TOWN OF OLD SAYBROOK
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
302 MAIN STREET
OLD SAYBROOK, CT 06475-2369
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
Monday, June 30, 2008
The Town of Old Saybrook Water Pollution Control Authority met on Monday, June 30, 2008, in the Pasbeshauke Pavilion at Saybrook Point Park, College Street Extension Old Saybrook, Connecticut to conduct a special meeting.
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Pavel Wilson at 7:30PM.
II. Roll Call of Members – by WPCA Secretary
WPCA Secretary, George Gwizd, called the roll of members; Chuck Wehrly, John Claffey, Robert Hansen, Pavel Wilson, Elsa Payne, and Nelson Engborg were present. Dr. Robert Powitz and Doris Zumbroski were absent.
Also in attendance were; Peter Grose of Fuss & O’Neill, Don Lucas, WPCA Coordinator, and Robbie Marshall, WPCA Recording Clerk.
III. Comments from the Chair and Members
Chairman Wilson announced that there was a meeting about the WWMD finances on Tuesday with Dennis Greci and 1st Selectman Michael Pace. Coordinator Lucas and Chairman Wilson would attend.
On Wednesday there will be a meeting with Dennis Greci, Jennifer Perry, and Mary Jane Engle regarding AT systems. Peter Grose has the agenda along with an update for the process of selecting AT systems. There will also be a meeting with Mary Jane Engle to get the Health District up to speed on the WWMD.
IV. Discussion on Draft Facilities Plan
The WPCA reviewed the Draft Facilities Plan and made the following suggestions for changes.
Page 2: Change the statement about the Public Education sessions to read initiate series of Public Education sessions beginning in August 2008.
Robert Hansen discussed the two factions in Town; those that want sewers for development purposes and those who are supporting sewer avoidance. He said that time is of the essence and that the WPCA should get the project completed.
Chairman Wilson said that it was important to get the public information sessions set up for the 15th of August.
Mr. Hansen said that 70% of the Town could wind up paying for the sewer system while the people on Main Street benefit from it.
Chairman Wilson said the very best we can do is present a factual information session to the public. The sewer treatment plant will cost this much versus the sewer avoidance program (divided among the individuals.) How ever the Town votes, that is what is going to be.
George Gwizd said he would like to see a meeting this summer. Chairman Wilson said he spoke to Michael Pace and he said he is onboard. He also spoke to Rep. Marilyn Guiliano who said she would like the latest information to get up to speed. She said she is working with the State agencies; DEP and DPH.
Chuck Wehrly said one of the best things about the WPCA is that the decisions made by the Board have not been determined by politics whatsoever. And I would not expect that going forward. We are going to do what we are going to do regardless of what one party or another prefers. As far as Public Education is concerned, it is education, not a sales job. The way it is presented in the Facilities Plan; not only the public but the State would support it because it is the most cost effective method.
There was a discussion on the Sewer Avoidance philosophy; the last vote in town was 2 to 1 for sewer avoidance.
Mr. Gwizd said the last few public education meetings were learning experiences. That is what we should base our restructuring of the meetings on. The discussion on the August meeting continued with the suggestions to have the right people and appropriate structure, use index cards for questions, answer each question without interruption, and develop a polished presentation but not with a professional from out of town.
Page 3: Elsa Payne asked if the definition of waterfront includes marsh. Mr. Grose replied no, not for the interpretation of this report. Ms. Payne said it might be something to keep in mind for the P.E. Sessions. Mr. Grose said it is stated in Chapter 7 but he could clarify it here.
Chairman Wilson asked that the statement in the 3rd paragraph that advanced treatment systems will be required on several hundred properties be spelled out. Mr. Grose suggested 400-500. And for the purpose of this program waterfront means any lot that abuts a surface waterbody; river etc.
Chairman Wilson asked about the sentence at the bottom of the page regarding approval by the Health District. Mr. Grose said once the DPH takes over the jurisdiction of the small AT systems they will probably delegate authority to the area Health District. There was a discussion on the WPCA’s role at that point. Mr. Grose said the WPCA statutorily is charged with planning the appropriate wastewater management techniques to be used in various areas. The decision was to leave it as the document is a draft and may change.
Section 1.7.: Ms. Payne said it implies that it is always a matter of leaching fields (requiring upgrade.) Mr. Grose said it’s other things; it should be broader than that.
