TOWN OF OLD SAYBROOK

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY

302 MAIN STREET

OLD SAYBROOK, CT 06475-2369

 

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

 

Monday, June 9, 2008

 

The Town of Old Saybrook Water Pollution Control Authority met on Monday, June 9, 2008, in the Pasbeshauke Pavilion at Saybrook Point Park, College Street Extension Old Saybrook, Connecticut to conduct its regularly scheduled second Monday of the month meeting. 

 

I.                   Call to Order

 

The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Pavel Wilson acting as Chairman at 7:30PM.

 

II.                Roll Call of Members – by WPCA Secretary

 

WPCA Secretary, George Gwizd, called the roll of members; Nelson Engborg, John Claffey, Robert Hansen, Pavel Wilson, Elsa Payne, and Doris Zumbroski were present.  Chairman Robert Powitz and Chuck Wehrly were absent.

 

Also in attendance were; Peter Grose of Fuss & O’Neill, Don Lucas, WPCA Coordinator, Robbie Marshall, WPCA Recording Clerk, and members of the public.

 

III.             Approval of Minutes

 

The WPCA reviewed the Regular Meeting minutes from the May 27, 2008 meeting.

 

The following changes were made.

 

Page 3   Section V  Paragraph 2

 

Delete: they don’t what       Add: they don’t want

 

Page 4  Section V   Paragraph 5

 

Delete: The yes if               Add: The yes is

 

A motion was made by George Gwizd to approve the Regular Meeting minutes from May 27, 2008 as amended. It was seconded by Doris Zumbroski and approved with one abstention; Elsa Payne.

                  

IV.              Open Forum

 

Jean Castagno said she sent a letter to the Attorney General because at the last meeting Chairman Powitz said there were 2 errors in the letter that the Attorney Blumenthal had sent her on October 17, 2006.  She read her email which stated the above and that Chairman Powitz and Michael Pace have agreed to ignore the errors.  She said she does not understand the 2 errors or the reason why they chose to ignore them.  Mrs. Castagno received an email from Attorney Blumenthal which said that he regretted that he could not comment on what others have said about a letter sent in 2006 regarding an outstanding court order to Old Saybrook regarding a “community pollution problem.”  He was unaware of any errors and recommended asking those who said there were errors to explain their views.

 

Doris Zumbroski said one was about a town meeting.  She asked Mrs. Castagno what his letter said.  Mrs. Castagno read the original letter from Attorney Blumenthal.

 

There was a discussion about what the errors might be.

 

Acting Chairman Pavel Wilson said he would have the specifics at the next meeting.

 

Mrs. Castagno agreed, but said that what was disturbing, was that Ms. Wingfield and Mr. Pace found 2 errors and no one knows what they are, including the Attorney General.

 

Chairman Wilson said it really doesn’t have a tremendous impact on what we’re trying to do.  The other attorneys agreed that these 2 items should not have been presented the way they were.

 

Chairman Wilson agreed that he would email them to her as she cannot attend the next meeting.

 

V.                 Chairman’s Comments and Correspondence

 

Chairman Wilson asked if anyone wanted to comment on the classes at URI.

 

Robert Hansen said it was excellent.  We had a lot of bits and pieces but not the whole thing together.

 

Chairman Wilson remarked on the opening comment which said this is like kicking the tires, because you can see it.

 

George Gwizd said it was a great session but his thoughts went in a different direction.  We have to get the public information sessions done to keep the people informed.  They are not aware of what we have been doing for a number of years. But he did enjoy it; it was presented very well.

 

John Claffey said he was impressed because he was not aware that there were that many systems.  He would have liked them all to be above ground so he could look into them and see how it all works.

 

Chairman Wilson said he took a course in which the first day is in the classroom and the next day is in the field.  Another course is a more intense 2-day session in which there is no field work.  It is a tremendous challenge and should actually be 3 days.

 

VI.              Old Business  

 

a. Saybrook Commons: Peter Grose said there were some missing costs in the agreement; like electricity which was pretty significant.  They worked up an estimate and it’s going out to Attorney Wertam who will try to meet with the applicant.  They made comment on the capital costs and operating costs; the two funds that will protect the Town if things don’t go smoothly. 

 

Chairman Wilson asked if it would be submitted to Michael Pace when it is completed.  Mr. Grose said the statutes delegate it to the WPCA, who will have time to review it.  A copy is sent along to the Selectmen for their information.  The attorney could explain it; it’s a little different than the Eden Harbour document.

