Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 07/19/19851-1 MINUTES Water Board July 19, 1985 Members Present Norm Evans, Chairman, Henry Caulfield, Jim O'Brien, Neil Grigg, Mary Lou Smith, (alt.) Vice -Chairman, Bill Elliott, Tom Moore, Tom Sanders, Dave Stewart, John Scott Staff Present Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Curt Miller, Andy Pineda, Linda Burger, Webb Jones, Ben Alexander, Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney Guests Larry Simpson, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Doug Bigge, West Fort Collins Water District Members Absent Morton Bittinyer, Stanley Ponce (alt.) Minutes The minutes of May 16, 1985 were approved. Videotape Mike Smith explained that the videotape was produced by the City to provide information about the Plant No. 1 relocation project. Both 1/2" and 3/4" tapes are available for any interested groups. There were some questions and comments from Board members about particular parts of the tape. The Board was impressed with the quality of the production. Water Production Summary Norm Evans noticed from the Summary report that we are running just above the projected levels of treated water delivery. Dennis Bode confirmed that the City's water use has been high due to the record heat. A number of those days we have been above our previous peak use. At this point, however, there is no cause for concern. Jim O'Brien commented that we spend so much money treating water when only a small percentage of it is used for drinking. Are we looking into any ideas for dual water systems? Mr. Smith responded that we are trying to encourage developers to look at dual systems for irrigation vs. inside use. Dave Stewart is working with Everett on one possible site on Oak Ridge. The Water Utility is also trying to encourage the planners of a new City park to implement this concept. Amendment to West Fort Collins District Agreement See Attached. Review: Colorado Water Quality Control Commission Activities Linda Burger, a member of the Water Quality Control Commission told about some of the major occurrences in the Commission within the past few months. The major event since the last time she visited the Water Board was that an amendment to the State Water Quality Control Act was passed. This will make some major differences in how the water quality program operates. The Commissions' activities for probably the next two years will be strongly oriented towards bringing regulations in compliance with the new state law which is now in compliance with the federal law. The only problem Ms. Burger sees is if there are too many changes in the federal law which is currently undergoing revisions. There were a number of fairly important changes. One that didn't get a lot of press, but may affect the City somehwat, is that there were changes in the way 4U4 dredge and fill permits through the Corps of Engineers are certified by the state. There are three different kinds of 404 permits. In the past, the state has applied conditions to all of those permits before the Corps could issue them. The state law now prevents the state from putting any conditions on the general or nationwide permit; and it requires the Commission to pass regulations before any conditions can be applied to the individual permit. The Commission quickly adopted some emergency regulations to allow the summer construction season to go ahead. Those will be up for final adoption at the August meeting. Probably the more widespread action that is going on has to do with reviewing all the regulations and changing two aspects of that: 1) bringing regulations in compliance with Senate Bill 83. 2) The Commission established, a few months ago, a task force to review the basic regulations governing water quality standards. Part of the reason for that was the ammonia issue and the difficulty that is being encountered statewide in applying ammonia permit limits based on the standards. The standards were adopted originally under the assumption that on a class 2 warm water stream, secondary treatment would be adequate to protect the use. The Commission found itself faced with nearly 7U municipal systems that were going to be forced to go beyond secondary based on the current standards. The assumption that secondary treatment would do it didn't turn out to be true. Given that difficulty and all the costs involved in all those facilities having to go beyond secondary treatment, the Commission appointed a task force to review the ammonia issue and various metals issues, primarily -- also the low flow requirements that all the standards were based on. That task force is expected to have its recommendations ready for the Commission towards the end of the year. At that point they will go into a massive changing of regulations. It is hoped that they can work out the quirks in the basic regulations and deal with any other issues which have been given a lot of exposure in the press like economic reasonableness and how that is applied. The other major activity that the Commission is involved in is the long term ground water protection program. They have a draft of basic regulations for ground water protection that has been developed and will go to hearing in November of this year. Dave Stewart asked how the Oil & Gas Commission and the Water Quality Control Commission are working out the brine problem. Ms. Burger said that it has been resolved for the time being. As far as regulating brine, that is primarily Oil & Gas