Mr. Gwizd asked about the graphs and maps. Mr. Grose explained that the information was developed from querying data from the Town. It is a pretty rough but helpful first cut to determine how much area is available for leaching. They used GIS to get some idea. The next step is to go lot-by-lot. He suggested a 2-step process; research and design. The first is to pull the property cards, go down the street and see what is there for the record. The second phase is to go on the property; there may be some good information from the pump out program. There has been discussion on how many test pits need to be done; possibly not on every lot. It was hoped that Inspector Dave Taylor who knows the properties pretty well would be involved.
There was a discussion on the terms and requirements used in the draft. Mr. Hansen said there should be a page of the guidelines available for the public. Ms. Payne agreed that a description of a code compliant system would help put people at ease. Chairman Wilson said this can be determined at the next meeting when the presentation is developed. It was also decided that maps on boards be available. Mr. Lucas said there are 12 pages of standards and a lot of the answers are not cut and dried. There are lot of variables; depth to groundwater and structures on the lot. A handout won’t address individual lots. This information reflects the research that has been done so far, but is not cast in concrete. Chairman Wilson said as we get closer to the referendum we will
have better information. John Claffey asked if the summary could just show the number of bedrooms and lot size. Although the public may not understand depth to groundwater they will understand that a steel or undersized tank needs to be replaced. He said they are going to be asking the questions and we are going to have to answer them the best we can. But if someone really wants to know, here’s how you do it; go into Town Hall. We have to be willing to give them an idea. There was continued discussion on a handout being feasible. Nelson Engborg said the information can be written against the Public Health Code standards; filter requirements, number of bedrooms, steel tanks, undersized tanks, and cesspools. If people want to know we can give them a sheet of things they cannot have. Mr. Grose said it is encouraging to hear the conversation starting with the Health District. In the past the WPCA worked closely with the
Health Department. Now, the Health District is not particularly knowledgeable about the WPCA program. It is important that they get up to speed for when people start asking questions. He suggested that the WPCA start a dialog with the Health District and keep it going.
Ms. Payne asked why the permitting is 5 years when there will be remote monitoring and the pump out program. We don’t have permitting right now; it seems like a lot of paperwork. Mr. Lucas said that is the only enforcement you have. They have to renew it. Mr. Grose said it was discussed in mediation and that the permitting would tie into the 5-year pump out program. Mr. Lucas said the DEP wants the assurance that it is a continuing program.
Chairman Wilson asked if it was anticipated that the $35-45 million figure would be adjusted before next summer. Mr. Grose replied no, but that’s not to say that when DEP reviews the draft that it won’t be raised, lowered, or the range narrowed.
Section 1.1.3 will be covered by the Selectmen. Mr. Grose has been reminding the DEP to waive some of the restrictions on the Clean Water Fund money and keep the promises they made. On top of page 6 are the references to what the Town will contribute according to Michael Pace.
Mr. Wehrly said that it is not dollars but value the Town in offering. Mr. Grose said he tried to write it that way; the goal would be that the actual cost homeowners would pay is ½ of it, but that includes construction, management. That is where the value comes in; the staffing and soft costs the Town would be handling (not kicking in 25% of the dollars.) There was a discussion on the term “soft costs” and removing it from the report. There may be more information after the financial meeting on Tuesday.
Page 5: There was a discussion about the numbers. Mr. Grose said there is some conservatism built into the numbers. They were bumped up a little bit. You can say $35- 40 million and probably be okay.
Page 6: Mr. Wehrly asked that the make up of the WPCA Board (past members), be corrected and updated; Ed Gyllenhammer, add Nicholas Gorra Sr., Carl Fortuna Jr., Michael Evangelisti, and Robbie Marshall (Recording Clerk who is a valuable contributor) added.
Chapter 7: Mr. Lucas said that on page 30 in the 2nd paragraph it gives the impression that it is a done deal; all the hassles between the DEP and DPH have been resolved. Mr. Grose agreed and said we could say that even after many working sessions there is still work to do and furthermore delegation has now changed.
Ms. Payne said the WWMD ordinance in Appendix J seems to be an older version. Mr. Grose said he will add the June 2006 version.
