HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 02/20/1976•
WATER. BOARD
Regular Meeting
February 20, 1976 - 3:30 P.M.
Present: Ward Fischer
Raymond Anderson
Bernard Cain, Jr.
Karl E. Carson
Henry Caulfield
Norman Evans
Everett Richardson
James Waltz
Robert L. Brunton
Absent: Ronald Fulkrod
Harvey Johnson
Staff members present: Cain, Hays, Hilgenberg, Jones, Kaplan, Krempel, Lewis
and Liquin
Also: City Attorney March
Minutes of Regular Meeting of
January 9, 1976, approved
Chairman Fischer inquired if there were any corrections to the minutes. Hearing
none, he declared the minutes approved as published.
Boards and Commissions Manual Items
Chairman Fischer stated that at the last meeting, it had been suggested that
several committees be appointed. One of the committees to be appointed is the
By-laws Committee. The Chair appointed Henry Caulfield as the Chairman and
Board members Karl Carson and Everett Richardson to serve on this committee
to prepare the by-laws of the Water Board for the Boards and Commissions Manual.
Chairman Fischer stated that the Board members should make suggestions to the
committee members. He suggested the by-laws be simple, and the committee should
consider not appointing an executive committee. Chairman Fischer had a question
on the Boards and Commissions Manual under the Selection and Composition Section,
which speaks of a nominating committee. He requested the by-laws committee
determine whether or not the City Council would like the Board to give them
recommendations on future members when vacancies occur, because in the past,
the Council had not requested input from the Board on this.
Chairman Fischer then appointed a Long Range Goals Committee to advise the Board
of subjects for discussion and consideration, so that the Board can always be
looking ahead and analyzing potential problems. This will be a permanent committee.
He appointed Norm Evans as Chairman and Board members Raymond Anderson and Ronald
Fulkrod to serve on the committee, with Chairman Fischer serving as an ex-officio
member.
Chairman Fischer advised the administration of a committee that was established
some time ago for the purpose of attempting to work with the administration and
the water and sewer districts to try to solve the long range proglem of utility
growth and management. He stated that it had been suggested that the Board
might make recommendations on this, but the Water Board will not amke any formal
recommendations without the committee's report to the Board as to what their
position ought to be. Chairman Fischer requested that Bernard Cain, as Chairman,
meet with the administration to determine in what areas they want the Board's
advise. The members of the committee are Bernard Cain, as Chairman, James Waltz,
and Everett Richardson.
Board member Caulfield requested for the purpose of the By-laws Committee, that
Mr. Krempel inform him of all the sub -committees of the Water Board.
Consideration of Alternatives for
Downstream Slope Protection, Joe Wright Dam
Mr. Krempel, Water Utilities Director, stated that the Water Board's comments
on the alternative types of downstream slope protection to be used on Joe Wright
Dam would be valuable to the staff in making a selection between slope molding,
top soil -seeding, and rock -cobble facing. Information on each, including cost
estimates, had previously been mailed to the Board. The staff of McCall -Ellingson
has proposed the rock -cobble facing, but some members of the Forest Service
staff felt the City should give more thought to other alternative treatments
to the face of the dam, which might possibly be more aesthetic.
Mr. Krempel then presented to the Board slides of drawings prepared by the Forest
Service, various dams most of which the Bureau of Reclamation had built, and
dams in the area, so as to show examples of rock facing and slope molding and
the way these different slope treatments look after a number of years. He
explained the slope molding was 40% soil and 60% stone. This treatment will
support vegetation, but could seriously increase the opportunity for errosion
and sedimentation in Joe Wright Creek. The slope molding treatment will cost
about $100,000. McCall -Ellingson say this will have to be fertilized and
maintained for possibly 15 to 17 years to get vegetation. Mr. Krempel asked
the Water Board members for their individual comments.
Board member Anderson stated that he felt the cost of the slope molding was
too high and the benefits were too low. He preferred the rock facing.
Board member Richardson stated that with the slope molding method, he is concerned
with top soil and fertilizer running off into the stream and with the danger of
trees growing, as the roots could cause leaks in the dam. He preferred the rock
facing as it could prevent errosion, and he has seen dams with rock facings that
are natural. He suggested that some trees could be planted in the road to screen
the dam from sight.
-2-
1J
Board member Evans stated if the contractor was given a free hand in the construction,
he might be able to achieve a slope molded surface that would still have the
ability to support vegetation, but with a rock facing that would have resistance
to errosive actions. He felt the slope molding was too expensive, and he preferred
the rock facing.
Chairman Fischer stated he preferred the rock facing as the slope molding method
would take tremendous time and effort and does have the errosion problems. He
felt the rock facing was just as aesthetically pleasing as the slope molding.
Board member Cain stated that the cost of the installation and maintenance of
slope molding is too high. He preferred a mixture of cobblestone and untreated
soil so as some natural vegetation will grow over the years.
Board member Caulfield inquired if the Bureau of Reclamation had any requirements
in the loan application in terms of landscaping. Mr. Krempel advised him that
to the best of his knowledge, neither the Bureau nor the Forest Service had any
standards regardings this. Mr. Caulfield stated that he felt an uneven surface
in which some degree of vegetation could grow, but without any steep areas that
will result in errosion would be the best method. He preferred more rock and
less soil with a minimum of errosion.