Comm. responsibility. However, the Commission developed a 2 list of recommendations of things that should be included in the U & G Co. regulations to assure the WQCC that water quality was being protected. The U&G Comm. has new staff which allows them to go out and monitor. They do have regulations adopted now. Dave Stewart also asked if the Division of Wildlife is proposing classification changes for reservoirs such as Chatfield and Cherry Creek from flood control to recreational. Yes, the Commission reclassified those two for phosphorous standards. Are the other Front Range reservoirs destined for this change? The only recommendations for this area that Ms. Burger could recall were for Spring Creek and Sheldon Lake. At this point Fossil Creek Reservoir wasn't mentioned, but it could be a possibility in the future. Norm Evans inquired about the status of irrigation storage reservoirs owned by irrigation companies. Are these considered waters of the state and therefore subject? The latest directive the Commission has had from EPA is that things like access cannot be considered in setting standards or the original designation of the reservoir. The Commission hasn't come to terms with that yet on the state level. There are many agricultural impoundments which vary a lot. Some have access for fishing, recreation etc. -- others are totally closed off. According to EPA it really doesn't matter whether there is access. The responsibility is to protect the water quality in case it is used or so it could be used. Ms. Burger emphasized the incredible amount of time and energy that has gone into preventing our state program from being taken back by the Federal Government. She considers what the Commission accomplished to be noteworthy. The task now is to try to make it all work, she added. Review of Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Activities Larry Simpson, Manager of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District talked about some of the areas that affect Fort Collins. The District has commissioned a rate study to look at two areas: The general rate structure - trying to evaluate their present methods vs. "the state of the art". The second area is a review of the operating agreements. The entire structure of the operating agreements needs to be reevaluated to determine whether any of the changes were necessary or if they were high or low. That study is rapidly nearing completion. Upon completion, the District will be asking to renegotiate all of those operating agreerents with the entities involved. The agreements were originally established to collect costs based on a formula which involved the overall operating cost of both the District and the Bureau of Reclamation divided by the number of acre feet of water run through the Adams tunnel each year. This creates a tremendous problem of fluctuation, because in a wet year, they bring half the water through that they do during a dry year. Based on that formula, the operating agreement charges or special district service charges fluctuate dramatically. They hope to come up with an agreement that will be more favorable to the water users. The major rate study will follow. Neil Grigg asked about the firm doing the study. Mr. Simpson assured the Board that Brown Bortz & Coddington was a very well respected, thorough and competent company. They hope to have the Operations Management agreement completed by the first of the year so that the Board can take action and begin the renegotiating. That process should take an additional 6-7 months. The Rate Study is expected to be completed within a year. 3 The other area that will involve the City at some point are the negotiations with U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to accept the operation and maintenance of the entire west slope system. Over the next year and a half, they will be negotiating for various bits and pieces of the East Slope system depending on which ones are directly related to power or to water distribution. This amounts to the eventual take-over of Carter, Horsetooth and all the systems downstream of that. This will allow the District to eliminate a number of redundancies between their staff and the Bureau. It will also eliminate a large block of overhead costs that are now carried for the Washington office and the regional office of BOR. It is hoped that this will result in the reduction of the District's overall 0 & M costs. This will also give them more flexibility to integrate the Windy Gap project into the CBT operations. The west slope process is moving fairly rapidly. Mr. Simpson anticipates that the transfer process will be accomplished within a year. Neil Grigg asked if the Bureau will retain all the power facilities to operate. Mr. Simpson responded that they are contemplating retaining all the power. Henry Caulfield asked if it would be the Bureau doing that or Western Power. Mr. Simpson said it would still be the Bureau. Mr. Caulfield: "So you'll still have three parties to deal with." Mr. Simpson: "I don't know at what point that is negotiable. At this point, the Bureau has consolidated the Frying Pan -Arkansas operations into the Loveland office so that they will have all the power systems in both in one office along with the North Platte System. There is undoubtedly some redundancy there." Eventually it would be an advantage to have one entity dealing with the power. On the water side, consolidation can achieve some significant economic advantages. Mr. Caulfield asked if that