 

A member of the public asked how many units were in Saybrook Commons.  He was told approximately 186. 

 

Mr. Grose was asked if Amendment 5 had been submitted to the DEP.  He said it was sent to Dennis Greci.  He explained the 55% reimbursement for planning phase from planning grants.  Mr. Greci has asked about what has been submitted and are there costs waiting to be submitted?  Mr. Grose said he doesn’t have that information and doesn’t know who would.  Mr. Lucas will look into it.  Mr. Grose said the hours seem okay, they need a plan to provide further funding. 

 

The biggest news is that they are very close to completing the facilities plan and would like to distribute it.  An announcement can be emailed when the copies are ready.  Included in the plan are many familiar documents like the draft ordinance, focus areas etc.  It explains the history, the nature of the alternatives, and decentralized wastewater plan with updated costs.  He will get the document out as soon as he can.

 

Ms. Payne asked what happens if the WPCA redrafts the district’s lines.  Mr. Grose replied that it makes sense to get the report out and get it into DEP with the understanding that there may be changes.  The cover letter can say here is the draft that was requested by July 15th, we are working on changes to particular sections.  That’s fine; at least it meets the deadline.  Mr. Grose said you’ll see that not every detail is worked out.  We have the basic financing plan which we got from listening to Michael Pace.  That needs some more fleshing out.  Some key items are; who is going to put in and maintain these systems, prequalifying designers, installers, etc.  It is a work in progress but tries to capture everything.

 

A member of the public asked how they can put a price on an AT system.  Mr. Grose said there is a ballpark figure since we don’t have the exact systems, it is less precise than if we used a sewer.

 

b. Small Cities Grant: Mr. Wilson said there was a meeting last Tuesday at which they reviewed the application and revised it.  It should be approved so we can use it to get our program started.  Some things are still outstanding such as approval from DEP for working in a 100 and 500 year flood plain.  Once we have something approved it, will be advertised in the newspapers.  It appears that we are not really that far away.  Attorney Cronin approved two documents.  The WPCA is leading the way on the program and he will summarize the meeting, distribute it for comment, and identify where the group is on the project.  It was mentioned that there is one month in the summer during which funds cannot be drawn.  But there is a way around it and the funds will be repaid.  There was a discussion on this.

 

Mrs. Castagno asked how people qualify for the grant.  Chairman Wilson reminded her that the WPCA had gone over that.  She indicated that there were new attendees present.  Chairman Wilson went over the requirements for their benefit.  It is based on the ratio of what’s owed and the value of the property but the initial process is based on earnings.  A family of four qualifies at $60,000 or less, a couple at $30,000.  The guidelines will be at Youth and Family Services.

 

c. Status of Coordinator:  Mr. Lucas is officially the WPCA Coordinator; however the WPCA does not yet have an office.

 

d. Public Information Session: Mr. Claffey said he spoke to Chairman Powitz and they will get together.  The July meeting was taken off the table.  Chairman Wilson said there is still a bunch of questions, but we don’t know what they are.  George Gwizd advised that the sessions be held no later than the second week in August. 

 

Chairman Wilson asked who Mr. Claffey needs to meet with.  Mr. Claffey said he needed to meet with Chairman Powitz first and then Ms. Payne and Mrs. Zumbroski.

 

VII.           New Business

 

a. Discussion on URI Field Course; One class was discussed under Chairman’s Comments.  Mr. Lucas discussed the course he and Chairman Powitz attended.  It was a 2-day course presented by George Loomis and Dave Taylor as well as instructors from Texas and North Carolina.  There is a consortium of institutes for Decentralized Wastewater treatment.  This includes people from Texas, North Carolina, Minnesota, Washington state, Rhode Island, and also assistance from vendors with bottomless sandfilters, and activated sludge systems.  The course is basically for the operators and maintainers of I/A systems.  They give a brief description of each system and components.  The manual has a chapter on septic tanks and pumps and how they operate.  There is 42 pages of check lists.  The first checklist is a septic system description and includes items like; what kind of system is on the lot, how big is the lot, what is the location, what are the critical resources that need to be protected, number of bedrooms, is there a garbage disposal etc.  Some states will do a sample of the wastewater stream from the house to compare it to the effluent.  The next form is an evaluation of the septic tank and leach field.  Forms should be dated when the inspection was done.  The course was directed to O and M rather than description of systems.  What are you looking for when you go out to maintain a bottomless sand filter?  What are the signs of abuse, the system needs attention, or malfunction?  They reviewed the checklist for septic tank, pump chamber, bottomless sandfilter, recirculating sandfilter, activated sludge units, media filters, and gravity systems; going into great detail on each one.  They invented a great program to take advantage of.  It takes a lot of onus off the WPCA because one of the things we have been struggling with (and DEP wanted to know) is; how do you propose to perform O and M on these systems?  This was devised by a third party (and adopted by other states) and is a tremendous resource.  We can administer systems that we think we can work with.

