Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-30 Water and Sewer Advisory Committee MinutesWater Supply Advisory Committee Meeting September 30, 1999 a s, The meeting was convened at 7:35 p.m. at the Berger Room, 16 Lowell Street. Present were comiuittee members Stephen Blewitt, Will Finch, Steve Oston, William Freeman, Gail Wood, Richard Moore, Dick w nd eor e t ,~~Perry. Also present were Assistant Town Manager Russell Dean, Water Treatment Plant Supervisor Pete Tassi, Public Works Director Ted McIntire, John Gall from Camp Dresser McKee, and Gerry McDonald from the Water & Sewer Advisory Committee. Chairman Blewitt said Steve Oston would be chairman for the evening in the absence of Mary Grimmer and the fact he had a personal matter to attend to. Steve Oston took up the agenda and asked for a motion on the minutes. Gail Wood moved the approval of the minutes of September 16, 1999. Dick Howard seconded the motion. After a brief review of the minutes Gail Wood suggested amending one section to add a question mark regarding the DEP looking for a number and then looking for the source of the number. The minutes were then approved by a vote of 7-0-0. Stephen Blewitt departed the meeting. Member Robert Salter entered the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Gail Wood asked if we were going to discuss the cost information backup handed out at last week's meeting. Russ Dean asked if there were specific questions on the backup material. Gail Wood commented that Andover was less expensive than she expected. The Ipswich option was less expensive than she expected. Camille Anthony entered the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Richard Moore entered the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Dick Howard asked for an explanation of the yields of the different options. John Gall said all the options include a 190,000 gpd reduction from the implementation of the conservation program Bedrock wells assumed a 200,000 gpd yield. Bedrock options are deducted from the Ipswich share of the forecast. The Hundred Acre and Bare Meadow bedrock wells would cut into the main source as opposed to being an additional source. Gail Wood said if we aren't allowed to withdraw more from the River does it not render the source as an additional source moot? William Freeman said he was surprised the Ipswich/Bedrock combination was rated so high when bedrock represents only 1/10 of the yield. John Gall said with MWRA you buy on an annual basis. Time of year in terms of usage is not an issue. You buy a right to an annual amount of water. 1.479-mgd would be withdrawn. Russ Dean asked if the buy-in fee would be prorated depending on gallonage. John Gall said yes. John Gall said the Andover yield was 400,000 gpd. John Gall said on the MWRA options, bedrock yield assumption was 200,000 gpd, Andover 400,000 gpd, and the Ipswich River/MWRA option, 1 million gallons from each. William Freeman again said he was surprised at the difference between the Ipswich and Ipswich/Bedrock rating when the bedrock is only 10% of the flow. Richard Moore said we have better control and implementability over bedrock. His personal opinion is contamination in the bedrock is a big concern. Was a big fan of bedrock wells until he was educated about contamination getting into the bedrock in North Reading. John Gall commented on Gail Wood's two bedrock well rating on vulnerability - one for Bear Meadow, and one for Hundred Acre. She thought there were two different levels of vulnerability. CDM recommended bedrock only be developed away from the current source of supply for vulnerability reasons. Gail Wood said she had to rate the options based on known vulnerabilities - we don't know about vulnerabilities in the Bare Meadow area. Historically we've had issues in the Hundred Acre wellfield. John Gall said the Hundred Acre site was discounted by CDM. George Perry said even in Bare Meadow you're downstream with roads on both sides. Robert Salter said the bedrock wells draw from the same basin. William Freeman said bedrock wells are only 10% of the demand. Steve Oston said there is only a five- percent differential in the ratings of the options - it's very close. Dick Howard referred to Kerry Mackin's letter on the Ipswich River Watershed Association's issues with the Ipswich as a future water source. Gail Wood said we're not withdrawing more than what we're registered for. Camille Anthony said circumstances may change. Richard Moore said clearly if there is a change in the withdrawals permitted from the River it may impact us. To say we will be reduced might be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Russ Dean mentioned the bedrock option and said operations decisions have to be made based upon the bedrock option - to drill pilot wells. Robert Salter said there is a glaring cost information issue with the water treatment plant option. We've had 10 million in the capital plan in the past, and now it's a 5.9 million estimate. What does it do to the option on the curve? Why have we been carrying 10 million instead of 6 million. We have to explain this to Town Meeting. As a Town Meeting member the discrepancy will have to be addressed. Dick Howard said it was a variance not a discrepancy. Peter Tassi said the 10 million in the capital plan was to replace the plant and were basic estimates of replacement costs. Robert Salter wanted a long term projection on life cycle of renovating versus replacing the plant. There should be variance bars on the options. On the Ipswich option, the variance bars would be longer to account for renovation versus replacement. Russ Dean asked about renovations and their impact on options over the long term. John Gall said the resultant net present value gap between options (Ipswich & MWRA) would be closed. A replacement plant is worth more than a renovated plant. renovated plant. Dick Howard wondered what the political climate in Town was for a renovated plant versus