will change who will contract with Larimer County for recreational operation of Horsetooth for example? In all probability it will. The ownership of the property will still be the U.S. Government. Now anything contracted has to be a three-way contract anyway. The U.S. either administers the contract if they retain jurisdiction or the District administers the contract if they retain jurisdiction. The negotiations to answer Mr. Caulfield's question will be between Larimer County Recreation and the District. The District has developed a fairly sizeable computer capacity initiated because of Windy Gap and the District's other activities. Consequently, they are working to develop a water resources data base which will be accessible to all qualified entities. It is hoped that -this will result in making this information available to all water uses who might not otherwise have access to it. The cost of installing the data collection platform at the source will be up to the entity. The District, with very little cost, if any, will be able to provide information through their own link. Tom Moore asked how much a platform costs. It depends on what is being collected. A complete weather station measuring solar radiation, wind speed, temperature, rainfall, etc., runs approximately $1700-1800. The snow pillows and sensor equipment run about $3000. The District began installing those in some key locations. Currently, the Soil Conservation Service has been zero budgeted for next year which probably means that the District will be taking over the entire snow measurement program. The District is working with the various water resources in the St. Vrain Basin, the Cache La Poudre Basin, and the South Platte Basin on major planning 4 studies. The St. Vrain study is nearing completion. The Cache La Poudre Study is in the beginning stages of data gathering. The study is planned for a 14 month period. It is an analysis of present and future needs within the basin and the present systems and what will be required to provide for those needs in the future, looking at every option available. Henry Caulfield asked if the finished study on the St. Vrain is available. A copy could be sent to Mike Smith who would make it available to anyone interested. The South Platte Basin Study is one that has been requested of Water & Power Resources Authority. That will, it is hoped, bring the Cache La Poudre, the St. Vrain and all of the other studies compiled about the South Platte through the years, together into a cooperative management plan that can be used in the South Platte Basin. It will evaluate basically regulatory storage below Greeley and in the Sterling area, maximizing the use of the ground water system and ground water recharge systems; also the problem with diversion structures in the river below Greeley. The District is pursuing the Cache La Poudre Project study at the same time that the Poudre Basin study is being done. The District is attempting to develop some kind of storage system on the Poudre River. The present plan would involve nothing above Poudre Park. It would involve Grey Mountain Reservoir principally or a diversion structure into the Glade Reservoir which is proposed in the valley north of the Cramer Ranch. It would also involve a major pump storage component between the Cache La Poudre forebay and Grey Mountain. An FERC permit has been applied for in Washington which is now being processed. With normal procedures the permit would not be granted for another 8-10 months. This project should, therefore, fit into the results of the Poudre Basin Study and will be able to take advantage of the data generated from the study. There are a number of options to be looked at and at this point, the project is only conceptual. At the same time, the District has been negotiating with the environmental groups trying to achieve a meeting of the minds so that some form of Wild & Scenic designation on the Poudre can be accomplished. Henry Caulfield asked if the City's Sheep creek and Rockwell sites have been preserved. Sheep Creek is outside of the Wild & Scenic designated area. Rockwell would be preserved under the present concept. One of the concerns that halted the Wild & Scenic compromise agreement previously, was the protection of a reservoir site above a Wild & Scenic designated stretch from the requirement of making minimum flow releases down stream at the whim of the forest service. The present language does not provide that kind of protection for Rockwell. It is one that the National groups are very adamant about; they don't want to set a national precedent. The City should address this issue in their response. Possibly, if the Glade Reservoir would be developed, the need for Rockwell would disappear. Henry Caulfield asked if the City's water rights are being preserved. Mr. Simpson responded, definitely. He added that all current water rights will be preserved and all current exchanges; future projects, or future water rights or future conditional decrees will be subject to the Wild & Scenic reserve right. Essentially, creating a Wild & Scenic river establishes a federal reserve water right. Henry Caulfield clarified that the federal government establishes control by the use of a 404 permit, which involves obtaining an agreement through the forest service whereby they will specify what they want as a condition for getting the permit. 