Water Pollution Control Authority
Minutes
October 30, 2014
Present: Chairman Kurt Zemba, Doug Wilkinson, Frank Chan, Dimitri Tolchinski, Rich Prendergast, Rob McCarthy, Ernest Lorda, Tom Risom; Sanitarian Sonia Marino; Dave Prickett & Jay Sheehan from Woodard and Curran; Atty. Andrew Lord; DEEP Engineers Dennis Greci and Carlos Esquerra; First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder joined the meeting in progress
Absent/excused: Donna Bednar, alternate Andrea Lombard
Also present: Selectwoman Mary Jo Nosal, Selectman Skip Sibley; approximately 50 members of the public
~
Call to Order
Chairman Kurt Zemba called the meeting to order at 7:36pm.
He summarized activities to date, beginning with the WPCA’s decision to submit a Facilities Plan to the DEEP in May. Kurt emphasized that the WPCA has not yet implemented a plan and is in fact waiting for direction from the DEEP.
Kurt expressed concern over misinformation about the process being followed by the WPCA. He addressed behavior he described as inappropriate at the last WPCA meeting. Kurt said, while the WPCA expects some spirited discussion and will take the public very seriously, he expects courtesy and civility from the audience.
He thanked the Boards of Selectmen and Finance for their support of the process and criticized other boards and commissions for premature discussions of the Wastewater project, restating that the WPCA has not made up its mind about its next steps.
~
Approval of the Minutes – September 9, 2014
A motion was made by Tom Risom, seconded by Doug Wilkinson, to approve the minutes of September 9, 2014. Motion passed.
Approval of the Minutes – September 17, 2014
A motion was made by Dimitri Tolchinski, seconded by Ernest Lorda, to approve the minutes of the Special Meeting/Info Session of September 17, 2014. Motion passed.
Summary/Presentation of the Final Facilities Plan Submitted to the DEEP - Woodard & Curran
Dave Prickett reviewed the proposed project area, stating that Woodard & Curran has been working with the DEEP to further refine the area. They identified five criteria to be used in evaluating wastewater management needs:
- Soil permeability
- Depth to ground water
- Lot size
- Density of existing development
- Sea level rise
Dave noted that quantitative data is available for each of the criteria identified.
White Sand Beach
Although White Sand Beach (WSB) does have an elevated risk based on some of the criteria, their depth to groundwater is good. The anticipated cost per user in WSB would be $10,000 to $15,000 higher than in other areas because of location, necessitating an additional pump station to serve only WSB.
Jay Sheehan pointed out that WSB would face a significantly higher cost if they need to develop a wastewater management plan alone at a later date.
Woodard & Curran recommends removing WSB from the proposed project area.
Hawks Nest Beach
Dave Prickett noted there are three distinct differences between WSB and Hawks Nest Beach (HNB):
- Depth to groundwater is significantly more shallow in HND
- HNB has a significantly larger number of small lots
- Anticipated cost per user in HNB is within the average range
Woodard & Curran recommends that HNB remain in the proposed project area.
Asked about Sound View, Dave Prickett said the data for that area is very clear. The area has poorer soils, more diverse development, and is adjacent to beach communities that conducted their own studies.
Woodard & Curran have updated the Facilities Plan and submitted it to the DEEP. They continue to receive feedback from the DEEP and expect final comments by November 7. They will need the balance of November and December to revise the Plan based on the DEEP’s remarks, and expect to submit a revised plan to the DEEP by Christmas.
The WPCA should have the final Plan for their scheduled January 13 meeting.
Dave Prickett said the DEEP is helping to tighten assumptions in the Plan, which will allow Woodard & Curran to further refine anticipated costs.
Kurt expects a Town Meeting could be scheduled for mid-April at the earliest, and suggested the WPCA may ask the Board of Selectmen to adjourn the Town Meeting to a Referendum the next day.
This would be similar to the way Regional School District conducts voting on its annual budget.
WPCA members discussed the recommendation to remove WSB from the proposed project area.
There are 160 houses in the WSB area, with 128 of them members of the WSB association.
Dimitri Tolchinski said he would like to hear from WSB homeowners, and questioned if residents on Brighton Road, an adjacent neighborhood, would be interested in participating in the project. Tom Risom objected, stating that the WPCA’s job is to minimize the size of the proposed area, not to go shopping for participants.
Sanitarian Sonia Marino confirmed that it is reasonable to assume that septic issues in WSB can be addressed using traditional sewer avoidance methods.
Tom Risom asked for specific data regarding HNB, and suggested that the WPCA consider dividing HNB into two distinct areas, with the beach side area being the one likely in need of inclusion in the project area.
Dave Prickett responded that 86% of the lots in HNB are smaller than ¼ acrea.
Dimitri distributed a map prepared by Jacobson Engineering illustrating well location(s) and showing groundwater tables for HNB (attached).
CT DEEP Presentation
Dennis Greci, DEEP, provided a powerpoint presentation about wastewater issues, covering pollution, State Statutes regarding pollution, and the role of the DEEP in addressing pollution.
He said the protection of human health is the primary goal.