Page 31: Ms. Payne asked about the reference to very small lots that may require a community AT system. She asked if 2 homes can share a system; does anything here preclude that? Mr. Grose said it doesn’t preclude it but doesn’t address it. There are regulations that prevent you from doing that and it also becomes a community system. The State’s biggest issue is the policy, concerning the 21-day travel time, for treated effluent which must stay in the ground for that amount of time. It is impossible with lots that small. You may need to take a road ending or vacant lot for leaching. The question is who owns and controls the system. Some states require an association. Mr. Lucas said it is important that we leave the option in the program.
We may very well end up with some type of community system.
Table 7-1: Mr. Lucas suggested the last line saying “we estimate that 4069 upgrades be needed in 15 neighborhoods” be rephrased. There are 4000 fixes on 1900 properties. Mr. Grose said it could be reversed to read “10% may not require anything, others may require multiple fixes.”
Page 32: 7.2.2: Should the homeowner have the option of hiring their own engineer? Mr. Grose said it would be tougher to manage. Discussion included: designing systems, choosing from a list of designs, an engineer designing dozens at a time and getting better pricing, controlling and managing individual homeowner’s engineering, and forfeiting the Town’s input (25%.) Mr. Grose said he didn’t know what could be specified for training of the engineers.
Ms. Payne asked if there was special language required by the Stipulated Judgment (page 4.) Mr. Grose said they are not there yet; it’s just a draft.
Chairman Wilson asked about the reference to the “Town’s Engineer.” Mr. Grose said the WPCA and Health District staff is not likely to do any design. A designer who is not an engineer could design the conventional systems. An ATS designer would have to be a registered engineer. They may require engineers to design all the upgrades. You may not hire an engineer on staff, but consultants.
Pages 32 and 33: Ms. Payne said it’s confusing on who is giving the approval. There was a discussion on the responsibilities of the Health District and the WPCA. It was decided that for the report the WPCA should be identified at approving ATS and the Health District for conventional systems. There was a discussion on staff, including a clerk of the works. Mr. Grose said he would draft a letter to DEP, that the WPCA could use, that would say there are many unknowns that require the collaboration between the various entities (WPCA,Health District, DPH, DEP.)
Section 7.2.4: The Town will issue the permit. Same as above.
Page 13 - 3.3.3: The second paragraph has Towns X, Y, and Z. They should be Clinton, Deep River, and Old Saybrook. Monitoring should be added to the title Operation and Maintenance.
Pages 35 and 36: AWT should be corrected to ATS.
Section 7.5.2: Reference to Appendix O which is public participation; reference should be deleted.
Section 7.7.1: Yearly amount for pumpout is averaged out to $100. It should be $200 every 5 years.
Ms Payne noted the cost established for the wastewater treatment plant does not include the land or operator’s salary. Mr. Grose said he thought the operator’s salary might be included in maintenance but he would check.
Section 8.3.4: In the first line there is “of” instead of “if.”
Mr. Grose suggested that in the public education session the slide show should show the comparison of the alternatives side by side; technical feasibility, economics, Plan of Development etc.
Section 8.3.5: Sewer option does not include cost of land in the capital costs.
Section 8.4.2: 2nd paragraph the word “the” has been omitted.
Section 10.0: Mr. Wehrly asked if we have the environmental impact for the WWMD, do we need it for the central sewer as well. Mr. Grose said traditionally no. We just have to show that we have considered all alternatives. If DEP requires it, we’ll add it.
Page 43: Will adjust the 4000 upgrades.
Mr. Hansen discussed wells being closed if they are less than 70 feet from a septic system.
Page 47 – 11.1.2: Mr. Lucas suggested eliminating the reference to training at URI. Mr. Grose advised to keep URI as the WPCA has attended and recommends the program, but add the Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment (CIDWT) Installers Academy.
Page 48 – 11.2: The Implementation Schedule should be changed to add PE sessions “starting” in late summer of 2008. The 2nd paragraph should read vote on the ordinance in 2009 and start in 2010.
Table after Page 27: $71 million capital cost “does not include land” should be added. Mr. Wehrly said the treatment plant dollar figure should be stated in the text in 6.4.3; it is only in the table.
Appendix I: There is a duplication of what is under Tab E – Mediation. Mr. Grose said it was intended.
