Loading...
Agenda_2015_11_10 Costa Mesa Sanitary District ... an Independent Special District AGENDA Michael Scheafer President Arthur Perry Vice President Robert Ooten Secretary Arlene Schafer Assistant Secretary James Ferryman Director Public Comments. Any member of the public may address the Board. Speakers on agenda items should identify themselves to the Deputy Clerk before the meeting so that their input can be provided at the time the item is considered. Speakers on non-agenda items will be heard under Public Comments. Pursuant to State law, the Board may not discuss or take action on non-agenda items except under special circumstances. Speakers must limit their remarks to three minutes or as decided upon by the Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer reserves the right to declare any speaker out of order. Obtaining Agenda Materials: The public is entitled to copies of all documents that are made part of the agenda packet. If any document or other writing pertaining to an agenda item is distributed to all or a majority of the Board after the packet is prepared, a copy of that writing may be obtained at the District offices at 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa, California. The Deputy Clerk of the District may be contacted at (949) 645-8400. In Compliance with ADA: Contact Noelani Middenway, (949) 645-8400, 48 hours prior to meeting if assistance is needed (28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II). BOARD OF DIRECTORS STUDY SESSION 628 W. 19TH STREET, COSTA MESA 92627 Tuesday, November 10, 2015 9:30 AM I.CALL TO ORDER II.ROLL CALL (If absences occur, consider whether to deem those absences excused based on facts presented for the absence - such determination shall be the permission required by law.) III.PUBLIC COMMENTS This time has been set aside for persons in the audience to make comments on items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District that are not listed on this agenda. Members of the public will have the opportunity to address the Board of Directors about all other items on this agenda at the time those items are considered. Under the provisions of the Brown Act, the Board of Directors is prohibited from taking action on oral requests but may refer the matter to staff or to a subsequent meeting. The Board of Directors will respond after public comment has been received. Please state your name. Each speaker will be limited to four (4) continuous minutes. IV.ITEMS OF STUDY 1.Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) Self Audit Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive the PowerPoint presentation from Willdan Engineering and direct staff to bring back the SSMP on the November 19, 2015 Board of Directors meeting for re-certification. 2.Recycling & Waste Diversion Reports - October 2015 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. 3.Code Enforcement Officer Report - October 2015 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. 4.Organics Ad Hoc Committee Update - Oral Report Recommendation: The November meeting was canceled. 5.Health Savings Account (HSA) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. 6.CR&R Annual Performance Review Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. 7.Closed Circuit Televising (CCTV) District Wastewater System Recommendation: That the Board of Directors provide direction to staff. 8.Future Study Session Items Recommendation: That the Board of provide staff with direction on items to be placed on future study session agendas. V.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND DIRECTOR COMMENTS VI.ADJOURNMENT THE NEXT STUDY SESSION OF THE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL BE HELD ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2015 AT 9:30 A.M. IN THE DISTRICTS BOARD ROOM, 628 W. 19TH STREET. Costa Mesa Sanitary District ... an Independent Special District Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) Self Audit Item Number:1. Recommendation/Notes: Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive the PowerPoint presentation from Willdan Engineering and direct staff to bring back the SSMP on the November 19, 2015 Board of Directors meeting for re-certification. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) Self Audit Cover Memo Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Javier Ochiqui, Senior Management Analyst Date: November 10, 2015 Subject: Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) Self Audit Summary Per the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements (GWDR) for Sanitary Sewer Systems (State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-003-DWQ), the District developed and implemented a comprehensive Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP), with the primary objective of reducing and preventing Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs). A key requirement of the SSMP is that every two years routine internal audits be performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the SSMP as well as the District’s compliance with the SSMP elements. Willdan has completed the 2015 audit and is ready to present their findings to the Board. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors receive the PowerPoint presentation from Willdan Engineering and direct staff to bring back the SSMP on the November 19, 2015 Board of Directors meeting for recertification. Analysis The last self-audit was performed in March of 2013 and the findings were presented to the Board on June 27, 2013. In February of 2015, staff solicited proposals for conducting an internal audit of the Distirct’s SSMP. Staff sent RFPs to the following consultants: 1. Environmental Engineering & Consulting (EEC) 2. Willdan Engineering 3. Larson Consulting 4. Dudek 5. Willow Enterprises 6. Dexter Wilson Engineering Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 2 of 3 All the firms referenced above have demonstrated experience conducting SSMP audits for various sanitation and sanitary agencies. However, EEC and Willdan Engineering were the only consulting firms that submitted a proposal. CMSD entered into an Agreement with Willdan Engineering to perform the 2015 self-audit of the District’s SSMP. Willdan determined that the minor nonconformance identified in 2013 were corrected and are currently being performed. Below are the 2013 nonconformance issues that have been corrected. 1. Standard sewer permits do not mention pretreatment requirements recognized by OCSD. 2. All employees training related to operations and maintenance of sewer system are not documented. Specifically, training seminars to the California Water Environment Association are not documented. 3. CMSD does not conduct routine refresher training for staff on SSO response procedures. 4. Reevaluate the system-wide cleaning frequency to identify the necessary actions for CMSD to meet the sewer system cleaning commitment. In 2015, Willdan Engineering identified only two minor nonconformance issues, which are described below: 1. CMSD’s Sewer Master Plan is ten years old and needs to be updated, which includes conducting a hydraulic capacity analysis. 2. A long term CIP Scheduled needs to be adopted. Currently, CMSD’s CIP schedule does not go past 2015. It should be noted that a hydraulic capacity analysis is budgeted in the FY 2015-16 and 2016-17 budgets. The analysis will begin in the spring of 2016 and is planned to be completed by fall 2016 Overall, CMSD has developed a comprehensive SSMP in compliance with the State WDR. Willdan Engineering staff will be giving a brief PowerPoint presentation to the Board regarding their findings in the 2015 self-audit. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies to the objective and strategy of Strategic Plan Element 1.0, Sewer Infrastructure, which states: “Our objective is to collect and transport wastewater to meet the needs of existing and future customers.” Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 3 of 3 “We will do this by the careful management of the collection infrastructure using prudent planning and maintenance, with financial strategies to maintain sufficient capacity and respond to changing regulatory demands.” Legal Review Not applicable at this time. Environmental Review Preparation of a self-audit of the District’s Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) is an administrative matter, and administrative matters are exempt under CEQA and the District’s CEQA Guidelines. The SSMP assists the District in providing comprehensive sewer system management, including protection of the environment by eliminating sanitary sewer overflows. Financial Review The contract to perform the Sewer System Management Plan Internal Audit by Willdan Engineering for $10,584 was included in 2014-15 fiscal year adopted budget. This budgeted amount was carryover into the current year budget, therefore suffient funds are available. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the complete agenda packet for the November 10, 2015, Board of Directors Study Session meeting at District Headquarters and posted on the District’s website. Attachments: A – CMSD Self-Audit performed by Willdan Engineering B – SSMP PowerPoint Presentation by Willdan Engineering Reviewed by: Wendy Hooper Davis Finance Manager Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) 2 Year Self Audit October 14, 2015 Prepared for: Costa Mesa Sanitary District 628 West 19th Street Costa Mesa, California Prepared by: Willdan Engineering 2401 E. Katella Avenue; Suite 300 Anaheim, CA 92806 _________________________________ Ryan T. Moore RCE 82724 Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District i Willdan Engineering Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Audit Methods .................................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Performance Measures ................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Results Reporting .......................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 2015 Audit Results ............................................................................................................................ 4 3.1 Goals ............................................................................................................................................. 4 3.1.1 Plan and Schedule for Management, Operation, and Maintenance of Sewer System ........ 4 3.1.2 Reduction and Prevention of Sewer System Overflows ....................................................... 4 3.1.3 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................... 5 3.2 Organization .................................................................................................................................. 5 3.2.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................... 6 3.3 Legal Authority .............................................................................................................................. 6 3.3.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................... 7 3.4 Operation and Maintenance Program .......................................................................................... 7 3.4.1 CMSD Sanitary Sewer System Map ....................................................................................... 7 3.4.2 Preventative Maintenance Plan ............................................................................................ 7 3.4.3 Rehabilitation and Replacement Plan ................................................................................... 8 3.4.4 Staff Training ......................................................................................................................... 9 3.4.5 Equipment and Replacement Parts Inventory ...................................................................... 9 3.4.6 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 10 3.5 Design and Performance Provisions ........................................................................................... 10 3.5.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 10 3.6 Overflow Emergency Response Plan .......................................................................................... 11 3.6.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 11 3.7 FOG Control Program .................................................................................................................. 11 3.7.1 Public Education and Outreach Program ............................................................................ 12 3.7.2 Inspection of Grease-Producing Facilities ........................................................................... 12 3.7.3 Legal Authority to Prohibit Discharges to the System ........................................................ 12 3.7.4 Grease-Removal Device Requirements .............................................................................. 12 Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District ii Willdan Engineering 3.7.5 Cleaning Schedule for Sewer System Sections Subject to FOG Blockages and Source- Control Measures for Enhanced Maintenance Areas ......................................................................... 12 3.7.6 FOG Disposal Plan ............................................................................................................... 13 3.7.7 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 13 3.8 System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan ........................................................................ 13 3.8.1 Evaluation............................................................................................................................ 13 3.8.2 Design Criteria ..................................................................................................................... 