Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 06/17/1988WATER BOARD MINUTES June 17, 1988 Members Present Norm Evans, President, Henry Caulfield, Vice President, Neil Grigg, MaryLou Smith, Tom Moore, Tom Sanders, Ray Herrmann, Dave Stewart, Jim Kuiken, (alt.) Staff Dennis Bode, Curt Miller, Tom Gallier, Kelley Gonazles, Molly Nortier, Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney Guests John Bigham, Agency Coordinator, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Members Absent John Scott, Chester Watson, (alt.) President Norm Evans opened the meeting. The following items were dis- cussed: Minutes The minutes of May 26, 1988 were approved as distributed. John Bigham announced that the Windy Gap pumping plant start up was June 1. They have been able to use at least three of the big pumps for a 12 hour period. Moisture in the snow shed on the west side has been quite low. When the runoff began, it came very fast. "We were losing about an inch of actual moisture from the snow pack per day," he said. As a result, they were not able to run the fourth pump. He said they probably will take the flows they were able to pump to court for firming up that decree. There will probably be about 8-10,000 AF of water to pump rather than the 6,600 AF which Mr. Bigham reported last month. They began at 12:01 the morning of June 1. Each time they start the pump "it's $11,000 just to push the start button," he emphasized. In order to eat up that demand charge, the District believes they might as well pump with the anticipation that there may be some dry weather ahead. "We'll pump a little more for the participants of the Windy Gap project, so there will be a little cushion of water above what was actually scheduled for next year, or to compensate for any unpredicted uses of water," he explained. Although it has been fairly warm and dry "we appear to be in good shape on the east slope." The District anticipates having Granby Reservoir at approximately 80% of active capacity. The east slope CBT units are close to being full. Water Board Minutes June 17, 1988 Page 2 Jim Kuiken had a question about the last Windy Gap minutes. The minutes stated that Mr. Zimbleman handed out an executive summary of a study the District and Subdistrict were undertaking regarding growth projections within the District and Subdistrict and the associated impact on the delivery system, including looking at the impacts if boundaries were extended. Another was on the South Platte Basin study. He asked for comments on both of those studies. Mr. Bigham replied that Bill Steele is conducting the study on supply and demands and the growth projections. He will be using the St. Vrain study, the South Platte study, the Loveland drought study, and the I-25 corridor study in trying to update those growth projections to determine what the demands are for the near future. It is hoped that by the end of the summer there will be results that will indicate "where we should go on that." Regarding the South Platte study, Mr. Zimbleman merely distributed the minutes of the meetings of the technical group, the steering committee and the coordinating group. The District's Eric Wilkerson is working on that 18 month study which is only in the beginning stages. Mr. Kuiken asked if it would be appropriate to ask Mr. Bigham to inform the Board on the progress of those studies, and perhaps provide some of the executive summaries if they are public. Mr. Bigham said he would do whatever he can to keep the Board informed. Chairman Evans thanked Mr. Bigham for coming regularly to Water Board meetings to report on NCWCD activities. Tom Gallier, Wastewater Division Manager, reported on the background o septage waste transfer agreement with Larimer County. That background information is attached in the form of an agenda item summary. Mr. Gallier showed some of the drawings of the proposed facility. He indicated on the first drawing where the facility will be located on the Waste -water Treatment Plant No. 1 site on East Mulberry. The facility will not discharge into Plant 1, however, but into a 42" intercepter sewer; basically a tie line between Plants 1 and 2. The advantage of that is there will be an adequate time period within the line as far as mixing and detention. If there is anything in the waste that might cause a plant upset, it at least will have a little time to break down and be diluted before it enters Plant 2. "That's been a concern all along because the commercial toilet waste generally contains a preservative to inhibit bacterial growth and this will give it a chance to break down and be diluted somewhat before it enters Plant 2," Mr. Gallier re-emphasized. The layout of the facility, designed by J.M. Montgomery, is coming along very well. Basically it looks like a garage type structure. There will be an overhead door on one end which will allow trucks to back in during all weather conditions, where they will discharge their loads through the bar screens into a tank; the bars are there to intercept large materials. 