Loading...
05/08/2002 - Minutes Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Minutes May 8, 2002 Members Present: Patrick Carroll, Joyce Patton, Beverly Froude, and Bill Scheiderich Staff Present: Ed Wegner, Dennis Koellermeier, Kathy Kaatz and Richard Sattler Visitors: Joe Glicker (Montgomery Watson Harza), Roel Lundquist, Steve Moncaster (Golder and Associates), Chris Uber, Doug Geller, Nesh Mucibabic, David Peters, Eileen Webb, and Paul Owen 1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Introductions The meeting was called to order at 5:33 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes —April 10, 2002 Commissioner Patrick Carroll motioned to accept the minutes of the April 10, 2002, meeting and Commissioner Joyce Patton seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous to accept the minutes as presented. 3. Aquifer Storage and Recovery— Montgomery Watson Harza/Dennis Koellermeier Dennis Koellermeier conducted a brief introduction about Joe Glicker and Steve Moncaster. He then stated that the ASR project was at the end of the-injection phase and the aquifer currently contained 97 mg of water. The turbidity issue still exists and has caused problems more than once. Our ASR pilot test program and experiences are being carefully watched by surrounding interested communities. Joe Glicker's presentation included the following points of information: • New well installed in the latter part of 2001 • New well is more productive with 800 gpm versus 300 gpm • Good injection capacity • Injection began in early January and was planned to continue for 110 days to acquire 129mg of water • The project currently is in the storage period and the withdrawal period will begin in June • Injection data is consistent with the conceptual model Intergovernmental Water Board 1 May 8,2002 DRAFr COPY • Water has not been seen in surface springs • Water leaking from the ASR could be up to 25%, but the preliminary data indicates it will only be 10% • A 2nd well at the same site is possible • Turbidity events have caused drawbacks and there have been three such events • There have been no reports from water customers of turbidity issues • Turbidity reduces the well's performance • The decision was made to terminate injection 20 days early • Water quality sample tests indicated sediment problem originated from surface water • Source of problem is still unknown, but could be an accumulation in reservoir • Identifying the source may not assure prevention in the future • Well rehabilitation was suggested in a phased approach that would include installation of an automatic shut-off valve and chemical treatment (Commissioner Scheiderich requested information on where the bacteria and algae were settling. Mr. Moncaster explained that a skin has formed on the walls of the aquifer.) • Feasibility study estimates show the intermediate phase time frame (1.5 mgd capacity) would save $100,000 on operating costs per year and the full scale phase (6.0 mgd capacity) would save $400,000 • Updated pricing assumptions — Portland to charge $.30 ccf for water; Portland is charging $.01 ccf for water going in and $.41 ccf withdrawal • Impact from turbidity events - $20,000 for investigations • Well rehabilitation - $30,000 to $50,000 • Payback will be in less than 10 years • Rehabilitation of the well should be performed before recovery period • Pilot test will be completed in October 2002 • Next phase (Spring 2003) would be to install an automatic valve to prevent turbidity issues in future and drill a second well at the same site A discussion followed where various theories and scenarios were reviewed as to what might possibly have caused the turbidity events, but nothing could be pinpointed as the definite cause. A thorough explanation of the well rehabilitation phase was reviewed. • Quantify the performance as water is being pumped out • Compare performance against the baseline figures • Physical phase of well rehabilitation will include removal of the pump, installation of rods at the base of the well, analyze loose materials, and track performance • More testing before going to the chemical phase Intergovernmental Water Board 2 May 8,2002 DRAFT COPY Mr. Wegner said the rehab work could be incorporated in the cost total, not to exceed $60,000, which would have to go before the City Council and include a budget adjustment. A time factor is involved, as the well is needed for the summer supply. A lot of money and time could be spent to determine what caused the turbidity problem to happen, but that would not guarantee that the problem could be corrected or changed. The automatic valve to shut off and turn on the injection process appears to be the best solution to preventing future problems of that nature. The IWB recommended proceeding with Phase I of the rehabilitation of the well. 4. Long Term Water Update— Ed Wegner Information material was distributed to the board members for their review. Joint Water Commission — Source options are being finalized and those options include: • Two dam raises at two different heights • A pipeline from the Willamette River to transfer irrigation water • Conservation and re-use of water from Clean Water Services • The Sand Creek tunnel to the coast range that would pipe water to a watershed. Alternative analyses are being built around these scenarios. They are about a month behind in gathering data, however the fieldwork has already started and should be caught up soon. In June there will be public forums to keep the citizens