13 3.8.3 Capacity Enhancement Measures ....................................................................................... 14 3.8.4 Capital Improvement Plan Schedule ................................................................................... 14 3.8.5 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 14 3.9 Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications ........................................................... 14 3.9.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 14 3.10 SMP Program Audit ..................................................................................................................... 14 3.10.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 15 3.11 Communications Program .......................................................................................................... 15 3.11.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan ................................. 15 4.0 Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 16 Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 1 Willdan Engineering 1.0 Introduction The Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD) is an independent special district that provides sewer and solid waste collection service to the City of Costa Mesa, portions of the City of Newport Beach, and portions unincorporated Orange County. The CMSD headquarters are located at 628 West 19th Street and the District Yard is located at 174 West Wilson Street in the City of Costa Mesa, California. The CMSD serves a population of approximately 116,700, as well as residential, commercial, industrial, and retail businesses. The CMSD’s sewer system assets consist of 224 miles of mainline sewers, 4 miles of pressurized sewer lines (force mains), and 20 wastewater pumping stations. In 2006, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted statewide sewer regulations, termed waste discharge requirements (WDR), aimed at reducing the occurrence of sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). In an effort to create uniformity in the way sewer systems are managed across the state, the SWRCB, through the WDR, requires any sewer agency with a sewer system of greater than 1 mile to implement a sewer system management plan (SSMP). To comply with the WDR, the CMSD developed an SSMP establishing policies and procedures to direct sewer system management in its service area and uphold California water quality standards. The SSMP must be audited every two years to assess the effectiveness of the plan and identify improvements that could further increase the plan’s effectiveness in limiting SSOs. The CMSD conducted an initial audit in 2011 that identified necessary revisions to the SSMP. CMSD subsequently updated the SSMP in based on the findings of the 2011 audit. CMSD conducted a follow-up audit in June 2013. Willdan Engineering was retained to support the CMSD in developing and performing a third audit to the Costa Mesa SSMP. This report documents the results of the third audit. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 2 Willdan Engineering 2.0 Audit Methods Willdan’s framework for the SSMP audit consists of five key elements: 1. Audit Kick-Off Meeting – A kick-off meeting with CMSD staff was conducted to describe the audit process, define the purpose of the audit, and set expectations for the audit. 2. SSMP Assessment – The 2015 audit focused on the conformance of the CMSD’s practices to the policies of the SSMP. The audit especially considered changes that have been made in response to the findings and recommendations of the 2013 audit. 3. Documentation/Data Gathering and Review – All available data and previously prepared documents relevant to the SSMP were gathered and reviewed. Information from this review was used to plan staff interviews regarding CMSD practices, policies, and procedures related to the SSMP. 4. Staff Interviews – Multiple interviews with CMSD staff were conducted to assess the level of conformance of CMSD practices with the policies and procedures identified in the SSMP (Table 2-1: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Personnel Interviewed). Personnel were asked to opine on the performance of, and recommend improvements to, the sewer system management program. Table 2-1: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Personnel Interviewed Name Title Responsibility Mr. Scott Carroll General Manager Oversight of District operations Mr. Robin Hamers District Engineer Management of design and improvement Mr. Steve Cano Wastewater Maintenance Superintendent Supervision of maintenance activities Mr. Joel Ortiz Wastewater Maintenance Worker III Operation of vacuum/jetter truck Mr. Brandon Hickman Wastewater Maintenance Worker I Operation of vacuum/jetter truck 5. Report Preparation – A report was prepared documenting the audit findings and recommendations. The report was provided to CMSD staff for review. 2.1 Performance Measures Willdan evaluated the CMSD’s sewer system management operations against the established SSMP policies and procedures: 1. Goal 2. Organization 3. Legal Authority 4. Operation and Maintenance Program 5. Design and Performance Provisions Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 3 Willdan Engineering 6. Overflow Emergency Response Plan 7. FOG Control Program 8. System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan 9. Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications 10. SSMP Program Audits 11. Communications Program 2.2 Results Reporting To enable the CMSD to focus on improving its sewer system management program, Willdan’s findings for each performance area are described in terms of the degree of nonconformance with the SSMP:  A minor nonconformance is a minor deficiency in the CMSD’s sewer management program that would not normally warrant issuance of a notice of violation, fine, or other enforcement action by the regulatory oversight agency. This type of nonconformance usually occurs when an SSMP requirement is not being met and can occur when repeated deficiencies become a trend.  A major nonconformance is a serious deficiency in the CMSD’s sewer management program that may warrant a notice of violation, fine, or other enforcement action by the regulatory oversight agency. This type of nonconformance is normally the result of noncompliance with an applicable State regulation or permit. For each identified nonconformance, Willdan recommends specific actions to correct the nonconformance to the extent practicable.  A recommended corrective action is a recommended change to CMSD sewer system management operations where existing practices do not conform to the SSMP. Implementation of these actions is expected to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the SSMP and should be implemented as soon as practicable. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 4 Willdan Engineering 3.0 2015 Audit Results The following sections describe each SSMP performance category, outline performance criteria, and document the CMSD’s conformance to each category. Corrective actions are recommended where the CMSD’s practices do not conform to the SSMP. 3.1 Goals Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. The CMSD measures the effectiveness of its sewer system management program against three goals established by the SWRCB for the SSMP: 1. Provide a plan and schedule to properly manage, operate, and maintain all parts of the sanitary sewer system in order to provide reliable service in the future 2. Reduce and prevent SSOs 3. Help mitigate any SSOs that do occur 3.1.1 Plan and Schedule for Management, Operation, and Maintenance of Sewer System The CMSD has established maintenance schedules for sewer lines; pump stations; force mains; siphons; and hot spots, or areas of the sewer that are prone to SSOs and require more frequent cleaning. CMSD monitors the status of these maintenance activities to ensure that designated schedules are being met. In addition, the CMSD has established and implemented a condition assessment plan, Capital Improvement Plan, Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Reduction Program, Hot Spot Abatement Program, Sewer Lateral Assistance Program, and a Private Sewer Pumping Station Maintenance Program. The combination of these plans and programs with the established maintenance efforts allows the CMSD to keep SSO incidents consistently low. These plans and programs are discussed in detail in later sections of this audit. 3.1.2 Reduction and Prevention of Sewer System Overflows In 2014, the CMSD experienced a total of three public SSOs (1.3 per 100 miles of sewer) in its service area and recovered 100% of the total volume of spilled wastewater. This is well below the 2013-14 state average of 4.90 public SSOs per 100 miles of sewer. In 2013, the CMSD experienced one SSO event. While one event is a very low occurrence frequency, the event was Category 1. The overflow resulted from a pump station SCADA system failure. The overflow reached a public storm drain connected to an OCFCD channel and the beach. Only 2.5% of the spill was recovered. To prevent future SCADA failure, the CMSD installed a secondary SCADA alarm to the pump station. In 2010, the CMSD opened the new District Yard at 174 West Wilson Street in Costa Mesa. The District Yard is a centralized storage area located in the heart of Costa Mesa. The centralized location of the District Yard enables CMSD staff to access necessary equipment and respond quickly to SSOs. CMSD attributes its fast SSO response times to the centralized, accessible location of the District Yard. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 5 Willdan Engineering The CMSD uses closed-circuit television (CCTV) to inspect locations where SSOs previously occurred to determine causes of the SSOs. The CMSD determines the need for repairs, enhances maintenance and source-control efforts, or implements other applicable corrective actions for SSO-prone locations to preclude repeated SSOs. If an SSO event occurs on private property, the CMSD requires the property owner to inspect the private lateral sewer line using CCTV and then works with the property owner(s) to ensure proper corrective actions are taken to prevent reoccurrence. If necessary, the CMSD escalates enforcement, including requirements to clean the private sewer lateral, continued inspection of the private lateral with CCTV, and/or repair the private lateral. The CMSD personnel follow up on enforcement cases through phone calls or by visiting the offices of property owners to ensure that the required actions are being implemented (Appendix A, Example Enforcement Letter). 3.1.3 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No nonconformances related to SSMP goals were identified. 3.1.3.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.2 Organization Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. The CMSD is in conformance with Section II, Organization, of the SSMP. The WDR requires sewer agencies to appoint Legally Responsible Officials (LRO) to oversee the implementation of the SSMP. The SSMP must include the names and telephone numbers of staff responsible for implementing the elements the SSMP program and must outline the chain of communication for reporting SSOs. The CMSD has adequately defined an organizational structure for sewer system management:  Responsible officials  Lines of authority and responsibilities for the CMSD SSMP program  Chain of Communication for Reporting SSOs The CMSD updated the SSMP in 2011 to reflect the current organizational structure, including the names and telephone numbers of persons responsible for managing the sewer system:  General Manager – Alternate LRO responsible for overall sewer management program and manages SSO reporting process.  District Engineer – LRO responsible for standards and specifications of the sewer system, creation and implementation of the Capacity Assurance Plan and Capital Improvement Plan, reporting SSOs to the California Integrated Water Quality Control Board, and updating and maintenance of CMSD maps. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 6 Willdan Engineering  Wastewater Maintenance Superintendent – Primary responder for SSOs; responsible for routine operations and maintenance activities, oversight of staff training, and management of equipment and spare parts inventories.  Maintenance Workers – Responsible for general field maintenance activities, including cleaning of enhanced maintenance locations and maintenance of pump stations.  Inspector – Responsible for ensuring new construction meets standards, implementation of emergency response, and oversight of contractors hired to work on CMSD facilities. 3.2.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No nonconformances related to the CMSD’s organizational structure were identified. 3.2.1.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.3 Legal Authority Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. CMSD updated the sewer permit to identify the pretreatment requirement as recognized by OCSD. The CMSD is in conformance with Section III, Legal Authority, of the SSMP. The WDR requires that sewer agencies have appropriate legal authority to implement and enforce certain elements of the SSMP. The CMSD Operations Code affords the CMSD the required legal authority to implement and enforce key elements of the SSMP:  Prevent illicit discharges into the sanitary sewer (Operations Code Section 6.07.040)  Require that sewers and connections be properly designed and constructed (Operations Code Section 6.01.010)  Ensure access for maintenance, inspection, or repairs for portions of the lateral owned or maintained by the CMSD; not applicable, as the CMSD does not own or maintain laterals  Limit the discharge of fats, oils, and grease (FOG) and other debris that may cause SSOs (Operations Code Section 6.07.040 and Section 6.04.060)  Enforce any violation of its sewer ordinances (Operations Code Title I) The CMSD reviews plumbing plans, inspects the sewer system repairs and new construction, and enforces established policies. The CMSD has applied the necessary enforcement actions to promptly mitigate illicit discharges. While enforcement actions are rarely required, the CMSD has been able to effectively mitigate fats, oils, and grease discharge issues by requiring installation of grease interceptors for several existing facilities that are considered significant contributors to SSOs. Although the CMSD does not own or maintain lateral sewer lines, it can legally require property owners to inspect and repair private lateral sewer lines that connect the private property to the public sewer system (Operations Code Section 6.03). Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 7 Willdan Engineering Operations Code Section 6.8.060 states that pretreatment requirements recognized by the Orange County Sanitation District for facilities are set forth in CMSD’s standard sewer permit (Appendix B, Example Standard Sewer Permit). 3.3.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No nonconformances related to the CMSD’s organizational structure were identified. 3.3.1.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.4 Operation and Maintenance Program Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. The SSMP outlines five key elements of the CMSD’s sewer system operation and maintenance program:  CMSD sanitary sewer system map  Preventative maintenance plan  Rehabilitation and replacement plan  Education and training  Equipment and replacement parts inventory 3.4.1 CMSD Sanitary Sewer System Map In 2012, CMSD completed development of a geographic information system (GIS) and transitioned hand- drawn sewer system atlases to a GIS-based sewer atlas. The GIS-based atlas shows the location of gravity sewer lines and manholes, pumping facilities, and force main pipelines. A separate map showing the location of all storm water conveyance facilities is also available to field staff. Any necessary corrections to the sewer atlas identified by CMSD staff and contractors are provided to the District Engineer for review and, where appropriate, revision of the atlas. In the past, revisions were made by red-lining a master copy of the paper atlas, but they are now made directly to the GIS. 3.4.2 Preventative Maintenance Plan 3.4.2.1 System-Wide Cleaning The CMSD uses CMSD staff to clean all sewer lines as a preventive maintenance measure. CMSD divided the service area into 62 zones based on the wastewater drainage watersheds and distributed the 62 zones evenly between CMSD staff. In previous years, the entire sewer system was cleaned once every two years, but in the past year, CMSD increased the cleaning frequency with a target of cleaning the entire system each year (Appendix C, Example Sewer Cleaning Work Order). Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 8 Willdan Engineering 3.4.2.2 Hot Spot and Lift Station Maintenance CMSD staff periodically evaluate hot spot locations with CCTV and determine individual cleaning frequencies for these locations. Since 2012, CMSD has reduced the number of hot spot locations in its service area from 45 to 34. The reduction can be attributed to several preventive maintenance measures that include proactive lining of locations susceptible to root intrusion, improved cleaning practices, and detailed analysis of sources of fats, oils, and grease (FOG) discharges to the sewer system. Staff inspect the CMSD’s 20 lift stations on a weekly basis, document pump run times and routine maintenance activities, and further evaluate abnormalities to identify any significant issues. CMSD contracts with JIMNI Systems for emergency response for weekends and spills during off hours. CMSD hired a SCADA Technician/ Industrial Electrician on July 14, 2014 to conduct comprehensive pump inspections and purchased a new utility truck ($143,318) to assist with these activities. Previously, CMSD contracted Xylem, Inc. to conduct comprehensive pump station maintenance. All maintenance activities are documented in journals located at each lift station, and days and times of maintenance are logged in a separate spreadsheet. Work orders are currently not created for lift station maintenance. 3.4.3 Rehabilitation and Replacement Plan 3.4.3.1 Rehabilitation Projects The CMSD has a proactive rehabilitation and replacement program that includes measures for reducing I/I. In 2009, CMSD completed the second CCTV inspection of the entire sewer system to assess the system in detail and identify I/I issues. CMSD subsequently established eight rehabilitation projects to address major issues identified during the CCTV study and incorporated the projects into the SSMP. CMSD plans to conduct a CCTV inspection of the entire system in 2016. The CCTV will assess the system in detail and identify I/I issues to be conducted in the future. 3.4.3.2 Capital Improvement Program The CMSD has implemented an Asset Management Plan that tracks life expectancy, expected rehabilitation and reconstruction, and costs for the sewer system. The minimum balance in the fund was established at $5 million. Projects identified in the Asset Management Plan are completed as part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). CMSD has allocated $1,847,000 for the CIP for fiscal year 2015/2016. By law, funds from the CIP must be used for maintenance and rehabilitation projects. The CMSD balances funding from the CIP for new sewer system improvement projects that aim to improve the operating efficiency and life expectancy of the entire sewer system. Based on statements from CMSD staff and past performance of the CIP, CMSD has allocated sufficient funds to complete rehabilitation and repair projects planned for fiscal year 2015/2016. Table 3-1 lists the CIP projects for fiscal year 2015/2016. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 9 Willdan Engineering Table 3-1: CIP Projects for 2015/2016 Fiscal Year No. Project Proposed Budget 2015/2016 101 Westside Pump Station Abandonment $ 1,184,000 310 Indus Relining $ 353,000 311 Manhole Cover Repairs Phase 2 $ 150,000 312 Aviemore PS Upgrade $ 100,000 N/A SMP Update $ 60,000 Total $ 1,847,000 The SSMP notes that CIP schedule will be updated upon the completion of the Sewer Master Plan (SMP) following the integration of GIS flow modeling software. At this time, it is important that the SMP is updated to forecast and prioritize future CIP projects. The SMP is scheduled to be updated in 2016. 3.4.3.3 Private Sewer Pumping Station Maintenance Program In 2014 SMSD launched a Private Sewer Pumping Station Maintenance Program. SMSD recognizes that spills from private property can have damaging effects to the environment. Because of this, SMSD is taking the time to provide discussions and recommendations outside of their legal responsibility in order to keep the community beaches open and waterways pollution free. Under this program, the District offers no-cost expert technical, maintenance, and engineering discussion and recommendations for achieving reliable service and avoiding sewer overflows. SMSD offered this program to 28 privately owned pump stations within the district boundary. In 2014, 5 private sewer pumping stations were inspected by SMSD maintenance staff. 3.4.4 Staff Training In accordance with SSMP requirements, CMSD staff responsible for operation and maintenance of the sewer system actively participate in education and training activities. The CMSD’s Wastewater Maintenance Superintendent has acquired Grade 4 certification as a collection system maintenance operator through the California Water Environment Association. In addition one field personnel has completed Grade 2 certification and two others have completed Grade 1 operator certification. CMSD personnel routinely attend training seminars and events for continued education and professional development. Since the 2013 audit, CMSD has documented these events (Appendix D, Record of Training form). In addition, the staff is involved in quarterly mock simulations where they set up a portable power generator and backup pumps. 3.4.5 Equipment and Replacement Parts Inventory CMSD has developed an inventory of available equipment and replacement parts that are important for performing operations within the CMSD service area. The inventory lists the availability, quantity, and listing date of each part and piece of equipment. The Wastewater Maintenance Superintendent reviews the inventory periodically and updates the inventory as parts and equipment are used or replaced. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 10 Willdan Engineering Since the last SSMP update, CMSD has purchased a 2013 Ford Crane Service Truck and a 2015 Kenworth Vac-All Sewer Combination Truck. The Crane Service Truck allows CMSD to remove large pumps rather than rely on contractors for required pump maintenance. In addition, CMSD has added wireless tablets to the fleet for mobile connection to GIS mapping and for maintenance tracking. 3.4.6 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No noncomformances with SSMP design and performance provisions were identified. 3.4.6.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.5 Design and Performance Provisions Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. CMSD has established design and performance provisions for the installation, rehabilitation, and repair of sewer system assets; the provisions are established in four documents:  Title 7 of the CMSD Operations Code  Costa Mesa Sanitary District Standard Plans and Specifications for the Construction of Sanitary Sewers  Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (“Green Book”)  American Public Works Association Standard Plans for Public Works Construction In addition, CMSD has standardized procedures for the use of equipment in pumping stations to facilitate maintenance and replacement. All new construction and rehabilitation activities must adhere to the established design standards adopted by CMSD. CMSD tracks each project and logs the construction plans that have been created for each project. CMSD’s written standards are made readily available and accessible to staff members, who refer to these standards when performing repairs or inspections. CMSD is also receptive to new construction and rehabilitation methods that may be more economical and efficient. During interviews, CMSD staff indicated that facility installations and repairs are regularly tested and inspected. Documentation provided by CMSD shows that installation and repair procedures are documented and tracked. Documentation also shows that CMSD keeps records of plan reviews conducted for new business construction and where property owners have been required to alter plans to comply with CMSD design standards. 3.5.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No noncomformances with SSMP design and performance provisions were identified. 3.5.1.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 11 Willdan Engineering 3.6 Overflow Emergency Response Plan Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. The SSMP requires six key elements for the CMSD Overflow Emergency Response Plan:  SSO notification procedures  Appropriate response to all overflows  Regulatory notification procedures  Oral notification  Written notification  Training procedures  Emergency response operations  Program to contain and prevent sewage discharges to surface waters CMSD’s criteria for determining Category 1, Category 2, and Category 3 (level of severity) SSOs, as well as procedures for response and reporting of each SSO, are consistent with the SSMP. CMSD has also developed a separate emergency response plan to address sewer pumping stations. Based on the documentation review, CMSD’s internal SSO records are consistent with the California Integrated Water Quality Control Board’s data. For each SSO occurrence, CMSD notified the proper authorities and submitted all reports pursuant to the documented procedure. Based on interviews with CMSD staff, staff members keep a copy of the SSO Emergency Response Plan in each service vehicle, have read the plan, and routinely practice SSO response procedures and volume estimations. 3.6.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No noncomformances with SSMP design and performance provisions were identified. 3.6.1.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.7 FOG Control Program Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. The SSMP requires seven key elements for the CMSD FOG Control Program:  Public education outreach program  FOG disposal plan  Legal authority to prohibit discharges to the system Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 12 Willdan Engineering  Grease removal device requirements  Inspection of grease-producing facilities  Cleaning schedule for sewer system sections subject to FOG blockages  Source control measures for enhanced maintenance areas Based on the historically low number of FOG-related SSOs in the CMSD service area, CMSD’s FOG Control Program is effective at preventing FOG accumulation in the sewer system and FOG-related SSOs. In the past four years, CMSD experienced relatively few FOG-related SSOs compared to the total number of SSOs; this ratio can be attributed to a successful FOG Control Program. 3.7.1 Public Education and Outreach Program In 2005, CMSD began providing all identified food service establishments (FSEs) in its service area with educational and outreach materials, including the FOG Program Rules and Regulations, regarding the proper disposal of FOG generated in their facilities. These materials are still provided to each FSE as needed during routine FOG inspections. The educational materials are also available on the CMSD’s website (http://www.cmsdca.