11 • Water Board Minutes June 17, 1988 Page 3 Samples will be pulled fr Once everything has been discharge out of the bac Gallier stressed that it be okay. k om the tank and tested in a small lab on site. approved, a valve will be opened that will of the tank into the interceptor sewer. Mr. will not be discharged until everything appears to Some samples will be tested on site, others, on a random basis, will be stored for further testing or composted so "we can determine what the actual organic load is coming out of the facility each day," Mr. Gallier explained. The facility will actually pay the sewer bill out of its budget to the wastewater plant based on the organic load it will be receiving. The building will have a small office in the front where the haulers can fill out their paper work. There will also be a small office for the supervisor who will handle the permits and paper work relating to billing and the on site inspection of the vehicles and off site investigation of any problems with the waste that comes in. The major thing is the laboratory where key elements can be tested as the waste comes in. Any sophisticated testing probably will be handled by an outside lab. Responding to a question about how the facility would look, Mr. Gallier assured the Board that the structural material of the facility will blend in with the existing buildings. There are two issues that need to be dealt with at this time; one pertains to money. The initial estimate for the project was $306,250. The City and County agreed up front, and even put wording into the contract stating this was a rough estimate and could change. "We were dealing in an unknown territory as far as what the facility would involve," Mr. Gallier admitted. Ultimately it looked as though the estimate was low even though some costs were cut. The final estimate was $332,000. That is a fairly firm estimate because, essentially, the design is nearly completed on the project. "Based on the construction bids we get, that estimate should be pretty close," he confirmed. This means a little over $26,000 in additional funds are needed from the County. The way the contract is structured, an additional amendment isn't needed. "We just need to notify the County that the extra money is needed. Their options are telling us to return their money because they are no longer interested in doing the project (which is highly unlikely), negotiating with us to see if there are areas where the costs can be reduced, or simply funding the increased dollars. " The City is prohibited from moving forward until it hears something from the County. "At this point the County has the documents in hand so the ball is in their court." The other issue is that initially the County was concerned that they would be funding the transfer station and if, for some reason, the City had to close it down, they would have spent all of that money, and the City would retain possession of the facility. "So we reached an agreement that if we, for whatever reason, should shut down the facility for six months or longer during the first year period of the contract, the County would have the right to repossess the real property, being the land itself and the physical structures on it. The City agreed to that because it didn't seem like a major issue." However, when it looked like it was going to have to be built on the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 1 site, "we discussed this with County staff and in house, and basically decided that we couldn't live with Water Board Minutes June 17, 1988 Page 4 that since it was property that the City already owned. The other reason is that the site isn't compatible for other uses. If the County took possession we couldn't see them taking over that property for some other satellite service facility." Therefore, the County agreed to remove those provisions of the agreement, if the City basically agreed to provide the property at no cost to the project. Both parties recognized that it would require an amendment to the agreement. The amendment appears in the contract included with Water Board packets. The only other changes in the amendment are structural related to timing. A requirement was included that, after the first year of operation, the City would have an audit done and if the audit showed that we had made a paper profit, we would return the profit for that year to the County. "We also do not intend to operate at a loss, so another part of the amendment states that the County is obligated to make good that loss." Mr. Gallier assured the Board that the City can adjust the rates or whatever is necessary, to make it a self -funding facility. Construction should take about 90 days once it is started. Assuming there are no major delays because of the County or Council approval, the best estimate for a completion date is mid -November. Mr. Gallier informed that Board that staff needs a recommendation from them on the amendments to bring to Council. He also wanted to discuss the issue of non -hazardous industrial waste which has been of concern to the Water Board and the City Council. Basically that is waste generated from off -site pretreatment facilities