushed and fire hydrants maintained annually. Calculation: Total number of mains flushed and fire hydrants maintained per year. 355 443 216 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET I1.17 Critical Valve Exercising Target: 631 critical valves exercised annually. Calculation: Total number of critical valves exercised in a year. 631 633 631 5 105 205 305 405 505 605 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET L1.01 Employee Voluntary Turnover Rate Target: Less than 5% turnover annually. Calculation: YTD Number of voluntary terminations (not including retirements)/Average number of employees. 0.08% 1.50% 3.77% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET L1.02 Training Hours per Employee Target: 12 hours per employee annually. 22.89 18.11 26.84 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: YTD Total qualified training hours for all employees/Average number of FTEs. L1.03 Safety Training Program Target: 24 hours per field employee annually. 30.83 30.38 35.44 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 2017 2018 2019 YE A R -EN D R E S U L T TARGET Calculation: YTD Total qualified safety training hours for field employees/Average number of field employees. District Staff entering an excavation to complete a service replacement. Questions? 2019 Issues Facing the Water Sector 1.Renewal and replacement of aging water and wastewater infrastructure 2.Financing for capital improvements 3.Long-term water supply availability 4.Public understanding of the value of water systems and services 5.Watershed/source water protection 6.Public understanding of the value of water sources 7.Groundwater management and overuse 8.Aging workforce/anticipated retirements 9.Emergency preparedness 10.Cost recovery (pricing water to accurately reflect the cost of service) 11.Governing board acceptance of future water and wastewater rate increases 12.Compliance with current regulations 13.Compliance with future regulations 14.Talent attraction and retention 16.Public acceptance of future water and wastewater rate increases 17.Water conservation/efficiency 18.Cybersecurity issues 19.Asset Management 20.Drought or periodic water shortages 21.Improving customer, constituent, and community relationships 22.Data management 23.Water loss control 24.Certification and training 25.Energy use/efficiency and cost 26.Water rights 27.Water quality issues from premise plumbing systems 28.Expanding water reuse/reclamation 29.Financing for water research 30.Physical security issues 31.Climate risk and resiliency