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=114&Itemid=409). 3.7.2 Inspection of Grease-Producing Facilities Each FSE within the CMSD service area is supposed to be inspected at least once every two years; however, higher-risk FSEs, such as those with grease-removal equipment or those associated with enhanced maintenance locations that are prone to sewer blockages, are inspected more frequently. 3.7.3 Legal Authority to Prohibit Discharges to the System Where additional enforcement of the FOG Control Program is required, Sections 6.07.040 and 6.04.060 of the Operations Code provide the CMSD with the legal authority to enforce the FOG Program Rules and Regulations. In some instances in 2014, CMSD issued enforcement letters to FSEs and required one FSE to attend a CMSD Board of Directors hearing to discuss compliance issues. CMSD has adopted an enforcement flow chart to guide FSE enforcement procedures (Appendix E, Enforcement Response Flow Chart); however, CMSD does not have written enforcement procedures for responding to FOG noncompliance. 3.7.4 Grease-Removal Device Requirements CMSD requires all new FSEs to install a grease interceptor, which must first be approved by CMSD. In addition, existing FSEs that have been identified to cause or contribute to sewer system blockages are required to install a grease interceptor. CMSD is receptive to alternative grease-control technologies, particularly for facilities with physical constraints (i.e., space, slope) that make installation of traditional interceptors impracticable. 3.7.5 Cleaning Schedule for Sewer System Sections Subject to FOG Blockages and Source- Control Measures for Enhanced Maintenance Areas CMSD identifies sewer locations subject to FOG accumulation and designates the sewer in that area as a hot spot (requires cleaning more than once per year). CMSD staff routinely monitor hot spot locations to Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 13 Willdan Engineering identify and mitigate the cause of FOG accumulation. Where applicable, structural repairs or escalated source-control measures are implemented to reduce the maintenance frequency for hot spots. 3.7.6 FOG Disposal Plan Once a grease interceptor is pumped, pumping companies can take grease waste to the Orange County Sanitation District’s FOG waste receiving facility. In addition, some of the larger pumping companies have their own treatment facilities on-site that receive FOG waste. In 2011, CMSD implemented a residential FOG recycling program. Residents can deliver grease waste to the Orange Coast College Recycling Center, which is open 7 days a week. In 2014, over 500 gallons of residential grease were collected at the recycling center. 3.7.7 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No noncomformances related to the FOG Control Program were identified. 3.7.7.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.8 System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan Finding: Found one minor nonconformance. SSMP outlines four key elements of the CMSD’s System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan:  Evaluation  Design criteria  Capacity enhancement measures  Capital Improvement Program schedule 3.8.1 Evaluation CMSD’s Sewer Master Plan, last updated in 2005, includes a hydraulic capacity analysis; CMSD has addressed all deficiencies identified through this analysis. The CMSD plans to update the Sewer Master Plan upon completion of GIS-based flow modeling development. In addition, CMSD routinely analyzes pump station data to identify trends in sewer flow changes that have the potential to become hydraulic capacity issues, including indicators of I/I. 3.8.2 Design Criteria The CMSD uses industry-standard design criteria that state that sewer lines up to 18 inches in diameter should not flow more than half full during peak wet weather and lines 21 inches in diameter or larger should not flow more than three quarters full. CMSD is planning to use the new GIS-based flow modeling capabilities to evaluate whether sewer lines are exceeding standard capacities. According to interviews with the District Engineer, CMSD will conduct this analysis during the next Sewer Master Plan update scheduled for 2016. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 14 Willdan Engineering 3.8.3 Capacity Enhancement Measures In 2011, CMSD established a program to plug and seal manholes located in low-lying gutters and alley areas to minimize storm-water inflow. 3.8.4 Capital Improvement Plan Schedule The 2005 Sewer Master Plan identifies CIP projects to be completed over 10 years. As discussed in Sections 3.4.3.1 and 3.4.3.2, CMSD has completed the majority of identified CIP projects and needs to schedule new projects for the 2015/2016 fiscal year. According to the District Engineer, there will be an updated SMP in 2016 which will provide a CIP schedule for the next 10 years. 3.8.5 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan One minor nonconformance related to sewer system operation and maintenance was identified: a) CMSD has completed the CIP improvement projects identified in the 2005 Sewer Master Plan. CMSD does not have a scheduled CIP improvement projects past 2015. 3.8.5.1 Recommended Corrective Actions One corrective action is recommended to remedy the identified nonconformance: a) CMSD needs to conduct a new SMP to establish a CIP schedule. According to the District Engineer, CMSD plans write a new SMP in 2016. 3.9 Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. CMSD reviews all elements of the SSMP every other year and updates the SSMP document as needed. The SSMP was last updated in 2013 to reflect the current conditions of the CMSD. 3.9.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No nonconformances related to the program monitoring, measurement, and modifications were identified. 3.9.1.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.10 SMP Program Audit Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. CMSD has conducted the required SSMP audits. The first audit was conducted in 2011 and covered all sections of the SSMP. Six minor nonconformances were identified in 2011:  The SSMP did not reflect the current organizational structure of CMSD.  The SSMP did not reflect the current Operations Code section numbers. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 15 Willdan Engineering  The miles of sewer reported in California Integrated Water Quality System did not match the actual miles of sewer lines for CMSD.  The SSMP did not reflect usage of the GIS or CMMS.  Field staff had not read and signed off on the SSMP and SSO Emergency Response Plan.  The SSO Emergency Response Plan was not present in each CMSD field vehicle. As of the 2013 audit, CMSD addressed each noncompliance identified in 2011 within the established time frame. The 2013 audit found four minor nonconformances:  Standard sewer permits do not mention pretreatment requirements recognized by OCSD.  CMSD is not currently on pace to complete cleaning of all wastewater drainage watershed sections scheduled for fiscal year 2012/2013 and risks falling short of the target without immediate adjustment.  All employee training efforts are not documented.  CMSD does not conduct routine refresher training for staff on SSO response procedures. As of the 2015 audit, CMSD addressed most of the noncompliance identified in 2013 within the established time frame. 3.10.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No nonconformances related to the SSMP program audits were identified. 3.10.1.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. 3.11 Communications Program Finding: CMSD is fully conformant to the SSMP in this area. The CMSD posted the updated SSMP on its website (http://cmsdca.gov) and has certified the SSMP on the State’s California Integrated Water Quality System website. The SSMP is always available to any interested party; CMSD will consider any comments or recommendations made by outside organizations. 3.11.1 Areas of Nonconformance to the Sewer System Management Plan No nonconformances related to the CMSD’s communications program were identified. 3.11.1.1 Recommended Corrective Actions No corrective actions are recommended at this time. Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District 16 Willdan Engineering 4.0 Summary CMSD developed a comprehensive SSMP in compliance with the State WDR. Based on personnel interviews, documentation review, and consistently low number of SSO events, the CMSD has effectively implemented the SSMP to reduce and prevent SSOs within CMSD service area. CMSD continually evaluates the condition of its sewer system assets and conducts routine preventive maintenance to ensure the system is functioning efficiently. However, the current audit identified one area in which the CMSD’s sewer system management practices are not consistent with the SSMP (Table 4-1, Summary of Sewer System Management Plan Audit Results). No major nonconformances were identified; however, 1 minor nonconformance was identified. To correct the minor nonconformance CMSD needs to update their SMP. The current SMP was written in 2005 and forecasted CIP projects for 10 years. CMSD has completed the CIP projects identified in the 2005 SMP and needs to update/revise the SMP to identify future CIP projects. The SMP should be updated in the 2015/2016 fiscal year. For all future updates to the SSMP, WDR requires a change log. The change log tracks all changes to the SSMP as it is a living document. The change log should include the date of the change, the SSMP element revised, a description of the change/ revision, and the person who authorized the revision. Table 4-1: Summary of Sewer System Management Plan Audit Results Sewer System Management Plan Section Finding Section 1: Goals In Conformance Section 2: Organization In Conformance Section 3: Legal Authority In Conformance Section 4: Operations and Maintenance In Conformance Section 5: Design and Performance Provisions In Conformance Section 6: Overflow Emergency Response Plan In Conformance Section 7: FOG Control Program In Conformance Section 8: System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan Minor Nonconformance Section 9: Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications In Conformance Section 10: SSMP Program Audits In Conformance Section 11: Communications Program In Conformance Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District Willdan Engineering Appendix A: Example Enforcement Letter Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District Willdan Engineering Appendix B: Example Standard Sewer Permit Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District Willdan Engineering Appendix C: Example Sewer Cleaning Work Order Costa Mesa Sanitary District - Work Order November 19, 2012 Work Order #16164 Clean Main Priority 3 Supervisor CANO, STEVE Location Contractor Address Comments Map attached, pipes to be cleaned are highlighted vibrant blue. Select CCTV observations also appear on map, labeled with distance from downstream manhole. Legend attached. Instructions Always clean upstream pipe segments before advancing downstream. Projected Start Date 7/1/2012 Actual Start Date Projected Finish Date 6/30/2013 Actual Finish Date Associated Asset IDs Facility Condition Assessment Notes (Debris, Grease, Roots: Zero, Light, Moderate, Heavy) 138790 138792 138793 138794 138797 Debris: Z L M H Grease: Z L M H Roots: Z L M H Debris: Z L M H Grease: Z L M H Roots: Z L M H Debris: Z L M H Grease: Z L M H Roots: Z L M H Debris: Z L M H Grease: Z L M H Roots: Z L M H Debris: Z L M H Grease: Z L M H Roots: Z L M H Work Order Lifecycle Requested By Initiated By GALLEGOS, RAMON On 11/6/2012 5:01:35 PM Submitted To ORTIZ, JOEL On 11/6/2012 5:01:36 PM Opened By On Work Completed By Closed By On Costs Labor 0 Materials 0 Equipment 0 Permits 0 Total 0 Page 1 of 2 Costa Mesa Sanitary District - Work Order November 19, 2012 138799 138801 Debris: Z L M H Grease: Z L M H Roots: Z L M H Debris: Z L M H Grease: Z L M H Roots: Z L M H Labor Estimated Name Dates Hours / Units - Actual Name Dates Hours / Units - Field Crew Comments Page 2 of 2 Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District Willdan Engineering Appendix D: Record of Training Form Waste Discharge Requirements Sewer System Management Plan 2015 Self Audit Costa Mesa Sanitary District Willdan Engineering Appendix E: Enforcement Response Flow Chart Ro u t i n e I n s p e c t i o n Co n d u c t e d a t F S E No n c o m p l i a n c e Re q u i r i n g Fo l l o w - u p 1 Id e n t i f i e d ? Ye s No Fi r s t F o l l o w - u p In s p e c t i o n Co n d u c t e d No n c o m p l i a n c e Re q u i r i n g Fo l l o w - u p 1 Id e n t i f i e d ? No Yes Le t t e r I s s u e d t o F S E Sp e c i f y i n g R e q u i r e d Co r r e c t i v e A c t i o n s an d D u e D a t e s f o r Co r r e c t i o n Second Follow-up Inspection ConductedNoncompliance Requiring Follow-up 1 Identified?NoYes Th i r d F o l l o w - u p In s p e c t i o n Co n d u c t e d Noncompliance Requiring Follow-up 1 Identified?Issue Fine or Hearing for Termination of Service In s p e c t i o n Fr e q u e n c y i s In c r e a s e d NoYes 1. N o n c o m p l i a n c e R e q u i r i n g a F o l l o w - u p I n c l u d e : FO G > 2 5 % Dis l o d g e d B a f f l e T u b e Da m a g e d B a f f l e W a l l In a c c e s s i b l e f o r I n s p e c t i on (unable to open lids) Gr i n d e r I n s t a l l e d Re v i e w F S E En f o r c e m e n t a t SS S C M e e t i n g Es c a l a t e d F S E En f o r c e m e n t Re q u i r e d 2. Noncompliance Requiring Immediate Elevated Enforcement Include:FOG > 80%Restricted Effluent Evidence of Recent SSO Ye s No No n c o m p l i a n c e Re q u i r e s Im m e d i a t e Ele v a t e d En f o r c e m e n t 2 ? Re q u i r e C o r r e c t i o n of N o n c o m p l i a n c e Im m e d i a t e l y . Ye s No 4/13/2012 CS M D  Se w e r  Sy s t e m   Ma n a g e m e n t  Pl a n   Au d i t  20 1 5 By  Wi l l d a n E n g i n e e r i n g 2 In t e r n a l  Au d i t  20 0 6  ‐ St a t e  Wa t e r  Re s o u r c e s  Co n t r o l  Board   ad o p t e d  Wa s t e  Di s c h a r g e  Re q u i r e m e n t s ( W D R )    WD R  re d u c e s  th e  oc c u r r e n c e  of  sa n i t a r y  sewer   ov e r f l o w s  (S S O s ) .    