a new plant. Gail Wood said she feared if the Town buys in to the MWRA they may go to a different cost calculation. She asked John Gall to speculate. Who is paying the MWRA capital cost now? John Gall said the capital costs go on the rates. Gail Wood asked if they were likely to change rate structures? At some point all the water will have to go through a filtration process. At some point in the future they'd have to build a filtration plant. John Gall said the MWRA has a 1.8 billion dollar capital plan. They have 200 million in the plan to build a water treatment plant in Marlboro - it would not include filtration if the MWRA has their way. It would include filtration if the EPA has their way. The difference in cost of filtration versus non-filtration is 200 million roughly. This doesn't make a big difference in the homeowner's bills. Would they change rate methodology? The sewer calculation included population and industrial users. They went to a flow based measure to charge. Water starts out that way - he would be very surprised if they changed the method - you pay for what you use. Gail Wood said the MWRA only had the 1.8 billion capital plan after the Garrity ruling John Gall said Deer Island was a known cost 12 years ago. Quincy did not want to subsidize Boston - that was the type of issue that was there. 1.8 billion is in the rate given to the committee. The filtration plant is not - but it doesn't have a big impact. Dick Howard asked about a new plant. Based on his calculations, a new plant would average about $100 more per year on household cost. You have the existing system plus twice the debt service. This equals $100 more per household on average. John Gall said the math works out that way. Richard Moore asked if "mothballing the plant" costs were included in the MWRA option. John Gall said no, the estimate is likely somewhere between 500-600K to mothball the plant. Russ Dean asked if there was any legal requirement or regulation that would mandate mothballing the plant. John Gall said you probably would want to. John Gall presented the handouts which plotted annual household cost plus score, a composite ranking of the options, and each individual member rating of the most favorable option. John Gall said the bedrock well option has legs in Reading. Spending the 200,000 is useful. Permitted withdrawals are one year away, Kerry Mackin's study is two years away. A lot of different factors go into the mix. A discussion on the chart took place. The options showed three could be eliminated because of prohibitive cost and implementation: Ipswich/Andover, MWRA/Andover, MWRA/Ipswich. Robert Salter said the yield stands up. Ipswich/MWRA option versus MWRA/Ipswich option had different environmental impacts. It doesn't make sense. Camille Anthony said she questioned the ranking system. Richard Moore said there is diversity in the opinions Robert Salter mentioned the Ipswich/MWRA and MWRA/Ipswich results didn't make sense to him. Richard Moore said there are big differences in MWRA as a primary source. A discussion on weights and ratings ensued. Steve Oston talked about the graph - he was pleased with the results. The options fell pretty much where he expected and were consistent with the criteria being evaluated. Richard Moore said the graph exacerbates cost and perhaps the axes should be adjusted so the options do not seem so far apart. Gail Wood made a motion to eliminate the following options from discussion: MWRA/Ipswich, MWRA/Andover, Ipswich/Andover, and MWRABedrock. Steve Oston seconded the motion. Robert Salter did not want to eliminate Ipswich/Andover. Steve Oston said the committee has endorsed the methodology - now we're saying we don't like the result. What is the issue with this? Richard Moore discussed implementability scoring of the options. Gail Wood said implementability got a lower rating on the MWRA. Will Finch asked if the 400,000 yield from Andover would hold up over time. Richard Moore said three criteria were consistent - quality, vulnerability, and environmental impacts. Implementability and control were exceptions... another meeting was held - was implementability a long-term issue? MWRA has an impact on the western part of the state. Dick Howard asked why the MWRA/Bedrock option comes out? Robert Salter asked why have bedrock? It's our own system. Would we maintain the plant? He didn't give MWRA/Bedrock a high score. Richard Moore said we shouldn't change scores. John Gall said we would have on-site treatment for bedrock, and it wouldn't go through the plant. Will Finch said Steve Blewitt liked the MWRA/Bedrock option and since he isn't here perhaps it should be left in. Robert Salter proposed amending the motion to leave MWRABedrock in as an option. Dick Howard seconded the motion. Gail Wood asked if we buy into MWRA for 1 million gallons and a bedrock well yields 500,000 gallons, do we get our money back? John Gall said the operating costs go down linearly over time. Richard Moore said the year-to-year operating costs go down. Vote on Salter's amendment taken: 9-0-0, motion carried. Vote on main motion taken to delete the three other options: 9-0-0 motion carried. John Gall handed out the sensitivity analysis to answer Steve Oston's question from a prior meeting. Cost goes down over time as debt service decreases, but overall not a major difference. Gail Wood said do the bedrock exploration first. Richard Moore said we should do the bedrock search to get results. By then the USGS model will be done on pulling water from the Ipswich. We can last 5-6 years on plant modifications. Peter Tassi reminded the committee the Town's registered withdrawal is good through 2008. We aren't up for renewal. Keep in mind timelines. Robert Salter asked if the water could be changed based on flow? Is that a concern? Peter Tassi said they'll look at our withdrawal. Robert Salter said the vulnerability on bedrock is a big unknown - you don't know until you drill. A timeline was