WPCA members asked how the DEEP decides that a “community” problem exists?; how are benefit assessments developed?; what are the different kinds of orders that the DEEP can issue?; what happens if either the WPCA or the Town vote “no” to an order from the DEEP.
A community issue could involve as few as 25 and as many as several thousand
Towns will typically hire several appraisers to develop data for benefit assessment. The WPCA will decide what the benefit assessment will be.
The DEEP can issue a Consent Order for which the parties involved negotiate the language of the Order. The DEEP can also issue an Administrative Order – the DEEP writes the order, which can be appealed.
If the WPCA decides not to pursue a plan ordered by the DEEP, it can submit a revised plan to the DEEP.
If the Town votes not to pursue a plan at Town Meeting or Referendum, the DEEP will expect the Town to find out why it failed, provide additional or clarified information to voters, and go back for another vote. If the Town continues to vote No, the DEEP would take the Town to court.
Chairman Kurt Zemba opened the floor for questions to the DEEP from the public.
Rick Jones of West End Drive asked about specific data showing that HNB is polluting. He stated there are no wells in HNB; homes are connected to the Connecticut Water Company.
Dennis Greci said that some properties do have wells, and data collected does indicate a potential community pollution problem in HNB.
Jack Mut of Springfield Road asked if connection to CT Water would resolve potential wastewater issues. Mr. Greci responded that CT Water connection could be a solution to situations where proximity from septic to well is a problem, but would not resolve other issues. He noted that wastewater is a means of transmitting contaminants and disease, and we need the protection of the Public Health Code.
Elaine Lasky, Columbus Avenue, stated that she lives in HNB and has a well. She asked how storm surge might impact wells and sewers at HNB. Mr. Greci indicated that sewers present less of a risk
than traditional septic systems.
Tim Griswold, Griswold Point, asked why the State DEEP was not more open to some of the new wastewater management technologies currently implemented in other states. Mr. Greci said Connecticut proceeds cautiously in vetting new technologies.
Sandy Garvin, HNB, requested more detail on testing at HNB, and asked how much need justifies the installation of sewers. Mr. Greci responded that the more dense an area, the more cost-effective it becomes to install sewers. Woodard & Curran clarified that the groundwater data used in the Facilities Plan had been provided by the Town Health Department.
Todd Machnik, Mile Creek Road, stated that the Town’s data was most likely from failed septic systems.
A representative from East Lyme’s WPCA briefly described benefit assessments in that town.
Wade Buchanan, WSB, asked how “background” data is differentiated from property data.
John Hughes, HNB, asked about problems at the Bridebrook pumping station in East Lyme and about pollution problems at Rocky Neck State Park.
Woodard & Curran explained that project costs in Old Lyme include costs related to upgrading system components in East Lyme.
Dennis Greci stated that testing at Rocky Neck has shown that pollution problems there are not of human origin. He reiterated that the DEEP is aware of problems with the Bridebrook pumping station which will be upgraded or relocated.
Lisa Clark, West End Drive, requested additional clarification on user fees. There are 4 separate cost components:
Benefit Assessment for capital costs associated with the project
User fees to cover operating & maintenance costs, which can also have a capital component
Connection charge
Costs associated with decommissioning an existing septic tank
Mr. Greci added that the DEEP will typically ask a town to budget “reserve funding” to cover anticipated repair costs.
Tim Griswold, Griswold Point, asked about the impact of sending wastewater out of town on the Town’s water resources.
Q&A from WPCA to DEEP and Consultants
Members asked for clarification on benefit assessments and what happens when there is a difference between actual costs and the assessment allowed. It was reiterated that the WPCA will make the benefit assessment determinations.
Attorney Andrew Lord asked the DEEP to clarify that there is no Rogers Lake component to the Facilities Plan. Dennis Greci confirmed that the DEEP has no direction or plans regarding Rogers Lake at this point.
A motion was made by Rich Prendergast, seconded by Ernest Lorda, to accept the recommendation of Woodard & Curran to remove White Sand Beach from the scope of the proposed project area.
Doug Wilkinson expressed concern that the Town will face a large expense if WSB is removed now, but needs a sewer project in the future, because the cost will be much higher than currently forecast.
Dimitri Tolchinski shared his concern.
A motion was made by Dimitri, seconded by Frank Chan, to table the motion. Motion failed with only Dimitri voting in favor.
Members questioned if there is a way to reserve capacity for WSB’s potential future need only. Dennis Greci said the DEEP will fund an allowance for additional capacity if they agree with the recommendation.
Kurt stated that the Land Use boards will be included in the discussion and decisions about future development in the Town.
On the motion to exclude WSB from the proposed project area, members voted as follows:
6 – Yes, 1- abstention by Dimitri Tolchinski. Chairman Kurt Zemba added his vote.
Final Vote: 7 -1 in favor. Motion passed.
Woodard & Curran will continue to evaluate HNB data.
A motion was made by Dimitri Tolchinski, seconded by Tom Risom, to appoint Chris Seery as the new WPCA Clerk. Motion passed unanimously.
Adjournment
A motion was made by Doug Wilkinson, seconded by Ernest Lorda, to adjourn at 10:45pm.
Cathy Frank
11/3/14
| 