Al l  wa s t e w a t e r  ag e n c i e s  ar e  re q u i r e d  to  ke e p  a   Se w e r  Sy s t e m  Ma n a g e m e n t  Pl a n  (S S M P )  and   pe r f o r m  in t e r n a l  au d i t s  ev e r y  tw o  ye a r s .   11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 3 In t e r n a l  Au d i t Th e  au d i t  is  de s i g n e d  to  ad d  va l u e  an d  im p r o v e   th e  or g a n i z a t i o n ’ s  op e r a t i o n s .  It  he l p s  th e   or g a n i z a t i o n  ac c o m p l i s h  it s  ob j e c t i v e s  by   br i n g i n g  a  sy s t e m a t i c ,  di s c i p l i n e d  ap p r o a c h  to   ev a l u a t e  an d  im p r o v e  th e  ef f e c t i v e n e s s  of  risk   ma n a g e m e n t ,  co n t r o l ,  an d  go v e r n a n c e  process. 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 4 CS M D  Sy s t e m  CM S D  Se r v i c e     Ap p r o x i m a t e l y  11 6 , 7 0 0  Pe o p l e  Re s i d e n t i a l ,  Co m m e r c i a l ,  an d  In d u s t r i a l    Se w e r  Sy s t e m  As s e t s    22 4  mi l e s  of  ma i n t e n a n c e  se w e r s  4  mi l e s  of  pr e s s u r i z e d  se w e r  li n e s  20  wa s t e w a t e r  pu m p i n g  st a t i o n s 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 5 Au d i t  Pe r f o r m a n c e  Me a s u r e s     Mi n o r  No n c o n f o r m a n c e  Wo u l d  no t  wa r r a n t  is s u a n c e  of  a  no t i c e  of   vi o l a t i o n ,  fi n e ,  or  ot h e r  en f o r c e m e n t  ac t i o n .  Ma j o r  No n c o n f o r m a n c e    Se r i o u s  De f i c i e n c y  in  th e  se w e r  ma n a g e m e n t   pr o g r a m  th a t  ma y  wa r r a n t  a  no t i c e  of  vi o l a t i o n ,   fi n e ,  or  ot h e r  en f o r c e m e n t  ac t i o n . 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ Fu l l y  Co m p l i a n t ✘ Mi n o r  No n c o n f o r m a n c e   ✘ Ma j o r  No n c o n f o r m a n c e   6 Au d i t  Pe r f o r m a n c e  Me a s u r e s     Go a l s  Or g a n i z a t i o n  Le g a l  Au t h o r i t y  Op e r a t i o n  an d  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pr o g r a m  De s i g n  an d  Pe r f o r m a n c e  Pr o v i s i o n s  Ov e r f l o w  Em e r g e n c y  Re s p o n s e  Pl a n  FO G  Co n t r o l  Pr o g r a m  Sy s t e m  Ev a l u a t i o n  an d  Ca p a c i t y  As s u r a n c e  Pl a n  Mo n i t o r i n g ,  Me a s u r e m e n t ,  an d  Pr o g r a m  Mo d i f i c a t i o n s  SS M P  Pr o g r a m  Au d i t s  Co m m u n i c a t i o n s  Pr o g r a m 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 7 Go a l s  CM S D ’ s  SS M P  Go a l s :  Pr o v i d e  a  pl a n  an d  sc h e d u l e  to  pr o p e r l y  manage,  op e r a t e ,  an d  ma i n t a i n  al l  pa r t s  of  th e  sa n i t a r y   se w e r  sy s t e m  in  or d e r  to  pr o v i d e  re l i a b l e  service   in  th e  fu t u r e  Re d u c e  an d  pr e v e n t  SS O s  He l p  mi t i g a t e  an y  SS O s  th a t  do  oc c u r 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant 8 Or g a n i z a t i o n  De f i n e d  or g a n i z a t i o n a l  st r u c t u r e  fo r  se w e r   sy s t e m  ma n a g e m e n t  Ch a i n  of  Co m m u n i c a t i o n  fo r  Re p o r t i n g  SS O s 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant Le g a l  Au t h o r i t y  CM S D  ha s  ap p l i e d  th e  ne c e s s a r y  en f o r c e m e n t   ac t i o n s  to  pr o m p t l y  mi t i g a t e  il l i c i t  di s c h a r g e s .   ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant 9 Op e r a t i o n  an d  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pr o g r a m  CM S D  Sa n i t a r y  Se w e r  Sy s t e m  Ma p  GI S  Ba s e d  Se w e r  At l a s  – 2 0 1 2  Se w e r  an d  Pu m p  Sy s t e m s  St o r m  Wa t e r  Co n v e y a n c e  Sy s t e m .    Re v i s i o n s  Ma d e  Di r e c t l y  to  GI S 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 10 Op e r a t i o n  an d  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pr o g r a m   (C o n t i n u e d )  Re h a b i l i t a t i o n  an d  re p l a c e m e n t  Pl a n    Cl e a n i n g  Fr e q u e n c y  In c r e a s e d  to  On c e  a  Ye a r  Pr i v a t e  Se w e r  Pu m p i n g  St a t i o n  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Program  No ‐Co s t  Ex p e r t  ad v i c e  fo r  pr i v a t e  pu m p i n g  st a t i o n s  to  help   av o i d  SS O s  fr o m  pr i v a t e  pu m p  st a t i o n s .    Pr e v e n t a t i v e  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pl a n  (2 0 1 1 )  97  Ho t s p o t s  (2 0 1 3 )  45  Ho t s p o t s  (2 0 1 5 )  34  Ho t s p o t s 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 11 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 012345678910 06 / 0 7 0 7 / 0 8 0 8 / 0 9 0 9 / 1 0 1 0 / 1 1 1 1 / 1 2 1 2 / 1 3 1 3 / 1 4 1 4 / 1 5 N u m b e r   o f   P u b l i c   S S O s Op e r a t i o n s  an d  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pr o g r a m Total  Public  SSOs FOG  Related Public  SSOs 12 Op e r a t i o n  an d  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pr o g r a m   (C o n t i n u e d )  Ed u c a t i o n  an d  Tr a i n i n g  St a f f  ro u t i n e l y  at t e n d  tr a i n i n g  se m i n a r s ,  an d  do c u m e n t s   st a f f ’ s  at t e n d a n c e .  Gr a d e  4  ‐ Co l l e c t i o n  Sy s t e m  Ma i n t e n a n c e   Op e r a t o r  Ce r t i f i c a t i o n  Co n d u c t s  re f r e s h e r  tr a i n i n g  (9 / 5 / 1 3 ,  9/ 2 5 / 1 4 ,  1/ 1 2 / 1 5 ,   1/ 2 6 / 1 5 )  Eq u i p m e n t  an d  Re p l a c e m e n t  pa r t s  In v e n t o r y    20 1 3  Fo r d  Cr a n e  Se r v i c e  Tr u c k  20 1 5  Ke n w o r t h  Va c ‐Al l  Se w e r  Co m b i n a t i o n  Tr u c k  CM S D  Re m o v e  La r g e  Pu m p s  fo r  Ma i n t e n a n c e .  Wi r e l e s s  ta b l e t s  in  fl e e t 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 13 Op e r a t i o n  an d  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pr o g r a m   (C o n t i n u e d )  CI P  Pr o j e c t s  As s e t  Ma n a g e m e n t  Pl a n    Mi n i m u m  Ba l a n c e  $5  Mi l l i o n  Ma i n t e n a n c e  an d  Re h a b i l i t a t i o n  Pr o j e c t s  $1 , 8 4 7 , 0 0 0  fo r  th e  20 1 5 / 2 0 1 6  FY  We s t s i d e  Pu m p  St a t i o n  Ab a n d o n m e n t  In d u s  Re l i n i n g  Ma n h o l e  Co v e r  Re p a i r s  SS M P  Up d a t e 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant 14 De s i g n  an d  Pe r f o r m a n c e  Pr o v i s i o n s  CM S D  ha s  st a n d a r d i z e d  Pr o c e d u r e s  fo r  the  use   of  eq u i p m e n t  in  pu m p i n g  st a t i o n s  to  fa c i l i t a t e   ma i n t e n a n c e  an d  re p l a c e m e n t .   11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant 15 Ov e r f l o w  Em e r g e n c y  Re s p o n s e  Plan  Re s p o n s e  an d  Re p o r t i n g  of  SS O s  Ca t e g o r y  1,  Ca t e g o r y  2,  an d  Ca t e g o r y  3   pr o c e d u r e s  ar e  co n s i s t e n t  wi t h  th e  SS M P .    Se p a r a t e  em e r g e n c y  re s p o n s e  pl a n  to  ad d r e s s   se w e r  pu m p i n g  st a t i o n s .  St a f f  Me m b e r  Ac c e s s  to  SS O  SS O  Em e r g e n c y  Re s p o n s e  Pl a n  in  ea c h  se r v i c e   ve h i c l e  Ro u t i n e l y  pr a c t i c e  SS O  re s p o n s e  pr o c e d u r e s  and   vo l u m e  es t i m a t i o n s . 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant 16 FO G  Co n t r o l  Pr o g r a m  FO G  Co n t r o l  Pr o g r a m  Ed u c a t i o n  an d  Ou t r e a c h  Fo o d  Se r v i c e  Es t a b l i s h m e n t  (F S E )  En f o r c e m e n t   Co o r d i n a t i o n  FO G  Di s p o s a l  Pl a n    20 1 4  ‐ Ov e r  50 0  ga l l o n s  of  re s i d e n t i a l  gr e a s e  were   co l l e c t e d  at  th e  re c y c l i n g  ce n t e r .   11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant 17 Sy s t e m  Ev a l u a t i o n  an d  Ca p a c i t y   As s u r a n c e  Pl a n  CM S D ’ s  Se w e r  Ma s t e r  Pl a n  (2 0 0 5 )  CM S D  ha s  ad d r e s s e d  id e n t i f i e d  de f i c i e n c i e s    Up d a t e  Hy d r a u l i c  Ca p a c i t y  An a l y s i s  Up d a t e  CI P  Sc h e d u l e  Co r r e c t i v e  Ac t i o n :  CM S D  ha s  sc h e d u l e d  funds   to  up d a t e  th e  Se w e r  Ma s t e r  Pl a n  in  20 1 6 . 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✘ CM S D  Mi n o r  No n c o n f o r m a n c e   18 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant SS M P  Pr o g r a m  Au d i t s  CM S D  ha s  co n d u c t e d  th e  re q u i r e d  SS M P  Audits. Mo n i t o r i n g ,  Me a s u r e m e n t ,  an d   Pr o g r a m  Mo d i f i c a t i o n s  CM S D  re v i e w s  an d  up d a t e s  th e  SS M P  as  needed.  ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant 19 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 ✔ CM S D  Fu l l y  Compliant Co m m u n i c a t i o n s  Pr o g r a m  Up d a t e d  SS M P  on  CM S D ’ s  we b s i t e  an d  is   av a i l a b l e  on  th e  St a t e ’ s  Wa t e r  Qu a l i t y  System. 20  ✔ Go a l s  ✔ Or g a n i z a t i o n  ✔ Le g a l  Au t h o r i t y  ✔ Op e r a t i o n  an d  Ma i n t e n a n c e  Pr o g r a m  ✔ De s i g n  an d  Pe r f o r m a n c e  Pr o v i s i o n s  ✔ Ov e r f l o w  Em e r g e n c y  Re s p o n s e  Pl a n  ✔ FO G  Co n t r o l  Pr o g r a m  ✘ Sy s t e m  Ev a l u a t i o n  an d  Ca p a c i t y  As s u r a n c e  Pl a n (C o r r e c t i v e  Ac t i o n  Ta k e n )  ✔ Mo n i t o r i n g ,  Me a s u r e m e n t ,  an d  Pr o g r a m  Mo d i f i c a t i o n s  ✔ SS M P  Pr o g r a m  Au d i t s  ✔ Co m m u n i c a t i o n s  Pr o g r a m 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 Su m m a r y 21 Qu e s t i o n s ?  Ry a n  Mo o r e  Wi l l d a n E n g i n e e r i n g  RM o o r e @ W i l l d a n . c o m  65 7 . 2 2 3 . 8 5 7 4 11 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 Costa Mesa Sanitary District ... an Independent Special District Recycling & Waste Diversion Reports - October 2015 Item Number:2. Recommendation/Notes: Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Recycling & Waste Diversion Reports - October 2015 Cover Memo CR T r a n s f e r C R T r a n s f e r To : J a v i e r  Oc h i q u i T o : J a v i e r  Oc h i q u i Fr o m :                                  CR  Tr a n s f e r  In c . F r o m :                                  CR  Tr a n s f e r  In c . Ju r i s d i c t i o n : C o s t a  Me s a  Sa n i t a r y  Di s t r i c t  (9 ) J u r i s d i c t i o n : Co s t a  Me s a   Sa n i t a r y  Di s t r i c t   Sa n t a  An a  He i g h t s   (1 1 ) Mo n t h / Y e a r : O c t ‐15 M o n t h / Y e a r : O c t ‐15 Re c y c l i n g R e p o r t R e c y c l i n g R e p o r t Re c y c l e T o n s R e c y c l e T o n s Co m m o d i t y Pe r c e n t a g e R e c y c l e d Co m m o d i t y Pe r c e n t a g e R e c y c l e d Ne w s p a p e r 8 . 1 7 % 21 0 . 1 7 Ne w s p a p e r 3. 9 1 % 3.04 Ca r d b o a r d 6 . 6 3 % 17 0 . 4 1 Ca r d b o a r d 5. 5 8 % 4.33 Mi x e d P a p e r 1 2 . 0 8 % 31 0 . 6 6 Mi x e d P a p e r 9. 0 8 % 7.04 Gl a s s 4 . 7 7 % 12 2 . 6 8 Gl a s s 5. 4 1 % 4.19 PE T 1 . 0 3 % 26 . 5 9 PE T 0. 8 2 % 0.63 HD P E 0 . 6 6 % 16 . 9 2 HD P E 1. 2 1 % 0.94 Al u m i n u m C a n s 0 . 4 4 % 11 . 2 1 Al u m i n u m C a n s 0. 3 3 % 0.26 No n - F e r r o u s M e t a l 0 . 0 0 % - No n - F e r r o u s M e t a l 0. 0 0 % - Ti n / M e t a l 1 . 8 6 % 47 . 8 9 Ti n / M e t a l 2. 1 2 % 1.64 Gr e e n w a s t e 1 5 . 4 5 % 39 7 . 4 6 Gr e e n w a s t e 14 . 0 2 % 10.88 Or g a n i c / F i n e s 0 . 0 0 % - Or g a n i c / F i n e s 0. 0 0 % - Wo o d 2 . 3 9 % 61 . 4 4 Wo o d 5. 0 3 % 3.90 Co n c r e t e / A s p h a l t 0 . 0 0 % - Co n c r e t e / A s p h a l t 0. 0 0 % - Mi x e d P l a s t i c 3 . 2 4 % 83 . 2 3 Mi x e d P l a s t i c 4. 4 6 % 3.46 Li q u i d s 0 . 3 6 % 9. 3 4 Li q u i d s 0. 0 0 % - To t a l s 57 . 0 8 % 1, 4 6 8 . 0 0 To t a l s 51 . 9 7 % 40.31 To t a l  To n n a g e 2, 5 7 1 . 8 8 To t a l  To n n a g e 77 . 5 7 Re c y c l e d  To n n a g e 1, 4 6 8 . 0 0 Re c y c l e d  To n n a g e 40 . 3 1 La n d f i l l  To n n a g e 1, 1 0 3 . 8 8 La n d f i l l  To n n a g e 37 . 2 6 NO T E :    Or g a n i c  ma t e r i a l  co n t a i n s  wa t e r  we i g h t .    Du r i n g  pr o c e s s i n g / t r a n s p o r t i n g  fi n i s h e d  pr o d u c t  th i s  li q u i d  ev a p o r a t e s .  Th e  "l o s t  we i g h t "  is  sh r i n k a g e JU L Y A U G S E P T O C T N O V D E C J A N F E B M A R A P R M A Y J U N E T O T A L 3, 5 1 0 . 0 5 2 , 8 4 0 . 7 3 2, 7 8 6 . 5 7 2,6 4 9 . 4 5 11,786.80 1, 9 9 4 . 8 5 1 , 6 1 5 . 3 3 1 , 5 8 5 . 7 9 1 , 5 0 8 . 3 1 6,704.28 1, 5 1 5 . 2 0 1 , 2 2 5 . 4 0 1 , 2 0 0 . 7 8 1 , 1 4 1 . 1 4 5,082.52 56 . 8 3 % 5 6 . 8 6 % 5 6 . 9 1 % 5 6 . 9 3 % # D I V / 0 ! # D I V / 0 ! # D I V / 0 ! # D I V / 0 ! # D I V / 0 ! # D I V / 0 ! # D I V / 0 ! # D I V / 0 ! 5 6 . 8 8 % Re c y c l e d % CM S D WA S T E D I V E R S I O N R E P O R T F Y 2 0 1 5 - 2 0 1 6 To t a l T o n n a g e Re c y c l e d T o n n a g e La n d f i l l e d T o n n a g e Mo n t h / Ye a r T o n s   Ju l ‐15 1 9 5 . 6 4 Au g ‐15 5 8 0 . 2 3 Se p ‐15 7 3 5 . 4 5 Oc t ‐15 8 1 3 . 6 7 No v ‐15 De c ‐15 Ja n ‐16 Fe b ‐16 Ma r ‐16 Ap r ‐16 Ma y ‐16 Ju n ‐16 To t a l 23 2 4 . 9 9 19 5 . 6 4 58 0 . 