Ms. Payne said there is a lot of detail on the Wastewater Treatment Plant but not a lot of detail on the ATS. Mr. Grose replied that’s because it is up in the air as to what we can and cannot use. Ms. Payne asked what technologies the costs were based on and that they be included.
There was another discussion on drafting a cover letter from the WPCA to go with the report. Mr. Grose will write a letter for the WPCA to review. He will send copies of the items that were changed. Fuss & O’Neill will courier the Facilities Plan to the DEP. The changes will be made by the end of this week or first ½ of next week. Dennis Greci said it could be submitted electronically. Fuss & O’Neill typically creates PDFs for archiving purposes.
A motion was made by Chuck Wehrly to approve the Draft Wastewater Facilities Plan: Old Saybrook Wastewater Management Study as amended for delivery to the CT. DEP. It was seconded by Nelson Engborg and approved unanimously.
V. Discussion of Near Term Tasks (List by Fuss & O’Neill)
Mr. Grose said the goal was to help the WPCA keep tasks moving forward. He then reviewed the list.
1. Implementation Plan: The biggest items were the WWMD ordinance vote and funding authorization.
2. Response Letter to the DEP: Attorney Cronin still has the letter. Chairman Wilson will address it at the meeting on Tuesday.
3. Fuss & O’Neill Amendment 5: There will be a conversation on Tuesday with Dennis Greci on the two items in his letter. There was a discussion on what is reimbursable. Mr. Grose said that staff time is not generally reimbursable, unless it is very specific to the project and approved in advance. He doesn’t know if they will cover Steve Luckett’s time or not. Generally legal is not covered but they are willing to consider legal costs for mediation, the Upgrade Program Standards, and WWMD ordinance. Mr. Grose will produce F & O’s records and Chairman Wilson will speak with Attorney Wertam. Some research needs to be done on what costs have already been submitted.
4. Facilities Plan Draft Report: Will be submitted on time to the DEP.
5. Finalize WWMD Ordinance and Upgrade Standards Documents: Mr. Grose suggested saying in the response letter that refinements to those documents depend on who is responsible for what programs; what role DPH plays versus DEP. He also suggested having Attorney Wertam run through his presentation again. Attorney Wertam believes that the WWMD and Upgrade Standards definitions are pretty well coordinated but not with Ordinance 75. It is more important to have discussions on the AT systems and with the DPH and Health District.
6. Revisions to Ordinance 75: The question is how does this ordinance fit in with the overall plan? It was a good interim step to make progress a year and ½ ago. Attorney Wertam asked if it would help with the WWMD. The Town Attorney has not been quick to support it.
Ms. Payne said the WWMD does not include the whole town. That’s why we still need Ordinance 75. Chairman Wilson said he emailed Attorney Wertam about coordinating the 3 documents. Attorney Wertam suggested putting it on the back burner. Mr. Grose said the ordinance is similar to what Westbrook did and acceptable to DEP. The question is the fit and timing.
7. Financing Plan: Someone needs to review the summary in the draft Facilities Plan; we’ll hear more about it tomorrow. The Clean Water Fund needs to be fleshed out.
8. Interface with Health Departments (CRAHD and DPH): This entails bringing the CRAHD up to speed and getting input from DPH.
9. Advanced Treatment Systems: Also entails getting input from DPH which does not seem ready to happen now.
10. Public Outreach and Participation: What is the message the WPCA wants to get out this summer? The mandate needs to be reinforced, explain the two alternatives, and possibly ordinance 75. How PE and Outreach will be accomplished using articles, newsletters, and Fact Sheets. Chairman Wilson said the WPCA would discuss the presentation at the next meeting. Mr. Grose said there is a cable access TV program that one town uses to disseminate information. The remaining public participation program needs to be worked out.
11. Potential Program Modifications: Neighborhoods might be moved and Michael Pace’s infrastructure upgrades might be added.
Chairman Wilson said that an agenda of items to discuss with the Health Department will be emailed to Mary Jane Engle.
VI. iscussion of DEP Letter of April 15, 2008
This was discussed under Item 2 and Chairman Wilson will pursue it on Tuesday in Town Hall.
VII. Adjournment
A motion to adjourn was made at 10:13PM by Nelson Engborg. It was seconded by George Gwizd and carried unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Old Saybrook Water Pollution Control Authority
Robbie A. Marshall
Robbie A. Marshall
WPCA Recording Clerk
| 