developed on recommending the options. John Gall said the MWRA timeline is 3 to 4 years for joining, based on the Bedford and Regis College experiences. Dick Howard said the MWRA decision would have to be made by 2002. Robert Salter said the Ipswich River/MWRA decision has to be made by 2002. John Gall said the Water Management Act permitting will start in 2000 and take at least one year. John Gall said the USGS model was delivered to DEP today and will run scenarios over the next year. The IRWA sustainability study is a 2-year effort. Bedrock/Conservation can fit anywhere in the timeframe. Steve Oston asked what benefit we get from full bedrock exploration - does it give us the answers we need? What happens if in 5 years the wells dry up? John Gall said you have to do well testing - 10/30 day pumping. Peter Tassi said it depends on how much you invest. How much will the Town invest in monitoring wells around the main source. Robert Salter said the protection of the vulnerability of the Ipswich and build those into costs associated with the options. We want to take steps now to protect us until 2006. Gail Wood said there is an issue of stormwater discharge and containment. She wants Mass Highway to pay for it like they have in other places. Russ Dean asked how much of an issue is Ipswich vulnerability in other communities. John Gall said some communities are more sensitive than others. On hazardous waste there are 800,000 shipments per day. There are 350 serious accidents per year. Will Finch said the IRWA fought Salem/Beverly on increasing their permitted withdrawals. Camille Anthony said Middleton had an outdoor ban this summer. Gail Wood said so did Franklin - the issue was not enough storage. You have to know why Town's have the bans. Peter Tassi said there were Towns downstream that lifted their bans once the rainfall came. Dick Howard said part of the recommendation involved negotations with MWRA. Robert Salter said grant moneys for recharge should be sought. John Gall suggested selling the registered rights to the IRWA for 8.3 million - the difference in the net present value between the two systems. Then the MWRA option would be revenue neutral. Russ Dean asked if there were any major conservation groups around the country who would look at the Ipswich, the fact it is on the 10 most endangered rivers list. and nav 9.3 million for the reui-tererl rights. John Gall said there is a legal question about ability to sell registered rights but he believes under state law it can be done. Richard Moore said we should explore the legality of this issue. Steve Oston asked if we can narrow the options. Richard Moore said we have to be sure we can join MWRA. William Freeman said there are two basic decisions. Parameters for decisionmaking along with the timeline. The question is what throws the pendulum? Dick Howard said repair or replace the plant would swing the Ipswich costs. Vulnerability would also drive it. New plant versus renovated plant. John Gall said if 6 million wouldn't do it, he wouldn't have given it as a recommendation. William Freeman said as an engineer it would be hard to justify scrapping the plant. Gail Wood went over the plant report. Was Peter Tassi satisfied? Peter answered yes. William Freeman asked what factors bring MWRA into the picture? Gail Wood said vulnerability and contingencies. We have the emergency connection. Russ Dean went over the schedule. October 7, 1999 meeting in the Berger Room, October 12th and 26th with the BOS, October 28th public presentation. Will Finch said he likes the MWRA as a long-term solution. Richard Moore said there is no reason to believe MWRA has an unlimited supply, there are problems to be had, and a mix is perhaps the best option. Will Finch said the committee was looking at a 60/70-year option. Gail Wood said there are problems in big cities with water supply. There were deaths in Milwaukee. Will Finch said what was their local alternative? Robert Salter asked about the surveys - what does the public say? Russ Dean said we have received back 307 surveys to date. Will Finch said the Conservation Commission is opposed to the River pumping. Dick Howard said he favors an Ipswich/MWRA combination option. Richard Moore said he thought this would dissatisfy everyone. Steve Oston asked about a combination of Ipswich/MWRABedrock. The exploratory program is $200,000. Ted McIntire said $200,000 is available and can be spent tomorrow on bedrock drilling. Dick Howard asked if the Ipswich/MWRA combo would be defeated inside the committee 8-0? Consensus was no it would not. Richard Moore said we'd get far into the MWRA_process _and find out where it would lead us. There is a point of view that says the Ipswich is a viable future source. Dick Howard asked based on what we know today could we say that Ipswich/MWRA/Bedrock is a viable long-term solution? William Freeman said the flexibility in the future exists -there is a one-time buy in fee and then you can buy on an as-needed basis. Richard Moore said that can be an expensive 1 gallon buy. William Freeman asked if we paid a premium on MWRA water after the gas spill. Gail Wood said yes we paid the Woburn retail rate. John Gall said if we buy water from MWRA now, we pay the MWRA rate. If there is an issue like a supply deficit, you pay premiums. Russ Dean handed out Steve Blewitt's outline of recommendations. Camille Anthony said we should break up the recommendations into two meetings. John Gall should do the cost areas of options. John Gall said he would break out costs. John Gall suggested the presentation go like this: lead off/going forward, and then introduce findings. Russ Dean said he would work up a draft based upon the committee discussion tonight, get it to the committee before the meeting of the 7`h to meet and finalize the recommendation at that meeting. Dick Howard moved to adjourn at 10:22 p.m. William Freeman seconded. Motion carried 9-0-0. Russ Dean Assistant Town Manager .-e__