and small commercial operations, predominantly grease traps and sand and grit traps from car washes, etc. "We have been working with the County to try to resolve this problem," he said. It was determined that the best solution was adding a small operation to the transfer station to stabilize the material, and essentially dry it out and bind it up. The material that looks like it would work best for that is cement kiln dust which is a waste by-product of the Portland Cement industry. There is a track record for operating a facility like that in Denver, a company called Conservation Services. The problem is their fee is fairly large; if it is a liquid, it can range from 40 to 50 cents a gallon. That's okay for a big industry but not for a small operation. The City then spoke with representatives from the Ideal Cement Co. and "we were able to work out an informal agreement where they would sell us the kiln dust at a very favorable cost." It began to look like it could be workable until about three weeks ago. We could have worked out a disposal cost in the range of 8 to 15 cents a gallon which isn't cheap but it is cheaper than anyone else can do it, he said. "Then we hit a snag in the form of the State Health Department. It seems that people in the solid waste section have major concerns about this processed material being brought into a domestic landfill. After a couple of months of discussions with the State, the City found two examples of where this is being done with State Health Department approval; 2 small landfills use this process. The State's final response was "yes, that's correct, yes, you can do it for grease trap waste," but they still have a problem with sand and grit trap waste; the reason being that the Larimer County Landfill is not clay lined, and the two landfills with approval for this, do have clay liners. The State told Frank Lancaster of the County that if the County would create essentially a u Water Board Minutes June 17, 1988 Page 5 mono -fill, a dedicated small cell with clay waste, they would probably look favorably on afford to do that. lining specifically for this it. However, the County can't Tom Sanders asked what the estimated volume of the material is. Mr. Gallier replied that the total volume at the landfill is about 3 1/2 million gallons of liquid waste. Of that total only about 100,000 gal. is actually this other category. Mr. Gallier admitted that part of the problem is that "none of us have done a strong job of enforcing our pretreatment ordinances on these small businesses. There are many grease traps in town that don't get cleaned on a regular basis; the same is true for car washes." MaryLou Smith wanted a clarification of the health department's stand. "Are they now allowing this waste to come directly to the landfill?" There are many landfills in the state with this problem, Mr. Gallier responded. What they have told the County is that's illegal, and they want it stopped. They have given the County time to find a solution. "Unfortunately, we don't have any solutions: it's not a very pleasant position to be in," he stressed. He still thinks the idea of stabilizing it on site is very workable, and he also believes it can be done economically, "and we are ready to do it," he added. He believes that the County would be willing to fund with the City, the additional capital cost which would be very roughly around $50,000 for a small operation at the transfer station. Dr. Evans asked: "Once you have stabilized it with the kiln dust, is there further disposal?" Mr. Gallier explained: Basically, the liquid is in a pit. You add the cement kiln dust to it which absorbs a lot of moisture. It stabilizes the material into a matrix. Once the material sits for 24-48 hours it is dry enough to pass what is called a paint filter test that determines if there is any free water in the material. Once it passes that test you can scoop it out with a small backhoe, put it in a dump truck and take it to the landfill. Tom Sanders believes that "if we go for that, we should put that operation at the landfill; merely rejuvenate a pond, eliminate all but one pond and do it on site." Dr. Sanders contends that the "State is absolutely wrong in requiring clay liners in this state. Within the next year or so, I think we are going to prove that is not necessary." He suggested as a strategy that we would agree to put monitoring wells down stream from the disposal site and if leachate shows up, we will do an analysis. He believes leachate would not show up due to the fact that there is not enough water to move the material in the first place. He went on to say that the State is reacting to a policy from the East Coast. "I think we should aggressively challenge the State on this issue, particularly when the material is in a matrix form which is pretty stable" he asserted. Mr. Gallier agreed that the State is relying on other states' activities; the State of Colorado doesn't want to be first." He added that it hasn't been done very much anywhere. "Grease will break down biologically," Dr. Sanders stated. The issue is the sand and grit