5 Mr. Simpson contends that since Northern Colorado has been planning ahead with regard to their water resources, they are, relatively speaking, one of the most water rich areas in the state. Consequently, attempts are being made by investors to get some of that water to the Denver area to alleviate their so called "tap gap." As for the Windy Gap Project and the Denver "tap gap", the District is negotiating with the metro providers and the Denver Water Board trying to figure out some way that Windy Gap water, over the next 15 years, could be leased on an interim basis to help solve the "tap gap". The exchange and physical delivery systems are there to make it happen; the political systems are not. The Denver Water Board has plenty of water for their needs and thus, they have no interest in a temporary solution to the "tap gap". They would prefer a permanent solution with the construction of Two Forks. Henry Caulfield added that in order to provide Windy Gap for the "tap gap" commitments, there would have to be a state statute to ammend the boundary. Mr. Simpson said that is right and the District is not comfortable with doing that either. They really don't want to "open it up" because a lot of people below the District boundaries would like to get into the Big Thompson water. Norm Evans brought up the question of the City's annexation to the Sub - District at this point. Mr. Simpson said he had originally given Paul Eckman some information which he thought was his Board's position as far as inclusion of all the City of Fort Collins. However, the present policy remains unchanged. Any entity that makes first use of Windy Gap water shall have all of its annexed boundaries within the boundaries of the municipal Sub -District. Therefore, all of Fort Collins is required to be in the boundaries because the City makes first use of Windy Gap water through the agreement with PRPA. Paul Eckman gave some background about what has occurred so far with this question - the first occasion being about a year ago. The initial problem was that the City was concerned that once the entire City was in the boundaries, they would be subject to a mill levy. It was found later that that possibility was extremely remote. The Water Board still asked for further information from the District before they would make a recommendation to the Council. Mr. Eckman suggested that since Larry Simpson was here from the District, this would be an excellent opportunity to question him and perhaps make a recommendation to the Council at this time. Mr. Simpson emphasized that he doubted that a mill levy would ever be enacted in the Sub -District without a vote of the people. Henry Caulfield contends that the Water Board's problem is the idea that Fort Collins is paying for something without using the water. Water we are using belongs to PPRA, although we are getting first use. Mr. Simpson related that as the District Board deliberated the question, the possibility of setting a precedent presented a real concern. Another question that has been raised recently is that PRPA is becoming somewhat disenchanted with using the City's treated sewage effluent and the possibility exists that they may want to use river water. In the event that this would happen, the City's situation with regard to Windy Gap would change. Paul Eckman stressed that PRPA has an obligation to perform under that contract whether they want our water or not. Mr. Caulfield said he is talking about if we changed the contract. Norm Evans 11 explained that the City's concerns can be traced historically. Initially, in the Windy Gap project before there was a Sub -District, there was a strong determination of the Six City Committee that the Cities would finance their individual parts of it in their our ways, and that there would not be a taxing mechanism. Dave Stewart, after considerable discussion, moved that the City proceed with the necessary action for inclusion into the Sub -District. Tom Moore seconded the motion. Henry Caulfield asked that the question be postponed in the light of our relationship with the Power Authority. If we are going to go along with first use, he thinks we need to reexamine the right of refusal agreement with PRPA for future Windy Gap water. Jim O'Brian concurred. After futher discussion, Neil Grigg moved to table the item. Tom Sanders provided a second. The vote was unanimous to table. Tom Moore suggested that staff produce a memo and cover letter that the Board could use as a basis for a vote at a future meeting. Tom Sanders asked Mr. Simpson what the status is on the restriction that the Bureau had placed on the Horsetooth storage level. Mr. Simpson received a letter from the Secretary of the Interior recently which reaffirmed their position that physical modification of the structure under the dam safety act where the U.S. pays for it, was not an appropriate expenditure of federal monies even though this is the only dam out of 100+ that they took this approach with. The money that had been initially budgeted for this purpose was diverted instead to the Arizona Salt River project. At this point they have left it open for negotiation for some way of solving the problem with appropriate cost sharing; in their eyes 50-50, which could be a substantial amount to the Northern District. However, it will be negotiated because 10,000 acre feet of water located at that point is too invaluable, particularly when we are trying to find another area to store water. It may take a few years to work out a proper cost sharing arrangement. Tom Sanders asked about the possibility of fighting this from a technical