2 3 73 5 . 4 5 81 3 . 6 7 0 10 0 20 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 60 0 70 0 80 0 90 0 T O N S Ju l ‐15 A u g ‐15 S e p ‐15 O c t ‐15 N o v ‐15 D e c ‐15 J a n ‐16 F e b ‐16 M a r ‐16 A p r ‐16 M a y ‐16 J u n ‐16 To n s 19 5 . 6 4 5 8 0 . 2 3 7 3 5 . 4 5 8 1 3 . 6 7 OR G A N I C S  RE C Y C L I N G  TO N N A G E S FY  15 / 1 6   Costa Mesa Sanitary District ... an Independent Special District Code Enforcement Officer Report - October 2015 Item Number:3. Recommendation/Notes: Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Code Enforcement Officer Report - October 2015 Cover Memo Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Edward Roberts, Code Enforcement Officer Date: November 10, 2015 Subject: Code Enforcement Officer Report – October 2015 This report summarizes major points for three ordinance enforcement topics covering scavenging, graffiti, and trash container enforcement. For the month of October, the CMSD Code Enforcement Officer focused his efforts on patrols in various parts of the community. The goal was to identify and deter instances of scavenging and residential trash carts left within the public view. In the month of October we saw a reduced number of complaints filed with CMSD Code Enforcement staff regarding scavenging activity in the city. As with most scavenging complaints, the alleged violations take place in the early morning hours. In order to address resident concerns, the Code Enforcement Officer investigated all complaints and adjusted his schedule to accommodate requests for early morning or weekend enforcement. Included below are instances of scavenging that were detected while the Officer was investigating specific complaints. Proactive Scavenging Investigations: 09 1952 Arnold Avenue- While patrolling the 1900 block of Arnold Avenue, Officer Roberts observed a female subject, rummaging through CMSD trash carts in front of the residence at 1952 Arnold Avenue. Officer Roberts contacted the subject in front of the location and asked if her if she was scavenging recyclable material from CMSD carts. The female subject admitted to scavenging recyclable material from CMSD carts. Based on the female’s admission and level of cooperation, she was admonished regarding CMSD policy and instructed to return all recyclable material to a nearby trash cart. Board of Directors October 2015 615 W. Bay Street- While patrolling the 600 block of West Bay Street, Officer Roberts observed a male subject, rummaging through a few CMSD trash carts in front of 615 West Bay Street. Officer Roberts contacted the subject in front of the location and determined that he was scavenging recyclable material from CMSD trash carts. The subject was counseled and admonished regarding CMSD policy. All recyclable material was returned to a nearby trash cart and the subject was sent on his way. 671 Darrell Street- While patrolling the W/B lanes of the 600 block of Darrell Street, Officer Roberts observed a female scavenging through a trash cart located on the street directly in front of 671 Darrell Street. Officer Roberts contacted the female and she was identified verbally. Officer Roberts directed the female to return all material to a nearby CMSD trash cart and then advised her regarding her scavenging activity. The female was sent on her way with a verbal admonishment. 2097 Maple Avenue- While patrolling the 2000 block of Maple Avenue, Officer Roberts observed a male subject, rummaging through CMSD trash carts in front of 2097 Maple Avenue. Officer Roberts contacted the subject in front of the location and determined that he was scavenging recyclable material from one of the CMSD carts. The male subject admitted to scavenging recyclable material from CMSD carts. The subject was subsequently admonished regarding CMSD policy and instructed to return all recyclable material to a nearby trash cart. 2204 Meyer Place- While on patrol in the 2200 block of Meyer Place, Officer Roberts observed a male and female rummaging through CMSD trash carts in front of 2204 Meyer Place. Based on his observations, Officer Roberts contacted the subjects regarding their scavenging activity. During the course of the contact, the subjects were advised that scavenging is prohibited activity and their actions could result in citation if observed scavenging again. Both subjects stated that they understood and were sent on their way. 2104 Monrovia Avenue- While patrolling the N/B lanes of the 2000 block of Monrovia Avenue, Officer Roberts observed a male subject pushing a shopping cart with plastic bags affixed to the basket portion. As Officer Roberts drove closer to the subject, he noted that the bags contained what appeared to be recyclable material within. Officer Roberts contacted the subject in front of 2104 Monrovia Avenue and asked him if he had obtained the recyclable items from within CMSD carts. The subject admitted that he had been scavenging prior to being contacted by Roberts. Based on the subject’s admission, Officer Roberts directed him to return all recyclable material to a nearby trash cart. The male stated that he understood and left the scene without further incident. Board of Directors October 2015 2224 Raleigh Avenue- While patrolling the 2200 block of Raleigh Avenue, Officer Roberts observed a male rummaging through CMSD trash carts in front of 2224 Raleigh Avenue. Based on his observation of scavenging, Officer Roberts contacted the subject. During the course of the contact, the subject was cooperative and advised that scavenging is prohibited activity. The subject stated that he understood and was sent on his way. 409 Victoria Street- While patrolling the 400 block of Victoria Street, Officer Roberts observed a male subject, rummaging through CMSD trash carts in front of 409 Victoria Street. Officer Roberts contacted the subject in front of the location and asked if he was scavenging recyclable material from CMSD carts. The male subject admitted to scavenging recyclable material from CMSD carts. Based on the subject’s admission, he was admonished regarding CMSD policy and instructed to return all recyclable material to a nearby trash cart. The subject was sent on his way. 2048 Wallace Avenue- While patrolling the 2000 block of Wallace Avenue, Officer Roberts observed a male subject rummaging through a CMSD trash cart. Officer Roberts made contact with the subject and asked him what he was doing. During the course of the contact, the subject admitted that he was scavenging through CMSD carts in order to obtain recyclable material. At the time of contact, the subject did not have any recyclable material on his person. The subject was admonished about CMSD policy pertaining to scavenging and sent on his way. END OF SCAVENGING ENFORCEMENT REPORT Board of Directors October 2015 Trash Container Enforcement: In the month of October, there were a few customer complaints reported to the District Headquarters regarding trash carts in public view. The following is a list of locations where trash cart violations were found and addressed by the Courtesy Notice process. Total Cases: 61 The following locations received First Warnings: (1) Albert Place - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Azalea Drive - Storage of carts in public view. (3) Baker Street - Storage of carts in public view. (2) Bay Street - Storage of carts in public view. (2) Cabrillo Street - Storage of carts in public view. (2) Capital Street - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Colgate Drive-Storage of carts in public view (2) College Avenue-Storage of carts in public view (2) Concord Street - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Costa Mesa Street - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Dakota Avenue - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Fordham Drive - Storage of cart in public view. (2) Fullerton Avenue- Storage of carts in public view. (2) Governor Street- Storage of carts in public view. (2) Iowa Street - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Knox Street - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Minnesota Avenue - Storage of carts in public view. (2) Monrovia Avenue-Storage of carts in public view. (2) Molokai Place - Storage of carts in public view. Board of Directors October 2015 (1) Orange Avenue- Storage of carts in public view. (2) Pomona Avenue - Storage of carts in public view. (1) Raleigh Street- Storage of carts in public view. (1) Redwood Avenue - Storage of carts in public view. (4) Santa Ana Avenue- Storage of carts in public view. (2) Senate Street - Storage of carts in public view. (3) Tustin Avenue - Storage of carts in public view. (2) Wallace Avenue - Storage of carts in public view. (2) Watson Avenue - Storage of carts in public view. (4) Wilson Street - Storage of carts in public view. (1) 16th Place - Storage of carts in public view. (3) 17th Street - Storage of carts in public view. (2) 18th Street - Storage of carts in public view. (2) 19th Street - Storage of carts in public view. END OF TRASH CONTAINER ENFORCEMENT REPORT No cases of graffiti on a trash carts were opened in the month of October.             Costa Mesa Sanitary District Scavenging Report – October 2015 Locations:  1952 Arnold Ave  615 W. Bay St  671 Darrell St  2097 Maple Ave  2204 Mayer Pl  2104 Monrovia Ave  2224 Raleigh Ave  409 Victoria St  2048 Wallace Ave Costa Mesa Sanitary District ... an Independent Special District Health Savings Account (HSA) Item Number:5. Recommendation/Notes: Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Health Savings Account (HSA)Cover Memo Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services.  www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Dyana Bojarski, Management Analyst I Date: November 10, 2015 Subject: Health Savings Account Summary The Board is requesting information about Health Savings Accounts (HSA). A HSA is defined as a tax-sheltered savings account for the purpose of paying for medical expenses that is funded by employees, employers, or both. To qualify for a HSA, an individual must be covered by a qualifying high-deductible health plan. Contribution limits are set by law. Staff Recommendation It is recommended that the Board receive and file this report. Analysis Health-care costs have risen significantly in the United States, with the average employee spending over $1,000 more per year on out-of-pocket expenses than he/she did three decades ago. Employers are feeling this burden with the real cost of providing health care also increasing substantially over that same time frame. A HSA could benefit both the employer and the employee. A HSA is an account that is designated for use with a high deductible health plan. High deductible health insurance plans are more affordable on a monthly basis, but have very high deductibles that must be met before coverage begins.     Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 2 of 4 How HSA’s work:  Money currently spent on a traditional health plan is used to purchase a low-cost high-deductible policy  All or a portion of the savings is deposited as an employer contribution into a tax- deductible HSA  Employees may contribute additional dollars  The HSA should be used to help pay unreimbursed medical expenses until the deductible is met (or can be used for any purpose with significant tax consequences.)  The high-deductible insurance policy takes care of covered medical expenses that exceed the deductible Advantages of an HSA:  Contributions to HSAs are deductible from taxable income (or can be made through payroll deductions with pretax dollars), and distributions for qualified medical expenses are not counted as taxable income. Any interest or other capital earnings from the account build up tax free as well.  Funds roll over from one year to the next and continue to build over time with no maximum  Funds are portable. They stay with the individual if they change employers (assuming the new employer has a HSA) or leave the work force  Account holders can withdraw funds from HSA’s for any expense after age 65 without a tax penalty, although withdrawals for non-health-care expenditures are subject to regular income tax, much like an IRA. Funds deposited in a HSA can also be used to pay for Medicare premiums. Disadvantages of an HSA:  Plan can only be used if using a high deductible health plan. If individual is under age 65 and withdraws money for a non-medical use, they will have to pay taxes and penalties on the money used. If over age 65, there are no penalties, but taxes will still have to be paid on money used  There are limits on how much can be invested each year. The 2015 limits are $3,350 per year for an individual and $6,650 for a family plan. For 2016, the limits are $3,350 for an individual and $6,750 for a family  Because many health savings accounts are invested in stocks, bonds and mutual funds, account values can decline over time.  Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 3 of 4    HSA’s cannot be used to pay health plan premiums, except for qualified long-term care insurance (coverage that includes the cost of nursing home care, home health care or assisted living), health insurance while receiving unemployment compensation under federal or state law, health care continuation coverage such as Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) plans and Medicare and other health care coverage if you are 65 or older The District’s health plan provider is CalPERS. At this time, CalPERS does not offer any High Deductible Health Plans (HDHP). The 2016 HDHP minimum deductible amount for individuals is $1,300 and for families it is $2,600. CalPERS currently offers three health plans that have deductibles, PERS Choice, Pers Select, and PersCare. All three plans have a $500 deductible for individuals and $1,000 for family. This makes the District ineligible to add an HSA to employee benefits. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item supports achieving the objective and strategy for Strategic Element No. 6.0, Personnel / Organizational Management, which states: Objective: To employ and retain a high quality motivated workforce. Strategy: “We will do this by utilizing sound policies and personnel practices, offering competitive compensation and benefits, providing opportunities for training, development and professional growth, while ensuring a safe and secure workforce.” Legal Review Not applicable Environmental Review The establishment of an HSA is not a disturbance of the environment and does not constitute a project under CEQA or the District’s CEQA Guidelines. Financial Review A Full-Administered HSA plan (third party administration) will cost the District a $300 set-up fee and up to $50 a month. There is no annual fee. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the November 10, 2015 Board of Directors study session at District Headquarters and on District’s website at www.cmsdca.gov. Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 4 of 4 Alternative Actions 1. Direct staff to report back on a Flex Spending Plan. Attachment: CalPERS Health Plans Costa Mesa Sanitary District ... an Independent Special District CR&R Annual Performance Review Item Number:6. Recommendation/Notes: Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type CR&R Annual Performance Review Cover Memo Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Javier Ochiqui, Senior Management Analyst Date: November 10, 2015 Subject: CR&R Environmental Services – Annual Performance Review for FY 14-15 Summary Per Section 40 of the Agreement, the “DISTRICT shall complete a yearly performance review of the trash collection and recycling program on a yearly basis and CONTRACTOR and DISTRICT shall meet to discuss and resolve problems that may be occurring in the programs. DISTRICT shall prepare a performance review form that allows for evaluation of services provided at the residences as well as administrative services including report preparation, accuracy, and timeliness of transmittal, responsiveness to inquiries, database management, service levels and helpfulness.” Staff is providing the Board of Directors with the results of the yearly performance review for FY 2014-15. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. Analysis The evaluation term was from July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015. Staff evaluated CR&R Environmental Services (CR&R) using the following four ratings: Excellent, Satisfactory, Unsatisfactory and Not Applicable (N/A). CR&R’s overall quality of service is “Excellent.” The District’s $17.24 net-to-hauler rate for FY 2014-15 is $0.35 per unit less than the maximum level allowed, which is the county-wide average. CR&R responded to two hydraulic leaks between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2015. Once notified, they promptly dispatched crews to power wash and clean up the spills. The spill that occurred on May 7, 2015, was not caused by a CR&R truck, but CR&R decided to clean it anyway. CR&R’s overall quality of service and commitment to the Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 2 of 3 District is excellent. However, there were a few times when the District received more than three missed pick-ups calls per month. Below are possible reasons for missed pick-ups: 1. Driver error 2. Carts not placed at curbside by 6:30AM 3. Carts blocked by vehicles or placed too close to an obstruction (i.e., trees, buildings, mailboxes, fire hydrants, etc.) In addition, as part of the yearly performance review process, staff hired Michael Balliet from Michael Balliet Consulting, LLC to provide a partial compliance review the following areas of the Agreement:  Additional Container Payments  Rate Survey and Appropriate Rate Confirmation  Composting Facility Agreement  Required Use Stanton MRF  Master Manifest & Diversion Requirements  Administrative Compliance  Education and Outreach  Equipment and Personnel Requirements  Support Service For each review area listed above, Mr. Balliet found CR&R to be in compliance with agreement requirements (Attachment 2). Staff will continue to complete a yearly performance review of CR&R. In addition, staff recommends that CR&R continue to complete the Master Manifest report every August 1st and submit it to CMSD in order to facilitate CMSD’s annual review process. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 2.0, Solid Waste, which states: “Objective: Our objective is to manage the collection and recycling of residential trash in the most economical and environmentally friendly way.” “Strategy: We will do this by looking for ways to improve efficiencies, achieve high customer satisfaction, and considering prudent new recycling methods.” Legal Review Not applicable at this time. Environmental Review A performance review of CR&R in and of itself is an administrative matter and is not a disturbance of the environment similar to grading or construction and is not a project under CEQA or the District’s CEQA Guidelines. The programs of CR&R, such as the organics programs, receive individual CEQA review when they are initiated or revised. Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 3 of 3 Financial Review The cost to perform the partial compliance audit review by Michael Balliet is $3,990. This cost was approved in the FY 2015-16 Budget. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the complete agenda packet for the November 10, 2015, Board of Directors Study Session meeting at District Headquarters and posted on the District’s website. Attachment: 1 – Annual Performance Review of CR&R Environmental Services 2 – Annual Review Assistance Report by Michael Balliet Consulting, LLC Attachment 1 Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD) Yearly Performance Review of CR&R, Environmental Services Evaluation Term: July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015 Prepared by Javier Ochiqui, Senior Management Analyst Attachment 1 YEARLY PERFORMANCE REVIEW OF CR&R, INCORPORATED (Per Section 40 of the Agreement) Per Section 40 of the Agreement, the “DISTRICT shall complete a yearly performance review of the trash collection and recycling program on a yearly basis and CONTRACTOR and DISTRICT shall meet to discuss and resolve problems that may be occurring in the programs. DISTRICT shall prepare a performance review form that allows for evaluation of services provided at the residences as well as administrative services including report preparation, accuracy, timeliness of transmittal, responsiveness to inquiries, database management, service levels and helpfulness.” Agreement Between the Costa Mesa Sanitary District of Orange County, California, hereinafter called “DISTRICT”, and CR&R, Environmental Services. A California corporation hereinafter called “CONTRACTOR” for Trash Collection, Hauling, Special Service, Support of DISTRICT programs and recycling services. Service Description: CONTRACTOR furnishes all labor, material and equipment necessary for the collection of all solid waste as hereinafter defined from single family dwellings and multi-family dwellings using curbside service within the boundaries of the DISTRICT except certain residences in the geographical limits of the City of Newport Beach, as said boundaries now exist or may hereinafter exist and the disposal of such solid. CONTRACTOR provides containers for all single-family and small multi-family residents utilizing curbside collection inside the DISTRICT . CONTRACTOR provides transfer station services for the acceptance of Solid Waste from DISTRICT for the purpose of recovery and reclamation of recyclable materials and the transfer of un- recyclable residue to Orange County landfill sites or otherwise as the DISTRICT may direct. Name of Contractor Address of Contractor CR&R, Environmental Services________ 11292 Western Avenue______________ __________________________________ Stanton, CA 90680_________________ __________________________________ 714-826-9049______________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ Evaluation Term: July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015 Attachment 1 PART I - EVALUATION OF CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE The contractor should be evaluated using the following ratings: E = Excellent: Contractor exceeded the requirements. Explain how. S = Satisfactory: Contractor met the requirements. If the contractor had difficulty meeting the requirements, explain why. U = Unsatisfactory: Contractor did not meet all of the requirements. Explain all noncompliance’s or unsatisfactory performance, and whether and how the contractor was at fault, where applicable. N/A = Not Applicable. EXPECTATION = DISTRICT’S expected corrective action or recommendation or notice for continued Excellent performance. Attachment 1 1. Cost/Price Control (Para 2, 11 and Exhibit “A”). Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Trash Revenue Accounting (Para 28, 34) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Most Favorable Net to Hauler Rate (Para 31) Rating: E__ __ S_ U____ N/A____. Consider: Did the contractor complete the contract within the contract amount or did the contractor experience cost growth? Were unnecessary cost/price change proposals submitted? Comments: Per the Second Amendment to the Agreement, “the District’s goal is to maintain net-to-hauler rates that do not exceed ten percent (10%) of the County average (less the AD project costing or other special charges making the rate comparison inequitable) during the term of this Agreement. District net-to-hauler rates shall be calculated each calendar year by taking the total compensation paid to Contractor and dividing it by the total number of units serviced (excluding the Organics Recycling Program charges)…” We found CR&R to be in compliance. CR&R’s $17.24 net-to-hauler compensation for the audit period is $0.35 per unit less than the maximum level allowed. Therefore they are in compliance. 2. Schedule Control (Para 7, 8, 9, 10). Rating: E____ S_ U____ N/A____. Consider: Did the contractor meet the original performance schedule for route collections? Did the reported number of missed collections exceed three per month? Comments: There were a few times when CMSD received more than three missed pick- ups calls per month. Below are reasons for missed pick-ups: 1. Driver error 2. Carts not placed at curbside by 6:30AM 3. Carts blocked by vehicles or placed too close to an obstruction (i.e., trees, buildings, mailboxes, fire hydrants, etc.) 3. Contract Administration (Para 11 C). Rating: E__ __ S_ U____ N/A____. Consider: Did the contractor respond to Government correspondence in a timely manner? Were contract modifications promptly executed? Were weight tickets submitted on time to validate invoicing? Did contractor submit the occupancy report within the first three days of the month (Para 4, 17)? Were invoices submitted correctly? Were contract discrepancies/problems reported promptly?   Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Corporate Structure Changes Communicated (Articles, Bylaws, stock register/ownership, Statements) (Para 5) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Timely Weight Ticket Submittals (Para 16) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Contractor shall record and provide a log of complaints on a monthly basis (Para 22) Attachment 1 Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Information Cards (Para 25) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Transfer Station and/or AD Service (Para 27) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Annual Facility Tours Provided (Para 32A) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Annual Seminar Conducted (Para 32B) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Biennial Brochure Mail out (Para 32C) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Est. $10,000 Public Edu. Fund (Para 32D) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Provided $500 Recycling Cash Donation (Para 32E) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Annual $10,000.00 Cash or Services (Para 32F) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Full Expenditure by end of FY (Para 32I) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Annual Audited Financial Statements Provided with Audit Trails and All Recycled Materials Revenue (Para 34) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: $5,000 Anti-Scavenging Provided (Para 36) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Master Manifest Availability (Para 37) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Master Manifest Delivered Upon Request (Para 37) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Tonnage Documentation by Truck Identification Number, Route and Date Electronically on the First Day of Each Month (Para 37) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Master Manifest Completeness (Para 37) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Annual Performance Review Participation (Para 40) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: DISTRICT Indemnification/Defense/Hold Harmless (Para 42) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: $50,000 Performance Bond Maintained (Para 44) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: $5,000,000 Public Liability Policy (Para 45) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Worker’s Compensation Insurance Maintained (Para 46) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Federal, State and Local Law Compliance (Para 47) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Appropriate Licenses and Permits Maintained (Para 48) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Employment/ Non-Discrimination (Para 49) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Drug Awareness Program Established and Maintained (Para 50) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: 40% or Greater Stock Assignment (Para 51) Comments: CR&R provided three facility tours and did a great job. They also attended several Town Hall meetings regarding our new Organics Recycling Program. CR&R also attended the OCC Recycling Day on April 15, 2015. In regards to the biennial brochure, CMSD and CR&R decided to postpone mailing the brochure since we were revising it to include the Organics Recycling Program. The new brochure will be ready by January 2016. Therefore, we still gave them a “Satisfactory” rating since they were ready to mail out the old version. Attachment 1 To our knowledge, CR&R did not hire an independent Certified Public Accountant to render an opinion about their financial statements. However, we reviewed the CMSD Master Manifest document prepared by CR&R and established its accuracy by a review of the tons in the various waste categories. All reconciled to facility totals provided therein. Therefore, CR&R is found to be accurate and in compliance. In total CR&R’s diversion rate reporting is very accurate and deemed to be in compliance. 