 

Chairman Wilson asked if monitoring was included in the manual along with O and M.  Mr. Lucas said yes and when the program starts and we have these systems in the ground now we have a yardstick we can use for the vendors who provide service for them.  We can say to the vendor in order for you to bid for this maintenance you need to have the certification from this program.  And the certification must be maintained.  They only offer the course once a year.  He advocates that members attend next year. It is pretty intense but well worth it.  He recommended that Fuss & O’Neill attend.  Mr. Grose agreed and said it is mentioned in the facilities plan.  The consortium’s course is the gold standard for O and M, and highly regarded in the industry.  He said that the state regulators must concur that this is the approach we need rather than a class 3 wastewater treatment operator which is not well suited to onsite systems.

 

Mr. Hansen said he thought that the WPCA is trying to make all the members of the Board masters of everything.  He said he saw 7 or 8 units and that is the maximum he would like to understand.  Mr. Hansen said the WPCA should use Mr. Lucas’s knowledge and whoever else is an engineer to select 4 or 5 systems.  It is our job as a board to implement, get it established and manage it, not just select it.  Because we don’t have the skills.  Don does.  We don’t.  We have different responsibilities we have to do, but the Board can’t do them all.

 

Mr. Grose said you will see in a number of places, like the facilities report, that the WPCA will do this and the WPCA will do that, but it doesn’t mean you have to have that engineering expertise.  You have the authority to do it.  This local body is responsible for wastewater management rather than DEP dictating it.  You have some choices in the matter and have staff, consultants, and your attorneys to help you.   

 

b. Review of WWMD Ordinance with Coordinator’s Comments: Don Lucas said in the WPCA manual there is a draft dated March 23, 2006.  There are actually 2 ordinances; one is the pump out ordinance (75) and the second proposed ordinance is the Waste Water Management District which empowers the Town to create and define the WWMD.  He said the biggest concern was to make sure there is uniformity between ordinance 75 and this one, and the glossary of terms that Elsa provided.  If we are going to define and refer to things, it’s critical that we don’t change definitions, ordinance to ordinance and we use definitions that are national standards.  He compared the WWMD to ordinance 75 and for example item 3 “change of use” is slightly different from ordinance 75.  Item 4 refers to the Director of Health whereas there is now an area Health District.

 

Elsa Payne asked if item 2 is correct, “Only those treatment systems approved by the WPCA.”  She wanted to know if the WPCA will be approving systems.  Mr. Lucas replied that if we are going to administer the program then it is critical that we decide what systems we are going to allow.

 

Ms. Payne said she thought the State was going to establish that.  Peter Grose said that in the mediation process the goal was stated that the WPCA should select a small number of systems based on cost and reliability.  They may be from a list the State produces or list from NSF 246 that Chairman Powitz discussed at the last meeting. 

 

Doris Zumbroski added that the list could be updated from year-to-year so it would have to be something that is approved by the WPCA.

 

Mr. Lucas said that he and Chairman Powitz attended a 2-day course at URI and one thing that struck him from an administrative perspective is the number of nuances between the systems.  So for the WPCA and staff to have detailed knowledge of so many systems would be an onerous task.  We would want to keep things simple from a lot of perspectives; to be able to explain them to the public.

 

Mr. Grose said the upgrade standards, which were part of mediation, also has definitions.  There was an attempt made to get those to align. 

 

Robert Hansen asked if the WPCA is going to choose 3 to 5 systems based on the terrain and so forth.

 

Mr. Lucas said yes, that is the goal.  Some systems are not suitable for seasonal usage; others are adaptable for that kind of use.

 

            Mr. Hansen said basically we have to come up with a flow chart starting with the

selection of systems and then on to the next step along with a timeframe.