standpoint. Mr. Simpson said that the District has evaluated that approach and, frankly, there have been bigger agencies than the District opposing this concept. Currently, the state legislature is proposing a study to oppose this action. Mr. Simpson has met with a rep. from the Corps of Engineers and the under-secretary of the Interior for Land & Water. They both have agreed to cooperate in that kind of a study. The Soil Conservation Service won't cooperate. The impact statewide will be much worse than just Horsetooth. Philosophically, if we go against the U.S. technically and win, have we really protected the citizens of Fort Collins? Consequently, the District is going to go ahead and fix the reservoir and participate actively to get the criteria changed in the process. This impacts everyone in the state. The cost will be approximately $4,000,000. There are two major problems. Spring and Dixon Canyon dams settled out two feet more than they were designed to. However, there are no structural problems with the facilities. The settling problem can be corrected with about $1-1/2 million which hopefully can be done in about 2 or 3 years. That would gain back about half of the 10,000 a.f. The other part where Horsetooth would have to be raised, would be a longer term situation. If we can spread the costs out so that there isn't a major impact on the water users, and the rates, we may be able to get it all done at once. Neil Grigg said there was visiting with the draft pmp figures that 24" to 33". is another aspect to this in the long range. Mr. Grigg state climatologist and he related that he had seen some raise the pmp so much that it is alarming; i.e. from 7 Henry Caulfield confirmed that this had emerged two weeks ago at the natural hazards conference in Boulder. Larry Simpson added that the higher figure is the one that was used to make the determination for Horsetooth. That is what upset the District so much because that was the first time they had seen that figure. Mr. Simpson does not know how far the State legislature is willing to go to fight the battle. Given the fact that dam insurance is almost impossible to obtain, the Water Congress has been working with insurance brokers all the way to Lloyds of London to try to prepare an insurance package for dam liability that can be offered state wide. The whole process is almost ready to collapse; the insurance market just won't touch it. If nothing happens within the next 2 months, the state is going to have to decide what to do about all those dams with no insurance. Henry Caulfield asked if the Legislature had changed the rules with respect to appointments to the District Board. They changed the rule to the degree that 60 days prior to an appointment there is an advertisement required and the judges are bound to receive all resumes of people interested up to 30 days from the time of the appointment prior to the time that the appointment is made. There were also a number of administrative changes. Jim O'Brien asked if anyone in the District office had actually gone through the Bureau's calculations on the pmp figures for Horsetooth. Mr. Simpson answered that one of their employees has gone through the figures. He hasn't gone through the entire process, however. The District is planning to hire a qualified hydrologist to reevaluate the entire thing. Mr. Simpson added that the District questions strongly the manner in which the Bureau, in their preliminary design, proposed to modify the structure. There were other options they could have explored. Mr. O'Brien asked what kind of funding would the District be looking at. Mr. Simpson said they would have to dip deeply into 0 & M contingency funds that are available, plus possibly go out for a bond issue or borrowing if the U.S. won't finance it themselves. Other Business Tom of o—M re asked about the $80,000 expenditure for a Xeriscape demonstration garden. He asked if this has been approved. The staff verified that the Council had approved it. Tom Moore contends that instead of spending that money on our own garden, why not go to Denver to see theirs. Molly Nortier explained that this is not just a landscaping project. A demonstration garden incorporates various kinds of water saving plantings, mulches, meters for monitoring water use, signage, benches, brochures, education, etc. Dave Stewart added that people would not drive to Denver to see the garden there. Furthermore, the Denver Water Dept. is difficult to find. Mr. Stewart also contends that the $80,000 that we spend now could save us $800,000 ten years from now in treatment plant capacity and buying additional water. Henry Caulfield questioned seriously why this item was not brought to the Water Board, nor referred to the appropriate committee of the Board, when the City Water Utility is committed to paying 85% of the cost of the garden. He was not questioning the merit of the project, only that it was not referred to the Board. A Some members of the Board wanted to make it known that they were somewhat disconcerted by the process that was used in this matter and object to the expenditure of $80,00 without the review of the Water Board. Dr. Evans will pass this concern to Gerry Horak who remains the Council liaison with the Board. MaryLou Smith added that some members are concerned but it should be noted that there are some who are not. Tom Sanders asked about the purchase of Big Thompson water. Mike Smith responded that 200 units have been purchased for $750 per