Board member Carson stated the rock facing was aesthetically pleasing to him.
He is opposed to spending $100,000 for the slope molding. He preferred the
rock facing with some soil so as natural growth can take place.
Board member Waltz stated the talus, the natural rock slopes which accumulates
at the base of cliffs, in that area is identical to the material that will be
used on the dam facing. He preferred the rock facing only, without any soils
that might help vegetation take root.
Mr. Krempel stated the Water Board's opinion was very helpful.
Report on Proposed Revised Sewer Ordinance,
Including Surcharges and Industrial Cost Recovery
Mr. Krempel, Water Utilities Director, stated that when the City received the
$6 million federal grant for the expansion of Sewer Treatment Plant No. 2, the
City had to make a commitment to adopt an industrial cost recovery ordinance
to cover the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972, P.L. 92-500, which states that portions of the grant which benefits
industrial users must be repayed to the federal government. The construction
of Plant No. 2 is almost 80% complete, and the City must adopt this ordinance
in order for the City to continue to receive funds from the government. The
Water Utility staff has been working on this ordinance for the last 6 months.
He further stated this ordinance will attempt to equalize the construction
costs of treating sewage between industries that are not located in a municipal
or sanitation district and industries that are. The industries that are not
located in a sanitation district have a great cost of treating their own sewage
to the federal standards. Industries that are in a sanitation district have
- 3-
the economical advantage of the federal government paying a large share of the
construction costs, and they will be required to pay their allocated portion
of the cost of the sewage plant that serves them.
The City must further adjust their rates, so that industries that discharge
more pollution in the form of BOD and suspended solids pay a higher proportion
of the cost of treating the sewage. One benefit of this ordinance is that it
will defer the time the City will have to increase the sewer rates of residential
service. Mr. Krempel then distributed copies of the proposed revised sewer
ordinance to the Water Board members. He stated this should be on the City
Council Agenda for introduction sometime in March.
Mr. Tom Hays, Water Utilities Engineer, then spoke to the revised sewer ordinance
saying it contains provisions EPA has required the City to consider and address,
and it addresses changes necessary to bring the ordinance up—to—date. He stated
the ordinance contains an extensive coverage of prohibited discharges that are
harmful to the sewer system and the treatment plant processes. It sets up a
system of user charges that will be proportionate to the amount of pollution
that a user contributes to the sewer system in compliance of federal regulations.
It classifies users according to the different types of discharges that they
contribute to the sewer system. The amount of surcharge for the users will
be dependent upon the pollutant strength they contribute and will be based
on the actual operational cost of the new sewer plant. There are provisions
for the monitoring of the discharges of various businesses and industries.
The major industries with discharges other than normal domestic sewage, are
charged the industrial cost recovery. This charge will be based on the proportional
amount of capacity that an industry is using of the total plant capacity and
will be that percentage of the federal share of the capital construction cost
of the plant. This will be prorated over a recovery period of 20 years.
Mr. Hays further stated that of the amount of money that is recovered from an
industry, 50% is returned to the federal government, 40% is reserved by the,
City for future sewer plant expansions, and 10% can be used for the City's
discretionary use. This ordinance will have an impact on the City, as it may
require additional testing and monitoring equipment and manpower. Also the
Finance Department will have to institute a new system of billing. This will
require careful monitoring of the accounting of funds, as the funds that are
recovered from industries are subject to auditing by the federal government.
Mr. Hays added that by adopting this ordinance, the City will not have to repay
the $6 million in federal funds to the government.
Report on "Utility Management Task Force"
Copies of the report "Fort Collins Utility Services and Growth Management" prepared
by Dr. Norman Wengert had previously been mailed to the Water Board members.
City Manager Brunton stated that recently there has been a series of task force
meetings to try to reach agreements with the various utilities on the problem
of utility growth and management. He stated that in about 4 to 6 weeks, they
will have some concrete recommendations as to changes in the utility extension
policy to discuss with the Water Board before taking these recommendations jointly
to the City Council in this whole area. Chairman Fischer reminded Mr. Brunton
—4—
the Water Board has a committee with Bernard Cain as Chairman, and he would like
the committee to work with the administration before anything is formally presented
to the Board in regards to the water and sewer districts, as he would like the
recommendations of that committee before the Water Board considers it.
Mr. Brunton stated he would like to set up a meeting with the sub -committee and
bring this to the Water Board as soon as possible.
Dr. Norm Evans then assumed the Chair.
Mr. Brunton stated that minutes of the task force meetings will be sent to the
sub -committee to bring them up -to -day. The members of the task force are:
Robert L. Brunton, City Manager
Susan Olsen Jones, Assistant to City Manager
Art March, Jr., City Attorney
Roy Bingman, Engineering Services Director
Charlie Cain, Finance Director
Stan Case, Electric Utility Director
Roger Krempel, Water and Sewer Utilities Director
Les Kaplan, Planning Director
Bill Holmes,,Land Acquisition Officer
Board member Caulfield stated that this issue relates to the Water Board and
also the study that has been undertaken by the Planning & Zoning Board. He
inquired as to how these will fit together in the future procedurally. City
Manager Brunton advised that the task force's recommendations on the goals and
objectives for growth management and the recommendations on the utility extension
policies will both be put into an overall comprehensive plan. He suggested
that there might be a joint meeting of the Water Board and the Task Force.