 

Chairman Wilson asked Mr. Grose if he was working with Dennis Greci on an approval list.  Mr. Grose said not really.  He had written something in the past about how it could be done building off what would be acceptable at the State level.  He sent it to Chairman Powitz a couple of weeks ago to explain how the WPCA could go through a bidding process.  The WPCA may want to get information from the vendors.  We’re a little bit in limbo because the question is, is it going to be the DEP or the DPH that is going to give you the delegation to do that.  You could go ahead and do it on your own, but there is the risk of whether they are going to accept it or not.

 

Chairman Wilson said there was discussion at Betsey Wingfield’s meeting that was encouragement for Mr. Grose and Mr. Greci to get something started.  Mr. Grose said he would be happy to if that is the direction requested.  The most important thing is if the WPCA is okay with the facilities plan and getting it into DEP.  That forms the background for more details.

 

Chairman Wilson said that Amendment 5 is complete and he asked if it was submitted to DEP.  Mr. Grose said it was sent to Mr. Greci.  He asked if there were a couple of other items that were to be completed by July 15th.  Mr. Grose said yes, he would report on them.

 

Mr. Hansen asked if it would make sense to select 4 or 5 systems and then get DEP’s approval of them.

 

There was a discussion about what had been done in the past and the results.  Chairman Wilson said working with Mr. Grose and Mr. Greci would cut through some of the information.

 

Nelson Engborg said that Chairman Powitz wanted NSF 246 systems; out of 30, 20 may not have the certification.  Chairman Wilson added that this was agreed to at Ms. Wingfield’s meeting.

 

Mr. Lucas said a critical step is the redefining of the District because that will give us a better sense of the limitations the systems will have to work under.  Chairman Wilson said he understood that there is some agreement of definitions of other regulations that needs to be done. 

 

Mr. Grose said the upgrade is a draft document, dated September 22, 2005, worked out in the mediation process.  It is the technical background from which the WWMD ordinance was built.  That is dated March 23, 2006.  Those documents must be finalized before you adopt your ordinance.  That is the framework under which you will select the systems and which neighborhoods will be upgraded and in what order.  So these documents need to be dusted off and completed.

 

Mr. Lucas said he would look at the other documents and try to achieve uniformity which would give the WPCA credibility.

 

Chairman Wilson said there was an email from Chairman Powitz saying that he would like to arrange a separate public meeting to discuss changing the boundaries of the WWMD which would make more sense considering the changing demographics.  Chairman Wilson thought the WPCA would approve the changes to the definitions to speed the process along, but felt it was premature because there is other work that needs to be done to make sure everything is consistent.

 

Mr. Lucas named the documents that must agree as; Ordinance 75, the WWMD, Upgrade Standards.  Mr. Grose said the WWMD ordinance references the Upgrade Standards and there is a reason for that.  An ordinance has to be passed at a Town meeting.  It is not easy to make changes after it has been approved.  The Upgrade Standards is actually called the Upgrade Program and you have more flexibility.  The WPCA can change that.  The ordinance gives you the power using the framework adopted by legislation in 2005.  Attorney Wertam could attend and give a primer on that as some members weren’t here then.

 

c. Review and Pay Bills

 

Doris Zumbroski submitted 2 contractual bills and 1 bill from the Coordinator for payment.

 

The first was from Fuss & O’Neill in the amount of $1620.00 for the Saybrook Commons maintenance agreement review.  The second was from Fuss & O’Neill for engineering services rendered in the amount of $2966.00.  The third was from the WPCA Coordinator for the URI class in the amount of $465.00.

 

Saybrook Commons is eligible for reimbursement from the applicant.

 

A motion was made by George Gwizd to pay the bills from; Fuss & O’Neill in the amount of $1620.00 for the Saybrook Commons maintenance agreement review,  Fuss & O’Neill for engineering services rendered in the amount of $2966.00, and the WPCA Coordinator for the URI class in the amount of $465.00.  It was seconded by Nelson Engborg and approved unanimously.

 

Mrs. Zumbroski asked Mr. Grose to send in any outstanding bills to be paid before the fiscal year ends.  Shipman & Goodwin will be notified by Pavel Wilson as well.  Mr. Grose said Fuss & O’Neill typically closes the billing period on June 30 and sends the invoice to Town Hall.  Anything to be included in this year’s budget must be submitted by July 9th.  Mr. Grose suggested approving and authorizing the Chairman to sign any bills that come in after the last June meeting.

 

Mrs. Zumbroski said there is $29,439.85 remaining in the budget.  68.48% has been expended.

 

VIII.        Adjournment

 

A motion to adjourn was made at 8:40PM 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