unit. Dr. Evans asked Mr. Simpson about his Board's concern regarding the A-B acquisition of water and its transfer to the City, etc. Mr. Simpson said the acquisition has just been taken care of. There is still the question of an industrial rate for the brewery, and when they transfer the water to the City of Fort Collins what it will do to the rate. This is one of the things that is being evaluated in the rate study, as to whether major industrial users of that type shouldn't be charged an industrial rate even though they are served by the City. Dave Stewart asked why the A-B master agreement was tabled by the Council. Mike Smith exlained that the Council didn't have the information from the attorney's office in time. Jim O'Brien asked how the staff was coming with the conservation study report. The rough draft was presented to Mike Smith and Bill Carnahan a few days ago. Possibly by the next meeting, staff will provide something for the Board to look at. Larry Simpson expressed his regret that The Coloradoan no longer prints the ET rates for crops - the only newspaper in the district that doesn't. The staff said that, after four years, the newspaper decided not to print the City's lawn watering guide or cartoons this year. Jim O'Brien added that the stream flow is no longer there either. Mike Smith announced that the Council wants to have a joint meeting with the Water Board either the first or second week of August to discuss the drought study. The final reports should be finished soon. The reports will be distributed to Board members prior to the meeting to allow enough time for thorough review. Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:21 p.m. Water board ecretary E WATER BOARD MINUTES July 19, 1965 Amendment To West Fort Collins Water District Agreement Mike Smith explained that the three proposed changes to the agreement came about through discussions with the District on providing service to those City customers who will be without service when the Water Treatment Plant is relocated. He stated that they decided to make some revisions to the agreement that would benefit both parties. The proposed changes and additions are as follows: 1. Increase the amount of water the City treats for the District to a peak capacity of 2.5 million gallons per day or 50,000,000 gallons per month. In the past, the agreement specified number of taps allowed, but not sizes. By limiting the number of gallons of water treated, the agreement is tied more closely to actual physical capacity. The cost of the additional treated water is built into the District's rates. 2. Change the notice of cancellation of the agreement from 3 years to 5 years. This would give both parties adequate time to make other arrangements if one party decided to cancel the agreement. 3. The District agrees to serve those City customers located north of the Bellvue area who will be disconnected as a result of the water treatment relocation project. Norm Evans asked if the change for the customers would make any difference in the cost to them. Mike Smith replied that the City would pay the District's standard hook-up fee to connect them to the District's lines. The City's outside City rates and the District's rates are only pennies apart, so the customers will see very little change in their monthly bills. Henry Caulfield asked if the City will have to provide wells to some customers. Mike Smith replied that 5 or 6 customers in the canyon will be provided domestic wells when the water treatment plant is abandoned. Tom Sanders asked what would be the negative impact if the District didn't serve these customers. Doug Bigge, with the West Fort Collins Water District, pointed out that it would be a substantial cost for the City if they had to run new water lines to these customers. Mike Smith agreed and further commented that the City and District were not in competition with each other. No significant negative impacts have been identified. Bill Elliott asked whether there was a need to mention the number of customers the City will have to pay hook-up charges for. Mike responded that the number of affected customers will not be pinpointed until the changeover occurs (summer of 1966). The approximate number is under 2U. Henry Caulfield asked whether these changes would clean up the City's and the District's service areas. Mike Smith confirmed that it would do this in the Bellvue area. Jim O'Brien asked that since the 2.5 million gallons per day is equivalent to 3000 taps, what would be the projected increase over what time period. Doug Bigge responded that the 2.5 million gallons per day is a peak figure and that the large lot sizes in the District should limit the pace of increased treated water demand, so this increase should suffice for approximately 10 years. Henry Caulfield made a motion, seconded by Bill Elliott, to recommend approval of the proposed changes and additions to the agreement with the City of Fort Collins and the West Fort Collins Water District. The motion was unanimously approved. CITY OF FORT COLLINS WATER UTILITIES M E M O R A N D U M DATE June 17, 1985 TO Water Board Members n� FROM Dennis A. Bode, Water Resources and Planning Manager r RE Water Board Meeting Dr. Norman Evans, Chairman of the Water Board, asked that I notify you that the meeting scheduled for June 21, 1985 has been cancelled. The next regular- meeting will. be held on July 19, 1985. WATER UTILITIES 700 Wood Street . P.O. Box 580 . Fort Collins. Colorado 80522 . (303) 221-6681 221-6685