4. Responsiveness to Government. Rating: E____S_ U____N/A____. Consider: Were complaints from the District resolved in a reasonable and cooperative manner? Were telephone calls responded promptly? Were controversial issues resolved amicably? Was the contractor reasonable and responsive to the District’s needs? Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Public Outreach (Para 25, 32) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Special Programs- Battery Recycling Program (Para 15W) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Christmas Tree Collection (Para 15B) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Holiday Collections (Para 10) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Special/Humanitarian Requests (Para 15C) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Residue/Flow Control (Para 29) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Site Access to DISTRICT (Para 38) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Plant Tours On Request (Para 39) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: DISTRICT Audit Rights Honored(Para41) Comments: CR&R did an excellent job with public outreach. CR&R provided three tours of their recycling plant. They also provided one tour to their AD facility in Perris, CA. They attended and presented at several different Town Hall Meeting regarding the new Organics Recycling Program. Hundreds of CMSD residents attended and CR&R helped answer questions. Keep up the great work! CR&R also collected 278 tons of large items within CMSD boundaries. In addition, CR&R will continue to produce “green cards” free of charge to the District. The green cards are cart hangers that are left at a residence to explain why a cart was not serviced. Below are the reasons green cards are placed on carts:  Construction materials in carts  Hazardous materials or liquids in carts  Overfilled trash carts – all trash must fit inside the cart with the lid closed.  Large items placed inside the carts – CMSD residents can call (949) 646-4617 to schedule a large item pick-up 5. Contract Compliance with Operational Requirements. Rating: E__ __S____U____N/A____. Consider: Were all of the contract requirements met? Were problems resolved? Are the delivered items or services used for the purpose intended? Specifically rate the following operational subcategories: Attachment 1 Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Overall Quality of Service: Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Prompt Weekly Collection (Para 7) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Contractor Equipment/Identification List/Environmentally Friendly Fuel Program (Para 12) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Vehicle Waste Leak Prevention (Para 12) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Vehicle Waste Leak Clean-Up (Para 12) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Accumulated Trash Reported (Para 14) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Vehicle Cleanliness (Para 12) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Quarterly Signage Rotation (Para 12) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Customer Satisfaction is Number 1 (Paras 20, 22, 36) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Customer Change out Requests Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Accuracy, Thoroughness and Timeliness Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Adherence to Approved Schedules (Paras 7, 8, 9, 10) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Resolution of Delays (Para 10) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Notice of Labor Disputes/Resolutions (Para 10D) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Provide and Maintain the Containers (Para 11B) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: 8AM-5PM Office Hours (Para 21) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: After Hours Voice-mail/Replies (Para 21) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Monthly Complaint Log Delivery (Reports, Complaints and Pleadings) (Para22) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: AB939 Compliance (Para 27) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: AB939 Education Program Provided (Para 32, 6) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Controllable Waste Delivered to MRF (Para 28) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Waste Diversion (Para 30) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Residue Sent to Designated Disposal Facility (Para 28) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: 50% Diversion Rate Met (Para 30) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Maintained Graffiti-Free Containers (Para 36) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Master Manifest (Para 37) Comments: CR&R responded to two hydraulic leaks between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2015. Once notified, they promptly dispatched crews to power wash and clean up the spills. The spill that occurred on May 7, 2015, was not caused by a CR&R truck, but CR&R decided to clean it anyway in support of good customer service. CR&R purchased a new product on the market to remove hydraulic stains but the product was ineffective. The District would like to see CR&R continue to take initiatives. CR&R’s overall quality of service and commitment to the District is excellent. However, there were a few times when the District received more than three missed pick-ups calls per month. Below are possible reasons for missed pick-ups: Attachment 1 1. Driver error 2. Carts not placed at curbside by 6:30AM the day of collection 3. Carts blocked by vehicles or placed too close to an obstruction (i.e., trees, buildings, mailboxes, fire hydrants, etc.) 6. Key Personnel (Paras 5, 24). Rating: E____S_ __U____N/A____. Consider: Did the personnel have the knowledge and expertise necessary to perform the operational and management requirements? Were changes in key personnel made? How often were they made? Rating: E: S: U: N/A: District Approved Ops Mgr. (Para 20) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Liaison/Interfaces Appointed (Para 24, 54) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Driver Conduct/Uniforms (Para 26) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Evidence of Driver Scavenging (Para 26) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Driver Solicitation of Gratuities (Para 26) Rating: E: S: U: N/A: Employee Handbook (Para 26) Comments: None noted. 7. Recommendation: Would you recommend this contractor for future contracts? Yes_ __No___. If no, please fully explain. Name of Evaluator: Javier Ochiqui Phone Number: (949) 645-8400 ext. 222 Title of Evaluator: Senior Management Analyst Signature: __________ Date: 11/5/15 PART II -EVALUATION OF CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE CONTRACTOR’S Review. I have reviewed the performance evaluation of CR&R under the July 20, 2006 Agreement and Amendments. I do concur__ __ I do NOT concur____ with it. The attached comments consisting of ___ number of pages are returned herewith for review by an individual at a level above the contract management officer responsible for this contract. Name of Authorized Reviewer:_______________Phone Number:_______________ Title of Reviewer:_________________________________________________________ Attachment 1 Signature:___________________________Date:____________________________ PART III-EVALUATION OF CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE DISTRICT Review of CONTRACTOR’S Comments. I have considered the comments submitted on the performance evaluation of CR&R under the July 20, 2006 Agreement and Amendments. The attachment to this form, consisting of ____ number of pages, is my final decision on this evaluation. Name of Reviewer:________________Phone Number:_______________ Title of Reviewer:________________________________________ Signature:_________________________________Date:______________________ Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Costa Mesa Sanitary District ... an Independent Special District Closed Circuit Televising (CCTV) District Wastewater System Item Number:7. Recommendation/Notes: Recommendation: That the Board of Directors provide direction to staff. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Closed Circuit Televising (CCTV) District Wastewater System Cover Memo Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services.  www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Scott Carroll, General Manager Date: November 10, 2015 Subject: Closed Circuit Televising (CCTV) District Wastewater System Summary The last time the District CCTV its entire wastewater system was in 2006-09. 2016 will be ten years since a portion of the system was CCTV, so it’s time to CCTV the system again to evaluate the condition of said system and start planning for improvements. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors provide direction to staff. Analysis Televising and recording the current condition of a wastewater system ensures service reliability to the public, assists meeting life cycle projections, and identifies immediate improvements. For instance, the 2006-09 CCTV identified 255 Grade 5 (eminent failure) sewer sections. Armed with this information, the District completed rehabilitating all 255 sections within three years and cost the District over one million dollars to complete. The 2006-09 CCTV also identified 1,600 Grade 4 sections. The next CCTV project will identify how many Grade 4s are now Grade 5s and then staff can create an action plan for the Board to consider. A Request for Proposal (RFP) has been prepared in which the entire system will be CCTV in three years (2016-19). However, staff believes the cost per year will be substantially more than the budget amount. In the FY 2015-16 Budget is $70,000 for this service.   Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 2 of 3 Recently, the City of Newport Beach received proposals for CCTV services in which the City received a very good proposal from a private vendor at a cost of $0.288 per foot. CMSD has 1,158,432 feet of gravity sewer mains, so preliminary costs for CMSD would be $111,209 a year, but Newport Beach’s CCTV program is for five years, which helps the low cost because the program is spread out longer. Staff believes a three year program will result in a higher cost per foot. To keep costs low CMSD could implement a five year program like Newport Beach, but staff, including the District Engineer, does not recommend a CCTV program longer than three years because the risk to system failure increases substantially and a five year program might not be viewed favorably by state regulators. Finally, one of the performance goals the Board assigned me is to “CCTV the entire sewer system”. Due to a late start on this program and based on staff findings to CCTV the entire system in three years this goal will not be met. Therefore, I am recommending making this goal a two year goal where the goal is to begin the CCTV Program before June 30, 2016. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with Strategic Element 1.0., Sewer Infrastructure, and Strategic Goal No. 1.5, Sewer Line Cleaning & CCTV Program. Legal Review Not applicable at this time. District Counsel will review and approve a contract with the recommended vendor. Environmental Review The proposed CCTV project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq.) under Section 15309 Inspections as a “Class 9” activity described as: Class 9 consists of activities limited entirely to inspections, to check for performance of an operation, or quality, health, or safety of a project, including related activities such as inspection for possible mislabeling, misrepresentation, or adulteration of products. Financial Review There is $70,000 in FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17 Budgets, but staff believe the budget amounts will be insufficient and the Board will have to approve appropriating additional funds when a proposed contract is presented. How much more is needed for appropriation is not known at this time until proposals are received, analyzed and recommended for approval. Public Notice Process Board of Directors November 10, 2015 Page 3 of 3   Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the November 10, 2015 study session meeting at District headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Direct staff to implement a five year CCTV Program. 2. Do not approve amending the General Manager’s performance goal. Reviewed by: Wendy Davis Finance Manager