Mr. Krempel stated that if each section was studied one at a time, this would
be a never ending process, whereas with each section being studied at the same
time, this will be put together in a more reasonable period of time.
Status of Current Projects and Studies
Mr. Krempel, Water Utilities Director, stated that on the Spring Canyon Outlet,
the optimum size of 500 cfs will cost an estimated $8 million. By request, the
Bureau investigated whether this could be done under an 0 & M type of budget,
and it has been learned this cannot be done.
The final design of the waste discharge system at Water Treatment Plant No. 1
is proceeding and will be completed sometime this year. There is some modernizing
being done on that plant at the same time to help meet the new water standards.
The City did get a commitment for a grant of about 25% of the cost for this
project.
The construction for the 8 million gallons expansion at Water Treatment Plant
No. 2 has been bid, and the bids were very favorable. The equipment and materials,
worth $300,000, had been pre -bid and are on the way. This should be completed
by June 1976.
-5-
•
The construction on Sewer Treatment Plant No. 1 is about 71% complete. The
Labor Department ruled that the City must pay prevailing wages on this project.
This could cost the City about $55,000, although the City did receive a state
grant to cover 25% of that additional cost.
The construction on Sewer Treatment Plant No. 2 is almost 80% complete and
should be in service about September.
Joe Wright Reservoir Loan Application
Mr. Chuck Liquin, Water Project Engineer, stated that on the Joe Wright Reservoir
loan application, there had been a problem with the portion of the application
dealing with hydrology. The Bureau of Reclamation had felt that there was not
enough water to fill the reservoir. But in looking at the worst 20 years, from
1952 to 1971, there was more than substantial water to fill the reservoir with
the water content of the runoff area, and the Bureau is now satisfied. The
Regional Director will contact the Commissioner of the Bureau in Washington
to advise him of this project, and in turn Representative Jim Johnson will
be contacted. The application should be in Washington about March 15, and
should be on the floor of the House about the first of April. It will be taken
off the floor about the first of June when the Public Works hearings begin.
Mr. Krempel added that the City is working to complete the application so as
to have the Bureau of Reclamation Budget amended to add in this project on the
floor of the House of Representatives.
City Manager Brunton stated that the Highway Commission is cooperating on the
relocation of Highway 14. Board member Cain inquired whether it had been determined
as to who is responsible for this work. Mr. Brunton stated that the Highway
Commission recognizes it is their responsibility. Mr. Krempel stated if the
City is successful in being included in the 1977 budget, the work on the reservoir
will be done around the highway the first year; but if the project is in the
1978 budget, the work will be done concurrently at that location. The construction
of the reservoir will not be held up becuase of the highway work.
Other Business
1. Mr. Krempel stated that because of the cost of the Spring Canyon Outlet
and possible plant, the City is proceeding with a small engineering study
of the Soldier Canyon Outlet to determine the optimum capacity of that
outlet.
2. Mr. Krempel stated that he and Mr. Liquin attended the Colorado Water Congress
Conference. He distributed to the Water Board members copies of resolutions
that the Colorado Water Congress had adopted at their conference. He stated
there was a great amount of concern at the Congress about the point source
implementations of P.L. 92-500. Also the Fish and Wildlife Water Appropriations
were possibly being made to the detriment of the economy of the State of
Colorado.
Board member Caulfield stated the resolution on Section 208 Planning Activities
is strongly supported by the Larimer-Weld Council of Governments.
3. Board member Evans reported that the Water Quality Control Commission is
still in the process of reclassifying the Poudre River to a Class C to allow
exceptions for chlorine and ammonia removal. There has been a misunder-
standing that by establishing a "C" classification, this will allow for
the downgrading of the river. The misconceptions that have arisen on this
matter are being straightened out. There will be a public hearing possibly
next month, and he will notify the City of that hearing.
Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned.
Secretary
as
WATER BOARD
Subcommittees
Rate Committee - Non -active
Owen Moore, Chairman
Ward Fischer
Fred Feit
Sewage Committee - Non -active
Norm Evans, Chairman
Harvey Johnson
W. G. Wilkinson
Six City Committee - Non -active
Owen Moore
Norm Evans
Harvey Johnson
Utilities Committee - Active
Bernard Cain, Chairman
James Waltz
Everett Richardson
Engineering Committee
W. G. Wilkinson
Everett Richardson
Norm Evans
Legislative Committee - Active
Karl Carson, Chairman
Henry Caulfield
Norm Evans
By-laws Committee - Active
Henry Caulfield, Chairman
Karl Carson
Everett Richardson
Lone Ranee Goals Committee - Active
Norm Evans, Chairman
Raymond Anderson
Ronald Fulkrod
Ward Fischer - ex-officio member