waste, Mr. Gallier stressed. There is a risk, he admitted. "When you have a car wash operation there are toxic chemicals around. It is also possible that trucks could come in at night and dump a load of hazardous waste." Water Board Minutes June 17, 1988 Page 6 Dr. Sanders wanted to discuss another issue regarding the waste transfer station. Odors will be a problem, particularly if you must keep the waste in a holding tank for a period of time to perform an analysis. "Have you looked into that?" There are some things we can do concerning odor control Mr. Gallier replied, but right now the holding time in the tank will be very short. There is an underground storage tank planned outside of the facility. The discharge line is basically a Y. "We can go either to that tank or into the collection system. If everything passes our quick test, then we will release it into the collection system. If, for whatever reason, it doesn't appear to be satisfactory, we will pass it on to the storage tank and further tests will be done. If it comes out bad the hauler pays for proper disposal of the waste and any additional costs associated with it, he assured the Board. Dr. Evans asked if the Federal Government has any involvement in it. "They could," Mr. Gallier replied. The City has a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waiver on its wastewater treatment plant sites. One of the issues we must look into if it goes any further is "do we place our waiver, which is very important to us, at risk by having this located at a wastewater treatment plant. "I don't think so," he maintains. At the worst we would have to re -define this area for the EPA as being a RCRA site and not include it in our NPDES permit. However, he emphasized that he didn't see it as a major problem. Dave Stewart was also concerned about the odor problem. "Is there any kind of odor control plan?" Not at this point, Mr. Gallier replied. We could put a ventilation system in. He pointed out that they tried to build the facility large enough initially to completely enclose the trucks as they entered, but "we couldn't do it because of prohibitive costs." We could put a system in to control air around the tank and prevent that from being a major problem. Tom Sanders contends that the transfer station is right next to Mulberry and "that's the first thing you smell when you come into town. Mr. Stewart agreed and added, "I think we should propose odor control as an option." Someone mentioned a landscape buffer of the area. Mr. Gallier said it should actually be a very nice looking facility and there is attractive existing landscaping as well. Dr. Sanders suggested that provisions should be made in the original design to install odor control devices at a reasonable cost. Mr. Gallier's impression at his point, is that it could be done without too much trouble. Curt Miller said staff has been concerned about the odor problem also. They have asked about other installations doing similar things, and they have done it without severe odor problems, "otherwise we wouldn't attempt to do one without it," he added. Mr. Gallier said that probably the best solution, if we decide we have to do it, is put ventilation ducts in through the roof. Water Board Minutes June 17, 1988 Page 7 Chairman Evans called for a recommendation of approval of the amendments in the agreement with the County. Henry Caulfield moved that the Water Board recommend approval of the amendments. Tom Sanders seconded the motion. Neil Grigg asked if the odor control became an issue that had to be dealt with in some stage of the design and it did result in increased costs, would that imply that the County would have a share in those costs? "No, not directly," Mr. Gallier answered. If we felt we had to close the facility down because the odors were a problem, we would have a right to do that. If the County wanted to work with us financially to address that problem, they might consent to the need to do that. Mr. Gallier pointed out another item relating to cost. In the operating budget for the facility they calculated between $15-17,000 a year for capital recovery. Those funds theoretically will be available as long as the facility is self -funded. "I don't think we could install odor control for $15,000, however," he added. Mr. Caulfield recalled that the City controls the rate that the haulers would pay, "so you could tack on a 5% increase or something." "That's correct, but we don't want to charge too much or it will be cheaper to haul to Denver." That's the reason for the audit at the end of the year in the event we charge too little or too much, "Mr. Gallier explained. Mr. Stewart asked about the odor control costs. "You could probably easily spend $50,000 or more," Mr. Gallier replied, "depending on how sophisticated you wanted to get." Tom Sanders suggested possibly adding an amendment stating that if odor control is required, that we talk about increasing funds from the County. Mr. Gallier responded that we could do that but it would delay the process. Dr. Evans suggested consideration of an alternate site. "This would be an issue at