informed. Bull Run Regional Drinking Water Supply— There are 13 agencies participating now because Clackamas River Water District voted not to participate for the time being. The elected officials group is called the Policy Steering Committee (PSC) and meets on the 4th Thursday of each month. Joyce Patton is the chairperson of that committee. Last month the PSC approved the criteria for evaluation of various scenarios. The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is made up of the managers from the various agencies and meets weekly with the consultant and work groups to draft the technical memos. Copies of the draft, minutes, etc., were included in handouts to the IWB. There has been feedback from citizens and they have requested the TAC complete a full appraisal of assets. Also, they have requested investigation into a Public Utilities District (PUD) versus a 190 IGA. A PUD membership is based on geographic proportions and would place Portland in charge. Commissioner Intergovernmental Water Board 3 May 8,2002 DRAFT COPY Patton stated that the PSC would hear out all aspects. There will be an open house on July 24th at Tualatin Valley Water District. Commissioner Patton wanted it to be known that she did not volunteer to be the chair of the PSC and she accepted reluctantly. 5. Discuss Citizen Involvement Process for Long Term Water Some participating agencies have made decisions to hold open houses or create task forces to disburse information after the reports are received in August or September. Mr. Wegner requested the IWB discuss and advise as to how the Tigard Water System area should approach citizen involvement. It was suggested that solicitation take place for an appointment of interested volunteers. A task force would not require participants to have a high level of technological background, but focus more on the form of government or relationship that would be wanted with Portland over the next 50 years and whether they want it to go before a vote of the people. Commissioner Patton stated that the creation of this new regional entity was very significant and there was a lot to be said about the final product going for a vote. Commissioner Carroll feared that would be creating another Metro. Commissioner Patton stated that it would depend on the power given to the entity and that the governing structure does not have to be through elected officials. Portland shares voice along with all other members of the PSC. Mr. Wegner said the Citizen's Involvement Team (CIT) might be a good place to start advertising, followed with a bulk mailing and an open house with presentations on cable to be rebroadcast. Task forces are cumbersome and time consuming and there is a time frame that needs to be considered. A bulk mailing would provide information to all users. Mr. Wegner will present a schedule outline for public meetings at the next IWB meeting. 6. Assistant PW Director's Utility Report— Dennis Koellermeier Beaverton Intertie —The City Manager of the City of Tigard has sent a letter to accept the bid for the intertie project. The bid came in at $254,078 and includes a $20,000 contingency, which is well within the budget of$275,000. The contractor is a good one and the project should be completed July 1. Clute Property Sale —The reappraisal of this property is underway. We should have that information by the next meeting. At the next IWB meeting we would like to discuss recommendations to the City of Portland on the water treatment plant options. Intergovernmental Water Board 4 May 8,2002 DRAFT COPY t 7. Proposed Water Rate Adjustment: Multi-Year Approach - Dennis Koellermeier A schedule of the water rate adjustment was distributed for review. October 1St is the date that has been selected for the rate adjustment to go into effective and is set for a three-year period for adjustment. Tigard has been working from a rate model that was previously adopted and will be back on track with the model if the rate change in October is at 10% and then 6% for the two following years. There will be a representative from the Finance Department at the next IWB meeting to review revenue issues. The system development charge (SDC) was adjusted last year. Commissioner Scheiderich requested information on where the annexation of Bull Mountain area stood. Commissioner Patton said the City Council was in no hurry to push forward for annexation and they were interested in hearing feedback from the majority of residents in that area. There is no consensus of the Council to move in either direction. Commissioner Scheiderich wanted to know how much CH2M Hill would charge for their opinion on altering the methodology to index cost of construction, which seems to be what was being done elsewhere. Dennis Koellermeier said he would check on the request and present that information on the next agenda. Commissioner Patton was concerned about huge spikes in the water rates and was sensitive to the water rate increases, especially with the upcoming increase in the sewage rates as well. A draft of a rate resolution will be prepared to present at the next meeting. 8. Informational Items Informational items were distributed for review by the Board Members. 9. Public Comments - None 10.Non-Agenda Items 11.Adjournment Commissioner Patton motioned to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Carroll seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous and the meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Intergovernmental Water Board 5 May 8,2002 DRAFT COPY