any of the sites we looked at" Mr. Gallier replied. "We couldn't make it work at the Resource Recovery Farm which would have been a good site, but the location of the sewer lines was a problem," he explained. "We went through all of the issues at every site we considered," he stressed. He concluded that if they have to deal with these issues, it will be easier at the wastewater treatment plant site. Because we are dealing with some complex issues and the letter has already gone to the County, Neil Grigg advocated that the Board vote positive on this with the minutes reflecting that the Board is concerned about odor control. Henry Caulfield added, "and our endorsement is contingent upon a satisfactory solution to the odor control problem, if there is one." Mr. Gallier said he could easily put that in a letter to the County stating that the Water Board has expressed that concern. The question was called. The motion passed with one abstention from Jim Kuiken who is an employee of Montgomery Engineers, the designers of the project. It should also be noted that Mr. Kuiken did not participate in the discussion. Water Board Minutes June 17, 1988 Page 8 Dr. Evans thanked Tom Gallier for his excellent report. Committee Reports Legislative/Finance Committee chairman Henry Caulfield pointed out that a summary of Legislative issues prepared by Linda Burger, was included in the Water Board packets at Mr. Caulfield's request. During the Legislative sessions, a summary will be provided periodically for the Board's information. At that time Board members will have an opportunity to make comments and suggestions. Neil Grigg reported that the Water Supply Policy Committee had met on June 9. At that meeting they discussed how much additional water we need to acquire, how fast we need to acquire it and who should pay for it. At their next meeting they hope to arrive at some conclusions and recommendations on these questions. Staff Reports Treated Water Production Summary Dennis Bode reported that in May water use was about 14% above what was projected. Except for one rainy period, it was very dry. That continued into June with above average use. "We have had above average temperatures for the last four months. It appears we are in a dry spell," he concluded. Other Business Tom Sanders asked how staff is progressing on the water acquisitions. Dennis Bode replied that staff is in the process of closing on the purchases that were approved. Those closings will continue throughout the summer and should be completed by September. Norm Evans complimented staff on a news item that appeared in the Triangle Review entitled "What Should You Know About Your Drinking Water?" He passed the article around. Molly Nortier said that they should have received this same information on a flyer in their Utility bills. Dr. Evans announced that the NCWCD is offering tours of their facilities this summer and all Board members should have received an invitation listing the dates when those tours will be offered. He polled the members to determine what dates would be best in order that Board members could perhaps plan to go at the same time. August 5 appeared to be most favorable for the east slope tour and the 10th for the west slope tour. Dr. Evans suggested that members call the District office to indicate their preferences. Norm Evans said he had a good visit with the president of the North Poudre Irrigation Company recently and it appears that there are some good prospects for Reservoirs 5 and 6. If we pursued this seriously we could be able to use them advantageously in exchange arrangements. "What they call penalty water and direct flow excesses that seen to be available, could be stored and exchanged." This would be an advantage to both the City and North Poudre. "This is an item that should be explored seriously," he urged. Water Board Minute• • June 17, 1988 Page 9 With regard to a seat on the North Poudre Board of Directors, the City now has more than 16% of the stock in the Company. Most of the stockholders "would not be too excited about adding a City representative on the Board," but the Board itself might consider that, he related. And finally, Fossil Creek Reservoir is a very important safety valve for the City's sewage effluent, because the City's effluent is normally routed through Fossil Creek Reservoir. The River Commissioner has managed that. There has been some uncertainty if we have a firm agreement with North Poudre on using the Reservoir that way. The president of North Poudre, Bob Stieben, thinks we have a firm agreement, but Dr. Evans is not sure. If we don't, he thinks we should pursue a written agreement. Dr. Evans welcomed Harvey Johnson, founder and honorary member of the Water Board. Mr. Johnson expressed his pleasure at being asked to participate in the luncheon honoring Dr. Evans. The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 noon. A luncheon honoring Norm Evans for his 25 years on the Water Board followed. In addition to Harvey Johnson, Mayor Ed Stoner and Council Liaison to the Water Board, Gerry Horak were in attendance. n Water Board Secretary